Climate Change & The Carbon Challenge

Two of the greatest sustainability-related challenges that humanity faces are climate change and the dramatic decline in the productivity of natural ecosystems and the loss of biodiversity. 

The changing of the climate impacts temperature and weather patterns, continuing the current upward trend of extreme weather events. The rising temperatures and the loss of biodiversity is disrupting the delicate balance of nature that we actually kind of rely on for our own survival. 

But how did we get here?

These challenges have come about as a direct result of human activities, predominantly in the form of excess carbon emissions and the mismanagement of natural resources and systems. 

Now aside from the direct impact of human activities there has always been a fluctuation in the earth's climate. In the last 800,000 years there have been 8 distinct cycles of ice ages and warmer periods with the end of the last ice age being just under 12,000 years ago and it is within this current cycle that the beginning of the modern climate cycle and of human civilisation came to be. 

Most of these warming periods can be attributed to very slight changes in the earth orbit which in turn results in an increased amount of solar radiation experienced by the planet. This was pretty steady until the mid 1800’s when something changed. 

Just over 200 years ago, the world has undergone profound economic and technological developments, altering the structure of business, politics and society. From agricultural innovations, mass production, fossil fuel usage and infrastructure, to transport, communication, and global connectivity - the way people live and conduct business today is something a farmer in the 1800s could not have imagined.

Although the Industrial Revolution - which ultimately paved the way for industrialisation, economic growth, and countless global innovations- resulted in many benefits (including greater access to an increased range of goods and services, improved life expectancy, literacy rates, and access to opportunities), the rapid development has come at a price. 

As individual wealth increases, the desire to purchase more goods and services also increases. Over the past 50 years, the world has experienced unprecedented growth and as a result, an unprecedented deterioration of the natural resources needed to fuel this growth. 

Think about a day in your life, all the places you go, various devices and vehicles you use. The resources the company you work for use, hell the nichrome wire that is the core mechanism that allows your toaster to toast ($20 at any discount store), is made of an alloy mined from two separate places, likely on opposite sides of the world. And how many toasters have you thrown out in your lifetime?

It doesn’t take much deep thinking to realise that this resource usage on a daily basis is just immense. 

Currently, humanity uses the equivalent of 1.7 planets to provide the resources necessary to produce goods and absorb waste. This means that it takes the Earth one year and 7 months to regenerate what is used in a year! 

And it’s getting worse.

During these last 200 years, human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels have increased concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere by 40%. If unchecked, continuing emissions will warm up the planet between 2.6°C to 4.8°C by the end of this century. This would have serious implications for human societies and the natural world. 

The more we overshoot what natural processes can remove in a given year, the faster the atmospheric concentration of CO2 rises.

Ok. So it’s pretty bad. Am I to blame? Are you? Or is it just the big corporations and governments and we are just powerless pawns in this dangerous and consequential game?

Corporations produce just about everything that we buy, use, and throw away. And as such they certainly play an outsized role in this issue. 

Corporations only have the power they do because they are supported by us. 

We buy those products. We fuel the machine. But as depressing as that is it also gives away a glimpse of a possible silver lining. It means that we aren’t helpless. It means that we actually have some power here. And as technology developed further, that potential power is only getting stronger. 

And we’ll get back to that. First things first. We can’t know the damage being done by corporations or in fact the harm reduction that can be or is being done, without being able to measure it. 

As I previously mentioned human emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases – are a primary driver of climate change and present one of the world's most pressing sustainability challenges.

Now we’ve all head of Greenhouse gas emissions and probably understand the basic gist of how they impact the planet. But when looking at the greenhouse gas emissions of corporations, it’s important to break down and catagorise those emissions further, so we can get a clearer picture of what’s going on, and what activities are actually likely to make a difference.

Businesses are capable of emitting three kinds of emissions:

These are known as Scope 1, 2 & 3.

Scope 1 emissions are those that a business produces directly. These are fully within a business’s control, such as equipment, traveling, offices.

So burning fossil fuel in a fleet of your trucks rather than investing in electric vehicles for example. 

Scope 2 emissions are those that a business produces indirectly, such as electricity required for productivity, waste management…

The electricity used for charging those electric vehicles would fall into this category. 

And finally, Scope 3 emissions are those that are produced in a business’s supply chain.

Meaning those not produced by the company itself, but rather are tied up in the entire supply chain and inter-business relationships that allow your company to do what it needs to do. 

No prizes for guessing which of the three scopes is the hardest to tackle often the most significant.

For many companies Scope3 emissions represent approximately 70% of their total carbon footprint. The implication is that for a business to be Net Zero, most will have to target an emissions reduction in their supply path.

Dividing emissions into three groups is intended to help measure progress in making the huge reductions that are needed to limit global temperature rises to well below 2°C – the central aim of the Paris Agreement.

So if you’ve cutback on your use of the office printer, well done - but consider what’s contributing to your Scope 3 emissions. For Example

Digital technology accounts for 4% of total global greenhouse gas emissions – and is increasing by 9% each year

The communications industry, the backbone of digital advertising, will represent 20% of global emissions by 2025

The internet emits 1.6 billion tonnes of carbon each year – the same amount as highway vehicles globally.

In my world, the ad tech world, these Scope 3 emissions are inherently difficult to navigate and resolve. Our ecosystem is fragmented. The expanse of the supply chain feels infinite. The technology and platforms that have become our solution for navigating a fragmented ecosystem is a significant contributor to climate change.

For years we’ve been trying to optimise the supply path to balance efficiency and effectiveness – and now we need to consider a third measure of success – emissions.

In the digital media industry, the supply chain can be complicated: it isn’t just media owners and their emissions, it’s tech platforms: supply and demand-side, verification partners, ad-serving, device usage, and the list goes on.

So how should the digital media industry approach this carbon problem?

While every channel has a carbon footprint, the rapid growth of digital and a hyper-connected world has created unprecedented energy demands, meaning that digital poses a significant challenge as an industry “carbon hotspot.”

Media decarbonization means reducing the carbon intensity of media agencies’ output – that is, the media plans and placements.

Media planning is coming to the forefront as companies look to minimize their carbon footprint across their supply chain. Understanding one’s current emissions provide the foundational data for both tackling the hotspots and measuring progress.

Ok, progress. So once you’ve measured your carbon footprint then what? 

For me the focus should be first on where you can reduce your carbon emissions. There is a lot of talk about carbon offsetting but for me this is just a temporary answer, not the solution. 

The reason I don’t see it as a solution is that it is an investment in removing carbon from the atmosphere rather than reducing its production in the first place. The primary focus should be on reducing the amount of carbon created before we offset.

Think about it, the same ad can get delivered to the same publisher through fewer pipes, incurring both economic and carbon savings.

Efficient campaign management and elimination of digital waste is the foundation for a low-carbon campaign, so here are some best practices you can follow:

1. Address impression wastage. 

Capped Frequency, a standard practice for media campaigns that limits how often an ad appears, not only offers a better audience experience but reduces waste.

2. Reduce high-carbon formats. 

It may feel like an obvious statement, but anything that slows down the web experience has a heavy download weight, which equals a higher carbon footprint.

3. Reduce data waste. 

Data is energy. The more data we consume, the more emissions we produce. 

4. Supply chain optimization. 

Consider how digital advertising is bought, especially the programmatic landscape with auctions on top of auctions (now the norm due to header bidding), which creates additional unnecessary waste.

And as awareness is raised across the board to these kinds of issues and solutions, and companies are waking up to the fact that the people who actually purchase and use their products and services, ie, support their success, are increasingly more informed, we are actually beginning to see a shift.

Fiona Lloyd, global client and brand president at Dentsu media agency Carat, said her company was focussed on collaborating with media owners to identify carbon hotspots in the supply chain and actively decarbonise them, as well as working with clients to create benchmarks and cross-channel calculators. 

Dentsu has also set targets to cut carbon emissions by 46% by 2030.

Laure-Sarah Labrunie, media lead at Nestlé, said the FMCG brand had set a net zero roadmap to achieve worldwide net zero by 2050. She highlighted a test that the international advertiser had done with Impact Plus, a French company, to compare a “traditional” digital video campaign for Nescafe, with one that made “hygienic” and “pragmatic” changes to reduce carb

These changes included using mono sound instead of stereo sound, effectively cutting the energy used in audio playback in half. Implementing smarter video compression, broadcasting on Wi-fi instead of 4G, and upweighting media activity on Monday, Friday and weekends as they found broadcasting at those times had less carbon impact.

The two campaigns had the same target and storytelling and the same budget, and while the performance and reach remained the same, the carbon footprint of the second campaign was 47% lower than the “standard” one. This has led Nestle to draw up a 10 “golden rules” to apply to video campaigns’ content and broadcast to reduce their carbon footprint.”

And at our company for example we have partnered with carbon measurement organizations Cedara and Scope3. One focused on measuring and improving our own emissions, and the other those of our partners and value chain. This is a first step in a new framework aimed at re-thinking our entire operation and implementing models that will reduce all of our scope emissions significantly.

Climate change is emerging as a major challenge for modern society. The Digital Media Industry as we’ve seen is a big contributor. Government, business, and wider society are already being affected and we all have a role to play in tackling it.

I want to leave you with the following questions:

Think of a scope 3 emission in your personal/professional life, and something small you could change that would positively impact your emissions?

What are the kinds of conversations are you having with people in your personal & professional life surrounding this topic?

Where have you noticed some of these emission reduction efforts in companies that you interact with?

Think about 1 or all of them, and then if you like, record them quickly, just on your voice memos or whatever app you have handy on your phone, and email them to us. We are really interested to hear what you have to say, and we will even feature some of the responses on a future episode as a discussion point.

Send an email to me at podcast@the-digital-distillery.com or just get in touch through one of our channels if you would like to send some other way.

That's it for today's episode of Green About Media. I look forward to hearing from you and you can catch up again in two weeks when we are diving into the Digital Carbon Footprint, as well as talking about Carbon handprints.