Are sports the key to widespread green awareness?

I had lunch today with a recent graduate of the Boston Architectural College, who has been studying the topic of sustainability in sports. His central area of interest wasn’t necessarily to learn what professional sports organizations are doing to green their own operations, but how sports could be the single greatest accelerator of sustainability awareness, momentum and engagement among mainstream consumers.

Sports, perhaps more than any other topic in mainstream America, hold our collective interest year after year, from our youth to our senior years.

The opportunity tactically for sports to accelerate green awareness doesn’t just lie with the teams themselves, but also their participating athletes. It’s one thing for the Los Angeles Lakers to go green. It’s another level entirely if Kobe Bryant does it, and both explicitly and implicitly drives his fans to follow him.

Are any of your local professional sports organizations already “going green”? If so, how are they doing it, and what impact has that already had on fans? Please share in the comments below!

Cradle to grave sustainability

Sustainable products and brands aren’t just about creation and consumption. They’re also about having a sustainable strategy for disposal. And that end-game isn’t always well thought out today even with sustainable products.

At the Sustainable Brands conference last night, Leonard Robinson from the California EPA commented that the patent approval process for new products should require an analysis of the entire lifecycle of the product, including how it will be disposed of. His comment generated the only spontaneous, mid-speech round of applause of the night.

The fluorescent, spiral-shaped lights we’ve been buying at the hardware store lately? They contain mercury, and must be recycled. But few consumers know this, nor do they have a clear means and location to do that recycling. Subsequently, those mercury-filled light bulbs are being added to our landfills.

Apple’s iPod has been considered a strong green product, since it essentially eliminates the need for CDs and all of their packaging. But what happens to the iPod itself when we’re done with it? When we’ve moved onto the latest model, how can previous iPod models be recycled, re-used or repurposed?

Many companies, such as Keen, are thinking through the entire lifecycle of their products already, and communicating that to their customers. Other brands are directly or indirectly (through government programs) working on take-back programs so that more and more products can be adequately recycled or safely disposed of.

Today’s green products are gaining momentum and market share due to their improved footprint and impact at the front end. But as those products make their way through their use cycle, consumer awareness of the end-game will increase. Brands will do well to think through that element of the lifecycle now.

Does green play in Peoria?

More than 500 brand marketers, agencies and green marketing specialists are in Monterey this week at Sustainable Brands 2008. But despite our collective passion for what we’re doing in our own businesses, we don’t yet reflect the rest of corporate America, let alone the average American.

While the ranks of early adopters in the sustainability movement are growing, and the volume of interest at an individual level also grows daily, that interest still pales to our collective focus on other national issues.

A Gallup poll this past March indicated that 40 percent of Americans worry about the environment a great deal. That’s compared to 58 percent who worry about health care, and 60 percent who worry about the economy.

Yes, we’re worried about the environment, but not yet enough. Not enough to make it a national priority, and not enough to take collective action at a meaningful scale.

The critical mass of worry and action is still largely focused on the coasts. The West Coast, and California in particular, is leading the way in thinking and acting green. The Northeast isn’t far behind.

But the Midwest – where energy prices are almost half what they are in California or New York - isn’t there yet. Our job as sustainability leaders is to make our message relevant not just to early adopters, but to every American.

Products like the G Diaper may lead the way. It’s something every parent needs, it’s still disposable, but it’s also flushable. It’s biodegradable through our existing waste management systems, vs. sitting in landfills.

It’s continued innovations like this that will take sustainability from early adopters all the way to Peoria.

Profitable sustainability

It’s clear in talking to many companies here in Monterey this week that sustainability is still largely being driven by marketing objectives – be it PR, competitive differentiation, or simply aligning with growing consumer awareness and activism.

But for others, sustainability has become profitable. Either by tangibly increasing sales or market share, or by cutting costs, brands nationwide are using green to make green.

Some examples heard at Sustainable Brands 2008 this week:

• Staples has retrofitted all of its distribution trucks so that they cannot drive faster than 60 miles per hour. This not only makes the trucks safer (think lower insurance premiums) but also increases their fuel efficiency by 15 percent. Staples is saving 500,000 gallons of diesel fuel a year this way.
• Stonyfield Farm was one of the first yogurt makers to move from hard plastic lids to foil tops, saving $1,000,000 a year in the process (not to mention reducing the plastic needed for packaging)
• More than 55 percent of employees at Sun Microsystems telecommute at least half of the time. While they couldn’t cite specific figures, Sun says this has reduced operating costs for the company significantly (while also decreasing employee commute time and measurably increasing job satisfaction)

How is your organization using sustainability initiatives to make money or save money?

Debate on Climate Change Legislation – Join the Conversation

A New York Times article posted yesterday discusses the climate change legislation slated for debate in the Senate this week. The goals of this bill are as follows:

(1) to establish the core of a Federal program that will reduce United States greenhouse gas emissions substantially enough between 2007 and 2050 to avert the catastrophic impacts of global climate change; and

(2) to accomplish that purpose while preserving robust growth in the United States economy, creating new jobs, and avoiding the imposition of hardship on United States citizens.

The article cites concerns about whether this bill, in its current form, should get passed, noting that “the debate will force senators to take a stand on some of the most difficult, expensive and potentially life-altering questions that will face the world in coming decades.”

At the heart of this debate are two central themes. Proponents argue that our nation cannot wait until fuel prices come down in order to deal with these larger issues. Opponents believe “the bill would direct the largest changes in the American economy since the 1930s and should not be rushed through Congress without painstaking debate.”

This is what Frank Ackerman, an economist at Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University, had to say:

“How do you price the increased deaths, the losses of endangered species and unique habitats, the increased damages from hurricanes that are becoming more intense...Those numbers dwarf any reasonable estimate of the cost of doing something about climate change. The choice is a no-brainer.”

What do you think? Your comments and insights would be greatly appreciated.

A sustainable conference (in every way)

One would expect a conference about sustainable marketing to be full of sustainability options and strategies itself. For example, upon registration for Sustainable Brands 2008, each attendee had an option to purchase an offset for their travel to and from Monterey.

Now that I’m here, I can see to what great extent sustainability permeates the entire event. Almost everything here is biodegradable, recyclable, organic or offset. Some examples:

• The program was printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper from Mohawk Fine Papers, using 100% soy-based ink from GreenerPrinter
• Conference signage was printed by EcoBanner; 100% of the signs can be recycled or reused
• The conference tote bags are 100% recycled cotton canvas, and conference t-shirts are made of organic cotton and printed at an eco-friendly fabric printer
• Even the A/V equipment and strategy for the show emits 58% fewer carbon emissions vs. the typical conference A/V needs

What’s struck me the most – if I had experienced all of this at any other conference – I probably wouldn’t have noticed it was eco-friendly. There’s no reason more of our industry get-togethers can’t be like this.

This afternoon offered some great pre-conference content, and things kick off in earnest tonight with speakers from the California Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Fish and others.

Delayed Flights Waste More Than Just Passenger Time

No one likes a delayed flight. Now we find out that these flights are costing us more than just time. According to a recent report from the U.S. Joint Economic Committee (JEC), delayed flights in 2007 consumed about 740 million additional gallons of jet fuel totaling $1.6 billion extra in fuel bills and emitted 7.07 million metric tons of CO2.

This was the quote from U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer, Chairman of the JEC, on the problem:

“It has been apparent for far too long that to millions of Americans who fly, our domestic air travel system is broken and today’s Joint Economic Committee report puts a dollar figure on this mess. In 2007 alone passengers, airlines, and our economy felt a $41 billion punch in the gut from flight delays and the problem is only going to get worse.”

You can find the press release here.