About 100 German McDonald’s restaurants will make the change by the end of 2009, the company said in a statement Monday. Some franchises in Great Britain and France have already started using the new color scheme behind their Golden Arches.

“This is not only a German initiative but a Europewide initiative,” Martin Nowicki, McDonald’s Germany spokesman, told The Associated Press.

The Oak Brook, Illinois-based burger behemoth has more than 32,000 restaurants in 118 countries and has long been targeted by activists as being environmentally unfriendly.

Still, in recent years the company has warmed to “greener” practices, including environmentally friendly refrigeration and converting used oil into biodiesel fuel.

“With this new appearance we want to clarify our responsibility for the preservation of natural resources. In the future we will put an even larger focus on that,” Hoger Beek, vice chairman of McDonald’s Germany, said in the statement.

In Germany, McDonald’s has seen significant growth despite the global economic crisis, opening 42 new restaurants this year for a total of 1,350.

The chain plans to open another 40 new restaurants across Germany in 2010, encouraged by a worldwide revenues of $23.5 billion.

Yes, there’s plenty of irony in having Gazprom’s oil unit, OAO Gazprom Neft, use one of the most environmentally sustainable buildings as its headquarters, but oil company or Greenpeace, who wouldn’t want a corner office in that?

Gazprom Towers will stand 77 twisted stories and be “green as it is tall” according to Inhabitat:

Eco-conscious features are highlighted by a double glass skin, where atriums have been positioned between inner and outer walls to provide natural ventilation, interior lighting and even thermal insulation for the merciless sub-zero Russian winters. Specialized water, heating and ventilation system have also been incorporated to reduce the energy needs of the building, and numerous social spaces and green zones have been set aside for the comfort and leisure of its occupants.

There are some who are protesting against this building project being greenlit, claiming that it is a “monstrous, barbaric decision” to be resented by the people of St. Petersburg, Russia. I say that it’s a beautiful design and it’s good to see greener buildings becoming a trend with architecture firms.

Some companies have very high energy use. The reasons for this are pretty obvious: manufacturing requires a lot of energy. Computing requires a lot of energy. Air conditioning requires a lot of energy. If you combines groups of these: you need a lot of energy. Not many companies will go to real efforts to solve their specific problems.

Lately, Google has been splashed about the news on a number of green issues: apparently, they’re involved in two major projects which will make a huge difference.

Energy Efficient Computing

On September 26, Google wrote about their progress towards a more efficient infrastructure. The fundamental idea is twofold: first, to build network infrastructures which optimize use of multiple computers to process large quantities of data, a crucial element of Google’s search success. The second aspect is incorporating “chip multiprocessing” to make individual computers more efficient by using multiple simple processors rather than very large, fast processors.

Solar Panel Installation

The second major project is too install 1.6 megawatts of solar photovoltaic panels at the main Google campus in Mountain View, California.

This project is estimated to provide approximately 30% of their peak power usage: equivalent to approximately 1,000 average California homes. (Yes, that means that the Google complex uses approximately the power of 3,333 homes.)

Google expects these projects to help them save money: and they’re quite likely right. There are undoubtedly many other companies that could benefit from the same kind of efforts.

Anybody else doing this?

There are other companies who have worked to make use of alternate energy,and go green. Whole Foods Markets has installed solar panels in several of their California stores. It’s a start, but has a long ways to go.

Ruta, whose organization Environmental Defense was one of the early groups to partner with big corporations, said her company’s motto is “finding the ways that work.”

“If you work with somebody who’s a strange bedfellow but it gets you where you want to be, then that’s what it takes,” she said.

Still, other environmentalists insist they still have a healthy dose of skepticism about whether corporations will really help make a tangible environmental difference. For example, Dorner said the Sierra Club doesn’t expect to see eye-to-eye with corporate America on issues such as how drastically greenhouse gas emissions need to be curbed to offset global warming. “Of course, anything that they would find acceptable would be very different from something that we would find acceptable,” he said.

Dorner said his group also is quick to call foul when a company appears to be taking too much credit for an insubstantial environmentally friendly move. “Small commitments to the environment do not a green company make,” he said.

PR power of going green
Indeed, many of the companies touting environmental improvements have plenty to gain from a little good publicity.

As the main producer of ozone-destroying chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, DuPont was once considered one of corporate America’s worst environmental bad guys. The company admits that one motivation to improve things was a concern about its reputation.

“Nobody wants to be the No. 1 polluter,” said DuPont’s Rittenhouse.

Despite major changes, Rittenhouse concedes that the company still has work to do.

“There’s no question we’ve still got issues,” Rittenhouse said. “We’re trying to learn from our past mistakes and make sure we are doing better.”

A push toward more renewable fuel sources also could help the battered images of oil and gas giants, who have seen record profits as Americans have felt pain at the pump. And Wal-Mart, which is facing an organized and aggressive campaign against its labor and expansion practices, certainly wouldn’t mind a little bit of goodwill.

Environmental groups also worry about whether companies will live up to their own sustainability initiatives, or drop them if cheaper or more amenable alternatives come along.

Some advocates see hope in companies that are making the type of environmentally friendly investments that could take years to pay off, such as major plant revisions or extensive green remodeling.

For example, both FedEx Corp. and United Parcel Service Inc. have made some investments in vehicles that run at least partly on alternative fuels, as part of efforts to reduce dependence on fossil fuels over the long term.

Ruta, who worked with FedEx on their project, said those trucks are still more expensive to produce than their traditional counterparts, and zigzagging fuel prices can make it hard to predict a payback. Still, the hope is that the production process will eventually become more streamlined, bringing costs down and prompting more widespread use.

“We’re getting there,” she said.

According to the The Organic Trade Association’s Manufacturer Survey, the organic industry grew by 21% to reach $17.7 billion in consumer sales in 2006. Over the last decade organic sales have increase by an average of 20%, and this rate is expected to remain steady over the next 20 years.

Successful green businesses not only benefit the environment, but also use green business practices as means to market their products. If you are thinking of starting a green business, consider the following tips:

Find Your Niche. As the natural, organic lifestyle continues to catch on with consumers, there are many growth possibilities. Products such as food, cosmetics and cleaning supplies are growing areas within the organic trade, however, to be successful, you should look for opportunities that match your interests.

Get Certified. To differentiate your product or service as environmentally sound, consider obtaining certification from an independent, third-party. Being certified means that you can include their “ecolabel” on your product’s label and other marketing materials. Ecolabeling is important for attracting “green” customers. Learn more about Green Marketing.

Practice What You Preach. The most successful green businesses don’t just sell the green lifestyle. They live it. Selling green means being green, and this helps build your brand and image as a socially responsible.

Adopting environmentally-friendly and energy efficient business practices provides numerous benefits to new business owners looking to control costs, attract customers, and become socially responsible.

This guide provides you with some important information on implementing an environmental strategy for your business, including steps to becoming energy efficient, compliant with environmental regulations, and a recognized “green business.”

Step 1: Comply with Environmental Regulations

As a green business, you should practice what you preach. This means complying with all environmental regulations relevant to your business. Compliance not only protects the environment, it protects your business from fines and legal action from the government. Consult the Environment Regulations section of the Green Business Guide for more information.

Step 2: Develop an Environmental Management Plan

Running a green business means creating an environmentally-friendly, energy efficient workplace. A sound environmental plan will help minimize your company’s eco-footprint, and encourage green business practices throughout your organization.

Step 3: Build Green

If you are opening a business in a new or remodeled building, make sure you build green and install energy efficient heating and air conditioning systems, appliances, equipment and lighting.

Step 4: Buy Green Products

Consider buying green products that are

• Made from post-consumer, recycled materials
• Bio-based
• Non-toxic
• Energy efficient rated products, such as ENERGY STAR®
• Renewable and recyclable
• Locally produced, such as food that is locally grown and organic

Step 5: Adopt Energy Efficient Practices

Good energy management is good business. The prudent and conservative use of energy is one of the easiest and most cost effective steps you can take to cut costs, increase profitability, and create shareholder value. Given the potentially high returns and minimal risk, implementing energy efficiency practices is at the core of most business environmental management strategies.

Conduct an Energy Audit. Whether you are opening a home based business or moving into an existing commercial building, having an energy audit conducted on your facility will help you quickly identify areas where you can save energy costs.

Step 6: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle Wastes

Most businesses can save a substantial amount of money by reducing waste. In addition to lower removal costs, waste reduction measures help cut costs on raw materials, office supplies and equipment. Furthermore, by streamlining your operations to reduce waste, you may also be able to enhance your overall efficiency, productivity and public image.

