Shopping has become a cloak-and-dagger affair. Conspicuous consumption does not look good during a recession, which explains why so many of us are embracing e-commerce. Online shopping on these shores is projected to grow from sales of ￡8.9bn to around ￡21.3bn by the end of 2011.

Often people proclaim they've embraced e-commerce because it's "green". This is understandable. If many shopping bags in a recession looks bad, bricks and mortar retail - huge out-of-town shopping centres, retail emporia that insist on leaving their doors open even in winter and grocery stores full of the most inefficient freezers - look terrible during an ecological emergency.

Should we buy the idea that e-commerce is any better? Several studies have tried to answer this with cold, hard data.

A 2000 study on Webvan, a now defunct US online grocer, concluded that a wider adoption of e-commerce would not give us environmental gains, while a 2002 study of US book retailing found no greater energy savings selling online. But the study that all e-tailers are talking about is a new one from Carnegie Mellon University, which has found that shopping online via Buy.com's e-commerce model for electronic products uses 35 per cent less energy consumption and CO2 emissions than a traditional bricks-and-mortar model.

This is largely because it avoids the usual retail distribution model and, of course, the impact of consumers driving to a store （the average person drives 14 miles in total, to purchase three items）. And, from the shopper's perspective, online buying often allows you to avoid the ephemera of retail, like the 100m coat hangers that end up in landfill each year, or elongated till receipts. （Seek out shoeboxx.co.uk which allows you to organise all your receipts online, ultimately doing away with them.）

But both models are flawed, because online or on the high street, retailers are dependent on a hydrocarbon-fuelled delivery system. Trucks deliver 4.8m tonnes of freight each day in the UK, which works out at about 80kg per person. To make matters worse, after a truck drops off the goods it often returns empty to the depot. A 2002 study of 20,000 haulage trips found that only 2.4% of return journey legs found suitable backloads. This journey represents a large part of the impact of what we buy.

Online shopping may prove marginally more green in terms of energy saving （often a strategy that favours homogenised, multinational retail）, but we shouldn't forget progressive bricks-and-mortar retail. Places such as Ludlow in Shropshire, a fairtrade town based on ethical trading ideas, where the independent high street has been hard won. It brings consumers face to face with products with an equitable backstory, shortened supply chain and with values. This is a wiser and wider retail experience; anything else could leave you feeling short changed.

购物已变成了一种隐秘的事情。在经济萧条期间，炫耀性消费看起来不大好，这便解释了为什么我们有如此多的人纷纷采用电子商务模式。基于上述原因，预计到2011年底，网上销售额预计将从89亿英镑增长到约213亿英镑。

人们总声称他们热衷于电子商务是因为它的"绿色环保".这是可以理解的。经济衰退时期，如果还能看见大包小裹的购物袋算是糟糕的，那么，那些砖瓦和砂浆大楼里的零售业务在环境告急的时期看起来就可怕了。城镇外的各大购物中心、即使在冬天仍旧坚持着开门营业的零售百货中心、以及各家堆满低效能冰箱的杂货店都名列其中。

我们该相信电子购物更好更环保吗？有些研究已经试图利用客观确凿的数据来回答这一问题。

2000年，一项对Webvan（一家现已解散的美国在线杂货商）进行的研究得出结论是，更广泛地采用电子商务不会让我们获得环境收益，而 2002年进行的一项美国图书零售研究则表明，网上销售未能实现更大的能源节约。但是，目前所有的电子零售商关注的焦点成为了卡内基梅隆大学的最新研究内容，该研究发现，通过Buy.com的电子商务模式在网上购买电子产品时，与传统的砖瓦商场销售模式相比，能源消耗和二氧化碳排放不到35%.

这主要是因为它避免了通常的零售分销模式，当然，还有避免了消费者开车去商店带来的影响（平均每人共驾驶14英里，购买三种产品）.从消费者的角度来看，在线购买常常可以让您避免零售狂热，如每年的百米外套衣架排到垃圾填埋场，或是一堆长长的收据。（查找shoeboxx.co.uk,你可以在线整理所有收据，最终消除它们。）

但两种模式都有缺陷，因为无论是在线还是在商业街上，零售商们都要依赖碳氢化合物燃料输送系统。在英国，每天卡车都要运送480万吨的货运，大约人均消耗80公斤。更糟的是，一辆卡车卸下货物后，往往要空车返回停车场。2002年，一项关于2万次运输行程的研究发现，只有2.4 %的回程能找到合适的返回装载货物。这样的行程表明了我们购买是产生的一大部分影响。

从节约能源看，网上购物可能略有较为绿色环保的性质（通常称其为一项侧重于均质跨国的零售战略）,但我们不应该忘记现在有所进步的砖瓦大楼里的零售方式。像什罗普郡的鲁德洛那样的地区--一个基于道德交易想法的公平贸易城镇，独立发达的商业街已经来之不易。它使消费者们能直接而公平的看到产品及产品后的真实一面，缩短供应链和附加价值。这是一种明智而更广泛的零售经验；除此之外，还有什么可以让你感到受骗呢。