Unhelpful connotations

While it can be an exercise in semantics, words and prefixes such as eco, green, environmental, clean and sustainable develop connotations and meanings that can be very unhelpful:

• Eco and green do have a certain tree-hugging aspect to them and environmental does tend to involve lots of regulations

• Clean can be debatable and can provoke extreme responses from some, especially when aligned with coal, for instance

• Sustainable has had a better time of things as it was introduced with a formal definition, which went to the heart of what we would want as a parent and a current guardian of our planet.  In summary, we do not want to ruin our planet and penalise future generations.

• Corporate responsibility is well understood and can be seen being actively undertaken.  There will always be those that flout the rules and operate in a totally selfish and illegal way, but they are in the minority and they will attract the ire of society, the attention of the authorities and be snubbed by customers.  (The emphasis placed on responsible procurement and the supply chain has helped enormously in this regard as it has no longer become acceptable to blame a supplier for their practices when their products are purchased by another company and so explicitly supported commercially).

Have we reached the tipping point?

The question is, have we reached that tipping point where the majority of businesses not only recognise the need for sustainability but are now actively pursuing it?  Is the sustainable solution the obvious one to choose ahead of the non-sustainable one?  Have we achieved “of course” status yet?

Sadly, I think the answer is not yet.  The companies in the vanguard, especially those that are consumer-facing brands, have been reviewing their practices and making real changes to their operations and those of their suppliers.  Whole industry sectors have rallied their members and encouraged a total rethink in their approach to their environmental impact, such as tourism and hospitality, cement and building industries.  However, the medium and small-sized businesses have, generally, not made any appreciable changes to their operations and there are some large businesses who  continue to operate their activities without any apparent consideration of the reliability of supply of their raw material inputs, the inevitable increase in future energy prices and the impact of water scarcity.

How about a change of name?

But there is a certain weariness associated with the word ‘sustainability’.  It has had a good run, but to get us to that tipping point where a word is no longer needed, we may need just one more new word to encapsulate the concept.  What word or phrase might that be?  Is it responsibility, sociability, best practice or resource-focused?  Answers on a blog response…

Tim Smit, Eden Project

1. Tim Smit – founder of the Eden Project, which has become synonymous with raising awareness of green issues and inspiring young people

About 13 million visitors have come to the Eden Project, which cost £141 million to build and is estimated to have generated £1.1 billion for the West Country in extra tourist spending. Built to be as energy self sufficient as possible, the attraction provides environmental projects as well as allowing visitors to explore ideas and innovations that can be implemented to ensure we ‘tread lighter on the planet’.

Talking about the launch of The Eden Project: “I thought that environmentalists were usually so boring, I wanted to do something that was so theatrical that people would have to suspend cynicism.”

2. Harriet Lamb – Fairtrade opened up the lives of producers on the other side of the world

Her team has helped build commercial partnerships that have resulted in sales growing from £30 million in 2001 to £1.32 billion in 2011. This means that more than seven million people in Africa, Asia and Latin America benefit from Fairtrade - farmers, farm workers, and their families.

Fairtade this year launched a campaign requesting that the public sign a petition for smallholder farmers to get a better deal to hopefully spark debate about the matter at the summer G8 meeting. They achieved over 15,000 supporters.

On poverty: “Times are tough for people in the UK right now. But across the developing world, times are desperate for smallholders, caught between rising food and fuel prices and a credit crunch that sees orders falling and access to loans becoming harder than ever”

Yvon-Chouinard, Patagonia

3. Yvon Chouinard – founder of Patagonia which ‘walks the talk’

Just announced that his company will be launching an in-house venture fund named $20 million & Change for startups that try to make a positive impact in five areas: clothing, food, water, energy, and waste. Patagonie itself has challenged the status quo of retail.

On climate change: “…most of the damage we cause to the planet is the result of our own ignorance.” 

4. David Attenborough – imagine if he was your grandad?

The famous face, or rather voice, of nature surely deserves his place amongst our green leaders. Playing a pivotal role in the regular depiction of nature on our TV screens, providing a window to the vast world we live in and the need to treasure it – his role in bringing to light the need for environmental action across the world has shown that he has been equally important outside of the small box in which we see him.

