Here are some excerpts from the piece:
"The sheer amount of packaging we deal with every day is staggering. According to the U.S.-based Dogwood Alliance, 25 per cent of the 2.4 million hectares of trees cut down every year in the southeastern United States ends up wrapping and boxing consumer goods."
"The computer age, which was supposed to diminish our need for paper, has only made things worse."
"The little plastic cartridges for inkjet printers, for instance, are notoriously over-packaged, contained in complicated boxes, attached to cardboard or plastic trays, wrapped in sticky plastic and accompanied by a series of instruction pamphlets and promotional paperwork."
The problem, says the editorial "is compounded if you happened to order that inkjet cartridge from an online retailer; chances are it was shipped in a cardboard box five or six times larger than the already voluminous box encasing the little plastic cartridge, and then further protected by crumpled paper, bubblewrap or styrofoam peanuts."
"Responsible, environmentally-conscious consumers can only do so much to keep all these boxes, containers, trays and whatnot from filling landfills."
For Metro Vancouver and environs like nearly every city is facing a waste management problem. There is rising in adjacent to an environmentally-sensitive area of Burns Bog a landfill that is beginning to look (and smell) like the first stages of New York City's infamous and now-closed "temporary" Fresh Kills dump on Staten Island. Barges, railcars and trucks leave this scenic part of "Beautiful British Columbia" to be disposed of elsewhere. Incineration is being debated as an option in a region where thanks to traffic from urban sprawl plus the pollutants from ships, trucks and trains along with that from factories air quality is becoming problematic.
The editorial quite correctly recommends "manufacturers and retailers to do their part and reduce the amount of packaging material they use. Most of it we can do without."
What is needed to make that happen is leadership from the largest manufacturers and retailers e.g. BestBuy, Dell, HP, Staples, WalMart, for this bulk and waste costs them money too. Perhaps a LEED for packaging?
The other option is VAT or GST for waste i.e. disposal fees added to the prices. The more it costs to clean, destroy, recycle or transport or to clean up from the processing i.e. air and water pollution, solid waste disposal, the higher the costs. This is fair; why should these expenses, including resulting increased healthcare costs from tending to those who become ill from the effects be foisted onto taxpayers?
Either method--while the former is more preferable the latter will likely be the case knowing human nature--the net results will be developing greener packaging or a switch to virtual alternatives: cloud computing, doing away with printing and online-only reading.
A Canwest New Service article printed last Friday in The Province revealed, citing new Statistics Canada figures, that "wealthy Canadians were the worst polluting drivers in 2007. While the rich, defined as having annual incomes of $100,000+ were responsible for spewing out the most air pollution per person, at 5,737 kilograms or 12,621 lbs in 2007.
"'People in this income group were more likely to own vehicles that use more fuel, such as trucks and SUVs,'" the article cites the report.
Along with that StatsCan reported an increase of new 466,472 vehicles on the road in 2007 compared with 2006, with more than half the additional fleet made up of (you guessed it) SUVs, trucks and vans.
Disturbingly if not surprisingly the same report said that individual vehicle pollution was up by one-third in 2007 compared to 15 years or so earlier. So much for fuel effiencies...
And if you add that up to additional driving, road wear-and-tear and resulting maintenance costs which also lead to higher pollution, it appears that any green gains in automotive technology--like the building of roads to alleviate traffic congestion--are eventually wiped out by the users.
One example that I hope doesn't go this way is increased recycling in car construction. The same issue of the paper reports in a story "Working toward the Earth-friendly car" that more manufacturers want to use additional recyclable components, besides the long-recycled aluminum, copper, iron and steel that are the stuff of junkyards, shredders, dirty old railroad gondola cars and melt shops.
"Typically, the plastics being used by manufacturers have been reinforced with materials such as glass, carbon or polyethylene fibres combined with petroleum-based resins," says the story. "Now, however, researchers are finding those materials can be replaced with bioplastics and fibres derived from plants without sacrificing critical requirements such as strength and durability. And, with oil prices continuing to rise, these green alternatives are cost effective, too."
The article pointed to a European study which "predicts that by 2020, bio-based plastics could replace up to 90 per cent of the total amount of petroleum-derived plastics consumed globally in 2007.
"The auto industry consumes an average of about 135 kilograms (297 lbs) of plastic in every car it builds, so it's no surprise automakers are looking down this road with enthusiasm, especially with the current push to make components either recyclable or biodegradable."
The piece cites Deborah Mielewski, technical leader of plastics research in Ford Motor Company's materials research and advanced engineering department, says the dream is to see those 135 kg of petroleum-based plastics "replaced by what we can grow. It just makes sense."
Ford is already using natural fiber-based plastic in its Ford Flex crossover. This reportedly industry-first production-line application uses plastic reinforced with environmentally friendly wheat straw to create the Flex's third-row interior storage bins. Using the wheat straw as a bio-filler, this application alone, says the Province story " is reducing petroleum usage by more than 9,000 kg (19,800 lbs) per year and cutting CO2 emissions by more than 13,600 kg (29,920 lbs.) annually. It also has better dimensional integrity than non-reinforced plastic and weighs up to 10 per cent less than plastic reinforced with talc or glass.
The story adds that applications already under consideration by the Ford team include centre console bins and trays, interior air register and door trim panel components and armrest liners.
One would hope that these materials would make fully electric vehicles more viable with the wealthy being the early and fashion-leading adopters, thereby creating the market for more affordable and practical mass market versions to sell to the hoi polloi.
Then again, if the experience of SUVs and trucks are any indication--and I've written about automotive metals in the 1990s when these vehicles started to become popular people movers in the 'burbs'--the savings will go into bulkier, feature-loaded craft that take up more road space and leaving us in the same choking mess or probably worse than we're now in...
NetSuite cites a recent impact study by Greenspace that demonstrated that the average NetSuite customer reduces its electricity bill by $10,000 per year after switching from an on premise system. In aggregate, the NetSuite platform saved NetSuite customers more than $61 million in energy bills in 2008, eliminating the output of nearly 423,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide.
Rich in his blog has announced there is an official cash for phone system clunkers web page which will have links to important references such as ITEXPO West (Sept.1-3 in Los Angeles) "which is the global gathering place for all things IP communications" and "is the equivalent of an automotive supermarket (yes, communications in this case) where you can meet with all the vendors who save you money by replacing your old equipment. In many cases they can replace the "clunker" with something which is hosted meaning zero CAPEX costs.
Rich mentioned Grandstream's Cash for PSTN clunker program that they implemented with MegaPath. MegaPath is running a promo in which they will offer a $250 dollar credit for VARS or End users who purchase Grandstream's PBX.
Hosted and IP solutions also make telework more feasible both functionally and costwise, which means fewer air-killing/land-eating/energy-draining commute trips. Fewer and shorter trips results in a longer vehicle lifespan and less need for vehicles. Isn't that assurredly a better way than the current automotive program to reduce environmental damage from cars, trucks, and vans?
Rich pointed out another key benefit from this program: increased ability to save money on conference calls with this new technology. That means you do not have to make as many business trips, thereby avoiding car, plane, bus, and train emissions, and cutting down on the demand for greenspace destroying and must-be-maintained infrastructure that also results in more air, land, and water waste.
"In the auto industry you get a "cash for clunkers" offer once in a lifetime," says Rich. "In the telecom space we do it every day."
See you at ITEXPO West!
Yet that is what Lexmark, in a remarkable display of corporate responsibility has done in via research and advice, reported on TMCnet.
Among its suggestions are:
* Use two-sided printing to save paper
* Use software like the Lexmark Toolbar to print only the Web pages you need
* Share printers in the home or office through wireless networking technology
* Look for the longest available printer warranty to extend its life cycle
* Improve printer efficiency by switching the device off after use
* Print in draft mode to reduce the amount of ink used
* Use Lexmark high-yield cartridges for a higher yield of ink or toner, resulting in fewer cartridges to manufacture and recycle
* Recycle your printed pages and use paper with recycled content
I do have one complaint with Lexmark and that is over its inkjet cartridges. I own an X2650 multifunction printer--a low-cost unit that is adequate for my needs--but the cartridges can't be commercially refilled such as by Island Inket franchisees and others, and refillable alternatives are next to impossible to find.
Yes, Lexmark does have a free cartridge recycling service and one can get replacements with this at a lower price, but that doesn't help me and other users who are running out of ink, can't wait for the lousy mail service, and who want to lower our TCO. The last time my ink ran out I had to go to the local WalMart ASAP (where I had bought the printer) and pay full price.
Now I'm using an alternative strategy: sharing my wife's HP OfficeJet J6480, which is a more complex machine for what I need to do but which does have refillable cartridges.
That leads to another and serious issue: home inkjet printers have become so cheap that it is often less expensive to replace them--thereby creating more toxic e-waste--than in buying new cartridges.
Come on, Lexmark, you're almost there. Let your customers re-use rather than recycle the cartridges.
The latest such move is Recycle My Cell, a new Web-based nationwide initiative launched by Canada's wireless industry that lets users find out where and how to properly dispose of their cell phones and other wireless devices - regardless of carrier, brand, or condition.
The free program in the country that brought us the BlackBerry incorporates numerous existing cell phone recycling initiatives is being organized by the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association (CWTA) in conjunction with cell phone service providers, handset manufacturers, and recycling companies.
Recycle My Cell can be adopted by provinces and municipalities as part of their initiatives to manage e-waste. Nova Scotia, on Canada's east coast, is the first province to have done so.
Canadian retailers are already on board with cellphone recycling. BestBuy in Canada, through a partnership with Greentec, allows consumers to recycle their unwanted wireless devices, along with MP3 players, batteries, ink cartridges, and CDs by visiting a Best Buy store and dropping their items into their recycling stations. Best Buy doesn't accept computers (desktop and laptops), TVs, DVD players, and speakers.
The CWTA, the province of Nova Scotia, and retailers like Best Buy deserve praise for their actions to curb harmful e-waste through their recycling programs. Yet shouldn't the wireless and other electronic equipment manufacturers do their share to address this issue at the source by:
--Using less harmful substances
--Making products repairable and easily remodeled i.e. taking a page from the automotive industry and change the casings to reflect fashion shifts rather than the guts
The wireless carriers, telcos, and ISPs are in a position to insist on such standards. Make these goods right or we won't buy, sell, or support them. With the economic downturn manufacturers will have little choice but to go along.
The hard truth is that bandwidth and services i.e. 3G, 4G, data, video, IP over wireless, and web services like mobile CRM matter more to consumers than the boxes they are carried on.
The same goes for computers. As Microsoft demonstrated over 20 years ago by 'becoming the dog' in its relationship with IBM, it's not about the hardware, it's about the software and what it can do that matters. And with more software going on the web i.e. hosted/SaaS rather than in boxes, the less often nasty stuff there needs to be in those compartments, which means ultimately less e-waste and pollution.
]]>
Dumb computing is also for telecommuting workers, especially home agents. It lessens the cost, complex, and security issues with supporting them. There are now commercial thin client boxes like the eeePC by Asus that needs only an Ethernet connection
http://eeepc.asus.com/global/product.htm
What your ROI is for switching from smart to dumb will depend on total costs, installation or equipment rebuild, and energy, IT savings, and monetized security benefits. There is not only direct energy savings from the hardware but also from reduced cooling demand: PCs produce heat, and it is ventilation and cooling rather than heating that draws the most power.
The 'green' benefits are fewer greenhouse gas emissions and/or other environmental consequences such as e.g. land for hydro dams and generating stations, and for unsightly transmission and distribution equipment.
The actual environmental savings will depend on where your energy supplier gets their electricity. Solar and wind are the cleanest followed by hydro, biofuels, and natural gas, though hydro has its environmental consequences i.e. destruction of open, oxygen-generating space for reservoirs.
Oil-fired generators, especially those that get their supplies from tar sands whose production process is an ecological nightmare, and coal, especially that extracted by blowing up mountaintops, are down the list. They are especially reliant on scrubbers to remove sulfur dioxide, but in doing so produce CO2.
For the eco-conscious are companies that sell green power to businesses and consumers. One example is Bullfrog Power. http://www.bullfrogpower.com
Thin-client computing may also lead to less e-waste because the units are smaller, with less toxic substances used in their construction (see the past post on this topic) and may less last longer because their principal obsolescence-prone component is the software.
That 'small-is-beautiful' approach may make smart PCs the equivalent of SUVs. And that, according to the New York Times makes the PC vendors worried; they, like the automakers, rely on the big profits from the hulking but inefficient models.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/21/technology/21pc.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=business
Will big "smart" PCs join the SUVs and the other dinosaurs? --BBR