text:
As part of our ongoing water conservation efforts, we're sharing a new Product Lifecycle Assessment (LCA), which is an update to our groundbreaking 2007 study on the environmental impact of our products. Our new study analyzed the complete product lifecycle of a pair of jeans. It probed deeper into the environmental impacts of cotton in key growing regions, apparel production and distribution in a range of locations, and consumer washing and drying habits in key markets.
The LCA found that fiber production (predominantly cotton) continues to consume the most water over the lifecycle of a jean. To reduce the impact of cotton consumption, we're working with the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) to train farmers to grow cotton using less water. We plan to continue working with our global suppliers in the area, with the goal of sourcing approximately 75 percent of our cotton as Better Cotton by 2020, up from six percent today.
Beyond cotton, the LCA findings serve as a foundation for our company's ongoing sustainability efforts. Our 2007 study led to the launch of our Care Tag for the Planet initiative. Likewise, innovating around the constraint of reducing water in the manufacturing process led to the creation of our Water<Less process and the apparel industry's first water reuse and recycling standard.
But we can't do this alone. Our latest LCA findings underscore the need for people to start rethinking the daily tasks they do out of habit, like washing jeans after every wear. Of the nearly 3,800 liters of water used in the lifecycle of a pair of jeans, consumer care has the second-highest impact on consumption, after cotton. We found that by wearing jeans 10 times before washing, American consumers can reduce the water and climate change impact of washing their jeans by 77 percent, UK and French consumers by 75 percent and Chinese consumers by 61 percent.
In order to help consumers better understand their environmental impact, LS&Co. created the "Are You Ready to Come Clean" quiz. By sharing some basic information about your washing and drying habits, you can find out how much water and energy you use compared to average consumers in the U.S., U.K., France and China. After taking the quiz, we hope you'll click our #WashLessPledge and commit to washing your jeans less often (or not at all!) between World Water Day and Earth Day.
Why is reducing water use so important to LS&Co.? Water is essential to our business: every step of the process to create a garment requires water — from the cotton fields to manufacturing facilities. And in an era of increasing water scarcity, we recognize that water is essential for communities, agriculture, and a multitude of other industries.
And that's why we're really proud today to also announce that we've saved one billion liters of water since 2011 through our Water<Less process, which reduces the water used in garment finishing by up to 96 percent.
Nope, that's not a typo. One BILLION liters of water!
To put that into perspective, that's equivalent to:
When it comes to conserving water, no action is too small. So go ahead, squeeze a few more wears out of your favorite blues. Together we can do our planet and future generations a favor by working to protect this limited resource.
Michael Kobori is Vice President, Sustainability, at Levi Strauss & Co. This column originally appeared on Unzipped.]]>
As California's devastating drought enters its fourth year, and farmers face a second consecutive year with reduced surface water supplies, a diverse coalition of global businesses with significant supply chains or operations in California today announced Connect the Drops, a new campaign urging aggressive measures to maximize California's local and state water resources.
Launched by Ceres, a nonprofit sustainability advocacy organization, the campaign centers on a public declaration, signed by The Coca-Cola Company, Driscoll's, Gap Inc., General Mills, KB Home, Levi Strauss and Co. and Symantec. More companies are expected to join the effort in the coming weeks and months. The declaration states:
"We cannot risk our state's economic future by relying on outdated water management practices, policies and infrastructure. Now is the time for fresh thinking, shared purpose and bold solutions to build a resilient water future for all Californians. And it is incumbent on us—the business community—to help lead the way."
"Driscoll's roots in California stretch back nearly 150 years in the Pajaro Valley where Driscoll's originated," said Kelley Bell, VP of Social and Environmental Impact, Driscoll's, the world's largest berry company. "As a family-owned company that is highly dependent on groundwater, we recognize that our future hinges on reliable water sources. Without good water stewardship our communities will suffer and the future economy of California will be bleak. We joined Ceres campaign because we are not alone in facing this challenge or in recognizing the threat, and the solution will only come from a shared understanding of the problem and a willingness to address it together."
Currently 93 percent of California is categorized as being in a severe, extreme or exceptional drought. The state's agriculture economy lost more than $2.2 billion in 2014, and farmers left more than half a million acres of fields unplanted.
"Water is an issue we can no longer take for granted – whether we are looking at supply reliability, environmental protection, or water quality. Fortunately, there are solutions within reach for the challenges we face. The business community's voice in elevating the issues – through efforts like Connect the Drops – is hugely important for the future of our state's economy and well-being," said Felicia Marcus, Chair, State Water Resources Control Board.
Companies signing on to the campaign agree to 1) make and implement business commitments to support the state's action plan for water conservation, and 2) engage with policymakers, employees, customers and their peers on improving water management and enhancing water efficiency.
Driscoll's, for example, has implemented a suite of measures in the Pajaro Valley, from requiring their growers there to report groundwater use, to co-founding a public-private partnership called the Community Water Dialogue. The Pajaro Valley Community Water Dialogue has several work streams including the development of groundwater recharge zones and supporting the use of technologies for irrigation management.
Coca-Cola North America, which operates 53 facilities in California, has implemented water efficiency improvements saving nearly 280 million gallons of water.
"Coca-Cola recognizes that clean, accessible water is essential to the health of communities and ecosystems – and is indispensable for economic prosperity," said Jon Radtke, manager of sustainability for Coca-Cola North America. "In California and around the world, we work with our facilities, local water agencies and community partners to evaluate water resources and maximize water conservation efforts. Initiatives like Connect the Drops are important as our water resources become more stressed. By working together with other businesses, government and civil society, we hope to make a much greater impact than any one organization or sector could hope to achieve alone."
Similarly, KB Home, one of the nation's largest homebuilders, developed the Double ZeroHouse that is so highly water efficient it uses less than half the water of an average home.
"KB Home has prioritized water conservation in our development projects," said Larry Gotlieb of KB Home. "The Connect the Drops campaign will help the California business community highlight to elected officials that efforts spent on water stewardship now will ensure the strength of California's economy for decades to come."
General Mills operates several production facilities in California and sources a large number of ingredients from thousands of tomato, almond, berry, dairy and other farmers across the state.
"General Mills takes its responsibility to be good stewards of the planet's resources very seriously and, in California, that means reducing our water usage at our production facilities and working with our growers and suppliers to ensure agriculture continues to thrive in a sustainable manner, said Ellen Silva, senior manager of Global Sustainability, General Mills. "We firmly believe that in order for Californian citizens, businesses, farmers and the ecosystem to thrive, we must all work together to manage the water supply sustainably."
"Connect the Drops will bring the much needed business voice to the table on water policy in Sacramento," said Kirsten James, a Senior Manager at Ceres who is directing the Connect the Drops campaign. "It is critical for a diverse group of stakeholders to demand aggressive action from our state leaders in order to secure California's water future."
Headquartered in Boston, Ceres recently opened a new office in San Francisco to expand its work in California. "With the opening of our office in California, Ceres is poised to mobilize our networks of companies and investors in support of statewide sustainable climate, energy and water policies," said Ana Zacapa, Director, Ceres California.
For more information, please visit www.ceres.org/connect-the-drops
About Ceres
Ceres is a nonprofit organization mobilizing business and investor leadership on climate change, water scarcity and other sustainability challenges. Ceres directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), a network of over 100 institutional investors with collective assets totaling more than $13 trillion. Ceres also directs Business for Innovative Climate & Energy Policy (BICEP), an advocacy coalition of more than 30 businesses committed to working with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation. For more information, visit www.ceres.org or follow on Twitter @CeresNews.
In 2007, the technology giant EMC Corp. turned to a Boston nonprofit to help it become more environmentally sensitive — but worried that relations could become tense.
The nonprofit, Ceres, insisted that the Hopkinton company open its boardroom to financial, environmental, and social issue specialists, including critics ready to tell executives things they might not want to hear. But the relationship proved productive, and EMC, by one measure, reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent from 2005 and energy consumption per employee by more than 35 percent.
"The intent is not to get yelled at," said Kathrin R. Winkler, EMC chief sustainability officer. "The intent is to collaborate to find ways to move the needle."
Ceres, celebrating its 25th anniversary, has become one of the world's most influential environmental advocates by harnessing capitalism to convince companies that sustainability is central to their competitiveness and bottom lines. Ceres pushes its way into corporate boardrooms by enlisting a network of some of the nation's biggest institutional investors — including the $300 billion California Public Employees Retirement System — and once there demonstrates how combating climate change, cutting energy use, and preventing damage to the environment is in firms' economic interests.
Ceres has spurred multinational corporations such as PepsiCo Inc., Nike Inc., and Ford Motor Co. to change the way they act on climate change, including Ford's support of higher fuel-efficiency standards. In addition, the nonprofit has persuaded more than 1,000 companies, including General Motors and Apple, to sign the nonprofit's "Climate Declaration" urging Congress to adopt new laws to combat global warming.
"What will change the debate on climate in the US Congress," Ceres chief executive Mindy S. Lubber said, "will be when leaders of the largest economic firms and financial firms go up and say, 'We need to act because this is hurting us financially.' "
From its offices on Chauncey Street, Ceres also has become a significant player in the international climate debate, demonstrating that producing less waste and using renewables helps a company's bottom line. Lubber has spoken at the United Nations, last year addressing 500 global financial players at the Investor Summit on Climate Risk, and the World Economic Forum, a gathering of policymakers, intellectuals, political leaders, and corporate executives, in Davos, Switzerland.
