Online Shopping May Actually Increase Pollution

destinyland writes "British researchers have reached a startling conclusion. Unless online shoppers order 25 items at a time, they're polluting more than if they shopped at their local mall. An environmental benefit only occurs 'if online shopping replaces 3.5 traditional shopping trips, or if 25 orders are delivered at the same time, or, if the distance traveled to where the purchase is made is more than 50 kilometers. Shopping online does not offer net environmental benefits unless these criteria are met.' The study was conducted by Newcastle University's Institution of Engineering and Technology, which blames the environmental impact of transportation, warning that 'policy makers must do their homework to ensure that rebound effects do not negate the positive benefits of their policy initiatives.' But one technology site notes the study was conducted in Britain, which could have an impact on its conclusions."

Comments

Begs the question.

[RightSaidFred99]

Who shops online for environmental reasons?

ultimate low impact

[jewishbaconzombies]

The moral of the story? Save the planet. Kill yourself.

Re:ultimate low impact

[compro01]

Do you have any idea how much gas people will burn to get to your funeral? Or how much GHGs will be released to make your coffin? Or methane your rotting corpse will release or how much energy would be used to cremate it?

Re:ultimate low impact

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you have any idea how much gas people will burn to get to your funeral? Or how much GHGs will be released to make your coffin? Or methane your rotting corpse will release or how much energy would be used to cremate it?

You're right...kill all your friend and family first, eat them all, then kill yourself by jumping into a tank full of barracuda.

Re:ultimate low impact

[couchslug]

"The moral of the story? Save the planet. Kill yourself."

Do I get pollution tax credits for killing others?

Kind of short on details

[dracocat]

The article talked a lot about transportation costs. Were they just comparing transportation costs? What about the environmental impact of keeping the A/C running and lights going all day in the store?

Very very short on details.

Disagree

[commodore64_love]

The postwoman is already driving past my house every day. It takes no extra gasoline for her to carry that latest Amazon book or Electronic Boutique game with her.

Plus the freight trucks that move this crap across the country burn far less gas than if we all drove to the store. ~10,000 boxes carried in one truck is more efficient than 10,000 car trips.

Re:Disagree

[jrumney]

Plus the freight trucks that move this crap across the country burn far less gas than if we all drove to the store.

Apparently goods are teleported into stores, so those large freight trucks are only involved when you buy things online.

Really, the only variable is you driving to the store for a single purchase, vs a delivery driver including your house in their rounds (a slight detour from what they would have done anyway).

Re:Merry olde England, a factor? Certes, ye jest!

[gilleain]

Last time I was in London (some years now), I was appalled at the traffic, and the disorganized nature of the city's layout

Well, we tried burning it down in 1666, but that didn't quite work. Paris did a better job, but they had Napoleon.

How many orders ship on one UPS truck?

[crovira]

Its not the end purchaser who realizes some environmental benefits, its the shipper.

Its not about Joe Schmoe's environmental impact, its about Amazon and UPS and Fed Ex and USPS combined carbon footprint versus the environmental impact of all the Joe Schmoes out there.

This was bogus science starting from a false premise.