In 2008, Texas Instruments (TI) saved $5.1 million through reducing energy use by 5% and water consumption by over 7%. As a result, TI reduced its worldwide carbon footprint to 2.07 million metric tons of CO2, which represents a 2.8% reduction in the company’s worldwide carbon footprint.

The company’s 2008 Corporate Social Responsibility Report outlines the 159 distinct initiatives that were undertaken to realize the company-wide savings. Entitled, “Building a Better Future,” the new report organizes the company’s environmental performance into eight categories including air quality, climate change, energy use, alternative transportation, water use, materials usage & recycling, sustainable site policies and principles.

However, the most captivating elements of the report are the environmental performance highlights.

2008 indicators of success at Texas instruments include but are not limited to:
• Reduced total energy use by 5% from 2007.
• Reduced total water use by 7.3%.
• Recycled 1.4 billion U.S. gallons of water (16% of the company’s global water use).
• Recycled 88% of non-industrial waste.
• Recycled 91% of total waste.
• Constructed the first LEED Silver certified building in the Philippines.
• Set a goal of being LEED certified at all of their major existing buildings globally by 2011.

Of the 159 initiatives that TI embarked upon to accomplish these savings, the key projects include:
• A well-water cooling system in Germany, which leverages an underground aquifer to balance the site’s heating and cooling system. This system alone saved TI roughly $1 million in energy savings and reductions in annual water consumption by nearly 33 million gallons.
• Reusing 228 million gallons of water at a North Texas facility to scrub manufacturing exhaust enabled a savings of $937,000.
• In some instances, TI cut energy costs in half through targeting energy-intensive chillers and vacuum pumps and replacing the targeted system components with more efficient machinery and parts.
• TI avoided a 14% rise in employee commuting-related CO2 emissions through increasing the use of employee carpooling systems, mass transit and onsite shuttles.

Despite these accomplishments, the company still faces challenges in the years to come. The latest report identifies the challenges ahead, which include increased operating costs from greater regulatory assessments. Specifically, the company is concerned that increased regulations may result in a market in which necessary replacement materials for semiconductor manufacturing either won’t be available at cost-effective prices or, the materials won’t be available at all.

TI is currently exploring renewable energy sources and efficiency strategies as a means of determining a clear path to remaining profitable in a low-carbon economy. Given the company’s ability to achieve such significant savings in 2008 is a clear indicator that despite whatever challenges may lie ahead, the company is well-poised to create innovative and cost-effective solutions to maintaining it’s status as an industry leader while also reducing the environmental impact of doing business.

Perhaps, “Natural Capitalism” should have been titled, “Natural Capitalism: The Sustainability Revolution.”  Here’s why: Although some businesses already employ the principles of natural capitalism, this concept for the most part is an entirely new way of thinking about commerce and industry.  What natural capitalism calls for is a remarkable shift in the dominant paradigm.

Natural Capitalism presents a financially logical, environmentally sound and emotionally compelling justification for adopting the four main principles of natural capitalism.  While reading this book, I was caused to consider the notion that if only more people could access this content in a more digestable format, the idea would spread and it’s adoption would begin to take place in the mainstream.

And that’s why I created the Pocket Guide to Natural Capitalism: A Strategic Paradigm for Business & Environment.  Download the pdf, print it out for yourself, print it out for your friends and keep a few on hand to encourage the conversation around the business case for adopting the principles of natural capitalism.

Download your copy now!

Please note that this design borrows heavily from Monterey Bay Aquarium’s design for their Seafood Watch Program cards.  This design is not intended for sale, it’s merely an exercise for me to consider how to best make natural capitalism accessible to the mainstream.

Summary
The field of sustainability and the on-going adoption of sustainable business practices among global markets is a complicated web of interactions and relationships.  There lies a deep history in how this way of thinking has evolved and there is much to do in terms of making sustainability a principle of how our world operates.  “The Sustainability Revolution” provides an excellent overview of many key milestones in the evolution of sustainability as a concept.  I do not believe that this book intends to be a comprehensive portrayal of the field and it’s history and I do not think that the reader should consider it to provide that level of information.  Instead, I encourage the reader to embrace the concepts they are drawn to from the book and to explore those concepts more fully in other research efforts.   

I believe that “The Sustainability Revolution” provides a solid background on the evolution of “sustainability” as a concept in terms of when this concept began to be discussed in local and international arenas and how this concept has affected industries and consumers to date.  However, Edwards’ portrayal of “sustainability” does not convince me that it is in fact, a “revolution.”  More so, I believe that Edwards has described the concept of sustainability as a paradigm shift in progress.  A revolution and an in-process shift in mainstream thinking are two very different notions.  Ironically, Edwards uses both terms (revolution and paradigm shift) in the title of this book.  That being said, every field of study should have a few books such as “The Sustainability Revolution” which, provide the reader with valuable background information on the historical development of their chosen field of study.  Personally, I am more drawn to books that leverage current phenomena to engage the reader with inspiration for where we are today and where we headed tomorrow.  Along those lines, I think of Norman Uphoff’s “Reasons for Hope” and “Reasons for Success” as well as Hawken’s recent, “Blessed Unrest.”

One aspect of “The Sustainability Revolution” that I would like to focus on is Edwards’ presentation of the Hannover Principles.  I was surprised and somewhat disappointed that Edwards chose to begin his chapter on designing with nature with a presentation of the Hannover Principles because the statements that comprise the Hannover Principles are ones that date back much farther than McDonough’s 2000 declaration.  As a side note, I believe that the Hannover Principles were actually copyrighted by McDonough in the early 1990’s, prior to his 2000 presentation of these statements in Germany.  In considering Edwards’ presentation of designing with nature, I feel he has overlooked some very significant histories and concepts that would have served his chapter well.  If my understanding of the field is correct, I believe that designing with nature should begin with a discussion of the field of Industrial Ecology.  The concepts of Industrial Ecology can be dated as far back as the early 1900’s with the work of Buckminster Fuller.  The concepts of Industrial Ecology were further explored and explicated in the 1980’s by groups such as the Rocky Mountain Institute.  In the late 1980’s the term Industrial Ecology was made popular by Robert Frosch and Nicholas Gallopoulos.  In my estimation, the Hannover Principles are simply a re-wording of an already existing body of principles that had evolved over the course of many years, lead by thought leaders across a variety of fields.

So what is Industrial Ecology?
Industrial Ecology is a recognized and well followed, multi-disciplinary field which emphasizes the interactions of environment, economy and technology with a focus on the parallels between a “natural” system and “socio-technical systems”.  Very similar to the “cradle to cradle” concept, Industrial Ecology looks at the transformation of socio-technical systems from open loop to closed loop systems where waste is re-purposed as inputs to continue the original process from which it was discarded or, to be leveraged as input for a new process.

Why is it important to consider Industrial Ecology?
If what I have said is true (that the Hannover Principles are simply a re-statement of the principles of Industrial Ecology), then why is it important to focus on Industrial Ecology?…why not just skip Industrial Ecology and go straight to the Hannover Principles?  I think it’s important to learn about the contributions that the field of Industrial Ecology have made because some of these contributions include tangible tools that business managers, engineers and social entrepreneurs can make good use of in delivering more sustainable products and services.  These tools include but are not limited to Integrated Chain Management, the ISO 4000 management standards as well as engineering strategies such as cogeneration or energy recycling.

Identifying cost savings opportunities, ensuring long-term competitiveness, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions are all benefits of evaluating a company’s energy usage.

In order to identify the cost savings opportunities that investing in energy efficiencies provide, a company must first analyze the energy flows and consumption patterns of electricity and gas.   Efficiency strategies are typically low-risk, high-payback measures that can free substantial amounts of money for more lucrative investments.  With payback periods as short as a fiscal quarter, companies can realize immediate improvements to their bottom line through reducing energy related operating costs such as lighting, HVAC, office equipment, water heating and vehicles.

Increased costs of electricity generation, volatile natural gas prices and a growing demand for energy are signs that future costs of doing business will rise. Improving the efficiency of energy usage enables the long-term viability of a company through reducing the current and future operating cost structure of the company.  Improved energy efficiency also enhances industrial productivity metrics such as product output, production reliability and improved working conditions.

The rising threat of global climate change due to increased GHG emissions such as carbon dioxide provides the basis for the likelihood of a GHG emissions regulatory structure which will impact the finances of a company.  A cap and trade scheme will create opportunities for companies to generate revenue through the sale of credits accumulated by reductions in GHG emissions.  Alternatively, a carbon tax scheme will require that companies minimize their emissions in order to maintain financially sustainable operating costs.