Ceres was founded in 1989, just months after the Exxon Valdez oil spill that dumped more than 250,000 barrels along a pristine section of Alaska's coastline and ultimately cost Exxon, now ExxonMobil, more than $4.3 billion in penalties, lawsuits, and cleanup costs. The disaster inspired the idea that still drives Ceres: Corporations are harmed financially when they don't pay attention to the environment — and that matters to investors.
Ceres today works closely with 65 companies, stressing that if businesses manage their waste, energy, and supply chain well, it shows they can manage the entire enterprise, attracting investors, customers, and employees.
"They were one of the first to articulate the economic as opposed to the ethical argument in terms of investing," said Geoffrey M. Heal, a professor at Columbia Business School who teaches the business of sustainability. Heal called Ceres a "forceful player" and said, "They've set out the arguments clearly."
Ceres's clout with corporations comes from its network of 110 institutional investors, which see the connection between sustainability and profitability, including public pension funds in New York and California. All told, these investors control $13 trillion.
"We're thinking decades, generations out," said Anne Stausboll, chief executive of the California Public Employees Retirement System and cochair of the Ceres board. "We have a lot of focus on long-term sustainability."
This support makes it much easier for Ceres to open the doors to corporations, where the nonprofit aims to make decision-makers aware of their companies' environmental and social effects. The backing gives Ceres the clout to insist on buy-in at the chief executive level, access to company data, and rigorous examination of operations by investors, environmental specialists, and social activists chosen by the nonprofit.
The companies then pay Ceres for this work.
Bloomberg L.P., the financial data and news organization, enlisted Ceres in 2008. Ceres has helped Bloomberg determine how to reduce its carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2020 from what it was in 2007, a period during which the company will double in size. Among the steps: using energy-efficient LED lighting and encouraging recycling and composting at its facilities.
Curtis Ravenel, global head of sustainability at Bloomberg, said Ceres was able to challenge the company's practices and drive change, without being adversarial.
"What I like about Ceres is that they are aggressive, but not too aggressive," Ravenel said. "You want them to be pushing you. That's why I hired them, to keep us honest."
Heal, the Columbia professor, said it's difficult to measure the effect that Ceres has had. Investors and companies are much more aware of climate change, partly because of the media attention, partly because of Ceres, and partly because of other players, he said. "They're pushing on a door that's slowly opening anyway," he said.
Lubber, however, maintains that Ceres is responsible for significant changes in attitudes about climate change in capital markets. The organization, for example, was a partner in a 2011 Citigroup report that made an economic case for increasing fuel efficiency standards in the auto industry.
Following the report, the average fuel economy standard was raised to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, with the support of GM and Ford, both of which work with Ceres.
Ceres officials also want corporations to include environmental data, such as greenhouse gas emissions and reductions in toxic materials into regular earnings reports so investors can weigh their progress on these issues.
Already, some 6,000 companies voluntarily disclose greenhouse gas and energy efficiency data through a program created by Ceres and later spun off as an independent organization known as the Global Reporting Initiative.
As companies and investors learn the economic benefits of sustainable practices, Ceres hopes that they'll work to convince lawmakers that acting on climate change is not only good policy, but also good for their businesses. After all, Lubber said, money talks.
"That's part of our theory of change," she said, "that investors care about these issues and care mightily."
Budget (FY 2015): $10.7 million
Employees: 70
Major initiatives:
Investor Network on Climate Risk includes 110 institutional investors with combined assets of $13 trillion. The investors press businesses and policy makers to act on climate change.
Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy, or BICEP, includes more than 30 consumer companies that advocate for energy and climate legislation.
Clean Trillion Ceres has a goal of seeing annual global investments in clean energy increase from $281 billion in 2012 to $500 billion in 2020 and $1 trillion by 2030.]]>
So, at least, says Mindy Lubber, the president of Ceres, a nonprofit that brings together companies, investors and public-interest groups to advocate for sustainability.
"Companies have the strength and power – the footprint to make a huge difference," Lubber told me at a lunch earlier this month. Ceres celebrates its 25th anniversary Tuesday.
It's hard to overstate the importance of the proposed power plant rules, which are the cornerstone of President Barack Obama's climate agenda. Power plants account for nearly 40% of all US greenhouse gas emissions.
The EPA is asking each state to develop a plan to meet federally mandated carbon limits. But 29 of 50 states are now led by Republican governors, most of whom are likely to oppose the new rules. If the EPA effort falls flat, there's no way the US can lead the way to a global climate agreement.
Ceres and Lubber have set out to persuade corporations to support the EPA and the president, and overcome their habitual, instinctive resistance to government regulation. "It is going to be long and tedious and complicated," Lubber admits. "And really hard."
Boston-based Ceres, one of a handful of US green groups to focus on business, has never shied away from complex, unglamorous environmental work.
Formed in 1989 in the wake of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, Ceres has helped make sustainability reporting a common practice, developed best practices for corporate sustainability, promoted corporate buying of renewable power and spotlighted climate risk in the insurance industry, all in an effort to find common ground among capitalists and environmentalists.
"Our mission is to integrate sustainability into capital markets," Lubber says. "And we've never deviated from that."
By some measures, Ceres has had considerable impact. Corporate responsibility reports – an idea birthed by Ceres in the late 1990s – are now widespread.
Increasingly, big mainstream companies – Lubber cites General Electric, PepsiCo, Disney and the Detroit automakers, along with the usual suspects like Unilever and Ikea – regard sustainability and climate change as core business issues that require the attention of top executives and corporate boards.
"The conversation has changed," Lubber says. "It's remarkable."
Ceres' work with institutional investors has made a difference, too. Some investors, particularly those who take the long view, have come to see climate change and water scarcity as financial risks that need to be disclosed and addressed by corporates.
"I can tell you with certainty that the [US Securities and Exchange Commission] would not have mandated the disclosure of climate risk if it had not been for the investors coming to them, petitioning, lobbying," Lubber says, even if compliance with the SEC guidance has been spotty.
Yet Lubber makes clear that neither companies nor investors are moving far enough or fast enough. "We've got to ramp up, materially, investments in clean energy and decrease carbon emissions," she says.
Even among the biggest companies, many of whom have pledged to curb their environmental footprint, carbon emissions are rising at an unsustainable rate. Scientists say emissions need to decline sharply to avoid catastrophic climate impacts.
But instead of shrinking, self-reported greenhouse gas emissions from the world's 500 largest businesses – companies that are often noisy about their sustainability commitments – actually grew by 3.1% between 2010 and 2013, according to a worrisome Thomson Reuters report released last month.
That's why it's important for companies to support the EPA's power plant rules, Lubber says. Mandating that existing power plants cut US carbon-dioxide emissions by 30% by 2030 from 2005 levels would bend the emissions curve downwards.
Last month, Ceres released a statement supporting the rules that was signed by more than 200 companies, many small or midsized. Big firms to sign on included Ikea, Kellogg, Levi Strauss, Mars, Nestle, Nike, Novelis, VF and Unilever.
By contrast, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the America Petroleum Institute, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Mining Association and the US Chamber of Commerce, which represents many thousands of businesses, have formed a coalition called the Partnership for a Better Energy Future to oppose the EPA rules.
The group says the EPA's rules will raise electricity costs, increase blackouts, destroy jobs and damage America's competitive position in global markets.
It's this kind of position – pitting the environment against the economy – that Ceres and Lubber hope to head off by persuading more companies to speak out about the need for climate action. She holds out hope that business voices can help turn political conservatives' opinions around.
After all, she says, liberals and conservatives alike "would throw themselves in front of a bus to save their grandkid. And we've got this bus coming at us".]]>
Don't leave 2014 without realizing there have been notable — often underreported — big capital market breakthroughs on climate change, water protection and other sustainability fronts. Stock exchanges requiring company disclosure on sustainability risks or bonds backed by electricity payments from solar rooftop panels may not at first glance seem compelling, but these are the mechanisms that move markets and help build a more sustainable future.
Before we head into 2015, it's worth taking a moment to shine a light on key areas of progress.
1) Electric utility business models are changing before our eyes by eschewing new centralized power plants in favor of energy efficiency and decentralized distributed energy, which are less expensive for consumers and more resilient to extreme weather. Case in point: Consolidated Edison's ambitious $100–$150 million investment in energy efficiency and distributed energy — rooftop solar, battery technologies and smartphone-assisted energy conservation — to avoid building a new $1.1 billion substation.
2) Energy storage is a critical cog in large-scale deployment of renewable energy. That's why it's a big deal that Southern California Edison announced contracts last month for more than 260 megawatts of energy storage, five times more than what the state's utilities commission required. Among the companies selected: Ice Energy, which installs rooftop devices called Ice Bears that freeze water in 450-gallon pots. The devices run at night when temperatures are lower so making ice is easier; during peak hours, the ice is used for space cooling.
3) After many months of warnings, the financial industry is waking up to the oil industry's potentially wasteful spending on development of new fossil fuel reserves when global oil demand is weakening and carbon-reducing trends are taking stronger hold. In a stunning recent analysis, Goldman Sachs found nearly $1 trillion of oil projects at risk due to shrinking demand and plummeting oil prices. Among the potential "zombie projects": expensive Arctic oil, deepwater drilling and Canada's oil sands.
4) Nearly a dozen stock exchanges, including Singapore and Taiwan, are requiring disclosure from listed companies about what they are considering and doing to manage sustainability risks such as climate change and water scarcity. This is a big deal because it's a basic management dictum that if you're not disclosing a particular risk, you'll never be able to manage it. Nearly 7,000 companies already produce annual sustainability reports through GRI, but this can help capture the 70,000 plus companies that don't yet. NASDAQ, a key partner in a Ceres-led effort to unify investors and global exchanges on this issue, is considering a similar move.
