Carbon Footprint: How to Improve Transparency and Prevent Greenwashing
Signs on supermarket shelves show the carbon footprint of a box of fruit smoothies. photo: electric wire
In the early stages of the pandemic, many people were stuck at home, and orange-gray skies, flash floods and record-breaking heatwaves made climate denial more difficult. last year, IPCC sixth report The warning warned that without radical policy interventions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, global temperatures could rise by more than 1.5°C. There is already a wealth of literature on what interventions might make a big difference. For example, 2019 United Nations International Resource Group The report shows that consumerism outpaces global population growth as a major driver of resource depletion and greenhouse gas emissions. But even as climate awareness reaches new heights, the consumer economies of wealthy Western countries are only just beginning to make changes towards a sustainable future. Consumers are pushing companies to become more transparent by patronizing more eco-conscious brands.
Enter the product carbon footprint. For climate-savvy consumers looking to hold brands accountable for their greenhouse gas emissions, carbon footprinting is a step in the right direction. While the standards and validation methods for identifying these footprints have matured over the past decade, insights into how to best communicate footprints are just getting started. What do they really mean without a clearer understanding of how consumers understand and use footprints? How can consumers and brands actually use their carbon footprint to align with climate goals to avoid a 1.5°C rise in global temperature?
In 2018, Christoph Meinrenken of Columbia Climate Institute developed a method called carbon catalog This helps communicate the carbon emissions associated with each stage in the product life cycle. This free interactive data visualization tool shows the carbon footprint of hundreds of commercial and consumer products, making it easy for everyone to understand the carbon footprint of everyday products. The tool’s inventory covers 866 products from 145 companies and uses data from CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) from 2013 to 2017.
Although CDP is one of the larger international carbon accounting organizations, similar life cycle assessments can be calculated under the guidance of other agencies. Three main standards are instructive to jointly establish international standards for carbon footprint calculation: the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, ISO 14067:2018, and Non-2050:2011Companies that claim to be serious about calculating their efforts to fail to adhere to these standards now represent a significant reputational risk, and savvy consumers and investors alike will see this as a green wash.
It’s also worth noting that the SEC recently started proposing a rule that would require large companies to disclose their climate risks. With lessons learned in 2010, this proposal has been in the works for a long time. If implemented, the rule would be a landmark climate victory for the Biden administration. Companies will be responsible for some of the new filing requirements, including greenhouse gas emissions. Scope 1 emissions (emissions directly attributable to company-owned or operated facilities) and Scope 2 emissions (by-products of energy purchased and consumed by the company) will become the norm for all companies to report. However, Scope 3 emissions (caused by activities on assets owned or controlled by upstream or downstream partners of the reporting organization) reporting is more complex, and Waivers and loopholes abound. However, if the SEC’s proposed rule is not dismissed by the courts, the implications would be far-reaching. If companies are legally required to track and disclose their emissions, they will have the information necessary to engage consumers in an honest climate platform.
The pandemic has brought about a clear shift towards ecological consumerism.Although consumer spending has 11% year-on-year increase Since the start of the pandemic, 52% of respondents have 2021 PwC Global Survey said their sourcing practices were more environmentally friendly than they were six months ago.
Companies can capitalize on this growing interest in a number of different ways. The Carbon Catalog visualization tool showcases the multiple strategies companies are using to reduce emissions, and the data shows that several companies have made huge strides in reducing emissions from their products. Some companies have started adopting their own product carbon footprint tools, some have opted to put carbon labels on their products, while others have robust online and in-store customer education platforms. In the absence of a policy on how to present information on a product’s carbon footprint, we are sure to see a proliferation of disclosure methods. The problem with this is that without a consistent way of communicating the footprint, consumers may not know what to look for, how to interpret the environmental impact, or even where to find it. Likewise, where and how information is provided raises issues of fairness and intentionality. If a product’s carbon footprint information is only available online, the audience is more likely to be a whiter, wealthier population. If it’s just a physical label on the product itself, with limited space, clarity may be sacrificed for accessibility.
Multilateral alliances within the industry are forming to meet the challenges. This is the right thing to do, because the pace of action must be accelerated dramatically. The latest update to the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report claims that emissions must peak in 2025 if we are to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C. The report also provides pathways for halving greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors by 2030.Promising developments for better coordination of the industry include Coalition for Material Emissions Transparency (COMET) Framework, co-sponsored by the Columbia Center for Sustainable Investment, the Penn Institute for Public Policy at the Colorado School of Mines, RMI, and the United Nations Climate Change Secretariat. COMET guides member organizations to better integrate GHG reporting and climate finance.
To grow from laissez-faire carbon transparency, policymakers should start with legislation that provides financial incentives for companies using carbon accounting to meet science-based climate goals. Companies are seizing the opportunity to capitalize on the newfound climate awareness of many consumers, but that doesn’t mean they have robust plans to reduce their environmental impact or robust consumer education programs. While other policy options to penalize heavy-emitting companies could still play a role, incentives to reduce emissions and set consumer education standards may be more politically viable in the near future.Several federal carbon tax bills have been proposed in recent years, but Congressional action continues to fail despite Pew Research Center polling estimates 73% of U.S. adults support taxing companies based on emissions. Tax incentives can reward industry leaders and encourage others to develop their GHG reduction, carbon accounting and customer engagement strategies. Ideally, this incentive would be the first phase of a multi-year plan leading to mandatory requirements.
The hard work now is to ensure that carbon footprinting and education about carbon inventories, such as carbon inventories, do not become a greenwashing trend, but become a normal part of business activity. When this happens, corporate compliance will be less onerous and enforcement by state agencies will be realistic.
Caleb Smith is a Class of 2022 graduate of Columbia University’s MPA in Environmental Science and Policy and a former intern at the Earth Institute.
