How is my office commute and business travel connected to Net-zero goal?
Corporations have greater responsibility in curtailing green house gas emissions arising from their direct operations. However, bigger portion of total emissions come from supply chains and are indirect in nature which also include employee commute and business travel. This calls for a stronger commitment from employees to support their firm's corporate citizenship goals.
Why curtail greenhouse gasses (GHG) in first place?
According to climate scientists, to limit global mean temperature increase at 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by 2050, global carbon dioxide (one of GHG) emissions must be reduced by 85% below 2000 levels (reference). These measures are critical in reversing increasingly unpredictable and dangerous impacts for ecosystems.
What is the role of corporations, institutions and organizations?
Leadership and innovation from business is vital to make progress towards reducing the GHG emissions in addition to government policies. Committed to reach net-zero emissions, corporations [and business entities] are not only working to curb the emissions from their own operations, but also striving to mitigate the impact from their value chains and product portfolios. Following picture describes the cradle-to-grave emission footprint and broader classification into three categories (Scope-1: direct emissions, Scope-2: indirect purchased power, and Scope-3: indirect upstream and downstream supply chains):
What is my role as an employee?
Per a 2016 McKinsey study, >75% of GHG emissions are attributed to indirect Scope-3 emissions across manufacturing, food, electronics and textile industries.
Out of several emission sources that are accounted for under Scope 3, there are two major aspects that individual employees have direct influence on: commute to work (Scope 3) and business travel (Scope 3). In addition employees have direct influence on emissions resulting from office space (Facilities under Scope 2).
Recent pandemic years showed us a proof of concept on potential emission reduction channels. Postponed commuting and business travel via home-office prominence resulted in a total global carbon emissions drop by 7%.
Commute to work (Scope 3): Personal transportation accounts for ~20% of nation's GHG emissions. One work-day per week at home-office has a potential to cut those emissions by 1/5th! In addition corporations providing commuter benefits would incentivize employees choose commute channels with low carbon footprint.
Recommended by LinkedIn
Business Travel (Scope 3): Employee travel is one of the business world’s greatest contributors to carbon emissions due to prevalence of business travel by air and car. The sheer number of flights taken by employees compared to vacationers (12% of air travelers contribute to two-thirds of total flights) make it more prominent. In addition, a first class ticket on a long-haul flight emits, on average, four times as much as an economy seat (referenced in the picture below). To understand the enormity of the problem, one round-trip ticket from London to New York City generates more emissions (@986 Kg CO2) than what the average person in 56 countries produces in an entire year.
Now that the pandemic pause on business travel is fading, give a hard thought on if your next business trip can be avoided via a video conference or a local associate filling in for you in attending the critical in-person meeting.
Company Facilities: Having a corner office with glass walls adorned with personal artefacts is a perk many crave and is hard earned. However, the direct emissions [resulting from lighting/heating/cooling/cleaning the facilities] are proportional to the office space square-footage.
Shared co-working cubicles over large corner offices significantly cuts the carbon footprint!
Finally, I want to acknowledge that organizational deliverables and dynamics, type of job and nature of job duties, personal constraints and flexibility needs, accessibility to cleaner mode of transportation etc. play an important role in decision making towards commute and travel. Adding sustainability dimension to these aspects is warranted to contribute towards the collective net-zero goal.
Here is a video that summarizes Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions:
All views expressed in this forum are mine and not those of Exxonmobil. The data in the article is gathered from publicly available sources.
Senior Wind Turbine Technology Engineer, Offshore & Onshore at RWE Renewables
1yHi Srini, thanks for sharing the details to support to our environment.. There is a big concern country like USA where public transportation is not very much effective for local mobility and mostly people use cars if I compare with Germany and many other European countries.., Additionally walking or using bicycle as 1st preference if time permits must be promoted and local public transportation in place of commuting by car (atleast we must try if time permits)… So as a nutshell could you highlight the current situation or future plan the way well developed country USA (in terms of GDP and not as social indexing) that government and people are serious and planning to take the actions in this direction..
Translating Science into Commercial Success.
1yNice views. On foot commute or bicycle commute to office and near by shopping adds more value.
Entrepreneur | Investor | Humanitarian | Martial Artist
1yThis is a critical component of net zero goal. Post- pandemic hybrid work models are proving the point on how we can control footprint without disturbing the eco-system of deliverables.
Professor and Graduate Programs Coordinator, Public Health
1yNice article - good job!