Carbon footprint: Difference between revisions
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Add: bibcode, authors 1-1. Removed parameters. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Abductive | #UCB_toolbar |
|||
(998 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2024}} |
|||
[[File:Carbon Footprint simple-explanation EN.webm|The carbon footprint explained|thumb|right]] |
|||
{{Short description|Concept to quantify greenhouse gas emissions from activities or products}} |
|||
<!-- the first paragraph of the lead is meant to explain what it is and how it's used in everyday life (in a language that the person on the street can understand --> |
|||
[[File:Environmental-impact-of-food-by-life-cycle-stage.png|thumb|The carbon footprint can be used to compare the climate change impact of many things. The example given here is the carbon footprint ([[greenhouse gas emissions]]) of food across the [[supply chain]] caused by [[land use change]], farm, animal feed, processing, transport, retail, packing, losses.<ref name=":18">{{Cite journal |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah |last2=Roser |first2=Max |date=2024-03-18 |title=You want to reduce the carbon footprint of your food? Focus on what you eat, not whether your food is local |url=https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local |journal=Our World in Data}}</ref>]] |
|||
A '''carbon footprint''' (or '''greenhouse gas footprint''') is a calculated value or index that makes it possible to compare the total amount of [[greenhouse gas]]es that an activity, product, company or country [[Greenhouse gas emissions|adds to the atmosphere]]. Carbon footprints are usually reported in tonnes of emissions ([[CO2 equivalent|CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent]]) per unit of comparison. Such units can be for example ''tonnes CO<sub>2</sub>-eq per year'', ''per kilogram of protein for consumption'', ''per kilometer travelled'', ''per piece of clothing'' and so forth. A product's carbon footprint includes the emissions for the entire [[Life-cycle assessment|life cycle]]. These run from the production along the [[supply chain]] to its final consumption and disposal. |
|||
A '''carbon footprint''' is historically defined as the total emissions caused by an individual, event, organization, or product, expressed as [[carbon dioxide equivalent]].<ref>{{cite web|title=What is a carbon footprint? |url=http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/solutions/CarbonFootprinting/what_is_a_carbon_footprint.htm |doi= |accessdate=24 July 2009 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20090511102744/http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/solutions/CarbonFootprinting/what_is_a_carbon_footprint.htm |archivedate=11 May 2009 }}</ref> [[Greenhouse gas|Greenhouse gases]] (GHGs), including [[carbon dioxide]], can be emitted through land clearance and the production and consumption of food, fuels, manufactured goods, materials, wood, roads, buildings, transportation and other services.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://the.co2list.org/|title=The CO2 list (and original sources cited therein)|doi=|accessdate=18 March 2011}}</ref> |
|||
Similarly, an organization's carbon footprint includes the direct as well as the indirect emissions that it causes. The [[Greenhouse gas protocol|Greenhouse Gas Protocol]] (for [[carbon accounting]] of organizations) calls these ''Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions''. There are several methodologies and online tools to calculate the carbon footprint. They depend on whether the focus is on a country, organization, product or individual person. For example, the carbon footprint of a product could help consumers decide which product to buy if they want to be [[Climate movement|climate aware]]. For [[climate change mitigation]] activities, the carbon footprint can help distinguish those economic activities with a high footprint from those with a low footprint. So the carbon footprint concept allows everyone to make comparisons between the climate impacts of individuals, products, companies and countries. It also helps people devise strategies and priorities for reducing the carbon footprint. |
|||
In most cases, the total carbon footprint cannot be exactly calculated because of inadequate knowledge of and data about the complex interactions between contributing processes, including the influence of natural processes that store or release carbon dioxide. For this reason, Wright, Kemp, and Williams, have suggested to define the carbon footprint as: |
|||
<!-- this paragraph explains the concept of CO2 equivalents and explains that some other orgs exclude the non-CO2 greenhouse gases from this (most notably IPCC --> |
|||
:: A measure of the total amount of [[carbon dioxide]] (CO<sub>2</sub>) and [[methane]] (CH<sub>4</sub>) emissions of a defined population, system or activity, considering all relevant sources, sinks and storage within the spatial and temporal boundary of the population, system or activity of interest. Calculated as carbon dioxide equivalent using the relevant 100-year [[global warming potential]] (GWP100).<ref>{{cite journal|last=Wright|first=L.|author2=Kemp, S.|author3=Williams, I.|title='Carbon footprinting': towards a universally accepted definition|journal=Carbon Management|year=2011|volume=2|issue=1|pages=61–72|doi=10.4155/CMT.10.39}}</ref> [[File:Carbon footprint representation.jpg|alt=An artistic representation of a carbon footprint, shows a green, cartoon foot over a cartoon map of the world. |thumb|Visual representation of carbon footprint. ]] |
|||
The carbon dioxide equivalent (CO<sub>2</sub>eq) emissions per unit of comparison is a suitable way to express a carbon footprint. This sums up all the greenhouse gas emissions. It includes all greenhouse gases, not just carbon dioxide. And it looks at emissions from economic activities, events, organizations and services.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What is a carbon footprint |url=https://www.conservation.org/stories/what-is-a-carbon-footprint |access-date=2023-05-28 |website=www.conservation.org}}</ref> In some definitions, only the [[carbon dioxide]] emissions are taken into account. These do not include other [[greenhouse gas]]es, such as [[methane]] and [[nitrous oxide]].<ref name=":6">IPCC, 2022: [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Annex-I.pdf Annex I: Glossary] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230313100106/https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Annex-I.pdf |date=13 March 2023 }} [van Diemen, R., J.B.R. Matthews, V. Möller, J.S. Fuglestvedt, V. Masson-Delmotte, C. Méndez, A. Reisinger, S. Semenov (eds)]. In IPCC, 2022: [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220802125242/https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ |date=2 August 2022 }} [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. {{doi|10.1017/9781009157926.020}}</ref> |
|||
<!-- this paragraph talks about calculation methods --> |
|||
Most of the carbon footprint emissions for the average U.S. household come from "indirect" sources, e.g. fuel burned to produce goods far away from the final consumer. These are distinguished from emissions which come from burning fuel directly in one's car or stove, commonly referred to as "direct" sources of the consumer's carbon footprint.<ref>{{cite web|url= |
|||
Various methods to calculate the carbon footprint exist, and these may differ somewhat for different entities. For organizations it is common practice to use the [[Greenhouse gas protocol|Greenhouse Gas Protocol]]. It includes three carbon emission scopes. Scope 1 refers to ''direct'' carbon emissions. Scope 2 and 3 refer to ''indirect'' carbon emissions. Scope 3 emissions are those indirect emissions that result from the activities of an organization but come from sources which they do not own or control.<ref name=":13">Green Element Ltd., [https://compareyourfootprint.com/difference-scope-1-2-3-emissions/ What is the Difference Between Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111212333/https://compareyourfootprint.com/difference-scope-1-2-3-emissions/|date=11 November 2020}}, published 2 November 2018, accessed 11 November 2020</ref> |
|||
http://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/footprint |
|||
|title=Graph of the Average Carbon Footprint of a U.S. Household|accessdate=4 May 2012}}</ref> |
|||
The concept name of the carbon footprint originates from [[ecological footprint]], discussion,<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/magazine/17wwln-safire-t.html | work=The New York Times | title=Footprint | first=William | last=Safire | date=17 February 2008 | accessdate=28 April 2010}}</ref> which was developed by [[William E. Rees]] and [[Mathis Wackernagel]] in the 1990s. This accounting approach compares how much people demand compared to what the planet can renew. This allows to assess the number of "earths" that would be required if everyone on the planet consumed resources at the same level as the person calculating their ecological footprint. The carbon Footprint is one part of the ecological footprint. The carbon part was popularized by a large campaign of BP in 2005.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/magazine/17wwln-safire-t.html|title=William Safire - On Language - Grammar - Usage - English Language|last=Safire|first=William|access-date=2018-10-17|language=en}}</ref> In 2007, carbon footprint was used as a measure of carbon emissions to develop the energy plan for City of Lynnwood, Washington. Carbon footprints are more focused than ecological footprints since they measure merely emissions of gases that cause climate change into the atmosphere. |
|||
For countries it is common to use [[Consumption-based accounting of greenhouse gas emissions|consumption-based emissions accounting]] to calculate their carbon footprint for a given year. Consumption-based accounting using [[Input output analysis|input-output analysis]] backed by [[super-computing]] makes it possible to analyse [[Global value chain|global supply chains]]. Countries also prepare national [[Greenhouse gas inventory|GHG inventories]] for the [[UNFCCC]].<ref name=":21">{{Cite journal |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah |last2=Roser |first2=Max |date=2024-03-18 |title=How do CO2 emissions compare when we adjust for trade? |url=https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2 |journal=Our World in Data}}</ref><ref name=":20" /> The GHG emissions listed in those national inventories are only from activities in the country itself. This approach is called ''territorial-based accounting'' or ''production-based accounting.'' It does not take into account production of goods and services imported on behalf of residents. ''Consumption-based accounting'' does reflect emissions from goods and services imported from other countries. |
|||
Carbon footprint is one of a family of footprint indicators, which also includes [[water footprint]] and [[land footprint]]. |
|||
<!-- this paragraph talks about strengths and the issues around consumption-based accounting -->Consumption-based accounting is therefore more comprehensive. This comprehensive carbon footprint reporting including Scope 3 emissions deals with gaps in current systems. Countries' [[Greenhouse gas inventory|GHG inventories]] for the [[UNFCCC]] do not include international transport.<ref name=":14">{{Cite web |title=Emissions from fuels used for international aviation and maritime transport |url=https://unfccc.int/topics/mitigation/workstreams/emissions-from-international-transport-bunker-fuels |access-date=2023-06-11 |website=UNFCCC}}</ref> Comprehensive carbon footprint reporting looks at the final demand for emissions, to where the consumption of the goods and services takes place.<ref name=":15">{{Cite journal |last1=Tukker |first1=Arnold |last2=Pollitt |first2=Hector |last3=Henkemans |first3=Maurits |date=2020-04-22 |title=Consumption-based carbon accounting: sense and sensibility |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2020.1728208 |journal=Climate Policy |language=en |volume=20 |issue=sup1 |pages=S1–S13 |doi=10.1080/14693062.2020.1728208 |bibcode=2020CliPo..20S...1T |s2cid=214525354 |issn=1469-3062|hdl=1887/3135062 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
<!-- the lead could still be expanded a bit more to be about 500 words in total; e.g. we should add a bit on criticisms and some more details on the difficulties that like in the Scope 3 emissions calculations; maybe also some more explanations on how emissions are calculated in Paris Agreement and UNFCCC etc. --> |
|||
== Definition == |
|||
==Measuring carbon footprints== |
|||
[[File:Carbon Footprint simple-explanation EN.webm|thumb|The carbon footprint explained]] |
|||
[[File:Carbon-footprint-of-protein-foods-2.png|thumb|Comparison of the carbon footprint of protein-rich foods<ref name=":18" />]] |
|||
A formal definition of carbon footprint is as follows: "A measure of the total amount of carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>) and methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) emissions of a defined population, system or activity, considering all relevant sources, sinks and storage within the spatial and temporal boundary of the population, system or activity of interest. Calculated as carbon dioxide equivalent using the relevant 100-year [[global warming potential]] (GWP100)."<ref>{{cite journal |last=Wright |first=L. |author2=Kemp, S. |author3=Williams, I. |year=2011 |title='Carbon footprinting': towards a universally accepted definition |journal=Carbon Management |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=61–72 |doi=10.4155/CMT.10.39 |s2cid=154004878 |doi-access=free|bibcode=2011CarM....2...61W }}</ref> |
|||
Scientists report carbon footprints in terms of equivalents of tonnes of CO<sub>2</sub> emissions ([[CO2 equivalent|CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent]]). They may report them per year, per person, per kilogram of protein, per kilometer travelled, and so on. |
|||
An individual's, nation's, or organization's carbon footprint can be measured by undertaking a GHG emissions assessment, a [[Life-cycle assessment|life cycle assessment]], or other calculative activities denoted as [[carbon accounting]]. Once the size of a carbon footprint is known, a strategy can be devised to reduce it, e.g. by technological developments, [[Energy efficiency implementation|energy efficiency]] improvements, better process and product management, changed [https://www.dccae.gov.ie/en-ie/environment/topics/sustainable-development/green-public-procurement/Pages/default.aspx Green Public or Private Procurement (GPP)], [[carbon capture]], consumption strategies, [[Carbon offset|carbon offsetting]] and others. |
|||
In the definition of carbon footprint, some scientists include only CO<sub>2.</sub> But more commonly they include several of the notable [[greenhouse gas]]es. They can compare various greenhouse gases by using [[Carbon Dioxide Equivalent|carbon dioxide equivalents]] over a relevant time scale, like 100 years. Some organizations use the term ''greenhouse gas footprint'' or ''climate footprint''<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal |last1=Wright |first1=Laurence A |last2=Kemp |first2=Simon |last3=Williams |first3=Ian |date=2011 |title='Carbon footprinting': towards a universally accepted definition |journal=Carbon Management |language=en |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=61–72 |doi=10.4155/cmt.10.39 |issn=1758-3004 |s2cid=154004878 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2011CarM....2...61W }}</ref> to emphasize that all greenhouse gases are included, not just carbon dioxide. |
|||
For calculating personal carbon footprints, several free online carbon footprint calculators exist,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.co2list.org/files/calculators.htm|title=Carbon Footprint Calculators |publisher=CO2List.org |accessdate=23 August 2013}}</ref> including a few supported by publicly available peer-reviewed data and calculations including the University of California, Berkeley's CoolClimate Network research consortium and CarbonStory.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/carboncalculator|title=CoolClimate Carbon Footprint Calculator for U.S. Households and Individuals|accessdate=4 May 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwI9ptFQU1QiM2IzNWE0YTQtNjY4NS00MzM5LWFkZDUtOWNkY2NkNTMxOTM4/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1|title=Online supporting data, calculations & methodologies for paper: Jones, Kammen "Quantifying Carbon Footprint Reduction Opportunities for U.S. Households and Communities" ES&T, 2011 (publicly available)|accessdate=4 May 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.carbonstory.org/calculator/overview|website=carbonstory.org|title=Calculator|accessdate=12 March 2014}}</ref> These websites ask you to answer more or less detailed questions about your diet, transportation choices, home size, shopping and recreational activities, usage of electricity, heating, and heavy appliances such as dryers and refrigerators, and so on. The website then estimates your carbon footprint based on your answers to these questions. A systematic literature review was conducted to objectively determine the best way to calculate individual/household carbon footprints. This review identified 13 calculation principles and subsequently used the same principles to evaluate the 15 most popular online carbon footprint calculators. A recent study’s results by Carnegie Mellon's Christopher Weber found that the calculation of carbon footprints for products is often filled with large uncertainties. The variables of owning electronic goods such as the production, shipment, and previous technology used to make that product, can make it difficult to create an accurate carbon footprint. It is important to question, and address the accuracy of Carbon Footprint techniques, especially due to its overwhelming popularity.<ref>Collin, Robert William, and Debra Ann Schwartz. "Carbon Offsets." Encyclopedia of Contemporary American Social Issues, edited by Michael Shally-Jensen, vol. 4: Environment, Science, and Technology, ABC-CLIO, 2011, pp. 1311-1314. Gale Virtual Reference Library, www.pierce.ctc.edu:2055/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=puya65247&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CCX1762600165&asid=1cdc99a1a9c63a1b80bc1943bef02fef. Accessed 5 December 2016.</ref> |
|||
The [[Greenhouse gas protocol|Greenhouse Gas Protocol]] includes all of the most important greenhouse gases. "The standard covers the accounting and reporting of seven greenhouse gases covered by the [[Kyoto Protocol]] – carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>), methane (CH<sub>4</sub>), [[nitrous oxide]] (N<sub>2</sub>O), [[hydrofluorocarbon]]s (HFCs), [[perfluorocarbon]]s (PCFs), [[sulfur hexafluoride]] (SF<sub>6</sub>) and [[nitrogen trifluoride]] (NF<sub>3</sub>)."<ref>{{cite web |title=Corporate Standard Greenhouse Gas Protocol |url=https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-standard |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220729200224/https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-standard |archive-date=29 July 2022 |access-date=29 July 2022}}</ref> |
|||
Calculating the carbon footprint of an industry, product, or service is a complex task, as stated earlier. One tool industry uses is [[Life-cycle assessment|Life-cycle assessment (LCA)]], where carbon footprint may be one of many factors taken into consideration when assessing a product or service. The [[International Organization for Standardization]] has a standard called ISO 14040:2006 that has the framework for conducting an LCA study.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html|title=Environmental management -- Life cycle assessment -- Principles and framework|last=|first=|date=|website=International Organization for Standardization|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=}}</ref> Another method is through the [https://ghgprotocol.org/ Greenhouse Gas Protocol], a set of standards for tracking GHG emissions. |
|||
In comparison, the [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change|IPCC]] definition of ''carbon footprint'' in 2022 covers only carbon dioxide. It defines the carbon footprint as the "measure of the exclusive total amount of emissions of carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>) that is directly and indirectly caused by an activity or is accumulated over the lifecycle stages of a product."<ref name=":6" />{{rp|1796}} The IPCC report's authors adopted the same definition that had been proposed in 2007 in the UK.<ref name=":5">{{Cite book |last1=Wiedmann |first1=T. |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247152314 |title=Ecological Economics Research Trends |last2=Minx |first2=J. |date=2008 |publisher=Nova Science Publishers |editor-last=Pertsova |editor-first=C. C. |location=Hauppauge |pages=1–11 |chapter=A Definition of 'Carbon Footprint'}}</ref> That publication included only [[carbon dioxide]] in the definition of carbon footprint. It justified this with the argument that other greenhouse gases were more difficult to quantify. This is because of their differing global warming potentials. They also stated that an inclusion of all greenhouse gases would make the carbon footprint indicator less practical.<ref name=":5" /> But there are disadvantages to this approach. One disadvantage of not including methane is that some products or sectors that have a high methane footprint such as [[livestock]]<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah |author1-link=Hannah Ritchie |last2=Roser |first2=Max |author2-link=Max Roser |last3=Rosado |first3=Pablo |date=2020-05-11 |title=CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions |url=https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector |journal=Our World in Data}}</ref> appear less harmful for the climate than they actually are.<ref>{{Cite web |title=How New Zealand is reducing methane emissions from farming |url=https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231214-how-new-zealand-is-reducing-methane-emissions-from-farming |access-date=2024-02-10 |website=www.bbc.com}}</ref> |
|||
It should also be noted that predicting the carbon footprint of a process is also possible through estimations using the above standards. By using [[Emission intensity|Emission intensities/Carbon intensities]] and the estimated annual use of a fuel, chemical, or other inputs, the carbon footprint can be estimated while a process is being planned/designed. |
|||
== |
== Types of greenhouse gas emissions == |
||
{{See also|Carbon accounting}} |
|||
Direct carbon emissions come from sources that are directly from the site that is producing a product.<ref name=":1" /> These emissions can also be referred to as scope 1 and scope 2 emissions. |
|||