On our impact on the planet: “We are a plague on the Earth…It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us”

5. Alistair McGowan – brought many faces to the environmental movement

Well-known ambassador of WWF, patron of charity Trees for Cities and four-time host of the British Environment and Media Awards as well as many other environmental awards. Using his celebrity status to highlight issues in the environment. His involvement in the environment includes collaboratively purchasing a strip of land to prevent the development of a third runway at Heathrow airport, publicly backing solar power and developing an old coach house into an eco-friendly residential home.

On battling for the environment: “It’s the drip-drip effect of lots of small actions by individuals that has created the problem. And lots of small actions in reverse can help undo the problem.”

Other to sustainability leaders who narrowly missed out on the top five:

6. Andy Wood – md of Adnams, low carbon brewery leading light in how to do best by community/environment

7. Kevin McCloud – eco-design champion in the design/built environment

8. Paul Poleman – five levers for change at Unilver

9. Chris Packham – host of ‘SpringWatch’ and exe ceo of BATS

10. Prince Charles – has the ability to change things and scale-up Duchy of Cornwall etc.

These environmental leaders span many different professions from retail to the brewery trade and all are:

- Committed to creating change

- Leading by example

- Making sure that what they do is second to none

- Inspire millions of people through their work and visionHappy to stand up and be counted – not hiding behind the parapet.

Who will be the next environmental leaders of the future?

Elllen MacArthur is aiming to get 100 businesses to sign up to Circular Economy alliance

Having done a lot of sailing myself, I am unsurprised by former sailor Ellen MacArthur’s Damascean conversion to the environmental cause. The ‘Dame celebre’ recently announced that she was well on her way to getting 100 business leaders to sign up to her Foundation’s Circular Economy alliance (CE100) which promotes, as the name suggests, regenerative system change.

Sailing on a small boat gives you a deep appreciation of the natural world, of the need to conserve resources, save energy and make do with what you have got. All these principles are core to the circular economy.

Nature’s closed loop

Of course, the idea of operating the economy within natural limits is not new. In 1999, Natural Capitalism written by Paul Hawken, Amory B. Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins advocated a shift to biologically inspired production models and materials that mimicked nature’s closed loop. A few years later, Bill McDonough and Michael Braungart wrote Cradle to Cradle, which urged designers to learn from cyclical natural systems. Sandwiched between these bestsellers was a more modest work by Mathis Wackernagel, Nicky Chambers and yours truly which attempted to recast the sustainability debate in terms of our drain on the planet’s regenerative systems – what we referred to as its biocapacity.

What distinguishes MacArthur’s latest re-telling of the circular economy story is the level of engagement with industry. Whereas the business case for adopting a closed-loop approach was previously easy to ignore, rising commodity prices, expensive energy and increasing landfill costs have done much to push closed loop thinking into the Board Room. Combined with new legislation, consumer pressure and the ever present business risk of resource scarcity, the case for turning to natural world for inspiration as to how we run our economy is more compelling than ever.

Circular economy: a $1 trillion opportunity

According to an analysis by McKinsey, over $1 trillion of opportunity exists within the circular economy. The CE100 has already attracted some big players; amongst them BT, M&S, Ikea and Coca-Cola. I predict that MacArthur will have no problem finding 100 companies keen to prosper from closed loop principles.

Although I have been in sustainability consulting for many years, and advised many businesses on how to generate and implement circular solutions, I continue to hear of new innovations that are so elegant in their simplicity and application as to astound me that no-one has thought of them before. Here are a couple of examples that have inspired me recently. I hope they inspire you to look towards your own operations for ways and means of closing the loop:

Fat-fuelled power

Grease from restaurant and households, which is currently causing Thames Water a headache by bunging up the sewer system in the form of huge ‘fatbergs’, will be collected and used to generate energy in what will be the world’s large fat-fuelled power station. This will produce a hefty 130 gigawatt hours of renewable electricity per year (enough for 39,000 homes) providing energy to both the nearby sewage works and a standby desalination plant which is to be used at times of drought. The plant’s waste heat will be used in the Beckton gasworks.

