Download Climate Change 2016 Information Request HewlettPackard

2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Climate Change 2016 Information Request
Hewlett­Packard
Module: Introduction
Page: Introduction
CC0.1
Introduction
Please give a general description and introduction to your organization.
Information presented throughout this response is representative of Hewlett­Packard Company (HP Co.) as it operated in fiscal year 2015 (November 1, 2014 through October 31, 2015)
unless otherwise stated. HP Co. separated into two new publicly traded Fortune 50 companies on November 1, 2015: one comprising HP Co.’s market­leading enterprise technology
infrastructure, software and services businesses, Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE), and one that comprises HP Co.’s market­leading personal systems and printing businesses, which is
doing business as HP Inc. and has retained the HP logo. While this year’s response is based on the operation of the legacy HP Co., next year, in 2017, both companies will report
separately on their FY16 data and operations.
NOTE: The majority of this response is written in the present tense, as HP Co. existed in FY15 and in keeping with the language used in past CDP submissions.
HP Co. is a leading global provider of products, technologies, software, solutions and services to individual consumers, small­ and medium­sized businesses (SMBs) and large
enterprises, including customers in the government, health and education sectors. HP Co.'s commitment to environmental sustainability and energy efficiency spans our entire business—
from how we design our products, empower our customers, and manage our supply chain to how we run our operations, develop partnerships, and engage in public policy. Founded in 1939 and incorporated in 1947, HP Co. is a company with a history of strong global citizenship. Social and environmental responsibility is essential to our business strategy
and our value proposition for customers. They are also at the heart of an obligation we all share to help create a sustainable global society. HP Co. is using our position as the world’s
largest information technology (IT) company to help address some of society’s most pressing challenges. Our strategy is to use our portfolio and expertise to tackle complex issues—such
as improving energy and resource efficiency. We approach these issues in a holistic way, stretching beyond quick fixes and piecemeal solutions. HP Co. offers a wide range of technology,
services, and solutions for consumers, businesses, and large enterprises. Our portfolio is diverse, but our approach remains consistent: We design with the environment in mind. Forward­Looking Statements:
This document may contain forward­looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions.
If the risks or uncertainties ever materialize or the assumptions prove incorrect, the results of Hewlett­
Packard Company (HP Co.), HP Inc., Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) (collectively “the companies”) and their consolidated subsidiaries may differ materially from those expressed or
implied by such forward­looking statements and assumptions. All statements other than statements of historical fact are statements that could be deemed forward­looking statements,
including but not limited to any statements of the plans, strategies and objectives of management for future operations, including the execution of restructuring plans and any resulting cost
savings or revenue or profitability improvements; any statements concerning the expected development, performance, market share or competitive performance relating to products or
services; any statements regarding current or future macroeconomic trends or events and the impact of those trends and events on the companies and their financial performance; any
statements of expectation or belief; and any statements of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. Risks, uncertainties and assumptions include the need to address the many
challenges facing the companies’ businesses; the competitive pressures faced by the companies’ businesses; risks associated with executing the companies’ strategy and plans for future
operations; the impact of macroeconomic and geopolitical trends and events; the need to manage third­party suppliers and the distribution of the companies’ products and services
effectively; the protection of the companies’ intellectual property assets, including intellectual property licensed from third parties; risks associated with the companies’ international
operations; the development and transition of new products and services and the enhancement of existing products and services to meet customer needs and respond to emerging
technological trends; the execution and performance of contracts by the companies and their suppliers, customers, clients and partners; the hiring and retention of key employees;
integration and other risks associated with business combination and investment transactions; the execution, timing and results of restructuring plans, including estimates and assumptions
related to the cost and the anticipated benefits of implementing those plans. The companies assume no obligation and does not intend to update these forward­looking statements.
CC0.2
Reporting Year
Please state the start and end date of the year for which you are reporting data.
The current reporting year is the latest/most recent 12­month period for which data is reported. Enter the dates of this year first.
We request data for more than one reporting period for some emission accounting questions. Please provide data for the three years prior to the current reporting year if you have not provided
this information before, or if this is the first time you have answered a CDP information request. (This does not apply if you have been offered and selected the option of answering the shorter
questionnaire). If you are going to provide additional years of data, please give the dates of those reporting periods here. Work backwards from the most recent reporting year.
Please enter dates in following format: day(DD)/month(MM)/year(YYYY) (i.e. 31/01/2001).
Enter Periods that will be disclosed
Sat 01 Nov 2014 ­ Sat 31 Oct 2015
CC0.3
Country list configuration
Please select the countries for which you will be supplying data. If you are responding to the Electric Utilities module, this selection will be carried forward to assist you in completing your
response.
Select country
United States of America
Algeria
Argentina
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Belarus
Belgium
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazil
Bulgaria
Canada
Chile
China
Colombia
Costa Rica
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Ecuador
Egypt
Estonia
Finland
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
1/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Select country
France
Germany
Hong Kong
Hungary
India
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kuwait
Latvia
South Korea
Luxembourg
Malaysia
Mexico
Morocco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Panama
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Romania
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Serbia
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Tunisia
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Angola
Austria
Botswana
Congo, Republic of the
Cyprus
Ethiopia
Ghana
Greece
Jordan
Lebanon
Libya
Lithuania
Malta
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
Mauritius
Mozambique
Tanzania
Uganda
United Kingdom
Venezuela
Vietnam
CC0.4
Currency selection
Please select the currency in which you would like to submit your response. All financial information contained in the response should be in this currency.
USD($)
CC0.6
Modules
As part of the request for information on behalf of investors, electric utilities, companies with electric utility activities or assets, companies in the automobile or auto component manufacture
sub­industries, companies in the oil and gas sub­industries, companies in the information technology and telecommunications sectors and companies in the food, beverage and
tobacco industry group should complete supplementary questions in addition to the main questionnaire.
If you are in these sector groupings (according to the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS)), the corresponding sector modules will not appear below but will automatically appear in the
navigation bar when you save this page. If you want to query your classification, please email [email protected].
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
2/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
If you have not been presented with a sector module that you consider would be appropriate for your company to answer, please select the module below. If you wish to view the questions first,
please see https://www.cdp.net/en­US/Programmes/Pages/More­questionnaires.aspx.
Further Information
Module: Management
Page: CC1. Governance
CC1.1
Where is the highest level of direct responsibility for climate change within your organization?
Board or individual/sub­set of the Board or other committee appointed by the Board
CC1.1a
Please identify the position of the individual or name of the committee with this responsibility
In fiscal year 2015, Meg Whitman, President, Chairwoman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Hewlett­Packard Company (HP Co.) was the person with the highest level of direct
responsibility for Climate Change within the company. As of fiscal year 2016, HP Co. split into two companies, HP Inc. and Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE). Meg Whitman remains
President, and Chief Executive Officer of HPE and continues to be the person with the highest level of direct responsibility for Climate Change within HPE. Dion Weisler is HP Inc.’s
President and Chief Executive Officer and is the person with the highest level of direct responsibility for Climate Change within HP Inc. beginning in FY16.
HP Co.’s Board of Directors’ Nominating, Governance, and Social Responsibility (NGSR) committee oversaw the company’s sustainability efforts through FY15 and new committees with
the same name and oversight continue this role for HP Inc. and HPE moving forward. The Board’s NGSR may review, assess, report, and provide guidance to management and the board
regarding HP Co.’s policies and programs relating to sustainability issues, including climate change, and the impact of HP Co.’s operations on employees, customers, suppliers, partners,
and communities worldwide.
Additionally, Gabi, Zedlmayer, was HP Co.'s Chief Progress Officer (CPO) through FY15 and her team worked to unify and aggregate HP Co.’s multiple points of climate/sustainability
accountability into a common governance and reporting framework. The CPO (now CSO) reports to the SVP of Corporate Affairs, Gregg Melinson, who in turn reports to the Chief
Communications and Marketing (CMO/CCO) Officer, Henry Gomez, who reports to the President and CEO of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. Currently (FY16), Lara Birkes serves as the Chief
Sustainability Officer (CSO) at HPE and Nate Hurst is the Chief Sustainability & Social Impact Officer for HP Inc. Mr Hurst reports to the Global Head of Engagement and Sustainability who
reports to the Global Head (SVP) of Employee Engagement & Contribution who reports to the Chief Human Resources Officer (Tracy Keogh). Ms. Keogh reports to the President and CEO
of HP Inc.
New collaboration and partnership models were established across the HP Co. Senior Leadership community with engagement from all business and functional groups across the
company including from our new solutions development teams, supply chain, compliance, social responsibility, site operations, government affairs, and marketing domains. Each group
has specific responsibilities associated with the environment and contribute metrics to an internal and company­wide environmental goals, including climate related goals.
CC1.2
Do you provide incentives for the management of climate change issues, including the attainment of targets?
Yes
CC1.2a
Please provide further details on the incentives provided for the management of climate change issues
Who is entitled to benefit from these
incentives?
Corporate executive team
The type of
incentives
Incentivized
performance
indicator
Monetary
reward
Efficiency
project
Efficiency
target
Emissions
reduction
project
Emissions
reduction
target
Environmental
criteria
included in
purchases
Supply chain
engagement
Emissions
reduction
target
Energy
reduction
project
Energy
reduction
target
Efficiency
project
Comment
HP Co.'s corporate executive team including CTO's and business division leads are ultimately responsible
for products meeting energy efficiency targets (voluntary and regulatory related). Members of the corporate
executive team are also part of the establishment of, and meeting targets related to climate such as the 20%
GHG reduction target in HP Co. operations, supply chain and product use phase goals. Total compensation
packages include base salary and bonus structures that may factor the performance against the indicators
mentioned as well as others.
There are numerous Environment/Sustainability managers (over 100) throughout HP Co.’s company­wide
sustainability "ecosystem" that contribute to the company's efforts to meet our voluntary GHG emissions
reduction targets. Additionally, our Social and Environmental Responsibility (SER) team regularly engages
suppliers to report emissions, set targets, take action and track progress using the HP Co. SER supplier
scorecard. Total compensation (salary plus bonus) for these employees is partially based on emissions
performance and meeting or exceeding HP Co.'s voluntarily established targets and elements of business
performance that contribute to these targets.
Environment/Sustainability managers
Monetary
reward
Energy managers
Recognition
(non­
monetary)
Other: Product design engineers and
architects are responsible for integrating
energy efficiency into HP Co.'s products
targeted for consumer and enterprise
markets. Total compensation for these
employees includes successfully
incorporating and constantly improving
these activities into our products.
Monetary
reward
Efficiency
target
Product design engineers and architects are responsible for integrating energy­ and materials­efficiency
into HP Co.'s products targeted for consumer and enterprise markets. They employ tools and process such
as lifecycle assessments (LCA) and product carbon footprint analyses to determine how to best reduce
product environmental impacts. Total compensation for these employees includes successfully
incorporating and constantly improving these activities into our products.
Monetary
reward
Emissions
reduction
target
Environmental
criteria
included in
purchases
Supply chain
engagement
Our social and environmental responsibility (SER) program relies on HP Co.’s procurement operations
function to motivate and incentivize suppliers through ongoing relationships, including regular supplier
business reviews and day­to­day engagement. Our procurement operations team is trained to undertake
SER performance evaluation, education, and mentoring. Our SER scorecard directly ties ongoing
procurement decisions to supplier SER performance (emissions reporting and setting targets – used to
track and drive progress against HP Co.’s supply chain GHG goal) and participation in capability building,
ensuring SER is prioritized in business decisions. Total compensation (salary plus bonus) for these
employees is partially based on integration of supplier SER performance into general supplier business
management and purchasing decisions.
Buyers/purchasers
Energy managers working within the HP Co. Global Real Estate function, who are responsible for the
development of energy projects and procurement, including establishment and implementation of
renewable energy projects, energy efficiency projects and the establishing and meeting operational
emissions reduction (GHG) targets, have a component of their total compensation based on these activities.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
3/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Who is entitled to benefit from these
incentives?
Chief Purchasing Officer (CPO)
The type of
incentives
Recognition
(non­
monetary)
Incentivized
performance
indicator
Emissions
reduction
target
Environmental
criteria
included in
purchases
Supply chain
engagement
Comment
Further Information
Page: CC2. Strategy
CC2.1
Please select the option that best describes your risk management procedures with regard to climate change risks and opportunities
Integrated into multi­disciplinary company wide risk management processes
CC2.1a
Please provide further details on your risk management procedures with regard to climate change risks and opportunities
Frequency
of
monitoring
Annually
To whom are results
reported?
Board or
individual/sub­set of
the Board or
committee appointed
by the Board
Geographical areas considered
Along with other risks, climate change and weather related risks and opportunities are
considered in all geographical areas we have operations. HP Co.’s geographical footprint
includes corporate facilities in more than 90 countries in the following regions: Asia Pacific,
EMEA, Latin America and North America.
How far into
the future
are risks
considered?
> 6 years
Comment
The ERM process evaluates
short (1<), medium (1­3 yr.)
and long­term (3 ­ 6 yrs. and
beyond) risks.
CC2.1b
Please describe how your risk and opportunity identification processes are applied at both company and asset level
HP Co. uses Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) at the enterprise, business and supply chain levels to capture risks across governance, business strategy, compliance, social and
environmental responsibility, existing operations, corporate reputation and reporting. External risk/opportunity factors such as physical risks from climate change, political disruption, and
natural disasters are assessed through the ERM program. HP Co. performs targeted assessments for critical risks, such as changing economic conditions, climate change, energy, water
management and resource scarcity. If specific risks exceed thresholds for materiality, those risks are elevated through the ERM process for review and possible mitigation.
At the company level, climate change related risk/opportunities are evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively. In addition to financial risk, we consider brand and reputational risk,
investor and customer impact, and employee impact. Risk identification integrates risk management activities with Internal Audit, Ethics and Compliance, Business Continuity Planning,
and our Enterprise Compliance Group. Plans are developed to manage critical risks that exceed certain thresholds. Risks and opportunities at an asset level are measured on a case by case basis depending on the nature of the risk or opportunity. Example: key sites near sea level or within flood plain
areas are assessed for the threat of rising seas. HP Co. also utilizes our own Critical Facilities Services division to evaluate risks and opportunities for our and our customers’ new or renovated data center facilities including: space and
hardware planning, site selection, energy efficiency (to design and reduce cost and carbon footprint), engineering infrastructure (to plan electrical, mechanical, fire protection, fuel control)
and security systems. Key site factors (cost and liability) are modeled. Key sites and operations have business continuity plans and site recovery plans in place.
CC2.1c
How do you prioritize the risks and opportunities identified?
Risks and opportunities are identified and prioritized through the ERM Materiality process. Materiality is set for ERM once a year by the CFO and Business Controllership. Other risk
management organizations, such as Internal Audit, Ethics and Compliance, and Business Continuity Planning set thresholds with Senior Management approval based on program specific
needs.
HP Co. also commissioned a formal sustainability related materiality assessment which is reviewed and updated annually through a formal outreach process. Our objective review the
global citizenship issues that HP Co. faces, reconfirm our long­standing areas of focus, determine any gaps, and identify emerging issues and new leadership opportunities for our
business.
The assessment originally included:
•Interviews and workshops with internal stakeholders and HP Co. leaders
•Interviews with members of our External Global Citizenship Council (no longer active)
•Reviews of public and internal HP Co. documents
•Quantitative surveys of more than 230 external stakeholders and more than 650 HP Co. employees
Risks and opportunities identified through our materiality assessment that are in the upper quadrants (higher importance to HP Co. business success and higher importance to
sustainability stakeholders) are addressed in accordance with their importance with the appropriate HP Co teams. HP Co. works with customers, governments, NGOs, and other
companies to increase our understanding of environmental, social and ethical issues, address the concerns of stakeholders, search for solutions, and enact policies and practices that
require a collective approach. Key issues are mapped to the prominent stakeholders in each category and cross referenced against HP Co. business objectives and imperatives.
Information collected from the above sources is then disseminated internally to executives, and risks and opportunities are considered during strategic planning activities to influence
ongoing strategy.
CC2.2
Is climate change integrated into your business strategy?
Yes
CC2.2a
Please describe the process of how climate change is integrated into your business strategy and any outcomes of this process
(i) Our strategy was developed and (continues to be) influenced through internal processes and collaboration with external partners: HP Co. commissioned a formal materiality assessment
which is reviewed annually to reconfirm our long­standing areas of focus in CSR, determine any gaps in our current programs, and identify emerging issues and new leadership
opportunities for our business. The assessment was formally updated in 2014 as part of planning for 2015.
The assessment included insights from four main sources:
• Interviews and workshops with internal stakeholders and HP Co. leaders
• Interviews and engagement with external stakeholders through the Living Progress Exchange (LPX).
• Reviews of public and internal HP documents
• Review by an external agency familiar with sustainability issues and the IT industry
Information collected from the above sources is disseminated and reported internally to executives and is considered during strategic planning activities to further influence ongoing
strategy. Elements of the strategy and supporting efforts are further communicated internally and externally annually through HP Co.'s Living Progress Report. For the FY15 reporting
period, HP Inc. is publishing its 2015 HP Sustainability Report and HPE is publishing the 2015 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Living Progress Positions, Programs and Policies report.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
4/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
HP Co.'s initial materiality assessment identified energy and GHG emissions in the supply chain as material issues to both external stakeholders and our business. As a result, HP Co.
worked with internal management and external stakeholders to develop an industry first target to reduce GHG emissions in the supply chain. We set a goal to reduce first­tier manufacturing
and product transportation­related GHG emissions intensity in the company’s supply chain by 20% by 2020 based on 2010 levels. Data is collected from tier 1 suppliers tracked against
target related KPIs which further influences the strategy to reduce supplier related impacts. We have achieved this 20% reduction early, based on data collected through December 2014
(the most recent year data is available).
(ii) The aspects of climate change that have influenced HP Co.'s strategy are: climate change risks and opportunities including changes in regulations, and the need to adapt to a low
carbon economy and development of HP Co.’s low carbon business. Because worldwide energy consumption is forecasted to rise nearly 50% by 2035, the world needs solutions that
improve efficiency to keep pace with demand—and to reduce emissions that fuel climate change. HP Co. believes this represents a significant opportunity to deliver energy­efficient IT
infrastructure, and to create IT solutions that provide customers with better insight into and control over their energy use. As part of our strategy, HP Co. set a target to cut absolute GHG emissions from our operations to 20% below 2005 levels by 2013, and met this target 2 years early and set a new target to
reduce total GHG emissions from our operations (scopes 1 & 2) by an additional 20% by 2020 based on 2010 levels. We have also already exceeded this target, reducing our emissions
by 29% from our 2010 baseline by 2015. HP Co. also set an industry first target to reduce GHG emissions in the supply chain (i.e., reduce first­tier manufacturing and product
transportation­related GHG emissions intensity in the company’s supply chain by 20% by 2020 based on 2010 levels).
Our strategy is also influenced by a need to maintain access to markets. We do this by preparing for upcoming legislation, participating in public policy discussions, preserving our record of
legal compliance, and innovating and collaborating to meet societal needs. As HP Co., Living Progress is our approach to simultaneously driving human, economic and environmental
progress. (iii) The important components of the short term strategy that have been influenced by climate change (0­1 yrs) was the expansion of HP Co. targets to include the use­phase of our
products. As part of ongoing efforts to lower its carbon footprint across all phases of its business, HP Co. announced a goal to reduce the emissions intensity of its product portfolio by 40%
by 2020 compared to 2010 levels. As of end FY15, we had achieved a 26% reduction compared by 2010 levels. With this product goal announcement, HP Co. became the only global IT company to have set carbon reduction goals for all three parts of its value chain—operations, supply chain, and
product portfolio.
(iv) The important components of the long term strategy that have been influenced by climate change (2­10+ yrs) are linked to the opportunity for HP Co. to continue to develop our low
carbon business and mitigate risks associated with a higher cost of carbon and include 1) improving the efficiency of our portfolio, supply chain, and operations. 2) capturing market
opportunity by developing HP Co. solutions that improve or replace current energy­ and resource­intensive processes and behaviors with more efficient alternatives. Reducing the environmental impact of the IT supply chain: In 2013 HP Co. announced our industry leading target to reduce emissions in our supply chain by 20% by 2020. HP Co. is an
industry leader in helping our product manufacturing, transport, and recovery partners understand, improve, and report on their environmental performance. We continue to expand our
reuse and recycling programs to improve availability, reduce waste resulting from operations, and capture value from IT products at their end of life. We also work to reduce energy
consumption, GHG emissions, paper use, water consumption, and waste. (v) HP Co.’s strategic advantage relative to competition is reflected in the scope and scale of the solutions that we offer our customers. Moving forward as HPE and HP Inc., our companies
will continue to develop a robust set of energy and material saving technologies including extreme low­energy servers (Moonshot), next­generation, high efficiency printers (PageWide
Array and software solutions & tools, as well as consulting. These represent the most comprehensive end­to­end climate and energy management portfolio of anyone in the IT industry. (vi) The most substantial business decisions made during the reporting year that have been influenced by the climate change driven aspects of the strategy are: 1) increased investment
and accelerated launch of Moonshot and Apollo extreme low­energy server technologies, 2) execution of a 12 year, 112 MW PPA renewable energy project in Texas, 3) the launch of high
efficiency PageWide Array printers, and 4) continued development of HP Co.'s "The Machine", an extreme energy efficient technology that will fuse memory and storage, and enable
management and assurance of the system at scale. The aspect of climate change that has influenced the business decision is the opportunity for HP Co. to develop our low carbon
business. CC2.2c
Does your company use an internal price of carbon?
No, and we currently don't anticipate doing so in the next 2 years
CC2.3
Do you engage in activities that could either directly or indirectly influence public policy on climate change through any of the following? (tick all that apply)
Direct engagement with policy makers
Trade associations
Funding research organizations
Other
CC2.3a
On what issues have you been engaging directly with policy makers?
Focus of
legislation
Clean
energy
generation
Clean
energy
generation
Energy
efficiency
Clean
energy
generation
Corporate
Position
Details of engagement
Proposed legislative solution
Support
Demanding simpler buying of renewable energy by advancing the
renewable energy buyer's principles:
http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2014/07/11/GM­HP­Walmart­others­
demand­simpler­buying­renewables. HP Co. was one of the original
companies to convene on the topic, and advocate for companies and
NGOs to work together on the topic of creating a better renewable
energy market.
1. Greater choice in options to procure renewable energy 2. Cost competitiveness
between traditional and renewable energy rates 3. Access to longer­term, fixed­
price renewable energy 4. Access to projects that are new or help drive new
projects in order to reduce energy emissions beyond business as usual 5.
Increased access to third­party financing vehicles as well as standardized and
simplified processes, contracts and financing for renewable energy projects 6.
Opportunities to work with utilities and regulators to expand choices for buying
renewable energy
Support
Direct Engagement: The production tax credit (PTC) provides a tax
credit of 2.3 cents per megawatt hour of generated electricity for wind
developers (in 2016). Since the PTC was enacted eight years ago,
wind power capacity has increased by 47,000 MW, a seven­fold
increase. Eliminating the credit will shut down much of a thriving US
manufacturing sector, one of the fastest­growing sources of factory
jobs even in the depths of the economic slowdown. HP Co. signed a
letter with other leading firms to petition congressional leaders for an
extension of the production tax credit for wind power.
On­going engagement with congressional members indicating that a failure to grant
the extension would remove incentives for the renewable energy economy. As of
December 2015, a five year extension with of the PTC with a scheduled phase
down was granted.
Support
HP Co. participates in the Green Grid Association, a nonprofit, open
industry consortium of global IT companies, policy makers, and end
users seeking to improve energy efficiency in data centers and unite
industry efforts to develop a common set of metrics, processes, and
new technologies. The Goal of Green Grid is to become the global
authority on resource efficiency in information technology and data
centers.
The Green Grid is working closely with end­users, technology providers and
governments around the world to create standards for more efficient use of
resources in data centers. According to a recent study by Emerson Network Power,
72% of companies surveyed do not have a documented strategy for reducing
energy use in the data center, although most agree that data center energy
consumption is a real issue of concern. Green Grid provides a forum where IT,
Facilities and other C­level executives come together to discuss different options
that exist for improving resource efficiency.
Support
While data centers play an important role in the sustainability
solutions made possible through computing, they have significant
impacts of their own, driving around 1­2 percent of electricity use in
the U.S. Many data center operators have responded with strong
commitments to energy efficiency. In order to address these obstacles,
BSR has established Future of Internet Power Group, co­founded with
HP Co. and EBay and other leading technology companies that will
share and promote best practices and develop a platform for driving
low­carbon, sustainable power for data centers in collaboration with
select utilities and policymakers.
1: Increase the level of corporate ownership in sustainable, low­carbon power
generation that is additional to “business as usual,” both on­ and off­site. 2:
Enhance stakeholder understanding about the issues, impacts, constraints, and
opportunities for the industry to promote low­carbon sustainable energy sources. 3:
Collaborate with utilities to create workable, win­win solutions that promote
advances in low­carbon power.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
5/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Focus of
legislation
Other:
International
carbon
reduction /
climate
change
agreement
Energy
efficiency
Corporate
Position
Details of engagement
Proposed legislative solution
Support
HP Co. joined the White House and 80 other companies in signing
the American Business Act on Climate pledge in October 2015.
Through this commitment we are voicing our support for a strong
outcome at the Paris COP 21 and demonstrating an ongoing
commitment to climate action. Our specific pledge includes: 1)
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, compared to a 2010
baseline, by 2020 2) Purchase 115 MW of renewable energy by 2020
3) By 2020: Decrease first­tier manufacturing and product
transportation­related GHG emissions intensity in our supply chain by
20% compared with 2010. 4) By 2020: Reduce the emissions intensity
of our product portfolio by 40% compared to 2010 levels. (See
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the­press­office/2015/10/19/fact­sheet­
white­house­announces­commitments­american­business­act).
Support for a strong outcome in the Cop21 Paris climate negotiations building on
country climate targets Continued support of US policy that encourages the
deployment of more clean energy and an increase in low­carbon investments.
Support
HP Co. has used its leadership position within DigitalEurope to
establish an industry focused voluntary agreement (VA) in response
to European Union (EU) adopted Directive 2009/125/EC on energy­
related products (ErP). HP Co. was heavily Involved in the initial
drafting of this VA, which establishes minimum eco­design
requirements, was accepted by legislators and has led to the industry
achieving a 14% reduction in CO2e emissions related to energy
consumption. This reduction through the VA has led to three times the
CO2e emission savings predicted by an EU regulation scenario for
the period 2011­2020. HP Co. and DigitalEurope continue discussion
with representatives of the EU Institutions for future reductions in
CO2e emissions reductions related to product energy efficiency.
1) Contributes to the objectives of Directive 2009/125/EC establishing a framework
for the setting of eco­design requirements for energy­related products, in line with
Recitals18­21 Article 17 and Annex VIII on self­regulation measures; 2) Commits
signatories to comply with a set of primary design and information requirements that
products in scope placed in the EU Market shall comply with the specifications of
ENERGY STAR® v2.0 , default duplex pre­settings requirements in accordance with
specific agreed targets and includes default delay times; 3) Includes Resource
Efficiency requirements such as availability of N­up printing, design for recycling,
polymer composition, recycled plastic content and cartridge reuse. Information
requirements cover resource and energy efficiency and cartridge disposal; 4)
Includes Information requirements for end­users: on resource efficiency and energy
efficiency, on the availability of spare parts, on the cartridge disposal and treatment,
and on paper recyclability.
CC2.3b
Are you on the Board of any trade associations or provide funding beyond membership?
Yes
CC2.3c
Please enter the details of those trade associations that are likely to take a position on climate change legislation
Trade
association
Future of
Internet
Power
Group
We Mean
Business
Information
Technology
Industry
Council (ITI)
Is your
position
on climate
change
consistent
with
theirs?
Consistent
Consistent
Consistent
Please explain the trade association's position
Data centers contribute a major part of internet companies’ footprints (the other two contributors are end­
user equipment and access networks)—representing 1 to 2 percent of total electricity use in the United
States. As a result, data center sustainability has received a lot of attention in recent months and is a key
area of interest among organized activists. Yet leading companies have found that there are several
hurdles in pursuing this in the United States: 1.Infrastructure requirements 2.Cost premiums 3.Conditions
and technicalities 4.Operational complexity 5.Regulatory environment To address these issues, BSR has
formed Future of Internet Power, a new leadership initiative co­founded by HP and EBay with other
members including Adobe, Facebook, salesforce.com, and Symantec that will identify and publicize best
practices around low­carbon power sourcing for data centers in the United States, and it will help internet
companies work more effectively with key policymakers and utilities. As we move forward, we will be
considering opportunities to expand these insights for additional regions and sectors.
We Mean Business is a coalition of organizations working with thousands of the world’s most influential
businesses and investors. These businesses recognize that the transition to a low carbon economy is the
only way to secure sustainable economic growth and prosperity for all. To accelerate this transition, we
have formed a common platform to amplify the business voice, catalyze bold climate action by all, and
promote smart policy frameworks.
ITI supports government policies to achieve the following, all with the intent of both mitigating and adapting
to climate change, and doing so with increased public/private partnership: • Concluding, and then
implementing, a climate change agreement at COP 21 that takes a strong step forward toward a vibrant,
low­carbon, and sustainable future, as well as creating a transparent platform for countries to make and
track national emissions reduction commitment; • Establishing greenhouse gas emissions reduction
strategies, via a transparent and participatory process, that create a stable regulatory and investment
environment for low­carbon innovation and that emphasize cost effectiveness; • Establishing national
strategies to encourage innovative intelligent efficiency Solutions that utilize and enable ICT solutions •
Promoting and protecting strong global intellectual property regimes, which are essential to incentivize high
risk research and development and facilitate the dissemination of relevant transformative new technologies;
• With regard to fluorinated gases, an essential component in manufacturing the semiconductors that are
the fundamental building block of all ICT, focusing on reducing emissions of these gases rather than
prohibiting their use per se; • Helping ensure that the Internet of Things is leveraged consistent with the ITI
IoT Principles; and • Ensuring that ENERGY STAR and other relevant market recognition programs are
based on partnership with industry and adherence to. (More information at
http://www.itic.org/resources/ITIStatementonClimateChange_final.pdf)
How have you, or are you attempting to,
influence the position?
Identification of best practices and
opportunities Developing a common
understanding of opportunity areas for data
center operators to address obstacles to
collaboration with utilities and policymakers in
driving new low­carbon, sustainable power in
select locations Engagement, education, and
alignment Facilitating stakeholder forums to
promote greater awareness, understanding,
and alignment among internal and external
stakeholders on shared opportunities
Coalition development Creating a network of
experts and advocates to pursue public­policy
advocacy initiatives, and the establishment of
a buyer’s group for developing collaborative
investments in sustainable, low­carbon power
generation.
We have committed to setting a science­based
target via the We Mean Business Coalition
and will consider additional climate action in
line with the WMB policies in the future as two
separate companies.
In supporting the policy position and advocacy
of the ITI on climate change, we have
committed to: • Further reduce the carbon
footprint of our operations by advancing
corporate goals and policies that focus on
conserving energy, reducing emissions of
fossil fuels, and generating or using
renewable energy whenever possible; •
Reduce the carbon footprint of our tech
products over the course of their lifecycle; •
Help enable transformational innovation via
intelligent efficiency and the Internet of Things
(IoT).
CC2.3d
Do you publicly disclose a list of all the research organizations that you fund?
Yes
CC2.3e
Please provide details of the other engagement activities that you undertake
HP Co. has traditionally belonged to and actively engaged with a number of organizations seeking to address and manage the impacts of climate change, such as the Association of
Climate Change Officers, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, The Climate Group, The Global Emissions Logistics Council, The Green Grid, and WWF Climate Savers.
HP Co. also co­founded the "Future of Internet Power Group" along with EBay, and run by BSR. Objectives are to:
1: Increase the level of corporate ownership in sustainable, low­carbon power generation that is additional to “business as usual,” both on­ and off­site.
2: Enhance stakeholder understanding about the issues, impacts, constraints, and opportunities for the industry to promote low­carbon sustainable energy sources.
3: Collaborate with utilities to create workable, win­win solutions that promote advances in low­carbon power.
This aligns with HP Co.'s strategy to meet our energy demands of our operations and that of our customers through an increasing percentage of renewable energy. https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
6/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
HP Co. supports the advancement of public policy discussions to address global climate change. HP Co. signed onto CDP / and The We Mean Business coalition commitment to develop
science based GHG targets as part of the Road to Paris initiative.
CC2.3f
What processes do you have in place to ensure that all of your direct and indirect activities that influence policy are consistent with your overall climate change strategy?
Climate change related activities are governed by the HP Co. Climate Policy Position (http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/government/ww/pdf/SER_Climate_Change.pdf). Through FY15,
the HP Living Progress (LP) team conducted materiality assessments and stakeholder perception analysis to determine the key environmental issues for our external stakeholders. Key
issues are mapped to the prominent stakeholders in each category and cross referenced against HP Co. business objectives and imperatives. The LP team then works with global
government affairs personnel and HP Co. environmental and business leaders to maintain a consistent approach to activities that may be designed to influence policy. Quarterly meetings
are held to ensure the policy is consistent. Post­separation, these responsibilities are continued by the HP Sustainability Innovation team at HP Inc. and the HPE Living Progress team at
Hewlett Packard Enterprise.
Further Information
Page: CC3. Targets and Initiatives
CC3.1
Did you have an emissions reduction or renewable energy consumption or production target that was active (ongoing or reached completion) in the reporting year?
Absolute target
Intensity target
Renewable energy consumption and/or production target
CC3.1a
Please provide details of your absolute target
ID
Scope
Abs1
Scope
1+2
(market­
based)
% of
emissions in
scope
%
reduction
from
base
year
Base
year
Base year emissions
covered by
target (metric tonnes
CO2e)
Target
year
Is this a
science­
based
target? 100%
20%
2010
2016700
2020
Yes
Comment
Greenhouse gas emissions from HP Co. operations are primarily due to facility
energy use. In 2012, we set a goal to decrease total GHG emissions from
operations (Scope 1 and Scope 2) by 20% by 2020, compared to 2010.
CC3.1b
Please provide details of your intensity target
ID
Scope
Int1
Other: Scope
3: Purchased
goods and
services;
Scope 3:
Upstream
and
downstream
transportation
and
distribution
Int2
Scope 3: Use
of sold
products
% of
emissions
in scope
38%
%
reduction
from
base
year
20%
100%
40%
Metric
Metric
tonnes
CO2e
per unit
revenue
Metric
tonnes
CO2e
per unit
of
service
provided
Base
year
2010
2010
Normalized
base year
emissions
covered by
target
0.000056
100
Target
year
Is this a
science­
based
target?
2020
No, but
we are
reporting
another
target
which is
science­
based
Scope 3 target that covered emissions from HP Co. 1st Tier production suppliers
and 1st tier transportation/logistics providers. For the baseline, we used 2011
values because the company did not calculate Scope 3 emissions in 2010.
2020
No, but
we are
reporting
another
target
which is
science­
based
In 2014, HP Co. set a goal to reduce the GHG emissions intensity of our product
portfolio by 40% by 2020 compared to 2010 levels. The goal covers emissions
arising from the use of high­volume product lines, including notebooks, tablets,
desktops, mobile computing devices and workstations; inkjet, and LaserJet and
DesignJet printers; and HP Co. servers, including industry­standard servers, HP
Co. Moonshot, and HP Co. Apollo. The intensity is expressed as emissions
generated per unit of service or output. For printers and personal systems, each
product constitutes a unit of output. For servers, each unit of output equals a task
performed by the system, as defined by industry standards. Because this goal
combines emissions from three different product lines with different intensity
normalization methods, we assigned an index of 100 to the total "emissions per
unit of output" in 2010. We report our progress relative to that initial index number.
Comment
CC3.1c
Please also indicate what change in absolute emissions this intensity target reflects
ID
Int1
Direction of change
anticipated in absolute
Scope 1+2 emissions at
target completion?
No change
% change
anticipated in
absolute Scope
1+2 emissions
0
Direction of change
anticipated in absolute
Scope 3 emissions at target
completion?
% change
anticipated in
absolute Scope 3
emissions
Decrease
2.3
Comment
Since the emissions covered in this intensity goal are only a portion of
total Scope 3 emissions, the absolute decrease in Scope 3 emissions
is smaller than the percentage decrease in emissions intensity.
CC3.1d
Please provide details of your renewable energy consumption and/or production target
ID
RE1
Energy
types
covered by
target ase
B
year
Base year energy
for energy type
covered (MWh)
Electricity
production
2013
3000
%
renewable
energy in
base year 13%
Target
year
2015
%
renewable
energy in
target year
40%
Comment
We had a target to double on­site generation of renewable energy between 2013 and 2015.
The percentages reported in this table show the electricity generated from on­site
renewables as a percent of total on­site electricity generation.
