September 11, 2010
February 6, 2010
I’ve already documented Nike’s previous steps such as lobbying for aggressive climate legislation, and leaving the Chamber of Commerce Board over its poor positions on climate change. Now, Nike is taking it one step further, and abandoning buying carbon offsets and RECS(renewable energy certificates) in favor of actual emissions reductions. You can check out the news of this in the NY Times blog here, as well as Nike’s new report on corporate responsibility, which highlights the progress the company has made, and identifying areas where it needs to improve.
From the NY Times:
“In an introduction to the report, Mark Parker, Nike’s president and chief executive, said the company had “finally figured out” it could use its knack for design and innovation to bring about environmental, labor and social change.
“We opened the aperture of our lens and discovered our potential to have a positive influence on waste reduction, climate change, managing natural resources, renewable energy and factory conditions,” he said.
Among other achievements, the report noted that in the fiscal year 2009, Nike reduced its overall greenhouse gas emissions across its supply chain to 2007 levels. It also says a program begun in 2008 to improve energy efficiency at manufacturing facilities reduced carbon emissions by 6 percent, even though production at the factories increased by 9 percent.
But Nike also reported that it had stopped purchasing carbon offsets to counter emissions generated by employee air travel and that it was moving away from buying renewable energy certificates to compensate for use of fossil-fuel generated electricity at its own facilities — practices it considered temporary and difficult to verify.
Offsets have come under scrutiny of late, and some question whether renewable energy certificates – which are supposed to stimulate the creation of new renewable energy projects – are simply a payment to a project that would have occurred anyway.
“Rather than purchase renewable energy certificates to achieve climate neutrality, which have become increasingly controversial,” the report stated, “we believe it is more meaningful to invest in energy efficiency and in distributed energy projects that reduce our reliance on grid energy and help stabilize energy costs for the long term.”
As for air travel, in place of buying offsets, the company is investing heavily in teleconferencing technologies that will decrease the need for travel and save money.
“We have begun using these technologies across the business and have seen not only reduced travel but also better product quality, and quicker and better decision making,” said Kate Meyers, a Nike spokeswoman.
Along with other companies, Nike is advocating for climate energy legislationthat will reward large-scale investments in carbon reduction. The company argues that “the lack of a market price for carbon has limited its ability to access and deploy clean energy across our operations.”
January 22, 2010
This is timely push back given the solemn mood in DC about the prospects for climate legislation given the Democrats loss of Massachusetts. You can read their press release here, and below.
Over 80 U.S. Companies Call on President Obama & Congress to Enact Comprehensive Climate and Energy Legislation
January 21, 2009 – WASHINGTON, D.C. – More than 80 leading CEOs from U.S. businesses, including Exelon, Virgin America, NRG Energy, eBay and PG&E, sent a letter to President Obama and members of Congress today calling on them to move quickly to enact comprehensive climate and energy legislation that will create jobs and enhance U.S. competitiveness.
Saying that the U.S. is “falling behind” in the global clean energy race, the letter calls for forceful leadership to achieve legislation that will unleash innovation, drive economic growth, boost energy independence and decrease our carbon emissions. The letter comes just one week before President Obama delivers his State of the Union address on January 27th.
“American businesses recognize this challenge and have already begun to respond and innovate. However, today’s uncertainty surrounding energy and climate regulation is hindering the large-scale actions that American businesses are poised to make,” the letter states. “We need strong policies and clear market signals that support the transition to a low-carbon economy and reward companies that innovate. It is time for the Administration and Congress to embrace this policy as the promising economic opportunity that will empower American workers to compete and American entrepreneurship to lead the way.”
The letter was signed by 83 CEOs from some of the nation’s largest electric power, manufacturing, clean tech, technology and consumer facing companies. To view the full text and the list of signatories please go to: http://www.wecanlead.org
“The United States can’t afford to fall behind in the global race to lead the new energy economy,” said Jonathan Wolfson, CEO of Solazyme, a leading renewable oil and bioproducts company. “American businesses have a history of leadership and innovation and are poised to do that in a new clean energy economy.”
“Power companies need and want to be part of America’s clean energy transition,” said David Crane, president and CEO of NRG Energy Inc., which owns and operates more than 24,000 megawatts of electricity generation capacity in the U.S. “But we need the certainty of clear rules and strong policies that will help us invest in that transition while also addressing climate change and keeping power affordable.”
“The same inventive solutions that will help the environment will also help move the airline industry forward,” said David Cush, president and CEO of Virgin America, a U.S. commercial passenger airline. “Big challenges have historically propelled more innovation and greater efficiencies. Strong climate and energy policies can be that challenge – one from which we will all emerge stronger.”
“Smart businesses can only do so much on their own to address climate change,” said Stonyfield Farm CEO Gary Hirshberg. “At this point, the rules need to change: there needs to be a price or tax on carbon. This incentive for genuine innovation needs to be firmly in place in order for the US to compete effectively in the global race to a clean energy economy.”
Peter A. Darbee, Chairman, CEO and President of PG&E Corporation said, “As the country looks to ways to support job creation, promote economic growth, and improve energy and national security, it’s clear to leading businesses that smart, sensible energy and climate policies can and should be part of the solution. We are asking leaders to recognize this opportunity and make it a reality.”
About We Can Lead
Business leaders from 150 companies from 30 states across the country joined the We Can Lead effort and traveled to Washington in early October 2009 to meet with Administration officials and more than 50 members of Congress to urge passage of comprehensive energy and climate legislation. We Can Lead advocates for passage of strong energy and climate legislation that includes a price on carbon to spur American innovation, unleash U.S. investment, create millions of new jobs, restore America’s competitiveness and provide for economic and national security.
We Can Lead is a partnership of the Clean Economy Network, Inc. and Ceres’ Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP). For more on We Can Lead, visit www.wecanlead.org
January 2, 2010
As someone who regularly goes through half a gallon of milk a day, this was a nice article in Business Green for me to see. Re-posted below.
The US Department of Agriculture and the Innovation Center for US Dairy have agreed to work jointly in support of the dairy industry’s goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25 per cent over the next decade.
The landmark memorandum of understanding identified a variety of projects that can help the dairy industry achieve those greenhouse gas reduction goals and increase its financial and environmental sustainability.
“This historic agreement, the first of its kind, will help us achieve the ambitious goal of drastically reducing greenhouse gas emissions while benefiting dairy farmers,” said US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “Use of manure to electricity technology is a win for everyone. It provides an untapped source of income for farmers, it provides a source of renewable electricity, reduces our dependence on foreign fossil fuels, and provides a wealth of additional environmental benefits.”
Under the agreement, USDA will take a number of steps to help farmers, including supporting a strategic research plan to help the industry further reduce environmental impacts. Other initiatives would help the industry develop future technologies, advance nutrient management, support renewable energy, and improve energy efficiency.
Potential outcomes of the MOU include accelerating opportunities to adopt livestock manure processing systems that capture methane gas from livestock manure and convert it into electricity, coordinating research information on life cycle assessments, and supporting the industry’s efforts in energy audits, feed management and energy conservation.
The Innovation Center is nearing completion of the first-ever life-cycle assessment of fluid milk from farm to table. Initial estimates by the Applied Sustainability Center at the University of Arkansas show that the entire dairy supply chain, from cattle feed ingredients through packaging and transportation to the consumer’s table, accounts for less than two per cent of US greenhouse gas emissions.
“The dairy industry’s on-going efforts to improve milk production efficiency over the past six decades have already reduced greenhouse gas emissions at the farm level by more than 60 per cent,” said Indiana dairy producer Mike McCloskey, chairman of the Innovation Center’s Sustainability Committee. “To feed a growing world we must continue to develop new ideas, innovations and best practices to preserve natural resources and secure a healthy future for the next generation.”
The agreement may also help accelerate adoption of methane gas digesters for all sizes of dairy farms, making it easier to connect digesters to electricity grids and help digester operators capture potential carbon offset payments. Additional support from the USDA could include research on how feed mixtures affect methane emissions from cows. Opportunities to reduce so-called enteric emissions have been identified by dairy stakeholders in the Innovation Center’s industry-wide plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
November 26, 2009
I already had a post last week where the Diamondback covered our presentation to the College Park City Council, and on Thanksgiving day our proposal for tax credits for green businesses has made it into the Washington Post and the Gazette.
U-Md. students urge College Park to create tax credit for ‘green’ firms
By David Hill
Representatives from UMD for Clean Energy presented their plan to the College Park City Council at its Nov. 17 work session. Their proposal would give property tax breaks to businesses that provide energy-efficient products and services, as well as those that reduce their own carbon footprint.
It could take several years to implement, and city officials appear willing to listen. But the plan faces several obstacles, one of which is that it is not currently legal.
“I think it’s a good idea,” said Councilman Patrick Wojahn (Dist. 1). “We’d like to utilize some version of it and we’re working on a fix right now with the state.”
Municipalities in Maryland are not allowed to offer tax breaks to businesses based on whether they are environmentally friendly, or “green.” Federal and state governments have done it for years — mostly to reduce energy use and reliance on nonrenewable sources — and counties in Maryland have had the right since May.
Nonetheless, the students said that with time and legislation, the proposed city-level tax break would make College Park a popular destination for a growing number of energy-efficient organizations.
“The renewable energy industry is expanding,” said Matt Dernoga, who met with the council alongside fellow student Hilary Staver. “We’re going to have to invest and shift away from conventional energy sources.”
Their proposal would call for a two-tier system. Tier 1 businesses — those that specialize in energy-efficient products and services — would receive a tax credit. A smaller credit would go to Tier 2 businesses in non-”green” sectors that adopt eco-friendly practices such as recycling and improving storm-water management.
Edmonston-based Community Forklift, which collects and sells used building materials, and Beltsville-based solar energy provider SunEdison are examples of businesses that would qualify for Tier 1. Staver said the city has few, if any, Tier 1 qualifiers of its own and that adding new ones would have a positive impact.
The students did not suggest a specific amount for the credit.
“[If residents] see that these companies are taking steps to reduce environmental impact … then it makes people think more about it in their lives,” Staver said. “It helps set an example for the public.”
While new Tier 1 businesses also would boost the city’s revenue, Mayor Stephen Brayman expressed concern over the tax breaks existing city businesses could receive. He said that in difficult economic times, lower taxes for Tier 2 operations could leave residents to foot the bill.
“If residents are paying more taxes to give businesses tax breaks, that might not be popular,” Brayman said, adding that the city’s budget likely will shrink in 2011 and 2012 due to the current economic decline. “The city doesn’t really have any money to give up.”
The council and student group said they would be willing to work toward a compromise. City officials currently lobbying the state for permission to offer a revitalization tax credit to attract new businesses, and Wojahn said they could incorporate language that appeals specifically to green businesses.
“We could probably adopt some parts of [the students'] proposal,” he said. “It’s becoming more and more important to attract these types of businesses.”
July 20, 2009
I always like to see major companies such as Microsoft taking steps to reduce emissions and go green. Now Samsung is following suit by investing $4.2 billion into cutting emissions and producing more environmentally friendly products. Kudos to them.
Samsung’s 4.2 bln dlrs “green” initiative
SEOUL (AFP) – billion dollar plan to develop eco-friendly products and cut emissions from its manufacturing plants by 2013.announced a 4.29
The “PlanetFirst” project focuses on achieving low-carbon growth, the company said in a statement.
It involves cuttingfrom plants by 50 percent and reducing total indirect emissions from all products by 84 million tons through 2013, as well as ensuring all products exceed global eco-mark standards.
Some 5.4 trillion won will be invested in eco-management initiatives and environmental cooperation with suppliers and partners will be strengthened.
The emissions cuts will come through improving the energy efficiencyof products including TVs, refrigerators and air conditioners to the highest level in the industry, and reducing standby power consumption.
The company is “committing to becoming a truly green enterprise that places eco-management at the very heart of our business decision-making and growth,” said vice chairman and CEO Yoon-Woo Lee at a ceremony launching the initiative.
“This eco-management initiative will encompass all of our supply chain, and the complete lifecycle of Samsung products, and by achieving these goals we aim to lead the way in tackling the environmental problems that are facing our planet.”,
Samsung Electronics, flagship of South Korea‘s largest business group, employs 164,600 people in 61 countries.
It is the world’s largest maker of computer memory chips and also a leading global producer of digital TVs, mobile phones and TFT LCD () screens.
Of the 5.4 trillion won, the company said it would spend 3.1 trillion developing eco-friendly products and 2.3 trillion on energy-saving technologies and greening its manufacturing plants.
