Showing posts with label greenwash. Show all posts
Showing posts with label greenwash. Show all posts

Monday, 22 April 2024

How do companies make themselves look green?

The is how Aggregate Industries does it – as any visitor to aggregate.com/sustainability will see:
 


Of course, many companies face the same problem – what photo to put on your sustainability page, to make yourself look green? 

But what if your business is concrete – the most destructive material on earth? What to choose then? 

Aggregate Industries has chosen a photo of a green living wall. 

If only all buildings were made like this, you might think. Green walls
Remove air pollutants 
Reduce urban temperatures 
Reduce energy consumption 
Improve biodiversity 
Attenuate rain water 
Reduce noise 
etc, etc
What a wonderful company Aggregate Industries must be, you might think, to produce such a product. 

You might think that, because next to the photo the company writes "Our Sustainable products". 

Yet Aggregate Industries does not design, make or sell green walls. 

The photograph is greenwash. 

Aggregate Industries does not even operate in the same country as the photographed building.


Aggregate Industries' parent company – which also has form in this area – does however operate in Paris. It is not known for its green walls either – but is known for polluting the Seine.

Thursday, 25 January 2024

‘Companies regularly set ambitious climate goals... that often quietly fizzle away’


While companies often gain positive media attention by trumpeting plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, many are failing to reach their climate goals, and the media rarely picks it up. There is little accountability and transparency on the outcomes of these goals, where various stakeholders, like investors and rating agencies that measure environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risk, do not penalize firms for missing these targets
Once upon a time, Aggregate Industries trumpeted ambitious plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In 2018, we posted The CO2 emissions that AI ‘forgot’ in 2016 and wrote: ...
we've heard about establishing baselines before – in 2012, 2008, 2003 – and the company has consistently failed to achieve any progress against them. Let's look, for example, at how AI fared against its 2012 baseline: 
2013: "Absolute process carbon emissions have increased against the 2012 baseline" 
2014: "Absolute carbon process emissions continue to rise and are now 13% higher than the baseline year" 
2015: "Absolute process carbon emissions continue to rise and are 20% above the 2012 baseline" 
2016: No mention of baselines 
AI has talked about reducing its CO2 emissions for more than 15 years, and has achieved exactly the reverse. 
Since then, Aggregate Industries has given up reporting its CO2 figures. In 1999, the company reported 228,267 tonnes of CO2. In 2019, in the post Climate emergency? Not at Aggregate Industries. CO2 emissions increase again, we estimated the company was emitting more than 5x that amount – somewhere in the region of 1.3 million tonnes of CO2 each year. 

Aggregate Industries is part of cement conglomerate Holcim. Last year, the company claimed that for 2022, "we delivered on all our net-zero levers", and that for 2023: 
We are accelerating our net-zero journey to decarbonize Holcim. Taking a science-driven approach, we upgraded our climate targets to align them with the 1.5°C framework and validated them with the Science Based Targets initiative
Bravo. But who's checking whether any of these targets are achieved?

Perhaps these Indonesians will. As previously posted, they are taking legal action against Holcim.

 


ECCHR, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, claims Holcim is "among the top 50 largest CO2 emitters in the world", and that its climate strategy is "Too little – too late": 
Climate change is happening. The clock is ticking. The global consensus is that global warming must not go beyond 1.5°C. Yet, to stand a chance of achieving this 1.5°C limit, the remaining carbon budget must be distributed fairly among all actors. Currently, the global cement industry contributes up to 8% of the global annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, since the production of cement is extremely CO2 intensive. The Swiss-based cement group Holcim Ltd. is the biggest player within the cement and concrete industry, and among the top 50 largest CO2 emitters in the world. Since 1950, Holcim has emitted over 7 billion tonnes of CO2, which accounts for 0.42% of all global industrial CO2 emissions, or twice as many emissions as produced by the whole of Switzerland during the same period. Holcim has published a climate strategy which includes the ambition to become a net zero corporation by 2050. However, as this report shows, Holcim’s climate targets and business strategy are not in line with the 1.5°C limit and are therefore further exacerbating the climate crisis. 

This report looks at Holcim’s past, current and future climate impact through assessing its past and present emissions, as well as its future emission reduction plans. It explains that Holcim has largely contributed to the climate crisis due to its enormous historical emissions. The corporation’s 2021 emissions still account for three times the annual emissions of Switzerland and have risen in recent years. The report concludes that Holcim’s emission reduction targets are incompatible with the 1.5°C limit. According to the latest climate science, to stand a 50% chance of achieving the 1.5°C limit with no or limited overshoot, absolute emission reductions of 43% until 2030, 69% until 2040 and 84% until 2050 from a 2019 base year are required.

Thursday, 21 September 2023

Could Holcim ever be a ‘CO2 hero’?

Holcim – cement conglomerate and parent company of Aggregate Industries – has been entertaining members of the press at its new Innovation Hub in Lyon, which the company has apparently set up to "showcase its sustainable building solutions and serve as a co-creation lab to accelerate low-carbon, circular and energy-efficient building worldwide."

Remarkably, somebody has come away thinking Holcim is a CO2 hero. How – given that the company has annual CO2 emissions more than many countries – could that possibly be?

Has Holcim dramatically cut its CO2 emissions to net zero – rather than just talk about it? Not according to its 2022 Sustainability Report, where we find Holcim pumped some 78 million tons of CO2 (scope 1 emissions) into the atmosphere in 2022 alone. Holcim claims: 
We reduced Scope 1 emissions to 562 kg CO2 net per ton of cementitious materials, which represented a decrease of 2% on a like-for-like basis versus the prior year. 
Of course, continued progress at that rate and the game’s over. 

Dig a little deeper though and we find that the press at Lyon were briefed by Nollaig Forrest, Holcim’s new chief sustainability officer. Her background is not in science, climate or sustainability, but – according to this article – in "communications and corporate affairs at multiple industrial companies". It’s clearly important to Holcim, with such glacial progress in emission cuts, to at least tell a good story. 

So how did Holcim persuade this journalist of its hero status?


Towards the end of his article, the author in question writes this paragraph: 
What strikes me most about Holcim is how a company can go from villain to hero by embracing the future. When I spoke to Jenisch, [Holcim CEO] he was adamant that the concrete industry wasn’t anything like the tobacco or car industry, fleeing from its responsibilities. And Holcim itself is a future-oriented company, he said, that wants to do its part. "Now that we know the harmful effect [of CO2], we are fully on it," he said. "We are part of the solution." Though the past is "interesting," he said, "it’s more important what action we take now. This is where we want to be part of. It’s more important that we accelerate climate action, with speed and transparency. We don’t want to be greenwashing." 
So, embrace the future, forget about all the damage caused by your past emissions and providing climate reparations for affected communities, keep selling cement at more than 0.5 tons net of CO2 for every ton produced, and become a CO2 hero. Easy. 

But let’s unpack that paragraph above.  

Holcim's CEO claims the concrete industry isn’t fleeing from its responsibilities, however that is exactly what Holcim is doing in the case of Indonesian islanders seeking proportionate compensation from the company for damage to their livelihoods due to repeated flooding as global warming has driven up sea levels, arguing that the company is responsible for 0.477% of global industrial emissions from 1950 to 2021. A spokesman for Holcim said: 
We do not believe that court cases focused on single companies are an effective mechanism to tackle the global complexity of climate action. 

And as far as accelerating climate action, we only have to look at this tiny corner of East Devon, and subsidiary Aggregate Industries' plans for an unsustainable multi-million mile haulage scheme for Straitgate Farm, to tell us all we need to know. But NGOs backing the islanders’ action also claim the company is not doing enough to cut its emissions
There is some support for this position from a new report by Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor, which ranked Holcim high relative to most of the other 23 companies studied for its net-zero ambition and transparency, but said its strategy only had moderate integrity because it hinges on energy intensity targets, low-quality renewable energy certificates and extensive use of carbon capture storage and usage. 
Finally, when it comes to "we don’t want to be greenwashing", Holcim appears to have put a brake on its Twitter account, but this was one of its last tweets. Greenwashing? You decide.

Monday, 13 February 2023

‘Sustainability is at the heart of our business’, parrots AI – and thousands of others


"Sustainability is at the heart of our business" is a phrase Aggregate Industries parrots again and again. But it's not the only company to do so. A search for the phrase on Google produces 140,000 results.

As this article remarks: 
Suspiciously similar versions of the same trite slogan inundate press releases, CEO speeches, advertising campaigns, media interviews and sustainability reports the world over.
We know the slogan means nothing to Aggregate Industries – as its plans for Straitgate Farm with processing of as-dug sand and gravel an unprecedented 23 miles away at Hillhead Quarry confirm. 

The article goes on: 
If ever there was a phrase that was so obviously extracted from the bowels of the corporate communications department and inserted into the mouth of an unsuspecting executive, this is it. 

The truth is, if sustainability actually was central to so many business philosophies, the planet would probably not be quite as warm as it is now.

So why are so many brands hiding behind the same slogan when talking about a topic that is now under such intense scrutiny from investors, regulators and consumers? 

"There is a perceived ‘safety in sameness’ – particularly when it comes to sustainability communications," says Suzy Goulding, who leads sustainability for communications company Publicis Groupe in Asia. As long as brands say exactly the same as their peers, no-one will ask awkward questions, appears to be the reasoning, she suggests. 

Using hackneyed slogans like "sustainability is in our DNA" achieves the opposite of shielding a company from scrutiny, Goulding contends. "The first thing I would want to ask a client if this was their opening statement would be: prove it."  

Fossil fuels companies use the "DNA" mantra often, observes Belinda Noble, founder of Comms Declare, a non-profit pushing for public relations firms to stop working for Big Oil.  

"For most companies it is meaningless, self-serving bullsh*t. Either, it is an aspiration from their executive team, or a blatant tactic from the marketing team to capitalise on green consumer sentiment,” she says. 

Brands that have genuinely embedded sustainability into their businesses, like clothing brand Patagonia and confectioner Tony’s Chocolonely, can usually clearly articulate what their purpose is without a generic catch-all phrase, says Darian McBain, the former CSO of the Monetary Authority of Singapore and Thai Union, who recently started a consultancy. 

She says businesses are feeling pressured to insert sustainability somewhere in the language they use, but don’t really understand how or why. “Sustainability is at the heart of our business” means little, isn’t measurable but keeps you firmly in the pack to meet generic stakeholder expectations,” says McBain. 

For some businesses, a more appropriate phrase would be "sustainability is the appendix of our business", McBain suggests: "No real purpose, can be removed surgically without significant interruption to longevity, but has significant implications if it bursts."

With growing pressure on brands to prove that their sustainability claims are real, with serious legal consequences for those that aren’t – just ask Shell, Danone, H&M, Deutsche Bank and others – loose, generalised claims now feel perilously out of date. 

Wednesday, 4 January 2023

Consumers committed to playing their part – but what about Aggregate Industries?

Aggregate Industries tries hard to give the impression it cares about sustainability and our climate emergency. The reality – as we all know from the company’s CO2-intensive plans for Straitgate Farm, hauling as-dug aggregate 23 miles between quarry face and processing plant, more than any other UK quarry operation and some 2.5 million HGV miles in all – is somewhat different.

Last year, the company's research discovered that "consumers are committed to playing their part in reducing their carbon footprint". But what about Aggregate Industries' carbon footprint? Or didn't the company's research stretch to include itself?
 

Tuesday, 8 November 2022

COP27 has begun, and suddenly the polluters pretend to care

Aggregate Industries and its parent company Holcim’s lamentable record on CO2 and climate action is the subject of far too many posts on this blog. But now that COP27 has started, it’s clearly time for things like this again:


Even in Devon, how much Aggregate Industries actually cares about climate action is plain for all to see. 

In 2015, Aggregate Industries recognised the harm of processing Straitgate material 23 miles away at Hillhead, warning "processing at Hillhead may be feasible, but would generate a massively greater quantity of CO2 emissions", and would be "unsustainable": 
8.38 Hillhead Quarry does, however, present an option for processing of the Straitgate deposit, but the consequential impact of additional CO2 emissions from greater haulage distances are considered to be unsustainable. 
Fast forward to 2022 – with the climate emergency even more urgent – and processing at Hillhead is exactly what Aggregate Industries wants to do, appealing Devon County Council’s decision to refuse its proposed quarry at Straitgate Farm with haulage of as-dug material totalling some 2.5 million miles.  

At the appeal, the barrister representing Aggregate Industries had the gall to claim "transport has been "minimised", complying with M22 [of the Devon Minerals Plan]... Having regard to the available options, the HVO offer, and the greenhouse gas report."

Of course, no other UK aggregates operator hauls as-dug sand and gravel 23 miles for processing. 
 

And it’s surprising that Aggregate Industries even references the infamous greenhouse gas report, subject of much discussion at the appeal. Devon County Council's barrister called it "a deeply flawed piece of work" – completely ignoring the 8 million tonnes of sand and gravel allocated right next door to the Hillhead processing plant. 

That’s how much Aggregate Industries really cares about climate change.

Thursday, 27 October 2022

Holcim emitted more than 7bn tonnes of CO2 between 1950 and 2021

... according to research by the Climate Accountability Institute – that’s 0.42% of all historical global industrial emissions. 

It’s a shameful legacy for one company to bequeath to humanity – especially since:
Leading companies and industry associations were aware of, or wilfully ignored, the threat of climate change from continued use of their products since the late 1950s.
Yesterday, the United Nations warned that current pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions will lead to global heating of 2.5C – a level that would condemn the world to catastrophic climate breakdown. Today, Inger Andersen, executive director of the UN Environment Programme, said:
We had our chance to make incremental changes, but that time is over. Only a root-and-branch transformation of our economies and societies can save us from accelerating climate disaster... Every fraction of a degree matters: to vulnerable communities, to ecosystems, and to every one of us.
Cement giant Holcim – previously badged LafargeHolcim until controversies like the one below – is the parent company of Aggregate Industries.

It is ranked 47 out of the Top 100 emitters by The University of Massachusetts Amherst’s 2021 greenhouse polluters index. 

Of course, you'd never know. Holcim doesn’t broadcast its dirty secret. It is the same company pumping out statements like "Sustainability is at the core of what we do", and that concrete is "the ideal sustainable material for our future", and that "Our teams are going above and beyond to keep our people and communities safe, while firmly leading our decarbonization journey."

Maybe one day companies will be banned from greenwashing. There was a glimmer of hope last week from the Advertising Standards Authority, which banned a series of misleading adverts from HSBC promoting climate-friendly initiatives. The watchdog ruled that the bank had to ensure any future environmental claims were: 
adequately qualified and did not omit material information about its contribution to carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions. 
Campaign groups welcomed the ASA’s ruling, saying it was a "significant moment in the fight to prevent banks from greenwashing their image." 

Clearly, it’s not just banks. Holcim proclaims it "takes climate action very seriously." But not seriously enough to stop its UK subsidiary from appealing the decision by Devon County Council to refuse permission to haul bog-standard aggregate 23 miles from quarry face to processing plant – a distance unheard of in the UK.

But, as we touched upon in the post Holcim’s cost to society in 2021? 156 million tons of CO2 emissions, the company’s carbon legacy and the impact it has left upon us is now being tested in the courts in "a first-of-its-kind lawsuit". 

According to Agung Wardana, an environmental law expert and a Humboldt Fellow at Max Planck Institute for International Law in Heidelberg, Germany, the lawsuit showcases an increase in public awareness on climate change and a desire for justice: 
This will be a landmark case in Indonesia. I think many others could follow suit in demanding accountability of major polluters. The homework to win the case is to find the causality between Holcim’s activities and its impact on Pari Island. That’s the challenge.

Tuesday, 23 August 2022

Construction industry greenwash fails to persuade majority – AI finds

Well, fancy that. 

Aggregate Industries – the company wanting to haul as-dug aggregate 23 miles between quarry face and processing plant, more than any other UK quarry operation and some 2.5 million HGV miles in all – the company that has given up reporting CO2 emissions after failing to make any progress over the last 20 years – wonders why 91% of people believe the construction sector is not delivering long-term sustainable solutions, and 51% of consumers do not trust the industry when it says it is committed to carbon reduction.

Surely the company need only take one look at itself to find the answer. 

Friday, 22 July 2022

Holcim’s cost to society in 2021? 156 million tons of CO2 emissions

As the UK hit 40°C this week, a milestone in UK climate history, spare a thought for residents of an Indonesian island threatened by rising sea levels who have begun legal action against the cement producer Holcim – parent company of Aggregate Industries. 


You can see why. We have posted about Aggregate Industries’ parent, and its record on CO2 emissions. Last year we posted LafargeHolcim’s cost to society in 2020? 146 million tons of CO2 emissions – more than many countries

Since then the name has changed but the pollution goes on. In 2021, Holcim's cost to society has INCREASED to 156 million tons. 


So much for all the claims, for all the greenwash:


Holcim maintained its focus on CO2 emission reduction in 2021... we acknowledge we must accelerate our CO2 reductions in the coming years.
And what about Aggregate Industries, Holcim's UK subsidiary? 


Kirstin McCarthy, sustainability director at Aggregate Industries, says: 
We need to transform our business and we have already made progress.
This is the same sustainability director who spoke in support of the company’s wholly unsustainable 2.5 million mile haulage plan for Devon

She says: 
Our priorities are to reduce our impact on the climate, protect and enhance nature and the environment, drive the transition to a circular economy and protect and support our people and communities.
More greenwash. 

But for how much longer can companies make meaningless, hollow claims? Lawyers and environmentalists have greenwashing companies in their sights.


As one article in the financial press remarked: 
The popular ploy of marketing everything from burgers to investment funds as 'green' doesn’t look sustainable any more.
Suggest they include concrete in that list.

Tuesday, 7 June 2022

Aggregate Industries appeals


Aggregate Industries won’t take no for an answer. It clearly has no respect for local democracy.

After three failed planning applications, the company has decided to roll the dice again and has submitted a last-minute appeal against Devon County Council’s refusal last year for a sand and gravel quarry at Straitgate Farm

Aggregate Industries’ appeal has been lodged with the Planning Inspectorate. A start date for the appeal process has not yet been issued, neither have the company’s grounds for appeal. The appeal is expected to be held by way of public inquiry, which is anticipated to last for 6 days.

Lest we forget, Aggregate Industries’ plans for Straitgate Farm necessitate hauling material 23 miles to Hillhead for processing, an astronomical 2.5 million miles in all. Any sustainability strategy, any ambitious targets the company might have are clearly meaningless.

Wednesday, 10 November 2021

‘Greenwashing – the new climate denial’


Whilst "the world is on track for disastrous levels of global heating far in excess of the limits in the Paris climate agreement", here are the latest announcements from the parent of Aggregate Industries: 


Clearly the greenwashing from Holcim has reached new levels, because for the world’s largest cement company – mining finite resources, destroying biodiversity, emitting millions of tonnes of CO2, contributing to climate change and hardship for millions of people – to claim "Sustainability is at the core of what we do" is simply asking people to suspend all rational thought. Lest we forget, Concrete is the most destructive material on Earth.

And the insanity continues. Did you know "The words innovation and sustainability mean the same thing"? No, neither did we. If you thought innovation was related to new ideas, and that sustainability was about meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs, Holcim wants you to think again. Not content with greenwashing, the multinational cement giant now wants to redefine the English language.

But don’t despair. Thank goodness Aggregate Industries – a company that has given up reporting its CO2 emissions – is playing its part for COP26:


It's hard to believe, given its multi-million-mile haulage plans for Straitgate, but Aggregate Industries claims to have net-zero ambitions. 

Here’s net zero explained:

A Sydney man has set an ambitious target to phase out his alcohol consumption within the next 29 years, as part of an impressive plan to improve his health.
The program will see Greg Taylor, 73, continue to drink as normal for the foreseeable future, before reducing consumption in 2049 when he turns 101. He has assured friends it will not affect his drinking plans in the short or medium term. 
Taylor said it was important not to rush the switch to non-alcoholic beverages. “It’s not realistic to transition to zero alcohol overnight. This requires a steady, phased approach where nothing changes for at least two decades,” he said, adding that he may need to make additional investments in beer consumption in the short term, to make sure no night out is worse off. 
Taylor will also be able to bring forward drinking credits earned from the days he hasn’t drunk over the past forty years, meaning the actual end date for consumption may actually be 2060. 
To assist with the transition, Taylor has bought a second beer fridge which he describes as the ‘capture and storage’ method.

Monday, 8 November 2021

Holcim at COP26

No wonder climate activists are worried that COP26 is a big PR stunt, when even cement polluters turn up to greenwash their gargantuan emissions.


If we are honest? Are there times then when Holcim – parent of Aggregate Industries – is not honest??

Cement is responsible for 8% of global CO2 emissions. Thank goodness that growing demand now presents an opportunity for the world’s biggest cement producer "to change how we do things". In case Holcim has forgotten, the first COP was held 26 years ago.


But when Holcim talks about looking at transportation, don’t hold your breath. If 23 miles separating proposed quarry and processing plant in Devon doesn’t make the company think twice, what will?

Monday, 27 September 2021

CMA issues deadline on ending ‘greenwashing’

The UK competition watchdog has given companies that make misleading claims about their environmental credentials until the end of the year to stop the practice, which is known as "greenwashing". 

Too many businesses were "falsely taking credit for being green" in order to woo environmentally minded consumers, the Competition and Markets Authority said.
Could Aggregate Industries – UK subsidiary of Swiss cement giant Holcim – be accused of "falsely taking credit for being green"? After all, the two tweets below can’t both be correct.
 

‘The ESG investing industry is dangerous’

Tariq Fancy – previously chief investment officer for sustainable investing at BlackRock – has written an essay on environmental, social and corporate governance: The Secret Diary of a ‘Sustainable Investor’ — Part 1:
This is the first of a three-part essay that shares how my thinking evolved from evangelizing ‘sustainable investing’ for the world’s largest investment firm to decrying it as a dangerous placebo that harms the public interest. It’s not short. But this topic is critically important: it lies at the heart of how we reform capitalism to address important environmental and social challenges with concrete action. I challenge business leaders who have advocated the ideas I question below to offer a serious rebuttal. 
The essay has been picked up by the FT


Tariq Fancy is quoted as saying: 
In my role at BlackRock, I was helping to popularise an idea that the answer to a sustainable future runs through ESG and sustainability and green products, or in other words, that the answer to the market’s failure to serve the long-term public interest is, of course, more market. A bit like the NRA’s traditional answer to mass shootings and related concerns around public safety — the answer is more guns. 
He says senior executives at Blackrock are too smart to believe their own claims about ESG: 
They must know that they’re exaggerating the degree of overlap between purpose and profit . . . These leaders must know that there is no way the set of ideas they’ve proposed are even close to being up to the challenge of solving the runaway long-term problems . . . And right now all of the other stuff they’re saying — the marketing gobbledegook — is actively misleading people. 
Tariq Fancy lays out a number of arguments. Here, quoted from the FT article, are three: 
Argument five. Giving people the dumb idea that shifting their savings from one investment fund to another is going to help materially with, say, climate change creates a dangerous distraction from solutions that fit the scale of the problem, all of which involve changing the rules of capitalism through regulation. 
Argument eight. Corporations, and the whole legal and social apparatus in which they sit, were built around the idea that companies exist to maximise shareholder wealth. That’s what they are designed to do and are required to do. Thinking that fiddling around in the financial markets is going to make companies fit for a radically different purpose — helping with broad social problems driven by economic externalities and tricky collective action problems — is simply bonkers.  
Argument nine. Do you really want financial industry bigwigs making choices about how to solve our biggest social problems? Fancy quotes one of the signatories to the hilariously empty and meaningless 2019 Business Roundtable statement on the purpose of the corporation: “There were times that I felt like Thomas Jefferson.” So said Johnson & Johnson CEO Alex Gorsky, who led the drafting of the BRT’s groundbreaking statement on stakeholder value. It’s easy to understand why he felt that way, given the weight of such lofty words about the future direction of not just business, but indeed society in general. But not enough people have asked a simple question: does it make sense that a CEO should feel like a famous US president? Only one of them is elected by the people.   
The author of the FT article finishes by saying: 
I myself find argument five particularly important. From what I understand, it’s clear we need, for example, a whopping big carbon tax, and soon, or we’re cooked. But we have some of the smartest, most powerful people in the corporate world rattling on about this sustainable investing drivel instead. It scares me.
It should scare us all. Holcim – parent of Aggregate Industries – emits more CO2 than many countries:

Thursday, 9 September 2021

BAU is not an option

As far as Aggregate Industries is concerned, the proposal to quarry Straitgate is just business as usual.

In reality, it would be worse than business as usual – when you consider the multi-million-mile haulage scheme, with the processing plant a wholly unsustainable 23 miles away from the proposed quarry face. 

Not one single aspect of the proposal reflects the climate and biodiversity emergency we face. 

However, business as usual is not an option. The UK must cut emissions, and fast: 


On net zero, Aggregate Industries and parent Holcim talk the talk: 


However, the Straitgate proposal shows no intention to walk the walk. Talk of net zero is just greenwash.

Friday, 3 September 2021

Autumn will bring an increased risk of flooding... says AI


Indeed, SuDS do have a major role to play. At Aggregate Industries’ very own proposal to quarry Straitgate Farm, SuDS would be needed to protect downstream communities from flooding.

Aggregate Industries’ Updated Flood Risk Assessment for Straitgate – which at now at almost 5 years old has not been updated, and has not been informed by the elevated groundwater levels recorded at the site, nor the revised maximum water table contours – says: 
The DCC Minerals SFRA states that suitable Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) strategies should be employed within Mineral Development Sites so that surface water runoff rates are managed to greenfield rates. 4.1.3 
However, as it stands, Aggregate Industries' SuDS scheme at Straitgate is unworkable – runoff rates would not be managed to greenfield rates – click on the flooding label for more. 

But whilst we’re on the subject of Aggregate Industries and protecting, do take a look at what the company planning a multi-million mile haulage scheme for Straitgate is doing to protect the planet ♻️.


Of course, Aggregate Industries would still rather we did not read such claims. No idea why.

Wednesday, 25 August 2021

More greenwash from Holcim

The world’s largest cement producer is greenwashing again:
 

What Aggregate Industries' parent Holcim fails to mention is the industry’s monstrous CO2 emissions:
 

So, is concrete the ideal sustainable material for our future? Clearly this prize-winning writer doesn’t think so, in fact quite the reverse:
 

Some wonder if the cement companies are deliberately keeping us addicted to concrete:
 

As for all the sand needed to make concrete:
 

Tuesday, 10 August 2021

UN climate change report sounds ‘code red for humanity’

"The alarm bells are deafening," warns UN Secretary-General António Guterres.

 
How is this urgency reflected in UK planning? On 20 July 2021, a new version of the National Planning Policy Framework was released. We posted about it here. The NPPF sets out the government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. 

According to this article, the term "climate change" appears three more times than the predecessor document published two years before. The NPPF has not been updated to reflect the UK’s 2050 net zero obligation approved by Parliament in 2019. The section on "planning for climate change" still reads: 
152. The planning system should support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change. It should help to: shape places in ways that contribute to radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimise vulnerability and improve resilience; encourage the reuse of existing resources, including the conversion of existing buildings; and support renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure. 
However, reference to the UN’s 17 Global Goals for Sustainable Development has been added to the NPPF, and the paragraph which defines sustainable development in more detail has been toughened up with "much more binding" language about protecting and enhancing the environment: 


Nevertheless, it seems a meagre response to the crisis we now find ourselves in. This editorial argues: 
Without an accelerated reduction in greenhouse gases during the next decade, the ambition of the 2015 Paris climate agreement to limit global heating to 1.5C will not be met. The price of failure will be a world vulnerable to irreversible and exponential effects of global heating: there will be worse floods more often, more terrible and frequent heatwaves and devastating and repeated droughts. 

The science is irrefutable. Less certain is the strength of political will to act upon it. An awesome burden of responsibility now rests upon this generation of leaders as humanity finds itself at a fork in the road. The actions taken or foregone during the next 10 years will define the parameters of the possible for future generations. A step-change is required, but across the world green rhetoric continues to translate into policymaking at a pace which is fatally slow.

How has Holcim, the world's largest cement producer responded to this dire warning, given that cement is responsible for about 8% of CO2 emissions? Just as if it has played no part at all:
 

This of course is the same company that in 2020 alone pumped out 146 million tonnes of those greenhouse gas emissions choking our planet, the same company that would ultimately profit from the multi-million-mile-CO2-belching-haulage-scheme planned for Straitgate Farm. The hypocrisy.