Develop waste management procedures throughout your operations that includes:

• Use of post-consumer, recycled products
• Elimination of excessive product packaging materials
• Optimized use of paper products
• Participation in recycling programs, such as EPA’s WasteWise

Step 7: Conserve Water

The increased demand on our nation’s water supply is threatening human health and the environment. By implementing a water efficiency program, you can not only help conserve this precious resource, but cut your costs associated with buying, heating, treating and disposing of it.

• Have a water audit conducted at your facility by your local water agency
• Conserve water using best available technology and water saving equipment utilities
• Minimize discharges to sewer/wastewater

Step 8: Prevent Pollution

Every business generates waste. For some, it may be only waste paper or dirty water; for others, it may be hazardous or toxic wastes that require special handling and disposal.

Whatever the type or volume of waste your company generates, it is costing you money. You pay for what you use twice – once when you buy it and the second time when you throw it away. The bottom line is that preventing waste will save you money.

For resources to help you prevent pollution, visit our guide to Pollution Prevention.

Step 9: Create a Green Marketing Strategy

If you are starting a green business, you need to market yourself as one. Adding “green” claims and eco-labels to your marketing strategy will enhance your brand image and secure your market share among the growing number of environmentally concerned consumers.

Visit our Green Marketing Guide for information on the legal aspects of green marketing and strategies for successful campaigns.

Step 10: Join Industry Partnership and Stewardship Programs

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sponsors a wide variety of industry partnership and stewardship programs that aim to reduce the impact of industrial activities on the environment. These partnerships will help you build relationships with other green business owners in your industry, and build a brand that’s credible with your customers.

The following are three reports covering some of the hottest cleantech sectors: wind, solar, and algae biofuels.In each section, you’ll find growth targets for the respective industries, policy guidance, and a few investment recommendations.This report is your gateway to what will be a $45 trillion profit machine by 2050.

Investing in Solar Technology

Solar energy is big business these days. What started as a niche market is quickly transforming into a go green worldwide movement.And just as in other industries, the solar sector is evolving. And the best panels these days are considerably different from the panels being produced even just one year ago.

They use less (if any) silicon, and are more efficient, thinner and, in some cases, even flexible. But it hasn’t always been that way. . .

Investing in Next Generation Solar Technology

The solar industry started with bulky, rigid panels that had to be installed after a building’s construction. These are the photovoltaic systems most people think of whenever solar is mentioned; clunky panels that are clearly visible on a building’s roof.Those first generation solar cells were either monocrystalline or polycrystalline. . . the latter is what we normally see on roofs today.After those cumbersome cells came the second-generation thin-film models. The most successful of this generation has been the cadmium telluride (CdTe) series of cells.

These cells are much thinner, use less material, and are easier to produce — but they’re still rigid.The main company that produces these cells, First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR), has been the darling of Wall Street for the past two years, soaring from $23.50 in 2006 to as high as $317.00.That’s a gain of about 1,250% for the green investors who got in on this IPO. Of course, this stock has sold off with the broader market during recent economic turmoil.  Take a look:

But First Solar isn’t the only company turning a pretty penny in the solar market. Here is an overview of the industry along with relevant companies.

The Solar Value Chain

At the very beginning of the value chain we have polysilicon producers, of which there are a few big players and a few hope-to-be big players. The product at this level is a commodity, so the low-cost provider wins as long as the product is pure and consistent.

Companies here include the Norwegian REC Silicon, a division of Renewable Energy Corporation (OSL: REC), the German Wacker Chemie (Frankfurt: WCH), and the private Hemlock Semiconductor Corp.Advantages in the poly industry stem from adjustments to levels of purity, using recycled or scrap materials, and vertically integrating (more on that in a bit), to reduce operational costs and improve margins. Remember, poly is a raw material and a commodity, so any saved cost creates a competitive advantage.

There are now several companies in the wafer space, but only a few operate as pure or near-pure plays. MEMC Electronic Materials (NYSE: WFR), whose ticker indicates its business, is a big player here and is also a participant upstream in the poly business. Renesola (NYSE: SOL) is also gaining traction.
These first two links in the solar chain have fallen victim to declining silicon prices, which have gone from over $400 per kilogram to $100 per kilogram in just the past few quarters, with $60 per kilogram likely soon. The sharp decline was induced by a sudden oversupply as companies rushed to build new factories to meet rising demand. Just as a glut of supply came online, the future demand picture was muddied by the global recession. . . and prices plummeted.

You’ll want to wait until demand visibility returns before dabbling in this sector.The cell stage is where we begin to see a great deal of participants. It’s also where we see the most diversity in business models.Some companies, like JA Solar (NASDAQ: JASO), focus exclusively on producing cells. The more common approach is to vertically integrate, which means participating in the upstream and downstream segments of the solar market.

Here we have companies like Solarfun (NASDAQ: SOLF), Yingli (NYSE: YGE), SunPower (NASDAQ: SPWRA), Q-Cells (XETRA: QCE), and a number of other major players. The idea is to control the silicon process from ingot to module, cutting costs by not having to purchase individual materials or parts at the spot price or via contract. It also ensures consistent quality and the protection of intellectual property.

The only problem is, it’s highly capital-intensive to vertically integrate because you have to build factories that produce all the materials involved. The tightening of credit markets has led to companies not being able to secure financing, forcing them to stall or cancel expansion plans.Not being able to expand means not being able to increase capacity, leading to no new sales growth and reduced stock valuations, which we’ve recently seen.

The last step is the production of a solar panel or module by arranging cells together, binding them, and adding the electronic components. This is what companies get most noticed for, like Suntech (NYSE: STP) and First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR), though the latter doesn’t use silicon at all.But as we’ve seen in the other segments of the solar chain, prices are falling for cells and modules too. This excerpt from a recent Reuters article sums it up:

Analysts at HSBC forecast average selling prices for solar systems will drop by about a fifth in 2009 given oversupply and a tighter credit environment, but prices for cells and modules have so far fallen much faster than those for silicon and wafer. Several industry bellwethers, such as cell producers Q-Cells and Sharp as well as module maker Solon have had to revise outlooks.

In the long term, price reduction is good for the industry because it allows solar to compete with the going rate for retail electricity. But the rapid decline has left most producers holding the bag, sometimes having to sell panels at less than cost or with a negative margin. The industry, however, isn’t going away by any stretch of the imagination. Global installed capacity is still forecast to grow about 33% this year and about 22% in 2010.

Free Stock Pick #1: The Only Solar Stock for the Next Two Years

Buy Yingli Green Energy (NYSE: YGE) under $12.50. This is one of the most undervalued solar stocks on the market. One of the best among all Chinese producers, Yingli is establishing a global footprint as a low-cost solar leader. Getting in now will certainly lead to handsome gains down the line.

Wind Energy Stocks

Investing in Wind Energy: Returns that Will Blow You Away

Most don’t know that the domestic wind energy market is currently being dominated by overseas players.With the exception of General Electric, foreign competitors — mostly European — have taken a strong position as wind market leaders.Because of their early aggression in tackling environmental issues, it’s no secret that European firms have led the way in many renewable technologies. Their cavalierness has led Germany to be the cradle of the solar revolution; the Scots have taken the lead on wave power; a Portuguese/Spanish/Danish tandem leads on wind.Last year, Energias de Portugal, the national utility, bought Horizon Wind Energy from Goldman Sachs for $2.15 billion — the highest price ever paid for a wind-only company.

For its part, Spanish company Acciona acquired rights to about 1,300 MW of wind farms in the Midwest.But the U.S wind market isn’t the only one that’s booming. Europe still has billions to claim as well.In a recent report, the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) said that wind became the leader in terms of new installed energy capacity.

Through 2020, wind is expected to account for 34% of new generating capacity. It’ll account for 46% from 2020-2030.And the goal of attaining 12-14% of Europe’s power from wind by 2020 is well within reach.By 2020, it’s expected that 180 gigawatts (GW) of electricity will be supplied by the wind. That’s enough for about 107 million European households.

For that to happen, wind-based capacity needs to increase 9.5 GW per year through 2020. That shouldn’t be too hard, considering the EU installed 8.5 gigawatts worth of wind capacity last year.The U.S. wind market and domestic wind energy stocks are ready to boom as well. . .

Domestic Wind Energy

Twenty years from now, wind energy could produce 20% of America’s electricity.

An Energy Department study found that wind energy could generate 20% of U.S. electricity by 2030, as compared to today’s one percent.The good news is found in the following Energy Department report.  The report finds that achieving a 20% wind contribution to U.S. electricity supply would:

• Reduce carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation by 25 percent in 2030;
• Reduce natural gas use by 11%;
• Reduce water consumption associated with electricity generation by 4 trillion gallons by 2030;
• Increase annual revenues to local communities to more than $1.5 billion by 2030; and
• Support roughly 500,000 jobs in the U.S., with an average of more than 150,000 workers directly employed by the wind industry.

To achieve 20%, wind turbines would have to produce 300,000 megawatts of power, compared to today’s generated 16,000 megawatts.It’s doable.And it should come as no surprise that billionaire investors are lining up for a piece of the coming wind energy boom, including T. Boone Pickens.”When I go into these markets, I expect to make money on them. I don’t expect to lose,” says Pickens.

With plans to spend some $10 billion to build the world’s biggest wind farm, the billionaire has gone green.And it’s a brilliant move, as we deal with incessantly rising oil prices.

The Bottom Line on Wind Energy

Between 2006 and 2008, both Germany and Spain’s wind power capacity experienced impressive growth (about 16% and 44%, respectively).But U.S. capacity catapulted nearly 120% in the same time.

Don’t think for a second that wind energy is about slow down. . .Since 2000, wind power production has increased fivefold. Remember that during that period, oil prices have grown nearly the same amount. Now that peak oil is starting to edge itself under the global spotlight, we can expect to see a massive interest in renewables like wind energy.Reports from the U.S. Department of Energy state that wind energy supplied in just three U.S. states could potentially power the entire nation!

Think about it for a minute. . .

We’re talking about a source of energy that is a renewable, clean, has a low operating cost, and has technology that’s been around for over a century (the first power producing windmill was created back in 1887).But it isn’t just the past growth that we’re impressed with. Over the next two years, the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) predicts that the world’s installed wind power capacity will practically double to 158.3 GW.With that kind of growth, the investment opportunities will certainly be lucrative.

Free Stock Pick #2: The Only Wind Stock for the Next Two Years

Buy First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (NYSE: FAN) under $17.00. Seeing as how most of the wind growth in the next few years will come from foreign companies, the best way to profit is through and exchange traded fund (ETF). This one hold some of the biggest and best performing wind companies in the world. . . and will be a sure bet as this sector comes of age.

Bonus Report on Algae Biofuel

Investing in Algae Biofuel

Hundreds of millions of years ago, the earth was covered with shallow oceans filled with algae and other simple critters.As landmasses shifted and grew, water was displaced, leaving thick masses of algal residue that were eventually buried and compressed.Skip forward a few eons, throw in some heat and pressure, and. . . ta-da! Oil.Then, in 1859, Colonel Drake drilled the first oil well in Titusville, PA, unleashing not only oil. . . but an economic juggernaut that would dictate our way of life for years to come.

The world began to use oil for everything from fuel to waterproofing, and since then has consumed over a trillion barrels. With such furious consumption — and no way to make more — world oil reserves are set to dwindle.Essentially, we’re going to deplete in less than 300 years what took hundreds of millions of years to form. And with the depletion of oil, alternatives are destined to emerge.And, ironically, algae is one of them.

Biofuel Bliss

Research like that being done at the Colorado State University’s (CSU) Engines and Energy Conservation Laboratory and the University of New Hampshire (UNH), suggests that algae could supply enough fuel to meet all of America’s transportation needs in the form of biodiesel.

That’s right . . . all of it!

Whereas with our current biodiesel feedstocks, like soy and palm, there’s no way we could grow enough to supply all of our transportation needs.In fact, it would actually require twice the land area of the U.S. devoted to soybean production to meet current heating and transportation needs.That’s a lot of beans! Algae, on the other hand, could supply all U.S. diesel power using a mere 0.2% of the nation’s land.In fact, enough algae can be grown to replace all transportation fuels in the U.S. on only 15,000 square miles or 9.6 million acres of land.

That’s about the size of Maryland.Granted, that still may sound like a lot. But consider that we now use 938 million acres for farmland in the United States.I’d show you a pie chart of how much land would be required for algae growth, but the slice is so tiny, it wouldn’t even be visible.Of course, the question is how the heck can you make so much biodiesel from such a small amount of algae?

