Dan Fogel and Peter Marsh
Op Editorial, Winston-Salem Journal 9/9/08
The doubtful among us might call it catching the “green wave” and responding to the natural inclination to “do the right thing,” and therefore perhaps not a serious leadership topic. We have a different view about “Climate Protection Week,” a series of events promoting environmentally sustainable practices in Winston-Salem. This week has a deeper significance and marks an important milestone on the journey of a community in transition.
The Winston-Salem we live in today, like many communities throughout the developed world, enjoyed tremendous growth and prosperity during the industrial era of the late 19th and 20th Centuries. But now the employment base from these industries faces serious decline from, among other things, global competition.
Perhaps it is comforting that we are not alone in that economic transition. The message of this week’s events reaches beyond global competition. It is fundamentally about the fact that we are highly interconnected to many systems (economic, social and environmental) that must be in balance and be regenerative to be sustainable.
This realization is what people in business call the Triple Bottom Line, a phrase originally coined by John Elkington in 1994 and later expanded and articulated in his 1998 book Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. In accounting terms it means expanding the traditional reporting framework to take into account environmental and social performance in addition to financial performance.
Our viewpoint comes from our work with municipalities, businesses, non-profit organizations and universities seeking to adopt sustainability principles as part of their core strategy. Recent local examples include our research that supported the Piedmont Triad Research Park’s decision to adopt sustainable guidelines for the development and operation of the park. Another is our consultation with the Family Services organization in the organization’s decision to build the first newly constructed green building in Winston-Salem under the US Green Building council’s LEED rating system.
Our research shows that more than 12 percent of the Top 200 Public and Private Companies in North Carolina are beginning to take action on sustainable practices. Many have begun tactical programs and cost-savings measures around energy conservation, green building practices, or reduction of transportation costs.
With media reporting daily on how climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, dwindling fossil fuel sources coupled with escalating prices, a world food crisis and globalization a impacting people’s lives, communities and organizations are being confronted with an uncomfortable reality: Become part of the problem or become part of the solution.
So how do you get started down the path of sustainability? When dealing with large complex natural systems, how do you know what to do? If many experts say that climate change exceeds the capacity of governments worldwide to solve, how do you get your arms around a course of action at the individual, organizational, community levels?
It begins with the decision to act – to act in a way that equally values social capital, environmental capital and economic advancement in a balanced system. Many municipalities and businesses are stepping up to the plate and exploring ways to merge increased capacity (growth and profits) with social responsibility and environmental sustainability.
That leads to the need for education, research and analysis to begin to frame up the short-, mid-, and long-term opportunities that apply to each specific culture, organization or community. It also leads to a new mindset based in systems thinking, what Paul Hawken, one of the most respected authors in the field, has defined as the “Ecology of Commerce.”
An effective organization that looks at its strategy through a sustainability lens starts with self assessments. These assessments include a review of products, services, processes and business models and how they could be improved using a sustainability lens. Greenhouse gas emissions, energy audits, value chain assessments, competitor analyses and matching processes against standard processes such as ISO 14000 are all methods used by best-in-class firms.
The leadership of this community has begun to answer the question of how to get started. Mayor Allen Joines signed the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement last year, and the city has just completed its first greenhouse gas emissions profile, with a goal of reducing carbon emissions in the city by 7 percent from 1990 levels. "That may not sound like much," Joines said, "but to meet this mark by our goal of 2012, the entire community must be involved and committed."
As an outcome the analysis frequently results in a new way to focus on maximizing results for stakeholders (employees, customers, citizens, stockholders). At the highest level, a new strategy emerges that involves a new set of opportunities and market innovations. Actions that do not add value to an organization and its owners should not be priorities. Sustainability is not only be good for the survival of our planet – it is a key means to increased profitability.
Winston-Salem’s stated goals will lead to an exploration of its connection to larger systems of community and the environment. With our support and energy as citizens, that path will eventually lead to an understanding of sustainability as a core strategy for the entire community.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Climate Change and The Southeast
Peter Marsh
President, EcoLens Group 10/2/09
The following is a summary of research specific to the effects of climate change on the Southeastern United States. Economic impacts of climate change will occur across the United States, but with uneven distribution by region, within the economy and within society. Negative impacts will outweigh the positive for most sectors that provide essential goods and services. Climate change will place tremendous pressure on public sector budgets.
The Southeast states – Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North and South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and the Gulf Coast of Texas – may be some of the hardest hit by climate change in the US.
Having undergone rapid population growth during the 1970s-1990s (30%), the region is expected to continue growing, perhaps another 40% between 2000 and 2025. This growth has come in spite of economic transition from legacy industries including textiles, furniture manufacturing, and tobacco as well as shifts from global economic transitions.
Employment sectors fueling regional growth include financial services, higher education, advanced manufacturing, logistics, tourism, healthcare, retirement and senior living.
By value, the region produces about one quarter of US agricultural products; half of US timber supplies; and much of the nation’s fish, poultry, tobacco oil, coal and natural gas (Burkett et al. 2001). As such, the state economies are intricately tied to the condition of their natural resources.
The climate in the Southeast has gone through a warm period during the 1920s-40s, a cool period from 1950-1960, and is presently in another warm period that began in the 1970s.
There has been a 20-30% increase in precipitation over the last 100 years. The Canadian Climate Centre (CCC) model scenarios show continued warming through the 2090s, whereas the Hadley Centre model scenarios project less warming (Burkett et al. 2001) and about a 20% increase in precipitation throughout the region by 2100. Both models predict an increase in the heat index greater in the Southeast than in other US regions, 8-15ºF (4.5ºC-8.4ºC) or more (Burkett et al. 2001).
With warmer weather and warmer water in the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico, the region may experience an increased frequency and intensity of storms, sea-level rise, and the loss of important agricultural areas, crops and timber species.