CC3.1e
For all of your targets, please provide details on the progress made in the reporting year
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
7/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
%
complete
(time)
% complete
(emissions or
renewable
energy)
Abs1
50%
100%
Int1
40%
100%
Int2
50%
65%
RE1
100%
100%
ID
Comment
In 2015, GHG emissions from HP Co. facilities continued to decrease. Our operations produced 1,432,100 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent
(CO2e) emissions, a 14.1% reduction from 1,667,700 tonnes of CO2e in 2014, and a 29% decrease from our 2010 baseline. HP Co. has exceeded
and met this goal five years early.
In 2014, GHG emissions intensity (in mton CO2e per $million revenue) from first­tier production suppliers and transportation providers decreased
by 20% from the 2010 baseline, achieving HP Co.’s goal. Data collection from production suppliers lags by a year, therefore only progress through
2014 has been reported. As of 2014, HP Co. met this goal.
Through the end of 2015, we reduced the GHG emissions intensity of our product portfolio by 26%, compared to 2010. A significant amount of the
improvement was due to gains in server processing power, as performance in that area is normalized to tasks performed. Personal systems also
contributed to this progress, due to energy efficiency gains as well as shifts in product mix (for example, from laptops to tablets).
We exceeded our goal to double our on­site renewable energy generation from 2013 (3 million kWh) to 2015 (8 mission kWh)
CC3.2
Do you classify any of your existing goods and/or services as low carbon products or do they enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions?
Yes
CC3.2a
Please provide details of your products and/or services that you classify as low carbon products or that enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions
evel of
L
aggregation
Group of
products
Description of product/Group of products
HPE Moonshot. Similar to avoided emissions, HP Co
produces a large variety of low­carbon products. As a main
example, our second generation Moonshot server, launched
in 2013, is the result of 10 years of sustained effort from a
dedicated team of HP Co Labs researchers, capitalizing on
our industry­leading server intellectual property. Moonshot
is a new type of server, tailored for specific workloads and
high performance. By sharing management, power, cooling,
networking, and capacity across a large number of units, it
increases our customers’ computing capability while
reducing resource use. Specifically, Moonshot servers
utilize up to 65% less power and use 90% less space
compared to traditional servers. And on specific workloads,
Moonshot delivers even more substantial savings. For
example, the HP Moonshot for NoSQL Databases would
utilize up to 90% less power, use 97% less space, and cost
78% less than a traditional server environment.
Taxonomy,
project or
methodology
Are you
used to
reporting
classify
low carbon
product/s as
product/s
low carbon
or avoided
or to
emissions? calculate
avoided
emissions Low carbon
product
%
revenue
from low
carbon
product/s
in the
reporting
year
Other:
Internal study
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
% R&D in
low
carbon
product/s
in the
reporting
year Comment
HP Co. helps customers manage the explosion of
data and capitalize on the opportunities it presents
while reducing related environmental impacts such
as scope 1 and 2 emissions and total cost of
ownership through highly efficient processing and
a smaller environmental footprint. With one of the
industry’s broadest technology portfolios, HP Co.
continually works to improve environmental
performance across the life cycle of our products
and solutions—from single­user, personal
computing devices and printers to enterprise
servers, storage and networking equipment, and
entire data centers. Through this company­wide
effort, we are transforming the environmental
footprint of information technology (IT) while
meeting our customers’ needs. We provide a
Converged Infrastructure approach, which reduces
environmental impacts without sacrificing
computing power. HP Co. Converged Infrastructure
supports a New Style of IT in which servers,
storage, and networking devices are integrated to
increase efficiency, improve hardware utilization,
and eliminate unnecessary powering and cooling.
HP Co.’s latest generation of ProLiant Gen8 and
Moonshot servers offers increased processing
power while using less energy and space than
typical server environments, reducing the carbon
footprint of large­scale computing. Traditional
approaches to enterprise data storage can
produce data center sprawl by requiring as many
as a dozen separate storage architectures. HP
Co.’s storage vision for supporting Converged
Infrastructure reduces this to a single architecture
for primary storage and a single architecture for
backup, recovery, and archiving (BURA). Our
networking solutions provide simplicity and
scalability while reducing energy use and physical
space requirements. Our second generation
Moonshot server, launched in 2013, is the result of
10 years of sustained effort from a dedicated team
of HP Labs researchers, capitalizing on our
industry­leading server intellectual property. It
represents a paradigm shift in data center
economics and environmental footprint. Moonshot
is a new type of server, tailored for specific
workloads and high performance. By sharing
management, power, cooling, networking, and
capacity across a large number of units, it
increases our customers’ computing capability
while reducing resource use.
8/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
evel of
L
aggregation
Group of
products
Description of product/Group of products
HP PageWide Technology: In FY15, HP expanded the use
of its revolutionary HP PageWide Technology with the
introduction of new ENERGY STAR qualified HP Officejet
Pro X Series Printers that significantly lower costs, energy
usage, and carbon emissions. HP PageWide Technology
utilizes a stationary print bar that spans the width of a page
and prints entire documents in a single pass. The simplicity
of this process improves efficiency and reliability compared
to the mechanical complexity of standard inkjet and laser
printing technologies. Our latest PageWide Pro and
PageWide Enterprise business printers demonstrate our
sustainable design priorities of energy efficiency, materials
innovation, and design for recyclability. Through
improvements in the fusing and drying process, the EPEAT
Silver rated PageWide XL 8000 is 10 to 30 times more
energy efficient than competing products. According to a
third­party analysis, business printers using HP PageWide
Technology use at least 98% less energy and generate up
to 95% less supplies and packaging waste than comparable
laser printers, and can reduce the carbon footprint of printing
by up to 52%.
Closed loop recycled plastic in HP Original print cartridges:
HP Co’s earliest closed loop recycling activities began with
creating Original HP toner cartridges with plastic recycled
from the HP Planet Partners program in 2000. Leadership
with closed loop plastics recycling expanded in 2005 when
the company started using recovered polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) from our ink cartridges as a material
source for new cartridges. Over time, this program has
expanded to include additional cartridges and
polypropylene plastic. Our ground­breaking, closed­loop
recycling process combines plastic from HP ink cartridges
recovered via our Planet Partners program with plastics from
recycled bottles and apparel hangers, to create a
reconstituted plastic that meets HP Co’s specifications for
use in manufacturing new HP print cartridges. More than
80% of HP ink cartridges now contain 45­70% recycled
content and 100% of HP toner cartridges now contain 10­
33% recycled content. Through 2015, HP Co. manufactured
more than 3 billion HP ink and toner cartridges using more
than 177 million pounds of recycled content material.
Through this process, we have kept 682 million cartridges,
50 million apparel hangers, and 3.3 billion postconsumer
plastic bottles out of landfills, upcycling these materials for
continued use. A third­party LCA shows that the recycled
PET used in HP ink cartridges has a carbon footprint up to
33% smaller than virgin plastics and reduces fossil fuel
consumption by 54% and water consumption by 75%.
Taxonomy,
project or
methodology
Are you
used to
reporting
classify
low carbon
product/s as
product/s
low carbon
or avoided
or to
emissions? calculate
avoided
emissions Avoided
emissions
Other: Third
party life
cycle
assessment
Avoided
emissions
Other: Third
party life
cycle
assessment
%
revenue
from low
carbon
product/s
in the
reporting
year
% R&D in
low
carbon
product/s
in the
reporting
year Comment
CC3.3
Did you have emissions reduction initiatives that were active within the reporting year (this can include those in the planning and/or implementation phases)
Yes
CC3.3a
Please identify the total number of projects at each stage of development, and for those in the implementation stages, the estimated CO2e savings
Stage of development
Under investigation
To be implemented*
Implementation commenced*
Implemented*
Not to be implemented
Number of projects
85
30
18
144
114
Total estimated annual CO2e savings in metric tonnes CO2e (only for rows marked *)
6936
2252
22380
CC3.3b
For those initiatives implemented in the reporting year, please provide details in the table below
Activity
type
Description of activity
Estimated
annual
CO2e
savings
(metric
tonnes
CO2e)
Scope
Voluntary/
Mandatory
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Annual
monetary
savings
(unit
currency
­ as
specified
in CC0.4)
Investment
required
(unit
currency ­
as
specified
in CC0.4)
Payback
period
stimated
E
lifetime of
the
initiative
Comment
9/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Energy
efficiency:
Building
services
HP Co. implemented over 100 energy efficiency projects in
FY2015 to reduce its Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Energy efficiency
initiatives in 2015 included the following: LED lighting upgrade
Our Corvallis, Oregon site upgraded 3,600 fluorescent light fixtures
with LED tubes, saving 1.05 million kWh of energy annually. Smart
building pilot project In Houston, Texas we integrated fault
detection and diag¬nostics software with the existing building
automation system to identify equipment operating inefficiently and
alert the maintenance team. This will save an estimated 1.2 million
kWh of energy per year. We may apply this technology to other HP
Co. facilities. Retro­commissioning This project improved the
efficiency of existing mechanical and electrical infrastructure at
three large HP facilities in Boise, Idaho, Corvallis, Oregon and
Singapore, saving 8.8 million kWh annually.
22366
Scope 1
Scope 2
(location­
based)
Voluntary
6500000
1200000
1­3
years
11­15
years
The
estimated
lifetime of
initiatives
varies, but a
conservative
estimate is
at least 10
years.
CC3.3c
What methods do you use to drive investment in emissions reduction activities?
Comment
Method
Dedicated budget for energy
efficiency
Dedicated budget for other
emissions reduction activities
Capital funds allocated for energy efficiency projects meeting a 3­year simple payback requirement.
Capital funds allocated for energy efficiency projects meeting a 3­year simple payback requirement.
Internally facing web pages and employee communications on energy efficiency, sustainability, and HP's contribution to climate change. HP supports
programs such as WWF's "Earth Hour" to raise awareness of climate change and the role that energy usage plays.
Optimization of real estate portfolio.
Employee engagement
Other
Further Information
Page: CC4. Communication
CC4.1
Have you published information about your organization’s response to climate change and GHG emissions performance for this reporting year in places other than in your CDP response? If so,
please attach the publication(s)
Publication
Status
Page/Section
reference
Attach the document
In voluntary
communications
Complete
14­72, 141­
150
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change 2016/Shared
Documents/Attachments/CC4.1/HP_2015_Sustainability_Report_FINAL.pdf
In voluntary
communications
Complete
9­18
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change 2016/Shared
Documents/Attachments/CC4.1/HPE Living Progress Positions, Policies,
and Programs.pdf
In voluntary
communications
Complete
5­7
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change 2016/Shared
Documents/Attachments/CC4.1/HPE Living Progress 2015 Data
Summary.pdf
Comment
On November 1, 2015, Hewlett­Packard Company
separated into two companies—HP Inc. and Hewlett
Packard Enterprise. HP Inc. (HP) is a leading global
personal systems and printing business. The HP 2015
Sustainability Report includes performance data from
Hewlett­Packard Company (HP Co.) through FY2015
(which ended October 31, 2015), unless stated otherwise.
The document also describes HP’s sustainability policies
and programs moving forward. In many cases, these
continue and build on policies and programs of Hewlett­
Packard Company. HP intends to report yearly on its social
and environmental progress, following the standard
Hewlett­Packard Company met each year since 2001.
Next year we will report on HP Inc. data only. This report
provides in­depth information to stakeholders including
customers, industry analysts, socially responsible
investors, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),
employees, sustainability specialists, governments, and
others. Our sustainability website
(www.hp.com/sustainability) provides summary information
for readers seeking a higher­level overview of our
approach and performance, and in some areas, additional
detail. Previous reports are available on the reporting
page.
On November 1, 2015, Hewlett­Packard Company
separated into two companies—HP Inc. and Hewlett
Packard Enterprise (HPE). HPE business­focused
organization with four divisions: Enterprise Group, which
works in servers, storage, networking, consulting and
support; Services; Software; and Financial Services. The
HPE Living Progress Positions, Policies and Programs: A
forward­looking document that sets out HPE’s approach to
the issues of most significance to our business and the
ethical and environmental challenges we face. To identify
the topics reported on, we used a robust materiality
assessment process. Our Living Progress website
provides summary information for readers seeking a
higher­level overview of our approach and performance,
and in some areas, additional detail. Previous reports are
available on the reporting page.
http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hpe/hp­
information/livingprogress/reporting.html
HPE Living Progress 2015 Data Summary: A summary of
Hewlett­Packard Company’s Living Progress performance
data in 2015. This document captures the key metrics of
the historical business before the separation in November
2015, and continues Hewlett­Packard Company’s tradition
of external reporting. Next year we will report on HPE data
only.
Further Information
Module: Risks and Opportunities
Page: CC5. Climate Change Risks
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
10/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
CC5.1
Have you identified any inherent climate change risks that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure? Tick all that apply
Risks driven by changes in regulation
Risks driven by changes in physical climate parameters
Risks driven by changes in other climate­related developments
CC5.1a
Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in regulation
Risk driver
Fuel/energy
taxes and
regulations
Cap and
trade
schemes
Description
Fuel/energy taxes or
changes in existing
regulation could
increase the cost of
doing business for HP
Co., our supply chain,
and our customers
especially in regions
where we have
significant operations
and supply chain, such
as the U.S., the
European Union, Brazil
India, and China.
Increases in the cost of
business could reduce
profits; increases in our
customer's costs could
reduce demand for all
products including HP
Co.'s (e.g., ProLiant
servers, and HP Spectre
Laptop). HP Co. has
accounted for the
potential impact of
energy prices through
analyses of the impact
of higher energy costs
on our operations.
Cap and Trade
schemes could increase
the cost of doing
business for HP Co, our
supply chain, and our
customers. Increases in
the cost of business
could reduce profits;
increases in our
customer's costs could
reduce demand for all
products including HP
Co.'s.
Potential impact
Increased
operational cost
Increased
operational cost
Timeframe
3 to 6
years
1 to 3
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Indirect
(Client)
Likelihood
Likely
Likely
Magnitude
of impact
Low­
medium
Low­
medium
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Estimated
financial
implications
Management method
Cost of
management
Regulations/tax
resulting in
increased cost of
energy/fuel would
increase HP's cost
of doing business.
A 2015 NERA
Economic
Consulting study
analyzed the
impact of the Clean
Power Plan on
electrical prices
and estimates an
annual cost
increase in the U.S.
by double digit
percentages;
assuming 20% of
the retail energy
purchased by HP
Co. is consumed in
the U.S.at an
average cost of
$0.104/KWh,
implementation of
CPP could have a
potential future
financial implication
of an estimated
increased cost of
$5M USD over the
next 5­10 years.
We manage the risks
associated with changes in
fuel/energy taxes and
regulations by closely tracking
the development and
implementation of new
regulations in all regions in
which HP Co. operates, and
by developing and investing in
new products, processes and
technology that meet or
exceed pending regulation or
help to mitigate the impacts of
regulation and higher energy
costs on our customers.
Enterprise risk management
and environmental regulation
tracking include analysis of
the cost and impact to our
supply chain, operations or
customers. For example, we
developed Moonshot, a new
type of server system that
consumes up to 65% less
power than a traditional sever
environment. And our
Managed Print Services
offering helps customers
optimize printer fleets and
digital workflows and reduce
printing­related energy usage
up to 40%. We also engage
directly and/or through joint
advocacy with policy makers
in countries in which we do
business to assist in their
development of sound and
constructive policies and
rules. Examples include:
Since 2012, HP Co. has
engaged with the U.S. DOE to
inform the requirements of
external power supplies’
performance and shipment
traceability Critical HP Co.
operations and suppliers are
evaluated for regulatory,
physical and other conditions
related to climate change,
including requesting supplier
carbon footprint data annually.
HP Co. also has strong
relationships with our
suppliers in order to anticipate
and address any potential
risks.
The practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
which
monitor
changes in
regulation
are
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
therefore the
additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is
expected to
be <5% of
operating
cost.
From an operations
perspective, any
regulation that puts
an upward
pressure on the
cost of energy
would potentially
increase our cost of
doing business in
that region.
Likewise, increased
regulation of
products can add to
their cost. In these
situations we
quantify the
financial implication
by identifying the
revenue that is
exposed if we fail to
comply.
We use Enterprise Risk
Management at the enterprise,
business and function level to
capture risks across
governance, strategic,
compliance (including
regulations), operational,
reporting, and external factors
such as earthquakes, extreme
weather, and climate change.
Risks are evaluated
quantitatively in financial
terms, and qualitatively
against reputation integrity,
customer, employees,
operations, and
investors/market
capitalization. Risks are
evaluated based on inherent
and residual risk, as well as
likelihood and ability to
influence risk. HP has
conducted a targeted risk
assessment of climate
change, energy, and water.
The practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
which
monitor and
evaluate
changes in
regulation
are
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
therefore the
additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
11/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Risk driver
Product
efficiency
regulations
and
standards
Carbon
taxes
Description
Any increase in the
regulation of products
could result in an
increase in the cost of
that product resulting in
decreased product
demand and lower
revenue. HP Co, does
take a proactive
approach to product
energy efficiency with
voluntary targets For
example, as of June
2015 we have more PC
products recognized by
environmental
certifications such as
ENERGY STAR and
EPEAT in more
countries than any other
PC manufacturer. HP's
proactive approach
helps to mitigate any
potential cost increases
for our customers.
Emissions and/or
carbon taxes could
increase the cost of
doing business for HP
Co., our suppliers, and
customers affecting the
bottom line either
through increased costs
or reduced demand. HP
Co. has planned for the
potential impact of
energy prices through
analyses of the impact
of higher energy costs
on our supply chain
network.
Potential impact
Reduction/disruption
in production
capacity
Increased
operational cost
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
1 to 3
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Direct
Likelihood
Virtually
certain
Virtually
certain
Magnitude
of impact
Estimated
financial
implications
Low­
medium
From an operations
perspective, any
regulation that puts
an upward
pressure on the
cost of energy
would potentially
increase our cost of
doing business in
that region.
Likewise, increased
regulation of
products can add to
their cost. In these
situations, we
quantify the
financial implication
by identifying the
revenue that is
exposed if we fail to
comply. For
example, in 2015,
we estimated that
more than $5 B in
revenue is
associated with
meeting
environmental
certifications/eco­
labels such as
ENERGY STAR
and EPEAT and
other green public
procurement
requirements.
Low
From an operations
perspective, any
regulation that puts
an upward
pressure on the
cost of energy
would potentially
increase our cost of
doing business in
that region.