5) San Francisco's water utility is giving new meaning to "love that dirty water" by allowing building owners and developers to produce and exchange onsite water with each other — a radical departure from traditional monopolistic water utility models. It's paying up to $500,000 to developers who can produce water onsite — including gray water, rainwater or stormwater — for use by other entities in the city. The utility's own headquarters is living proof of the benefits of onsite water systems: It uses 60 percent less water than comparable-size buildings with an additional construction cost of less than 1 percent.
6) U.S. farmers are among the most productive in the world, but that productivity comes at a huge cost: Their practices are not sustainable, especially in regard to pollution and water use. That's why it's encouraging to see Field to Market, a public/private partnership that includes Unilever, General Mills and Procter & Gamble, announce an ambitious effort to accelerate sustainable growing practices on 20 percent of the nation's farmland — 50 million acres — by 2020. The colossal corn sector — the U.S.'s biggest commodity crop by far — will be a top priority.
7) Standard & Poor's and Moody's are making big changes in how they scrutinize water systems that borrow money — via bonds — for major water infrastructure projects. If the changes are finalized next year, these critical credit-rating agencies will include climate risks in evaluating water utility bonds. The changes — which Ceres has been advocating since publishing a report on water bond risks several years ago — send an important signal that water systems may get higher credit ratings if they invest in systems more resilient to drought and flooding, and lower ratings if they are especially vulnerable to extreme weather. A higher credit rating can mean lower interest rates, which translates to more affordable consumer water bills.
8) Producing energy at a cost equal to conventional fossil fuel sources is the Holy Grail for wind and solar energy producers, and that day is arriving. Austin Energy signed a deal last spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at about 5 cents per kilowatt-hour, which is 1 to 2 pennies less than utility-scale coal or natural gas power. Meanwhile, American Electric Power has signed long-term commitments for 2,500 MW of wind power, most of it in Texas and other parts of "wind alley" in the Midwest.
9) Bonds are lifeblood for any company that wants to raise capital so it can grow. Solar company execs have talked for years about selling bonds backed by solar electricity contracts, but it's been hard to pull off. That all changed when solar installer SolarCity got the go-ahead from Standard & Poor's to issue first-ever bonds backed by electricity payments from its solar rooftop panels. The company has since issued more than $300 million of bonds, including $201.5 million sold in July with interest rates ranging from 4 to 5.45 percent.
These capital market breakthroughs are in line with what Ceres has been working on since launching 25 years ago and will help catalyze sustainability across entire industries and the broader economy.
Looking ahead to 2015, I have some wishes: a U.S. stock exchange adopting a sustainability listing standard; the green bond market eclipsing $100 billion a year; and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalizing its carbon-reducing rule for existing U.S. power plants.]]>
This is a giant step forward in unifying the world behind this colossal threat and accelerating our efforts towards the Clean Trillion- boosting global clean energy investments by $1 trillion per year by 2030."]]>
By this measure, we already have the power to tackle climate change -- which is the biggest social, environmental and economic issue facing us today. In September 400,000 people marched in New York and around the world, calling for climate action. Their demands were echoed by major corporations and by global investors alike as they called on governments to reach an ambitious climate deal, including meaningful carbon pricing.
So what's standing in our way? It's quite obvious: the fossil fuel industry. It is the last remaining holdout as the world continues on its inevitable transition to low-carbon. Fossil fuel companies -- much like your stubborn, elderly relative that refuses to change his eating habits despite the doctor's warnings of a heart attack -- have a choice to make. They can either begin to pivot out of high-cost, high-polluting projects to the clean energy sources that will fuel our future, or they can wait until it's too late.
We've seen it before. Eastman Kodak, a venerable photography company for much of the 20th century, was rendered obsolete by digital. The same for movie rental stores like Blockbuster.
The warning signs for the fossil fuel industry couldn't be clearer. Its financial standing is substantially weaker than it was a decade ago, when high oil prices guaranteed high profits. Companies are seeing weaker profits as oil prices fall below $80 a barrel. Take Shell, whose profits are lower today than they were in 2009, despite a $40 jump in the price per barrel of oil.
The fact is that global temperature increases of any more than two degrees Celsius will put our global economy in jeopardy, and we're currently on a path to significantly exceed this threshold. In order to protect our way of life, the world must invest an additional trillion dollars per year into clean energy. Yet, the fossil fuel industry is still spending more than half a trillion dollars a year to develop reserves that will likely need to remain in the ground.
Ceres is working to change "business as usual" for the fossil fuel industry by mobilizing the very investors that own these companies. Working closely with the Carbon Tracker Initiative (CTI), Ceres has organized 75 institutional investors to voice their concern that fossil fuel companies are underestimating the financial risks they face as the global economy transitions to a lower-carbon future. We're especially focused on curbing massive, long-term investments in expensive, risky projects, such as ultra-deepwater oil drilling and Canadian oil sands.
As part of the Carbon Asset Risk Initiative, coordinated by Ceres and CTI, these investors managing $3.5 trillion are engaging with 45 of the world's top fossil fuel companies. The good news is that their concerns are being heard and are beginning to influence fossil fuel companies' strategies. Some companies are now using "shadow" carbon prices to screen projects, and some of the highest-cost, most carbon-intensive projects, including several in the Canadian oil sands region, have even been cancelled in just the past few months.
Yet, despite these small but important wins, the industry for the most part is forging ahead with their outdated thinking. Exxon and Shell publicly responded to investors' concerns by predicting that declining oil demand from a low-carbon economy is unlikely until at least 2030. We know that this argument is flawed, and we must keep the pressure on fossil fuel companies to use valuable shareholder capital more wisely.
Fossil fuel companies need to evolve. This transition will look different for each company, and will not happen overnight -- yet it is clear that business models will need to be revised to reflect a future that is less dependent on carbon-intensive energy.
Between October 27 and December 5, Ceres is participating in the Skoll Social Entrepreneurs Challenge on CrowdRise.]]>
But our point is this — "actionable" is not the same thing as "action." To realize the value of this report and to ensure a safe and livable future for us all, decision makers must respond — by reducing global warming pollution and lessening the impacts we already see.
The Working Group 1 Report and National Climate Assessment tell us in no uncertain terms that climate change is happening, and that it is primarily due to human activities. Land and sea temperatures are rising. Glaciers and ice sheets are melting. Oceans are acidifying. Working Group II tells us about the impacts to the environment and the economy as warming increases, including crop failures, more frequent extreme weather events, and conflict over water and other scarce resources. We already see all of this in every region of the United States and around the world. Working Group III lays out our options for reducing our greenhouse gas pollution and shifting our economy to run on low-carbon energy, increasing efficiency and investing in reforestation.
Prepared by thousands of scientists, these climate change panel reports are the most comprehensive and authoritative climate science assessments ever undertaken for the globe; the National Climate Assessment was similarly comprehensive for the 50 states. In combining them, the Synthesis Report and the National Climate Assessment conclusively show us that we know enough, right now, to be sure that action today is cheaper, safer and more effective than action tomorrow.
So what does this mean for policymakers? It means that politicians and business leaders have no further legitimate excuses for continued inaction.
Thankfully, it seems like many have realized this. At the People's Climate March in September, hundreds of thousands of people from all over the world made it clear that they want action on climate. Just days after the rally, the U.N. Climate Summit showed us that countries and businesses are ready to move forward. It was especially inspiring to hear hundreds of companies and investors making solid commitments, whether on 100 percent renewable energy sourcing, sustainable palm oil production or an international price on carbon.
Led in part by Ceres, a group of 350 institutional investors, representing more than $24 trillion in assets, called on governments to put a price on carbon pollution (a term validated by the Supreme Court), phase out fossil fuel subsidies and enact an international climate treaty by 2015.
So business leaders are ready, but they're looking to politicians to implement policies that provide the regulatory certainty they need. The sooner businesses know what policies governments will enact to reduce carbon emissions, the better they can tailor their plans and continue to spur unhindered economic growth.
What we're witnessing in this Olympic-scale journey to a low carbon economy is researchers passing the torch. Powerful businesses are taking it and running. Meanwhile governments have sent strong signals that they're ready to start running, too. Take, for example, the Obama Administration's effort to reduce carbon emissions at existing U.S. power plants, and the European Union's new commitment to a 40 percent reduction in carbon emissions.
The commitments made at the U.N. summit shows leaders reaching for the torch, though we'll have a better idea after the December negotiations in Lima. Next year in Paris, we'll know for sure if they're off and running. Judging by the unprecedented outpouring of global support at the People's Climate March, the public is cheering them on every step of the way — state by state, nation by nation, and planet by … actually, we only have one of them.
Gary Yohe is a convening lead author for Chapter 18 of Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report, and the Huffington Foundation Professor of Economics and Environmental Studies at Wesleyan University. Mindy Lubber is president of Ceres, a nonprofit organization that mobilizes business leaders to embrace a sustainable future]]>
CVS Health launched its "Prescription for a Better World" strategy for sustainability last year, focusing on building healthier communities, protecting the planet, and creating economic opportunities. In its 2013 Corporate Social Responsibility report, the company identified increasing access and affordability of health care, utilizing sustainable packaging, reducing prescription drug abuse, and mitigating its carbon footprint as principal sustainability priorities. This month, CVS Health implemented its decision to stop selling tobacco in its 7,700 stores nationwide and launched a comprehensive smoking cessation program.
"CVS Health is a company that clearly understands the inextricable link between health and sustainability," said Mindy Lubber, President of the sustainability advocacy group, Ceres. "We look forward to working with the company as it continues to set and achieve goals related to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving water and waste management, increasing renewable energy use and more."
