Posts

Are online meetings better for the environment?

/in /by

Online meetings. Who knew that this is what would keep the world ticking over in 2020. Prime Ministers and Presidents have made decisions by Zoom vote and businesses have stayed afloat by engaging employees and clients onscreen. Many companies have gone as far as shutting office doors in favour of cyberspace after discovering that they can, in fact, get the job online as they did in person, pre-pandemic.

Whilst there are many cost-saving advantages of running a business rent-free, an interesting question that is gaining in momentum, is the cost of online meetings on the environment? It might seem quite obvious that if you’re not driving (or catching public transport) to a meeting you’re not polluting the air, which would make online meetings better for the environment (than meeting in person). Except, it’s not as simple as that.

Check out these following stats relating the to the streaming costs for online meetings (put together by digital expert Gerry McGovern):

  • A one-hour audio call consumes about 36 MB of data per person.
  • A one-hour standard-definition video call consumes about 270 MB per person.
  • A one-hour high-definition video call consumes about 540 MB per person.
  • A one-hour ultra-high-definition video call consumes about 1.3 GB per person.

Assuming an average of one one-hour meeting a day involving two people, 250 days a year, then:

  • The audio-only calls would emit 0.08 kg of CO2.
  • The standard-definition video calls would emit 0.6 kg of CO2.
  • The high-definition video calls would emit 1.1 kg of CO2.
  • The ultra-high-definition calls would emit 2.8 kg of CO2.

An average tree can absorb about 10 kg of CO2 per year. Here’s the equivalent number of people calling that would be required in order for it to be necessary to plant one tree in order to offset the pollution:

  • 270 people for audio only
  • 36 for standard-definition video
  • 18 for high-definition video
  • 7 people for ultra-high-definition video.

The average CO2 emissions from new passenger cars registered in the European Union in 2018 was 0.1204 kg of CO2 per kilometre. Thus, on a yearly basis:

  • The audio-only calls would be the equivalent of driving 0.7 of a km.
  • The standard definition video calls would be the equivalent of driving 5 km.
  • The high-definition video calls would be the equivalent of driving 9 km.
  • The ultra-high-definition calls would be the equivalent of driving 23 km.

Surprised? Probably. Although, the payoff doesn’t seem entirely unreasonable; 9 km for a year’s worth of meetings. Yet, McGovern suggests that streaming may represent no more than 5 percent of the total costs. There are also processing costs – like, saving and storing meetings, and viewing them at a later date, and what about costs relating to the devices used for the meetings?

The overall point is that digital is not necessarily green or greener. For example, what happens if far more meetings now occur online than were held offline? And more people attend these meetings – because they can; because it’s as simple as the click of a button?

Something we can do in our working life to limit the impact of digital meetings on the environment, is to be essential (holding only as many meetings as are necessary) and efficient (meeting for only as long as is necessary) – this consideration could make all the difference.

For all your energy related questions, feel free to contact the CH Systems team on 0208 302
8149 or info@chsystems.cc.

How a sustainable water strategy will save your business money

/0 Comments/in /by

The conservation of energy has been a hot topic for the last few years. The effects of global warming have forced the world to take note and take action; governments, businesses and home owners have been (correctly) burdened with the social responsibility to do what they can to reduce their carbon footprint.

Energy – gas and electricity – is an obvious expense on a balance sheet and so most businesses are naturally inclined to focus a great deal of effort on finding ways to minimise this expense. As it so happens, decisions made for economic reasons often turn out to be the sustainable route as well, a happy coincidence, but there is a cost that companies often overlook, and that is water.

Water is usually overshadowed by the price of energy but it bears hidden costs that it would benefit businesses to take note of, such as the carbon and monetary costs of supplying that water, heating it and treating it after use. In other words, water is intrinsically linked to energy use and carbon emissions – so why aren’t we trying harder to save it?

Recent estimates suggest that if we continue business as usual, global demand for water will exceed viable resources by 40 per cent by the year 2030. Policymakers are thus under pressure to tighten water regulations amidst growing concern about scarcity and pollution. As an outcome, businesses will be compelled to implement sustainable water strategies. This means recycling more water and looking at new ways in which to develop goods and services with a much smaller water footprint. And for smaller companies, awareness is a good starting point.

Martin Stuchtey, director of the McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, says that businesses need to shift to a circular economy for water:

“We need a completely new mindset of not contaminating water in the first place. We need to treat it like a durable and keep it in closed loops; or like a consumable, but return it in a way so that it is cheap or beneficial to take into second or third use.”

Companies should start to look beyond their fences; to collaborate with others – experts in the field – and encourage respective suppliers, partners, customers and others to work with them in their effort to implement water-saving plans. Industry sectors also need to join forces to manage water more efficiently, Stutchey argues:

“There might be ways that a handshake between the agriculture and industries might provide the better solution. Industrial grey water, if it’s not too contaminated, could in fact be an interesting input into agriculture. We need to go across sectors and manage water in more effective and circular ways.”

The good news is that an effective water management plan can transform the economic prospects of a business – if ever there was an incentive!

For more information on water sustainability or any plumbing-related issues feel free to contact the CH Systems team on 0208 302 8149 or info@chsystems.cc

Sources: Theguardian.com – “A sustainable water strategy is good for business”; “Six thing business needs to know about water and sustainability” and Mckinsey.com – “Rethinking the water cycle”