Category: Green Business

By Posted on Posted in Eco-friendly, Energy & Sustainability, Entrepreneurship, Environmenl, Environment, Frugality/Frugal Fun, Green Business, Green Living/Green Lifestyles, Innovation, Peace and War, People Helping People, poverty, Technology Tagged with , , , , ,

Watch this video about the Copenhagen Wheel, a device that captures and stores energy from cyclists pedaling and coasting, and supplements pedal power on the uphills or over long distances. And then read a few of the comments.

To me, this is brilliant technology! First, it makes biking—and particularly bicycle commuting over distances of 20 to 50 miles—an attractive option for tens of thousands of people who’ve felt unwilling to try it before. That, in turn, reduces the number of cars on the road, which has dozens of advantages to the planet and to our pocketbooks. Second, it makes it possible for the moderate cyclist (like me) to go much farther by bike.

A lot of the comments are angry that this will disrupt their exercise. I think they’re not thinking about it the right way. Instead of blaming a machine for interfering with their workout, think about the ability to bike instead of drive to good riding places some distance away, or to bike much farther distances to explore an area farther out.

I do ride for exercise. And I do face a BIG hill when I go out my door. I’ve learned to manage it, but when I first moved to that area, it was very tough. Something like this would have been a nice transition as I learned to conquer that tough hill.

And for the exercise-only bikers, I have one more suggestion: write to the company and tell them you want a manual override option: an off switch, in other words. Then you have the boost when you need it.

Let’s apply this kind of creativity to every aspect of our lives! We could not only solve climate change but war, poverty, and other global issues. I wish this company much success!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Eco-friendly, Energy & Sustainability, Entrepreneurship, Environmenl, Green Business, Green Living/Green Lifestyles Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Buying local. Worker co-ops. Neighborhood resiliency. Community control. Does it feel overwhelming trying to track and sort out all of these community economy movements and buzzwords?

Writer Laura Flanders, Yes Magazine, and GritTV have collaborated to make it easier for the rest of us. They’ve launched a new feature called Commonomics, and the first installment is a nice roundup of some of these trends, told through the stories of people whose stories rarely make it into mainstream media.

The initial installment is called “Welcome to Commonomics: How to Build Local Economies Strong Enough for Everyone,” and OI recommend reading it.

 

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Eco-friendly, Energy & Sustainability, Green Business, Green Living/Green Lifestyles Tagged with , , , ,

I recently interviewed Kelly Rudy of El Monte Sagrado, a green luxury hotel in Taos, New Mexico. In this 4-minute video, Kelly discusses some of the property’s unusual green features—especially the way water is handled and the types of plantings—in this four-minute interview .

To watch, just click on the link in the first line. Your comments are welcome.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Eco-friendly, Energy & Sustainability, Environmenl, Green Business, Green Living/Green Lifestyles Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Earthship Biotecture World Headquarters, just outside Taos, New Mexico, is a deep ecology subdivision of some 70 homes, expected to grow eventually to about 130. It sits on 650 acres, of which 347 acres are parkland, owned in common by the residents. DSCN7767The houses look like a mating between the Taos Pueblo adobe of 1000 years ago and Starship Enterprise. Visitors can go through a self-guided tour with explanatory video and slideshow and learn how the homes—off-grid not just for electricity but also for water and sewer—are constructed to use very little electricity, water, or heating/cooling energy. I asked Ashton Wolfe, one of the media liaisons, what was different about Earthships compared to other passive solar earth-sheltered homes. She explained that:

  • Earthships are fairly self-contained: they generate their own electricity and all or most of their own water (the threshold is eight inches of rain a year, so in a dry, desert climate like Taos, extra water is sometimes needed). Passive solar design and thick earthen and rubber tire walls eliminate the need for any fossil-fuel-based heating or cooling system. Attached greenhouses not only provide growing space for food, but also create an essential climate barrier between extreme outside temperatures (ranging from -30° to over 100°F in Taos, assisting the homes in maintaining temperatures ranging from 65 to 75° all year long, without any need for outside power sources.
  • The key structural innovation is old tires packed with soil.
  • The buildings contain a large percentage of recycled materials, and thus are somewhat different from unit to unit. Many of these are not traditional building materials, but things like old cans and bottles, so Earthships also reduce landfill volume.
  • Water is used four times, filtered through a system of restorer cells that capture and purify wastewater. It starts with the highest uses: drinking and washing, then domestic uses, flushing toilets and finally, exterior landscaping: watering nonfood plants.
  • Earthship homes, which have been built in every state and in some 18 countries, lend themselves well to building on undeveloped lots. Much of the cost of a “normal” home is in the infrastructure: connecting water, sewer, and electricity, for instance. While Earthships’ construction cost is higher, at about $200-$250 per square foot in a place like Taos, the lack of infrastructure costs result in a house that is pretty much comparably priced with a conventional home—and of course, far cheaper to operate over the lifespan of the house.
  • The concept was developed by Michael Reynolds in the years after his graduation from architecture school in 1969. By 1975, he was using the filled-tire construction method, and the first Earthship incorporating self-sufficiency in water, power, heating, and cooling was constructed back in 1988.DSCN7775

 

The Earthship community has a very informative website at Earthship.com. It looks like there’s very little there when you srrive at the website, but scroll down or click through to the blog and you’ll see there’s actually quite a bit.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Abundance and Prosperity, Business-general, Energy & Sustainability, Green Business, Peace and War, Politics, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , , ,

All through the Vietnam era, we used to hear that war was terrible in so many other ways, but good for the economy. It put people to work, it allowed companies facing hardship to find customers, etc. etc.

This was always a misleading argument, as war spending created far fewer jobs than many other categories.

It seems today’s market is much more aware of the potential economic devastation of war. Consider this bit of news:

With the possibility of military action against Syria easing, investors sent the markets soaring to a sharply higher close with the Dow leaping 127 points to 15,191. Nasdaq climbed 22 points to 3729.

Incidentally, money spent on energy efficiency and going green has a much higher rate of return for the economy. Green energy spending creates more jobs, consumer spending, and long-term consumer savings that frees up cash for more spending, while war drives us deeper into debt.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Abundance and Prosperity, Demographics/Psychographics, Energy & Sustainability, Entrepreneurship, Green Business, People Helping People Tagged with , , , , ,

A friend sent me a link to a very interesting article, “A Locavore’s Dilemma: On the Fantasy of Urban Farming” by Will Boisvert

According to Mr. Boisvert (whose name, ironically, translates as “green woods”), we would all do more for the planet to buy big-agro chemiculture food from thousands of miles away than to develop food sources in or close to urban areas.

I’ve heard this argument before. And I do think it’s important to do our research and know the numbers; it’s important to make a business case for local food sustainability, whether urban or rural.

But I’d say Mr. Boisvert totally misses the point.

He says the most sustainable thing we can do in NYC is build more housing, to avoid further stress on the exurbs and suburbs, which are very UNsustainable. But I don’t see why it has to be housing vs. food. Build that 600-person apartment building he wants, and THEN use add urban agriculture and solar arrays to harness the roof for food and energy.

And his attack on COmmunity Supported Agriculture farms (CSAs) is just bizarre. I don’t think our annual membership fee for the organic CSA we belong to here in Massachusetts would even cover the same amount of factory food at our local supermarket, and it’s far cheaper than buying the nonindustrial stuff at Whole Foods, a pricy organic grocery, or the farmers markets.

We do need to look at the economics/carbon impact of urban agriculture and the urban food movement, and often, they’re not pretty. But no uglier than mass-scale farming.

He writes:

Hauling each spud from upstate thus requires as much fuel as moving it 585 miles by corporate semi or 2,340 miles by rail. I don’t know the numbers, but I think truck is a lot more common than rail.

If that’s true, then even with the much-reduced efficiency per mile, the number of miles is so much fewer that local food, especialy urban agriculture, comes out way ahead. If the potatoes go 127 miles at 28 ton-miles/gallon vs. 2500 miles from Arizona at 120 tm/g, the Catskills come out way ahead: 4.5 gallons vs. 20.8 for the far-shipped chemiculture ones. And his analysis doesn’t recognize that the efficiencies of big trucking disappear rapidly when that huge truck is running 4 mph stop-and-go in NYC traffic, while those of urban farming increase.

As he notes, a neighborhood urban farm might use one gallon to transport to multiple sites across the city, in a small van. And if we’re really talking hyperlocal, your neighborhood rooftop or small-lot urban farm could efficiently deliver in a five-mile radius with a bicycle (more efficient in time as well as fuel, in NYC’s traffic-choked streets)—which can offset the fuel costs of hauling the soil up to the roof by crane. Equipped with a handlebar box, a rear rack, and maybe even a small trailer, bicycles can carry quite a bit. Even back in the 1960s when I was a kid in the Bronx, a lot of local merchants offered bicycle delivery (using massive one-speed bikes with huge handlebar boxes).

Even if it’s trucked in a van, the fuel cost of a three-block delivery is pretty close to zero.

And unlike Mr. Boisvert, I don’t discount the many other benefits. Better quality food, community-building, job skills training for those interns and volunteers, and an understanding of the food cycle. My own first garden was in Brooklyn, in fact, and the thrill of growing my own food in my mini-urban farm definitely helped push me to the locavore mindset. I discovered a new crop: radish seed cones; the young ones are terrific in salads. And that was also around the time that I started advocating using flat roofs as food and energy resources.

I do have some concerns, and would like to see research, on how urban agriculture can avoid pollution-borne contamination of the food. But he doesn’t talk about that.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Ethics-International, Green Business, People Helping People, Social and Economic Justice, travel Tagged with , , ,

I can think of no better way to celebrate July 4th this year than to acknowledge the huge honor my hero and friend Dean Cycon, CEO of Dean’s Beans in Orange, MA recently received.

Dean Cycon, CEO, Dean's Beans, jamming with musicians in Rwanda
Dean Cycon making music in Rwanda

Dean Cycon is the most ethical business owner I know, and the only person to be a guest twice on the business ethics radio show I hosted and produced for four years, from 2005 to 2009. Dean has done 100% organic and fair trade coffee and cocoa since the day he opened his company, which he located in a depressed area where jobs are scarce. Dean not just funds but also actively partners with people in the villages that supply his coffee to do “people-centered development” projects, led by the folks who live and work in those villages. He also partners with local charities in western Massachusetts to create private label coffee they can sell as fundraisers. Oh yes, and he’s also the author of one of my favorite travel books: Ippy Award gold winner Javatrekker: Dispatches from the World of Fair Trade Coffee (Chelsea Green, 2007). And he’s a fun guy who hasn’t let success interfere with his playful spirit.

And now, OMG, Dean Cycon has been awarded one of the most prestigious honors in the world: the Oslo Business for Peace Award, also known as the alternative Nobel Prize for business. The award judges are actual Nobel Laureates, including microlending pioneer Prof. Muhammad Yunus, winner of the Nobel prize in Economics in 2006, and Prof. A. Michael Spence, winner of the Nobel prize in economics in 2001. Dean is one of five honorees, and the only American. All I can say is, he richly deserves it.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Abundance and Prosperity, Energy & Sustainability, Entrepreneurship, Green Business, People Helping People, Technology Tagged with , , , , , ,

Since about 1980, I’ve felt that we could solve a lot of our urban problems by seeing flat city roofs (and for that matter, roofs in suburban shopping centers, etc.) as resources: places where we can harvest energy with solar collectors—but also harvest food.

But when I started talking about my brainstorm, people told me that the roofs were not designed to bear the weight of a dense garden, and the amount of reinforcement they needed would make the whole idea unworkable. I never quite believed this. It seemed to me that if you were to put one or two 200 square-foot gardens onto a 2000 square foot roof, the weight load could be distributed across the entire rooftop without much difficulty. But I’m not an engineer.

Still, I wasn’t surprised to see the “green roof” movement emerge over the past ten years or so—but I was disappointed at how few green roofs seem to grow edible crops.

I do think community food self-sufficiency—particularly in urban areas–is a big part of the answer to “how do we reclaim our economy—and our bodies?” and a great antidote to the very dangerous practices of “chemiculture” [a word I personally coined, BTW], GMO seed strains, and the attempt by Monsanto and similar companies to exercise a terrifying degree of control over (and damage to) our food supply.  So I was delighted when I found these folks in the Bronx, using 6000 square feet of the 10,000-square-foot roof of a city-owned apartment building, to commercially grow hydroponic greens. With hydroponics, there is no soil, and therefore the issue of weight and roof support is moot. In this short video, Farm Manager Kate Ahearn gives us some background about the project. (I did make one error. I referred to a supermarket rooftop farm in Lynn, Mass. It’s actually in LynnFIELD.)

This model, with hydroponic gardens and protection from the elements, offers a 12-month growing season and numerous harvests. Yes, it’s more expensive to set up than a basic soil-based garden, but the payback is much greater. And as a green marketing guy, I see profitable, sustainable, earth-friendly businesses like this as a big step forward not only in economic development but in human rights and the rights of other living things.

Note: there will be more on this story. My old buddy Ted Cartselos did another shoot, with a better camera, on Friday. (Thanks, Ted, for working with me on this.)

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Energy & Sustainability, Green Business Tagged with , , ,

If ever there was a profit-driven, bottom-line-focused corporation, it’s
Walmart—not exactly a “tree hugger” company. Yet, Walmart’s bottom-line-driven approach to sustainability creates hundreds of millions in new product revenues.

First, there is Walmart’s pressure on its suppliers to green up its act. Walmart puts all of its suppliers through a rigorous evaluation process that examines both manufacturing and packaging practices,

Second, Walmart has looked at its energy footprint, and taken big steps to use less energy—saving hundreds of millions of dollars in the process. Looking at everything from the way its truck cabs are climate-controlled to store design to optimizing delivery routes, Walmart has discovered that green business practices can also save boatloads of money.

Third, Walmart sells enormous quantities of organic food to people who never shop at Whole Foods.

Walmart’s quest for green-friendly practices ripples throughout its massive supply chain with global impact.

The net effect is far more than I or any other green activist can hope to achieve.

Watch a video of Shel Horowitz discussing Walmart’s sustainability strategies, interviewed on Earth Day on the Bill Newman Show, WHMP, Northampton, MA:

 Shel Horowitz on Bill Newman Show, Earth Day 2013

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Energy & Sustainability, Green Business, Innovation, Shel's Personal Life Tagged with , ,

Note to manufacturers: your green products (including recycled products) have to compete on quality. If someone buys a recycled product and discovers it’s crappy, not only are they a one-time customer who won’t repeat, but they’re also a negative talking machine, trashing not just your product but in many cases, green products or recycled products in general.

In other words, any time you put out crap in the name of selling recycled products, you hurt the prospects of every green business. Don’t rush to market; take the time to get the quality right first!

This rant was inspired by the cleanup after my daughter’s Passover Seder.  She had recycled aluminum foil. I was excited to see it, as I hadn’t known such a thing was  available in the consumer market. But my excitement quickly turned to frustration when I tried to use it, and discovered it was so brittle that I had to use about three times as much; it ripped wherever I touched it. It was as bad as the first generation of biodegradable diapers that we tried to use when she was a toddler, circa 1990. As bad as the solar cell-phone charger I bought a year or two ago that was so ineffectual I returned it for a refund.

Now, I’m a committed green, and I will give recycled aluminum foil another try in five years or so. But if this had been my first experience of a recycled product, it probably would have been my last.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail