In our book, we wrote about DESERTEC.

It’s nice to see that it’s:

• more than a dream
• employing project managers
• employing project team workers
• setting an example for renewable energy

See this really nice and very new video:

Note the aspects of social, economic, and ecological sustainability involved.

And note the importance of project management to the effort.

THIS is a good example of a solid intersection of sustainability and project management.

What do you think?

Today, 28-November, is the kickoff of the Durban (South Africa) UN Climate Change Conference  – COP17.

Does COP17 matter?  Is it relevant?

Not one, but two EarthPM connections to this conference made us curious.

First, we were lucky enough to be the keynote speaker at PMSA’s Good in Green conference there back in late Septenber.  Second, the GreenBiz author of a recent post, Heather King, sat down with us last summer to discuss all sorts of green business issues as they pertain to project management.  Heather posted this article which provides 4 compelling reasons why COP17 does matter.

We’d like to draw our readers’ attention to reason number 4:

4. Business leaders are increasingly involved — across sectors and continents.

Industry leaders are increasingly involved in the COP talks. As clean energy deployments in over 80 countries have skyrocketed, clean energy suppliers and adopters need assurance that governments will support this market.

In addition, COP 17 will work to establish a technology center that will serve as a hub for leveraging and deploying climate monitoring, management and adaptation solutions in different countries. This will require significant collaboration with technology and information industry leaders.

Two significant business events in Durban that are concurrent with COP 17 intend to elevate the voice and influence of industry at the talks:

• The World Climate Summit. This organization will host its second event on December 3 — 4th with leaders from Ernst and Young, PWC, Coca Cola, Phillips.

• Business for the Environment (B4E). B4E is gathering leaders from Tata Steel, Bank of America, HP and others on December 6 to discuss a clean industrial revolution.

So…that’s reason number 4.  If you’re interested in Heather’s other three reasons, click here.  We assert that reason number 4 alone is enough to get the Project Managers of the world interested.  We’re talking about “skyrocketing” clean energy deployments.  Translation: projects.  So at a minimum, become conversant in this practice area, improving your ability to be gainfully employed as a productive project manager!

Working together – saving tomorrow today.  That’s the theme of COP17.  If you want to find out more about the conference, here is the link to COP17.

November 19th, although you probably missed it, was World Toilet Day.

World Toilet Day’s objective is to raise global awareness of the struggle 2.6 billion face every day without access to proper, clean sanitation.WTD also brings to the forefront the health, emotional and psychological consequences the poor endure as a result of inadequate sanitation.

We see it, of course, as YAIOPMAS (Yet Another Intersection Of Project Management And Sustainability).  After all, the need to get 2.6 billion people access to sanitation will certainly yield projects and jobs for project managers, and the effort fits neatly into the “social” and “ecological” sustainability.  Economic, ecological, and social – the three elements of sustainability.

So, if you’ll excuse our toilet-language analogy, we’re really talking about the triple bottom line.

Science Friday, a radio program from the US’ NPR network, recently covered this topic. And when we say ‘covered it’ we don’t mean that they put the seat down.  We mean that they gave it interesting, fact-based, and detailed coverage.  Coverage you’d like no matter who you are.  But if you listen to it as a project manager, you should hear the sound of opportunity.
In fact, the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is offering grants in the area of innovation for waste disposal.  We suggest you have a look at this video:

The link to the Science Friday program is HERE.

If you’d like to see some of the project work that has already gone into this, have a look at this short video, showing one of the winners of the Gates grant:

In any case, hopefully this not only increased your awareness of how those many billions of people have issues about where to “go”, but also we’ve increased your awareness that project managers could have an active role in improving the situation.

We focus on projects, project management, the connection between sustainability and project management, projects, and most importantly, YOU – the project manager.

That focus includes ecological but also economic and social continuity and success – in other words, running projects that consider the long term effects of the project’s product on the enterprise financially, for its employees and customers, and for the long-term health of the planet.

We are not tree-huggers, even though the picture on the cover of our award-winning book is of a tree.

But some of our rationale for taking on our work is rooted (pun intended) in caring for our home – Earth.

And we know that there are many of you out there who are justifiably skeptics – even cynics, and deniers, when it comes to climate change.  That’s fine with us.  We are left-brained, engineer/scientist types and we like that type of questioning.  It’s what keeps innovation going.

Still, we think it’s important to keep the project managers out there up-t0-date with news and recent findings with respect to climate change.

The most recent news, unfortunately, isn’t good.  It’s downright scary.

In this article, based on findings from the UN (I can almost hear the groan from some of you, but that’s okay, too), indicates that “heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are building up so high, so fast, that some scientists now think the world can no longer limit global warming to the level world leaders have agreed upon as safe”.

And in this story, World Meteorological Deputy Secretary-General Jeremiah Lengoasa said,  “With this picture in mind, even if emissions were stopped overnight globally, the atmospheric concentrations would continue for decades because of the long lifetime of these greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”.

Our book has tips on how you can bring these facts to bear on your projects.

No, the sky isn’t falling.  But “the sky” is over, under, around, and inside your project.  So you should know about how it affects your project and its project – and vice-verse.

Tune in Tuesday, Nov. 1 from 12 p.m.-1 p.m. EST for a live panel discussion from Washington, D.C., part of the 2011 GreenGov Symposium. Dr. Heidi Cullen, MNN Board of Advisors member and director of communications and senior research scientist for Climate Central, will moderate a discussion featuring members of the Obama administration who will discuss clean power, energy security, green fleets and more. 

Rarely do we use this forum for political discussions, and even more rarely do we use this forum for personal campaigns, but in this case, it is both and directly related to sustainability.  So I’m (Dave) going to go out on my own limb and declare that this post is from me, not EarthPM.  The sustainability issue is one that is personally meaningful to me, fishing.  Sometime around 2005 – 2006, I penned an article about the Great Bay, New Hampshire fishery.  It was  published in the Fly Fisherman, September 2009 issue, and is titled “Granite State Stripers – A blueprint for catching striped bass in New Hampshire’s Great Bay Estuary.”  During the time I was doing the “research” (fishing) for this article, big menhaden and herring inhabited the bay in good numbers.  I used to go to the falls in Exeter and watch the lobsterman throw their wire baskets into the falls to collect herring for bait for their lobster traps.

Unfortunately, I don’t see the number of herring or menhaden that I did in the past.  According to research, the menhaden population is down to between 8-12% of historic highs.  I am going to try to be as politically correct as I can be here, but point out that there is a difference of opinion between those of us who are trying to protect striped bass and other species we get so much pleasure fishing for, and Omega Protein (OP), Inc.  According to their website, OP “is a nutrition and wellness company dedicated to delivering healthy products to the animal, human and plant nutrition industries. Omega Protein’s marine product lines are sourced from menhaden, an Omega-3 rich fish harvested along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts.”  The key word there is menhaden.  OP supplies “a custom line of omega-3 fish oil, protein-rich specialty fishmeal and organic fish solubles for aquaculture, companion animal, livestock and equine feed manufacturers. We produce ultra-refined, molecularly distilled omega-3 ingredients for human food manufacturers, and we market branded fish solubles
as agronomic plant food.”  They need huge quantities of menhaden.

The menhaden is also key to the survival of many of the fish species I alluded to above, striped bass and big bluefish for sure, as well as weakfish and maybe even sharks.  All of the species have seen serious declines in their population over the same periods as the aggressive efforts of OP.  I don’t feel it is overfishing the striped bass or others that is causing the decline, but rather a drastic reduction in the natural foods those fish feed on, particularly the menhaden.  I remember the years I spent on the Jersey coast.  Huge schools of menhaden travelled up and down the shoreline.  It was very exciting to see the gamefish tearing into those schools.  The frenzy was a site to see.  Little did I know that I may have been witnessing that for the last time.

Politically, Omega Foods is a juggernaut.  They possess both the political clout and money to overwhelm any and all opposition to their agenda.  Their agenda right now is to move their operations inshore because they have virtually wiped out the larger, offshore menhaden.  The next thing they will do is go after the “peanuts” that have provided much of the inshore forage for the stripers and blues of late.  The peanuts certainly aren’t enough to maintain the fishery, just to slow its decline a little.  Evidence shows that the stripers from the Chesapeake are not faring well and probably stems from being undernourished.  The fishery cannot be sustained much longer without some protective measures.  The omega-3 contained in the very oily menhaden is also good for the striper.  Without it, they probably won’t survive.

To be fair, Omega Foods has a sustainability tab on their website and accepted a “friend of the sea” recognition in 2009 for their marine conservation efforts.  To me, however, there seems to be some contradiction here.  It’s a “they said they said” argument.  Who is right needs to be decided.  So if you are interested in the marine environment, because we don’t know how this will affect the entire ecosystem, do some research, and take a stand.  If you find what I found, you need to let The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) know how you feel.   They are the body that regulates this fishery,.  At its summer meeting in Arlington, Virginia, ASMFC approved public hearings for Addendum 5 to Amendment 1 of the Atlantic Menhaden Fishery Management Plan. That addendum would establish a new interim fishing mortality threshold and target (based on maximum spawning potential — MSP) with the goal of increasing abundance, spawning stock biomass, and menhaden availability as a forage species. The MSP approach was recommended by the 2009 peer review panel that determined menhaden weren’t being overfished at that time – but were in 2008. Indeed, scientific documentation indicates that menhaden have been overfished in 32 of the last 54 years.

The Menhaden Defenders aim to push the ASMFC to establish the first-ever coastwide catch limits for the 2012 fishing season with a conservative target of 30 percent MSP, and a threshold of 15 percent -leaving 30 percent of mature fish free to maintain the stock. The ASMFC would also be urged to quickly begin management of the species on an ecosystem basis, taking into account its importance as a forage fish. Then there must be appropriate monitoring, management tools, and additional enforcement in order to achieve the goals.

That decision needs to be made on a level playing field.  Unfortunately, it is a David and Goliath effort. But remember, David did win!

Just back from two keynote addresses at the PMSA (Project Management South Africa) Conferences in Durban and Johannesburg, we’ll share with you some experiences and findings in some upcoming blog posts.  There was simply too much ‘good stuff’ to try to encapsulate all of this in one post.

We’d like to start with something fundamental and impressive: the South African Constitution.

An organization – or in this case, a large country – has to start somewhere.  Clearly, South Africa still has problems, but at least there is a vibrant vision in place.  In fact, their vision is somewhat, well, visionary.  In fact, it’s one of the few, if not the only country that states environmental rights so explicitly in their Constitution.  It’s right there, Section 24 in Chapter 2, under the Bill of Rights.

Even the US State Department recognizes this in their “Background Note” on South Africa.

It gets very personal.  In fact, one of the speakers at the “Good in Green” conference in Durban specifically indicated that she – as a director of a company which is involved in construction in South Africa – is legally responsible for her actions with response to the environment and can personally face stiff fines and time in prison for irresponsible environmental actions.  You can read more about how the Constitution becomes “active” in this document called “EnviroCrimes“.

In this document, the government answers the question, “what are we protecting?”:

The environment extends from our everyday surroundings to our whole beautiful country. South Africa’s rivers and wetlands, its mountains and plains, its estuaries and oceans, its magnificent coastline and landscapes all contain an exceptionally rich and varied array of life forms. In fact, our country ranks as the third most biologically diverse country in the world and is the only country to have an entire plant kingdom within its national boundaries.

And they also answer the question, “why is it important to prosecute offenders?”:

Environmental crime has serious social and economic impacts on the daily lives of our people.  For example, the pollution of groundwater can cause cancer in adults and children, while illegal fishing can cause the stock of a particular fish species to fall, resulting in job losses for honest fishers.

So, let’s get to it.  Here it is, directly from the South African Constitution:

Section 24: Environment

Everyone has the right to:

• an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being
• have the environment protected for present and future generations

The government must pass laws that:

• prevent pollution and damage to our natural resources
• promote conservation
• make sure that natural resources are developed while also promoting the economic and social development of people

You can read more about this element of the South African Constitution at this site.

So, you’re asking, maybe, what’s the connection to project management?

There are several that come immediately to mind:

• As mentioned above, this is a bit of a wake-up call to project managers doing business (and projects!) in South Africa; there is this legal connection, traceable to the Constitution, which makes them literally responsible for their actions.
• The Constitution can be used to help justify many infrastructure projects.  While at the conference I was impressed by some hefty projects to rid the country of invasive species, projects which employed many South Africans – including many project managers.
• The consciousness of the environmental rights is an ever-present reminder for project managers to think sustainably.  Perhaps it is no coincidence that South Africa was sponsoring this Good in Green conference!

One of our favorite cartoonists is Gary Larson, who for many years drew “The Far Side“.

