DAILY NEWS Oct 15, 2012 4:59 PM - 1 comment

P&G shareholders vote on EPR proposal

TEXT SIZE bigger text smaller text
By: SWR Staff
October 15, 2012 2012-10-15

More than 94 per cent of Procter & Gamble shareholders voted against an extended producer responsibility resolution (EPR) at its annual shareholder meeting on October 9, 2012 in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Eco-action group As You Sow proposed the shareholder resolution, which was backed by The Granary Foundation, owner of at least $2,000 in value of common stock of the company. As You Sow asked the company to be more proactive on developing EPR for future packaging policies.

At the meeting, the shareholders responded as follows:

 “…The majority (greater than 70%) of the greenhouse gas emissions related to our products’ lifecycles comes from the consumer use phase. Raw materials and manufacturing represent 16%, while packaging only represents less than 2%. As a result of this analysis, we have focused our greenhouse gas efforts where we can provide the greatest benefits—reducing our own emissions and enabling consumers to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions through development of innovative products and education.”

As You Sow noted that in 2010 alone, Americans threw away $11.4 billion in recyclable materials, or 55 million tonnes of product packaging, including aluminum, glass, paper, plastic, and steel. Just 12 per cent of plastic, the group says, is reclaimed annually.

While As You Sow has engaged with Nestlé Waters, Coca-Cola, Colgate-Palmolive, General Mills, Kraft Foods, Safeway, Target, Kroger, Unilever, Walmart and Whole Foods, none have adopted EPR policies. However, Nestlé Waters and Coca-Cola have shown support.

 The P&G resolution was co-filed by by Green Century Equity Fund and Trillium Asset Management. Walden Asset Management is also a partner in our ongoing dialogue with the company.



Horizontal ruler

Reader Comments

Most recent firstOldest first

DrRossh

This is a shame that people are still short sighted to not look beyond their own selves. No matter how clouded the EPR issue can be spun by different sides, we all have to realise this is going to become necessary if we want to not degrade the quality of our life styles. Sacrificing our childens quality of life for our own right now is not the best choice we can make. What would they say given the chance to answer the question?

Posted October 17, 2012 04:12 AM


FirstPrevNextLast
Horizontal Ruler

Post A Comment

Disclaimer
Note: By submitting your comments you acknowledge that Solid Waste & Recycling has the right to reproduce, broadcast and publicize those comments or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever. Please note that due to the volume of e-mails we receive, not all comments will be published and those that are published will not be edited. However, all will be carefully read, considered and appreciated.

Your Name (this will appear with your post) *

Email Address (will not be published) *

Comments *



* mandatory fields