e-mail and direct mailing co2 impact

58

Upload: bpost

Post on 23-Jan-2015

1.529 views

Category:

Business


0 download

DESCRIPTION

ENVIRONNEMENTAL IMPACT OF E MAILING COMPARE TO PAPER MAILING. WHO TO MEASURE THE C02 OF BOTH RESULTS OF SIMULATIONS

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact
Page 2: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

What’s behind my m@ail?Comparative Analysis of Sustainability and

effectiveness of e-mail vs paper mailGaëtan Dartevelle, Managing Partner, Greenloop

Jacques Bruyneel, DM Consultant, bpost business

22/03/11

Page 3: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact
Page 4: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Common assumptions

1. Direct Mail generates more carbon footprint than digital

2. It’s better for environment to move to CRM paperless

3. Direct mailing is a waste of trees

Page 5: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

What we believe by bpost

Page 6: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

bpost approach with Greenloop

• STEP 1: a DM carbon meter = how to measure and reduce “your” direct mailing C02 impact; bpost is the first post & media to calculate LCA

• STEP 2: To compare the C02 for delivery of a mailing and an e mail

• Purpose: Advices to go for better green Direct Marketing

Page 7: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

E-billing to save the trees and the earth?

http://www.digi.com http://www.greencitizens.net http://www.timewarnercable.com

Page 8: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

E-billing to save the trees and the earth?

Page 9: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

E-folders to save the trees and the earth?

“In 2 weken, 600.000 folders,

of 5.000 ton papier en 41.600 bomen bespaart”

Page 10: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

E-catalogues to save the trees and the earth?

Source: www.e-leclerc.com

Page 11: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

And the consumer?

38.000 bomen en 1512 ton C02 bespaar

Page 12: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

And the consumer?

Page 13: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

And the consumer?

Heel wat klanten (...)

vinden het niet kunnen

dat het bedrijf beslist

heeft om hun rekeningen

voortaan via e-mail te

versturen.

“ONGEVRAAGD

EN ONGEWILD”

luidt het.

Source: Het Laatste Nieuws 02/12/2010

Page 14: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Bill

ions

em

ails

/day

Year

World email and spam traffic 2001-2010 Total emails send/day in bilions Total spam/day in bilions

Dematerialization «From atoms to bits»? 1995 - MIT professor Nicolas Negroponte

Sources: Radicati Group, 2010; Mcafee, 2009; UPU, 2009

0

0,3

0,6

0,9

1,2

1,5

1,8

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Bill

ion p

ost

lett

ers

/day

Year

World postletter traffic 2000-2009 Total of postletters per day in billions

Number of emails/day has increased dramatically over the last 10 years, but the number of post letters has only slightly decreased

Page 15: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

ICT and PAPER usage

Sources: 1CEPI, 2010; 2Arnfalk, 2010

Production of paper & board in CEPI countries, quarterly trend

2000 - 20101

Conclusion2:

• Relatively small substitute effect

• Large complementary and generational effect

Page 16: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Resource extraction

Production Usage Waste

Environmental impacts of the ICT and paper industryBeyond CO2...

energy usage & GHG emissions

Effect on:

biodiversity

toxicity

energy usage & GHG emissions

biodiversity

toxicity

energy usage & GHG emissions

biodiversity

energy usage & GHG emissions

biodiversity

TOX

GHG

BIO

Page 17: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Sources: 1UNEP, 2010; 2Umicore, 2007; 3CSIRO, 2007

Rare materials Modern electronics contain up to 60 different elements1

800 laptops contain up to 1 kg of gold2

Intensive chemical refinement of materials

Water usage250.000 M3 water is used for 1 tonne of gold3

TOX

GHG

BIO

TOX

Impact on resource extraction

Page 18: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Logging of mature virgin forests 56% of all woodsources in EU are PEFC and FSC certified1

Homogeneous replanting for logging

Source: 1 CEPI, 2009

Impact on resource extraction

BIOBIO

GHGBIO

Page 19: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Recycled paper

40

Virgin fiber 60%

In Europe, only 15% of paper “raw material” comes from specific “thinning” (cutting of trees)

25% Waste of forest industry

50% Sanitary “thining”

25%Specific “thinning”

15% (= 25% of 60%) of paper “raw material” comes from specific “thinning”

25% of these virgin fibers comes from specific

“thinning”60% of paper production is

made of “virgin” fiber

“Use of paper” DOES NOT mean “forest destruction”

Even environmentalist say that there is nothing wrong in using timber (large or small trees) for paper production, provided the forest is

managed in a sustainable way

Page 20: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Source: 1Williams, 2004

Energy intense complex production81% of life cycle energy use during production phase1

Chemical treatment

GHG

TOX

Impact on production

Page 21: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Production of pulp & paperCO2 emissions have decreased by 42% per tonne of paper pulp since 19901

BleachingCOD used has decreased by 76.3% since 19901

Water usage

Impact on production

GHG

TOX

GHG

TOXTOX

TOX

Source: 1CEPI, 2009

Page 22: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Continuous energy use ICT GHG emissions are 2% of global total1

Global data centres GHG emissions comparable with those of The Netherlands2

GHG

Sources: 1Gartner, 2007; 2McKinsey & Co, 2008

Impact on usage

Page 23: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

A non polluting ICT?

Printers; 6%

PCs and Monitors (excluding embodied

energy); 39%

Servers (including

cooling); 23%

Fixed-ine telecoms; 15%

Mobile telecoms; 9%

Produits postaux traditionnels;

63%

Source: Gartner – IT Vendors, Service Providers and Users Can Lighten IT’s Environmental Footprint, December 2007

IT carbon emission breakdown

• ICT sector’s current share of world greenhouse gas is 2% and it is expexted to more than double by 2020

Page 24: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Transport430 billion mail items send in 20091

Source: 1Arnfalk, 2010

GHG

Impact on usage

Page 25: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

LandfillOnly 15% of global E-waste is recycled1

Yearly E-waste increase: 40 million tonner/year2

BIOTOX

Impact on waste

Quickly obsoleteIncreasing life span of phone from1 to 4 years decreases environmental impact with 40%3

BIOTOXGHG

Sources: 1Pike Research, 2010; 2UNEP, 2010; 3Umicure, 2007

Page 26: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Source: 1CEPI, 2009

LandfillPaper recycling rate in EU 2009: 72,2%1

Impact on waste

GHG

GHG

Page 27: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Comparing life cycle

ICT and paper: linear versus circular system

15% 72%

Page 28: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Comparing apples and pears?

ICT and paper: difference in functionality & usageCompare the

function: ‘send a

message’

Page 29: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

The life Cycle analysis of a DM campaign

Page 30: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Resource extraction

Production Usage Waste

ICT life cycle

Use of rare materials 1 billion de GSM’s contains:

• 9 T palladium

• 24 T gold

• 250 T silver

• 4000 T cobalt

• 9000 T copper

Source: L’Echo, 2010

Use of rare materials Production of a 2 gram

micro-chip requires

1,6 kg fossil fuel

Source: McKinsey & Co.

Energy consumption

• Data centers CO2 emissions expected to grow from 80 megatons in 2007 to 340 megatons in 2020

• Data centers worldwide generate roughly half of that of the airline industry

• Rapid obsolesce

• Limited recycling

• Toxicity

Source: Williams et al, 2002

Page 31: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Reading a magazine with a clean conscience?Life Cycle Assessment comparison between an online magazine and its paper version

Two-way comparison:

• A 120 page magazine (Finnish)

• 11 editions per year

• 40 minutes average reading time per month

Online or paper: NO DIFFERENCE in terms of CO2 emissions

Page 32: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

The Direct Mailing carbon meter

Page 33: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Number of Addresses & diffusion

Page 34: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

The MAILING

Page 35: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Results

Page 36: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

E mail carbon Meter

Purpose:

Calculating the CO2 emissions of sending

a typical DM by post and sending an comparable alternative

campaign via email

Page 37: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

E mail Carbon Meter

Email DM campaign:

• 30.000 recipients

• 200 kb message

• 10 mandays of database & campaign design

• Reading time recipient: 1,52minutes

up to 15 sec.

DM campaign:

• 30.000 recipients

• C5 size letter (3 pages)

• 10 mandays of database & campaign design

• (Reading time recipient: 1,52 minutes)

• Recycled paper

• From Antwerp to whole of Belgium

Page 38: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

DM and E mail Carbon Meter

Results from DM Carbon Meter

Carbon emissions from paper DM: 9 grams/paper DM

Carbon emissions from email (1,52 Min):

(30 sec):

(15 sec):

5,6 grams/email DM

5,0 grams/email DM

4,8 grams/email DM

Page 39: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Simulating the effect of sending a typical DM and a typical email message

C02 EMISSION:

1 DM = 2,0 times email

Page 40: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Some testimonies

80% ongelezen

1 Post=7@

Page 41: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Simulating the effect of sending a typical DM and a typical email message

C02 EMISSION including

efficiency:

1 e mail=

3,7 to 4,3 times more C02 than 1 DM

Page 42: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

But…volumes are not the same !

Worldwide1:

430 billions direct mailing

60.000 billions e mails (SPAM included)

Source: 1 Arnfalk, 2010

Page 43: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

SPAM effect

Global CO2

email trafficup to 20 times post letter traffic1

Source: 1 Arnfalk, 2010

Page 44: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact
Page 45: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

FACT: consumers receive 1.000 mass messages every week

200 TV ads

150 radio ads1000’s of ambient ads ...

20 e-mail ads

3 cinema ads

400 press ads/inserts

350+ outdoor ads

2+ DM pieces

Over 3.000 messages / day52 get your attention

4 are kept in mind positively

ROI of ads is part of the calculation

Source: Mindshare - Henley Centre (and TNS Media & Post survey)

Page 46: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

But only one personal postal adres

Page 47: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Value of beta DM is the second best after cinemaCampaign recall % per category

Avg=67,4%

Page 48: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

FACT: Paper Mailing generates a better content recall than e-mail

Paper mail has by far more effect on the long run

Direct mail is more effective throughout the media funnel leading to an 83% higher content recall rate compared to email

Received DM/Email

Recall DM/Email

Read DM/Email

Correct recall content

Paper mail

E-mail

100%

100%

49

28

49

28

55

57

27

16

81

75

22%

12%

Source: Market research on 1800 customers, utility sector case

Page 49: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

E-mail has a much stronger impact when combined with a physical mail

Received Opened Clicked Intentions

DM + E-mail

E-mail only

100%

100%

34

30

34

30

60

42

21

13

93

70

23

9

Source: DMix survey Mail order (2007)

113% 161% +255%

Page 50: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

The future is about the integration of E&P

■ 70% of belgian companies integrate e-mail marketing in their mediamix

■ 66% of them declare to be satisfied of the objectives reached

In one of the pilots we ran with our customers, adding DM to email

multiplied by 4 the number of final orders1

+ 414%

7

29

E-Mail only DM + E-mail

1 IAB - E-mail Marketing Cookbook; 2 Study E loves P – Pilot Research

Page 51: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

The power of Email (benchmark)

Source: IAB 2009

Belgian Benchmarks

Page 52: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

25,70%

8,50%

33%

24,35%

6,76%

27,77%

Unique open rate CTR CTR/Open rate

2008

2009

Benchmark paper & e mail

Sources: IAB

■ Direct mailing Béta: 67,4■ e-mail open rate: 24,35%

■ Click: 6,76%

-5,25%

Effectiveness of e mail is decreasing

-20,47%

-15,85%

Page 53: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Consumers: Media preferences 2010Scores 6 & 7 on a scale of 7

Étude Market Probe – 2010 – bpost – 1000 interviews

Page 54: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Consumers: Media preferences 2010Scores 6 & 7 on a scale of 7

Étude Market Probe – 2010 – bpost – 1000 interviews

Page 55: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Advices for “green” Direct marketing

We recommend: (shortlist)

1. First of all: the commercial impact & ROI !

2. Use and test the best media-mix P + @ alternatives

3. Inform the recipients of your aim and actions

4. Be careful with green washing argument

5. Use valid arguments

Page 56: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

Advices for “green” Direct marketing

With the DM Consultant of bpost

1. Calculate your carbon footprint for both types of media, paper & @

2. Advice to reduce your C02 impact 

3. Use carbon offsetting whenever possible

4. Run a pilot calculation with bpost

Page 57: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

“please consider the environment before printing this message”

“please consider the environment when forwarding, responding to, or printing this message” ?

Page 58: E-mail and Direct Mailing CO2 Impact

BIOMIM GREENLOOP NV/SArue d’Alost, 7-11, 1000 BruxellesGaëtan Dartevelle, 0475/[email protected]

bpost, Jacques BRUYNEEL0476/[email protected]

Presentation available on “www.DMplaza.be”