07 Oct 2010: Opinion
How One Small Business
Cut Its Energy Use and Costs
How significant would it be if America’s 29 million small businesses increased their energy efficiency and reduced their emissions? Judging from the example of one California entrepreneur, the impact could be far greater than you might expect.
Would enlisting millions of small companies in a national response to climate change be worth the effort? Their prominence in political rhetoric suggests that it might. Small business owners are attractive political icons — entrepreneurs personify American ideals of free enterprise, innovation and self-reliance. But their individual contributions to greenhouse gas emissions are small, and in practice, getting millions of entrepreneurs to agree about anything is like herding cats; we are a diverse, independent, and competitive group. This leaves the value of a small business response to climate change unclear.
Actual evidence is scarce. New technologies and LEED-certified buildings dominate the news, but the majority of small companies are neither clean-tech start-ups, nor likely to build new facilities. Experiments with my own company, which fits this common profile, suggest that we can reduce greenhouse-gas emissions rapidly and cost-effectively, and that some of the barriers to action are misunderstood.
I own a design firm, and my work on climate change exhibitions for the Marian Koshland Science Museum of the National Academy of Sciences
Green business plans that set impossible targets force people to look at problems in new ways.and the Birch Aquarium at Scripps Institution of Oceanography earned me the nickname “the closet climatologist” and provided an education about the potential consequences of unchecked global warming. These experiences engendered a sense of urgency about finding practical ways to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Like many Americans, I felt compelled to act and, because I am a business owner, I had the opportunity to try.
My company’s frustrating search for effective, affordable opportunities eventually led to a surprising discovery: Cost-saving opportunities to reduce carbon emissions are ever-present in the normal course of business operations.
My test bed is a small creative services company located in Southern California. Our 10 employees occupy a two-story, 2,000-square-foot, commercially-zoned residence that was built in the 1930s and upgraded during the mid-90s. Our facility has fairly good natural light and ventilation, but suffers from enormous heat gain. Owning this facility provided the flexibility to consider making long-term investments in the property, but we have not actually implemented them yet. Our experiment indicates that smaller, less-expensive steps can be extremely effective.
I began with an observation from Daniel Esty and Andrew Winston’s Green to Gold that successful sustainability programs are usually built upon extraordinarily ambitious goals. Green business plans that set impossible targets force people to look at problems in new ways. I found a suitably improbable goal in California’s landmark Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32). AB 32 requires California to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Since our company does not employ long-lived capital equipment, I reasoned that we should try to accelerate this timeline.
We joined the California Climate Action Registry in early 2008 to take advantage of its low-cost emissions verification program, and we
One employee asked if I was crazy, but our conversations helped establish a green-conscious culture.submitted our 2006 data to establish an emissions baseline. We set aggressive emissions targets: a reduction of 10 percent by 2010, 20 percent by 2013, and 80 percent by 2020, with similar goals for water use and landfill waste. One employee asked whether I was crazy, but our frequent conversations helped establish a green-conscious culture within a few months.
I traded the company’s small SUV for a Prius because it offered the highest mileage available at the time, and because the merits of biodiesel were in dispute. Next, we took our electric utility company’s advice and called them for an energy audit. In a pattern that is typical for service businesses, our air conditioning, computers, and other office equipment dominate our energy usage. The utility re-lamped our building — a $300 savings. We signed up for a program that lets the utility cycle our air conditioning during peak demand events, and we eliminated “vampire power” by turning power strips off at night. Unfortunately, the utility could not offer incentive programs for solar PV, cool roofs, weatherization, or low-E windows to businesses of our size, so we were left to rely on our own research and financial resources.
In setting a budget, an energy consultant told me that many companies invest three times their annual utility costs in efficiency upgrades. While this number is fairly arbitrary, it suggested that we might spend about $10,000 on carbon abatement. As a point of reference, a solar PV array, plus a carport structure we would need to build in order to aim solar panels southward, would have cost nine times that amount.
Unfortunately, government incentives on solar power were small in 2008, and our type of corporate structure disqualified us anyway. These barriers have since been lowered, but our experience suggests that we can benefit
By the end of 2008, we had reduced emissions by 65 percent and cut electricity costs by 40 percent.from improving energy efficiency, as a first step toward going solar. In fact, an architect recommended that we improve the passive efficiency of our building so that we might eventually invest in smaller, less expensive air conditioning and solar energy systems based on reduced demand. He recommended a highly reflective metal roof with additional insulation, which would have cost a prohibitive $40,000. Finding heat-gain data for less expensive roofing options proved to be impossible, so we were back to square one.
Then events took us by surprise: The lease on our copier expired, and we chose an energy-efficient, multi-function machine that allowed us to decommission two other laser printers, a laser fax, and a scanner. The print quality is so good that we reduced our large-format plotting by 75 percent.
Over the summer, our air conditioner broke down. We replaced it with the most energy efficient model we could afford, and took the opportunity to improve airflow through some of our ductwork. The total cost was $7,000.
The results of these simple steps have been extraordinary. By the end of 2008, we had reduced greenhouse-gas emissions by 65 percent, gasoline use by 63 percent, landfill waste by 45 percent, and water use by 18 percent. We cut costs for electricity by 40 percent, gasoline by 59 percent, and water by 20 percent. But the net savings are even more impressive: When vehicle and equipment maintenance, paper and toner, and other related costs and savings are considered, the company saves about $9,000 annually, which we can apply to further energy-efficiency upgrades.
In addition, we are experimenting with telecommuting, and we rescheduled supplier visits to coincide with commuting. We continue to learn lessons about maintaining teamwork in this process, and we have reduced employee driving by 43 percent, and reimbursed mileage costs by 29 percent.
The implications could not be clearer: There is a strong business case for slashing carbon emissions through simple, low-cost energy efficiency improvements. Energy efficiency upgrades look expensive when the payback comes entirely from energy cost savings, but we found additional savings on maintenance, supplies, and more. This finding is important because it belies the myth that reducing emissions necessarily requires investing in systems with high up-front costs and very slow payback. We are now approaching the threshold where solar PV will make sense for us, but we cut our emissions by nearly two-thirds before reaching that threshold.
Neither building ownership nor financing for expensive upgrades was a prerequisite for success in our case. But the scarcity of information about which actions work was an almost prohibitive barrier. Small business owners cannot afford to hire energy consultants, and it is unrealistic to think that many business owners will duplicate our research efforts. Even with all of our success, my company is not sure which efficiency upgrades to pursue next.
We will continue to reduce electricity demand by replacing older computer equipment that is obsolete anyway. Thereafter, we must turn to our building itself, and we will probably need help to be successful with that. Like every other small company, we would benefit from information that helps us prioritize options. Which of the following investments is likely to provide the best balance of up-front costs, fast payback, and emissions reductions: cooler roofing, window and wall shading, better natural ventilation, water-conserving landscaping, flash water heating, or solar water or PV? We simply do not know, and finding answers is beyond challenging.
Regulators have told me that they are confounded by the sheer diversity of small businesses and their circumstances, which may be why current information resources merely report anecdotal achievements. But our experiment suggests that they could do better with further analysis. Developing information that is genuinely useful to small business owners should be a top priority for government agencies.
MORE FROM YALE e360
Energy Sleuths in Pursuit
Of the Truly Green Building
READ MORE
More importantly, people create new behavioral norms when they tackle problems together. Small businesses employ half of the private-sector workforce, so engaging the nation’s small businesses can create a new culture of energy efficiency quickly, if the proverbial cats can be harnessed in this challenge.
The contributions that small businesses can make to America’s energy and climate future are being squandered through inattention. The time has come to energize the workforce that we employ and get it working on the problem. Moving quickly to save money is what small businesses do best. With better information and encouragement, small businesses can become humanity’s first responders in the climate crisis.
POSTED ON 07 Oct 2010 IN Business & Innovation Energy Forests Policy & Politics Urbanization North America North America
ABOUT THE AUTHORTom Bowman is founder and president of Bowman Design Group, a California-based company that creates exhibitions for corporations, museums, and event organizers. In 2009, the company received a Small Business of the Year award from the California Air Resources Board. He also established Bowman Global Change, which helps organizations develop sustainable strategies.
Recommend
Tweet
DIGG
Email
Print
Stumble Upon
ShareRELATED ARTICLES
Betting on Technology to
Help Turn Consumers Green
U.S. consumers tell researchers they want to buy environmentally friendly products, but so far they haven’t been doing that on a large scale. Now a host of companies and nonprofits are trying to use new technology — from smartphones to social networking — to make it easier for buyers to make the green choice.
