On EarthPM’s Rainbow of Green (see our book), this one may be off the scale, on the Green By Definition side.

Here is the first line from today’s Boston Globe story on the subject:

“A Canton landfill closed for more than two decades will soon be transformed into New England’s largest solar electric development, officials are expected to announce today.”

You can read the whole story here.

For those who are not familiar with our book, we have a chapter dedicated to a scale – or spectrum – or rainbow, of project types that range from “Green By Definition”, to “Green in General”.  Those which are “Green in General” are your everyday projects that don’t have that obvious connection to the envrironment or sustainability.  For example, creating a new release of payroll software.  Not intuitively “green”.  Of course, our assertion is that even in such a project there are things one can do to improve sustainability.  But that’s a story for another post.  In fact, our very next post.  So stay tuned, you Writers of Payroll Software, you Warriors of IT Development, your turn awaits.

This post is about the other side of the scale – Green By Definition.

Here we have a landfill in Canton, Massachusetts which will be the site of 24,000 solar panels installed across 15 acres — think 11 football fields — and this project, when completed, will be able to power more than 750 homes.  It will be three times larger than any other solar facility not just in Massachusetts, but in the six-state region that is New England.

“The land was just going to sit there forever,’’ said local selectman John J. Connolly. “This is a no-brainer.’’

So here we have a landfill truly fulfilling a higher calling.  The land underneath, harboring waste, the surface above generating 5.6 megawatts of power.

What does our Green Rainbow say about this?

The project manager who takes on this project will not have to spend a lot of time drawing attention to greenality.  Green thinking and focus on the environment is already in the mindset of the team.  This doesn’t solve all of his or her problems but it makes that aspect of their job easier.  Here’s an article from the local press showing the kind of attention the project gets even amongst townspeople.

We hope this project takes off.  It’s a great way for a landfill to fulfill its promise, and it’s yet another opportunity for a project team to show its stuff!

We came across an interesting series of postings, tweets, and links, totally by serendipity, but it led to some good questions and reinforced our belief in the word greenality.

Below, in italics, you will see a United States BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics) definition of “green jobs”.  Below this post, you will find the detailed description.  But start with the basic one:

Green jobs are either:

• A. Jobs in businesses that produce goods or provide services that benefit the environment or conserve natural resources.
• B. Jobs in which workers’ duties involve making their establishment’s production processes more environmentally friendly or use fewer natural resources.

There were two immediate discoveries when we did some detective work here.

First, when we followed up and went to the actual US Government sites, we noticed that the supporting text constantly  and repeatedly stumbled looking for a word to describe greenality.  They used “greenness” in most of those cases.  Greenness?  Really?  Our word – greenality -fits the bill.  We will send it along to the author of the document and continue to push for its use.  Remember, greenality means: the degree to which an organization has environmental (green) factors that affect its projects during the entire project life cycle and beyond”.

Second, the two-part definition the BLS uses mimics what we say about the spectrum of green in projects.  There are some projects – such as the creation of a new biofuel facility – in which the project’s outcome is, by definition, green in its purpose.  There are some, however, like a new version of game software, for which the green element is not so obvious.  Like us, the BLS seems to be asserting that “making their establishment’s production processes” (or in our view, their projects) – :more environmentally friendly or use fewer natural resources”.

This BLS definition is new, but it is reassuring to see that it reflects our thoughts and what we continue to convey to PMs and their organizations via this site and our book.

Here are some references from which we drew this information.

http://www.triplepundit.com/2010/10/government-looks-green-jobs/

http://www.thegreenjobbank.com/stories/us-bureau-of-labor-statistics-publishes-definition-of-green-jobs

http://www.bls.gov/green/

What do you think?  Never mind the US Government for a moment, how would you define a green job?  How would you define a green PM?  We’ve very interested in hearing from you on this topic.

