FedEx and UPS vie to be greenest

“What we like to talk about is technology that is forward-looking and things we actually think will be implemented,” said John Formisano, vice president of Global Vehicles for FedEx Express. “That other company talks about only making right-hand turns. Our view is to have the right vehicle on the right route.”

UPS, for its part, wonders why Memphis-based FedEx doesn’t use Global Reporting Initiative “G3” standards -- a strict reporting protocol -- to calculate sustainability measures the way UPS does.

“Having some type of discipline gives us the ability to report holistically on the environmental, social and economic impact, or what’s called the triple bottom line,” said Steven Leffin, corporate sustainability manager and plant engineer at Sandy Springs-based UPS.

FedEx, in a 28-page “Global Citizenship Update” released this week to coincide with today’s Earth Day observances, said its carbon emissions worldwide were 16.2 million metric tons in 2009.

UPS’s emissions were 15.4 million metric tons of CO2 globally in 2008, according to its 106-page “Corporate Sustainability Report,” the most recent report available.

Newsweek ranked UPS No. 85 and FedEx No. 93 on the 2009 Top 500 Greenest Companies list. And Climate Counts gave UPS a better score than FedEx. The rankings are based on overall greenhouse gas emissions, use of recycled materials, and clear reporting of emission initiatives and reduction goals.

Both companies are captive to the high impact on the environment of their transportation businesses.

While UPS and FedEx have about 1,900 alternative-fuel vehicles each, those are small parts of their fleets. At FedEx, alt-vehicles make up 4 percent of its 45,000 delivery vehicles, while at UPS, they account for about 2 percent of 94,000 vehicles.

Joel Babbit, the CEO of Mother Nature Network, the Atlanta-based web channel for environmental news, said shareholders, customers and employees have come to see sustainability as an important corporate value.

“It is more than just (public relations) for these companies,” he said. “Many young and prospective employees are placing a high importance on how a company conducts itself -- they ask is it socially responsible when they consider working for them.”

Satish Jindel, president of SJ Consulting, a transportation and logistics firm in Pittsburgh, said FedEx and UPS “are in the public eye on a daily basis with their trucks.”

So they need alternative fuels and policies they can cite as doing their part to support environmental principles, Jindel said.

FedEx and UPS agree on one thing: Alternative-powered vehicles need government incentives and support to be affordable on a large scale.

Both companies have also run up against obstacles that have slowed alternative-fuel growth in the world at large.

All-electric vehicles, for example, are a lot more expensive than regular trucks and have a limited range.

FedEx has all-electric trucks in London, for instance, but they lack extra power to keep drivers warm in extreme cold, said Formisano, which is why FedEx decided to send its first all-electric trucks in the United States to Los Angeles.

UPS operates vehicles that use compressed natural gas. But putting in the infrastructure to fuel up those trucks is costly and wouldn’t work every where, the company said.

Leffin called UPS’s alternative fleet more a “rolling laboratory” than a company-wide solution.

Fifty-three percent of UPS’s carbon emissions actually come from its airline, vs. 33 percent from ground operations. Leffin said the company has spent 30 years trying to boost fuel-efficiency in the air. The company also offers “carbon neutral” shipping in which customers pay a fee to offset the impact of their shipment. Fees are being waived this week. FedEx says that it will calculate the carbon but let customers decide how to offset it.

“Sustainability is a journey,” said Leffin. “If Mother Earth got less carbon as a result, then we’re acting where it matters most.”