Turning carbon emissions into agricultural lime

Imperial College is in receipt of Government funding to explore opportunities for doing something useful with carbon that might be captured from fossil fuel-based power stations if carbon capture and storage (CCS) became a practical technology.  Opponents of CCS rightly point out that merely secreting carbon emissions underground is neither risk-free nor a long term solution. Some of the ideas being explored by Imperial have the potential to change that. One project is looking at taking 90 per cent of the carbon emissions and converting them into agricultural lime – a product used by farmers to enhance crop yields. Another project is looking at turning flue gases into valuable plastics.

Read about HP’s closed loop recycling initiative for its printer cartridge business.

Western Isles (Picture: Neil Kenhead)

Stand on a beach in the Western Isles looking out at the Atlantic and it’s easy to see why for over a century people have dreamed of harnessing the power of our seas. The wave energy here is some of the most intense in the world, with the potential to provide the UK with 40 terrawatt hours (TWh) of electricity each year – over 10 per cent of current demand.

Given such a spectacular natural resource, alongside our nation’s engineering capacity and expertise in marine operations, it would be a tragedy if we were not at the forefront of global efforts to develop the technologies to turn this potential into reality.

Thankfully, the Government sees it this way too, and deserves credit for the policies it has put in place. As a result, there are now five different full-scale prototype wave devices operating in UK waters and scores of earlier stage concepts. A number of international firms are choosing to come to the UK to develop their technology.

How close are we to generating power from the waves?

Taken at face value, Government and industry statements over the last two years suggest rapid progress is being made. They talk of successful sea trials, large engineering companies entering the market, and imminent plans to deploy the first multi-device ‘test arrays’ – all critical steps towards commercialisation.

But scratch beneath the surface, and the picture is more complex. These claims are made under the banner of ‘marine energy’ which includes not only wave but also tidal stream technologies like the Atlantis tidal turbine, pictured below.

Whilst in the past it has made sense to lump these together for the purposes of policy and advocacy, they actually face different challenges and are now developing at different rates. Wave technologies, whilst still making progress, are not keeping pace with tidal stream technologies, and require a more tailored approach to support their development.

Wave and tidal: unique forms of energy

 This is in part due to the very different forms of energy embodied in the tides and waves. When tides are funnelled through topographical features such as narrow channels the resulting currents are fast, predictable and linear. The resource is similar in nature to wind, and so are the technological solutions to harnessing it.

By contrast wave energy moves in a circular motion and can vary massively in size and strength. It is unique and as a result the technologies here do not benefit from years of innovation and learning in other areas. There are fundamental challenges to designing devices which are capable of both extracting this energy and surviving in very rough seas.

Wave energy: a wide variety of possible solutions

So whilst tidal stream technologies have now converged around a horizontal-axis turbine design similar to wind turbines, there are still a wide variety of different wave energy solutions being developed. No consensus has emerged. This means fewer big companies are involved, a specialist supply chain will struggle to develop, and investors holding back because it’s impossible to judge who the eventual winners might be.

Pelamis’s ‘sea snake’ has faced technical problems

What’s more, when it comes to harnessing wave energy further away from shore (the lion’s share of the UK’s wave energy resource), there remains considerable doubt within the industry as to whether the current leading offshore wave devices are utilising approaches that will ever be capable of generating power at reasonable cost. The Pelamis ‘sea snake’, for example, has suffered a number of technical problems over the years.

It is unsurprising then, that of the five multi-device test arrays recently awarded EU and UK Government funding, four were tidal stream projects. Only one wave project was chosen, which involves deploying Aquamarine’s nearshore device – a big step forward but not one which brings us closer to the ultimate prize of offshore wave power.

What next for wave energy?

The different rates of progress over the last few years are now creating tension, which could threaten the development of wave energy unless greater differentiation is made in policy.

First, we still need to push the leading wave devices to test array stage. Even if ultimately unsuccessful, the learning and experience gained would benefit the industry as a whole. Given that most current marine energy array funding is being directed towards tidal devices, ring-fenced allocations are needed to take wave technologies to this stage.

Second, under the Renewables Obligation both wave and tidal energy currently benefit from the same revenue levels for their electricity. Yet the higher costs associated with wave devices mean wave projects will require higher levels in order to be viable. The upcoming setting of strike prices under the Government’s Energy Market Reforms offers a chance to put this right.

Third, it is critical that early stage innovation funding continues. In particular, there must be a renewed effort to ensure the best of the less advanced wave energy concepts, which have the potential to deliver competitive costs of energy in the long-term, have the chance to prove themselves as full-scale prototypes in open sea conditions.

In short, we must stop treating wave and tidal stream technologies in the same way. To realise the potential of wave energy, our approach must be as unique as the energy itself.

I am shareholder in a small business that owns an eco residential property in London. We fully support the move to a greener future and renewable technologies. But after eight years of heartache, we have finally decided to decommission our Hertz pellet boiler because of all the problems that have befallen it (we estimate our boiler has only worked for three years out of the eight we have owned it).

I confess we were too early to benefit from the RHI, but even if we’d had such an incentive and I knew what I know now, I would have made a different choice of technology. So, for those of you considering a pellet boiler, I’ve compiled a list of the some of the issues your biomass installer is unlikely to share with you before you make your purchase.

10 things your installer won’t tell you about your pellet biomass boiler before you buy it

1. We may overspec or underspec your boiler
2. The biomass boiler will likely breakdown frequently
3. The boiler will require “considerable more time and effort to ensure it runs efficiently and gives long service” compared to a gas boiler
4. The weekly checks and clean-outs you are required to carry out will not prevent breakdowns from occurring
5. When your boiler does breakdown, your building will be without heating for more than a few hours because we don’t have an engineer in your area
6. When things go wrong – and they will – we will blame it on the quality of the fuel you have purchased to burn in the boiler, not the quality of the boiler and parts
7. The electrical items on your boiler, only have a 12 month guarantee on them but some, such as the heat gun, will likely fail frequently
8. The service contract is very expensive because we know you will need to call us out a lot
9. Because the boiler will likely be manufactured abroad, we will not feel the same sense of responsibility to put things right as we would if we were the maker
10. When you decide it really does not make sense to keep throwing good money after bad, we will not buy back/sell on the biomass boiler for you.

In case you are wondering, our installer is part of a large reputable firm, MSC certified and a member of the REAL scheme.

Analysis by Carbon Tracker shows that in 2012, across the globe, we spent a massive $647 billion on finding and developing new reserves of oil, gas and coal. This is despite the fact that 80 per cent of all known stores of fossil fuels simply cannot be burnt if we are to limit global warming to an increase of 2C, the internationally agreed goal.

At the same time, Bloomberg New Energy Finance quantified total spend on new renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency in 2012 at $269 billion – an 11 per cent decrease since 2011. According to Michael Liebrich, chief executive of Bloomberg, clean energy investment is currently less than half where it needs to be by 2020.

It is hard to escape the uncomfortable conclusion that at a global level we are heading well and truly in the wrong direction. The graph below published by the Guardian shows the current trajectory of our carbon emissions and the enormous turnaround needed within five to 10 years. Current investment levels don’t suggest any such change is remotely possible.

And if you’re curious about what exceeding 2C of global warming might actually mean in practice, take a look at this recent infographic and report from the World Bank.

But are things really as pessimistic as all this suggests?

It can be helpful here to consider how change can sometimes occur suddenly and dramatically once certain thresholds are reached.

The concept of ‘tipping points’ is currently in vogue in the area of climate science, albeit with concerning consequences. The idea is that natural systems may initially respond slowly to external stimuli such as a rise in temperature, but then reach a point where ‘positive feedbacks’ kick-in, causing rapid and potentially irreversible change.

It is likely, for example, we are witnessing such a tipping point with the current melting of Arctic sea ice, where reduced ice cover leads to less sunlight being reflected away and more energy available to melt the remaining ice.

Australian commentator Paul Gilding argues that this way of understanding change is relevant to economic and political contexts too, and shows us how a rapid shift to a sustainable energy system and reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is possible within short timeframes.

So although investment in new fossil fuels is still far too high, it’s also the case that the Carbon Tracker report is part of a powerful new narrative arguing that fossil fuel firms are overvalued, and that a downward ‘adjustment’ is inevitable given likely future constraints on the use of oil, coal and gas. As investors become aware of this potential risk to the value of ‘carbon assets’, divestment in fossil fuels is a real possibility (read more here).

And although total global investment in renewables went down in 2012, we should also note that the rapid fall in technology costs meant that the total amount of newly installed renewable capacity actually went up.

These costs will continue to fall. Last year McKinsey predicted the price of small scale solar PV systems would reduce 40 per cent by 2015, meaning installation will be viable in many places without subsidy. When such thresholds are reached we might expect deployment rates and investment to soar way beyond current levels. This is the reason why Bloomberg have also predicted a tripling of investment in renewables by 2030.

In the mean time, many innovative new approaches are emerging to access more renewables investment. From the UK’s recently launched Green Investment Bank to new crowd-financing platforms that allow anyone to benefit from clean energy returns, these are not only making a difference now, but are also laying the foundations for more rapid change when wider social, economic and political tipping points are reached.

In short, as irresistible as the current trend towards a carbon intensive future sometimes seems, there are good reasons to believe that within five to 10 years things could look very different indeed.

Sam Friggens contributed to this blog. 

The first Severn Barrage was proposed almost a century ago

It is nearly a century since the first proposal to build a barrage across the Severn to generate power from the tides. Since then we have developed our National Grid, embarked on a dash-for-gas and built a fleet of nuclear power stations. Yet, still there is no Severn Barrage.

And now the fate of the latest proposal – led by private consortia Hafren Power – hangs in the balance. As an influential body of cross-party MPs prepares its conclusions to a review it held earlier this year, the consortia’s chief executive warned that a negative outcome could effectively kill the project.

A new vision

In timely fashion then, a coalition of organisations led by RegenSW has developed a new ‘balanced technology’ vision that challenges a narrow focus on a single ‘mega project’. Instead, it considers the whole of the Bristol Channel area from the Severn Estuary to the Atlantic, and presents a scenario where a mix of complementary marine renewable technologies are incrementally deployed to exploit the full range of energy resources on offer.

RegenSW’s ‘Balanced Technology’ approach looks at the whole Bristol Channel

The area would be a test bed for early-stage technologies such as wave power devices and tidal stream generators (essentially underwater wind turbines), which could start small and scale up as concepts are proven and costs come down. At the same time, established technologies such as offshore wind and, yes, even smaller tidal barrages, could be built at commercial scale from the word go.

Comparable energy potential

Proponents of the £25 billion Barrage say it is the only way to fully harness the tidal resource of the Severn. But analysis undertaken as part of the RegenSW vision shows that between 10-15 gigawatts of renewable power could be harnessed across the area, with or without a large barrage.

One reason for this is that a large barrage, such as that proposed by Hafren, would render tidal stream generators infeasible across much of the Bristol Channel, whereas the RegenSW would allow a multitude of generators to flourish.

Environmental benefits

According to Hafren, its latest barrage proposal will utilise new technologies to reduce damage to wildlife compared to previous schemes. However, evidence given to MPs puts these claims into perspective; new “fish-friendly” turbines are not yet proven, and a quarter of the intertidal zone so crucial to birdlife would still be lost.

In contrast, the incremental deployment of smaller projects would allow technologies to be tested and their impacts on wildlife understood before scaling up. In this scenario any tidal barriers would be much smaller in scale and placed along coastal bays and inlets, meaning less habitat loss.

Economic benefits

A further claim is that the Hafren barrage would create 50,000 net jobs, a figure one MP involved in the recent review described as “not credible”. Bristol Port Company remains far from convinced that the new barrage design would not negatively impact on its activities – the main reason a 2010 Government report identified a net gain of only 120 jobs.

The longer-lasting economic impacts of a barrage would also be limited once construction is complete; as a global one-off it is unlikely to lead to an exportable local industry. In contrast, the region is already home to a number of wave and tidal stream firms. Used as an international showcase for these technologies, the Bristol Channel could create a base in the region from which to export around the world for decades to come.

The Hafren Power Barrage

More deliverable

For all the charm of a mega-project capable of supplying five per cent of the UK’s electricity, Severn Barrage proposals have always been heavily contested. The scale of the project is matched by the scale of opposition and complexity of approval processes. Hafren’s plans to reach financial close in 2015 and full operation by 2025 seem at best optimistic, and at worst a fantasy.

On the other hand, smaller, less controversial projects would be deliverable sooner and mean Bristol Channel renewable power feeding the grid well before 2025.

Incompatible approaches?

It’s true that elements of the balanced technology approach could still support a large barrage. But there are real conflicts and opportunity costs too.

For example, subsidy for low carbon power is capped under the Levy Control Framework. Directing a large portion of this to a single piece of infrastructure would inevitably mean less support elsewhere, and could also mean less value for money too. Peter Hain MP estimates the barrage could need subsidy comparable to current offshore wind levels, whereas analysis from the Carbon Trust suggests tidal stream generators have the potential to be cheaper than this by the mid 2020s.

And for as long as attention is focussed on a single controversial mega project, uncertainty reigns, a hiatus is created, and investment in alternative technologies held back.

The new vision for renewable energy in the Bristol Channel is both inspiring and practical. But the latest proposal for the Severn Barrage is simply getting in the way.

With its new and well-respected CEO at the helm – Shaun Kingsbury – the Green Investment Bank (GIB) is up-and-running, announcing its first batch of investments.  Wind, energy efficiency and energy from waste projects are the lucky recipients of cash to help their development journey.  The stated priority sectors are offshore wind, Green Deal, non-domestic energy-efficiency and waste.

Just another state-owned bank?

The GIB will follow banking principles in its activities and, in particular, it will not provide financial support for new technologies or early stage businesses.  Its purpose is to accelerate the development of a sustainable infrastructure, so it has a clear focus on deployment and project finance and equity. It is specifically not a “lender of last resort; nor a provider of grants or regional assistance; nor a taker of high risk for low reward; nor a provider of venture capital or development equity.”

So, it is a normal bank with a particular focus on UK green infrastructure projects. Do we not already have two state-owned banks in RBS and Lloyds that have well-recognised renewable energy and waste project finance teams who can be given a clear mandate to do exactly what GIB is doing, but without the extra costs of setting up and running a whole new bank?  Do we really need another bank to do precisely what other project financiers are doing, given that the GIB is going to follow precisely the same principles?

Early stage finance: a missed opportunity?

The GIB was a real opportunity to provide investment and finance where it was needed most.  There are blockages in the green finance space, which could have been targeted.  It is almost impossible for a new waste technology to get the financial support it needs to roll out its first facility.  With one facility running and a history of performance, then project finance can become available.  But this is not what the GIB will be addressing.

Similarly, early stage technologies that wish to set up their route to market and scale up their manufacturing capability have no takers in the finance market at the moment.  They are still left to their own devices as the GIB will not provide development equity.

Necessary competition?

GIB is providing project finance for offshore wind and waste projects, where there are already a range of UK, European and US banks in the market.  GIB is ready to finance chunks of non-domestic energy-efficiency projects, where Foresight Group, Ingenious Clean Energy, Oxford Capital Partners, Sustainable Development Capital and Amber Infrastructure Group, to name but a few, are already operating.

If there was a shortage of funds for the projects that are available, then the GIB’s £3 billion will be well-received.  If the GIB is willing to take the more risky tranche of debt, which helps to close a financing with a consortium of banks, then that is a service very much worth providing.  But if the GIB is just another bank, potentially competing with other banks for the best projects around, the only thing we can hope for from this is that the extra competition will make the pricing of the finance for those projects a bit keener, which is good news for the projects and the price of electricity, but not such good news for the taxpayer who is providing the funds to back the GIB.

We can only hope that, once the GIB has been operating for a while, it can choose to reinvest some of its profits where the money is most needed.  Unfortunately, that will be too late for some new businesses.

Environmental friend or foe?

There is no doubt that Thatcher made several powerful environmental speeches, oversaw the development of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, and raised the profile of issues such as climate change, acid rain and population growth.

The EPA was a powerful piece of legislation that, for the first time, unified air, soil and water pollution and waste regulations.  It still survives today, albeit with some amendments.

But Thatcher’s love affair with the environment was short-lived, if it was indeed ever genuine.  Her obsession with free markets and libertarianism undermined all efforts at global environmental protection. Whilst she claimed to recognise the international scale of the challenge, Thatcherism set in train a race to the bottom as far as global environmental standards were concerned. No barriers were allowed to stand in the way of cheap trade.

