Abstract
The environmental and energy impacts of ICT were identified using a comparative life cycle assessment (CompLCA) focused on business invoicing processes comparing online to paper processes. There were net energy benefits from online billing. The potential impact across the economy and society is large, particularly as COVID-19 has forced many businesses and government services to shift to online service provision. For one million bills produced electronically and received by customers instead of a paper bill, 18.9 t CO2e is avoided, which translates to a national saving of 22,680 tCO2e, assuming 1.2 billion annual invoicing transactions. The impacts of CO2 are sensitive, however, to several assumptions. The study's originality was to show the range of invoicing variables that impact energy and the environment and to highlight which ones can be influenced. For example, the number of online bills produced was the most sensitive. However, the results are reversed under commonly occurring customer use situations. The study demonstrates the positive and negative impacts from the digitalisation of businesses. It suggests remedies based on the main drivers identified under company, contractor and customer control that led to energy consumption and environmental and land use impacts.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
No additional data sets are provided (other than in Supplementary Information).
References
Albers TM (2016) U.S. Adoption of electronic invoicing: challenges and opportunities. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Minneapolis
Amankwaa G, Asaaga FA, Fischer C, Awotwe P (2020) Diffusion of electronic water payment innovations in urban Ghana. Evidence from Tema Metropolis. Water 12:1011
Anderson JC, Cleveland G, Schroeder RG (1989) Operations strategy: a literature review. J Oper Manag 8:133–158
Anumba CJ, Ruikar K (2002) Electronic commerce in construction—trends and prospects. Autom Constr 11:265–275
Arushanyan Y, Ekener-Petersen E, Finnveden G (2014) Lessons learned – review of LCAs for ICT products and services. Comput Ind 65:211–234
Belkhir L, Elmeligi A (2018) Assessing ICT global emissions footprint: trends to 2040 & recommendations. J Clean Prod 177:448–463
Bieser J, Salieri B, Hischier R, Hilty L (2020) Next generation mobile networks: problem or opportunity for climate protection? Swisscom AG, Swisscleantech, and University of Zurich, Empa Zurich, St. Gallen
Brühl J, Smith G, Visser M (2019) Simple is good: Redesigning utility bills to reduce complexity and increase understanding. Util Policy 60:100934
Carre A, Crossin E, Clune S (2015) LCA of Kerbside recycling in Victoria. Sustain Victoria, Victorian Government, Melbourne, Victoria
Coroamă VC, Pargman D (2020) Skill rebound, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, United States
Esquer J, Vaeza-Gastélum C, Remmen A, Alvarez-Chávez CR, Velázquez LE (2015) Life cycle assessment for printed newspapers in Northwestern Mexico. Int J Sust Dev World 22:259–268
Gard DL, Keoleian GA (2008) Digital versus print: energy performance in the selection and use of scholarly journals. J Ind Ecol 6:115–132
Grinin L, Grinin A, Korotayev A (2022) COVID-19 pandemic as a trigger for the acceleration of the cybernetic revolution, transition from e-government to e-state, and change in social relations. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 175:121348
Guerin TF (2021) Policies to minimise environmental and rebound effects from telework: a study for Australia. Environ Innov Soc Trans 39:18–33
Hischier R, Reichart I (2003) Multifunctional electronic media-traditional media. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8:201–208
Itten R, Hischier R, Andrae A, Bieser J, Cabernard L, Falke A, Ferreboeuf H, Hilty L, Keller R, Lees-Perasso E, Preist C, Stuck M (2020) Digital transformation—life cycle assessment of digital services, multifunctional devices and cloud computing. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25:2093–2098
Karapetyan A, Yaqub W, Kirakosyan A, Sgouridis S (2015) A two-stage comparative life cycle assessment of paper-based and software-based business cards. Prog Comput Sci 52:819–826
Kim J, Rohmer S (2012) Electronic billing vs paper billing: dematerialization, energy consumption and environmental impacts. In: Electronics Goes Green 2012+, ECG 2012 - Joint International Conference and Exhibition, Proceedings. IEEEE, Berlin, Germany, pp 1–4
Kim S (2002) Firm characteristics influencing the extent of electronic billing adoption: an empirical study in the US telecommunication industry. Telematics Inform 19:201–223
Koomey J, Masanet E (2021) Does not compute: Avoiding pitfalls assessing the Internet's energy and carbon impacts. Joule 5:1625–1628
Kunkel JM, Shoukourian H, Heidari MR, Wilde T (2019) Interference of billing and scheduling strategies for energy and cost savings in modern data centers. Sustain Comput: Inform Syst 23:49–66
Lange S, Pohl J, Santarius T (2020) Digitalization and energy consumption. Does ICT reduce energy demand? Ecol Econ 176:106760
Lange S, Santarius T (2020) Smart Green World? Routledge, London, p 198
Laurent A, Weidema BP, Bare J, Liao X, Maia De Souza D, Pizzol M, Sala S, Schreiber H, Thonemann N, Verones F (2020) Methodological review and detailed guidance for the life cycle interpretation phase. J Ind Ecol 24:986–1003
McNeish J (2015) Consumer trust and distrust: retaining paper bills in online banking. Int J Bank Mark 33:5–22
Sovacool BK, Demski C, Noel L (2021) Beyond climate, culture and comfort in European preferences for low-carbon heat. Glob Environ Chang 66:102200
Strusani D, Houngbonon GV (2020) The impact of COVID-19 on disruptive technology adoption in emerging markets, International Finance Corporation (IFC). World Bank Group, Washington, D.C.
Turits M (2020) Why working from home might be less sustainable. @BBC_Worklife, London, UK
Turk V, Kuhndt M, Alakeson V, Aldrich T, Geibler JV (2003) The environmental and social impacts of ebanking. A case study with Barclays PLC. Final Report, Case study within the Digital Europe Project, London
Walzberg J, Dandres T, Merveille N, Cheriet M, Samson R (2020) Should we fear the rebound effect in smart homes? Renew Sust Energ Rev 125:109798
Zhang T (2022) E-invoicing will reduce emissions, says PwC. Accountants Daily, Momentum Media, North Sydney
Acknowledgements
To Gabrielle McCorkell, Peter Doyle and Christoph Brulliard for coordinating the modelling and drafting the outputs; Tim Grant (Lifecycles) for support with the modelling; and my former colleague Christine Dawes for data collection and verification of its quality and accuracy. Sven Lundie (UNSW) reviewed the modelling and approach taken.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The author undertook the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by the author.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
No ethical issue is to be declared in this article.
Consent to participate
No consent of participation is to be claimed.
Consent for publication
The author has read and approved the paper for publication. We confirmed that it has not been published previously nor is it being considered by any other peer-reviewed journal.
Competing interests
The author declares no competing interests.
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Guerin, .F. Evaluating impacts of paper and electronic billing and invoicing business systems from an environmental and energy perspective. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30, 88095–88110 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28689-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28689-1