2Sustain

In an effort to provide all of us with fundamental information about our communities, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its annual Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) earlier this month. This analysis provides information on nationwide toxic chemical disposals and other releases into the air, water and land, as well as data on waste management and pollution prevention activities n neighborhoods across the country.

TRI data is submitted annually to EPA and states by multiple industry sectors including manufacturing, metal mining, electric utilities and commercial hazardous waste facilities. Facilities must report their toxic chemical releases to EPA under the federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) by July 1st of each year. In addition, the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 requires information on waste management activities related to TRI chemicals.

EPA’s analysis for the latest reporting year, 2010, concluded that disposals are higher than the previous two years, but lower than 2007 and prior year totals.

The 2010 TRI data showed that since 2009 there has been: (more…)

Last month, SC Johnson released its 2011 annual public report, 360 Degrees of Greener Choices.

This year’s report marks the 20th year SC Johnson has publicly shared information about its goals, efforts and progress, and it also reflects the company’s “360-degree” framework and commitment.

The 360-degree approach involves understanding the entire product lifecycle from beginning to end. It starts with reducing impacts within the company’s supply chain, continues through manufacturing, reducing packaging and making products more recyclable. The circle is completed by helping drive greener choices for consumers through education and engagement.

In the 2011 SC Johnson report, the company says it has met –and in many cases, far exceeded –all of its sustainability objectives for 2011. Highlights include: (more…)

I received a few interesting responses to my last blog posting so I thought it may be fun to keep the dialogue going. The comments I received are pretty consistent with what I hear from many friends and colleagues here in the Bay Area – namely that companies need to be regulated in order to really take progressive, proactive action on social, environmental and labor issues. In particular, I believe most folks feel that companies need regulation to take meaningful action on global warming via hard-hitting new regulation on energy usage and GHG emissions reduction. While I think there is some truth to the fact that companies do need to be “motivated” by regulation (a.k.a. the “cattle prod approach”), I also see companies taking proactive steps independent of regulations, and I think that this should be acknowledged. I also think that such proactive steps if/when taken for the right reasons represent our best shot at truly meaningful, lasting, long-term change.

(more…)