Assessing temporary carbon sequestration and storage projects through land use, land-use change and forestry: comparison of dynamic life cycle assessment with ton-year approaches

被引:0
|
作者
Annie Levasseur
Pascal Lesage
Manuele Margni
Miguel Brandão
Réjean Samson
机构
[1] CIRAIG,
[2] Department of Chemical Engineering,undefined
[3] École Polytechnique de Montréal,undefined
[4] CIRAIG,undefined
[5] Department of Mathematical and Industrial Engineering,undefined
[6] École Polytechnique de Montréal,undefined
[7] Sustainability Assessment Unit,undefined
[8] Institute for Environment and Sustainability,undefined
[9] Joint Research Centre,undefined
[10] European Commission,undefined
[11] International Life Cycle Academy,undefined
来源
Climatic Change | 2012年 / 115卷
关键词
Life Cycle Assessment; Fire Scenario; Baseline Emission; Afforestation Project; Sequestration Project;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In order to properly assess the climate impact of temporary carbon sequestration and storage projects through land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF), it is important to consider their temporal aspect. Dynamic life cycle assessment (dynamic LCA) was developed to account for time while assessing the potential impact of life cycle greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. In this paper, the dynamic LCA approach is applied to a temporary carbon sequestration project through afforestation, and the results are compared with those of the two principal ton-year approaches: the Moura-Costa and the Lashof methods. The dynamic LCA covers different scenarios, which are distinguished by the assumptions regarding what happens at the end of the sequestration period. In order to ascertain the degree of compensation of an emission through a LULUCF project, the ratio of the cumulative impact of the project to the cumulative impact of a baseline GHG emission is calculated over time. This ratio tends to 1 when assuming that, after the end of the sequestration project period, the forest is maintained indefinitely. Conversely, the ratio tends to much lower values in scenarios where part of the carbon is released back to the atmosphere due to e.g. fire or forest exploitation. The comparison of dynamic LCA with the ton-year approaches shows that it is a more flexible approach as it allows the consideration of every life cycle stage of the project and it gives decision makers the opportunity to test the sensitivity of the results to the choice of different time horizons.
引用
收藏
页码:759 / 776
页数:17
相关论文
共 23 条
  • [1] Assessing temporary carbon sequestration and storage projects through land use, land-use change and forestry: comparison of dynamic life cycle assessment with ton-year approaches
    Levasseur, Annie
    Lesage, Pascal
    Margni, Manuele
    Brandao, Miguel
    Samson, Rejean
    [J]. CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2012, 115 (3-4) : 759 - 776
  • [2] Assessment and measurement issues related to soil carbon sequestration in land-use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF) projects under the Kyoto protocol
    García-Oliva, F
    Masera, OR
    [J]. CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2004, 65 (03) : 347 - 364
  • [3] Assessment and Measurement Issues Related to Soil Carbon Sequestration in Land-Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry (LULUCF) Projects under the Kyoto Protocol
    Felipe García-Oliva
    Omar R. Masera
    [J]. Climatic Change, 2004, 65 : 347 - 364
  • [4] Soils need to be considered when assessing the impacts of land-use change on carbon sequestration
    Sandra Duarte-Guardia
    Pablo L. Peri
    Nils Borchard
    Brenton Ladd
    [J]. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 2019, 3 : 1642 - 1642
  • [5] Soils need to be considered when assessing the impacts of land-use change on carbon sequestration
    Duarte-Guardia, Sandra
    Peri, Pablo L.
    Borchard, Nils
    Ladd, Brenton
    [J]. NATURE ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, 2019, 3 (12) : 1642 - 1642
  • [6] Reply to: Soils need to be considered when assessing the impacts of land-use change on carbon sequestration
    Kastner, Thomas
    Marques, Alexandra
    Martins, Ines S.
    Plutzar, Christoph
    Theurl, Michaela C.
    Eisenmenger, Nina
    Huijbregts, Mark A. J.
    Wood, Richard
    Stadler, Konstantin
    Bruckner, Martin
    Canelas, Joana
    Hilbers, Jelle P.
    Tukker, Arnold
    Erb, Karl-Heinz
    Pereira, Henrique M.
    [J]. NATURE ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, 2019, 3 (12) : 1643 - 1644
  • [7] Reply to: Soils need to be considered when assessing the impacts of land-use change on carbon sequestration
    Thomas Kastner
    Alexandra Marques
    Inês S. Martins
    Christoph Plutzar
    Michaela C. Theurl
    Nina Eisenmenger
    Mark A. J. Huijbregts
    Richard Wood
    Konstantin Stadler
    Martin Bruckner
    Joana Canelas
    Jelle P. Hilbers
    Arnold Tukker
    Karl-Heinz Erb
    Henrique M. Pereira
    [J]. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 2019, 3 : 1643 - 1644
  • [8] Impact Assessment of Biodiversity and Carbon Pools from Land Use and Land Use Changes in Life Cycle Assessment, Exemplified with Forestry Operations in Norway
    Michelsen, Ottar
    Cherubini, Francesco
    Stromman, Anders Hammer
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY, 2012, 16 (02) : 231 - 242
  • [9] Accounting for indirect land-use change in the life cycle assessment of biofuel supply chains
    Sanchez, Susan Tarka
    Woods, Jeremy
    Akhurst, Mark
    Brander, Matthew
    O'Hare, Michael
    Dawson, Terence P.
    Edwards, Robert
    Liska, Adam J.
    Malpas, Rick
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY INTERFACE, 2012, 9 (71) : 1105 - 1119
  • [10] Change detection (1985-2020): Projections on land-use land cover, carbon storage, sequestration, and valuation in Southwestern Gambia
    Dampha, Nfamara K.
    [J]. SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT, 2021, 7 (01):