improving transparency as the foundation for carbon performance · pdf file ·...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Improving transparency as the foundation for carbon performance
CDP Canada 200 Climate Change Report 2012 On behalf of 655 investors
with assets of US$ 78 trillion
Report written for Carbon Disclosure Project by:
Carbon Disclosure Project
6 W 48th Street, 10th FloorNew York, NY 10036
[email protected]+1 212 378 2086www.cdproject.net
2
CDP Investor Members 2012
Members
CDP works with investors globally to advance the investment opportunities and reduce the risks posed by climate change. It does this by asking almost 6,000 of the world’s largest companies to report on their climate change strategies, GHG emissions and energy use in the standardized Investor CDP format. To learn more about CDP’s member offering and becoming a member, please contact us or visit the CDP Investor Member section at:www.cdproject.net/investormembers
ABRAPP
Aegon
AKBANK T.A.Ş.
Allianz Global Investors
Aviva Investors
AXA Group
Bank of America Merrill Lynch
Bendigo and Adelaide Bank
Blackrock
BP Investment Management
California Public Employees
Retirement System - CalPERS
California State Teachers
Retirement Fund - CalSTRS
Calvert Asset Management
Company
Catholic Super
CCLA
Daiwa Asset Management Co.
Ltd.
Generation Investment
Management
HSBC Holdings
KLP
Legg Mason
London Pension Fund Authority
Mongeral Aegon Seguros e
Previdência S/A
Morgan Stanley
National Australia Bank
NEI Investments
Neuberger Berman
Newton Investment
Management Ltd
Nordea Investment Management
Norges Bank Investment
Management
PFA Pension
Robeco
Rockefeller & Co.
SAM Group
Sampension KP Livsforsikring
A/S
Schroders
Scottish Widows Investment
Partnership
SEB
Sompo Japan Insurance Inc
Standard Chartered
TD Asset Management Inc. and
TDAM USA Inc.
The RBS Group
The Wellcome Trust
2 2012 SIGNATORY INVESTOR
BREAKDOWN
259 (39%) Asset Managers 220 (33%) Asset Owners143 (21%) Banks33 (5%) Insurance13 (2%) Other
1 CDP INVESTOR SIGNATORIES AND ASSETS
(US$ TRILLION) AGAINST TIME
• Investor CDP Signatories• Investor CDP Signatory Assets
39 4235 95 155 225 315 385 475 534 551 6554.5 10 21 31 41 57 55 64 71 78
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Ass
ets
(US
$ Tr
illio
ns)
Num
ber
of S
igna
torie
s
3
CDP Signatory Investors 2012
Signatories 655 fi nancial institutions withassets of US $78 trillion weresignatories to the CDP 2012information request datedFebruary 1st, 2012
Aberdeen Asset ManagersAberdeen Immobilien KAG mbHABRAPP - Associação Brasileira das Entidades Fechadas de Previdência ComplementarAchmea NVActive Earth Investment ManagementAcuity Investment ManagementAddenda Capital Inc.Advanced Investment PartnersAEGON N.V.AEGON-INDUSTRIAL Fund Management Co., LtdAFP IntegraAIG Asset ManagementAK Asset Management Inc.AKBANK T.A.Ş.Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo)Alberta Teachers Retirement FundAlcyone FinanceAllenbridgeEpic Investment Advisers LimitedAllianz Elementar Versicherungs-AGAllianz Global Investors Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHAllianz GroupAltira GroupAmalgamated BankAMP Capital InvestorsAmpegaGerling Investment GmbHAmundi AMANBIMA – Associação Brasileira das Entidades dos Mercados Financeiro e de CapitaisAntera Gestão de Recursos S.A.APGAQEX LLCAquila CapitalArisaig Partners Asia Pte LtdArma Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş.ASM Administradora de Recursos S.A.ASN BankAssicurazioni Generali SpaATI Asset ManagementATP GroupAustralia and New Zealand Banking Group LimitedAustralian Ethical InvestmentAustralianSuperAvaron Asset Management ASAviva InvestorsAviva plcAXA GroupBaillie Gifford & Co.BaltCapBANCA CÍVICA S.A.Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena GroupBanco Bradesco S/ABanco Comercial Português S.A.Banco de Credito del Peru BCPBanco de Galicia y Buenos Aires S.A.Banco do Brasil S/ABanco Espírito Santo, SABanco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social - BNDESBanco Popular EspañolBanco Sabadell, S.A.Banco SantanderBanesprev – Fundo Banespa de Seguridade SocialBanestoBank Handlowy w Warszawie S.A.Bank of America Merrill LynchBank of MontrealBank VontobelBankhaus Schelhammer & Schattera Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m.b.H.BANKIA S.A.BANKINTERBankInvestBanque DegroofBanque Libano-Francaise
BarclaysBasellandschaftliche KantonalbankBASF Sociedade de Previdência ComplementarBasler KantonalbankBâtirenteBaumann and Partners S.A.Bayern LBBayernInvest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHBBC Pension Trust LtdBBVABedfordshire Pension FundBeetle CapitalBEFIMMO SCABendigo & Adelaide Bank LimitedBentall KennedyBerenberg BankBerti InvestmentsBioFinance Administração de Recursos de Terceiros LtdaBlackRockBlom Bank SALBlumenthal FoundationBNP Paribas Investment PartnersBNY MellonBNY Mellon Service Kapitalanlage GesellschaftBoston Common Asset Management, LLCBP Investment Management LimitedBrasilprev Seguros e Previdência S/A.British Airways Pension Investment Management LimitedBritish Columbia Investment Management Corporation (bcIMC)BT Investment ManagementBusan BankCAAT Pension PlanCadiz Holdings LimitedCaisse de dépôt et placement du QuébecCaisse des DépôtsCaixa Benefi cente dos Empregados da Companhia Siderurgica Nacional - CBSCaixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Nordeste do Brasil (CAPEF)Caixa Econômica FederalCaixa Geral de DepositosCaixaBank, S.ACalifornia Public Employees’ Retirement SystemCalifornia State Teachers’ Retirement SystemCalifornia State TreasurerCalvert Investment Management, IncCanada Pension Plan Investment BoardCanadian Friends Service Committee (Quakers)Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC)Canadian Labour Congress Staff Pension FundCAPESESPCapital Innovations, LLCCARE SuperCarmignac GestionCatherine Donnelly FoundationCatholic SuperCBF Church of England FundsCBRECbus Superannuation FundCCLA Investment Management LtdCeleste Funds Management LimitedCentral Finance Board of the Methodist ChurchCeresCERES-Fundação de Seguridade SocialChange Investment ManagementChristian Brothers Investment ServicesChristian SuperChristopher Reynolds FoundationChurch Commissioners for EnglandChurch of England Pensions BoardCI Mutual Funds’ Signature Global AdvisorsCity Developments LimitedClean Yield Asset ManagementClearBridge AdvisorsClimate Change Capital Group LtdCM-CIC Asset ManagementColonial First State Global Asset ManagementComerica IncorporatedCOMGESTCommerzbank AGCommInsureCommonwealth Bank AustraliaCommonwealth Superannuation CorporationCompton FoundationConcordia VersicherungsgruppeConnecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds
Co-operative Financial Services (CFS)Credit SuisseDaegu BankDaesung Capital ManagementDaiwa Asset Management Co. Ltd.Daiwa Securities Group Inc.Dalton Nicol Reidde Pury Pictet Turrettini & Cie S.A.DekaBank Deutsche GirozentraleDelta Lloyd Asset ManagementDeutsche Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbHDeutsche Bank AGDevelopment Bank of Japan Inc.Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP)Dexia Asset ManagementDexus Property GroupDnB ASADomini Social Investments LLCDongbu InsuranceDWS Investment GmbHEarth Capital Partners LLPEast Sussex Pension FundEcclesiastical Investment ManagementEcofi Investissements - Groupe Credit CooperatifEdward W. Hazen FoundationEEA Group LtdElan Capital PartnersElement Investment ManagersELETRA - Fundação Celg de Seguros e PrevidênciaEnvironment Agency Active Pension fundEpworth Investment ManagementEquilibrium Capital Groupequinet Bank AGErik Penser FondkommissionErste Asset ManagementErste Group BankEssex Investment Management Company, LLCESSSuperEthos FoundationEtica SgrEureka Funds ManagementEurizon Capital SGREvangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Pension Plan for Clergy and Lay WorkersEvangelical Lutheran Foundation of Eastern CanadaEvli Bank PlcF&C InvestmentsFACEB – FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDÊNCIA DOS EMPREGADOS DA CEBFAELCE – Fundacao Coelce de Seguridade SocialFAPERS- Fundação Assistencial e Previdenciária da Extensão Rural do Rio Grande do SulFASERN - Fundação COSERN de Previdência ComplementarFédéris Gestion d’ActifsFIDURA Capital Consult GmbHFIM Asset Management LtdFIM ServicesFIPECq - Fundação de Previdência Complementar dos Empregados e Servidores da FINEP, do IPEA, do CNPqFIRA. - Banco de MexicoFirst Affi rmative Financial Network, LLCFirst Swedish National Pension Fund (AP1)Firstrand Group LimitedFive Oceans Asset ManagementFlorida State Board of Administration (SBA)FolketrygdfondetFolksamFondaction CSNFondation de LuxembourgForma Futura Invest AGFourth Swedish National Pension Fund, (AP4)FRANKFURT-TRUST Investment-Gesellschaft mbHFukoku Capital Management IncFUNCEF - Fundação dos Economiários FederaisFundação AMPLA de Seguridade Social - BrasiletrosFundação Atlântico de Seguridade SocialFundação Attilio Francisco Xavier FontanaFundação Banrisul de Seguridade SocialFundação BRDE de Previdência Complementar - ISBREFundação Chesf de Assistência e Seguridade Social – FachesfFundação Corsan - dos Funcionários da Companhia Riograndense de SaneamentoFundação de Assistência e Previdência Social do BNDES - FAPESFUNDAÇÃO ELETROBRÁS DE SEGURIDADE SOCIAL - ELETROS
4
Fundação Forluminas de Seguridade Social - FORLUZFundação Itaipu BR - de Previdência e Assistência SocialFUNDAÇÃO ITAUBANCOFundação Itaúsa IndustrialFundação Promon de Previdência SocialFundação Rede Ferroviária de Seguridade Social - ReferFUNDAÇÃO SANEPAR DE PREVIDÊNCIA E ASSISTÊNCIA SOCIAL - FUSANFundação Sistel de Seguridade Social (Sistel)Fundação Vale do Rio Doce de Seguridade Social - VALIAFUNDIÁGUA - FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDENCIA COMPLEMENTAR DA CAESBFuturegrowth Asset ManagementGaranti BankGEAP Fundação de Seguridade SocialGenerali Deutschland Holding AGGeneration Investment ManagementGenus Capital ManagementGjensidige Forsikring ASAGlobal Forestry Capital SARLGLS Gemeinschaftsbank eGGoldman Sachs Group Inc.GOOD GROWTH INSTITUT für globale Vermögensentwicklung mbHGovernance for OwnersGovernment Employees Pension Fund (“GEPF”), Republic of South AfricaGPT GroupGraubündner KantonalbankGreater Manchester Pension FundGreen Cay Asset ManagementGreen Century Capital ManagementGROUPAMA EMEKLILIK A.Ş.GROUPAMA SIGORTA A.Ş.Groupe Crédit CoopératifGroupe Investissement Responsable Inc.GROUPE OFI AMGrupo Financiero Banorte SAB de CVGrupo Santander BrasilGruppo Bancario Credito ValtellineseGuardians of New Zealand SuperannuationHanwha Asset Management CompanyHarbour Asset ManagementHarrington Investments, IncHauck & Aufhäuser Asset Management GmbHHazel Capital LLPHDFC Bank LtdHealthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP)Helaba Invest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHHenderson Global InvestorsHermes Fund ManagersHESTA SuperHIP InvestorHolden & PartnersHSBC Global Asset Management (Deutschland) GmbHHSBC Holdings plcHSBC INKA Internationale Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHHUMANISHyundai Marine & Fire Insurance. Co., Ltd.Hyundai Securities Co., Ltd.IBK SecuritiesIDBI Bank LtdIllinois State Board of InvestmentIlmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance CompanyImpax Asset ManagementIndusInd Bank LimitedIndustrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.Industrial Bank (A)Industrial Bank of KoreaIndustrial Development CorporationIndustry Funds ManagementInfrastructure Development Finance CompanyING Group N.V.Insight Investment Management (Global) LtdInstituto de Seguridade Social dos Correios e Telégrafos- PostalisInstituto Infraero de Seguridade Social - INFRAPREVInstituto Sebrae De Seguridade Social - SEBRAEPREVInsurance Australia GroupIntReal KAGInvestec Asset ManagementInvesting for Good CIC LtdIrish Life Investment ManagersItau Asset ManagementItaú Unibanco Holding S AJanus Capital Group Inc.Jarislowsky Fraser LimitedJOHNSON & JOHNSON SOCIEDADE PREVIDENCIARIAJPMorgan Chase & Co.
Jubitz Family FoundationJupiter Asset ManagementKaiser Ritter Partner (Schweiz) AGKB Kookmin BankKBC Asset Management NVKBC GroupKCPS Private Wealth ManagementKDB Asset Management Co., Ltd.KDB Daewoo SecuritiesKEPLER-FONDS Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m. b. H.KevaKfW BankengruppeKillik & Co LLPKiwi Income Property TrustKleinwort Benson InvestorsKlimaINVESTKLPKorea Investment Management Co., Ltd.Korea Technology Finance Corporation (KOTEC)KPA PensionKyrkans pensionskassaLa Banque Postale Asset ManagementLa Financiere ResponsableLampe Asset Management GmbHLandsorganisationen i SverigeLBBW - Landesbank Baden-WürttembergLBBW Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbHLD Lønmodtagernes DyrtidsfondLegal & General Investment ManagementLegg Mason Global Asset ManagementLGT Capital Management Ltd.LIG Insurance Co., LtdLight Green Advisors, LLCLiving Planet Fund Management Company S.A.Lloyds Banking GroupLocal Authority Pension Fund ForumLocal Government SuperLocal SuperLogos portföy Yönetimi A.Ş.London Pensions Fund AuthorityLothian Pension FundLUCRF SuperLupus alpha Asset Management GmbHMacquarie Group LimitedMagNet Magyar Közösségi Bank Zrt.MainFirst Bank AGMAMA Sustainable Incubation AGManMAPFREMaple-Brown AbbottMarc J. Lane Investment Management, Inc.Maryland State TreasurerMatrix Asset ManagementMATRIX GROUP LTDMcLean BuddenMEAG MUNICH ERGO AssetManagement GmbHMeeschaert Gestion PrivéeMeiji Yasuda Life Insurance CompanyMendesprev Sociedade PrevidenciáriaMerck Family FundMercy Investment Services, Inc.Mergence Investment ManagersMeritas Mutual FundsMetallRente GmbHMetrus – Instituto de Seguridade SocialMetzler Asset Management GmbhMFS Investment ManagementMidas International Asset ManagementMiller/Howard InvestmentsMirae Asset Global Investments Co. Ltd.Mirae Asset SecuritiesMirvac Group LtdMissionary Oblates of Mary ImmaculateMistra, Foundation for Strategic Environmental ResearchMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupMitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co.,LtdMizuho Financial Group, Inc.Mn ServicesMomentum Manager of Managers (Pty) LimitedMonega Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHMongeral Aegon Seguros e Previdência S/AMorgan StanleyMountain Cleantech AGMTAA Superannuation FundMutual Insurance Company Pension-FenniaNanuk Asset ManagementNatcan Investment ManagementNathan Cummings Foundation, TheNational Australia Bank
National Bank of CanadaNATIONAL BANK OF GREECE S.A.National Grid Electricity Group of the Electricity Supply Pension SchemeNational Grid UK Pension SchemeNational Pensions Reserve Fund of IrelandNational Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE)NATIXISNedbank LimitedNeedmor FundNEI InvestmentsNelson Capital Management, LLCNeuberger BermanNew Alternatives Fund Inc.New Amsterdam Partners LLCNew Mexico State TreasurerNew York City Employees Retirement SystemNew York City Teachers Retirement SystemNew York State Common Retirement Fund (NYSCRF)Newton Investment Management LimitedNGS SuperNH-CA Asset ManagementNikko Asset Management Co., Ltd.Nipponkoa Insurance Company, LtdNissay Asset Management CorporationNORD/LB Kapitalanlagegesellschaft AGNordea Investment ManagementNorfolk Pension FundNorges Bank Investment ManagementNorth Carolina Retirement SystemNorthern Ireland Local Government Offi cers’ Superannuation Committee (NILGOSC)NORTHERN STAR GROUPNorthern TrustNorthward Capital Pty LtdNykreditOddo & CieOECO Capital Lebensversicherung AGÖKOWORLDOld Mutual plcOMERS Administration CorporationOntario Teachers’ Pension PlanOP Fund Management Company LtdOppenheim & Co. LimitedOppenheim Fonds Trust GmbHOpplysningsvesenets fond (The Norwegian Church Endowment)OPTrustOregon State TreasurerOrion Energy SystemsOsmosis Investment ManagementParnassus InvestmentsPax World FundsPensioenfonds VervoerPension DenmarkPension Fund for Danish Lawyers and EconomistsPension Protection FundPensionsmyndighetenPerpetual InvestmentsPETROS - The Fundação Petrobras de Seguridade SocialPFA PensionPGGM VermogensbeheerPhillips, Hager & North Investment Management Ltd.PhiTrust Active InvestorsPictet Asset Management SAPioneer InvestmentsPIRAEUS BANKPKAPluris Sustainable Investments SAPNC Financial Services Group, Inc.Pohjola Asset Management LtdPolden-Puckham Charitable FoundationPortfolio 21 InvestmentsPorto Seguro S.A.Power Finance Corporation LimitedPREVHAB PREVIDÊNCIA COMPLEMENTARPREVI Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do BrasilPREVIG Sociedade de Previdência ComplementarProLogisProvinzial Rheinland HoldingPrudential Investment ManagementPrudential PlcPsagot Investment House LtdPSP InvestmentsQ Capital PartnersQBE Insurance GroupRabobankRaiffeisen Fund Management Hungary Ltd.
5
Raiffeisen Kapitalanlage-Gesellschaft m.b.H.Raiffeisen Schweiz GenossenschaftRathbones / Rathbone Greenbank InvestmentsRCM (Allianz Global Investors)Real Grandeza Fundação de Previdência e Assistência SocialRei SuperReliance Capital LtdResolutionResona Bank, LimitedReynders McVeigh Capital ManagementRLAMRobecoRobert & Patricia Switzer FoundationRockefeller Financial (trade name used by Rockefeller & Co., Inc.)Rose Foundation for Communities and the EnvironmentRothschildRoyal Bank of CanadaRoyal Bank of Scotland GroupRPMI Railpen InvestmentsRREEF Investment GmbHRussell InvestmentsSAM GroupSAMPENSION KP LIVSFORSIKRING A/SSAMSUNG FIRE & MARINE INSURANCESamsung SecuritiesSanlam Life Insurance LtdSanta Fé Portfolios LtdaSantamSarasin & Cie AGSAS Trustee CorporationSauren Finanzdienstleistungen GmbH & Co. KGSchrodersScotiabankScottish Widows Investment PartnershipSEBSEB Asset Management AGSecond Swedish National Pension Fund (AP2)Seligson & Co Fund Management PlcSentinel InvestmentsSERPROS - Fundo MultipatrocinadoService Employees International Union Pension FundSeventh Swedish National Pension Fund (AP7)Shinhan BankShinhan BNP Paribas Investment Trust Management Co., LtdShinkin Asset Management Co., LtdSiemens Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbHSignet Capital Management LtdSmith Pierce, LLCSNS Asset ManagementSocial(k)Sociedade de Previdencia Complementar da Dataprev - PrevdataSocrates Fund ManagementSolaris Investment Management LimitedSompo Japan Insurance Inc.Sopher Investment ManagementSouthPeak Investment ManagementSPF Beheer bvSprucegrove Investment Management LtdStandard Bank GroupStandard CharteredStandard Chartered Korea LimitedStandard Life InvestmentsState Bank of IndiaState Street CorporationStatewideSuperStoreBrand ASAStrathclyde Pension FundStratus GroupSumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupSumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings, Inc.Sun Life Financial Inc.Superfund Asset Management GmbHSUSI Partners AGSustainable CapitalSustainable Development CapitalSvenska Kyrkan, Church of SwedenSwedbank ABSwift FoundationSwiss ReSwisscanto Asset Management AGSyntrus Achmea Asset ManagementT. Rowe PriceT. SINAI KALKINMA BANKASI A.Ş.Tata Capital LimitedTD Asset Management Inc. and TDAM USA Inc.Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association – College Retirement Equities Fund
Telluride AssociationTempis Asset Management Co. LtdTerra Forvaltning ASTerraVerde Capital Management LLCTfL Pension FundThe ASB Community TrustThe Brainerd FoundationThe Bullitt FoundationThe Central Church Fund of FinlandThe Children’s Investment Fund Management (UK) LLPThe Collins FoundationThe Co-operative Asset ManagementThe Co-operators Group LtdThe Daly FoundationThe Environmental Investment Partnership LLPThe Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.The Joseph Rowntree Charitable TrustThe Korea Teachers Pension (KTP)The Pension Plan For Employees of the Public Service Alliance of CanadaThe Pinch GroupThe Presbyterian Church in CanadaThe Russell Family FoundationThe Sandy River Charitable FoundationThe Shiga Bank, Ltd.The Sisters of St. AnnThe United Church of Canada - General CouncilThe University of Edinburgh Endowment FundThe Wellcome TrustThird Swedish National Pension Fund (AP3)Threadneedle Asset ManagementTOBAMTokio Marine Holdings, IncToronto Atmospheric FundTrillium Asset Management CorporationTriodos Investment ManagementTri-State Coalition for Responsible InvestmentTrygUBSUnibail-RodamcoUniCredit SpAUnion Asset Management Holding AGUnion Investment Privatfonds GmbHUnione di Banche Italiane S.c.p.a.UnionenUnipensionUNISON staff pension schemeUniSuperUnitarian Universalist AssociationUnited Methodist Church General Board of Pension and Health Benefi tsUnited Nations FoundationUnity Trust BankUniversities Superannuation Scheme (USS)Vancity Group of CompaniesVCH Vermögensverwaltung AGVentas, Inc.Veris Wealth PartnersVeritas Investment Trust GmbHVermont State TreasurerVexiom Capital, L.P.VicSuperVictorian Funds Management CorporationVietNam Holding Ltd.Voigt & Coll. GmbHVOLKSBANK INVESTMENTSWaikato Community Trust IncWalden Asset Management, a division of Boston Trust & Investment Management CompanyWARBURG - HENDERSON Kapitalanlagegesellschaft für Immobilien mbHWARBURG INVEST KAPITALANLAGEGESELLSCHAFT MBHWater Asset Management, LLCWells Fargo & CompanyWest Yorkshire Pension FundWestLB Mellon Asset Management (WMAM)Westpac Banking CorporationWHEB Asset ManagementWhite Owl Capital AGWinslow Management, A Brown Advisory Investment GroupWoori BankWoori Investment & Securities Co., Ltd.YES BANK LimitedYork University Pension FundYouville Provident Fund Inc.Zegora Investment ManagementZevin Asset ManagementZurich Cantonal Bank
CalSTRS (California State Teachers Retirement System)
“CalSTRS’ board has
made climate risk
management the
signature issue in our
corporate governance
engagement
program. CDP data
is an essential input
and is reviewed
prior to meeting
with companies on
any issue to ensure
that the discussion
covers climate risk if
warranted. CDP data
is also very important
to CalSTRS as we
develop and execute
our shareholder
resolutions.”
Jack Ehnes, CEO
6
CEO Foreword
“CDP has pioneered
the only global
system that collects
information about
corporate behavior
on climate change
and water scarcity,
on behalf of market
forces, including
shareholders
and purchasing
corporations.”
The pressure is growing for companies to build long-term resilience in their business. The unprecedented debt crisis that has hit many parts of the world has sparked a growing understanding that short-termism can bring an established economic system to breaking point. As some national economies have been brought to their knees in recent months, we are reminded that nature’s system is under threat through the depletion of the world’s fi nite natural resources and the rise of greenhouse gas emissions.
Business and economies globally have already been impacted by the increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events, which scientists are increasingly linking to climate change.1 Bad harvests due to unusual weather have this year rocked the agricultural industry, with the price of grain, corn and soybeans reaching an all time high. Last year, Intel lost $1 billion in revenue and the Japanese automotive industry lost $450 million of profi ts as a result of the business interruption fl oods caused to their Thailand-based suppliers.
It is vital that we internalise the costs of future environmental damage into today’s decisions by putting an effective price on carbon. Whilst regulation is slow, a growing number of jurisdictions have introduced carbon pricing with carbon taxes or cap-and-trade schemes. The most established remains the EU Emissions Trading Scheme but moves have also been made in Australia, California, China and South Korea among others.
Enabling better decisions by providing investors, companies and governments with high quality information on how companies are managing their response to climate change and mitigating the risks from natural resource constraints has never been more important.
CDP has pioneered the only global system that collects information about corporate behavior on climate change and water scarcity, on behalf of market forces, including shareholders and purchasing corporations. CDP works to accelerate action on climate change through disclosure and more recently through its Carbon Action program. In 2012, on behalf of its Carbon Action signatory investors CDP engaged 205 companies in the Global 500 to request they set an emissions reduction target; 61 of these companies have now done so.
CDP continues to evolve and respond to market needs. This year we announced that the Global Canopy Program’s Forest Footprint Disclosure Project will merge with CDP over the next two years. Bringing forests, which are critically linked to both climate and water security, into the CDP system will enable companies and investors to rely on one source of primary data for this set of interrelated issues.
Accounting for and valuing the world’s natural capital is fundamental to building economic stability and prosperity. Companies that work to decouple greenhouse gas emissions from fi nancial returns have the potential for both short and long-term cost savings, sustainable revenue generation and a more resilient future.
Paul Simpson
CEO, Carbon Disclosure Project
1. The State of the Climate in 2011 report, led by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the US and published as part of the
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS).
7
The incentive to capture and analyze carbon emissions data is the benefi t of transparency in understanding the performance of corporations. It is also a basic human desire to understand the changing world around us and to improve the lives of the next generation. As simple as it sounds, the process of taking a yearly snapshot of even a single country’s corporate carbon profi le is a complex project that requires signifi cant resources, cooperation, and expertise. Accenture is proud to be the offi cial writer of the CDP
Canada 200 Climate Change Report 2012.
The conclusions we found in this year’s report were encouraging. As the responses in this report show, Canadian companies are tackling the challenge of climate change head-on. They are seeking opportunities, managing risks, putting climate change on their boardroom agendas, encouraging their leaders and organizations, and increasingly, identifying and capturing the economic benefi ts of doing so. In short, the Canadian corporations that responded to this year’s CDP information request are rising to the long-term carbon and climate change challenge in the same way they would for any other signifi cant and material change.
In seeking to clarify the relationship between carbon, corporations, and the global economy, the Carbon Disclosure Project and Accenture work closely together in many regions of the world. We have collaborated to score and write the country reports in multiple countries around the world and will continue our Canadian support as CDP Canada 200 Report Writer over the next two years. Globally, Accenture is the solution integrator and implementation partner for CDP’s reporting platform and database – the
largest source of primary corporate climate change information in the world. This strong partnership stems from shared goals; namely, helping companies integrate climate change into strategies and operations. Ultimately, this helps our respective stakeholders – investors, respondents and the broader public – mitigate the risks of climate change and realize sustainable value creation related to carbon.
As a leading provider of consulting, technology and outsourcing services, Accenture helps leading organizations – in both the private and public sectors, in Canada and internationally – to improve productivity and effi ciency in their operations, reduce emissions, and reinvent their infrastructure as they move towards a low carbon economy.
Accenture thanks all the current Canadian Institutional Investor Signatories and the 107 responding companies for their ongoing and strong commitment to addressing climate change. We look forward to continuing our work with CDP, and we encourage the Canadian investment and business communities to act decisively on sustainability today, to drive high performance in the future.
Michael Denham
Country Managing Director, Accenture Canada
Foreword
“The Canadian
corporations that
responded to
this year’s CDP
information request
are rising to the
long-term carbon
and climate change
challenge in the same
way they would for
any other signifi cant
and material change.”
8
CDP Investor Members 2012 2
CDP Signatory Investors 2012 3
CEO Foreword
Paul Simpson, CEO, Carbon Disclosure Project
6
Foreword
Michael Denham, Country Managing Director, Accenture Canada
7
Executive Summary 9
Companies Identify More Climate Change Risks with a Direct Short-Term Impact on their Business 11
Companies Prioritize Climate Change on the Corporate Agenda, Finding More Value in Emissions
Reduction Initiatives and More Opportunity to Improve Profitability
15
Companies Improve Transparency on Climate Change Issues, but Lag on Performance Criteria 18
Value of Responding to CDP 19
Guest commentary
Marie Giguère, Executive Vice-President, Legal Affairs and Secretariat, Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec
20
Guest commentary
Peter Grauer, Chairman, Bloomberg L.P.
21
Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI) 22
Carbon Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) 25
Sector Snapshots
Canada 200 Sector Snapshot Overview 27
Communication and High Tech 28
Consumer Discretionary 29
Consumer Staples 30
Energy 31
Financials 32
Industrials 33
Materials 34
Utilities 35
Appendix I: Table of Emissions, Scores and Sector Information by Company 36
Key to Appendix I 41
Appendix II: Non-Canada 200 Responding Companies 42
CDP Canada Partners and Sponsors 43
Contents
Important Notice
The contents of this report may be used by anyone provided acknowledgement is given to Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP). This does not represent a license to repackage or resell any of the data reported to CDP or the contributing authors and presented in this report. If you intend to repackage or resell any of the contents of this report, you need to obtain express permission from CDP before doing so.
Accenture and CDP have prepared the data and analysis in this report based on responses to the CDP 2012 information request. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given by Accenture or CDP as to the accuracy or completeness of the information and opinions contained in this report. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specifi c professional advice. To the extent permitted by law, Accenture and CDP do not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this report or for any decision based on it. All information and views expressed herein by CDP and/or Accenture is based on their judgment at the time of this report and are subject to change without notice
due to economic, political, industry and fi rm-specifi c factors. Guest commentaries where included in this report refl ect the views of their respective authors; their inclusion is not an endorsement of them.
Accenture and CDP, their affi liated member fi rms or companies, or their respective shareholders, members, partners, principals, directors, offi cers and/or employees, may have a position in the securities of the companies discussed herein. The securities of the companies mentioned in this document may not be eligible for sale in some states or countries, nor suitable for all types of investors; their value and the income they produce may fl uctuate and/or be adversely affected by exchange rates.
'Carbon Disclosure Project’ and ‘CDP’ refer to Carbon Disclosure Project, a United Kingdom company limited by guarantee, registered as a United Kingdom charity number 1122330. In the United States, CDP is a special project of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.
© 2012 Carbon Disclosure Project. All rights reserved.
9
Executive Summary
3 NUMBER OF COMPANIES REPORTING
REGULATORY, PHYSICAL AND OTHER RISKS
• 2012• 2011
4 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS IDENTIFYING
ANNUAL MONETARY SAVINGS BY EMISSIONS
REDUCTION ACTIVITY TYPE
• 2012• 2011
Nu
mb
er
of
Co
mp
an
ies R
ep
ort
ing
Ris
ks
Risk Type
Regulatory Physical ClimateChange
Other*
77
67
54
6561
49
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Nu
mb
er
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Activity Type
EnergyEfficiency
Other* Fugitive orProcess Emissions
Reductions
Transportation
93
2016
10
74
17
8 8
0
20
40
60
80
100
* Other climate-related risks include reputation, changing consumer behavior, induced changes in human and cultural environments, fl uctuating socio-economic conditions, increasing humanitarian demands, amongst others.
* Other includes behavioral change, low carbon energy installation and purchase, product design, and any uncategorized initiative.
Amidst an increasingly uncertain regulatory landscape and changing physical environment, Canada’s largest public companies have used the 2012 Investor CDP Information Request to signal that they are now, more than ever, faced with the challenge of identifying and managing a spectrum of growing, near-term climate risks. As a result, they are increasing the position of climate change on the corporate agenda and are fi nding more ways to capitalize on climate-related opportunities to improve corporate profi tability while achieving climate change mitigation goals. Through their continued efforts to advance transparency in their climate change-related practices, encouraged by an increasingly aware and sensitive public and investment community, they are laying the foundation for good carbon performance.
The key fi ndings of the 2012 CDP Canada 200 Report are:
Companies identify more climate change risks with a
direct short-term impact on their business
• The total number of risks related to climate change increased by 8% (38) to 496 in 2012.
• Regulatory risks, such as carbon and fuel taxes, were most frequently reported (238), followed by physical risks (165), such as extreme weather, and “other” climate change risks (93), such as impact on a company’s reputation.
• Eighteen percent (12) more respondents (77) reported regulatory risks in 2012, while 10% (6) more respondents (67) reported physical risks (see Figure 3).
• Relative to physical and “other” climate change risks,
regulatory risks are seen as the most short-term – 67% (160) of these risks are expected to materialize within fi ve years.
• Physical risks are seen as the most direct in impact – 82% (136) of these risks are expected to have a direct impact on respondents, rather than on their customers and suppliers.
Companies prioritize climate change on the corporate
agenda, fi nding more value in emissions reduction
initiatives and more opportunity to improve profi tability
• Companies continue to weave the issue of climate change into the core fabric of their business models. Seventy-seven percent (79) of respondents report that climate change is integrated into their business strategy – up 4% (3) from 2011.
• Climate change is being addressed at the highest levels of the corporate structure. Eighty-six percent (89) of respondents report senior manager/offi cer or individual/sub-set board-level responsibility for climate change.
• Companies increasingly identify economic value in emissions reduction initiatives. A total of 139 reported emissions reductions initiatives have annual monetary savings – up 30% (32) from 2011 (see Figure 4).
• Companies fi nd more opportunities in climate change to improve profi tability by appealing to changing consumer demands and by reducing costs. An equal number of respondents (86) report 11% (32) more climate-change opportunities (315) than in 2011.
9
10
Companies improve transparency on climate change
issues, but lag on performance criteria
• Twenty-seven percent (47) more external publications, such as annual and voluntary reports, were used by respondents in 2012 to communicate corporate activity related to climate change and GHG emissions performance.
• Canada 200 respondents received an average carbon disclosure score of 60 – an increase of 9% (5) from 2011 (see Figure 5).
• Opportunities still exist for respondents to improve on carbon performance – by defi ning emissions reduction targets, verifying and assuring emissions data, and accelerating achievements in emissions reduction – as only one Canada 200 respondent received the “A” performance band required to gain entry into the Carbon Performance Leadership Index (CPLI).
About CDP Canada in 2012
The 2012 Investor CDP Information Request was sent to the Canada 2001 companies on behalf of 655 institutional investors (CDP signatories) representing $78 trillion in assets. The fi duciary backing of the 2012 CDP questionnaire increased by 19% (104) over the previous year, up from 551 signatories in 2011. This represents the growing interest of the investor community in environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting. Fifty-four percent (107) of the Canada 200 responded, representing 79% of the Canada 200 by market capitalization.2
For the fi rst time in Canada, this report publishes the carbon performance scores of eligible respondent companies. This information will enable respondents to better measure themselves against their peers and investors to quickly assess the quality of performance on actions taken to mitigate climate change.
The compilation of the 2012 CDP Canada 200 Report is based on their responses3 to the 2012 Investor CDP Information Request. This report examines how the largest Canadian companies continue to integrate climate change into their strategy, governance, management, and operations in order to mitigate risks and act on opportunities presented by climate change.
5 RANGE AND AVERAGE OF CANADA 200 CARBON DISCLOSURE SCORES
— Minimum— Maximum• 2012 Sector Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI) Average• 2012 Average• 2011 Average
1. Canada’s 200 largest publicly traded companies on the Toronto Stock
Exchange (TSX) by market capitalization.
2. Additionally, 92% (55) of the TSX60 (Canada’s 60 largest publicly
traded companies) responded, representing 91% of the TSX60 by market
capitalization.
3. Although 107 companies responded, the report analysis was conducted
on a base of a 103 companies. Companies excluded from the analysis were:
subsidiaries of another responding company, merged during the scoring
process, or submitted their response past the information request deadline.
Ca
rbo
n D
isc
losu
re S
co
re
Sector
0
20
40
60
80
100
Leaders(CDLI)
Communicationand High Tech
ConsumerDiscretionary
ConsumerStaples
Energy Financials Industrials Materials Utilities
91
837777
83 82 8082 80
59 605649
77
90 91
848981
8883
53
11
7164
36
64
56
12
83
63
52
20
57
35
5852
9
52
79
7168
50
79
10
1111
Companies Identify More Climate
Change Risks with a Direct Short-
Term Impact on their Business In 2012, Canadian companies reported an increasing number of risks––8% (38) more risks related to climate change were reported in 2012, 496 versus 458 in 2011. Regulatory risks topped the list, but concerns about physical risks from climate change were also expressed. Regardless of type, companies are taking action to mitigate these risks.
Regulatory risks are the most frequently cited
Canada’s fragmented regulatory environment, with different federal, provincial, and territorial climate change policy plans, poses an increasing risk to business operations. Of the companies that responded to the CDP 2012 questionnaire, 72% (77) identifi ed 238 regulatory risks. This reveals that regulation takes prominence as the leading climate change risk, when compared to physical risks (165) and “other” climate change risks (93), such as an impact on the company’s reputation.
“Uncertainty around regulation makes it difficult for our clients to plan for the future or quantify risk…and makes it difficult for financial institutions to adequately determine the extent and timeframes associated with regulatory risk…” – Bank of Nova Scotia
In fact, the actual number of companies reporting regulatory risks increased from 2011. Figure 6 illustrates a signifi cant 18% increase from 65 to 77 companies identifying regulatory risks. By comparison, the number of companies identifying physical risks and "other" risks increased by 10% (from 61 to 67 and 49 to 54, respectively).
6 MORE RESPONDENTS ARE REPORTING RISKS IN 2012
• 2012• 2011
Nu
mb
er
of
Co
mp
an
ies R
ep
ort
ing
Ris
ks
Risk Type
Regulatory Physical Other*
77
67
54
6561
49
0
20
40
60
80
* Other climate-related risks include reputation, changing consumer behavior, induced changes in human and cultural environments, fl uctuating socio-economic conditions, increasing humanitarian demands, amongst others.
12
Regulatory risks have the potential to impact both direct
and indirect business operations
Regulatory risks have a greater impact on companies in GHG-intensive industries, particularly in their direct operations.1 For example, the 77 companies that reported regulatory risks account for more than 98% of the emissions volume disclosed to CDP. Conversely, the 26 remaining organizations that did not identify regulatory risks are either self-identifi ed as low GHG emitters or have chosen not to disclose emissions. Regardless, organizations that did not disclose regulatory risks mentioned they are indirectly impacted by regulatory risks through their partners, customers and suppliers.
“While we have identified potential for regulatory risks related to climate change, we do not at this point deem these risks to be significant. We acknowledge that development of a legal and regulatory framework to address climate change would have potential economic impacts, for example, through disruption or increased cost of oil-dependent transportation, increased fuel and electricity costs and costs associated with new building requirements, and we will continue to monitor developments with interest. Future climate change regulations may also affect the operating costs for the real estate we occupy and that which we own as an investment.” – Sun Life Financial Inc.
Companies expect regulatory risks to impact the bottom-line. Sixty-six percent (156) of regulatory risks identifi ed are expected to increase operational costs, such as the increasing cost of energy and fuel, payment of carbon taxes and the operational cost of complying with emissions regulations obligations.
“Should a cap-and-trade regime be implemented [in B.C.], current estimates around cost suggest a range similar to that of the Carbon Tax… Teck’s B.C. operations [currently pays] a total of $40-45M per year in carbon fees.”– Teck Resources
Limited
Meanwhile, 11% (27) of regulatory risks are expected to impact capital costs, such as the investment made in infrastructure to comply with regulatory obligations.
As shown in Figure 7, the majority of regulatory risks are expected to impact organizations in the short term. Sixty-seven percent (160) of these risks are expected to materialize within fi ve years, while only 7% (17) are expected to have an impact in more than 5 years. Meanwhile, 26% (61) of the risks have an unknown or blank timeframe.
7 RESPONDENTS EXPECT THE MAJORITY OF REGULATORY RISKS TO MATERIALIZE WITHIN FIVE YEARS
• <5 Years• >5 Years• Unknown/Blank
1. For a detailed description on how CDP defi nes “Direct” versus “Indirect”
impacts, please refer to the CDP “Guidance for responding companies - Investor
CDP 2012, CDP Supply Chain 2012”, page 49.
Ris
k D
rive
r
Number of Regulatory Risks Reported
Uncertainty Surrounding New Regulation
Fuel/Energy Taxes and Regulations
Cap and Trade Schemes
Carbon Taxes
Emission Reporting Obligations
Other Regulatory Drivers*
General Environmental Regulations
Air Pollution Limits
Product Efficiency Regulations & Standards
International Agreements
0 10 20 30 40 50
6 2 3
8 6
13 1
9 6
8 1 7
16 3 2
19 3 11
23 2 8
30 2 5
28 4 12
* Other regulatory drivers include voluntary agreements, lack of regulation, product labeling and standards, etc.12
1313
More physical climate change risks are identifi ed in 2012
Risks from physical climate change––such as changes in precipitation patterns, changes in average temperatures, rising sea levels, droughts, etc.––are also receiving greater attention from the Canada 200. Extreme heat across Canada and the US, wildfi res in the western provinces, and tropical storms in the Gulf of Mexico are recognized as weather crises with potential ramifi cations on global operations and supply chains.
The Canada 200 responded accordingly on two levels. Firstly, the number of companies identifying physical climate change risks increased by 10% (6) to 67 in 2012 from 61 in 2011. Secondly, the total number of reported physical climate change risks increased by 11% (16), to 165 in 2012 from 149 in 2011.
Companies are clearly recognizing the direct impact physical climate change risks could have on their business. Eighty-two percent (136) of physical climate-related risks were reported to directly impact the company, a 14% (17) increase from 2011.
“Extreme weather events in our areas of operation (the four western provinces) such as flooding, wildfires, lightning, and tornados could impact the operation of our facilities and therefore impact production.” – ARC Resources Ltd.
Physical risks are the most direct in impact
Meanwhile, approximately 10% (17) of risks were considered to indirectly impact companies through their supply chain or customers, which is similar to the 2011 fi gures.
Furthermore, 76% (125) of risks were reported to have a potential impact on reducing or disrupting production capacity, or increasing operational costs. This is virtually unchanged from 2011.
“Physical risks affecting our suppliers could ultimately impact not only our own operations but our provision of products or services to our customers as well, depending on the circumstances. We view the range of impacts as follows: (a) minor delay in service or delivery (b) supply chain issues resulting in need to switch to alternate supplier which may result in delayed delivery, process workarounds, increased costs and differences in quality of materials and; (c) complete cessation of service or delivery in the short to medium term.” – Bank of Montreal
Companies are proactively mitigating climate change risks
Despite the regulatory and physical climate change risks, Canada 200 respondents are clearly and actively pursuing risk mitigation options. Overall, 10% (7) more companies are integrating climate change into their multi-disciplinary risk management processes (74 respondents in 2012 versus 67 in 2011), as can be seen in Figure 8.
“[Enbridge] has a formal risk management policy, procedures and systems designed to mitigate risks, such as operational risks…[Enbridge] performs an annual corporate risk assessment to scan its environment for all potential risks and allows pro-active management decisions to be made.” – Enbridge Inc.
8 MORE RESPONDENTS ARE INTEGRATING
CLIMATE CHANGE INTO MULTI-DISCIPLINARY
RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESSES
• Specific Risk Managment Process• Integrated into Multi-Disciplinary Processes• No Documented Processes
Nu
mb
er
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Year
24 24
6774
135
0
20
40
60
80
100
2011 2012
“As the responses in this report
show, Canadian companies are
tackling the challenge of climate
change head-on. They are seeking
opportunities, managing risks,
putting climate change on their
boardroom agendas, encouraging
their leaders and organizations, and
increasingly, identifying and
capturing the economic benefits of
doing so.”
Michael Denham
Country Managing Director,Accenture Canada
14
Most respondents are mitigating regulatory risks
Since regulatory concerns topped the list of risks, it is no surprise that Canadian companies are managing regulatory risks through a variety of methods. In fact, most companies are engaging with policy makers––74% (57) of companies that disclosed regulatory risks are engaging with policy makers to encourage further action on climate change mitigation and/or adaptation. Even of those that did not disclose regulatory risks, 54% (14) work with policy makers and others to monitor the potential risks and opportunities of regulations. See right for other actions being taken to mitigate regulatory risks.
Mitigating physical climate change risks poses a
challenge to respondents
Companies face more diffi culty in mitigating the risks posed by physical climate changes, mainly due to the uncertainty of occurrence. Nevertheless, respondents are being proactive in implementing initiatives to manage the controllable elements of these risks. See below for other actions being taken to mitigate physical risks.
Examples of Regulatory Risk
Mitigation
Engaging with policy makers
“Nexen believes that engaging in public policy debates affecting our industry is fundamental to ensuring long-term business success. [... we] participated on Government of Canada climate-related trade missions to Africa and Central/South America and are active in the Climate Change working group of our international industry association IPIECA who are committed to education and improving industry’s performance through cooperation and communication.” – Nexen Inc.
Setting energy efficiency targets
“In terms of energy costs, Stantec's Sustainable Development team is developing Performance Improvement targets and associated initiatives that will focus on energy efficiency within each facility. The Stantec Executive Leadership team has set goals for energy efficiency in all offices. Approved 2012 goals of reduction in energy usage by 4% are designed to reduce operational costs as a response to experienced and projected future fuel price increases.” – Stantec Inc.
Investing in transformation to reduce overall emissions
“[Emera recently] completed construction of [a] sixth generator on the site that recycles the heat from two natural gas combustion turbines already producing power at the plant and use it to generate additional electricity with minimal extra fuel. The new equipment captures waste heat from the exhaust streams of the two combustion turbines and uses it to power a new steam turbine and generator set, generating 25 megawatts of electricity without any additional fuel or emissions. A second 25 megawatts will be generated by burning gas added directly into the waste heat stream from the turbines to increase energy output. The cost of this project is $93 million.” – Emera Inc.
Investing in emissions data management and technology
“As emission reporting obligations become more complex, Enerplus will need to increase staff resources and may need to increase the accuracy of data collection technologies… To manage this risk, Enerplus has upgraded their GHG emissions database to include all Canadian and U.S. operated facilities as well as to import and track data necessary for the source categories. This investment in our database management for GHG emissions had initial costs of approximately $150,000 with yearly maintenance costs.” – Enerplus Corporation
Examples of Physical Risk
Mitigation
Adapting operations and supply chain
“The Company continually reviews physical risks to its business as part of regular management operating reviews and as issues are raised, it adapts its operating processes to minimize potential impact from these risks. For example, in anticipation of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana, USA in 2005, the Company pre-emptively prepared its operations and relocated its personnel and assets to minimize loss or suffering in the area. In addition, the Company procures its equipment, services and consumables from many sources and many locations to minimize risks of climate effects in any one particular geographic locale or business provider.” – Progressive Waste Solutions Ltd.
Investing in natural resource management and technology
“The flooding we experience[d] in Saskatchewan in 2011 had an estimated impact on ARC of between $5 - $10 million…These risks are out of our control and unpredictable. We are, however, taking measures to better manage our water (i.e., our consumption, sources, licenses, etc.). By improving our water management system we will be able to better react to restricted access to the source.” – ARC Resources Inc.
15
Companies Prioritize Climate Change on
the Corporate Agenda, Finding More Value
in Emissions Reduction Initiatives and
More Opportunity to Improve Profi tability Against a backdrop of increasing risks, companies are integrating climate change into their core strategies and operations. Specifi cally, the Canada 200 are prioritizing climate change on their corporate agendas, offering stronger individual performance incentives for the management of this issue, and identifying more economic benefi t in their related initiatives.
Climate change is increasing its position on the corporate
agenda
Seventy-seven percent (79) of respondents report that climate change is integrated into their business strategy––up 4% from 2011 (76).
“Canadian Tire has integrated its business sustainability strategy into its operating plans within a profit mandate. The Company defines business sustainability as the pursuit and achievement of economic benefits from enhanced social and environmental outcomes.” – Canadian Tire Corporation,
Limited
Furthermore, 86% (89) of respondents report senior manager/offi cer or individual/sub-set board-level responsibility for climate change––consistent with the Canada 200 last year. And there is a strong correlation between senior management involvement and carbon performance; of the top 40 respondents ranked by 2012 carbon performance score, only one did not report senior management or board-level responsibility for climate change.
More companies are offering incentives for the
management of climate change issues
The number of respondents that reported incentives for management of climate change issues increased by 6% from 44% (46) in 2011 to 50% (52) in 2012, as displayed in Figure 9.
These incentives are also more tangible; for example, monetary incentives are now offered by 46% (47) of respondents, up from 37% (38) last year.
Finally, these incentives are targeting higher levels of the organization. Eighteen percent (19) of all respondents report
9 RESPONDENTS OFFERING INCENTIVES FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUES
• 2012• 2011
50%(52) 46%
(47)
18%(19)
44%(46)
37%(38)
13%(13)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Offer AnyIncentives
OfferMonetaryIncentives
Target CEO,COO, or Other
Executive OfficerIncentive Type
16
an incentive for the CEO, COO, Corporate Executive Team, or an Executive Offi cer, which is an increase from 13% (13) in 2011. This is an encouraging trend. Offering incentives to the C-suite increases management buy-in, which then drives a stronger focus on climate change and should ultimately create value in the search of opportunities.
“CEO's performance is based on achieving annual targets which includes a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 10% per tonne of product by 2012 compared to 2007. (Type of incentive reported: monetary reward)” – Potash
Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc.
Companies are realizing economic benefi ts from
emissions reduction or avoidance
Companies continue to incorporate climate change into their strategy and operations because they increasingly see economic value in doing so. In the pursuit of reduced carbon emissions, companies are deploying two main strategies: implementing specifi c emissions reduction initiatives, and capitalizing on products and services that aim to reduce third-party emissions. Internally, companies appear to be transitioning from people and process-based initiatives as sources for emissions reduction towards fi xed capital investments in energy effi ciency and transportation initiatives. Fixed capital investments indicate a continued focus on capturing sources of emissions reduction, and ensuring greater persistence of these benefi ts. For example, while the total number of initiatives reported has decreased by 21% (84) from 408 in 2011 to 324 in 2012, the decrease in energy effi ciency initiatives was negligible and now energy effi ciency represents 55% (178) of all initiatives––up from 45% (182) in 2011 (see Figure 10).
More importantly, companies are tracking, recognizing and reporting the economic benefi ts of investing in climate change. Respondents are increasingly identifying annual monetary savings from emission reduction activities; the number of reported initiatives with annual monetary savings has increased by 30% (to 139 initiatives) in 2012 across all types of emissions reduction activities (see Figure 11). This is a paradigm shift from the assumption that carbon and emissions-related initiatives are merely a cost, rather than a true investment with an expected economic return. Finally, from a revenue and earnings perspective, companies are capitalizing on the opportunity to offer products that help third parties reduce emissions. Sixty percent (61) of respondents reported that the use of its goods and/or services directly enable GHG emissions to be avoided by a third party––up 9% (5) from last year.
“Use of our product (i.e., electricity generated by hydro, wind and landfill gas) allows our customers to reduce their GHG footprint. NGCC and SGER requirement led to 2,108,115 tonnes of CO2e reductions in 2011 and 17,932,210 tonnes since baseline years.” – Capital Power Corporation
“The consumer market is increasingly looking for products with improved environmental performance attributes and lower carbon footprints…. We are also improving our offerings of e-solutions and helping consumers to better understand how they can reduce their GHG emissions by using information and communication technologies (ICT) solutions.” – Bell Aliant Inc.
10 EMISSIONS REDUCTION INITIATIVES
IMPLEMENTED BY TYPE
• Other*• Fugitive or process emissions reductions• Transportation• Energy Effi ciency
11 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS IDENTIFYING
ANNUAL MONETARY SAVINGS BY EMISSIONS
REDUCTION ACTIVITY TYPE
• 2012• 2011
182 178
58 47
4130
127
69
0
100
200
300
400
Nu
mb
er
of
Em
issio
ns R
ed
uc
tio
nIn
itia
tive
s I
mp
lem
en
ted
Year
2011 2012
Nu
mb
er
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Activity Type
93
2016
10
74
17
8 8
0
20
40
60
80
100
EnergyEfficiency
Other* Transportation Fugitive orProcess
EmissionsReductions
* Other includes behavioral change, low carbon energy installation and purchase, product design, and any uncategorized initiative.
16
1717
Companies are identifying more climate change
opportunities
In conjunction with integrating climate change into their strategies and operations, Canadian companies continue to look for opportunities to improve profi tability and reduce costs by navigating a fl uid regulatory environment and appealing to changing consumer demands.
“Annual Performance Agreement commitments made by EVP, Environment & Strategic Planning in 2011: 1) Communicate Cenovus's environmental commitments, long-range forecasts to the organization; 2) Strengthen delivery of energy efficiency initiatives that subsequently improve GHG emissions and leverage available funding through the Climate Change and Emissions Management Corporation (CCEMC) for investigating future, game-changing technologies.” – Cenovus Energy Inc.
While the number of companies reporting opportunities has remained consistent at 86 since 2011, the total number of opportunities reported increased to 315 from 283. As seen in Figure 12, regulation is the most frequently reported climate change opportunity, thereby re-emphasizing that regulatory factors are top-of-mind for Canadian companies.
“In 2010, the expectation of stronger regulations to create more energy efficient products, presented Canadian Tire with an opportunity to increase in store traffic and to increase the sales of energy-efficient products in its portfolio… the incremental increase in sales in 2011 was equal to $2 million…” – Canadian Tire Corporation, Limited
With that being said, the most frequently cited individual opportunity drivers are in the “Other” category, and relate to “Changing consumer behavior”, which increased 46% to 35 in 2012 from 24 in 2011 and “Reputation”, which increased 17% to 34 from 29. These responses demonstrate that both "Changing Consumer Behavior" and "Reputation" are key drivers of action as the Canadian public becomes more knowledgeable and attuned to climate change and its impacts on business and the environment.
“As a consumer-oriented business that sells products directly into the market place, reputational risk is always [a] concern... For climate change in particular, consumers would be interested in our ability to perform as a responsible environmental steward. This presents a potential opportunity for us in that our ability to manage our environmental reputation more effectively than our competitors may result in increased guest patronage, or conversely, may shield us from increased concerns and a potential decrease in guest patronage... Effectively managing our reputation with respect to environmental sustainability in order to attract and retain key talent in the industry also presents us and our Restaurant Owners with a significant opportunity.” – Tim Hortons Inc.
As seen in Figure 13, companies most frequently reported an increase in demand for existing products and services as a potential impact of the opportunities identifi ed above.
"With demand for low-emissions natural gas and electricity steadily climbing... TransCanada continues to pursue new opportunities in technology that can improve the efficiencies of our systems, processes and facilities." – TransCanada
Corporation
13 INCREASED DEMAND IS THE MOST FREQUENTLY
CITED POTENTIAL IMPACT
12 REGULATORY OPPORTUNITIES ARE MOST
FREQUENTLY CITED
• 2012• 2011
Nu
mb
er
of
Op
po
rtu
nit
ies R
ep
ort
ed
Regulatory Other*Physical
153
61
101
130
62
91
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Opportunity Type
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
To
tal O
pp
ort
un
itie
s I
de
nti
fie
d
IncreasedDemand for
ExistingProdcuts/Services
New Products/Business Services
OtherImpact*
ReducedOperational
Costs
40%(122)
18%(55) 14%
(42)
28%(86)
5
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Potential Impact
* Other opportunities include those posed by changes in consumer attitude or improved standing due to your organization’s stance or action on climate change.
* Other impact includes: Increased production capacity, Investment opportunities, Increased stock price (market valuation), and 24 other categories. Blank responses were removed from chart sample.
18
Companies in the Canada 200 are focused on improving the visibility of their response to climate change, as evidenced by the increase in number of publications used to communicate with their stakeholders, as well as the improvement in the average carbon disclosure scores of the Canada 200 and the Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI) detailed on page 22.
For the fi rst time in Canada, this report publishes the carbon performance scores of eligible respondent companies. This information will enable respondents to better measure themselves against their peers and investors to quickly assess the quality of performance on actions taken tomitigate climate change.
Only one Canada 200 company achieved the Carbon Performance Leadership Index (CPLI), detailed on page 25, indicating an opportunity for others to improve their performance scores. The proactive effort of Canada 200 respondents to improve transparency in 2012 refl ects a foundation to excel on performance criteria in years to come.
Companies are increasing communication with external
stakeholders
As companies identify more climate change-related opportunities, they are increasing the number of publications used to communicate their response to climate change and GHG emissions performance. In 2012, companies reported a 27% (47) increase in annual reports, regulatory fi lings and voluntary communications––up from 177 in 2011 (see Figure 14). This growth was primarily driven by a 40% increase (from 87 to 122) in the number of voluntary communications, such as voluntary Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) or sustainability reports, and consumer facing publications and advertising, among others.
While the depth of these communications vary (e.g., one-page press release vs. annual sustainability report), the sharp increase in volume is a signal of more effort from corporations on communicating climate change-related topics to investors and the public.
14 NUMBER OF PUBLICATIONS REPORTED BY TYPE
• 2012• 2011
Nu
mb
er
of
Pu
blic
ati
on
s R
ep
ort
ed
AnnualReports
RegulatoryFilings
VoluntaryCommunications
Publication Type
71
31
122
63
27
87
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Companies Improve Transparency
on Climate Change Issues, but Lag
on Performance Criteria
“Enabling better decisions by
providing investors, companies
and governments with high quality
information on how
companies are managing their
response to climate change
and mitigating the risks from
natural resource constraints
has never been more important.”
Paul Simpson
CEO, Carbon Disclosure Project
18
19
Responding to CDP allows companies to meet
demand for transparency from investors, consumers and the general public.
“We meet stakeholder needs for transparent
disclosure by publicly communicating our
sustainability and climate change related initiatives.
Key disclosure mechanisms include the Carbon
Disclosure Project, our Corporate Responsibility
Report and [other publications]…” – Barrick Gold Corporation
“Shareholders and consumers are demanding that
corporations show progress on reducing their impact
on the environment. Rogers will continue to respond
to the CDP to provide information on our carbon
footprint and climate change related strategies.” – Rogers Communications Inc.
The CDP questionnaire motivates companies to organize a strategy and system for
emissions management and tracking.
“CCL has no in-place metric or database to capture
data from our 38 countries and over 72 operations
with common units of energy, waste volumes with
detail on energy and sustainability related
measurements... As we [were] invited in April 2012
to be part of a CDP response we have been working
for the past 90 days or so to organize a true strategy
and system…we have setup a team to put in place a
real-time GHG program.” – CCL Industries
Buyers are setting carbon reduction
targets and are using CDP as a medium to collect information from suppliers
“Leading multinational and manufacturing companies
are already setting environmental pre-selection
criteria for their suppliers….For example, Wal-Mart
has invited its suppliers to report their GHGs and
reduction targets as part of its sustainability index for
Wal-Mart products…CDP recently came out with a
supply chain questionnaire, endorsed by Wal-Mart,
Ford and other leading multinational organizations, to
enable companies to capture supplier emissions.”
– Canadian National Railway Company
CDP assists companies in measuring
carbon performance of themselves over time and compared to others companies.
“Yamana has been reporting its emissions in the
Corporate Sustainability Reports and other initiatives
(as CDP) voluntarily. Its emissions results indicate good
index comparing with its competitors.” – Yamana Gold Inc.
Overall, the Canada 200 sees value in responding to the CDP’s questionnaire (see table below). Their responses are a means to increase transparency with stakeholders, communicate targets, collect and track data, and measure performance. According to a 2011 study1, Carbon Disclosure Project data is downloaded on average more than 730,000 times a month via Bloomberg terminals––a sure sign that investors and consumers see the value of disclosing this type of information.
1. Eccles, Robert G.; Krzus, Michael P.; Serafeim, George. “Market Interest in
Nonfi nancial Information,” The Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Volume
23 Number 4 (Autumn 2011). Based on November 2010 – April 2011 data.
Value of Responding to CDP
19
20
The Caisse is convinced that climate change is a real and major issue, and that it may have an impact in the long term unless action is taken. The fi rst phase of the Kyoto protocol, which sought to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, ends in 2012. Several industrialized countries have decided not to participate in the next phase, preferring instead to begin negotiations on the terms of the next treaty, which only comes into force in 2020.
In this context, the Caisse attaches great importance to the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), an initiative that encourages companies to take into account the impact of their activities on the environment by asking them to account for and disclose their greenhouse gas emissions. Such disclosure encourages businesses to adopt best practices and develop emission reduction strategies.
As an investor, the Caisse wants to have a profi le of companies’ activities in this area in order to better analyze and manage this type of risk. The information collected in this way is useful to the Caisse because it allows for constructive dialogue with corporate leaders based on the disclosures. Where appropriate, our analysts and managers also integrate the costs related to CO2 emissions into their fi nancial models, or adjust the cost of capital based on carbon risk. In this regard, our managers applaud CDP’s collaboration with the Bloomberg platform, which now provides access to CDP data.
A few years ago, in the fi rst Canadian edition of the CDP, the Caisse noted that under its responsibility to depositors it is obliged to account for the environmental impacts of business activities. This is why the Caisse has agreed to sponsor this project. Today, CDP Canada’s 52 Canadian investors have asked businesses all over the world, including Canada’s 200 largest corporations by market capitalization, to disclose climate change information.
The Caisse supports this collective effort, and encourages businesses to cooperate with the CDP by providing the information it has requested.
Marie Giguère
Executive Vice-President, Legal Affairs and SecretariatCaisse de dépôt et placement du Québec
Guest Commentary
21
The scale, complexity and long-term nature of climate change challenges our collective capacity for problem solving. While capital markets generally allocate capital effi ciently, they are highly dependent on widely available, clear price signals. But without good information, these price signals can create signifi cant distortions. Today, environmental data is not yet comprehensively integrated into capital markets information systems, creating classic economic externalities – costs to society at large such as rising sea-levels, disruptions to agricultural production and loss of species - that some estimate to be valued at $33 trillion.
This represents a signifi cant market failure with potentially profound implications.
Why is it so hard to interrupt this narrative with an effective combination of market and regulatory responses?
Though we can’t offer a defi nitive answer just yet, we at Bloomberg and our partner, CDP, are certain of at least one thing: good information helps.
Data is the life-blood of policy-making and the capital markets; even with the most sophisticated assumptions, regulations and fi nancial models formulated on unreliable information are liable to miss the mark and, worse still, compound the problem.
This is the shared perspective of Bloomberg and CDP and why we’ve been partners since 2008 to collaborate on advancing the quality, quantity and analysis of environmental data. We understand that climate change risk is real and that reliable information is critical to the development of business, market and policy solutions.
At Bloomberg, we have seen a steady rise in investor interest in environmental, social and governance (ESG) information in recent years. In response to growing client demand, Bloomberg increased its capacity to deliver ESG data covering more than 6,000 global companies to investors, including CDP responses.
Within our ESG data set, corporate greenhouse gas emissions is the number one viewed metric by investors. Since our partnership began in 2008, investor queries of CDP data on Bloomberg terminals have risen substantially, both in quantity and number of users. In July 2012 alone, investors viewed more than four million greenhouse gas related indicators on Bloomberg terminals globally. Investors are beginning to address the information gap essential to our capital markets by accessing CDP’s critical environmental data infrastructure through Bloomberg every day.
By partnering with CDP - and you - we can bridge that information gap, integrate climate change considerations into investment decisions and accelerate the shift to a low carbon economy.
Peter Grauer
Chairman, Bloomberg L.P.
Guest Commentary
22
16 RANGE AND AVERAGE OF CANADA 200 CARBON DISCLOSURE SCORES
— Minimum— Maximum• 2012 Sector CDLI Average• 2012 Average• 2011 Average
Ca
rbo
n D
isc
losu
re S
co
re
Sector
0
20
40
60
80
100
Leaders(CDLI)
Communicationand High Tech
ConsumerDiscretionary
ConsumerStaples
Energy Financials Industrials Materials Utilities
91
837777
83 82 8082 80
59 605649
77
90 91
848981
8883
53
11
7164
36
64
56
12
83
63
52
20
57
35
5852
9
52
79
7168
50
79
Company Name Sector 2012 Carbon
Disclosure Score
2011 Carbon
Disclosure Score
Bank of Montreal Financials 91 88
ARC Resources Ltd. Energy 90 77
Stantec Inc. Industrials 89 81
Teck Resources Limited Materials 88 68
TMX Group Inc. Financials 84 80
Suncor Energy Inc. Energy 84 92
Barrick Gold Corporation Materials 84 81
Enbridge Inc. Energy 84 61
TransCanada Corporation Energy 83 NR
Enerplus Corporation Energy 83 64
Telus Corporation Communication and High Tech 82 59
Bank of Nova Scotia (Scotiabank) Financials 82 54
Tim Hortons Inc. Consumer Discretionary 80 84
Emera Inc. Utilities 79 75
Cenovus Energy Inc. Energy 79 78
Toronto-Dominion Bank Financials 78 60
Inmet Mining Corporation Materials 78 59
Nexen Inc. Energy 78 60
SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. Industrials 77 76
Canadian National Railway Company Industrials 77 82
15 2012 CANADA 200 CDLI
2012 Canada 200 Carbon Disclosure
Leadership Index (CDLI)
23
Importance of Carbon Disclosure and Performance
Leadership Indices to investors
Each year, company responses are reviewed, analyzed, and scored according to the CDP Scoring Methodology. The highest scoring companies for disclosure and/or performance enter the Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI) and the Carbon Performance Leadership Index (CPLI).
Analysis of the CDLI and CPLI provides insight into the characteristics and common trends among the leading companies on carbon disclosure and performance. They highlight good practices in reporting, governance, risk management, verifi cation and emissions reductions activities toward climate change adaptation and mitigation. Additionally, good carbon management and disclosure may be used as a proxy for superior, forward-looking management with a better understanding of the companies’ risk profi le.
The interrelations between CDLI and CPLI companies show how companies with better data can use this advantage within the business to drive value-adding activities. Companies in the CDLI and CPLI typically show a deeper understanding of, and address more pro-actively, the risks and opportunities presented by climate change. Their transparency and willingness to disclose information is attractive to investors.
For further information on the CDLI and the CPLI and how scores are determined, please visit www.cdproject.net/guidance.
About the CDLI
The CDLI provides a valuable perspective on the range of responses to CDP’s questionnaire. To qualify for entry into the CDLI, a company must make their responses public, submit them before the CDP questionnaire deadline, and achieve a disclosure score within the top 10% of the Canada 200.
The 2012 CDLI is a list of the top 20 companies with the highest carbon disclosure scores from the Canada 200 sample (see Figure 15). The CDP Scoring Methodology used to evaluate company responses is publicly available on CDP’s website but generally speaking, the carbon disclosure score represents the quality and comprehensiveness of individual company responses. While the quantity and depth of information provided is measured, the scoring process does not assess or place judgment on the content or merit of the action taken by respondents.
Range of scores
The range of scores for the 2012 CDLI is 77 to 91 with an average CDLI score of 83. This is greater than that of the 2011 CDLI, which ranged from 69 to 92 with an average score of 77––indicating an improvement in climate change reporting among leading Canadian companies. This is also refl ected by an improvement in the average disclosure scores for the Canada 200, which has increased 9% to 60 (from 55 in 2011).
However, these scores are still signifi cantly lower than those of the Global 500 CDLI companies, which range from 94 to 100. Additionally, the range of scores in the full respondent sample of the Canada 200 is very wide––from 9 to 91 (see Figure 16). At least one company in every sector scored 50 or below, suggesting that not all companies are equally advanced in their climate change reporting.
Sector representation and recognition of repeat top
performers
A placement on the 2012 CDLI refl ects a continued commitment to disclose information on corporate climate change issues. For example, 50% (10) of the 2012 CDLI were also leaders in 2011. Going further back in history, approximately 75% (15) of the 2012 CDLI have been honored with CDLI status at some point in the past.
Figure 17 illustrates that in 2012, the Energy sector represented the largest proportion of CDLI companies at 35% (7). By contrast, Energy represented 20% (4) of the 2011 CDLI. The Financials sector ranked second, comprising 20% (4) of the 2012 CDLI, down from 25% (5) in 2011. Meanwhile, fewer companies from the Materials sector are in the 2012 CDLI, which is mainly driven by the fact that some past CDLI companies are no longer in the Canada 200 sample. The Industrials, Utilities, Communication and High Tech, and Consumer Discretionary sectors each comprise a similar percentage of the CDLI as they did last year. Consumer Staples was the only sector with no CDLI representation.
17 CDLI SECTOR REPRESENTATION OF CANADA 200
7 (35%) Energy4 (20%) Financials3 (15%) Industrials3 (15%) Materials1 (5%) Utilities1 (5%) Communication and High Tech1 (5%) Consumer Discretionary
24
Comparison of CDLI to Canada 200 respondents
Figure 18 shows that companies from the CDLI outperformed the rest of the Canada 200 respondents in all key disclosure categories.1 This outperformance was highest in the categories of stakeholder engagement (e.g. GHG verifi cation/assurance), opportunities and emissions management.
For “Stakeholder Engagement”, the 2012 CDLI recognizes that the quality of data reported is increasingly important to their stakeholders. As a result, leaders are verifying/assuring emissions data more frequently than non-CDLI companies: 85% (17) of CDLI companies verifi ed Scope 1 emissions, versus 24% (20) for non-CDLI, and 60% (12) of CDLI verifi ed Scope 2 emissions, against 16% (13) for non-CDLI.
With “Opportunities” increasing from climate change-related issues, leaders in the 2012 CDLI are more thoroughly identifying, describing and estimating the fi nancial impact of climate change-related opportunities, or detailing why these opportunities do not exist.
“Emissions Management” was also prevalent among the 2012 CDLI Leaders. Nearly 90% (18) of CDLI companies are setting emissions reduction targets and revealing the progress toward achievement of these targets, while only 31% (26) of non-CDLI companies set targets.
1. Disclosure score key categories are based on the following areas of the
questionnaire: Emissions Management - Absolute and/or intensity targets,
emissions reduction activities, and change in emissions from prior year.
Emissions Reporting - Reporting of Scopes 1, 2, and 3 emissions data
and % operational spend on energy costs and energy use. Governance and Strategy - Level of oversight, incentives/rewards, integrated strategy,
risk management approach, and emissions trading. Opportunities -
Opportunities. Risks - Risks. Stakeholder Engagement - Verifi cation/
assurance, communication of sustainability information to public, and
engagement with regulators.
18 KEY INDICATORS OF DISCLOSURE LEADERS VS. REST OF CANADA 200 RESPONDENTS
• Canada 200 Non-CDLI• Canada 200 CDLI
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f P
ossib
leC
arb
on
Dis
clo
su
re S
co
re
31%
39%
61%
48%
75%79%
69%72%
90%
74%
97% 96%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Key Disclosure Category
StakeholderEngagement
Opportunites Emissions Management
Risks Emissions Reporting
Governance & Strategy
25
In 2012, all of the responding companies in the Canada 200 were reviewed, analyzed and scored for the quality of performance on actions taken to mitigate climate change.
Performance Scoring and the Carbon Performance
Leadership Index Methodology
All companies with a carbon disclosure score above 50 were eligible to receive a performance band.1 It is important to note that disclosure scores of less than 50 do not necessarily indicate poor performance; rather, they indicate insuffi cient information to evaluate performance.
Performance is grouped into six bands: A (representing highest performance), A-, B, C, D and E (representing lowest performance). The Carbon Performance Leadership Index, however, only includes Performance Band A.
19 2012 CANADA 200 CARBON PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP INDEX (CPLI)
1. More information can be found in the information request, supporting
methodology and guidance documents, as well as within individual company
responses at www.cdproject.net.
Company Name Sector 2012 Performance Band
Bank of Montreal Financials A
2012 Canada 200 Carbon
Performance Leadership Index (CPLI)
20 CANADA 200 RESPONDENTS IN EACH
CARBON PERFORMANCE BAND BY MARKET
CAPITALIZATION
• Less than $5B• Between $5B to $12B• Greater than $12B
Nu
mb
er
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Carbon Performance Band
15
10 92
510
8
2
9
6
11
0
5
10
15
20
25
A B C D E
1
Therefore, to enter the CPLI (Performance Band A), a company must:• Make their responses public and submit them via CDP’s
Online Response System• Attain a performance score greater than 85• Score maximum performance points on question 13.1a
(absolute emissions performance) for GHG reductions due to emissions reduction actions over the past year
• Disclose gross global Scope 1 and Scope 2 fi gures• Score maximum performance points for verifi cation of
Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions
Note: Companies that achieve a performance score high enough to warrant inclusion in the CPLI, but do not meet all of the other CPLI requirements, are classifi ed as Performance A- and are not included in the CPLI.
A listing of companies and their performance bands is included in Appendix I. Companies that did not qualify for a performance band appear in Appendix I without a band in the 2012 score column.
2012 Carbon Performance Leader
Bank of Montreal was the only respondent from the Canada 200 sample that emerged as CPLI in 2012 (see Figure 19). This ranking is an indication of good carbon performance on several key performance metrics.
It is interesting to note a possible relationship between high market capitalization and strong carbon performance. Respondents with a market capitalization of over $12B had the most representation across the Carbon Performance Bands A, B, and C (see Figure 20). This will be a point to revisit in the future as respondents become more familiar with the CDP Scoring Methodology.
26
21 AVERAGE CARBON PERFORMANCE SCORE OF
CANADA 200 VS. PERFORMANCE BAND “A” AND
“B” RESPONDENTS
• A - Band• B - Band• Average
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f P
ossib
le C
arb
on
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e S
co
re
Key Performance Category
100%93%
89%83%
90%
71%78%
54%52%
26%
35%
23%
10
0
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Governance StakeholderCommunications
Strategy Achievements
Opportunities to improve carbon performance among
Canada 200 respondents
The CDP Scoring Methodology awards performance points for effective corporate management, identifi cation of risks and opportunities considerations related to climate change, as well as emissions management. The following practices demonstrate thorough and detailed ways in which companies can score high performance points across the key performance score categories.2 “Best practices” are actions, which if correctly undertaken, increase the performance score.
Carbon performance best practices include: • Governance: Providing monetary incentives linked
to a performance indicator that incentivizes meeting emissions reduction targets. While most companies reported board or senior management oversight, leading companies went further by incentivizing executives for the effective management of climate change issues.
• Stakeholder Communications: Verifying and assuring emissions data, engaging with policy makers on climate change, and disclosing climate change information in mainstream fi lings. Only 25% (26) and 15% (16) of companies received performance scores for Scope 1 and 2 verifi cation respectively.
• Strategy: Setting targets for absolute emissions or
emissions intensity and redefi ning short and long-term business strategy according to the infl uence of climate
change. While climate change risks and opportunities are being integrated in company risk management procedures and overall business strategy, signifi cant opportunity remains for setting emissions reduction targets.
• Achievements: Making progress towards emissions reduction targets and reducing emissions through the implementation of activities. While thirty-fi ve percent (36) of companies reported a decrease in absolute emissions for Scope 1 and 2, few companies identifi ed emissions reductions initiatives as the cause.
Recalling that a performance score greater than 85 warrants a performance band A, Figure 21 shows that Canada 200 companies have an opportunity to improve across all performance categories.
2. Performance score key categories are based on the following areas of the
questionnaire: Governance – includes board or other senior management
oversight and monetary incentives for management of climate change;
Stakeholder Communications – includes verifi cation of emissions,
engagement with policy makers and advocating climate change mitigation, as
well as disclosure of climate change information in mainstream fi lings or other
external communications; Strategy – includes implementation of emissions
reduction targets, integration of climate change into risk management
procedures, integration of climate change risks or opportunities into overall
business strategy; Achievements – includes reporting of emissions reduction
due to implementation of activities, and demonstrating progress toward
meeting targets.
27
The following pages will analyze the CDP responses from each sector of the Global Industry Classifi cation Standard (GICS). The purpose of this is to provide a deeper understanding of the Canada 200 responses through sector-specifi c analysis and comparisons.
The key fi ndings from a cross-sector comparison include:• Industrials identifi ed the most risks and opportunities per
respondent across all risk categories (See Figure 22).• Industrials, Energy, and Utilities identifi ed the most
regulatory risks and opportunities per respondent––and among the largest total Scope 1 emissions (See Figure 23).
• Industrials had the highest average disclosure score relative to the average score of CDLI from that sector (See Figure 24).
• Communication and High Tech had a payback period of less than one year for 50% of emissions reduction activities implemented (See Figure 25). Energy had a payback period of over three years for approximately 45% of activities implemented.
Canada 200 Sector Snapshot Overview
24 AVERAGE CARBON DISCLOSURE SCORE OF
SECTOR VS. CANADA 200 CDLI
• 2012 Sector CDLI • 2012 Sector
100806040200Average Carbon Disclosure Score
Materials
Industrials
Financials
Energy
ConsumerStaplesConsumerDiscretionaryCommunicationand High Tech
Utilities 79
83
81
84
83
80
82
68
52
71
64
60
59
58
22 AVERAGE NUMBER OF RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES
REPORTED PER COMPANY IN EACH SECTOR
• Regulatory • Physical • Other
Financials
Utilities
Energy
Industrials
Consumer Staples
Risks Opportunities
Communicationand High Tech
ConsumerDiscretionary
Materials
Average
0 2 4 68 6 4 2
0.9 1.7 2.2 1.5 0.60.9
1.5 2.5 3.4 2.6 1.4 1.6
1.1 1.3 3.6 2.2 0.41.0
0.8 2.3 2.8 1.8 0.8 0.5
0.7 1.6
0.8
1.2
0.4 2.0 1.5 1.2
1.31.11.0 0.3 0.30.4
0.8 0.9
1.1 1.8 1.1 0.11.2
1.5 1.6 1.1 0.51.0
1.8 0.8 0.90.7
25 DISTRIBUTION IN PAYBACK PERIOD OF
EMISSIONS REDUCTION ACTIVITIES BY SECTOR
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years
Percentage of Emissions Reduction Activities
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Industrials (15)
Consumer Staples (12)
Energy (38)
Financials (53)
Consumer Discretionary (20)
Materials (24)
Communication and High Tech (14)7 5 2
10410
3116
211616
171110
372
312
23 TOTAL REPORTED EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
Scope 1: Scope 2: 187 Mt CO2e 25 Mt CO2e53% Energy 49% Energy27% Utilities 27% Materials13% Materials 8% Financials6% Industrials 5% Consumer Staples2% Other* 4% Consumer Discretionary* Refers to all other sectors 6% Other*not listed.
28
Se
cto
r S
na
psh
ot
Sector Themes
Climate change is part of management incentives and company strategies. “All employees have the ability to earn rewards and
recognition for specific actions and suggestions related to energy reductions, particularly as part of employee engagement initiatives.” – Bell Aliant Inc.
Sustainability initiatives are targeting energy effi ciency and new goods and services. “We have an Energy Management program that is focused
on improving efficiency and reducing absolute consumption across our operations. In 2011, this resulted in $6 million in efficiency savings.” – Telus Corporation
“We are estimating that our teleconference services conducted by our customers in 2010 prevented the emission of approximately 1.8 megatonnes of CO2e.” – BCE Inc.
Sector Opportunities
Regulation and extreme weather can drive revenue. “Large emitters may be impacted [by legislation] and
will be stimulated to reduce emissions. This may create additional opportunities for Rogers in virtual technologies that may replace traditional greenhouse gas emitting activities. Examples of these technologies include e-billing, e-commerce, internet meeting tools, video conferencing, and internet based services.” – Rogers Communications Inc.
“Potential extreme climate conditions also represent an opportunity for our Resiliency services... [which] help businesses mitigate their risks from things such as power outages or unavailable computer servers.” – Bell Aliant Inc.
Sector Risks
Regulation and extreme weather can also increase costs. “The many regulations present the risk of having to manage
and to be in compliance with multiple versions of national mandatory reporting and cap-and-trade systems. Duplicate or inconsistent regulations could potentially increase cost and impede our competitiveness.” – Celestica Inc.
“With increasing temperatures, there will be more demand put on cooling equipment. Greater demand on cooling requirements will result in increased costs.” – Rogers
Communications Inc.
Response SummarySector Response Rate:
71% (10 of 14) By Industry Within Sector:
Cable and Satellite (2), Integrated Telecommunication Services (4), IT Consulting and Other Services (1), Other (3)
Largest Non-Respondents:*,1
Shaw Communications Inc., OpenText CorporationLargest New Respondents:1
N/AProportion of Canada 200 Market Cap:2
$94B (87%) of $108B
Communication and High Tech
Sector Leaders Disclosure Score
TELUS Corporation 82
BCE Inc. 74
Cogeco Cable Inc. 69
20
0
40
60
80
100
Em
issi
ons
Man
agem
ent
Em
issi
ons
R
epor
ting
Gov
erna
nce
& S
trat
egy
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Ris
ks
Sta
keho
lder
E
ngag
emen
t
62 6661
90
7970
7597
76 75 7996
4337 39
72
5246 48
74
3631 31
69
DISCLOSURE BREAKDOWN FOR SECTOR VS. CANADA 200
• 2012 Sector • 2011 Sector • 2012 Canada 200 Non-CDLI • 2012 Canada 200 CDLI
TOTAL EMISSIONS3
• 2012 • 2011
Respondents
Scope 1284,421
294,523
919,773
888,049
145,328
119,727
90%
89%
90%
89%
60%
56%Scope 3
Scope 23
Tonnes CO2e
PAYBACK PERIOD OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION
INITIATIVES FOR MOST COMMON ACTIVITY TYPES
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years (Total Initiatives)
Energy Efficiency:Building Services
Energy Efficiency:Processes
Transportation: Fleet
17% 67%
33%
100%
33% 33%
17% (6)
(3)
(2)
* Largest non-respondents include companies that are non-responding (NR) and declined to partipate (DP). See Appendix I (pgs. 36-41) for more detail.1. Based on market capitalization data available from Thomson Reuters as of 2011. 2. Based on stock market data as of December 30, 2011.3. Percentage of respondents that reported emissions and total disclosed emissions for the sector.
29
Se
cto
r Sn
ap
sh
ot
Sector Themes
Respondents are monitoring emissions, implementing initiatives, and working towards setting specifi c targets in the future. “Measuring [our] footprint…was an important initial step…
to understand the impact it had on the environment and the implications of setting reductions targets.” – Canadian Tire
Corporation, Limited
Support for initiatives is driven through employee engagement and dedicated sustainability budgets. “[R]esources are allocated to various business groups
to facilitate the execution of our sustainability strategy… responsibilities include monitoring and improving our environmental footprint…energy efficiency…packaging, minimizing waste in our processes, and fleet fuel efficiency.” – Tim Hortons Inc.
Sector Opportunities
Reputation and consumer preferences create additional demand for existing products and services. “While furthering the groundwork that was established in 2009,
in 2010 Canadian Tire continued its efforts to reduce its scope 3 carbon footprint and precede provincial legislation by expanding its brand of Blue Planet products to include recycled tire floor mats.” – Canadian Tire Corporation, Limited
Energy effi ciency upgrades and transportation initiatives provide opportunities to reduce operational costs. “Tim Hortons implemented various energy saving initiatives
in their distribution centers which are expected to decrease annual C02 emissions by 37,000 tonnes and provide monetary savings of $45,000 per year.” - Tim Hortons Inc.
Sector Risks
A fragmented regulatory environment, including current and upcoming carbon taxes, is expected to impact operations and costs directly or indirectly through partners, customers and suppliers. “Fragmented regulatory landscape and the adoption of
inconsistent regional approaches to climate change policy creates some degree of uncertainty.” – Russel Metals Inc.
Response SummarySector Response Rate:
60% (9 of 15) By Industry Within Sector:
Distributors (3), Home Improvement Retail (2), Movies and Entertainment (0), Other (4)
Largest Non-Respondents:*,1
Dollarama Inc. Largest New Respondents:1
N/AProportion of Canada 200 Market Cap:2
$32B (76%) of $42B
Consumer Discretionary
Sector Leaders Disclosure Score
Tim Hortons Inc. 80
Canadian Tire Corporation 76
Aimia 75
20
0
40
60
80
100
Em
issi
ons
Man
agem
ent
Em
issi
ons
R
epor
ting
Gov
erna
nce
& S
trat
egy
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Ris
ks
Sta
keho
lder
E
ngag
emen
t
6367
8576 75 71
4743
51 49
25 28
6190
7597
7996
3972
4874
3169
DISCLOSURE BREAKDOWN FOR SECTOR VS. CANADA 200
• 2012 Sector • 2011 Sector • 2012 Canada 200 Non-CDLI • 2012 Canada 200 CDLI
TOTAL EMISSIONS3
• 2012 • 2011
Respondents
762,248
789,640
1,202,763
1,305,416
3,129,505
3,083,245
100%
92%
100%
92%
67%
67%
Scope 1
Scope 3
Scope 23
Tonnes CO2e
PAYBACK PERIOD OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION
INITIATIVES FOR MOST COMMON ACTIVITY TYPES
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years (Total Initiatives)
Energy Efficiency:Building Services
Low Carbon Energy Installation
Energy Efficiency:Processes
75%
33%
100%
33% 33%
25% (8)
(3)
(3)
* Largest non-respondents include companies that are non-responding (NR) and declined to partipate (DP). See Appendix I (pgs. 36-41) for more detail.1. Based on market capitalization data available from Thomson Reuters as of 2011. 2. Based on stock market data as of December 30, 2011.3. Percentage of respondents that reported emissions and total disclosed emissions for the sector.
30
Se
cto
r S
na
psh
ot
Sector Themes
Emissions reduction initiatives primarily target cost savings, as many respondents have not yet set emissions reduction targets. “Saputo did not have active emissions reduction targets
in the reporting year. However…it has implemented a number of initiatives, including equipment upgrades, energy efficiency projects and collaboration with suppliers and utility partners, to reduce emissions and improve its environmental stewardship.” – Saputo Inc.
Companies are reporting an increase in absolute emissions, resulting from organic and inorganic growth in their retail footprint and production capacity.
Sector Opportunities
Some respondents see an opportunity in the regulation of emissions planning and reporting, citing a competitive advantage as they have already prepared for potential regulatory changes. “If a comprehensive carbon pricing system were applied
across all of our markets and covered the entire retail industry… Walmart’s early action on emission reductions represents a competitive advantage over other retailers that have not performed such projects.” – Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Sector Risks
Physical climate parameters are likely to impact respondents’ agricultural operations and supply chains, increasing their operational costs. “Changing temperatures and precipitations patterns may lead
to decreased availability of critical raw materials in the supply chain, especially agricultural commodities. These will lead to the increased operational cost or even disrupt the business operations along the entire value chain of Nestlé.” – Nestlé
Response SummarySector Response Rate: 64% (7 of 11) By Industry Within Sector:
Food Retail (4), Drug Retail (1), Packaged Foods and Meats (2), Other (0)
Largest Non-Respondents:*,1
Alimentation Couche-Tard, Jean Coutu Group Inc.Largest New Respondents:1
N/AProportion of Canada 200 Market Cap:2
$47B (77%) of $60B
Consumer Staples
Sector Leaders Disclosure Score
Metro Inc. 77
Saputo Inc. 67
George Weston Ltd. 60
20
0
40
60
80
100
Em
issi
ons
Man
agem
ent
Em
issi
ons
R
epor
ting
Gov
erna
nce
& S
trat
egy
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Ris
ks
Sta
keho
lder
E
ngag
emen
t
68 66
8680 80 80
4031
46 48
35 34
6190
7597
7996
3972
4874
3169
DISCLOSURE BREAKDOWN FOR SECTOR VS. CANADA 200
• 2012 Sector • 2011 Sector • 2012 Canada 200 Non-CDLI • 2012 Canada 200 CDLI
TOTAL EMISSIONS3
• 2012 • 2011
Respondents
1,375,293
1,319,589
1,476,144
1,433,490
568,908
343,669
100%
100%
100%
100%
57%
57%
Scope 1
Scope 3
Scope 23
Tonnes CO2e
PAYBACK PERIOD OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION
INITIATIVES FOR MOST COMMON ACTIVITY TYPES
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years (Total Initiatives)
Energy Efficiency:Processes
Energy Efficiency:Building Services
75%
67% 33%
25% (4)
(3)
* Largest non-respondents include companies that are non-responding (NR) and declined to partipate (DP). See Appendix I (pgs. 36-41) for more detail.1. Based on market capitalization data available from Thomson Reuters as of 2011. 2. Based on stock market data as of December 30, 2011.3. Percentage of respondents that reported emissions and total disclosed emissions for the sector.
31
Se
cto
r Sn
ap
sh
ot
Sector Themes
Companies are engaging with government and various industry groups to address GHG emissions reduction strategies, policy, and guidance on emissions data. “Through one of the CAPP committees, industry members are
combining and providing additional equipment and processing data to support emissions modelling ..." – Enerplus
Corporation
Companies are actively implementing emissions reduction initiatives, but are less active in setting emissions targets and verifying emissions data. “… it is difficult to accurately calculate our base line
emissions. We … are formulating meaningful strategies to clearly identify baseline emissions, and improve the reliability of the data.” – Baytex Energy Corp.
Sector Opportunities
Emissions reduction, energy effi ciency, waste reduction initiatives and carbon credits are utilized to mitigate regulatory risks. “The BC Carbon Tax has prompted improved fuel gas
management … facility design will optimize our fuel gas consumption and reduce the environmental footprint of those facilities.” – ARC Resources Ltd.
Voluntary reporting initiatives are used as a means to safeguard a company’s reputation. “We are committed to advancing environmental stewardship,
[…]. We publicly report our environmental performance … in the CR Report, the DJSI report and the Carbon Disclosure Project.” – Cenovus Energy Inc.
Sector Risks
Companies are faced with uncertainty surrounding regulation, cap and trade schemes and carbon taxes. “The magnitude of the impact on Suncor is viewed as high,
as the complexity of possible regulations could result in lower shareholder returns and higher costs for new facilities as well as for retrofits to existing facilities.” – Suncor Energy Inc.
Extreme weather patterns are impacting supply chains. “Severe weather events may disrupt supplies or interrupt the
operations of Imperial facilities.” – Imperial Oil
Response SummarySector Response Rate:
44% (24 of 55) By Industry Within Sector:
Integrated Oil and Gas (4), Oil and Gas E&P (18), Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation (1), Oil and Gas Equipment and Services (1), Other (0)
Largest Non-Respondents:*,1
Pembina Pipeline Corporation, MEG Energy Corp.Largest New Respondents:1 TransCanada CorporationProportion of Canada 200 Market Cap:2
$338B (83%) of $408B
Energy
Sector Leaders Disclosure Score
ARC Resources Ltd. 90
Enbridge Inc. 84
Suncor Energy Inc. 84
20
0
40
60
80
100
Em
issi
ons
Man
agem
ent
Em
issi
ons
R
epor
ting
Gov
erna
nce
& S
trat
egy
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Ris
ks
Sta
keho
lder
E
ngag
emen
t
6962
8170
8576
4635
5743 44
32
6190
7597
7996
3972
4874
3169
DISCLOSURE BREAKDOWN FOR SECTOR VS. CANADA 200
• 2012 Sector • 2011 Sector • 2012 Canada 200 Non-CDLI • 2012 Canada 200 CDLI
TOTAL EMISSIONS3
• 2012 • 2011
Respondents
99,404,458
102,650,438
13,253,638
12,054,205
695,011
3,346,522
96%
96%
88%
83%
46%
33%
Scope 1
Scope 3
Scope 23
Tonnes CO2e
PAYBACK PERIOD OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION
INITIATIVES FOR MOST COMMON ACTIVITY TYPES
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years (Total Initiatives)
Energy Efficiency:Processes
Fugitive EmissionsReductions
Low Carbon Energy Installation
44% 31%
80%20%
33% 22% 44%
25% (16)
(9)
(5)
* Largest non-respondents include companies that are non-responding (NR) and declined to partipate (DP). See Appendix I (pgs. 36-41) for more detail.1. Based on market capitalization data available from Thomson Reuters as of 2011. 2. Based on stock market data as of December 30, 2011.3. Percentage of respondents that reported emissions and total disclosed emissions for the sector.
32
Se
cto
r S
na
psh
ot
Sector Themes
Respondents have realized energy effi ciency initiatives with short payback periods. “...we initiated lighting retrofits at most branches. This retrofit
initiative included installing daylight harvesting systems at locations that have good sources of natural light. The program is expected to save 2.4 million kwh per year, a 10% reduction from current levels. This completed initiative resulted in a reduction in energy consumption, carbon emissions, and maintenance costs.” – Bank of Montreal
Companies are faced with data uncertainties such as metering constraints; however, companies are implementing initiatives to develop better data management approaches. “We are developing a GHG management program, beginning
with gaining experience in data collection and emissions calculation… working to better understand the drivers or changes in our emission profile.” – Sun Life Financial Inc.
Sector Opportunities
Companies have identifi ed opportunities driven by changes in regulation, such as reduced operational costs and new areas for investment. “For several years, the Bank has supported companies doing
business in the environment sector (e.g., recycling of electronics) by granting them financing. Changes in regulatory requirements can create sources of opportunity, such as the increasing demand for cleaner energy and recycling solutions.” – National
Bank of Canada
Sector Risks
Companies are challenged by the potential impact of climate change on consumer behaviour and corporate reputation. “Stakeholders’ expectations with respect to the environment
and climate change are increasing. There is potential for reputational risk if TMX Group or its customers are perceived to have inadequate business responses to climate change impacts. Maintaining a positive reputation among stakeholders is very important to TMX Group.” – TMX Group Inc.
Response SummarySector Response Rate:
75% (21 of 28) By Industry Within Sector: Diversified Banks (7), Other Diversified Financials (2);
Insurance (5), Real Estate (2), Other (5)Largest Non-Respondents:*,1 Fairfax Financial Holdings , CI Financial Corp., ONEX
CorporationLargest New Respondents:1
Power Financial Corporation, Power Corporation of CanadaProportion of Canada 200 Market Cap:2
$345B (79%) of $436B
Financials
Sector Leaders Disclosure Score
Bank of Montreal 91
TMX Group Inc. 84
Bank of Nova Scotia (Scotiabank) 82
20
0
40
60
80
100
Em
issi
ons
Man
agem
ent
Em
issi
ons
R
epor
ting
Gov
erna
nce
& S
trat
egy
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Ris
ks
Sta
keho
lder
E
ngag
emen
t
70 70
8175
8573
5240
5450 47
33
6190
7597
7996
3972
4874
3169
DISCLOSURE BREAKDOWN FOR SECTOR VS. CANADA 200
• 2012 Sector • 2011 Sector • 2012 Canada 200 Non-CDLI • 2012 Canada 200 CDLI
TOTAL EMISSIONS3
• 2012 • 2011
Respondents
663,329
726,274
2,170,716
2,444,076
3,275,779
3,388,836
95%
75%
95%
85%
71%
60%
Scope 1
Scope 3
Scope 23
Tonnes CO2e
PAYBACK PERIOD OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION
INITIATIVES FOR MOST COMMON ACTIVITY TYPES
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years (Total Initiatives)
Energy Efficiency:Building Services
Energy Efficiency:Processes
Energy Efficiency:Building Fabric
35% 42%
80%20%
43% 43% 14%
23% (26)
(14)
(5)
* Largest non-respondents include companies that are non-responding (NR) and declined to partipate (DP). See Appendix I (pgs. 36-41) for more detail.1. Based on market capitalization data available from Thomson Reuters as of 2011. 2. Based on stock market data as of December 30, 2011.3. Percentage of respondents that reported emissions and total disclosed emissions for the sector.
33
Se
cto
r Sn
ap
sh
ot
Sector Themes
Companies are integrating climate change into their business strategy to drive productivity, innovation, reduce consumption, and increase effi ciency. “On an annual basis, climate change is discussed as part
of the company’s strategic planning and management review- which includes consideration of targets, performance improvements and resourcing of initiatives.” – Stantec Inc.
Companies are not setting emissions reduction targets; however, they are engaging in effi ciency initiatives to lower their energy consumption and operating costs. “SNC-Lavalin does not currently have a GHG reductions
program. Business units are encouraged to implement their own energy efficient programs....While reducing energy demand; these have had minimal impacts on GHG emissions as all energy consumed in the head office is purchased hydro-electricity with an extremely low carbon footprint.” – SNC-
Lavalin Group Inc.
Sector Opportunities
Cap and trade is seen as opportunity to increase demand for products and services; carbon/energy taxes are seen as opportunity to increase energy effi ciency initiatives. “Cap and Trade… should provide opportunities for SNC-
Lavalin Environment and Capital groups to offer services and to structure deals.” – SNC-Lavalin Group Inc.
Changing weather patterns are seen as an opportunity that will increase demand for companies’ products and services. “Warming temperatures and their impact on navigational
waters could increase our traffic volumes when shipping alternatives are not possible due to climatic changes.” – Canadian National Railway Company
Sector Risks
Uncertainties surrounding regulation and carbon/energy taxes are considered to have an impact on capital or operational costs. “Carbon Taxes in BC, Canada are at a rate of $0.0621/L
of fuel. This had the potential impact in the order of over $270,000 in 2011 to The Company.” – Progressive Waste
Solutions Ltd.
Response SummarySector Response Rate:
67% (8 of 12) By Industry Within Sector:
Railroads (2), Aerospace and Defense (1), Construction and Engineering (2), Other (3)
Largest Non-Respondents:*,1 Bombardier Inc., ATCO Ltd.Largest New Respondents:1
Westport InnovationsProportion of Canada 200 Market Cap:2
$61B (82%) of $74B
Industrials
Sector Leaders Disclosure Score
Stantec Inc. 89
SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. 77
Canadian National Railway Company
77
20
0
40
60
80
100
Em
issi
ons
Man
agem
ent
Em
issi
ons
R
epor
ting
Gov
erna
nce
& S
trat
egy
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Ris
ks
Sta
keho
lder
E
ngag
emen
t
80 79
9178
91 89
6154
6559
33 37
6190
7597
7996
3972
4874
3169
DISCLOSURE BREAKDOWN FOR SECTOR VS. CANADA 200
• 2012 Sector • 2011 Sector • 2012 Canada 200 Non-CDLI • 2012 Canada 200 CDLI
TOTAL EMISSIONS3
• 2012 • 2011
Respondents
10,578,939
28,009,104
378,065
393,726
140,453
49,504
100%
100%
100%
75%
75%
50%
Scope 1
Scope 3
Scope 23
Tonnes CO2e
PAYBACK PERIOD OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION
INITIATIVES FOR MOST COMMON ACTIVITY TYPES
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years (Total Initiatives)
Energy Efficiency:Processes
Transportation: Fleet
Fugitive EmissionsReductions
33%
100%
67% 33%
67% (3)
(3)
(3)
* Largest non-respondents include companies that are non-responding (NR) and declined to partipate (DP). See Appendix I (pgs. 36-41) for more detail.1. Based on market capitalization data available from Thomson Reuters as of 2011. 2. Based on stock market data as of December 30, 2011.3. Percentage of respondents that reported emissions and total disclosed emissions for the sector.
34
Se
cto
r S
na
psh
ot
Sector Themes
Defi nition of emissions reduction targets are challenged by changing operations and acquisitions. “AuRico has undergone a significant change in size and scale in the
reporting year… [as such] AuRico does not currently have an accurate base level to judge emission performance.” – AuRico Gold
Emissions reduction initiatives target energy effi ciency and use of transportation. “We upgraded the hot gas expander and steam turbine driver
on the air compressor at [an] acid plant, which is expected to improve energy efficiency and improve steam consumption for an operational savings of 77 million kilowatt hours annually.”
– Potash Corporation of Canada
“Our exploration group in Turkey was able to reduce their GHG emissions 7.7 tonnes of CO2e by installing a pipeline at one of the drill sites which reduced the need for water haulage by truck.” – Inmet Mining Corporation
Sector Opportunities
Companies can improve their reputation in local communities. “[By assisting] our neighbouring communities to implement
adaptation strategies… [or] deal with climate-related disasters (e.g., the flooding near our Donlin Project in Alaska), it will engender more goodwill which will result in real financial benefits.” – Barrick Gold Corporation
Goods and services that enable reduction of GHG emissions are seen as opportunities. “[We offer] specially engineered product offerings with
advanced-generation coatings and other technology to prevent nutrient loss to the environment.” – Agrium Inc.
Sector Risks
There is uncertainty surrounding regulation, cap and trade schemes and carbon taxes. “Lack of certainty makes it particularly challenging to fully
assess risks and opportunities and/or make informed decisions pertaining to energy use and GHG emissions.” – Teck Resources Limited
Changes in average temperature and precipitation pose a large risk. “Changes in climate may facilitate the spread of forest pests
such as the mountain pine beetle, and diseases that can affect trees.” – West Fraser Timber Co.
Response SummarySector Response Rate:
43% (23 of 53) By Industry Within Sector:
Precious Metals and Minerals (10), Diversified Metals and Mining (6), Gold (2), Other (5)
Largest Non-Respondents:*,1
New Gold Inc., Detour Gold Corporation, Lundin Mining Corporation
Largest New Respondents:1 Uranium One Inc., Eldorado Gold CorporationProportion of Canada 200 Market Cap:2
$250B (80%) of $313B
Materials
Sector Leaders Disclosure Score
Teck Resources Limited 88
Barrick Gold Corporation 84
Inmet Mining Corporation 78
20
0
40
60
80
100
Em
issi
ons
Man
agem
ent
Em
issi
ons
R
epor
ting
Gov
erna
nce
& S
trat
egy
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Ris
ks
Sta
keho
lder
E
ngag
emen
t
6266 68 68
81 80
35 38
45 49
31 29
6190
7597
7996
3972
4874
3169
DISCLOSURE BREAKDOWN FOR SECTOR VS. CANADA 200
• 2012 Sector • 2011 Sector • 2012 Canada 200 Non-CDLI • 2012 Canada 200 CDLI
TOTAL EMISSIONS3
• 2012 • 2011
Respondents
24,101,194
28,209,332
7,195,932
10,286,801
694,497
73,948,680
83%
86%
74%
82%
30%
36%
Scope 1
Scope 3
Scope 23
Tonnes CO2e
PAYBACK PERIOD OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION
INITIATIVES FOR MOST COMMON ACTIVITY TYPES
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years (Total Initiatives)
Energy Efficiency:Processes
Other
38%
33% 67%
44% 19% (16)
(3)
* Largest non-respondents include companies that are non-responding (NR) and declined to partipate (DP). See Appendix I (pgs. 36-41) for more detail.1. Based on market capitalization data available from Thomson Reuters as of 2011. 2. Based on stock market data as of December 30, 2011.3. Percentage of respondents that reported emissions and total disclosed emissions for the sector.
35
Sector Themes
Responsibility for climate change lies with the executive team and board members, and all respondents have an integrated climate change risk management approach. “Accountability for environmental performance rests with
the President and CEO of Capital Power, who in turn has delegated critical responsibilities to the Sr. VP., Operations, and the V.P., HS&E.” – Capital Power Corporation
Respondents engage with policy makers to increase awareness of industry regulations and policy, and to advise government on possible responses to climate change. “We have worked collaboratively with government to align
utility strategy and planning with public policy objectives, including increased targets for renewable energy (which enable reductions in carbon-based generation).” – Emera
Inc.
Sector Opportunities
Renewable energy is seen as an opportunity within the sector. “TransAlta’s renewable energy business is forecasted to grow at
200-300MW’s per year. The company is building greenfield wind and geothermal facilities in Canada and the US in response to a growing demand for renewable-based energy, in part to help address government climate change programs.” – TransAlta
Corporation
Sector Risks
Respondents are currently facing regulations and expect more in the future. “Environment Canada announced its intentions for a new
national GHG framework for the electricity sector. […] Nova Scotia’s existing GHG regulations require reductions in NS Power’s emissions similar to the intentions of the federal framework. […] the two levels of government announced they are working together on an “equivalency” agreement that may permit the provincial regulations to take precedent over proposed federal rules […].” – Emera Inc.
All respondents have identifi ed risks in water supply and availability. “The Company’s hydroelectric facilities are dependent upon
the availability of water. Variances in water flow may be caused by uncontrollable weather-related factors affecting precipitation.” – Capital Power Corporation
Response SummarySector Response Rate:
44% (4 of 9) By Industry Within Sector:
Electric Utilities (2), Independent Power Producers and Energy Traders (2), Multi-Utilities (0)
Largest Non-Respondents:*,1
Canadian Utilities Limited, Atlantic Power CorporationLargest New Respondents:1
Algonquin Power & Utilities CorporationProportion of Canada 200 Market Cap:2
$12B (39%) of $31B
Utilities
Sector Leaders Disclosure Score
Emera Inc. 79
Capital Power Corporation 74
TransAlta Corporation 68
20
0
40
60
80
100
Em
issi
ons
Man
agem
ent
Em
issi
ons
R
epor
ting
Gov
erna
nce
& S
trat
egy
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Ris
ks
Sta
keho
lder
E
ngag
emen
t
6877
8176
81 79
54 57
68 70
5571
6190
7597
7996
3972
4874
3169
DISCLOSURE BREAKDOWN FOR SECTOR VS. CANADA 200
• 2012 Sector • 2011 Sector • 2012 Canada 200 Non-CDLI • 2012 Canada 200 CDLI
TOTAL EMISSIONS3
• 2012 • 2011
Respondents
50,056,120
47,369,860
366,340
382,206
-
-
100%
100%
100%
100%
25%
0%
Tonnes CO2e
Scope 1
Scope 3
Scope 23
PAYBACK PERIOD OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION
INITIATIVES FOR MOST COMMON ACTIVITY TYPES
• <1 Year • 1-3 Years • >3 Years (Total Initiatives)
Energy Efficiency:Processes
Low CarbonEnergy Purchase
Low CarbonEnergy Installation
No Payback Periods Disclosed
No Payback Periods Disclosed
No Payback Periods Disclosed
(-)
(-)
(-)
Se
cto
r Sn
ap
sh
ot
* Largest non-respondents include companies that are non-responding (NR) and declined to partipate (DP). See Appendix I (pgs. 36-41) for more detail.1. Based on market capitalization data available from Thomson Reuters as of 2011. 2. Based on stock market data as of December 30, 2011.3. Percentage of respondents that reported emissions and total disclosed emissions for the sector.
36
Company Name Se
cto
r
2012 S
co
re1
(Dis
clo
su
re S
co
re,
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e B
an
d)
2011 R
esp
on
se
Sta
tus
To
tal S
co
pe
1 +
Sc
op
e 2
e
mis
sio
ns
2
Sc
op
e 1
2
Sc
op
e 2
2
Nu
mb
er
of
Sc
op
e 3
C
ate
go
rie
s R
ep
ort
ed
3
Ve
rifi
ca
tio
n/A
ssu
ran
ce
S
tatu
s
Ta
rge
t(s)
Re
po
rte
d
AGF Management Limited FIN DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Agnico-Eagle Mines Limited MAT 43 AQ 339,915 281,398 58,517 Int
Agrium Inc. MAT 56 C AQ 3,441,605 Int
Aimia CD 75 E AQ 7,137 1,139 5,998 1
Alacer Gold MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Alamos Gold Inc. MAT 11 DP
Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp UTIL 50 E X 339,451 316,355 23,096
Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc. CS NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
AltaGas Ltd. EGY 31 AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
ARC Resources Ltd. EGY 90 B AQ 900,284 506,467 393,817 2 VAR Abs
Astral Media Inc. CD NR IN NR NR NR NR NR NR
ATCO Ltd. IND DP AQ DP DP DP DP DP DP
Athabasca Oil Sands Corp. EGY DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Atlantic Power Corporation UTIL DP X DP DP DP DP DP DP
Aurico Gold Inc MAT 58 E X NP NP NP NP NP NP
B2Gold Corp MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Bank of Montreal FIN 91 A AQ 86,753 21,151 65,603 5 VAA Abs
Bank of Nova Scotia (Scotiabank) FIN 82 B AQ 112,348 15,027 97,321 3 VAA
Bankers Petroleum Ltd. EGY 20 AQ
Barrick Gold Corporation MAT 84 B AQ 5,030,690 3,004,464 2,026,226 VAA Abs
Baytex Energy Corp. EGY 64 E AQ 671,230 435,604 235,626
BCE Inc. TCOM4 74 C AQ 215,029 85,598 129,431 1 VAA Abs
Bell Aliant Inc. TCOM4 56 D AQ 131,869 31,484 100,385 2 Abs
Birchcliff Energy Ltd EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
BlackPearl Resources Inc EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Bombardier Inc. IND DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Bonavista Energy Corporation EGY 45 AQ 1,153,907 979,679 174,228
Bonterra Energy Corp EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Brookfi eld Asset Management Inc. FIN 63 D AQ(SA) 731,298 201,794 529,504
Brookfi eld Offi ce Properties Inc. FIN 59 D AQ 587,341 61,641 525,700
CAE Inc. IND 36 AQ 490 490 0
Calfrac Well Services Ltd EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Cameco Corporation MAT 63 D AQ 516,992 190,767 326,225 2 Abs
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC)
FIN 68 C AQ 72,486 23,360 49,126 1
Canadian National Railway Company IND 77 C AQ 4,969,406 4,797,401 172,005 2 Abs/Int
Canadian Natural Resources Limited EGY 38 AQ 16,617,843 14,833,951 1,783,892
Canadian Oil Sands Limited EGY 31 AQ 12,873,014 Int
Appendix I: Table of Emissions,
Scores and Sector Information
37
Company Name Se
cto
r
2012 S
co
re1
(Dis
clo
su
re S
co
re,
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e B
an
d)
2011 R
esp
on
se
Sta
tus
To
tal S
co
pe
1 +
Sc
op
e 2
e
mis
sio
ns
2
Sc
op
e 1
2
Sc
op
e 2
2
Nu
mb
er
of
Sc
op
e 3
C
ate
go
rie
s R
ep
ort
ed
3
Ve
rifi
ca
tio
n/A
ssu
ran
ce
S
tatu
s
Ta
rge
t(s)
Re
po
rte
d
Canadian Pacifi c Railway IND 70 D AQ 3,559,355 3,495,877 63,478 1 Int
Canadian Tire Corporation, Limited CD 76 D AQ 61,648 32,256 29,392 1
Canadian Utilities Limited UTIL DP AQ(SA) DP DP DP DP DP DP
Canadian Western Bank FIN 12 AQ
Canfor Corporation MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Capital Power Corporation UTIL 74 D X 11,919,005 11,919,005 0 2 VAA Int
Capstone Mining Corp MAT DP X DP DP DP DP DP DP
CCL Industries MAT 18 X
Celestica Inc. IT4 62 C AQ 179,404 9,296 170,108
Celtic Exploration Ltd. EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Cenovus Energy Inc. EGY 79 C AQ 5,080,287 4,025,530 1,054,757 1 VAA Int
Centerra Gold Inc. MAT 52 E AQ 321,701 264,676 57,025
CGI Group Inc. IT4 9 AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
China Gold International Resources Corp.
