Why Green Should Go Green

 

 

The debate over the legalization of marijuana has recently reached an all-time time high. A recent Gallup poll shows that Americans are more open to the idea of legalizing marijuana than ever before. Currently the marijuana industry is one of the least green sectors of the entire United States economy. It is estimated that indoor marijuana cultivation accounts for around one percent of the nation’s electricity consumption. According to a study conducted by Evan Mills of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the amount of energy needed to grow a single joints worth of marijuana in an indoor grow house could keep a 100-watt bulb running for 17 hours. Currently standing at a multi-billion dollar industry, the amount of energy wasted on indoor marijuana growing will continue to rise higher and higher.  In California alone the amount of energy used by grow houses is equivalent to the amount needed to power 3 million average homes. Indoor marijuana growing necessitates such a substantial level of energy for a variety of reasons including 1,000 watt lights to mimic the sun’s rays. Additionally, air conditioners, dehumidifiers, and fans are needed in order to control the indoor climate.  It is clear that something must be done in order to increase the sustainability of the marijuana industry. If growers were able to swap to outdoor growing then the strain on the environment will significantly be reduced. Regardless of the how people feel about the use of marijuana they should support legalization and outdoor growing in order to protect the environment.   

 

 

 

How Businesses View Sustainability

 

Sloan Management Review recently conducted a survey of global executives about sustainability, and the results are not pleasant. According to the survey the majority of executives do not see sustainability as a high priority issue. Executives say they are currently not focused on sustainability due to the economic climate and the inability to predict upcoming business obstacles. The other executives say they are seeking sustainability not in order to prevent climate change, but in order to remain competitive. Additionally, the majority of companies seeking sustainability say it is on their agenda, but they do not view it as a core value. I found this information to be troubling at best. This survey shows me how short sighted the majority of companies are. At some point the potential disasters of climate change must outweigh the potential profits of businesses if they continue a business as usual policy. Traditionally there has been debate over whether corporations have social responsibilities and if they do to what extent, but I believe this debate is outdated. Since corporations are responsible for so much of the greenhouse emissions, they must take responsibility for their actions and do their best to reduce emissions over the coming years. Consumers can act as a major catalyst for businesses to move towards sustainability. If consumers boycott environmentally unfriendly businesses for environmentally conscious ones, all businesses will move towards sustainability in order to regain their customer base. I remain hopeful that more companies will soon begin to look at other companies such as Coca-Cola and P&G as role models and move towards their respective levels of sustainability.

Green Airways

 

As I have previously discussed in my blog, the automotive industry has taken large strides to become more fuel efficient. With the amount of hybrid and electric cars trucks, and buses on the rise the automotive industry is lowering its carbon footprint by the day. However, the same cannot be said for the aviation industry. For example, last summer I traveled from Atlanta, Georgia to Madrid, Spain. This round trip alone emitted 3,385 pounds of CO₂. The aviation industry must begin to find ways of conducting business that uses less energy and cuts back on the reliance of fossil fuels. Richard Branson, CEO Virgin Atlantic Airways, recently discussed the need for the airline industry to move towards sustainability. Branson believes that a sustainable commercial alternative to jet fuel needs to be implemented in the aviation industry. In February 2008, Virgin conducted a test flight from London to Amsterdam using a fuel that mixed 80% kerosene with 20% biofuel. Using alternative fuels is just part of Virgin’s long term sustainability plan. By 2020 Virgin Atlantic has pledged to make a pledge to make a 30% carbon reduction per passenger per kilometer and to providing renewable fuels for the entire fleet of planes. To make this pledge come to fruition, over the past five years Branson has invested, through Virgin and personal expenses, in ethanol plants in the US and developing biofuel companies. Through his actions Branson is forging an admiral path to sustainability, in an industry that is lacking behind most others. Hopefully other airways will follow suit, and we will have green air travel in the coming years.

Public Interest Environmental Lawyering

 

 Today I attended a panel discussion on environmental lawyering. Panel participants include Professor Dean Hill Rivkin of The University of Tennessee College of Law, Stephanie Kodish of the National Parks Conservation Association, Stephanie Matheny of the Tennessee Clean Water Network, Sam Evans of the Southern Environmental Law Center, and Mary Cromer of the Appalachian Citizens Law Center.  The lawyers discussed various things about their jobs including: What do you do? Where does your job fit into the greater scheme of sustainability? Why do you do what you do? What are the rewards and Challenges? How do science and data fit in? and What animates your work? While these answers were intriguing, I found the two most interesting things to be the amount of public interest environmental lawyers and the overall purpose of public interest environmental lawyers. Currently there are only around 750 public interest environmental lawyers in the United States compared to the nearly 25,000 corporate lawyers. This statistic means it is incredibly difficult for public interest environmental lawyers to fight against big business. Additionally, since there are so few public interest environmental lawyers, the lawyers have to be extremely selective about the cases they take and cannot effectively defend the entirety of the public interest. This leads to many companies getting away with violations against government policies such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. Public interest environmental lawyers can be called the great internalizes. Their work forces companies that pollute to internalize the costs associated with the external effects of their pollution. These companies now factor in externalities when making decisions. Public interest environmental law seems like an interesting and expanding field for upcoming lawyers.

Food, Inc.

 

 

Today I viewed an extraordinary movie entitled Food, Inc. Food, Inc. is a 2008 documentary concerning the American food industry. It is directed by Robert Kenner and is narrated by Michael Pollan and Eric Schlosser. The film examines many facets of both corporate farming and organic farming in the United States. To be honest after watching this film I felt slightly overwhelmed, very informed, and a little scared. It is common knowledge that organic food is healthier for you then factory farm meat and genetically engineered food, but I never realized how wide the health margin between the two truly is. The film raises so many issues that it would be impossible for me to discuss all of them in one post, so I will only discuss the one that shocked me the most. Before viewing this film, I had no idea that a company could patent genetically engineered seeds. This concept that a company can patent a source of life seems foreign and unnatural to me. Additionally, I do not see how Monsanto, who provides the technology in 90% of the genetically engineered seeds used in the US market, can run operations like they do. Monsanto has the power, and uses it, to bully farmers into doing exactly what they want and forcing them to either buy their seed or get out of the soybean business. A company with this kind of power and this kind of market share constitutes a monopoly in my mind. After viewing this movie there is no question in my mind that the United States needs to implement food policy reform starting with removing the ability to patent genetically altered crops and introducing stricter regulations in the raising and slaughtering of meat. I encourage anyone who has not seen this movie to check it out.