« July 2006 | Main | September 2006 »
August 24, 2006
Ex-Dow Chemical worker charged in trade secrets case
REUTERS, AUGUST 23, 2006
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A former employee of Dow Chemical Co. (DOW.N: Quote, Profile, Research) has been arrested and charged with conspiring to steal company trade secrets and sell them in China, U.S. authorities said on Wednesday.
Former Dow researcher Wen Shyu Liu was arrested in Seattle, Washington on Tuesday on an inbound flight from Taipei, Taiwan on charges of conspiracy, receipt and possession of stolen trade secrets, wire fraud, illegal monetary transactions, perjury, and asset forfeiture, according to a press statement from U.S. Attorney David Dugas.
Liu, who worked for the leading U.S. chemical maker between 1965 and 1992, was indicted by a grand jury on March 24, 2005, Dugas said. He is also known as David Liou.
The indictment charges that Liu conspired to steal, copy and convey trade secrets related to a chemical developed by Dow called Tyrin CPE, Dugas said.
Tyrin is a polyethylene polymer used in a range of applications such as automotive and industrial hoses, electrical
cable jackets, vinyl siding and window framing.
Dow spokesman Scott Wheeler declined comment.
The indictment claims that Liu hired employees and former employees who had worked for Dow on Tyrin to prepare a "detailed engineering package to sell to prospective Chinese companies."
Liu, 69, was scheduled to appear before a U.S. magistrate judge in Seattle on Wednesday, Dugas said. If convicted on all counts, Liu could face up to 300 years in prison and millions of dollars in fines, Dugas said.
[Bhopal.net comment: Dow executives, whose chemicals have killed and maimed millions of people, do not face prison sentences, nor have they paid a penny in fines.]
Posted by bhola at 02:25 AM | Comments (0)
August 23, 2006
On the UN-Corporate Beat: Dow Chemical luncheon chickens come home to roost
MATTHEW RUSSELL OF INNER CITY PRESS, AT THE UN, AUGUST 22, 2006
UNITED NATIONS, August 22 -- Across from UN on Manhattan's East Side on Tuesday there was a protest of the use of Agent Orange in Southeast Asia. A manufacturer and distributor of Agent Orange, Dow Chemical, was celebrated at UN Headquarters less than a month ago, in a luncheon addressed by Deputy Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown and Mr. Amir A. Dossal, the head of the UN Foundation for International Partnerships. Inner City Press covered and questioned the luncheon on July 25, inquiring into how the UN screens and even tries to reform the corporations with which it interacts.
Tuesday at a noon press conference Kofi Annan's spokesman was asked this question, and he said that "it's clear that the Secretary-General has made an effort to reach out to transnational corporations, who have a role to play in the world we live in." Asked by Inner City Press how the UN's "bully pulpit" is used to improve these corporations, the spokesman said that's what the Global Compact is for. Video at http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/pressbriefing/brief060822.rm, Minutes 21:10 to 23:15.
UN-civil society?
Later on Tuesday the spokesman's office sent Inner City Press a copy of Dow Chemical's May 25, 2006 letter to Kofi Annan, asking him to attend the luncheon at that time two months out. The luncheon and the partnership with the UN are presented as fait accompli. Only the luncheon's date is in question, to accommodate the Secretary-General's schedule. As it turned out, due to intervening world events, Mr. Malloch Brown attended in Kofi Annan's stead. At the luncheon, the Deputy Secretary General said of Dow, "we endorse it."
Since the May 25 letter does not refer to any review of Dow Chemical's record, or any discussions for example with Amnesty International, which is on record questioning Dow's ethics, the question of question of oversight and safeguards remains unanswered. Email inquiries on Tuesday resulted in a call back from Mr. Dossal's office in New York, saying that he is in London but would call at or just after 5 p.m.. 6 p.m. his office called to say Mr. Dossal had dictated an email, which subsequently arrived. Given the proximity between its receipt and deadline, it is presented in full without comment:
From: dossal [at] un.org
To: matthew.lee [at] innercitypress.com
Cc: OSSG, ODSG
Sent: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 6:02 PM
Subject: Re: Request for your comment on 7/25/06 Dow Chemical lunch, in light of today's Agent Orange protest on 1st Avenue
Dear Mr. Lee,
Thank you very much for the follow-up regarding the Dow/Blue Planet Run event. I am currently out of the country, but I wanted to provide you with some background information below. As you may know, over 1.5 billion people do not have access to clean water. Dow Chemical is part of a global water challenge to work on raising our awareness and mobilizing new resources to bring safe drinking water to people in developing countries. The CEO of Dow is personally committed to this effort, working with the Blue Planet Run Foundation. The intention is to attract new funders who will contribute towards the achievement of this pressing Millennium Development Goal.
As you might be aware, it has been this Secretary-General's stated commitment to engage all actors, especially to harness the leadership of companies, foundations and NGOs to find creative solutions in addressing problems in the developing world. We feel that encouraging Dow Chemical and other multi-nationals to support the MDGs will make them more sensitive and more aware of their responsibility to be good corporate citizens. FYI, the Global Water Challenge includes a number of companies and foundations, including the UN Foundation, and NGOs, who are committed to finding solutions. I hope this information is helpful.
Amir A. Dossal, Executive Director
UN Office for International Partnerships
http://www.un.org/democracyfund/
For now, Inner City Press' previous description of the July 25 Dow luncheon is at http://www.innercitypress.com/unhq072506.html and below, with links to other perspectives on Dow Chemical's performance, not mentioned at the lunch or in the lead-up, it appears.
Feedback: editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-453A, UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 212-963-1439
Reporter's mobile: 718-716-3540
Posted by bhola at 09:10 AM | Comments (0)
August 22, 2006
24 hour strike at Dow plant at Porto Marghera, Venice
(small)AGENZIA GIORNALISTICA ITALIA, AUGUST 21, 2006
Venice, Aug. 21 - Dow Chemical workers have gone on strike at 10 AM for 24 hours. The strike was called by all the trade unions to protest against the missing reopening of the plants which has been decided by the chemistry giant's US managers.
Franco Baldan of Filcem-Cgil union says: "In the plant in Marghera (town near Venice) we guarantee only the control of the plant due to security reasons. We will intervene only in case of emergency. We are distributing leaflets in all the plants of the petrochemical area and we are organizing a meeting on Thursday the 24. The day after the meeting between Venice mayor Massimo Cacciari and Dow Chemical Italian managers we will decide if improving our protest and close all the Petrochemical industries demonstrating in the streets.
In our leaflet we explain to all the workers that the American multinational company violates the agreement sealed on July 27, and despises not only the workers' representatives but also the institutions, the local ones and the Italian government. They know the effects of a definitive closure of the Marghera plant for the Italian chemical industry. Dow Chemical's workers risk to lose their jobs and all the workers of the petrochemical area risk to lose their jobs too. They are around 5000 people.
The British Ineas, ex Evc has said that the Marghera plant is a strategic asset for its output and if the plant here is closed it will leave Italy and this decision will have effects also for the plants in Ravenna, Ferrara, Brindisi and Friuli. The environmental risk is very serious because the plant, which is closing violating the agreement sealed on Dec. 2005, leaves dangerous remains. The transport of dichlorethane and other products made by this plant with ships and tanks is rising in Italy. We are confident in the mediation made by the industry minister Pierluigi Bersani and in the meeting called by him at the ministry on Aug. 30 with the company managers" he said.
Posted by bhola at 08:54 AM | Comments (0)
August 21, 2006
Chemical industry fights anti-terrorism measures
PETER FAIRLEY, MT TECHNOLOGY REVIEW, AUGUST 17, 2006
As terrorism worries grow, will Congress finally force chemical plants to consider security upgrades? Don't bet on it.
The 1947 explosion of a fertilizer tanker ship in Texas City, TX, killed nearly 600 people. Chemical safety experts worry that hundreds of U.S. chemical plants could be vulnerable to similar destruction if attacked by terrorists. (Credit: Bettman/CORBIS)
The chemical industry has a history of disasters. Among the worst, in 1947 a fertilizer tanker ship exploded in Texas City, TX, killing nearly 600 people and injuring 3,500. In 1984, a cloud of methyl isocyanate from a Union Carbide pesticide plant in Bhopal, India, killed 4,000 people and injured as many as half a million. So it's no wonder that anti-terrorism experts voice concerns about the vulnerability of the nation's chemical plants.
Despite the warnings, the chemical industry, its supporters in Congress, and top officials in the Bush Administration have fought hard against laws to tighten security. But this September, when Congress returns to Washington, it may finally pass legislation to mandate that chemical plants -- and the industry's customers that store large quantities of hazardous chemicals -- reduce the inherent risk of catastrophes.
The sticking point will be whether to force facilities that pose the greatest risk to use so-called "inherently safer technology" -- a catchall for alternative processes or process conditions enabling a plant to produce or store less of the most hazardous chemicals.
Chemical producers have fought off proposals to mandate such behavior for more than two decades, claiming that the government is ill-equipped to regulate chemical processes. But in the wake of continuing terrorist threats, many in Congress, as well as among emergency responders, are losing their patience for the industry's foot-dragging.
"We're talking about a human being with intent to commit mass murder," says Carolyn Merritt, chair of the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, an independent federal agency that investigates chemical accidents. (The agency is comparable to the National Transportation Safety Board, which probes airline, bus, and train crashes.)
The threat is staggering. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 123 chemical facilities in the United States are located where a catastrophic release from them could injure or kill more than one million people each. Using a slightly different model, the Department of Homeland Security projects that 272 chemical facilities threaten at least 50,000 people each. "It is a real threat, and we as a country would be wise to take precautions," says Merritt.
Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. chemical industry claims it's invested $3 billion in security upgrades. But news reports of journalists walking into plants unimpeded have raised doubts about the industry's ability to fend off terrorists. And so have a series of recent reports from federal agencies. The latest, the "Terrorism and the Chemical Infrastructure" study, released by the National Academy of Sciences this summer, put inherently safer technology at the top of its list of options for protecting communities. "The most desirable solution to preventing chemical releases is to reduce or eliminate the hazard where possible, not to control it," the report concludes.
Examples of technological solutions include modifying a chemical process to operate at lower temperatures and pressures, replacing hazardous substances with safer substitutes (such as using a liquid ammonia reagent instead of gaseous ammonia), and using "mini-reactors" that produce hazardous ingredients on an as-needed basis, eliminating transportation and bulk storage. Unfortunately, the academy's study panel concluded, the implementation of such safety measures is "quite limited" -- because chemical producers frequently lack an economic incentive to make the changes.
Indeed, although the safety changes might seem like a no-brainer from a safety standpoint, the industry has been reluctant to embrace them, leading to calls for legislative action. "While I would like to think that all companies would inherently do the right thing to eliminate hazards, unfortunately I know that's not going to happen," says Merritt.
Last month, in a surprise move, the House Committee on Homeland Security approved a chemical terrorism bill that would require those facilities posing the highest risk to neighboring communities to report to the Department of Homeland Security on their potential for using inherently safer technologies. A plant could then be ordered to implement those measures if the agency determined them to be technically feasible and cost effective.
The American Chemistry Council, a Washington-based trade organization, calls the House bill a mistake. In a statement issued last month, after the House committee voted, the council's CEO, Jack Gerard, blasted the committee for "adopting language that puts government in a position of mandating changes to our processes and products."
But environmentalists say the industry's unwillingness to commit to using safer technology is irresponsible and motivated more by politics than by concern for national security. "They have viewed it as something laissez-faire, something that only they would determine in their own time and place," says Greenpeace's toxics campaign legislative director, Rick Hind. "In our view that's like saying we have the cure to cancer, but we'll only use it when we feel like it."
The chemical industry's supporters in Congress could seek to keep the "inherently safer technology" provisions out of the final bill -- especially since they don't appear in the Senate's version of the chemical safety legislation. However, activists hope tight electoral races in the fall, combined with continued worries over terrorism, will convince Congressional leaders to support the House committee's stronger legislation.
Meanwhile, some states have had enough with the federal slow pace and have taken their own actions. Most notably, New Jersey recently introduced requirements for inherently safer technology. Among the state's plants is the Kuehne Chemical alkali and chlorine plant in South Kearny, which has 12 million people within its 16-mile, worst-case accident "kill zone."
Even if Congress does pass legislation requiring chemical plants to adopt safer practices, however, the industry still may avoid implementing the changes. The proposed House version of the bill gives the Department of Homeland Security the discretion to decide what constitutes a high-risk facility and what measures those facilities need to take. And DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff is an avowed opponent of federally mandated inherently safer technology. In a speech to a chemical industry conference this spring, Chertoff suggested that such proposals would, at best, result in government "micromanaging" the industry and, at worst, be a sort of environmental Trojan horse, whereby DHS would be charged with "achieving environmental ends that are unrelated to security."
As a result, chemical safety advocates fear that they may win in the halls of Congress, yet still lose the battle to protect U.S. cities and towns lying downwind from the nation's chemical plants. "We don't have a lot of faith that [federal law] is going to be the turnaround it could be," says Greenpeace's Hind.
Posted by bhola at 09:15 AM | Comments (0)
August 19, 2006
EPA cites Dow Corning for clean-air violations
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES, AUGUST 18, 2006
Dow Corning Corp., a joint venture between Dow Chemical Co. (DOW) and Corning Inc. (GLW), was cited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for alleged clean-air violations.
A Dow Corning representative wasn't immediately available for comment.
According to the EPA, Dow Corning failed to operate air pollution control devices that restrict emissions of volatile organic compounds and particulates at two of its production processes in Midland, Mich.
The company failed to restrict the emissions in the manner required by its state operating permit and state regulations, and failed to comply with record-keeping requirements, the agency alleged.
The EPA said the findings are preliminary and it may issue a compliance order, assess an administrative penalty or bring suit against the company.
Dow Corning has 30 days from receipt of the notice to met with the EPA to discuss resolving the allegations.
Posted by bhola at 09:42 AM | Comments (0)
August 16, 2006
Study: People near Dow Chemical plant have higher dioxin levels
JOHN FLESHER, DETROIT FREE PRESS, AUGUST 15, 2006
Residents of some areas near the Dow Chemical Co. plant in Midland, Mich., have higher levels of dioxins in their bodies than people studied elsewhere, a University of Michigan study found.
But pollution from Dow is just one possible reason for the difference — and a small one at that, the report said. The primary explanation is that people living near the plant tend to be older than those in the other group studied, said David Garabrant, an epidemiologist and specialist in occupational and emergency medicine and the leader of the inquiry.
The report, released Tuesday, is “the first major study to show exactly how much exposure to dioxin people have in this area and how the dioxins get into their bodies,” Garabrant said.
Dow funded the study, which focused on sections of Midland and Saginaw counties near its plant. Dioxins, a group of toxins, were generated by company processes over several decades. One of the chemicals is known to cause cancer.
The study found that people in one of the areas studied, the Tittabawassee River floodplain, had 28 percent higher median levels of “dioxin-like chemicals” in their blood than members of a comparison group in Jackson and Calhoun counties.
Those counties were chosen because they are near the Midland-Saginaw area but more than 100 miles from the plant.
Older people tended to have higher dioxin levels, the report said. It also linked the elevated levels with eating foods such as fish from tainted waters and living where the soil is contaminated.
“This study provides facts that will allow the people of Midland and Saginaw and the people of Michigan to develop a plan for dealing with the contamination that is factually based and not based on speculation,” Garabrant said.
Posted by bhola at 12:06 AM | Comments (0)
August 14, 2006
Dow Chemical, Union Pacific and Union Tank Car announce collaboration on future vision for secure transportation of chemicals
DOW PRESS RELEASE, OMAHA, NEBRASKA, AUGUST 4, 2006
The Dow Chemical Company, Union Pacific and Union Tank Car Company concluded meetings this week where leaders of the three companies reaffirmed their commitment to safe and secure rail transportation of chemicals.
Dow, Union Pacific, and Union Tank Car assembled a joint project team to drive forward a process for the development of a next-generation rail tank car for highly hazardous chemicals.
The three companies also established an advisory group of academic, industry and former regulatory leaders to help guide the development of a next generation tank car design. This effort builds upon each company’s long-standing commitment to safety through the Responsible Care® program.
The advisory board members include: Christopher Barkan, Ph.D., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Railroad Engineering and Risk Analysis; Phil Daum, PE, Engineering Systems Inc., Tank Car Design; Chip Day, Center for Toxicology and Environmental Health, L.L.C., Hazmat Response; Chief John Eversole, International Association of Fire Chiefs, Local Hazmat ER; James Rader, AllTranstek L.L.C., (Transportation Fleet Management and HazMat Regulatory Compliance); Frank Reiner, PE, Chlorine Institute,Transportation Safety.
“Chemical transportation safety requires cooperation between shippers, transportation service providers and public and private partners who have responsibility for public safety,” said Henry Ward, director of transportation safety and security of The Dow Chemical Company. “We are delighted to be working together with Union Pacific, Union Tank Car and our advisory committee to develop innovations that will serve our company and help enable the production and distribution of essential products for decades to come.”
“We place the highest priority on the safe and secure transportation of all shipments,” said Bob Grimaila, Union Pacific’s vice president – environment and safety. “Together with our partners in the chemical and rail car industries, we are optimistic we can continue our improvement efforts with this new tank car design process.”
“As a supplier of tank cars to the chemical industry, we are fully aware that safety, security, and environmental concerns regarding hazardous materials require the timely introduction of innovative solutions,” said Rich Sobilo, director of engineering of Union Tank Car. “This effort builds upon exemplary cars already in service today. Our collaboration with Dow Chemical, Union Pacific and our advisory panel will allow us to develop the insight and resources we require to make our shared future vision a reality.”
Posted by bhola at 06:34 PM | Comments (0)
August 13, 2006
There’s money in thirst
CLAUDIA H. DEUTSCH, NEW YORK TIMES, AUGUST 10, 2006
Everyone knows there is a lot of money to be made in oil. But a fresh group of big businesses is discovering there may be even greater profit in a more prosaic liquid: water.
Nic Bothma/European Pressphoto Agency
A United Nations study foresees 5 billion of the world’s 7.9 billion people in 2025 facing a scarcity of clean water.
China Photos/Getty Images
The water line in a Chinese village. Dow Chemical bought a Chinese company involved in water technology.
“You’ve got exploding urban populations, increased pollution and a need to address those things in a meaningful way,’’ said Ian Barbour, general manager of Dow Chemical’s Water Solutions unit. “Of course, we’re investing significantly in the water business.”
Most analysts expect the water market in the United States to be worth at least $150 billion by 2010. And it may happen even sooner than that. Arid cities like Los Angeles and Phoenix already grapple with sporadic water shortages. New York City’s water — once lauded for its purity — is getting cloudy, and the American Society of Civil Engineers has given the pipes and other parts of the country’s creaky water system a D minus.
Globally, water problems are even more immediate. Many experts estimate that water-related equipment and services already make up a $400 billion global market.
“Water is a growth driver for as long and far as the eye can see,’’ said Deane M. Dray, who follows many water companies for Goldman Sachs.
Lots of others agree. Last month GE Energy Financial Services announced its first investment in water: $18 million in a wastewater reclamation plant in Atlanta. Alex Urquhart, the unit’s president, said he wanted to be holding $1 billion in water assets before long. General Electric’s industrial executives have even higher aspirations. In the last few years, G.E. has bought four water companies: Betz Dearborn in 2001, then Osmonics, Ionics and, most recently, Zenon Environmental Systems, which makes ultrafiltration membranes.
“Our water portfolio now runs the gamut of technologies that industrial customers, the Chinese government or the New York municipal water authority could need,’’ said Jeff Garwood, president of GE Water and Process Technologies. Siemens, the German conglomerate whose units often compete with G.E., makes the same claim. It bought U.S. Filter, once a premier stand-alone water company, for nearly $1 billion in 2004, and has acquired six smaller companies since.
“There isn’t a water treatment platform that we don’t now have the technology to address,’’ said Roger Radke, president of Siemens Water Technologies, which accounted for about 1.9 billion euros of Siemen’s 75.4 billion euros in revenue last year.
Chemical companies are taking an interest, too. Last month, Dow, which has made water-softening resins and membranes for treating water for 20 years, bought Zhejiang Omex Environmental Engineering, a Chinese company that adds three more technologies to Dow’s portfolio. In late July, Dow held a news conference at the United Nations, announcing its sponsorship of the Blue Planet Run, an event scheduled for next June, to raise money to tackle global water shortages.
“We’ve doubled our capacity for water-related products in every one of the last five years,” Andrew N. Liveris, Dow’s chief executive, said, adding that water-related revenue went from “less than $100 million” in 2001 to “hundreds of millions” today.
For now, the opportunities for would-be water industry players seem most ample outside the United States. The United Nations Population Fund projects that in 2025, if present rates of water consumption are maintained, 5 billion of the world’s 7.9 billion people will live in areas where safe water is scarce.
