Thoughts on Durban

At the start of this month, I got an email from One Hundred Months just highlighting that there are five years left to start making some significant changes to what we are doing in terms of reducing carbon emissions…

I am not particularly certain of whether to think that the COP17 talks in Durban were good or bad, but I am certain that more was certainly achieved than in other recent talks. The real positive news is that there now seems to be a degree of consensus that something needs to be done, and a long term framework that is legally binding.  Without a doubt, this is a great step and is something that has been missing from the climate change agenda in recent years; consensus is crucial to any capacity for things such as Australia’s carbon tax or any emission trading schemes in shipping and aviation which I have previously written about. The EU did very well to achieve its aims for the conference – and not surprisingly the United States has failed to demonstrate any leadership in this despite Obama’s pre-election promises (and with the presidential elections twelve months out, it is unlikely to improve) – see for example here. It will be interested to watch China, as the biggest emitter, to see what they do in the next few years to curb emissions – at a national level, they seem to appear as if they may be more committed to addressing this that the US or even India.

From the Washington Post

However, the real downside here is about the timing of what is meant to come next. The existing binding agreement (although very limited in terms of what countries are signed up to it) expires next year, so there is going to be a real gap in terms of commitments to reductions over this very critical period of the next few years in which extensive action is needed. This is precisely the same period in which it is crucial to bring yearly emissions down, so it is almost a case of closing the barn door after the horse has bolted…

Australia and Sustainability

As the Greenest Government ever decided to wreak havoc on the solar industry at the start of last week, the Australian Government last week finally passed a bill through the Senate imposing a carbon tax starting at approximately £15 per tonne. Of course this has not been without its detractors, but I do hope that the funds raised do get used to promote and support the use of more sustainable technology – once the price is right, these things are more efficient (as well as being good for the environment), and from a capitalist perspective, allow for improved profits.

The scheme itself is a good idea, but as with the debate about shipping emissions recently, or indeed airline emissions, that has fired up some interesting debates between the EU and the US, then the whole thing will fall down unless there is a degree of global consensus on this as Greg Hunt mentions in The Australian. So perhaps, as the following clip suggests, they might be a part two to the whole story!

 

 

And next week, I’m looking forward to attending the press launch of some UNEP reports in the lead up to COP 17 which should be rather interesting – perhaps a well placed question about global consensus wouldn’t go astray!

IBM Sustainability Summit 2011

Watching an empty train roll past yesterday morning while I waited to get on my way to a meeting gave me some pause for thought to consider the IBM Summit I attended on Tuesday in central London at 8 Northumberland. Unlike the event last year which was completely focused on transport, this had a wider series of topics being discussed, many linked to getting consumers to be more sustainable. There were a number of breakout sessions and workshops focused on questions around getting people to act in more sustainable ways, and some specifically linked to transport, for which the consensus was that it was crucial to challenge the norm of behaviour.

As with other more general sustainability events, it was a good opportunity to reflect on what we do and what some of the challenges are that we need to consider in overcoming in order to act/ be more sustainable. The key transport breakout session was around the topic of liberalising travel information to help people go greener. This is important, but at the very heart of the matter is the issue of pricing – until sustainability and pricing are linked, then it is going to be difficult to get the behaviour change necessary to really achieve great things with sustainable transport.

This morning, I attended an event put on by the Committee on Climate Change discussing UK shipping emissions, which was particularly interesting in terms of highlighting that transport-related emissions are going to become a greater problem over time as it is left behind energy in priority. It is clear, as they suggested, that this issue does need to be addressed, but it does not come without difficulty. I fear that a key stumbling block will of course relate to getting some form of international consensus on how to deal with this through the International Maritime Organization. It sort of reminded me of a Monty Python short video played on Tuesday by Mark Earls, one of the speakers at the IBM summit (shown below). Fortunately though, as one person highlighted today, it is in the best interests of the shipping community to reduce costs which will hopefully reduce carbon emissions anyway!

Sustainability briefing for freight companies

Last week, we run a small session for a number of freight companies that are part of TfL’s Freight Operator Recognition Scheme. We went through some basics of sustainability and the history of how greenhouse gas reporting started through the last 120 years or so, and then onto how companies can improve their reporting as well as understanding about Greenhouse Gas Reporting protocols. The presentation was fairly big, but here is part 1!

