Cited by 6Environmental Education and SustainabilityEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityCOVID-19 impact on air quality

Effects of Voluntary and Involuntary Real Lab Situations on Personal Carbon Footprints of Private Households. Experiences From Germany

Open access
Reusswig, Fritz, Bock, Seraja, Schleer, Christoph, Lass, Wiebke·2021·Frontiers in Sustainability

Abstract

This paper compares the carbon footprint effects of a voluntary real lab with those of the involuntary “real lab” provided by the lockdowns during the recent Corona crisis. In a voluntary real lab situation, 100 private households in Berlin (Germany) have tried to reduce their personal carbon footprints over 1 year (2018). The households have been equipped with a weekly carbon tracker, calculating their CO 2e1 footprint in the domains housing energy, mobility on ground, air travel, food, other consumption, and public consumption. The households have been informed by various channels and supported by a network of “green” local enterprises and NGOs. It was also possible for them to make use of in-home energy advisors, identifying easy-to-accomplish saving potential. On average, the households managed to reduce their footprint by 11%, with individual savings of up to 40%. One of the major problems the households have been experiencing was refraining from air travel, e.g., by substituting it by train l. Others identified road safety as a major problem when switching from cars to bikes. With an annual reduction of 10%, carbon neutrality could be reached in or even before 2050. But political decisions are needed in order to change the collective boundary conditions. In 2020, Germany–as many other countries–has experienced a COVID-19 lockdown with substantial restrictions to all kinds of consumption activities (flying, international travel, consumption activities in the public etc.). This work compares the CO 2 reduction effects of these two “real labs,” a voluntary and an imposed one, and ask what the relative quantitative effects are. Following that comparison, it reflect upon the similarities and differences of voluntary and imposed situations, and what there can be learned for the implementation of policies for more sustainable production and consumption patterns.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/frsus.2021.648433

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Households in Berlin saved an average of 11% in carbon emissions, with some people saving up to 40%.

    “The findings indicated that households saved an average of 11% in carbon emissions, with some people saving up to 40% (Reusswig et al. 2021).”

    From Strategies to achieve a carbon neutral society: a review (2022) · cites this paper as Reusswig et al. 2021

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. aa9281 · DOI
  2. Bounie, D., Camara, Y., Fize, E., Galbraith, J., Landais, C., Lavest, C., et al. (2020). Consumption Dynamics in the COVID Crisis: Real-Time Insights From French Transaction and Bank Data. CEPR Discussion paper No. DP15474. Available online at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3737607 (accessed December 13, 2020).
  3. Darby, S. (2006). The Effectiveness of Feedback on Energy Consumption: A Review of the Literature on Metering, Billing and Direct Displays. Oxford: Environmental Change Institute. University of Oxford.
  4. Ehrhardt-Martinez, K., Donnelly, K. A., and Laitner, S. (2010). Advanced Metering Initiatives and Residential Feedback Programs: A Meta-Review for Household Electricity-Saving Opportunities. Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reusswig, F., Bock, S., Schleer, C., & Lass, W.
Affiliations
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (DE)
Corresponding author
Reusswig, Fritz
Venue
Frontiers in Sustainability
Published
2021-06-02
Volume
2
ISSN
2673-4524 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3170145463
Cited by
6
References
82
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Publication Database PIK (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Education and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › COVID-19 impact on air quality
Keywords
personal carbon footprint, COVID-19 lockdown, household energy consumption, carbon neutrality, sustainable consumption, sustainable production

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review