.

The good folks at the Story of Stuff have put together this fantastic video that explains the problem with the materials economy; a system where people strip the world of its natural resources to consume more and more products.

Although this video lacks citations to reference material, I believe that it speaks truth on many levels. For one, the main and most important point is that this system needs to change because it is not sustainable.

Watch this video now, it will change how you see the U.S. consumer economy and its unsustainable impact on the world.

Special thanks to PosiPeople Community Member, Vascabruta, for the tip to this video.

The Montana Meth Project, est. 2005

Siebel Systems Founder and private philanthropist Tom Siebel has something to teach us about running an anti-drug campaign. Without wasting any time Mr. Siebel launched an anti-Meth media campaign in Montana in the same year that he sold Siebel Systems to Oracle. He decided that he would pay top dollar for the media rather than attempt to achieve impact with the typical non-profit shoe-string budget. He made it a point to pay for the very best and the social return on investment is evidence that higher costs can make a lot of sense.

In the past, several anti-drug campaigns have backfired, having no effect and perhaps even increasing the curiosity of youth and therefore making the problem worse. For example, the federal government’s attempt to curb teenage drug use with a multimillion-dollar ad campaign dramatizing the perils of marijuana has backfired spectacularly. (ref.) Many other examples, including for hard core drugs, can be found elsewhere. Clearly Tom Siebel didn’t want to repeat these results. And although, he openly admits achieving success with Meth have for a number of reasons been easier, nobody else has done what he has done on anywhere near the same scale. The Lifetime meth use by teenagers in Montana has dropped 44.6 percent since 2005. Meth-related crime increased by 21 percent from 2004 to 2005, but dropped by 62 percent in the two-year period that followed through 2007. (April 2008 report – Montana Department of Justice. It is recognized that not all these improvements can be attributed to the Montana Meth Project)

This isn’t where the story stops. The Montana Meth Project has saved Montana taxpayers millions of dollars up an above the costs of the program. Donors and governments of other states have taken note and efforts are taking hold in other states. The details of how he did are even more enlightening and recommend that readers do more research. Like all the other non-profit programs that I highlight each week (I miss some weeks) this is a top performing non-profit. I challenge readers to find other non-profits within the same class which out perform the non-profits I highlight. I want to know about them.

Here are some examples of the disturbing Print Ads and Videos that have worked well in Montana. They’re not uplifting and play on the baser motivation of fear.

.

Source: University if Virginia

The picture above shows a desert plant named sedum, known for its ability to absorb water. It has been a popular greening tool in Europe and large US cities such as Chicago and Seattle for years, and New York is just one of many new cities to follow trend.

When planted on rooftops, sedum can absorb up to 70% of the city’s rainfall, which can get into the sewage system and pollute the waterways. It can also act as an insulator, reducing heat from rooftops that can be trapped in the building, lowering the use of air conditioning in the summertime.

With so much effort going towards making our world greener, this is one of the better ideas in my opinion. Instead of trying and failing to develop new methods to improve the environment, we are using nature to help nature. However, this method is still somewhat expensive to implement; more states should consider New York Governor David A. Paterson’s tax abatement plan for developers and building owners who install green roofs, this might alleviate the pain for some buildings who are considering this.

The citywide to worldwide benefits will outweigh the short-term costs in the long run.

est. May, 2004

The principle measure of success for prisoner re-entry programs is the recidivism rate (the rate at which prisoners return to prison for any reason). PEP only works with Texas prisoners. While Texas has a recidivism rate of 28.3% (2001) and the U.S. has a recidivism rate of 67.5% (1994) for prisoners who left prison within a 3 year period, PEP’s is about 5% . PEP works inside prison where they are to a large degree not wanted, and have extreme accountability requirements from the prison. Here are the stats:

PEP RESULTS (AS OF JULY 1, 2008)

Total graduates: 370
Recidivism rate: less than 5% (Measured since the program’s inception for all participants who graduate PEP’s inside program, regardless of their participation in the free world.)

Employment rate: more than 97% of graduates are employed within four weeks of release
Average number of days to gain employment: 22
Average starting wage: $10.51 per hour
Number of businesses started: 43

Executive volunteers: 1,000+
MBA volunteers: 400+ from 22 MBA programs
PEP lifetime cost per head: $13K
National average annual cost for incarceration: $21K

A little more context: Another prisoner re-entry program, InnerChange achieved a rate of about 8% for prisoners released within a 2 year period. As I have done more research, almost all re-entry programs will cite statistics only for prisoners who complete their programs. It isn’t unreasonable for these programs to put a large number of prisoners through a strict interview process, and after only a percentage get in, have only 40 to 50% actually complete the program. So, most programs are not working with “lost causes”. One other point to consider is: typical protocol for releasing prisoners is not very tough to improve upon - it is atrocious. I am somewhat surprised the recidivism rate isn’t 80 or 90% nationally.

In spite of all the wrong implications one could take from the data , context and caveats - PEP outperforms almost all re-entry programs and does something that no other re-entry program does: rather than seeing inmates as a societal problem to be solved, it literally sees them as opportunities. It recognizes many prisoner’s potential to be ridiculously successful legal entrepreneurs. This isn’t as much a reformation program as it is a “reach full potential” program. This is why, this program comes out on top. Just start thinking of the added benefits: Prison entrepreneurs are much more likely to hire other prisoners from all those other workforce development prisoner re-entry programs. A reasonable venture capital model could result in PEP becoming 100% financed by PEP graduates. Etc. In fact I predict within 15 years time PEP will become self-sustaining with thousands of prisoners not only off the taxpayers’ bill but private “outside” funders’ bill as well. Former inmates funding responsible, profitable, PERMANENT re-entry - I think it can be done.

Once again, I hope you will forgive me for copy/pasting text; this time from PEP’s website: www.prisonentrepeneurship.org (Why try to write something that’s going to be worse?):

PEP’s team recognizes that prison is a storehouse of untapped potential. Many inmates come to prison as seasoned entrepreneurs who happened to run illegitimate businesses. For the truly reformed prisoners, once equipped with education and life skills training, the ROI potential for these men, their families and communities is limitless.

(more…)

.

The good folks at “We Can Solve It” are still putting their marketing might behind changing consumer’s attitudes to demand clean energy within 10 years. However, this time, they are focusing on getting government officials involved in the fight. The video above is their new message to U.S. politicians. You might remember this goal of having 100% clean energy in the U.S. in 10 years from Al Gore’s Energy Challenge speech.

It is important that all countries reduce their reliance on a single source of energy, so I’ve listed all of the different sources of energy below. (The video only mentions wind and solar energy.)

1. Wind Energy
2. Solar Energy
3. Geothermal Energy
4. Hydro Energy (Dams, Wave Energy, Tide Energy)
5. Nuclear Energy
6. Fossil Fuels (Oil, Coal, Natural Gas)
7. Space Solar Power System

The technology that is most interesting to me is the Space Solar Power System as it allows electricity to be generated from outside of the Earth’s environment.

Through all of this, it is important to keep everything into perspective. As the U.S. moves to a new energy infrastructure, it needs to consider doing it in a responsible way so that it isn’t a reckless gold rush like it is in upstate New York. What are your thoughts?

This quote is brought to you at the good folks at the Foundation for a Better Life. This quote is about listening. Enjoy!

“Listening is a magnetic and strange thing, a creative force. The friends who listen to us are the ones we move toward. When we are listened to, it creates us, makes us unfold and expand.”

- Dr. Karl Augustus Menninger (1893-1990); psychiatrist, founder of the Menninger Foundation