food

Starbucks To Raise Prices

January 3, 2012

Are you one of those people who constantly grumbles about $4 lattes? Brace yourself: Starbucks, patient zero of that particular fiduciary epidemic, just announced that it’s raising prices once again. The latest Starbucks price hike primarily affects Northeastern and Southern states, and will see menu prices rise by about one percent overall, reports Reuters. But the increase in prices will not be an even one percent across the board. The cost of a “tall” latte in New York City, for example, will go up by 10 cents, but prices for “grande” lattes will stay where they are. Starbucks attributed the move to a variety of factors , but one of them is surely commodity prices, which remain high. Another factor may be the New Year’s increase in the minimum wage in several states. If some prognosticators are right, though, this latest price hike could be just a taste of trends to come. In October, the Sustainability Director of Starbucks warned that climate change could harm coffee plants’ growing conditions down the line — which could make a $4 the late 21st-century’s equivalent of penny candy.

Read the full article →

Major Fishing Cuts To Protect Dwindling Cod Could Ruin Fishermen

January 1, 2012

BOSTON (AP) — In an industry where agreement comes slowly, the sudden prospect of huge fishing cuts to protect New England’s codfish inspired a quick consensus: Scores of fishermen will be ruined if those cuts are passed. But it’s not clear how or if that pain can be avoided, weeks after new scientific numbers indicated cod in the Gulf of Maine is much weaker than thought. “We really haven’t heard of something that works right now,” said Gib Brogan, of the environmental group Oceana. Fishery science and law present major obstacles to preserving both cod and fishermen. The law requires scientists to set a limit on how hard fishermen can fish for any species. If they exceed it, they’re illegally overfishing and regulators are charged with “immediately” stopping it. That means, given the grim new estimate of cod’s health, fishermen would have to accept a debilitating cut of about 90 percent in their cod catch next year, and there’s little wiggle room to avoid it. Meanwhile, the new data — though attacked from the outset by skeptical fishermen — has survived an initial review, and scientists say it likely won’t change much. Several lawmakers, starting with U.S. Sen. John Kerry, are now asking the U.S. Commerce Secretary to order a new assessment of the cod’s health in hopes of getting better data, but prospects are uncertain. Still, there’s optimism a solution can be found, if only because the alternative is devastating cuts that could sweep away remaining fishermen from Provincetown to northern Maine. “I’m not a betting man, but I’m optimistic to a fault,” said fisheries scientist Steve Cadrin, who works at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. He added, “Someone up high (in government) is going to have to make a bold move to allow a common-sense solution.” For centuries, Gulf of Maine cod has been the key species for small-boat fishermen on day trips from northern New England ports, including historic Gloucester. In 2010, cod brought in $15.8 million, second-most among the valuable bottom-dwelling groundfish species fishermen have long chased, such as flounder and haddock. Cod’s future looked great in 2008, when a major assessment indicated the Gulf of Maine species was headed for full recovery. But the new data, released this fall, said cod was actually so badly overfished that even if fishermen completely stop catching it, it can’t recover to a federally mandated level of abundance by a 2014 deadline. The new numbers are still being verified. If they hold up, onerous cutbacks on the cod catch are certain, and that would also mean tight limits on many other valuable groundfish off New England, to protect the cod that swim among them. But cod aren’t scarce and anyone who fishes the Gulf of Maine knows it, New Hampshire fishermen David Goethel said. He said the gap between the new estimate and reality demands a complete reworking of the new cod assessment, just as lawmakers have requested. That includes rethinking the numerous assumptions that go into the various population models, including such complexities as how well the federal boat that catches fish population samples scoops up older cod. “We need a do-over,” Goethel said. Absent new science that leads to a drastically different outlook for cod, another hope is that regulators will interpret fishery law differently than they ever have. Right now, fishermen are boxed in by the requirement to stay under that maximum rate at which they can catch codfish without overfishing it. In essence, the rate allows fishermen to haul home a safe fraction of a species. But in the case of Gulf of Maine cod, the new stock estimate is so low that that fraction shrinks to a pittance the fishing industry can’t survive on. And since the rate is determined by such basic biological factors as a species’ growth, reproductive and natural death rates, political pressure can’t do much to budge it. But Cadrin sees one possibility for fishermen to get some help. He hopes for new flexibility in how regulators react after they determine there’s overfishing on cod. He said that regulators have traditionally acted as if the law requires them to “immediately” stop overfishing on any species, but the actual law doesn’t require that — the word “immediately” is contained in a guideline to the law. Cadrin said if fishery managers want to be bold, they could give fishermen a short amount of time to stop overfishing, rather than “immediately” enforcing lethal restrictions when the new fishing year starts in May. More time would mean less severe cuts now, and a chance for more fishermen to survive. There is some sign from the top levels of U.S. fishery management that regulators are ready to do something different about codfish, even if they don’t know what. At a quickly called meeting last month to deal with the cod crisis, Eric Schwaab, the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service spoke of undiscovered solutions outside the traditional channels of government bureaucracy. The situation is so serious, Schwaab said, “those kind of extraordinary options ought to be on the table.”

Read the full article →

54 Miners Working When Drill Rig Caught Fire In Tennessee

December 28, 2011

By Tim Ghianni NASHVILLE, Tenn, Dec 28 (Reuters) – Three miners were trapped by smoke for hours on Wednesday before being brought safely to the surface at the Young zinc mine in Tennessee, authorities said. Two other miners were taken to a local hospital suffering from minor smoke inhalation after a drill rig caught fire at the mine in New Market, Tennessee, Fire Department Captain Sammy Solomon said. Fifty-four miners were in the zinc mine when the rig caught fire about 800 feet from the surface, and 51 of them were able to walk out of the mine, Solomon said. “They are on the surface, they are on the ground. They are officially out,” Solomon said just before 4 p.m. local time, adding that they appeared to be fine. A team from state-run Tennessee Mine Rescue led the trapped miners safely to the surface. The miners had been talking with authorities at the surface by phone after the fire broke out. The fire call came in about 1 p.m. Solomon, who has been a captain of the volunteer fire and rescue unit for more than 20 years, said a mine fire was almost unheard of in New Market, a town about 15 miles north of Knoxville in eastern Tennessee. “This is the first time it’s ever happened that I could ever remember,” Solomon said. The mine is located in Jefferson County, one of four counties in Tennessee with active zinc mining and milling operations that make it the nation’s second-largest zinc producer, according to state data. (Additional reporting by David Bailey; Editing by Jerry Norton)

Read the full article →

Which Kind Of Bulb Should I Buy?

December 22, 2011

Given the man light bulb choices available today and the new bulb efficiency standards that are set to go into effect in 2012, selecting the right bulb for your home can difficult. Below, check out the tips from the Natural Resources Defense Council for selecting the light bulb that both looks best and is energy efficient. The efficiency standards that are set to take effect on January 1, 2012 mean that older, incandescent bulbs will be phased out. Consumers, however, will still have a choice between newer, more efficient incandescent bulbs, CFLs and LED bulbs, reports the NRDC . Congressional Republicans included a rider in a spending bill last week that will delay enforcement of the light bulb efficiency law that was signed by President Bush in 2007. The Associated Press reports Rep. Fred Upton (R-Michigan) said, “Americans don’t want government standards determining how they light their homes.” According to the NRDC, the change is hardly a coup . The Republican rider “pertains only to funding for federal enforcement of federal lighting standards for this fiscal year.” The delay will not affect standards for manufacturers, or ultimately, consumers. Rocky Kistner, a HuffPost blogger with the NRDC, said “the money-saving law” is ” good for American consumers — and for American workers and their companies .” Light bulb manufacturers even oppose Congress’ efficiency standards funding delay. A statement from the National Electrical Manufacturers Association , representing over 90 percent of the lighting industry, said the industry “remains committed and supportive of the lighting standards established [by the 2007 law].” Captions courtesy of NRDC . Images courtesy of NRDC unless otherwise credited.

Read the full article →

Peter Gardett: European Downgrade Contagion

December 17, 2011

From the perspective of the U.S. energy business, the European debt crisis can feel very far away. The impacts of ongoing sovereign debt debates are felt first in markets for government bonds and currencies; one can only guess what the extent will be of ramifications on government commitments to clean energy or business activity levels in developed and emerging economies. But as the financial crisis showed, the interlinked and leveraged nature of contemporary finance gives market crises a whack-a-mole feel: suppressing damaging volatility in one market creates unexpected problems in another. Today, a California homeowner defaults and Iceland goes bankrupt. The energy sector escaped much of the impact of the early iterations of the financial crisis , now grinding into its fifth year, but this time around the escape may not be so easy or obvious. A conservative approach to financing following the collapse of Enron , strong demand for commodities and related products from China and other emerging economies, and hundreds of billions of dollars in support from the U.S. stimulus and associated programs , muffled for energy companies the impact of financial shakeups that brought down banks, carmakers and governments in recent years. But a combination of specific problems impacting institutions with deep exposure to energy trading, a foreign-currency crunch in Asia and the prospect for accelerated rebalancing of the global commodity economy as domestic U.S. energy production expands, is expected to ripple across the energy business and analysts preparing 2012 outlooks are issuing warnings for the sector. Bank Rout In the most immediate future, European banks will be pulling back on lending and trading activities that provide liquidity to both exchange-traded energy markets and bilateral energy commodities trade in the U.S. French banks like Societe General and Credit Agricole have been major players in global energy markets, and the European sovereign debt crisis has forced them to take off risk as they face turmoil in both the markets for government bonds and shrinking short-term lending between banks. The short-term bank lending in the so-called “repo” or “overnight” markets is the lubricant that keeps cash flowing through the financial system and its lockup can threaten the very existence of financial institutions. Threats to repo lending brought down Bear Stearns and were at the heart of the financial crisis that brought down Lehman Brothers and triggered the broader recession. With European banks conserving capital in an effort to avoid a replay of September 2008, cutting exposure to energy trading and energy lending is an obvious way to keep money inside the institution. This month alone both SocGen and Credit Agricole have announced they will shutter the majority of their U.S. energy trading operations, reducing the need to put up huge amounts of collateral to maintain trading positions. The banks also lend money to other financial groups that provide liquidity to energy markets and fund energy companies, including hedge funds. In Barclays Capital’s 2012 outlook, analysts cite recent data indicating hedge fund positions in all commodities, including energy, have been pared back sharply since the middle of 2011. Currency Correlations One stage removed from the immediate threat of a liquidity crisis in energy trading and lending is the potential for a slowdown in trade originating from Asian countries, particularly China, as manufacturers there seek new ways to finance deliveries of solar panels, windmills and other energy components to international customers. European banks are major suppliers of dollars to Asian manufacturers and exporters face limitations in accessing their own currency. The amount of financing pulled in the current crisis could hit $390 billion based on previous trends, recent analysis by Reuters BreakingViews estimates, and includes a 50 percent increase in the cost of borrowing in Asia since the middle of 2011 as part of the impact from retreating European banks. This trade finance issue is similar to the problem facing energy market players in the energy trading space, but with a longer tail and a broader set of potential outcomes. If Chinese solar panel manufacturers find themselves unable to ship cheap solar components to the U.S., will U.S. solar companies turn to domestic providers and pay higher prices in a tightening market? Sinovel, a Chinese firm, is by some estimates now the world’s second largest wind company; without access to dollars its export-oriented business growth plans could be dealt a blow in 2012. As in all crises, some firms would benefit and others suffer, but the sector already faces widespread uncertainty in financing and building projects that use Chinese and other Asia-sourced components, and a slate of cancellations or delays would do little to boost the industry or the broader economy. Weight of the World The European crisis could help accelerate an ongoing rebalance in the world’s economy, the head of commodities at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch argued this week, with increased domestic U.S. production of natural gas and oil lending tailwinds to the trend. “The world cannot keep accumulating claims on U.S. assets indefinitely,” head of Global Commodities and Multi-Asset Strategy Francisco Blanch said in presenting the bank’s 2012 commodities outlook as part of a broader presentation called “When Europe Sneezes.” An unwinding of the global imbalance, in which developed countries take on debt to acquire goods and commodities from emerging markets, has already begun in the manufacturing sector and now shows signs of spreading to commodities, including energy, Blanch said. While volatility will remain the trend in 2012, Blanch expects light at the end of the tunnel for the U.S. economy because of increased energy production from shales, underlining the potential for winners as well as losers from a European debt-triggered market shift. Shale oil production increases have been “phenomenal” the bank said, and Blanch predicts that production will provide a tail wind for the U.S. economy over the next 3-5 years, building on still-growing production from natural gas shales that has contributed to economic growth over the past 2-3 years. The energy sector has been agitating for change for years as it seeks to rebuild and grow. Its challenge in 2012 may be to navigate that change as it stems from an unexpected source. This AOL Energy Comment reflects the views of the author alone, in this case, AOL Energy Managing Editor Peter Gardett. Join the AOL Energy discussion by leaving a comment below or joining a conversation on our Discussions page.

Read the full article →

Fitch: Comprehensive Solution To European Debt Crisis ‘Beyond Reach’

December 17, 2011

ROME/BERLIN (Gavin Jones and Stephen Brown) – The credit rating agency Fitch has told euro zone countries it believes a comprehensive solution to their debt crisis is beyond reach, putting six euro zone economies including Italy on watch for potential downgrades in the near future. It reaffirmed France’s top-notch triple-A rating but even here said the outlook was now negative, meaning it could be downgraded within two years. Underscoring the tensions within the bloc over a crisis that has spread relentlessly over the past two years, Italy’s prime minister urged European policymakers on Friday to beware of dividing the continent with efforts to fight its debt crisis. In a swipe at Germany, he warned against a “short-term hunger for rigor” in some countries. Germany has led resistance to allowing the European Central Bank to ramp up its buying of government bonds on the open market to a big enough scale to douse the crisis, but Fitch late on Friday added to the pressure for just such a move. It said that, following the EU summit a week ago, it had concluded that “a ‘comprehensive solution’ to the euro zone crisis is technically and politically beyond reach.” “Of particular concern is the absence of a credible financial backstop,” it said. “In Fitch’s opinion this requires more active and explicit commitment from the ECB to mitigate the risk of self-fulfilling liquidity crises for potentially illiquid but solvent Euro Area Member States.” It put Belgium, Spain, Slovenia, Italy, Ireland, and Cyprus on negative watch, which could mean a downgrade within three months. Later another agency, Moody’s, cut Belgium’s credit rating by two notches, saying the euro zone debt crisis raised funding risks for countries with high public debt burdens, and said a further downgrade was possible within two years. Standard & Poor’s had already warned 15 of the currency bloc’s 17 members they were close to a downgrade. “The systemic nature of the euro zone crisis is having a profoundly adverse effect on economic and financial stability across the region,” Fitch said. The euro edged higher against the dollar but still suffered its worst weekly performance against the greenback in three months. German Chancellor Angela Merkel gained some respite from domestic pressure to take a tougher line in the crisis when eurosceptics in her junior coalition partner, the Free Democrats, lost a grassroots party referendum aimed at blocking a permanent euro zone rescue fund. A victory for the eurosceptics could have brought down Merkel’s centre-right coalition, but the outcome still left the FDP split, with its public support in tatters. Meanwhile, a first draft of a planned fiscal compact among euro zone countries and aspiring members, published on Friday, showed that countries could be taken to the European Court of Justice if they did not meet agreed budget goals. AUTOMATIC SANCTIONS Merkel – under pressure from the revered Bundesbank to force debt-saddled euro zone countries to reform and save their way out of crisis with austerity measures – has led a push for automatic sanctions for deficit “sinners” in the bloc. This has fed concerns that excessive belt-tightening in southern countries could send their economies into a negative spiral with no prospect of growing out of crisis, while feeding resentment in the prosperous north. Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti said Europe’s response “should be wrapped in a long-term sustainable approach, not just to feed short-term hunger for rigor in some countries.” “To help European construction evolve in a way that unites, not divides, we cannot afford that the crisis in the euro zone brings us … the risk of conflicts between the virtuous North and an allegedly vicious South,” he told a conference in Rome. French officials have sought to prepare the public for the likelihood that Paris will lose its top-notch rating from S&P for the first time since 1975, playing down the potential setback and focusing attention instead on neighboring Britain. President Nicolas Sarkozy had vowed to keep the top rating, and it could become an issue in next year’s election campaign. “The economic situation in Britain today is very worrying, and you’d rather be French than British in economic terms,” Finance Minister Francois Baroin said in a radio interview, a day after Bank of France Governor Christian Noyer said that if ratings agencies were even-handed, Britain deserved to be downgraded before France. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said French Prime Minister Francois Fillon had called him to explain that “it had not been his intention to call into question the UK’s rating but to highlight that ratings agencies appeared more focused on economic governance than deficit levels.” Clegg’s office said he accepted the explanation “but made the point that recent remarks from members of the French government about the UK economy were simply unacceptable and that steps should be taken to calm the rhetoric.” World Bank President Robert Zoellick said he was “deeply troubled” by the exchanges. He said politicians needed to be careful because “you’ve got a tinderbox out there in both political and economic terms.” Euro zone officials said potential downgrades, particularly from S&P, could raise the cost of borrowing for the region’s existing EFSF bailout fund, but would not make a big difference to its operations. EFSF FIREPOWER EFSF chief Klaus Regling told the Rome conference about 600 billion euros was available to fight the crisis. “If Italy and Spain were to ask for support, their gross financing needs for 2012 are less than that and I don’t think they would need to be taken off the market,” he said. The EFSF has the option of providing first-loss insurance on new bond issues, but the country concerned would have to make a formal request and negotiate conditionality, while the sum guaranteed would have to be agreed unanimously by EFSF members, subject to German parliamentary approval. Euro zone countries will hold talks next Monday on the draft text of the euro zone fiscal compact and on bilateral loans to the International Monetary Fund, officials in Brussels said. Slovak Finance Minister Ivan Miklos told Reuters they would commit 150 billion euros to boost the IMF’s lending capacity. The United States has refused to offer additional funding and it remains to be seen how much countries such as China, Russia, Brazil and India are willing to commit. The European Central Bank has resisted calls for unlimited purchases of euro zone sovereign bonds to quell the debt crisis, putting the onus on governments and their collective financial firewalls. ECB President Mario Draghi said on Thursday that euro zone governments were on track to restore market confidence and the ECB’s bond-buying plan was “neither eternal nor infinite.” But in one intriguing hint on Friday, Bank of Italy governor Ignazio Visco told the Rome conference: “The impression is that there is only one way to convince markets, and we’ll work on that.” He did not elaborate. Banks appear to be resisting pressure from governments to help debt-choked euro zone countries by using cheap money lent by the ECB to buy more sovereign bonds. The chief executive of UniCredit, one of Italy’s two biggest banks, said this week that using ECB money to buy government debt “wouldn’t be logical.” Euro zone governments need to sell almost 80 billion euros of fresh debt in January alone, and the stand-off between policymakers and banks could turn the slow-burning debt crisis into a conflagration in the New Year. In Greece, where the debt crisis began two years ago, a senior official of the EU/IMF troika team negotiating terms for a second bailout package said there was no guarantee that talks on the private sector’s contribution would lead to a voluntary deal involving the bulk of its creditors. Agreement has been held up by wrangling over issues ranging from the credit status and interest coupons on the new bonds to legal guarantees to be offered by the official sector. One key question is how many sign up to a private sector debt swap. Failure to secure agreement could force a disorderly default that might trigger a wider emergency across the euro zone. Asked if there was a risk of a disorderly Greek default, the troika official said: “Our objective is still to have a voluntary operation. If you ask me ‘Is there a guarantee that there will be a voluntary operation?’, of course there can never be a guarantee.” (Additional reporting by Steve Scherer in Rome, Annika Breidthardt in Berlin, Gareth Gore, Natsuko Waki, Kirsten Donovan and Ana Nicolaci da Costa in London, Martin Santa in Bratislava, Ingrid Melander in Athens; Writing by Paul Carrel and Paul Taylor/Ruth Pitchford; Editing by Jeremy Gaunt and Kevin Liffey) Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

