“If I’d asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse.” Henry Ford

Sometimes big leaps in innovation have to be done by a true believer – who doesn’t listen to their customers or conventional wisdom – but sees what is possible even though most people can’t see that far ahead.

Who really wanted a personal computer or a laptop in 1976 when Apple Computer was formed? Who even believed that such a thing was possible or affordable? The electronic gadgetry of modern urban life would have seemed like pure science fiction then – unlikely to ever exist or to be affordable.

Sometimes I try to look at green ideas through that viewpoint. Let go of the economic and technological realities of this year – and imagine what might come to pass in the world of green and sustainability. If we can’t imagine life without the “horse” – how will we ever accomplish the fundamental changes that are needed to move forward?

Part of the change is imagining what could be invented – that a horse-less carriage is possible. But another part of effecting change is to conceptualize and put together systems that are needed to implement new technologies on a society-wide basis. Henry Ford didn’t invent the first automobile – many others came before him. But he did implement an early and economically viable way of manufacturing and marketing cars – and that’s what’s remembered as a watershed that made a major difference.

I think that one of the things that makes green business concepts so overwhelming at times is the breadth and scope of change that’s involved. Changing just one component or one portion isn’t enough. Greening affects the whole system and the entire supply chain. But it starts with envisioning fundamentally different ways to accomplish things. At this point I can’t completely see how we can replace the fossil fuel and other unsustainable “horses” we’re used to, but I keep wondering.

For more about Henry Ford and innovation go to The Henry Ford

Can’t We Just Get Along? ASTM BEPA Standard Promotes Agreement on How to Measure Building Energy Performance

I was recently at the ASTM E50 committee meeting in St Louis. The new Building Energy Performance Assessment (BEPA) standard is coming along fast and its gaining wide acceptance. According to the leader of the BEPA committee, Tony Buonicore, this methodology for collection and assessment of data related to building energy performance has buy-in from a lot of important organizations in the field, including ASHRAE, DOE, EPA and US Green Building Council. They are all agreed that standardizing the rules for collecting data will benefit everyone and help synchronize data collection for standards such as ASHRAE energy conservation standards or Energy Star, sponsored by EPA and DOE.

A lot of the items in the BEPA standard are pretty basic. For example it defines gross floor area, the way to calculate the size of the building. The existing situation is that there are multiple ways to calculate the size of a building. One standard may let you include the square footage of an indoor parking area which another does not. One standard may include the square footage for hallways, closets, stairways and air shafts while another does not. These different definitions can lead to significantly different building size numbers – and since the building square footage is used as the denominator of a key equation (energy use intensity = annual energy consumption ÷ building square footage) – the difference in the square footage number can dramatically affect the result. On the one hand the standard is full of boring and nit-picking details but on the other hand once major organizations agree on a data collection format and get the definitions to agree, a lot of data becomes more meaningful and comparable between different programs going forward.

One of Tony Buonicore’s beefs is that benchmarking efforts for energy performance of commercial buildings have so far been inadequate. Benchmarking is the way that similar types and regions of buildings are compared (for example strip shopping malls in northern climates) and an average or top quartile energy performance number is calculated by comparing the energy use intensity among the buildings in the database. There are just not enough buildings with comparable data entered into existing databases used for benchmarking commercial buildings in the US. I can’t do justice to all Tony’s ideas – so take a look at his whitepaper on benchmarking: http://www.bepinfo.com/images/PDF/BEPNwhitepaper-AB-3-30-10.pdf Although the ASTM BEPA standard won’t solve all the problems with benchmarking by itself, the use of a common data collection standard by many organizations will allow the improvement of benchmarking databases and will encourage stronger benchmarking initiatives.

The business of creating standards is not very exciting. There’s a lot of time spent debating definitions and minutia. But the power of reasonable, widely accepted standards is huge and can benefit a host of energy assessment projects and help measure the value created by improving building energy efficiency.

Harriet Greenwood

How Do You Go Green With Measurable Results in a Time of Creative Chaos and Competing Ideas?

The world of “green” is chaotic and unregulated. Almost anything can pass for “green” and it’s really hard to decide what to do and when to do it. Not to mention that the rules keep changing as new incentives and technologies pop up all the time. The difference between actual green accomplishments and green hype requires measurements and standards. The current state of chaos is both a blessing and a curse. It’s a blessing because there is a choice of standards to apply. If you have an overall strategy – you can pick the best standards to support that strategy. There’s freedom to pick what to measure – then make it work. The curse…. well I already discussed that.

The dictionary says that chaos is a state of utter confusion or the inherent unpredictability in the behavior of a natural system such as the atmosphere or boiling water. Another definition is the confused, unorganized state of primordial matter before the creation of distinct forms. The opposite of chaos is cosmos – an orderly harmonious universe – which seems like a lofty but attractive goal.

But what to do? How can you make progress in the midst of chaos? I think that to start with you need a compass and a map. The compass is an appropriate standard to use to point the way and provide a scale of measurements. The map is a strategic plan which sets the priorities and time frame.

Yes I am a geek for standards…. and most of my friends get blank looks on their faces when I start to enthuse about ASTM or ASHRAE or LEED. But I still think that picking and understanding the right standards pack a powerful punch and can start to make sense out of chaos. Once you have your standard or standards – you can start by measuring where you are to begin with – your baseline. It may be possible to benchmark against other similar buildings or businesses by comparing your baseline number to published benchmarking statistics. So now you have some direction about what to do – it’s usually easy to see that some areas need improvement. You have a starting point and a compass!

But how do you go on and move forward? A strategic plan is crucial and then you can grapple with those delightful financial trade-offs. Where are the easy and low-cost items to address? What’s a reasonable timeframe to address them? What’s the wish list and time frame for big-ticket items?

Luckily, more often than not, there are fruitful low-cost ways to start. With a compass and a map there are ways to get creative and chart a sensible path through chaos. When you’re going green the learning never stops as new incentives and technologies keep changing the cost/benefit calculation. It helps to learn to love innovation and chaos – because both are here to stay for a while!

Harriet Greenwood
greenwood@envreview.com

Why are standards important to Greening?

“Green” is in all the headlines, but how do we know what it actually means? Standards are the key to defining “Green”. Although not widely understood, standards are essential to getting a greening project on the right track. Standards may not sound exciting but they have the potential to be the engine of the green movement.

I’ve been involved with national and international standards with ASTM for almost 20 years – and many of my friends think I’m nuts for being fascinated with the minutiae of precise definitions and clearly defined steps in a standardized practice. The truth is that because of ASTM standards, a powerful consulting industry has grown from the ground up during those 20 years, related to Phase I Environmental Assessments for real estate lending. The standardized definitions and procedures in the ASTM practice have helped me when I was a consultant by identifying what I did or did not need to do, and supplied liability protection by providing a precise scope of work. Standards also helped me later on as a banker, when I was ordering the assessments from consulting firms. Any consultant I contacted, from Maine to California, was working from the same well-understood scope of work and could price competitively. The good thing about standards is that you don’t have to be limited by them. They offer a basic template that you can add to depending on the situation.

For greening projects, widely recognized national standards don’t yet exist in many areas. Many current standards can be confusing and full of jargon and it would take an entire article to explain the complexities of each one. For green buildings, LEED standards are becoming well-known but may be too time consuming and expensive for some situations. Energy Star is a widely recognized US EPA and DOE standard that can apply to buildings, appliances and other products. ASTM is working on a Building Energy Performance Standard (BEPA) that standardizes the data collection process for measuring the energy performance of a building. ASHRAE has a set of highly technical energy efficiency standards for heating, ventilation and cooling systems. When you get into the poorly defined realm of green even more standards abound and range from very detailed San Francisco Green Business Program Standards to the Walmart Supplier Sustainability Assessment to Washington DC’s Greenopia ratings. At the moment there are so many standards related to green to choose from, that an important job for me as a green consultant is to help pick the right one or ones for the situation.

So maybe I am a geek when it comes to standards. But standards really are important – and someone’s got to love them!

Harriet Greenwood
greenwood@envreview.com
313-441-1414

Free to be Green

I met my friend Beth three years ago when we had the same career counselor at an outplacement firm in the Detroit area. Both of us had worked for Fortune 500 corporations, I was in banking and she in automotive engineering. Both of us had been fascinated over the years with sustainable business and green building ideas. Both of us had been frustrated by various pressures and constraints in our corporate jobs and felt there was a lot of important work related to green that we wanted to contribute to – but it just wasn’t possible. That’s when the career counselor suggested that Beth call me because we had a lot in common – and she was right!

I was laid off from banking in 2004 and have had my own business since 2005. Beth left the auto industry in 2006 and is now established as a corporate coach. Both of us found freedom to innovate as solo entrepreneurs that was lacking in our roles as corporate executives. I do not want to imply that it’s easy to go from the safety net of a regular paycheck and corporate benefits to the tightrope act of entrepreneurship. Personally I don’t know that I would have made the leap if I hadn’t been pushed! But now that I’m here – there’s a lot to like. I really like being able to take a long-term view of what’s important and what’s possible. Green consulting is not exactly a thriving field in the Midwest at the moment, but the needs are there and the potential is huge. I have to deal with my bottom line as does any business owner, but I can also budget the time to study for the LEED green building exam, learn energy auditing or blue-sky about sustainable business strategy.

In a corporate job there was an emphasis on face time, being at your desk and lots of passive time attending meetings. Yes I sometimes miss the paycheck and the benefits – but I do appreciate the freedom to think and ask “What if…”
By the way – check out Beth’s website at http://www.emiakininassociates.com

Is There Anything Green about Layoffs?

Living in the Detroit area, I’ve certainly seen and experienced a lot of the downsizing/layoff fever. I was really taken with the recent article in Newsweek, “Layoff the Layoffs” The article has the subheadline: ”Our overreliance on downsizing is killing workers, the economy and even the bottom line.”

I agree with the premise of the article – that staff reductions are a dangerous way to deal with a business downturn and often have numerous unintended side effects. One way to describe sustainable business is a concern with People, Planet and Profits. Layoffs clearly hurt people – not only the people laid off but a ripple effect for their families, neighbors and businesses in their community. Newsweek points out that their former employer gets hurt by the ripple effect as well through the loss of organizational knowledge and declines in employee morale and loyalty among those still employed. When the economy starts to rebound and it’s time to build up a business – the foundation for growth may be lacking. If a business is really caught in a downward spiral (the buggy-whip factory), layoffs won’t be enough to save it.

What does this have to do with Green? As in every part of green business, strategy is key. Clearly for many industries in these times, layoffs are unavoidable. But how they are done and who gets cut matters. Areas with the potential to innovate and grow should be protected and nurtured as much as possible during hard times. Pruning should be done with an eye to the shape of the company in years to come. The three-legged stool of People, Planet and Profit should be kept in balance with consideration for each of the three legs. In hard times survival may be the short-term goal – but Green demands an old-fashioned long-term view to show the payoffs.

Harriet Greenwood
Greenwood Solutions LLC
Dearborn, Michigan
greenwood@envreview.com

Greening is a Verb

Greening is a verb – you have to do something with an orientation to sustainability and the future. It’s not a passive idea – greening is not business as usual. It’s a shift from the practices of the past – or maybe a return to old-fashioned ideas of “waste not, want not”.

Going green means different things to different businesses. At this point in time, in 2010, there are few widely recognized standards or benchmarking systems for green or sustainable products or practices. That can be a drawback – but it can also be an advantage since anyone wanting to go green has the opportunity to define the term for their own business and determine what goals are important and how to measure progress toward green goals.

Some of the common measurables include:
• Carbon footprint
• Energy efficiency
• Water efficiency
• Waste reduction/recycling
• Decreased use of toxic materials
• Manufacturing cost reduction

Identifying reputable standards to use as a measuring stick – and then choosing the best fit for that company is a key part of a successful greening program. Several similar standards may exist but the choice of the most relevant standard(s) from the point of view of the company and important customers is fundamental to success.

Old fashioned frugality is part of going green. My parents and grandparents told stories about coming through hard times by being thrifty – making things last, re-using old clothes and old buttons, being self-reliant. Going green is based on many of those ideas – with the addition of new technologies and new thinking which has expanded our community and our world. Every business can benefit from increasing efficiency in a variety of areas ranging from smart metering to optimize energy use to smarter printing and paper use policies to reduce non-essential paper waste. Companies that go deeper into the green concept may use green purchasing procedures to reduce toxics or institute “cradle to grave” or “cradle to cradle” management of their products or wastes to reduce waste and optimize recycling.

Lean engineering with its efficiency boosting impact can be related to green. Lean to green is a popular term among many engineers and ties the impacts of maximizing process efficiency to improvements related to going green. Communication programs for people working together on the shop floor can result in innovative and effective ideas that bring measurable improvements.

One of the first jobs for a consultant in greening is to work with the client to define the potential advantages and strategies of going green for that business. Appropriate standards are then chosen and a timeline and an action program are developed. Communication within the company is crucial and a strong commitment and sense of strategic direction from senior management is a key factor in long-term success.

Once green improvements have been accomplished, it’s time for some publicity and marketing to make sure that customers and potential customers know about these achievements.

Going green takes time, effort and commitment. Opportunities for continuous improvement abound – but measurable progress on a short-term basis is critical. The advantages of greening a business are huge and long-lasting. A green business is taking action on the road to building a strong, competitive future in a 21st century marketplace.

Harriet Greenwood, LEED AP
Greenwood Solutions, LLC
313-441-1414
www.Greeningteam.wordpress.com