CEO Ghosn stresses coolness factor, tries new model to bring down price
Nissan Motor Co. CEO Carlos Ghosn says electric vehicles like the automaker's Leaf, shown here, need to be “affordable, … cool, attractive and fun to drive.”
Killer hunted after Thanksgiving party rampage
Lawyer: Crashers were ‘cleared’ by White House
Teenager lashed for wearing knee-length skirt
Cops: Dad locks kids in trunk, goes shopping
Rush starts as holiday shopping season revs up
Most viewed on msnbc.com
Shaquille O’Neal pays for slain girl’s funeral
Child entrepreneur gives back for holidays
Iran seizes rights lawyer’s Nobel Peace medal
‘Smart’ armor learns more with every bullet
Man says emergence from ‘coma’ like rebirth
The evolution of the electric car
The electric car is poised to become a mainstream transportation option for everyday drivers. Click on the ‘launch’ button above to read about the evolution of the electric car.
By Paul A. Eisenstein
msnbc.com contributor
updated 7:38 a.m. ET, Wed., Nov . 25, 2009
President Barack Obama has set an ambitious goal of putting at least 1 million battery-powered cars on the road by the middle of the coming decade.
Many in the auto industry have charitably called that target ambitious. Others are less polite. But while it may be a difficult goal, Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn is among those who believe the public may get charged up by the switch to electric power.
To get there, however, he stresses that some of the industry’s basic business models may have to be rethought to reflect the new world of electric propulsion.
Ghosn was in Los Angeles recently for the start of Nissan’s “Zero Emissions Tour,” a 22-city road show that will lead up to the launch next year of the first of four battery-electric vehicles, or BEVs, the Japanese maker plans to launch in the next few years.
The Leaf is a 5-seat sedan similar in size to the subcompact Versa, but it replaces the current model’s gasoline engine with an 80 kilowatt electric motor with about 110 horsepower that draws its power from a lithium-ion battery pack.
While Ghosn is quick to proclaim that battery propulsion “will change the industry,” he also acknowledges that to win over buyers, tomorrow’s BEVs will need to be “affordable, … cool, attractive and fun to drive.”
On the positive side, electric motors develop maximum tire-spinning torque the moment they start to turn, and a prototype Leaf launched fast enough to throw a passenger back deep into the seat. The design of Nissan’s first battery car is as distinctive as Toyota’s gas-electric hybrid Prius, though Leaf program manager Hideaki Watanabe said Nissan opted against a “spaceship-style design” to avoid alienating more traditional buyers who might otherwise want an emissions-free car.
Nissan is betting there is a core group of buyers who will opt for a vehicle like the Leaf to assuage their “environmental guilt.”
But to make the technology sustainable as a business will require reaching into the mainstream. That’s not easy. Even conventional hybrids, such as the Prius, Honda’s Insight and the Ford Fusion Hybrid, are struggling to garner more than 2 to 3 percent of the U.S. automotive market.
There is no hard data, but it's estimated that there are only a few thousand BEVs on the road now, not including hybrids, which also have a gasoline engine. Hybrids have had some initial success in part because they don’t have some of the limitations of the pure battery car, such as limited range, long charging times and high costs, mostly for their batteries.
Click for related content
Vote, discuss: Which green technology is best?
Automakers turn to safety to sell cars
Plug-ins rev up; are consumers ready?
Because of pricey lithium-ion, or LIon, technology, General Motors is expected to charge more than $40,000 for its extended-range electric vehicle, the 2011 Chevrolet Volt. A special $7,500 federal tax credit will bring the price down to the mid-$30,000 range, still a sizable chunk for a compact sedan.
Ghosn suggests the Leaf will be priced no more than “2 to 3 percent” more than a comparable gasoline vehicle, which would mean $25,000 or less, depending on final equipment levels.
How can Nissan afford to make such a deal without going deeply in debt on each vehicle? The sticker price will cover just the vehicle itself, and not the battery, which will be leased separately, Ghosn said. The monthly fee will be based on what it would cost to fuel up a comparable, gasoline-powered vehicle to run about 15,000 miles annually which, depending upon your assumptions about future oil prices, could run $200 to $400.
In its initial incarnation, the Leaf is expected to deliver up to 100 miles on a charge. Actual mileage may vary, depending on driving style and driving conditions. That may not sound like much but research shows that up to 70 percent of American drivers drive less each day than the 40-mile battery range of Volt and more than 80 percent never reach 100 miles in a day.
That doesn’t completely resolve so-called “range anxiety,” the fear of needing a little bit more in an emergency. To help address that, Nissan has been forming a variety of partnerships with the likes of Project Better Place, which is setting up a network of quick charging stations in Israel, and even special facilities that can swap a discharged battery for a fresh one in no more time than it normally takes to gas up.
Here in the States, Nissan recently inked a partnership with Texas-based Reliant Energy, which will provide fast 220-volt chargers to Leaf buyers and set up quick-charge facilities that could be used at offices or on the road. Nissan says one system under development would give an 80 percent charge in less than 10 minutes.
Such joint ventures are critical to making battery power a reality, most automakers have recognized. Many energy providers see a similar payoff, since the goal is to promote charging at night, when the power grid is underutilized and steep discounts can be offered. BMW, for one, has even been working with New York City parking garages to set up chargers for residents who might want an urban commuter car — like its Mini-e — but would otherwise have no place to recharge.
These partnerships, said Nissan’s Watanabe, could also provide a place for batteries once they’re no longer fit for use on the road. They likely would still have plenty of life and could be put out to pasture on load farms designed to stabilize the grid during times of peak demand. They also could serve to collect power from renewable sources like wind, solar or wave during peak production and keep the juice flowing at night or when winds die down.
Click for related content
At GM, down looks like up, at least for now
Automakers turn to safety to sell cars
Plug-ins rev up; are consumers ready?
Nissan is not only looking for new business models but also updating old ones. Traditionally, there’s been a big profit in providing bigger engines to those who want better performance. As LIon battery chemistry improves, experts anticipate battery packs will get smaller, lighter and cheaper. But for those who might want more range, Nissan is considering the idea of offering optional, longer-range packs —for a premium, of course.
It may also be possible to offer higher-power batteries and more powerful motors for those who might like the idea of a green muscle car.
There’s little doubt the battery car will change the way the auto industry does business. The companies that can adopt their business case to the new technology could lead the charge.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Top 10 Jobs in Green Technologies
Top 10 Jobs in Green Technologies
By Selena Dehne, JIST Publishing
Advanced Search >> The nation's movement to become a more productive and competitive economic force in the global marketplace is bringing a wealth of hope and job opportunities to recession-weary Americans.
"In order to succeed in the 21st century, we are working to improve education, expand health care, fix the infrastructure, overhaul our manufacturing industries, adopt green technologies and continue our leadership in high-tech innovation," says Laurence Shatkin, Ph.D., one of the nation's leading occupational experts and author of the recently released book "200 Best Jobs for Renewing America."
In his book, Shatkin discusses the six industries at the center of America's shift toward a forward-looking economy: education, infrastructure, health care, information and telecommunication technologies, green technologies and advanced manufacturing.
Of these industries, green technologies, in particular, has gained a great deal of interest among individuals hoping to secure a solid job as the economy continues to reinvent itself and become more competitive in the upcoming decades.
According to Shatkin's research, the following list outlines the best jobs overall in green technologies.
