The demand for corporate transparency is here to stay. Just last year, 390 investors representing more than $22 trillion assets signed a letter in support of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures, advocating for a unified set of recommendations for corporate climate disclosure. So as financial markets increasingly recognize Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) risks, and increasingly embrace ESG strategies, oil and gas companies failing to report on environmental risks, like methane emissions, will be at a disadvantage.
Yet despite the reputational and financial risks posed by methane emissions in the oil and gas sector, over 40 percent of oil and gas companies analyzed in a new EDF report fail to report even basic information on methane management. The report finds that the quality and quantity of methane risk management reporting has increased amongst nearly 60 percent of companies analyzed. But the overall improvement has not been enough.
At Environmental Defense Fund, we believe that environmental progress and economic growth can and must go hand in hand. EDF+Business works with leading companies and investors to raise the bar for corporate sustainability leadership by setting aggressive, science-based goals; collaborating for scale across industries and global supply chains; publicly supporting smart environmental safeguards; and, accelerating environmental innovation.
This is the fourth in a series of interviews exploring trends in sustainability leadership as part of our effort to pave the way to a thriving economy and a healthy environment.
Dave Stangis has dedicated over three decades of his career to steering sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts at two iconic American companies, Intel and Campbell Soup Company. As Vice President of Corporate Responsibility and Chief Sustainability Officer at Campbell, Dave has built the company’s reputation for setting a high bar on sustainability and corporate responsibility in the food industry. Case in point: Campbell was recognized as a top corporate citizen by Corporate Responsibility Magazine for the eighth consecutive year.
Campbell set an ambitious goal to cut the environmental footprint of its product portfolio in half by 2020, which entails reducing energy use by 35 percent, recycling 95 percent of its global waste stream, and sourcing 40 percent of the company’s electricity from renewable or alternative energy sources.
I recently spoke with Dave to learn about his approach to setting big sustainability goals, the role of technology and innovation in building a more sustainable food system, and which kind of beer goes best with a bowl of soup. Below is an edited transcript of our discussion.
President Trump announced the outline of his long awaited infrastructure plan during his first State of the Union address Tuesday night. While broad bipartisan support exists for addressing the nation’s infrastructure needs, how to fund the $1.5 trillion plan continues to be a significant point of contention.
The president’s remarks confirmed rumors that have swirled for weeks about plans for leveraging federal dollars to catalyze public and private investment, and close critical infrastructure funding gaps. How these approaches materialize in a final plan is anyone’s guess, but after experiencing $306.2 billion in natural disaster-related damages in 2017, one thing remains abundantly clear, an infrastructure plan that fails to integrate and prioritize resilience and sustainability will lock the U.S. into a costly business-as-usual development pathway that makes us ill prepared for a changing climate. Unfortunately, the risks posed by rising sea levels and extreme storms are only the tip of the iceberg. A new report from Moody’s warns cities and states of potential credit downgrades from failing to develop climate adaptation and mitigation strategies.
The U.S. faces a $2 trillion infrastructure funding gap through 2025. Failing to close this gap has serious economic consequences including losses to GDP, business sales, and jobs. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates failing to close the infrastructure investment gap costs US families $3,400 in disposable income per year. Filling this gap will not only require active partnership and collaboration between the public and private sectors, but also a commitment to inform our infrastructure investment decisions with the latest available science and technology. Infrastructure that integrates principles of sustainability and resilience fits that bill.
Just yesterday, the administration announced plans to cut the Department of Energy’s (DOE) renewable energy and energy efficiency program budgets by 72 percent according to a leaked draft of the DOE budget for fiscal year 2019. This is the second major blow to the renewable energy industry, coming only days after Trump imposed a 30% tariff on solar imports.
I find this ironic. On Tuesday, Trump stood before our country to deliver his first State of the Union address. It was a story on “America First” and domestic policy took the center stage – tax cuts, trade, the economy, jobs…and more jobs. But as he praised the accomplishments in these issues over the past year, I couldn’t help but see the other side: the opportunities we’re missing and the jobs we’re giving up (now even more so).
Earlier this week, Trump announced his decision to impose a 30 percent tariff on imported solar panels. A tariff will have a negative impact on solar – one of the fastest growing industries in the entire country.
Environmental Defense Fund released its second annual jobs report yesterday, In Demand: Clean Energy, Sustainability and the New American Workforce, following Trump’s decision. The report shows that solar jobs now outnumber those in the coal industry 1.6 to 1, with coal employing only 160,000. Even better, these jobs are local, well-paying and available to individuals from all types of educational backgrounds and career history.
But now, solar jobs are at risk. Yesterday, Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) estimated as many as 23,000 jobs would be lost under Trump’s tariff. The supportive policy environment that encouraged this growth is no longer in place. Let me explain.
In 2017, we saw a surge of commitments and action to disclose product ingredients to the public. Notably, more companies disclosed ingredients in cleaning products and fragrances — a major step towards greater transparency in a sector with little disclosure.
Retailer and brand commitments on safer ingredients are driven by a variety of factors, namely new state regulations and growing consumer demand for improved transparency and safer products. As more companies join the movement to set public commitments, we are encouraged that the trend will continue.
“Out of the mountain of despair, a stone of hope.” -Martin Luther King
Feeling down about our planet in 2018? Don’t!
There are many reasons to be hopeful around environmental action in the new year – and if the following developments don’t make you feel better, I’ve prescribed some action steps at the end that are guaranteed to set you on a healthier, happier path.
Don’t get me wrong, I know full well that 2017 was a hard year for the planet. I’ve lost count of the hurricanes, floods, droughts and fires—many linked to climate change—that rained upon us. It was a record-setting toll on the U.S. in 2017, with 16 enormous weather and climate events costing a total of $306 billion in damage (not sure how to calculate the emotional cost).
At Environmental Defense Fund, we believe that environmental progress and economic growth can and must go hand in hand. EDF+Business works with leading companies and investors to raise the bar for corporate sustainability leadership by setting aggressive, science-based goals; collaborating for scale across industries and global supply chains; and publicly supporting smart environmental safeguards.
This is the third in a series of interviews exploring trends in sustainability leadership as part of our effort to pave the way to a thriving economy and a healthy environment.
Anirban Ghosh has been at Mahindra since 1999, and in that time worked across the business, including sales, marketing, strategy, and new business development. He played a key role in Mahindra’s expansion into the agriculture business, led the implementation of award-winning shared value projects like watershed development, and applied a strategic approach to the company’s social investments.
In closing out 2017, we are energized by successes in our work with oil and gas industry partners. And as we look forward to a new year and a fresh start, here are five things we’ll be looking for as industry leaders step up methane action in 2018.
This year, 10 leading companies through the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative supported the ambition of achieving “near zero” methane emissions, and committed to set quantitative methane targets in 2018. This was an important and welcome moment as CEOs upped their methane pledge. 2018 will be a key year for follow through in establishing and announcing those targets. We will look for targets that are ambitious, innovation-forcing, and linked to credible plans for verification. We will also look that this action addresses emissions from both oil and gas production, as the International Energy Agency’s data shows that more methane emissions comes from oil production than from gas production.
No business is immune to the devastating effects of climate change anymore, as we saw from the onslaught of extreme weather events in 2017. Disasters brought more than $300 billion in damages this year, a 60-percent increase over 2016, Swiss Re reported last week.
As every business leader has long known, storms, flooding, wildfires and other calamities all threaten to disrupt their operations and growth, and can even affect an entire supply chain.
What’s new is that shareholders and potential investors are also now aware of the risk that extreme weather and natural disasters pose to “doing business as usual.”
Unsurprisingly, a growing number of companies are factoring resilience to climate change into their operations. It’s about the bottom line: Making a company more resilient is an investment in business continuity, shareholder value and overall performance.