Page 1/23

New Kinpo Group Green Information Journal

CONTENTS
No. 1 2 3 4 5 News NKG Green Product Policy How smart batteries create efficient data centers EPA The Complex Business of Recycling E-Waste (biobased-chemicals) Bio-based chemicals: When green is toxic $1 How Starbucks plans to reduce its paper cup waste Page 3 4 5 6 9 10 13 16 21 22

Page 2/23



2009 11 12

Page 3/23

NKG Green Product Policy

New Kinpo Group(NKG) strives to be one of the best companies with commitment to environment protection through our efforts and achievements in product developments, manufacturing and services recognized by NKG's stakeholders, employees, customers, suppliers and the public. Our missions for the commitment: Compliance to International Legislations Fulfillment for Customer Requirements Implementation of Green Product Design Principles Continuous Improvement in the Green Product Management System New Kinpo Group ensures that the products we deliver to the market are safe and no-harm to both human and environment.
Information fromNKG General Manager office issued on 2009.11.12

Page 4/23

IT Akamai Akamai 432KW 381KW 12% Akamai 100~300 /kWh 3~5 UPS(Uninterruptible Power Supply, UPS) 5 7 40 14(Lead-acid Battery)
Green Citizen

Page 5/23

How smart batteries create efficient data centers

The electric grid experiences the same daily peak demand issues as our freeways, seeing pronounced surges during the critical parts of the day. This makes providing power more expensive because extra power plants have to be built to meet this peak demand. Servers that provide the world's Internet content are also their busiest during this peak power period. And with the Internet consuming two percent of the world's energy and predicted to surpass the airline industry by 2020, the problem is only getting worse. Furthermore, companies that have large IT deployments are being challenged by rapid expansion and rising energy costs. For companies like Akamai that host their IT infrastructure in third-party collocation data centers, energy is typically priced based on the total supplied power in kilowatts (KW) charged at a fixed rate in $/KW, for example 50KW at $200/KW per month, similar to a fixed number of minutes for a mobile phone plan. While the supplied power is fixed, the power drawn by the servers vary with server activity which peaks and lulls daily. Energy costs could be reduced if the server peak-power demand, and hence the supplied power, can be lowered. One of the innovative ways Akamai is looking at mitigating this challenge and reducing network operational costs is to reduce the grid-based power supplied to its servers during peak demand by supplementing with batteries and recharging the batteries at night when most energy consumers are asleep and power production is cheap and plentiful. A recently published research paper by Ramesh Sitaraman, Akamai Fellow and UMass professor, written in collaboration with researchers at Penn State and BBN, evaluates using smart
Page 6/23

batteries in an Internet-scale distributed network such as the Akamai Network. The smart batteries that are placed inside a server or within a server rack detect when a server's power draw crosses a threshold level, as it becomes busier, and then supply battery power until the server power draw drops below the threshold. The batteries would recharge at night or whenever energy and server demand are low. The effect would be that the peak power draw from the electricity grid of a cluster of servers would flatten and lessen, with peak demand shifting from the electricity grid to the batteries. A trial of aggregate server power demand over a month in an Akamai New York data center showed smart batteries dropped the required power supply from 432 KW to 381 KW. Despite the control intelligence of these batteries, the chemistry is conventional lead-acid, similar to a deep-cycle marine batteries. Lead-acid batteries are fully recyclable. The capital cost of the battery is a function of the energy storage capacity of the battery in kilowatt-hours (kWh) which determines how long the battery can charge the server. This study uses reasonable estimates ranging from $100-300/kWh and a lifespan ranging from three-to-five years. Batteries dont have to supply power for very long to achieve a compelling peak power reduction benefit. Even a battery that can power a server for only five minutes, comparable to those batteries used in uninterruptable power supply (UPS) systems today, can provide a 7 percent power savings, while a larger 40-minute battery supply can save up to 14 percent. Furthermore, most of the power savings are achievable with a small cycle rate of one full discharge/recharge cycle every three days which is conducive to a five-year battery life. Power savings improve demonstrably as servers get better at power management.
Page 7/23

In the near term, cost savings are derived from a reduction in the power supplied to each server cluster -- power circuit size. Using smart batteries to reduce peak power loads would reduce the required power circuit size and, hence, the cost of each circuit. An alternate but equivalent way of viewing the benefit is that batteries allow more servers to be powered using the same power supply than before. (A key assumption is that the batteries could be fit into an existing server rack without taking up additional data center floor space and costs.) Longer term as the smart grid matures and electric utilities implement time-of-day energy pricing, electricity prices will be more expensive during the day when demand is high and cheaper at night. Batteries make even more sense with time-of-day pricing since energy can be stored during the cheap off-peak hours and discharged to servers during the expensive peak hours. In addition, large-scale adoption of this power demand-shifting technique would increase demand for wind energy which typically has higher production capacity at night, and help slow the need to build power plants to meet peak energy demand. Dr. Sitaraman emphasized "Our research helps establish batteries as a key part of the architecture of Internet-scale distributed networks. In addition to providing a distributed UPS function, batteries can also provide a cost reduction by decreasing the required power supply. Further, as servers become more energy-efficient and as batteries become cheaper and better, the case for batteries will only become more compelling."
Information fromGreen Citizen

Page 8/23

 EPA
474 272 141 1/4 10 e-Stewards R2(Responsibility Recycling, R2)
e-Stewards Basel Action Network ) ISO 14001 R2

BusinessWeek

Page 9/23

The Complex Business of Recycling E-Waste

IBMs massive recycling facilities are more like rehabilitation centers. Most of the computers, printers, and serverscastoffs from IBMs offices, along with equipment previously leased to corporate customersare refurbished and resold. Some are salvaged for parts. But inevitably some electronics are too old to resuscitate. Therein lies one of the biggest conundrums of the digital age: How to properly dispose of e-waste, which contains toxic materials such as lead, mercury, and cadmium. Its easy to buy something, but its hard to get rid of it, says Richard Dicks, general manager for the IBM division that handles the triage. Americans get rid of 47.4 million computers, 27.2 million televisions, and 141 million mobile devices annually, according to the latest figures from the Environmental Protection Agency. Only a quarter of all those devices are collected for recycling. Many states have passed laws that dictate how to dispose of electronics. Most prohibit dumping them in landfills and require that they be recycled. Californias laws, for example, are among the most stringent. Anyone buying a monitor in the state pays a recycling fee that funds e-waste disposal. Choosing a recycler isnt as easy as it may seem. There are many options, such as free electronics collection sites, haulers that send trucks to pick up computers, and manufacturer take-back programs. But their environmental rigor varies. Horror stories of U.S. electronics shipped to developing nations and improperly stripped of valuable metals are common. In China, Ghana, and India, some recyclers do little to prevent the release of toxics materials. Workers use acid to etch metals from circuit boards, polluting the environment with heavy metals, and burn the plastic covering off of wires to get at the copper
Page 10/23

underneath. One way to find a responsible recycler is to check whether it is certified. The EPA endorses two standards programs, e-Stewards and R2, both of which require regular independent audits of participating recyclers to ensure they follow good practices. But there is some debate about the definition of good practices. E-Stewards prohibits recyclers from exporting electronics for processing, for example, while R2 allows it as long those facilities meet certain standards. You can have a poor recycler in the U.S. just as easily as a really good recycler in China, says Corey Dehmey, assistant to the executive director at R2 Solutions, the nonprofit that oversees the R2 standard. Dell, the computer maker, along with other companies, has pushed for federal legislation that would ban the export of e-waste. Efforts to pass such bills in Congress have failed, however. Companies should pay close attention to data security when tossing out their electronics. Corporate information does not simply disappear when a device is no longer needed. Busineses that allow consumer information to leak out face the risk of civil lawsuits. Health-care and financial companies operate under the extra burden of federal laws that prescribe stiff fines for failing to store and dispose of consumer data properly. In general, large corporations do a good job of ensuring that their discarded electronics are properly disposed of, says Richard Fuller, president of the Blacksmith Institute, an environmental organization that focuses on industrial pollution. The big companies typically have the financial resources, employ a staff focused on sustainability issues, and recognize that being exposed as a careless polluter is bad for business. Its been really quite a shift in the corporate world to make sure that e-waste is correctly managed, Fuller says. Small and midsize businesses, however, are far more likely to fall short, he says. Many simply toss their old computers in the
Page 11/23