And one of our favorite Far Side cartoons was one in which he depicts a flock of ducks walking on the ground in a”V” formation.  One of the ducks in the back of this walking group looks up and sees a flock of ducks flying in a v-formation.    This duck exclaims, to no-one in particular, “Saaay, look what they’re doing!”.  We couldn’t find the actual image of this cartoon, but you get the idea.  We know you do.

This “flying” flock, obviously, is progressing much more quickly and efficiently towards their goal, and is using the power of the flock more effectively – and in general they’re behaving in a way which has much, much higher benefit and is taking advantage of the inherent capacity given to them by nature.

We got that feeling today when we read this story about how China’s government is stimulating the solar industry there.

That article is one of many.  Here’s another.  That one, from Reuters, has this to say:

“Beijing’s bid to boost the solar energy sector could draw more than $10 billion in private funding for projects and put China on track to become a leading market for solar equipment in the next three years.

China’s government said in March it will offer to pay 20 yuan ($2.90) per watt of solar systems fixed to roofs and which have a capacity of more than 50 kilowatt peak (kwp).

The subsidy, which could cover half the cost of installing the system, was popular among developers, attracting applications equivalent to the building of 1 gigawatt of solar power.

One GW, or 1 billion watts, is enough electricity to power a million homes.

China is expected to raise its 2020 solar power generation target more than fivefold to at least 10 GW. With incentives, analysts expect over 2 GW in new solar capacity will be installed as early as 2011, up from just over 100 MW in 2008.”

These incentives have stimulated research and development as well as implementation of solar projects in China.  So you can see why we’re interested: more projects = more project managers.

So the question is this: is your country walking or flying?

Boston's Big Dig

It’s the project that keeps on giving.

Or, if you are a taxpayer of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts – or, for that matter anywhere in the USA (since it received Federal funding) – you could say that it’s the project that keeps on taking.

We’re talking, of course, about Boston’s “Big Dig” project.  You know – the one that was supposed to cost $1B and actually cost $15B.  The one which has had ocean water leaking into it, and has had chunks of cement falling from the ceiling?  Yes, that one.  This latest aspect was covered in a revealing front-page story from today’s Boston Globe.
First of all, let us say that this posting exemplifies (but expands rather broadly) the type of long-term, or sustainability, thinking that we’ve been promoting.  Sustainability in this case refers to the long-term positive benefit of the project’s product (the tunnels and roads which make up the Big Dig), and in this case is not only the environmental impact of the project, it’s the environmental impact ON the product of the project.  It seems, according to this article, to come down to one chemical compound.

A very common one, found on most every dinner table.  Right there, next to the pepper.

Guessed it yet?

Salt.

Chemical formula: NaCl.

It appears that the design of the lighting fixtures, 8-foot-long, 110-pounds each, and numbering about 25,000, did not take into account the corrosive effects of salt on the clips which hold up the lights.

That’s why one of them fell down recently – luckily didn’t kill anyone – and that’s why they have busily been installing plastic straps in the most affected areas to keep the lights up.

If you don’t think this is scary, here is one scary extract:

“On Feb. 16 one crew found a hot spot where all the fastening clips were corroded on nine lights, nearly 1,000 pounds of precariously balanced fixtures hanging over motorists’ heads.”

Holy salt, Batman!  That’s half a ton of Damacles Swords!

The article goes on to say that the real fix to the problem would be a full replacement at a cost of $200M.

When we read the article we thought to ourselves: why didn’t the design include LED lighting?  The cars that are driving underneath the lights are using them.  The mobile phones and televisions that the design engineers use every day – they use them, too.  LED lighting is not as weighty, uses less energy, and wouldn’t be prone to  falling – at least not as prone as these heavy fluorescent fixtures.

A quick internet search yielded several manufacturers who are already making LED-based tunnel lighting.  So this is not just fantasy.

Failing that (we’re no experts on lighting), – or rather, in addition to that, sustainability thinking should have had the engineers taking into account the entry of salt into the equation from two sources: (1) the ocean, and (2) vehicles bringing in salt and other corrosives which are used in the winter to melt snow.

The Big Dig is not even that old.  These failed clip arrangements are not decades in age, only years.  How “long term” was the thinking that went into the design of the project?  Did it make sense to skimp on the design, perhaps saving $5M, only to jeopardize the lives of drivers and end up costing $200M and countless construction delays anyway?

