Some time ago, we looked at the South Sudan Email List footprint of our consulting firm . To give this environmental issue the importance it deserves in view of the climate emergency , we have decided to develop within the firm the carbon impact calculation tools that we can apply to our clients. We will thus be able to determine the impact that one of our missions may have on their carbon footprint. For example, does a successful digital transformation project reduce the customer’s greenhouse gas emissions in the long term? The main tool that we have developed is divided into two major parts. First, a database containing the different sources of greenhouse gas emissions among those that are frequently

found among our customers and over which we have the power to change during our missions: current IT equipment, network equipment, the use of data on the net as well as the use of the cloud for storage as for business tools, in particular. We have paid particular attention to ensuring that this data is rigorously sourced in order to be able to update it at any time to keep our tool up to date, to clarify assumptions when we have had to make some so as not to fall into over-simplification, and of course, by intellectual rigor. Second, a calculator based on this database, making it possible to inform

Towards carbon accounting

during an audit for example, or even a posteriori, the various elements encountered among those mentioned above as well as in what quantities. As a result, we obtain a carbon footprint in parallel with a classic financial statement : in the latter, we are used to the concepts of CAPEX and OPEX. We have therefore introduced equivalent concepts except that instead of €, it is kilograms of equivalent CO2 (noted kgCO2e), so that carbon accounting is just as meaningful and tangible as traditional financial accounting. Extract from our test client’s spreadsheet. In blue, the data that we provide on a case-by-case basis to take stock; in orange, the data calculated automatically from our database

South-Sudan-Email-List

It is particularly interesting to use this tool to compare two scenarios: one where the customer does not make any change, and the other where he undertakes a digital transformation. This allows us to see if after such a mission, the financial gain is accompanied or not by an improvement in terms of carbon impact. You will understand, once the calculation has been launched, we can know: how much carbon equivalent “was spent” during the mission: this is the C-CAPEX , how much the changes implemented allow over time to save equivalent carbon: it is the C-OPEX , and of course, over how long this “eco-investment” pays for itself .

Good news, the environment

Good news, the environment and the economy can be on the same side! We applied this methodology to one of our clients. It was about a school wishing to operate an update of its entire IS system, the management of its data and its business software, and a renewal of its technologies used as support in the education. To our good surprise, we found that the financial balance sheet at the end of the mission was accompanied by a lower C-COPEX than at the start, and made it possible to make the carbon impact of the mission profitable in less than 5 years. .

As you must have noticed, we are talking about equivalent carbon without mentioning the other GHGs in our balance sheet. This choice stems from the fact that, although the greenhouse gases recognized in the Kyoto Protocol are seven in number (CO 2 , CH 4 , HFC, PFC, N 2 O, SF 6 and NF 3 ), they do not all have the same global warming power (GWP), i.e. they do not all have the same effect on global warming. A ton of methane, for example, will be 23 times more harmful than a ton of CO2 released into the air. This is why we reduce all our calculations to equivalent kg of CO2 .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.