Search for any green Service

Find green products from around the world in one place

Hydrogen Vehicles Are on the Rise: Here’s What You Need to Know

Hydrogen Vehicles Are on the Rise: Here’s What You Need to Know

Hydrogen Vehicles Are on the Rise: Here’s What You Need to Know

The automotive industry is rapidly transitioning to alternative energy sources for fuel vehicles, considering the greenhouse gasses (GHGs) emitted every mile driven. Battery-electric cars are on the rise, but are better alternatives on the horizon?

Hydrogen emerged as a viable replacement for fossil fuels and could be the next big thing in the automotive industry. The rise of hydrogen fuel cells is coming sooner than you may think, so here’s what you need to know about these vehicles.

 

Rapid Market Growth

The future of hydrogen power is bright, as investors think it has massive potential for the automotive industry. Experts say the global hydrogen fuel cell vehicle market will have a compound annual growth rate of 43% until 2032, culminating in a $57.9 billion value. Automakers understand the severity of today’s climate crisis and use any means necessary to advance their sustainability goals.

 

Harnessing Hydrogen

Hydrogen is unstable, as it reacts with other atoms to form compounds. So, how can you harness this chemical element to be safe for your vehicle? Scientists typically use these methods for hydrogen fuel production:

  • Thermal: The Department of Energy (DoE) says about 95% of today’s hydrogen comes from repurposed natural gas. Scientists combine steam and hydrocarbon fuels to produce hydrogen fuel, requiring high temperatures and attention to detail.
  • Solar: Using renewable energy to produce clean fuel is smart, so experts have used solar power for hydrogen production. For instance, they can harness hydrogen fuel using bacteria and its natural photosynthetic activity.
  • Biology: Bacteria are also helpful for hydrogen fuel production through biological reactions. You can use microbes to break down biomass and wastewater, and these tiny organisms aren’t energy-intensive, as they harness sunlight for power.

 

Refueling Stations

Hydrogen fuel is already available if you live on the West Coast, as most of the existing stations are in California — primarily in Los Angeles and the Bay Area. You can also enjoy this alternative energy source in the Pacific Ocean at the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute. As hydrogen fuel grows in demand, you’ll see more opportunities to fill up with it.

The DoE says the United States has 59 retail hydrogen-fueling stations, but more projects are on the way. Fleet companies may have private areas for fueling their vehicles, especially as long-haul trucks convert to hydrogen fuel.

 

Can Semi-Trucks Use Hydrogen Fuel?

Battery-electric motors are a concern for larger vehicles like light-duty and long-haul trucks. These machines must be powerful enough to propel heavy machines for long distances, but their weight drains energy quickly. Will hydrogen fuel be a solution? The logistics industry has focused on this alternative fuel source for greener highways.

For instance, in 2025, Kenworth will begin full-scale production of Class 8 T680 hydrogen fuel cell electric trucks in collaboration with Toyota. The heavy-duty truck manufacturer will deliver its first hydrogen-powered vehicles this year and then expand production.

While the fuel source changes, the typical qualities in hydrogen-powered trucks do not. This Kenworth Class 8 T680 truck has a max payload of 82,000 pounds, demonstrating its ability to carry a significant amount of goods.

The truck uses Toyota’s 310kW Dual Motor Assembly, as the Japanese automaker has prioritized hydrogen fuel research in the last decade. It recently released the second-generation Mirai, which mixes hydrogen and oxygen to produce electricity.

States like California have imposed strict requirements for long-haul trucks and other vehicles, so hydrogen-powered trucks could be the answer for sustainability and dependable transportation. Kenworth tested hydrogen fuel cell technology at the Port of Los Angeles in 2022 and used its success to build the Class 8 T680 semi-truck. Continued success will likely mean further North American expansion.

 

Powering Outside the Highways

Hydrogen has become a viable option for passenger cars and even long-haul trucks in its early stages. However, highway vehicles are not the only method of transportation using hydrogen power. Last year, North America debuted its first hydrogen train in Quebec, Canada. This machine uses about 50 kg of hydrogen daily and eliminates dependence upon fossil fuels for these trips.

Hydro-Quebec provides energy for the train, enabling it to travel about 90 km between Quebec City and Baie-Saint-Paul. Emissions are less of a worry for the train, as you only see water vapor emerging from its pipes.

 

What Are the Benefits of Hydrogen-Powered Vehicles?

Hydrogen-powered vehicles are likely the future, as automakers heavily invest in the technologies required for these machines. Driving a hydrogen-powered car delivers these four benefits.

1. Reducing Emissions

Auto manufacturers like Toyota are pushing hydrogen fuel technology because of its eco-friendliness. The only emissions are water vapor and heat, thus making them better for the environment. Turning hydrogen fuel cells mainstream would reduce the amount of GHGs emitted daily, which is crucial to combating climate change.

The transition to hydrogen fuel cells would significantly boost the logistics industry, considering how many long-haul trucks hit the road daily. Research shows medium and heavy-duty vehicles in the U.S. emit over 400 million metric tons of GHGs. Converting trucks worldwide would help the surrounding environment and improve health for each road traveled.

2. Easy Transition

While converting existing trucks to hydrogen fuel cells takes time, the transition might be easier than you think. Logistics companies can keep their current gas transport and storage mechanisms, repurposing them for hydrogen fuel.

Additionally, truck owners wouldn’t have to jump through hoops to let their vehicles take hydrogen power. Retrofitting combustion engines for hydrogen power is more straightforward than with electric motors, especially with heavy trucks.

3. Beating Battery-Powered Vehicles

Battery-electric trucks are best for short drives due to their limited range. However, logistics companies need their vehicles to travel hundreds of miles each trip to keep deliveries on time. Hydrogen-powered trucks allow fleet owners to combine sustainability and efficient travel due to their range.

For instance, the Kenworth T680 hydrogen fuel-powered truck ranges up to 450 miles, depending on the driving conditions. Regardless, it’s more than you’d get from an electric truck. In fact, the Kenworth machine boasts one of the highest ranges for any semi-truck using alternative energy sources.

4. Rapid Refueling

Another significant advantage of hydrogen trucks over battery-electric vehicles is the quick refueling. Fully electric trucks will need to wait for a few hours before they can head back on the road, causing trips to be longer than scheduled. However, hydrogen machines only require a few minutes to fill up, greatly boosting logistics companies. The Kenworth hydrogen fuel cell vehicle lets fleet owners increase uptime and reduce lead times.

Foreshadowing a Bright Future

The automotive industry is pushing for fossil fuel alternatives to help the planet’s transportation sector. While battery-electric technology has existed for over a decade, hydrogen fuel cells are another way for automakers to produce cleaner vehicles.

The future of hydrogen vehicles is bright as researchers continue to improve the technology and bring it into the mainstream.

 

 

 


 

 

 

Source  Happy Eco News

Meta Powers Towards Net Zero with Carbon Removal Projects

Meta Powers Towards Net Zero with Carbon Removal Projects

Any organisation worth their sustainability salt knows that reaching net zero emissions in operations alone is not enough

Decarbonization must extend beyond offices and factories to include Scope 3, from the emissions caused by suppliers to those created by employees.

For Meta, the world’s fifth-biggest tech company, this challenge is being met with ambitious targets and bold, meaningful action.

Having already hit net zero emissions in global operations in 2020, the social media giant now has its sustainability sights set on achieving net zero value chain emissions by 2030.

This is quite the challenge, given 99% of Meta’s carbon footprint came from Scope 3 in 2022 – and this continues to rise.

“We know that reaching net zero emissions across our value chain will not be an easy task,” Rachel Peterson, Vice President of Data Centre Strategy at Meta said in the company’s 2023 Sustainability Report.

“Right now, our Scope 3 emissions are increasing and will continue to do so as we work to support the global demand for the services we provide.”

 

Meta Tackles Hard-to-Abate Sectors with Carbon Removal Projects

Meta acknowledges that reaching this goal requires a significant shift in how it builds infrastructure and operates its entire business – and the 20-year-old company is prioritising efficiency and circularity in its business decisions and embracing low-carbon technology to operate with a lower emissions footprint.

For example, through its supplier engagement programme, Meta is working to decarbonise its supply chain and enable at least two-thirds of its suppliers to set SBTi-aligned reduction targets by 206.

However, there are some emissions from hard-to-abate sectors the Facebook owner knows will be difficult to reduce by the end of the decade.

And so to tackle this, Meta has turned to carbon removal projects, the third pillar in its high-level emissions reduction strategy.

In a white paper outlining its Net Zero Strategy, the company says investing in value chain emissions reductions projects is necessary to address sources it can’t directly influence – like companies or processes used to extract and process the copper in data centre hardware or mechanical electrical equipment.

“These projects offer a significant opportunity to decarbonise our business at pace and scale require to achieve our 2030 reduction target,” the paper states.

For Meta, a diverse approach to carbon removal that includes both nature-based and technological approaches is crucial – not only to ensure near-term climate impact but to support carbon removal solutions for the future.

This strategy involves the purchase of credits from projects that align with Meta’s principles, from reforestation to investment in direct air capture technology.

 

Nature-Based Solutions in Mitigating Carbon Emissions

Since 2021, the social media giant has supported numerous nature-based carbon removal projects, from Australia to Kenya, including increasing forest carbon stock of community ejido forests in Oaxaca and increasing stored carbon via protection of forests that provide habitat for mitigating salmon in California.

And demonstrating its continued commitment to investing in nature-based solutions to mitigate carbon emissions, Meta recently signed a major carbon credits deal for 6.75 million carbon credits with Aspiration, a leading provider of sustainable financial services.

These credits hail from a myriad of ecosystem restoration and natural carbon removal approaches, including native tree and mangrove reforestation, agroforestry, and the implementation of sustainable agricultural practices.

Meta’s role in the voluntary carbon market extends beyond purchasing credits from projects to supporting new project development through financing and encouraging the evolution of standards that bring more certainty to the market.

Among the ways Meta is driving development in the sector is through collaborative action that will “aggregate the resources of multiple companies to create rapid change at scale”.

This includes a collaborative pledge to develop carbon projects that centre Indigenous leadership.

Through 1t.org, the National Indian Carbon Coalition and Meta have pledged to support and promote a model of carbon projects that centre on the leadership, traditional ecological knowledge, and vision of Indigenous Peoples for themselves and their land.

Among other collaborative projects:

  • Participation in the Business Alliance to Scale Climate Solutions (BASCS), which provides a platform for businesses and climate experts to meet, learn, discuss and act together to improve climate solutions.
  • Collaboration with the World Resources Institute to develop a method to map forest canopy height↗ at individual tree-scale using a new Meta AI training model. We have mapped forest canopy in California and São Paulo, Brazil, and are making the data public and freely available

 

 

Meta’s Role in Scaling Carbon Removal Technologies

In further driving development in the sector, Meta joined forces with other big tech companies in 2022 to accelerate the development of carbon removal technologies by guaranteeing future demand.

While some say focusing on carbon capture is a distraction to the real goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Meta argues that both emissions reductions and carbon dioxide removal are needed.

And climate science backs this up.

Scientists say removing the carbon emissions that we have already pumped into the atmosphere is necessary if we are to avoid the 1.5-degree rises in global temperature set out in the Paris Agreement.

Launched in 2022, Frontier is a US$925 million joint commitment between Meta, Stripe, Shopify, McKinsey Sustainability and Alphabet – more recently bolstered with four new companies – Autodesk, H&M Group, JPMorgan Chase and Workday – committing a combined US$100 million.

Frontier helps its member companies purchase CO2 removal via pre-purchase agreements or offtake agreements. The goal is to spur the development of a new industry by providing a novel source of funding that isn’t based on debt or equity investments, but on actual product purchases before the technology is fully available at scale.

So far, Frontier has spent $5.6 million buying nearly 9,000 tonnes of contracted carbon removal from 15 different carbon dioxide removal startups.

Among these, RepAir uses electrochemical cells and clean electricity to capture carbon dioxide from the air, while Living Carbon is a synthetic biology startup working on engineering natural systems to remove carbon dioxide.

With this strategy, Meta is helping to expand the voluntary carbon market, overcome barriers to scale, and at the same time achieve its own ambitious net zero goals.

 

 


 

 

Source

Mars on a Procurement Pathway to Net-Zero

Mars on a Procurement Pathway to Net-Zero

Mars has published its open-source action plan to accelerate the drive towards achieving Net Zero emissions, including a new target to cut carbon in half by 2030 across its full value chain. The strategy also involves investing US$1bn over the next three years alone to drive climate action

The strategy incorporates an understanding of how supplier engagement, supply chain and procurement impacts their environmental footprint, as 80% of it comes from their inputs such as raw materials, packaging and logistics.

“The carbon footprint of our entire supply chain from farming through to the end of life of our packaging and everything in between is the same as that of a small country – Finland has almost exactly the same footprint,” explains Barry Parkin the Chief Procurement and Sustainability Officer at Mars Inc. “When we look at where our footprint was ten years ago, 70% or more of it is embedded in the goods or services we buy. So, procurement is therefore absolutely critical.”

This means the role of procurement, supply chain, and supplier engagement is integral to the company reaching their ambitious sustainability targets, and Parkin is acutely aware that means it is essential for them to do things differently. “Our job is to re-imagine and re-design supply chains so that they have a dramatically lower carbon footprint,” he says. “To put it another way, unless we change what we buy, or where we buy it or how we buy it we are not going to really change our carbon footprint. ”

Their roadmap involves removing approximately 15 million metric tons by 2030 and then another 15 million metric tons by 2050 when they reach net zero.  Since 2015 Mars have already reduced emissions by 8%, whilst growing the business by 60%, showing that it is possible to decouple emissions from growth and success of a business.

 

Supplier relationships 

As for any major organisation trying to address their sustainability strategy, it is impossible for Mars to make significant progress with their carbon footprint without the help and buy-in from their enormous supply networks.

“As a global company, we rely on suppliers across our value chain as essential partners in our journey to reach net zero,” says Parkin.  “Like most companies, addressing our Scope 3 emissions is challenging because of their indirect nature and our lack of direct control or visibility. Only by working with our Tier 1 suppliers can we make progress with them on their own emissions and on their upstream emissions with our Tier 2 suppliers and beyond.”

Mars was a founding member of the Supplier Leadership on Climate Transition coalition, that is a dedicated body for instigating climate action through industry-wide supply chains.  This allows companies like Mars to use their scale and influence to guide, mentor and train suppliers with emissions strategies and also celebrate their best practice.

This reflects the collaborative approach Mars is trying to adopt with all their stakeholders to reach their climate targets.  “Suppliers that demonstrate substantial progress in reducing their environmental footprint are recognised and rewarded with additional business,” explains Parkin. “This metrics-driven strategy ensures that our suppliers have a significant role in our journey towards sustainability, aligning their efforts with our commitment to addressing the climate crisis.”

To achieve this relationship, Mars sets clear expectations for suppliers regarding emissions reduction, renewable energy adoption, and sustainable sourcing. They then incorporate those climate performance metrics into some of their biggest supplier’s evaluation criteria.

 

Recipe optimisation 

For one of the global leaders in food products, pet supplies and confectionery, they are also able to leverage product design and ingredients into their net-zero strategy.  Mars describes that as ‘optimising recipes’ and procurement is again integral in making that aspect of the plan a success.

“Our procurement team actively collaborates with suppliers to identify and source new ingredients in a way which lowers emissions and advances our sustainability goals,” says Parkin. “This collaborative approach helps improve our supply chain sustainability performance, including the procurement of ingredients that have a reduced carbon footprint.”

This approach of working closely with the suppliers who provide the ingredients, allows Mars to enhance their product offerings while at the same time finding new ways to reduce the emissions associated with the recipes.

 

Buying-in to the road map 

Parkin is praising the positive reaction from their suppliers to the Net Zero Roadmap, but that is also because many of those partners have been on a sustainability journey with the company for a number of years, since setting out their first scope 3 targets for their full value chain back in 2017.

