Terna in comparison

CO2 emissions: comparative data

Comparison of Terna with other companies as regards the emission of greenhouse gases was done by using total direct and indirect emissions in CO2 equivalent thousands of tonnes as a reference.

Both the figures of the transmission companies (TSO panel), the bigger listed Italian companies (FTSE-MIB) and the international sustainability leaders (SM-Supersector Leaders) were taken into consideration.

The emissions in absolute terms do not reflect the various companies' performance in the efficient use of energy and in limiting climate change emissions, which should be assessed over time and with reference to normalisation factors which eliminate the differences deriving from the varying nature of business and the size of the company.

In the absence of significant normalisation factors valid for all sectors, it was deemed in any case of interest to present the company data on CO2 emissions in absolute terms - despite the limited comparability. Such figures, which vary greatly in terms of magnitude from one case to another, at least provide an indication of the size of greenhouse gas emissions - and therefore of the practical need to contain them from the point of view of sustainability, in the various sectors and various companies.

For example, of the TSOs, the highest figure, (in line with the analysis of the 2010 data) is for Eskom which operates in South Africa and includes electricity generation among its many activities, while the lowest is for ISA, a TSO which operates in Latin America and does not deal with electricity production or distribution.

For 2012, the emission of greenhouse gases related to Terna' activities was 140.0 CO2 equivalent thousand tons; in 2011, the year for which comparative figures are available, the emissions were 136.4 CO2 equivalent thousand tons.

TSO Panel: 17 figures available; average CO2 emissions: 26,121.9 thousand tonnes CO2; minimum value: 3.5 (ISA – Latin America); maximum value: 231,900 (Eskom - South Africa). In this comparison Terna comes out below the average, which is the highest of the averages of the three panels and influenced by values registered by transmission operators who also own electricity generation businesses.

FTSE-MIB Panel: 23 figures available(1); average emissions of CO2: 9,472.7 thousand tonnes CO2; minimum value: 12.3 (Ubi Banca); maximum value: 123,832.0 (Enel) Terna is one of the big Italian companies with lower emissions, well below average and with total emissions only just higher than those of banks and insurance companies, the category with the lowest values.

RobecoSAM Panel - Supersector Leaders: 19 figures available; average CO2 emissions: 5,997.2 thousand tonnes CO2; minimum value: 10.1 (Telenet Media); maximum value: 51,810.0 (Repsol – Oil and Gas). In this comparison too, Terna confirms a quantity of emissions well below average. The extreme variability of the company figures makes a graphic representation of little significance; the table shows the minimum, average and maximum values in the three panels considered.

Greenhouse gas emissions - thousands of tonnes  CO2 - 2011
  TSO FTSE-MIB RobecoSAM - Supersector Leaders
Average 26,121.9 9,472.7 5,997.2
Max 231,900.0 123,832.0 51,810.0
Min 3.5 12.3 10.1
Standard deviation 62,294.2 27,556.6 14,484.9
Terna 136.4
(1) In the case of the indicator of CO2 emissions, for two of the companies on the FTSE MIB panel the figure published in the document “CDP Italy 100 Climate Change report 2012” as part of the Carbon Disclosure Project, was considered.

SF6 leaks: comparative data

The use of SF6 gas is a specific feature of the transmission operators sector, only figures for companies belonging to the TSO panel were considered.

The comparison between Terna and other transmission operators relative to SF6 leaks was conducted by taking the percentage of leaks compared to the total gas used as the reference.

In 2012, the average incidence of SF6 leaks for Terna was 0%; in 2011, the year for which comparative figures are available, the incidence was 0.60%.

Compared to the other transmission operators the incidence of SF6 leaks for Terna was better than average, confirming the results reported in the Sustainability Report for the last two years.  

TSO Panel: 14 figures available; average incidence of SF6 leaks: 0.85% (a decrease from the 2010 values); minimum value: 0.1%; maximum value: 3.1%; standard deviation: 0.8%.Terna comes out better than average.

The comparison with figures for 2011 is based on a larger number of companies (14 instead of 11). Considering for 2011 also, only the 11 companies considered in the previous edition, the average incidence value would be 1.1%, in line with the calculations of last year. 

INCIDENCE OF SF6 LEAKAGE*

INCIDENCE OF SF6 LEAKAGE*

* The incidence of the leaks was calculated as the percentage of leaks out of the total gas contained in the equipment.

Water consumption: comparative data

The comparison of Terna with other companies as regards the use of water was conducted by taking both total consumption and consumption in cubic metres per employee as reference figures.

The figures of the transmission companies (TSO panel), as well as of the bigger listed Italian companies (FTSE-MIB) and of the international sustainability leaders (SM-Supersector Leaders) were taken into consideration.

In all the panels the figures show substantial non-comparability, in that consumption reflects the varying importance of water in production processes, as well as the different sizes of the companies, not necessarily reflected by the number of employees. The companies involved in electricity generation which use water in the production process - generally for cooling the plants - are at the top of the ranking for pro capita consumption; those companies providing intangible services (such as banks) occupy the lowest positions. The highest pro capita consumption figure is for ESKOM, the South African TSO which includes among its activities the production and distribution of electricity, while the lowest is for an Australian and New Zealand Banking Group.

Despite the intrinsic limitations of the comparison and in the absence of more effective normalisation factors than the number of employees, it was deemed in any case of interest to present the main figures on water consumption. Such figures, while unsuitable for being interpreted as a reflection of the various companies' performance in the efficient use of the resource, do at least provide an indication of the importance of the use of water - and therefore of its practical importance in terms of sustainability- in the various sectors and various companies. In the comparisons made, the overall use of water was considered without distinction between fresh water and sea water.

For 2012, total water consumption for Terna was 219,311 (63.9 cubic metres pro capita), an increase compared to 2011 (see page 125), the year for which comparative figures are available, (176,525.0 total cubic metres, equivalent to 50.5 cubic metres pro capita).

TSO Panel: 11 figures available;

  • total water consumption – thousands of cubic metres: average 31,626,504.3; minimum value: 64.8 (REE-Spain); maximum value: 327,252,000.0 (ESKOM - South Africa). The South African TSO is involved in the entire energy process, from production to distribution to the end customer. Last year the relative water consumption figures for Eskom were not included in the comparative data and this explains the sharp increase in the average figure, from 1,808,338.8 to 31,626,504.3 for total consumption and from 106,362.7 to 796,743.9 for pro capita consumption);
  • pro capita water consumption – cubic metres: average 796,743.9; minimum value: 39.8 (REE-Spain); maximum value: 7,527,706.9 (ESKOM - South Africa).

Terna is well below average for both total consumption and pro capita consumption. The average was strongly affected by the figures for operators not acting exclusively in the transmission of electricity but who also possess businesses involving electricity generation or the transport of natural gas.

FTSE-MIB Panel: 23 figures available;

  • total water consumption – thousands of cubic metres: average 125,863.1; minimum value: 37.5 (Banca Mediolanum); maximum value 2,583,870.0 (Eni);
  • pro capita water consumption – cubic metres: average 1,704.5; minimum value: 18.8 (Assicurazioni Generali); maximum value 32,837.7 (Eni).

In this case too, Terna's consumption (total and pro capita) is well below average. Specifically, Terna's pro capita consumption is only slightly above the average of the 8 companies on the panel providing banking and insurance services.

RobecoSAM Panel - Supersector Leaders: 17 figures available;

  • total water consumption – thousands of cubic metres: average 300,902.4; minimum value: 133.7 (Australian and New Zealand Banking Group); maximum value: 4,087,000.0 (Iberdola - Utilities);
  • pro capita water consumption – cubic metres: average 9,396.3; minimum value: 9.8 (Australian and New Zealand Banking Group); maximum value: 124,569.5 (Iberdola- Utilities).

In terms of worldwide sustainability best practices, Terna is well below average consumption.

The extreme variability of the company figures makes a graphic representation of little significance; the table shows the minimum, average and maximum values and the standard deviation in the three panels considered.


Water consumption: 2011
TSO FTSE-MIB RobecoSAM – Supersector Leaders
thousands of cubic metres cubic metres/
employee
thousands of cubic metres cubic metres/
employee
thousands of cubic metres cubic metres/
employee
Average 31,626,504.3 796,743.9 125,863.1 1,707.7 300,902.4 9,396.3
Max 327,252,000.0 7,527,706.9 2,583,870.0 32,837.7 4,087,000.0 124,569.5
Min 64.8 39.8 37.5 18.8 133.7 9.8
Standard deviation 98,150,430.7 2,245,743.8 537,256.3 6,807.9 985,382.5 30,148.3
Terna 176.5 50.5 176.5 50.5 176.5 50.5
Wherever not directly available the pro capita consumption figure was obtained by dividing total water consumption by the number of employees.

Production of waste: comparative data

The comparison of Terna with other companies as regards waste was conducted by taking both total production and pro capita production in cubic metres as reference points.

The figures of the transmission companies (TSO panel), as well as of the bigger listed Italian companies (FTSE-MIB) and of the international sustainability leaders (SM-Supersector Leaders) were taken into consideration.

