Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Methane oxidation, biogenic carbon, and the IPCC’s emission metrics. Proposal for a consistent greenhouse-gas accounting

  • CARBON FOOTPRINTING
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The fifth assessment report by the IPCC includes methane oxidation as an additional indirect effect in the global warming potential (GWP) and global temperature potential (GTP) values for methane. An analysis of the figures provided by the IPCC reveals they lead to different outcomes measured in CO2-eq., depending on whether or not biogenic CO2 emissions are considered neutral. In this article, we discuss this inconsistency and propose a correction.

Methods

We propose a simple framework to account for methane oxidation in GWP and GTP in a way that is independent on the accounting rules for biogenic carbon. An equation with three components is provided to calculate metric values, and its application is tested, together with the original IPCC figures, in a hypothetical example focusing on GWP100.

Results and discussion

The hypothetical example shows that the only set of GWP100 values consistently leading to the same outcome, regardless of how we account for biogenic carbon, is the one proposed in this article. Using the methane GWP100 values from the IPCC report results in conflicting net GHG emissions, thus pointing to an inconsistency.

Conclusions

In order to consistently discriminate between biogenic and fossil methane sources, a difference of 2.75 kg CO2-eq. is needed, which corresponds to the ratio of the molecular weights of CO2 and methane (44/16). We propose to correct the GWP and GTP values for methane accordingly.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boucher O, Friedlingstein P, Collins B, Shine KP (2009) The indirect global warming potential and global temperature change potential due to methane oxidation. Environ ResLett 4:044007

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherubini F, Strømman AH, Hertwich E (2011) Effects of boreal forest management practices on the climate impact of CO2 emissions from bioenergy. Ecol Model 223(1):59–66

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen TH, Gentil E, Boldrin A, Larsen AW, Weidema BP, Hauschild M (2009) C balance, carbon dioxide emissions and global warming potentials in LCA-modelling of waste managementsystems. Waste Manage Res 27(8):707–715

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hauschild M, Wenzel H (1998) Environmental assessment of products. Vol 2: Scientific background, vol. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Houghton JT, Jenkins GJ, Ephraums JJ (eds) (1990) Climate Change. The IPCC Scientific Assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 364 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, p 1535

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2013) ISO/TS 14067 - Greenhouse gases - Carbon footprint of products - Requirements and guidelines for quantification and communication. Geneva, Switzerland

  • European Commission (2010) ILCD handbook. General guide for life cycle assessment—detailed guidance, 1st edn. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment andSustainability, Ispra

    Google Scholar 

  • Joos F, Roth R, Fuglestvedt JS, Peters GP, Enting IG, von Bloh W, Brovkin V, Burke EJ, Eby M, Edwards NR, Friedrich T, Frölicher TL, Halloran PR, Holden PB, Jones C, Kleinen T, Mackenzie FT, Matsumoto K, Meinshausen M, Plattner GK, Reisinger A, Segschneider J, Shaffer G, Steinacher M, Strassmann K, Tanaka K, Timmermann A, Weaver AJ (2013) Carbon dioxide and climate impulse response functions for the computation of greenhouse gas metrics: a multi-model analysis. Atmos Chem Phys 13:2793–2825

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Levasseur A, Lesage P, Margni M, Deschenes L, Samson R (2010) Considering time in LCA: dynamic LCA and its application to global warming impact assessments. Environ Sci Technol 44(8):3169–3174

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz I, Rigarlsford G, Milài Canals L, King H (2013) Accounting for greenhouse-gas emissions from the degradation of chemicals in the environment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(1):252–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myhre G, Shindell D, Bréon FM, Collins W, Fuglestvedt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque JF, Lee D, Mendoza B, Nakajima T, Robock A, Stephens G, Takemura T, Zhang H (2013) Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rypdal K, Paciornik N, Eggleston S, Goodwin J, Irving W, Penman J, Woodfield M (2006) Introduction to the 2006 guidelines. In: Eggleston HS, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K (eds) IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, vol 1. IGES, Hayama

    Google Scholar 

  • Shine K (2009) The global warming potential-the need for an interdisciplinary retrial. Clim Chang 96:467–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shine K, Fuglestvedt J, Hailemariam K, Stuber N (2005) Alternatives to the global warming potential for comparing climate impacts of emissions of greenhouse gases. Clim Chang 68:281–302

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • WRI (2011) Greenhouse Gas Protocol - Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard., World Resources Institute and World Business Council for Sustainable Development, http://www.ghgprotocol.org/files/ghgp/public/Product-Life-Cycle-Accounting-Reporting-Standard_041613.pdf (accessed 20 January 2016)

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author thanks the useful input received from Dr. Olivier Boucher, CNRS Research Director, and Dr. William Collins, Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry and Earth System Modeling, University of Reading.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 2.-0 LCA consultants, Skibbrogade, 5, 1, 9000, Aalborg, Denmark

    Ivan Muñoz

  2. The Danish Centre for Environmental Assessment, Aalborg University, Skibbrogade 5, 1, 9000, Aalborg, Denmark

    Jannick H. Schmidt

Authors
  1. Ivan Muñoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jannick H. Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ivan Muñoz.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Hans-Jürgen Garvens

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

A spreadsheet including the application of the proposed GWP and GTP values in an example. Determination of the Oxidation factor in Eq. (1) for time horizons of 20, 50 and 100 years (XLSX 409 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Muñoz, I., Schmidt, J.H. Methane oxidation, biogenic carbon, and the IPCC’s emission metrics. Proposal for a consistent greenhouse-gas accounting. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21, 1069–1075 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1091-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1091-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation