Subscribe RSS

COLUMBUS, OH — A new life cycle assessment (LCA) tool developed by the Ohio State University Center for Resilience brings a new dimension to LCA by taking into account ecosystem services like soil erosion, pollination, flood prevention and cropland.
Eco-LCA is a free, online tool that acts as a complement to other LCA tools by showing how different products and materials have different impacts on nature.

"Typically most LCAs tend to focus on emissions and their impact, and they will account for some natural resources, maybe some fossil fuels, maybe some minerals," said Bhavik Bakshi, an Ohio State University professor who helped develop Eco-LCA. "But what our work and what our tool does is it also tries to account for other services that ecosystems offer."

Those services are divided into four areas: Supporting services (soil, pollination, sunlight, hydropotential, geothermal, wind), regulating services (flood protection, disease regulation, carbon sequestration), provisioning services (fuels, ores, water, timber, cropland), and cultural services (spiritual and recreational benefits).

Eco-LCA is best used to compare items, and the online tutorial provides a walkthrough for comparing paper, foam, ceramic and glass cups.

"The tool itself is going to be coarse," Bakshi said, "so it will give you a rough ballpark of how different products might compare to one another."

Eco-LCA isn't aimed at any specific type of user, he said. "It's for people who are interested in understanding the broader environmental implications of products," Bakshi said, listing off possible users as varied as industrial practitioners, consumers, researchers and policymakers.

Eco-LCA was created and is offered for free thanks to funding from the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Plantation - CC license by Flickr user CIAT - International Center for Tropical Agricultu, Photo by Neil Palmer (CIAT)

WASHINGTON, DC — Landscape architects and experts have launched a sweeping test of a sustainability rating and assessment system for greenspaces in the built environment with a pilot that involves more than 150 sites in 34 states, Canada, Iceland and Spain.

The pilot is being conducted by the Sustainable Sites Initiative, abbreviated as SITES, which led the development of the voluntary rating program that its creators hope will be used like the LEED system -- but one focused on landscapes and greenspaces.

The system created by the partner organizations behind SITES -- the American Society of Landscape Architects, the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center at The University of Texas at Austin and the United States Botanic Garden -- is intended for use on sites of all types to gauge and certify their sustainability.

The standards, which were released last fall, can be applied to landscaping at commercial and public buildings, transportation corridors and parks. It's not necessary for buildings to be present, but the sites must be designed landscapes or greenspaces.

SITES opened applications for the pilot in November and expected to receive perhaps 75 strong contenders, according to Steve Windhager, director of the Landscape Restoration & Sustainable Sites Initiative at the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center at the University of Texas at Austin. The organization received more than four times that many.

"We were overwhelmed, but in a good way," Windhager told GreenerBuildings.com. "We received 354 applications."

The pilot includes projects at corporate headquarters, industrial complexes and educational centers as well as high-profile efforts for the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History & Culture, the New Orleans’ Lower Ninth Ward Sustainable Infrastructure Project and the Indianapolis Super Bowl Village. They range from less than an acre to hundreds in size and involve relatively modest to multimillion-dollar budgets.

In addition to providing visual and physical respite from the built environment, the sites in the pilot are designed to reduce environmental impacts not only of the location itself, but also the lands around it in many cases. For example, sites in the pilot may restore habitats, rehabilitate landfills, clean and store stormwater in addition to lowering the urban heat island effect or fostering outdoor education.

“It’s exciting that many of these pilot projects -- eight in every 10 -- will revitalize previously built landscapes,” Susan Rieff, executive director of the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center said in a statement this week. “We can address the serious environmental challenges the world faces in its existing communities by consciously redeveloping these spaces for ecological health as well as beauty.”

Under the SITES system, locations are rated on a 250-point scale for possible certification at four levels. Points are awarded for elements such as site selection, water, soil, vegetation, materials, human health and well-being, construction and maintenance. Sites attaining 40, 50, 60 or 80 percent of possible points are awarded one-, two-, three- or four-star certification, respectively.

Projects participating in the pilot are in various stages of development; some are still in the design phase, others are near completion. They all have until June 2012 to provide feedback about the benchmarking program to SITES. The data will be used in the certification process for the projects and to revise the assessment system. SITES has a goal of releasing a final version of its rating system and reference guide in 2013.
Details about the projects selected for the pilot are available at www.sustainablesites.org/pilot. More information about the Sustainable Sites Initiative and its rating system is available from "The Sustainable Sites Initiative: Guidelines and Performance Benchmarks 2009." (pdf) and "The Case for Sustainable Landscapes" (pdf).

Category: | 0 Comments



TOKYO, Japan — Toshiba, Samsung and Dell have all taken a hit the latest quarterly rankings from Greenpeace on green electronics for failing to meet their self-imposed deadlines on removing toxic chemicals from their products.

The 15th edition of the NGO's Guide to Greener Electronics finds all three companies losing ground, while Nokia and Sony Ericsson retain their top spots.

Toshiba, which had previously been ranked third, fell to 14th, and Samsung dropped from 7th to 13th; Dell actually improved its score overall despite failing to meet its goal to remove toxics, in part for joining in an effort to remove toxics from electronics in the European market. Dell, however, was the subject of a protest by Greenpeace today, with activists gathering outside the company's headquarters with the message for CEO Michael Dell: "Michael, What the Dell? Design Out Toxics."

"These industry giants cannot claim to be green until they follow through on their commitments to eliminate substances from their products that are harmful to the environment and public health," Greenpeace International Toxics Campaigner Iza Kruszewska said in a statement. "Companies that are still using PVC and BFRs in their products need to follow the lead of Apple, HP and Indian brands HCL and Wipro who are phasing out these toxic chemicals."

The companies most improved in the rankings this time around are Panasonic, which climbed to 6th place from 10th; Sony, which moved into a tie with Panasonic; Hewlett-Packard's move into 8th place from 11th; and Sharp moving to 9th place from 13th.

Other notable drops in the rankings are LG Electronics, which fell from 6th to 12th place for poor reporting on the energy efficiency of its products. LGE's products have led to criticism of the Energy Star certification process, an overhaul of Energy Star's methodology, and a renewed commitment from LG to provide truly energy efficient products.

More coverage of Greenpeace's quarterly results is available from GreenBiz.com; the latest rankings are also available from GreenBiz.com, and for more information, visit the Greenpeace website.



With the launch of Walmart's sustainability scorecard and a growing interest in the retail world for greener products, suppliers need to know how to anticipate and respond to retailers' sustainability demands.

"Retail: A Pivot Point for Sustainability," a new report from Five Winds International and GreenBiz Reports, looks at the current situation of retailer, consumer and government demands for products with positive environmental and social benefits.

While Walmart is the first to create a method for scoring its supplies on such topics as energy, waste, water and ethical production, it also has one of the broadest reaches with the ability to influence the products provided by suppliers and the products available to an enormous amount of consumers.

The report also asks some important questions about the accuracy and viability of some retailers' actions.

"Can low cost, quality and sustainability go hand in hand? We suspect not, but for now retailers like Walmart and IKEA are driving a lot of action in this area," it says.

And although a retail company might not appear to be the best source for determining what makes a product or supplier sustainable, the report points out that "Walmart wisely engaged an army of NGO's, academics, leading suppliers and government regulators to help them design a system for rating suppliers' sustainability performance."

To help suppliers and producers grapple with current and future sustainability demands, the report offer five pieces of advice:

1. Assess the world around you and your place in it
2. Get your management team on board and set your strategic direction
3. Hardwire sustainability into your core business processes
4. Engage and communicate
5. Circle back to Step 1

To access the report, click here: 
http://www.greenbiz.com/business/research/report/2010/05/16/retail-stocking-shelves-green

GreenBiz.com



In 2005, the SPC completed version 1.0 of the Definition of Sustainable Packaging. This definition represents an important first step in articulating a common understanding of the term sustainable packaging. It provides a common vision and a framework for understanding activities directed toward improving packaging and continues to inform the future vision of the coalition and its individual member-companies. Sustainable packaging:

  • Is beneficial, safe & healthy for individuals and communities throughout its life cycle;
  • Meets market criteria for performance and cost;
  • Is sourced, manufactured, transported, and recycled using renewable energy;
  • Optimizes the use of renewable or recycled source materials;
  • Is manufactured using clean production technologies and best practices;
  • Is made from materials healthy in all probable end of life scenarios;
  • s physically designed to optimize materials and energy;
  • Is effectively recovered and utilized in biological and/or industrial closed loop cycles.



The Sustainable Packaging Coalition is focused on raising awareness of the sustainability issues related to packaging, as well as fostering the development of tools, resources, partnerships, and strategies to address them. Through meetings, projects, and participation in a range of external outreach events, the Coalition is working to catalyze the discussion about sustainable packaging and support efforts to achieve it.

What do you think about this definition? What’s your definition for Sustainable Packaging?


Trees are the lungs of our planet.  They produce the oxygen we need to breathe.  I’d say that’s pretty important.   In addition to providing the clean air we breathe, trees are a windbreak on a mountain hike, a home insulator, a natural play structure for children (and adults) and a way to make your neighborhood more beautiful.  Trees matter.

At the root of all positive change is the idea that it could occur.  Believing good things will happen causes us to fully engage in the process of making life better.  Starbucks proposed an opportunity to come together as a global community and shape a better world. 

Check out this add from Starbucks promoting the use of reusable mugs over the traditional paper cups.





Category: | 0 Comments


Some companies identified and are developing new ways to meet consumers’ demands for eco-friendly products. Some of the more recent innovative technologies include products and packaging that contain post-consumer recycled materials. 

This solution claims to offer sustainability benefits, such as resource conservation and reduction of environmental footprint, without increasing costs. 

Although we know they are not technically comparable, what do you think about this innovative technology compared to the use of bio-plastics? Which one you think that creates more purchasing intention? Have ideas to share? Add your comments below and join the global conversation.


Category: | 0 Comments