Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Why it’s so hard to create a truly recyclable Keurig coffee pod

News Feed
Tuesday, December 17, 2024

There’s a Keurig machine in some 40 million households in the U.S. Single-serve coffee brewing systems — which allow consumers to make just one cup of coffee at a time by feeding a pod into a slot and pressing a button — have soared in popularity since the early 2000s.  Inevitably, this leads to a lot of trash.  Every cup of java brewed creates a conundrum: what to do with the coffee pod that produced it. To start, can it be recycled? The answer, in Keurig’s case, is not really. The company’s single-use coffee pods — also known as K-cups — are made of polypropylene plastic, a material that experts warn is not as recyclable as consumers have been led to think. Two of the country’s largest recycling companies have said they do not accept K-cup pods, and one environmental group calculated that if you lined up all the K-cup pods in the world’s landfills side by side, they would comfortably circle the globe 10 times.  A new coffee pod company claims to have developed a solution to Keurig’s plastic waste problem. Cambio Roasters, which launched in September, offers a Keurig-compatible coffee pod that’s made out of aluminum — which, unlike plastic, is infinitely recyclable. Cambio is led by a team of former Keurig employees, including founder and CEO Kevin Hartley, who was previously a chief innovation officer at Keurig Green Mountain, as the company was formerly known. “This is, in our view, the most exciting innovation in coffee since the K-cup,” said Hartley during a launch-day press call for Cambio.   Experts, however, aren’t sure that Cambio understands just how big of a problem K-cups pose to curbside recycling systems.  “Really, plastic is just not a good option,” said Jeremy Pare, a visiting professor of business and environment at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment. But even aluminum, with all its benefits, is “still going to have issues.” Part of the difficulty of creating a truly recyclable packaging option — for just about any consumer good — is the severely fragmented nature of the American recycling landscape. “There are over 10,000 recycling systems in the U.S.,” said Pare, who is also a member of the Plastic Pollution Working Group at Duke’s Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment, and Sustainability. “And yet, at the same time, only a quarter of the population has access to recycling in the U.S.” (Pare lives in one such community with no formal recycling program, just outside of Augusta, Maine.) In the U.S., the question of whether something is recyclable can only accurately be answered on a local level. Read Next The best coffee for the planet might not be coffee at all L.V. Anderson Another problem is the plastic composition of most K-cup pods. Sustainability concerns have followed the Keurig brand closely as it has scaled. (Once a small startup, Keurig was acquired by Green Mountain Coffee Roasters in 2006; in 2018, Keurig Green Mountain merged with Dr Pepper Snapple to become Keurig Dr Pepper.) Keurig started selling K-cups pods made of polypropylene in 2016, with the goal of making 100 percent of K-cup pods “recyclable” by 2020. But the company has run into trouble for touting recyclability. In 2018, a California resident sued Keurig for claiming that K-cup pods could be recycled after the foil lid was removed and the coffee grounds were rinsed or dumped out — which resulted in Keurig agreeing to pay $10 million in a class-action settlement. And in September of this year, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Keurig for falsely claiming the pods “can be effectively recycled.” (Keurig settled the claim by agreeing to pay a $1.5 million penalty fee.)  Hartley, who left Keurig in 2017, knew consumers wanted a plastic-free K-cup option — and after years of prototypes and testing, he and his team settled on aluminum as an easier-to-recycle alternative. Aluminum is also impervious to oxygen, which causes coffee to lose its flavor over time. “Whenever we brew a cup of coffee, it tastes exactly as the roastmaster intended,” said Hartley.  Cambio Roasters launched earlier this year as a plastic-free alternative for Keurig coffee pods. Cambio Roasters / Chrisman Studios Cambio isn’t the first single-serve coffee company to opt to ditch plastic or invest in circularity. Nespresso, a popular single-serve coffee company that’s owned by the Nestlé Group, has made its capsules out of aluminum for over 30 years. In 2020, Nespresso announced that its pods would be made of 80 percent recycled aluminum, and it claims its global recycling rate is 32 percent.  But Nespresso pods only work in Nespresso machines. Because Cambio coffee pods are designed to work with Keurig models, Hartley hopes to give consumers what they want “without having to buy a new brewer.” Cambio also allows users to peel back the lid and dump out the grounds before recycling. Nespresso pod lids are difficult to remove, and the company instructs users to recycle their pods as is, grounds and all — but they’re only approved for curbside recycling in New York City and Jersey City, where a designated recycling contractor cleans them out before reprocessing them. (Nespresso consumers can also mail used pods back to the manufacturer for recycling, or drop them off at Nespresso stores.) Unfortunately, swapping plastic for aluminum doesn’t automatically solve K-cup pods’ recyclability crisis, experts say. What really prevents coffee pods, regardless of what they’re made of, from having a second life is their size.  After collection, recyclables are sorted at a facility known as a materials recovery facility, or MRF. MRFs aren’t equipped to collect small items — a common rule of thumb is that they can’t handle anything smaller than a credit card — and so small objects placed in recycling bins often wind up getting sent to landfills. “The K-cups are so small that they fall through” the machinery in many recycling facilities, said Pare. “So other than separating” coffee pods from the waste stream “individually, there’s no good way to recycle them.”  Cambio’s approach to working around this is two-pronged. First, the company says it wants consumers to stack used K-cup pods together — and then pinch them closed — to overcome many recycling facilities’ size requirements. Three or more used K-cup pods should create a piece of aluminum large enough to fit through the machinery at recycling facilities, says Hartley. (These instructions don’t currently appear on Cambio’s packaging or website.) Nespresso instructs consumers to recycle their used coffee pods as is, grounds and all. Smith Collection / Gado / Getty Images Cambio says it is also developing a device that will make this stacking and pinching of used K-cups easier. “Think of this device as an easy way for consumers to bundle cups together and then toss into their recycling bin,” said Hartley. He added that the company has filed for patents for second-generation Cambio pods that can be “snapped” together after use. Jan Dell, a chemical engineer and an environmental nonprofit founder, said, “I don’t think aluminum pods are a meaningful improvement,” citing their small size as a barrier to being accepted and sorted via curbside recycling systems. “Think of the pods like confetti: impossible to collect back up.” Cambio disagreed with Dell’s characterization of the switch to aluminum, pointing out that currently, essentially no single-use plastic pods are recycled, whereas aluminum can be endlessly recycled. “To Cambio and consumers, these two facts are meaningful.” Hartley also shared that the work of ensuring Cambio’s compatibility with recycling programs across the country is “ongoing.” The company is planning to run tests with MRFs in specific markets “as soon as feasible.” In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson from Keurig Dr Pepper said, “We know our consumers want simplicity and less waste.” They shared that the company has “been lightweighting our pods to reduce the amount of plastic used,” as well as “increasing options for recycling them,” including a soon-to-be-launched program in which customers will be able to mail their used pods to Keurig for recycling. The spokesperson also said the company is “continually exploring” more “sustainable packaging” options.  Dell leads the nonprofit The Last Beach Cleanup, which is focused on fighting plastic pollution. The ultimate solution to Keurig’s plastic footprint, she said, is a product that eliminates “the need to collect anything back from customers,” like a fiber-based pod that can be composted along with the grounds. Keurig is currently testing a plant-based pod format that won’t have any plastic or aluminum, and the company expects it to be certified compostable, according to the Keurig Dr Pepper spokesperson. Hartley said he worked on that product for many years, calling it “an amazing innovation.”  But these coffee pucks, which are not yet available for sale, will require an entirely new machine to run. “It’s going to take a long time before America is going to throw away 40 or 50 million brewers and buy 40 or 50 million new brewers,” said Hartley. He added, referring to his time with Keurig, “I won’t tell publicly how much money we spent to start from zero and have 50 million American households loving their Keurigs. But it’s a big lift, and it takes decades.”  In an interview with the Atlantic in 2015, the inventor of the K-cup said, “I feel bad sometimes that I ever did it.” As the market for single-serve coffee brewers grows, so will its impact on the environment, unless its products are somehow wildly reimagined and redesigned. Keurigs and Nespresso machines are marketed as both convenient and luxurious, a combination that is likely to keep drawing in new market segments.  But eco-conscious coffee brewers can rest easy in the knowledge that you don’t need a Keurig or Nespresso machine to brew one cup of coffee at a time; any coffee maker can be single-serve if you use only the water and coffee grounds you actually need. No pods required — maybe just a filter.   This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Why it’s so hard to create a truly recyclable Keurig coffee pod on Dec 17, 2024.

A company is betting on aluminum to solve K-cups’ sustainability problem. But experts say it’s complicated.

There’s a Keurig machine in some 40 million households in the U.S. Single-serve coffee brewing systems — which allow consumers to make just one cup of coffee at a time by feeding a pod into a slot and pressing a button — have soared in popularity since the early 2000s. 

Inevitably, this leads to a lot of trash. 

Every cup of java brewed creates a conundrum: what to do with the coffee pod that produced it. To start, can it be recycled? The answer, in Keurig’s case, is not really. The company’s single-use coffee pods — also known as K-cups — are made of polypropylene plastic, a material that experts warn is not as recyclable as consumers have been led to think. Two of the country’s largest recycling companies have said they do not accept K-cup pods, and one environmental group calculated that if you lined up all the K-cup pods in the world’s landfills side by side, they would comfortably circle the globe 10 times

A new coffee pod company claims to have developed a solution to Keurig’s plastic waste problem. Cambio Roasters, which launched in September, offers a Keurig-compatible coffee pod that’s made out of aluminum — which, unlike plastic, is infinitely recyclable. Cambio is led by a team of former Keurig employees, including founder and CEO Kevin Hartley, who was previously a chief innovation officer at Keurig Green Mountain, as the company was formerly known. “This is, in our view, the most exciting innovation in coffee since the K-cup,” said Hartley during a launch-day press call for Cambio.  

Experts, however, aren’t sure that Cambio understands just how big of a problem K-cups pose to curbside recycling systems. 

“Really, plastic is just not a good option,” said Jeremy Pare, a visiting professor of business and environment at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment. But even aluminum, with all its benefits, is “still going to have issues.”

Part of the difficulty of creating a truly recyclable packaging option — for just about any consumer good — is the severely fragmented nature of the American recycling landscape. “There are over 10,000 recycling systems in the U.S.,” said Pare, who is also a member of the Plastic Pollution Working Group at Duke’s Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment, and Sustainability. “And yet, at the same time, only a quarter of the population has access to recycling in the U.S.” (Pare lives in one such community with no formal recycling program, just outside of Augusta, Maine.) In the U.S., the question of whether something is recyclable can only accurately be answered on a local level.

Another problem is the plastic composition of most K-cup pods. Sustainability concerns have followed the Keurig brand closely as it has scaled. (Once a small startup, Keurig was acquired by Green Mountain Coffee Roasters in 2006; in 2018, Keurig Green Mountain merged with Dr Pepper Snapple to become Keurig Dr Pepper.) Keurig started selling K-cups pods made of polypropylene in 2016, with the goal of making 100 percent of K-cup pods “recyclable” by 2020. But the company has run into trouble for touting recyclability. In 2018, a California resident sued Keurig for claiming that K-cup pods could be recycled after the foil lid was removed and the coffee grounds were rinsed or dumped out — which resulted in Keurig agreeing to pay $10 million in a class-action settlement. And in September of this year, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Keurig for falsely claiming the pods “can be effectively recycled.” (Keurig settled the claim by agreeing to pay a $1.5 million penalty fee.) 

Hartley, who left Keurig in 2017, knew consumers wanted a plastic-free K-cup option — and after years of prototypes and testing, he and his team settled on aluminum as an easier-to-recycle alternative. Aluminum is also impervious to oxygen, which causes coffee to lose its flavor over time. “Whenever we brew a cup of coffee, it tastes exactly as the roastmaster intended,” said Hartley. 

A promotional photo of boxes of Cambio Roasters, an aluminum single-use coffee pod company, stacked on a table
Cambio Roasters launched earlier this year as a plastic-free alternative for Keurig coffee pods. Cambio Roasters / Chrisman Studios

Cambio isn’t the first single-serve coffee company to opt to ditch plastic or invest in circularity. Nespresso, a popular single-serve coffee company that’s owned by the Nestlé Group, has made its capsules out of aluminum for over 30 years. In 2020, Nespresso announced that its pods would be made of 80 percent recycled aluminum, and it claims its global recycling rate is 32 percent

But Nespresso pods only work in Nespresso machines. Because Cambio coffee pods are designed to work with Keurig models, Hartley hopes to give consumers what they want “without having to buy a new brewer.”

Cambio also allows users to peel back the lid and dump out the grounds before recycling. Nespresso pod lids are difficult to remove, and the company instructs users to recycle their pods as is, grounds and all — but they’re only approved for curbside recycling in New York City and Jersey City, where a designated recycling contractor cleans them out before reprocessing them. (Nespresso consumers can also mail used pods back to the manufacturer for recycling, or drop them off at Nespresso stores.)

Unfortunately, swapping plastic for aluminum doesn’t automatically solve K-cup pods’ recyclability crisis, experts say. What really prevents coffee pods, regardless of what they’re made of, from having a second life is their size. 

After collection, recyclables are sorted at a facility known as a materials recovery facility, or MRF. MRFs aren’t equipped to collect small items — a common rule of thumb is that they can’t handle anything smaller than a credit card — and so small objects placed in recycling bins often wind up getting sent to landfills. “The K-cups are so small that they fall through” the machinery in many recycling facilities, said Pare. “So other than separating” coffee pods from the waste stream “individually, there’s no good way to recycle them.” 

Cambio’s approach to working around this is two-pronged. First, the company says it wants consumers to stack used K-cup pods together — and then pinch them closed — to overcome many recycling facilities’ size requirements. Three or more used K-cup pods should create a piece of aluminum large enough to fit through the machinery at recycling facilities, says Hartley. (These instructions don’t currently appear on Cambio’s packaging or website.)

Photo of used Nespresso pods in the Nespresso brewer's waste container
Nespresso instructs consumers to recycle their used coffee pods as is, grounds and all. Smith Collection / Gado / Getty Images

Cambio says it is also developing a device that will make this stacking and pinching of used K-cups easier. “Think of this device as an easy way for consumers to bundle cups together and then toss into their recycling bin,” said Hartley. He added that the company has filed for patents for second-generation Cambio pods that can be “snapped” together after use.

Jan Dell, a chemical engineer and an environmental nonprofit founder, said, “I don’t think aluminum pods are a meaningful improvement,” citing their small size as a barrier to being accepted and sorted via curbside recycling systems. “Think of the pods like confetti: impossible to collect back up.”

Cambio disagreed with Dell’s characterization of the switch to aluminum, pointing out that currently, essentially no single-use plastic pods are recycled, whereas aluminum can be endlessly recycled. “To Cambio and consumers, these two facts are meaningful.” Hartley also shared that the work of ensuring Cambio’s compatibility with recycling programs across the country is “ongoing.” The company is planning to run tests with MRFs in specific markets “as soon as feasible.”

In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson from Keurig Dr Pepper said, “We know our consumers want simplicity and less waste.” They shared that the company has “been lightweighting our pods to reduce the amount of plastic used,” as well as “increasing options for recycling them,” including a soon-to-be-launched program in which customers will be able to mail their used pods to Keurig for recycling. The spokesperson also said the company is “continually exploring” more “sustainable packaging” options. 

Dell leads the nonprofit The Last Beach Cleanup, which is focused on fighting plastic pollution. The ultimate solution to Keurig’s plastic footprint, she said, is a product that eliminates “the need to collect anything back from customers,” like a fiber-based pod that can be composted along with the grounds.

Keurig is currently testing a plant-based pod format that won’t have any plastic or aluminum, and the company expects it to be certified compostable, according to the Keurig Dr Pepper spokesperson. Hartley said he worked on that product for many years, calling it “an amazing innovation.” 

But these coffee pucks, which are not yet available for sale, will require an entirely new machine to run. “It’s going to take a long time before America is going to throw away 40 or 50 million brewers and buy 40 or 50 million new brewers,” said Hartley. He added, referring to his time with Keurig, “I won’t tell publicly how much money we spent to start from zero and have 50 million American households loving their Keurigs. But it’s a big lift, and it takes decades.” 

In an interview with the Atlantic in 2015, the inventor of the K-cup said, “I feel bad sometimes that I ever did it.” As the market for single-serve coffee brewers grows, so will its impact on the environment, unless its products are somehow wildly reimagined and redesigned. Keurigs and Nespresso machines are marketed as both convenient and luxurious, a combination that is likely to keep drawing in new market segments. 

But eco-conscious coffee brewers can rest easy in the knowledge that you don’t need a Keurig or Nespresso machine to brew one cup of coffee at a time; any coffee maker can be single-serve if you use only the water and coffee grounds you actually need. No pods required — maybe just a filter.  

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Why it’s so hard to create a truly recyclable Keurig coffee pod on Dec 17, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

How Promote Giving, a New Investment Model, Will Raise Millions for Charities

Joel Holsinger, a partner at Ares Management Corp., on Wednesday launched Promote Giving, an initiative encouraging investment managers to donate a portion of their fees to charity

The first foreign trip Joel Holsinger took in 2019 after joining the board of directors at the global health nonprofit PATH convinced him that he needed to do more to raise money for charities.The investment manager, who is now also a partner and co-head of alternative credit at Ares Management Corp., saw firsthand how a tuberculosis prevention program was helping residents of Dharavi, India's largest slum. He also saw that the main hurdle to expanding the program’s success was simply a lack of funding.“I wanted to do something that has purpose,” Holsinger told The Associated Press. “I wanted a charitable tie-in to whatever I do.”Shortly after returning from India, Holsinger created a new line of investment funds where Ares Management would donate at least 5% of its performance fee, also known as the “promote,” to charities. The first two funds of the resulting Pathfinder family of funds alone have raised more than $10 billion in investments and, as of June, pledged more than $40 million to charity.Holsinger wanted to expand the model further. On Wednesday, he announced Promote Giving, a new initiative to encourage other investment managers to use the model, which launches with funds from nine firms, including Ares Management, Pantheon and Pretium. The funds that are now part of Promote Giving represent about $35 billion in assets and could result in charitable donations of up to $250 million over the next 10 years.Unlike broader models like ESG investing, where environmental, social and governance factors are taken into account when making business decisions, or impact investing, where investors seek a social return along with a financial one, Promote Giving seeks to maximize the return on investment, Holsinger said. The donation only comes after investors receive their promised return and only from the manager's fees. “We’re not doing anything that looks at lower returns,” Holsinger said. “It’s basically just a dual mandate: If we do good on returns for our institutional investors, we will also drive returns that go directly to charity.”Charities, especially those who do international work, are in the midst of a difficult funding landscape. The dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development and massive cuts to foreign aid this year have affected nearly all nonprofits in some way. Those nonprofits who don't normally receive funding from the U.S. government still face increased competition for grants from organizations who saw their funding cut.Kammerle Schneider, PATH’s chief global health programs officer, said this year has shown how fragile public health systems are and has reinforced the need for “agile catalytic capital” that Promote Giving could provide.“There is nothing that is going to replace U.S. government funding,” said Schneider, adding that the launch of Promote Giving offers hope that new private donors may step in to help offer solutions to specific public health problems. “I think it comes at a time where we really need to look at the overall architecture of how we’re doing this and how we could be doing it better with less.”Sal Khan, founder and CEO of Khan Academy, which offers free learning resources for teachers and students, says the structure of Promote Giving could provide nonprofits stable income over several years that would allow them to spend less time fundraising and more time on their charitable work. “It's actually been hard for us to raise the philanthropy needed for us to have the maximum impact globally,” said Khan. While Khan Academy has the knowledge base to expand rapidly around the world and numerous countries have shown interest, Khan said the nonprofit lacks enough resources to do the expensive work of software development, localization and building infrastructure in every country.Khan hopes Promote Giving can grow into a major funder that could help with those costs. "We would be able to build that infrastructure so that we can literally educate anyone in the world,” he said.Holsinger hopes for that kind of growth as well. He envisions investment managers signing on to Promote Giving the way billionaires pledge to give away half their wealth through the Giving Pledge and he hopes other industries will develop their own mechanisms to make charitable donations part of their business models. Kate Stobbe, director of corporate insights at Chief Executives for Corporate Purpose, a coalition that advises companies on sustainability and corporate responsibility issues, said their research shows that companies that establish mission statements that include reasons for existing beyond simply profit generation have higher revenue growth and provide a higher return on investment.Having a common purpose increases workers' engagement and productivity, while also helping companies with recruitment and retention, said Stobbe, who said CECP will release a report that documents those findings based on 20 years of data later this week. “Having initiatives around corporate purpose help employees feel a connection to something bigger,” she said. "It really does contribute to that bottom line.”That kind of win-win is what Holsinger hopes to create with Promote Giving. He said many of the world's problems don't lack solutions. They lack enough capital to pay for the solutions.“We just need to drive more capital to these nonprofits and to these charities that are doing amazing work every day,” he said. “We're trying to build that model that drives impact through charitable dollars.”Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP’s philanthropy coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/philanthropy.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

EU's Von Der Leyen Says Private Sector Deals Could Unlock 4 Billion Euros for Western Balkans

TIRANA (Reuters) -European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday private sector deals signed or in the pipeline could unlock...

TIRANA (Reuters) -European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday private sector deals signed or in the pipeline could unlock about 4 billion euros ($4.63 billion) in new investment as part of an EU growth plan for the Western Balkans region.During a summit in the Albanian capital Tirana between the EU and the Western Balkans countries, Von der Leyen invited investors to take part in the growth plan that aims to double the size of the region's economies in the next decade.She said that 10 important business deals will be signed in Tirana on Monday, and 24 other potential investments will be discussed on Tuesday."Together they could bring more than 4 billion euros in new investments in the region," Von der Leyen said at the summit. "The time to invest in the Western Balkans is now."The EU has pledged 6 billion euros to help the six Western Balkans nations form a regional common market and join the European common market in areas such as free movement of goods and services, transport and energy.But in order for payments to be made, Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia must implement reforms and resolve outstanding issues with their neighbours.Von der Leyen identified artificial intelligence, clean energy and industrial value chains as three strategic sectors that would integrate local industries into EU supply chains.She cautioned that regulatory integration and industrial alliances are key to this effort.The six countries were promised EU membership years ago but the accession process has slowed to a crawl.The delay is partly due to reluctance among the EU's 27 members and a lack of reforms required to meet EU standards - including those concerning the economy, judiciary, legal systems, environmental protection and media freedoms.Serbia and Montenegro were the first in the region to launch EU membership talks, and Albania and North Macedonia began talks with Brussels in 2022. Bosnia and Kosovo lag far behind.(Reporting by Daria Sito-SucicEditing by Ros Russell)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Offshore oil plan was 'primed for cash flow,' but then it hit California regulators

A Texas company wants to drill for oil off Santa Barbara County's coast. Experts say its path to oil sales is looking more and more challenging.

When a Texas oil company first announced controversial plans to reactivate three drilling rigs off the coast of Santa Barbara County, investor presentations boasted that the venture had “massive resource potential” and was “primed for cash flow generation.” But now, less than two years later, mounting legal setbacks and regulatory issues are casting increasing doubt on the project’s future.Most recently, the California attorney general filed suit against Houston-based Sable Offshore Corp., accusing it of repeatedly putting “profits over environmental protections.” The lawsuit, filed last week in Santa Barbara County Superor Court, accuses Sable of continually failing to follow state laws and regulations intended to protect water resources. Sable, the lawsuit claims, “was at best misinformed, incompetent and incorrect” when it came to understanding and adhering to the California Water Code. “At worst, Sable was simply bamboozling the Regional Water Board to meet a critical deadline,” according to the lawsuit.The action comes less than a month after the Santa Barbara County district attorney’s office filed criminal charges against the company, accusing it of knowingly violating state environmental laws while working on repairs to oil pipelines that have sat idle since a major spill in 2015. The company also faces legal challenges from the California Coastal Commission, environmental groups and even its own investors. These developments now threaten the company’s ability to push forward on what has become an increasingly expensive and complicated project, according to some experts.Clark Williams-Derry, an analyst for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said there are still ways Sable could get off the ground and begin oil sales, but the repeated setbacks have become what he called “cumulative risk” for investors, who are key to funding the restart. “Sable is at risk of burning through its cash, and lenders are going to have to make a decision about whether or not this is a good investment,” Williams-Derry said. Ongoing pushback from the public, the state and in lawsuits makes that increasingly a hard argument to make, he said. Sable, however, said it remains steadfast in its goal of reactivating the Santa Ynez Unit — a complex of three offshore platforms, onshore processing facilities and connecting pipelines. The unit was shuttered by a different company a decade ago after a corroded section of pipeline ruptured near Refugio State Beach, creating one of the state’s worst oil spills. The company denies that it has broken any laws and insists that it has followed all necessary regulations. Recently, however, company officials have promoted a new restart plan that could avoid California oversight. Company officials say the new plan would keep the project entirely within federal waters — pivoting away from using the contentious pipelines and from what company officials called California’s “crumbling energy complex.”Jim Flores, the company’s chief executive, said Sable is working with the Trump administration’s National Energy Dominance Council on the plan to use an offshore storage and treatment vessel to transport crude from its offshore wells instead of the pipeline system. Although the company reports that pipeline repairs are complete, the lines have not yet been approved for restart by state regulators. “California has to make a decision soon on the pipeline before Sable signs an agreement for the [offshore vessel] and goes all in on the offshore federal-only option,” Flores said in a statement. The company acknowledges that transporting oil by ship instead of pipeline would dramatically extend the company’s timeline and increase its costs. In a June Securities and Exchange Commission report, Sable said there was “substantial doubt ... about the company’s ability to continue,” given ongoing negative cash flow and stalled regulatory approvals. However, the company says it continues to seek approvals to restart the pipelines from the California Office of the State Fire Marshal. The state fire marshal has said the plans remain under review, but the office has made clear that the pipelines will be approved for operation only “once all compliance and safety requirements, including ... approvals from other state, federal and local agencies, are met.”Deborah Sivas, a professor of environmental law at Stanford’s Law School, said it’s getting harder to see a successful path forward for Sable.“It’s pretty rare that an entity would have all these agencies lined up concerned about their impacts,” Sivas said of state regulators. “These agencies don’t very lightly go to litigation or enforcement actions. ... and the public is strongly against offshore drilling. So those are a whole bunch of reasons that I think are going to be hard obstacles for that company.”But even if Sable can pivot to federal-only oversight under a friendly Trump administration, Williams-Derry said there’s no clear-cut path. “This is an environment where some of the best, most profitable oil companies in the U.S. have cut drilling this year because profits are too low,” Williams-Derry said. Sable has enough money in the bank right now to have a “little bit of running room,” he said, “...but you can imagine that [investors] are going to start running out of patience.”The new lawsuit filed by the California attorney general lays out a year’s worth of instances in which Sable either ignored or defied the California Water Code during the firm’s pipeline repair work. The attorney general’s office called Sable’s evasion of regulatory oversight “egregious,” warranting “substantial penalties.” It’s not immediately clear how much will be demanded, but violations of the California Water Code are subject to a civil liability of up to $5,000 for each day a violation occurs. Despite repeated reminders and warnings from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast region, Sable did not comply with the water code, preventing the board “from assuring best management practices ... to avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to water quality,” the lawsuit said. “No corporation should gain a business advantage by ignoring the law and harming the environment,” Jane Gray, chair of the Central Coast Water Board, said in a statement. “Entities that discharge waste are required to obtain permits from the state to protect water quality. Sable Offshore Corp. is no different.”The case comes months after the California Coastal Commission similarly found that Sable failed to adhere to the state’s Coastal Act despite repeated warnings and fined the company $18 million.

Work Advice: How to avoid ‘workslop’ and other AI pitfalls

AI at work has drawbacks such as ‘workslop,’ which can hinder productivity. Strategic AI use and transparency are top solutions.

Following my response to a reader who’s resisting a push to adopt artificial intelligence tools at work, readers shared their thoughts and experiences — pro, con and resigned — on using AI.The consensus was that some interaction with AI is unavoidable for anyone who works with technology, and that refusing to engage with it — even for principled reasons, such as the environmental harm it causes — could be career-limiting.But there’s reason to believe that generative AI in the office may not be living up to its fundamental value proposition of making us more productive.A September article in Harvard Business Review (free registration required) warns that indiscriminate AI use can result in what the article dubs “workslop”: “AI-generated work content that masquerades as good work but lacks the substance to meaningfully advance a given task.”Examples of workslop include AI-generated reports, code and emails that take more time to correct and decipher than if they had been created from scratch by a human. They’re destructive and wasteful — not only of water or electricity, but of people’s time, productivity and goodwill.“The insidious effect of workslop is that it shifts the burden of the work downstream,” the HBR researchers said.Of course, workslop existed before AI. We’ve all had our time wasted and productivity bogged down by people who dominate meetings talking about nothing, send rambling emails without reviewing them for clarity or pass half-hearted work down the line for someone else to fix. AI just allows them to do more of it, faster. And just like disinformation, once workslop enters the system, it risks polluting the pool of knowledge everyone draws from.In addition to the literal environment, AI workslop can also damage the workplace environment. The HBR researchers found that receiving workslop caused approximately half of recipients to view the sender as “less creative, capable and reliable” — even less trustworthy or intelligent.But, as mentioned above, it’s probably not wise — or feasible — to avoid using AI. “AI is embedded in your everyday tasks, from your email client, grammar checkers, type-ahead, social media clients suggesting the next emoji,” said Dean Grant from Port Angeles, Washington, whose technology career has spanned 50 years. The proper question, he said, is not how to avoid using it, but what it can do for you and how it can give you a competitive advantage.But even readers who said they use AI appropriately acknowledged its flaws and limitations, including that its implementation sometimes takes more effort than simply performing the task themselves.“[H]ow much time should I spend trying to get the AI to work? If I can do the task [without AI] in an hour, should I spend 30 minutes fumbling with the artificial stupid?” asked Matt Deter of Rocklin, California. “At what point should I cut my losses?”So it seems an unwinnable struggle. If you can’t avoid or opt out of AI altogether, how do you make sure you’re not just adding to the workslop, generating resentment and killing productivity?Don’t make AI a solution in search of a problem. This one’s for the leaders. Noting that “indiscriminate imperatives yield indiscriminate usage,” the HBR article urges leaders encouraging AI use to provide guidelines for using it “in ways that best align to the organization’s strategy, values, and vision.” As with return-to-office mandates, if leaders can articulate a purpose, and workers have autonomy to push back when the mandate doesn’t meet that purpose, the result is more likely to add value.Don’t let AI have the last word. Generating a raw summary of a meeting for your own reference is one thing; if you’re sharing it with someone else, take the time to trim the irrelevant portions, highlight the important items, and add context where needed. If you use AI to generate ideas, take time to identify the best ones and shape them to your needs.Be transparent about using AI. If you’re worried about being judged for using AI, just know that the judgment will be even harsher if you try to pass it off as your own work, or if you knowingly pass along unvetted information with no warning.Weigh convenience against conservation. If we can get in the habit of separating recyclables and programming thermostats, we can be equally mindful about our AI usage. An AI-generated 100-word email uses the equivalent of a single-use bottle of water to cool and power the data centers processing that query. Knowing that, do you need a transcript of every meeting you attend, or are you requesting one out of habit? Do you need ChatGPT to draft an email, or can you get results just as quickly over the phone? (Note to platform and software developers: Providing a giant, easy-to-find AI “off” switch wouldn’t hurt.)Step out of the loop once in a while. Try an AI detox every so often where you do your job without it, just to keep your brain limber.“I can’t deny how useful [AI has] been for research, brainstorming, and managing workloads,” said Danial Qureshi, who runs a virtual marketing and social media management agency in Islamabad, Pakistan. “But lately, I’ve also started to feel like we’re losing something important — our own creativity. Because we rely on AI so much now, I’ve noticed we don’t spend as much time thinking or exploring original ideas from scratch.”Artificial intelligence may be a fact of modern life, but there’s still nothing like the real thing.Pro Tip: Having trouble getting started with AI? Check out Post Tech at Work reporter Danielle Abril’s brilliant articles on developing AI literacy.

Richard Tice has 15-year record of supporting ‘net stupid zero’ initiatives

Firms led by deputy Reform UK leader since 2011 have shown commitment to saving energy and cutting CO2 emissionsUK politics live – latest updatesHe never seems to tire of deriding “net stupid zero”, but Reform UK’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, has a 15-year business record of support for sustainability and green energy initiatives.The Reform party has made opposition to green energy and net zero part of its policy platform. Its founder, Nigel Farage, has called net zero policies a “lunacy”; the party has called to lift the ban on fracking for fossil gas; and one of the first Reform-led councils, Kent, rescinded last month its declaration of a climate emergency. Continue reading...

He never seems to tire of deriding “net stupid zero”, but Reform UK’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, has a 15-year business record of support for sustainability and green energy initiatives.The Reform party has made opposition to green energy and net zero part of its policy platform. Its founder, Nigel Farage, has called net zero policies a “lunacy”; the party has called to lift the ban on fracking for fossil gas; and one of the first Reform-led councils, Kent, rescinded last month its declaration of a climate emergency.However, companies led by Tice since 2011 boasted of their commitments to saving energy, cutting CO2 emissions and environmental responsibility. One told investors it had introduced a “green charter” to “mitigate our impact on climate change” and later hired a “full-time sustainability manager” as part of “its focus on energy efficiency and sustainability”.Another said it was “keen to play its part in reducing emissions for cleaner air” and said it had saved “hundreds of tonnes of CO²” by installing solar cells on the rooftops of its properties.A glance at Tice’s account on X reveals contempt for warnings of climate breakdown and efforts to mitigate it. Last year he said: “We are not in climate emergency; nor is there a climate crisis.” In May he stated: “Solar farms are wrong at every level” and insisted they would “destroy food security, destroy jobs [and] destroy property values”.He recently adopted the slogan “net stupid zero”, describing efforts to neutralise the UK’s fossil fuel emissions as “the most costly self-inflicted wound in modern British history”.But Steff Wright, a sustainability entrepreneur and former commercial tenant of Tice, found that statements in the annual reports from CLS Holdings and Quidnet Reit, property companies led by Tice, contradicted his public position.Wright said: “These reports reveal that Tice can clearly see the financial, social and environmental benefits of investing time, money and energy into sustainability focused initiatives.“He is a businessperson, and if he has chosen to be a chief executive of at least two companies who have taken steps to reduce carbon emissions and implement energy-efficient innovations, it’s because there is a business case to do so.”In 2010, the year Tice joined CLS Holdings as deputy chief executive, the company said it was committed to “a responsible and forward-looking approach to environmental issues” by encouraging, among other things, “the use of alternative energy supplies”. The following year, when Tice was promoted to chief executive, the company implemented the green charter and hired a sustainability manager. In 2012, CLS celebrated completing its “zero net emissions” building, adding: “The board acknowledges the group’s impact on society and the environment and … seeks to either both minimise and mitigate them, or to harness them in order to affect positive change.”In the company’s 2013 report, climate change was identified as a “sustainability risk”, requiring “board responsibility”, “dedicated specialist personnel” and “increased due diligence”. The company’s efforts were rewarded in 2014, when it was able to tell shareholders it had exceeded its CO2 emissions reduction targets.Tice launched Quidnet Reit, a property investment company, the following year. When it published its first full accounts, covering 2021, Tice was also chair of Reform UK, and already setting out his stall against “net stupid”. But for his company, fossil fuel emissions remained a priority.The 2021 report stated: “The company is keen to play its part in reducing emissions for cleaner air,” and detailed investments in solar power which “importantly … will reduce CO² emissions by some 70 tonnes per annum”.Quidnet’s emissions reduction efforts continued into 2022 and 2023, with the company stating both years that its solar investments were “saving hundreds of tonnes of CO²” a year. However, after a Guardian report last year covered some of Quidnet’s environmental commitments, no mention was made of them in last year’s report.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionWright said: “Solar initiatives and other energy efficiency schemes have benefited Tice’s property companies whilst he was in charge, but now … there is a political advantage to gain Tice is all too happy to label these schemes as ‘perilous’ for investors.”Tice said critics were “in danger of confusing apples with pears”, insisting the comparisons revealed no contradiction. “I have never said don’t reduce emissions, be they CO2 or other, and where sensible use technology to do so efficiently,” he said.“Solar panels on roofs, selling electricity to tenant[s] underneath are [an] excellent double use of [a] roof and involve no subsidies. Solar farms on farmland is insane, involves large public subsidies and often include dangerous [battery energy storage] systems.”Tice said that when he ran CLS, net zero was not a legal requirement. “My issue has always been the multibillion subsidies, fact that renewables have driven electricity prices higher, made British industries uncompetitive and destroyed hundreds thousand jobs,.“Also in annual reports, because of [the] madness of ESG, so banks and shareholder became obsessed with emissions so companies felt pressured to report on all this. ESG is also mad, stands for Extremely Stupid Garbage, and is now rapidly sensibly being abandoned by many companies and banks.“So my position has been clear and logical and never involved subsidies. Big difference.”

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.