Read more of this story »

Wal-Mart’s drive toward going green may have been met by green activists with skepticism, but it’s hard to argue that they are focusing on efforts to make sustainability a key part of their business. Wal-Mart’s suppliers have been given the ultimatum: “Help us on our mission to go green and skip the greenwashing”.

Rand Waddoups, senior director of corporate strategy and sustainable development, on Thursday (August 7, 2008) told more than 250 suppliers that Wal-Mart had devised a clearer strategy on its sustainability marketing.

The plan focuses on four concepts that Wal-Mart wants to promote - waste improvement and recycling, natural resources, energy and social or community impact.

“We need to fill the pipeline with products,” Waddoups said. “Not only do we need more innovative products, but we need to be able to tell a story around that product.”

As any sales or marketing executive who has sold to Wal-Mart, as I have, can tell you, the only answer to that request is, “yes, sir (or madam).

Wal-Mart sent out emails to all buyers last week giving them an Aug. 18 deadline to submit “green” products that meet the criteria. Products selected will get a major promotion during Wal-Mart’s 2009 “Earth Month” marketing campaign.

Reading between the lines, this of course means, more than just developing a great green promotional story. Required is a compelling back story to support the green attributes and shield the manufacturer and Wal-Mart by extension from green washing.

Read more of this story »

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:

Read more of this story »

Forests need strong allies to win their survival battles. This week it seems they have a new powerful friend that might help. His name is Wal-Mart.

Environmental Leader reports that the world’s largest retailer has become a member of the Global Forest & Trade Network (GTFN), a WWF initiative to eliminate illegal logging and improve the management of valuable and threatened forests. By becoming a member, Wal-Mart pledges to help save endangered forests by using more wood from sustainable and certified sources.

WWF published a press release about the new member of GTFN this Monday, reporting that by joining the organization, Wal-Mart has committed to phasing out illegal and unwanted wood sources from its supply chain and increasing its proportion of wood products originating from credibly certified sources – for Wal-Mart stores and Sam’s Clubs in the United States.

Read more of this story »

Yes, Wal-Mart does a fantastic job entertaining the troops, but my real interest was in further news on company sustainability initiatives. Over the next week or so, I’ll be reporting on those. Today, I just wanted to provide some initial thoughts, and perhaps get the conversation going.

In case you haven’t noticed, the economy’s in a bit of slump… and that means more people are turning to discount retailers for their basic needs and luxuries. Sales figures are up for the company, and all of the executives that spoke at various portions of the media conference noted the company’s founding value of saving people money. At some points, I began to wonder just a bit if the much-heralded sustainability initiatives of the past few years were taking a back seat to it’s ability to provide goods (and services) at low prices.

Read more of this story »

Two articles from Advertising Age this week provide some insight. Both pieces examine the relationship between Wal-Mart’s advertising firms and its sustainability initiatives. The first article, “‘Come as You Are’ to Help Environment”, reveals that Wal-Mart’s green initiatives did indeed start as a marketing campaign and nothing more. The person speaking on the issue? Not a sustainability expert, but a representative from Wal-Mart’s advertising firm, the Martin Agency.

Mark Hughes, director of the ad firm, insists that despite its initial duplicity, Wal-Mart has become a true believer in sustainability. The company has launched a huge marketing campaign around the idea, and many of Lee Scott’s public statements reinforce Wal-Mart’s green image. But Hughes also notes that the company - and its marketing machine - focus more on what consumers can buy to help the environment, and less on what Wal-Mart is actually doing on the issue.

Ad Age’s second piece, “Who’s in Charge of Green?”, highlights the fact that Wal-Mart’s marketing staff vastly outnumbers the company’s sustainability team, and most of the go-to sustainability reps are actually part of the marketing department. Adam Werbach, the company’s sustainability golden boy, is employed by Saatchi & Saatchi, a marketing firm, not Wal-Mart’s sustainability department.

What does it mean for Wal-Mart’s environmental initiatives to be written about in an advertising industry magazine, rather than an environmental publication? Perhaps what Ad Age itself admits: that consumers are increasingly skeptical of corporate green campaigns, and are more and more often calling companies out for greenwashing. This could be disastrous for Wal-Mart’s green campaign, and the company implement more comprehensive changes if its intends to capitalize on a “green” image.

