Reporter:When you started focusing on the environment at Wal-Mart, you were under an organized attack from union-backgroups that were attacking you for wage policies,immigration policies,health policies,but not necessarily for enverionmental policies.So what made you decide to bring the environment to the environment to forefront of what Wal-Mart was doing?
记者：当您致力于整顿沃尔玛的环境问题时，很多工会支持的小组正在对您制定的工资政策、移民政策、健康政策进行着有组织的抨击，而并没有涉及到环境问题。那么究竟是什么原因使您决定将环境问题作为沃尔玛要处理的首要问题呢?
Scott:It's consistent with what we say our purpose is, and that is saving people money so they can live better. We looked at what Sam Walton started and how he developed the company. It was by eliminating waste, bringing in efficiencies.And by thinking about sustainability from our standpoint it really is about how do you take cost out, which is waste,wherther it's through recycling,torough less energy use in the store, through the constructinn techniques we're using,through the supply chain. All of those things are simply the ceration of waste. We found it's consistent with the entire model we've had since Sam opened the first store.
斯科特：这与我们的企业目标一致，即为人们节省资金以使他们过上更好的生活。我们研究了山姆·沃尔顿创立和发展沃尔玛的过程，最后得到的结论便是减少浪费，提高效率。站在我们的角度来考虑公司长期发展，那实际上就是降低成本勤俭节约，无论是通过回收利用、节约现有能源、改善施工技术的方式，还是通过控制供应链的方式，因为在这些过程中便会产生浪费所以我们认为这与山姆最初的设想是完全一致的。
Reporter:So it's all about cost reduction. It's not about trade-offs? Is there never a point where you say, gosh,this is going to cost us a little more, but it's going to be much better for the environment?
记者：所以这都是关于降低成本的，这并非是折衷的举措?您会不会认为，虽然做这些事成本花费要高一些，但对保护环境更有益处?
Scott:Well,there are things that you, as a business, have to think about that something may be more cost-effective but is just wrong pollution of the water or those kinds of things.Those things come into play. One of the things people talk about is, will people pay more? Our question is, why should they have to? If you can take the waste out,if you can take the cost out, and you can provide people who are working people living paycheck to paycheck with an opportunity to be more sustainable,we think they will react to that,and they do.
斯科特:作为一个企业，不得不考虑如何更有效地节约成本，但某些节约成本的方法可能是错误的比如为了降低成本可能会导致水资源的污染，这种事时有发生人们常常讨论的一件事情是:人们需要为此而付出更多吗?而我我们所考虑的问题是:人们为什么要付出更多呢?如果可以减少浪费，降低成本，那就能为那些靠工资辛苦生活的工人们提供一个机会，使他们能够更好地生活，我想他们会积极响应，而且他们的确是这么做的。
Reporter:Will your consumers pay more for products that are environmentally green? Is there any willingness to pay more for something that is perceived as being good for the environment?
记者：您认为顾客会愿意以更高的价格购买那些对环境有益的商品吗?顾客会有这样的意向吗?
Scott:Depending on the store, you see a difference in how people are reacting. Where you have a store that's in a higher-household-income area, you can see that people can afford to and are willing to pay a little bit more. People in general are living paycheck to paycheck for a broad amount of American society. It's not that they don't care about sustainability; it's that they can't afford to pay more. They can't pay a dollar more for the cleaning supply. They can't pay $3 more for a T-shirt.
斯科特：这取决于商店所处的位置，顾客对此的反应因人而异、如果把商店设在高收入区，你会发现那里的人们有能力也愿意多付一些钱去购买这类商品一般而言，美国大部分人都是依靠薪水生活的.不是他们不关心社会的可持续发展，而是他们的收入水平不允许他们为此而花更多的钱，他们不会为清洁服务而多花1美元，也不会为一件T恤多花3美元。
Reporter:If we impose either a tax or a cap-and-trade system on carbon emissions, that is like a tax,that means that those shoppers at Wal-Mart will have to pay more for most of the things they're buying from you, doesn't it?
