A “Missionary” for Sustainable Energy

“I want my life to make a difference,” says John Bahr, Ph.D. An active man in his early 70s, Bahr has enriched his retirement years by involving himself in environmental issues. Starting out with very little knowledge, he has become a powerful advocate for Wisconsin’s sustainable energy movement. “This work satisfies my desire to do something worthwhile with my life while I have the opportunity,” he says. I spoke with Bahr from his Wisconsin home. I wanted to learn more about the work that he does and how it fulfills him as a retiree.

BPGL: How did you become interested in the environment?

BAHR: I first became interested in environmental issues as a Boy Scout in the 1950s. We had a very active group that did a lot of hiking and camping in parks and forests in different parts of the country. As an adult, I’ve been on many Boundary Waters wilderness canoe trips, and enjoyed mountain backpacking and lots of camping and hiking.

BPGL: Did your work life prepare you for what you’re doing today?

Bahr in the control room of an ethanol plant in St. Joseph, Missouri, of which he is a member.

BAHR: My electrical, mechanical and biomedical engineering degrees helped set the stage for this current involvement. I’ve worked with General Electric, doing system development and product design research, as well as teaching and program development at the Medical College of Wisconsin. I started and managed two national businesses to develop and sell software to long-term care facilities. In addition, I oversee a farm in Kansas. And I have a lot of experience working with community volunteer organizations.

BPGL: What got you interested in doing advocacy and educational work with alternative energy?

BAHR: After retiring, I began to think about what I might do that would use my experience and also have value to the community. One of my friends asked, “Why not wind power?” He pointed out that there was growing concern about finding an alternative to fossil fuels (coal and oil) to avoid environmental pollution [and lessen] our dependence on foreign countries for our energy needs. I knew very little about this technology, so I started to learn by reading and going to conferences. My interest in wind power expanded to include other renewable energy sources, including: solar PV and heating, biofuels, water power, and geothermal.

It became clear that the general population also had limited knowledge of both the need for alternative energy sources as well as how to meet those needs. People sometimes fear that which they don’t understand, particularly in a time of change. Since renewable energy projects require public acceptance, I realized that those of us who understood this technology, or were learning about it, were in a good position to go out into the community to tell others about it. This became a form of missionary work for me.

SHARING THE MESSAGE

BPGL: You call it “missionary work.” To carry the analogy further, who are you “preaching to” about renewable energy?

BAHR: I divide the population into three groups in terms of learning about something new:

1. Those who already understand what is being proposed, and will accept change without further information or encouragement.
2. Those who strongly oppose change and have no interest in learning anything new (my mind is made up, don’t confuse me with the facts). This group can be written off as beyond reach.
3. Those people who have neither strong feelings for or against a new idea and are open to learning more about it. However, they are not motivated enough to seek information on their own. If you go to where they gather for other reasons, they will listen to you and consider what you are saying.

So, our education work is focused on community groups, such as church forums; schools; library forums; business groups such as Rotary, Kiwanis and Lions clubs; environmental groups; government groups; etc. We are able to reach people who are there because they routinely go to those groups. So far this program has been presented to over 80 groups in Southeast Wisconsin. If we come to talk to them, they will listen and, hopefully, learn and begin to make changes. That’s what we do.

BPGL: I understand you are active in a number of environmental groups and efforts. What are they, and what is your role?

A fellow volunteer celebrates the installation of solar panels on Bahr's church. Photo: John Bahr

BAHR: I’m on the Board of RENEW Wisconsin, where I chair the Education Committee. This group presents programs promoting renewable energy sources and sustainable energy practices to groups that request them. We also contact community groups to explain what we do and offer to present a program for one of their meetings. This may be attractive to groups like Rotary and Kiwanis, which need weekly programs for their meetings. It is a positive sign that global warming and renewable energy are increasingly becoming topics of general interest.

I’m also on the Executive Committee of the local Sierra Club, where I chair the Global Warming and Energy Committees. This work is similar to what I do for RENEW. However, the Sierra Club has a large membership with many volunteers and is well known in the community, while RENEW has a number of technical experts in their fields, but a comparatively small general membership. They fit together well.

Because of my growing visibility as an energy educator, I was appointed to the Energy Committee of my local community, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. Here, I’m helping develop community programs to use energy more efficiently and reduce the total cost of energy to the city. Knowledge and volunteers from my other groups will be helpful with that. Related to this is my work to introduce and promote the Cool Cities program to regional communities, to help structure and promote their own energy savings programs. I hope to use the experience from Wauwatosa as a model for other communities.

TAKING ACTION TO CONSERVE

BPGL: From your perspective, what are the most significant things the average person can do right now to conserve energy?

BAHR: Conserve energy where you live and where you work. We like to say that the least expensive and non-polluting kWh is the one not used. Due to cost considerations, not everyone can put a wind turbine in their back yard or solar panels on their roof. But everybody can save energy. There are many books, publications, and articles containing lists of things everyone can do to save energy. People should get one of these lists and use it. There are trained inspectors, sometimes paid or subsidized by local utilities or state-sponsored energy programs, who will come to your home or business to do an energy survey and offer suggestions of how to reduce your energy consumption. There are very simple things anyone can do, such as convert to compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). You can also use energy-efficient appliances, carefully manage your thermostat, reduce heat loss through windows, etc. Get — and follow — a guidelines list.

Members of the Renewable Energy Committee standing with hub and blade assembly of a 1.65 mW wind turbine. Photo: John Bahr

BPGL: What about for the longer term?

BAHR: We need to promote the greater development of renewable energy sources. This may require lobbying with your government and utilities. Work with your neighbors to form neighborhood-based, energy-efficiency groups who can inform and encourage each other in energy efficiency progress in each home. When building a new building or remodeling, use energy-efficient designs and materials. Consider geothermal as a heating and cooling technology. Promote mass transit, and manage your personal transportation to reduce energy use. Recruit and support political candidates who promote responsible energy use.

BPGL: There is a lot of good information available to the public now, but also some misinformation. Are you aware of any harmful myths about alternative energy or conserving energy?

BAHR: A primary concern is the attitude that the most important thing is to provide energy in our country at the lowest possible cost, regardless of the effect on our environment. Sadly there is popular support for this position from some people who think only in the short term.

MYTH BUSTING

There is a lot of misinformation, such as the these myths:

MYTH: CFLs pose a great risk to our environment due to their mercury content.

CFL bulbs last 5000 hours compared to 750 hours for a regular light bulb.

FACT: Using a CFL for its rated life will reduce environmental mercury much more, because of lower power plant emissions, than the small amount that can be released if the bulb is broken.

MYTH: The power surge required to turn on a CFL is so large that you must leave the light on for several hours to justify using it.

FACT: When you turn on a CFL, the extra energy to get it going is the amount used in 7 seconds of regular use.

MYTH: Frequent turning on and off will reduce the life of a CFL by as much as 50%. An example of this would be a bathroom or closet light. Thus using a CFL in one of these short cycle locations would reduce its expected life to perhaps 5000 hours, compared to 750 hours for a regular light bulb. Of course, if you consider that CFLs cost $1.00 on sale, and that in 5000 hours they save a huge amount of energy ($50.00 worth at current rates), and that they reduce a large amount of greenhouse gas emission, there isn’t much argument.

THE TRUTH ABOUT WIND TURBINES

There are many wild stories about the danger of wind turbines to those who live nearby. Someone claimed that a woman couldn’t get pregnant if she lived within a mile of a wind turbine (not true). A lawyer appeared at a public hearing to say, “Listening to a wind turbine is like standing next to a runway when a 747 airplane takes off.” When later confronted about the absurdity of his comment, he pointed out that he will say anything his clients will pay him to say. Having stood under a wind turbine running at full power, I can say how quiet they are. It’s like listening to your kitchen refrigerator from the next room. You can hear traffic on an expressway a mile away over the noise of the turbine. Unfortunately, people believe and retell ridiculous things like this.

Myths about windmills abound, but Bahr is working to dispel them. Photo: John Bahr

There is continuing comment about bird kill from wind turbines. At one of our presentations, a person claimed that if you install a wind turbine, “you’ll have flaming birds fall out of the sky.” Information based on many studies indicates the average turbine kills 1.7 birds per year. A study by the highly regarded Sibley Guide estimated that all the wind turbines in the country kill under 100,000 birds per year compared to 500,000,000 killed by cats.

Some things are true but fixable: If the turbine is between the observer and the sun — this will be true for a few houses in morning and evening on a clear day for about 10 minutes a year — shadow flicker can be a problem. If this is objectionable, you can use window blinds or plant a hedge. Most wind farm developers will help with this. In the same category, if the TV signal path from the station antenna to a home goes through wind turbine blades, there can be a problem. Most utilities will work with homeowners to install a different type of home antenna. As you can expect, this is a rare event.

Some people complain about aesthetics. Studies have shown that property values go up faster near a new wind farm than away from it. Many people find them interesting, kind of like living near Mt. Rushmore. If you go by the wind farm at Montford, Wisconsin, in the western part of the state on Highway 18, you see a restaurant that provides parking and an information stand for those who want to stop to see and learn about the turbines (and watch the cows grazing under them). The restaurant staff finds this brings in new business.

These and other sorts of misinformation are the kind of things we address in our educational programs.

AN ENRICHING EXPERIENCE

BPGL: How has your voluntary environmental work benefited you personally?

BAHR: It provides the opportunity to learn and apply new things. It connects me, in a satisfying way, with the community where I live. It brings me together with people who have similar values. And it provides a good model for my children.

Miriam Kashia

Contributing Writers

Blue Planet Green Living (Home Page)

Green Consultant Boosts Efficiency and Profits

“Being environmentally responsible is not just about meeting the regulations and complying with the laws anymore, but that you’re actually setting the bar for other industries in your sector, and that you’re using good environmental management to expand your business and to make a profit. As an environmental consultant, I help you find a new way to innovate and become the most efficient, to squeeze every dollar that you can out of what you’re earning,” says Molly Long, president of A.W.E. Consulting.

Long helps companies identify where they can improve.

In Part 1, we spoke with Long about her experience with the laws, rules, and regulations of environmental management. Part 2 discussed her role as an environmental auditor for ISO 14001 compliance. Part 3 focuses primarily on Long’s job as an environmental consultant, helping businesses become highly effective and sustainable.

BPGL: With the inauguration of President Obama, the nation is turning toward green jobs both to help us out of this economic slump and to improve the environment. As an environmental consultant, you’re already engaged in a green job. What does this part of your job entail?

LONG: As a consultant, I help my clients assess what they are doing right, what they are doing wrong, and help them figure out where they can improve. Plus, I offer any service that another environmental consulting or engineering firm can offer, such as permitting, training, compliance assessments, and environmental remediation projects.

BPGL: So, if I were to hire you as an environmental consultant for my business, what exactly would you do?

LONG: I would come in and clean up your environmental management methods, whether they are based on ISO 14001 or not. I would make sure you’re compliant with laws and regulations. But much more than that, I would help you go beyond compliance and turn what you’re doing environmentally into something positive for your business.

When I consult, I ask questions like, “How do you use your resources?” “How do you make sure that your people are doing the right job and that they’re competent to do it?” Every time an employee has an error, it costs you money. So it’s about error-proofing and looking at ways to improve, streamline, and increase efficiency. And that makes a business truly sustainable.

A well-managed company has qualified people doing the right jobs.

When it comes to consulting, I also believe in that age-old philosophy that it is better to teach someone to fish than to just give them a fish. Many consultants are looking for ways to ensure they can continue to consult. But at the end of the day, a consultant is not a member of the organization and does not share in the accountability for its success. I feel it is crucial for people to have the tools they need to be successful going forward without a consultant. This is a pretty unorthodox philosophy for a consultant.

BPGL: How are A.W.E.’s consulting services different from traditional consulting groups?

LONG: Traditional environmental consulting focuses on how to keep a client “out of trouble and under the radar for regulation.” This is based on the wrong-headed concept that meeting the law means your business is operating as well as possible. The ultimate goal in this philosophy is being able to get out of having to obey the law at all — it has nothing to do with doing what is sustainable.

For example, fluorescent bulbs have mercury in them, so they have the potential to pollute when they are disposed of, and they are regulated by the EPA. There is a market for recycling the mercury from bulbs, so rather than disposing of them and letting the mercury go into the ground, the mercury can be recovered and reused. Some lighting companies came out with “green” bulbs. These lights still have mercury in them, but it is better protected, so that the mercury will supposedly not come out when the bulb is broken. As a result, direct pollution for mercury releases from broken bulbs is reduced.

BPGL: That sounds like a great innovation.

LONG: It is a great innovation, but it has an unintended consequence. Now people throw these “green” bulbs in the trash, and the mercury isn’t recovered. It’s a disposable mentality driven by the desire to avoid regulation, rather than the desire to do what is environmentally sustainable. The problem is that now the market for recovered mercury is weakened because people would rather throw away their bulbs than separate them for recycling. The company that chooses to dispose of their bulbs rather than recycle them may think they’re saving money related to compliance and disposal costs, but in reality, everything becomes more expensive, because we have to use fresh resources to make the bulbs rather than using recovered mercury.

Companies must get away from disposable thinking.

This is just one example of where “disposable thinking” has led us astray. In order for a business to be truly sustainable, they have to look at environmental management as more than just a cost center. Instead of thinking about minimizing disposal costs, they need to expand their concept of what is a “product” and help develop and expand the markets they can sell to. The philosophy here might be best expressed as “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure.” I believe it is crucial for consultants to be able to use their knowledge and experience to help their clients think outside the box so they can have an environmental edge over their competitors.

BPGL: What you’re doing is in line with what we profess at Blue Planet Green Living, which is that you can help to save the planet and be profitable at the same time.

LONG: You have to make money; otherwise it’s not sustainable. You can’t just do the right thing one time and leave it alone. It has to be something that you do over and over again, and that has a pathway for improving on what you’ve already done.

BPGL: So, for example, as you improve your business and streamline operations, you also create less carbon.

A.W.E. works with companies to make them efficient and sustainable.

LONG: You create less carbon. You create less waste. You put fewer pollutants in the water. You use fewer raw materials. You use less energy. There are incredible metrics related to how sustainable businesses not only protect, but improve, the environment. But people don’t know how to tap into them, because they are focused very narrowly on compliance or the performance of an individual process.

A lot of companies never make the connection between what they’re doing to protect the environment and save energy costs and their global carbon footprint or the positive impact on their local community. I’m there to help them see that bigger picture, how everything plays together. I help them learn how to recognize the aspects of their operations that are truly “green.”

I’m a wildlife ecologist by degree. And ecology is the science of how everything interacts with everything else. There’s no one thing that you can do that’s not going to affect other things. So you have to look at everything in the system, because everything that you do inside the system is going to have far-reaching effects throughout that system. That’s my approach as I’m looking at the bigger picture.

BPGL: As a consultant, how do you motivate companies to consider complying with ISO standards?

LONG: I strongly encourage adopting the environmental management style described in the ISO 14001 standard. The standard is actually quite simple. The thousands of regulations out there can be distilled into simple concepts. And that’s what the standard does. One of the biggest problems that we have when folks start doing the standards, is that they approach it from a regulatory mind frame, like, There are going to be these thousands of requirements we’re going to have to do!

But the reality is, it’s very simple. You do whatever is efficient. When something’s not working, you recognize what’s not working. You don’t just correct the symptoms that are visible, but you actually try to discover the root cause of why it did not work, and fix it so that it doesn’t happen again. You prevent the recurrence of the problem.

We want to make the environment better than it was when we got here.

BPGL: There are so many laws and regulations, and it seems new ones are created all the time. That’s got to be a huge problem for companies.

LONG: If you’re doing environmental management now because you’re reacting to a new law or laws and regulations that apply to you, how do you figure out what you need to do? Let’s get that out of the way and figure out who’s going to do what, when is he going to do it, and whether we’re doing it right or wrong. Then we can work on setting up things that will help you get to the point where laws and regulations are moot, because you’re so far beyond that now, and compliance is not really an issue for you.

It’s a matter of moving forward so that you can get away from those thousands and thousands of individual laws that apply to you, and work on the basic concept of, We’re not going to pollute. We’re complying with everything we need to. And we can get better. We’re always getting better. Those are the three basic things that everybody wants to work on. I’m trying to distill all of these thousands of individual laws they’re setting, with individual parameters for everything.

It really comes back to one simple thing, which is that we don’t want to pollute. We don’t want to make the environment worse than it is. And if we can, we want to try to be of benefit to the environment, not just to protect it, but actually to be a benefit to it, to make it a better environment than we found when we got here.

NOTE: Long, of A.W.E. Consulting, Inc. writes about ISO 14001 in her blog, Show Me the Shall. She will be teaching an introductory ISO 14001 course March 11-12 in Chicago. For more details, or to register for the training, visit A.W.E. Consulting or email molly@aweconsulting.com. Customized training sessions are also available.

Part 1: Red Tape, Regulations, and Environmental Crimes

Part 2: ISO 14001: Comply with Laws, Prevent Pollution, Continually Improve

Part 3: Green Consultant Boosts Efficiency and Profits (Top of Page)

Julia Wasson

Blue Planet Green Living (Home Page)

Related Post:

My 5: Molly Long, A.W.E. Consulting

My 5: Molly Long, A.W.E. Consulting

BPGL: What are the five most important things we can do to save the planet?

Molly Long, Environmental Auditor and Consultant, A.W.E. Consulting:

Molly Long, President, A.W.E. Consulting, Environmental Auditor and Consultant

• I think the right people doing the right jobs is number one, because it really does take that— the people with the knowledge doing the right thing.

• Believing that each person can make a difference as an individual. Whenever you take a small step, you do make a difference. It may not have worldwide impact, but you are doing something to at least make your own environment better. If everybody did that, we’d all make a big difference.

• Recognizing that moving the problem somewhere else is not a fix. We’ve got to deal with the problem where it is occurring.

• Communicating. We’ve got to have the ability to talk to each other and be open, not just to different understandings, but to different cultures and the different ways people have of approaching things.

• We really have to get out of this disposable mindset.

Blue Planet Green Living (Home Page)

Related Posts:

Part 1: Red Tape, Regulations, and Environmental Crimes

Part 2: ISO 14001: Comply with Laws, Prevent Pollution, Continually Improve

Part 3: Green Consultant Boosts Efficiency and Profits

Related Category:

My 5

ISO 14001: Comply with Laws, Prevent Pollution, Continually Improve

“When something goes wrong, a company has an accident or a mistake, we immediately blame that company for not doing things right. And then, inside that company, it goes down from the plant manager, whose neck is on the line, and he starts looking for somebody he can blame,” says Molly Long. “There’s a hierarchy of blaming that occurs. It’s the picture of the two-story outhouse. No one wants to be on the bottom floor.”

Auditor Molly Long (center) and others suited up to enter the blast furnace at a steel mill.

As president of A.W.E. Consulting, Long audits compliance with ISO 14001, which, she describes as, “an international standard that helps people coalesce their environmental management into something that’s meaningful and trackable.” When a business seeks ISO 14001 certification, it enters into a process that changes that blaming mentality by putting responsibility where it belongs: at the top.

In Part 1, we interviewed Long about the abundance of laws, rules, and regulations surrounding environmental management. In Part 2, we talk with her about about her role as an ISO 14001 auditor. In Part 3, we’ll find out about Long’s role as an environmental consultant.

BPGL: What is ISO 14001, and why should businesses care?

LONG: ISO 14001 guarantees the community in which the business operates that they are doing what they can to meet their environmental commitments: pollution prevention, compliance, and continual improvement. It sets up a framework for businesses to interact with their community, to comply with laws, and to make sure that the business is sustainable.

The primary purpose is to protect the environment, but businesses also can use ISO 14001 to help them innovate. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets standards so that everybody can be safe and healthy, and no one blows things up and kills fish and so on. But, if a business wants to, they can take it further and do what is environmentally correct and, at the same time, innovate a benchmark for other businesses to follow.

The ISO standards are created by the International Organization for Standardization. It’s a much broader group of people than if you just had legislators who were affected by their local issues. And there are lots of people who submit comments on the standards, too.

BPGL: As an ISO 14001 auditor, what are you looking for in terms of environmental management?

LONG: A lot of companies already do environmental management. They have to, because of all the regulations, but they don’t have a systematic way of doing it, and they’re not very good at collecting data about performance.

The way most companies interact with the environment is, “The EPA tells us we have to do something, so we’re going to do it this way.” They’re not necessarily doing it the best way, the way that’s the most efficient for them. They’re just doing it because they have to do it.

But the best environmental management involves three basic things:

• Defining what needs to get done
• Defining who needs to do it
• Identifying the things that will tell you whether it’s been done properly

A typical day of auditing includes reading a LOT of paperwork.

A lot of people do the first part, or maybe the second part, but when it comes to measuring whether it was done properly or effectively or in the best way, they don’t do a lot of that. So ISO 14001 sets up a system that is driven by the top management in an organization. Top management uses this data on performance to help them meet three basic commitments:

• To comply with laws and regulations that apply to them.
• To prevent pollution wherever possible. So even if a law or regulation doesn’t tell their business they have to do something, but they know that it will prevent pollution, they pledge to do it.
• To continually improve. They try to make their business better, more efficient, and more effective at preserving the environment, at the same time making it more economically feasible and more sustainable.

Everything each employee does must be in line with those three commitments, which are stated in the organization’s environmental policy. The standard recognizes that the ultimate responsibility lies with top management to meet these commitments and provide the necessary resources to get the job done — it breaks the blaming cycle.

BPGL: How does a company get certified as ISO 14001 compliant?

LONG: The pathway to certification is through an independent body. If somebody wants to register their system to the ISO 14001 standard, they have to go to an authorized registrar. The business’s relationship with the registrar is as auditor and auditee. We differentiate between compliance and conforming, because compliance refers to laws and regulations, but the ISO standard is voluntary. Also, unlike most legal requirements, the requirements of the standard can be implemented in a variety of ways and still be considered conforming.

An audit is similar to an EPA inspection, except that instead of assessing compliance to a few environmental laws and regulations, the auditor is looking at the organization’s approach to environmental management holistically, all the ways their operation can affect the environment, both positively and negatively. The auditor for the registrar visits the facility to determine if they’re meeting the requirements for 14001, or whatever standard it is that they want to become registered for, so they can recommend that the organization receive certification for their efforts.

But certification is just the start. In a systems audit, we’re looking at the management of all media — air, water, and land, as well as effects to the community and natural resources use. We also look to see what positive impacts an organization is having on the environment. When a business has met the baseline for compliance, we want to take it a step further and help them make improvements to their management of environmental issues. We have to see evidence of that improvement in order for them to keep certification.

BPGL: Is ISO 14001 certification voluntary or a requirement for all businesses?

ISO 14001 is a requirement for US businesses that trade overseas.

LONG: It depends. ISO 14001 is a requirement for companies that want to do business or sell things overseas. But for companies that just do business in the US, it’s not a requirement, yet. Many automotive companies require their suppliers at various levels to be certified, as they are themselves.

In some states there’s an environmental award issued by the governor or by a state agency, or even by the EPA, which has an environmental performance track. The award is a special type of recognition that has benefits that go along with it. And, often, one of requirements for getting into those programs or awards is that a business is a 14001-certified system. That’s as far as we’ve taken it in this country.

I think we place too high a value on compliance with laws and regulations. Our focus on compliance skews the metrics for performance by equating compliance with doing what is best for the environment. ISO 14001 requires the focus to shift to efficiency and sustainability, but many do not understand this. Also because it is voluntary, ISO is seen as less stringent, so businesses, regulators and the community at large still view compliance as the gold standard for environmental stewardship. We’re really missing the boat here.

Think of driving your car within the posted speed limit — you are complying with a law, but it doesn’t mean you are a good driver, or that you are committed to improving your driving skills. Lets face it: Many drivers focus on avoiding getting caught speeding more than they do driving as well as possible. It’s no different with environmental regulations.

Sure, obeying the laws is important, but our laws aren’t always the best option for environmental protection. Plus, laws don’t require you to improve or be more efficient — the EPA doesn’t care if businesses operate efficiently, their primary concern is for the public welfare. But as we talked about before, using laws to eliminate businesses because of environmental concerns is no more sustainable than allowing businesses to pollute as much as they want.

BPGL: Are many US businesses opting for ISO 14001 certification?

LONG: The US lags far behind the rest of the world in putting ISO 14001 systems in place. Any kind or size of operation you can think of can implement the standard, whether it’s a mom-and-pop grocery store or a not-for-profit organization, an office building, or a major industrial facility. And it’s an international standard, so it doesn’t just mean that the US can do it.

BPGL: Is a lack of efficiency something the environmental manager should be watching for?

Businesses can't be very profitable when they operate inefficiently. Photo: Joe Hennager

LONG: Of course. Businesses want to be as profitable as possible, but you can’t maximize profits when you operate inefficiently. In ISO 14001, we have to look beyond compliance and understand the metrics that indicate good environmental performance as well as the context of the business, in order to make a judgment about whether they’re actually being successful at protecting the environment, being efficient, and becoming a sustainable business.

BPGL: So in some cases you’re an auditor and in other cases, you’re a consultant?

LONG: Exactly. I play two very different roles in my career. And the two really don’t meet. They can’t meet. I could never audit somebody that I consulted and I would not consult somebody that I had audited.

Consultants and auditors aren’t miracle workers — successful environmental management is up to top management. They have to be committed and supportive of environmental management, or it doesn’t work. Something I see everywhere is that companies hire an environmental manager, and he becomes the scapegoat. He’s the person that gets blamed whenever something goes wrong. But that’s just one person overseeing the activities of many other people, sometimes hundreds or even thousands, who all have the ability to impact the environment in some way through their work. I can speak to this, because I was in this position. One environmental manager, or even a small group of them, cannot possibly know what any one person is going to do right or wrong on any one day, and cannot possibly carry out all those activities by themselves just to ensure they happen properly.

A single environmental manager can't possibly know everything everyone does on any given day.

Regardless of this impossible scenario, it is the reality in most traditional compliance-based system: all the onus comes back down on one person’s shoulders, the environmental guy/gal. So when mistakes are made, there’s a blaming culture that is very much out there, and it happens at all levels. But blaming doesn’t solve any problems.

BPGL: But how do you get away from that, when it all rolls downhill?

LONG: ISO 14001 tries to change that. The first thing it asks is, “Who is ultimately responsible?” Top management. They’re the ones who need to provide the resources to be able to get these things done. And that means resources throughout the organization. So you can’t just hand it to one person and say, “Here you go, here’s your system.” I try to work with management so they can get the right information to the right people, so they can each do their own work properly. That is so key.

BPGL: How can anyone be expected to be compliant when they can’t possibly know all the laws?

LONG: Being an environmental manager in a traditional compliance-based system is almost an impossible job. There’s no one person who can know everything, every law that is out there. I don’t profess to know even close to a small decimal point of all the laws that are out there.

This is one of the things I really like about 14001. Of course, you have to know what laws apply to you. However, at the end of the day, if you’re in doubt, you have your two other commitments to fall back on: Is what you’re doing preventing pollution? And is what you’re doing helping you to get better? If you meet those other two commitments, you are usually in compliance as well. By the same token, if those two questions aren’t answered, it doesn’t matter whether you’re compliant or not.

Compliance is ultimately arbitrary, because the same laws often apply in different environments, and also because they are influenced by politics and culture. For example, who is protecting the environment better? California doesn’t allow you to dump oil on the ground, but they do exempt some other nasty stuff from environmental regulation because of political lobbying. Whereas Mexico doesn’t care too much about oil on the ground, but you have to plant a lot of trees to offset the land you took up to build a parking lot.

ISO 14001 provides the tools for moving beyond compliance to arbitrary laws and begin following the path to true sustainability. It helps its adherents make sure the right people are doing the right job, and that they have adequate resources. It eliminates the blaming cycle by assigning accountability and responsibility to those with the proper authority. It also demands cooperative effort to find solutions that address the roots of problems rather than their symptoms, and recognizes that you can’t push your problems off on someone else. These are the management concepts I try to help people grasp, not only as an auditor, but as a consultant and trainer.

Businesses are using down time to get organized. Photo: Joe Hennager

BPGL: Are you seeing a decrease in voluntary compliance in this economic downturn?

LONG: It’s interesting, because a lot of people are asking, “Is this economic slowdown affecting people’s ability to comply with environmental laws, are they cutting corners, things like that?” Actually, what I’ve found in my travels, has been more that people are taking the time to focus on some things that they don’t have the time to do when they’re running full bore. They’re doing maintenance, they’re taking the time to do some projects. So actually, we’re seeing some environmental improvements.

At least at this stage, we’re seeing that people are taking some time to do the little things that don’t cost a lot of money but the kind of things they couldn’t really justify in the course of day-to-day operations. For example, they’re organizing so that parts and materials are inside or in areas where they are less likely to impact the environment. They’re getting the stuff out of the way so they can continue running their lines. Now they’re saying, The line’s down, let’s organize this area. Let’s make it neat and safe and as environmentally friendly a space as possible.

Part 1: Red Tape, Regulations, and Environmental Crimes

Part 2: ISO 14001: Comply with Laws, Prevent Pollution, Continually Improve (Top of Page)

Part 3: Green Consultant Boosts Efficiency and Profits

Julia Wasson

Blue Planet Green Living (Home Page)

Related Post:

My 5: Molly Long, A.W.E. Consulting

Polar Bear Sculpture Floats Down Thames

Editor’s note: On occasion, we bring you press releases about interesting events around the world. We received the following release from UKTV in London:

London, 26th January 2009: A 16 foot high sculpture of an iceberg featuring a stranded female polar bear and her baby cub was launched on the River Thames today providing Londoners with a timely reminder of the dangers of global warming.

The sculpture, which was specially commissioned to mark the launch of Eden, a new digital TV channel devoted to natural history, graphically brought to life one of the most iconic images of climate change – the melting ice caps.

A life-like 16ft high sculpture of an iceberg featuring a stranded polar bear and its cub was launched on the Thames today to mark the launch of the new Natural History TV channel Eden

A team of 15 artists spent two months constructing the 20 ft. by 20 ft. square structure, which was launched in Greenwich, South East London at 6:30am, before travelling up the Thames to stop beside Tower Bridge and the Houses of Parliament for a national photocall. The structure weighing 1.5 tonnes was winched into place in freezing temperatures, before travelling 7.5 miles along the Thames.

The melting of the ice caps will not only affect the polar bears, there will also be serious repercussions for the two billion people who depend on the glacial meltwater that feeds their rivers. The polar bears’ presence in London highlights these issues which will also be addressed in Eden’s Fragile Earth series which will run throughout the week.

Broadcaster and eminent wildlife conservationist, Sir David Attenborough says: “The melting of the polar bears’ sea ice habitat is one of the most pressing environmental concerns of our time. I commend Eden for highlighting the issue; we need to do what we can to protect the world’s largest land carnivores from extinction.”

Eden’s Channel Head, Adrian Wills, says: “The Earth is a fragile place and we were keen to launch with a message that would draw attention to the uncertain state of our finely balanced environment. Our aim is to reflect one amazing world, with one amazing channel that can address issues like climate change whilst providing an entertaining, informative experience by airing a range of high-end premieres, landmark natural history programmes and first class wildlife documentaries.”

The Eden sculpture is certified as 100% recyclable by the Set Salvage Company authorised by the Mayor of London’s office.

Now the polar bears’ have finished their journey along the Thames, they will be taking the message about global warming to Hampstead Heath as well as key cities across the UK including Birmingham and Glasgow.

Eden’s programming starts at 9am, Monday 26th January 2009, with Attenborough Explores…Our Fragile World at 10pm. A programme schedule for the new, digital, Natural History channel Eden can be found online.

Eden goes live at 9am on 26th January with a schedule packed full of high-end premieres. From the scale and beauty of Superstorm, Ganges and Wild China to the revelation and intimacy of Tribe (series 3), Elephant Diaries (series 2) and Tribal Wives – that will play alongside landmark series such as Planet Earth, Ray Mears’ Extreme Survival, Life of Mammals and Full Circle with Michael Palin. A complementary Eden website goes live on the same day.

Eden can be found on:
Sky Channel: 532
Virgin TV Channel: 208

Blue Planet Green Living (Home Page)

Related Posts:

UNFCCC Meets on Climate Change

Red Tape, Regulations, and Environmental Crimes

“When I went to Ireland recently,” says environmental auditor and consultant Molly Long, “I sat in a pub with a pint of Guinness while being lectured to by an average citizen of Dublin about what environmental terrorists we Americans are. He didn’t know we were environmental consultants. It was a really interesting perspective. He said we do a terrible job of protecting the environment.”

Long is a former hazardous waste inspector for the state of Indiana. Today she is in high demand as an ISO 14001 auditor and an environmental consultant, two services she provides through A.W.E. [Agriculture. Wildlife. Environmental.] Consulting, Inc. As an enforcer of laws, an environmental auditor, and a consultant, Long has worked extensively with a wide variety of businesses, industries, and government groups. In this interview, she brings broad perspective to the topic of environmental laws and regulations.

Molly Long, Environmental Auditor and Consultant

We interviewed Long from her office in Michigan City, Indiana. What follows is the first of a three-part interview.

BPGL: What was your response to the criticism that businesses in the U.S. are environmental terrorists?

LONG: I wanted to listen, to hear what that take was. I didn’t want to pollute it with my own opinion. It was an eye opener. They thought our environmental laws were weak and shabby and didn’t do a good job of protecting the environment. And when I think back on it, they’re right. Our environmental laws have not done a good job of protecting the environment. But they’ve done a great job of confusing everybody.

Businesses constantly struggle to consistently comply with the laws and regulations – forget about trying to improve the environment. Our environmental laws are so complicated, we can’t really even tell if they are effective or not at protecting the environment.

BPGL: Are you talking about red tape?

LONG: Yes. Red tape is one of the biggest environmental tragedies we have. Having been an enforcer of laws and regulations, I can tell you that red tape is probably 90 percent of the problem. People can’t dig through it, and they can’t put proper resources toward physically protecting the environment because they are too worried about what kind of records they need to keep. Besides creating a red tape nightmare that kills more trees than it saves, we have actually weakened true environmental protection through our environmental laws because they are designed to manage a lowest common denominator for environmental protection that applies across a broad spectrum of regulated businesses. This results in some industries being under regulated and others being regulated out of business, or choosing to go somewhere else.

If you want to look at the causes of economic collapse, one of them is losing our industrial base. There is no country that can become strong and have a good, sound economy without an industrial base. For example, the steel companies are heavily regulated and cause a lot of pollution, but we need the goods that they make. We should be working closely with them to make sure we are regulating the right things environmentally and still allowing them to operate in a sustainable way. The very environmental laws that govern us are part of our problem.

BPGL: More of a problem than causing endless paperwork and confusion?

LONG: Yes, because often we aren’t regulating the right things, things that can have major environmental impacts. Remember the coal ash incident that happened recently in the Tennessee Valley? Coal ash is not regulated. We’ve taught all industry and business to focus only on those things that they can get in trouble for, not on those things that they should be taking care of for the simple reason that they’re bad for the environment. Just like with any other legislation, lobbyists and influence groups all come into play in the making of environmental laws. When I was a regulator, we had a saying: “Regulate by the part per billion and exempt by the ton.” Coal ash is one of those things that gets exempted by the ton.

We were raking mom and pop organization over the coals for miniscule amounts of pollution, (and sometimes putting them out of business) while the big guys could dump literally tons of polluting substances because the material was exempted from environmental regulation. It was exempted because the big guys had the big bucks to pay for lobbyists to get them the regulations they wanted Meanwhile, the big guys are allowed to dump tons and tons and tons of this stuff, because it’s not regulated. What that means is, some lobbyist got in there and got what they wanted. The problem with laws and regulations is that they are subject to that very kind of influence. On one hand that sounds evil, but on the other hand, you can’t blame industry, because they are trying to find a way to operate and stay in this country.

Laws and regulations covering industry are not as strict in some parts of the country.

Another confusing issue is that laws and regulations covering industry are not as strict in some parts of the country. Let’s say you’re in Alabama and you really want to bring industry down there. It’s the hot spot right now — all the South is the hot spot for industry. They’re giving every incentive they can think of to get industry to come down there. And let me tell you, the laws and regulations in Alabama are not the same as they are in Maine, or California, or Iowa, or Chicago. They’re going to do what they can to get the business down there.

BPGL: Does that mean they’re going to weaken their restrictions in the South? How can they do that?

LONG: The rules are set up to where the EPA is the federal baseline, and you can’t be weaker than the federal baseline. But the federal baselines are trying to cover 50 different states and the U.S. protectorates, as well, so we have lots of different scenarios, and the [federal] rules are going to be very broad and general.

States are authorized to run their own EPA programs, and they’re expected to make more stringent regulations based on the more specific environments in the state. There are lots of different contexts for the type of environment that needs protecting. Think of a business that operates in the middle of the desert versus a business right next to a wetland versus a business in the middle of a forest versus a business in the middle of a neighborhood.

BPGL: What are some examples of those different contexts?

LONG: I’ve seen some steel mills that are in the middle of a major city, and I’ve seen others that are out in the middle of nowhere. They have very different environmental concerns. The one steel mill that’s in the middle of the city is basically in a funnel, surrounded by multi-million dollar homes. They are scrutinized by the community every second of the every day, and people are concerned about their property value in addition to the environment. At this mill, everything it has is under cover. Their scrap yards are covered, so they can minimize noise and dust. And they have certain loading procedures for their ladles so that they don’t make noise.

But something that’s out in the middle of nowhere, and nobody’s around to hear or see, that’s a whole different story. Another steel mill has no human neighbors, but is very committed to protecting thousands of acres of forest nearby. It’s all about context. There’s no regulation or set of regulations that can cover every situation in a way that’s right for everyone. Instead of issuing laws based on theoretical science and the interests of lobbyists, regulators should be working closely with industry to determine solutions for environmental protection that are tailored to the business and the environmental context it operates in.

BPGL: With so many different contexts, how well do the regulations work?

Steel mill regulations are often made by people who have never worked in a steel mill.

LONG: One of the biggest problems we have in this country is that we’re piling all these regulations on different industries, and the regulations are made by people who don’t necessarily understand how things work on the level that they’re regulating. In other words, somebody is making regulations for a steel company who has never worked in a steel company. They don’t know how it functions, and that’s a problem because they can’t make the regulations match very closely to what needs to be done.

We’ve already got hundreds of thousands, if not millions and more, different regulations, and it varies from state to state, sometimes from city to city, sometimes from one area of a city to another area of the city, depending on the size of the city. We’re regulating all these fine distinctions, especially when it comes to something like air. We have all these complicated air regulations. But at the end of the day, you can’t subdivide air. You can’t say, This portion of air is clean, and this portion right next to it is not clean. It just doesn’t work that way. As my father says, that’s like having a no peeing section in a swimming pool.

BPGL: That brings me to a comment we heard from a family in Iowa. Their pool service company said that the acidity of their swimming pool had changed in the last few years because of the increasing number of coal plants in China.

LONG: Exactly. Weather patterns are worldwide. Air is certainly affected by weather, and weather is affected by air. What we do here is affecting what happens over there, and vice versa. We can’t just say, “You make your air as clean as possible, and everything will be okay.”

We end up pushing a lot of our problems away instead of dealing with them. We say, “Well, we just won’t have this industry here next to us, because it will be bad,” instead of working together to find a solution that is sustainable for everybody. It’s not sustainable if you’re putting all the nasties somewhere else. Then you’ve just made a problem for somebody else, and you’ve greatly increased inefficiency, greatly increased cost, greatly increased all the problems that go with it.

Another big problem with environmental regulation in this country is that it sets a very adversarial tone between industry and government. It sets up a fear among business owners: I could go to jail if I do this wrong! That’s the way our justice system works, but it doesn’t stop the bad guys from doing wrong – it just makes the average law-abiding citizen scared and confused. Then to top it off, the EPA does not offer any assistance or even a consistent interpretation of their laws. This causes many people to accidentally violate laws simply because of ignorance of them or misunderstanding the law’s intent.

That certainly doesn’t mean there aren’t people who don’t willfully violate environmental laws. When I was an inspector, there were people who were sent to jail through my inspections, and they deserved it. There were some really bad actors.

BPGL: Give an example of an environmental crime that got someone sent to jail.

Dumping hazardous wastes is illegal.

LONG: An electroplater was going out of business and was dumping all his chemicals down the drain to the city. The city traced it back, shut off his sewer access, and called the state to investigate. By the time I got there, he was trying to sell his wastes and extra chemicals and trying to leave the state, possibly the country. In his parking lot, he was burning what he couldn’t sell. We also found out he had made a deal with the city to sell his polluted property (they didn’t know) to use for a children’s activity center. Based on my investigation and those of other state and federal agencies, he went to the federal pen.

Another company was picking up people’s waste and claiming to properly dispose of it. But it turned out they were dumping it in various fields around the county. We went to their residence to investigate and discovered a shed full of bulging drums of unknown material, which led to a big clean-up operation. These people also went to prison.

But that isn’t really the end goal — that only upon threat of death or going to jail that you should do something. You should do things because it makes sense to you and for the community, and because it helps your business. That’s the way a business has to work or it can’t succeed. A country where businesses can’t succeed is not going to have a strong economy, and countries with bad economies can’t do a good job of protecting the environment.

Part 1 of 3

Part 1: Red Tape, Regulations, and Environmental Crimes (Top of Page)

Julia Wasson

Blue Planet Green Living (Home Page)

Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference, Feb. 4-6, 2009

The Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference will take place in Washington, DC, February 4 - 6, 2009 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel and Omni Shoreham Hotel. The following information is provided in the conference brochure.

“The 2009 Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference will bring together 2,000 prominent leaders from the labor movement, business and industry, environmental organizations and community groups, as well as elected officials and decision makers from government, to forge an agenda for transforming our struggling economy through a variety of innovative environmental investments — including energy efficiency, renewable energy and green technologies. This agenda will constitute a powerful ‘new green deal’ — creating jobs, increasing energy independence, reducing global warming and dramatically expanding clean energy and green technology markets.”

“The Conference will:

• Focus the country on the specific combination of policy changes, public investments and funding mechanisms that are necessary to accelerate the growth of the green economy;
• Quantify and illustrate the job-creating potential of global warming solutions and green chemistry;
• Demonstrate the breadth of the coalition that supports the transition to a clean, renewable energy economy; and
• Highlight the potential of the green economy to forge a new social agenda that lifts Americans out of poverty, improves public health and strengthens our middle class.”

THE GREEN JOBS EXPO

Meet with trade groups, corporations, manufacturers, non-profit groups, government groups, and academic institutions. Check out their displays and find out about green jobs and academic programs for today and tomorrow.

THE GREEN JOBS EXPO THEATER

Listen to presentations about green jobs and careers, and green initiatives. Students from high school, college, and vocational schools are welcome.

GREEN JOBS ADVOCACY DAY

Go with your fellow conference participants to Capitol Hill, to “educate lawmakers about the new, green economy.”

SPEAKERS

The speakers’ roster includes:

• Sherrod Brown, U.S. Senator
• Amy Klobuchar, U.S. Senator
• Kathleen Sebelius, Governor, State of Kansas
• Martin O’Malley, Governor, State of Maryland
• Keith Ellison, U.S. Congressman, 5th District, Minnesota
• Achim Steiner, Executive Director, UNEP
• Cathy Zoi, CEO, Alliance for Climate Protection
• James P. Hoffa, General President, Teamsters Union
• Denise Bode, CEO, American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)
• Van Jones, Founding President, Green for All
• And more!

COST

$125 per person

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Jennifer Bakkom
612-378-4154
jenb@bluegreenalliance.org

REGISTRATION

Conference attendees may register online. Some sessions are already filled, so hurry!

Julia Wasson

Blue Planet Green Living (Home Page)

Notes from Nepal: Climate Change Reaches the Himalayas

In Jagdish Poudel’s first entry in the “Notes from Nepal” series, he told us that he would soon be going to the Himalayas to teach uneducated rural residents about climate change. Last week, Poudel, along with fellow environmental science M.Sc. students Aseem Kanchan, Raju Pokharel, and Mausam Khanal, journeyed to Khudi, high in the Annapurna Mountain Range. What follows is Jagdish’s second entry, in which he tells us about giving a presentation to Khudi villagers, who live in a place where the once-abundant snow has turned to rain, and the mountainsides are losing their coat of white.

Jagdish Poudel, Aseem Kanchan, Raju Pokharel, and Mausam Khanal pose in front of a snowless Himal (mountain) on the way to Khudi.

Nepal is rich in biodiversity and natural resources. While the nation leaps through the process of economic development and embraces globalization at an accelerated pace, she also demonstrates concern for biodiversity conservation and sustainability. Central to this process, however, is the understanding that it is never easy to balance the delicate relationship between conservation and development, especially given the complex effects of climate change.

As the environment warms, the survival of a large number of plant and animal species will depend on their ability to move to higher latitudes and altitudes. The ever-accelerating warming of the environment can, therefore, cause a loss of ecosystem integrity or destroy the habitats of certain species. Consequently, large populations of plant and animal species could be wiped out due to climate change and habitat fragmentation.

Rural residents take notes during the students' presentation.

Keeping these things in mind, three other M.Sc. students and I went to the village of Khudi to organize a workshop on climate change and its impact on the local people. We had an idea about the things that we would need to show to them. We had been wondering whether we could make them understand. We four friends gave three presentations, including some important points about temperature increases due to greenhouses gases; the melting of snow and ice; and changes in rainfall patterns, with increased frequency of extreme rains. People living in and around Khudi watershed are experiencing different rainfall patterns than in previous years, sometimes heavy enough to cause the loss of fertile soil, as well as flooding and landslides.

Poudel and his friends give a high-tech presentation in a Himalayan village.

Observers have noted an overall decrease in annual rainfall in the arid and semi-arid regions of the Annapurna Range. So far this year, there has been no rainfall in the area. Consequently, there is less snow on the Himal (mountain) and the water level in the river has been low. I saw that the Himal was bare, where there used to be a huge amount of snow just a few years ago. Meanwhile, there has been an increasing tendency of extreme showers and storms in summer, leading to severe flood disasters and soil erosion. Besides increased floods, there is also an increase in the frequency of other natural disasters, such as heat waves, drought, dust storms, and typhoons.

In the development process and expansion of human activities, lots of rangeland and forest areas have been, and are still being, replaced by agricultural lands. Besides the above-mentioned impacts of climate change, there are other direct and indirect threats to biodiversity from climate change. We anticipated that the local people would mention these at the workshop. Some points I was expecting them to mention included: widely spreading invasive organisms, especially weeds and pests; shortage and uneven distribution of water resources (we saw this at Khudi, when we took a look around the area); growing vulnerability of grasslands, forests, and wetlands, and of the people who are dependent on those natural resources; and a decrease in the health of the ecosystem.

Poudel explains climate change to the group.

Above all, the increase in climate variability and extreme events will alter environmental conditions and threaten many species that live in narrow habitats. We couldn’t find any data over there yet, but study has to be done on that area for this purpose. The giant panda, for example, has a very brief breeding period in the later spring and early summer. Changes in the timing of seasonal temperatures may upset its breeding season and place further stress on this species. This may apply to many other species, as well, such as the snow leopards and the red pandas that are found in Sagarmatha National Park, Annapurna Conservation Area, and Langtang National Park.

The people at Khudi told us that some vegetables and improved seeds of agricultural crops are growing better this year than before, even though they don’t understand why. People also experienced an increased number of mosquitos and insects around Khudi. This, too, is due to climate change.

A 71-year-old man listens intently.

As far as I could tell while interacting with local people, they didn’t know what climate change is. But in government and private schools, students are learning about it from their teachers.

I had a deep interaction with an old man of age 71. He was trying hard to understand the presentation I was making. After my presentation, he told me that he now knows what climate change is and how it happened. The old man was not in the mood to know why this is happening; he doesn’t even want to know more about climate change. But he was keen to understand about the mitigation techniques and precautions he needs to take to protect his land and his family from natural disasters that might occur if the Khudi river floods in summer.

The class poses for a group photo.

He is an old man. Even if he tries hard to know how all these things happen, he will hardly understand all our scientific data and facts. He does understand the pictures and videos that I took there to show the people. I am happy that he wants to know more about mitigation techniques and precautions against natural hazards.

But climate change is not a problem that can be solved just by the effort of a few people. It needs global support and determination. Educating the younger generation and school students is the most important thing we can do to stop further harmful impacts from climate change.

It was a nice workshop, where most of the local people and school students participated. I would like to do such work again and again in those places where people are directly affected by climate change.

Jagdish Poudel

Contributing Writer

Blue Planet Green Living (Home Page)

Related Posts:

Notes from Nepal: Teaching Climate Change in the Himalayas