Al Gore's talking points, Katrina, wildfires, rising oil prices and drought -- these things have sufficiently convinced average citizens and the mainstream media to awaken to the importance of living sustainably. At least that's what the numbers from a recent survey by GfK Roper Consulting say.

According to the 2007 GfK Roper Green Gauge study, 87% of 2,000 Americans say the are "seriously concerned about the environment." Big bad corporations are being held accountable as only 29 percent believe that companies are doing their part in protecting the environment.

Talking and doing are two different things, as evidenced by the statistic that 79 percent of people say a company's record on the environment is important, yet many retailers continue to have practices that are less than stellar and find a welcome audience. But talking with their wallets in selecting "appropriate" companies is clearly becoming more important.

The most intriguing part of this study was the categorization of how people describe themselves. People who consider themselves environmentally active represent 30 percent of Americans, while 36 percent say they would buy green when it is convenient but aren't likely to get directly involved. The remaining third are not concerned or insufficiently motivated to do anything about the environment or consider it in their purchases.

So it's a fairly even split between those who are willing, somewhat willing, and unwilling to put sustainability/environmentalism into their daily existence. This survey probably would have been more heavily weighted towards the unwillings just a few years ago. I don't expect that that number will ever dip below 25 percent, if it ever gets that small.

So corporations need to target their pitches appropriately -- sell to the two-thirds, don't take the motivated people for granted, and forget convincing the remaining one-third to buy your eco-friendlyproduct; it just ain't gonna happen.

New particulate filters made from ceramic and developed by Geo2 Technologies could increase fuel efficiency while reducing the amount of soot emitted by diesel engines.

Geo2 Technologies' VP of product development Bilal Zuberi told me the technology his company is developing could filter out multiple pollutants simultaneously in a much smaller package. Zuberi says the technology can filter out both nitrogen oxide and other emissions, saving valuable space and weight in a vehicle, enhancing fuel efficiency. Geo2's goal is reduce the size of today's particulate filters by 1/2 to 2/3.

Particulate filters can reduce the fuel efficiency of vehicles because of building up "backpressure" when the flow of gases becomes to slow, according to Zuberi. Geo2's filters are more porous, and will only increase backpressure by 4 percent. The filters will also remove up to 95 percent of the soot, he said.

The ceramic material costs about as much as today's powder-based filters, Zuberi says, but they cost less because they do not require the precious metals such as platinum that make up several hundred dollars of the price. (CORRECTION: Geo2' diesel particulate filters do not require precious metals, while their multi-function filters use less precious metals than current products.) The technology, which is currently being evaluated by a tier one supplier and OEMs according to Zuberi, could show up in production vehicles as early as 2010.

Companies that have not invested in (or perhaps believe in) hybrid technology are planning a slew of diesel vehicles in the next few years as high MPG alternatives. If this technology works as planned, diesels good surpass hybrids in both fuel economy and emissions.

According to a report by Bloomberg, "knowledgeable" sources say GM is planning on producing 30,000 to 60,000 Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid cars during the first year.

That would be a huge number to make within the next few years considering the technical challenges in mass producing lithium ion batteries, according to an industy expert.

If (and this is a big if) GM can sell a Volt that gets 80 mpg or above (equivalent since most of the driving would be solely under electric power) for under $30,000, it would be highly disruptive in the market and could turn the company's fortunes around in a hurry.

Yet to be determined: what government incentives would be provided to defray some of the cost of purchasing the vehicle, as well as the impact on the power grid. Although most recharging would be done off-peak, it's funny that at the same time people are trying to get off the grid and reduce power consumption, many folks are crazy for a car that would rely get most of its power off the grid. The best solution? Solar panels, net metering, and a plug-in hybrid.

The state of Colorado is expected to get a return of nearly 50 percent on energy efficiency upgrades that were just completed on 20 government buildings.

The total cost of the project was $13.6 million and according to a press release "is funded entirely by the energy savings generated by the efficiency improvements." Savings of $20 million over 20 years are expected, and the project will also cut about 8,000 metric tons in utility carbon dioxide emissions.

These kinds of projects are a great opportunity for lenders and energy efficiency companies to work with public and private institutions who are hesitant or unable to invest the up-front capital. I am guessing that some creative financing was used to pay for the work done by Chevron Energy Solutions, which oversaw the project. I've heard of cases where the energy company doesn't charge anything to the customer, but the contractor works with a lender to share in the savings.

Developing special lending programs dedicated to energy efficiency projects is a great way for banks to prove they are green.

For companies, this is a win-win situation. If there is no cost, reduced emissions, lower maintenance cost, and a chance to share or own the long term savings, energy efficiency might move to the top of COO's ledgers in ways to improve the bottom line.

Landlords whose tenants pay for their own are in a unique position since they have almost no incentive to reduce heating costs. Incentives to do or these types of "no risk" improvements may be necessary.

The Philadelphia Eagles are showing their commitment to sustainability by using recycled paper throughout the stadium and buying wind energy for power during home games.

You might not think of a recycled bathroom tissue and paper towel company as a corporate sponsor, but SCA Tissue North America purchased the rights to a suite area in Lincoln Financial Field as part of a deal that will see recycled paper in the bathrooms throughout the stadium.

Fans will be reminded of the environment during their frequent beer-induced trips to the rest room, so SCA will get plenty of exposure. The Eagles will also reimburse employees who purchase wind energy for their homes, a unique program for a football franchise.

Shouldn't entertainment venues such as sporting, concerts, etc., that are based on disposable income be leading the way in promoting sustainable practices? As we shift to a sustainable economy, non-essential events can pay the "early adopter" premium as energy and paper industries build their production capabilities and reduce the cost for everyday use. Wouldn't you agree?