Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

External air pollution costs of telework

  • Life Cycle Management (Subject Editor: Gerald Rebitzer)
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background, Aims and Scope

Telework is associated with a number of costs and benefits, including reduced company overhead costs, need for office and parking space, office energy consumption, increased productivity, reduced absenteeism, retention of specialized employees, reduction in transportation-related fuel consumption and air pollution, and many others. This paper applies a systems model to telework and nontelework scenarios to quantify direct energy and fuel costs and external costs related to air emissions from transportation, heating, cooling, lighting, and electronic and electrical equipment use both at the company and the home office, including rebound effects.

Methods

E-COMMUTair, a scalable web-based tool created by the authors and designed to assess the air pollution effects of individual or company telework programs versus nontelework is employed along with Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis. E-COMMUTair is using the latest available U.S. energy use and air emission factors. The external costs of air emissions are estimated. The role of telecommuting frequency is emphasized, and differences between various states are explored. The paper identifies the drivers of external costs, and presents an example breakeven analysis focused on CO2 and key model parameters.

Results and Discussion

Nontelework’s external costs are equal to or higher than telework’s costs for every model component, demonstrating that telework programs could provide benefits, including monetary benefits, to society. Transportation is the major contributor to the total costs, with home heating and cooling, and office cooling following. Most of the monetary costs associated with transportation are borne by individuals rather than society. Teleworking employees increase their home-related expenses but reduce their travel-related expenses, ending up with smaller total costs. Energy and fuel costs get reduced in the office space when telework programs are applied, resulting in benefits to companies. Energy and external costs decrease as telework frequency increases. When compared to not teleworking, 5-day telework scenarios on cooling days in California can have about 50–70% lower total costs. The probabilistic analysis confirms the results of the deterministic analysis. The sensitivity analysis reveals that for the nontelework scenario, transportation-related variables such as commuting distance and average number of passengers affect CO2, CO, and NOx emissions, while for the telework part, frequency and the number of roundtrips are the most relevant.

Conclusions

Both analyses show that telework programs have the potential to lower both energy and external costs creating a favorable bottom line for society, employees, and companies by decreasing tailpipe emissions, lowering transportation costs, and decreasing energy costs at the company office. However, important parameters such as telecommuting frequency, characteristics of the office and home space, climate patterns, and rebound effects that determine external costs along with the price of gasoline, electricity and natural gas in the state where the program is implemented can greatly influence the final results, and should be carefully examined.

Recommendations and Perspectives

The effects of telework programs on people’s daily lives are complex and difficult to predict and quantify. The current analysis showed that significant financial benefits can be expected from telework programs, but as seen often in environmental policy-making, the details of implementation will make or break the success of a program.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shafizadeh RK, Mokhtarian PL, Niemeier DA, Salomon I (2000): The Costs and Benefits of Home-Based Telecommuting. Technical Report, University of California, Davis, CA

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arnfalk P (1999): Information Technology in Pollution Prevention — Teleconferencing and Telework Used as Tools in the Reduction of Work Related Travel. Licensiate Thesis, Lund University, Sweden

    Google Scholar 

  3. Innovisions Canada (2005): Canadian Telework Association. 〈http://www.ivc.ca/costbenefits.htm〉 (accessed June 1, 2005)

  4. Kitou E (2002): Air Pollution Assessment of Telework: A Design of a Decision-Support Tool. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA

    Google Scholar 

  5. National Environmental Policy Institute/ International Telework Association and Council (1999): Telework and the Environment. White Paper Sponsored by National Environmental Policy Institute, Washington, DC

  6. Matthews HS, Williams E (2005): Telework Adoption and Energy Use in Building and Transport Sectors in the United States and Japan. J Infrastructure Systems 11(1) 21–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Roitz J, Allenby B, Atkyns R, Nanavati B (2003): Organizing Around Networks, Not Buildings. 2002/2003 AT&T Employee Telework Research Results, 〈http://www.att.com/telework/article_library/survey_results_2003.html〉 (accessed June 1, 2005)

  8. Nilles JM (2000): Telework America 2000 — Research Key Findings. Report on Survey Results, JALA International, Inc., International Telework Association and Council

  9. Hopkinson P, James P, Maruyama T (2002): Teleworking at BT — The Economic, Environmental and Social Impacts of its Workabout Scheme. Report on Survey Results

  10. U.S. Department of Energy (1994): Energy, Emissions, and Social Consequences of Telecommuting. Office of the Secretary, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  11. U.S. Department of Transportation (1993): Transportation Implications of Telecommuting. Office of the Secretary, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  12. JALA International Inc. (1993): City of Los Angeles Telecommuting Project Final Report. Department of Telecommunications, Los Angeles, CA

    Google Scholar 

  13. Department of Public Works, San Diego (1990): Telecommuting Pilot Study Final Report. County of San Diego, CA

  14. Southern California Association of Governments (1988): Telecommuting Pilot Project for the Southern California Association of Governments. Evaluation Report, Environmental Planning Department, Los Angeles, CA

    Google Scholar 

  15. Matthews HS, Horvath A, Hendrickson CT (2001): External Costs of Air Emissions form Transportation. J Infrastructure Systems 7(1) 13–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kitou E, Horvath A (2005): Telework Impact Estimation Tool. Consortium on Green Design and Manufacturing, University of California, Berkeley, 〈http://cgdm.berkeley.edu/telework/〉 (accessed June 1, 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kitou E, Horvath A (2003): Energy-Related Emissions from Telework. Environmental Science & Technology 37(16) 3467–3475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Matthews HS, Lave LB (2000): Applications of Environmental Valuation for Determining Externality Costs. Environmental Science & Technology 34(8) 1390–1395

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang QM, Santini DJ (1995): Monetary Values of Air Pollutant Emissions in Various U.S. Regions. Transportation Research Record 1475, 33–41

    Google Scholar 

  20. Steindel C (1995): Current Issues in Economics and Finance. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 1(9)

  21. Cecchetti SG (2000): The U.S. Inflation Alphabet: A Primer. Occasional Essays on Current Policy Issues, 〈http://www.econ.ohiostate.edu/cecchetti/pdf/cpi5.pdf〉 (accessed June 1, 2005)

  22. Measures of Prices, Inflation, Expected Inflation, and Interest Rates. 〈http://www.digitaleconomist.com/inf_4020.html〉 (accessed June 1, 2005)

  23. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2001): Federal and California Exhaust and Evaporative Emission Standards for Light-duty Vehicles and Light-Duty Trucks 2001. Office of Transportation and Air Quality, 〈http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stds-id.htm〉 (accessed June 1, 2005)

  24. U.S. Department of Transportation (2005): National Transportation Statistics 2000. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 〈http://www.bts.gov/btsprod/nts/〉 (accessed June 1, 2005)

  25. Pratt JH (1999): Costs/Benefits of Teleworking to Manage Work/Life Responsibilities. American National Telework Survey, International Telework Association and Council

  26. U.S. Department of Energy (1999): A Look at Residential Energy Consumption in 1997. Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, 1997 Residential Energy Consumption Survey, DOE/EIA-0632

  27. U.S. Department of Transportation (2003): National Household Travel Survey 2001. Washington, DC

  28. Energy Information Administration (2004): Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government. U.S. Department of Energy, 〈http://www.eia.doe.gov〉 (accessed June 1, 2004)

  29. Nordman B, Piette MA, Pon B, Kinney K (1998): It’s Midnight... Is Your Copier On? Energy Star Copier Performance. LBNL-41332 UC-1600, Environmental Energy Technologies Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA

    Google Scholar 

  30. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/ U.S. Department of Energy, and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (2005): Energy Star Purchasing Initiative. Online Calculator/Database, Energy Star Program, 〈http://www.epa.gov/appdstar/purchasing/calculators〉 (accessed June 1, 2005).

  31. California Energy Commission (2005): Gasoline Taxes by State 2002. 〈http://www.energy.ca.gov〉 (accessed June 1, 2005)

  32. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2005): The Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database. 〈http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/egrid/> (accessed June 1, 2005)

  33. Decisioneering, Inc. (2000): Crystal Ball 2000. User’s Manual. Denver, CO

  34. Kitou E, Horvath A (2006): Transportation Choices and Air Pollution Effects of Telework. J Infrastructure Systems 12(2) 121–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kitou E, Masanet E, Horvath A (2001): Web-based Tool for Estimating the Environmental Impacts of Telework. Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, Denver, CO

  36. Scharnhorst W (2006): Life Cycle Assessment in the Telecommunication Industry: A Review. Int J LCA 13(1) 75–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Toffel MW, Horvath A (2004): Environmental Implications of Wireless Technologies: News Delivery and Business Meetings. Environmental Science & Technology 38(12) 2961–2970

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Rosenblum J, Horvath A, Hendrickson CT (2000): Environmental Implications of Service Industries. Environmental Science & Technology 34(22) 4669–4676

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Pacca S, Horvath A (2002): Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Building and Operating Electric Power Plants in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Environmental Science & Technology 36(14) 3194–3200

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Esperidon 13, Larissa, 41335, Greece

    Erasmia Kitou

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, 215 McLaughlin Hall # 1712, Berkeley, CA, 94720-1712, USA

    Arpad Horvath

Authors
  1. Erasmia Kitou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arpad Horvath
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arpad Horvath.

Additional information

formerly Postdoctoral Researcher, University of California, Berkeley

ESS-Submission Editor: Dr. Gerald Rebitzer (Gerald.Rebitzer@alcan.com)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kitou, E., Horvath, A. External air pollution costs of telework. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13, 155–165 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2007.06.338

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2007.06.338

Keywords

Search

Navigation