The figures - both absolute and pro capita - show substantial non-comparability, in that they reflect differences in the type of business performed, and therefore in the generation of waste in the production processes, as well as the size of the companies, not necessarily reflected by the number of employees. The highest pro capita figure is for Enel, while the lowest is for Banca Intesa Sanpaolo (both belonging to the FTSE-MIB panel).

Despite the intrinsic limitations of the comparison and in the absence of more effective normalisation factors than the number of employees, it was deemed in any case of interest to present the main figures on waste production. Such figures, while unsuitable for being interpreted as a reflection of the various companies' performance in limiting environmental impact do at least provide an indication of the importance of waste, and therefore of its practical importance in terms of sustainability in the various sectors and various companies.

In 2012 Terna produced a total of 6,208.1 tonnes of waste. Waste production per employee was 1.8 tonnes, a decrease from 2011, the year for which comparative figures are available (7,198.1 tonnes total and 2.1 tonnes pro capita).

TSO Panel: 13 figures available;

  • Total waste production – tonnes: average 222,711.8; minimum value 41.9 (ISA – Latin America); maximum value 1,700,000.0 (National Grid – UK).
  • Pro capita waste production – tonnes: average 12.3; minimum value 0.1 (ISA – Latin America); maximum value 73.3 (National Grid – UK).

In this comparison Terna comes out below the average, greatly influenced by some transmission operators who also own electricity generation businesses.

FTSE-MIB Panel: 24 figures available;

  • Total waste production – tonnes: average 691,932.9; minimum value 676.2 (Ansaldo); maximum value 11,639,212.0 (ENEL);
  • Pro capita waste production – tonnes: average 12.1; minimum value 0.04 (Banca Intesa Sanpaolo); maximum value 154.4 (ENEL).

Compared to the listed companies in the FTSE-MIB, Terna comes out below average, with values comparable to those of service companies.

RobecoSAM Panel Supersector Leaders: 18 figures available;

  • Total waste production– tonnes: average 273,607.0; minimum value 106.0 (Telenet, Belgian company operating in the media sector); maximum value 1,495,500.0 (UPM, Finnish company operating in the forestry and paper manufacturing sector).
  • Pro capita waste production– tonnes: average 14.8; minimum value 0.1 (Telenet, Belgian company operating in the media sector); maximum value 93.8 (GPT Group, Australian real estate company).

Compared to worldwide sustainability best practices, Terna is well below average for waste production. The figure is strongly influenced by the extreme variety of the sectors considered, some of which produce large quantities of waste.

The extreme variability of the company figures makes a graphic representation of little significance; the table shows the minimum, average and maximum values and the standard deviation in the three panels considered.


Production of waste -2010
TSO FTSE-MIB RobecoSAM - Supersector Leaders
t t/employee t t/employee t t/employee
Average 222,711.8 12.3 691,932.9 12.1 273,607.0 14.8
Max 1,880,000.0 73.3 11,639,212.0 154.4 1,495,500.0 93.8
Min 41.9 0.1 676.2 0.04 106.0 0.1
Standard deviation 523,264.1 20.6 2,375,283.4 33.5 388,056.0 27.3
Terna 7,198.1 2.1 7,198.1 2.1 7,198.1 2.1
Wherever not directly available the pro capita waste production figure was obtained by dividing the total amount of waste produced by the number of employees.

Personnel turnover: comparative data

The comparison between Terna and other companies with regard to staff turnover was used a rate calculated by comparing the number of employees leaving to the number of employees at 31 December the previous year.  

As the staff turnover rate is an indirect indicator of the internal climate that affects every division of the company, the figures for transmission companies (TSO panel) and those of large companies listed on the Italian stock exchange (FTSE-MIB) were taken into account, as well as those for international leaders in sustainability (RobecoSAM - Supersector Leaders).

For 2012 Terna had a turnover rate of 3.0%, a reduction compared to the 4.4% of 2011, the year for which comparison data was available. Compared to other companies, Terna has a lower turnover rate than the average for all the reference panels. 

TSO panel: 12 figures available; average turnover rate: 4.9%; minimum value: 2.5%; maximum value: 8.2%; standard deviation: 1.9%. In this comparison, Terna is better than average, with the lowest value compared to the other panels, influenced by four companies with a rate of less than 4%.

FTSE-MIB panel: 23 figures available; average turnover rate: 7.2%; minimum value: 1.0%; maximum value: 18.5%; standard deviation: 4.9%. Terna is better than average for the FTSE-MIB panel of companies.

RobecoSAM - Supersector Leaders panel: 14 figures available; average turnover rate: 10.5%; minimum value: 2.2%; maximum value: 18.4%; standard deviation: 4.7%.

Even compared to the best global sustainability practices, Terna has a low turnover rate.

TSO TURNOVER RATE

TSO TURNOVER RATE

FTSE-MIB TURNOVER RATE

FTSE-MIB TURNOVER RATE

RobecoSAM - SUPER SECTOR LEADERS TURNOVER RATE

RobecoSAM - SUPER SECTOR LEADERS TURNOVER RATE

Training for employees: comparative data

The comparison between Terna and other companies with regard to training was made by using the annual per capita training hours as a basis.

As the staff turnover rate is an aspect of sustainability that affects every division of the company, the figures for transmission companies (TSO panel) and those of large companies listed on the Italian stock exchange (FTSE-MIB) were taken into account, as well as those for international leaders in sustainability (RobecoSAM - Supersector Leaders).

In 2012, Terna delivered 41 hours of training per capita, a reduction compared to the 51 hours in 2011 (please see page 142 for an explanation).

Compared to other companies, Terna was in first place for all three reference panels.  

TSO panel: 12 figures available; average hours per capita: 45.2; minimum value: 15.6; maximum value: 96.0; standard deviation: 21.8. In this comparison, Terna is above the average rate.

FTSE-MIB panel: 26 available figures (25 companies, one of which, Autogrill, has figures diversified by industrial sector), average hours per capita: 30.8; minimum value: 5.6; maximum value: 51.0; standard deviation: 15.4. Terna is in the top position for large Italian companies.

RobecoSAM - Supersector Leaders panel: 16 figures available; average hours per capita: 42.0; minimum value: 3.9; maximum value: 158.0; standard deviation: 39.0. Even with regard to the global best practices in sustainability, Terna is in the top position in terms of the quantity of training provided per employee.

TRAINING HOURS/TSO EMPLOYEE

TRAINING HOURS/TSO EMPLOYEE

TRAINING HOURS/FTSE-MIB EMPLOYEE

TRAINING HOURS/FTSE-MIB EMPLOYEE

TRAINING HOURS/RobecoSAM - SUPERSECTOR LEADERS EMPLOYEE

TRAINING HOURS/RobecoSAM - SUPERSECTOR LEADERS EMPLOYEE

Training hours were calculated on the basis of other published data. The transition from per capita training days to hours was made by assuming eight hours in a day.

Women/men remuneration gap: comparative data

The comparison between Terna and the other companies in terms of equal opportunities is based on the percentage salary gap between men and women, the result of the ratio between women's  and men’s basic annual salary for the various categories.

Although the salary gap is an aspect of sustainability that affects all sectors of the company, it was only possible to make a comparison with the Italian companies quoted on the FTSE-MIB because, for those in the other two panels, workers are categorised differently depending on the company and country, and this does not translate into the categories of senior, and junior executives and clerical staff used by Terna and most other Italian companies.

The percentage differential between women's and men's salaries at Terna was 79% for senior executives, 94% for junior executives and 94% for clerical workers. In 2011, the comparison year, the differential for junior executives and clerical workers was the same as for 2012, while for senior executives it was 80%. In comparison to other Italian companies on the FTSE-MIB, Terna is above average in terms of the gender salary gap for junior executives and clerical workers.

FTSE-MIB panel: 21 figures available (15 companies, two of which have data diversified according to the country or area); average salary differential: 84% senior executives, 90% junior executives, 88% clerical workers; minimum value: 64% senior executives, 57% junior executives, 40% clerical workers; maximum value: 100% senior executives, 113.2% junior executives, 100.0% clerical workers; standard deviation: 11% senior executives, 12% junior executives, 13% clerical workers.

The cases of complete equality of average pay, by gender, of senior and junior executives and clerical workers that could derive from the reference to contractual minimums only, indicates a potential lack of conformity in the definition of the basic salary applied by various companies.

GENDER PAY GAP - FTSE-MIB SENIOR EXECUTIVES (1)

GENDER PAY GAP - FTSE-MIB SENIOR EXECUTIVES

(1) For this table only, 19 figures were considered, as Ansaldo does not publish the value of the pay difference for senior executives in China.

GENDER PAY GAP - FTSE-MIB JUNIOR EXECUTIVES

GENDER PAY GAP - FTSE-MIB JUNIOR EXECUTIVES

GENDER PAY GAP - FTSE-MIB WHITE-COLLAR EMPLOYEES

GENDER PAY GAP - FTSE-MIB WHITE-COLLAR EMPLOYEES

 

Finally, in 2012, in line with the G3.1 version of the GRI protocol, some of the companies on the FTSE MIB panel also published data relating to the gender pay difference. With reference to 2011, a far lower volume of data was obtained for the salary gap compared to the figures referenced for the pay difference: this information was therefore not processed.