Philanthrocapitalism_ How Giving Can Save the World - Matthew Bishop [67]
All that changed after 9/11 and the Iraq War. With oil prices soaring and mounting evidence of the destructive impacts of climate change, everyone began to take the issue more seriously. Senator John McCain and Hillary led delegations of more skeptical senators to northern Norway and Alaska to see the already clear impact of warming for themselves. Other countries proved that clean efficient energy use could be profitable. Denmark increased the size of its economy 50 percent with no increase in energy use and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, in part by generating more than 20 percent of its electricity from wind, the highest percentage in the world. While the U.S. government was condemning Kyoto as a threat to growth, the United Kingdom determined to beat its Kyoto reduction target by 25 to 50 percent, and in so doing created enough good jobs to enjoy something we Americans didn’t—rising wages and declining inequality. Germany is now the number one producer of wind energy, and Japan leads the world in the production and installation of solar panels.
We could accomplish all that here. California, which has been working on energy conservation seriously for more than thirty years, has a per capita energy use that is only 50 percent of the U.S. average. To date, the U.S. government’s positive actions have been confined to a modest increase in research and development and in tax incentives for purchasing clean energy products, incentives that still are not nearly as great as those that remain available to the old energy economy, or as those producing a boom in solar and wind energy in Japan, Germany, and Spain. The most encouraging development in America is the blizzard of activity being undertaken by the private sector and by individual communities and states.
With evidence of climate change clear and oil costing more than $60 a barrel, there are almost limitless opportunities to make money out of doing the right thing. The biofuel industry is exploding, bringing with it a potential revival in the fortunes of rural America. Most American companies are far ahead of the government in seeing the climate change problem as an economic opportunity. Those that are leading the way are giving you the chance to do something about climate change too, by supporting them with your purchasing power.
Wal-Mart is one of the world’s largest companies, with 1.8 million employees and revenues of over $315 billion. Every week 176 million customers shop at Wal-Marts in fourteen countries. It has more than sixty thousand suppliers worldwide and stocks 142,000 items in a typical U.S. Super-center. Wal-Mart’s president, Lee Scott, is a straight-talking Midwesterner whose unfailingly calm demeanor and soft voice can be deceptive. He has a quick mind, a good imagination, and a wry sense of humor. A couple of years ago, I had an interesting conversation with him at a time when Wal-Mart was being heavily criticized for everything from its employment and employee benefit practices, to its huge volume of imports from China, to the pressure it puts on smaller competitors. We talked about the need to do more on climate change. For several years, Wal-Mart had been actively pursuing energy conservation to reduce costs, and I pointed out that most of its customers were people of modest income who would also save money if the company adopted a much more comprehensive effort that involved them.
A little more than a year later, Wal-Mart announced its Sustainability 360 plan. With input from several environmental and energy experts, Wal-Mart devised a strategy to pursue three ambitious goals: to be supplied 100 percent by renewable energy; to create zero waste; and to sell sustainable products that conserve resources and protect the environment.