Walmart in top 10 of environmentally friendly companies.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

EPA Announces U.S. Organizations Using the Most Green PowerWASHINGTON –– Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Green Power Partnership released an updated list of the Top 50 organizations that are choosing to use electricity from clean, renewable sources.


“We applaud the leadership demonstrated by organizations that are helping reduce carbon pollution and spur the growth of clean, American-made energy sources by increasing their use of renewable energy,” said EPA Acting Administrator Bob Perciasepe. “As President Obama has made clear, clean energy is critical to our health, our economy, our security, and our ability to effectively address climate change.”Intel Corporation continues to top the list, using green power to cover 100 percent of its electricity load. Microsoft Corporation moved into second place by increasing its green power use to more than 1.9 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually. Apple Inc., new to the Top 50 list, ranks number 10 with 85 percent of its nationwide electricity now coming from green power.


The top 10 partners appearing on the Top 50 list include:

1. Intel Corporation
2. Microsoft Corporation
3. Kohl’s Department Stores
4. Whole Foods Market
5. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
6. U.S. Department of Energy
7. Staples
8. Starbucks Company-Owned Stores
9. Lockheed Martin Corporation
10. Apple Inc.

For the first time, EPA also released a list of partners that have committed to purchasing green power for a period of five years or more. These organizations send a strong signal to renewable energy developers, stating that they are committed to green power for the long-term and are helping to reduce future greenhouse gas emissions. Among the partners with the longest-running contracts are the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State University, The Ohio State University, Iowa State University, and the University of Maryland. Of the 47 partners appearing on the list, 15 are higher education institutions.
In addition, for the seventh year in a row, the agency is encouraging increased green power use among higher education institutions through the College and University Green Power Challenge. Out of the 32 competing conferences, the Big 10 is this year’s conference champion, collectively using more than 315 million kWh of green power annually and avoiding carbon pollution equal to that produced by the electricity use of more than 33,000 American homes. The University of Pennsylvania continues to be the top individual school in the challenge, purchasing more than 200 million kWh of wind power annually--more green power than any of the 75 other competing schools.


Green power is a subset of renewable energy and represents the renewable energy resources and technologies that provide the highest environmental benefit. EPA defines green power as electricity produced from solar, wind, geothermal, biogas, eligible biomass, and low-impact small hydroelectric sources.


As part of the EPA’s Green Power Partnership, more than 1,400 organizations are purchasing more than 27 billion kilowatt-hours of green power annually, avoiding carbon pollution equal to that created by the electricity use of more than 2.8 million American homes. The partnership provides quarterly updated lists of partners using green power in the following categories: K-12 schools, technology and telecommunications, local government, and retail, among others.


More on the Top 50 list and other Top rankings: www.epa.gov/greenpower/toplistsMore on the 2012-13 EPA College & University Green Power Challenge conference champions: www.epa.gov/greenpower/initiatives/cu_challenge.htm

More on EPA’s Green Power Partnership: www.epa.gov/greenpower

[Robert not Bobby]

Good for WalMart. With its thousands of stores, if all them had hundreds of solar panels on their roofs, not only would it be entirely self-sufficient, it could probably sell excess capacity into the local grids and make a tidy profit.

[Deleted]

Bobby--Not really.  It's a lot more complicated and expensive than you think.  Knowing firsthand how much Walmart puts into energy management, if they could actually do that, they would be doing it already.

Walmart is a lot greener than people give them credit for.  And their efforts to be "green" go far beyond just buying "green" power.  I suspect they also pay employees who do their jobs and stick around a while a lot better than a mom-and-pop does.

[Value Buy]

I guess Walmart is not held accountable for the miles of parking lots that is not "green", but brownfields across America

[djAdvocate]

i've heard this before.  i would be interested in knowing whether manufacture and transportation is factored in to this "green" certification.

[happyhoix]

Apr 17, 2013 13:32:14 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i've heard this before.  i would be interested in knowing whether manufacture and transportation is factored in to this "green" certification.

Walmart would figure in their own transportation, from their distribution hubs to their stores. They've probably focused on reducing the amount of empty trucks or partial shipments they haul to reduce their trans emissions.

For manufacturing, they require their vendors to track their greenhouse gas emissions and submit them to an international tracking agency. They also require their vendors to track waste disposal, water use, recycling, etc. They've required vendors to change packaging - for instance, if you look in their stores now, you rarely see shoes in cardboard boxes. Most of the time the shoes are attached to some kind of plastic tree and hung on racks - this reduces the packaging.

They also want their vendors to promise to be 'socially responsible' e.g. not to use cheap child labor to make those shoes.

I don't know how truthful all their vendors are being, there was that stink about one of walmart's vendors sweat shops having a fire or something about a year ago. I'm sure that was embarressing at Wally World.

[Deleted]

I guess Walmart is not held accountable for the miles of parking lots that is not "green", but brownfields across America

If you're going to say something like this, you need to explain how there is a better alternative.  "Green" is always relative.

i would be interested in knowing whether manufacture and transportation is factored in to this "green" certification

This particular list appears to only be about the electricity they purchase, so I'd say no. But I bet they'd get awards for those parts of the value chain as well. Walmart is much "greener" than alternative of having a bunch of mom & pop stores. I can't imagine what cities today would even look like without big box retailers. Traffic would be worse, sprawl would be worse, etc.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 13:45:58 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

I guess Walmart is not held accountable for the miles of parking lots that is not "green", but brownfields across America

If you're going to say something like this, you need to explain how there is a better alternative.  "Green" is always relative.

i would be interested in knowing whether manufacture and transportation is factored in to this "green" certification

This particular list appears to only be about the electricity they purchase, so I'd say no. But I bet they'd get awards for those parts of the value chain as well. Walmart is much "greener" than alternative of having a bunch of mom & pop stores. I can't imagine what cities today would even look like without big box retailers. Traffic would be worse, sprawl would be worse, etc.

yeah, i am just asking.  because, for example, buying an out of season Avocado that was grown in Chile is NOT very green.

[Deleted]

In many ways LEED is a bunch of hooey anyway, imo.

Yes.  Marketing gimmick more than anything else.

because, for example, buying an out of season Avocado that was grown in Chile is NOT very green.

"Local farming" is frequently much worse, but that doesn't stop greenies from being attracted to it like flies because they think it will help reduce energy use.  Walmart has to satisfy demand.  Same as before, they have to have a viable, "greener" alternative.

[formerroomate99]

For me, Walmart allows us to be greener simply because we can do all our shopping in one trip rather than going to many different places.  And since it is so unpleasant there, I have a big incentive to get in, and get out without getting sidetracked browsing and filling my cart with useless stuff I don't need. 

Though I have to admit that the availability of cheap crap there is a big part of the reason that many people end up buying bigger houses farther from work. 

[Virgil Showlion]

Apr 17, 2013 13:01:09 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Bobby--Not really.  It's a lot more complicated and expensive than you think.  Knowing firsthand how much Walmart puts into energy management, if they could actually do that, they would be doing it already.

Walmart is a lot greener than people give them credit for.  And their efforts to be "green" go far beyond just buying "green" power.  I suspect they also pay employees who do their jobs and stick around a while a lot better than a mom-and-pop does.

If it was cost-efficient to go solar, companies would line up to go solar. Huge outlays and significant maintenance work.

I'm not saying that it isn't worth it. I've toyed with the idea of installing solar power in our condo.

[TonyTiger]

Big flippin' deal... especially when you consider that the pollution involved in their manufacture and logistics are not factored into the equation because that's all farmed-out elsewhere; much of it in regions where the assessment cannot be reliably undertaken anyway; making them look far more squeaky-clean than they truly are.

Big flippin' deal... especially when you consider that they are not Labor Friendly... come back and let us know when they've accomplished that, and then you'll really have something worth talking-up... 

[Deleted]

Tony--Once again, "green" is relative.  If you can explain how it could be better, let me know.  Please check in on Walmart's practices first, though.  They've been mentioned briefly here.

As far as "labor friendly", how many mom and pop stores offer health insurance to their employees?  I'd be willing to bet Walmart offers better career opportunities the typical mom and pop shop.

Ironically, there was a movement a while back where people suggested Walmart should pay its employees a "living wage" of $12/hr.  Turns out that a person can already make $12/hr at Walmart.  They do have to work hard, stick around, and prove their value, but I don't think that's asking too much, do you?

[Robert not Bobby]

I don’t have anything against Wal Mart per se and certainly not in any kind a strict ideological sense (and since when does ideology have anything to do with buying the cheapest toilet paper, shaving cream and under arm deodorant, and cheesy stuff that you would only buy from infomercials…they also have cheap tuna and I love tuna...hmmmm good premium tuna). They run a business and they run it well, it is just not my cuppa tea.

Apart from some of the stranger folks (bless their hearts) who are ambling down the isles, Wal Mart is a beacon of savings, for the small stuff.

Too bad they buy most of their stuff from China. That, I have a big problem with…and I said I wouldn’t make it political or was that ‘ideological’?.

 

Shop till you drop, or you too can be an extreme couponer.

[happyhoix]

Big flippin' deal... especially when you consider that the pollution involved in their manufacture and logistics are not factored into the equation because that's all farmed-out elsewhere;

Yes and you have to be careful when a company claims to be 'zero landfill' like walmart says it wants to go.

Zero Landfill seems to imply they recycle everything and don't create trash.

In fact, zero landfill only means they don't personally ship anything to a landfill. However, they may send their trash to a waste to energy faciliilty, which burns it and then landfills the ash (not certain if incineration, with the energy requirements and air emissions, makes that option that much 'greener' than landfill) or else they ship everything to a recycling facility, which recycles the stuff that is commercially viable and landfills what it can't sell, but since they take ownership of the trash, Walmart can claim 'zero landfill.'

To me, claiming to be a 'green' company is about as nebulous as claiming to make an 'organic' product.

[weltschmerz]

Walmart in top 10 of environmentally friendly companies.

Are they requiring that their overseas suppliers meet basic environmental and safety standards?
Have they stopped buying products made from illegally logged wood which threatens the habitat of the endangered Siberian tiger?

[TonyTiger]

Not to mention the devastation wreaked by WalMart upon local economies when most of the mom-and-pop shops die-off in face of the new rapacious retail wolf in town... 

Until there's no place to go in Bedford Falls Pottersville, but to crawl to Old Man Potter and buy from his super-store... 

[happyhoix]

Apr 17, 2013 17:20:53 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Walmart in top 10 of environmentally friendly companies.

Are they requiring that their overseas suppliers meet basic environmental and safety standards?
Have they stopped buying products made from illegally logged wood which threatens the habitat of the endangered Siberian tiger?

They make their vendors sign something that says they intend to be green, but I don't think anyone from walmart ever comes around to check the truthiness of those papers.

[Deleted]

They make their vendors sign something that says they intend to be green, but I don't think anyone from walmart ever comes around to check the truthiness of those papers.

You think Walmart doesn't audit their suppliers?  On what do you base your assumption?  Walmart is very particular about their processes.  For example, they have people on staff whose job is to make sure their energy bills are paid on the bill due date and not a day sooner.  Walmart doesn't skip on the details.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 14:05:35 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Well no, but all of the major supermarkets by in season produce from all over the world.

precisely.  gotta stop that. 

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 14:56:00 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

In many ways LEED is a bunch of hooey anyway, imo.

Yes.  Marketing gimmick more than anything else.

because, for example, buying an out of season Avocado that was grown in Chile is NOT very green.

"Local farming" is frequently much worse,

in what sense?

but that doesn't stop greenies from being attracted to it like flies because they think it will help reduce energy use.  Walmart has to satisfy demand.  Same as before, they have to have a viable, "greener" alternative.

not necessarily, but i doubt you will hear out my argument to the contrary.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 17:05:20 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Tony--Once again, "green" is relative.  If you can explain how it could be better, let me know.  Please check in on Walmart's practices first, though.  They've been mentioned briefly here.

As far as "labor friendly", how many mom and pop stores offer health insurance to their employees?  I'd be willing to bet Walmart offers better career opportunities the typical mom and pop shop.

it pays to question the concept of careerism.

Ironically, there was a movement a while back where people suggested Walmart should pay its employees a "living wage" of $12/hr.  Turns out that a person can already make $12/hr at Walmart.  They do have to work hard, stick around, and prove their value, but I don't think that's asking too much, do you?

no, i really don't.  but none of my employees make less than $16/hr, and i haven't paid $12/hr for almost half a decade.  then again, my employees bring way more value to the business than Wal-Mart's do.

[Deleted]

in what sense?

The claim is that shorter distance means less energy.  However, "local farming" is often orders of magnitude more inefficient than bigger operations.  When you roll in the energy that people expend to aquire "local" products, it gets even worse.  I won't go into any more detail here, but the energy calculations are easy.

not necessarily, but i doubt you will hear out my argument to the contrary.

When have I ever NOT heard you out?  You actually think things through.  If I want to hear anyone out, it's you.

it pays to question the concept of careerism.

No comprendo.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 19:21:23 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

in what sense?

The claim is that shorter distance means less energy.  However, "local farming" is often orders of magnitude more inefficient than bigger operations.  When you roll in the energy that people expend to aquire "local" products, it gets even worse.  I won't go into any more detail here, but the energy calculations are easy.

not necessarily, but i doubt you will hear out my argument to the contrary.

When have I ever NOT heard you out?

fine.  let me put it another way.  let's just say that I don't want to spend the next week defending the argument against a broad range of attacks, not so much from you, but from those that love things just the way they are.

it pays to question the concept of careerism.

No comprendo.

i think there is a lot more to life than climbing ladders, that's all.  people are free to disagree, of course.  this is America, after all.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 19:21:23 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

in what sense?

The claim is that shorter distance means less energy.  However, "local farming" is often orders of magnitude more inefficient than bigger operations.  When you roll in the energy that people expend to aquire "local" products, it gets even worse.  I won't go into any more detail here, but the energy calculations are easy.

.

avocados can't be mechanically harvested.  therefore, having a corporate farm really doesn't help matters.

[Deleted]

i think there is a lot more to life than climbing ladders, that's all.  people are free to disagree, of course.  this is America, after all.

Yes of course there is.  Why would you think I'd disagree with that?  My only goal climbing the ladder is to hasten my retirement so that I can spend the rest of my life splitting my time between relaxing and doing volunteer work.

I really wasn't even talking about climbing the ladder, though.  I just meant working hard and staying long enough to get a few promotions (which come fairly frequently in a high turnaround job like that).

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 19:32:10 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

i think there is a lot more to life than climbing ladders, that's all.  people are free to disagree, of course.  this is America, after all.

Yes of course there is.  Why would you think I'd disagree with that?  My only goal climbing the ladder is to hasten my retirement so that I can spend the rest of my life splitting my time between relaxing and doing volunteer work.

a worthy goal if you would rather not be working.  and for the record, my comment was an aside, not a rebuttal. 

I really wasn't even talking about climbing the ladder, though.  I just meant working hard and staying long enough to get a few promotions (which come fairly frequently in a high turnaround job like that).

i wouldn't really know.

[Deleted]

avocados can't be mechanically harvested.  therefore, having a corporate farm really doesn't help matters.

My comments weren't really about avocados in particular.  The point was that sometimes "green" ideas aren't even "green".  But supply and demand still rules and makes them happen.

[Deleted]

Yes.  Understood.  I'm just heartbroken you'd think I wouldn't listen...

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 19:35:33 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

avocados can't be mechanically harvested.  therefore, having a corporate farm really doesn't help matters.

My comments weren't really about avocados in particular.  The point was that sometimes "green" ideas aren't even "green".  But supply and demand still rules and makes them happen.

rules and regulations also make it happen, in terms of pricing and availability.  if people care about things like food safety, there is a cost for that.  if people want to buy a specific brand, there is a cost to that, as well.  and if people insist on buying out of season, there is a cost for that.  and, of course there are human costs, social costs, and environmental costs that never even make the balance sheet.  ;]

there are market inefficiencies, too.  the idea of a perfect market is pretty silly.  sometimes people will just buy shit because they have money.  the cost is immaterial to them.  and some people won't buy something they desperately want, no matter how low the cost.  it is the way of the world.