Search

Investors are continuing to show their concern over the progress that their assets – as their shares of companies’ securities - are making toward Paris Agreement goals. This year’s State of Transition Report from the Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI), a corporate climate commitments benchmark initiative led by investors, dives into industry progress toward a low-carbon economy.

The results show that corporate climate commitments are a mixed bag, mostly indicating stagnation within the 16 sectors surveyed. Some signs of hope do surface, though, including a doubling of genuine net zero targets.

Results show an overwhelming need for a wake-up call to corporations instead of congratulations. “The TPI universe has become more stagnant and where there is movement it is now about as likely to be downward as upward, in stark contrast to previous years,” policy officer and TPI researcher Valentin Jahn states in the report.

Pinpoints of light in a sky of stagnating commitments

In investigating the corporate climate commitments of 401 companies within energy, industrial and materials, transport and consumer goods and services sectors, the study’s authors found indicators of progress, including a huge increase of genuine net zero targets that cover a company’s most material emissions — 14 more in 2020 for a total of 35 today. The report goes so far as to say most of these companies, representing 16 percent of global market value, have basic carbon management practices in place. Despite such progress, “most companies are still not taking a truly strategic approach to the issue,” researchers note.

The average company is somewhere between “building capacity on climate change” and “integrating climate change into operational decision-making,” the report finds, leaving only 15 percent aligned with a below 2-degree Celsius benchmark in 2050. Almost half of the companies scored by TPI don’t align with any Paris Agreement benchmark.

Despite results the authors call “sobering,” the increase in net zero targets may be a meaningful pattern. The TPI writes that this growth “suggests that we may be on the cusp of a systemic transformation in how these large greenhouse gas emitting companies view the strategic risks and opportunities presented by climate change.”

A benchmark made for investors

The TPI is an initiative led by asset owners that supports investor decision-making. Over 100 investors have pledged support for the TPI, representing $25 trillion combined assets under management and advice (AUM), the organization claims.

Open-source data and analysis like the TPI’s are in high-demand. Even in 2019, the Harvard Business Review found that ESG issues were top of mind across the board for investment firm executives, though finding consistent data can be challenging.

This year’s State of Transition Report points to specific recommendations for ESG-motivated investors.

First, investors will want to watch for management quality, as TPI’s data does point to a correlation between management quality and carbon performance, particularly with emissions disclosures. Study authors also observe that “the share of companies aligned with TPI’s most ambitious Below 2°C benchmark rises as the Management Quality level rises.”

Even with an increase in commitments in some areas, TPI researchers emphasize that, overall, corporations are failing to plan concrete short- to medium-term actions. To spur corporations forward, the report recommends four areas for investors to push: covering material emissions in net zero greenhouse gas commitments by 2050 or sooner; setting short-, medium- and long-term targets; publishing strategy and capital expenditure plans to demonstrate how the company will meet its goals; and releasing disclosures.

One last counsel on corporate climate commitments: “Investors should be looking for companies to align themselves with the benchmarks as soon as is practicable,” the study’s authors recommend.

Image credit: Edward Howell/Unsplash

Photo: Citizens gather in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, to protest the death of Daunte Wright earlier this week.

Many of our colleagues are not okay, and employers need to reach out and find a way to support them. The trial of Derek Chauvin, the police officer who is charged with murder after kneeling on George Floyd's neck for over eight minutes, is bringing more disturbing details about the killing to light. As the trial wrapped its 10th day in Minneapolis on Monday, another unarmed Black man — 20-year-old Daunte Wright — was shot and killed by police during a traffic stop in Brooklyn Center, a suburb about 10 miles away.

As of press time, the only notable brand that has spoken out on the death of Daunte Wright is Ben & Jerry’s — so far, corporate America has been disappointingly silent.

Even as our hearts break and our blood boils, we're all expected to sign into our Zoom calls and punctuate our emails with friendly exclamation points and emoticons as if nothing is wrong. Employers and mangers, it’s about time stop this — and better yet, let's revisit Fortune Senior Editor Ellen McGirt's 2016 piece on why employers need to talk about the killings of Black people.

McGirt wrote the article shortly after the death of Philando Castile. Police officers pulled the 32-year-old Castile over for a traffic stop in Falcon Heights, Minnesota. He was shot to death in the driver's seat in front of his girlfriend — who streamed the horrific sequence on Facebook Live — and her four-year-old daughter.

“Now imagine a young associate watches a video of one of the shootings, shares it on Twitter, expresses fear and outrage, gets attacked by a troll, then walks into a staff meeting,” McGirt wrote back in July 2016.

Those words aptly describe how many are feeling this week: Only now, the probability is high that same employee is compelled to log into a Zoom or Google Hangouts meeting instead of walking into a conference room. The fact many are now working in isolation can add to the despair countless Americans are feeling this week. Unlike one scenario described by an expert McGirt interviewed five years ago, there is less of chance of being expected to chime in during a meeting or have to visit client accounts in neighborhoods with a looming police presence, but the deep sense of loss, sadness and anger isn’t any less pronounced.

So once again, management at companies across the U.S. will have to find a way to bring up these difficult conversations with their colleagues. These talks are difficult, but they are necessary: Pretending that it is business as usual only risks sending a dismissive message to many of your employees at a time when they need that open door, or moments to catch up by video conference or telephone, the most.

We recommend you subscribe to McGirt’s newsletter, RaceAhead. Her 2016 article has also been syndicated on Yahoo.

Image credit: Josh Hild/Unsplash

Editor's note: This article series is sponsored by Procter & Gamble and produced by the TriplePundit editorial team.

We all want to do our part to protect the planet, but sometimes it’s hard to know where to start. According to a study we recently conducted in the U.S. — which is consistent with research we’ve conducted in multiple markets around the world — while 72 percent of people want to do more to be sustainable at home, less than half make environmentally conscious choices at home as much as they’d like. And for those who don’t act sustainably, "not knowing how" is the biggest barrier. 

The opportunity is closer to us than we might think. Among the 28 sectors of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, “homes” are in the top three, as big as road transportation. Homes are certain to become an even more critical source of emissions, as the electricity we use at home — accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic — is expected to nearly double by 2050. Closing this intention-to-action gap and unlocking change at home has the potential to help mitigate the climate crisis.

In celebration of Earth Week and as part of our commitment to inspire responsible consumption among the 5 billion consumers we serve every day, we’re launching It's Our Home, our new campaign to highlight how small actions in our homes can cumulatively make a meaningful difference for our common home, planet Earth.   

Through this campaign, P&G and our brands are committing to use our voice, reach, innovation and expertise to help people embrace sustainable living at home. 

Change agents in our homes are younger and mightier than ever

The change agents inspiring these simple choices at home are not celebrities, politicians or scientists; in fact, nearly 9 out of 10 parents reported that they are most likely to be influenced by their children to be more sustainable at home.  Children are becoming champions of sustainability, sparking kitchen table debates and educating family members on small positive actions. This insight inspired P&G’s new short film, It’s Our Home, in which Luisa helps her family make simple daily choices to protect our planet. 

Small changes can make a world of difference

Were you aware of the fact that using the dishwasher actually saves water compared to washing dishes by hand? Did you know that closing the tap while brushing your teeth can save more than 3,000 gallons of water every year? The small changes we make in our daily routines — such as using cold water for laundry, taking shorter showers or turning off the tap while shaving — can have a big impact. 

That’s why our brands continue to look for new ways to enable sustainable habits at home. Cascade knows that even small dishwasher loads can save water and is encouraging families to skip the pre-rinse with its “Do It Every Night” ad campaign. A running sink can use up to four gallons of water every two minutes, while an Energy Star-certified dishwasher uses less than four gallons per cycle. So, if you spend just 10 minutes per day handwashing your dishes, then choosing your dishwasher for your daily load of dishes and skipping the pre-rinse can save you up to 100 gallons a week. 

At P&G, we believe that sustainability can be a driver of irresistible superiority and innovation can make responsible consumption irresistible. Our brands are making it simple for households to be more sustainable without tradeoffs in product performance or convenience. Washing on cold with Tide provides a better clean (than the bargain brand on hot), while Dawn Powerwash Dish Spray creates spray-activated suds without water to get dishes clean without soaking, so there’s no need to use the faucet until the final rinse. 

Making an impact with everyday purchases

You can participate in the It’s Our Home movement through P&G Good Everyday, our new rewards program powered by our brands that helps turn everyday actions into acts of good. Through this program, consumers earn points that can be redeemed for rewards — and as they earn, we make donations to causes they care about. For example, thanks to our partners at the Arbor Day Foundation, consumers can pledge to recycle or donate their points to plant a tree, helping to create a legacy of doing good together. 

Doing more for our planet, our home 

Sustainability has been embedded in how P&G does business for decades, and we’re continually reducing the impact of our operations. We are committed to positively impacting homes, communities and the planet — especially in the areas of packaging, climate and water. Over the past 10 years, we have reduced our absolute GHG emissions by 50 percent, reached zero manufacturing waste to landfill across all sites, and doubled the use of recycled resin in plastic packaging.  

While there is a lot of work still ahead of us, we’re making progress on our Ambition 2030 goals, including reducing manufacturing emissions by 50 percent, purchasing 100 percent renewable electricity, making 100 percent of packaging recyclable or reusable, and reducing virgin petroleum plastic packaging by 50 percent. Later this year, P&G will issue a climate transition action plan outlining the company’s plans toward the long-term objective of net zero emissions for Scope 1 and 2 (direct emissions and those generated by purchased electricity), as well as elements of Scope 3 (supply chain) emissions.

As part of our commitment to Lead with Love, we believe that every action we take — as companies, brands and individuals — can make the world a better place. This decade represents a critical window of opportunity to accelerate progress toward a more sustainable and equitable world.  

Together, we can protect our planet, our common home, now and for generations to come. 

Image courtesy of Procter & Gamble 

Shake Shack keeps finding new and interesting ways to live up to its “Stand for Something Good” motto. In the latest development, the popular chain of retro-modern restaurants is taking a stand on plastic pollution. The company has introduced biodegradable straws and cutlery at selected sites. In keeping with the company’s quirky image, this is no ordinary bio-material. It is not made from plants. Instead, it is a plastic-like substance naturally produced by an ocean-dwelling microbe.

Shake Shack stands against plastic pollution

The latest Shake Shack venture is significant because it provides a high-profile platform for innovative new products that can help reduce plastic pollution. Shake Shack’s new straws and cutlery are coming from the Restore Foodware branch of the biotechnology firm Newlight Technologies.

Newlight’s new bio-material is called AirCarbon. According to Shake Shack, the new straws and cutlery have the look and feel of plastic, but they can be composted at home.

Shake Shack also notes that the material is made without synthetic glues or other synthetic additives.

To start, Shake Shack plans to roll the new items out at restaurants in West Hollywood, Santa Monica and Long Beach in California this spring, along with Madison Square Park and West Village in New York City, and Miami Beach in Florida.

A plastic pollution warrior like none other

The plastic pollution fight is becoming crowded with bio-based alternatives, but Newlight has carved out an unusual niche for itself.

Conventional single-use plastics are made from fossil energy sources, including natural gas as well as petroleum and coal. When discarded improperly on land, fossil-sourced plastic items can easily travel down rivers and streams to the ocean, where plastic pollution has already reached crisis proportions.

In contrast, AirCarbon is produced by the natural metabolism that occurs when certain ocean-dwelling organisms digest air and carbon-containing greenhouse gases dissolved in saltwater. As they feast, the microorganisms create and store a plastic-like material called polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB).

Like conventional plastic, PHB can be melted and molded into a variety of forms that hold their shape when cooled. Unlike conventional plastic, PHB enables sequesters greenhouse gases that are already airborne, instead of extracting new fossil gasses from underground.

That makes PHB a form of carbon recycling, with the additional benefit of sequestering more carbon than its production requires.

The curious history of PHB

Plant-based bioplastics are fairly common. PHB and other bioplastics made by microorganisms represent another step on the sustainability ladder.

Compared to conventional crops used in bioplastic production, microorganisms can reduce or practically eliminate land use issues. They can also grow and reproduce much faster than plants. In addition, the conditions for their growth and reproduction can involve greater efficiency and less expense than conventional agriculture.

Despite the advantages, PHB has taken more than a century’s worth of research to achieve its commercial potential.

Newlight’s AirCarbon has its roots in 1888, when the first observation of granular specks in the bodies of certain bacteria took place.

Forty years later, in 1927, a researcher succeeded in isolating and identifying the specks.

Newlight Technologies was founded in 2003, almost 100 years later. The company plowed ten years of research into AirCarbon, in order to engineer a microorganism that could create and store far more bioplastic than it normally needs.

AirCarbon was ready for the market by 2013, attracting the attention of early adopters including Dell, IKEA and Sprint.

All hands on deck to end the ocean plastic crisis

All that hard work paid off for Newlight. The company cites a long list of awards for AirCarbon, including Biomaterial of the Year by the Nova Institute, Innovation of the Year by Popular Science, recognition as a Technology Pioneer by the World Economic Forum, and recognition as a Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Award winner by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

In another interesting twist, earlier this year Newlight teamed up with IBM to introduce a blockchain-based carbon tracker for Newlight’s new fashion brand, Covalent.

As a materials-based solution to the ocean plastic crisis, AirCarbon adds to a growing toolkit that also includes grassroots activism, consumer awareness, new recycling methods, a coordinated global effort and many other elements.

Businesses looking for a way out of the plastic mess now have many options from which to choose. So, why wait? Shake Shack didn’t.

Image credits: Shake Shack corporate site; Facebook

Business leaders who seek to take a stand against voter suppression are meeting with fierce pushback from Republican elected officials and their allies. The weapon of choice is “cancel culture,” an accusation aimed at characterizing voter advocates as intolerant, overbearing, and undemocratic. “Cancel culture” is clearly meant as a reputational smear, but it contains a much more concerning point of view that goes beyond brand reputation to have an impact on the whole corporate social responsibility movement.

The hidden threat behind the “cancel culture” slur

In the abstract, “cancel culture” is a relatively harmless rhetorical trick. It generally refers to a sort of knee-jerk reaction to any kind of offensive speech, literature, entertainment or other public acts.

However, in practice the phrase has emerged as an anti-liberal and anti-Democratic slur, one that is intended to smother criticism of Republican policies that foster white supremacy.

In the context of Republican support for white supremacists, cancel culture provides a rhetorical weapon against those who criticize hate speech. It confers the moral high ground to a broad interpretation of free public discourse, in which everyone is entitled to articulate hate speech in any public forum, anywhere.

If an entertainment company, sports team, school, media platform or other institution refuses to enable such license, that’s cancel culture in action.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

The basic premise behind the cancel culture slur has been articulated most clearly and persistently by Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

“We care deeply about diversity,” Zuckerberg wrote in a 2016 memo to employees cited by Forbes. “That's easy to say when it means standing up for ideas you agree with. It's a lot harder when it means standing up for the rights of people with different viewpoints to say what they care about. That's even more important (emphasis added).”

The problem is the lack of an ethical or moral anchor for “different viewpoints.”

Zuckerberg refined his perspective somewhat in 2018, when challenged on Facebook’s tolerance for Holocaust denial. Facebook has also tempered its tolerance speech that incites physical harm. Still, the basic theory of speech is the same. In terms of the Facebook platform there is no single point of ethical or moral reference for hate speech. It all depends on the intention of the speaker, and that intention is to be determined by Facebook.

As positioning himself as the ultimate champion of free speech, Zuckerberg also clarifies the moral outrage expressed by white supremacists who feel they are being censored. If Facebook is the arbiter of free speech, then any speech permitted on Facebook should be permitted in any public forum.

That is clearly a specious argument, but former President Trump provides a standout example of how Republican elected officials have worked to normalize this zero-ethics approach to public speech. Time and again he used his public office to elevate public hate speech and celebrate white supremacists with the presidential seal of approval.

Cancel culture and corporate social responsibility

All of this should raise a giant red flag for business leaders who have a stake in the corporate social responsibility movement.

The cancel culture slur is more than a rhetorical dart slung by Republican politicians and white supremacists. It is a direct threat to the central principle of corporate social responsibility.

After all, the whole concept of corporate social responsibility presumes that an ethical center exists, and that business leaders can steer their companies in ways that get them closer to, or farther from, ethical behavior.

Major League Baseball raises the bar

Now the question is whether business leaders are giving up the corporate social responsibility model of ethical behavior in favor of the Facebook model.

In some respects, the Facebook model is winning.

As a group, corporate leaders failed to take action against the 147 Republican members of Congress who supported the failed insurrection of January 6, and they stood by while state legislators introduced hundreds of bills that make it more difficult to vote.

On the plus side, one pivotal, attention-grabbing moment occurred earlier this month, when Major League Baseball abruptly raised the bar on voter suppression protest by pulling the 2021 All-Star Game out of Atlanta. MLB explicitly cast the decision as a protest against a new voter suppression bill signed into law by Governor Brian Kemp.

The MLB decision brought the cancel culture slur roaring into the media spotlight, with Kemp providing a representative example.

“It means cancel culture and partisan activists are coming for your business, they’re coming for your game or event in your hometown, and they’re coming to cancel everything from sports to how you make a living,” Kemp said last week, in a widely reported criticism of the MLB decision.

Employee activism in play

It remains to be seen if corporate citizens finally turn off the flow of money to the Republican elected officials who support voter suppression. However, it does appear that more business leaders are finally waking up to the potential for the cancel culture slur to undermine corporate social responsibility movement.

On March 31 a group of 72 leading Black executives took out a full page ad in The New York Times to protest the new wave of voter suppression bills. More than 200 other business leaders followed up on April 2 in support of that effort, through a public letter organized by The Civic Alliance.

Letter-writing is all well and good, but the corporate movement in support of voter rights will most likely fade with time, unless something happens to provide it with additional momentum.

One factor that could come into play is employee activism. Employee activists have become increasingly outspoken and influential in corporate policy, and the voter suppression bills have sparked a new wave of activity in that area, as illustrated by the MLB decision.

Lisa Lerer, the New York Times National Political Correspondent, deftly underscored the power of employee activists last week in her On Politics newsletter.

“An M.L.B. source described what many within the league saw as an untenable scenario for the sport: A number of players would refuse to participate in the game. The remainder would have been asked — over and over again — about their positions on the voting law,” Lerer wrote.

Few workers have the high profile and financial clout of professional athletes, but many possess skills and institutional knowledge that employers can’t afford to lose. Business leaders that aim to recruit and retain top talent should be doing everything they can to push back against the cancel culture smear and stand up against voter suppression.

Image credit: Marcus Winkler/Unsplash

At least 28 U.S. state legislatures are passing or considering bills that attack transgender youth. Whether the legislation bans medical treatments for trans youth in the name of “science,” or curtails trans girls and women from participating in sports in order to ensure “fairness,” the flurry of such activity in state capitols is breathtaking. 

And it’s breathtaking in a destructive, cruel way. Hence organizations from the American Medical Association to dozens of America’s largest companies have publicly stated their opposition to any anti-transgender legislation.

Yet weeks before Pride Month, when companies switch to rainbow flag logos and push out communications about what they are doing for the LGBTQ community, there’s a problem: Many of the same companies that have spoken out against anti-transgender bills are also funding the politicians fighting to roll back any protections for this 0.6 percent of the population who still live largely in the shadows.

In the wake of an Arkansas bill that restricts medical treatments for trans youth, which became law last week, the next focal point of the political backlash against the transgender community is North Carolina. Five years after the state lost the NBA All-Star Game after passing a largely panned anti-trans “bathroom” bill, NC legislators are at it again. Proposed bills include measures such as requiring teachers to out transgender students to their parents, blocking certain medical procedures to LGBTQ youth under 21, and allowing any entity within the state’s wider healthcare industry to deny any services or information if it conflicts with the provider's “conscience.”

Many companies either based in North Carolina or conducting business in the state have spoken out against the legislation, but independent journalist Judd Legum isn't buying it: “The sponsors of S514 [an anti-trans bill making its way through the North Carolina legislature] are supported by corporations that hold themselves out as ardent supporters of LGBTQ rights," Legum wrote in his Popular Information newsletter on Monday.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

That list of companies includes an alphabet soup of brands, including American Airlines, Atrium Health, Blue Cross Blue Shield North Carolina, Cigna Duke Energy, UnitedHealth Group and Wells Fargo.

Legum points out that while these companies have often been public about their support of transgender citizens and the wider LGBTQ community, they have also funneled financial contributions to the sponsoring lawmakers behind S514. 

One could make the argument that when a company makes political donations, it doesn’t necessarily know what kind of legislation that lawmaker will support in the near future. But as we saw last year with the global pandemic and fight for racial justice, the “both sides” argument does not hold water any longer. The lesson companies must learn in 2021 — one that was amplified in the wake of the January U.S. Capitol riots — is that the least companies can do is to back their words with action.

In the case of North Carolina, such action means demanding that those political contributions in question be returned, and making it clear such checks won’t be cut or wired again.

Image credit: Lena Balk/Unsplash

It’s only April, but in parts of the U.S. Southwest, it already feels like summer. With temperatures in the upper-90s last week and virtually the entire western half of the U.S. in drought, it seems we can prepare for yet another year of record-breaking weather.

Parts of Texas have yet to recover from the deadly winter storm two months ago while now facing an onslaught of hot, dry days punctuated by the upcoming hurricane season. It’s not unprecedented: Texas last saw such a severe winter storm in 2011, followed that summer by the worst year of the state’s multiyear drought which included 90 days of 100 degrees-plus temperatures and catastrophic wildfires.

But although most of Texas is in drought, the biggest area of concern is the Southwest, where some scientists say that states are in the throes of a megadrought, meaning an intense drought that lasts for decades or longer. In recent years, it has felt like a continuous drought, occasionally punctuated by rainfall relief. It brings to mind the saying attributed to a meteorologist in the 1930s, who said Texas is “a land of eternal drought, interrupted occasionally by biblical floods.”

The problem is, those eternal droughts and biblical floods have gained intensity in the last century. Climate change projections for the region from Texas to California present a stark water picture.

Climate change, drought and economics

The western U.S. is also home to rapid economic growth. According to the Census Bureau, 11 of the 15 fastest growing cities are in western states, in particular across Texas and Arizona. Unfortunately, climate change also threatens the economic wellbeing of those states.

Recently, the Institute for Public Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law conducted a survey of 738 economists, Gauging Economic Consensus on Climate Change, which found that the benefits of taking action on climate change far outweigh the costs. This aligns with recent findings that the U.S. could save $8 trillion if Paris Climate Agreement targets were met compared to business-as-usual, and that figure is considered conservative. This is not wholly unexpected when we look at the number of multi-billion dollar natural disasters over the past few years, from the $16.6 billion in damage attributed to California wildfires in the fall of 2020 to the $133.8 billion cost of Hurricane Harvey in 2017 - and everything in between.

Further, according to the same study, more economists are on board with taking urgent action as climate models are consistently proven right in terms of increased intensity and duration of extreme weather events. Drought, in particular, has devastating cascading effects. Drought directly has an impact on agriculture, which could lead to depressed economies in farming communities as well as increased food costs for society overall.

Droughts also pose problems for the power generation sector: in hydroelectric power as well as fossil- and nuclear-powered electricity, which all rely on considerable amounts of water for generating electricity. Less critical, but no less important for local economies, are the effects on water recreation and the businesses that support it, from boat rentals and sales to restaurants and shops that cater to the participants.

Cities, especially in the drought-riddled west, will increasingly compete with these sectors for water. More straws in smaller pools could lead to conflict, as already witnessed in the long-standing tri-state water wars in the southeastern U.S. Further, economic booms will be limited if companies can’t rely on water being available for their operations. Luckily, cost-effective solutions already exist to address these problems.

Cost-effective water technologies for taking on drought

The energy-water nexus offers cost-effective carbon emission reductions. At the utility level, wastewater and drinking water utilities often comprise 30 to 40 percent of a city’s electricity demand. Because the majority of our electricity is generated using water- and carbon-intensive fossil fuels, deploying energy efficiency in those utilities’ operations is a win-win: It reduces energy demand (and lowers bills), which lowers carbon emissions, and it also reduces both operating costs at the water utility level and loss of non-revenue water.

Further, water efficiency projects could potentially deliver the same carbon and energy demand savings as traditional electric utility energy efficiency programs, but at considerably lower costs. Unfortunately, with a few exceptions, most electric utilities still pursue the age-old energy solutions in a silo, rather than partnering with water utilities for deeper emissions reductions.

Other opportunities abound for the energy-water nexus at water utilities. Floating solar - sometimes called “floatovoltaics” - reduces evaporation rates of retention ponds and keeps the solar panels cool and thus increases their efficiency. Biogas collection at wastewater treatment plants reduces methane emissions and can power systems with net-zero energy. Smart grid technologies can reduce leakage rates, which are as high as 40 percent in some areas, decreasing both the lost revenue and the energy and water that are literally flushed away by treated water not making it to its intended target. All of these are proven technologies, and with appropriate policy direction and investment opportunities, will only become more cost-effective the more they’re deployed.

If the majority of over 700 economists who study climate impacts on the economy feel the need to take action is urgent, even more so than five years ago. They reiterate that governments and businesses should deploy every weapon in their arsenal to prevent economic disaster from unmitigated climate change.

We are past the point of simply looking at inside-the-fence energy efficiency solutions at electric utilities. We need an economy-wide approach, and the water sector has vast potential and nearly unlimited opportunities to contribute. A more holistic approach to the energy-water nexus from both sides of the coin simply makes cost-effective sense. And for drought-stricken areas, conserving every last drop has never been more important.

Image credit: Olivier Chatel/Unsplash

The energy industry is undergoing a fundamental shift. Exactly how quickly the world will adopt clean energy is still unclear. One significant argument for keeping society’s fossil fuel love affair going is to protect jobs in the conventional energy sector. But how safe are those jobs really?

A new analysis shows that employment in the fossil fuel sector will drop 20 to 30 percent, regardless of the transition to renewable energy. Also, many of the oil industry jobs that were lost in 2020 due to decreased demand from the pandemic are not likely to return. The following are rebuttals against the argument that fossil fuel companies support high-quality jobs — which, together, make the idea of subsidies to help an ailing industry even less appealing.

Robots could replace oil and gas workers

Recent analysis from the research firm Rystad Energy highlights that robotics could replace hundreds of thousands of oil and gas workers globally by 2030. This move would reduce drilling costs by several billion dollars and in turn shrink the size of both onshore and offshore crews. If the United States did reduce its staffing needs according to Rystad Energy’s estimates, this would equate to 140,000 lost jobs.

Learning from the ailing coal industry

The coal industry has experienced a long decline in employment over the last century. At its peak in 1923, there were 863,000 coal mining jobs. As of 2020, there were only 40,000 jobs.  Despite former President Donald Trump’s promise to “bring those miners back,” employment and production actually declined during his presidency. Coal mining jobs tend to be highly concentrated in certain areas in the U.S. — and most of the activity is taking place in Wyoming, where the industry is beginning to face more challenges. Thus, the effects of the industry's decline are especially pronounced in these communities.

Who is the culprit causing declining coal employment since its heyday? Mechanization makes the industry far more efficient and safer than when workers used pickaxes and pushed carts. The rise of natural gas and, to a lesser extent, renewable energy have curbed demand for coal. Barack Obama-era policies that were largely reversed during the Trump administration slightly furthered its decline.

Sadly, the waning of the coal industry has taken its toll on workers. From 2011 to 2016, demand for coal tanked, both internationally and domestically. Three of the four largest U.S. coal companies declared bankruptcy, shedding hundreds of millions in retiree pensions and healthcare benefits.

Further fossil fuel industry layoffs

According to the nonprofit Bailout Watch, 77 oil and gas companies received $8.2 billion in pandemic-related tax breaks yet still laid off 16 percent of their combined workforce of 58,000 employees. The layoffs are due in part to automated operations reducing the need for workers.

Jobs in renewable energy

The Joe Biden administration has been looking to the renewable energy sector to create high-quality jobs as jobs in fossil fuels phase-out. Jobs in renewable energy tend to be well dispersed throughout the country and not so concentrated in specific areas, unlike coal mining jobs. As of 2020, there are 523,000 employed in the renewable energy sector, and the solar energy industry employed 345,000 in the United States, with significant anticipated growth. These are encouraging numbers, but there are some issues to keep in mind.

Although construction has traditionally been difficult to automate, the solar energy industry is also experiencing some digitization and automation within construction and manufacturing. 

One criticism of the renewables sector is that women and people of color are underrepresented, according to a 2019 study. As with many industries in the U.S., the discrepancy is structural, as one Inside Climate News report from last summer explained. Bottom line: This is still a very white and male-dominated industry. “The overall solar workforce is 73 percent white, and women and gender non-binary people make up less than 28 percent of solar workers,” TriplePundit’s Mary Mazzoni wrote that same year.         

Fossil fuel subsidies

According to conservative estimates by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute, direct subsidies and tax benefits to the fossil fuel industry in the U.S. total about $20 billion annually. Of this, 20 percent goes to coal and 80 percent to petroleum and natural gas. According to the IMF, fuel subsidies disproportionately impact the wealthiest while providing little value to the bottom quintile of the population. Thus, fuel subsidies can exacerbate income inequalities.

Historically, these subsidies were intended to lower production costs and ensure domestically extracted energy sources. However, many of the external costs of fossil fuels, such as their impacts on health and the climate, are not included in such figures. External costs can be significant and more challenging to quantify. Besides, the oil industry knew about the impact of burning fossil fuels on human health yet aggressively lobbied against regulations. A common plug for fossil fuel subsidies is the need to protect industry jobs, but this has become highly questionable.

Subsidies have had a large impact on the availability and cost of fossil fuels. Keeping their prices artificially low by ignoring environmental and social costs, such as climate change and acid rain, leaves a significant burden unaccounted for. Fossil fuel subsidies also enable overconsumption, further fueling the issue.

Historically, humanity has switched fuel sources many times throughout its existence. The waning use of coal and the adoption of renewable energy show a slow but needed shift. Finally, peak oil consumption might have also already passed, according to a September 2020 BP report.

Although fossil fuels’ short-term benefits are hard to deny, such as their immediate impact on productivity and economic growth, there are few positive long-term attributes. If even their ability to create decent jobs is in question due to automation, the glaring external costs become even harder to ignore.

Image credit: Robin Sommer/Unsplash

Even as President Joe Biden sets new vaccination goals and vaccines become more widely available, there is still a concerning amount of hesitancy from Americans to get vaccinated. Health experts have said to truly curb the virus, as many individuals as possible should receive the vaccine — and it will take organizations, government entities, community centers, celebrities, and individuals of all shapes and sizes to encourage vaccinations. This week, we’ll highlight companies that are lending their brand and marketing power to build more confidence in receiving the vaccine.

Ford Motor Company worked with eleven nonprofits to create a PSA to fight misinformation surrounding vaccinations, especially in Black and Hispanic communities. The #VaxWithFacts spot delivers a message of unity, support and advocacy to combat the spread of misinformation among diverse populations. It features leaders from all of Ford Fund’s Multicultural Advisory Committeeincluding organizations like the Arab American and Chaldean Council, Latin Americans for Social and Economic Development, the National Urban League, and others.

Budweiser has continued to make headlines around their efforts to provide relief in the pandemic. Now, the beverage company has partnered with the Ad Council to create a health campaign dedicated to COVID-19 vaccine awareness and education called “Good Times Are Coming.” Monica Rustgi, Budweiser’s Vice President of Marketing explains why Budweiser is the company to produce this campaign: “As America’s most iconic beer, we’re uniquely positioned to use our influence to remind people how close we are to being able to celebrate together, thanks to these vaccines.”

Walgreens and John Legend teamed up to create a campaign called “This Is Our Shot,” to build awareness that the COVID-19 vaccine is available and is the best way to put an end to the pandemic. The video shows heartwarming snapshots of ways we can get back together once vaccinated, from barbeques to sporting events, with overlaid narrative by the trusted voice of Legend making the plea to get vaccinated. This campaign is part of Walgreen’s many efforts to equitably curb and ultimately end the pandemic.  

Throughout the pandemic, companies have provided support to the effort in new and different ways to meet the moment. At the onset, organizations provided urgent and acute support through donations, paywall removals, and product and service innovations. But as the pandemic continues, companies too must evolve their support to solve for the pressing needs of the day. There is still work to be done to put an end to the pandemic, but the communications brands have put together can play an important role in helping to build trust in the vaccine and ultimately get us back to ‘normal.’

Previously published in the 3BL Media Newsroom.

Image credit: Steven Cornfield/Unsplash