U.S. Fossil Fuel Boom
Dims Glow of Clean Energy
A surge in gas and oil drilling in the U.S. is helping drive the economic recovery and is enhancing energy security. But as the situation in Ohio shows, cheaper energy prices and the focus on fossil fuels has been bad news for the renewable energy industry.
Building Retrofits: Tapping
The Energy-Saving Potential
No more cost-effective way to make major cuts in energy use and greenhouse gas emissions exists than retrofitting buildings. Now, from New York to Mumbai to Melbourne, a push is on to overhaul older buildings to make them more energy efficient.
The Cerrado: Brazil’s Other
Biodiverse Region Loses Ground
While Brazil touts its efforts to slow destruction of the Amazon, another biodiverse region of the country is being cleared for large-scale farming. But unlike the heralded rainforest it borders, the loss of the cerrado and its rich tropical savanna so far has failed to attract much notice.
Agribusiness Boom Threatens
Key African Wildlife Migration
The Ethiopian region of Gambella is home to Africa’s second-largest mammal migration, with more than a million endangered antelope and other animals moving through its grasslands. But the government has now leased vast tracts to foreign agribusinesses who are planning huge farms on land designated a national park.
MORE IN Opinion
Besieged by Climate Deniers,
A Scientist Decides to Fight Back
Climate scientist Michael Mann, who has faced years of attacks from climate-change skeptics, explains why he believes bad-faith assaults on science have no place in a functioning democracy and why the truth about global warming will inevitably gain wide acceptance.
The Folly of Big Agriculture:
Why Nature Always Wins
Large-scale industrial agriculture depends on engineering the land to ensure the absence of natural diversity. But as the recent emergence of herbicide-tolerant weeds on U.S. farms has shown, nature ultimately finds a way to subvert uniformity and assert itself.
Shunning Nuclear Power
Will Lead to a Warmer World
A physicist argues that if we allow our overblown and often irrational fears of nuclear energy to block the building of a significant number of new nuclear plants, we will be choosing a far more perilous option: the intensified burning of planet-warming fossil fuels.
Innovation is Not Enough:
Why Polluters Must Pay
Innovative energy technologies are certainly essential if the world is to curb carbon emissions. But in response to a recent e360 article by the co-founders of the Breakthrough Institute, an economist argues we must also cap emissions or put a price on carbon in order to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.
Beyond Cap and Trade,
A New Path to Clean Energy
Putting a price and a binding cap on carbon is not the panacea that many thought it to be. The real road to cutting U.S. emissions, two iconoclastic environmentalists argue, is for the government to help fund the development of cleaner alternatives that are better and cheaper than natural gas.
On the Road Back to Rio,
Green Direction Has Been Lost
Twenty years ago, an historic environmental summit in Rio de Janeiro produced groundbreaking treaties and high hopes that pressing issues would be addressed. But as organizers prepare for the Rio+20 conference in June, there is little on the agenda to suggest any substantive action will be taken.
As Roads Spread in Rainforests,
The Environmental Toll Grows
From Brazil to Borneo, new roads are being built into tropical forests at a dizzying pace, putting previously intact wilderness at risk. If we hope to preserve rainforests, a leading researcher says, new strategies must be adopted to limit the number of roads and reduce their impacts.
Solar Power Off the Grid:
Energy Access for World’s Poor
More than a billion people worldwide lack access to electricity. The best way to bring it to them — while reducing greenhouse gas emissions — is to launch a global initiative to provide solar panels and other forms of distributed renewable power to poor villages and neighborhoods.
In Australia’s New Carbon Tax,
A Host of Missed Opportunities
The Australian government will begin imposing a tax on carbon emissions in mid-2012. But large giveaways to industry mean Australia’s scheme doesn’t go nearly far enough in reducing the nation’s CO2 emissions or providing economic stimulus.
Making the Case for the
Value of Environmental Rules
Some U.S. politicians have been attacking environmental regulations, arguing that they hurt the economy and that the costs outweigh the benefits. But four decades of data refute that claim and show we need not choose between a clean environment and economic growth.
RELATED e360 DIGEST ITEMS
18 May 2012: Apple’s Main Data Center
Will Use Only Green Power by 2013
16 May 2012: State Oversight Helps Reduce
Effects of Fracking, Study Says
15 May 2012: U.S. Companies Use Steel Linked
To Amazon Destruction, Greenpeace Finds
14 May 2012: Americans Willing to Pay
Slightly More For Clean Energy, Study Says
11 May 2012: Eel Breeding Innovation
Sought to Conserve Wild Populations
10 May 2012: Lack of Profitability Drives
U.S. Company Out of Biofuels Business
08 May 2012: Standard EV Charging System
Adopted by U.S., German Automakers
07 May 2012: Economic Boom Leaves Myanmar
Vulnerable to Environmental Abuses
04 May 2012: Japan Goes Nuclear-Free
For the First Time in Four Decades
03 May 2012: Earth Observation Satellites
Threatened by Budget Shortfalls in U.S.
Yale Environment 360 is
a publication of the
Yale School of Forestry
& Environmental Studies.
SEARCH e360
CONNECT
Twitter: YaleE360e360 on Facebook
Donate to e360
View mobile site
Bookmark
Share e360
Email newsletter
Subscribe to our feed:
ABOUT
About e360Contact
Submission Guidelines
Reprints
e360 VIDEO
The Warriors of Qiugang, a Yale Environment 360 video that chronicles the story of a Chinese village’s fight against a polluting chemical plant, was nominated for a 2011 Academy Award for Best Documentary (Short Subject). Watch the video.
DEPARTMENTS
OpinionReports
Analysis
Interviews
e360 Digest
Video Reports
TOPICS
BiodiversityBusiness & Innovation
Climate
Energy
Forests
Oceans
Policy & Politics
Pollution & Health
Science & Technology
Sustainability
Urbanization
Water
REGIONS
Antarctica and the ArcticAfrica
Asia
Australia
Central & South America
Europe
Middle East
North America
e360 VIDEO REPORT
As temperatures rise and water supplies dry up, tribes in East Africa increasingly are coming into conflict. A Yale Environment 360 video reports on a phenomenon that could become more common: how worsening drought will pit groups — and nations — against one another. Watch the video.
e360 MOBILE
from Yale
Environment 360 is now available for mobile devices at e360.yale.edu/mobile.
Top Image: aerial view of Iceland. © Google & TerraMetrics.
e360 VIDEO REPORT
Leveling Appalachia: The Legacy of Mountaintop Removal Mining, an e360 video examining the environmental and human impacts of this mining practice, won the award for best video in the 2010 National Magazine Awards for Digital Media. Watch the video.
OF INTEREST
COMMENTS
Thank you for putting this post together, Tom. Your story is an inspiration to small businesses across America and your call for actively engaging the small business community in energy efficiency and carbon reduction initiatives is dead on.
I work for The Council of Smaller Enterprises (COSE) in Cleveland; we are a small business support organization with more than 16,000 members. I am focused on energy and sustainability issues for our members, and you point out exactly the challenges that we face on a daily basis in trying to promote these issues. The diversity of our membership makes focusing on any one issue extremely difficult. Encouraging members to undergo a comprehensive lighting retrofit may be applicable for one business, but not necessarily for another. Furthermore, many small businesses are held back by their concern that the barriers to energy efficiency (knowledge, cost, time, research, etc.) will be too great to bear much fruit through the effort. However, as your case study points out, small steps, conservation measures, and responding to circumstances in a proactive way can reap considerable dividends.
This type of widespread engagement to grab the low-hanging fruit on energy efficiency is exactly what we are trying to encourage here. We are releasing an Energy Efficiency Resource Guide later this month that we hope will be a piece that small business owners throughout the country can use to find easy steps to cut use and costs. We are also holding an Energy Efficiency Challenge to highlight and reward our members who have taken on this effort.
Ultimately, as you point out, small businesses make up the bulk of the workforce in this country. There are more than 29 million of them, and they account for more than 99% of employer firms. Until we all get on the same page and realize that we need to bring them into the fray and actively tackle their hurdles to energy efficiency, we cannot expect to engrain sustainability into the mindset of business culture, nor is it likely we can reach emission reduction goals.
Cutting emissions 17% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 may seem like a daunting task, but it's one the science says we need to meet. And it's something we can't hope to achieve without small businesses taking part.
- Tim Kovach
Product Coordinator, Energy at COSE
www.cose.org/blog
www.twitter.com/COSEenergy
The California Jobs Initiative (CJI) is an oil corporation farce and fraud. There is no connection, whatsoever, between greenhouse gas emission reduction and the jobs. This notion is an to the intelligence people of California. In fact, there is job growth in the clean, renewable enegy industry. Chevron employs 65,000 worldwide and CJI is not going to change this. The only jobs created by the oil industry are clean-up jobs after oil spills and deep water, blow-outs and pump-handler jobs. CJI will make fantastic profits for the oil industry, increase air pollution, especially in communities around their refineries and there will not be lower gas prices. Koch Industries, Valero and Tesoro are super Enrons. Since when did the oil companies start to show any concern for the unemployed and their families and for small businesses?
I am a member of a local nonprofit that is focusing on addressing the impacts of climate change and preparing for a future with less abundant fossil fuels. Energy efficiency is one the main presentations that we give around the community.
We have found that each person, residence, business, etc. has to go a journey similar to what you've described. We've also found that the answer is different for each person.
I noted that you mentioned you have high air conditioning usage. Have you looked into putting up solar screens on your windows? They can block 90% of the sunlight before it gets to your windows. It drastically cuts down on the AC usage.
We have also developed a worksheet that quantifies how much money can be saved by taking various energy/water conservation measures (primarily aimed at residences). If you are interested, I am happy to share the work sheet and audit checklist with you.
Thanks for a great article.
Inspiring article. The way I'm thinking now, there could be no more importanty initiative. I base my thinking on the following:
"Green business plans that set impossible targets force people to look at problems in new ways."
So here's my impossible initiative: As with Kennedy's call to put a man on the moon in 10 years, issue a call for America to become the nation with the smallest carbon footprint by the year 2020.
Nice article. There's a lot more information and successful strategies for the built environment available via real estate industry groups, like IREM and BOMA. Contact a professional in your area. Cheers!!
Mr. Bowman, this is a great article. Besides being well-written -- I teach university writing and am a writer myself -- you provide many specific details that any reader can take away to help readers think about what might work for them. Sure, you're business has many factors that set it apart from another small business, but with the details you provide, a reader has some sort of sample framework as a rough guide.
Further, this article is inspiring. I don't own a small business nor work in one (I'm retired), but if I did and if I hadn't thought about these matters, I would feel inspired to sit down and put on my thinking cap. Maybe some other business owners out there who read your piece will decide to analyze their own situations -- and to act. Your mention of your company's downright extraordinary savings surely will cause readers to sit up and take notice.
I live alone in a smallish apartment measuring about 530 square feet, in central Bangkok. While the climate is tropical, it doesn't get *that* hot, even during the hot season (typically February through May), rarely going over 100 degrees. About a year ago, one of my two air-conditioners ran out of gas and the other one's motor went out almost simultaneously. I had already taken a few small steps to reduce my energy and water consumption, and decided to see how I might fare depending on just my two ceiling fans and two floor fans (and natural breezes). I've never looked back, especially in light of the fact that my electricity bill has dropped by about 2/3rd's, as my water bill had already done. I also am conscientious about turning off lights, etc. when I don't need them.
While what you, if anything, you've done at home is beyond the scope of this article, Mr. Bowman, I was left supposing that you likely took a look at options there as well. Imagine the impact if most of your fellow business owners not only took steps to reduce their energy and water consumption in their businesses but in their homes as well.
One of your experiences that really surprised me was having difficulty in finding information. Maybe that will improve as more people take an active interest in discovering such information.
Thanks for a very good article.
An well written article that illuminates how pragmatism and basic steps often offer the best solutions, while grandiose rhetoric and fanaticism can detract from large benefits achieved simply.
Most impressive is how you achieved your business goals without excessive capital investment unrelated to your business.
Over the years, without excessive regulatory oversight or penalties, the U.S. has continued to achieve improved efficiencies in energy use of 2% or more per year. This has been achieved, for the most part, by free market drivers such as customer demand and cost reductions.
POST A COMMENT
Comments are moderated and will be reviewed before they are posted to ensure they are on topic, relevant, and not abusive. They may be edited for length and clarity. By filling out this form, you give Yale Environment 360 permission to publish this comment.