Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies are valuable tools for identifying high impact processes and redesigning supply chains. However, LCAs have limits, in the sense that they offer insight into relative sustainability and don't question whether a product, or its use, is sustainable in absolute terms. In this intentionally provocative paper, you join Emma, a fictional average American 15-year-old, as she consults an LCA researcher, a sustainable consumption expert and a sociologist to investigate the best way to reduce the environmental impact of her hair removal. This paper presents a streamlined LCA for shaving, waxing and laser and connects this to a socio-material analysis of the history of hair removal in the USA to offer intervention into leverage points beyond Emma's choice of product. Our argument is not that avoiding shaving or waxing or laser is ‘the best’ action an individual could take to lower their environmental impact, instead we highlight how even the smallest activities coalesce into billion-dollar industries globally, with attendant billion tonne emissions. Thus, we utilise some of Danielle Meadows' twelve strategic leverage points to change systems in order to identify other interventions, such as (6) shifting information flows to make LCAs more impactful and accessible; (4) self-organising to normalise hairiness; or (3) changing the goals of the system. For example, valuing wellbeing over profit would arguably lead to regulation preventing medical professionals from marketing painful non-medical procedures. This paper reflects on how individuals make sense of their environmental impact within systems and argues for an increased emphasis on global wellbeing and absolute sustainability.

Storytelling is gaining traction in the field of energy and social science research. It supports collective agenda setting, embraces complexity, and represents one way to tackle the ‘wicked problems’ of climate change. It is particularly important given the commonly opaque nature of social science outputs, and the urgency in which responses to climate change are now required. Responding to these challenges and recognising the value of storytelling, we present three ‘telling tales’ in this paper. Each takes inspiration from a well-known fairy tale character (i.e., mermaids, vampires, and witches) to translate energy and social science research in the empirical contexts of electricity generation, sustainable travel, and plastic pollution in the UK. We draw on these fairy tale characters as a part of arguing that UK policy reflects a fixation with renewables, excessive caution concerning car ownership and use, and a reductive approach to plastics. In response, we consider some alternative approaches, each aimed at delivering transformational adaptation, premised on demand reduction. We aim, more broadly, to inspire others to tell their own convincing tales to communicate research findings beyond academic circles and to help bring about change.

Information and communication technologies are recognised to be sufficiently mature to support traceability for reusable packaging at large scale. However, issues of data management, data integration, trust and collaboration in this complex ecosystem remain under-explored. We suggest that Digital Passports and mandatory reporting could provide a way to audit and incentivise reuse of packaging, allowing governments to focus on prevention and to frame packaging as an asset, rather than inevitably turning into waste after a short single-use cycle. Digital Passports can address business’ concerns (or excuses) for not investing in reusable packaging from helping with determining affordability through measuring packaging lifespans; meeting health and safety standards through batch coding and evidencing cleaning checks; addressing reputational concerns through clear documentation on the environmental impact of reusable items; and making reusable packaging competitive through waste taxation that actually measures reuse. We explore Digital Passports, not simply as a technical intervention but as boundary objects that are useful in supporting collaboration, identifying points of miscommunication between key actors along the value chain, from misconceptions of health and safety regulations to a distinction between retailers' and manufacturing brands' willingness to invest in reuse. Thus, we provide a solid foundation for future research on Digital Passports, the digital circular economy and reusable packaging.

Techno-economic approaches largely avoid delineating necessary energy uses or questioning how excessive lifestyle expectations may curtail attempts to achieve ambitious climate change targets. In this Perspective, I present data suggesting a general trend of increasing domestic floor area per capita globally and argue that this ought to be a key focus in future energy research, considering that house size is the largest determinant of domestic energy consumption. Particular attention should be directed at the confluence of factors that influence floor area per capita and questions of lifestyle expectations, energy sufficiency and invisible energy policies that have enabled the rise in floor area per capita both deliberately and inadvertently. Overall, this elucidates why energy research must consider lifestyle expectations and demographic trends that are generally seen as outside the remit of energy policy.

Domestic energy demand is a topical policy issue, with implications for climate change, energy vulnerability and security. Domestic energy demand varies considerably by country, climate, building type, and even when these factors are the same, occupancy patterns and inhabitant's lifestyles also create variation. However, clarifying understanding of the basic locus of analysis: the home, house, dwelling, or household has received little attention to date, despite its relevance to debates on energy demand. This paper explores the theoretical and methodological assumptions of investigating the ‘house’ compared to the ‘home’ and the implications for domestic energy researchers. We suggest that the ontological priority given to the ‘home’ results in scholarship which considers both social and physical aspects that shape demand. Conversely, research prioritising the ‘house’ is dominated by techno-economic thinking, and overlooks critical social considerations. Recognising this important distinction, we conclude with a plea for scholars to be cognisant of ontology and language, and provide some suggestions for a future research agenda.