Posts Tagged ‘transparency’

The decision by the German government to take into account the relative weight of a vehicule into the car Co2 labelling goes against all the environmental logic.

Any carbon labelling should be about absolutes. Why dividing by the weight or size? People are not stupid, they know that if they buy a bigger car, it will have more emissions.

What would be the incentives for car companies to decrease the weight of the car and therefore reduce fuel consumption?

There are car manufacturers such as Jaguar investing millions in aluminium-based light weight vehicles, which enables lower size engines , with the aim of reducing emissions by 16%. What is the message from Germany? Put more steel and a bit of lead and a couple of rocks on the top to achieve A rating.

It’s unbelievable how after the crisis, several countries are dismissing European competition rules and use the environment as the excuse for protectionism.

I wonder what rah-rah the big German manufacturers would be taking about stakeholder engagement and transparency in their sustainability reports while lobbying so intensely for a carbon tax that goes against all the environmental logic.

See article in the FT

The best system in Europe is the French labelling system. It has a bonus-malus where cars under 126g CO2/km get money back and cars over 155g pay more. This has been quite succesful. The emission from new cars has been reduced from 149g CO² /km  to 133g CO²/km in a couple of years.  See below how easy it is.

Eco Penalty
CO² Emission Rate
(Grams/Km)
Tax Amount
2010 2011 2012
≤150 0 0 0
>150≤155 0 200 200
>155≤160 200 750 750
>160≤165 750 750 750
>165≤190 750 750 750
>190≤195 750 1 600 1 600
>195≤200 1 600 1 600 1 600
>200≤240 1 600 1 600 1 600
>240≤245 1 600 2 600 2 600
>245≤250 2 600 2 600 2 600
Eco Bonus
CO² Emission Rate
(Grams/Km)
Amount
2010 2011 2012
≤60 5 000 5 000 5 000
>60≤90 1 000 1 000 1 000
>90≤95 1 000 1 000 700
>95≤100 700 700 700
>100≤105 700 700 700
>105≤110 700 700 700
>110≤115 700 700 200
>115≤120 200 200 200
>120≤125 200 200 0
>125≤130 0 0 0

defraEarlier this week, the UK Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra to you and me) joined the Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Home Office in publishing real-time energy consumption data online. If you go to this page on their web site   you can see a graph spiking up and down showing energy units used per hour and use over the past 24 hours at its main London headquarters building. It is also clever enough to disclose the energy cost per hour and carbon emissions.

Whether this is simply a gimmick or real progress towards full transparency – I think it is certainly a good start. The government has committed to cutting carbon emissions across all central departments by 10% by next May, so it will be interesting to what Defra does next (and which departments follow suit). It has already promised that as more data is collected, it will publish results for different time periods (use per week, month and year).

So, Defra is definitely making a move in the right direction, but it needs to look at more than just energy consumption. Real carbon transparency will depend on reporting total carbon emissions during the whole life cycle of a building – including the energy used to produce building materials and furniture (and carpet!). Also, it’s not just carbon emissions that have a negative impact on the environment. Hopefully, one day in the not too distant future, government departments will also report on waste production and water usage in a similar way.

In my opinion, the best way for the Government (or any organisation for that matter) to get reliable and validated information on its full environmental impact, including carbon emissions is to use Environmental Product Declarations  and continue to provide just the facts.

What a remarkable thing is wikileaks! I’m still trying to understand the power of transparency and whistleblowing. What Wikileaks does is taking transparency to the maximum, that’s why is so powerful. Well, it’s involuntary transparency, which makes it even more interesting.

Instead of the typical boring CSR report, 3-times distilled like these new vodkas, by the usual Corporate Affairs directors and the lawyers, can you imagine how great would be to read the drafts with the tracked changes? That would give you much more information on the performance and policy of a company that the final polished report. And what about reading the drafts of the assurance statements? That would be at least more fun than reading the normal ones…

Maybe one day we’re lucky and wikileaks get this stuff from a big company…

www.wikileaks.org