Who’s in Charge of Green? [Advertising Age]
‘Come as You Are’ to Help Environment [Advertising Age]

The largest retailer on earth finds itself the subject of Environmental Leader’s latest study on green marketing. Despite Wal-Mart’s massive green marketing campaign over the last year, consumers still don’t consider the retailer a sustainable company, explaining:

Brands that have spent significant marketing dollars communicating green initiatives such as Wal-Mart and GE are not connecting.

Environmental Leader’s report focuses specifically on the effectiveness of green marketing campaigns, but it implies a much larger truth: consumers aren’t buying Wal-Mart’s greenwashing. The chart above (click here for a larger version) explains that in the minds of socially-conscious shoppers, social responsibility goes far beyond Wal-Mart’s current definition. Employee treatment, community connection and supply chain practices are equally important as environmental issues. But Wal-Mart has a track record of trouble in each of these categories, leading conscientious consumers to rightfully distrust the company’s green overtures.

Wal-Mart’s habit of making cosmetic changes instead of systematic improvements to its business practices aren’t fooling any shoppers. If Wal-Mart wants its green message to stick, it needs to address its sustainability problems from the ground up. Corporate transparency, employee friendliness, and fair, sustainable product sourcing aren’t just footnotes to an advertising campaign - they’re necessary parts of the modern responsible corporation. Wal-Mart would be better served to use the millions it currently spends on marketing to make holistic changes to its business model.

Green Marketing Campaigns Don’t Always Stick [Marketing Vox]

Recently they started tracking shoppers’ green buying habits. Actually all retailers track products their consumers purchase for inventory control. Wal-Mart however was one of the leaders in using this data to tightly control inventory and share information with manufacturers. They retain leadership in this area with RFID tracking systems and well managed JIT manufacturing cooperative programs with their vendors.

Now Wal-Mart is sharing some of this information with the world with the Wal-Mart Live-Better Index .

Read more of this story »

But an article in today’s Northwest Arkansas Morning News shows that the company’s suppliers just aren’t responding the way the company had hoped. Pressure on suppliers was a major aspect - one of pray few tangible plans from the company - to reduce its carbon footprint. Today’s Morning News article reveals that fewer than half of Wal-Mart’s supplier companies have met demands for packaging improvements, and it doesn’t seem like they’ll be reaching Wal-Mart’s goals any time soon.

What will Wal-Mart do to remedy the situation? Cut out over half its suppliers? We think not. Perhaps Wal-Mart should make some changes to its own business model, before it starts demanding changes from its suppliers.

Suppliers struggle with scorecard [Northwest Arkansas Morning News]

The store, located in Las Vegas, is said to use up to 45 percent less energy than your basic Supercenter. It’s also designed specifically for the Southwest’s typical climate conditions.

Read more of this story »

It’s the first time anyone from Wal-Mart has admitted so candidly that the company has no foreseeable plans to implement the changes it has promised. The company has failed to provide tangible benchmarks up until now (its 2007 sustainability report was unsubstantial) and Scott’s statements today imply the company has no intention of providing quantifiable results in the years to come.

In addition, Scott’s comments in this Wall Street Journal video lay bare the fact that Wal-Mart’s motivations lie with profitability, not environmentalism. While money is indeed a great motivator, the company’s dedication to eco-efforts is fickle at best. The company simply doesn’t have the stamina to achieve the long-term goals its set forth. Zero waste and 100% renewable energy are a looong ways off for this company.

It’s been almost two weeks since I traveled to Kansas City for Wal-Mart’s Year-Beginning Meeting, so that’s probably more than enough time to think about the broad implications of CEO Lee Scott’s “Company of the Future” speech, and the plans outlined for energy efficiency and supply chain sustainability. In that time, I’ve also thought about Enterprise Rent-a-Car’s green initiatives, and Joel Makower and Greener World Media’s State of Green Business 2008 report (and I’ll be writing more about both). I’ve also spent some time at Wal-Mart Watch’s site, and read through some of the sustainability-related criticism that organization has offered.

Each meeting I’ve had with people at Wal-Mart has challenged me: there’s still that activist in me that wants to shout about past and current issues, and he competes with a more pragmatic business thinker who wants to praise the company (and others) for seeing a business case for sustainability. I think we need both voices to be a part of the mix: not just mine, of course, but many activists and business thinkers contributing to the conversation. To add my two cents, I’ll focus on some of the issues raised by the company.

Energy Efficiency: I’m pretty sure it’s universally accepted, even by critics, that Wal-Mart’s moves towards more energy-efficient stores are positive steps. This is also a prime example of good business thinking on sustainability: energy efficiency contributes to a healthier bottom line while also producing lower levels of emissions. Where I get tangled up, though, is the combination of these efforts with the company’s growth plans.

Read more of this story »

(Image source: www.treehugger.com)

Ecolabelling.org — looking behind the labels
What’s green? And who says so?

Ecolabels are everywhere from Wal-Mart’s “seafood aisle” to my local grocery store. But, at the end of day, what do these labels really mean? Who’s behind them?

And, most importantly, can I rely on them to make my certified no-rainforests-were-destroyed-in-the-making-of-this-latte latte?

Ecolabelling.org – your source on the background of over 285 ecolabels around the world – makes it easier to answer these questions and more by sharing a global database of who’s deciding what’s green.

Big Room Inc. launched ecolabelling.org for as a resource for consumers, environmental professionals and procurers to learn the source of each ecolabel and what it actually means.

That means: one less consumer paralysed in indecision under the florescent lights of the natural foods aisle and one more green procurer who can sift through nearly 100 food ecolabels with the click of a mouse.

So far, ecolabelling.org has tracked down over 285 ecolabels or green certification systems that exist worldwide and estimate that close to 400,000 companies and nearly 500,000 products have gained a green label or valid certification. The database is a platform that will grow, so they look forward to hearing from eco-labels and certification schemes worldwide. Are they missing your favourite ecolabel? Let them know!

For more information about who is deciding what is green, check out www.ecolabelling.org.

Numerous companies have taken a beating for problems with factory conditions in the developing world, while the retail sector in general has had to face both PR and legal nightmares related to the movement of American operations to “cheaper foreign markets” (yeah, I’m paraphrasing Lou Dobbs here). Combine that with recent revelations that some goods from Chinese factories have been tainted with everything from lead to antifreeze, one might wonder why more multinationals aren’t racing back to the US and other more regulated markets. But that’s a different post…

Suppliers

Supply chain issues took up roughly a third of Scott’s speech last week, and, again, the CEO presented some bold concepts for how Wal-Mart might address problems raised by sourcing products from the developing world. The first concerned the company’s relationships with its suppliers:

Read more of this story »

It’s no secret: I hate Wal-Mart. Honestly, I have only been inside a Wal-Mart store four times in my life, including buying batteries in Colby, Kansas on a cross-country childhood vacation, and every time I leave the store, I feel disgusted with American consumerism. This company’s initial practice of establishing stores in small communities to drive out “ma and pa” stores has contributed to the homogenizing of American retail. Furthermore,

Over 70% of products on Wal-Mart’s shelves are made in China. The recent string of product recalls shows the dangerous and even deadly consequences of Wal-Mart’s corporate bullying strategy to drive down the cost of products. Suppliers are forced to ship production to places like China where quality and labor standards are far less stringent.

Wal-Mart’s race to the bottom strategy leads to more than just unsafe products - it forces suppliers to cut corners when it comes to their own workers as well (walmartwatch.com).

I don’t care how green Wal-Mart attempts to be when they still sell dangerous products for children. I was shocked to learn that Wal-Mart is still selling, in some states, PVC vinyl backed baby bibs that contain lead despite a recall in Illinois.

Read more of this story »

Editor's note: I had hoped to actually complete this series last week, but my administrative duties got the best of me. So, here's part two on my trip to Bentonville, Arkansas, for Wal-Mart's media day and shareholders' meeting. You can find part one here.

After finishing up at Sam's Club, our next stop was the Bentonville Supercenter. Like the Sam's Club we visited, the Supercenter was fairly new: it had opened in May, 2005. Like the store we'd just come from, this one also sported ample skylights and bright white walls, and had a definite "upscale" feel. One of the executives who met us on the tour confirmed this was intentional for the particular store… a part of the company's "store of the community" concept.

That idea perked my ears up, of course — wouldn't a "store of the community" be carrying local foods and produce in the grocery section? That question was answered before I got to ask it: yes, a handful of produce items were purchased from local farmers. We also saw plenty of evidence of Wal-Mart's organics push as we walked through other areas of the store's grocery section.

At one stop, I was surprised to hear sustainability brought up: at the back of the store, we were introduced to Wal-Mart's "Site to store" program. Think Wal-Mart meets the long tail: thousands of items only available on the company's web site can be shipped to a Wal-Mart store with no shipping charges for the customer. I expected to hear about how such a program improved customer choice while still offering low prices, but the team from Wal-Mart.com also discussed how the program fits into the company's sustainability goals. Site to store items are shipped on trucks already bound for stores where the customers will pick them up; as such, they don't require the packaging needed if they were shipped by a parcel service. For individual items, of course, this probably doesn't add up to much, but, of course, Wal-Mart works on huge scale: the collective amount of fuel and packaging saved wasn't given, but one can imagine it's sizeable.

In housewares, we got to see a visual representation of the retailer's commitment to selling compact fluorescent light bulbs: there were several rows of shelves carrying the a wide variety of bulbs. An endcap display on one of these rows served to educate consumers about the energy-saving benefits of using CFLs, and also gave them the conversion values for the wattage of CFLs vs. incandescents.

Our tour ran out of time, and our visit to the electronics section was cut short… unfortunately, that meant we didn't get the hear the part of presentation on sustainability and electronics. I'll see what more I can find out on this front.

While our tour guides in other parts of the store didn't necessarily stress sustainability, I saw organic cotton highlighted on a number of displays in both clothing and home decorating sections. The notion of personal sustainability was also highlighted, particularly with health and wellness items. This concept isn't one that Wal-Mart just stresses to customers: thousands of associates have also committed to "personal sustainability projects" (PSPs) that involve improving their personal health and lightening their environmental footprint.

My question from the last post still remains, and surrounded by literally acres of merchandise, I still wondered about the pairing of consumption and sustainability. It's tempting to point at the retail giant and say "Look at all of this stuff you're selling… can we achieve true sustainability while hawking such a wide variety of goods?" I'm going to keep thinking on that, but, again, I invite your thoughts on the topic.

UPDATE: I found out yesterday that Wal-Mart has completed the roll-out of the Site to Store program to over 3300 stores throughout the US. Now, I can tell you how much fuel and packaging is saved by this program: according to the company's press release, "As a result of transportation and packaging efficiencies, 1,000 gallons of gasoline are saved each week and 20,000 fewer boxes are used each month."

Last Thursday and Friday, I was on the road again. This time, my travels took me to Bentonville, Arkansas… yep, the home of Wal-Mart. The company invited me down for its annual shareholders’ meeting and the media events preceding it. Over the next few days, I’ll devote a few posts to what I saw, and what I thought.

Thursday’s media event was jam-packed with activities, starting with a tour of Bentonville’s Sam’s Club. Opened in September 2006, this store was a far cry from the one I remember going to with my parents years ago: as opposed to looking and feeling like a warehouse (which it basically was), the Bentonville store was bright and inviting.

A big part of that feel comes from some of the eco-friendly elements the company built into the store. For instance, the ceiling is arrayed with 54 skylights, and artificial lighting is equipped with sensor dimmers that adjust to the amount of sunlight coming in. The walls are painted white to enhance the light, and even the flooring was chosen for its light reflection. LED lighting is used in refrigeration units. I couldn’t get an exact figure on the amount of energy the store saves (because it’s so new, I was told), but am guessing it’s significant.

We also got to take a look at recycling efforts in the store. We saw a “super bale,” a compressed package of recyclable materials that is sent to a processing plant for separation and recycling. Wal-Mart and Sam’s Clubs efforts to recycle materials from deliveries to the stores has been so successful that they now sell recycled materials back to their suppliers. Our tour guides made it very clear: the company is interested in “doing well by doing good,” and they presented this as a prime example.

We also saw a display for “Students for Recycling,” a joint effort between Sam’s Club, Aquafina, and Keep America Beautiful. The campaign challenges schools around the country to hold collection drives for PET bottles. Prizes are awarded to the fifty schools that collect the most material, and all of it will be turned into backpacks that will be distributed “to students who are making a difference in their communities.” Last year’s “Recycle the Warmth” effort converted the bottles into fleece jackets that were given to needy children in communities that participated in the drives.

During the tour, I got a chance to spend a few minutes chatting with Doug McMillon, president and CEO of Sam’s Club, about other sustainability initiatives. He told me, for instance, that he’s given his buyers a “25% challenge”: he wants a quarter of the purchases they make from vendors to be products that are, in some way, sustainable. When I asked him how this is tracked, he made it clear that it wasn’t a matter of buyers having to document these purchases on a ready-made check-off list; rather, the company is working with these employees to educate them on what constitutes a sustainable product. Currently, these employees and others are being encouraged to read Paul Hawken’s The Ecology of Commerce, and Daniel C. Esty’s and Andrew S. Winston’s Green to Gold: How Smart Companies Use Environmental Strategy to Innovate, Create Value, and Build Competitive Advantage. McMillon made it clear that he wants to educate and empower his employees, rather than dictate sustainability to them. Because Sam’s Club is a source of supplies for so many small businesses, McMillon also noted that there are opportunities available to educate the wider business community on the benefits of “going green.”

When I signed up for the tour, my initial thought was “Ho hum… a tour of Sam’s Club.” I certainly left feeling better about what’s happening with these retail centers. Of course, I couldn’t also help but feel a bit overwhelmed by the rows and rows of merchandise, a feeling that stayed with me at our next stop, the new Bentonville Supercenter. The question that’s always stayed with me as I’ve talked with the folks at Wal-Mart: is it possible to for a company that’s making its billions off of such a wide range of low-priced goods to really work towards sustainability? While I’m impressed by the company’s efforts, I’m not going to try to answer that question now; rather, I’ll have more thoughts on that as I write more about last week’s events. I certainly invite you to share your ideas and opinions, though.

Back in December, the word leaked out that mega-retailer Wal-Mart had issued a "request for proposals" (RFP) on adding solar arrays to selected stores. When I interviewed Andy Ruben, the company's vice-president for sustainability, the company was still quiet about this program.

Today, the cat's officially out of the bag: Wal-Mart announced that it would purchasing solar power from "BP Solar, SunEdison LLC, and PowerLight, a subsidiary of SunPower Corporation, for 22 combined Wal-Mart stores, Sam's Clubs and a distribution center in Hawaii and California."

Keep in mind that this is just a pilot program — the company wants to explore the viability of using solar power in order to meet its long-term goal of being 100% powered by renewable energy. Furthermore, the company won't be buying solar arrays, but will enter into power purchase agreements with these companies: the contractors will install the solar arrays on Wal-Mart stores, and the company will buy the power generated by those arrays. With this model, which is also being used by GM and Whole Foods, the company avoids the massive investment in new equipment. What is unique about Wal-Mart's arrangement with these companies is that the retailer will also take ownership of renewable energy credits created by the power produced.

The company estimates that the solar power installations will provide up to 30% of the energy needed at the store at which its installed. Wal-Mart also claims that this move should result in greenhouse gas emissions savings of 6,500-10,000 metric tons per year.

Those savings are impressive, no doubt, and we hope that Wal-Mart's pilot is successful enough to install solar panels on other stores. The educational value of each of these installations may prove an even bigger benefit, as many Wal-Mart and Sam's Club shoppers will get a closer look at the benefits of solar power each time they shop. No word on whether the company will actively promote the use of solar energy to shoppers at these stores, but let's hope so — there's a great opportunity to spread the word…

Reuters and PR Newswire

On Thursday, we pointed to a BusinessWeek article (via Gristmill) that claimed "A number of organic farmers across the country say that Wal-Mart has backed off of aggressive plans to offer more organic foods." Writer Pallavai Gogoi quoted two organic farmers who said that orders from the giant retailer have dried up; the executive director of the Florida Certified Organic Growers & Consumers group further suggested the Wal-Mart's move into organic foods appeared to misinterpret demand for these items at its stores.

In response to these claims, Karen Burk, a member of Wal-Mart's corporate communications team, assured Gogoi that the company remained committed to selling a wide variety of organic foods, and that its original goals had been miscommunicated; furthermore, the company had met or exceeded the goals for organic foods.

Today, Burk submitted a letter to BusinessWeek's editor claiming that the article created "an erroneous and inaccurate representation of Wal-Mart’s commitment to providing our customers with affordable access to organic products." A representative of the company passed the letter along to Green Options, and we've published it in full below. Wal-Mart's efforts to "green" its products and operations will have an enormous effect on the supply of and demand for more sustainable options in the marketplace, so we believe this conversation about the company's commitments needs to happen through a broad range of media channels.

Karen Burk's letter

April 13, 2007

Dear Editor,

Pallavi Gogoi’s article, posted April 12, 2007, on Businessweek.com, is an erroneous and inaccurate representation of Wal-Mart’s commitment to providing our customers with affordable access to organic products.

We have been selling organic products in our Supercenters and Neighborhood Markets for many years and, due to customer demand, announced plans to double the organic food offerings in those locations in March of 2006. We quickly met that goal and even exceeded it in communities where there is an exceptionally high demand for organic offerings. We continue to see steady customer interest in buying quality organics at great prices.

We realize that the customer base in each of our communities is unique, so we tailor the assortment in each of our stores to meet our customers’ needs. This is part of our long-standing “store of the community” philosophy of matching the mix of merchandise with the customer base and demand in each specific community. At a Bear Stearns investors conference on March 8, 2006, Wal-Mart executive Stephen Quinn announced, “We’re soon going to have over 400 SKUs (stock keeping units) of both fresh and brand name superior organic foods available at the Wal-Mart price.” Today we’re proud to offer significantly more than that company-wide, which is completely in line with our plans. This enables specific locations to customize their assortment of organics to fit the consumers in their community. This simply makes good business sense. We’ve used this same philosophy of tailoring our merchandise mix for each store for various categories for more than 10 years.

As a company that’s always working to provide our customers with the best products at the best value, we determine what we’ll buy based on ongoing assessments of quality, price, customer feedback and other factors. Organic apples are one of the top selling organic produce items at Wal-Mart, along with carrots, citrus, lettuce and packaged salads. Far from “backing off,” sales for Wal-Mart’s organic produce for 2006 were at a growth rate well above the industry average of 13.7 percent, based on data from the Organic Trade Association.

Bottom line, Wal-Mart’s growth in the organics category will continue to be reflective of the demand and we will continue providing our customers with the organic products they desire at low prices.

Sincerely,

Karen Burk
Wal-Mart Corporate Communications

We're interested to hear what you think about the claims made both in the BusinessWeek article, and in Ms. Burk's response.

• Wal-Mart Sustainable Packaging Value Network. The company is leading the largest effort in the retail industry to encourage sustainable packaging not only at its own stores, but throughout its value chain.
• ASDA, Wal-Mart's British subsidiary and the 2nd largest grocer in that country, has pledged to reduce its packaging by 25 percent by the end of 2008.
• The company has pledged to sell 100 million compact fluorescent lights, a goal which, if achieved, would save American consumers $3 billion in energy costs, and prevent the emissions equivalent to a fleet of 700,000 vehicles.
• The company has recently become the 2nd largest private purchaser of renewable power, second only to Whole Foods Market.
• The company is testing several concept stores, designed to use zero net energy. Succeeding would not only reduce Wal-Mart's giant impact, but it would light the way for other big box retailers.
• Wal-Mart has long had a favorable reputation among SRI investors who make diversity their social criteria. The company is among the largest employers of black and hispanic managers in the country, far exceeding some of its more unionized critics.

I am sure I missed some other initiatives, since CEO Lee Scott has been on a whirlwind tour promoting them all. If Wal-Mart even partially succeeds in accomplishing what it has announced, the net impact will be greater than the comparatively tiny initiatives of Target, Costco, Kohl's, Sears, and KMart combined. If British Petroleum (NYSE:BP), an oil company for Pete's sake, can be sainted in SRI circles, why should Wal-Mart continue to get such a bad rap?

In addition to BP, large companies have shown before that they can change their stripes. Nike (NYSE:NKE) used to be known as a sweatshop pariah. Now, they lead the charge against sweatshop abuses. Dell, Inc. (NASDAQ:DELL) faced e-waste picketers not more than four years ago. Now, they have the most comprehensive e-waste policy of any computer manufacturer. Denny's (NASDAQ:DENN) was once handed the most severe punitive judgement ever for discrimination. Now, they are getting awards.

What do you think? Is this Greenwashing, or has Wal-Mart gotten the religion?