1. Construction managers
Annual earnings: $76,230
Percent growth: 15.7 percent
2. Industrial engineers
Annual earnings: $71,430
Percent growth: 20.3 percent
3. First-line supervisors/managers of construction trades and extraction workers
Annual earnings: $55,950
Percent growth: 9.1 percent
4. Environmental scientists and specialists
Annual earnings: $58,380
Percent growth: 25.1 percent
5. Construction and building inspectors
Annual earnings: $48,330
Percent growth: 18.2 percent
6. Environmental engineers
Annual earnings: $72,350
Percent growth: 25.4 percent
7. Plumbers, pipefitters and steamfitters
Annual earnings: $44,090
Percent growth: 10.6 percent
8.Geoscientists, except hydrologists and geographers
Annual earnings: $75,800
Percent growth: 21.9 percent
9. Carpenters
Annual earnings: $37,660
Percent growth: 10.3 percent
10. Electricians
Annual earnings: $44,780
Percent growth: 7.4 percent
*Percent growth between 2006 and 2016.
By Selena Dehne, JIST Publishing
Advanced Search >> The nation's movement to become a more productive and competitive economic force in the global marketplace is bringing a wealth of hope and job opportunities to recession-weary Americans.
"In order to succeed in the 21st century, we are working to improve education, expand health care, fix the infrastructure, overhaul our manufacturing industries, adopt green technologies and continue our leadership in high-tech innovation," says Laurence Shatkin, Ph.D., one of the nation's leading occupational experts and author of the recently released book "200 Best Jobs for Renewing America."
In his book, Shatkin discusses the six industries at the center of America's shift toward a forward-looking economy: education, infrastructure, health care, information and telecommunication technologies, green technologies and advanced manufacturing.
Of these industries, green technologies, in particular, has gained a great deal of interest among individuals hoping to secure a solid job as the economy continues to reinvent itself and become more competitive in the upcoming decades.
According to Shatkin's research, the following list outlines the best jobs overall in green technologies.
1. Construction managers
Annual earnings: $76,230
Percent growth: 15.7 percent
2. Industrial engineers
Annual earnings: $71,430
Percent growth: 20.3 percent
3. First-line supervisors/managers of construction trades and extraction workers
Annual earnings: $55,950
Percent growth: 9.1 percent
4. Environmental scientists and specialists
Annual earnings: $58,380
Percent growth: 25.1 percent
5. Construction and building inspectors
Annual earnings: $48,330
Percent growth: 18.2 percent
6. Environmental engineers
Annual earnings: $72,350
Percent growth: 25.4 percent
7. Plumbers, pipefitters and steamfitters
Annual earnings: $44,090
Percent growth: 10.6 percent
8.Geoscientists, except hydrologists and geographers
Annual earnings: $75,800
Percent growth: 21.9 percent
9. Carpenters
Annual earnings: $37,660
Percent growth: 10.3 percent
10. Electricians
Annual earnings: $44,780
Percent growth: 7.4 percent
*Percent growth between 2006 and 2016.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Toxic Waters
As Sewers Fill, Waste Poisons Waterways
By CHARLES DUHIGG
Published: November 22, 2009
It was drizzling lightly in late October when the midnight shift started at the Owls Head Water Pollution Control Plant, where much of Brooklyn’s sewage is treated.
Damon Winter/The New York Times
A worker maintaining a tank at a Brooklyn wastewater treatment plant. Half the rainstorms in New York overwhelm the system.
When It Rains, It Pollutes
Systems on the Brink
Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’ response.
Search data on more than 200,000 facilities around the nation permitted to discharge pollutants.
Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record
The New York Times surveyed violations of the Clean Water Act in every state, and the response by state regulators.
Damon Winter/The New York Times
William Grandner, superintendent of Owls Head Water Pollution Control Plant in Brooklyn, kept an eye on multiple monitors that track the flow of sewage.
Read All Comments (262) »
A few miles away, people were walking home without umbrellas from late dinners. But at Owls Head, a swimming pool’s worth of sewage and wastewater was soon rushing in every second. Warning horns began to blare. A little after 1 a.m., with a harder rain falling, Owls Head reached its capacity and workers started shutting the intake gates.
That caused a rising tide throughout Brooklyn’s sewers, and untreated feces and industrial waste started spilling from emergency relief valves into the Upper New York Bay and Gowanus Canal.
“It happens anytime you get a hard rainfall,” said Bob Connaughton, one the plant’s engineers. “Sometimes all it takes is 20 minutes of rain, and you’ve got overflows across Brooklyn.”
One goal of the Clean Water Act of 1972 was to upgrade the nation’s sewer systems, many of them built more than a century ago, to handle growing populations and increasing runoff of rainwater and waste. During the 1970s and 1980s, Congress distributed more than $60 billion to cities to make sure that what goes into toilets, industrial drains and street grates would not endanger human health.
But despite those upgrades, many sewer systems are still frequently overwhelmed, according to a New York Times analysis of environmental data. As a result, sewage is spilling into waterways.
In the last three years alone, more than 9,400 of the nation’s 25,000 sewage systems — including those in major cities — have reported violating the law by dumping untreated or partly treated human waste, chemicals and other hazardous materials into rivers and lakes and elsewhere, according to data from state environmental agencies and the Environmental Protection Agency.
But fewer than one in five sewage systems that broke the law were ever fined or otherwise sanctioned by state or federal regulators, the Times analysis shows.
It is not clear whether the sewage systems that have not reported such dumping are doing any better, because data on overflows and spillage are often incomplete.
As cities have grown rapidly across the nation, many have neglected infrastructure projects and paved over green spaces that once absorbed rainwater. That has contributed to sewage backups into more than 400,000 basements and spills into thousands of streets, according to data collected by state and federal officials. Sometimes, waste has overflowed just upstream from drinking water intake points or near public beaches.
There is no national record-keeping of how many illnesses are caused by sewage spills. But academic research suggests that as many as 20 million people each year become ill from drinking water containing bacteria and other pathogens that are often spread by untreated waste.
A 2007 study published in the journal Pediatrics, focusing on one Milwaukee hospital, indicated that the number of children suffering from serious diarrhea rose whenever local sewers overflowed. Another study, published in 2008 in the Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health, estimated that as many as four million people become sick each year in California from swimming in waters containing the kind of pollution often linked to untreated sewage.
Around New York City, samples collected at dozens of beaches or piers have detected the types of bacteria and other pollutants tied to sewage overflows. Though the city’s drinking water comes from upstate reservoirs, environmentalists say untreated excrement and other waste in the city’s waterways pose serious health risks.
A Deluge of Sewage
“After the storm, the sewage flowed down the street faster than we could move out of the way and filled my house with over a foot of muck,” said Laura Serrano, whose Bay Shore, N.Y., home was damaged in 2005 by a sewer overflow.
Ms. Serrano, who says she contracted viral meningitis because of exposure to the sewage, has filed suit against Suffolk County, which operates the sewer system. The county’s lawyer disputes responsibility for the damage and injuries.
“I had to move out, and no one will buy my house because the sewage was absorbed into the walls,” Ms. Serrano said. “I can still smell it sometimes.”
When a sewage system overflows or a treatment plant dumps untreated waste, it is often breaking the law. Today, sewage systems are the nation’s most frequent violators of the Clean Water Act. More than a third of all sewer systems — including those in San Diego, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, Philadelphia, San Jose and San Francisco — have violated environmental laws since 2006, according to a Times analysis of E.P.A. data.
Thousands of other sewage systems operated by smaller cities, colleges, mobile home parks and companies have also broken the law. But few of the violators are ever punished.
As Sewers Fill, Waste Poisons Waterways
Published: November 22, 2009
(Page 2 of 3)
The E.P.A., in a statement, said that officials agreed that overflows posed a “significant environmental and human health problem, and significantly reducing or eliminating such overflows has been a priority for E.P.A. enforcement since the mid-1990s.”
Damon Winter/The New York Times
Rainwater and sewage are treated at Owls Head.
When It Rains, It Pollutes
Toxic Waters
Systems on the Brink
Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’ response.
All Articles in the Series »
Find Water Polluters Near You
Select a State
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
Search data on more than 200,000 facilities around the nation permitted to discharge pollutants.
Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record
The New York Times surveyed violations of the Clean Water Act in every state, and the response by state regulators.
In the last year, E.P.A. settlements with sewer systems in Hampton Roads, Va., and the east San Francisco Bay have led to more than $200 million spent on new systems to reduce pollution, the agency said. In October, the E.P.A. administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, said she was overhauling how the Clean Water Act is enforced.
But widespread problems still remain.
“The E.P.A. would rather look the other way than crack down on cities, since punishing municipalities can cause political problems,” said Craig Michaels of Riverkeeper, an environmental advocacy group. “But without enforcement and fines, this problem will never end.”
Plant operators and regulators, for their part, say that fines would simply divert money from stretched budgets and that they are doing the best they can with aging systems and overwhelmed pipes.
New York, for example, was one of the first major cities to build a large sewer system, starting construction in 1849. Many of those pipes — constructed of hand-laid brick and ceramic tiles — are still used. Today, the city’s 7,400 miles of sewer pipes operate almost entirely by gravity, unlike in other cities that use large pumps.
New York City’s 14 wastewater treatment plants, which handle 1.3 billion gallons of wastewater a day, have been flooded with thousands of pickles (after a factory dumped its stock), vast flows of discarded chicken heads and large pieces of lumber.
When a toilet flushes in the West Village in Manhattan, the waste runs north six miles through gradually descending pipes to a plant at 137th Street, where it is mixed with so-called biological digesters that consume dangerous pathogens. The wastewater is then mixed with chlorine and sent into the Hudson River.
Fragile System
But New York’s system — like those in hundreds of others cities — combines rainwater runoff with sewage. Over the last three decades, as thousands of acres of trees, bushes and other vegetation in New York have been paved over, the land’s ability to absorb rain has declined significantly. When treatment plants are swamped, the excess spills from 490 overflow pipes throughout the city’s five boroughs.
When the sky is clear, Owls Head can handle the sewage from more than 750,000 people. But the balance is so delicate that Mr. Connaughton and his colleagues must be constantly ready for rain.
They choose cable television packages for their homes based on which company offers the best local weather forecasts. They know meteorologists by the sound of their voices. When the leaves begin to fall each autumn, clogging sewer grates and pipes, Mr. Connaughton sometimes has trouble sleeping.
“I went to Hawaii with my wife, and the whole time I was flipping to the Weather Channel, seeing if it was raining in New York,” he said.
New York’s sewage system overflows essentially every other time it rains.
Reducing such overflows is a priority, city officials say. But eradicating the problem would cost billions.
Officials have spent approximately $35 billion over three decades improving the quality of the waters surrounding the city and have improved systems to capture and store rainwater and sewage, bringing down the frequency and volume of overflows, the city’s Department of Environmental Protection wrote in a statement.
“Water quality in New York City has improved dramatically in the last century, and particularly in the last two decades,” officials wrote.
Several years ago, city officials estimated that it would cost at least $58 billion to prevent all overflows. “Even an expenditure of that magnitude would not result in every part of a river or bay surrounding the city achieving water quality that is suitable for swimming,” the department wrote. “It would, however, increase the average N.Y.C. water and sewer bill by 80 percent.”
The E.P.A., concerned about the risks of overflowing sewers, issued a national framework in 1994 to control overflows, including making sure that pipes are designed so they do not easily become plugged by debris and warning the public when overflows occur. In 2000, Congress amended the Clean Water Act to crack down on overflows.
(Page 3 of 3)
But in hundreds of places, sewer systems remain out of compliance with that framework or the Clean Water Act, which regulates most pollution discharges to waterways. And the burdens on sewer systems are growing as cities become larger and, in some areas, rainstorms become more frequent and fierce.
Damon Winter/The New York Times
The Newtown Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, is the largest of New York City’s 14 treatment plants.
When It Rains, It Pollutes
Toxic Waters
Systems on the Brink
Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’ response.
Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record
The New York Times surveyed violations of the Clean Water Act in every state, and the response by state regulators.
New York’s system, for instance, was designed to accommodate a so-called five-year storm — a rainfall so extreme that it is expected to occur, on average, only twice a decade. But in 2007 alone, the city experienced three 25-year storms, according to city officials — storms so strong they would be expected only four times each century.
“When you get five inches of rain in 30 minutes, it’s like Thanksgiving Day traffic on a two-lane bridge in the sewer pipes,” said James Roberts, deputy commissioner of the city’s Department of Environmental Protection.
Government’s Response
To combat these shifts, some cities are encouraging sewer-friendly development. New York, for instance, has instituted zoning laws requiring new parking lots to include landscaped areas to absorb rainwater, established a tax credit for roofs with absorbent vegetation and begun to use millions of dollars for environmentally friendly infrastructure projects.
Philadelphia has announced it will spend $1.6 billion over 20 years to build rain gardens and sidewalks of porous pavement and to plant thousands of trees.
But unless cities require private developers to build in ways that minimize runoff, the volume of rain flowing into sewers is likely to grow, environmentalists say.
The only real solution, say many lawmakers and water advocates, is extensive new spending on sewer systems largely ignored for decades. As much as $400 billion in extra spending is needed over the next decade to fix the nation’s sewer infrastructure, according to estimates by the E.P.A. and the Government Accountability Office.
Legislation under consideration on Capitol Hill contains millions in water infrastructure grants, and the stimulus bill passed this year set aside $6 billion to improve sewers and other water systems.
But that money is only a small fraction of what is needed, officials say. And over the last two decades, federal money for such programs has fallen by 70 percent, according to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, which estimates that a quarter of the state’s sewage and wastewater treatment plants are “using outmoded, inadequate technology.”
“The public has no clue how important these sewage plants are,” said Mr. Connaughton of the Brooklyn site. “Waterborne disease was the scourge of mankind for centuries. These plants stopped that. We’re doing everything we can to clean as much sewage as possible, but sometimes, that isn’t enough.”
Comment
I am sure we have similar problems here in Miami. New or repaired sewers are needed, as well as wastewater plants to process the wastewater and return it to the Earth.
By CHARLES DUHIGG
Published: November 22, 2009
It was drizzling lightly in late October when the midnight shift started at the Owls Head Water Pollution Control Plant, where much of Brooklyn’s sewage is treated.
Damon Winter/The New York Times
A worker maintaining a tank at a Brooklyn wastewater treatment plant. Half the rainstorms in New York overwhelm the system.
When It Rains, It Pollutes
Systems on the Brink
Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’ response.
Search data on more than 200,000 facilities around the nation permitted to discharge pollutants.
Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record
The New York Times surveyed violations of the Clean Water Act in every state, and the response by state regulators.
Damon Winter/The New York Times
William Grandner, superintendent of Owls Head Water Pollution Control Plant in Brooklyn, kept an eye on multiple monitors that track the flow of sewage.
Read All Comments (262) »
A few miles away, people were walking home without umbrellas from late dinners. But at Owls Head, a swimming pool’s worth of sewage and wastewater was soon rushing in every second. Warning horns began to blare. A little after 1 a.m., with a harder rain falling, Owls Head reached its capacity and workers started shutting the intake gates.
That caused a rising tide throughout Brooklyn’s sewers, and untreated feces and industrial waste started spilling from emergency relief valves into the Upper New York Bay and Gowanus Canal.
“It happens anytime you get a hard rainfall,” said Bob Connaughton, one the plant’s engineers. “Sometimes all it takes is 20 minutes of rain, and you’ve got overflows across Brooklyn.”
One goal of the Clean Water Act of 1972 was to upgrade the nation’s sewer systems, many of them built more than a century ago, to handle growing populations and increasing runoff of rainwater and waste. During the 1970s and 1980s, Congress distributed more than $60 billion to cities to make sure that what goes into toilets, industrial drains and street grates would not endanger human health.
But despite those upgrades, many sewer systems are still frequently overwhelmed, according to a New York Times analysis of environmental data. As a result, sewage is spilling into waterways.
In the last three years alone, more than 9,400 of the nation’s 25,000 sewage systems — including those in major cities — have reported violating the law by dumping untreated or partly treated human waste, chemicals and other hazardous materials into rivers and lakes and elsewhere, according to data from state environmental agencies and the Environmental Protection Agency.
But fewer than one in five sewage systems that broke the law were ever fined or otherwise sanctioned by state or federal regulators, the Times analysis shows.
It is not clear whether the sewage systems that have not reported such dumping are doing any better, because data on overflows and spillage are often incomplete.
As cities have grown rapidly across the nation, many have neglected infrastructure projects and paved over green spaces that once absorbed rainwater. That has contributed to sewage backups into more than 400,000 basements and spills into thousands of streets, according to data collected by state and federal officials. Sometimes, waste has overflowed just upstream from drinking water intake points or near public beaches.
There is no national record-keeping of how many illnesses are caused by sewage spills. But academic research suggests that as many as 20 million people each year become ill from drinking water containing bacteria and other pathogens that are often spread by untreated waste.
A 2007 study published in the journal Pediatrics, focusing on one Milwaukee hospital, indicated that the number of children suffering from serious diarrhea rose whenever local sewers overflowed. Another study, published in 2008 in the Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health, estimated that as many as four million people become sick each year in California from swimming in waters containing the kind of pollution often linked to untreated sewage.
Around New York City, samples collected at dozens of beaches or piers have detected the types of bacteria and other pollutants tied to sewage overflows. Though the city’s drinking water comes from upstate reservoirs, environmentalists say untreated excrement and other waste in the city’s waterways pose serious health risks.
A Deluge of Sewage
“After the storm, the sewage flowed down the street faster than we could move out of the way and filled my house with over a foot of muck,” said Laura Serrano, whose Bay Shore, N.Y., home was damaged in 2005 by a sewer overflow.
Ms. Serrano, who says she contracted viral meningitis because of exposure to the sewage, has filed suit against Suffolk County, which operates the sewer system. The county’s lawyer disputes responsibility for the damage and injuries.
“I had to move out, and no one will buy my house because the sewage was absorbed into the walls,” Ms. Serrano said. “I can still smell it sometimes.”
When a sewage system overflows or a treatment plant dumps untreated waste, it is often breaking the law. Today, sewage systems are the nation’s most frequent violators of the Clean Water Act. More than a third of all sewer systems — including those in San Diego, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, Philadelphia, San Jose and San Francisco — have violated environmental laws since 2006, according to a Times analysis of E.P.A. data.
Thousands of other sewage systems operated by smaller cities, colleges, mobile home parks and companies have also broken the law. But few of the violators are ever punished.
As Sewers Fill, Waste Poisons Waterways
Published: November 22, 2009
(Page 2 of 3)
The E.P.A., in a statement, said that officials agreed that overflows posed a “significant environmental and human health problem, and significantly reducing or eliminating such overflows has been a priority for E.P.A. enforcement since the mid-1990s.”
Damon Winter/The New York Times
Rainwater and sewage are treated at Owls Head.
When It Rains, It Pollutes
Toxic Waters
Systems on the Brink
Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’ response.
All Articles in the Series »
Find Water Polluters Near You
Select a State
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
Search data on more than 200,000 facilities around the nation permitted to discharge pollutants.
Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record
The New York Times surveyed violations of the Clean Water Act in every state, and the response by state regulators.
In the last year, E.P.A. settlements with sewer systems in Hampton Roads, Va., and the east San Francisco Bay have led to more than $200 million spent on new systems to reduce pollution, the agency said. In October, the E.P.A. administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, said she was overhauling how the Clean Water Act is enforced.
But widespread problems still remain.
“The E.P.A. would rather look the other way than crack down on cities, since punishing municipalities can cause political problems,” said Craig Michaels of Riverkeeper, an environmental advocacy group. “But without enforcement and fines, this problem will never end.”
Plant operators and regulators, for their part, say that fines would simply divert money from stretched budgets and that they are doing the best they can with aging systems and overwhelmed pipes.
New York, for example, was one of the first major cities to build a large sewer system, starting construction in 1849. Many of those pipes — constructed of hand-laid brick and ceramic tiles — are still used. Today, the city’s 7,400 miles of sewer pipes operate almost entirely by gravity, unlike in other cities that use large pumps.
New York City’s 14 wastewater treatment plants, which handle 1.3 billion gallons of wastewater a day, have been flooded with thousands of pickles (after a factory dumped its stock), vast flows of discarded chicken heads and large pieces of lumber.
When a toilet flushes in the West Village in Manhattan, the waste runs north six miles through gradually descending pipes to a plant at 137th Street, where it is mixed with so-called biological digesters that consume dangerous pathogens. The wastewater is then mixed with chlorine and sent into the Hudson River.
Fragile System
But New York’s system — like those in hundreds of others cities — combines rainwater runoff with sewage. Over the last three decades, as thousands of acres of trees, bushes and other vegetation in New York have been paved over, the land’s ability to absorb rain has declined significantly. When treatment plants are swamped, the excess spills from 490 overflow pipes throughout the city’s five boroughs.
When the sky is clear, Owls Head can handle the sewage from more than 750,000 people. But the balance is so delicate that Mr. Connaughton and his colleagues must be constantly ready for rain.
They choose cable television packages for their homes based on which company offers the best local weather forecasts. They know meteorologists by the sound of their voices. When the leaves begin to fall each autumn, clogging sewer grates and pipes, Mr. Connaughton sometimes has trouble sleeping.
“I went to Hawaii with my wife, and the whole time I was flipping to the Weather Channel, seeing if it was raining in New York,” he said.
New York’s sewage system overflows essentially every other time it rains.
Reducing such overflows is a priority, city officials say. But eradicating the problem would cost billions.
Officials have spent approximately $35 billion over three decades improving the quality of the waters surrounding the city and have improved systems to capture and store rainwater and sewage, bringing down the frequency and volume of overflows, the city’s Department of Environmental Protection wrote in a statement.
“Water quality in New York City has improved dramatically in the last century, and particularly in the last two decades,” officials wrote.
Several years ago, city officials estimated that it would cost at least $58 billion to prevent all overflows. “Even an expenditure of that magnitude would not result in every part of a river or bay surrounding the city achieving water quality that is suitable for swimming,” the department wrote. “It would, however, increase the average N.Y.C. water and sewer bill by 80 percent.”
The E.P.A., concerned about the risks of overflowing sewers, issued a national framework in 1994 to control overflows, including making sure that pipes are designed so they do not easily become plugged by debris and warning the public when overflows occur. In 2000, Congress amended the Clean Water Act to crack down on overflows.
(Page 3 of 3)
But in hundreds of places, sewer systems remain out of compliance with that framework or the Clean Water Act, which regulates most pollution discharges to waterways. And the burdens on sewer systems are growing as cities become larger and, in some areas, rainstorms become more frequent and fierce.
Damon Winter/The New York Times
The Newtown Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, is the largest of New York City’s 14 treatment plants.
When It Rains, It Pollutes
Toxic Waters
Systems on the Brink
Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’ response.
Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record
The New York Times surveyed violations of the Clean Water Act in every state, and the response by state regulators.
New York’s system, for instance, was designed to accommodate a so-called five-year storm — a rainfall so extreme that it is expected to occur, on average, only twice a decade. But in 2007 alone, the city experienced three 25-year storms, according to city officials — storms so strong they would be expected only four times each century.
“When you get five inches of rain in 30 minutes, it’s like Thanksgiving Day traffic on a two-lane bridge in the sewer pipes,” said James Roberts, deputy commissioner of the city’s Department of Environmental Protection.
Government’s Response
To combat these shifts, some cities are encouraging sewer-friendly development. New York, for instance, has instituted zoning laws requiring new parking lots to include landscaped areas to absorb rainwater, established a tax credit for roofs with absorbent vegetation and begun to use millions of dollars for environmentally friendly infrastructure projects.
Philadelphia has announced it will spend $1.6 billion over 20 years to build rain gardens and sidewalks of porous pavement and to plant thousands of trees.
But unless cities require private developers to build in ways that minimize runoff, the volume of rain flowing into sewers is likely to grow, environmentalists say.
The only real solution, say many lawmakers and water advocates, is extensive new spending on sewer systems largely ignored for decades. As much as $400 billion in extra spending is needed over the next decade to fix the nation’s sewer infrastructure, according to estimates by the E.P.A. and the Government Accountability Office.
Legislation under consideration on Capitol Hill contains millions in water infrastructure grants, and the stimulus bill passed this year set aside $6 billion to improve sewers and other water systems.
But that money is only a small fraction of what is needed, officials say. And over the last two decades, federal money for such programs has fallen by 70 percent, according to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, which estimates that a quarter of the state’s sewage and wastewater treatment plants are “using outmoded, inadequate technology.”
“The public has no clue how important these sewage plants are,” said Mr. Connaughton of the Brooklyn site. “Waterborne disease was the scourge of mankind for centuries. These plants stopped that. We’re doing everything we can to clean as much sewage as possible, but sometimes, that isn’t enough.”
Comment
I am sure we have similar problems here in Miami. New or repaired sewers are needed, as well as wastewater plants to process the wastewater and return it to the Earth.
South District Wastewater Treatment Plant
The raw wastewater that comes into the South District Wastewater Treatment Plant first goes through conventional treatment, which consists of the following steps:
Heavy solids are separated from the wastewater stream.
Biological matter is progressively converted into a solid mass by using indigenous, water-borne micro-organisms.
Finally, the biological solids are neutralized and either disposed of or reused. The treated water may be disinfected chemically or physically.
In the case of Miami-Dade County's project, the water will go from secondary treatment through the High-Level Disinfection plant that is under construction.
How water reclamation works:
The first step is microfiltration or ultra-filtration -- a filtration process that removes contaminants from a fluid (liquid and gas) by passage through a micro-porous membrane. A typical microfiltration membrane pore size range is 0.1 to 10 micrometres (µm). (A micrometer is one millionth of a meter. For comparison, a strand of human hair is about 100 µm wide.)
Next, the water goes through reverse osmosis -- basically, a filtration process. It works by using pressure to force a solution through a membrane, retaining the solute on one side and allowing the pure solvent to pass to the other side. This is the reverse of the normal osmosis process, which is the natural movement of solvent from an area of low solute concentration, through a membrane, to an area of high solute concentration when no external pressure is applied.
Hydrogen peroxide is now added. It is commonly used to remove pollutants from wastewater and from air. It contests bacterial growth through oxygen addition. It can also be used to treat pollutants that can be easily oxidized such as iron and sulphides and pollutants that are difficult to oxidize such as dissolved solids, gasoline and pesticides.
Ultraviolet disinfection, a common treatment of drinking water that uses ultraviolet radiations to inactivate microorganisms, is then added. Ultraviolet disinfection of water consists of a purely physical, chemical-free process. The radiation initiates a photochemical reaction that destroys the genetic information contained in the DNA. The bacteria lose their reproductive capability and are destroyed. Even parasites such as Cryptosporidia or Giardia, which are extremely resistant to chemical disinfectants, are efficiently reduced. UV can also be used to remove chlorine and chloramines. This process, called photolysis, requires a higher dose than normal disinfection. The sterilized microorganisms are not removed from the water. UV disinfection does not remove dissolved organics, inorganic compounds or particles in the water. However, UV-oxidation processes can be used to simultaneously destroy trace chemical contaminants and provide high-level disinfection. It is currently in use at the reuse plant in Orange County.
When the full-scale reclaimed water plant is complete and operational it will pump 21 million gallons a day of this purified, highly treated water to the moat at Miami Metrozoo, where it will recharge our groundwater. The result will be very pure water whose quality will be near that of distilled water.
Comment
That is 21 million gallons per day that can be saved for drinking water. Apparently there is only a pilot plant open at this time.
Typically, 50% of the water used residentially is used outdoors. If residents install a submeter they will not be charged for that use, whether its for washing the car, the dog, watering the grass, or refilling the pool. A 50% reduction would be significant for most people and the savings could pay for the cost of installing the submeter. Visit www.miamidade.gov/wasd/save_wup.asp or www.miamidade.gov/wasd/save_submeter.asp for more information.
Heavy solids are separated from the wastewater stream.
Biological matter is progressively converted into a solid mass by using indigenous, water-borne micro-organisms.
Finally, the biological solids are neutralized and either disposed of or reused. The treated water may be disinfected chemically or physically.
In the case of Miami-Dade County's project, the water will go from secondary treatment through the High-Level Disinfection plant that is under construction.
How water reclamation works:
The first step is microfiltration or ultra-filtration -- a filtration process that removes contaminants from a fluid (liquid and gas) by passage through a micro-porous membrane. A typical microfiltration membrane pore size range is 0.1 to 10 micrometres (µm). (A micrometer is one millionth of a meter. For comparison, a strand of human hair is about 100 µm wide.)
Next, the water goes through reverse osmosis -- basically, a filtration process. It works by using pressure to force a solution through a membrane, retaining the solute on one side and allowing the pure solvent to pass to the other side. This is the reverse of the normal osmosis process, which is the natural movement of solvent from an area of low solute concentration, through a membrane, to an area of high solute concentration when no external pressure is applied.
Hydrogen peroxide is now added. It is commonly used to remove pollutants from wastewater and from air. It contests bacterial growth through oxygen addition. It can also be used to treat pollutants that can be easily oxidized such as iron and sulphides and pollutants that are difficult to oxidize such as dissolved solids, gasoline and pesticides.
Ultraviolet disinfection, a common treatment of drinking water that uses ultraviolet radiations to inactivate microorganisms, is then added. Ultraviolet disinfection of water consists of a purely physical, chemical-free process. The radiation initiates a photochemical reaction that destroys the genetic information contained in the DNA. The bacteria lose their reproductive capability and are destroyed. Even parasites such as Cryptosporidia or Giardia, which are extremely resistant to chemical disinfectants, are efficiently reduced. UV can also be used to remove chlorine and chloramines. This process, called photolysis, requires a higher dose than normal disinfection. The sterilized microorganisms are not removed from the water. UV disinfection does not remove dissolved organics, inorganic compounds or particles in the water. However, UV-oxidation processes can be used to simultaneously destroy trace chemical contaminants and provide high-level disinfection. It is currently in use at the reuse plant in Orange County.
When the full-scale reclaimed water plant is complete and operational it will pump 21 million gallons a day of this purified, highly treated water to the moat at Miami Metrozoo, where it will recharge our groundwater. The result will be very pure water whose quality will be near that of distilled water.
Comment
That is 21 million gallons per day that can be saved for drinking water. Apparently there is only a pilot plant open at this time.
Typically, 50% of the water used residentially is used outdoors. If residents install a submeter they will not be charged for that use, whether its for washing the car, the dog, watering the grass, or refilling the pool. A 50% reduction would be significant for most people and the savings could pay for the cost of installing the submeter. Visit www.miamidade.gov/wasd/save_wup.asp or www.miamidade.gov/wasd/save_submeter.asp for more information.
