The Shop also benefits from the green wave

Should we write “The Shop also benefits from the green wave” or “the environment benefits from the supermarket Online Shop”? Good question. Edition 27 of Migros Magazine dedicates an article on the environmental gain from the the Shop supermarket, which, remember, is the property of Migros. We learn that, because of the people who shop on the Web at the Shop, for 23’668 orders over the last 12 months, we saved the equivalent of 143 football fields covered with forest absorption of CO2 (on the other hand, a soccer field covered in forest, it doesn’t have to be convenient to play on it…) as well as the equivalent of the energy required to light 20’047 people a year. For energy consumption and CO2, their settings are:

• Transport: the average journey of an individual customer (as Star) is well less optimized that a delivery grouped with optimized route (loop).
• Storage: an online supermarket didn’t need lighting or ambient air conditioning for customers. Refrigerated areas have a much better performance in the warehouse in a large area.

On the other hand, the Shop also assesses:

• Time saving: they take into account only the transport, assuming that the time spent at the races even is not necessarily less online than in a real store (except that shopping online, they can be Sunday or at 3: 00 in the morning…)
• Transport costs: they calculate the real cost of delivery by deducting mileage for travel to the store.

Interesting. I have to say that, apart from the argument of delivery costs, their argumenatation is consistent… More info on the page ecobalance of a customer of the Shop of the Shop site.