Thanks for posting. I agree with AR, the individuals they choose to utilize to develop the algorithm need to be carefully selected to ensure the system isn’t learning from terrible drivers. Tesla could hire professional drivers/chauffeurs to be the test pilots as these drivers are expected to drive safely and provide their customers with a smooth ride. In addition, Tesla could develop a simple app that connects these test cars with customers looking for a ride. People would be excited to participate in the pilot program and Tesla would be able to bring in additional “taxi” revenues. Uber has started to do this in Pittsburg https://newsroom.uber.com/pittsburgh-self-driving-uber/. Although, this would change Tesla’s current business model it could be an interesting shift for them. They could become a future competitor and eliminate the need for apps like Uber and Lyft by directly manufacturing energy efficient, self-driving ‘taxis’.
Thanks for posting. I am concerned that Walmart will not be able to transition into the digital world fast enough and may very well be too late. In 2016, Walmart will close 269 stores which will affect roughly 16,000 employees. In addition, Walmart’s share price decreased by 30% last year (http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/15/news/companies/walmart-store-closings/). I believe this can be attributed to Walmart’s less than appealing online platform and competitors such as Amazon. Although, Walmart is investing in some digital platforms such as online grocery shopping (http://grocery.walmart.com/usd-estore/m/home/anonymouslanding.jsp) they need to improve their existing eCommerce platform and increase investment in transformative technology asap if they are to have any chance of setting themselves apart from competitors.
Thanks for posting. I agree that stadiums such as the Barclays Center need to focus on revolutionizing the experience they provide, but shouldn’t be attempting to do so by replicating the home viewing experience. The following article https://www.eventbrite.com/blog/ds00-5-reasons-people-go-to-sporting-events-and-what-we-can-learn-from-them/ provides 5 reasons people go to sports: socializing and networking, halftime shows, promotions and giveaways, team spirit, and impressing someone. You will see that none of the reasons have anything to do with feeling at home. I would argue that although people want to be comfortable they are going to games to get away from home and want a truly unique experience. Barclays Center should be attempting to use technology to provide customers with something they are unable to get at home. I found another interesting article http://jameystegmaier.com/2012/04/why-do-you-go-to-live-sporting-events/ that suggests that sports teams could improve attendance by helping their fans remember the experience by offering some type of special ‘you were there’ digital memento.
Thanks for posting. Like most people, I would rather sleep in my own bed, but I appreciate when I am staying at a hotel that is using technology to improve my stay. When I stay at a hotel I typically leave all the lights and the TV on even when I leave the room. However, if hotels made it simple and convenient to turn off all the electronics in the room through either a button near the door or an app they would be able to reduce their energy expenditures. I saw in an article that in 2016 only 20% of Hotels reported having plans to utilize IT to help with energy management. As this is one of Hotels largest costs, it seems like it should be a priority focus area. http://hospitalitytechnology.edgl.com/news/6-Mega-Trends-in-Hotel-Technology105033
Thanks for posting. I would agree that Whole Foods needs to incorporate more digital initiatives, like online ordering, to remain competitive in the supermarket business, especially as they have competitors such as Google Express, Amazon Fresh, and Peapod all trying to capitalize on the push towards convenient grocery shopping. However, I don’t think Instacart is the right partnership for them. If you conduct a quick online search you will find plenty of articles, such as http://www.thekitchn.com/i-had-my-groceries-delivered-by-instacart-and-heres-how-it-went-214795, in which consumers are complaining about the price and quality of Instacart. They may mark up products as much as 20%. As SCWC mentions above this may look bad for Whole Foods. In order to remain competitive, they should either cut out this third-party service and replace it or acquire it. They could then adjust pricing and control quality in a more effective manner to increase their revenues and customer base while reducing the risk of negative PR from Instacart.
Thanks for posting JZ. I’m expecting to purchase a home myself soon, so this issue is worrisome. Millennial homeowners are going to find themselves stuck between a rock and a hard place feeling like they must buy insurance, but not wanting to deal with excessive premium costs. I wonder if we will see a transformative business model pop up that decreases this risk for the insurance company and enables them to maintain lower premium levels while also providing excellent customer service. I would be afraid that insurance companies would try to maintain the premium levels by capping payouts or capping the number of claims per geographical location. Maybe we will start to see some group insurance plans where communities in high risk areas pool funds together to get a group rate for premiums. I am nervous to see what happens over the next decade.
Thanks for posting Ldubs. I’m always blown away by the severity of the negative impact that some of these large companies have on local communities. I wouldn’t have known that they play such a big role in groundwater depletion. One issue that bothers me is how the 3 areas that the company is focusing on reducing its emissions in are the three areas that have the lowest contribution. They don’t mention in their strategy any plans for reducing their supply chain carbon emissions which equate to 71% of their estimated emissions. I imagine they chose not to tackle the bigger issue due to financial reasons, or because the ‘behind the scenes’ sources of emissions have less of a PR risk, but they would probably benefit in the long term if they invested in R&D to improve the efficiency of their packaging. Additionally, if they were to develop a revolutionary approach to beverage packaging there could be an opportunity to benefit financially from patenting and/or selling the rights.
Thanks for posting MIM. I would love to see these major companies start making some of these changes earlier (i.e., when it becomes known that products they use have negative effects on the environment), as we all know the government is often a few years behind on policy. I started researching refrigeration technology and found that Carrier, a leader in heating, air-conditioning and refrigeration solutions, was one of the first providers to utilize CO2 as a refrigerant http://www.carrier.com/commercial-refrigeration/en/eu/sustainability/#0. I wonder if Sysco has considered such technologies and if it is an economically feasible replacement for them.
Thanks for posting BAL. I am glad people are taking the time to provide criticisms to the US energy companies. I truly believe energy providers need to step up and play a bigger role in decreasing carbon emissions, especially in the US. I’m curious as to why there is such separation between the energy generation portfolios of FP&L and NEER. It seems like the holding company isn’t taking sustainability very seriously if they aren’t going to make clean energy a priority across their subsidiaries.
You should check out this report on benchmarking utilities on their clean energy deployment (https://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/benchmarking-utility-clean-energy-deployment-2014/view). The report ranks energy companies by their renewable energy sales, cumulative annual energy efficiency savings, and incremental annual energy efficiency savings. It was interesting to see how the different companies stack up against each other (FP&L ranked low).
I didn’t see much regarding NextEra partnerships, but they would probably benefit from working with innovative companies in the solar and wind departments and battery storage areas. This would allow them to ramp up their renewables percentage within their portfolio mixes. You’d be surprised how cheap some of the new wind technologies are, at ~$.75 – $1.5 per Watt for a utility scale farm (http://sheerwind.com/product-line).
Thanks for posting JB. I wouldn’t have thought that slight changes in a consumer’s diet could have significant effects on GHG emissions. As I was reading your post, I started thinking about where the Impossible food team was making sacrifices and if it can recreate the same protein and nutrient balance that one would see in traditional meat. I went to their website and was pretty discouraged by the nutritional facts (http://www.impossiblefoods.com/faq/). Although they can deliver bioavailable protein and vitamins such as iron, the amount of saturated fat is appalling, 54% of your recommended daily value from a 3 oz serving. I probably eat roughly 8 oz of protein per meal which would mean I would be receiving over 100% of my daily saturated fat content in one meal from the Impossible Burger. They may be able to recreate a plant based burger, but they are light-years away from helping the US reduce obesity!!