KCC Celebrates World Environment Day
On World Environment Day, we're sharing the impactful efforts of our teams as they continue to work toward a more sustainable future and deliver on our purpose, Better Care For A Better World. Our Epping facility near Cape Town, South Africa, implemented an on-site solar panel installation that's expected to generate more than 2,200 megawatt-hours (MWh) of clean energy annually. That's enough to power roughly 500 homes and remove more than 2,300 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions each year.
The installation is part of Kimberly-Clark's broader on-site solar program, which plays a vital role in our energy-sourcing strategy and supports our climate goals. In 2024 alone, we activated eight new solar installations across our global operations, generating 34,000 MWh of renewable energy. And we're just getting started, with 14 more installations planned for 2025.
These initiatives are some of the many ways we are working toward our global sustainability ambitions.
About Kimberly-Clark Kimberly-Clark (Nasdaq: KMB) and its trusted brands are an indispensable part of life for people in more than 175 countries. Fueled by ingenuity, creativity, and an understanding of people's most essential needs, we create products that help individuals experience more of what's important to them. Our portfolio of brands, including Huggies, Kleenex, Scott, Kotex, Cottonelle, Poise, Depend, Andrex, Pull-Ups, GoodNites, Intimus, Plenitud, Sweety, Softex, Viva and WypAll, hold No. 1 or No. 2 share positions in approximately 70 countries. We use sustainable practices that support a healthy planet, build strong communities, and ensure our business thrives for decades to come. We are proud to be recognized as one of the World's Most Ethical Companies® by Ethisphere for the seventh year in a row and one of Fortune's Most Innovative Companies in America in 2024. To keep up with the latest news and to learn more about the company's more than 150-year history of innovation, visit the Kimberly-Clark website.
View original content here.
Visit 3BL Media to see more multimedia and stories from Kimberly-Clark Corporation
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
How Stablecoins Are Changing Global Finance
Stable Coin. Stablecoins Cryptocurrencies Stable Market Price Value Coin Currency. The U.S. Senate has taken a major step toward regulating stablecoins by advancing the GENIUS Act—a bill that could reshape the digital finance landscape. Still under discussion, the legislation proposes strict reserve and transparency rules for issuers and signals growing government interest in crypto oversight. Stablecoins are crypto tokens that are typically pegged to the U.S. dollar. They allow users to transact within blockchain ecosystems without the volatility of traditional cryptocurrencies. Today, two clear leaders dominate the market. Yet, while Washington begins drafting policy, stablecoins have already found product-market fit in places far beyond Capitol Hill. The global use of stablecoins is growing steadily, regardless of whether the market is in a bull or bear phase. In Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and among crypto-native startups, they've quietly emerged as a preferred tool for payments, payroll, and preserving value in unstable economies. So what does this bottom-up adoption mean for the future of global finance? Are stablecoins here to stay, or will they be replaced by Central Bank Digital Currencies? And if they are here to stay, how to ride this trend? According to DefiLlama, the current market capitalization of stablecoins is around $250 billion, which is still a small share of the global M2 money supply, approximately 1%. In other words, we're still early. To understand where the growth might come from, it's worth examining what stablecoins are used for—and why they've become so popular. Stablecoins market capitalization. The first is USDT (Tether), the largest stablecoin by market capitalization. Interestingly, Tether has also emerged as one of the most financially efficient companies in the world on a per-employee basis. According to a tweet published by Avichal Garg, co-founder of Electric Capital, the company generated an estimated $85.6 million in profit per employee in 2024: Profit per Employee (USD) vs. Company The second major player is USDC, issued by U.S.-regulated firm Circle. The company went public on June 5, under the ticker CRCL, with its stock surging over 200% on its first day of trading—pushing its market capitalization above $20 billion, according to Barron's. These two companies currently dominate the stablecoin space. Others worth mentioning include: • USDS (formerly DAI), which started as a decentralized stablecoin but has become only partially decentralized due to its large holdings of U.S. Treasuries and USDC. • USD1, a politically charged entrant tied to Donald Trump's network, which has generated some discomfort among Democratic lawmakers. Rep. Maxine Waters (D–Calif.), the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, voiced strong objections during a joint hearing on digital assets, stating: 'I object to this joint hearing because of the corruption of the President of the United States and his ownership of crypto and his oversight of all of the agencies.' Stablecoins are enjoying instant product-market fit: everyone needs access to crypto dollars — a version of the U.S. dollar that can be easily converted back to fiat, yet offers several advantages over traditional USD. While much of the attention on stablecoins focuses on regulation and market cap, their real momentum comes from how they're being used: The most obvious example of stablecoin usage is international payments. Sending U.S. dollars across borders with the traditional banking system typically involves SWIFT. Banks charge between $5 and $50 per transaction, often around $20, regardless of the transfer amount. That means sending $1,000 could cost users up to 2–5% in fees. In addition, the SWIFT transfers can take several business days to settle. Compared to transferring the same amount via stablecoins, even in the worst case, fees might only be a few dollars, and the transaction typically settles within minutes. That's at least 10 times cheaper and potentially 100 times faster. There's also another major benefit: users avoid capital controls, currency conversion hurdles, and heavy compliance bottlenecks, particularly relevant when sending money from or to countries with restrictive financial systems. The second use case — using stablecoins as a means of payment — is less advanced, largely due to regulatory inertia. Governments generally want citizens to transact in their local currencies, and stablecoins challenge that sovereignty. The lack of clarity discourages businesses from accepting them, especially given the lingering memory of Operation Choke Point, when certain industries were unofficially cut off from banking services. Despite the current U.S. administration's relatively crypto-friendly stance, the stablecoin bill GENIUS Act has yet to pass through Congress. This uncertainty keeps most merchants and payment providers on the sidelines. Once clear legislation is enacted, trust in stablecoins like USDT and USDC will likely surge. As for CBDCs, a concept that is often met with skepticism in the cryptocurrency community, the need for a government-backed digital dollar seems increasingly unnecessary. According to U.S. Treasury International Capital data, Tether's treasury holdings alone rival those of sovereign investors like Germany or Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, Circle's portfolio is comparable to that of Thailand or Sweden. With such significant exposure to U.S. debt and growing political opposition to CBDCs—including campaign promises from Donald Trump to block their development—stablecoins may have already secured their place as the preferred digital dollar infrastructure in the United States. The third major use case—decentralized finance —is where stablecoins are already thriving. They serve as the foundational currency for DeFi applications, enabling lending, borrowing, swapping, yield farming, and more—all without centralized intermediaries. The functionality mirrors traditional finance but with key advantages: it's global, permissionless, and often more efficient. According to Dune Analytics data in the DeFi Report 2024–2025 , approximately 151 million wallet addresses interacted with DeFi protocols in 2024. While this figure likely includes duplicates, it provides a useful upper bound for estimating user activity. By comparison, World Bank data from 2021 shows that 4.6 to 4.9 billion people used traditional banking services globally. This also underscores the early stage of adoption of DeFi. But, once frameworks are established, DeFi usage could accelerate rapidly. Following these three cases, it's fair to say that stablecoins are here to stay. And this may only be the beginning: as crypto infrastructure intersects with artificial intelligence, stablecoins could enable AI agents to transact autonomously, unlocking programmable, real-time finance. So, how can investors position themselves to benefit from this trend? There are many ways, some of them look obvious, like buying CRCL as it has become a public company, or investing in Coinbase stocks (COIN), a company which is steadily growing its own layer two DeFi ecosystem. Some are more complicated, like finding companies to invest in that adopt stablecoins in their operations — for payments, payroll, or international transfers — and which are likely to scale faster than their peers, thanks to lower costs and global reach. Check Stripe, PayPal, and Deel as examples. On the decentralized side, assuming a favorable regulatory framework materializes, in a next way of adoption, DeFi applications could rapidly pull users away from traditional banks. In that case, there is significant upside in owning tokens or equity in platforms like Uniswap, Aave, or even Hyperliquid — all of which are well-positioned to become foundational players in the next generation of financial infrastructure. Derivative DEX trading volumes. But don't forget the risks to watch. Transformation won't come without resistance. The banking lobby remains one of the most powerful political forces in the world, and it's unlikely to welcome a shift toward 'magic internet money' without a fight. Regulatory headwinds, political gridlock, and coordinated opposition from legacy institutions are all real risks investors should keep in mind. But we know that fortune, at least in markets driven by emerging technologies, often favors the brave.
TechCrunch
4 hours ago
- TechCrunch
Inside Anthropic's AI ambitions with Jared Kaplan
If you've been following Anthropic, you'll know it's been a busy year for the AI startup. Back in March, the company announced that it raised $3.5 billion at a $61.5 billion valuation in a round led by Lightspeed Venture Partners. Since then, it's launched a blog for its Claude models and, according to Bloomberg reporting, partnered with Apple to power a new 'vibe-coding' software platform. Instead of our usual Friday news rundown, today's episode of Equity brings you a conversation from this week's TechCrunch Sessions: AI event in Berkeley. Our friend and co-host Max Zeff sat down with Jared Kaplan, co-founder and chief science officer at Anthropic. Listen to the full conversation to hear more about: Who has direct access to Claude's AI models , Windsurf's response, and how it all ties into Anthropic's broader goals around openness, safety, and sustainability. , Windsurf's response, and how it all ties into Anthropic's broader goals around openness, safety, and sustainability. The company's pivot away from chatbots and toward agentic AI systems that can perform real tasks. How internal tools like Claude Code are shaping the future of AI-powered development. What it means to build AI that enterprises can actually trust, and how that affects the way humans interact with software, work, and each other.
Forbes
5 hours ago
- Forbes
SXSW London Debates: Is The Green Transition Financially Viable?
Rhian-Mari Thomas argues that the green transition is financially viable at SXSW London, referencing ... More the record amount of investment in the sector in 2024 Thought leaders across green finance and economics gathered to debate the financial viability of climate progress on day four of SXSW London. Held at the innovation and ideas festival's Climate & Nature House, a space hosted by Bellwethers to have meaningful environmental conversations, the session followed a traditional debate format encouraging a jovial air of competition. Sophie Lambin, founder and CEO of Kite Insights, and Stephen Dunbar-Johnson, president, international at the New York Times Company moderated the conversation. Lambin clarified that the debaters were tasked with addressing whether we can realistically and successfully invest our way to a green future, considering our current economic system and the state of the climate emergency, or whether we need new financial tools and a financial system. Arguing for the notion that 'the green transition is financially viable' were Rhian-Mari Thomas, CEO Green Finance Institute, Marisa Drew, chief sustainability officer, Standard Chartered Bank, and Fiona Howarth, CEO of Octopus Electric Vehicles. Arguing against the notion were Kathy Boughman McLeod, CEO Climate Resilience for All, Chaitanya Kumar, head of economy & environment at New Economics Foundation and Erinch Sahan, business and enterprise lead at Doughnut Economics Action Lab. Each debater was given three minutes to make their case. The debaters prepare their arguments on stage at SXSW London In support of the motion, Thomas started the conversation by saying that the green transition is 'economically strategic, it is socially imperative, and it is already underway.' She highlighted that a record $2.1 trillion was invested in green energy technology in 2024 according to BloombergNEF. Thomas sees this as evidence that the financial markets view green investments as smart economic strategy that not only provides financial opportunity, but protects us from the social and economic damage of the climate crisis. Howarth drew on the enormous success of her employer, Octopus Energy Group, as evidence that current investment is working. Started nine years ago, the company now employs 10,000 people and is valued at $9 billion while making green energy a viable option for consumers. She says this is thanks to 'smart innovators', and 'clever policy mechanisms'. Drew, instead, highlighted that emerging markets such as India, China, Indonesia and Middle Eastern countries have some of the fastest growing economies and are doubling down on green energy transition. 'What is Saudi Arabia doing? It is spending billions, if not trillions, on diversifying its economy. What does that tell you? The energy transition is viable, and the old way is no longer going to be the case in the not-too-distant future,' she argued. The first rebuttal came from Sahan, who highlighted that while $2.1 trillion was invested in green energy last year, the Climate Policy Initiative estimates that $6 trillion per year is needed to fund a green transition. He also argued that financial viability of a movement currently means that it is still satisfying the ROI needs of the financial market. 'These parameters are holding us back,' he said, taking off his belt to use as a symbol that financial markets are placing a straightjacket on businesses and governments to make progress on climate. He then pulled out an apple to make the point that the current green transition focuses on low hanging fruit, undermining the need for larger systemic change that picks the fruit at the top of the tree too. Chaitanya Kumar argued that the current financial system is too heavily influenced by fossil fuel ... More companies to be a fully viable solution to the green transition Kumar's speech made the point that large investment funds have interests in many of the biggest companies in the world as well as oil and gas companies, intrinsically tying them together, and creating strong lobbying power. 'Incumbent power and the political economy of the transition is still very much held by fossil fuel interests around the world,' he said. He drew on examples of the lobbying by fossil fuel companies which saw the EU label natural gas as a 'green energy' in 2022 and Microsoft's pivot on its sustainability strategy to adjust for escalating AI emissions. Finally, McLeod, highlighted the social costs, as well as the environmental costs of the current system. 'The market we have, not necessarily the market we wish to have, incentivizes pollution, devalues people and overlooks protection,' she told the audience. Addressing the plight of informal women workers who are on the frontline of the climate crisis, she said: 'This economy is chaos. We cannot maintain these expectations of return and believe that there is a green future. That is a fantasy.' The debate was declared a tie after the audience were invited to applaud the team they felt debated the best. Summarising the conversation, Dunbar-Johnson emphasised the importance of debate on these issues: 'What you did is encapsulate the complexity of the arguments in these subjects. This is a subject that we must grapple with. If the money is there, do we have the political solutions to drive that? We do have instruments to drive it, but the reality is, too much of the narrative is about the cost of the transition, not about the cost of not transitioning and the opportunities.'
