Impact Measurement via Carbon Calculators

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 19)

Abstract

Intervention studies have shown that eco-feedback is a useful measure leading to a reduction in energy consumption. Eco-feedback is most powerful if it is combined with goal setting, action-relevant information, and social comparison and if it is behaviorally relevant. Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) calculators are eco-feedback systems that are suitable for measuring the carbon balance of individuals and households. They also make it possible to measure the impact of activities aiming to reduce the carbon emissions of individuals by influencing behavior and changes in everyday life routines. Citizens participating in the e2democracy (e2d) project used such a tool over a period of up to 2 years. This chapter reviews the criteria followed to select the CO2e calculator and to adjust it for continuous measurement with various feedback functionalities. The different categories of CO2e measurement are presented, and how consumption, such as kilowatt hours (kWh), is converted into CO2e emissions is explained. The chapter also describes the actual functioning of the calculator, how participants interacted with it and the feedback provided to them. Finally, some challenges, such as the lack of data about emission factors (EFs), interpolation, validation, and comparability, are also discussed.

Keywords

Carbon Emission Emission Factor Climate Protection Heating Energy World Wildlife Fund 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  2. AvantTime (2007) White paper, CO2-Rechner storyboard, internal non-public document. Tübingen, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  3. Birnik A (2013) An evidence-based assessment of online carbon calculators. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 17:280–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bottrill C (2007) Internet-based carbon tools for behaviour change. Environmental Change Institute University of Oxford, Oxford. http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/research/energy/downloads/botrill07-calculators.pdf. Accessed 27 July 2015Google Scholar
  5. Darby S (2006) The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption. A review for DEFRA of the literature on metering, billing and direct displays. University of Oxford, Oxford. http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/research/energy/downloads/smart-metering-report.pdf. Accessed 27 July 2015Google Scholar
  6. E-Control (2009) National energy regulator Austria. http://www.e-control.at. Accessed 26 June 2014
  7. Ehrhardt-Martinez K, Donnelly KA, Laitner JA (2010) Advanced metering initiatives and residential feedback programs: a meta-review for household electricity-saving opportunities. Report No. E105. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  8. European Environment Agency (2013) GHG emissions by EU Member States 2013. http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-eea-1#tab-based-on-data. Accessed 27 July 2015
  9. Fischer C (2008) Feedback on household electricity consumption: a tool for saving energy? Energy Effic 1:79–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Forster P, Ramaswamy V, Artaxo P, Berntsen T, Betts R, Fahey DW, Haywood J, Lean J, Lowe DC, Myhre G, Nganga J, Prinn R, Raga G, Schulz M, Van Dorland R (2007) Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative forcing. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Global Footprint Network (2010) Ecological footprint atlas 2010. Oakland California, USAGoogle Scholar
  12. IDAE (2005) Instituto para la Diversificación y Ahorro de la Energía 2005–2010 (Spanish plan for renewable energies). www.idae.es. Accessed 27 July 2015
  13. Intelliekon (2011) Nachhaltiger Energiekonsum von Haushalten durch intelligente Zähler‑, Kommunikations- und Tarifsysteme. Ergebnisbericht, November 2011, Fraunhofer-Institut für Solare Energiesysteme (ISE), Freiburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  14. Padgett JP, Steinemann AC, Clarke JC, Vandenbergh MP (2008) A comparison of carbon calculators. Environ Impact Assess Rev 28:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schächtele K, Hertle H (2007) Die CO2 Bilanz des Bürgers, Recherche für ein internetbasiertes Tool zur Erstellung persönlicher CO2 Bilanzen; IFEU on behalf of the Federal Environment AgencyGoogle Scholar
  16. Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V (2007) The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol Sci 18(5):429–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2008) Nudge—improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  18. WWF (2012) WWF living planet report 2012—biodiversity, biocapacity and better choices. http://www.oneplanetliving.org. Accessed 27 July 2015

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Information Management Bremen (ifib)University of BremenBremenGermany
  2. 2.University of SaragossaSaragossaSpain

Personalised recommendations