December, 03 2009, 01:03pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Molly Dorozenski, Greenpeace U.S., (646)862-1509
Lisa Manley, The Coca-Cola Company, (404) 676-4571
Coca-Cola Commits to Climate-Friendly Refrigeration Through Engagement With Greenpeace
Investments in supply chain to enable transition to 100 percent HFC-free equipment by 2015
ATLANTA
Days before the United Nations summit on climate change begins in Copenhagen, The Coca-Cola Company and its bottling partners today announced that 100 percent of their new vending machines and coolers will be hydrofluorocarbon-free (1) (HFC-free) by 2015. Coca-Cola is committing to use its scale to aggregate demand and encourage supply as a means of accelerating the transition to HFC-free refrigeration equipment. This announcement is a direct result of work with Greenpeace that began in 2000, and a demonstration that phasing out the use of HFCs is a tangible and near-term action corporations can take to protect the climate.
The transition to HFC-free refrigeration will reduce the equipment's direct greenhouse gas emissions by 99 percent. A recent peer-reviewed report by top scientists shows that HFCs will be responsible for between 28% and 45% of carbon-equivalent emissions by 2050 if society reduces carbon dioxide while leaving HFCs unchecked. Eliminating HFCs in the commercial refrigeration industry would be equivalent to eliminating the annual greenhouse gas emissions of Germany or Japan.
"Climate change is real and the time to act on solutions is now," said Muhtar Kent, Chairman and CEO of The Coca-Cola Company. "Greenpeace has played a critical role in raising our awareness about the need for natural refrigeration. Our announcement today demonstrates a commitment to use our influence in the marketplace to drive innovation and help shape a low-carbon future."
This step by Coca-Cola will help accelerate a market shift in commercial refrigeration away from HFCs. The Coca-Cola Company has invested more than $50 million in research and development to advance the use of climate-friendly cooling technologies. In 2010, The Coca-Cola Company and its bottling partners will purchase a minimum of 150,000 units of HFC-free equipment, effectively doubling the current rate of purchase to enable alignment with an interim goal to purchase 50 percent of all new coolers and vending machines without HFCs by 2012.
The Company and its bottling partners have approximately 10 million coolers and vending machines in place today around the world, comprising the largest element of the Coca-Cola system's total climate impact. As a result of the commitment to eliminate the use of HFCs in this equipment, carbon emission reductions will exceed 52.5 million metric tons over the life of the equipment - the equivalent of taking more than 11 million cars off the road for one year.
"We welcome Coca-Cola's commitment to help tackle climate change; large enterprises have both an opportunity and responsibility to change the game and Coca-Cola's action leaves no excuse for other companies not to follow," said Kumi Naidoo, Executive Director, Greenpeace International.
Coca-Cola currently utilizes two HFC-free solutions. Hydrocarbon refrigeration is used in smaller refrigeration equipment and carbon dioxide (CO2) is used in larger equipment. CO2 is a safe, reliable and energy efficient alternative with positive characteristics as a refrigerant. It does not deplete the ozone layer and it is 1,430 times less damaging to the climate than a typical HFC.
Already, as a direct result of Coca-Cola's supply chain engagement, a major supplier has communicated its intention to build a dedicated CO2 compressor production facility, helping to meet the growing demand for HFC-free refrigeration options throughout the industry.
"Addressing climate change requires leadership and collaboration," said Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "Just days away from the negotiations in Copenhagen, this announcement by Coca-Cola and Greenpeace demonstrates that investments in low-carbon technologies can make business sense."
This announcement is a direct result of discussions with Greenpeace that began in the run-up to the 2000 Sydney Olympics. Greenpeace challenged Coca-Cola to go HFC-free in all of the equipment it supplied to the Games. By the Torino Games in 2006 and the Beijing Games in 2008, the Company was using all HFC-free technology at Olympic venues. For the past five years, the relationship between Greenpeace and Coca-Cola has become increasingly cooperative as both sought a cost-effective alternative to HFCs.
"At Coca-Cola, we are deploying our scale and working with suppliers to deliver cost effective alternatives to HFC, for us and for others." said Rick Frazier, Vice President, Supply Chain, The Coca-Cola Company.
"Greenpeace increasingly works with businesses to make fundamental manufacturing and sourcing changes by connecting regulation, economies of scale and supply chain security," said Amy Larkin, Director of Greenpeace Solutions. "Coca-Cola's commitment today runs ahead of regulation and takes some fear out of rapid change."
Coolers and vending machines impact the climate in three ways: through direct energy use (operating the machine), through chemicals used in the machine's insulation foam, and by leakage or improper end-of-life disposal of the refrigerant gas used in the cooling system. In addition to its refrigerant gas commitment, Coca-Cola developed a proprietary energy management system (EMS) that delivers energy savings of up to 35 percent and has placed over 1.7 million of these units around the world. In 2006, the Company completed the transition to HFC-free insulation foam for all new purchases of refrigeration equipment. Together, HFC-free insulation and HFC-free refrigerant will generate 99 percent fewer direct greenhouse emissions than traditional equipment.
Notes to Editor
Notes to editors:
Dr. Gerd Leipold will take interviews on behalf of Greenpeace International for this announcement. Kumi Naidoo took over from Dr. Leipold on November 15, 2009. Dr. Leipold should be referred to as former Greenpeace International Executive Director.
1. HFC's were invented to replace the ozone-depleting chemicals, CFCs, but have a very high global warming impact. Scientists have projected that we need to cap greenhouse gas emissions within the next decade, then rapidly reduce emissions by mid century to stabilize the atmosphere and avoid dangerous climate change. Uncontrolled HFC consumption and emissions growth would make it much more difficult to reach those goals. Yet alternatives for virtually every application of HFC exist today.
2. Natural refrigerants, as the name suggests, are refrigerants that occur in nature that can be used in refrigerators and air-conditioners. They don't significantly harm the ozone layer or the climate, they are often cheaper and more energy efficient than their fluorinated-gas (F-gas) counterparts, and they have been proven to work in virtually all applications. The three main natural refrigerants in use are hydrocarbons, ammonia and carbon dioxide.
3. For more information on Greenpeace's F-Gas work, go to:
www.greenpeace.org/F-gases. In the early 1990s, Greenpeace set out to find climate-friendly alternative technologies, convinced that there was a way to avoid the HFC route proposed by the chemical industry. The result was the creation of GreenFreeze technology (3) which is now used in over 350 million domestic refrigerators
worldwide. Greenpeace open-sourced the GreenFreeze technology, that uses hydrocarbons. The organisation then marketed, gathered orders, and pre-sold 70,000 refrigeration units (in three weeks) for an East German manufacturer in order to make the retooling of its factory worthwhile. Since March 15, 1993, when the first GreenFreeze refrigerator rolled off the assembly line, 350 million units have been sold in Europe, Russia, Asia and South America by leading brands including Whirlpool, Bosch, Panasonic, LG, Miele, Electrolux, and Siemens. Greenpeace's achievement was recognized by the United Nations Environment Program in 1997, when GreenFreeze received the prestigious UNEP Ozone Award. Greenpeace has received no financial remuneration or royalty for developing the product.
4. To maintain absolute independence, Greenpeace does not accept money from companies, governments or political parties. The organization depends on the donations of its supporters to carry on its nonviolent campaigns to protect the environment.
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000LATEST NEWS
US Reportedly Working to Stop ICC From Issuing Arrest Warrant for Netanyahu
"There is absolutely no reason for Biden to be involved in this," said one analyst. "But once again, Biden steps in to protect Netanyahu from the consequences of the war crimes he commits."
Apr 28, 2024
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reportedly growing increasingly concerned that the International Criminal Court is preparing to issue arrest warrants for him and other top government officials for committing war crimes in the Gaza Strip.