[[File:Scope3 Calculation Guidance -updated.png|thumb|upright=1.4|Overview of [[Greenhouse gas protocol|Greenhouse Gas Protocol]] scopes and emissions across the [[value chain]], showing upstream activities, reporting company and downstream activities.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-05-02 |title=Greenhouse Gas Protocol |url=https://www.wri.org/initiatives/greenhouse-gas-protocol |access-date=2023-07-19 |website=World Resources Institute |language=en}}</ref><ref name=":24">{{Cite web |title=Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard |url=http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standards/scope-3-standard |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210131203838/https://ghgprotocol.org/standards/scope-3-standard |archive-date=31 January 2021 |access-date=2016-02-28 |website=Greenhouse Gas Protocol}}</ref>]] |
|||
The [[greenhouse gas protocol]] is a set of standards for tracking greenhouse gas emissions.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Greenhouse Gas Protocol |url=https://ghgprotocol.org/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201222020458/https://ghgprotocol.org/ |archive-date=22 December 2020 |access-date=25 February 2019}}</ref> The standards divide emissions into three ''scopes (S''cope 1, 2 and 3) within the [[value chain]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Streamlined Energy And Carbon Reporting Guidance UK |url=https://longevityzero.com/secr-reporting-guidance/ |access-date=2020-07-16 |website=LongevityIntelligen |language=en}}</ref> Greenhouse gas emissions caused directly by the organization such as by burning fossil fuels are referred to as S''cope 1''. Emissions caused indirectly by an organization, such as by purchasing secondary energy sources like electricity, heat, cooling or steam are called ''Scope 2''. Lastly, indirect emissions associated with upstream or downstream processes are called ''Scope 3''. |
|||
=== Direct carbon emissions (Scope 1) === |
|||
Scope 1 emissions are emissions that are directly emitted from the site of the process or service.<ref name=":2">{{Cite book|title=Accounting for Carbon Monitoring, Reporting and Verifying Emissions in the Climate Economy|last=Bellassen|first=Valentin|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2015|isbn=9781316162262|location=|pages=6}}</ref> An example for industry would be the emissions related to burning a fuel on site. On the individual level, emissions from personal vehicles or gas burning stoves would fall under scope 1. |
|||
Direct or ''Scope 1'' carbon emissions come from sources on the site that is producing a product or delivering a service.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard |url=https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/Product-Life-Cycle-Accounting-Reporting-Standard_041613.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190225223919/https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/ |archive-date=2019-02-25 |website=GHG Protocol}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite book |last=Bellassen |first=Valentin |title=Accounting for Carbon Monitoring, Reporting and Verifying Emissions in the Climate Economy |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2015 |isbn=9781316162262 |pages=6}}</ref> An example for industry would be the emissions from burning a fuel on site. On the individual level, emissions from personal vehicles or gas-burning stoves are Scope 1. |
|||
=== Indirect carbon emissions (Scope 2) === |
|||
Scope 2 emissions are the other emissions related to purchased electricity, heat, and/or steam used on site.<ref name=":2" /> In the US, the EPA has broken down electricity emission factors by state.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-03/documents/emission-factors_mar_2018_0.pdf|title=Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories|last=|first=|date=|website=EPA|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=}}</ref> |
|||
Indirect carbon emissions are emissions from sources upstream or downstream from the process being studied. They are also known as ''Scope 2'' or ''Scope 3'' emissions.<ref name=":1" /> |
|||
Scope 2 emissions are the indirect emissions related to purchasing electricity, heat, or steam used on site.<ref name=":2" /> Examples of upstream carbon emissions include transportation of materials and fuels, any energy used outside of the production facility, and waste produced outside the production facility.<ref name=":51">{{Cite web |title=Scope 2 Calculation Guidance |url=http://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/ghgp/Scope3_Calculation_Guidance.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201021072905/https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/ghgp/Scope3_Calculation_Guidance.pdf |archive-date=21 October 2020 |access-date=25 February 2019 |website=GHG Protocol}}</ref> Examples of downstream carbon emissions include any end-of-life process or treatments, product and waste transportation, and emissions associated with selling the product.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=EPA, OA |first=US |date=2015-12-23 |title=Overview of Greenhouse Gases {{!}} US EPA |url=https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160812082641/https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases |archive-date=12 August 2016 |access-date=2017-11-01 |website=US EPA |language=en}}</ref> The GHG Protocol says it is important to calculate upstream and downstream emissions. There could be some [[Double counting (accounting)|double counting]]. This is because upstream emissions of one person's consumption patterns could be someone else's downstream emissions |
|||
==Indirect carbon emissions== |
|||
Indirect carbon emissions are emissions from sources upstream or downstream from the process being studied, also known as scope 3 emissions.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|url=https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/Product-Life-Cycle-Accounting-Reporting-Standard_041613.pdf|title=Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard|last=|first=|date=|website=GHG Protocol|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=2019-02-25}}</ref> |
|||
=== Other indirect carbon emissions (Scope 3) === |
|||
Examples of upstream, indirect carbon emissions may include:<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=http://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/ghgp/Scope3_Calculation_Guidance.pdf|title=Scope 2 Calculation Guidance|last=|first=|date=|website=GHG Protocol|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=}}</ref> |
|||
Scope 3 emissions are all other indirect emissions derived from the activities of an organization. But they are from sources they do not own or control.<ref name=":13" /> The GHG Protocol's ''Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard'' allows companies to assess their entire value chain emissions impact and identify where to focus reduction activities.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard {{!}} Greenhouse Gas Protocol |url=https://ghgprotocol.org/standards/scope-3-standard |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211209194835/https://ghgprotocol.org/standards/scope-3-standard |archive-date=9 December 2021 |access-date=2021-12-09 |website=ghgprotocol.org}}</ref> |
|||
Scope 3 emission sources include emissions from suppliers and product users. These are also known as the ''value chain''. Transportation of good, and other indirect emissions are also part of this scope.<ref name=":24" /> In 2022 about 30% of US companies reported Scope 3 emissions.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Bokern |first=D. |date=March 9, 2022 |title=Reported Emission Footprints: The Challenge is Real |url=https://www.msci.com/www/blog-posts/reported-emission-footprints/03060866159 |access-date=2023-01-22 |website=MSCI |language=en-US}}</ref> The [[International Sustainability Standards Board]] is developing a recommendation to include Scope 3 emissions in all GHG reporting.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Molé |first=P. |date=2022-11-01 |title=ISSB Votes to Include Scope 3 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Disclosures in Updates to Draft Standards |url=https://www.ehs.com/2022/11/issb-votes-to-include-scope-3-greenhouse-gas-ghg-emission-disclosures-in-updates-to-draft-standards/ |access-date=2023-01-22 |website=VelocityEHS |language=en-US}}</ref> |
|||
* Transportation of materials/fuels |
|||
* Any energy used outside of the production facility |
|||
* Wastes produced outside of the production facility |
|||
== Purpose and strengths == |
|||
Examples of downstream, indirect carbon emissions may include:<ref name=":0" /> |
|||
{{See also|Carbon accounting}} |
|||
[[File:Are consumption-based CO₂ per capita emissions above or below the global average., OWID.svg|thumb|Are consumption-based CO₂ per capita emissions above or below the global average<ref>{{Cite web|title=Are consumption-based CO₂ per capita emissions above or below the global average?|url=https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capita-equity|access-date=2023-07-07|website=Our World in Data}}</ref>]] |
|||
The current rise in [[Global surface temperature|global average temperature]] is more rapid than previous changes. It is [[Scientific consensus on climate change|primarily caused by humans]] burning [[fossil fuel]]s.<ref name="Lynas_2021">{{cite journal |last1=Lynas |first1=Mark |last2=Houlton |first2=Benjamin Z. |last3=Perry |first3=Simon |date=19 October 2021 |title=Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature |journal=[[Environmental Research Letters]] |volume=16 |issue=11 |page=114005 |bibcode=2021ERL....16k4005L |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966 |s2cid=239032360 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>Allen, M.R., O.P. Dube, W. Solecki, F. Aragón-Durand, W. Cramer, S. Humphreys, M. Kainuma, J. Kala, N. Mahowald, Y. Mulugetta, R. Perez, M.Wairiu, and K. Zickfeld, 2018: [https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2022/06/SR15_Chapter_1_HR.pdf Chapter 1: Framing and Context]. In: [https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty] [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 49-92. {{doi|10.1017/9781009157940.003}}.</ref> The increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is also due to [[deforestation]] and [[Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture|agricultural]] and [[Greenhouse gas emissions#Industrial processes|industrial practices]]. These include [[Environmental impact of concrete|cement production]]. The two most notable greenhouse gases are [[Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere|carbon dioxide]] and [[Methane emissions|methane]].<ref name="auto2">{{cite web |date=18 September 2020 |ref={{harvid|Our World in Data, 18 September|2020}} |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah |title=Sector by sector: where do global greenhouse gas emissions come from? |website=Our World in Data |url=https://ourworldindata.org/ghg-emissions-by-sector |access-date=28 October 2020}}</ref> Greenhouse gas emissions, and hence humanity's carbon footprint, have been increasing during the 21st century.<ref>{{Cite book |last=European Commission. Joint Research Centre. |url=https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/730164 |title=CO2 emissions of all world countries :JRC/IEA/PBL 2022 report. |date=2022 |publisher=Publications Office |isbn=9789276558026 |location=LU |doi=10.2760/730164}}</ref> The [[Paris Agreement]] aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions enough to limit the rise in global temperature to no more than 1.5°C above [[Pre-industrial society|pre-industrial]] levels.<ref>{{Cite web |last= |title=The Paris Agreement |url=https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210319205057/https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement |archive-date=19 March 2021 |access-date=18 September 2021 |website=UNFCCC}}</ref><ref name=":172">{{Cite web |last=Schleussner |first=Carl-Friedrich |date=13 May 2022 |title=The Paris Agreement – the 1.5 °C Temperature Goal |url=https://climateanalytics.org/briefings/15c/ |access-date=2022-01-29 |website=Climate Analytics |language=en}}</ref> |
|||
The carbon footprint concept makes comparisons between the climate impacts of individuals, products, companies and countries. A carbon footprint label on products could enable consumers to choose products with a lower carbon footprint if they want to help [[climate change mitigation|limit climate change]]. For meat products, as an example, such a label could make it clear that beef has a higher carbon footprint than chicken.<ref name=":18" /> |
|||
* Any end-of-life process or treatments |
|||
* Product and waste transportation |
|||
* Emissions associated with selling the product |
|||
Understanding the size of an organization's carbon footprint makes it possible to devise a strategy to reduce it. For most businesses the vast majority of emissions do not come from activities on site, known as Scope 1, or from energy supplied to the organization, known as Scope 2, but from Scope 3 emissions, the extended upstream and downstream [[supply chain]].<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Read |first1=Simon |last2=Shine |first2=Ian |date=2022-09-20 |title=What is the difference between Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, and what are companies doing to cut all three? |url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/09/scope-emissions-climate-greenhouse-business/ |access-date=2023-05-28 |website=World Economic Forum |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Lenzen |first1=Manfred |last2=Murray |first2=Joy |date=2009-02-20 |title=Input into Greenhouse Gas Protocol Technical Working Group discussion on sectoral value chain mapping of emissions by purchased categories |url=https://isa.org.usyd.edu.au/education/documents/20090220_ISA-USyd_Pain-Free-Scope-3v_www-version.pdf |access-date=May 28, 2023 |website=The University of Sydney Centre for Integrated Sustainability Analysis}}</ref> Therefore, ignoring Scope 3 emissions makes it impossible to detect all emissions of importance, which limits options for mitigation.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lenzen |first1=M |last2=Treloar |first2=G |date=2002-02-01 |title=Embodied energy in buildings: wood versus concrete—reply to Börjesson and Gustavsson |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421501001422 |journal=Energy Policy |language=en |volume=30 |issue=3 |pages=249–255 |doi=10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00142-2 |bibcode=2002EnPol..30..249L |issn=0301-4215}}</ref> Large companies in sectors such as clothing or automobiles would need to examine more than 100,000 supply chain pathways to fully report their carbon footprints.<ref name=":7">{{Cite web |last1=Reiner |first1=Vivienne |last2=Malik |first2=Arunima |last3=Lenzen |first3=Manfred |date=2022-02-24 |title=Google and Amazon misled about their carbon footprint. But what about the rest of us? |url=https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7633285/google-and-amazon-misled-about-their-carbon-footprint-but-what-about-the-rest-of-us/ |access-date=2023-05-28 |website=The Canberra Times |language=en-AU}}</ref> |
|||
==Ways to reduce personal carbon footprint== |
|||
{{See also|Individual action on climate change}} |
|||
The importance of displacement of carbon emissions has been known for some years. Scientists also call this [[carbon leakage]].<ref name=":22">{{Cite journal |last1=Wiedmann |first1=Thomas |last2=Lenzen |first2=Manfred |date=2018 |title=Environmental and social footprints of international trade |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-018-0113-9 |journal=Nature Geoscience |language=en |volume=11 |issue=5 |pages=314–321 |doi=10.1038/s41561-018-0113-9 |bibcode=2018NatGe..11..314W |s2cid=134496973 |issn=1752-0894|hdl=1959.4/unsworks_50533 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> The idea of a carbon footprint addresses concerns of carbon leakage which the [[Paris Agreement]] does not cover. Carbon leakage occurs when importing countries outsource production to exporting countries. The outsourcing countries are often [[Developed country|rich countries]] while the exporters are often [[Developing country|low-income countries]].<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Reiner |first1=Vivienne |last2=Malik |first2=Arunima |date=October 13, 2021 |title=Carbon 'footprinting' could accurately measure countries' emissions |work=news.com.au |url=https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/carbon-footprinting-could-accurately-measure-countries-emissions/news-story/b0f9e868428544f24ef0d4a5ba2c4128 |access-date=7 July 2023}}</ref><ref name=":22" /> Countries can make it appear that their GHG emissions are falling by moving "dirty" industries abroad, even if their emissions could be increasing when looked at from a consumption perspective.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Harrabin |first=Roger |date=2008-07-31 |title=UK in 'delusion' over emissions |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7536421.stm |access-date=2023-06-19 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite report |url=https://isa.org.usyd.edu.au/publications/documents/Defra_EmbeddedCarbon_ExecSum.pdf |title=Development of an Embedded Carbon Emissions Indicator – Producing a Time Series of Input-Output Tables and Embedded Carbon Dioxide Emissions for the UK by Using a MRIO Data Optimisation System, Report to the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs |last1=Wiedmann |first1=T. |last2=Wood |first2=R. |date=2007 |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute at the University of York and Centre for Integrated Sustainability Analysis at the University of Sydney |location=London |last3=Lenzen |first3=M. |last4=Minx |first4=J. |last5=Guan |first5=D. |last6=J. |first6=Barrett}}</ref> |
|||
The most common way to reduce the carbon footprint of humans is to [[Waste hierarchy|Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Refuse]]. |
|||
Carbon leakage and related international trade have a range of environmental impacts. These include increased [[air pollution]],<ref name=":16" /> [[water scarcity]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lenzen |first1=Manfred |last2=Moran |first2=Daniel |last3=Bhaduri |first3=Anik |last4=Kanemoto |first4=Keiichiro |last5=Bekchanov |first5=Maksud |last6=Geschke |first6=Arne |last7=Foran |first7=Barney |date=2013-10-01 |title=International trade of scarce water |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800913002176 |journal=Ecological Economics |language=en |volume=94 |pages=78–85 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.06.018 |bibcode=2013EcoEc..94...78L |issn=0921-8009}}</ref> [[biodiversity loss]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lenzen |first1=M. |last2=Moran |first2=D. |last3=Kanemoto |first3=K. |last4=Foran |first4=B. |last5=Lobefaro |first5=L. |last6=Geschke |first6=A. |date=June 2012 |title=International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11145 |journal=Nature |language=en |volume=486 |issue=7401 |pages=109–112 |doi=10.1038/nature11145 |pmid=22678290 |bibcode=2012Natur.486..109L |s2cid=1119021 |issn=1476-4687}}</ref> [[raw material]] usage,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wiedmann |first1=Thomas O. |last2=Schandl |first2=Heinz |last3=Lenzen |first3=Manfred |last4=Moran |first4=Daniel |last5=Suh |first5=Sangwon |last6=West |first6=James |last7=Kanemoto |first7=Keiichiro |date=2015-05-19 |title=The material footprint of nations |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |language=en |volume=112 |issue=20 |pages=6271–6276 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1220362110 |issn=0027-8424 |pmc=4443380 |pmid=24003158 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2015PNAS..112.6271W }}</ref> and energy depletion.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lan |first1=Jun |last2=Malik |first2=Arunima |last3=Lenzen |first3=Manfred |last4=McBain |first4=Darian |last5=Kanemoto |first5=Keiichiro |date=2016-02-01 |title=A structural decomposition analysis of global energy footprints |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261915014282 |journal=Applied Energy |language=en |volume=163 |pages=436–451 |doi=10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.10.178 |bibcode=2016ApEn..163..436L |issn=0306-2619}}</ref> |
|||
This can also be done by using reusable items such as thermoses for daily coffee or plastic containers for water and other cold beverages rather than disposable ones. If that option isn't available, it is best to properly recycle the disposable items after use. When one household recycles at least half of their household waste, they can save 1.2 tons of carbon dioxide annually<ref name="environment.about.com">{{cite web|url=http://environment.about.com/od/globalwarming/tp/globalwarmtips.htm|title=Personal Steps You Can Take to Fight Global Warming|author=Larry West|work=About.com News & Issues}}</ref>{{reliable source|date=December 2012}}. |
|||
Scholars have argued in favour of using both consumption-based and production-based accounting. This helps establish shared producer and consumer responsibility.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lenzen |first1=Manfred |last2=Murray |first2=Joy |last3=Sack |first3=Fabian |last4=Wiedmann |first4=Thomas |date=2007 |title=Shared producer and consumer responsibility — Theory and practice |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0921800906002953 |journal=Ecological Economics |language=en |volume=61 |issue=1 |pages=27–42 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.018}}</ref> Currently countries report on their annual [[Greenhouse gas inventory|GHG inventory]] to the [[United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change|UNFCCC]] based on their territorial emissions. This is known as the territorial-based or production-based approach.<ref name=":20">{{Cite journal |last1=Eggleston |first1=H. S. |last2=Buendia |first2=L. |last3=Miwa |first3=K. |last4=Ngara |first4=T. |last5=Tanabe |first5=K. |date=2006-07-01 |title=2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories |url=https://www.osti.gov/etdeweb/biblio/20880391 |journal=IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme |language=English}}</ref><ref name=":21" /> Including consumption-based calculations in the UNFCCC reporting requirements would help close loopholes by addressing the challenge of carbon leakage.<ref name=":16">{{Cite journal |last1=Kanemoto |first1=K. |last2=Moran |first2=D. |last3=Lenzen |first3=M. |last4=Geschke |first4=A. |date=2014 |title=International trade undermines national emission reduction targets: New evidence from air pollution |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095937801300160X |journal=Global Environmental Change |language=en |volume=24 |pages=52–59 |doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.09.008 |bibcode=2014GEC....24...52K |issn=0959-3780}}</ref> |
|||
Another easy option is to drive less. By walking or biking to the destination rather than driving, not only is a person going to save money on gas, but they will be burning less fuel and releasing fewer emissions into the atmosphere. However, if walking is not an option, one can look into [[carpooling]] or [[mass transportation]] options in their area. |
|||
The Paris Agreement currently does not require countries to include in their national totals GHG emissions associated with international transport. These emissions are reported separately. They are not subject to the limitation and reduction commitments of Annex 1 Parties under the [[United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change|Climate Convention]] and [[Kyoto Protocol]].<ref name=":14" /> The carbon footprint methodology includes GHG emissions associated with international transport, thereby assigning emissions caused by international trade to the importing country. |
|||
Yet another option for reducing the [[carbon]] footprint of humans is to use less air conditioning and heating in the home. By adding insulation to the walls and attic of one's home, and installing [[weather stripping]] or [[caulking]] around doors and windows one can lower their heating costs more than 25 percent. Similarly, one can very inexpensively upgrade the "insulation" (clothing) worn by residents of the home.<ref name="aquarianonline.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.aquarianonline.com/dressed-not-to-chill/|title=Dressed Not to Chill|work=Enlighten Up! with The Aquarian}}</ref> For example, it's estimated that wearing a base layer of long underwear (top and bottom) made from a lightweight, super insulating fabric like microfleece (''aka'' Polartec®, Capilene®) can conserve as much body heat as a full set of clothing, allowing a person to remain warm with the thermostat lowered by over 5 °C.<ref name="aquarianonline.com" /><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2011/02/body-insulation-thermal-underwear.html|title=LOW-TECH MAGAZINE|work=lowtechmagazine.com}}</ref> These measures all help because they reduce the amount of energy needed to heat and cool the house. One can also turn down the heat while sleeping at night or away during the day, and keep temperatures moderate at all times. Setting the thermostat just 2 degrees lower in winter and higher in summer could save about 1 ton of [[carbon dioxide]] each year.<ref name="environment.about.com" />{{reliable source|date=December 2012}} |
|||
== Underlying concepts for calculations == |
|||
Choice of diet is a major influence on a person's carbon footprint. Animal sources of protein (especially red meat), rice (typically produced in high methane-emitting paddies), foods transported long distance and/or via fuel-inefficient transport (e.g., highly perishable produce flown long distance) and heavily processed and packaged foods are among the major contributors to a high carbon diet. Scientists at the University of Chicago have estimated<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Diet, Energy, and Global Warming|journal=Ametsoc.org|volume=10|issue=9|pages=1–17|doi=10.1175/EI167.1|year = 2006|last1 = Eshel|first1 = Gidon|last2=Martin|first2=Pamela A.|citeseerx=10.1.1.394.3094}}</ref> "that the average American diet – which derives 28% of its calories from animal foods – is responsible for approximately one and a half more tonnes of greenhouse gasses – as {{CO2}} equivalents – per person, per year than a fully plant-based, or vegan, diet."<ref>[http://cecmanitoba.ca/resource/hearings/22/WPG2-006.pdf Presentation to the Manitoba Clean Environment Commission "Hog Production Industry Review" by Syd Baumel, April 27, 2007] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131005014225/http://cecmanitoba.ca/resource/hearings/22/WPG2-006.pdf |date=5 October 2013 }}</ref> Their calculations suggest that even replacing one third of the animal protein in the average American's diet with plant protein (e.g., beans, grains) can reduce the diet's carbon footprint by half a tonne. Exchanging two thirds of the animal protein with plant protein is roughly equivalent to switching from a Toyota Camry to a Prius. Finally, throwing food out not only adds its associated carbon emissions to a person or household's footprint, it adds the emissions of transporting the wasted food to the garbage dump and the emissions of food decomposition, mostly in the form of the highly potent greenhouse gas, methane. |
|||
The calculation of the carbon footprint of a product, service or sector requires expert knowledge and careful examination of what is to be included. Carbon footprints can be calculated at different scales. They can apply to whole countries, cities,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wiedmann |first1=Thomas |last2=Chen |first2=Guangwu |last3=Owen |first3=Anne |last4=Lenzen |first4=Manfred |last5=Doust |first5=Michael |last6=Barrett |first6=John |last7=Steele |first7=Kristian |date=2021 |title=Three-scope carbon emission inventories of global cities |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.13063 |journal=Journal of Industrial Ecology |language=en |volume=25 |issue=3 |pages=735–750 |doi=10.1111/jiec.13063 |bibcode=2021JInEc..25..735W |s2cid=224842866 |issn=1088-1980|hdl=1959.4/unsworks_73064 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> neighborhoods and also sectors, companies and products.<ref>{{Cite web |last=((Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy)) |date=25 June 2020 |title=UK local authority carbon dioxide emissions estimates 2018 |url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/894785/2005-18-local-authority-co2-emissions-statistical-release.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210126205847/https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/894785/2005-18-local-authority-co2-emissions-statistical-release.pdf |archive-date=26 January 2021 |access-date=13 April 2021 |website=GOV.UK}}</ref> Several free online carbon footprint calculators exist to calculate personal carbon footprints.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.mycarbonplan.org/measure-carbon-footprint-calculator|title=My Carbon Plan - Carbon Footprint Calculator, which provides a calculator using ONS data in the UK|website=mycarbonplan.org|access-date=2020-04-04|archive-date=27 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200727073303/https://www.mycarbonplan.org/measure-carbon-footprint-calculator|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://co2list.org/|title=CO2List.org which shows CO2 coming from common products and activities|website=co2list.org|access-date=2019-10-04|archive-date=3 October 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191003010424/http://www.co2list.org/|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
Software such as the "Scope 3 Evaluator" can help companies report emissions throughout their value chain.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Scope 3 Evaluator {{!}} GHG Protocol |url=https://ghgprotocol.org/scope-3-evaluator |access-date=2023-06-11 |website=ghgprotocol.org}}</ref> The software tools can help consultants and researchers to model global sustainability footprints. In each situation there are a number of questions that need to be answered. These include which activities are linked to which emissions, and which proportion should be attributed to which company. Software is essential for company management. But there is a need for new ways of [[enterprise resource planning]] to improve [[corporate sustainability]] performance.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hack |first1=Stefan |last2=Berg |first2=Christian |date=2014-07-02 |title=The Potential of IT for Corporate Sustainability |journal=Sustainability |language=en |volume=6 |issue=7 |pages=4163–4180 |doi=10.3390/su6074163 |issn=2071-1050 |doi-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
The carbon handprint movement emphasizes individual forms of carbon offsetting, like using more public transportation or planting trees in deforested regions, to reduce one's carbon footprint and increase their "handprint."<ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2108015,00.html|title=Handprints, Not Footprints|journal=Time|volume=45|issue=9|pages=4088–4095|accessdate=4 March 2012|doi=10.1021/es102221h|pmid=21449584|date=2012-03-12|last1=Jones|first1=Christopher M.|last2=Kammen|first2=Daniel M.}}</ref> |
|||
To achieve 95% carbon footprint coverage, it would be necessary to assess 12 million individual supply-chain contributions. This is based on analyzing 12 sectoral case studies.<ref name=":11">{{Cite web |title=Pain-free scope 3. Input into Greenhouse Gas Protocol Technical Working Group discussion on sectoral value chain mapping of emissions by purchased categories |url=https://isa.org.usyd.edu.au/education/documents/20090220_ISA-USyd_Pain-Free-Scope-3v_www-version.pdf |access-date=June 11, 2023}}</ref> The Scope 3 calculations can be made easier using input-output analysis. This is a technique originally developed by Nobel Prize-winning economist [[Wassily Leontief]].<ref name=":11" /> |
|||
[[Centre for Environment Education]] (CEE), Ahmedabad, India - a Centre of Excellence in Environmental Education has played a leading role in global efforts at strengthening the role of education in sustainable development over the years. The Handprint <ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.handprint.in/ |title=Handprint Website|}}</ref> concepts signifying positive action and commitment towards Sustainability was launched at one of its conferences “The 4th International Conference on Environmental Education”, in Ahmedabad, in 2007 <ref>{{cite web| url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_International_Conference_on_Environmental_Education |title=Ahmedabad Conference|}}</ref>. The Handprint is being used around the world to strengthen action towards fulfillment of the UN SDGs. |
|||
=== Consumption-based emission accounting based on input-output analysis === |
|||
A July 2017 study published in ''[[Environmental Research Letters]]'' argued that the most significant way individuals could mitigate their own carbon footprint is to have fewer children, followed by living without a vehicle, forgoing air travel and adopting a plant-based diet.<ref>{{cite news |last= Perkins|first=Sid|date=July 11, 2017|title=The best way to reduce your carbon footprint is one the government isn’t telling you about|url=http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/best-way-reduce-your-carbon-footprint-one-government-isn-t-telling-you-about|work=[[Science (journal)|Science]] |location= |access-date=December 31, 2017 }}</ref> |
|||
{{Further|Input–output model|Greenhouse gas inventory#Consumption based accounting}}[[File:Consumption-based vs. production-based CO₂ emissions per capita, OWID.svg|thumb|Consumption-based vs. production-based CO₂ emissions per capita<ref>{{Cite web|title=Consumption-based vs. production-based CO₂ emissions per capita|url=https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-vs-production-co2-per-capita|access-date=2023-07-07|website=Our World in Data}}</ref>]] |
|||
[[File:Production vs. consumption-based CO₂ emissions, OWID.svg|thumb|Production vs. consumption-based CO₂ emissions for the United States]] |
|||
[[File:Production vs. consumption-based CO₂ emissions per capita, OWID.svg|thumb|Production vs. consumption-based CO₂ emissions per capita for China]] |
|||
Consumption-based emission accounting traces the impacts of demand for goods and services along the global supply chain to the end-consumer. It is also called consumption-based carbon accounting.<ref name=":15" /> In contrast, a ''production-based approach'' to calculating GHG emissions is not a carbon footprint analysis. This approach is also called a ''territorial-based approach.'' The production-based approach includes only impacts physically produced in the country in question.<ref name=":17">{{Cite journal |last1=Dietzenbacher |first1=Erik |last2=Cazcarro |first2=Ignacio |last3=Arto |first3=Iñaki |date=2020 |title=Towards a more effective climate policy on international trade |journal=Nature Communications |language=en |volume=11 |issue=1 |page=1130 |doi=10.1038/s41467-020-14837-5 |issn=2041-1723 |pmc=7048780 |pmid=32111849 |doi-access=free|bibcode=2020NatCo..11.1130D }} [[File:CC-BY_icon.svg|50x50px]] Text was copied from this source, which is available under a [[creativecommons:by/4.0/|Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License]]</ref> Consumption-based accounting redistributes the emissions from production-based accounting. It considers that emissions in another country are necessary for the home country's consumption bundle.<ref name=":17" /> |
|||
==SDG Handprint Lab== |
|||
Consumer-based accounting is based on input-output analysis. It is used at the highest levels for any economic research question related to environmental or social impacts.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Malik |first1=Arunima |last2=McBain |first2=Darian |last3=Wiedmann |first3=Thomas O. |last4=Lenzen |first4=Manfred |last5=Murray |first5=Joy |date=2019 |title=Advancements in Input-Output Models and Indicators for Consumption-Based Accounting |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.12771 |journal=Journal of Industrial Ecology |language=en |volume=23 |issue=2 |pages=300–312 |doi=10.1111/jiec.12771 |bibcode=2019JInEc..23..300M |s2cid=158533390 |issn=1088-1980|hdl=1959.4/unsworks_57565 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Analysis of [[global supply chain]]s is possible using consumption-based accounting with input-output analysis assisted by super-computing capacity. |
|||
The SDG Handprint Lab is one such initiative of CEE being initiated in Higher Education institutions. The SDG Handprint Lab would involve university students in direct Handprint action towards SDGs and targets through a unique pedagogy that involves understanding of the complex and transdisciplinary nature of sustainable development in the context of local area sustainability issues. |
|||
Leontief created [[Input output analysis|Input-output analysis]] (IO) to demonstrate the relationship between consumption and production in an economy. It incorporates the entire supply chain. It uses input-output tables from countries' national accounts. It also uses international data such as UN Comtrade and [[Eurostat]]. Input-output analysis has been extended globally to multi-regional input-output analysis (MRIO). Innovations and technology enabling the analysis of billions of supply chains made this possible. Standards set by the United Nations underpin this analysis.<ref name=":8">{{Cite book |url=https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/370160 |title=Handbook of input-output table compilation and analysis |date=1999 |publisher=UN Statistics Division |language=en|last1= Division|first1= UN Statistics}}</ref>{{rp|280}} The analysis enables a ''Structural Path Analysis.'' This scans and ranks the top supply chain nodes and paths. It conveniently lists hotspots for urgent action. Input-output analysis has increased in popularity because of its ability to examine [[global value chain]]s.<ref>{{Cite web |title=World Trade Organization - Global Value Chains |url=https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/miwi_e/miwi_e.htm |access-date=2023-06-05 |website=www.wto.org |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |chapter-url=http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9781786430816 |chapter=Recent Developments in Input–Output Analysis |title=Elgar Research Reviews in Economics |date=2020-07-31 |editor-last=Dietzenbacher |editor-first=Erik |doi=10.4337/9781786430816 |editor2-last=Lahr |editor2-first=Michael L. |editor3-last=Lenzen |editor3-first=Manfred |isbn=9781786430809 |s2cid=225409688 }}</ref> |
|||
== Ways to reduce industry's carbon footprint == |
|||
A product, service, or company’s carbon footprint can be affected by several factors including, but not limited to: |
|||
=== Combination with life cycle analysis (LCA) === |
|||
* Energy sources |
|||
{{Further|Life-cycle assessment}} |
|||
* Offsite electricity generation |
|||
[[File:Life_cycle_analysis_and_GHG_carbon_accounting.jpg|thumb|Life cycle analysis: The full life cycle includes a production chain (comprising supply chains, manufacture, and transport), the energy supply chain, the use phase, and the end of life (disposal, recycle) stage.]] |
|||
* Materials |
|||
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a methodology for assessing all environmental impacts associated with the [[Product lifecycle|life cycle of a commercial product]], [[Process lifecycle|process]], or service. It is not limited to the greenhouse gas emissions. It is also called life cycle analysis. It includes [[water pollution]], [[air pollution]], [[ecotoxicity]] and similar types of pollution. Some widely recognized procedures for LCA are included in the [[ISO 14000]] series of environmental management standards. A standard called ISO 14040:2006 provides the framework for conducting an LCA study.<ref>{{Cite web |date=12 August 2014 |title=Environmental management -- Life cycle assessment -- Principles and framework |url=https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190226045810/https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html |archive-date=26 February 2019 |access-date=25 February 2019 |website=International Organization for Standardization}}</ref> ISO 14060 family of standards provides further sophisticated tools. These are used to quantify, monitor, report and validate or verify GHG emissions and removals.<ref>{{Citation |publisher=Beuth Verlag GmbH |doi=10.31030/2851769 |title=DIN EN ISO 14067:2019-02, Treibhausgase_- Carbon Footprint von Produkten_- Anforderungen an und Leitlinien für Quantifizierung (ISO_14067:2018); Deutsche und Englische Fassung EN_ISO_14067:2018 }}</ref> |
|||
Greenhouse gas product life cycle assessments can also comply with specifications such as [[Publicly Available Specification]] (PAS) 2050 and the [[Carbon emissions reporting#Greenhouse Gas Protocol|GHG Protocol Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard]].<ref>[http://shop.bsigroup.com/en/forms/PASs/PAS-2050 "PAS 2050:2011 Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services"]. ''BSI''. Retrieved on: 25 April 2013.</ref><ref>[http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standards/product-standard "Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130509224311/http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standards/product-standard|date=9 May 2013}}. ''GHG Protocol''. Retrieved on: 25 April 2013.</ref> |
|||
These factors can also change with location or industry. However, there are some general steps that can be taken to reduce carbon footprint on a larger scale. |
|||
An advantage of LCA is the high level of detail that can be obtained on-site or by liaising with suppliers. However, LCA has been hampered by the artificial construction of a boundary after which no further impacts of upstream suppliers are considered. This can introduce significant [[truncation error]]s. LCA has been combined with input-output analysis. This enables on-site detailed knowledge to be incorporated. IO connects to global economic databases to incorporate the entire supply chain.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lenzen |first=Manfred |date=2000 |title=Errors in Conventional and Input-Output—based Life—Cycle Inventories |url=http://doi.wiley.com/10.1162/10881980052541981 |journal=Journal of Industrial Ecology |language=en |volume=4 |issue=4 |pages=127–148 |doi=10.1162/10881980052541981 |bibcode=2000JInEc...4..127L |s2cid=154022052 |issn=1088-1980}}</ref> |
|||
In 2016, the EIA reported that in the US electricity is responsible for roughly 37% of Carbon Dioxide emissions, making it a potential target for reductions.<ref> |
|||
Easterlyn, Jonah. "U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis." How Much of U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Are Associated with Electricity Generation? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). N.p., 1 April 2016. Web. 5 December 2016. |
|||
</ref> Possibly the cheapest way to do this is through energy efficiency improvements. The ACEEE reported that energy efficiency has the potential to save the US over 800 billion kWh per year, based on 2015 data.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://aceee.org/sites/default/files/publications/researchreports/u1604.pdf|title=The Greatest Energy Story You Haven’t Heard: How Investing in Energy Efficiency Changed the US Power Sector and Gave Us a Tool to Tackle Climate Change|last=Molina|first=Maggie|date=October 2016|website=ACEEE|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=}}</ref> Some potential options to increase energy efficiency include, but are not limited to <ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827114004971|title=ScienceDirect|website=www.sciencedirect.com|access-date=2019-04-01}}</ref>: |
|||
== Problems == |
|||
* Waste heat recovery systems |
|||
{{Expand German|CO2-Bilanz#Kritik|date=March 2023}} |
|||
* Insulation for large buildings and combustion chambers |
|||
* Technology upgrades, ie different light sources, lower consumption machines |
|||
=== Shifting responsibility from corporations to individuals === |
|||
Carbon Footprints from energy consumption can be reduced through the development of [[alternative energy]] projects, such as solar and wind energy, which are renewable resources. |
|||
Critics argue that the original aim of promoting the personal carbon footprint concept was to shift responsibility away from corporations and institutions and on to personal lifestyle choices.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=Kaufman |first=Mark |date=13 July 2020 |title=The devious fossil fuel propaganda we all use |url=https://mashable.com/feature/carbon-footprint-pr-campaign-sham/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200917005055/https://mashable.com/feature/carbon-footprint-pr-campaign-sham/ |archive-date=17 September 2020 |access-date=2020-09-17 |website=[[Mashable]] |language=en}}</ref><ref name=":23">{{Cite journal |last=Turner |first=James Morton |date=2014-02-01 |title=Counting Carbon: The Politics of Carbon Footprints and Climate Governance from the Individual to the Global |url=https://direct.mit.edu/glep/article/14/1/59-78/14640 |journal=Global Environmental Politics |language=en |volume=14 |issue=1 |pages=59–78 |doi=10.1162/GLEP_a_00214 |issn=1526-3800 |s2cid=15886043}}</ref> The [[fossil fuel]] company [[BP]] ran a large advertising campaign for the personal carbon footprint in 2005 which helped popularize this concept.<ref name=":3" /> This strategy, employed by many major fossil fuel companies, has been criticized for trying to shift the blame for negative consequences of those industries on to individual choices.<ref name=":3" /><ref name="westervelt">{{Cite magazine |last=Westervelt |first=Amy |author-link=Amy Westervelt |date=2021-05-14 |title=Big Oil Is Trying to Make Climate Change Your Problem to Solve. Don't Let Them |url=https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/climate-change-exxonmobil-harvard-study-1169682/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210621192628/https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/climate-change-exxonmobil-harvard-study-1169682/ |archive-date=21 June 2021 |access-date=2021-06-13 |magazine=Rolling Stone |language=en-US}}</ref> |
|||
