Public awareness began to rise early in the decade, and thanks to influencers such as Al Gore (An Inconvenient Truth); William McDonough and Michael Braungart (Cradle to Cradle); and Michael Pollan (Omnivore’s Dilemma), sustainability became more mainstream and widely understood.

With this growing awareness of: climate change, land use, food shortages, and dwindling water supplies, almost every major corporation today now supports sustainability in some form – as either a real commitment or marketing ploy.

As leaders, designers, filmmakers, artists, activists, and environmentalists champion the cause, the number of conscientious consumers who inspect labels and do their due diligence before making a purchase, continues to grow.

We now see LEED guidelines incorporated into building codes on every level – from residential homes to skyscrapers and industrial parks. Green initiatives and sustainable practices are forming the mainframe and foundations of a broad spectrum of businesses.

Sustainability is now both an environmental and economic necessity. And going forward, smart new businesses across all sectors will be shaped by sustainability in order to succeed.

The last decade has seen an incredible increase in climate change science, media news coverage of that science, increased understanding of that science through the media, individual NEED to make individual change and a corporate business model shift to provide consumers the tools and products to help them become more sustainable.

In 2000, sustainability was just “going public” and a lot of people still viewed it as a “Hippie Philosophy.” Being sustainable meant making individual decisions and choices thought of it as “voluntary Simplicity” or “Minimalism.” These terms were coined because for many years, people who lived sustainable lifestyles were viewed as “too poor to be able to live a consumer lifestyle.” Those who “Chose” sustainability for ethical or earth saving reasons wanted a way to show the world that it was a lifestyle “choice.”

Sustainability has gone mainstream and Government and Business have helped.

The US Green Building Council formally released its Leadership in Energy and Environment Design building standards (LEED) full Green Building Rating system 2.0 in March 2000. In 10 short years, a quick Google search of “LEED” results in almost 9,000,000 search results. Leed certification is starting to pervade almost every aspect of building design and architecture from “Green” houses to Commercial and Government buildings. Leed is an example of Government and Private Business working together for sustainability.

An example of Business helping people be more sustainable is the surge in canvas and cloth bags that are used for grocery shopping, aluminum drinking bottles, remote control surge protectors, organic produce, environmentally safe cleaning products, programmable thermostats.

Even with all these advances, there is controversy over Big Government being too involved in individual lives. For example, the U.S. Government is mandating the eventual elimination of incandescent lightbulbs by 2012, in favor of the more energy saving (and less fossil fuel burning) compact fluorescent lightbulbs. These and other innovations are viewed by some as infringement of individual rights. But with the increase in such things as environment destroying mountain top removal coal mining, the government must weigh individual rights with environmental security.

I believe that the we will continue to see both an individual acceptance of sustainability and more technological advances to assist with a more sustainable lifestyle.

• Technological advances and greater acceptance of those advances will most likely include things like motion detection light switches, televisions and even heating systems.
• We can also look forward to greater smart grid technology that will utilize renewable power sources such as solar and wind as primary energy sources that will switch to fossil fuel sources as back up.
• Eventually, these energy grids will be able to store renewable energy that is generated during non peak hours to use during peak hours, perhaps getting rid of the need for fossil fuel generated electricity all together.
• Lithium battery technology will continue to progress, to the point where we will all be able to drive hundreds of miles on one charge, before plugging into a publicly available recharging station run on renewable energy.
• Green roofs (roofs covered with low maintenance plant materials, trees, grasses and shrubs) will become more standard on new construction as Leed certification becomes more attractive to builders through greater tax breaks and rebates.
• The price of oil will continue to rise, helping to drive the funding of and public acceptance of bio-fuels, hybrid and electrical vehicles and public transportation.
• Mixed use residential, retail and office buildings will be built in an effort to make pedestrian friendly neighborhoods and cities that people can live, shop and work in without having to commute long distances.

All of these things are already either being worked on, being improved or being rolled out. The future, in our case, must continue to be now. The future that we see for ourselves must be the present that we demand.

I think sustainability will increasingly become a more common concern for consumers and as they start to demand more sustainability from companies, products and the government, it will evolve from a concept and a buzzword to a way of life. People will consider where something falls on sustainability scales the same way they consider consumer reports when making a large household purchases. While I don’t see this happening in the very near future, I do believe it WILL happen, particularly as we begin to feel the squeeze of decreasing natural resources.

