The Green Baroness is on a quest to help travelers address their carbon impact with some helpful travel options. In part 2 I will be addressing Ground transportation.
Though emissions from one car is nothing compared to the best airplane, they certainly add up. As you look at how you will get around at your destination, consider public-transit options versus the standard rental car. Public transportation is often cheaper and faster, it offers a great way to sightseee and gives you a "flavor" of the culture in the area, and is almost always earth-friendly.
Example- Stockholm. Visitors often take the 20 minute Arlanda Express train from the main airport into center city. When full, the electric train emits just over a pound of carbon dioxide per round trip per person. Compared to hiring a car for the 54 mile round trip excursion, which would add 37 pounds of carbon dioxide according to Sustainable Travel International, and this comparisons was done with an environmentally friendly taxi service!
In the event that public transportation is not an option and a rental car is the way to go, consider agencies like Enterprise Rent a car, which has bulked up it's green options. Enterprise also owns National and Alamo and they have about 9000 hybrids in their fleet, available at 100 locations nationwide. While it is a small portion of the 750,000 vehicle rental fleet, they also offer 448,000 cars that are certified by the EPA to get at least 28 miles per gallon on highways.
Want to rent a hybrid? Renting a hybrid car does come with a price premium. Enterprise claims they generally cost $10-$15 more a day then similarly sized vehicles. Avis also offers hybrids, to which they currently have 2,200 at a $15-$25 a day higher rate than a similar vehicle.
One option for those folks who travel alot to urban places and need to utilize a car in different areas, is the Zip Car program. This is a great option for a traveller that might utilize public transportation at home and have the occasional need for a car, especially on trips. Your hourly or daily fee covers gas and insurance and the car can be waiting for you at the airport. Check them out to see if this is a viable option for you- www.zipcar.com
One of the challenges for people and companies wishing to reduce their carbon output is travel. It is harder to chose a "green" option when it comes to travel these days, however that doesn't necessarily mean that you will have to walk to that meeting across town versus driving there.
Looking for some options to help you to create a more efficient trip can really help drive down the emissions from that journey.
Booking direct flights, staying at hotels with Energy Star appliances or opting for public transportation can have a big impact on your carbon footprint.
The Green Baroness is going to tackle each step for your journey in the quest to offer travellers some greener options. First up is Air Travel.
Aviation is responsible for 2% of global carbon-dioxide emissions. While Virgin Airways, Continental Airlines and Deutsche Lufthansa among others are testing bio fuels, they're years away from making a regular run on coconut oil etc. , so while we cannot wait until that technology is available there are two biggest factors in a flights emissions- whether it runs nonstop and the age of the aircraft. You may use these two factors when booking a flight to get the most efficient flight possible.
A nonstop flight is generally less harmful that one with intermediate stops, as plans utilize more fuel for take off and landing then when cruising at high altitudes.
Also travelling an efficient route but in an old clunker of a plan will defeat the purpose. To see emissions for your individual flight check www.carbon.trx.com from TRX, an Atlanta based travel software company.
You will learn that emissions vary greatly among individual flights- for example, a New York - San Fransisco trip on Delta emits 595 pounds of carbon dioxide in a 735H. The same flight in a Delta 757 craft emits 38% more carbon dioxide.
The 102 story Empire State Building was opened in 1931 to much fanfare as the tallest skyscraper in the world. While not the tallest building anymore, the current owners want it to become a greener building. This is the vanguard of a new trend, retro-fitting old commercial buildings to lower their energy use.
The new lights, refurbished windows and other upgrades in the building will save an estimated $4.4 million a year on utility bills and pay for themselves in three years. However, in the next 15 years, the changes will likely keep 105,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide out of the air.
What a great example of creating better efficiencies, one that Adobe, Herman Miller and other organizations are perfectly aware of and strive to address.
The empire State Building is one of the most prominent projects by commercial-building owners who are putting their money towards these sorts of green retrofits. By taking this step, they are betting that this investment will help keep their properties desirable in a tough market, help them attract better clients and give them a competitive advantage should the government pass tougher building energy standards.
Commercial real estate accounts for nearly 20% of US energy use, so addressing this sector can really be a huge opportunity in curbing greenhouse-gas emissions. While new buildings are increasingly being built "green", the bigger potential lines in the tens of billions of square feet already built, waiting for their green retrofit.
Over the past year or so there are more IT companies addressing their client’s requests to become more sustainable. One of those offerings is Carbon Counting Software.
At a most basic level, IT services offered by IBM, SAS, Clear Standards and other are “housekeeping” devices. Companies seem to vary in their emphasis on operations, as some are used as a tool for executive level decision making, while others help cut the tedious work of carbon management. Essentially they all aim to create a product that is easy to use and available online. Heck let’s face it the basic principles of carbon emissions reductions is no secret and if a company creates a policy and invests in the most energy-efficient, low carbon products and trains its staff, it will reduce their carbon output.
However, the new breed of software can be helpful if emission standards are set in the future, and trade-off’s might need to be made. Another plus is that the software connects sustainability with profitability and that mindset will only help their industry across the board.
Like anything else in business these days, to be credible the systems need to be measured and auditable. Suppliers suggest that the way around this issue is to build evolving carbon accounting standards into their software and be clear about emissions factors they are using when extracting energy data. However, like basic accounting- garbage in is garbage out, so the company will ultimately be responsible for the data they put into the system, knowing what buildings to include etc.
What is most interesting is that these new offerings will generate a major tool that could play an increasingly important role in determining the numbers disclosed by companies in their annual report, where reporting may become mandatory. This their profile will rise if sales of their products take off.
Posted on 3:50 PM, under
SEO
As someone who googles a lot of sustainable and “Green” companies, I can tell you the interesting results that come from these searches. Sadly not all of my results hit the mark, despite my best efforts to fine tune my key words. Which made me ponder, how does a Green Company get their organization to stand out in an internet search? What SEO tips can one employ to help their business and their values reach the online community?
The first line of action is how does your company appear in the “positioning” of the search- towards the top of the results or at the bottom? Take a moment and google your company and review the results. You might want to explore at least 3 search engines to accomplish this to see how they can differ in the results.
One of the main decisions about how an eco business markets itself offline & online is whether to lead with the eco/ethical message or position in the same space as other companies. So let’s look at the options.
You can position yourself, from an eco/ethical position (Niched) or get in the “mix” with other similar companies (More competitive) or straddle them both and do a mix of niched and competitive. When considering potential traffic on the web, the “mix” option may be a better one for some organizations.
Posted on 12:40 PM, under
Seems like we are witnessing what happens when a supposedly “transparent” and eco friendly firm such as what SIGG portrayed to the public and their partners is actually not. Guess SIGG is now “brown” instead of “green” as this latest snafoo is costing them customers and partners.
SIGG finally admitted that their bottles are not as “health friendly” as they have been advertising. Bottles manufactured before August 2008 have liners that contain bisphenal A, a chemical that may adversely affect human health. So now over a year later we are being alerted to this information? However, their bottles have been touted before 2008 as being BPA free etc.
Simran Sith wrote on Huffington Post decrying the company’s lack of transparency on the BPS issue. If you have a SIGG bottle manufactured before August 2008, bring the bottle back to any major retailer and they should exchange it for a new BPA- free model. Sadly, SIGG is not even revealing this information on their website, and would much rather have you pay to return the bottle to them for an exchange. However Simran spoke to SIGG CEO Steve Wasik who confirmed they would allow the exchanges to occur at the stores.
With this news, Patagonia announced today they will terminate all co-branding and marketing efforts with SIGG, Inc. Seems like Patagonia was duped by SIGG, as Patagonia’s VP of Environmental Initiatives Rick Ridgeway stated, “We even arranged for one of the leading scientists on BPA research to come to our company to educate us on the issue. Once we concluded there was basis for concern, we immediately pulled all drinking bottles that contained BPA from our shelves and then searched for a BPA-free bottle. We very clearly asked SIGG if there was BPA in their bottles and their liners, and they clearly said there was not. After conducting such thorough due diligence, we are more than chagrined to see the ad that is appearing in Backpacker, but we also feel that with this explanation our customers will appreciate and understand our position.”
Patagonia is returning all SIGG bottles still on their shelves (even the BPA free versions) for recycling and are searching for a new bottle vendor.