CarbonVoyage FORS Sustainability Briefing Part 1

 

 

Are you a freight company in London?

We’re running an event on 6 September to help FORS members meet their environmental objectives. If you’re a freight company in London and not a member of FORS (which is run by Transport for London), you should think about joining – for more information, apply here!

Details for FORS Environment Lecture

Freight and Collaborative Consumption

Back in February, I went along to a great session at NESTA all about Collaborative Consumption, an issue that is closely linked to sustainability – I guess you could say that it is all about sharing assets/ resources which reduces waste and thus cost (and by extension carbon). The underpining concepts of collaborative consumption are just as relevant in freight/ shipping/ logistics as they are for consumers. Empty capacity rates in logistics are significant – up around the 30 – 40% (which I mentioned in my last post) – an interesting example of this is the following diagram taken from Merge Global.

Freight and shipping utilisation rates

While there are certainly external factors that influence this (such as what could potentially be transported on a backhaul), it does not really help the profitability of a freight company. The current economic climate is not particularly helpful as Maersk points out. There are certainly structural inefficiencies which will never allow for perfect utilisiation rates of transport. With an oversupply of freight assets, low profitability and minimal rates of economic growth in major economies, there are some tough times ahead for the industry.

While our focus to date has predominantly been on road freight, it seems that there opportunities for collaborative solutions which are missed. In passenger transport, my favourite example is taxis and airports (particularly Heathrow) where there are millions of empty taxi and minicab journeys each year.

Freight seems to exhibit many similar characteristics, without some of the behaviour change issues that affect making passenger transport more efficient (such as the issue of sharing). Recently, we’ve been working on a location that has many different businesses (eg. a business park or business improvement district or other transport hub) and there has fundamentally been no collaboration between each of the organisations in freight deliveries or collections. What that means is that when courier drops off a package, it often happens as the same time as another courier shows up to pick up a package; or, that there are multiple milk deliveries on a Monday morning from different places. Aside from the basic cost implications, it creates unneeded congestion in an area that has very limted road access. As we look at traffic/ freight patterns in the context of the Olympics, there is of course the option to restrict deliveries to particular times, but this won’t make things more efficient.

Given the impact of cost, congestion and carbon, the only real option (other than not having things delivered or collected) is to look at a more collaborative approach to working with other organisations that share similar needs. There are a number of works/ studies that look at the potential impact of more sustainable transport on cost and carbon, such as one I mentioned over a year ago from the National Geographic. In a report we are doing for a client at present, we are using some of the statistics from the London Freight Plan regarding the impact of carbon and congestion (for this client, cost is not actually the issue). The London Freight Plan suggests that efficiencies in freight could result in 0.61 million tonnes of carbon savings, and that the financial cost of congestion is between £2-£4 billion per annum which is clearly considerable. Previous work that we’ve done, including that with the University of Manchester and Tesco has given us into some of the barriers to behaviour change for people to travel in more sustainable ways, and it will be very interesting to see which of those barriers is also present for freight…

 

 

Sustainable Mobility: Use transport in more efficient ways saving both money and carbon

Sustainable Mobility: Use transport in more efficient ways saving both money and carbon.

Green Shoots can help – an article in the Municipal Journal

This article was written in the Municipal Journal – please visit here to read it.

Pressure to lower costs can go hand in hand with initiatives to reduce the carbon footprint of local authorities, suggests James Swanston

The next few years will see a reduction in local authority budgets of more than one-quarter, together with similar targets for cutting carbon levels.

The fundamental challenge posed by the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) also presents an opportunity for the ‘other’ CSR – corporate and social responsibility to start providing solutions.

But, while corporate and social responsibility can be seen as a mechanism to produce an overall positive impact on society, including a cleaner environment, it can also be aligned with cost-saving measures, since the two go together – cost savings can lead to carbon reductions, while carbon savings and sustainability measures can result in cost reductions.

Transport is a significant element of all government expenditure, and cannot be excluded from spending cuts. And yet transport is a core element of many local services, including emergency services, education, health and welfare.

Sustainable transport strategies can help deliver massive financial savings through improved efficiency, with a minimal impact on underlying services, and savings in the region of 20% are not unrealistic. Local authorities can adapt a number of strategies to address this challenge, using existing technology, solutions and concepts which are already available.

In some respects, the financial spending cuts are not as significant as the legally-binding carbon reduction/management targets being set. Nationally, the UK is meant to reduce its transport-related carbon emissions from 135 to 111 MtCO2e by 2020.

Accurate reporting for Scope 1 and 3 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions is a key component of this, and while more focused on central government at present, it will be quite enlightening to see how successful the recent Revenue and Customs 2010-11 dry run sustainability reporting is, given that public sector spending has not always been that transparent – a fact highlighted by the DCLG when it decided to ‘open the books’ in August 2010.

Ultimately, any new strategy will cost money to implement, whether it is about deploying new technology, training, education, communications, or incentives. However, sustainability-focused transport strategies can have very fast returns on investment.

Consider the case of taxi usage around Whitehall by six central government ministries, which costs around £10m a year – so the total central government cost is significantly more. Imagine if a strategy was implemented whereby all staff had to use public transport, with the exception of key personnel or those who shared, and a shuttle service was set up between key government locations. The cost savings could be immense.

Local authorities have an unenviable task of seeking immediate savings, with more needed in coming years, while not increasing council taxes. This, therefore, requires a rapidly-implemented plan incorporating efficiency, reduced services and new revenue streams.

Here are some generic ideas which may be of use. A key enabler for any idea is robust management information to make the right decisions – and often this is not available.

Fleet management

Greater fuel efficiency can be achieved through driver training in a very quick space of time, and some telematic devices can provide a more sophisticated solution to enable this, as well.

Another option is to use hybrid vehicles, but this is obviously a more expensive proposition in the short term, depending on funding arrangements, and also are less effective than highly-efficient diesel vehicles on highways.

Consideration should also be given to whether an organisation actually needs its own vehicles, or whether it could share a fleet with an adjoining local authority.

Alternatively, there may be some merit in seeing whether a fleet size needs to be maintained or whether there are car clubs/car hire schemes that could be used, enabling an authority to see off under-utilised fleet vehicles.

Car parking

Where councils operate their own parking facilities, consideration should be given to changing the tariff structure to something that is based on a vehicle’s carbon emissions, and incorporate special rates for car sharing.

Not only can this provide a new revenue stream, but would start to address carbon and air-quality issues by incorporating special rates for car sharing. It could also start to reduce the horrific rates of single car occupancy and congestion while, at the same time, free up car parking spaces that can then generate more revenue.

Incentivising staff in local authorities to walk, cycle or use public transport would have health benefits, and also help free up parking spaces for members of the public or local businesses.

Shared services

Given the 30-40% empty running/dead mileage rates in taxis and private hire vehicles, as well as road freight, collaboration between neighbouring local authorities could look to fill these empty vehicles for a discount.

Procurement processes should factor in opportunities to work with other organisations and, if an office is located in a business park, there are opportunities to have a shared taxi service or shuttle bus schemes.

Change is inevitable because of cost pressures, but it is still useful to understand some of the barriers that organisations and individuals need to address. Competition for scarce resources will become greater, inefficient procurement mechanisms need to be removed, employee terms and conditions may need to change, and organisational change must be fully supported from the top-down.

Staff will need to trust new strategies and have the right incentives and information in place to support change, and understand just how new approaches can help maintain key services and protect jobs. Harsh decisions may be needed to meet the current financial landscape, but there are also opportunities to create local services that are more sustainable in economic and environmental terms.

Those who support the need to address climate change should appreciate the need for urgent action, while those who are sceptical will hopefully discover just how neatly financial and environmental savings can go together.

Carbon Voyage gets some help from Rolls Royce

Through our link with Heropreneurs, we have recently become recipients of a grant from Rolls – Royce to assist us in building our business; we think it is really great that a start up focused on reducing the environmental impact of transport has been able to get this from a large company renowned for its work in the aerospace industry . We are also planning a trip out to their facility in Bristol to find out a bit more about their sustainability strategies and particularly look at some of the work they are doing with gas turbine engines to reduce their impact on the environment.

Speech at the inaugural Heropreneurs Dinner

Last night, I attended the inaugural dinner for Heropreneurs, a  new charity established to help service leavers start up their own businesses. It was attended by the Minister for Veterans Affairs and a range of ex-military people who are all very successful business people in their own right. The following is the text of the speech I delivered - I did not completely stick to script, but it is broadly the same in content and theme:

The Right Honourable Under Secretary of State, ladies and gentlemen, my name is James Swanston and I run Carbon Voyage, a start up and an investment for Heropreneurs.

