stimulate sustainable economic growth through climate ... · carbon disclosure project stimulate...
TRANSCRIPT
CARBON DISCLOSURE PROJECT
Stimulate sustainableeconomic growth through climate changemanagement
Iberia 125 Climate Change Report 2012
On behalf of 655 investors
with assets of US$ 78 trillion
Report writer: Scoring partner:
Portada 2012 19/11/12 04:37 Página 1
Portada 2012 19/11/12 04:37 Página 2
Aegon
AKBANK T.A.S.
Allianz Global Investors
Aviva Investors
AXA Group
Bank of America Merrill
Lynch
Bendigo and Adelaide Bank
Blackrock
BP Investment Management
California Public Employees
Retirement System -
CalPERS
California State Teachers
Retirement Fund - CalSTRS
Calvert Asset Management
Company
Catholic Super
CCLA
Daiwa Asset Management
Co. Ltd.
Generation Investment
Management
HSBC Holdings
KLP
Legg Mason
London Pension Fund
Authority
Mongeral Aegon Seguros e
Previdência S/A
Morgan Stanley
National Australia Bank
NEI Investments
Neuberger Berman
Newton Investment
Management Ltd
Nordea Investment
Management
Norges Bank Investment
Management
PFA Pension
Robeco
Rockefeller & Co.
SAM Group
Sampension KP
Livsforsikring A/S
Schroders
Scottish Widows
Investment Partnership
SEB
Sompo Japan Insurance Inc
Standard Chartered
TD Asset Management Inc.
and TDAM USA Inc.
The RBS Group
The Wellcome Trust
1
CDP Investor Members 2012
CDP works with investorsglobally to advance theinvestment opportunitiesand reduce the risksposed by climate changeby asking almost 6,000 ofthe world’s largestcompanies to report ontheir climate strategies,GHG emissions andenergy use in thestandardized InvestorCDP format. To learnmore about CDP’smember offering andbecoming a member,please contact us or visitthe CDP Investor Membersection athttps://www.cdproject.net/investormembers
2 2012 SIGNATORY INVESTOR
BREAKDOWN
259 Asset Managers 220 Asset Owners143 Banks33 Insurance13 Other
1 CDP INVESTOR SIGNATORIES & ASSETS
(US$ TRILLION) AGAINST TIME
• Investor CDP Signatories• Investor CDP Signatory Assets
5%
39%
33%
21%
2%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Ass
ets
(US
$ Tr
illio
ns)
Num
ber
of S
igna
turie
s
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
35 95 155 225 315 385 475 534 551 6554.5 10 21 31 41 57 55 64 71 78
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 1
Aberdeen Asset ManagersAberdeen Immobilien KAG mbHABRAPP - Associação Brasileira das Entidades Fechadasde Previdência ComplementarAchmea NVActive Earth Investment ManagementAcuity Investment ManagementAddenda Capital Inc.Advanced Investment PartnersAEGON N.V.AEGON-INDUSTRIAL Fund Management Co., LtdAFP IntegraAIG Asset ManagementAK Asset Management Inc.AKBANK T.A.�.Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo)Alberta Teachers Retirement FundAlcyone FinanceAllenbridgeEpic Investment Advisers LimitedAllianz Elementar Versicherungs-AGAllianz Global Investors Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHAllianz GroupAltira GroupAmalgamated BankAMP Capital InvestorsAmpegaGerling Investment GmbHAmundi AMANBIMA – Associação Brasileira das Entidades dosMercados Financeiro e de CapitaisAntera Gestão de Recursos S.A.APGAQEX LLCAquila CapitalArisaig Partners Asia Pte LtdArma Portföy Yönetimi A.�.ASM Administradora de Recursos S.A.ASN BankAssicurazioni Generali SpaATI Asset ManagementATP GroupAustralia and New Zealand Banking Group LimitedAustralian Ethical InvestmentAustralianSuperAvaron Asset Management ASAviva InvestorsAviva plcAXA GroupBaillie Gifford & Co.BaltCapBANCA CÍVICA S.A.Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena GroupBanco Bradesco S/ABanco Comercial Português S.A.Banco de Credito del Peru BCPBanco de Galicia y Buenos Aires S.A.Banco do Brasil S/ABanco Espírito Santo, SABanco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social -BNDESBanco Popular EspañolBanco Sabadell, S.A.Banco SantanderBanesprev – Fundo Banespa de Seguridade SocialBanestoBank Handlowy w Warszawie S.A.Bank of America Merrill LynchBank of MontrealBank VontobelBankhaus Schelhammer & SchatteraKapitalanlagegesellschaft m.b.H.BANKIA S.A.BANKINTERBankInvestBanque DegroofBanque Libano-FrancaiseBarclaysBasellandschaftliche KantonalbankBASF Sociedade de Previdência ComplementarBasler KantonalbankBâtirente
Baumann and Partners S.A.Bayern LBBayernInvest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHBBC Pension Trust LtdBBVABedfordshire Pension FundBeetle CapitalBEFIMMO SCABendigo & Adelaide Bank LimitedBentall KennedyBerenberg BankBerti InvestmentsBioFinance Administração de Recursos de Terceiros LtdaBlackRockBlom Bank SALBlumenthal FoundationBNP Paribas Investment PartnersBNY MellonBNY Mellon Service Kapitalanlage GesellschaftBoston Common Asset Management, LLCBP Investment Management LimitedBrasilprev Seguros e Previdência S/A.British Airways Pension Investment Management LimitedBritish Columbia Investment Management Corporation(bcIMC)BT Investment ManagementBusan BankCAAT Pension PlanCadiz Holdings LimitedCaisse de dépôt et placement du QuébecCaisse des DépôtsCaixa Beneficente dos Empregados da CompanhiaSiderurgica Nacional - CBSCaixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco doNordeste do Brasil (CAPEF)Caixa Econômica FederalCaixa Geral de DepositosCaixaBank, S.ACalifornia Public Employees’ Retirement SystemCalifornia State Teachers’ Retirement SystemCalifornia State TreasurerCalvert Investment Management, IncCanada Pension Plan Investment BoardCanadian Friends Service Committee (Quakers)Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC)Canadian Labour Congress Staff Pension FundCAPESESPCapital Innovations, LLCCARE SuperCarmignac GestionCatherine Donnelly FoundationCatholic SuperCBF Church of England FundsCBRECbus Superannuation FundCCLA Investment Management LtdCeleste Funds Management LimitedCentral Finance Board of the Methodist ChurchCeresCERES-Fundação de Seguridade SocialChange Investment ManagementChristian Brothers Investment ServicesChristian SuperChristopher Reynolds FoundationChurch Commissioners for EnglandChurch of England Pensions BoardCI Mutual Funds’ Signature Global AdvisorsCity Developments LimitedClean Yield Asset ManagementClearBridge AdvisorsClimate Change Capital Group LtdCM-CIC Asset ManagementColonial First State Global Asset ManagementComerica IncorporatedCOMGESTCommerzbank AGCommInsureCommonwealth Bank AustraliaCommonwealth Superannuation CorporationCompton FoundationConcordia VersicherungsgruppeConnecticut Retirement Plans and Trust FundsCo-operative Financial Services (CFS)Credit SuisseDaegu BankDaesung Capital ManagementDaiwa Asset Management Co. Ltd.Daiwa Securities Group Inc.Dalton Nicol Reid
de Pury Pictet Turrettini & Cie S.A.DekaBank Deutsche GirozentraleDelta Lloyd Asset ManagementDeutsche Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbHDeutsche Bank AGDevelopment Bank of Japan Inc.Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP)Dexia Asset ManagementDexus Property GroupDnB ASADomini Social Investments LLCDongbu InsuranceDWS Investment GmbHEarth Capital Partners LLPEast Sussex Pension FundEcclesiastical Investment ManagementEcofi Investissements - Groupe Credit CooperatifEdward W. Hazen FoundationEEA Group LtdElan Capital PartnersElement Investment ManagersELETRA - Fundação Celg de Seguros e PrevidênciaEnvironment Agency Active Pension fundEpworth Investment ManagementEquilibrium Capital Groupequinet Bank AGErik Penser FondkommissionErste Asset ManagementErste Group BankEssex Investment Management Company, LLCESSSuperEthos FoundationEtica SgrEureka Funds ManagementEurizon Capital SGREvangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Pension Plan forClergy and Lay WorkersEvangelical Lutheran Foundation of Eastern CanadaEvli Bank PlcF&C InvestmentsFACEB – FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDÊNCIA DOSEMPREGADOS DA CEBFAELCE – Fundacao Coelce de Seguridade SocialFAPERS- Fundação Assistencial e Previdenciária daExtensão Rural do Rio Grande do SulFASERN - Fundação COSERN de PrevidênciaComplementarFédéris Gestion d’ActifsFIDURA Capital Consult GmbHFIM Asset Management LtdFIM ServicesFIPECq - Fundação de Previdência Complementar dosEmpregados e Servidores da FINEP, do IPEA, do CNPqFIRA. - Banco de MexicoFirst Affirmative Financial Network, LLCFirst Swedish National Pension Fund (AP1)Firstrand Group LimitedFive Oceans Asset ManagementFlorida State Board of Administration (SBA)FolketrygdfondetFolksamFondaction CSNFondation de LuxembourgForma Futura Invest AGFourth Swedish National Pension Fund, (AP4)FRANKFURT-TRUST Investment-Gesellschaft mbHFukoku Capital Management IncFUNCEF - Fundação dos Economiários FederaisFundação AMPLA de Seguridade Social - BrasiletrosFundação Atlântico de Seguridade SocialFundação Attilio Francisco Xavier FontanaFundação Banrisul de Seguridade SocialFundação BRDE de Previdência Complementar - ISBREFundação Chesf de Assistência e Seguridade Social –FachesfFundação Corsan - dos Funcionários da CompanhiaRiograndense de SaneamentoFundação de Assistência e Previdência Social do BNDES -FAPESFUNDAÇÃO ELETROBRÁS DE SEGURIDADE SOCIAL -ELETROSFundação Forluminas de Seguridade Social - FORLUZFundação Itaipu BR - de Previdência e Assistência SocialFUNDAÇÃO ITAUBANCOFundação Itaúsa IndustrialFundação Promon de Previdência SocialFundação Rede Ferroviária de Seguridade Social - ReferFUNDAÇÃO SANEPAR DE PREVIDÊNCIA E ASSISTÊNCIASOCIAL - FUSAN
2
CDP Signatory Investors 2012
655 financial institutions withassets of US$78 trillion weresignatories to the CDP 2012information request datedFebruary 1st, 2012
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 2
Fundação Sistel de Seguridade Social (Sistel)Fundação Vale do Rio Doce de Seguridade Social - VALIAFUNDIÁGUA - FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDENCIACOMPLEMENTAR DA CAESBFuturegrowth Asset ManagementGaranti BankGEAP Fundação de Seguridade SocialGenerali Deutschland Holding AGGeneration Investment ManagementGenus Capital ManagementGjensidige Forsikring ASAGlobal Forestry Capital SARLGLS Gemeinschaftsbank eGGoldman Sachs Group Inc.GOOD GROWTH INSTITUT für globaleVermögensentwicklung mbHGovernance for OwnersGovernment Employees Pension Fund (“GEPF”), Republic ofSouth AfricaGPT GroupGraubündner KantonalbankGreater Manchester Pension FundGreen Cay Asset ManagementGreen Century Capital ManagementGROUPAMA EMEKLILIK A.�.GROUPAMA SIGORTA A.�.Groupe Crédit CoopératifGroupe Investissement Responsable Inc.GROUPE OFI AMGrupo Financiero Banorte SAB de CVGrupo Santander BrasilGruppo Bancario Credito ValtellineseGuardians of New Zealand SuperannuationHanwha Asset Management CompanyHarbour Asset ManagementHarrington Investments, IncHauck & Aufhäuser Asset Management GmbHHazel Capital LLPHDFC Bank LtdHealthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP)Helaba Invest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHHenderson Global InvestorsHermes Fund ManagersHESTA SuperHIP InvestorHolden & PartnersHSBC Global Asset Management (Deutschland) GmbHHSBC Holdings plcHSBC INKA Internationale Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHHUMANISHyundai Marine & Fire Insurance. Co., Ltd.Hyundai Securities Co., Ltd.IBK SecuritiesIDBI Bank LtdIllinois State Board of InvestmentIlmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance CompanyImpax Asset ManagementIndusInd Bank LimitedIndustrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.Industrial Bank (A)Industrial Bank of KoreaIndustrial Development CorporationIndustry Funds ManagementInfrastructure Development Finance CompanyING Group N.V.Insight Investment Management (Global) LtdInstituto de Seguridade Social dos Correios e Telégrafos-PostalisInstituto Infraero de Seguridade Social - INFRAPREVInstituto Sebrae De Seguridade Social - SEBRAEPREVInsurance Australia GroupIntReal KAGInvestec Asset ManagementInvesting for Good CIC LtdIrish Life Investment ManagersItau Asset ManagementItaú Unibanco Holding S AJanus Capital Group Inc.Jarislowsky Fraser LimitedJOHNSON & JOHNSON SOCIEDADE PREVIDENCIARIAJPMorgan Chase & Co.Jubitz Family FoundationJupiter Asset ManagementKaiser Ritter Partner (Schweiz) AGKB Kookmin BankKBC Asset Management NVKBC GroupKCPS Private Wealth ManagementKDB Asset Management Co., Ltd.
KDB Daewoo SecuritiesKEPLER-FONDS Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m. b. H.KevaKfW BankengruppeKillik & Co LLPKiwi Income Property TrustKleinwort Benson InvestorsKlimaINVESTKLPKorea Investment Management Co., Ltd.Korea Technology Finance Corporation (KOTEC)KPA PensionKyrkans pensionskassaLa Banque Postale Asset ManagementLa Financiere ResponsableLampe Asset Management GmbHLandsorganisationen i SverigeLBBW - Landesbank Baden-WürttembergLBBW Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbHLD Lønmodtagernes DyrtidsfondLegal & General Investment ManagementLegg Mason Global Asset ManagementLGT Capital Management Ltd.LIG Insurance Co., LtdLight Green Advisors, LLCLiving Planet Fund Management Company S.A.Lloyds Banking GroupLocal Authority Pension Fund ForumLocal Government SuperLocal SuperLogos portföy Yönetimi A.�.London Pensions Fund AuthorityLothian Pension FundLUCRF SuperLupus alpha Asset Management GmbHMacquarie Group LimitedMagNet Magyar Közösségi Bank Zrt.MainFirst Bank AGMAMA Sustainable Incubation AGManMAPFREMaple-Brown AbbottMarc J. Lane Investment Management, Inc.Maryland State TreasurerMatrix Asset ManagementMATRIX GROUP LTDMcLean BuddenMEAG MUNICH ERGO AssetManagement GmbHMeeschaert Gestion PrivéeMeiji Yasuda Life Insurance CompanyMendesprev Sociedade PrevidenciáriaMerck Family FundMercy Investment Services, Inc.Mergence Investment ManagersMeritas Mutual FundsMetallRente GmbHMetrus – Instituto de Seguridade SocialMetzler Asset Management GmbhMFS Investment ManagementMidas International Asset ManagementMiller/Howard InvestmentsMirae Asset Global Investments Co. Ltd.Mirae Asset SecuritiesMirvac Group LtdMissionary Oblates of Mary ImmaculateMistra, Foundation for Strategic Environmental ResearchMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupMitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co.,LtdMizuho Financial Group, Inc.Mn ServicesMomentum Manager of Managers (Pty) LimitedMonega Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHMongeral Aegon Seguros e Previdência S/AMorgan StanleyMountain Cleantech AGMTAA Superannuation FundMutual Insurance Company Pension-FenniaNanuk Asset ManagementNatcan Investment ManagementNathan Cummings Foundation, TheNational Australia BankNational Bank of CanadaNATIONAL BANK OF GREECE S.A.National Grid Electricity Group of the Electricity SupplyPension SchemeNational Grid UK Pension SchemeNational Pensions Reserve Fund of IrelandNational Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE)NATIXIS
3
“Banco Santander
and the FC2E
(Carbon Fund for
Spanish Companies)
are analyzing the
business potential
and participation in
the emission
reduction sector in
the post-Kyoto
period as well as the
development of
regulations and
national and
international
legislation that will
govern this market.”