The Times of Israelreported Sunday that the Israeli government, in partnership with the U.S., is "making a concerted effort to head off" possible arrest warrants from the ICC, which first launched its war crimes investigation in the occupied Palestinian territories in 2021.
Israel does not recognize the ICC's jurisdiction and has refused to cooperate with the probe. The ICC says it has jurisdiction over Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.
Citing an unnamed Israeli government source, The Times of Israel reported that "a major focus of the ICC allegations will be that Israel 'deliberately starved Palestinians in Gaza.'" Other officials who could face arrest warrants are Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi.
The Times of Israel's reporting came shortly after Israeli journalist Ben Caspit wrote that Netanyahu is "under unusual stress" over the possibility of arrest warrants and is leading a "nonstop push over the telephone" to forestall ICC action.
Like Israel, the U.S. is not a party to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC in 2002. The legal body is tasked with investigating individuals, not governments.
The U.S., Israel's leading arms supplier, has opposed the ICC's Palestine investigation from the start, with Secretary of State Antony Blinken saying in a 2021 statement that the court "has no jurisdiction over this matter" because "Israel is not a party to the ICC."
But the Biden administration vocally supported the ICC's decision to issue an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over war crimes committed in Ukraine, even though neither Russia nor Ukraine are parties to the Rome Statute.
Seeing commentary that ICC arrest warrants against Israeli officials would create a dangerous precedent because Israel isn’t a party to the Rome Statute.
Guess who else isn’t a party to the Rome Statute?
Russia.
ICC already crossed that bridge with warrant for Putin.
— Brian Finucane (@BCFinucane) April 28, 2024
The Israeli government has been accused of committing numerous war crimes in Gaza since the October 7 Hamas-led attack, including genocide, ethnic cleansing, and using starvation as a weapon of war. Late last year, the human rights group Democracy for the Arab World Now submitted to the ICC the names of dozens of Israeli military commanders who are believed to have been directly involved in violations of international law.
Reports of potentially imminent ICC action have sparked alarm among conservatives in the United States.
U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote on social media Friday that the court should "should stand down on this immediately."
In an
editorial published that same day, The Wall Street Journal suggested the U.S. and United Kingdom could "risk finding Americans and Britons under the gun" next if they don't warn ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan against issuing arrest warrants for Israeli officials. Human rights organizations and legal experts have said Biden and other U.S. officials could be held liable under international law if they continue supporting Israel's war on Gaza.
"Mr. Khan's candidacy was championed by his native Britain and supported by the U.S.," continues the Journal editorial, "so both countries may have influence if they warn Mr. Khan of what will happen if he proceeds."
The Times of Israelnoted Sunday that according to reports in several Israeli media outlets, the U.S. is "part of a last-ditch diplomatic effort to prevent the International Criminal Court from issuing arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials."
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, argued Sunday that "there is absolutely no reason for Biden to be involved in this."
"But once again," Parsi added, "Biden steps in to protect Netanyahu from the consequences of the war crimes he commits, which Biden claims he privately is frustrated about."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Leaked State Department Memo: Israeli Assurances 'Neither Credible Nor Reliable'
"Today's leak should mark a final end to this impunity. President Biden has no choice but to fully enforce the law and halt aid to Israel."
Apr 28, 2024
A newly leaked internal memo shows that officials at four U.S. State Department bureaus don't believe the Israeli government's assurances that it is using American weaponry in Gaza in compliance with international law, rejecting them as "neither credible nor reliable."
The memo, first reported by Reuters on Saturday, is a joint submission from the State Department's bureaus of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; Population, Refugees, and Migration; Global Criminal Justice; and International Organization Affairs.
The leaked document raises "serious concern over non-compliance" with international law, specifically citing the Israeli military's repeated attacks on civilian infrastructure, refusal to investigate or punish those responsible for atrocities, and killing of "humanitarian workers and journalists at an unprecedented rate," according to Reuters.
The memo also points to Israel's arbitrary rejection of humanitarian aid trucks, which has fueled famine in the Gaza Strip. The bureaus' conclusion matches that of officials at the United States Agency for International Development.
Human rights groups have been documenting Israel's atrocities and systematic obstruction of aid for months, but the Biden administration has continued approving weapons sales for the Netanyahu government despite U.S. laws prohibiting arms transfers to countries violating human rights and blocking American humanitarian assistance.
Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), said Saturday that "the State Department's leaked confirmation that Israel has restricted the transport and delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance leaves no doubt: U.S. law requires the suspension of military aid to Israel."
"For too long, the Biden administration has breached or ignored U.S. laws that require the suspension of aid to an abusive regime like Israel, fueling Israeli belligerence and rewarding its atrocities," said Whitson. "It's time for real consequences."
"Suspending military aid is the bare minimum the U.S. must do to avoid further complicity in these abuses."
In March, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant penned a letter assuring the Biden administration that the Israeli military's use of American weaponry has been in line with international law. A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department subsequently indicated that the Biden administration has not found Israel "to be in violation of international humanitarian law," drawing outrage from analysts and members of Congress who say it is obvious Israel is committing war crimes. in Gaza.
The U.S. State Department is expected to deliver its final assessment of Israel's assurances to Congress in early May.
The written assurances from Israel were required under a White House policy known as National Security Memorandum 20 (NSM-20), which has the ostensible aim of preventing "arms transfers that risk facilitating or otherwise contributing to violations of human rights or international humanitarian law."
NSM-20 states that "in furtherance of supporting Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2378-1) and applicable international law," the U.S. will "obtain credible and reliable written assurances from a representative of the recipient country as the Secretary of State deems appropriate that, in any area of armed conflict where the recipient country uses such defense articles, consistent with applicable international law, the recipient country will facilitate and not arbitrarily deny, restrict, or otherwise impede, directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance and United States Government-supported international efforts to provide humanitarian assistance."
Raed Jarrar, DAWN's advocacy director, said Saturday that "Section 620I has been rendered toothless by State Department inaction and special treatment for Israel."
"Today's leak should mark a final end to this impunity. President Biden has no choice but to fully enforce the law and halt aid to Israel," said Jarrar. "From bombing residential towers to blocking food and medicine, Israel's war on Gaza has been marked by utter disregard for civilian life and international law. Suspending military aid is the bare minimum the U.S. must do to avoid further complicity in these abuses. But it's an essential first step to show that even Israel is not above the law."
Details of the internal State Department memo emerged just days after Congress gave final approval to a foreign aid package that includes $17 billion in unconditional military assistance for the Israeli government.
In a joint statement on Friday, dozens of civil society groups warned that the newly approved military aid risks deepening U.S. complicity in an assault that has killed more than 34,000 people and put millions at risk of starvation.
"Not only does this supplemental aid package provide Israel with billions in lethal arms, it also provides the country with privileges above and beyond anything it has ever received, in particular for the war reserve stockpile and offshore procurement," the groups said. "The passage of the supplemental bill further risks U.S. complicity in grave international crimes committed by Israel."
"We urge the administration and Congress to uphold U.S. law and policy and international law by withholding the transfer of additional lethal military aid to Israel," they added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Disgust Greets White House Correspondents' Dinner as Israel Kills Journalists in Gaza
"To sit and schmooze with the president while he sends billions of dollars in weapons to Israel to kill their colleagues in Gaza is unethical and immoral."
Apr 27, 2024
On Saturday night, U.S. reporters and government officials—including President Joe Biden—will gather at the Washington Hilton Hotel for the annual White House Correspondents' Dinner, a glitzy, humor-filled affair that has faced mounting boycott calls in recent weeks as Palestinian journalists in Gaza are targeted and killed by the Israeli military in appalling numbers.
