I used to ride my bicycle for the climate. My cycling helmet was my badge of honour. I told myself that if I didn’t drive, I would emit less carbon dioxide and slow down the climate crisis. It’s the same logic that I assume many people apply to veganism, consumer choices, or other lifestyle changes.
However, when I did the math to quantify my impact, I realized how misguided I was. I’ve come to realize that personal lifestyle changes, however noble they may be, are a misdirection of effort — and exactly what fossil fuel companies want us to do.
The history of the carbon footprint
I assume everyone has probably heard about carbon footprints. But how did this concept enter our vocabulary?
The concept of measuring the environmental cost of our lifestyles has existed since the 1990s, but rose in popularity after 2004. That is when petroleum and gas company giant British Petroleum Amoco (BP), popularized the term “carbon footprint,” and introduced an online carbon footprint calculator for individual consumers.
The initiative was a resounding success. Newspapers ran hundreds of stories on consumer choice in response to the climate crisis, and “Carbon footprint” became the 2007 Oxford UK Word of the Year. As I’m sure many of you can attest to, it became part and parcel of science education in Ontario to talk about your carbon footprint. By getting the public to think about their consumption choices, BP somehow had finally done something good for the climate.
Or so it seemed.
The individualized and consumer-focused carbon calculator shifted the focus from corporate responsibility to individual responsibility. The effect of this is twofold. First, it misdirects people’s focus from the real culprit of emissions: fossil fuel companies.
Many harmful industries, such as oil and gas, have used deflecting tactics similar to those of the plastic industry. The plastic industry, for example, promotes individual recycling as a solution to plastic waste rather than addressing the root issue of single-use plastic production — despite 8 million metric tons of plastic still entering our oceans each year.
Secondly, I believe that the concept of a carbon footprint has the potential to hinder any sort of meaningful climate action. The insistence that we must live less conveniently alienates people from real climate action. Try telling a motorhead to give up their car, then try asking them to support environmental reforms. I don’t think that will go well.
In this way, the carbon footprint and calculator is yet another oil industry campaign to resist and delay life-saving climate regulations.
Carbon calculations
It may seem that with a problem as severe as the climate crisis, every little bit counts. But the numbers say otherwise. According to Oxfam, an independent British organization focusing on alleviating poverty, if you divide carbon emissions by income, the richest one per cent of earners emit over 15 per cent of global emissions or nine per cent of the carbon budget: the maximum levels of carbon dioxide the world can produce while limiting global warming.
That’s more than the total emissions of the European Union.
Even if the lowest 90 per cent of earners dropped their emissions to zero tomorrow, the richest 10 per cent would use up the entire carbon budget before 2030.
The same phenomenon can be seen when we divide emissions along the lines of industry versus individual. During the COVID-19 pandemic, when virtually everyone stopped driving, global emissions only dropped six per cent. Industries kept grinding on, accounting for the remaining majority.
So what do we do?
It’s clear to me that if we approach the climate crisis as consumers, we have no real power. But when we approach the crisis as a collective of citizens, that’s when things can change. Coming together and demanding change is what makes a difference. Climate solutions like renewable energy, electric vehicles, and forest conservation already exist. We just need the political will to implement them on a global scale.
When scientists discovered the hole in our ozone layer, when acid rain threatened our forests, when smog choked the streets of Los Angeles — no one drove less. But if people sounded the alarm and pushed for systemic change, we could win corporate regulations that reduce human impact on the environment.
The climate crisis is no different. I believe that the only way we can make real progress is to come together to demand regulations that safeguard our health and future. Protest, write, debate, demand. And most important of all: vote. To get the world off fossil fuels, we need to elect climate-serious governments, not drive less.
So, by all means, ride a bike instead of a car. Go vegan, shop green, fly less — these can all give a resounding feeling of control over an issue that is out of our individual hands.
But if you want to make a real difference, you know what to do.
Constantine Vrachas Matthaios is a second-year student at New College studying human geography and Book & Media Studies. He is the VP Communications Assistant at Regenesis UTSG and a Lead Copy-editor for The Varsity.
