marketing potential
There are many similarities between the Carbon Trust Standard
and the ISO 9000 standards. CTS is a voluntary scheme which will
reward good practice and tell stakeholders and customers that
an organisation awarded the Standard is doing the right thing.
the short term as few if any would have been
‘badge of honour’, as well as saving them
pursuing such a strategy to the required level
money through lower energy consumption.
of detail for that length of time.
But organisations forced to participate in
This hurdle has been recognised, however.
the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) by
Where an organisation’s electricity and fuel
reason of their electricity consumption, will
spend is under £50,000, the criteria for quali-
be viewing the new standard in a very differ-
fying are significantly reduced.
ent light. Qualifying for the CTS will make a
Morrison again: “The qualifying period over
significant financial difference to those com-
which data must have been collected is re-
panies. The Carbon Trust Standard will have a
duced to one year, for example, and we would
bearing on those organisations’ positioning in
not be looking for a carbon governance com-
the complex ‘league table’ created under the
mittee within the organisation.
Commitment’s rules.
“There has to be evidence that carbon re-
Harry Morrison explained what the impact of
duction is high on that body’s agenda and that
CTS would be: “The Standard is one of two early
there is a culture which enables and promotes
action measures which lower the cost of par-
its implementation.”
ticipation in the CRC – the other is the use of
Below: Ulster Carpets' factory at UK businesses of all sizes use the ISO 9000
advanced metering technology for electricity.
Craigavon, Northern Ireland, one Standard in their adverts, on their website and
In the first year of the CRC being operational,
of the private sector CTS holders. in correspondence. Many public sector organi-
participants will be awarded points towards their
Since starting to work with the sations treat that standard as a pre-requisite
league position. In that first year, the CTS and
Carbon Trust in 2001, the for securing contracts. How far does the Car-
smart metering will each account for 50% of the
company has reduced its carbon bon Trust expect that the CTS will play a simi-
points that establish league table position.
footprint by 44%. lar role? “There are many similarities. It is a
voluntary scheme which will reward good
Opposite: Abbey Corrugated practice and tell stakeholders and customers
Early adoption an advantage
invested in a condensate return that an organisation which has been awarded
There are financial incentives for a CRC par-
system for its boiler plant to the Standard is doing the right thing.”
ticipant to secure CTS status at the earliest
reduce gas requirements. This
opportunity. While the CRC is discussed in
combined with other improve-
Saving CTS holders money
other features in this edition, it is sufficient to
ments has helped to reduce the
note that participants will have to purchase
company's carbon footprint by For the typical UK business, holding the Car-
their carbon requirements from the scheme’s
22% over the last 6 years. bon Trust Standard should prove a valuable
Administrator.
For the first three years of live operation,
the rate per tonne is set at £12, with subse-
quent pricing set by auction of a controlled
reduction in the total carbon ‘pot’.
CRC participants finishing in the upper half
of the table will be awarded a bonus in addi-
tion to their £12 outlay; those beneath the mid
point will receive less back out of the scheme
than their outlay costs. The bonus at the top of
the table is 10% in year 1 and 20% in year 2:
there are corresponding penalties at the op-
posite end of the table. And in between the
two extremes, the bonus/penalty percentage
is graduated proportionately.
It is clearly worth the effort and cost involved
for a CRC participant to qualify for the Carbon
20
The Informed Executive
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98