Coca-Cola Buys Half Of Middle East Beverage Company

December 14, 2011

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — The Coca-Cola Co. is buying roughly half of Saudi Arabia’s Aujan Industries for $980 million, pairing the U.S. soda giant with one of the Middle East’s top independent beverage companies. Under the terms of the deal announced Wednesday, Atlanta-based Coca-Cola will get a 50 percent stake in the part of Aujan that holds rights to the company’s brands, and 49 percent of its distribution company. The companies say it is the largest investment yet by a multinational firm in the region’s consumer goods industry. The fast-growing Middle East has some of the world’s highest rates of nonalcoholic drink consumption, said Ahmet C. Bozer, who heads Coca-Cola’s Eurasia and Africa Group. “In addition to their great brands, we are investing in Aujan because it is a well-run, successful business. This transaction creates a platform for further cooperation between The Coca-Cola Company, Aujan and existing bottling partners across the region,” Bozer said in a statement. Aujan sells the popular Rani line of fruit drinks and the nonalcoholic malt drink Barbican throughout the Middle East. It also holds the regional license for Vimto, a British spiced fruit drink that is popular with many Muslims celebrating the holy month of Ramadan. The acquisition doesn’t include Aujan’s manufacturing and distribution business in Iran, which is subject to multiple U.S. sanctions. Family-run Aujan was founded in 1905 and is based in the eastern city of Dammam on Saudi Arabia’s Persian Gulf coast. It employs more than 2,500 people and brings in revenue of more than $850 million annually. In a statement, Aujan Chairman Adel Aujan said the deal will better position the company to succeed both in the region and internationally. The companies expect the deal to close in the first half of 2012.

Read the full article →

Taco Bell: We’ll ‘Reinvent The Taco’ With Doritos

December 8, 2011

Some things are perfect: sunshine, rainbows, koala bears, King Lear , fish tacos eaten on the beach in Malibu. These are things that, like the wheel, no one would want to reinvent. But what about Taco Bell tacos? Given that they’ve been accused of being filled with a faux-ground meat mixture , they hardly seem as perfect as rainbows. So why not reinvent them? Probably can’t make them any worse, right? If only. As it turns out, Taco Bell had the capability to make its tacos much, much worse. Parent company Yum Brands just had to team up with fellow food giant PepsiCo for an answer, in the form of taco shells made of nacho cheese-flavored Doritos. The tacos debuted at the beginning of 2011 in selected markets in the San Joaquin Valley in California, and proved enough a success that Yum Brands has decided to bring the product to Taco Bells around the country. Representative from the company told Nation’s Restaurant News that the Doritos Locos Tacos would “reinvent the taco,” and help separate Taco Bell from its competitors. The fillings on the Dorito-clad tacos are said to be spiced more mildly than those in traditional tacos, to help compensate for the extra flavor in the shell. At this point, it’s unclear how the bright orange cheese powder on the exterior of the new tacos will affect Taco Bell’s sodium reduction initiative , but we can’t imagine it’s helping. Maybe Taco Bell shouldn’t have reinvented its wheel after all. Here’s an ad for the tacos that’s been aired in California test markets:

Read the full article →

BP Cited For 5 More Alleged Violations Related To Blown-Out Well

December 7, 2011

NEW ORLEANS (AP) – Federal regulators have issued a second set of violations against BP for activities related to the blown-out well that led to the deaths of 11 rig workers and the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history. The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement issued five violations Wednesday. The violations claim BP failed to conduct an accurate pressure integrity test and failed to suspend drilling operations “when the safe drilling margin identified in the approved application for permit to drill was not maintained.” Federal regulators in October cited BP PLC for seven violations and contractors Transocean Ltd. and Halliburton for four violations apiece. BSEE director James Watson says the second round of violations is based on “additional regulatory violations by BP.” BP has 60 days to appeal.

Read the full article →

Nathan Novemsky: The Perils of Wrapping Paper: A Story of Consumer Expectation

December 7, 2011

It happens: a frantic last day of work before departing for the holiday. The time for making or purchasing gifts has come and gone. You find yourself, half-defeated, scanning the souvenir wire-racks of an airport or gas station. You hold out hope: somewhere, surely, there must be a meaningful piece of kitsch. This is the unavoidable trajectory of much gift shopping, and so here’s a piece of advice for the last-minute shopper: if the gift you’re about to give is less than ideal, then leave it unwrapped. You may just spread more cheer this season. Intuitively, it may seem that receiving an unwanted gift with attractive wrapping would be preferable to receiving the same gift unwrapped: at least pretty wrapping provides something positive about the exchange of, say, a fruitcake, or a pair of argyle socks; you might call it the asset of aesthetics, a small pleasure before the sight (and sigh) of disappointment. But some of my research at the Yale Center for Customer Insights , conducted with my colleague Ravi Dhar at the Yale School of Management, suggests this belief about the benefits of gift wrapping could be misguided. People think nice wrapping can never hurt — and they’re wrong! When it comes to the exchange of gifts, nice wrapping sets high expectations, amplifying the disappointment of receiving unusual or undesirable gifts, and even dimming the glow of great gifts. This research, of course, has implications immediately relevant to gift giving. Most obviously, if you think you might be giving a disappointing gift, then don’t wrap it. Of course most gifts are chosen with the high hopes that they are exactly what the recipient wants. But even for good gifts, my research shows that spending a lot of time or money on great wrapping may not make the recipient either happier with the gift or more thankful to the gift giver. Rather, mediocre wrapping can enhance the joy of receiving that great gift because the wrapping did not build up expectations. There are also practical implications that apply not to gift giving, but to gift receiving: when receiving a nicely wrapped gift, take a moment to ask yourself — I recommend in silence — whether or not you are anticipating a higher-quality gift just because of the trimmings. We found across a number of trials that the simple act of asking this question helps gift recipients realize that expectations matter. A moment’s pause and consideration could help you avoid setting yourself up for disappointment. This research carries weighty implications well beyond the realm of gift exchange. The fact that providing a high-quality initial experience results in higher expectations for what follows, as well as a greater likelihood of disappointment if the second experience doesn’t match these heightened expectations, should give pause to marketers at organizations that work directly with their customers. Though an enticing mark of differentiation, adding playful or attractive extras at the outset of a customer interaction could prove detrimental. For example, sprucing up the hotel lobby makes guests anticipate nicer rooms; a friendly store greeter means that a shopper will expect a smoother check-out process; and a free glass of champagne offered to diners before their meal may mean that they judge their entrées with more exacting standards. This is not a call for severe, Victorian austerity, for a palette of grays and browns. But be wary of raising expectations that you can’t fulfill. Offering your friends a thoughtfully wrapped gift, or your customers a delightful add-on to their experience is a great strategy — but only if you can follow through with an equivalently delightful gift or experience.

Read the full article →

Burger King To Be Deposed As Number Two Burger Chain

November 29, 2011

In August, Burger King got rid its longtime mascot , a bizarre king wearing a golden crown. The coup d’etat replaced the king with a more domestic emblem, a mom. The timing, it now seems, was fortuitous — Burger King must have known it could soon lose its royal standing as the second-biggest burger chain in America. For now, Burger King still has its plum spot on the totem pole — but according to Nancy Luna of the OC Register , a competitor is nipping at its heels. Luna argues that Wendy’s, the perennial runner-up to BK and McDonald’s, could soon surpass Burger King in total revenue to become the third-biggest burger chain in America. Her intel came from business analyst Mark Kalinowski, who argues Wendy’s has done a better job differentiating itself from market leader McDonald’s than Burger King has. Wendy’s has launched a number of new menu items in recent months, including natural-cut french fries with sea salt and ” Dave’s Hot-n-Juicy Cheeseburger .” Burger King has mirrored Wendy’s, with new fries and a new burger , but its moves have come later and been less dramatic than Wendy’s. Four of the 10 biggest fast food chains in the country , by revenue, have menus oriented around burgers; together, they sell tens of billions of dollars worth of food every year. The number two fast food chain overall, though, is Subway.

Read the full article →

Mercury Storage Case Goes To Supreme Court

November 28, 2011

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will consider throwing out an $18 million penalty against Texas-based Southern Union Co. for illegally storing mercury at a rundown building in Rhode Island. The justices said Monday they will hear the natural gas company’s appeal of the criminal penalty that was imposed by a federal judge and upheld by an appeals court. What makes the case unusual is that the company is challenging the size of the penalty under a line of Supreme Court cases concerning prison sentences. Southern Union had used the building in Pawtucket to store outdated mercury-sealed gas regulators that it removed from customers’ homes. The mercury was initially removed and shipped to a recycling center. But when that work stopped, the regulators and loose mercury were left to accumulate inside the building.

Read the full article →

Laurie David: Thanksgiving Conversation Starter: Is It Time to Ban Soda Ads on Prime Time Television?

November 23, 2011

Did you know Coca-Cola’s first television ad aired on Thanksgiving Day in 1950? It was part of a special live production featuring the ventriloquist Edger Bergen and his sidekick Charlie McCarthy? It was a humble foray into the new but powerful advertising medium for the soft drink giant. However, it didn’t take long for the company to realize the power of TV, particularly on younger audiences. I have to admit few commercials evoke warm holiday memories more than the ubiquitous Coca-Cola ads such as those polar bear commercials. Remember the one that starts with two polar bear cubs struggling to pull a Christmas tree up a snowy hill? After some help from mom (or possibly dad) — the little ones are rewarded with an ice-cold coke for a job well done. Knowing what I know now about the effects of sugary drinks on children the image of kids chugging down a Coke [or in this case polar bear cubs] evokes the same feelings I’d get if they were taking a deep drag on cigarettes. Oh give me a break — it’s just a soda, I can hear the comments already. A little soda once in a while is not going to harm anyone. Sadly, many kids are drinking a lot more than just a little bit of soda every day. The statistics are sobering — Americans suck down about 30 percent more calories from sugar-sweetened drinks now than they did just 10 years ago. When it comes to children, they’re gulping down up to 15 percent of their total calories for the day from these liquid candies. For teens its worse, soft drinks are the number one source of calories in a their diet. Did you know that a 12-ounce can of regular soda can contain as much as 10 and a ½ teaspoons of sugar. That’s as much sugar found in two 1 ½ ounce chocolate candy bars. Those numbers are shocking enough, however, what should give us all pause are the findings from one study that found if a child consumes just one drink filled with added sugar a day his or her chance of becoming obese increases by 60 percent! It’s not surprising then that soda consumption is linked to childhood obesity , type-2 diabetes , high blood pressure and heart disease . These facts are fairly well known by now. Groups like Yale’s Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity have been sounding the alarms for quite sometime. You’d think with all this information, the least soft drink companies could do is cut back on the advertising — at least those focused on kids. Right? Wrong! According to our friends at the Rudd Center kids are getting bombarded with more and more ads every year. Take a look at their latest findings : Soda Ad Exposure From 2008 to 2010, exposure to TV advertising for regular soda doubled for children. In 2010, while children saw 50% more ads on TV for sugary fruit drinks, adults saw twice as many ads for 100% juice. Capri Sun, Kool-Aid and Sunny D dominated children’s exposure to sugary drinks on TV, together comprising 40% of children’s total exposure to sugary drinks. We should all find the fact that food companies are spending so much money on advertising directly to kids — nearly $2 Billion a year — truly disturbing. It doesn’t sit well with our nation’s pediatricians either. In 2006, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement which said exposure to advertising, “may contribute significantly to childhood and adolescent obesity, poor nutrition, and cigarette and alcohol use.” According to the AAP, kids and teens view more than 3,000 ads a year, on television alone. They say research has shown, “that young children — younger than 8 years — are cognitively and psychologically defenseless against advertising.” Coke and Pepsi have gone even further, aided by spineless show producers, and their networks, by purchasing embedded ads directly into the shows content. The blurred line between the show and the ads pummel young viewers. The average age of an American Idol or X factor fan is 6-12! The beloved judges sip it as they dole out advice to the contestants. Celebrities chug it during the commercial breaks. Hardly seems right, does it. For a while there it looked like the FTC and several other regulatory agencies, which are part of the so-called Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children , were poised to take a strong stand on the issue. That was until last month when they caved-in to pressure from industry, which complained that the group’s original recommended voluntary guidelines designed to limit the way unhealthy foods are sold to children between the ages of 2 and 17 was, “unworkable.” Now the working group is thinking of changing the recommended age limits to kids between 2 and 11. Not only that, they’re thinking of looking the other way when it comes advertising “seasonal or holiday confections” like Halloween or Easter candy, or at places such as theme parks or sporting events. When will regulators get a backbone? They have to stop letting industry kick them around and keeping them from protecting the health of America’s children? I know I’m not alone in my disgust. Corporations are no longer allowed to advertise cigarettes on TV due to the potential impact it could have on our kids. When it comes to hard liquor, the government didn’t ban it, the companies did it voluntarily. Can you imagine! It is now time to institute a similar TV advertising ban on soda. We are in the midst of a health epidemic. Some one has to start caring. Some food for thought as you sit down and give thanks for our children this holiday season.

Read the full article →

Donald Cohen: Junk Food Companies Say Eating More Fruits and Vegetables Is a ‘Job Killer’

November 22, 2011

An effort to get American children to eat more fruits and vegetables should, even in hyper-polarized Washington, be a no-brainer. Last week, Congress declared pizza sauce to be a vegetable in school lunches. Now, major food manufacturers are escalating their attacks against healthy food, calling proposed food marketing guidelines “job killers” that will devastate the American economy. Earlier this year, the Federal Trade Commission, along with three other federal agencies (FDA, CDC and USDA), released a set of proposed voluntary guidelines for marketing food to children to reduce sugars, fats and salts and increase fruits, whole grains and vegetables in the diets of American youth. In 2008, led by Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Tom Harkin (D-IA), Congress asked for the recommendations to address the nations’ growing obesity crisis among our nation’s youth. Studies show that one-third of all children aged 10 to 17 are overweight or obese. In the past three decades rates have more than doubled among kids aged 2 to 5 and more than tripled among those ages 6 through 11. The incidence of “adult onset” diabetes in children and youth has more than doubled in the past decade. A coalition of major manufacturers of processed foods, fast-food chains and the media industry that depends on their advertising dollars are spending millions to derail the proposed guidelines. The FTC has already started to trim the proposal in response to the lobbying blitzkrieg but industry wants to go ever further. They want to use an industry-designed scheme that would declare Chocolate Lucky Charms, Marshmallow Pebbles and Cookie Crisp cereals as healthy. But despite industry claims these guidelines are not mandatory regulations; they are voluntary guidelines developed by an independent committee of nutrition experts about how we can improve children’s health. That hasn’t stopped industry predictions of economic disaster. According to comments filed by General Mills’ to Interagency Working Group “the economic consequences [of the guidelines] for American consumers and American agriculture would be devastating.” They also predict “severe” economic consequences for the media industry and their employees. They argue that the voluntary guidelines would cause consumers to eat more fruits and vegetables produced in other countries and therefore fewer grains grown in America. According to research funded by the Grocery Manufacturers of America, “demand for fruits and vegetables would increase by 1009 percent and 226 percent respectively” resulting in almost $500 billion more spent on imported food and $30 billion less on domestically grown grain. Even if the voluntary guidelines were that effective and their study was accurate, it’s an audacious marketing spin to turn an overwhelmingly positive victory for public health into a big government, job-killing attack on freedom. Another industry-funded study claimed that the voluntary guidelines would result in the loss of 74,000 jobs. An analysis by the Economic Policy Institute found the study riddled with “implausible” assumptions, historical inconsistencies and incomplete analyses of potential impacts to both the industry and economy as a whole. For example, the industry study assumes, without justification, a 20 percent decline in advertising and completely ignores the likely scenario in which companies shift advertising to other products or audiences. It also ignores the fact that there has been no negative economic impact since the industry adopted its own guidelines in 2006. In fact, EPI concludes that the guidelines could have no impact on jobs or could even lead to job growth in other parts of the economy. Finally, General Mills adds that the food companies’ $1.6 billion in advertising expenditures “would go up in smoke.” “$1.6 billion in economic activity cannot disappear without an impact on people’s jobs and livelihoods” they wrote. While it’s impossible to believe that food conglomerates wouldn’t redirect their advertising dollars, it’s even harder to think that media companies wouldn’t find other buyers. In fact, they’ve done it before. When Congress banned tobacco ads on TV and radio in 1970 media companies stood to lose $220 million in annual cigarette advertising. Like their counterparts today, the networks, and broadcasters associations lobbied hard alongside big tobacco against the ban. The media industry did fine. Total TV and radio advertising sales has increased every year before the ban and after. According to media analysts , in 1969 ad expenditures on TV and radio were $4.85 billion. In 1972, they were $5.7 billion. For decades, industries have opposed laws, rules and even basic consumer information that have made us all healthier. At every step they predict disaster but, in fact, they respond with new ideas and innovations, and we all benefit. These voluntary guidelines merely suggest a path that industry should embrace and applaud.

Read the full article →

New iPad App Lets You Design A Pizza, Then Order It For Delivery

November 21, 2011

The three biggest pizza chains in America (Pizza Hut, Domino’s and Papa John’s) have all developed apps for Apple’s iOS. All three companies’ apps let potential customers find nearby branches of the chain in question and order pizzas for takeout or delivery. But only one of these apps — the new Domino’s iPad app, Domino’s Pizza Hero — lets you order a pizza that you’ve designed yourself. According to Mashable Business , the app takes the form of a game nominally based on Domino’s real-life “Pizza School.” Users learn how to (virtually) carry out all the steps required to make a real Domino’s pizza, from kneading the dough and spreading the sauce to plopping the pepperoni on top. As an advertisement for the Domino’s brand, this is great, nefarious stuff; emphasizing the human effort needed to assemble a pie supports the idea that Domino’s makes artisan pizza . But that’s not even the game’s full impact. After making a given pie, Domino’s Pizza Hero lets the user order that same pie straight to your door. This builds on people’s natural desire to own things they’ve customized themselves — AKA ” The IKEA Effect ” — without sacrificing the convenience of online ordering and delivery pizza. Of course, it’s unclear how scrupulously the actual “artisans” at local Domino’s will follow the template and topping arrangement created on Pizza Heros’ iPad screens. But even if Domino’s Pizza Heros really boils down to a highly elaborate version of GrubHub, with just one vendor, at least it has a fairly convincing alibi. Here’s a brief trailer for the game:

Read the full article →

Mark Tercek: Message to Congress: Healthy Lands and Waters Support a Healthy Economy

November 11, 2011

What do The Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited, the Civil War Trust, the National Marine Manufacturers Association and the Saucony shoe company have in common? Of course, they all have a shared interest in getting people outdoors. But they are also part of America’s Voice for Conservation, Recreation and Historic Preservation. This broad coalition of businesses and nonprofit organizations is urging Congress to support conservation of our natural and historic resources as it addresses the Federal budget deficit. The group’s more than 1,000 member organizations represent tens of millions of Americans with diverse backgrounds and political views. What they have in common is a shared understanding that natural resource conservation, outdoor recreation and historic preservation programs are vital to the health and prosperity of the American people. Coalition members have signed onto a letter urging Congress to address the federal deficit without disproportionate cuts to critical programs that protect our country’s tremendous natural and historic heritage. This outpouring of bipartisan support is more evidence of what public opinion polls say — the overwhelming majority of Americans support conservation . There are many reasons for this support. One very important — and often overlooked — reason is the important role of conservation in sustaining our country’s economy. A new study commissioned by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation reveals the huge benefits conservation provides to the nation’s economy. For example, healthy lands and waters are the backbone of our country’s thriving outdoor recreation industry, which supported more than 6 million jobs and contributed $730 billion to the US economy in 2006. Billions more in economic activity come from agriculture, forestry, commercial fishing and other components of our natural resource based economy. In my view, these numbers underscore a serious misconception in the way we think and talk about government funding for conservation. Taking a short-term view, funding is just another word for spending . In the long run, however, such funding is a smart investment that produces very attractive economic returns. And conservation investments sustain the valuable benefits that nature provides to people — safe and plentiful water supplies, coastal buffers from storms, reduction in pollution and support of agriculture and forestry. Take the Farm Bill, for example. Conservation programs within the bill encourage farmers and forest land owners to conserve and manage their land in ways that reduce soil erosion, improve water quality, mitigate the risks of flood damage and provide wildlife habitat. These programs were cut significantly during the House’s work on the Agriculture Appropriations bill in June. These cuts may result in short-term savings. But in the long run, we will pay back heavily in costs from flooded homes and farmlands, and polluted runoff that contributes to the Gulf of Mexico’s “dead zone,” an area of water where depleted oxygen levels prevent any marine life from surviving. According to The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the dead zone costs the US seafood and tourism industries $82 million a year. The organizations that comprise the America’s Voice coalition understand the need for addressing our nation’s fiscal health. We recognize that conservation programs should shoulder their fair share of spending reductions. However, as I pointed out at the coalition’s press conference last week on Capitol Hill, conservation funding accounts for a mere 1.26% percent of the current federal budget. Conservation spending did not cause the budget deficit and cutting conservation cannot fix the deficit. This is not to say that all conservation funding is justified, especially in the face of a budget crisis. We need to look hard at the efficiency of government conservation programs and find better ways to accomplish more with less. Following the budget decisions, there should be a systematic process to re-design, better coordinate and integrate the conservation and environmental programs of the federal government. My organization, The Nature Conservancy, has submitted a paper on this topic to the Council on Environmental Quality and the White House Office of Management and Budget. We look forward to working collaboratively and constructively with the federal government to make better use of our country’s conservation dollars. But in the meantime, as federal budget deadlines loom, I hope that Congress recognizes the immense value of programs that sustain our country’s irreplaceable natural resources. Healthy natural systems are the foundation for a healthy economy. We owe it to the next generation to leave them with both.

Read the full article →

Managers Blamed For 2010 Nevada Gold Mine Deaths

November 8, 2011

RENO, Nev. — Federal safety investigators say two Nevadans were killed in a mining accident partly because someone wedged a broom handle against a reset button to bypass an alarm that would have shut down the system. The Mine Safety and Health Administration said Monday that managers of Barrick Goldstrike’s Meikle Mine are responsible for the August 2010 accident in Carlin that killed Daniel Noel and Joel Schorr. The two Spring Creek men were struck by a pipe that gave way in a ventilation shaft because it was clogged with excessive waste rock material. MSHA says the pipe overfilled because the broom handle kept the loading system from tripping off. It blames managers of the Toronto-based mining company for failing to ensure the safe operation, inspection and maintenance of the mine.

Read the full article →

Appeals Court Overturns Key Cape Wind Clearance

October 29, 2011

BOSTON — A federal appeals court on Friday overturned the Federal Aviation Administration’s ruling that the array of turbines proposed for the Cape Wind project don’t pose a danger for local air traffic, possibly further delaying the wind farm proposed a decade ago. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said the FAA misread its own rules when assessing Cape Wind, which aims to be the nation’s first offshore wind farm. The court said the FAA did not adequately determine whether Cape Wind’s 130 turbines – each 440-feet tall – would pose a danger to pilots relying on sight rather than the plane’s instruments. The court vacated the government’s “no hazard” finding and sent the case back to the FAA, agreeing with plaintiffs that “the FAA did misread its regulations.” The project has faced relentless opposition since it was first proposed in 2001 for Nantucket Sound, off Massachusetts. Critics say its power would be too costly and the wind farm will spoil beautiful vistas, while posing environmental and navigational threats. The court ruling came in an appeal of the FAA finding by the town of Barnstable and the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound. The decision could mean further delays for the $2.6 billion project. FAA spokesman Jim Peters said the agency was reviewing the court decision. He said the FAA does not know yet whether it will have to start over its review of Cape Wind. Audra Parker of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound suggested the decision could sink the project. She said a significant delay could make it impossible for Cape Wind to attract needed investors, “a key step toward Cape Wind’s ultimate failure.” A lawyer for Barnstable, Eric Pilsk, said the FAA took 2 1/2 years to return a new finding in a similar case in Nevada that his firm handled. But Cape Wind spokesman Mark Rodgers said the ruling won’t affect the project schedule, which calls for producing power by 2014. He said the project needed a renewed hazard determination from FAA within coming months anyway. The suit is just another delay tactic by project critics, he added. “The FAA has reviewed Cape Wind for eight years and repeatedly determined that Cape Wind did not pose a hazard to air navigation,” he said. “The essence of today’s court ruling is that the FAA needs to better explain its Determination of No Hazard ruling.” Bill Short, a consultant working the renewable energy industry, said the ruling was a blow to Cape Wind, but the project can likely withstand any delay because it already has a buyer for half its power under very favorable terms. “(It’s like) driving down the road and you’ve hit one hellacious, enormous pothole and it has given you a flat tire. That’s what this is like (for Cape Wind),” he said. “As opposed to you’re driving down the road and your car goes into a sinkhole and you don’t come out.” Cape Wind backers say the costs for the project are worth the numerous benefits, including kicking off a new clean energy industry, while lowering carbon emissions and reducing dependence on foreign oil. Last year, Cape Wind sold half its projected power output to the utility National Grid, after the project became the first U.S. offshore wind farm to win a lease from the U.S. Department of the Interior. But it has struggled to find a buyer for the other half of its electricity. Without one, it likely can’t attract financing to fully build out the project. It could move ahead with a smaller project, but that would raise the price of its power and make it less economical to build. In its ruling Friday, the court said the FAA made its initial finding of “no hazard” after inadequate analysis, basing it solely on the fact Cape Wind’s turbines aren’t 500 feet tall – the threshold for when turbines become a concern to pilots flying primarily by sight, not instruments, under “visual flight rules.” The court said the FAA’s handbook indicates the turbine height is just one possible factor the FAA must consider, including how Cape Wind would affect pilots flying by visual flight rules. It said there were hundreds of such flights in the area over a three-month span and cited testimony from some local pilots worried about colliding with the turbines in the frequently foggy and rough weather over Nantucket Sound. “The FAA might ultimately find the risk of these dangers to be modest,” the ruling read, “but we cannot meaningfully review any such prediction because the FAA cut the process short in reliance on a misreading of its handbook and, thus, as far as we can tell, never calculated the risks in the first place.”

Read the full article →

Andy Mannle: Is Nuclear Energy a Fuel with a Future?

October 28, 2011

Nuclear energy has always been a controversial issue. With the meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi plant this spring, increased concerns about climate change, and a global debate over the future of energy, this year is no exception. Nuclear advocates argue that it is a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels that can provide more baseload power than renewables. Opponents respond that even if you resolve daunting radioactive waste, environmental risk and security issues, exorbitant construction costs remain. Studies by the California Energy Commission ( PDF ) and Mark Cooper ( PDF ), Senior Fellow at Yale University’s Institute for Energy and the Environment, have shown that the costs of building future nuclear capacity are even higher. Despite buzz about a “nuclear renaissance,” the industry has had trouble attracting private investment, and relies almost exclusively on government subsidies and support. By contrast, the private renewables market has soared over the last several years, with the UN Environment Programme reporting that global investments in green energy topped $211 billion in 2010, up 32 percent from 2009, and a staggering 540 percent since 2004. Meanwhile in the first quarter of 2011, renewable energy production in the U.S. surpassed nuclear for the first time. All signals point to significant growth in the solar and renewables markets over the next decade, while nuclear production has remained flat for years. If new nuclear plants cannot compete on either cost or scale in today’s private market, enormous government support will be required simply to maintain, let alone expand, nuclear capacity in the future. However, both the Japanese and German governments are responding to the Fukushima disaster by increasing their emphasis on renewables instead of nuclear. The Japanese just established a Feed-In Tariff to expand renewables, with a recent poll showing 77 percent supporting a nuclear phase out. The Germans are actively considering phasing out their nuclear program entirely. Not all countries are halting their nuclear plans, however. In the fast-developing BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China) the IAEA reports as of early August 2011, 45 new nuclear plants are under construction in BRIC nations. 27 are in China, followed by Russia (11), India (6), and Brazil (1). But the nuclear industry needs to do more than build a few plants a year to be a true low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels. A hard look at the science of reducing atmospheric carbon to 350ppm shows why. To get the world off coal, which produces roughly half of the world’s power, would require 7-8 terawatts of energy. One nuclear power plant yields a gigawatt of power, meaning 8000 nuclear power plants would be needed to produce 8 terawatts. To do this by 2050, 200 plants would need to be built a year, which is roughly one every 1.5 days. Since nuclear plants only have a lifespan of 50 years, by the time the required amount is built, early plants would have to start being decommissioned. After that, new plants would need to keep being built at the same pace just to replace retiring ones. So if the world goes nuclear, supplying half the power we need would require building a new plant every other day forever. Even if this rate of growth were feasible, it is clearly unsustainable. Of course, no single strategy is going to wean us off coal in several decades. We will need a combination of carbon reduction strategies — what Princeton researchers Robert Socolow and Stephen Pacala call ” stabilization wedges ” that each reduce a billion tons a year for the next 50 years. The “wedges” include efficiency, renewables, carbon sequestration, reforestation, and replacing coal plants with natural gas. But even for nuclear to generate a single wedge would require tripling our current nuclear capacity. The reality is global CO2 emissions are rising, not falling. And we can’t build enough nuclear alone to stop them. As such, nuclear’s benefits as a low-carbon alternative would only materialize in the context of a global war on carbon. Absent that, nuclear becomes just another low-carbon energy source competing on the open market with cleaner renewables and cheaper natural gas. Ironically, the current slow growth of nuclear and the possibility of an actual nuclear retreat after Fukushima could mean an acceleration in our rising CO2 emissions, cautions the International Energy Agency. So we cannot build enough nuclear to solve our CO2 problem in the long term, but if we don’t build more, it may get worse in the near term. Powerful industry lobbies in the U.S. and elsewhere will continue to support nuclear as a fuel source, of course, but even the industry recognizes that a major expansion is unlikely. Speaking at an American Nuclear Society conference in August 2011, John Rowe, CEO of Exelon, the country’s largest nuclear utility said 3 of the 4 conditions necessary for expanding nuclear cannot be met. While newer designs offer the right technology, Rowe argues that the government has not resolved waste disposal issues. Additionally, there is currently excess generation capacity because the economic recession has slowed energy consumption. While this will likely change as we retire more coal plants and the economy grows, the influx of cheap natural gas from shale has undercut nuclear’s higher prices. Today, nuclear cannot compete on cost with fossil fuels, and cannot compete on quality with renewables. Going forward, renewables offer rapid growth and innovation combined with falling costs, which will make it harder for nuclear to compete in the future. And as fossil fuel prices rise, they will also likely drive up nuclear’s construction costs, offsetting any price advantage there. Without a major breakthrough, it seems safe to say nuclear will never be cheaper than coal or natural gas; nor will it be as safe, clean, and attractive to consumers and investors as renewables. In the end, the most likely option for nuclear energy is neither renaissance nor retreat, but continued slow growth, with heated arguments on all sides. This article originally appeared in the October issue of World Energy Monitor, a newsletter published by the United Nations’ World Energy Forum. The newsletter includes a competing perspective from the World Nuclear Association, and international highlights on nuclear issues. It is currently being hosted at the Energy & Water Institute of NY .

Read the full article →

Global Ban Advances To Stop Dumping Toxic Waste On Developing Countries

October 22, 2011

CARTAGENA, Colombia — More than 170 countries agreed Friday to accelerate adoption of a global ban on the export of hazardous wastes, including old electronics, to developing countries. The environmental group Basel Action Network called the deal, which was brokered by Switzerland and Indonesia, a major breakthrough. “I’m ecstatic,” said its executive director, Jim Puckett. “I’ve been working on this since 1989 and it really does look like the shackles are lifted and we’ll see this thing happen in my lifetime.” The deal seeks to ensure that developing countries no longer become dumping groups for toxic waste including industrial chemicals, discarded computers and cellphones and obsolete ships laden with asbestos, he said. Delegates at the U.N. environmental conference in Cartagena agreed the ban should take effect as soon as 17 more countries ratify an amendment to the so-called 1989 Basel Convention. “This agreement was stalled for the past 15 years,” Colombia’s environment minister, Frank Pearl, said in praising the vote. Katharina Kummer, the convention’s executive secretary, estimated it will take about five years to reach the required 68 ratifying nations. Puckett said he thought it would be closer to two years. Fifty-one nations have already ratified the 1995 amendment, which effectively enforces the Basel Convention, a treaty aimed at making nations manage their waste at home rather than send it overseas. The United States, the world’s top exporter of electronic waste, is among nations that have not even ratified the original convention. “Unless the U.S. joins the treaty they are just going to be a renegade,” Puckett said, adding that the U.S. has no rules for exporting electronic waste, which it sends mostly to China but also to Africa and Latin America. Phone messages left by The Associated Press for members of the U.S. delegation to the talks were not immediately returned. The global ban has been strongly backed by African countries, China and the European Union, which already prohibits toxic exports and Puckett said Colombia played a strong role in Friday’s breakthrough. Opponents have been led by Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan, and recently joined by India, said Puckett. But in Cartagena, he said, Japan’s position softened from 2008, when parties to the convention held their last meeting in Bali, Indonesia. It ended in a stalemate. The issue took center stage in 2006 when hundreds of tons of waste were dumped around the Ivory Coast’s main city of Abidjan, killing at least 10 people and sickening tens of thousands. The waste came from a tanker chartered by the Dutch commodities trading company Trafigura Beheer BV, which had contracted with a local company to dispose of the waste. Puckett said shipping companies had opposed inclusion in the ban, wanting the keep sending old ships to India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to scrap them. “Just about four days ago another six people died on the beaches of Bangladesh,” he said. He told the AP there are no reliable estimates on how many tons of toxic waste are exported annually because developed nations don’t accurately report them. He said a private U.S. company will, for example, list them as “exports” in sending them to a developing nation so they can avoid paying taxes and other fees. The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal allows its 178 members to ban imports and requires exporters to gain consent before sending toxic materials abroad. But critics say insufficient funds, widespread corruption and the absence of the United States as a participant have undermined the convention, leaving millions of poor people exposed to heavy metals, PCBs and other toxins. They have long argued that an outright ban of exporting toxic waste is the only solution. ___ Frank Bajak contributed from Bogota, Colombia.

Read the full article →

The 30 Greenest Tech Companies

October 21, 2011

Newsweek has also compiled a list of the world’s 30 greenest tech companies as part of its 2011 Green Rankings . Some of them you may recognize from the list of the overall 15 greenest U.S. companies . For this list, Newsweek pulled all of the tech companies, including both hardware and software makers, from its 2011 greenest companies in the world list. The magazine partnered with two research firms, Trucost and Sustainalytics , and developed the methodology “in consultation with an advisory panel of corporate sustainability experts.” An unrelated recent study, entitled ” Analysis of Small Business Innovation in Green Technologies ,” by the U.S. Small Business Administration found that small business leads the way in “green technology innovation” in America. According to a press release , small business only accounts for eight percent of U.S. patents, yet they account for 14 percent of green tech patents. More information about Newsweek’s 2011 Green Rankings methodology can be found here . View the 2011 Green Rankings list below courtesy of Newsweek/The Daily Beast . —

Read the full article →

Peanut Butter Price Jumps After Worst Peanut Harvest In 30 Years

October 10, 2011

If you thought living on peanut butter and jelly sandwiches could get you through the recession, think again. The sandwich spread is seeing a major price hike. Thanks to a failing peanut crop due to last summer’s scorching hot weather, there’s a shortage of peanuts in supply. Big brands like Peter Pan, Jif and Smucker’s are left with little choice but to raise prices, reports the Wall Street Journal . The price jumps range from 24 to 40 percent, with Jif planning to raise prices by 30 percent in November and Peter Pan by up to 24 percent in the coming weeks, reports MarketWatch Radio . So far, the Wall Street Journal says , USDA figures show the cost of a ton of unprocessed peanuts has spiked from $450 to $1,150 since last year. Researchers at New Mexico State University told ABC KOAT News that high heat, strong winds and bone-dry conditions created the worst peanut season in more than 30 years. Peanut butter is consumed in 90 percent of U.S. households. Americans consume on average over 1.5 million pounds of peanut butter and peanut products each year, notes to the National Peanut Board . The peanut crop is not the only commodity to suffer from severe weather conditions. French wine and Italian pasta are some other endangered national exports impacted by climate change. Last week, a report claimed chocolate could become a luxury item if farmers in West Africa didn’t adapt to the warming climate. Whether you like your peanut butter organic, creamy or nutty, be prepared to pay a hefty price for it. Or stock up before those price hikes kick in.

