Connect with us

Published

on

A traditional sustainability certification can take six to eight weeks and thousands of dollars in consultancy fees, and still leave purchasers wondering whether the claims actually hold up. Martin Johnston, founder of EarthRating.ai, thinks he can deliver a more useful answer in 10 minutes. His London-based startup is building a universal credibility score for sustainability — a 1,000-point rating, drawn from roughly 100 public data points, that measures whether what a company says about its environmental and social performance is consistent with what its audited filings and regulatory disclosures actually show. The premise borrows directly from consumer credit scoring: a FICO score doesn’t tell a lender whether you’re a good person, only whether your behavior is consistent enough to be trusted. On this episode of Sustainability In Your Ear, Martin explains how EarthRating’s “accelerated impact engine” gathers verified data instead of relying on questionnaires, and why the small and mid-sized businesses now caught up in the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and the UK’s Procurement Act 2023 need an affordable way to prove their credentials.

Martin Johnston, founder of EarthRating.ai, is our guest on Sustainability In Your Ear.

Most sustainability frameworks rely on self-reported questionnaires; EarthRating pulls data from audited annual reports, regulatory filings, press coverage, and marketing materials, then cross-checks them against each other to surface contradictions before they become a regulatory or reputational problem. A near-term emissions target that appears in a press release but not in the audited annual report is exactly the kind of credibility gap the platform is designed to flag. Importantly, EarthRating isn’t measuring environmental impact — it’s measuring whether a company’s story is internally consistent and externally verifiable. That sidesteps the impossible problem of reducing carbon, water, biodiversity, and social performance into a single comparable number, and replaces it with a more tractable question: are the claims true? That speed and accessibility comes with real caveats, and Martin and I dig into them. A credibility score isn’t an impact score: a small landscaping firm with a modest, well-documented commitment to electric mowers could rate higher than a multinational with aspirational but unverified net-zero pledges. That’s the right calibration for measuring trust, but it isn’t the same as measuring environmental performance. EarthRating also exists at “Google 1.0,” in Martin’s own words — a launch-stage platform with a proprietary methodology that hasn’t yet been externally audited. Global standards aren’t willed into existence; they’re earned through adoption. The underlying problem EarthRating is trying to solve — making credible sustainability measurement accessible to the businesses that have been priced out of it — is a real one, and worth watching.

To find out more about EarthRating, visit EarthRating.ai.

Interview Transcript

Mitch Ratcliffe  0:09

Hello, good morning, good afternoon, or good evening, wherever you are on this beautiful planet of ours. Welcome to Sustainability In Your Ear. This is the podcast conversation about accelerating the transition to a sustainable, carbon-neutral society, and I’m your host, Mitch Ratcliffe. Thanks for joining the conversation today.

We’re going to talk about, well, in a way, credit scores. Every sustainability claim made today faces the same fundamental problem: we lack a credible common language that quantifies a business’s impact on planet and people. A company, of course, can call itself sustainable simply by cherry-picking a single metric, commissioning a favorable audit, or simply repeating the word often enough that it seems to stick.

However, regulatory pressure is tightening. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive now covers roughly 50,000 companies, and the UK’s Green Claims Code is actively prosecuting misleading environmental marketing. Here in the United States, the SEC’s climate disclosure rules are still in effect, although they are under attack. Of course, regulation alone doesn’t solve the underlying problem. Businesses, investors, and consumers still lack a fast, affordable, and trustworthy way to evaluate whether a sustainability claim actually holds up.

Our guest today is Martin Johnston, founder of EarthRating.ai. It’s an early-stage company building what it calls a universal credibility score for sustainability. The Earth Rating is a 1,000-point scale generated in minutes using AI and verified data from a company. It’s designed to measure, manage, and monitor sustainability performance across businesses of all sizes, from a regional landscaping firm to a global fashion house.

But unlike legacy frameworks built for large corporations with dedicated sustainability teams and consultancy budgets, EarthRating is designed to be accessible to small and medium-sized companies. They constitute the vast majority of economic activity worldwide and have been almost entirely locked out of credible sustainability measurement. EarthRating’s core proposition is that sustainability credibility should work more like a credit score — standardized, legible, and universally available — rather than opaque, expensive, and inconsistent.

So we’re going to talk with Martin about what makes a sustainability score genuinely credible, rather than just another layer of greenwashing; how EarthRating’s methodology handles the inherent incompleteness of any single score across carbon, water, biodiversity, and governance; and what guardrails prevent businesses from gaming the system he’s designing. We’ll dig into who the primary audience for an Earth Rating actually is — whether it’s regulators, investors, supply chain partners, or even consumers — and how the company is thinking about the gap between giving a business a number and actually changing its behavior. We’ll also look at the roadmap: what EarthRating is building, which markets it’s targeting first, and what would have to be true for a startup like this to become the universal standard it’s aiming to be.

You can learn more about EarthRating at EarthRating.ai. EarthRating is all one word, no space, no dash. EarthRating.ai. So can a single AI-powered score do what decades of sustainability frameworks have failed to accomplish — make environmental credibility fast, affordable, and impossible to fake? Let’s find out right after this brief commercial break.

Mitch Ratcliffe  3:43

Welcome to the show, Martin. How are you doing today?

Martin Johnston  3:45

Oh, yeah, not bad, actually. Thank you very much.

Mitch Ratcliffe  3:47

Well, thanks for joining me. We had a really interesting conversation a couple of months ago about what EarthRating is up to. And I want to start off by asking — you’re describing this as a universal credit score for sustainability. What will make EarthRating credible when so many sustainability scores and certifications have been accused of serving mostly as marketing tools?

Martin Johnston  4:07

Yeah, it’s a good question. I think the difference between us and other people really is the fact that we can summarize it in three words: we don’t actually ask, we find out. Where most other frameworks are reliant upon questionnaires and self-reporting — and I know a lot of them are now catching up on verifying the data and that kind of stuff — we’ve built an accelerated impact engine that gathers 100-plus data points and feeds them into a scoring system where we can verify what people are saying against what they’re actually doing. We search for verified information and verified data, and therefore what comes out of the platform is quite a good indication of the maturity of where a company is at from a sustainability perspective, based on evidence and based on real data, rather than based on a questionnaire that someone else has filled in for them.

Mitch Ratcliffe  5:13

Can you describe briefly what kind of data you get when you make that assessment?

Martin Johnston  5:18

Yeah, I can describe it. Obviously, I don’t want to go too much into detail, but we research the four pillars of sustainability — so human, environmental, economic, and social. Data that comes out includes things like: Is it verified carbon measurement? Do they have a near-term target? Do they have a future target? We then assess whether that is actually verified by an independent body. So it’s not just what the company says about itself — has it actually got third-party endorsement? From there, what we can then look for is any flags or any conflicting statements, because we go into detail from actual reports that have been signed off by their accountancy teams, versus what the press and what marketing materials say. It looks to verify that data and compares the conflicts. So from our point of view, it’s not really a certification. It’s a B2B tool which allows organizations to genuinely use it in an impactful way. It’s not there to scrutinize and be used as a lens so other people can jump on the bandwagon of having a go at businesses who are trying to do the right things and be positive towards the planet and the people who live on it.

Mitch Ratcliffe  6:40

Roughly how long does it take to establish that score once I decide to do it as a company? What does the timeline look like?

Martin Johnston  6:48

To be honest with you, it varies, but we’re talking minutes.

Mitch Ratcliffe  6:52

Minutes?

Martin Johnston  6:53

We’re talking anything up to 10 or 15 minutes. We can do it sometimes in three or four. It depends on the veracity of the information we’re searching for, how much information is available, and whether we have to cross-check that information using our accelerated impact engine. Literally, the speed is how quickly we can ascertain that information — whereas, you know, comparable processes take six to eight weeks for a certification, and 12 months-plus for others.

Mitch Ratcliffe  7:27

Sustainability measurement is fragmented across carbon, water, biodiversity, social impact, the human implications that you described a moment ago. How do you handle that kind of inherent incompleteness in any single score? And how does EarthRating express explicitly what it doesn’t measure as well as what it does?

Martin Johnston  7:49

Good question. Well, we’re measuring the credibility — this is our differentiator. We measure the credibility of what an organization is saying, rather than the impact itself. So what we look for is: What does an organization say it’s doing? What claim is it making? And then we offer data to verify that claim. That’s why it’s a credit score in the true sense of the word — a credit score is actually credibility. That’s what credit means. It’s based on the idea of trust: if you are paying back your debts to your financial institutions on a regular basis within the timeframe and show that you can manage your financial responsibilities in a considerate way, you will get a good trust score, which is what a credit score is. That means you are a good opportunity for underwriters to look at and say, ‘Yeah, you’re a good person to loan my money to. I live where I live, I bank with the right bank, I’m on the electoral roll, and I have a credit history of doing the right thing on a timely basis.’ If you take that financial model and recategorize it to sustainability and change the inputs — are the claims credible? Are they historically valuable? Do they prove themselves time and time again, consistently? — when you do that, you build up a nice picture of an organization that you can actually trust on what it’s claiming to do. And that’s what we’re trying to do.

Mitch Ratcliffe  9:15

That’s interesting. You think about the timeliness of a credit score, which goes down if you don’t use credit. At some point, it will be necessary to be on the system on an ongoing basis. But how frequently would a review be completed? Or is this integrated into the businesses’ systems in such a way that it’s just a continuous score?

Martin Johnston  9:39

Okay, so we’re kind of in launch process at the moment. We’re doing Google 1.0 — not what Google is now, but what Google was back then. For us, we are continuously going to be checking, but continuously means we’ll be giving updates on a quarterly basis to organizations. However, we want to move this to real time, because we believe that, in the words of Douglas Adams, bad news travels fast. If a claim that an organization is making hits the headlines, then that needs to be alerted to the business — just like a credit score has alerts which say somebody’s checked your file, somebody’s looking at your profile, an underwriter or whatever. We think the same process has to happen for businesses to be able to respond quickly and responsibly to potential threats or risks.

Mitch Ratcliffe  10:32

I was particularly intrigued by your focus on small business. Can you explain what a landscaping company, for instance, or maybe a regional logistics firm, might actually do with the sustainability score? Who are they going to show it to, and why does it matter to them to do it?

Martin Johnston  10:50

To be honest, this is the current problem for small businesses. Inherently, reporting on sustainability is too costly, too time-consuming, overwhelming, and confusing. The whole thing needs to be looked at from a complexity level. That means that 91% of small businesses do not report on sustainability at all, yet they make up the vast majority of the economies of the world. If you combine the numbers and the impact, and the ability we could give if small businesses have the same opportunities as larger businesses to report on sustainability — and we break those barriers down — then that allows a business to operate in a world where sustainability needs to be taken a lot more seriously. It needs to be shown as innovative and commercially valuable, not just a nice-to-have. In the UK particularly, we’ve got the new Procurement Act, which has come out, and if you cannot show sustainability and the progress of sustainability for your business, you could be excluded from government contracts. You could be excluded from the largest supply chains. Bigger businesses are looking to regulate their supply chains and their ESG claims throughout, because they’re responsible for their own supply chains. That means small businesses, if they can’t do this, might risk losing or reducing their work or opportunities to gain work. And then the biggest thing as well is tender writing. If we can give them an instant ability to showcase where they sit on a maturity level of sustainability, and how easy it is for them to implement a reporting process that takes minutes, not months — not even years — and costs no time at all in terms of labor to produce, then that removes the bureaucracy and the friction that small businesses face when trying to come up with stuff that they’re required to do for procurement.

Mitch Ratcliffe  12:56

A credit score is typically paid for by another organization that wants to see how my credit is, or my business’s credit is. What’s the business model? You described it as a B2B metric. Am I going to, when I’m reviewing a supplier, pay you to get a rating?

Martin Johnston  13:11

The idea is that eventually, when we process this out and it’s a bit more mature and the business has grown, then, yeah, we will be hopefully selling the reporting processes that organizations can pay for. But for us, this is a tool for a small business to use to implement and to make sustainability actionable, so they pay for it, and they pay to be on the platform.

Mitch Ratcliffe  13:32

Could you also begin to roll up individual entities’ carbon impact? For instance, there’s Scope 1 and 2 emissions, in order to provide some other organization up or downstream visibility into their impact, so they could calculate their Scope 3 score?

Martin Johnston  13:49

Yeah. Well, this is also interesting, because sustainability has a complexity attached to it where consultancy is required for stuff like that. So what we’ve done, and what we are doing, is we’re building a sustainability navigator, which effectively is a tool that sits on a platform. If they need to understand where to go and get their SBTi carbon Scope 1, 2 or 3, or need to do something that requires heavy lifting in terms of what sustainability metrics look like for their business, then our sustainability navigator will point them to the right places without the fees of a consultancy — £800 to £1,500 a day.

Mitch Ratcliffe  14:35

Okay, so this is where the AI comes in. As you’ve developed this guidance you just described, what is it based on — for instance, the SBTi standards? How did you develop the methodology that it’s going to use to coach those small businesses? Because that’s really an interesting opportunity.

Martin Johnston  14:55

Yeah. Well, we’ve been doing sustainability for quite a while, and I’ve looked at all of the frameworks. We haven’t sort of adopted any particular one. But what we do understand is the standardization of questions that are being required through tenders and through responses by businesses. We’ve developed 100-plus data points, which we developed our own over a number of years. It’s proprietary information that we gather. It’s not based on any one framework, but the sustainability navigator will point them to people who actually can help them — organizations that can give guidance in the right way. So that’s what we’ve done. That’s what we’re aiming to do. It’s still in its infancy, and we’re in launch mode, so we’ve got to do more of the doing, rather than more of the talking about what we’re going to do in order to implement this stuff.

Mitch Ratcliffe  15:54

It does sound like one of the functions of that AI guidance in the future could be to look across the market space and say, ‘Here’s a partner who can solve this problem for you.’ Becoming the marketplace, in the long run.

Martin Johnston  16:08

No, absolutely not. It’s not a way to become the marketplace at all. It’s a three-in-one platform. It provides a credit score instantly — or almost as instant as you can be — which gives information to an organization showing how well they are performing against the four pillars of sustainability and where the information gaps are. We then have a Green Claims Code checker, so we actually go out and search for: Are they compliant with the Green Claims Code? Is there anything out there that could put them at risk, and is that affecting their credit score effectively? And then we have the sustainability navigator, which can help them correct anything, fill in the gaps, or provide them with information to say, ‘Look, these are the best three things you can do to increase your score and make the immediate impact you need to do.’ We’ve got a growth mindset built into the platform. The idea is to reward the businesses that want to improve quickly and get them on the journey. Because even having a low score — that’s the difference between us and everybody else. There’s no pass/fail. It’s not negative. A low score is, ‘Well done. You’re on the journey.’ It’s not ‘You need to improve.’ It’s ‘You’ve made the step, you’ve made the commitment, you’ve made the positive commitment to actually want to do something that’s positive for your business.’ For me, commercially, sustainability leads to innovation, it leads to cost efficiencies in the long term, and it helps businesses future-proof themselves. So it’s an absolute no-brainer to want to do something that protects the business from itself in the future.

Mitch Ratcliffe  17:50

You are at the launch stage, and Google version 1.0, as you just said. What are you finding that early customer discussions are pointing towards in terms of what they’re most interested in — the continuous monitoring, the transparency in their supply chain, getting benchmarked?

Martin Johnston  18:08

The most interesting thing is the fact that we do all the work for them. They’re astonished. They say, ‘Well, what do we have to do?’ And we say, ‘Nothing. You give us your company name, you give us your company registration number, and we do the rest.’ The fact that they don’t have to fill in a questionnaire, the fact it doesn’t take them weeks to produce answers to all of these questions, the fact that it’s not labor-intensive — that’s the game changer, we think, which will be the non-bureaucratic, non-burdensome process that stops businesses from wanting to do good.

Mitch Ratcliffe  18:41

Simplification. And we’re talking about an incredibly complex system that’s growing more so all the time, especially with the growing impact of climate change on all of our businesses. This is, I think, a great place to stop and take a quick commercial break. I want to dig into a lot more of this. We’ll be right back. Folks, stay tuned.

Welcome back to Sustainability In Your Ear. Let’s return to my conversation with Martin Johnson. He’s founder of EarthRating.ai, which aims to make environmental impact an easily measured and understood business metric with a universal credibility score for people and planet. So Martin, as we were talking about, this is an immensely complex problem, and you’re at this early stage, still gathering a lot of interest from organizations. What does your roadmap look like? And what are the particular areas of complexity you think you can tackle in the next 12 to 18 months?

Martin Johnston  19:35

Some interesting questions there. I think you’ve nailed on something — the landscape for sustainability is incredibly complex, and it shouldn’t be. The reality is that it took rocket science to get us off the planet, but we only need trees, water, and air to breathe and live on it. So we need to simplify sustainability, and that’s our purpose. The whole idea is to look at how we can make it easier, simpler, and less complex for businesses to start to report and then create operational efficiencies by making the right decisions for their business. The whole concept of sustainability is really about literally the word ‘sustain’ and ‘able.’ If you aren’t doing the right things, you’re putting your business at risk in the future. There’s supply chain risk, demand risk, regulatory risk, and reputational risk that all need to be put into the mix when you start to think about what the future looks like for your business. For us, the roadmap really is to create a universal — and ‘universal’ doesn’t necessarily mean the same; it means available to every business. Making that available to every business means we need to break those barriers down, which create the complexities, and allow businesses to start doing the right things, rather than spending time, money, and energy on reporting the wrong things. That’s where we need to change the system. We need to create a new operating system for sustainable business. Look at how we can then seriously make inroads, so it becomes almost the standard, if you like, by simplifying sustainability and getting mass adoption as quickly as we can. That’s the aim.

Mitch Ratcliffe  21:25

What would you describe as the most important question you can help a business answer about itself or a supplier in the next couple of years? Let’s talk simplification. Bring it down to that level.

Martin Johnston  21:38

I guess the simple question is: if you’re looking to regulate your supply chain and you’re looking to de-risk your supply chain as an organization from above, you need to know that your supply chain is saying what they’re doing and actually implementing what they’re doing — not just saying the right things to help them win tenders, because they’d be putting everybody at risk. So what we’re doing, first of all, is just absolutely putting the credibility back into what sustainability is for businesses and for people. And then what that means for a smaller business who’s looking upwards is that they can show they’re on the journey, show they’re good enough to win and be part of a regulated supply chain, and actually want to be in an ecosystem where businesses think beyond profits and balance sheets — because it’s commercially not astute not to. It’s because it’s commercially the right thing to do.

Mitch Ratcliffe  22:43

When we talked a couple of months ago, when we first met, you mentioned that you’re focused on — and this is a quote — ‘detecting credibility gaps early.’ Can you describe what a credibility gap is going to look like in practice, and how your monitoring will catch it, particularly before it becomes a reputational crisis for the company?

Martin Johnston  23:02

Yeah. One of the things we are doing, as I said right from the beginning — and we didn’t make this statement, Douglas Adams did — bad news travels fast. Bad news travels really quickly, and the ability for businesses to put out statements which are unintentionally wrong is where this goes pear-shaped for them. The well-intentioned statement by any large organization is genuinely probably well-intentioned, but when it doesn’t take total impact into consideration, it can then be taken out of context and actually be untrue. That’s where you need to look at the regulatory complexity and the gap in the marketplace. Look at the statements that they’re making applying across the board. So it’s total impact considerations, actually saying, ‘You can’t say that, because over here you’re not doing it.’ That means you can pull out what could be a compliance risk, a damaging reputational risk, and an opportunity for fines risk, and show businesses, ‘This is how you should be rephrasing this, or sourcing some evidence to prove it,’ before you then spend loads of money on an advertising campaign and getting it all wrong.

Mitch Ratcliffe  24:26

One of the concerns that a lot of people have when we talk about artificial intelligence and sustainability, frankly, is a credibility problem in and of itself. Models can hallucinate. The training data could be biased, and as you’ve pointed out, verification can be really hard. How do you validate all of the inputs and the AI inference that is applied to those inputs when generating the score?

Martin Johnston  24:52

Yeah, okay. There is a lot of hallucination in AI, which is why we use it very minimally. The idea is the gathering of the data. If you take a credit score model, it gathers realistic data from all kinds of places. It then aggregates that data, and that aggregated data can give you a very solid viewpoint of what you can do. You can then potentially use AI to look into that data — which you know is correct — to give you the right information much quicker than if you were to do it with human eyes. That’s the thing you have to do: gather the correct data, the right data, and evidence against that data. The other good thing you can do is compare data sources from one to the other, and by doing that, show the gaps from, say, a news source against the annual report. The annual report will be signed off. The annual report will be true. The annual report will have an accountancy stamp all over it to say this is legally correct. So what you need to do is look at the legally correct information, take the legally correct information, benchmark it against marketing information, and showcase where things could go wrong. That is not necessarily a hallucination AI job. That’s just using AI to show how you can display data quicker than you could do in any other way. But you have to still gather the data and gather the data sources, which is why our accelerated impact engine has gathered all of that. It’s taken years to build. It’s not just sticking something into Claude and saying, ‘What do you think of this?’

Mitch Ratcliffe  26:23

Specialized models are going to be particularly important as you think about the emergence of a universal standard, which, of course, you’re trying to build. What has to be true in terms of the technology — our ability to integrate into systems and do these kinds of credibility checks — in terms of regulation? Do you need to have… as you pointed out, the UK government has a new procurement law. The European Union has transparency laws in terms of the sustainability and environmental impact of a variety of products. Is that all moving in the direction to support your work?

Martin Johnston  26:56

No, I don’t think we need more regulation. I really don’t. I think AI maybe needs regulation, but that’s not what I’m about. It’s not what we’re here to talk about at all. I think the point is, sustainability and more regulation, more red tape, will just stop businesses from doing it. The best example of self-regulation we have in this country is the Law Society, and it’s a system which everybody adopts, everybody understands and learns. It’s almost like the industry self-regulating. I think we need to get businesses to understand that they need to self-regulate against stuff. That’s where sustainability can actually start to take a much bigger impact and a much bigger step forward — if we actually lost a lot of the regulation. For example, you have repurpose and recycling, and then so much insurance invalidation from using materials that have been used before, because of the risks involved. Yet the questions behind that are not necessarily commercially correct. It’s just that the risk is too great. So I think regulation, and imposing stuff on businesses — particularly around wanting to be more sustainable — is just another tax that they don’t need. Innovation moving forwards, doing the right things to de-risk their business from future demand, from future supply chain restriction because of global issues around the world that stop things from happening or trap movement from happening, and international trade being available, is something that needs less friction, less friction — rather than more barriers.

Mitch Ratcliffe  28:44

In the long term — and I’m asking you to think maybe five or 10 years out in the future — who’s the ultimate consumer of the EarthRating score? Does it include investors, and maybe ultimately consumers who would say, ‘Is this business one that I can trust to be sustainable?’

Martin Johnston  29:00

I think that’s a good question, actually. In five years’ time, the aim really is for us to be globally recognized, like a credit score for environmental and social impact — transparent, credible, and recognized worldwide. We’d love investors and consumers to look at it and back businesses with real sustainability credentials, which doesn’t involve greenwashing. It drives demand for genuine impact. Honestly, if we could build this into finance so the highest scores influence lending — they influence decision-making — so that sustainability becomes a strategic financial advantage, that would be incredible. And to finalize it all off, access for small businesses — giving them the tools and the resources to adopt sustainable business practices — is probably the biggest opportunity for us as a race to make a difference to the planet and the businesses that are on it.

Mitch Ratcliffe  30:11

Based on what you’ve learned so far, what’s your advice for a small business that’s thinking about its sustainability moves? Where would you urge them to focus first or second?

Martin Johnston  30:22

I’d obviously go and get yourself an EarthRating.

Mitch Ratcliffe  30:24

Well, beyond that, what would make their EarthRating score really shine?

Martin Johnston  30:31

Well, I think what they need to do is look at their business model. The best businesses solve problems, and they expressly say so through their brand. For example, you’ve got Tony’s Chocolonely in Europe — I don’t know if you have them in the US — although they exist to eradicate poverty in chocolate supply chains. They’ve got an open supply chain methodology, and they’ve grown exponentially by doing something really positive and being really good, then showcasing the problem they solve for the world through their brand. Patagonia do it as well — ‘Don’t buy this jacket.’ All the best brands are universally challenging what a marketing campaign looks like. But I’m actually going back to what they stand for. Where do they fit into this world, and what difference can they make? A small business should apply the same model: What are you doing? Why are you here? And what difference can you make? Then start championing that, because that’s an authentic positioning that no one can copy. That’s most important for any business — to start operating in a way that amplifies that process, because that means you’ll engage suppliers, you’ll engage partners, you’ll engage opportunities, and create advocates for brands and businesses more than any other way. In doing so, you’ll automatically want to adopt sustainable business practices, which just make you a better business.

Mitch Ratcliffe  31:56

I think of an orchestra when you describe that. A lot of people will focus only on the rhythm section or only on the violins because that’s what they do, but they have to see themselves in this larger picture — the way that Patagonia or Tony’s Chocolonely does, where they’re trying to help and create opportunities and solutions for the world, rather than simply meet some demand. As you design EarthRating, how do you describe that vision for your contribution to the larger world?

Martin Johnston  32:23

You just mentioned an analogy I really like — the orchestra. If you take it up to a bigger stage, you know, we’re called Earth, and the only reason we are alive on this planet is because we operate and are located within a larger solar system, where the gravity of the worlds pulls us in a way where we are equidistant from the sun, which allows life and oxygen to exist, right? So if you can take that orchestra analogy and explode it out to the solar system and then bring it back to the planetary system, to the ecosystem — we’re all part of it. It’s really important to understand that, to play a part in its future, we need to think in systems. We need to think system-wide. You can’t operate in isolation, because you just don’t operate within a structure where impact matters — if you don’t understand what your impact is on others.

Mitch Ratcliffe  33:21

You’ve got to look up, take a wider view of the world, it sounds like, and I wholeheartedly agree with that perspective. Now you’re early. You’re still collecting a lot of interest from people. How can folks — say, a small business — get involved with EarthRating.ai?

Martin Johnston  33:39

Well, we’ve got a holding website up there, which you can sign up to, and we can get in contact with you. We’ve also got a LinkedIn page, and I think those are the best two ways. Yeah, that’s probably the right way to go — to EarthRating.ai and register interest, and then we can get in contact. We do need adoption at scale. So yeah, one of the things we want to do is to challenge and transform sustainability by simplifying the whole thing and making it easier, more accessible, and more available to a larger audience group than it currently is.

Mitch Ratcliffe  34:15

Well, Martin, thanks very much for a fascinating conversation.

Mitch Ratcliffe  34:23

Welcome back to Sustainability In Your Ear. You’ve been listening to my conversation with Martin Johnston. He’s the founder of EarthRating.ai, an early-stage company building what it calls a universal credibility score for sustainability claims. You can learn more about Martin and his team’s work at EarthRating.ai. EarthRating is all one word, no space, no dash. EarthRating.ai.

Artificial intelligence has incredible power to find, organize, and systematize large amounts of unstructured information, which humans have plenty of — though its reasoning over that information may not always be sound. AI’s promise for sustainability work, which, as Martin pointed out, is to gather and analyze far more information for contradictions that undermine the credibility of a company’s claims that it achieves a reduced environmental and adverse social impact, is significant. But it’s early days for AI and EarthRating, and they’ve made a lot of promises that we’re going to have to see whether the technology and EarthRating can keep.

EarthRating doesn’t try to measure a company’s environmental impact. It measures whether the claims a company makes about its impact hold up against the evidence available in the public record. So like a FICO score that doesn’t tell a lender whether you’re a good person, this tells them whether your behavior is consistent enough to be trusted. EarthRating proposes to do the same for sustainability claims by pulling roughly 100 data points from audited reports, regulatory filings, news coverage, and marketing materials, and then flagging the gaps between what a company says and what the verifiable record shows.

The promise of a sustainability credibility score generated in minutes, not the six to eight weeks a conventional certification takes, would deliver simplicity. If that works as advertised, it would represent a real application of AI to a problem that has resisted simplification for two decades — the slow, expensive, fragmented mess that sustainability reporting has become. But perhaps we can take simplicity too far.

So two ideas from this conversation come wrapped with a healthy stack of promises still to be kept. The first is the reframe itself — credibility instead of impact. This is interesting because it sidesteps the impossible problem of trying to reduce carbon, water, biodiversity, and social performance into a single comparable number, and replaces it with a more tractable one: whether a company’s statements are internally consistent and externally verifiable. That has obvious value for procurement teams under, for instance, the UK’s new Procurement Act or the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, which now covers about 50,000 companies and is pushing accountability down the supply chain.

But there’s a limit to transparency too. A high credibility score means a company is telling the truth about what it does, but it doesn’t mean the company is necessarily doing enough. A small landscaping firm with a modest, well-documented commitment to, say, electric mowers and edgers could rate higher than a multinational with ambitious but aspirational net-zero targets that have not been independently verified. That’s probably the right calibration for a trust score, but it’s not the same thing as an environmental performance score. As we’ve discussed with prior guests, the limits of single-metric thinking in a systems world are that every framework leaves something out, and the question is whether the thing it leaves out matters more than the thing it captures.

The second idea is the small business democratization play, and this is where the opportunity is largest and the proof is thinnest. Martin cited a striking number: 91% of small businesses don’t report on sustainability at all, even though they constitute the vast majority of economic activity worldwide. The reasons are exactly as you’d expect — cost, frameworks built for companies with dedicated sustainability teams, and bureaucracy that is overwhelming for a regional logistics firm or a five-person landscaping outfit. If EarthRating can give those companies a credible, low-friction way to participate in regulated supply chains and government tenders, it solves a real economic exclusion problem.

But the platform is, in Martin’s own words, at Google 1.0. And I was there when Google 1.0 was launched, and it did some important and interesting things that set it apart. But it was a launch-stage project with a proprietary scoring methodology — the PageRank algorithm — that wasn’t yet externally audited, and it had no business model. They were still trying to work that out. The vision for EarthRating to become a global standard that influences lending decisions and consumer trust is genuinely interesting, but global standards aren’t willed into existence by founders. They’re ratified by customers, by usage, embraced by regulators, and ultimately require widespread education to ensure that the seal of approval it grants is well understood in the market and not just another meaningless symbol or certification.

So let me add one note of friction here. Martin made the case that sustainability needs less regulation, not more, and that self-regulation is the path forward. I don’t think the historical record supports that argument. The real reason that small businesses are suddenly facing sustainability scrutiny at all is because of the regulation. The UK Procurement Act, the EU’s wide-ranging environmental and circular economy programs, and the SEC climate disclosure rules here in the United States are pushing sustainability reporting down the supply chain. EarthRating exists in a market that regulation created. That’s not a knock on the product — it’s an observation about the soil that it must grow in.

So count me intrigued, but with asterisks. An AI-powered credibility score for sustainability claims is a useful idea, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses that have been left on the sidelines of the reporting economy. Whether EarthRating becomes a standard or is absorbed by a larger framework is a question only adoption will answer, and so we’ll be watching.

Hey, and would you do me a favor? If you’ve enjoyed this conversation, please share it with a friend or a family member. You folks are the amplifiers who can spread more ideas to create less waste. So please tell your friends and family that they can check out more than 550 episodes in our archive and hear us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Audible, or whatever purveyor of podcast goodness they prefer. Writing a review on your favorite podcast platform does help people find us. Thank you for your support.

I’m Mitch Ratcliffe. This is Sustainability In Your Ear, and we will be back with another innovator interview soon. In the meantime, folks, take care of yourself, take care of one another, and let’s all take care of this beautiful planet of ours. Have a Green Day.

The post Sustainability In Your Ear: EarthRating’s Martin Johnston On Making Sustainability Claims Creditable appeared first on Earth911.

https://earth911.com/podcast/sustainability-in-your-ear-earthratings-martin-johnson-on-making-sustainability-claims-creditable/

Continue Reading

Green Living

Earth911 Inspiration: Nature Is Not a Place To Visit. It Is Home.

Published

on

This week’s quote is from poet Gary Snyder: “Nature is not a place to visit. It is home.”

Earth911 inspirations. Post them, share your desire to help people think of the planet first, every day. Click to get a larger image.

"Nature is not a place to visit. It is home." --Gary Snyder

The post Earth911 Inspiration: Nature Is Not a Place To Visit. It Is Home. appeared first on Earth911.

https://earth911.com/inspire/earth911-inspiration-nature-is-not-a-place-to-visit/

Continue Reading

Green Living

Best of Sustainability In Your Ear: Colorado’s First-Of-Its-Kind EPR Oil Recycling Program With David Lawes

Published

on

Subscribe to receive transcripts by email. Read along with this episode.

Americans dispose of approximately 1.3 billion gallons of used motor oil annually, but only about 800 million gallons get recycled, and most of that is burned as fuel rather than re-refined into new oil. The plastic packaging oil comes in is more problematic: most curbside programs won’t accept them because residual oil contaminates other recyclables. What happens when the companies that make motor oil embrace extended producer responsibility (EPR) laws that require recycling the oil and the containers it comes in? David Lawes, CEO of the Lubricants Packaging Management Association (LPMA), is leading what could become a national model for extended producer responsibility. Colorado just became the testing ground. In September 2024, five major oil companies—BP Lubricants, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, and Valvoline—founded LPMA as an independent producer responsibility organization.

David Lawes, CEO of the Lubricants Packaging Management Association, is our guest on Sustainability In Your Ear.

Colorado gave producers a choice: join the Circular Action Alliance, which manages all packaging and printed paper recycling in the state, or develop their own sector-specific program that demonstrates better outcomes. LPMA chose the independent path, arguing that petroleum packaging requires specialized handling that general-purpose programs can’t provide efficiently. Lawes brings two decades of EPR policy experience to the role, including a decade regulating EPR programs in Canada. The program he ran in British Columbia achieves a 96% recycling rate for oil containers—compared to less than 1% in most U.S. states. “This is not about skirting the law or finding an easier pathway,” Lawes explains. “It is about meeting the same results in an industry-friendly way.”

If Colorado’s model works, it could reshape EPR programs nationwide. We discuss why petroleum packaging can’t be managed through curbside programs, what lessons from Canada’s more developed EPR system apply here, and whether the U.S. needs national recycling standards to harmonize the patchwork of state regulations. You can learn more about LPMA at interchange360.com.

Editor’s Note: This episode originally aired on December 1, 2025.

The post Best of Sustainability In Your Ear: Colorado’s First-Of-Its-Kind EPR Oil Recycling Program With David Lawes appeared first on Earth911.

https://earth911.com/podcast/sustainability-in-your-ear-colorados-first-of-its-kind-epr-oil-recycling-program-with-david-lawes/

Continue Reading

Green Living

Sustainability In Your Ear: Cody Two Bears on Indigenized Energy’s Community-Centric Grid Strategy

Published

on

Tribal households in the United States carry an energy burden 28% above the national average and endure 6.5 times more power outages a year, and roughly 17,000 tribal homes — housing at least 54,000 people — have no electricity at all, according to the Department of Energy. Those are the communities now first in line to absorb the next surge in demand, because Energy Information Administration concluded data center load will be the dominant driver of long-term U.S. electricity growth. Our guest this week is Cody Two Bears, founder and CEO of Indigenized Energy, and his answer to that arithmetic is tribal energy sovereignty: build it yourself, on your own terms, at your own pace. A member of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and once the youngest person elected to its tribal council, Cody founded the organization in 2017 after the NoDAPL protests and went on to develop North Dakota’s largest solar farm. It recently became an independent 501(c)(3) this spring and now runs energy makeover projects in four tribal communities and food sovereignty work in two more. A household that signs on returns a share of what it saves — a flat fee on one reservation, a 50-50 split on another, a sliding scale elsewhere that asks 70% from a family with a job and 10% or 20% from an elder on a fixed income. The revolving fund covers maintenance, sustains jobs, and eventually becomes collateral in places where conventional lending has never worked, because sovereign land doesn’t fit a repossession-based credit model. Cody puts it plainly: tribes are asking for a hand up, and the point of the first dollar is that nobody has to come back for a second.

Cody Two Bears, founder and CEO of Indigenized Energy, is our guest on Sustainability In Your Ear.

The Tribal Renewable Energy Coalition that Indigenized Energy helped form won $136 million through the EPA’s $7 billion Solar for All program, and Cody’s team completed some of the earliest builds in the country before EPA terminated the program in August 2025. The reimbursements never arrived. Cody also declines to treat any of this as partisan, and he’s persuasive about why: North Dakota is a firm red state, and its farmers run the math on solar the way they’d run it on a truck loan. Ann Arbor and Portland are now standing up residential programs that resemble what tribes have operated for years, which makes Indian Country something closer to an R&D lab for community-scale energy than a charity case. The conversation gets most interesting where energy stops being about electricity. Indigenized Energy’s off-grid array at the Northern Cheyenne buffalo facility in Montana — too remote for a grid connection — runs the electric fences, water stations, and freezers, and feeds both the tribe and local food banks; Solar Builder named it 2025 Project of the Year under 100 kW. A similar system is going up at Wozu on Standing Rock to support a returning buffalo herd, doubling as shade during handling. Grass-fed buffalo raised on regenerated grassland commands a premium, so healing the land lands on the balance sheet. The energy decision, the food decision, and the land decision are one decision, because the systems were never separate to begin with.

To learn more about Indigenized Energy’s projects, programs, and workforce training, visit 4Indigenized.energy. September 16–18, 2026 brings People of the Sun to the Standing Rock Reservation, a three-day gathering of tribal leaders, energy practitioners, artists, and musicians marking ten years since NoDAPL; tickets are at PeopleoftheSun.live.

Interview Transcript

Mitch Ratcliffe 0:11

Hello. Good morning. Good afternoon. Or good evening, wherever you are on this beautiful planet of ours. Welcome to Sustainability In Your Ear. This is the podcast conversation about accelerating the transition to a sustainable, carbon-neutral society, and I’m your host, Mitch Ratcliffe. Thanks for joining the conversation today.

We’re going to be talking energy independence for the nation’s Indigenous communities, which could be a model for the distributed, community-centered electrical grid of the future. The national conversation about the clean energy transition has a geography problem. It tends to center on the places where capital flows most easily: coastal cities, utility-scale solar farms in the Sun Belt, offshore wind corridors in the Northeast. But the communities bearing the highest energy burdens in the country, many of them rural and tribal, are treated as footnotes in a story that’s mostly being written somewhere else, and that gap is getting harder to ignore.

Electricity demand is accelerating, driven by AI infrastructure buildout, data centers, and an aging grid straining to modernize, and the pressure continues to land unevenly. Native American families pay disproportionately high utility rates for disproportionately unreliable service, and they’re facing the next wave of demand pressure while the federal policy environment that was supposed to support tribal energy development has become, let’s just say, significantly less reliable. The clean energy transition, as currently structured, risks leaving behind the communities that most need it.

And my guest today has been working on the other version of this story, one in which tribes don’t wait for transitions to arrive, but build their electric infrastructure themselves, on their own terms, at their own pace. Cody Two Bears is the co-founder and CEO of Indigenized Energy, an organization that works alongside tribal nations to advance energy sovereignty. He’s a member of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, and what makes Indigenized Energy structurally different from most organizations in this market is the thing it refuses to be — an outside group bringing solutions to Native communities. Instead, Indigenized Energy is of these communities, staffed by Native leaders and practitioners, accountable to tribal governance, and built to stay present long after a grant cycle or a solar installation is complete.

Indigenized Energy is running energy makeover projects in four tribal communities, integrating solar, battery storage, and efficiency upgrades in a model designed to be replicable. Alongside that work, food sovereignty projects in two communities are connecting clean energy directly to land regeneration, water conservation, and community food systems, because Cody’s position is that energy is never just about electricity. And in April of this year, Indigenized Energy became an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit, a milestone that positions the organization to steward resources directly and build the long-term partnerships its three-year strategic plan depends upon.