Banco Santander
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 3
Nedbank LimitedNeedmor FundNEI InvestmentsNelson Capital Management, LLCNeuberger BermanNew Alternatives Fund Inc.New Amsterdam Partners LLCNew Mexico State TreasurerNew York City Employees Retirement SystemNew York City Teachers Retirement SystemNew York State Common Retirement Fund (NYSCRF)Newton Investment Management LimitedNGS SuperNH-CA Asset ManagementNikko Asset Management Co., Ltd.Nipponkoa Insurance Company, LtdNissay Asset Management CorporationNORD/LB Kapitalanlagegesellschaft AGNordea Investment ManagementNorfolk Pension FundNorges Bank Investment ManagementNorth Carolina Retirement SystemNorthern Ireland Local Government Officers’Superannuation Committee (NILGOSC)NORTHERN STAR GROUPNorthern TrustNorthward Capital Pty LtdNykreditOddo & CieOECO Capital Lebensversicherung AGÖKOWORLDOld Mutual plcOMERS Administration CorporationOntario Teachers’ Pension PlanOP Fund Management Company LtdOppenheim & Co. LimitedOppenheim Fonds Trust GmbHOpplysningsvesenets fond (The Norwegian ChurchEndowment)OPTrustOregon State TreasurerOrion Energy SystemsOsmosis Investment ManagementParnassus InvestmentsPax World FundsPensioenfonds VervoerPension DenmarkPension Fund for Danish Lawyers and EconomistsPension Protection FundPensionsmyndighetenPerpetual InvestmentsPETROS - The Fundação Petrobras de Seguridade SocialPFA PensionPGGM VermogensbeheerPhillips, Hager & North Investment Management Ltd.PhiTrust Active InvestorsPictet Asset Management SAPioneer InvestmentsPIRAEUS BANKPKAPluris Sustainable Investments SAPNC Financial Services Group, Inc.Pohjola Asset Management LtdPolden-Puckham Charitable FoundationPortfolio 21 InvestmentsPorto Seguro S.A.Power Finance Corporation LimitedPREVHAB PREVIDÊNCIA COMPLEMENTARPREVI Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco doBrasilPREVIG Sociedade de Previdência ComplementarProLogisProvinzial Rheinland HoldingPrudential Investment ManagementPrudential PlcPsagot Investment House LtdPSP InvestmentsQ Capital PartnersQBE Insurance GroupRabobankRaiffeisen Fund Management Hungary Ltd.Raiffeisen Kapitalanlage-Gesellschaft m.b.H.Raiffeisen Schweiz GenossenschaftRathbones / Rathbone Greenbank InvestmentsRCM (Allianz Global Investors)Real Grandeza Fundação de Previdência e AssistênciaSocialRei SuperReliance Capital Ltd
ResolutionResona Bank, LimitedReynders McVeigh Capital ManagementRLAMRobecoRobert & Patricia Switzer FoundationRockefeller Financial (trade name used by Rockefeller & Co.,Inc.)Rose Foundation for Communities and the EnvironmentRothschildRoyal Bank of CanadaRoyal Bank of Scotland GroupRPMI Railpen InvestmentsRREEF Investment GmbHRussell InvestmentsSAM GroupSAMPENSION KP LIVSFORSIKRING A/SSAMSUNG FIRE & MARINE INSURANCESamsung SecuritiesSanlam Life Insurance LtdSanta Fé Portfolios LtdaSantamSarasin & Cie AGSAS Trustee CorporationSauren Finanzdienstleistungen GmbH & Co. KGSchrodersScotiabankScottish Widows Investment PartnershipSEBSEB Asset Management AGSecond Swedish National Pension Fund (AP2)Seligson & Co Fund Management PlcSentinel InvestmentsSERPROS - Fundo MultipatrocinadoService Employees International Union Pension FundSeventh Swedish National Pension Fund (AP7)Shinhan BankShinhan BNP Paribas Investment Trust Management Co., LtdShinkin Asset Management Co., LtdSiemens Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHSignet Capital Management LtdSmith Pierce, LLCSNS Asset ManagementSocial(k)Sociedade de Previdencia Complementar da Dataprev -PrevdataSocrates Fund ManagementSolaris Investment Management LimitedSompo Japan Insurance Inc.Sopher Investment ManagementSouthPeak Investment ManagementSPF Beheer bvSprucegrove Investment Management LtdStandard Bank GroupStandard CharteredStandard Chartered Korea LimitedStandard Life InvestmentsState Bank of IndiaState Street CorporationStatewideSuperStoreBrand ASAStrathclyde Pension FundStratus GroupSumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupSumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings, Inc.Sun Life Financial Inc.Superfund Asset Management GmbHSUSI Partners AGSustainable CapitalSustainable Development CapitalSvenska Kyrkan, Church of SwedenSwedbank ABSwift FoundationSwiss ReSwisscanto Asset Management AGSyntrus Achmea Asset ManagementT. Rowe PriceT. SINAI KALKINMA BANKASI A.�.Tata Capital LimitedTD Asset Management Inc. and TDAM USA Inc.Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association – CollegeRetirement Equities FundTelluride AssociationTempis Asset Management Co. LtdTerra Forvaltning ASTerraVerde Capital Management LLCTfL Pension FundThe ASB Community TrustThe Brainerd Foundation
The Bullitt FoundationThe Central Church Fund of FinlandThe Children’s Investment Fund Management (UK) LLPThe Collins FoundationThe Co-operative Asset ManagementThe Co-operators Group LtdThe Daly FoundationThe Environmental Investment Partnership LLPThe Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.The Joseph Rowntree Charitable TrustThe Korea Teachers Pension (KTP)The Pension Plan For Employees of the Public ServiceAlliance of CanadaThe Pinch GroupThe Presbyterian Church in CanadaThe Russell Family FoundationThe Sandy River Charitable FoundationThe Shiga Bank, Ltd.The Sisters of St. AnnThe United Church of Canada - General CouncilThe University of Edinburgh Endowment FundThe Wellcome TrustThird Swedish National Pension Fund (AP3)Threadneedle Asset ManagementTOBAMTokio Marine Holdings, IncToronto Atmospheric FundTrillium Asset Management CorporationTriodos Investment ManagementTri-State Coalition for Responsible InvestmentTrygUBSUnibail-RodamcoUniCredit SpAUnion Asset Management Holding AGUnion Investment Privatfonds GmbHUnione di Banche Italiane S.c.p.a.UnionenUnipensionUNISON staff pension schemeUniSuperUnitarian Universalist AssociationUnited Methodist Church General Board of Pension andHealth BenefitsUnited Nations FoundationUnity Trust BankUniversities Superannuation Scheme (USS)Vancity Group of CompaniesVCH Vermögensverwaltung AGVentas, Inc.Veris Wealth PartnersVeritas Investment Trust GmbHVermont State TreasurerVexiom Capital, L.P.VicSuperVictorian Funds Management CorporationVietNam Holding Ltd.Voigt & Coll. GmbHVOLKSBANK INVESTMENTSWaikato Community Trust IncWalden Asset Management, a division of Boston Trust &Investment Management CompanyWARBURG - HENDERSON Kapitalanlagegesellschaft fürImmobilien mbHWARBURG INVEST KAPITALANLAGEGESELLSCHAFT MBHWater Asset Management, LLCWells Fargo & CompanyWest Yorkshire Pension FundWestLB Mellon Asset Management (WMAM)Westpac Banking CorporationWHEB Asset ManagementWhite Owl Capital AGWinslow Management, A Brown Advisory Investment GroupWoori BankWoori Investment & Securities Co., Ltd.YES BANK LimitedYork University Pension FundYouville Provident Fund Inc.Zegora Investment ManagementZevin Asset ManagementZurich Cantonal Bank
4
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 4
Guest Foreword – Dr Janez Potocnik. European Commissioner for the Environment 6
CEO Foreword 7
Letter from Spain 8
Letter from Portugal 9
Prologue from ECODES 10
PwC Commentary 11
Executive summary 12
Key Themes and Highlights 14
Progress towards a low carbon economy 14The drivers and barriers to carbon action 17Improving climate change governance? 20
Commentary from Euronatura: Carbon Management Landscape in Portugal 22
2012 Leaders 23
CDLI 24CPLI 25
Telefónica perspective 26
Sector analysis 27
Financials 28Industrials 30Utilities 32
Investor perspective 34
Key statistics 35
Appendix 38
5
Contents
“Development of low carbon
financial products and services
aligned with the banks climate
change strategy represents new
business opportunities and with
them the possibility of expanding
the banks market share.”
Caixa Geral de Depositos
Important Notice
The contents of this report may be used by anyone providing acknowledgementis given to Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP). This does not represent a license torepackage or resell any of the data reported to CDP or the contributing authorsand presented in this report. If you intend to repackage or resell any of thecontents of this report, you need to obtain express permission from CDP beforedoing so.
Ecodes and CDP have prepared the data and analysis in this report based onresponses to the CDP 2012 information request. No representation or warranty(express or implied) is given by Ecodes or CDP as to the accuracy orcompleteness of the information and opinions contained in this report. Youshould not act upon the information contained in this publication withoutobtaining specific professional advice. To the extent permitted by law, Ecodesand CDP do not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care forany consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in relianceon the information contained in this report or for any decision based on it. Allinformation and views expressed herein by Ecodes and CDP are based on their
judgment at the time of this report and are subject to change without notice dueto economic, political, industry and firm-specific factors. Guest commentarieswhere included in this report reflect the views of their respective authors; theirinclusion is not an endorsement of them.
Ecodes and CDP, their affiliated member firms or companies, or their respectiveshareholders, members, partners, principals, directors, officers and/oremployees, may have a position in the securities of the companies discussedherein. The securities of the companies mentioned in this document may not beeligible for sale in some states or countries, nor suitable for all types of investors;their value and the income they produce may fluctuate and/or be adverselyaffected by exchange rates.
Carbon Disclosure Project’ and ‘CDP’ refer to Carbon Disclosure Project, aUnited Kingdom company limited by guarantee, registered as a United Kingdomcharity number 1122330.
© 2012 Carbon Disclosure Project and Ecodes. All rights reserved.
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 5
natural capital and resources. It reflects an importantchange in the approach of corporations. Companies needstronger, more long-term price signals to produce returnson investment, and it is for public authorities to provide theright signals, incentives, direction and most importantlyleadership. We need to move from a short-term to a morelong-term vision that will help us see that there is a clearlink between resource efficiency and increasedprofitability, and improve on both.
Our most important resource is our natural capital and thebenefits that we draw from nature year after year. If weerode that capital for short-term gains, we are simplygambling with our future. There will be no growth in thefuture if it is not sustainable, if it is not resource efficient.This is already necessary for our generation, butindispensable for the next.
Dr. Janez Potocnik
European Commissioner for the Environment6
“We need to
promote
competitiveness,
prosperity and
quality of life
within the limits of
our planet.”
Guest Foreword
As the world struggles to exit from the financial andeconomic turmoil, we must look ahead and focus not onlyon jobs and growth, but also on the type of growth wewant. We can no longer continue to ignore the severity ofdebt in our natural capital. Environmental degradation isbecoming more and more evident everywhere. The stateof our oceans, soils, forests and biodiversity, and theimpacts of climate change are just some of the signs thatwe are beginning to see. This will have severeconsequences not only on health and the environment butalso on the economy.
If we do not want resource scarcities and pressures to bea major constraint on growth in the near future, we need topromote competitiveness, prosperity and quality of lifewithin the limits of our planet. This is why the EuropeanCommission places resource efficiency at the centre of itsagenda for economic transformation. The objective is toachieve environmentally compatible growth, decouplingresource use from economic growth and reducinggreenhouse gas emissions.
The important impact of better resource efficiency onclimate change is too often underestimated. This is why Iwelcome CDP’s vision to widen its scope to include
Copyight: EU
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 6
7
The pressure is growing for companies to build long-termresilience in their business. The unprecedented debt crisisthat has hit many parts of the world has sparked a growingunderstanding that short-termism can bring an establishedeconomic system to breaking point. As some nationaleconomies have been brought to their knees in recentmonths, we are reminded that nature’s system is underthreat through the depletion of the world’s finite naturalresources and the rise of greenhouse gas emissions.
Business and economies globally have already beenimpacted by the increased frequency and severity ofextreme weather events, which scientists are increasinglylinking to climate change1. Bad harvests due to unusualweather have this year rocked the agricultural industry, withthe price of grain, corn and soybeans reaching an all timehigh. Last year, Intel lost $1 billion in revenue and theJapanese automotive industry were expected to lose around$450 million of profits as a result of the business interruptionfloods caused to their Thailand-based suppliers.
It is vital that we internalize the costs of futureenvironmental damage into today’s decisions by putting aneffective price on carbon. Whilst regulation is slow, agrowing number of jurisdictions have introduced carbonpricing with carbon taxes or cap-and-trade schemes. Themost established remains the EU Emissions TradingScheme but moves have also been made in Australia,California, China and South Korea among others.
Enabling better decisions by providing investors,companies and governments with high quality informationon how companies are managing their response to climatechange and mitigating the risks from natural resourceconstraints has never been more important.
CDP has pioneered the only global system that collectsinformation about corporate behaviour on climate changeand water scarcity, on behalf of market forces, includingshareholders and purchasing corporations. CDP works toaccelerate action on climate change through disclosureand more recently through its Carbon Action program. In2012, on behalf of its Carbon Action signatory investorsCDP engaged 205 companies in the Global 500 to requestthey set an emissions reduction target; 61 of thesecompanies have now done so.
CDP continues to evolve and respond to market needs.This year we announced that the Global CanopyProgramme’s Forest Footprint Disclosure Project will mergewith CDP over the next two years. Bringing forests, whichare critically linked to both climate and water security, intothe CDP system will enable companies and investors torely on one source of primary data for this set ofinterrelated issues.
Accounting for and valuing the world’s natural capital isfundamental to building economic stability and prosperity.Companies that work to decouple greenhouse gasemissions from financial returns have the potential for bothshort and long-term cost savings, sustainable revenuegeneration and a more resilient future.
Paul Simpson
CEO Carbon Disclosure Project
CEO Foreword
1: The State of the Climate in 2011 report, led by the National Oceano-graphic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the US and published as part of the Bulletin of
the American Meteorological Society (BAMS)
“CDP has pioneered
the only global
system that collects
information about
corporate behaviour
on climate change
and water scarcity,
on behalf of market
forces, including
shareholders and
purchasing
corporations.”
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 7
8
reduction of carbon emissions in the diffuse sectors, theFES-CO2 is a clear indicator of the high activity of Spanishcompanies and their desire for and commitment to a lowcarbon economy. Furthermore, the implementation ofinitiatives such as the promotion of carbon footprintsawareness and the development of a strategy for thereduction of emissions from the diffuse sectors by 10% by2020, establish key components that help us move towardsmore sustainable production and consumption patterns.
In the transition to a green economy, the role of the privatesector and public-private partnerships are key to success.All business and productive sectors should help trigger anddrive this change. The private sector should take theinitiative, take risks and seize opportunities in strategicsectors. From the public sector, we must continue workingto create a stable regulatory framework to minimize therisks, facilitate investment and encourage privateparticipation.
The CDP Iberia 125 Climate Change Report 2012 confirmsthat Spanish and Portuguese companies are engaged inthis common effort, have taken firm steps towards moresustainable, low-carbon models, have integrated climatechange in their business strategies and consider climatechange a source of opportunity.
I express my gratitude to CDP, ECODES and PwC, as wellas to all those involved in this year’s edition of the report fortheir efforts and good results, and encourage you tocontinue working in this endeavor to turn the opportunitiesassociated with climate change into reality.
Miguel Arias Cañete
Minister of Agriculture, Food and the Environment
"The Spanish
environmental
industry is a key
factor of the
competitiveness of
our economy, a key
exporter and a
generator of
employment."
Since assuming the portfolio of Minister of Agriculture, Foodand the Environment, I have witnessed the importance ofclimate change for the Spanish business sector as well asthe leadership role that our enterprises are playing in thenecessary transition to a green, sustainable and low-carboneconomy.
The transition to a green and low-carbon economy,imposed by the reality of climate change and the currenteconomic crisis, requires leadership and important mutualand cooperative efforts by all involved stakeholders. Theleadership of the Spanish business sector will help us tobring about this change.
The Spanish environmental industry is a key factor of thecompetitiveness of our economy, a key exporter and agenerator of employment. Despite the effects of theeconomic crisis, the Spanish clean technology companieshave demonstrated maturity, strength and an ability toadapt to new challenges.
Moreover, the major Spanish companies confirm, for thefifth consecutive year as reflected in this CDP Iberia 125Climate Change Report 2012, their unwaveringcommitment and show strong leadership to confront theimportant challenges posed by climate change.
The public sector is also firmly committed to this commonenterprise. The government of Spain has launchedimportant initiatives to promote the transition to a lowcarbon economy in our country. The Carbon Fund for aSustainable Economy (FES-CO2) is proving to be anessential tool for supporting the transformation of Spain’ssystem of production. With nearly 200 project applicationssubmitted under the first call for Climate Projects for the
Letter from Spain
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:30 Página 8
9
It is encouraging to see how companies in Portugal areable and willing to disclose their emissions data, carbonstrategies and opportunities/risks associated with climatechange. The efforts companies are currently undertakingto assess and manage their emissions, as portrayed in thisreport, preempts future national policies that shouldinclude companies that are presently not covered by theEU ETS. These policies will add to the recently launched“National Low-Carbon Road Map 2050” as tools forguiding business into an emissions reduction path, whichwe predict will spur innovation within companies. Thesetwo aspects combined – innovation and low emissions –are key to re-launch national economic growth, as theygenerate “green” jobs and decrease foreign energydependence and lessen the trade deficit.
In the future I hope to see more Portuguese companiesready to respond to the Carbon Disclosure Project, as itcontinues its important mission of accelerating solutionsto climate change by putting relevant information at theheart of business, policy and investment decisions.
Assunção Cristas
Minister of Agriculture, Sea, Environment and Regional Planning
“With investors
making climate risks
and opportunities a
part of the
investment equation,
sustainable projects
and companies will
surely gain leverage
to attract capital.”
Climate change presents itself as one of the biggestchallenges of our time. The environmental transformationscaused by climate change can result in an acutecompetition for scarce natural resources, affecting socialand political stability in many regions and placing globalsecurity and development under threat.
In order to find solutions for such a complex problem,governments should count on the cooperation of thebusiness sector. Challenging as it may be, lowering thecarbon intensity of the world economy is now as pressingas economically advantageous. There is economic valueattached to energy efficiency beyond direct moneysavings, are the positive gains as to investors’assessments.
The Carbon Disclosure Project, as an investor-driveninitiative, shows how the capital markets and investors, byusing this data to appraise investment decisions, are ableto set in motion best practices concerning corporations’climate related performance, strategy and transparency.
With investors making climate risks and opportunities apart of the investment equation, sustainable projects andcompanies will surely gain leverage to attract capital; thisis a unique asset that the Carbon Disclosure Project isbringing to the Portuguese corporate and investmentlandscape. The Portuguese Government understands thecompetitive advantage the country can obtain byachieving leadership on low-carbon technology andindustries, thereby enabling the economy to promote jobcreation in a carbon-constrained world.
Letter from Portugal
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 9
10
Overall, the average disclosure score obtained hasimproved 6 points from the previous year. More companiesare reporting information on their emissions, offeringincentives for meeting objectives, setting goals, andverifying their emissions.
Furthermore not only are the overall results better comparedto last year’s results, they also compare very favorably withthe results of other surrounding countries. Bothimprovements are very relevant because both Spain andPortugal are nations mired in a severe economic crisis inwhich the issue of climate change could very well berelegated to a second plane. In our opinion it has not beenrelegated because the leading companies of Spain andPortugal, many with a growing international reach, knowthat their efforts to achieve leadership positions in theinternational sphere are intrinsically tied to theirperformance in the fight against climate change.
An additional important finding of this report is that manycompanies have seen the results of their particular efforts toreduce their emissions diminished by two external factors.One has been a severe drought in both countries, whichhas significantly reduced the contribution of hydropower tothe energy mix. This leads us to the paradoxical conclusionthat climate change is to a certain extent undermining thefight against climate change. The other factor in Spain hasbeen the continued government policy of supporting thecoal industry. In other words, the progress of companies isstrongly conditioned by government policy.
Many companies perceive as a risk the current uncertaintyregarding the legislative and regulatory frameworks post-Kyoto. Governments should live up to their responsibilitiesand not shun scientific evidence, and act together to buildan ambitious regulatory framework to provide a context ofcertainty for business investment. Governments mustencourage change.
Víctor Viñuales
CEO ECODES
“If a company does
not take sufficient
account of the risks
that climate change
poses for its
business, investors
will rightfully be
more reluctant to
invest in it.”
The crisis has not slowed the climate commitment
Hurricane Sandy, and its undeniable link to global climatechange, marked the last phase of the U.S. presidentialelection campaign, demonstrating the impossibility ofignoring or minimizing the real and destructive threatposed by such a complex problem. Unfortunately we areseeing, close to home and far away, growing evidence ofclimate change.
However, the current structure of nation states is proving tobe wholly inadequate to properly safeguard and managethe global public commons. The Rio+20 summit earlier thisyear demonstrated once again the difficulties of the currentmodel of global governance. The short-termism that resultsfrom the ongoing electoral processes of different countries,among other problems, is delaying global agreements thatgo beyond the Kyoto Protocol.
But there are signs of hope. The Carbon Disclosure Projectis one of these signs. In recent years, this initiative hasbecome the gold standard for access to information aboutthe carbon management of large companies across theglobe. And it has established itself as the leading source ofdata and information for the major financial institutionsaround the world performing due diligence prior to investingin or financing to these companies. If a company does nottake sufficient account of the risks that climate changeposes for its business, investors will rightfully be morereluctant to invest in it. If a large company does not takeadvantage of the opportunities that the fight against climatechange also provides, it is not a smart company. Thefinancial sector demonstrates its wisdom using CDP data tomake more informed economic decisions in relation tolisted companies.
The CDP Iberia 125 Climate Change Report 2012 showsthat the relevance of climate change on the decisionmaking processes of the major Spanish and Portuguesecompanies has not diminished. On the contrary, those thatperformed well in 2011 have now improved theirperformance. The number of companies that exceed 70points in the Disclosure Score has risen from 25 to 34 thisyear. And companies with more modest performance interms of climate change management have also improved.
Prologue from ECODES
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 10
11
Cost efficient insight
Where companies are able to measure GHG impacts inthe value chain benefits for the business will follow.Reduction of supply risk, positive collaboration withsuppliers, efficiency and cost reduction, innovation andinformed product strategy are just some of the positiveoutcomes to be gained. Companies should not miss thisopportunity to improve their business functions, andconsequently, reduce their GHG impact.
Several methods have now been developed which alloworganizations to measure supply chain emissions in a time,cost and resource efficient way. For example, one ofPwC’s recommended approaches is primarily based on aninput – output model that identifies emission hot spots inthe supply chain. This approach can give companies notonly an efficient way to calculate their whole supply chainemissions, including all tiers, but also the ability to focuson key suppliers in order to take further steps towardsdata requests and emission reduction activities.
Beyond GHG
Impacts and influence relating to the value chain go beyondGHG emissions and include water, biodiversity, land use andother environmental pollution. Collectively the health ofenvironmental assets, in particular as an input and serviceprovider for economic production, can be referred to asnatural capital. Its measurement, both for corporates andgovernment is a key element in the future of sustainabilityand natural capital accounting was a major theme at thisyear´s Rio +20 summit. PwC recently worked with Puma indeveloping the world’s first corporate environmental proft &loss account, valuing the impact of their operations and fourtiers of their supply chain. Over time, we will see companiesmake radical changes to their environmental accounting foremissions and resource use along their entire value chain.
María Luz Castilla
Director of Sustainability and Climate Change, PwC Spain
“Value chain
analysis allows
companies to take
into consideration
broarder emissions-
related risk and
opportunity in the
definition of their
climate change
strategy.”
Opportunity in the value chain
Knowledge for strategy
As climate change becomes a greater issue forstakeholders, governments are expected to set newpolicies and provide market-based incentives to driveemissions reduction activity, which will in turn set thepath towards a low carbon economy. Organizations needto start thinking and developing their strategy for thisfuture, in order to position themselves well relative to thecompetition and make informed decisions for theirinvestments.
An effective corporate climate change strategy requires adetailed understanding of a company’s GHG impact andinfluence. This understanding is not complete withoutsubstantial knowledge not only of its own operationalemissions, but of its wider value chain. For most sectorsGHG impact under direct company control is a small partrelative to that under their indirect influence. Value chainanalysis allows companies to take into considerationbroarder emissions-related risk and opportunity in thedefinition of their climate change strategy, focusing theirefforts on the greatest source of GHG impact. CDPprovides us with valuable insight on current businesspractices on value chain emissions through both itsInvestor and Supply Chain initiatives. For example, fromour analysis of the Iberia 125 2012 CDP responses wecan see that currently only 16% are disclosing emissionsfrom purchased goods and services.
Even organizations that have taken steps towards thecalculation of the wider value chain impact are in mostcases still far from a comprehensive managementstrategy. Key reasons that keep companies from anunderstanding of the impacts include lack oftransparency on data quality, large numbers of suppliers,lack of supplier knowledge or experience with GHGreporting, lack of supplier resources, and supplierconfidentiality.
PwC Commentary
Informe 2012 20/11/12 09:56 Página 11
The Iberia 125 Climate Change Report 2012, Stimulatesustainable economic growth through climate changemanagement, aims to promote corporate transparency onclimate change management in Spain and Portugal andoffers investors and other stakeholders an analysis of thecurrent trends and strategies put forward to manage climatechange risks and identify the opportunities that can createlong-term value for companies in times of economicdifficulties. For the second time in a row, Carbon DisclosureProject (CDP) has requested carbon disclosure from thelargest 125 companies in Spain and Portugal by marketcapitalisation. The analysis in this report is based on theinformation provided by the 51 companies that respondedto the 2012 CDP information request, 2 of which referred totheir parent company’s response. This year’s response rateis 41% just above last year’s response rate (40%).1
Both Iberian countries, Spain and Portugal, are sufferingfrom economic crisis and face an uncertain future. Many ofthe assumptions that have been shaping the policies andactions for preventing climate change over the past twodecades are now under quarantine. During the 90s andmost of the first decade of this century the challenge forSpain and Portugal was to converge with the otherEuropean regions while limiting the growth of carbonemissions. The biggest problems in controlling carbonemissions in the region were related to growingconsumption and transport. It was also a time of momentumfor legislation promoting the development of renewableenergy that saw spectacular growth during this period.
Nowadays priorities have completely changed. Theeconomic crisis has halted the rising trend in carbonemissions in Spain and Portugal. From 2008 to 2010
emissions in Iberia stabilised and slightly decreased. Butcrisis also slowed investments in areas such as cleantechnologies. This will undoubtedly delay the transition to alow carbon economy and make it thus more difficult toachieve. The challenge for many companies today is toreduce their greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) despite thedifficulty to finance their business operations. Thosecompanies delaying their climate change policies, waiting foreconomic recovery, will face competitive disadvantagesonce the economy will grow again. On the other hand, thosecompanies that are already having comparatively low GHGemissions and are integrating climate change into theirbusiness strategy will be more likely to grow and expandtheir activities while meeting emission limits on carbon,which are expected to become increasingly stringent.
Even in times of deep economic recession, companies arestill finding more opportunities than risks in climate change,especially in the short-term. The efficient use of resourceshas become for many companies a strategic decision forsurvival. Resource-efficient companies have not only betterfinancial results2, but energy efficiency has also become anecessity to reduce consumption and costs while abatingcarbon emissions. Never before had companies used somuch information and communication technology to reducebusiness travels.
Some of the Iberian companies state they are currentlyexperiencing difficulties and growing competition inattracting financing; as a result, sustainability issues havegained interest for companies that are looking forcompetitive advantages. Companies like Acciona, BBVA,CaixaBank, Ferrovial, Inditex, OHL, Repsol and Telefónicasee in carbon management an opportunity to attract
12
Executive summary
Gas Natural Utilities 99 A Yes YesRepsol YPF Energy 98 A- YesAbengoa Industrials 96 A Yes YesAcciona Industrials 96 A Yes YesEDP Utilities 96 B YesIberdrola Utilities 95 A Yes YesBanco Financials 94 A- YesEspírito SantoOHL Industrials 94 B YesSonae Consumer Staples 93 B YesGalp Energia Energy 93 B YesTelefónica Telecommunication 92 B Yes
ServicesEndesa Utilities 92 C YesFerrovial Industrials 90 A YesCaixa Geral Financials 87 A Yesde Depositos5
2012 answers36 15
2012 sample85 40
2011 answers35 15
2011 sample85 40
2010 answers34 12
2010 sample85 40
2009 answers35 7
2009 sample85 20
2008 answers25
2008 sample35
3 IBERIAN DISCLOSING COMPANIES (2008-2012)
• Spain (Response rate)• Portugal (Response rate)
Table 1. IBERIAN COMPANIES INCLUDED IN THE CDLI
AND/OR CPLI (2012)
Co
mp
an
y
Na
me
Se
cto
r
Dis
clo
su
re
Sc
ore
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e
Sc
ore
CD
LI
CP
LI
(41%)
(40%)
(37%)
(40%)
(71%)
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:30 Página 12
investors. Again, the efficient use of resources translates intogreater profitability, and a growing number of investors aretaking into account environmental criteria in their decision-making processes. CDP scores are one of these criteria.They help investors to identify the most advanced practicesin climate change management and business strategies fora low carbon economy. CDP scores were recentlyrecognised as the most credible sustainability rating in asurvey among international sustainability professionals3.
Another main reason behind companies’ decision toengage in carbon management lies in the need to complywith current regulation. In the past, government measures such as the European Union Emission TradingScheme (EU ETS) carbon market have created a stableframework to facilitate investment in emissions reduction. Inaddition, some Iberian disclosing companies have foundsignificant business opportunities in fighting against climatechange and they have targeted their long-term strategy inthis way. For these companies it is essential to limitregulatory uncertainty to a minimum. We need both a post-Kyoto agreement to ensure continuity in emissionreductions and commitments, as well as European andnational legislative security to provide a stable frameworkfor the execution of investment and long-terminfrastructures.
Uncertainty is precisely one of the investment barriersdisclosing companies mention the most in their response tothe CDP questionnaire: uncertainty on regulation, but alsoon the future price of energy, on the social and economiclandscape and on consumer demands and behaviour.
However, as the effects of climate change are alreadytangible, waiting for legislative security while resources arebecoming increasingly scarce is not the way forward.Action is needed now to future proof our business, re-launch the economy and secure a leader business positionin a future low carbon world.
Companies in water-intensive sectors in Iberia witnessedhow last year’s droughts affected their businessoperations. The hydroelectric power production fell, whichmade difficult that carbon emissions slowed at the same
pace as the economy. Moreover, since we are living in aninterconnected, globalised world, the increase in theelectricity carbon footprint led to a rise in companies'Scope 2 emissions from electricity consumption, which insome cases cancelled out the positive effect of theiremission reduction measures. Thus, despite the fall ineconomic activity, responding companies as a whole havereported a 7 % increase in Scope 1 emissions and only a6 % reduction in Scope 2 for 20114.
On the other hand, 55 % of the Iberian responders havereported to have been able to reduce emissions(combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions) during the year ofdisclosure. Up to 72 % of these reductions have beengenerated through the implementation of emissionreduction measures, unrelated to cyclical reasons and notlinked either to the shrinking in activity or divestitures. Thenumber of emission reduction initiatives reported bycompanies has remained at the previous year’s levels,while all indicators of climate change governance haveimproved once again and place the Iberian respondingcompanies at comparable levels, or even better, than themain regional samples. However, as a deeper analysisshows later in this report, there is still a need forimprovement in the quality of carbon management of theIberia disclosers.
Table 1 shows the Iberian disclosing companies that thisyear have been included in the Carbon DisclosureLeadership Index (CDLI) and Carbon DisclosurePerformance Index (CPLI). For more information aboutCDP scores, the CDLI and the CPLI please see chapterLeaders 2012.
The average score of companies included in the CDLI is 95,showing that there has again been a great improvementfrom the previous year’s average score of 88.The averagescore of CDLI companies is still significantly higher than theaverage score of all reporting companies in Iberia, whichresults in 76 points and has increased from 68 in 2011.Looking at the performance index, six companies (doublethan in the previous year) have made it into the CPLI, havingachieved the performance band A despite a strictermethodology this year.
13
1. This percentage and the ones provided in figure 3 incorporate allthe 51 Iberian companies that responded to CDP. When referring toresponse rates, we have included all the 51 responses. Howeverthe remaining report analysis, including CDLI and CPLI, is based onthe lower total of 49 which excludes the 2 companies whichreferred to their parent company’s response.2. HBR. Companies that Invest in Sustainability Do BetterFinancially.http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/09/sustainable_investing_time_to.html3. SustainAbility. Rate the Raters, Phase Five: Polling the Experts2012. http://www.sustainability.com/library/rate-the-raters-phase-five-polling-the-experts-2012#.UIrJzm8xqN84. Please note that these emissions are due to companies’worldwide operations and are not exclusively generated in theIberian Peninsula.5. As in 2011, we have included Caixa Geral de Depositos in theanalysis. This company is not a public listed company, but it hasanswered CDP questionnaire for four consecutive years.
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 13
2012
12 12 15 10
2011
17 9 16 6
4 EMISSION REDUCTION TARGETS8
• No target• Absolute and intensity targets• Intensity target• Absolute target
5 EMISSION REDUCTION ABSOLUTE TARGETS
TIMEFRAME9
• 1-5 years• 6-10 years• 11-15 years• More than 15 years
62%
14%
19%
5%
Progress towards a low carbon economy
Total GHG emissions6 in Iberia decreased each year from2008 to 2010. Since 2010, emissions have stabilised ataround 426 million metric tons CO2e (425.5 million metrictons CO2e in 2010 and 426.1 million metric tons in 2011).According to the respective ministries, total emissions in2011 were 356.1 million metric tons CO2e in Spain and70.0 million metric tons CO2e in Portugal.
Nevertheless, with a 27.9% of emissions increase, Spainhas exceeded his 15% increase Kyoto target and is in adifficult position to meet its Kyoto commitment by 2012.Portugal will meet their 27% increase Kyoto limit, asaverage 2008–2011 emissions in Portugal were 21.7 %higher than 1990.
With an uncertain future regarding mandatory GHGlimitations for developed countries under a possiblesecond commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, it isnecessary to have a benchmark against which to assessthe reduction targets of Iberian companies and inparticular their progress towards compliance with thesetargets. In the specific case of the European Union, theEurope 2020 strategy has been adopted establishing anemissions reduction target of 20 % from 1990 by 2020.This strategy seeks to ensure that it meets the “target 20-20-20” while also promoting green growth and jobs.
Nevertheless, most of the Iberian disclosers have operationsoutside Spain, Portugal and the EU itself and therefore, weneed to evaluate their actions against climate change from aglobal perspective. As indicated by the CDP Global 500Climate Change report this year, the PwC Low CarbonEconomy Index specifies that in order to avoid surpassingthe limit of 2°C of temperature rise, G20 countries mustreduce their emissions intensity by approximately 5.1% peryear from 2020 to 2050. Are the Spanish and Portuguesecompanies on course to meet this huge challenge?
From the analysis of the data disclosed by Iberiancompanies this year, we can identify that companies haveprogressed in setting emissions reduction targets. Thepercentage of companies without targets in place hasbeen reduced to 24 % (35% in 2011)7, while thepercentage of companies that rely exclusively on intensitytargets rather than absolute targets, decreased from 33%to 31%. However, most companies have not set targetsbeyond 2020 and only 30% (9) have reduction targets witha term of more than five years from now.
Table 2 shows the main absolute targets Iberian disclosershave in place. Given the wide range of targets, to developthis table we have considered only absolute targets forScope 1 (direct emissions) and Scope 2 (indirect fromenergy consumption). In those cases where targets refer toonly a portion of the emissions in the scope, in the thirdcolumn we have indicated the percentage of emissionscovered. When the target was referring to total emissions,including Scope 3 (indirect along the supply chain), wehave indicated that the target covers 100% of Scope 1and Scope 2 emissions. Please notice that no companyhas a multi-year reduction target bigger than 5.1% annualfor Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions (column 7). The lastcolumn shows the conversion of these objectives intoannual absolute reductions.
In short, although the number of disclosers havingemission reduction targets has increased from 65% to76%, both the level of ambition as well as the timeframe
6. All Spanish and Portuguese GHG national emissions according tothe definition in the IPCC methodology for national inventories.7. Disclosure of emission reduction targets is stricter in 2012 than itwas in 2011. The number of companies without targets in 2011wouldbe bigger using the 2012 methodology. 8. Companies disclosing absolute or intensity targets have only beenincluded in this section where they have been fully described,providing base year, target year, percentage reduction and for intensitytargets, target metric.
14
Key Themes and Highlights
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 14
7 DIRECTION OF CHANGE IN ABSOLUTE EMISSIONS
FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN IBERIAN COMPANIES11
• Decreased• Increased• No change• First year of estimation
55%
35%
2%8%
6 PROGRESS TOWARDS REDUCTION TARGETS
ACHIEVEMENT
• Absolute targets achieved or in progress• Intensity targets achieved or in progress• Non achieved targets
41%
31%
28%
15
Abengoa Scope 2 98% 10.00% 2010 2013 3.17% 18,303Acciona Scope 1+2 100% 3.20% 2010 2011 3.20% 34,018Acerinox Scope 1+2 100% 20.00% 2005 2020 1.22% 7,036Banco Sabadell Scope 1+2 100% 3.00% 2009 2014 0.59% 130Bankinter Scope 2 100% 5.00% 2010 2011 5.00% 332Brisa Scope 1+2 100% 6.00% 2009 2012 1.96% 476CaixaBank Scope 2 100% 5.00% 2010 2011 5.00% 2,253EDP Scope 1 100% 20.00% 2008 2015 2.64% 566,104Enagás Scope 1 81% 20.00% 2009 2020 1.37% 2,992Ferrovial Scope 1+2 100% 0.00% 2009 2020 0.00% 0Gas Natural Scope 1+2+3 100% 12.47% 2009 2014 2.38% 3,279,135Grifols Scope 1 18% 18.20% 2010 2013 1.08% 430International Consolidated Airlines Group Scope 1+2 100% 50.00% 2005 2050 0.91% 251,876Mapfre Scope 1+2 67% 2.00% 2009 2013 0.33% 126NH Hoteles Scope 2 11% 100.00% 2010 2011 11.10% 14,599Portugal Telecom Scope 1+2+3 100% 20.00% 2008 2020 1.53% 3,578R.E.E. Scope 1+2 9% 20.00% 2010 2020 0.18% 1,337REN Scope 1 5% 0.50% 2010 2011 0.02% 4Repsol YPF Scope 1+2 100% 9.26% 2005 2013 1.11% 312,358
9. Companies may report multiple emission reductions due to implementation of activities, targets and reward incentives. In all of these cases,companies are only counted once in the statistics presented in this report, with the exception of the statistics on absolute and intensity targetswhere companies that have both types of target will be counted once in each type.10. Annual reduction equivalent rate calculated assuming an equal reduction from base year to target year. Please notice that according to thesecond column, some targets cover Scope 1 or Scope 2 emissions, and other cover Scope 1 and 2 or even Scope 3. So they are not fullycomparable.11. This figure shows the percentage of companies for which absolute emissions within the reporting year have decreased, increased orremained unchanged. It does not include the magnitude of emissions increase or decrease.
Table 2. EMISSION REDUCTION ABSOLUTE TARGETS (Scope 1 and 2)
Co
mp
an
y
Na
me
Sc
op
e
% o
f e
mis
sio
ns
in s
co
pe
% o
f
red
uc
tio
n
Ba
se
ye
ar
Ta
rge
t ye
ar
% a
nn
ua
l
red
uc
tio
n10
Eq
uiv
ale
nt
an
nu
al
em
issio
n
red
uc
tio
ns (
tCO
2e
)
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:01 Página 15
over which targets are set seem insufficient to provide ashift in emissions trends when the economy eventuallyrecovers. On the other hand, we can see that 72 % ofresponding companies have achieved their targets or areon track to meet them with only 28 % of responders fallingbehind them.
A review of the overall emissions reported by theresponding companies shows an increasing trend, although55% (27) of respondents indicate a reduction of emissionscompared to the previous year. This means that thereduction declared by these 27 companies is lower than theincrease in total emissions reported this year by Iberiandisclosers, thus resulting in a net emissions increase for theoverall sample compared to the previous year.
Although four new Iberian companies reported theiremissions for the first time this year, the 5.6% growth inreported Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions, which reached393 million metric tons CO2e in 2012 (from 372 millionmetric tons CO2e in 2011) cannot only be explained bythese new additions.
For those respondent companies that reported an increasein their emissions, Table 3 indicates the percentageincrease and the main reasons for it. In this table we findsome of the largest Iberian net emitters such as Endesa(with a 29.9% increase), Gas Natural (17.9% increase),EDP (15% increase), Galp (4.9% increase) and Abengoa(14.4% increase), all of them among the top 10 emitters(please see Appendix). Four of these companies areoperating in the electricity market. The main cause of theincrease in emissions for those companies in the Utilitiessector has to do with the increased use of coal forelectricity generation in Spain as a result of the entry intoforce of Decree RD 134/2010 which sets quotas fordomestic coal use13. This change in law, in addition to
extreme weather conditions and droughts in the IberianPeninsula, has caused the hydroelectric production indexto fall in 2011 to 0.82 in Spain and 0.92 in Portugal, whichresulted in a decrease in renewable energy production.Endesa, Gas Natural and EDP reduced hydropowerproduction while significantly increasing electricitygeneration from coal.
As a result, the emissions factor for electricity in Spaingrew by 20.8% in 2011 compared to 2010. This is alsoreflected in the increased Scope 2 emissions from manyother companies, such as Portugal Telecom, which statesit has consumed 40% less renewable electricity in 2011compared to the previous year.
In addition to the above, we should also take into accountthat emissions reported by companies come from theirglobal operations and are not exclusively generated in theIberian Peninsula (even if the majority is). Other reasonsthat contribute to increased emissions are improvementsin the emissions inventory by updating the methodology orthe inventory scope (reason cited in 27% of the cases), theacquisition of other companies (23%) or increasedproduction (8%).
Although the extreme weather conditions together with theintegration of a regulation that incentivises theconsumption of coal as electricity generation are not theonly reasons for the overall increase in emissions, it isimportant to highlight that their effects have indeedovercome the efforts of Iberian companies to decreasetheir level of emissions through the implementation ofemission reduction initiatives.
This fact should be taken into discussion with regards tofuture trends and progress of Iberian companies into a lowcarbon economy.
16
9 IDENTIFIED RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES
BY TYPE (2012)
• Risks• Opportunities
8 IBERIAN DISCLOSERS TOTAL EMISSIONS
(Scope 1 and 2) (Mt CO2e)12
• Scope 1• Scope 2
2012 (49 disclosers)
357 36
2011 (45 disclosers)
333 38
Regulation
44 46
Physical changes
35 35
Other climate-related
35 40
No answer
3 5
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 16
The drivers and barriers to carbon action
There are different reasons driving Iberian respondingcompanies to engage in carbon management, but itseems that now, in a context of economic crisis,companies are placing greater emphasis on theopportunities that climate change management canprovide, thus trying to avoid the risks of inaction,especially in the short-term. The percentage ofcompanies that have identified regulatory opportunities
17
3%
3%
15%
15%
15%
10%
12%6%
6%
8%
7%
10 RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES TIMEFRAME
• Current• 1-5 years• 6-10 years• >10 years• Unknown
Opportunities
38% (48) 38% (47) 19% (24)
Risks
19% (35) 43% (79) 22% (40)
11 REGULATORY OPPORTUNITIES
• Air pollution limits• Cap and trade schemes• Carbon taxes• Emission reporting obligations• Fuel/energy taxes and
regulations• General environmental
regulations, including planning
• International agreements• Other regulatory drivers• Product efficiency regulations
and standards• Product labelling regulations
and standards• Voluntary agreements
12. There has been a change in the way in which Scope 1 and 2emissions reported under the Climate Change Reporting Framework(CCRF) are calculated although this is not expected to cause a majorchange in reported emissions. In 2011 the Scope 1 and 2 figure wastaken as parent and subsidiaries under control of the parent whereas in2012 joint ventures are also included.13. Spanish Government passed this decree in February 2010.http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/02/27/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-3158.pdf
Abengoa 14.43 Acquisitions, mergers, change in methodology.Banco Popular Español 50.00 Change in methodologyBBVA 5.00 Weather conditionsEDP 15.00 Increased stationary combustion in thermal power plants owned
by the company in the Iberian PeninsulaEndesa 29.90 Resources availabilityErcros 13.50 Increase of electricity emission factorGalp Energia 4.90 Change in boundaryGamesa N/A Acquisitions, Change in outputGas Natural 17.90 Legal requirementsGrifols 261.70 AcquisitionsIndra N/A Acquisitions, Organic growthJerónimo Martins 30.00 Increase in the number of sites.Mediaset España Comunicación 6.10 AcquisitionsOHL 18.00 Change in outputPortugal Telecom 21.00 Reduction of renewable energies integrated at the composition
of the energy suppliedR.E.E. 10.46 Acquisitions, Change in methodology, New facilities builtSonae 10.00 Acquisitions, Extension of opening hoursSonaecom 12.00 Reduction of renewable energies integrated at the composition
of the energy supplied
Table 3. EMISSION INCREASES AND REASONS (Scope 1 and 2)
Co
mp
an
y
Na
me
Em
issio
ns
inc
rea
se
(%)
Inc
rea
se
rea
so
n
7%(13)
8%(15)
3%(4)
2%(2)
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 17
4%
7%
17%
20%
1%
11%
5%4%
6%
3%
10%
5%
7%
12 REGULATORY RISKS
• Air pollution limits• Cap and trade schemes• Carbon taxes• Emission reporting obligations• Fuel/energy taxes and
regulations• General environmental
regulations, including planning• International agreements
• Lack of regulation• Other regulatory drivers• Product efficiency regulations
and standards• Product labelling regulations
and standards• Uncertainty surrounding new
regulation• Voluntary agreements
7%
7%
7%
21%
21%
17%
10%
10%
13 SHORT-TERM RISK DRIVERS WITH A HIGH
POTENTIAL IMPACT
• Cap and trade schemes• Fuel/energy taxes and
regulations• International agreements• Change in precipitation
extremes and droughts
• Uncertainty surrounding newregulation
• Fluctuating socio-economicconditions
• Reputation• Other
(94%) and other opportunities such as corporate reputationor changing consumer behaviour (82%) is only slightlygreater than the number of companies that have identifiedthe same kind of risks (90% and 71% respectively).
The difference in the perception of risks andopportunities lies in the timeframe in which they areexpected to impact the company operations. Almost allcompanies have identified opportunities that couldmaterialise within a year’s time (38% of all opportunitiesidentified) or from 1 to 5 years from now (38% again).However, only 19% of the identified risks are consideredas current (please se figure 10).
Regulation, especially that related to fuel/energy taxes andconsumption and carbon emissions, has been identifiedas one of the main sources for both risks (costsassociated with compliance) and opportunities (involvingincentives for cost savings and enabling the growth ofservices to third parties). (See figure 11 and 12).
In addition to the above, if there is a regulatory elementthat concerns companies, it is the uncertainty in futurelegislation, which represents 10% of total regulatory risksidentified. Although the expected scenario for respondingcompanies is that in the medium-term there will be agradual shift from fossil fuels to low-carbon renewableenergy, legal uncertainty is already a barrier to long-terminvestments, for example the construction of infrastructuresuch as building renewable energy production plants. Asother examples of regulation uncertainty, disclosingcompanies refer to the policies on use of biofuels, orwaste and waste water management policies, that canprevent investing in these areas.
Furthermore, it is difficult for the power generation sector tocombine and integrate EU policies like the climate andenergy package with national regulations such as quotas for
domestic coal in Spain or the moratorium on incentives forrenewable energy. According to companies’ responses,uncertainty about post-Kyoto commitments particularlyaffects investments in renewable energy, modernisation ofthermal power generation plants and projects in the CleanDevelopment Mechanism and Joint Implementation(CDM/JI). Investments in the renewable energy sector inSpain decreased by 53% in 2010, and some respondentsare delaying their decisions on CDM/JI project development.
As is the case with regulation, physical changesassociated with climate change (extreme weather events,rising average temperatures and changes in rainfallpatterns) are identified both as risk for businesses’ valuechain and also as a business opportunity for the necessaryactions for prevention and mitigation.
Other important drivers for company action andinvestment in carbon management are reputational issuesand changes in consumption patterns, which togetherrepresent 60% and 65% respectively among the otherclimate-related risks and opportunities identified.
Figures 13 and 14 illustrate the factors that can generaterisks and opportunities with a high potential impact forcompany operations, either now or within a period of 1 to5 years. These figures are based on the number of timesthat companies point out these drivers in their response aswith high potential impact.
Regulatory issues such as the EU ETS market and energytaxes present, according to responding companies, themost immediate risks and opportunities and, at the sametime, those with a greater potential impact. Indeed the bulkof emissions reduction activities of companies are orientedtowards reducing energy consumption. Energy efficiency inbuildings and processes are by far the types of activitiesthat most companies are implementing to reduce their
18
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 18
19
14 SHORT-TERM OPPORTUNITY DRIVERS WITH
HIGH POTENTIAL IMPACT
• Cap and trade schemes• Fuel/energy taxes and regulations• Air pollution limits• Other
34%
33%
13%
20%
Energy efficiency: building services12488
Energy efficiency: processes176163
Behavioral change3150
Product design1127
Low carbon energy installation2625
Transportation: fleet2121
Process emissions reductions1918
Energy efficiency: building fabric1416
Transportation: use3013
Fugitive emissions reductions126
Low carbon energy purchase75
Other3642
15 EMISSION REDUCTION ACTIVITY TYPES
• 2012• 2011
< 1 year8664
1-3 years9790
> 3 years185107
Unknown139213
16 EMISSION REDUCTION ACTIVITIES BY
PAYBACK PERIOD
• 2012• 2011
“BES has taken upon itself the
responsibility of exerting a
positive influence on its clients,
encouraging them to adopt
equipment that permit to reduce
their energy bill and consequently
the emission of GHG. The offer of
innovative low-carbon products
helps to engage employees and
improve the Bank reputation,
gaining new clients, being a
competitive advantage”.
Banco Espirito Santo
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 19
emissions. Both types of activities have grown in the lastyear despite the economic crisis, suggesting that they arebringing value to businesses during times of financialdifficulties. 86% of the energy efficiency activities andprocesses and 40% of efficiency in buildings have paybackperiods of more than three years. If we take into account allemission reduction activities for which we have informationon the financial analysis behind them, 50% of them have apayback period longer than three years, showing that fastreturns are not one of the main criteria for companydecisions on investment in reduction activities.
The existence of a dedicated budget for energy efficiency(23%) and the need to comply with regulatoryrequirements (16%) are the most frequently-used methodsto drive investments in emissions reduction activities (seeFigure 18). In addition, as much as 71% of emissionreductions are reported to be due to emission reductionactivities, compared to 29% that arise from a variety ofreasons related to changes in the activity of the companyor its environment. Its important to mention thatcompanies without an emission reduction target are alsoimplementing reduction activities. While these activitiesmake sense to reduce GHG emissions and costs,companies without a reduction are missing out a widerfinancial analysis. Companies that set targets can measuretheir achievements against those targets and understandthe extent to which their efforts are translating into actions,as well as benchmark themselves against their peers.
Improving climate change governance?
In 2012 Iberian responding companies have againexcelled, in particular in comparison to those of otherCDP samples, in areas such as increased responsibilityfor climate change (86% of them indicate that theresponsibility for climate change is anchored at the boardor senior executive level) or the integration of climatechange into the business strategy (94% of companies). In these areas, Iberian responding companies positionthemselves at the same level as Global 500 companiesand above other samples such as Britain, France or Italy.The high level of corporate climate change responsibilitythat we find in responding companies in the Iberiasample is consistent with high values in other indicatorssuch as the quality of climate change management, bothin terms of transparency (86% of companies haveexternally verified Scope 1 emissions and 80% Scope 2emissions) and performance (94% of companies haveimplemented initiatives to reduce emissions and 84%have products and services that help third parties toreduce emissions).
This fact however contrasts with the lack of emissionsreduction targets in the long-term. These targets arenecessary to put Iberia on a path towards a low carboneconomy. The lack of a long-term commitment suggeststhat, for the responding companies, there are still areas forimprovement in the governance and management ofclimate change.
20
17 EMISSION REDUCTION ACTIVITIES SUMMARY
• < 1 year• 1-3 years• > 3 years• Unknown
Energy efficiency: processes18 32 86 40
Energy efficiency: building services29 34 40 21
Behavioral change14 3 5 9
Product design1 1 90
Low carbon energy installation2 2 12 10
Transportation: fleet1 2 7 11
Process emissions reductions3 2 9 5
Energy efficiency: building fabric1 6 6 1
Transportation: use14 4 4 8
Fugitive emissions reductions30 2 7
Low carbon energy purchase1 3 1 2
Other2 6 12 16
3%
11%
17%
23%1%
13%
3%2%
8%
1%
3%8%
7%
18 METHODS USED TO DRIVE INVESTMENT IN
EMISSIONS REDUCTION ACTIVITIES
• Compliance with regulatoryrequirements/standards
• Dedicated budget for energyefficiency
• Dedicated budget for lowcarbon product R&D
• Dedicated budget for otheremission reduction activities
• Employee engagement• Financial optimization
calculations
• Internal price of carbon• Internal incentives/recognition
programs• Internal finance mechanisms• Lower return of investment
(ROI) specification• Marginal abatement cost curve• Partnering with governments
on technology development• Other
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 20
In order to identify the main areas for improvement inclimate change management, we have compared thenumber of disclosers that have stated they comply witheach of the requirements of the different areas of goodcorporate governance in climate change issues14, againstthe number of companies who have obtained the highestscore in the performance score for each of these areas15.The Performance Score awards actions that contribute toclimate change mitigation, adaptation and transparency,so it can be interpreted as an indicator of the margin forimprovement. For more information about CDP scoresplease refer to chapter 2012 Leaders.
Figure 19 shows there is a big gap especially with regardsto the integration of climate change into the businessstrategy and the creation of incentives for staffperformance to achieve emissions targets.
Regarding business strategy, 94% of responding companies(46) claim to have integrated climate change into the latter.However, only 33% of disclosing companies (16) haveobtained the highest performance score in thecorresponding question of the CDP questionnaire. Theremaining 61% of responding companies (30) have begunintegrating climate change in their business strategy but wecannot state that this is reflected directly in their businessand operations. To do this, companies must demonstratethat changes in their strategy, both short and long-term,have been influenced by the risks and opportunitiesidentified in climate change. These changes should be thenreflected in the establishment of long-term emissionreduction targets and activities.
Progress since 2011 is remarkable with regards to thenumber of companies using incentives to improve theperformance of their climate change management. In2012, 67% of responding companies (33) report havingincentives in place, compared to 56% in 2011. However,only 31% of companies (15) have obtained the highestperformance score for this question. There are thus 36%of companies (18) who have some kind of incentive for
climate change management but there is no assurancethat these incentives are directly contributing to asignificant reduction in emissions.
Although 86% of responding companies (42) haveintegrated climate risk management into theircomprehensive risk management system, a majority of themcannot yet ensure that these risks have been effectivelyintegrated into their business strategy (51% (25) do not getthe maximum performance score for this question). To provethat, these companies will need to ensure that the riskevaluation is done at least once every year and that theresults of the analysis are reported directly to the board.
The gap between simply complying and scoring themaximum performance points shows the way toexcellence in carbon management. Following this path willhelp Iberian disclosing companies to be ready for a lowcarbon future. Since most of the companies that answeredthe questionnaire (98%) assigned the responsibility forclimate change to the board of directors or a seniorexecutive, improvements in the above-mentioned areasshould be possible.
21
14. By complying with the requirements of good governance we meanthe following: – Companies in which climate change risks and opportunitiesmanagement procedures are integrated into a multi-disciplinarycompany wide risk management process– Companies in which climate change is integrated into their businessstrategy– Companies providing incentives for the management of climatechange issues, including the attainment of targets– Companies engaging with policy makers to encourage further actionon mitigation and/or adaptation15. The CDP scoring methodology include a detailed description onwhich characteristics the previous governance areas should include toobtain the maximum score. Please see CDP scoring methodology:https://www.cdproject.net/en-US/Pages/guidance.aspx
Risk Management Integration4224
Strategy Integration4616
Incentives3315
Engagement with policemakers4229
19 GOVERNANCE QUESTIONS: NUMBER OF
COMPANIES COMPLYING AND ATTAINING
MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE SCORE
• Companies complying• Companies attaining maximum performance score Monetary incentives
67%56%
Engagement with policy makers for further action86%71%
Integrated climate change risk management86%83%
Board level responsibility86%79%
Integrated strategy94%96%
20 TRENDS IN KEY GOVERNANCE INDICATORS
• 2012• 2011
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 21
22
where state or European incentives and rebates areavailable, to minimise return periods. Companies can alsoconsider doing energy audits or third-party evaluations toidentify where to act and how to obtain good results.
A company’s influence is not limited to their employees;suppliers’ engagement is a key part of a carbon strategy.Suppliers participation can have tremendous impacts inthe companies’ products and services and on howcompanies are perceived in the market both by othersuppliers and consumers. Portuguese companies startedtheir suppliers programs focusing on product-qualityindicators. Nevertheless, as these programmes take amore complex format, there is a delay in adding weight tothe energy and carbon aspect.
Shifting Scenario
The debate on European and national strategies onclimate change are not centre stage when it comes to themedia and political Portuguese agenda. The Europeandrive in promoting the fight on climate change as a vectorof economic development was muffled by the Europeancrisis: both companies and Government have their pathquestioned by budget constraints.
In Portugal, some business sectors have already beenpointed out as experiencing climate change impacts.Notwithstanding, both public and private programs topromote renewables and energy efficiency have decreased.Surely, there is a link between these programmes’ decrease– or postponement – and the financial sector credit crunch.In fact, as a result of the economic crisis, Portuguesecompanies are experiencing changes in fiscal and labourpolicies, all the while reacting to the economic downturn.Therefore, unless Portuguese companies had alreadyintegrated “carbon management” as key vector of theirbusiness strategy - which few had - this economic contextcan cause a shift of focus away from that issue.
There are a few governmental carbon policy frameworksexpected to be released soon. They target companies thatso far have not been requested by law to deal with carbonmanagement. At present, this can be a huge challenge forsome companies. However, it is a necessary challenge if ithelps companies to adjust and cut costs while alsodecreasing their carbon intensity per revenue.
André Baltazar
Researcher, Euronatura
Carbon Management Landscape in Portugal
Portuguese companies currently view carbonmanagement as a tool for tackling increasing energy costsand pressure from competitors. Related advantages suchas being relevant criteria on the consumer, investor orprocurement side is looked-at by companies with growingsignificance. The Carbon Disclosure Project - with itsInvestor and Supply Chain Programmes pushing carbonmanagement higher on the corporate agenda - is nowplaying a key-role in shifting to this mind-frame.
There is a significant number of Portuguese companieswith a rigorous carbon inventory, since establishing thiscarbon baseline is mandatory for sketching a strategy.Many companies have also started to enlarge their Scope3 inventories, acknowledging its relevance in thecompany’s carbon footprint. It is also worth noting a wide-spread willingness to put in place efficiency andemission-reduction targets. This decision drives innovationand sends an important message to stakeholders. In fact,the first movers in Portugal go beyond inventory andtarget-setting; they also forecast emissions scenarios andstudy the future effects of climate change in thecompany’s activity.
Roadmap to an Effective Strategy
Companies are setting multiple targets based on therelationship between reducing carbon emissions andsaving money. However, most of those targets are limitedin scope and do not translate into absolute emissionsreductions. Also, there is a lack of connection betweensustainability goals and employees incentives: 31% (4) ofPortuguese companies in the sample do not provide them.Furthermore, letting other departments within the companyknow about the financial benefits of “carbon savings” canhelp achieve those targets. Several Portuguese companieshave expressed that this practice has had positive impactson the way in which their carbon and sustainability strategyis perceived and engaged internally.
Being aware of low-hanging fruits embodied inbehavioural changes can make for good results and bigsavings with minimum capital investment: conveyinformation on good workplace practices and processesto all employees. Track and benchmark the company’scarbon performance, and pass on this information forbetter engaging within and outside the company. If capitalis available, companies can start by investing in energyefficiency in activities’ with high carbon intensity levels or
Commentary
from Euronatura“Putting in place efficiency and
emission reduction targets drives
innovation and sends an
important message to
stakeholders.”
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 22
Introduction to the Carbon Disclosure Leadership
Index (CDLI) and the Carbon Performance Leadership
Index (CPLI)
Each year, company responses are reviewed, analyzedand scored for the quality of disclosure and performanceon actions taken to mitigate climate change. The highestscoring companies for disclosure and/or performanceenter the CDLI and the CPLI.
What are the CDLI and CPLI criteria?
To enter the CDLI, a company must:• Make their responses public and submit them via CDP’s
Online Response System • Achieve a score within the top 10% of the total
population
To enter the CPLI (Performance Band A), a company must:• Make their responses public and submit them via CDP’s
Online Response System • Attain a performance score greater than 85• Score maximum performance points on question 13.1a
(absolute emissions performance) for GHG reductionsdue to emission reduction actions over the past year
• Disclose gross global Scope 1 and Scope 2 figures• Score maximum performance points for verification of
Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions
Notes: Companies that achieve a performance score highenough to warrant inclusion in the CPLI, but do not meetall of the other CPLI requirements are classed asPerformance Band A- but are not included in the CPLI.
Why are the CDLI and CPLI important to investors?
Analyses of the CDLI and CPLI provide insights into thecharacteristics and common trends among the leadingcompanies on carbon disclosure and performance. Theyhighlight good practices in reporting, governance, riskmanagement, verification and emissions reductionsactivities toward climate change adaptation andmitigation.
Additionally, good carbon management and disclosuremay be used as a proxy for superior, forward-lookingmanagement with a better understanding of thecompanies’ risk profile.
The inter-relations between CDLI and CPLI companiesshow how companies with better data can use thisadvantage within the business to drive value-addingactivities.
Companies in the CDLI and CPLI typically show a deeperunderstanding of, and address more pro-actively, the risksand opportunities presented by climate change. Theirtransparency and willingness to disclose information isattractive to investors. For further information on the CDLIand the CPLI and how scores are determined, please visitwww.cdproject.net/guidance.
23
2012 Leaders
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 23
CDLI
Carbon disclosure scores attained by Iberian disclosershave significantly improved from the previous yearalthough the scoring methodology became stricter in2012. 78% (38) of the disclosers improved their score fromprevious year. The greatest improvements are achieved byArcelor Mittal with a jump of 51 points and CaixaBank with31 points16.
Companies with a disclosure score above 70 points areconsidered high scorers, though they are not necessarilyCarbon Disclosure Leaders. Being a high scorer mayindicate that senior management has an understanding ofthe business issues related to climate change and thatthey are incorporating climate related risks andopportunities into their core business. High scoresrepresent 69% of the Iberian disclosers (34), growing from52% (25) in 2011. The overall improvement proves that thequality of carbon disclosure has increased dramatically inIberia. Companies’ responses to CDP’s informationrequest ensure them high visibility and the opportunity tobenchmark themselves against their peers. Therefore,reaching a good CDP score can contribute and supportcompanies in their sustainability positioning.
The companies included in this year’s CDLI have adisclosure score ranging from 92 to 99. The averagedisclosure score for CDLI companies is 95, which meansan increase of 7 points compared to the 2011 CDLIaverage score (88). The average score of CDLI companiesis significantly higher than the average score of allreporting companies of the Iberian sample, which resultsin 76 points and has increased from 68 in 2011.
Gas Natural leads the CDLI with 99 points. Repsol YPFearns the second best score with 98 points, closelyfollowed by Acciona, Abengoa and EDP with 96 disclosurepoints each. All the latter companies are listed in the CDLIfor the second consecutive year, while Gas Natural hasmanaged to remain disclosure leader for another year.Iberdrola, Banco Espírito Santo, Sonae and Galp areamong the newly-listed disclosure leaders.
Gas Natural Spain Utilities 99Repsol YPF Spain Energy 98Abengoa Spain Industrials 96Acciona Spain Industrials 96EDP Portugal Utilities 96Iberdrola Spain Utilities 95Banco Espírito Santo Portugal Financials 94OHL Spain Industrials 94Galp Energia Portugal Energy 93Sonae Portugal Consumer Staples 93Endesa Spain Utilities 92Telefónica Spain Telecommunication
Services 92
Table 4. CARBON DISCLOSURE LEADERSHIP INDEX
FOR IBERIA SAMPLE 2012
24
Disclose Scope 1+2100%97%
Disclose Scope 3100%92%
Verify Scope 1+292%70%
Verify Scope 392%57%
21 CDLI VS. NON-CDLI METRICS17
• CDLI• Non-CDLI
Verification of emissions100%60%
Quantify emissions reductions from activities100%63%
Integrated risk management100%84%
High level governance100%84%
Integrated strategy100%93%
Monetary incentives100%63%
Products and services enabling emissions reductions100%81%
22 CPLI VS. NON-CPLI KEY PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS
• CDLI• Non-CDLI
Na
me
Co
un
try
Se
cto
r
Dis
clo
su
re
Sc
ore
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 24
CPLI
Looking at the performance index, six companies have madeit into the CPLI, having achieved the performance band A.This means doubling the CPLI number of companies from2011, despite a stricter methodology this year18.
Companies in the CPLI are demonstrating best practice interms of governance, strategy and emissions reductions.These companies are strongly outperforming the rest ofthe Iberian sample in all of the key metrics.
Abengoa, Caixa Geral de Depositos and Iberdrola arenew among the performance leaders, and the latersucceeded also in being included as performance leaderwithin the CPLI of the G500 population. Acciona, GasNatural and Ferrovial are included in the CPLI for thesecond consecutive year.
35 companies populate the top three bands (A, B and C) andonly seven are in the lowest two (D and E). Another sevencompanies have not been scored for performance becausethey have a disclosure score below the 50 points threshold.
In conclusion, the analysis shows that the huge majority ofresponding companies of the Iberian sample is not onlyimproving in terms of disclosure and performance, but hasalready reached a very good level of both.
16. CaixaBank 2012 score is compared to Criteria Caixa Corp 2011score.17. CDP has been working to encourage greater levels of third partyverification/assurance of data in response to demands for higher levelsof data quality. This led to a change in the way in whichverification/assurance was reported and scored in 2011. Thereforeonly data for 2011 and 2012 for verification/assurance is includedhere. The term “reported and approved” refers to the fact that thenumber of companies with verification is based on the scoring of theverification statements attached to their response. Where companiesreport verification/assurance of more than one scope, they are onlycounted once in the statistic provided.18. Please notice that according to CDP scoring methodologyperformance bands are relative to the companies’ responses in thatparticular year. That makes difficult to compare CPLI over time.Moreover, the criteria to enter the CPLI were raised in 2012. Pleasesee CDP scoring methodology: https://www.cdproject.net/en-US/Pages/guidance.aspx 25
Abengoa Spain Industrials AAcciona Spain Industrials AFerrovial Spain Industrials ACaixa Geral de Portugal Financials ADepositosGas Natural Spain Utilities AIberdrola Spain Utilities A
Table 5. CARBON PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP
INDEX FOR IBERIA SAMPLE 2012
Na
me
Co
un
try
Se
cto
r
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e
Ba
nd
Why is investing in climate change
related R&D with regards to new
products so important to obtain a
comparative advantage in your sector?
Why do you think innovation projects
pay off and are important even in times
of financial crisis?
The role that energy technologies mustplay in curving CO2 emissions is key tomitigate the potential impacts associatedto climate change. Although the financial crisis is forcing oursociety to pay attention in some otherurgent questions, only those companiesworking with the most suitable technologywill be able to operate and competeproperly in the markets giving society thelevel of security of supply, sustainabilityand satisfaction demanded.
Which benefits did you obtain from
measuring and verifying Scope 3
emissions? How does it help you to
develop a better carbon management?
The starting point to develop a bettercarbon management is an accuratemeasurement of the GHG emissions.Measuring GHG emissions Scope 3allows our company to comprehensivelyknow the energy efficiency of theseprocesses, enabling us to allocateresources in a cost-effective way,focusing the company´s efforts on thosewith the greatest impact or higher roomfor improvement. Verifying the whole of GNF´s carbonfootprint gives all these work thenecessary level of assurance and externalrecognition.
Antonio Gella, HSEQA Director.
Gas Natural
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 25
26
For the third year in a row, Telefónica is one of the leadingtelecommunications companies in the Carbon DisclosureProject. We are proud to be part of the top businesses thatrespond to institutional investors with millionaire assets,interested in the transparency and the performance ofcompanies with regard to climate change. We also believethat the Information and Communication Technology (ICT)Sector has a major role in promoting a low carboneconomy, which for the first year has been put into valuewithin CDP, with the creation of a particular supplement ofour sector.
In this edition, Telefónica has achieved a score of 92 pointsout of 100 in the Carbon Disclosure Score, increasing 2points since last year. Our efforts to include climate changeas part of our core business and the transparent carbonmanagement that we carry out every year has taken us tothis position. Furthermore, Telefónica has remained incategory B of the Carbon Performance Score that includescompanies with initiatives in progress, which they willconclude shortly, to mitigate, adapt to climate change andto drive green ICT innovation for a low carbon economy.
The strategy of the Climate Change and Energy Efficiencyof Telefonica has three fronts: 1) Green ICTs, the basis forthe identification of risks and opportunities that climatechange present to us and helps to drive our positioning asthe leading ICT company in this field; 2) Green from ICTs,to promote internal energy efficiency and to reduce ourGHG emissions; and 3) Green with ICTs, with initiatives todevelop competitive solutions and services that improveclients’ efficiency and enhance emissions reductions inother sector of the economy by the use of our technology.
On the Green from ICTs front, where the CDP focuses,Telefónica has improved its operational energy efficiencyincluding data centers by almost 20%, putting it at a thirdfrom reaching its target for 2015: an improvement of 30%compared to 2007, measured in kWh/equivalent access.To achieve this, the 30 energy efficiency projectsdeveloped in the company in 2011 have been essential.With them, we have saved 7.6 million euros and reduced265,000 tons CO2e.
Similarly, Telefónica consolidated the energy consumptionand greenhouse gas emissions inventory accounting &development processes – essential for taking the rightdecisions – maintaining total greenhouse gases at 1.8million tons. At the same time, for the third year running,An independent auditor performed a specialised energyand emissions review of all of the group’s operations, andfor the first time, we included the verification of theemissions reduced by every project developed.
Referring to transparency, another valued aspect by CDP,Telefónica regularly informs its interest groups about itprogress in energy and carbon management throughvarious 2.0 channels, the Annual Sustainability Report andan annual workshop on energy and climate change.
Our score in CDP reflects the efforts in the past, theresults of the present and our commitment to the future.We consider that CDP is a good reference for ourinvestors at this moment. In this sense we will do our bestto improve in the coming years.
Telefónica perspective
“We believe that the
Information and
Communication
Technology (ICT)
Sector has a major
role in promoting a
low carbon
economy, which has
been put into value
within CDP with the
creation of a
particular
supplement of our
sector.”
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 26
27
2
10
3
6
13 1
2
2
4
8
23 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDING COMPANIES
BY SECTOR
• Energy• Materials• Industrial• Consurmer Discrectionary• Consumer Staples
• Health Care• Financials• Information Technology• Telecommunication Services• Utilities
19. This analysis includes all responses, including non public responses andsubsidiary companies which responded via their parent company. This year, thosecompanies that send a non public response and that are only included in theIberian report can have non public scores . Nevertheless, those companies that areincluded in other reports such as Euro 300 and Global 500, cannot have nonpublic scores despite having sent non public responses. From next year all scoreswill be public despite the company's response is sent as public or non public.
All of the companies covered in the Iberian sample can becategorized into 10 sectors based on the Global IndustryClassification Standard (GICS). Examining companies bysector often provides insight into the challenges faced bya particular sector. Moreover, the nature and scale ofclimate related activities are often best compared on asector by sector basis. The largest number of respondingcompanies of the 51 companies that responded19 to theCDP questionnaire can be found in the Financials (13),Industrials (10) and Utilities (8) sectors as illustrated infigure 23.
All 10 sectors are very diverse and this is reflected in therange of response rates as well as by the disclosure andperformance scores obtained in each of them. The highestscoring sector in both in terms of disclosure andperformance is the Energy sector with an averagedisclosure score of 96 points. Nevertheless, this sectorincludes only two companies, a small sample notrepresentative for comparisons. From those sectorsincluding more than five companies, Utilities has the bestdisclosing and performance scores with an averagedisclosure score of 88 points. The Consumer discretionarysector has the lowest average scores both for disclosureand performance.
Sector analysis
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 27
28
Board or other senior management oversight of climate change86%83%
Provide incentives for the management of climate change71%75%
Have emissions reductions targets76%67%
Have emissions reductions initiatives94%92%
Have products and services that enable GHG emissions reductions84%83%
Integrate climate change risks and opportunities management90%100%
Integrate climate change into business strategy94%100%
Decreased absolute emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined)86%67%
Engage with police makers80%83%
24 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
• Overall Iberian disclosers• Financials
25 PUBLIC CARBON DISCLOSURE SCORE AND
PERFORMANCE BAND21
Dis
clos
ure
Sco
re
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Banco EspíritoSanto
Caixa Geralde Depósitos
CaixaBankBanco Comercial
Portugués Mapfre
BBVA
Banif Bankinter
Banco Santander
Banco Sabadell
Performance Band
6%
29%
11%20%
8%
3%
23%
26 METHODS TO DRIVE INVESTMENT IN EMISSION
REDUCTION ACTIVITIES
• Compliance with regulatory requirements/standards• Dedicated budget for energy efficiency• Dedicated budget for low carbon product R&D• Dedicated budget for other emission reduction activities• Employee engagement• Financial optimisation calculations• Other
Sector response rate:
Financials overall: 52% (13 out of 25)
Key industries in within the financial responders:
Banks (10 out of 13)Diversified financials (2 out of 13)Insurance (1 out of 13)
Respondents:
Banco Comercial Portugues, Banco Espírito Santo, BancoPopular Español, Banco Sabadell, Banco Santander,Banif, Bankinter, BBVA, Bolsas y Mercados Españoles,Caixa Geral de Depósitos, CaixaBank, Espirito SantoFinancial Group, Mapfre.
Non-respondents20:
Banca Cívica, Banco BPI, Banco de Valencia, BancoPastor, Bankia, Corporación Financiera Alba, DinamiaCapital Privado, Grupo Catalana Occidente, QuabitInmobiliaria, Realia Business, Sonae Capital.
Financials
D C B A– A
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 28
29
Energy efficiency: processes11 4 4
Energy efficiency: building services9 17 13 5
Behavioral change11 1 3
Product design41
Low carbon energy installation2
Transportation: fleet11
1111
Process emissions reductions
Energy efficiency: building fabric3 4
Transportation: use
Fugitive emissions reductions
Low carbon energy purchase3 2
Other3 1 6
27 NUMBER OF EMISSION REDUCTIONS
ACTIVITIES BY ACTIVITY TYPE AND PAYBACK
PERIOD
• < 1 year• 1-3 years• > 3 years• Unknown
28 EMISSION REDUCTION TARGETS
• Absolute target• Intensity target• Absolute and intensity target• No target
34%
33%0%
33%
Why are you engaging in sharing best
practices and sustainability knowledge,
which benefits do you see in it?
We are committed to sustainabledevelopment, so it´s our mission to be theleaders in best practices, but also inpromoting them inside the community.We believe that creating value in acompany is not only to generate wealthbut also to promote our values andknowledge. If we manage to do that, wewill be contributing for a better societyand we will also be spreading the benefitsof progress and innovation to anincreasing number of people.
Which benefits do you see in
monitoring your supply chain
emissions and how does it help you to
get truly hold of your carbon footprint?
Sustainability in the supply chain is arelevant theme across all areas of Sonae´sactivity, by directly affecting its overallperformance. Therefore Sonae hasdeveloped mechanisms for selection andqualification of suppliers, taking accountof sustainability requirements to minimizeany impacts related to climate change.The relationship between Sonae and itssuppliers ensures that the company iswell placed to identify the effects of achanging climate on supply and find waysto benefit from any possible opportunity.
Luís Reis. Chief Corporate Center
Officer and President of Sonae´s
Sustainable Forum. Sonae
20. See footnote 1921. The 2012 score is comprised of the disclosure scorenumber and performance score letter. Only companies thathave scored more than 50 for their disclosure score are given aperformance score and have been included here. Scores forcompanies with a non-public response are also non-public,except for companies that are also included in the Global 500or Euro 300 samples.
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 29
30
Board or other senior management oversight of climate change86%80%
Provide incentives for the management of climate change71%80%
Have emissions reductions targets76%90%
Have emissions reductions initiatives94%90%
Have products and services that enable GHG emissions reductions84%80%
Integrate climate change risks and opportunities management90%100%
Integrate climate change into business strategy94%100%
Decreased absolute emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined)86%80%
Engage with police makers80%100%
29 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
• Overall Iberian disclosers• Industrials
18%
18%
12%
9% 12%
6%
25%
31 METHODS TO DRIVE INVESTMENT IN EMISSION
REDUCTION ACTIVITIES
• Compliance with regulatory requirements/standards• Dedicated budget for energy efficiency• Dedicated budget for low carbon product R&D• Dedicated budget for other emission reduction activities• Employee engagement• Financial optimisation calculations• Other
Sector response rate:
Industrials overall: 38% (10 out of 26)
Key industries in within the industrials responders:
Capital goods (6 out of 10)Transportation (3 out of 10)Commercial and professional services (1 out of 10)
Respondents:
Abengoa, Abertis, Acciona, ACS, Brisa, Ferrovial, FCC,Gamesa, International Consolidated Airlines Group, OHL.