May 26, 2009
A couple days ago, I made a post about how UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Al Gore addressed over 500 business leaders about the need for them to be involved in pushing for a global climate treaty in Copenhagen in December. The UN has posted Ki-moon’s speech on their website, and I think that Ban makes an extraodrinary case. I’m posting the speech below.
Your Majesty, Royal Highness, Excellencies, Distinguished guests,
I am delighted to be here. Perhaps more important, I am glad you have chosen to take the time to be here today.
We meet at a critical moment in human history. Our planet is warming to dangerous levels. In December, the UN Climate Change Conference will meet here in Copenhagen to find solutions to this grave global threat.
As business leaders, you are crucially placed to ensure that government negotiators seal a deal.
We are enduring the worst economic downturn since [the] 1930s. It is essential that we do not allow this to hold back the political momentum, investment and innovation that we need to combat climate change.
Climate change is the defining challenge of our time. I also believe it is the most potent game-changer for business over the next century. It is an opportunity we must seize.
Today, I want to challenge you. I want to see you in the vanguard of an unprecedented effort to retool the global economy into one that is cleaner, greener and more sustainable.
You and your colleagues have the ingenuity and vision to lead by example where others – including governments – are lagging behind.
With your support, and through your example, we must harness the necessary political will to seal the deal on an ambitious new climate agreement in December here in Copenhagen.
This will not be easy. Fundamental change never is. But, if we get it right, we can reasonably look forward to sustained growth and prosperity.
If we get it wrong we face catastrophic damage to people, to the planet – and to the global marketplace.
Excellencies, dear friends,
Our excessive reliance on a fossil fuel-based economy is destroying our planet’s resources. It is impoverishing the poor. It is weakening the security of nations. And it is choking global economic potential.
The science is clear. Global emissions must peak in less than a decade to avert the worst consequences of climate change.
Many scientists are saying that worst-case projections are already being realized – indeed surpassed. This was the message from the International Scientific Congress, held here in Copenhagen in March.
We know that the safest way of reducing climate risks is to reduce emissions. We know that taking early action makes good business sense. And we know the cost of inaction will be much bigger than the cost of action now.
Some estimates say that rising greenhouse gas emissions could cause a decline of 5 per cent or more in global GDP.
Compare that with what it would take to bring down greenhouse gas emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, estimates that it could cost as little as 0.1 per cent of global GDP each year until 2030. And that does not factor in the multiple extra benefits to health and development.
Most importantly, we know we have the tools to change course.
What we need is political will, at the highest level, coupled with the right policy signals and market incentives.
In September I am convening a summit meeting on climate change at the UN headquarters in New York to galvanize this political will among the political leaders.
I am inviting all Heads of State and Government.
Business leaders will also be a part of the conversation.
A strong message from the business community to governments worldwide may make all the difference.
As business leaders, you must make it clear to your leaders that doing the right thing for the climate is also the smart thing for global competitiveness and long-term prosperity.
We may never get a better opportunity. And if the world’s scientists are right, we may not get a second chance.
Your Majesty, Excellencies, distinguished guests,
We have seen how a local crisis – a bank failure, a disease outbreak – can quickly go global.
We live in an interconnected world. An effective agreement in Copenhagen would be a powerful vote of confidence in multilateralism. By the same token, failure would be bad news for everyone.
But there is yet another vitally important reason why we must seal a deal in December in Copenhagen.
We know that the right kind of deal will provide the regulatory certainty and long-term price signals that businesses are demanding. We know that a deal can unleash investment, stimulate innovation and facilitate the global spread of low-carbon technologies.
What is often overlooked is the impact a deal could have on global trade. Success in Copenhagen could set a powerful example: if Member States can find a way forward on an issue of such tremendous complexity, surely they can do the same in other areas, most notably the stalled Doha round of trade talks.
On the other hand, failure in Copenhagen could lead countries to turn inward in a misguided effort to handle the climate challenge on their own. We could see new, climate-related protectionist barriers.
But such go-it-alone policies simply cannot work, for climate or for trade. They would undermine the core principles of non-discrimination that the international trading system has been building over the past six decades. They could lead to trade anarchy.