Likewise, increased
regulation of
products can add to
their cost. In these
situations we
quantify the
financial implication
by identifying the
revenue that is
exposed if we fail to
comply.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Management method
We manage the risks
associated with changes in
product efficiency regulations
and standards by closely
tracking the development and
implementation of new
regulations in all regions in
which HP Co. operates,
worldwide and by developing
and investing in new products,
processes and technology that
meet or exceed pending
regulation or help to mitigate
the impacts of regulation and
higher energy costs on our
customers. Where possible,
we engage directly and/or
through joint advocacy and
partnerships with policy
makers in countries in which
we do business to assist in
their development of sound
and constructive policies and
rules. For instance, since
2012, HP has engaged with
the U.S. Dept of Energy to
inform the requirements of
external power supplies’
performance and shipment
traceability. Product portfolio
examples include: we have
decreased the energy
consumption of HP Co’s
personal systems and servers
product portfolio by 25% on
average between 2010 and
2015. We developed
Moonshot, a new type of
server system that consumes
up to 89% less energy than a
traditional sever environment.
Additionally, our Managed
Print Services offering helps
customers optimize printer
fleets and digital workflows
and reduce printing­related
energy usage up to 40%.
We use Enterprise Risk
Management at the enterprise,
business and function level to
capture risks across
governance, strategic,
compliance (including
regulations), operational,
reporting, and external factors
such as earthquakes, extreme
weather, and climate change.
Risks are evaluated
quantitatively in financial
terms, and qualitatively
against reputation integrity,
customer, employees,
operations, and
investors/market
capitalization. Risks are
evaluated based on inherent
and residual risk, as well as
likelihood and ability to
influence risk. HP Co. has
conducted a targeted risk
assessment of climate
change, energy, and water.
Cost of
management
The practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
which
monitor
changes in
regulation
are
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
therefore the
additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
The practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
which
monitor
changes in
regulation
are
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
therefore the
additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
12/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Risk driver
Emission
reporting
obligations
Description
Emissions reporting
obligations require
increased costs and
resources to meet
reporting obligations.
These obligations
increase the cost of
doing business for HP
Co., our suppliers, and
customers.
Potential impact
Increased
operational cost
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Virtually
certain
Magnitude
of impact
Low
Estimated
financial
implications
Management method
Cost of
management
New obligations to
report emissions
would increase
HP's cost of doing
business. A 2015
NERA Economic
Consulting study
analyzed the
impact of the Clean
Power Plan on
electrical prices
and estimates an
annual cost
increase in the U.S.
by double digit
percentages;
assuming 20% of
the retail energy
purchased by HP
Co. is consumed in
the U.S.at an
average cost of
$0.104/KWh,
implementation of
CPP could have a
potential future
financial implication
of an estimated
increased cost of
$5M USD over the
next 5­10 years.
Likewise, increased
regulation of
products can add to
their cost. In these
situations we
quantify the
financial implication
by identifying the
revenue that is
exposed if we fail to
comply. For
examples, we
estimated that more
than $5 B in
revenue is
associated with
meeting
environmental
certifications/eco­
labels such as
ENERGY STAR
and EPEAT and
other green public
procurement
requirements.
We use Enterprise Risk
Management at the enterprise,
business and function level to
capture risks across
governance, strategic,
compliance (including
regulations), operational,
reporting, and external factors
such as earthquakes, extreme
weather, and climate change.
Risks are evaluated
quantitatively in financial
terms, and qualitatively
against reputation integrity,
customer, employees,
operations, and
investors/market
capitalization. Risks are
evaluated based on inherent
and residual risk, as well as
likelihood and ability to
influence risk. HP has
conducted a targeted risk
assessment of climate
change, energy, and water.
The practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
which
monitor
changes in
regulation
are
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
therefore the
additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
Management
method
The methods we
use to manage
this risk are a part
of our continual
evaluation of our
supply chain and
operations. We
use ERM at the
enterprise,
business and
function level to
capture risks
across
governance,
strategic,
compliance,
operational,
reporting, and
external factors
such as extreme
weather events.
Risks are
evaluated in
financial terms,
and against
reputation
integrity,
customer,
employees,
operations, and
investors/market
capitalization.
Risks are
evaluated based
on inherent and
residual risk, as
well as likelihood
and ability to
Cost of
management
Because
practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
is already
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses,
therefore the
additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
CC5.1b
Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in physical climate parameters
Risk driver
Description
Tropical
cyclones
(hurricanes
and
typhoons)
Any tropical cyclones
(hurricanes and
typhoons) that could
create short or long
term disruptions to
locations where we or
our suppliers are
currently located or
ship could pose a risk
to the companies
abilities to produce
products and provide
services to our
customers resulting in
lost revenue. These
disruptions would
likely also impact our
customers and their
ability to operate.
From an operations
perspective, physical
risks such as
precipitation
extremes and
flooding could cause
short term
manufacturing or
shipping delays or
increased
manufacturing or
shipping costs,
putting customer
orders at risk. Long
term disruptions that
could provide an
impetus for
reconfiguring our
operations or supply
Potential
impact
Increased
capital
cost
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Very likely
Magnitude
of impact
Low
Estimated financial implications
In the 2011 example, HP Co. revenue of
$130.0 billion was down 7% as reported or
8% in constant currency. We estimate that
more than half of the revenue decline was
due to the hard disk drive shortage due to the
flooding event in Thailand. Assuming all
declines in revenue were a direct result of the
flooding event, the cost of a similar regional
flooding event could potentially result in a
financial implication of an approximate $4B
decline in HP Co.'s annual revenue based on
FY15 reporting.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
13/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Risk driver
chain. While HP Co.
Description
regularly makes
changes to our
supply chain based
on the return on the
investment and risk
analysis, in the case
of physical
disruptions we would
incur similar costs to
maintain the supply
chain. The inability to
support ongoing
demand for
components may
result in reduction of
revenue, gross
margins in HP Co.’s
businesses. For
example in late July
2011, Thailand
began experiencing
severe flooding that
caused widespread
damage to the local
manufacturing
industry. HP obtains
disk drive
components used in
its PCs, servers and
storage devices from
suppliers with
operations in
Thailand that were
severely impacted by
the flooding in July
2011. HP Co.
experienced short­
term reduction in the
supply of these disk
drive components;
industry supply of
hard disk drives was
about 30% below the
expected demand in
calendar Q4.
Potential
impact
Timeframe
Direct/
Indirect
Likelihood
Magnitude
of impact
Estimated financial implications
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
influence risk.
Management
Additionally HP
method
Co. may insure
contingent 3rd
party locations
against
catastrophic
events. For
example, HP Co.
uses a supply
chain
visualization tool
to monitor its
Printing and
Personal Systems
(PPS) supply
chain for real­time
disruptions
resulting from
climate/weather,
seismic, political
and social events.
With 100% of
PPS supply chain
nodes (e.g.,
offices, labs,
internal and
external
manufacturing)
tracked in the
tool, HP Co.’s
Business
Continuity
Group’s response
time is
accelerated and
our business
resiliency
improved. During
annual testing,
scenario
analyses are
evaluated for
business risks.
Risk
management
plans are
developed as
appropriate.
Physical risks are
evaluated and
considered as a
part of Business
Continuity
Planning, and
incorporated into
resiliency plans.
For example, as a
result of the July
2011 Thailand
flooding, HP Co.
altered inventory,
and made
strategic buys of
hard drives to
plan for
shortages.
Cost of
management
14/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Risk driver
Change in
temperature
extremes
Description
Changes in
temperature extremes
could require us to
make products
(including data
centers) that could
operate within those
extremes; this could
in turn make those
products and services
more expensive and
potentially more
energy intensive. Our
customers may also
be negatively
impacted by these
extreme
temperatures. An
increased cost in our
products could result
in decreased demand
for all energy
intensive products
and services such as
data center related
products, including
HP Co. 's
Potential
impact
Increased
capital
cost
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Very likely
Magnitude
of impact
Low­
medium
Estimated financial implications
Management
method
Cost of
management
Financial implications of temperature
extremes would be proportional to rises in
temperature and the cost of energy within
those regions affected. According to
Ponemon Institute’s 2013 study, one minute
of data center downtime costs an averages of
US$7,900
(http://www.datacenterdynamics.com/content­
tracks/power­cooling/one­minute­of­data­
center­downtime­costs­us7900­on­
average/83956.fullarticle). An average
incident of 86 minutes could cost a company
approximately $690,000 based on this study.
HP Co. is aware of these financial risks and
has embedded strategies to mitigate
downtime whenever feasible. We also
provide data center solutions and services
that help our customer avoid downtime.
The methods we
use to manage
this risk are
integrated into
our business
practices and are
a part of our
continual
evaluation of our
supply chain and
operations. We
use Enterprise
Risk
Management at
the enterprise,
business and
function level to
capture risks
across
governance,
strategic,
compliance,
operational,
reporting, and
external factors
such as extreme
precipitation
events, flooding,
earthquakes and
climate change.
Risks are
evaluated
quantitatively in
financial terms,
and qualitatively
against reputation
integrity,
customer,
employees,
operations, and
investors/market
capitalization.
Risks are
evaluated based
on inherent and
residual risk, as
well as likelihood
and ability to
influence risk.
Additionally HP
Co. may insure
contingent 3rd
party locations
again
catastrophic
events. HP Co.
has conducted a
targeted risk
assessment of
climate change,
energy, and
water. Critical HP
Co, operations
and suppliers
were evaluated
for regulatory,
physical and
other conditions
related to climate
change. Scenario
analysis were
evaluated for
business risks.
Risk
management
plans were
developed as
appropriate.
Physical risks are
evaluated and
considered as a
part of Business
Continuity
Planning, and
incorporated into
resiliency plans. It
is unlikely that
these disruptions
would affect HP
Co.
disproportionately
compared with
other businesses
in our sector.
Because
practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
are already
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
the additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
15/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Risk driver
Description
Change in
mean
(average)
precipitation
Changes in average
precipitation patterns
could provoke energy
and water resource
shortages and/or
supply chain
disruption and could
increase the cost of
doing business
(though not
disproportionately
compared to our
competitors) affecting
the bottom line. . In
late July 2011,
Thailand began
experiencing severe
flooding that has
caused widespread
damage to the local
manufacturing
industry. HP Co.
obtains disk drive
components used in
its PCs, servers and
storage devices from
suppliers with
operations in
Thailand that were
and continue to be
severely impacted by
the flooding. We have
experienced and
expect to continue to
experience a short­
term reduction in the
supply of these disk
drive components. If
we are unable to
support our ongoing
demand for disk drive
components, the
revenue, gross
margins and results
of operations of our
PC, server and
storage businesses
may be adversely
affected.
Potential
impact
Increased
capital
cost
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Very likely
Magnitude
of impact
Low
Estimated financial implications
In the 2011 example, HP Co. revenue of
$130.0 billion was down 7% as reported or
8% in constant currency. We estimate that
more than half of the revenue decline was
due to the hard disk drive shortage due to the
flooding event in Thailand. Assuming all
declines in revenue were a direct result of the
flooding event, the cost of a similar regional
flooding event could potentially result in a
financial implication of an approximate $4B
decline in HP Co,'s annual revenue.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Management
method
The methods we
use to manage
this risk are
integrated into
our business
practices and are
a part of our
continual
evaluation of our
supply chain and
operations. We
use Enterprise
Risk
Management at
the enterprise,
business and
function level to
capture risks
across
governance,
strategic,
compliance,
operational,
reporting, and
external factors
such as extreme
precipitation
events, flooding,
earthquakes and
climate change.
Risks are
evaluated
quantitatively in
financial terms,
and qualitatively
against reputation
integrity,
customer,
employees,
operations, and
investors/market
capitalization.
Risks are
evaluated based
on inherent and
residual risk, as
well as likelihood
and ability to
influence risk.
Additionally HP
may insure
contingent 3rd
party locations
again
catastrophic
events. HP has
conducted a
targeted risk
assessment of
climate change,
energy, and
water. Critical HP
operations and
suppliers were
evaluated for
regulatory,
physical and
other conditions
related to climate
change. Scenario
analysis were
evaluated for
business risks.
Risk
management
plans were
developed as
appropriate.
Physical risks are
evaluated and
considered as a
part of Business
Continuity
Planning, and
incorporated into
resiliency plans. It
is unlikely that
these disruptions
would affect HP
disproportionately
compared with
other businesses
in our sector.
Cost of
management
Because
practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
are already
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
the additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
16/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Risk driver
Description
Change in
precipitation
extremes
and
droughts
Changes in
precipitation
extremes could cause
flooding and
droughts, could
provoke energy and
water resource
shortages and could
increase the cost of
doing business
affecting the bottom
line (though not
disproportionately
compared to our
competitors). HP Co,
has included the
potential impact of
energy prices through
analyses of the
impact of higher
energy costs and
water costs and
availability on our
supply chain network.
According to the
Energy Information
Administration (EIA),
Brazil relies on
hydropower for more
than three­quarters of
its electrical power.
The country has
recently experienced
its worst drought in 40
years, which has
contributed to
electricity blackouts in
many Brazilian
regions. By late 2014,
many of the
hydroelectric facilities
in the Sao Paulo
region were below
10% capacity,
accordingly to
HydroWorld.com
Potential
impact
Increased
capital
cost
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Very likely
Magnitude
of impact
Medium­
high
Estimated financial implications
Between 2014 and 2015, reduced rainfall in
the State of Sao Paolo in Brazil caused
significantly reduced hydroelectric
generation capacity. This resulted in local
commercial energy rates rising 90% year
over year and an increase in HP Co.’s local
energy costs of near 70% in 2015 compared
to 2014 (factoring in conservation efforts), a
more than $5 million dollar impact on local
operational costs.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Management
method
The methods we
use to manage
this risk are
integrated into
our business
practices and are
a part of our
continual
evaluation of our
supply chain and
operations. We
use Enterprise
Risk
Management at
the enterprise,
business and
function level to
capture risks
across
governance,
strategic,
compliance,
operational,
reporting, and
external factors
such as extreme
precipitation
events, flooding,
earthquakes and
climate change.
Risks are
evaluated
quantitatively in
financial terms,
and qualitatively
against reputation
integrity,
customer,
employees,
operations, and
investors/market
capitalization.
Risks are
evaluated based
on inherent and
residual risk, as
well as likelihood
and ability to
influence risk.
Additionally HP
Co. may insure
contingent 3rd
party locations
again
catastrophic
events. HP Co.
has conducted a
targeted risk
assessment of
climate change,
energy, and
water. Critical HP
Co. operations
and suppliers
were evaluated
for regulatory,
physical and
other conditions
related to climate
change. Scenario
analysis were
evaluated for
business risks.
Risk
management
plans were
developed as
appropriate.
Physical risks are
evaluated and
considered as a
part of Business
Continuity
Planning, and
incorporated into
resiliency plans. It
is unlikely that
these disruptions
would affect HP
Co.
disproportionately
compared with
other businesses
in our sector.
Cost of
management
Because
practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
are already
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
the additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
17/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Risk driver
Sea level
rise
Description
Changes in sea level
could affect or disrupt
our supply chain and
transportation
network which would
affect HP Co.'s ability
to deliver our
products, increase
costs and potentially
reduce demand.
However, risk
analysis conducted
on HP Co. directly
owned/operated
facilities indicated
insignificant risk
related to sea level
rise based on current
facilities at time of
analysis.
Potential
impact
Increased
capital
cost
Timeframe
>6 years
Direct/
Indirect
Indirect
(Supply
chain)
Likelihood
Virtually
certain
Magnitude
of impact
Estimated financial implications
No implications for HP Co. operations,
financial implications within the supply chain
and logistics would be proportional to the
scope and regions affected, but likely limited
to coastal regions susceptible to flooding due
to sea level rise.
Low
Management
method
The methods we
use to manage
this risk are
integrated into
our business
practices and are
a part of our
continual
evaluation of our
supply chain and
operations. We
use Enterprise
Risk
Management at
the enterprise,
business and
function level to
capture risks
across
governance,
strategic,
compliance,
operational,
reporting, and
external factors
such as extreme
precipitation
events, flooding,
earthquakes and
climate change.
Risks are
evaluated
quantitatively in
financial terms,
and qualitatively
against reputation
integrity,
customer,
employees,
operations, and
investors/market
capitalization.
Risks are
evaluated based
on inherent and
residual risk, as
well as likelihood
and ability to
influence risk.
Additionally HP
may insure
contingent 3rd
party locations
again
catastrophic
events. HP has
conducted a
targeted risk
assessment of
climate change,
energy, and
water. Critical HP
operations and
suppliers were
evaluated for
regulatory,
physical and
other conditions
related to climate
change. Scenario
analysis were
evaluated for
business risks.
Risk
management
plans were
developed as
appropriate.
Physical risks are
evaluated and
considered as a
part of Business
Continuity
Planning, and
incorporated into
resiliency plans. It
is unlikely that
these disruptions
would affect HP
disproportionately
compared with
other businesses
in our sector.
Cost of
management
Because
practices
such as risk
evaluation
and
Enterprise
Risk
Management
are already
integrated
into our
operations
and
businesses
the additional
cost
associated
with climate
specific
actions is 0
USD.
CC5.1c
Please describe your inherent risks that are driven by changes in other climate­related developments
Risk
driver
Description
Potential
impact
Timeframe
Direct/
Indirect
Likelihood
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Magnitude
of impact
Estimated
financial
implications
Management
method
Cost of
management
18/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Reputation
We believe that technology can and will play a
critical role in addressing climate change. For
this reason, it is essential that HP Co. not only
provides the products and services that can help
our customers reduce their impact, but also that
we maintain our reputation and credibility in this
space. Increased attention on the IT sector, and
its associated climate related impacts such as
those identified by Greenpeace in their "How
Dirty is Your Data" report highlight the potential
reputational risk associated with failing to
address climate related risks concern raised by
the IT stakeholder community. The risks
associated with our reputation are in our
relationship with our customers and with the
people in the regions in which we operate
globally. If it were perceived by our customers
and stakeholders that HP Co. was failing to
address global climate related concerns through
our product and service offerings, this could
potentially result in a loss of business (revenue)
and loss in brand value. HP Co. considers the
financial implications of the risk associated with
our reputation to be significant. HP Co.’s
reputation is built on the fact that global
citizenship is rooted in values that have driven
our company for 75 years and it is at the core of
everything we do at HP Co. We consider our
reputation to act with integrity and accountability
and operate responsibly and sustainably to be
very important to our business and our
customers – the potential financial implications
of this risk extend from the ability to access
markets to retaining customers to being able to
operate within countries and communities.
Negative changes in reputation are known to
affect brand value. HP considers the financial
implications of the risk associated with our
reputation to be significant. HP’s reputation is
built on the fact that global citizenship is rooted
in values that have driven our company for 75
years and it is at the core of everything we do at
HP. We consider our reputation to act with
integrity and accountability and operate
responsibly and sustainably to be very important
to our business and our customers – the
potential financial implications of this risk extend
from the ability to access markets to retaining
customers to being able to operate within
countries and communities. Negative changes in
reputation are known to affect brand value.
Reduced
demand for
goods/services
1 to 3
years
Direct
Virtually
certain
Low­
medium
In 2014,
Interbrand placed
HP Co.’s brand
value at $23.8
billion. Attempts
for companies to
quantify changes
in reputation on
brand value have
proven difficult
however, an
event
(reputational risk)
that caused a
10% reduction in
the stated brand
value, could cost
HP
Co.approximately
$2.38 billion in a
loss of future
brand equity.
We manage
the risk
associated
with our
reputation by
following our
Standards of
Business
Conduct and
gaining trust
by being open,
honest and
ethical in all of
our dealings.
Some
examples of
the methods
we use:
•Transparency
and credibility
in our
operations ­
we started
reporting
emissions in
2001 and were
the first
technology
company to
publish a list of
our suppliers
and an
estimate of the
emissions
associated
with our supply
chain and
logistics. HP
Co. was the
first and
remains one of
the only ICT
companies of
our size to
report and
assure our
entire carbon
and water
footprints. This
data is made
public through
HPE's annual
Living
Progress
Report and HP
Inc.’s
Sustainability
Report •
Helping to
influence
customer
behavior by
enabling them
to reduce their
impact through
our products
and services
(examples are
given in more
detail in
section 3 and
6 of this
questionnaire).
• Tracking
reputation and
customer
behaviors
worldwide and
distributing the
findings
throughout the
company. •
Requiring all
employees to
complete
annual training
on HP Co.’s
Standards of
Business
Conduct
(SBC). In
2015, 99.97%
of active
employees,
including
every senior
executive,
completed the
annual SBC
training
course.
The costs
associated
with these
actions: In
2015, HP
Co.’s social
investments
totaled $89.6
million; $17.1
million in
cash and
$72.5 million
in products
and services.
Additionally,
In 2015, more
than 9,000
employees
participated
in the HP
Co.’s U.S.
Cash
Matching
program a.
These
employees,
HP Co, and
the Hewlett
Packard
Company
Foundation
provided
more than
$9.3 million
to NGOs and
schools
through cash
and product
donations.
Further Information
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
19/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Page: CC6. Climate Change Opportunities
CC6.1
Have you identified any inherent climate change opportunities that have the potential to generate a substantive change in your business operations, revenue or expenditure? Tick all that apply
Opportunities driven by changes in regulation
Opportunities driven by changes in physical climate parameters
Opportunities driven by changes in other climate­related developments
CC6.1a
Please describe your inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in regulation
Opportunity
driver
Description
Fuel/energy
taxes and
regulations
Any regulation
that may increase
the cost of
fuel/energy or
taxes on carbon
emissions may in
turn impact the
operational costs
of HP Co. In an
effort to offset
these potential
impacts and to
drive suppliers to
adopt emissions
reduction
activities, HP Co.
began a supplier
focused energy
efficiency
program in Asia.
HP Co.’s supplier
Energy Efficiency
Program (EEP) in
China and
Southeast Asia is
our main initiative
for increasing
efficiency and
reducing
environmental
footprint at
production
supplier sites. We
encourage
factory managers
to adopt energy
efficiency
programs and
practices, in
collaboration with
nongovernmental
organizations
(NGOs) such as
BSR, WWF
China, and the
World Resources
Institute.
Potential impact
Reduced
operational costs
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Likely
Magnitude
of impact
Medium
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Estimated financial implications
Suppliers participating in HP Co.’s Energy
Efficiency Program (EEP) have reported saving
800,000 tonnes of CO2e (derived from energy
savings, including 500 million kilowatt hours)
between 2010 and 2015), adding up to an
estimated cost savings of $65 million (based on
local electricity rate; provided by suppliers).
Management
method
We are
managing this
opportunity
through a
strategy where
we are focused
on ensuring that
HP Co. is better
suited than our
competitors to
meet new
regulations and
to actively
capture the
market
opportunity by
helping our
customers do
more with less.
Proactively
addressing
regulations that
impact HP Co.
presents an
opportunity to
increase the
resiliency and
profitability of our
supply chain
while ensuring
market access
and reducing
operational costs.
We have an
internal team that
works across the
businesses and
regions to
understand,
influence and
plan for any
pending
regulations. As
part of managing
opportunities
around
regulation, HP
Co. works with a
variety of
initiatives,
stakeholders and
partner
organizations.
For example
through 2015, HP
Co.’s supplier
Energy Efficiency
Program (EEP)
program has
covered more
than 200
production
supplier sites.
Through the EPP
HP Co. and
participating
suppliers
collaborate with
nongovernmental
organizations
(NGOs) such as
WWF China and
World Resources
Institute to
promote energy
efficiency
programs and
practices.
Cost of
management
For the fiscal
year 2015,
HP Co. spent
$3.135 billion
on R&D.
Because
these specific
actions are
already
incorporated
into HP's
business, the
additional
cost
associated
with the
actions to
address
climate
specific
changes in
regulation is
0 USD.
20/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Opportunity
driver
Description
Product
efficiency
regulations
and
standards
New or changing
regulations and
standards that
may require
increased
product energy
efficiency (and
reduced carbon
emissions) to sell
or achieve
certification(s) in
certain markets
raises the
customer
demand for
energy­efficient
products and
services and
presents an
opportunity for
HP Co. to
increase revenue
from energy
efficient ProLiant
servers, LaserJet
Multi­Function
Printers,
EliteBook PCs
and many other
products in our
portfolio. For
example,
Canada External
Power Supply
(EPS) Rules,
European
Network Standby
Regulation (Lot
26), and the
China Energy
Efficiency for PCs
are some
examples of
standards that
HP Co. is
proactively
addressing
through our
products. There
are also
legislations and
regulations (such
as the ENERGY
STAR Efficiency
Amendment Act
of 2004, LEED,
and IEEE 1680.x
which leverages
the efficiency
requirements of
ENERGY STAR)
that require a
level of product
efficiency for
certification or
market access.
These
certifications are
increasingly
required for
customer
procurement
consideration. An
example of our
commitment to
exploring this
opportunity, HP is
leading the
discussion on a
methodology for
calculating
product carbon
footprints for the
Grenelle II law in
France and with
IEEE 1680.1.
Potential impact
Increased
demand for
existing
products/services
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Virtually
certain
Magnitude
of impact
Medium­
high
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Estimated financial implications
The Smart 2020 report indicated that the total ICT­
enabled energy efficiency translates into
approximately $946.5 billion of cost savings while
the McKinsey Quarterly estimated the opportunity
for energy efficiency investments to be over $170
billion a year. For HP Co., in particular, we have
estimated that more than $5 B in revenue in FY15
was associated with meeting environmental
certifications/eco­labels such as ENERGY STAR
and EPEAT and other green public procurement
requirements.
Management
method
HP Co. offers
solutions
customized for
many different
industries to help
lower resource
consumption and
emissions. Our
portfolio of
servers, personal
systems and
printing solutions
helps customers
use energy and
other resources
more efficiently,
replace
outmoded and
inefficient
processes, and
live and work
more sustainably.
Our R&D
investments have
also resulted in
significant energy
efficiency gains
from each new
generation of
products. HP
Co.’s product
portfolio is on
average 50%
more efficient
today than in
2005. • HP’s
PageWide
Technology prints
with better quality
at faster speeds
while using less
energy than ever
and reducing the
carbon footprint
of printing.
According to a
third­party
analysis,
business printers
using HP
PageWide
Technology use
at least 98% less
energy and can
reduce the
carbon footprint
of printing by up
to 52%. • HP was
also the first to
ship products
based on the
IEEE Energy
Efficient Ethernet
standard (IEEE
802.3az) that we
helped develop.
.• HPE Moonshot
offers game­
changing server
architecture. By
sharing
management,
power, cooling,
networking, and
storage, the
Moonshot
solution uses up
to 65% less
power than
traditional
servers, reducing
energy
consumption and
associated
carbon
emissions.
Additionally, the
HPE Apollo 8000
System is the
world’s first
warm­water
liquid cooling
supercomputer,
using 28% less
energy than
traditional air­
cooled systems
and eliminating
up to 3,800 tons
of carbon dioxide
emissions per
year
Cost of
management
For the fiscal
year 2015,
HP Co. spent
$3.135 billion
on R&D.
Because
these specific
actions are
already
incorporated
into HP Co.'s
business, the
additional
cost
associated
with the
actions to
address
climate
specific
changes in
regulation is
0 USD.
21/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Opportunity
driver
Description
Air pollution
limits
Regulations that
impose air
pollution limits
(such as the
Clean Air Act and
indoor air
pollutions
standards for
print shops and
offices in
Germany) create
an increased
demand for HP
Co,’s digital print
and graphics
solutions such as
Indigo Digital
Press and Scitex
Industrial Press,
potentially
resulting in
increased
revenue. This
includes our
water based inks
(with no detected
Hazardous Air
Pollutants or
HAPs), and water
based Latex Inks
(that are
odorless, emit
extremely low
levels of VOCs,
and contain no
HAPs ­ The inks
were tested for
hazardous air
pollutants per
U.S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency Method
311 (testing
conducted in
2008) and none
were detected.
HAPs are air
pollutants that
are not covered
by ambient air
quality standards
but which, as
defined in the
Clean Air Act,
may present a
threat of adverse
human health
effects or adverse
environmental
effects).
Potential impact
Increased
demand for
existing
products/services
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Virtually
certain
Magnitude
of impact
Medium
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Estimated financial implications
Management
method
Cost of
management
Digital printing market analysis shows that the
industry will grow from $131.5 billion in 2013 to
$187.7 billion in 2018, a compound annual growth
rate of 7.4%, according to the latest research from
Smithers Pira. During the 2013­2018 period,
Smithers Pira forecasts that digital printing trends
will impact a strong growth in the industry, led by
inkjet technology. A core strength of HP Co.’s in
both innovation and commercialization. In the
Graphics segment alone, HP believes there is a
total addressable market of $35 billion and
commands the #1 in large format design, mid­
volume and low­volume graphics markets
http://www.smitherspira.com/news/2013/june/digital­
printing­trends­market­analysis­to­2018
HP Indigo digital
presses, which
provide solutions
for publishing,
direct mail,
collateral, and
more, have a
record of strong
environmental
performance. For
example, when
developing the
HP Indigo 10000
Digital Press in
2012, we used a
full life cycle
assessment to
help us design­in
requirements for
energy and
waste reduction
and recycled
materials. Three
models of our
Indigo presses
are
independently
verified for
specific
environmental
credentials
through the
Intertek Green
Leaf Mark
program. For
example, the HP
Indigo 7600
Digital Press
utilizes an oil­
recycling system,
eliminating the
need for
additional oil to
be added during
printing and
maintenance.
For the fiscal
year 2015,
HP Co. spent
$3.135 billion
on R&D.
Because
these specific
actions are
already
incorporated
into HP Co.'s
business, the
additional
cost
associated
with the
actions to
address
climate
specific
changes in
regulation is
0 USD.
22/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Opportunity
driver
Carbon
taxes
Description
Carbon taxes
may increase the
cost for our
customers to
conduct their
business through
their
consumption of
energy or their
own direct
activities. In order
to stay
competitive, our
customers will
look to HP Co. for
innovative ways
to reduce their
footprint through
innovative ICT
solutions. As HP
continues to
develop cutting
edge technology
through
developments
such as our
Project
Moonshot, these
efforts could
result in an
increase in
demand for our
products and
increased
revenue. The
financial
opportunities for
HP are sizable
due to the ability
of IT to reduce
customer’s direct
IT footprint while
managing the
increase in data
and reporting
requirements.
Potential impact
Increased
demand for
existing
products/services
Timeframe
1 to 3
years
Direct/Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Virtually
certain
Magnitude
of impact
Medium­
high
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Estimated financial implications
In an Australian Industry Group survey of 485
businesses conducted at the end of November
2012, the carbon tax was estimated to have
increased energy prices from 1 July of 2012 by an
average 14.5 per cent. This result was broadly
consistent across sectors.
Management
method
HP Co. offers
solutions
customized for
many different
industries to help
lower resource
consumption and
emissions. Our
broad portfolio
helps customers
use energy and
other resources
more efficiently,
replace
outmoded and
inefficient
processes, and
live and work
more sustainably.
• The HP Co.
Moonshot for
NoSQL
Databases and
for Hadoop
applications
would utilize up
to 90% less
power, use 97%
less space, and
cost 78% less
than a traditional
server
environment
Through these
efforts, HP
expects data
center
efficiencies to
reach new
heights. •
Desktops,
Notebooks,
Monitors: .
Between 2010
and 2050, we
have decreased
the energy
consumption of
our personal
systems product
portfolio by 25%
on average. •
HP’s PageWide
Technology prints
with better quality
at faster speeds
while using less
energy than ever
and reducing the
carbon footprint
of printing. A
third­party
analysis shows
that business
printers using HP
PageWide
Technology can
reduce the
carbon footprint
of printing by up
to 52% and use
at least 98% less
energy than
comparable laser
printers. •
Storage: HP
3PAR Storage is
designed to be
highly efficient in
every way,
consolidating
hundreds or
thousands of
virtual machines
on a single
storage system.
This allows
enterprises to
meet their
business needs
with up to 7xs
compared with
equivalent
products.
Cost of
management
For the fiscal
year 2015,
HP Co. spent
$3.135 billion
on R&D.
Because
these specific
actions are
already
incorporated
into HP Co.'s
business, the
additional
cost
associated
with the
actions to
address
climate
specific
changes in
regulation is
0 USD.
23/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Opportunity
driver
Description
Renewable
energy
regulation
As part of
ongoing efforts to
lower the carbon
footprint of its
business, HP Co.
announced in
July 2015, that it
signed a 12­year
power purchase
agreement (PPA)
for 112
megawatts (MW)
of wind power.
This deal was in
part motivated by
the potential
expiration of the
Renewable
Energy
Production Tax
Credit (PTC)
which has
recently been
extended. This is
the first utility­
scale renewable
energy purchase
by HP Co., and
illustrates the
company's
holistic approach
to reducing its
operational
footprint and
developing a
sustainable
cloud.
Potential impact
Reduced
operational costs
Timeframe
3 to 6
years
Direct/Indirect
Direct
Magnitude
of impact
Likelihood
Virtually
certain
Estimated financial implications
The 112 MW of locally generated wind electricity is
sufficient to power 100 percent of HP's Texas­based
data center operations, the equivalent of powering
42,600 homes each year, and will avoid the
emission of more than 340,000 tons of carbon
dioxide annually. The PTC offers a $0.023kWh tax
credit for wind in 2016 and will decrease by 20%
each year after. This credit could translate in to
millions of dollars of operational cost savings over
the next 5 years depending on the level of
production achieved.
Medium
Management
method
The agreement
enabled HP Co.
to reach its 2020
operational
greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions
reduction goal by
the end of FY15,
five years ahead
of schedule. That
goal originally
aimed to reduce
total GHG
emissions from
its operations
(Scope 1 and
Scope 2) by 20
percent of 2010
levels by 2020.
The
approximately
1.5 million
square feet of
Texas data center
operations
support HP Co.'s
entire internal
global
information
technology (IT)
requirements and
the delivery of IT
services to a
portion of HP Co.
customers. HP
Co. currently
operates five
data centers in
Texas, located in
Houston,
Hockley, Plano,
and two in Austin.
Cost of
management
This effort is
part of our
ongoing
evaluation of
energy
solutions and
is managed
by our
internal
operations
team. No
additional
cost of
management
is expected.
CC6.1b
Please describe the inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in physical climate parameters
Opportunity
driver
Other
physical
climate
opportunities
Description
Risks customers may have related to the
physical impacts of climate changes (such as
changes in precipitation causing flooding,
droughts and changes in temperature
extremes) present opportunities for HP Co. to
provide the infrastructure and software to
manage and analyze large and complex sets
of data (including climate modelling and
weather analysis). This is an opportunity to
increase the demand for HPCo. 's existing
products and services, positively impacting
our bottom line. Software provides enterprise
IT management, information management and
security intelligence/risk management
solutions. Solutions are delivered in the form
of traditional software licenses or as a service.
Augmented by support and professional
services, HP Software solutions allow large IT
organizations to manage infrastructure,
operations, application life cycles, application
quality and security, IT services, business
processes, and structured and unstructured
data. In addition, these solutions help
businesses safeguard digital assets, comply
with corporate and regulatory policies, and
control internal and external security risks.
Potential impact
Increased
demand for
existing
products/services
Timeframe
3 to 6
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Likely
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Magnitude
of impact
Medium­
high
Estimated
financial
implications
We see the
opportunity
for
unstructured
data
analysis,
which can
help our
customers
address big
data
challenges,
including
physical
climate
change and
the demand
for
outsourcing,
continue to
grow –
Wikibon
forecast the
Big Data
market will
grow at an
astounding
CAGR of
58%
between
now and
2017, hitting
the $50
billion within
five years. In
2015 HP
Co.’s
software
group
generated
$3.46 B in
revenue. A
5% increase
in revenue
would result
in an
estimated
financial
implication
of approx.
$0.17B
Management
method
Cost of
management
HP Co.takes
advantage of this
opportunity
through current
product and
service offerings
as well as
strategic
acquisitions.
These include
solutions that can
analyze complex
sets of big data
including
environmental,
physical and
climate related
data. An example
of one way HP
Co.captured the
opportunity
around data
analysis was
through the
creation of the
HAVEN platform.
The HP Haven
Connector
Framework
capability
combines the
context­aware,
unstructured data
analytics of HP
IDOL with the
advanced SQL­
based analytics
capabilities of HP
Vertica (HP Co’s
2011
acquisition).
The costs
associated
with
capturing this
opportunity
are dispersed
across
multiple
business
groups. HP
Co.’s
acquisition of
the analytic
database
management
software
company,
Vertica, in
2011, had a
total fair
value of
purchase
consideration
of $320 mil.
24/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Opportunity
driver
Description
Other
physical
climate
opportunities
Risks customers may have related to the
physical impacts of climate changes (such as
changes in precipitation causing flooding,
droughts and changes in temperature
extremes) present opportunities for HP Co.’s
services and outsourced technology to reduce
this risk for our customers, increasing the
demand for our products, positively affecting
our bottom line. Our methods to manage this
opportunity are to provide a wide range of
services, storage and cloud solutions to
respond to customer needs and challenges. •
Infrastructure Technology Outsourcing
delivers comprehensive services that
streamline and optimize our clients’
infrastructure to efficiently enhance
performance, reduce costs, mitigate risk and
enable business change. These services
encompass the data center and the workplace
(desktop); network and communications; and
security, compliance and business continuity. •
HP Co.’s storage offerings include storage
platforms for high­end, mid­range and small
business environments. Our flagship product
is the HP 3PAR Utility Storage Platform, which
is designed for virtualization, cloud and IT­as­
a­service. The Storage business has a broad
range of products including storage area
networks, network attached storage, storage
management software and virtualization
technologies. These offerings enable
customers to optimize their existing storage
systems, build new virtualization solutions and
plan their transition to cloud computing. • HP
Co.’s Converged Infrastructure portfolio of
servers, storage and networking combined
with HP Co. Software’s Cloud Service
Automation software suite creates HP’s
CloudSystem. This integrated solution
enables enterprise and service provider
clients to deliver infrastructure, platform and
software as a service in a private, public or
hybrid cloud environment.
