Brussels is currently buzzing, and this is not only due to the fact that the sun is shining (a rare event in Belgium). Green Week, an annual event of the Environment Directorate of the European Commission, began on 23 June. Green Week is the biggest annual conference on European environment policy, which includes high-level speakers from all over Europe and beyond. A key theme this year is the push for a global deal to control climate change at the Copenhagen conference in December. In his opening speech, Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said ‘Copenhagen must go down in history as the crossroads at which the world changed direction by agreeing targets and actions ambitious enough to avert dangerous climate change.’

This type of rhetoric is commonplace in Brussels, with a wide range of industries supporting this approach. In the transport sector, the Aviation Global Deal Group proposes a global Emissions Trading Scheme which would be administered by an international organisation such as ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation). However, the outcome of Copenhagen will undoubtedly depend on the stance of the US and China. One thing is for sure though, a global deal to avert climate change is certainly more probable than continued sunshine in Brussels!

For a video of Green Week, click on the following link: Green Week, Brussels 2009

Deutsche Bank's new Carbon Counter in Manhattan; Photo via Scientific American

At the end of last week, Deutsche Bank’s Asset Management division launched the world’s first scientifically valid, real-time carbon counter: a nearly 70-foot-tall digital billboard outside Penn Station in Manhattan, displaying the running total of long-lived greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. 

The Carbon Counter and “Know the Number” campaign is part of climate-change awareness and education initiative sponsored by the Climate Change Advisors group (DBCCA), DB’s institutional climate change investment and research business.

Underpinning the Carbon Counter’s creation is the belief that information catalyses action. The number on the Carbon Counter is based on measurements developed by MIT scientists, which include all greenhouse gases covered under the Kyoto and Montreal Protocols.

The current quantity of long-lived greenhouse gases in the atmosphere as shown by the Carbon Counter is 3.64 trillion metric tons, increasing by approximately 2 billion metric tons per month. With carbon in the atmosphere reaching an 800,000-year high, Kevin Parker, Global Head of Deutsche Bank’s Asset Management division, commented: “We can’t see greenhouse gases, so it is easy to forget that they are accumulating rapidly. It will be a huge task to bring global emissions under control and my hope is that putting this data in the public view will spur both governments and markets to move us more quickly to a low-carbon economy.”

A sign of our increasing carbon count and the role of the financial services industry in enabling change, the prominent clock should help to keep people focused on repairing the environment, as much as the global economy. Surely if there is a valuable lesson the credit crunch offers in managing climate change, it is this: The longer the risk is ignored, the more drastic the consequences.

Eco-watchers around the world know that the prioritization of environmental issues can lead to tough choices. It can impact the way companies do business, and, in some cases, change the face of entire industries.

This past week here in China provides a case in point. In this instance, the industry under fire is that venerable staple of Chinese life – disposable chopsticks.

All chopped out?

Many restaurateurs have historically chosen them over the re-usable kind for cost and hygiene reasons. In fact, the chopstick industry employs about 300,000 people, and exports 60 percent of its product, creating exports worth about US$200 million. By some estimates, China throws away 45 billion disposable chopsticks annually, representing about 25 million fully grown trees worth of wood.

But in keeping with an aggressive environmental agenda that China has recently embarked upon, Vice-Minister of Commerce Jiang Zengwei has called for restaurant owners to stop using disposable chopsticks and switch to the re-usable kind. He has even hinted at the possibility of future regulation in this area.

Needless to say, this doesn’t sit well with the disposable chopstick industry. They have pointed to the fact that most disposable chopsticks are made from fast-growing birch and poplar wood. They have noted that melamine resin chopsticks – the most common form of reusable chopstick – pose health risks because of their ‘high formaldehyde content’ and the possibility that restaurants may not properly sterilise them between uses. And they have cried foul about the number of jobs that could be lost if the government continues on its current quest to reduce the use of their product.

These may well be valid points. What is better, environmentally speaking – the harvesting of fast-growing trees or the use of a non-recyclable chemical resin? Does the ‘formaldehyde content’ of the melamine chopstick have any impact on human health, and if so, is it a greater or lesser risk than porous wood, which cannot be sterilised? And what will the real economic impact be?

All of these are good questions, and deserve fair consideration. But the industry is short on time – and on public opinion.