“Suppliers have expressed their appreciation for the transparency and specificity of our roadmap,” explains Parkin.  “It has enabled them to better understand our expectations and how their contributions fit into the broader picture of achieving net zero emissions. The roadmap’s emphasis on collaboration and collective responsibility has resonated with our suppliers, fostering a spirit of partnership in our shared journey towards sustainability.”

The partnership allows procurement partners to take proactive steps in their organisations and strategies to address their emissions, and be part of a collective responsibility to finding both a sustainable future and a productive business relationship.

Aside from the influence such an ambitious net-zero strategy has on the culture and direction of a company like Mars Inc, it also creates a larger impression on other companies in their business ecosystem as other brands and businesses look to follow their lead.

Barry Parkin is aware of the value of that influence, and how their procurement and supply chain can help lead others to greater sustainable achievements.

“Global companies like Mars play an important role in shaping sustainability standards and advancing climate action at scale,” he explains. “Our influence extends across the globe, allowing us to inspire change on a wider scale. When companies set high sustainability standards, it encourages others in their industries to follow suit.”

He adds: “Companies like Mars have the resources, expertise, and innovation capabilities needed to pioneer sustainable practices and technologies.

“We can invest significantly in research and development, pilot groundbreaking initiatives, and implement sustainable solutions beyond the reach of smaller organisations. This proactive approach not only benefits the environment but also builds a positive reputation with environmentally conscious consumers and attracts like-minded partners.”

If a globally recognised brand like Mars can leverage their sprawling supply and procurement network for better environmental outcomes, it can only help to bring others on the same journey. “This ripple effect fosters industry-wide transformation, promoting a more sustainable future,” finishes Parkin. “If a business such as Mars can halve it’s footprint by 2030, that matters.”

 


 

 

Source   Sustainability

Businesses aim to get green travel policies on track

Businesses aim to get green travel policies on track

New survey reveals four out of five SMEs intend to take steps to encourage employees to embrace lower carbon travel options.

Over 80 per cent of UK small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) intend to increase their support for lower carbon business travel through corporate travel policies and budgets for 2024.

That is the headline finding from a new survey of over 500 decision makers at businesses with fewer than 250 employees commissioned by Trainline Partner Solutions, the B2B arm of Trainline.

The survey found nine in 10 UK SMEs expect to boost travel expenditure this year, while 92 per cent expect to see levels of business travel increase.

However, at the same time 83 per cent intend to strengthen their travel policy and/or financial support to make it easier for employees to opt for lower carbon travel modes in 2024. Specifically, 48 per cent are planning to use rail more to help reduce their emissions from business travel.

The survey also found 52 per cent of respondents have already set targets for reducing their emissions from business travel – and of those SMEs that have no such goals, two-thirds think it is likely their company will set a target this year.

“Businesses are telling us they expect to both travel and spend more this year as business travel continues to rebound post-Covid,” said Andrew Cruttenden, general manager at Trainline Partner Solutions. “We’re seeing a clear signal that sustainability considerations are a growing factor in setting travel policies and budgets, and rail is a great way to reduce the carbon emissions for travel versus flying and driving. Carriers and travel partners must ensure they can meet this growing demand by innovating and investing in the right tech that helps make rail a simple and seamless option for business travellers.”

Most businesses have slashed travel-related emissions in recent years, after the covid pandemic triggered widespread use of video conferencing platforms. However, business travels are expected to continue to recover this year, prompting calls for businesses and policymakers to incentivise wider use of lower emission forms of travel.

For example, the Climate Perks campaign has called on companies to offer employees extra days off if they use rail for their holidays, while green groups have repeatedly called for businesses to eschew the use of short haul flights wherever rail offers a viable alternative.

However, efforts to encourage wider use of rail have been hampered by the relatively high cost of rail compared to flights, with a Greenpeace analysis last month pointing to how popular rail routes across Europe over the festive period were on average 3.4 times more expensive than equivalent flights.

As such, campaigners are continuing to call on governments to introduce new policies and taxes to curb the availability of short haul flights and tackle the price differential between rail journeys and flights.

 

 


 

 

Source  –   BusinessGreen

Walmart and General Mills build a sustainable food supply

Walmart and General Mills build a sustainable food supply
Working as partners in regenerative agriculture projects, Walmart and General Mills are working with authorities to create a more sustainable food system

Disruption of the food supply chain is perhaps the single most impactful event that can have detrimental effects globally. Also, the emissions that are produced as a result of the global food supply are just as impactful to our future and the shortage of food itself.

According to 2018 data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) meat, eggs and nuts are the primary sources of food across the states while vegetables are the third largest and fruit is at the bottom. However, from what we’ve seen over recent years, many would suggest the meat supply chain accounts for a large proportion of the industry’s emissions and is therefore unsustainable in its current mass-production form.

Now, this is not to blame the humble cow or any other animal for climate change, but more the processes in which meat is reared and distributed across the US. With certain regenerative principles in place—and the support from the public to reduce consumption—farms are known to provide higher quality goods that are nutritionally beneficial.

How does regenerative agriculture support a sustainable food system?

This is neither a slight of common habits, nor a simple task to conduct. In order to make the food system sustainable economically, consistent, and less impactful to the climate, examples of regenerative agriculture show the impacts of more mindful farming.

On the 17th October 2023, General Mills and Walmart announced a joint effort that will likely spark further consideration as the organisations advance regenerative agriculture across 600,000 acres of US soil by 2030. This project is about reducing the emissions and resource-drain from farming, improving soil health and, in turn, product quality.

The primary projects will be supported through grant funding from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) and will reshape the process for growing crops like wheat across the Northern and Southern Great Plains.

Based on the research from the USDA, grains are the second most-consumed foods in the country after the meat, eggs, and nuts group.

These two corporations will also collaborate with Sam’s Club, a division of Walmart that offers superior quality and pricing for millions of items supplied to the US and Puerto Rico.

“Through this partnership, we will work hand-in-hand with Walmart and Sam’s Club to help regenerate the acres of land in the key regions where we source ingredients for our shared business,” says Jon Nudi, Group President, North America Retail at General Mills.

“We are excited by the opportunity to bring our products, including Pillsbury refrigerated dough and Blue Buffalo pet food and treats, to Walmart shelves more sustainably, with the help of our merchants and farmer partners.”

The three organisations believe that regenerative agriculture holds the key to emissions reduction in the supply chain and tackles many of the challenges within the modern food system. They also recognise their collective footprint and overall impact on the industry, and therefore will set the benchmark for regenerative agriculture implementation in the wider industry.

Walmart’s and General Mills’ sustainability alignment

Both organisations are impacted by the fate of the planet. As influential businesses in the food supply chain—Walmart operating across many facets of consumer goods—sustainability is now at the core of their future projects. Walmart’s net-zero emissions target is set for 2040 and will be driven by a number of investments into clean energy, providing 100% renewables to its facilities by 2035. The path to net-zero in Scope 3 requires further action to support its partners, suppliers, and customers to deliver on their own emissions targets.

When it comes to securing the food supply chain, Walmart dedicates much of its support to preserving land for regenerative projects and in investing deforestation-free product sourcing, which was recognised as one of the key downfalls of the meat supply chain—limited space resulting in deforestation.

“We’re committing to making the everyday choice the more sustainable choice for consumers,” says John Laney, Executive Vice President, Food at Walmart US.

“This collaboration is an example of how we are working across our value chain on intentional interventions to help advance regenerative agriculture and ensure surety of supply for these essential food products for the long term.”

As a key supplier of food globally, General Mills owns some of the much-loved brands and will continue to ensure that these products are delivered at lower impact to the planet. Also focusing on regenerative agriculture, energy sourcing and packaging innovation will also allow the company to drive healthier approaches in the food supply chain.

 

 


 

 

Source   Sustainability

Why Are Eco-Conscious Corporations Interested in Remote Work?

Why Are Eco-Conscious Corporations Interested in Remote Work?

Why Are Eco-Conscious Corporations Interested in Remote Work?

Remote work has risen in popularity over the last few years and is maintaining its status for evolving reasons. Primarily, people are noting how it’s better for the environment. Eco-conscious corporations are jumping into remote work life to better align with their values.

Here are a few reasons why they’re interested in digitizing their workforces. Companies should consider several pros and cons when making the leap to remote work.

 

What Are Eco-Conscious Corporations?

Traditional corporations have various values and goals. They may prioritize making profits or expanding their consumer base to bolster success. Eco-conscious corporations also value those things, but these goals must operate within structures that minimize the company’s planetary impact.

Corporations stand to gain from becoming eco-friendly in many ways, and consumer base increases may be most influential in the decision to go remote. Research shows that 89% of consumers have made minor to complete sustainable lifestyle changes. They want brands that won’t compromise those values, opening a market sector businesses stand to gain from joining.

Is Remote Work Eco-Friendly? 8 Pros and Cons

Corporations that want to attract and retain sustainably minded consumers may become interested in remote work due to these benefits. However, they may also face a few challenges when making the green jump. Here are the most vital points to keep in mind.

Pro: It Eliminates Commuting Emissions

When people think about working a remote position, not dealing with a commute is likely the first thing that comes to mind. Logging on from home gives them hours of their free time back. It also means they don’t have to burn gasoline to drive every day.

Breathe London found that morning and evening emissions fell by 25% and 34%, respectively, when people began working from home. Eco-conscious corporations that let 50 people work from home full time eliminate 50 carbon emissions footprints weekly. The sum can significantly affect the planet, especially if the company has a sizable employee roster.

Con: Home Offices Require Individual Electricity

People need electricity to work from home. They must access Wi-Fi, turn on lights, and use their air conditioning or heating. All those things happen in one location when people work in a commercial office space.

Remote teams transitioning to online work see electricity usage multiply by however many living spaces become full-time home offices. Some workers may prefer to think of this as sustainable consumption because it limits a person’s environmental impact to only essential needs, minimizing their planetary effects. However, power becomes an issue when a company has many employees.

Pro: Digital Work Doesn’t Need Paper

Employees print things every day when they’re in a traditional office. They might need documents before a conference call, copies of a presentation or records in filing cabinets according to company filing policies.

Remote work doesn’t need paper. Everything happens through computers, so waste disappears overnight. Employees can keep their work lives entirely on their computers or use their preferred resources, like physical planners made with recycled paper.

Con: Remote Work Encourages More Water Usage

Offices always have numerous waterlines. They’re necessary for kitchen and bathroom sinks, plus lines to other appliances like refrigerators, dishwashers and coffee machines.

Virtual teams use water when working from home, too, but they might increase their water usage in additional ways. Remote workers can do dishes and laundry throughout the day instead of limiting those chores to a few times a week after work hours. It may mean using more water than before, increasing their dependency on the limited natural resource.

Pro: Workers Create Less Product Waste

Going to an office every day creates opportunities for single-use product waste. Employees may stop at a drive-thru for a single-use cup of coffee. The workplace kitchen might have free cutlery with individual plastic wrappers.

Those things aren’t a necessity for remote workers. They can make their coffee at home with reusable mugs and compostable filters. They’ll use their silverware to eat lunch and reusable containers for snacks.

The option to order food for delivery remains when people work at home. However, having immediate access to anything they could need in their kitchens makes remote workers less likely to purchase single-use products that go immediately into the garbage.

Con: Office Furniture Goes to Landfills

When a small business hires only remote workers when it launches, there’s nothing to lose. It’s different when an eco-conscious corporation becomes interested in remote work.

The company likely already has in-person office space in one or more locations. Transitioning to an entirely online workspace leaves those buildings empty. Trash-hauling teams may need to pick up unused furniture and electronics when the business moves out. It may go directly into landfills if the corporation’s leadership doesn’t have time to sell each piece individually.

Pro: Employees Can Make Their Food

Employees don’t always eat the food they bring to the office. They might forget there’s a company-sponsored lunch or free snacks for an upcoming holiday. By the time they get home, the food in their lunch box might not be edible anymore.

Free meals provided by corporations can also be too big for employees who dislike large lunches. Both scenarios result in wasting the natural resources required to prepare food. They contribute to the estimated 30%-40% of waste in the American food supply system, but they don’t have to be an unfortunate part of every worker’s life.

Remote employees can make exactly how much food they want and any kind they prefer while at home. They might even have groceries delivered to reduce impulse buys and eliminate another trip to town that burns gas. It’s another way remote work is eco-friendly and quickly becoming more popular with sustainably minded people.

Con: Home Office Upgrades Create Waste

People may upgrade their home office when they must spend 40 hours or more there weekly. The single-use plastics and styrofoam packaging that come with new furniture pollute landfills after the desks or chairs arrive at the purchaser’s home.

Construction waste could become a new issue as well. Someone may add a room to their house or renovate an existing space to create a home office. The excess waste caused by aerosol cans, unused drywall and leftover paint fills landfills, too. None of that is necessary for in-person work where optimized office spaces are already available.

 

 

The Future Is Remote and Eco-Friendly

There are numerous reasons why remote work is eco-friendly. It’s worth noting how it helps the planet and may create new environmental challenges. By understanding both, corporations and their team members can work together to make the least environmental impact when transitioning to fully remote schedules.

 

 


 

 

Source   Happy Eco News

Compass Group meets EV goal early, increases climate targets for food-related emissions

Compass Group meets EV goal early, increases climate targets for food-related emissions

The British company has this week published its first in-depth climate impact report, developed to communicate progress towards its 2030 net-zero goal that it unveiled in 2021. The goal entails reducing absolute emissions across all scopes by at least 69% by 2030. against a 2019 baseline. It has been validated in line with the Science-Based Targets Initiative’s (SBTi) 1.5C trajectory.

Compass Group UK&I will finalise a plan to neutralise residual emissions in 2023, detailing its approach to insetting and offsetting.

According to the report, Compass Group UK&I has delivered a 6.46% reduction in absolute emissions since 2019. The business has grown, but it has posted significant decreases in emissions across all Scopes – more than 57% for Scope 1 (direct) emissions; more than 81% for Scope 2 (power-related) emissions and more than 20% for food-related indirect emissions (Scope 3).

On Scope 2 emissions, the report confirms that Compass Group UK&I delivered its ambition to procure 100% renewable electricity by 2022 on time. This is a significant change, given that, in 2019, just 2% of the company’s electricity mix was renewable.

The report also confirms that Compass Group UK&I has achieved its EV ambitions, set for 2024, two years early. The business had pledged to introduce an electric policy for cars by 2024 but this was brought in last year. All cars on order are pure electric. One-third of the firm’s car fleet is now pure-electric and a further 18% are hybrid.

 

Lower-carbon menus

Like most food businesses, Compass Group UK&I sees a significant majority of its emissions footprint – more than 77% – arising from indirect (Scope 3) sources. More than 64% of its overall emissions footprint lies in the lifecycle of ingredients and foods.

In setting its net-zero target, Compass Group UK&I pledged to switch at least 40% of its food offerings to plant-based proteins by 2030, with an interim target of at least 25% by 2025. It has also forged ahead with plans to source more meat, dairy and produce from regenerative farms and to source more locally and seasonally to reduce transport-related emissions.

Work so far has resulted in emissions from animal proteins falling more than one-third since 2018.

The report reveals that Compass Group UK&I’s 4,000+ chefs have either delivered – or are in the process of delivering – more than 90,000 recipe reformulations in support of this work. It also confirmed that more than 25,000 frontline catering staff have completed carbon training, which is now being rolled out on a mandatory basis.

New targets

Compass Group UK&I’s director of delivery for net-zero, Carolyn Ball, said: “As knowledge and understanding continues to grow within our teams, our clients, suppliers and partners, we are seeing a gear shift across our entire value chain. There is a long way to go and no shortcuts to get there, but our responsibility and opportunity to act is as clear as it is compelling.”

One shift in knowledge for businesses procuring goods from agriculture supply chains is the introduction of specific Forest, Land and Agriculture (FLAG) Guidance from the SBTi. The guidance clarifies how companies that are linked to land-intensive activities across the value chain can account for emissions reduction and removal.

Following the launch of initial guidance last year, the SBTi is set to provide an update this year.

