[Corp. Watch] Chronicles of greenwashing: BP just a lot of B.S.

[Corporation Watch]

BP Brings 'Green Era' to a Close

  By Shanta Barley

(BBC, May 11) -- Environmental groups have accused British Petroleum  
(BP) of dropping its pledge to be green and replacing it with a  
commitment to be "responsible".
	The oil giant was widely recognized as the first oil company to both  
acknowledge and tackle climate change. Its in-house carbon trading  
scheme -- built with a little help from an unlikely ally, the U.S.- 
based non-profit organization the Environmental Defense Fund -- was  
among the first of its kind.

	However, a change of chief executive has led to an apparent change of  
policy. In April, new CEO Tony Hayward announced that safety was the  
company's "number one priority". Some environmental groups saw this as  
an attempt to move away from "green" as a brand value, which was  
introduced by Hayward's predecessor, Lord Browne.

	Greenpeace said the oil giant had a lot to gain by dropping its  
promise to be green. Charlie Kronick, Greenpeace's senior climate  
change adviser, suggested that the pledge was the only thing holding  
it back from making further cuts to its green credentials.

	"Now that BP is blissfully released from its pledge to invest in  
clean energy, it has a carte blanche to sell off its unprofitable  
green energy arm," he told the BBC. "It can get back to doing what it  
does best: being a 100% fossil fuels train wreck," Kronick added.  
"This is classic smoke and mirrors."

	BP denies that it is back-tracking on its commitments to climate  
change. "The change represents an evolution and expansion of green as  
a brand value, rather than a replacement," said spokesman David  
Nicholas.

	"The new brand value, 'Responsible', encompasses BP's original  
aspirations towards the environment, in addition to other key areas  
such as safety and social welfare," he explained. "Our aspirations  
remain absolutely unchanged: no accidents, no harm to people and no  
damage to the environment."

'Still committed'

	Tom Woollard, a director at environmental consultancy ERM, which  
counts BP as one of its clients, is inclined to agree. "I don't think  
BP has taken a step backwards on being green," he told the BBC. "The  
people I know who work at BP are still as committed as ever to  
upholding green values, despite the change."

	However, BP's low-key roll-out of the new brand values does mark the  
end of an era.

	Lord Browne's re-branding in 2000 promised that the company would  
move "Beyond Petroleum" by finding cleaner ways to generate energy,  
and listed "performance-driven, innovative, progressive and green" as  
its brand attributes.

	Britain's green energy sector flourished, as Lord Browne's shining  
for solar power went head-to-head with rival oil giant Shell's  
investment in wind projects. Both oil titans lavished huge quantities  
of money on slick green advertising campaigns.

	But Rita Clifton, chief executive of brand specialists Interbrand,  
said high-profile promotions could be a double-edged sword. "You can't  
promise in an advert[isement] what you aren't delivering on a day-to- 
day basis, and not expect a backlash," she told the BBC.

	And the backlash was fierce: Campaigners demanded to know what  
exactly was green about being responsible for a massive oil spill on  
Alaska's North Slope, investing in the extraction of oil from tar  
sands (described by campaigners as "global warming's greatest crime"),  
and spending less than 1.5% of its budget on solar power.

	BP's environmental credentials suffered a further setback in 2008  
when the company announced its intention of withdrawing financial  
support for a scheme that monitored mangroves next to a liquefied  
natural gas (LNG) plant it was constructing in Papua, New Guinea.

	"Withdrawal of BP's support for the monitoring process goes against  
all the green rhetoric that is so prominent in BP's public relations  
and marketing exercises," campaigners at Tapol, Down to Earth, and a  
number of other human rights organizations wrote in a letter to BP CEO  
Tony Hayward.

	Paul Barber, a Tapol spokesperson, says that BP has also broken its  
promise to re-inject the carbon dioxide which will escape into the  
atmosphere from the gas field.

	"About 12% of the gas field is carbon dioxide, which will now be  
vented directly into the atmosphere because BP has backtracked on its  
promise to institute carbon capture and storage at the Tangguh gas  
field," Barber told BBC.

Shifting sands

	BP's tone changed in 2008 when Tony Hayward, who replaced Lord Browne  
in 2007, intimated that he was looking to "monetize BP's alternative  
energy business". And BP recently pulled clean out of Britain's green  
energy sector, cutting investment in renewable energy by 30%, and  
cutting its solar power workforce by a quarter.

	Time for a new look then? And if so, what?

	BP has rebranded itself as "responsible" in order to regain the trust  
it lost following the 2005 Texas City explosion, which killed 15  
people and injured more than 170 others. The incident was described as  
"one of the worst industrial accidents in the history of the U.S." by  
ERM's Tom Woollard.

	It led to a record fine of more than $21 million by the U.S.  
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. It also resulted to BP  
picking up the nickname "Big Problems", and the episode "seriously  
shook BP's bond of trust with investors", says Rita Clifton.

	Tony Hayward has worked hard to regain the public's trust by  
improving the safety of BP's operations. In April, he announced that  
safety was the firm's "number one priority".

	"A new brand value is BP's way of saying that safety is now a top  
priority," Woollard explained. "It's a promise to potential partners  
that another Texas City is not on the cards".

	It would be easy to jeer at BP for casting off what many have always  
considered to be a half-heartedly green mantle. But is it any wonder  
that BP is reverting to its old habits, given the skepticism with  
which campaigners greet the green shoots of green thinking in the  
senior management of oil companies?

	When confronted with the prospect of sneering green groups, it could  
well be that any oil company toying with the idea of experimenting  
with green initiatives -- beyond the near-term interests of their  
shareholders -- will think twice.

	And anyway, as Lord Browne outlined in a recent speech at Cardiff  
University, perhaps saving the world should not be left to the oil  
companies. If the world could not incentivize green behaviors using  
good ol' capitalism, Lord Browne noted, it has to be accomplished via  
legislation, if it can be done at all.