Lorna Li | Green Marketing 2.0

In California we do.

As geeks and new tech enthusiasts, we depend on computer infrastructure and use a lot of greenhouse gas-emitting electricity to grok our world. Deep down inside, we hope the same breakthroughs in science, technology and innovation that make us Twitter with excitement can also help us restore our balance with Nature.

In and around the SF Bay Area, Internet companies are tackling climate change with what they know best - technology innovation and the crowdsourcing powers of the social web.

Google is probably the company with the most ambitious global warming corporate action plan on Earth. Fortunately, it has the budget to do so. Google has long indicated a commitment to addressing climate change, from both the Foundation perspective and from the standpoint of business operations. Google’s commitment to lightening its ecological footprint can result in some pretty nice employee perks such as free, mostly organic food for its 10,000 employees, and utensils made out of biodegradable corn-based plastic that can be turned into dirt in its very own composting facilities.

Google currently partially powers their huge data centers with solar power, installing 1.6 megawatts of solar photovoltaic panels at their headquarters in Mountain View. The search engine not only invests in renewable energy and greener technologies, it has made a commitment to reducing its behemoth carbon footprint to zero. That’s a lot of clicks to make carbon neutral.

Not to be outdone, Yahoo! launched Yahoo! Green an excellent Green information portal that aggregates top climate change and environmental news, in addition to a section dedicated to Y! Answers about the Environment. Other Yahoo! Green sections include Global Warming, tips on how to live a Green Lifestyle, a Carbon Footprint Calculator, a Green Gift Guide, and a section where users can pledge to Take Action. Two search engines, two different approaches to being Green. As Michael Arrington pondered, Google vs. Yahoo, who cares most about the environment?

Green websites are hot, with TreeHugger snapped up by the Discovery Channel, and Zaadz, a LOHAS social networking site, purchased by Gaiam earlier this year. Even TechCrunch’s arch-rival, GigaOm launched Earth2Tech this year, a site devoted to the business of clean technologies, its innovations and everything else.

WiserEarth, a nonprofit venture launched by Paul Hawken, founder of the Natural Capital Institute, is compelling community directory and networking forum created on a structured wiki platform. The site maps and connects non-governmental organizations and individuals addressing the central issues of our day: climate change, poverty, the environment, peace, water, hunger, social justice, conservation, human rights and more.

Whether for profit or nonprofit, California clearly likes to fight global warming with technology. The state has become the nation’s biggest hub for green tech companies, attracting hundreds of $ millions in investment. In 2006, California’s green tech businesses soaked up $884 million, 36 percent of all the money venture capitalists spent on the industry within the United States.

For decades, California has led the nation with its clean and green policies. But population growth and increasing energy consumption, coupled with aggressive greenhouse-gas reduction laws mean the next stage of environmental progress will need to be stronger, faster and more innovative than in the past.

Can a handful of pioneering, VC-funded, bleeding-edge tech companies come up with solutions that will help turn the tide of global warming? I hope so.

Technorati Tags: google, yahoo green, earth2tech, treehugger, zaadz, gaiam, green tech, california green tech, greentech, wiser earth, paul hawken, natural capital institute

As environmental and student groups rally for Congress to adopt strong fuel efficiency and renewable electricity standards in 2007’s New Energy Bill, the Big Three Auto Makers in America - General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler - are spending millions to convince Congress and the public that 35 mpg by 2020 is simply not achievable.

Auto industry workers say, “Bollocks!”

A large group of auto workers and dealers have broken from the industry in order to support the 35 mpg by 2020 fuel efficiency standard. As members of the American auto industry who have designed, built and sold automobiles in this country for decades, they state that 35 mpg can be achieved, will create jobs, and can help the U.S. end its foreign oil addiction.

Spearheading the movement are Adam Lee, president of Lee Auto Malls in Maine, Gary Muenzhuber, representing Autoworkers of Minnesota, Inc, Chicago-based Chuck Frank, owner of one of the nation’s largest Chevy dealerships and Kentucky-based Karen Bowen, a former Ford executive.

Adam Lee, third generation autodealer, makes this personal plea to the public to tell Congress that 35 mpg by 2020 is necessary for the survival of the auto industry.

“My family has been selling American made cars since 1936. My livelihood and the livelihood of over 350 employees who work for us depend upon the success of the automobile industry. Today that strength is severely compromised by the lack of fuel-efficient cars and trucks customers want to buy. …

Without a 35 mile-per-gallon mandate, I’m afraid, global warming and our dependence on foreign oil will continue to get much worse in the long run. And, in the short run, I’m afraid I’ll be stuck with a lot full of cars that no one wants to buy or even worse: This country will no longer have an American auto industry.”

Known as the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standard, the legislative move to raise mileage for cars and light trucks to an average of 35 mpg by 2020 was, in fact, passed by the U.S. Senate in June. This is the first Congressional increase in fuel efficiency in 30 years, and yet the auto industry is pushing a counter-proposal of 32 mpg by 2022.What’s the Difference Between 35 mpg by 2020 Vs. 32 mpg by 2022?A lot.

In their report titled Energy Bill Must Guarantee Real Oil Savings, the Union of Concerned Scientists calculated the difference between the 35 mpg by 2020 and 32 mpg by 2022. Here is what they found:

Barrels of Oil Saved Per Day:
- 500,000 Auto Lobby Proposal
- 1.2 Million Senate CAFE Compromise

Consumer Savings at the Pump:
- $11 Billion Auto Lobby Proposal
- $25 Billion Senate CAFE Compromise

Emissions Reductions
- 85mmt CO2 Auto Lobby Proposal
- 206 mmt CO2 Senate CAFE Compromise

As environmental organizations and student groups are lobbying for stronger legislation to deal with climate change and global warming, auto industry workers are lobbying for their livelihoods.

The math is simple.

As gas prices continue to rise, unless American auto manufacturers produce more efficient cars, they will continue to lose market share to international auto manufacturers. This will mean lots of downsizing down the road.

Rather than choose to innovate now, which will benefit both American consumers and the U.S. auto industry as a whole, the Auto Lobby would rather spend $ millions in a PR campaign that could sway the public and take this country a step backwards, all in a bid for maximum short-term profits.

As Adam Lee states, if fuel efficiency is not a long-term priority, in the short run, we may not have an auto industry.

Technorati Tags: 2007 energy bill, new energy bill, 35 mpg by 2020, 35mpgby2020, 32 mpg by 2022, Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standard, CAFE standard, auto lobby, fuel efficiency, adam lee, lorna li

This weekend, students were up in arms about climate change. Saturday, November 3rd, was the National Day of Climate Action, which saw hundreds of student rallies raising a ruckus on climate change legislation on campuses across the United States.

To drive the message home, today, on Monday, November 5th, 3,000 students will descend upon Capitol Hill for the largest youth lobby on global warming ever - Power Shift 2007. Today, students will demand of Congress a bold and comprehensive climate change legislation that steer America towards a clean and just energy future.

On this day, these students will deliver an action-oriented, concrete proposal to move the nation forward, based on the comprehensive priorities of the 1Sky Campaign:

1. GREEN JOBS NOW!
Create 5 million green jobs conserving 20% of our energy by 2015
2. CUT CARBON 80% BY 2050
Freeze carbon pollution levels now and cut at least 30% by 2020
3. NO NEW COAL
Enact an immediate moratorium on new coal-fired power plants

In addition, the Power Shift team will highlight the most important bills on climate change that are currently on the table in Congress, such as the:

Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act

Senate Energy Bill

Waxman Safe Climate Act

House Energy Bill

Powershift 2007 is an initiative of the Energy Action Coalition, a coalition of more than 40 youth-led organizations from across the US and Canada with the intention to support and strengthen the student and youth clean energy movement in North America.

With hundreds of workshops, dozens of panels, and leading experts and advocates, Power Shift 2007 intends to arm a generation of young people to ensure that by 2009, the U.S. passes a powerful, national plan to stop global warming. The goals of this plan include a strong, clean energy economy, achieve energy independence, create millions of green jobs, increase global equity, and revitalize the American economy.

Support the Youth of Power Shift 2007

A great way to rally behind the students rallying on Capitol Hill today is to send this petition to Congress asking for a 2007 Energy Bill that includes the highest standards of fuel efficiency and more renewable energy.

Technorati Tags: national day of climate action, power shift 2007, 2007 energy bill, new energy bill, energy action coalition, 1sky, climate change, global warming, lorna li