Reclaimed Water
Reclaimed Water
As Miami-Dade County’s population continues to increase, so does our demand for drinking water. Like all natural resources, the Biscayne Aquifer, Miami-Dade County’s current source of drinking water, is not limitless. The use of reclaimed water in Miami-Dade County helps preserve the Biscayne Aquifer.
Reclaimed water is highly treated, filtered and disinfected wastewater that is beneficially reused. Reclaimed water can replace or supplement groundwater supplies. Common uses for reclaimed water include irrigation, wetlands restoration, aquifer recharge, vehicle washing, air conditioning cooling towers, and other industrial uses. The use of reclaimed water is often referred to as wastewater reuse.
Miami-Dade County is currently expanding its water reclamation program and is currently evaluating several water reclamation projects, including the ambitious High-Level Disinfection project and the South Dade Wastewater Treatment Plant. For more information, read the Reuse Feasbility Study Update Report.
To assess large scale use of reclaimed water, the Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Department is designing two pilot projects. The Aquifer Recharge Pilot Project will evaluate the treatment techniques necessary for recharging the Biscayne Aquifer through the rapid infiltration of highly treated wastewater.The Coastal Wetlands Rehydration Project will investigate the applicability of using highly treated wastewater effluent to replace the historic freshwater flows that once were discharged into the coastal wetlands of Biscayne Bay.
By using reclaimed water, the Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Department is working to provide a sustainable water resource for our environment and our future.
As Miami-Dade County’s population continues to increase, so does our demand for drinking water. Like all natural resources, the Biscayne Aquifer, Miami-Dade County’s current source of drinking water, is not limitless. The use of reclaimed water in Miami-Dade County helps preserve the Biscayne Aquifer.
Reclaimed water is highly treated, filtered and disinfected wastewater that is beneficially reused. Reclaimed water can replace or supplement groundwater supplies. Common uses for reclaimed water include irrigation, wetlands restoration, aquifer recharge, vehicle washing, air conditioning cooling towers, and other industrial uses. The use of reclaimed water is often referred to as wastewater reuse.
Miami-Dade County is currently expanding its water reclamation program and is currently evaluating several water reclamation projects, including the ambitious High-Level Disinfection project and the South Dade Wastewater Treatment Plant. For more information, read the Reuse Feasbility Study Update Report.
To assess large scale use of reclaimed water, the Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Department is designing two pilot projects. The Aquifer Recharge Pilot Project will evaluate the treatment techniques necessary for recharging the Biscayne Aquifer through the rapid infiltration of highly treated wastewater.The Coastal Wetlands Rehydration Project will investigate the applicability of using highly treated wastewater effluent to replace the historic freshwater flows that once were discharged into the coastal wetlands of Biscayne Bay.
By using reclaimed water, the Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Department is working to provide a sustainable water resource for our environment and our future.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Starbucks: Multinational, multimillion dollar green corporation?
Starbucks: Multinational, multimillion dollar green corporation?
posted by: Jasmine Greene 16 hours ago
Hello,
I saw this on Care2 and thought you'd like it as well.
Care2 is the largest and most trusted information and action site for people who care to make a difference in their lives and the world.
Care2.com send We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.
19 comments
2009 marked a significant change for Starbucks. It's not just because of their net profit loss this year or the fact that they closed hundreds of stores. Starbucks has taken the initiative to build greener and more individualistic chains.
Environmental Controversies
While Starbucks has not been the center of many environmental debates, there are two notable cases where environmental advocates voiced their discontent. The first case was in regards to their cups. The hot cups are made out of 10% post-consumer waste, the plastic lining around the cup actually makes them non-recyclable. Where do all these cups go then? Into the landfill. In fact 2 billion Starbucks cups land in trash [Source: GreenDaily]. Even the plastic cups, which were modified in 2008, are not practical. Sure, they are made of polypropylene (PP), which uses 15 percent less plastic than the average PET cups and emit 45 percent less greenhouse gasses during their production. These PP cups are labeled with a No. 5 symbol at the bottom (recyclable) [Source: Starbucks], but many Starbucks don't even offer recycling.
The second major environmental issue includes the enormous amount of water that Starbucks uses. While the regular appliances like dishwashers and sinks use a large amount of water, the biggest waster is the use of the dipper well method. The method uses a continuous stream of fresh running water to rinse away food residue, to keep utensils clean and prevent bacterial growth [Source: Starbucks], however this method wastes about 6 million gallons of water a day [Source: ABC News].
Starbucks' Initiative
Earlier in 2009, Starbucks responded to these concerns. Partnered with EarthWatch, Starbucks is looking to make all of their cups completely recyclable and actually offer recycling in store [Source: Starbucks]. While it won't be until 2015 that all Starbucks offer these cups, many are taking the initiative to reduce the amount of paper and plastic waste. In fact, in Manhattan, seven stores took part in a cup recycling pilot program offered by the Green Global USA’s Coalition for Resource Recovery (CoRR). The paper cups will be collected and and combined with old corrugated cardboard for recycling [Source: Earth911]. For those planning to stay at Starbucks, the company plans on reintroducing "for here" ceramic cups in stores by 2010, and they also offer $0.10 to people who bring in their own mugs [Source: GreenBiz].
Starbucks has also addressed their water usage and in 2009 they plan to have a complete water footrpint audit to see how much water they are actually using. At the moment, while many stores are still using the dipper well method, many have converted to high pressure dishwashers that use a fraction of the water (less than one gallon per cycle) and train their employees to to keep the refrigeration coils on ice machines clean. This reduces the amount of latent heat that would make ice melt faster [Source: Starbucks]. The company has actually reduced their water usage from 26 gallons/SF in 2006 to 24 in 2008 [Source: Environmental Leader].
But Starbucks is going above and beyond the call of duty and has an entire environmental initiative to make their stores even more environmentally friendly. Earlier this year, three flagship stores, two in Seattle and one in Paris, set the standard for the store. Rather than demolishing and throwing out materials from the previous tenants, Starbucks is actually reusing these items to create chains that have individuality and reflect their respective neighborhoods. But it's not just about reclaiming the materials, Starbucks is seeking LEED certification for all new company-owned stores beginning next year and, in conjunction with 3Degrees, also buys wind renewable energy certificates for more than 211 million kilowatt hours. This actually makes Starbucks one of the largest purchasers of green energy in the US [Source: Environmental Leader]. But they don't stop there. In November of 2009 Starbucks announced that they would switch over standard bulbs to LEDs in over 8,000 locations, allowing them to consume 10% less electricity. This is part of a larger goal to cut energy consumption by 25% by the end of 2010 [Source: Treehugger].
While many consumers and environmentalists have denounced Starbucks in the past, it appears that they have answered almost all of their customers' concerns. It remains to be seen if all of they meet all of these goals, but Starbucks has definitely moved beyond their greenwashing methods of the past.
Read more: starbucks, environment & wildlife, starbucks green initiative, starbucks eco-friendly
Otto V. says
Nov 22, 2009 9:04 AM
If the service would improve, coffee sales would improve especially in the South Bay areas of California.
Natasha S. says
Nov 22, 2009 8:30 AM
Every little bit helps in restoring health to the planet. I especially like the $.10 discount for bringing one's own cup - for many that will be a savings of $.50/week - $2.00 per month - $24.00 per year - or more and 300 paper cups saved. "Pas mal", as the french say. So, I guess I can be thankful for the little things.
Could Starbucks do more? Sure. Will they? That would be very nice. At least they are taking steps in the right direction. Now, if they would pay their baristas more and accept lower corporate profits, that would be even better.
It's the old battle of finding a balance between money and humanity. Which one do we value more? And I say we, because where each of us spend our money determines which side of the balance carries more weight/importance/influence.
Freya The Wanderer says
Nov 22, 2009 8:20 AM
We need to thank Starbucks with our bucks. As long as they continue to go green, we should buy lattes, or at least cups of tea, there.
Wowsux S. says
Nov 22, 2009 7:25 AM
This is the same Starbucks that refused to donate coffee to our troops?
No, after having to read their political sayings on the sides of the cups, I have purchased my last Starbucks anything. They should have stuck to selling coffee and kept their politics off the product.
There are other places to get a cup of coffee, my kitchen for instance.
Jo Fuller says
Nov 22, 2009 7:19 AM
At least this is a start!! More companies should take heed.
PL T. says
Nov 22, 2009 7:07 AM
It's a good start, and I applaud their current and future efforts, especially the Fair Trade coffees. But until Starbucks expedites and actually manifests their green mission, my family and I will choose an independent coffee shop 8x/10.
I say this because we are not all that enamored with their service. It's too variable! Some baristas (and I use the term loosely, since they really don't pull the shots any more) are refreshingly cordial, while others are sullen and condescending - definitely not the OTC personality that belongs in the service industry. Generation X'er's may not care, but we Boomer's prefer a pleasant and polite affect with our expensive coffee.
And while we're on the topic of service - ENOUGH WITH THE UP$ELL! It's a transparent ploy to $ell $omething el$e, and it's obvious that we are not being informed about anything special, only being leaned on to buy more,more,more. So unless the customer is blind, the pastries, etc, are right there in plain view - if we wanted something other than what we ordered, we're capable of saying so.
I realize this annoying practice is not limited to Starbucks, but ditching the 'upsell' sure would be a great improvement there, because good service that backs up a good 'green' product will influence the decision as to where I buy my coffee - and anything else, for that matter.
Marthe B. says
Nov 22, 2009 5:44 AM
starbucks is my favorite place for having a fresh delicious coffee,workers there are nice and friendly and i really would participate more if they'd ask people to bring their own mug,tissues are now made from recycable paper,i wish more details on the coffee packs about fair trade,all their coffee should be from fair trade,i hope they'll do more and more,for peace too:)in palestine and israel
Chad M. says
Nov 22, 2009 5:36 AM
This a start, I guess. But why didn't they start this sooner? Yet another corporate company that is only concerned about profits and nothing else. Yes, profits are needed to stay in business but there are other concerns, as well. The environment is everything and companies like Starbucks need to pay more attention to this. Like most big companies, they'll just enough to shut people up. Sorry, Starbucks, but you haven't done enough to pull me away from my locally owned, much smaller, and much, much greener, coffee shop.
Vladimir Kotenev says
Nov 22, 2009 5:35 AM
Starbuch green strategies claims are fake since I know Starbucks corporate people. It is fishy!
Christoph Wuth says
Nov 22, 2009 5:23 AM
$tarbucks should offer an attractive discount to patrons who pour their coffee in their own cup, and clean up afterwards.
Comment
My local starbucks does allow me to have their old coffee grounds to put in my garden and on my lawn from time to time, but there is a LOT more they could be doing. All of their drink cups could, and should, be recycled. I have spoken to them and they say they really cant do any recycling until corporate okays it. Thats hard to understand because other Starbucks stores 5 miles away recycle regularly. The folks at Starbucks seem to be willing, as they say they have a lot of cardboard and plastic milk cartons that could be recycled, but arent.
posted by: Jasmine Greene 16 hours ago
Hello,
I saw this on Care2 and thought you'd like it as well.
Care2 is the largest and most trusted information and action site for people who care to make a difference in their lives and the world.
Care2.com send We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.
19 comments
2009 marked a significant change for Starbucks. It's not just because of their net profit loss this year or the fact that they closed hundreds of stores. Starbucks has taken the initiative to build greener and more individualistic chains.
Environmental Controversies
While Starbucks has not been the center of many environmental debates, there are two notable cases where environmental advocates voiced their discontent. The first case was in regards to their cups. The hot cups are made out of 10% post-consumer waste, the plastic lining around the cup actually makes them non-recyclable. Where do all these cups go then? Into the landfill. In fact 2 billion Starbucks cups land in trash [Source: GreenDaily]. Even the plastic cups, which were modified in 2008, are not practical. Sure, they are made of polypropylene (PP), which uses 15 percent less plastic than the average PET cups and emit 45 percent less greenhouse gasses during their production. These PP cups are labeled with a No. 5 symbol at the bottom (recyclable) [Source: Starbucks], but many Starbucks don't even offer recycling.
The second major environmental issue includes the enormous amount of water that Starbucks uses. While the regular appliances like dishwashers and sinks use a large amount of water, the biggest waster is the use of the dipper well method. The method uses a continuous stream of fresh running water to rinse away food residue, to keep utensils clean and prevent bacterial growth [Source: Starbucks], however this method wastes about 6 million gallons of water a day [Source: ABC News].
Starbucks' Initiative
Earlier in 2009, Starbucks responded to these concerns. Partnered with EarthWatch, Starbucks is looking to make all of their cups completely recyclable and actually offer recycling in store [Source: Starbucks]. While it won't be until 2015 that all Starbucks offer these cups, many are taking the initiative to reduce the amount of paper and plastic waste. In fact, in Manhattan, seven stores took part in a cup recycling pilot program offered by the Green Global USA’s Coalition for Resource Recovery (CoRR). The paper cups will be collected and and combined with old corrugated cardboard for recycling [Source: Earth911]. For those planning to stay at Starbucks, the company plans on reintroducing "for here" ceramic cups in stores by 2010, and they also offer $0.10 to people who bring in their own mugs [Source: GreenBiz].
Starbucks has also addressed their water usage and in 2009 they plan to have a complete water footrpint audit to see how much water they are actually using. At the moment, while many stores are still using the dipper well method, many have converted to high pressure dishwashers that use a fraction of the water (less than one gallon per cycle) and train their employees to to keep the refrigeration coils on ice machines clean. This reduces the amount of latent heat that would make ice melt faster [Source: Starbucks]. The company has actually reduced their water usage from 26 gallons/SF in 2006 to 24 in 2008 [Source: Environmental Leader].
But Starbucks is going above and beyond the call of duty and has an entire environmental initiative to make their stores even more environmentally friendly. Earlier this year, three flagship stores, two in Seattle and one in Paris, set the standard for the store. Rather than demolishing and throwing out materials from the previous tenants, Starbucks is actually reusing these items to create chains that have individuality and reflect their respective neighborhoods. But it's not just about reclaiming the materials, Starbucks is seeking LEED certification for all new company-owned stores beginning next year and, in conjunction with 3Degrees, also buys wind renewable energy certificates for more than 211 million kilowatt hours. This actually makes Starbucks one of the largest purchasers of green energy in the US [Source: Environmental Leader]. But they don't stop there. In November of 2009 Starbucks announced that they would switch over standard bulbs to LEDs in over 8,000 locations, allowing them to consume 10% less electricity. This is part of a larger goal to cut energy consumption by 25% by the end of 2010 [Source: Treehugger].
While many consumers and environmentalists have denounced Starbucks in the past, it appears that they have answered almost all of their customers' concerns. It remains to be seen if all of they meet all of these goals, but Starbucks has definitely moved beyond their greenwashing methods of the past.
Read more: starbucks, environment & wildlife, starbucks green initiative, starbucks eco-friendly
Otto V. says
Nov 22, 2009 9:04 AM
If the service would improve, coffee sales would improve especially in the South Bay areas of California.
Natasha S. says
Nov 22, 2009 8:30 AM
Every little bit helps in restoring health to the planet. I especially like the $.10 discount for bringing one's own cup - for many that will be a savings of $.50/week - $2.00 per month - $24.00 per year - or more and 300 paper cups saved. "Pas mal", as the french say. So, I guess I can be thankful for the little things.
Could Starbucks do more? Sure. Will they? That would be very nice. At least they are taking steps in the right direction. Now, if they would pay their baristas more and accept lower corporate profits, that would be even better.
It's the old battle of finding a balance between money and humanity. Which one do we value more? And I say we, because where each of us spend our money determines which side of the balance carries more weight/importance/influence.
Freya The Wanderer says
Nov 22, 2009 8:20 AM
We need to thank Starbucks with our bucks. As long as they continue to go green, we should buy lattes, or at least cups of tea, there.
Wowsux S. says
Nov 22, 2009 7:25 AM
This is the same Starbucks that refused to donate coffee to our troops?
No, after having to read their political sayings on the sides of the cups, I have purchased my last Starbucks anything. They should have stuck to selling coffee and kept their politics off the product.
There are other places to get a cup of coffee, my kitchen for instance.
Jo Fuller says
Nov 22, 2009 7:19 AM
At least this is a start!! More companies should take heed.
PL T. says
Nov 22, 2009 7:07 AM
It's a good start, and I applaud their current and future efforts, especially the Fair Trade coffees. But until Starbucks expedites and actually manifests their green mission, my family and I will choose an independent coffee shop 8x/10.
I say this because we are not all that enamored with their service. It's too variable! Some baristas (and I use the term loosely, since they really don't pull the shots any more) are refreshingly cordial, while others are sullen and condescending - definitely not the OTC personality that belongs in the service industry. Generation X'er's may not care, but we Boomer's prefer a pleasant and polite affect with our expensive coffee.
And while we're on the topic of service - ENOUGH WITH THE UP$ELL! It's a transparent ploy to $ell $omething el$e, and it's obvious that we are not being informed about anything special, only being leaned on to buy more,more,more. So unless the customer is blind, the pastries, etc, are right there in plain view - if we wanted something other than what we ordered, we're capable of saying so.
I realize this annoying practice is not limited to Starbucks, but ditching the 'upsell' sure would be a great improvement there, because good service that backs up a good 'green' product will influence the decision as to where I buy my coffee - and anything else, for that matter.
Marthe B. says
Nov 22, 2009 5:44 AM
starbucks is my favorite place for having a fresh delicious coffee,workers there are nice and friendly and i really would participate more if they'd ask people to bring their own mug,tissues are now made from recycable paper,i wish more details on the coffee packs about fair trade,all their coffee should be from fair trade,i hope they'll do more and more,for peace too:)in palestine and israel
Chad M. says
Nov 22, 2009 5:36 AM
This a start, I guess. But why didn't they start this sooner? Yet another corporate company that is only concerned about profits and nothing else. Yes, profits are needed to stay in business but there are other concerns, as well. The environment is everything and companies like Starbucks need to pay more attention to this. Like most big companies, they'll just enough to shut people up. Sorry, Starbucks, but you haven't done enough to pull me away from my locally owned, much smaller, and much, much greener, coffee shop.
Vladimir Kotenev says
Nov 22, 2009 5:35 AM
Starbuch green strategies claims are fake since I know Starbucks corporate people. It is fishy!
Christoph Wuth says
Nov 22, 2009 5:23 AM
$tarbucks should offer an attractive discount to patrons who pour their coffee in their own cup, and clean up afterwards.
Comment
My local starbucks does allow me to have their old coffee grounds to put in my garden and on my lawn from time to time, but there is a LOT more they could be doing. All of their drink cups could, and should, be recycled. I have spoken to them and they say they really cant do any recycling until corporate okays it. Thats hard to understand because other Starbucks stores 5 miles away recycle regularly. The folks at Starbucks seem to be willing, as they say they have a lot of cardboard and plastic milk cartons that could be recycled, but arent.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Daimler Brings Car-Sharing to the Lone Star State
Daimler Brings Car-Sharing to the Lone Star State
By Tony Borroz November 18, 2009 | 3:20 pm | Categories: Infrastructure, Mass Transit
Swing by Austin, Texas next year, and you’ll see people driving Smart cars they don’t even own. Daimler’s finalized a deal to bring car-sharing to the Texas capital, something we told you was in the works back in March.
Austin will be the American showcase for car2go and an experiment to see how car sharing plays out here in the states. Yes, we know about Zipcar, but car2go is aimed more at a business-to-business model. Or more accurately it’s a business-to-government model, since car2go will be in a partnership with the City of Austin aimed at providing personal, on-demand mobility for more than 13,000 city employees.
This first phase starts with 200 smart fortwo vehicles and a defined group of users, namely, city employees. Car2go aims to increase the number of vehicles at some point in 2010 and make them accessible to everyone. The goal is to make city driving as easy as using a mobile phone, planning for the system to be easy, flexible, reasonably priced and work as a progressive solution to growing challenges of urban mobility.
The car sharing system is fairly uncomplicated. The fortwos are available 24/7 to all members. Members can grab any available vehicle on the street, or, if you’re one of those plan ahead sorts, you can reserve a car online ahead of time.
Being able to use a “car on demand” is a significant difference from traditional car-sharing programs like Zipcar, and another big difference is that car2go allows you to use the vehicle for as long as you like without committing to a specific return time. Also, car2go allows users to make one way trips. Charges are not based on distance, but on time, with rates starting by the minute.
“Car2go is an innovative answer to current and future mobility needs in urban areas. We are pleased with the success we achieved in Ulm, Germany – the first car2go city - and we are ready for the next logical step on our way to an international rollout,” says Daimler board member Dr. Thomas Weber.
Let’s see if Austin can do as well as Ulm, when car2go Smarts are rented as many as 500 to 1,000 times a day and used by 15,000 customers — the equivalent of more than 15 percent of city residents with a drivers license.
By Tony Borroz November 18, 2009 | 3:20 pm | Categories: Infrastructure, Mass Transit
Swing by Austin, Texas next year, and you’ll see people driving Smart cars they don’t even own. Daimler’s finalized a deal to bring car-sharing to the Texas capital, something we told you was in the works back in March.
Austin will be the American showcase for car2go and an experiment to see how car sharing plays out here in the states. Yes, we know about Zipcar, but car2go is aimed more at a business-to-business model. Or more accurately it’s a business-to-government model, since car2go will be in a partnership with the City of Austin aimed at providing personal, on-demand mobility for more than 13,000 city employees.
This first phase starts with 200 smart fortwo vehicles and a defined group of users, namely, city employees. Car2go aims to increase the number of vehicles at some point in 2010 and make them accessible to everyone. The goal is to make city driving as easy as using a mobile phone, planning for the system to be easy, flexible, reasonably priced and work as a progressive solution to growing challenges of urban mobility.
The car sharing system is fairly uncomplicated. The fortwos are available 24/7 to all members. Members can grab any available vehicle on the street, or, if you’re one of those plan ahead sorts, you can reserve a car online ahead of time.
Being able to use a “car on demand” is a significant difference from traditional car-sharing programs like Zipcar, and another big difference is that car2go allows you to use the vehicle for as long as you like without committing to a specific return time. Also, car2go allows users to make one way trips. Charges are not based on distance, but on time, with rates starting by the minute.
“Car2go is an innovative answer to current and future mobility needs in urban areas. We are pleased with the success we achieved in Ulm, Germany – the first car2go city - and we are ready for the next logical step on our way to an international rollout,” says Daimler board member Dr. Thomas Weber.
Let’s see if Austin can do as well as Ulm, when car2go Smarts are rented as many as 500 to 1,000 times a day and used by 15,000 customers — the equivalent of more than 15 percent of city residents with a drivers license.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)