Recession stalls firms’ carbon footprint cuts
7 December 2009 | By Luke McLeod-Roberts
Related Articles
Top firms back new code to measure carbon output
3 September 2008
Taskforce tackles legal carbon footprints
28 April 2008
Together we can do our bit to address climate change
30 June 2008
DLA Piper, Eversheds and Linklaters attain silver standard in CSR charter
15 June 2009
City firms worst on carbon, first LSA report reveals
11 December 2008
Many of the UK’s major law firms have reduced their carbon footprints over the last financial year, but the economic downturn has been singled out as an obstacle to further progress.

Nigel Knowles
Law firm network the Legal Sector Alliance (LSA), which seeks to establish best practice for the profession, has published a survey of its members, which together represent around a quarter of the solicitors in England and Wales.
The report, which has been launched to coincide with the Copenhagen negotiations for the next stage of the Kyoto protocol, indicates that 35 per cent of respondents achieved reductions in their carbon footprint during 2008-09, while more than half (55 per cent) anticipate carbon reductions during the coming year.
LSA chair Sir Nigel Knowles said: “The LSA is an outstanding example of what can be achieved by adopting a collaborative approach to combating climate change.”
Firms indicated that energy savings had been made by switching off computers, turning down heating, introducing energy-efficient lighting and air conditioning, encouraging employees to keep travel diaries, calculating individual employee carbon footprints and recycling IT equipment.
However, the report states that the downturn and apathetic employees have prevented further advancement. “The adverse business impacts of the current economic environment contributed to many organisations reporting that the payback period for investment in energy-efficient and sustainable products and services can be too long,” says the report. “One global organisation highlighted that the recession had contributed to increased business travel as employees were increasingly working with clients in other jurisdictions.”
But Andrew Whitehead, head of the energy practice at LSA founder member Martineau argued that there should not just be a simple trade-off between economic savings and carbon reduction. “Firms should be doing things which both reduce their carbon footprint and improve their bottom line at the same time,” he said. “However, [it is more difficult in the current economic climate] to make capital expenditure such as greening your energy supplier.”
And many LSA members have pointed to the limited control they have over rented office space. “Seventy to 80 per cent of a firm’s carbon footprint is associated with its building,” said Whitehead. “Unless you downgrade the building, it doesn’t matter whether you reduce your total number of staff, you’ve still got that cost.”
However this may change with the implementation of the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC), which will be introduced by the UK Government from April 2010.
The scheme will oblige all firms whose electricity consumption is above a certain threshold to report their usage. Firms will have to forecast their consumption and buy allowances at £12 per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted. All businesses will have their results published in a league table.
Firms in managed premises may try to avoid the potentially complex reporting process, but the costs could still be passed on to them by their landlords.
Climate change is an increasingly important practice area for UK firms, according to the report. Around 43 per centof respondents advised clients “on opportunities and obligations arising from and under climate change law.” Allen & Overy, Linklaters and SJ Berwin are among the LSA’s City members that have advised on measures such as carbon trading and the clean development mechanism. In contrast, the LSA’s high street members often said that they had not provided advice in this area because it is not relevant to their area of work.
However, Whitehead said that this group of smaller firms could be missing a trick. “If you’re a high street practice advising on conveyancing you’ve got to think about the physical impact of climate change [and issues such as] installing photovoltaic panels and what happens when you move house.”
Last year the inaugural ranking of LSA firm footprints revealed that Allen & Overy, Lovells, Slaughter and May and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer had the largest carbon footprints per member of staff (The Lawyer, 11 December, 2008). The 18 founder members of the LSA will publish their latest carbon footprints later this month.
Law firms’ Green measures
Communication and employee engagement: Awareness days, emails, intranet pages, weekly newsletters and posters highlighting ‘green’ best practice. Incorporation of
sustainability training into employee induction process. Appointment of green champions in each office and environmental work included in pro bono activity.
Client advice: Assistance through client briefings, newsletters and e-bulletins, issues-specific publications and articles, presentations, seminars and workshops.


Readers' comments (3)
Richard Morley | 7-Dec-2009 4:28 pm
If firms are advising on climate change they may be well placed to get their own houses in order. Envido are helping law firms like Linklaters deliver significant savings in cost and carbon with 12 month payback times. Firms not in the CRC may be eligable for interest free loans to procure carbon saving technologies from the Carbon Trust of which Envido are an appointed provder www.envido.co.uk
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rural bliss | 7-Dec-2009 5:06 pm
What a load of hot air.
It makes me laugh to see all these holier than thou law firms wittering on about their carbon footprints.
I bet the partners haven't swapped their Mercs and BMW's for Fiat Pandas, And I bet they still swan off for their three or four foreign holidays each year - "Do as I say, not as I do".
Climate change is the religion of hypocrites. If governments really believed the effects were as drastic as the experts say there would be an immediate ban on all unnecessary travel.
In reality it's just another means for governments to control and restrict the lives of their citizens and to distract them from the fact that their economy is heading for bankruptcy.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9-Dec-2009 7:00 am
Dear Rural bliss,
So you don't think firms should save money by cutting unnecessary power usage and prolonging equipment lifespans?
Even if you don't believe in climate change, surely the bottom line will matter.
The trade off? As simple as flicking a switch.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment