Cargando…

Comparative Greenhouse Gas Footprinting of Online versus Traditional Shopping for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: A Stochastic Approach

[Image: see text] Variability in consumer practices and choices is typically not addressed in comparisons of environmental impacts of traditional shopping and e-commerce. Here, we developed a stochastic model to quantify the variability in the greenhouse gas (GHG) footprints of product distribution...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shahmohammadi, Sadegh, Steinmann, Zoran J. N., Tambjerg, Lau, van Loon, Patricia, King, J. M. Henry, Huijbregts, Mark A. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Chemical Society 2020
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7081612/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32100529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06252
_version_ 1783508205555417088
author Shahmohammadi, Sadegh
Steinmann, Zoran J. N.
Tambjerg, Lau
van Loon, Patricia
King, J. M. Henry
Huijbregts, Mark A. J.
author_facet Shahmohammadi, Sadegh
Steinmann, Zoran J. N.
Tambjerg, Lau
van Loon, Patricia
King, J. M. Henry
Huijbregts, Mark A. J.
author_sort Shahmohammadi, Sadegh
collection PubMed
description [Image: see text] Variability in consumer practices and choices is typically not addressed in comparisons of environmental impacts of traditional shopping and e-commerce. Here, we developed a stochastic model to quantify the variability in the greenhouse gas (GHG) footprints of product distribution and purchase of fast-moving consumer goods (FMCGs) via three prevalent retail channels in the United Kingdom (U.K.). We found that shopping via bricks and clicks (click and fulfillment via physical store delivery) most likely decreases the GHG footprints when substituting traditional shopping, while FMCGs purchased through pure players with parcel delivery often have higher GHG footprints compared to those purchased via traditional retail. The number of items purchased and the last-mile travel distance are the dominant contributors to the variability in the GHG footprints of all three retail channels. We further showed that substituting delivery vans with electric cargo bikes can lead to a GHG emission reduction of 26% via parcel delivery. Finally, we showed the differences in the “last mile” GHG footprint of traditional shopping in the U.K. compared to three other countries (China, Netherlands, and the United States), which are primarily caused by the different shares of modes of transport (walking and by car, bus, and bike).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7081612
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher American Chemical Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70816122020-03-20 Comparative Greenhouse Gas Footprinting of Online versus Traditional Shopping for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: A Stochastic Approach Shahmohammadi, Sadegh Steinmann, Zoran J. N. Tambjerg, Lau van Loon, Patricia King, J. M. Henry Huijbregts, Mark A. J. Environ Sci Technol [Image: see text] Variability in consumer practices and choices is typically not addressed in comparisons of environmental impacts of traditional shopping and e-commerce. Here, we developed a stochastic model to quantify the variability in the greenhouse gas (GHG) footprints of product distribution and purchase of fast-moving consumer goods (FMCGs) via three prevalent retail channels in the United Kingdom (U.K.). We found that shopping via bricks and clicks (click and fulfillment via physical store delivery) most likely decreases the GHG footprints when substituting traditional shopping, while FMCGs purchased through pure players with parcel delivery often have higher GHG footprints compared to those purchased via traditional retail. The number of items purchased and the last-mile travel distance are the dominant contributors to the variability in the GHG footprints of all three retail channels. We further showed that substituting delivery vans with electric cargo bikes can lead to a GHG emission reduction of 26% via parcel delivery. Finally, we showed the differences in the “last mile” GHG footprint of traditional shopping in the U.K. compared to three other countries (China, Netherlands, and the United States), which are primarily caused by the different shares of modes of transport (walking and by car, bus, and bike). American Chemical Society 2020-02-26 2020-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7081612/ /pubmed/32100529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06252 Text en Copyright © 2020 American Chemical Society This is an open access article published under a Creative Commons Non-Commercial No Derivative Works (CC-BY-NC-ND) Attribution License (http://pubs.acs.org/page/policy/authorchoice_ccbyncnd_termsofuse.html) , which permits copying and redistribution of the article, and creation of adaptations, all for non-commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Shahmohammadi, Sadegh
Steinmann, Zoran J. N.
Tambjerg, Lau
van Loon, Patricia
King, J. M. Henry
Huijbregts, Mark A. J.
Comparative Greenhouse Gas Footprinting of Online versus Traditional Shopping for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: A Stochastic Approach
title Comparative Greenhouse Gas Footprinting of Online versus Traditional Shopping for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: A Stochastic Approach
title_full Comparative Greenhouse Gas Footprinting of Online versus Traditional Shopping for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: A Stochastic Approach
title_fullStr Comparative Greenhouse Gas Footprinting of Online versus Traditional Shopping for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: A Stochastic Approach
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Greenhouse Gas Footprinting of Online versus Traditional Shopping for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: A Stochastic Approach
title_short Comparative Greenhouse Gas Footprinting of Online versus Traditional Shopping for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: A Stochastic Approach
title_sort comparative greenhouse gas footprinting of online versus traditional shopping for fast-moving consumer goods: a stochastic approach
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7081612/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32100529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06252
work_keys_str_mv AT shahmohammadisadegh comparativegreenhousegasfootprintingofonlineversustraditionalshoppingforfastmovingconsumergoodsastochasticapproach
AT steinmannzoranjn comparativegreenhousegasfootprintingofonlineversustraditionalshoppingforfastmovingconsumergoodsastochasticapproach
AT tambjerglau comparativegreenhousegasfootprintingofonlineversustraditionalshoppingforfastmovingconsumergoodsastochasticapproach
AT vanloonpatricia comparativegreenhousegasfootprintingofonlineversustraditionalshoppingforfastmovingconsumergoodsastochasticapproach
AT kingjmhenry comparativegreenhousegasfootprintingofonlineversustraditionalshoppingforfastmovingconsumergoodsastochasticapproach
AT huijbregtsmarkaj comparativegreenhousegasfootprintingofonlineversustraditionalshoppingforfastmovingconsumergoodsastochasticapproach