In the past year alone, 1000 restaurants in Guangzou, and more than 300 in Beijing, have responded to the government’s call. And a recent poll by major information portal Sina.com suggests that 84.2% of online users support the end of disposable chopstick use on environmental grounds. Unless the industry is both quick and deft, it looks like a change in the way the Chinese use chopsticks could be here to stay – yet another example of how eco rules these days, even in the most traditional of Chinese industries.

Which type of chopstick do you prefer? Why?

Rock ‘n roll: To many, it conjures images of hip, edgy musicians with screaming fans singing along to their favorite tunes. Loud and fun? Yes. Sustainable? It’s getting there, thanks to major recycling efforts, hundreds of thousands of gallons of biodiesel, even forks made from biodegradable potato starch.

At the heart of this is Reverb, a non-profit organization founded in 2004 by environmental activist Lauren Sullivan and her husband, Adam Gardner of the band Guster. Reverb’s mission is simple: raising awareness and support for the environment by tapping into the connection between musicians and their fans.

To do this, the organization works to educate, inspire and mobilize music fans. Their efforts begin even before the very first note is played, helping to “green” artists’ tours – and the music industry as a whole – by working with high-profile musical acts such as the Barenaked Ladies, Dave Matthews Band, Sheryl Crow, Fall Out Boy, Guster, John Mayer, Bonnie Raitt and more to reduce the environmental footprint of their tours. How do they do that? It varies by act, but actions include using biodiesel to fuel tour busses, to adding recycling capabilities to venues that don’t already have it, encouraging concert-goers to carpool to events, offering built-in carbon offsets associated with fan merchandise, and taking steps to make concerts carbon neutral. Here’s a photo album with more info.

In all, Reverb has reduced more than 62,600 tons of CO2 through greening more than 1,100 events on 70 tours, including the Campus Consciousness Tour, which brings the “Eco-Village” concept — featuring a festival-like atmosphere before and during the show, with booths set up inside and outside the venue — to colleges and universities across the country. What’s more, the organization has reached more than 8 million fans, encouraging more responsible individual behavior. The group has also engaged the support of nearly 300 businesses and non-profit/community groups – an eclectic roster boasting some big names like Stonyfield Farm, the Sierra Club, Ben & Jerry’s, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Seventh Generation, NativeEnergy, The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Clean Cities and many, many others.

What’s next for Reverb? We asked Gardner a few questions just the other day (a little more casual than the Congressional testimony he delivered a couple years back, but insightful nonetheless)…

FH Sustainability: What motivates you to get up in the morning?

Adam Gardner: Usually my crying 1-year-old daughter at the crack of dawn! It’s rough at first, but I always end up loving spending time alone with her before the rest of the neighborhood wakes up.

FH Sustainability: What concerns keep you up at night?

Adam Gardner: Between Guster, Reverb and being a new dad, I generally fall asleep the moment my head hits the pillow, but occasionally my mind will get racing with ideas about how we could be reaching more people more effectively.

FH Sustainability: What accomplishment are you/Reverb most proud of so far?

Adam Gardner: It’s hard to pinpoint. We’ve been fortunate enough to work with so many great artists and have significant results. For example on Dave Matthews Band’s last summer tour, the fans alone reduced over 5.5 million pounds of CO2 through our on-line carpooling and fan carbon offset programs.

FH Sustainability: What’s the next big challenge you/Reverb plan to tackle?

Adam Gardner: We want to diversify the artists with whom we work so we can spread awareness and action to hip-hop and country audiences.

While greening rock concerts might seem like fun and games, the effort is large in scope and the results mean serious business. Simply put: Sustainability rocks.

Hello from Brussels, where we are all analysing the results of the European elections and busy interpreting how the new makeup of Parliament will affect our clients.

My colleague Teresa Calvano recently blogged about how well the Greens did in the election – nowhere more so than in France. In fact, “les verts” did so well that they came within a whisker of pushing the Socialists into third place – no mean feat during a global recession, especially in a country like France, with its strong tradition of championing socialist causes such as the 35-hour work week!

So why did the Greens do so well? One explanation that has been put forward is the slightly suspicious timing of the release of the free to view documentary “Home.” The film, which many have compared with Al Gore’s award-winning 2006 documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth,” was directed by famous French photographer Yann Arthus-Bertrand and produced by Luc Besson.

