Ok, I know that I'm biased when it comes to how organizations can leverage technology to provide visibility into their CSR initiatives; after all, I work for a software company that actually provides this type of technology. But my bias is for good reason. It works.

The practice of claiming environmental responsibility without having metrics or processes to back it up certainly leaves a sour taste in the mouth of the eco-conscious consumer. Even if an organization is truly engaged and mindful of their environmental stewardship, the public is now wary and weary of corporate claims that don't hold...um, water.

And the general appetite for responsible companies and governments when it comes to environmental protection is growing. Look at the recent survey of American attitudes created for Yale and George Mason University. It indicated that 3 out of 4 voters favor regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant and a majority of those polled felt that global warming should be a priority for the President and Congress. Scientific American recently ran a story on the study, if you're interested in reading more.

The only way you can really ensure your message of environmental stewardship is believed is by having the data to back it up. Many people will say that capturing that information is easier said than done. While I would never say it's easy, a change in how an organization does things never is, but I will say it may be easier than you think.

The availability of tools like our Environmental Sustainability Metrics application, is enabling a whole new level of visibility into how organizations are performing against their sustainability targets. Visibility that can provide reassurance to skeptical customers and other interested stakeholders like employees and investors. These tools don't just chart and graph existing data, they require tracking tasks to be completed, forms to be filled in and go as far as to raise red flags when activities run overdue. Performance tracking and trending is clearly visible from graphical performance dashboards.

So yes, I am 100% biased on the subject, but I am one of those people who feels skeptical about green claims and I love reading corporate success stories that can be backed up by metrics. Don't you?

While its ambitious agenda to curb greenhouse gases (GHG) has been delayed, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is still moving ahead in full force to have power plants – one of the biggest contributors of GHGs – cut emissions drastically.

The EPA announced late last year it would move to push new, strict emissions performance standards on plants and refineries. The move faced stiff opposition from U.S. Republicans, as well as some others opposed to imposed limits on emissions, since it was viewed as a move by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to make up for the fact President Barack Obama failed to pass promised environmental legislation in his first term in office. However, the EPA had a legal mandate from the Supreme Court to move forward on carbon emissions cuts.

This week the EPA indicating it is budging, but only slightly. Its new deadline for proposing a GHG performance standard has been moved to September 30, two months later than the initially proposed July 26 deadline.

While power plants across the U.S. may breathe a collective sigh of relief that the deadline is not mere weeks away, this is but an eight week extension. Tracking, reporting, and mitigating GHG emissions will be the new reality for all power plants and refineries by the end of the year.

What's the best plan? Well, since you can't manage what you don't measure, start tracking carbon emissions immediately.

While the current rule may apply only to the biggest emitters – refineries and power plants represent more than 40 per cent of nationwide emissions, according to the EPA – eventually all businesses will need to move towards emissions reporting and reduction. So what's stopping you? Track and report on emissions now. It can be cost-effective, cheap and – counterintuitively – generate substantial financial rewards.

Did I mention we make software for that?

The next few days are critical for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The organization declared late last year it would expand its mandate and regulate greenhouse gas emissions from plants and refineries, a move that has not been popular with Republicans and a handful of Democrats.

The Senate will vote in the coming days – potentially as early as Wednesday – on three amendments to a small business bill that could potentially limit the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gasses, an ability that is provided by both the Clean Air Act and a 2007 Supreme Court decision on the agency’s scope. By regulating the emissions of U.S. plants and refineries, the EPA would be able to regulate emissions from sources that represent more than 40 per cent of nationwide greenhouse gas emissions.

However, it must overcome the many legislative roadblocks that, to varying degrees, would prevent it from regulating emissions from stationary sources, including:

• An amendment sponsored by Democratic Senator Max Baucus that would exclude some farms and businesses (that emit under 75,000 tons of carbon) from the EPA’s greenhouse gas regulation purview. This is considered the most moderate of the proposed amendments.
• An amendment by Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller that would postpone adoption of new EPA rules by at least two years.
• A drastic proposal by Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to permanently prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gasses from plants and refineries.

Republicans argue the U.S. economy cannot sustain the costs associated with expanded pollution controls. They need the support of a number of Democrats to pass McConnell’s amendment in a vote that may occur as early as Wednesday, and have indicated they have the support of at least 50 senators in the Democrat-led Senate. Most of the Democrats who have signaled support for the Republican amendment represent states where coal constitutes a large part of the economy.

Though the EPA’s announcement, delivered right after the 111th Congress adjourned in late December, came as a shock to some, the White House has long maintained the EPA would work to restrict emissions in accordance with its legal mandate, whether or not climate legislation was passed.

If any of the proposed amendments fail to gain the 60 necessary Senate votes for passage, the EPA would be poised to expand its authority to regulate emissions, sooner rather than later – unless Republicans in the GOP-dominated House of Representatives are successful at pushing through their own legislation designed to cripple the EPA’s greenhouse gas-regulating authority.

You've probably heard a lot of buzz about the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) in recent years. That's because more and more organizations have been reporting every year since the organization launched in 1999.

