Sustainability goes mainstream

Businesses, at least some, are implementing

Phil Carson | Mar 21, 2012

Share/Save  

 

I attended the Sustainable Opportunities Summit yesterday in Denver, hosted by a local organization, CORE, and its member companies, and the Leeds School of Business at the University of Colorado, Boulder. 

(CORE once stood for Connected Organizations for a Responsible Economy, but now it's embedded in the slogan, "CORE stands for sustainable business.") The topics and speakers and sponsors were too numerous to trot out here, but visit their website to see what it's all about. 

The gathering and the tracks I attended reminded me of the discussions I hear in grid modernization. And while there's an element of "doing the right thing," the panels I heard were filled with high-powered corporations that believe that sustainable practices also lead to cost reductions, more realistic strategic planning and more satisfied employees and customers.

Many of the discussion topics were similar: How to create a sustainable business model. Green marketing. The intersection of IT and energy efficiency. Achieving zero waste. Motivating employee cultural shifts. The nexus of energy, water and food. Green jobs. Talking to customers.

But the language of the discussions themselves also called attention to parallels between the corporate sustainability conversations and those devoted to grid modernization. You can certainly speculate for yourself why that's so, but the first two terms I'll call out probably tell most of the story.  

First, CORE's definition of sustainability: "Sustainability means utilizing the world's natural and human resources to create economic value for the current generation in a manner that conserves and renews those resources so that future generations may use them to achieve an equal or greater quality of life."

That notion certainly governs the shift from coal to natural gas to renewables, as well as describing the driver for grid modernization in terms of intelligence, resilience and the investments to achieve these things. 

Another term: "mainstreaming." As in, sustainability has gone mainstream. In the wake of one of the worst recessions in this country, and certainly in the seemingly perennial boom-bust cycle of a natural resource state such as Colorado, the idea is that growth is great, but not if its inevitable corollary is bust. Some of us, buffeted by hard times, would require a little less in life if we could maintain it without big swings for good or ill. Sustainability also informs the move away from coal, which is another mainstream notion today.

The old standby, "energy efficiency," pervaded many discussions yesterday, in particular when it came to reducing the power needs of large data centers, commercial buildings and industrial processes and residences. That's where corporate sustainability and the power industry are joined at the hip.  

Another term we'll enjoy, except actually saying it: "dematerialization." The example often bandied about is former physical media such as compact discs that have been replaced by digital files. Poof! No materials. But the power industry is in a long-term shift from actual, physical fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and uranium and moving toward sunshine and wind. When it comes to transmission and distribution in a centralized power paradigm, dematerialization could also imply self-sufficient microgrids that no longer need poles and wires. One could argue that people, such as meter readers, are being dematerialized as well, but that's a cruel use of euphemism. 

Another term: "vampire servers." These are the on-site servers that store and manage the data many businesses and hum in the background, quietly maintaining data storage and corporate functions, all the while sucking juice. That term is a bit tainted in that it came from a speaker who is involved in popularizing the cloud, but it pointed to what a company has to weigh when considering using the cloud. If you quantified the energy spend on vampire servers, you might be likelier to explore using the cloud. (Another form of dematerialization, in a sense.)

"The trough of disillusionment." Loved that one. That was a venture capitalist talking about investments in clean tech. As in, first the hype, then the trough of disillusionment, then the hard-eyed look at wringing value from your investments. In the VC world, practitioners are looking for "exit events," meaning, VC-funded companies that manage to launch an initial public offering or get acquired, allowing investors to recoup a return on investment. 

"Silver bullet or silver buckshot" was a crude phrase that doesn't really serve to move the conversation beyond the tired notion of a single solution. I mean, you'll note that a silver bullet is used to kill vampires in fiction, but otherwise it has no real validity. This is just another way of saying that we need a variety of tools in our toolkit. But let's agree to bury that phrase. 

"You can't manage what you can't measure" sure gets a workout in both sustainability discussions and in grid modernization. In sustainability, the accompanying mantra is "reporting, metrics and transparency," which might be said to apply well to power industry pilot projects, particularly those that received federal stimulus dollars. In the corporate world, that drive for transparency has a social responsibility component now under scrutiny in Congress, which is considering requiring disclosure when a company's supply chain relies on so-called "conflict minerals." That is, minerals used in, say, consumer electronics that come from war-torn African nations or other circumstances where human rights violations shouldn't be abetted by far away customers. 

When it comes to the language of sustainability, I suspect that electric utilities, like corporate America, are batting around these phrases, too. Language often reveals a lot of things and, in this case, I find it interesting that often common phrase-ology crops up in both discussions of corporate sustainability and our discussions on grid modernization. Just call me a kook for words. 

Phil Carson
Editor-in-chief
Intelligent Utility Daily 
pcarson@energycentral.com  
303-228-4757     

Related Topics

Comments

Sustainable: The Silver Bullet is just a Silver Anniversary

Do you know where the term Sustainable Development came from?

A UN report in 1987 that defined the term... by Gro Harlem Bruntland in the "Bruntland Report"

Just five years later the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio was held and guess what the two main themes were?

Sustainable Development & The Environment...  really the first is the resposne to the second...

and that's how the Agenda for the 21st Century was born... to make sure every living human on earth that impacted the eviroment should act going forward... global governance...

of course, Phil, you are right, the left is in love with nomenclature and is sure to pay attention once the rest of society catches up - just in time to change the name to protect the game.

You see, Agenda 21, the progressive policy that tends to hamper those dasterdly property rights was found out fairly quickly and that's when Bill Clinton's Chair for the President's Council for Sustainable Development sent out a memo and said "stop talking about Agenda 21 because folks will come out and protest etc etc... we don't use that term any more, we use terms like Smart Growth and Sustainable Development..."

But we have caught on again and now the American Planners Association (APA) has created a handbook and how to fight back at public meetings when "Agenders" show up... one way:  Change the name from Sustainable (anything) to "Quality Growth"

that's a good one... I mean, who could be against "quality", right?  Well, who could be against "Sustainable"?  Right?  Well, just start drilling down into what it really means (at least what it really means to those progressive save-the-earth-from-the-humans types in the UN and the 2,000+ NGOs who have drank the koolaide with them...  if you drill down and keep asking them to give a concrete example of how to "measure" when YOU are doing it right, uh sustainable... uh SMART, I mean Quality and they always seem to invoke the Rules for Radicals playbook and use the one word you finished your article with:

Don't listen to the Kooks... they wear tin-foil hats... or are they made of silver?

What about security of data and cyber-assets

I am not a particularly computer savvy individual so perhaps someone may please take the time to answer something for me.  What are the data and cyber-asset security implications of Cloud usage?  Already we have seen there are concerns and actual incidents of the Internet being used to steal corporate and government secrets and to manipulate control of power plants and manufacturing plants with the intent of causing damages.  I find it astounding that the Department of Defense and their contractors would actually have data files of top secret weapons programs on computers that are even connected to the Internet but there have been reports of electronic espionage that indicate the vulnerability of any such computer system.  Won't Cloud computing increase the vulnerability?

No expert either

Good point, one which is often repeated. While I do not have a good explanation, the cloud computing folks at the Sustainability Opportunity Summit repeated what I've heard before: that if you have proper security measures and practices in place, cloud computing does not increase your vulnerability. But if I had responsibility for data security, that'd be cold comfort.

Regards, Phil Carson