Potential Impacts and Strategy Considerations
Increased Frequency and Intensity of
Major Weather Events
Pressure on infrastructure, increased repair and maintenance costs
Disruption of transportation and energy supplies
Impact on industrial and service sector productivity
Increased construction costs
Increase insurance / risk management costs
Burden on Federal, State and Local governmental budgets
Impact on water quality
Costal salination of potable aquifers
Impacts on agricultural and forest products
Ecosystem disruptions
Increase in Temperature
Significant increase in electricity consumption to cool the built environment
Change in design standards
Increase in refrigerant use, distribution and storage
Increase in ozone and smog
Human and animal health risk and productivity impact from heat waves
Urban heat island effect compounding anomalous highs
Change in precipitation trends and humidity levels
Increase in forest fire risk and severity
Increase in incidence, duration and severity of drought
Change in agricultural strategy / crop tolerance
Change and adaptation of forest ecosystems
Increase in pests and diseases / weakened ecosystem
Water Quantity and Quality
Decrease in potable water quantity and quality
Prolonged periods of severe drought
Decrease in groundwater saturation and flow rates in major tributaries
Limitations on development based on water system capacities
Increased state and county regulation of water use
Impact on hydroelectric and nuclear power generation
Decrease in steady rainfalls, increase in rapid high volume events
Impact of deforestation and development on
groundwater absorption rates
Increase in flood and storm-water management design standards
Air Quality
Increased CO2 emissions from coal power plants
Increased ozone levels from heat and pollution
Health and productivity loss from respiratory impacts
Restrictions on development to meet EPA standards
Impact of pending governmental regulations on GHG emissions
Impact on tourism and senior living industries
Impact on agriculture and forests
References
Beck, Coby. “Be the Change.” Carbon Planet. Issue 6 October/November 2007. www.carbonplanet.com
Brookhaven National Laboratory. “Florida Tower Footprint Experiments.” Environmental Sciences Department Environmental Research and Technology Division. April 2007.
Cazorla, Marina. Toman, Michael. “International Equirt and Climate Change Policy.” Resources for the Future. December 2000 Climate Issue Brief No. 27.
Center for Clean Air. “Manager of Adaptation.” The Center for Clean Air Policy.
Clark, James S. Dietze, Michael C. Feeley, Ken. Hersh, Michelle. Ibanez, Ines. LaDeau, Shannon. McBride, Allen. Welch, Nathan E. Wolosin, Michael S. “Predicting Biodiversity Change: Outside the Climate Envelope, Beyond the Species-Area Curve.” Ecological Society of America. 2006.
Dai, Aiguo. Kunkel, Kenneth E. Liang, Xin-Zhong. Pan, Jianping. Wang, Julian X.L. Zhu, Jinhong. “Regional Climate Model Downscaling of the U.S. Summer Climate and Future Change.” Journal of Geophysical research, Vol. 111, D10108. 31 May 2006.
Dai, Aiguo. Kunkel, Kenneth E. Liang, Xin-Zhong. Li, Li. “Regional Climate Model Simulation of Summer Precipitation Diurnal Cycle Over the United States.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31, L24208. 23 December 2004.
Field, B.D. Jacob, D.J. Mickley, L.J. “Effects of Future Climate Change on Regional Air Pollution Episodes in the United States.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31, L24103. 28 December 2004.
Heilman, Warren E. Potter, Brian E. Zerbe, John I. “Regional Climate Change in the Southern united States: The Implications for Wildfire Occurrence.” Springer-Verlag. 1998.
Hoffman, Andrew J. “Getting Ahead of the Curve: Corporate Strategies That Incorporate Climate Change.” The University of Michigan. October 2006.
IBM. “Mastering Carbon Management.” IBM Institute for Business Value.” Supply Chain Management. IBM Corporation 2008.
Jenkins, Jennifer. Nemani, Ramakrishna. Nishida, Kenlo. Reddy, Swarna. Running, Steven. Thornton, Peter. White, Michael. “Recent Trends in Hydrologic Balance Have Enhanced the Terrestrial Carbon Sink in the United States.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 29. 28 May 2002.
McKinsey & Company. “The Carbon Productivity Challenge: Curbing Climate Change and Sustaining Economic Growth.” McKinsey Global Institute.
Moreau, David H. “What are the Experts Saying about Effects of Climate Change on Rainfall and Stream flow in the Southeast?” Water Resources Research Institute of the University of North Carolina. July 2007.
Pew Center. “Adaptation Planning – What U.S. States and Localities are Doing.”
Pew Center. “Economy-Wide Cap-and-Trade Proposals in the 110th Congress.”
Randall, Doug. Schwartz, Peter. “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security.” October 2003.
Roach, John. “In U.S., Climate Change May Hit Southeast Hardest.” National Geographic News. 11 August 2005.
Ruth, Lawrence W. Stephens, Scott L. “Federal Forest-Fire Policy in the United States.” Ecological Society of America. 2005.
Schmid, H.P. “Matching Carbon Exchange Products from Modis to Flux Towers: Are we Comparing Apples with Apples?” Geophysical Research Abstracts. Vol. 6, 06604, 2004.
Srivastave, Leena. “Reducing the World’s Carbon Footprint: An Indian Perspective.”
Strategic Director, Neighborhood Services.” The Principles of Tackling Climate Change in Manchester.” Manchester City Council. 5th February, 2008.
Sussman, Frances G. “Adapting to Change: A Business Approach.” Pew Center. April 2008
The Center for Integrative Environmental Research. “The US Economic Impacts of Climate Change and the Costs of Inaction.” The University of Maryland. October 2007.
Titus, James G. “The Potential Effects of Global Climate Change on the United States.” U.S. EPA Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation. December 1989.
USDA Forest Service. “Vulnerability of the Southeastern United States to Climate Change.” Southern Global Change Program. 6 July 2008.
UNDP. “Developed countries must cut emissions, invest in adaptation to prevent human development reversals.” 27 November 2007.
UNDP “US must climate-proof growth to prevent human development reversals.” 27 November 2007.
USGC. “Effects of Climate Change on Southeastern Forests.” U.S. Dept. of the Interior. U.S. Geological Survey. June 1997
U.S. Government Accountability Office. “Climate Change: Expert Opinion on the Economics of Policy Options to Address Climate Change.” GAO. May 2008.