Many already do. According to the World Bank, the Middle East, so awash in oil, has about 5 percent of the world’s people but less than 1 percent of the world’s renewable fresh water. Siemens recently joined forces with Mekerot, Israel’s biggest water utility, to explore new technologies to reuse scarce water in Israel, and ultimately sell it to other parched nations.
Eugene P. Corrigan Jr., an entrepreneur in Charleston, S.C., has mapped out the logistics for sending empty oil tankers back to the Middle East with their ballast tanks full of excess water. He has yet to get a Middle Eastern country to adopt his idea — “I sense a real reluctance to be dependent on a source beyond their borders for a water supply,’’ he said — but he continues to try.
Rampant industrialization in the East is also attracting Western water players. “Industrial complexes are igniting in China and Russia, and there is a huge need for companies to help them manage their water effectively,’’ said William J. Roe, chief operating officer for the Nalco Company, a water treatment company in Naperville, Ill., that has stepped up sales efforts in emerging economies.
The United States, too, has the potential to become a big customer for water technologies. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, Americans use nearly 100 gallons of water per person per day. If that goes unchecked, 36 states will be enduring water shortages by 2013, the agency warned.
“You are going to see a growth in membrane technologies, in monitoring systems, in many parts of the water technology industry as we put in place stronger and more protective drinking water standards,’’ said Benjamin H. Grumbles, assistant administrator for water at the E.P.A.
For now the water industry remains fragmented, with no company commanding more than 5 percent of sales. But it is consolidating rapidly, as big companies like Siemens, G.E., Danaher and ITT continue their buying sprees. In 1999, there were 60 companies in the Palisades Water Index, a list of water company stocks put out by WaterTech Capital, an investment bank in Plano, Tex. Today, the list is pared to 38, and Stephen J. Hoffmann, president of WaterTech, expects it will soon be fewer.
Paradoxically, as conglomerates snap up water companies, it has become harder for investors to capitalize on the water industry’s growth.
“This industry has an awful lot of potential, but Pentair and Nalco are pretty much the only pure plays left,’’ said Timothy M. Ghriskey, chief investment officer at Solaris Asset Management, which owns shares of Pentair.
But water-based funds are filling the breach. In December, PowerShares Capital Management introduced the PowerShares Water Resources Portfolio, an exchange-traded fund that invests in the companies included in the Palisades Water Index. In addition, three European mutual funds specialize in water-related companies and William S. Brennan Sr., portfolio manager for the Praetor Global Water Fund in Paris, said he was setting up a similar fund in the United States.
“Whenever you flush a toilet, take a shower, drink a glass of water, someone is making money,’’ he said, noting that the water stocks he tracks went up 10.65 percent in 2005, compared with a rise of about 3 percent in the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index.
Still, picking the right water stock is not simple. For now, no treatment technology is a panacea.
The cost of reverse osmosis membranes, which lie at the heart of most desalination projects, has plummeted, but desalination still remains capital and energy intensive, and creates its own troublesome sludge. Moreover, many of the regions that are prime desalination markets— the Middle East, for one — are also political powder kegs.
“You’ve got to understand the politics, the financing, a lot more than just making the widgets,’’ said Arthur L. Goldstein, the retired chairman of Ionics, a desalting pioneer now owned by G.E.
Ultraviolet radiation, an increasingly popular means of disinfecting water, is rendered less effective by sediments and sludgy particles, often present in water that needs treatment. Systems to treat and reuse wastewater are generally the least costly and most efficient, but they have yet to overcome the gut-level aversion many people have to deriving water from sewage.
And water-short nations may be competitors as well as customers. China, for example, has shipped so much activated carbon, a water purification material derived from coal, to the United States that the Calgon Carbon Corporation has filed antidumping charges against it.
“A Chinese entrepreneur doesn’t face the environmental regulations we do, and they have been eroding the profitability of this industry since the mid 1990’s,’’ said John Stanik, chief executive of Calgon, which had $335 million in revenue last year, all from water treatment technologies.
Still, most water companies say that the market is big enough so that small companies can readily avoid competing with better-heeled rivals.
For example, the Met-Pro Corporation, a Harleysville, Pa., company that gets most of its $85 million in revenue from air pollution equipment, formed Pristine Water Solutions this year to sell pumps and treatment chemicals to industrial customers and smaller municipalities.
“We’ll go to places that wouldn’t represent enough money for the bigger players,’’ said Raymond De Hont, chief executive of Met-Pro.
Pentair, once primarily a tools company, sold that business in 2004, the same year it bought the water treatment company Wicor, and now derives nearly 75 percent of its revenue from water-related sales.
“We let the big dogs focus on large construction projects, while we sell them the pumps and tubes and housings that they need,” said Randall J. Hogan, chairman of Pentair. Mr. Hogan sees no reason to switch strategies. “Ten years ago we were a $100 million pump company,’’ he said. “We’re now doing $2.13 billion in water alone.’’
Posted by bhola at 11:28 PM | Comments (0)
August 10, 2006
Dioxin-tainted soil found
MIKE KELLER, SUNHERALD.COM, AUGUST 10, 2006
GULFPORT - A new area contaminated with dioxin has been found just west of Canal Road by officials involved in the Seabee Base Agent Orange cleanup.
The area, running parallel to Canal Road, became contaminated after workers dredged the canal of contaminated soil that came off the Seabee base and dumped it in the undeveloped woods next to the waterway, said Bob Fisher, a Tetra Tech employee who is in charge of sampling for the cleanup project.
The dredging was routine maintenance done without knowledge of the contaminated soil.
"This area is zoned residential and these piles need to be excavated and removed," Fisher said. "It needs to happen."
Fisher estimated thousands of cubic yards of soil would need to be removed. He said the average dioxin readings on the piles were 15 parts per thousand; the state's residential-area level triggering cleanup is 4.26 parts per thousand.
One sample, taken after Katrina, showed dioxin concentration more than five times higher than the state-mandated action level.
Dioxin contamination came from 850,000 gallons of Agent Orange that had been stored on the base between 1968 and 1976. Agent Orange was the military code name for one of a powerful group of herbicides used during the Vietnam War.
The initial dioxin-cleanup project, at the northeast corner of Canal Road and 28th Street, is six weeks away from completion.
The project manager for ECC, the company removing 100,000 tons of contaminated soil and locking it in six feet of concrete on the Seabee base, said a third of the final concrete cap had already been poured.
"It's a good effort," said Dr. Joseph Mitchell, a resident and member of the board advising the cleanup. "My concern is what this does to people when it gets in their system. You know it does some damage and they will probably never get it all, but the more they can remove, the better for the future."
Past and current residents at the meeting, meanwhile, implored the government to step up health screening for those unknowingly exposed to cancer-causing dioxin for 20 years.
Betty Hope, who lived north of the base the entire time it was used for Agent Orange storage, said she knew many neighbors who died of unexplained cancers. Both she and her mother had breast cancer. She said dioxin was found on her family land.
"I was tested and I don't have the gene for breast cancer," Hope said. "If people knew they were exposed to it, maybe they'd go get tested. There's too many people I know who have gotten cancer."
Hope's sister, Jeanne St. Amant, who now lives in Kiln, said people who lived in the neighborhood died of brain cancers and tumors and eye cancer.
"So many girls 13 and 14 years old had cysts on their ovaries. We had five cases in our little area," St. Amant said.
Posted by bhola at 12:37 AM | Comments (0)
August 09, 2006
Dow Chemical forms Russian joint venture
ASSOCIATED PRESS, AUGUST 8, 2006
MIDLAND, Mich. — Dow Chemical Co., the nation's No. 1 chemical company, on Tuesday said it formed a joint venture with Russian polyurethane specialist Izolan to manufacture products for customers in the former Soviet republic.
Financial terms of the venture were not disclosed.
Called Dow Izolan, the company will make custom-tailored polyurethane systems products at Izolan's current site in Vladimir, about 120 miles northeast of Moscow. A company spokeswoman said the polyurethane systems would be sold to a broad customer base for use in everything from automobile seat cushions to tennis shoes.
About 100 current Izolan employees will work at the joint venture, which plans to build a new plant in the Vladimir area in the next two years.
Dow Chemical said the joint venture combines its technical expertise with Izolan's local presence and market experience.
Shares of Dow Chemical rose 30 cents to $36.34 in morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange.
Posted by bhola at 07:17 AM | Comments (0)
August 07, 2006
Confronting the threat of terrorism
Bhopal.net comment: Today we carried a press release from Bhopal, where survivors of the Union Carbide disaster staged a day's fast in remembrance of Hiroshima. Corporations including Dow and Union Carbide were involved in the Manhattan Project that led to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. Dow-made napalm rained fire on Vietnam, and Dow's Agent Orange has maimed upwards of a million Vietnamese children. That is terrorism, naked and stark. Dow is a terrorist organisastion.
Mónica Guzmán, Midland Daily News, August 6, 2006
Regional first responders met with chemical experts Thursday to learn about the hazards of transporting volatile chemicals, a sign that local emergency management still is evolving in response to the fears and insecurities sparked by the 9-11 terrorist attacks nearly five years ago.
"We are much better now than we were before, and we get better all the time," said Lt. Harry Partridge, district coordinator of emergency management for the Michigan State Police. "We had a good handle on accidents. We were woefully behind on people doing things on purpose – terrorism."
Partridge spoke candidly with several first responders gathered at the workshop for Transportation Community Awareness and Emergency Response in Homer Township, sponsored by The Dow Chemical Co. and the Michigan Chemistry Council.
"As we hear occasionally on all the news channels and in the paper, there’s a threat to the transportation system," Partridge said.
Michigan started sweeping reforms in its local emergency management after 9-11, following the rest of the country in using federal grants to purchase high-tech equipment and train fire and police officers to handle potential terrorist attacks.
State agencies have received millions in grants from the Homeland Security Department, which has funded the terrorism training of about 5,900 Michigan emergency officials since 9-11.
"We like to say (terrorism training) is like HazMat with an attitude," he said.
The state Hazardous Materials center became the Emergency Management and Homeland Security Center in 2006 "to mirror our new responsibilities," Partridge said, following a national trend among local emergency management agencies.
Dow officials say they are working with other chemical companies and transportation producers to make the hulls of railcars bulletproof, install fingerprint ID readers on highway transports and put GPS tracking systems on vehicles, in recognition of their stake in the threat.
Chemical companies also feel a greater obligation since the 9-11 attacks to inform first responders about how to handle chemical incidents, a goal of the biannual TransCAER workshops, said Jerry Howell, CEO of the Michigan Chemistry Council. For example, firefighters responding to a tank carrying liquid nitrogen should know that spraying water would heat, not cool, the -200-degree chemical.
"It’s important for large chemical companies to continue to monitor and be a part of (the discussion)," Howell said. "Crises come and go, but we stay here for the long haul."
Dow has not had a transportation incident in 25 years, officials said, and they’d like to keep it that way in the post 9-11 world, despite the price tag: Dow will have spent half a billion dollars on security since 9-11 by the end of this year.
Yet even the most high-tech, costly security measures can be defeated by a threat as determined as terrorism, as security officials know all too well.
"If you’re willing to give your life for your cause, there’s nothing we can do," said Gil Rider, chairman of Michigan TransCAER and distribution emergency response coordinator for Dow North America.
Still, it’s hard to put a price on preparation. Cooperation between agencies and communication with public and private interests remains a priority in facing new domestic terrorist threats, and already agencies have made encouraging progress, Partridge said.
First responders are better trained, better equipped and better prepared than they were 10 years ago, but in the wide-reaching climate of insecurity, the work might never be done.
"We will never be able to stop everyone," Partridge said.
Posted by bhola at 11:23 PM | Comments (0)
August 03, 2006
Dow: Licence for Union Carbide process to Sinopec
PLASTEUROPE.COM, AUGUST 3, 2006
Bhopal.net comment: Dow no longer bothers to hide the dirty secret that METEOR is a Union Carbide technology. Lying about this very point cost Dow a lucrative contract with the Indian Oil Corporation after ICJB members alerted the Indian government. Union Carbide is a criminal corporation in India, a fugitive from justice, refusing since 1992 to attend a Bhopal court where it is charged with criminal homicide.
Dow Technology Licensing (Midland, Michigan / USA; www.dow.com) has licensed the Union Carbide "Meteor" LEC technology to Chinese state-owned petrochemical group Sinopec ( www.sinopec.com) for use in plants being built by Sinopec´s Tianjin branch and its subsidiary Zhenhai Refining & Chemical Company. Tianjin plans a plant for 420,000 t/y of MEG and 40,000 t/y of pure EO as part of a 1m t/y ethylene cracker complex in the Bohai Gulf. The Zhenhai facility will produce 650,000 t/y of MEG and 100,000 t/y of pure EO at Ningbo.
Dow Technology Licensing (Midland, Michigan / USA; www.dow.com) has licensed the Union Carbide "Meteor" LEC technology to Chinese state-owned petrochemical group Sinopec ( www.sinopec.com) for use in plants being built by Sinopec´s Tianjin branch and its subsidiary Zhenhai Refining & Chemical Company. Tianjin plans a plant for 420,000 t/y of MEG and 40,000 t/y of pure EO as part of a 1m t/y ethylene cracker complex in the Bohai Gulf. The Zhenhai facility will produce 650,000 t/y of MEG and 100,000 t/y of pure EO at
Posted by bhola at 11:02 PM | Comments (0)
Dow Chemical insiders buy $1.6M in stock
NICOLAS BRULLIARD, DOW JONES NEWSWIRES, AUGUST 3, 2006
WASHINGTON — Four executives of Dow Chemical Co., including its chief executive, reported buying company stock just days after its second-quarter earnings release sent its stock price down 10 percent.
Dow Chemical spokesman Chris Huntley said the recent drop in stock price provided the executives with a "tremendous opportunity" to invest in their company's stock.
"They absolutely believe the strategy is right, that it's working, and that the stock at the moment represents a really good financial opportunity," Huntley said.
The insiders reported spending a combined $1.58 million, or an average of $34.29 a share, to buy a total of 46,000 shares, according to data provider Washington Service and filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Shares of the Midland, Mich.-based chemical company dropped 10 percent to $33.54 on Thursday after Dow Chemical said increased costs for raw materials and energy reduced its second-quarter net income and it warned that it would be difficult to meet previously issued 2006 forecast.
Chairman and Chief Executive Andrew N. Liveris reported buying 20,000 Dow Chemical shares on Monday, along with Geoffery E. Merszei, who reported buying 15,000 shares.
General Counsel Charles J. Kalil reported buying 10,000 shares on Tuesday, and Corporate Vice President Phillip H. Cook reported buying 1,000 shares, also on Tuesday.
Huntley, Dow Chemical's spokesman, also said company executives are required to meet stock ownership requirements.
"This is what's expected of people who run the company, that they'll invest and put their money in the company as they go forward," he said.
In its most recent proxy statement filed in March, Dow Chemical said executives are typically expected to hold the equivalent of three to four times their salary in stock within four years of their promotion. Each additional promotion gives them more time to comply with the requirement.
Liveris, who became chief executive in November 2004 and assumed the additional title of chairman earlier this year, is required to hold stock equivalent to six times his annual salary and has until November 2010 to do so, according to Dow Chemical's proxy.
Liveris' salary for 2005 was about $1.09 million, according to the proxy. After his recent stock purchase, Liveris had direct ownership over 185,943 shares and indirect ownership over an additional 1,145 shares.
Based on the recent trading price of $35.02, Liveris' direct and indirect holdings in Dow Chemical stock are valued at about $6.55 million.
Dow Chemical shares closed up 74 cents, or 2.2 percent, at $35.01 on the New York Stock Exchange.
Posted by bhola at 09:33 AM | Comments (0)
Dow Chemical to market USC researcher's technology
ASSOCIATED PRESS, AUGUST 3, 2006
COLUMBIA, S.C. The University of South Carolina says water purification technology by one of its researchers will enter the market under a new licensing agreement with The Dow Chemical Company.
Chemical engineer Tom Davis' technology is a method of removing salt from a liquid.
The technology, called Zero Discharge Desalination, employs a water purification process that separates calcium and sulfate to create two steams of salt.
The technology could benefit communities in the western U-S, where groundwater is limited and often tainted.
Posted by bhola at 09:30 AM | Comments (0)
August 02, 2006
Clean Water and the Tao of Dow
JOEL MAKOWER, WORLDCHANGING.COM, AUGUST 1, 2006
Dow Chemical announced last week that it would develop new technologies and solutions "for creating safer, more sustainable water supplies for communities around the world."
The announcement, part of Dow's 2015 Sustainability Goals, included a pledge to develop technologies focusing on desalination; chemistry and polymers for removing specific impurities; leak-reducing materials that increase the efficiency of community water systems; and lower-cost technologies and business models for managing municipal water supplies.
Sounds like yet another in a series of old-line polluters committing to a new, greener strategy in the footsteps of GE, Dupont, and BP, right?
Of course, it's never that simple.
Dow, it seems, has a longer row to hoe than most big companies to be seen authentically as a convert to sustainability. And while the three companies mentioned above -- and nearly all industrial companies, for that matter -- have environmental legacies to deal with, Dow's legacy may be tougher than most to overcome. The modern history of the 110-year-old company includes manufacturing the Vietnam-era defoliant Agent Orange, which made its way into the food chain and was linked to birth defects among Vietnamese people and U.S. soldiers. Dow also manufactured napalm, a mixture of petrol and a chemical thickner that produces a tough sticky gel that attaches itself to the skin. Its use by U.S. troops is associated with thousands of horrific deaths of Vietnamese.
The legacy also includes Dow's ownership of Union Carbide, which it purchased in 2001, making it heir to that company's toxic tragedy in Bhopal, India. A 1984 gas leak at a Union Carbide plant there released 27 tons of the deadly gas methyl isocyanate, leading to some 20,000 deaths and, according to some accounts, injuries to more than 100,000 others. (In 1989, Union Carbide paid a $470 million legal settlement to the government of India for the accident.)
Then there's Dow's production of a myriad of plastics, including vinyl chloride, which has been singled out as particularly toxic; and the pesticide Lorsban, which has been associated with death among wildlife that inhale its vapors. And, of course, the silicone breast implants that Dow Corning (co-owned by Dow) marketed in the 1970s, which caused health problems for some women after the devices began leaking. Dow ultimately paid more than $3 billion to cover claims associated with implants among 170,000 women.
Suffice to say, turning this legacy into a warm, fuzzy image is not for the faint of heart.
Not that Dow isn't trying. In addition to its water announcement, the $46 billion (2005 sales) company recently launched a new corporate image campaign called "The Human Element." Its goal, according to a Dow press release, is to "reintroduce the company and announce its vision of addressing some of the most pressing economic, social, and environmental concerns facing the global community in the coming decade."
"This is more than an ad campaign to our company. It is a statement to the world and, more importantly, to ourselves about the future direction of our business," said Patti Temple Rocks, Dow vice president of global communications and reputation. "It will be our calling card to people around the world who care about the future relationship between businesses, society, and the environment. It reflects our intention as a company to prioritize the things we do to advance innovation and focus the people and resources of Dow on solving human problems."
The company says the campaign will run in U.S. broadcast, print, and online media through the end of 2006, with plans to extend the campaign to key international markets in 2007. So far, the campaign has been relatively low-key, compared to, say, GE's Ecomagination rollout last year, or BP's "Beyond Petroleum" campaign. Indeed, Dow's name and logo flash only briefly at the end of its 30-second commercials.
Perhaps it's better that way. The ads seem largely ineffective, in that their core message (We love chemicals + we care about chemicals = we care about you, the human element) seems vague and noncommittal, the impressive cinematography notwithstanding. It's another in a long line of frustratingly nonspecific corporate image ads that I've railed against in the past. What specifically does Dow intend to do differently to address the "human element"? There's no clue. (View images from the campaign here.)
It's not that Dow hasn't gotten the green corporate bug. Like many companies, it is investing in clean technologies. In June, for example, it acquired Zhejiang Omex Engineering Co. of China because, Dow said, the smaller company specializes in water-purification systems. Also in June, Dow purchased $1.25 million in stock of Millennium Cell, a fuel cell manufacturer, part of a "three-year, milestone-driven joint development program to collaborate on the development and commercialization of portable fuel cell systems for use in consumer electronics and military applications," says Dow. The company also says it plans to look at plastics and other products to build modular homes for use in developing countries, according to news reports.
But these are, at best, timid steps toward sustainability for a behemoth chemical company, and unlikely to move the masses to view Dow in a kinder, gentler light. Unlike GE and Dupont, which have made the introduction of sustainability-minded products a core business-development strategy, and BP, for which alternative energy is a natural extension of its existing energy business, Dow's effort to paint a green self-portrait seems feeble -- an almost obligatory gesture in an era in which companies are expected to be more proactive about the fate of the earth and its denizens.
In the end, an unapologetic chemical company's low-key efforts to persuade the public that it wants to be a leader in clean water is bound to leave a bad taste in most people's mouth.
Comments :
Here's another possibility.
Dow, as well as other major chemical companies, want to "own" the basic necessities of life - in keeping with the neocons' goal to privative everything.
The chemical companies have genetically modified basic food, and seeds, then get a patent issued by the U.S. saying that the chemical companies "own" this particular seed. For example corn.
Farmers buy the seed. It blows into neighboring fields. Anyone who is found with any of the chemical company's seed in their fields is sued by the chemical companies, and must pay money to the chemical companies for using "their" corn seed.
Of course, they spread their seed far and wide so that eventually all of the corn seed in the world is contaminated with their seed, and every farmer in the world must pay money to them every single year for every crop they grow.
I think they have the same idea in mind for water. They will put drops of their patented chemicals in some water supply, then assess charges against every municipality whose water tests positive for this specific chemical. After all, it's "patented" and they own it.
Soon all the drinkable water in the world will be essentially "owned" by the chemical companies.
Thirsty? Get out your wallet.
By: NABNYC on August 01, 2006 at 12:30pm
Flag: [abusive]
Small communities all down the Rio Grande Corridor depend on ground water "leaked" from unsealed canals.
By: qofdisks on August 02, 2006 at 01:57am
Flag: [abusive]
Thanks for this very good article.
Wanted to correct one, widely spread fallacy.
Dow Corning has NOT paid but a small fraction of the hundreds of thousands of women harmed by their faulty products. Those that have been paid, received an average of a miniscule $10,000 per woman ... barely enough to cover the cost of removing their failed implants.
The vast majority have received nothing, though their health problems and often disfigurement continue.
Dow did however, hire the JunkScience Propaganda Team to spread vast amounts of disinformation for well over a decade now, as well as help fund 'studies' that miss the damage done to these women.
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org
Posted by: Ilena Rose at July 31, 2006 08:31 AM
First, full disclosure: I am former employee of Dow and a current shareholder of Dow. My household also holds a smaller amount of GE stock – my spouse wants it, I don't. Believe me, I'd sell it in a heartbeat if he'd just say yes, and I'm going to keep hammering on him about it until he sells.
I am shareholder of Dow because the company is NOT the same company it was 10, 20, 30 years ago, and the people in its culture – some of them my close friends -- are very conscious of their social responsibilities. They haven't forgotten Agent Orange nor Bhopal, even though they may have joined the firm long after; these two millstones haunt their every business decision, and yet they manage to continue to innovate and achieve profitability (although not all the time, like many other businesses in their industries). It is because of these issues that Dow instituted a “triple bottom line” measurement on its performance every year, weighing economic prosperity, environmental stewardship and corporate social responsibility against previous performance and against its competitors.
I had a professor at a local university who was a former Dow employee; I remember him tearing up during a lecture, when he discussed with the class products Dow made during the Vietnam era. He was still greatly affected 20+ years later by the choices the business made at that time. A substantive number of the employees were and remain extremely concerned about the acquisition of Union Carbide (UCC) because of Bhopal; it was a soul-rending, massive "blot" on a corporate culture that was safety conscious to the extreme. (Employees know never, ever to cut a corner at Dow on safety, or they will be walking the pavement outside the plant gate in a hurry, sans employment.) Bhopal continues to weigh on the people of Dow because they did not have any control over UCC, and the people responsible were long gone by the time what remained of UCC was acquired. They are now saddled with the burden -- emotional, psychic and otherwise -- of a disaster whose precursors these people could not ever have tolerated on Dow property under Dow control.
I will tell you from feedback I received from friends that they were aghast at how UCC was run once the acquisition was completed and Dow folks took over the operations; the business still operated as if it was in the 1950's in many respects, scared the bejabbers out of many of these safety conscious people. They've worked damned hard to bring what remained of UCC up to contemporary safety and operational performance -- while having to deal with the new and additional burdens of post-9/11 security issues at the same time. These are critical factors about which most outside observers, including the average shareholder, are in the dark about completely, that the acquisition increased safety exponentially to communities in which UCC plants existed, while saddling Dow employees and shareholders with an enormous burden.
Dow employees also had to deal with the issue of profitability; the acquisition was a drain at the same time that energy feedstocks began to escalate in price. Energy feedstocks like natural gas and petroleum are a substantial portion of chemical companies' costs, and Dow is hardly an exception. Pressure for sustained profitability in spite of UCC and energy costs led to an upheaval at the level of CEO. (Fortunately for me, I left the firm as part of a spin-off deal not long after the acquisition of UCC but before this management change; the stress for those who remained was great.)
If I've been concerned about holding Dow stock, it was at this point; a former CEO, an old schooler who was far more concerned with the financial bottom line and making shareholders happy, returned to the business to whip it back into shape. Blossoming innovations were curtailed in order to save money; I can tell you that what I knew about innovations in the pipeline prior to UCC were breathtaking, the kind of transformative technology that could change the world as we know it. But unfortunately, if innovation is not making money in a short time frame under the kind of pressure that shareholders place on profitability, it's gone – shelved and written off, or patents sold off to businesses that may or may not bring the innovation to market. I am absolutely certain that some of the transformative technologies I saw in incubation died on the pyre of profitability.
For all I know as an outsider, large-scale hydrogen fuel cell technology development may have suffered for profitability. Dow had joint ventures or agreements dating back a few years with at least two auto manufacturers to provide hydrogen (a waste product for Dow) to the auto makers for fuel cells, which in turn Dow would trial for plant electricity. Have you heard anything more about these particular efforts? Do tell – because I haven't.
Right here is the crux of the matter: Dow is a publicly-held corporation that must respond to shareholders. If shareholders want double-digit returns and consistent dividends, then sacrifices must be made. What will maintain the financial yield shareholders saw last year – a new, untried environmentally-sound technology needing two more years investment, or a tried-and-true chemical product? Will paying for local environmental cleanup pay greater dividends than investing the money in more efficient production technology while fighting local cleanup? Will increasing investment in smoking cessation and on-site healthcare reduce healthcare insurance costs and improve profitability? The answers are a complex matrix – and the ultimate driver and beneficiary is the shareholder.
Don't kid yourself for a moment that any of the other companies cited in this article are somehow better. They are under the very same pressures, have managers that are schooled just like those at Dow, may even share board members, consultants, investment firms, you name it. Jack Welch, for example, has been revered in business circles for his ability to grow and create profit, used as model of management prowess in business schools and by boards of directors around the world. However Welch did some dicey things as leader of GE; he used long-term funds to finance short-term debt, and chewed up/spat out employees like so much chaff. How is this socially responsible behavior? (Don't even get me started on his personal relationship that surely cost GE shareholders.) Welch's successors are compared to Welch by shareholders; will they be as profitable and ruthless as Welch? How does that shape an organization? Has GE and its shareholders learned anything from the Welch years and earlier, or are they doing business and investment as usual?
More importantly, are shareholders demanding more than increasing stock value and dividends? When are we going to hold shareholders accountable, ask them to do more than simply use industries' own definition of sustainability as a benchmark for performance?
Ultimately, what sets Dow apart is not their current business practices, but past mistakes that are named and branded with one or two words – and whether the business and its shareholders learn constructively from them. What also sets Dow apart will be its inability to educate the larger public about what it has already accomplished.
Did you know that Dow has been providing half a million people with clean water through its technologies since 1999 in a suburb of Paris France at the Mery sur Oise filtration plant -- the same kind of technologies mentioned in this WorldChanging article?
Did you know that Dow instituted that triple bottom-line measurement back in the mid-90's, and a 12-point sustainable operating development plan in 2000? That fuel cell technology has been in the pipeline at Dow well before the UCC acquisition? Or that Dow invests in its local communities, or makes grants to countries like Tanzania to further sustainable development?
I didn't think so. That's a different and very long row for Dow to hoe. I'll give up my Dow stock when I don't hear about constructive and sustainable behavior by their management and employees.
===========
P.S. in response to the previous comment, Dow Corning is a joint venture and a separate organization from Dow Chemical. The media and the public don't seem to understand this any more than they understand that the word "Stryofoam" is a brand name and not a universal term for expanded styrene. It's the same kind of blindness that helps people ignore their responsibilities in driving corporate decision making.
Posted by: Rayne at July 31, 2006 11:03 AM
Dow had a weird ad campaign recently where they talked about how companies need to consider the "human element" which was, RIDICULOUSLY, "Hu": atomic number 6 or 8 or something. That means it's either carbon or oxygen. I'd have laughed if it didn't make me so angry. Nice idea, but piss-poor implementation.
Posted by: Automaton at July 31, 2006 12:08 PM
Adding to my above post, it looks like the human element is number 74 in your photo there, instead of whatever it is they had in their TV ad. But that's Tungsten! It's completely meaningless. Are they trying to say they don't understand basic chemistry?
Posted by: Automaton at July 31, 2006 12:12 PM
Um, how is Dow going to survive after peak oil?
Anyone for $300 per barrel oil?
What is it going to use as a feedstock when oil doubles and triples in price? Just how much sugar cane or biomass can we grow to make "green chemistry" plastics? How much land will that take? How much ethanol/biodiesel growth will that displace? What happens if Dow goes belly up... how many employees will that be out of work? (Along with bankrupt car-manufacturers and airline employees.)
Where is the nano-tech revolution that is going to revolutionize materials construction all-together? We need it, now.
Peak oil is more than transport fuel. Yes it will affect the viability of the airline industry and car industries in their current format. No I don't think there is a "silver bullet" in energy that can do the job oil does. But far more than "just" transport, the very feedstock of the entire petro-chemical and plastics industry is threatened.
With transport, plastics, chemicals, and even fertilizers (NPK are mined, transported and manufactured using oil and gas), oil really is the "lifeblood" of our civilization. Dow "going green" may just be a advertising stunt, but it's too little too late. Unless some miracle of algae growth is initiated, I fully expect Dow to be bankrupt within the decade.
Posted by: Eclipse Now at July 31, 2006 05:17 PM
So what would Worldchanging suggest Dow does to stop being a typical liberal-communist greenwashing corporation?
As I understand it, Worldchanging is first and foremost a group of people who are striving towards social justice (the only worldchanging tool).
Is Worldchanging launching a campaign against this evil new activity of that terroristic company?
Posted by: Lorenzo at July 31, 2006 05:20 PM
On shareholders and long-term performance: long term initiatives tend to be riskier than business as usual, so it's reasonable for the stock price to fall at least a little. But the idea that businesses don't invest in longer term growth now shareholders bother to check the price of the asset their own is rather oversold. Australian supermarket Coles has just announced a AUD1.2 billion (~USD1 billion) investment in, um, signage.
"The consequence is a headline pause in profit while the underlying business performance continues to improve but the cost of these initiatives and the transformation means that headline [profit growth] will pause for 12 months," Mr Fletcher said.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/coles-to-get-12b-new-look/2006/07/31/1154198072743.html
That long term attitude for business growth is of course in stark contrast to what they're focusing on, branding. But is it such a stretch to imagine the same soundbite being used to explain initiatives in eg, energy efficiency?
Posted by: Adam Burke at July 31, 2006 07:51 PM
Until you have suffered twenty years from the horrible neurologic and respiratory damage from isocyante poisoning like I have, you cannot find a way to excuse those who perpetrate this crime and continue to do so. If an individual rather than a corporation would have done this to me, I would have been convicted of a crime. But a corporation can do this and get no more than court delays and minor sellouts. But judicial bribery became an issue in my case, that could never amount to any more than a civil issue. Lawyers and doctors got everything. Judges made out like bandits. I got nothing.
Posted by: Victors at July 31, 2006 08:35 PM
Posted by bhola at 07:59 PM | Comments (0)
August 01, 2006
Dow commits to invest in clean water solutions
GREENBIZ.COM
MIDLAND, Mich., July 27, 2006 - Dow Chemical this week committed the company's resources to developing new technologies and solutions for creating safer, more sustainable water supplies for communities around the world.
Speaking at the United Nations, Andrew Liveris, Dow's chairman and CEO, emphasized the urgency of addressing the needs of the 1.2 billion people worldwide whose lives are threatened because of inadequate or unhealthy water supplies.
"Water is the single most important chemical compound for the preservation and flourishing of human life," Liveris said. "And yet today, more than a billion people are in peril every day because they do not have enough water or the water they have is unhealthy. Lack of clean water is the single largest cause of disease in the world and more than 4,500 children die each day because of it."
As part of Dow's 2015 Sustainability Goals, Liveris pledged the Company would reinforce its commitment to technologies designed to meet the needs of the 21st century for water development, purification and transmission technologies, including:
# New solutions for economically viable desalination;
# New and improved chemistry and polymers for removing specific impurities in water;
# Innovative materials for leak-proof water piping that can dramatically increase the efficiency of community water systems;
# New, lower-cost technologies and business models for the management of municipal water supplies.
"As a large company, we take our philanthropic mission very seriously, but we approach the challenge of developing water resources not in a spirit of charity but as a business, in a spirit of enterprise," Liveris said. "Where we create the most leverage, the most value, the most power to solve this problem is in the laboratory and in the marketplace."
Liveris also outlined a new partnership between Dow and the Blue Planet Run Foundation, a U.S.-based non-profit organization committed to sustainable water solutions. The foundation will raise awareness of and funds for clean water projects worldwide through the inauguration of the Blue Planet Run(R), the first-ever global endurance run around the world, sponsored by Dow.
Over the course of 100 days, beginning in June 2007, a team of Blue Planet Run athletes will circumnavigate the globe, running 24 hours a day.
According to Blue Planet Run Foundation founder Jin Zidell, the partnership with Dow has created a platform for expanding the reach and influence of the foundation within the community of major corporations that are actively working to achieve sustainability goals.
"The partnership between the Blue Planet Run Foundation and Dow is truly a cooperative effort to raise awareness for this important cause," said Zidell. By working together, we are creating a movement to celebrate life and make a real difference in the lives of millions of most disadvantaged people around the world."
"Blue Planet Run creates a focal point for rallying individuals, businesses and governments around the problem of clean water access," Liveris said. "It is an important piece of our educational and philanthropic commitment to this issue and consistent with the compassionate, dedicated, generous spirit of the 42,000 men and women of The Dow Chemical Company."
Posted by bhola at 08:07 PM | Comments (0)