Green Options › Forums › What's Going On in Green? › Environmental News and Politics › Wal-Mart to cut 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gas pollution by 2015
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wal-Mart to cut 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gas pollution by 2015

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
From The Energy Collective, Joe Romm & Sarah Collins  http://theenergycollective.com/TheEnergyCollective/59833

İn 2009, Wal-Mart received the Aspen Institute Energy and Environment award for Corporate Energy Efficiency.  To build on this success, Wal-Mart just announced its new sustainability goal: to eliminate 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gases from the supply chain by 2015.  This amount, roughly equivalent to the company’s total corporate emissions last year, is “the equivalent of taking more than 3.8 million cars off the road for a year.”

Wal-Mart’s latest environmentally-friendly initiative builds on several years of its investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy.  Wal-Mart introduced three goals in 2005: to be supplied 100 percent by renewable energy; to create zero waste; and to sell products that sustain people and the environment.  Their work accelerated in 2006 when Wal-Mart made a big push to go organic and embrace other environmentally friendly policies.

For the rest of the story please see the link above.


post #2 of 10
If you're interested in the green qualities of Wal-Mart you might also want to check out Is Wal-Mart Green? which looks at their ‘Sustainability Index.’ issue. It's one of the more positive pieces I've seen about this chain; but realistic too.

No matter what Wal-Mart does it's still really hard for me to consider them greener than some other local stores though. It's like the whole Clorox Green situation. Yes, Clorox may have some green policies in the company and they may have one line of greener cleaners, but to me it still feels like greenwashing because more people still buy their bleach and other icky products than the green line. It's like they wanted a token green product and some token green policies to jump on the green bandwagon but when you get right down to it, they still contribute greatly to earth pollution problems with their products, as does Wal-Mart with their overabundance of everything you don't need for $5 or less.

I guess I should be happy that big companies are trying at all, especially since the big guns are the ones consumers see the most of, but some of it still seems like a greenwashing, "look at how green we are" tactic with not enough to back it up because there's too much to fix in the company already.
post #3 of 10

It's good they are doing something... they very easily have the power and resources to do nothing. That would be far worse then their attempts at being environmentally friendly. I guess you take what you can get type of thing.

post #4 of 10
 I work for a company that supplies products to Wal Mart. They are serious about this. They are initiating Greenhouse gas tracking in the supply chain. They are wanting total GHG figures, and plans for required reduction. Those that comply, and companies such as ours that already have those programs in place, are awarded a higher supplier score and that gives them a better chance for more shelf space.

I don't think their is greenwashing. They are putting real pressure on their suppliers.
post #5 of 10
Thread Starter 
İ think you really do have to give the companies like Wal Mart credit. They could just as easily not bother at this time. With their supplier base this is not a minor effort as whirnot noted.

For example, 3% of household cleaners sold in 2008 were green - that gives an indication of the customer interest and concern. İt will increase certainly but not much yet.

İf Wal Mart and others don't do anything they would have the Sierra Club, Greenpeace and others upset. İn many parts of the country that might even be considered a plus. İn the court of public opinion green actions are still of not much account. Just by being obstructionist, groups like Greenpeace can cause a company grief in a court of law but not in public opinion.  

İn politics the vocal minority has more influence as the main selections are made before the general public becomes involved - the candidates are not selected by the party as a whole but by highly motivated special interest groups. By the time the general election comes around the public ends up with a choice of idiot A or idiot B. 
post #6 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ View Post

İ think you really do have to give the companies like Wal Mart credit. They could just as easily not bother at this time. With their supplier base this is not a minor effort as whirnot noted.

For example, 3% of household cleaners sold in 2008 were green - that gives an indication of the customer interest and concern. İt will increase certainly but not much yet.

İf Wal Mart and others don't do anything they would have the Sierra Club, Greenpeace and others upset. İn many parts of the country that might even be considered a plus. İn the court of public opinion green actions are still of not much account. Just by being obstructionist, groups like Greenpeace can cause a company grief in a court of law but not in public opinion.  

İn politics the vocal minority has more influence as the main selections are made before the general public becomes involved - the candidates are not selected by the party as a whole but by highly motivated special interest groups. By the time the general election comes around the public ends up with a choice of idiot A or idiot B. 


I agree.  I'll take whatever they can do to help the environment.  They're a huge chain and a little initiative will go a long way.  

 

But I do hope that they'll start right now!  

post #7 of 10

The greenwashing / maybe small step towards reality doesn't negate the fact that 90%+ of wm products

are shipped in from China-massive emissions footprint there guys.

I know, cheap, cheap, cheap.

That's wm's middle name but gimme a break.

They have the money to cover every wm store in operation now with solar panels; have they?

They have reduced the packaging/shipping but that's a win for their bottom line too besides

less trucks moving/less emissions. They're saving money and they're calling it green for us.

They don't treat their vendors/employees right.

On a scale of 1-10 for greenness; they get a 3+ but that's all so far.

post #8 of 10

I do not think it is Greenwash. They have put together a pretty nice looking sustainability index, which they implement. What they have discovered is that cutting emissions also cuts energy use which also cuts costs. They are going green because it is helping their profits, which is great for business and the environment. It's a win win.

 

They have developed a pretty handy energy monitoring system, which they are of course keeping to themselves, why help their competition?. This system helps them save a good amount of energy and money. I am sure the system is very similar to this energy management system It is good business, not greenwash. Personally I hope more businesses come to realize this.

post #9 of 10

I would be interested in where you got your data showing 90% of their products sre Chinese.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenteadrinker View Post

The greenwashing / maybe small step towards reality doesn't negate the fact that 90%+ of wm products

are shipped in from China-massive emissions footprint there guys.

I know, cheap, cheap, cheap.

That's wm's middle name but gimme a break.

They have the money to cover every wm store in operation now with solar panels; have they?

They have reduced the packaging/shipping but that's a win for their bottom line too besides

less trucks moving/less emissions. They're saving money and they're calling it green for us.

They don't treat their vendors/employees right.

On a scale of 1-10 for greenness; they get a 3+ but that's all so far.

post #10 of 10


Ya so would I, it's most likely high but 90%?

Quote:
Originally Posted by whirnot View Post

I would be interested in where you got your data showing 90% of their products sre Chinese.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenteadrinker View Post

The greenwashing / maybe small step towards reality doesn't negate the fact that 90%+ of wm products

are shipped in from China-massive emissions footprint there guys.

I know, cheap, cheap, cheap.

That's wm's middle name but gimme a break.

They have the money to cover every wm store in operation now with solar panels; have they?

They have reduced the packaging/shipping but that's a win for their bottom line too besides

less trucks moving/less emissions. They're saving money and they're calling it green for us.

They don't treat their vendors/employees right.

On a scale of 1-10 for greenness; they get a 3+ but that's all so far.


 
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Environmental News and Politics
Green Options › Forums › What's Going On in Green? › Environmental News and Politics › Wal-Mart to cut 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gas pollution by 2015