INTEGRATIVE DESIGN & SUSTAINABLE INDUSTRY

This article looks into integrative design and how it can be used to make industry more sustainable.

small one

The last 3 weeks we have looked into integrative design as the leading idea within energy efficiency and how it applies to buildings and mobility. You can find links to all of these articles below.

THE MOST IMPORTANT IDEA IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY

INTEGRATIVE DESIGN & SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS

INTEGRATIVE DESIGN & SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY

This week looks into how integrative design can be applied to industry. It is based on the Amory Lovins 2018 paper How big is the energy efficiency resource?

If anyone was in any doubt as to how important it is to make industry more sustainable, Amory’s opening statement would leave you in no doubt:

“Upwards of half, perhaps three-fifths, of the world’s electricity runs motors, chiefly in industry.”

Amory also makes it clear that standard off the shelf sustainable solutions offer far less potential than integrative design can offer:

“The two standard improvements—more-efficient motors and adjustable-speed drives—save 2× less electricity at 5× higher unit cost than a whole-drivesystem retrofit, because 28 of its 35 improvements are free byproducts of the first seven.”

Amory explains that:

Even bigger improvements are available in the most common systems that motors drive, and should be done first to make their motor systems smaller, hence cheaper.

Based upon the fact that half the world’s drivepower runs pumps and fans, Amory points towards evidence which shows the following:

Making their pipes and ducts fat, short, and straight rather than thin, long, and crooked can save 8090+ % of their friction, and typically pay back in less than a year in retrofits and less than zero in newbuilds.

Amory also points towards eye watering inefficiencies in the power sector:

Compounding losses—in power plant, wires, inverter, motor, pump, piping—lose 90% of the power plant’s fuel energy. But reversing those compounding losses into compounding savings, from downstream to upstream, enables one unit of friction or flow saved in the pipe to leverage 10 units of saved fuel, cost, and emissions at the power plant. Thus full global optimization of pipe and duct systems could in principle save, with enticing profits, enough pump and fan energy to displace roughly a fifth of the world’s electricity or half its coal-fired electricity. Probably no official climate assessment includes this major opportunity.”

It should be clear that there is a lot more work to do to communicate the benefits of integrative design so that these opportunities can be seized upon.

Amory points to the similarities between integrative design when applied to vehicles and industry:

Applying integrative design across sectors reveals common themes. The 10× downstream-to-upstream amplification of energy saved in pipe/pump systems is analogous to the 57× amplification of reduced tractive load back to fuel savings in autos.

What you need to know

This article looked into integrative design and how it can be used to make industry more sustainable.

One thing that this entire series on integrative design should have made clear, is that there is an enormous well of untapped potential energy efficiency savings. They are left untapped, because people focus on parts of the system, but not how the system as a whole functions. Integrative design can address this.

We looked at how massive amounts of the world’s electricity is used to power motors.

We also looked at how merely optimising pipework to reduce friction can make a significant difference in saving electricity, which has cascading benefits both upstream and downstream.

Overall, integrative design could be the missing link that is needed to make industry more sustainable. But it is held back by being a design method and not a technology in itself.

Thank you for reading,

By Barnaby Nash

Please share your thoughts in the comments section below, or reach out to me on social media. What do you think needs to be done to make industry more sustainable?

Let’s stay connected

I can be reached on LinkedIn and on Twitter @FollowBarnaby

 

INTEGRATIVE DESIGN & SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY

This article looks into integrative design and sustainable mobility.

download.jpg

The last 2 weeks we have looked into integrative design as the leading idea within energy efficiency and how it applies to buildings. You can find links to both of these articles below.

THE MOST IMPORTANT IDEA IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY

INTEGRATIVE DESIGN & SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS

This week looks into how the idea behind integrative design can be applied to sustainable mobility. It is based on the Amory Lovins 2018 paper How big is the energy efficiency resource?

The paper’s section on mobility opens by citing evidence from Loveday that highlighted the success of BMW’s 4×-efficiency i3 electric car (pictured above). This vehicle used integrative design and pays for the carbon fibre in its passenger cell by needing fewer. This made the lightweighting free and recharging faster.

Amory emphasises that a smaller powertrain is most valuable in electric vehicles, at least until batteries or fuel cells become much cheaper.

Amory also emphasises the need to persevere with integrative design, even if initial experiments are unsuccessful. As with buildings, small savings can cost more than big savings, whose marginal cost at first rises, but can decline again as whole-vehicle synergies emerge at very high savings. The actual potential is considerably larger and cheaper with integrative design.

Amory also points towards evidence that shows that since 2000, integrative design has more than doubled potential auto efficiency, which you can see in the figure below.

figure

Amory also points towards some of his own writing that shows that tripled to quintupled aeroplane efficiency also looks feasible and worthwhile based on authoritative virtual designs by Boeing, NASA, and MIT—even more with liquid hydrogen or electric propulsion. With savings on the order of half or more have been designed in a variety of ships. It looks like there is no type of vehicle that integrative design cannot make more sustainable.

Amory highlights further evidence that shows that shared, connected mobility systems enabled by wireless infomatics offer further design integration for people and freight. Energy efficiency savings from vehicles can also be increased further with improved urban form and density.

What you need to know

This article looked into integrative design and sustainable mobility.

It was based on the Amory Lovins 2018 paper How big is the energy efficiency resource?

We looked into how leightweighting can make electric cars cheaper and more energy efficient.

We also looked into how it is important to pursue integrative design and design the vehicle as one system and not through a series of ad hock energy efficiency initiatives.

Thank you for reading,

By Barnaby Nash

Please share your thoughts in the comments section below, or reach out to me on social media. What do you think needs to be done to make mobility more sustainable?

Let’s stay connected

I can be reached on LinkedIn and on Twitter @FollowBarnaby

INTEGRATIVE DESIGN & SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS

This article looks into integrative design and sustainable buildings.

empire 3

Last week’s article which you can access via the link below explored the most important idea in energy efficiency. Which we identified to be integrative design.

THE MOST IMPORTANT IDEA IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY

This week looks into how the idea behind integrative design can be applied to buildings. It is based on the Amory Lovins 2018 paper How big is the energy efficiency resource?

One of the first examples he gives, is the well-known 2010 retrofit of the Empire State Building. The integratively designed whole-building retrofit cut site energy use 38%, from 277 kWh m−2 yr−1 (slightly below the US office median of 293) to 173 kWh m−2 yr−1.

On this project, the majority of the efficiency gains were paid for by $17.4 million capital savings from making the cooling systems one-third smaller to match the reduced cooling load, rather than replacing them with larger new ones (plus bigger electrical risers).

Amory Lovins points towards the impressively efficient Rocky Mountain Institute Innovation Center in Basalt, Colorado that records an efficiency rating of 51 kWh m−2 yr−1 in a much colder climate. It manages to do this with no-boilers, no-chillers and provides more energy to the grid than it uses. net-positive.

Amory Lovins also points towards evidence from the IPCC which suggests that superefficient new and retrofitted buildings need not raise construction cost until energy savings reach at least∼80%–90% if then.

The paper also looks into Zimbabwe’s largest office and shopping complex, the 31 600m2 1996 Eastgate Centre in Harare, which uses biomimetic passive cooling and ventilation design (modelled on termite mounds) to save 90% of mechanical energy and deliver normal or better comfort at normal construction cost.

One of the key takeaways of Amory’s paper is that integrative design makes order-of magnitude building efficiency improvements inexpensive (or even cheaper than normal), mainly by eliminating or shrinking and simplifying HVAC equipment.

He explains that this enables total demand reductions of around 4–6×, not the usual <2×, thus expanding cost-effective energy savings by >2×.

Amory also points to how major building systems and functions often reveal hidden opportunities to do the right things in the right order and thus save even more energy at lower cost. He uses the example of LED lighting, which as you can see below is only the sixth priority in the steps recommended in the Illuminating Engineering Society’s Handbook of Fundamentals.

  1. Improve the visual quality of the task
  2. Improve the cavity reflectance and geometry of the space
  3. Improve lighting quality to cut veiling reflections and discomfort glare
  4. Optimize lighting quantity
  5. Harvest and distribute natural light; and then
  6. Raising source efficacy
  7. Optimize luminaires
  8. Improve controls, maintenance, and training.

Amory also points towards the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, Handbook of Fundamentals, whose top advice below is  widely ignored.

  1. Cool the people, not the building
  2. Exploit all comfort variables to expand the range of conditions in which people feel comfortable
  3. Minimize unwanted gains of heat and humidity into the space
  4. Passive cooling (ventilative, radiative, ground—or groundwater-coupling
  5. Active non-refrigerative cooling (evaporative, desiccant, absorption)
  6. Coolth storage and controls

Amory also points out that the capital savings from shrinking or eliminating HVAC equipment in new buildings can also be largely obtained in retrofits by timing deep retrofits to match routine major renovations, such as renewing HVAC systems or façades.

He points towards smart building examples that apply advanced glazings that insulate better, look clear, pass abundant daylight, but block unwanted heat transfer, and are spectrally ‘tuned’ to each direction.

What you need to know

This article looked into integrative design and sustainable buildings.

It is based on the Amory Lovins 2018 paper How big is the energy efficiency resource?

The key takeaway is that savings were achieved through integrative design, not by adding more widgets, but by leaving more out.

This week looked at buildings, subsequent articles will look at mobility and industry.

Thank you for reading,

By Barnaby Nash

Please share your thoughts in the comments section below, or reach out to me on social media. What do you think the most important idea in integrative design is?

Let’s stay connected

I can be reached on LinkedIn and on Twitter @FollowBarnaby

 

THE MOST IMPORTANT IDEA IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY

This article looks into the most important idea in energy efficiency. Also notice the way I said idea rather than technology as that is exactly what we are going to look at today.

bananafarm_11-judy_hill_lovins

I have been a fan of Amory Lovins and the work that the Rocky Mountain Institute put out for a while. This week I was reading his paper How big is the energy efficiency resource? It was published in Environmental Research Letters in 2018. I was totally blown away by his findings, which could have a really big impact on sustainability.

Amory debunks the commonly held perception that energy efficiency is plagued by a problem of low hanging fruit, where easy gains will be made early on and gains will become progressively harder as time passes. This is based on a theoretical construct, that works well in textbooks, but is not born out in reality.

I am minded to quote the great Yogi Berra who once remarked that: “In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.” This is why it is important to test theories to see if they are actually correct.

I could not do it justice by paraphrasing, so I have pasted Amory Lovins’s research finding in full below:

“The efficiency resource far exceeds the sum of savings by individual technologies because artfully choosing, combining, sequencing, and timing fewer and simpler technologies can save more energy at lower cost than deploying more and fancier but dis-integrated and randomly timed technologies. Such ‘integrative design’ is not yet widely known or applied, and can seem difficult because it is simple, but is well proven, rapidly evolving, and gradually spreading.”

This finding that integrative design and not more and fancier widgets is the key to energy efficiency is extremely powerful. Unfortunately, it goes against a lot of our human instincts which probably explains its slow uptake. But there is always time to turn that around.

What you need to know

This article looked into the most important idea in energy efficiency.

It was based upon Amory Lovins’s 2018 paper How big is the energy efficiency resource?

His finding that integrative design unlocks far more potential than individually targeted initiatives may be the most important idea in energy efficiency.

Thank you for reading,

By Barnaby Nash

Please share your thoughts in the comments section below, or reach out to me on social media. What do you think the most important idea in energy efficiency is?

Let’s stay connected

I can be reached on LinkedIn and on Twitter @FollowBarnaby

 

HOW PIGOUVIAN TAXES COULD CHANGE THE WORLD

This article looks into Pigouvian taxes and explores how they could change the world. Pigouvian taxes are named after English economist Arthur Pigou (1877–1959) who also developed the concept of economic externalities.

download

In lay man’s terms, a Pigouvian tax is a government cost on activities that create socially harmful externalities. An externality is an activity that creates a negative effect on others in a society but not necessarily the person who does that activity.

A Pigouvian tax, aims to correct an undesirable or inefficient market outcome. It does this by being set equal to the social cost of the negative externalities.

For those of you who like graphs there is a very helpful graph below that shows how it achieves this.

Social_cost_with_tax.svg

Pigou’s recommendation was for taxes to be placed on the offending producer, proportional to the damage that they inflict. This could be applied equally well to both social and environmental problems.

Hopefully you can see where I am going with this, as there is a lot of similarity to the polluter pays principle, which I was writing about recently. You can find a link to this article below.

THE RENAISSANCE OF THE POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE

What you don’t want is blanket taxation that punishes people who are not responsible for negative social end economic outcomes as much as those who are responsible for them.

Pigouvian taxes are also important for their focus on making amends for the externalities that are caused, but not necessarily going any further into punishment territory. The aim of a Pigouvian tax is to cost the producer an amount equivalent to the harm they caused others.

This makes them a more politically acceptable form of taxation. After all, who could be against holding those responsible for externalities accountable for their actions?

A great example is beginning to emerge of clean air zones in urban areas, where drivers are charged for bringing the most polluting vehicles into urban areas. This has developed very quickly into an important phenomenon. But the driver behind these zones is principally poor air quality as opposed to the climate change impact of these vehicles.

An altogether different approach would be to apply Pigouvian taxation to the problem of climate change. This would come in the form of a carbon tax.

We have briefly discussed the idea for this before in my article on Elon Musk’s perspective on climate change. You can find a link to this article below.

ELON MUSK ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Elon’s suggestion is for a non-partisan revenue neutral carbon tax. This would mean that only those using a high level of carbon would pay an increased level of taxation.

Carbon taxes have been implemented in the past. However, the lack of success in past schemes is more to do with the low-price set for carbon. These schemes could not be described as Pigouvian as they were not set at an equal rate to the externality of climate change.

If properly applied to the problem of climate change, Pigouvian taxation could be the missing link that drives carbon emissions down in the timeframe that we need this to happen by.

What you need to know

This article looked into Pigouvian taxation and how it could change the world.

A Pigouvian tax is a tax that is applied to a negative activity in proportion to the damage that it occurs.

If applied to the problem of climate change, it could be revolutionary in making those responsible for carbon emissions, responsible for paying for the damage done.

Thank you for reading,

By Barnaby Nash

Please share your thoughts in the comments section below, or reach out to me on social media. What do you think about the potential of Pigouvian taxes?

Let’s stay connected

I can be reached on LinkedIn and on Twitter @FollowBarnaby

THE RENAISSANCE OF THE POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE

This article looks into the polluter pays principle and its modern day renaissance.

450px-Sandro_Botticelli_-_La_nascita_di_Venere_-_Google_Art_Project_-_edited

The Renaissance was a fervent period of European cultural, artistic, political and economic “rebirth” following the Middle Ages. This took place from the 14th century to the 17th century. The Renaissance promoted the rediscovery of classical philosophy, literature and art. A fantastic example of this is Sandro Boticelli’s The Birth of Venus, which is pictured above. It looked great when it was pained in 1845 and it still looks great now.

The polluter pays principle is a really important aspect of environmental law. It originated from the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. It is a principle that if properly enacted and enforced, could be transformational in changing the relationship between man and the natural world.

The essence of the polluter pays principle is to make the party responsible for producing pollution, responsible for paying for the damage done to the natural environment. It is a simple principle, but its translation into reality has been underwhelming.

However, there has been one area in particular where the polluter pays principle has begun to flourish. Just as The Renaissance saw an explosion in activity in the arenas of art, architecture, thinking and writing. Perhaps this new modern renaissance of the polluter pays principle in dealing with urban air pollution could be the catalyst for applying the principle more widely to deal with other environmental problems.

Let’s now turn to a few UK examples of how the polluter pays principle is being applied to urban air pollution.

London

London already had a non charging low emission zone that covered most of Greater London. But as with most things in life, money talks and the impact of this non charging zone can be described as marginal at best.

What has really caught the public’s attention is the recently introduced Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) that went live in April 2019.

london-ulez-e1559491968662.png

This is coming in two parts, which you can see from the picture above. The inner zone that went live in April 2019 and the expanded zone that will go live in October 2021.

The most polluting vehicles that do not meet the standards required of the ULEZ will incur the following charges:

  • £12.50 for private cars, vans, motorcycles and mopeds
  • £12.50 for taxis
  • £100 for buses, coaches and HGVs

I think it was the £100 charge for larger vehicles that was really driving interest in the ULEZ. But pollution from HGV’s are estimated to be responsible for £40 billion worth of costs in Europe. So, it is only fair that they pay for the damages that they incur.

Leeds

Leeds is another city in the UK that will be introducing a clean air charging zone. It will go live in January 2020 and cover most of the city centre.

Leeds ULEZ

Non-compliant vehicles will incur the following charges:

  • No charge for private cars, vans, motorcycles and mopeds
  • £12.50 for taxis (or £50 per week for Leeds-licensed vehicles)
  • £50 for buses, coaches and HGVs

Again, just like London, this is a very positive step forward that will see those most responsible for urban air pollution paying for the damage that they create. My only disappointment is that there is no charge for private cars, but perhaps that will come with time.

Birmingham

Birmingham also has plans for a charging clean air zone that have been approved by the government.

Birmingham

This scheme will charge non-compliant vehicles at the following rate:

  • £8 for private cars and taxis
  • £50 for buses, coaches and HGVs
  • Motorcycles and mopeds are expected to be exempt

The zone in Birmingham will be introduced from 1 January 2020 on or inside the inner ring road.

Heathrow

Heathrow is neither a city or a local authority, but they have drawn up their own plans to improve air quality around the airport.

This would come into force in 2022, the Heathrow charging ULEZ will see vehicle standards identical to those of the London ULEZ applied for cars and private hire vehicles entering car parks and drop-off areas at any of the airport’s terminals 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

This policy was only announced in late May 2019 so precise figures for charges have not yet come about. But it is believed that a fee of £10 – £15 is being considered. It is also rumoured that black cabs will be exempt from the charge, which is something that I do not believe should be the case. The cost of their air pollution needs to be internalised so as to make public transport more attractive.

Elsewhere

It is also worth pointing out that there are very advanced discussions for charging clean air zones in Bath, Sheffield and Manchester. However, the exact details of how these schemes will work has yet to be decided upon.

What you need to know

 This article looked into the polluter pays principle and its modern day renaissance.

The Renaissance was a period of rebirth and rejuvenation.

The polluter pays principle has struggled to flourish in the years since it was first conceived in 1992. But perhaps with urban air pollution we are seeing a problem that is well suited to being solved by the principle.

Time will tell how successful these schemes are. If they are successful, there is nothing to stop the polluter pays principle from being applied to other environmental problems.

Thank you for reading,

By Barnaby Nash

Please share your thoughts in the comments section below, or reach out to me on social media. What do you think about the polluter pays principle?

Let’s stay connected

I can be reached on LinkedIn and on Twitter @FollowBarnaby

 

WRAPPING UP 2018

This is the penultimate article I will publish in 2018. This week I will be looking into a personal milestone that I will achieve this year. I will look into some interesting and disturbing facts related to wrapping paper. Then I want to pick out some key items that I believe will define how sustainability in 2018 is remembered.

Wrapping paper

Personal milestone

On a personal note, 2018 has been a good year for me. I have been amazed by how well people have reacted to the content I have been publishing this year. I published articles on 48 out of 52 Sundays in 2017. My target was to publish something every single Sunday in 2018 and with one more article to put out next week, I will have hit that target. As with all things in life, consistency is key. Whether you read and liked one article or supported each and every one, your support and comments are what makes this worthwhile, so thank you.

Wrapping paper madness

Christmas is a time that presents many contradictions for sustainability. It seems that the throwaway culture is placed into overdrive during this period. It is too early to tell whether the Blue-Planet effect will have impacted buying habits this Christmas. But from my initial impressions, I would have to say that this has not happened. Here are a few UK wrapping paper facts to mull over this Christmas.

  • The amount of wrapping paper used for presents is enough to wrap around the equator 9 times.
  • The average household will get through four rolls of wrapping paper.
  • Approximately 910,000,000 metres of wrapping paper will be used
  • Wrapping paper is designed for single use only, and although some of us try to re-use it, realistically this can only be done once or twice before it is finally binned.

Sustainability in 2018

In terms of the wider sustainability agenda, I think 2018 has been a positive year. Momentum continues to build behind sustainable brands and sustainability has become increasingly mainstream. There are 3 items that I have picked out that I believe have defined 2018.

1. Plastics and the circular economy

Ever since the final episode of Blue Planet II was aired in January 2018, businesses and governments worldwide have awoken from their slumber and begun to take action to reduce the use of single use plastics and recycle them wherever possible. It does lead me to think of the possibilities if there was a “Blue Planet” moment for carbon like there has been for plastics. The momentum would be unstoppable.

In 2018 I really liked the P&G, Suez and Terracycle collaboration to produce the world’s first recyclable shampoo bottle made from up to 25% recycled beach plastic. I chronicled this in my article Partnerships for the goals, which you can find via the link below.

PARTNERSHIPS FOR THE GOALS

I thought the collaboration summed up nicely, how even titans like P&G and Suez couldn’t solve this problem alone and enlisted the help of recycling upstarts Terracycle to help make it a reality. It’s okay to not have all the answers yourselves. Just make sure you are collaborating and working with others to help make sustainability a reality.

I would say whilst a lot of pressure and momentum was building on plastics in 2018, there has been less progress towards creating a circular economy. This would be an economy made up of a majority of businesses employing a circular economy business model. I chronicled this in my article How to overcome the main barrier to the circular economy, which you can find via the link below.

HOW TO OVERCOME THE MAIN BARRIER TO THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY

Creating a fully circular economy business model is tough. This explains why progress in this area has been slow. But there is good news. Things that are hardest to achieve are generally the most worthwhile. I remain confident that we will see major breakthroughs on circular economy principles in the not too distant future.

2. Carbon targets

This year and every year for the foreseeable future sustainability will be dominated by one problem, carbon. Whether through the combustion of fossil fuels or deforestation and forest degradation human societies continue to emit massive amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. This carbon is creating a greenhouse effect which is causing a rise in temperatures at a planetary scale.

One article that I published this year that I was very surprised by the response to was my article on Elon Musk’s perspective on climate change. You can find this via the link below.

ELON MUSK ON CLIMATE CHANGE

I was not really prepared for the response that I receive to this. But Elon Musk is a pretty cool guy, very intelligent and he certainly knows how to capture the attention of millennials. Hopefully when people read it, they internalised his central message, which is that this is a big problem that requires fundamental solutions.

One of the most impressive carbon initiatives that was launched in 2018 was Maersk’s new carbon targets.

In December Maersk announced its goal to reach carbon neutrality by 2050. To achieve this, carbon neutral vessels must be commercially viable by 2030 and new innovations and adaption of new technology is required.

I was really impressed by this and it’s now up for competitors in their industry to see if they can do it quicker.

I thought I chronicled the need for zero-based targets rather well in my article that you can find via the link below. One may be the loneliest number, but as far as sustainability goes, zero is the most important number there is.

WHY ZERO-BASED TARGETS ARE SO POWERFUL

 

3. Thinking bigger about sustainability

This is a trend that I hope will spill over from 2018 and continue to get bigger in 2019.

Whether it is through partnerships with others or ambitious individual targets, it is clear that businesses need to think bigger about sustainability.

I was pleased with the response to my article about Interface, which you can find via the link below.

IS THIS THE BEST SUSTAINABILITY POLICY OF ALL TIME?

 

I still maintain that they remain unmatched at the pinnacle of corporate sustainability. But goals are made to be broken and hopefully we see some new entrants in 2019.

I was blown away by the response to my article about the Net Positive Project, which you can find via the link below.

HOW TO MAKE SUSTAINABILITY GREAT

I think it shows that there is a clear yearning to move sustainability on from being about “being less bad” to creating businesses that are good actors who give back to the communities in which they are based. Hopefully 2019 is a big year for the Net Positive Project.

What you need to know

This article looked into a personal milestone that I will have achieved in 2018, by uploading something new to my website every single Sunday for a year.

We also looked into some interesting facts about wrapping paper. Christmas is known as a time of indulgence and not a time of sustainability. We can only hope consumers buying habits change in the future.

We then looked into 3 things that I believe characterised sustainability in 2018. These were:

1. Plastics and the circular economy

2. Carbon targets

3. Thinking bigger about sustainability

Overall, there is a lot to be positive about in 2018. Sustainability continues to rise in importance in corporate agendas. You can always complain that there is not enough change happening fast enough. But there has been a good foundation laid and things are certainly heading in the right direction.

Thank you for reading,

By Barnaby Nash

Please share your thoughts in the comments section below or reach out to me on social media. What do you think defines sustainability in 2018?

Let’s stay connected

I can be reached on LinkedIn and on Twitter @FollowBarnaby