This fall Climate Counts will be releasing our third annual climate scores for the core group of 93 companies we’ve scored (we’ve scored almost 150 overall).  From 2007 to 2008, we saw score improvements among 84 percent of the companies we evaluated.  Over time, companies have become more actively engaged in our process, as they’ve come to understand the value of an ever-improving score in strengthening their environmental credibility with consumers.  Nearly every day, we hear from a new company acknowledging the once and future power of climate-awakened consumers everywhere. When the issue clearly matters to you, it matters to the companies who want your business.

Companies might seem inaccessible, unreachable and unshakable by individuals like you.  But the truth is, they spend more time and money on researching the motivations and demands of their consumers than you realize.  So when social media truly exploded this year, once again the power of the consumer voice got yet another shot in the arm.

Facebook walls and Twitter pages allow users to question, call-out, or comment about companies’ actions (or lack thereof).  And it all happens in real time.  Your demand for climate action no longer has to languish in a stack of mail on an executive assistant’s desk, or in a bloated e-mail inbox that nobody reads.  It’s instantly out there, in a public arena, not only for company reps to see – but for friends and acquaintances around the world to track as well.  And it doesn’t stop there.  Company reps can reply, friends can RT @, conversations get #, and a consumer movement takes off.  All of a sudden one voice doesn’t feel so small.

So where do you start?  How to do you find these companies?

At Climate Counts, we’ve done some of the legwork by creating a new tool to help you find, follow, and tweet about companies on Twitter.  You’ll find the Twitter handles for companies on their individual Climate Counts company pages.  Click on the Twitter icon or select from the Twitter handles listed below, which link to companies Twitter accounts.  Even if a company does not have a Twitter account, you can still speak out about that company’s Climate Counts score to draw attention to what they doing or not doing to address the issue.

If you’re not a Twitter user or if the 140-character count is getting you down, you can still always continue to e-mail companies directly from our company pages.  By clicking the envelope icon on these pages, you can customize and send letters directly to company representatives and easily encourage your friends to do the same.

This year, with international climate talks in Copenhagen on the horizon and climate legislation continuing to wend its way through Congress, the need for serious corporate attention to climate change has never been greater.  And what’s at stake is greater too, as evidence of climate change seems more and more visible everyday. This fall, we hope you’ll join us in showing companies that climate change – and your voice – matters!

Tweet on,
@ClimateCounts

We’re teaming up with Dave Matthews Band and MusicMatters to activate individual commitments to reduce waste and increase efficiency. The SO MUCH TO SAVE pledge asks people to commit to at least one of five actions, including using Climate Counts company scores to shop consciously and raise your voice.

Take the pledge here (check out #4!) and download the free SO MUCH TO SAVE 2009 album, featuring DMB and supporting artists from the tour.

SO MUCH TO SAVE is part of DMB’s Bama Green Project.

We recently partnered with a group called Kapitall, which helps people to consciously invest in and understand financial markets. Their website uses an interactive, graphically-driven interface that lets you better explore companies, so when you go to invest your money, you know what you’re investing in.

Likewise, at Climate Counts, we believe every time you shop or invest, you’re voting with your dollars.  How you spend your money changes the world.  By partnering with Kapitall, we hope to help you have an impact on climate change as you navigate through your investment options.  Keep track of the latest company climate news here and check out www.kapitall.com to use the that information and create a portfolio with a real climate agenda. You can also read more about our partnership in their 8/11/2009 blog post: How We Use Climate Counts Ratings.

As the Environmental Leader article, ‘Amtrak commits to carbon tracking,’ reports — Amtrak is working to reduce their climate impact. Read the article about their GHG inventory plans, reduction targets and disclosure initiative (through Climate Counts) and stay tuned for more information on Amtrak’s commitment at ClimateCounts.org in coming months.

Today’s No Impact Man blog post by our friend Colin Beavan offers some worthy food for thought.  With proposed legislation, new science reports, and consumer information flooding the airways — Colin never ceases to offer us perspective on what life inside and outside the climate movement is all about.  And today’s post is no exception.  Titled What I’d say if I was wrong about climate change, Colin hashes through the fallout of working toward climate protection … even if the projections are off base.

At Climate Counts, we look at whether companies are measuring their impact, working toward improvement, and make their efforts public and transparent.  Climate change or no climate change, what’s the downside of a growing trend toward accountability, sustainability, and responsibility within our corporate and consumer world?

In addition to reading today’s post, we encourage you to check out the No Impact Man documentary and book, which hits both theatres and bookstores this fall! Watch the trailer here and read more about the No Impact Experiment here.

The Environmental Leader post, EcoLogo for Toys in works, reports that a third party certification of the environmental-friendliness of kids’ products is underway.

This past spring, Climate Counts released scores for the Toys and Children’s Equipment sector. With all companies but one scoring below 20 on our 0-to-100 point scale, it is clear this industry needs to take serious action to address their climate impact.  And we need this message to be sent loud and clear through as many channels as possible.  One way you can help is by sending companies an email from our Climate Counts company pages.

By Wood Turner, Climate Counts Executive Director

Every year around this time, the father in me starts thinking deep thoughts about why I’ve dedicated my career to environmental awareness and, in particular, helping people who don’t consider themselves activists understand why environmental issues should matter to them. In more recent years, it’s morphed into an almost singular focus for me on why global climate change should matter to all of us.

For me, it’s simple. It’s the kids.

As a parent, I am firmly in the camp of those who want to do everything they can to make sure their kids are exposed to fewer potential hazards than they were. I always laugh when my own mom says, “Well, we fed you [some processed food I could never imagine giving my kids] and you turned out OK,” or “We didn’t even have carseats when you were growing up and you’re just fine.” Yeah, yeah, yeah – I for one feel completely free of nostalgia for the “good old days” of the polluted 1970s or blissfully ignorant 1950s. We’ve evolved in many ways, and that’s a good thing.

What’s not evolving is the point of view of many of the companies that are making the products we parents are buying to protect our kids. In many ways, companies that make children’s safety equipment are incessantly frightening us into an upgrade: “Hey concerned parent, remember that carseat you used for your newborn in 2006? Well, nothing could be more dangerous for your newborn with a 2009 birthday. You’ve got to buy this year’s model in order to keep you kid safe!” Most of us hear the call and do just as we’re told, stretching our own wallets way too often to support a business model fueled by planned obsolescence.

Look, I’m not really out to pick apart a business model, regardless of whether it relegates lightly-used carseats to landfills. Indeed, we parents – we consumers – have to make our own choices. If it boosts the revenues the companies we buy from, I guess that is what it is.

But here’s the problem I do have – and it all gets back to climate change.

Children’s equipment companies know we want to keep our kids safe. And that’s not just today or this week or this year. I think about the safety of my kids long after they’ll have left my house, long after I’m gone. I want their entire lives to be safe and secure. I want to take every precaution possible in the way I treat the world I leave them. I’m not trying to anticipate what could result from global climate change. I don’t want to know – and not because I’m trying to avoid thinking about it. I don’t want to know because I don’t want it to happen.

So that affects the way I think about the products I buy ostensibly to keep my kids safe. I think those choices have to extend far beyond the catastrophic car accident I hope will never happen, far beyond the tiny fingers that might get slammed in the bedroom door (which has happened, despite my precautions), far beyond the potential toxic chemicals that may be in the food we feed them. They have to extend to climate change.

It concerns me as a parent and as an advocate for climate change that many of the most well-known companies making children’s equipment are not actively involved in reducing their global warming pollution. When Climate Counts (which I direct) announced scores on the climate action of the toys and children’s equipment sector a couple of months back, results were dismal. At the request of consumers who were interested in this sector, we scored 13 of the biggest companies – companies who make familiar family brands like Graco, Safety 1st, Instep, Evenflo, Chicco, One Step Ahead, Britax, Peg Perego, and more – and TEN scored less than five points out of a possible 100 on climate. No understanding of the overall impact of their companies’ energy use, waste, distribution, and sales on climate. No evidence of any efforts to reduce energy use or greenhouse gas emissions. No support for good climate policy. And no conversation at all with the legions of parents who buy from these companies because they help to ensure the safety of their kids – no conversation about climate change, something that could have a greater impact on the safety and well- being of the current generation of children than maybe anything else.

Sure, the toys and children’s equipment sector has a tiny impact on climate change when compared to the oil industry or the automobile industry. But that’s shouldn’t matter. Each of our families and our communities is thinking about how we can have a smaller footprint. Every company should be trying to do the same thing – and doing it in such a way, frankly, that not only creates real value for the consumer but also results in the long-term viability – and credibility – of the company itself. We parents have demonstrated our consumer power by greatly expanding the market for organic food in recent years. We can also shape the market in favor of those companies that care as much about climate change – and the long-term safety of our kids – as we do. To not to be thinking in these terms is to be completely diminishing our parental role as protectors and nurturers of our kids.

Some of the deniers out there will say, maybe not. Maybe, just maybe there will be no measurable negative impact on our children’s lives because of climate change. You know what? I don’t believe in maybe. I simply don’t want to know what will happen if we don’t demand more from the companies we trust.

Today, Climate Counts is releasing our review of the pharmaceutical industry, and they’ve made for an interesting case: they are both extraordinarily profitable and have received the highest scores yet of any of the 14 industries on our Climate Counts Company Scorecard. But in spite of good scores on measurement and reporting, they’ve been weak on reducing their emissions and have, for the most part, failed to use their formidable collective lobbying muscle to help pass strong climate legislation. 

That’s quite a mixed bag–what does it all mean?

Profits and Climate Action are (of course) Compatible

14 of 16 pharmaceutical companies we scored fell into our “striding” class—the highest level in the Climate Counts ranking system (typically at least 50 points out of a possible 100)—and two companies (AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson) scored over 75 points. These are all companies from an industry (pending mergers notwithstanding) that is one of the most profitable in the world. So the good news is we have yet more proof that climate action is compatible with good business. 

Why Not Do More?

We evaluate climate performance in terms of impact measurement, reductions achieved (including management accountability for reductions); public policy engagement; and openness and transparency in reporting. Pharmaceutical companies are proving to be consistently good at getting their houses in order; greenhouse emissions tracking is a sector strength, as is acknowledging and showing public support for a collective societal approach to addressing climate change.

The majority of companies in the sector, however, have not set aggressive or specific goals to reduce their emissions. They are also falling short at taking real steps to cut emissions. Many pharmaceutical companies rely on lengthy and antiquated supply chains, so logistical efficiency improvements could be a priority that would result in reductions (some, like GlaxoSmithKline, seem to recognize this opportunity). Additionally, those big pharma companies that don’t actually manufacture their products could play a market-leading role in encouraging climate action and climate leadership throughout the value chain.

Invest in Climate

The prescription drug business is overflowing with profits. Despite a widely held perception that companies sacrifice much profit to drug research and development costs, the margin they enjoy on most drugs is on the order of 91-95%. The industry has the added economic benefit of having a locked-in market (the government represents the three largest purchasers of pharmaceuticals: Medicare, the VA, and Medicaid) and limited competition between companies since most are highly specialized. The upshot? The industry can afford to be – and by many accounts, is – notoriously inefficient at manufacturing.

The pharmaceutical giants could be investing significant amounts of money in the kinds of renewable energy and energy-efficiency technology that most companies and sectors can only dream about right now. In other words, the kind of ROI evidence that less profitable, less successful companies say they need in order to truly prioritize climate protection? Big pharma could really be the test case.

Speak-Up in Congress

Notably, the pharmaceutical sector–which pays big dollars for lobbying support in Washington DC on issues related to healthcare–is conspicuously absent (or obscured) when it comes to advocating for strong legislation to fight climate change. Johnson & Johnson, a member of the US Climate Action Partnership, is an exception, but what if the sector presented a coordinated voice to lawmakers? It’s time to move behind a small and select group of companies willing to speak out on climate change. It’s time for entire sectors to step forward, armed with a compelling narrative about how climate action and energy-efficiency investments have changed their businesses in extraordinarily positive ways.

Actually, the overarching question really is, why isn’t the sector demonstrating explicitly that strong, voluntary corporate climate action is consistent with good business? That’s the message the marketplace needs, now more than ever with a possible climate law on the horizon that many have argued wouldn’t in its current form go far enough to address the scientific realities of climate change.

Regardless of their high scores, there is much more that the pharma industry could and should be doing on climate, and that’s true of every company and every major company we’ve scored so far.  To be perfectly clear, though, big pharma is better than most industry sectors in embracing corporate climate responsibility. Better, though, is not good enough. If money is what’s needed to address climate change with the kind of technology and logistical improvements worthy of 21^st-century, future-friendly companies, then the pharmaceutical companies certainly have it to spend. Whether they will show they’re serious about being climate innovators depends on whether we hold them to a standard worthy of the profits they’ve earned in the name of innovating for our health.

The line: “Global warming is baloney” was seen posted on several Burger King billboards in Memphis, Tenn. According to a number of news outlets, including a Fox report, Burger King ultimately denounced the signs as being representative of their corporate stance on the issue and the signs have since been taken down.  But, while the top tier of the company may not be denying global warming outright, they have yet to acknowledge or address their company’s climate impact. Take a minute and let them know you want to see signs of climate action, click here to go to their Climate Counts company scorecard and send them an e-mail about their position on climate change.

More articles: [UPDATED June 3, 2009]

The Memphis Flyer

The Renewable Planet

Nashville Scene

At Climate Counts, we believe how you shop can change the world. To further your “how to” knowledge, we’ve compiled a short list of our favorite books. So as the days of summer reading at the beach approach, pick up a title or two from the list below.

Ecological Intelligence — by Daniel Goleman
“Revealing the hidden environmental consequences of what we make and buy, and how with that knowledge we can drive the essential changes we all must make to save our planet and ourselves.”

The Lazy Environmentalist — by Josh Dorfman
“Josh Dorfman takes you inside the latest developments in green living to demonstrate how you can easily and affordably have your designer jeans and your planet too. From raising eco-conscious kids to greening your daily commute, Dorfman provides insights into the next wave of green innovation and the products and services that will lighten your planetary impact and lower your expenses.”

Return on Sustainability — by Kevin Wilhelm
“Return on Sustainability is a market-based call to action for companies to stop global warming by articulating the business case and addressing the business community in their language; profit and brand value. It details how climate change impacts companies, and how they can turn this risk into an opportunity to improve their financial, brand, and sustainability (environmental, social, climate) performance.”