Geoffrey Supran and [[Naomi Oreskes]] of Harvard University argue that concepts such as carbon footprints "hamstring us, and they put blinders on us, to the systemic nature of the climate crisis and the importance of taking collective action to address the problem".<ref name="leber">{{cite news |last1=Leber |first1=Rebecca |date=13 May 2021 |title=ExxonMobil wants you to feel responsible for climate change so it doesn't have to |url=https://www.vox.com/22429551/climate-change-crisis-exxonmobil-harvard-study |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230325073105/https://www.vox.com/22429551/climate-change-crisis-exxonmobil-harvard-study |archive-date=25 March 2023 |access-date=25 March 2023 |work=Vox}}</ref><ref name="SupranOreskes2021">{{cite journal |last1=Supran |first1=Geoffrey |last2=Oreskes |first2=Naomi |date=May 2021 |title=Rhetoric and frame analysis of ExxonMobil's climate change communications |url= |journal=One Earth |volume=4 |issue=5 |pages=696–719 |bibcode=2021OEart...4..696S |doi=10.1016/j.oneear.2021.04.014 |issn=2590-3322 |pmid= |s2cid=236343941 |doi-access=free}}</ref> |
|||
[[Reforestation]], the restocking of existing forests or woodlands that have previously been depleted, is an example of [[Carbon offset|Carbon Offsetting]], the counteracting of carbon dioxide emissions with an equivalent reduction of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.<ref>Corbett, James. "Carbon Footprint." Climate Change: In Context, edited by Brenda Wilmoth Lerner and K. Lee Lerner, vol. 1, Gale, 2008, pp. 162-164. In Context Series. Gale Virtual Reference Library, www.pierce.ctc.edu:2055/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=puya65247&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CCX3079000057&asid=e7c1362a6d136f126eb44525b39ec5ee. Accessed 5 December 2016.</ref> Carbon offsetting can reduce a companies overall carbon footprint by offering a [[carbon credit]]. |
|||
=== Relationship with other environmental impacts === |
|||
A [[Life-cycle assessment|life cycle]] or supply chain carbon footprint study can provide useful data which will help the business to identify specific and critical areas for improvement. By calculating or predicting a process’ carbon footprint high emissions areas can be identified and steps can be taken to reduce in those areas. |
|||
A focus on carbon footprints can lead people to ignore or even exacerbate other related environmental issues of concern. These include [[biodiversity loss]], [[ecotoxicity]], and [[habitat destruction]]. It may not be easy to measure these other [[Human impact on the environment|human impacts on the environment]] with a single indicator like the carbon footprint. Consumers may think that the carbon footprint is a proxy for environmental impact. In many cases this is not correct.<ref name="Berg">{{Cite book |last=Berg |first=Christian |title=Sustainable action: overcoming the barriers |date=2020 |isbn=978-0-429-57873-1 |location=Abingdon, Oxon |oclc=1124780147}}</ref>{{rp|222}} There can be [[trade-off]]s between reducing carbon footprint and [[environmental protection]] goals. One example is the use of [[biofuel]], a [[renewable energy]] source and can reduce the carbon footprint of energy supply but can also pose ecological challenges during its production. This is because it is often produced in [[monoculture]]s with ample use of [[fertilizer]]s and [[pesticide]]s.<ref name="Berg" />{{rp|222}} Another example is [[Offshore wind power|offshore wind parks]], which could have unintended impacts on [[marine ecosystem]]s.<ref name="Berg" />{{rp|223}} |
|||
The carbon footprint analysis solely focuses on greenhouse gas emissions, unlike a [[life-cycle assessment]] which is much broader and looks at all environmental impacts. Therefore, it is useful to stress in communication activities that the carbon footprint is just one in a family of indicators (e.g. [[ecological footprint]], [[water footprint]], [[land footprint]], and material footprint), and should not be looked at in isolation.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Fang |first=K. |author2=Heijungs, R. |author3=De Snoo, G.R. |date=January 2014 |title=Theoretical exploration for the combination of the ecological, energy, carbon, and water footprints: Overview of a footprint family |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1470160X13003166 |journal=Ecological Indicators |volume=36 |pages=508–518 |bibcode=2014EcInd..36..508F |doi=10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.017}}</ref> In fact, carbon footprint can be treated as one component of ecological footprint.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wiedmann |first1=Thomas |last2=Barrett |first2=John |date=2010 |title=A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods |journal=Sustainability |language=en |volume=2 |issue=6 |pages=1645–1693 |doi=10.3390/su2061645 |issn=2071-1050 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name=":5" /> |
|||
== Schemes to reduce carbon emissions: Kyoto Protocol, carbon offsetting, and certificates == |
|||
The "Sustainable Consumption and Production Hotspot Analysis Tool" (SCP-HAT) is a tool to place carbon footprint analysis into a wider perspective. It includes a number of socio-economic and environmental indicators.<ref>{{Cite web |title=SCP Hotspots Analysis |url=http://scp-hat.lifecycleinitiative.org/ |access-date=2023-06-05 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name=":12">Piñero, P., Sevenster, M., Lutter, S., Giljum, S. (2021). [http://scp-hat.lifecycleinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/SCP-HAT-2.0_Technical-documentation_Oct2021_final02.pdf Technical documentation of the Sustainable Consumption and Production Hotspots Analysis Tool (SCPHAT) version 2.0]. Commissioned by UN Life Cycle Initiative, One Planet Network, and UN International Resource Panel. Paris.</ref> It offers calculations that are either consumption-based, following the carbon footprint approach, or production-based. The database of the SCP-HAT tool is underpinned by [[Input–output model|input–output]] analysis. This means it includes Scope 3 emissions. The IO methodology is also governed by UN standards.<ref name=":8" />{{rp|280}} It is based on input-output tables of countries' national accounts and international trade data such as UN Comtrade,<ref>{{Cite web |title=UN Comtrade |url=https://comtradeplus.un.org/ |access-date=2023-06-19 |website=}}</ref> and therefore it is comparable worldwide.<ref name=":12" /> |
|||
Carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere, and the emissions of other GHGs, are often associated with the burning of fossil fuels, like natural gas, crude oil and coal. While this is harmful to the environment, [[carbon offset]]s can be purchased in an attempt to make up for these harmful effects. |
|||
=== Differing boundaries for calculations === |
|||
The [[Kyoto Protocol]] defines legally binding targets and timetables for cutting the GHG emissions of industrialized countries that ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Accordingly, from an economic or market perspective, one has to distinguish between a ''mandatory market'' and a ''voluntary market''. Typical for both markets is the trade with emission certificates: |
|||
The term ''carbon footprint'' has been applied to limited calculations that do not include Scope 3 emissions or the entire supply chain. This can lead to claims of misleading customers with regards to the real carbon footprints of companies or products.<ref name=":7" /> |
|||
== Reported values == |
|||
*[[Certified Emission Reduction]] (CER) |
|||
{{Expand German|CO2-Bilanz#Daten und Fakten|date=May 2023}} |
|||
*[[Emission Reduction Unit]] (ERU) |
|||
{{See also|Greenhouse gas emissions}} |
|||
*[[Verified Emission Reduction]] (VER) |
|||
=== |
=== Greenhouse gas emissions overview === |
||
{{excerpt|Greenhouse gas emissions|paragraphs=1-2}} |
|||
To reach the goals defined in the Kyoto Protocol, with the least economical costs, the following [[Flexible Mechanisms|flexible mechanisms]] were introduced for the mandatory market: |
|||
=== By products === |
|||
*[[Clean Development Mechanism]] (CDM) |
|||
[[File:Carbon-footprint-of-EU-diets-by-supply-chain.png|thumb|Carbon footprint of EU diets by supply chain]] |
|||
*[[Joint Implementation]] (JI) |
|||
The [[Carbon Trust]] has worked with UK manufacturers to produce "thousands of carbon footprint assessments". As of 2014 the Carbon Trust state they have measured 28,000 certifiable product carbon footprints.<ref>{{cite web |title=Footprint measurement |url=http://www.carbontrust.com/client-services/footprinting/footprint-measurement |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141223225009/http://www.carbontrust.com/client-services/footprinting/footprint-measurement |archive-date=23 December 2014 |access-date=14 August 2012 |publisher=The Carbon Trust}}</ref> |
|||
*[[Emissions trading]] |
|||
==== Food ==== |
|||
The CDM and JI mechanisms requirements for projects which create a supply of emission reduction instruments, while [[Emissions Trading]] allows those instruments to be sold on international markets. |
|||
[[Plant-based diet|Plant-based foods]] tend to have a lower carbon footprint than meat and dairy. In many cases a much smaller footprint. This holds true when comparing the footprint of foods in terms of their weight, protein content or calories.<ref name=":18" /> The protein output of peas and beef provides an example. Producing 100 grams of protein from peas emits just 0.4 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO<sub>2</sub>eq). To get the same amount of protein from beef, emissions would be nearly 90 times higher, at 35 kgCO<sub>2</sub>eq.<ref name=":18" /> Only a small fraction of the carbon footprint of food comes from transport and packaging. Most of it comes from processes on the farm, or from land use change. This means the choice of what to eat has a larger potential to reduce carbon footprint than how far the food has traveled, or how much packaging it is wrapped in.<ref name=":18" /> |
|||
=== By sector === |
|||
- Projects which are compliant with the requirements of the CDM mechanism generate [[Certified Emissions Reduction]]s (CERs).<br /> - Projects which are compliant with the requirements of the JI mechanism generate [[Emission Reduction Unit]]s (ERUs). |
|||
{{Main|Greenhouse gas emissions#Emissions by sector}} |
|||
The [[IPCC Sixth Assessment Report]] found that global [[Greenhouse gas emissions|GHG emissions]] have continued to rise across all sectors. Global consumption was the main cause. The most rapid growth was in transport and industry.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2022 |title=IPCC 6th Assessment Report. WG III. Mitigation of Climate Change. Chapter 2 Emissions Trends and Drivers pp. 215-294 |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter02.pdf |access-date=June 11, 2023 |page=218}}</ref> A key driver of global carbon emissions is [[affluence]]. The IPCC noted that the wealthiest 10% in the world contribute between about one third to one half (36%–45%) of global GHG emissions. Researcheres have previously found that affluence is the key driver of carbon emissions. It has a bigger impact than population growth. And it counters the effects of technological developments. Continued economic growth mirrors the increasing trend in material extraction and GHG emissions'''.'''<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wiedmann |first1=Thomas |last2=Lenzen |first2=Manfred |last3=Keyßer |first3=Lorenz T. |last4=Steinberger |first4=Julia K. |date=2020-06-19 |title=Scientists' warning on affluence |journal=Nature Communications |language=en |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=3107 |doi=10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y |issn=2041-1723 |pmc=7305220 |pmid=32561753|bibcode=2020NatCo..11.3107W }}</ref> “Industrial emissions have been growing faster since 2000 than emissions in any other sector, driven by increased basic materials extraction and production,” the IPCC said.<ref>{{Cite web |title=IPCC 6th Assessment Report. WG III. Full Report. 2029p. |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FullReport.pdf |access-date=June 11, 2023 |pages=1163}}</ref> |
|||
The CERs and ERUs can then be sold through [[Emissions Trading]]. The demand for the CERs and ERUs being traded is driven by: |
|||
==== Transport ==== |
|||
- Shortfalls in national emission reduction obligations under the Kyoto Protocol.<br /> |
|||
[[File:Carbon-footprint-travel-mode.png|thumb|Comparison to show which form of transport has the smallest carbon footprint<ref name=":19">{{Cite web |title=Which form of transport has the smallest carbon footprint? |url=https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint |access-date=2023-07-07 |website=Our World in Data}}<nowiki>}} </nowiki>[[File:CC-BY icon.svg|50px]] Text was copied from this source, which is available under a [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License]</ref>]]There can be wide variations in emissions for transport of people. This is due to various factors. They include the length of the trip, the source of electricity in the local grid and the occupancy of public transport. In the case of driving the type of vehicle and number of passengers are factors.<ref name=":19" /> Over short to medium distances, walking or cycling are nearly always the lowest carbon way to travel. The carbon footprint of cycling one kilometer is usually in the range of 16 to 50 grams CO<sub>2</sub>eq per km. For moderate or long distances, trains nearly always have a lower carbon footprint than other options.<ref name=":19" /> |
|||
- Shortfalls amongst entities obligated under local emissions reduction schemes. |
|||
=== By organization === |
|||
Nations which have failed to deliver their Kyoto emissions reductions obligations can enter [[Emissions Trading]] to purchase CERs and ERUs to cover their treaty shortfalls. Nations and groups of nations can also create local emission reduction schemes which place mandatory carbon dioxide emission targets on entities within their national boundaries. If the rules of a scheme allow, the obligated entities may be able to cover all or some of any reduction shortfalls by purchasing CERs and ERUs through [[Emissions Trading]]. While local emissions reduction schemes have no status under the [[Kyoto Protocol]] itself, they play a prominent role in creating the demand for CERs and ERUs, stimulating [[Emissions Trading]] and setting a [[market price]] for emissions. |
|||
==== Carbon accounting ==== |
|||
A well-known mandatory local emissions trading scheme is the [[EU Emissions Trading Scheme]] (EU ETS). |
|||
{{excerpt|carbon accounting|paragraphs=1-2|file=no}} |
|||
=== By country === |
|||
New changes are being made to the trading schemes. The [[EU Emissions Trading Scheme]] is set to make some new changes within the next year. The new changes will target the emissions produced by flight travel in and out of the European Union.<ref name="Callick, Rowan 2011">Callick, Rowan. "Nations Split on Route to Reduce Carbon Emissions." The Australian. 2 March 2011. Web. 1 March 2011.</ref> |
|||
{{Main|List of countries by greenhouse gas emissions per capita}} |
|||
[[File:Consumption-based CO₂ emissions per capita, OWID.svg|thumb|upright=1.5|Consumption-based CO₂ emissions per capita, 2017]]CO<sub>2</sub> emissions of countries are typically measured on the basis of ''production''. This accounting method is sometimes referred to as ''territorial emissions.'' Countries use it when they report their emissions, and set domestic and international targets such as [[Nationally determined contribution|Nationally Determined Contributions]].<ref name=":20" /> ''Consumption''-based emissions on the other hand are adjusted for trade. To calculate consumption-based emissions analysts have to track which goods are traded across the world. Whenever a product is imported, all CO<sub>2</sub> emissions that were emitted in the production of that product are included. Consumption-based emissions reflect the lifestyle choices of a country's citizens.<ref name=":21" /> |
|||
According to the World Bank, the global average carbon footprint in 2014 was about 5 tonnes of CO<sub>2</sub> per person, measured on a production basis.<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |title=CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita) |url=https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?end=2014&start=1960&view=chart |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190306111344/https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?end=2014&start=1960&view=chart |archive-date=6 March 2019 |access-date=March 4, 2019 |website=The World Bank}}</ref> The [[EU]] average for 2007 was about 13.8 tonnes CO<sub>2</sub>e per person. For the USA, Luxembourg and Australia it was over 25 tonnes CO<sub>2</sub>e per person. In 2017, the average for the USA was about 20 metric tonnes CO<sub>2</sub>e per person. This is one of the highest per capita figures in the world.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What is your carbon footprint? |url=https://www.nature.org/en-us/get-involved/how-to-help/carbon-footprint-calculator/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210910224410/https://www.nature.org/en-us/get-involved/how-to-help/carbon-footprint-calculator/ |archive-date=10 September 2021 |access-date=2021-09-25 |website=The Nature Conservancy |language=en-US}}</ref> |
|||
Other nations are scheduled to start participating in Emissions Trading Schemes within the next few year. These nations include China, India and the United States.<ref name="Callick, Rowan 2011" /> |
|||
The footprints per capita of countries in [[Africa]] and [[India]] were well below average. Per capita emissions in India are low for its huge population. But overall the country is the third largest emitter of CO<sub>2</sub> and fifth largest economy by nominal GDP in the world.<ref>Nandy, S.N. (2023). Differential Carbon Footprint in India – An Economic Perspective. Journal of Sustainability and Environmental Management, 2(1), 74–82. https://doi.org/10.3126/josem.v2i1.53119</ref> Assuming a [[global population]] of around 9–10 billion by 2050, a carbon footprint of about 2–2.5 tonnes CO<sub>2</sub>e per capita is needed to stay within a 2 °C target. These carbon footprint calculations are based on a consumption-based approach using a Multi-Regional [[input–output model|Input-Output]] (MRIO) database. This database accounts for all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the [[Global value chain|global supply chain]] and allocates them to the final consumer of the purchased commodities.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Tukker |first1=Arnold |last2=Bulavskaya |first2=Tanya |last3=Giljum |first3=Stefan |last4=de Koning |first4=Arjan |last5=Lutter |first5=Stephan |last6=Simas |first6=Moana |last7=Stadler |first7=Konstantin |last8=Wood |first8=Richard |date=2016 |title=Environmental and resource footprints in a global context: Europe's structural deficit in resource endowments |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959378016301091 |journal=Global Environmental Change |language=en |volume=40 |pages=171–181 |doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.07.002|bibcode=2016GEC....40..171T }}</ref> |
|||
=== Voluntary market mechanisms === |
|||
In contrast to the strict rules set out for the mandatory market, the voluntary market provides companies with different options to acquire emissions reductions. A solution, comparable with those developed for the mandatory market, has been developed for the voluntary market, the Verified Emission Reductions (VER). This measure has the great advantage that the projects/activities are managed according to the quality standards set out for CDM/JI projects but the certificates provided are not registered by the governments of the host countries or the Executive Board of the UNO. As such, high quality VERs can be acquired at lower costs for the same project quality. However, at present VERs can not be used in the mandatory market. |
|||
== Reducing the carbon footprint == |
|||
The voluntary market in North America is divided between members of the Chicago Climate Exchange and the Over The Counter (OTC) market. The [[Chicago Climate Exchange]] is a voluntary yet legally binding [[emissions trading|cap-and-trade emission scheme]] whereby members commit to the capped emission reductions and must purchase allowances from other members or offset excess emissions. The OTC market does not involve a legally binding scheme and a wide array of buyers from the public and private spheres, as well as special events that want to go [[carbon neutral]]. Being carbon neutral refers to achieving net zero carbon emissions by balancing a measured amount of carbon released with an equivalent amount sequestered or offset, or buying enough carbon credits to make up the difference. |
|||
{{Main|Climate change mitigation|Greenhouse gas emissions#Reducing greenhouse gas emissions}}[[File:Go vegan and cut your climate footprint by 50%. (23310836832).jpg|thumb|Sign at demonstration: "Go vegan and cut your climate footprint by 50%"]] |
|||
=== Climate change mitigation === |
|||
There are project developers, wholesalers, brokers, and retailers, as well as carbon funds, in the voluntary market. Some businesses and nonprofits in the voluntary market encompass more than just one of the activities listed above. A report by Ecosystem Marketplace shows that carbon offset prices increase as it moves along the supply chain—from project developer to retailer.<ref name="ecosysmarket">{{cite web|url=http://ecosystemmarketplace.com/documents/acrobat/StateoftheVoluntaryCarbonMarket18July_Final.pdf|title=Archived copy|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110710170031/http://ecosystemmarketplace.com/documents/acrobat/StateoftheVoluntaryCarbonMarket18July_Final.pdf|archivedate=10 July 2011|deadurl=yes|accessdate=21 August 2007|df=dmy}}</ref> |
|||
Efforts to reduce the carbon footprint of products, services and organizations help limit climate change. Such activities are called climate change mitigation.{{excerpt|climate change mitigation|paragraphs=1}} |
|||
===Reducing industry's carbon footprint=== |
|||
While some mandatory emission reduction schemes exclude forest projects, these projects flourish in the voluntary markets. A major criticism concerns the imprecise nature of GHG sequestration quantification methodologies for forestry projects. However, others note the community co-benefits that [[forestry]] projects foster. |
|||
[[File:Windmill field.jpg|thumb|[[Wind farm]]s provide energy with a fairly low carbon footprint compared to [[fossil fuel]]s.]] |
|||
Project types in the voluntary market range from avoided [[deforestation]], afforestation/reforestation, industrial gas [[Carbon dioxide sink|sequestration]], increased [[Efficient energy use|energy efficiency]], fuel switching, [[Carbon capture and storage|methane capture]] from coal plants and [[Climate change and agriculture#Livestock|livestock]], and even [[renewable energy]]. Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) sold on the voluntary market are quite controversial due to [[Carbon credit#Additionality and its importance|additionality]] concerns.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.acore.org/renewableenergyinfo/includes/resource-files/bios.doc|title=Archived copy|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20070707112535/http://www.acore.org/renewableenergyinfo/includes/resource-files/bios.doc|archivedate=7 July 2007|deadurl=yes|accessdate=21 August 2007|df=dmy}}</ref> Industrial Gas projects receive criticism because such projects only apply to large industrial plants that already have high fixed costs. Siphoning off industrial gas for sequestration is considered picking the low hanging fruit; which is why credits generated from industrial gas projects are the cheapest in the voluntary market. |
|||
{{Main|Climate change mitigation#Industry}} |
|||
[[Carbon offsets and credits|Carbon offsetting]] can reduce a company's overall carbon footprint by providing it with a carbon credit.<ref>{{cite book |last=Corbett |first=James |title=Climate Change: In Context, vol. 1 |date=2008 |publisher=Gale |isbn=978-1-4144-3708-8 |editor1=Brenda Wilmoth Lerner |pages=162–164 |chapter=Carbon Footprint |editor2=K. Lee Lerner}}</ref> This compensates the company for carbon dioxide emissions by recognizing an equivalent reduction of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. [[Reforestation]], or restocking existing forests that have previously been depleted, is an example of carbon offsetting. |
|||
The size and activity of the voluntary carbon market is difficult to measure. The most comprehensive report on the voluntary carbon markets to date was released by Ecosystem Marketplace and New Carbon Finance in July 2007.<ref name="ecosysmarket" /> |
|||
A carbon footprint study can identify specific and critical areas for improvement. It uses [[Input–output model|input-output analysis]] and scrutinizes the entire supply chain.<ref name=":8" /> Such an analysis could be used to eliminate the supply chains with the highest greenhouse gas emissions. |
|||
[[ÆON]] of Japan is firstly approved by Japanese authority to indicate carbon footprint on three [[private brand]] goods in October 2009. |
|||
== History == |
|||
== Average carbon footprint per person by country == |
|||
The term ''carbon footprint'' was first used in a [[BBC]] vegetarian food magazine in 1999, <ref>{{cite web |title=carbon, n. |url=https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/27743 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230324110039/https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/27743 |archive-date=24 March 2023 |access-date=24 March 2023 |website=OED Online |publisher=Oxford University Press}}</ref> though the broader concept of ''ecological footprint'', which encompasses the carbon footprint, had been used since at least 1992,<ref>{{cite web |title=ecological footprint, noun.|url=https://www.oed.com/dictionary/ecological-footprint_n?tab=factsheet#128781000100 |access-date=8 October 2024 |website=OED Online |publisher=Oxford University Press}}</ref> as also chronicled by William Safire in the New York Times.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Safire |first1=William |date=17 February 2008 |title=On language: footprint |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/magazine/17wwln-safire-t.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200314124823/https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/magazine/17wwln-safire-t.html |url-status=live |access-date=8 October 2024 |archive-date=14 March 2020 }}</ref> |
|||
In 2005, fossil fuel company [[BP]] hired the large advertising campaign [[Ogilvy (agency)|Ogilvy]] to popularize the idea of a carbon footprint for individuals. The campaign instructed people to calculate their personal footprints and provided ways for people to "go on a [[Climatarian diet|low-carbon diet]]".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2006-02-12 |title=BP Global - Environment and society - Carbon reduction |url=http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9005334&contentId=7009881 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060212090704/http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9005334&contentId=7009881 |archive-date=2006-02-12 |access-date=2021-06-13}}</ref><ref name="supran2021">{{cite news |last1=Supran |first1=Geoffrey |last2=Oreskes |first2=Naomi |date=18 November 2021 |title=The forgotten oil ads that told us climate change was nothing |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/18/the-forgotten-oil-ads-that-told-us-climate-change-was-nothing |url-status=live |access-date=24 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211118171257/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/18/the-forgotten-oil-ads-that-told-us-climate-change-was-nothing |archive-date=18 November 2021}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.barillacfn.com/en/magazine/food-and-society/climatarian-the-zero-emissions-meal/|title=Climatarian: the "zero emissions" meal|last=|first=|date=24 June 2016|website=BCFN Foundation|language=en|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200206165616/https://www.barillacfn.com/en/magazine/food-and-society/climatarian-the-zero-emissions-meal/|archive-date=6 February 2020|access-date=6 February 2020|url-status=dead}}</ref> |
|||
According to The World Bank, the global average carbon footprint in 2014 was 4.97 metric tons CO<sub>2</sub>/cap.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?end=2014&start=1960&view=chart|title=CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita)|last=|first=|date=|website=The World Bank|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=March 4, 2019}}</ref> The [[EU]] average for 2007 was about 13.8 tons CO<sub>2</sub>e/cap, whereas for the [[U.S.]], [[Luxembourg]] and [[Australia]] it was over 25 tons CO<sub>2</sub>e/cap. In 2017, the average for the USA was about 20 metric tons CO2e. <ref>{{Cite webThe footprints per capita of countries in [[Africa]] and [[India]] were well below average. To set this numbers into context, assuming a [[global population]] around 9–10 billion by 2050 a carbon footprint of about 2–2.5 tons CO<sub>2</sub>e per capita is needed to stay within a 2 °C target. The carbon footprint calculations are based on a consumption based approach using a Multi-Regional [[Iurl=https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks|access date=April 1, 2019}}</ref> |input–output model|Input-Output]] database, which accounts for all [[greenhouse gas]] (GHG) emissions in the global supply chain and allocates them to the final consumer of the purchased commodities. GHG emissions related to [[land use, land-use change, and forestry|land use cover change]] are not included.<ref> |
|||
{{cite journal|last1=Tukker|first1=Arnold|last2=Bulavskaya|first2=Tanya|last3=Giljum|first3=Stefan|last4=de Koning|first4=Arjan|last5=Lutter|first5=Stephan|last6=Simas|first6=Moana|last7=Stadler|first7=Konstantin|last8=Wood|first8=Richard|year=2016|title=Environmental and resource footprints in a global context: Europe's structural deficit in resource endowments|volume=40|pages=171–181|doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.07.002|periodical=Global Environmental Change}}</ref> |
|||
The carbon footprint is derived from the [[ecological footprint]], which encompasses carbon emissions.<ref name=":5" /> The carbon footprint follows the logic of ecological footprint accounting, which tracks the resource use embodied in consumption, whether it is a product, an individual, a city, or a country.<ref name=":5" /> While in the ecological footprint, carbon emissions are translated into areas needed to absorb the carbon emissions,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wackernagel |first1=Mathis |last2=Hanscom |first2=Laurel |last3=Jayasinghe |first3=Priyangi |last4=Lin |first4=David |last5=Murthy |first5=Adeline |last6=Neill |first6=Evan |last7=Raven |first7=Peter |author-link=Mathis Wackernagel |date=26 April 2021 |title=The importance of resource security for poverty eradication |journal=Nature Sustainability |volume=4 |issue=8 |pages=731–738 |doi=10.1038/s41893-021-00708-4 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2021NatSu...4..731W }}</ref> the carbon footprint on its own is expressed in the weight of carbon emissions per time unit. [[William Rees (academic)|William Rees]] wrote the first academic publication about ecological footprints in 1992.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Rees |first=William E. |author-link=William Rees (academic) |date=October 1992 |title=Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out |journal=Environment & Urbanization |volume=4 |issue=2 |pages=121–130 |doi=10.1177/095624789200400212 |doi-access=free|bibcode=1992EnUrb...4..121R }}</ref> Other related concepts from the 1990s are the "ecological backpack" and [[material input per unit of service]] (MIPS).<ref name="calculatingMIPS">{{cite book |last1=Ritthoff |first1=M |url=http://epub.wupperinst.org/frontdoor/index/index/docId/1577 |title=Calculating MIPS – Resource productivity of products and services |last2=Rohn |first2=H |last3=Liedtke |first3=C |date=2003 |publisher=Wuppertal Institute}} Accessed 22 February 2012</ref> |
|||
Mobility (driving, flying & small amount from public transit), shelter (electricity, heating, construction) and food are the most important consumption categories determining the carbon footprint of a person. In the [[EU]], the carbon footprint of mobility is evenly split between direct emissions (e.g. from driving private cars) and emissions embodied in purchased products related to mobility (air transport service, emissions occurring during the production of cars and during the extraction of fuel).<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Ivanova|first1=Diana|last2=Stadler|first2=Konstantin|last3=Steen-Olsen|first3=Kjartan|last4=Wood|first4=Richard|last5=Vita|first5=Gibran|last6=Tukker|first6=Arnold|last7=Hertwich|first7=Edgar|year=2016|title=Environmental Impact Assessment of Household Consumption|volume=20|pages=526–536|doi=10.1111/jiec.12371|periodical=Journal of Industrial Ecology|number=3}}</ref> |
|||
== Trends and similar concepts == |
|||
The carbon footprint of U.S. households is about 5 times greater than the global average. For most U.S. households the single most important action to reduce their carbon footprint is driving less or switching to a more efficient vehicle.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Jones|first1=Christopher|last2=Kammen|first2=Daniel|year=2011|title=Quantifying Carbon Footprint Reduction Opportunities for U.S. Households and Communities|volume=45|pages=4088–4095|doi=10.1021/es102221h|pmid=21449584|periodical=Environmental Science & Technology|number=9}}</ref> |
|||
The [[International Sustainability Standards Board]] (ISSB) aims to bring global, rigorous oversight to carbon footprint reporting. It was formed out of the International Financial Reporting Standards. It will require companies to report on their Scope 3 emissions.<ref>{{Cite web |title=IFRS - ISSB unanimously confirms Scope 3 GHG emissions disclosure requirements with strong application support, among key decisions |url=https://www.ifrs.org/news-and-events/news/2022/10/issb-unanimously-confirms-scope-3-ghg-emissions-disclosure-requirements-with-strong-application-support-among-key-decisions/ |access-date=2023-06-11 |website=www.ifrs.org}}</ref> The ISSB has taken on board criticisms of other initiatives in its aims for universality.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Making sense of ISSB {{!}} Deloitte Australia {{!}} About Deloitte |url=https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/making-sense-issb.html |access-date=2023-06-11 |website=Deloitte Australia |language=en}}</ref> It consolidates the Carbon Disclosure Standards Board, the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board and the Value Reporting Foundation. It complements the Global Reporting Initiative. It is influenced by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures. As of early 2023, Great Britain and Nigeria were preparing to adopt these standards.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Jones |first=Huw |date=2023-02-16 |title=G20-backed standards body approves first global company sustainability rules |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/g20-backed-standards-body-approves-first-global-company-sustainability-rules-2023-02-16/ |access-date=2023-06-11}}</ref> |
|||
The concept of ''total equivalent warming impact'' (TEWI) is the most used index for carbon dioxide equivalent (CO<sub>2</sub>) emissions calculation in [[air conditioning]] and [[refrigeration]] sectors by including both the direct and indirect contributions since it evaluates the emissions caused by the operating lifetime of systems.<ref name=":25">{{Cite journal |last1=Aprea |first1=Ciro |last2=Ceglia |first2=Francesca |last3=Llopis |first3=Rodrigo |last4=Maiorino |first4=Angelo |last5=Marrasso |first5=Elisa |last6=Petruzziello |first6=Fabio |last7=Sasso |first7=Maurizio |date=2022 |title=Expanded Total Equivalent Warming Impact analysis on experimental standalone fresh-food refrigerator |journal=Energy Conversion and Management: X |language=en |volume=15 |pages=100262 |doi=10.1016/j.ecmx.2022.100262|doi-access=free |bibcode=2022ECMX...1500262A |hdl=10234/200662 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> The ''Expanded Total Equivalent Warming Impact'' method has been used for an accurate evaluation of refrigerators emissions.<ref name=":25" /> |
|||
==The carbon footprints of energy== |
|||
{{Main|Life-cycle greenhouse-gas emissions of energy sources}} |
|||
The following table compares, from peer-reviewed studies of full life cycle emissions and from various other studies, the carbon footprint of various forms of energy generation: nuclear, hydro, coal, gas, solar cell, peat and wind generation technology. |
|||
[[Image:Greenhouse emissions by electricity source.PNG|thumb|400px|right|The Vattenfall study found renewable and nuclear generation responsible for far less CO<sub>2</sub> than fossil fuel generation.]] |
|||
{| style="font-size:95%; text-align:right;" class="wikitable sortable" border="0" |
|||
|+ Emission factors of common fuels |
|||
|- |
|||
! colspan=2 | Fuel/<br>resource |
|||
! Thermal <br>({{abbr|g[{{nowrap|CO<sub>2</sub>-eq}}]/MJ<sub>th</sub>|Grams of CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent per megajoule of [[thermal energy]]}}) |
|||
! Energy intensity <br>(J<sub>th</sub>/J<sub>e</sub>) |
|||
! Electric <br>({{abbr|g[{{nowrap|CO<sub>2</sub>-eq}}]/kW·h<sub>e</sub>|Grams of CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent per kilowatt-hour of [[electrical energy]]}}) |
|||
|- |
|||
| rowspan=3 align=left | [[Coal]] |
|||
| align=left | B |
|||
| {{Ntsh|92.51}}91.50–91.72 |
|||
| {{Ntsh|2.99}}2.62–2.85<ref name="ISA2008"> |
|||
{{cite journal|last=Bilek|first=Marcela|author2=Hardy, Clarence|author3=Lenzen, Manfred|author4=Dey, Christopher|year=2008|title=Life-cycle energy balance and greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear energy: A review|url=http://www.isa.org.usyd.edu.au/publications/documents/ISA_Nuclear_Report.pdf|deadurl=yes|journal=SLS|volume=49|issue=8|pages=2178–2199|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20091025164626/http://www.isa.org.usyd.edu.au/publications/documents/ISA_Nuclear_Report.pdf|archivedate=25 October 2009|accessdate=4 November 2009|df=dmy}}</ref> |
|||
| {{Ntsh|994}}863–941<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| align=left | Br |
|||
| 94.33 |
|||
| 3.46<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
| 1,175<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| 88 |
|||
| 3.01 |
|||
| 955<ref name="IPCC"> |
|||
{{cite journal|last1=Fridleifsson|first1=Ingvar B.|last2=Bertani|first2=Ruggero|last3=Huenges|first3=Ernst|last4=Lund|first4=John W.|last5=Ragnarsson|first5=Arni|last6=Rybach|first6=Ladislaus|date=11 February 2008|title=The possible role and contribution of geothermal energy to the mitigation of climate change|url=http://iga.igg.cnr.it/documenti/IGA/Fridleifsson_et_al_IPCC_Geothermal_paper_2008.pdf|deadurl=yes|location=Luebeck, Germany|pages=59–80|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110722030340/http://iga.igg.cnr.it/documenti/IGA/Fridleifsson_et_al_IPCC_Geothermal_paper_2008.pdf|archivedate=22 July 2011|accessdate=6 April 2009|conference=IPCC Scoping Meeting on Renewable Energy Sources|editor=O. Hohmeyer and T. Trittin|df=dmy-all}}</ref> |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan=2 align=left | [[Oil]] |
|||
| {{Nts|73}}<ref name="strategic">{{Cite news|url=http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1748-9326/2/4/044001/erl7_4_044001.pdf?request-id=dd247af1-1eb0-4c8d-a20b-426d37d8ee5f|title=Strategic GHG reduction through the use of ground source heat pump technology|last1=Hanova|first1=J|date=9 November 2007|periodical=Environmental Research Letters|accessdate=22 March 2009|publisher=IOP Publishing|last2=Dowlatabadi|first2=H|location=UK|volume=2|pages=044001 8pp|doi=10.1088/1748-9326/2/4/044001|issn=1748-9326|postscript=<!--None-->}}</ref> |
|||
| {{Nts|3.40}} |
|||
| {{Nts|893}}<ref name="IPCC"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| rowspan=3 align=left | [[Natural gas]] |
|||
| align=left | cc |
|||
| {{Ntsh|68.30}}68.20 |
|||
| rowspan=3 | − |
|||
| {{Ntsh|664}}577<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| align=left | oc |
|||
| 68.4 |
|||
| 751<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| align=left | |
|||
| |
|||
| 599<ref name="IPCC"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| rowspan=2 align=left | [[Geothermal power|Geothermal<br>power]] |
|||
| align=left | T{{sub|L}} |
|||
| rowspan=2 | {{Nts|3}}{{clarify|text=~|reason=What does this tilde denote?|date=January 2019}} |
|||
| rowspan=2 | − |
|||
| {{Ntsh|41}}0–1<ref name="IPCC"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| align=left | T{{sub|W}} |
|||
| 91–122<ref name="IPCC"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| rowspan=2 align=left | [[Uranium]]<br>[[Nuclear power]] |
|||
| align=left | W{{sub|L}} |
|||
| rowspan=2 {{n/a}} |
|||
| {{Ntsh|0.19}}0.18<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
| {{Ntsh|62.5}}60<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| align=left | W{{sub|L}} |
|||
| 0.20<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
| 65<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan=2 align=left | [[Hydroelectricity]] (run of river) |
|||
| {{n/a}} |
|||
| {{Nts|0.046}}<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
| {{Nts|15}}<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan=2 align=left | [[Concentrating solar power|Conc. solar power]] |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| {{Nts|40}}±15 |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan=2 align=left | [[Photovoltaics]] |
|||
| |
|||
| {{Nts|0.33}}<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
| {{Nts|106}}<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan=2 align=left | [[Wind power]] |
|||
| |
|||
| {{Nts|0.066}}<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
| {{Nts|21}}<ref name="ISA2008"/> |
|||
|} |
|||
Note: 3.6 megajoules (MJ) = 1 kilowatt-hour (kW·h), thus 1{{nbsp}}g/MJ = 3.6{{nbsp}}g/kW·h. |
|||
Legend |
|||
; B: Black coal (supercritical)–(new subcritical) |
|||
; Br: Brown coal (new subcritical) |
|||
; cc: combined cycle |
|||
; oc: open cycle |
|||
; T<sub>L</sub>: Low-temperature/closed-circuit (geothermal doublet) |
|||
; T<sub>H</sub>: High-temperature/open-circuit |
|||
; W<sub>L</sub>: Light water reactors |
|||
; W<sub>H</sub>: Heavy water reactors, estimate. |
|||
These three studies thus concluded that hydroelectric, wind, and nuclear power produced the least CO<sub>2</sub> per kilowatt-hour of any other electricity sources. |
|||
These figures do not allow for emissions due to accidents or terrorism. [[Wind power]] and [[solar power]], emit no carbon from the operation, but do leave a footprint during construction phase and maintenance during operation. [[Hydropower]] from reservoirs also has large footprints from initial removal of vegetation and ongoing methane (stream detritus decays anaerobically to methane in bottom of reservoir, rather than aerobically to CO<sub>2</sub> if it had stayed in an unrestricted stream).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.co2list.info/1/category/hydroelectricity/1.html|title=Hydroelectricity|publisher=CO2List|accessdate=30 September 2013}}</ref> |
|||
The table above gives the carbon footprint per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated, which is about half the world's man-made CO<sub>2</sub> output. The CO<sub>2</sub> footprint for heat is equally significant and research shows that using waste heat from power generation in combined heat and power district heating, chp/dh has the lowest carbon footprint,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.claverton-energy.com/carbon-footprints-of-various-sources-of-heat-chpdh-comes-out-lowest.html|title=Carbon footprints of various sources of heat - CHPDH comes out lowest - Claverton Group|work=claverton-energy.com}}</ref> much lower than micro-power or heat pumps. |
|||
Coal production has been refined to greatly reduce carbon emissions; since the 1980s, the amount of energy used to produce a ton of steel has decreased by 50%.<ref>Aldridge, Susan. "Coal and Steel." Energy: In Context, edited by Brenda Wilmoth Lerner, et al., vol. 1, Gale, 2016, pp. 111-113. In Context Series. Gale Virtual Reference Library, www.pierce.ctc.edu:2055/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=puya65247&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CCX3627100037&asid=c5505c667ede36bcd7fa5600a94cbc50. Accessed 5 December 2016.</ref> |
|||
===Passenger transport=== |
|||
[[File:Average carbon dioxide emissions (grams) per passenger mile (USA 2008).png|thumb|Average carbon dioxide emissions (grams) per passenger mile (USA). Based on 'Updated Comparison of Energy Use & CO 2 Emissions From Different Transportation Modes, October 2008' (Manchester, NH: M.J. Bradley & Associates, 2008), p. 4, table 1.1<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.buses.org/files/2008ABAFoundationComparativeFuelCO2.pdf|title=Archived copy|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130515034836/http://www.buses.org/files/2008ABAFoundationComparativeFuelCO2.pdf|archivedate=15 May 2013|deadurl=yes|accessdate=23 November 2012|df=dmy}}</ref>]] |
|||
This section gives representative figures for the carbon footprint of the fuel burned by different transport types (not including the carbon footprints of the vehicles or related infrastructure themselves). The precise figures vary according to a wide range of factors. |
|||
====Flight==== |
|||
{{main|Environmental impact of aviation}} |
|||
Some representative figures for CO<sub >2</sub> emissions are provided by LIPASTO's survey of average direct emissions (not accounting for high-altitude radiative effects) of airliners expressed as CO<sub>2</sub> and CO<sub >2</sub> equivalent per passenger kilometre:<ref>{{cite web|url=http://lipasto.vtt.fi/yksikkopaastot/henkiloliikennee/ilmaliikennee/ilmae.htm|title=Average passenger aircraft emissions and energy consumption per passenger kilometre in Finland 2008|website=lipasto.vtt.fi|accessdate=3 July 2009}}</ref> |
|||
* Domestic, short distance, less than {{convert|463|km|mi|0|abbr=on}}: 257 g/km CO<sub >2</sub> or 259 g/km (14.7 oz/mile) CO<sub >2</sub>e |
|||
* Long distance flights: 113 g/km CO<sub >2</sub> or 114 g/km (6.5 oz/mile) CO<sub >2</sub>e |
|||
However, emissions per unit distance traveled is not necessarily the best indicator for the carbon footprint of air travel, because the distances covered are commonly longer than by other modes of travel. It is the total emissions for a trip that matters for a carbon footprint, not the merely rate of emissions. For example, a greatly more distant holiday destination may be chosen than if another mode of travel were used, because air travel makes the longer distance feasible in the limited time available.<ref>Gössling S., Upham P. (2009). [http://www.gci.org.uk/Documents/Aviation-and-Climate-Change_.pdf Climate change and aviation: Issues, challenges and solutions]. EarthScan. 386pp.</ref> |
|||
====Road==== |
|||
CO<sub>2</sub> emissions per passenger-kilometre (pkm) for all road travel for 2011 in Europe as provided by the European Environment Agency:<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/energy-efficiency-and-specific-co2-emissions/energy-efficiency-and-specific-co2-5|title=Energy efficiency and specific CO2 emissions (TERM 027) - Assessment published Jan 2013|work=europa.eu}}</ref> |
|||
* 109{{nbsp}}g/km{{nnbsp}}CO<sub>2</sub> (Figure 2) |
|||
For vehicles, average figures for CO<sub>2</sub> emissions per kilometer for road travel for 2013 in Europe, normalized to the [[NEDC test cycle]], are provided by the International Council on Clean Transportation:<ref>{{cite book|url=http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/EU_pocketbook_2014.pdf|title=EU pocketbook 2014|website=theicct.org|page=28}}</ref> |
|||
* Newly registered [[car|passenger cars]]: 127{{nbsp}}g{{nnbsp}}CO<sub>2</sub>/km |
|||
* [[Hybrid-electric vehicles]]: 92{{nbsp}}g{{nnbsp}}CO<sub>2</sub>/km |
|||
* [[Light commercial vehicles]] (LCV): 175{{nbsp}}g{{nnbsp}}CO<sub>2</sub>/km |
|||
Average figures for the [[United States]] are provided by the [[US Environmental Protection Agency]],<ref>http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/fetrends/1975-2014/420r14023a.pdf</ref> based on the [[EPA Federal Test Procedure]], for the following categories: |
|||
* Passenger cars: 200{{nbsp}}g{{nnbsp}}CO<sub>2</sub>/km (322{{nbsp}}g/mi) |
|||
* [[Trucks]]: 280{{nbsp}}g{{nnbsp}}CO<sub>2</sub>/km (450{{nbsp}}g/mi) |
|||
* Combined: 229{{nbsp}}g{{nnbsp}}CO<sub>2</sub>/km (369{{nbsp}}g/mi) |
|||
====Rail==== |
|||
In 2005, the US company Amtrak's carbon dioxide equivalent emissions per passenger kilometre were 0.116 kg,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.buses.org/files/2008ABAFoundationComparativeFuelCO2.pdf|title=table 1.1, figures from 2005. Cf|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130515034836/http://www.buses.org/files/2008ABAFoundationComparativeFuelCO2.pdf|archivedate=15 May 2013|deadurl=yes|df=dmy}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://docs.wri.org/wri_co2comm_2002_commuting_protected.xls|title=sheet 8, cell C33 (figures from 2002)}}</ref> about twice as high as the UK rail average (where much more of the system is electrified),<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/rolling-c9-environ.pdf|title=figures from 2008–9.|archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20090324105139/http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/rolling-c9-environ.pdf|archive-date=24 March 2009|dead-url=yes|accessdate=23 November 2012}}</ref> and about eight times a Finnish electric intercity train.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://lipasto.vtt.fi/yksikkopaastot/henkiloliikennee/raideliikennee/junat_henkiloe.htm|title=figures for 2007|work=vtt.fi}}</ref> |
|||
====Sea==== |
|||
Average carbon dioxide emissions by ferries per passenger-kilometre seem to be {{convert|0.12|kg|oz|abbr=on}}.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ferryshippingconference.com/backnet/media_archive/original/e3e0aadf3abf4f91b429a6c072becfae.pdf|title=SO<sub>x</sub> and CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions once again Hot Topic at Ferry Shipping Conference|last=Holthof|first=Philippe|date=10 April 2009|work=Ferry Shipping Conference 08: Building Bridges in the Industry|page=3}}</ref> However, 18-[[Knot (unit)|knot]] ferries between Finland and Sweden produce {{convert|0.221|kg|oz|abbr=on}} of CO<sub>2</sub>, with total emissions equalling a CO<sub>2</sub> equivalent of {{convert|0.223|kg|oz|abbr=on}}, while 24–27-knot ferries between Finland and Estonia produce {{convert|0.396|kg|oz|abbr=on}} of CO<sub>2</sub> with total emissions equalling a CO<sub>2</sub> equivalent of {{convert|0.4|kg|oz|abbr=on}}.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://lipasto.vtt.fi/yksikkopaastot/henkiloliikennee/vesiliikennee/autolauttae.htm#|title=Archived copy|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110719224329/http://lipasto.vtt.fi/yksikkopaastot/henkiloliikennee/vesiliikennee/autolauttae.htm#|archive-date=19 July 2011|dead-url=yes|access-date=5 July 2014|df=dmy-all}}</ref> |
|||
== The carbon footprints of products == |
|||
Several organizations offer footprint calculators for public and corporate use, and several organizations have calculated carbon footprints of products.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://The.CO2List.org|title=CO<sub>2</sub> Released when Making & Using Products|accessdate=27 October 2009}}</ref> The US Environmental Protection Agency has addressed paper, plastic (candy wrappers), glass, cans, computers, carpet and tires. Australia has addressed lumber and other building materials. Academics in Australia, Korea and the US have addressed paved roads. Companies, nonprofits and academics have addressed mailing letters and packages. Carnegie Mellon University has estimated the CO<sub>2</sub> footprints of 46 large sectors of the economy in each of eight countries. Carnegie Mellon, Sweden and the Carbon Trust have addressed foods at home and in restaurants. |
|||
The Carbon Trust has worked with UK manufacturers on foods, shirts and detergents, introducing a [[carbon emission label|CO<sub>2</sub> label]] in March 2007. The label is intended to comply with a new British [[Publicly Available Specification]] (i.e. not a standard), PAS 2050,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bsigroup.com/PAS2050|title=PAS 2050|work=bsigroup.com}}</ref> and is being actively piloted by The Carbon Trust and various industrial partners.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/carbon/briefing/carbon_label.htm|title=Certification - Carbon Trust|work=carbontrust.co.uk|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080516033219/http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/carbon/briefing/carbon_label.htm|archivedate=16 May 2008|deadurl=yes|df=dmy}}</ref> As of August 2012 The Carbon Trust state they have measured 27,000 certifiable product carbon footprints.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.carbontrust.com/client-services/footprinting/footprint-measurement|title=Footprint measurement|publisher=The Carbon Trust|accessdate=14 August 2012}}</ref> |
|||
Evaluating the package of some products is key to figuring out the carbon footprint.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Pasqualino|first1=Jorgelina|last2=Meneses|first2=Montse|last3=Castells|first3=Francesc|date=1 April 2011|title=The carbon footprint and energy consumption of beverage packaging selection and disposal|journal=Journal of Food Engineering|volume=103|issue=4|pages=357–365|doi=10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2010.11.005}}</ref> The key way to determine a carbon footprint is to look at the materials used to make the item. For example, a juice carton is made of an aseptic carton, a beer can is made of aluminum, and some water bottles either made of glass or plastic. The larger the size, the larger the footprint will be. |
|||
===Food=== |
|||
{{main|Low carbon diet}} |
|||
In a 2014 study by Scarborough et al., the real-life diets of British people were surveyed and their dietary [[GHG footprint|greenhouse gas footprints]] estimated.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Scarborough|first1=Peter|last2=Appleby|first2=Paul N.|last3=Mizdrak|first3=Anja|last4=Briggs|first4=Adam D. M.|last5=Travis|first5=Ruth C.|last6=Bradbury|first6=Kathryn E.|last7=Key|first7=Timothy J.|year=2014|title=Dietary greenhouse gas emissions of meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK|journal=Climatic Change|volume=125|issue=2|pages=179–192|doi=10.1007/s10584-014-1169-1|pmc=4372775|pmid=25834298}}</ref> Average dietary greenhouse-gas emissions per day (in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent) were: |
|||
*7.19 for high meat-eaters |
|||
*5.63 for medium meat-eaters |
|||
*4.67 for low meat-eaters |
|||
*3.91 for fish-eaters |
|||
*3.81 for vegetarians |
|||
*2.89 for vegans |
|||
===Textiles=== |
|||
The precise carbon footprint of different textiles varies considerably according to a wide range of factors. However, studies of textile production in Europe suggest the following carbon dioxide equivalent emissions footprints per kilo of textile at the point of purchase by a consumer:<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=zs13m5JquBwC|title=How Bad are Bananas? The Carbon Footprint of Everything (London: Profile, 2010), pp. 93, 112 (table 6.1)|last=Berners-Lee|first=Mike|date=2010-12-09|isbn=978-1847651822}}</ref> |
|||
*Cotton: 8 |
|||
*Nylon: 5.43 |
|||
*PET (e.g. synthetic fleece): 5.55 |
|||
*Wool: 5.48 |
|||
Accounting for durability and energy required to wash and dry textile products, synthetic fabrics generally have a substantially lower carbon footprint than natural ones.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=zs13m5JquBwC|title=How Bad are Bananas? The Carbon Footprint of Everything'' (London: Profile, 2010), pp. 93-94|last=Berners-Lee|first=Mike|date=2010-12-09|isbn=978-1847651822}}</ref> |
|||
===Materials=== |
|||
The carbon footprint of materials (also known as embodied carbon) varies widely. The carbon footprint of many common materials can be found in the Inventory of Carbon & Energy database,<ref name="ICE Database">G.P.Hammond and C.I.Jones (2011) ''[http://www.circularecology.com/embodied-energy-and-carbon-footprint-database.html Embodied energy and carbon footprint database]''</ref> the GREET databases and models,<ref name="GREET databases and models">GREET databases ''[https://greet.es.anl.gov/ GREET databases and models]''</ref> and LCA databases via openLCA Nexus<ref name="LCA databases via openLCA Nexus">LCA databases via openLCA Nexus ''[http://www.openlca.org/lca-data LCA databases via openLCA Nexus]''</ref> |
|||
===Cement=== |
|||
[[Cement]] production and carbon footprint resulting from soil sealing was 8.0 Mg person<sup>−1</sup> of total per capita CO<sub>2</sub> emissions (Italy, year 2003); the balance between C loss due to soil sealing and C stocked in man-made infrastructures resulted in a net loss to the atmosphere, -0.6 Mg C ha<sup>−1</sup> y<sup>−1</sup>.<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Scalenghe, R.|author2=Malucelli, F.|author3=Ungaro, F.|author4=Perazzone, L.|author5=Filippi, N.|author6=Edwards, A.C.|year=2011|title=Influence of 150 years of land use on anthropogenic and natural carbon stocks in Emilia-Romagna Region (Italy)|journal=Environmental Science & Technology|volume=45|issue=12|pages=5112–5117|doi=10.1021/es1039437|pmid=21609007}}</ref> |
|||
== See also == |
== See also == |
||
{{portal|Science}} |
{{portal|Science}} |
||
* [[Carbon emission]] |
|||
{{div col|colwidth=20em}} |
|||
*[[ |
* [[Carbon intensity]] |
||
* [[Carbon neutrality]] |
|||
*[[Avoiding dangerous climate change]] |
|||
*[[ |
* [[Ecological footprint]] |
||
*[[ |
* [[Embedded emissions]] |
||
*[[ |
* [[Food miles]] |
||
* [[Greenhouse gas inventory]] |
|||
*[[Carbon intensity]] |
|||
* [[Individual action on climate change]] |
|||
*[[Carbon literacy]] |
|||
* [[Life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of energy sources]] |
|||
*[[Carbon lock-in]] |
|||
*[[ |
* [[Zero-carbon city]] |
||
*[[Ecological footprint]] |
|||
*[[Ecosharing]] |
|||
*[[Energy neutral design]] |
|||
*[[Energy policy]] |
|||
*[[Enterprise carbon accounting]] |
|||
*[[Environmental impact of aviation]] |
|||
*[[Food miles]] |
|||
*[[Greenhouse debt]] |
|||
*[[Greenhouse gas emissions accounting]] |
|||
*[[Global warming]] |
|||
*[[Greenhouse gas inventory]] |
|||
*[[Hypermobility (travel)|Hyper-mobile travellers]] |
|||
*[[Land footprint]] |
|||
*[[Life cycle assessment]] |
|||
*[[List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita]] |
|||
*[[List of countries by greenhouse gas emissions per capita]] |
|||
*[[Low carbon diet]] |
|||
*[[Open Carbon World]] |
|||
*[[Telecommuting]] |
|||
*[[Water footprint]] |
|||
*[[Weighted average cost of carbon]] |
|||
{{div col end}} |
|||
== References == |
== References == |
||
{{Reflist|30em}} |
|||
=== Citations === |
|||
{{Reflist}} |
|||
== |
==External links== |
||
{{refbegin}} |
|||
* Wright, L., Kemp, S., Williams, I. (2011) 'Carbon footprinting': towards a universally accepted definition. ''Carbon Management'', 2 (1): 61-72. |
|||
* UK Carbon Trust (2008) "[http://www.carbontrust.com/resources/guides/carbon-footprinting-and-reporting/carbon-footprinting Carbon Footprinting]". |
|||
* {{cite journal |url = http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/POST-PN-268 |title = Carbon footprint of electricity generation,October 2006 |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date = October 2006 |website=researchbriefings.parliament.uk |publisher=[[Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology]] |access-date = 14 September 2016 |quote = October 2006, Number 268 }} |
|||
* Wiedmann, T. and J. Minx (2008). A Definition of 'Carbon Footprint'. Ecological Economics Research Trends. C. C. Pertsova: Chapter 1, pp. 1–11. [[Nova Science Publishers]], Inc, Hauppauge NY, USA. [https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=5999 catalog] also available as [https://web.archive.org/web/20081223014334/http://www.censa.org.uk/reports.html ISA-UK Research Report 07/01] |
|||
* World Energy Council Report (2004). ''Comparison of energy systems using life cycle assessment''. |
|||
* Energetics (2007). ''The reality of carbon neutrality''. |
|||
* [http://www.ghgprotocol.org/ The GHG Protocol] |
* [http://www.ghgprotocol.org/ The GHG Protocol] |
||
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20090307034640/http://www.walkerscarbonfootprint.co.uk/walkers_carbon_trust.html Walkers Carbon Footprint] |
|||
* Generally accepted definition: [http://www.carbonandmore.com/2012/08/13/definition-carbon-footprint/ Carbon Footprint] |
|||
{{refend}} |
|||
==External links== |
|||
<!-- ==============================({{NoMoreLinks}})============================== --> |
|||
<!-- DO NOT ADD MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A COLLECTION OF LINKS --> |
|||
<!-- If you think that your link might be useful, instead of placing it here, put --> |
|||
<!-- it on this article's discussion page first. Links that have not been verified --> |
|||
<!-- WILL BE DELETED --> |
|||
<!-- ============================================================================= --> |
|||
{{wikinews|New words added to Webster's dictionary}} |
|||
{{Sisterlinks}} |
|||
{{Dmoz|/Science/Environment/Carbon_Cycle/Carbon_Management/|Carbon Management}} |
|||
{{Sustainability}} |
{{Sustainability}} |
||
{{ |
{{Climate change}} |
||
{{Use dmy dates|date=May 2017}} |
|||
{{Population}} |
|||
{{Authority control}} |
{{Authority control}} |
||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Carbon Footprint}} |
|||
[[Category:Environmental impact of the energy industry]] |
[[Category:Environmental impact of the energy industry]] |
||
[[Category:Articles containing video clips]] |
|||
[[Category:Greenhouse gas emissions]] |
[[Category:Greenhouse gas emissions]] |
||
[[Category:Environmental indices]] |
[[Category:Environmental indices]] |
||
[[Category:Environmental terminology]] |
|||
[[Category:Articles containing video clips]] |
Latest revision as of 11:43, 19 December 2024
A carbon footprint (or greenhouse gas footprint) is a calculated value or index that makes it possible to compare the total amount of greenhouse gases that an activity, product, company or country adds to the atmosphere. Carbon footprints are usually reported in tonnes of emissions (CO2-equivalent) per unit of comparison. Such units can be for example tonnes CO2-eq per year, per kilogram of protein for consumption, per kilometer travelled, per piece of clothing and so forth. A product's carbon footprint includes the emissions for the entire life cycle. These run from the production along the supply chain to its final consumption and disposal.
Similarly, an organization's carbon footprint includes the direct as well as the indirect emissions that it causes. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol (for carbon accounting of organizations) calls these Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. There are several methodologies and online tools to calculate the carbon footprint. They depend on whether the focus is on a country, organization, product or individual person. For example, the carbon footprint of a product could help consumers decide which product to buy if they want to be climate aware. For climate change mitigation activities, the carbon footprint can help distinguish those economic activities with a high footprint from those with a low footprint. So the carbon footprint concept allows everyone to make comparisons between the climate impacts of individuals, products, companies and countries. It also helps people devise strategies and priorities for reducing the carbon footprint.
The carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq) emissions per unit of comparison is a suitable way to express a carbon footprint. This sums up all the greenhouse gas emissions. It includes all greenhouse gases, not just carbon dioxide. And it looks at emissions from economic activities, events, organizations and services.[2] In some definitions, only the carbon dioxide emissions are taken into account. These do not include other greenhouse gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide.[3]
Various methods to calculate the carbon footprint exist, and these may differ somewhat for different entities. For organizations it is common practice to use the Greenhouse Gas Protocol. It includes three carbon emission scopes. Scope 1 refers to direct carbon emissions. Scope 2 and 3 refer to indirect carbon emissions. Scope 3 emissions are those indirect emissions that result from the activities of an organization but come from sources which they do not own or control.[4]
For countries it is common to use consumption-based emissions accounting to calculate their carbon footprint for a given year. Consumption-based accounting using input-output analysis backed by super-computing makes it possible to analyse global supply chains. Countries also prepare national GHG inventories for the UNFCCC.[5][6] The GHG emissions listed in those national inventories are only from activities in the country itself. This approach is called territorial-based accounting or production-based accounting. It does not take into account production of goods and services imported on behalf of residents. Consumption-based accounting does reflect emissions from goods and services imported from other countries.
Consumption-based accounting is therefore more comprehensive. This comprehensive carbon footprint reporting including Scope 3 emissions deals with gaps in current systems. Countries' GHG inventories for the UNFCCC do not include international transport.[7] Comprehensive carbon footprint reporting looks at the final demand for emissions, to where the consumption of the goods and services takes place.[8]
Definition
[edit]A formal definition of carbon footprint is as follows: "A measure of the total amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) emissions of a defined population, system or activity, considering all relevant sources, sinks and storage within the spatial and temporal boundary of the population, system or activity of interest. Calculated as carbon dioxide equivalent using the relevant 100-year global warming potential (GWP100)."[9]
Scientists report carbon footprints in terms of equivalents of tonnes of CO2 emissions (CO2-equivalent). They may report them per year, per person, per kilogram of protein, per kilometer travelled, and so on.
In the definition of carbon footprint, some scientists include only CO2. But more commonly they include several of the notable greenhouse gases. They can compare various greenhouse gases by using carbon dioxide equivalents over a relevant time scale, like 100 years. Some organizations use the term greenhouse gas footprint or climate footprint[10] to emphasize that all greenhouse gases are included, not just carbon dioxide.
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol includes all of the most important greenhouse gases. "The standard covers the accounting and reporting of seven greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol – carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PCFs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3)."[11]
In comparison, the IPCC definition of carbon footprint in 2022 covers only carbon dioxide. It defines the carbon footprint as the "measure of the exclusive total amount of emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) that is directly and indirectly caused by an activity or is accumulated over the lifecycle stages of a product."[3]: 1796 The IPCC report's authors adopted the same definition that had been proposed in 2007 in the UK.[12] That publication included only carbon dioxide in the definition of carbon footprint. It justified this with the argument that other greenhouse gases were more difficult to quantify. This is because of their differing global warming potentials. They also stated that an inclusion of all greenhouse gases would make the carbon footprint indicator less practical.[12] But there are disadvantages to this approach. One disadvantage of not including methane is that some products or sectors that have a high methane footprint such as livestock[13] appear less harmful for the climate than they actually are.[14]
Types of greenhouse gas emissions
[edit]The greenhouse gas protocol is a set of standards for tracking greenhouse gas emissions.[17] The standards divide emissions into three scopes (Scope 1, 2 and 3) within the value chain.[18] Greenhouse gas emissions caused directly by the organization such as by burning fossil fuels are referred to as Scope 1. Emissions caused indirectly by an organization, such as by purchasing secondary energy sources like electricity, heat, cooling or steam are called Scope 2. Lastly, indirect emissions associated with upstream or downstream processes are called Scope 3.
Direct carbon emissions (Scope 1)
[edit]Direct or Scope 1 carbon emissions come from sources on the site that is producing a product or delivering a service.[19][20] An example for industry would be the emissions from burning a fuel on site. On the individual level, emissions from personal vehicles or gas-burning stoves are Scope 1.
Indirect carbon emissions (Scope 2)
[edit]Indirect carbon emissions are emissions from sources upstream or downstream from the process being studied. They are also known as Scope 2 or Scope 3 emissions.[19]
Scope 2 emissions are the indirect emissions related to purchasing electricity, heat, or steam used on site.[20] Examples of upstream carbon emissions include transportation of materials and fuels, any energy used outside of the production facility, and waste produced outside the production facility.[21] Examples of downstream carbon emissions include any end-of-life process or treatments, product and waste transportation, and emissions associated with selling the product.[22] The GHG Protocol says it is important to calculate upstream and downstream emissions. There could be some double counting. This is because upstream emissions of one person's consumption patterns could be someone else's downstream emissions
Other indirect carbon emissions (Scope 3)
[edit]Scope 3 emissions are all other indirect emissions derived from the activities of an organization. But they are from sources they do not own or control.[4] The GHG Protocol's Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard allows companies to assess their entire value chain emissions impact and identify where to focus reduction activities.[23]
Scope 3 emission sources include emissions from suppliers and product users. These are also known as the value chain. Transportation of good, and other indirect emissions are also part of this scope.[16] In 2022 about 30% of US companies reported Scope 3 emissions.[24] The International Sustainability Standards Board is developing a recommendation to include Scope 3 emissions in all GHG reporting.[25]
Purpose and strengths
[edit]The current rise in global average temperature is more rapid than previous changes. It is primarily caused by humans burning fossil fuels.[27][28] The increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is also due to deforestation and agricultural and industrial practices. These include cement production. The two most notable greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide and methane.[29] Greenhouse gas emissions, and hence humanity's carbon footprint, have been increasing during the 21st century.[30] The Paris Agreement aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions enough to limit the rise in global temperature to no more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.[31][32]
The carbon footprint concept makes comparisons between the climate impacts of individuals, products, companies and countries. A carbon footprint label on products could enable consumers to choose products with a lower carbon footprint if they want to help limit climate change. For meat products, as an example, such a label could make it clear that beef has a higher carbon footprint than chicken.[1]
Understanding the size of an organization's carbon footprint makes it possible to devise a strategy to reduce it. For most businesses the vast majority of emissions do not come from activities on site, known as Scope 1, or from energy supplied to the organization, known as Scope 2, but from Scope 3 emissions, the extended upstream and downstream supply chain.[33][34] Therefore, ignoring Scope 3 emissions makes it impossible to detect all emissions of importance, which limits options for mitigation.[35] Large companies in sectors such as clothing or automobiles would need to examine more than 100,000 supply chain pathways to fully report their carbon footprints.[36]
The importance of displacement of carbon emissions has been known for some years. Scientists also call this carbon leakage.[37] The idea of a carbon footprint addresses concerns of carbon leakage which the Paris Agreement does not cover. Carbon leakage occurs when importing countries outsource production to exporting countries. The outsourcing countries are often rich countries while the exporters are often low-income countries.[38][37] Countries can make it appear that their GHG emissions are falling by moving "dirty" industries abroad, even if their emissions could be increasing when looked at from a consumption perspective.[39][40]
Carbon leakage and related international trade have a range of environmental impacts. These include increased air pollution,[41] water scarcity,[42] biodiversity loss,[43] raw material usage,[44] and energy depletion.[45]
Scholars have argued in favour of using both consumption-based and production-based accounting. This helps establish shared producer and consumer responsibility.[46] Currently countries report on their annual GHG inventory to the UNFCCC based on their territorial emissions. This is known as the territorial-based or production-based approach.[6][5] Including consumption-based calculations in the UNFCCC reporting requirements would help close loopholes by addressing the challenge of carbon leakage.[41]
The Paris Agreement currently does not require countries to include in their national totals GHG emissions associated with international transport. These emissions are reported separately. They are not subject to the limitation and reduction commitments of Annex 1 Parties under the Climate Convention and Kyoto Protocol.[7] The carbon footprint methodology includes GHG emissions associated with international transport, thereby assigning emissions caused by international trade to the importing country.
Underlying concepts for calculations
[edit]The calculation of the carbon footprint of a product, service or sector requires expert knowledge and careful examination of what is to be included. Carbon footprints can be calculated at different scales. They can apply to whole countries, cities,[47] neighborhoods and also sectors, companies and products.[48] Several free online carbon footprint calculators exist to calculate personal carbon footprints.[49][50]
Software such as the "Scope 3 Evaluator" can help companies report emissions throughout their value chain.[51] The software tools can help consultants and researchers to model global sustainability footprints. In each situation there are a number of questions that need to be answered. These include which activities are linked to which emissions, and which proportion should be attributed to which company. Software is essential for company management. But there is a need for new ways of enterprise resource planning to improve corporate sustainability performance.[52]
To achieve 95% carbon footprint coverage, it would be necessary to assess 12 million individual supply-chain contributions. This is based on analyzing 12 sectoral case studies.[53] The Scope 3 calculations can be made easier using input-output analysis. This is a technique originally developed by Nobel Prize-winning economist Wassily Leontief.[53]
Consumption-based emission accounting based on input-output analysis
[edit]Consumption-based emission accounting traces the impacts of demand for goods and services along the global supply chain to the end-consumer. It is also called consumption-based carbon accounting.[8] In contrast, a production-based approach to calculating GHG emissions is not a carbon footprint analysis. This approach is also called a territorial-based approach. The production-based approach includes only impacts physically produced in the country in question.[55] Consumption-based accounting redistributes the emissions from production-based accounting. It considers that emissions in another country are necessary for the home country's consumption bundle.[55]
Consumer-based accounting is based on input-output analysis. It is used at the highest levels for any economic research question related to environmental or social impacts.[56] Analysis of global supply chains is possible using consumption-based accounting with input-output analysis assisted by super-computing capacity.
Leontief created Input-output analysis (IO) to demonstrate the relationship between consumption and production in an economy. It incorporates the entire supply chain. It uses input-output tables from countries' national accounts. It also uses international data such as UN Comtrade and Eurostat. Input-output analysis has been extended globally to multi-regional input-output analysis (MRIO). Innovations and technology enabling the analysis of billions of supply chains made this possible. Standards set by the United Nations underpin this analysis.[57]: 280 The analysis enables a Structural Path Analysis. This scans and ranks the top supply chain nodes and paths. It conveniently lists hotspots for urgent action. Input-output analysis has increased in popularity because of its ability to examine global value chains.[58][59]
Combination with life cycle analysis (LCA)
[edit]Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a methodology for assessing all environmental impacts associated with the life cycle of a commercial product, process, or service. It is not limited to the greenhouse gas emissions. It is also called life cycle analysis. It includes water pollution, air pollution, ecotoxicity and similar types of pollution. Some widely recognized procedures for LCA are included in the ISO 14000 series of environmental management standards. A standard called ISO 14040:2006 provides the framework for conducting an LCA study.[60] ISO 14060 family of standards provides further sophisticated tools. These are used to quantify, monitor, report and validate or verify GHG emissions and removals.[61]
Greenhouse gas product life cycle assessments can also comply with specifications such as Publicly Available Specification (PAS) 2050 and the GHG Protocol Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard.[62][63]
An advantage of LCA is the high level of detail that can be obtained on-site or by liaising with suppliers. However, LCA has been hampered by the artificial construction of a boundary after which no further impacts of upstream suppliers are considered. This can introduce significant truncation errors. LCA has been combined with input-output analysis. This enables on-site detailed knowledge to be incorporated. IO connects to global economic databases to incorporate the entire supply chain.[64]
Problems
[edit]You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in German. (March 2023) Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Shifting responsibility from corporations to individuals
[edit]Critics argue that the original aim of promoting the personal carbon footprint concept was to shift responsibility away from corporations and institutions and on to personal lifestyle choices.[65][66] The fossil fuel company BP ran a large advertising campaign for the personal carbon footprint in 2005 which helped popularize this concept.[65] This strategy, employed by many major fossil fuel companies, has been criticized for trying to shift the blame for negative consequences of those industries on to individual choices.[65][67]
Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes of Harvard University argue that concepts such as carbon footprints "hamstring us, and they put blinders on us, to the systemic nature of the climate crisis and the importance of taking collective action to address the problem".[68][69]
Relationship with other environmental impacts
[edit]A focus on carbon footprints can lead people to ignore or even exacerbate other related environmental issues of concern. These include biodiversity loss, ecotoxicity, and habitat destruction. It may not be easy to measure these other human impacts on the environment with a single indicator like the carbon footprint. Consumers may think that the carbon footprint is a proxy for environmental impact. In many cases this is not correct.[70]: 222 There can be trade-offs between reducing carbon footprint and environmental protection goals. One example is the use of biofuel, a renewable energy source and can reduce the carbon footprint of energy supply but can also pose ecological challenges during its production. This is because it is often produced in monocultures with ample use of fertilizers and pesticides.[70]: 222 Another example is offshore wind parks, which could have unintended impacts on marine ecosystems.[70]: 223
The carbon footprint analysis solely focuses on greenhouse gas emissions, unlike a life-cycle assessment which is much broader and looks at all environmental impacts. Therefore, it is useful to stress in communication activities that the carbon footprint is just one in a family of indicators (e.g. ecological footprint, water footprint, land footprint, and material footprint), and should not be looked at in isolation.[71] In fact, carbon footprint can be treated as one component of ecological footprint.[72][12]
The "Sustainable Consumption and Production Hotspot Analysis Tool" (SCP-HAT) is a tool to place carbon footprint analysis into a wider perspective. It includes a number of socio-economic and environmental indicators.[73][74] It offers calculations that are either consumption-based, following the carbon footprint approach, or production-based. The database of the SCP-HAT tool is underpinned by input–output analysis. This means it includes Scope 3 emissions. The IO methodology is also governed by UN standards.[57]: 280 It is based on input-output tables of countries' national accounts and international trade data such as UN Comtrade,[75] and therefore it is comparable worldwide.[74]
Differing boundaries for calculations
[edit]The term carbon footprint has been applied to limited calculations that do not include Scope 3 emissions or the entire supply chain. This can lead to claims of misleading customers with regards to the real carbon footprints of companies or products.[36]
Reported values
[edit]You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in German. (May 2023) Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Greenhouse gas emissions overview
[edit]Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human activities intensify the greenhouse effect. This contributes to climate change. Carbon dioxide (CO2), from burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas, is the main cause of climate change. The largest annual emissions are from China followed by the United States. The United States has higher emissions per capita. The main producers fueling the emissions globally are large oil and gas companies. Emissions from human activities have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 50% over pre-industrial levels. The growing levels of emissions have varied, but have been consistent among all greenhouse gases. Emissions in the 2010s averaged 56 billion tons a year, higher than any decade before.[77] Total cumulative emissions from 1870 to 2022 were 703 GtC (2575 GtCO2), of which 484±20 GtC (1773±73 GtCO2) from fossil fuels and industry, and 219±60 GtC (802±220 GtCO2) from land use change. Land-use change, such as deforestation, caused about 31% of cumulative emissions over 1870–2022, coal 32%, oil 24%, and gas 10%.[78][79]
Carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas resulting from human activities. It accounts for more than half of warming. Methane (CH4) emissions have almost the same short-term impact.[80] Nitrous oxide (N2O) and fluorinated gases (F-gases) play a lesser role in comparison. Emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide in 2023 were all higher than ever before.[81]By products
[edit]The Carbon Trust has worked with UK manufacturers to produce "thousands of carbon footprint assessments". As of 2014 the Carbon Trust state they have measured 28,000 certifiable product carbon footprints.[82]
Food
[edit]Plant-based foods tend to have a lower carbon footprint than meat and dairy. In many cases a much smaller footprint. This holds true when comparing the footprint of foods in terms of their weight, protein content or calories.[1] The protein output of peas and beef provides an example. Producing 100 grams of protein from peas emits just 0.4 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq). To get the same amount of protein from beef, emissions would be nearly 90 times higher, at 35 kgCO2eq.[1] Only a small fraction of the carbon footprint of food comes from transport and packaging. Most of it comes from processes on the farm, or from land use change. This means the choice of what to eat has a larger potential to reduce carbon footprint than how far the food has traveled, or how much packaging it is wrapped in.[1]
By sector
[edit]The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report found that global GHG emissions have continued to rise across all sectors. Global consumption was the main cause. The most rapid growth was in transport and industry.[83] A key driver of global carbon emissions is affluence. The IPCC noted that the wealthiest 10% in the world contribute between about one third to one half (36%–45%) of global GHG emissions. Researcheres have previously found that affluence is the key driver of carbon emissions. It has a bigger impact than population growth. And it counters the effects of technological developments. Continued economic growth mirrors the increasing trend in material extraction and GHG emissions.[84] “Industrial emissions have been growing faster since 2000 than emissions in any other sector, driven by increased basic materials extraction and production,” the IPCC said.[85]
Transport
[edit]There can be wide variations in emissions for transport of people. This is due to various factors. They include the length of the trip, the source of electricity in the local grid and the occupancy of public transport. In the case of driving the type of vehicle and number of passengers are factors.[86] Over short to medium distances, walking or cycling are nearly always the lowest carbon way to travel. The carbon footprint of cycling one kilometer is usually in the range of 16 to 50 grams CO2eq per km. For moderate or long distances, trains nearly always have a lower carbon footprint than other options.[86]
By organization
[edit]Carbon accounting
[edit]Carbon accounting (or greenhouse gas accounting) is a framework of methods to measure and track how much greenhouse gas (GHG) an organization emits.[87] It can also be used to track projects or actions to reduce emissions in sectors such as forestry or renewable energy. Corporations, cities and other groups use these techniques to help limit climate change. Organizations will often set an emissions baseline, create targets for reducing emissions, and track progress towards them. The accounting methods enable them to do this in a more consistent and transparent manner.
The main reasons for GHG accounting are to address social responsibility concerns or meet legal requirements. Public rankings of companies, financial due diligence and potential cost savings are other reasons. GHG accounting methods help investors better understand the climate risks of companies they invest in. They also help with net zero emission goals of corporations or communities. Many governments around the world require various forms of reporting. There is some evidence that programs that require GHG accounting help to lower emissions.[88] Markets for buying and selling carbon credits depend on accurate measurement of emissions and emission reductions. These techniques can help to understand the impacts of specific products and services. They do this by quantifying their GHG emissions throughout their lifecycle (carbon footprint).By country
[edit]CO2 emissions of countries are typically measured on the basis of production. This accounting method is sometimes referred to as territorial emissions. Countries use it when they report their emissions, and set domestic and international targets such as Nationally Determined Contributions.[6] Consumption-based emissions on the other hand are adjusted for trade. To calculate consumption-based emissions analysts have to track which goods are traded across the world. Whenever a product is imported, all CO2 emissions that were emitted in the production of that product are included. Consumption-based emissions reflect the lifestyle choices of a country's citizens.[5]
According to the World Bank, the global average carbon footprint in 2014 was about 5 tonnes of CO2 per person, measured on a production basis.[89] The EU average for 2007 was about 13.8 tonnes CO2e per person. For the USA, Luxembourg and Australia it was over 25 tonnes CO2e per person. In 2017, the average for the USA was about 20 metric tonnes CO2e per person. This is one of the highest per capita figures in the world.[90]
The footprints per capita of countries in Africa and India were well below average. Per capita emissions in India are low for its huge population. But overall the country is the third largest emitter of CO2 and fifth largest economy by nominal GDP in the world.[91] Assuming a global population of around 9–10 billion by 2050, a carbon footprint of about 2–2.5 tonnes CO2e per capita is needed to stay within a 2 °C target. These carbon footprint calculations are based on a consumption-based approach using a Multi-Regional Input-Output (MRIO) database. This database accounts for all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the global supply chain and allocates them to the final consumer of the purchased commodities.[92]
Reducing the carbon footprint
[edit]Climate change mitigation
[edit]Efforts to reduce the carbon footprint of products, services and organizations help limit climate change. Such activities are called climate change mitigation.
Reducing industry's carbon footprint
[edit]Carbon offsetting can reduce a company's overall carbon footprint by providing it with a carbon credit.[99] This compensates the company for carbon dioxide emissions by recognizing an equivalent reduction of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Reforestation, or restocking existing forests that have previously been depleted, is an example of carbon offsetting.
A carbon footprint study can identify specific and critical areas for improvement. It uses input-output analysis and scrutinizes the entire supply chain.[57] Such an analysis could be used to eliminate the supply chains with the highest greenhouse gas emissions.
History
[edit]The term carbon footprint was first used in a BBC vegetarian food magazine in 1999, [100] though the broader concept of ecological footprint, which encompasses the carbon footprint, had been used since at least 1992,[101] as also chronicled by William Safire in the New York Times.[102]
In 2005, fossil fuel company BP hired the large advertising campaign Ogilvy to popularize the idea of a carbon footprint for individuals. The campaign instructed people to calculate their personal footprints and provided ways for people to "go on a low-carbon diet".[103][104][105]
The carbon footprint is derived from the ecological footprint, which encompasses carbon emissions.[12] The carbon footprint follows the logic of ecological footprint accounting, which tracks the resource use embodied in consumption, whether it is a product, an individual, a city, or a country.[12] While in the ecological footprint, carbon emissions are translated into areas needed to absorb the carbon emissions,[106] the carbon footprint on its own is expressed in the weight of carbon emissions per time unit. William Rees wrote the first academic publication about ecological footprints in 1992.[107] Other related concepts from the 1990s are the "ecological backpack" and material input per unit of service (MIPS).[108]
Trends and similar concepts
[edit]The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) aims to bring global, rigorous oversight to carbon footprint reporting. It was formed out of the International Financial Reporting Standards. It will require companies to report on their Scope 3 emissions.[109] The ISSB has taken on board criticisms of other initiatives in its aims for universality.[110] It consolidates the Carbon Disclosure Standards Board, the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board and the Value Reporting Foundation. It complements the Global Reporting Initiative. It is influenced by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures. As of early 2023, Great Britain and Nigeria were preparing to adopt these standards.[111]
The concept of total equivalent warming impact (TEWI) is the most used index for carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2) emissions calculation in air conditioning and refrigeration sectors by including both the direct and indirect contributions since it evaluates the emissions caused by the operating lifetime of systems.[112] The Expanded Total Equivalent Warming Impact method has been used for an accurate evaluation of refrigerators emissions.[112]
See also
[edit]- Carbon emission
- Carbon intensity
- Carbon neutrality
- Ecological footprint
- Embedded emissions
- Food miles
- Greenhouse gas inventory
- Individual action on climate change
- Life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of energy sources
- Zero-carbon city
References
[edit]- ^ a b c d e f Ritchie, Hannah; Roser, Max (18 March 2024). "You want to reduce the carbon footprint of your food? Focus on what you eat, not whether your food is local". Our World in Data.
- ^ "What is a carbon footprint". www.conservation.org. Retrieved 28 May 2023.
- ^ a b IPCC, 2022: Annex I: Glossary Archived 13 March 2023 at the Wayback Machine [van Diemen, R., J.B.R. Matthews, V. Möller, J.S. Fuglestvedt, V. Masson-Delmotte, C. Méndez, A. Reisinger, S. Semenov (eds)]. In IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Archived 2 August 2022 at the Wayback Machine [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. doi:10.1017/9781009157926.020
- ^ a b Green Element Ltd., What is the Difference Between Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions? Archived 11 November 2020 at the Wayback Machine, published 2 November 2018, accessed 11 November 2020
- ^ a b c Ritchie, Hannah; Roser, Max (18 March 2024). "How do CO2 emissions compare when we adjust for trade?". Our World in Data.
- ^ a b c Eggleston, H. S.; Buendia, L.; Miwa, K.; Ngara, T.; Tanabe, K. (1 July 2006). "2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories". IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme.
- ^ a b "Emissions from fuels used for international aviation and maritime transport". UNFCCC. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
- ^ a b Tukker, Arnold; Pollitt, Hector; Henkemans, Maurits (22 April 2020). "Consumption-based carbon accounting: sense and sensibility". Climate Policy. 20 (sup1): S1 – S13. Bibcode:2020CliPo..20S...1T. doi:10.1080/14693062.2020.1728208. hdl:1887/3135062. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 214525354.
- ^ Wright, L.; Kemp, S.; Williams, I. (2011). "'Carbon footprinting': towards a universally accepted definition". Carbon Management. 2 (1): 61–72. Bibcode:2011CarM....2...61W. doi:10.4155/CMT.10.39. S2CID 154004878.
- ^ Wright, Laurence A; Kemp, Simon; Williams, Ian (2011). "'Carbon footprinting': towards a universally accepted definition". Carbon Management. 2 (1): 61–72. Bibcode:2011CarM....2...61W. doi:10.4155/cmt.10.39. ISSN 1758-3004. S2CID 154004878.
- ^ "Corporate Standard Greenhouse Gas Protocol". Archived from the original on 29 July 2022. Retrieved 29 July 2022.
- ^ a b c d e Wiedmann, T.; Minx, J. (2008). "A Definition of 'Carbon Footprint'". In Pertsova, C. C. (ed.). Ecological Economics Research Trends. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers. pp. 1–11.
- ^ Ritchie, Hannah; Roser, Max; Rosado, Pablo (11 May 2020). "CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions". Our World in Data.
- ^ "How New Zealand is reducing methane emissions from farming". www.bbc.com. Retrieved 10 February 2024.
- ^ "Greenhouse Gas Protocol". World Resources Institute. 2 May 2023. Retrieved 19 July 2023.
- ^ a b "Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard". Greenhouse Gas Protocol. Archived from the original on 31 January 2021. Retrieved 28 February 2016.
- ^ "Greenhouse Gas Protocol". Archived from the original on 22 December 2020. Retrieved 25 February 2019.
- ^ "Streamlined Energy And Carbon Reporting Guidance UK". LongevityIntelligen. Retrieved 16 July 2020.
- ^ a b "Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard" (PDF). GHG Protocol. Archived from the original on 25 February 2019.
- ^ a b Bellassen, Valentin (2015). Accounting for Carbon Monitoring, Reporting and Verifying Emissions in the Climate Economy. Cambridge University Press. p. 6. ISBN 9781316162262.
- ^ "Scope 2 Calculation Guidance" (PDF). GHG Protocol. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 October 2020. Retrieved 25 February 2019.
- ^ EPA, OA, US (23 December 2015). "Overview of Greenhouse Gases | US EPA". US EPA. Archived from the original on 12 August 2016. Retrieved 1 November 2017.
- ^ "Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard | Greenhouse Gas Protocol". ghgprotocol.org. Archived from the original on 9 December 2021. Retrieved 9 December 2021.
- ^ Bokern, D. (9 March 2022). "Reported Emission Footprints: The Challenge is Real". MSCI. Retrieved 22 January 2023.
- ^ Molé, P. (1 November 2022). "ISSB Votes to Include Scope 3 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Disclosures in Updates to Draft Standards". VelocityEHS. Retrieved 22 January 2023.
- ^ "Are consumption-based CO₂ per capita emissions above or below the global average?". Our World in Data. Retrieved 7 July 2023.
- ^ Lynas, Mark; Houlton, Benjamin Z.; Perry, Simon (19 October 2021). "Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (11): 114005. Bibcode:2021ERL....16k4005L. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966. S2CID 239032360.
- ^ Allen, M.R., O.P. Dube, W. Solecki, F. Aragón-Durand, W. Cramer, S. Humphreys, M. Kainuma, J. Kala, N. Mahowald, Y. Mulugetta, R. Perez, M.Wairiu, and K. Zickfeld, 2018: Chapter 1: Framing and Context. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 49-92. doi:10.1017/9781009157940.003.
- ^ Ritchie, Hannah (18 September 2020). "Sector by sector: where do global greenhouse gas emissions come from?". Our World in Data. Retrieved 28 October 2020.
- ^ European Commission. Joint Research Centre. (2022). CO2 emissions of all world countries :JRC/IEA/PBL 2022 report. LU: Publications Office. doi:10.2760/730164. ISBN 9789276558026.
- ^ "The Paris Agreement". UNFCCC. Archived from the original on 19 March 2021. Retrieved 18 September 2021.
- ^ Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich (13 May 2022). "The Paris Agreement – the 1.5 °C Temperature Goal". Climate Analytics. Retrieved 29 January 2022.
- ^ Read, Simon; Shine, Ian (20 September 2022). "What is the difference between Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, and what are companies doing to cut all three?". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 28 May 2023.
- ^ Lenzen, Manfred; Murray, Joy (20 February 2009). "Input into Greenhouse Gas Protocol Technical Working Group discussion on sectoral value chain mapping of emissions by purchased categories" (PDF). The University of Sydney Centre for Integrated Sustainability Analysis. Retrieved 28 May 2023.
- ^ Lenzen, M; Treloar, G (1 February 2002). "Embodied energy in buildings: wood versus concrete—reply to Börjesson and Gustavsson". Energy Policy. 30 (3): 249–255. Bibcode:2002EnPol..30..249L. doi:10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00142-2. ISSN 0301-4215.
- ^ a b Reiner, Vivienne; Malik, Arunima; Lenzen, Manfred (24 February 2022). "Google and Amazon misled about their carbon footprint. But what about the rest of us?". The Canberra Times. Retrieved 28 May 2023.
- ^ a b Wiedmann, Thomas; Lenzen, Manfred (2018). "Environmental and social footprints of international trade". Nature Geoscience. 11 (5): 314–321. Bibcode:2018NatGe..11..314W. doi:10.1038/s41561-018-0113-9. hdl:1959.4/unsworks_50533. ISSN 1752-0894. S2CID 134496973.
- ^ Reiner, Vivienne; Malik, Arunima (13 October 2021). "Carbon 'footprinting' could accurately measure countries' emissions". news.com.au. Retrieved 7 July 2023.
- ^ Harrabin, Roger (31 July 2008). "UK in 'delusion' over emissions". BBC News. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
- ^ Wiedmann, T.; Wood, R.; Lenzen, M.; Minx, J.; Guan, D.; J., Barrett (2007). Development of an Embedded Carbon Emissions Indicator – Producing a Time Series of Input-Output Tables and Embedded Carbon Dioxide Emissions for the UK by Using a MRIO Data Optimisation System, Report to the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (PDF) (Report). London: Stockholm Environment Institute at the University of York and Centre for Integrated Sustainability Analysis at the University of Sydney.
- ^ a b Kanemoto, K.; Moran, D.; Lenzen, M.; Geschke, A. (2014). "International trade undermines national emission reduction targets: New evidence from air pollution". Global Environmental Change. 24: 52–59. Bibcode:2014GEC....24...52K. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.09.008. ISSN 0959-3780.
- ^ Lenzen, Manfred; Moran, Daniel; Bhaduri, Anik; Kanemoto, Keiichiro; Bekchanov, Maksud; Geschke, Arne; Foran, Barney (1 October 2013). "International trade of scarce water". Ecological Economics. 94: 78–85. Bibcode:2013EcoEc..94...78L. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.06.018. ISSN 0921-8009.
- ^ Lenzen, M.; Moran, D.; Kanemoto, K.; Foran, B.; Lobefaro, L.; Geschke, A. (June 2012). "International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations". Nature. 486 (7401): 109–112. Bibcode:2012Natur.486..109L. doi:10.1038/nature11145. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 22678290. S2CID 1119021.
- ^ Wiedmann, Thomas O.; Schandl, Heinz; Lenzen, Manfred; Moran, Daniel; Suh, Sangwon; West, James; Kanemoto, Keiichiro (19 May 2015). "The material footprint of nations". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 112 (20): 6271–6276. Bibcode:2015PNAS..112.6271W. doi:10.1073/pnas.1220362110. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 4443380. PMID 24003158.
- ^ Lan, Jun; Malik, Arunima; Lenzen, Manfred; McBain, Darian; Kanemoto, Keiichiro (1 February 2016). "A structural decomposition analysis of global energy footprints". Applied Energy. 163: 436–451. Bibcode:2016ApEn..163..436L. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.10.178. ISSN 0306-2619.
- ^ Lenzen, Manfred; Murray, Joy; Sack, Fabian; Wiedmann, Thomas (2007). "Shared producer and consumer responsibility — Theory and practice". Ecological Economics. 61 (1): 27–42. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.018.
- ^ Wiedmann, Thomas; Chen, Guangwu; Owen, Anne; Lenzen, Manfred; Doust, Michael; Barrett, John; Steele, Kristian (2021). "Three-scope carbon emission inventories of global cities". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 25 (3): 735–750. Bibcode:2021JInEc..25..735W. doi:10.1111/jiec.13063. hdl:1959.4/unsworks_73064. ISSN 1088-1980. S2CID 224842866.
- ^ Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (25 June 2020). "UK local authority carbon dioxide emissions estimates 2018" (PDF). GOV.UK. Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 January 2021. Retrieved 13 April 2021.
- ^ "My Carbon Plan - Carbon Footprint Calculator, which provides a calculator using ONS data in the UK". mycarbonplan.org. Archived from the original on 27 July 2020. Retrieved 4 April 2020.
- ^ "CO2List.org which shows CO2 coming from common products and activities". co2list.org. Archived from the original on 3 October 2019. Retrieved 4 October 2019.
- ^ "Scope 3 Evaluator | GHG Protocol". ghgprotocol.org. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
- ^ Hack, Stefan; Berg, Christian (2 July 2014). "The Potential of IT for Corporate Sustainability". Sustainability. 6 (7): 4163–4180. doi:10.3390/su6074163. ISSN 2071-1050.
- ^ a b "Pain-free scope 3. Input into Greenhouse Gas Protocol Technical Working Group discussion on sectoral value chain mapping of emissions by purchased categories" (PDF). Retrieved 11 June 2023.
- ^ "Consumption-based vs. production-based CO₂ emissions per capita". Our World in Data. Retrieved 7 July 2023.
- ^ a b Dietzenbacher, Erik; Cazcarro, Ignacio; Arto, Iñaki (2020). "Towards a more effective climate policy on international trade". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 1130. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.1130D. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-14837-5. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 7048780. PMID 32111849. Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
- ^ Malik, Arunima; McBain, Darian; Wiedmann, Thomas O.; Lenzen, Manfred; Murray, Joy (2019). "Advancements in Input-Output Models and Indicators for Consumption-Based Accounting". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 23 (2): 300–312. Bibcode:2019JInEc..23..300M. doi:10.1111/jiec.12771. hdl:1959.4/unsworks_57565. ISSN 1088-1980. S2CID 158533390.
- ^ a b c Division, UN Statistics (1999). Handbook of input-output table compilation and analysis. UN Statistics Division.
- ^ "World Trade Organization - Global Value Chains". www.wto.org. Retrieved 5 June 2023.
- ^ Dietzenbacher, Erik; Lahr, Michael L.; Lenzen, Manfred, eds. (31 July 2020). "Recent Developments in Input–Output Analysis". Elgar Research Reviews in Economics. doi:10.4337/9781786430816. ISBN 9781786430809. S2CID 225409688.
- ^ "Environmental management -- Life cycle assessment -- Principles and framework". International Organization for Standardization. 12 August 2014. Archived from the original on 26 February 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2019.
- ^ DIN EN ISO 14067:2019-02, Treibhausgase_- Carbon Footprint von Produkten_- Anforderungen an und Leitlinien für Quantifizierung (ISO_14067:2018); Deutsche und Englische Fassung EN_ISO_14067:2018, Beuth Verlag GmbH, doi:10.31030/2851769
- ^ "PAS 2050:2011 Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services". BSI. Retrieved on: 25 April 2013.
- ^ "Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard" Archived 9 May 2013 at the Wayback Machine. GHG Protocol. Retrieved on: 25 April 2013.
- ^ Lenzen, Manfred (2000). "Errors in Conventional and Input-Output—based Life—Cycle Inventories". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 4 (4): 127–148. Bibcode:2000JInEc...4..127L. doi:10.1162/10881980052541981. ISSN 1088-1980. S2CID 154022052.
- ^ a b c Kaufman, Mark (13 July 2020). "The devious fossil fuel propaganda we all use". Mashable. Archived from the original on 17 September 2020. Retrieved 17 September 2020.
- ^ Turner, James Morton (1 February 2014). "Counting Carbon: The Politics of Carbon Footprints and Climate Governance from the Individual to the Global". Global Environmental Politics. 14 (1): 59–78. doi:10.1162/GLEP_a_00214. ISSN 1526-3800. S2CID 15886043.
- ^ Westervelt, Amy (14 May 2021). "Big Oil Is Trying to Make Climate Change Your Problem to Solve. Don't Let Them". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on 21 June 2021. Retrieved 13 June 2021.
- ^ Leber, Rebecca (13 May 2021). "ExxonMobil wants you to feel responsible for climate change so it doesn't have to". Vox. Archived from the original on 25 March 2023. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
- ^ Supran, Geoffrey; Oreskes, Naomi (May 2021). "Rhetoric and frame analysis of ExxonMobil's climate change communications". One Earth. 4 (5): 696–719. Bibcode:2021OEart...4..696S. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2021.04.014. ISSN 2590-3322. S2CID 236343941.
- ^ a b c Berg, Christian (2020). Sustainable action: overcoming the barriers. Abingdon, Oxon. ISBN 978-0-429-57873-1. OCLC 1124780147.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - ^ Fang, K.; Heijungs, R.; De Snoo, G.R. (January 2014). "Theoretical exploration for the combination of the ecological, energy, carbon, and water footprints: Overview of a footprint family". Ecological Indicators. 36: 508–518. Bibcode:2014EcInd..36..508F. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.017.
- ^ Wiedmann, Thomas; Barrett, John (2010). "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods". Sustainability. 2 (6): 1645–1693. doi:10.3390/su2061645. ISSN 2071-1050.
- ^ "SCP Hotspots Analysis". Retrieved 5 June 2023.
- ^ a b Piñero, P., Sevenster, M., Lutter, S., Giljum, S. (2021). Technical documentation of the Sustainable Consumption and Production Hotspots Analysis Tool (SCPHAT) version 2.0. Commissioned by UN Life Cycle Initiative, One Planet Network, and UN International Resource Panel. Paris.
- ^ "UN Comtrade". Retrieved 19 June 2023.
- ^ ● Source for carbon emissions data: "Territorial (MtCO₂) / Emissions / Carbon emissions / Chart View". Global Carbon Atlas. 2024.
● Source for country population data: "Population 2022" (PDF). World Bank. 2024. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 October 2024. (2022 data) - ^ "Chapter 2: Emissions trends and drivers" (PDF). Ipcc_Ar6_Wgiii. 2022. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 April 2022. Retrieved 4 April 2022.
- ^ Ritchie, Hannah; Rosado, Pablo; Roser, Max (28 December 2023). "CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions". Our World in Data.
- ^ "Global Carbon Project (GCP)". www.globalcarbonproject.org. Archived from the original on 4 April 2019. Retrieved 19 May 2019.
- ^ "Methane vs. Carbon Dioxide: A Greenhouse Gas Showdown". One Green Planet. 30 September 2014. Retrieved 13 February 2020.
- ^ Milman, Oliver (6 April 2024). "Scientists confirm record highs for three most important heat-trapping gases". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 8 April 2024.
- ^ "Footprint measurement". The Carbon Trust. Archived from the original on 23 December 2014. Retrieved 14 August 2012.
- ^ "IPCC 6th Assessment Report. WG III. Mitigation of Climate Change. Chapter 2 Emissions Trends and Drivers pp. 215-294" (PDF). 2022. p. 218. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
- ^ Wiedmann, Thomas; Lenzen, Manfred; Keyßer, Lorenz T.; Steinberger, Julia K. (19 June 2020). "Scientists' warning on affluence". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 3107. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3107W. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 7305220. PMID 32561753.
- ^ "IPCC 6th Assessment Report. WG III. Full Report. 2029p" (PDF). p. 1163. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
- ^ a b c "Which form of transport has the smallest carbon footprint?". Our World in Data. Retrieved 7 July 2023.}} Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
- ^ "Carbon Accounting". Corporate Finance Institute. Retrieved 6 January 2023.
- ^ Downar, Benedikt; Ernstberger, Jürgen; Reichelstein, Stefan; Schwenen, Sebastian; Zaklan, Aleksandar (1 September 2021). "The impact of carbon disclosure mandates on emissions and financial operating performance". Review of Accounting Studies. 26 (3): 1137–1175. doi:10.1007/s11142-021-09611-x. hdl:10419/266352. ISSN 1573-7136. S2CID 220061770.
- ^ "CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita)". The World Bank. Archived from the original on 6 March 2019. Retrieved 4 March 2019.
- ^ "What is your carbon footprint?". The Nature Conservancy. Archived from the original on 10 September 2021. Retrieved 25 September 2021.
- ^ Nandy, S.N. (2023). Differential Carbon Footprint in India – An Economic Perspective. Journal of Sustainability and Environmental Management, 2(1), 74–82. https://doi.org/10.3126/josem.v2i1.53119
- ^ Tukker, Arnold; Bulavskaya, Tanya; Giljum, Stefan; de Koning, Arjan; Lutter, Stephan; Simas, Moana; Stadler, Konstantin; Wood, Richard (2016). "Environmental and resource footprints in a global context: Europe's structural deficit in resource endowments". Global Environmental Change. 40: 171–181. Bibcode:2016GEC....40..171T. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.07.002.
- ^ Fawzy, Samer; Osman, Ahmed I.; Doran, John; Rooney, David W. (2020). "Strategies for mitigation of climate change: a review". Environmental Chemistry Letters. 18 (6): 2069–2094. Bibcode:2020EnvCL..18.2069F. doi:10.1007/s10311-020-01059-w.
- ^ Abbass, Kashif; Qasim, Muhammad Zeeshan; Song, Huaming; Murshed, Muntasir; Mahmood, Haider; Younis, Ijaz (2022). "A review of the global climate change impacts, adaptation, and sustainable mitigation measures". Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 29: 42539–42559. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-19718-6. PMC 8978769.
- ^ Ritchie, Hannah; Roser, Max; Rosado, Pablo (11 May 2020). "CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions". Our World in Data. Retrieved 27 August 2022.
- ^ Rogelj, J.; Shindell, D.; Jiang, K.; Fifta, S.; et al. (2018). "Chapter 2: Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5 °C in the Context of Sustainable Development" (PDF). Global Warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty (PDF).
- ^ Harvey, Fiona (26 November 2019). "UN calls for push to cut greenhouse gas levels to avoid climate chaos". The Guardian. Retrieved 27 November 2019.
- ^ "Cut Global Emissions by 7.6 Percent Every Year for Next Decade to Meet 1.5°C Paris Target – UN Report". United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. United Nations. Retrieved 27 November 2019.
- ^ Corbett, James (2008). "Carbon Footprint". In Brenda Wilmoth Lerner; K. Lee Lerner (eds.). Climate Change: In Context, vol. 1. Gale. pp. 162–164. ISBN 978-1-4144-3708-8.
- ^ "carbon, n." OED Online. Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 24 March 2023. Retrieved 24 March 2023.
- ^ "ecological footprint, noun". OED Online. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 8 October 2024.
- ^ Safire, William (17 February 2008). "On language: footprint". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 14 March 2020. Retrieved 8 October 2024.
- ^ "BP Global - Environment and society - Carbon reduction". 12 February 2006. Archived from the original on 12 February 2006. Retrieved 13 June 2021.
- ^ Supran, Geoffrey; Oreskes, Naomi (18 November 2021). "The forgotten oil ads that told us climate change was nothing". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 18 November 2021. Retrieved 24 March 2023.
- ^ "Climatarian: the "zero emissions" meal". BCFN Foundation. 24 June 2016. Archived from the original on 6 February 2020. Retrieved 6 February 2020.
- ^ Wackernagel, Mathis; Hanscom, Laurel; Jayasinghe, Priyangi; Lin, David; Murthy, Adeline; Neill, Evan; Raven, Peter (26 April 2021). "The importance of resource security for poverty eradication". Nature Sustainability. 4 (8): 731–738. Bibcode:2021NatSu...4..731W. doi:10.1038/s41893-021-00708-4.
- ^ Rees, William E. (October 1992). "Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out". Environment & Urbanization. 4 (2): 121–130. Bibcode:1992EnUrb...4..121R. doi:10.1177/095624789200400212.
- ^ Ritthoff, M; Rohn, H; Liedtke, C (2003). Calculating MIPS – Resource productivity of products and services. Wuppertal Institute. Accessed 22 February 2012
- ^ "IFRS - ISSB unanimously confirms Scope 3 GHG emissions disclosure requirements with strong application support, among key decisions". www.ifrs.org. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
- ^ "Making sense of ISSB | Deloitte Australia | About Deloitte". Deloitte Australia. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
- ^ Jones, Huw (16 February 2023). "G20-backed standards body approves first global company sustainability rules". Reuters. Retrieved 11 June 2023.
- ^ a b Aprea, Ciro; Ceglia, Francesca; Llopis, Rodrigo; Maiorino, Angelo; Marrasso, Elisa; Petruzziello, Fabio; Sasso, Maurizio (2022). "Expanded Total Equivalent Warming Impact analysis on experimental standalone fresh-food refrigerator". Energy Conversion and Management: X. 15: 100262. Bibcode:2022ECMX...1500262A. doi:10.1016/j.ecmx.2022.100262. hdl:10234/200662.