O
Orchid Squid
https://bonpote.com/analyse-le-concept-dempreinte-carbone-a-t-il-ete-invente-par-les-petroliers/
Very interesting article from Bon Pote. He explains how the concept of carbon footprint was taken up by British Petroleum (BP) in the 2000s to shift the responsibility for carbon emissions onto individuals and no longer onto polluting companies. He explains that changes must first come from companies that must stop the launching/financing of fossil projects. Knowing that companies like Shell or ExxonMobil have been aware of their impact on global warming for almost 60 years.
We must therefore ask ourselves the question where the changes should come from. These carbon footprint measures are there to make consumers feel guilty. But basically, no systemic change is being taken: not polluting companies or policies to really reduce their carbon emissions. You should not become eco-anxious to see your carbon footprint if no feasible alternative is put in place to mitigate these carbon expenses.
So for me this feature is a bad idea. And I think other features could be more useful.
Y
Yellow sunshine Reindeer
Super interesting to know
W
Wenge Cobra
Data 1: The quantity of CO² emitted by global human and volcanic activity is about 150 times faster than the fastest natural cycle measured in the entire history of Earth's geology.
Data 2: The quantity of CO² emitted by human activity is about 37 billion tons/year, while that of volcanoes is about 320 million tons/year. Human activity therefore emits about 115 times more CO² than volcanic activity.
Data 3: The quantity of CO² emitted per year by human and volcanic activity represents 1/200th of the stock already present in the Earth's atmosphere.
Data 4: France emits an average of 316 million tons of CO² per year, which represents approximately 0.84% of global emissions (human and volcanic activity), and therefore approximately 0.004% of the stock already present in the Earth's atmosphere. If 100% of France's CO² emissions for 1 year increase to 0%, the 100% of the global CO² stock at the end of one year will therefore be 99.996%.
Commentary:
So I encourage other countries in the world to also emit 0% Co² per year. Note that CO² is absolutely not responsible for the 1380 billion animals killed per year for food, nor for the fact that 60% of mammals on Earth are farm animals, or meat in the future, nor for the fact that wild mammals now represent only 4% of mammals on Earth, and whether we are, CO² or not, in the 6th mass extinction because of our expansionism, fragmentation and destruction of natural and wild spaces, of our eating habits, and of the pollution not of the air, but of the soil and water. CO2 emissions are truly a detail among the real causes of the loss of Earth's habitability by living beings.
Therefore, calculating the carbon footprint of our purchases is absolutely useless.
Thank you.
B
Beige Emu
Wenge Cobra: the calculation concerning France's CO2 balance is accurate, but I don't see the connection with your conclusion.
Thinking at the scale of France makes as much sense as reasoning at the scale of your city or Europe.
Of course, the climate challenge is not the only one, but it is nonetheless existential for human societies.
The individual levers to reduce our impact on the climate through our purchases are weak. However, the climate impact of the average French person's purchases is greater than the global average and is not compatible with climate stabilization if the whole planet imitates us.
And if everyone tells themselves that changing their habits is not going to limit the rise in temperature, there is no risk of stopping at 1.5 or 2 degrees.
After that, I am not sure that the carbon footprint that can be calculated from the data associated with a CB makes any sense.
W
Wenge Cobra
Beige Emu: Hello Éric, I think that is exactly what you are talking about, it is true that at the time of writing my comments I wanted to say “things” and “things” that tell us the quantity of CO² as if it were a first problem and as if the data, so complex, could be at least reliable.
There are always negative externalities to all human activity, what must be combated is the “green washing” of industries and advertising, which indicate a 0% emission electric SUV. When you know that to manufacture a small Ford in the United States in 1930 from 700kg (Ford T) to 1 ton (Ford A) you need about 7 tons of coal, that to manufacture a small car in China in 1990 you need about 4 tons of coal, that makes you put into perspective on SUVs of 1.5 to 2 tons, which means zero emissions.
Q
Quintessential Tortoise
If we cannot create a precise carbon footprint according to the products purchased (e.g. for food shopping, each product has a different impact), perhaps we could start by inventorying the brands/businesses/types of businesses and by giving each one an environmental score according to their investment policies and commercial ethics? A partnership with Moralscore to build indicators and develop this carbon footprint calculation tool adapted to spending with the Helios card?
N
Nearby Spoonbill
Quintessential Tortoise: it might be useful to be able to find Hélios in the list of banks offered by the Greenly application, which makes it possible to measure the carbon footprint of each expenditure via access to the various accounts in a household.
P
Purple Locust
Quintessential Tortoise: indeed, a partnership with MoralScore would be interesting! also, for the most common purchases, we could refer to the Ademe Carbon Base, which offers a lot of conversions of raw or manufactured goods into CO2.