• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

Top Corporate Air Polluters Named

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
TOP CORPORATE AIR POLLUTERS NAMED

AMHERST, MA, May 11, 2006 – Researchers at the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts today released the Toxic 100, an updated list of the top corporate air polluters.

"The Toxic 100 informs consumers and shareholders which large corporations release the most toxic pollutants into our air," says James K. Boyce, director of PERI's environment program. "We measure not just how many pounds of pollutants are released, but which are the most toxic and how many people are at risk. People have a right to know about toxic hazards to which they are exposed. Legislators need to understand the effects of pollution on their constituents."

The Toxic 100 index is based on air releases of hundreds of chemicals from industrial facilities across the United States. The rankings take into account not only the quantity of releases, but the relative toxicity of chemicals, nearby populations, and factors such as prevailing winds and height of smokestacks. The Toxic 100 index identifies the top air polluters among corporations that appear in the “Fortune 500,” “Forbes 500,” and “Standard & Poor's 500” lists of the country's largest firms. The Toxic 100's top five companies are E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co., US Steel, ConocoPhillips, GE, and Eastman Kodak.

A new feature of the web-based list is that readers can see the details behind each company, such as individual facilities owned by the corporation, specific chemicals they emit, their toxicities, and their contributions to the company's overall Toxic Score.

The data on chemical releases come from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). The TRI is widely cited in press accounts that identify the top polluters in various localities. But reports based on these data alone have three limitations:

* Raw TRI data are reported in total pounds of chemicals, without taking into account differences in toxicity. Pound-for-pound, some chemicals are up to ten million times more hazardous than others.
* TRI data do not calculate the numbers of people affected by toxic releases--for example, the difference between facilities upwind from densely-populated urban areas and those located far from population centers.
* TRI data are reported on a facility-by-facility basis, without combining plants owned by one corporation to get a picture of overall corporate performance.

The Toxic 100 index tackles all three problems. It includes toxicity weights and the number of people at risk using 2002 data—the most recent available from the EPA's Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators project. PERI researchers added up facility-by-facility data from the EPA to get corporate rankings.

“In making this information available, we are building on the achievements of the right-to-know movement,” Boyce explains. “Our goal is to engender public participation in environmental decision-making, and to help residents translate the right to know into the right to clean air.”

###

http://www.umass.edu/peri/programs/development/toxic100press.htm

United States polluters, anyway.
 

EltrikSoulCntlr

TRIBE Member
Vincent Vega said:
How on earth is Berkshire Hathaway on that list?
Berkshire is a parent company of all the companies it owns. The subsiduaries are the ones who pollute. Hathaway is the top level admin & investment portion of those companies.
 

Vincent Vega

TRIBE Member
I'm aware of Berkshire's role as parent to its subsidiaries. But I don't know why the parent/holding company itself should be listed as a "polluter" due to its ownership stake in some companies that do. It's absurd.
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

Vincent Vega

TRIBE Member
Boss Hog said:
Who should take ownership of the polluting companies then?
The "polluting companies" themselves?

In the case of Berkshire, many of these companies have either been acquired outright or had a significant amount of their stock purchased (not necessarily in entirety) by what is nothing other than a large holding company owning shares in subsidiaries engaged in a number of diverse business activities. Berkshire's principal holdings are actually insurance assets, it is basically a large fund which maintains stakes in a variety of companies which continue to operate largely as they did prior to Berkshire's involvement.

So.....if Berkshire happens to own a stake in a manufacturer of industrial products such as Johns Manville, then it is Manville that should be listed, not BH. For it is Manville that is the polluter, not poor ol' Warren Buffett!;)
 
Last edited:

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Vincent Vega said:
Warren Buffett


All hail Warren Buffett!!!!!


Berkshire Hathaway had there meeting 2 weeks agi on the same day as one of my flight lessons. Try landing at Eppley Airfield with 2 dozens jets screaming in.
 
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
Maybe factors like which lists a company is going to end up on this year should be considered before stocks are "acquired"?

I guess that's falling within the realm of responsible business.
 

Vincent Vega

TRIBE Member
Boss Hog said:
Maybe factors like which lists a company is going to end up on this year should be considered before stocks are "acquired"?

I guess that's falling within the realm of responsible business.
An entirely different argument which has little to do with which company's name should appear on these lists. I maintain it should be the polluter, not its largest shareholder.



*Aeryanna......private jets and diamonds as previously discussed.
 

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
Vincent Vega said:
An entirely different argument which has little to do with which company's name should appear on these lists. I maintain it should be the polluter, not its largest shareholder.

So a parent company shouldn't be at all responsible for the company it now has majority control of?
 

Skipper

TRIBE Member
I was fully expecting to have worked for at least 2 companies on that list. I've only worked for one.

Thanks for posting this.
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
kyfe said:
congrats to all those who made the list

good work

Hey i tried but we manufacture all our crap in China where they don't bother reoprting pollution levels. I tell you the fake plastic dogshit and whoopy cushions I pimp polluted more people than any of these lefty novices.
 
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories

Re: Shoe

TRIBE Member
This should finally settle the longstanding feud between Ford and GM over who was the bigger emitter of 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran.
 
Top