Well, let’s revert back to ninth grade science class for a moment.Biofuels are really a form of solar energy. Because crops convert solar energy into chemical energy in a process called. . . Anyone? Anyone? Photosynthesis!

It’s this chemical energy, in the form of oils, that we need to produce biofuels.According to the UNH report, the more efficient a particular plant is at converting solar energy into chemical energy, the better it is from a biofuels perspective.So in this area, algae’s the clear winner.

In fact, algae does this so well that up to 50% of its body weight can be fat, or the oil needed to make biodiesel.That makes algae the highest-yielding feedstock for biodiesel, producing 24 times more oil per acre, on average, than the next leading feedstock: palm oil at 635 gallons/acre/year. Take a look:

And some companies have far surpassed the 15,000 gallon-per-acre accepted benchmark.

In fact, one company can produce 180,000 gallons of biodiesel every year from just one acre of algae. That comes to about 4,000 barrels, at a cost of $25 per barrel, or $.59 per gallon.To put that in perspective, it takes 3,750 acres of soy to make the same amount of biodiesel at a cost of about $2.50 per gallon for 4,000 barrels.

So, how is this going to be done?

Algae Profits Bloom

It is possible to use human sewage and wastewater from agricultural endeavors to enhance the growth of algae.In fact, when done right, algae can double and even triple overnight with the addition of these fertilizers.Compare that to the five-month growing season for soy or canola! Plus, as algae grows it absorbs Co2 from the air. MIT has even fed emissions from their on-site power plant directly to algae being cultivated for biofuel production.

In addition, fertilizer for other food crops can be produced by using the leftover nutrients that aren’t used to make the biofuel. That’s like having your algae and eating it too. So let’s back up and look at the big picture. . .We have the technology right now to cultivate algae that can be used as fuel, using human and animal waste as fertilizer.

This is waste that would otherwise need to be treated or end up in our nation’s ground water.Not a bad deal at all!

Then, after the necessary oils have been extracted from the algae, we use the byproducts (phosphorus and nitrogen), as fertilizer for the food crops that feed the nation — all while extracting C02 from the air.That’s a beautiful thing.

And that’s why we’re currently looking at a number of companies . . . some public, some soon to go public . . . that we believe will capitalize in a big, big way on algae.Now don’t get me wrong. The last thing we want to do now is jump on every algae-based biodiesel producer that comes along.

Until we see validation on a commercial scale, this is a market that will have to remain under the microscope.

When gas was over four dollars a gallon, metro transit systems experienced record ridership and hybrids were on lengthening backorder. Now with our global economy in a tailspin, front lawns are being replaced with vegetable gardens and backyards are filling with chicken coops. But I wonder … with a probable resumption of a (more slowly) growing economy, will we see a majority of people return to more comfortable but less sustainable behaviors?

Further, do we need to cross thresholds like ten dollars per gallon of gas and 30 percent unemployment before we see systemic change in behavior? I think there is a less destructive way.

Within the industries that create and operate our built environment, the LEED green building certification system has become a positive market force. The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) created the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) as a third-party verification system that certifies the degree to which a building or community is meeting performance metrics across a wide variety of sustainability metrics.

LEED is creating market incentives that are changing the behavior of real estate developers, designers, engineers, contractors; and building owners, operators and even the occupants. For example, at Gensler we have over 520 registered architects, but over 950 LEED accredited professionals. To help us meet the market demand to deliver LEED certified buildings, every one of these leaders has embarked on an educational program (and passed the LEED exam) to learn how to design and deliver more sustainable solutions.

Now imagine if we could create an educational program for citizens and a certification system for all products in our economy. Let’s call it “LEED for Citizens.” At its heart, this program would create the market forces to change global consumer behavior and “nudge” our economy and societies towards sustainability. But unlike USGBC which is a non-profit voluntary initiative from within industry, we need government policies which help “nudge” our citizens and economy in a sustainable direction. Many of the components of a LEED for Citizens program already exist in the non-profit sector, but there is still a lack of the kind of systemic market forces that could change consumer behavior on the scale needed to avoid the annihilation of our habitat and the demise of our civilization.

What if you received a small tax break for passing the LEED for Citizens exam…and a small reduction in interest rates by purchasing (or remodeling) a LEED Home? Imagine what it might do if you received a retail discount when purchasing a LEED certified product, by showing your LEED for Citizens endorsement — the way you now receive AAA discounts on travel? For that matter, how might our medical system change if we received a small discount on health care insurance by certifying our diet and exercise program with our doctor? What if additional tax deductions were allowed for the value of food and products that were grown or made within 500 miles of your home? The result of these small benefits would add up to big reductions in our more destructive consumer habits.

The survival of our civilization, and the durability, resilience and biodiversity of ecosystems that make life on earth possible are dependent upon radically changing consumer behavior. We need to foster the market forces that “nudge” people to live life in sustainable ways and “nudge” corporations to provide the services and products that allow them to do so. We need to re-localize our economies and prepare for a future of diminishing energy return on energy investment (EROEI). Now more than ever, we need an educated citizenry and a healthy steady-state economy that preserves and enhances natural, social and economic capital.

A LEED for Citizens program would be a big step in the right direction. Many of us had our hopes raised on April 1st when it was broadly circulated on the internet that President Obama had passed his LEED exam and become a LEED accredited professional. Unfortunately, it was an April fool’s joke — and it highlights a growing cynicism that we lack the political will to make sustainability a priority. Machiavelli said that “political virtue is born of crisis alone,” but the crisis that is bearing down upon us is way beyond Machiavelli’s experience and too frightful to ignore. Fortunately, tools like LEED demonstrate how we can proactively change market forces to achieve sustainability. The time has come to scale up across our economy with citizens that are rewarded by being accredited as “green consumers” and by implementing a full scale “arms race” among corporations to achieve 3rd party sustainability certifications.

This would create the tipping point we need — not the destructive force of collapse, but the positive force of renewal as we collectively reorganize ourselves as buyers and sellers meeting in a truly sustainable marketplace.

Isn’t that the ultimate purpose of an economy?

Why go green

“All of a sudden, everybody wants you to be in their movie,” Ruta, director of corporate partnerships with Environmental Defense, said recently with a laugh.

It’s possible to take that statement quite literally — after all, the environment was the star of the Oscar-winning “An Inconvenient Truth.” But what is really exciting Ruta these days isn’t the buzz out of Hollywood but the increasing interest across the country, on Wall Street. For corporate executives, going green is becoming, if not mainstream, at least more commonplace.Companies ranging from retailing titan Wal-Mart to investment firm Goldman Sachs are jumping on the green bandwagon and pledging to make tangible changes that go beyond the public relations-oriented “greenwashing” of years past.

In another major shift, some big companies are even asking that they be regulated on greenhouse gas emissions, arguing that it is the only way for them to plan for how to deal with the rising threat of global warming. A coalition of businesses and environmental groups earlier this year formed a partnership called the U.S. Climate Action Partnership aimed at doing just that.

Are corporations experiencing a sudden rash of social consciousness? Not exactly. Instead, companies are increasingly realizing that going green could be a new way for companies to save — or even make — more green, as in money.

“The strategies that are being … implemented by some of the leading-edge companies are done to maximize profits and to mitigate risk,” said Fred Wellington, senior financial analyst for the environmental group World Resources Institute.

Still, the big surprise isn’t so much that companies are getting involved in environmental issues, but what companies are doing it. People expect companies like Whole Foods, Patagonia and REI to have environmental initiatives; not only is it key to their public relations efforts, it also makes good business sense for them to preserve resources.

But DuPont? BP? Wal-Mart? These are companies that still raise the hackles of environmentalists for some of their practices, yet are also taking serious steps toward promoting things like solar power and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. What exactly do they have to gain?

The answer, as always, lies in the bottom line.

Cost savings in energy savings
When Wal-Mart Stores Inc. pledges to significantly reduce energy use at its stores, that translates into lower costs for running the same business. It’s not the only money-saving environmental effort under way at the famously stingy retailer.

DuPont, the giant chemical maker that once was considered among America’s worst polluters, estimates that it has saved $3 billion from a nearly two-decade effort to dramatically reduce carbon emissions. Not surprisingly, the company is pushing for even more cuts.

And what about BP? The oil and gas giant will remain just that for a long time, but it pays to be thinking about the future now. If oil prices surge even higher, or supplies dwindle, people will still want to heat their homes, drive their cars and turn on their lights. For a company like BP to make it in that type of market, it might help to be able to offer alternative products, such as solar or wind energy.

Pat Tiernan, Hewlett-Packard Co.’s vice president for social and environmental responsibility, says that for the computer maker, “sustainability is about making business sense.”

“We don’t do things just to be good. We don’t do things just to be, for example, tree huggers,” Tiernan said. “We do select things that have a brand value to them, but most of the things that we do, it has to make business sense.”

Environmental groups also are increasingly trying to show companies the business case for environmental improvements. Ruta, of Environmental Defense, said her group notes three major potential benefits — cost savings from energy reductions, increased market share from more competitive products, and managing the risks associated with depending on fuels such as oil, which could spike in price or become more heavily regulated.

Companies are starting to pay more attention.

“What we’re witnessing is some of the bigger, major corporations in the United States understanding that these are fundamentally business issues, and they’re developing business responses and strategies,” said Wellington, of the World Resources Institute.
The same logic applies to corporate efforts to push regulation of carbon emissions, which many say are a key driver of global warming.

By now, it seems inevitable that big businesses will eventually face some sort of U.S. regulation, so clearly there is an incentive for corporations to be involved in how those regulations are crafted. For those that have already taken action to reduce such emissions, there’s also a big incentive to get credit for what they have already done voluntarily.

Some big businesses are calling for a system dubbed “cap and trade,” in which companies that beat emission targets can essentially sell pollution credits to more egregious polluters who don’t meet the standards. Such a free-market system could prove lucrative for companies that employ the right strategy.
One alternative to cap and trade would be an outright tax on all carbon emissions. Supporters of that idea say it would force costs directly onto almost all carbon emitters, perhaps pushing them to move more quickly to find cleaner alternatives or cut energy use.

The trend toward going green is extending beyond the most obvious polluters, and reaching companies ranging from big Wall Street firms to technology mainstays.

“Whether for altruistic reasons or not, (companies) realize that our sort of 19th-century energy economy that we are currently running on is coming to an end,” says Josh Dorner, spokesman for the Sierra Club. “It’s to their advantage — to their business advantage — to start gearing up for a low-carbon economy.”

The Goldman Sachs Group has invested more than $1.5 billion in alternative and clean energy including solar and wind power, and also is establishing a business dealing in carbon-emission credits. A “cap and trade” system similar to what U.S. companies are proposing is already in place in Europe, and a voluntary trading system has been set up in the United States.

Golman Sachs also is now applying environmental criteria when deciding whether to approve a loan or underwrite a transaction, and it has developed a business giving institutional investors information about companies’ environmental and social practices.

“We’re proud of the environmental things we can accomplish, but we’re also, I think, being smart business people,” said Mark Tercek, head of Goldman Sachs’ office of corporate citizenship.

Electronics makers including Dell and Hewlett-Packard are encouraging more recycling amid mounting concerns about the environmental effects of dumping electronics — and their accompanying toxic chemicals — into landfills. HP’s Tiernan said part of his company’s motivation is an expectation that regulations on electronics recycling and disposal will become more stringent.

In some cases, HP charges for shipping and handling of recyclables. The company also sees some benefit from reusing plastics and other products that it recycles.

HP and other companies also are seeing increasing interest in products that can save their customers money. Dell’s Web site keeps a running tally of estimated carbon emissions avoided — and money saved by customers — because of its improved technology.

Strange bedfellows
Environmental groups, some of which have been enlisted to help corporations achieve their new goals, admit that it can be a bit strange to work with companies who have been — and in some cases still are — their opponents in other areas.

BP has pledged to spend $8 billion over 10 years to develop a profitable alternative fuels business, among a host of other environmental initiatives. But the British company also has come under fire for leaky pipes and lax maintenance at its giant Prudhoe Bay oil field in Alaska and for a deadly explosion at a Texas refinery.
DuPont is often mentioned as one of the most aggressive companies tackling environmental issues, having effectively reinvented its practices since about 1990. But the company also is embroiled in several disputes with environmental regulators, and continues to produce some products environmentalists would prefer not to see, such as insecticides.

Wal-Mart continues to build Supercenters the size of several football fields, surrounded by massive parking lots. But the world’s largest retailer also has pledged major energy-saving initiatives over the next few years, and is pushing its environmental agenda onto its massive chain of suppliers. Wal-Mart’s potential clout is so great, in fact, that Environmental Defense recently put an office in the company’s hometown of Bentonville, Ark.