By encouraging conspicuous personal consumption she also opened the doors on consumerism. The Pharisee society, as Archbishop Robert Runcie said, wracked with intolerance and selfishness.

It is this aspect of Thatcherism that persists and has infected subsequent Governments of all political persuasions.

Unlike other former world leaders, Gorbachov and Clinton come to mind, who used their retirement to speak out on environmental issues, Thatcher was silent.

The power of the growing green movement

If we are to thank anyone for the good work done by the Thatcher Government, we need to look elsewhere. Thatcher’s flirtation with environmentalism is more likely the product of the growing green movement in the 1980’s leading to a startling performance by the Green Party in the 1989 European elections. An astute political operator, such as Thatcher, would have recognised the threat posed at the ballot box.  Credit must surely also go to Sir Crispin Tickell, a leading green thinker and Thatcher’s adviser at the time, who is thought to have exerted considerable influence over Thatcher.

Whilst Thatcher undoubtedly helped put environmental issues on the agenda, her record on delivery tips the scales solidly against her. An Iron Lady tinged with verdigris.

We’re obsessed by online; apparently the UK spends more than any other country online (so I heard at Media Trust’s GoMobile Conference last week). And mobile is the next big thing. But how do you harness this to influence people and generate real change?  We’ve been looking at how the best charity campaigns do just this.

There has been a doubling of supporters on key UK charities social media channels in the past year alone and 80 per cent of charities now are actively using social media as part of their campaigns. It’s easy to see why: Facebook and Twitter have over 1.4 billion members – it’s a cheap, targeted, and engaging way to reach and influence audiences instantly.

Here are our top five best uses of social media by charities:

Fair Trade – Battle for Farmers

More than 500 million of the world’s farmers produce 70 per cent of the world’s food but receive an average of only three per cent of the retail prices charged by supermarkets. Fairtrade’s campaign to get a better deal for the smallholder farmers highlighted the issue at this year’s G8 meeting.

Why it’s on the list

Campaign signed-up just under 10,000 people as a result of a brilliant, shareable campaign video and protest idea backed by some solid celebrity faces (Jonathan Ross included). The petition will be sent to the PM David Cameron on World Fair Trade Day in May before the G8 meeting the following month.

Invisible Children – KONY campaign

The KONY 2012 campaign started as an experiment. Could an online video make an obscure war criminal famous? And if he were famous, would the world work together to stop him? Or would it let him remain at large?

Why it’s on the list

The fastest growing viral video of all time, with 100 million YouTube views in six days, 3.7 million people pledging their support raising over $12 million and becoming the “most liked” non-profit on Facebook with 3.1 million likes. KONY was the #9 most searched person on Google this year.

Avaaz.org – online petition platform

Launched in January 2007, Avaaz.org is a global online campaigning organization that brings people-powered politics to international decision-making.

Why it’s on the list

Avaaz has grown to more than 10 million members worldwide.

It provides an online, low-cost process in which people all over the world can sign up to try and make a difference – right injustices, save people’s lives, campaign for fairness – anything.

Breast Cancer Awareness UK – I like it on

Mysterious updates such as, ‘I Like It On’ followed by ‘the floor’, ‘the bed’, etc., started appearing on females’ Facebook social profiles.  Women were actually talking about where they like to leave their handbags and this created curiosity and interest to find out about Breast Cancer Awareness UK.

Why it’s on the list

Clever, inexpensive way to create a buzz across Facebook and Twitter by leaving the work up to the audience!

Movember – supporters of Prostate Cancer UK

Movember – the famous yearly campaign started back in 2003 from humble beginnings in Melbourne, Australia. Since then it has skyrocketed and throughout the month of November – you would struggle not to see any supporters rocking the facial hair.

Why it’s on the list

Last year, through Movember, Prostate Cancer UK (the main UK beneficiary of campaign) managed to raise an amazing £26 Million.

Social media is a way for brands to interact with many people in a targeted away – often with instant results. As these examples have show, if the content is brilliant and intriguing, you have a good chance of people sharing it. A focused campaign, with brave responsive creative, will stand any charity in good stead.

We will be discussing three of these case studies at our next Shortcuts seminar series on May 5.

For more information, or to book your place – email me at giles@greenbananamarketing.com.