Regarding the impact of the outcome on business and consumer behavior, I don’t think there will be an impact for some time. The wheels of progress on something this huge will move very slowly, I predict. Of course, both businesses and consumers will eventually have to adapt to certain changes that I can’t predict but my hope is that there will be major developments in carbon reduction-oriented industries that will boost the economy and create new jobs to the degree that consumers won’t be adversely affected.

There is new hope that the United States will step up to the plate and become a world leader at the UN Climate change Conference this year, with the election President Obama, but popular consensus is that this years conference will be more of framework for future talks, than the defining Climate Change agreement that so many are hoping for.

The two main things that will come from these talks are:

1. Setting targets for controlling emissions of carbon dioxide by China and the United States.
2. Agreeing on how much rich countries should pay for poor nations clean energy technology.

I believe that the legislation putting these targets and agreements won’t happen at this years climate talks though. Those details will be left to be ironed out in the years to come.

There has been no better time in our history, to get the worlds population behind climate change legislation, than right now. With the inundation of “the greening of our societies” in the media, in the offices and in our homes, the popular consensus is that climate change is real, it is happening now, and it is man made.

Consumers though, are a bit confused. Most of them know “how” to change, but what they don’t know is “why” they should. High level science like climate change does not impact the average 1st world consumer on a daily basis. Until this point, there has been a lot of talk about climate change legislation, and consumers have been listening, but not very carefully.

Once climate change legislation has been passed, and governments are forced to make changes in fossil fuel burning electricity generation and transportation technology, the consumer will take a more active interest. For the first time, consumers will be effected by that legislation through the costs of utilities and transportation.

I believe that consumers and businesses will be slow to accept change, but once they are educated with the “why we should change” versus the “how we can change” aspect of climate change, there will be the acceptance that we need.

While the world waits for politicians to not only agree to make change, but to implement that change, the rate of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has increased 29% since 2000. What I would like to see is not only a framework for future negotiations and legislation, but actionable items that start taking place right now. Even if these items are small, we must prove to ourselves and the world that we take this threat seriously, and are ready and prepared to act.

Ratification of an actual treaty will probably be delayed until 2010. If the signing does take place at the upcoming talks, the immediate impact on business and consumers in developed nations will ramp-up over the next decade with an incremental increase in prices for consumers and regulation for businesses as the transition to a “greener” economy takes shape. Long-term cost savings on healthcare, energy and lifestyle will take a while to kick-in, but ultimately may be far-reaching. Developing nations will benefit from a tremendous influx of aid and technology to motivate their embrace of “going green” at the expense (through carbon offset credits and direct financial aid) of major greenhouse gas emitters like the U.S., China and Europe.

The upcoming Climate Treaty that will replace the Kyoto Protocol will probably bear the signature of President Obama and a long list of other major developed and developing nations – but probably not China and India – a major drawback. The treaty can be expected to set targets seeking a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, a number that will not satisfy hardcore global warming reductionists and will enrage global warming naysayers. If the global economy shows improvement in the next twelve months the treaty has a real chance; if the global recession continues or deepens, climate change legislation and treaties may fall victim to more pressing day-to-day economic concerns.

We think that ultimately, the industries affected by Cap and Trade will pass along their increased C&T-associated expenses to consumers. We don’t foresee a major bump in consumer prices, because we don’t see C&T having a major impact on reducing carbon emissions.

As far as the impact on the sustainability industry Cap and Trade is not a green jobs creator. It is a vehicle created to lower emissions long term, assuage energy lobbyists and special interests and line a few Wall Street firms pockets at the taxpayers’ expense. New energy technologies and alternative energy infrastructure would benefit much more from a real “Carbon Tax” that mandated change, and in so doing, stimulate new, green industrial growth and positive environmental impact.

Tap dancing around emission standards with the smoke and mirrors approach of Cap and Trade won’t help consumers pay the future health insurance premiums and hospital expenses associated with the respiratory ailments and diseases caused by inhaling fossil fuel-based carbon emissions and air pollution. We’re afraid that to be effective in any way, Cap and Trade will need a major overhaul before it gets too far down the road.