What Do the Icons Mean?

What Do The Icons Mean?

At the bottom of each product card found on The Carbon Platform, you will find five tiles (I-V) that highlight information regarding the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions profile for the product and the manufacturing company.  Each tile links to further information.

Collectively this information is part of what we term the Carbon Credentials™ of a product / company, and provides critical insights into how products achieve lower-than-industry-average GHG emissions.

Here’s some further context about each icon set, going from left to right:

We report the estimated industry average CO₂ emissions for each product we sell, adjusted for product variant types.  This value represents the potential reduction in atmospheric levels of CO₂ due to purchasing a specific item – assuming promised corporate actions and offsets are achieved in full.

What does good look like?  Short answer: buying low-carbon products that reduce emissions of more than a kilogram (a couple of pounds) is meaningful.  In more detail: if individuals were responsible for no more than about 1 metric ton (1000 kg or ~2,200 lbs.) of CO₂ per year, this would make a massive positive difference to the climate.  [By way of illustration, it is estimated that the average American emits about 16 metric tons per year today.]  1 metric ton CO₂ per year works out to about 2.7 kg per day (~6 lbs.).  So, it’s worth thinking hard about finding low-carbon products for any purchase that gets close to a day’s-worth of CO₂ emissions.

What is CO₂e?  There are several gases that contribute to global warming, each with a different impact on temperature, per unit weight.  In order to simplify things, scientists calculate how much CO₂ would need to be emitted into the atmosphere to generate the same warming effect as all these different greenhouse gases.  This value is reported as CO₂e, where CO₂ stands for carbon dioxide, and ‘e’ stands for equivalent.

Why “industry average” CO₂e values for each product?  First, “industry average” CO₂e values represent the reduction potential for sustainable products, assuming abatement efforts and carbon offsets are fully realized.  The higher the potential, the greater the possible benefit.  Second, irrespective of the value itself (whether large or small), we want to build awareness of GHG emissions. We think it is important for individuals to have access to this critical information as a foundation for informed decision making.  Imagine trying to eat consciously and not having access to any nutrition information!  Third, we use this value as an internal check to test whether we can easily obtain high-quality emissions information.  We use our experiences as part of a broader dialog with industry participants and other stakeholders regarding progress towards allowing individuals to make informed purchasing decisions. 

Companies trying to reduce their GHG emissions can take one or more major actions.  We think it is important to document these so customers can see what actions Brands are pursuing.

Absolute Reduction entails actions that literally result in the production of fewer products.  As an example: each product sold that lasts 2X longer than the industry average – all other things being equal – could displace 1 conventional product that has an average lifetime.  Note the qualifier “all other things being equal”.  Many products (to name one: LED lights) actually require more CO₂ to manufacture than the product they aim to replace, and it is critical then to look to second-order effects (amount of time used, how is electricity generated) to complete a true cost/benefit analysis.  (In case you are wondering, here is one analysis of these factors for LED lights).

Efficiency Improvements do not change the quantity of products produced or consumed, but rather make the production or distribution of these products less carbon intensive through more efficient processes or materials.  Converting a manufacturing facility to run on renewable power would be one example of an efficiency improvement (again, with the qualified “all other things being equal” – if electricity is currently generated using hydropower, renewable power would be a questionable tactic to reduce emissions).

Modal Shifts substitute a lower-carbon-intensive action for a higher-carbon-intensive one.  Changing working location to reduce emissions associated with commuting or changing product logistics so that air shipments are now done via ground are examples of potentially meaningful modal shifts.

III. Offset Type

Today there are very few companies that can completely eliminate their CO₂e emissions.  The question that necessarily arises is what to do about residual emissions?  Our conviction is that, at present, the careful selection of – and investment in – carbon offset projects is an appropriate way to address these emissions.

A carbon offset project seeks to eliminate GHG emissions from the atmosphere that otherwise would have occurred had the project not been undertaken (so-called “additionality”), and to secure this elimination on a long enough timescale to matter (so-called “permanence”).

Indisputably, there are a lot of challenges associated with the carbon offset industry (and a significant body of literature highlighting examples of projects that are unlikely to deliver any lasting impact).  Nevertheless, it is exactly this tension that has forced forward-thinking companies to redouble their efforts to deliver high-quality offsets.  We remain optimistic that over time more, and higher-quality, offsets will become available.

Not to be overlooked: the act of purchasing offsets (hopefully) triggers manufacturers to ask “how do we minimize our GHG emissions so as to minimize our offset costs?”  Importantly, this is only a productive discussion if it happens within a company, as this creates the required feedback loop between actions generating emissions and the consequences (paying for offsets).

Where we have information about the types of carbon offsets companies are purchasing, we provide this information to our customers.  Common types of offsets include:

Renewable Energy Generation.  There are some occasions where the dominant source of power consumes fossil fuels, and absent a dedicated investment, renewable energy is unlikely to be adopted.  In these cases, renewable projects that are undertaken to displace the use of fossil-fuel-based energy sources may avoid GHG emissions.

Biological Solutions.  Biomatter (specifically trees) is a dominant sink for CO₂.  Accordingly, a whole variety of projects designed to preserve trees, replant trees, and increase the retention of carbon within soil are used to manage atmospheric CO₂ levels.  For these projects it is absolutely critical to ensure that projects are designed carefully and offsets are measured directly.

Other Solutions.  Offset projects designed to reduce the use of firewood in meal preparation, or that retrofit buildings to reduce energy needs beyond what would be done as part of normal efficiency improvement projects, or even that capture CO₂ directly and store it in locations where it remains inaccessible for centuries-to-millennia all constitute other approaches to reducing atmospheric CO₂ levels.

Not all offsets achieve their result immediately.  If you plant a tree, assuming it survives, you can expect CO₂ to be absorbed from the environment over decades.  If you stop an abandoned well from leaking methane, you can achieve a reduction in CO₂e from the moment the leak is fixed.

We think it is important for be clear about the estimated time-to-impact for different offset projects, and accordingly we provide estimates regarding the timing of offsets for products we sell:

The most compelling offsets deliver meaningful reduction in atmospheric CO₂ levels almost immediately (icon at left represented by a calendar).  Offsets that deliver an impact within a calendar year (icon second from left) are also compelling.  Projects that require a decade or a century (two icons on the right, above) have to be reviewed carefully.

The process of understanding a company’s emissions, and confirming its offset purchases meet high standards is both necessary to build confidence in efforts to reduce GHG emissions, and also inherently a specialized task.

At The Carbon Platform, we look to independent third parties with required competencies to assess manufacturers’ emissions claims, and regard our arm’s length relationship with third party validators as key to avoiding potential conflicts of interest.  Note that some companies may self-certify (either because they are very clear in their approach and transparent regarding their emissions, or because their size makes it challenging to work with third party validators in a cost-effective manner).  A selection of third parties validating GHG emissions is shown below, where the final icon at the right is used by us to represent companies that self-certify: