Apple, BP and Orsted: Can we trust corporate sustainability pledges?
However, can we truly trust that these pledges are credible and mean what we believe they do?
'We have a big issue in the broad environmental and sustainability space, where organisations are really trying to have their cake and eat it too,' Chris Hocknell, director at Eight Versa, said.
'They want to have these ambitious grand strategies to meet net zero or even carbon neutral. But they, in many respects, don't actually have the solutions within their control or they don't have the plans to get there.'
And whilst an unrealistic roadmap is a problem, Chris thinks the entire way we look at sustainability is bad for business.
'I want to change how we evaluate carbon performance. It's kind of anti-innovation, it's anti-growth.'
In this episode of The Big Question, Euronews' Business editor Angela Barnes is joined by sustainability consultant Chris Hocknell, to discuss where companies are going wrong with their climate targets.
'An honesty deficit'
'One of the problems is that it's not properly audited and verified, so we have companies that will use it incorrectly and say things that are technically untrue, but they can't actually be verified unless you have the data to dig into, so there's a lack of policing effectively,' Chris explained.
He also suggested that both Apple and BP have been criticised for being unclear with their terminology.
BP in particular, he noted, has set itself a target of achieving 'net zero operations' by 2050. However, this only applies to their Scope 1 and 2 emissions.
'It really means that they exclude the use of their product, the oil and gas itself, which is technically not correct.
'If your product is liquid carbon effectively, then oil is ultimately used to be combusted and turned into other products or even as a fuel. So your main product is not a net zero product,' Chris told The Big Question.
In case you're unfamiliar with the scope system, here's a basic explainer.
Scope 1: Direct emissions from sources owned and controlled by the organisation.
Scope 2: Indirect emissions from purchased energy.
Scope 3: Indirect emissions in the value chain. E.g From suppliers or from product use.
Whilst Chris criticised BP's use of terminology, he acknowledged that oil and gas 'are the lifeblood of the whole economy and industrialised society' and suggested that focusing on making their direct emissions more efficient and being clearer with that messaging is the best foot forward.
Should we be suspicious of all climate pledges?
Chris' outlook wasn't all doom and gloom. He highlighted how climate messaging does match the actions of many companies.
'Orsted is one where they've transitioned into obviously making green tech and are very large. They've got a very self-evident business model which is pivoting towards the technology of the future, in theory,' Chris explained.
'There are other companies like Patagonia [which] is a classic case study, they've internalised this sustainable and pro-environment philosophy into their business model but they're tailoring their message, their product to a slither of the market and I think the problem is that the companies that can actually reinvent or target their products to that kind of very pro-green element of the market is a minority.'
For some industries, striving for 'net zero' or 'climate neutral' just isn't possible.
'We call them kind of hard to abate industries. You know, there's steel, glass, any of the big, heavy industry. There's not an option for them.
'They've got to keep doing what they're doing and we depend on it. So they don't have any easy options. And I think that's the big elephant in the room, these hard to abate industries.
'How do we transition them? Because there isn't the technology at hand. And that's another kind of myth is that we think we have these technologies just at our fingertips and we actually don't.'
Is there a better way for companies to approach their climate goals?
Instead of setting unrealistic goals that the business leaders of the future will not be able to achieve, Chris suggested companies begin discussing their climate goals in terms of efficiency.
'Probably all the people on the board at this point in time, won't be on the board in 2040, 2045, 2050. So we have this real challenge where it's much easier to keep pretending you're on track.'
Each year, they should aim to achieve more whilst reducing their current impact - doing more with less. He believes regulation could help with that too.
'I think we need an efficiency philosophy rather than a rationing and a budgetary perspective on things.
'We need to innovate and grow our way out of this problem and that current runs through almost all of our regulation and I think we need a more entrepreneurial and innovation-minded approach to all of our policy making rather than bureaucratic boxing in and limits and hurdles.'
The Big Question is a series from Euronews Business where we sit down with industry leaders and experts to discuss some of the most important topics on today's agenda.
Watch the video above to see the full discussion with Chris Hocknell.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
9 hours ago
- Euronews
Timing of new data rules and plan to cut red tape baffles tech sector
Tech companies are confused about the timing of upcoming EU rules that aim to monetise data along with a new attempt to simplify rules affecting the sector, industry representatives have told Euronews. Most provisions of a new EU Data Act will come into effect on 12 September, just three months before the European Commission presents its digital simplification package: an effort to cut red tape and pull back on certain reporting obligations. In 2022, the European Commission proposed the new law to make sure that data created using smart devices - like connected cars or smart home equipment - is shared fairly. The EU wants to make sure the people using such devices benefit as more and more machines create huge amounts of data. Manufacturers of devices must design their products in a way that makes it easy for users to get and share their data under the Act. But there are some exceptions: if sharing data could reveal important business secrets, companies can temporarily stop the sharing. In emergency situations like floods or cyberattacks, private companies may be required to share their data with government agencies to help manage the crisis. Digital trade groups, however, say that uncertainty now surrounds the rules because of the simplification plans announced by EU Tech Commissioner Henna Virkkunen. The EU executive is currently gathering 'insights on where current policies can be simplified or streamlined'. In a statement to Euronews, the Business Software Alliance (BSA), a trade group which counts Amazon, Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle among its members, said that the timing of the simplification package 'raises the risk that companies will need to comply with the full obligations of the Data Act, only to see them potentially revised shortly thereafter'. Fewer than half of EU member states have designated or legally empowered national authorities responsible for implementing the new Data Act, according to BDA, which is now calling for the application of the law to be deferred to ensure legal clarity "until a coherent and effective implementation is found'. This was echoed by trade group Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA). CCIA Europe's Head of Policy and Deputy Head of Office, Alexandre Roure said 'Reopening the Data Act now would only create more uncertainty, and that's something companies can't afford. Including the Data Act in the Commission's upcoming digital simplification package would send mixed signals just as businesses are starting to adapt.' A spokesperson for the Commission said that 'there is no link between the planned Digital Simplification Omnibus and the national measures needed to give practical effect to the Data Act.' Rules in practice Besides the simplification efforts, most companies 'are still grappling with what the rules mean in practice,' said Roure. 'Clear guidance is urgently needed, especially on thorny issues like protecting businesses' trade secrets and how the Data Act interacts with the GDPR's data protection framework,' he added. BSA said also that 'significant concerns persist among industry stakeholders.' 'One major issue is the uncertainty over whether companies can recover the full value of contracts when a business customer terminates a fixed-term agreement prematurely. Additionally, the Act's aim to enforce interoperability across all cloud service providers may unintentionally hinder competition and innovation, potentially driving up costs for end users,' the statement added. The Commission said that while the Data Act applies directly in all 27 member states from 12 September, it also includes provisions that require national implementation measures such as on penalties and enforcement. Breaches of the Act can result in fines of up to €20 million or 4% of the company's total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher. 'The Commission is working closely with member states to support a timely and consistent implementation, including through the European Data Innovation Board where these national implementation measures will be discussed,' the spokesperson said.
France 24
9 hours ago
- France 24
BP makes largest oil, gas discovery in 25 years off Brazil
The discovery comes as a boost to the struggling energy major as it undergoes a major overhaul to focus on its more profitable oil and gas business, shelving its once industry-leading renewable energy strategy. The company said it had located oil and gas at the Bumerangue prospect, 404 kilometres (251 miles) from Rio de Janeiro, in a water depth of 2,372 metres. "This is another success in what has been an exceptional year so far for our exploration team, underscoring our commitment to growing our upstream," said Gordon Birrell, BP's executive vice president for production and operations. It marks the 10th discovery by BP in 2025. Shares in the company rose more than one percent on London's top-tier FTSE 100 index following the announcement. BP is ramping up its global exploration programme, with around 40 wells planned over the next three years, including as many as 15 to be drilled this year. The group expects to grow its daily global output to between 2.3 million and 2.5 million barrels of oil equivalent in 2030. "BP will want to use its latest numbers to convince the market it has truly revamped its strategy and moved away from the green push which proved unpopular with a significant portion of its shareholder base," said AJ Bell investment director Russ Mould. BP publishes its latest earnings on Tuesday, after rival Shell last week reported a 23-percent slide in first-half net profit, hit by lower oil and gas prices.
Euronews
14 hours ago
- Euronews
Why copper, aluminium and steel drive Trump's MAGA agenda3
Like the US government's country-specific tariffs, the hefty 50% levies on all steel, copper and aluminium imports go beyond economics — reflecting Trump's desire to reclaim once-dominant US industries and rally his blue-collar base. "Much of the motivation for tariffs on the base inputs of production, such as copper, is primarily a political motivation," David Stritch, a senior FX Analyst at Caxton, told Euronews. "Trump has on several occasions become frustrated at the reversal in the production of all three materials, away from the United States, which was the dominant global producer as recently as the 1980's, and towards Chile for copper and China for steel and aluminium," he continued. Trump has long framed steel and aluminium as the backbone of American strength, linking their production to economic survival as well as national security. During his first term in 2018, he underscored just how central he believes these industries are. "A strong steel and aluminium industry are vital to our national security. Absolutely vital," Trump said. "Steel is steel. You don't have steel, you don't have a country. Our industries have been targeted for years and years — decades, in fact — by unfair foreign trade practices leading to the shuttered plants and mills, the laying off of millions of workers, and the decimation of entire communities. And that's going to stop, right? It's going to stop," he declared at the time. When it comes to copper, the US currently imports around half of its resources, mostly from Chile and Canada. On Wednesday, copper prices fell sharply before the 1 August deadline for the implementation of new tariffs, with US copper futures sinking 20% to around $4.55 or €3.94 per pound, marking the largest intra-day fall on record. This came after US copper prices surged to new records in July when Trump first announced the levy. Again taking investors by surprise, the president then announced this week that the raw material — as opposed to semi-finished products — would be exempt from the duty, threatening less of a supply squeeze. Imports of copper concentrate and cathodes won't be affected by new levies, although shipments of wire, pipes, and sheeting will be. Meanwhile the doubling of steel and aluminium tariffs, to 50% from their previous 25% tariff rate, has significantly raised US domestic metal prices, cutting off cost-competitive imports and increasing volatility for manufacturers. Higher input costs and shrinking availability are forcing US companies to consider reshoring their investments and redesigning their supply chains. Whether or not tariffs will actually boost domestic production nonetheless remains to be seen, as levies imposed by Trump during his first term failed to do so. By 2024, US steel output was actually 1% lower than in 2017, before Trump's initial tariffs, while aluminium production had declined by nearly 10%. According to recent analysis, Trump's tariffs could raise manufacturing costs by up to 4.5%, squeezing narrow-margin sectors like EVs and appliances, as well as delaying investment in key manufacturing hubs across the country. Industries 'snatched away' from the US For most of the 20th century, the United States was the world's top copper producer until Chile took this title, marking the end of US dominance. Today, Chile remains the largest global producer of the metal. In terms of steel production, the US peaked in the early 1970s before the industry faced a prolonged collapse, deepened by a series of recessions. Cheaper and more efficient systems in Japan, South Korea, Europe and elsewhere undercut high-cost US integrated steel mills. A strong dollar also made foreign steel even cheaper, while domestic plants were burdened with aging equipment, high labour contracts and rising environmental costs. Steel towns — the ones Trump now wants to reinvigorate nearly 50 years later — collapsed economically, despite government interventions to keep them afloat. This is why the region from New York through the Midwest continues to be called the Rust Belt, referring to corroding mills and production sites that have long fallen out of use. In terms of aluminium, the US was the world's leading aluminium producer for much of the 20th century, largely due to the abundance of cheap electricity needed for smelting and strong domestic demand from defence, aerospace and automotive industries. In the early 2000s, China overtook the US as the leading producer of aluminium. "Trump's greatest base of support, primarily blue collar non-college educated men, has seen the largest drop in employment opportunities as a result of this offshoring," Stritch told Euronews. Increasing costs, especially in green-adjacent industries Trump's sweeping 50% tariffs on copper, steel and aluminium are likely to disrupt industries that rely heavily on these materials, from construction and defence and even green technologies. "Practically, all three materials are used extensively from solar panels to car batteries, one may assume that it would thus be the US manufacturing base that suffers to the largest extent," Stritch continued. Nowhere is this pressure felt more acutely than in sectors like electric vehicles and renewable energy, where these metals are essential and profit margins are already minimal. Stritch added: "We may further speculate that owing to the high tariff placed on these goods and the general fragility of the electric car market at present, the high inputs of all three materials and the thin average industry profit margin of 5%, EV producers may endure the worst of the increased input costs."