As promised above, here is the detailed definition from the BLS:

• A. Jobs in businesses that produce goods and provide services that benefit the environment or conserve natural resources. These goods and services are sold to customers, and include research and development, installation, and maintenance services. This definition will be used in the BLS survey of establishments in industries that produce green goods and services. Green goods and services fall into one or more of five groups:
  1. 1. Energy from renewable sources. Electricity, heat, or fuel generated from renewable sources. These energy sources include wind, biomass, geothermal, solar, ocean, hydropower, landfill gas, and municipal solid waste.
  2. 2. Energy efficiency. Products and services that improve energy efficiency. Included in this group are energy-efficient equipment, appliances, buildings, and vehicles, as well as products and services that improve the energy efficiency of buildings and the efficiency of energy storage and distribution, such as Smart Grid technologies.
  3. 3. Pollution reduction and removal, greenhouse gas reduction, and recycling and reuse. These are products and services that:
     • Reduce or eliminate the creation or release of pollutants or toxic compounds, or remove pollutants or hazardous waste from the environment.
     • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions through methods other than renewable energy generation and energy efficiency, such as electricity generated from nuclear sources.
     • Reduce or eliminate the creation of waste materials; collect, reuse, remanufacture, recycle, or compost waste materials or wastewater.
  4. 4. Natural resources conservation. Products and services that conserve natural resources. Included in this group are products and services related to organic agriculture and sustainable forestry; land management; soil, water, or wildlife conservation; and stormwater management.
  5. 5. Environmental compliance, education and training, and public awareness. These are products and services that:
     • Enforce environmental regulations.
     • Provide education and training related to green technologies and practices.
     • Increase public awareness of environmental issues.
• B. Jobs in which workers’ duties involve making their establishment’s production processes more environmentally friendly or use fewer natural resources. These workers research, develop, maintain, or use technologies and practices to lessen the environmental impact of their establishment, or train the establishment’s workers or contractors in these technologies and practices. This definition will be used in the BLS survey of establishments across all industries to identify jobs related to green technologies and practices used within the establishment. These technologies and practices fall into one or more of four groups:
  1. 1. Energy from renewable sources. Generating electricity, heat, or fuel from renewable sources primarily for use within the establishment. These energy sources include wind, biomass, geothermal, solar, ocean, hydropower, landfill gas, and municipal solid waste.
  2. 2. Energy efficiency. Using technologies and practices to improve energy efficiency within the establishment. Included in this group is cogeneration (combined heat and power).
  3. 3. Pollution reduction and removal, greenhouse gas reduction, and recycling and reuse. Using technologies and practices within the establishment to:
     • Reduce or eliminate the creation or release of pollutants or toxic compounds, or remove pollutants or hazardous waste from the environment.
     • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions through methods other than renewable energy generation and energy efficiency.
     • Reduce or eliminate the creation of waste materials; collect, reuse, remanufacture, recycle, or compost waste materials or wastewater.
  4. 4. Natural resources conservation. Using technologies and practices within the establishment to conserve natural resources. Included in this group are technologies and practices related to organic agriculture and sustainable forestry; land management; soil, water, or wildlife conservation; and stormwater management.

In our book, we use the example of an earthworm as almost perfect sustainability.  GIGO, only in the earthworms case, the garbage that goes in as it eats its way through the earth, comes out the other end as better “earth” than what went in.  That is sort of the way GPGT works.  A garbage truck picks up at curbside.  After it makes its rounds, the truck heads to the landfill where the garbage is dumped and covered.  The garbage decomposes and forms, among other byproducts, methane.  The methane is tapped off, processed and used to fuel the garbage trucks.  Sounds simple, doesn’t it?  When you put it that way, it is, however, there were lots of complex projects undertaken to make it happen.

There’s plenty of stuff to decompose in a landfill, from food scraps to lawn trimmings.  It has been happening for years and as natural gas and propane become more and more expensive, a project to recover methane from landfills became more attractive.  From the altruistic point of view, not allowing methane to escape into the air, or being burned off to contribute to green house gases improves air quality.  But face it, the incentives from the government, and the savings from not having to buy fuel on the open market are pretty good project drivers.

