Protect Our Winters sustainability score: 52/100

No published Scope 1 or Scope 2 emissions data. Small nonprofit office with estimated <1,000 tonnes CO₂e annual footprint. No manufacturing or heavy energy use. Absence of formal disclosure reflects small nonprofit capacity, not environmental risk; operational impact is physically negligible.

No published Scope 3 data. Supply chain limited to office supplies, branded merchandise, and contractor fees. Staff travel to DC lobby days and events is dominant emissions source. Organisation acknowledges 'imperfect advocacy' tension. No supplier engagement programme; inherently short, low-impact supply chain.

No year-on-year operational emissions data. Organisation expanded to 14+ international chapters with growing staff and activity, implying rising travel and operational emissions. No deliberate absolute reduction programme for own operations. Negligible baseline means physical impact remains minimal.

No published renewable energy policy, RE100 membership, or green tariff commitment. Boulder office benefits from grid improvement (Xcel Energy targets 80% carbon reduction by 2030), but POW has not formally selected green electricity. Organisation advocates for clean energy transition externally but has no documented strategy for own operations.

Core mission includes public lands protection advocacy. Sent 11,000+ letters opposing Arctic oil and gas drilling. Platform covers solar, public lands, transportation, carbon pricing. No TNFD disclosure, no biodiversity footprint quantification, no deforestation-free commitment. Negligible own operational nature impact; indirect contribution via policy work.

No published resource use or waste data. Service-based nonprofit with office supplies, branded merchandise, and digital operations. Merchandise procurement from multiple outdoor partners undisclosed. Digital-first model inherently reduces material use. No circular economy policy or waste targets.

No published water consumption data. Small office in water-stressed Boulder, Colorado; typical commercial consumption is negligible. No chemical discharge or pollution risk. Advocacy for climate action indirectly supports watershed health via snowpack protection. Physically immaterial water footprint.

No science-based targets, net-zero pledge, or emissions reduction timelines for own operations. Theory of change cites IPCC pathway (45% reduction by 2030, net zero 2050) and POW UK developed supplier emissions guidance, but no commitments apply to POW's own footprint. No formal self-set measurable operational targets.

Publishes annual reports (through 2024) and IRS Form 990 filings (publicly accessible via ProPublica). Board structure includes independent members; documented theory of change and policy priorities. No board-level ESG governance, TCFD/CSRD disclosure, or sustainability-linked executive compensation. Financial transparency above average for nonprofit size.

No greenwashing complaints, regulatory actions, or credible NGO criticism of own environmental conduct. Actively exposes third-party greenwashing (e.g., FIS 'Climate Positive' offset critique). Lobbying entirely pro-climate (carbon pricing, solar, public lands, clean transport). Acknowledges unresolved tension: staff and athlete travel emissions documented in supported films.