The Chinese coal industry is known for its lucrative returns: the China Shenhua Energy Co. gained 65% from July to September, and many investors claim they can't afford not to be in China. In fact, 20% of Shenhua's stock is held by U.S. investors — one of whom is the Teachers Retirement System of Texas.

But China's coal is also a huge polluter. According to the New York Times, China uses more coal than the US, the EU, and Japan combined, contributing an enormous amount of CO2 to the atmosphere. Coal-fired plants emit more than 60 different hazardous air pollutants. The large amounts of sulfur dioxide produced by Chinese coal cause acid rain, which pollutes water sources. But because of China's rapidly advancing economy, the country needs energy — fast and cheap. Coal-fired plants are much cheaper and quicker to build than natural gas, nuclear, or hydroelectric plants, and it's widely available.

Boston, Massachusetts, hosted the 3rd annual Conference on Clean Energy this past Monday and Tuesday. Panel discussions by clean energy investors, entrepreneurs developing emerging clean energy technologies for startups and more were on the agenda, along with Robyn Beavers, Director of Environmental Programs at Google.

Google, who already has the largest corporate installation of solar-powered electricity, is apparently not satisfied... and well it shouldn't be. According to Beavers, Google intends to generate a total of 50 megawatts of electricity from renewable sources, for all its operations, by the year 2012.

Beavers outlined a number of steps that Google is taking towards those goals. A 1.6 megawatt solar installation at its corporate headquarters in Mountain View, Calif, and solar panels on building roofs are just the beginning. Not to mention the solar-panel-roofed carports, under which their plug-in hybrids are charged.

"Wind, solar, geothermal, fuel cells — you name it, we're looking into it," Beavers said.

A Norwegian company called Renewable Energy Corporation (REC) will build the complex, which will be completed in different stages to incorporate wafer, cell, and module production. REC already operates the world's current largest solar plant in Norway, which produces about 650 megawatts of energy annually.

A solar manufacturing plant would be the first of its kind in Southeast Asia, and REC looked at 200 locations before settling on Singapore. A combination of tax incentives, grants, and a skilled workforce were some of the reasons REC liked it. Likewise, Singapore officials are thrilled about playing center stage in the world's rush to clean technology. Ko Kheng Hwa of the Economic Development Board explained:

Innovest, an investment research firm, launched the study in order to better understand the effect of sustainability upon potential business investment. What they found was a much more substantial difference than most had predicted. In fact, the report found that, "In the longer term, the out-performance potential will become even greater as the capital markets become more fully sensitized to the financial and competitive consequences of environmental and climate change considerations”.

While this may be great news for some, it does not mean happy days for all. The report noted that the 'strong and postive' correlation between a business's performance and its sustainability was not necessarily true for every sector of business.

King Corn focuses on co-producers Ian Cheney and Curt Ellis as they move to Iowa, rent an plot of farmland, and attempt to grow an acre of corn using typical industrial methods: genetically modified seeds, nitrogen fertilizers, powerful herbicides, and government subsidies. They show us exactly how industrial corn production works today, from seed to table, in the convoluted journey of a commodity. From Ian and Curt's one acre, they harvest enough corn to make 57,348 sodas, 3,894 burgers, or 6,726 boxes of cornflakes. And yes, corn is a major ingredient in all of those foods.

Findings from a new report examining insurance companies' responses to climate change were released at the International Association of Insurance Supervisors last week. The study found that an increasing number of companies are implementing initiatives to reduce the risk of climate change's impacts and reduce the emissions that cause the problem.

"From Risk to Opportunity 2007: Insurer Responses to Climate Change" was commissioned by Ceres, a U.S. group of investors and clean energy supporters that also directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk, which manages more than $4 trillion in assets. Mindy S. Lubber, President of Ceres, explained the report's findings:

Insurers are beginning to respond to global warming – and not just by withdrawing from coastal markets with high financial exposure. We’re seeing a rapid proliferation of products that will reduce climate-related financial losses, as well as the pollution causing global warming. Yet, insurer responses to date are not nearly sufficient given the scale of the challenge. We need more insurers, especially U.S. insurers, to step up.

Indeed, Europe's largest insurer, Allianz, said that climate change may increase insured losses from extreme events in an average year by 37 percent within a decade. Karolinska medical university in Sweden predicts cardiovascular health problems to rise along with global temperatures.