The strategic plan itself is worth understanding. It’s built around a vision of Native-led energy futures that support thriving communities for the next seven generations — a planning horizon that puts it in a different category than most organizations in this sector. Where others build for grant cycles, Indigenized Energy is building for continuity across leadership transitions, funding volatility, and the long arc of what it actually takes to shift who holds power in an energy system.

So we’re going to talk with Cody about what the energy burdens actually look like in the communities where he works; how AI demand growth is shaping the stakes for rural and tribal communities; why distributed solar and microgrids are tools for sovereignty and not just cost savings; how energy connects to food and land and water in ways the mainstream conversation misses; as well as what it means to build an organization from the inside out rather than delivering solutions from the outside in. The clean energy transition will either be built with Indigenous communities or it will be built around them. Let’s explore Cody Two Bears’ clear view of the difference right after this quick commercial break.

Welcome to Sustainability In Your Ear, Cody Two Bears. How you doing today?

Cody Two Bears 4:21

Good, good. Could be better, I guess. We know there’s a lot of energy crisis out there, a lot of things happening in the world. But you know, we’re doing the best we can with some of the circumstances.

Mitch Ratcliffe 4:35

What we’re going to talk about on this show — the circumstances are truly unusual. But Indigenized Energy’s vision is for a Native-led energy future that supports generations of thriving communities for the next seven generations, and that’s a very different planning horizon than, you know, say, the typical three- or five-year corporate strategy or any federal funding cycle. How does that thinking in generations change the decisions you’re making about energy today?

Cody Two Bears 4:55

I think the biggest thing — what it looks like for, you know, energy is our people. Native American people never really thought about the energy crisis like we do today. You know, 150 years ago, 200 years ago, we were always just focused on, you know, food sovereignty, our traditional medicines, our culture, our language, things that are really important to us. But now, as we fast forward and we live in this energy era, and with really climate change kind of causing catastrophic events around the world, you’re starting to see how energy can really play a role into life-and-death situations.

So because of that, Native American people now have really looked toward energy sovereignty as another pillar, just like all those other things like food sovereignty and traditional medicines. Now, as we move forward, it’s really important to really understand how energy can really heal the land, but also making sure that energy can also make us sovereign and less reliant on outside resources.

Mitch Ratcliffe 5:57

We’re going to talk a lot about the idea of sovereignty over the course of the conversation, but let me ask you about what the day-to-day experience of energy dependence feels like. What’s it actually look like in a family’s daily life?

Cody Two Bears 6:10

I think, you know, being on the reservation — I grew up on the reservation my whole life. I grew up in one of the top 10 poorest counties in the country, Sioux County, North Dakota, on the Standing Rock Reservation. Standing Rock borders two states, North Dakota and South Dakota, and is the fifth largest landmass tribe in the country. So we have a lot of land out there, rich land.

But most importantly, when I grew up, I never understood why we always had frequent power outages, why some of our utility rates were some of the highest compared to other places around us in the region especially. But I think the biggest thing I’ve learned is we always had to pay more for energy, which I would call less reliable energy. But yet we had to pay more, which was kind of ironic in itself.

But most communities, we are what I always say at the end of the line, you know, and it is something that, as infrastructure at the end of the lines are always aging, outages can be more frequent and even last longer toward the end of those utility lines. You know, that really hits our families on reservations pretty hard. The energy burden of us having to try to keep the lights on and keep our homes warm in the winter — and you can only imagine, in the northern plains where I grew up, we experience, I would say, sometimes below negative 70 wind chill factor, and we have to keep our homes warm. And could you imagine not having energy during those times, or having a power outage during those times? And now we’re even experiencing, you know, 100-plus-degree weather more frequent in the South. Could you imagine not having cool air, energy, in the South?

So, you know, those are the things that have really struck hard to a lot of people now. You know, in reservations where I come from, we’ve been experiencing those for a long time. Now we’re just seeing the rest of the world starting to experience that and start to ask questions. But I think that makes our work at Indigenized Energy even more important now, and why our energy projects have really powerful impacts, is because lowering energy costs puts real money back into our families’ pockets, especially places where I come from. But it also creates more resilient homes, which is really important. Local jobs, and of course, everlasting economic value for our community, which is really, really important. So the work that I do here at Indigenized Energy is that much more impactful because of all the reasons I just discussed, and you can walk out your front door and see the results.

Mitch Ratcliffe 8:43

And that must be a really powerful experience, not just for you, but for everybody in the community.

Cody Two Bears 8:49

Absolutely. And I think the biggest thing is taking it right off the top of the meter, having those significant savings in real time, just right there at our disposal, right off the meter. Distributed energy projects, for me, in Indian Country are really important. You know, I know just having a reliable grid is really important as well, of creating solar farms and different things like that. But you can’t create a higher, more impact than actual distributed energy in Native communities.

Mitch Ratcliffe 9:18

Let’s talk a little about sovereignty, and this is a concept that’s breaking out all over the place. On the net, for instance, it means raising walls around data and infrastructure that were previously open. It sounds like some previous historical eras — the enclosure movement in the U.K., for instance, and of course the seizing of lands from Native tribes in the United States. Can you unpack how tribal sovereignty supports your community’s relationship with place and resources? What does that mean to your community?

Cody Two Bears 9:51

I think, you know, just look at it in this aspect of it. For many generations, Native tribes have contributed a lot to the greater good of the United States, this country that we live in today. You know, we were the ones that had to give up a lot of our land, a lot of our resources, to be able to allow this country to flourish. Well, now a lot of Native lands have shrunken now because of the taking of our lands and what has happened historically in the last couple hundred years.

But I think the biggest thing that we’re learning from that is whatever little lands we have left now — because before then they threw us on lands that were some of the most ugliest, desolate lands in the country. But now they’re some of the most beautiful lands in the world, you know, because we’re able to preserve those lands that we’re on. But because of that, there’s not a lot of development happening on those lands.

So what we look at that is, you know, number one, our energy infrastructure is very outdated. Number two, we’re using more energy more and more every day. The Western world, where we live in the United States, we use energy probably 10 times more than the other side of the world, and it’s just continuously, rapidly growing. You know, our energy needs are always growing. So we as Native tribes, because we have a lot of land, we have a lot of resources, we want to be able to contribute to the energy grid in a way that we see fit, in a way of what energy sovereignty means to us. So not only do we want to take care of our own people and our own needs, so we don’t have to always outsource our needs anymore — we want to always insource our needs.

I think the creative thing that we’re doing here can teach a lot of municipalities, can teach a lot of communities out there, states, on actually how to be sovereign themselves and not have to rely on the greater good. Because one example: when we all know the catastrophic events that happened in Texas a few years ago, where they got cold down there and their grid shut down, and they had no power for like a week or a week and a half or something — and then we had to shut down up in the north for like four hours out of the day to send power down their way, you know. So those are just some of those examples why I say energy resiliency is really important, because we have to start to protect our communities and where we live, and our states and where we come from, even more so.

And that’s what energy sovereignty and what Indigenized Energy is doing for tribes. We’re starting to work with tribes to help them become their own tribal utility, help them generate their own energy in their own communities, and help dictate those rates, because we know that with all the things that are going on in the world right now — and we’ll get into a lot of the AI data center stuff here in a minute — but because of all the energy needs and what’s happening in the world right now, those energy costs are continuously rising. So it’s really important to be able to generate our own energy moving forward, and that’s what energy sovereignty means to Native Americans.

But what I will say is, energy is different for every tribe. There’s 575 federally recognized tribes, and they might do it a little bit different compared to the next tribe, and that’s okay. But the most important part is looking out for their future generations to come and making sure that those energy costs stay within those communities, but most importantly, they’re more resilient than ever. As you know, solar is becoming cheaper every single year. It’s becoming cheaper, it’s more efficient. So tribes are really looking at a way in to figure out how can we become more energy sovereign as we move forward.

Mitch Ratcliffe 13:20

As you say, distributed energy and microgrids can offer real energy independence, but there’s a lot of upfront costs and technical complexity. What’s the model for making these projects work financially for communities that have been systematically under-resourced?

Cody Two Bears 13:36

And that’s a great question there, Mitch, because, you know, Indigenized Energy — I really thought hard about this. We all know that in the world today we can put up an energy project in a community like mine and turn around and leave. But if you don’t build the skill sets or capacity internally to make them understand what you’re putting there, it’s probably going to fail. It’s probably going to crumble in the next two or three years, right?

So what I do is, we create projects at Indigenized Energy, but we also are really focused on creating programs. And within those programs — what I’ve learned, and Indigenized Energy has been doing this for the last seven years now, Mitch, which is pretty exciting — so what we do is, when we create a program, a distributed residential solar program for a tribe, usually we need some upfront capital or philanthropic dollars to help kickstart a program, but knowing that these programs are going to be self-sufficient on their own.

So what I mean by that, Mitch: if you had a home on the reservation and you wanted solar, and you wanted to sign up for a program, you could sign up for that program. Every program that we create is different from each reservation that we work with. One reservation would have a flat rate fee that you would pay to be a part of the program. Another one saves 50% across the board on what you generate in your home and what you save in your home in that month — 50% of that goes back into the program, the other 50 you get to save within your own pocket. Or another one is like a sliding scale, right? Where if you work, which is, you know, very rare on reservations, not a whole lot of jobs, but if you do work, you might be able to pay up to 70% back into the program. You keep 30% because you have a job, while there’s other elders that are on fixed incomes that may only pay 10 or 20% back. So it’s like a sliding scale program.

And what we’re seeing with these programs — and that’s what we got awarded Solar for All, the $7 billion through the EPA, Mitch. When we did our proposal for that, we created that model, and we were held in high regard. Indigenized Energy, through our coalition of tribes and other Plains tribes, we were held in high regard on: this is exactly the model we need to make solar flourish in the world.

So what that means is, as we create these programs, we’re actually kickstarting that. We’re just going to kickstart that with that $136 million we got, and that was going to put like 400 of these things on every reservation. And could you imagine the income it would generate being a part of a program for every tribe and where I come from? And what that will do is, it would unlock and unleash us as Native American people to finally be investable.

You know, because a lot of times Native American tribes, we have our own laws and our own sovereignty. So a lot of times we can’t get home loans on a tribe. They can’t go and just repo a home on our reservation, or a car loan, or different types of things. So it’s very tough to do and create loans within reservations. But whenever you create a program, a sustainable program that generates money within places of some of the highest poverty places and tribal nations in the country — you generate money. Well, that’s a fund that sustains jobs. That’s a fund that takes care of the O&M, and it also creates a fund that, once you start creating that fund, you can go out and take a loan and leverage all the money that’s out there for us for low-income communities to take advantage of. So that’s what we were going to do to kickstart Indigenized Energy to take us to the next level.

And what we’ve learned in the last six months, Mitch, is there’s places like Ann Arbor, Michigan — you can look up — and Portland, they’re actually creating distributed residential programs within their own communities now, and that’s something that tribal nations have been doing for quite some time. So I just wanted to give you the kind of nuts and bolts of why our work was really important, is because we do a lot of projects too, but programs was really the big thing that Indigenized created that would really help green economies flourish within reservation boundaries.

Mitch Ratcliffe 17:39

A lot of people see the process of financialization as just bad, but what you’re saying is that it can be used to move from human exploitation to human enablement.

Cody Two Bears 17:49

Right. And I think that’s the biggest thing at Indigenized Energy. We don’t always ask for handouts; we ask for a hand up. And I think that’s the biggest thing: as we’re continuously raising money, we’re continuously saying, “Hey, help a tribe start a residential program, and once they start that, then you won’t need to keep going back and asking for more money anymore. It’s going to be self-sustainable.”

And I think that was why, you know, when Biden saw our vision and actually held our proposal in high regard — there was 60 awardees that got awarded the Solar for All program, and we were one of two that was held up as an example of that. And you know, I really wish we could have continued on with that project. You know, of course, this new administration here pulled those federal fundings. We were actually through the planning stages, ready to deploy the projects and start to build things before it got pulled. But the crazy thing about that, Mitch, is even though the money got pulled, a lot of our money we never really got reimbursed fully the way we should have. So Indigenized Energy, we lost quite a few dollars and resources of not being able to get reimbursed, because it was cut off so fast.

But most importantly, I think our tribes are more ready than ever to be able to take in funds because of that, and we’re kind of ready to deploy. We’re just looking for alternative resources and support and help to make that happen.

Mitch Ratcliffe 19:10

So you just completed a transition to becoming an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit, and that’s significant. But you’re doing it in a genuinely difficult funding environment. What does organizational resilience look like for somebody in a mission-driven organization who’s navigating that strife-driven national dialogue you just described?

Cody Two Bears 19:31

I think the biggest thing is, as nonprofits do the work, funders always ask, “Well, what is your sustainability plan to keep you guys going?” And I think the model that I just shared is exactly that sustainability plan. That, you know, any funder that would understand this financialization model, they would want to give to that. They would want to say, “Wow, I want to be a part of something like that.” So for us, it’s just getting the word out there. The model now is actually working. It makes sense. We just need to deploy in other tribal communities that we service and work with.

But you know, as far as becoming our own 501(c)(3), we can really now lock in and do this work even more at a higher level for our tribal communities. Because sometimes when you use federal funds, well, there’s always like some red tape that you go through. There’s needs within tribal communities that won’t be met, because you can only do so much with federal dollars. Or if you’re, you know, fiscally sponsored, well, the policies that they create through fiscal sponsors don’t align with tribal values. So a lot of times we always hit roadblocks because of that. So becoming a Native-led organization and our own 501(c)(3) now has really propelled us to even cut all that red tape and to really help tribal nations the way they really need it. And I think that’s the exciting part about doing this energy work, being Native-led, but most importantly, being our own 501(c)(3).

Mitch Ratcliffe 21:01

You mentioned this before, that the national conversation these days about energy demand is increasingly being driven by AI expansion and data centers, just generally. And most of that conversation focuses on grid capacity at the macro level. What gets lost or left out when frontline and rural communities aren’t part of the conversation? What do we need to know about the interdependence we need to build?

Cody Two Bears 21:24

Yeah, look. You know, there’s no avoiding it. These AI data centers are going to be coming. They’re going to be built. A lot of times it’s going to affect communities around them. A lot of times it’s going to drive up the energy costs, you know, a lot more, and it’s going to utilize a lot of their natural resources around them, right? So there’s no way of avoiding it. But I think the concern is what that means for families that are already struggling with high energy costs — is that it’s going to be so difficult.

Like, just on a reservation, there’s AI data centers going up around reservations, and we already pay high energy costs. We already have to take the burden of looking at what that would look like when power goes low. It’s going to go to these data centers, and then I just told you we’re always at the end of the line. So we’re going to get that less energy. It’s going to go somewhere else because we’re at the end of the line, which is going to cause more frequent power outages, then those energy costs to rise. So that’s why our work now even makes more sense. The work that we’re doing now is needed much more than ever, because of that fact.

And we know that as tribal communities, of the demands out there, we also know that we have to do something within our tribal reservations to utilize our sovereignty around energy as we move forward. So I think that’s the biggest thing right now. We’re kind of seeing these AI data centers starting to play out, the types of resources it’s creating, the type of energy costs rising around us. I think is really, really disturbing in my mind. So I just want to make sure that we continue to move the needle within our tribal communities, to make sure we are continuing our work, to making sure we are providing our own energy resources within our tribal nations. Because, you know, those are just more examples for us to keep pressing forward and moving the needle, to making sure we’re taking care of our own needs.

Mitch Ratcliffe 23:15

As we think about a new technology like artificial intelligence, we have to drive it to do the right things for the planet and the people who live on it, but the infrastructure buildout is accelerating demand for natural resources, critical minerals, and so forth, as well as water, in addition to electricity. How do you address the contradiction between those things when you think about whether AI data centers, or data centers generally, might even be part of tribal economic development strategies in the future?

Cody Two Bears 23:44

So I think, you know, as every tribe — and I just said that earlier on this podcast — every tribe has different agendas. Every tribe utilizes things in an economic way. Some tribes don’t. Some tribes want to keep their internal natural resources and not allow things like that to happen within their tribal boundaries. So every tribe has different priorities, different needs.

But what I will say, though, is, as we do this just transition away from fossil fuels — like, you know, I think fossil fuels are the determining factor of why we are the way we are today, right? But there isn’t going to be a perfect technology today. We’re just slowly making that transition, and I think that’s one thing that a lot of my tribal elders or people in my community always ask me. Well, there’s always some type of form of extraction, right? You’re never going to get away from that. But what is less impactful? You know, what can we do to minimize our footprint within the Earth and the land and the waters and the environment around us?

And I think that just transition that we talked about is really important to me, because if I can lessen my footprint just that much more, you know, we’re gonna do that. And when the technology gets better, where we don’t need to do extraction as much anymore in the future, we’ll slowly adjust those. But right now I think it’s just that transition that we’re making away from not having to rely on one source of energy that really is destructing the lands, and understanding and knowing that, yes, there’s other forms of things that are happening out there that are being extracted, but nothing at a major level compared to what we’ve been doing in the past. So there is some movement there, and I know technology will get better. And us as Native Americans, we’re always paying attention to what is the next best thing we should be focused on to continue protecting the environment.

Mitch Ratcliffe 25:31

I think we’ve got a good lay of the land, but there’s a lot more to talk about here, folks. We’re going to take a quick commercial break and be right back to continue talking with Cody Two Bears.

Mitch Ratcliffe 25:45

Welcome back to Sustainability In Your Ear. Let’s return to my conversation with Cody Two Bears, who’s co-founder and CEO of Indigenized Energy, which is a nonprofit developer of distributed electrical infrastructure that’s working to connect Native communities across the continent.

Cody, Indigenized Energy is advancing energy makeover projects in four tribal communities right now. You know, you’re integrating solar, battery storage, and various forms of efficiency. How do you think about designing resilience at the community scale? What do you describe to people when you work with them to develop an infrastructure that supports their way of life?

Cody Two Bears 26:24

Well, that’s kind of why I created Indigenized Energy, Mitch. You know, I always thought, well, what type of good technologies are out there in the world? You know, there’s all good technologies, there’s bad technologies, but there’s also technologies — you have to use them in the right way. If you don’t use them in the right way, then we’re no better than, you know, the oil companies or people that are extracting the lands in a negative way. So my aim was always collaborating Western science and technology with Indigenous ways of life and traditional customs as Native people. And how do you collaborate that to allow Native American communities to make it make sense? And I knew that was going to be the biggest challenge as I created Indigenized Energy, bringing a certain type of technology in to create energy sovereignty within our tribal communities, which is really important.

But these whole makeover projects have been significantly something that’s really true to, you know, understanding that even solar energy in itself isn’t just the answer. You know, I’ll give you an example. A lot of tribal nations live in federal HUD homes, like cookie-cutter type homes that are issued by the federal government through treaties — our treaty laws, where the federal government is supposed to build homes and provide federal funding for homes within our communities, but it’s very, very minimal. They’re cookie-cutter type homes, like I talked about. The walls ain’t very well insulated, and then, of course, Grandma’s got her old freezer that she’s had that she loves for the last 20 to 30 years, that just won’t give up, but she loves it. All these factors play in to creating, you know, what an energy bill looks like in your home, and those energy bills are sometimes eight to nine times higher than the national average, because our homes ain’t well insulated. Our homes still use old technology, and home efficiency is really becoming a big thing for tribal communities as well. So we can save a lot of money just on top of the meter with solar, but could you imagine how much we would save by making even our homes more efficient?

So these home makeover programs and distributed energy projects that we do really are game changers in our communities. As we learn from what tribal communities’ needs are, we’re starting to learn that, number one, tribal communities are very distant. They’re in the middle of nowhere. A lot of our homes are just kind of put out there. There’s not really anything out there, and what that means is whenever we get disconnected from energy — especially our elders, especially our medical-needs people — they could be out without energy for a few days, which could be catastrophic.

So what we’re learning from our tribal communities, and why these home makeover projects are really important, is the tribal communities really want to focus on their elderly. They want to focus on the people in these remote areas. So then, when the power does go out, there’s battery backup there. There’s huge savings, and because we’re always at the end of the line, like I talked about, they can’t get more resilient than that. And one thing that I’ve learned from the few projects that we’ve done is there was one home that we did in the Oglala Sioux Tribe there, by Pine Ridge. When the power went out on their reservation, the home that we did there a few years ago — they were the only ones with power. This elderly group was the only ones with power, and didn’t even know that the rest of everybody was out for a whole day. They still had that resilience of having power in their home. So those are the types of things we see that are really impactful. We know that the work that we do is impactful from day one, from the time we turn that system on, the energy system on, and provide that energy resiliency.

Another one that’s really impactful there, Mitch, is we won Project of the Year through Solar Builder magazine last year, in 2025. We did a food sovereignty project that was initiated with energy sovereignty through a buffalo program out there in Northern Cheyenne. Their buffalo program is in the middle of nowhere. There’s no utility lines that reach out there to that buffalo program, because — I told you — we’re always at the end of the line. But there, there was no power lines going out there, so we had to bring the power to them. We created a small little off-grid system that powered their buffalo facility, and their buffalo facility processes buffalo meat to the community.

So not only did that have battery backup in there to make sure that we’re running in real time, but most importantly, it powered their electric fences. It powered their water stations. It powered their freezers for their buffalo meat. And now, because of that, you know, they’re able to really feed not just their own community, but they’ve been feeding local food banks in the local area because of our efforts there within that project.

So those are some powerful, powerful things that I talk about, Mitch, about why our work at Indigenized Energy is important, because, you know, we just don’t create something to save money. We actually create something that creates a way of life for our people, and I think that’s really the biggest thing that we see and why our work is so impactful. But those are just a couple examples of these home makeover projects and resiliency within communities that are really important and powerful, that we really want people to understand and know, because there’s a lot of great work that is happening out there. Even though the federal government wiped out all of our funding, that didn’t stop us from continuing to know what’s important. And our tribal communities are working hard every day to continue to strive toward that.

Mitch Ratcliffe 31:58

I can, to whatever degree it’s possible, really relate to being at the end of the road. I live in a very remote rural community. The federal broadband subsidy program installation stopped a half mile down the road. You know, so thankfully I have Starlink and I can talk with you. But I’m thinking, as I talk about this: is this a model for any community? And what’s your advice to a small town or a county that’s contemplating its energy independence?

Cody Two Bears 32:25

Well, I think there already is. You know, Texas is a red state, but we see a couple communities in Texas that are 100% renewable, and it’s a red state. I don’t know why renewable energy has to be under a political agenda. I don’t understand why solar has to be a political agenda. Because if you really look at it, even in where I come from in North Dakota, you know, we’re a very firm red state as well. But the farmers and ranchers are looking at solar as an economic thing. Like, it pencils out. It makes sense. Like, you’re going to save money. It’s like a car loan, right? Like, I make a loan on a solar system, and I pay that off within, you know, six, seven years, whatever it’s going to be, and then you have this power for the next 20 years free. So I mean, you know, it’s just economics. It makes sense. And so, like I said, solar energy is becoming cheaper more and more every day.

So those are the types of things that I look at. I don’t like to go on the political landscape. I show real examples of impacts of what this really does in places where we’ve worked, and I think that’s what the stories people need to hear. They don’t need to hear the propaganda of what this does, what that does, how it affects this, how it affects that. You know, I just look at real-world impacts that we’ve created.

But I think, you know, for communities outside the reservation, I would really encourage them to even look at what Ann Arbor is doing, what Portland is doing, you know, what tribal nations are doing, because we’re our own sovereign nation. Let’s learn together to figure out what an actual microgrid would look like for a community, what a tribal utility — or what a utility — would look like in your community, and how can you start programs that make sense where you come from. Because these energy costs ain’t going to wait. They’re always going to continuously rise, and we’re going to use more energy more and more every day. So I really encourage, you know, states, like I said, municipalities and cities, to really take a look at the energy crisis, because whether they know it or not, they’re going to be affected with outdated systems, and we need to figure out creative ways on how to create that within. And I think that’s the most important part of what we’re teaching here at Indigenized Energy around what energy sovereignty looks like on Native reservations, but how could that be expanded in other parts off the reservation?

Mitch Ratcliffe 34:45

This comes back to sovereignty and the idea that we will negotiate as equals. And one of your core principles is tribal direction comes first. And as you pointed out, there’s a diverse approach to tribal direction, a lot of different flavors. Many of the philanthropic and policy-driven funding opportunities that are available come with a lot of agenda. And again, thinking about any small community, not just tribal communities, how do you negotiate from a place of equality based on setting your own local standards and standing by them?

Cody Two Bears 35:20

Yeah, and I think the biggest thing that I would say is, how does funding fit in? And this is a great question, Mitch, because this is something that I know, as growing up as a Native American my whole life — you know, our people always being the original environmentalists in the Western Hemisphere — and I always look at this as energy is not just energy savings. It’s not just creating jobs. When you create good energy, it’s going to trickle down to everything else, because everything is all connected, right? So if you’re using less fossil fuels and using other alternative resources of energy, what you’re doing is you’re helping the air, you’re helping the land, you’re helping the water, you’re improving resources around us that really make sense.

So then, as you go after these federal dollars and these funds, I even use renewable energy as an economic value, of economic development. So we can attack it in all kinds of avenues and ways to how energy can make sense tied to funding, even though it’s not directly funded toward an energy project. We can relate to energy and what we do here in our work at Indigenized Energy and connect that with food sovereignty. We can connect that with jobs, with workforce — workforce development money is out there. So, you know, the things are endless on how you can connect philanthropy, federal dollars, and grants to the work that we do. You know, there’s always a path forward on what that connection looks like.

But I’ve done energy work now for the last 10 years — I’m coming on 10 years through Indigenized Energy’s existence. What I’ve learned is, you know, the work that we do helps all other areas and not just energy. And I think that’s what makes this work so attractive. That’s what makes this work so successful, and why I feel like, you know, energy projects should be funded even more than ever, because it helps the whole ecosystem around us.

Mitch Ratcliffe 37:19

It’s really interesting how you describe unlocking land regeneration through this integrated approach to energy and food sovereignty. What does it look like when those two things reinforce one another? You began to describe the ripple effects, but can you point to a couple of examples where the economy of a community and the options available to it expanded because of food and energy sovereignty investments?

Cody Two Bears 37:44

Yeah. So we actually are doing a project right now on my home reservation on Standing Rock. There’s an organization called Wozu, and they do a lot of land regeneration right now. But they also are bringing back more of the buffalo herd as well, and it’s quite remarkable, the work that they’re doing. But we’re doing an off-grid system there for that buffalo program within theirs, and it’s right outside their buffalo handling facility. It’s actually bolted really high, and it’s an array there that provides shade for the buffalo, right? Which is pretty cool. So whenever they sort the buffalo there, they have a shade that’s powered by the solar array through their whole facility there, which is pretty cool. And we’re just now putting out the press release on that and what that looks like.

But we’re pretty excited about that, because now that particular program — to keep themselves sustainable, they have to be able to provide buffalo meat for their community, but they also want to, in the future, sell buffalo meat, especially, you know, with the land regeneration of the buffalo. The buffalo now are feeding off of natural grasslands, healed lands, so that grass-fed buffalo meat is at a premium right now throughout the world. So the biggest thing is that’s what’s going to keep our tribe economically stable — this program and this community — because not only are they able to help feed our own people, while using energy sovereignty and power to be able to do that, that’s going to create a ripple effect for economy-based programs that help them not only save money, not only preserve their buffalo meat, not only take the health and well-being of their buffalo as a whole as they use that for their facility, but what that does is it creates economic impacts in our communities. It also helps us be self-sustaining and self-generating.

So that’s the powerfulness of this work that we do. Because when you tie in food sovereignty, energy sovereignty, or whatever it may be, it’s always connected. You know, you can never go wrong, because those are the types of things that are really going to help flourish and take communities like ours to the next level, and we have several examples of that now. So that’s why it’s always good to not just say, let’s just throw up an energy project — and it’s good to do that and save money — but when you can tie it into other things of your ways of life, not just on reservations, but anywhere in the world, you know that really makes sense, because now that economy that you’re trying to build is speeding up a little bit more, faster, because you’re collaborating the both into something great.

Mitch Ratcliffe 40:29

I’ve asked several Native guests over the years to describe what it’s like to be indigenous to a place, which I think is a skill all of us need to open our eyes to, to recognize our relationship with the systems in which we live. And I think you just described what the world would look like if we are really successful in localizing power generation. But as you think about where you’re going as an organization, where the Native communities of America are going as a collective identity, how important is the role of economic development and cultural preservation to the strategies that you’re designing for Indigenized Energy?

Cody Two Bears 41:12

All right, so let me tie this, Mitch. The word indigenized. There’s a reason why I called it Indigenized Energy, and let’s not even think about this as Indigenous people, even though that’s who I work for, that’s the work that I do for my nonprofit, and that’s my mission. But let’s just think back for a second on the word indigenized. Yeah, everybody came from somewhere. Everybody had a way of life. Everybody had a way of sustainability, you know, before the Western world kind of took over and did what they did.

Now here we are having all these issues and these problems. Now we’re starting to ask questions: Well, what do we do now to kind of reverse what we’ve done? Or what do we do now to kind of learn how to give back to the land? Because every day, Mitch, we’re taking, taking, taking, but nobody was ever taught how to give back, or give back in a way to help regenerate what we’ve been doing on this planet. And I think that’s what Indigenous people have been doing for so many generations. We’ve been taught how to do that. It’s in our way of life and our structure and what we do.

But I think the biggest thing that I want you guys to understand is that the word indigenized, and what that means is, as I go into a tribal community — like I told you, everybody’s going to do something a little bit different. So we’re going to have to indigenize what we do for the needs of what’s sustainable within your region, your climate, and what you do. There’s no one cookie-cutter way, Mitch, of doing this work everywhere. Every climate, every region has to do things differently. So we have to indigenize what we do to meet their needs, to make it make sense for them.

And I think that’s what we need to do for outside tribal communities, like in cities, municipalities. We need to indigenize their energy systems. We need to indigenize their food systems, because there’s certain things that they have to grow at certain times of the year. There’s certain medicines that are in their region that we need to keep sustainable and healthy.

So I think that’s why the word indigenized, to me, is really important, and that’s why that connects with outside communities, outside tribal reservations, because we have to learn about who we are and where we come from. And that’s something my grandma always taught me, Mitch. She told me that, and I was like, “Well, Grandma, what do you mean by that?” But you don’t know where you’re going unless you know where you’ve been. And I think that’s the biggest thing that I’ve learned: once you’ve learned where you’ve been, once you’ve learned your history of your lands and where your house is and where your city is, and how it evolved, then you’ll better understand and know: okay, this part of this land here that we live on, this is what this is good for. This is what we need to focus on. So you’re actually indigenizing what you create moving forward, by just understanding who you are and where you really come from.

Mitch Ratcliffe 43:58

Cody, that’s a spectacularly clear frame for this conversation. Thanks so much for all of the ideas you’ve shared. How can our listeners follow your work? And I know that you’ve got a big event coming up. Tell us about it.

Cody Two Bears 44:09

Yeah, so you can follow us at Indigenized — it’s actually 4Indigenized.energy, the number four — and you can find us there. You look at all our work, all our previous projects, all the awards and successes that we’ve had within our projects to date. And also, we’d like to invite everybody to come out to the People of the Sun event on Standing Rock. It’s September 16th through the 18th on our reservation there on Standing Rock, and this just isn’t another conference or festival. It’s an event centered on Indigenous leadership, innovation, culture, and community. We’re bringing together tribal leaders, industry experts, artists, musicians, changemakers — you name it. We’re bringing them in, and really having those honest conversations about what the future of energy looks like, what our food systems look like, and what sovereignty looks like in real time.

And I think this year especially, it’s meaningful, because it’s the 10-year anniversary of NoDAPL. If we remember, on my homelands there on Standing Rock, in the community of — why Indigenized Energy was created — it was created because of the NoDAPL protest that happened in my community, a pipeline that was put a half mile north in my community. That’s why we do this work. It’s a 10-year anniversary, so we want to celebrate the progress that we’ve made and the work that really we’re focused on.

So I think the biggest thing is that we’re going to give out a lot of awards to a lot of champions out there in the energy sector. We’re also going to make sure that, you know, we’re entertaining people culturally, bringing a lot of great high-end musicians. So I encourage you guys to really look at PeopleoftheSun.live. Tickets now actually have become available on that website now, so go out there and get a ticket. But this is an event you’re not going to want to miss. And because of what’s happening in this country and the direction we’re going, we want to be able to allow people to be excited about this work. And just because, you know, there’s a lot of federal cuts and they moved all the tax incentives and the IRA and all of that away from this work, that doesn’t necessarily mean we’re going to stop. We should be continuing to celebrate what is working out there, and by bringing people together, we can really accomplish that all together, as tribal people and non-tribal people. So I encourage you guys to look into PeopleoftheSun.live and see what we’re going on in September, and invite you all out to Standing Rock.

Mitch Ratcliffe 46:30

Well, Cody, the celebration of solutions is absolutely what we need to be focused on. Thanks so much for a really fascinating conversation.

Cody Two Bears 46:38

Thank you for your time, Mitch, and super excited about the work that you’re doing and putting out the word on why this work is important. So thank you so much.

Mitch Ratcliffe 46:50

Hey, welcome back to Sustainability In Your Ear. You’ve been listening to my conversation with Cody Two Bears, co-founder and CEO of Indigenized Energy, a Native-led nonprofit that helps tribal nations build their own distributed solar, storage, and efficiency technology designed around what each community actually needs. You can learn more about Cody and his team’s work at four — that’s the number four — Indigenized.energy, and there is no space or no dash between four and Indigenized. That’s 4Indigenized.energy. And you can also find tickets for the People of the Sun gathering at Standing Rock on September 16th through 18th at the site as well.

Let’s start with the word indigenized. That’s the concept Cody built his organization around, and when I asked him about being indigenous to a place, he shared a view that’s much wider than tribal energy policy. What does this mean? Everybody comes from somewhere, and everybody once had a way of living that worked where they lived. We’ve been moving an awful lot compared to previous generations the last few centuries. Every region has its own climate, its own growing season, its own medicines, its own history of how the land came to be what it is, and every place contains a community: human, animal, insect, fungal, and many more. Nature is a set of systems, and we are inside them. We’re not standing over them, as Western thinking has insisted for centuries, even as the systems that we depend upon collapse.

Native and Indigenous peoples have carried and transmitted the practical knowledge that we need about how to live as part of those systems rather than at their expense, and that is the inheritance available to all of us. But we have to learn to be of and for our place, not just prepared to take from it, whether we’re talking about mining the land, cultures, or personal data for profit. And there’s no cookie-cutter approach to designing a sustainable future that can succeed, which means the transferable asset in this case isn’t a solar project design, but the practice of knowing where you are well enough to know what to build.

Cody’s grandmother’s line lands harder than any policy paper that you’re ever going to read: you don’t know where you’re going unless you know where you’ve been. And you can see that principle at work in the Northern Cheyenne buffalo facility, an off-grid array that drew national attention to Indigenized Energy’s work in the tribal energy sector. The installation runs the electric fences, the water stations, the freezers, and it helps feed the community and local food banks. Energy sovereignty and food sovereignty aren’t parallel programs; they’re the same program, and a larger system than either one alone. Grass-fed buffalo raised on regenerated grassland commands a premium price, which adds the benefit of healing the land to the buffalo meat operation’s bottom line.

And that’s what balance looks like when it’s working. The energy decision, the food decision, the land decision, along with the economic decisions, are one decision, because the systems were never separate to begin with. But we’ve consistently oversimplified the economic thinking that we do. However, systems thinking is starting to unpack that misunderstanding.

Now compare all of that to the other thread in this conversation — the one I can’t shake. Cody did not romanticize the AI data center buildout. He said it’s coming, and there’s no avoiding it. He explained the mechanism driving higher energy prices plainly: rising regional demand, rising rates, and when load has to be curtailed so that you can feed those data centers, the end of the line is where the curtailment lands. Standing Rock is the fifth largest tribal landmass in the country, and also one of the poorest counties in America, and residents already pay premium prices for less reliable service. A 2023 Department of Energy report documented this pattern. Where the wire ends tells you who mattered when it was built. And the thing we have to recognize about building an infrastructure is it hardwires these power relationships over the long term — not just energy power, but political and social power.

But consider the sense of resignation in that statement, that there’s no avoiding it. A new set of systems arrives, sited by people far away, and the community absorbs the consequences without a seat at the table. And look, Cody’s people have lived that story before at a scale that most of us have never had to imagine, and here we are laying another vast layer of infrastructure on top of an industrial system that is already tearing nature apart, and we’re calling its arrival inevitable. It’s not just Native communities on the receiving end of these dictates that will shape their future — it’s all of us, and that’s the part we need to refuse. We need a voice at the table. A sense of inevitability, in the way that Cody expressed it, is the experience of a decision someone made and declined to explain to you. We can have a real conversation about what to adopt, what to discard, and what our choices mean, but only if we understand the whole system in which we are living, considering everyone and everything in the system — which is exactly the understanding indigenizing our thinking would provide.

“End of the line” speaks volumes. It suggests we’re on our own, although when you get there, you actually find that there are communities everywhere in need of new infrastructure. We’re all at the end of the line in the take, make, and waste centralized economy. We have to recognize that, which brings me to the practical answer that Cody would hand to any rural county commissioner in America.

Indigenized Energy doesn’t just install systems; it builds programs with communities that fund themselves. When a household signs on to get solar installation, it returns a share of what it saves — perhaps a flat fee here, a 50-50 split in the cost there, a sliding scale that asks for 70% from a working family and only 10% or 20% from an elder who’s living on a fixed income. The community is in it together, and that revolving fund pays for maintenance, sustains jobs, and eventually becomes collateral where conventional lending has never worked, because sovereign land doesn’t fit a repo-based credit model. It’s an acknowledgement that everyone in the community is in it together.

The Tribal Renewable Energy Coalition that Indigenized Energy helped form won 136 million dollars through the EPA’s Solar for All program on the strength of its community-centric design. Then the federal money was pulled mid-planning, and Cody’s organization ate unreimbursed costs on the way out. But the model didn’t fail, because the communities were bought into its benefits. It was the funding cycle that failed. It was the political system that failed.

Meanwhile, cities like Ann Arbor and Portland are building residential distributed programs that look a lot like what tribes have been running for years, and that’s your leading indicator. Indian Country is the R&D lab for community-scale energy, and it still needs philanthropic or public capital to kickstart — capital that’s scarcer than it was 18 months ago.

We can learn a lot from Indigenized Energy. The communities that were never at the center of the grid may be the ones who figure out how to live well without depending on it, because they never lost the habit of asking what a place can actually support. Think local, act local, and understand our roles — and there are many roles — in the larger world that we owe our children and grandchildren, down to the seventh generation.

September at Standing Rock marks 10 years since the NoDAPL protests. A decade has turned that protest into a renewable energy infrastructure. Indigenize what you build where you are. That’s the plan. We’ll be tracking what gets built next, and the growing awareness that becoming small-i indigenous is the challenge of our times. So get to know nature and the human systems that shape your reality.

Hey, look, if this conversation gave you something worth passing along, please send it to one person who needs to hear it, or leave a review where you listen. Folks, you’re the amplifiers that can spread more ideas to create less waste, and our archive has more than 560 episodes, and it’s waiting for you on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Audible, or whatever purveyor of podcast goodness you prefer. Thanks for your support.

I’m Mitch Ratcliffe. This is Sustainability In Your Ear, and we will be back with another Innovator interview soon. In the meantime, folks, take care of yourself, take care of one another, and let’s all take care of this beautiful planet of ours. Have a green day.

The post Sustainability In Your Ear: Cody Two Bears on Indigenized Energy’s Community-Centric Grid Strategy appeared first on Earth911.

https://earth911.com/business-policy/sustainability-in-your-ear-cody-two-bears-on-indigenized-energys-community-centric-grid-strategy/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com