Companies    Members    About Ecoprofile Log in | Create account  

Category results

Text Match

Header Match

Members

Company

Categories

Products

More Results
Gästartikel från RÅDET FOR BÆREDYGTIG TRAFIKGästartikel från RÅDET FOR BÆREDYGTIG TRAFIK

Solar Energy    Wind Energy    Boat   

MAERSK - BOARD OF DIRECTORS DOES NOT SUPPORT PROPOSALS RE SUSTAINABILITY

JIMMY FLINDT 2011-07-11        #18367

MAERSK LINE The world’s largest container shipping company and a customer-focused leader in reliable, eco-efficient transport declares on top of their website re

SUSTAINABILITY
We are committed to developing environmentally sustainable solutions.

However, this commitment does not seem to apply for the Board of Directors when it comes to their own headquarter building in Copenhagen or their willingness to invest in the possibilities of using renewable energy (sun and wind) in marine transportation following the latest General Assembley 04-04-2011 point h.
 

Extract from minutes from General Assembly on Monday 4 April 2011:


h) Deliberation of any proposals submitted by the Board of Directors or by shareholders.

A shareholder has submitted the following three proposals:

i) that the General Meeting recommends that the Board of Directors adopt a more outward-oriented profile, for instance by installing solar cell panels and/or miniature wind generators on the roof of the Company’s building on 50 Esplanaden for production of environmental "green" electricity to cover a majority of the Company’s administration’s own electricity consumption from renewable energy (sun and/or wind) directly from the roof construction of the building itself.

ii) that the General Meeting recommends that the Board of Directors initiate letting the Company’s administration building on 50 Esplanaden be EMAS registered in accordance with regulation (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001.

iii) that an amount of DKK 100 million for the year 2011 is allocated/transferred in order to investigate the possibilities of using renewable energy (sun and wind) for propulsion of the Company’s vessels, e.g. for upgrading of an existing vessel or development of an entirely new proto type.

The Board of Directors does not support the shareholder’s proposals.




JIMMY FLINDT 2011-08-03        #18603
Maersk Fleet Live
Nice NRT application: follow Maersk's fleet online.
http://www.maerskfleet.com/#live-map

JIMMY FLINDT 2011-09-02        #18882
Referring til rejected proposal H II the European Commission has made a more detailed description of EMAS on their website and the European Environment Agency (eea) in Copenhagen has made some initiative trying to fulfil some of the objectives behind its EMAS registration with the Danish EPA by Reducing emissions from business travel .

A Swedish shipping company Stena Line seems to have achieved great results by minor investments by the use of renewable wind energy on their ferries that has lowered the oil consumption and thereby its CO2 emissions which has raised attention in the Danish media, see articles:

Stena Line først i verden med vindkraft på færge
 
færge med vindmøller på fordækket
 
One can only imagine the beneficial effects both for the running costs and for the environment if the Board of Directors of the world’s largest container shipping company chose to apply to the commitment declared on top of their website by using a microscopic part of its profit to investigate the possibilities of using renewable energy (sun & wind) for propulsion of the Company's vessels.

One can only admire the Svedish shipping company Stena Line
 and its respect for the environment when investing Stena Line environment .

 

JOHAN ERLANDSSON 2012-04-15        #20457
If Stena and Maersk were to be compared, what would suitable indicators be?

JIMMY FLINDT 2012-04-18        #20505
In reply to the above request one could perhaps argue the willingness of Stena Line to invest in the possibilities of using renewable energy in marine transportation while Mærsk to the best of my belief, so far, has not invested anything in the use of renewable energy on only a single one of their vessels, see also the development as described under point g, item 4 from ANNUAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY Thursday 12 April 2012 held in Bella Centret in Copenhagen, in spite of a very favourable result for year 2011.
 
One could have hoped for a little more respect shown by the Board of Directors in MAERSK LINE towards UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the UN system in general and in particular in 2012 - UN International Year for sustainable Energy for All  where United Nations officials called on governments, the private sector and civil society to help expand energy access, improve efficiency and increase the use of renewables and in particular from the world’s largest container shipping company and a customer-focused leader in reliable, eco-efficient transport who on top of their website declares re SUSTAINABILITY quote “we are committed to developing environmentally sustainable solutions”.
 
Perhaps the explanation is that the greater part of the concerns profit from comes from oil drilling why the company is more tend to invest in new oil drilling equipment rather than their vessels and, thereby,and with the power this company represent might hamper the development of using renewables in marine transportation, not only in Denmark, but globally.

JOHAN ERLANDSSON 2012-04-19        #20506
Stena too has a substantial part of their business in oil. If it would show that Maersk uses less fuel per transported weight unit, would Stena still be the better option?

JIMMY FLINDT 2012-04-19        #20525
Stena Line has shown its willingness by a minor investment (1 mio SEK) by the use of renewable wind energy on one of their ferries STENA JUTLANDICA that has lowered the oil consumption and thereby its CO2 emissions which has raised attention in the Danish media, see articles:

Stena Line først i verden med vindkraft på færge
 
færge med vindmøller på fordækket
 
The technique by using renewables (sun & wind) in marine transportation has proven its viability from both a technical and a financial point of view for larger vessels like the Australian Solarsailor, but so far with very little or no support whatsoever from the big operators in international shipping that contribute greatly to the man made problems with emissions, global warming and climate change.
 
Stena has shown innovation and paved the way by taking the first and hopefully a very important step by using renewable on one of their ferries.

JOHAN ERLANDSSON 2012-04-20        #20526
But if I take on the role as the Devil's advocate I could say the Stena wind generators could be all greenwash. I must say I am a bit suspicious to harvesting wind energy from a wind speed you have produced yourself, or that wind generators is the best way to reduce drag. If that would really work, why don't we have wind generators on all cars? I would like to see how much fuel they are actually saving, not theoretical calculations.

Usings sails is a whole different story of course.

I would also like to see comparable environmental performance indicators, e.g. emissions per transported weight unit. 

JIMMY FLINDT 2012-04-20        #20538

It is difficult for me to understand why some people voluntarily chose to take the role as the Devil’s advocate though I do not consider myself rather religious.
 
Perhaps, one of the conditions is the acknowledgement of the man-made problems with emissions, global warming and climate change, as laid down in the bylaws for the new climate movement in Denmark, klimabevægelsens vedtægter , see also political platform .
 
If the Devil’s advocate does not acknowledge these problems as man-made problems, it does not give much sense even to discuss renewable energy and believe it or not there are still many people in Denmark and most likely also in Sweden who do not acknowledge these problems as man-made problems.

Furthermore, one can argue there has always been climate changes on the Globe long before mankind and human civilazation began.

Archaeological excavations can prove at least three ice ages in Earth history.
 
Therefore, to the best of my belief and it is a matter of belief and the choices we make as our self proclaimed most intelligent species on Planet Earth.
 
To my opinion an intelligent species should not destroy its own environment.

The Devil’s advocate will most likely be able to greenwash and throw suspicion on each and every effort trying to lower emissions from international shipping in spite of proven technology and track record like the Australian Solarsailor.
 
So why is using sails a whole different story and why testing the explanations given in the articles about Stena Line that the biggest gains on fuel saving comes from the effect of the windmills breaking the wind in front of the ferry (this part alone will save from 80-90 tonnes of oil per year for the ferry Stena Jutlandica according to the article) while all larger vessels in international shipping nowadays are issued bulb bows under the water line to bend the water streams under the vessel?

Hard to understand why the automobile industry makes huge investments in letting car designers try to lower the air resistance of modern cars, so why should the big operators in international shipping even bother to make any investments trying to lower the air restistance for their ships?

Who might even believe in climate change and air restistance when sailing a wall of containers accros the oceans between the continents besides the natural wind - the Devil's advocate?

It is probably a priority issue made by the board of directors who decide it might be much more profitable for the company investing its time, energy and money in new drilling equipment and new ships for deep water drilling see article in Berlingske from 5th July 2011 nye skibe til dybtvandsboringer .

QUENTIN VAN 2013-01-16        #21709
@ Jimmy Flindt
Whilst I agree in your initial statement that Maersk should lead the way and investigate their options of using renewable energy for their energy consumptions, and invest a microscopic part of their profit into renewable energies, your statement also implies that they are making profit>
They were NOT > Maersk container business has been losing money in 2010, 2011 & 2012

What you are also not aware of is that Maersk has been leading the enviro way throughout the years:
E.g. back in 2006, Maersk adopted a stricter standard than the proposed new California (the leading green state in the US) law for vessel emissions for all their vessels calling in the whole U.S. before the law was even passed in California.

Whilst I concur with you that this (deplorable) decision by the board of directors was probably not the smartest one in the view of public opinion, this does not entitle us to label Maersk as an non-ecofriendly company.

FYI: I am a former Maersk employee who left the company several years ago. So far, out of 5 companies I've spent my career in, Maersk has proven to be the greenest.

JIMMY FLINDT 2013-01-16        #21716
@ Quentin Van,

No doubt about it. Maersk has made huge investments for a sustainable development of their ships, except when it comes to investing in exploiting the possibilities of using renewable energy (sun and wind) in marine transportation.

Perhaps, minor investments in using renewable energy solutions (sun and wind etc.) could lead to a profit in their container business since the oil consumption represents a considerable expenditure post in the running costs of a large vessel.

Perhaps, a microscopic part of the profit from their oil business, could help to develop their fleet to a much more sustainable way by using renewable energy.

To my mind it is sad the Board of Directors totally rejects minor investments in exploiting the possibilities of using renewable energy at the General Assembly for the last two (2) years why I find the board with its rejection sends out the wrong signals, especially last year upon UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in 2012 - UN International Year for sustainable Energy for All where United Nations officials called on governments, the private sector and civil society to help expand energy access, improve efficiency and increase the use of renewables and in particular from the world’s largest container shipping company and a customer-focused leader in reliable, eco-efficient transport.
 
Since I consider the members of the Board of Directors as intelligent people they are probably with their rejection, especially last year 2012 probably the ones to be held responsible to label Maersk as a non-ecofriendly company, if anybody?

Other companies are trying to increase the use of renewables in marine transportation, see recent news article about "Hydrogen Ferry" from Nordic Folkecentre for Renewable Energy from January 2013 under the direct reference (link): http://www.folkecenter.net/gb/news/world/hydrogen-ferry/ .





JIMMY FLINDT 2013-02-10        #21861
DR1 broadcasted Thursday 7th February 2013 a sad documentary about the closing of the last big shipyard Lindø in Denmark entitled "Møllers sidste skib" (Møllers last ship) referring to the closure after finalization of Emma Maersk, see http://www.dr.dk/tv/se/moellers-sidste-skib/moellers-sidste-skib#!/.

It is really a sad story how it has affected the former employed and the local community around the former shipyard after the closing.

One cannot stop thinking if the shipyard could have continued on a smaller scale as a repair or an upgrading shipyard if Maersk had allowed it to develop sustainable installlations for the use of renewables (sun, wind, hydrogen etc.) on larger ships in marine transportation.

Log in to reply




Facebook



Create account

Member already? Log in!

ECOPROFILE INTERNATIONAL has 2911 members. As a member you can:
- Start and participate in discussion
- Interact with members
- Subscribe to our newsletter




First name

 
Last name

 
Email


Password

 
Newsletter


Nationality



Spam check, type Green below

 


Mobility
Freight
On Foot
Bicycle
Mopeds & Motorcycles
Bus and Train
Online Communication
Car
Boat
Air
Hotels & Conferencing
Other Travel
Energy
Insulation
Heating & Indoor Climate
Hot water
Domestic Electricity Use
Solar Energy
Wind Energy
Hydropower
Oil, coal & gas
Nuclear
Biomass
Heat Pumps
Geothermal Power
Energy Other
Food
Organic
Locally produced
Home Grown
Gathered
Hunting and Fishing
Meat
Seafood
Vegetables
Beverages
Food Other
Other Consumption
Electronics
Construction Materials
Furniture and Interior Decoration
Hobby Products
Sport and Outdoor Activities
Clothing and Textile
Toys
Skin Care
Entertainment
Other Consumption
Society & Economy
Perspectives on Sustainability
Consumption and Lifestyle
Business
Economic Growth
Culture & Media
Planning
Waste and Recycling
Water
Waste Water
Jobs and labour time
Kids
Education
Savings and Investment
Environmental Politics