Posts Tagged ‘sustainability’

Among the World’s Top 25 of the Social Media Sustainability Index

4 March 2013

ACCIONA ranks among the ” SMI-Wizness Social Media Sustainability Index” Top 25 companies. The index is compiled by the firm of consultants SMI-Wizness and comprises the companies with best practices in social media communication.

With a score of 77/100 points, 23rd-placed ACCIONA has improved its position considerably on the first SMI-Wizness Social Media Sustainability Index, when it came in at 59th place. ACCIONA is the third-ranked company and one of the leaders in the “New Emerging Channels” category.

According to this report, the social media sites that are used most for conveying sustainability values are Twitter (@acciona_EN) and Facebook (official page). Among the Top 100 companies:

  • 70 have a sustainability blog (similar to this one)
  • 15 have a Pinterest account (go to the ACCIONA Sustainability pin board)

The report takes a close look at the companies that appear in global indices such as the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, FTSE4Good and Newsweek’s Green Brands Survey, and how their positioning and commitment to sustainability are conveyed across social media.

One of the Company’s most noteworthy recent communication actions is the video of the Sustainability Master Plan which drew considerable attention following its dissemination across the corporate channels and their subsequent virality.

Sustainability Master Plan (Video)

8 February 2013

This video reflects through global data, what are the resources of this world to the demands of the population and the Sustainable practices oriented to meet this challenges, as proposed by ACCIONA through its Sustainability Master Plan.

Sustainable investment & divestment I

5 February 2013

2012 can be described as a good year if we bear in mind the growing appetite by investors to take into account Environmental, Social and Governance factors, when it comes to making investment decisions, despite (or maybe due to) the ongoing economic and market turmoil. Last year also saw the publication of a considerable number of reports on this kind if investment and, along with signs that the processes used to analyze these criteria are becoming standardized and that standards are converging, they point to a sector that is maturing.

According to the latest GSIA (Global Sustainable Investment Alliance) report on sustainable investment in seven regions of the world, asset managers everywhere are talking social, environmental and governance factors into consideration in their choice and management of investments, affecting more than 10 trillion euro’s worth of assets (US$ 13.6 trillion). This figure covers more than 21% of the total assets managed in the regions that fall within the reports’ scope, and comes as conclusive proof that sustainable investment has reached a worldwide scale. The lion’s share of the investment and management of sustainable assets (65%) are located in Europe, and 96% of these types of assets are concentrated in Europe, USA and Canada (Latin America is not included in this study).

To understand the nature of this investment trend we need to look beyond the overall figures. The report shows that the three most usual sustainable investment strategies are as follows: the “Exclusion” method (accounting for US$ 8.3 trillion in assets), involves excluding from investment portfolios specific investments or categories, such as companies, sectors or countries; the “Integration” strategy, which accounts for US$6.2 trillion worth of assets, and includes, explicitly, environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks and opportunities in the traditional financial analysis; and finally, “Engagement and voting on Sustainability matters”, which accounts for US$4.7 trillion worth of assets.

These three strategies are followed by “Norms-based screening” (US$3.0 trillion); this involves selecting assets according to their adherence to and compliance with internationals standards and norms, e.g. the UN Global Compact, and is the most common approach in Europe. Selection of the “Best-in-class”, accounting for US$1.0 trillion worth of assets, assesses the best companies in a given sector, their performance and their efforts and improvements based on ESG criteria.  This list ends with “Sustainability Themed” investments or assets linked to the development of sustainability, and “Impact investments”, made by companies, funds or organizations with the intention of generating a social or environmental impact as well as financial returns. These latter strategies account for US$83bn y US$89bn respectively.

Allia, a UK social investment organization, has just launched the first Social Impact Bond.  The Future for Children Bond is the first retail bond of this class, and is aimed at improving living conditions for teenagers at risk of social exclusion in the United Kingdom.

These figures are corroborated by other study published at the end of 2012, and in which

Eurosif underscores the fact that two thirds of these investment funds have grown by 35% since 2009.

According to the latest study on Sustainable Investment, “Sustainable Investing: Establishing Long-Term Value and Performance”, published by Deutsche Bank, companies that score highly in terms of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and sustainability have cheaper access to capital and represent less risk for investors.

ACCIONA’s efforts where sustainability is concerned are being recognized by socially responsible investors. The company is a component of a number of sustainability indexes, such as the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, FTSE4Good, MSCI ESG Indices, STOXX Sustainability and the CPLI (Carbon Performance Leadership Index) Europe 300.

So we can safely say that the practices in and commitments to sustainability affect value, and that outstanding sustainability credentials are an ever-increasing important competitive advantage. Similarly, poor, controversial or negative sustainability credentials can lead to divestment by institutional or other investors and harm the companies affected. In a later post, we’ll be taking a look at a trend known as “Sustainable Divestment”.

6th Major Truth on Climate Change: Global warming, a dramatic reality

27 August 2012

In previous articles we stated that forecasts point to an increase in median temperatures of up to 5ºC more before the end of this century. The increase in climate change brought about by global warming does not, strictly speaking, lend itself to forecasts; the bad thing is that, up until now, all the forecasts have been rendered inaccurate by the sheer speed and intensity of events and their impact—in short, by reality.

James Hansen’s latest paper on Perception of Climate Change, published last month by PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) and mentioned in The Economist, states that the “climate dice” (a term used to describe the chance of unusually warm or cool seasons) has shifted towards unusually warm spells over the past thirty years. Thanks to global warming, another new category has emerged: “extremely high summertime temperatures”. This “extreme heat”, which during the base period (1951-1980) covered much less than 1% of the Earth’s surface, now covers about 10% of the land area. The seasonal temperature deviations have shifted unmistakably towards high temperatures and the range of anomalies has increased.

What does “global warming” really mean? As well as temperature increases, it means alterations in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather  phenomena, with 2011 beating all existing records in the USA: annual losses caused by these phenomena have gone from a few billion US dollars in 1980 to more than 200 billion dollars today, according to the IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events. Other phenomena related to global warming such as the rise in sea levels, changes in the frequency and intensity of heavy precipitation and wind events, the increase of cyclones, the fall in farm productivity, the increasing scarcity of potable water or the loss of biodiversity, are just a few of the global phenomena that will cause significant regional impacts.

Let’s focus further on a particularly sensitive issue: water. One of the immediate impacts expected is the growing scarcity of drinking water: in the Mediterraneanregion and Africa and Southern Africa, increased drought levels and the subsequent drop in surface runoff (by more than 30%), and in large areas of China, India (the Himalayas alone are home to more than 50,000 glaciers that feed into 10 major rivers that are vital to the water supply in Asia—the Amu Darya, the Indus, the Ganges, the Brahmaputra, the Irrawaddy, the Salween, the Mekong, the Yangtze, the Hu nag He and the Tarim—on which 1.3 billion people depend for their water supply, and the Andes, as a result of glacier ice melting in the mountains which provide seasonal water for a number of rivers.

“Water is going to run out longer before oil does” warned Nestlé Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, in the last OECD forum held last May.

Regarding water-related phenomena, drought and flooding and their effects on food are major issues. Two forecasts based on cutting-edge predictive models paint a somber picture unless changes are made urgently:

Researcher Aiguo Dai uses a predictive model that analyzes changes in the worldwide aridity over the period 1923-2010 and concludes that these changes point towards severe and prolonged periods of drought for the next 30-90 years as a result of lower rainfall precipitations and increasing evaporation.

Between 100 and 200 million people a year fell prey to flooding, drought and other water-related disasters; nearly two-thirds of these disasters are caused by flooding. The OECD’s Environmental Outlook 2050 calculates that the number or people at risk of suffering the consequences of flooding will rise from today’s figure of 1.2 billion to approximately 1.6 billion in 2050—that’s nearly 20% of the planet’s population! The economic value of the assets at risk will come to 45 trillion dollars in 2050, a figure 340% higher than in 2010.

Speaking on food prices crisis and volatility, in a recent Financial Times article, the Head of Investments at GMO, Jeremy Grantham, warned that the impact of current climate change effects on drought and flooding are being seriously underestimated.

We are already faced with one of the consequences: the food price volatility. The US corn crisis, brought on by the worst drought seen in the USA since the 1950’s, is directly related to global warming. Moreover, as Stanford’s Noah Diffenbaugh states in a recent study published in Nature Climate Change, it shows that US corn price volatility is far more sensitive to the immediate effects of climate change than to energy policies (such as production quotas for bio-fuels).

The evidence on the dramatic effects of global warming are more and numerous and serious by the day, and their consequences represent a futile waste of human life, and lead to the deterioration of vast eco-systems which, in turn speeds up global warming. We are witnessing the destruction of a part of our historic and cultural essence,  greater volatility of basic food prices (wheat, corn, rice) and the ever-diminishing security of their supply due to protectionist measures in the countries where they are produced (Russia in2010, India in 2011).

Science has made it clear that the causes of global warming are, by and large, human-made, the term: Anthropocene, is already in use to name the era we are now entering. Global overpopulation and the Western world excessive consumption lifestyle are to blame, as its increasing demand for energy is satisfied by producing fossil fuels whose large-scale combustion is highly polluting, as is  the case of coal, oil and, to a lesser extent, gas; main CO2 producers and responsible for heating the planet.

In coming articles we’ll take a close look at the technologies currently available and the most pressing changes needed for managing the global warming challenge

5th Truth about Climate Change: Global Warming is accelerating more than it looks like

25 July 2012

In our last post about the 4th Climate Change truth we defined the anthropocentric causes of Global Warming; in this one we will offer you some facts that will aloud you to understand how climate change is accelerating and why, if nothing is done, temperature could reach an incremental 5ºC by the end of this century and how, this increase in global warming will produce relevant impacts on our planet.

The measurements of increasing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere show that, if we keep our production and consumption as usual, we will trespass the 450ppm CO2 concentration by 2040. Hawaii’s Mauna Loa observatory, one of the world references in CO2 measurement, registered a concentration as high as 396,78ppm in May2012. The highest ever known in 800.000 years.

The global warming observed between 1960 and 2009 shows that average land surface temperature is already between 1ºC and 2ºC above average in big zones of Canada and Russia. But more worrisome is the Artic area, where land surface temperature has being increase between 4ºC and 4.1ºC. Nobody seems surprised by the fact that the Arctic Ocean is now navigable in summer.

Human activity is accelerating its pressure over Earth system , as reflected by the GEO5, UNEP report; we are reaching thresholds that once surpassed could “generate abrupt and may be irreversible changes in the functions that support life in this planet”; the first cause is increase in population, by 2030 we will be more than 8000 millions, a 20% increase.  The second cause is consumption; purchasing power of middle classes will increase by 172% in the next 18 years. The third cause is our inefficient use and irresponsible waste of our Planet resources, human ecological footprint will increase in 33% and we will have lost 55% more of the Amazon forests. This phenomenon will rocket the net generation of electricity by 84%. 65% of the actual energy mix is based in coal and oil; thus, CO2 emissions from energy production will increase in 20% in the next 20 years.

What we will see, if urgent measures are not put in place, will be an acceleration of the already fast changes in Climate that has taken place in the last 30 years. Media is starting to register each day more frequently this symptoms:

Unabated Global Warming to Accelerate Melting of Greenland Ice Sheet:   Scientists from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and the Universidad Complutense de Madrid warned in their report that the vast Greenland ice sheet could have been thinning at an alarming faster rate and reversing that trend may prove difficult.

The World Meteorological Organization’s (WMO) Annual Statement on the Status of the Global Climate confirms 2011 as 11th warmest on record. Climate change accelerated in 2001-2010, according to preliminary assessment. WMO said that 2011 was the 11th warmest since records began in 1850.

U.S. Sees Hottest 12 Months And Hottest Half Year On Record: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Calls It A One In 1.6 Million Event. During the second half of June led to at least 170 all-time high temperature records broken or tied. The result is one of the worst droughts ever seen in the US.

Pace of Global Warming Accelerating Dramatically in US  A new report published by Climate CentralThe Heat is On, shows that the pace of global warming in the US has accelerated dramatically in the past 40 years.

Just a few days ago, the  Financial Times, non-suspicious for environmental alarmism, published a brief article on: Freak weather linked to global warming. The issue is that it is really uncommon to see articles that link extreme weather events to global warming in the media. Let’s hope for a regain of trust in scientific evidence.

Our next post, coming soon: Sixth truth about Climate Change. It will give you a brief overview about the dramatic effects of global warming.

Riominus20 – Chapter 3: The Legacy

9 July 2012

Two days after the Río+20 summit came to a close, on 24 June, news of the event barely took up four paragraphs in the Santiago de Chile daily “El Mercurio” and failed to make the pages of the International Herald Tribune. Ten days later, media interest in Rio+20 has all but disappeared, apart from an incident involving some crafty Rio de Janeiro villains who made off with money and documents belonging to Niger’s Education delegate. She was prevented from boarding her flight home and she’s still at a loose end in Rio enjoying the hospitality of a local translator. For its part, Rio’s foremost daily and Brazil’s number two in circulation terms, “O Globo”, held on 3 July a seminar on “Rio+20: The Legacy”, with Brazil’s Environment Minister, Ms. Isabella Teixeira, as guest speaker.

But what kind of legacy has Rio+20 left behind? The following five issues might point us in the right direction:
The first part of this Legacy that we need to look at is our own perception of the phenomenon: Rio+20 has come to represent the consecration of a certain type of narrative on sustainability:

Media are neither innocuous nor neutral where climate change is concerned and, possibly influenced by the parallel forum, the so-called “People’s Summit”, held on the other side of Rio and which called into question the role of business as a provider of sustainable development solutions, the media mirrored discontent and ire in statements such as “Rio summit closes among criticism for the weak accord without clear and measurable targets”; “failure for want of ambition”; leaders “did not take on the responsibility to impose actions, targets and schedules”; the result is “an abstract document far-removed from reality”, and so on.

The role of the media is not being taken into account in the perception and the speed required for change. In response to O Globo, Rajendra Pachauri pointed out that “a change in perception, priorities and direction is called for”. This process of change requires a huge communication effort in which media cannot be content to stand in the wings. Basically, some media appear to be more concerned with dishing up controversy than presenting the cold facts, and this favors the climate change negationist fraternity, as pointed out in the recently published “The Inquisition of Climate Science” which deals with the role of the media in the face of climate change.
Legacy number two comes in the shape of the progress made thus far. We can safely say that Rio+20 was definitely not a place for people who like jumping to conclusions, but, nonetheless, conclusions there were, namely:

In the first place, Rio+20 gives us an overall document which, in the words of the WBCSD’s new Chairman, Peter Bakker “confirms that the world still has a platform for seeking out shared solutions”. He goes on to say that “had it not been so, it would have been extremely hard to convey a message underscoring the urgent need for sustainability and the changes required”. We’re making progress but, to paraphrase Bakker, “surmounting a global emergency by means of a multilateral process, which involves getting 193 countries to agree on a text, is something from which we cannot expect miracles”. As UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon said only a few days ago “this agreement is a triumph of multilateralism”.

Thirdly, Rio+20 acknowledges and calls on companies to play a relevant role in achieving Sustainable Development, and highlights three aspects of the contribution that can be made by the business community: innovation, collaboration agreements and advising governments with recommendations on policy decisions, as explained in the Global Compact document “Overview & Outcomes” on the conclusions of the Corporate Sustainability Forum, an event held just days after the official Rio summit. This second legacy, however, turns out to be a double-edged sword: although it recognizes the private sector’s capacities and resources for innovation, collaboration and policy recommendations and puts the onus of responsibility for them on companies, there is no sign of companies’ official capability to influence those policies and regulatory frameworks, without which any recommendation is just a waste of breath.

In the fourth place, the clear overlap of the Rio summit’s three relevant final documents: The Future we Want, the official document signed by heads of state; Overview & Outcomes, the document that emerged from the Global Compact Corporate Sustainability Forum and, undoubtedly representative despite coming out prior to the summit, the WBCSD’s Changing Pace. All three of them, using more or less decorative prose, call for and acknowledge the need for urgent action on climate change and the private sector’s relevant role, and stress the importance of listening to all the parties involved in arriving at policies aimed at implementing measures. This overlap takes the focus off private sector participation and directs it at Sustainable Development. It would be a good thing if these organizations were to work together and coordinate their efforts (they are, after all, the first ones to call for such efforts) and thus gain in efficiency.

Fifth, Rio+20 leaves us with the feeling that the call for collaboration between governments, companies and civil society and the trend among the more forward-thinking companies* to adopt initiatives and not expect too much in the way of major accords, is swelling its ranks and more quickly than appearances would have us believe, with more and more companies and organizations getting directly involved in sustainable development. In recent years, the number of companies with Sustainability strategies in place has grown four-fold. And so we come away from Rio+20 with the feeling that we could be on the verge of a sea-change and that there is hope for a real shift.

*In this case “progressive companies” are those which have committed to and defend a certain way of doing business and are convinced of the need to take into account social and environmental factors when it comes to exercising their responsibility, and which actively and publicly participate in favor of policy changes aimed at fighting climate change, ensuring a carbon-free economy and striving for a planet fit for future generations.

Related articles:

Riominus20 – Chapter2

9 July 2012

This chapter concludes this brief look at the salient points of “The Future we Want”, the outcome document adopted at Rio+20:

47. Companies: the original document encouraged mandatory corporate reporting on Sustainability; the outcome document, however, merely acknowledges its importance.

84-85. Creation of a high-level forum: This is a step forward; at the Brazil summit the Sustainable Development Committee was not at the ministerial level. From now on, environment talks will be held at the political level rather than a technical one.

88. On the role of the UNEP: The UNEP will not become an independent agency, as initially requested, but some diplomats say that in the future it will go from the current 52 members to membership of all of the UN member-states, and that, although it is currently financed through donations, it will have its own budget set by the UN.

104: To ensure current commitments stemming from prior Sustainable Development summits, the original document called on countries to reduce the existing gaps regarding implementation; in the end, no specific actions on current sector-targets were decided.

139. Health: Call for steps to ensure universal health coverage. This coverage is referred to in the outcome document but the latter talks of its “importance” and makes no mention to health coverage as a “right”.

158. Oceans: Originally called for protection for the diversity of the high seas and international waters, as well as restrictions on fishing subsidies. The final draft mentions restrictions on subsidies. However, the intended reference to protection of biodiversity was removed at the last minute following pressures from Venezuela, USA, Canada, Japan and Russia.

193. Forests: The document originally referred to the conservation of forests and the fight on deforestation as one of the ways of achieving sustainable development. It was understood that through this recommendation, governments and international organizations would draw up concrete steps for reforestation. The final document recognizes that is important to deal with the issue but fails to list the appropriate forums.

238. Women: The document originally mentioned “women’s reproductive rights”. The final draft of the outcome document omitted the mention that in some countries the reference was to the right of abortion. The chairperson of the Global Fund for Women, Musimbi Kanyoro, spoke out against pressures from The Vatican to omit the expression “women’s reproductive rights”, which was finally left out. We cannot forget that the world population is on the rise and that, consequently, there is an increasingly greater demand for resources. These are two of the main factors behind Climate Change.

And finally, points 130 and 225. Energy: Although we’ve covered this issue previously, it’s worth stressing that perhaps as a result of pressures from OPEC member states, one of the critical issues, namely the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, warrants no more than a paragraph and is banished to the Consumer section (22) when, by rights and according to logic, it should be included in the Energy section (130).
In the original document, in section 130 it was stated that “we recognize the need for further action to rationalize and phase out subsidies”. In the final document, however, it was replaced by “countries reaffirm the commitments they have made to phase out”. In other words, we go from recognizing the need to take steps, to countries reaffirming the commitments that they have undertaken.

Related articles:

Is it possible to double the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix? Rio+20-June16

Is it possible to double the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix? Rio+20-June16

16 June 2012

Sustainable Energy for All

We  participated today in the session: Double share of Renewable Energy in the Global Energy Mix to achieve Sustainable Energy for all.

Sustainable Energy  for All” is the  Secretary General Ban Ki Moon initiative, whose goals are: ensuring universal access to modern energy  services by 2030; doubling  the  global rate of improvement in energy efficiency by 2030; and doubling the share of  renewable energy  in the global energy mix by 2030.

How to double  this share is our  topic today.

It is  a privilege to be in the Global Compact Corporate Sustainability Forum, and to have the opportunity to share our vision on how to double the renewable energy percentage in the global energy mix.

I consider five key  issues to make this possible:

First: renewable energy is a capital intensive business, disbursement of investment capital is make effective all in year 0. On the cost side, along with the operating costs you are paying financial costs for twenty years. The revenues came from three factors, PPA’s (power purchase agreement) FITs (Feed in Tariff) and the Load Factor (ratio between operating hours of your facility and the 8760 yearly hours). To  function properly, this model needs stability.

The first condition to double the renewable energy percentage in the global energy mix is a minimum regulatory framework. To maintain a positive evolution and investment stimulus it is necessary a degree of stability, predictability and long-term orientation on policy that is nonexistent today.

Second: A necessary step to advance is to gradually remove subsidies to fossil fuels so as to achieve a real competitive market reflecting the real prices of all technologies.

In the  document The future we want”, which is being  discussed now in  Rio, and is meant to be the official document to  be signed by  chiefs of state in the  next days;  in the  Section V: Framework for  action, in the  ENERGY section, #6 in a shy manner but clearly, is stated that fossil fuels subsidies inhibit  sustainable development.

Third: The implementation success of the different measures have to take place during the present decade, otherwise, the negative effects would be very difficult to reverse. One of them is to lock-in the  GHG emissions trajectory. The last  measures of the Mauna Loa  observatory (April 2012) registered more  than  393ppm’s of  CO2 in the  atmosphere. We are in close danger  to  surpass the  450ppm’s goal for 2050.

Fourth: there are still 1,5 billion people in the world without access to electricity and it is Goverments and Leader Business Companies who have the responsibility of reducing this number down to the minimum. Distributed energy systems out of renewable energy are part of the solution to provide electricity to this rural areas, isolated from the grid.

Fifth: we need a stable and supporting regulatory framework that combines utilities and distributed energy in urban areas. Smart grids and fully  integrating renewable energy are the right path to take. Of course, this will require a considerable investment which, in the long term will imply cost savings, improving energy  efficiency and security  of supply and last but not least, reducing costs and GHG emissions.

World Environment Day

5 June 2012

Today, June 5th, we mark World Environment Day, established by the United Nations General Assembly. This year, the theme is “Green Economy: Does it include you?” ACCIONA wants to join in the celebrations by making its environment commitment known to one and all.

We invite you to visit this page where you will find what we do at ACCIONA.

Third major truth on Climate Change: Global warming levels are significant

17 April 2012

The body of scientific evidence documenting the rise of global temperatures is, by now, incontrovertible, as are data showing that the rise is being caused by the concentration of man-made greenhouse gases. If this trend is allowed to continue, we must be prepared for radical changes in our physical world.

The data gathered show that the planet’s average temperature has gone up 0.74ºC over the past one hundred years, while modeling predicts that it is set to rise between 2ºC – 5ºC before the end of the century. For a layman, it is hard to fully grasp the importance of these increases, bearing in mind that the variations in temperature on a daily or seasonal basis, to which we are accustomed, are much higher. We need to change our perspective and remember that we are dealing with average global temperatures. These numbers acquire their full importance when you consider that 5ºC is the difference that exists between the current average global temperature and the one in the last Ice Age. A mere 5ºC difference between us the last Ice Age! What are we going to call this planet that we are overheating with our activity? “The Scorched Age” or the Anthropocene?

In a few years’ time we won’t need to classify our era based on climate change because its effects will be clear to see. The most reliable set of data until now, the IPCC Report, has already made a link between man-made greenhouse gas emissions and the increasing frequency of extreme rainfall, and the increasing rise in the minimum and maximum daily temperatures. Similarly, the UNEP’s report “Keeping Track” (linked to the Global Environmental Outlook-5 (GEO-5), highlights the rapid changes that have taken place over the past twenty years owing to the accumulation of the effects of human activity on the climate system.

DARA’s Climate Vulnerability Monitor indicates an estimated 350,000 deaths annually directly related to climate change; over the next ten years that figure will rise to five million and, according to its calculations, from 2030 onwards we can expect one million deaths a year caused by climate change. Today 80% of all climate-related deaths affect children living in Southern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

 

See “The ten truths of climate change”


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.