According to  Jennifer Andrews, Director of Communications for Waste Management Inc, there are more than 300 trash trucks (the industry likes the name trash truck rather than garbage truck) fueled by garbage, or rather the methane produced by “trash”.   Waste Management (WM) Inc, the country’s largest provider of waste management services, along with Linde North America, a world leading gases and engineering company, built a liquefied natural gas (LNG) landfill gas designed to purify and liquefy the landfill gas at WM’s Altamont Landfill near Livermore, California.  It has a capacity to produce up to 13,000 gallons/day of natural gas to fuel the WM’s trash collection vehicles.

This project is also part of the company’s environmental sustainability initiative to double its waste-based energy production from the equivalent of 1 million homes to 2 million homes by 2020. WM is also directing capital spending of up to $500 million per annum over a 10-year period to increase the fuel efficiency of its fleet by 15 percent and reduce fleet emissions by 15 percent by 2020 as well as investments in new technologies to enhance their business according to their website www.wm.com.

WM and others are continuing to explore landfill gases as alternate fuel sources.  We’ll keep you informed of other projects in the future.  WM is certainly going to make our next “At the Top of Their Game” list for companies who are doing their sustainable best.

“Green Projects” are being implemented at breakneck speed.  It is hard to keep up with the sheer volume.  That’s exciting news for project managers embracing the “green wave”.  One particular project caught our attention, not only because it garnered national attention, Parade Magazine, April 18, 2010, but because it is local to Earthpm and my wife is an alum.  The University of New Hampshire (UNH), and Waste Management (WM), are powering the college with garbage.  Yes, garbage!  According to the recent article, Waste Management, the operators of a landfill a dozen or so miles from the campus of 15,000 students, was dealing with surplus gas containing 50% methane.  Most landfill operators are forced to burn the gas because it is a pollutant, but can be used as fuel.  WM realized that UNH could use methane, but how to get it there was a problem.  $49 million dollars and 12.7 miles of pipeline later, UNH has its methane.

We wondered how UNH will pay for the project.  The answer is from an article by the EcoLine Partnership.  UNH will sell the renewable energy certificates (RECs) generated by using landfill gas to help finance the overall cost of the project and to invest in additional energy efficiency projects on campus. In addition, UNH will sell power in excess of campus needs back to the electric grid. “By selling the RECs from EcoLine™, UNH will further fund its aggressive plan toward climate neutrality,” says Tom Kelly, UNH chief sustainability officer and director of the office of sustainability. “With this climate action plan, called WildCAP, UNH has committed to lowering its emissions by 50 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2080.”

Of course, WM cannot simply tap the landfill and send it down the pipeline.  The naturally occurring by-product of landfill decomposition is collected via a state-of-the-art collection system consisting of more than 300 extraction wells and miles of collection pipes.  The gas is purified and compressed at a new UNH processing plant at the Waste Management’s Turnkey Recycling and Environmental Enterprise (TREE) in Rochester, N.H.  It then travels through a 12.7-mile-pipeline from the landfill to UNH’s cogeneration plant, where it will replace commercial natural gas as the primary fuel source.

Just in these few paragraphs alone, there were three major projects identified; collection of the methane, the pipeline, power generation conversion at UNH.  While UNH is the first in the nation to do this, we are sure that more and more universities (and business/municipal complexes) will follow, especially those within close proximity to a landfill.  And these days, who isn’t!

From The Weekly Sentinel, I found seventh and eighth graders from the Noble Middle School in North Berwick, Maine, are recycling school cafeteria wastes.  As a result of a year-long project, the school’s “Green Team” is both reducing the amount of waste that goes to area landfills (saving money), and providing rich earth for their vegetable garden.  The vegetables will find their way into the school cafeteria next fall, completing a cycle of sustainability.  The volunteer project members collect uneaten vegetables for their compost tumblers.   The tumblers are turned 5 times a day by the same group of volunteers.  One risk the team had to deal with was that they soon ran out of tumbler space.  The contingency was to take it to the high school’s “earth tub” composter.

This is not the only project the team is working on.  Another one is to collect aluminum cans and plastic bottles for recycling.  To date, in 18 months, the team has collected 11,000 cans and 12,000 plastic bottles.  They also have an awareness campaign for those pesky non-recyclable milk cartons.  They collected them and put them on display to show how many are used.

We, at EarthPm are positive that these efforts are going on across the country and across the world.  Let us know what kinds of projects your area is undertaking to help the environment and to save money.  Who knows, perhaps one or more of those project leaders may qualify for the Shamrock 7™.  Watch this site for the selection criteria coming in July 2010.

The older readers of our pages will (or may) remember The Unknown Comic, an entertainer whose “schtick” was performed completely behind a paper bag.  A fully-compostable paper bag.

In terms of makeup, this was one green comic.  You may not have remembered or liked him, but from his perspective at least, he was at the top of his game.

Well, in our new book one of the companies we consider “at the top of their game” – Sun Chips®, is calling forward the spirit of the Unknown Comic, or at least his fully-compostable bag.   On Earth Day, April 22, 2010, Frito-Lay’s Sun Chips will be  introducing a 100% compostable bag for their chips.  According to their website, the bag is designed to fully disintegrate in about 14 weeks in a “hot, active compost bin or pile.”  It is another example of a  creative project designed to continue on a path of sustainability.

And what do you think they called the effort to introduce that bag?

A project.

And now it’s in the bag.  No joke.

Most of us will be familiar with the line from Mary Poppins that begins the same way as this posting.   And if not, there are some Project Management lessons available from the very simple message from Mary.  You can get THAT spoonful of sugar right here.

But we’re not talking sugar.  And it’s not a lesson about how you can incentivize your project team with sweets.  That may come later…but this posting is about an aspect of Green PM not often covered: toxicity.   In our upcoming book, we’ll be dealing with the aspect of toxicity as we cover the life cycle effects of certain processes and the creation of  hypoxia in the norther Gulf of Mexico.  In this article we talk about a project to develop new materials specially engineered to “catch” and absorb mercury.

As featured in the December issue of Popular Science magazine, a product from Steward Advanced Materials is capable of cleaning mercury from a contaminated area 100 times better than any other method and it does so at half the cost.

Imagine this as you look at the teaspoon photo in this posting.  The particles in this powder are engineered with such an intricate spongelike pattern of holes that a single teaspoon has the same surface area as a football field.  A football field!

The silica-based powder is further engineered with sulfur atoms so that when a mercury-tainted liquid is encountered by the powder (or the other way around), the mercury bonds with the sulfur to form a stable powder that is safe for landfills.  Normally, mercury has to go through an expensive separate step to be neutralized.

This product, called SAMMS®, has successfully cleaned wastewater at coal plants, an offshore oil rig, and a chemical manufacturer.  The product holds promise for other materials, including the possibility of cleaning up radioactive wastes by swapping out the sulfur with other atoms to do that type of work.

Just another example of how a project and a project’s product which certainly is very green (okay…physically, it’s white) does not have to be an electric car, a wind farm, or a recycling facility.

This post is about coffee.

And, it’s about coffeemakers.

And, it’s about the single-serve coffeemakers and the little non-recyclable pods or cups that go inside them and then are discarded after seconds of use.

In an article by Scott Kirsner in today’s Boston Globe, the subject of the Keurig coffeemaker and their “K-Cups” is discussed.  Green Mountain Coffee owns Keurig (they bought it in 2005 – read about that here).  The article discussed the quandary Green Mountain finds itself in as a ‘responsible’ company with a conscience.  In fact they do work hard on fair trade for the coffee itself.