But have you ever wondered who, exactly, is reporting? The answers are much closer than you think. The GRI website features a comprehensive, downloadable reports list containing information on all organizations that have provided sustainability reports along GRI guidelines through the past 12 years (that GRI is aware of). You can download the report as a Microsoft Excel file here.

While only a few organizations have reported in 2011 (we’re only in the second month of the year, after all), what is striking about the list is the sheer increase of the amount of organizations that report year after year. Nearly 1,800 organizations reported in 2010, up from about 1,450 in 2009.

After downloading the report, you can sort by organization, country, region, adherence level and status (i.e., whether an organization’s GRI compliance status was GRI-checked or self-declared). The spreadsheet also provides links to (where available) the published reports of existing organizations.

So, for example, if your organization is looking for GRI best practices, find a relevant organization in the spreadsheet, check out their Application Level score (expressed as a alphabetical grade reflecting the extent to which a report adheres to GRI guidelines), then download and review their report to get an idea of what reporting formats and formulas might work for you.

Intelex is excited to attend the 14^th annual Energy, Utility & Environment Conference (EUEC) this week!

Intelex Sales VP Steve Ross and Solutions Specialist Frasier Dickie are looking forward to representing Intelex at the event, which will feature 600 speakers, 2,000 attendees and 160 exhibits. Intelex will be stationed at booth #208 in the Phoenix Convention Center, Exhibits Hall from Jan 31^st to February 2^nd. Feel free to swing by and check out the fabulous range of environmental software solutions that can benefit your company. As a bonus, attendees can enter their business cards at the Intelex booth for a chance to win a Big Screen TV!

For more information visit www.euec.com.

Late last month, the day after the U.S.’s 111th Congress officially adjourned, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson announced that, despite the fact lawmakers failed to pass President Barack Obama’s ambitious energy bill, the organization would tackle climate change within its own means by regulating greenhouse gas emissions for power plants and refineries.

In the wake of that announcement, a group of irked Republicans have vowed to bar the EPA from clamping down on emissions from some of America’s biggest polluters. A bill tabled on the opening day of the new Republican-dominated Congress and sponsored by Representative Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) would prevent the EPA from regulating power plants and refineries by amending the Clean Air Act to state greenhouse gases are not subject to the law. The EPA derives its authority to regulate greenhouse gases from the decades-old Act, which calls for emissions controls.

Nearly 50 Republican representatives (and one Democrat) have co-sponsored the two-page bill, which would attempt to repeal the Clean Air Act’s endangerment finding, a facet of the legislation which states greenhouse gases endanger human health.

Though there might be enough support to pass the legislation, it is unlikely opponents would be able to thwart the EPA entirely. At best the challengers might be successful in delaying the EPA’s move by a couple of years, but the roadblocks preventing a sweeping amendment to the Clean Air Act are substantial.

Attempting to repeal the endangerment finding would result in significant legal challenges, since the EPA is adhering to a 2007 Supreme Court decision that stated the EPA had violated the Clean Air Act by not regulating greenhouse gas emissions. In this sense, the EPA under President Barack Obama is technically adhering to the law by proposing to regulate emissions by plants and refineries, which represent 40 per cent of nationwide emissions.

Even if Congress is successful in passing legislation to thwart the EPA’s move, there’s also the significant fact President Obama – a staunch advocate of aggressive climate policies – would have to sign the bill into law, which he could refuse to do unless sponsors were able to garner the 67 Senate votes required to overcome a veto.

Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), one of the strongest upper chamber advocates of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, has vowed to use “every single tool” at her disposal to prevent House Republicans from blocking the EPA’s efforts.

In the meantime, it is safe to assume the EPA will proceed in the rulemaking process throughout 2011, which will eventually result in emissions standards for plants and refineries – which should start tracking and reporting on air emissions – in 2012.

U.S. President Barack Obama might have failed to pass any substantive climate change legislation in the outgoing Congress’ otherwise productive final weeks, but that hasn’t stopped some action on climate from occurring before the year’s end.

Lisa Jackson, head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), announced last week – on Dec. 23, no less, only a day after the 111th Congress officially adjourned for the year – that the agency would introduce new emission standards targeted at fossil fuel power plants and petroleum refineries in early 2011. These two sources alone represent almost 40 per cent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, according to the EPA.

Far from announcing any specific details surrounding emissions standards, Jackson simply laid out a timeline for issuing rules curbing greenhouse gas emissions, with standards for power plants and refineries to be proposed in 2011, and final rules to be issued, after consultation with stakeholders, in 2012.

While it may seem the proposed regulations should require congressional approval to pass, it is actually within the EPA’s mandate to determine greenhouse gas regulations. In 2007 the Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases fit within the Clean Air Act’s definition of air pollutant (the Act gives the EPA the power to regulate air pollutants).

Pending any roadblocks presented by the Republicans' incoming Congressional majority, this announcement means America’s biggest emitters will have to monitor, measure and curb air emissions in accordance with forthcoming standards.

The EPA has reiterated the timeline allows for extensive listening sessions with the business community, states, and other stakeholders in the early part of next year, before the rulemaking process begins, and will solicit additional feedback during the routine notice and comment period.

Go to the EPA’s website for more information about the proposed settlement agreements and for opportunities to provide feedback on the proposed regulations.