In my last column I talked about change and how difficult it is to bring cultures and philosophies together to cause change. One of the most important aspects of change is being honest, so you are able to cut through the layers of engagement, opinions and ego. You peel these back until you get to truth.  And truth allows for change, which brings me to the story of the city that converted to 100% renewable energy.  There were plenty of differences, plenty of debates (a la the Paris Accord), but, at the end of the day, everyone had one goal: to reduce greenhouse gas.

The city of Burlington, Vermont had been experimenting with “green energy” since the early 80’s when it replaced its coal burning electric plant with one that burned wood chips. To be sure, it had plenty of feedstock from Vermont’s forest products industry that could be provided at a reasonable cost. This was in the early 80s, mind you, when “green” was talk and controversial.  But in 2004 Vermont joined a market for renewable energy credits that had been established for sister states. All of a sudden becoming 100% renewable became a goal for all parties because it made sound economic sense.

Ken Nolan, who was a resource planner at the time, said, “That was the first time we had an inkling that this might be the right thing to do, not just for the environment but for the Burlington Electric Department and its customers.” The timing was right because the long term contract with a nuclear plant had expired and a short term contract with a natural gas supplier was about to expire. Wind and solar power were becoming cheaper, and as Nolan said, “We actually saw a path where we could make this work.”

In the fall of 2014, Burlington became the largest municipality in the US to sever ties with traditional power. Nolan, who is now the city manager of Power Resources, acknowledges that it has benefited from “unique circumstances, including proximity to enormous natural resources, including rivers that generate hydropower and open spaces for wind farms.” And, after explaining the economics, they were able to conclude an agreement with folks from all political persuasions who agreed to bond initiatives that paid for everything (isn’t this the state where Bernie Sanders hails?).

Green energy today is more expensive than coal and natural gas.  Burlington, however, has controlled costs by selling credits to utilities in neighboring states, like Massachusetts, which require energy producers to meet certain renewable energy benchmarks. When utilities can’t meet the requirements, they are allowed to buy renewable credits, through the regional market, from places like Burlington. It’s a win-win for Burlington because the revenue is shared with its power customers as savings. Pretty neat.

Burlington continues to support its green energy infrastructure.  It has new solar and wind installations and offers free energy outlets and technical support to the entire community.  These initiatives, along with discounts on energy-efficient products, have actually caused the city to use less energy today than in 1989. As Nolan says, “It’s actually kinda easy being green.”  Wow, talk about debate that brought change.  Pretty exciting stuff.

Being able to change has a lot to do with culture. In Burlington we heard about a culture willing to at least consider change. Eventually black and white, better economics, brought about change. What about safety? How do we create a strong culture of safety and preparedness in the workplace? Too often, it’s too late.  Adversity forces us to change, after the fact.

Safety culture starts at the top, of course. Senior management and line supervisors influence everyone’s buy-in. Thus, leadership advocates a shift, a change, in workshop culture with clear and visible messages and an investment in resources and training change that brings about results.

Albert Einstein said, “We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.” Indeed, when we talk about change in safety culture we have to take a hard look. As Einstein says, it has to be a different approach. Does your company have a culture of safety?  If your company promotes a culture of safety, what does it do every day to support and cultivate this culture? How do you assess change in safety culture? Is senior management, is leadership engaged in its promotion? And so on.

When I heard and thought about Burlington’s commitment to change and commitment to renewable energy I then thought of another story about a trucker working in the Bakken oil field region in North Dakota. “We didn’t come to North Dakota for the scenery.  We’re here for the money.”  This truck driver told a Minneapolis news reporter that he had just received a $3,000 ticket for driving a truck that was 20,000 pounds overweight.  The driver continued, “You have to go heavy just to keep up with the wells.”

“We try to run as hard as we can,” another driver told that same reporter. He was in a dump truck that had just pulled off a scale in the same area of the Bakken oil fields weighing 19,000 pounds above the 82,000 pound limit for that kind of truck.

We’ve created another monster, at least to my way of thinking.  Men in their 20s, 30s, and 40s (some right out of high school) have flocked to that North Dakota region to find their pot of gold, endless work at high rates. One truck driver said, “Until I got to Bakken, every job I took paid less than the one before.”  And, “We’re not going to run legal because we’re not going to make no money.”  “I’m not a guy who just wants to get by. I want to be successful. I want to have things.” It’s about reward for risk, not about safety culture, not about changing to do what is right. Who cares about running overweight, potentially causing a fatality. The Bakken environment beats selling shrimp in Baton Rouge, delivering pizzas in Portland, Maine, or eking out a living in dying towns in Mississippi or West Virginia. As one other driver said, “It’s not hard work, just dangerous. We don’t know half the stuff we’re breathing in.”

The monster, of course, is the pursuit of happiness at any cost, regardless of safety and environmental consequences. Faster is better, money is better. Keep the line moving. It seems to me that the Burlington story epitomizes the positive that can happen with culture change while Bakken epitomizes the absolute opposite: a complete disregard for safety in the presence of the almighty dollar. “I’m not a guy who just wants to get by. I want to get ahead. I want to be successful. I want to have things. Most things cost money. Money is important in life.”

Sadly, in some cases, culture brings out the very worst in mankind.

Another Letter from the Earth.



Calvin Frost is chairman of Channeled Resources Group, headquartered in Chicago, the parent company of Maratech International and GMC Coating. His email address is [email protected].