Household Carbon Emissions in India: Correlation with Income and Household Size
This paper reports the carbon emission of households of Bhilai, Durg, Rajnandgaon region of Chhattisgarh, India and their correlation with the income and household size. The total direct carbon emission is studied against the three household CO2 emission activities viz. energy, transport (petrol), and LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) for different income groups. The ANOVA and linear regression model study of the area reveals that the highest contributor for total primary CO2 emission is household energy uses; on the contrary the emission from LPG uses has the highest impact for every unit difference in uses. Notwithstanding the income is positively correlated with energy uses while an LPG emission remains almost constant for all income groups. The study of impact of household size on total primary CO2 emission put forward the adults have more impact with a coefficient value of 24.2 units as compared to 17.1 for children. The income is positively correlated with total primary emission but household’s characteristics influence emissions differently for low, middle and high income groups. Hence household’s size and CO2 emission from different activities have greater impact on total emission than income. For emission reduction policies those areas should be targeted.
Bai, X.M. (2007). Integrating global environmental concerns into urban management. The scale and readiness arguments. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 11: 15–29. doi: 10.1162/jie.2007.1202.
Bai, X.M., Dhakal, S., Steinberger, J. and H. Weisz (2012). Drivers of urban energy use and main policy leverages. In: Grubler, A. and Fisk, D.J. (editors). Energizing Sustainable Cities. Earth Scan.
Baiocchi, G., Minx, J. and K. Hubacek (2010). The Impact of Social Factors and Consumer Behavior on Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the United Kingdom. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 14: 50–72.
Brand, C. and B. Boardman (2008). Taming of the few: The unequal distribution of greenhouse gas emissions from personal travel in the UK. Energy Policy, 36: 224–238.
Brand, C. and J.M. Preston (2010). ‘60-20 emission’: The unequal distribution of greenhouse gas emissions from personal, non-business travel in the UK. Transp. Policy, 17: 9–19.
Boussauw, K. and F. Witlox (2009). Introducing a commuteenergy performance index for Flanders. Transportation Research Part A, 43: 580–591.
Buchs, M. and S.V. Schnepf (2013). From expenditure to emissions? Comparing three methods of estimating UK household emissions using expenditure data, to be published as S3RI working paper.
DEFRA (2008). Distributional Impacts of Personal Carbon Trading. London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. online http://www.defra.gov.uk/ environment/climatechange/uk/individual/carbontrading/ pdf/pctdistributional-impacts.pdf, download 1 July 2008.
DEFRA (2011). Guidelines for Company Reporting on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Annexes updated August (2011). London: UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/ business/envrp/pdf/envrpgas-annexes.pdf.
Dhakal, S. (2010). GHG emissions from urbanization and opportunities for urban carbon mitigation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2: 277–283. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2010.05.007.
Dietz, T., Gardner, G.T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P.C. and M.P. Vandenbergh (2009). Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. 106(44): 18452–18456. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0908738106. Epub.
Dresner, S. and P. Ekins (2006). Economic instruments to improve UK home energy efficiency without negative social impacts. Fiscal Studies, 27: 47–74.
Druckman, A. and T. Jackson (2008). Household energy consumption in the UK: A highly geographically and socioeconomically disaggregated model. Energy Policy, 36: 3177–3192.
Druckman, A. and T. Jackson (2009). The carbon footprint of UK households 1990–2004: A socio-economically disaggregated, quasi-multi-regional input-output model. Ecological Economics, 68: 2066–2077. doi: 10.1016/j. ecolecon.2009.01.013.
Duffy, A. and R. Crawford (2013). The effects of physical activity on greenhouse gas emissions for common transport modes in European countries. Transportation Research Part D, 19: 13–19.
EPA (2006). Implications of the EU Climate Protection Target for Ireland. Environmental Protection Agency. Wexford: Johnstown Castle; 2006. research/climate/ erc%20report%205.pdf (accessed 21 September 2007a).Fahmy, E., Thumim, J. and V. White (2011). The distribution of UK household CO2 emissions: Interim report. JRF programme paper: Climate change and social justice. University of Bristol and Centre for Sustainable Energy.
Feng, L., Lin, T. and Q. Zhao (2011). Analysis of the dynamic characteristics of urban household energy use and GHG emissions in China. China Population, Resources and Environment, 21: 93–100.
Gough, I., Abdallah, S., Johnson, V., Ryan-Collins, J. and C. Smith (2011). The distribution of total greenhouse gas emissions by households in the UK, and some implications for social policy. CASE paper 152, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, London: London School of Economics.
Grimm, N.B., Faeth, S.H., Golubiewski, N.E., Redman, C.L., Wu, J.G. et al. (2008). Global change and the ecology of cities. Science, 319: 756–760. doi: 10.1126/ science.1150195.
Glaeser, Edward L. and Matthew E. Kahn (2010). The greenness of cities: Carbon dioxide emissions and urban development. Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, 67(3): 404–418.
HM Government (2006). The UK climate change programme 2006. London, UK: The Stationery Office.
IPCC Climate Change (2007). The Physical Science Basis—Summary for Policy Makers. http://www.ipcc.ch/ SPM2feb07.pdf (accessed 20 March ’07).
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014). Climate Change: Synthesis Report. Available: http:// www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/SYR_AR5_ LONGERREPORT.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2014.
Jones, C.M. and D.M. Kammen (2011). Quantifying carbon footprint reduction opportunities for US households and communities. Environmental Science and Technology, 45: 4088–4095. doi: 10.1021/es102221h.
Kaye, J.P., Groffman, P.M., Grimm, N.B., Baker, L.A. and R.V. Pouyat (2006). A distinct urban biogeochemistry? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21: 192–199. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.12.006.
Kennedy, Hilary, Beggins, Jeff, Duarte, M. Carlos, Fourqurean, James, W., Holmer, Marianne, Marbà, Nuria and Jack J. Middelburg (2010). Seagrass sediments as a global carbon sink: Isotopic constraints. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 24: 1–8, GB4026, doi:10.1029/2010GB003848.
Lenzen, M. and R.A. Cummins (2011). Lifestyles and wellbeing versus the environment. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 15: 650–652. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00397.x.
Lin, J., Cao, B., Cui, S., Wang, W. and X.M. Bai (2010). Evaluating the effectiveness of urban energy conservation and GHG mitigation measures: The case of Xiamen City, China. Energy Policy, 38: 5123–5132. doi: 10.1016/j. enpol.2010.04.042. 38: 4828–4837. doi: 10.1016/j. enpol.2009.08.050.
Lynas, M. (2007). Carbon Counter. Glasgow: Harper Collins Publishers. International Ecological Footprint Conference, May 8–10, 2007, Cardiff, UK.
NPC (National Productivity Council) (2009). State-wise Electricity Consumption & Conservation Potential in India. Submitted to Bureau of Energy Efficiency, Ministry of Power, Govt. of India.
Pachauri, S. and D. Spreng (2002). Direct and indirect energy requirements of households in India. Energy Policy, 30(6): 511–523; ISSN 0301-4215. URL http: //www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421501001197.
Parikh, J. and Chandrakiran (2007). Economic Impact of Carbon Emission Restrictions: A case of India.
Energy Security, Climate Change and Sustainable Development. J.P. Mathur and N. Bansal (eds). Anamaya Publishers, New Delhi, India. Pataki, D.E., Alig, R.J., Fung, A.S., Golubiewski, N.E., Kennedy, C.A. et al. (2006). Urban ecosystems and the North American carbon cycle. Global Change Biology, 12: 2092–2102. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01242.x.
Schipper, L., Bartlett, S., Hawk, D. and E. Vine (1989). Linking life-styles and energy use: A matter of time? Annual Review of Energy, 14: 273–320. doi: 10.1146/ annurev.energy.14.1.273.
Seto, K.C., Fragkias, M., Güneralp, B. and M.K. Reilly (2011). A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PLoS ONE, 6: e23777. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023777.
Tukker, A. and B. Jansen (2006). Environmental impacts of products—A detailed review of studies. J. Ind. Ecol, 10: 159–182.
Wang, Y. and M. Shi (2009). CO2 emission induced by urban household consumption in China. Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment, 7: 11–19.
Wei, Y., Liu, L., Fan, Y. and G. Wu (2007). The impact of lifestyle on energy use and CO2 emission: An empirical analysis of China’s residents. Energy Policy, 35: 247–257. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2005.11.020.
Weisz, H. and J.K. Steinberger (2010). Reducing energy and material flows in cities. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2: 185–192. doi: 10.1016/j. cosust.2010.05.010.
Wiedmann, Klaus-Peter, Hennigs, Nadine and Astrid Siebels (2007). Measuring Consumers’ Luxury Value Perception: A Cross-Cultural Framework. Academy of Marketing Science Review, (7): 4–8.