Carbon Footprint of two performances

Carbon footprint accounting is one of many tools helping to monitor the transition to ecologically sustainable practices. In order to avoid irreversible effects of climate change, the global temperature should not rise more than 1.5°C by the year 2100. This means that the carbon footprint of consumers in high-income countries needs to be reduced by more than 90% by 2050.

The goal of carbon accounting is to get new information of international production of art works in the frame of festivals in order reduce the carbon emissions in the future. The carbon footprint assessment covers the emissions from the two performances carried out in 2022 as part of Festivals’ Path project: Oh Europa and Last Night of the Deer.

Results of the calculation

Action Hero: Oh Europa
Travel 2000 kg CO2e
Accommodation 510 kg CO2e
Total 2510 kg CO2e

Jānis Balodis & Nahuel Cano: The Last Night of the Deer
Travel 810 kg CO2e
Accommodation 960 kg CO2e
Electricity 220 kg CO2e
Total 1990 kg CO2e

Audience travel (estimate) 9600 kg CO2e

There were 210 visitors in the perfomances in Kuopio, and probably twice as much in Riga, perhaps 600 visitors altogether. The total emissions of the two productions (4500 kg CO2e) divided by the number of visitors (600) gives us a sum of 7.5 kg CO2e per audience member. This equals approximately two Hesburger double burgers.

As most of the audience members have visited more performances and events at the festivals, the emissions of audience travel should be divided between all the events and performances the visitors have participated to have a correct sum per audience member.

Comparison – what if?

As part of Festivals’ Path project we committed to produce the works examined in this calculation without air-travel. Had the artists travelled by air, their travel emissions had been different:

Action Hero: Oh Europa
Travel 3700 kg CO2e (1700 kg CO2e more than by land)
Accommodation 250 kg CO2e
Total 3 950 kg CO2e

Jānis Balodis & Nahuel Cano: The Last Night of the Deer
Travel 3 300 kg CO2e (2490 kg CO2e more than by land)
Accommodation 960 kg CO2e
Electricity 220 kg CO2e
Total 4 480 kg CO2e

If only 5 visitors had arrived by plane from Helsinki to Kuopio instead of using a train, the emissions from audience travel had grown by 1 900 kg CO2e (almost 20%). One return flight from New York to Helsinki would have generated 3 900 kg CO2e (extra 40%) of emissions compared to the estimated carbon budget.

The high volume of emissions from individual flights underlines the importance of route and schedule planning as well as weighing the ”value for the emissions” in each specific case. It is clear that travelling by land produces less emissions compared to air-travel.

Results in detail

Oh Europa results (2 510 kg CO2e) were received from Action Hero company directly, and no detailed information could be obtained.

The Last Night of the Deer emissions (1 990 kg CO2) consisted of the following parts:

Artists travel
Riga – Tallinn – Helsinki – Kuopio (by car, rehearsals July) 270 kg CO2e
Tallinn – Helsinki (ferry, 2 persons + 1 car) 84 kg CO2e
Driving in Kuopio during rehearsals 23 kg CO2e
Driving in Kuopio during the festival 23 kg CO2e
Driving in Riga during rehearsals and festival 0 kg CO2e
Riga – Tallinn – Helsinki – Kuopio (by car, festival Semptember) 270 kg CO2e
Tallinn – Helsinki (ferry, 2 persons + 1 car) 84 kg CO2e

Bus ride for audience in Kuopio
City Hall Kuopio – Länsirannantie, 2 times 57 kg CO2e

Accommodation
Apartment in Riga, 2 months 360 kg CO2e
Apartment in Kuopio (rehearsals 24.–29.7.) 113 kg CO2e
Hotel in Kuopio (during the festival 11.–17.9.) 490 kg CO2e

Electricity
Riga, cultural centre Rītausma (estimate) 209 kg CO2e
Kuopio, rehearsals in July 0 kg CO2e
Kuopio, performance in September, total electricity 13 kg CO2e

Apart from the travel emissions (510 kg CO2e, 29 %), 670 kg CO2 (38 %) was produced in Kuopio and 650 kg CO2 in Riga (33 %).

Lessons to be learned from the process

There’s a lot to learn from this experiment. Carbon footprint could be better integrated in the project life-cycle. There is a need for more systematic data collection during the project in order to get more reliable data.

Here are some recommendations:
1) Have a short lecture about carbon accounting to all stakeholders before doing anything
2) Specify the scope of the carbon footprint calculation and the emission factors/calculator used
3) Specify the data that needs to be collected and name the persons that need to collect it
4) Include a notion of collecting necessary data to contracts with artists; find out if they are already collecting the data or calculating their carbon footprint
5) Include a notion of collecting necessary data to contracts with venues; find out if they are already collecting the data or calculating their carbon footprint
6) Data collection about the audience travel can be improved – special emphasis on invited guests
7) Routines for data collection should be established, more areas could be studied to get a more complete picture of the carbon footprint of the festival production

Goal setting

There are carbon budget targets for the next future decades. Another way of framing the required change is using the ”Hesburger index”.

In order to stay below 1.5°C, the carbon budget for an average Finnish consumer should be:
2020 – 8 double burgers a day (10.4 tons of CO2e/year)
2030 – 2 double burgers a day (2.5 t CO2e/year)
2040 – 1 double burger a day (1.4 t CO2e/year)
2050 – 0.5 double burger a day (0.7 t CO2e/year)

It is worth noticing that the carbon budget for 2050 is very slim. As change in culture and lifestyles is slow, there is an urgent need for trendsetters, persons who live according to the 2050 budget long before the year 2050. There is also a need for organisations that create new, resilient ways of producing and experiencing culture, and maintaining international networks which promote mutual understanding and even world peace.

In this context, I recommend to monitor in a simple manner the emissions from the festival and its individual productions, as well as the larger impact it has on the surrounding people and culture. Another recommendation is to make some preliminary calculations about the travel emissions, which could be used in communication with the audiences and the artists.