PC: Big Box Backlash
Carbon Footprint Flattens Wal-Mart
By Brendan L. Smith
WASHINGTON, D.C., August 15–The newest weapon in environmentalists’ arsenal against big box stores is the issue of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Wal-Mart is already feeling the heat: Plans to build a 184,000-square-foot super center on the outskirts of Yucca Valley, Calif., in the Mojave Desert, were derailed because of the company’s failure to mitigate the store’s massive carbon footprint.
San Bernardino Superior Court Judge Barry Plotkin also found that Wal-Mart hadn’t addressed ozone and dust pollution and disregarded data showing that the supercenter would cause “urban decay” by forcing local stores out of business. Last year, the Yucca Valley Town Council approved the supercenter and a 920-space parking lot despite problems with the environmental impact report, which predicted that the store would generate more than 7,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year.
Citizen activists and environmental groups traditionally have fought big box stores through local zoning ordinances over store size, traffic impacts, or environmental threats to nearby streams, wetlands, or other sensitive areas. As many states and the federal government wrestle with the effects of climate change, litigation is targeting big box stores that generate huge numbers of vehicle trips that contribute to global warming.
“I think it’s certainly an indicator of where the big box stores and sprawl-style development need to be going,” says Jonathan Evans, a staff attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “No longer can they fail to analyze what they need to do to reduce their carbon footprint.”
Wal-Mart claimed that the installation of rooftop solar panels at the Yucca Valley supercenter would be excessively expensive even though the Mojave Desert is an ideal location for solar power, Evans says. Just northwest of Yucca Valley, NextEra Energy Resources operates the world’s largest solar power plant.
The Center for Biological Diversity, a Tucson-based environmental group, is conducting confidential negotiations with Wal-Mart about additional mitigation efforts for the supercenter, Evans says. The Coalition for Environmental Integrity in Yucca Valley also has been involved in the suit.
California Leads the Fight
Many states do little to regulate GHG emissions, but California has adopted legislation that reins in projects with large carbon footprints.
Approved in 2007 by the California State Legislature, SB 97 requires the analysis of a development’s carbon footprint under CEQA. Terry Rivasplata, a technical director with environmental consulting firm ICF Jones & Stokes in Sacramento, explains that at each step, “CEQA creates a spot where someone could bring litigation. They can basically sue on any issue that anyone has brought up under the review process for the project.”
Citizen groups sued Wal-Mart last year to halt the construction of a Wal-Mart distribution center in Barstow. Activists also have opposed the approval of Wal-Mart supercenters in Del Norte County and American Canyon, Calif., because of GHG emissions and other environmental impacts that may violate CEQA. Some of the legal fights have failed, but they have helped delay or alter Wal-Mart’s development plans.
In 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit over the approval of a 520,000-square-foot retail center in Perris, Calif. The center, which includes a 24-hour Wal-Mart supercenter, would generate up to 40,000 vehicle trips per day.
“Wal-Mart is one of the world’s largest greenhouse gas polluters,” the Center for Biological Diversity reported. “Its annual greenhouse gas emissions, including its supply chain, are equivalent to almost half of the emissions of the entire state of California.”
SB 97 required the development of new CEQA guidelines for mitigating GHG emissions. The California Natural Resources Agency is reviewing draft guidelines, with a January 1 deadline for final adoption.
Activists aren’t the only ones using CEQA. The California Attorney General’s Office has ramped up its climate change litigation. Since 2007, the office has reached agreements to reduce GHG emissions with ConocoPhillips for a planned refinery expansion in Contra Costa County; Great Valley Ethanol for a planned ethanol plant in Hanford; and San Diego Airport Authority for its development plans at Lindbergh Field.
Planning for the Future
Although CEQA has been a valuable tool, California’s recent groundbreaking climate change laws may not make a huge dent in big box stores. AB 32 sets ambitious goals for reducing California’s GHG emissions back to 1990 levels by 2020. SB 375 builds on that effort by seeking to reduce vehicle emissions through regional guidelines adopted by metropolitan planning organizations. But cities and counties will retain control over local planning decisions, says Sonoma County planning director Pete Parkinson.
“I think [SB 375] will have a big impact on land use planning in general. Whether it has a specific impact on big box stores is hard to say,” says Parkinson, who is a member of the Regional Targets Advisory Committee that will help devise the regional emissions targets.
While some cities in California have banned giant big box stores, other localities have lax zoning rules. Some local governments may see the lure of tax dollars and jobs from big box stores as a greater incentive than funding designated for communities that meet the regional emissions guidelines under SB 375.
“Some cities and counties will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to meet those goals,” Rivasplata says. “Greenhouse gases are going to be a big issue and with big box stores they are probably a big target.”
‘Greenwashing Details’
Wal-Mart has publicized its sustainability initiatives but critics say the efforts are a drop in the bucket for the world’s largest corporation. While many companies have suffered during the recession, Wal-Mart’s total sales increased 7 percent over the past fiscal year to more than $400 billion.
Wal-Mart claims it wants to use 100 percent renewable energy, but it hasn’t set a deadline to reach that goal. The company says it is committed to sending zero waste to landfills by 2025 through increased recycling efforts.
With more than 7,800 stores worldwide, Wal-Mart’s carbon emissions increased every year from 2005 to 2007. The company generated more than 15 million tons of carbon dioxide in the United States in 2007, according to Wal-Mart’s latest sustainability report.
Wal-Mart has announced plans to install solar power at a relatively small number of stores in California, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Mexico. It reached an agreement with Duke Energy in April to supply wind-generated electricity to approximately 350 stores and facilities in Texas.
Big box stores can reduce their carbon footprints through solar power, white roofs, restrictions on idling time for delivery trucks, electric hookups for refrigerated trucks, bicycle parking, and other measures, Rivasplata says.
Al Norman, founder of the citizen activist group Sprawl-Busters, says Wal-Mart has been compelled to make some concessions such as reducing the size of stores to accommodate for infill development. But changes intended to reduce sprawl or mitigate harmful environmental impacts have been made by Wal-Mart only as a result of activist opposition.
“The traditional single-story windowless box is pretty much Wal-Mart pro forma,” Norman says. “All the greenwashing details of the stores don’t amount to a whole lot.”