[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Financial Measuring pollution prevention performances
Those reporting requirements relate to known environmental liabilities.
Pollution does not require reporting if it is allowed under a permit or does
not create a known liability. For example haz waste sent to an incinerator
does not create a known liability, and therefore does not have to be
reported as part of the financial liability of the corporation. Even
contribution to a superfund site does not have to be reported if the
liability has not been quantified yet or is very uncertain.
Old superfund liabilities have no direct correlation to current pollution
generating activities and no direct effect on current pollution prevention
efforts. I have personally met corp execs whose companies were involved in
superfund sites but who also thought that pollution prevention was a waste
of corporate effort.
Ralph E. Cooper, Ph.D., J.D.
San Antonio, TX 78231
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Sutherland" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 9:05 AM
Subject: Financial Measuring pollution prevention performances
> Don't all publicly traded corporations on the US stock exchange have to
> provide financial transparency of corporate depreciation and liability
> investments (ie. pollution prevention infrastructure expenditure)to
> Several multinationals are incorporating the same pollution prevention
> indicators and metrics for their environmental performance reporting to
> see: http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jan2000/2000L-01-19-07.html
> ie.Baxter International, Monsanto, and Ford provide financial pollution
> prevention environmental performance reports with global reporting
> initiative (http://www.globalreporting.org ) metrics to shareholders with
> their annual financial reports.
> Donald Sutherland