What can we learn from the recent BP situation?

I followed the events regarding BP in Whiting, Ind., quite intently. It’s the first time in a long time that I opened the newspaper and immediately started looking for something other than a Cubs’ recap right away, which shows where my priorities lie.

In short, BP decided to back off of its proposed increased dumping of ammonia and suspended solids into Lake Michigan after extreme consumer, environmental and political backlash.

Let me state this: I am a bit of a tree-hugger.

The perfect vacation for me is to backpack into an unspoiled wilderness and live in the elements for a week. I find that there is nothing more relaxing than to remove myself from the hustle and bustle of city life, perch myself high on a mountain, or next to a lake with a few friends and fishing rods, taking in the extreme beauty that Mother Nature has to offer. Now that’s heaven.

Needless to say, it’s easy to see where I fall in this argument with BP.

I believe that environmental and social consciousness, and a conscience, should come before profit. I’m not saying that hard work shouldn’t yield a profit, but there has to be a way to blend both, and steps like this make me think that we are moving closer to that. Not because of what corporations want, but because of what consumers are demanding.

However, I have to admit, I was surprised at the outcome with BP in Whiting. I thought the corporation would face some initial backlash, let the loudest voices eventually grow hoarse and then go on proceeding to plan. How wrong I was.

I wonder if BP would have received the same reaction 10 years ago if it had tried something like this. I’m willing to bet that it would have gotten some opposition, but it probably still would have gone ahead with its plans.

Things really have changed quite a bit in the last few years as more information comes to light about the severity of our environmental impacts. People are starting to listen.

Technically, the increased amount of waste BP wanted to dump into Lake Michigan was within federal regulations. Under current laws and standards, the energy giant had every right to do it.

I think what we learned here is a basic rule that we all learn at a very young age: just because you can do something, it doesn’t mean that you should.

Unfortunately, that pretty much flies in the face of how things work in our economy, especially with public corporations. Shareholders won’t buy or keep stock in a company that doesn’t bring in a high return on investment.

To keep our prices down and sales high, jobs are outsourced, pristine environments are often destroyed and sometimes cheap, harmful materials are used instead of top-quality options.

And as consumers, we—even we tree-huggers—generally just look the other way. We don’t really care what it took to keep our tube socks at $2 a pair, but the second we have to pay $5 a pair, there will be an outcry. A private company may be able to get away with that, but not a public one.

Shareholders would never let it happen.

There really is no money to be made in things like saving the environment, so why bother?

Unless, that is, the majority of consumers demand it. Then it becomes part of the sales process. Companies, even public ones, can use environmentally friendly practices to their advantage.

BP has the opportunity now to rewrite this story to its benefit. I could care less if it plays the hero in marketing ads. In fact, I think that it should. It would set a precedent.

Obviously, if there had been no consumer outcry, the energy giant would have continued on its merry way, but I’ll give officials credit for listening to the public. Tout that.

However, the thing that scares me the most is that consumers could be punished for their good intentions. This disruption of business operations could bring escalated costs.

After all, BP was trying to save a buck. Now, it could follow suit and pass those extra costs onto the consumer.

However, I would think that a company that made a profit of $22.3 billion in 2006 has the kind of resources to make this happen without it seriously affecting the consumer.

Not to mention that despite its position as one of the largest energy companies, BP still has some competition.

Profit will always be the name of the game, but fortunately, companies still need to get that dollar out of our pockets.

This situation proves that these companies do listen. They won’t change on their own, but they will change with our outraged voices and our hefty buying power urging them to do the right thing.

Contact news editor Mark Thomton at mthomton@thebusinessledger.com or at 630-428-8788.