Non-respondents22:
Acciones Unipapel, Construcciones y Auxiliar deFerrocarriles, Duro Felguera, Fersa Energias Renovables,Grupo Soares da Costa, Martifer, Mota-Engil, Prosegur,Sacyr Vallehermoso, Semapa - Sociedade de Investimentoe Gestao, Service Point Solutions, Solaria Energía y MedioAmbiente, Sonae Indústria, Teixeira Duarte, Vueling,Zardoya Otis.
Industrials30 PUBLIC CARBON DISCLOSURE SCORE AND
PERFORMANCE BAND23
Dis
clos
ure
Sco
re
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Abengoa
Ferrovial
OHL
Albertis
Brisa
ICA Group
Performance Band
D C B A– A
Acciona
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 30
31
Energy efficiency: processes1 1 4 4
1 1 2 1
1 1
2 3
4 1
1 5
1
2 1 2
1
1
2 2 3 3
Energy efficiency: building services1 4 7 4
Behavioral change
Product design
Low carbon energy installation
Transportation: fleet
Process emissions reductions
Energy efficiency: building fabric
Transportation: use
Fugitive emissions reductions
Low carbon energy purchase
Other
32 NUMBER OF EMISSION REDUCTIONS
ACTIVITIES BY ACTIVITY TYPE AND PAYBACK
PERIOD
• < 1 year• 1-3 years• > 3 years• Unknown
33 EMISSION REDUCTION TARGETS
• Absolute target• Intensity target• Absolute and intensity target• No target
10%
20%
60%
10%
With regards to corporate action
against climate change, why do you
think it is important to have incentives
in place which are linked to targets?
No doubt incentives help bigorganizations to be focused on objectivesat the corporate level. From thatperspective, our challenge is how todesign reliable metrics to make sure that(a) decision makers understand and agreewith the objectives, and (b) incentives areproperly linked with such targets, sodecision makers are aware they arecontributing to achieving the challenge.
Which role does regulatory uncertainty
play with regards to delaying
investment decisions and climate
protection in your company?
We do have to provide certainty in themedium and long term for companies andinvestors. Regulatory uncertainty isprobably jeopardizing many businessopportunities emerging worldwide in thecontext of the global climate changeregulatory framework. In particular, lack ofreliable reduction objectives at bothglobal and regional levels make it moredifficult for players to forecast the marketenvironment, and reduce legal security onlong-term investments.
Iñigo Meirás. CEO Ferrovial
22. See footnote 1923. See footnote 21
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 31
32
Board or other senior management oversight of climate change86%86%
Provide incentives for the management of climate change71%86%
Have emissions reductions targets76%100%
Have emissions reductions initiatives94%100%
Have products and services that enable GHG emissions reductions84%86%
Integrate climate change risks and opportunities management90%100%
Integrate climate change into business strategy94%100%
Decreased absolute emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined)86%43%
Engage with police makers80%100%
34 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
• Overall Iberian disclosers• Utilities
19%
19%
10%
10%
16%
7%
19%
36 METHODS TO DRIVE INVESTMENT IN EMISSION
REDUCTION ACTIVITIES
• Compliance with regulatory requirements/standards• Dedicated budget for energy efficiency• Dedicated budget for low carbon product R&D• Dedicated budget for other emission reduction activities• Employee engagement• Financial optimisation calculations• Other
Sector response rate:
Utilities overall: 100% (8 out of 8)
Key industries in within the utilities responders:
Utilities (8 out of 8)
Respondents:
EDP, EDP Renováveis, Enagás, Endesa, Gas Natural,Iberdrola, R.E.E., REN
Non-respondents24:
There are no non-responders within this sector
Utilities35 PUBLIC CARBON DISCLOSURE SCORE AND
PERFORMANCE BAND25
Dis
clos
ure
Sco
re
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Gas Natural
R.E.E.
Iberdrola
EDP
Endesa
REN
Enagás
Performance Band
D C B A– A
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 32
33
Energy efficiency: processes2 6 6 6
1 2 3 2
1 2 3
1 1 1 1
7
1 3
1 1
2 1 1 3
3 1 6
1 4
Energy efficiency: building services
Behavioral change
Product design
Low carbon energy installation
Transportation: fleet
Process emissions reductions
Energy efficiency: building fabric
Transportation: use
Fugitive emissions reductions
Low carbon energy purchase
Other
37 NUMBER OF EMISSION REDUCTIONS
ACTIVITIES BY ACTIVITY TYPE AND PAYBACK
PERIOD
• < 1 year• 1-3 years• > 3 years• Unknown
38 EMISSION REDUCTION TARGETS
• Absolute target• Intensity target• Absolute and intensity target• No target
14%
29%
57%
0%
What are the benefits of anticipating
climate change consequences for your
business and how do you make sure
that adaptation is already taken place?
ACCIONA mitigates risks and successfullyresponds to opportunities arising fromdifferent climate change scenarios byadapting its products and servicesportfolio. This results in electricitygeneration from renewable sources only(17,749 GWh and 11.31 million tCO2avoided in 2011), participation involuntary carbon markets, and reductionin energy consumption, GHG emissionsand costs. ACCIONA also works towardsgiving solutions to water scarcity throughdesalinization and water treatment(508Hm3 water treated in 2011).
What would be your message to
investors with regards to climate
change?
Climate change is one of the majorchallenges faced by all of us today, andjoint actions are taking place from all thepolitical, economic and social sectors.Investors could play a key role by givingprecedence in its investment decisions tolow-carbon production models andsustainable business practices whichbring environmental, social and economicbenefits. ACCIONA has set itself thechallenge to lead the transition to a lowcarbon economy.
Juan Ramón Silva Executive Director,
Sustainability. Acciona
24. See footnote 1925. See footnote 21
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 33
34
What is NBIM’s policy on corporate climate risk
management?
We expect portfolio companies to identify material risks,define an optimal mitigation strategy and take action toimplement that strategy. Companies should also have awell-functioning governance structure for risk and betransparent in their interaction with policy-makers andregulators. They should disclose sufficient informationdemonstrating an effective approach to climate changerisk, including key performance indicators on greenhousegas emissions.
How does NBIM use CDP data?
NBIM uses CDP data as a source of company-levelinformation on climate change risk for our portfoliomanagers. We are supportive of the standardisedquestions and answers in the CDP Information Request,as this helps us integrate CDP data with our internal dataplatforms in ways that we find beneficial. The growth in thenumber of companies reporting to CDP means a greatershare of our global equities portfolio is covered eachsuccessive year.
We are in the process of incorporating CDP data into ourinternal investment data platform. It will allow our portfoliomanagers to identify whether companies are meeting ourexpectation with regards to climate change riskmanagement, reporting, and performance, and comparedata across time, and across relevant peers. In turn, eachportfolio manager can form an opinion about thesignificance and relevance of the information for thecompanies they cover.
Which CDP data points are disseminated to NBIM’s
portfolio managers?
We have produced a framework for assessing companiesrelative to climate change risk based on our own weightingof individual CDP data points. The framework considersindicators related to governance structure, riskassessment, strategy implementation, reporting, andperformance, each of which is linked to a CDP data point.For example, we review the companies’ own assessmentof their exposure to various climate change risks, and theactions they have taken to reduce their risk exposure.
We also use CDP data to identify whether companies havelines of reporting up to board level and whether theydisclose their position and political activities relative toclimate change regulation. We measure performance byconsidering emissions reduction targets and trackingwhether greenhouse gas emission intensity is increasingor decreasing, and whether emissions data have beenindependently verified.
Christopher Wright
Senior Analyst at Norges Bank Investment Management(NBIM)
NBIM manages the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global which owns approximately 2% of Europeanequities. As of 31.12.11, it held shares in 75 companies inSpain, with a combined market value of 5.8 billion euros,and 23 companies in Portugal, with a combined marketvalue of 860 million euros.
Investor perspective
“It will allow our
portfolio managers
to identify whether
companies are
meeting our
expectation
with regards to
climate change
risk management,
reporting, and
performance, and
compare data
across
time, and across
relevant peers.”
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 34
From the 125 Iberian companies invited to disclose (the85 largest Spanish companies and the 40 largestPortuguese companies by market capitalisation), 51companies responded to the CDP Investor request201226. Figure KS1 is based on all these companies,including those that reference a holding company’sresponse (EDP Renováveis and Espirito Santo FinancialGroup). Analysis in the remainder of this report is basedon data provided to CDP by 15/07/2012 on 49 uniqueresponses submitted up to 30/06/2012 to the 2012Investor programme.
In 2012, we see a modest increase in the uniqueresponse rate reaching 39% (49), up from 37% (46) lastyear. Nevertheless, there is still much room forimprovement as this number is still far from the responserate of the Global 500 companies (81%). The highest rateof respondents can be found in the Utilities sector(100%) where all seven companies disclosed informationwhile companies in the Health Care sector are the leastresponsive (14%). In fact, only one out of sevencompanies provided information from this sector. 14companies declined to respond to the request and 60chose to not respond at all.
Climate change is gaining in importance for corporations.Indeed, 86% of responding companies appointed boardor other senior management as those with the oversightfor climate change. Companies are also increasing theuse of incentives to manage climate change (71% in2012 compared to 56% in 2011).
35
Key statistics
42%
14%2%
7%
60%
KS1 RESPONSES STATUS
• Answered questionnaire, response publicly available• Answered questionnaire, response not publicly
available• Indirect answer. The company refers to parent• Declined to participate• No answer
26. This includes all responses, including non public responsesand subsidiary companies which responded via their parentcompany. Board or other senior management oversight of climate change
86%79%
Provide incentives for the management of climate change71%56%
Have emissions reductions targets76%65%
Have emissions reductions initiatives94%94%
Have products and services that enable GHG emissions reductions84%79%
Identify regulatory risks linked to climate change90%85%
Identify regulatory opportunities linked to climate change94%88%
Externally verify their emissions (Scope 1)86%71%
Externally verify their emissions (Scope 2)80%73%
KS3 KEY PERFORMANCE STATISTICS 2011-2012
• 2012 (Overall Iberian disclosers)• 2011 (Overall Iberian disclosers)
Energy50% 0%
Materials18% 0%
Industrials31% 8%
Consurmer Discrectionary21% 11%
Consumer Staples20% 0%
Health Care14% 0%
Financials48% 4%
Information Technology17% 17%
Telecommunication Services60% 20%
Utilities100%
0%
KS2 SECTOR RESPONSE RATES 2012
• Public• Non-Public
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 35
Companies disclosing absolute or intensity targets haveonly been included in this section where they have beenfully described, providing base year, target year,percentage reduction and for intensity targets, targetmetric.
Companies may report multiple emissions reductions dueto implementation of activities, targets and rewardincentives. In all of these cases, companies are onlycounted once in the statistics presented below.
The number of companies disclosing Scope 1 or 2emissions includes those that have disclosed theiremissions as zero. This is a change in approach fromprevious years.
Only four sectors reported more than one million metrictons CO2e (Energy, Materials, Industrials and Utilities),jointly accounting for 98.67% of Scope 1 and 2emissions. The Materials sector, responsible for 45% ofScope 1 emissions and 52% of Scope 2 emissions, isthe biggest emitter. The Utilities sector accounts for36% and 24% Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissionsrespectively.
The number of companies reporting Scope 3 emissions isconstantly rising. In 2012, 46 companies27 identified 15different sources of Scope 3 emissions with businesstravel mentioned by 84% (41) of companies and employeecommuting mentioned by 41% (20) of companies, beingthe categories most often enumerated and whichaccounted for 4% of disclosed Scope 3 emissions.Usually companies beginning Scope 3 inventories startreporting these categories. Companies that reportedbusiness travel and employee commuting in the past arenow involved in reporting other upstream and downstreamcategories such as purchasing (20%) or transportation anddistribution of products (12%). The Scope 3 categorieswith a bigger contribution to total Scope 3 emissions are‘Use of sold products’ (51% of total Scope 3 emissions)and ‘Waste generated in operations’ (27%).
Most of the companies that reduced their emissions fromthe previous year, reported emission reduction activities(72%) and changes in input materials (12%) as the mainreasons for this decrease. According to this companiesemissions reductions are a result of a proactive climatechange strategy driving to an improvement in carbonintensity.
36
KS4 NUMBER OF COMPANIES REPORTING SCOPE 3
EMISSIONS28
• Yes• No
2012
46 3
2011
38 10
Energy
Materials
Industrials
127 9
40 2
163 19
26 2
Utilities
Total emissions do not reach 1 Mt CO2e for the followingsectors: Consumer Discrectionary, Consumer Staples, HealthCare, Financials, Information Technology andTelecommunication Services.
KS5 IBERIAN DISCLOSERS TOTAL EMISSIONS BY
SECTOR (Scope 1 and 2) (Mt CO2e)
• Scope 1• Scope 2
KS6 COMMONLY REPORTED SCOPE 3 CATEGORIES
(WITH EMISSIONS DATA PROVIDED)
Business travel41
Employee commuting20
Waste generated in operations10
Fuel- and energy-related activities (not in Scopes 1 or 2)10
Purchased goods & services9
Other (downstream)7
Downstream transportation and distribution6
Upstream transportation & distribution5
Other (upstream)5
Use of sold products3
Processing of sold products2
Downstream leased assets2
Upstream leased assets1
End-of-life treatment of sold products1
Capital goods1
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 36
37
On the other hand, 50% of the companies that increasedemissions from the previous year explain this increase byreasons not related to carbon intensity: changes inboundary (12%) or methodology (15%), and acquisitions(23%). Companies reporting ‘other’ reasons to explainincreases include several mixed causes as increase ofthe electricity emission factor or the company activitygrowth.
2%
2% 5%5%
2%
72%
12%
KS7 REASONS FOR EMISSIONS DECREASE
• Change in boundary• Change in methodology• Change in output• Change in physical operating conditions• Divestment• Emissions reduction activities• Other: Change in input materials
23%
8%
15%
12%
42%
KS8 REASONS FOR EMISSIONS INCREASE
• Acquisitions• Change in boundary• Change in methodology• Change in output• Other
The Climate Disclosure
Standards Board (CDSB), a
special project of CDP, is an
international organization
committed to the integration of
climate change-related
information into mainstream
corporate reporting. CDSB’s
internationally accepted Climate
Change Reporting Framework is
designed for use by companies in
making disclosures in, or linked
to, their mainstream financial
reports about the risks and
opportunities that climate change
presents to their strategy,
financial performance and
condition. Designed in-line with
the objectives of financial
reporting and rules on non-
financial reporting, the Climate
Change Reporting Framework
offers a leading example of how
to apply the principles of
integrated reporting with respect
to reporting on climate change.
27. Whilst in some cases “Other upstream” or “Otherdownstream” are legitimate selections, in most circumstancesthe data contained in these categories should be allocated toone of the named categories. Reporting companies areencouraged to use these specific categories where appropriateas not doing so and using “Other” greatly affects data qualityand therefore the usefulness of the data for investors. Anattempt to subjectively attribute categories where companieshave selected “Other” has not been undertaken. In addition,only those categories for which emissions figures have beenprovided have been included.28. Only companies reporting Scope 3 emissions using theGreenhouse Gas Protocol Scope 3 Standard named categorieshave been included.
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 37
38
Table of emissions, scores and sector information by company
Appendix
Company name Co
un
try
Se
cto
ra
20
12
Sc
ore
c
20
12
re
sp
on
se
sta
tus
b
20
11
re
sp
on
se
sta
tus
b
To
tal S
co
pe
1 +
Sc
op
e 2
em
issio
ns
Sc
op
e 1
Sc
op
e 2
Nu
mb
er
of
Sc
op
e 3
ca
teg
ori
es r
ep
ort
ed
d
Ve
rifi
ca
tio
n/A
ssu
ran
ce
sta
tus
e
Ta
rge
t(s)
rep
ort
ed
f
Abengoa Spain IND 96 A AQ AQ 3,597,229 2,953,020 644,209 4 VAA S1, S2, S3 Abs, IntAbertis Infraestructuras Spain IND 84 B AQ AQ 149,967 34,331 115,636 1 VAA S1, S2Acciona Spain IND 96 A AQ AQ 857,215 666,977 190,238 6 VAA S1, S2, S3 Abs, IntAcciones Unipapel Spain IND NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRAcerinox Spain MAT 83 B AQ AQ(NP) 380,215 167,502 212,713* 2 "VAR S1, S2, Abs, Int
VAF S3"ACS Actividades de Spain IND 41 AQ(NP) AQ NP NP NP NP NP NPConstrucción y Serviciosg
Adolfo Domínguez Spain CD NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRAlmirall Spain HC NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRAltri Portugal MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRAmadeus IT Holdingg Spain IT 60 C AQ(NP) AQ(NP) NP NP NP NP NP NPAmper Spain TCOM NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRAntena 3 Televisión Spain CD NP AQ(NP) DP NP NP NP NP NP NPArcelor Mittal Luxembourg MAT 85 C AQ AQ 179,930,000 162,028,000 17,902,000* 1 VAA S1, S2, S3 IntAzkoyen Spain CD NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRBanca Cívica Spain FIN DP DP — DP DP DP DP DP DPBanco BPI Portugal FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRBanco Comercial Portugal FIN 83 C AQ AQ 73,384 17,629 55,755 2 VAA S1, S2, S3PortuguêsBanco de Valencia Spain FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRBanco Espírito Santo Portugal FIN 94 A- AQ AQ 28,028 7,378 20,650 3* VAA S1, S2, S3 IntBanco Pastor Spain FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRBanco Popular Español Spain FIN 41 AQ AQ 7,601 845 6,756 2 VAR S1, S2, S3Banco Sabadell Spain FIN 50 D AQ AQ 20,598 379 20,219* 1 AbsBanco Santander Spain FIN 79 C AQ AQ 414,846 30,272 384,574 2 VAR S1, S2, S3 IntBanif Portugal FIN 71 D AQ AQ 9,878 3,690 6,188 1Bankia Spain FIN DP DP — DP DP DP DP DP DPBankinter Spain FIN 70 B AQ AQ 6,571 243 6,328 3* VAA S1, S2, S3 AbsBarón de Ley Spain CS NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRBBVA Spain FIN 80 C AQ AQ 345,523 9,964 335,559 1 VAR S1, S2, S3 IntBolsas y Mercados Spain FIN NP AQ(NP) AQ(NP) NP NP NP NP NP NPEspañolesBrisa- Auto-Estradas Portugal IND 67 C AQ AQ 16,367 7,511 8,856 1 VAA S1, S2 Absde PortugalCaixa Geral de Portugal FIN 87 A AQ AQ 46,478 4,426 42,052* 2 VAA S1, S2, S3 IntDepósitosh
CaixaBank Spain FIN 85 B AQ AQ 3,131 1,821 1,310 4* VAA S1, S2, S3 AbsCampofrío Alimentacion Spain CS NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRCementos Portland Spain MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRValderrivasCIE Automotive Spain CD 27 AQ AQ 57,120 57,120 AbsCimpor Portugal MAT DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DPCodere Spain CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRCofina Portugal CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRConstrucciones y Auxiliar Spain IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRde FerrocarrilesCorporación Financiera Spain FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRAlbaCorticeira Amorim Portugal MAT DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DPDia Spain CS NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRDinamia Capital Privado Spain FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRDuro Felguera Spain IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NREbro Foods Spain CS NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NREDP - Energias Portugal UTIL 96 B AQ AQ 18,237,580 16,957,182 1,280,398 5 VAA S1, S2, S3 Abs, Intde Portugal"EDP Renováveis Portugal UTIL AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA)(See EDP)"Enagás Spain UTIL 85 B AQ AQ 292,613 239,861 52,752 2 "VAA S1, S2, Abs, Int
VAR S3"Endesa Spain UTIL 92 C AQ AQ 51,046,755 50,694,969 351,786 2* VAA S1 Int
Informe 2012 04/12/12 10:54 Página 38
Company name Co
un
try
Se
cto
ra
20
12
Sc
ore
c
20
12
re
sp
on
se
sta
tus
b
20
11
re
sp
on
se
sta
tus
b
To
tal S
co
pe
1 +
Sc
op
e 2
em
issio
ns
Sc
op
e 1
Sc
op
e 2
Nu
mb
er
of
Sc
op
e 3
ca
teg
ori
es r
ep
ort
ed
d
Ve
rifi
ca
tio
n/A
ssu
ran
ce
sta
tus
e
Ta
rge
t(s)
rep
ort
ed
f
39
Ercros Spain MAT 66 D AQ NR 788,603 339,910 448,693 VAR S1, S2"Espirito Santo Financial Luxembourg FIN AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA)Group (See Banco Espírito Santo)"Estoril Sol Portugal CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NREuropac Spain MAT NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRFaes Farma Spain HC NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRFerrovial Spain IND 90 A AQ AQ 1,070,951 638,019 432,932 4* VAA S1, S2, S3 Abs, IntFersa Energias Spain IND DP DP NR DP DP DP DP DP DPRenovablesFibras Sinteticas Portugal MAT NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRde PortugalFluidra Spain CD DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DPFomento de Spain IND NP AQ(NP) AQ(NP) NP NP NP NP NP NPConstrucciones y ContratasGalp Energia Portugal EGY 93 B AQ AQ(NP) 3,392,027 3,199,557 192,470 3 VAA S1, S2, S3 IntGamesa Corporación Spain IND 46 AQ AQ 57,583 15,991 41,592 VAR S1, S2 IntTecnológicaGas Natural Spain UTIL 99 A AQ AQ 24,131,361 23,177,862 953,498* 8 VAA S1, S2, S3 Abs, IntGrifols Spain HC 88 C AQ AQ 197,773 88,159 109,614 2 "VAA S1, Abs
VAR S2, S3"Grupo Catalana Spain FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NROccidenteGrupo Empresarial Ence Spain MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRGrupo Ezentis Spain IT NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRGrupo Soares da Costa Portugal IND NR NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NRIberdrola Spain UTIL 95 A AQ AQ 41,381,862 36,193,156 5,188,706 4 VAA S1, S2, S3 IntIbersol Portugal CD DP DP NR DP DP DP DP DP DPImpresa Portugal CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRInapa Portugal MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRInditex Spain CD 81 B AQ AQ 313,332 21,919 291,413 1 VAA S1, S2, S3 IntIndra Spain IT 64 D AQ AQ 34,004 6,971 27,033 1 "VAA S1, S2, Int
VAR S3"International Consolidated Spain IND 75 C AQ AQ 22,699,731 22,578,170 121,561 2 VAA S1, S2, S3 Abs, IntAirlines GroupJazztel Spain IT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRJerónimo Martins Portugal CS 54 E AQ AQ 1,006,606 199,133 807,473 4La Seda de Barcelona Spain MAT NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRLaboratorios Spain HC DP DP NR DP DP DP DP DP DPFarmaceuticos RoviMapfre Spain FIN 83 C AQ AQ 31,945 3,054 28,891 2 "VAA S1, S2, Abs
VAR S3"Martifer Portugal IND NR NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NRMedia Capital Portugal CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRMediaset Espana Spain CD NP AQ(NP) AQ NP NP NP NP NP NPComunicaciónMeliá Hotels International Spain CD 85 C AQ AQ 189,626 47,348 142,278 4 VAA S1, S2, S3 IntMiquel y Costas Spain MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRMota-Engil Portugal IND DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DPNatra Spain HC NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRNatraceutical Spain HC NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRNH Hoteles Spain CD 87 B AQ AQ 149,407 65,010 84,397 2 VAA S1, S2, S3 Abs, IntNovabase Portugal IT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRObrascon Huarte Lain Spain IND 94 B AQ AQ 416,586 342,938 73,648 2 VAA S1, S2, S3 Abs, Int(OHL)Pescanova Spain CS NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRPortucel Empresa Portugal MAT DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DPProdutoraPortugal Telecom Portugal TCOM 82 C AQ AQ 168,254 16,851 151,403 1 VAA S1, S2, S3 AbsPrisa Spain CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRProsegur Spain IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 39
Company name Co
un
try
Se
cto
ra
20
12
Sc
ore
c
20
12
re
sp
on
se
sta
tus
b
20
11
re
sp
on
se
sta
tus
b
To
tal S
co
pe
1 +
Sc
op
e 2
em
issio
ns
Sc
op
e 1
Sc
op
e 2
Nu
mb
er
of
Sc
op
e 3
ca
teg
ori
es r
ep
ort
ed
d
Ve
rifi
ca
tio
n/A
ssu
ran
ce
sta
tus
e
Ta
rge
t(s)
rep
ort
ed
f
40
Quabit Inmobiliaria Spain FIN NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRR.E.E. Spain UTIL 65 C AQ AQ 873,120 68,325 804,795 2* Abs, IntRealia Business Spain FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRReditus Portugal IT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRREN - Redes Energéticas Portugal UTIL 81 C AQ AQ 181,481 17,288 164,193 1 VAA S1, S2, S3 AbsNacionaisRepsol YPF Spain EGY 98 A- AQ AQ 24,696,516 23,138,229 1,558,287 5 VAA S1, S2, S3 AbsSacyr Vallehermoso Spain IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRSAG GEST Portugal CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRSemapa Portugal IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRService Point Solutions Spain IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRSniace Spain MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRSolaria Energía y Spain IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRMedio AmbienteSonae Portugal CS 93 B AQ AQ 304,828 62,065 242,763 3* VAA S1, S2, S3 IntSonae Capital Portugal FIN DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DPSonae Indústria Portugal IND DP DP NR DP DP DP DP DP DPSonaecom Portugal TCOM 83 B AQ AQ 34,358 4,199 30,159 3* VAA S1, S2, S3Sumol Compal Portugal CS DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DPTécnicas Reunidas Spain EGY DP DP NR DP DP DP DP DP DPTeixeira Duarte Portugal IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRTelefónica Spain TCOM 92 B AQ AQ 1,727,044 111,516 1,615,528 3 VAA S1, S2, S3 IntToyota Caetano Portugal CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRTubacex Spain MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRTubos Reunidos Spain MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRVértice 360 Spain CD NR NR — NR NR NR NR NR NRViscofán Spain CS NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRVista Alegre Atlantis Portugal CS NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRVueling Spain IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRZardoya Otis Spain IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRZeltia Spain HC NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NRZON Multimédia Portugal TCOM NP AQ(NP) AQ(NP) NP NP NP NP NP NP
KEY TO APPENDIX
a CD Consumer DiscretionaryCS Consumer StaplesEGY EnergyFIN FinancialsHC Health CareIND IndustrialsIT Information TechnologyMAT MaterialsTCOM TelecommunicationsUTIL Utilities
b AQ Answered QuestionnaireDP Declined to ParticipateNR Not RespondedNP Non PublicSA See Another
c The 2012 score is comprised of the disclosure score number and perfor-mance score letter. Only companies that have scored more than 50 fortheir disclosure score are given a performance score. Companies that arein the CDLI or CPLI have the relevant part of the score (disclosure or per-formance) in bold text. Companies that have not responded have the rele-vant response status code in this column.
d Only Scope 3 categories reported using the Greenhouse Gas ProtocolScope 3 named categories (as provided in the Online Response System)are included when determining the number of categories reported. Compa-nies that have reported one or more additional categories of “Other ups-tream” and/or “Other downstream” are indicated with an asterisk (*). Wherecompanies have not provided emissions data or where they have not re-ported a named Scope 3 category according to the GHG Protocol Scope 3standard, this column is blank.
e VAR: Verification/Assurance reported; companies have reported that theyhave verification complete or underway with last year’s statement availablebut the verification statement provided has not been awarded the fullpoints available, or they have not been scored and therefore their verifica-tion statement has not been assessed.VAF: Verification/Assurance reported as underway, first year; companieshave reported that the have verification underway but that it is the first yearthey have undertaken verification. In this case there is no verification state-ment available for assessment.VAA: Verification/Assurance approved; companies have reported that theyhave verification complete or underway with last years certificate availableand they have been awarded the full points available for their statement.S1: Scope 1; verification/assurance applies to Scope 1 emissions.S2: Scope 2; verification/assurance applies to Scope 2 emissions.S3: Scope 3; verification/assurance applies to Scope 3 emissions.
f Abs Absolute targetInt Intensity target
g Iberian companies disclosing in 2012 that also belong to other CDP sam-ples such as Euro 300 and Global 500 cannot have non public scores evenif their response is non public. Other companies that respond to CDP re-quest as non public and that because of their market capitalization are onlyincluded in the Italian sample are allowed to have non public scores. Thiswill change for 2013, when all scores will be published, independently fromthe fact that the company response will be public or non.
h As in 2011, we have included Caixa Geral de Depositos in the analysis.This company is not a public listed company, but it has answered CDPquestionnaire for four consecutive years.
Informe 2012 19/11/12 13:02 Página 40
GHG emissions from this publication have been offset through CeroCO2 projects of emissions reduction and absorption. www.ceroco2.org
Portada 2012 19/11/12 04:37 Página 3
The sole responsibility lies with the author and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
Co-funded by the LIFE+ programme of theEuropean Unioin
CDP contacts
Diana GuzmanDirector, Southern EuropeTel: +39 02 3051 6041 [email protected]
Katharina LütkehermöllerProject Officer, Southern EuropeTel: +39 02 3051 [email protected]
Steven TebbeManaging Director, CDP Europe
CDP Southern EuropeVia Ampère 61/a20131 MilanItaly
Carbon Disclosure Project EuropeReinhardtstr. 1410117 BerlinGermany
Carbon Disclosure Project gGmbH;Executive Officers: Steven Tebbe;Sue Howells; Roy Wilson; RegisteredCharity no. HRB119156 B; local courtof Charlottenburg, Germany
ECODES contacts
Víctor Viñ[email protected]
Aurelio GarcíaHead of [email protected]
Marta [email protected]
Charles [email protected]
Aranzazu [email protected]
Carlos Martí[email protected]
Michele [email protected]
[email protected] San Bruno, 950001 ZaragozaEspañaTel: +34 976 298 282Fax: +34 976 203 092
EURONATURA contacts
Hugo CostaExecutive [email protected]
André [email protected]
[email protected] das Pimenteiras 6A1600 - 576 LisboaPortugal
PwC contacts
María Luz CastillaDirector, Sustainability and [email protected]
Pablo [email protected]
Antonio [email protected]
Alberto [email protected]
Marga de Roselló[email protected]
Andy [email protected]
María Gómez [email protected]
PwC Spainwww.pwc.es/sostenibilidadTel: 902 021 111Tel: + 34 915 684 400
Torre PwCPaseo de la Castellano, 259 BMadrid 28046
Avenida Diagonal, 640Barcelona 08012
Claudia [email protected]
Carlos de Llera [email protected]
PwC Portugalwww.pwc.com/ptTel: +351 213 599 000Palácio SottomayorRua Sousa Martins 1-2Lisbon 1069-316
Portugal partner:
Spanish Sponsor:
Spanish Collaborators:
Portuguese Sponsors:
Portada 2012 04/12/12 13:49 Página 6