What’s Being Done?

A number of high- and low-profile companies are constructing green buildings as their new headquarters and retrofitting existing buildings. Until recently, companies had the “it’s either the jobs or the environment” standpoint, but now we’re seeing more and more companies enjoying the benefits of it voluntarily. Tax incentives, a sense of responsibility, the idea that it’s easier to do it right the first time rather than having to clean up mistakes. Any of these things could be responsible for this change, but this change is taking place.

• Bank of America. This colossal company is currently investing in a $1 billion facility in New York City that will provide 70 percent of energy for the building, cut water consumption in half and install a recycling program to limit its waste.
• Adobe Systems, Inc. The folks who brought you software to your pc are upgrading their own operations in Silicon Valley by decreasing energy use by 35 percent, natural gas use by 41 percent and water consumption by 22 percent.
• Westin, Sheraton, Omni, Radisson, Hilton, Adams-Mark. These hotels and many more belong to Green Hotel Association, a body set up to paint these buildings green. Okay, not literally green, but cutting water consumption and energy use is just the tip of the iceberg.

• The San Francisco Bay Area is home to The Green Business Program which is set up to guide businesses in adopting better and greener business practices throughout the area.

What’s Working?

The business world changes as fast as celebrity religions, but the green movement is forcing major changes and business-as-usual doesn’t cut it anymore:

• Citigroup is tackling the paper waste dilemma by minimizing paper use and converting to 30 percent postconsumer recycled copy paper, annually saving 2,800 tons of greenhouse gases, 26.3 million gallons of water, 8,900 tons of wood and 1,450 tons of solid waste.
• As of May 2007 FedEx has an agreement with Azure Dynamics Corporation to seek hybrid-electric powered engines for delivery trucks, seeking 96 percent decrease in particulate emissions, 65 percent decrease in smog-causing emissions and 57 percent increase in fuel efficiency.

• Remember the old foam hamburger boxes from McDonald’s? Those were replaced by wrappers in 1990 as one of the earlier green movements and doing so has saved the company 150,000 tons of packaging waste.
• By Starbucks switching to 10 percent postconsumer-recycled coffee cups, they have saved, in one decade, the equivalent of 3 million pounds of solid waste, 47 millions gallons of wastewater and have used 11,300 fewer tons of wood consumed.

What’s Not Working?

Some groups and businesses work against “green change.” For instance, the Guardian reports the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an Exxon-Mobile funded – and Bush administration-linked – lobby group has offered $10,000 per article to scientists and economists to downplay claims by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

And don’t be fooled by companies pretending to change. It’s called “greenwashing” and it’s when a company announces its intentions to enhance its green practices while making no effort to actually change. One way to tell if a company is greenwashing is to see if they have set specific goals and have publicly reported their progress.

Results of Inaction?

During the centuries leading up to the early 1900s, Hawaii’s island of Oahu enjoyed a renewable clean water source in its taro patches and its fisheries on the east shores. When Big Sugar arrived it all changed. Today, much of that same water is being used for golf courses and expensive plantations rather than for the people of Oahu. This is the kind of environmental breakdown that businesses are notorious for when left unchecked by the people affected.

The climate change debate illustrates many of the problems with environmentally responsible business practices. The costs of not acting will far outweigh the costs of changing our habits and attitudes concerning the environment. The easy road is never easiest by the end and businesses are learning this, slowly but surely. Isn’t it strange how business drives innovation yet these same businesses seem to be left in the dark when it comes to environmental concerns caused by their “innovation”?