Corporate Giants: Polluting Our Planet

The world's most polluting industries include fossil fuels, agriculture, fashion, food retail, transportation, and construction. According to various reports, a small number of large companies are responsible for a significant portion of global greenhouse gas emissions. For example, 20 fossil fuel companies have been directly linked to over one-third of all greenhouse gas emissions, and 100 companies have been the source of more than 70% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions since 1988. These companies have continued to expand their operations despite being aware of the negative environmental impact of fossil fuels. As a result, they are driving the climate emergency that threatens the future of humanity and the planet.

Fossil fuel companies and climate change

The fossil fuel industry has been aware of the environmental impact of its products for decades. In 1965, US President Lyndon Johnson released a report detailing the likely impact of continued fossil fuel production on global heating. Despite this, fossil fuel companies have continued to expand their operations, driving the climate emergency that threatens the future of humanity.

According to a report by the Carbon Majors Database, 100 companies were responsible for 71% of global greenhouse gas emissions between 1988 and 2015. The report pinpoints how a relatively small set of fossil fuel producers may hold the key to systemic change on carbon emissions. The energy sector is one of the largest industries in the world, and major fossil fuel companies routinely make billion-dollar profits by extracting and distributing oil, gas, and coal.

Fossil fuels produce carbon dioxide (CO2) when burnt, and CO2 is the main driver of climate change. Instead of acknowledging the harmful effects of their products, many of the world's largest fossil fuel companies have knowingly deceived the public about climate science and policy. They have waged marketing and lobbying campaigns to convince lawmakers and the public that the science behind climate change is not certain. This includes spreading disinformation about the climate benefits of "natural gas" or methane gas, which is 84 times more potent than carbon dioxide and leaks throughout the supply chain.

Some fossil fuel companies have also worked to delay action on climate change by influencing academic institutions and funding climate disinformation campaigns. ExxonMobil, for example, has been accused of spreading disinformation and engaging in "greenwashing" by marketing itself as part of the climate solution while actively working to undermine climate policies. Other companies, including BP, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips, have been accused of deceiving the public about their commitment to achieving the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and net-zero emissions by 2050.

Agriculture and greenhouse gas emissions

Agriculture contributes approximately 10% of total US greenhouse gas emissions. This includes emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane.

Carbon dioxide emissions in agriculture come from increased decomposition of plant matter in soils and from converting lands to agricultural uses. These emissions are partially offset by the increased plant matter stored in cropland soils. Carbon dioxide emissions can be reduced by planting additional crops outside of the primary growing season (cover cropping) and using cultivation methods that cause less disturbance to the soil.

Nitrous oxide is the second-largest contributor to agricultural emissions, resulting mostly from agricultural fertilizer application to soils and manure management. Nitrous oxide formation can be limited by reducing the amount of fertilizer applied and avoiding applications when conditions are more favourable to nitrous oxide formation.

Methane emissions come primarily from livestock digestion (enteric fermentation) and the way livestock manure is managed. Methane emissions from manure can be reduced by adopting manure management practices that capture and use emissions.

While agriculture contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions, it is important to note that the commercial, residential, and industrial sectors also play a significant role. These sectors' emissions increase when indirect emissions from electricity end-use are included, as buildings use a large share of electricity for heating, ventilation, air conditioning, lighting, appliances, and plug loads. Additionally, the transportation sector is the largest source of direct greenhouse gas emissions due to the burning of fossil fuels for cars, trucks, ships, trains, and planes.

To reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions, the US federal government has various tools at its disposal, including "conservation programs" in Title II of the Farm Bill, which provide cost-share payments and technical assistance for implementing practices to protect agricultural soils, water and air quality, ecosystems, and species habitats, as well as to lower agricultural emissions. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act also increased funding dedicated to greenhouse gas mitigation in those programs by $19.5 billion over five years.

Fashion industry's carbon footprint

The fashion industry has a significant carbon footprint, contributing up to 10% of global carbon emissions. If left unchecked, this figure could rise to 26% by 2050. The rise of "fast fashion" since the 1990s has been a major driver of this trend, with apparel companies doubling their production between 2000 and 2014. The average consumer bought 60% more clothing in 2014 than in 2000 and kept each item for half as long. Social media has also fuelled increasingly short fashion cycles, with consumers discarding clothing after just seven wears.

The production of clothing has a large environmental impact, with the manufacturing of textiles responsible for about 20% of the world's industrial water pollution. Producing polyester and other synthetic fibres requires 1.3 billion barrels of oil annually, and when washed, these garments release microplastics into waterways, contributing to plastic pollution in the sea.

To address the fashion industry's carbon footprint, there have been calls for legally binding environmental and labour standards. The Act on Fashion Coalition, including clothing companies, labour rights organisations, and environmental justice groups, supports a bill to hold big brands accountable for their impact on workers and the environment. The bill aligns with New York's Climate Leadership and Community Protect Act, which aims to cut carbon emissions by 40% by 2030.

Transitioning to a circular economy, with a focus on reuse and rental, has been proposed as a strategy to reduce the fashion industry's environmental impacts. The second-hand trading model has the potential to reduce carbon emissions by 90%. Additionally, consumers can play a role in shifting away from destructive consumption patterns, with younger generations already expressing a desire to move away from fast fashion.

Food retail and plastic waste

The corporate food system is built on a model that heavely relies on plastics for production, distribution, marketing, and retail. This has resulted in unprecedented amounts of plastic waste entering the environment, contaminating land, water, and the food chain. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that recycling plastic waste is not a viable long-term solution as it only delays the disposal of the products. While governments are implementing more regulations on single-use plastics, they are often not willing to challenge the corporate food system, leading to a rapid accumulation of plastic waste.

Food retailers are in a challenging position as they face increasing pressure to reduce their plastic waste. They have the opportunity to lead the way in solving the plastics crisis by reducing their dependence on plastic packaging, promoting more effective recycling practices, and partnering with others to improve recycling infrastructure. However, the cost of non-plastic alternatives is typically higher, and the revenue gained from recycling plastic waste is negligible compared to the cost of avoiding plastic disposal altogether.

Some retailers are exploring alternatives to plastic packaging, such as bioplastics like starch-based plastic or PLA containers. However, these alternatives have their limitations, as they are only compostable in industrial composting plants. Retailers offering pre-packaged prepared foods can also find alternatives to plastic clamshells and tubs, such as paperboard.

The 25 largest CPG companies have made sustainable packaging commitments, including waste reduction goals and the use of recyclable or reusable packaging. For example, Mars aims to reduce its use of virgin plastic by 25% by 2025, while Nestlé aims for 100% recyclable or reusable packaging by 2025. Other companies, like Unilever, PepsiCo, and Coca-Cola, are pursuing plastic-free packaging solutions.

While the food retail industry faces challenges in reducing plastic waste, there are also opportunities for innovation and collaboration to develop more sustainable packaging solutions. By working together, food retailers can play a significant role in addressing the plastics crisis and protecting the environment.

Transportation of merchandise

Transportation is a vital sector for modern societies and economies, allowing producers to sell their products across the world. However, it is also a major contributor to environmental pollution. In the US, the transportation sector is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, accounting for about 28% of the total. This includes emissions from cars, trucks, commercial aircraft, and railroads. Similarly, in the EU, transport is responsible for about a quarter of total GHG emissions and is the largest contributor to nitrogen oxides emissions, which are harmful to health and the environment.

Road transport is the largest contributor to climate change within the transport sector. This is due to the high number of vehicles, as well as the increased use of each vehicle, a phenomenon known as the Jevons paradox. Freight transportation, which involves the use of trucks, planes, ships, and trains to transport goods, makes up 8% of global GHG emissions, and up to 11% when warehouses and ports are included. Nearly all freight transportation runs on oil and gas, and road vehicles like trucks and vans make up the majority (65%) of freight emissions.

The environmental impact of the transportation of merchandise is not limited to GHG emissions. Transportation equipment emits over 20% of the world's black carbon, a powerful short-lived climate pollutant that can cause serious health problems for people living near roads, ports, or communities receiving home deliveries. Additionally, emissions from ships, which carry about three-quarters of the world's cargo, contribute significantly to air and water pollution during their voyages.

To reduce the environmental impact of the transportation of merchandise, various strategies can be implemented. These include the use of modern engines, low-carbon fuels, and more efficient practices such as improving vehicle space utilization and reducing freight demand. Additionally, transitioning from road and air transport to rail and human-powered transport, as well as increasing transport electrification and energy efficiency, can help mitigate the environmental impact of the transportation of merchandise.

Some regions have already taken steps to reduce the environmental impact of transportation. For example, the number of electric vehicles in Europe is growing every year, with electric cars accounting for 22.7% of new car registrations in 2023. Additionally, the share of energy from renewable sources used for transport in the EU increased from under 2% in 2005 to 8.7% in 2022. Policies such as levying congestion charges on cars travelling in congested areas during rush hour can also help reduce traffic congestion and its associated environmental impacts.

Frequently asked questions