Earlier this month, dozens of Palestinian journalists urged their American colleagues to spurn the invite-only event "as an act of solidarity with us—your fellow journalists—as well as with the millions of Palestinians currently being starved in Gaza due to the Biden administration's continued political, financial, and military backing of Israel."
One journalist, Mehdi Hasan of Zeteo, has heeded the call.
"I have attended the White House Correspondents' Dinner for the past two years," Hasan, a former MSNBC host, wrote on social media Saturday, hours before the event. "I decided not to attend today's dinner (which, to be clear, is hosted by D.C. journalists not the White House) in solidarity with under-fire Palestinian journalists in Gaza who have called for a boycott."
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, at least 97 media workers—92 of them Palestinian—have been killed in Gaza, Israel, and Lebanon since October 7. The Palestinian Journalist Syndicate puts the number higher at 125.
"Israel has killed over 10% of our colleagues," said Shuruq As'ad, director of the Palestine Journalism Hub and supporter of calls to boycott the White House Correspondents' Dinner, which is hosted by the White House Correspondents' Association.
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), an organization representing more than 600,000 media workers across 146 countries, endorsed the boycott push on Saturday, as did the National Writers Union (NWU).
"More than 100 journalists and media workers have been killed in the past six months of Israel's war on Gaza, backed by the United States government," NWU said in a statement. "As a union of journalists and media workers who strive for truth, we refuse to normalize genocide. Stand with journalists in Gaza and amplify the call for a boycott."
Israel's assault on Gaza, which has been fueled by U.S. weapons and diplomatic support, is the deadliest conflict for journalists in decades. Last year, roughly 75% of the journalists killed globally were killed by Israeli forces.
Al Jazeera's Gaza bureau chief, Wael Dahdouh, has lost five family members to Israeli airstrikes, including his 27-year-old son Hamza, who was also a journalist.
"To dine with him as he allows Palestinians to die of starvation by cutting off funding to critical humanitarian aid is despicable."
Press freedom groups have accused the Biden White House of failing to do enough to stop the Israeli military from targeting members of the media, who continue to risk their lives to show the world the devastation Israel is inflicting in Gaza.
"The Biden administration has been all talk when it comes to journalists killed by the Israel Defense Forces," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said earlier this year. "The Biden administration says it cares deeply about journalists' freedom to cover the war but has failed to demand Israel ensure journalists' safety or hold it accountable when it doesn't."
The New York Timesreported that in addition to the jokes, Biden is "expected to issue a more serious warning at a time when journalists around the world are being jailed or detained more frequently for doing their job."
But it remains to be seen whether the president will mention Gaza journalists specifically.
President Biden will address the White House Correspondents Dinner tonight. It’s expected that’ll he’ll mention threats to journalists around the world. Will he mention Israel’s murder of Shireen Abu Aqlah & the scores of Palestinian journalists murdered in Gaza? Probably not. pic.twitter.com/nA6M2t9nK9
— James J. Zogby (@jjz1600) April 27, 2024
Protests are expected outside the dinner's venue, but as NBC Newsreported, "protests inside the event itself are much less common and perhaps unprecedented, given the tight security."
"People involved in organizing the protests said they knew of no plans to try to infiltrate the exclusive invite-only dinner," the outlet added. (Kelly O'Donnell, NBC's senior White House correspondent, is presiding over this year's dinner.)
Sandra Tamari, executive director of the Adalah Justice Project, which helped organize the letter calling for a boycott of Saturday's dinner, said it's grotesque for reporters who claim to be committed to a free press to pal around with members of an administration that is aiding deadly attacks on journalists in Gaza.
"To sit and schmooze with the president while he sends billions of dollars in weapons to Israel to kill their colleagues in Gaza is unethical and immoral," said Sandra Tamari, executive director of Adalah Justice Project, which helped organize the letter calling for a boycott of Saturday's dinner. "To dine with him as he allows Palestinians to die of starvation by cutting off funding to critical humanitarian aid is despicable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular