Wow, Electrolux really sucks! In a good way!

Watch this:

From Fast Company:

Hans Stråberg, the President and CEO of Electrolux, explains the reasoning behind Vac from the Sea:

Our oceans are filled with plastic waste. Yet on land, there is a shortage of recycled plastic. The supply of sustainable raw material, such as recycled plastic, is crucial for making sustainable appliances, and assisting consumers in making their homes greener. I therefore hope people will join us in raising awareness about the threat plastic poses to marine habitats, and the urgent need for taking better care of the plastic that already exists.

Please click the yellow “Help Now – It’s Free” button and watch the Body Glove video. When you do, Body Glove will donate dollars to the Whaleman Foundation.

Why should you? Because it doesn’t cost you anything more than a minute of your time but more importantly watch the below video of Hayden Panettiere and that should help explain things.

[YouTube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL1wYZFMVB8]
YouTube – Hayden Panettiere PSA for SocialVibe.com

Need another reason? Well, how about because I’m asking nicely. :)

While you’re at it, please sign the petition.

This widget was created by a company called Social Vibe and not only can you attach it to your blog but you can connect it to your Facebook profile which I’ve also done. It’s really pretty cool what Social Vibe has done with this. There are currently about 30 causes and 25 companies that you can mix and match to suit your interests. It’s kind of like orchestrating your our corporate social responsibility program. Your actions tell companies where you’d like to see them put their philanthropic dollars. Finally you can participate in a cause related marketing program without actually being a consumer of anything more than media. Cool!

Saving whales and dolphins and the latest Body Glove swimwear seemed like a good fit for Sea-Fever. What do you think?

One more time: Please watch for the Body Glove video dolphins’ and whales’ sake!

Thanks!

Share this post :

The email was about an opportunity they have to win a grant from Patagonia, one of the coolest, most environmentally conscious and socially responsible organizations on the planet. The program is called Voice Your Choice and this is from their website:

Activism takes many forms, but you can cast a vote at your neighborhood Patagonia store this summer as one way to get involved in local environmental issues, show support for your favorite environmental group or just warm up for the November elections.

Each store will profile five groups that have done something extraordinary to help restore and protect the local environment. These groups have been our partners, helping us to further our stated mission to "build the best product, cause no unnecessary harm and use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis."

Rocking the Boat has some stiff competition in their neighborhood with Riverkeeper, Bronx River Alliance, Newtown Creek Alliance, and Solar One, all worthy organizations.

So if by chance you read this and live in their “neighborhood” which is New York City, stop by the Upper West Side Patagonia store and voice your choice!

Share this post :

According to the article, The Port of Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners approved a three-year agreement with the Los Angeles Maritime Institute’s TopSail Youth Sail Training Program that will provide $525,000 for the first year and increase 3 percent a year over the following 2 years.

“The program provides a life experience for the teen participants,” said Arley Baker, senior director of communications and legislative affairs. “Many of the participants have had little exposure to the ocean, so a sailing adventure is extraordinary for them – let alone an adventure where they play a role in navigating the ship as a crew. It’s a teambuilding adventure.”

Programs like this do a great job of educating and building self-esteem in participants; however, they also expose young people to potential maritime careers. With the looming shortage of qualified professional mariners on the horizon, this can only be a good thing. (Statement of Chairman Oberstar and Subcommittee Chairman Cummings from Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Hearing – “Mariner Education and Workforce” – Oct 17, 2007)

Kudos to the Port of LA and congratulations to LAMI and to all of the kids that will benefit from life changing experiences at sea under sail!

Photo” Port of Los Angeles

Technorati tags: Port of LA, Port of Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners, LAMI, Topsail Youth, US House of Representatives

Treehugger.com reports that the EPA has finally banned a substance that is considered one of the most toxic substances ever released into the world’s oceans.

Tributyltin, a type of biocide, is a cheap and powerful barnacle and algae killer that was once commonly used on most of the world’s commercial ships. It is typically mixed into the bottom coating for hulls, where it helps keep the ship clear of barnacles and other similar species. TBT is highly prized by sailboat racers and yachtsmen who use it to make their hulls move more easily through the water and by certain environmentalists, who argue it can help prevent the spread of invasive species from one port to another.

According to the post, every major US and European paint company stopped using the substance in 2001 and endorse the maritime treaty banning it. China and other developing maritime nations would seem to be the target here.

