PAS 2050 is the new UK standard designed to provide a uniform method for businesses to calculate the carbon footprint of their goods and services, so that they can be compared within the same parameters. 

Products can be labelled with a “muddy footprint” logo stating the carbon footprint is X amount of CO2 per unit of the product.

This standard is a first in the world and a good first step towards internationally accepted standards, which should be the ultimate goal.

The Carbon Trust introduces the standard saying that “no single consistent method for calculating carbon footprints has existed until now”. This may be a bit of an exaggeration. There are many self-consistent ways of calculating the carbon footprint. Once the set of parameters is decided, what is to be included and excluded, the calculation is straightforward and consistent. In fact it is so basic that it doesn’t require much scientific input.

The standard is by definition a convention out of the many possible ways to measure the carbon footprint. In fact, this particular choice leaves out much of what should be arguably included. For example, some would argue that transport of consumers to retail outlets is part of a product’s carbon footprint; or that a company’s non-manufacture related footprint, such as advertising, marketing, etc, should also be passed on as part of the carbon footprint of the final product. However adopting a benchmark is necessary, especially to prevent misleading emission reduction claims; this way customer is able to compare objectively.

The question is whether PAS 2050 will be of help or hindrance. Its weakness is that, like the briefly fashionable “food miles”, it is only one part of the picture. A customer, given the choice between two apparently similar products of different carbon footprint, is likely to choose the one with the lowest one. However, would he choose the same product if he was told that it was manufactured through child labour in Asia, or that its manufacture contributed to water shortages in the Third World? 

The standard tells us nothing about the ecological footprint of the product (toxicity, acidification), the human cost in producing it (labour standards), water use, sustainability, its impact on biodiversity. The list goes on.

It is the equivalent of disclosing a product’s salt and no other nutritional content. We all know that some low-fat products are high in calories and disclosing one single element can give a very misleading picture. That is why nutritionally it makes sense to itemise a key list, such as calories, protein, sugars, fats, saturated fats and salt.  

The environmental impact should be disclosed through a breakdown of sustainability factors. The carbon footprint is one of them. The choice of other parameters and standards should include biodegradability, toxicity, use of water and resources, etc. Only then can customers compare products with information about the whole picture.

An additional question mark on the standard is that it doesn’t take into account carbon offsetting. I.e. if a product’s carbon footprint is 150g of CO2, it is no good to say that it is zero just because you have offset the emissions. But a manufacturer can add an additional information box on the label explaining that the carbon footprint disclosed has been offset.

For example, a juice drink with a carbon footprint of 100g of CO2 in a biodegradable container, whose emissions have been totally offset (therefore sold as carbon neutral at the point of sale) is an ecologically superior product than a similar product with a carbon footprint of 50g of CO2 (not offset) in a recyclable container. However the PAS 2050 label on its own would seem to indicate otherwise.

PAS 2050 tells us the damage we are inflicting by contributing to global warming, it does not provide the solution. It is not clear whether the customer is supposed to feel guilty about these emissions as they read the label, and ponder the damage they are causing? Wouldn’t it be more constructive for companies to fully offset their operations and sell carbon neutral goods and services rather than passing on guilt to their customers?

One positive aspect of PAS 2050 is that it brings honesty to the process, so that companies calculate their carbon footprint accurately and often it gives them food for thought and reflect on how to lower their emissions (one shocking example of butter croissants manufacture in the “Guide to PA 2050” by BSI describes that the carbon footprint of 1 tonne of croissants was 1.2 tonnes of CO2).