We hope you’ve enjoyed this detour* from a traditional triple-bottom-line view of sustainability, which here includes a safety twist.  But really it’s not that far off track.  Sustainability thinking, when embedded in design, has benefits well beyond making improvements to the financial, ecological, and social aspect of a project’s product.  It also may save lives.

*not that detours would be anything new for the Big Dig.  Even on-line map makers couldn’t keep up with all the twisty turns we had to go through as this project was underway…see this article.

The Elephant and the Swiss Army Knife

As we work with project managers to promote the idea of sustainability thinking in our profession, we encounter some excellent challenges – challenges from our project management colleagues.

Like us, these colleagues have years – often decades – of valuable experience under their belts, and come with the training and vocabulary, as well as the “upbringing” around project scope and the job of the project manager.

That’s all good.  And, we appreciate these challenges, especially when they’re posed by thoughtful and knowledgeable project managers.  These challenges force us to question our thinking.  And we have.  What’s come out of that questioning is a re-affirmation that sustainability thinking does belong in the repertoire of the PM and their projects.

Recently we’ve had an interesting (and ongoing) exchange with a “camp” of project managers who have challenged us from an angle which is a bit different from other cynics.   Some cynics have questioned whether climate change is an issue at all, or whether it’s caused by humans, and so on.  Often these folks have a lot of emotion and a strong agenda, and the ironic thing is that if they read our book and/or blog postings, they’d know that:

• The case for sustainability is only partly related to the environment.  The triple bottom line of sustainability involves not just environmental concerns but importantly includes economic and ethical/social considerations
• Our case for sustainability thinking in PM does NOT hinge on climate change, whether it exists or not, or is caused by humans, iguanas, elephants, or aliens.

No, instead of challenging us emotionally with a rant against climate change, this camp agrees strongly with the need for business managers to tackle sustainability issues head on.  This camp gets that part of the equation.

So – where’s the rub?

Here it comes – a subtle but significant difference: although they agree with the need for businesses to take on sustainability, they feel strongly that project managers have no role in this effort at all.  They view sustainability as simply another constraint. A burden.  A heavy, unnecessary burden.

While we continue to firmly believe that we have a key and central role – the connection between strategy and operations, this camp holds just as firm to the belief that these aspects of business need not – should not – must not – find their way into our projects.

In fact, they’ve gone as far as to make the analogy that the consideration of sustainability would be akin to having to carry around a large mammal on our backs.  It would be, they assert, like an elephant on our backs.  Another constraint to worry about, to distract us, to prevent us from doing our jobs, which is focused on the unique deliverable to be provided within the agreed timeline and budget.  We know.  We know.

Further, we won’t deny that there is more work to do if one is to properly consider sustainability in initiating, planning, executing, monitoring and controlling, and closing a project.

Where we differ from this camp is in describing exactly what it is we’re ‘carrying’ if we take this on.  We don’t think it’s an elephant or any sort of large mammal.  Instead, what we are taking on is something which indeed does have a little weight, but which, in fact, contains a significant value to the project and the project manager, and even more so, the very business managers that the other camp think should be uniquely charged with this responsibility.

(Here the authors would like to apologize to all elephants, and in fact, the entire pachyderm family, and indeed all large mammals, by insinuating that elephants have no value.  We indeed think they have significant value, but you have to admit that they really weren’t put on Earth to be carried around by project managers).

So what is it that we suggest for a counter-analogy?  Instead of an elephant, how do we visualize this extra weight, this additional burden?

A Swiss Army knife.  A tool that, yes, has some weight, in fact, but is something from which we can get a significant amount of value in exchange for the “cost” of carrying it along with us on our project journey.

Considering sustainability – economic, ecological, and/or ethical – may be a little bit more work, but it helps you in many ways as you’ve seen, and will continue to see on this blog.  A quick sample of the various tools on the ‘sustainability army knife’ include:

• Improved risk identification and therefore a higher-quality risk response plan (you cannot plan a response for a sustainability risk you never identified)
• Higher morale for the team
• Better recognition/understanding by the project team of the project’s product
• More connectivity with the organization’s mission/vision (leading to more of the above)
• Eased transition into operation of the project’s product
• Reduced use of resources for the project itself (e.g. applying lean techniques to the project’s execution)

Those are just a few of valuable tools that can fold out from your “sustainability thinking” army knife.

Agree or not, we hope you’ll enjoy the analogy.

And remember, a Swiss Army knife never forgets.