Environmental accounting
Expenses
The table page 47 presents the total costs versus savings for the three key resources used in our industrial processes (energy, water and chemicals).
The costs include all environmental expenses for water, waste water and air treatment, recycling of water and chemicals, waste transportation and disposal, as well as costs related to environ- mental management systems, audits, permits and remediation. They also include sampling and analysis of water, waste water, recycled chemicals, ground, air and external noise as well as the depreciation of equipments and investment in the upgrading of environmental facilities. The 2007 costs were underestimated and we report in 2008 the cost we did not report last year.
Savings
On an annual basis, we calculate our savings as follows: a baseline is set every year and the expected consumption for the following year is determined with the assumption that there are no impro- vement actions taken. Every year, the real consumption (including energy, water and chemical saving programs) is measured against the projection to show actual savings.
In 2008, our total savings was US$303m with net savings of US$262m once costs are deducted. The decrease in total saving is linked to the decrease of production volume.
Environmental investments
Despite the fact that our environmental investments have decreased compared to 2007, we have continued to upgrade our infrastructure.
In order to achieve our objectives for a reduction in carbon emis- sions from Perfluorinated Compounds (PFCs), during the process of transferring from one site to another, all the abatement systems of the receiving sites have been upgraded.
In order to reach our objectives in energy savings we continuous- ly upgrade our manufacturing equipments.
Programs for the reduction of natural resources l
j
2.1lST’s programs to reduce the use of energy, water and chemicals at all sites are the foundation of our longstanding eco-efficiency approach to environmental stewardship and they have saved the company around US$1,200m over eight years. Once established and identified in any given site, environmental good practices are deployed in other manufacturing plants and building installa- tions across the company. Most of the projects have a pay-back threshold below three years, meaning that the money invested to increase equipment-related and other kinds of efficiency should be recouped within a three-year period.
As part of our culture of spreading good practice across the com- pany, many resource-efficient projects have been implemented in other sites in 2008:
• water and heat recovery was put in place to reduce water draw down and natural gas consumption at Agrate, Italy;
• a new VOC abatement system was also installed at Agrate; • a water reclaim project was completed at Bouskoura, Morocco; • an ultra filtration water plant was installed at Muar, Malaysia; • a water recycling system and a die saw waste water recovery were installed at Shenzhen, China;
• a micro filtration and water recovery plant was installed at Kirkop, Malta.
5
You can find the disclosure on management approach in the html version of this reportM
For information on the indicators presented in this section, please refer to the Reader’s Guide at the beginning of this reportEnvironmental burden: net values
l EN16 l EN17 l EN 19 l EN 20 l EN26 l STEV21 l
j
4.1 lj
4.3 lj
4.4 lEmissions to air indicators Units 2005 2006 2007 2008
Global warming* MTCE 626,420 563,363 478,884 404,319
Ozone depletion Kg R11 Eq 78 135 171 62
VOCs Tons 311 290 262 244
Atmospheric acidification Kg SO2 Eq 81,509 72,951 58,178 63,142
Photochemical Oxidant Creation Kg ethylene Eq 46,767 65,974 15,761 48,969
Air emission toxicity** Kg PH3 Eq 7,532 3,737 4,881 4,720
Emissions to water***
Eutrophication Kg [P+N] 387,051 385,031 381,889 414,730
Aquatic oxygen demand Kg COD**** 443,870 354,965 351,967 834,032
Heavy metals to water Kg heavy metals 17,522 13,279 13,277 10,354
Aquatic ecotoxicity Kg Cu Eq 11,490 13,964 10,398 7,598
(*) Includes direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from our manufacturing plants and indirect emissions from energy consumption and transport, reported in Metrics Tons of Carbon Equivalence (MTCE). Does not include GHG emissions from controlled manufacturing sites, subcontractors and foundries.
(**) Emissions of substances are considered only if they exceed the minimum threshold of 3ppm, expressed in phosphine equivalent. For Volatile Organic Compounds, Atmospheric Acidification, Photochemical Oxidant Creation and Air Emission Toxicity the Particulate Matter is not covered.
(***) Domestic waste water is included.
(****) Total Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD).
Environmental costs versus savings l EN30 l STEV8 l STEV35 l STEV58 l US$m
Indicators 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total costs 35 34 35 28 41 Energy savings 91 107 129 201 192 Water savings 19 22 26 27 25 Chemical savings 64 74 82 90 86 total saving 174 203 237 318 303
Balance (cost savings) 139 179 202 290 262
the method used to calculate the savings shown in this table is the following:
1) we set a baseline using the 1994 model with the assumption that there are no installation enhancements; 2) this baseline is projected each year (in relation to the quantities produced);
3) each year, the actual value is compared to this projection; and
4) the result shows the theoretical benefits due to the installation improvements concerning the savings for energy, water and the use of chemicals.
Total costs cover expenditure of environmental management areas (including waste and remediation) and yearly net investment and equipment depreciation.
0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 0.16 1.96 2.45 2.99 1.90 1.33 1.83 2.10 1.20 2.00 0.75 0.92 0.53 0.67 0.48
Environmental investments l EN30 l STEV6 l
Water recycled and reused Water from
wells on suppliers
Water losses through evaporation ST waste water treatment plant External waste water treatment plant Clean water discharged Former point of abatment estimation Water content of liquid waste St Site A B
Location violation Fine Corrective action(s) Status
Ang Mo Kio
(Singapore) In June 2008, an ammonia scrubber has been out of control during a short period of time. As a result, a white irritating powder has been emitted with no major damage to people, nor perma- nent pollution on ground. A fine has been issued by the Sin- gapore Authority.
US$
3.3k Implementa-tion of a quar- terly audit by a third party on the scrubber’s performance.
Closed
Compliance with environmental laws and regulation
IEN28 I
ST sites with internal Water Waste Treatment Plant ST sites without internal Water Waste Treatment Plant
Environmental incidents 2008 I EN23I
A minor case of soil contamination by solvents occurred in Tours, France, in 2006. Investigations were completed in 2007 and remediation is ongoing.
A groundwater organic contamination identified at our site in Rennes, France, in 2006 has been investigated in collaboration with local authorities. A remediation plan was launched in early 2008 and is still on going. An incident occurred in June 2008 at the Ang Mo Kio site in Singapore (as detailed below).
Point of measurement
Emissions to water
Environmental Performance overview 08
Objectives 08
Reduce energy consumption by 5%*
Reduce water consumption by 5%*
Reduce chemical consumption by 5%*
HIGH LEvEL OBJECtIvE