CDP 2017 Climate Change 2017 Information Request CDP Mars
Module: Introduction
Page: Introduction
CC0.1
Introduction Please give a general description and introduction to your organization.
Mars, Incorporated has been a private, family-owned company for more than 100 years. Headquartered in McLean, Virginia, USA, with annual net sales of more than $35 billion, we have more than 85,000 Associates in 80 countries. Being a private, family-owned company gives us the freedom to invest in the long-term and to make sustainable business decisions that will help us endure for generations to come.
We have a diverse global business comprised of six segments: Petcare, Chocolate, Wrigley, Food, Drinks, and Symbioscience. Our portfolio of brands offers quality and value to consumers around the world and includes PEDIGREE®, WHISKAS®, M&M’S®, SNICKERS®, MARS®, EXTRA®, ORBIT®, UNCLE BEN’S® and many more.
Our business objective, first expressed by Forrest E. Mars, Sr. in the early 1930s, is the manufacture and distribution of food products in such a manner as to promote a mutuality of services and benefits among all stakeholders. This objective, and the stewardship of the Mars Family, inspire us to put our Five Principles – Quality, Responsibility, Mutuality, Efficiency and Freedom – into action every day to make a positive difference for people and the planet through our performance.
CC0.2
Reporting Year Please state the start and end date of the year for which you are reporting data. The current reporting year is the latest/most recent 12-month period for which data is reported. Enter the dates of this year first. We request data for more than one reporting period for some emission accounting questions. Please provide data for the three years prior to the current reporting year if you have not provided this information before, or if this is the first time you have answered a CDP information request. (This does not apply if you have been offered and selected the option of answering the shorter questionnaire). If you are going to provide additional years of data, please give the dates of those reporting periods here. Work backwards from the most recent reporting year. Please enter dates in following format: day(DD)/month(MM)/year(YYYY) (i.e. 31/01/2001).
Enter Periods that will be disclosed
Fri 01 Jan 2016 - Sat 31 Dec 2016
CC0.3
Country list configuration
Please select the countries for which you will be supplying data. If you are responding to the Electric Utilities module, this selection will be carried forward to assist you in completing your response.
Select country
Argentina Australia Austria Belgium Brazil Canada China Colombia Czech Republic Egypt France Germany Hungary India Select country
Indonesia Japan Kenya Lithuania Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Philippines Poland Russia South Africa Spain Taiwan Thailand United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States of America
CC0.4
Currency selection
Please select the currency in which you would like to submit your response. All financial information contained in the response should be in this currency.
USD($)
CC0.6
Modules As part of the request for information on behalf of investors, companies in the electric utility sector, companies in the automobile and auto component manufacturing sector, companies in the oil and gas sector, companies in the information and communications technology sector (ICT) and companies in the food, beverage and tobacco sector (FBT) should complete supplementary questions in addition to the core questionnaire. If you are in these sector groupings, the corresponding sector modules will not appear among the options of question CC0.6 but will automatically appear in the ORS navigation bar when you save this page. If you want to query your classification, please email [email protected]. If you have not been presented with a sector module that you consider would be appropriate for your company to answer, please select the module below in CC0.6.
Further Information
Module: Management
Page: CC1. Governance
CC1.1
Where is the highest level of direct responsibility for climate change within your organization?
Board or individual/sub-set of the Board or other committee appointed by the Board
CC1.1a
Please identify the position of the individual or name of the committee with this responsibility
Job title of the individual or name of the committee: The highest level of direct responsibility for climate change is the Technology Committee of the Mars Board.
Description of its/their position in the corporate structure: The Technology Committee is a Committee of the Board of Directors of Mars, Incorporated.
Richard Ware, Vice President Manufacturing, Research & Development and Procurement, is Secretary of the Committee and a direct report of the President of Mars, Incorporated.
CC1.2 Do you provide incentives for the management of climate change issues, including the attainment of targets?
Yes
CC1.2a
Please provide further details on the incentives provided for the management of climate change issues
Who is entitled to Incentivized The type of benefit from these performance incentives incentives? indicator Comment
Emissions A percentage of the bonus for our top 100 executives is based on performance against a target for Corporate executive Monetary reduction target reducing absolute Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions from our operations. The emissions team reward reduction goal and the percentage of the bonus linked to this is the same for all executives. Emissions A percentage of the bonus for our top 100 executives is based on performance against a target for Chief Executive Monetary reduction target reducing absolute Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions from our operations. The emissions Officer (CEO) reward reduction goal and the percentage of the bonus linked to this is the same for all executives. Emissions A percentage of the bonus for our top 100 executives is based on performance against a target for Monetary Executive officer reduction target reducing absolute Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions from our operations. The emissions reward reduction goal and the percentage of the bonus linked to this is the same for all executives. Emissions A percentage of the bonus for our top 100 executives is based on performance against a target for Chief Operating Monetary reduction target reducing absolute Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions from our operations. The emissions Officer (COO) reward reduction goal and the percentage of the bonus linked to this is the same for all executives. Emissions A percentage of the bonus for our top 100 executives is based on performance against a target for Chief Financial Monetary reduction target reducing absolute Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions from our operations. The emissions Officer (CFO) reward reduction goal and the percentage of the bonus linked to this is the same for all executives.
Further Information
Page: CC2. Strategy
CC2.1 Please select the option that best describes your risk management procedures with regard to climate change risks and opportunities
Integrated into multi-disciplinary company wide risk management processes
CC2.1a
Please provide further details on your risk management procedures with regard to climate change risks and opportunities
How far into Frequency To whom are the future of Geographical areas considered Comment results reported? are risks monitoring considered?
We assess the feasibility of renewable energy when selecting factory sites, and of using renewable energy at existing sites. Our Responsible Sourcing program involves risk assessments for thousands of tier-1 suppliers that cover climate change vulnerability, to help evaluate risks and due Our risk management process applies to our diligence measures. Our water stewardship manufacturing operations in 32 countries across six program prioritizes sites in water-scarce areas, Board or continents, to tier-1 suppliers, and origins for key including those predicted to become water stressed individual/sub-set of commodities. At operational level, we evaluate due to climate change. In some cases, we work the Board or climate risks including weather-related and Annually > 6 years with insurance brokers to assess site flood risks. committee geophysical risks at all manufacturing sites. We For instance, sites highly likely to flood have appointed by the manage risks relating to tier-1 suppliers through our purchased temporary flood barriers. We are Board Responsible Sourcing program. Assessments of our reducing risks from rising energy costs and supply value chain-wide emissions take into account origin insecurity by increasing energy efficiency and countries for key raw materials. reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Making agriculture more sustainable is key to protecting our business. Around 85% of our scope 3 emissions and 80% of total GHG emissions relate to the production of the goods and services we purchase, agricultural raw materials in particular.
CC2.1b
Please describe how your risk and opportunity identification processes are applied at both company and asset level
Company Level: most of our environmental impacts occur outside of our direct operations. Planetary Boundaries is a highly-respected analysis that identifies 10 environmental impacts and the point at which each one will cause catastrophic harm to human wellbeing. We used this concept, coupled with information about our value chain, to identify three broad areas of environmental impact most relevant to our business: land use, water use, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. We have worked with various external partners and used peer-reviewed, publicly-available data to quantify these impacts throughout our value chain.
We identify risks and opportunities in our supply chain based on a comprehensive assessment of our GHG emissions. This combines supply chain data including raw material type, origins and tonnes purchased, with external data from the UN Food & Agriculture Organisation and Ecoinvent, among others. We carry out further impact assessments for raw materials at risk. For example, in 2016 we ran a pilot project to investigate the climate change resilience and adaptive capacity of rice growers in Spain over the next 10-20 years, to inform our sourcing strategies. Through our Responsible Sourcing program, we assess tier-1 supplier risks. All high- risk suppliers are prioritized for audit, unless they have already received a Sedex Members Ethical Trade Audit within the last two years.
Asset Level: Mars manufactures at 127 sites in 31 countries, across six continents. We track our emissions at facility level and monitor local regulatory developments. The Corporate Risk Manager leads identification of physical risks and opportunities. Regulatory risks and opportunities are jointly managed by the Global Sustainability Director, and Scientific and Regulatory Affairs. Site-level reputational risks and opportunities are assessed by Corporate Affairs and site management. We conduct regular monitoring to ensure risks are mitigated.
CC2.1c
How do you prioritize the risks and opportunities identified?
We prioritize the greatest impacts identified across our value chain. We develop scientifically credible metrics to measure these impacts, and work with recognized NGO leaders such as the World Resources Institute to set long-term commitments based on what is needed to solve the problem. Our short-term goals are designed to ensure progress, rather than as an end in themselves. We track our progress internally and report publicly.
For example, we mapped our supply chain and partnered with Quantis and Maplecroft to prioritize our raw materials, based on the scale of the impact of producing them and their importance to the business. Our emphasis on impact reduction for our raw materials is characteristic of our approach to global challenges: derived from science, research and collaboration; and designed to tackle the long-term problems facing agricultural supply chains, rather than achieving short-term goals.
One priority identified is to eliminate deforestation. In line with others in our industry, we continue to implement our Deforestation Policy, launched in March 2014, for four priority raw materials: beef, palm oil, pulp & paper, and soy. For palm oil and pulp & paper, we are working with The Forest Trust (TFT) to design programs with our suppliers aimed at decoupling deforestation from our supply chains.
Commodity and risk management: Our Commercial Applied Research Team (CART) supports our decision-making in commodity and risk management. We draw on the team’s 3-6 month weather forecasts and climate models to analyse how changes in climate will affect commodity prices. For raw material sourcing locations most vulnerable to climate change, we are conducting more detailed analyses of future projections of climate change and the resilience of stakeholders to cope with these changes over the next 10-20 years. This information will inform our sourcing strategies.
CC2.1d
Please explain why you do not have a process in place for assessing and managing risks and opportunities from climate change, and whether you plan to introduce such a process in future
Main reason for not having a process Do you plan to introduce a process? Comment
CC2.2
Is climate change integrated into your business strategy?
Yes
CC2.2a
Please describe the process of how climate change is integrated into your business strategy and any outcomes of this process
One scientific input we use is Planetary Boundaries, which identifies 10 environmental impacts and the point at which each one will cause catastrophic harm to human wellbeing. We combined this data with information on our value chain to identify three areas of impact most relevant to our business, including GHG emissions.
1) Business Strategy: - We select factory sites based in part on assessment of physical climate risks. - Our Commercial Applied Research Team (CART) uses 3-6 month weather forecasts and climate models to identify commodity risks. - We report facility-level GHG emissions to the management team and Board of Directors, and use this to inform the development of strategies and priorities such as our Sustainable in a Generation (SIG) environmental commitments. - We disclose GHG emissions for our full supply chain (Scopes 1, 2 & 3) according to the GHG Protocol, as well as our actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change, in our annual Principles in Action Summary. - We engage with governments and other stakeholders to support robust climate change policies.
2) Aspects of climate change that have influenced strategy: - The consequences of climate change, such as changing temperatures and rainfall patterns, floods, droughts, and the spread of pests and diseases is likely to affect crops, from corn to cocoa, threatening farmer livelihoods and our business. According to the IPCC, global GHG emissions must be cut by approximately 80% by 2050. In addition to reducing our own impacts to help mitigate climate change, our sustainable sourcing programs for raw materials including beef, cocoa, dairy, peanuts and rice are helping farmers adapt to changing weather patterns: - We worked with the University of California, Davis, University of Arkansas and the USDA Agricultural Research Service to develop an alternate wetting and drying (AWD) irrigation approach that saves water and reduces methane emissions from rice fields. We are exploring ways to use this method in Europe and the Mississippi Delta, where irrigation is unsustainable. - We are investing $1.45 million in mapping the peanut genome, which will allow breeders to quickly develop even higher-yielding varieties and adapt to impacts such as drought. - We are using the cacao genome sequence to develop new varieties of disease-resistant and highly-productive trees that can contribute to a more sustainable cocoa industry.
Regulatory changes: The Global Sustainability Director and Scientific and Regulatory Affairs team closely monitor local regulatory developments.
Commercial opportunities: Sustainability is an important factor for customers purchasing office beverage systems. By adjusting the way we make cups, we have reduced their carbon footprint by 6%, and our FLAVIA® and KLIX® drinks machines consume nearly 22% less energy than in 2010.
3) Short term strategy: We use four strategies to meet our short and long-term operational targets: operational efficiency; capital efficiency (investment in more efficient equipment and processes); developing and deploying new technology to change the way we do things; and renewable energy.
We have increased operational efficiency by setting benchmarks and identifying best practices; and capital efficiency by reducing IRR hurdle rates and allocating ring-fenced capital for sustainability improvements. We have implemented numerous renewable energy projects globally, with the Mesquite Creek windfarm in the US the largest, making Mars the sixth largest renewable energy user in the USA in 2015. In combination, these efforts met our 2015 goal of reducing absolute GHG emissions from our operations by 25%. Three key principles guide our decisions to invest in renewable energy: Mars must retain the environmental benefits to prevent duplication of carbon savings claims; the renewables should aim for cost parity with the energy replaced; and Mars will partner with others to fund large projects. Site performance data helps us assess how effective our efficiency and technology measures are and determine the best future investments. This process has already shown that we need to accelerate our renewable energy activities to keep us on track to meet our energy and GHG reduction targets.
4) Long term strategy: Based on IPCC assessments, we have committed to eliminating GHG emissions from our operations by 2040. Beyond our operations, we have set long-term commitments for reducing impacts including GHG emissions across our value chain. Our sustainable sourcing programs work with farmers to develop plant varieties and growing techniques for adapting to climate change, including our industry-leading work on cocoa, mint and rice sustainability. For example, in 2016 we ran a pilot project to investigate the climate change resilience and adaptive capacity of rice growers in Spain over the next 10-20 years. The insights gathered will inform our sourcing strategies.
5) Advantage over competitors: In addition to driving increased consumer preference for our products, our aim is to use sustainable innovations to secure sustainable supplies of key raw materials, to mitigate against declining yields and increasing demand. Committing to long-term sourcing strategies will forge stronger partnerships with suppliers and farmers and allow us to deliver the desired impact. This will also make Mars an attractive employer in an increasingly competitive global market for talent.
6) Most substantial business decisions: - We have increased internal engagement on our SIG program and targets using workshops to help Associates identify opportunities to increase energy efficiency and apply renewable technology. All sites have developed SIG roadmaps for achieving their targets for GHGs, energy, water and waste to landfill. - Our Deforestation Policy, published in 2014, commits us to sourcing the raw materials with the greatest impact on forests (beef, palm oil, pulp & paper, and soy) from suppliers that produce or purchase all raw materials from legal sources, with no deforestation of primary forest or areas of high conservation value; no development in high carbon stock forest areas or on peatlands regardless of depth; and no burning to clear land. Our policies for all four raw materials are available on our website. - We have set long-term commitments and strategies for reducing impacts including GHG emissions across our value chain. These are leading to important changes to aspects of our business, such as where and how we source our raw materials. - In partnership with the Sumitomo Corporation, we supported the construction of a 200 megawatt windfarm, Mesquite Creek, in Texas. Annual generation exceeds 100% of our US operations' electricity needs. - Through a partnership with Eneco UK, from April 2016, 100% of the electricity needs for our UK operations are met by a new 20-turbine Moy windfarm in the Scottish Highlands.
CC2.2b
Please explain why climate change is not integrated into your business strategy
CC2.2c
Does your company use an internal price on carbon?
Yes
CC2.2d
Please provide details and examples of how your company uses an internal price on carbon
Although we did not use an internal carbon price during the 2016 calendar, from 2017 we now include carbon pricing as a criterion for evaluating electricity tenders in our European operations. Carbon is valued at €5 / tonne and tenders are evaluated on a country-by-country basis.
CC2.3
Do you engage in activities that could either directly or indirectly influence public policy on climate change through any of the following? (tick all that apply)
Direct engagement with policy makers Trade associations Funding research organizations
CC2.3a
On what issues have you been engaging directly with policy makers?
Corporate Focus of legislation Details of engagement Proposed legislative solution Position
Other: Future U.S. federal regulation to Absolute emission reduction targets at a level reduce emissions and Support Written response to Bicameral Task Force on Climate Change required to achieve an 80% reduction in GHG adapt to climate emissions by 2050 change Close collaboration in drafting the University of Cambridge’s Natural Capital Leadership Compact. The Compact is a business statement of intent that urges international governments to commit to a global policy framework on the responsible and Other: International sustainable use of natural resources. Participated in advising International governments to commit to a global policy governmental Support former president of the European Commission Jose Manuel framework on the responsible and sustainable use of commitments on Barroso, Commissioner Hedegaard, Commissioner Potočnik and natural resources climate change other senior EC officials on how the EU can exit the recession through green innovation, and the Natural Capital Leadership Compact’s bold business commitments Spoke at the UN Conference on Sustainable Development at Rio +20. Mandatory carbon Mandatory carbon reporting is part of our EU environmental Environmental footprint included in standardized Support reporting footprint work product level labelling As a member of BICEP, an advocacy coalition, we are committed Other: Action on to working with policy makers to pass energy and climate Support Climate change action by the US government climate change legislation, and enabling the transition to a low-carbon economy that will create new jobs and stimulate economic growth while Corporate Focus of legislation Details of engagement Proposed legislative solution Position
stabilizing our planet’s climate. In May 2016, BICEP named Mars the Most Valuable Player for our climate change actions and advocacy over the previous year. Attended the COP22 UN Climate Change Conference in Marrakech in November 2016. Barry Parkin, Mars Chief Sustainability Officer had a one-to-one conversation with his Unilever counterpart, Jeff Seabright, hosted by the U.S. Agency for International Development, to uncover how Chief Sustainability Officers can drive companies to create positive Other: International change. As a founding investor of Livelihoods Fund for Family Mars joined business and political leaders in calling governmental Support Farming (L3F), Barry also spoke at the Livelihoods Funds for action to implement the targets agreed in 2015 in commitments on Agriculture Adaptation Africa Initiative event, reasserting the Paris. climate change importance of the fund as an innovative way to help farmers and their communities thrive. At a Climate Group Renewable Energy RE100 event, Kevin Rabinovitch shared how we are moving to 100% renewable energy, including plans for a new wind farm in Mexico following on from similar wind projects in Texas and Scotland. The Clean Power Plan will introduce strong but Mars was one of four companies to support the US achievable standards for US power plants, and Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Climate Plan by filing customized goals for US states to cut the carbon Clean energy Support an amicus brief - a legal document that provides information and emissions driving climate change. The Clean Power generation arguments for an appellate court (in this case, US Federal Court) Plan provides national consistency, accountability and to consider. a level playing field while reflecting each state’s energy mix. Alongside more than 360 other businesses and investors, Mars signed a letter to the elected leaders of the United States, asking them not to abandon the Paris pledges and to invest in a low- carbon future for the sake of our economy. In an interview with the New York Times, Global Sustainability Director, Kevin The letter, which made headlines across the world, Other: U.S. Federal Rabinovitch, made clear that politics could never sway our will have been seen by decision makers globally who Government resolve to meet the ambitious science-based targets we set to Support we hope will join our efforts in tackling this global commitment on climate reduce the emissions in our own operations: “This doesn’t threat after reading it. It is only through decisive action change change our commitments. We’re doing this because we see a and collaboration that this can happen. real business risk. We see a real business problem.” Speaking to CNBC, Barry added: "It is vital that the business community demonstrates its ongoing commitment to tackling climate change. This is an important moment in global political and economic history, and we absolutely must come together to solve the Corporate Focus of legislation Details of engagement Proposed legislative solution Position
immense challenges facing the planet. Climate change, water scarcity and deforestation are serious threats to society. It is imperative that global businesses, like Mars, do their part to face down those threats." The letter, which made headlines across the world, will have been seen by decision makers globally who we hope will join our efforts in tackling this global threat after reading it. It is only through decisive action and collaboration that this can happen.
CC2.3b
Are you on the Board of any trade associations or provide funding beyond membership?
Yes
CC2.3c
Please enter the details of those trade associations that are likely to take a position on climate change legislation
Is your position on climate Please explain the trade association's Trade association change How have you, or are you attempting to, influence the position? position consistent
with theirs?
