People, Planet, Profits & Projects

You know from reading our blog postings, whether here, at our website, or other guest posts we’ve contributed over the last couple of years, that we are neither “tree huggers” nor “Hummer huggers”, but fall somewhere in between.  We do believe that sustainability is the way of the future for a variety of reasons including, we assert, that it is the right thing to do.  Every once in a while we come across a project executed by one of the more radical factions that deserves a closer look.  In this case it is a project, a challenge, to the Information Technology (IT) industry.  The gauntlet was thrown down by Greenpeace.    It is called the Cool IT Challenge. 

According to the Greenpeace Internationalwebsite, and as we also believe because of the huge impact it has on the environment,  “The IT sector is uniquely positioned to help the world shift to a prosperous clean energy economy, and the Cool IT Challenge is urging IT companies to put forth innovation, mitigate their own carbon footprint, and advocate for significant policy changes in the mutual interest of business and the climate.”  Further, “Greenpeace launched the Cool IT Challenge in 2009 to call on Information Technology (IT) companies to power technological solutions needed to fight climate change.  In 2008, The Climate Group and the Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI) issued a report, called SMART 2020: enabling the low carbon economy in the information age, which showed how the IT sector can reduce economy-wide global emissions of up to 15 percent by 2020.”

The Cool IT challenge pits global IT companies against each other to try to top the prestigious Cool IT Climate Leaderboard.  The “Leaderboard” is another metric that investors and concerned consumers can access to assess the different tech companies and their sustainability efforts.  Here is the link to look at the latest leaderboard.  Tech companies are compared using three categories; IT Climate Solutions, IT Energy Impact and Political Advocacy.  Climate Solutions are the “economy-wide technical climate solution” efforts that the tech companies are offering to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.    Energy Impact are the “initiatives” undertaken to reduce their own global warming emissions.  Political Advocacy, that we find very interesting, is the “active” engagement by these companies in the political advocacy and support for science-based climate and energy policies. 

While the latest leaderboard show that Google has topped the leaderboard and many of the companies are gaining ground.  But what it also shows is that there is a significant drop across the board on political advocacy.  As we said, this is one of the more interesting of the measures for us because without political support and advocacy thereof, changing the conversation will be difficult.  It is not only “talking the talk”, but “walking the walk.” 

A popular and fundamental axiom in project management is that in order to be successful a project must have top-down support.  Grassroots, or bottom up, can only do so much.  We need to continue to push these companies to include political actions in their projects, whether it is continuing to connect to the enterprises sustainability plan, communicating the need to do so with upper management, encouraging management ot become involved in the political proces of sustianabilty or with our buying habits by supporting the companies that support this mission. 

There are many projects that can lead to a more sustainable product.  I received a rug the other day from Pottery Barn.  We were looking for a sustainable product and this rug fills the bill.  It originates from Obeetee, a company founded on sustainable principles.  Shortly after World War I, a couple of British entrepreneurs decided to create an enterprise by partnering with group of local artisans in the rug making area of Uttar Pradesh, India.  Those artisans had a tradition of weaving high quality rugs for centuries.  But what makes it sustainable?

One thing that they do is vertical integration.  The company works directly with over 15,000 weavers so that the loom owners have close ties to the factory.  Those close ties allow for mutually beneficial relationship to form.  That relationship resulted in the “coveted” SA8000: 2001 Certification for Social Accountability which examines 8 core elements including; worker health and safety, working hours, child labor, forced labor, discrimination, freedom of association and collective bargaining, wages and discipline. 

Additionally Obeetee carpets are made with safe dyes and chemicals and “is the first in the industry to set up water effluent treatment plants and air pollution control systems.”  They majority of their power is generated using gas derived from biomass.  It is eco-friendly way to recover heat and power from the biomass and is utilized to run the power turbines.  Obeetee contributes to surrounding communities by planting trees and developing parks.  Even though the hiring age in India for labor is 14 years old, Obeetee’s hiring standards are a minimum of 16 years old. 

Looking at the labeling on the rug pad we also purchased at the same time from Pottery Barn, it states that it is “made from recycled polyester and nylon needle punched fibers, attached to a pad of natural and synthetic rubber.”  It also states that it is “made from recycled materials that are safe to use on all types of floors.”   

It is always interesting to find a company, in potentially a fossil fuel intensive industry, carpeting, and seeing that the projects along the way have lead to a very sustainable company.  One that we’ve mentioned before is Interface Global, “the worldwide leader in design, production and sales of environmentally-responsible modular carpet for the commercial, institutional, and residential markets, and a leading designer and manufacturer of commercial broadloom.”  Global Interface intends to be 100% sustainable by the year 2020. 

It is worth noting that whatever the product of your enterprise may be, it will fall somewhere in the “green spectrum," green by intent to green in general, from developing a wind farm to putting out a new software release. Defined in Green Project Management, greenality “is the “degree to which an organization has considered environmental (green) factors that affect its projects during the entire project life cycle and beyond.”  Obeetee has certainly done that from the beginning.

I was watching a video the other day called Connections.  Surprise, surprise, it is about fly fishing.  There are three videos in the series so far including Drift and Rise.  The videos are a collaboration that includes Chris Patterson, long-time cinematographer for Warren Miller Films that brought us some spectacular skiing videos.  Connections is all about the connections we make to other fly fishermen, to getting to and from fly fishing locations, to the places we fish, guides, people we meet fly fishing, resort owners, fly shop employees, and finally between the angler and the fish on the end of the line.  It got me thinking about all the connections we’ve made by being are involved with sustainability.

We started slowly making those, for a good reason.  Sustainability is controversial and can be a source of conflict.  We needed to get out facts straight or at the least, investigate the reasoning behind sustainability.  It is also, to some, the cause de jour, a thing to exploit.  To us, it is much more than that.  It is our connection with the “natural world.”  It is the future if we are to have one. When we look at all of the issues we are facing in the future, like continued population growth, habitat destruction and water scarcity for example, we see that sustainability as that ultimate connector. 

There is a connection between green or sustainable business practices and project management.  We’ve talked about this before, project managers are where ideas become reality.  Therefore the reality of sustainable practices, are executed by project managers.  Our most cherished connections is the ones we’ve made with other, like-minded, project management practitioners who get it and get us.  We’ve made these connections all over the world and we are very proud of that fact.  The numbers are growing, too,  as evidenced by the interest in EarthPM.

The video discusses some of the same connections that we have with sustainability, even though in some instances they didn’t realize it.  As an example they talk about the transportation connection.  We have to get to the places we fish.  How we do that in the most sustainable way is up to us.  Fuel efficient vehicles, making sure our vehicles are properly tuned and tires properly inflated to reduce fossil fuel consumption and emissions, or carbon offsets for air transportation are examples of connecting sustainability with transportation. 

Belonging to or donating to organizations like the Nature Conservancy who are protecting those valuable resources that we fly fishermen use, is a connection between us and the land.  Purchasing our equipment from companies who are part of the “1% for the Planet” is another way to connect.  You can find those companies by going to 1% for the Planet website.  Not purchasing from companies who employ unethical business practices is a way to connect to sustainability via corporate social responsibility.  Those companies can easily be identified by going to any number of sustainability indices. 

When we think about it, we see that we are connected to sustainability in just about every way.  Perhaps we just need some someone to be able to “Touch” us to see them.

Could water be the new oil?  We mean that in a “demand” type of way.  If the answer is yes, then we have a very critical issue.  I noticed in the Wall Street Journal the other day that Fidelity Investment had a two page ad suggesting that investing in water resources may be the way to go in the future.  In other words, they are predicting that water could be the next traded commodity.  Looking at it pragmatically, we can see that possibility.  With an increasing population, strange happenings with the global climate like a change the weather patterns, urbanization, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, groundwater pollution, and all of the other sustainability issues, there is a good possibility that water may become scarce.  The demand for water could exceed the supply, making those who control the water in the driver’s seat.  That begs the question as to whom, if anyone should control the water.

We may not have much choice in the matter.  Water is controlled today.  When dry weather persists, municipalities place restrictions on its use.   At least there is control on municipal water supplies.  Even those with well water are at the mercy of contamination and periods of drought.  They, too, will have to look to some collective source of water.

Ron Lauder, in a CNBC video, makes the point that only 1% of the world’s water is drinkable.  He says that 97% is unusable, 1% each are in the arctic and Antarctic leaving 1% of drinkable water.  The statistical collection website, Worldometers, says ““Almost 80% of diseases in so called "developing" countries are associated with water, causing some three million early deaths. For example, 5,000 children die every day from diarrhea, or one every 17 seconds.”  You can clearly see the problem.

Not many countries remain unaffected.  It is a particularly critical issue in the countries with the most populations, like India, Pakistan, Mexico, China, and the United States, especially in the mid-west, southwest, and western US.  While oil rich, Saudi Arabia is water poor, and along with Yemen and Israel will face severe future shortages.

Who controls the water will be a critical issue in the future.  The wisdom of making such a life-sustaining resource a commodity seems to be flawed.  Whether or not a government, “Fanny Mae” type, agency should be controlling the water could be flawed, too.  The scarcity of water will certainly be a serious issue and what we do about it will have to be carefully and thoughtfully approached.

I picked up a recent copy of National Fisherman magazine.  I hadn’t seen a copy in years and I picked it up for a couple of reasons; (1) as a sportfisherman, catch and release, I like to see what the fisheries and commercial fisherman are doing, and this is their magazine, (2) at our post office, if you get a duplicate copy of a magazine or you get one you don’t want to read, you leave it on the counter to see if it might interest another person to pick it up, reuse/recycle, (3) I watch my share of The Deadliest Catch and (4) the subtitle of the magazine is Informed Fishermen-Profitable Fisheries-Sustainable Fish (people, profit, planet – Triple Bottom-line).

So reading through the magazine, I came across a short article by Sam Rauch, acting director of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS – “nimfis” as it is know in the marine fisheries arena).   The title of the article is “Crossing the border to successfully manage fish stocks.”  He starts out by saying “U.S. and Canadian fishermen and natural resources managers face the same challenges.”  But he really had me at “Driven by our common interest in sustainability (my emphasis), we have developed a close working relationship over the years with a long record of success.”

It only goes to show that we cannot do this alone, even if we wanted to.  The resource does not know the boundaries.  They just wander all over the place crossing into other jurisdictions, international waters that may have little regulation, or wherever the food supply or migratory patterns take them. 

A couple of the examples of working together that Mr. Rauch cites are a shared commercial fisheries resource, the yellowtail flounder, and protected species, like the Atlantic sturgeon.  As to the yellowtail flounder, joint Canadian/U.S. legislation was passed to increase the U.S. flounder fisherman’s catch limits, while still protecting the transboundary stock.  For the sturgeon, there is a developing Canadian caviar industry in the St. Lawrence River, and the U.S. and Canada are planning a strategy to be able to sustain the stock of sturgeons while accommodating this new interest. 

Mr. Rauch ends the article by saying, “As we face threats from climate change and growing interest in offshore siting of alternative energy projects, a strong working relationship with Canadian fishermen and resource managers will be key to ensuring that marine species and their habitats are protected and fishing opportunities maximized.”  It has to be a balance between the factors of the triple bottom-line in order for people, planet or profits to sustain.  That message is clear to us, but needs to be shouted from the roof tops or shoreline as the case may be.