Despite overall gains in sustainability, perceptions of sustainability performance are not keeping track, a new report finds.  The report published by brandlogic and CRD Analytics assessed overall sustainability of 100 of the leading corporations and surveyed perceived sustainability from 2500 respondents.  Corporations assessed account for 16% of gross world product. Respondents were drawn from purchasing/supply professionals, investment professionals, and graduating college/university students across six countries.   

The report suggests a failure to effectively communicate sustainability gains to target stakeholder groups who are increasingly skeptical and points to an increased need for effective communication of sustainability gains.

Full Report: www.sustainabilityleadershipreport.com

Image Credit: The Brandlogic Sustainability IQ Matrix(TM) categorizes global brands as Challengers, Leaders, Laggards or Promoters. (Graphic: Brandlogic)

Researchers from Arizona State and Purdue Universities recently unveiled a new computer model for calculating the carbon footprint of individual cities.  Focusing their initial efforts on the city of Indianapolis, the U.S.’s 12th largest metropolitan area, researchers say they can analyze carbon emissions down to the individual building or street segment.  Aggregating the detailed data provides an overview of regional emissions and identifies areas for targeted reductions. Monitoring carbon emissions will help cities baseline carbon contributions, set carbon goals, target energy inefficiencies, and reduce energy costs.  The specialized software, called Hestia, seeks to be more user friendly than current methods for calculating carbon footprints of urban areas, and will provide “interactive, photorealistic, three-dimensional visualization.”

For more on the Hestia Project.

Photo Credit: The Hestia Project, Arizona State University

Earlier this month the Carbon Disclosure Project released their 2012 S&P 500 Climate Change report titled “Accelerating progress toward a lower-carbon future.”   Highlights from the report include:

• ·         655 financial institutions with assets of US$78 trillion were signatories to the CDP in
         2012.
• ·         52% of respondents reported emissions reductions versus 35% in 2011.
• ·         92% of the 2012 S&P 500 respondents reported board or executive-level oversight of CDP
         issues.
• ·         Microsoft and UPS ranked highest with a Carbon Disclosure Score of 99/100.
• ·         The telecommunications sector represents just 1% of all S&P 500 CDP respondents.

Many of the facts disclosed by the report are not surprising, such as the growing corporate emphasis on emissions reductions and a strong showing by technology companies. However, one area of surprise is the under-representation of the telecommunications industry. The telecom industry had only 5 respondents, representing just 1% of all S&P 500 respondents.  It did however, boast 2 companies (3% of the total) on the leaderboards of the Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI) or the Carbon Performance Leadership Index (CPLI).

Chart Credit: Carbon Disclosure Project,2012 "Accelerating progress toward a lower-carbon future."

Marc Gunther, an author for GreenBiz.com, asked himself this very same question in an article titled "What the Heck Happened in Durban?". Depending on whether you see the glass half full or half empty, the outcomes at the UNFCCC's Conference of the Parties 17 in Durban, South Africa will give you a sigh of relief or make your blood boil at the lack of dedication to the climate issue on the global stage. Either way, Marc Gunther provides an excellent summary for you to help come to your own conclusions about what the negotiations in Durban will mean for our future in the face of climate change.

Coppervale's Paul Shmotolokha was recently interviewed by Communications Technology journal for the article, Going Green Makes a Good Investment.

Part 1 of this blog series set up the burgeoning problem of the effect of set-top boxes (STB’s) on home energy use as highlighted by a recent NRDC study. In part 2, the actors responsible for implementing solutions to this growing problem are examined to determine what has been done so far to address the need for more efficient STB’s.

While most U.S. providers are aware of the STB issue, few have taken the steps to implement effective solutions. U.S. operators Verizon Communications and AT&T Inc. are the few cited as having mandated EPA’s Energy Star compliance for its STB’s going forward, taking the first step in ensuring that at least the boxes deployed meet Energy Star requirements. European pay-tv providers, on the other hand, have been pressured by the European Union to recognize the impact STB’s have on the consumer and the environment. For “simple STB’s” (i.e. no “Conditional Access” (CA), no “Digital Video Recorder” (DVR)), the EU has mandated power consumption levels and set timeframes with which operators must meet those levels with the devices they deploy. For complex STB’s (i.e. boxes with CA, DVR, DOCSIS modems, etc.), a voluntary agreement to set power consumption targets and timeframes was developed and brokered by the European ICT industry. Currently, many of the largest cable providers in the EU (Liberty Global/UPC, Kabel Duetschland, Kabel Baden Wurttemberg, Virgin Media, Telenet, and ONO) are participants in this voluntary agreement, along with other “Direct to Home” (DTH) and IP operators, as well as many of the suppliers of STB’s. 

The voluntary agreement calls for STB’s to meet efficiency standards similar to that of the U.S. Energy Star program from an overall power usage standpoint. Additionally, and probably more importantly, the voluntary agreement sets targets for “Total Energy Consumption” (TEC) in a year - targets that can only be met only if operators implement the deep sleep modes for their STB's. Defining and committing to TEC in a year as opposed to just power levels is a hugely positive step in the right direction. Suffice it to say, the agreement is still voluntary, and although estimates by the Digital Interoperability Forum indicate the agreement now covers 80% of the complex STB market in Europe, there is still a portion of the market not participating. Mechanisms such as enforcement and potential sanctions against a participating company that cannot meet the requirements of the agreement have yet to be tested. The voluntary agreement is certainly a great step in the right direction, but is still short of being a complete solution. Interestingly, this effort in Europe, at least anecdotally, is disproving common held beliefs about STB's and their energy efficiency in the home. First, the changes needed to improve STB efficiency have not cost the operators anything significant in the way of higher STB costs. Second, it appears at least for now that they have not caused any significant customer upheaval due to the changes in the way the STB works when sleep modes are implemented.

The STB efficiency issue is gaining traction in the U.S., signaled by the NRDC study and published feedback to the study in the New York Times, other web sites and blogs. The U.S. Department of Energy has communicated plans to put in place mandatory efficiency standards for STB’s similar to its requirements for many other appliances. As consumers become savvy about the total cost of ownership of STBs, they too may begin to actively join the discussion and push back on their providers to address the issue head-on. While the direction regulators, operators, and consumers may take on the issue of STB power usage and efficiency in the U.S. may not be certain, what is certain is that the issue itself is not going away.

Co-Authored by: Chuck Carroll and Lew Rakowsky

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) recently published a study revealing that the electricity required to operate all U.S. set-top boxes (STBs) is equal to the annual household electricity consumption of the entire state of Maryland, results in 16 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, and costs American households more than $3 billion each year. The study identified that more than 80% of U.S. homes subscribe to some form of pay television service, which explains how these energy-hungry devices could consume approximately 27 billion kilowatt hours of electricity equal to the output of nine average (500 megawatt) coal fired power plants in 2010.

In the current business model, broadband and digital television providers specify, purchase, and supply these boxes to customers. As the spread of broadband and digital television services increases, the number of these devices is likely to increase, and subsequently, the customer’s household electricity use is likely to increase. Unfortunately, service providers supplying STB’s and other devices in the home have little or no incentive to design, build, buy or demand more efficient devices because they do not bear the operational cost associated with the device. Instead, the cost to power these devices is shouldered by the consumer.

Therein lies a real problem. From an energy efficiency and energy usage standpoint, there is a disconnect between the consumer who pays for the electricity to power the box, and the operator who by and large determines how much electricity the box will use. The driver behind the NRDC research is an effort to raise public awareness about the amount of electricity these devices use, their cost to consumers for that electricity, and more importantly, the growing impact these boxes will have on our energy grid if the industry continues down a path of disinterest regarding STB efficiency. 

There are two primary solutions the NRDC cites to significantly reduce the overall power requirements of these boxes in the home. One opportunity exists with the EPA Energy Star program to specify new targets for efficient STB’s to meet, as well as to qualify STB’s to these standards. The second and most important strategy to minimize “Total Energy Consumption” (TEC) in the home is to employ devices that can go into a much lower power, deep sleep mode when not in use. This feature allows for true strides to be made in lowering overall power usage in the home. What we do as a society today with STB’s is the equivalent of “leaving the lights on in a room even when they are not needed”. It seems that with STB’s the assumption is that we need to leave them powered on and fully capable continuously, and that anything short of that is too a great an inconvenience for consumers to justify the energy savings an efficient device might create.

In part 2 of this blog series, we will discuss what current broadband and telecommunications providers in the U.S. and E.U. are doing about the STB efficiency imperative and what kind of traction this issue is getting in the media.

Co-Authored by: Chuck Carroll and Lew Rakowsky