dumpster or hire irresponsible haulers to take them away. Recyclers fees vary widely. Some charge nothing and recoup their costs entirely by reselling the scraps. But services that offer no-cost hauling may be more likely to cut corners. Expect to pay roughly $10 per item for a higher-end recycler, Fuller says. At IBM, dealing with used equipment is a huge effort. The volume38,000 pieces a weekis enough to keep up to 350 employees and thousands of contractors busy in 22 plants around the globe. IBM replaces about 100,000 employee desktop computers annually along with the usual assortment of other electronics. Customers that lease IBM equipment go through even more. Among the first steps IBM takes when electronics arrive at a facility is to assess its potential value. What is its condition? Can it be refurbished and resold? Around 90 percent of the assets, in IBM-speak, pass the test and get a second life. Like many recyclers, IBM inspects electronics it receives for hard drives. Any that are found are wiped of data (even if theyve been cleaned prior to their delivery) or shredded. Equipment thats too old or broken to go back on the market is dismantled and harvested of parts and precious metals, such as gold, which is used in circuitry. The vast majority of the material is recycled. Less than 1 percent is incinerated or sent to a landfill, according to IBM. IBM is committed to doing the work responsibly and is keenly interested in protecting its reputation, Dicks says. Equipment is dismantled or resold in the region where it originates rather than sent overseas, he says. Partners that ultimately end up in possession of the scraps are audited on a regular basis. This is a good business for IBM to be in economically, and this is a good business to be in environmentally, he says.
Information fromBusinessWeek

Page 12/23

(biobased-chemicals)
10 (Cargill) NatureWorks PLA PLA 12 10 20 90 (PET) 314 230
Page 13/23

 20 37 (TSCA) TSCA PLA PVC PVC() PVC PET 20% PET p-xylene p-xylene 2011 PET NileProcter & GambleFordHeinz PET Virent BTX -(benzene):(toluene): (xylenes)
Page 14/23

 GreenScreen TSCA
Greenbiz

Page 15/23

Bio-based chemicals: When green is toxic

Compostable cups. The PlantBottle. Polyethylene plastic from sugar cane. Bioplastics and other biobased chemicals made from plants rather than petroleum can slash a products carbon footprint. Brand owners are driving demand for bioproducts to help meet corporate sustainability goals. And biobased makes economic sense as a hedge against the high price of crude and volatile fossil fuel markets. But is bio-based enough? Consumers want safer products too. Simply replacing the carbon from oil with carbon from plants won't necessarily make a product safer, if the chemical in question is hazardous to health. If toxic petrochemicals are made with renewable biomass, will customers revolt? Lets explore the challenge. Ten years ago, Cargill launched NatureWorks to convert cornstarch to polylactic acid (PLA), the first biopolymer to compete head-on with petrochemical plastics and fibers. PLA scored so well against all 12 principles of green chemistry that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency gave the company a prestigious national award for environmental safety. Since then, biobased demand has exploded. Although just a few percent of all plastics are biobased today, analysts predict rapid annual growth will claim 20 percent market share within a decade. Getting to 90 percent is already technically feasible. Major Benefits to Climate

Turning plants into products can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels in two ways. Manufacturing PLA produces 60 percent less greenhouse gases than the petrochemical plastics such as PET and polystyrene. Life cycle assessments show similar reductions for other biobased chemicals.
Page 16/23

But bioproducts reap even greater climate benefits upstream of the production process. Biomass has a material carbon footprint of zero. Thats because plants fix carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in roughly the same timeframe (years) that greenhouse gases are released at the end of the useful life of bioproducts. But petrochemical products are made from fossil feedstocks formed millions of years ago. The eventual disposal of petro-products adds to man-made climate change. Consider the material carbon advantage. Every hundred pounds of biopolymer that replaces fossil-based polyethylene avoids 314 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions over the life of the product. Substituting for petrochemical PET reduces greenhouse gas emissions by about 230 pounds. Although the climate gains are real, the market rush to bioproducts has raised some old questions and a new concern. Some have questioned whether biobased materials from agricultural crops can ever be a truly sustainable feedstock. From energy intensive land use and chemical inputs to rising food costs, they argue that the benefits are marginal or worse. Those concerns may be valid for biofuels such as ethanol. But biobased plastics and chemicals used in consumer products are materials, not fuels. The petrochemicals they aim to replace only account for about five percent of oil and gas consumption. And the next generation feedstocks, such as forest products and agricultural waste, are more sustainable than food crops. Others have raised end-of-life issues. Some bioplastics are biodegradable, but too few systems exist to collect and compost those products when they become waste. And only about 10 percent of plastics are currently recycled. But those infrastructure gaps plague all compostable materials and all plastics; you cant really blame bioproducts.

Page 17/23

 in with the New Concern Instead, I want to raise a brand new concern about bioproducts. Left unchecked, the emerging biobased chemicals industry could repeat many of the toxic chemical mistakes of the 20th century. Thats because just about any toxic chemical can be made from biomass instead of oil or gas. Two related trends trouble me. First, the federal government lacks meaningful authority to regulate chemicals. Everyone agrees that the 37-year old Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) is obsolete. Yet, Congress has repeatedly failed to fix our broken federal chemical safety system. Relentless opposition by toxic chemical manufacturers has thwarted passage of the Safe Chemicals Act. Until TSCA reform succeeds, toxic petrochemicals will largely get a free ride, with few questions asked. Second, the emerging biobased chemicals industry has targeted drop-in replacements for existing chemical markets rather than new biobased molecules. Thats because building markets for new biopolymers like PLA remains too expensive in the short run for many. A nasty synergy is brewing. Existing toxic petrochemicals are unfairly favored under our broken regulatory system. Now industry seeks to make those very same chemicals except with biomass instead of petroleum. Meanwhile, market barriers and lax regulation discourage introduction of new greener chemistries. So far, the rush to renewable chemical feedstocks has largely ignored the health and safety profile of biobased materials across their lifecycle. Plans to produce biobased PVC plastic provide an extreme example. To make PVC, the poison plastic, add two carcinogens, pump the resin full of toxic additives and leave a trail of chlorinated waste from production and disposal. Replacing the petroleum in PVC with renewable carbon hardly greens its lifecycle.

Page 18/23

The current pursuit of biobased PET plastic raises a similar concern. In Coca-Colas breakthrough PlantBottle, only 20 percent of the carbon is renewable. The bottle is PET plastic but with just one biobased ingredient made from sugar cane. The rest is fossil carbon from p-xylene, a hazardous chemical linked to brain damage in newborn animal studies. A race is underway to produce biobased p-xylene to meet brand owner demand. In 2011, Coca-Cola announced a plan to bring a 100 percent bio-PET bottle to market. To get there, they launched a new Plant PET Technology Collaborative with Nike, Procter & Gamble, Ford and Heinz. At least one company, Virent, aims to make the whole suite of toxic BTX hydrocarbons from biomass: benzene (causes cancer in people), toluene (harms reproduction and development) and xylenes. Biobased toxic chemicals are not the answer. As a society we need to design chemicals and chemical processes that are inherently safe for public health and the environment. Tips for Business Counting myself as one of the new biobased enthusiasts, I have some sage business advice for my fellow travelers among the brand owners, start-up biobased companies, agricultural giants and biobased divisions of major chemical manufacturers. Apply a green chemistry lens to your target market and material selection. Use the GreenScreenTM or similar tool to benchmark the hazards associated with the chemicals you aim to replace with biobased substitutes. Avoid chemicals of high concern entirely. Think twice about making major investments in other chemicals of concern. Such markets will not be sustainable once public awareness and regulatory attention catch up to you, even when these chemicals are biobased. Support the Safe Chemicals Act to ensure meaningful TSCA reform. The existing law unfairly grandfathered in most toxic
Page 19/23

petrochemicals without scrutiny when it passed. Chemical policy reform is inevitable, driven by a patchwork quilt of state policies and chaotic market movement away from toxic chemicals. When federal reform finally breaks, a backlog of demand for meaningful chemical regulation will sweep the nation. If youre caught behind the regulatory curve, your market share may be washed away, regardless of whether its biobased. The real business opportunity lies in products and materials that are both renewable and safe for people and the planet across their lifecycle. By advancing biobased green chemistry, industry can ride two waves longer, and avoid being wiped out by the inevitable cross current of consumer alarm and toxic regulation.
Information fromGreenbiz

Page 20/23

$1

2012 11 600 26% 2015 5% 1 10 10

Greenbiz

Page 21/23

How Starbucks plans to reduce its paper cup waste

Starbucks is seeking to serve greener refills by selling cheap, reusable plastic cups to replace some of the billions of paper cups handed out in stores each year. The world's largest coffee shop chain began offering the so-called "personal tumblers" for $1 a piece across its stores in the U.S. and Canada yesterday. The move is the latest promotion by Starbucks to reduce waste sent to landfill. Customers who bring their own cups already receive a discount on their drinks in stores globally. According to Starbucks' latest sustainability report, the company requires approximately four billion cups globally each year, the majority of which are handed out in disposable paper cups many of which are not recycled. In 2008, the company set a goal to serve a quarter of all its drinks in reusable plastic cups by 2015, and has promoted them in the past by offering free coffee to customers who brought their own cups. However, Starbucks was forced to revise its target down to five percent by 2015 last year after finding the initial 25 percent target too challenging. The company said 1.9 percent of drinks were sold in reusable cups in 2011, meaning customers brought their own cups into stores more than 34 million times. As a result, more than 1.5 million pounds of paper waste were saved from landfill.
Information fromGreenbiz

Page 22/23

Group QA Division

Page 23/23