Green Options » FTC

Is Wal-Mart Trying to Undermine Carbon Offset Guidelines?

Jeff McIntire-Strasburg — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:31:17 +0000

Though much of my time over the past couple of weeks has been devoted to the behind-the-scenes work of bringing The Inspired Economist into the Green Options Media blog network, I’ve also made sure to follow the discussion regarding Wal-Mart’s comments to the FTC regarding carbon offsets and renewable energy credits. In a post titled “Wal-Mart Lobbies Against Carbon Offset Guidelines,” Tony Calero at Wal-Mart Watch got this discussion started by pointing to the company’s comments filed in response to an FTC request:

Herein lays the scandal: Despite the company’s “green” initiatives, Wal-Mart is actively lobbying against the clarification of offset guidelines. The company’s hypocritical stance on the issue came to light last week in a hearing of the Federal Trade Commission. The FTC is attempting to modernize the “Green Guides,” guidelines issued for corporations defining acceptable marketing claims regarding environmental products and initiatives. In response to the FTC’s solicitation of retailer comment to guide the process, Wal-Mart’s Director of Energy Regulation, Angela Beehler, expressed Wal-Mart’s firm opposition towards the clarified scope and definition of carbon offsets…

As you might imagine, other media outlets picked up on this pretty quickly: Grist, for instance, noted that Consumers Union and other groups have “been advocating for clear, specific definitions to avoid misleading green claims, ” and that “the FTC’s definition of carbon offsets could most affect the retailer’s ultra-ambitious goal to someday run on 100 percent renewable energy — a huge amount of which would likely have to come from offsets or renewable-energy certificates.” US News and World Report’s “Fresh Greens” blog asked “Is Wal-Mart being hypocritical, or are its green efforts in good faith?” Eoin O’Carroll of the Christian Science Monitor’s “Bright Green Blog” not only expressed a reaction similar to my own (essentially head-scratching), but also took a step further than the rest of us: he gave Wal-Mart a call. Much of the response he received followed the typical MO of a corporate communications department: the company restated its broad sustainability goals, and offered some more specific ones related to greenhouse gas emissions and energy efficiency. It addressed offsets and renewable energy credits in the last paragraph:

Is Anybody Watching? The Green Gap Survey Reveals Consumers Want Regulation of Environmental Claims

mcmilker — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:37:08 +0000

Some scary truths about consumers’ assumptions could lead to a “green” backlash concludes The Green Gap Survey, released this week by Cone LLC and The Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship.
We in the business of making environmentally friendly and natural product know that little regulation exists around the terms, “green,” “environmentally friendly,” and “natural.” But, consumers don’t and are, perhaps naively, trusting.

47 percent trust companies to tell them the truth in environmental messaging
45 percent believe companies are accurately communicating information about their impact on the environment
61 percent of Americans say they understand the environmental terms companies use in their advertising

(D)emocracy: Your Chance to Chime-in on Carbon Offset Projects

Timothy B. Hurst — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:34:45 +0000

Last month, the Federal Trade Commission conducted hearings and convened a workshop for scientists, economists, environmental activists and representatives of the leading American retailers of ‘carbon offsets’ and ‘renewable energy credits’ (RECs) to learn more about the rather opaque business models and practices of some companies.

Though the hearings were only exploratory in nature, the FTC was able to address some of the concerns and misgivings the public has about unregulated voluntary carbon markets. The FTC also raised their concern about the validity of some companies’ advertising claims (for an excellent analysis of the carbon-offset hearings, read the piece by Jeremy Elton Jacquot for TreeHugger). In short, people want to see what they get and get what they pay for - and in the world of renewable energy credits and carbon offsets, this can be a tricky prospect.

In response to these hearings, and in an effort to legitimize the fledgling offset and REC industries, carbon offset retailer TerraPass has decided to democratize. By opening up a comment period for seven particular carbon-offset projects, TerraPass has decided to build-in an added layer of transparency to make their enterprise a little less hazy. I applaud TerraPass for this move forward. And I am totally fine if it is purely profit driven.

As companies strive to stay in the black of their ‘triple bottom line’ I hope we will be seeing more of these democratic experiments in the private sector. You don’t have to be a ’stockholder’ to make a comment, just a stakeholder. And when we’re talking climate change, it seems that everyone is a stakeholder. According to the company:

“We welcome comments from our customers, from anyone familiar with the projects themselves, from policy experts, and from the general public.

If you have any feedback for us regarding these projects – their environmental records, the importance of TerraPass support to project success, or anything else, please provide it via email.”

Photo Credit: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency