According to a new report from OfficeMax Grand&Toy, 50 per cent of Canadian enterprise organization heads said their sustainability-related initiatives have added to profits, compared to 31 per cent globally.

The report, Driving Sustainability in Canada and the Role of Supply Chain & Procurement, also found 76 per cent of Canadian decision-makers said sustainability is necessary for competitiveness, and another 87 per cent said their organizations had placed sustainability on their respective agendas permanently.

That compares to global averages of 67 per cent and 70 per cent, respectively.

“Canadian enterprise organizations are showing a strong commitment to sustainability initiatives,” OfficeMax Grand&Toy general manager of marketing Jeff Hayward said in a statement.

“They are using fully-developed operational capabilities to drive profit from these actions.”

But when it comes to the top organizations, or harvesters, Canada starts to fall behind.

Chief executives from harvesters—firms profiting from sustainability-related actions and decisions—are far more likely to commit strongly to sustainability (85 per cent compared to 61 per cent in Canada), according to the report.

“What we’re seeing in Canada is a sustainability approach that emphasizes business efficiencies or cost reductions,” senior researcher and report co-author Warren Shiau said.

“The advantage to this is that enterprise Canadian organizations are among the global leaders in driving profitability from sustainability,” Shiau continued. “In the long term however, these organizations may face challenges as they try to extend sustainability adoption into other areas of the business where positive impact is harder to measure.”

Such is the case for technology powerhouse Hewlett-Packard, which turned to Montreal-based plastics experts Lavergne Group to form a closed-loop “up-cycling” system to recycle printer cartridges to make new products while reducing the amount of virgin plastics in its manufacturing operations.

“This was not only an unprecedented innovation in terms of getting plastic back into electronic products, but even within the plastics industry it was viewed as a pretty incredible innovation,” said Dean Miller, recycling program manager with HP, during a recent tour of the Lavergne Group recycling facility in Montreal. “Not only because of the technical issues that were involved, but because of the scale (of the project.)”

Combining used ink and toner cartridges and other post-consumer products in the recycling process has kept an estimated 280 million cartridges and two billion polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles out of landfills, according to HP.

But reaching those historic levels of waste diversion wasn’t easy.

HP’s Planet Partners program, aimed at encouraging consumers to recycle electronic products, began accepting printer cartridges in 2000—the same year the company hooked up with Lavergne to begin discussing the idea of a closed-loop recycling process.

It would take nine years before the two began actually recycling cartridges in such a system using prototype equipment.

It took another two years to begin full-scale operation of the process, in 2011.

Prior to turning to Lavergne founder and president Jean-Luc Lavergne for help, HP relied on shredding printer cartridges to extract a percentage of the material.

In the original ‘shred and separate’ process, HP would sort disposed cartridges before shredding them and separating the plastics, where the recovered material was refined.

While that process is still used by the company for cartridges produced in low volume, HP was looking for a way to recover more plastic from its high-volume inkjet cartridges.

The goal was for new products to contain up to 70 per cent recycled material.

“Without (Lavergne) as a partner we would not be talking about this closed-loop success,” Miller said. “We would likely be talking about HP’s ability to recycle the plastic, but we wouldn’t be talking about our ability to put it back in (new) cartridges.”

HP knew it wouldn’t be possible to rely solely on used cartridges for recycled material—according to Miller, the plastic breaks down during processing—and so the company looked to add another plastic product to the mix.

With Lavergne’s expertise in recycling PET bottles—the company has been up-cycling plastic beverage containers since 1995—HP was able to blend the recycled cartridge plastic with bottle plastic to create a better-quality resin.

However, HP was concerned the new resin wouldn’t have the same properties needed in the existing manufacturing facilities.

“Since we had molding tooling and production tools around the world worth millions of dollars that was already running the virgin resin, this material had to be a drop-in replacement,” he said.

Miller said this was the biggest sticking point while engineering the closed-loop recycling process.

“Lavergne was able to compound (its) combination of the recycled bottle material, our recovered PET and (some) additives to create a resin capable of going back into HP cartridges,” Miller said.

In the closed-loop process, used cartridges are shipped in from HP’s recycling facilities in Germany and Nashville, Tenn., before being disassembled using specialized machines, rinsed and turned into “HP clean shred” plastic.

From there, the HP plastic is blended with newly recycled and rinsed PET beverage bottles in the largest ‘V’-style blender in North America—it mixes approximately two tonnes of material at a time, according to HP—to create a homogeneous blend of recycled flake.

The last step before quality check is plastic extrusion, the process of combining recipe components and heating the batch to create pellets of high-quality recycled resin, which is ultimately shipped back to HP for its manufacturing processes.

Plastic flakes from used HP printer and toner cartridges and PET beverage bottles are blended together into a resin used to make new cartridges. PHOTO Dan Ilika

“It’s one thing for a company that has 300,000 employees to say it’s okay for five or six people to go off on a project for four or five years, (but) it’s quite another thing for a company of Lavergne’s size—50 or 60 people—to invest five or six people for four or five years with no return.”

The payoff, though, has been huge, as HP has manufactured more than one billion cartridges with recycled content.

Now HP is looking to expand on that success, hoping to boost the recycled plastic content in its printer cartridges to more than 80 per cent and find ways to expand the use of recycled materials in its full range of products, including printers and computers.

And you can count on a little Canadian ingenuity being involved in the process.

According to Volkwagen, its new XL1 is the most fuel-efficient production car in the world, with a European combined fuel consumption rating of 261 miles per gallon.

The sleek sports car-inspired two seater is modelled after its track-going counterparts in more than just looks, with a design focused on outstanding aerodynamics, a low centre of gravity and light weight.

The XL1 weighs 1,953-lbs., according to the automaker.

A plug-in hybrid, Volkwagen says the car can cover up to 32 miles as a zero-emissions vehicle in all-electric mode.

When not in all-electric mode, the XL1 can cruise at a constant 100 kilometres an hour while using just 8.3-horsepower, Volkswagen claims.

The XL1 sports a 47-horsepower two-cylinder TDI diesel engine, a 27-horsepower electric motor, a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission and a lithium-ion battery.

Production and availability dates were not made available by Volkswagen.

The XL1 will be built at the automaker’s Osnabrück plant in northwestern Germany.

“Our large land mass, cold climate and resource-intensive economy make us less likely to rank highly on some indicators of environmental sustainability, but many of our poor results are based on our inefficient use of our resources,” said Len Coad, director, director, energy, environment and technology policy. “Canada must promote economic growth without further degrading the environment. Encouraging more sustainable consumption is crucial to achieve that objective.”

A 15^th-place ranking, the same as in 2009, puts Canada ahead of Australia and the US. These three countries are similar: they are three largest countries in terms of land area, and they are the most resource-intensive economies in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Canada does show some excellent environmental results, said the Conference Board. Forests are generally well-protected and well-managed, while air quality has improved modestly and energy use per person is down and water quality is still high.

But several of Canada’s dismal results are due to overconsumption, the report said. In addition to generating the most waste, Canadians’ water withdrawals are nearly double the average of the other countries and are lower only than the US. And despite some improvement, Canadians are still the largest users of energy in the developed world.

Waste: In 2009, Canada generated 777 kilograms of municipal waste per capita—the 17 country average was 578 kg. Most of the waste goes to landfills or incinerators—of the 34 million tonnes generated in 2008, 26 million went there for disposal.

Energy: Canada’s energy use is a mixed picture. Canadian greenhouse gas emissions per capita in 2010 earned a D grade, likely because of increased exports of natural resources. Yet GHG emissions per capita fell by almost five percent between 1990 and 2010. Similarly Canada ranks 17^th and last for the highest level of total energy consumption, but energy intensity decreased by almost 20 percent between 1990 and 2009.  Canada improved the share of its electricity produced by nuclear and renewable sources (mostly hydroelectric power) from 72 percent in 2000 to almost 78 percent in 2011.

Air quality: Canada’s performance on all four air quality indicators in this analysis improved between 1990 and 2009. Yet, compared to most other countries, Canada still emits higher levels per capita of nitrogen oxides, sulphur oxides, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).

Water: At a glance, the report said, Canada enjoys abundant and safe water. For example, Canada earns an A grade for water quality and ranks 4^th on this indicator. Yet, regions such as the Prairies, southern Ontario and southern Quebec have water quality concerns, due in part to municipal water discharges (still, despite upgrades, one of the largest sources of pollution in Canadian waters). Furthermore, Canada’s water withdrawals are nearly double the 16-country average, and Canadians use more than nine times the water per capita that Denmark does.

Forest management: Canada is a top performer in its forestry practices. Canada gets an A grade and ranks second only to Japan on use of forest resources.

Biodiversity: Canada gets an A for maintaining threatened species. Nevertheless, the number of species at risk in Canada is increasing, although federal biodiversity action plans have been prepared for the agriculture and forestry sectors. In contrast, Canada’s Marine Trophic Index declined between 2000 and 2006, so Canada gets a D grade and ranks last on this indicator. The Marine Trophic Index is a measure of the extent to which a country is fishing for smaller species that are further down the food chain, so it measures the overall level of depletion of fish stocks.

How Canada Performs is a multi-year research program at The Conference Board of Canada to help leaders identify relative strengths and weaknesses in Canada’s socio-economic performance. The How Canada Performs website presents data and analysis on Canada’s performance compared to 16 peer countries in six performance categories: economy, innovation, environment, education and skills, health, and society.

According to the ministry, the latest data shows Canadians emitted an average of 20.3 tonnes of GHG in 2010, the lowest level since tracking began in 1990.

“The data collected shows that between 2005 and 2010, GHG emissions decreased by 6.5 per cent despite an economic growth of 6.3 per cent,” Environment Minister Peter Kent said in a statement.

“These numbers demonstrate that the Canadian economy can grow without increasing GHG emissions levels.”

Environment Canada’s National Inventory Report, released in April 2012, shows that, compared with 2005 levels, emissions in 2010 declined in almost all sectors, including oil and gas and electricity generation.

The federal government’s overall climate change strategy aims to reduce GHG emissions by 17 per cent from 2005 levels by 2020.

Environmental Commissioner Gord Miller says the government is ending or scaling back programs to fight greenhouse gas emissions, and will fall short of meeting its targets for 2020 and 2050.

Miller says the Liberals cut funding for programs to buy electric vehicles and develop charging stations, and delayed construction of 31 kilometres of HOV lanes because of shrinking revenues.

He gives the government high marks for phasing out coal-fired electricity generation, but says the associated increase in the use of natural gas means it has surpassed coal as the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the energy sector.

Miller also singles out the transportation sector as a special concern, saying it is the largest source of the unwanted emissions.

“Clearly the Ontario government’s commitment to responding to GHG emissions and climate change has become questionable,” Miller told reporters.

“While the coal phase-out is a worth accomplishment, it is now past performance and no new initiatives to garner such measurable benefits or reductions are being advanced.”

Miller’s annual report on climate change also takes the Liberals to task for “a complete lack of engagement around the question of carbon pricing,” and urges action.

“Other jurisdictions are demonstrating that carbon pricing can be adopted without hurting economic growth, while delivering the benefit of lowered GHG emissions,” he said.

“Decisive action on carbon pricing could reboot the program and provide a rate and elusive win-win-win for the government, economy and the environment.”

The report by the UN Environment Program, released just days ahead of a major climate conference, said the concentration of heat-trapping greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is up about 20 per cent since 2000.

Scientists say those emissions are contributing to climate change and that failure to contain them could have dangerous consequences, including rising sea levels inundating coastal cities, dramatic shifts in rainfall disrupting agriculture and drinking water, the spread of diseases and the extinction of species.

Emissions levels, driven by the burning of fossil fuels, need to come down by 14% by 2020 for the world to reach a pathway that could keep the global temperature rise below 2 degrees C, compared with pre-industrial levels, UNEP said. That’s the stated goal of U.N. climate negotiations, which resume next week in Doha, Qatar.
But it won’t happen if countries don’t come ahead with more ambitious plans to cut emissions than what’s currently on the table.

The US agency said if no swift action is taken, emissions are likely to hit 58 gigatons in 2020 – 14 gigatons too much to have a chance of limiting warming to 2 degrees. The projected gap is now bigger than it was last year and in 2010.

UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said that bridging the gap remains doable and that there are many “inspiring” actions at the national level on renewable energy, energy efficiency, protecting forests, and vehicle emissions standards.

“Yet the sobering fact remains that a transition to a low-carbon, inclusive Green Economy is happening far too slowly and the opportunity for meeting the 44 Gt target is narrowing annually,” Steiner said.

The report confirmed scientific observations that the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is growing, not shrinking. On Nov. 20 the World Meteorological Organization reported that the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere reached a record high last year.

Climate activists said the reports underscored the urgency in advancing clean technologies, such as wind and solar power.

“The only way we are going achieve the necessary cuts in emissions is to move away from fossil fuels and towards a world of renewable energy,” said Kaisa Kosonen, climate policy adviser at Greenpeace.

The Kyoto Protocol, the only international agreement to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases from industrial countries, expires this year. Talks in Doha will focus on extending it for another term while negotiators work on a more comprehensive climate pact that would also include developing countries, whose share of global emissions is growing.

Synergy began marketing Sofame’s water heating systems earlier this year, according to the Montreal-based firm, with strong end-user interest perpetuating the deal.

To enter the Chinese market, Sofame has agreed to source key components of its systems in China, and will sub-contract and oversee manufacturing of Sofame heat recovery units for the Chinese market by qualified Chinese manufacturers.

According to Sofame, with light fuel oil in China carrying a price of $1.20 per US gallon and natural gas around $5.50 per Dekatherm, prices in that country hover around double those of the U.S. market.

“We are eager to bring Sofame’s proven 94- to 99 per cent efficiency rates to industrial energy users across China,” Synergy sales director Edward Wu said in a statement. “By supplying components sourced in China, a significant cost barrier is eliminated.”

Synergy has five offices in China, including Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong and Guangzhou.

With the deal in place, Sofame now has representation in China, Mexico and France, in addition to operations in North America.

Whether it be a cap-and-trade system, a full-fledged carbon tax or the federal government’s sector-by-sector regulations, each policy to curtail the amount of greenhouse gases sent into the atmosphere comes with a hefty price tag—as well as considerable benefits.

The differences between the policies are many, however.

Who pays the price? How transparent is the price on carbon? And how effective is the policy in reducing emissions in time to meet international commitments?

These questions are barely being discussed in the deafening Conservative attack on NDP climate policies that kicked off this week’s new session of Parliament.

“What my concern is is that there is no way to have a rational debate about sound policy against climate change in Canada. Without carbon pricing, you cannot succeed,” a frustrated Liberal MP Stephane Dion said.

“It’s not the only answer, but it’s part of the answer.”

The Conservatives are accusing the NDP of trying to spring a nasty “tax on everything” on the public, through its carbon-pricing proposal to set up a cap-and-trade system.

“Canadians and people across the globe know we have a government smart enough to reject dumb ideas like a $20-billion carbon tax,” Harper told the House of Commons on Monday.

A cap-and-trade system is not the same as a carbon tax.

Both policies would reduce carbon emissions and would come with a cost that industry and consumers would have to pay in one way or another.

But they function in very different ways.

With a cap-and-trade system, the country’s main emitters would pay the government to buy permits to emit greenhouse gases, and then trade them so that the companies that can cut emissions most efficiently is effectively paid by other companies to do so.

It’s the policy favoured by the NDP, and it used to be the leading option for the federal Conservatives as well.

Alberta has already adopted a version of cap-and-trade, as has Quebec.

Ontario and Manitoba have committed to moving in that direction.

Analysis done by American officials has shown that a cap-and-trade system in the United States reduced the cost of reducing emissions by about 50 per cent, compared to a traditional regulatory approach, says University of Ottawa professor Stewart Elgie, chair of the Sustainable Prosperity think tank.

A carbon tax is even cheaper, if the British Columbia experience is a guide, Elgie said.

There, the provincial government has been able to use revenue from its carbon tax to lower income tax, more than making up for the higher cost of gasoline that consumers feel at the pumps, he said.

Plus, a carbon tax can be implemented quickly, without the government having to go industry by industry to examine who is emitting what, and how, and then decide how to limit the emissions.

“They’re different systems. One limits emissions, the other puts a price on carbon. They both can work. They’re both more effective than conventional … regulation,” Elgie said.

“The idea that either a tax or a trading system would hurt the economy is dead wrong. The evidence is all to the contrary. Just look at B.C. and Alberta, look at six European countries that have done this. In fact it’s the absence of a carbon price that can hurt the economy.”

Indeed, federal documentation shows there is no free lunch.

The federal policy of regulating emitters sector by sector—”command and control,” as business likes to call the approach—also carries hidden costs.

Buried deep in federal regulations to restrict emissions in the coal-fired electricity sector, officials explain that the costs of those new rules is about $16-billion in today’s terms.

About half of the cost is due to increased consumption of natural gas that will be the side-effect of cracking down on coal.

The coal regs come with benefits too, which federal officials estimate will more than offset the costs by a margin of $7-billion.

That’s because of the savings on health care, power generation and dealing with climate change.

Similarly, the cost associated with regulations on emissions for heavy vehicles is about $800-million, by far offset by benefits worth $5-billion.

And passenger vehicle rules are expected to cost Canada $4.2-billion, offset by benefits of $13.4-billion.

So even though the Conservatives are not even close to finishing regulating emitters—they still have to do oil and gas, and several other major sectors—the costs are already well above the $20-billion Harper accuses Mulcair’s plan of costing.

The benefits are also substantial, just as they would be with a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade scheme, experts say.

But sector-by-sector regulations require heavy-handed government control and lead to uncertainty and unpredictable politicking, businesses frequently complain.

Plus, numerous experts including the federal environment auditor and the now-defunct National Roundtable on Environment and the Economy say that the policies will not be in place soon enough for Canada to reach its international commitments to cut emissions by 2020.

Elgie argued that delaying a clear price on carbon is also costing Canadians dearly.

He points to B.C. forests decimated by pine beetles, and the loss of a way of life in the North.

Regardless of what is said at the federal level, a price on carbon is steadily becoming a reality in Canada—through provincial policy, and through international market pressure, says Josh Laughren, director of climate and energy at the Canadian branch of the World Wildlife Fund.

Carbon pricing “is not a dirty word anywhere except in the Ottawa bubble,” he said in a recent interview.

With most of the big provinces already having adopted or moving towards emissions-control schemes, it’s only a matter of time before a pan-Canadian arrangement becomes a necessity, he added.

“Price on carbon is coming. It’s here, to some extent.”

Launched by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (DTTL) , the survey, Sustainability: CFOs come to the table, found more than half of CFOs say their involvement has increased over the last year.

The survey—representing 250 CFOs in 14 countries across five continents—provides global insight into how increasingly more CFOs are engaging with sustainability to support their business goals, and operationalizing sustainability to gain a competitive advantage.

“Companies are sitting up and taking notice that sustainability is not just a brand or a corporate responsibility element—it is becoming a key driver of financial performance and the future of business,” Deloitte sustainability leader Dave Pearson said in a statement.

“CFOs have begun to take an active role in driving the execution of sustainability strategies and making key organizational changes within their organizations, such as introducing more sustainable technology and deploying environment-friendly policies.”

According to the survey, the percentage of CFOs and chief operating officers accountable to their company’s boards for sustainability issues nearly doubling from 20 per cent to 36 per cent in the past year.

As such, CFOs have become focused on a number of sustainable operating practices:

• Increased focus on sustainability in tax and financial reporting: As integrated reporting gains momentum, along with a growing number of green credits and incentive measures, CFOs placed greater importance on sustainability aspects of reporting.

• The majority of CFOs reported a meaningful impact from sustainability concerns on both financial reporting (74 per cent) and tax matters (54 per cent).

• Increased investment in technology: To further reduce the footprint of company travel and energy use from data centers, CFOs plan to invest in three specific areas: video conferencing (56 per cent); data centre efficiency equipment (52 per cent); and electric vehicles (35 per cent).

The Canadian Press has learned that when Environment Canada releases its next update on greenhouse gas emissions trends in August, the report will show that Canada is almost 50 per cent of the way towards meeting its 2020 goal.

That’s a big jump from the 25 per cent announced a year ago.

Multiple sources say the surge is a result of provincial measures, more efficient technology and a recent international agreement that credits Canada for its large forests.

“We’re trending in the right direction,” said one source on condition of anonymity.

The report is expected to be made public within a couple of weeks.

Specifically, it will show that existing government measures will make greenhouse gas emissions fall to 720 megatonnes in 2020, instead of the 850 megatonnes that would have resulted from no government action.

The 720-megatonne estimate is 65 megatonnes lower than the total at this time last year.

It means that if nothing else changed on the policy front, the actions Canadians and their governments are taking now would reduce emissions by almost half the amount required under Canada’s international commitments.

Ottawa has pledged under the Copenhagen accord that by 2020, Canada will have cut its emissions to 607 megatonnes, or 17 per cent below 2005 levels.

Part of the progress is math. In the past, Canada didn’t count land-use change or forestry in its calculations, but now, after international negotiations, it can. That accounts for 25 megatonnes of the surge, sources said.

But the rest of the advance is because newly constructed buildings and new vehicles are far more efficient than they were in the past, and because provincial policies for reducing emissions are proving to be effective.

Quebec is implementing a cap-and-trade system to encourage a low-carbon economy, while British Columbia has implemented a carbon tax.

Plus, some federal regulations may be beginning to have an effect, sources said.

In April, Environment Canada said emissions in 2010 were no longer increasing even though the economy had resumed growth after the recession. The upcoming emissions trends report, which is subject to stringent peer review, assumes that the “decoupling” persists, sources said.

A spokesman for Environment Minister Peter Kent would not comment on the emissions trends report.

“We’re in the process of crunching our numbers and look forward to releasing this year’s trend report in the coming weeks,” said director of communications Rob Taylor.

Still, it’s an open question whether federal and provincial policies will be introduced and implemented fast enough to finish the job in time.

“If we steadfastly stick to the sector-by-sector approach… it’s just not going to be possible. There’s too much time lag to develop them, and they don’t do enough,” said Matt Horne, acting director of the climate change program at the Pembina Institute, an environment think tank.

Ottawa has rejected both a cap-and-trade system and a carbon tax, and has instead opted to impose rules on key industrial sectors that are major emitters of carbon.

But only two sets of rules have been introduced so far.

New coal regulations are in the final stages of being ready, and oil and gas will likely be next, in early 2013. But Horne fears the federal government is in the midst of weakening its plans for coal regulations. And Ottawa faces intense pressure from the oil patch to go easy in that sector too.

Numerous experts, as well as the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, and the federal environment auditor, have all warned that Ottawa won’t come close to reaching its target if it relies solely on those regulations.

That’s because they are taking a long time to develop, and an even longer time to actually affect the way industries carries out their business.

In the meantime, companies are starting up new ventures under the existing regime, and locking in high carbon emissions—keeping levels high for decades to come.

“Despite making progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Canada is not on track to achieve the federal government’s 2020 reduction target of 17% below 2005 levels,” the round table said June in its last major report before shutting its doors due to government funding cuts.

“Canada will not achieve its 2020 GHG emission reductions target unless significant new, additional measures are taken. More will have to be done. No other conclusion is possible.”

Putting a price on carbon and investing heavily in hydro-electric power would be key ways to meeting the target, the advisory body has suggested.

“It would be tough to meet them (the target) regardless. There’s not much time left,” said Horne. “I’m not sure we can get all the way there.”

Aerographite, made up of a network of porous carbon tubes that is three-dimensionally interwoven at both nano and micro levels, is now considered the lightest material in the world.

It weights only 0.2-milligrams per cubic centimetre, according to scientists at KU and Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), and is therefore 75-times lighter than Styrofoam but still very strong.

The scientific results were published in scientific journal Advanced Materials July 3, 2012.

The jet-black Aerographite remains stable, is electrically conductive, ductile and non-transparent.

With these unique properties and its very low density, the carbon-made material outperforms all similar materials, KU said in a release.

“Our work is causing great discussions in the scientific community,” TUHH Ph.D. student and co-author Matthias Mecklenburg said in a statment. “The hitherto lightest material of the world, a nickel material that was presented to the public about six months ago, is also constructed of tiny tubes, only nickel has a higher atomic mass than carbon.”

Aerographite weighs four times less than world-record-holder up to now, according to Mecklenburg.

Despite its low weight, researchers claim Aerographite is highly resilient.

While lightweight materials normally withstand compression but not tension, Aerographite features both: an excellent compression and tension load.

It is able to be compressed up to 95 percent and be pulled back to its original form without any damage.

Researchers describe the material as ivy-web which has wound itself around a tree—with the tree removed.

Due to its unique material characteristics, Aerographite could fit onto the electrodes of Li-ion batteries used in electric cars or bikes.

In that case, only a minimal amount of battery electrolyte would be necessary, which then would lead to a reduction in the battery’s weight.

According to the scientists, the material could also be used to enhance electrical conductivity of synthetic materials.

Non-conductive plastic could be transformed without causing it to gain weight, according to researchers.

Statics, which occur to most people daily, could hence be avoided.

Aerographite could also be used in electronics for aviation and satellites or as an aid in water purification.

TerraCycle, a firm that reuses and reprocesses hard-to-recycle waste, has launched its Cigarette Waste Brigade program, which diverts cigarette butts—along with plastic and foil cigarette packaging—from landfills and uses them to make pallets for industrial shipping.

“I’m personally very excited about cigarette butts because it’s a landmark waste stream,” said TerraCycle founder Tom Szaky. “It’s a massive litter issue.”

According to Szaky, TerraCycle set out with three goals in mind: recycle cigarette butts; recycle used chewing gum; and recycle used diapers.

“Our basic premise is a simple one,” Szaky said, “we make things that are not recyclable … recyclable.”

The ball got rolling early with the cigarette butt program, but look for a chewing gum initiative in Brazil and a used diaper plan in U.S., to be launched by year-end.

Exclusive to Canada, the cigarette recycling program banks on the initiative of individuals, businesses and anti-litter groups to collect the discarded waste and send it to TerraCycle in increments of up to 70-lbs. per package, free of charge.

Once the butts arrive at a TerraCycle facility in Toronto they are sanitized through a radiation process, shredded and separated: organic material goes through specialty composting and made into compost, with the plastic melted down into pellets for industrial use.

According to Szaky, the plastic is safe for multipurpose use, though his company would rather not take any chances.

“The plastic we’ve tested independently at labs … is proven to be safe but to be extremely careful from our end—because we want to just be very, very cautious about this—we’re only allowing the plastic to go into industrial uses,” he said.

From there the pellets are sent to a pallet manufacturer in the northern U.S., where they are melted down and formed into an alternative pallet to the traditional wood or virgin plastic products used across the continent and around the globe.

“We aren’t a plastic pallet company,” Szaky said. “There’s already a huge plastic pallet industry out there and that industry is the one that’s buying this raw material to replace their current raw material.”

Though TerraCycle recycles the cigarette waste at a loss, Szaky said the program is subsidized by Canada’s largest tobacco company to make it economically viable.

In the first 30 days of operation the program received more than 5,000 butts, which Szaky is pleased with.

“(It) may not seem like a big deal at all but the fact that (it’s) happened already in the first 30 days is pretty amazing,” he said.

The project, still in its infancy, has garnered the attention of some of the world’s largest tobacco companies.

“Since we launched in Canada we have been getting massive interest from the top three cigarette companies around the world to replicate the program,” he said, noting TerraCycle has signed a deal for a U.S. program and is in talks for another in Europe.

If the environmentally responsible nature of the program isn’t enough to get people involved, the social aspect is sure to draw interest.

“In addition to free shipping and recycling the material … we also give $1 for every pound of butts that you send us to any charity or school that you wish in Canada,” Szaky said, adding there is no limit to the amount of waste people can send in.

The PA6 resin will be adopted on three of Ford’s current production engines.

Polyamide resin manifolds are to appear in the 2.5-liter I-4 engine for the Ford Fusion and Ford Escape; the 5.0-liter V-8 engine used in vehicle models including F-Series trucks and Mustang; and the 6.2-liter V-8 engine for the F-Series.

Tier 1 Suppliers Montaplast (2.5L), and MAHLE North America (6.2L and 5.0L), are producing the manifolds.

In 2009, Ford reduced the amount of automotive-related plastics to landfills by nearly 30 million pounds and saved approximately $4.5 million by reusing recycled materials.

Polykar, based in Montreal, manufactures polyethylene film and packaging.

The company’s compostable bags were selected for the city’s Zero Waste Day Camps this month.

Participants at the summer camps recycle and compost while learning about waste management.

Polykar’s bags are certified by the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) and the Bureau de normalisation du Québec (BNQ).

The company manufactures the bags in Montreal through a co-branding agreement with BASF.

According to reports from the Connecticut university, the findings could lead to new ways of reducing landfill waste.

Students in Yale’s Rainforest Expedition and Laboratory course collected organisms called endophytes, which are found in rainforest plants. They took them back to New Haven, Conn. to test them for biological activity.

On the 2008 trip to Equador, student Pria Anand, decided to see if the endophytes she collected could be used in bioremediation.  In a rudimentary test, Anand showed a chemical reaction did take place when an endophyte she found was introduced to plastic.

Another student in the class, Jeffrey Huang, analyzed endophytes to find those that broke down chemical bonds most efficiently.

Student Jonathan R. Russell then discovered that one family of endophytes identified by Huang showed the most promise for bioremediation. Russell went on to identify the enzyme that most efficiently broke down polyurethane.

While other agents can degrade polyurethane, the enzyme identified by Yale students is potentially significant because it can do so in the absence of oxygen, which is normally a prerequisite.

A new group of students are now analyzing newly discovered endophytes collected during recent rainforest trips to see if they can also degrade more intractable plastics such as polystyrene.

Their work was recently published in the Journal of Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

The soybean in the diaper replaces a third of petroleum-based products, according to Battelle.

Soybeans are about 20 percent oil, 70 percent soybean meal and eight percent hulls. Soybean meal is the part Battelle scientists use to convert to the SAP.

Battelle conducted the research in collaboration with the United Soybean Board (USB) and the Ohio Soybean Council (OSC). Their other recent developments in soy research have included flexible foams for bedding and furniture, toner for printers, lubricants, coatings, plasticizers.

The market for SAPs today is about 1.6 million tons per year, with diapers accounting for 83 percent of that, according to Battelle.

The Brazil-based petrochemical company polymerized sugar cane derivatives to make the cap, which is now being launched in Tetra Pak packages for Nestlé’s Ninho and MolicoUHT milk.

As of August, UHT milk for Ninho, Ninho Levinho, Ninho Low Lactose and Molico brands will be packed in Tetra Brik Aseptic packages using the caps.

It’s the first time the food and beverage packaging industry has used PE made out of 100 per cent renewable raw materials in this way, according to the companies.

The bioplastics symbol was established earlier this year through a competition held by bioplastics producer Cereplast. The logo is intended to raise awareness of bioplastics in consumer products ranging from disposable food containers to children’s accessories. It will work like the universal recycling symbol, which helps consumers identify products that are recyclable or made from recycled materials.

Cereplast has applied for trademark registration and is currently determining guidelines for the use and licensing of the symbol.

The company is hosting an online forum to engage consumers, industry and other stakeholders on potential guidelines and licensing requirements for the new logo. It’s open for public comment until August 12.

Frederic Scheer, Chairman and CEO of Cereplast, said guidelines for using the symbol should be unbiased.

“As such we will appoint an independent entity to oversee the usage of the symbol by manufacturers globally,” Scheer said.

After the initial forum period, Cereplast will revise the proposed usage guidelines and licensing agreement and again enlist the public to comment on the finalized rules.

The bioplastics symbol is expected to become available for use by product manufacturers by November 15, 2011.

“Green chemistry markets are currently nascent, with many technologies still at laboratory or pilot scale,” says Clint Wheelock, Pike Research president.

“Many production-scale green chemical plants are not expected to be running at capacity for several more years.  However, most green chemical companies are targeting large, existing chemical markets, so adoption of these products is limited less by market development issues than by the ability to feed extant markets at required levels of cost and performance,” he says.

The report forecasts that the total chemical industry will expand to $5.3 trillion in annual revenues in the next ten years.

It says alternatives in the polymer sector will represent the highest penetration level (5.7%) within the total chemical market, as it is somewhat more developed than the other key sectors.

Because special, fine, and commodity chemical sectors are more nascent, they’ll see lower penetration rates.

The report says three major themes are driving the green chemistry movement forward, including waste minimization in the chemical production process, the replacement of existing products with less toxic alternatives and the shift to renewable feedstocks.