The actions of the multinationals are not up to the plans they announce to reduce their carbon footprint and appear “greener”. This is the conclusion of the “Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2023” report, published on Monday February 13 by the think tanks NewClimate Institute and Carbon Market Watch. “The climate strategies of twenty-four of the greatest “climate leaders” are totally insufficient and tainted with ambiguity”note its authors.
Moreover, their long-term “net zero carbon” promises distract from a worrying backlog. Indeed, the report explains, “their 2030 commitments are less than half of what is needed to stay below [du seuil] 1.5°C warming” set by the Paris agreement of 2015, an objective that is now out of reach. None of the companies studied escape criticism, even if Maersk dominates for its ” integrity “ and his “transparency”.
The Danish shipowner, which is deploying an ambitious clean fuel program for its container ships, is followed by Apple, ArcelorMittal (steel), Google, H&M, Holcim (cement), Microsoft, Stellantis (PSA-Fiat-Chrysler, automotive) and Thyssenkrupp (steel). At the bottom of the ranking are the airline American Airlines, Carrefour, JBS (agribusiness) and Samsung Electronics. This sample weighs 10% of the turnover of the 500 largest global groups, and those who make it up appear as leaders in carbon neutrality, while “most do not represent an example of good practice leadership”.
Practices deemed misleading
In addition, to be able to claim that they have met their commitments, these companies plan to offset between 23% and 45% of their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions rather than reducing them. These mechanisms, consisting, for example, of planting trees or storing CO2 issued, represent “a major stumbling block for the credibility of their climate strategies”, warns the report, which is alarmed by a drift in such practices, which are nevertheless well accepted by the certification bodies. They mislead consumers and investors, he warns, and expose companies to lawsuits and reputational risk.
What about Carrefour and Stellantis, the only French in the sample studied? They emit as much CO2 (137 million tonnes) each other, but are at both ends of the spectrum. The French distribution giant is among the worst rated. The primary culprit is its product and packaging supply chain, with indirect GHG emissions (“scope 3”) representing almost all of its discharges.
You have 44.52% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.