Wilson, Angene. “Adaptation to Global Climate Change.” National Peace Corps Association. Volume 21, Number 22. Summer 2008
World Heath Organization. “Reducing the Carbon Footprint of the Health Sector.” 20 January 2008.
President, EcoLens Group 10/2/09
The following is a summary of research specific to the effects of climate change on the Southeastern United States. Economic impacts of climate change will occur across the United States, but with uneven distribution by region, within the economy and within society. Negative impacts will outweigh the positive for most sectors that provide essential goods and services. Climate change will place tremendous pressure on public sector budgets.
The Southeast states – Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North and South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and the Gulf Coast of Texas – may be some of the hardest hit by climate change in the US.
Having undergone rapid population growth during the 1970s-1990s (30%), the region is expected to continue growing, perhaps another 40% between 2000 and 2025. This growth has come in spite of economic transition from legacy industries including textiles, furniture manufacturing, and tobacco as well as shifts from global economic transitions.
Employment sectors fueling regional growth include financial services, higher education, advanced manufacturing, logistics, tourism, healthcare, retirement and senior living.
By value, the region produces about one quarter of US agricultural products; half of US timber supplies; and much of the nation’s fish, poultry, tobacco oil, coal and natural gas (Burkett et al. 2001). As such, the state economies are intricately tied to the condition of their natural resources.
The climate in the Southeast has gone through a warm period during the 1920s-40s, a cool period from 1950-1960, and is presently in another warm period that began in the 1970s.
There has been a 20-30% increase in precipitation over the last 100 years. The Canadian Climate Centre (CCC) model scenarios show continued warming through the 2090s, whereas the Hadley Centre model scenarios project less warming (Burkett et al. 2001) and about a 20% increase in precipitation throughout the region by 2100. Both models predict an increase in the heat index greater in the Southeast than in other US regions, 8-15ºF (4.5ºC-8.4ºC) or more (Burkett et al. 2001).
With warmer weather and warmer water in the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico, the region may experience an increased frequency and intensity of storms, sea-level rise, and the loss of important agricultural areas, crops and timber species.
Potential Impacts and Strategy Considerations
Increased Frequency and Intensity of
Major Weather Events
Pressure on infrastructure, increased repair and maintenance costs
Disruption of transportation and energy supplies
Impact on industrial and service sector productivity
Increased construction costs
Increase insurance / risk management costs
Burden on Federal, State and Local governmental budgets
Impact on water quality
Costal salination of potable aquifers
Impacts on agricultural and forest products
Ecosystem disruptions
Increase in Temperature
Significant increase in electricity consumption to cool the built environment
Change in design standards
Increase in refrigerant use, distribution and storage
Increase in ozone and smog
Human and animal health risk and productivity impact from heat waves
Urban heat island effect compounding anomalous highs
Change in precipitation trends and humidity levels
Increase in forest fire risk and severity
Increase in incidence, duration and severity of drought
Change in agricultural strategy / crop tolerance
Change and adaptation of forest ecosystems
Increase in pests and diseases / weakened ecosystem
Water Quantity and Quality
Decrease in potable water quantity and quality
Prolonged periods of severe drought
Decrease in groundwater saturation and flow rates in major tributaries
Limitations on development based on water system capacities
Increased state and county regulation of water use
Impact on hydroelectric and nuclear power generation
Decrease in steady rainfalls, increase in rapid high volume events
Impact of deforestation and development on
groundwater absorption rates
Increase in flood and storm-water management design standards
Air Quality
Increased CO2 emissions from coal power plants
Increased ozone levels from heat and pollution
Health and productivity loss from respiratory impacts
Restrictions on development to meet EPA standards
Impact of pending governmental regulations on GHG emissions
Impact on tourism and senior living industries
Impact on agriculture and forests
References
Beck, Coby. “Be the Change.” Carbon Planet. Issue 6 October/November 2007. www.carbonplanet.com
Brookhaven National Laboratory. “Florida Tower Footprint Experiments.” Environmental Sciences Department Environmental Research and Technology Division. April 2007.
Cazorla, Marina. Toman, Michael. “International Equirt and Climate Change Policy.” Resources for the Future. December 2000 Climate Issue Brief No. 27.
Center for Clean Air. “Manager of Adaptation.” The Center for Clean Air Policy.
Clark, James S. Dietze, Michael C. Feeley, Ken. Hersh, Michelle. Ibanez, Ines. LaDeau, Shannon. McBride, Allen. Welch, Nathan E. Wolosin, Michael S. “Predicting Biodiversity Change: Outside the Climate Envelope, Beyond the Species-Area Curve.” Ecological Society of America. 2006.
Dai, Aiguo. Kunkel, Kenneth E. Liang, Xin-Zhong. Pan, Jianping. Wang, Julian X.L. Zhu, Jinhong. “Regional Climate Model Downscaling of the U.S. Summer Climate and Future Change.” Journal of Geophysical research, Vol. 111, D10108. 31 May 2006.
Dai, Aiguo. Kunkel, Kenneth E. Liang, Xin-Zhong. Li, Li. “Regional Climate Model Simulation of Summer Precipitation Diurnal Cycle Over the United States.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31, L24208. 23 December 2004.
Field, B.D. Jacob, D.J. Mickley, L.J. “Effects of Future Climate Change on Regional Air Pollution Episodes in the United States.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31, L24103. 28 December 2004.
Heilman, Warren E. Potter, Brian E. Zerbe, John I. “Regional Climate Change in the Southern united States: The Implications for Wildfire Occurrence.” Springer-Verlag. 1998.
Hoffman, Andrew J. “Getting Ahead of the Curve: Corporate Strategies That Incorporate Climate Change.” The University of Michigan. October 2006.
IBM. “Mastering Carbon Management.” IBM Institute for Business Value.” Supply Chain Management. IBM Corporation 2008.
Jenkins, Jennifer. Nemani, Ramakrishna. Nishida, Kenlo. Reddy, Swarna. Running, Steven. Thornton, Peter. White, Michael. “Recent Trends in Hydrologic Balance Have Enhanced the Terrestrial Carbon Sink in the United States.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 29. 28 May 2002.
McKinsey & Company. “The Carbon Productivity Challenge: Curbing Climate Change and Sustaining Economic Growth.” McKinsey Global Institute.
Moreau, David H. “What are the Experts Saying about Effects of Climate Change on Rainfall and Stream flow in the Southeast?” Water Resources Research Institute of the University of North Carolina. July 2007.
Pew Center. “Adaptation Planning – What U.S. States and Localities are Doing.”
Pew Center. “Economy-Wide Cap-and-Trade Proposals in the 110th Congress.”
Randall, Doug. Schwartz, Peter. “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security.” October 2003.
Roach, John. “In U.S., Climate Change May Hit Southeast Hardest.” National Geographic News. 11 August 2005.
Ruth, Lawrence W. Stephens, Scott L. “Federal Forest-Fire Policy in the United States.” Ecological Society of America. 2005.
Schmid, H.P. “Matching Carbon Exchange Products from Modis to Flux Towers: Are we Comparing Apples with Apples?” Geophysical Research Abstracts. Vol. 6, 06604, 2004.
Srivastave, Leena. “Reducing the World’s Carbon Footprint: An Indian Perspective.”
Strategic Director, Neighborhood Services.” The Principles of Tackling Climate Change in Manchester.” Manchester City Council. 5th February, 2008.
Sussman, Frances G. “Adapting to Change: A Business Approach.” Pew Center. April 2008
The Center for Integrative Environmental Research. “The US Economic Impacts of Climate Change and the Costs of Inaction.” The University of Maryland. October 2007.
Titus, James G. “The Potential Effects of Global Climate Change on the United States.” U.S. EPA Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation. December 1989.
USDA Forest Service. “Vulnerability of the Southeastern United States to Climate Change.” Southern Global Change Program. 6 July 2008.
UNDP. “Developed countries must cut emissions, invest in adaptation to prevent human development reversals.” 27 November 2007.
UNDP “US must climate-proof growth to prevent human development reversals.” 27 November 2007.
USGC. “Effects of Climate Change on Southeastern Forests.” U.S. Dept. of the Interior. U.S. Geological Survey. June 1997
U.S. Government Accountability Office. “Climate Change: Expert Opinion on the Economics of Policy Options to Address Climate Change.” GAO. May 2008.
Wilson, Angene. “Adaptation to Global Climate Change.” National Peace Corps Association. Volume 21, Number 22. Summer 2008
World Heath Organization. “Reducing the Carbon Footprint of the Health Sector.” 20 January 2008.
Research Park Aims to Meet Green Standards
Matt Evans
The Triad business Journal 6/13/08
The Piedmont Triad Research Park, which is already aiming at becoming the largest urban research park in the country, wants to add another distinction as the greenest such development in the land.
Park officials were expected to announce Thursday that they would be pursuing certification under the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program for the entire 200-plus acre project. LEED is a nationally recognized third-party certification of environmental sustainability based on design, construction and operational benchmarks.
Environmental issues have been at the forefront throughout the early stages of development, according to Piedmont Triad Research Park President Doug Edgeton, not just as a matter of principle but also necessity since so much of the property involved is reclaimed industrial sites.
"We've been having to do a lot of cleanup just in the process of getting going," Edgeton said. "As we've been talking to others in the industry, we haven't found any other research parks going for LEED, so we thought, 'maybe there's a niche here for us.'"
Edgeton said the park has already taken a number of steps that count toward the stringent LEED requirements, including reusing existing buildings and materials to reduce waste going to the landfill and bringing storm water drainage above ground the reduce impurities in the runoff that reaches Salem Creek.
LEED rules will require the park to hit other targets such as a 30 percent reduction in overall energy consumption compared to existing benchmarks. Edgeton said the most challenging aspect of pursuing the certification will likely be the need to reconfigure road and new building layouts to maximize the impact of passive solar energy.
It will all cost money in the short run, not just for the construction itself but also to pay for the certification process. Many developers are turned off by the cost of green building, but Peter Marsh, vice president of facility planning and design firm Workplace Strategies in Winston-Salem, said those fears are usually exaggerated.
While costs can vary widely depending on the project, Marsh said in general the cost premium for LEED-level construction is between 1 percent and 6 percent, and for owner-occupied projects, the amount of time it takes to recoup that initial cost is one to three years, after which energy savings flow to the bottom line.
Marsh has been working with experts from Wake Forest and engineers on the Piedmont Triad Research Park project. He said the studies aren't yet done that will predict how much the green building will cost and eventually save, but he said it should prove worthwhile.
"In situations like this where you're talking about long-term owner occupancy, you typically see very considerable paybacks," Marsh said.
What isn't yet measurable is how much LEED certification might return to the park in terms of new tenants attracted by the green focus. But Edgeton said he's sure that return will also be significant.
"When we go out and talk to companies they have a checklist, and it includes the progressiveness of the community and quality of life," Edgeton said. "Going green says, 'We have a very high quality of life.'"
The Triad business Journal 6/13/08
The Piedmont Triad Research Park, which is already aiming at becoming the largest urban research park in the country, wants to add another distinction as the greenest such development in the land.
Park officials were expected to announce Thursday that they would be pursuing certification under the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program for the entire 200-plus acre project. LEED is a nationally recognized third-party certification of environmental sustainability based on design, construction and operational benchmarks.
Environmental issues have been at the forefront throughout the early stages of development, according to Piedmont Triad Research Park President Doug Edgeton, not just as a matter of principle but also necessity since so much of the property involved is reclaimed industrial sites.
"We've been having to do a lot of cleanup just in the process of getting going," Edgeton said. "As we've been talking to others in the industry, we haven't found any other research parks going for LEED, so we thought, 'maybe there's a niche here for us.'"
Edgeton said the park has already taken a number of steps that count toward the stringent LEED requirements, including reusing existing buildings and materials to reduce waste going to the landfill and bringing storm water drainage above ground the reduce impurities in the runoff that reaches Salem Creek.
LEED rules will require the park to hit other targets such as a 30 percent reduction in overall energy consumption compared to existing benchmarks. Edgeton said the most challenging aspect of pursuing the certification will likely be the need to reconfigure road and new building layouts to maximize the impact of passive solar energy.
It will all cost money in the short run, not just for the construction itself but also to pay for the certification process. Many developers are turned off by the cost of green building, but Peter Marsh, vice president of facility planning and design firm Workplace Strategies in Winston-Salem, said those fears are usually exaggerated.
While costs can vary widely depending on the project, Marsh said in general the cost premium for LEED-level construction is between 1 percent and 6 percent, and for owner-occupied projects, the amount of time it takes to recoup that initial cost is one to three years, after which energy savings flow to the bottom line.
Marsh has been working with experts from Wake Forest and engineers on the Piedmont Triad Research Park project. He said the studies aren't yet done that will predict how much the green building will cost and eventually save, but he said it should prove worthwhile.
"In situations like this where you're talking about long-term owner occupancy, you typically see very considerable paybacks," Marsh said.
What isn't yet measurable is how much LEED certification might return to the park in terms of new tenants attracted by the green focus. But Edgeton said he's sure that return will also be significant.
"When we go out and talk to companies they have a checklist, and it includes the progressiveness of the community and quality of life," Edgeton said. "Going green says, 'We have a very high quality of life.'"
Downtown Research Park Goes Green
Richard Craver
Winston-Salem Journal, June 12, 2008
Piedmont Triad Research Park is preparing to walk the walk about going green.
Park officials said yesterday that they plan to adopt environmentally friendly guidelines, based on the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, rating systems by the U.S. Green Building Council, for the park's infrastructure and research centers.
Green buildings are constructed of materials that are renewable, don't harm the environment and use less energy than in conventional construction methods.
Doug Edgeton, the president of the research park, said that the guidelines will be used in future planning, construction and operations, such as placing new buildings to absorb more solar power.
Those include: specific performance targets, processes and recommendations for energy efficiency; renewable energy sources; storm-water management; reduction in use of potable water; care and management of material resources; and other areas of development and operation.
"Sustainable-development practices are consistent with the mission and values of our tenant population," Edgeton said. "Our effort to be better stewards of the environment and create a sustainable place further reinforces PTRP as a place where innovation lives."
About 859 people work at the research park, which has 39 tenants. Among the companies are 31 that are not affiliated with Wake Forest University Health Sciences, which owns the research park. There are eight Wake Forest programs at the park, including the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine.
Edgeton said he hopes that the park would be included in a pilot council program that targets neighborhood developments as part of reducing urban sprawl.
One example of an LEED-influenced building in Winston-Salem is Traders Row at 305 W. Fourth St. Cavanaugh & Associates PA, an engineering-consulting company, and Walter Robbs Callahan and Pierce Architects are the main tenants. The new Family Services building in the Southeast Gateway is another example.
Although other research parks are building according to LEED standards, "they are generally not considering the entire park from this perspective,"
said Dan Fogel, an associate dean at the Babcock Graduate School of Management of Wake Forest University. Fogel and Workplace Strategies Inc.
recently conducted a study of other research parks and large-scale developments.
"What is unique about PTRP is their park-wide perspective on LEED," Fogel said.
A study by the New Buildings Institute, released in April, found that new buildings certified under the LEED certification system are, on average, performing up to 30 percent better than non-LEED certified buildings in terms of energy use. The study also found a correlation between increasing levels of LEED certification and increased energy savings.
"We found so many studies, including ours, that have supported the cost factor as being lower for green buildings than other types," Fogel said.
"While 'first costs' may be higher, the payback is very rapid and the on-going costs are dramatically lower."
Edgeton said that the LEED certification "dove tails" into requirements for a 60-acre, mixed-use project being pursued by park officials and Struever Bros. Eccles & Rouse, a Baltimore company that focuses on revitalizing urban neighborhoods.
"One of the requirements for the north district is that it be at LEED certification," Edgeton said.
Officials with Struever could not be reached for comment. The company has been featuring the local project prominently on its Web site - www.sber.com/home.php <http://www.sber.com/home.php> - for months.
Struever said it plans to "transform 1.1 million square feet of the R.J.
Reynolds historic tobacco warehouses into an urban live-work-play community, with Wake Forest University Health Sciences as the primary driver.
Incorporated into the space will be medical laboratory and research space, a variety of residential options and commercial space."
When the project surfaced in November, the company said it planned to develop the 60 acres in phases over five to six years.
At that time, the contract for the project had been expected to be signed by January. Edgeton said he expects Struever Bros. to provide an update within two weeks. Edgeton has said that Struever Bros. has the finances to take on the job, which is estimated to run into the "hundreds of millions of dollars."
The park has hired HDR Inc., an architectural, engineering and consulting company based in Omaha, Neb., to lead the LEED certification effort. Park officials said that adhering to the green guidelines would complement collaborative efforts with city of Winston-Salem on storm water, transportation and other infrastructure design and engineering projects already under way with HDR.
Winston-Salem Journal, June 12, 2008
Piedmont Triad Research Park is preparing to walk the walk about going green.
Park officials said yesterday that they plan to adopt environmentally friendly guidelines, based on the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, rating systems by the U.S. Green Building Council, for the park's infrastructure and research centers.
Green buildings are constructed of materials that are renewable, don't harm the environment and use less energy than in conventional construction methods.
Doug Edgeton, the president of the research park, said that the guidelines will be used in future planning, construction and operations, such as placing new buildings to absorb more solar power.
Those include: specific performance targets, processes and recommendations for energy efficiency; renewable energy sources; storm-water management; reduction in use of potable water; care and management of material resources; and other areas of development and operation.
"Sustainable-development practices are consistent with the mission and values of our tenant population," Edgeton said. "Our effort to be better stewards of the environment and create a sustainable place further reinforces PTRP as a place where innovation lives."
About 859 people work at the research park, which has 39 tenants. Among the companies are 31 that are not affiliated with Wake Forest University Health Sciences, which owns the research park. There are eight Wake Forest programs at the park, including the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine.
Edgeton said he hopes that the park would be included in a pilot council program that targets neighborhood developments as part of reducing urban sprawl.
One example of an LEED-influenced building in Winston-Salem is Traders Row at 305 W. Fourth St. Cavanaugh & Associates PA, an engineering-consulting company, and Walter Robbs Callahan and Pierce Architects are the main tenants. The new Family Services building in the Southeast Gateway is another example.
Although other research parks are building according to LEED standards, "they are generally not considering the entire park from this perspective,"
said Dan Fogel, an associate dean at the Babcock Graduate School of Management of Wake Forest University. Fogel and Workplace Strategies Inc.
recently conducted a study of other research parks and large-scale developments.
"What is unique about PTRP is their park-wide perspective on LEED," Fogel said.
A study by the New Buildings Institute, released in April, found that new buildings certified under the LEED certification system are, on average, performing up to 30 percent better than non-LEED certified buildings in terms of energy use. The study also found a correlation between increasing levels of LEED certification and increased energy savings.
"We found so many studies, including ours, that have supported the cost factor as being lower for green buildings than other types," Fogel said.
"While 'first costs' may be higher, the payback is very rapid and the on-going costs are dramatically lower."
Edgeton said that the LEED certification "dove tails" into requirements for a 60-acre, mixed-use project being pursued by park officials and Struever Bros. Eccles & Rouse, a Baltimore company that focuses on revitalizing urban neighborhoods.
"One of the requirements for the north district is that it be at LEED certification," Edgeton said.
Officials with Struever could not be reached for comment. The company has been featuring the local project prominently on its Web site - www.sber.com/home.php <http://www.sber.com/home.php> - for months.
Struever said it plans to "transform 1.1 million square feet of the R.J.
Reynolds historic tobacco warehouses into an urban live-work-play community, with Wake Forest University Health Sciences as the primary driver.
Incorporated into the space will be medical laboratory and research space, a variety of residential options and commercial space."
When the project surfaced in November, the company said it planned to develop the 60 acres in phases over five to six years.
At that time, the contract for the project had been expected to be signed by January. Edgeton said he expects Struever Bros. to provide an update within two weeks. Edgeton has said that Struever Bros. has the finances to take on the job, which is estimated to run into the "hundreds of millions of dollars."
The park has hired HDR Inc., an architectural, engineering and consulting company based in Omaha, Neb., to lead the LEED certification effort. Park officials said that adhering to the green guidelines would complement collaborative efforts with city of Winston-Salem on storm water, transportation and other infrastructure design and engineering projects already under way with HDR.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
“Learn how you can save the planet”
Less than 30 days ago, William Becker, representing the Climate Action Project at the University of Colorado, published the “100-Day Action Plan to Save the Planet: a Climate Crisis Solution for the 44th President.” The plan has nine major areas for taking action against the ill-effects of climate change
1. Move rapidly away from investments that lock-in carbon emitting energy solutions
2. Rebuild government leadership in this important area
3. Mobilize the marketplace to build a new 21st century economy
4. Launch an economy-wide clean energy surge
5. Ensure that climate change is equitable and fair
6. Create an agenda for natural resource stewardship that responds to climate change
7. Help the nation adapt to the climate change already underway
8. Redefine national security to include climate and energy security
9. Integrate local, state, national and global organizations to create policies that acknowledge and advocate solutions to issues related to environmental sustainability
In light of the difficult military, economic, and social decisions President-elect Obama faces, the urgency of climate change may get mired in his decisions. For this reason, we take Becker’s document seriously; it should be read, actively critiqued, and discussed. Becker and his colleagues present compelling and practical ideas. For example, they show how we can rejuvenate Americans’ penchant for innovation through government grants and incentives. He proposes an extensive “green army” involving 1.5 million Americans in the fight against the negative impacts of climate change. Further, he advocates appointing the nation's best experts to climate-critical positions in the federal government. This action would solidify the wide acceptance of climate change science rather than bolster the politics of it.
Becker is especially cogent when explaining how we can mobilize the marketplace to build a new 21st century economy. By employing carbon taxes or cap and trade systems, we can find ways to account for the true cost to our ecosystems and can provide subsidies for renewable energy solutions.
Central to his plan is the redefining of national security to include energy and climate change. The national security argument for energy independence has been increasingly cited but remains incomplete. Typically, the argument has the effect of targeting and blaming nations rather than energy sources. For instance, the US government is exploring alternative energy sources largely to reduce ties to the Middle East instead of being motivated by environmental reasons. By redefining national security, Becker suggests shifting the focus of national security to include not only volatile foreign affairs but also domestic climate change issues.
The Plan highlights other problems and potential solutions. For instance, $78 billion is spent each year on traffic congestion. In our class’s benchmarking research of multiple cities, we found that some U.S. cities are attempting to centralize commerce centers to promote “smart growth,” which would cut emissions. However, even though emissions may be reduced, actual traffic congestion may increase. To combat this, cities are exploring various “smart solutions” for commuting (e.g. greenways, bike lanes, pedestrian lanes, and even efficient car pools). Each city has experienced the difficulty of striking the balance of centralizing commerce areas with reducing congestion. If done correctly, however, it allows people to travel easily and efficiently through town and emit fewer emissions. Overall,Becker’s ideas get us one step closer to viable solutions.
These solutions do not go uncontested, however. One proposed incentive in the Plan is for states to adopt new building codes that restrict greenhouse gas emissions in order to combat the 38.5% gas emission rate from buildings. Incentives are often effective mechanisms to create change, but Becker’s zero-tolerance emission standard is lofty. Currently, we already see voluntary adoption of private building standards (e.g. LEED), which increase energy efficiency and decrease greenhouse gas emissions. The Plan’s proposed government role to make this a national code, while feasible, is only as such if the goal of reduction in emissions is realistic. Further, perhaps the incentives should be directed more towards businesses and private individuals, since they are more flexible and will directly respond to the market.
These ideas as well as many others are available in “The 100 Day Action Plan.” We suggest you not only read this important work, but also respond to it, create dialogues around it, and send the new government your ideas on how to solve the important issues surrounding climate change. We cannot ignore this increasingly-important issue.
Ana Jerman, senior, Communications
Wesley Johnson, senior, Biology
Drew Legge, senior, Economics
Lacey Robinson, senior, Political Science
Emily Spear, senior, Senior Political Science
Dan Fogel, Executive Professor of Strategy
“The Triple Bottom Line—How Businesses are Balancing People, Planet and Profit.”
Wake Forest University Babcock Graduate School of Management Magazine.
With media reporting daily on how climate change, poverty, immigration, and globalization are impacting people’s lives, corporations are being confronted with an uncomfortable reality: Become part of the problem or become part of the solution. Therefore, many businesses are stepping up to the plate and exploring ways to merge profitability with social responsibility and environmental sustainability. In other words, they’re focusing on the triple bottom line.
The phrase “triple bottom line” emphasizes balance between improving people’s lives, protecting the planet, and generating a profit. It encourages corporations to make social and environmental issues part of their overall business objectives and to address a wider set of challenges beyond the confines of a specific business or industry. The assumption is that if corporations do not confront global issues, such as poverty, environmental degradation, and the interconnectedness of the world, they are likely to see a decrease in well-being throughout the world and, ultimately, in their own profits.
Sustainability—the view that our actions must leave in place a world that is at least as prosperous and environmentally sound as the one we entered—is the guiding principle of the triple bottom line mentality. But what must a company adhering to the triple bottom line do to produce a more sustainable world? What impact does a company make by using triple bottom line practices, and why is this important?
First, the company is forced to analyze how its products, services, businesses, and processes can be improved to increase the sustainability of the corporation and the world. This analysis may result in a new focus on maximizing shareholder wealth while being sensitive to a world whose resources are finite and can only be generated using renewable resources. Other times, choices within the supply chain are reevaluated with increased sensitivity to human rights for suppliers, as in Nike’s case, and to the carbon footprint created by production and distribution.
Ironically, some observers view a focus on the triple bottom line as one that produces the most value-maximizing business outcomes, because adhering to natural processes creates more valuable long-term results. There are even some companies, such as carpet manufacturers Interface and Tandus, that have restructured their entire business models with an emphasis on environmental sustainability. Now, Interface “leases” carpet to its customers so that it can take responsibility for installation and carpet recycling.
Second, the triple bottom line uncovers new business opportunities at the bottom of the pyramid. Microfinance—the practice of providing small loans to people who have limited or no access to capital and who use social networks as collateral—has generated positive results in emerging markets, like India, because of its social and economic impact. This concept, pioneered by Nobel Prize winner Muhammad Yunus, is developed from a view that we can create business solutions for difficult social problems—in this case, extreme poverty.
Third, the triple bottom line forces companies to consider the economic value of the environment. Instead of viewing the environment as a free good, it is viewed as providing a service to corporations. Some economists estimate the value of services provided by the environment at a minimum of three times the world economy. For example, if these services were being taken into account, gas would be $8 per gallon. The triple bottom line concept urges companies to find ways not only to preserve and protect these valuable services, but also to increase the viability of the environment.
Fourth and finally, profitable alternatives to philanthropy emerge as companies examine the triple bottom line. Imboiente, a consulting and landscaping firm based in Portugal’s Algarve region, repairs landscapes damaged by roads, dams, and civil engineering projects. The company also works with foresters and other landowners to reverse the effects of poor agricultural practices. Imboiente’s success is attributed to a surprising combination of philanthropy and sound business practice that serves to improve the environment.
In addition to giving existing companies something new to consider, the triple bottom line has been a catalyst for the development of new markets. Consider the Chicago Climate Exchange, the world’s first registry and trading system for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The idea is to commoditize gas emissions, and by trading that commodity, one brings into play the advantages of capital markets. Why are people trading credits related to gas emissions? Because traders see the underlying asset value of the commodity. Many people believe that this rules-based market is one way to reduce pollution, which they view as a chief contributor to global warming.
Triple bottom line thinking also is influencing architecture and cityscapes. Environmental ratingsystems, such as the one by the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), are becoming part of mainstream building codes. My recent research on environmental guidelines within organizations shows that every major metropolitan area has created a sustainable-design office or unit to shape the design of buildings and communities. The New Urbanism movement in community development has created “integrated design” to represent this triple focus, which has been prevalent in Europe and parts of Asia for decades.
In order to assure that the triple bottom line concept isn’t merely a fad and becomes part of every business culture, it must be instilled in the future generation of business leaders. Wake Forest is one of six U.S. founding members and one of 53 international partners of the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative, an organization of corporations, business schools, and leadership centers that developed its educational principles based on the triple bottom line.
Emphasizing sustainability pushes corporate activity to balance financial outcomes with social and environmental impacts. Only then do we achieve true accountability.
Dan Fogel is Associate Dean for Working Professional
Programs and Executive Professor of
Strategy at the Babcock School, and is based at
Babcock’s Charlotte campus.
Making decision to take right path
Winston-Salem Journal guest column.
September 16, 2008 by Daniel S. Fogel and Peter F. Marsh.
The doubtful among us might call it catching the "green wave" and responding to the natural inclination to "do the right thing," and therefore perhaps not a serious leadership topic. We have a different view about "Go Green Winston-Salem," a climate-protection week series of events promoting environmentally sustainable practices in Winston-Salem.
The Winston-Salem we live in today, like many communities throughout the developed world, enjoyed tremendous growth and prosperity during the industrial era of the late 19th and 20th centuries. But now the employment base from these industries faces serious decline from, among other things, global competition.
Perhaps it is comforting that we are not alone in that economic transition. The message of this week's events reaches beyond global competition. It is fundamentally about the fact that we are highly interconnected to many systems (economic, social and environmental) that must be in balance and be regenerative to be sustainable.
Our viewpoint comes from our work with municipalities, businesses, nonprofit organizations and universities seeking to adopt sustainability principles as part of their core strategy. Recent local examples include our research that supported the Piedmont Triad Research Park's decision to adopt sustainable guidelines for the development and operation of the park. Another is our consultation with the Family Services organization in its decision to build the first newly constructed green building in Winston-Salem under the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED rating system.
With media reporting daily on how climate change, greenhouse-gas emissions, dwindling fossil-fuel sources coupled with escalating prices, a world food crisis and globalization impact people's lives, communities and organizations are being confronted with an uncomfortable reality: Become part of the problem or become part of the solution.
Our research shows that more than 12 percent of the Top 200 Public and Private Companies in North Carolina are beginning to take action on sustainable practices. So how do you get started down the path of sustainability at the individual, organizational and community levels?
It begins with the decision to act -- to act in a way that equally values social capital, environmental capital and economic advancement in a balanced system. Many municipalities and businesses are stepping up to the plate and exploring ways to merge increased capacity (growth and profits) with social responsibility and environmental sustainability.
That leads to the need for education, research and analysis to begin to frame up the short-, mid-, and long-term opportunities that apply to each specific culture, organization or community. It also leads to a new mindset based in systems thinking, what Paul Hawken, one of the most respected authors in the field, has defined as the "Ecology of Commerce."
An effective organization that looks at its strategy through a sustainability lens starts with self assessments. These assessments include a review of products, services, processes and business models and how they could be improved using a sustainability lens. Greenhouse-gas emissions, energy audits, value-chain assessments, competitor analyses and matching processes against standard processes such as ISO 14000 are all methods used by best-in-class firms.
The leadership of this community has begun to answer the question of how to get started. Mayor Allen Joines signed the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement last year, and the city has just completed its first greenhouse-gas emissions profile, with a goal of reducing carbon emissions in the city by 7 percent from 1990 levels. "That may not sound like much," Joines said, "but to meet this mark by our goal of 2012, the entire community must be involved and committed."
As an outcome, the analysis frequently results in a new way to focus on maximizing results for stakeholders (employees, customers, citizens, stockholders). At the highest level, a new strategy emerges that involves a new set of opportunities and market innovations. Actions that do not add value to an organization and its owners should not be priorities. Sustainability is not only good for the survival of our planet -- it is also a key means to increased profitability.
Winston-Salem's stated goals will lead to an exploration of its connection to larger systems of community and the environment. With our support and energy as citizens, that path will eventually lead to an understanding of sustainability as a core strategy for the entire community.
■ Daniel S. Fogel is an associate dean at the Babcock Graduate School of Management at Wake Forest University and chairman and founder of EcoLens Group. Peter F. Marsh is the president and co-founder of EcoLens Group and vice president of Workplace Strategies Inc.
September 16, 2008 by Daniel S. Fogel and Peter F. Marsh.
The doubtful among us might call it catching the "green wave" and responding to the natural inclination to "do the right thing," and therefore perhaps not a serious leadership topic. We have a different view about "Go Green Winston-Salem," a climate-protection week series of events promoting environmentally sustainable practices in Winston-Salem.
The Winston-Salem we live in today, like many communities throughout the developed world, enjoyed tremendous growth and prosperity during the industrial era of the late 19th and 20th centuries. But now the employment base from these industries faces serious decline from, among other things, global competition.
Perhaps it is comforting that we are not alone in that economic transition. The message of this week's events reaches beyond global competition. It is fundamentally about the fact that we are highly interconnected to many systems (economic, social and environmental) that must be in balance and be regenerative to be sustainable.
Our viewpoint comes from our work with municipalities, businesses, nonprofit organizations and universities seeking to adopt sustainability principles as part of their core strategy. Recent local examples include our research that supported the Piedmont Triad Research Park's decision to adopt sustainable guidelines for the development and operation of the park. Another is our consultation with the Family Services organization in its decision to build the first newly constructed green building in Winston-Salem under the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED rating system.
With media reporting daily on how climate change, greenhouse-gas emissions, dwindling fossil-fuel sources coupled with escalating prices, a world food crisis and globalization impact people's lives, communities and organizations are being confronted with an uncomfortable reality: Become part of the problem or become part of the solution.
Our research shows that more than 12 percent of the Top 200 Public and Private Companies in North Carolina are beginning to take action on sustainable practices. So how do you get started down the path of sustainability at the individual, organizational and community levels?
It begins with the decision to act -- to act in a way that equally values social capital, environmental capital and economic advancement in a balanced system. Many municipalities and businesses are stepping up to the plate and exploring ways to merge increased capacity (growth and profits) with social responsibility and environmental sustainability.
That leads to the need for education, research and analysis to begin to frame up the short-, mid-, and long-term opportunities that apply to each specific culture, organization or community. It also leads to a new mindset based in systems thinking, what Paul Hawken, one of the most respected authors in the field, has defined as the "Ecology of Commerce."
An effective organization that looks at its strategy through a sustainability lens starts with self assessments. These assessments include a review of products, services, processes and business models and how they could be improved using a sustainability lens. Greenhouse-gas emissions, energy audits, value-chain assessments, competitor analyses and matching processes against standard processes such as ISO 14000 are all methods used by best-in-class firms.
The leadership of this community has begun to answer the question of how to get started. Mayor Allen Joines signed the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement last year, and the city has just completed its first greenhouse-gas emissions profile, with a goal of reducing carbon emissions in the city by 7 percent from 1990 levels. "That may not sound like much," Joines said, "but to meet this mark by our goal of 2012, the entire community must be involved and committed."
As an outcome, the analysis frequently results in a new way to focus on maximizing results for stakeholders (employees, customers, citizens, stockholders). At the highest level, a new strategy emerges that involves a new set of opportunities and market innovations. Actions that do not add value to an organization and its owners should not be priorities. Sustainability is not only good for the survival of our planet -- it is also a key means to increased profitability.
Winston-Salem's stated goals will lead to an exploration of its connection to larger systems of community and the environment. With our support and energy as citizens, that path will eventually lead to an understanding of sustainability as a core strategy for the entire community.
■ Daniel S. Fogel is an associate dean at the Babcock Graduate School of Management at Wake Forest University and chairman and founder of EcoLens Group. Peter F. Marsh is the president and co-founder of EcoLens Group and vice president of Workplace Strategies Inc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
