Counting carbon part 3 - product carbon footprints

 

 

In my last blog (counting corporate carbon) I tried to give a flavour of the complexities, vagaries even, of calculating a company’s carbon footprint.

Challenging as that task is, it is a trivial pursuit compared to the difficulty of calculating the carbon footprint of each of us as we go about our daily lives, eating, showering, heating, cooling, travelling and of course(since we are good capitalists)purchasing.

 

But this is the aim of a number of influential and well intentioned people. To identify the ‘embedded’ carbon in each and every product and empower the consumer to make low carbon, climate friendly choices.

“We’ll put the Orios back and have the low carbon rich teas instead.”

 
Before I get to the issues here, let’s just deal with the terminology. Whoever labelled the carbon dioxide associated with the manufacture, packaging, distribution and sale of products as ‘embedded’ was either very poor with words or setting out to sow confusion. Because ‘embedded’ it is not.

The carbon dioxide (confusingly often just called ‘carbon’) is of course released to the atmosphere at a multitude of points during the extraction of raw materials, processing, manufacture and transport to retail outlets. The carbon is (mostly) not in the product but in a huge trail of gas wafting behind them as they are created and sold. That’s what makes counting it so hard. If it was indeed embedded in the product, life would be simple – we could just measure it.

 
So how can the ‘wafting trail’ be measured and what would we do with the information? In the UK business leaders are committing to footprint their products under the guidance of The Carbon Trust, a government funded organisation. The carbon Trust has developed a methodology and publishes the footprints on its (rather strange) website.

Most significant among the early movers is UK and international supermarket Tesco. In the words of CEO Terry Leahy:

“Imagine if all those people acted to cut carbon emissions in all they did. This would be true collective action: millions of people who, through their own unique, individual actions, would be working towards a common, shared goal of protecting the environment. The green movement would become a mass movement in green consumption. That’s our goal.”

“As I announced back in January (2007), we’re beginning the search, a worldwide search, for a universally accepted and commonly understood measure of the carbon footprint of every product we sell.

 
This will enable customers to compare their carbon footprints as easily as they can compare their price or nutritional profile. We want to understand how measurement can work in a simple, cost effective way when applied to a wide range of products.” 

Similar work is being undertaken in the US. I’m unsure if this is coordinated by an equivalent to the Carbon Trust, but outdoor clothing company Patagonia is leading the charge.

This is all well intentioned, expensive and hugely encouraging activity. But what will it achieve? Let’s look behind the label…

As I mentioned above, to capture the carbon footprint of a product, you have to measure the ‘wafting trail’ of CO2 at every point of emission all the way ‘down’ the life cycle of a product. Something simple like a potato, for example might involve:

 

- carbon emitted by the seed company,(energy used, packaging manufactured, delivery to farmer) 

- carbon emitted by fertiliser manufacturer

 

- carbon emitted on the farm (water pumping, sowing, harvesting, packaging, delivery to supermarket)

 

- carbon emitted by the supermarket (distribution, refrigeration, lighting, heating).

 

Even this is simplified and remember we are considering a potato. Now try it for a pizza – or a pair of jeans – or, deep breath, a laptop. By the way apologies for any inaccuracies in the growing of potatoes – I’ve never done it.

Undaunted, teams of environmental scientists have been crunching the numbers to bring the consumer the carbon data he or she craves. Now, I confess to a morbid fascination with the numbers below, but I suspect as interests go, it has the social appeal of model railway engineering (visit our office and I’ll show you my Hornbies).

So here are some of the first carbon labels:

Patagonia presents the information very nicely on a micro site. They have footprinted ten products from shirts, to dresses to shoes (see http://www.patagonia.com/usa/footprint/index.jsp)

 

 

For example, Womens Nine Trails shorts:
CO2 1.4kg shorts 0.107 kg, ratio CO2 to product 6.

 

 

Or, Honeydew Shoe:
CO2 22 kg, shoe 0.56 kg, ratio CO2 to product 39.

 

 

It’s shocking and fascinating that between 6 and 39 times the weight of their products is released as CO2 to make them.

Here are some from the UK companies (see http://www.carbon-label.co.uk/product.html) 

 

Tesco Pure Squeezed Orange Juice:
360g CO2 per 250 ml serving: ratio 3:2
 

Tesco King Edwards Potatoes:
160g CO2 per 250g serving: ratio 2:3 

 
Walkers crisps:
75 g CO2 per 35 g crisps – ratio 2:1
 

Innocent Smoothie:
249 g CO2 per 250 g drink – ratio 1:1

 

 

Look behind the label though and the complexity and fluidity of many supply chains becomes apparent. Strawberries in winter are different from summer. Shoes from China different from Vietnam. Spanish oranges different from Californian oranges? To keep labels accurate and current they would require real time updating as product specifications or sourcing alter. Can anyone really imagine this working? What we have with today’s, early labels, is a significant proportion of assumptions and generalisations being used to produce a number. Fine for an indication of the size of the issue, but no good for telling your Orios from your Rich Teas.

Some are suggesting we have a CO2 recommended daily allowance, RDA (like fat or salt). We are told we are each responsible for around ten tonnes of CO2 per year in Europe and 20 tonnes in the US. This of course is spread across all our activities, but I strongly suspect does not include the full ‘wafting trail’. So the RDA would be calculated as 1/365 of whatever our annual carbon allowance becomes.

The idea that we can calculate this for ourselves as we shop is probably unrealistic. But it would be possible with online purchases to provide a carbon statement with the shopping basket – if the numbers were robust.

So where is all this heading? I can’t see Terry Leahy’s vision of consumers voluntarily responding to labels having a significant impact on global warming in the near future. I can imagine governments attaching sales tax rates to carbon footprints like VAT but ‘CAT’ (carbon added tax). Maybe I should trademark that! This way consumers could continue to worry about dollars and pounds and not have to cope with a parallel carbon currency.

Lastly might there be a quota? A what? Not since world war two have we rationed products. Might we each have a carbon footprint to use as we choose – one transatlantic flight or 10,000 Orios? Perhaps the wealthy could buy credits from the poor. Crack for your carbon? On reflection I don’t think we should go there.

CR Sage.