Walmart Amps Up the Green Light
March 8, 2010
The recent news from the political front on global warming has made many hearts heavy. The Copenhagen climate talks fizzle; the well-respected head of the UN climate change convention resigns. And in a polarized Congress, climate legislation languishes, while irresponsible politicians are claiming that climate science is “snake oil” and seeking ways to prosecute scientists.
How exciting, then, to get a high-wattage jolt of energy—and responsible leadership—from a powerful ally in the fight against global warming: Walmart, one of the largest companies in the world. To paraphrase Groucho Marx, these days politics doesn’t make strange bedfellows—business does.
Walmart isn’t waiting for politicians or regulators to do the right thing. Last week CEO Mike Duke stood on a podium with EDF’s Fred Krupp and announced a goal of eliminating 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gases from Walmart’s global supply chain by the end of 2015 (watch webcast of the announcement). That’s the equivalent of taking more than 3.8 million cars off the road for a year. Or, if you look at it another way — saving 2 billion gallons of gasoline a year.
To find these reductions, Walmart will be asking the estimated 100,000 companies that supply it to cut the amount of carbon they emit when they produce, package and ship their products. This pollution reduction goal will affect every step of the manufacturing process from raw materials to recycling.
The Green Supply Chain
The environmental impacts of a green WalMart supply chain are enormous.
Take a look at the green supply chain of the future.
For instance, suppliers could label clothes to be washed in cold water instead of hot water, or accelerate the innovation of fabrics that dry faster. “The significance of Walmart’s commitment is the shift in perspective that it represents,” says Elizabeth Sturcken, EDF’s managing director for corporate partnerships. “It’s like moving from using a microscope to using a satellite to find opportunities for carbon pollution reduction across the globe.”
This action, the result of five years of collaboration with EDF and others, is sure to have a tremendous ripple effect. When Walmart makes a sea change, it hauls other companies along in its wake. And these companies are not small: Colgate-Palmolive, Johnson & Johnson, Proctor & Gamble. Moreover, Walmart reaches consumers at home, a surefire way to change attitudes and habits. Consider a few examples:
- When Walmart decided that the shipping and storage of large containers of laundry detergent was wasteful (so much of it was water), it told suppliers it would only carry concentrates to be sold in smaller containers—and that’s become the dominant form of detergent at Walmart and all other retailers.
- When Walmart took a hard look at the DVDs on its shelves, the company asked 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment to make the plastic packaging lighter, cutting lifecycle carbon emissions significantly and saving energy. Subsequently, the lighter packaging was used for software and games as well. These greener products are now being sold everywhere – not just at Walmart – an example of how a small change can have a big multiplier effect.
- When with EDF’s help, Walmart decided to educate its customers about the energy efficiency of CFLs by setting up informative displays in their stores, it sold hundreds of millions of bulbs. That compelled manufacturers to make refinements in their design and the quality of their light, transforming an entire industry.
Walmart has also been addressing its own carbon footprint—though that is dwarfed by suppliers’ emissions. It is increasing the efficiency of its trucks and stores. All this is saving the company money, and that, of course, is what Walmart is about. The company can, and undoubtedly will, do more. As Mike Duke, Walmart’s president, puts it: “We need to get ready for a world in which energy will only be more expensive, and there will only be a greater need to operate with less carbon in the supply chain.”
More than a third of all Americans shop at the country’s largest retailer every week. To critics, such big box stores are juggernauts indifferent to quality and local values. Certainly, large retailers’ way of doing business reinforces corporate and global food production. Walmart, like others, relies on a massive network of transport spanning great distances. Global sourcing has occasionally resulted in shoddy or even dangerous products on retailers’ shelves, such as when lead paint was found in toys from China. Like all chain stores, the outlets are physically disassociated from the very towns in which they sit, though they certainly create jobs, no small matter. But it’s also true that Walmart has begun developing closer relationships with its suppliers, buying locally, demanding better quality, and now, reducing its carbon emissions.
As John Lyle, who was a professor of landscape architecture at California Polytechnic Institute, wrote: “What humans designed we can redesign and what humans built, we can rebuild.” Walmart’s climate initiative is an important step in that direction. Participation is voluntary, though Walmart has made it clear that companies that cut their emissions will have an advantage in getting their product onto its shelves. Compliance remains a thorny issue, as the international supply chain is plagued by practices like illegal logging and phony labeling. Walmart is working on a detailed set of guidelines for accountability (you can comment on it on EDF’s Innovation Exchange website in a few weeks), and is pressing for more transparent sourcing. “We need a clear chain of custody from start to finish,” explains EDF project manager Michelle Harvey.
In this recession, we’ve heard a lot about what’s gone wrong with globalization. But today, it is possible that Walmart, one of the most agile players in the global economy, can show us how to harness the world marketplace to encourage innovation and cut dangerous pollution. “Walmart’s work will impact almost every American consumer, regardless of where they shop,” says Steve Hamburg, EDF’s Chief Scientist. “These are the products that are sold on every Main Street: a win for the environment. The idea is to change industry norms; that will help to strengthen American businesses and reduce the impact of our consumer society.”
Some thoughtful environmentalists feel we aren’t going to get things right until we have a wholesale transformation of our values—and that includes cutting way down on consumption. As David Orr writes: “We do not often see the true ugliness of the consumer economy.” We need a rebirth of social values that protect the environment. But that kind of change takes a long time, perhaps generations. We have experienced that painful crawl in the evolution of our attitudes about race, feminism and sexuality. How much time do we have?
We are beginning to see glimmers of change in our consumer mentality, partly because of a shaky economy and partly because of demographics. I have a hunch—based on anecdotal evidence—that baby boomers, facing empty nests and insecure stock markets, are scaling back their lifestyles, moving into smaller homes and lightening up. There does come a time when enough’s enough—when we no longer feel the need for more stuff that’s going to be thrown away.
There is a profound value in slowing down the pace of our lives, deepening our connections to the natural world, and honoring what is, after all, our children’s heritage.
The more we understand the consequences of waste and pollution, the more intolerable those become.
I believe Walmart understands this message. As the company’s president says, America needs “comprehensive legislative policy that addresses energy, energy security, the country’s competitiveness and reducing pollution.” Sure, cutting waste is good for business, and recasting the argument against global warming as a matter of wastefulness is smart marketing. But the message from Walmart to the American people is loud and clear: America’s corporate leaders want action on global warming!
So if you’re wondering who is selling snake oil these days….well, perhaps the global warming deniers will consider shrinking their packaging.
91 Responses
Comment from klem
March 8th, 2010 at 11:23 am
Will you get a grip. Wal-mart is the king of supply chain managers. Reducing waste in the supply chain will simply lower costs to Wal-mart. They’re not doing this to save the planet, they’re doing this to make more money and further crush their competition. Reducing supply chain costs is just good business, all companies should be doing this. Over time they all will.
Selling the supply chain waste reduction process as a way of saving the planet is just their marketing department doing it’s job.
Pingback from Dominique Browning's Personal Nature Column » Walmart Amps Up the … · Job News
March 8th, 2010 at 11:46 am
[...] Link: Dominique Browning's Personal Nature Column » Walmart Amps Up the … [...]
Comment from Dominique Browning
March 8th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
Klem,
Take a look at these articles to see why WalMart’s commitment is such a big deal:
http://greenbiz.com/blog/2010/02/25/two-cheers-walmarts-co2-pledge
http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2010/02/25/why-walmarts-carbon-commitment-will-make-world-difference/
Comment from Julia
March 8th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
Does it really matter why they are doing it? What matters are the effects of their actions.
Comment from Suzanne
March 8th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Dominique,
I was just re-reading one of your 2002 H&G editorials, loving your writing all over again. I’m thrilled to find this new(ish) column. Tough subject. Good work.
