by jbushnell

It’s a perfect storm for developers of carbon accounting software: a brand new market, social and political pressure to comply, and a low barrier to entry.  And it’s worse than I thought.

A recent LinkedIn discussion pointed out that there are over 60 vendors offering carbon accounting solutions.  That seems like a lot to me, but I’m can’t say I’m surprised at the glut.  Carbon accounting requires some discipline and data management skills, but it’s not rocket science and many vendors can pretty easily churn out a carbon plugin for their current offerings.

In the greenhouse gas inventories I’ve prepared, I’ve chosen to learn the accounting protocols, develop the spreadsheets, and design a database to hold the information.  I did this so I could really understand the accounting, and to identify the best carbon abatement projects.  But more often than not, when an organization decides to measure its emissions, it falls to an already busy employee – a facilities manager or sustainability director.  They don’t have the time to develop a custom process, and so they look for turn-key solutions.

As much as I learned from the time I spent developing a carbon accounting system, I realize one major factor that is missing: institutional awareness.  The data, the methods, the conclusions, while all documented, reside with me, on my computer, and on my website.  I monitor air travel emissions, refrigerant leaks, and commuter activity, but I am not the person who makes decisions about travel budgets, maintenance, or public transit.  And while I can influence and inform those practices with my ideas and perspectives, there is still something of a disconnect between our carbon footprint and our daily decision making.

I think an institutional carbon tracking system would place the information in the hands of the people who can make a difference.  It would give maintenance workers a chance to input their own data, and track their progress.  It would give administrators a window into the environmental performance of their department or team.  In effect, it would make me obsolete.  A worthy enough goal in itself…

But which to choose?  I’m not prepared to answer that question, but I will respond with several more questions.  These come from Stephen Few, a leader in data visualization and analytics.  Few often rails against vendors for products that offer all sauce and no substance.  He recommends asking the following questions when you try to choose a visualization package.  I think the same apply to carbon accounting and probably any type of product or service you buy:

• Does the vendor have deep expertise in the domains that its products support? Does it exhibit this expertise, not only in its products, but in its communications as well, including marketing materials and sales presentations?
• Does the vendor invest in the development of features and functions in its products that actually work and are actually needed by more than a few users?
• Does the vendor exhibit a commitment to designing products to be as easy as possible to use?
• Does the vendor develop products that nudge users in beneficial directions (that is, in directions that actually produce results that effectively serve their needs)?
• Has the vendor defined its potential users clearly enough and gotten to know them well enough to develop the product in relevant ways?
• Does the vendor refrain from making marketing claims that are false or otherwise misleading?
• Does the vendor know how to tell the story of what its product does, how it works, and why it’s good? If it doesn’t, this is a sign that it doesn’t have a clear story to direct its efforts into a coherent product.
• Does the vendor make it easy for potential buyers to evaluate its products?
• Does the vendor help its users develop the conceptual skills (not just skills in using the software) that are necessary to use its products productively? For example, if it produces data analysis software, does it offer instruction in the principles and practices of analysis?
• Does the vendor take the time to develop user documentation that is really helpful, with clear explanations and meaningful examples?
• Does the vendor’s support mechanism (phone support, etc.) demonstrate that it genuinely wants to solve your problems rather than only provide the minimum support that customers will find tolerable?

I suspect that many of the carbon accounting solutions would whither in the light of these questions.  Have you tried any of them?  And how did they work for you?