Traceability is probably the last thing, if at all, that crosses our minds when we shop for clothing. The most we know about a piece of cloth in terms of traceability is where it is made in, as it is labelled on the tag. Even if we, as consumers, want to find out more about the story behind the clothing we bought, there is no way to do so. There should be a way.

The article Managing the Unmeasurable in Apparel Industry reminds me of a video clip I watched in class that shows the true cost of fast fashion. Specifically, it shows the poor working conditions in apparel factories in the developing world, and how workers are forced to accept low wages and work in buildings that can collapse anytime. Over the years, there have been accidents where factories collapse because of lack of funds for building maintenance and upgrade, causing death of thousands of workers. Surprisingly, what is behind these factories are not small brands that can not afford to provide workers with better working conditions, but large clothing brands like Zara and H&M. What is more surprising to me is Zara’s cold-blooded reply when asked for the brand’s opinion on the factory accidents: “They could’ve been working in worse conditions in other jobs like mining.”

The video had some considerable influence on my shopping behaviour. Now, every time I walk into a Zara store, I feel uncomfortable. When I see the piece of cloth I picked up is made in a developing country, I hesitated. I wish I were able to find out more behind the price tags and account for those behind-the-scene factors in my purchase decision.

The article casts some light on improving the traceability of clothing and making apparel supply chain more sustainable. It has suggested several areas where traceability of the industry can be improved through collective actions, as well as several technology options that can support traceability. On top of the areas mentioned in the article, I think consumer behaviour can also be an influential factor in driving traceability. If the public start to demand for information on how the clothing is made, it will force brands to disclose and improve their supply chain.

What is it?

A group of organizations from the world of business and some NGOs have come together to explore how to feed 9 billion people enough protein in a way that is affordable, healthy and good for the environment.

Why?

Our current way of producing and eating protein is placing increasing burden on our land and sea resources. From land use to the methane released from cattle, agriculture activities contributes to environmental problems in many ways. With growing population, it is necessary to come up with sustainable ways to produce and consume protein without sacrificing the environment and the needs of future generations.

How?

The group is initiating a global conversation on sustainable protein and calling for expertise and ideas on ways to solve the challenge through improvement in six areas.

What are some of the foreseeable issues?

The first issue that comes to my mind is the long timeframe of the challenge. In order to avoid going beyond the 2C dangerous level of global warming in 2050, it requires actions today because there will be a time lag between our action and the result. It means that even if we are able to achieve sustainable protein by 2040, we will not be able to start seeing improvements in climate problems until five, six years after that.

On top of that is the issue of changing consumer behaviour. How quickly can we get the public to adopt the practice of producing and consuming sustainable protein? To effectively get the message across the globe, it requires collaboration of international governments, policy changes, education efforts, and global training. Moreover, we need to find ways to help sustainable protein compete with traditional protein and make a smooth transition without compromising on market efficiency.

Overall, I think the protein challenge has ambitious goals, but they are still at their concept stage. I look forward to seeing how the group plan to achieve these goals in an effective manner.

After so many years of relying on fossil fuels for its fast economy development, I am glad to see China finally joins the battle of combating climate change. The country has set out a five-year plan to reduce carbon emission. China is planning to shift to a sustainable development path by shifting from a manufacturing based to a service based economy, reduce coal use, and employ non-fossil energy. Although the plan is only a broad approach, it is at least a good starting point.

In order to achieve its carbon emission reduction goals, the top government in China should first ensure its vision is shared by all levels of government. There should be a policy alignment across all governments, as well as specific metrics to measure the progress. Secondly, the governments should seek out effective ways to deliver the message to the general public because a real change can only be made by uniting the effort of its citizens. Lastly, the Chinese government should subsidize the use and development of renewable energy to help green start-ups secure the market. This should be done alongside with imposing an environmental cost on major polluters in the local economy.

To approach the environmental problems from the front-end, China needs to build the topic of sustainability into its education curriculum. It is very important to plant that “green” seed in the minds of younger generations because soon they will become the biggest consumers and suppliers of the global market. Only if they have a green mindset and are equipped with the knowledge of sustainability will they be able to design products and processes that are truly sustainable from the beginning. Furthermore, they have a chance to influence how their parents think and behave, as well as inspiring future generations. In all, education can help create a positive feedback loop in carrying out sustainable practices and end polluting behaviours for China.

Article Reference: https://www.greenbiz.com/article/chinas-unveils-plan-low-carbon-growth

I grew up hearing about ocean plastics, and I have seen them in life a couple times. The fact that they have been around for as long as I have been around makes me think they are part of the nature just like sand and stones, but the truth is, they really aren’t. They are man-made wastes that could threaten marine lives and would not biodegrade like other natural substances. The article What Would It Take to Get Plastics Out of the Ocean gives me a clearer picture on how much of these man-made wastes are really out there and being ignored.

As we have all heard of the “island of plastics”, in fact, there are five of them floating in our ocean, with a sixth one about to form near the Arctic. If we step in and conduct a massive cleanup right now, it would require 1,000 boat to filter the water 24 hours a day for 79 years. This sort of gives us the magnitude of how much plastics are out there, but there is still great variability in research numbers because there are tiny plastics, called micro- or nano-plastics, that are extremely hard to detect.

What surprised me was not only the presence of micro-plastics, but also the products that contain these micro-plastics. For examples, cosmetics and cleaning agents both contain plastics in their formulas. For years, we focused on reducing the usage of products that obviously contain plastics, but we overlooked the products that contains plastics but does not have a plastic finishing, and their impact is just as large and might be even harder to reverse.

The article has mentioned a couple proposed solutions to the problem, such as installing a trash-intercepting waterwheel that would skim garbage from the surface of the river before it could float downstream and fixing a filtering platform on the seabed to catch trash. Most of them remained a concept still due to public critics and controversies; a major critic being that instead of finding ways to clean up, we should avoid making waste in the first place, and redesign the plastic we really need. I agree with the front-end thinking, but I also think that adaption measures are equally important because they can buy us time to redesign plastics and change consumer behaviour. At the end of the day, we still have to clean up the waste that is already there.

This is rather a disappointing news. Best Buy, a company that used to recycle any used electronic products from customer for free, now has to charge a $25 fee for every TV and computer monitor drop-off. This is mainly due to the increasing amount of e-waste received, leading to higher recycling and transportation costs, and also the fact that the company is the sole e-recycling provider in many towns in the U.S.

The news makes me reflect on my own behaviour of disposing e-waste. For the past ten years, I have possessed four cell phones and two laptops. Every time I get a new cell phone, I have trouble finding ways to get rid of the old one. I could have sold them, but it has been increasingly hard to sell seconded phones because they become outdated so soon given the pace of technology advancement today. I knew I should not disposal them along with other household waste, but I had no idea how to dispose them responsibly. So, at the end they ended up in the storage room. Out of sight. It was only until recently that a separated bin was assigned for the disposal of electronic products at my apartment building. Still, I have no idea where these e-waste are being sent to and whether or not they are getting the proper treatment. There is simply far too few legitimate places to dispose e-waste responsibly and laws regarding the process.

I also think that electronic manufacturers should bear their own share of recycling responsibility by having an inclusive recycling program like the ones offered by Best Buy and Dell. A cradle-to-cradle process design is fundamental to sustainable operation in the e-industry, especially when material costs are rising rapidly due to the declining resource availability. On top of its environmental benefits, companies can recycle and reuse certain components, such as gold, to generate significant cost savings. Therefore, I believe there is a business case for recycling e-waste, and manufacturers should switch their mindset around to see e-recycling as an opportunity rather a liability.

Article Reference: http://www.greenbiz.com/article/too-much-good-thing-hobbles-best-buys-e-waste-recycling

The Impossible Cheeseburger looks just like any other conventional burgers. The unconventional part lies in the source of its protein, which is 100% plant-based. It is different from a veggie burger on that fact that it is made for meat-lovers who are not willing to compromise the pleasure they get from conventional burgers. It is “the most delicious burger they can buy at the best value”, Impossible Foods claimed.

Veggie burgers have been around for decades, but they are usually sold on a side menu to accommodate the small segment of vegetarian consumers. Impossible Foods’ plan to target the general public solely with its plant-based burgers is definitely a bold move, especially in the highly competitive fast food industry. Its unique meat recipe well differentiates the company and helps it enter the market strong. The company recognizes that most consumers are unlikely to compromise the pleasure they get from burgers for the environment. Therefore, instead of emphasizing on the environmental and health benefits of its products, Impossible Foods emphasizes on the quality of its “meat”, which provides the same or better taste and smell. The company’s strategic marketing message grabs the public’s attention and aids the successful launch of this new product.

As of now, Impossible Foods has only one product planned for sale, the Impossible Cheeseburger. I think there is little problem attracting the first batch of consumer because it is a fresh and interesting concept; the real challenge is to sustain sales after the hype and outcompete other well-established fast food giants on quality and price. Moreover, the company need to generate enough revenue to fund the development of other products and launch them fast before its competitors come up with similar products. Ongoing innovation is crucial to secure the company’s place in the industry.

One concern I have for the product is the amount of artificial flavouring and other additives required to create the meat taste and smell. It would be reassuring to the public if Impossible Foods can be transparent on its ingredients and provide nutrition facts on its products.

For those who are interested in learning more about the company, you can find an interview with the company’s founder, Patrick Brown, here: http://www.greenbiz.com/video/impossible-foods-founder-patrick-brown-burgers-made-plant

Electricity, a resource that is taken for granted in developed countries, is finally brought to people in rural Kenya for the first time, in a consistent and reliable way, thanks to the renewable energy micro-grids offered by SteamaCo. Micro-grids are independent power generation and distribution systems that make use of local renewable energy. In the case of Kenya, it would be solar energy collected by roof-top solar power systems. These mini power stations have transformed the villages and improve living significantly, as well as brightening up the local economy.

Unlike traditional green strategies that require a price premium or compromises on profit, installing renewable energy micro-grids in East African countries is a green strategy with strong financial incentives. The rural villages, or most of the third world countries, is a huge consumer market for electricity and other resources that has been left out. Currently, only one third of the population in East African countries has access to electricity. There is strong demand for power from these scattered communities where no electricity supplier has tapped into. It is a “blue ocean” of business opportunities for SteamaCo. Furthermore, with one fifth of the world’s population continue to live without access to electricity, if the company can scale up the production of these micro-grids, the financial return on the micro-grid business looks promising.

The micro-grids improves lives of villagers in every aspects, from household appliances to fuel pumps on the streets. Most importantly, they help villages become more resilient. First of all, the access to electricity has allowed telecommunication to be widely available. The improved communication between households and villages provide more support in case of catastrophic events such as drought and disease outbreak. Secondly, the micro-grids uses local renewable energy, which is reliable and self-sustaining. Lastly, the electricity generated is enough to support more business activities and education opportunities, which hopefully will lift people out of poverty.

Lastly, I want to borrow an inspiring quote from a software manager at SteamaCo to encourage more green practices in third world countries: “Even though our customers are poor, they have purchasing power and they know how to use it.”

Article Reference: http://www.greenbiz.com/article/how-microgrids-are-bringing-power-rural-kenya