So we need to seal a deal in December for these reasons, too. To protect the trading regime. To enable trade to underpin development, spread green solutions and usher in the green economy.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Climate change affects every aspect of society, from the health of the global economy to the health of our children. It is about the water in our wells and in our taps. It is about the food on the table.
It is about energy security and international security. It is at the core of nearly all the major challenges we face today
That is why it is an issue for Heads of State. And that is why it is an issue for business.
So far, only a small portion of the business and investment community has made climate change a strategic priority. Too many are sitting on the fence, waiting for others to act, or waiting for the clear policies that will signal a level playing field.
Others are defenders of the old order. For those who are directly or implicitly lobbying against climate action I have a clear message: your ideas are out of date, and you are running out of time.
What the fence sitters and the skeptics fail to understand is that climate change fundamentally changes the 21st century balance sheet.
Sooner or later there will be a higher price on carbon – imposed either by policy or by market forces.
Any multinational business that doesn”t have a strategy in place to deal with climate change will end up on the losing side of history.
That is not where you plan to be.
Investing now in green solutions is cheaper – and ultimately more profitable – than spending more, later, in a catch-up race for global competitiveness.
Polluting industries have successfully cleaned up their act in the past. That is part of the dynamic tradition of private-sector innovation. There are good examples today of industries in the developing and developed worlds cutting emissions.
I welcome such steps, and call for more.
We must also invest in the lower-carbon economic winners of the future.
I know that some argue that we cannot afford to act on climate change during a global recession.
I disagree. What we cannot afford is more short-sighted approaches. The global economy needs more than a quick fix. It needs a fundamental fix.
If we have learned anything from the financial crisis, it is that we must put an end to unethical and irresponsible behaviour and the tyrannical demand for short-term profit.
The price of a global bail-out may seem high, but it will pale next to the enormous human and economic costs of delaying action on climate change.
Continuing to pour trillions of dollars into fossil-fuel subsidies is like investing in sub-prime real estate. Our carbon-based infrastructure is like a toxic asset. that threatens the entire portfolio of global goods – from public health to food security.
We must direct investment away from dirty energy industries. It is time to create market incentives that reward long-term investment in clean energy and innovation.
Distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, dear friends,
The smart money is on the green economy. Many of you are already showing the way.
You have shown that energy efficiency and green technologies can drive profitable performance.
Many of you are deeply engaged in the UN Global Compact. You are building a community of businesses, which I hope will show that “caring for the climate” can be a new paradigm for business success.
Many of your good examples are featured in a series of new studies that will be unveiled today under the “Caring for Climate” banner.
Throughout this meeting you will share important lessons. You will showcase solutions in construction, energy, transportation, manufacturing, and many more.
These examples show that a transformation is possible.
But to seize this transformation, we need the regulatory certainty and market signals that only a binding global climate change agreement can provide.
We need an agreement with clear long-term goals and mid-term targets.
And we need your voice, your influence, and your example.
You can help to seal a deal in December, and this is how you can do it:
I ask all of you to support the “Copenhagen Call” that we will issue at the end of this meeting. Use your influence as business leaders to bring climate change to the attention of policy makers and the public.
Instruct your government affairs teams to lobby vigorously and relentlessly for a successful outcome in Copenhagen in December. Do it now. And do it in every capital where you are represented.
Mobilize employees, partners, clients and customers to take a stand and demand climate action from governments.
Work with your trade associations and interest groups to ensure their lobbying supports an effective Copenhagen agreement.
Join the UN’s “Seal the Deal” campaign. Add your stamp to the global movement for action.
Above all, I encourage all of you to continue on the path of innovation and collaboration.
Continue to spread green solutions through your supply chains. Continue to push for private-sector solutions that reduce climate risks– in health, water and natural resources, in insurance and investment and economic development.
This, my friends, is the essence of business statesmanship in the 21st century. Send a strong message to the governments that hold the keys to success in December.
Tell them to seal the deal.
Seal the deal to power green growth. Seal the deal to protect our planet. Seal the deal to build a more sustainable, prosperous global economy that will benefit all nations.
Your customers and your shareholders will reward you. And your children will thank you one day.
Thank you for your time. I wish you a most productive meeting.
May 25, 2009
I’ve made some posts before about major businesses getting involved in pushing for strong action on global warming. There have also been a few other posts on progress made by Microsoft and Wal-Mart. I think that proactive businesses are a very key component of US and international action on climate change. A lot of corporations have larger revenues than many countries, are very much involved in the political process, and have the resources to influence negotiations that non-profits do not. Unfortunately in the past few decades, too many corporations have used these resources to stall action. If some of them can be engaged and convinced to support global action, that makes the struggle for a treaty easier. Much of the global economy is powered by consumerism, but if the producers are doing more to ensure that the supply chain has a smaller environmental impact, that makes a big difference. I just came across an article about Al Gore and UN Chief Ban Ki-Moon meeting in Copenhagen with over 500 business leaders about the need for them to be proactive in the process of negotiating a global climate treaty. I think it’s a very good thing that these leaders are becoming involved in the process for the right reasons I outlined above. Hopefully as we move closer towards Copenhagen I’ll have more news like this with greater steps being taken in the right direction by all parties involved. Notable excerpts below.
“Climate-change heavyweights U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon and Nobel prize winner Al Gore urged more than 500 business leaders on Sunday to lend their corporate muscle to reaching a global deal on reducing greenhouse gases.”
“The three-day World Business Summit on Climate Change is a precursor to the negotiations to determine what will succeed the Kyoto climate treaty that expires in 2012.”
“Xie Zhenhua, vice chairman of China’s national development and reform commission, pledged to play “a positive and a constructive” role to reach a global climate treaty, and already is putting in place its climate plan for 2015 and beyond.”
April 26, 2009
I’ve been fascinated with how Wal-Mart, once one of the most notoriously unsustainable and labor-abusive corporations, has managed to transform both its image and it’s now its business to a more sustainable one. On Earth Day, Wal-Mart announced that they were adding 10-20 solar arrays onto their facilities, to accompany the 18 they already have. According to the article….”After the new solar panels are in place, the total capacity of renewable energy coming from the Walmart facilities will be 32 million kilowatt hours per year, reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 22,500 metric tons, said the company.” In addition, Walmart has the goal of eventually running on 100% renewable energy, producing zero waste, and selling sustainable products.
I think it started when they decided to hire the ex-President of the Sierra Club to help transform the company. The entire story of how this happened can be read here, and it’s quite incredible. Also great is hearing from Wal-Mart’s CEO Lee Scott asking ”since when is waste a business strategy?”.
A story in the New York Times back in January took a good look at Wal-Mart’s transformation, as well as how it has helped their bottom line, and drawn other big corporations along with them into the mix. Here are a few notable quotes from this. I would do a more in depth look of what Wal-Mart has been doing besides solar panels, but the Times story covers it all real well.
“By virtue of its herculean size, Wal-Mart eventually dragged much of corporate America along with it, leading mighty suppliers like General Electric and Procter & Gamble to transform their own business practices.”
“Today, the roughly 200 million customers who pass through Wal-Mart’s doors each year buy fluorescent light bulbs that use up to 75 percent less electricity than incandescent bulbs, concentrated laundry detergent that uses 50 percent less water and prescription drugs that contain 50 percent less packaging.”
“It is hard to measure the financial return of a good image. But no one at Wal-Mart talks about headline risk anymore because the headlines have become largely positive. Profits climbed to $12.7 billion in the 2008 fiscal year, from $11.2 billion in the 2006 fiscal year, while sales jumped to $375 billion, from $312.4 billion, during the same period. The percentage of employees on Wal-Mart’s health insurance plan rose to 50.2 percent, from 44 percent.”
““As businesses, we have a responsibility to society,” he said this month, speaking to members of the National Retail Federation in his last public speech as Wal-Mart chief. “Let me be clear about this point. There is no conflict between delivering value to shareholders, and helping solve bigger societal problems.”
April 16, 2009
The Environmental Defense Action Fund, the United Steelworkers, and the Blue-Green Alliance have started a new website called the cap solution. The main idea behind this campaign is to deliver the message to the American people that regulating and capping carbon is good for the economy. Businesses are saying this, not just environmentalists. This ad is being shown because the climate bill is being heavily debated in Washington, and in a little over a month, the noise will be deafening. Expect to see a lot more ads like this, but also some dishonest ones like this from the polluters. Enjoy the video below.