{"id":5188,"date":"2009-12-21T10:09:42","date_gmt":"2009-12-21T16:09:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.sustainablog.org\/?p=5188"},"modified":"2009-12-21T10:09:42","modified_gmt":"2009-12-21T16:09:42","slug":"online-shopping-how-green-is-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/online-shopping-how-green-is-it\/","title":{"rendered":"Online Shopping: How Green is It?"},"content":{"rendered":"
The Online Shopping Survey conducted by GfK<\/a> in 2008 showed that about 70 % of people<\/strong> think shopping online is good for the environment as it helps to reduce the carbon footprint. But is it really that simple?<\/p>\n Too many variables come in to play: when you live, how much you buy, who delivers the purchase., etc. This post overviews 4 main factors to compare the impact of conventional versus online shopping: carbon dioxide emissions, product packaging, shopping research and product storage.<\/p>\n With actually quite a few “buts” coming here and there, online shopping seems a bit greener which is visualized via the following table (red indicates a greater impact):<\/p>\n \n Img src<\/a> by Adam Swank<\/a><\/p>\n The most recent research conducted by Logistics Research Centre<\/a> at Heriot-Watt University in March 2009 compared the carbon footprints of online and conventional shopping. The research was based on two absolutes:<\/p>\n According to the research, an average trip to the mall produces 4,274 g of carbon dioxide, while a typical van-based delivery creates about 180 g (which makes online shopping approximately 24 times greener). Thus, when both of the above absolutes are true, online shopping turns eco-friendlier than conventional shopping in terms of carbon dioxide emissions.<\/p>\n You can download the whole research paper here<\/a>.<\/p>\n The research deliberately disregards the following cases:<\/p>\n Img src<\/a> by Betsssssy<\/a><\/p>\n Goods purchased online and delivered to your front door require individual packaging unlike those stored and bought at retail outlets that are delivered to stores in bulk. This results in more packaging resources and a greater waste.<\/p>\n According<\/a> to Fritz Yambrach<\/a>, a professor of packaging science at the Rochester (N.Y.) Institute of Technology:<\/p>\n “The product distribution system for Internet sales – similar to mail-order catalogues – normally requires more packaging material because the wholesale-retail system is circumvented…”<\/p>\n Img src<\/a> by Hey Paul<\/a><\/p>\n There is one more huge factor to take into account: how much easier it is to conduct a product research online than in real life. If a consumer has insufficient information on a product before buying, it can result in a few really “eco-unfriendly” activities:<\/p>\n The Internet has made online research much easier. Online shopping communities like Buxr<\/a>, price comparison tools like PriceGrabber<\/a>, user reviews aggregators like BizRate<\/a> have made shopping almost surprise-free: one can find what, where and how to buy without ever leaving home.<\/p>\n Img src<\/a> by sashafatcat<\/a><\/p>\n A centrally-located warehouse, from where goods (that are purchased online) are shipped to the buyers’ houses, must provide much less impact on the environment than multiple retail malls scattered all over your neighborhood (think about the amount of resources these outlets require to be cooled, heated and lit).<\/p>\n The debate in itself makes little sense. Both conventional and Internet shopping may be green under certain circumstances. If you shop online only because you think this way is greener, I can tell you it might be not. Here are a few tips that could make shopping greener (if you care):<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\nCarbon Dioxide Emissions<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
Product Packaging<\/h2>\n
Product Research<\/h2>\n
\n
Product Display and Storage<\/h2>\n
The Conclusion?<\/h2>\n
\n