Climate Action - Assisting business towards carbon neutrality

There is a broader way to think about carbon and climate. Everything in a business embodies some form of carbon, either in the product itself or in the energy and materials it takes to make the product. Buildings, fittings and equipment are all proxies for carbon, ‘carbon copies’ that can be chosen based on the least amount of impact they will have on the climate and the bottom line.

As carbon is already part of a company’s DNA, engrained in its systems and business model, it’s important to take actions to reduce it. Integrating climate friendly criteria into R&D, product design and development, supply chain management, manufacturing, distribution, marketing and communications creates a systematic company response that can trigger a ripple effect by helping to ‘unchain’ suppliers from their climate impacts and multiplying both the savings in carbon emissions and unnecessary costs.

The supply chain

For some organisatons, the biggest carbon emissions may come from suppliers. Reducing those emissions are more challenging, but many companies are setting procurement guidelines that include environmental requirements that encourage low or no carbon products and services. Unbundling the carbon from your supplies can also create multiple benefits and is itself a process embedded in the larger moves to sustainable development. Sometimes this may cost more, but often the cost can be the same or less. A partnering effort with suppliers and/or downstream clients can result in efficiency gains that provide a win-win for all involved. More intelligent application of information and communications technologies can help to drastically cut material and energy waste in the value chain.

Sourcing materials, such as paper from companies adhering to internationally certified standards can mitigate some supply chain risks. The Forestry Stewardship Council, for example, is an international nonprofit organisation promoting responsible management of the world’s forests. The FSC trademark is increasingly recognised as an international standard for responsible forest management. More than 90 million hectares in more than 70 countries have been certified according to FSC standards while several thousand products are produced using FSC certified wood and carrying the FSC trademark.

There is one supplier that is actually critical to a business – staff. The time and energy they use getting to and from their place of employment can produce significant carbon emissions. Helping them to reduce their emissions at the same time they are helping the company to reduce its emissions can produce multiple benefits, and a more engaged staff.

Reduce the waste

In the area of recycled material use, switching to recycled or sustainably sourced paper can lead to considerable savings, reducing both waste directed to landfill and carbon emissions. The Waste & Resources Action Programme estimates the average greenhouse gas savings from using recycled paper instead of it going to landfill is 1.4 tonnes of CO2 for every tonne of paper and cardboard. A WRAP study of 112 companies, including BT, Carillion, Ernst and Young, KPMG, Sainsburys, Tate & Lyle and all London’s boroughs, found these organisations bought 23,000 tonnes of recycled paper and board in 2005, saving 53,000 m3 of landfill space, 690,000,000 litres of water, 621,000 kg of air pollutants and 32,000 tonnes of CO2.

Buildings

As a business periodically needs to replace existing assets, new infrastructure presents an excellent opportunity to reduce emissions and costs. This involves office buildings (including leased buildings), factories and plants, vehicle fleets and equipment.

Conventional buildings can account for almost 40 per cent of CO2 emissions per year, but high performance facilities, ie those that are environmentally accountable, energy efficient and productive for occupants, are economically possible through an integrated approach to design and construction. This approach can produce buildings with capital costs the same or less than conventional construction, and significantly lower operational costs over the life of the building, which also lowers the impact on climate.

Features of buildings constructed in this way include:

• Systems that efficiently use water resources and energy.
• Quality indoor environments that are healthy, secure, pleasing and productive for occupants and owners.
• Natural landscaping, efficient material use and recycling.

Such designs require people, processes and technologies to be brought together early in the design phase. The project team includes the owner, architect, builder, subcontractors and suppliers and is assembled before making any major decisions about the building. The team will be together throughout the project, considering each aspect with an eye towards reducing resource use during construction.

For many businesses, an office retrofit can produce significant reductions in pollution while increasing productivity. There are many good examples of using the approach above to create new offices that are more productive and cheaper to run, all while reducing environmental impacts. Most retrofits address the key physical assets: lighting, space conditioning, furniture and floor coverings.

Packaging smart Wal-Mart

US retail giant Wal-Mart worked with one of their toy suppliers to help them reduce packaging on just 16 items. The toy suppliers saved on packaging costs while Wal-Mart used 230 fewer shipping containers to distribute their products, saving about 356 barrels of oil and 1,300 trees. By broadening this initiative to 255 items, the company believes it can save 1,000 barrels of oil, 3,800 trees, and millions of dollars in transportation costs.

Whole system engineering

There is substantial experience with retrofits where a ‘whole system engineering’ approach, ie looking at the entire building as a system, produces surprising, multiple benefits. In an analysis of one Chicago 20,000 m2 office tower retrofit, for example, super efficient windows, lights and office equipment could reduce cooling load by 85 per cent compared to the original building. This made the replacement cooling equipment 75 per cent smaller and US$200,000 cheaper. This was enough savings to pay for all the other renovations and reduced the annual energy bill by 75 per cent.

Source: Niclas Svenningsen and Thierry Braine-Bonnaire, (2007) ‘The buildings challenge, entering the climate change agenda.’ in Climate action