Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting

被引:237
|
作者
Brandao, Miguel [1 ]
Levasseur, Annie [2 ]
Kirschbaum, Miko U. F. [3 ]
Weidema, Bo P. [4 ]
Cowie, Annette L. [5 ,6 ]
Jorgensen, Susanne Vedel [7 ,8 ]
Hauschild, Michael Z. [7 ]
Pennington, David W. [1 ]
Chomkhamsri, Kirana [1 ]
机构
[1] Commiss European Communities, Joint Res Ctr, Inst Environm & Sustainabil, Sustainabil Assessment Unit, I-21027 Ispra, Italy
[2] Ecole Polytech, Dept Chem Engn, CIRAIG, Montreal, PQ H3C 3A7, Canada
[3] Landcare Res, Lincoln, New Zealand
[4] Aalborg Univ, Aalborg, Denmark
[5] Univ New England, Rural Climate Solut, Armidale, NSW, Australia
[6] NSW Dept Primary Ind, Armidale, NSW, Australia
[7] Danish Tech Univ DTU, Dept Engn Management, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
[8] Novozymes AS, DK-2880 Bagsvaerd, Denmark
来源
关键词
Climate change; Carbon footprint; Carbon cycle; Carbon stocks; Carbon sinks; Global warming potential (GWP); Time preferences; BIOENERGY; LCA; MITIGATION; EMISSIONS; IMPACT; TIME;
D O I
10.1007/s11367-012-0451-6
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Biological sequestration can increase the carbon stocks of non-atmospheric reservoirs (e.g. land and land-based products). Since this contained carbon is sequestered from, and retained outside, the atmosphere for a period of time, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is temporarily reduced and some radiative forcing is avoided. Carbon removal from the atmosphere and storage in the biosphere or anthroposphere, therefore, has the potential to mitigate climate change, even if the carbon storage and associated benefits might be temporary. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and carbon footprinting (CF) are increasingly popular tools for the environmental assessment of products, that take into account their entire life cycle. There have been significant efforts to develop robust methods to account for the benefits, if any, of sequestration and temporary storage and release of biogenic carbon. However, there is still no overall consensus on the most appropriate ways of considering and quantifying it. This paper reviews and discusses six available methods for accounting for the potential climate impacts of carbon sequestration and temporary storage or release of biogenic carbon in LCA and CF. Several viewpoints and approaches are presented in a structured manner to help decision-makers in their selection of an option from competing approaches for dealing with timing issues, including delayed emissions of fossil carbon. Key issues identified are that the benefits of temporary carbon removals depend on the time horizon adopted when assessing climate change impacts and are therefore not purely science-based but include value judgments. We therefore did not recommend a preferred option out of the six alternatives presented here. Further work is needed to combine aspects of scientific and socio-economic understanding with value judgements and ethical considerations.
引用
收藏
页码:230 / 240
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting
    Miguel Brandão
    Annie Levasseur
    Miko U. F. Kirschbaum
    Bo P. Weidema
    Annette L. Cowie
    Susanne Vedel Jørgensen
    Michael Z. Hauschild
    David W. Pennington
    Kirana Chomkhamsri
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2013, 18 : 230 - 240
  • [2] Carbon footprinting, labelling and life cycle assessment
    Hans-Jürgen Schmidt
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2009, 14 (Suppl 1) : 6 - 9
  • [3] Biogenic Carbon and Temporary Storage Addressed with Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment
    Levasseur, Annie
    Lesage, Pascal
    Margni, Manuele
    Samson, Rejean
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY, 2013, 17 (01) : 117 - 128
  • [4] Review: life-cycle assessment, water footprinting, and carbon footprinting in Portugal
    Burman, Nicholas W.
    Croft, Joel
    Engelbrecht, Shaun
    Ladenika, A. O.
    MacGregor, O. S.
    Maepa, Mpho
    Bodunrin, Michael Oluwatosin
    Harding, Kevin G.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2018, 23 (08): : 1693 - 1700
  • [5] Review: life-cycle assessment, water footprinting, and carbon footprinting in Portugal
    Nicholas W. Burman
    Joel Croft
    Shaun Engelbrecht
    A. O. Ladenika
    O. S. MacGregor
    Mpho Maepa
    Michael Oluwatosin Bodunrin
    Kevin G. Harding
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2018, 23 : 1693 - 1700
  • [6] Options for accounting carbon sequestration in German forests
    Krug J.
    Koehl M.
    Riedel T.
    Bormann K.
    Rueter S.
    Elsasser P.
    [J]. Carbon Balance and Management, 4 (1)
  • [7] The availability of life-cycle assessment, water footprinting, and carbon footprinting studies in Brazil
    Bodunrin, Michael O.
    Burman, Nicholas W.
    Croft, Joel
    Engelbrecht, Shaun
    Goga, Taahira
    Ladenika, A. O.
    MacGregor, O. S.
    Maepa, Mpho
    Harding, Kevin G.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2018, 23 (08): : 1701 - 1707
  • [8] The availability of life-cycle assessment, water footprinting, and carbon footprinting studies in Brazil
    Michael O. Bodunrin
    Nicholas W. Burman
    Joel Croft
    Shaun Engelbrecht
    Taahira Goga
    A. O. Ladenika
    O. S. MacGregor
    Mpho Maepa
    Kevin G. Harding
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2018, 23 : 1701 - 1707
  • [9] Accounting for the Carbon Sequestration Potential of Reinforced Concrete in a Whole-Building Life-Cycle Assessment
    Souto-Martinez, Adriana
    Delesky, Elizabeth A.
    Foster, Kyle E. O.
    Srubar, Wil V., III
    [J]. AEI 2017: RESILIENCE OF THE INTEGRATED BUILDING, 2017, : 285 - 298
  • [10] Carbon sequestration assessment and analysis in the whole life cycle of seaweed
    Lian, Yushun
    Wang, Rui
    Zheng, Jinhai
    Chen, WenXing
    Chang, Lirong
    Li, Cheng
    Yim, Solomon C.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2023, 18 (07)