Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
sector. However, this type of measurement might
be useful when assessing the energy efficiency of
manufacturing a product or delivering a service.
Out of the C4C signatories under scrutiny,
only a handful actually report that they have com-
mitted to carbon intensity reduction goals and
even fewer have made progress towards these
goals. Table 6 includes the intensity reduction
achievements that specific companies included
in their disclosure reports. Based on the explana-
tions given in these reports, the companies have
dedicated time and energy to defining how best
to reduce their emissions intensity and working
towards reduction goals.
pathways become more costly, companies with
a firm grasp of emission reduction strategies will
be in a stronger position relative to their competi-
tors. As demonstrated in the preceding sections,
there is a wide range of quality and coverage in
accounting for emissions when strategizing about
how to achieve emission reductions. A company
could gain a competitive advantage by joining
voluntary initiatives that encourage internal im-
provements and provide a head start on regulations.
The company may also gain from an improved
image, by being associated with a “green initia-
tive”. However, the benefits of this action only
extend beyond the firm and reach society more
broadly if the firm takes steps to achieve real
improvements in environmental performance. As
we have shown, 57% of the large companies that
have signed onto the UN Global Compact's Car-
ing for Climate Program report no climate-related
data. 37% of companies report at least one year
of emissions data and 69 firms (27%) report more
than one year of emissions data. Of the 69 firms
reporting more than one data point, only 20 firms
SOLUTIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
With GHG regulations entering into force in the US
and EU, it is important for companies to have an
understanding of trends in emissions and possible
means of reducing them. As business-as-usual
Table 6. Examples of Progress Towards Intensity Reduction Targets in 2007 (Carbon Disclosure Project,
2010)
Name
Progress Towards Intensity Reduction Targets
BT Group plc
53% reduction since 1996-7 baseline
Lafarge
16% reduction per ton of cement CO2 emissions on a worldwide basis compared to 1990.
Unión Fenosa
During 2007, specific emissions from thermal power plants in Spain reached 706 g/kWh, which
represents a reduction of 29% compared with 1990
E.ON AG
In total, E.ON reduced its carbon intensity in 2007 by 31%, in comparison to figures from 1990,
due in part to the technical improvement of our generation portfolio.
Telecom Italia
45% increase as compared to 2006, thus higher than the defined target (873 bit/Joule). The annual
increase of the index is however progressively shrinking.
Munich Re Group
In 2007 a decrease in energy consumption was achieved (due to efficiency increase in facility
management and in IT). However, increase in travel intensity compensated this achievement (due
to increase in business activities in America and Asia).
Unilever
Since 1995 reduction of 30% in GHG emissions per ton production
Centrica plc
reductions in this level of carbon intensity since 2005:
2006- 394g CO2/kWh
2007- 390g CO2/kWh
Pfizer, Inc.
35% reduction in GHG emissions as indexed to $ MM revenue. This goal achievement resulted in
an absolute reduction in GHG emissions of nearly 20% from 2000 to 2007.