But the K-cups are another story.  They are made from non-recyclable materials.  And although the cups themselves are small, their numbers are huge.  Last year alone, over 1.6 billion (yes, billion!) cups were used.  My calculations say that this is enough K-cups to circle the earth one and a quarter times. And they all go into landfills after their seconds of use and stay there for hundreds or thousands of years.  And that’s just Keurig.  There is also Tassimo, Senseo, and others.  Further, the forecast for K-cup sales are 3 billion in 2010 and 5 billion in 2011.  So now we are talking about a chain of K-cups from 2009, 2010 and 2011 made up of 9 or 10 billion units and circling the earth eight times!

Here’s Keurig’s environmental statement:

Keurig’s Environmental Statement:

Sharing Our Commitment for a Better Planet

All of us at Keurig are citizens first and employees second! We are committed as a company to responsible business practices that sustain our environment for all.

In fact, our parent company Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. (GMCR) is a leader in developing Fair Trade/Organic coffee blends that are great for coffee lovers, coffee growers, and our planet. Also GMCR is repeatedly cited for best practices in business ethics.

As such, we’d like to share what we are doing at Keurig and what we are doing in cooperation with GMCR to build a better world for both gourmet coffee lovers…and lovers of best practices in corporate responsibility.

Sustainable Packaging

K-Cup^® Portion Pack Packaging is an area of major environmental concern for all consumer product companies. As the single-cup coffee market and our Keurig brewing systems grow in popularity, we understand that the impact of the K-Cup^® Portion Pack waste stream is one of our most significant environmental challenges. The K-Cup package is made up of three main elements — the cup itself, a filter and an aluminum foil top. The polyethylene coating of the foil – as well as the process of heat-sealing the various elements – makes recycling difficult.

However, this packaging approach prevents oxygen, light and moisture from degrading the coffee. Without the barrier the packaging materials provide, we could not maintain the quality and freshness of the coffee, which means that all the resources and effort put into growing and roasting great coffee would be wasted. Finding a more environmentally-friendly approach to this packaging challenge is a big priority for us. We are working on a few different fronts to improve the environmental characteristics of the K-Cup^® system, as well as to mitigate its impact.

Here’s what we are doing

• We are actively researching alternatives to the the K-Cup^® Portion Pack’s petroleum –based materials
• We are conducting a Life Cycle Analysis to help us understand the overall environmental impact of the K-Cup^® Portion Pack as compared to the use of a typical drip- brewer.There are environmental considerations at every step on the road from “tree to cup”. By studying the K-Cup over its entire life cycle, we can more clearly understand how and where we can reduce its footprint.
• We are working to identify the right definition of “environmentally friendly” for all our packaging, including the K-Cup Portion Pack. For example it could mean carbon-neutral, made with renewable materials, recyclable, biodegradable, compostable, petroleum-free, all of the above, or something entirely different. We are researching what is possible today and tomorrow, taking into account the current state of packaging technology, consumer preferences, community infrastructure, performance requirements, and the demands of the marketplace.
• We also continue to offer the My K-Cup, a reusable filter cartridge assembly that can be refilled by the consumer, is easily cleaned, and is compatible with all Keurig home brewers sold today.

For project managers, there are some interesting things to consider (perhaps over a cup of coffee)…

-Note the reference to the Life Cycle Analysis.  This is something we’ll be discussing in detail in our upcoming book. Project Managers can gain from this type of analysis of the project and the product of the project.

-Note the possible number of projects that this has already triggered:

—The Life Cycle Analysis itself

—The development of a recyclable K-cup

—The introduction and advertising and deployment of the “My K-Cup”

This is another good example of how green practices make opportunities for projects and therefore opportunities for PMs to contribute to environmental efforts in a way that pays off not only for the environment but for the PM.

We’ll update you here if we get any update from Green Mountain or Keurig.