Global Food – 2 billion tonnes of all food produced ends up as waste

As much as 2 billion tonnes of all food produced ends up as waste Institution of Mechanical Engineers calls on urgent action to prevent 50% of all food produced in the world ending up as waste 10 January 2013

A report by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers has found that as much as 50% of all food produced around the world never reaches a human stomach due to issues as varied as inadequate infrastructure and storage facilities through to overly strict sell-by dates, buy-one-get-one free offers and consumers demanding cosmetically perfect food.
With UN predictions that there could be about an extra three billion people to feed by the end of the century and an increasing pressure on the resources needed to produce food, including land, water and energy, the Institution is calling for urgent action to tackle this waste.

The report ‘Global Food; Waste Not,Want Not’ found that:

• between 30% and 50% or 1.2-2 billion tonnes of food produced around the world each year never reaches a human stomach;
• as much as 30% of UK vegetable crops are not harvested due to them failing to meet exacting standards based on their physical appearance, while up to half of the food that’s bought in Europe and the USA is thrown away by the consumer;
• about 550 billion m3 of water is wasted globally in growing crops that never reach the consumer;
• it takes 20-50 times the amount of water to produce 1 kilogram of meat than 1 kilogram of vegetables;
• the demand for water in food production could reach 10–13 trillion m3 a year by 2050. This is 2.5 to 3.5 times greater than the total human use of fresh water today and could lead to more dangerous water shortages around the world;
• there is the potential to provide 60-100% more food by eliminating losses and waste while at the same time freeing up land, energy and water resources.

Dr Tim Fox, Head of Energy and Environment at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers said: “The amount of food wasted and lost around the world is staggering. This is food that could be used to feed the world’s growing population – as well as those in hunger today. It is also an unnecessary waste of the land, water and energy resources that were used in the production, processing and distribution of this food.

“The reasons for this situation range from poor engineering and agricultural practices, inadequate transport and storage infrastructure through to supermarkets demanding cosmetically perfect foodstuffs and encouraging consumers to overbuy through buy-one-get-one free offers.  “As water, land and energy resources come under increasing pressure from competing human demands, engineers have a crucial role to play in preventing food loss and waste by developing more efficient ways of growing, transporting and storing foods. “But in order for this to happen Governments, development agencies and organisation like the UN must work together to help change people’s mindsets on waste and discourage wasteful practices by farmers, food producers, supermarkets and consumers.”

By 2075 the UN predicts that the world’s population is set to reach around 9.5 billion, which could mean an extra three billion mouths to feed. A key issue to dealing with this population growth is how to produce more food in a world with resources under competing pressures – particularly given the added stresses caused by global warming and the increasing popularity of eating meat – which requires around 10 times the land resources of food like rice or potatoes.

The world produces about four billion metric tonnes of food per year, but wastes up to half of this food through poor practices and inadequate infrastructure. By improving processes and infrastructure as well as changing consumer mindsets, we would have the ability to provide 60-100% more food to feed the world’s growing population.
The ‘Global Food; Waste Not,Want Not’ report recommends that:

1. The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) works with the international engineering community to ensure governments of developed nations put in place programmes that transfer engineering knowledge, design know-how, and suitable technology to newly developing countries. This will help improve produce handling in the harvest, and immediate post-harvest stages of food production.
2. Governments of rapidly developing countries incorporate waste minimisation thinking into the transport infrastructure and storage facilities currently being planned, engineered and built.
3. Governments in developed nations devise and implement policy that changes consumer expectations. These should discourage retailers from wasteful practices that lead to the rejection of food on the basis of cosmetic characteristics, and losses in the home due to excessive purchasing by consumers.

You might also like “The Under-Recognised Public Health Problem of Food Waste” here

Independent Distributed Energy and Transport Systems

Electric Vehicles provide clean and efficient transport systems – bus, car, bike, ferry EV also can be used as mobile energy storage/backup energy storage – EV can be charged during day from solar to provide additional backup energy for peak day/night if required with smart systems ensuring energy left for travel the next day and top up power from off peak electricity.

Integrated with solar they can provide zero emissions transport – plug in charging stations can be located almost anywhere with stations having their own battery storage to fast charge vehicles for increased range. Stations can be located at supermarkets, shopping centres, work sites as well as commercial charging stations. Customers with solar can sell power to other customers rather than to big distributors so distributed energy systems rather than centralised improves energy security.

