Carbon Offset for iPhones, iPods: Hot Air or New Leaf?
9:28 am, June 23rd, 2009, Nicole Martinelli
New Zealand Carbon Offset Farm, courtesy AcornHQ
Help plant a tree to offset carbon emissions from your iPhone or iPod is the green idea behind AcornHq, a London-based company.
The brainchild of a couple of New Zealand transplants, John and Sarah Lewis, the company asks 20 Apple device owners to give $3.50 per device — iPhone or current and older iPods — to plant a tree to counteract the effects on the environment from manufacture and use.
Those oak trees take root on a New Zealand planting farm, where Lewis hopes Acorn donors willing to trek that far will be able to visit soon.
After the jump, details on how it works from John Lewis.
Interview by Leander Kahney.
CoM: Is planting a tree really a good offset for your iPhone?
John Lewis: Trees are a great choice to offset the carbon emitted by your iPhone or iPod. There are three natural carbon sinks: forests, oceans and soil.
The easiest one for humans to increase the capacity of almost immediately are forests. As the trees mature they suck carbon out of the atmosphere and store it as wood. We estimate that our trees can absorb between 2,500-3,000 kilograms of carbon per year.
For every 20 donations, a tree is planted. Photo courtesy AcorhHq.
CoM: Have you got any data?
John Lewis: The original idea we had was to find out exactly how much carbon was involved to make, manufacture and transport your tech gadget to you. Whether that was your mobile phone, MP3 player, satnav system or whatever.
We learned quite early on that the data needed to exactly support that idea doesn’t exist quite yet. It forced us to simplify the idea and focus solely on the niche of iPod and iPhone owners where there is some good data.
The key piece of data that we based our assumptions on is Apple’s 2008 Environmental Performance reports.
Using the iPhone as an example, Apple estimates that it will emit 55 kgs of life-cycle carbon emissions. That is the highest amount from the iPod/iPhone range and contrasts with the iPod shuffle which Apple estimates 10kgs for.
It means we are offsetting a maximum of 1,100 kgs of life-cycle carbon emission (based on Apple’s estimates) per tree while our trees are capable of absorbing 2500-3000 kgs of carbon per year until they mature. We decided early on to deliberately over compensate in this regard.
CoM: Why are the trees planted in New Zealand?
John Lewis: Ultimately it doesn’t matter where the trees are planted. We are from New Zealand which is the main reason we chose to plant trees there, forming a partnership with the Blockhill carbon sink project. Olmec Sinclair (who runs the project and planting farm) and I worked together in the same IT consultancy firm several years ago.
We turn the question over to you — is this indulgence granting for gadgets or a worthy way to make amends?
Let us know in the comments.
Posted by Nicole Martinelli in iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3G S, iPod, iPod Touch | Comment on this article
Excellent idea. I need some trees for my yard. Please send me $5 for every iPod or iPhone you have. Thanks.
Keith Thomas, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:49 am
Keith > it’s still a win-win situation anyway, isn’t it? They (and the Earth) get the tree, you get the piece of mind that you did something to offset your carbon footprint.
Jorge, on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:55 am
Sooooo! It seems that the iPhone has been made so smart that it’s planning on destroying the earth! Wutever
Eric, on June 23rd, 2009 at 11:05 am
Great idea. Tho’ “…New Zealand planting farm, where Lewis hopes Acorn donors willing to trek that far will be able to visit soon” means you pay your $3.50 to offset your carbon emission, then shoot it all to buggery by flying over to check out your bit of a tree. Hmmmm.
Alison, on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Hi,
Nice idea but the science isnt quite with you and perhaps there are better ways of offsetting such as buying renewable energy VCS credits.
The Suzuki Foundation and others say that it can take between 40 – 70 yrs before trees start to sequester any significant amounts of CO2.
Most models and reports say that by 50 yrs business as usual will have catastrophic consequences for the environment. In Australia it will be the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef, 85% of agriculture in the Murray Darling Basin and the permanant loss of the Snow Fields.
Similar consequences will occur overseas.
So in the interest of the environment do something that has a permanant and immediate impact on climate change.
Peter Sykes, on June 23rd, 2009 at 5:04 pm
People really fall for all this carbon crap. Emissions from a cell phone, the IPHONE to be exact! People really need to stop letting these lying ass scientist and politicians get away with murder.
Anonmuz, on June 23rd, 2009 at 5:04 pm
It think it’s been generally accepted that planting trees as carbon offsets is naïve sadly. A nice idea, but a little behind the times. Friends of the earth and WWF both made a statement against planting trees several years ago…
I really think that carbon offsetting can make a difference. I only offset using high quality CER-based carbon offsets from companies such as http://www.clear-offset.com/ essentially allow private individuals to invest in green technologies that wouldn’t necessarily make commercial sense otherwise.
If the powers that can’t build a biomass plant or hydro dam as it’s too expensive, then have a guess what they’re going to build instead – yup, yet more coal / oil / gas fired power stations.
Carbon Offsetting is not a bad thing, in fact it can be very positive – it’s just been done in the past by the wrong methods (planting trees and treadle pumps), by the wrong people (those looking to make a quick buck). Open your eyes and take another look….
Jamie, on September 7th, 2009 at 5:52 am