One British strategic communications firm argued that the airline industry essentially needs a PR makeover. Steve Dunne of the Brighter Group went so far as to say that the industry risks sliding into a reputation akin to that of cigarette manufacturers in the U.S.: "The aviation industry is just not representing itself properly or effectively to put the lobbying efforts of the eco-warriors into some kind of perspective."

I'm not convinced the risk is that dramatic — at least here in the U.S. While there are certainly efficiency measures airlines should be considering — such as being towed to a starting point on the runway instead of burning fuel to get there – advocating a total ban on air travel as some do (or even very high taxes) is a losing cause (by the way, I want to hear a convincing argument as to why flying on a commercial plane isn't public transportation, like taking the bus).

The article in question concerned a report that Greenpeace made about the latest gadget that everyone has to have: the iPhone. Apparently, in short, it was a danger to the environment as a result of its materials, and its lack of recyclability.

Their Rebuttal

The Bromine Science and Environmental Forum (BSEF) has swung back at Greenpeace, condemning their report as nothing more than a scandalous and hyped attack.

The international organization of the bromine chemical industry pointed out that none of the substances Greenpeace attacked Apple for using were banned under existing environmental laws. In fact, according to the BSEF, all the substances that were criticized by Greenpeace "…are approved for use, and provide critical performance and safety functions in a wide range of electronic products."

They went on to say that the brominated flame retardants that are used in the construction of the iPhone are all common ingredients in a wide variety of currently stocked products. The retardants provide a high level of fire safety, the Forum said, "essential in an age in which computer batteries randomly catch fire."

Speaking at a Mortgage Bankers Association meeting in Boston, Branson said that Virgin hopes to provide clean biofuels to buses, trains and cars within the next three to four years.

However, of more immediate importance is the decision to test a Virgin Atlantic 747 on renewable fuel next year. "Early next year we will fly one of our 747s without passengers with one of the fuels that we have developed," Branson told the annual conference. The company is developing fuels in conjunction with Boeing Co and engine-maker GE Aviation, a unit of General Electric Co.

Virgin is in a race against Air New Zealand to be the first to test such a flight. Air New Zealand said that it hoped to run a test flight on a combination of biofuel and kerosene in late 2008, so Virgin at least has a deadline to try and beat.

September of 2006 saw Greenpeace launch the Green My Apple website. Rather than asking for green iPods, they were asking for "green" iPods. The question they asked was this: why do Macs, iPods, iBooks and the rest of their product range contain hazardous substances that other companies have agreed to abandon?

May of this year saw Steve Jobs — the Apple god, if you will — announce to the world that "Apple is ahead of, or will soon be ahead of, most of its competitors" on environmental issues. But with the release of the iPhone in June in America, Greenpeace was left alone in the cold. Apple seemingly had just talked the talk, and sat at home on their couch.

So Greenpeace set out to see just what the iPhone was made of, literally. Purchasing an iPhone, and sending it to their UK labs, they found that the iPhone contained "toxic brominated compounds (indicating the prescence of brominated flame retardants (BFRs)) and hazardous PVC."

"Steve Jobs has missed the call on making the iPhone his first step towards greening Apple's products," said Zeina Alhajj, Greenpeace International toxics campaigner. "It seems that Apple is far from leading the way for a green electronics industry as competitors, like Nokia, already sell mobile phones free of PVC."

While General Electric announced structural changes to compensate for increased business in its energy-efficient lighting sector, BP is planning to restructure itself to emphasize…more petroleum.

Once self-dubbed "Beyond Petroleum" because of its increased focus on clean energy — and even considered to be one of the friendlier oil companies by clean energy supporters — BP is now folding its gas power and renewables division into its two exploration and refining segments. But despite the de-emphasis on renewables, it will continue to use the "Beyond Petroleum" moniker (still good for business I suppose) and build wind turbines and solar cells.

Why the change? Simple business: The company's new CEO, Tony Hayward, is frustrated with its performance compared to rivals like ExxonMobil. While Exxon and BP produce nearly the same about of oil each day (4.2 million barrels from Exxon compared to 3.8 million from BP), the stock market "values" BP's barrels at $59 and Exxon's at $122. So Hayward wants to realign BP with its core mission to boost profits: find oil and gas and make it into fuel. As James Harding of the The Times (London) put it, "Mr Hayward is setting out to make BP resemble Exxon, not The Body Shop."

Divine, a delicious Fair Trade chocolate company, has a tasty deal for all the top chefs out there. They're looking for recipes that have "heaps of creativity, Divine appeal, and powerful statements about why contestants are hungry to change the world through Fair Trade." The sweetest entry wins a trip to Washington D.C. and some chocolate. The entries are due December 15th, and with the holidays coming, there's a perfect opportunity to test out your creation on family and friends while introducing them to Fair Trade. If you need a snack to get your creative juices flowing, try out some of Divine's or Equal Exchange's recipes.

The latest big business to jump on this bandwagon is Panasonic, the leading brand owned by Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.

Back in April of this year, Panasonic launched their "GP3" — their three year business plan. It was the standard boilerplate plan of achieving steady growth with profitability. Panasonic has now added ecological goals to GP3, and they give us reason to smile.

The first smiley goes to their method of determining their reduction of emissions in terms of total global levels, rather than on a per basic unit basis – the latter being the volume of CO2 emissions divided by consolidated sales or production volume.

They're also using the 2007 production capacity level as the measure by which all future progress of carbon elimination will be measured.

Jim Campbell, President and CEO of GE's consumer and industrial division, explained:

"We are increasing our focus on the development and production of new, innovative lighting products like LEDs, organic LEDs, our new high efficiency incandescent light bulbs and other products that our customers will increasingly demand and require."

LEDs, or light-emitting diodes, use a semiconductor device that emits light when an electric current passes through it. They are a super-efficient form of lighting. An organic LED means that the emitting layer material is an organic compound. They are lighter and more flexible than regular LED lights, and have been used in cell phone displays and digital cameras.

Adana is the nation’s fourth largest city and the centre for the Turkish cotton and textile industries. In this case the American cotton is sent to a factory where it is spun and used to make towels. Great attention is paid to ensure high quality, oh-so-soft and fluffy towels to attract the Turkish shopper... or rather, the American shopper. The towels are packaged and sent to the United States on another container ship. This is crazy!

There are of course the energy and CO2 emissions involved in this to and from tango across the ocean. But even if we put aside such issues in the name of international trade, it cannot be denied that the system is absurd, especially given the fact that Turkey is one of the top ten cotton producers in the world.

The Weather Makers

The Future of Nature: Writing on a Human Ecology from Orion Magazine (Milkweed Editions, $18.00), just might be that book. A collection of thought-provoking essays selected and introduced by Barry Lopez, The Future of Nature includes writings by such heavy-hitters as Wendell Berry, Bill McKibben, and Derrick Jensen, all originally published in Orion, the seminal magazine covering the intersection of culture, nature, and the environment.

Editor's note: This week, Celsias editor Craig Mackintosh takes a look at Toyota's images as a "green" car company, and some issues that could undermine that perception. This post was originally published on October 3, 2007.

When people think of a 'green' car, the first that pops into most people's minds is the Toyota Prius - the world's most successful hybrid auto. Toyota has been riding a wave of consumer and media popularity, aided by celebrity endorsements from Prius owners like Leonardo diCaprio and Cameron Diaz. And, at 60mpg in city driving, there's plenty to set it apart from the typical U.S. energy hog.

But, behind the scenes, all is not as may initially appear with Toyota. Instead of using the popularity of their enviro-flagship, the current climate of heightened environmental awareness and their new status of having overtaken Detroit's General Motors as the world's biggest auto manufacturer to rachet up the rate of progress on even greater fuel efficiencies, Toyota has been quietly working in the opposite direction - teaming up with U.S. automakers in moves that seem to endorse the accusations made by the Who Killed the Electric Car people (i.e. profits before progress - actions that blatantly contradict the market-forces-will-solve-all philosophy of some).

I attended the two-day event, which delivered in its round-up of impressive energy and global warming experts: Nobel Laureate in Physics Dr. Stephen Chu, biofuels expert Dr. Lee Rybeck Lynd, peak oil expert Ken Deffeyes, economist Paul L. Joskow, polar explorer Will Steger, hydrogen expert Joan M. Ogden, and James Hansen, Director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

While at times the science got a bit thick, the message from all of the lecturers was clear: Global warming is urgent, we need to do something NOW, and many different solutions will get us there.

I was most interested to hear from Paul L. Joskow, an MIT economist who discussed the best methods for regulating carbon dioxide (CO2), a major contributor to global warming. Many politicians favor a cap-and-trade policy, in which a limit on CO2 is determined and then tradable/sellable permits to pollute are issued to utilities and industry. Economists, on the other hand, generally prefer a carbon tax that simply taxes CO2 at a certain rate.