As such, Compass Group UK&I has increased its emissions targets. It has now pledged to deliver a 72% reduction in FLAG emissions by 2030 and 90% reduction in non-FLAG emissions by 2030, against a 2019 baseline.

The report also includes new commitments to end deforestation in the supply chains of directly-sourced deforestation-linked commodities by 2025 and to increase non-food-waste recycling on all sites where Compass manages the contract by 2030.

 

 


 

 

Source edie

airBaltic reduces carbon footprint using one model of plane

airBaltic reduces carbon footprint using one model of plane

Air travel makes the world smaller, miraculously allowing someone in, say, London to reach Tokyo in about 12 hours (it takes a boat six weeks to do the same); but it is also extremely deleterious to the environment and makes people think twice about the mode of travel altogether.

In light of this sentiment, airlines hitting their sustainability goals is of the utmost importance. One of the standouts in this regard is airBaltic, the flagship carrier of Latvia, and an airline that is on track to reach its sustainability goal of carbon neutrality by 2050.

To what does airBaltic attribute this success? The adoption, across its entire fleet, of one make of aeroplane: the French-designed and manufactured Airbus A220-300.

A one-model airline

The carrier first adopted this model aeroplane in 2016, and since then, airBaltic has become the largest operator in the world of this type of aircraft model. It made the decision in 2020 to make the model the sole jet it uses. Since making the move, airBaltic has already reduced its carbon emission by 20%

The Airbus A220-300 has a further capacity to reduce CO2 emissions by 25%; additionally, it can reduce Nox emissions by 50%.

The airline has benefitted over the past year, as the price of fuel has skyrocketed due to geopolitical factors such as the war in Ukraine. According to the group CEO Martin Gauss: “With the higher fuel cost, our best offset against this is the Airbus A220-300 because we have 25% less fuel burn this year than we’ve had in the years when we were using different aircraft.”

It’s not for lack of air miles: since adoption, the airBaltic’s Airbus A220-300s have logged more than 120,000 flights, flying over 263,000 block hours.

And the carrier will continue stocking the model: December 31 of last year saw its 39th join the fleet, and this number is expected to hit 50 by 2024.

 

 


 

 

Source Sustainability

Microsoft and McKinsey collaborate on decarbonisation

Microsoft and McKinsey collaborate on decarbonisation

Microsoft and McKinsey are combining their tech and sustainability expertise to help businesses measure and reduce their overall carbon footprint
Microsoft and McKinsey have joined forces to help organisations with a scalable technology solution to help in the fight against climate change.

The integrated solution combines sustainability data intelligence from Microsoft Sustainability Manager with decarbonisation planning and an execution engine using McKinsey Sustainability’s Catalyst Zero.

According to the two companies, this technological collaboration will enhance companies’ sustainability transformations by integrating their data from activities that produce emissions with initiatives to abate them.

“Urgent and decisive action to curtail emissions is needed if we are to reach net zero by 2050. By combining our tech and sustainability expertise and experience, Microsoft and McKinsey will help businesses accurately and swiftly measure and reduce their overall carbon footprint,” says Tomas Nauclér, senior partner at McKinsey and global co-leader of McKinsey Sustainability.

 

 

Using sustainability knowledge to meet specific needs
Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability is the company’s first horizontal industry cloud designed to work across multiple industries. Its solutions can be customised to specific industry needs, whether a customer is in retail, energy, manufacturing, or another industry.

The new solution is powered by Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability, and it uses Sustainability Manager to automate and scale the collection of companies’ sustainability-related data and support establishing an emission baseline. Following that, McKinsey’s Catalyst Zero solution, which draws on sustainability expertise and experience, provides a holistic understanding of emissions at company, product and value chain levels, and helps leaders create a detailed decarbonisation plan by leveraging a vast proprietary library of decarbonization levers.

The ongoing data feed between Microsoft’s and McKinsey’s solutions regularly monitors whether the impact forecasted in the decarbonisation plan is happening as planned. The joint solution is powered with tens of thousands of emission factors and decarbonisation levers across 70+ industry sectors to rapidly quantify baseline emissions, generate a company-specific Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC), and also plan and track granular decarbonisation initiatives.

“We are focused on accelerating progress to achieve a more sustainable future, and our collaboration with McKinsey, to deliver innovative Cloud for Sustainability solutions will help customers unify their data intelligence, build robust IT infrastructure and gain insights into their overall carbon footprint in order to help them develop and execute robust decarbonisation strategies to achieve their sustainability goals,” says Elisabeth Brinton, Microsoft Corporate Vice President for Sustainability.

 


 

Source Sustainability

 

What if we did everything right? This is what the world could look like in 2050

What if we did everything right? This is what the world could look like in 2050

The World We Are Creating

It is 2050. Beyond the emissions reductions registered in 2015, no further efforts were made to control emissions. We are heading for a world that will be more than 3 degrees warmer by 2100.

The first thing that hits you is the air.

In many places around the world, the air is hot, heavy, and depending on the day, clogged with particulate pollution. Your eyes often water. Your cough never seems to disappear. You think about some countries in Asia, where out of consideration sick people used to wear white masks to protect others from airborne infection. Now you wear a daily mask to protect yourself from air pollution. You can no longer walk out your front door and breathe fresh air: there is none. Instead, before opening doors or windows in the morning, you check your phone to see what the air quality will be. Everything might look fine— sunny and clear— but you know better. When storms and heat waves overlap and cluster, the air pollution and intensified surface ozone levels make it dangerous to go outside without a specially designed face mask (which only some can afford).

Southeast Asia and Central Africa lose more lives to filthy air than do Europe or the United States. There few people work outdoors anymore, and even indoors the air tastes slightly acidic, making you feel nauseated throughout the day. China stopped burning coal ten years ago, but that hasn’t made much difference in air quality around the world because you are still breathing dangerous exhaust fumes from millions of cars and buses everywhere. China has experimented with seeding rain clouds— the process of artificially inducing rain— hoping to wash pollution out of the sky, but results are mixed. Seeding clouds to artificially create more rain is difficult and unreliable, and even the wealthiest countries cannot achieve consistent results. In Europe and Asia, the practice has triggered international incidents because even the most skilled experts can’t control where the rain will fall, never mind that acid rain is deleterious to crops, wreaking havoc on food supply. As a result, crops are increasingly grown under cover to protect them from the weather, a trend that will only get stronger.

 

 

Our world is getting hotter. Over the next two decades, projections tell us that temperatures in some areas of the globe will rise even higher, an irreversible development utterly beyond our control. The world’s ecosystems have stopped absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and are, on balance, emitting it. Oceans, forests, plants, trees, and soil had for many years absorbed half the carbon dioxide we spewed out. Now there are few forests left, most of them either logged or consumed by wildfire, and the permafrost is belching greenhouse gases into an already overburdened atmosphere.

The increasing heat of the Earth is suffocating us, and in five to ten years, vast swaths of the planet will be uninhabitable. By 2100, Australia, North Africa, and parts of the western United States might be entirely abandoned. Now everyone knows what the future holds for their children and grandchildren: tipping point after tipping point has been reached until eventually there will be no more civilization. Humans will be cast to the winds again, gathering in small tribes, hunkered down and living on whatever patch of land might sustain them.

The planet has already reached several such tipping points. First was the vanishing of coral reefs. Some of us still remember diving amid majestic coral reefs, brimming with multicolored fish of all shapes and sizes. Corals are now almost gone. The Great Barrier Reef in Australia is the largest aquatic cemetery in the world. Efforts have been made to grow artificial corals farther north and south from the equator where the water is a bit cooler, but these efforts have failed, and marine life has not returned. Soon there will be no reefs anywhere— it is only a matter of a few years before the last 10 percent dies off.

