July 5, 2007
Carbon Footprints Need Annual Updates
Starbucks has calculated the carbon footprint of its North American locations only once, in 2003, when it had approximately 3,700 stores in North America, Forbes reports. It now has 6,281 U.S. company-owned stores and more than 1500 international locations.
At that time, Starbucks emitted 295,000 tons of carbon into the atmosphere. Starbucks decided to leave out an additional 81,000 tons of carbon dioxide it emitted by transporting coffee materials and disposing of solid waste.
That 295,000-ton figure gives Starbucks a small carbon footprint, among a list of about 1,000 companies compiled by the Carbon Disclosure Project. Near the top of the list is American Electric Power with 146.5 million tons of carbon emissions. Next in line are oil and gas companies Royal Dutch/Shell and British Petroleum with 105 million tons and 92 million tons.
Comparatively, General Electric’s 12.4 million ton footprint makes it a medium-size emitter. The smallest carbon emitters weighed in at a few thousand tons. Most of the lower footprints belong to insurance companies, retailers and banks.
The EPA asks companies to check their numbers annually. Both Intel and Sun Microsystems, for example, do just that.
Advertisers
Enhance Sustainability. Improve Profitability.
Learn how at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>
EFFECTIVELY MANAGE WATER COMPLIANCE
Understand how increased enforcement may affect your company. Find out more >>
EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st
CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>
Join the Discussion
Recent Daily News [ see all ]
- 11/06/2009
- 11/05/2009
- 11/04/2009
- Emissions Intensity Falling Globally
- JohnsonDiversey Ups GHG Reduction Target to 25%
- Sainsbury’s Offers Free London Electric Car Charging
- Carbon Trading Could Trigger a ‘Sub-prime Style’ Economic Crash
- Peabody, Exxon Accused of Undermining Climate Talks
- BMW, Toyota, Ford Tout Eco-cars
- In ‘Apathy Gap,’ Energy Efficiency at Home Ranks Low
- China Pushes for CO2 Storage, Not Emissions Reductions
- Clean Tech VC Funding On Rebound, Up 50% Since 2nd Quarter
- IECC Building Code Recommendations Add Up to 30% in Energy Efficiency Gains
- Disney Buys $7M in Reforestation Offsets, a Corporate Record
- McKesson to Save $300K Via Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
- Sprint to Save $2.1M With Eco-Friendly Packaging
- U.S. Export-Import Bank Adopts Carbon Policy to Support Renewable Energy
- Greening the Automotive Supply Chain
- Yokohama Rubber Cuts GHG Emissions 13.4% in 2008
- Electronics Industry Lawsuit Called ‘Attack on States’ Rights’
- Wal-Mart Adding LEDs to 650 Stores
- One Committee Down for Senate Climate Bill, Five More to Go
- EU Poised to Give Heavy Industry Free Carbon Permits
- ResponsibleTravel.com Scuttles Carbon Offsetting Option
- U.S. Cap-and-Trade Creates Winners and Losers among Largest Emitters
- DOE Awards $155M to Make Industrial Sector More Energy Efficient
- System Upgrades Power Up Energy Savings for Hotels
- Xerox Cuts GHG Emissions by 20% from 2002
- Waste Management Landfill Gas Project Complete
- Intel, Pepsi, Kohl’s Stay Atop Green Power Partnership list
- Wal-Mart Thinks Big With Smaller Stores
- Despite Critics, Gore ‘Proud’ to Invest in Green Firms
- Metal Recyclers Spar Over Ship Recycling Site
Industry Voices [ see all ]
A Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Partnership
Brad Cashaw
Vice President
Quaker Foods and Snacks Supply Chain and Sustainability
Forest Carbon Core to Climate Change Deal
Chris Elliott
Forest Carbon Initiative Lead
World Wildlife Fund
VCS and CarbonFix Tops in Review of Forestry Carbon Standards
Paulo Lopes
Carbon Management Consultant
Carbon Clear






Reader Comments
Carbon footprints won’t change under the scheme of carbon offset purchasing. I’ll give Starbucks credit, because they don’t have the individual site footprint, to install anything but solar, and it would be difficult to justify. But the rest of the corporate players that are purchasing carbon credits, and bragging about it, need to know that soon, consumers will know this is just green publicity, and they will be offended by it. When is someone of stature going to come forward and say, checkbook environmentalism doe not reduce you carbon footprint? Carbon doesn’t magically disappear when you purchase carbon offsets, it just provides soap box time, opportunity to tell the world how wonderful you are, look at me, holding a handfull of carbon offset credits in front of your smokestack, give me a break. Companies should only be allowed to purchase carbon offsets, that have actually installed renewables, like geothermal and solar. This is such a farse, American’s are so gullible, reduction of carbon has taken a back seat to itself, carbon offsets are a very dangerous misleading fine example of our ignorance in renewables. And the public is onboard,hook,line and sinker.
Brian Mello | July 5th, 2007