MAT DP X DP DP DP DP DP DP
CI Financial Corp. FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Cineplex Inc. CD NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
CML Healthcare Inc HC NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Cogeco Cable Inc CD4 69 D X 13,516 5,521 7,995 1 Int
Corus Entertainment Inc. CD NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Crescent Point Energy Corporation EGY 62 D AQ 1,127,284 845,116 282,168
Crew Energy Inc. EGY NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Davis + Henderson Corp IT4 NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Detour Gold Corporation MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Dollarama Inc CD DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Dundee Corp. FIN NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Dundee Precious Metals Inc MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Eldorado Gold Corporation MAT 52 E DP 226,474 44,525 181,950
Emera Inc. UTIL 79 B AQ 9,502,627 9,338,674 163,953 VAA Abs
Empire Company Limited CS 57 C AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Enbridge Inc. EGY 84 C AQ 4,646,349 1,641,028 3,005,321 1 Int
Encana Corporation EGY 75 D AQ 6,013,374 5,447,265 566,109 2 VAA
Enerfl ex Ltd EGY DP X DP DP DP DP DP DP
Enerplus Corporation EGY 83 C AQ 759,205 548,453 210,752 2 VAR Int
Ensign Energy Services Inc. EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
European Goldfi elds MAT DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Fairfax Financial Holdings FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Finning International Inc. CD 41 AQ 73,104 42,581 30,523 3
First Capital Realty Inc. FIN 58 D AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
First Majestic Silver Corp MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
First Quantum Minerals Limited MAT 54 E AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Fortis Inc. UTIL DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Franco-Nevada Corporation MAT 15 AQ
38
Company Name Se
cto
r
2012 S
co
re1
(Dis
clo
su
re S
co
re,
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e B
an
d)
2011 R
esp
on
se
Sta
tus
To
tal S
co
pe
1 +
Sc
op
e 2
e
mis
sio
ns
2
Sc
op
e 1
2
Sc
op
e 2
2
Nu
mb
er
of
Sc
op
e 3
C
ate
go
rie
s R
ep
ort
ed
3
Ve
rifi
ca
tio
n/A
ssu
ran
ce
S
tatu
s
Ta
rge
t(s)
Re
po
rte
d
Freehold Royalties Ltd. EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Gabriel Resources Ltd. MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Genworth MI Canada Inc. FIN AQ(SA) NR AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA)
George Weston Limited CS 60 E AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Gildan Activewear Inc. CD 66 D AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Goldcorp Inc. MAT 71 C AQ 1,411,700 667,800 743,900 4 VAA Abs
Grande Cache Coal Corp MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Great-West Lifeco Inc. FIN AQ(SA) DP AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA)
Harry Winston Diamond Corp MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Home Capital Group Inc. FIN DP AQ DP DP DP DP DP DP
HudBay Minerals Inc. MAT 50 C AQ 86,744 71,371 15,373 Abs/Int
Husky Energy Inc. EGY 70 D AQ 9,938,613 8,490,499 1,448,114 VAA Int
IAMGOLD Corporation MAT 40 AQ 281,437 258,179 23,258
IGM Financial Inc. FIN AQ(SA) DP AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA) AQ(SA)
Imperial Oil Limited EGY 61 D AQ 11,663,200 10,285,400 1,377,800 VAA Int
Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.
FIN 41 AQ 397 328 69
Inmet Mining Corporation MAT 78 D AQ 170,593 46,108 124,485 2 Int
Intact Financial Corporation FIN 62 D AQ 13,193 5,715 7,478 1
Ivanhoe Mines Ltd. MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Jean Coutu Group Inc CD5 NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Just Energy Group Inc. UTIL NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Keyera Facilities Income Fund EGY 65 C AQ 1,757,155 1,480,430 276,725 VAA Int
Kinross Gold Corporation MAT 71 D AQ 1,220,037 652,512 567,625 2
Kirkland Lake Gold Inc. MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Laurentian Bank of Canada FIN 43 AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Legacy Oil + Gas Inc. EGY NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Linamar Corporation CD DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Loblaw Companies Limited CS 55 E AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Lundin Mining Corporation MAT IN AQ IN IN IN IN IN IN
MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd. (MDA Corporation)
IT4 DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Magna International Inc. CD 55 E AQ 1,222,940 337,383 885,557
Major Drilling Group International. MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Manitoba Telecom Services TCOM4 43 AQ 18,559 13,167 5,392 Abs
Manulife Financial Corp. FIN 57 C AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Maple Leaf Foods Inc. CS 60 E AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
MEG Energy Corp. EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Methanex Corporation MAT 28 AQ 2,705,262
Metro Inc. CS 77 C AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Minefi nders Corp MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Mullen Group Ltd EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
NAL Energy Corporation EGY NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
39
Company Name Se
cto
r
2012 S
co
re1
(Dis
clo
su
re S
co
re,
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e B
an
d)
2011 R
esp
on
se
Sta
tus
To
tal S
co
pe
1 +
Sc
op
e 2
e
mis
sio
ns
2
Sc
op
e 1
2
Sc
op
e 2
2
Nu
mb
er
of
Sc
op
e 3
C
ate
go
rie
s R
ep
ort
ed
3
Ve
rifi
ca
tio
n/A
ssu
ran
ce
S
tatu
s
Ta
rge
t(s)
Re
po
rte
d
National Bank of Canada FIN 68 D AQ 7,921 3,091 4,830 1 VAR Int
Nevsun Resources Ltd. MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
New Gold Inc. MAT NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Nexen Inc. EGY 78 C AQ 5,824,000 5,790,000 34,000 5 VAA Abs/Int
Niko Resources Ltd. EGY 52 E AQ 33,154 31,255 1,899
North West Company Inc. CS NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Northland Power Inc UTIL NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
NovaGold Resources Inc. MAT NR AQ NR NR NR NR NR NR
ONEX Corporation FIN NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
OpenText Corporation IT4 DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Osisko Mining Corporation MAT NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Pacifi c Rubiales Energy Corp. EGY 67 D IN NP NP NP NP NP NP
Pan American Silver Corp. MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Paramount Resources Ltd. EGY NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Pason Systems Inc EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Pembina Pipeline Corporation EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Pengrowth Energy Corporation EGY 44 NR 1,384,605 857,399 527,206 NP NP NP
Penn West Exploration EGY 65 E AQ 3,429,216 2,211,935 1,217,281 2
PetroBakken Energy Ltd. EGY NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Petrobank Energy and Resources Ltd. EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Petrominerales Ltd. EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Peyto Exploration & Development Corp.
EGY NR AQ NR NR NR NR NR NR
Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc.
MAT 68 D AQ 10,212,800 8,512,800 1,700,000 Int
Power Corporation of Canada FIN 73 D DP NP NP NP NP NP NP
Power Financial Corporation FIN 73 D DP NP NP NP NP NP NP
Precision Drilling Corporation EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Progress Energy Resources Corp. EGY 42 AQ 222,640 221,961 679
Progressive Waste Solutions Ltd. IND 76 C AQ 2,229,192 2,204,626 24,566 1
Provident Energy Ltd. EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Quadra FNX Mining MAT DP NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Quebecor Inc. IND4 57 E AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Reitmans CD NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Research In Motion Limited TCOM4 61 E AQ 93,611 14,572 79,039 4
Rogers Communications Inc. CD4 66 D AQ 151,644 36,443 115,201 1
RONA inc. CD 43 AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Royal Bank of Canada FIN IN AQ IN IN IN IN IN IN
Rubicon Mineral MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Russel Metals Inc. CD 60 E AQ 46,423 30,720 15,703 1
Saputo Inc. CS 61 D AQ 530,688 286,189 244,499 VAR
Semafo Inc. MAT NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Shaw Communications Inc. CD4 DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
40
Company Name Se
cto
r
2012 S
co
re1
(Dis
clo
su
re S
co
re,
Pe
rfo
rma
nc
e B
an
d)
2011 R
esp
on
se
Sta
tus
To
tal S
co
pe
1 +
Sc
op
e 2
e
mis
sio
ns
2
Sc
op
e 1
2
Sc
op
e 2
2
Nu
mb
er
of
Sc
op
e 3
C
ate
go
rie
s R
ep
ort
ed
3
Ve
rifi
ca
tio
n/A
ssu
ran
ce
S
tatu
s
Ta
rge
t(s)
Re
po
rte
d
ShawCor Ltd. EGY NR AQ NR NR NR NR NR NR
Sherritt International Corporation MAT DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Shoppers Drug Mart Corporation CS 49 AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Silver Standard Resources Inc. MAT NR DP NR NR NR NR NR NR
Silver Wheaton Corp. MAT 19 AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Silvercorp Metals Inc. MAT NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. IND 77D AQ 45,392 14,968 30,424 2
SouthGobi Resources Ltd. EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Stantec Inc. IND 89 C AQ 36,326 7,671 28,655 3 VAR Int
Sun Life Financial Inc. FIN 76 B AQ 80,273 32,771 47,502 4
Suncor Energy Inc. EGY 84 B AQ 18,739,477 16,600,796 2,138,681 1 VAA Int
SXC Health Solutions Corp. HC NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Tahoe Resources Inc. MAT NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Talisman Energy Inc. EGY 63 C AQ 12,207,000 12,086,000 121,000 VAA
Teck Resources Limited MAT 88 B AQ 2,954,695 2,655,347 299,348 1 VAR Int
Telus Corporation TCOM4 82 C AQ 371,100 70,000 301,100 3 VAR Abs
Thompson Creek Metals Company Inc.
MAT DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
Thomson Reuters Corporation CD6 61 D AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Tim Hortons Inc. CD 80 C AQ 23,241 19,173 4,068 1 Int
TMX Group Inc. FIN 84 B AQ 4,474 406 4,069 1 VAA Abs
Toromont Industries Ltd. CD 35 AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
Toronto-Dominion Bank FIN 78 B AQ 222,019 47,265 174,754 1 VAA Abs
Tourmaline Oil Corp EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
TransAlta Corporation UTIL 68 C AQ 28,661,377 28,482,086 179,291 VAA Abs/Int
TransCanada Corporation EGY 83 C AQ 12,241,946 12,064,325 177,621 1 VAR Abs/Int
Transcontinental Inc. IND 72 C AQ 114,800 56,100 58,700 3 Int
TransForce Inc. IND DP X DP DP DP DP DP DP
Trican Well Service Ltd. EGY 60 E AQ 294,854 289,060 5,795 2
Trilogy Energy Corp EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Trinidad Drilling Ltd EGY NR X NR NR NR NR NR NR
Uranium One Inc. MAT 43 NR 19,805 7,214 12,591
Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.
HC NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Veresen Inc. EGY DP NR DP DP DP DP DP DP
Vermilion Energy Inc. EGY NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Viterra Inc. CS DP DP DP DP DP DP DP DP
West Fraser Timber Co. Ltd. MAT 55 E AQ NP NP NP NP NP NP
WestJet Airlines Ltd. IND NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Westport Innovations Inc IND 60 E X NP NP NP NP NP NP
Yamana Gold Inc. MAT 76 C AQ 394,203 263,191 131,012 3
41
1. The 2012 score is comprised of the disclosure score number and
performance score letter. Only companies that have scored more than 50 for
their disclosure score are given a performance score. Companies that are in
CDLI or CPLI have the relevant part of the score (disclosure or performance)
in bold text. Companies that have not responded have the relevant response
status code in this column.
2. Emissions fi gures have been rounded to the nearest whole number. Due
to rounding the "Total Scope 1 + Scope 2 Emissions" column may not equal
the "Scope 1" column and "Scope 2" column added together. There has
been a change in the way in which Scope 1 and 2 emissions reported under
CCRF are calculated although this is not expected to cause a major change
in reported emissions. In 2011 the Scope 1 and 2 fi gure was taken as Parent
and subsidiaries under control of the parent whereas in 2012 joint ventures
are also included.
3. Only Scope 3 categories reported using the Greenhouse Gas Protocol
Scope 3 standard categories (as provided in the Online Response System)
are listed here.
4. Company has been recategorized as "Communication and High
Technology" for inclusion in the sector snapshots.
5. Company has been recategorized as "Consumer Staples" for inclusion in
the sector snapshots.
6. Company has been recategorized as "Financials" for inclusion in the sector
snapshots.
Key to Appendix I
Key
AQ Answered questionnaire
AQ(L) Answered questionnaire late
AQ(SA) Company is either a subsidiary or has
merged during the reporting process. See
company in brackets for further information
on company’s status.
IN Provided information
DP Declined to participate
NP Non Public
NR No response
X Company did not fall into one of the CDP
samples in that year
* The company reported Scope 3 emissions
from "Other (upstream)" or "Other
(downstream)" categories; however, these
were not included in the count of 'Number
of Scope 3' categories reported' as they
are not one of the 15 specifi c name Scope
3 types.
VAR Verifi cation/Assurance reported; companies
have reported that they have verifi cation
complete or underway with last year's
statement available but the verifi cation
statement provided has not been awarded
the full points available, or they have not
been scored and therefore their verifi cation
statement has not been assessed.
VAF Verifi cation/Assurance reported as
underway, fi rst year; companies have
reported that they have verifi cation
underway but that it is the fi rst year they
have undertaken verifi cation. In this case
there is no verifi cation statement available
for assessment.
VAA Verifi cation/Assurance approved;
companies have reported that they have
verifi cation complete or underway with last
years certifi cate available and they have
been awarded the full points available for
their statement.
Abs Absolute emissions reduction target
Int Intensity emissions reduction target
Sector Key
CD Consumer Discretionary
CS Consumer Staples
EGY Energy
FIN Financials
HC Healthcare
IND Industrials
IT Information Technology
MAT Materials
TCOM Telecommunications
UTIL Utilities
42
Appendix II: Non-Canada 200
Responding CompaniesCDP would like to recognize all of the Canadian companies outside of the Canada 200 sample that responded to the 2012 Investor CDP questionnaire. The majority of these responses are publicly available via the CDP website: www.cdproject.net
Air Canada
Allseating Corporation
Andean Resources Limited*
Bentall Kennedy
Boardwalk REIT*
Boliden Group*
Brookfi eld Infrastructure
Partner L.P.*
Brookfi eld Renewable Power Inc.*
Canada Post Corporation
Catalyst Paper Corporation
Co-operators Group Limited, The
Daishowa-Marubeni
International Ltd.
Domtar Corporation*
Dorel Industries Inc.
E-L Financial Corporation Limited*
Essar Power Canada Ltd.
Inscape Corporation
Krug Inc.
Lululemon Athletica Inc.
Millar Western Forest Products Ltd.
Newmont Mining Corporation*
Petro-Canada
Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers Inc.*
Sears Canada Inc.*
SunOpta Inc.
*Company was a Canada 200 Respondent in 2011.
43
CDP Canada Partners and SponsorsGlobal Implementation Partner, Report Writer and Typesetter
CDP Silver Canada Consultancy Partners 2012
Zayed Future Energy Prize
In recognition of its work to catalyze the transition to a profi table low carbon economy, drive greenhouse gas emissions reduction and sustainable water use by business and cities, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) has been awarded the top accolade in the SME and NGO category of the Zayed Future Energy Prize.2012 WINNER
In addition, CDP has been generously supported by:
Investment Management Corporation
44
CDP Contacts
Stephen Donofrio
Project Manager and Report [email protected]
Zoe Tcholak-Antitch
DirectorCDP North America
Paula DiPerna
Special AdvisorCDP North America
Sue Howells
Co-Chief Operating Offi cer
Marc Fox
Director, Investor InitiativesCDP North America
Chyrstina Gastelum
Senior ManagerCDP Supply Chain
Andrea Tenorio
ManagerCDP Reporter Services
Carbon Disclosure Project
40 Bowling Green LaneLondon, EC1R 0NEUnited KingdomTel: +44 (0) 20 7970 5660Fax: +44 (0) 20 7691 [email protected]
Carbon Disclosure Project
c/o RPA, 6 W 48th Street, 10th FloorNew York, NY 10036USATel: + 1 (212) 378 2086Fax: + 1 (212) 812 4335https://www.cdproject.net/USA
Accenture Contacts
David Abood
North American Sustainability Lead [email protected]
Losel Tethong
Canadian Sustainability Lead [email protected]
Kristen Caughill
Director, Marketing and Communications––[email protected]
Accenture Inc.
145 King Street West Suite 1401Toronto, Ontario M5H 1J8CanadaTel: 1 416 641 5220www.accenture.com
Carbon Disclosure Project 2012
This report and all of the public responses from corporations are available for download from www.cdproject.net
Our sincere thanks are extended to the following Advisory Council Members:
Tim Adamson, Brigid Barnett, Kim Brand, Jennifer Coulson, Joanne Howard, Jim Johnston, Michael Leering, Robert Peterman, Johanne Pichette, Lauren Sweeney, Losel Tethong
Global Partners