CDP 2015 Climate Change 2015 Information Request CDP Metcash
Module: Introduction
Page: Introduction
CC0.1
Introduction Please give a general description and introduction to your organization.
Metcash Limited (Metcash) is Australia’s leading wholesale distribution and marketing company specialising in grocery, fresh produce, liquor, hardware and automotive parts and accessories.
Metcash champions the interests of the independent grocery, liquor, hardware and auto-spares sectors through its core competencies of buying, merchandising, marketing, brand building, distribution logistics and warehousing. This includes Metcash being the brand owner for a range of around 4,000 SKUs, covering corporate and controlled brands, fresh produce, and non-trade products.
By supporting of its customers, independent retailers, Metcash is behind the "third force" in the Australian grocery retailing market.
Metcash is comprised of four divisions, often referred to as business pillars, each operating in a distinct wholesaling industry segment; Metcash Food & Grocery, Australian Liquor Marketers, Mitre 10 and Automotive.
Metcash's customers are, predominantly, independently owned retail stores.
Metcash operates in Australia and New Zealand, has over 5,500 employees, and in the 2013/14 financial year, generated sales of $13.4 billon.
CC0.2
Reporting Year Please state the start and end date of the year for which you are reporting data. The current reporting year is the latest/most recent 12-month period for which data is reported. Enter the dates of this year first. We request data for more than one reporting period for some emission accounting questions. Please provide data for the three years prior to the current reporting year if you have not provided this information before, or if this is the first time you have answered a CDP information request. (This does not apply if you have been offered and selected the option of answering the shorter questionnaire). If you are going to provide additional years of data, please give the dates of those reporting periods here. Work backwards from the most recent reporting year. Please enter dates in following format: day(DD)/month(MM)/year(YYYY) (i.e. 31/01/2001).
Enter Periods that will be disclosed
Mon 01 Jul 2013 - Mon 30 Jun 2014
CC0.3
Country list configuration
Please select the countries for which you will be supplying data. If you are responding to the Electric Utilities module, this selection will be carried forward to assist you in completing your response.
Select country
Australia
CC0.4
Currency selection
Please select the currency in which you would like to submit your response. All financial information contained in the response should be in this currency.
AUD ($)
CC0.6
Modules As part of the request for information on behalf of investors, electric utilities, companies with electric utility activities or assets, companies in the automobile or auto component manufacture sub-industries, companies in the oil and gas sub-industries, companies in the information technology and telecommunications sectors and companies in the food, beverage and tobacco industry group should complete supplementary questions in addition to the main questionnaire. If you are in these sector groupings (according to the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS)), the corresponding sector modules will not appear below but will automatically appear in the 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. If you wish to view the questions first, please see https://www.cdp.net/en-US/Programmes/Pages/More-questionnaires.aspx.
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
• Audit, Risk & Compliance Committee.
• Group Sustainability Manager, reporting through Risk & Assurance Team to the CFO.
• The Audit Risk & Compliance Committee (ARCC) is a sub-committee of the Metcash Board of Directors. Members can be viewed in the Metcash Annual Report, Pages 16, 17 and 24. The ARCC receives reviews and discusses climate change issues quarterly, as part of the quarterly ARCC Report prepared by the Risk Department of Metcash. The Group Sustainability Manager and General Manager Risk & Assurance prepare a report to the ARCC committee every three months, covering current and upcoming issues, which is then discussed by the committee, and directives are issued to staff via the committee minutes where required for further action or information.
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 benefit from The type of Incentivized
these incentives? incentives performance indicator Comment
Energy reduction project The Group Sustainability Manager has KPI’s on achievement of energy Environment/Sustainability managers Monetary reward Efficiency project reduction projects and energy efficiency projects.
Further Information
Re: Q 1.1a Refer to pages 16, 17 and 24 for the composition of the Metcash Audit Risk and Compliance Committee.
Attachments
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2015/23/11823/Climate Change 2015/Shared Documents/Attachments/ClimateChange2015/CC1.Governance/Metcash-Annual-Report- 2014[1].pdf
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
Geographical How far into the Frequency of To whom are results reported? areas future are risks Comment monitoring considered considered?
Board or individual/sub-set of the 6 monthly reports on climate change risks & opportunities Six-monthly or Board or committee appointed by Australia > 6 years are prepared by the Sustainability Team for the Audit Risk & more frequently the Board Compliance Committee, a sub-set of the Board
CC2.1b
Please describe how your risk and opportunity identification processes are applied at both company and asset level
Climate change risks/opportunities identification process is as follows:
Regulatory Physical & Other risks & opportunities, affecting either company or assets, are identified by the Sustainability Team
Risks & opportunities are documented by the Sustainability Team in the Climate Change Adaptation and Risk Management Plan, and by the Sustainability Team in the Enterprise Risk Management program that utilizes the software Protecht. Both are updated annually and inform Metcash’s response to the CDP Climate Change Questionnaire.
Each risk/opportunity is described in terms of impact on company level, as documented in the Metcash Climate Change Adaptation and Risk Management Plan. This ensures that risks and opportunities are documented, prioritised and identified for action.
The Metcash Climate Change Adaptation and Risk Management Plan has a section dedicated to the regional impacts of climate change around Australia in terms of physical risks. Site specific risks and opportunities are difficult due to the non-localised nature of climate risk predictions. However, where possible, the Metcash Climate Change Adaptation & Risk Management Plan makes recommendations to manage risks and opportunities at asset level, such as on the Metcash Climate Risk & Opportunity Map. In the most part, recommendations apply to all Metcash sites.
The Group Sustainability Manager overseen by General Manager Risk & Assurance are accountable for the process. Risks/opportunities re-assessed annually during EMS Management Review. A risk register is maintained in the EMS documentation and in the Climate Change Adaptation and Risk Management Plan.
CC2.1c
How do you prioritize the risks and opportunities identified?
Risk analysis follows the Australian Standard 5x5 grid analysis, which includes a monetary figure of each level of consequence. Controls for those risks and opportunities are also recorded.
Risk evaluation is undertaken by the Group Sustainability Manager and General Manager Risk to identify highest risks or opportunities, and those with the greatest residual risk after controls are applied. Risks or opportunities with similar controls are grouped together.
Highest risks or opportunities are prioritised, and where controls are low cost high benefit, or create benefit among multiple risks or opportunities. Actions on the control strategies are then assigned via the annual Sustainability Strategy or via our Risk Management software (PROTECHT).
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
i. The Sustainability Manager prepared the Climate Change Adaptation & Risk Management Plan, and reviews every three years, in close collaboration with the Enterprise Risk Manager. The Risk Management Plan &Business Continuity Plans are developed and updated annually through face to face scenario workshops with onsite managers of each Metcash site to develop and test key controls. Key controls for adaptation are then attributed to responsible staff for monthly attestation via our risk management software, which issues monthly compliance reports to sites & senior managers. The result has been that climate risk has been taken into consideration across the business, right down to site business unit level – as part of our business as usual risk identification, management and reporting processes.
ii. Metcash’s Sustainability Strategy of annual actions or projects has been based around four key areas, Our Business, Our Products, Our Customers and Our Suppliers. In addressing each of these four key areas, Metcash has included consideration of our climate risks and opportunities, and has set emission reduction targets.
The following is a brief description of the key elements of our Sustainability Strategy
Reduce Electricity Costs This element focuses on our core distribution centres, which are responsible for 80% of the Metcash Group’s electricity consumption. Increase Retailer Customer Sustainable Stores This element focuses on increasing the number of independent retailer customers who include sustainable elements in their store design, fit out, refurbishment, and merchandise ranging.
Maintain Credentials and Recognition This element focuses on continuing to report publically on Metcash’s progress toward sustainability, both on regulatory and voluntary basis.
Fairly Help The Community This element focuses on our core value to support the community, by developing reporting and strategic partnerships.
iii. Climate change has influenced both the short term and long term strategy.
Metcash short term strategy has altered in the following immediate ways since 2008:
Establishment of an executive level environmental sustainability committee, including the group CEO and business division directors to oversee policy and project initiatives;
Quarterly reporting to the Board subcommittee on climate & other environmental & social sustainability issues;
Building design to withstand climate related risks;
Emergency response planning which has been well tested since 2007 with a severe Sydney hailstorm and 2011 Queensland & Victorian floods and cyclone;
Commencement of investment in resource efficiency programs;
Setting of emission reduction targets;
Communication has commenced via Metcash.com and our Annual Report;
iv. Climate change has influenced both the short term and long term strategy.
The executive level environmental sustainability committee helps to set long term direction for Metcash and gives weight and importance to climate risk & opportunity which is driven through the business,
Strategic inclusion of climate risk & opportunity in Metcash policy, such as development of Sustainability Policy, Strategy and Climate Adaptation & Risk Management Plan & Map;
Development of an operational, site based EMS with an emphasis on Metcash’s contribution and adaptation to climate change as well as encouraging innovation to seek opportunities at site level.
Incorporation of new technologies into new, purpose built properties such as our NSW distribution centre, our first to achieve a Green Star rating from the Green Building Council of Australia (LEED equivalent);
Encouraging our customers and suppliers to identify their own climate risks and opportunities and to take action on them – further widening the opportunity Metcash has to influence change in the supply chain. v. Our strategy has had the benefit of learning from our competitors mistakes, and has drawn on international best practice to ensure that it is at the cutting edge of sustainability management, looking beyond our own operations to that of our customers and suppliers, and even extending right to consumers. Keeping our strategy internal only has allowed us to integrate staff input and adapt our system in it’s infancy, protecting us from reputation risk around going public too soon – giving us further strategic advantage over our competitors. One example of where business strategy has been influenced is by crafting our sustainability strategy by first comparing the success of sustainability strategies from similar organisations, in Australia and abroad.
vi. Reputation
One example of where substantial business decisions have been influenced is in attempting and being awarded a 4 Star Green Star – Industrial v1 Design and As Built from the Green Building Council of Australia for the first time for our NSW distribution centre, was which represents “Australian Best Practice” in environmentally sustainable design & building.
CSR chapter in our Annual Report
Our Responsibility section on our website
Physical
One example of where substantial business decisions have been influenced is in attempting and completing for the first time an "Energy Performance Contract" of retrofits, at two warehouses in South Australia.
An example where a substantial business decision has been influenced by the physical effects of climate change is the investment in our first solar PV project, a 16.3 kWh system on a warehouse in the Northern Territory which is affected frequently by power outages and storms,
Using ,Learning & refining emergency response / business continuity plans resulting from numerous severe weather events. One example where a substantial business decision has been influenced is in the subscription of site managers to Early Warning Network so they have pre warning and can take action to minimise the physical impact of sudden weather, terroriust or pandemic threats,
Other
Sharing information and encouraging our customers and suppliers to identify their own climate risks and opportunities and to take action on them – further widening the opportunity Metcash has to influence change in the supply chain. One example of where substantial business decisions have been influenced is the development of the Approved Supplier Program to commence influencing better adaption, measurement and mitigation of climate change impacts amongst our supply chain.
CC2.2b
Please explain why climate change is not integrated into your business strategy
CC2.2c
Does your company use an internal price of carbon?
No, and we currently don't anticipate doing so in the next 2 years
CC2.2d
Please provide details and examples of how your company uses an internal price of carbon
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
CC2.3a
On what issues have you been engaging directly with policy makers?
Focus of Corporate Details of engagement Proposed legislative solution legislation Position
Consulted via phone and in writing with the Suggest collaboration with industry groups and certified training NSW Environment Department on their Energy efficiency Support organisations. Focus on existing projects to incorporate energy efficiency in refrigeration energy efficiency training standard training for refrigeration mechanics and engineers. program. Other: Product Written Submissions, attendance at working More research into the life cycle impacts of product to inform the most Support Stewardship meeting groups effective & minimum climate impact product stewardship scheme Other: Review of Retention of the packaging stewardship scheme with a focus on design being Packaging Support Attendance at working group meetings fit for purpose Covenant OEH Training Program for refrigeration mechanics review- support the inclusion of energy efficiency, but integrated into the existing formal training Energy efficiency Support Interview, written and submission for refrigeration mechanics. Also via accredited continuing professional development through industry bodies.
CC2.3b
Are you on the Board of any trade associations or provide funding beyond membership?
No
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 change Please explain the trade How have you, or are you attempting to, Trade association consistent with theirs? association's position influence the position?
CC2.3d
Do you publicly disclose a list of all the research organizations that you fund?
CC2.3e
Do you fund any research organizations to produce or disseminate public work on climate change?
CC2.3f
Please describe the work and how it aligns with your own strategy on climate change
CC2.3g Please provide details of the other engagement activities that you undertake
CC2.3h
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?
Metcash has a process for managing engagement activities. This process involves having a draft engagement prepared by the Group Sustainability Manager, having it approved by the General Manager Risk, having it approved by the General Manager Corporate Affairs, and finally submitting the engagement itself.
This approach ensures that all engagement is consistent with out overall climate change strategy as it is centrally managed by the Group Sustainability Manager. Standard templates have been developed which are maintained and added to depending on the nature of the engagement by the Sustainability Manager. This ensures consistent messaging as well as answering specific information requirements.
Nature of engagement includes responding to consultation in writing or meetings, participating in policy research, participation in co-regulatory agreements and on various committees.
Topics of engagement include legislation, policy, strategy and co-regulatory agreements as well as industry voluntary initiatives.
CC2.3i
Please explain why you do not engage with policy makers
CC2.4
Would your organization's board of directors support an international agreement between governments on climate change, which seeks to limit global temperature rise to under two degree Celsius from pre-industrial levels in line with IPCC scenarios such as RCP2.6?
No opinion
CC2.4a Please describe your board's position on what an effective agreement would mean for your organization and activities that you are undertaking to help deliver this agreement at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris (COP 21)
Metcash has no position.
Further Information
The Metcash vision and mission statement is to be a leader in the marketing and distribution of food and other fast moving consumer goods. We have an overarching Sustainability Policy, which is implemented via our annual Sustainability Strategy, which outlines our internal resource/emission efficiency targets and the projects planned for the year ahead to reach them. Our Strategy has four key focus areas, Reduce Electricity Costs, Increase Retailer Customer Sustainable Stores, Maintain Credentials and Recognition, Fairly Help the Community, and many projects stem from each of these areas; including projects to mitigate/adapt to the risks associated with climate change. Sub-policies and projects stemming from the Sustainability Strategy deal directly and specifically with climate change risk & opportunity, for example, our Climate Change Adaptation and Risk Management Plan which has key recommendations for adaptation to our key climate change risks, be they regulatory, physical or other – which have been implemented across the business. Our Strategy has four key focus areas, Reduce Electricity Costs, Increase Retailer Customer Sustainable Stores, Maintain Credentials and Recognition, Fairly Help the Community, and many projects stem from each of these areas; including projects to mitigate/adapt to the risks associated with climate change. Sub-policies and projects stemming from the Sustainability Strategy deal directly and specifically with climate change risk & opportunity, for example, our Climate Change Adaptation and Risk Management Plan which has key recommendations for adaptation to our key climate change risks, be they regulatory, physical or other – which have been implemented across the business.
Page: CC3. Targets and Initiatives
CC3.1
Did you have an emissions reduction target that was active (ongoing or reached completion) in the reporting year?
Absolute target
CC3.1a
Please provide details of your absolute target
Base year % % of emissions reduction Base Target ID Scope emissions in (metric Comment from base year year scope tonnes year CO2e)
An absolute target was selected as an easily understandable, internal, first carbon target. However Metcash is an extremely fluid business. This makes Scope Abs1 100% 20% 2009 79706.01 2015 target setting difficult to show meaningful information over time. For example 1+2 88 Franklins supermarkets were bought and sold, sites divested and more businesses from 2009-2015 have been acquired then consolidated. This target applies to our five largest sites, our distribution centres. It has an Scope emphasis on electricity consumption, hence it is a scope 2 target. DC Abs2 42% 10% 2013 47735 2015 2 electricity consumption is around 42% of all of Metcash’s electricity consumption.
CC3.1b
Please provide details of your intensity target
% of % reduction Normalized base ID Scope emissions in Metric Base year Target year Comment from base year year emissions scope
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
For all of your targets, please provide details on the progress made in the reporting year
% complete % complete ID Comment (time) (emissions)
Metcash is an extremely fluid business. This makes target setting difficult to show meaningful information over time. For example 88 Franklins supermarkets were bought and sold, sites divested and more businesses from 2009-2015 Abs1 80% 0% have been acquired then consolidated (Mitre 10, Automotive brands, ATAP, Confectionary Wholesaler, MIDAS etc). The target was 63765.01 and the actual for 13/14 was 92,298. 38.65% of the reduction was achieved, from the baseline (47,735) to 45,890 in 13/14. The target 42,962 has not yet Abs2 50% 38.65% been achieved.
CC3.1e
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
Does the use of your goods and/or services directly enable GHG emissions to be avoided by a third party?
No
CC3.2a
Please provide details of how the use of your goods and/or services directly enable GHG emissions to be avoided by a third party
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 7 4712 To be implemented* 3 326.42 Implementation commenced* 0 0 Implemented* 4 326 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 initiative
CO2e) in CC0.4) in CC0.4)
We undertook an investigation into Energy DC Laverton: Scope no and low cost operational Voluntary efficiency: Lights off after 95.97 2 18000 0 <1 year 6-10 years efficiency . Lights were being left
Processes hours on after hours and just needed to be switched off each evening. We undertook an investigation into no and low cost operational Energy DC Laverton: Scope Voluntary efficiency . External loadin bay efficiency: Canopy lights off in 201 2 38000 0 <1 year 6-10 years lights were left on 24/7 in some Processes the day areas which are now being switched off. We undertook an investigation into no and low cost operational Energy efficiency . We found that if there DC Laverton: Scope efficiency: Voluntary were more switches to isolate Reconfigured light 159.95 2 30000 5000 <1 year 6-10 years Building different sections of the switches services warehouse then site management would be able to switch off more lights. Energy Lighting is an obvious efficiency DC Canning Vale Scope efficiency: Voluntary 4-10 option in warehouses and a good LED Lighting 953 2 91000 706376 6-10 years Building years saving was available from Retrofit services investing in an LED retrofit. Scope Energy The cooling towers were leaking DC Canningvale 2 efficiency: Voluntary 11-15 water and not efficiently cooling Cooling Tower 218 Scope 20962 290000 6-10 years Building years the refrigeration. Dual benefit of Replacement 3 services energy and water savings
Energy DC Crestmead UV 103 Scope Voluntary 500 1200 1-3 years 6-10 years West facing windows were 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 initiative
CO2e) in CC0.4) in CC0.4)
efficiency: Window Tinting in 2 effecting employee comfort in the Processes canteen and offices Scope afternoons. UV Window tinting 3 was identified as an option and served as a useful trial Scope Air conditioning units failed, Energy DC Crestmead 2 causing the air con to reduce Voluntary 4-10 efficiency: Replacement of 3 103 Scope 3500 18000 6-10 years effectiveness. Repair and years Processes X AC Compressors 3 replacement restored worker comfort and stock protection. Metal halides have just a 5 year Energy shelf life and fail. Instead of DC Crestmead Scope efficiency: Voluntary replacing them as they fail with replaced as fails 103 2 8000 16000 1-3 years 6-10 years Building metal halides, they are replaced lighting with LED services with LED, avoiding a large one off CAPEX Two of the six PFC units were shorted out by a severe electrical Energy DC Kidman Park Scope Voluntary storm. We noticed the power efficiency: Decomissioning of 55 2 500 0 <1 year 6-10 years factor on that circuit remained very Processes PFC Unit good. Therefore it was decomissioned. Lights and air con units were Energy regularly being left on overnight. DC Kidman Park Scope efficiency: Voluntary The onsite Sustainability nightly switch off 56 2 16000 0 <1 year 6-10 years Building Champion developed a switch-off procedure services checklist for warehouse staff to implement.
CC3.3c What methods do you use to drive investment in emissions reduction activities?
Method Comment
Compliance with regulatory This is a key driver for investment in emission reduction activities, including for regulated reporting requirements like requirements/standards NGERS. Dedicated budget for energy Metcash has a dedicated budget annually for the Sustainability Team, including funds for energy efficiency related efficiency activity. Dedicated budget for low carbon Metcash is not a product manufacturer, but staffing costs are allocated to business growth annually product R&D Dedicated budget for other emissions Metcash has a dedicated budget annually for the Sustainability Team, which is used for other emission reduction reduction activities activities such as operational energy efficiency. This is a key driver for investment in emission reduction activities – particularly by identifying and promoting emission Employee engagement reductions which also reduce costs and provide an opportunity for employee leadership or favourable performance reviews. The Metcash Sustainability Team engages the services of the Finance division to undertake financial optimisation Financial optimization calculations calculations related to energy and carbon reduction activities. While Metcash does not apply an internal carbon price, we do carefully monitor the Australian political landscape, Internal price of carbon including predictions of the impact of direct action carbon abatement schemes. Metcash has a "Sustainability Champions" program that recognises the efforts of staff volunteers who generate savings Internal incentives/recognition through sustainability projects in their State. Sustainability Champions can use their experience during performance programs reviews, and obtain new skills. Internal finance mechanisms Metcash applies ROI requirements on capital expenditure projects. Lower return on investment (ROI) Metcash considers each capital expenditure project on its merit, and has to date proceeded with energy/carbon specification efficiency works at a longer ROI than traditionally required. Sustainability Manager uses the McKinsey & Company MACC to 2020 (2008) for Australia in communicating carbon Marginal abatement cost curve abatement activities to investment decision makers. Partnering with governments on Metcash have applied for such partnerships but as yet have been unsuccessful in securing any. technology development
CC3.3d
If you do not have any emissions reduction initiatives, please explain why not
Further Information
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
In mainstream financial reports https://www.cdp.net/sites/2015/23/11823/Climate Change 2015/Shared but have not used the CDSB Complete 14-15 Documents/Attachments/CC4.1/Metcash-Annual-Report-2014[1].pdf Framework https://www.cdp.net/sites/2015/23/11823/Climate Change 2015/Shared In other regulatory filings Complete 1-621 Documents/Attachments/CC4.1/https___eers cleanenergyregulator gov.pdf https://www.cdp.net/sites/2015/23/11823/Climate Change 2015/Shared In voluntary communications Complete 48-51 Documents/Attachments/CC4.1/Sustainability Assessment - DJSI Sustainability Assessment 2014 - Metcash Ltd.pdf
Further Information
Metcash has also publicised our response to climate change and GHG Emissions performance via media articles, websites, staff magazine and staff email.
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
Active membership on Integrated into Metcash is agreements, existing budgets, impacted by a anticipatory self Costs to meet number of imposed targets & Consumer Goods international energy efficiency Brand value Forum an annual agreements, both project damage and ongoing 10% legislated and Increased Indirect identification and International Virtually possible fines / premium on voluntary E.g operational >6 years (Supply Low implementation. agreements certain delisting timber product Consumer Goods cost chain) Applies to $100,000- procurement and Forum mandates operational 500,000. 10% on capital timber & resource use in all costs for refrigeration worksites. replacement of purchasing Residual risk Low, refrigeration requirements & maintained over equipment. the next five years. Air pollution Regulation Increased Indirect Exceptionally Up to Strict OHS Integrated into >6 years Low limits limiting air operational (Supply unlikely $5,000,000 and procedures existing budgets,
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
pollution, is not a cost chain) jail time for implemented by Costs from major risk to individuals onsite staff & $100,000 – Metcash as we involved in audited regularly 500,000 per do not undertake pollution ISO14001 EMS annum recurring any incidents. May with strict to implement manufacturing. indirectly affect operational OHS/ EMS However we are supply and procedures for annually over at still liable under transportation handling of least 5 years. regulation e.g. of goods. dangerous goods Australian Clean and maintenance Air Act procedures to minimise refrigerant leakage on our operational sites. Residual risk Low & risk maintained for the next five years. Metcash is affected by regulation putting a price on carbon. E.g. the Energy efficiency Renewable Costs around Increased costs targets and Energy Targets $150,000 capital Increased of electricity projects; Residual increase 1 to 3 About as cost for energy Carbon taxes operational Direct Medium 0.9% risk Low & risk electricity costs years likely as not audits and $1M cost ($3,150,000 in maintained over as will the new for project 2013) the next five Clean Energy implementation. years. Futures Act 2012 (carbon tax). The average cost pass through has been 0.09% of
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
the total electricity spend, equal to $3,150,000 in 2013 Cap & trade schemes would Energy efficiency not directly affect targets and Metcash but projects; Passing would incur pass on increased Integrated into through costs. product & service Increased costs capital works For example, the costs to our of energy, budgets, approx Clean Energy Increased customers who Cap and trade 3 to 6 About as products and $300,000 pa Futures Act 2012 operational Direct Medium will likely pass schemes years likely as not services of Integrated into would commence cost costs on to approx operational staff a cap & trade consumers. $1,575,000 budgets, approx system in 2015. Residual risk Low $250,000 pa We estimate & risk maintained pass through to over a timeframe be 50% of the of the next five carbon tax or years. $1,575,000 pa Mandatory Fines for emission inaccurate A dedicated reporting on reporting to manager, external Scope 1 and 2 NGERS are audit, subscription emissions does $200,000 per to carbon and Integrated into Emission effect Metcash. Increased infringement. environmental Virtually existing budgets, reporting For example the operational >6 years Direct Medium Fines for accounting certain approx $200,00 obligations Australia National cost inaccurate software. Residual pa Greenhouse and participation in risk Low & risk Energy Reporting EEO $110,000. maintained over Act 2007 and Suppliers the next five software to passing on years. manage such costs and our
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
data costs in the customers order of having staff $100,000 per requirements annum and costs associated with having to report themselves. Metcash is impacted by fuel taxes as a user Developing of fuels and as Increased costs refrigeration fuels are used of energy, inventory with a extensively in our products and view to upgrades supply chain. E.G services & Conversion of tax on increased fleet to lower refrigerants, operational consumption Australian Fuel costs vehicles running Integrated into Fuel/energy Tax. Synthetic Increased Virtually associated with on lower carbon existing budgets, taxes and refrigerant costs operational >6 years Direct Low certain fleet vehicles. intensity and approx $200,000 regulations are expected to cost e.g Carbon lower cost fuels. pa rise 420%. Tax increased Pass through Assuming cost of costs to leakage of 2% synthetic customers. annually, this refrigerants by Residual risk Low equates to 420% or & risk maintained approx 427 kg of $179,000 over the next five refrigerant per years annum at additional cost of $179,000 Metcash is a Resourcing to Participate in co- Staffing costs. Product brand owner of Increased ensure regulatory These costs are efficiency 3300 sku’s so is operational >6 years Direct Unlikely Medium regulation is agreements, annual for the regulations impacted directly cost met, fees for undertake foreseeable and standards and in the supply participation voluntary product future. Integrated
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
chain E.G $1,000,000 efficiencies, into existing Australian request suppliers budgets, approx Packaging to improve $100,000 pa Covenant which product has an annual sustainability or fee have products rated. Residual risk Low & risk reduced over the foreseeable future. Participate in co- Resourcing to regulatory ensure agreements, accurate undertake Metcash is a labeling and voluntary brand owner of fees payable to labelling:Cost 3300 sku’s so is any such sharing or flow impacted directly schemes, for through to/from and in the supply example, Product our suppliers. We Integrated into chain E.G Increased voluntary labelling have also existing staffing Australian operational >6 years Direct Unlikely Low product regulations commenced budgets, approx Standards, NGO cost labeling is and standards improvement of $500,000 pa Standards & around packaging to requests e.g $110,000 for reduce carbon Planet Ark’s the first product footprint of Carbon Footprint plus a products. Label percentage of Residual risk Low sales under the & risk maintained Planet Ark over the next five scheme. years. Metcash is a Resourcing to Metcash Membership fees Increased Voluntary signatory to More likely meet the participates in to the various operational >6 years Direct Low agreements numerous than not requirements of most voluntary voluntary cost voluntary the voluntary agreements agreements
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
agreements, agreements, already;skilled & integrated into each of which and flow resourced staff to existing budgets, poses risk of through of manage approx $100,000 increasing costs from compliance, pa, staff compliance suppliers and Residual risk Low resourcing costs requirements, to customers & risk reduced and project E.G Australian for voluntary over time. implementation Packaging agreements costs. Costs are Covenant, such as the annual. Sustainability Australian Advantage Packaging (NSW), Non- Covenant and Governmental the Roundtable Organisations on Sustainable (topical / issue Palm Oil. based Approx collaboration) In $250,000 pa From The Cold - govt-industry agreement on refrigeration energy efficiency in supermarket, processing, warehousing and transport sectors. Metcash are Increased Energy and water Costs are subject to State compliance efficiency in sites, planning fees and General and local costs, penalties specify new builds charges, environmental planning Increased from non to meet voluntary consultant and regulations, requirements as operational >6 years Direct Unlikely Low compliance, standards, such builder fees, staff including well as pollution cost increased cost as the 4 star costs to manage planning regulation E.G or reduced Green Building such risks and Protection of the availability of Council of capital Environment insurance. It Australia rating, to expenditure.
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
Operations Act may also exceed Integrated into 1993 that carries involve direct foreseeable existing budgets, fines of up to costs where planning $100,000 - $5m for company Metcash seeks regulations. $500,000 pa or individual to undertake Metcash has guilty of a building or operational pollution incident refurbishment procedures to of lease prevent pollution properties. $5 and emergency million. procedures to minimize incidents; reduces risk likelihood & consequence; residual risk reduced for the next 5 years Energy efficiency, Costs are staff greenhouse gas costs, Investor management, and subscription costs hesitation, risk mitigation, and project costs. It is always hard pressure on without waiting for These costs are a to predict the energy pricing, any certain mixture of capital nature and scope first mover regulatory costs and of regulatory Uncertainty disadvantage, change. Monitoing integrated into change, and it Increased surrounding staff time to of legislative existing budgets. tends to be operational >6 years Direct Unlikely Low new monitor change via Costs are annual driven by political cost regulation legislative various over the cycles. Affected change and subscriptions such foreseeable regulation could cost to manage as LawLex. future. E.g. the encompass any compliance. Participation in cost to manage of the above $100,000 to industry bodies compliance to $500,000 and co-regulatory NGER and EEO agreement. costs Metcash in Residual risk of the order of
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
Low & risk $100,000 - maintained over a $500,000 pa timeframe of the next five years. Costs are staff and project costs. These costs are a mixture of capital costs and annual over the Energy efficiency, It is always hard foreseeable greenhouse gas to predict the future. E.g. there Investor management, and nature and scope is no regulation hesitation, risk mitigation, of regulatory around climate pressure on without waiting for change, and it Increased change Lack of energy pricing, any certain tends to be operational >6 years Direct Unlikely Low adaptation, but regulation first mover regulatory driven by political cost Metcash have disadvantage. change. Residual cycles. Affected spent in the order $100,000 to risk of Low & risk regulation could of $35,000 to $500,000 maintained over a encompass any prepare a climate timeframe of the of the above change next 5 years. adaptation assessment & plan for our worksites $100,000 - $500,000 pa Metcash has Costs are staff Metcash are Investor operational costs as part of subject to federal hesitation, fines procedures to existing Other and state air Increased & court prevent pollution operational regulatory pollution operational >6 years Direct Unlikely Low penalties. and emergency budgets e.g. site drivers regulations such cost $100,000 to procedures to OHS training. as the Clean Air $500,000 minimize $100,000 – Act. incidents; reduces 500,000 pa.
Potential Direct/ Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated impact Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
risk likelihood & consequence; residual risk reduced for the next 5 years
CC5.1b
Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by change in physical climate parameters
Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood impact of impact Estimated financial Management Cost of
implications method management
Temperature change in Australia as Higher cost of Project costs & predicted by the products related to operational CSIRO is likely to agricultural costs, e.g. increase across production, change in Passing on costs electricity costs much of Australia, building fabric to customers. Change in per kWh of particularly in Increased specifications for new Residual risk mean 1 to 3 More likely Low- consumption. central and operational Direct constructs, & higher Low, risk (average) years than not medium Capital & western Australia, cost energy consumption reduced over the temperature annual costs but also costs due to foreseeable over the importantly in all refrigerants (costs future. foreseeable key agricultural increasing 420% from future. $50,000 area and areas of 1 July 2012). to $200,000. human $500,000-1,000,000. settlement. Human health Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood impact of impact Estimated financial Management Cost of
implications method management
impacts from heatwave conditions will worsen, and electricity supply may be affected. It is very likely that heat waves will be more intense, more Subscription for Property damage Groupwide frequent and all site managers (including internal insurance longer lasting with to the location infrastructure eg. IT cover of $4.2-5 a decrease in based severe systems), an increase million per diurnal weather event, in staff costs due to annum & EWN Change in temperature Increased pandemic event More likely Low- heatstroke, stock loss subscription temperature range. Decreases operational >6 years Direct or terrorist event than not medium / business interruption $4,000-8,000 extremes in frost will affect cost “Early Warning due to loss of critical pa. These certain crops. Network”. infrastructure, costs are Human health Residual risk quality/quantity/cost of annual over the impacts from Medium Low with produce. $500,000 - foreseeable heatwave the risk 1,000,000 future. conditions will maintained. worsen, and electricity supply may be affected. Rainfall change in Staff Higher cost of Australia as Engaging with management products related to predicted by the suppliers on (e.g. agricultural CSIRO is likely to sustainability and emergency and Change in production. Flash decrease in the Increased passing on costs contingency mean 1 to 3 More likely Low- flooding damage to north, east coast operational Direct to customers. planning) costs. (average) years than not medium property and delay of and south, with cost Residual risk These costs precipitation transport routes. an increase in Low with the risk are annual over Damage to business mean reduced over the foreseeable critical infrastructure. precipitation in time. future. $500,000 – 1,000,000 South Australia, $100,000 – Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood impact of impact Estimated financial Management Cost of
implications method management
central Australia, 500,000 pa. and Western Australia. This will affect agriculture cropping, flash flooding, town water supply and business critical infrastructure. As temperature regimes change, Passing on costs seasons are likely to customers, Capital & to shrink or taking insurance annual costs: lengthen, cover, Higher cost of staff affecting maintaining products related to management precipitation subscriptions to agricultural costs, the cost Change in patterns. In some Increased the Early More likely Low- production., Higher of insurance precipitation regions of operational >6 years Direct Warning Network than not medium cost of water, cover at $4.2-5 pattern Australia, cost & undertaking currently $450,000- million per precipitation water efficiency $500,000 pa. annum, & intensity is projects. $500,000 – 1,000,000 investment in projected to Residual risk water efficiency increase but there Medium Low with projects. would be longer risk reduced over periods between time. rainfall events. The increased Disruption to supply Passing on costs Costs are incidence of (inputs), cost / to customers, annual, include storm events damage to property, maintaining our groupwide Change in such as cost / damage to subscriptions to insurance precipitation Increased hurricanes can be 3 to 6 More likely Low- critical infrastructure, the Early cover at $4.2-5 extremes operational Direct traced to warming years than not medium Impacts on clients or Warning Network million per and cost oceans. consumers, (EWN), annum, water droughts Increased quality/quantity/cost of undertaking efficiency flooding due to produce. $500,000 to water efficiency projects, and these extreme 1,000,000. projects, EWN Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood impact of impact Estimated financial Management Cost of
implications method management
weather events maintaining subscription and glacial melt is insurance. $4,000-8,000 likely to increase Residual risk of pa. as well. Medium Low (as Temperature the Likelihood is patterns such as unlikely to heat waves and change) with the droughts are risk maintained likely to occur over time. with increased severity. As the climate warms, snow cover and sea ice extent decrease. Costs are This may improve annual staff Passing on costs shipping routes, Reduced shipping costs and to customers. speed and cost. Increased costs and increased existing Snow and 3 to 6 More likely Low- Residual risk However operational Direct product operational ice years than not medium Low with risk agricultural cost costs.$500,000 to budgets in the reduced over systems may be 1,000,000. order of time. adversely $100,000 to effected, 500,000. especially crops requiring frost to bear fruit. Sea level is Infrastructure Careful site Costs are projected to rise damage, property selection, annual, include by up to an damage (including passing on costs our groupwide average of 0.59 m internal infrastructure to customers, insurance Increased Sea level by the end of the More likely Low- eg. IT systems), maintaining cover at $4.2-5 operational >6 years Direct rise century, with than not medium interruption to supply / subscriptions to million per cost substantial delivery, threats to the Early annum, geographical employee health and Warning infrastructure variability likely. safety, and insurance Network, well alterations This is of premiums. $500,000 – practiced $500,000 – Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood impact of impact Estimated financial Management Cost of
implications method management
particular concern 1,000,000. Business 1,000,000, and as all Australian Continuity Plans EWN capital cities are for every subscription on the coastline, Metcash site, $4,000-8,000 as well as insurance cover, pa. significant & encouraging business critical customers and infrastructure. suppliers to take Homes would be action on climate affected causing change change to the adaptation. economy and Residual risk consumer Medium Low, risk spending. Climate maintained over refugees from time. nearby low lying pacific islands is also likely affecting labour markets. An increase of Careful site peak wind selection, Costs are intensities and passing on costs Infrastructure annual group- increased near- to customers, damage, property wide insurance storm maintaining damage (including cover at $4.2-5 precipitation is subscriptions to Tropical internal infrastructure million per predicted for the Early cyclones Increased eg. IT systems), annum, staff future tropical More likely Low- Warning (hurricanes operational >6 years Direct interruption to supply / costs, energy cyclones, with a than not medium Network, having and cost delivery, threats to efficiency / decrease in the well practiced typhoons) employee health and alternate overall number of Business safety, and insurance supply, & EWN storms. Tropical Continuity Plans premiums.$500,000 – subscription North for every 1,000,000. $4,000-8,000 Queensland is Metcash site, pa. particularly insurance cover, affected, with & encouraging Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood impact of impact Estimated financial Management Cost of
implications method management
associated effects customers and such as flooding suppliers to take felt into south action on climate east Queensland change including the adaptation. capital Brisbane. Residual risk Medium Low, risk maintained over time. With changes to physical climate their interaction Passing on costs will induce to customers, & changes in Infrastructure Costs are encouraging natural resources damage, property annual staff customers and such as crops, damage (including costs and Induced suppliers to take forestry and Increased internal infrastructure existing changes in More likely Low- action on climate insect vectors, for operational >6 years Direct eg. IT systems), and operational natural than not medium change example causing cost change or interruption budgets in the resources adaptation. changes in to supply / order of Residual risk growing seasons, delivery.$500,000 – $100,000 to Low; risk migration patterns 1,000,000. 500,000. maintained over will differ, in time. addition to changes in plant species. Passing on costs Costs are to customers, annual group- Many physical maintaining wide insurance changes are still Increased price or subscriptions to cover at $4.2-5 Uncertainty considered Increased reduced availability of More likely Low- the Early million per of physical speculative, as operational >6 years Direct insurance at $4.2-5 than not medium Warning annum, staff risks the potential cost million per annum, Network, having costs, energy problems are other increased costs. well practiced efficiency / interlinked. Business alternate Continuity Plans supply, & EWN Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood impact of impact Estimated financial Management Cost of
implications method management
for every subscription Metcash site, $4,000-8,000 insurance cover, pa. and encouraging customers & suppliers to take action on climate change adaptation. Residual risk Low; risk maintained over time.
CC5.1c
Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in other climate-related developments
Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
There are potential Action on climate Costs are annual impacts associated change & group-wide with negative Loss of market resource insurance cover at perceptions share, loss of efficiency, $4.2-5 million per Inability About as experienced by the share price, reporting openly annum, staff Reputation to do >6 years Direct likely as Medium public (including reduced sales. on carbon costs, energy business not lobby groups) as $500,000- emissions, efficiency / well as suppliers and 5,000,000. engaging with alternate supply, customers around suppliers and & EWN an organization’s customers to subscription Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
carbon performance, also take action. $4,000-8,000 pa. Residual risk of Low with the risk maintained over the foreseeable future. Taking action on climate change & resource Costs are annual Climate change can Reduced efficiency, group-wide induce changes in customer reporting openly insurance cover at customer demand for on carbon $4.2-5 million per preferences for certain (high emissions, Changing Inability About as annum, staff products/services, 1 to 3 carbon / engaging with consumer to do Direct likely as Low costs, energy who may be less years unsustainable) suppliers and behaviour business not efficiency / likely to purchase or products, customers to alternate supply, use the services of reduced sales. also take action. & EWN high carbon impact $500,000- Residual risk of subscription companies. 5,000,000. Low with the risk $4,000-8,000 pa. maintained over the foreseeable future. Property damage Action on climate Costs are annual (including change & for the internal resource foreseeable infrastructure eg. efficiency, Climate change future; group-wide IT systems), reporting openly Induced could cause mass insurance cover at Threats to on carbon changes in migration and Inability About as $4.2-5 million per 1 to 3 employee health emissions, human and cultural changes to do Direct likely as Medium annum, staff years and safety, Loss engaging with cultural such as changing business not costs, energy of product, suppliers and environment labour markets, efficiency / damage to customers to crime and safety alternate supply, reputation, lost also take action, & EWN supply contract having business subscription funds. $500,000- continuity plans $4,000-8,000 pa. 5,000,000. in place. Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
Residual risk of Low with the risk maintained over the foreseeable future. Action on climate change & Costs are annual resource for the Climate change Reduced efficiency, foreseeable could induce customer reporting openly future; group-wide changes in social demand for on carbon insurance cover at Fluctuating and economic certain (high emissions, Inability About as $4.2-5 million per socio- prosperity changing carbon / engaging with to do Direct likely as Low annum, staff economic a local or regional unsustainable) suppliers and business not costs, energy conditions scale in response to products, customers to efficiency / regulatory or reduced sales. also take action. alternate supply, physical climate $500,000- Residual risk of & EWN impacts 5,000,000. Low with the risk subscription maintained over $4,000-8,000 pa. the foreseeable future. Costs are community Engaging in funding support As climate change community such as more than effects start to support activities $60,000,000 become evident, in Loss of product, and climate donated to Increasing particular in the Inability lost supply mitigation community and 1 to 3 humanitarian developing world, to do Direct Unlikely Low contract funds. activities . charity groups years demands there is the potential business $500,000- Residual risk of through the for funds to be 5,000,000. Low with the risk Community Chest diverted to address maintained over program in the humanitarian needs the foreseeable past 10 years, and future. emergency disaster relief in the order of Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
$100,000 per event. Costs are a combination of capital costs and annual over the foreseeable future. Action on climate change & Reduced Costs are annual resource customer for the efficiency, It may become demand for foreseeable reporting openly difficult to operate certain (high future; group-wide on carbon effectively under the carbon / insurance cover at emissions, Uncertainty uncertainty Inability unsustainable) $4.2-5 million per 1 to 3 engaging with in social surrounding the to do Direct Unlikely Low products, annum, staff years suppliers and drivers reputational, business reduced sales, costs, energy customers to behavioural and Loss of product, efficiency / also take action. socio-economic risks lost supply alternate supply, Residual risk of listed above contract funds. & EWN Low with the risk $500,000- subscription maintained over 5,000,000. $4,000-8,000 pa. the foreseeable future. Action on climate Costs are annual change & for the resource foreseeable efficiency, future; group-wide Loss of market as markets respond reporting openly insurance cover at share, loss of Uncertainty to climate change Inability on carbon $4.2-5 million per 1 to 3 share price, in market impacts and to do Direct Unlikely Low emissions, annum, staff years reduced sales. signals predictions, volatility business engaging with costs, energy $500,000- can be induced suppliers and efficiency / 5,000,000. customers to alternate supply, also take action. & EWN Residual risk of subscription Low with the risk $4,000-8,000 pa. Direct/ Potential Magnitude Risk driver Description Timeframe Indirect Likelihood Estimated impact of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
maintained over the foreseeable future.
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 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
Company exposure to regulatory risk is: Low- due to no liability for acquitting permits and due to mitigation and adaption efforts; - Mitigation being resource efficiency and emission reduction projects through the Energy Performance Contract, and Sustainability Strategy Projects as well as Grant opportunities. - Adaption efforts by maintaining compliance and minimising exposure to legislation through mitigation (most Australian regulations are triggered when emission/energy caps are exceeded) - We will only be impacted by higher enegry prices, though at a low level - Our current data collection processes will need to continue, as well as additional compliance costs (external verification, report compilation). Better utility data management is also an opportunity to identify cost savings. It is unlikely that physical risks will result in the cost of product being "greatly affected: as we are a volume based grocery and food supply business. It is more likely we would be affected by losses from distrupted supply chain that are passed on via minor product cost increases. Insurance premiums have increased due to the nature of our warehouse structures and other factors (GFC), as a result which excesses some of our sites have doubled. We assess other climate change risks as being a low risk to Metcash. Because our business is in the marketing and distribution of food as a wholesaler which is a critical life requirements and unlikely to be significantly impacted by market changes. There may be some changes to availability and cost of some goods but our suppliers core business and also farmers are to use site appropriate species for production. Reputational risks are unlikely to significantly affect the success of the wholesale business.
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
Magnitud Opportunity Timefram Direct/Indirec Likelihoo Description Potential impact e of Estimated driver e t d Cost of impact financial Managemen management implications t method
Internationally Increase in About as Federal grant Identifying Probably a International 1 to 3 binding capital Direct likely as Low funds for resource requirement agreements years agreements availability not emission efficiency for matched Magnitud Opportunity Timefram Direct/Indirec Likelihoo Description Potential impact e of Estimated driver e t d Cost of impact financial Managemen management implications t method
negotiated reduction opportunities, funding for within the frame activities at measuring federal grants of the United around $250,000, resource use at around Nations and associated and setting $500,000. international savings from internal conventions or resource targets, any other efficiency regularly internationally projects, business reviewing recognized wide in the order funding protocol. E.g of $7mil pa. opportunities. Kyoto Protocol – mandated national emission reduction targets. Identifying Costs are resource staff costs Improved ROI for efficiency and capital emission opportunities, costs for Carbon tax is reduction measuring consultant currently being activities, ability to resource use Reduced 1 to 3 More likely fees to Carbon taxes proposed by the Direct Low sell climate and setting operational costs years than not identify Australian programs to internal resource Government suppliers and targets, efficiency customers.Aroun regularly opportunities d $250,000 pa. reviewing at around funding $100,000. opportunities. Cap & trade Improved ROI for Identifying The costs scheme is emission resource associated Cap and currently being About as reduction efficiency with these Reduced capital 1 to 3 trade proposed by the Direct likely as Low activities, ability to opportunities, opportunities costs years schemes Australian not sell climate measuring are staff costs government, for programs to resource use and capital several years suppliers and and setting costs for Magnitud Opportunity Timefram Direct/Indirec Likelihoo Description Potential impact e of Estimated driver e t d Cost of impact financial Managemen management implications t method
time customers. internal consultant commencement Around $250,000 targets, fees to . pa. regularly identify reviewing resource funding efficiency at opportunities around $100,000. The costs The methods Better suited than associated Metcash are its competitors to with these Metcash is using to meet these opportunities subject to the manage the requirements due are staff costs Australia opportunity Emission Increased stock to well and annual National More likely are emission reporting price (market >6 years Direct Low established costs for Greenhouse than not reporting obligations valuation) systems & emission and Energy systems and software use. software, at Reporting Act creating a Approx $250,000 around 2007 package to reputational $200,000 to sell to benefit. 500,000 per customers. annum. Metcash is Improved ROI for impacted by fuel The methods emission The costs taxes as a user Metcash are reduction associated of fuels and as using to activities, ability to with these Fuel/energy fuels are used manage the Reduced More likely sell climate opportunities taxes and extensively in >6 years Direct Low opportunity operational costs than not programs to are staff cost regulations our supply are creating suppliers and in the order of chain. E.G tax a package to customers. $100,000 to on refrigerants, sell to Around $250,000 400,000. Australian Fuel customers. pa. Tax Product Metcash is a Products already Exceeding The costs efficiency brand owner of meet anticipated the associated Reduced More likely regulations 3300 sku’s so is Unknown Direct Low standards, requirements with these operational costs than not and impacted increased market of the opportunities standards directly and in for products. Australian are staff costs Magnitud Opportunity Timefram Direct/Indirec Likelihoo Description Potential impact e of Estimated driver e t d Cost of impact financial Managemen management implications t method
the supply chain Around Packaging and annual E.G Australian $1,000,000 to Covenant costs for Packaigng 5,000,000. and voluntary Covenant implementing memberships a Sustainable , in the order Supply Chain of $100,000 Management to 400,000. Program. Metcash is a Exceeding The costs brand owner of the associated 3500 sku’s so is requirements Products already with these impacted of the meet anticipated opportunities Product directly and in Increased Australian standards, are staff costs labelling the supply chain demand for Packaging More likely increased market and annual regulations E.G Australian existing Unknown Direct Low Covenant than not for products. costs for and Standards, products/service and Around voluntary standards NGO Standards s implementing $1,000,000 to memberships & requests e.g a Sustainable 5,000,000. , in the order Planet Ark’s Supply Chain of $100,000 Carbon Management to 400,000. Footprint Label Program. Metcash is a Exceeding signatory to the Products already The costs numerous requirements meet anticipated associated voluntary of the standards, with these agreements, Australian increased market opportunities each of which Packaging for products, are staff costs poses risk of Covenant, Voluntary Reduced More likely improvement in and annual increasing >6 years Direct Low meeting the agreements operational costs than not the ROI for costs for compliance requirements emission voluntary requirements, of the reduction memberships E.G Australian Consumer activities. Around , in the order Packaging Goods $1,000,000 to of $100,000 Covenant, Forum & 5,000,000. to 400,000. Sustainability Roundtable Advantage on Magnitud Opportunity Timefram Direct/Indirec Likelihoo Description Potential impact e of Estimated driver e t d Cost of impact financial Managemen management implications t method
(NSW), Non- Sustainable Governmental Palm Oil and Organisations implementing (topical / issue a Sustainable based Supply Chain collaboration) In Management From The Cold - Program. govt-industry agreement on refrigeration energy efficiency in supermarket, processing, warehousing and transport sectors. The costs associated Identifying with these Metcash are Possible federal resource opportunities subject to State grant funds for efficiency are staff costs and local emission opportunities, and capital General planning reduction measuring costs for environmenta requirements as activities, and resource use Reduced More likely consultant l regulations, well as pollution >6 years Direct Low associated and setting operational costs than not fees to including regulation E.G savings from internal identify planning Protection of the resource efficient targets, resource Environment new buildings. regularly efficiency Operations Act Approx $250,000 reviewing opportunities. 1993 pa. funding In the order of opportunities. $100,000- 250,000.
CC6.1b Please describe the inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in physical climate parameters
Opportunity Direct/ Magnitude Description Potential impact Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
Decreases in frost will affect certain crops, for example Profit from Continual Annual staff by making different Change in selling new review of costs In the agricultural Reduced More likely Low- temperature >6 years Direct products at product range, order of products being operational costs than not medium extremes around forward $100,000- available in the $1,000,000 pa. contracts. 250,000. supply chain, and reducing their costs to Metcash. Rainfall change in Australia as predicted by the CSIRO is likely to decrease in the north, east coast and south, with an increase in mean Profit from Continual Annual staff precipitation in selling new review of costs and Change in South Australia, products and product range, capital water mean central Australia, Investment More likely Low- savings in forward efficiency >6 years Direct (average) and Western opportunities than not medium water supply contracts, and project costs in precipitation Australia. This will costs in the investment in the order of mean different order of water $100,000- agricultural $1,000,000 pa. efficiency. 250,000. products will be available in the supply chain, and will likely make rainwater harvesting more financially viable. Change in As temperature Investment More likely Low- Profit from Continual Annual staff >6 years Direct precipitation regimes change, opportunities than not medium selling new review of costs and
Opportunity Direct/ Magnitude Description Potential impact Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
pattern seasons are likely products and product range, capital water to shrink or savings in forward efficiency lengthen, affecting avoiding contracts, and project costs in precipitation increases to investment in the order of patterns. In some water supply water $100,000- regions of costs in the efficiency. 250,000. Australia, order of precipitation $1,000,000 pa. intensity is projected to increase but there would be longer periods between rainfall events. This will mean different agricultural products will be available in the supply chain, and will likely make rainwater harvesting more financially viable. The increased incidence of storm Profit from events such as Annual staff selling new Continual hurricanes can be costs and products and review of traced to warming capital Change in savings in product range, oceans. Increased resource precipitation Investment More likely Low- avoiding forward flooding due to >6 years Direct efficiency extremes opportunities than not medium increases to contracts, and these extreme project costs in and droughts energy water investment in weather events and the order of supply costs in resource glacial melt is likely $100,000- the order of efficiency. to increase as well. 250,000. $1,000,000 pa. Temperature patterns such as
Opportunity Direct/ Magnitude Description Potential impact Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
heat waves and droughts are likely to occur with increased severity. This creates opportunity for Metcash to prepare with energy & water efficiency now. The costs Savings in As the climate associated with imported warms, snow cover these product cost and sea ice extent Indirect opportunities Snow and Reduced 1 to 3 More likely leading to Monitoring decrease. This may (Supply Low are annual staff ice operational costs years than not increased shipping costs. improve shipping chain) costs in the profit in the routes, speed and order of order of cost for Metcash $100,000- $1,000,000 pa. 250,000.. With changes to physical climate their interaction will induce changes in natural resources The costs such as crops, associated with forestry and insect Continual these Induced vectors, for New Indirect Profit from review of opportunities changes in 1 to 3 More likely Medium- example causing products/business (Supply selling new product range, are annual staff natural years than not high changes in growing services chain) products forward costs in the resources seasons, migration contracts order of patterns will differ, $100,000- in addition to 250,000. changes in plant species. This will mean different agricultural
Opportunity Direct/ Magnitude Description Potential impact Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver Indirect of impact Management Cost of financial method management implications
products will be available in the supply chain
CC6.1c
Please describe the inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in other climate-related developments
Opportunity Direct/ Magnitude Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver Indirect of impact Management Cost of Potential impact financial method management implications
Continual review of product range, communicating Being a fast mover Profit from sustainability Annual staff in the adaptation Increased selling new policies & costs In the space provides demand for More likely Low- products at Reputation >6 years Direct procedures, and order of opportunity for existing than not medium around having well $100,000- brand & reputation products/services $1,000,000 established 250,000. enhancement pa. annual humanitarian giving programs. Customer Profit from Continual review Annual staff preferences for Increased selling new of product range, Changing costs In the products/services demand for More likely Low- products at and setting consumer >6 years Direct order of can change to existing than not medium around sustainability behaviour $100,000- preference our products/services $1,000,000 policies & 250,000 products pa. procedures. Induced Increased Increased Profit from Continual review Annual staff 1 to 3 More likely Low- changes in population would demand for Direct selling new of product range, costs In the years than not medium human and result in increased existing products at communicating order of
Opportunity Direct/ Magnitude Description Timeframe Likelihood Estimated driver Indirect of impact Management Cost of Potential impact financial method management implications
cultural sales of food & products/services around sustainability $100,000- environments consumers seeking $1,000,000 policies & 250,000. low carbon pa. procedures, and products. having well established annual humanitarian giving programs. Continual review of product range, Increased communicating Profit from population would sustainability Annual staff Fluctuating Increased selling new result in increased policies & costs In the socio- demand for 1 to 3 More likely Low- products at sales of food & Direct procedures, and order of economic existing years than not medium around consumers seeking having well $100,000- conditions products/services $1,000,000 low carbon established 250,000. pa. products. annual humanitarian giving programs. As climate change Continual review effects start to of product range, become evident, in communicating particular in the Profit from sustainability Annual staff developing world, Increased selling new Increasing policies & costs In the there is the potential demand for 1 to 3 More likely Low- products at humanitarian Direct procedures, and order of for funds to be existing years than not medium around demands having well $100,000- diverted to address products/services $1,000,000 established 250,000. humanitarian needs pa. annual , opportunity exists humanitarian to publicise our giving programs. humanitarian efforts
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 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
Metcash has identified climate change opportunities; - Changes to product efficiency and product labelling is an opportunity as we are already including climate/sustainability changes in our products/labelling/packaging, for example, being the first home brand canned tuna product to disclosure the FAO catch area in the can label. This may assist in market advantage as consumer behaviour shifts toward more sustainable products. Our local sourcing practices are an advantage over our competitors (who import or use national sourcing) if carbon labelling is mandated. - Another current opportunity is that mandatory business carbon emission disclosure has shown that our business is far less carbon intensive that our competitors Our anticipatory adaption measures have resulted in Metcash being recognised as a leader in risk management via our sophisticated web based organisational risk management system, business continuity planning, and climate change adaption measures. Metcash does have opportunities driven by physical climate change: - adaptation measures (pre-warning systems and emergency planning/contingency) and mitigation measures (energy/water efficiency retrofits) also generate business benefit financially, in staff morale and performance, and reputational- particularly as we are fast movers in the adaptation space. A changing climate will also open new opportunity for products and services- e.g different agricultural products being available in the supply chain, which can open new markets and revenue generating streams. 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
Tue 01 Jul 2008 - Tue 30 Jun Scope 1 2009 6140.55
Tue 01 Jul 2008 - Tue 30 Jun Scope 2 2009 73565.46
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
Australia - National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act
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
HFCs IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR - 100 year) SF6 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
Further Information In regards to question 7.4 and 7.2, please find attached the National Greenhouse & Energy Reporting Act Emission Factors used to manage our inventory. In regard to 7.1, Metcash selected our baseline year, due to comprehensive data collection systems first being in place for the 01 07 08 to 30 06 09 financial year. Data has been third party assured from the 0910 financial year onwards.
Attachments
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2015/23/11823/Climate Change 2015/Shared Documents/Attachments/ClimateChange2015/CC7.EmissionsMethodology/emission factors.csv
Page: CC8. Emissions Data - (1 Jul 2013 - 30 Jun 2014)
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
8381
CC8.3
Please provide your gross global Scope 2 emissions figures in metric tonnes CO2e
83917
CC8.4
Are there are 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 Relevance of Source Scope 1 Scope 2 Explain why the source is excluded emissions emissions from this excluded from source this source
Contractor Emissions- onsite contractor Contractor emissions were not collected during the reporting period, as a emissions such as acetylene torch use for Emissions are Emissions are process that is accurately and completely used by contractors has not been welding or repairing racking in our not relevant not relevant able to be established. Contractor emissions are estimated at being less warehouses then 0.01% of Scope 1 Emissions. Emissions from our three New Zealand Warehouses are not included in Emissions are Emissions are New Zealand Operations- Emissions these figures as we currently only gather data in accordance with NGER Act not relevant not relevant 2007 which refers to Australian operations We have a 1.38% rate of inaccuracy and 5% extrapolated data across all No emissions No emissions Incomplete Information carbon emission reporting. We are able to produce a report outlining the excluded excluded extrapolated data from our carbon management software.
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
Main sources Uncertainty range Please expand on the uncertainty in your data of uncertainty Scope
Data Gaps Assumptions There are minor gaps in data completeness. usually due to missing invoices or pages of invoices. Our carbon More than 2% but Scope Extrapolation management software automatically extrapolates continuous missing data- as opposed to occasional data like less than or equal 1 Data LPG filling for forklifts, which is non-continuous therefore unable to be extrapolated- such gaps remain. to 5% Management Uncertainty calculator for NGER Act 2007 reporting reports uncertainty of 3%
Data Gaps Assumptions There are minor gaps in data completeness, usually due to missing invoices or pages of invoices missing. More than 2% but Scope Extrapolation Our carbon management software automatically extrapolates continuous missing data- as opposed to less than or equal 2 Data occasional data- like missing electricity bill second pages which usually contain the data. Uncertainty to 5% Management calculator for NGER ACT 2007 reporting reports uncertainty of 3%
CC8.6
Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported Scope 1 emissions
Third party verification or assurance complete
CC8.6a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your Scope 1 emissions, and attach the relevant statements
Proportion of Type of reported Scope 1 verification or Relevant standard Page/section emissions verified assurance Attach the statement reference (%)
Australian National Reasonable https://www.cdp.net/sites/2015/23/11823/Climate Change 2015/Shared Pg1 GHG emission 100 assurance Documents/Attachments/CC8.6a/1410 Metcash GHG Verification Report.pdf regulation (NGER)
CC8.6b
Please provide further details of the regulatory regime to which you are complying that specifies the use of Continuous Emissions 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 your reported Scope 2 emissions
Third party verification or assurance complete
CC8.7a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your Scope 2 emissions, and attach the relevant statements
Type of Page/Section Proportion of verification or Relevant standard reference reported Scope 2 assurance Attach the statement emissions verified
(%)
Australian National Reasonable https://www.cdp.net/sites/2015/23/11823/Climate Change 2015/Shared Pg1 GHG emission 100 assurance Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/1410 Metcash GHG Verification Report.pdf regulation (NGER)
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 Comment verified
In Metcash's first year of third party verification, for the 09/10 financial year, assurance on compliance to the 14064 Greenhouse No additional data verified Gas Management standard was also received. That additional verification has been discontinued.
CC8.9
Are carbon dioxide emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization?
No
CC8.9a
Please provide the emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization in metric tonnes CO2
Further Information
Page: CC9. Scope 1 Emissions Breakdown - (1 Jul 2013 - 30 Jun 2014)
CC9.1
Do you have Scope 1 emissions sources in more than one country?
No
CC9.1a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by country/region
Country/Region Scope 1 metric tonnes CO2e
CC9.2
Please indicate which other Scope 1 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide (tick all that apply)
By business division By facility By GHG type
CC9.2a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business division
Business division Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
Metcash Food & Grocery 1100 Australian Liquor Marketers 142 Mitre 10 525 Metcash Limited (DCs, SSA, Offices) 1071 Fleet Vehicles 5454
CC9.2b
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by facility
Scope 1 emissions Facility (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude
Fleet Fuel Facility ACT 5 35.227 149.128 Fleet Fuel Facility NSW 1062 33.865 151.207 Fleet Fuel Facility NT 200 12.460 130.841 Fleet Fuel Facility QLD 1624 27.467 153.028 Fleet Fuel Facility SA 631 34.925 138.599 Fleet Fuel Facility Tas 44 42.881 147.330 Fleet Fuel Facility VIC 1398 37.813 144.963 Fleet Fuel Facility WA 490 31.951 115.859 Metfoods North Ryde Office 0 33.777 151.125 Scope 1 emissions Facility (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude
North Ryde Office (Macquarie Park) 1 33.784 151.125 ALM Alice Springs 2 23.668 133.866 ALM Cairns 22 33.751 150.907 ALM Canberra - Fyshwick 34 19.274 146.780 ALM Darwin 16 23.669 133.865 ALM Hobart 13 27.462 153.108 ALM Launceston 22 12.439 130.920 ALM Townsville 33 41.438 147.180 Cellarbrations Baulkham Hills 0 34.946 138.627 Cellarbrations Frewville 0 42.835 147.265 Cellarbrations Tweed Heads West 0 42.859 147.306 CCC Alexandria 117 35.322 149.149 CCC Balcatta 3 33.914 151.192 CCC Bendigo 4 19.269 146.770 CCC Cairns 65 31.862 115.821 CCC Clayton 18 37.925 145.138 CCC Geelong 3 27.570 153.033 CCC Nerang 66 37.926 145.139 CCC North Plympton 46 27.995 153.348 CCC Northmead 74 33.914 150.921 CCC Pooraka 120 21.142 149.193 CCC Tottenham 1 33.796 150.996 CCC Townsville 78 34.956 138.542 CCC Wickham 67 37.748 145.024 CSD Preston 5 16.933 145.766 CWD Alice Springs 24 23.346 150.513 CWD Canberra 0 23.693 133.864 CWD Coffs Harbour 0 27.372 153.061 CWD Darwin 184 30.314 153.101 CWD Mackay 51 32.914 151.755 Scope 1 emissions Facility (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude
CWD Rockhampton 21 12.440 130.927 DC Canning Vale 317 32.068 115.902 DC Crestmead 97 27.688 153.075 DC Huntingwood 78 33.800 150.871 DC Kidman Park 451 34.918 138.535 DC Laverton 126 37.834 144.784 DC Silverwater 1 33.829 151.052 IGAFresh Cairns – Woree 0 16.949 145.750 IGAFresh Dapto 0 34.494 150.793 IGAFresh Footscray Markets 2 27.538 153.004 IGAFresh Pooraka 0 16.953 145.750 IGAFresh Rocklea Produce Markets 29 34.840 138.604 IGAFresh Townsville 0 19.266 146.756 IGAFresh Wangaratta 23 36.365 146.302 IGA Fresh Warilla Grove SC 0 34.503 150.794 IGA Fresh Warilla Shellharbour Rd 0 34.558 150.848 Mitre 10 Acacia Ridge 23 33.842 150.894 Mitre 10 Bega 11 36.129 144.752 Mitre 10 Canning Vale 4 27.576 153.038 Mitre 10 Coastway 12 36.929 149.879 Mitre 10 Colac 4 38.225 144.542 Mitre 10 Derrimut 52 36.674 149.841 Mitre 10 Echuca 0 32.070 115.917 Mitre 10 Eden 17 38.006 145.253 Mitre 10 Faggs Geelong 134 36.929 149.878 Mitre 10 Faggs North Geelong 21 34.039 150.744 Mitre 10 Faggs Wallington 49 36.393 145.364 Mitre 10 Hallam 0 38.339 143.581 Mitre 10 Mazegga’s 9 36.929 149.878 Mitre 10 Mooroopna 5 38.162 144.355 Scope 1 emissions Facility (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude
Mitre 10 Pambula 48 34.800 138.641 Mitre 10 Para Hills 0 37.803 144.755 Mitre 10 Wetherill Park 20 32.127 116.002 SSA Fairfield 0 37.766 145.020 SSA Logan Central 0 27.673 153.109 SSA Scanning Heidelberg 0 37.756 145.069 Mitre 10 Cowes 0 31.446 152.895 Mitre 10 Huonville 25 43.029 147.048 Mitre 10 Kingston 71 42.988 147.289 Mitre 10 Leongatha 6 38.466 145.960 Mitre 10 Tarwin Lower 0 38.699 145.867 Mitre 10 Wonthaggi 10 38.617 145.599 ABS Kewdale 1 31.975 115.953 ABS Bundaberg 0 24.864 152.357 ABS Darwin 0 12.425 130.881 ABS Geebung 0 27.366 153.048 ABS Molonglo 2 35.328 149.183 ABS Taree 0 31.896 152.450 ATAP-VIC 58 37.802 144.779 ATAP- NSW 2 33.900 151.037 ATAP- QLD Acacia Ridge 2 27.581 153.007 ATAP- SA 1 34.907 138.599 ATAP-WA 0 31.996 115.955 Garrmax QLD Brenbale 0 27.317 152.979 IBS Auto Solutions NSW 0 33.862 150.962 ALM Envy Hotel Broadbeach BTL 0 34.826 138.615 ALM Envy Hotel Burleigh BTL 0 28.089 153.499 ALM Envy Hotel Surfers BTL 0 27.997 153.428 CCC Value Depot Eagle Farm 96 37.808 144.921 IBS Auto Solutions QLD 0 27.434 153.044 Scope 1 emissions Facility (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude
IBS Auto Solutions SA 0 34.934 138.062 IBS Auto Solutions VIC 1 38.005 145.209 IBS Auto Solutions WA 0 32.068 115.911 Melbourne Clutch and Brake 0 37.688 145.032 Autobarn Albury 6 36.080 146.923 Autobarn Ringwood 0 37.817 145.223 Autobarn South Bankstown 0 33.931 151.030 Autobarn Sunshine 9 37.777 144.832 Automotive Brands Canningvale 0 32.058 115.928 Automotive brands Coopers Plains 7 27.563 153.021 Automotive Brands Nunawading 0 37.820 145.182 Corporate Office 44 Waterloo Road 0 33.783 151.126 CSD Far North Wholesalers/Hanly Cairns 0 16.940 145.769 CSD Far North Wholesalers/Hanly Mackay 0 21.145 149.189 CSD Far North Wholesalers/Hanly 0 19.321 146.718 Condon/Townsville CSD Far North Wholesalers/Hanly 0 23.340 150.506 Rockhampton Mitre 10 Inverloch 4 38.628 141.717 Mitre 10 Mornington 0 42.857 147.395 ALM Gepps Cross 0 34.837 138.607 Cellarbrations Shepparton 0 36.395 145.396 Cellarbrations Cottesloe 0 28.189 153.505 Autobarn/MALZ Cannington 0 32.026 115.947 Autobarn/MALZ Midland 0 31.894 116.016 MIDAS Belmont 0 38.178 114.351 MIDAS Brookvale 0 33.761 151.275 MIDAS Cooks Hill 0 32.935 151.767 MIDAS Devonport 0 41.176 146.360 MIDAS Enoggera 0 27.419 152.197 MIDAS Essendon 0 37.741 144.902 Scope 1 emissions Facility (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude
MIDAS Frankston 0 38.136 145.128 MIDAS Geebung 0 27.368 153.051 Autobarn Macgregor 0 27.560 153.070 Autobarn Nunawading 0 37.817 145.172 Autobarn Toowoomba 0 27.570 151.951 Autobarn Upper Coomera 0 27.853 153.299 Autobarn/MALZ Balcatta 0 31.867 115.806 Autobarn/MALZ Cockburn 0 32.124 115.868 Automotive Brands Armidale 0 30.512 151.661 Automotive Brands Enoggera 0 27.419 152.992 Automotive Brands Innaloo 0 31.903 115.799 Automotive Brands Port Macquarie 0 31.426 152.876 Automotive Brands Welshpool 0 31.987 115.936 Automotive Brands Willawong 0 27.600 153.029 Autopro Malaga 0 31.853 115.885 Autopro Young 0 34.313 148.292 MIDAS Glynde 0 34.892 138.648 MIDAS Gosford 0 33.426 151.339 MIDAS Headoffice 0 37.687 144.881 MIDAS Highpoint 0 37.774 144.885 MIDAS Joondalup-Winton Road 0 31.741 115.762 MIDAS Kippa-Ring 0 27.227 153.094 MIDAS Labrador 0 27.932 153.382 MIDAS Magill 0 34.913 138.669 MIDAS Nottinghill 0 37.901 145.142 MIDAS Port Adelaide 0 34.851 138.509 MIDAS Salisbury 0 34.764 138.643 MIDAS South Melbourne 0 37.831 144.964 MIDAS Southport 0 27.978 153.411 MIDAS Springwood 0 27.616 153.123 Scope 1 emissions Facility (metric tonnes CO2e) Latitude Longitude
MIDAS Strathpine 0 27.293 152.984 MIDAS Sunbury 0 37.583 144.722 MIDAS Tweed Heads 2 28.191 153.540 MIDAS Waterloo 0 33.909 151.202 Autopro Maitland 0 32.739 151.564
CC9.2c
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by GHG type
GHG type Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
CO2 6828 CH4 4 N2O 42 HFCs 1507
CC9.2d
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by activity
Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) Activity
CC9.2e
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by legal structure
Legal structure Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
Further Information
Page: CC10. Scope 2 Emissions Breakdown - (1 Jul 2013 - 30 Jun 2014)
CC10.1
Do you have Scope 2 emissions sources in more than one country?
No
CC10.1a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions and energy consumption by country/region
Country/Region Scope 2 metric tonnes CO2e Purchased and consumed Purchased and consumed low carbon electricity, electricity, heat, steam or cooling heat, steam or cooling accounted for in CC8.3 (MWh) (MWh)
CC10.2
Please indicate which other Scope 2 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide (tick all that apply)
By business division By facility
CC10.2a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business division
Business division Scope 2 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
Metcash Food & Grocery 7132 Australian Liquor Marketers 1842 Metcash Corporate Offices 48568 Fleet Vehicles 0 Mitre 10 4911 Automotive Brands Group 3436 Convenience 18028
CC10.2b
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by facility
Facility Scope 2 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
Metfoods North Ryde Office 12 North Ryde Office (Macquarie Park) 663 ALM Alice Springs 47 ALM Cairns 312 ALM Canberra - Fyshwick 278 ALM Darwin 125 ALM Hobart 45 ALM Launceston 17 ALM Townsville 83 Cellarbrations Baulkham Hills 11 Cellarbrations Cottesloe 85 Cellarbrations Frewville 74 ALM Gepps Cross 240 Cellarbrations Shepparton 172 Cellarbrations Tweed Heads West 63 CCC Alexandria 1008 CCC Balcatta 1260 CCC Cairns 756 CCC Clayton 1602 CCC Geelong 1086 CCC Nerang 1064 CCC North Plympton 1501 CCC Northmead 1280 CCC Pooraka 444 CCC Tottenham 367 CCC Townsville 928 CCC Wickham 6 CSD Preston 1263 CWD Alice Springs 574 CWD Canberra 13 CWD Coffs Harbour 17 CWD Darwin 2299 Facility Scope 2 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
CWD Mackay 445 CWD Rockhampton 434 DC Canning Vale 11245 DC Crestmead 11725 DC Huntingwood 7986 DC Kidman Park 3298 DC Laverton 11636 DC Silverwater 1963 IGAFresh Dapto 161 IGAFresh Footscray Markets 526 IGAFresh Pooraka 223 IGAFresh Rocklea Produce Markets 2824 IGAFresh Wangaratta 1280 IGA Fresh Warilla Grove SC 105 IGA Fresh Warilla Shellharbour Rd 326 Mitre 10 Acacia Ridge 794 Mitre 10 Bega 53 Mitre 10 Canning Vale 148 Mitre 10 Coastway 6 Mitre 10 Colac 141 Mitre 10 Derrimut 916 Mitre 10 Echuca 44 Mitre 10 Eden 53 Mitre 10 Faggs Geelong 326 Mitre 10 Faggs North Geelong 169 Mitre 10 Faggs Wallington 212 Mitre 10 Hallam 555 Mitre 10 Mazegga’s 229 Mitre 10 Mooroopna 93 Mitre 10 Mornington 11 Mitre 10 Pambula 55 Mitre 10 Para Hills 11 Facility Scope 2 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
Mitre 10 Wetherill Park 336 SSA Scanning Heidelberg 25 Mitre 10 Cowes 93 Mitre 10 Huonville 50 Mitre 10 Inverloch 68 Mitre 10 Kingston 94 Mitre 10 Leongatha 75 Mitre 10 Tarwin Lower 19 Mitre 10 Wonthaggi 363 ABS Kewdale 42 ABS Bundaberg 14 ABS Darwin 22 ABS Geebung 11 ABS Molonglo 24 ABS Taree 21 ATAP- VIC 713 ATAP- NSW 48 ATAP QLD Acacia Ridge 34 ATAP SA 34 ATAP- WA 26 Garrmax QLD Brenbale 34 IBS AUTO SOLUTIONS NSW 70 IBS AUTO SOLUTIONS QLD 10 IBS AUTO SOLUTIONS SA 5 IBS AUTO SOLUTIONS VIC 28 IBS AUTO SOLUTIONS WA 9 MELBOURNE CLUTCH AND BRAKE 18 Autobarn Albury 64 Autobarn Ringwood 25 Autobarn South Bankstown 9 Autobarn Sunshine 51 Automotive Brands Canningvale 52 Facility Scope 2 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
Automotive brands Coopers Plains 174 Automotive Brands Nunawading 1445 Corporate Office 44 Waterloo Road 15 CCC Value Depot Eagle Farm 1687 ALM Envy Hotel Broadbeach BTL 106 ALM Envy Hotel Burleigh 83 ALM Envy Hotel Surfers BTL 146 Aytobarn/MALZ Cannington 12 Autobarn/MALZ Midland 18 MIDAS Belmont 10 MIDAS Brookvale 4 MIDAS Cooks Hill 4 MIDAS Enoggera 7 MIDAS Essendon 8 MIDAS Frankston 5 MIDAS Geebung 5 Autobarn Toowoomba 21 Autobarn Upper Coomera 31 Autobarn/MALZ Cockburn 12 Automotive Brands Armidale 24 Automotive Brands Innaloo 18 Automotive Brands Port Macquarie 10 Automotive Brands Welshpool 4 Automotive Brands Willawong 89 Autopro Malaga 15 Autopro Young 9 MIDAS Glynde 6 MIDAS Gosford 4 MIDAS Head Office 14 MIDAS Highpoint 6 MIDAS Joondalup Winton Road 13 MIDAS Kippa-Ring 5 Facility Scope 2 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
MIDAS Labrador 8 MIDAS Magill 3 MIDAS Notting Hill 4 MIDAS Port Adelaide 5 MIDAS South Melbourne 6 MIDAS Southport 3 MIDAS Springwood 5 MIDAS Strathpine 6 MIDAS Sunbury 7 MIDAS Tweed Heads 4 MIDAS Waterloo 5 Autopro Maitland 43
CC10.2c
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by activity
Activity Scope 2 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
CC10.2d
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by legal structure
Legal structure Scope 2 emissions (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 fuel, electricity, heat, steam, and cooling in MWh your organization has purchased and consumed during the reporting year
Energy type MWh
Fuel 60331 Electricity 194746 Heat
Steam
Cooling
CC11.3
Please complete the table by breaking down the total "Fuel" figure entered above by fuel type
Fuels MWh
Fuels MWh
Diesel/Gas oil 36897.5 Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) 16816.61 Motor gasoline 4284.3 Ethane 57.1 Natural gas 2275.50
CC11.4
Please provide details of the electricity, heat, steam or cooling amounts that were accounted at a low carbon emission factor in the Scope 2 figure reported in CC8.3
MWh associated with low carbon Basis for applying a low carbon emission factor Comment electricity, heat, steam or cooling
Grid connected low carbon electricity generation owned A 16.3kWh solar system was installed on our ALM Alice 28.74 by company, no instruments created Springs Warehouse in November 2011
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 value Direction of Reason Comment (percentage) change
projects completed in the reporting year reduced emissions by 28,761 metric tonnes, which Emissions reduction 23.75 Decrease represents 23.8% of the emissions reported last year. (Previous year emissions 121,059- current activities year emissions 92,298/previous year emissions 121,059 X 100) Divestment
Acquisitions
Mergers
Change in output
Change in methodology Change in boundary
Change in physical operating conditions Unidentified
Other
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
% change Direction of Intensity Metric Metric from previous change from Reason for change figure numerator denominator year previous year
Metcash's overall emissions dropped by 23.75% (due to efficiency metric tonnes unit total 6891 26.13 Decrease projects) while revenue grew, resulting in the positive result of a decrease CO2e revenue in the amount of $ revenue per unit of emissions
CC12.3
Please describe your gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions for the reporting year in metric tonnes CO2e per full time equivalent (FTE) employee
% change Direction of Intensity Metric Metric from change from Reason for change figure numerator denominator previous year previous year
Metcash's overall emissions dropped by 23.75% (due to efficiency projects) metric tonnes 17.05 FTE employee 18.38 Decrease while number of employees also declined, resulting in the positive result of CO2e a decrease in number of emission units per employee.
CC12.4
Please provide an additional intensity (normalized) metric that is appropriate to your business operations
% change Direction of Intensity Metric Metric from change from Reason for change figure numerator denominator previous previous year year
Metcash's overall emissions dropped by 32.5% while the total square meters metric tonnes also dropped, due largely to sale of Franklins acquisition. This resulted in a 0.109 square meter 10 Increase CO2e slightly higher intensity figure. It remains better than every previous year of reporting, except 2013.
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 (metric tonnes Credits Purpose, e.g. or credit type identification standard tonnes of CO2e): Risk adjusted cancelled compliance purchase 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 Emissions calculation tonnes using data 3 emissions Evaluation methodology CO2e obtained from Explanation status suppliers or
value chain
partners
We are aware that this source of Scope 3 emissions is relevant Purchased goods Relevant, not to our business, but we have not yet been able to measure the and services yet calculated emissions due to a focus on establishing customer emission and supplier emission data collection first We are aware that this source of Scope 3 emissions is relevant Relevant, not to our business, but we have not yet been able to measure the Capital goods yet calculated emissions due to a focus on establishing customer emission and supplier emission data collection first Fuel-and-energy- Not relevant, Metcash has only minor other fuel use, other than that already
Percentage of emissions metric calculated Sources of Scope Emissions calculation tonnes using data 3 emissions Evaluation methodology CO2e obtained from Explanation status suppliers or
value chain
partners
related activities (not explanation reported under Scope 1 and 2, such as lubricants, oils and included in Scope 1 provided greases, acetylene for welding racking. These fuels are or 2) immaterial in amount. Transportation and distribution is a key source of Scope 3 Upstream emissions for our business. However, majority of our Relevant, not transportation and transportation is undertaken by suppliers. Suppliers measure yet calculated distribution and report their emissions under their controlling corporation for the purposes of meeting NGER Act 2007 requirements. Activity data, 98% accuracy. Emission factor Waste generated in Relevant, We are now capturing in our carbon management software 12525 source VISY. Emission 100.00% operations calculated waste and recycling produced by our operations. factor: 0.76608T CO2e per T of waste Calculated by KM travelled We have commenced data collection and reporting of this Relevant, Business travel 2446.50 and DEFRA calculation source of Scope 3 emissions. We use the DEFRA calculation calculated method for air miles. method for the air miles and resulting CO2-e We are aware that this source of Scope 3 emissions is relevant Employee Relevant, not to our business, but we have not yet been able to measure the commuting yet calculated emissions due to a focus on establishing customer emission and supplier emission data collection first We are aware that this source of Scope 3 emissions is relevant Upstream leased Relevant, not to our business, but we have not yet been able to measure the assets yet calculated emissions due to a focus on establishing customer emission and supplier emission data collection first Transportation and distribution is a key source of Scope 3 emissions for our business. However, majority of our Downstream Relevant, not transportation is undertaken by suppliers. Our suppliers transportation and yet calculated measure and report their emissions under their controlling distribution corporation for the purposes of meeting NGER Act 2007 requirements. Processing of sold Relevant, not We are aware that this source of Scope 3 emissions is relevant
Percentage of emissions metric calculated Sources of Scope Emissions calculation tonnes using data 3 emissions Evaluation methodology CO2e obtained from Explanation status suppliers or
value chain
partners
products yet calculated to our business, but we have not yet been able to measure the emissions due to a focus on customer emission and supplier emission data collection. We are aware that this source of Scope 3 emissions is relevant Relevant, not to our business but we have not yet been able to measure the Use of sold products yet calculated emissions due to a focus on establishing customer emission and supplier emission data collection first We are aware that this source of Scope 3 emissions is relevant End of life treatment Relevant, not to our business but we have not been able to yet measure the of sold products yet calculated emissions due to a focus on establishing customer emission and supplier emission data collection first We are aware that this source of Scope 3 emissions is relevant Downstream leased Relevant, not to our business but we have not been able to yet measure the assets yet calculated emissions due to a focus on establishing customer emission and supplier emission data collection first. Metcash manages a licensee support program that includes voluntary opt in for measuring their carbon emissions. Due to the voluntary nature, and the large number of customers Relevant, not Franchises (180,000), complete data sets or representative samples are yet calculated not available. We do not report this data publicaly but it is provided to franchisees with benchmarking to drive improvement. Investments
Other (upstream)
Other (downstream)
CC14.2 Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported Scope 3 emissions
No third party verification or assurance
CC14.2a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken, and attach the relevant statements
Type of verification Attach the statement Relevant standard or assurance Proportion of Scope 3 Page/Section reference emissions verified (%)
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
Sources of Reason for Emissions value Direction of Scope 3 Comment change (percentage) change emissions
It has been challenging to collect an accurate and complete dataset for waste. Data Waste Change in from suppliers has been questionable quality. We are working to improve the data generated in 49 Decrease methodology collected by our suppliers and how we convert that into tonnages of waste and then operations emissions Change in Business travel 100 Increase This is the first year of reporting our air miles and associated carbon emissions methodology
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
CC14.4a
Please give details of methods of engagement, your strategy for prioritizing engagements and measures of success
Metcash engages with our suppliers on GHG emissions and climate change strategies via our Sustainable Supply Chain Program, an online survey completed by potential suppliers when tendering for our corporate branded products. Focus groups have been held in establishing the Program. We prioritise engagements based on areas of highest risk & lowest scores amongst our corporate branded product suppliers, and showcase best practice. We plan to measure the success of the program by the number of suppliers engaged, percentage overall, and improvements over time.
Metcash engages our customers on GHG emissions and climate change strategies via our publications, regular face to face meetings and via our Sustainability@Retail Customer Support Program. We prioritise engagement based on the topics of greatest concern to our customers, as communicated by the above methods or directly to the Group Sustainability Manager. Success is measured by collecting customer store emission data over time, and by each participating store’s emission reduction activities. This is reported internally and with our customers via the above means.
Metcash engages with value chain partners, such as growers groups, processors groups, and manufacturer groups through consultation meetings for either their GHG emission reduction or climate change programs, or via our Sustainable Supply Chain Program. For example, Metcash was consulted and provided input to help shape the Dairy Australia National Dairy Industry Sustainability Strategy. We prioritise these engagements based on the relationship with Metcash, and potential benefits to environment, society & Metcash of involvement. We measure the success of such engagements by recording the number of groups we collaborate with.
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
Number of % of total Comment suppliers spend
Metcash doesn't collect the metric of percentage of total spend per supplier. Instead we have reported the percentage gross 2500 6% revenue derived from corporate branded product sales. Metcash is a wholesaler, so we have more than 10,000 suppliers of products that we wholesale.
CC14.4c
If you have data on your suppliers’ GHG emissions and climate change strategies, please explain how you make use of that data
How you make use of the data Please give details
Supplier emissions and climate change data is collected via a supplier scorecard, and used to assist buyers in Use in supplier scorecards the supplier selection process Identifying GHG sources to prioritize for We take ideas from our suppliers to assist Metcash itself to identify and prioritize reduction actions reduction actions Our supplier scorecard identifies physical risk in the supply chain. Buyers are then able to make purchasing Managing physical risks in the supply chain decisions that take into consideration those risks. For the purpose of information sharing of successful case studies amongst our suppliers to further encourage Other best practice
CC14.4d 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
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
Louise Rhodes Group Sustainability Manager Energy manager
Further Information
CDP 2015 Climate Change 2015 Information Request