Obtain the data you need to make the most informed decisions by accessing our extensive portfolio of information, analytics, and expertise. Sign in to the product or service center of your choice.
Industrial production represents about one-third of the globe's
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions annually, making it a crucial target
for reductions if the world is to reach the goals of the Paris
Treaty by 2050, said Alan Krupnick, senior fellow at Washington,
DC-based think tank Resources for the Future (RFF).
In a report released by RFF in November 2020, "Green Public Procurement of
Natural Gas, Cement, and Steel," Krupnick proposed that the US
government take a leadership role in pushing key industries such as
steel, cement and natural gas to move towards net zero. Tighter
federal procurement practices that incorporate deep emissions cuts
as one of the factors in federal purchasing decisions are needed,
he said. It's a message that he believes will resonate through the
new administration of President-elect Joe Biden. "There's a wave
that's building," he said in a webinar on 1 December to discuss
government procurement and climate change (see link).
Government does have an important role to play, agreed fellow
webinar panelist Holly Elwood, senior advisor for the
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program (EPP) at the US
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). "Procurement is a huge
opportunity and a powerful tool to shift to a low-carbon economy.
Last year, $586 billion was spent by the federal government on
procurement," Elwood said.
The US House of Representatives is very supportive of leveraging
government procurement at the federal level to not only directly
influence suppliers, but also to create a template for state and
local government and private purchasers, added Abigail Regitsky, a
staff member of the bipartisan US House Select Committee on the
Climate Crisis. The committee released a report on 30 June 2020
called "Solving the Climate Crisis,"
which includes procurement as one of dozens of strategies to be
implemented to enable the US to reach net zero emissions by 2050,
she said.
Democrats in the US Senate launched a Special Committee on the Climate
Crisis in May 2020 without Republican members, and they issued
a report in August. While it does not include specific
recommendations for government procurement, the report also
emphasizes the federal role in areas such as infrastructure and
technological development to advance the US towards net zero in
2050.
Designing a program
A government or private procurement program must begin with
performance standards that define what is "green" and measurement
protocols so bidders can report how green they are, said Krupnick.
The suppliers must adhere to some type of certification system,
backed up by audits, so that the purchasing agents can rely on
their representations. In addition, the procuring agency needs a
scoring system that includes all the attributes that will be
considered in a purchasing decision, he said.
"This is a 'carrot' approach, rather than a 'stick' like a
carbon tax," Krupnick said. Models exist, such as the EPA's EPP
Program. "The EPP Program engages with procurement staff in federal
agencies, works to build consensus in private sector standards
development, encourages ecolabel organizations to develop robust
product registries and calculators to document cost savings and
environmental benefits achieved due to procurement of more
sustainable products, and focuses on sectors where the federal
government represents a significant segment of the market,
including some electronic products," Krupnick wrote in his
report.
EPA's ENERGY STAR Program focuses similarly on products and
buildings that have superior performance in energy use and
lifecycle energy. "The close connection between energy use and CO2
emissions makes ENERGY STAR relevant to green procurement. This
particular program's emphasis on the energy performance of cement,
iron, glass, and steel manufacturing plants makes it especially
relevant," Krupnick wrote.
Other federal agencies have programs as well, said EPA's Elwood.
For example, the US Department of Transportation has a Sustainable
Pavement Program and its broader INVEST Program that shares best
practices for sustainability in highway development. The General
Services Administration, which is in charge of federal real estate,
has convened a Green Building Advisory Committee, which is due to
issue a report in January 2021 with new recommended standards.
For natural gas procurement, a comparable system doesn't exist
within the government, but Krupnick said that an industry-developed
program could be adopted by government procurement agents fairly
easily. For example, more than 60 oil and gas producers and
midstream companies in the US participate in the ONE Future
Coalition, which sets a target of 1% methane emissions across the
natural gas value chain, and Krupnick said the 1% standard could be
the baseline for any natural gas purchases by an agency or the
military.
When in office, Biden can push some of those strategies through
executive order, said Regitsky, and she said she expects those
types of procurement directives to be issued fairly early in his
presidency. President Obama, for example, released a six-page
executive order on 1 November 2013 titled, "Preparing the United States for the Impacts of
Climate Change," which itself built on his 2009 executive order
about climate change. The executive orders created the Interagency
Climate Change Adaptation Task Force; required greater data
collection and public dissemination of data about emissions; and
sought to "identify opportunities to support and encourage smarter,
more climate resilient investments" at all levels of government.
President Trump revoked that order in March 2017, but Biden could
revive it and expand it.
Looking longer term, Regitsky said the industry needs certainty
in order to make the financial commitment to transform production
activities to net zero. One route could be to incorporate into
federal purchasing, by administrative action or legislation, the
Environmental Production Declaration ® (EPD) system, which defines
internationally accepted standards for emissions and other
environmental impacts.
The House's climate report recommends the creation of a national
EPD data base, which could be used not only by the federal
government, but also by buyers at other levels of government and
private industry. The first step would be to ensure that the
government has the emissions data to make comparisons between
products, and she said that industries such as cement and steel
would have to work with the government to create the data.
The actual procurement standards could be a two-tiered model,
similar to California's Buy Clean Program, Regitsky said. The first
tier would be an industry-wide standard that emissions cannot
exceed, which Regitsky said would "cut out the dirtiest actors."
This would be ratcheted down over time. The second tier would
incentivize manufacturers who achieve much lower emissions, perhaps
by requiring that a percentage of government procurement meet this
second tier. It also could be tightened over time, and government
purchases could be required to account for a higher percentage as
well.
Finally, those requirements would be complemented with increased
government support for research and development (R&D) on new
manufacturing processes and products, as well as moving the most
promising of them from R&D to commercialization. "If we are
asking industry to ratchet down emissions, we have to help them
achieve that," she said.
Limits
However, while government procurement can speed up use of cement
or steel produced with low or nearly zero carbon emissions, the
panelists said that the road ahead is long and challenging. "You
can't expect miracles from these programs," Krupnick said, pointing
out that federal government's share of the steel market annually is
not likely to be more than about 3%. For cement, US government
purchases are much higher, maybe 15% of the market, and it's higher
still for ready-mix concrete.
The cement industry is committed to reducing its environmental
impact, said Charles Franklin, representing the Portland Cement
Association, during the webinar. Since 1990, the industry has
reduced energy consumption by 35% per ton of production and related
carbon emissions intensity by 11%, he said. In November 2020, the
Portland Cement Association created a committee to develop by the
end of 2021 a roadmap for reaching carbon neutrality across the
value chain.
But the industry is wary of EPDs, which do not always capture a
product's emissions lifecycle, Franklin said. As an example, he
said that cement and concrete (of which cement is a major
component) are highly energy-intensive to make. Both the energy to
make the products and the chemical process to generate cement give
off large amounts of CO2. But at the same time, Franklin observed,
"the products are the tools to make the buildings themselves more
energy efficient," and so the end-use factor needs to be considered
in the life cycle as well.
The association's roadmap will look at the use of EPDs, and it
will also seek to answer questions such as how the industry's
manufacturing processes can incorporate the use of clean energy,
alternative materials and emerging technologies such as carbon
capture for the chemically-produced CO2 emissions.
It will also seek to develop standards that can imposed
globally, as about 15% of annual US cement is imported. "We are a
trade-exposed industry," he said. "The worst-case scenario is
offshoring the emissions and then [making] them even higher when
shipping is included."
Wrapping it up, Krupnick said that government and industry can
focus on several key issues:
Defining the green benchmark for products. How is performance
measured, and how will that expectation be increased over
time?
Lifecycle (end use) emissions. How can these be fully counted?
This becomes important in comparing products such as cement and
concrete with alternatives such as wood for a building.
Choosing winners. Does procurement rest on the picking the
supplier with the lowest emissions, or does a successful candidate
just have to meet a minimum performance standard?
Balancing with other criteria. Product quality, design, cost,
durability—all of these factors, and more, are still part of
every government purchasing decision. It's also where market
considerations come in, as government purchasing can influence
producers and other buyers.
Posted 03 December 2020 by Kevin Adler, Chief Editor