The second tipping point was the melting of the ice sheets in the Arctic. There is no summer Arctic sea ice anymore because warming is worse at the poles— between 6 and 8 degrees higher than other areas. The melting happened silently in that cold place far north of most of the inhabited world, but its effects were soon noticed. The Great Melting was an accelerant of further global warming. The white ice used to reflect the sun’s heat, but now it’s gone, so the dark sea water absorbs more heat, expanding the mass of water and pushing sea levels even higher. More moisture in the air and higher sea surface temperatures have caused a surge in extreme hurricanes and tropical storms. Recently, coastal cities in Bangladesh, Mexico, and the United States have suffered brutal infrastructure destruction and extreme flooding, killing many thousands and displacing millions. This happens with increasing frequency now. Every day, because of rising water levels, some part of the world must evacuate to higher ground. Every day the news shows images of mothers with babies strapped to their backs, wading through floodwaters, and homes ripped apart by vicious currents that resemble mountain rivers. News stories tell of people living in houses with water up to their ankles because they have nowhere else to go, their children coughing and wheezing because of the mold growing in their beds, insurance companies declaring bankruptcy leaving survivors without resources to rebuild their lives. Contaminated water supplies, sea salt intrusions, and agricultural runoff are the order of the day. Because multiple disasters are always happening simultaneously in every country, it can take weeks or even months for basic food and water relief to reach areas pummeled by extreme floods. Diseases such as malaria, dengue, cholera, respiratory illnesses, and malnutrition are rampant.

Now all eyes are on the western Antarctic ice sheet. If and when it disappears, it could release a deluge of freshwater into the oceans, raising sea levels by over five meters. Cities like Miami, Shanghai, and Dhaka will be uninhabitable—ghostly Atlantises dotting the coasts of each continent, their skyscrapers jutting out of the water, their people evacuated or dead.

Those around the world who chose to remain on the coast because it had always been their home have more to deal with than rising water and floods— they must now witness the demise of a way of life-based on fishing. As oceans have absorbed carbon dioxide, the water has become more acidic, and the pH levels are now so hostile to marine life that all countries have banned fishing, even in international waters. Many people insist that the few fish that are left should be enjoyed while they last— an argument, hard to fault in many parts of the world, that applies to so much that is vanishing.

As devastating as rising oceans have been, droughts and heatwaves inland have created a special hell. Vast regions have succumbed to severe aridification followed by desertification, and wildlife has become a distant memory. These places can barely support human life; their aquifers dried up long ago, and their groundwater is almost gone. Marrakech and Volgograd are on the verge of becoming deserts. Hong Kong, Barcelona, and Abu Dhabi have been desalinating seawater for years, desperately trying to keep up with the constant wave of immigration from areas that have gone completely dry.

The Sahara Desert, which was once contained in Africa, now extends to Europe, into areas of Spain, Greece, and southern France. Extreme heat is on the march. If you live in Paris, you endure summer temperatures that regularly rise to 44 degrees Celsius (111 degrees Fahrenheit). This is no longer the headline-grabbing event it would have been thirty years ago. Everyone stays inside, drinks water, and dreams of air conditioning. You lie on your couch, a cold wet towel over your face, and try to rest without dwelling on the poor farmers on the outskirts of town who, despite recurrent droughts and wildfires, are still trying to grow grapes, olives, or soy— luxuries for the rich, not for you.

You try not to think about the 2 billion people who live in the hottest parts of the world, where, for upward of forty-five days per year, temperatures skyrocket to 60 degrees Celsius (140 degrees Fahrenheit)— a point at which the human body cannot be outside for longer than six hours because it loses the ability to cool itself down. Places such as central India are becoming uninhabitable. For a while people tried to carry on, but when you can’t work outside, when you can fall asleep only at four a.m. for a couple of hours because that’s the coolest part of the day, there’s not much you can do but leave. Mass migrations to less hot rural areas are beset by a host of refugee problems, civil unrest, and bloodshed over diminished water availability.

Inland glaciers around the world are almost gone. The millions who depended on the Himalayan, Alpine, and Andean glaciers to regulate water availability throughout the year are in a state of constant emergency: there is no more snow turning to ice atop mountains in the winter, so there is no more gradual melting for the spring and summer. Now there are either torrential rains leading to flooding or prolonged droughts. The most vulnerable communities with the least resources have already seen what ensues when water is scarce: sectarian violence, mass migration, and death.

Even in some parts of the United States, there are fiery conflicts over water, battles between the rich who are willing to pay for as much water as they want and everyone else demanding equal access to the life-enabling resource. The taps in nearly all public facilities are locked, and those in restrooms are coin-operated. At the federal level, Congress is in an uproar over water redistribution: states with less water demand what they see as their fair share from states that have more. Government leaders have been stymied on the River and the Rio Grande shrink further. Looming on the horizon are conflicts with Mexico, no longer able to guarantee deliveries of water from the depleted Rio Conchos and Rio Grande. Similar disputes have arisen in Peru, China, and Russia.

Food production swings wildly from month to month, season to season, depending on where you live. More people are starving than ever before. Climate zones have shifted, so some new areas have become available for agriculture (Alaska, the Arctic), while others have dried up (Mexico, California). Still others are unstable because of the extreme heat, never mind flooding, wildfire, and tornadoes. This makes the food supply in general highly unpredictable. One thing hasn’t changed, though— if you have money, you have access. Global trade has slowed as countries such as China stop exporting and seek to hold on to their own resources. Disasters and wars rage, choking off trade routes. The tyranny of supply and demand is now unforgiving; because of its scarcity, food is now wildly expensive. Income inequality has always existed, but it has never been this stark or this dangerous.

Whole countries suffer from epidemics of stunting and malnutrition. Reproduction has slowed overall, but most acutely in those countries where food scarcity is dire. Infant mortality is sky high, and international aid has proven to be politically impossible to defend in light of mass poverty. Countries with enough food are resolute about holding on to it.

In some places, the inability to gain access to such basics as wheat, rice, or sorghum has led to economic collapse and civil unrest more quickly than even the most pessimistic sociologists had previously imagined. Scientists tried to develop varieties of staples that could stand up to drought, temperature fluctuations, and salt, but we started too late. Now there simply aren’t enough resilient varieties to feed the population. As a result, food riots, coups, and civil wars throw the world’s most vulnerable from the frying pan into the fire. As developed countries seek to seal their borders from mass migration, they too feel the consequences. Stock markets are crashing, currencies are wildly fluctuating, and the European Union has disbanded.

As committed as nations are to keeping wealth and resources within their borders, they’re determined to keep people out. Most countries’ armies are now just highly militarized border patrols. Lockdown is the goal, but it hasn’t been a total success. Desperate people will always find a way. Some countries have been better global Good Samaritans than others, but even they have now effectively shut their borders, their wallets, and their eyes.

When the equatorial belt became mostly uninhabitable just a few years ago, you watched the news with disbelieving eyes. Undulating crowds of migrants, half a billion people, were moving north from Central America toward Mexico and the United States. Others moved south toward the tips of Chile and Argentina. The same scenes played out across Europe and Asia. Most people who lived between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn were driving or walking away in a giant band of humanity. Enormous political pressure was placed on northern and southern countries to either welcome migrants or keep them out. Some countries let people in, but only under conditions approaching indentured servitude. It will be years before the stranded migrants are able to find asylum or settle into new refugee cities that have formed along the borders.

Even if you live in areas with more temperate climates such as Canada and Scandinavia, you are still extremely vulnerable. Severe tornadoes, flash floods, wildfires, mudslides, and blizzards are always in the back of your mind. Depending on where you live, you have a fully stocked storm cellar, an emergency go-bag in your car, or a six-foot fire moat around your house. People are glued to oncoming weather reports. No one shuts their phones off at night. When the emergency hits, you may only have minutes to respond. The alert systems set up by the government are basic and subject to glitches and irregularities depending on access to technology. The rich, who subscribe to private, reliable satellite-based alert systems, sleep better.

The weather is unavoidable, but lately the news about what’s going on at the borders has become too much for most people to endure. Because of the alarming spike in suicides, and under increasing pressure from public health officials, news organizations have decreased the number of stories devoted to genocide, slave trading, and refugee virus outbreaks. You can no longer trust the news. Social media, long the grim source of live feeds and disaster reporting, is brimming with conspiracy theories and doctored videos. Overall, the news has taken a strange, seemingly controlled turn toward distorting reality and spinning a falsely positive narrative.

Everyone living within a stable country is physically safe, yes, but the psychological toll is mounting. With each new tipping point passed, they feel hope slipping away. There is no chance of stopping the runaway warming of our planet, and no doubt we are slowly but surely heading toward human extinction. And not just because it’s too hot. Melting permafrost is also releasing ancient microbes that today’s humans have never been exposed to— and as a result have no resistance to. Diseases spread by mosquitoes and ticks are rampant as these species flourish in the changed climate, spreading to previously safe parts of the planet, overwhelming us. Worse still, the public health crisis of antibiotic resistance has only intensified as the population has grown denser in the last inhabitable areas and temperatures continue to rise.

The demise of the human species is being discussed more and more— its trajectory seems locked in. The only uncertainty is how long we’ll last, how many more generations will see the light of day. Suicides are the most obvious manifestation of the prevailing despair, but there are other indications: a sense of bottomless loss, unbearable guilt, and fierce resentment at previous generations who did nothing to ward off this final, unstoppable calamity.

 

The World We Must Create

It is 2050. We have been successful at halving emissions every decade since 2020. We are heading for a world that will be no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius warmer by 2100.

In most places in the world, the air is moist and fresh, even in cities. It feels a lot like walking through a forest, and very likely this is exactly what you are doing. The air is cleaner than it has been since before the Industrial Revolution.

You have trees to thank for that. They are everywhere.

It wasn’t the single solution we required, but the proliferation of trees bought us the time we needed to vanquish carbon emissions. Corporate donations and public money funded the biggest tree- planting campaign in history. When we started, it was purely practical, a tactic to combat climate change by relocating the carbon: the trees took carbon dioxide out of the air, released oxygen, and put the carbon back where it belongs, in the soil. This of course helped to diminish climate change, but the benefits were even greater. On every sensory level, the ambient feeling of living on what has again become a green planet has been transformative, especially in cities. Cities have never been better places to live. With many more trees and far fewer cars, it has been possible to reclaim whole streets for urban agriculture and for children’s play. Every vacant lot, every grimy unused alley, has been repurposed and turned into a shady grove. Every rooftop has been converted to either a vegetable or a floral garden. Windowless buildings that were once scrawled with graffiti are instead carpeted with verdant vines.

The greening movement in Spain had begun as an effort to combat rising temperatures. Because of Madrid’s latitude, it is one of the driest cities in Europe. And even though the city now has a grip on its emissions, it was previously at risk of desertification. Because of the “heat island” effect of cities— buildings trap warmth and dark, paved surfaces absorb heat from the sun— Madrid, home to more than 6 million people, was several degrees warmer than the countryside just a few miles away. In addition, air pollution was leading to a rising incidence of premature births, and a spike in deaths was linked to cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses. With a health care system already strained by the arrival of subtropical diseases like dengue fever and malaria, government officials and citizens rallied. Madrid made dramatic efforts to reduce the number of vehicles and create a “green envelope” around the city to help with cooling, oxygenating, and filtering pollution. Plazas were repaved with porous material to capture rainwater; all black roofs were painted white; and plants were omnipresent. The plants cut noise, released oxygen, insulated south- facing walls, shaded pavements, and released water vapor into the air. The massive effort was a huge success and was replicated all over the world. Madrid’s economy boomed as its expertise put it on the cutting edge of a new industry.

Most cities found that lower temperatures raised the standard of living. There are still slums, but the trees, largely responsible for countering the temperature rise in most places, have made things far more bearable for all.

Reimagining and restructuring cities was crucial to solving the climate challenge puzzle. But further steps had to be taken, which meant that global rewilding efforts had to reach well beyond the cities. The forest cover worldwide is now 50 percent, and agriculture has evolved to become more tree-based. The result is that many countries are unrecognizable, in a good way. No one seems to miss wideopen plains or monocultures. Now we have shady groves of nut and fruit orchards, timberland interspersed with grazing, parkland areas that spread for miles, new havens for our regenerated population of pollinators.

Luckily for the 75 percent of the population who live in cities, new electric railways crisscross interior landscapes. In the United States, high- speed rail networks on the East and West coasts have replaced the vast majority of domestic flights, with East coast connectors to Atlanta and Chicago. Because flight speeds have slowed down to gain fuel efficiency, passenger bullet trains make some journeys even faster and with no emissions whatsoever. The U.S. Train Initiative was a monumental public project that sparked the economy for a decade. Replacing miles and miles of interstate highways with a new transportation system created millions of jobs— for train technology experts, engineers, and construction workers who designed and built raised rail tracks to circumvent floodplains. This massive effort helped to reeducate and retrain many of those displaced by the dying fossil fuel economy. It also introduced a new generation of workers to the excitement and innovation of the new climate economy.

Running parallel to this mega public works effort was an increasingly confident race to harness the power of renewable sources of energy. A major part of the shift to net- zero emissions was a focus on electricity; achieving the goal required not only an overhaul of existing infrastructure but also a structural shift. In some ways, breaking up grids and decentralizing power proved easy. We no longer burn fossil fuels. There is some nuclear energy in those countries that can afford the expensive technology,6 but most of our energy now comes from renewable sources like wind, solar, geothermal, and hydro. All homes and buildings produce their own electricity— every available surface is covered with solar paint that contains millions of nanoparticles, which harvest energy from the sunlight, and every windy spot has a wind turbine. If you live on a particularly sunny or windy hill, your house might harvest more energy than it can use, in which case the energy will simply flow back to the smart grid. Because there is no combustion cost, energy is basically free. It is also more abundant and more efficiently used than ever.

Smart tech prevents unnecessary energy consumption, as artificial intelligence units switch off appliances and machines when not in use. The efficiency of the system means that, with a few exceptions, our quality of life has not suffered. In many respects, it has improved.

For the developed world, the wide-ranging transition to renewable energy was at times uncomfortable, as it often involved retrofitting old infrastructure and doing things in new ways. But for the developing world, it was the dawn of a new era. Most of the infrastructure that it needed for economic growth and poverty alleviation was built according to the new standards: low carbon emissions and high resilience. In remote areas, the billion people who had no electricity at the start of the twenty-first century now have energy generated by their own rooftop solar modules or by wind-powered minigrids in their communities. This new access opened the door to so much more. Entire populations have leaped forward with improved sanitation, education, and health care. People who had struggled to get clean water can now provide it to their families. Children can study at night.

Remote health clinics can operate effectively. Homes and buildings all over the world are becoming self- sustaining far beyond their electrical needs. For example, all buildings now collect rainwater and manage their own water use. Renewable sources of electricity made possible localized desalination, which means clean drinking water can now be produced on-demand anywhere in the world. We also use it to irrigate hydroponic gardens, flush toilets, and shower. Overall, we’ve successfully rebuilt, reorganized, and restructured our lives to live in a more localized way. Although energy prices have dropped dramatically, we are choosing local life over long commutes. Due to greater connectivity, many people work from home, allowing for more flexibility and more time to call their own.

We are making communities stronger. As a child, you might have seen your neighbors only in passing. But now, to make things cheaper, cleaner, and more sustainable, your orientation in every part of your life is more local. Things that used to be done individually are now done communally— growing vegetables, capturing rainwater, and composting. Resources and responsibilities are shared now. At first you resisted this togetherness— you were used to doing things individually and in the privacy of your own home. But pretty quickly the camaraderie and unexpected new network of support started to feel good, something to be prized. For most people, the new way has turned out to be a better recipe for happiness.

Food production and procurement are a big part of the communal effort. When it became clear we needed to revolutionize farms, with increased community reliance on small farms. Instead of going to a big grocery store for food flown in from hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away, you buy most of your food from small local farmers and producers. Buildings, neighborhoods, and even large extended families form a food purchase group, which is how most people buy their food now. As a unit they sign up for a weekly dropoff, then distribute the food among the group members. Distribution, coordination, and management are everyone’s responsibility, which means you might be partnered with a downstairs neighbor for distribution one week and your upstairs neighbor the next.

While this community approach to food production makes things more sustainable, food is still expensive, consuming up to 30 percent of household budgets, which is why growing your own is such a necessity. In community gardens, on rooftops, at schools, and even hanging from vertical gardens on balconies, food sometimes seems to be growing everywhere.

We’ve come to realize, by growing our own, that food is expensive because it should be expensive— it takes valuable resources to grow it, after all. Water. Soil. Sweat. Time. For that reason, the most resource- depleting foods of all— animal protein and dairy products— have practically disappeared from our diets. But the plant-based replacements are so good that most of us don’t notice the absence of meat and dairy. Most young children cannot believe we used to kill any animals for food. Fish is still available, but it is farmed and yields are better managed by improved technology.

We make smarter choices about bad foods, which have become an ever- diminishing part of our diets. Government taxes on processed meats, sugars, and fatty foods helped us reduce the carbon emissions from farming. The biggest boon of all was to our collective health. Thanks to reduced cancers, heart attacks, and strokes, people are living longer, and health services around the world cost less and less. In fact, a huge portion of the costs of combating climate change were recuperated by governments’ savings on public health.

Along with outrageous spending on health care, gasoline and diesel cars are also anachronisms. Most countries banned their manufacture in 2030, but it took another fifteen years to get the internal combustion engine off the road completely. Now they are seen only in transport museums or at special rallies where classic car owners pay an offset fee to allow them to drive a few short miles around the track. And of course, they are all hauled in on the backs of huge electric trucks.

When it came to making the switch, some countries were already ahead of the curve. Technology-driven countries such as Norway and bicycle-friendly nations like the Netherlands managed to impose a moratorium on cars much earlier. Unsurprisingly, the United States had the hardest time of all. First, it restricted their sale, and then it banned them from certain parts of cities— Extreme Low Emission Zones. Then came the breakthrough in the battery storage capacity of electric vehicles, the cost reductions that came from finding alternative materials for manufacture, and finally the complete overhaul of the charging and parking infrastructure. This allowed people easier access to cheap power for their electric vehicles. Even better, car batteries are now bi-directionally connected with the electric grid, so they can either charge from the grid or provide power to the grid when they aren’t being driven. This helps back up the smart grid that is running on renewable energy.

The ubiquity and ease of electric vehicles were alluring, but satisfaction of our appetite for speed finally did the trick. Supposedly, to stop a bad habit you have to replace it with one that is more salubrious or at least as enjoyable. At first China dominated the manufacture of electric vehicles, but soon U.S. companies started making vehicles that were more desirable than ever before. Even some classic cars got an upgrade, switching from combustion to electric engines that could go from zero to sixty mph in 3.5 seconds. What’s strange is that it took us so long to realize that the electric motor is simply a better way of powering vehicles. It gives you more torque, more speed when you need it, and the ability to recapture energy when you brake, and it requires dramatically less maintenance.

As people from rural areas moved to the cities, they had less need even for electric vehicles. In cities it’s now easy to get around— transportation is frictionless. When you take the electric train, you don’t have to fumble around for a metro card or wait in line to pay— the system tracks your location, so it knows where you got on and where you got off, and it deducts money from your account accordingly. We also share cars without thinking twice. In fact, regulating and ensuring the safety of driverless ride-sharing was the biggest transportation hurdle for cities to overcome. The goal has been to eliminate private ownership of vehicles by 2050 in major metropolitan areas. We’re not quite there yet, but we’re making progress.

We have also reduced land transport needs. Threedimensional (3D) printers are readily available, cutting down on what people need to purchase away from home. Drones organized along aerial corridors are now delivering packages, further reducing the need for vehicles. Thus we are currently narrowing roads, eliminating parking spaces, and investing in urban planning projects that make it easier to walk and bike in the city. Parking garages are used only for ride-sharing, electric vehicle charging, and storage— those ugly concrete stacking systems and edifices of yore are now enveloped in green. Cities now seem designed for the coexistence of people and nature.

International air travel has been transformed. Biofuels have replaced jet fuel. Communications technology has advanced so much that we can participate virtually in meetings anywhere in the world without traveling. Air travel still exists, but it is used more sparingly and is extremely costly. Because work is now increasingly decentralized and can often be done from anywhere, people save and plan for “slow- cations”— international trips that last weeks or months instead of days. If you live in the United States and want to visit Europe, you might plan to stay there for several months or more, working your way across the continent using local, zero-emissions transportation.

While we may have successfully reduced carbon emissions, we’re still dealing with the after-effects of record levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The long-living greenhouse gases have nowhere to go other than the alreadyloaded atmosphere, so they are still causing increasingly extreme weather— though it’s less extreme than would have been had we continued to burn fossil fuels. Glaciers and Arctic ice are still melting, and the sea is still rising. Severe droughts and desertification are occurring in the western United States, the Mediterranean, and parts of China. Ongoing extreme weather and resource degradation continue to multiply existing disparities in income, public health, food security, and water availability. But now governments have recognized climate change factors for the threat multipliers that they are. That awareness allows us to predict downstream problems and head them off before they become humanitarian crises. So while many people remain at risk every day, the situation is not as drastic or chaotic as it might have been. Economies in developing nations are strong, and unexpected global coalitions have formed with a renewed sense of trust. Now when a population is in need of aid, the political will and resources are available to meet that need.

The ongoing refugee situation has been escalating for decades, and it is still a major source of strife and discord. But around fifteen years ago, we stopped calling it a crisis. Countries agreed on guidelines for managing refugee influxes— how to smoothly assimilate populations, how to distribute aid and resources, and how to share the tasks within particular regions. These agreements work well most of the time, but things get thrown off balance occasionally when a country flirts with fascism for an election cycle or two.

Technology and business sectors stepped up, too, seizing the opportunity of government contracts to provide largescale solutions for distributing food and providing shelter for the newly displaced. One company invented a giant robot that could autonomously build a four-person dwelling within days. Automation and 3D printing have made it possible to quickly and affordably construct high-quality housing for refugees. The private sector has innovated with water transportation technology and sanitation solutions. Fewer tent cities and housing shortages have led to less cholera.

Everyone understands that we are all in this together. A disaster that occurs in one country is likely to occur in another in only a matter of years. It took us a while to realize that if we worked out how to save the Pacific Islands from rising sea levels this year, then we might find a way to save Rotterdam in another five years. It is in the interest of every country to bring all its resources to bear on problems across the world. For one thing, creating innovative solutions to climate challenges and beta testing them years ahead of using them is just plain smart. For another, we’re nurturing goodwill; when we need help, we know we will be able to count on others to step up.

The zeitgeist has shifted profoundly. How we feel about the world has changed, deeply. And unexpectedly, so has how we feel about one another.

When the alarm bells rang in 2020, thanks in large part to the youth movement, we realized that we suffered from too much consumption, competition, and greedy self-interest. Our commitment to these values and our drive for profit and status had led us to steamroll our environment. As a species we were out of control, and the result was the near-collapse of our world. We could no longer avoid seeing on a tangible, geophysical level that when you spurn regeneration, collaboration, and community, the consequence is impending devastation.

Extricating ourselves from self- destruction would have been impossible if we hadn’t changed our mindset and our priorities, if we hadn’t realized that doing what is good for humanity goes hand in hand with doing what is good for the Earth. The most fundamental change was that collectively— as citizens, corporations, and governments— we began adhering to a new bottom line: “Is it good for humanity whether profit is made or not?”

The climate change crisis of the beginning of the century jolted us out of our stupor. As we worked to rebuild and care for our environment, it was only natural that we also turned to each other with greater care and concern. We realized that the perpetuation of our species was about war more than saving ourselves from extreme weather. It was about being good stewards of the land and of one another. When we began the fight for the fate of humanity, we were thinking only about the species’ survival, but at some point, we understood that it was as much about the fate of our humanity. We emerged from the climate crisis as more mature members of the community of life, capable of not only restoring ecosystems but also of unfolding our dormant potentials of human strength and discernment. Humanity was only ever as doomed as it believed itself to be. Vanquishing that belief was our true legacy.

Join our Book Club to discuss the extract.

To join the Book Club, click here.

To follow the Book Club on Twitter, click here.

To follow the Book Club on Instagram, click here.