Read the full article →

Natalie Pace: The High Price of Gas (in Lives)

September 26, 2011

Business 101 teaches us that failure is valuable to business. The Apple computer and the IBM PC rose out of the ashes of the Osborne computer bankruptcy. The colossal failure of eToys didn’t stop Amazon from becoming the most successful retailer on the planet. Dot Coms collapsed in 2000, but Apple is worth $380 billion today. And even as Solyndra solar failed, Sunpower Solar remains a worldwide leader in power output, with sales that are almost double what they were two years ago. As talking heads kick the Solyndra scandal around to score political goals, as if it’s the only green company worth discussing, there are corporations, countries and individuals that are using green products to increase economic growth, save lives, cut costs, create jobs, increase national security and reduce pollution. Economic Growth Having a leading solar panel manufacturer, like Sunpower and others, at a time when China is investing multi-billions in clean energy could be key to U.S. economic growth. A report by The Pew Charitable Trusts states that China has developed the world’s most aggressive strategic plan for clean energy adoption. China became the worldwide leader in clean energy with $34.6 billion in investments in 2009. China vows to have 500,000 electric, hybrid and fuel-cell vehicles on the road by 2015 and five million by 2020. The government is employing tax incentives, Cash for Clunkers , feed-in tariffs and government spending to promote the adoption of electric vehicles, next generation information technology, energy efficient products and renewable energy. According to Yang Jiechi, the minister of foreign affairs, People’s Republic of China, who spoke at the Clinton Global Initiative ‘s annual meeting on Sept. 21, “It is very important to build environmentally friendly mechanisms. We have spent a lot of capital on hybrid cars and electric cars.” Focusing on fuel efficiency made Toyota Motors the No. 1 automaker in the world. U.S. automakers like Tesla Motors , General Motors and Ford are banking on having a strong EV presence going forward — with the Chinese market directly in their sights. Is this the time to cut funding to The Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) program? Health In cities like Beijing, Los Angeles, New York and even Las Vegas, it’s not just a question of being on the right side of global warming. It’s a question of reducing pollution and cutting down on respiratory illnesses. Saving Lives Oil prices are sky high, but the cost of fuel in lives is even higher. According to Thomas Hicks , the deputy assistant secretary of energy for the U.S. Navy, who spoke to me at CGI , “For every 50 fuel convoys, we have one American killed or wounded. For us, that’s just too high a price to pay for fuel.” Bringing fuel into “the theatre” means sending convoys from Pakistani ports through insurgents and IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) to Afghanistan. To reduce the risk and save lives, Ray Mabus, the secretary of the Navy, has outlined five energy goals , including: 1. Incorporating “green” evaluation factors when awarding contracts 2. Sailing the “Great Green Fleet” 3. Reducing petroleum use in non-tactical vehicles 4. Increasing alternative energy ashore 5. Increasing alternative energy use department-wide The Navy will cut their petroleum use in their non-tactical fleet (commercial vehicle fleet) by 50 percent by 2015. By 2020, half of the energy used by the Navy will come from alternative sources and half of the installations will be net zero energy. And to ensure that these goals are met, Mabus just launched a new new dedicated energy masters degree program. “Through the the masters program and the executive energy series, [Naval Postgraduate School] will ensure that energy is fully integrated,” said Mabus. “As a result, NPS students will guide the Navy and the nation toward a better, more secure energy future.” Is alternative energy reliable enough for our national defense? Tom Hicks advised me that the U.S. has a 270 MW geothermal plant in California that we have been operating for 20 some odd years. “Most people don’t know about it,” Hicks told me. “It’s enough power to power the base in China Lake, but also to provide 200 MW of power to the grid,” he said. National Security The spike in oil prices during the Arab Spring sank the average American’s budget, but it had a similar affect on our defense budgets (and any business involved in transportation as well). Based on June oil prices, fuel costs will increase by a billion dollars to the Navy this year, according to Hicks. “That impacts our flying hours, our steaming hours, our ability to sail our ships and to fly our planes,” Hicks warns — making energy independence a national security priority. Creating Jobs One of the most important pieces of going green is energy efficiency — something old buildings are very deficient in. The Better Buildings Initiative , a policy that U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced at CGI America in June of this year, will upgrade the energy efficiency in up to 300 million square feet of office space — from military housing to college campuses. According to President Obama, who spoke at CGI in New York City on Wednesday, Sept. 21, this will “create jobs, while saving billions for businesses in energy bills, and cut down on our pollution.” It also trains out-of-work constructions workers — who make up one of the largest unemployed industries in the U.S., at 11.3 percent in August of 2011 — to have new skills that are valuable for 21st century construction jobs. Cutting Costs In his speech at CGI, Obama also told the crowd, “The CEO of Southwest Airlines estimates that if we put in the new generation of GPS air traffic control, we would save 15 percent in fuel costs. Think about what that would do overall for the cost of the ticket… Maybe they could start giving out peanuts again.” Indeed the cost of fuel is not peanuts to the airline industry. Fuel costs were over $3.6 billion in 2010 for Southwest Airlines . Energy Independence Companies, countries and individuals alike suffer when the price of energy is the most expensive budget line item — and can be increased significantly at the drop of a hat by countries that are not friendly to American interests. Innovation, research and development and even failures are all part of the solutions needed for the many challenges that America, and the world, face today. With trillions being spent worldwide on solar, wind, geothermal, biofuels, electric vehicles and other clean energy products, continuing the U.S. commitment to R&D, private enterprise, public policy and consumer incentives is an investment in economic growth, national security, the security of our armed forces and a better world. There are many successful clean energy projects and companies that are as news and water-cooler worthy as the one green company that failed. Natalie Pace is the author of “You Vs. Wall Street” and the founder and CEO of the Women’s Investment Network, LLC. She is a blogger on HuffingtonPost.com and a repeat guest on national television and radio shows such as “Good Morning America,” Fox News, CNBC, ABC-TV, Forbes.com, NPR and more. As a philanthropist, she has helped to raise more than two million for Los Angeles public schools and financial literacy. Follow her on Facebook.com/NWPace . For more information please visit NataliePace.com .

Read the full article →

David Macaray: Southland Grocery Workers Poised to Strike

September 21, 2011

Unless last minute negotiations result in management backing off their demand that health care benefits be drastically altered, members of the UFCW (United Food and Commercial Workers) are ready to walk off their jobs at Vons, Albertsons and Ralphs grocery stores as early as Sunday night, having already spent approximately eight months at the bargaining table. The 72-hour notice to terminate the contract expires Sunday night. At that time the union can choose either to call a strike or, if there are genuine signs of progress, continue negotiating without a contract in place. That they are teetering on the precipice is itself remarkable. Considering that the UFCW went out on a debilitating 141-day strike in 2003-2004, many people (including grocery store management and their lawyers) were betting that the membership, despite their truculent rhetoric and saber-rattling, would chicken out as they drew closer to zero hour. After all, it’s one thing to talk tough, but it’s a whole other deal to back it up with decisive action–particularly when memories of the previous strike are still fresh in everyone’s minds. But clearly, the UFCW rank-and-file is prepared to act. One reason for their willingness is that they are a tough, loyal union, whose members have complete confidence in their elected leadership; another is that management’s offer (if it remains as is) simply leaves them no choice but to hit the bricks. Management’s hard-line position has made it eminently clear that they’re intent on hollowing out the UFCW’s medical plan, and that this offer is but the first salvo. Given the general perception of unions, management’s timing makes perverse sense. Having reckoned that organized labor, both locally and nationally, is too weak, distracted and demoralized to put up much of a fight, store executives believe now is the opportune time to attack–that the stars are in alignment–that the UFCW membership is ripe for having its health package chipped away. But management appears to have badly underestimated the membership. To a former union bargainer (I served as chief negotiator on three contracts, and as a committee member on three others), the UFCW’s determination and commitment is nothing short of astounding. Typically, because of the psychological trauma and potential economic impact, it’s fairly difficult to get a membership to go on strike even once, so getting people to go out twice in a relatively short time is remarkable. Of course, management is acutely aware of that fact, which is why they’re making this aggressive move now. They’re willing to roll the dice. But, painful memories or not, these UFCW members have surprised everyone with their steely resolve. On the subject of memories, the 2003 strike brings up another painful one as well–and not just for the membership. When the union struck the grocers, Ralphs management got themselves into an unbelievably messy situation. Looking for creative ways to avoid the full impact of a shutdown (having found out the hard way that replacement workers were nowhere near as efficient as veteran employees), Ralphs management secretly approached more than a thousand of its locked-out employees and offered them jobs–but at stores outside their neighborhoods so they wouldn’t be recognized by the picketers. And because store executives knew the union could legally request the names of the all strike-breakers, they proceeded to make a bad situation infinitely worse by fraudulently submitting fake names and fake I-9 documents for these employees. When word got out, not only was it an unmitigated public relations debacle, it was also a felony. After being indicted by a federal grand jury, Ralphs immediately pled guilty to the charges, paid a hefty $70 million fine, and quietly hoped that the matter would be forgotten. We hope the two sides are able to reach an equitable agreement, so that a strike can be averted. But if a strike is called, we wish the UFCW the best of luck in its battle with the grocers. While there’s a long list of employees in other industries who have quietly rolled over and allowed management to take every liberty imaginable, the UFCW has chosen to fight back, and for that they deserve our respect and admiration. David Macaray, a Los Angeles playwright and author (“It’s Never Been Easy: Essays on Modern Labor”), was a former union rep. He can be reached at dmacaray@earthlink.net

Read the full article →

Alaskans Get $1,174 Checks From State’s Oil Wealth

September 20, 2011

JUNEAU, Alaska — Most Alaska residents will soon be getting a check for $1,174 simply because they live there. Each person’s share of the state’s vast oil wealth was announced with much fanfare in Anchorage Tuesday, with Gov. Sean Parnell ripping open a gold-colored envelope to reveal the number. This day is so widely anticipated in Alaska that the announcement of the Permanent Fund Dividend amount was carried live on television statewide, and dozens tuned in to watch a live webcast by the governor’s office. This year’s check is the smallest since 2006 and $107 less than last year’s amount, which was $1,281. Parnell warned the amount could diminish more in the future, given market volatilities and the fact that oil production in the state is declining. Nonetheless, he called this year’s amount “healthy.” State Revenue Commissioner Bryan Butcher said 647,549 Alaskans were deemed eligible to receive dividends, and about $760.2 million is expected to be paid out. Most Alaskans will get their dividends by direct deposit Oct. 6; the rest will receive checks in the mail. The 2010 U.S. Census put Alaska’s population at 710,231. Already, Alaskans are making plans for how they’ll use their dividends, from paying bills to putting the money toward a new car to buying sled dogs. Retailers are advertising “PFD” sales. So is Alaska Airlines, whose offer is popular in a state where few communities are connected to a road system and the cost of going to the nearest city to shop – or just get away – adds up fast. While the extra money is a great perk, it doesn’t always go far in a state where some rural residents pay $7 or more a gallon for gasoline and one study showed food costs for a week could run into the hundreds of dollars for a family of four. Vern Weiss owns Moochers Bar and Grill in Nenana, a community of about 380 people 55 miles southwest of Fairbanks. He said he spends about the amount of last year’s check in a week on food and beverages for his business. Still, every bit helps. The economy in that area is tough, and he said he has barely been able to make sure his employees are paid. A dividend check, he said, can help pay a lot of little bills. Voters passed a constitutional amendment in 1976 to establish the Permanent Fund as a way to stretch out the state’s oil wealth for future generations. At the time, Alaska had just experienced a construction boom spurred by a $900 million bonus payment from energy companies for oil discoveries. Today, state government relies heavily on oil revenues to run, and most Alaska residents receive a dividend check; people have to live in the state for a year to be eligible to apply. The amount of investment earnings allocated to dividends is based on a five-year rolling average of the permanent fund’s performance. The market hit from the U.S. recession and ensuing economic slump are factored into the most recent period. Still, Tuesday was “a happy day for Alaskans,” Butcher said. State labor department economist Neal Fried said there’s no question the dividend has an impact on Alaska’s economy but he’s seen no research to quantify just how big the bump is. The way people treat their dividends likely varies with their individual circumstances and even how long they’ve been getting the extra money, he said. Butcher, who used to work at the Alaska Housing Finance Corp., said October tended to be the month when many people caught up with mortgage payments. Parnell said one of his great duties as governor is being able to announce the annual dividend, calling it a “unique duty that 49 other governors likely wish they had.” He said he and his wife, Sandy, would likely put their dividends toward the cost of college for their two daughters. Last year, $783.4 million was paid to 611,522 people, according to the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend Division. The fund ended the recent fiscal year with a balance of $40.1 billion. Alaskans received their largest dividend – $2,069 – in 2008, according to the dividend division. In 2006, the dividend was $1,106.96. Bosco Olson Sr., city administrator of Hooper Bay, said dividend announcement day is like Christmas, with the town’s 1,100 residents patiently waiting and excited. Olson, whose town is about 500 miles west of Anchorage, said he’s considering using his dividend for a new lead dog or two for his sled dog team.

Read the full article →

GM Blue Roses Debut in America This Fall

September 17, 2011

The once unattainable blue rose will go on sale in the U.S. and Canada this November. These flowers have been sold in Japan since 2009, and believe it or not, it took 20 years to develop through genetic engineering. As Wired explains , “the rose is genetically modified to synthesize delphinidin, a pigment found in most blue flowers.” The Japanese floral company, Suntory Flowers , plans to sell 300,000 of the blue roses in 2012 under the brand name “applause,” reports The Japan Times . CNET notes a single rose can be bought for almost $50 in Japan. This isn’t the first time flowers have been modified. In 2008, scientists genetically engineered flowers to make them smell 10 times more powerful , reports Science Daily. The $31 billion flower industry is interested in creating unusual breeds to capture the attention of customers looking for something unique and special. Environmental groups and the EPA are concerned about the long term effects of some genetically modified products . Many suggest that more longitudinal studies of GM crops need to be done.

Read the full article →

Devon Swezey: Industry Titans Push Energy Innovation

September 15, 2011

By Alex Trembath and Devon Swezey. On Tuesday, the American Energy Innovation Council (AEIC) — composed of industry titans like Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates, Bank of America Chairman Chad Holliday and leading venture capitalist John Doerr — released a follow-up to their 2010 report “A Business Plan for America’s Energy Future.” The new report, “Catalyzing American Ingenuity: The Role of Government in Energy Innovation,” doubles down on the Council’s earlier calls for increased and sustained public investment in clean energy technology, and offers new ideas about how greater energy innovation investment can be paid for in a new era of fiscal austerity. In the wake of the high-profile bankruptcy of California solar company Solyndra , government critics are attacking federal investment in clean energy innovation, arguing that such decisions should be left to the “free market.” But in their new report, these business leaders and entrepreneurs argue that government investment in energy innovation is key to realizing a clean energy future. In addition to Gates, Holliday and Doerr, the AEIC boasts membership from former Lockheed Martin CEO Norm Augustine, Xerox CEO Ursula Burns of Xerox, General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt and Tim Solso, CEO of Cummins Inc. In the report, these executives highlight the tremendous impact that federal investment has had on technological innovation and economic growth throughout American history: The federal government has played a central role in catalyzing and driving innovation and technology deployment throughout the history of the United States — often with strong results. This kind of support took a variety of forms. In the 19th century government scientists mapped out natural resource endowments and Army officers surveyed routes for railroads, including helping to plan and sometimes manage their construction. In the early and mid-20th century, programs such as rural electrification and massive public works projects, such as the construction of the Interstate Highway System, enhanced mobility and connectivity and directly or indirectly contributed to the development of new technologies and industries … government efforts to develop guidance systems for the military played a role in the development of digital computers and microchips. Navy support for aviation technology led directly to Boeing’s 707 — one of the first major commercial jetliners. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) created a distributed network of computers called ARPANET, which laid the early foundation for the internet. The U.S. government played a direct and indispensable role in launching the commercial nuclear power industry. Indeed, as the Breakthrough Institute has documented in “Where Good Technologies Come From,” the federal government has made key investments in most of the technologies we take for granted, including the personal computer, the Internet, the jet engine, GPS, cell phones, the biotechnology industry, and countless blockbuster pharmaceutical advances. Today, as the AEIC report makes clear, such investment is urgently needed to catalyze breakthrough innovation in clean energy technologies in order to make them cheaper, more reliable, and therefore more widely adopted around the world. Critics tend to ignore this history, claiming that innovation is solely the domain of the private sector. Following Solyndra’s bankruptcy, these critics have insisted that “the government should not play venture capitalist.” AEIC member John Doerr, perhaps the nation’s most well known venture capitalist, sees things differently. Doerr writes, “America must embrace risks in innovation and invest heavily in R&D to create a full pipeline of good ideas.” Echoing what we wrote after Solynda closed its doors, the report recommends that federal energy innovation investment “focus more on overall program success than on individual project success and emphasize the value in calculated risks.” In addition to issuing a robust defense of federal investment in energy innovation, the AEIC report also presents smart suggestions for strengthening some energy technology programs and reforming others. They support the federal energy loan guarantee program (which is under increasing scrutiny after Solyndra’s bankruptcy), and call for boosting the budget of ARPA-E , the government’s innovative, high-risk energy research agency, to $1 billion annually from around $200 million today. They also support a new Clean Energy Deployment Administration to aid the commercialization of first-of-their-kind innovations and mobilize significant private-sector capital in scaling up advanced energy technologies. The Council also urges reform of the inefficient process by which the government conducts national energy policy, warning that “uncertain annual appropriations, short-term tax credits, and one-time spending injections are all unsuited to creating the sustained, predictable funding stream needed to bolster the country’s innovative infrastructure.” Moreover, as Breakthrough wrote recently in the National Journal , many of the federal programs supporting clean energy industries are set to expire in the next few years, which will likely precipitate a crash in the industry. In order to avoid the perpetual boom-bust cycle in clean energy, the U.S. government must increase the kinds of energy innovation investments outlined in the AEIC report. These investments must be rationalized around driving innovation and cost declines to make clean energy cost-competitive without subsidy. Given the tight fiscal environment, the Council recommends a number of revenue streams that could fund innovation investment without adding to the budget deficit, including revenues from domestic oil and gas production, redirecting existing energy subsidies for mature industries, or small fees on electricity usage. Ultimately, however, these leading business executives make a forceful case that America’s current “budget dilemma,” as they call it, is no reason to delay in boosting funding for energy innovation. “Supporting innovation,” they write, “is an investment, not a cost.” Indeed, given the country’s economic malaise, there is no better time to make growth-enhancing investments that could catalyze a new era of American economic leadership in a key global industry. Critics of government investment in energy innovation would do well to listen to these titans of industry, and to heed their recommendations. To read the full AEIC report, click here (PDF).

Read the full article →

Rich Nadworny: Has Ben & Jerry’s Lost Its Way?

September 9, 2011

Ben & Jerry’s launched a new ice cream this week, ” Shweddy Balls ,” in honor of Alec Baldwin’s old Saturday Night Live skit. In an instant, Twitter was abuzz. Shweddy Balls and Ben & Jerry’s both zoomed to the top of the trending list. Mashable wrote about it , as did a number of other media outlets. However, the new ice creams looks like another indicator that the great Ben & Jerry’s brand has lost their way. The brand has always gone its own way. From the idea of putting lots of things in ice cream to committing itself to social justice, Ben & Jerry’s has always stood out. It’s done so by taking stands that are true to Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield’s philosophy, but it’s always used a large dose of humor and word play. Once it launched Cherry Garcia, it also embraced an alternative, hippy style that was also true to the Vermont brand. It followed that with flavors like Phish Food, but also Chubby Hubby, One Sweet Whirled, Karamel Sutra and Half Baked, to name a few. Clever names, names that made you stop, think and laugh. This year, however, we’re seeing names like ” Clusterfluff ” and “Shweddy Balls.” To which I can only respond “WTF?” I wonder if Ben & Jerry’s is losing market share to younger college audiences and 20 somethings. Clearly, that’s where the brand is headed, with names like these. They’re certainly not targeting the people who buy Chubby Hubby. If so, that’s a major shift for the brand. What competition are they afraid of? Maybe they’ve just run out of creativity. For the past few years, it seems like half the flavors at the scoop shop have chocolate in their names. There’s also been a lot of focus on celebrity co-branding with Colbert and Jimmy Fallon. And now Alec Baldwin. Clearly, though, Shweddy Balls and Clusterfluff show that Ben & Jerry’s have crossed an invisible brand line. Branding “expert” Allen Adamson from the venerable agency Landor Associates explains what’s happening in an AP article: ‘You don’t get noticed today without taking some risks. If you do something that offends no one, you won’t get noticed,’ he said.” In one sentence, Landor redefined branding as offending someone. That’s not the Ben & Jerry’s brand. They’ve never been offensive. They’ve stood for what they believe, yes, even when it hasn’t been popular. They’ve been true to who they are, but always done so with a twinkle in their eye. But, offensive, never. I admit, as a Vermonter, I’m overly sensitive to our Vermont brands. Maybe it’s because we don’t have so many. In the last year, we’ve seen our beloved Magic Hat forced to sell to a beer distributor and watched the exodus of key people who made the brand what it is today. I remember going to the original Ben & Jerry’s in the old gas station across from the park and listening to Don Rose (the tallest guy in our shul, no less) playing the piano. I saw first hand as they expanded to Europe. I still follow what Cohen and Greenfield do to support sustainability and local businesses. And I’ve always enjoyed eating and laughing at the crazy flavors, even Sweet Potato Pie. But Shweddy Balls or Clusterfluff? No thanks. I’m sure they’ll be successful from a marketing standpoint, but from a brand standpoint they are way off. It’s certainly not anything I’d bring home to the kids. As a final nail in the coffin, there’s a quote from the AP article “The company’s not worried about offending people with the name,spokesman Sean Greenwood said. ‘We’re the caring company,’ Greenwood said Thursday.” If you have to say it, it’s not true.

Read the full article →

Beloved Burger Chain Plans Massive Middle Eastern Expansion

September 8, 2011

The American military may slowly be pulling out of the Middle East , but the troop are quickly being replaced by another aggressive army: the fast food industry. Smashburger, founded in Denver in just 2007, announced yesterday that it had partnered with two Middle Eastern restaurant business to bring its “better burgers” to three countries on the Persian gulf . Bahrain-based Georgetown Associates will open franchises in Kuwait and Bahrain, and Saudi company Al Musbah will open eight Smashburgers in airports around Saudi Arabia over the next eight years. Doug Branigan, Smashburger’s head of franchising, told the Huffington Post that restaurant operators had long been approaching him to partner on outposts in the Arabic-speaking world. “There’s tremendous interest in American brands throughout the Middle East,” he said. Indeed, Smashburger joins several other major restaurant companies that have made inroads in the Gulf in recent years. The one closest in feel to Smashburger is probably Danny Meyer’s Shake Shack , which has opened outposts in Dubai and Kuwait City and has plans for several more restaurants in the Arab world. Branigan said that he isn’t daunted by the competition; instead, the success of Shake Shack’s Middle Eastern restaurants gives him high hopes for sales at Smashburger, especially in Kuwait. “We see ourselves being in much the same space as Shake Shack,” he said. “We both serve great fresh-made burgers, though I think we complement them with a broader menu than they do. But no, we think Shake Shack is a great brand and we’re enthusiastic about their success in the region. ” For the most part, the Smashburgers in the Middle East will be much like the 109 currently operating, all in the United States. “The menu translates extremely well,” Branigan said. “Of course, we have to make a few small adjustments. There’s no alcohol in any of the products. You can’t have pork in any of the products.” The first Middle Eastern Smashburger is expected to open in Kuwait in early 2012.

Read the full article →

Christine Bader: Is Steve Jobs the Next John Browne?

September 8, 2011

Environmental damage threatens another CEO’s otherwise successful legacy. Steve Jobs is one of the most admired CEOs of all time. He transformed his company from a middling player into one of the world’s largest and most successful businesses. He transcended mere leadership of his industry to transform the way we interact with information and with each other. But following fast on the heels of Jobs’s announcing his retirement was the latest in a series of revelations of how Apple has inflicted serious harm on people and the environment. Last week, renowned Chinese environmentalist Ma Jun released another damning report on pollution by Apple suppliers. In May, three workers died and 16 were injured by an explosion at a factory where iPads are manufactured, the latest in a string of deaths and labor abuses associated with Foxconn , one of Apple’s major suppliers. Last year, in spite of documentation of numerous problems, Jobs said its factory in China “is not a sweatshop. ” Pollution and human rights abuses cannot be offset by great products. Steve Jobs — and all other CEOs — must be judged on how they affect people and planet as much as how they affect the company’s share price. An increasing number of investors agree . Those who doubt that business success can be overshadowed by social and environmental issues need look no further than another once-revered CEO: John Browne of BP. By taking over Amoco and Arco, Browne transformed the former British Petroleum from a “two-pipeline company” (with major assets only in the North Sea and Alaska) to a true supermajor. In 1997, he earned praise from environmentalists and the wrath of his oil titan peers by becoming the first head of a major energy company to acknowledge the realities of climate change and urge action. Browne was anointed “The Sun King” by the media, frequently voted Britain’s most-admired chief executive, and even knighted with the honorific “Lord” by the Queen of England. But then came the Texas refinery explosion that killed 15 people in 2005, followed by the rupture of a pipeline the following year that oozed 200,000 gallons of oil into the Alaskan tundra. Both occurred on Browne’s watch. And of course, last spring saw the Deepwater Horizon rig explode to such disastrous effect in the Gulf of Mexico. Browne had stepped down by then, but some speculate that he created the cost-cutting and risk-taking culture that led to the Gulf disaster. Browne’s achievements are no less historic. He shifted the global debate about climate change. He created new models for resource development in Azerbaijan , Indonesia , and elsewhere, in which the company partnered with human rights groups and grassroots organizations to ensure that local communities benefited from the company’s presence. (I worked on such projects for BP under Browne’s tenure.) Yet those acts weren’t enough to prevent major harm elsewhere — harm that permanently defined BP in the eyes of many. While Apple may not be able to wreak damage on the same scale as BP, it is not too much to ask any company to take responsibility for safety and environmental standards in its supply chain. Apple is making efforts in this area, but they seem to be coming up short: The company earned a mediocre “Room for Improvement” from the Enough Project in its study of the 21 largest electronics companies to assess progress toward conflict-free supply chains. It earned a similarly lackluster 4.9 out of 10 in Greenpeace’s Guide to Greener Electronics , primarily for its lack of disclosure about its supply chain. In his new role as chairman, Jobs should start by announcing that henceforth Apple will be as much of a leader on social and environmental issues as it has in every other aspect of its performance. He should set up a task force of external experts including Ma Jun, give them free reign to inspect Apple’s supply chain, and have them publish regular reports on their findings. Apple should also catch up with the rest of the business world and publish its suppliers list. HP has been publishing its list since 2008. Nike began doing so in 2005 after similar criticism to what Apple is facing, and is still doing so today without the negative repercussions that they claimed would ensue. There is no question that Jobs’s leadership of Apple gifted us with beautiful products that have revolutionized how we interact with information and each other. But worker deaths, factory pollution, and lack of disclosure are not the hallmarks of a great company, nor of a great leader. Steve Jobs needs to tackle those issues with the same relentless focus that has made Apple such a success — so far.

Read the full article →

Oil Company Struggles To Clean Up China Spill

September 6, 2011

SHANGHAI — The oil spills from offshore wells operated by ConocoPhillips in China’s Bohai Bay are posing political and technical challenges for the oil company far messier than the crude and drilling mud seeping from the seabed. The company said Monday that it had complied with a government order to suspend all drilling, water injection and production at the affected Penglai 19-3 oil field, one of China’s biggest. Operations are currently stopped at 180 producing wells and 51 injecting wells, for a total of 231 wells, said a statement by Houston, Texas-based ConocoPhillips, which operates the field in a venture with state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp. CNOOC, which owns 51 percent of the venture, said the suspension of production in Penglai 19-3 would reduce output by 40,000 barrels a day, in addition to the 22,000 barrels a day lost with the shutdown of the two wells where the spills occurred. For such big oil companies, the loss is not a major blow, though for ConocoPhillips, Penglai 19-3 is its largest project in China, noted Thomas Grieder, analyst for Asia-Pacific energy at IHS Global Insight. The spills began in early June and have unleashed a flood of criticism inside China over how ConocoPhillips has handled the cleanup. The State Oceanic Administration rejected the company’s assertion that it had met an Aug. 31 deadline to completely clear up any damage and prevent further seeps. Chinese maritime authorities facing pressure from fisheries and environmentalists to minimize further damage to the already heavily polluted Bohai appear to have lost patience with the prolonged effort to staunch the oil seeps. “ConocoPhillips has not been able to address this problem for two months and the Chinese authorities are losing face. It’s kind of an inevitable reaction to something that’s been going on a while,” Grieder said. Regardless of the tensions provoked by the spills, China is relying ever more heavily on foreign partners for the technology it needs to tap difficult to exploit deepwater oil reserves, said Grieder. According to ConocoPhillips, the spills released about 700 barrels of oil into Bohai Bay and 2,500 barrels of mineral oil-based drilling mud, which is used for lubrication, onto the seabed. All but a small fraction of that oil and mud has been recovered, and the small amounts still emerging are from earlier seeps that have been shifting under layers of sand on the seabed, it says. But the State Oceanic Administration contends that monitoring by satellite, underwater robots and other means shows the oil is still seeping. It criticized ConocoPhillips’ containment measures as stopgap and said the company may have caused oil to seep through faults in the seabed by putting too much pressure on the oil reservoir. Dong Xiucheng, a professor at the China University of Petroleum, described the accident as “unusual.” “It is hard technically to find the reason and the exact location of the spill and to try to stop it since it is on the seabed not in a pipeline. Both ConocoPhillips and CNOOC must have tried to do it, but it takes time,” Dong said. ConocoPhillips has pointed to safety concerns and other difficulties in capping and cleaning up the oil and mud in murky seas with minimal visibility. “Addressing the issue is rather complex,” Grieder said. “They’re trying to identify small cracks on the sea floor in a situation where you can’t see much.” ConocoPhillips said Monday that divers were continuing to search the ocean floor and that remote-controlled robots were taking seabed samples to monitor the situation. The company said it was working with CNOOC on a plan to reduce pressure in the oil reservoir and was preparing a revised environmental impact report. The maritime authority has said it is preparing to file lawsuits on behalf of those who suffered losses due to pollution from the spill. Apart from frictions over the pace and progress of the cleanup, state-run media and environmentalists have been lobbying for harsher penalties for such accidents – current law calls for maximum fines of 200,000 yuan (less than $31,000). The official newspaper China Daily, in a harshly worded commentary Monday, said that a joint investigation by seven government departments found ConocoPhillips China had “seriously violated operating rules.” “Not only is the oil spill worse than the company reported but, despite its assurances to the contrary, it has failed to bring the situation under full control and find and stop the sources of the spills,” it said. “Obviously, China needs to learn a lesson from this incident.” ConocoPhillips has denied allegations that it sought to mislead the maritime authority by falsely claiming to have stopped and cleaned up the oil seeps. The company said it was committed to complying with the law and conducting “all business activities with the highest ethical standards.” “This commitment fully applies to how we conduct our business in China,” it said. ConocoPhillips requested a correction of a weekend news report on state-run China Central Television. The report claimed that a ConocoPhillips China employee interviewed by marine radio said the company was deliberately deceiving the State Oceanic Administration in reporting that the oil spills had been fully contained and cleaned up. “The ConocoPhillips China employee interviewed by CCTV did not make the negative comment which CCTV is attributing to him,” it said.

Read the full article →

Halliburton Sues BP Over Deepwater Crisis

September 2, 2011

NEW ORLEANS — BP PLC has engaged in a “cover up scheme” to hide its culpability for the deadly rig explosion that spawned last year’s massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, one of the oil giant’s partners in the drilling project claims in a newly filed lawsuit. Halliburton Energy Services Inc.’s suit, the latest of several that the project’s partners have filed against each other, accuses BP of concealing critical information about the deepwater well that blew out on April 20, 2010. Halliburton, which did cement work on BP’s Macondo well, claims in Thursday’s suit that BP provided false information about the location of pockets of oil and gas around the well before the blowout. Halliburton says knowing the location of those zones is critical for a cementing job. “Profit and greed” were BP’s motives for concealing the information, the lawsuit alleges. Halliburton says it likely would have insisted on redesigning the well’s production casing if it had known about an additional hydrocarbon zone that BP allegedly failed to disclose. “Such changes would have cost BP millions of dollars on a well that was already painfully over budget and behind schedule,” says the suit, filed in a Harris County, Texas, state court. In response to the suit, which seeks unspecified monetary damages, BP spokesman Scott Dean accused Halliburton of trying to deflect blame and divert attention from its role in the disaster. Dean said “multiple independent investigations” have identified “serious problems” with the cementing of the well. “BP has accepted its responsibility for responding to the spill and is accordingly paying costs and compensation,” Dean said in a statement. “In contrast, Halliburton has refused to accept any responsibility or accountability. As BP has said repeatedly, it expects other parties to accept their responsibilities and bear their share of the costs.” Halliburton’s suit accuses BP of intentionally omitting information about the location of hydrocarbon zones from its own report on the causes of the blowout. Halliburton also claims BP withheld the same information from government investigators. In addition to suing BP in the Texas state court, Halliburton also said Friday that it is amending existing claims against BP in federal court to include fraud allegations. U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier in New Orleans is presiding over tens of thousands of claims resulting from the oil spill, including the suits that companies filed against each other.

Read the full article →

Energy Secretary Suggests U.S. Support For Keystone XL Pipeline

September 1, 2011

WASHINGTON — Canada’s status as a close U.S. ally should boost a plan to pipe oil from western Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in comments that signaled support for the massive $7 billion pipeline. “It’s certainly true that having Canada as a supplier for our oil is much more comforting than to have other countries supply our oil,” Chu said in a TV interview this week that will be aired later this month. Technology used to extract oil from tar sands such as those in Alberta, Canada are improving dramatically, Chu said, making such projects less risky to the environment. The proposed Keystone XL pipeline “is not perfect, but it’s a trade-off,” Chu said. U.S. officials will have to weigh the benefit of a reliable supply of oil from a friendly country against environmental concerns raised by a possible spill, he said. Chu’s comments are the latest sign that the Obama administration appears likely to back the 1,700-mile pipeline, which would carry crude oil extracted from tar sands in Alberta, Canada, and bring it to refineries in Texas. The pipeline would travel through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma. The State Department said in a report last week that the project is unlikely to cause significant environmental problems during construction or operation. Calgary-based TransCanada, which would operate the pipeline, says it would be built to strict environmental standards, including 57 conditions above those required by law. The company and project supporters on both sides of the border say it would create tens of thousands of jobs and significantly reduce U.S. dependence on Middle Eastern oil. Despite those reassurances, the project has become a flashpoint for environmental groups, who say the pipeline would bring “dirty oil” that requires huge amounts of energy to extract and could cause an ecological disaster in case of a spill. Opponents have urged President Barack Obama to block the project as a sign he is serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming. Environmental activists, including actress Daryl Hannah and NASA scientist James Hansen, have been arrested in ongoing protests outside the White House the past two weeks. Chu’s interview with the “energyNOW!” TV show is set to air in mid-September on Bloomberg Television.

Read the full article →

Scott Poynton: Panda Bashing: Reflections on NGO-Business Partnerships

September 1, 2011

NGO-Business partnerships have been getting a bad press lately. WWF for example: TV exposés questioning the use of donor money and partnerships with controversial companies, French employees publicly stating concerns about delivery, Global Witness criticizing GTFN. The Panda is not alone: Conservation International had that awful sting experience with Don’t Panic . All the research tells us that NGOs are infinitely more trusted than corporates, but if those we trust most are faltering, where does that leave us? Fascinating stuff. I think what’s happening is that we’ve grown in a healthy, positive way as a society into a new, more cynical school. People now just refuse to believe what anyone tells them! Where’s this come from? Chris Lang at REDD Monitor posted a blog recently, citing Harry Frankfurt’s work ” On Bullshit “. Frankfurt says : The increase in the amount of bullshit in contemporary life as compared with, say 100 years ago, is because of the intensity of the marketing motive in contemporary society. We are constantly marketing things, selling products, selling people, selling candidates, selling programs, selling policies and once you start out by supposing that your object is to sell something then your object is not to tell the truth about it but to get people to believe what you want them to believe about it. And so this encourages a resort to bullshit. NGOs, like businesses, have an intense marketing motive. Businesses spend money — lots of it — on environmental and social programs. There’s no shortage of NGOs with which to partner. This creates a dance where businesses bring their dollars, NGOs bring their programs, and amid much choreography, someone wins. Unsurprisingly, because that is how our human minds work, it is usually the NGO with the slickest marketing able to convince us that their program best matches the motive. NGOs do spend money on marketing and where there’s marketing, inevitably, there is bullshit, too. Nothing wrong with a focus on brand, but when the approach to build the brand value trends towards bullshit, you’re in trouble. As competition increases — more NGOs on the block — so does the tendency to over-claim achievements. As money gets tight, you’ve got to fight harder for scarce resources. It’s a recipe for high quality bullshitting and we shouldn’t be surprised that it exists in the NGO world — we’re all part of the human system. That NGOs work for the public good doesn’t mean they’re immune to this most basic human tendency. The problem for large NGOs in particular is that despite having been around for generations, with large headcounts and billion dollar budgets, the world’s problems are getting worse, not better. People are starting to scratch their heads and are spotting a disconnect between flashy marketing and delivery. This healthy cynicism, this great new questioning of absolutely everything, has gained momentum and intensity since the global financial crisis in 2008-09. People feel as though those they trusted fed them a bullshit-rich line there that caused the crisis. Things went badly wrong and people suffered. They’re still suffering and this is breeding a whole new wave of cynicism. People now are asking more questions and raising an eyebrow to say “Really? Prove it to me!” This is a lightning rod in the world of social media. Anyone can spot some bullshit and post it on Twitter or Facebook and bang, you are having an impact. People are gaining control of their lives. It’s rich, it’s excellent and it’s putting everyone — all of us who depend to some extent on marketing — on notice to be mighty careful in claiming too much and setting off bullshit indicators. Prenuptial dances between businesses and NGOs now focus more on questions of delivery. What are you delivering? How are you doing it? Is it bringing real change in the eyes of the people that count? All of which is good news. ‘Deliver or die’ is the new maxim and there should be no NGO lamenting about it. The world is in a perilous state; we have to bring change, and quickly. Our challenge as NGOs now is to think deeply about how to structure business partnerships within this new context, not to ditch them altogether. They must deliver what they promise. For businesses, the challenge is to hone bullshit indicators, to find dance partners who focus on real delivery, in the field, where it matters and who let the results speak for themselves. Partnerships like that, good ones, will change the world.

Read the full article →

Mattias Wallander: Going the Extra Mile

August 31, 2011

I’ve been a runner most of my life. I started running when I was in my teens and was immediately addicted. I’ve always found that running has been a great way to clear my head — I’ve come up with some of my best ideas while jogging along city streets, or on riverside trails. While running started out as just a way to get exercise, it quickly turned into a wonderful personal challenge for me. I began to run longer and longer distances and soon I was training for my first marathon. Training for a marathon is a process that I’ve come to both love and loathe, a process that’s both exhausting and exhilarating. I ran my first marathon in 2006. And I was hooked… You might think of running as a very ‘green activity’ — just you and your running shoes pounding the pavement. Right? Actually, that’s not the case. In 2008, Runner’s World magazine surveyed hundreds of runners and calculated the annual CO2 impact of a typical American runner, which includes everything from clothing and running shoes to traveling to and from marathons. They found that one runner generates approximately 5,449 pounds of CO2 in a year! That’s equivalent to driving an SUV 300 miles every month for a year. As the CEO of a ‘green company’ I found this very troubling. I’d been noticing some trends that weren’t so environmentally appealing. For instance, I saw how along the marathon course runners were tossing off, and abandoning, clothes — a lot of them. As runners warm up we shed layers: warm up jackets and pants, long sleeve T’s, hats, shirts and more. The more races I ran, the more concerned I grew that all that clothing might be thrown in the trash along with cups, water bottles and other discarded items along the race route. This seemed like a huge waste to me, but it also seemed like a problem that I could help fix. In 2008 my company, USAgain , which collects discarded clothes and shoes and puts them back in the use cycle, began partnering with marathons around the country. We have collected at the Twin Cities Marathon since 2008 and partnered with the San Francisco Marathon this year. At every marathon since then we’ve prevented an average of 500-600 pounds of clothing from being dumped in landfills. This is an incredible amount of clothing and almost all of it is perfectly wearable — some of it is even new. About 10.8 million tons of textiles end up in landfills every year. When it comes to marathons, there are hundreds of them annually in the United States, and thousands across the globe. USAgain is growing our reach in the marathon community so that we can do our part to make running just a little bit greener. Some things that you can do as a runner — even if you just jog a few miles a week — to go the extra mile to help lessen your impact on the environment are: recycle your old running shoes by donating them to charity, or giving them to an organization that will reuse or recycle them. Wash your running clothes in cold water, with minimal detergent — it’s gentler on both clothes and environment. Buy organic cotton clothing when possible. Non-organic cotton is grown with tons of fertilizer and pesticides that pose health hazards to people and animals, not just pests.

Read the full article →

Gilbert B. Kaplan: President Obama, Enact a Jobs Program Based on Real Trade Reform

August 31, 2011

Press reports make clear that the president and the White House staff are working non-stop to put together a jobs program to announce on Labor Day. Obviously a good thing to do, given that unemployment appears to be stuck permanently above 9%. At that level, and with other financial indicators tanking, President Obama may soon find his name among the 9.1% unemployed. If the president wants to find a place to create jobs, he needs to look hard at what has happened to the manufacturing sector since 2000 and figure out a way to start turning that around. At the end of the year 2000, we had 17,263,000 manufacturing jobs in this country. Today we have about 11,745,000, an astounding drop of 32% in a little over ten years, in the most important job generator in the economy. In addition to these 5,518,000 manufacturing jobs lost, it is universally recognized that manufacturing jobs have a multiplier effect. For every manufacturing job there are at least 2 or 3 additional jobs created, in services around the plants and in manufacturing communities, in R & D and finance, in transportation, in wholesale and retail trade, and in government. Let’s assume it’s just two additional jobs. That means the 5.5 million manufacturing jobs we have lost have resulted in total job loss of 16.5 million. Given that the total number of unemployed in the economy as of the end of July (according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics) was 13.9 million people, it is clear that these manufacturing job losses are having an astounding effect. So what should the president do about it? The simple fact is that the majority of these manufacturing jobs are now overseas, as a result of our failure to enforce our trade laws or to adopt creative, new solutions to the trade problems we face. During the 2000-2010 period, our trade deficit in manufactured goods increased by almost 30%, roughly parallel to the loss in manufacturing jobs. Our trade deficit just in advanced technology products increased to $81 billion, from a surplus of $5.3 billion in 2000. Our trade deficit with China increased from $84 billion to $273 billion. For those who say that the issue is lower wages in China, Vietnam or elsewhere, that’s simply not true. Almost nothing we make in the U.S. or made in the year 2000, has a wage component of more than 10% of the cost of production, a cost that is readily off-set by the cost of shipping products from distant shores. The real problem is unfair trade practices by our trading partners and our foolish and destructive refusal to take actions to remedy these practices. We have to adopt new trade strategies on manufacturing if we want to create good jobs in this country. To do that, I hope the president will announce the following trade actions in his jobs speech next week: Immediately off-set currency undervaluation by the Chinese, or at least instruct the Department of Commerce to self-initiate countervailing duty cases on the undervaluation. A few weeks ago, Fred Bergsten, President of the Peterson Institute of International Economics called the sustained currency undervaluation by the Chinese “by far the largest protectionist measure adopted by any country since the Second World War — and probably in all of history.” Yet the president just stands idly by. As to other subsidies which have caused U. S. industries to move off-shore or have created unfair advantages causing U. S. industries to cut back or close plants, the president should instruct the United States Trade Representative and the Secretary of Commerce to create an unfair trade strike force that would immediately initiate anti-subsidy cases against any government that gives subsidies to its industries that cause harm to U. S. competitors. These subsidies include programs like free land, below-market interest loans, grants to build greenfield factories, free energy and tax breaks — all actions that are endemic in China and our other trading competitors. We should expect our government to act against these economic security and job base threats the same way they act against national security threats. The third major disadvantage U. S. manufacturers have is that, in every other country when manufacturers export, their VAT (value added taxes) are rebated. As a result they get a 5-17% cost and price advantage on every export sale. This is supercharging the export proclivities of every other country in the world. Because of a peculiarity we wrongfully agreed to in the international trade regime decades ago, when U. S. manufacturers export their goods, the U. S. cannot rebate the income taxes they have paid. Our manufacturers are undercut and forced out of the globalized market. The president should immediately propose a system of trade zones where manufacturers will pay a VAT tax in lieu of an income tax, and then rebate the VAT tax on goods which are exported — equalizing competition with China, Japan, the EU and the rest of our trading competitors. All over this country, plants remain closed down and workers are moving down the food chain, suffering from the enormous loss of manufacturing jobs, and from the disappearance of related jobs in their manufacturing communities. We are a great country but we cannot sustain a 32% drop in a very high paying sector of our economy — manufacturing including advanced manufacturing — and expect to remain so. Without dealing with the trade issues, there is no way to address this decline. The above steps will quickly begin the turnaround. As an added bonus, this is not a big new spending program, which would likely hit a road block in the House. President Obama, take the leap!

Read the full article →

Krispy Kreme To Take On Dunkin’, Starbucks With New Coffee Offerings

August 31, 2011

When you visit the Krispy Kreme website , you’re confronted with three central options. From left to right, you see first ” Iced Drinks ,” then ” Coffee ” and only then, third, ” Doughnuts .” This order is in spite of the fact that the chain’s official name is “Krispy Kreme Doughnuts” — not to mention the fact that only 12% of its revenue comes from beverages, with 4% coming from coffee. But if the rank does not yet reflect Krispy Kreme’s hierarchy of profit-drivers, it may signal a shift in the company’s priorities. According to Nation’s Restaurant News , Krispy Kreme is set to release three new signature coffee flavors this Friday, and plans to advertise them with the slogan “Worthy Of Our Doughnuts.” The three flavors, which are made from 100% Arabica beans, are House, Dark Roast and House Decaf. The 660-outpost-strong chain’s representatives have said that they hope the coffee offerings will entice customers to visit the store more often. American coffee drinkers gulp an average of 3.1 cups of Joe per day, so it seems like a strong bet. Moreover, the company can look to its largest shareholder, Robert Stiller , for advice if it gets confused by the competitive coffee market: he made his considerable fortune as the founder of Green Mountain Coffee Roasters Inc. If Krispy Kreme’s signature coffee gambit pays off, it could be the boost the chain needs to regain market share it’s lost since its peak in 2006. Since then, revenues have tumbled by a third, from $543 million to $362 million — though that latter figure is itself a significant increase from 2010′s nadir of $347 million. Krispy Kreme’s main competitor, Dunkin Donuts, gets the majority — 60% — of its revenue from beverage sales.

Read the full article →

Robert L. Borosage: On Jobs: Tell It Like It Is

August 30, 2011

Washington is waiting for Obama. Next week, the president has scheduled a big speech to propose new measures to create jobs and get the economy going. Reports are that the administration is still undecided whether to put forth a bold plan or propose measures that might pass the Republican Congress. AFLCIO President Rich Trumka had it right when he told the president: ‘Do not look at what is possible — look at what is necessary… If you only propose what you think they’ll [the Republican Congress] accept, they control the agenda.” Republicans have already made this an easy choice, by denouncing virtually any idea out of the president as dead on arrival. Their “jobs plan” involves cutting spending, rolling back financial regulation, repealing health care reform, subsidizing big oil, and passing more corporate trade deals. This would cost jobs, and make the economy less competitive in the long run. They are either wrong-headed or willing to sustain mass unemployment in order to insure Obama’s defeat. Or both. So half measures aren’t likely to pass anyway. And worse, they constitute presidential malpractice, using the “bully pulpit” to confuse rather than educate the American people about the straits we are in. Far better simply to tell it like it is. But progressives shouldn’t be waiting on Obama in any case. It is long past time for Democrats in the Congress to put forth a bold plan to revive America and put people back to work. Let the White House ignore it and Republicans scorn it. Take it to the country. The faltering economy and sustained mass unemployment will make it more and more compelling. Eventually, the president will figure out he needs to run on something. The bold agenda will frame the choice for Americans to decide in the election. So what would that agenda look like? There is no shortage of good ideas. For a series on big ideas on making America work, go here. . Here is my version. Get the Challenge Right The economy is barely growing. Twenty-five million Americans are in need of full time work. One in four teenagers not in college can’t find a job. Wages aren’t keeping up with prices. Our trade deficit is rising, as more and more good jobs get shipped abroad. Nearly one in three homes with a mortgage is underwater, worth less than the mortgage. Moreover, there is no old healthy economy to recover to. The old economy didn’t work for most Americans even when it was growing. The cancer was spreading before it metastasized in the financial panic. In the so-called Bush recovery years before the collapse, the few captured all the rewards of growth. Most households lost ground. That economy was built on unsustainable debt. We were hemorrhaging manufacturing jobs and borrowing $2 billion a day from abroad. And we were in complete denial about global warming and the catastrophic climate changes that have already begun. We can’t recover to that old economy — and we wouldn’t want to. So the task is not simply to give the economy a stimulus, like a dead car battery that just needs a booster cable and a charge to get it going again. We need to rebuild the engine and modernize the wiring, creating a new strategy for America in the global economy even as we put people back to work. Ironically, no one has made this case better than Barack Obama, most notably in his ” Economic Sermon on the Mount” at Georgetown University in April 2009. (Maybe if the president just re-read some of his old speeches…) Elements of a Real Jobs Agenda Given that reality, consider the following elements of a new strategy: • Revive Manufacturing in America We must end the unsustainable global imbalances that drive us ever further into foreign indebtedness. That would best be done with global cooperation — the surplus nations like China exporting less; the deficit nations like the U.S. making more at home and selling more abroad. But we can gain that cooperation only by setting out an independent course to revive manufacturing in the U.S. and to balance our trade. This requires a national plan for manufacturing — targeting industries, coordinating research, providing incentives and training, and repealing tax laws that reward companies for shipping jobs abroad. It requires a new trade strategy, insisting that every major nation play by the same set of rules, taking direct action against mercantilist nations like China that protect their markets, rig their currencies and steal our technology. Buy America should be a mandate on all federal, state and local government purchases, consistent with our trade laws. • Capture a Lead in the Green Industrial Revolution The priority target should be the green industrial revolution. It is sweeping a world that has no choice but to address catastrophic climate change. This will change how we live, the appliances we use, the way we travel and fuel our cars, and how we light our homes or power up our computers. China, Germany, Spain and others are rushing to dominate growing markets in solar, wind, fast trains, electric cars and more. This should be the centerpiece of our manufacturing strategy, investing in research and innovation, providing investment incentives, building key infrastructure such as a smart grid. The Apollo Alliance, now merged with the Blue Green Alliance, has a comprehensive energy plan, as well as key initiatives on green manufacturing and transportation, that provides a good roadmap. • Rebuild America This is truly a no-brainer. At current interest rates, America is now being paid to borrow money for seven years. That’s right, investors are so spooked they are buying U.S. bonds that pay lower interest than the rate of inflation. For all the ranting of the right, the U.S. now has access to essentially free money. And we have compelling investments to make that that will have real returns. Our decrepit infrastructure — from roads to bridges to sewer systems to mass transit — is not only taxing our competitiveness; it increasingly endangers lives. Meanwhile, the construction industry is flat on its back. There will never be a better time to finance rebuilding that will eventually have to be paid for. It will cost more later than now. Create a national infrastructure bank, as the president suggests. But go big. Current plans are too timid to take advantage of our current opportunity. These projects will take time to get moving, but we’d be fools to delay a major initiative to rebuild America. • Save Our Schools The president has correctly warned against debilitating cuts in our schools. But across the country, we see the carnage at all levels, from pre-K to college: teachers laid off, after school and advanced placement programs closed, music and arts and languages discontinued. Colleges are raising fees and tuitions, cutting grants, and slashing class offerings. We need to staunch the layoffs of skilled teachers. But we also should be using the current opportunity to invest in creating the finest public education system in the world, from universal preschool, to modernized public schools, to advanced training and affordable college. Expanded federal revenue sharing with the states in exchange for commitments to sustain state and local investment in schools is an essential first step. Again, these investments will generate a strong return in economic performance and can be financed with essentially free money. Why would we allow an essential key to a prosperous society be savaged when it can be revived now with money investors are paying us to hold? • Save Our Homes As noted nearly one in three homes with a mortgage is underwater. Millions have lost their homes already. Millions more are struggling to sustain mortgages even as their jobs are lost, incomes decline, or higher mortgage interest rates kick in. Housing prices will not stabilize until the massive overhang of foreclosed homes is reduced. We need a serious program to restructure this debt. The New Bottom Line has called on the Attorney Generals to require, as part of settling the mortgage fraud negotiations, that banks write off principle and refinance underwater mortgages at current lower rates. They estimate it would pump about $70 billion a year into the economy and create about 1 million private sector jobs. It would cost the banks about half of what the top six paid out in compensation and bonuses last year. Those already facing foreclosure should have access to bankruptcy proceedings that can restructure their debts and, where appropriate, restructure their mortgages, providing them with a right to rent their own homes at market price. • Put Veterans and the Young to Work Veterans are 50 percent more likely to be homeless than other Americans. One in four teenagers is officially unemployed; nearly one in two young African Americans and Latinos is unemployed. We are breaking trust with those who risk their lives for us. We are abandoning the young at the beginning of their work lives. It is hard to think of anything more corrosive to the future of this nation. If veterans and young people cannot find employment in the private sector, then government should act as the employer of last resort. Rep. Jan Schakowsky has a sensible bill that would provide 2.2 million jobs, largely through direct employment in the public or non-profit sectors. It creates a new Green and Urban Corps and provides resources to nonprofits to hire the young. Work installs discipline and self-confidence. It provides hope. We should insure that every veteran and every young person has that opportunity. These elements are only the beginning. We’d be wise to raise the minimum wage, and empower workers to insure a greater sharing of corporate profits and productivity. Greater aid to states and localities now in budget straits would also help limit the drag on the economy. Straight Talk on Deficits and Debt As we get the economy moving, we need to be clear about how to put our books in order. The U.S. has a real long-term debt concern — but it is entirely driven by our broken health care system. Comprehensive health care reform is already beginning to create savings, both in Medicare and more broadly. More will require taking on the private insurance and drug companies, and the private hospital complexes that make our costs almost twice per capita those of any other industrial nation. Fixing health care isn’t about “shared sacrifice,” or putting a lid on Medicare and Medicaid. It is about getting costs under control, not shifting them to those least able to pay. Empowering Medicare to negotiate bulk discounts on prescription drugs is a no brainer. Creating a public option to compete with oligopolistic private insurers would help. That every other industrial country has manged this challenge suggests just how lame our privatized system is. And as the economy recovers and people go back to work, our deficits won’t be much of a problem — other than health care costs. But paying for the new commitments above will require progressive taxes and new priorities, ending the wars abroad, reducing our commitment to policing the world, and cutting the Pentagon budget, even as we maintain the strongest military in the world. Progressive tax reforms are long overdue. As Warren Buffett wrote, he pays a lower tax rate than anyone in his office, including his secretary. We should tax income from wealth at the same rate as income from work, to curb systematic tax avoidance schemes, crack down on offshore tax havens, and on companies parking profit abroad. And as Buffett argued, millionaires and multimillionaires can easily pay a higher tax rate than that now imposed. The Choice for Americans All this sounds outlandish. The Tea Party legislators will go nuts. The corporate lobbies will spend so much in opposition it just might boost the economy. But Americans aren’t as stupid as Washington thinks. They understand the economy is in trouble. They are looking not for a short-term boost, but for a long-term strategy. They are appalled at Washington’s scorn for their priorities. They want a focus on jobs and reviving America’s economic strength. They are upset about deficits largely because they think they are a measure of an economy that is broken. They want Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid protected. They think the banks should help pay for the mess they have made. They want the rich to pay their fair share, and an end to the money politics where predatory corporate lobbies rig the rules to benefit themselves. The first step is a clear, bold agenda on jobs and American economic revival. It is time to present this to the American people, to introduce it in Congress, and to fight for it all the way through the 2012 elections.

Read the full article →

Jared Bernstein: Self-Inflicting Our Economic Wounds

August 23, 2011

Just because we’ve got the debt ceiling debate behind us doesn’t mean we’re finished with economic masochism. The president was last seen trying to pivot to the jobs agenda, but the “fiscal consolidation” crowd is never far behind. So it seemed like a good time to reflect on the costs of acting too soon — that is, aggressively attacking the budget deficit before the economy is strong enough to move forward without fiscal support. Some new research by Goldman Sachs (“The Speed Limit of Fiscal Consolidation,” subscription required) provides a strong warning. The figure shows the impact on real GDP growth of a 1% of GDP consolidation (which for the US would mean a $150 billion reduction of the deficit) either through cutting spending or raising taxes. What’s particularly useful about the Goldman Sachs estimate is that they simulate the Federal Reserve doing nothing to offset the contractionary effect of the fiscal contraction. Source: GS, The Speed Limit of Fiscal Consolidation, Figure 9 In many cases, when there’s risk that deficit reduction would slow growth, the Fed will offset that threat with looser monetary policy (lower interest rates). But what if the Fed has used up that ammo already — they’re at the “zero bound”, meaning they’ve already lowered the interest rate they control to zero (and they’re unwilling to use less conventional ordnance, like quantitative easing)? In that case, as the figure shows, real GDP is projected to fall between 1% and 1.5% after two years, and more after three years. According to the researchers: For 2012 we expect fiscal restraint of about 1¼% of GDP. Given the zero bound, this adjustment could be expected to lower real GDP by almost 2% by 2014 — that is, shave off one percentage point off growth for two years. That’s probably about an extra point of unemployment over two years, or another 1.5 million unemployed added to the jobless rolls. Of course, if growth is much stronger by then, we could perhaps afford to sacrifice some of it to get on a better fiscal path, but it’s very hard to imagine it will be, at least for the next few years. All of which is to say two things: #1, we need a kick-ass jobs plan, and not just on paper but at work in the economy; and #2, we need to hold off on the fiscal consolidation for a few years. That won’t make any difference to the long term deficit, but it will make a lot of difference to working families. And needless to say, we need a very different politics — one that would accommodate numbers one and two. This post originally appeared at Jared Bernstein’s On The Economy blog.

Read the full article →

Terry Tamminen: The City of the Future Is Already Here

August 18, 2011

Ever see those signs that say, “If you lived here, you’d be home by now”? They’re usually affixed to urban revitalization projects located near mass transit hubs (of course you’re commuting another hour to your sprawl development in the ‘burbs when you read it). Those projects represent a part of the city of tomorrow, but look a bit farther afield to get the full picture of what life could be like in a clean, sustainable city of the future — and of the business opportunities that are hidden within. In East London, for example, the organizers of the 2012 Olympics are restoring a massive industrial wasteland into an efficient eco-city. A million cubic meters of contaminated dirt has been converted into parkland, nearly 3,000 apartments, and shopping centers, all with high tech amenities and smart energy meters to make future improvements plug-and-play. Biomass boilers with efficient waste-heat capture will power much of the development at first, but clever “energy centers” will make it possible to add solar or other renewables in the future. In New Jersey, Toys R Us just unveiled a huge solar array — the largest of its kind in North America — providing nearly three-quarters of the energy used by its 1.5 million-square-foot distribution center and its iconic Times Square retail store.  This is one of the projects that has now placed New Jersey second only to California in terms of installed solar power capacity, thanks to shrewd financial incentives, streamlined regulations, and by encouraging solar power generation on old landfills and farmland.  At the current rate of growth, New Jersey is on track to create approximately 80,000 jobs in the solar sector over the next decade.   In mid-town Manhattan, the U.S. Postal Service’s Morgan Processing and Distribution facility hosts a green roof — 2.5 acres of plants and grasses — that cut the building’s storm water runoff by as much as 75% and reduce energy costs by $30,000 a year.  On still another part of the globe, the city of Tokyo is filtering its water supply by restoring forests in the watershed, which cuts greenhouse gases and air pollution at the same time.   What do all of these initiatives have in common? A recognition that the almost 7 billion people on the planet (yes, the UN estimates we’ll hit that number this October) will only enjoy a decent quality of life if we make better use of the resources we already have. That, in turn, highlights that there are vast economic development opportunities in efficiency, renewable energy, and converting waste into valuable assets. Another lesson from these examples is that while these business opportunities are global, so is the competition for them. China’s vehicle manufacturer BYD is selling battery-powered buses to the city of Los Angeles, while Smith Electric Vehicles of England is selling electric trucks to the U.S. Marines. Those trucks will at least have some American components — Texas-based Valence Technology makes the lithium iron magnesium phosphate battery systems for Smith Electric. So the city of the future is actually here today, just not yet aggregated in one place nor designed and built by any one nation’s innovators. But we can learn from these scattered examples of what works, how these developments are increasingly cost-effective alternatives to business-as-usual, and what great business opportunities are all around us in the sustainability space. And if more American companies take heed, we might change that famous sign to read, “If you lived here, you’d be in a much better home by now.”

Read the full article →

Hawaii Upgrading System To Sell Renewable Energy To Grid

August 13, 2011

HONOLULU — After a slow start to a program allowing people to sell renewable energy to Hawaii’s power grid, it’s being revamped to attract more interest and reduce the state’s dependence on imported oil. Only a handful of solar power projects have gone online since the highly anticipated program started last November, causing the state Public Utilities Commission to consider solutions that would make the initiative more attractive to independent producers. The program, called a feed-in tariff, sets standard rates at which businesses and residents can sell their power to the utility, Hawaiian Electric Co. Renewable energy advocates said the program has been hindered because Hawaiian Electric isn’t required to purchase power fed to the grid, and because the utility may request that a power developer complete an interconnectivity study costing tens of thousands of dollars. Proposals for improving the feed-in tariff for large-scale projects up to 5 megawatts are due Sept. 6, and regulators would then consider the recommendations and possibly enact them later. “It needs to have up-front obligations of the utility that they will interconnect systems and purchase all of the electricity produced by the systems,” said Erik Kvam, CEO for Zero Emissions Leasing, a solar power developer. “No developer with any sense is going to go out and find investment money for a project when they don’t have a commitment from the utility up front.” The program had a “tepid response” in its first five months, with only three projects launched in that time, according to an April report by Harold Judd of Accion Group, the independent observer overseeing the program. A few more projects have started since then. But the feed-in tariff is picking up steam, said Hawaiian Electric spokesman Peter Rosegg. Seventy applications are pending for Oahu, which would produce 10.3 megawatts of electricity when installed, he said. “We want to get the most possible customer-sited renewable energy on our system while maintaining reliability,” Rosegg said. One potential solution would preserve the utility’s concerns about reliability while providing assurances to solar power developers that they would get paid. Renewable power producers should be financially compensated for the times when Hawaiian Electric decides it won’t accept their power onto the grid, said Mike Champley, a consultant for Blue Planet Foundation, whose mission is to make Hawaii energy independent. “Curtailment or the threat thereof is so overwhelming that it makes these projects basically unfinanceable. It causes uncertainty of the revenue stream,” said Champley, a retired executive from Detroit utility DTE Energy who now lives on Maui. “If there were more certainty, one could plan or adjust accordingly.” Businesses need assurances that their renewable power will reach the grid before they make investments, said Doug Codiga, an energy and environmental lawyer representing Blue Planet. “One of the terms you would expect from a feed-in tariff … is a very simple statement saying, ‘If you sign this contract, we will accept the power,’” Codiga said. “Curtailment is perhaps the most critical issue that is slowing the implementation of the feed-in tariff program in Hawaii.” A separate energy program aimed at smaller renewable power producers – such as homes and businesses with solar panels on their roofs – has met with much greater success, Rosegg said. Net energy metering allows customers to subtract the amount of power they feed to the grid from their bills, but the system is limited to projects smaller than 100 kilowatts each. About 3,600 net energy metering installations are generating more than 20 megawatts of electricity on Oahu, Rosegg said.

Read the full article →

Preeti Vissa: Advice to the Special Budget Committee: Go After Tax Evaders, Spare Seniors

August 12, 2011

Pursuant to the recent debt ceiling agreement, Congress has begun setting up what’s officially called the Joint Special Select Committee on Deficit Reduction . Much of the speculation about what this committee will do has centered on two questions: Will it cut essential programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security? Will it raise taxes on the wealthy? Two recent reports from my colleagues at The Greenlining Institute give good reasons why the committee should consider a different approach entirely. The first, “Corporate America Untaxed,” documents the vast degree to which major U.S. corporations avoid paying federal income taxes by hiding profits offshore. My colleagues Samuel S. Kang and Tuan Ngo found that 77 of Fortune 100 companies have at least one operation in countries that are designated as tax havens — places like Bermuda and the Cayman Islands where very little business actually goes on, but corporate taxes are minimal or nonexistent. Today, Americans on average pay over 20 percent of their income in federal taxes, while Exxon pays 14 percent , IBM pays less than four percent, and General Electric and DuPont paid virtually nothing in income tax last year. How much lost tax revenue are we talking about? Estimates have ranged between $60 billion and $100 billion a year. Cracking down on these offshore tax havens could bring in $1 trillion over the next decade — two thirds of the savings the committee is charged with finding — without raising taxes on any individual American and without cutting benefits that the elderly and poor depend on for survival. Adding insult to injury, many of these companies get huge contracts from the federal government. Our taxes contribute billions of dollars to the income of firms that duck their responsibilities by funneling profits offshore. All this is made more urgent by the picture painted by another recent Greenlining report, “The Economic Crisis Facing Seniors of Color.” While many Americans have found their retirement nest eggs battered by the economic downturn, some groups are in far worse shape than others, to the point of facing genuine crisis. And because standard measures like the federal poverty level don’t include factors that disproportionately affect elders, many who are struggling financially never get counted in official poverty statistics. Using the most accurate data available, an astonishing 91 percent of African American and Latino seniors are financially vulnerable. While data on Asian Americans is more sparse, some Asian ethnic groups have poverty rates three to four times that of whites. There are lots of reasons for this, including the fact that Latinos, African Americans and Asians are all less likely than whites to be working at a job that offers a retirement plan. They also tended to have more of their wealth tied up in their home as real estate values tanked and millions faced foreclosure. But the bottom line is that there are millions of Americans at or approaching retirement age who have essentially nothing to fall back on besides Social Security and Medicare. If benefits are cut or eligibility reduced or delayed, the results won’t be statistics on a chart. They’ll be actual human beings — elderly, often frail human beings — sleeping in alleys and eating dog food. America can do better than this. Before it even thinks about cutting programs that literally keep people alive, the congressional special committee should make sure that the IBMs and General Electrics of the world pay their fair share. And companies that evade taxes shouldn’t get one dime of taxpayer-funded contracts.

Read the full article →

Denise Bode: After a Scorching Week, Wind Power Lessons From the Texas Heat Wave

August 11, 2011

It’s over, for the moment — Electricity Reliability Council of Texas( ERCOT), the company that manages the Texas utility system, said Monday that it doesn’t expect peak electricity demand this week to surpass last week’s record levels. As he did after a sudden freeze stressed the Texas system in February, ERCOT CEO Trip Doggett credited wind power with a critical contribution during last week’s power emergency. Doggett said electricity from wind farms recently installed along Texas’ Gulf Coast began flowing at just the right time to help meet peak demand in the late afternoons. With that in mind, some lessons from the week’s real-world experience with substantial amounts of installed wind generating capacity on a large utility system: Adding wind power makes a utility system more reliable, not less. Balancing electricity supply and demand is a complex task, and utility system operators are used to turning various types of power plants on or off to match demand as it rises and falls throughout the day. Even though wind energy is variable, it varies slowly — unlike conventional power plants, which can fail instantaneously — and can be a critical component in times of need. For three straight days in the real world last week, wind made the difference between keeping the lights on and the air conditioners running — and rolling blackouts. No power plant runs 100 percent of the time. Throughout last week’s heat wave, as in February’s freeze, the Texas utility system was bedeviled by outages of conventional power plants due to extreme weather. According to an Aug. 2 blog article by Elizabeth Souder of the Dallas Morning News, “The high temperatures also caused about 20 power plants to stop working, including at least one coal-fired plant and natural gas plants.” Souder noted that a spokesman for ERCOT, “said such outages aren’t unusual in the hot summer…” This is fascinating, since the rap on wind is that it’s not dependable because “sometimes the wind stops blowing.” In the real world, sometimes it also gets too hot or too cold for the supposedly dependable fueled peaking power plants to operate properly. Geographic dispersal of wind farms makes their electricity production more dependable. This is something that seems intuitively obvious — the wind is usually blowing someplace — and has been predicted by a host of studies. Last week, it became crystal clear, as the Gulf Coast wind farms, which provide some 13 percent of Texas’s overall wind generation, accounted for as much as 70 percent of the wind-generated electricity being provided during peak hours. The reason for this is that winds are often low in west Texas, where most of the state’s wind farms are located, on very hot days, while ocean breezes blow more strongly. Generation from offshore and coastal land-based wind matches up well with summer demand peaks. Again, this is a phenomenon that has been predicted by studies. During a heat wave in the Northeast in July, Cape Wind, the company that hopes to install a large offshore wind farm off Cape Cod in Massachusetts, said its meteorological data showed the project would have been producing at full capacity during peak demand hours. The Texas experience bears that out, with ERCOT CEO Doggett telling the Austin American-Statesman , “We’d love to have more development of coastal wind. And we’re hoping their ability to generate during the peak hours may encourage more development in that area.”

Read the full article →

Mason Inman: The Climate Post: As Markets Dive, Clean Energy Stocks Hit by "Triple Whammy"

August 11, 2011

The stock market took a beating this week , after rating agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded U.S. bonds — but clean tech stocks have been falling even faster than the market as a whole. Shares in clean energy companies have been hit by a “triple whammy” — producing too much capacity for the demand, problems with government debt, and broader risk aversion among investors. As a part of this, clean energy venture capital funding has dropped 44 percent when compared with last year. Analysts from the global bank HSBC said wind energy stocks are undervalued and their prices could fall more as debt crises in both the United States and European Union stand to cut wind subsidies further . There are more than seven gigawatts of wind projects under construction now — but few planned beyond 2013 because of uncertainty about policies. Solar stocks were down after many companies reported dismal second-quarter results, as prices on panels fell — but not as fast as the costs of producing them–and as their margins shrank. First Solar, the biggest solar panel manufacturer outside of China, boosted production but suffered a large drop in profits — and their share price. Suntech, the biggest manufacturer, also saw its stock fall, hitting a one-year low . But some analysts say renewables stocks are bottoming out , and are set to rise again. Adjusting to No Nukes Germany decided to phase out nuclear power within 10 years and rely more heavily on renewables, and the country’s utilities are scrambling to adjust. E.ON, the world’s biggest utility in terms of sales, suffered its first-ever quarterly loss and is laying off 11,000 workers as it aims to boost its spending on renewables. Another utility, RWE, is also selling off assets to cope with poor performance — but is planning to stick with its renewables investments . Making the Military Green The U.S. military is the single biggest user of oil in the world , and has been warned by analysts its dependence is a security threat . Now the U.S. Army has formed a new renewables office that may spend $7 billion over the next decade on renewable and alternative energy power. Although the military has a target of using 25 percent renewable energy by 2025, many installations lack the expertise to move forward quickly enough, said the U.S. Department of Defense, and the new office aims to fill that gap. Meanwhile, units within the mega-corporations Boeing and Siemens have teamed up to pursue military contracts for smart-grid technologies , which the military could develop and bring down the costs, helping them reach the market later . Risky Business With oil prices high and political uncertainty in many oil-exporting countries, the U.S. faces near-record energy security risks , according to a new U.S. Chamber of Commerce report . In 2010, their energy risk index is as high, as in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and near the record high of 2008. The Chamber predicts the risk level will remain high for another 25 years. With gloomy economic prospects, the International Energy Agency (IEA), the U.S. Energy Information Administration , and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries all agreed oil demand later this year is likely to be less than they had thought. With Saudi Arabia boosting its production to the highest level in 30 years , oil prices have fallen a bit in recent weeks, but this is largely because of weak economies , the IEA said. The Climate Post offers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday by Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions .

Read the full article →

President Obama Announces New Fuel Standards For Heavy Vehicles

August 9, 2011

WASHINGTON — Fire trucks and concrete mixers, semis, heavy-duty pickups and all trucks in between will, for the first time, have to trim fuel consumption and emissions of heat-trapping gases under new efficiency standards announced Tuesday by President Barack Obama. The White House said the standards will save businesses billions of dollars in fuel costs, help reduce oil consumption and cut air pollution. The standards apply to vehicle model years 2014 to 2018. Three categories of vehicles are affected. Big rigs or semis will have to slash fuel consumption and production of heat-trapping gases by up to 23 percent. Gasoline-powered heavy-duty pickups and vans will have to cut consumption by 10 percent, or by 15 percent if the vehicles run on diesel fuel. The standards also prescribe a 9 percent reduction in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions for work trucks, which include everything from fire trucks and concrete mixers to garbage trucks and buses. In a statement, Obama said people who build, buy and drive medium and heavy-duty trucks support the new standards. Obama had planned to unveil the standards at a trucking business in Virginia, a state crucial to his re-election hopes. But the trip was canceled Tuesday without explanation and Obama met privately at the White House with industry officials. He then flew to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to pay respects to 30 U.S. troops killed over the weekend in Afghanistan. Their remains were flown to the base. The White House projected savings of 530 million barrels of oil and $50 billion in fuel costs over the lives of the vehicles covered by the new standards, along with improved air quality and public health. The administration released no miles-per-gallon equivalent for the new standards, saying that to do so would be confusing given the multiple categories of vehicles, the different types of vehicles in each category and the varying payloads that each one carries. Officials did stress that the costs of making the trucks more fuel-efficient – ranging from hundreds of dollars to thousands of dollars per vehicle – will be recouped through reduced fuel costs over the lifetime of the vehicles. It’s the second round of fuel efficiency standards Obama has announced in the past month. Last month, the president announced a deal with automakers to double overall fuel economy to 54.5 mpg by 2025, starting in model year 2017. Cars and light trucks now on the road average 27 mpg. That followed a 2009 deal committing cars and trucks to averaging 35.5 mpg by model year 2016.

Read the full article →

Legal Immigration Reform: White House Pushes Skilled Worker Visas

August 3, 2011

In a bid to spur job creation and promote startups, the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services has announced new efforts to attract foreign talent to American shores. Specifically, the administration is promoting two kinds of visas — known as the H-1B and the EB-2 visa — by making the application process more transparent, and by releasing a set of guidelines to clarify the necessary requirements for skilled foreign nationals hoping to enter the U.S. In addition, the administration is “streamlining” the application process for what is known as the EB-5 ” immigrant investor ” program, which allows foreign nationals who have significantly invested in American companies to qualify for a green card. The Tuesday announcement reflects an increased push to reform legal immigration for skilled workers, though it stops short of any concrete legislative changes. Speaking to HuffPost, USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas explained that the effort was simply one to clarify — and not amend — current immigration policy. “We have laws currently in place … and we are making sure those policies are fully understood,” he said. “This is independent of immigration reform.” Business interests — in particular those in the high tech sector — hailed the efforts by the administration to bring and retain top tier talent. In an interview with HuffPost, Lynn Shotwell, executive director of the American Council on International Personnel , called the effort a “really welcome development. It shows the administration is trying to do what business leaders, including Mayor Bloomberg and others, have called for. Namely, to open our doors to talented foreign nationals.” Yet while Shotwell maintained that it was “a step in the right direction,” she noted that “we have to see how much it changes current adjudication.” Others lauded the administration’s efforts to untie legal immigration from the thorny and often divisive issue of illegal immigration. “We’ve been [working on] this issue for several years — making it easier for high tech workers to come to the U.S.,” said Emily Mendell, spokesperson for the National Venture Capital Association . “The problem has been the reluctance of Congress to separate illegal reform from legal reform. The key to having this move forward is the ability of Congress to separate the two.” Steve Case , a member of the president’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness (and the former CEO of HuffPost parent company AOL), said, “Immigration is a sensitive, complex and emotional issue — there’s a lot of history to it. My view is that, notwithstanding that, you have to focus on the main event right now, which is the economy and jobs.” He continued, “The data we have says the best source of job creation is high-growth entrepreneurial companies. If you want to create jobs, you have to focus on entrepreneurship and the global war for talent.” But for some advocates, the splitting of legal from illegal immigration is cause for concern. Leading immigration reform advocate Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) acknowledged the difficulty of passing any sort of comprehensive reform in such a hyper-partisan political climate, and underscored the necessity to launch administrative efforts to ameliorate the system, rather than simply rely on broad legislative action. “We will not get any substantive immigration reform out of this Congress with House Republicans driving the agenda heading into an election year,” said Gutierrez. “That’s why the focus is on the White House and what the Obama administration can do under current law.” But he cautioned against focusing too much on legal immigration concerns over those of illegal workers. “The one million or so undocumented immigrants who were brought here as children don’t have corporate lobbyists, don’t host fundraisers, or give big bundled donations, but if you think about it, their contributions to the economy over time will be tremendous,” he said. “They are no less important to America’s economic future than foreign workers are, and I hope the president takes action on their behalf as well.”

Read the full article →

WATCH: The Wood-Powered Car That Runs On Any Organic Material

July 28, 2011

We’re all aware that, if we don’t shift to more renewable sources of energy, we’ll eventually deplete the reserves of fossil fuels that power our vehicles today. If only there was a car that could run on any organic material…and took its name from an adorable semiaquatic North American mammal.

Read the full article →

Food inflation in focus amid lofty crop price outlook

July 25, 2011

By Karl Plume CHICAGO (Reuters) – Grain prices will likely remain elevated at the end of this year, a Reuters poll showed, providing little relief to food prices while continuing to challenge policymakers battling to tamp down inflation. Many analysts say the era of cheap food may well be over as rising crop production struggles to keep pace with soaring global demand, particularly from the mushrooming middle-class populations of developing nations such as China and India. But experts do not expect a repeat of the late-year grain market rallies of 2010 which ignited record food inflation that stirred popular unrest in the Middle East and North Africa, toppling governments in Egypt and Tunisia. The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization’s index of food prices hit a record peak in February, creating fears of a repeat of the 2007/08 global food crisis that prompted food riots and forced millions into hunger. Governments have progressively taken steps to rein in soaring costs for staples that disproportionately impact the world’s poor, including the systemic releases of state grain stocks in China and the construction of grain silos in India. Much will hinge on weather in the U.S. Farm Belt this summer as near-perfect crop conditions are needed in the world’s top grain exporter to soothe markets on edge over shrinking stockpiles of corn and soybeans and rapidly rising demand for food. Debt problems in Europe and the United States will also play a role. If left unresolved, they could tip the world into another recession like the one that eroded grain prices beginning in late 2008. CORN SEEN RISING Prices of corn — a cornerstone of the food chain that impacts the cost of meat, milk, and eggs — are forecast to end 2011 at $6.89 per bushel, about 10 percent higher than a year earlier but short of June’s all-time high of nearly $8. At midmorning on Monday, spot corn futures on the Chicago Board of Trade were down about 2 percent at $6.75 a bushel. Strong demand from livestock and ethanol producers and concern over crop yields in the United States, the world’s largest producer and exporter, would lead to the third consecutive annual increase in corn prices. “I generally look for relatively high prices come year’s end with no major harvest correction,” said PFG Best analyst Tim Hannagan, referring to corn. “All end-users of grain such as ethanol producers, feeders, food processors and exporters will be aggressive buyers at harvest time to ensure they have their share of inventory as insurance for expected tight stocks and strong demand in 2012,” Hannagan said. Soybeans, which are crushed to produce soymeal, also a livestock feed, and soyoil used for cooking and to make biodiesel fuel, were seen at $13.92 a bushel at the end of the year, near 2010′s lofty close of $13.94. Soyoil prices themselves were seen rising about 3 percent year-on-year at 59.73 cents per lb, according to the average analyst forecast. Spot CBOT soybeans fell at midmorning on Monday to $13.55 a bushel while soyoil slid to 55.45 cents per lb, both down nearly 2 percent. The wild card for corn and soy prices may be China, the world’s top soybean importer and an emerging importer of corn, as policymakers there walk the line between red-hot economic growth and soaring inflation. “Both corn and soybeans have potential to go substantially higher if Chinese growth stays on track to provide firm demand. However, it may take time for that demand to develop, especially because China has shown the ability to be patient and buy only at lower price levels,” said Bryce Knorr, senior editor of Farm Futures Magazine. Wheat, a food staple grown in nearly every country around the world, was forecast to ease to $7.53 a bushel, down about 5 percent from the prior year as global stocks rebound following a severe drought last year in key exporter Russia and neighboring countries. But experts warned that wheat’s downside may be limited as cattle, hog and poultry producers around the world increasingly use it as an alternative feed grain instead of costly corn. Spot CBOT wheat futures fell about 2.5 percent on Monday to $6.73 per bushel. (Additional reporting by KT Arasu, Sam Nelson, Julie Ingwersen, Mark Weinraub and Michael Hirtzer; Editing by Dale Hudson)

Read the full article →

States Cut Programs Helping Families Pay Electric Bills

July 21, 2011

SOUTH BEND, Ind. — Many states hit hardest by this week’s searing heat wave have drastically cut or entirely eliminated programs that help poor people pay their electric bills, forcing thousands to go without air conditioning when they need it most. Oklahoma ran out of money in just three days. Illinois cut its program to focus on offering heating money for the winter ahead. And Indiana isn’t taking any new applicants. When weighed against education and other budget needs, cooling assistance has been among the first items cut, and advocates for the poor say that could make this heat wave even more dangerous. “I’ve never seen it this bad,” said Timothy Bruer, executive of Energy Services Inc., which administers the federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program in 14 Wisconsin counties. The group has turned away about 80 percent of applicants seeking cooling assistance. The sizzling summer heat comes after a bitterly cold, snowy winter in many places and at a time when unemployment remains stubbornly high. The cuts began after Congress eliminated millions of dollars in potential aid, forcing state lawmakers to scale back energy assistance programs. The agencies that distribute the money are worried that the situation could get even worse next year because the White House is considering cutting the program in half. Joyce Agee, a retired secretary from South Beloit, Ill., said she typically receives about $300 in utility assistance each summer and up to $600 for the winter to supplement her Social Security income. After running her air conditioner constantly, she’s worried about her next electric bill. “I’ve cut back on what I eat so that I can pay my light bills and everything else,” she said. The government provided $4.7 billion for low-income energy assistance for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30, down $400 million from the year before. The money is primarily used by states to help with heating bills in winter, which lasts longer and generates higher utility bills. But dozens of states, particularly those in the South and Midwest, have traditionally used a portion of the money to provide help during the summer – especially for elderly people and those with medical conditions that could be fatal in high heat. “Energy assistance helps vulnerable people. If they can’t turn their air conditioner on because they’re afraid to pay the bill, there’s documented cases of people dying over time. It’s totally preventable,” said Mark Wolfe, executive director of the National Energy Assistance Directors’ Association, which is made up of state officials who give out the federal money. The hot air mass that has plagued the Plains for days began spreading eastward Thursday, roasting residents of the Ohio Valley and the East Coast under a sizzling sun that made people sick, closed schools and prompted cities to offer cooling centers and free swimming. Forecasters issued excessive heat warnings for a huge section of the country, from Kansas to Massachusetts. The temperature surpassed 100 degrees in Toledo, Ohio – just a few degrees shy of a record set in 1930. Combined with 69 percent humidity, it felt as hot as 107. The weather is suspected of contributing to a number of deaths across the nation. At least six more fatalities were reported Thursday, including a Michigan restaurant cook who suffered a heart attack after being sent home from his job and a teenage boy who drowned while swimming at summer camp in the same state. Missouri officials confirmed five heat-related deaths since June. Kansas City authorities were investigating at least 13 others in which heat was suspected. Emergency room visits were way up, according to public health officials, mainly because of people suffering from heat exhaustion and heat stroke. Since the recession began, requests for heating and cooling assistance have skyrocketed, with 8.9 million households nationwide receiving federal help this year. That’s up from 5.8 million in 2008-09. Some states scaled back or canceled cooling assistance programs because they feared the government money would be cut further or would not arrive in time to help with winter heating bills. The program was never meant to be the sole source of aid, but, Wolfe said, states are now “broke” and have few other options. Donations to social service groups that offer help have also dropped. In Indiana, only those applicants who sought winter assistance were permitted to apply for help this summer. Federal funding arrived so late that state officials gave $100 to people who received winter utility money. That was double the normal amount, but it left nothing for new applicants in many places. Illinois canceled its entire summer utility program because the money was already spent. About 70,000 households received aid in 2010, compared with 421,000 for the winter program. Oklahoma officials doled out the entire $22 million for the summer program in just three days earlier this month. “There’s always more need than we have money,” said Jeff DeGraff, a Louisiana Housing Finance Agency spokesman. Michigan saw the biggest drop in its federal funding, which tumbled from $238 million to $38 million. Texas’ funding fell by $28.6 million. The situation could get worse next year. President Barack Obama has proposed cutting funding for the program to $2.5 billion. States are worried. A group of governors plans to send a letter to Congress asking lawmakers to maintain the federal funding at current levels next year. “It seems like the wrong time to be cutting energy assistance,” Wolfe said. “People need help getting by. There are a lot of people right on the edge. To cut them now is cruel.” In the area around Rockford, Ill., which was especially hard hit by the economic downturn, 2,000 households that typically receive help to keep their electricity on must do without. City officials have been steering residents to cooling centers and trying to spread the word about how to avoid overexposure, said George Davis, executive director of Rockford’s human services department. “We don’t have a lot of other options,” he said. Mary Ware, a 62-year-old Chicago woman who suffers from high blood pressure and diabetes and requires dialysis three times a week, lives in a basement apartment with her son and daughter. She receives disability income but can’t afford air-conditioning. She described her apartment as “miserable.” “It’s very hot, and all I got is a box fan,” Ware said. Officials in many states say they sympathize with those struggling against the heat, but they insist helping the poor in the winter has to be a priority because heating costs are higher, the season is longer and the demand for aid is greater. That reasoning offered little comfort to the 30 people who had signed up Thursday morning to get energy assistance in Milwaukee, where applications have risen 20 percent since this week’s heat wave began. “We’ve been making far more exceptions than we normally would for safety reasons,” energy assistance supervisor Sonya Eddie said. Koyama Stokes, 31, of Milwaukee, received $300 to put toward the $600 she owes to keep her electricity on. She said she had to attend two funerals over the last month in Mississippi, and the trips broke her budget. She provides for her two disabled children and a niece and nephew using $1,500 in monthly Social Security payments. She was thankful for the help she received Thursday but said deeper cuts in energy assistance would devastate her. “I don’t think I could survive,” she said. “I can’t see my kids looking at me hungry.” ___ Associated Press writers Karen Hawkins in Chicago; Andrew Miga in Washington; David Mercer in Champaign, Ill., Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City; Carrie Antlfinger in Milwaukee; Melinda Deslatte in Baton Rouge, La.; and Jeni O’Malley in Indianapolis contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Lisa P. Jackson: Promoting Electronics Recycling and New Jobs

July 20, 2011

At the ROUND2 electronics recycling facility in Austin, Texas, American workers dismantle, sort, test and repair a steady stream of discarded printers, computers and other electronics. The millions of pounds of electronic waste that ROUND2 processes each year are kept out of landfills here and abroad, and the valuable materials in them are reused. In addition, ROUND2′s e-cycling business is also creating good jobs. The company has put several hundred people to work nationwide, and just last February the Austin facility announced plans to hire 52 more technical staff members. Seeing the economic and environmental opportunities in e-cycling, I visited ROUND2′s Austin campus today, where I stood with Michael Dell, CEO of Dell Inc., Dan Hesse, CEO of Sprint, Mark Price, Vice President of Sony Electronics, and several government officials to announce the Obama administration’s National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship. To fortify the National Strategy, we also announced a commitment from Dell, Sprint and Sony to use private sector business practices that will strengthen our homegrown e-cycling industry and create jobs for American workers. Government and industry are working together to tackle an environmental and health issue in a way that supports innovation, cuts costs and creates good jobs. It’s an important effort at an important time. Already, the United States generates some 2.5 million tons of electronic waste per year. Not only do those discarded electronics contain potentially dangerous chemicals and pollutants, they also have precious metals, rare earth materials, plastic and glass that can be recovered and recycled, reducing the economic costs and environmental impacts of securing and processing new materials for new products. It is also critically important that we undertake this National Strategy with the active involvement of the private sector. Dell, which Newsweek ranked as 2010′s greenest company in the United States, has been a leader in responsible electronics management. Dell has worked for years to improve e-waste recovery, and also partnered with the EPA on efforts that reduced the amount of lead in their products by more than 19 million pounds. Sprint has already collected more than 25 million discarded mobile phones. Sprint has set an ambitious goal that, by 2017, they will be reusing or recycling nine phones for every 10 they sell. Sony has partnered with EPA since 2004 and collected and recycled almost 3 million pounds of used consumer electronics. To effectively tackle e-waste, we need to think about everything from how to design more efficient and sustainable technology, to making sure consumers have widespread access to recycling drop off locations and other options for easily donating or recycling used electronics. Private sector involvement is instrumental to ensuring that the process of research, innovation, development and commercialization of a new product is not complete without also focusing on recycling. Of course, EPA and its federal government partners have a role to play as well. President Obama has called on us — as the nation’s largest consumer of electronics — to lead by example on electronics stewardship. The National Strategy we are announcing today explains how the federal government will: Promote the development of more efficient and sustainable electronic products; Direct federal agencies to buy, use, reuse and recycle their electronics responsibly; Support recycling options and systems for American consumers; and Strengthen America’s role in international electronics stewardship. The success of ROUND2 is just the beginning of creating jobs by increasing electronics recycling nationwide. The leadership of President Obama on this issue — combined with the commitments of companies like Dell, Sprint and Sony- – sends a very strong signal about the bright future of the e-cycling industry in this country. Fostering the growth of a market for electronics recycling can help American companies create good jobs in a field that supports cleaner communities today, and a cleaner future tomorrow. The history of protecting our health and our environment is a history of innovation. Better ideas and new products have helped make almost everything we do cleaner, healthier and more energy-efficient. That history has also shown us that the engines of our economy run best when they run clean. The National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship is another chapter of that history, in which environmental protection, innovation, and economic growth work hand in hand.

Read the full article →