BICEP advocates for innovative climate and Mars has signed BICEP’s Climate Declaration, which calls upon U.S. Business for clean energy policies. Its members are federal policymakers to seize the economic opportunity of addressing Innovative Climate & Consistent proponents of renewable energy, greener climate change. By joining BICEP, Mars will advocate for policies that will Energy Policy transportation and stricter pollution controls on enable cleaner, more efficient energy use and generate solutions for the (BICEP) power plants. threats of climate change. The European Pet FEDIAF represents the pet food industry in 26 Mars is supporting the development and deployment of climate change Food Industry Consistent European countries via 18 pet food industry policy in the form of product metrics. Federation (FEDIAF) associations. The federation aims to influence a Is your position on climate Please explain the trade association's Trade association change How have you, or are you attempting to, influence the position? position consistent
with theirs?
legislative framework for the production of safe, nutritious and palatable pet food. FEDIAF supports the responsible design, operation and maintenance of processes and plants to minimize emissions into the environment. Mars supports EU product environmental footprint programs that acknowledge and quantify the impact of products on climate change policy. CGF is a global industry network that brings together CEOs and senior corporate managers We are a member of the Consumer Goods Forum (CGF). Our Chief to collaborate on sustainability and consumer Sustainability Officer is on the CGF’s Sustainability steering team, and in issues. CGF has committed to mobilizing its 2013, our Global Chief Customer Officer became the co-chair of the Consumer Goods resources to achieve zero net deforestation by Consistent Operational Excellence steering team. Our deforestation policy prioritizes Forum (CGF) 2020. CGF’s position is that “Climate change is the four raw materials that are aligned with the CGF’s priority raw a major strategic threat, one which could affect materials (beef, palm oil, paper/pulp and soy), and we are represented on our customers and their habitats, our the paper/pulp working group. businesses and the wider economy and society”. GMA works with the consumer packaged goods (CPG) industry to adopt model sustainability practices that drive down Our Global Sustainability Manager sits on the GMA Sustainability Task greenhouse gas emissions, decrease the Force. Currently, the Task Force is engaged in two primary projects – amount of materials used in packaging, reduce packaging and food waste, but these are not truly aligned with our Grocery the amount of food waste sent to landfill, and priorities at this moment. We have not engaged on these projects Manufacturers Consistent improve water conservation. The association because the food waste work is focused on retailer to consumer waste, Association (GMA) fosters collaboration between industry which is not where we focus our efforts. Rather, we develop robust members by organizing educational specifications for our packaging, and focus on reducing waste to landfill. opportunities, encouraging model-practice Since 2007, we have reduced waste to landfill by 89%. sharing, and spotlighting industry successes and opportunities. Supports renewable energy. Aim of the group is WWF/RMI corporate to make it easier for corporates to buy renewable energy Consistent Co-authors and initial signatories to the principles. renewable energy by sharing expertise and buyers publishing principles. Is your position on climate Please explain the trade association's Trade association change How have you, or are you attempting to, influence the position? position consistent
with theirs?
The Science Based Targets initiative is a partnership between CDP, UN Global Compact, WRI and WWF, which helps companies determine how much they must cut emissions to prevent the worst impacts of climate change. The Initiative aims to lift Mars helped to co-author a methodology to help companies set science- corporate ambition and help businesses pursue based targets to reduce GHG emissions in line with a 2° C The Science Based bolder solutions to climate change. It supports Consistent decarbonisation pathway. Our target setting methodology was identified in Targets Initiative companies to set emission reduction targets in the project as a credible approach to setting science based targets – see line with what the science says is necessary to more at http://sciencebasedtargets.org/methodologies/ keep global warming below the dangerous threshold of 2 degrees. This will send a clear signal to policymakers that industry is committed to playing its part in decarbonizing the economy and will inspire other companies to move to ensure their future resilience. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol is the most widely used international accounting tool for government and business to understand, Greenhouse Gas quantify, and manage greenhouse gas We have contributed to and reviewed the Scope 2 GHG emissions Protocol, Scope 2 Consistent emissions. The Protocol has developed Power accounting standards methodology. Accounting Accounting Guidelines which provides guidance on the GHG accounting standards for Scope 2 emissions. Convened by The Climate Group and in partnership with CDP, RE100 will raise awareness of the benefits for going ‘100% renewable’. The initiative will celebrate the success of companies on their journey to being RE100 Consistent Mars is a founding member of the RE100 commitment. 100% renewable and will collaborate with others to determine the best approaches for achieving the final goal. RE100 was officially launched at Climate Week NYC 2014. Fifty- eight companies have now joined the campaign Is your position on climate Please explain the trade association's Trade association change How have you, or are you attempting to, influence the position? position consistent
with theirs?
and made a public commitment to going 100% renewable. The Business Renewables Center is a member-based organization founded by Rocky Rocky Mountain Mountain Institute. The BRC works with major Mars joined the Business Renewables Center in May 2016 to use our Institute Business Consistent corporations, developers and service providers experience to help other companies successfully purchase renewable Renewables Center to streamline and accelerate corporate energy, and to gain market insights that the BRC network provides. procurement of large-scale wind and solar energy. The FoodDrinkEurope (FDE) Association represents the commercial, technical, economic, legal and scientific interests of the food and drink manufacturing industry in the European Union. The Climate & Energy Working Group deals with topics such as climate change, renewable energy, energy efficiency, and waste-to-energy policies, among others. We call on policymakers to: - Agree an ambitious long-term global climate deal. FDE Board members agreed to contribute to this FoodDrinkEurope target reducing greenhouse gas emissions in (FDE) – Climate & Mars chairs the working group, ensuring our position is taken into Consistent operations by 25% by 2025. - Put in place Energy Expert consideration in each decision. effective implementation mechanisms for the Group approved EU 2030 Climate and Energy Framework and EU Energy Union Strategy. - Maintain a permanent dialogue to ensure a holistic approach to the European food chain. - Agree a global definition as well as a scientifically-reliable methodology for assessing food wastage. - Stimulate investment and innovation in low-carbon and resource efficient technologies. - Foster industrial symbiosis and a circular economy. - Help consumers make more sustainable and healthy lifestyle choices.
CC2.3d
Do you publicly disclose a list of all the research organizations that you fund?
No
CC2.3e
Please provide details of the other engagement activities that you undertake
CC2.3f
What processes do you have in place to ensure that all of your direct and indirect activities that influence policy are consistent with your overall climate change strategy?
Mars participates in all policy engagement and research that we support, enabling us to ensure these activities remain consistent with our climate change strategy. As paying members of the organizations we support, we can influence their positions, policies and research objectives. We work with many trade associations around the world, and hold leadership positions in some of them. On some issues, our views are different from these organizations. On the rare occasions we cannot reach a compromise, we are willing to advocate independently or adopt internal policies to govern our activities.
The Mars Associates who work on policy initiatives are involved with multiple organizations, ensuring our positions are consistently communicated across all activities.
The selection of the organizations and policy initiatives we support is managed by our internal Sustainability Working Group and overseen by our Sustainability Leadership Team. This is intended to ensure that we work only with those organizations whose positions and policies are consistent and supportive of our own approach.
In all external engagements, we follow the policies in the Mars Guide to Global Standards, Policies and Practices (see Further Information), which help us to act with integrity, honesty and in line with The Five Principles. We make sure all relevant Associates understand and abide by these policies.
CC2.3g Please explain why you do not engage with policy makers
Further Information
Mars public policy and advocacy guidelines: http://www.mars.com/global/about-us/policies-and-practices/public-policy-advocacy
Page: CC3. Targets and Initiatives
CC3.1
Did you have an emissions reduction or renewable energy consumption or production target that was active (ongoing or reached completion) in the reporting year?
Absolute target Renewable energy consumption and/or production target
CC3.1a
Please provide details of your absolute target
% Base year % of reduction emissions Base Target ID Scope emissions in from covered by Comment year year Is this a science- scope base target (metric based target? year tonnes CO2e)
We have set a new target to decouple GHG Yes, but this Scope 1+2 emissions from business growth across our full value target has not (market- chain, including emissions from our agricultural Abs1 100% 27% 2015 25606000 2025 been approved as based)+3 supply chain, which accounts for 80% of the total science-based by (upstream) emissions in our value chain. Our aim is to at least the Science freeze emissions until 2020 and achieve a 27% % Base year % of reduction emissions Base Target ID Scope emissions in from covered by Comment year year Is this a science- scope base target (metric based target? year tonnes CO2e)
Based Targets reduction by 2025. This is an interim target toward the initiative long-term commitment in Abs2, and is in line with recommendations to reduce global GHG emissions by 80% by 2050. Our targets have been submitted for approval by the Science Based Targets Initiative. Please note our estimate of S1 emissions from leased vehicles is included in this baseline. This is our new long-term target for decoupling GHG emissions from business growth across our full value Yes, but this chain, including emissions from our agricultural target has not supply chain, which account for 80% of the total Scope 1+2 been approved as emissions in our value chain. This target has been set (market- Abs2 100% 67% 2015 25606000 2050 science-based by in line with scientific recommendations for reducing based)+3 the Science global GHG emissions by 80% by 2050. Our targets (upstream) Based Targets have been submitted for approval by the Science initiative Based Targets Initiative. Please note our estimate of S1 emissions from leased vehicles is included in this baseline. Our aim is to decouple GHG emissions from business growth and achieve absolute emissions reductions. This is an interim target toward the long-term Yes, but this commitment in Abs4 of eliminating scope 1 and 2 target has not emissions from operations, in line with Scope 1+2 been approved as recommendations to reduce global GHG emissions Abs3 (market- 98% 40% 2007 2087000 2020 science-based by by 80% by 2050. Our targets have been submitted for based) the Science approval by the Science Based Targets Initiative. Based Targets The 2% currently out of scope is our estimate for initiative scope 1 emissions from leased vehicles in our sales force. This dataset now includes the IAMS factories which Mars acquired in 2014. Yes, but this Our long-term commitment is to eliminate scope 1 Scope 1+2 target has not and 2 emissions from operations, in line with Abs4 (market- 98% 100% 2007 2087000 2040 been approved as recommendations to reduce global greenhouse gas based) science-based by emissions by 80% by 2050. Our targets have been % Base year % of reduction emissions Base Target ID Scope emissions in from covered by Comment year year Is this a science- scope base target (metric based target? year tonnes CO2e)
the Science submitted for approval by the Science Based Targets Based Targets Initiative. The 2% currently out of scope is our initiative estimate for scope 1 emissions from leased vehicles in our sales force. This dataset now includes the IAMS factories which Mars acquired in 2014.
CC3.1b
Please provide details of your intensity target
Normalized % of % reduction base year Is this a science- ID Scope emissions in from base Metric Base year emissions Target year Comment based target? scope year covered by
target
CC3.1c
Please also indicate what change in absolute emissions this intensity target reflects
Direction of change anticipated in % change anticipated Direction of change anticipated in % change anticipated ID absolute Scope 1+2 emissions at in absolute Scope 1+2 absolute Scope 3 emissions at target in absolute Scope 3 Comment target completion? emissions completion? emissions
CC3.1d
Please provide details of your renewable energy consumption and/or production target
% Base year % renewable Energy types energy for Base renewable Target energy in ID covered by energy type Comment year energy in year target year target covered base year (MWh)
Mars is focused on reducing carbon emissions in its own operations and is gradually increasing renewable energy supply to its sites worldwide Electricity with the goal that 100% of energy consumption will be fossil-fuel free by RE1 2007 2480232.97 0% 2040 100% consumption 2040. Mars has committed to 100% renewable electricity through its participation in the RE100 campaign. Our RE100 reporting spreadsheet is attached under further information.
CC3.1e
For all of your targets, please provide details on the progress made in the reporting year
% complete ID % complete (time) (emissions or Comment renewable energy)
This target was introduced in late 2016 and we will report Abs1 progress when we have a full year of data. This target was introduced in late 2016 and we will report Abs2 progress when we have a full year of data. % complete ID % complete (time) (emissions or Comment renewable energy)
We have achieved 72% of our targeted emissions reduction for Abs3 69.2% 72.3% 2020, with another three years to go. We are currently on track to meet our target of zero emissions Abs4 27.3% 28.9% from our operations by 2040.
CC3.1f
Please explain (i) why you do not have a target; and (ii) forecast how your emissions will change over the next five years
CC3.2
Do you classify any of your existing goods and/or services as low carbon products or do they enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions?
Yes
CC3.2a
Please provide details of your products and/or services that you classify as low carbon products or that enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions
Taxonomy,
project or % % R&D in Are you methodology revenue low Level of Description of reporting used to from low carbon aggregation product/Group of products low carbon classify carbon product/s Comment product/s or product/s as product/s in the avoided low carbon or in the reporting emissions? to calculate reporting year avoided year
emissions
Lifecycle analysis shows that, across our full portfolio, product use represents just 1.6% of our total value chain GHG emissions. As a result, our strategies for reducing GHG emissions do not focus on this area, but we seek to make voluntary We used innovative technology improvements beyond regulatory requirements for to reduce the cooking time on the small number of products where the product use Group of our UNCLE BEN’S® rice by Low carbon Other: Life phase is more significant. For instance, we used products half, resulting in an 18% product cycle analysis innovative technology to reduce the cooking time on reduction of GHG emissions our UNCLE BEN’S® rice by half, resulting in an 18% during the cooking phase. reduction of GHG emissions during the cooking phase. The cooking time reduction from 20 to 10 minutes if applied across our total production and based on an electric range boiling 1.5L of water and the same US electricity average represents a savings of nearly 50,000 tonnes of CO2e. Lifecycle analysis shows that more than two-thirds of the energy used to make a drink in our FLAVIA® single serve machines is for heating the water before brewing the coffee, tea or hot chocolate. Providing efficient drinks machines that use less energy will help customers reduce both their energy Group of FLAVIA single-serve drinks Low carbon Other: Life bills and GHG emissions. When compared against products machines product cycle analysis three leading bean-to-cup machines in the U.K., the FLAVIA C400 was calculated to be 52 percent more energy efficient over a typical week. An estimate of the emissions avoided over time: We have reduced average FLAVIA® and KLIX® drinks machine base energy consumption by 10% from a 2010 baseline.
Taxonomy,
project or % % R&D in Are you methodology revenue low Level of Description of reporting used to from low carbon aggregation product/Group of products low carbon classify carbon product/s Comment product/s or product/s as product/s in the avoided low carbon or in the reporting emissions? to calculate reporting year avoided year
emissions
Mars Drinks' customers told us their greatest sustainability concern relating to workplace drinks machines was the packaging. We examined the entire lifecycle of our Freshpack® to find ways to improve and discovered that raw material extraction was the biggest CO2 contributor. By removing an ALTERRA Freshpacks® for aluminum foil layer and reducing the number of Group of Avoided Other: Life FLAVIA single-serve drinks materials used, we reduced the carbon footprint of products emissions cycle analysis machines the packaging by 31%. In addition, our Recycle Your Freshpacks program gives North American customers an easy way to divert 100% of their Freshpacks away from landfill, avoiding emissions arising from waste disposal. Mars Drinks is determined to provide the most sustainable workplace drinks solution by 2020.
CC3.3
Did you have emissions reduction initiatives that were active within the reporting year (this can include those in the planning and/or implementation phases)
Yes
CC3.3a Please identify the total number of projects at each stage of development, and for those in the implementation stages, the estimated CO2e savings
Total estimated annual CO2e savings in metric tonnes Stage of development Number of projects CO2e (only for rows marked *)
Under investigation 823 76000 To be implemented* 414 469000 Implementation commenced* 5 27000 Implemented* 412 79000 Not to be implemented 0 0
CC3.3b
For those initiatives implemented in the reporting year, please provide details in the table below
Annual Estimated monetary Investment annual savings required Activity Description of CO2e (unit (unit Payback Estimated
type activity savings Voluntary/ currency currency - period lifetime of Scope Comment (metric Mandatory - as as the
tonnes specified specified in initiative
CO2e) in CC0.4) CC0.4)
Scope 1 Energy Operational Scope 2 Operational efficiency gains are Voluntary efficiency: Efficiency across 4000 (location- 1897000 6207000 <1 year Ongoing permanent and will last as long as
Processes all factories based) the factories – generally decades.
Annual Estimated monetary Investment annual savings required Activity Description of CO2e (unit (unit Payback Estimated
type activity savings Voluntary/ currency currency - period lifetime of Scope Comment (metric Mandatory - as as the
tonnes specified specified in initiative
CO2e) in CC0.4) CC0.4)
Capital efficiency measures will Scope 1 last the length of assets’ lives – Energy Capital Scope 2 ranging from 2 to 30 years Voluntary 1-3 21-30 efficiency: Efficiency across 13000 (location- 4464000 19883000 depending on the equipment. years years Processes all factories based) Even short-life equipment will be replaced by equipment that is at least as efficient in the future. Renewable energy from the Moy wind farm in Scotland, UK. There is no investment-- Mars has Renewable Scope 2 committed to a long-term Low carbon energy from the (market- Voluntary 21-30 contract. The emissions energy Moy wind farm 62000 0 0 based) years reductions from the wind farm purchase covering all UK have enabled Mars to make operations additional significant progress toward its 2040 Sustainable in a Generation goal.
CC3.3c
What methods do you use to drive investment in emissions reduction activities?
Method Comment
In our programs to deliver our Sustainable in a Generation (SiG) targets, business segments prioritize projects based on Marginal abatement cost curve marginal abatement costs. Dedicated budget for energy Individual business segments set aside budget to improve energy efficiency. efficiency Our commitment to more sustainable operations is embedded in our culture. Associates from our manufacturing, research and development and procurement functions in each business segment consider it a priority to implement our Sustainable in Employee engagement a Generation (SiG) strategy and improve performance at our operations. Our SiG workshops identify potential improvements in energy use and increase Associate engagement in our SiG program. Site-level performance data help us assess how effective our efficiency and technology measures are and determine the best Other future investments. This process has already led us to accelerate renewable energy activities intended to keep us on track to meet our energy and greenhouse gas reduction targets. A percentage of the bonus for our top 100 executives is based on performance against our absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions reduction target. In addition, our global Make the Difference Awards take place every other year to celebrate Internal incentives/recognition Associates who bring innovative thinking, fresh perspectives and personal commitment to their work. The awards include a programs ‘planet’ category for associates who improve our environmental performance. They reward innovation, responsibility and exceptional effort and help us share best practices across the organization. Our strategic rice sourcing team is establishing a global network of rice researchers, research institutions and government Partnering with governments on agencies to generate new research to support rice production and breeding programs. We then work with farmers to translate technology development this science into innovative farming practices that boost output while reducing GHG emissions and water consumption. We have put in place dedicated full-time associates to focus on energy efficiency improvements and GHG reductions in most Other of our operating businesses and at the larger sites in the Chocolate segment. Compliance with regulatory Facility-level assessments identified major impacts in six of our sites which are subject to EU ETS, and in two sites that are requirements/standards part of the Beijing Pilot Carbon Emission Trading Program. Since 2010 we have targeted all new office buildings and extensions above 1,000m2 to be certified at LEED Gold level. Following the sunset of LEED v3 in 2016, new factory projects under the more rigorous LEED v4.0 standard will target Silver level. (Offices will continue to target Gold certification). This helps ensure our buildings are designed to be energy efficient, Other and that other climate-related considerations are included in building designs (e.g. employee transportation, use of recycled and low embedded carbon building materials etc.) A recently completed project at our Chocolate factory in Poland achieved LEED Platinum and one of the highest LEED point scores ever recorded for an industrial project. Through the Livelihoods Fund for Family Farming (L3F) set up by Mars and Danone in 2015, we encourage investment in large-scale projects that enable farmers to produce greater yields of higher quality using sustainable agricultural practices. Other Projects create additional benefits such as biodiversity preservation, water resources management, and carbon dioxide sequestration. We collaborate with suppliers to encourage them to invest in emissions reductions in the production of our agricultural raw Other materials. Through the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative Platform, we are working on a Dairy Sustainability Framework for business-to-business settings with input from both dairy buyers and suppliers. Similarly, we are identifying best practices to Method Comment
reduce the environmental impacts of mint farming related to productivity, water usage, distillation efficiency and reduction of GHG emissions. For example, Wrigley collaborated with the Mint Industry Research Council to educate North American farmers on the environmental and economic benefits of using natural gas over diesel fuel. Over four years, these farmers converted 18 percent of total mint production from diesel to propane or natural gas, resulting in a reduction of over 8,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide. In India, another key mint growing region, Wrigley is developing a sustainable agriculture plan. This assesses our environmental and social impacts, and sets strategies against these impacts to ensure we secure a vibrant Indian mint industry for the future.
CC3.3d
If you do not have any emissions reduction initiatives, please explain why not
Further Information
Attachments
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/ClimateChange2017/CC3.TargetsandInitiatives/RE100 Reporting Spreadsheet 2017 - MARS FINAL.xlsx
Page: CC4. Communication
CC4.1
Have you published information about your organization’s response to climate change and GHG emissions performance for this reporting year in places other than in your CDP response? If so, please attach the publication(s)
Page/Section Publication Attach the document reference Status Comment
As a private company, Mars, Incorporated is not required to Principles in https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate file a regulatory financial report, but we choose to report on Action In voluntary Change 2017/Shared sustainability separately. There is additional information on Complete Summary communications Documents/Attachments/CC4.1/mars-2016-pia- our approach and performance on our website at 2016, pages summary-final-06142017.pdf http://www.mars.com/global/sustainability/operations/energy- 7, 16-20 climate
Further Information
Mars Principles in Action Summary 2016: http://www.mars.com/docs/default-source/doing-our-part/principles-in-action/2016-summary/mars-2016-pia-summary-final- 06142017.pdf?sfvrsn=4
Module: Risks and Opportunities
Page: CC5. Climate Change Risks
CC5.1
Have you identified any inherent climate change risks that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure? Tick all that apply
Risks driven by changes in regulation Risks driven by changes in physical climate parameters Risks driven by changes in other climate-related developments
CC5.1a
Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in regulation
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
Our goal is to decouple environmental impacts from production volumes. We are working to reduce scope 1 & 2 There are GHG emissions Associates from our operations responsible for by 40% by 2025 and implementing the 100% by 2040. This SiG Program at is through our Mars, Sustainable in a Incorporated, $40-60 million. Generation program, business Based on our which has four segment, and Increase in scope 1 and 2 components: General site level. The regulations and emissions of OPERATIONAL environmental Increased cost of this taxation seeking 1 to 3 just under 2 EFFICIENCY: regulations, operational Direct Very likely Low resource is to limit fossil fuel years million tonnes driving down energy including cost between $5m energy use and and a and water use, and planning and $6m. Of this, GHG emissions hypothetical waste through $2.8m funds carbon price of Associate behavior program $20-30/tonne change and smarter management at equipment use. For a global and example, the regional level, Chocolate segment and $2.5m is has implemented a allocated to global program to deploy SiG at monitor and improve site level. utility systems efficiency. CAPITAL EFFICIENCY: investing in technology and processes that use less power. For
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
example, our Steinbourg, Veghel and Viersen sites have installed heat pump systems that recover waste heat, reducing natural gas use and associated emissions. NEW TECHNOLOGY: developing and deploying innovations to improve operational efficiency. For example, we are participating in DryF, an EU Horizon 2020 project to develop high temperature heat pumps that could recover waste heat in pet food manufacture. RENEWABLE ENERGY: exploring onsite renewable energy use for both new and existing operations. In 2015, Mars opened a 118- turbine wind farm at Mesquite Creek, Texas, which generates 100% of our electricity needs
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
in the United States. In 2016, we introduced a 20- turbine wind farm in Scotland, that provides enough renewable electricity to power our UK operations. In 2017, we plan to activate a new wind farm to generate enough electricity to power our five plants in Mexico. There is significant and in some cases increasing $1-$20 million. uncertainty about Using the EU the future Product direction of We are participating Environmental national in the development Footprint Uncertainty regulations on of the Product Increased initiative as an surrounding climate change 3 to 6 Environmental €90k over three operational Direct Very likely Low example, if on- new (and other years Footprint initiative as years cost pack labelling is regulation sustainability) part of a FEDIAF required, the impacts. There (European Pet Food changes could are also different Industry) pilot. result in costs at systems and the higher end approaches of the range. being advanced in different regions. Both the uncertainty of
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
these outcomes and the possibility of divergent programs across borders creates business risk.
CC5.1b
Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in physical climate parameters
Direct/ Risk Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
Induced changes Financial We partnered with Approximately 18 in natural implications are in WWF and associates work in resources are a the tens of Maplecroft to this area, requiring risk to the cost millions. Our prioritize raw between $2–3 and availability of analysis is materials for million investment Induced our agricultural conducted based sustainable per year in Increased Indirect changes raw materials. A More likely on fundamental sourcing, based on salaries, travel and operational >6 years (Supply High in natural warmer climate than not supply and the scale of their program budgets. cost chain) resources may lead to a demand balance impact and Thirteen shortage in sheets, where business associates work agricultural uncertainty of relevance. We then full-time on commodities and physical risks built on the results developing our associated price present financial to more accurately sustainable shocks. The implications. estimate GHG sourcing program, Direct/ Risk Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
effects of climate There is a risk that emissions working with the change may also climate change associated with key senior category affect where will reduce yields, crops. This helped buyers of key raw commodities can quality and us develop long- materials. Five be produced. For availability in the term commitments associates are example, our supply chain, for reducing GHG dedicated to the analysis has leading to higher emissions across CART team. found that, in the costs. We are also our value chain. United States, considering Our procurement farming of wheat scenarios where teams are and barley is prices are reduced developing moving further and the supply sustainable north. base is increased. sourcing strategies for each affected raw material to ensure we and our suppliers work toward these commitments. Our sustainable sourcing programs help suppliers boost efficiency. We are using the cacao genome sequence to develop new varieties of disease-resistant, highly-productive trees to contribute to a more sustainable cocoa industry. We encourage contract rice growers to adopt the alternate Direct/ Risk Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
wetting and drying (AWD) irrigation approach, which saves water and reduces methane emissions. In 2016, we ran a pilot project to investigate the climate change resilience and adaptive capacity of rice growers in Spain over the next 10-20 years, to inform our sourcing strategy. Our Commercial Applied Research Team (CART) supports our decision-making in commodity and risk management. The team has expertise in seasonal weather and intimate knowledge of the IPC forecast process, helping Mars to assess the impact of seasonal weather on yields. We continue to implement our Deforestation Policies for the four Direct/ Risk Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
raw materials with the greatest impact on forests: beef, palm oil, pulp and paper, and soy.
CC5.1c
Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in other climate-related developments
Direct/ Risk Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
Our strategies, Approximately 18 $1-$10 million. policies, partnerships associates work in As a privately- and actions for this area, requiring owned addressing high- between $2–3 company, we profile environmental million investment Reputational Other: cannot estimate impacts such as per year (in damage Damage to resulting share- deforestation reduce salaries, travel and arising from stakeholder price changes. the risk of negative programme About as negative relationships Up to 1 Indirect The impact on press coverage. On budgets. Thirteen Reputation likely as Low press that limits our year (Client) our business palm oil, for associates work not coverage or ability to would take the example, we are full-time on NGO operate as form of softer working toward fully developing our campaigning. effectively costs such as sustainable and sustainable loss of talent or traceable sources of sourcing program, relationships palm oil that are free working with the with regulators of deforestation, senior category and partners. expansion on buyers of key raw carbon-rich materials. Five Direct/ Risk Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
peatlands, and associates are human and labor dedicated to the rights violations. We CART team. partner with The Forest Trust (TFT) to help mills and plantations increase traceability, and we support TFT's aggregator and refinery transformation (ART) program. These measures will help ensure a genuinely sustainable pipeline where all material is sourced from companies whose mills only produce sustainable palm oil.
CC5.1d
Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent risks driven by changes in regulation that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure
CC5.1e Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent risks driven by changes in physical climate parameters that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure
CC5.1f
Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent risks driven by changes in other climate-related developments that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure
Further Information
Page: CC6. Climate Change Opportunities
CC6.1
Have you identified any inherent climate change opportunities that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure? Tick all that apply
Opportunities driven by changes in regulation Opportunities driven by changes in physical climate parameters Opportunities driven by changes in other climate-related developments
CC6.1a
Please describe your inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in regulation
Opportunity Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Direct/Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
Our goal is to decouple environmental impacts from production volumes. We are working to reduce There are $10-$180 scope 1 & 2 GHG Associates million. emissions from our responsible for Government operations by 40% implementing incentives can by 2025 and 100% the SiG support the by 2040. This is Program at deployment of through our Mars, energy Sustainable in a Incorporated, efficiency and Generation Ability to business renewable program, which has reduce costs segment, and General energy assets four components: by operating site level. The environmental Reduced in service of our OPERATIONAL more cost of this regulations, operational >6 years Direct Very likely Medium objectives. We EFFICIENCY: efficiently resource is including costs estimated the driving down and reducing between $5m planning high end of this energy and water reliance on and $6m. Of range based on use, and waste fossil fuels. this, $2.8m the expired US through Associate funds program Production Tax behavior change management at Credit incentive and smarter a global and of $23/MWh for equipment use. For regional level, renewables and example, the and $2.5m is energy use Chocolate segment allocated to equal to ~1/8 of has implemented a deploy SiG at our global total. global program to site level. monitor and improve utility systems efficiency. CAPITAL EFFICIENCY: investing in technology and
Opportunity Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Direct/Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
processes that use less power. For example, our Steinbourg, Veghel and Viersen sites have installed heat pump systems that recover waste heat, reducing natural gas use and associated emissions. NEW TECHNOLOGY: developing and deploying innovations to improve operational efficiency. For example, we are participating in DryF, an EU Horizon 2020 project to develop high temperature heat pumps that could recover waste heat in pet food manufacture. RENEWABLE ENERGY: exploring onsite renewable energy use for both new and existing operations. In 2015, Mars opened a 118-turbine wind
Opportunity Potential Magnitude Description Timeframe Direct/Indirect Likelihood Estimated driver impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
farm at Mesquite Creek, Texas, which generates 100% of our electricity needs in the United States. In 2016, we introduced a 20- turbine wind farm in Scotland, that provides enough renewable electricity to power our UK operations. In 2017, we plan to activate a new wind farm to generate enough electricity to power our five plants in Mexico.
CC6.1b
Please describe your inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in physical climate parameters
Opportunity Potential Direct/ Magnitude Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
We study Other: Indirect <$10 million. We In developing our Approximately 18 Change in More likely changing Greater >6 years (Supply Medium analyze scenarios long-term associates work in mean than not precipitation supply chain) to estimate the commodity this area, requiring
Opportunity Potential Direct/ Magnitude Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
(average) patterns in security impact of changes sourcing between $2–3 temperature locations across for certain in average strategies, we million investment our supply crops precipitation on our routinely scan per year in salaries, chain. In supply chain. This crop-growth travel and program agricultural helps us to trends to budgets. Thirteen areas where estimate where the anticipate shifts associates work precipitation is greatest impacts in geographic full-time on increasing, we will occur. Our production developing our expect this to analysis estimates patterns. While sustainable increase the that although a this more often sourcing program, supplies of change in average highlights risks to working with the some temperature has existing senior category agricultural the potential to production, it can buyers of key raw products, and to double sourcing also identify materials. Five potentially open costs, on the opportunities. associates are up new sourcing margin there will be dedicated to the regions for some opportunities CART team. certain crops. as new regions become viable sourcing locations.
CC6.1c
Please describe your inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in other climate-related developments
Opportunity Direct/ Magnitude Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver Potential Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial impact method management implications
Enhanced Other: $1-10m. This is Our corporate There are Up to 1 Indirect Reputation corporate Increased Very likely Medium based on unpaid and segment- Associates year (Client) reputation from access to media coverage level responsible for
Opportunity Direct/ Magnitude Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver Potential Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial impact method management implications
being seen as a talent and calculations of Sustainability and implementing the leader on climate external announcements Corporate Affairs SiG Program at change. For partnerships of big projects like teams seek Mars, example, in 2016 our Mesquite opportunities to Incorporated, we received the Creek Wind and publicize our business U.S. our participation sustainability segment, and site Environmental in public efforts and level. The cost of Protection conferences and participate in this resource is Agency (EPA) forums. external between $5m and Climate sustainability $6m. Of this, Leadership forums. This $2.8m funds Award for enables us to program Organizational share best management at a Leadership. practices, drive global and progress in regional level, sustainable and $2.5m is business, and allocated to enhance our deploy SiG at site reputation as a level. sustainable business leader.
CC6.1d
Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent opportunities driven by changes in regulation that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure
CC6.1e Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent opportunities driven by changes in physical climate parameters that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure
CC6.1f
Please explain why you do not consider your company to be exposed to inherent opportunities driven by changes in other climate-related developments that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure
Further Information
Module: GHG Emissions Accounting, Energy and Fuel Use, and Trading
Page: CC7. Emissions Methodology
CC7.1
Please provide your base year and base year emissions (Scopes 1 and 2)
Base year Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope
Mon 01 Jan 2007 - Mon 31 Dec Scope 1 2007 835000
Base year Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope
Mon 01 Jan 2007 - Mon 31 Dec Scope 2 (location-based) 2007 1252000
Mon 01 Jan 2007 - Mon 31 Dec Scope 2 (market-based) 2007 1252000
CC7.2
Please give the name of the standard, protocol or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions
Please select the published methodologies that you use
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition)
CC7.2a
If you have selected "Other" in CC7.2 please provide details of the standard, protocol or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions
CC7.3
Please give the source for the global warming potentials you have used
Gas Reference
CO2 IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR - 100 year) CH4 IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR - 100 year) N2O IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR - 100 year)
CC7.4
Please give the emissions factors you have applied and their origin; alternatively, please attach an Excel spreadsheet with this data at the bottom of this page
Fuel/Material/Energy Emission Factor Unit Reference
Please see attachment in Further Information
Further Information
Base year emissions have increased versus last year's reporting due to inclusion of refrigerant gas emissions and an operational boundary change to include an acquired business. Emissions factors attached in spreadsheet for CC7.4
Attachments
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/ClimateChange2017/CC7.EmissionsMethodology/2016 Scope 1_2 Emission factors-28JUN2017.xlsx
Page: CC8. Emissions Data - (1 Jan 2016 - 31 Dec 2016) CC8.1
Please select the boundary you are using for your Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas inventory
Operational control
CC8.2
Please provide your gross global Scope 1 emissions figures in metric tonnes CO2e
744000
CC8.3
Please describe your approach to reporting Scope 2 emissions
Scope 2, location-based Scope 2, market-based Comment
We are reporting a Scope 2, location-based figure We are reporting a Scope 2, market-based figure
CC8.3a
Please provide your gross global Scope 2 emissions figures in metric tonnes CO2e
Scope 2, location-based Scope 2, market-based (if applicable) Comment
1191000 739000
CC8.4
Are there any sources (e.g. facilities, specific GHGs, activities, geographies, etc.) of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure?
Yes
CC8.4a
Please provide details of the sources of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure
Relevance of
market-based Relevance of Source Scope 2 Explain why the source is excluded Relevance of Scope 1 location-based Scope emissions from emissions from this source 2 emissions from this this source (if source applicable)
Our Scope 1 emissions exclude an estimated 44.4 kT CO2e from Sales autos Emissions are relevant and No emissions from this No emissions from sales autos. This is done for consistency with Mars' other public (scope 1) calculated, but not disclosed source this source disclosures.
CC8.5 Please estimate the level of uncertainty of the total gross global Scope 1 and 2 emissions figures that you have supplied and specify the sources of uncertainty in your data gathering, handling and calculations
Uncertainty Main sources of Please expand on the uncertainty in your data range uncertainty Scope
Data Gaps Assumptions More than 2% but The primary source of uncertainty is estimated data for our smaller offices and veterinary health Extrapolation Scope 1 less than or equal businesses. Measured energy data is not available from many of these sites, as they are located Metering/ Measurement to 5% within leased spaces without direct energy invoicing. Constraints
Data Gaps The primary source of uncertainty is that national electricity emissions factors often lag reality. Assumptions Scope 2 More than 2% but This has previously led to minor restatements. Another source of uncertainty is estimated data Extrapolation (location- less than or equal for our smaller offices and veterinary health businesses. Measured energy data is not available Metering/ Measurement based) to 5% from many of these sites, as they are located within leased spaces without direct energy Constraints invoicing.
The primary source of uncertainty is our estimate of our smaller offices and Veterinary Health Data Gaps businesses. Measured energy data is not readily available from many of these sites which are Assumptions located in leased spaces without direct invoicing. Another source of uncertainty is assumptions Extrapolation of quality criteria for S2 emissions factors. Since publication of the WRI’s GHG Protocol Scope 2 Scope 2 More than 2% but Metering/ Measurement Accounting Guidance in Q1 2015 (S2 Guidance) Mars has been working with its energy suppliers (market- less than or equal Constraints to obtain documentation related to quality criteria, and to assess the availability of utility-specific based) to 5% Other: Insufficient or contract-level emission factors associated with renewable energy purchased by Mars. We documentation quality found that several of our renewable energy purchases are difficult to fully document compliant from energy suppliers quality criteria for S2 Market based reporting at the supplier’s current maturity level. We continue to work with suppliers to obtain the proper documentation, and expect to resolve this issue in the next 1-2 years.
CC8.6
Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported Scope 1 emissions
Third party verification or assurance process in place
CC8.6a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your Scope 1 emissions, and attach the relevant statements
Proportion Type of of reported Verification Status in verification Relevant Scope 1
or assurance the current or Page/section standard emissions Attach the statement cycle in reporting assurance reference verified
place year (%)
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change Annual Limited Whole Complete 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.6a/Mars PiA AA1000AS 100 process assurance document 2016_LRQA GHG Assurance Statement-TR Final.pdf https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change Annual Limited Whole Complete 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.6a/Mars PiA ISO14064-3 100 process assurance document 2016_LRQA GHG Assurance Statement-TR Final.pdf https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change Other: LRQA Annual Limited Whole Complete 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.6a/Mars PiA verification 100 process assurance document 2016_LRQA GHG Assurance Statement-TR Final.pdf approach
CC8.6b
Please provide further details of the regulatory regime to which you are complying that specifies the use of Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS)
Regulation % of emissions covered by the system Compliance period Evidence of submission
CC8.7 Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to at least one of your reported Scope 2 emissions figures
Third party verification or assurance process in place
CC8.7a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your location-based and/or market-based Scope 2 emissions, and attach the relevant statements
Proportion Type of Location- Verification Status in of verification Page/Section Relevant based or or the reported or reference standard market- assurance current Attach the statement Scope 2 assurance based cycle in reporting emissions
figure? place year verified
(%)
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change Location- Annual Limited Whole Complete 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/Mars PiA AA1000AS 100 based process assurance document 2016_LRQA GHG Assurance Statement-TR Final.pdf https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change Location- Annual Limited Whole Complete 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/Mars PiA ISO14064-3 100 based process assurance document 2016_LRQA GHG Assurance Statement-TR Final.pdf Other: https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change Location- Annual Limited Whole LRQA Complete 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/Mars PiA 100 based process assurance document verification 2016_LRQA GHG Assurance Statement-TR Final.pdf approach
CC8.8 Please identify if any data points have been verified as part of the third party verification work undertaken, other than the verification of emissions figures reported in CC8.6, CC8.7 and CC14.2
Additional data points verified Comment
No additional data verified
CC8.9
Are carbon dioxide emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization?
Yes
CC8.9a
Please provide the emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization in metric tonnes CO2
4700
Further Information
Page: CC9. Scope 1 Emissions Breakdown - (1 Jan 2016 - 31 Dec 2016)
CC9.1
Do you have Scope 1 emissions sources in more than one country?
Yes
CC9.1a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by country/region
Country/Region Scope 1 metric tonnes CO2e
Africa and Middle East 13000 CIS and Asia 139000 Europe 188000 Americas 404000
CC9.2
Please indicate which other Scope 1 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide (tick all that apply)
By business division
CC9.2a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business division
Business division Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
Chocolate 214000 Drinks 620 Business division Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
Food 41000 Petcare 412000 Symbioscience 400 Wrigley 64000 Veterinary centers, offices & retail 12000
CC9.2b
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by facility
Facility Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude
CC9.2c
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by GHG type
GHG type Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
CC9.2d Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by activity
Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) Activity
Further Information
Page: CC10. Scope 2 Emissions Breakdown - (1 Jan 2016 - 31 Dec 2016)
CC10.1
Do you have Scope 2 emissions sources in more than one country?
Yes
CC10.1a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions and energy consumption by country/region
Purchased and consumed low Scope 2, market-based Purchased and Country/Region carbon electricity, heat, steam or Scope 2, location-based (metric (metric tonnes CO2e) consumed electricity, cooling accounted in market-based tonnes CO2e) heat, steam or approach (MWh) cooling (MWh)
Africa and Middle 46000 46000 71000 0 East CIS and Asia 346000 346000 552000 400 Purchased and consumed low Scope 2, market-based Purchased and Country/Region carbon electricity, heat, steam or Scope 2, location-based (metric (metric tonnes CO2e) consumed electricity, cooling accounted in market-based tonnes CO2e) heat, steam or approach (MWh) cooling (MWh)
Europe 266000 212000 759000 166000 Americas 533000 134000 1065000 724000
CC10.2
Please indicate which other Scope 2 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide (tick all that apply)
By business division
CC10.2a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business division
Scope 2, location-based Business division (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope 2, market-based
(metric tonnes CO2e)
Chocolate 433000 258000 Drinks 6000 500 Food 37000 19000 Petcare 409000 225000 Symbioscience 2000 0 Wrigley 214000 149000 Veterinary centers, offices & retail 91000 87000
CC10.2b
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by facility
Facility Scope 2, location-based (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tonnes CO2e)
CC10.2c
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by activity
Activity Scope 2, location-based (metric tonnes CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tonnes CO2e)
Further Information
Page: CC11. Energy
CC11.1
What percentage of your total operational spend in the reporting year was on energy?
More than 0% but less than or equal to 5%
CC11.2 Please state how much heat, steam, and cooling in MWh your organization has purchased and consumed during the reporting year
Energy type MWh
Heat 3000 Steam 147000 Cooling
CC11.3
Please state how much fuel in MWh your organization has consumed (for energy purposes) during the reporting year
3955000
CC11.3a
Please complete the table by breaking down the total "Fuel" figure entered above by fuel type
Fuels MWh
Diesel/Gas oil 20000 Distillate fuel oil No 5 15000 Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) 66000 Natural gas 3833000 Distillate fuel oil No 4 20 Biogas 14000 Fuels MWh
Wood or wood waste 7000
CC11.4
Please provide details of the electricity, heat, steam or cooling amounts that were accounted at a low carbon emission factor in the market-based Scope 2 figure reported in CC8.3a
MWh consumed Emissions associated with low factor (in Basis for applying a low carbon emission factor carbon electricity, units of metric Comment heat, steam or tonnes CO2e cooling per MWh)
This is electricity from the Mesquite Creek Windfarm in Contract with suppliers or utilities, supported by energy 661000 0 Texas, USA, supported by RECs retired annually on behalf attribute certificates of Mars. Off-grid energy consumption from an on-site installation Purchased from an on-site installation owned by a supplier or through a direct line to an off-site generator owned 1200 0 at our Henderson, Nevada, USA site. PEC instruments are by another company used. Contract with suppliers or utilities, supported by energy Contract with green electricity supplier for our site in Austria, 6300 0 attribute certificates backed by GO tracking instruments. Contract with green electricity supplier for our site in Contract with suppliers or utilities, supported by energy 18500 0 Lithuania, backed by GO instruments and "Certificate of attribute certificates RES" Direct procurement contract with a grid-connected Electricity usage for our sites in Brazil, which is described as generator or Power Purchase Agreement (PPA), where low carbon hydroelectricity. In the Brazilian electricity market 62000 0 electricity attribute certificates do not exist or are not there are no energy attribute certificates for purchased required for a usage claim renewable electricity. Off-grid energy consumption from an on-site installation Photovoltaic energy from an on-site installation, owned by a or through a direct line to an off-site generator owned 400 0 third party and purchased by our Huairou China Chocolate by another company site.
MWh consumed Emissions associated with low factor (in Basis for applying a low carbon emission factor carbon electricity, units of metric Comment heat, steam or tonnes CO2e cooling per MWh)
Direct procurement contract with a grid-connected Wind energy generated by the Moy Wind farm in Scotland, generator or Power Purchase Agreement (PPA), 98000 0 UK, which provides enough electricity for all of our UK supported by energy attribute certificates operations. Backed by REGO instruments. Contract with suppliers or utilities, with a supplier- Non-electrical low-carbon energy purchase for our factories specific emission rate, not backed by electricity 43000 0 in Haguenau, France (Green Steam) and Gargzdai, Hungary attribute certificates (Geothermal heating).
CC11.5
Please report how much electricity you produce in MWh, and how much electricity you consume in MWh
Consumed
Consumed renewable Total Total electricity that is Total renewable electricity electricity electricity purchased (MWh) electricity that is Comment consumed produced produced (MWh) produced by (MWh) (MWh) company
(MWh)
A small portion of our electricity is self-generated through on- 2375000 2297000 78000 1600 1600 site, direct renewable installations and cogeneration.
Further Information
Page: CC12. Emissions Performance CC12.1
How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the reporting year compare to the previous year?
Decreased
CC12.1a
Please identify the reasons for any change in your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) and for each of them specify how your emissions compare to the previous year
Emissions Direction Reason value Please explain and include calculation of change (percentage)
This decrease is due to emissions reductions from a UK national-level renewable energy project plus the Emissions 6.1 Decrease energy efficiency initiatives described in CC3.3b. Calculation = 1 - (2016 S1&S2 Emissions) / (2015 S1&S2 reduction activities emissions) In this calculation, 2015 data has been updated to include IAMS, matching 2016 data in scope. Divestment Mars acquired the IAMS pet food business in 2014, and we have now integrated these facilities into our operational boundaries. The acquisition caused our emissions to increase in absolute terms, but the impact is tempered as these facilities are in the USA, where our electricity use is covered by renewable energy Acquisitions 2.8 Increase generated at our Mesquite Creek wind farm in Texas. The number to the left shows the additional amount of market-based emissions attributed to the IAMS businesses in 2016 as a percentage of our operations without these businesses. Calculation = (IAMS 2016 Emissions) / (S1&S2 2016 Emissions minus IAMS) Mergers Change in output Change in methodology Change in boundary Change in physical operating conditions Unidentified Other
CC12.1b
Is your emissions performance calculations in CC12.1 and CC12.1a based on a location-based Scope 2 emissions figure or a market-based Scope 2 emissions figure?
Market-based
CC12.2
Please describe your gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions for the reporting year in metric tonnes CO2e per unit currency total revenue
Metric Metric % Direction denominator: numerator (Gross change of change Intensity Unit total global combined Scope 2 from from Reason for change figure = revenue Scope 1 and 2 figure previous previous
emissions) used year year
Our emissions decreased from last year when adjusting last year's data to include emissions from the IAMS acquisition in 2014. This is Market- 42 metric tonnes CO2e 35000 11 Decrease due to emissions reduction activities including energy efficiency based improvements and renewable energy projects. This value is reported as tonnes CO2e per million US$ revenue.
CC12.3
Please provide any additional intensity (normalized) metrics that are appropriate to your business operations
Metric Direction of % change numerator (Gross change Intensity Metric from global combined Metric Scope 2 from Reason for change figure = denominator previous Scope 1 and 2 denominator: figure previous year emissions) Unit total used year
Restated data for 2015 show an intensity figure of 0.18, rather than the previously disclosed figure of metric tonnes metric tonne of Market- 0.17 5.7 Decrease 0.17. This means our emissions intensity reduced CO2e product based slightly in 2016 to 0.17 tonnes CO2e per tonne of production.
Further Information
Page: CC13. Emissions Trading
CC13.1
Do you participate in any emissions trading schemes?
No, and we do not currently anticipate doing so in the next 2 years
CC13.1a
Please complete the following table for each of the emission trading schemes in which you participate
Period for which Verified emissions in Scheme name Allowances allocated Allowances purchased Details of ownership data is supplied metric tonnes CO2e
CC13.1b What is your strategy for complying with the schemes in which you participate or anticipate participating?
CC13.2
Has your organization originated any project-based carbon credits or purchased any within the reporting period?
No
CC13.2a
Please provide details on the project-based carbon credits originated or purchased by your organization in the reporting period
Credit Number of Number of credits origination Project Project Verified to which credits (metric tonnes Credits Purpose, e.g. or credit type identification standard (metric CO2e): Risk adjusted canceled compliance purchase tonnes CO2e) volume
Further Information
Page: CC14. Scope 3 Emissions
CC14.1
Please account for your organization’s Scope 3 emissions, disclosing and explaining any exclusions
Percentage of emissions metric calculated Sources of Scope tonnes Emissions calculation methodology using data 3 emissions Evaluation CO2e obtained from Explanation status suppliers or
value chain
partners
Emissions calculated using a combination of primary Purchased goods Relevant, 20592000 data and public lifecycle analysis datasets, coupled 10.00% and services calculated with internal material usage data. Calculated using representative capital projects and secondary data sources for material emissions Relevant, Capital goods 124000 factors (e.g. steel, concrete) along with economic 0.00% calculated allocation of disclosed emissions of our major capital suppliers. Fuel-and-energy- Not relevant, related activities explanation Not applicable (not included in provided Scope 1 or 2) Upstream Outbound logistics calculated using distance/weight Relevant, transportation and 1431000 and fuel emissions factors. Inbound logistics 0.00% calculated distribution estimated. End of life impacts of packaging waste are covered in “End of life treatment of sold Products”. A Not relevant, Waste generated significant majority of product (food) explanation in operations waste is reused as animal feed, provided avoiding emissions by displacing other feeds (though we do not claim these benefits). Relevant, Calculated using data from travel providers plus Business travel 54000 100.00% calculated flight class/segment length data. Estimated using actual employee headcount plus estimated distances and 2015 average global Employee Relevant, vehicle efficiencies from OECD/IEA "International 115000 0.00% commuting calculated comparison of light-duty vehicle fuel economy" and emissions factor for gasoline from WRI Transport Tool v. 2.6. Percentage of emissions metric calculated Sources of Scope tonnes Emissions calculation methodology using data 3 emissions Evaluation CO2e obtained from Explanation status suppliers or
value chain
partners
Not relevant, Upstream leased explanation Not applicable assets provided Downstream Calculated from publicly disclosed retail scope 1 and Relevant, transportation and 1388000 2 footprint data and market share, plus Mars 0.00% calculated distribution outbound logistics. Not relevant, Processing of sold explanation Not applicable products provided Use of sold Relevant, Calculated based on rice cooking requirements and 91000 0.00% products calculated drinks machine energy usage. End of life Calculated based on regional Relevant, treatment of sold 188000 recycling/landfill/incineration rates for packaging 0.00% calculated products materials. Not relevant, Downstream explanation Not applicable leased assets provided Not relevant, Franchises explanation Not applicable provided Not relevant, Investments explanation Not applicable provided Other (upstream) Other (downstream)
CC14.2 Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported Scope 3 emissions
Third party verification or assurance process in place
CC14.2a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken, and attach the relevant statements
Type of Verification verification Relevant Proportion of or Status in the Attach the statement or Page/Section standard reported Scope assurance current assurance reference 3 emissions cycle in reporting year verified (%) place
Underway but not complete for https://www.cdp.net/sites/2017/82/11382/Climate Change Annual reporting year – Limited Whole ISO14064- 2017/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC14.2a/CY15 Mars 77 process previous assurance document 3 GHG Assurance Statement-ASRauthorized-clean.pdf statement of process attached
CC14.3
Are you able to compare your Scope 3 emissions for the reporting year with those for the previous year for any sources?
Yes
CC14.3a
Please identify the reasons for any change in your Scope 3 emissions and for each of them specify how your emissions compare to the previous year
Emissions Sources of Scope 3 Reason for Direction of value Comment emissions change change (percentage)
This increase in emissions vs. last year's disclosure is due to improved data Purchased goods & Change in 151 Increase granularity in our raw material supply chains, improving the accuracy of our services methodology emissions data. This increase in emissions vs. last year's disclosure is due to improved data Change in granularity regarding capital expenditures, and the addition of more types of Capital goods 148 Increase methodology purchases in our reporting. This value now includes capital building projects as well as equipment purchases. Upstream Change in This increase in emissions vs. last year's disclosure is due to improved data transportation & 96 Increase methodology granularity, improving the accuracy of our emissions data. distribution Change in This increase in emissions vs. last year's disclosure is due to using updated Employee commuting 28 Decrease methodology emissions factors and efficiencies for light duty vehicles. Downstream Change in Emissions associated with retail distribution decreased due to using retailer- transportation and 59 Decrease methodology specific, publicly available data for a more accurate calculation of impacts. distribution Change in Emissions associated with the use phase for cooking dry rice were recalculated Use of sold products 61 Decrease methodology using lifecycle analysis work in order to more accurately calculate the impacts. This decrease in emissions vs. last year's disclosure is due to improved data End-of-life treatment Change in 22 Decrease granularity in our packaging raw material supply chains, improving the accuracy of of sold products methodology our emissions data.
CC14.4
Do you engage with any of the elements of your value chain on GHG emissions and climate change strategies? (Tick all that apply)
Yes, our suppliers Yes, our customers Yes, other partners in the value chain
CC14.4a
Please give details of methods of engagement, your strategy for prioritizing engagements and measures of success
We prioritize stakeholder engagement on GHG emissions and climate change in the area of our value chain responsible for the greatest proportion of our emissions - our agricultural supply chain.
Our Responsible Sourcing policy and Supplier Code of Conduct set global standards for environmental impacts and other areas, among tier-1 suppliers across our global supply chain. As of mid-2016, more than 600 third-party assessments of our first-tier supplier workplaces had been carried out, and more than 90% of our suppliers were in alignment with our Responsible Sourcing requirements.
We have in place a number of sustainable sourcing programs where we work, directly or via partners, with suppliers and farmers beyond tier-1 to reduce environmental impacts. For example:
- In 2016, we successfully mapped 100% of beef and 97% of soy our global operations sourced to the sites where the materials were processed. This exercise showed that we source just 5% of our beef and around 16% of our soy from Brazil, where deforestation is a key concern. We have engaged with all our Brazilian beef suppliers to establish compliance with our Beef & Deforestation policy requirements, and we have begun collaborating with leading soy certification programs to certify that the soy we source from Brazil meets our Soy & Deforestation policy requirements. - We are participating in the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative Platform's efforts to develop a Dairy Sustainability Framework for business-to-business settings, with input from both dairy buyers and suppliers. - We are collaborating with a Spanish rice supplier, WWF and Danone to pilot good practices for reducing the GHG, water and biodiversity impacts of rice, and to jointly advocate sustainability to national and regional government. - We are working with the World Cocoa Foundation, ACDI/VOCA, USAID, and other leading chocolate and cocoa companies, on a common strategy to address the impacts of climate change on cocoa, and to find innovations to help farmers adapt to changing weather patterns.
We estimate supplier emissions using Eco-invent and publicly available databases to quantify the impacts of sourcing our raw materials. We aim to help improve public data on the impacts of agricultural production through partner-level engagement with the World Food Lifecycle Database (WFLDB) project. Through this project we link supplier-specific data to the WFLDB process and review the resulting lifecycle analysis models, improving the quality of the data.
We work with industry partners to share best practices and conduct lifecycle assessments of specific aspects of our value chain, through organizations including The Sustainability Consortium, The Sustainable Food Lab and AIM-PROGRESS.
We partner with customers on environmental initiatives, such as making product transportation more efficient. For example, Mars Petcare’s supply chain operations and commercial teams in the United States collaborated with customers to make delivering our pet food products more efficient. Their work has saved 100,000 gallons of fuel and US$1 million per year, while reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
CC14.4b To give a sense of scale of this engagement, please give the number of suppliers with whom you are engaging and the proportion of your total spend that they represent
% of total Number Type of spend of Impact of engagement engagement (direct and suppliers indirect)
We work with thousands of suppliers globally, who help us source, create, package, and distribute our products. Our Responsible Sourcing program guides our social and environmental efforts in this area. It is founded on our Supplier Code of Conduct, which includes environmental commitments. As of mid-2016, more than 600 third-party Active 700 assessments of our first-tier supplier workplaces had been carried out, and more than 90% of our suppliers were in engagement alignment with our Responsible Sourcing requirements. During 2016, we directly engaged with more than 700 suppliers representing nearly two-thirds of all suppliers of priority raw materials, during hundreds of meetings and over 50 trips to origin countries.
CC14.4c
Please explain why you do not engage with any elements of your value chain on GHG emissions and climate change strategies, and any plans you have to develop an engagement strategy in the future
Further Information
http://www.mars.com/global/press-center/newsroom/mars-partner-world-cocoa-foundation-launches-smart-cocoa-program
Module: Sign Off
Page: CC15. Sign Off
CC15.1
Please provide the following information for the person that has signed off (approved) your CDP climate change response
Name Job title Corresponding job category
Richard Ware Vice President, Supply, Research & Development and Procurement Chief Operating Officer (COO)
Further Information
Module: FBT
Page: FBT1. Agriculture
FBT1.1
Are agricultural activities, whether in your direct operations or elsewhere in your value chain, relevant to your climate change disclosure?
FBT1.1a
Please explain why agricultural activities are not relevant to your climate change disclosure
FBT1.2
Are the agricultural activities that you have identified as relevant undertaken on your own farm(s), elsewhere in your value chain, or both?
FBT1.2a
Please explain why agricultural emissions from your own farms are not relevant
FBT1.3
Do you account for greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural activities undertaken on your own farm(s) as part of the global gross Scope 1 emissions figure reported in CC8.2, and/or the Scope 2 figure reported in CC8.3a of the core climate change questionnaire?
FBT1.3a
Please select the form(s) in which you wish to report the greenhouse gas emissions produced by agricultural activities (agricultural emissions) undertaken on your own farm(s)
FBT1.3b
Please report your total agricultural emissions produced on your own farm(s) and identify any exclusions in the table below
Agricultural Scope emissions (metric Methodology Exclusions Explanation Comment tonnes CO2e)
FBT1.3c
Please report your agricultural emissions produced on your own farm(s), disaggregated by category, and identify any exclusions in the table below
Agricultural Emissions emissions (metric Methodology Exclusions Explanation Comment category tonnes CO2e)
FBT1.3d Please explain why you do not account for greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural activities undertaken on your own farm(s), and describe any plans for the collection of this data in the future
FBT1.4
Do you implement agricultural management practices on your own farm(s) with a climate change mitigation and/or adaptation benefit?
FBT1.4a
Please identify agricultural management practices undertaken on your own farm(s) with a climate change mitigation and/or adaptation benefit. Complete the table
Agricultural Description of agricultural Climate change Activity ID Comment management practice management practice related benefit
FBT1.4b
Does your implementation of these agricultural management practices have other impacts? Complete the table
Impact on Impact on Description Activity ID Impact on yield Impact on cost Impact on water Other impact Comment soil quality biodiversity of impacts
FBT1.4c
Do you have any plans to implement agricultural management practices in the future?
FBT1.4d
Please detail your plans to implement agricultural management practices in the future
FBT1.5
Is biogenic carbon pertaining to your own farm(s) relevant to your climate change disclosure?
FBT1.5a
Please report biogenic carbon data pertaining to your own farm(s) in the table below
Emissions/ CO2 flux Removals (metric Methodology Exclusions Explanation Comment tonnes CO2e)
FBT1.6
Do you account for greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural activities in your value chain as part of the Scope 3 category "Purchased goods and services" reported in CC14.1 of the core climate change questionnaire?
FBT1.6a
Please report these agricultural emissions from your value chain and identify any exclusions in the table below
Agricultural emissions (% of
the emissions reported in the Scope Exclusions Explanation Comment category “Purchased goods
and services”)
FBT1.6b
Please explain why you do not account for greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural activities in your value chain as part of the Scope 3 category “Purchased goods and services” reported in CC14.1 of the core climate change questionnaire
FBT1.7
Do you encourage your agricultural suppliers to undertake any agricultural management practices with a climate change mitigation and/or adaptation benefit?
FBT1.7a
Please identify agricultural management practices with a climate change mitigation and/or adaptation benefit that you encourage your suppliers to implement. Complete the table
Agricultural Description of Your role in the Explanation of how Activity ID management agricultural implementation of you encourage Climate change related benefit Comment practice management practice this practice implementation
FBT1.7b Does the implementation of these agricultural management practices in your value chain have other impacts? Complete the table
Impact on Impact on Description Activity ID Impact on yield Impact on cost Impact on water Other impact Comment soil quality biodiversity of impacts
FBT1.7c
Do you have any plans to engage with your suppliers on their implementation of agricultural management practices?
FBT1.7d
Please detail these plans to engage with your suppliers on their implementation of agricultural management practices
Further Information
Page: FBT2. Processing
FBT2.1
Are processing activities, whether in your direct operations or elsewhere in your value chain, relevant to your climate change disclosure?
FBT2.1a
Please explain why processing activities are not relevant to your climate change disclosure
FBT2.2 Are the processing activities that you have identified as relevant undertaken in your direct operations, elsewhere in your value chain, or both?
FBT2.2a
Please explain why emissions from processing activities in your direct operations are not relevant
FBT2.3
Do you account for emissions from processing activities in your direct operations as part of the global gross Scope 1 emissions figure reported in CC8.2 and/or the Scope 2 figure reported in CC8.3a of the core climate change questionnaire?
FBT2.3a
Please report these emissions from processing activities in your direct operations and identify any exclusions in the table below
Emissions from Scope processing activities Exclusions Explanation Comment (metric tonnes CO2e)
FBT2.3b
Please explain why you do not account for emissions from processing activities in your direct operations, and describe any plans for the collection of this data in the future
FBT2.4 Do you account for emissions from processing activities in your value chain as part of the Scope 3 category "Purchased goods and services" and/or "Processing of sold products" reported in CC14.1 of the core climate change questionnaire?
Page: FBT3. Distribution
FBT3.1
Are distribution activities, whether in your direct operations or elsewhere in your value chain, relevant to your climate change disclosure?
FBT3.1a
Please explain why distribution activities are not relevant to your climate change disclosure
FBT3.2
Are the distribution activities that you have identified as relevant undertaken in your direct operations, elsewhere in your value chain, or both?
FBT3.2a
Please explain why emissions from distribution activities in your direct operations are not relevant
FBT3.3
Do you account for emissions from distribution activities in your direct operations as part of the global gross Scope 1 emissions figure reported in CC8.2 and/or the Scope 2 figure reported in CC8.3a of the core climate change questionnaire?
FBT3.3a
Please report these emissions from distribution activities in your direct operations and identify any exclusions in the table below
Emissions from Scope distribution activities Exclusions Explanation Comment (metric tonnes CO2e)
FBT3.3b
Please explain why you do not account for emissions from distribution activities in your direct operations, and describe any plans for the collection of this data in the future
FBT3.4
Do you account for emissions from distribution activities in your value chain as part of the Scope 3 category "Upstream transportation and distribution" and/or "Downstream transportation and distribution" in CC14.1 of the core climate change questionnaire?
Page: FBT4. Consumption
FBT4.1
Are emissions from the consumption of your products relevant to your climate change disclosure?
FBT4.1b
Please explain why emissions from the consumption of your products are not relevant to your climate change disclosure
FBT4.1a
Do you account for emissions from the consumption of your products as part of the Scope 3 category "Use of sold products" and/or "End of life treatment of sold products" in CC14.1 of the core climate change questionnaire?
CDP 2017 Climate Change 2017 Information Request