|
|
 |
In
Washington and in the Corporate Suite
Thirteen years after the Rio Summit and eight years after the
introduction of the Kyoto Protocol, Global Warming is finally
getting attention -- in America's top corporate suites and in
Congress. And the implications are all good for the environment,
says NNYN founder Ted Kheel. Although the approaches to global
warming taken by large corporations such as GE and Exxon are
in often in conflict with each other, says Kheel, the overall
debate is bringing greater visibility to the problem and more
possibility of real solutions. The Green Divide may actually
benefit the Global Warming debate.
Even Congress seems to be taking the hint. Late in June the
Senate passed a resolution that finally recognizes the problems
of global warming and declares that the U.S. must enact mandatory
limits on the pollution that causes it. The breakthrough resolution,
which still needs to be translated into a comprehensive global
warming law, is seen as a major victory for those who want curbs
on global warming. The resolution is a direct blow to Pres.
Bush who has been steadfast in his opposition to signing the
Kyoto Protocol. His Administration has argued that signing the
Protocol would make American businesses uncompetitive because
of the huge cost burdens imposed on them. Besides, the Administration
argues, two of the largest countries in the world - China and
India - are also not signatories of the Protocol. Nevertheless,
the new resolution voted for by both Republicans and Democrats
should put pressure on the Administration to comply.
Corporations such as General Electric, oil companies such as
ExxonMobil and BP have been the most active in articulating
green strategies. Even financial institutions such as JP Morgan
Chase now say they plan to make lending decisions based on environmental
impacts.
In May, General Electric, and its chairman and CEO, Jeffrey
Immelt announced that the company would tie its future to the
growth of clean energy, clean water, and other clean technologies
through a commitment to what GE calls "ecomagination." GE's
plan calls for increased spending to develop new technologies
such as wind-power generation, diesel-electric hybrid locomotives,
more-efficient aircraft engines and appliances, and advanced
water-treatment systems.
GE also pledges to spend $1.5 billion a year on such research
by 2010, more than double the $700 million it spends today.
Immelt said GE expects to double the revenue goal over that
period for products that provide better environmental performance,
to $20 billion a year, and expects more than half of its product
revenue to come from such products by 2015.
Among the oil companies BP and ExxonMobil have been among the
most vocal in talking about green strategies, perhaps because
they are seen as being in an industry which contributes greatly
to the warming problem.
In 1998, BP embarked on a very visible campaign to push its
green agenda. The program, says BP, has accelerated its own
energy efficiency improvement program - this has now mitigated
around half the growth in operational emissions since 2001.
BP also continues to develop ways to measure emissions from
the products it sells and define how their use can help avoid
emissions. It has increased sales of natural gas, which releases
less carbon than oil or coal when consumed and expanded our
solar energy business and pushed it into profit.
Over the next decade ExxonMobil says it will invest over $100
million to research "innovative and cost-effective" ways of
meeting the world's energy needs. The company is also investing
in Stanford's Global Climate and Energy Project to develop breakthroughs
in solar, biofuel, hydrogen and even coal technologies that
could be offered cheaply and profitably to developing countries,
whose growing economies will require increasing fuel in the
future. Exxon is also pushing in-house energy efficiency and
co-generation, which last year resulted in 10 million fewer
tons of carbon dioxide released into the air--equal to taking
a million cars off the road. Nonetheless, Exxon contends it
does not see very direct correlations between global warming
and emissions and is against controls because they hurt business
and don't help the environment.
Financial giant JPMorgan Chase says it too is adopting a comprehensive
environmental policy. The policy will be implemented with an
Environmental Management System that includes planning, training,
implementation, measurement, reporting and review, and will
apply to new business and existing business that comes up for
renewal or extension after September 1, 2005. Specifically,
it will integrate environmental and social awareness into the
credit analysis and financing decision process, and incorporate
it, where appropriate, as part of its due diligence review.
Kheel points out that the conflict in approaches and philosophies
- The Green Divide - is no trivial thing. There are those who
want mandatory controls because they are in a position to benefit
from providing products and services to help implement these
controls. The ones that espouse a green policy but oppose mandatory
controls are being pragmatic, says Kheel. They recognize the
fact that those who ignore controls may acquire greater business
advantages than their competitors who comply. The entire issue
is a cat and mouse game. Nevertheless, the recognition that
approaches to global warming can create business opportunities
and be beneficial environmentally is a great step forward from
the days of the Rio Summit, says Kheel.
|
|