Potential impact
Increased
demand for
existing
products/services
Timeframe
3 to 6
years
Direct/
Indirect
Direct
Likelihood
Likely
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Magnitude
of impact
Estimated
financial
implications
Management
method
Cost of
management
Medium­
high
The financial
opportunity
associated
with
providing
information
technology
services is
sizable – In
2015, HP
Co.’s
infrastructure
technology
outsourcing
business
accounted
for more
than 10% of
HP Co.'s
consolidated
net revenue
($12.104
billion). HP’s
storage
group’s
revenue was
$3.180
billion. We
expect
growth in
these areas
to continue
over time.
In order to
manage this
opportunity, HP
Co. will improve
the efficiency of
our portfolio and
operations and
partnering with
our suppliers to
reduce risk. Other
methods to
manage this
opportunity
include
continuous
innovation and
collaboration with
our customers
and partners is
central to how we
develop and
apply these
solutions, and
advance
responsible
practices and
standards across
our global
operations and
supply chain.
The cost
associated
with these
actions: is
already
integrated
throughout
our business
and therefore
the additional
cost to
address
climate
specific
related
actions is 0
USD.
25/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Opportunity
driver
Other
physical
climate
opportunities
Description
Potential impact
Extreme weather events (such as the flooding
in Thailand in 2011, but also including
changes in average temperatures, droughts,
snow and ice) highlight an opportunity to
examine and invest in our supply chain in
order to ensure long­term resiliency. HP Co.’s
supplier Energy Efficiency Program (EEP) in
China and Southeast Asia is our main
initiative for increasing efficiency and reducing
environmental footprint at production supplier
sites. We encourage factory managers to
adopt energy efficiency programs and
practices, in collaboration with
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) such
as BSR, WWF China, and the World
Resources Institute.
Reduced
operational costs
Timeframe
3 to 6
years
Direct/
Indirect
Indirect
(Supply
chain)
Likelihood
More
likely than
not
Magnitude
of impact
Medium
Estimated
financial
implications
Management
method
Cost of
management
Suppliers
participating
in HP Co.’s
Energy
Efficiency
Program
(EEP) have
reported
saving
800,000
tonnes of
CO2e
(derived
from energy
savings,
including
500 million
kilowatt
hours)
between
2010 and
2015),
adding up to
an estimated
cost savings
of $65
million
(based on
local
electricity
rate;
provided by
suppliers).
We are
managing this
opportunity
through a
strategy where
we are focused
on ensuring that
HP Co. is better
suited than our
competitors to
meet new
regulations and
to actively
capture the
market
opportunity by
helping our
customers do
more with less.
Proactively
addressing
regulations that
impact HP Co.
presents an
opportunity to
increase the
resiliency and
profitability of our
supply chain
while ensuring
market access
and reducing
operational costs.
We have an
internal team that
works across the
businesses and
regions to
understand,
influence and
plan for any
pending
regulations. As
part of managing
opportunities
around
regulation, HP
works with a
variety of
initiatives,
stakeholders and
partner
organizations.
For example
through 2015, HP
Co.’s supplier
Energy Efficiency
Program (EEP)
program has
covered more
than 200
production
supplier sites..
Through the EPP
HP and
participating
suppliers
collaborate with
nongovernmental
organizations
(NGOs) such as
WWF China and
World Resources
Institute to
promote energy
efficiency
programs and
practices.
The cost
associated
with these
actions: is
already
integrated
throughout
our business
and therefore
the additional
cost to
address
climate
specific
related
actions is 0
USD.
CC6.1c
Please describe the inherent opportunities that are driven by changes in other climate­related developments
Opportunity
driver
Description
Potential impact
Timeframe
Direct/
Indirect
Likelihood
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Magnitude
of impact
Estimated
financial
implications
Management
method
Cost of
management
26/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Other
drivers
Reputation and changing customer
behavior both present an opportunity for
HP’s products that are seen as
advantages versus alternatives provided
by competitors. Further, an increased
awareness by customers of climate
change not only drives awareness of
brands and HP Co.’s environmental
strengths, (such as our Living
Progress/Sustainability program and our
energy efficient products) but also drives
behavior changes, brand preferences
and opens new markets for our products.
The drivers above can result in an
increase in both revenue and/or brand
equity.
Premium price
opportunities
1 to 3
years
Direct
Virtually
certain
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
High
HP Co. is aware
that
environmental
responsibility
plays an
important role in
defining our
brand and can
help differentiate
HP Co.products
over our
competitor’s.
This presents a
unique
opportunity for
HP Co. and one
that we are intent
on capturing – in
2015, Interbrand
valued HP Co’s
brand at $23.1B
USD. If HP Co.
were to
experience a 2
percent increase
in brand equity,
related to
leadership in
climate
stewardship for
instance, the
financial
implication could
be an increases
brand value of
approximately
$0.5B USD.
We are looking
into the future to
manage this
opportunity in two
ways – first with
continued
research on
customer needs,
behaviours and
trends that can
help guide our
product design
and offerings,
and second with
a focused
branding effort of
showing how IT
works for our
customers. For
example, our
water­cooled HP
Apollo 8000
System uses
28% less energy
than air­cooled
servers, and HP
Managed Print
Services, one of
our innovative
product­as­a­
service offerings,
has delivered
customers
reductions in
their printer
related energy
use by up to 40%
as well as
decreases in
paper waste of
25% or more. We
are looking to the
future by
exploring the
possibilities of 3D
printing, and, with
The Machine,
reinventing the
fundamental
architecture of
computers to
produce order of
magnitude
improvements in
performance and
efficiency.
The costs
associated
with these
actions:
Environmental
sustainability
is deeply
integrated into
the company,
our
businesses
and the
regions we
operate in, HP
reported sales
and marketing
expenses of
$3.089 billion
in 2015.
27/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Other
drivers
Induced changes in human and cultural
environments, fluctuating socio­economic
conditions, and increasing humanitarian
demands have been a long standing
focus for our social responsibility
initiatives and employee engagement.
Climate change impacts create socio­
economic and humanitarian issues HP
Co. technology can help alleviate. In
addition to the social benefits that these
activities provide, the greater recognition
HP Co. may receive in this arena may
result in increased brand equity.
Wider social
benefits
1 to 3
years
Direct
Virtually
certain
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Medium
In 2015,
Interbrand
valued HP Co.’s
brand at $23.1B
USD. If HP
Co.were to
experience a 2
percent increase
in brand equity,
related to
leadership in
climate
stewardship for
instance, the
financial
implication could
be an increases
brand value of
approximately
$0.5B USD.
Living Progress
is HP Co.'s (prior
to FY16)
approach to
simultaneously
driving human,
economic and
environmental
progress. This
means we
consider the
human,
economic and
environmental
impacts as we
develop our
products,
manage our
operations, and
interact with our
customers,
employees and
communities. We
work with our
partners to
understand a
targeted need,
and identify the
capabilities and
expertise we
have to offer,
harnessing all of
HP Co.’s assets
—human,
technological,
intellectual, and
financial—to
develop a
sustainable
solution. We
cultivate
relationships with
diverse
stakeholders,
such as social
entrepreneurs,
industry peers,
governments,
and
nongovernmental
organizations.
The costs
associated
with these
actions: In
2015, HP Co’s
social
investments
totaled $89.6
million; $17.1
million in cash
and $72.5
million in
products and
services.
Additionally,
In 2015, more
than 9,000
employees
participated in
the HP Co’s
U.S. Cash
Matching
program a.
These
employees,
HP Co, and
the Hewlett
Packard
Company
Foundation
provided more
than $9.3
million to
NGOs and
schools
through cash
and product
donations.
28/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Changing
consumer
behaviour
In many industries worldwide, products
are created and consumed in a
traditional, linear ‘take, make, dispose.’
model HP Co. recognizes this process is
unsustainable and that consumer interest
and behaviour is shifting towards service­
based and less wasteful models are
growing. , A new generation of customers
exhibits preference for access over
ownership as seen in the increase of
shared cars, machinery, and other articles
of daily use. The circular economy is
regenerative by intention, using designs
that continually recover and re­use
materials. It decouples growth from a
reliance on increasingly scarce raw
materials, benefiting the environment.
Companies can save money by gaining
more value from raw materials, expand
markets through product innovation,
improve their reputation by enhancing
environmental performance, and
strengthen customer engagement and
relationships through higher value
product­as­as service offerings (as
opposed to only selling devices). HP Co.
recognizes opportunities for circular
economy­based solutions to better serve
and capture our core markets like printing
supplies and “as a service” models as
well as growth and future ones such as
digital commercial print and 3D printing.
For example, HP Co’;s Instant Ink ink
cartridge monthly subscription program
doubled in size to over 1 million
subscribers in the nine months following
July 2015.
Increased
demand for
existing
products/services
3 to 6
years
Direct
Very likely
Medium­
high
HP Co.
recognizes the
market
opportunities
associated with
both new
products/services
and
enhancements to
existing offerings
that advance a
more circular
economy. For
example, the use
of closed loop
recycled plastic
in the
manufacture of
Original HP print
cartridges (see
right) yields a
product with
uncompromised
quality and
reliability but with
reduced
environmental
impact,
enhancing
customer value
of a $14 billion
business (FY15).
A 2% increase in
sales supported
with this
differentiation
and value would
generate an
additional $280
million in
revenue.
HP Co.’s circular
economy strategy
combines
resource­efficient
product designs
and new,
transformative
business models
to deliver efficient
and effective
performance, as
well as services
that fit the needs
of customers and
communities.
Examples
include: 1)
materials
innovation and
closed loop
plastic recycling
used in more
than 3 billion
Original HP print
cartridges to
date, keeping
682 million
cartridges, 50
million apparel
hangers, and 3.3
billion post­
consumer plastic
bottles out of
landfills,
upcycling these
materials for
continued use; 2)
Instant Ink our ink
cartridge
subscription
service, offers
customers more
convenience and
cost savings of
up to 50%, cuts
waste up to 67%
less waste per
printed page, and
doubles the
return rate for
recycling; 3)
Digital presses,
including HP
Indigo and
PageWide Web
Presses enable
customers to
produce highly
customized
printed materials
in a shorter time
and with between
20­50% less
waste,
depending on the
application; and
4) MultiJet Fusion
3D Printing
technology that
enables shorter
production runs
and manufacture
of one­of­a­kind
products and
parts locally,
rapidly, and
inexpensively,
driving down
cost­per­part,
waste, and GHG
emissions.
For the fiscal
year 2015, HP
Co. spent
$3.135 billion
on R&D.
Because
these specific
actions are
already
incorporated
into HP Co.'s
business, the
additional cost
associated
with the
actions to
address
climate
specific
changes in
regulation is 0
USD
Further Information
Module: GHG Emissions Accounting, Energy and Fuel Use, and Trading
Page: CC7. Emissions Methodology
CC7.1
Please provide your base year and base year emissions (Scopes 1 and 2)
Scope
Scope 1
Scope 2 (location­based)
Scope 2 (market­based)
Base year
Sun 01 Nov 2009 ­ Sun 31 Oct 2010
Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
326200
Sun 01 Nov 2009 ­ Sun 31 Oct 2010
1690500
CC7.2
Please give the name of the standard, protocol or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
29/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Please select the published methodologies that you use
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition)
CC7.2a
If you have selected "Other" in CC7.2 please provide details of the standard, protocol or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions
CC7.3
Please give the source for the global warming potentials you have used
Gas
CO2
Other: C2F6
Other: Cf4
Other: Sulphur hexaflouride
Other: Nitrogen triflouride
Other: CHF3
Other: C3F8
Other: C4F8
Reference
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 ­ 100 year)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 ­ 100 year)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 ­ 100 year)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 ­ 100 year)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 ­ 100 year)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 ­ 100 year)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 ­ 100 year)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 ­ 100 year)
CC7.4
Please give the emissions factors you have applied and their origin; alternatively, please attach an Excel spreadsheet with this data at the bottom of this page
Fuel/Material/Energy
Diesel/Gas oil
Natural gas
Other: Purchased electricty varies by region
Emission Factor
0.003
117
Unit
metric tonnes CO2e per liter
lb CO2e per million BTU
metric tonnes CO2e per MWh
Reference
.003 ­ GHG Protocol "Stationary Combustion Tool"
Climate Registry 12.1 ­ Natural Gas US Weighted Average
GHG Protocol "Stationary Combustion Tool"
Further Information
Page: CC8. Emissions Data ­ (1 Nov 2014 ­ 31 Oct 2015)
CC8.1
Please select the boundary you are using for your Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas inventory
Operational control
CC8.2
Please provide your gross global Scope 1 emissions figures in metric tonnes CO2e
188300
CC8.3
Does your company have any operations in markets providing product or supplier specific data in the form of contractual instruments? Yes
CC8.3a
Please provide your gross global Scope 2 emissions figures in metric tonnes CO2e
Scope 2, location­based Scope 2, market­based (if applicable) Comment
1656200
1243800
CC8.4
Are there are any sources (e.g. facilities, specific GHGs, activities, geographies, etc.) of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included
in your disclosure?
Yes
CC8.4a
Please provide details of the sources of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure Relevance of
Scope 1
emissions
from this
source
Relevance of
location­based
Scope 2 emissions
from this source Purchased electricity; natural
gas from joint ventures
Emissions are
not relevant
Emissions are not
relevant
Emissions are not
relevant
Joint ventures may not be reported unless/until they have a real estate impact that
registers them in HP Co.’s real estate database. Any joint ventures that have not
been updated into the database are likely small and would not impact the total
emissions significantly.
Diesel generators; from other
operationally controlled
entities, activities and
facilities. (Scope 1 only)
Emissions are
not relevant
No emissions
excluded
No emissions excluded
Diesel Generators. The majority of diesel emissions from our facilities are
accounted for, however there are de minimis amounts that are not included.
Source
Relevance of market­
based Scope 2
emissions from this
source (if applicable) Explain why the source is excluded
CC8.5
Please estimate the level of uncertainty of the total gross global Scope 1 and 2 emissions figures that you have supplied and specify the sources of uncertainty in your data gathering, handling
and calculations
Scope
Scope 1
Scope 2
(location­
based)
Uncertainty range
More than 5% but
less than or equal to
10%
More than 5% but
less than or equal to
10%
Main
sources of
uncertainty
Please expand on the uncertainty in your data
Extrapolation
Natural gas data are not available for all sites. For non­reporting sites consumption is estimated based on a representative sample
of measured sites. Diesel is reported from sites known to have large consumption. Other sites are not material or diesel usage does
not.
Extrapolation
Electricity consumption data are not available for all sites. For non­reporting sites consumption is estimated based on a
representative sample of measured sites.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
30/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Scope
Scope 2
(market­
based)
Uncertainty range
Main
sources of
uncertainty
More than 5% but
less than or equal to
10%
Extrapolation
Please expand on the uncertainty in your data
Electricity consumption data are not available for all sites. For non­reporting sites consumption is estimated based on a
representative sample of measured sites.
CC8.6
Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported Scope 1 emissions
Third party verification or assurance process in place
CC8.6a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your Scope 1 emissions, and attach the relevant statements
Verification or
assurance
cycle in place
Status in the
current
reporting
year
Type of
verification
or
assurance
Annual process
Complete
Limited
assurance
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change 2016/Shared
Documents/Attachments/CC8.6a/EY­HPE Review Report and Transmittal
Letter.pdf
2­4
Annual process
Complete
Limited
assurance
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change 2016/Shared
Documents/Attachments/CC8.6a/HP­EY_FY15 Sustainability
Assurance_Independent Accountants Review Report.pdf
1­3
Attach the statement
Page/section
reference
Proportion of
reported Scope 1
emissions verified
(%)
Relevant
standard
Attestation
standards
established by
AICPA (AT101)
Attestation
standards
established by
AICPA (AT101)
100
100
CC8.7
Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to at least one of your reported Scope 2 emissions figures
Third party verification or assurance process in place
CC8.7a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your location­based and/or market­based Scope 2 emissions, and attach the relevant statements
Location­
based or
market­
based
figure? Verification
or assurance
cycle in
place Status in
the current
reporting
year Type of
verification
or
assurance
Location­
based
Annual
process
Complete
Limited
assurance
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change
2016/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/EY­HPE Review
Report and Transmittal Letter.pdf
2­4
Market­based
Annual
process
Complete
Limited
assurance
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change
2016/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/EY­HPE Review
Report and Transmittal Letter.pdf
2­4
Location­
based
Annual
process
Complete
Limited
assurance
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change
2016/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/HP­EY_FY15
Sustainability Assurance_Independent Accountants Review
Report.pdf
1­3
Market­based
Annual
process
Complete
Limited
assurance
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change
2016/Shared Documents/Attachments/CC8.7a/HP­EY_FY15
Sustainability Assurance_Independent Accountants Review
Report.pdf
1­3
Attach the statement
Page/Section
reference
Relevant
standard
Attestation
standards
established by
AICPA
(AT101)
Attestation
standards
established by
AICPA
(AT101)
Attestation
standards
established by
AICPA
(AT101)
Attestation
standards
established by
AICPA
(AT101)
Proportion of
reported Scope
2 emissions
verified (%)
100
100
100
100
CC8.8
Please identify if any data points have been verified as part of the third party verification work undertaken, other than the verification of emissions figures reported in CC8.6, CC8.7 and CC14.2
Additional data points verified
Renewable energy products
Comment
CC8.9
Are carbon dioxide emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization?
No
Further Information
Page: CC9. Scope 1 Emissions Breakdown ­ (1 Nov 2014 ­ 31 Oct 2015)
CC9.1
Do you have Scope 1 emissions sources in more than one country?
Yes
CC9.1a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by country/region
Country/Region
Asia Pacific (or JAPA)
Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA)
Americas
Scope 1 metric tonnes CO2e
5600
65700
117000
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
31/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
CC9.2
Please indicate which other Scope 1 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide (tick all that apply)
By GHG type
CC9.2c
Please break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by GHG type
GHG type
CO2
CH4
N2O
HFCs
PFCs
Scope 1 emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)
167877
773
137
16600
2900
Further Information
Page: CC10. Scope 2 Emissions Breakdown ­ (1 Nov 2014 ­ 31 Oct 2015)
CC10.1
Do you have Scope 2 emissions sources in more than one country?
Yes
CC10.1a
Please break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions and energy consumption by country/region
Country/Region
Asia Pacific (or JAPA)
Eastern Europe, Middle
East, and Africa
(EEMEA)
Americas
Scope 2, location­
based (metric tonnes
CO2e) 415000
Scope 2, market­
based (metric tonnes
CO2e)
415000
Purchased and consumed
electricity, heat, steam or cooling
(MWh)
592000
0
354300
204900
843000
418000
886900
623900
1942000
488000
Purchased and consumed low carbon electricity, heat, steam
or cooling accounted in market­based approach (MWh)
CC10.2
Please indicate which other Scope 2 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide (tick all that apply)
Further Information
Page: CC11. Energy
CC11.1
What percentage of your total operational spend in the reporting year was on energy?
More than 20% but less than or equal to 25%
CC11.2
Please state how much heat, steam, and cooling in MWh your organization has purchased and consumed during the reporting year
Energy type
Heat
Steam
Cooling
Energy purchased and consumed (MWh)
0
0
4000
CC11.3
Please state how much fuel in MWh your organization has consumed (for energy purposes) during the reporting year 312000
CC11.3a
Please complete the table by breaking down the total "Fuel" figure entered above by fuel type
Fuels
Natural gas
Diesel/Gas oil
MWh
300000
12000
CC11.4
Please provide details of the electricity, heat, steam or cooling amounts that were accounted at a low carbon emission factor in the market­based Scope 2 figure reported in CC8.3a
Basis for applying a low carbon emission factor
Direct procurement contract with a gridconnected generator or Power
Purchase Agreement (PPA), supported by energy attribute certificates
Contract with suppliers or utilities, supported by energy attribute
certificates
Contract with suppliers or utilities, with a supplier­specific emission rate,
not backed by electricity attribute certificates
Energy attribute certificates, Guarantees of Origin
Energy attribute certificates, Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)
MWh consumed associated with low
carbon electricity, heat, steam or
cooling
Comment
305000
Wind Power Purchase Agreement in Texas, enough to provide
renewable electricity to all of HP Co.’s Texas­based data centers
180617
Purchased Renewables with certificates
51064
Purchased Renewables without certificates
285050
135773
Purchased Renewables with GoOs specifically
Renewable Energy Credits (RECs), US only
CC11.5
Please report how much electricity you produce in MWh, and how much electricity you consume in MWh https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
32/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Total electricity
consumed (MWh) 3393000
Consumed electricity that is
purchased (MWh)
3373000
Total electricity
produced (MWh) 20000
Total renewable electricity
produced (MWh) 8000
Consumed renewable electricity that is
produced by company (MWh) Comment
8000
Further Information
Page: CC12. Emissions Performance
CC12.1
How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the reporting year compare to the previous year?
Decreased
CC12.1a
Please identify the reasons for any change in your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) and for each of them specify how your emissions compare to the previous year
Emissions
value
(percentage)
Reason
Emissions
reduction
activities
9.7
Direction
of
change
Please explain and include calculation
Decrease
The decrease in Scope 1 and 2 emissions can be attributed to the following primary sources: (1) Energy efficiency and renewable energy
generation activities; and (2) An increase in renewable energy purchasing. In FY15, HP Co.’s investments in energy efficiency and on­site
renewable energy generation projects yielded emission reductions of 22,380 mton CO2eThe renewable energy purchasing increase yielded
the reduction of 139,371 mton CO2e. The total emission reduction due to these activities was 161,751 mton CO2e The 2014 Scope 1 and 2
emissions total was 1,667,700. Therefore the percentage change attributed to emission reduction activities is calculated as follows:
(161,751/1,667,700)=9.7%.
Divestment
Acquisitions
Mergers
Change in
output
Change in
methodology
Change in
boundary
Change in
physical
operating
conditions
Unidentified
Other
CC12.1b
Is your emissions performance calculations in CC12.1 and CC12.1a based on a location­based Scope 2 emissions figure or a market­based Scope 2 emissions figure? Market­based
CC12.2
Please describe your gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions for the reporting year in metric tonnes CO2e per unit currency total revenue
Intensity
figure =
Metric numerator (Gross
global combined Scope 1 and
2 emissions) 0.000014
metric tonnes CO2e
Metric
denominator:
Unit total
revenue
Scope
2 figure
used
103355000000
Market­
based
% change
from
previous
year
7.4
Direction of
change from
previous year
Reason for change
The decrease occurred due to a significant reduction in gross Scope 1
and 2 emissions as a result of numerous emission reduction projects
between 2014 and 2015.
Decrease
CC12.3
Please provide any additional intensity (normalized) metrics that are appropriate to your business operations
Metric
numerator (Gross
global combined
Scope 1 and 2
emissions) Intensity
figure =
Metric
denominator
Metric
denominator:
Unit total Scope
2
figure
used %
change
from
previous
year
Direction
of change
from
previous
year
3.7
metric tonnes CO2e
full time
equivalent
(FTE)
employee
355610
Market­
based
21.5
Decrease
0.2203
metric tonnes CO2e
square meter
6499239
Market­
based
13.4
Decrease
Reason for change
The decrease occurred due to a significant reduction in gross Scope 1 and 2
emissions as a result of numerous emission reduction projects between 2014
and 2015. In addition, the number of employees and contractors increased due
to separation activities.
The decrease occurred due to a significant reduction in gross Scope 1 and 2
emissions as a result of numerous emission reduction projects between 2014
and 2015.
Further Information
Page: CC13. Emissions Trading
CC13.1
Do you participate in any emissions trading schemes?
No, and we do not currently anticipate doing so in the next 2 years
CC13.2
Has your organization originated any project­based carbon credits or purchased any within the reporting period?
No
Further Information
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
33/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Page: CC14. Scope 3 Emissions
CC14.1
Please account for your organization’s Scope 3 emissions, disclosing and explaining any exclusions
Sources of
Scope 3
emissions
Purchased
goods and
services
Evaluation
status
Relevant,
calculated
metric
tonnes
CO2e
16600000
Capital
goods
Relevant,
calculated
400000
Fuel­and­
energy­
related
activities (not
included in
Scope 1 or 2)
Relevant,
calculated
300000
Emissions calculation methodology
The Company uses separate LCA’s methods to calculate GHG emissions
associated with the following three product categories: Personal systems
including desktops, notebooks, workstations, displays, thin clients,
tablets/slates and all­in­ones. Printers including LaserJet, Inkjet and
DesignJet models, as well as scanners. Servers including all BL, DL, ML, SL
and Microservers. Personal systems Product Carbon Footprints (PCFs) are
generated using the Product Attribute to Impact Algorithm (PAIA) model
created by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in conjunction with the
company and other manufacturers. The inputs to the PAIA model include
such things as component characteristics, product energy use and transport
information, many of which can be found on the product data sheets. The
Company has the ability to generate PCFs for nearly all of our computer
products using the PAIA model, including notebooks, desktops, monitors, all­
in­ones, workstations and tablets. The results are applied across the
shipped volumes of all personal system products. Digital Signage, Retail
Point­of­Sale units and calculators are not considered in the calculation due
to their small relative number and availability of lifecycle information. Printer
LCAs for Inkjet and LaserJet products were prepared in conformance with
ISO14040 by thinkstep (formerly PE International). The LCA for printer
products includes the GHG emissions associated with all consumables,
including paper and cartridges, over the lifetime of the product. Server LCAs
were derived using a detailed energy analysis for the use­phase, the
primary Scope 3 impact for servers. The energy consumption is calculated
using the publically available Power Advisor using the typical configuration
(memory, processor, chassis, etc.) of each server category. The lifecycle
phases of a server were estimated as: 75.5% use­phase, 21%
manufacturing, 3% transportation and 0.5% end of life based on the
Company’s analysis. This was applied across the total shipped volume for
each server category. The calculation methodology for all three LCA’s
encompasses the following Scope 3 categories: 4 and 9 for Transportation;
11 for Use of Sold Products; 12 for End­of­Life Treatment of Sold Products.
Capital expenditures are identified on the Company’s balance sheet;
generally, the goods identified in Property, Plant, and Equipment (PP&E)
represents the annual investment in capital goods by the Company The
upstream impact of these investments were estimated using the following
category factors: Buildings: 589,000 mtCO2e/$1B; Mechanical Equipment:
567,000 mtCO e/$1B; Electronic Equipment: 454,000 mtCO e/$1B; Other:
464,000 mtCO e/$1B.
This category accounts for all of the upstream emissions associated with the
energy purchased by the Company (Scope 1) and electricity consumed by
the Company (Scope 2) for facilities under our operational control and as
defined by the boundary for Scope 1 and 2 emissions. This category
excludes emissions from the combustion of fuels or electricity consumed by
the reporting company, since they are already included in Scope 1 or Scope
2. A total factor of 18% was applied to estimate the upstream impacts and is
based on transportation and distribution losses, plant use losses and
emissions associated with extraction and transportation of fuels. Location­
based Scope 2 emissions were used to calculate this category value.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Percentage
of
emissions
calculated
using data
obtained
from
suppliers
or value
chain
partners
30.00%
Explanation
HP Co. utilizes The GHG Protocol Corporate
Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and
Reporting Standard for Scope 3 emissions
reporting. HP Co. uses Lifecycle analysis (LCA)
tools to calculate product­related impacts. An
LCA evaluates all stages of a product’s life
using an inventory of relevant energy and
material inputs and environmental releases.
LCAs are designed to provide the total product
carbon footprint (PCF) and a percentage
breakdown of where the emissions occurred
based on the categories of manufacture,
transport, use, and end­of­life. HP Co.
completed a wide range of LCAs for products
across HP Co.’s portfolio and which are
representative of the high volume products that
HP Co. sells. HP Co. uses different methods or
models to calculate LCAs for the various types
of products HP Co. sells today. Separate
models that use HP Co. specific information
have been created for the non­product related
Scope 3 categories. HP Co. also collects
supplier CO2e emissions data directly from
suppliers through the EICC­ON tool, annually.
Our supplier emissions data covered 95% of
our first tier manufacturing suppliers (by spend)
and 31% of our first tier services suppliers (by
spend) in 2014, the most recent year that data
is available. Total emissions during 2014
equalled 4,300,000 metric tonnes CO2e.
Supplier emissions are allocated to HP Co. on
the basis of revenue. Primary data from
suppliers is reported additionally in "Other:
Upstream" below. Due to the nature of the LCA
based analysis used to capture the complete
supply chain from cradle­to­gate for this
category, it is difficult to compare the primary
data to the calculated total. The emissions are
reported as separate line items, but should not
be added together.
0.00%
0.00%
34/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Sources of
Scope 3
emissions
metric
tonnes
CO2e
Evaluation
status
Upstream
transportation
and
distribution
Relevant,
calculated
1500000
Waste
generated in
operations
Not
relevant,
calculated
0
Business
travel
Relevant,
calculated
200000
Employee
commuting
Relevant,
calculated
900000
Emissions calculation methodology
The Company uses separate LCA’s methods to calculate GHG emissions
associated with the following three product categories: Personal systems
including desktops, notebooks, workstations, displays, thin clients,
tablets/slates and all­in­ones. Printers including LaserJet, Inkjet and
DesignJet models, as well as scanners. Servers including all BL, DL, ML, SL
and Microservers. Personal systems Product Carbon Footprints (PCFs) are
generated using the Product Attribute to Impact Algorithm (PAIA) model
created by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in conjunction with the
company and other manufacturers. The inputs to the PAIA model include
such things as component characteristics, product energy use and transport
information, many of which can be found on the product data sheets. The
Company has the ability to generate PCFs for nearly all of our computer
products using the PAIA model, including notebooks, desktops, monitors, all­
in­ones, workstations and tablets. The results are applied across the
shipped volumes of all personal system products. Digital Signage, Retail
Point­of­Sale units and calculators are not considered in the calculation due
to their small relative number and availability of lifecycle information. Printer
LCAs for Inkjet and LaserJet products were prepared in conformance with
ISO14040 by thinkstep (formerly PE International). The LCA for printer
products includes the GHG emissions associated with all consumables,
including paper and cartridges, over the lifetime of the product. Server LCAs
were derived using a detailed energy analysis for the use­phase, the
primary Scope 3 impact for servers. The energy consumption is calculated
using the publically available Power Advisor using the typical configuration
(memory, processor, chassis, etc.) of each server category. The lifecycle
phases of a server were estimated as: 75.5% use­phase, 21%
manufacturing, 3% transportation and 0.5% end of life based on the
Company’s analysis. This was applied across the total shipped volume for
each server category. The calculation methodology for all three LCA’s
encompasses the following Scope 3 categories: 4 and 9 for Transportation;
11 for Use of Sold Products; 12 for End­of­Life Treatment of Sold Products.
The total non­hazardous waste activity across the Company is reported in
the annual Living Progress Report. An emissions factor determined by the
US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Waste Reduction Model
(WARM) is used to convert this to GHG emissions. A portion of
nonhazardous waste is diverted from the waste stream and reused;
emissions from this portion are not considered at this time, which is
considered a conservative approach. The emission associated with
processing hazardous waste is assumed to be negligible given the low
relative volumes and comprehensive management practices the Company
has in place.
The estimation takes into account the type of aircraft, passenger and cargo
load, cabin class and miles traveled for each ticketed purchase. The
average emissions factor used is 0.38 lbs CO2 / passenger mile. The
Company includes emissions from commercial air travel but excludes
emissions relating to car rental and hotel stays since the data is currently not
available. Emissions from transportation in vehicles owned or controlled by
the Company are accounted for in Scope 1 (for fuel use).
Assumptions for commute distance, vehicle type and number of working
days for categories of employees (office, teleworkers and mobile sales) were
based on a US transportation survey. Emission factors for the conversion of
gasoline and other fuel types to carbon dioxide equivalents are obtained
from the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies and the IPCC Mobile
Consumption document. For teleworkers, the household emissions for an 8
hour work day are calculated by using the average US household energy
per day times the IEA worldwide electricity conversion factor of 528 grams of
CO2e per kWh.
Percentage
of
emissions
calculated
using data
obtained
from
suppliers
or value
chain
partners
0.00%
100.00%
0.00%
Not
relevant,
explanation
provided
0.00%
Downstream
transportation
and
distribution
Not
relevant,
explanation
provided
0.00%
Processing of
sold products
Not
relevant,
calculated
The majority of products shipped is accounted for in the Lifecycle analysis of
each Business group.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
HP Co. also provides data reported by logistics
service providers (LSP) that HP contracts to
deliver our products. They differ from the larger
product life cycle assessment­based estimate,
which includes additional upstream and
downstream transport related to our products,
as well as retail and storage. Our global CO2e
footprint from our logistic service providers for
2015 was approximately 1.6 million metric
tonnes. This is reported additionally in "Other:
Downstream" category below. Due to the
nature of the LCA based analysis used to
capture the complete transportation emissions
for this category, it is difficult to compare the
primary data to the calculated total. The
emissions are reported as separate line items,
but should not be added together.
0.00%
Upstream
leased assets
0
Explanation
0.00%
All facilities under operational control that are
leased by HP Co. are accounted for in Scope 1
and 2. As indicated in the 2015 HPE Living
Progress Report and HP Sustainability Report,
HP Co. owns or leases approximately 6.5
million sq meters, and we extrapolated data as
available from comparable operations,
primarily data centers and office space, for the
remaining floor space, unless stated otherwise.
The reported square meters may differ from
other published information, such as HP Co.’s
Annual Report on Form 10­K for the year ended
October 31, 2015, due to the assumptions used
for greenhouse gas accounting.
This category is calculated using the methods
described for Category 1 (Purchased Goods
and Services) and is considered together with
Category 4 (Upstream transportation). It is
included in the "Upstream Transportation and
Distribution" number).
It is believed that the additional processing of
sold products that is not already accounted for
in the ship volumes would be negligible.
Original equipment manufacturers that
integrate products with their own hardware or
software and sell as integrated products would
show up in the business group ship volumes.
35/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Sources of
Scope 3
emissions
metric
tonnes
CO2e
Evaluation
status
Use of sold
products
Relevant,
calculated
24100000
End of life
treatment of
sold products
Relevant,
calculated
0
Downstream
leased assets
Relevant,
calculated
0
Franchises
Not
relevant,
explanation
provided
Investments
Not
relevant,
calculated
0
Emissions calculation methodology
The Company uses separate LCA’s methods to calculate GHG emissions
associated with the following three product categories: Personal systems
including desktops, notebooks, workstations, displays, thin clients,
tablets/slates and all­in­ones. Printers including LaserJet, Inkjet and
DesignJet models, as well as scanners. Servers including all BL, DL, ML, SL
and Microservers. Personal systems Product Carbon Footprints (PCFs) are
generated using the Product Attribute to Impact Algorithm (PAIA) model
created by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in conjunction with the
company and other manufacturers. The inputs to the PAIA model include
such things as component characteristics, product energy use and transport
information, many of which can be found on the product data sheets. The
Company has the ability to generate PCFs for nearly all of our computer
products using the PAIA model, including notebooks, desktops, monitors, all­
in­ones, workstations and tablets. The results are applied across the
shipped volumes of all personal system products. Digital Signage, Retail
Point­of­Sale units and calculators are not considered in the calculation due
to their small relative number and availability of lifecycle information. Printer
LCAs for Inkjet and LaserJet products were prepared in conformance with
ISO14040 by thinkstep (formerly PE International). The LCA for printer
products includes the GHG emissions associated with all consumables,
including paper and cartridges, over the lifetime of the product. Server LCAs
were derived using a detailed energy analysis for the use­phase, the
primary Scope 3 impact for servers. The energy consumption is calculated
using the publically available Power Advisor using the typical configuration
(memory, processor, chassis, etc.) of each server category. The lifecycle
phases of a server were estimated as: 75.5% use­phase, 21%
manufacturing, 3% transportation and 0.5% end of life based on the
Company’s analysis. This was applied across the total shipped volume for
each server category. The calculation methodology for all three LCA’s
encompasses the following Scope 3 categories: 4 and 9 for Transportation;
11 for Use of Sold Products; 12 for End­of­Life Treatment of Sold Products.
The Company uses separate LCA’s methods to calculate GHG emissions
associated with the following three product categories: Personal systems
including desktops, notebooks, workstations, displays, thin clients,
tablets/slates and all­in­ones. Printers including LaserJet, Inkjet and
DesignJet models, as well as scanners. Servers including all BL, DL, ML, SL
and Microservers. Personal systems Product Carbon Footprints (PCFs) are
generated using the Product Attribute to Impact Algorithm (PAIA) model
created by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in conjunction with the
company and other manufacturers. The inputs to the PAIA model include
such things as component characteristics, product energy use and transport
information, many of which can be found on the product data sheets. The
Company has the ability to generate PCFs for nearly all of our computer
products using the PAIA model, including notebooks, desktops, monitors, all­
in­ones, workstations and tablets. The results are applied across the
shipped volumes of all personal system products. Digital Signage, Retail
Point­of­Sale units and calculators are not considered in the calculation due
to their small relative number and availability of lifecycle information. Printer
LCAs for Inkjet and LaserJet products were prepared in conformance with
ISO14040 by thinkstep (formerly PE International). The LCA for printer
products includes the GHG emissions associated with all consumables,
including paper and cartridges, over the lifetime of the product. Server LCAs
were derived using a detailed energy analysis for the use­phase, the
primary Scope 3 impact for servers. The energy consumption is calculated
using the publically available Power Advisor using the typical configuration
(memory, processor, chassis, etc.) of each server category. The lifecycle
phases of a server were estimated as: 75.5% use­phase, 21%
manufacturing, 3% transportation and 0.5% end of life based on the
Company’s analysis. This was applied across the total shipped volume for
each server category. The calculation methodology for all three LCA’s
encompasses the following Scope 3 categories: 4 and 9 for Transportation;
11 for Use of Sold Products; 12 for End­of­Life Treatment of Sold Products.
The Company calculates this category using square footage from buildings
leased to third parties as reported in the Company’s annual report and
assuming that these facilities are outside of its operational control and not
included in the Company’s Scope 1 or 2 emissions. Only real estate assets
are included in the calculation; product equipment leasing is accounted for
in the shipped volume of each business group. The U.S. Department of
Energy Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey data for average
office building emissions intensity and the worldwide average emissions
factor intensity per the IEA are used. According to the survey, the average
energy consumption of office buildings is 92,860 BTU per square foot, the
emission factor of the worldwide average from IEA is 528 grams of CO2e per
kwh and the conversion rate of BTU to kilowatt hours is 1BTU ­ .00029307
kwh.
By using an estimated emissions factor of 565mtCO2/$1mil (per the
EIOLCA), the emissions are <20,000 and can be considered de minimis.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
Percentage
of
emissions
calculated
using data
obtained
from
suppliers
or value
chain
partners
Explanation
0.00%
0.00%
Calculated figure is negative 300,000 which
rounds to zero in overall footprint. End of life
treatment is a relevant category.
0.00%
Calculated figure is 30,000 which rounds to
zero. Downstream leased assets is relevant
category.
0.00%
HP Co. does not operate franchises.
0.00%
From the FY15 10K: "Corporate Investments
includes HP Labs and certain cloud­related
business incubation projects among others." (p.
9) Total revenue from investments made by HP
in 2014 were $27 million (p. 45 of 10K) ­ the
emissions associated with these investments is
considered negligible compared to product
manufacturing and use. By using an estimated
emissions factor of 565mtCO2/$1mil (per the
EIOLCA), the emissions are <20,000 and can
be considered de minimis.
36/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Sources of
Scope 3
emissions
Other
(upstream)
Other
(downstream)
metric
tonnes
CO2e
Evaluation
status
Relevant,
calculated
Relevant,
calculated
Percentage
of
emissions
calculated
using data
obtained
from
suppliers
or value
chain
partners
Emissions calculation methodology
4300000
Together with the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), HP
developed the EICC Carbon & Water Reporting System (CWRS), a standard
approach to measuring and reporting carbon emissions in the global
electronics supply chain. The CWRS is based on global standards such as
the WRI Greenhouse Gas Protocol and Carbon Disclosure Project. HP asks
suppliers to disclose actual emissions and suggests the GHG Protocol be
used. However, some may use ISO 14064. Through CWRS, companies can
measure and share emissions data with their customers in a standardized
questionnaire including quantitative carbon emissions and energy data, as
well as qualitative information on carbon and energy management practices.
Supply chain emissions are allocated to HP Co. based on suppliers' dollar
volume of HP Co. business compared with their total revenue. This
methodology derives an estimated HP Co. supply chain carbon footprint.
The reported GHG emissions account for our first­tier manufacturing,
materials, components and service suppliers.
84.00%
1600000
These figures for transport GHG emissions are based on data reported by
logistics service providers (LSP) that HP Co. contracts to deliver our
products. They differ from the larger product life cycle assessment­based
estimate, which includes additional upstream and downstream transport
related to our products, as well as retail and storage. These data do not
include data from all recent HP Co. acquisitions. We partner with our LSPs to
develop our global transportation CO2e footprint. Each of our LSPs
calculates the CO2e emissions for all the freight they move on behalf of HP.
These CO2e reports are consolidated to give us an “estimated” global CO2
footprint. The LSPs use methodologies from both SmartWay and the
GreenHouse Gas (GHG) Protocol to produce their individual reports. Our
LSPs have their tools/methodologies validated by a third party company as
well. HP Co. also uses Ernst and Young to validate our own Scope 3
emissions (including Transport). We are one of few companies of our size to
demonstrate transparency with our global CO2e transportation footprint
(available since 2008). Our global transport CO2e footprint for 2015 was
approximately 1.6 million metric tonnes. We have also communicated our
global CO2e reduction goals externally. From 2009 through 2012, we set a
global goal to reduce transport CO2e emissions by 180,000 metric tonnes
and we achieved approximately 190,000 metric tonnes. Warehouse
consolidations, trailer load optimizations and mode conversions (air to
ocean, truck to rail) helped HP Co. achieve our CO2 reduction goals across
our global supply chain.
100.00%
Explanation
Together with the Electronic Industry
Citizenship Coalition (EICC), HP developed the
EICC Carbon & Water Reporting System
(CWRS), a standard approach to measuring
and reporting carbon emissions in the global
electronics supply chain. The CWRS is based
on global standards such as the WRI
Greenhouse Gas Protocol and Carbon
Disclosure Project. HP asks suppliers to
disclose actual emissions and suggests the
GHG Protocol be used. However, some may
use ISO 14064. Through CWRS, companies
can measure and share emissions data with
their customers in a standardized questionnaire
including quantitative carbon emissions and
energy data, as well as qualitative information
on carbon and energy management practices.
Supply chain emissions are allocated to HP Co.
based on suppliers' dollar volume of HP Co.
business compared with their total revenue.
This methodology derives an estimated HP Co.
supply chain carbon footprint. The reported
GHG emissions account for our first­tier
manufacturing, materials, components and
service suppliers.
These figures for transport GHG emissions are
based on data reported by logistics service
providers (LSP) that HP Co. contracts to deliver
our products. They differ from the larger product
life cycle assessment­based estimate, which
includes additional upstream and downstream
transport related to our products, as well as
retail and storage. These data do not include
data from all recent HP Co. acquisitions. We
partner with our LSPs to develop our global
transportation CO2e footprint. Each of our LSPs
calculates the CO2e emissions for all the freight
they move on behalf of HP Co. These CO2e
reports are consolidated to give us an
“estimated” global CO2 footprint. The LSPs use
methodologies from both SmartWay and the
GreenHouse Gas (GHG) Protocol to produce
their individual reports. Our LSPs have their
tools/methodologies validated by a third party
company as well. HP Co. also uses Ernst and
Young to validate our own Scope 3 emissions
(including Transport). We are one of few
companies of our size to demonstrate
transparency with our global CO2e
transportation footprint (available since 2008).
Our global transport CO2e footprint for 2015
was approximately 1.6 million metric tonnes.
CC14.2
Please indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported Scope 3 emissions
Third party verification or assurance process in place
CC14.2a
Please provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken, and attach the relevant statements
Verification or
assurance
cycle in place Status in the
current
reporting
year Type of
verification
or
assurance
Annual
process
Complete
Limited
assurance
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change 2016/Shared
Documents/Attachments/CC14.2a/EY­HPE Review Report and Transmittal
Letter.pdf
2­4
Annual
process
Complete
Limited
assurance
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate Change 2016/Shared
Documents/Attachments/CC14.2a/HP­EY_FY15 Sustainability
Assurance_Independent Accountants Review Report.pdf
1­3
Page/Section
reference
Attach the statement
Relevant
standard
Attestation
standards
established by
AICPA (AT101)
Attestation
standards
established by
AICPA (AT101)
Proportion of
reported Scope 3
emissions
verified (%)
100
100
CC14.3
Are you able to compare your Scope 3 emissions for the reporting year with those for the previous year for any sources?
Yes
CC14.3a
Please identify the reasons for any change in your Scope 3 emissions and for each of them specify how your emissions compare to the previous year
Sources of
Scope 3
emissions
Use of sold
products
Reason for
change
Emissions
value
(percentage)
Direction
of
change
Comment
Emissions
reduction
activities
15
Decrease
Greenhouse gas emissions related to product use fell by 15% compared to 2014, largely due to continued efforts to reduce
server energy consumption. A continued shift from larger desktops to smaller, less energy intensive desktops, notebooks, and
tablets was another factor.
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
37/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
CC14.4
Do you engage with any of the elements of your value chain on GHG emissions and climate change strategies? (Tick all that apply)
Yes, our suppliers
Yes, our customers
CC14.4a
Please give details of methods of engagement, your strategy for prioritizing engagement and measures of success
HP Co. prioritizes engagement with Tier 1 production and non­production suppliers, logistics service providers and consortiums to influence climate change strategies and GHG emissions.
Our strategy for engagement includes:
• Requiring annual GHG emissions inventory and goal reporting by 95% of production suppliers, and GHG emissions reporting by non­production and logistics suppliers
• Incentivizing suppliers to set and achieve GHG emissions­reduction goals through our supplier SER scorecard
• Facilitating supplier energy efficiency education programs
• Deploying efficiency initiatives for transportation suppliers
• Developing and continuously improving supplier support tools and guidance on GHG emissions reduction in collaboration with industry consortium Electronic Industry Citizenship
Coalition (EICC)
Our measurement for success is determined by tracking the percentage of suppliers reporting to HP Co. in each category and reductions in emissions. In 2008, HP Co. became the first major information technology (IT) company to measure and publish aggregated manufacturing supply chain GHG emissions (for the year 2007).
Measurement and reporting are the first steps towards encouraging our suppliers to establish GHG emissions­reduction programs with tangible targets. In 2014 (latest year data is
available), 94% of our production suppliers (by spend) had GHG emissions reduction targets in place. Our supplier tracking program enabled us to better understand our supply chain
GHG impacts and how they relate to HP’s overall carbon footprint. The data also helped our suppliers recognize the potential for environmental and cost savings in their businesses. Our supply chain accounts for 41% of HP Co.’s carbon footprint. To address this portion of our footprint, we set our industry’s first supply chain GHG emissions reduction goal: to achieve a
20% decrease in first­tier manufacturing and product transportation­related GHG emissions intensity by 2020, compared with 2010. The goal was developed in consultation with Climate
Savers, a World Wildlife Fund (WWF) program that promotes aggressive private sector action to decrease GHG emissions. HP Co. met the goal by the end of 2013. Note that we reported
an 18% reduction as of 2013 in our 2015 CDP response; the percentage has since been recalculated due to suppliers submitting revised retrospective data.
We are confident that, in collaboration with us, our suppliers can further improve energy efficiency, reduce their emissions, and contribute to meeting our goals. In 2015, HP Co. achieved
40% of its secondary goal to help suppliers cut 2 million tonnes of their CO2e emissions between 2010 and 2020. Through HP Co.’s Energy Efficiency Program (EEP), participants
developed energy­saving action plans targeting local efficiency improvements. Through participation in EEP, suppliers have cumulatively avoided 800,000 tonnes CO2e of emissions and
saved more than $65 million.
HP Co. is also working to reduce GHG emissions with nonproduction suppliers. Nonproduction suppliers are those that do not provide materials, components or transport for HP Co.’s
products, such as travel vendors, telecommunication firms, and staffing companies. By the end of 2014, 69.6% of our first­tier nonproduction suppliers reported their GHG emissions—
through CDP or some other mechanism, compared with 65% in the prior fiscal year. We will continue to train and support these suppliers to improve GHG emissions disclosure and plan to
publish data covering more of our nonproduction supply chain.
HP Co. selects logistics service providers (LSPs) that maintain high standards in social and environmental responsibility (SER), in line with our Supplier SER Agreement and HP Co.’s
EICC Code of Conduct. These LSPs continually look to increase energy and fuel efficiency through improved routes and upgraded engine technologies. To measure progress, we require
LSPs to track GHG emissions associated with the transport of HP products. In 2013, we began to explicitly consider environmental performance when selecting LSPs, along with cost,
turnaround time, and other factors.
Additionally, we work with a number of groups focused on decreasing the environmental impact of commercial freight, such as Green Freight Asia, Green Freight Europe, International Air
Transport Association, Clean Cargo Working Group, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) SmartWay. Through these partnerships and related internal efforts, HP Co. is driving
reduced logistics environmental impacts by helping to develop new standards and calculation methodologies for environmentally responsible product transportation. In the United States,
we ship 100% of HP products using SmartWay road transportation carriers designated by the U.S. EPA. SmartWay trucks consume about 18% less fuel than conventional class 8 freight
trucks.
CC14.4b
To give a sense of scale of this engagement, please give the number of suppliers with whom you are engaging and the proportion of your total spend that they represent
Number
of
suppliers
109
% of
total
spend
(direct
and
indirect)
84%
Comment
In 2015, HP Co. collected GHG emissions and other environmental­related information from 109 of our production suppliers for the 2014 reporting year (the latest
year for which data is available). These suppliers represented 95% of our first tier production suppliers by spend. That year, we also obtained information from 39
of our first tier nonproduction suppliers for the 2014 reporting year. These suppliers represented 31% of our first tier nonproduction suppliers by spend.
Nonproduction suppliers are those that do not provide materials, components or transport for our products, such as travel vendors, telecommunication firms, and
staffing companies.
CC14.4c
If you have data on your suppliers’ GHG emissions and climate change strategies, please explain how you make use of that data
How you
make use
of the data
Please give details
Use in
supplier
scorecards
In 2013, we updated our procurement scoring process, placing greater emphasis on SER performance in the business award process. Rather than include SER as an
integral part of our overall supplier scorecard, which we have done for many years, the updated scorecard and five­tier supplier rating system acts as a multiplier to our
general supplier performance management score. This new approach has resulted in significantly greater consideration of suppliers’ engagement and SER performance.
Suppliers with strong SER performance can increase their overall scorecard results, which increases their opportunities for new or expanded business. Suppliers with
persistently poor SER performance may see a reduction in their scorecard rating of up to 50% and a decrease in the business they are awarded. This scorecard offers
incentives for suppliers to report GHG emissions data to HP Co. and also to set and achieve GHG emissions­reduction goals.
Managing
physical
risks in the
supply
chain
HP Co.’s actions to reduce GHG emissions and mitigate the risks of climate change were especially evident in 2013, when we became the first IT company to publish a
global supply chain GHG emissions­reduction goal. Our target is to achieve a 20% decrease in first­tier manufacturing and product transportation­related GHG emissions
intensity by 2020, compared with 2010. GHG emissions data, collected directly from our suppliers, became the basis for our goal setting work. HP Co. met this target early,
in 2013.
Other
HP Co. trackeds progress against itsour new supply chain GHG emissions reduction goal through the data collected directly from suppliers. In addition to targeting 20%
decrease in first­tier manufacturing and product transportation­related GHG emissions intensity by 2020, compared with 2010, HP Co. has also set a goal to assist itsour
suppliers in preventing the emissions of 2 million metric tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent between 2010 and 2020 through specific supplier environmental improvement
projects. We also know how many of our suppliers have targets to reduce GHG emissions. By tracking supplier goals, we have seen an increase in efforts to reduce GHG
emissions. In 2014, 94% of our production suppliers (by spend) had GHG emissions reduction targets in place, up from 67% in 2008.
Further Information
Module: Sign Off
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
38/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Page: CC15. Sign Off
CC15.1
Please provide the following information for the person that has signed off (approved) your CDP climate change response
Name
Renee Morin (HPE) and David Eichberg
(HP Inc.)
Job title
Living Progress Stakeholder Engagement, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, and Global Sustainability
Programs, HP Inc.
Corresponding job category
Environment/Sustainability
manager
Further Information
Module: ICT
Page: ICT1. Data center activities
ICT0.1a
Please identify whether "data centers" comprise a significant component of your business within your reporting boundary
Further Information
Page: ICT2. Provision of network/connectivity services
ICT0.1b
Please identify whether "provision of network/connectivity services" comprises a significant component of your business within your reporting boundary
Further Information
Page: ICT3. Manufacture or assembly of hardware/components
ICT0.1c
Please identify whether "manufacture or assembly of hardware/components" comprises a significant part of your business within your reporting boundary
Further Information
Page: ICT4. Manufacture of software
ICT0.1d
Please identify whether "manufacture of software" comprises a significant component of your business within your reporting boundary
Further Information
Page: ICT5. Business services (office based activities)
ICT0.1e
Please identify whether "business services (office based activities)" comprise a significant component of your business within your reporting boundary
Yes
ICT5.1
Please provide a description of the parts of your business that fall under "business services (office based activities)"
ICT5.2
Please provide your absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions and electricity consumption for the business services (office based activities) component of your business
Scope 1 emissions (metric
tonnes CO2e)
Business activity
Scope 2 emissions (metric
tonnes CO2e)
Annual electricity
consumption (MWh)
Electricity data collection
method
Comment
Business services (office based
activities)
ICT5.3
Please describe your gross combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions for the business services (office based activities) component of your business in metric tonnes per square meter
Intensity
figure
0.2203
Metric
numerator
metric
tonnes
CO2e
Metric
denominator
Square
meter
% change from
previous year
13.4
Direction of change from
previous year
Decrease
Reason for change
Comment
Scope 1 and 2 emissions decreased significantly between 2014 and 2015
due to Emission Reduction Activities.
ICT5.4
Please describe your electricity use for the provision of business services (office based activities) component of your business in MWh per square meter
Intensity figure
Metric numerator
MWh
Metric denominator
Square meter
% change from previous year
Direction of change from previous year
Reason for change
Comment
Further Information
Page: ICT6. Other activities
ICT0.1f
Please identify whether "other activities" comprise a significant component of your business within your reporting boundary
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
39/40
2/8/2017
Climate Change 2016 Information Request ­ Hewlett­Packard
Further Information
CDP: [D][­,­][D2]
https://www.cdp.net/sites/2016/95/23195/Climate%20Change%202016/Pages/DisclosureView.aspx
40/40