Osbert Lancaster recently posted a blog about the difficulty understanding exactly what a commitment to a carbon free economy will entail. The too-good-to-be-true accounts, like the one provided by Lord Adair Turner, suggest a rather fishy estate-agent motivation. To believe that itâs âthat simpleâ makes you feel a little bit self-conscious and gullible.
FROM THE EDITOR
Canadian Climate Change Program Promises Big Impact
In the Quietly Making Progressive News department . . . our eminently sensible neighbors to the north are engaging in innovative research into sustainable agriculture. The federal Canadian government is sponsoring 20 new projects with the CD$27 million Agricultural Greenhouse Gases Program (AGGP), a partnership with universities and conservation groups across the country, reports Markets Insider. The goal? “The program supports research into greenhouse gas mitigation practices and technologies that can be adopted on the farm.” The AGGP investments support the Global Research Alliance (GRA) on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases, a group of 49 countries working to find ways to grow more food without growing greenhouse gas emissions. (Agriculture, along with forestry, account for 30% of global GHG emissions.) Innovative, collective, government-backed action to deal with climate change: anybody in the US polity interested?
John Howell, Editorial Director
ReportAlert: NAB releases 2017 Sustainability Report
ReportAlert: Marsh & McLennan Companies issues 2015-2016 Corporate Citizenship Report
ReportAlert: Westpac Group publishes 2017 Sustainability Performance Report
News & Blogs
Itâs been a while since my last formal blog post. That one was some time last year on Intelâs CSR blog. Since then, Iâve been on a little journey. The CSR and Sustainability world inside leading corporations has matured significantly over the last couple of years. Some companies have gotten better at telling the story and some companies have begun to crack the code of integration.
I must admit that I grew up with a strong anti-golf course prejudice. During the 7 year draught in California, my parents encouraged me to take fast showers (3 minutes max) and use small amounts of water for our garden. The presence of damp, green and pristine golf courses in my neighborhood seemed nothing less than water injustice.
The Nonprofit Quarterly's Rick Cohen recently posted on social enterprises that receive millions of dollars in government funds.
Lord Adair Turner, chair of the UK government's advisory committee on climate change, makes tackling climate change seem (relatively) easy.Â But is keeping it simple, stupid? Or is it a sensible strategy to avoid frightening the horses?
This week, a division of the World Bank gave WaterHealth International (a California based company) $15 million to install water purification and disinfection systems in India. This will quadruple the number of decentralized units in Indian communities, touching over 600 villages. Of course, of a possible 600,000 villages that might use the technology, this is a small project.
I'm often surprised when I hear claims from people that being environmental is expensive. I mean, I understand the point that organic fruit and vegetables cost more than conventionally grown produce, or that eco-products are often more expensive. But on balance, I think that living sustainably has caused me to save more money.
So today I thought I'd give you some tips for how to save your money, and still be environmentally conscious.