Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Sunday, August 21, 2016
What Have We Done to The World?
Recently I posted about socially conscious and responsible sourcing. Michael Jackson says it much better than I:
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Estes is Fined by EPA for Air Violations - Another Volkswagen?
I just saw an interesting news article stating the EPA has fined Estes $100K (Plus Estes has to pay another $285K in projects) because they violated the California Truck and Bus Regulations. From the news article:
There were also two very important items embedded in the article and the first one has to do with sub-contractors to Estes:
Finally, the article states:
I think the regulators are getting emboldened as they are finding more and more of this abuse. There also was a case against Samsung where they had defeated the Energy Star ratings in refrigerators and in that case had to compensate every consumer. We all know of the troubles International / Navistar has had.
If I were at a trucking company I would be less concerned about "more regulation" and far more concerned about whether my company was meeting requirements in the first place.
Companies Mentioned in This Article:
In light of the Volkswagen issues where the car company clearly violated environmental laws on purpose, I think we are going to see a lot more of this. As we all know, with regulations companies take "calculated risks" and one of them appears to be around meeting environmental regulations. My advice to compliance departments is they may want to tighten up what they are doing."EPA Regional Administrator Jared Blumenfeld said Estes violated the California Truck and Bus Regulation dozens of times between 2012 and 2014.The regulation, adopted in 2009, requires that all commercial heavy diesel trucks and buses operating in the state be equipped with diesel particulate filters (DPFs), which limit toxic emissions."
There were also two very important items embedded in the article and the first one has to do with sub-contractors to Estes:
"In reaching the settlement, Estes cooperated with federal investigators, admitting that the company or its subcontractors in California operated more than 80 trucks between 2012 and 2014 that were not equipped with diesel particulate filters"What is fascinating in that statement is they are taking direct responsibility for their sub contractors. So, one way "around" the laws is not to just broker freight and say it is their fault. Looks like Estes will own that liability too.
Finally, the article states:
"Sax said this was “the first of many cases” the EPA and CARB will bring against trucking companies in order to enforce the California Truck and Bus Regulation.
Blumenfeld confirmed the EPA has been investigating out-of-state trucking companies operating in California since the spring of 2014."If that is not a direct statement of intent, I do not know what is. Clearly, companies had better be careful with what they are doing in California and I would suspect you will see a lot of new trucks headed West soon.
I think the regulators are getting emboldened as they are finding more and more of this abuse. There also was a case against Samsung where they had defeated the Energy Star ratings in refrigerators and in that case had to compensate every consumer. We all know of the troubles International / Navistar has had.
If I were at a trucking company I would be less concerned about "more regulation" and far more concerned about whether my company was meeting requirements in the first place.
Companies Mentioned in This Article:
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Mapping The Carbon Use Chain to The Value Chain
I am starting to do a lot of work and study on the impact of the complete value chain on the environment. I think the argument over whether there is climate change occurring is absolutely over. It is clear our environment is changing and changing rapidly. The only question left is how much of this change is due to human interaction and how much is just natural cycles. The answer, of course, is that it is due to both.
Given that I believe it is due to both I have to ask why would we ignore the portion we can impact just because there is a potion of it we cannot impact? Further, if we know an activity is causing environmental issues why continue that activity? Why not try to mitigate the impact of the activity or moderate our engagement in that activity?
A simple example is in fuel mileage of automobiles. If we can get automobiles to 50mpg or higher (whether by better engineering of the internal combustion engine or moving to another energy source like electric) why not do it? The obvious answer is if there were some functionality we absolutely needed that the 50mpg car could not provide but I find that is few and far between. Most users of large trucks (i.e.., Pick up trucks and SUVs) are using them because they "like big" more than any real functional use. Some will say it is for better use in bad weather but as someone who drives a hybrid in Wisconsin during severe weather I can tell you I see as many big trucks / 4wd's in the ditch as I do anything.
So, the answer is we should do whatever we can to effect positively our impact on the environment. In order to do this we first have to map out our impact (end to end) on the environment. The best model I have seen (adapted from the Greenhouse Gas Protocol) breaks it into the following segments:
Given that I believe it is due to both I have to ask why would we ignore the portion we can impact just because there is a potion of it we cannot impact? Further, if we know an activity is causing environmental issues why continue that activity? Why not try to mitigate the impact of the activity or moderate our engagement in that activity?
A simple example is in fuel mileage of automobiles. If we can get automobiles to 50mpg or higher (whether by better engineering of the internal combustion engine or moving to another energy source like electric) why not do it? The obvious answer is if there were some functionality we absolutely needed that the 50mpg car could not provide but I find that is few and far between. Most users of large trucks (i.e.., Pick up trucks and SUVs) are using them because they "like big" more than any real functional use. Some will say it is for better use in bad weather but as someone who drives a hybrid in Wisconsin during severe weather I can tell you I see as many big trucks / 4wd's in the ditch as I do anything.
So, the answer is we should do whatever we can to effect positively our impact on the environment. In order to do this we first have to map out our impact (end to end) on the environment. The best model I have seen (adapted from the Greenhouse Gas Protocol) breaks it into the following segments:
- Extraction of raw materials
- Production of product
- Transportation and distribution of product
- Use of product
- Disposal of product
It is important that the entity which conducts the "pull" in this value chain be the one to impact the actual conduct of the entire chain. We know the consumer is essentially the entity which pulls all the way through however the consumer is too fragmented to be able to make a consolidated impact. This must be at the producer of the product level. This leads us to the 3 Scopes which product producers need to measure if they are truly going to understand the environmental footprint of their product and their company.
Some may ask why this "burden" should be put on the producer of the product and I think the answer is threefold. First, virtually all the activities upstream would not occur if they were not "pulled" by the producer. No one would mine for coal if there were not users who wanted to buy the coal to use. It is really that simple.
Second, the user of the product (downstream) does not have enough information to know the art of the possible. They can conduct good comparisons of products which exist but it is hard for them to know what could exist and therefore they are working with imperfect and incomplete information. The producer has that information.
Third, the consumer of the product cannot impact end of life disposal beyond doing the right thing based on societal infrastructure. For example, I can send my products to a recycle center but I do not actually recycle the product. Knowing whether the product packaging and end of life product "carcass" is capable of being recycled is beyond the consumer's capability. This must be put on the producer to execute.
Ultimately, the cost will be put on the consumer and products will compete within a "sustainable" sandbox. The choice to operate outside of the sustainable sandbox will very quickly disappear.
In looking at the totality of the business case we see there are clear cost reducing and brand enhancing reasons to look at your entire value chain, map it it to the environmental / energy supply chain and make impact in each area.
WebRep
currentVote
noRating
noWeight
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Cap and Trade Has Come To Be in California
Consider it a birthday of sorts. Yesterday, California launched their first "Cap and Trade" market by auctioning off allowances in the California Carbon market. This, while just being California, actually becomes the world's second largest carbon market right behind all of the European Union.
While right now it essentially only applies to major refineries and electric plants the day is coming when it will apply to transportation fuels. My personal recommendation is the industry should get prepared to deal with this inevitability rather than fight it. Politics aside, what we have found is what generally starts with the California Air Resource Board (CARB) moves across the Nation fairly quickly.
The Wall Street Journal reports on this launching and reports California expects to raise $1bl in 2012 and $2.8 to $11bl by 2015. A critical factor for success is we have to ensure this money goes to actually reducing emissions or offset projects rather than the general coffers of the state. If we can avoid the "money grab" then this will be a very effective way to use market incentives to lower emissions.
According the the California auction site, the results will be listed on November 19, 2012. Auction information can be found at the CARB auction site.
While right now it essentially only applies to major refineries and electric plants the day is coming when it will apply to transportation fuels. My personal recommendation is the industry should get prepared to deal with this inevitability rather than fight it. Politics aside, what we have found is what generally starts with the California Air Resource Board (CARB) moves across the Nation fairly quickly.
The Wall Street Journal reports on this launching and reports California expects to raise $1bl in 2012 and $2.8 to $11bl by 2015. A critical factor for success is we have to ensure this money goes to actually reducing emissions or offset projects rather than the general coffers of the state. If we can avoid the "money grab" then this will be a very effective way to use market incentives to lower emissions.
According the the California auction site, the results will be listed on November 19, 2012. Auction information can be found at the CARB auction site.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Are You Truly Dedicated to Sustainability?
This is a question I ponder all the time. While I am thrilled when people do anything to help the planet, regardless of motives, I do wonder what would happen if people really were dedicated to this important initiative. While we all know the "big things" to do (i.e., alternative fuels, recycle, etc.) I wonder how much impact we could make if we all just did some of the small things. So here are just a few things you can do starting TODAY to make the planet a better place:
1. Regardless of the type of vehicle you own, drive the speed limit. Reduces emissions and saves gas. Nothing infuriates me more than to see a hybrid drive driving 80 - 90 miles an hour.
2. Recycle, recycle, recycle.. Including composting
3. Buy less stuff.. Everything you buy comes to you on a truck, using fuel and will eventually have to be disposed of. Less stuff means less of all that.
4. Go on a diet and eat locally grown items. This is an amazing task which is great for everyone. You will be healthier (I know, I am one to talk but I have lost a lot of weight and will continue!), less food will need to be grown, and less trucks needed to drive all that food around if you buy locally.
Here is a small example: We are spreading mulch to make our garden better and hopefully return oxygen to the environment. We needed to put down weed blocker and rather than go buy it, we used old newspaper to do this. It got rid of waste, we saved money and it eliminated the need for the weed blocker which means one less roll needed to be shipped. If everyone did this and we reduced the need by thousands (Sorry if you are in the weed blocker industry) then we could actually take trucks off the road, reduce emissions and reduce the need for diesel fuel.
Here are some other ideas from The Wall Street Journal.
This is the way we can all contribute on a small level as we all work hard to make big changes as well.
Just a thought...
Happy Earth Day!!
1. Regardless of the type of vehicle you own, drive the speed limit. Reduces emissions and saves gas. Nothing infuriates me more than to see a hybrid drive driving 80 - 90 miles an hour.
2. Recycle, recycle, recycle.. Including composting
3. Buy less stuff.. Everything you buy comes to you on a truck, using fuel and will eventually have to be disposed of. Less stuff means less of all that.
4. Go on a diet and eat locally grown items. This is an amazing task which is great for everyone. You will be healthier (I know, I am one to talk but I have lost a lot of weight and will continue!), less food will need to be grown, and less trucks needed to drive all that food around if you buy locally.
Here is a small example: We are spreading mulch to make our garden better and hopefully return oxygen to the environment. We needed to put down weed blocker and rather than go buy it, we used old newspaper to do this. It got rid of waste, we saved money and it eliminated the need for the weed blocker which means one less roll needed to be shipped. If everyone did this and we reduced the need by thousands (Sorry if you are in the weed blocker industry) then we could actually take trucks off the road, reduce emissions and reduce the need for diesel fuel.
Here are some other ideas from The Wall Street Journal.
This is the way we can all contribute on a small level as we all work hard to make big changes as well.
Just a thought...
Happy Earth Day!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)