Embedded Files
Behenna-poster.pdfLauren Behenna
The Kodiak Electric Association or KEA is an energy provider for the community of Kodiak Island Alaska. KEA is completely unique from any other company like it, in that it is the only option that the people of this island have. Founded in 1941, KEA started through the use of diesel energy, but as the town has grown, they have moved to 99.7% sustainable energy sources. According to KEA’s website, “Unlike most other companies, Kodiak Electric Association was formed by and is owned entirely by you and the other members we serve. Our purpose is not to maximize profits for shareholders - we are a not-for-profit organization.” This statement rings true as their profits come from the consumers that are directly using their energy resources. Energy bills are based on how much energy the household uses, and based on interviews from citizens of Kodiak, their electric bill is vastly cheaper than in locations they have previously lived.Kodiak Electric Association has three sources from which their energy comes from. 80% from a hydroelectric source in a nearby river, 19.7% wind, and .3% from a backup diesel generator. With a population of 13,448 people using these energy methods, the amount of diesel energy saved through the use of wind power alone is about 16 million gallons of diesel. Considering this is a fishing community, it is important to the livelihood of much of the population that little to no pollution be released into the surrounding ocean.
The association is well aware that a hydroelectric generator and wind turbines can disrupt the surrounding environment and the wildlife that lives there. However, the company has done extensive research and changes in order to be sensitive to the needs of the surrounding area. For example, before the installation of the six wind turbines, KEA tracked the migration and travel patterns of the island’s birds, including the bald eagle, to place the turbines in the location of least disruption. For the most part, this meticulous research has worked, with only five interactions with eagles in 11 years. In terms of disturbing the aquatic life in the river in which the hydroelectric generator is placed, KEA has installed a fishery enhancement in the river. This installation has provided for a great and consistent salmon stream, so the fish have a different route to travel. Along with this, as part of the hydroelectric permit, KEA has given the seed money for the Brown Bear Trust, an organization that works on providing bear habitat and information on the Kodiak Brown Bear.
The CEO of the Kodiak Electric Association stated that the reason they started looking towards being fully sustainable was because of the cost volatility of diesel fuel. They realized that because of the small population that they are providing for, as well as the environmental advantages, that these methods are the most effective to pursue. It is because of this cost efficiency, that the cost to their members is the same as it was 20 years ago.
Overall, the Kodiak Electric Association has worked tirelessly over the past 80 years to provide the community with a renewable and clean source for their energy. Although their strategies are very accomodating for this small town, it may be possible to convert these methods to work on a larger scale. Perhaps the predominant use of renewable energy in our modern societies can be learned from KEA, and spread to communities across the world.
Rachel Kurima
The Adidas shoe and clothing company holds sustainability as one of its core values. The company has several pages on its main website that are dedicated to the principles and practices that it has in regards to making its brand, and the world, more sustainable. While the company has done a lot of good, its weaknesses should also be addressed. This presentation will be an overview of both, starting in the environmental sphere, then moving to the social and economic ones. Environmentally, one of the things that Adidas has emphasized the most is reducing waste and recycling materials. One way that the company does this is by using recycled polyester that is made from plastic waste like water bottles. It asserts that the process uses less water, energy, and chemicals during production. The recycling also reduces CO2 emissions. The company also uses intercepted ocean waste plastic that is retrieved from beaches and remote islands. The material is shredded and reworked to become a high-performance yarn that the brand uses in its Adidas x Parley sportswear. Since plastic does not bio-degrade normally and instead breaks down into pieces that animals mistake as food, this is an important practice that protects marine life. The company even partnered with a Miami high school to take this initiative to the next level, creating a football field composed entirely of recycled ocean plastic. In addition, the company created a 100% recycled shoe. It began encouraging customers to wear them, and instead of throwing them out when worn down, return them. Then, there is a system in place to grind the used shoes down and recycle them into a new pair of shoes. This is not only a form of recycling that the company institutes, but also a practice that was intended to start changing the mindsets of their consumers. Adidas wants people to start thinking in terms of giving back instead of throwing away their resources.While Adidas has done a lot of good environmentally, there are some areas that it still falls short in. One of the biggest ones is how it handles some of the aspects of the production of its clothing line. It has been accused of polluting waterways through harsh dying procedures. It has also been accused of contaminating water through chemical residues left in their finished clothing. While these are valid accusations, it still appears that Adidas has done quite a bit more environmental good than bad. At least, it has done a great deal to improve on itself and create initiatives. Now I will move on to the social aspect of Adidas’s sustainability. A positive of their social aspect is that they employ over 775,000 people, which means that they keep that many people from being unemployed. Employment generally gives people the ability to support their families, become more educated, and maintain a higher quality of life. However, Adidas has been criticized for not always paying its employees who work in its factories (which are abroad in China, Indonesia, and elsewhere) a living wage. In addition, while Adidas has taken some action over the years to confront forced labor, there does still seem to be some faint links between the company and that practice, specifically in China. Taking a look at the economic side of things, there are also some key positives and negatives. A massive positive is that Adidas has seen revenue growth in excess reaching 11% since 2015, which is quite a strong number for just around five years. It is a rate that was 70% faster than Nike’s was over the same period (Trefis Team 1). This indicates that the company should be able to stay in business and continue to grow and make money. However, Nike’s profits were double Adidas’s profits of $2 billion in 2018. This shows that Adidas still has a strong competitor that could spell an economic downfall for the company if they are not careful.
Copy of Tabletop Presentation Template 11x17 - Google Slides.webmMallory Lawson
Please play the video for narrative.Proctor-poster.pdfJoseph Proctor
Patagonia is an outdoor clothing company that is based out of Ventura, California and was founded by Yvon Chouinard in 1973. Since then, it has become one of the most well known clothing companies in the United States and the world, and it has striven to achieve environmental goals and practices in how the company makes its clothes as well as being proactive in the fight against the environmental crisis.Patagonia is clear in its company principles that it aims to be as environmentally friendly as possible, and it has made multiple mission statements, defined goals, and implemented actions that all help the company achieve a high rate of sustainability characteristics throughout the company and its supply chains. First, Patagonia aims at creating “[a]n apparel industry that produces no unnecessary environmental harm and has a positive impact on the people and communities associated with its activities”*. The company is focused on providing durable and high quality products without shifting externalities out into the natural environment. I personally own some Patagonia apparel and like many of their customers, I am glad to know that I am buying from a company that cares for and actively protects the natural world.
Another principle that Patagonia strives to achieve is the idea that they can use business to implement solutions that work towards fighting against the environmental crisis that the world is facing today. The company wishes to use its success through environmentally friendly products to encourage other companies and more people on the whole to think more critically about how their businesses and lifestyles affect the environment. Finally, it is important to the company that it is always trying to improve the ways in which it can diversify and improve its environmental outreach, which is one of the main reasons that it has put forth its goal of carbon neutrality. By 2025, Patagonia aims to become completely carbon neutral throughout all its products and supply chains, and this is a major step in sustainable responsibility.
The goals and principles previously discussed speak to the genuine effort that Patagonia is putting into its environmental effort, but where the company is truly put to the test is what actions and practices the company is actively pursuing. For starters, Patagonia uses recycled polyester in many of its clothing products, and this allows the company to still remain competitive in the clothing industry without having to rely on harmful petroleum-based materials. According to Patagonia’s website, the latest season gear’s fabric is made from up to 80% recycled polyester. Not only does this impressive statistic appeal to customers looking to buy Patagonia products, but it also shows that the company truly cares about being environmentally responsible and achieving its proposed principles of reducing by-products that harm the environment.
Additionally, Patagonia has co-founded the Sustainable Apparel Coalition, which is an organization of 49 businesses, non-governmental organizations, and even the Environmental Protection Agency. The idea behind the Coalition is that no single company or set of shareholders can solve the issues surrounding the apparel industry and its effects on the environment alone, so they must proactively work together to find and implement solutions that benefit the greater well-being of the planet instead of individual companies making profits. The coalition had its inaugural meeting in 2010, and together they decided that one of the groups main goals was to create “[c]redible, practical, and universal standards and tools for defining and measuring environmental and social performance”* which will allow the companies involved to further develop their own environmental principles and practices.
Finally, perhaps the most intuitive and environmentally friendly practices that Patagonia partakes in is offering its customers free lifetime repair and replacement for its products and committing 1% of all sales to environmental protection and preservation. Knowing that a part of one’s purchase will go towards environmental causes is likely to attract more consumers that are looking to reduce their footprint on the Earth, and Patagonia makes that possibility a reality. Like I stated previously, I own some Patagonia apparel and I am able to take it to any store and they will repair any damages or replace products that I can no longer use. This not only allows people to feel confident in buying Patagonia products, but it also does a tremendous service to the environment. Instead of replacing damaged apparel multiple times throughout their lives, consumers can limit the waste products that they produce which in turn allows Patagonia to use less materials while also preventing unnecessary waste from entering the environment, fulfilling its principle of reducing the environmental harm that its products would otherwise inflict on the natural world.
* Denotes source retrieved from Patagonia.com
Scheuer-poster.pdfKatherine Scheuer
The organization that I have chosen to do my case study on is Target, specifically the Kalamazoo location. I’ve been an employee with Target since June of 2018 and while I’ve exclusively worked in the front end, I’ve gotten a very good sense of the sustainability practices ran in our store. First and foremost, we have multiple recycling bins in front of our store. Near our guest service desk, we have a recycling bin dedicated to phones/mp3 players/batteries, one specifically for plastic bags, and one specifically for plastic bottles. Behind the guest service counter, we have a simple recycling bin, placed next to a trash bin. Last summer while working, I learned from our cart attendant (who is in charge of taking the trash and recycling out every night), informed me that he takes both recycling and trash and puts them in the dumpster. When I asked why, he explained that team members carelessly throw the trash into the recycling bin and it becomes too difficult to sort through it every night, so he doesn’t have any choice but to throw them both in the dumpster. This, I learned, is going to be a big block in the road for my case study. While our location offers many opportunities to be sustainable, the lack of effort from team members prevents the opportunity to be sustainable. In the next few days, I plan on reaching out to our cart attendant to see whether or not the phones/mp3 players/batteries and plastic bags actually get sent to a proper recycling location, and not just thrown away. Another similar situation to this would be the cardboard baler in the back room. While it’s specifically for cardboard, I have time and again seen team members throw things such as styrofoam and bubble wrap into the baler. I haven’t reached out to anyone to see how this affects the recycling process, although I’m sure it does, I plan to reach out within the next few days as well. Our store, along with others I’m sure, currently, incentives guests to use reusable bags by adding a discount for every bag used. We currently offer $.05 off of a purchase for every reusable bag used, and while that might seem like a small amount and easily overlooked, it really does seem to be working as I have seen many guests remind me of the discount before I even have the chance to enter it. I do hope in the future that we follow the footsteps of Target locations in California that put a tax on plastic bags, and make you pay extra to use them. We also do not offer paper bags as an option because according to the store manager it’s “not worth the hassle”, although I’ve seen many skip on bags entirely because they wanted to use paper rather than plastic, so hopefully it is something they incorporate into stores with no bag tax in the future.Target’s corporate puts out a sustainability report each year explaining all sustainability principles they intend to implement, principles they’ve met, and principles they are currently working on meeting. A lot of the sustainability principles they focus on are internal and have been implemented into our store, but the few that haven’t are probably the most important, one being solar panels. Target set out to achieve ENERGY STAR certification in 80% of their buildings and achieved this goal 3 years ahead of when they had set the goal, with the Kalamazoo store being one of the stores who are ENERGY STAR certified. Target as a whole is also exceeding their goal of diverting 70% of their retail waste from landfills through recycle and reuse programs and is currently at 75%. Target has just this year met their goal of investing $1 million in textile recycling technologies, and are still working towards a full transition into a circular apparel industry.
Page updated
Report abuse