Sustainable Opportunity

Life Cycle Assessment

2010-05-28T08:52:00.000-07:00

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)}

LEED for Landscapes

2010-05-28T08:49:00.000-07:00

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).

Greenpeace Guide

2010-05-28T08:46:00.000-07:00

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.

How to Respond When Retailers Demand Sustainability

2010-05-17T09:36:00.000-07:00

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

SPC Sustainable Packaging Definition

2010-05-12T12:21:00.000-07:00

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?

One Person Can Save Trees… Together We Can Save Forests

2010-05-11T08:41:00.000-07:00

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.

New technologies give life to sustainability initiatives

2010-05-10T13:06:00.000-07:00

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.

Sustainable Packaging

2010-05-10T12:23:00.000-07:00

LONDON, United Kingdom — Lightweighting will continue to be the main strategy packaging suppliers and buyers use to lower the impacts of their packaging, and companies are mainly making such changes to cut costs, according to a new survey.

Packaging News' new Packaging and the Environment survey asked packaging suppliers and buyers in the U.K. about actions they've taken to improve the environmental performance of packaging, how well they understand various concepts, what accreditations they feel are important, and more.

Conducted in March, the survey drew responses from 142 people that work on the supply side of packaging and 63 on the customer side.

Regarding steps that have been taken to change packaging, all respondents were asked what they have done in the past 12 months and what they plan to do in the next 12 months.

The top steps suppliers have done in the last year are lightweighting, supply chain optimization, increasing recycled content and increasing recyclable content. The top steps in the coming year mirrored those, but with the addition of performing more carbon footprint measurements of packaging.

The top steps taken by buyers were the same as those by suppliers, in higher percentages. But for the coming 12 months, increasing recycled content took over the top stop from lightweighting, and more buyers than last year plan to conduct carbon footprinting. The item that was chosen by the fewest on both sides was increasing compostable and biodegradable content.

The main driver for all those changes has been cost reduction. That was the driver chosen by more than 60 percent of buyers when asked what is causing customers to request packaging changes and by more than 70 percent of suppliers when asked why they have requested changes.

"This may be a sign of the cost-conscious times in which we are living; or it suggests that packaging's environmental credentials are taken for granted," the report on the survey says. "It could also reinforce what many sceptics on packaging reduction schemes have been saying for some time - that cost reduction and sustainability improvements often go hand in hand."

Following lower costs, buyers said environmental impact was their second highest driver, while suppliers felt that on-shelf differentiation was a more important driver than environmental considerations.

When it comes to sales calls, the most important messages mentioned by both groups were cost and quality, followed by customer service, and then environmental credentials.

Suppliers were also asked what they've done and plan to do at factories. The top actions done in the past year were recycling company waste and investing in low-energy equipment and consumables like lightbulbs. Fewer plan to undertake such actions in the coming year, possibly because they've already started up recycling programs or made purchases of new equipment.

DOE, USDA Announce Funding for Biomass Research

2010-05-08T13:02:00.000-07:00

The US Departments of Energy (DOE) and Agriculture (USDA) jointly announced up to $33 million in funding for research and development of technologies and processes to produce biofuels, bioenergy and high-value biobased productss.

The funding announcement is for several types of projects aimed at creating a diverse group of economically and environmentally sustainable sources of renewable biomass.

Section 9008(e)(3) of the Food Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 provides direction and guidance on the technical areas addressed by the Biomass Research and Development Initiative, (BRDI). The technical areas are:

Feedstocks development
Biofuels and biobased products development
Biofuels development analysis

BRDI requires that each proposed project integrate all three of the technical areas. The intent of requiring integration is to encourage a collaborative problem-solving approach to all studies funded under BRDI, to facilitate formation of consortia, identify and address knowledge gaps, and accelerate the application of science and engineering for the production of sustainable biofuels, bioenergy and biobased products.

Pre-applications are due June 7, 2010, and must be submitted electronically. Applicants who are encouraged to submit full applications wil be notified by July 26, 2010.

The funding opportunity is available online at Grants.gov.

New DOE Video Highlights Impact of Biofuels on Rural Communities

DOE also released a new video which showcases how cellulosic biofuel technologies can help decrease U.S. dependence on foreign oil, spur growth in the domestic biofuels industry, and provide new revenue opportunities to farmers in many rural areas of the country. The video, shot at a harvesting equipment demonstration in Emmetsburg, Iowa, highlights a new way of producing ethanol from the cellulose fibers in corn cobs, not from the corn kernels. The technology generates a new opportunity for farmers to harvest and sell the cobs that they’d normally leave in the field. To date, DOE has committed over $1 billion to 27 cost-shared biorefinery projects.

SustainableBusiness.com

Europe's First LEED Program Established in Italy

2010-05-07T06:32:00.000-07:00

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and Green Building Council Italia (GBC Italia) have partnered to advance green building and promote carbon emissions reductions in Italy and worldwide.

At the heart of the partnership, GBC Italia will be the first organization in the European Union to implement the LEED green building rating system. In the GBC Italia version of LEED, local standards and codes will be referenced, Italian-specific units will be incorporated, and alternative compliance paths will be provided as appropriate to account for regional variances and contexts.

The two groups signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that also agrees to sharing of tools, research and information around green building.

“Harnessing the strengths of partnerships around the world allows us to collectively make a difference in our built environment on a scale that otherwise would not be possible,” said Scot Horst, Senior Vice President of LEED, USGBC.

The LEED green building certification system is a leading program for the design, construction and operation of green buildings. Over 32,000 projects are currently participating in the commercial and institutional LEED rating systems, comprising over 9.6 billion square feet of construction space in all 50 U.S. states and 114 countries across the globe.

The green building industry is projected to contribute $554 billion to the US gross domestic product from 2009-2013.

GBC Italia is a member of World GBC, with more than 330 members, all leaders in different positions of Italian and international building sector. More than 70 projects are registered in Italy, and there are around 100 LEED Professional Credential holders.

*SustainableBusiness.com News

Lower Production Helps Chevron, Shell Reduce Emissions

2010-05-07T06:21:00.000-07:00

OAKLAND, CA — Chevron and Royal Dutch Shell reduced their greenhouse gas emissions last year, though those cuts were mainly from lower production and facility shutdowns.

Both companies released their latest sustainability reports this month, covering GHG emissions, energy efficiency, renewable energy and more.

One of Shell's main strategies is to increase its focus on natural gas, which is says will account for more than half of its energy output in 2012. Natural gas plants cost less than coal plants to build and can emit 50-70 percent fewer emissions than coal plants, depending on how old the plants are.

Shell's direct GHG emissions in 2009 totaled 67 million tonnes of Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), an 11 percent drop from 2008.

The company explains in its 2009 Sustainability Report that the lower level is mainly due to reduced activity at refineries and chemical plants, and forced production shutdowns in Nigeria, where violence and oil theft caused Shell to suspend some production while it repairs damage. In the future, though, emissions may rise as other projects are completed and starts producing.

Energy efficiency projects were a lesser cause of emissions reduction as some efficiency gains were balanced out by emissions increases elsewhere. Shell's upstream business increased its energy efficiency, which was offset by the increased energy it needed to use when working in ageing fields and getting to harder-to-reach resources. The company also increased efficiency at its Canadian oil sands operations, but those too were offset by its trucks using more diesel to cover longer distances between mining areas and the processing plant than in 2008.

While efficiency at chemical plants improves, efficiency at refineries declined because lower demand for products caused refineries to work below their full production capacity.

Another one of Shell's strategies is to further its work with carbon capture and storage (CCS), and now is involved with CCS projects in Norway, Australia and Canada.

Chevron's 2009 Corporate Responsibility Report also touches on CCS, primarily on the company's Gorgon natural gas project off the northwest coast of Australia. Chevron sanctioned the project last year and says that once it's operations, it will capture and store up to 3.4 million metric tons of CO2 a year.

Chevron's emissions also dropped from 2008 to 2009, falling 3.6 percent to 57.4 million tonnes, performing better than the company's goal of 60.5 million tonnes. Chevron attributed the drop to reduced flaring, production shutdowns in Nigeria similar to those Shell faced, production decreased in its U.S. mid-continent and Alaska operations, and reduced demand and some shutdowns in California.

Some of Chevron's decreases were offset by increased production in Kazakhstan and the Gulf of Mexico.

*GreenBiz.com

Braskem's Green PE

2010-05-04T19:58:00.000-07:00

By this October, Brazilian petrochemical firm Braskem S.A. (Sao Paulo) plans to have the first Green PE plant in the world in commercial scale. It is planned to have 200,000 tonnes/yr of production capacity for its sugar-cane based polyethylene (PE) online, with work on sugar-cane derived polypropylene (PP) and EPDM (ethylene propylene diene monomer) rubber ongoing.

The Braskem's facility will convert ethanol from sugar cane in resin to be used in other plastic products. Considered a watershed in the polymer market, for it is made with 100% renewable raw materials, the material has the same appearance and properties of traditional plastics in the final product, the difference is that it can capture CO2 from the atmosphere, i.e. one ton of green resin captures 2.5 tons of CO2.

That is a great combination: Braskem has the Green PE technology and Brazil is a very big sugar cane producer.

The production of ethanol is expected to double in five years, and double again in 10 years.

Top Ten Sustainable Companies and their BENEFITS

2010-05-02T16:47:00.000-07:00

Over the past decade, "sustainability" has become a popular corporate buzzword with a nebulous definition. To most people it connotes an abstract sense of do-gooding that centers on a company's effects on society and the environment. A Toronto media company called Corporate Knights has tried to make the idea clear and measurable by collecting data on 3,000 global public companies and evaluating them according to 11 different metrics. Today, as a result of that research, it published its first-ever ranking of the world's 100 most sustainable companies.

Corporate Knights' editor-in-chief Toby Heaps says that to be considered sustainable, companies must "squeeze four times more wealth out of every resource they use." Heaps announced the list at Davos, where his company is hosting a dinner for the financier George Soros.

Corporate Knights worked with a research firm to winnow down its list of publicly traded companies from 3,000 to 300, based on financial performance and other criteria. Then the Corporate Knights research group worked with two different asset management firms to evaluate those 300 companies based on 10 environmental, social and governance performance metrics, including energy productivity, waste productivity and CEO-to-average-worker pay ratio. An 11th indicator was added for "transparency."

Corporate Knights relied on the companies to give it accurate data. When a company wouldn't provide information for one of the 10 metrics, Corporate Knights assigned it a null score for that category and then penalized it with an unfavorable transparency score.

Heaps says he believes that consumers and investors will be less jaded about sustainability if companies are more transparent. "One of the things that have held back the sustainability movement on Wall Street is that on many of these issues, companies operate in a black box," he says. "You need to have transparency if you want people to take you seriously. Then you can get beyond platitudes and discuss issues that people really care about."

1. General Electric

2. Pacific Gas and Electric

3. TNT NV

4. Hennes & Mauritz

5. Nokia

6. Siemens

7. Unilever

8. Vodafone

9. Smiths Group

10. Geberit.

The questions I have are:

Do you believe there is any relation between the companies size (economically) and their expenses with sustainability (MKT, developments...)?

Which are the benefitis you think these companies have being the Top Ten Sustainable Companies?

Sustainable Agriculture

2010-04-29T12:35:00.000-07:00

The Problem: Genetic Engineering

Genetic engineering enables scientists to create plants, animals and micro-organisms by manipulating genes in a way that does not occur naturally. These genetically modified organisms (GMOs) can spread through nature and interbreed with natural organisms, thereby contaminating non-“GE” environments and future generations in an unforeseeable and uncontrollable way.

Proponents argue that genetic engineering is worth the risk because it helps alleviate the global food crisis. However, globally speaking, lack of food is not the cause of hunger. Political challenges and failures are the cause of world hunger with an estimated one billion victims. In other words, more food doesn’t necessarily mean fewer hungry.

Also, according to recent carbon footprint analysis, the entire chain of food production and consumption accounts for 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing these greenhouse gas emissions and increasing the long-term storage of carbon in the soil are therefore essential measures to prevent a climate catastrophe.

The Solution: Organic Agriculture

Organic agriculture is a rapidly growing sector of agriculture that focuses on the health, ecology, fairness and care of the farming process. Organic practices use local resources and offers opportunities for increasing farmers’ income and improving their livelihood.

To feed the world sustainably into the future, fundamental changes are needed in our farming and food systems. We need a thorough and radical overhaul of present international and national agricultural policies. You can help by using your power as a consumer to buy locally grown, organic food and urging your Representatives to pass laws that protect our health and eliminate genetic engineering.

The question is: How commited are you changing the food you buy?

Some pictures of Braziliam organic fair!!

Coca-Cola Introduces PlantBottle

2010-04-28T12:49:00.000-07:00

Made from up to 30% plant-based material, PlantBottle packaging is a natural step toward the bottle of the future and is a 100% recyclable bottle like traditional PET plastic.

Mix about one-third plant material with traditional PET plastic and you have Coca-Cola latest sustainable packaging innovation. It reduces the dependence on non-renewable resources and it is a completely recyclable bottle, just like traditional PET plastic. Preliminary research indicates it reduces carbon footprint.

http://bit.ly/3xM2xm

FootPrint Calculator

2010-04-27T13:05:00.000-07:00

How much land area does it take to support your lifestyle? Take this quiz to find out your Ecological Footprint, discover your biggest areas of resource consumption, and learn what you can do to tread more lightly on the earth.

http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/calculators/

The New PUMA Fuseproject Packaging - Clever Little Bag

2010-04-27T07:20:00.000-07:00

In partnering with PUMA, a leader in sportswear, shoes and products, FuseProject looked to create a game changing packaging system that would greatly reduce their footprint and build on their initiatives toward cleaner, greener, and safer practices contributing to a better world around us.

The challenge was to look at one of the most difficult and stagnant issues facing the retail industry in regards to sustainability and environmental harm: packaging, and more specifically shoeboxes. Boxes contribute to millions of tons of waste a year and even with proposed second uses, they are eventually thrown out.

Why is it so clever? By providing structure to a cardboard sheet, the bag uses 65% less cardboard than the standard shoe box, has no laminated printing, no tissue paper, takes up less space and weighs less in shipping, and replaces the plastic retail bag.

The cardboard structure is die cut from one flat piece of material and has no additional printing or assembly, thus it can be returned to the stream faster and more efficiently. The structure was created with four walls that taper in to allow for secured stacking, another important element left over from the original shoebox.

The bag is non-woven which means less work and waste (it is stitched with heat). It protects the shoes from dust and dirt in the warehouse and during shipping. The “clever little bag” is an iconic brand element upon leaving the store as it replaces the plastic shopping bag, and it is also used for shoe storage in travel suitcases. The bag is made of non-woven polyester consisting of recycled PET, and eventually is also recyclable.

The roll out of the new packaging and distribution system is planned for 2011.

Global Inheritance

2010-04-27T05:12:00.000-07:00

Global Inheritance is an organization which works to reinvent the activism for today's young generations focusing on creativity and communication. They have a strong art appeal and are always looking for artists to join them to establish their mission to develop a visual bridge to build a stronger world.

Their biggest art initiatives currently include TRASHed :: Art of Recycling, POSTed and You’re the Bomb. In TRASHed, the point is to talk about recycling in a different way. It is an ongoing recycling education program that redefines the way people view recycling and trash collection.

Global Inheritance arranges the artistic redesign of recycling bins, and then integrates the bins at events to encourage recycling and provide additional ways to view the artwork. Live paintings often occur at events, while bins designed and created by artists beforehand are also featured. Through a network of over 7,000 artists, TRASHed appoints the right talent to match each event's aesthetic. Canvases are not limited, as TRASHed :: Art Of Recycling artists also design bottles, compost bins, and oversized recycling containers in addition to recycling bins. Take a look at some examples: