It Grows On Trees

Astronaut Snags "Best of Show" with Work for Poet

Mostly, we try to track the wider world of green communications, but we recently received a decent enough reason to brag on our own work. In this, our first year entering work in the South Dakota Advertising Federation awards show, Astronaut took Best of Show in "electronic media," one of only two categories so honored.

The work that beat out scores of worthy entries (many from the old-guard agencies in our area) is a program called "Landscapes" we developed and produced for Poet, the world's largest ethanol producer and one of our best clients.

Its primary objective was to generate excitement, interest and action from farmers in the region to join Poet's effort to produce cellulosic ethanol on a commercial scale. Its secondary objective was to demonstrate the company's leadership and give others who support renewable energy and biofuels a clear star to steer by in Project Liberty, Poet's cellulosic ethanol effort. 

As with all agency work, this was a team effort. Landscapes is the result of one of those great moments of collaboration between our client, our shop and our production partner, VVI. So we want to share the love with them, big time. Best of all, our client/producer at Poet, Autumn Bates, reports the show did its job by generating real enthusiasm and buy-in from its farmer audience.

Props also to Insight Marketing Design, our friends who took Best of Show in the Addy's print category.
The awards garnered a little press here.      

Oh yeah, Astronaut also earned one Best of Class award, three gold Addy's and four silver Addy's. Not bad for the new kid on the block, huh?

Greenpeace Recycles JFK

And the result is both creepy and cliché.

Look, at this point, invoking the Apollo project and the civil rights movement of the 1960's to stir support for a green economic makeover has been thoroughly done.

We did it two years ago (pre-Astronaut*) when we rebranded the world's largest biofuel producer, Poet. The "We" campaign did it earlier this year. Thomas Friedman (2004) and Al Gore (2007) have each called for a new "Apollo program" to reverse global warming. And before any of us, the Apollo Alliance started it in 2004.

I like what Greenpeace has done in the past. And I'm a fan of AKQA, which produced this. But the CG repurposing of JFK's speech completely upstages the message. I wonder if by reanimating the departed hero, Greenpeace has really put a nail in the coffin of his inspiration.

Hat tip to adrants, which has apparently delighted in covering Greenpeace's advertising over the years.

* When we named our shop "Astronaut" in early 2007, it was to invoke the mojo of those "star travellers," not to link the green movement to the moonshot of '69. If that means anything.

Help Us Help You

Funny how the worm turns — not only when the Oilmen turn into Windmen, but when online media turns to broadcast media, and vice-versa.

Just this morning, in the latest issue of Commarts, its interactive annual, editor Patrick Coyne's column caught my attention with this quote from interactive architect Liz Danzico:

"The page metaphor is dead...the idea of getting beyond the browser is really taking shape, too."

Put another way, the intersection of new and old media, metaphorically or practically, is getting more twisted and free all at once. Consider the oxymoronic assault a few green(ish) marketers have made on my inbox this week: I've been getting emails linking to online media with entreaties for your help and mine getting some TV spots to air.

Apparently reaching millions online isn't enough. They actually want us to use social networks to get their media on the tube.

Curiouser still is the implied message that these spots can only be effective if they're seen on TV. Here they are:

The first, from T. Boone himself, hasn't won the approval of NBC gatekeepers, but apparently it might if you squawk for airtime the billionaire can't buy.

The second from a political action group Campaign for America's Future (with a minority-green message) is aimed at Republicans gathering  in St. Paul next week; producers are hoping to raise money online to get the spot on the air in time for the GOP convention.

The third from the We Campaign is already airing on TV, but campaign organizers are are reaching out in hopes you''ll forward it to friends online.

In Which Alternative Energy and the Green Economy Live or Die by the Blue Collar

In the run-up to the 1994 World Cup soccer tournament, the first ever held in the United States, when asked what it would take to make the game catch fire as a major league sport in this country, one commentator replied, "working class people."

Think about it. That majority segment of the global population is the reason soccer is the most popular sport on the planet. It's played by the hardscrabble denizens of the toughest economies across the world, on dirt fields, concrete back lots and weed choked patches of grass. Its greatest heroes come from the humblest roots. In the US, soccer is an upper-middle-class rite of passage, played on glistening expanses of pristine suburban lawn. That's alien to the Americans who shape culture, especially those in the inner cities and far rural corners of the heartland.

And yet proof of the working-class maxim is right in front of us here in the States: all the biggest sports in America are the province of blue collar dreamers — football, basketball, baseball and hockey. These are cultural forces ruled and propagated not by a privileged elite, but by regular people in the  toughest neighborhoods in America. They're the cultural grassroots that germinate and gather strength in the proving ground of the sandlots, the school ice rinks, the frozen ponds, the playground courts.

Find a way to capture their devotion, and you will capture the country.

 

So it goes with preened and booksmart greenies: the movement will live or die by the participation of those who are not classically green. Which is why Good Old Boy T. Boone Pickens may be the Wayne Gretzky of the movement.

The Texan oilman's pedigree is maybe the most shocking and delightful boost the green movement could have hoped for. You expect Al Gore to make hay with with the college-educated middle class. But a self-made billionaire born in a dusty little Oklahoma hamlet is the guy who just might connect with regular folks in a way that Planet Green and Leo DiCaprio simply can't. Watch this video. You want to have a beer with this guy and listen to his stories. But then, he's a product of working class America. Rich as hell, yes, and so is Brett Favre, and look how many Americans are standing by him even as he squeezes the Jets for millions.

Pickens's entrée into this space holds a lot lessons for anyone trying to scratch out mainstream acceptance of their ideas. One of my favorites is the fact that he's got a Facebook page; if an 80-year-old oilman is talking environmentalism in this medium, shouldn't you?

The biggest lesson, though, is that the success of a green makeover for this country rests not in the hands of its traditional allies, but in those of the Americans Pickens represents. It will be interesting to see if others catch on. I for one hope like hell they do.

Xcel's Wind Win Situation

Can you ever be happy to get your electric bill? Yes, when it looks like this:

In my part of the country, Xcel Energy is the major utility delivering both electricity and natural gas to millions in eight Western and Midwestern states. This bill hit my mailbox the same day the company announced it had brought online 1,000 megawatts of electricity from wind turbines.

It caught my eye for two reasons:

1) for an energy company, what a great way to kill two birds with one stone -- advertise your environmental achievements on a touchpoint that reaches your customers reliably each month while cushioning the bill with a feel-good message; simple, but effective. Plus, you can't go wrong with the image of kids looking to a future of wind-turbines on the open prairie (especially if you're really using them).

2) the paradox this thing represents, one some prominent green marketers have been batting around a lot this year: are you being dishonest by focusing on environmental achievement even as you downplay your environmental shortcomings?

According to Xcel's web site, more than half of the electricity it generates, or 7,800 megawatts, comes from coal-fired plants. It makes another 5270 megawatts from other fossil fuels (natural gas and oil).

Wind energy represents less than ten percent of the company's electricity portfolio. So is Xcel misleading us -- is it sinning -- when it touts its position as the top wind energy producer in the United States?

Hell, no. Companies demonstrating material leadership in the green space, even those that simultaneously contribute to the problem, to the tune of tens of millions in investments have earned the right to assume a pro-environmental posture in their communications (especially when they mercifully forego the color green in pieces like the above).

Xcel is perfectly within its rights to spotlight incremental improvements in its environmental impact. No matter how much we wish it were otherwise, the company's 3.3 million customers want electricity right now. I'm personally using some of it to write this. No one's going to flip a switch and turn off installed coal-fired infrastructure. But if Xcel is slowly but surely shifting gears to include more and more renewable energy -- and can prove they're Number One in wind -- we should applaud their claims to leadership.

And this is true of countless other companies who are coming to the table with small but very real eco-friendly improvements to products and service in demand in the market.

The 1,000 megawatts Excel's wind turbines generate can power up to 270,000 homes. A drop in the bucket? Of course. But that's stilll a lot of Christmas lights.  The company's wind win is a win-win for everyone: it's a critical step in the right direction, but in pure marketing terms, it demonstrates leadership that puts the renewable energy convo right in the faces of 3.3 million bill payers every month. That's a good thing.

Some will dismiss this kind of communication as "greenwashing" or a "sin of hidden trade-offs," considering how much the company relies on coal-fired plants.

I contend that, when it comes to examples from industry like we see in Xcel, the real sin of green washing is the way some green marketers frame the conversation: with a metric that only registers absolutes and dismisses the middle ground, incremental progress or the reality of meeting present-tense market demands. They trade greenwashing for a red herring.

I'm not done on this subject. More to come. For now, big ups to Xcel, and keep the wind power coming. And, if you must, keep the bills coming, too.

BTUs: WTF?

The war over global warming — or is that "climate change?" — is often  a war of words. To win it, advertisers with sustainable products have win the skirmishes.

Newsweek stirred up the academics and true believers last week with its story on the greenhouse-effect disinformation machine. The deniers, as the article reveals, are masters at framing conversations to the disadvantage of those with the science on their side.

And while companies like Philips bask in the glow of adulation from treehuggers in love with their CFLs  (180,000+ of 'em "take the equivalent of 12,650 cars off the road," per a previous post) folks in ethanol (whose product took the equivalent of over a million cars of the road in 2004 alone) struggle with semantics that frame their renewable fuel in unflattering, even inaccurate terms.

So sayeth Michigan State University professor Bruce Dale. The question of net energy gain is a red herring, he explains in an article at Renewable Energy Access. The real issue is how effective an alternative energy source is at replacing fossil fuels.

"Net energy analysis is simple and has great intuitive appeal," Dale says, "but it is also dead wrong and dangerously misleading -- net energy must be eliminated from our discourse."

It's always been ironic to me that detractors of biofuels throw around BTU figures and claims of net energy gain or loss in the production of those fuels without applying the same standards to petroleum production. Dale says we need to reframe the conversation to get the appropriate picture of the benefit of renewable energy.

How are you framing your conversation?

ACE Day Two: Punching the "Gas" to Drive Change

Yesterday a record 1,800 people packed the second day of the ACE annual conference, "Driving Change for 20 Years." And for good reason: the "change" ACE's members want to drive seems to be experiencing a real turbo-charge, not simply in funding or even interest in ethanol and renewable fuels, but in the sophistication of the industry at all levels.

It was a day packed with presentations that were informative for both their content and what they represent: the maturation of the industry. Although a lot of good folks in green business still debate the efficacy or enviornmental benefit of biofuels, the people here are miles ahead and barrelling forward at break-neck speed to develop the technologies and improve practices that make ethanol the dominate force in renewable energy in America.

Five big issues dominated the day's formal presentations:

The industry is Maturing. Fast.

Several presentations focused explicitly on what ethanol producers need to do to mange their risk exposure -- which is just another way of minimizing costs, increasing efficiencies and maximizing profits. From insurance "architecture" to managing rail logistics, the conversation here is about managing the volatility of the business. The question of whether ethanol is here to stay or not is moot. The question of which producers will be here to stay for the long haul is very much alive. Thus industry players are scrutinizing everything they can do operationally and financially to accomplish two key objectives: adapt to breathtaking operational advancements and run a tight business — two things that aren’t always compatible.

Cellulosic ethanol: Get ready.

For those in the industry, the conversation is not "hey, we should do this," but "here's how we're going to do it." As I drafted this post, Poet Energy's Larry Ward was demonstrating his company's model for collecting, handling and fermenting corn stalks and stover to make ethanol. His rationale for that feedstock as opposed to, say, prairie grasses or wood chips, is that there's already an installed base of technology and infrastructure for harvesting corn, and, considering that most existing biorefineries are in the cornbelt, it makes sense to plan to capture cellulose accessible through corn producers. Earlier in the day, a panel gave a fascinating presentation on "Overcoming Obstacles for Cellulosic Ethanol." The room was packed for both of the groups morning presentations. What's clear to me is that the scientists, most notably South Dakota State University's Kevin Kephart and Chris Zygarlicke of the Energy and Environmental Research Center have already divined the path to cellulosic ethanol — at both the molecular level and the regional, operation level. It’s not that they or anyone else needs convincing that cellulosic biorefining is coming — it’s which path we’ll take. Numerous players are stepping in to answer that question, including Poet, BlueFire, Verenium and Mascoma.


Food V. Fuel: The Myth, The Madness

Attendees took delight crushing the idea that ethanol made from corn is either driving up food costs or threatens overall food supply. But the message — however false — seems attractive for its simplicity. After all, people eat corn. Cows and chickens eat corn. People eat cows and chicken. Therefore corn grown to make fuel must mean more scarce or more expensive food. Not. As John Ubranchuck demonstrated  to the audience, the price of corn accounts for a very small percentage of the cost of food. A box of corn flakes, for example, contains 4 pennies worth of corn. Of greater impact to food prices is energy. A barrell of oil, for instance, today fetches $78.00, a new record.

The Bite of the Opposition

The fiction of food versus fuel, in addition to other complaints raised by those who oppose ethanol, are a thorn in the side of those in the industry: a small but painful distraction. The industry is marching forward despite the hue and cry of the armchair quarterbacks who haven’t got the message about ethanol’s positive energy balance or its true impact on food prices. But the antagonism still stings. People at the conference are frustrated with that blind spot for the fuel’s massive environmental and economic benefits. That’s a problem for the industry; groups like ACE and EPIC still struggle to manage that message.

The Big Guns

Some of the more impressive presentations actually came from politicians: Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty and South Dakota Senator John Thune aren’t just the farm-interest shills some would claim. Both gave rousing, articulate support of ethanol and described what each is doing in government to compel biofuels #1 patron and antagonist — gasoline companies — to distribute higher blends of ethanol.

More to come.

(PS: So my plan to fully live-blog the event turned out to be a little tape-delayed. Sorry!)