The film shows a variety of landscapes from the sky and tells the story of climate change. It tries to display the beauty of the Earth and makes the case for how human industrial activity is posing a serious threat to the planet’s survival. Its release came on June 5, two days before the election, and was aired on French National Television where 8.3 million French tuned in to watch it, representing one third of all French viewers. The film also made good use of new social media and has had millions of views on YouTube! as well.

Many politicians in France have pointed to the film’s release as being a significant factor in the election and suggest that it considerably boosted the Green vote. The fact that it was aired on public television has therefore raised some eyebrows. More importantly, with an increase in the number of Green Members of Parliament, our clients have to continue to make the environment one of their top priorities.

So make sure you take a look at the film – in terms of beauty, I guarantee it’s easier on the eye than 90 minutes of watching a former U.S. vice president, and no less hard hitting.

A couple of weeks ago, I had the good fortune to attend the 2009 Sustainable Brands Conference in Monterey, California. I was invited to the conference to present the findings of a recent survey sponsored by Fleishman-Hillard and the American Marketing Association called “Marketers’ Views Remain Bright on the Topic of Sustainability, Despite Gloomy Economy.” More than 600 people attended the conference, and I was gratified to be a part this enthusiastic, committed and extremely intelligent group – all of whom are devoted to sustainable branding.

Before attending the conference, I took the idea of sustainable branding for granted. But one of the beauties of attending smart conferences like this one is exposure to new ideas and ways of thinking. And this conference was no exception. It got me to thinking: What is sustainable branding? What exactly makes one brand more sustainable than another?

The answers lie as much in manufacturing and construction and in ingredient choice as they do in brand values and corporate philosophies. After all, sustainability is in large part a concept, an idea. A brand’s attributes and the benefits associated with those attributes are what matter most at the end of the day. It is how you make the product, use the product and ultimately dispose of it – or, better yet, reincarnate it – that makes one product or brand better than another when it comes to sustainability.

The reality is that almost all products and brands require energy and materials to make them. Further, most products and brands are created with the objective to inspire need and consumption. So, does that mean, on some level, that sustainable branding is an oxymoron?

To answer this question, I start with Jim Merkel’s definition for sustainability. Merkel, the founder of the Alternative Transportation Task Force in San Luis Obispo, California, once said that, “Sustainability is human consumption based on biospheric production or using the earth’s resources at a rate slower than they regenerate.” To be sustainable under this definition, we must use less to produce less, and we must slow down. Way down. Way, way down. Slow down enough to allow for large-scale natural regeneration.

A restaurant placard in Santorini, Greece; Photo via Wikipedia

Think about it. We now have the concept of slow, small and local. We have slow eating. We have slow money. Perhaps we should think about slow branding, too. Slow branding would be based on trust, transparency, efficiency and a bankable promise that leads us all to a healthier future. Sustainable branding is, in effect, slow branding.

If you agree with the idea that slow is better… If you support the idea that regeneration must come in front of consumption in the world order to ensure a sustainable future… And, if you are a smart brand marketer with a mission to inspire consumers to love you and your brand, what do you do? Do you see value in slowing down?

For your weekend pleasure… Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard offers a simple, intelligent perspective about businesses and the environment.

Happy Father’s Day.

As a child, the Easter Bunny’s annual visit to my house didn’t generate the same anticipation as that created by the man in the red suit at Christmastime. It’s not that the big bunny wasn’t a welcome visitor; he most certainly was. I just regarded the Easter Bunny as a second-rate Santa because the stuff he left behind wasn’t usually as cool. However, one year he left something behind that forever changed my life. That year, in addition to the usual chocolate eggs, Peeps and jelly beans, there, next to my Easter basket, was a stack of comics.

One of the things I’ve always liked about comic book characters is that every so often their publishers will kill them off only to bring them back months or years later, usually with a few changes that make him or her fit in better with the modern world.

Superman image via Wikipedia

In the more than 20 years since I left Smallville for Metropolis, the paper industry has been pronounced dead more times than I care to count. Like comic book characters that have been written off only to be reintroduced, the paper industry continues to reinvent itself in the face of countless obituaries.

Last year, I received an interesting challenge at the office: to take a look at what AT&T’s benefits communications group (a Fleishman-Hillard client) was spending on paper, production and postage to communicate with groups it couldn’t reach electronically and “see if there’s anything there.” It turns out there was quite a bit.

If you are a child of the 70s like me, your knowledge of paper production was probably formed by watching a PBS-like documentary showing plaid-clad lumberjacks felling giant trees that they then floated downstream to a giant factory that belched sun-vanquishing clouds of waste into an azure sky.

In the subsequent three decades, a lot has changed. Since 2000, almost 20 percent of U.S. paper mills – nearly 100 -have shut their doors. Those that remain open are rapidly adopting practices that are good for the bottom line and good for the environment. Gone are the days when recycled papers were only available in a few sickly shades of gray; today’s recycled stocks are brighter and lighter than ever before. And, in some cases, a paper stock identical to one produced 10 years ago requires substantially less water and fewer trees to produce.

That’s not to say there still isn’t a long way to go: Recent research indicates that paper is the single largest component of our nation’s landfills at nearly 25 percent. Paper production is also among the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. Despite these facts – and the countless obits – paper probably isn’t going anywhere. In fact, it’s hard to imagine getting through the day without it. The average American, for example, uses 700 pounds of the stuff annually, the largest per capita consumption on the planet.

So, we took a look at the options. At the conclusion of our research, we recommended that our client move to a new greener stock that took fewer raw materials to produce, created less waste, was more efficient on the press and cost less to mail. In the first three months following the transition, the company saved more than $200,000 – and nearly $1 million in the first nine months.

Despite our increasing use of electronic communications, chances are your company still relies on paper – to some degree – to get the word out and get the work done. When plotting your company’s paper strategy, it pays to take a page from the comics: Phase out the old standbys that no longer fit your business model and introduce ones that are better suited for the world we live in. Be a super-hero… your company – and the planet – are counting on you.

Business for Social Responsibility has issued its 2008 report, which includes BSR’s thinking on the impact of current economic, social and environmental conditions for sustainable business. It also provides a sustainability road map for 2009. Good reading!

In April, Fleishman-Hillard Green Champions – our network of employees in offices around the world that helps Fleishman-Hillard meet our own sustainability and environmental stewardship goals – launched a cell phone recycling challenge to all U.S. offices to collect as many used wireless devices and accessories as possible.

It’s a timely cause: Recycling or reusing cell phones — which are made up of precious metals, copper and plastics — prevents air and water pollution and reduces greenhouse gas emissions that occur during manufacturing. According to the U.S. EPA, more than 100 million cell phones are discarded annually; and, in 2007, only 10 percent were recycled.

Our recycling drive supported the EPA’s Plug-In To eCycling National Cell Phone Recycling Week (April 6-12). It also supported Cell Phones for Soldiers, the charity that recycles wireless devices and uses the proceeds to buy free phone cards for military families. (A note of disclosure: Cell Phones for Soldiers also recycles with our client, AT&T.) Some offices extended their recycling work through the week of Earth Day so that more phones could be collected.

Our aim was to encourage fellow FHers to recycle used cell phones, Personal Data Assistants (PDAs), cell phone batteries, chargers and other accessories — and make it easy for folks to participate. Phones were collected, counted and shipped to the charity via free shipping labels available online. We also encouraged a little cross-office competition for the office collecting the most phones and the office with the most creative recycling bin. (Kudos to our D.C. office, which won by recycling 222 phones and accessories to the cause.)

Our scary green friend encourages employees in Dallas to participate.

Drives ran in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, D.C., Portland, Sacramento and St. Louis. Bins ranged from recycled boxes with bobbleheads and decorations, to a stuffed costume of a “green champ” that sat in a break room, “scaring” people into donating phones. In total, we collected nearly 500 devices – which translates to the following environmental equivalents, according to the charity’s recycler:

• Saving enough energy to power 17 U.S. households for a month (more than one for an entire year).
• Reducing the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as removing 12 passenger cars from the road for a month—or more than one car for a year.
• Reducing 67 metric tons of air emissions associated with manufacturing.

Just think what we could do if we made this recycling project a year-round opportunity to help protect the environment! What has your office done to make recycling easier?