The Ceres Roadmap for Sustainability outlines 20 expectations for sustainable corporations, including calling for strong governance to better position companies to anticipate and adapt to changing economic, social, environmental and other factors. CVS Health's commitment to sustainability comes from the highest levels – the Board of Directors' Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has oversight of the company's corporate social responsibility activities, and an Environmental Leadership Council of senior-level executives reports directly to the company's Chief Executive Officer and President, Larry Merlo.
"We are proud to be joining the distinguished group of companies in the Ceres network," said Eileen Howard Boone, SVP of Corporate Social Responsibility & Philanthropy. "We look forward to leveraging our partnership with Ceres to help benchmark best-practices in sustainability and impact measurement."
CVS Health is the first pharmacy company to join the Ceres network, which includes 65 leading companies from sectors such as automotive, apparel and footwear, technology, food and beverage, and financial services. For a complete list of Ceres network members, visit http://www.ceres.org/company-network/company-directory.
About Ceres
Ceres is an advocate for sustainability leadership. Ceres mobilizes a powerful coalition of investors, companies and public interest groups to accelerate and expand the adoption of sustainable business practices and solutions to build a healthy global economy. Ceres directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), a network of over 100 institutional investors with collective assets totaling more than $13 trillion. Ceres also directs Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), an advocacy coalition of nearly 30 businesses committed to working with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation. For more information, visit www.ceres.org or follow on Twitter @CeresNews.
About CVS Health
CVS Health is a pharmacy innovation company helping people on their path to better health. Through our 7,700 retail pharmacies, more than 900 walk-in medical clinics, a leading pharmacy benefits manager with nearly 65 million plan members, and expanding specialty pharmacy services, we enable people, businesses and communities to manage health in more affordable, effective ways. This unique integrated model increases access to quality care, delivers better health outcomes and lowers overall health care costs. Find more information about how CVS Health is shaping the future of health at www.cvshealth.com.
The report, Insurer Climate Risk Disclosure Survey Report & Scorecard: 2014 Findings & Recommendations, ranks property & casualty, health and life & annuity insurers that represent about 87 percent of the total US insurance market. The companies were ranked on a half-dozen climate related indicators, including governance, risk management, investment strategies, greenhouse gas management and public engagement (such as their climate policy positions.) The report is based on company disclosures last year in response to a climate risk survey developed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC).
"Despite being on the 'front line' of climate risks, most of the company responses show a profound lack of preparedness in addressing climate-related risks and opportunities," said Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres, a nonprofit sustainability advocacy group. "A big positive in the report's findings is the strong leadership among a small number of property & casualty insurers – a trend that needs to become far more mainstream if the industry is to accelerate global responses to this colossal threat."
The companies were ranked on a four-tier scoring system, based on a 100-point scale, that included "Leading," "Developing," "Beginning" and "Minimal" grades. Nine of the 330 companies – three percent overall – received the "Leading" rank, including ACE, Munich Re, Swiss Re, Allianz, Prudential, XL Group, The Hartford, Sompo Japan and Zurich. The Hartford and Prudential are the only U.S.-headquartered insurers among the nine firms.
The vast majority of the insurers – 276 of the 330 companies – earned "Beginning" or "Minimal" ratings. The heath and life & annuity insurers had especially weak responses, with 89 percent and 80 percent, respectively, receiving the lowest "Minimal" rating.
"As key regulators of this sector, we strongly encourage insurance industry leaders and investors who own these companies to take this challenge far more seriously," said Washington Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler, who wrote the report foreword and chairs the NAIC's Climate Change and Global Warming Working Group. "The insurance industry is uniquely positioned as the bearer of risk to make adjustments now to lessen dramatic impacts we know are coming. This is not a partisan issue, it's a financial solvency issue and a consumer protection issue."
Three of the nine top scoring companies were global reinsurance companies, including Munich Re, Swiss Re and XL Group.
"Rising value concentrations in cities, new growth regions, and ever-greater risk accumulations, have combined with climate uncertainty to make the management of natural hazards an increasingly critical issue," said Tony Kuczinksi, President and CEO of Munich Re America. "For this reason, climate change presents complex risks to the property and casualty insurance industry, but it also presents a number of business opportunities. We see tremendous opportunity for our industry to take a leadership role in addressing climate change by delivering solutions that not only transfer risk but incentivize its reduction."
"We believe that understanding the risks associated with climate change, coupled with environmentally responsible business practices, will enhance The Hartford's competitive position, but as importantly, they are simply the right things to do," said Alan Kreczko, The Hartford's general counsel and chair of the company's Environment Committee.
"Many of our customers recognize the economic and risk reduction benefits of green buildings and sustainable business practices," added Noel Douglas Martin, Vice President and Assistant General Counsel, Firemen's Fund Insurance Co., a member of the Allianz Group. "Supporting them with responsive products and services is simply a matter of good business."
Martin noted that Fireman's Fund is widely recognized for its innovative green building insurance and risk services in the U.S. Allianz has developed more than 150 green solutions across all business segments globally, generating more than $1.4 billion in revenues.
The report cites numerous studies and on-the-ground examples of how rising global temperatures are driving sea level increases, and more pronounced extreme weather events are causing larger damages and losses in coastal and non-coastal areas alike. The insurance sector is on the veritable 'front line' of these escalating financial risks, especially property & casualty firms, which often bear the financial brunt of extreme weather losses. Insured losses from Hurricane Sandy alone totaled more than $29 billion.
The changing climate also has major implications for life & annuity insurers, especially in regard to their vast investment portfolios. L&A firms have trillion of dollars of investments – roughly two-thirds of the U.S. insurance sector's total cash and invested assets – that may be affected by wide-ranging climate-related ripples across the economy, including physical impacts, carbon-reducing regulations and fast-growing clean energy opportunities.
Among the report's key findings:
The report includes specific recommendations for insurance companies, including:
The report also includes recommendations for insurance regulators, including:
About Ceres
Ceres is an advocate for sustainability leadership. Ceres mobilizes a powerful coalition of investors, companies and public interest groups to accelerate and expand the adoption of sustainable business practices and solutions to build a healthy global economy. Ceres directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), a network of over 100 institutional investors with collective assets totaling more than $13 trillion. Ceres also directs Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), an advocacy coalition of nearly 30 businesses committed to working with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation. For more information, visit www.ceres.org or follow on Twitter @CeresNews.]]>
The Croatian Pride pushes off the dock and cuts slowly through the grey Gulf of Mexico, its engine growling. The air hangs thick and steamy, and the movement of the 40-foot oyster boat brings relief as it breezes past marshy areas where blue herons stand sentinel. The boat's captain, John Tesvich, is a fourth generation oysterman, but on this early fall day, it's journalists, not oysters, that he's hauling.
Reporters are on board the Croatian Pride to learn about Louisiana's $50 billion plan to restore the state's rapidly vanishing coastline, a crisis the New York Times Magazine termed "existential," and the impact those plans will have on Louisiana's legendary oyster fishery. The discussion jumps, however, from coastal restoration, to the lingering impacts of the Deep Water Horizon spill, to Hurricane Katrina, and finally the Gulf's "dead zone," a huge swath of ocean the size of Connecticut that forms every summer and is essentially devoid of life.
Coastal Louisiana faces a complex web of environmental challenges from land loss, to declining fisheries, water quality problems and climate change. On the Croatian Pride this September day, the stepchild issue is water quality, or more specifically the nutrient-laden agricultural fertilizer and wastewater that wash into the Gulf and boost algae and microbe blooms that gobble up oxygen and kill other marine life—while creating the second largest dead zone in the world.
Nitrogen run-off from the nation's booming Corn Belt is the single largest source of nutrient pollution in the Mississippi River basin, which drains a stunning 41 percent of the waterways in the contiguous United States. Massive amounts of water, sediment and nutrients wash off cornfields from as far away as Minnesota, enter the Mississippi River system, and eventually reach the Gulf.
The problem may worsen if the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) raises the ethanol mandate for blended gasoline next month—despite earlier commitments to reduce it. Fully one-third of corn grown in the U.S. already goes to ethanol refiners today, and that number could climb.
The Gulf of Mexico's dead zone forms far offshore, but even oysters are not immune to the low-oxygen condition, called hypoxia, that agricultural wastes can create.
Shallower marsh waters can get hit as well. "You hear of it," says Tesvich, who chairs the Louisiana Oyster Task Force. "Crabbers see it too."
"If you get a dead zone over your bed, it'll wipe you out," adds Tesvich. Some summers he says he's lost 20 to 30 percent of his oysters from it. "You'll see the water is a brownish color or there's algae on top. Maybe you'll see some fish floating on the water or dead crabs. When you start to see some dead oysters, you get out."
The commercial fisheries hit hardest by the dead zone are shrimp and fish such as red snapper. The biggest impact is loss of productive habitat. Shrimp fishermen are also forced to go further out, spend more on diesel fuel, and the shrimp they catch tend to be smaller, says Nancy Rabalais, executive director and professor, Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium.
The dead zone is one of many reasons why the Gulf's valuable fishing industry, generating close to $2 billion in sales in Louisiana alone, is diminishing. Thirty years ago, 90 percent of the shrimp consumed in the U.S. originated in the Gulf. Today it's just 30 percent.
The oyster fishery is also struggling in the wake of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill and subsequent freshwater flooding events from the Mississippi River, which are toxic to oysters. Last year was the worst on record, according to Tesvich, who says, "I can't tell if I'll have oysters next week or in a month," and that he's had to source oysters from Maryland on occasion to keep up with orders.
While Tesvich speaks, his nephew Luke Cibilich steers the Croatian Pride through a thicket of white poles that jut from the water like a slalom course, marking bed ownership. Dropping a backhoe-like shovel into the water, Cibilich hauls up a couple dozen oysters mixed with rocks and mud and dumps the load onto a counter. Tesvich sorts through the craggy, blackened shells and slices them open to offer his guests.
"Oysters are at their weakest in the summer, after they've spawned," he explains. "Temperatures are high." That's precisely when hypoxic conditions hit, whether inshore or further out in the dead zone.
Various strategies are being pursued for reducing the nutrient pollution in the Mississippi River basin, which is largely unregulated. A lawsuit is pending against the EPA. Petitioners want the agency to set enforceable, numeric limits on nitrogen and phosphorus that would force upstream states to curb the pollution.
Better farm management practices, such as more precise application of fertilizers, reduced tillage, broader use of cover crops, and the development of buffer strips and wetlands to act as natural filters, are the most cost-effective means of control, as outlined in Ceres' recent report, Water & Climate Risks Facing U.S. Corn Production.
But getting corn farmers and other growers to voluntarily change their practices isn't easy.
"Small acreage farmers and concerned farmers are making great progress in making changes," says Rabalais, but not industrial sized farms. "It's an economic issue driven by global trade. Big agribusinesses hedge their bets with fertilizer."
That's where large corn buyers can come in, and increasingly they are. Walmart, the country's largest grocer, is collaborating with its food and beverage suppliers and their supply chains to reduce the fertilizer impacts of 14 million acres of U.S. farmland. Companies like General Mills, and Coca-Cola have begun partnering with grain suppliers, agronomic experts and farmers to measure fertilizer use and identify opportunities for improvement.
But more companies – including ethanol producers – need to step up.
As Rabalais points out, it's not just the Gulf that's impacted by agricultural runoff. "It's the same thing that's happening in Lake Erie that shut down Toledo's drinking water this summer."
Back at the dock in Empire, Tevisch offers some parting words. "I'm an optimist at heart," he says but "there are a lot of uncertainties" in the future of the oyster fishery. Then turning to his nephew, who is listening intently, he advises, "It's about resilience. Our forefathers were resilient. Changes are coming. Get involved; stay on top. Be resilient."]]>
Read the transcript below or click here to listen to the interview.
Hundreds of world leaders and government ministers meet tomorrow in New York City for a summit on climate change. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon convened the meeting to rally support for new solutions to a warming climate. We have two stories now about that search for solutions.
First, as NPR's Christopher Joyce reports, climate activists are looking for action from the business world.
CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: The United Nations hosts a lot of climate meetings. Lately they've focused on trying to get governments to write up a new international treaty to lower greenhouse gas emissions. It would replace the treaty signed in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan. So far, they've failed. The biggest fail was in 2009 in Copenhagen. President Barack Obama spoke at that meeting and expressed his misgivings.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I have to be honest - as the world watches us today, I think our ability to take collective action is in doubt right now.
JOYCE: No treaty emerged from Copenhagen. So the climate summit this week in New York is different. Binding agreements are not on the table. Instead, it's a pep rally to get world leaders to volunteer something to limit warming. Then next year at the next big climate meeting in Paris, maybe they'll actually write a new treaty. But even those who want a global treaty wonder if it's possible. Michael Jenkins runs Forest Trends, which advocates for protecting forests as a sponge to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and slow warming.
The New York summit, he says, is an effort to make sure Paris isn't another failure.
MICHAEL JENKINS: It might be really discouraging in that we're not able to agree on a global issue. We don't have the makeup - we don't have the DNA in us to be able to come up with a global binding treaty.
JOYCE: But he says maybe a one-size-fits-all, U.N.-dominated treaty is not the only way to reduce emissions.
JENKINS: You know, bilateral agreements between countries like China and the U.S. or Brazil and the U.S. - we might be able to put Humpty Dumpty back together with that kind of a plan B.
JOYCE: And whether it's a global treaty or a series of bilateral agreements, that plan B would have to include business in a way that the Kyoto treaty did not. In fact, there's been an avalanche of studies and reports in the buildup to the New York summit. That essentially say...
MINDY LUBBER: The game has changed.
JOYCE: Mindy Lubber is president of Ceres, a coalition of corporations, investors and nonprofits that are concerned about climate change's effects on the economy.
LUBBER: Having the economy lurched backwards and forwards by monumental changes in weather patterns serves nobody.
JOYCE: Lubber says more businesses now fear that things like changing weather patterns pose financial risks; risks like the prolonged drought in the Western U.S. now.
LUBBER: If you're running a manufacturing business and you may not have enough water due to implications from climate and water shortages, that's a bad business move. So a lot of action has focused on risk.
JOYCE: Like reducing the reliance on fossil fuels. So at this climate summit, business leaders are much in evidence. Among them is Steve Howard, the sustainability manager for the furniture giant, IKEA.
STEVE HOWARD: I'd like to see in New York a much stronger voice from businesses that say, if you're ready to act on this, or you're already acting, we're with you.
JOYCE: Howard says IKEA is investing in wind and solar energy and now sells only the most efficient lighting. He acknowledges that the world economy still depends on coal and oil, the biggest sources of greenhouse gases. They can't just be switched off.
HOWARD: We're going to be needing fossil fuels for a long time to come. That will be a managed transition, but there will be winners and losers.
JOYCE: Now companies like IKEA are joining climate activists to argue that if fossil loses, other parts of the economy will gain. Last week, for example, the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate published a study that says economies can grow by investing in renewable energy.
British economist Lord Nicholas Stern is one of the authors.
LORD NICHOLAS STERN: Too often, we've seen this expressed as some kind of artificial horse race between growth on one hand and climate responsibility on the other.
JOYCE: In New York, delegates will offer green energy projects on the growth side. On the responsibility side, limits on carbon emissions and a plan to give developing countries money to save their forests as so-called carbon sinks.
These are pledges though, not promises. And the reality the world has to grapple with is that oil is still the planet's largest provider of energy. Number two - coal. Christopher Joyce, NPR News.]]>
Here is the plain truth – and you've heard it before: We won't solve climate change unless we wean ourselves off oil and coal and use cleaner energy sources.
But there is a novel solution, and it's not the one hundreds of thousands of people were talking about on the streets of Manhattan. Take the people making the most money off the extraction of vast oil and coal reserves – the investors who own oil and coal companies – and show them how they stand to lose billions if these companies get it wrong in navigating the transition to a low-carbon economy.
Oil and coal reserves that fossil fuel companies already have are enough to cook the planet. They spend more than half a trillion dollars a year to develop new reserves. The International Energy Agency says that two-thirds of proven coal and oil resources should remain underground if we want to limit global temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), the goal set by world leaders attending a United Nations Climate Summit here tomorrow.
Investors are starting to connect the dots. Many of the world's largest investors are voicing concern that fossil fuel companies are grossly underestimating the financial risks they face as the global economy shifts from high-polluting energy to cleaner alternatives. They're especially focused on curbing investments in expensive, high-carbon oil projects that simply won't make economic sense as global oil demand is constrained by carbon emission limits, more competitive clean energy technologies and other factors.
Last fall, these investors, which collectively manage $3.5 trillion in assets, wrote to the world's 45 largest fossil fuel companies, asking them to disclose how climate change will affect their businesses, including the potential of current and future reserves becoming unusable – or "stranded." They also filed shareholder resolutions with a dozen companies and held face-to-face meetings with oil giants such as Exxon and Shell.
In their responses to investors, Exxon and Shell argue that a low-carbon economy – and declining global oil demand – are unlikely until the distant future, which is why they're continuing to invest billions in increasingly expensive, carbon-intensive oil plays. In short, they said, 'We don't think world governments will limit carbon pollution anytime soon and until they do, we'll keep drilling.'
We think this 'business as usual' thinking is fraught with risks. Even without a global carbon price, the industry's financial standing is significantly weaker than it was just a decade ago, when high oil prices guaranteed high profits. Companies are seeing weaker profits, even with oil prices hovering around $100 a barrel. In the case of Shell, which is especially dependent on oil that is expensive to develop, its profits are lower today than they were in 2009, despite a $40 jump in the price per barrel of oil. Exxon's annual returns in the past five years, like Shell's, are also lagging behind the S&P 500 index.
A big reason for the weaker returns is that 'expensive' oil is the new norm. More than ever before, oil majors are spending significantly more capital on harder-to-get oil. Capital expenditures by the largest oil companies are now five times the levels they were in 2000.
And the future profitability of expensive fossil fuels looks even more uncertain. Leading financial firms point to a number of factors that could weaken oil demand faster than the industry is planning, including proliferating carbon-reducing regulations and the increased competitiveness of clean energy. Citi Research forecasts that oil demand could peak as early as 2020 – just six years from now.
Once oil demand drops, prices will fall too. As oil prices dip below $100 a barrel, the profit margins on these projects are thin at best. A recent report by the Carbon Tracker Initiative identifies the top 20 undeveloped high-cost oil projects – representing a whopping $91 billion of capital spending in the next decade – that companies and shareholders should be stopping right now. The projects, a mix of Canada oil sands, ultra deepwater and Arctic ventures, all have 'breakeven' points above $95 a barrel.
"To create shareholder value, oil majors need to reduce exposure to exploration projects requiring the highest oil prices, rather than solely pursue production volume," the Carbon Tracker report concludes.
There is some evidence that companies are responding to these concerns. Under increasing investor pressure, Exxon, Chevron and Shell are reducing capital spending this year, especially Shell which is cutting such costs by 20 percent. Specific projects are being shelved, too, including several in Canada's oil sands.
Still, these actions are nowhere near the cutbacks we'll need to have a chance of limiting carbon pollution so that we can avoid excessive warming that will be catastrophic to our environment and economy. All fossil fuel companies must examine, in a far more rigorous way, whether investing shareholder capital on ever more expensive, carbon-intensive sources of energy is prudent in a world that is getting hotter and is transitioning already to a low-carbon future.
Mindy Lubber is president of Ceres, a nonprofit organization mobilizing business and investor leadership on climate change and other global sustainability challenges. For more details, visit www.ceres.org or follow on Twitter @CeresNews]]>
That is roughly the amount of additional investment needed worldwide each year for the next 36 years to stave off the worst effects of global warming and keep the Earth habitable, according to the International Energy Agency. The Paris-based organization of 29 developed countries calculated the cost in 2012 and raised its estimates this year. Ceres, a Boston-based nonprofit investor group that advocates environmental sustainability, framed it as the "Clean Trillion" in an investment campaign that has become a rallying cry.
While $1 trillion sounds like a lot, knowing the figure is good news, according to climate activists, investment experts and United Nations organizers of the next round of global climate talks. Worldwide, almost $4 trillion a year will need to be invested over that time anyway in electric grids, power plants and energy efficiency, the IEA says. In a global economy of $75 trillion, $1 trillion works out to 1.3 percent of the world's annual output of goods and services, or about $10,400 a person. The calculation also focuses the discussion on investment—suggesting the potential for returns and profits—rather than on costs for disaster response and losses to rising oceans.
"One of the things we're trying to show is that this is an opportunity story in response to the horror of the risks we're facing," says Sean Kidney, chief executive officer of the Climate Bonds Initiative, a London-based nonprofit promoting large-scale investment in a low-carbon world. "We're in a big hole. The key thing is for government and investors to sit down and work it out. It's got to be a grand collaboration to get out of the hole."
Putting a price tag on the energy sources, transportation systems, energy-saving steps and reductions in carbon-based greenhouse gas emissions provides a framework for discussion, according to the IEA, corporate leaders and others. It has also shifted the perspective of companies and investors. On Sept. 23, the UN is hosting a Climate Summit in New York that's meant to showcase new climate-related pledges from governments and to boost support for an international climate treaty. Next year in Paris, negotiators hope to sign a successor agreement to the expired Kyoto climate accord.
Importance of 2 Degrees
Nations participating in the treaty talks will attempt to work out a plan for keeping the average temperature of the world's atmosphere from climbing by 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) since the dawn of the Industrial Age in the 18th Century. The rapid increase in burning of fossil fuels over the past 2½ centuries has poured billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere, causing surface air temperatures to warm by 0.8 degrees on average, according to climate scientists.
Stopping the increase short of a 2-degree rise would allow the planet to dodge the most damaging effects of climate change, scientists say. The Earth's atmosphere is now on track to warm 4 degrees by the end of the century, triggering a range of mostly irreversible changes, leading to famine, water shortages, disease and wholesale migration away from coasts and expanding deserts, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Nations involved in the climate treaty negotiations agreed to the goal of holding the increase under 2 degrees, but most countries probably will fall short of their goals for reduced emissions by 2020. Greenhouse gases have continued to rise, largely because of the continued expansion in burning of fossil fuels, which is responsible for 70 percent of climate-change emissions, according to the IEA. Warming is a function of the accumulation of carbon dioxide and other gases, so every new coal-fired power plant brings the 2-degree limit closer.
Prodded by investors and growing evidence of climate change, businesses including General Motors Co., Toyota Motor Corp., Nike Inc., General Mills Inc., Apple Inc. and Google Inc. have taken stock of how climate change will affect them. A growing number are shifting to renewable energy, preparing for sharply higher fossil fuel costs and developing more energy-efficient products. Now business leaders are urging global leaders to act.
Leading up to the UN Climate Summit next week in New York, business groups and investors who manage trillions of dollars published reports and held meetings to call for action. Last week, investment groups publicized the creation of We Mean Business, an umbrella organization of investors urging world leaders to agree on a plan for fighting climate change.
"There's a very compelling signal to governments that business is moving forward," said Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the group leading the climate treaty talks. "The future will happen by default or design. It is in everyone's interest for that future to be based on policy on the part of governments and on design on the part of business sector. That is the ultimate collaboration that we're looking for."
While reframing the issue as an investment opportunity has altered the approach to slowing climate change, reaching a global agreement won't be easy. For years, climate talks have focused largely on the economic and environmental consequences of not acting. The goal has been to get polluting countries to agree to limits on burning of fossil fuels. With coal and oil the lifeblood of economic growth, that's been a tough sell.
Moreover, even if investment rises by more than $1 trillion a year, there's no certainty it will be enough. The climate, economies, technology and governments are complex systems that are in constant flux. This year, the IEA had to increase its estimates to reflect a larger-than-expected drop in the costs of generating solar energy, a delay in carbon-capturing technology and a hit to nuclear power projections after the Fukushima disaster in Japan.
What $1 Trillion Will Buy
To make its estimate for clean energy investment, the IEA examined the costs and development of more than 500 related technologies, plumbed its 40-year database of global energy production and consumption statistics and combined them with emissions data and climate science.
In its report this year, the IEA said the world would need to invest an additional $44 trillion by 2050 in clean energy and related technologies to comply with the 2-degree pledge. The "clean trillion" formulation was based on the IEA's 2012 estimate of $36 trillion, but for simplicity and to account to other estimates that are higher and lower, the rounded $1 trillion has stuck.
Just to accommodate today's trends and projections for growth in energy demand, the world would have to fund $140 trillion in new and upgraded electric grids, power plants and energy efficiency, according to the IEA. The estimated $44 trillion of additional investments in clean energy increase that total by 35 percent.
While definitions vary, the IEA's clean-energy investment list includes:
Overhauling transportation will take the most money, accounting for 49 percent of the total, the IEA estimates. Power generation is second at 21 percent, with housing, offices and industrial installations accounting for the rest.
David Etzinga, author of the IEA report, warned that the $44 trillion cost estimate includes assumptions on the use of several new technologies that are still being developed, such as carbon capture and storage. These need to be funded, nurtured and redesigned over time, and if successful, they will have to be widely deployed to reduce costs.
"The less progress we make in the early stages, the more expensive it's going to get over the long term because you can't necessarily rush the learning," Etzinga said. "You have to put the time in. You have to install the gigawatts or the megawatts in order to bring those costs down."
The world can still meet the 2-degree goal, he said, but the slower the progress, the greater the chances that existing and new fossil fuel facilities will have to be shut down before the end of their useful lives.
"We see that approximately 800 gigawatts of generation capacity is going to need to be retired before the end of its technical life, so that's another example of how these costs go up," Etzinga said. "Technology gets deployed, and then if we really need to meet our climate goals, we actually have to shut this stuff down. That's a waste of money."
Now, corporations, governments and groups ranging from the World Bank to pension managers are becoming more focused on the economic benefits of tackling climate change.
The IEA estimates, for example, that between now and 2050, the world could have a net savings of $115 trillion that would otherwise be spent on fossil fuels. The health benefits of limiting pollution also translate into substantial savings.
In addition, there is some evidence that the link between higher energy use and greater prosperity isn't absolute. Germany and some other economies have shown that economic growth and lower power use can co-exist.
Investment Lags
So far, however, clean energy investment is lagging. Worldwide investment in clean energy peaked in 2011 at $318 billion, less than a third of the $1 trillion target. In 2013, clean energy funding fell to $254 billion, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. The Bloomberg LP unit bases its calculations on a smaller "clean energy" universe than the IEA, omitting such things as energy efficiency measures, but it has consistent data stretching back to 2004.
There have been other reversals, too. Oil giants BP Plc and Chevron Corp., at one time among the largest investors in clean energy projects, have either dismantled or sold off their renewable energy units. And in some places—Australia and Ohio among them—politicians have dropped policies aimed at curbing fossil fuel use.
What's more, fossil fuel projects are still being built using outdated, more-polluting technology. According to the IEA, 60 percent of global coal technology deployed worldwide in the last 10 years fell into that category.
In January, Ceres launched an investment campaign framing the IEA's low-carbon funding target as the "Clean Trillion." In a report accompanying the launch, Ceres—whose name was also the name of the Roman goddess for agriculture and fertility—laid out concrete ways to fund the transition and made the case that the task of reworking the global energy system was both feasible and potentially profitable.
"A trillion is actually not a big number anymore in global economies," said Mark Fulton, a co-author of the Ceres Clean Trillion report. "It's a challenge, but it's easily doable."
Global Bond Market
The global bond market, expected to be a critical source of clean energy money, is about $100 trillion strong—significantly larger than the market for stocks. And there is plenty of money sitting on the sidelines and transferable out of fossil-fuel investments. Pension funds, insurance companies, corporations and others have large amounts of cash on their balance sheets, and they're looking for investments that would boost returns in an era of record-low interest rates.
"There is no problem with money," said Kidney of the Climate Bond Initiative, which has been following the emergence of green and climate-action bonds. "The world is awash in capital that's looking for a good home."
Borrowed money in the form of bonds is especially useful for the climate challenge because ramping up renewable energy and other infrastructure requires large infusions of funds up front, and the payback accumulates over time as either revenue or savings.
A market for green bonds is already beginning to take root, with companies, governments and others selling debt instruments to fund rail projects, solar power plants, energy efficiency projects and even consumer purchases of electric cars.
Since 2008, the World Bank has issued more than $6.4 billion in green bonds in 17 currencies. The International Finance Corp. has issued $3.6 billion in green bonds. Intergovernmental economic development organizations have joined the trend, and so have governments and major corporations.
GDF Suez, a French utility, sold $3.4 billion in bonds to fund renewable projects. It was the largest green bond issued to date—and it attracted triple the amount of investment needed.
Overall, $503 billion was invested in 1,900 outstanding climate-themed bonds at the end of July, according to the Climate Bond Initiative. More than 70 percent of it funded rail and other transportation projects. A large percentage of those bonds included some form of government backing, thanks largely to the inclusion of state-backed railway projects in China and elsewhere. More green investment opportunities are needed, though, according to asset managers and investment authorities.
'Clean-Energy Investment Gap'
"Quite simply, there's a huge clean-energy investment gap," said Jack Ehnes, chief executive officer of the California State Teachers' Retirement System, the second-largest U.S. pension fund, with assets of $146 billion.
Ehnes and hundreds of other leading investors attended the UN's Investor Summit on Climate Risk last January on ways to increase climate-related financing.
"Meeting the $1 trillion-a-year goal will be a challenge, but it is where we need to be in order to protect and grow or portfolios and to ensure the long-term sustainability of our planet," Ehnes said.
Ceres President Mindy Lubber said pension funds aren't alone in seeking investing opportunities.
"Many in the business community ... are eager for climate action," Lubber said. "Businesses have seen firsthand the devastating impact of climate change, and they realize it is not good for the planet or for our economy."
Lubber and others said there are several roadblocks slowing down clean energy investment. The main one is uncertainty over the strength of government commitments to help move energy systems from fossil fuels to clean energy. If the UN doesn't broker a climate treaty, will federal and regional governments act aggressively? Will they enact policies to accelerate the transitions—and will they renege on those policies?
"Many corporations are wising up and responding to both the risks and the opportunities that climate change present," said Nigel Topping, executive director of CDP, a nonprofit that focuses on company disclosures on climate change. "What's missing is a strong policy response around the world to climate change, and a lack of such a policy is adding dangerous uncertainty to the marketplace." That kind of uncertainty, he said, "holds business back from bold investment."
Investors are also waiting for a strong flow of green projects that offer good returns, but that aren't too risky. Funding won't go to green bonds in large sums unless they are financially on a par with, or better than, other investment options, investor groups say.
Governments can assist on that front, too, by providing loan guarantees and shouldering some of the costs. Last month, for example, the U.K. government provided guarantees for $78.7 million in bonds for a Scottish biomass power project.
Such guarantees are one way governments can reduce risk and help raise investor interest in climate or green bonds. Governments can also help along the energy transformation by changing regulations, instituting mandates, providing tax breaks and incentives, and funding critical research and development, advocates say.
Policy-makers also can raise the cost of using fossil fuels by removing subsidies, creating disincentives and instituting strict emission controls.
One of the most discussed policy options is putting a price on carbon emissions. One way to do that is by imposing a steadily rising tax on fossil fuel use. Another is to enact a cap-and-trade system that would set progressively lower emission limits and allow trading of emission credits in a market. Power plants and others would have to buy credits at increasing prices to continue to operate. Carbon markets are widespread in Europe and elsewhere, including in California and the Northeast.
What it comes down to, according to the UN's Figueres, is that it's going to take major commitments from government leaders and investors to help the world stay clear of the worst effects of climate change.
"This is absolutely critical, because we are running out of time," she said. "We can no longer afford the luxury of being gradual or incremental. We really do need very, very stark changes right away."]]>
That's why CalPERS and dozens of other investors petitioned the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for climate disclosure guidance in 2007 and applauded the SEC's decision to issue formal interpretive guidance in 2010. Since then, more companies are mentioning climate issues in financial filings, but the breadth and quality of the disclosures with the SEC are still lacking.
These shortcomings were a key point in a major report issued recently, "Risky Business: The Economic Risks of Climate Change in the United States," by three Wall Street heavyweights: Michael Bloomberg, Henry Paulson and Robert Rubin. "Businesses and investors have largely been kept in the dark about how climate change will impact specific industries or specific regions, and that puts American businesses and the American economy in an extremely vulnerable position," Bloomberg told reporters earlier this summer.
]]>Just as companies need to step up their disclosure efforts, more investors should be scrutinizing material climate risk data that are being provided in corporate 10-K filings. But doing so requires an efficient way to easily find and analyze climate disclosures in 10-Ks.A new web-based climate search tool from the nonprofit sustainability group Ceres and CookESG Research will be helpful in filling this void. Available at www.ceres.org/secsearchtool it covers annual SEC filings by all of the largest publicly traded U.S. companies in the Russell 3000. It automatically excerpts climate information from 10-K filings, such as reporting on regulatory risks, renewable energy opportunities and extreme weather impacts.
This tool is valuable for companies, analysts and investors. For companies, it provides an efficient way to understand how industry peers view material climate risks. For analysts, it can demonstrate gaps between voluntary and mandatory reporting to highlight financially material issues. And investors can be better equipped to engage directly with companies on the quality of their responses to climate change.
A new Ceres analysis derived from the tool shows that 62 percent of S&P 500 companies provided climate disclosure in their 2014 filings. But the tool finds a wide range in the quality of that disclosure, from quantified information on financial impacts to less than useful cryptic boilerplate language. Many of these companies acknowledge climate risks but provide no information on financial exposure and efforts to reduce that exposure.
Investors require better climate disclosure in securities filings to avoid risky investments. Whereas voluntary climate reporting provides helpful data for investors, it often contains incomplete information and is not focused on material issues. Also, some S&P 500 companies and many smaller ones provide no voluntary disclosure at all.
In truth, securities regulators are the best positioned of any regulator to obtain comparable, quantified and detailed information from companies about climate risks. Long-standing SEC rules require disclosure of forward-looking material risks, and climate change is one of the biggest such risks that companies and investors face.
Reflecting such concerns, CalPERS's newly adopted ten "Investment Beliefs" are meant to provide a basis for strategic management of our investment portfolio, inform organizational priorities and ensure alignment between our board and staff. Belief No. 9 states that "risk to CalPERS is multifaceted and is not fully captured through measures such as volatility or tracking error." It expands by noting that as a long-term investor, CalPERS must consider risk factors that are slow to develop, such as climate change and natural resource availability.
Fully incorporating all risks, including climate change, into the investment-decision-making process will have a tangible impact in shifting significant capital away from high-carbon emitters toward clean energy alternatives.
To further accelerate this shift, CalPERS is an active participant in two important initiatives: carbon asset risk and green bonds. Climate disclosure is a critical element of both efforts.
The carbon asset risk initiative, which includes 75 investors managing $3.5 trillion in assets, asks some of the world's largest oil and gas, coal and electric power companies to stress-test the financial risks that global warming poses to their businesses. The issue is especially relevant to oil and gas firms that are investing billions of dollars a year developing high-cost, high-carbon projects that could potentially be stranded as carbon-reducing regulations and renewable energy take hold globally in the coming decades. This effort resulted in new, detailed responses from companies like Exxon Mobil Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell, which illustrate, unfortunately, their unwillingness to seriously wrestle with these issues. An expectation that this risk will be discussed in more detail in SEC filings is part of the solution.
CalPERS is also eager to explore growing opportunities with fixed-income climate bonds and green bonds, a market that has exploded in the past two years. Although many factors are still in play in this emerging market, it goes without saying that better disclosure around these bonds is important for achieving even bigger growth and acceptance.
The bottom line: CalPERS is a big believer in the philosophy that what gets measured gets managed, and what gets disclosed gets done. Stronger climate disclosure is a hugely important step in managing the colossal climate challenge.
Anne Stausboll is CEO of the $300 billion California Public Employees' Retirement System. CalPERS is a member of the Investor Network on Climate Risk,a network of 110 institutional investors with collective assets totaling $12 trillion.


text:
|Amazon Price
|New from
|Used from
"Please retry"
Audio CD, Abridged, Audiobook
"Please retry"
Winning leadership strategies from the Navy's Elite Special Forces
With hands-on, field-tested advice from authors with decades of experience in business and combat, this straight-talking handbook shows how the leadership and team-building techniques of the elite, no-nonsense Navy SEALs can help you forge a powerful, goal-driven workforce, one that is prepared to take on--and triumph over--every challenge. Built around first-hand examples from both the military and business worlds, this step-by-step success manual will show you how to
Enlist the Leadership Lessons of the Navy SEALs to transform your workplace from a group of disconnected individuals into a confident, goal-driven team.
"The SEALs are without doubt one of the highest-performing organizations on the planet. The secret ingredient is that every SEAL is a leader/teacher, engaged in continuous, interactive teaching and learning. This book . . . is a must read for all leaders."--Noel M. Tichy, Professor, University of Michigan Business School and author of The Cycle of Leadership
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
Order was fulfilled in a timely fashion and product was as described and in great condition. Book contains practical solutions to complex problems.Published on January 27, 2012 by Ivan Duldulao
This book gives a view into the Seal mentality of leadership. In a world where everyone must stand on their own they must also be responsible to others also. An interesting read.Published on November 7, 2011 by Jack Bert
You really don't need to be in a position of leadership to benefit from this book. But if you manage people in a results orientated enterprise I think you'll find the insights in... Read morePublished on October 23, 2011 by John T. Turner
This book was an instant help. Lots of strategies that I could put into use immediately. I would recommend this book to anyone who ever plans on leading anything. Read morePublished on March 29, 2011 by Rock guy

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION
Planning your attack, er, strategy for online dating
In this day and age, most people know someone who has tried online dating, or they have tried it themselves.
This artful memoir by Baltimore-based journalist Amy Webb dares to ask the question: "If technology has become as sophisticated as we know it to be today, why is it still so difficult to match us with our soul mates?"
This is a fun book, even for those not interested in online dating. Despite her obvious intellect and, frankly, intimidating resumé -- she wrote for major U.S. publications before starting her own digital-media consulting company -- Webb is down to earth and keeps things light and funny throughout. She's also not above dropping the occasional F-bomb or two to make a point.
Webb, who is in her 30s, registered on several dating sites to avoid further ill-advised set-ups by friends and family. Although some sites promised "true love," Webb quickly realized that sometimes "a match made in heaven" may just refer to someone living in the same zip code.
Following a particularly obnoxious date, Webb decided that if she was going to find someone remotely compatible, she was going to have to outsmart -- or "game" -- the system. After making a list of all the traits she was looking for in a mate, she gave each one a score, depending on how much she valued each trait (wanting to have kids she deemed more important than wanting to travel). This would help her score her upcoming dates and stay within a certain margin.
Her next step was to go undercover; Webb signed on to a dating site under a male alias, which essentially allowed her to view her competition and their profiles, determine which women were the most popular and what they had in common.
The most sought-after women online tended to have simple profiles of usually no more than three sentences, the idea being to pique the interest of prospective dates, not bore them to death.
By comparison, Webb's own profile read more like a job resumé, with photos that were outdated and downright frumpy. The result, even she was forced to admit, was seriously underwhelming.
As an intelligent woman, she wanted to attract an intelligent mate, so while her profile would never read "I love to have fun" or "I love to laugh" (who doesn't?), she realized she needed to put in a bit more time and effort.
"I didn't want to try to hide who I was or pretend to be someone else," she explains. "I just wanted to learn from the masters and present the best possible version of myself online."
Eventually, she did, creating a new and improved profile, this time with current, flattering photos. Within one day, Webb received 14 new messages. And, yes, one of those messages was from her future (now current) husband.
Webb spent one month assessing profiles online, documenting her findings with charts and graphs, some of which she reproduced here.
But put those highlighters and Sharpies down! She's not advocating that readers follow her plan to a T (no need for an online alias, either).
Instead, Webb outlines only the most important steps to success and gives lots of helpful tips on every aspect of planning your attack -- er, strategy.
Lindsay McKnight, who works in the arts in Winnipeg, has not ruled out online dating.
Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition February 9, 2013 J9
Updated on Saturday, February 9, 2013 at 10:27 AM CST: adds fact box
Fact Check
Have you found an error, or know of something we've missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.
Having problems with the form?Contact Us Directly
More Books
You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.
You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.
Have Your Say
New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.
The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.
- Back to Top
- Return to Books
More Books
(1 of 29 articles for this week)
Patricia Arquette, Oscar-winning actress from 'Boyhood,' working on memoir04/1/2015 5:02 PM 0
Photo Store Gallery
Most Popular
- Mob boss preferred revenge over money
- 'The Buried Giant' by Kazuo Ishiguro tops Maclean's fiction list
- Journeyman's tale leaves it all on the ice
- Atrocities rampant in Nazis' concentration camp for women
- The African paradox: Disconnect between resource-rich nations, abject poverty
- Review: 'The Poser' is darkly funny, but female characters are written to a flat type
- Serving up a winner: Food blogger's foray into print a tasty treat
- Kosovo horrors highlight our central search for justice
- Drug does the talking in addictive, disturbing novel
- POETRY: Underrated city poet's collection impressive
- Atrocities rampant in Nazis' concentration camp for women
- Mob boss preferred revenge over money
- Serving up a winner: Food blogger's foray into print a tasty treat
- Kosovo horrors highlight our central search for justice
- The African paradox: Disconnect between resource-rich nations, abject poverty
- Mystery writers share tips at reading
- POETRY: Underrated city poet's collection impressive
- Lehane's rich thriller brings gripping Mob trilogy to a close
- 4 Africa authors among 10 Man Booker International Prize finalists
- Drug does the talking in addictive, disturbing novel
- Miriam Toews on short list for U.K.'s lucrative Wellcome Book Prize
- Mob boss preferred revenge over money
- Novel gets into the mind of Vincent Li
- Publisher says fantasy author Terry Pratchett dies at 66 after battle with Alzheimer's
- Through grandfather's eyes
- Raziel Reid, Rick Monture at News Café today
- Plenty of cyber-crime on poorly policed web
- Skin-care maven releases memoir
- Margaret Atwood's new novel 'The Heart Goes Last' to be released in September
- Bullying can be used for positive social change, author suggests
Ads by Google


text:
Blogs & Opinion
- Football
- Cricket
- Rugby Union
- Rugby League
- Golf
- Boxing
- Speedway
- More Sports +
A-Z of Bloggers +
Experts and Columnists
Aaron Cook
- Aaron Wilkinson
- Adam Leventhal
- Aikines Aryeetey
- Alan Smith
- Alex Hammond
- Andrew Strauss
- Andy Walker
Barrie vs Terry
- Barry Cowan
- Ben Swift
- Benedict Bermange
- Bob Willis
- Bradley Wiggins
- Brian Carney
- Brian Carney
- Butch Harmon
Daniel Routledge
- Dave Ord
- David Jones
- David Livingstone
- David Lloyd
- Denis Pugh
- Dewi Morris
- Drabble Down Under
- Dwight Yorke
Jamie Carragher
- Jamie Redknapp
- Jeff Stelling
- Jess Varnish
- Jim Watt
- Joanna Rowsell
- Jody Cundy
- Johnny Nelson
- Johnny Phillips
- Jonathan Davies
Laura Innes
- Laura Trott
- League One Spotlight
- League Two Spotlight
- Liam Tancock
- Lizzie Armitstead
- Louis Smith
- Luke Dorn
Mark Butcher
- Mark Petchey
- Mark Roe
- Mark Rohan
- Martin Tyler
- Matt Crampton
- Matt Le Tissier
- Michael Bisping
- Michael Holding
- Mike Atherton
- Miles Harrison
Nasser Hussain
- Neal Foulds
- Neil McCann
- Neil Reynolds
- Niall Quinn
- Nick Knight
- Nicola Sanders
- Nigel Pearson
Paul McGinley
- Paul Merson
- Perri Shakes-Drayton
- Peter Beagrie
- Phil Clarke
- Phil Edwards
- Phil Thompson
Rachael Wyse
- Ray Wilkins
- Richard Boxall
- Richard Fahey
- Richard Isaacs
- Richard Moore
- Rob Burrows
- Rob Lee
- Rob Williams
- Rod Harrington
- Ruud Gullit
Adam Craig
- Adam Gee: Euro Tour
- Adam Smith
- Alex Ferguson
- Andrew Balding
- Anita Navin's Coach's Corner
Worcestershire secure Ajmal
Pakistan spinner Saeed Ajmal will return to Worcestershire this summer for a third time depending on his availability.
Munro back at Worcestershire
Worcestershire have re-signed NZ batsman Colin Munro as their overseas player for the 2015 NatWest T20 Blast.
Ajmal returns with new action
Pakistan spinner Saeed Ajmal made his return to competitive cricket on Friday and hopes to play in next year's World Cup.
County fixtures announced
County champions Yorkshire begin their title defence against Worcestershire on the opening day of the 2015 season.
County ins and outs
Keep up to date with all the county cricket signings and departures ahead of the 2015 season.
Shantry signs New Road deal
Worcestershire seamer Jack Shantry has signed a two-year contract extension, keeping him at New Road till 2017.
Mitchell signs Worcs extension
Worcestershire captain Daryl Mitchell has signed a new four-year contract to keep him at New Road until the end of 2018.
Moeen not getting carried away
England all-rounder Moeen Ali is taking nothing for granted despite a fantastic first season in international cricket.
Other Cricket Experts:
- Adam Leventhal
- Andrew Strauss
- Benedict Bermange
- Bob Willis
- County Countdown
- David Lloyd
- Drabble Down Under
- Ian Harvey
- Ian Ward
- Mark Butcher
- Michael Holding
- Mike Atherton
- Nasser Hussain
- Richard Isaacs
- The Ashes Panel
- Women's cricket
Latest Posts in Cricket:
Kate Cross blog
The England Women star reflects on the ODI series with New Zealand and some stunning panoramic views....
Latest News
Ireland stun Windies
Ireland secured the first shock of the World Cup with a four-wicket victory over the West Indies in Nelson.
Pietersen signs for Sunrisers
Kevin Pietersen will play alongside Eoin Morgan for Sunrisers Hyderabad in the 2015 Indian Premier League.
Porterfield targeting quarters
William Porterfield expects Ireland to qualify for the World Cup quarter-finals following their win over West Indies.
Ireland 'on track for quarters'
Ireland's hopes of reaching the World Cup quarter-finals are firmly on track after their win against West Indies, says Kyle McCallan.
Kate Cross blog
The England Women star reflects on the ODI series with New Zealand and some stunning panoramic views.
World Cup wallchart
It's time to plan your next seven weeks around the cricket with the Sky Sports World Cup wallchart!
Sky Cricket Podcast: Bob Willis and Eoin Morgan on England's World Cup defeat to Australia
The 2015 World Cup has begun with thumping wins for co-hosts Australia and New Zealand.
Cricket World Cup: How the Associate members have stunned the big boys…
Ireland, Scotland, Afghanistan and United Arab Emirates will be the Associate members mixing it with cricket's powerhouses at the 2015 World Cup - but can any of them pull off an upset like these from yesteryear...