I’m looking forward to your new book! Best wishes for a happy and well-received release.
Comment from Susan E Roth
March 9th, 2010 at 9:17 am
I agree with Klem, Walmart is only in it for good business, not for anything but profit, and cutting out further competition from the few small companies and Mom and Pop stores that have managed some how to survive when Walmart comes to your community. Until they start treating their workers better, especially the women, and actually stop their deceitful union busting practices, there is nothing that company can do to convince me that they are not evil incarnate. I am glad they are going green, but what choice does any business have if they want to stay competitive? I am glad green is good for business, but don’t mistake a business move as a sign that Walmart actually cares about the planet. Susan
Comment from Aaron Agassi
March 9th, 2010 at 9:39 am
Much as I support all improved efficiency in reducing adverse environmental impact, I simply have to draw the line: I am against reduction in consumption. Real economic growth is good for environmental protection. I still hold out hope for progress and increasing affluence. I despise “virtuous” sacrifice. Such is neither desirable nor necessary, but ultimately harmful. Virtuous sacrifice defames and blinds the public to technological advance such as can vastly and radically accelerate both affluence and environmental protection. Please immediately stop recommending virtuous sacrifice and desist from praising decline in consumer income. The self-loathing siren song of sacrifice only ends in cutthroat lemming-like calamity.
Comment from Linda daCosta
March 9th, 2010 at 9:46 am
I’m pleased you’re bringing such information to light. Verizon is another major company that has made a commitment to reducing its carbon footprint…so you might check them out for a future column. What I would like to see included in these pieces is the impact on jobs creation: people care more about that issue right now and the RE industry is our best chance to make new jobs and train workers from dying industries to enter this new economy. Thanks for considering adding this factor to your column.
Comment from Susie O'Keeffe
March 9th, 2010 at 9:49 am
Dear EDF -
Your nonprofit corporation doesn’t has the reputation for leading edge thinking, and this is fine. Your legal works serves a purpose in helping get the mainstream educated. However, your article on Walmart reveals where your alliances ultimately lie (the curse of the nonprofit is that as it grows it begins to exist in order to exist instead of for its mission. How mush does Walmart give you in donations?)
The reality is, no matter how “green Walmart” may become, it is based on an ethical system that is fundamentally flawed. It is an ethical and moral system that has, among many other things, raised consumption to a necessary virtue. It is one of the root causes on our current ecological and social crisis. Walmart is based in this system and the materialism, and greed that it paved the way for. Walmart thrives through the destruction of local economies. It cannot meet the needs of an ecologically sound world because it prospers on homogenization, buying huge quantities at the lowest prices, and selling huge quantities. Walmart can, does and will continue to destroy local economies, put local people out of business, and take the soul from our towns as well as the many very poor people in other nations who have no choice but to sell their raw materials for the creation of cheap Walmart products at the lowest price possible.
Your lack of vision and understanding is discouraging though not surprising. We want to believe that we can just keep on with the same system and make some “green” adjustments. The reality is, as Wendall Berry writes, solving our environmental problems will take an entirely different system based on entirely different claims.
Susie O’Keeffe
Pingback from Vonn 2nd in super-G race, Mancuso 3rd (AP) - What Celebrities Are Doing
March 9th, 2010 at 9:57 am
[...] Dominique Browning's Personal Nature Column » Walmart Amps Up the … [...]
Comment from Del "Abe" Jones
March 9th, 2010 at 9:57 am
Climate Change
With all this furor over emails
And the debating who, is right
How can anybody question
That we all face a real plight?
Our political persuasion
Or position, rich or poor
Should not, make a difference
We should all, try to do more.
The ice is disappearing
And the oceans on the rise
Drought and crops are failing
And less ozone in our skies.
Caused by Man or Nature?
Greenhouse effect from CO2?
From El Niño or La Niña?
Could they all be lies, or true?
It’s beyond comprehension
Some think, we don’t leave our brand
With our burning fossil fuels
As we desecrate the Land.
We pollute our precious water
Fish our oceans to the brink
Don’t worry as the Polar Bear
Is about to become, extinct.
Big polluters fight the change
Because, they don’t really care
Their bottom line is all that matters
They don’t want to do their share.
It’s the almighty dollar
Which will rule, in this fight
Unless the people of the World
Demand, we all do, what’s right.
It surely won’t hurt anything
If we at least, try to change our fate
Though, it might not make a difference
Because, it may already be too late.
Del “Abe” Jones
12.11.2009
Comment from bud johnston
March 9th, 2010 at 10:00 am
to bad Wal mart is so poor at employee relations, it could make their image a lot better.making a big profit is always their bottom line
Comment from justthefacts
March 9th, 2010 at 10:02 am
REDUCE: Don’t buy Walmart
REUSE: If you have to buy, then reuse their products
RECYCLE: If you have to recycle, you have failed in the first two steps.
Comment from justthefacts
March 9th, 2010 at 10:02 am
REDUCE: Don’t buy Walmart
REUSE: If you have to buy, then reuse their products
RECYCLE: If you have to recycle, you have failed in the first two steps.
Comment from Brian Bigelow
March 9th, 2010 at 10:02 am
I’ve been rather surprised more recently by Walmart. The last two pairs of shoes I’ve bought at Walmart are made of recycled material. Yes, I’ve also bought every CFL in the house from Walmart.
Comment from Caroline
March 9th, 2010 at 10:04 am
This is a terrific article, and the criticisms may miss the point: not only is Wal-Mart changing the global manufacturing system in a way that is greener as well as more demanding in terms of Human Rights and Labour, they are reporting on this – and having suppliers report on this too. That means that we are all, globally, gaining access to enormously much more information that is verifiable, testable and possible to argue with. Governments have not brought us such measures, and have even rolled back or diluted those that were once implemented.
If we want to change consumption habits in richer countries, and I would argue that we do, then the availability of this information is critical to our having an understanding of the full impact of our purchases. The drive for efficiency in manufacture and distribution, married to the need to report it (using public reporting tools like the Carbon Disclosure Project), will give journalists, NGOs, governments and interested citizens the ability to know. And, it will allow interest groups to make the high cost of cheap goods visible.
The column started with a call for accountability. That is the power of the actions sited.
Thanks!
Comment from Rebecca Varon
March 9th, 2010 at 10:05 am
I would like to concur with and echo the comments made by Susie O’Keefe, Susan E Roth and Klem.
Comment from George
March 9th, 2010 at 10:13 am
I can not believe that EDF is aligning itself as a friend of WalMart. Walmart stands for everything that is/has gone wrong with our society in the last ten years. Its whole message is “buy more”. Unbelievable that EDF is supporting them. If this is how EDF is choosing to align themselves I will not be a further supporter of EDF.
Comment from Fallopia Tuba
March 9th, 2010 at 10:13 am
Why does anyone think Walmart can change?
I echo this comment from justthefacts:
“REDUCE: Don’t buy Walmart
REUSE: If you have to buy, then reuse their products
RECYCLE: If you have to recycle, you have failed in the first two steps.”
Comment from David Teague
March 9th, 2010 at 10:14 am
Now if Walmart will clean up its personnel issues and mitigate its intensely aggressive approach to marketing, perhaps I can with good conscience buy there. They come into a community, promise all things to all people, then they aggressively price other locals out of the market. If the store doesn’t meet the company’s guidelines, they abandon the town.
Comment from Larry A Holmes
March 9th, 2010 at 10:38 am
Walmart in their infinite wisdom ahve decided that other companies do all of the work and they reap the benefits. They have shoe boxes for stores, huge energy consumption and not graet acceptance in our communities.
In Florida, where I live, energy is starting to take a turn with whole communities trying to harness solar energy. If the company would start converting all of their stores at least to save more energy, then they will be doing our environment a huge favor.
Comment from Annie D
March 9th, 2010 at 10:43 am
Del “Abe” Jones, I love your poem and I am going to forward it to as many people as possible. Very succinct.
I understand all the arguments against Walmart, but I have to say I am very encouraged to read that such a big and influencial company is at least trying to go green, and I hope that there will be a trickle down effect to other companies who have no green plan as yet. Business is business and if competition ends up being the green solution for the planet, better that than ignoring the planet’s peril.
Annie D
Comment from Carlyn Short
March 9th, 2010 at 10:48 am
Does it matter that Walmart is looking at their financial bottom line – NO!! In the long run the earth is what matters; protecting the environment, using her resources wisely, leaving something for our children and grandchildren. I’m one of those boomers who has cut back – live in a 16′ x 20′ log cabin with no A/C or central heat (in Texas), drive a hybrid, collect recycling for four families to take to the local recycling center monthly. Yes, I am looking at the bottom line also.
Comment from Donnie
March 9th, 2010 at 11:06 am
Compact fluorescent bulbs give me a migraine, vertigo, and make me sick to my stomach. This is a common complaint from a lot of people. They also interfere with many hearing aids, and cause loud buzzing and distortion to the point, that the hearing aid becomes useless when in the same area as the bulbs.
CFL bulbs also contain mercury, and are hazardous when they break. Many people have had problems with the base smoldering or catching fire. And they give off highly toxic fumes when that happens. Whether to use these bulbs, or not, should be a matter of choice for everyone. They should not be forced on to people who can not tolerate them, or have had bad experiences with them in the past, and do not want to use them.
I still will not shop at Wal-mart, no matter how green they pretend to be. I do not want to buy the shoddy imported crap that they mostly sell.
Comment from Connie Peterson
March 9th, 2010 at 11:12 am
What about the millions of plastic bags that go out at Walmart? They package very little in every bag so that you have more bags than necessary … do they have a cut-back from the bag maker? They should have more re-use-able cloth bags at the counter for those of us who forget or don’t have enough with us. Can’t they purchase bags that dissolve into the soil? I shop at Walmart as little as possible. I do not like the stores or the products, but there are times and places that I have no choice as there is no other store around.
Comment from Valer
March 9th, 2010 at 11:19 am
Good for Walmart in taking steps to reduce their carbon footprint. Now, will Walmart take steps against China for their horrific human rights and animal cruelty record?
Comment from Silver Bullet
March 9th, 2010 at 11:21 am
The author quotes David Orr: “We do not often see the true ugliness of the consumer economy.”
That’s because it isn’t ugly. It’s imperfect, but still the most compassionate culture ever developed on the face of this planet. Many of the problems that the consumer economy does have are the result of people like the author fighting it tooth and nail every step of the way.
We have seen, time and again however, the truly evil ugliness of the statism that she and the edf promote, and it is one of the most abhorrent abominations ever created by human beings.
She also states that: “We need a rebirth of social values that protect the environment. But that kind of change takes a long time, perhaps generations. We have experienced that painful crawl in the evolution of our attitudes about race, feminism and sexuality. How much time do we have?”
Speak for yourself. My attitudes about race, feminism, and sexuality are:
1. None of them affect my perception of a person unless they make an issue of them, and
2. My life experience is that when someone does make an issue of them, they are more often than not projecting their beliefs onto others.
And as for protecting the environment, that’s just more of the green propaganda machine claiming that those that don’t join their movement don’t care about the environment. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Anyone is entitled to reduce their consumption, but NO ONE is entitled to reduce mine or anyone else’s without consent. The United States is a free republic, and the only way that will change is if the legal voters of this country agree to it with a legitimate majority. The pendulum is finally beginning to swing in the right (pun intended) direction.
I hope you all enjoy the blessings of living in the most wonderful country on earth today. ;o)
Comment from Paul Reith
March 9th, 2010 at 11:22 am
Dominique-
Great story about progress. I find it amazing that such apparently motivated people find time to criticize and condemn their would-be allies. Even if we can’t get progress from Congress, Walmart can influence across borders in a way Congress can’t anyhow. When environmental responsibility is good for business, I benefit even when I’m not the consumer.
Thanks for the hard work!
Comment from bruceleier
March 9th, 2010 at 11:24 am
Good for them. I guess. I still will not shop there because of their active role in destroying USA manufacturing jobs and small town small businesses.
Comment from sam moturi
March 9th, 2010 at 11:27 am
walmart is doing the right thing.i agree entirely that whatever it’s motives,finaly the erth benefits.that is great.if you fail in reducing,reuse and recyling,you have not failed cimpletely as you can send the waste for manufacture of some organic fertiliser,manufature other items from waste,biomass used for energy generation etc.the 4th ‘Recover’
Comment from Tina
March 9th, 2010 at 11:38 am
I don’t think that relabeling clothes is going to do any good. No one really reads the labels anymore. There is no real way Walmart can change. They still have to ship their items from China. that involves cargo planes. That’s air pollution. They keep their TV’s on display running constantly. Energy waste. They are hopeless! Wow they sell a few eco bags. They must be doing so much! NOT!
Comment from LorBoy
March 9th, 2010 at 11:41 am
I do not shop at Walmart because I find them so morally repugnant on so many levels. Their immense power to affect the entire consumer stream somehow does not make me sleep easier.
They have a very long hike ahead of them if they if they are ever going to balance out their horrific corporate kharma.
Comment from Kristin
March 9th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
What about how terrible they treat their employees, their contribution to urban sprawl and thus eliminating farms, their anti-union stance, their sweatshop imported materials, and so on?
I wouldn’t exactly call WalMart an ethical company!
Comment from Chance O'Connor
March 9th, 2010 at 12:05 pm
Dominique,
Thank you for trumpeting Walmart’s move toward a greener model. But I think that Walmart is only doing what they hope will create good PR in hopes that it will bring in more business. Based on their track record all decisions are made for profit, not out of concern for people or the environment. Most of the changes they make will be forced onto the companies that do business with them. Yes they will make some changes for appearances sake but you can bet they won’t give up anything that they don’t take back from those they do business with. Walmart pushed companies to China to lower production costs opening the door to poorly made, and sometimes dangerous goods, in order to make as much money as possible.
Comment from Charles Elliott
March 9th, 2010 at 12:11 pm
If Walmart would simply go out of business, it would have the best possible environmental impact. Walmart is all about cheapening products by pressuring the manufacturers until the quality and durability are not there. More stuff for the junk pile as we devour the earth! Like most nonprofits, EDF must have fallen upon hard times. But selling out the environment is NOT a viable way forward. For EDF or the planet. Just say NO to Walmart!
Comment from Ol' Pete
March 9th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
Wal-Mart is the Anti-Christ chain store. Mom & Pop stores are Mary & Joseph stores and Jack Daniels is the Messiah.
Keep your wits about you and stay beautiful always.
Comment from Monica Kelly Wright
March 9th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
I have to agree with Kristan! If Walmart really cares about this country and global warming, they will start stocking American made items instead of filling their stores with junk made in countries that exploit workers and the environment. Shipping this junk half way around the world creates a great deal of carbon emissions. Quit trying to pretend you are a environmentally conscious company and do something real Walmart. And stop trying to take credit for everything that your suppliers are doing to help the environment.
Comment from Katrina
March 9th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
I concur with Caroline’s comments on 03/09/10. EDF does an excellent job of making change in the real world. We can dream of an idealized world, based on an often a mythical past, or we can move forward to improve what we have. Keep up the good work EDF
Comment from Kerul
March 9th, 2010 at 1:02 pm
There are valid points to just about everyone’s comments here, both the supportive and the critical. It seems clear that greening business-as-usual is simply window dressing, and that unless a transition to a paradigm in which biospheric limits are accounted for, social and environmental degradation will continue, perhaps be slightly stretched out before reaching devastating irreversible critical mass. Yet systems do not turn on a dime – it will take time and gradual transition to create the paradigm shift, time which we may or may not have.
Walmart’s environmental efforts may not be as sincere or effortful as we’d like, and their business model may still be abhorrent in a number of ways, but their example will create pressure that forces industry to stop throwing up roadblocks to change. This process then creates public expectations, which then creates momentum for government policy to support sustainability, which then creates a tighter framework for industry, a loop which continues to strengthen and support positive change. Yes, the longer we wait the more expensive it will be, but radical change is also very costly, and not likely.
Walmart doesn’t need my dollars, and I will still not support them because of other social and business policies, but that does not mean I (we) shouldn’t appreciate the direction they are going and the social influence they will generate toward sustainable change, while still pushing them to do ever more.
Comment from Gregory Hilbert
March 9th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
As the founder of Green Education Network, I am appalled and disgusted by EDF’s Walmart-funded regime of “If you can’t beat the causes of a course to catastrophe, take their money and have a good life for yourself while helping them lead the world’s sheep to slaughter”.
That EDF partnered with a woman who enriched herself selling consumerism to America’s middle class (I read your bio) only shows how pervasive is the greedy grip of the wealthiest among us who own, execute and feed off the selfish interests of multinational corporations devouring the resources on which all life depends.
For a maddening but authoritative and enlightening revelation of the process by which the officers and executives of “establishment” non-profits like EDF are living the good life by becoming advertisers for the oligarchical Walmarts of the world, read this month’s cover story in The Nation — and then come back here to see it in action — at http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100322/hari/single
You cite another such feeder of leftovers off the multinational corporation banquet table in your comment of March 8 at 1:45PM. You and that site and EDF repeat a spin of the data that is grossly misleading. Walmart’s goal is a pittance reduction. Do the math. Over the 5 years Walmart’s emissions would have grown by 3 million tonnes, which it targets to offset by 4 million tonnes, for a net reduction of 1 million of its 20 million tonnes over a 5-year period. 5%/5yrs= a net reduction of 1% per year.
That’s the FACT of the matter. That’s the TRUTH of the matter. And you and EDF are giving them millions of dollars worth of free advertising and publicity, while EDF operates as a non-profit purporting to help save the world.
I say what Walmart is doing is an excellent example of too little and too late, and what you and EDF are doing is an excellent example of self-interested support of it. In partnership with a small and impoverished Foundation leader who “gets it”, I will be soon launching a new website in an attempt to help counter this disastrous trend. I am documenting submission of this comment for the purpose of widely publicizing any failure to post it or action to delete it. Your published guidelines did not reserve for yourself the right to do so.
My name is Gregory Hilbert, my personal email address is greghilbert@hotmail.com, and I have considerable expertise in the use of media and law for the sake of truth and justice.
Comment from Bohemian Mamo'
March 9th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Greenwashing takes many forms these days. Clearly your organization has joined the ranks of those who choose to muddy the waters by portraying slight of hand gimmicks as true reform. Your position ranks right up there with the Sierra Club promoting Dow chemical!! (I returned my membership card to them)
Walmart doesn’t care about sustainably produced goods; they make their BILLIONS off mass-produced garbage that harms people and planet at every step. Walmart doesn’t care about promoting healthy, nutritious food; they make their BILLIONS off imported, chemical laden JUNK food! Walmart doesn’t care about their employees, refusing nursing mothers the opportunity to pump breast milk at work, union busting, reducing pay by increasing health care costs, promoting men over women, many of whom are single mothers whose low wages keep them and their children in poverty and dependent on the State for food and medical assistance. Walmart doesn’t care about protecting our Mother; they care about image and profit margins. Sure they looked good promoting CFLs, but if they actually gave a damn they would have also provided recycling centers and educated people about proper disposal, instead those bulbs and their toxic mercury have been added to the endless stream of pollution flowing from Walmarts business model. Decades ago manufacturers realized they could save money on shipping if products were packaged in plastic and now we and our children pay the price with our lives!
I am disgusted that a so-called environmental protector is again using their influence to persuade people to shop at Walmart!!! Are you insane!!??? Or are you simply providing incontrovertible evidence that Environmental Defense has no integrity???!
Dominique Browning, maybe if your 10 year old daughter had been diagnosed with ovarian cancer and lost all of her reproductive organs you might think twice about promoting the propaganda of a company whose business influence undoubtedly contributes to the demand for cheap, unhealthy products made with crap like BPA and other endocrine disruptors. Your “story” is a repugnant fairytale. BTW, the only reason I leave this comment here is because your “unsubscribe” form only allowed 255 characters. I am so angry I am shaking and I want you to know it!!!
Comment from Joe Zinich
March 9th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Cost reduction is one driver of business profits. Businesses that reduce cost by using less energy,less raw materials, recycling, etc. and, if they have enough market heft, requiring the same from their suppliers is wonderful. All profit, the businesses, their employees,their suppliers and THE ENVIRONMENT.
EDF should do more selling of the profit aspect of reducing carbon footprint and reward the business that does by endorsing their efforts – like walmart.
People who say that EDF should wake up, Walmart is taking advantage of EDF, are very short sighted. More and more businesses who see the advantage of cost reduction, higher profit and competitiveness will drive change.
Does it really matter how we reach a sustainable world?
Comment from REESORT
March 9th, 2010 at 1:57 pm
Walmart could do even more by converting their truck fleet to natural gas.
Comment from Marta
March 9th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
Kudos to the EDF for working with Walmart. Now, if you can just get Target to develop green vision, that would be wonderful – two retail giants helping to green up the planet.
Comment from sly
March 9th, 2010 at 2:04 pm
When Walmart treat their fellowmen (employees) the way they deserve it, stop selling inferior quality products using cheap labor made in China I might rethink but until then I will not step through their door.
I echo justthefacts as well:
“REDUCE: Don’t buy Walmart
REUSE: If you have to buy, then reuse their products
RECYCLE: If you have to recycle, you have failed in the first two steps.”
Comment from Mark Morley
March 9th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
Thank you for this article. I applaud Environmental Defense for engaging WalMart in the effort to develop and disseminate greener business practices. The environmental movement will get nowhere if environmentalists choose only to engage businesses that are already environmentally progressive (and which businesses are REALLY progressive, anyway?). Large businesses like WalMart represent the bulk of our national economy, and redefining their business practices is critical. Staunch environmentalists do not represent a large enough percentage of the population that we can just run the WalMarts out of business and make everyone shop at green, locally owned retailers. WalMart’s willingness to redefine its business practices is a glimmer of hope. It may not be all that we would like, it may even be too little too late, but it is a start. And given all the stalling that is happening in this country with respect to global warming, I’m happy to see these steps. Will I shop WalMart in the future? I don’t know. They have a long ways to go to win my business…but they’re headed in the right direction.
Comment from Elmo
March 9th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
This is all very nice to know about Wall Mart, however I still will continue to boycott them. Why? Because at their core they are still a despicable company. Because Wall Mart is a right-wing company that funnels vast sums of money into the campaigns of the Republican politicians who are doing everything they can to fight any efforts to protect us from pollution and global warming. Why is the Clean Air Act being gutted? Because congress is indentured to corporate America. Wall Mart is a huge supporter of the Bush family, and was the biggest supporter of Jeb Bush’s campaigns for Governor of Florida. Wall Mart had the highest number of employees on food stamps and welfare, because wages were so low. Wall Mart busts unions and intimidates employees who try to organize. Wall Mart destroys downtowns in small towns all across America by putting mom and pop business out of business. Wall Mart takes out “Peasant Insurance” on its employees, so if they die, Wall Mart, and not the family make money from their death. See Michael Moore’s “Capitalism: A Love Story”; it explains how Peasant Insurance works, and how Wall Mart uses it to make money. If you really care about the environment, the best message you can send to Wall Mart and the world is to support locally owned small business, eat locally grown food, and keep your money in your local economy where it will continue to support your community and your neighbors.
Comment from Elmo
March 9th, 2010 at 3:29 pm
@Bohemian Mamo’
Right On!!! I stand with you!!!
Comment from gnocco
March 9th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
before getting too mushy over Walmart’s channeling of John Muir, i’ll wait to see how successful the company is in having pollution addressed at the Chinese factories that churn out so many of the products it sells. to what degree will it ‘go local’? also, is a 20 million tonne reduction in greenhouse gases a year a signifcant number when Walmart has 2 million employees and 100,000 suppliers for 8,100 stores and 200 million customers? how much of this programme is a real corporate commitment and how much of it is a PR pose? we’ll have to see some results. as for now, Walmart crowing about its greenness has a similar odor to Exxon’s ‘green’ TV commercials.
Comment from Dominique Browning
March 9th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
A quote from EDF Vice President of Corporate Partnerships Gwen Ruta in response to comments that WalMart donates to EDF:
“EDF takes no money from WM or any of its corporate partners. That independence allows EDF to maintain its objectivity and frees us to drive change across entire industries.”
More here: http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=1746
Comment from Teresa
March 9th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
So according to this article WalMart is annoucing THEY will make reductions by “asking the estimated 100,000 companies that supply it to cut the amount of carbon they emit when they produce, package and ship their products” In other words WalMart is merely attempting to shift poor public opinion about their evil ways with “green talk”, but no action.
Sorry, WalMart is a corporate conglomerate that puts small local businesses OUT OF BUSINESS. I’ve seen it firsthard. And WalMart is supporting the Chinese economy because almost everything they sell comes from China. Remember the old days when they advertised “made in America”? Notice that they don’t do that anymore.
I occasionally have to shop at WalMart when I need something I can’t get in my area (which is semi-rural), without driving 30-35 miles. However I try not to shop at WalMart, and in fact I try not to patronize mega stores of any kind unless I absolutely have to. Support your local small businesses (aka your neighbors), your community, your local farmers etc. They actually care about their customers because their livlihood depends upon it. And the tax revenues STAY IN YOUR CITY/TOWN.
I am City government employee, the wife of a small business owner and the daughter of a self employed father.
Comment from Julie
March 9th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
Walmart is interested in its bottom line. Switching to energy saving methods is very cost effective. Walmart thwarts labor organizing efforts and does not offer benefits to its employees. Walmart purchases products manufactured in foreign countries thereby contributing to American job loss and encouraging poor labor conditions in those foreign countries. Walmart can call itself green but the bottom line is only black or red.
Comment from Jess
March 9th, 2010 at 4:32 pm
I like this article. The fact is, most everyone is going to shop at Wal-Mart. There are people who won’t but most do. When I go to my Wal-Mart it is packed everytime. Why, because it’s cheap and everything is there. They already eliminate some gases by making it so you don’t have to travel all over to go to 2 or 3 different places to get everything that you need. One stop.
So wanting to eliminate 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gases is a bonus. Who cares why they are doing it they still are! All business are in it to make money, the bottom line. But if Wal-Mart is going to help save the planet in the process, Good Job!!!
Comment from J Davis
March 9th, 2010 at 4:32 pm
Wow global warming…… such lies…..every scientist is full of crap…..global warming….I laugh every-time I see it…. just another way for the government to make some $$$. Everyone knows all the data is crap…. yet im suppose to give my money to the EDF after already paying enough taxes as is? give me a break I wouldnt give them a penny for their thoughts….because they are crap anyways!
Comment from Comments from Margaia
March 9th, 2010 at 5:29 pm
I find it very interesting and quite enlightening to read all the various responses which reveal insights into who we Americans are. What diversity!… from those who have no sense or knowledge of the scientific facts related to climate change/global warming (either due to ignorance, lack of opportunity for educating themselves, fear or sheer refusal to know what we are facing);to those who fear or don’t want to let go of their affluent life style or addiction to consumerism; to those who don’t realize that WalMart unfortunately is here to stay, so this first “Big Step” in the right direction should be appreciated for what it is, hoping that it wll lead to more and more steps in the right direction that will affect all other corporations; to those who hail EDF for working with WalMart to help effect some important changes. Let’s hope EDF continues to work with WalMart to pressure them on all the other issues people point out, so that more positive change can happen! I think we need to realize that every step in the direction of working toward counter-acting climate change/global warming, whether it’s each little positive step we take as individuals, or the larger steps made by corporations, all count when we join forces. Yes, it may all be too little too late, because we’ve been getting information and signs about the changing environment caused by human beings for the past several decades, but we’ve only awakened lately to the impending catastophes that await us. At least what we do NOW can slow down or lessen the effects of what is happening in and on our Home Planet, but what is already lost will never be recovered. We are not handing down to our children the magnificent Earth that we have known. So let’s all do what we can — without judging or condeming other’s intentions, goals and actions — to save what we can of our beloved planet Earth! I’m 75 yrs old, and I’ve been doing all I can (as I learn more and more what can be done), since I was 35!
Comment from gabsmith
March 9th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
How much easier it is to take the low road toward a high profile company. How quickly you forget the RAPID RESPONSE of WALMART in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina when WALMART dispatched 1500 of their own trucks to help the people in need in New Orleans when our own President remained impotent to send aid. Let’s get on board or get out of the way and support all businesses who have the forsite to do the right thing!
Comment from golden2husky
March 9th, 2010 at 8:46 pm
Many good points about WalMart, both pro and con. While I do not shop there, I do shop the Depot often. One key point to bring out is that we should be concerned about minimizing our footprint. As consumers we all make some impact, some more than others. WalMart’s “new” green(er) policies will be beneficial even if we choose to go elsewhere. The key statement was “…When Walmart makes a sea change, it hauls other companies along in its wake…” So even if one dislikes WM for a myriad of good reasons, these polices will encourage many other companies to become more environmentally responsible. We also have to be realistic. Despite all the negativity a lot of people still shop there and that is not going to change. So we might as well get as much environmental benefit out of them that we can.
Comment from John M. Morgan
March 9th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
I agree with Gregory Hilbert and urge people to read the Nation article.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100322/hari/single
Comment from Gregory Hilbert
March 9th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
I repeat my comment of March 9 at 1:06PM.
Thank you John Morgan above for urging that people read the Nation article at http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100322/hari/single
For the record, EDF states that it accepts no funding from Walmart, and that all of the money it receives for such partnerships as it has with Walmart are funded by such organizations as The Overbrook Foundation. EDF maintains staffed offices in Bentonville Arkansas where Walmart is headquartered. EDF receives over $100 Million in grants and donations yearly. Moreover, if you review EDF publicity links you will observe Walmart will obtain it’s paltry 1% reduction in emissions courtesy of its suppliers, including the huge multinational corporations from whom EDF can take money without anyone knowing Walmart pressed them to. Since I commented at 1:06 PM today their logos disappeared from the for-profit website to which this blog posted a link!
EDF went from grants and donations of $52 Million to over $100 Million in just 5 years, by making itself among other things a promoter of the “too little and too late practices” of its many greedy for-profit corporate partners, contributors, and oligarchical allies, Walmart and the Waltons included.
Does the blogger of this website deny receiving compensation from EDF for praising Walmart, either in the form of money or other good and valuable consideration in anticipation of personal profit?
Comment from Merrijo Hatfield
March 9th, 2010 at 11:19 pm
I don’t shop at Walmart either, because of the way it treats its employees and suppliers. In particular, when my (disabled) daughter worked there – doing a good job! – they treated her badly – and illegally. They kept promising they would correct the policies, but never did. She should have sued them, instead of quitting.
I do know of one good thing episode, though. When CA had its terrible wildfires (about ten years ago), they allowed anyone who needed to to park their trailers in their parking lots.
Also: Our local religious camp (Thousand Pines), was helping the firefighters; when Walmart executives heard about it, they came out and personally dove into the work. They also contributed a lumber mill to help convert the burned trees into dormitories; also beds, linens, and anything else needed.
Comment from MM (Arkansas)
March 10th, 2010 at 12:03 am
<<>>
Yes. I can easily imagine a technically “sustainable” world in which there is so little of any real value that there is no point living in it. Culture matters. Ours is deeply pathological, and sick unto death. The entire Wal-mart phenomenon is only one symptom of this. We live during the fall of the second “Rome” (that’s the U.S., to be clear), there is no question about that anymore; and like ancient Rome, we (the U.S.) will collapse under our own corruption; that seems inevitable now. The only question for me is how long the death throes will take, and whether our festering disease will poison the rest of the world irretrievably first. It may be that little “band-aids” like this move on Wal-Mart’s part, which might somewhat slow the destruction, might make the ultimate damage worse by slowing the collapse. I don’t say this lightly, because I have a child myself, and I don’t relish the thought of her living in the Dark Ages–but they are so clearly coming anyway, it begins to seem that it might be best to bring them swiftly and limit the extent of the degradation before the “reboot” that might be hoped for in the aftermath. My advice–build or join the strongest “monastery” you can find. These were the isolated strongholds of education and culture during the last Dark Age. Perhaps they will take different forms this time, but a securable and somewhat insular setting is probably important. Plant a garden, wherever you can. Buy nothing packaged in plastic (hint: real food isn’t). Turn off your television and get rid of your cellphone (don’t throw it away though, it’s hazardous waste). Read a book. Feed your brain and your body only healthy, REAL things (hint: anything on a screen–including this message–isn’t). Talk to the people you love face to face. Cherish the time you have with them; the times they truly are a-changing, ready or not. Pray. Pray harder. God help us.
Comment from Zainab Faruqui Ali
March 10th, 2010 at 12:47 am
my congratulations to walmart for taking measures to eliminate 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gases from Walmart’s global supply chain! every step, small or big, counts in the movement for reducing global warming.
Comment from caroline
March 10th, 2010 at 3:04 am
I am so disappointed that EDF posted this huge endorsement of WalMart sent to people who I assume by conscience try not to darken their doors with their shadow. Nothing in this article will make me shop at WalMart because of the destruction they represent to all the communities they invade and the treatment of their employees. So WalMart employs 2M people, I bet those people would be so much happier if they were employed by a small business, those same ones that WalMart put out of business with their behemoth, horrible stores where they were treated like human beings; so WalMart has 200M customers per week, those customers would be much better served in businesses that really cared about their patronage in a more personal and humanitarian way.
I despise WalMart and will never shop there, I’m disappointed with this writer and I will unsubscribe with EDF for trying to sell us a rotten bill of goods.
Comment from Donna H.
March 10th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
There are so many good, truthful comments here. Most of them reflect my opinion of WalMart and the reason why I haven’t shopped at WalMart since the founder, Sam Walton, died and his heirs took over the company. Mr. Walton had a business philosophy (as stated in the book “The WalMart Decade”) that he didn’t want his business to grow to a size that made it impossible for him to visit every store personally at least once a year. When he did visit he didn’t announce himself or identify himself as he walked around the store observing the conditions and the atmosphere, interacting with customers and staff. He was truly concened about the people who worked for him. It was reported that if he found the manager sitting in his office he would ask him about conditions he had seen. If the manager couldn’t explain he was reminded that his “office” was the store and that he should be out there, “managing by walking around.” He believed that the “Made in America” slogan truly reflected what a business should be concerned with – buying American made products kept American people working so they would have money to spend with American businesses. All of the changed within a very short period of time when his heirs and successors decided that they didn’t have enough wealth but needed to make even more, regardless of how they got it. WalMart will convince me that they have really changed their ways when they once again adopt and act by Sam Walton’s philosophy. Until then, I won’t spend my money in their stores. I don’t care how “green” they profess to be.
Comment from Just my $0.02
March 10th, 2010 at 5:26 pm
Paul Reith hit the nail on the head.
After reading ALL of the comments, I went back and discarded any that seemed to be founded in environmental dogma, then I removed the obvious nut jobs, and finally the blind haters of corporations. I suggest that the readers do the same and see what is left (no pun intended).
From my perspective, Walmart is exercising free market capitalism for the benefit of WALMART with consequential benefit to all Americans.
Business is the engine of economic growth and business made the United States of America the most innovative, prosperous, ethical, generous nation in history.
I expect that many of the true-believers have already checked out and are busily typing viscious responses…but I believe that 300,000,000 Americans each making modest, environmentally friendly changes to their everyday lives serves the cause far more than a mob of frothing-at-the-mouth zealots.
Lunacy will not take the day, but rather moderation and civilly presented modest proposals of changes that we all can live with.
Just my $0.02
Comment from Kathleen Williams
March 10th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
I would like to be counted in the ranks of those who are appalled at EDF’s support of this corporation. Wal Mart is single-handedly leading the trend to double the amount of trash created in America through its competitive, shoddy, planned-obsolescent products.
Comment from Caleb W Cliff
March 11th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
In response to the varying opinions, it is important to understand that Walmart is currently here and it is a company with massive influence and power. Yes, it takes these actions for its bottom line. And yes, Walmart does not harbor a sustainable model, but for the time being, the side effect at least helps to shift other large companies behaviors. And until we have better models, more localized, stripped down and permaculture style models, their influence will remain. It may as well have a good effect.
But we should all be looking into how we can grow things from the bottom up, empower communities and shift towards localizing businesses. Small scale factories, farming, creating side-chain recycling outfits, like putting an aluminum plant next to a can recyclery, would lessen fuel costs and create more jobs in local communities, shortening commutes and reconnecting communities.
Without further digression, all of this must remain relevant to current states of business and agriculture. Yet as such, it is vastly important to keep pushing intelligent ideas of scaling back and localization for future developments. We are completely capable of creating sustainable models. Thank you.
Comment from Just my $0.02
March 11th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
Bravo Caleb!
That is what I call RATIONAL ENVIRONMENTALISM.
Brain-storming by families, communities, counties, and states allows the best, most-implementable ideas to rise to the top.
Just my $0.02
Comment from Evelyn Thompson
March 11th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
I work at Walmart. I seldom buy anything there, because most of their merchandise is made in China. When Sam was alive, there were a lot more American made goods available. If they would stock American made goods, the carbon footprint would be significantly less than it is now. It’s a lot less expensive to ship w/in the continental U.S. than it is to ship from the other side of the world.
Are they going “green”? I guess so, they took the door greeters’ heaters away (in Pikeville, KY) this past winter because of “rising utility bills”. These were SMALL heaters where we could at least warm our hands & feet during this very cold winter. Now, get this: The cart bay, where the returned carts are stored, has a large overhead heater on the ceiling. The carts have heat — those who stand by the doors to greet customers coming in have none. Can you say, “BULLSH*T”?
WallyWorld is not about being green for the sake of the planet. They are about “LOOKING GOOD TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC”. They care nothing for their employees, and do all they can to get anyone with any significant amount of time there to quit, so they can hire newbies who don’t cost as much to pay.
I fully agree with those who said Walmart is the anti-Christ of stores.
Comment from Ysusf Mohammad
March 12th, 2010 at 2:26 am
“So if you’re wondering who is selling snake oil these days….well, perhaps the global warming deniers will consider shrinking their packaging.”
Just because people don’t believe in global warming doesn’t mean they don’t save energy or aren’t concerned about the planet. EDF thinks in order to be an environmentalist one must believe in global warming? The two aren’t related. Talk about selling the snake oil.
Comment from Gregory Hilbert
March 12th, 2010 at 10:36 am
I repeat my comments CONDEMNING EDF’s praise of Walmart made March 9 at 1:06PM and 10:22PM above. I repeat that the FACT of the math of Walmart’s goal is a pittance net reduction of 1 million of its 20 million tons of emissions, only 1% per year over a 5-year period!
I cite comments made by others above applauding Walmart’s pledge to reduce its emissions by 20 million tons(which is NOT what Walmart pledged)as PROOF EDF’s distorted presentation is so grossly misleading as to constitute AN OUTRAGEOUSLY ADVERTENT DECEPTION IF IT IS NOT PUBLICLY CORRECTED VIA EDF EMAIL TO IT’S ENTIRE LIST. I will not relent until EDF does so.
In the meantime I ask readers to see the CALL TO ACTION:
http://www.greeneducationnetwork.com/article/gens-gregory-hilbert-condemns-edf-praise-of-walmart
Comment from Susan Markowitz
March 12th, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Walmart giveth and Walmart taketh away. Mostly taketh away! I nearly fainted when I read about this ED’s “unholy alliance.” Give Walmart a pat on the back, even a cheer, for making one stride in the right direction. As so many others have pointed out, they do not deserve an alliance with a respected environmental organization such as ED, while they are at the same time committing so many other, serious human-rights and anti-environmental violations (forcing towns to accept one of their mega-boxes, along with the attendant mega-parking and mega-drainage issues).
I am deeply disappointed in ED for allying itself with a company with such a sorry record on fair-employment-practices and purchases of goods made in sweatshops. Yes, environmental steps are important; so is a company’s overall behavior.
There are so many other hardworking, worthy environmental organizations out there, and so few dollars on my (unemployed) part, that I will henceforth redirect same to those which evaluate the overall practices of their ally-companies before endorsing same.
Comment from Joe Zinich
March 12th, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Does it matter why Walmart is going green? Or is it more important that they are?
I hope that more businesses and individuals jump on the profit driven green bandwagon. Save money and oh by the way you also save the planet. That is a win win.
I deplore many of Walmart’s business practices, but they are expert at driving cost from their system and their suppliers systems. They are profit driven.
Few people and even fewer businesses are driven by profit. Demonstrate how being green will reduce individual household costs and reduce businesses costs and increase their sales and they’ll all jump on the bandwagon. Isn’t that what we want?
Comment from Skye
March 12th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
I am SOOO sick of the us against them mentality! Yes, some of Wal-Marts policiies suck, but so do K-Mart’s, Costco’s, Penney’s, Sears, Kohl’s and a bevy of other non-mom and pop stores. I don’t hear anyone complaining about them or boycotting them. If we’re fighting for change and a company is willing to use the assistance of an organization like EDF that is ready to step in a help implement changes that benefit ALL, why not??? Wake up people that are objecting! Go, EDF!! You have my continued support!!
Comment from quentinp
March 12th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
Fascinating article, and comments.
If I had to choose between
1) People who care who and no difference to the planet
and
2) People who don’t care (as many above claim of WalMart) but are working to make the planet better
I would choose 2 in a heartbeat – and keep my eye on them. Which is what I see happening. And how sure can we be that WalMart’s motivations are purely impure?
For ages we’ve been saying that green is good business and as soon as it actually becomes good business we need to encourage that shift, not complain about our assumption that certain people in certain companies true motives might not be as pure or self-sacrificing as ours.
Thank you EDF for starting this work with WalMart, may others pay attention, and may we use this to prove to some lead-footed politicians that change is possible.
Those that have a problem with WalMart for other reasons need to fight their fights for their reasons and through their channels. Refusing to reduce CO2 emitted by WalMart because it might actually help the company would be perverse.
This is the company that decided a year or so ago to push the sale of 1,000,000 CFLs (from memory) even though their customers were not asking for this shift (and at WM what the customers ask for is almost always what they get).
If EDF did it (read their policy about dealing with for-profit companies) then it’s good enough for me.
Comment from Danielle
March 12th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
As per the Center for Biological Diversity (see below) their change is the result of settling a lawsuit brought against them by the CBD.
Suit Forces Walmart to Slash Greenhouse Gas Pollution
Settling lawsuits filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, late last week Walmart agreed to adopt significant anti-global-warming measures in constructing two new Supercenters in Southern California. The settlement requires the nation’s largest retailer to install three 250-kilowatt rooftop solar facilities and incorporate cutting-edge efficiency measures at planned stores in Perris and Yucca Valley, as well as to start a refrigerant audit and improvement program to reduce emissions at certain existing California Walmart stores. Walmart will also contribute $120,000 to the Mojave Desert Land Trust for land-conservation purposes. The big-box chain agreed to employ similar CO2-reduction measures for a proposed Supercenter in Riverside.
The settlement adds to the Center’s list of successes in upholding California’s premier environmental and land-use law, the California Environmental Quality Act, to improve new development, reduce greenhouse gas pollution, save energy, save money, and promote a vibrant green economy. In the words of Center Senior Attorney Matt Vespa, “If big-box stores are to be built in California, measures like the installation of solar-power systems must be adopted to minimize the projects’ greenhouse gas pollution.”
Get more from the Los Angeles Times.
Comment from D Lamont
March 12th, 2010 at 3:15 pm
How about that 18 wheeler in the photo? And, the fact that most people who shop big box stores drive long distances in their SUVs to stock up on all those cheap products from China! Then they tend to overbuy, so create waste.
Let’s have a little reality here.
D Lamont
Comment from R Collins
March 12th, 2010 at 3:42 pm
Perhaps EDF could also approach WalMart about not coming in and dominating the local economy of entire communities. All the CFL, packaging changes and green office materials in the world can NEVER make up for the devastation they employ with the products the actual products they put on the market,the communities they irreparably change by FORCING their way through the Local Government process, by the good local economies they destroy.By supplanting,present and future produced local and INDIGENOUS in place products.
And what of cradle to cradle ?
Walmart’s are equivalent to the giant ocean trawlers – is that who you want to give a platform for a pro bono green washing to ? They not only create a market for literally tons of cheap non recyclable crap,and make re localization of our economy impossible in the process they destroy our culture as well. The local ‘market’ is one of the foundations of culture. All these issues have enormous ghg consequences attached l that far outstrip the new WalMart changes.
I believe our job is to help people understand why the 3 E’s Environment,Equity, Economy are critical to our survival here on earth – Walmart will never pass that test they only want to green up it for marketing sake. I think we understand getting a big bang for GHG emmissions buck – but don’t you think you should also acknowledge the whole picture, otherwise that is not a well rounded education for ‘your members’ and the watching public.The message EDF is giving is that those particular ghg reductions make up for all the above – that is why it is called green washing in the first place.
Across the country many organizations exist that are working to re- localize and the actions of the big non profits legitimizing the big corporations or at the very least self censoring themselves from talking about the local consequences of giant corporate has an impact on our work down here in the knitty gritty.The ‘trench’ where the shops shut down , the 5 acre green belt forest gets cut for a huge heat island,the Town Council hits a corporate lawsuit wall -all for the plastic ware distributing WalMart to have it’s identical building in our town. And our unique home now looks like anywhere America with storm water pouring off the acres big parking lots.
And then when the doors open and the community comes in with a request for something slightly unusual or more ‘green’ that we used to get at ‘Jim’s Hardware’ we are told by the part time stressed out store manager that it’s out of his hands and we must contact corporate headquarters . . . .
We have now been fully ‘transformed’ alright,
R Collins
Comment from A. Hoffman
March 13th, 2010 at 5:18 am
The statement by Walmart’s president that America needs “comprehensive legislative policy that addresses energy, energy security, the country’s competitiveness and reducing pollution.” is so incredibly Orwellian, hypocritical and oxymoronic coming from him, that it makes me wonder how stupid does he actually think people are to not see how utterly transparent that statement is. Walmart was THE major force that forced American industry to close their plants and set up shop in countries with minimal (or no) environmental laws, weak or non-existant labor laws, and toxic and hazardous materials, all so Walmart could maximize their profits and enrich the Walton family to the tune of billions. I wonder how much the president of Walmart would support legislative policy that reduced pollution if that legislation clamped down on the wasteful and polluting shipping of cheap, throw-away, useless crap from halfway around the world?
Come on EDF, give me break! After reading this Walmart promo piece, I feel like throwing up! Americans need to face the hard facts: Americans make up 5% of the world’s population but consume 24% of the world’s resources. On average, one American consumes as much energy as 2 Japanese, or 6 Mexicans, or 13 Chinese, or 31 Indians, or 128 Bangladeshis, or 307 Tanzanians, or 370 Ethiopians! If undeveloped countries consumed at the same rate as the US, four complete planets the size of the Earth would be required! And this is the lifestyle that Walmart, and apparently EDF promotes here and abroad!
So go on and make all of your centrist, corporatist, environmentalist supporters feel like they are helping the planet by buying DVD’s with thinner packaging, clothes with different labels, and concentrated laundry soap. It’s like fiddling while Rome burns. As you do that, the mass consumption and gluttony of resources promoted by Walmart and companies like them will only continue to help us swirl ever faster towards the drain.
Global warming is very real, and undeniable, as is toxic waste from the unregulated production and use of hazardous chemicals and pesticides that Walmart encourages. If you really stand for “Environmental Defense”, you should be pushing for much more drastic and serious steps to save humanity and the species that cohabitate the planet with us, because if we continue our reckless lifestyle, the planet will shake us off like the annoying and useless fleas that we are.
Comment from Steven Goldstein
March 13th, 2010 at 11:14 am
Good job EDF.Now if only someone can only get Walmart to have a majority of their employees as full time employees so they are eligible for health insurance. Walmart has circumvented the insurance issue by hiring part time employees. Greed has motivated their going “green”. Greed has also kept the majority of their employees fron attaining health benefits.
Comment from darlene carter
March 13th, 2010 at 5:00 pm
Those of us in small communities allowed Wal Mart to come into our rural areas based on the premise that they were a “BUY AMERICAN” based company. They drove out all the small businesses with their price point and left us “hog tied” with no where else to go unless we drove to a larger community.
Once they got us “Hooked” they no longer buy American made, they don’t hire enough people in the community, proof; look at the lines of people. They have 12 cash registers to get you out but only have 4 open. Their pay is minimum, they are increasing prices while reducing size, they do not contribute to our community with regards to their profit. I went and asked for some bags of dog and/or cat food for our animal shelter and was refused. They claimed they only bring the ones that are busted or open. I was told by an employee that the people in the warehouse take them home. They wouldn’t even contribute 1 bag. I buy for my pets and the shelter every month from them and spend abaout $100. All the other people in the county do the same thing. They should be so ashamed not to help the shelter when we all buy from them.
I have nothing good to say about them. I am the voice for everyone I know here in Grant County.
Comment from Gregg Lavoie
March 13th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
The debate that has been going on about global warming in my opinion is complete idiocy. One side stating global warming is a result of human pollution, the other side arguing global warming is not a result of human pollution. Both sides clearly acknowledging the existence of extreme human pollution of the planet. So it does not matter whether global warming is the result of human pollution, it just matters that there is extreme human pollution and we all know it is damaging our environment. Why waste our time arguing whether it is causing global warming or not. How about we spend our time cleaning up our messes and preventing them in the future! A much better use of our time!
Comment from Pat
March 13th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Folks, can we back up a minute on this topic? WalMart is in it for the money – yes, of course. Maybe you don’t want to shop there. Maybe you don’t want to buy new stuff. But millions of people do both of those things and they do them at WalMart. And a lot of them don’t care about the environment. This retailer is making their products cleaner, and that’s a choice that their customers don’t have to make – the company will do it for them. Is it so difficult to say that this move on their part is better than if it didn’t put these policies in place? Think about, please.
Comment from Nancy Fifer
March 15th, 2010 at 11:34 am
I loathe Walmart and my friends laugh because I boycott the “evil empire”. I admire your efforts,but it will take a lot more than “green” to convince me that the greedy Walmart family has changed its spots. Too many egregious offenses to mention. Nancy Fifer
Comment from Ed Limey
March 19th, 2010 at 3:15 pm
Wal-Mart and China’s Pollution Problems
As Beijing prepares for the opening ceremonies of the Olympic summer games later this week, more and more attention is being drawn to China’s pollution problems. The country is notorious for smog-filled air and chemically tainted waterways. While cleaning crews struggle to clear up algae-strangled rivers, many athletes are planning to compete with face masks because the air quality is so poor.
China recently became the world’s largest CO2 producer, producing one quarter of the world’s carbon emissions. A post on Treehugger today points out that 33% of those emissions are from export manufacturing.
Wal-Mart is an integral part of this problem. As we mentioned in yesterday’s post on China’s human rights violations, Wal-Mart isn’t the cause of China’s pollution problems, but it certainly has a vested interested in keeping China’s environmental standards low. Were China to improve environmental regulation, manufacturers looking to source as cheaply as Wal-Mart demands would inevitably be forced to other countries and China would loose billions.
The Olympics are only highlighting a problem that has been going on for decades: companies like Wal-Mart force countries like China to sacrifice environmental integrity for production profits. It’s a critical aspect of corporate social responsibility that Wal-Mart glibly passes-over in its sustainability reports, but China’s carbon production is everyone’s affair. As the Olympics have revealed, China’s people are suffering from these practices and shouldn’t be made to bear the world’s burden.
It’s Not You, It’s Me: 33% of China’s CO2 Emissions From Export Manufacturing [TreeHugger]
33% of China’s carbon footprint blamed on exports [New Scientist]
Global CO2 emissions: increase continued in 2007 [Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency]
Pingback from Dominique Browning's Personal Nature Column » Walmart Redux: Citizens and Consumers
March 26th, 2010 at 9:27 am
[...] normally write about the same subject twice in a row, but the impassioned responses to last month's column on Walmart's move to cut carbon emissions from their supply chain made me want to give it [...]
Pingback from Walmart Redux: Citizens and Consumers — EDF Innovation Exchange Blog
March 26th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
[...] normally write about the same subject twice in a row, but the impassioned responses to last month's column on Walmart's move to cut carbon emissions from their supply chain made me want to give it [...]
Pingback from SEN Condemns EDF, Walmart, Fox News, Glenn Beck, Discovery TLC Palin Choice, Launches Boycott | sen4earth.org
March 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
[...] Comment from Gregory Hilbert March 9th, 2010 at 1:06 pm [...]
Comment from P. Neisman
April 2nd, 2010 at 7:29 pm
Wal Mart is China’s distribution channel into the US market, sending us pollution, garbage products, toxic products, tainted foods and chemicals. Boycott Wal-Mart and buying only US or Canada made products will sustain our economy. The unfair trade practices for China has to be stopped, and cheap broken products that end up in our landfill is enough of a reason. We support your boycott, keep up the steady consistent movement.
Pingback from EDF, Wal-Mart & Sunshine » ren-new.com » Helping you make sustainability profitable.
April 5th, 2010 at 6:02 am
[...] Dominique Browning wrote an article about the positive environmental impact of Wal-Mart’s work and of their collaboration with EDF. That prompted these thoughts: [...]
Comment from ANNMARIEThomas32
April 14th, 2010 at 5:22 pm
People deserve very good life time and mortgage loans or just short term loan can make it much better. Just because people’s freedom bases on money state.