Why don't hotels tell us their carbon footprint?

According to a TripAdvisor survey, two thirds of travellers consider environmental credentials when choosing a hotel [1]. However, a similar two thirds say they find this difficult because they do not have enough information. TripAdvisor have said they will set up a rating scheme based for hotels based on their environmental practices - do they have energy efficient lighting and appliances, do they reuse towels and so on. However, how do we know if these practices actually translate into significant environmental savings? There is a scheme for measuring the carbon footprint of hotels called HCMI (Hotel Carbon Measurement Initiative). This was set up with the support of hotel chains such as Marriott, Intercontinental Hotels Group, Meliá Hotels International and Red Carnation Hotels [2]. Corporate clients can ask the hotel for their carbon footprint when they make a booking so they can fill in their environmental accounts. So why don't they advertise this for individuals too?

Carbon emissions from TV versus books, revisited

A big surprise for me when I wrote my book was that watching TV (usually) generates less carbon emissions than reading a book. However at that time I was considering a paper book whereas these days we use e-readers a lot of the time. How much difference does that make? For a fair comparison, I am using carbon emissions per hour watching or reading.

The trouble with carbon foot-printing is that there are so many variables it is impossible to give straight answers. If you twist my arm I would say that the TV is now only a little better than the e-reader in a typical case. In fact if you look at the chart below you would think that the e-reader was scarcely better than the paperback book. However, the worst case for the paper book is when it is read only once, which is likely, whereas the e-reader worst case is a lifetime of only 25 books, which is much less likely. The more you use the e-reader, the lower the emissions. If you read newspapers on your reader too, then the carbon savings mount up rapidly.

At the end of this post I offer answers to personal questions such as, should I watch the TV tonight and should I buy an e-reader?

Estimates of carbon emissions per hour from watching TV or reading a book.

This chart shows my best estimates for carbon emissions per hour with the assumptions described below. I have included the embodied emissions as well as the power use of the TV or reading device. Also I have included the programme production and transmission for TVs and the authoring and publishing emissions for the books as well as printing for the paper version.

Would you woo your valentine with a plastic bottle of wine?

Adnams Brewery recently added some South African wines to their list that come in bottles made from PET, the same plastic as fizzy drinks bottles. This saves energy and carbon emissions both from making the bottle and in transport (because the PET bottles are lighter). If your partner is environmentally conscious would they appreciate these savings?  How much difference does the plastic bottle actually make? Adnams doesn't say how much so I have done some calculations. Also there are other options such as bag in a box or using thinner glass bottles.

Airline boom or airline bust (and telepresence)

There are opposite and equally valid viewpoints as to whether or not Heathrow should get a third runway: no because it means more flights and more flights means more greenhouse gas emissions or yes because the airline industry is growing and we don't want Heathrow left behind. It is true that airline travel is growing, worldwide, and while so far its proportion of world greenhouse gas emissions is small (2% [1]) this is also growing (and in the UK it is 5.4% [2]).  Will this always be the case and what are the alternatives?

Energy star labels for computers

I have sometimes wondered why computers don't have energy labels like washing machines and refrigerators. However, it turns out there are lots of different environmental labeling systems and some of them do apply to computer equipment. Directgov has an overview of various labeling systems here. Two that apply to computer equipment are the EU Energy Star system, which is tied to the US Energy Star system, and the Energy Saving Trust Recommended Products list (EST). It turns out my computer (a rather obsolete Mac Mini) qualifies but my monitor just misses. (I didn't choose it, it was a present.) I had a good look at the Energy Star criteria for certification and was surprised that

• For computers the active power consumption doesn't matter, they are expected to spend most of their time idle, asleep or off.
• Games consoles are excluded, so they can't be Energy Star at all.
• For monitors the active power allowed depends on size and for screens over 50" 300W or more is accepted, allowing even some plasmas to qualify (click here for a list).

The EST criteria are calculated and set differently. For computers EST is considerably more strict but for small displays the EST criteria are much less exacting.

How green is my charcoal barbecue?

The barbecue season has started. In my book I looked at cooking on the hob and in the oven but I didn't think of barbecues. You might think that using charcoal on your barbecue is carbon neutral because charcoal is made from wood which is renewable fuel. This is not entirely true because of greenhouse gas emissions (a) during manufacture of the charcoal and (b) in transport.  So how does cooking on the barbie compare with, say, under a grill in the kitchen?

TV: standby or switch off

I was on the radio last Thursday (You and Yours, BBC Radio 4) answering the question 'How much would you save by switching your TV off at the wall instead of leaving it on standby?'. The answer is, not very much, although of course it depends somewhat on the TV and there are lots of other easy ways to save energy.

Carbon emissions from watching TV

Working out the carbon emissions/hour from watching TV is not so easy as you might think because there are a lot of components to consider, some of them very variable and hard to gauge. There are carbon emissions from the electricity to power the TV, from making the TV, making the program and, if you really want to be comprehensive, emissions from the spending choices of the TV stars who earn high salaries from appearing on the programs.

Carbon emissions from leisure activities

In this post I compare different leisure activities according to how much carbon emissions are generated per hour. This is very different from the last post where I looked at how much carbon emissions are generated for each penny spent. For example, drinking beer in a pub has quite high carbon emissions per hour but is also very expensive.

Here is a summary. There is a huge variation in carbon emissions from all of the activities, depending on our behaviour and choices.

Does saving energy reduce your carbon emissions? - avoiding the rebound effect

In a pub enjoying a beer

The trouble with saving energy is that it also saves us money and that means we have more money to spend which we can do in different ways, generating varying amount of carbon emissions,  maybe more than we saved in the first place; this is the rebound effect. So I have been looking at how we spend our leisure and at the general rate of carbon emissions per unit money spend for various activities such as reading a book, watching TV or going to the pub.

Carbon footprint for reading a newspaper on an iPad

Making paper (even recycled), printing it and transporting it uses a lot of energy and generates carbon emissions. However e-readers such as the iPad or the Kindle also have a carbon cost for manufacturing. In my book I explore the payback time for reading books on a Kindle and I reckon, depending on your assumptions, it comes to about 70 books – which in my case would be a couple of years reading. However, newspapers consume a huge amount of paper too, and can just about sensibly be read now with something like an iPad. If you read a newspaper every day, how long would it take to pay back the initial carbon emissions from the iPad?