No commuting, reduced use of office equipment and less business travel. But does working from home actually serve to lower your organisation’s carbon footprint?
The short answer is: it depends.
For those organisations looking to lower emissions, there is an argument to say that remote working is a great way to help organisations reduce their environmental impact and take a stronger stance on sustainability. Indeed, according to analysis carried out back in 2020 by the International Energy Agency, it was found that around a fifth of global jobs could easily be carried out at home at least three days a week – which would constitute a saving of circa 80 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year.
However, many climate scientists have contested that this assertion is far too narrow and short sighted. When we widen the scope of emissions to assess the impact of additional energy consumption at home, variations in commuter travel, the shift of fleets to Electric Vehicles and the impact of seasonal variations, the picture becomes a lot more complex.
It can be argued that shifting emissions out of an organisation’s carbon footprint and onto employees’ domestic footprint is merely transferring the problem; not tackling the climate crisis. Or, to put this into terms more relevant to those measuring against the Greenhouse Gas Protocol – moving emissions out of Scope 1 and 2 into Scope 3.
So, what are some of the considerations we need to take into account when ascertaining whether working from home is better for carbon emissions?
The industry
First and foremost, it depends on the type of business or organisation we are measuring emissions for. Is it an energy-intensive manufacturing company or an office, a retail store or a hospitality venue? This question will initially dictate whether it is at all feasible for some or all staff to work from home but it will also have a bearing on how changing the working model serves to reduce energy consumption.
Size and location of the organisation
Let’s take an office-based business, for example. If there are 1,000 employees all housed within modern premises, it is highly likely that the office will provide a more energy efficient space for workers than 1,000 homes all being used throughout the working day between 9am and 5pm.
Of course, if there are other occupants who would typically be at home during the day – perhaps another relative who is also sharing the space – then the emissions attributable to the business will be reduced significantly. But it is also worth noting that insulation requirements for offices and other commercial premises are much more stringent than for domestic settings. Where employers have invested in solar panels or other renewable on-site energy sources, this can also contribute to reduced emissions.
Depending on where the organisation is based, commuter emissions may also vary dramatically. After all, 1,000 employees walking to work versus 1,000 employees driving an average of 15 miles to (and from) work on a daily basis will produce substantially different carbon footprints.
While it is currently easy for organisations to overlook the issue of commuter-related emissions by simply meeting Scope 1 and Scope 2 requirements of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, any organisation committed to making real-world reductions should be accounting for commuting and its associated emissions under Scope 3.
Equipment and appliances
Using a laptop at home or in the office may make little difference but if we consider the disparity between 1,000 home printers all on standby 24/7 against one large company printer, for example, we can again see how a more typical office environment may be more efficient. However, this saving may again be negated by organisations with a paperless office policy or particularly efficient digital communications tools.
The time of year
As anyone who has ever noticed the disparity between winter and summer energy usage in their home will know, heating and powering a home during the colder months requires significantly more energy. During the summer months it’s likely that homeowners will leave the central heating off and only use artificial lighting late at night. Conversely, in the winter months it may be that a homeworker never has the heating switched off and has the lights switched on even during the middle of the day.
When we take these elements into account it may even be relevant for organisations to note that the emissions balance between office and home can vary over the course of a 12-month period. Indeed, there’s a case to be made that office-based work in the winter and home working in the summer may be optimal in some circumstances.
Measuring and reporting is key
With so many variables to consider it may seem incredibly difficult to establish whether remote working is better for carbon emissions? However, it is critical for organisations to benchmark their emissions – catering for all variables, both at home and on premises – in order to understand how improvements can be made to the working model in order to reduce energy consumption and lower emissions.
Fortunately, at SmartCarbon we have made it simple to calculate emissions for those working from home using the methodology first established in the Ecoact whitepaper. This document that has recently been adopted by the UK government as a guideline for working from home emissions factors. By inputting either the number of employees or hours worked from home, the SmartCarbon Calculator utilises the extensive data captured for UK businesses in this whitepaper and can be used within our Calculator tool to help organisations to determine how remote, hybrid or office-based work affect their emissions across Scopes 1, 2 and 3 over the course of a 12-month period.
Similarly, we can assist organisations to benchmark emissions related to supply chain activities and commuting, even without historic data to hand. This can be done via national commute statistics and Standard Industry Classification (SIC) emissions data published annually by the Office for National Statistics.
Not only does this facility enable organisations to measure and report on their current carbon footprint with greater ease; it also supports them to track progress over time and measure improvements made as a result of changing working practices.
An important part of this process is ensuring that staff feel empowered and accountable for the organisation’s emissions. Working hard to educate them on the important of efficiency initiatives and the overall strategy to reach net zero targets will ultimately help to ensure that they buy in to the organisation’s plans and are motivated to play their part.
Ready to calculate your emissions? Get in touch.