Skip to Content
Author's profile photo Former Member

Perspectives of Hopenhagen: of travels and calories

Climate change, it is now clear, will touch all of us as people. People traveling and people eating, that is.

 A couple of newsworthy editorial features worth highlighting this week.

The first one is the commentary The Economist made of two studies, representing two weather scenarios and their impact on the production of food worldwide. The change in rain patterns, and often the reduction of precipitation in poor areas, will push the daily calories intake of hundred of millions of people below what it is today – and into levels that cannot sustain such populations without massive risk of famine. Plenty of implications for supply chains in consumer goods, but even more importantly, plenty of impact for geopolitical stability. You can see the animation here

It is worth every second of it.

The second is a feature of the New York Times on travel (“Paying More for Flights Eases Guilt, Not Emissions”), describing how offsetting (i.e. purchasing offsets) doesn’t change behavior. That is one of the reasons why SAP has decided to use offsets as a last resort, and not as the first point of entry. There was also an interesting quote:

“Passenger offsets purport to cancel out carbon dioxide emissions ton for ton through investments in green projects. But critics say there is no transparency about how companies measure whether that happens.” Company stakeholders, NGOs and regulators will increasingly ask for these. This sounds like integration of Carbon measurement tools (like Carbon Impact) and company Financials.

See The New York Times

For more on Climate Change and COP15, see

Assigned Tags

      You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
      Author's profile photo Former Member
      Former Member
      Can you share, in brief, what SAP is doing, and how that translates into negating climate-change?

      Please be specific, with numbers if you could; no PR materials please.

      For one, it would be good to see how much carbon dioxide SAP has killed (as opposed to 'not created' which is just another way of obfuscating an issue), and, what difference it makes to overall CO2 emissions SAP generates/causes.

      Author's profile photo Former Member
      Former Member

      Not sure what "killing CO2" means, but all data we have currently publicly available are on

      And most importantly, SAP has set itself a target that our leadership has committed to stick to, and there are a number of activities under way. While the numbers are already down, the longer term picture is more important. 

      It is not PR - if you wanted to talk PR I am sure you would have asked our PR department, and I do not belong to that - so I hope you realize that mine is not a PR job 🙂