Green Options

In yesterday’s Sustainable Industries Economic Forum, keynote speaker Paul Hawken discussed the political will it would take to avert global catastrophe. An underlying elephant in the room, however, was the behavior change that we would need to see from more citizens than just the progressive element, the early adopters.  This may be a crucial element missing in the sustainability sphere, as beautifully put by Phil Micheal Williams, one of the excellent panelists on SI’s discussion panel following Hawken’s talk. 

At yesterday’s Sustainable Industries Economic Forum, keynote presenter Paul Hawken was asked, “What is the best counterargument to the argument that carbon caps will raise energy costs and hurt our economy?”  In typical Hawken style, his earlier speech was well done, inspiring and insightful.  In typical Hawken style, his off-the-cuff answers to audience questions was where he really shone.  And this answer was perhaps his shining moment of the day.

During yesterday’s Sustainable Industries Economic Forum, keynote speaker Paul Hawken suggested that it will take a somewhat monumental effort to get back to 350 ppm in our atmosphere (we’re at 387 right now). His list was daunting.  We’d need one new olympic sized pool of bioalgae fuel production every second for 25 years, for example.  He said that while being a ‘doomer’ has a negative connotation, the facts are the facts, and that there is a role for this kind of startling statistic.  An audience member asked the question that was on all our minds:  “It seems untenable.  Do you have hope that this can actually happen?”

Paul Hawken was the keynote speaker at the Sustainable Industries Economic Forum in San Francisco on Thursday. He had some inspiring talking points (the forum’s goal was to ‘reinspire the inspired’), but one of the key takeaways was in how we should be viewing sustainability.  He started by saying that sustainability should be viewed as a easily defineable.  Sustainability means we survive.  Living unsustainably means we don’t.  But it was how he suggested we view this that was really interesting. 

A Vermont-based company called Brighter Planet seems to think the green consumer will just give away our opinions for the chance to win $200.  Since I just completed the survey, I’m going to go ahead and guess they’re right! 

Bryan Welch, publisher of Utne Reader, Mother Earth News, and Natural Home Magazine, gave the keynote address at Green America’s Green Business Conference in San Francisco. (Take a look at TriplePundit for my 5 articles over the last few days on the hot topics of the conference).   His guidelines for a sustainable future are simple and beautiful.  As was his slideshow of his goats he raises in a humane manner on his Rancho Cappuchino (a tongue-in-cheek reference to being called a Cappuchino Cowboy by a more traditional rancher) in Kansas.

But one particular question in the Q&A session gave him pause:  is the green economy the latest in the dot-com bubble mold?

Deborah Nelson, Executive Director of the Social Venture Network, interviewed Margot Fraser, founder and former CEO of Birkenstock USA, as part of the Green America Green Business Conference about the latter’s success in business, and her new book, Dealing with the Tough Stuff.

Nelson’s first question was a great one, and right to the point for the current economic crisis:  what did you struggle with at the beginning? 

We all give to environmental non-profits for different reasons.  Sometimes, with local groups, it’s to fight a certain development or to protest a local company’s toxic emissions.  With national groups, it’s usually to fight policies we don’t agree with that come from governments or multinational companies.  Sometimes we win, sometimes we don’t.  And even when we do, there are often compromises that make our hard fought victory less effective.  It seems there is never a sure bet.  Or is there?

There is one surefire way that donations will result in decreased emissions, decreased consumption, and slowing of environmental degradation.  Can you guess how? 

Yesterday, I wrote about the new DH9 from DewPointe, one of the cool eco-innovations to be showcased at West Coast Green October 1-3 in San Francisco.  The DH9 is capable of extracting water vapor from the air and converting it to (very) pure drinking water, at a rate of about 6.5 gallons per day.  The technology is inspiring, in that this is a free-standing water manufacturer, needing no water supply, and conjures up images of moisture farms and growing forests where once there was desert.  Indeed, even in 30% relative humidity, which is akin to some of the driest deserts in the world, the DH9 can produce 4 gallons of water per day from the air.

The big drawbacks are the cost ($1600 retail price) and the need for electricity.  While standing, the DH9 uses 80 Watts, and while actively filtering, it uses 500.

Researchers in Stuttgart, however, have solved one of those two problems:  their system is completely based on renewable, on-site energy. 

Oatmeal has gotten a bad rap.  Kids (and adults) may view it as a health food with all the flavor of drywall.  There are a lot of ways to get kids of all ages to wake up and WANT oatmeal for their breakfast of choice.

Of course, the health benefits are clear.  I’m 34, and while I don’t worry about this kind of stuff, my family history of very high cholesterol had me wondering about the claim Wilford Brimley made about Quaker oats removing cholesterol from your bloodstream.  So I decided to run a little self-experiment.  In one year, my cholesterol dropped from over 300 down to 164.  Call me a believer.

But what about that drywall?