Food companies are trying to beat the federal government’s push to make chemicals in food more transparent. The 300+ members of the Grocery Manufacturers Association has launched an initiative that will give the FDA access to a database of food companies’ safety information for chemicals and other ingredients used in processed foods in an effort to improve the safety and transparency of ingredients used in food products.
Politico reports the FDA has come under increasing pressure to review food chemicals, which it says are mostly self-approved by food companies.
The 2014 U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index tracks clean tech progress by state, and in the 50 largest metro areas. The report's state index identifies the top markets and states for clean tech by comparing 70+ indicators in three main categories: Technology, Policy, and Capital.
Clean-energy generation, energy storage installations, green building deployment, energy efficiency expenditures, VC investments, and clean-energy patents data are among the many metrics identified in each state to create the conclusive ranking.
To determine the top cities, Clean Edge tracks 20 indicators within the categories of: Green Buildings, Advanced Transportation, Clean Electricity & Carbon Management, and Clean Tech Investment & Innovation in the 50 largest U.S. metros.
HERE ARE THE TOP CITIES (five of the top 10 are located in California):
While green advocates in a number of other states might dispute that notion, there’s no denying the Golden State’s long history of leadership on environmental issues. In 1884, a state judge outlawed the dumping of gold-mining rubble into waterways, a decision that predated the federal Rivers and Harbors Act by 15 years. In 1959, the state developed its own air quality standards, and when the Federal Air Quality Act was passed in 1967, California received a waiver allowing it to enforce tighter emissions regulations than called for by the law. The state is home to the country’s first carpool lanes, and passed the first law requiring smog checks for cars. Even the U.S. Green Building Council itself was founded in San Francisco.
In 2010, when opponents of California’s landmark Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 tried to suspend the law, a new-on-the-scene group was there to help fight to protect the legislation: USGBC California. Dennis Murphy helped start the statewide group in 2009, giving the California’s eight individual USGBC chapters an umbrella organization that could advocate for their shared values in precisely moments like this one.
Although the legislation was a little outside of USGBC’s usual green-building mission, it spoke to the larger environmental concerns that are shared by nearly all of the organization’s members. “If this law went away, it almost wouldn’t matter what we were doing on more narrowly defined green building issues,” Murphy says. “We realized that we needed to be part of a broad coalition.”
Murphy set up phone banks where volunteers called USGBC members and urged them to vote against Proposition 23 that would have suspended AB-32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, requiring greenhouse gas emission levels in the state be cut to 1990 levels by 2020. Ultimately, the proposition was defeated by more than 2 million votes.
Currently, Murphy is pushing for the state to pass “purple pipes” legislation requiring new buildings to include infrastructure for utilizing recycled water. “We get involved in a lot of stuff,” Murphy acknowledges, laughing. “Across the country, nobody has the irrational sense of hope and optimism that we do." But Murphy also quips that "Innovation is like the wind, blowing from the West to the East—starting in California and then making its way across the rest of the country."
Lots of organizations, from city governments and universities to sporting venues and events to manufacturers and retailers, are pledging to drastically reduce or even eliminate any waste going to landfill.
Companies like GAF, Bridgestone, Mayer Bros. and the Waste Management Phoenix Open are getting claims validated to prove the accuracy of their claims and to gain a competitive advantage among consumers, business partners and investors who value waste diversion and the efficiencies it requires.
Interestingly, other companies are choosing not to have their claims publicly validated, but are opting to go through the same process and having their programs audited. Companies are finding value in the audit itself beyond the well-recognized public relations benefits.
Some of the additional value of a waste diversion audit, as reported to UL Environment auditors, includes:
Making money
Saving money
Reinvigorating recycling and waste diversion program
Ensuring consistent internal measurement
Creating a level playing field
Avoiding making exaggerated claims
Earning Wall Street respect
"What gets measured and audited gets done even better.”
But times change, and after the massive battering, the industry is starting to bounce back. Construction spending is up, projects are more plentiful and optimism is starting to sneak its way in. But now, there’s another problem — a shortage of workers, because so many left the industry to find employment elsewhere.
Nespresso plans to spend 500 million Swiss francs ($550 million) in the next six years in an effort to improve the environmental and social impact of Europe’s biggest single-serve coffee brand.
The Nestle SA (NESN) division’s sustainability program will include 15 million francs to assist farmers in Ethiopia, Kenya and South Sudan, Nespresso said in a statement today. It also plans to increase the recycling of Nespresso capsules and reduce the company’s carbon footprint by 10 percent and become carbon-neutral.
Nespresso is expanding its efforts after exceeding goals set in 2009 to improve farmer welfare through sustainable coffee sourcing. The brand has faced increasing competition from lower-priced systems as well as capsules made by rivals that work in its machines.
