A better way to measure individual climate action | CBC Climate Change News

Welcome to our weekly newsletter where we highlight environmental trends and solutions that are moving us to a more sustainable world.

Hi, it’s Inayat from CBC’s climate unit. I have long been skeptical about the idea of individual responsibility for climate change, especially in the face of government and corporate inaction. This week, I have a Q&A with a U.K. researcher proposing a carbon capability score, which he says is a better way to account for all the choices we make (or can make) to fight climate change.

This week:

• A better way to measure individual climate action
• The Big Picture: A million satellites and our atmosphere
• Skwah First Nation powers the community with solar energy

A better way to measure individual climate action

The concept of a person’s carbon footprint has long been controversial in the climate movement. The term was popularized through an ad campaign by the British oil giant BP in 2004, but in the decades since has been seen as a way of shifting responsibility for climate change from corporations and governments onto individuals.

Researchers in the U.K. have proposed a new carbon capability measure, which they say is a better way to score individual climate action. By having people fill out a wide-ranging survey that asks them questions about their relationships, jobs and other areas of their lives, the researchers hope to build a much more comprehensive — and useful — accounting of everything a person is able to do to fight climate change.

I caught up with Sam Hampton, senior researcher at the University of Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute, to talk about the paper he co-authored.

Inayat Singh: What got you interested in coming up with a new capability measure?

Sam Hampton: Actually, we know that people’s impact on the environment can be positive and negative, and also a lot of our carbon footprint is outside our direct control. 

An example is if you rent your house from a landlord, then it’s not your decision whether you upgrade the efficiency of the building or you put solar panels on the roof. You have to negotiate with your landlord. If you live in the countryside and there’s no good public transport, you rely on a car. 

This begins to speak to this idea of structure and agency. Agency is this idea of what people have free choice and free will over, and structure are all the things that make that either easier or more difficult. 

Carbon capability is this lovely framework for building all of that together and looking more holistically at the role of individuals within the context of climate change and what makes them more carbon capable.

IS: How is carbon capability different from a carbon footprint?

SH: Carbon footprints are really effective tools at telling us what our direct personal emissions are in these four areas: energy, food, transport and what I call shopping, or things we buy.

But what’s not included there are things like whether we vote or whether we work in climate change in our job or whether we try to talk about it to our friends and family and whether we raise awareness and volunteer. 

There are all kinds of other things that we can do besides just thinking about our own carbon footprint. So carbon capability incorporates those other elements, too.

IS: How do you hope a carbon capability measure can be used?

SH: I do see it as kind of replacing the carbon footprint.

An example is if there’s a particular community that is interested in understanding how they are different from others. If they use the tool and then they say, “Oh look, together, we as a group are actually really good in these ways? And actually we perform less [well] in these ways. So then collectively, as a community, what could we do to work on that?” 

An example is the Women’s Institute in the U.K., which is a voluntary membership organization that’s got 200,000 members. So it’s quite a big civil society group. 

And they are quite a unique demographic — women, but they also tend to be much older, usually a bit more wealthy.

It was really interesting comparing their results, because when it came to things like reusing clothes, repairing things, they scored really well. These are people who have got sewing skills, repair skills. 

But then they also fly more frequently than other people in the country. So they need to think about that. 

Ultimately, [the carbon capability measure] could just be a tool for engaged people thinking about how they could do better for climate change.

— Inayat Singh

Old issues of What on Earth? are here. The CBC News climate page is here. 

Check out our podcast and radio show. In our newest episode: A coffee farmer shares the raw reality: climate change is shifting the world’s “bean belt.” CBC’s Anand Ram and Inayat Singh introduce us to fifth-generation farmer Chalo Fernandez, who’s using social media to let people know how increasing heat is affecting his beans. We’ll break down what the science says and why these farmers are the most resilient innovators in the game.

What On Earth drops new podcast episodes every Wednesday and Saturday. You can find them on your favourite podcast app or on demand at CBC Listen. The radio show airs Sundays at 11 a.m., 11:30 a.m. in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Check the CBC News Climate Dashboard for live updates on record-breaking weather and current conditions across the country. Set your location to find out how today’s temperatures compare to historical trends. 

Reader feedback

Last week, Emily Chung wrote about Ontario companies that are building solar in Africa, following up on an earlier article on rooftop solar on the continent.

Brenda Walker wrote: “I hope this project [Solar Panda’s rent-to-own rooftop solar systems] goes on to make solar power available in many countries beyond Africa, but what an excellent start. Really heartening to read. Thank you for sharing.”

Write us at whatonearth@cbc.ca (and send photos there too!)

The Big Picture: A million satellites and our atmosphere

(Michael Seeley)

I love space, and I’ve always loved watching rocket launches. But back in the day, you’d see, on average, four to five shuttle launches a year, seven max. Today, there are hundreds a year, from players all around the world, although most are from the U.S. 

SpaceX is leading the charge, lofting on average about 50 of its Starlink satellites a week. The company has now filed a proposal to the Federal Communications Commission to launch a million data centres (read: satellites) into orbit around Earth. While no time frame is given, it has many scientists worried, for several reasons. First, there will be millions of satellites interfering with the night sky, which will likely also have repercussions for observatories around the world. 

But there’s also the environmental issue. There will likely be thousands of launches in order to put that many satellites into orbit, and these launches can deposit black soot in the atmosphere, which could further cause warming. As well, some of those satellites will end their likely five-year lifespan burning up in the atmosphere. Studies have shown that unusual metals are left behind when this happens. The long-term consequences of this SpaceX proposal aren’t fully understood — and that is exactly what worries scientists. 

“It’s daunting because we’re doing this sort of experiment with the atmosphere when we don’t really know what the result will be,” said Eloise Marais, a professor of atmospheric chemistry and air quality at University College London.

– Nicole Mortillaro

Hot and bothered: Provocative ideas from around the web

• Want a green burial? Families are trying to break down the barriers that make it difficult to get one, especially if your loved one dies during the winter, The Narwhal reports.

• Did you know you can burn metal powders instead of fossil fuels, and that some rockets do? Now that technology is being tested in industrial boilers to supply the hot water and steam needed to produce everything from beer and baby formula to paper and plastic resins, without emitting CO2.

• It was a snowy winter in the eastern half of Canada, and many communities have struggled with what to do with the salt and pollutant-laden snow. The Guardian profiles Toronto’s solution — gathering the snow into 10-storey piles and then melting it — and its impacts on local ecosystems.

Skwah First Nation powers the community with solar energy

When visitors come to Skwah First Nation near Chilliwack, B.C., community energy champion Slade Williams says the nation’s mission to shrink its carbon footprint is easily observable — because you can see it from the rooftops.

“It is great that everybody who drives into our community, or even near our community, they can see the solar,” said Williams.

The band recently finished installing solar panel arrays on its community hall, an administration building and its preschool.

Williams said the project, three years in the making, will help reduce the community’s carbon emissions and save money on its B.C. Hydro bills.

“We want to show others in the Fraser Valley and the Stó:lō territory that this is the way to be,” he said.

A BC Hydro spokesperson said a July 2024 rebate program for solar panels in Indigenous communities was so popular the utility paused it by December that year.

“We received hundreds of applications in the first six months from nations all across the province,” said Susie Rieder.

“And because of that high demand, the Indigenous offer is currently paused, just while we work on reintroducing an updated version.”

In lieu of that program, Rieder said communities can still apply to the utility’s mainstream solar and battery programs.

Most remote communities still reliant on diesel

Skwah First Nation is on the BC Hydro grid and can take advantage of “self-generation.”

“The amount of power that we use will be offset with the amount of power that we generate,” said Williams.

Meanwhile, many off-grid reserves and communities are still reliant on diesel, which remains a fuel with numerous uses.

“It’s quite a remarkable energy source, but it can be very expensive and it can be dirty and also noisy,” said Heather Exner-Pirot, director of energy, natural resources and environment at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.

“And so there’s always a desire to reduce dependence on diesel. But again, having all those qualities in another energy source has been difficult to find.”

Williams said cost is often the biggest hurdle to pivoting from diesel in remote communities.

“I think that some of the barriers might be … having them financed,” he said.

“Remote locations tend to be dependent either on diesel, or if they have electricity access but no natural gas, access will be dependent on propane, or even wood-burning,” said Exner-Pirot.

“It’s a matter of trying to, you know, maintain that mix of reliability and sustainability, but also affordability, which is obviously a huge challenge for most remote communities.”

Future energy solutions in B.C.

University of British Columbia chemical engineering professor Naoko Ellis has been mapping out renewable energy options for B.C. communities with Accelerating Community Energy Transformation (ACET), a team based at the University of Victoria.

The team aims to scale up clean energy technology.

“There’s solar, wind, as we know, and biomass — a lot of biomass in B.C. — as well as geothermal,” said Ellis. “Coastal communities can look at tidal or hydropower in other areas. And because it’s place-based, it kind of comes to really community-specific solutions.”

Exner-Pirot said burgeoning nuclear technology could also be a possibility for remote Indigenous communities one day. 

“The new one that’s kind of coming on board … is small modular reactors, or normally in this case, it’ll be a micro-reactor as small as five megawatts,” she said.

Ellis sees growing potential for more Indigenous-owned and -operated energy projects.

“We can think about what does ownership look like and what are the new forms that we need to think about in terms of energy systems?”

— Kier Junos

Thanks for reading.  We’ll be taking a short Spring Break next week, and will be back on March 26. In the meantime, if you have questions, criticisms or story tips, please send them to whatonearth@cbc.ca.

What on Earth? comes straight to your inbox every Thursday. 

Editors: Emily Chung and Hannah Hoag | Logo design: Sködt McNalty