记者：如果对碳排放征税或者设立类似税收的限额交易体系.这是否意味着顾客在沃尔玛购买商品时就不得不比以前花费更多?
Scott:I think that's very possible. We believe a carefully crafted carbon program is something that probably is inevitable and probably positive. What we would ask is that people be mindful of the general population and not be so ideological that we simply say we're going to go from here to here and, yes, people have to pay more but it's worth it. How do you craft something that does the right thing for the environment and for sustainability but doesn't leave behind the basic population that we serve the most?
斯科特：很有可能，我们认为一个精心设计的关于碳排放的规划是必然会出现的，而且还会产生积极的作用我们想要提醒人们的是.大家要留意总体的情况，而不是简单地想我要从哪去哪，人们是会比以前花费的更多但这是值得的。怎样做才能最大限度地既对环境有利，又能有利于经济的可持续发展.但同时又不会让我的顾客流失呢?
Reporter:Is 60% to 80% by 2050 too much? A 60% to 80% reduction [in carbon-dioxide emissions]?
记者：到2050年，二氧化碳的排放量减少60%一80%，这会不会太多?
Scott:You're outside of my knowledge base. We have a very small Washington office. We have no scientists. We are a，and we operate stores that serve customers.
斯科特：这我不太清楚我们在华盛顿只有一个很小的办公室，我们不是科学家，我们只不过是零售商，经营商店为顾客服务。
Reporter:But let's take it to a level that you understand very well, and that is that you have done all that you've done in the past three years. You've focused on products,you've gotten your suppliers focused on these issues,you've gotten your trucking fleet focused on these issues,you've gotten your stores focused on these issues. And yet with all of that, you're still growing your,carbon footprint by, according to your own reporting, what, 8% or 9% a year. So how, after making all the efforts that you've made in the past three years and you still see your carbon footprint expanding at that rate, can we possibly hope to do 60% to 80% reductions by 2050?
记者：那让我们来聊聊您知道的东西，您在过去三年一直都是这么做的L您把精力放在产品上的同时，也让供应商、运输队和卖场把注意力放在产品上尽管如此，正如您自己的报告中所提到的，你们公司的碳排放量每年仍上涨8%一9%。尽管在过去三年里您做了这么多，但是碳排放量仍在以一定速度增加，照这种情况发展，到2050年碳排放量怎么能减少60%一80%呢?
Scott:First of all, we have started on a program that has a long,long way to go. At the store level, we have what are called PSPs, which are Personal Sustainability Programs which encourage Wal-Mart employees to embrace a cause in areas such as environmental sustainability or personal health. We have, I think, 500,000 people who are signed up and have started recycling or using CFLs or that are doing something related to wellness.We have these groups of people working on different things from our supply chain all the way into our communities.There is an energy about it,and it's real and it makes a difference. But it is simply the start.
斯科特：首先,我们已经开始了一项长期计划。在卖场方面我们在进行PSP计划，即个人可持续发展计划，这个计划鼓励沃尔玛的员工在环境可持续性发展和个人健康等方面有所建树我想我们已经有50万人签了约并且已经开始进行回收利用，或是为保护环境和维护身心健康作出贡献。从供应链到我们的工会，很多人都参与了这样的活动大家对此很有热情，而且确实制造了不同，但这只是一个开端。
Reporter:On an issue like packaging,of course,there's a long way you could go.There's significant groups of people out there now who are saying we shouldn't be bottling water. Why bottle water? It's just an environmental waste. How do you decide? You're still selling bottled water, I assume?
记者：当然，解决对于像包装这样的问题，你们还有很多要做的。有不少人认为，我们不应该使用瓶装水，为什么要用瓶子装水呢?那简直就是一种环境资源的浪费_你们对此如何打算?我想，你们现在还是在卖瓶装水吧?
Scott:A lot. If the customer wants bottled water, we are going to sell bottled water. Buteven if you're going to sell bottled water, you can sell it and have less of a negative impact. How have you arranged you so that it's the mos[一that it possibly can be? How do you price in a way that can help a customer make a choice that is more environmentally effective?
斯科特：是的，我们有很多瓶装水如果顾客需要瓶装水，那么我们就会卖。但是即使卖瓶装水，我们也能尽可能小地对环境造成伤害。怎样安排运输才能最有效地进行配送，如何合理地给商品定价从而帮助顾客进行选择而达到更好的环保效益?
Reporter:You have set as company goals zero waste and 100% renewable energy. Those are very ambitious goals. What you haven't told us is when.
记者：您将公司的目标定位为零污染和能源百分百再生，这是很有抱负的目标。但您没有说的是这个目标将在什么时间实现。
Scott:I don't have a clue,We are not scientists. And so do you set a goal that you're going to reduce this by this and this by this and you put the time frame out there? I'm almost 60 years old. You want to put a time frame out there of 10 years when I'm long retired and if they don't hit it, it doesn't matter. Why do that? Why not just say that ultimately we think this is possible that the technology will develop, that there are things that we can do. We've got solar now that is bein installed in a number of stores in California and Hawaii. We have wind that we're experimenting with. But we have 7,000 stores.I think these are opportunities for us. Do you think electricity is going to be cheaper in 10 years than it is today? We need to be experimenting today and understand what works and be out there so that we don't subject our shareholders to inappropriate cost-or our customers,because ultimately it is they who pay the bill.
斯科特：这我不能确定.我们不是科学家难道你一旦确定了一个减排目标，就会知道要通过这样减少多少排放，然后通过那个减少多少，还规定出具体的时间吗?我已经快60岁了，如果制定一个10年的目标，那么10年之后我早已退休，而如果人们没有实现这一目标，那也就这样了为什么要这样做呢?为什么不等到最后再说，技术很有可能发展到这一步，而我们也能够做这些事情了现在我们已经将太阳能装置安装在加利福尼亚和夏威夷的卖场里，而且我们还利用风能作试验不过我们有7000多家商店，我想我们还有很多机会。你认为10年之后的电价会比今天便宜吗?我们需要现在就来作试验，了解会有什么样的结果，那样我们才不至于让股东承担不必要的花费，或者让我们的顾客来承担，毕竟最终付账的是他们。
Reporter:When you launched this program several years ago, Wal-Mart at the time was getting some extraordinarily bad public relations.Today,if you look at the way Wal-Mart has been written about over the course of the past year, these green initiaives have generated enormously good public relations. Some people would say that's why you're doing it.This is all about public relations.
记者：当您几年前开始实施这个项目的时候，沃尔玛正在遭遇公关危机。但是如今，如果回头去看沃尔玛这几年开展的项目，就会发现这些环保活动已经使沃尔玛建立了很好的公众关系。有人说这正是你这样做的原因，即为了建立良好的公众关系。
Scott:You just need to work with our people. These things are real. The differences we are making are real. We face a number of challenges, and part of the challenges we face are related to the fact that we have probably the largest, most highly financed campaign against us in the history of business. Part of the issues we face are because we are not as good as we should be. We sat down and we said 10 years from now what will the people in the company wish we had done, such as we wish that the prior generation in management might have done? And the thing that stuck was that this world is going to become more and more sensitive to environmental sustainability. Whether it's three years from now or five years or 10 or I5, ultimately society is going to hold you accountable for whether or not you participated appropriately and the role you played in advancing this area of environmental sustainability
克斯特：你只有和我们的员工一起工作才能够了解，这些事情都是真实的，我们所做出的改变也是真实的。我们面对了很多的挑战，而其中有些可能是我们有史以来面临的最大最严峻的、对我们的融资活动的挑战，有一些事情的发生是因为我们做得还不够好。我们坐下来讨论，之后10年的时间里，公司里的人会希望我们做些什么，就像我们之前希望公司的管理层能够做到些什么一样，这个世界的人们将对环境的可持性续越来越敏感。无论是在3年、5年或者是10年、15年之后，最后社会才能告诉你过去的所作所为是否正确，对环境的可持续发展是否有效。