Lindy Johnson, a lawyer who works for NOAA, called it “very, very bad stuff.”

Good news for our Oceans!

As this article demonstrates, CSR is not just about companies doing good works. At it most effective and sustainable level, its more about designing and executing corporate strategies that address some of society’s more adaptive challenges.

Hindustan Lever’s Lifebuoy campaign, however, is not philanthropy; it’s business. Throughout its long life, the antibacterial soap has been positioned as a health-and-wellness product: a 1902 ad in Harper’s promised “this wonderful cleanser and purifier” was “the enemy of dirt and disease.” That “core proposition” remains, says Punit Misra, the marketing manager who oversees Lifebuoy and other skin-cleansing brands for Hindustan Lever. Perhaps the most significant change to the product itself in recent years has been the introduction of smaller, and thus cheaper, bars: a half-size, 50-gram bar, for five rupees (about two ounces, for roughly 12 cents), was introduced in the early 1990s. (The small-package approach is now used by many companies in developing markets.) More recently, the packaging was made “more contemporary” by replacing the “strapping young man” on the package with an image of a couple and their children, Misra says.

And five years ago, the company introduced a campaign called Swasthya Chetna or “Glowing Health,” which, boiled down, argues that even clean-looking hands may carry dangerous germs, so use more soap. It began a concentrated effort to take this message into the tens of thousands of villages where the rural poor reside, often with little access to media. “Lifebuoy teams visit each village several times,” Manwani said in his speech, using “a glo-germ kit to show schoolchildren” that soap-washed hands are cleaner. Manwani says this program has reached “around 80 million rural folk” and added that “sales of Lifebuoy have risen sharply.” The small bar has become the brand’s top seller.

There can often be a fine line between effective CSR and exploitative marketing; however, Hindustan Lever hits the mark with Life buoy and its Swasthya Chetna (“Glowing Health”) campaign. The article sites University of Michigan professor and author of The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid, C.K. Prahalad:

“The question that comes up all the time is: These companies are pushing consumption, but what we need is livelihood improvement,” he told me in an interview. But preventing illness also means a family might avoid a potentially devastating loss of several days’ work. And ultimately, he says, campaigns like Lifebuoy’s Swasthya Chetna should be evaluated not ideologically but by their impact on the global poor. “The alternative,” he said, “is needless death.”

Technorati tags: NY Times, Corporate social responsibility, CSR, Hindustan Lever, Lifebuoy, C.K. Prahalad

In yesterday’s New York Times Magazine’s cover essay “The Greening of Geopolitics: The Power of Green” Friedman built on his earlier editorial.  

The essay’s subtitle reveals his premise: “What does America need to regain its global stature? Environmental Leadership”

It’s an interesting, and simple piece, that presents his theories on petrodollars and democracy, the “China price” of energy, green patriotism and the incredible scale of the challenge to create an emissions-free energy infrastructure for the future.

Friedman writes,

The only thing as powerful as Mother Nature is Father Greed. To a degree, the market is already at work on this project – because some venture capitalists and companies understand that clean-tech is going to be the next great global industry.

This follows pretty closely what I have recently written about here, here, here and here. 

While in the past thinking and acting Green may have been considered a fad or trend, that is no longer the case. There are no simple solutions to the challenges that we face; however, smart business people are thinking and working hard at trying to capitalize on these new opportunities. Ultimately this can be a win / win / win situation for the economy, environment, and our children and grandchildren.

Technorati tags: NY Times, Thomas L. Friedman, Green, sustainibility, corporate social responsibility, climate change, global warming

Following on my recent post BusinessWeek – Hugging the Tree-Huggers, this is another example of the previously unthought of convergence of social sector activists and corporate interests to try to solve some of the planet’s most significant challenges.

Kansas City Power plans on saving significant amounts of electricity by helping commercial landlords and homeowners replace lighting and appliances with more energy efficient models. In return,  the Sierra Club will withdraw their opposition to a major project and will stop claiming an existing plant violates the Clean Water Act.

The article goes on to state:

Kansas City Power and Light, based in Kansas City, Mo., plans to ask regulators and state legislatures to let it invest in higher-efficiency equipment and earn a rate of return on the money it spends, just as it would earn a rate of return on a new power plant. In some cases customers will see bigger bills; others would see their bills go down because of lower consumption, but they would have to help pay the cost of any new equipment. The utility would subsidize the cost of new equipment.

“We believe there’s a lot of low-hanging fruit there, energy efficiency that can be invested in that costs less than building a baseload plant,” said Mike Chesser, the chairman and chief executive of the utility. “The trick is to get the business model in place,” Mr. Chesser said.

He said that, as part of the agreement, the Sierra Club would help the company persuade regulators that costs and pollution would be lower if the money could be invested in conservation instead of in new construction. The effort might involve buying central air-conditioners in bulk, going into residential neighborhoods and replacing equipment house after house, he said.

It will be interesting to see this plan in action.

Wald also reports about a group of 65 large companies, including BP America, DuPont and others who on Monday called on Congress ”to establish a carbon policy to limit climate-change risk and to clarify for businesses what requirements are likely to emerge.”

It seems like every day there is a new report of agreement between high profile groups and companies that previously engaged in antagonistic relations.  It’s an interesting evolution in social change to monitor.

Technorati tags: Corporate social responsibility, Sierra Club, Kansas Power and Light Company, New York Times

Hugging the Tree-Huggers by John Carey leads off with a story about the recent mega takeover of Texas utility TXU Corporation and the importance of the public support for the transaction by the Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The TXU takeover is a sign of a remarkable evolution in the dynamic between corporate executives and activists. Once fractious and antagonistic, it has moved toward accommodation and even mutual dependence. Companies increasingly seek a “green” imprimatur, while enviros view changes in how business operates as key to protecting the planet.

A visit to the homepage of Environmental Defense Fund while writing this post revealed the  congratulatory headline: “Global Warming Victory: We brokered a buyout in Texas that will lead to a cleaner energy future.” (article)

The BusinessWeek article also presents Greenpeace and other activist organizations new relations with companies that were once targets.  

For companies, alliances with environmentalists can help both the bottom line and the public image. “We used to see Greenpeace as the enemy,” says DuPont CEO Charles O. Holliday Jr. Now DuPont employs Paul Gilding, former head of Greenpeace International, as a paid consultant, and the company ranks high on lists of green leaders. “We work with our enemies,” says Holliday.

The article also dispenses a dose of reality:

“Our job is not to please or convince the activists,” says Scott Noesen, Dow’s director of sustainable development. “The best we can do is set meaningful targets and report on our successes and failures and dilemmas.”

Technorati tags: BusinessWeek, corporate social responsibility, Greenpeace, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, TXU

The opening essay was written by Andrew Zolli, a consultant and futurist with Z + Partners and he does a great job in highlighting the evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility. Entitled Business 3.0 – The oblivious capitalist’s days are numbered, Zolli’s essay starts by citing Milton Friedman’s September 13, 1970 New York Times Magazine essay wherein the Nobel Prize winning economist argues that ”the one and only social responsibility of business (is) to engage in activities designed to increase it’s profits.” Free-market, laissez faire economics at it’s finest.

Thankfully, today some business leaders see opportunity, competitive advantage and economic benefit in innovative strategies that can help save the planet.  Zolli writes:

Well ahead of slower-moving governments, companies of every size and in every part of the world are now waking up to humanity’s impending and interlocking crises, and the vastly lucrative rewards that solving them might bring

As with the Industrial and Information Revolutions before them, the protagonists in the “Eco-Innovation” Revolution will take the field with new approaches, ideas, and technologies that will upend our notions of production, consumption, wealth, and invention.

Zolli provides some interesting ideas for consideration: waste accountability leading to design for low cost disassembly; the LOHAS (“lifestyles of health and sustainability”) $227 billion market made up of consumers who are willing to spend a 20% premium on “clean, green products over nonsustainable alternatives”; and biomemetic and organic technologies such as Lotusan Paint and BAE Systems’ Synthetic Gecko. Zolli writes:

These products share one trait: They will win in the marketplace. Not because they’re eco-friendly or warm and fuzzy or have a Ben & Jerry’s seal of approval. They’ll win because they deliver better, cheaper, and more profitable results.

Seeking a competitive advantage through green and sustainable strategies is not really at odds with Friedman’s profit maximization model. Integrating social responsibility with corporate strategy can be good for business and for the future of our planet.

Technorati tags: Corporate Social Responsibility, Milton Friedman, sustainibility, Fast Company, Fast 50, Andrew Zolli, LOHAS