I thought it would be useful to set the scene by providing some background to my business and then discussing those areas in which Heropreneurs and indeed government can add value.

Transport is responsible for almost a quarter of all carbon emissions. Most commercial road transport is empty 30% of the time and 84% of all commuter journeys in cars only have single occupants.

My business was set up to address this by making transport more efficient, cutting cost, carbon and congestion.

To do this, we built a software application that tries to make best use of transport – sharing vehicles, filling empty return journeys and finding the right mode of travel; we initially developed this around passenger travel and are now working on a freight version of our software which is already attracting significant interest in the UK and elsewhere.

We compliment this with an advisory service to help major organizations in developing and implementing strategies to manage transport needs.

I negotiated our first deal, a research collaboration with Tesco and the University of Manchester almost a year ago whilst on leave from Afghanistan, and key customers now include Aegis Group plc and more recently, a major public sector organisation; pending successful funding from the Technology Strategy Board later this month, the organisations we anticipate we will be working with will include a range of very large public and private sector organisations. Our research work with the University of Manchester continues and we are regularly approached to assist research efforts at other universities.

We are very positive about opportunities in the current economic climate as our service can help the government deliver services whilst meeting significant cost and carbon reduction targets with minimal upfront investment. However, this will require some new thinking in the government and a willingness for innovation – some of our models point to wastage of 20% and higher in the way transport is used across all levels of government and the MoD is certainly not exempt from this. In the experience of many innovative companies, government is poorly set up to support fresh thinking when it comes to new ways of doing business.

While this all paints a rather impressive picture, or at least we feel rather positive, it is not all plain sailing and this is where an organisation such as Heropreneurs can provide a great deal of value. Most of us have served in highly demanding war zones where our decisions, often made in a split second, are about life or death, so in some respects, the pressures of a start up do not quite compare. Our ‘do more with less’ lifestyle certainly translates very nicely into bootstrapping a start up, but help is still needed.

Mentoring is perhaps the most important thing – having links into experience can help entrepreneurs open doors and negotiate the obstacles and pitfalls of running a business. Links with big business are also key – via Heropreneurs, one FTSE 100 company is now investing money and time in supporting some of our efforts, and our link with them will only serve to add to our credibility as a new enterprise.

Support with business services – PR, legal, accounting – can take a massive amount of pressure off a start up and remove major costs from the early stages of the life of a business.

Access to funding for start ups, rather dear to my heart at the moment, is fundamentally broken at the moment, although I would be keen to note that funding should not be seen as an automatic right for anyone with a cunning plan. Tech businesses in particular do not require amounts that sit within the normal model of angel and venture investing; banks do not lend money and do their best to ignore enterprise finance initiatives. Ten or twenty thousand pounds can go an amazing distance in start ups these days, and in some respects, that is the kind of funding levels that are important – if I look at our business, the help that an amount such as that would provide to us would be amazing, particularly to help ease pressure on our working capital needs, but it is hardly a funding level that would excite most angel investors or VCs.

Trying to break into public sector procurement is somewhat akin to a sisyphean task; at minimum, it would be great for Heropreneurs to help start ups build partnerships with the right organisations to be competitive for bids – a need that we have right now as we look to compete for a major public sector organisation to manage their transport better – which we know we can do if we can jump through the procurement hurdles. Perhaps a more exciting idea though would be for Heropreneurs to work with the MoD to establish a suitable test bed or incubator for public sector opportunities – smart, entrepreneurial service leavers know exactly where the opportunities are to do things better, far more than defence civilians or the standard set of major consulting firms that cost a lot of money, and it would also enable some retention of the corporate knowledge that is exiting the uniformed services at alarming rates.

In closing, I would like to add my thanks to those of Peter’s for coming tonight. The space in which Heropreneurs exists links very well with the Government’s aspirations for big society as well as the continuing need to foster enterprise and innovation in the United Kingdom. It can also reinforce the very positive light in which those who serve in uniform are seen.

Effective mentoring, funding, business support, and assisting with public sector procurement opportunities are all fantastic ways for Heropreneurs to enable service leavers to excel in building new businesses.

I hope I have been able to plant some ideas about where you can support Heropreneurs; most service leavers are without the right networks and opportunities to achieve their potential, so having this mechanism to assist entrepreneurial service leavers is an aspiration worth of support.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 871 other followers