The Citistates Group presents

Thank you for reading This website is no longer being updated, as of October 2013. We invite you to visit our new site at

Politics Aside: Climate Science Makes Business Sense

Neal Peirce / Sep 24 2011

For Release Sunday, September 25, 2011
© 2011 Washington Post Writers Group

Neal PeirceSeveral Republican presidential candidates — Texas Gov. Rick Perry at the fore — are dismissing climate change as a concoction of misguided or self-serving scientists.

But a growing number of Main Street and regional business leaders, types often thought of as Republican leaning, are taking the issue ever-more seriously, if not to save the world, at least to serve their bottom lines.

Each year the American Chamber of Commerce Executives, Partners for Livable Communities and the Institute for Sustainable Development give out “Green Plus” awards to local chambers and communities that have launched exemplary, community-wide efforts to “go green” with varieties of carbon-saving initiatives. Winners for 2011 recently announced include Cleveland, Chattanooga (Tenn.) Savannah (Ga.), North Myrtle Beach (S.C.) and Gatlinburg (Tenn.).

Local efforts have been getting hands-on carbon counseling for several years from ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA. ICLEI helped Chicago, in an effort inaugurated under former Mayor Richard M. Daley, develop its pace-setting “Green Office Scorecard” that measures climate project progress of firms in the inner-city Loop area. With friendly competition among businesses, major advances have been registered in reduced electricity demand, carbon emissions averted, reduction of water use, and increased transit usage leading to cars off Chicago’s streets.

More recently formed, the Climate Prosperity Project, headquartered in Washington, focuses on business-related carbon-saving initiatives for entire metropolitan regions.

ICLEI’s latest star performer is Westchester County, N.Y., where a multi-faceted climate program begun under a Democratic county administrator is continuing under his Republican successor. Modeled in part on the Chicago effort, Westchester’s endeavor features a “Green Business Scoreboard” which lets businesses check how far they’ve come, and how they compare to fellow firms, in carbon-saving steps they’ve taken in conserving electricity and fuel, water consumption, waste recycling and green procurement.

Westchester companies are measuring, for example, energy they save through expanded employee carpooling, telecommuting, and videoconferencing as a substitute for cars or flying. Firms with big land holdings are taking measures to install green roofs and install permeable pavements, along with planting more trees. The county itself is saving electric energy valued at $100,000 a year by installing software that automatically cuts off its 5,000 government computers at 7 p.m. each evening, then repowers them in the morning.

In Westchester, says county official Scott Ferkvist, there’s “no real debate on climate — we start from the overwhelming climate consensus and scientific truth.” But even if climate change “isn’t real,” he adds, businesses are seeing they can save substantial funds by reducing waste, cutting energy use, preventing flooding.

“There’s lots of enthusiasm and positive energy,” he adds, as 100 to 150 people show up for each of the meetings discussing the Green Scorecard policies and comparing companies’ scores.

St. Louis’ program, operated by the Regional Chamber and Growth Association (RCGA) — also uses a variation of the Chicago scorecard to gauge firms’ climate-saving progress. Except that the focus is expansive: an entire five-county area. And staffing of the St. Louis effort, notes Eric Schneider of RCGA, is actually contracted out to the “green team” of the EarthWays Center, a spirited woman-led effort that’s a division of the Missouri Botanical Garden.

That crossing of boundaries, its mix of public and private players in search of cost savings and climate progress, has become the hallmark of the business-led energy efficiency and carbon reduction front, from Austin to Charleston, San Diego to Houston to Arlington County, Va.

And multiplying such efforts across the country, argues Andre Pettigrew, executive director of the Climate Prosperity Project, can have dramatic impact in creating new business-to-business partnerships and innovations, in generating stronger market demand for the clean economy goods and services that will be key to America’s future economic well-being.

Part of the benefit can be in stimulating overall U.S. demand for — and production of — clean economy goods and services, an area in which the country now lags Europe, China and other growing economies.

The private sector role is key, it’s suggested, because government resources — local, state or federal — are likely to be exceedingly short for several years to come. What’s more, as businesses learn how climate-related moves cuts costs, more innovations and strategic partnerships are all but sure to emerge.

“This is a business/economic development-led strategy as opposed to environmental public strategy,” Pettigrew argues.

So what about the argument over climate change science? It can, in part, be ignored, Pettigrew argues:

“When you get out into the real business world, you have to ask– ‘Do you want to mitigate your risks? Do you want to achieve real economies? Do you want to expand your markets?’ That’s the point. And it won’t change, whether the science of climate change is 20, or 50 — or zero — percent wrong.”

Neal Peirce’s e-mail is

For reprints of Neal Peirce’s column, please contact Washington Post Permissions, c/o PARS International Corp.,, fax 212-221-9195. For newspaper syndication sales, Washington Post Writers Group, 202-334-5375,


  1. Rodger Gamblin
    Posted September 24, 2011 at 2:24 pm | Permalink


    As a scientist who has studied the matter in some detail, I can say with some authority that man-made global warming is highly unlikely. Also your comments regarding the saving energy by an individual implies he or she believes in man made global warming is also highly improbable. Recently, when a group of over 100 physicists petitioned the American Physical Society to disclaim the position that man’s actions caused global warming, and that petition got some publicity, over 1000 other serious scientists all over the world immediately asked to sign the petition.

    I do not mean to join in the concept that matters of science be determined by group consensus. It just doesn”t work that way, but your being aware that the issue is not factually supported, may help you consider further study on the matter.

    Yours sincerely,
    Rodger L Gamblin

  2. Everett Peirce
    Posted September 24, 2011 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    Mr. Pettigrew is right. So perhaps warming is not as serious as some would argue. What’s to be lost in planning for the worst scenario? Nothing lost if we get the best and plenty wrong in not planning for the worst and getting it!

  3. Linda Rimer
    Posted September 24, 2011 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

    So glad you are embracing climate change….finally.
    Linda Rimer

  4. Neal Peirce
    Posted September 24, 2011 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    This column is not the place to get into a full-bore discussion on whether climate change is real or not. It’s established that huge majorities of world scientists take the threat very seriously. I will also go along with a couple of eminent global authorities– .

    Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations: “In the decades to come, climate change may make hundreds of millions of urban residents — and in particular the poorest and most marginalized — increasingly vulnerable to floods, landslides, external weather events and other natural disasters.”

    Juan Clos, former Mayor of Barcelona and now U.N. Undersecretary-General of UN-Habitat: “The effects of urbanization and climate change are converging in dangerous ways that that threaten the world’s environmental, economic and social stability.”

  5. Neal Peirce
    Posted September 24, 2011 at 8:51 pm | Permalink

    Regarding Linda Rimer’s comment above. She is a fervent believer in action to curb climate change, which I respect. Regarding the “finally” in her comment, I’d refer her to such past columns as the one I prepared before the Copenhagen summit – as well as my coverage of the C40 conference in São Paulo last spring.