Environmental impact of Gifts In Kind Tom Keffer, Phd Senior Advisor, Mercy Corps This presentation available at

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind2 Approach Bounding the problem Assumptions Six different case studies –Two in detail Conclusions Lessons Learned

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind3 Bounding the problem Impacts we could consider –Energy impact –CO 2 emissions –End-of-life issues –Packaging

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind4 Operation Boundaries Direct emissions –Emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the agency / company Electricity indirect –Emissions from the generation of electricity consumed by the agency / company Other indirect –Emissions done on behalf of the agency / company Guidelines from The Greenhouse Gas Protocol by the World Resources InstituteThe Greenhouse Gas Protocol

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind5 Assumptions CO2 emissions g CO2-e/(tonne – km) Equiv Efficiency (tonne – km) / L Ship (1) Rail (1) Truck (long-haul) (*) Truck (short-haul) (2) Truck (India) (3) Pickup Air (long-haul) (1) (1) DEFRA Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions (2) Faiz, et al.: Mercedes 1217 (7 tonne) (3) Faiz, et al.: Tata 1201 (5 tonne) (*) See appendix

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind6 Case study #1 One 40’ container, 16,898 kg (~37,000 lbs) Hygiene & School kits Baltimore, MD to Cobán, Guatemala, where it was then distributed by Mercy Corps

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind7 Case #1: Route Leg 1 Leg 2 Leg 3 Leg 4

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind8 Case #1, cont’d Leg 1: Baltimore to Port Everglades (~1,600 km) –Truck Freight class 60 Cost: ~$1,700 CO 2 : 1.8 tonnes (6 mpg, 16 T load) –Rail <5600 ft³ capacity (very small for rail) Cost ~$3,300 CO 2 : 0.7 tonnes

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind9 Case #1, cont’d Leg 2: Port Everglades to Puerto Barrios, Guatemala (1,600 km) –Ship CO tonnes Leg 3: Puerto Barrios to Cobán (320 km) –Truck CO 2 : 0.8 tonnes Leg 4: Cobán to local schools –Pickup Truck Alta Verapaz Department is 8686 km 2 Assume average trucking distance 50 km one way CO 2 : 1.1 tonnes

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind10 Case #1: summary

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind11 But,… The materials were purchased from retail stores throughout the USA, then shipped to the warehouse in MD! Assumptions –Each kit weighs about 1kg –One trip to the store per 25 kits –680 trips

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind12 But, … cont’d Collection – mpg each –20 km RT each –326 gallons of gas –2.8 tonnes of CO 2 Shipment –680 packages 1,000 km each –~1.4 tonnes of CO 2

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind13 Now look at our graph…

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind14 Case #1: summary Dominated by aggregation and delivery to Maryland Leg SUV2.8 T34% Leg UPS1.4 T17% Leg 11.7 T21% Leg 20.4 T5% Leg 30.8 T10% Leg 41.1 T13% Total8.2 T100%

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind15 Case study #2 95 boxes of condoms 1,002 kg Donation of surplus product –Would have been destroyed

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind16 Case #2: route Leg 1 Leg 2 Leg 3 Leg 4

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind17 Case #2: route Leg 1 –Trucked from Eufaula, Alabama to Toronto, Canada –1,800 km –0.11 T CO 2 Leg 2 –Air shipped Toronto to London –5,800 km –3.3 T CO 2 Leg 3 –London to Nairobi –6,800 km –3.9 T CO 2 Leg 4 –Trucked from Nairobi to IDP camp in Nakuru –160 km –0.02 T CO 2

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind18 Case 2: summary

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind19 Case #2: summary Nearly as much CO 2 (7.3 Tonnes) as Case #1 (8.2 Tonnes) despite weighing 5% as much –(although the shipment did go 4 times farther)

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind20 All cases Project Ref #ProductShipping CostVolume & WeightCO 2 emissions (MC 364) Guatemala Hygiene & School Kits $3,280 (Local collection, long-haul truck and ocean freight) 1 x 40’ container 16,898 KG 8.2 T (MC 477) Kenya Male latex condoms$4,560 (Long-haul truck and air freight) 95 boxes: 18 ¼” x 11 ¾” x 15” 1,002 KG 7.3 T (MC 156) Nepal Nike apparel, footwear & equipment $4,719 (Ocean freight) 1 x 20’ container 10,206 KG 2.3 T (MC 316, 387) Mongolia Refurbished computers $3,901 (Ocean freight, rail, “India” truck) 1 x 20’ container 4,091 KG 2.3 T (MC 499) Iraq PharmaceuticalsFreight donated – value unclear (air freight) 72 cartons 950 KG 2.4 T (MC 454) Liberia Recycled latex paint & new paint brushes $7,460 (Rail, ocean freight, “India” truck) 1 x 20’ container 9,881 KG 5.6 T

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind21 Cost vs CO 2 emissions Assumes $3/gal gas + $10/UPS shipment

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind22 Computers: recycle or destroy? Energy –One desktop computer requires 240 kg of fossil fuels (about 0.74 T CO 2, if it all went in the atmosphere) –Four times what it will use in its lifetime Lead - Older monitors can contain 4-8 lbs. Mercury - Flat panel displays, wiring boards PVCs – about 14 lbs in an average computer –Dioxin formed if it is burned Barium –Used on the front panel of a CRT Conclusion: –Way better to recycle and ship to Mongolia than buy a new one!

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind23 Condoms: recycle or destroy? Made from natural latex –Nearly a sink of CO 2 –Natural: 1.78 kg CO 2 -E / kg Perspective: –2.5 T of fuel was used to move 1 T of condoms to Kenya that took 1.8 T of CO 2 to produce

Lessons learned

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind25 Lessons learned - 1 Air shipment trumps everything “Last mile” problem –Energy and CO 2 budget for shipping can be dominated by pickup and delivery logistics Long haul hardly matters if done by ship or rail –Done by inefficient transport modes Pickups and “India” trucks –“Spoke” problem Shipments broken up into smaller, less efficient, packaging Net energy savings only for energy-intensive products

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind26 Lessons learned - 2 Price is a reasonable metric of the environmental cost of shipping –About 0.6 tonnes of CO 2 / $1k –But, gets distorted Well intentioned donations Pricing set at the margin Media needs Early ownership of GIK helps –But, limits opportunity to mix and match

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind27 Organization boundaries redux Are we responsible for emissions done on our behalf by transportation sectors? –What about situations with “zero marginal CO 2 cost? Case study: IKEA –66% of emissions are from customer travel! –Influenced store location decisions, home delivery options Double counting possible

Appendices

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind29 Resources Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative In particular, their Corporate Accounting And Reporting Standard: Red, White and “Green”: the Cost of Carbon in the Global Wine Trade DEFRA Guidelines for Company Reporting on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Annexes updated July annexes.pdf annexes.pdf

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind30 Truck efficiency Long-haul semi in the US gets 6-8 mpg Carry tonnes Works out to gCO2/(km-tonne) I used 63 (light loads, dead heading)

Environmental Impact of Gifts In Kind31 CO 2 vs. Carbon Most emissions in the literature are quoted in metric tonnes of CO 2 -equiv (t CO 2 -eq) –Other GHGs converted to equivalents of CO 2 –Metric tonnes –This has been the trend A few quotes are in metric tonnes of carbon equivalents –Useful in calculations involving carbon cycles –Multiply by 3.67 to convert to t CO 2 -eq