This needs to be managed by progressive distribution networks The E-revolution is soon to become a reality in Australia.  Electric vehicles and devices will explode within the space of ten years offering those who are ready, equipped and capable of understanding the bigger picture, employment and development opportunities that will parallel the early industrial revolution.  With the introduction of eVehicle, eBike, eScooter and eBus, solar energy capture and energy distribution infrastructure will also offer a major investment portfolio prospect for organisations seeking returns for their members.

Colin Gillam  spoke at the  Making Cities Liveable Conference in conjunction with the Sustainability Conference “SustainableTransformation” in Melbourne in 2013.

Electric Cars May Be Safer than Conventional Vehicles… more

The Dust Bowl Returns

FRESNO, Calif.

EVERY Saturday in late December and January, as reports of brutal temperatures and historic snowfalls streamed in from family in Vermont, New York and even southern Louisiana, we made weekly pilgrimages to our local beer garden to enjoy craft brews and unseasonably warm afternoons.

Normal winters here in Fresno, in the heart of California’s Central Valley, bring average highs in the 50s, steady periods of rain and drizzle, and the dense, bone-chilling Tule fog that can blanket the valley for days and even weeks on end.

But not this year. Instead, early 2014 gave us cloudless skies and midday temperatures in the 70s. By the end of January, it seemed like April, with spring trees in full bloom.

Read the full artcle By BLAIN ROBERTS and ETHAN J. KYTLE in The New York Times

Sustainable Renewable Energy Sources in US continue to grow

Sustainable Renewable Energy

According to the latest issue of the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) “Electric Power Monthly,” with preliminary data through to June 30, 2013, renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar, wind) provided 14.20 percent of the nation’s net electric power generation during the first half of the year. For the same period in 2012, renewables accounted for 13.57 percent of net electrical generation.

Moreover, non-hydro renewables have more than tripled their output during the past decade. They now account for almost the same share of electrical generation (6.71 percent) as does conventional hydropower (7.49 percent). Ten years ago (i.e., calendar year 2003), non-hydro renewables provided only 2.05 percent of net U.S. electrical generation.

Comparing the first six months of 2013 to the same period in 2012, solar thermal & PV combined have grown 94.4 percent (these additions understate actual solar capacity gains. Unlike other energy sources, significant levels of solar capacity exist in smaller, non-utility-scale applications – e.g., rooftop solar photovoltaics). Wind increased 20.1 percent and geothermal grew by 1.0 percent, while biomass declined by 0.5 percent while hydropower dropped by 2.6 percent. Among the non-hydro renewabes, wind is in the lead, accounting for 4.67 percent of net electrical generation, followed by biomass (1.42 percent), geothermal (0.43 percent), and solar (0.19 percent).

Business Imperative and Market Demand Driving Green Building Growth

 

As sustainability and energy efficiency initiatives take hold around the world, firms are finding business value and opportunities from green building, including the opportunity for new environmentally responsible products, according to McGraw-Hill Construction’s latest SmartMarket Report, “World Green Building Trends – Business Benefits Driving New and Retrofit Market Opportunities in Over 60 Countries,” released today. The report, developed in partnership with United Technologies Corp. (UTC), is based on a study of global green building trends and aims to discern drivers of the green building marketplace.

According to the study, firms are shifting their business toward green building, with 51 percent of respondents planning more than 60 percent of their work to be green by 2015. This is a significant increase from the 28 percent that said the same for their work in 2013 and double the 13 percent in 2008.

This growth is not a trend localized to one country or region. From 2012 to 2015, the number of firms anticipating that more than 60 percent of their work will be green:

• More than triples in South Africa;

• More than doubles in Germany, Norway and Brazil;

• Grows between 33 and 68 percent in the United States, Singapore, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates and Australia.

“This report confirms that the green building movement has shifted from ‘push’ to ‘pull’—with markets increasingly demanding no less than green buildings,” said John Mandyck, chief sustainability officer, UTC Climate, Controls & Security. “By promoting greater efficiencies for energy and water, green buildings lower building costs while conserving the earth’s precious resources. This powerful combination of built-in payback with environmental stewardship creates a new value proposition that is accelerating green building in all regions of the globe.”

The key driver to going green, according to the survey, is that now green building is a business imperative around the world. In the 2008 report, McGraw-Hill Construction found that the top driver for green building was “doing the right thing.” However in 2012, business drivers such as client and market demand are the key factors influencing the market.

“The acceleration of the green building marketplace around the world is creating markets for green building products and technologies, which in turn will lead to faster growth of green building,” said Harvey Bernstein, vice president of Industry Insights and Alliances at McGraw-Hill Construction. “And the fact that green is growing in all parts of the world indicates that there are market opportunities in both established markets as well as developing countries.”

These opportunities are mapping against expected benefits:

• 76 percent report that green building lowers operating costs

• More than one third point to higher building values (38 percent), quality assurance (38 percent), and future-proofing assets (i.e., protecting against future demands) (36 percent)

Global industry professionals have high expectations of the operating cost benefits of green building—19 percent believe their operating costs will decrease by 15 percent or more over the next year (51 percent believe there will be increases of 6 percent or more), and 39 percent believe they will see savings of 15 percent or more over the next five years (67 percent expect savings of 6 percent or more).

In 2012, 89 percent of global industry professionals report using or specifying a green building product, and even more—91 percent—expect to do so by 2017. The most significant green building product opportunities are in the categories of electrical, mechanical, and thermal and moisture protection with at least 60 percent of survey respondents stating that they had installed or specified products in these categories in 2012, with a slightly higher percentage expecting to do so by 2017.

Given its importance, measuring lower operating costs is also the most used metric to evaluate green building performance—reported by 52 percent. These benefits are particularly important given that they can offset the higher initial costs that 76 percent of the industry report as the biggest challenge to building green.

The findings published in the report are drawn from a McGraw-Hill Construction survey of firms across 62 countries around the world. Firms include architects, engineers, contractors, consultants and building owners. The sample was drawn from firm members of the World Green Building Council in 62 countries, other global industry associations, and the ENR Top Lists. Of the respondents, 92 percent are members of Green Building Councils around the world. The results include a feature of nine countries with sufficient sample for statistical analysis. The study expands and contrasts against McGraw-Hill Construction’s 2008 Global Green SmartMarket Report study. Given the survey sample source, McGraw-Hill Construction compared the sample against a non-GBC member audience, which was comparable in terms of involvement in green and planned activity. Further, the U.S. sample was consistent with McGraw-Hill Construction’s extensive analysis of the U.S. construction market through its Dodge project data.

The study was produced in partnership with United Technologies with support from the World Green Building Council and the U.S. Green Building Council. Other research association partners include the Chartered Institute of Buildings, International Federation of Consulting Engineers (Fédération Internationale Des Ingénieurs-Conseils), Association for Consultancy and Engineering, Conseil International du Bâtiment (International Council for Building), Architect’s Council of Europe, and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. A separate survey of global manufacturing firms was also conducted.

For more key findings from the World Green Building Trends SmartMarket Report, visit http://analyticsstore.construction.com/index.php/world-green-building-trends-smartmarket-report-2013.html

World’s Largest Investors Launch Effort to Engage Global Stock Exchanges on Sustainability Reporting Standard for Companies

Sustainability advocacy group Ceres, in collaboration with BlackRock and other major institutional investors, have announced an initiative to engage global stock exchanges via the World Federation of Exchanges (WFE) on a possible uniform reporting standard for sustainability reporting by all exchange members.

The launch includes specific recommendations for integrating environmental and social disclosure requirements into listing rules for companies listed on U.S. and global stock exchanges. The proposal was developed by Ceres’ Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR) and its member-driven Investor Initiative for Sustainable Exchanges. Over 100 institutional investors from six continents helped shape the listing standards proposal.

The recommendations, highlighted in the report Investor Listing Standards Proposal: Recommendations for Stock Exchange Requirements on Corporate Sustainability Reporting, will be formally submitted this week to stock exchange members of the WFE in conjunction with the launch of an exchange comment period that will run for several months.

“We need a joint solution that will help bring more consistent and comparable information to all markets, and will not leave any one exchange at a competitive disadvantage for taking leadership in this space,” NASDAQ OMX CEO Robert Greifeld said, speaking of the sustainability disclosure engagement process. NASDAQ OMX and Ceres have been working together for almost two years on this issue.

The start of the comment period coincides with the announcement yesterday that the WFE has launched a Sustainability Working Group to discuss and debate sustainability disclosure issues within the exchange community. Exchanges will submit their feedback on the Investor Listing Standards Proposal directly to the WFE.

“Cross border collaboration by stock exchanges will help shift public companies towards more comparable and meaningful disclosure of ESG (environmental, social and governance) risk factors,” said Gwen Le Berre, Vice President of Corporate Governance and Responsible Investment at BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager with $4.3 trillion in assets under management. “This will enable investors to more accurately value companies and make better informed investment decisions.”

“We know from experience that sustainable, long-term growth requires integrating ESG considerations into the investment process,” added New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli, trustee of the New York State Common Retirement Fund, one of the nation’s largest public pension funds. “A global standard for sustainability reporting would give investors data to assess performance and risk, while allowing exchanges and companies to address specific market regulations and cultures.”

“For years, investors have been decrying the current state of corporate sustainability disclosure as woefully insufficient and not comparable,” added Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres and director of INCR. “The time has come for a broadly-adopted sustainability disclosure standard—one that moves beyond voluntary approaches. We look forward to the feedback from exchanges, and their recommendations for advancing robust and useful sustainability reporting worldwide.”

Waste Management JV to Produce Liquid Fuels from Landfill Gas

Houston, Texas based Waste Management, has formed a joint venture company to produce renewable fuels and chemicals from biogas and natural gas using smaller-scale Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) technology.

Read the full article here  Waste Management JV to Produce Liquid Fuels from Landfill Gas

How do we change behaviour in a consumerist society?

By Peter Newton, Swinburne University of Technology

Peter Newton

Many Australians are happy to declare their interest in sustainability, to reducing their environmental impact. But how many of them are prepared to reduce the amount they actually consume?

We recently explored whether Australian households have an “attitude-action gap” on environment and consumption. We surveyed 1200 Melbourne households, examining attitudes, intentions and opinions related to the environment and urban living. We also recorded objective data on actual household consumption of energy, water, housing space, urban travel and domestic appliances.

It’s not uncommon being a material green

Three lifestyle segments emerged: a majority (40.3%) of those who responded to this survey were defined as “material greens”, 33.5% “committed greens” and 26.3% “enviro-sceptics”.

Committed greens were strongly pro-environment in beliefs and behavioural preferences, and prepared to sacrifice economically for an environmental benefit. This was the only group prepared to pay more tax if it would benefit the environment (50%), as well as higher utility charges (56%). A high percentage agreed the environment should be the highest priority, even if it hurts the economy (80%).

This group strongly disagreed (76%) that the expense is not worth the benefits, wanting the environment to take higher priority over the economy. They consistently purchased green-labelled products, declined plastic bags and volunteered time for green projects. They strongly disagreed with statements such as “The environmental crisis is exaggerated”, “I have more important things to do”, “There is no regulation requiring me to”, “Reducing my household’s energy and water consumption is not worth the trouble” and “It’s not my responsibility”.

Material greens moderately agreed the environment should be a higher priority than the economy and that the balance of nature is delicate and easily upset. But 56% agreed that the expense is probably not worth the benefits and — as a bottom line position — they were not willing to pay! This group was vehemently opposed to paying more taxes or higher utility charges (96% and 90%, respectively) from their household budget.

The group was pro-purchase of green-labelled products and avoided use of plastic bags, but was unlikely to donate hours to voluntary environmental work. They saw the environment as important, but not worth paying for in dollars or time, especially by themselves as individuals.

Enviro-sceptics weren’t prepared to make higher personal payments for the environment, and agreed the expense would not be worth the benefits. They weren’t interested in “green choices”: only a low proportion bought green-labelled products, gave up plastic bags and donated time for voluntary environmental projects. A relatively high percentage believed the environmental crisis is exaggerated (44%), they have more important things to focus on (55%), there is no regulation requiring them to (54%) and it’s not their responsibility (45%).

Who are these people?

There were significant socio-demographic differences for these three clusters, in terms of age, gender, level of education, household income, family structure and suburb location.

The committed greens cluster contained more university graduates and households with higher incomes. They know what behaviours are likely to be required in a climate- and resource-constrained future and can pay to make the transition.

The material greens households had the lowest proportion of university graduates, were the youngest and also tended to be on lower household incomes.

The enviro-sceptics contained more men and those aged 45 and over than either of the other clusters.

Although the enviro-sceptics and material greens clusters tended to have similar incomes, the latter cluster is more likely to consist of households with children, which could have had some influence on their pro-environment attitude.

The committed greens lived predominantly in the inner city suburbs (where, in recent years, the Greens Party has become politically dominant), while the material greens tended to live in greenfields and outer suburban areas. Enviro-sceptics are dispersed across the city.

They talk the talk, but…

When we examined actual levels of household consumption of energy and water (from most recent bills), housing space, urban travel and appliances, there were no significant differences between the three lifestyle groups in relation to their combined level of urban resource consumption.

The gap between intentions and action like that revealed here is a significant challenge for behaviour change research. People want to be sustainable consumers, but there are clearly significant barriers getting in their way. What stops people reducing their consumption? Lack of time makes it difficult to make the necessary changes; and there are financial challenges, including determining whether the benefits reward the financial outlay. At a pragmatic level, there remains a lack of information on what can be done and how best to get it done – a challenge for social marketers and an opportunity for new business services in a green economy.

A deeper challenge is that social norms relating to sustainable consumption are yet to materialise in high income societies, such as Australia; they would constitute an important influence on the voluntary behaviour of individuals and households. An ethos of household water conservation that emerged during the recent drought (encouraged by a combination of media and restrictions) quickly evaporated when state governments removed restrictions. In the space of two years, average daily per capita consumption has increased by 66% to 250 litres in Melbourne. Old habits returned.

It’s an open question whether imminent system failure will be required to trigger a “tipping point” in societal values associated with environment and consumption. This is a major reason why supply-side urban technology initiatives need to proceed apace, why governments need to remain actively involved in regulation, pricing and incentive programs, and why research that spans the cognitive-social spectrum of consumption must continue to search for triggers for effective behaviour change.

This article was originally published at The Conversation.  Read the original article.

Climate impacts– analysing infrastructure interconnectivity and flow-on effects for Australian cities

Nicki Hutlley

Manidis Roberts, KPMG and The Climate Institute (TCI) collaborated to undertake an exercise to credibly identify, quantify and cost, climate impacts on city infrastructure (Melbourne) as a result of extreme heat event.

We modelled the impacts on infrastructure and their interdependencies under a specified climate event. This provided a case study of the flow-on impacts of the damage to infrastructure from future climate events. We explored the interdependencies that play out between businesses and infrastructure owners and operators under future climatic conditions, such as an extreme heat, sea level rise or extreme rainfall events. The exercise identified nodes of interconnectivity and interdependency and where there are critical infrastructure vulnerabilities to future climatic events. It also analysed flow-on effects throughout the economy of any resulting disruption to services and performance of assets as a consequence of these events.

There have been very few exercises of this nature carried out to date, and this now forms an important body of research for the TCI Resilience Flagship Project and more widely. An analysis found businesses and organisations are largely unprepared for a heatwave event of magnitude. 2030 predictions doubling both frequency and severity of impacts would severely overstretch budgets, infrastructure capacity, coping ranges and system interactions and would be unmanageable. The potential impact on individual businesses in terms of effect on total revenue was calculated. The exercise also shows that the responsibility for planning and actions to reduce vulnerabilities lies with multiple parties and not just those initially impacted. Systems resilience rather than sector resilience is required.

Nicki Hutlley, Chief Economist, KPMG and Stella Whittaker, Senior Executive – Sustainability and Climate Change, Manidis Roberts spoke at the 6th Making Cities Liveable Conference in conjunction with the Sustainability Conference “SustainableTransformation” in 2013

100 Speakers at Joint Sustainability and Liveable Cities Conference Melbourne, June 2013

Over 100 Presenters over the 3 days – 17th to the  19th  of June 2013 at the Novotel Melbourne St Kilda.

Confirmed keynotes presenters include;

• Dr Nick Fleming, Chief Sustainability Officer, Sinclair Knight Merz and Chairman of the Sustainability Taskforce of Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, and a Director of the Board of the Australian Green Infrastructure Council. NSW
• Jason Roberts, Co-Founder, Better Block,  USA
• Melissa Houghton, Director, Sustainability at Work, VIC
• Professor Anthony Capon, Head, Discipline of Public Health, Faculty of Health University of Canberra ACT
• Tony Wood, Energy Program Director, Grattan Institute, VIC
• Simon Lockrey, Research Fellow, Sustainable Products and Packaging, Centre for Design, RMIT University, VIC
• Professor Billie Giles-Corti, Director,   School of Population and Global Health,  Melbourne University, VIC
• Angela Hazebroek , Director Urban and Regional Planning Solutions (URPS),  SA
• John Thwaites, Professorial Fellow, Monash University, and Chair of ClimateWorks Australia and the Monash Sustainability Institute.

Message from the Mayor Amanda Stevens
The City of Port Phillip remains committed to maintaining a sense of place, reinforced by a network of public spaces, local character and built heritage as well as well designed community infrastructure to support our diverse community. This conference will be an excellent opportunity to explore innovation, exchange ideas and be creative… more

Welcome from Conference Chair, Paula Drayton
“This is a fantastic opportunity for professionals in the public and private sector to examine the challenges and solutions needed to develop the Liveable Cities of tomorrow.  The Conference will also examine public policy and social/community outcomes and consider what actions we can take to positively influence the ongoing debate… more

The full program is available on the conference website

Two Conferences! Three Days! One Location!
Delegates will have access to an extensive range of topics with over 100 presentations across three days including Keynotes, Concurrent Sessions, Case Studies and Posters.