In a newly carbon-constrained world, being carbon neutral as a company has suddenly become a potential competitive advantage. oing it right, however, can be difficult. Marty Janowitz of Jacques Whitford shares his experience of the process.

In 2007, Jacques Whitford, an engineering, environmental and earth sciences consulting company, became the first major consulting firm of its size to go carbon neutral. With 1,600 employees in 45 offices, achieving this goal wasn’t simple. Nonetheless, the company felt that it was an important step to take.

The person charged with making the firm’s carbon neutral vision a reality was Marty Janowitz, Jacques Whitford’s vice-president of sustainability. For months, Janowitz worked with a multi-disciplinary internal team of climate and sustainability experts to assess the company’s carbon footprint, develop a response plan, which included setting aggressive emission reduction targets, and oversee the purchase of carbon offsets. Here, Janowitz shares his experiences of the process.

Green Business: Why go carbon neutral?

Janowitz: Our company is committed to recognizing and responding to environmental challenges by taking our share of responsibility in meaningful and practical ways, so going carbon neutral just makes sense, from that perspective.

It also made good business sense. We are in the business of advising clients on environmental issues — by going through the process ourselves, by committing to emission reductions and purchasing quality offsets, we are able to offer our clients grounded insight, knowledge and expertise that will make it easier for them.  

To be a leader in our field, it’s important to ’walk the talk.’ Going carbon neutral demonstrates, to our employees and clients, that we are committed to an environmentally sustainable future.

GB: How did you calculate your carbon footprint?

Janowitz: It wasn’t effortless. We really relied on our own experts to develop our strategy and program based on their evaluation and interpretation of previously developed protocols, methods,
and approaches.

Our first step was to examine how our firm runs. We looked at all aspects of our business - everything from the electricity used to power each of our locations, to the emissions produced by employees traveling on behalf of the company or clients. At the conclusion of the study, we were able to identify three main sources of greenhouse gas emissions: our buildings and the energy used to power, heat and cool them; our vehicles; and our flights. Once we identified these sources, we were able to start calculating our carbon footprint. We started with three representative offices and then, as we learned and refined the process, we extended it to all our offices and operations.

Establishing the baseline of our carbon emissions was an important first step. The information we gathered to form a baseline has allowed us to set reduction targets, and is enabling us to measure our conservation initiatives. As a company of scientists and engineers, being able to quantify results is very important. We’ve since expanded our baseline assessment to a wider range of sustainability aspects such as waste, water and material use.
 
GB: What have you done to reduce your carbon emissions?

Janowitz: It is an ongoing process. After our initial assessment of our carbon footprint, we started with some of the easier things like switching to compact fluorescent lighting, switching off office lights when they aren’t needed and encouraging carpooling and cycling to work. Other things take longer. For example, as our leases on company cars end, we are switching exclusively to hybrid vehicles. Based upon our baseline and an assessment of what is possible, we have set reference reduction targets and each office is undertaking to set specific local targets and build them into their operational business plans. They are going to be measured on results and compared on a monthly basis. By the end of the first year cycle, we expect to have reduced emissions and therefore will be able to reduce our need to acquire offsets.

Part of the process is creating a culture of conservation at all levels of the company. We’ve launched an assertive education and engagement program on carbon reduction and other sustainable practices with monthly themes using a variety of tools and techniques including webinars, discussions, plug and play presentations and even games. We are establishing policies and guidance on a number of sustainability parameters. For example, when we relocate or expand we now look for office space that will meet energy efficiency and other sustainable design criteria such as location within a short walk to public transit. As we learn more about our carbon emissions, we will continue to adapt and change our business practices to incorporate sustainability.

GB: Are you buying carbon offsets?

Janowitz: Yes. After much research on best practices and criteria, we evaluated a number of options and decided to partner with U.S.-based Carbonfund.org. This non-profit foundation assessed the work we did to analyze our carbon footprint, and recommended investments in carbon-reducing projects such as renewable energy, alternative energy and energy efficiency in both Canada and the U.S. From our perspective, the offsets are an incentive to find new and better ways to reduce our emissions.

GB: What do you say to critics who suggest that carbon offsets enable companies to be wasteful and ’buy’ their green status?

Janowitz: We recognize that this could be the case but decided that the best approach was to acquire offsets and be committed to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions through conservation and sustainable business practices. Our ultimate goal is to be as close as possible to carbon neutral through efficiencies and innovation. Purchasing carbon offsets is something we can do while we improve and, frankly, it gives us further economic incentive to achieve results. It helps us to achieve our goal and balance our footprint of 8,501 metric tonnes of carbon a year from the atmosphere.

GB: What has surprised you the most about the carbon neutral experience?

Janowitz: I think we were all surprised and delighted by the positive response to this project. Being carbon neutral and committing to substantial emission reductions has been popular with our staff and has helped us to recruit and retain the best people in our industry. Staff and clients
have all expressed strong interest and support of our various sustainability practices and services. Being carbon neutral sets us apart from our competitors and sets a standard we are proud to pioneer.

GB: Having achieved carbon neutral status, what have you learned from this process? 

Janowitz: Taking on something new is always a challenge in any organization. The key is to be clear on what we are doing and why, to discuss and communicate our objectives throughout the company and then to go about the transition step by step, learning and improving as we go.

GB: What advice would you give to other companies who are considering going carbon neutral?

Janowitz: Sustainability, including climate change strategies, is not a fad. It’s an imperative, driven by need, in accord with progressive values, and those of us working in the marketplace have to tackle it head on. Even beyond the ethics of the situation, it is now being strongly driven by the market itself. It’s a challenge like so many of the challenges businesses have addressed before. Carbon and sustainable strategies also present enormous opportunities to improve operations, and redefine and reposition our businesses to prosper in the coming carbon constrained era. My recommendation is to get serious, get organized and get some good advice.
 

< Prev		Next >