Life Cycle Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Life cycle assessments of greenhouse gas emissions have been developed for analyzing products “from cradle to grave”: from resource extraction to waste disposal. Life cycle assessment methodology has also been applied to economies, trade between countries, aspects of production, and waste management, including CO2 capture and sequestration. Life cycle assessments of greenhouse gas emissions are often part of wider environmental assessments, which also cover other environmental impacts. Such wider-ranging assessments allow for considering “trade-offs” between (reduction of) greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental impacts and co-benefits of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Databases exist which contain estimates of current greenhouse gas emissions linked to fossil fuel use and to many current agricultural and industrial activities. However, these databases do allow for substantial uncertainties in emission estimates. Assessments of greenhouse gas emissions linked to new processes and products are subject to even greater data-linked uncertainty. Variability in outcomes of life cycle assessments of greenhouse gas emissions may furthermore originate in different choices regarding functional units, system boundaries, time horizons, and the allocation of greenhouse gas emissions to outputs in multi-output processes.
Life cycle assessments may be useful in the identification of life cycle stages that are major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and of major reduction options, in the verification of alleged climate benefits, and to establish major differences between competing products. They may also be helpful in the analysis and development of options, policies, and innovations aimed at mitigation of climate change.
The main findings from available life cycle assessments of greenhouse gas emissions are summarized, offering guidance in mitigating climate change. Future directions in developing life cycle assessment and its application are indicated. These include better handling of indirect effects, of uncertainty, and of changes in carbon stock of recent biogenic origin and improved comprehensiveness in dealing with climate warming.
KeywordsBurning Corn Ozone Shale Diesel
- Brehmer B, Boom RM, Sanders J (2009) Maximum fossil fuel feedstock replacement potential of petrochemicals via biorefineries. Chem Eng Des 87:1103–1119Google Scholar
- Douglas GA, Harrison GF, Chick JP (2008) Life cycle assessment of Seagen marine current turbine. J Eng Marit Environ 222M:1–12Google Scholar
- ELCD (2008) European commission joint research centre – European reference life cycle data system. http://lct.jrc.ec.europa.eu/lcanfohub/dataset
- Greene DL (2011) Rebound 2007: analysis of U.S. light duty vehicle travel statistics. Energy Policy. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.083Google Scholar
- Guinee JB (ed) (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
- Haines A, McMichael AJ, Smith KR, Roberts I, Woodcock J, Markandya A, Armstoing BG, Campbell-Lendrum D, Dangour AD, Davies M, Bruce N, Tonne C, Barrett M, Wilkinson P (2009) Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: overview and implications for policy makers. Lancet 374:2104–2114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Havlik P, Schneider UA, Schmid E, Böttcher H, Fritz S, Skalsky R, Aoki K, de Cara S, Kinderman G, Kraxner F, Leduc S, McCallum I, Mosnier A, Sauer T, Obersteiner M (2011) Global land-use implications of first and second generation biofuel targets. Energ Policy. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.030Google Scholar
- Hoglmeier K, Weber-Blaschke G, Richter K (2014) Utilization of recovered wood in cascades versus utilization of primary wood- a comparison with life cycle assessment using system expansion. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0774-6Google Scholar
- Huijbregts MAJ, Thissen UMJ, Guinee JB, Jager T, Kalf D, van der Meent D, Ragas AMJ, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Reijnders L (2000) Priority assessment of toxic substances in life cycle assessment. Part I: calculation of toxicity potentials for 181 substances with the nested multi-media fate exposure and effects model USES-LCA. Chemosphere 41:541–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- IPPC Working Group I (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK/New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Iribarren D, Hospido A, Moreira MT, Feijoo G (2010) Carbon footprint of canned mussels from a business-to-consumer approach. A starting point for mussel processors and policy makers. Environ Sci Policy. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.05.003Google Scholar
- Myrhe G, Shindell D, Bréon F, Fuglestvedt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque J, Lee D, Mendoza B, Nakajima T, Robock A, Stephens G, Takemura T, Zhang H (2013) Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing. In: Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the fifth assessment report on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Petron G, Frost G, Miller BR, Hirsch AI (2012) Hydrocarbon emissions characterization in the Colorado Front Range: a pilot study. J Geophys Res 117, D04304Google Scholar
- Pottimg J, Hauschild M (2005) Background for spatial differentiation in LCA impact assessment – the EDIP2003 methodology. Danish Ministry of the Environment. www.mst.dk/Udgiv/publications/2005/87-7614-581-6/pdf
- Reijnders L, Huijbregts MAJ (2009) Biofuels for road transport. A seed to wheel perspective. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Reijnders L, Soret S (2003) Quantification of the environmental impact of different dietary protein choices. Am J Clin Nutr 78:664S–668SGoogle Scholar
- Sann TE, Palanisamy K, Nazrain M, Ani FN (2006) Study of carbon dioxide emission during combustion of biodiesel. In: International conference on energy and environment 2006, Kajang, pp 65–70Google Scholar
- Schöpp W, Potting J, Hauschild M, Blok K (1998) Site-dependent life cycle impact assessment of acidification. J Ind Ecol 8(2):63–87Google Scholar
- Stern N (2006) Stern review on the economics of climate change. HM Treasury, London. http://apo.org.au/