The Biochar Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Carbon Footprint’

“A carbon offset or (carbon credits) is assumed to be a financial instrument which shows greenhouse gases emission reduction and helps us to take personal responsibility for the environmental consequences of our activities.”

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most important greenhouse gas produced by human activities, primarily through the combustion of fossil fuels such as oil, natural gas, and coal. As a result of tremendous world-wide consumption of such fossil fuels, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased over the past century which ultimately resulted in a global warming, the prime suspect in the greatest mass extinction of all time – wiping out 95% of all life forms on the planet.

We all are responsible to add CO2 and ultimately the global warming. Carbon footprint is a measure of the impact of our activities on the environment, and in particular on climate change. It relates to the amount of greenhouse gases we are producing in our day-to-day lives through burning fossil fuels for electricity, heating, transportation etc.

As the Global Warming issues are getting attention of the masses, people are seeking a perfect solution to handle the situation before it becomes too late.Carbon offsets are becoming an increasingly popular way for individuals and businesses to participate in solutions to global warming. Carbon offsets help us to balance out our carbon footprint easily and effectively in a more peaceful manner. Offsetting emissions is a process whereby an individual or organisation purchases carbon credits to neutralise its global warming impact. Each carbon credit represents the abatement or sequestration of one tonne of CO2-equivalent greenhouse gases – or carbon emissions – from our atmosphere.

The basic idea behind carbon offsetting is that you pay to fund projects that neutralise CO2 emissions produced by you. You invest your contributions towards greenhouse gases reduction through projects which produce clean energy that replaces the energy production from fossil fuel. Wind farms project is a good example of such projects. Other types of offsets available for sale on the market include those resulting from energy efficiency projects, methane capture from landfills or livestock, destruction of potent greenhouse gases such as halocarbons, and carbon sequestration projects (through reforestation, or agriculture) that absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Carbon credits allow us to become more “Carbon Neutral”. You may be doing everything that you possibly can to reduce your carbon footprint, but it still might not be enough. Despite your energy saving, recycling and green transportation efforts at home and at work, you still may feel like you are not adequately reducing your carbon footprint. In this situation you can consider buying carbon credits for the more promising results and peace of mind at the same time. When you purchase carbon credits you help lower your carbon footprint and you prevent global warming. Before you purchase your carbon credits always make sure that the organization you are supporting is legit and is truly helping the environment.

Carbon credits are becoming a key component of national and international attempts to mitigate the growth in concentrations of greenhouse gases. There are many benefits for a business to reduce their carbon footprint and become carbon neutral when skyrocketing energy costs eat into profits. A carbon credit is the best way to help individuals and companies reduce their carbon dioxide emissions by offsetting them in a more environmentally friendly way.

Incoming search terms:

• carbon capture
• co2 sequestration
• whirlpool carbon credit offset

A carbon footprint measures the total greenhouse gas emissions caused directly and indirectly by an individual, event, organization or product. Carbon accounting (also called GHG accounting) does assess the carbon footprint to help organizations adopt strategies aimed at fighting climate change. As with financial accounting and reporting, generally accepted carbon accounting principles are intended to underpin and guide carbon accounting and reporting to ensure that the reported information represents a faithful, true, and fair account of a company’s carbon emissions.

Business community in India has started seeing value in undertaking carbon accounting and reporting it in public forums. Such forums include Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) and company’s Sustainable Development Reports. The number of companies which responded the CDP’s information request on climate change strategy, risk and opportunities assessment and carbon accounting was answered by 37 companies in 2007. The number increased to 51 in 2008 and dropped marginally to 44 in 2009, partially explained by the global financial crisis.

There is still long way to go for Indian businesses on the path of carbon accounting and disclosures. Even in the top 200 firms in India (by market capitalization), the response rate in last few years has steadily increased and reached 20%, a rather dismal performance compared to developed markets.

There are a few sectors like the software and services which are clear leaders in being carbon-aware, accounting carbon emissions from their emissions, taking efforts in reducing it and communicating it to the stakeholders. Part of this can be explained given the fact that these companies are most export dependent and draw majority of their clientele and revenues from markets of US and EU. Clear laggards in efforts in this direction are companies in the field of banking & diversified financials, capital goods, real estate and retail. Very few companies in these sectors have responded to the CDP information request and have accounted for their carbon emissions. Part of the lack of drive can be explained by significant domestic base, relative inelasticity of demand to seemingly peripheral factors and relative less thought given to corporate social responsibility.

In the following discussion, we summarize the key issues that would become increasing relevant to Indian organizations and drive thorough and wide spread carbon accounting, reduction and disclosure efforts.

Upcoming regulations

Industries such as steel and textiles could soon face a carbon entry barrier, one way or the other, while exporting goods to markets where the country has enacted regulations stipulating guidelines for the domestic industry. The domestic industry, to maintain its competitiveness would ensure that less efficient (and therefore more carbon intensive) products entering into the economy pay for the difference in carbon levels by ‘carbon tax’ or equivalent.

Though these regulations may take some time to be widely implemented, it makes business sense for companies in select sectors to be prepared with a clear understanding of where they stand with respect to competition from developed countries and other developing countries such as China, Brazil or Vietnam.

Developing countries such as India, Brazil, China and South Africa (BASIC) are facing increasing pressure from the developed world to monitor and report their GHG emissions. This is due to the fact that the growth in GHG emissions worldwide in foreseeable future will come from these economies, thanks to their contribution to world economy and increasingly so. In order to make sure that the developed countries continue to finance emission reduction projects, energy efficiency and other technology development, the BASIC countries may have to undertake monitoring, reporting and verification of their national GHG inventories. When such an mechanism becomes a part of internationally negotiated agreement, carbon accounting and reporting would become statutory requirement like the annual financial reporting and auditing.

Investor requirements

Having realized the crucial importance of good disclosure and corporate governance practices, investors across the globe are demanding companies to disclose their climate change strategies, perceived risks and opportunities created by climate change, contribution to climate change and efforts taken to minimize corporate carbon footprint. To reduce the transaction costs of responding to individual investors in unique format and vice-versa, Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) has been created as a not-for-profit non-governmental organization. Active since 2006, in 2010 CDP sent out information request to more than 3500 organizations across sectors and scales around the globe. In India, the information is sought from top 200 companies by market capitalization. The responses from companies in relation to their climate change strategies, perceived risks and opportunities and carbon footprint of their operations will be analyzed, compiled in a report and sent to more than 530 investors across globe. Investors also become aware if the organization chooses not to respond to such an information request or decline to participate. The list of investors who get seek such information from corporations through CDP includes Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JP Morgan Asset Management among others.

Such investor-facing communication should be taken seriously taken by companies and pursued pro-actively even if organization does not receive information request.

Basis for Energy efficiency

Carbon emission is a direct indicator of the energy consumption in a process or an activity. By mapping carbon footprint in detail, an organization can identify ‘emission hotspots’, the energy intensive processes and take actions to reduce the carbon footprint/energy consumption per unit product/service produced/delivered. This can directly lead to cost savings and thus addition to bottom-line, the ultimate test for evaluating success or failure of an activity/intervention.

Impact the national policy

Though the carbon accounting and disclosure efforts of an individual company may not have a direct bearing on the climate policy decisions taken by the Indian government, a wide participation by India Inc. in activities in the area of carbon accounting, emission reductions and reporting can send a strong signal that Indian industry is proactively engaging in the climate change dialogue and response process. Such activities will contribute towards political process through analysis and reporting. For example – the release of CDP India 2009 report coincided with landmark session in parliament where the environmental Minister Mr. Jairam Ramesh announced that India will reduce its carbon intensity levels by 20-25% on its 2005 over the next 11 years. The Economic Times carried an article quoting the CDP India report and saying that India Inc. is well positioned to achieve the 20-25% emission intensity reduction targets given that companies are already voluntarily disclosing their carbon footprints and undertaking measures to reduce them.

It is evident that voluntary initiatives such as the CDP or company’s sustainability reports highlighting their carbon emissions, reduction measures and targets are influencing policy decisions and in future will play a significant role in India’s climate change strategy and policy.

________________________

EcoLogic Consultancy is a focused Carbon Management consulting firm. We provide services in the wide spectrum of carbon management, helping our clients identify the risks and opportunities in climate change, mitigate the risks, exploit the opportunities, and thus tackle the environmental challenge.

For further details, reach us at

enquiry@ecologicconsultancy.in

www.ecologicconsultancy.in

Indrajeet – +91-90287 88430

Kedar – +91-90007 72462

Incoming search terms:

• co2 carbon capture sequestration

Along with positive ideas come those scammers who are out to make a buck. Even though trading in carbon credits is still in its infancy, there are those who are already taking advantage of what may be a very beneficial environmental program. To first understand how to avoid being taken advantage of, it is important to understand exactly what carbon credits are.

Carbon credits are part of national and international attempts to stop the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. One carbon credit is equal to one ton of carbon. Many individuals are now taking an interest in their carbon footprints, trying to lower their usage, as well as trying different ways to offset their usage. Carbon credits are part of an approach to emissions trading. With a certain amount of greenhouse gas allotted to markets, each individual group is given the opportunity to decide how much of a limited amount can be designated to each area. This allows for industries to control the amount of greenhouse gases they are using. This also allows industrial and commercial processes to market in the direction of lower emissions, or utilize approaches that are designed to not emit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. This helps to finance carbon reduction schemes.

Many companies sell carbon credits. These carbon credits are sold to companies who voluntarily desire to lower their carbon footprint. Carbon credits are purchased from investment funds or carbon development companies. Many of these companies have saved these credits from other individual products and offset themselves and the buyers by selling them. The quality of the credits is based on the validation process, the type of fund, and the development company. The price is also affected by these things. Voluntary units typically have less value than the units sold through the rigorously-validated Clean Development Mechanism.

There are two distinct types of Carbon Credits: Carbon Offset Credits (COCs) and Carbon Reduction Credits (CRCs). Carbon Offset Credits consist of clean forms of energy production, wind, solar, hydro and biofuels. Carbon Reduction Credits consists of the collection and storage of Carbon from the earth’s atmosphere through reforestation, forestation, ocean and soil collection and storage efforts. Both ways are valid and positively recognized, each used in different situations.

Whether or not you decide that the use of carbon credits are for you, it is important to know how to avoid being scammed.

• First and foremost, do your research on the company you are thinking of buying credit from. It is necessary to see if the industrial companies are actually implementing reductions in carbon use and greenhouse emissions or if they are really doing very little.

• They need to have verification. A shortage of verification makes it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits. Reliable third party verification is critical.

• Be careful of companies or individuals that are over-pricing their carbon credits. Why are their credits more expensive? What is their value? Have their prices increased or decreased due to changes in their emissions reductions?

Do the research before purchasing carbon credits. It is important to find if the organization has any history of selling worthless credits which do not yield reductions. There is no point in purchasing carbon credits if they do not benefit you or the environment.

Incoming search terms:

• carbon storage
• carbon footprint

Copyright (c) 2010 Alison Withers

According to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation food and bioenergy crops are now competing for land, water and other resources in many parts of the world.

The FAO argues that the rising price of basic foods in 2007 – 08 that generated food scarcity worries and import restrictions in some countries wasn’t caused only by poor harvests in major producing countries and high oil and energy prices raising the cost of inputs like fertilizers and irrigation as well as the transport costs of inputs and food.

The speculation on the commodity markets was also partly driven by the rising demand for liquid biofuel, it says.

The environmental argument for using bio-diesel made from oilseed rape, or bio-ethanol, manufactured from wheat, maize or sugar, is the significantly lower carbon dioxide emissions over the full cycle of production and use compared with fossil fuels.

Not surprisingly the prospect of a smaller carbon footprint and greater energy security has encouraged Governments around the world to offer tax breaks to encourage use of biofuels and to set targets for the inclusion of biofuels in transport and other fuels.

When there was an over-supply of commodities like food it was fine, but not once it was clear that global population growth and diet change were together generating increased demand for food while climate change with its associated droughts and storms seemed to be limiting the world’s productive capacity.

The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), confusingly, takes the view that the increase in biofuels production has NOT been the dominant driver of food price inflationfor certain crops and certain countries.

It cites long-term factors – like the failure to accord the importance it deserved to the agricultural sector during the last decades, plus distorted agricultural markets and the dismantling of policies supporting domestic markets in developing countries – as being far more accountable for the present food crisis than biofuels.

It argues that where biofuels have had an impact, the relationship between biofuels and food price spikes should be interpreted more as a policy failure than as an intrinsic and unavoidable consequence of the production of biofuels. Nevertheless plainly bioenergy can provide opportunities to increase rural incomes and employment.

But while rising commodity prices imply potential greater profits from switching land to crops for biofuels they also arguably lead to the destruction of vast areas of rainforest, as trees are felled to make way for palm oil plantations in countries like Brazil and Malaysia, and to the threat of creating “a monocultural desert, devoid of biodiversity, across vast swathes of the British countryside”.

According to Andre Croppenstedt, an economist with the Agricultural Development Economics Division of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, biofuel production need not compete with food production if biofuel demand generates increased incomes for farm households and this in turn is invested in raising productivity of all farm activities, including food production.

UNCTAD also argues that what’s needed in the longer term is support for investment efforts aimed at enhancing the agricultural productivity of developing countries, particularly of small farmers, and making sure that these investments increase farmers’ ability “to capture a larger share of the growing agricultural revenues”

Whatever the pros and cons of the arguments there is a finite amount of available crop-producing land,

So there needs to be greater investment in the resources and support farmers need to improve their land’s yield while farming sustainably.

One way of doing that would be to support the efforts of biopesticide developers with globally agreed and quicker regulation of their new generation low-chem agricultural products and with Government investment towards the costs of developing more environmentally friendly crop protection and yield enhancing products.

Even if such higher yielding methods come to market, however, land availability still sets limits to how much cna be produced.

Investment should therefore be also coupled with promoting the development of second-generation biofuels – based on converting cellulose resources such as grass and fast-growing trees into fuels – to help to limit the direct competition between food and fuel associated with most first-generation biofuels.

The EC Climate Change Initiative accepted that second generation biofuels produced from materials like straw and forestry residues could enable far greater reductions in Greenhouse gases.

It also advocates selecting an overall production chain that can use a high yielding biomass crop to improve land use efficiency.

For instance most oils seed crops only produce a few tonnes per hectare per annum, sugar and starch crops may generate 5 to 10 tonnes, while significantly greater yields come from woody plants – or from conventional crops like cereals if the straw can be used.

Incoming search terms:

• carbon capture
• energy security
• malaysian palm oil
• palm oil

As we all know, Texas summers can be brutally hot, and Texas winters can be surprisingly cold. Both seasons end up wreaking havoc on our utility bills as we struggle to keep our homes cool in the summer and warm in the winter. Add in all the other little things — the coffee maker, the computer, the TV, and all the other devices that spend most of their time plugged into your home’s electrical system — and many homeowners give up on ever finding a way to really control their Texas electricity costs. But as energy prices continue to rise, and as the pressures on the average homeowner’s finances rise right along with them, the need to find new ways to cut costs and save money becomes a lot more compelling. We know that we could probably cut back on our energy usage, but how do we know where to start? Our Texas electric bill tells us how much energy we’ve used, but only once a month, and that’s not very helpful. Even when we make changes, it could take months to tell whether they’re working, or if they’re saving us enough to be worthwhile. At the same time, major sources of inefficiency might be going unnoticed and unaddressed.

Two competing new services, PowerMeter by Google and Hohm by Microsoft, are on the way with some new tools to help Texas homeowners. Microsoft estimates that the average American home could save almost 0 per year on energy usage. While that number sounds big, they base it on extensive testing in 60 million homes across the country; and of all 50 states, Texas ranked lowest in energy efficiency. Of course, what that really means is that Texas potentially has the biggest opportunity to use less electricity, reduce our carbon footprint, and save a whole lot of money.

Both PowerMeter and Hohm promise the potential for big increases in both efficiency and cost savings by way of an energy monitoring device called a smart meter. Once connected to your home’s electricity supply system, the meter sends an ongoing stream of data to your home computer via a connected wireless device. Your computer then sends that information on to a data hub run by one of the two companies. There, your information is analyzed and re-packaged into a dynamic, user-friendly web interface for you to review and use.

The appeal of these applications for homeowners is that your energy usage is no longer reduced to a single, inscrutable number on your monthly utility bill. The two applications differ somewhat in how your utility data is presented, but the primary feature in both is an extensive analysis of exactly how all of that electricity is being used. For example, Google PowerMeter can help you identify how much energy you’re using on a constant basis — the low-level drain from “always on” devices that can, over time, add up to a major source of inefficiency. Microsoft’s Hohm goes a step further by making active recommendations about how a homeowner might cut back their electricity usage, increasing energy efficiency and lowering costs.

There are further differences between the two services. Google’s emphasis is on the numbers; it tells you exactly how much power you’re using on an hourly basis, and generates graphs of usage over time, whether that means the last hour or the last month. This is a great service for people who like their data raw, as it means that a homeowner can correlate usage to specific patterns during the day. For example, if you know your usage spikes around 7 AM, you can probably guess that it has a lot to do with your family getting ready for work and school. Therefore, you might be able to save money if everyone takes shorter showers, or if you lower the temperature on your water heater. PowerMeter can also analyze usage patterns over the past to predict what your approximate usage and costs will be in the future. So as you make changes and check your results, you can watch your projected bills rise and fall until you’re happy with them.

Microsoft Hohm, on the other hand, is staking its claim on reaching the masses. Already available nationwide, Hohm’s interface is a a more comfortable affair, replacing a lot of the hard, granular data with a condensed “Hohm Score” that compares your home’s real energy usage to its potential energy efficiency — that is, how much you’re actually saving versus how much you could potentially be saving. It also guides you toward possible sources of savings, ranging from large and potentially savings-rich projects like insulating your home, to small things like replacing conventional light bulbs with power-saving compact fluorescent bulbs. It also allows you to compare your energy usage to that of people in your neighborhood, city, state, and all across the country.

If you’re interested in monitoring your home’s energy usage, there are a few things to keep in mind, since the two applications work a bit differently. So far, Google PowerMeter forms its main partnerships with utility companies, and to date it hasn’t established such a relationship with any Texas energy company, so for the time being it remains out of reach for Texans. However, if you’re interested in PowerMeter, it’s worth keeping in mind that while Google is sometimes a bit coy in the beginning, when they do enter a market, they often take it over completely. Google also has an excellent reputation for development, and loves to give its users exactly what they want. While PowerMeter might not yet be a player in your area, they could become the biggest game in town in the reasonably near future.

Microsoft Hohm, on the other hand, partners primarily with device-makers rather than power companies. Anyone can buy and install a compatible device and be up and running, no matter where they live or who supplies their energy. But Hohm requires more of a time investment to reach its full potential. A new user of the service will start out by answering a substantial number of questions about their home — details about the building, what kind of appliances you use, etc. — and some homeowners may find the process a little daunting. (Apartment dwellers may even find Hohm to be of limited use to them if they don’t have ready access to some of these details.) The good news is, even a partially-completed profile can produce some very useful insights and advice, and you can always add information and refine your profile later on.

If you’re interested in using Microsoft Hohm, your first step should be to contact your energy provider and ask them for any relevant information they can provide. Then purchase a Hohm-compatible device, such as Blue Line’s Power Cost Monitor, and register for your free Hohm account. Texas homeowners leaning towards Google’s PowerMeter service will have to wait a while longer, but in the meantime, you should contact your energy provider and let them know that you want to see a Texas energy company on PowerMeter’s list of partners.

In the end, it’s worth bearing in mind that both services are currently in their nascence, and will doubtless see further development and lots of changes in the future. As smart meters become more common and the cost of energy goes up, homeowners will do well to find a way to make use of the information that a these new monitoring tools can provide. Google and Microsoft are already working to make this information easily accessible to their users, and the competition between them will undoubtedly bring out the best in both.

There’s a lot of money to be saved on energy usage in this country, and perhaps nowhere more than in Texas. To help you make sure that some of that money ends up in your pocket, Google PowerMeter and Microsoft Hohm offer two great ways to discover your home’s potential for energy savings, and make your home the most efficient house on the block.

Incoming search terms:

• apartment google powermetter
• google energy what is the aim
• sweb electricty