carbon footprint_challenges and opportunities
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
1/45
Seminar Report (TD 694)
On
CARBON FOOTPRINT-CHALLENGES AND
OPPORTUNITIES
Submitted in partial fulfilment for the Degree of
M. Tech. in Technology & Development
by
Vishal Singh
(Roll No. 123350007)
Under the guidance ofProf. Prasad Modak
Centre for Technology Alternatives for Rural Areas (CTARA)
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay,
Powai, Mumbai400076.
October, 2012
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
2/45
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the seminar report titled CARBON FOOTPRINT-CHALLENGES
AND OPPORTUNITIES prepared by Vishal Singh is approved for submission at Centre
for Technology Alternatives for Rural Areas (CTARA), IIT Bombay, Powai.
31st October 2012
Signature of Seminar Guide
Guide name: Prof. Prasad Modak
Designation: Professor
Department: CTARA, IITB
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
3/45
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the report entitled CARBON FOOTPRINT-CHALLENGES AND
OPPORTUNITIES submitted by me, for the partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of
Technology to CTARA, IITB is a record of the seminar work carried out by me under the
supervision of Dr. Prasad Modak, Professor, CTARA, IIT Bomaby.
I further declare that this written submission represents my ideas in my own words and where
others ideas or words have been included, I have adequately cited and referenced the original
sources. I affirm that I have adhered to all principles of academic honesty and integrity and
have not misrepresented or falsified any idea/data/fact/source to the best of my knowledge. I
understand that any violation of the above will cause for disciplinary action by the Institute
and can also evoke penal action from the sources which have not been cited properly.
Place: Mumbai
Date: 31st October 2012 Signature of the Candidate
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
4/45
Abstract
This seminar report would study different methodologies and protocols employed for Carbon
Footprinting of products. Primarily, it would attempt to identify similarities and differences
between the different protocols, such as GHG, Carbon Trust and JEMAI.
While undertaking this study, we would increase our understanding of the different methods,
processes and procedures for assessing carbon footprint of a particular product. This would
also enlighten us on the working of different CFP protocols and their acceptability in the
market. A detailed study of all the three protocols has been done.
This report would also help us to understand the emerging trends in the carbon trading
market. How should the carbon emissions be taxed or traded remains the question. The report
also throws some light on the Indian context and related developments.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
5/45
ii
Contents
1.Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Carbon Footprint ................................................................................................................................. 3
1.2 PROCEDURE ........................................................................................................................................ 4
1.3 GHG Protocol ...................................................................................................................................... 5
1.3.1 Obtaining the mark as per GHG Protocol .................................................................................... 5
1.3.2 Review process as per GHG Protocol ........................................................................................... 5
1.4.CARBON TRUST ................................................................................................................................... 6
1.4.1 Carbon footprinting software solutions ....................................................................................... 6
1.4.2 Assessment Criteria...................................................................................................................... 6
1.5 JEMAI Protocol .................................................................................................................................... 7
1.5.1 New CFP Program with flexibility ................................................................................................. 7
1.5.2 Four targets in operating new CFP program by JEMAI ................................................................ 7
2.Carbon Footprint Labels ............................................................................................................................. 8
2.1 Redundancy of LCA ............................................................................................................................. 9
2.2 GHG Protocols Methodology for CFP............................................................................................... 10
2.3 Required details by Carbon Trust Standard ...................................................................................... 11
2.4 Required details by JEMAI................................................................................................................. 12
3.Challenges ................................................................................................................................................ 13
3.1 Technical Challenges ......................................................................................................................... 14
3.1.1 Scope of emissions ..................................................................................................................... 14
3.1.2 Life cycle stages .......................................................................................................................... 14
3.1.3 System boundaries ..................................................................................................................... 14
3.1.4 Offsetting of emissions .............................................................................................................. 15
3.1.5 Data ............................................................................................................................................ 15
3.1.6 Allocation ................................................................................................................................... 15
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
6/45
iii
3.1.7 End-of-life ................................................................................................................................... 15
3.2 Environmental Challenges ................................................................................................................ 16
3.2.1 Carbon storage ........................................................................................................................... 16
3.2.2 Land use change ......................................................................................................................... 16
3.2.3 Capital goods .............................................................................................................................. 16
3.3 Other Problems ................................................................................................................................. 17
4.OPPORTUNITIES ....................................................................................................................................... 18
4.1 Solving Problems ............................................................................................................................... 18
4.1.1 Solving Technical Difficulties ...................................................................................................... 18
4.1.2 Solving Environmental Difficulties ............................................................................................. 19
4.2 Available Alternatives ....................................................................................................................... 20
4.3 GHG protocol in India........................................................................................................................ 21
4.4 Future development of the CFP Program ......................................................................................... 23
4.4.1 Impact of Other Agencies .......................................................................................................... 24
4.4.2 Recent Developments in the Carbon Market ............................................................................ 25
4.4.3 What Next .................................................................................................................................. 27
5.CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................ 28
5.1 Lessons Learnt ................................................................................................................................... 28
5.2 Future Scope ..................................................................................................................................... 29
References .................................................................................................................................................. 30
Annexure ..................................................................................................................................................... 33
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
7/45
iv
LIST OF IMAGES
Image 1.1: GHG Protocol mark ...5
Image 1.2: CFP label by Carbon Trust, UK....6
Image 1.3: The JEMAI CFP Logo ....7
Image 2.1: Different labels displaying CFP.8
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
8/45
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 List of Inventories required for CFP calculation.10
Table 2.2 Methodology followed by Carbon Trust Standard..11
Table 2.3 Methodology followed by EcoLeaf12
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
9/45
vi
ABBREVIATIONS
GHG Green House Gases
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
CO2e/CO2eq carbon dioxide equivalent
GWP100 100-year global warming potential
CFP carbon footprint
LCA Life Cycle Assessment
MFA Material Flow Analysis
AAU Assigned amount units
CER Certified Emission Reduction
ERU Emission Reduction Unit
VER Verified Emission Reduction
BLICC Business Leaders Initiative on Climate Change
CCX Chicago Climate Exchange
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EU-ETS European Union Emission Trading Scheme
SEMARNET Mexican Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources
CESPEDES Center of Private-Sector Studies for Sustainable Development
WRI World Resources Institute
WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development
PhilGARP Philippine GHG Accounting and Reporting Program
RGGI Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative
ISO International Organization for Standardization
TERI The Energy and Resources Institute
TERI-BCSD TERI-Business Council for Sustainable Development
CII-GBC Confederation of Indian Industry- Sohrabji Godrej Green Business Centre
JEMAI Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry
METI Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
M&S Marks & Spencer
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
10/45
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
Carbon footprinting is the new way of branding an organizations efficiency, its impact on the
place or society in which it survives and its effect on the resources it uses. It also takes accountof the effects of having used any particular consumer product. The concept of product carbon
footprinting does allow a consumer the power to know and decide about the kind of affect he
will cause by his usage of products. This requires all the consumer products to be carbon
footprinted and labels put on them. Now here comes a real challenge. There are myriad number
of markets all around the world. But we also see a rising acceptability of CFP and the benefits of
usage of low CFP products by the consumers. This report will try to explore the real challenges
of product footpring and labeling for its carbon nd /or GHG emsiions. It will also try to explore
the opportunities of the new markets which are already established and those which are expected
to rise due to tightening of rules and policies against polluting companies and pro environment
efforts by nmeroues government/non govt. agencies. How and why , if ever it does, will the
system of having products CFP labeled on them will take off, is the question which this report
ponders upon.
The sequence of the report will contain a list of procedures and their usage and acceptance in the
industry. The first chapter will discuss the origin and the definition of carbon footprint and
different ways and methods, protocols, which are used to decide the amount of GHG emissions
any particular industry is making. This provides us with an opportunity to identify and label the
products of that particular industry with the amount of emissions required to make it.
The second chapter will then highlight the major conformations made by different protocols,
which are required to calculate the CFP of products. There are also however many different
fields of ambiguities wherein it is very difficult to calculate and assign amount of emissions
made in term of CO2.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
11/45
2
This bring us to the third chapter which intends to incorporate the challenges felt by the industry
before any government makes it mandatory to have products footprinted and labeled. As for now
it is voluntary, but the subject markets have seen a very welcome attitude of consumers towards
pro green products and also their affinity towards products having a low CFP.
The fourth chapter will try to explore the available solutions to the challenges of product CFP
and labeling scene. It will also showcase a list of methods and alternatives which can be used to
deter the challenges of the same while exploring the available as well as rising and upcoming
opportunities. There is a huge rise in various options that new industries can take in order to get
through the system, get certification by a competent authority, and get eligible to use labels on
their products.
The sixth chapter will summarize the report and will highlight the major topics discussed in the
report. It will also show the future prospects of the carbon scene and the essential direction that
the product CFP and labeling system will acquire.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
12/45
3
1.1 Carbon Footprint
A carbon footprint is defined as "the total set of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions caused by an
organization, event, product or person."1
Wright, Kemp, and Williams, writing in the journal Carbon Management, have suggested a more
practicable definition:
"A measure of the total amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) emissions of a
defined population, system or activity, considering all relevant sources, sinks and storage
within the spatial and temporal boundary of the population, system or activity of interest.
Calculated as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) using the relevant 100-year global warming
potential (GWP100)."2
Greenhouse gases are emitted by almost all human and animal activities, also from natural
activities, dams, seas, factories et al. For easier reference, it is expressed in terms of the amount
of carbon dioxide, or its equivalent (CO2e/CO2eq).
CFP emissions for any household come from "indirect" sources or in production of items of daily
usage, while emissions that come directly from usage of fuel and energy are the "direct" sources
of the consumer's carbon footprint.3
The concept name of the carbon footprint originates from ecological footprint, discussion, which
was developed by Rees and Wackernagel in the 1990s which estimates the number of "earths"
that would theoretically be required if everyone on the planet consumed resources at the same
level as the person calculating their ecological footprint. 4
The word was defined in 1965 in the Science Year newsletter:
"Footprint, the proposed landing area for a spacecraft."
The December 1982 edition of Computerworld magazine referred to the 'desktop footprint':
1"What is a carbon footprint?". UK Carbon Trust. Retrieved 21 Oct 2012
2 Laurence A Wright, Simon Kemp & Ian Williams, www.future-science.com/doi/abs/10.4155/cmt.10.39?cookieSet=1 Retrieved 21 Oct 20123http://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/footprint Retrieved 21 Oct 20124http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/magazine/17wwln-safire-t.html?_r=1& Retrieved 1 Oct 2012
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
13/45
4
1.2 PROCEDURE
Product carbon footprint labeling is generally the last stage of the CFP process. This starts with
the organization or the company wanting to register themselves gets ahead with steps to reduce
its carbon footprint, take a pledge to keep reducing it later on, and applying for the certification
process.
This however is just a start and the reviewing organization then asks the applicant to do a
comprehensive analysis of the details of the energy and material usage by the production process
as well as other related activities like paperwork, postage, logistics and other miscellaneous
sources. How do the three major reviewing and certifying organizations do this and on what
grounds they grant the applicant to use the label on their products are being discussed in this
chapter.
It will be entertaining to learn how an agency like GHG, Carbon Trust or EcoLeaf goes ahead
with the actual process of getting CFP calculated for an organization or product. Different
agencies take different approaches towards the same goal. This chapter gives an overview of the
three aforementioned agencies and their background information.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
14/45
5
1.3 GHG Protocol
A decade-long partnership between the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business
Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) resulted in the formation of the GHG Protocol.
It is now working with businesses, governments, and environmental groups around the world to
build cleaner, greener and effective programs for tackling climate change.
1.3.1 Obtaini ng the mark as per GHG Protocol
A prime limitation or opportunity, whatever you choose to call it, the GHG protocol mark is
available only for those products that are publically available at no cost to users. If not all the
external, stakeholders were considered during development of the product, GHG will require that
it should be done and produced. This is ensured by GHG protocol to maintain open and healthy
stakeholders discussion and buy-in. There is no royalty fees associated for using the mark for
products with no cost to users. Applicants can apply for the mark at the beginning, middle, or
end of their development process. Product rules can be developed individually or following the
guidance of a product rule program.
1.3.2 Review process as per GHG ProtocolThe interested organization or company applies to GHG for a review. GHG Protocol presents the
review results to the applicant and discusses any changes that need to occur to obtain the mark.
Applicant makes the changes necessary and resubmits to GHG Protocol for final approval. Once
the mark or review claim has been obtained, it cannot be used for any other purpose than the
reviewed sector guidance, product rule, or calculation tool. For product rules, if the review was
completed on the product rule development guidance document, only that document can bare the
mark or claim. Later a list of documents and tools that bare the mark or review claim is provided
on the GHG Protocol website. This list is reviewed on a regular basis, and any documents or
tools that have become outdated or revised are removed.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
15/45
6
1.4.CARBON TRUST
The Carbon Trust introduced the worlds first carbon label, the Carbon Reduction Label, in the
UK in 2006. Products featuring their carbon footprint as a Carbon Trust Label are Walkers
Crisps, Kingsmill bread, British Sugar, Cemex cement, Marshalls paving and Quaker Oats.
Carbon Trust helps organizations develop a certifiable product footprint for the registered
organization. Carbon Trust also has developed certifiable footprinting models that are aligned to
GHG protocol and PAS 2050, and analyses the data to pinpoint opportunities for business.
1.4.1 Carbon footprinti ng software solutions
The Value Chain Hotspotter is a tool that provides organizations from all sectors with a rapidassessment of the carbon "hotspots" in their value chain, allowing anyone to identify risks and
reduction opportunities. Footprint Expert has been used by many leading companies such as
Dyson, Pepsico, Coca-Cola, Tesco and Marks & Spencer.5
1.4.2 Assessment Cr iteria
To achieve Carbon Trust Standard an organization needs to meet these three criteria.
Provide an accurate footprint measurementincluding all required emission sources. Demonstrate an absolute reduction of footprint or equivalent relative efficiency
improvement.
Demonstrate good carbon management to Carbon Trust standard including carbongovernance, accounting, reduction methods and targets.
Then the organization needs to submit an application for review by an independent assessor
using the following tools:
Carbon Footprint Calculator which is used to record organizations carbon footprintand the reduction in this footprint over time
Assessment Form which is used to document whether the organization meets therequired carbon management standards.
5www.carbontrust.uk
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
16/45
7
1.5 JEMAI Protocol
The governmental Japanese CFP Pilot Project was completed on March 2012. Since April 2012,JEMAI (Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry) has taken over theJapanese CFP scheme, and has been officially started the operations ofthe CFP CommunicationProgram. Acceptance of applications for CFP-PCR certification and system certification wasstarted on July 2, and all components required for the new CFP Program are finalized.6
1.5.1 New CFP Program with fl exibi li ty7
The Japanese CFP pilot project was operated strictly, considering ensuring of reliability andtransparency. In operations by JEMAI, consensus obtained from findings and outcomes of thepilot project is maintained. Meanwhile improvements in operations using flexibility of theprivate entity, aims at the new programs ease of availability for participation and understandingby businesses who introduce CFP and by consumers who receives communicative information.
The followings are main improvements and responding points of the new CFP Program:
Streamlining of CFP-PCR development, and speeding-up of certification Diversification of verification methods, and speeding-up of verification Easing of participation requirements by revising operations of secondary data usage More flexibility for use of a CFP mark, and promoting of communication Considerations for comparability
1.5.2 Four targets in operating new CFP program by JEMAI
8
As the program operator of Japanese CFP program has been taken over from the government byJEMAI, they have set new program targets from the following four perspectives and aim tooperate an attractive CFP program, using flexibilities as private organization.
Commitment to prevent global warming Ensuring reliability and transparency: CFP environmental labeling project conforming
to ISO 14067 (under development), aims at operations enhancing credibility andtransparency by strictly adhering to accounting rules and by the third party certification
Disclosure of Eco-Products information:New CFP program aims to raising awarenessof the CFP program through a CFP mark, and to disclose Eco-Products information so
that customers and general consumers can choose CFP products. Enjoyable program which all stakeholders can share
6http://www.cfp-japan.jp/english/7http://www.cfp-japan.jp/english/overview/overview_05.html8http://www.cfp-japan.jp/english/overview/overview_03.html
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
17/45
8
Chapter 2
Carbon Footprint Labels
A very positive change has been induced in the customers view of goods of daily use all around
the world. One may argue that global warming and climate change were hypes and fictionalstories created by the western media and the giant corporates, just to disallow developing
countries from using their cheap fuel sources such as coal and gas and become rich when the
developed countries have already used up their resources and sit barren and dry. Having known
this fact we may argue that we should not pay any heed to these warnings and should continue
with whatever is happening, but we rather not; reason being the ultimate results of many such big
projects and corporates have been utter failures who did not pay any attention to the environment
and ecology around them.
A similar kind of assessment test is carried out on each finished product to assess and calculate
its life cycle and its carbon footprint. It is then provided with a CFP label which says the amount
of CO2 released during its manufacture. Different agencies provide labels for usage on different
products.
Image 2.1: Different labels displaying CFP9
9http://businessconnectionknowledge.blogspot.in/2010/12/shopping-carbon-footprint-2.html
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
18/45
9
2.1 Redundancy of LCA
LCA remains to be a redundant system for impact calculation as it remains to hold on to too
much technicality. Why then this craze about CFP of products? Answer to this question would be
that since this is very similar to the global warming potential (GWP) indicator used in life cycle
assessment (LCA) but has a much broader concept. Also, since NGOs and other non-
government agencies have pushed this whole concept of CFP rather than any research institute;
makes it acceptable and understood by nonprofessionals. We must not forget here that any
oversimplified system, however simple to understand, does not do much good. The beauty of
online CFP calculators is that they focus on what is important: CO 2 emissions. That being said,
relying entirely on one indicator can sometimes be misleading; therefore, one should remain
conscious of oversimplification.
Owing to these problems and challenges of a new system, several agencies and organizations
have come up with complex and long methodologies for calculation of CFP. The GHG protocol,
Carbon Trust, UK, and JEMAI Japan are some of the many protocols that are used for the CFP
of products. We will try to study them and find similarities and differences between these three.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
19/45
10
2.2 GHG Protocols Methodology for CFP
The GHG protocol defines the areas and limits for calculation of CFP of products and
organizations. Not only GHG but even other certifying agencies approve the direct and indirect
emissions to be the largest cause of GHG outlet in the production process. Also mobile,
transportation and logistics form a big part. Waste management as a CFP reduction strategy is
very much in vogue, hence it is also accounted for. GHG protocol defines direct imports and
exports of CO2 as a contributing factor and does account for those industries, which use them. A
biomass combustion table is also provided but it is not accounted for calculation of CFP.
Table 2.1 List of Inventories required for CFP calculation
Operations in Inventory Describing the inventory boundaries and listing the operations
included in the inventory
Direct - Fuel Combustion Direct emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O resulting from fuel combustion -
includes default emission factors
Indirect Fuel
Combustion
Indirect emission of GHGs due to power imports and other sources
Mobile & Transportation Emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O from fuel combustion in mobile
equipment and transportation devices
Waste Management Emissions of CH4 resulting from mill-owned landfills or anaerobic
treatment operations
CO2 Imports and
Exports
CO2 emissions exported to precipitated calcium carbonate plants and CO2
imports (e.g. for neutralization)
Custom Emission Factors Calculating custom emission factors
Energy Content Fuel specific higher heating values
Conversion Factors Factors for converting among common units of measure
Biomass Combustion
CO2
Direct emissions of biomass CO2 for informational purposes only (do not
include in GHG inventory)
Revision Log Presents revisions made to the various versions of these calculation tools.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
20/45
11
2.3 Required details by Carbon Trust Standard
The Carbon Trust Standard defines calculation of CFP in a rather ingenious way. Carbon Trust
has developed software tools called Footprint Expert and Value Chain Hotspotter. As the name
suggests,, the Footprint Expert provides all different tools for calculation of product or process
CFP. The Value Chain Hotspotter allows a user to identify the most critical emission spots and
suggests measures accordingly. A rough sketch of the followed methodology would require
accounting of direct and indirect emissions, breakdown of emissions according to fuel type used
and sources, provision of emission factors and assessor footprint calculations. This gives us the
absolute footprint, which in accordance with relative and turnover benchmark, are converted to
relative footprint. Reduction calculations are calculated over base year data and reductions goals
are established.
Table 2.2 Methodology followed by Carbon Trust Standard
Operations in Inventory Describing the inventory boundaries and listing the operations
included in the inventory
Footprint Calculation Direct and indirect sources, imported power, owned transport and business
travel accounting
Breakdown of Emissions Emissions due to petrol, diesel, gas, imported power, process fugitive, other
solid fuels and indirect emissions
Reduction Calculation Calculation of footprint relative to benchmark (adjusted) is made; Absolute
footprint, relative & turnover benchmark and base year data required
Data Sources (for assesse
use only)
Site visit description, date and address
Data For Assessment Absolute footprint, relative footprint, turnover benchmark and reduction
percentage calculations
Assessor Footprint Vehicle type, fuel used, distance travelled, emission factor, footprint
calculation
Emission Factors This table gives a comprehensive list of all types of emissions and their
conversion factors
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
21/45
12
2.4 Required details by JEMAI
EcoLeaf as a subsidiary body of JEMAI, Japan, handles the requests for CFP calculation across
different countries over several industries. It follows a rather life cycle oriented scope of
calculation and require the details of inputs and outputs of energy and material during different
stages of product manufacture as well as use. It incorporates the information about product raw
materials and energy usage in the manufacturing stage. Product site information allows the
calculation of other indirect sources and sinks. Distribution stage calculation will require details
like the weight of product, distance travelled before use, type of fuel used etc. The last stage
incorporates the disposal or recycles details of the product life cycle.
Table 2.3 Methodology followed by EcoLeaf
Operations in Inventory Describing the inventory boundaries and listing the operations
included in the inventory
Product information Product raw material, power used, material and energy flows accounting
Production site
information
Water, steam, fuels, energy and other calculations; sewage and other bi-
products taken into account
Distribution stage
information
Mass, distance, vehicle used, fuel used, loading ratio and packing ratio
accounted for
Use stage Product usage requirements (subject to analysis)
Disposition/Recycle stage
information
Processes, methods and other types of activities involved in disposal of
used products; percentage of actual recovery from waste
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
22/45
13
Chapter 3
Challenges
There are a myriad number of mindboggling challenges with the whole CFP process. Will thescope of GHGs remain to just the six gases as defined in Kyoto Protocol or will it be detailed
and encompass more varieties as well? What are the life cycle stages, which should be included
for calculation, and which ones should not? How to demarcate the limit or the boundary of a
particular stage in the life cycle? These kinds of questions are from all sorts of difficulty levels.
While just some brainstorming by experts may solve some, others need an in depth
understanding of the process and the relevant complexities involved. In the chapter we shall see
how and why are these kinds of complexities, ambiguities and challenges arise, also how to
understand them. Since understanding the problems will take us one step forward towards the
solution and will provide us with a great deal of comprehension about the challenges itself, we
shall try to achieve the same in the next few pages.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
23/45
14
3.1 Technical Challenges
The technical challenges refer to the technicalities and complexities of the production process
(accompanied by emissions) and the ambiguities in the ways and methods of demarcation of a
particular process for calculation purposes. Technical challenges also carry the burden of
explaining the material and energy flows across the whole process as well as those which did not
take part of the process as an integral part but rather happened at some other place or time. This
mainly consists of energy generation and distribution processes.
3.1.1 Scope of emissions
As for product CFP, will there be calculations for all GHGs specified by IPCC 2007 or only the
six GHG gases of Kyoto Protocol be considered remains to be the biggest question of all the
challenges concerned. When a regulatory or certifying agency assesses the scope of emissions of
the product, does it have to consider all the GHG emissions as per IPCCs recommendations or
just the six of Kyoto has to be the biggest dilemma of all the government or else, agencies, who
wish to establish such a system for use in accordance with world over.
3.1.2 Life cycle stages
The general understanding of CFP is related to the life cycle calculations using process-based
data, the inclusion of the use phase becomes controversial between business-to-business and
business-to-consumer point of views. If included, then how should the consumer behaviour be?
Also what remains the driving factor in the consumers minds for picking up such a product and
how long does he use it; these kind of questions remain to provide enough of scope for thought
in the carbon market.
3.1.3 System boundari es
How do we correctly outline the boundaries of a particular system, and where shall it cut off?
How should the limiting attribute be decided? Whether it should concern the material threshold
or emission threshold? How to account for transportation made by employees of the particular
plant or factory, and how to account for employees situated away from the production site? Time
boundaries are also quite a big challenge, especially for agricultural products. We also need to
take into account the mass of agricultural product returned unused or rejected as biomass.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
24/45
15
3.1.4 Offsetti ng of emissions
Will offsetting of emissions be counted in the calculation or not remains a big technical
challenge. Several agencies have defined it in varied ways and there are many who have different
standards of accepting and calculating emission offsets done during production process or
elsewhere. Will the use of renewable energy be considered as a type of offsetting; or will there
be still another set of calculation required to calculate the emissions made by renewable energy
plants, or will they be any government or agency induced free limits for renewable plants or will
they also have to account for the emissions involved, remains a big question.
3.1.5 Data
The source of data for calculation of the footprint of a particular product /process remains to be
the technical process, that which is related to the actual movement of goods rather than money.
Now there are some fundamental issues with this understanding; which data sources will be
considered and which would not be? What percentage of primary processes and how much of
secondary processes will constitute the details of the data? Will there be any operational data
quality requirements which can be considered to be the standard or optimum?
3.1.6 All ocation
The existing standard ISO 14040 defines the process procedures. Will there be need for a new
system or will it suffice the needs? What will be the implications of its uniform usage amongst
different nations of the world? How will the quality of any particular product determine its
market share and the rise and fall of the same with respect to its CFP? Will there be differences
in the qualities and processes even after common certification? These remain some prime
questions for allocation
3.1.7 End-of-l if e
After a product has been used and is ready or waiting to be disposed, defined the end of life. If
however it will be recycled or disposed without extraction of reusable resources is the question.
Content based approach on the product level or average recycled content on the material level
should be used as the basis for the details of disposal cycle? Also it remains to define the kind of
usage the unorganised sector makes of the products when recycled by them.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
25/45
16
3.2 Environmental Challenges
This section deals with the environmental effects of production process and the effects it makes
on the nearby surrounding, be it water, land or air and many a times even underground water.
How do we define the scope of environmental effects made in the short as well as the long run.
Who is to pay for the changes in the land use pattern and who is responsible for the changes in
the long run of the affected society? These questions remain the prime objective in formulating
the environmental challenges for the product CFP process.
3.2.1 Carbon storage
How to deal with the processes that emit substantially lesser CO2 but yet are responsible for
emissions? How to deal with carbon storage systems, and those where the carbon is captured or
carbon sequestration takes place in situ or nearby? What kind of effects do they make on the total
amount of emissions? Also who is to look after the stored carbon reserves and who will ensure
them against environmental or other disasters?
3.2.2 Land use change
There are proven emissions arising from direct land use change. This has been a prime cause of
concern for people who are steering the pro-environment movement. Should these emissions be
included in CFP calculations or not? Shall changes in soil carbon (source or sink) be included or
not? If however included, how and what should be the scope of its effect and how to quantify the
short versus long term effects?
3.2.3 Capital goods
Any tangible assets that an organization uses to produce goods or services such as office
buildings, equipment and machinery are defined to be capital goods.However, capital goods that
a business does not use up in a single year of production cannot be entirely deducted as business
expenses in the year they are purchased. They are instead added depreciatingly over years of its
use. Similarly, should the emissions for the production of such a capital good be calculated in
one year or spread over years and also how to account for its reuse and recovery, remains a big
question.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
26/45
17
3.3 Other Problems
There are a host of other small to medium set of problems which all need to solve after the
solving of bigger aforementioned challenges. The prime one of them remains to be the energy
scene consisting of renewable electricity and electricity mix. How to quantify different
renewable sources and how to assign emission values to them? Are they to be deducted per
usage, or over lifetime or will be policy protected also remains a big question. Shall the grid-
average carbon intensity be used and, if so, what is the grid? Shall renewable energy be treated
as part of the grid or shall there be specific benefits if it is used in a specific supply chain?
Looking at this non-exclusive list of methodological issues reveals a very valuable aspect of the
carbon footprint discussions and standardisation activities: the sobering recognition of very
down-to-earth, basic scientific challenges for our community which have been getting a bit out
of sight over the years. While most scientific attention was recently focussed on pushing impact
assessment further, by e.g. finding ways to calculate how many years of life I may lose
depending on someones assumptions on my quality of lifebased on a certain amount of
emissions at ONE virtual point of time and ONE virtual place, we now face the challenge that
calculating a meaningful inventory result is not really solvedeven for the probably easiest class
of substances like greenhouse gases.10
10http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11367-009-0064-x/fulltext.html
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
27/45
18
CHAPTER 4
OPPORTUNITIES
First of all we have to understand that the willingness to accept the fact that CFP can be ameaningful tool for mitigating global warming, and that if used properly, it can be developed as a
perfect scale for measurement of any one product with a similar product from other brands. This
will allow the consumers the power to know the exact amount of affect or impact their usage of a
particular product will make on the environment. Thus the consumers can make an informed
choice and they will be more attracted towards products having lower footprints, even if they
were not of their favourite brand. This kind of consumer behaviour was seen after the launch of
labels by Carbon Trust in UK.
4.1 Solving Problems
It will be quite a big achievement and also a big contribution to solve the technical,
environmental and general problems discussed above. A simple academic study cannot take on
the kind and nature of such problems. In this section we will try to solve the technical and other
problems as discussed above in the last section and also will increase our understanding about
some of those problems which are considered inexplicable by the current standards of our
learning.
4.1.1 Solving Techni cal Di ff icul ties
Scope of emission, life cycle stages and system boundaries are defined by different agencies and
the rules and guidelines of such effect are also available. Here however the bigger problem is the
regulation and acceptance of standards which differ from country to country. Also there is a need
for regularity and uniformity in the process. Since GHG, PAS, ISO etc. are working together to
establish such a code of conduct, we should rely on them to bring on uniformity in the market.
There is also a rise in the acceptance of certified products after they have been launched in the
market and consumers all around got to know the benefits of using a low CFP product. People
also have got acquainted with the effects of their usage of product and its overall impact. This
facility will provide the information required by a consumer to make an informed decision.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
28/45
19
Offsetting emissions will surely require a closer look than any other problem as it is one which
falls in the ambit of both a technical as well as environmental problem. It needs to be quantified
and much of its processes need to be studied and their parts are to be standardised and rated as
per emission sequestration technique, capital required, time and space requirements and the
actual quantity of emissions sequestered or captured.
Data entry is yet a problem that requires address. It is generally seen that data from various
different sources have to be collated and merged before getting all the details which need to be
accounted for CFP calculations. This brings us to a problem which is quite big for big and
established industries rather than the new ones. There are guidelines available for backtracking
of data sources and getting the required information out of the system. Guidelines have been
developed by all the three agencies discussed earlier. Since these guidelines are almost same in
mature and manner of application, there can be a worldwide acceptance on one common set of
guidelines which will provide guidance to all different industries.
The problem of allocation is yet being studied upon and there is a lot of debate on this point as
there are still not many rules and standardisation of energy distribution systems across different
countries so as to correctly measure the CFP of the same. This also is seen in the problem related
to the waste disposal and recovery systems al around the world. There is such a large scope and
variety in recovery systems, with some places entirely dumping their garbage away and others
with efficiencies a low as 10% to 60%.
4.1.2 Solving Environmental D if fi culties
Solving of environmental challenges, which basically address the long term effects of any
particular process takes into account the effects of carbon capture method for emissions,
sequestration and storing techniques, also the effects of land use change over a period and the
calculation including capital goods and other durables. This is a question which not only haunts
environmentalists all around the world but also has brought in much debate and oppositions of
big projects. Environmental effects are long lasting and they usually cause loss of livelihood,
destruction of ecology and other devastating effects. This is tried to be brought under control by
emission sequestration techniques and control measures. The state of ambiguity still hovers over
the question of environmental considerations.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
29/45
20
4.2 Available Alternatives
There is a completely new range of available alternatives for a consumer of any particular
marketable product. As per the rules now it is important to denote the nutritional value of any
eatable and is recognized by consumers to choose accordingly. Similarly a carbon footprint label
will give them an opportunity to choose from a range of products of which some of them give
them a balanced information about the techniques used to produce them and the emissions
caused. There is already a lot of pro green talk which has steered this market towards getting
daylight. This also requires a system which can be used to deter the challenges of the same while
exploring the available as well as rising and upcoming opportunities. There is a huge rise in
various options that new industries can take in order to get through the system, get certification
by a competent authority, and get eligible to use labels on their products.
Success as eye-opener that climate change is not the only problem we have and that CFP is not
in all cases the right proxy to support sustainable production and consumption.11
First and foremost, product carbon footprinting identifies the true drivers of GHG emissions,
often revealing some surprises. It therefore enables better targeted, more effective emissions
reduction and cost savings initiatives, which may or may not fall under the companys direct
control. Some companies who have used the draft PAS 2050 method have already reduced
product-level GHG emissions by 15-20%. Considerable cost savings have also been achieved
due to energy and waste efficiency measures across the supply chain.
Product carbon footprinting also helps companies strengthen relationships with suppliers,
particularly if it reveals cost savings opportunities up the supply chain.
In addition, measuring product carbon footprints can improve a companys general business or
management practices in unanticipated ways, such as developing interactive tools to improve
sourcing decisions.
11http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11367-009-0064-x/fulltext.html
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
30/45
21
4.3 GHG protocol in India
The Energy and Resources Institute Business Council for Sustainable Development (TERI-
BCSD), The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), and the World Resources Institute (WRI)
organized a stakeholder dialogue on Corporate GHG Accounting in India on February 2nd, 2011.
The event was held on the sidelines of the World CEO Forum 2011 and was the first formal
consultation of a project between TERI and WRI. The partnership aims to build capacity on
corporate GHG accounting and gain an appreciation of the necessary steps required for
developing a national GHG program.
CEOs from businesses such as Ingersoll-Rand India, BASF India Ltd, Shree Cement Ltd, and
EG Gas Ltd as well as senior representatives from several other companies participated in the
dialogue. Following overview presentations from WRI and TERI, the discussions focused on the
merits of GHG accounting and inventorization where the motto If you cant measure, you cant
manage was stressed. It was clear that businesses were focused on climate change and were
eager to explore some of the next steps to voluntarily measure and disclose their emissions.12
WRI, in partnership with The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) and TERI-Business
Council on Sustainable Development (TERI-BCSD), is working in India to build the foundation
for a voluntary GHG emissions measurement and accounting program for companies and
organizations. They are currently in the process of consulting the stakeholders to understand their
expectations from such a program and identify the various services that it should provide. The
shared vision is to build a centre of excellence on GHG measurement and accounting within the
country, which offers a range of services that serve multiple business objectives and develops
customized accounting tools and protocols to accurately quantify corporate-level GHG
emissions. Over the last decade, TERI and WRI have worked together to develop and/or road-
test sector-specific GHG measurement and accounting tools. These included tools for sectors
such as cement, aluminium, fertilizers, and power. TERI also participated in the development of
the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard.
12http://www.ghgprotocol.org/feature/stakeholder-dialogue-corporate-ghg-accounting-india
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
31/45
22
WRIs other key partner in the country is the Confederation of Indian Industry- Sohrabji Godrej
Green Business Center (CII-GBC) and in the past, they have jointly worked to build indu strys
capacity on GHG accounting and quantification.13
To date, the GHG Protocol has established successful partnerships to facilitate the design and
implementation of GHG programs in Brazil, China, India, Mexico, Philippines and North
America.
Since there has been a lot of speculation about the carbon credit markets but it fell flat on due to
over availability of credits and permits in the first few years, and also due to the steep and
continuous fall of carbon credits market in the past years, also the reluctance of EU-ETS to
continue trading, all shows the mistakes that have already been done and their outcomes
suffered. Australia which was out of the Kyoto Protocol earlier and signed in later now has a
carbon tax akin to California which is based on the principal of polluter pays. This move
however has been widely criticized by consumer groups and protesters are demanding it to be
removed. It is believed that corporates would rather choose to pass on the taxes onto their
customers rather than doing something proactive to actually reduce their footprint.
13http://www.ghgprotocol.org/programs-and-registries/india
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
32/45
23
4.4 Future development of the CFP Program14
The product CFP craze has just begun. However, to make this craze into a more stable and
effective program, it requires to examine an appropriate direction from mid-and long-term
viewpoints, and to start planning several concrete targets and means for achieving them from
now on. It is important that the CFP labels itself will evolve flexibly based on social and business
environments, usually considering such domestic and international trends. The CFP Program is
an excellent tool as a first step for businesses to address disclosure of environmental information
in their business activities. Starting from making a CFP declaration, businesses can then improve
many aspects of their businesses not only in CO2 reductions by reviewing their assessment
results, and will finally achieve the production of goods and service to be chosen by the market.15
As of now, having the facility of internet and all of worlds information at our fingertips, we
must be aware of the effects that GHGs have put on our ecology and environment. We also must
not forget that overhyped facts like Global Warming and Climate change have actually made a
difference in the scenario. In the 1980s, emissions and other impacts of the factories and other
large structures were not given enough importance to be talked about. No one ever did want to
talk about the harmful effects of the chemicals being discharged as sewage or flue gases (even
today there still are some big corporates which try to avoid these kinds of questions).
Now, that there has been a rising awareness amongst people of all classes about the effects of
any large structure being built or the surrounding natural assets being subjected to any large scale
changes, there has been questioning and criticism of any such project and Impact assessment
tests have made their way into policies rather than being a luxury as considered earlier.
Companies and large organizations already have started cutting down on inefficient systems and
replacing them with greener and more efficient ones.
14http://www.cfp-japan.jp/english/overview/overview_06.html15http://www.cfp-japan.jp/english/overview/overview_07.html
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
33/45
24
All new projects and startups are being questioned about the impacts they would make on the
society and the market, not only in the economic and monetary sense, but in environmental and
social fields as well. There has been a whole new system of seeing things happening in the light
of effects and impacts they would make on ourselves and our surroundings. This awakening has
led to impact assessment tests being carried out before start of any such project. There has also
been a change in gauging the stakeholders of any such project. Earlier where only the investors,
vendors, suppliers, customers in government was considered to be the stakeholders, now there
has been an increasing dialogue between the indigenous population and those people who live in
an around the project sites.
4.4.1 Impact of Other Agencies
The CarbonCounted label started in January 2007. It uses a live carbon supply chain to determine
the amount of carbon dioxide emitted to bring a product to market.
Climatop started labels in spring 2008 in Switzerland. The independent association climatop
labels the most climate friendly products with their label approved by climatop. As a rule of
thumb, products have to be at least 20% better as other products from the same category.
Examples of labeled products can be found at the Swiss retailer Migros, such as an organic fair
trade sugar from Paraguay, recycling kitchen towels or laundry detergents.
Japan announced carbon footprint labeling scheme in 2008. The labels appeared on dozens of
items including food and drink starting in April 2009, providing detailed breakdowns of each
product's carbon footprint under a government-approved calculation and labeling system.
California state representative Ira Ruskin sponsored a carbon labeling billthe Carbon Labeling
Act of 2009in the California state legislature, which has been voted out of the Assembly
Committee on Natural Resources. The act would require the State Air Resources Board to
develop and implement a program for the voluntary assessment, verification, and standardized
labeling of the carbon footprint of consumer products sold in the state.
In July 2009, Wal-Mart announced an environmental labeling program for its products. The
intent is to create over the next five years a universal rating system, that scores products based on
how environmentally and socially sustainable they are over the course of their lives. Wal-Marts
goal is to have other retailers eventually adopt the indexing system. 16
16http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_emission_label
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
34/45
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
35/45
26
Jeffery Sachs, Director of Columbia's Earth Institute, warned on against calls for the tax to be
replaced by a tradable permit system by carbon emitters.
"For many reasons staying with the tax would be better, more straight forward, easier to
implement (and a) stronger signal to the private economy than one gets from trading
permits,"20
It's estimated that in China the combination of seven pilot schemes will cover 700 million tonnes
of carbon dioxide compared with the 382 million tonnes in Australia and 165 million tonnes in
California.
The European scheme is the world's largest covering 2.1 billion tonnes.
Carbon trading kicked off in Guangdong in September with four cement companies buying 1.3
billion permits at $9 a credit, the report states.
20 http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/us-expert-praises-aust-carbon-tax/story-e6frfkui-
1226503297515#ixzz2AbYU7rC6
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
36/45
27
4.4.3 What Next
It is going to become a very interesting debate to see whether the cap-and-trade system as used
by EU-ETS and other agencies takes off, or is it the Carbon Tax regime as put forward by
Australia and supported by California that holds the seat. Both the systems have proven helpful
for reaching emission targets but have quite a few inherent flaws. For example, the cap-and-trade
system cannot be assumed to be a stable system because of the changes in the prices of CER
units according to the whims and fancies of the market. Experts, however debate that since this is
a very mature market and has been built out of enormous efforts of nations and agencies, this
will be a secure system of trade in future. Sceptics refuse to believe in these statements though.
The carbon tax regime also has to face criticism in the name of not actually being able to achieve
the primary targets of emission reduction. This is derived from the fact that taxes of such nature
have been passed on the consumers inadvertently and it will be the people who will actually pay
up. Corporates will have no social incentive to go green or use a more efficient technology.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
37/45
28
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
The carbon market, despite being a multi-million dollar one, is still very new and has a scope of
expanding even more. The question would be the mechanisms used by governments of countriesto capture this market. Whether the use of carbon taxes aka Australia and California takes over
or does the cap-and-trade mechanism work in the free market would be question worth
pondering for small countries and growing economies. However, since most of the world has
understood the effects and disasters climate change can spill on us, there is a rush to go green
and clean, and hence is the usage of labels showing exactly the amount of impact one would
make on the environment by having a can of fruit juice or by buying a new shirt. This is a thing
that has potential and will set newer standards for the industry.
5.1 Lessons Learnt
The study, as targeted, tries to find out and compare the procedures and methodologies of
product footprinting as suggested by different agencies. Noting this will however be interesting,
that the different agencies are always developing their set of rules for CFP of products and
corporates. A generally accepted protocol for footprinting will however be much more feasible
option as there is already too much confusion and uncertainty of the future of carbon market. A
taxation regime also doesnt promise to help much because the corporates inadvertently try to
pass on the extra taxes levied on them to the ultimate consumers. The cap-n-trade system has its
benefits and is a mature market but still unsure of its future. In such a kind of scene, it will be
interesting to follow the developments of the carbon market.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
38/45
29
5.2 Future Scope
The process of CFP by the three mechanisms or protocols as they are better known has been
done. Future scope of such a study would be an intensive research of all the criteria and
parameters of calculation of CFP of a particular product such as paper cup or a juice can. Such a
study will reflect the nature and manner in which the three discussed agencies cover different
subject areas. This will also give us an outline for a hold-all complete plan for CFP of products
all around the world indiscriminately if such a thing ever becomes a reality. We have seen that
the product footprint has to come from the producer getting certified first, also, since the product
cannot be granted a label unless the producer gets certified, there has been a shallow response
from corporates for voluntary certification. A scene where getting footprint certified will not be
considered a luxury and will be as mandatory for the corporates as other rules, will definitely see
a surge of innovations in the sustainability market. This calls for policy changes and active
response from the corporate as well as the social sectors. We must not forget here that this s one
case which has been propelled by the social activists and groups rather some research institute or
big corporate houses. Hence a continued effort from the parts of all the players will definitely
prove to be a gamechanger.
We also have learnt that having just a guiding agency or a set of guidelines for any process is not
enough. It requires more than just effort to put together the pieces of industry together and then
maybe bring in a policy or a rule change. In democratic countries like India, it is not only
difficult to bring in a law but, enforcing it as well.
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
39/45
30
References
Carbon Trust http://www.carbontrust.com/home
CTSC004 Introduction to the Carbon Trust Standard methodology (31 Oct 2012) CTV043 Introduction to the Carbon Trust Standard methodology (31 Oct 2012) Calculation Tools for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Pulp and Paper Mills
Version 1.1 July 8, 2005, Prepared by: National Council for Air and Stream
Improvement, Inc. (NCASI), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA (31 Oct 2012)
GHG Protocol http://www.ghgprotocol.org/
Calculating CO2 process emissions from Cement Production (Cement-basedMethodology)
Guide to calculation worksheet (October 2001) (26 Oct 2012)
GHG Protocol guidance on uncertainty assessment in GHG inventories and calculatingstatistical parameter uncertainty (26 Oct 2012)
Global-Warming-Potential-Values (26 Oct 2012) Quantitative Uncertainty Guidance (26 Oct 2012) No. BD-07-013 Paper Beverage Carton (PSC BD-01) (26 Oct 2012)
JEMAI Protocol http://www.cfp-japan.jp/english/
PRODUCT-CATEGORY RULES (PCR) For preparing an environmental declaration(EPD) for Product Group Technical - Chemical products for the building- and
construction industry
NPCR 09 January 2012 (28 Oct 2012)
Guidelines for the Introduction of the ECO-LEAF Environmental LabelFirst Edition April 2002, JAPAN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ASSOCIATION FOR INDUSTRY
Product Category Rules (PCR) (Approved PCR ID: PA-BB-02)Paper Containers, Packaging and Wrapping (intermediate goods)Release date: September 8, 2010 (29 Oct 2012)
The Carbon Footprint of Products Calculation and Labeling Pilot Program PCR Basic Module CPC Division 32:Pulp, paper and paper products; printed matter and
related articles, VERSION 1.0 DATED 2008-12-18 (30 Oct 2012)
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
40/45
31
Project for Development of Environmental and Emission Standards of VOCs (Volatile Organic
Compounds) in the Kingdom of Thailand (20 Oct 2012)
Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) Assessment of Dell LaptopResults and Recommendations
Scott O'Connell, Markus Stutz (22 Oct 2012)
Report on the CFP Verification Scheme Committee Summary of three-year discussion
(Provisional translation), February 2012
Japanese CFP pilot project CFP Verification Scheme Committee (23 Oct 2012)
The Carbon Trust Standard Rules v1.3 June 2010 1 (24 Oct 2012)
CARBON FOOTPRINT MEASUREMENT METHODOLOGY REPORT
Centre for Water and Waste Technology, University of NSW
Dr Sven Lundie et al., Fonterra Co-Operati ve Group Limited 12 January 2009 (25 Oct 2012)
GHG protocol A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard
REVISED EDITION, WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE (27 Oct 2012)
International Review for Environmental Strategies
Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. xxxxx, 2004
2004 by the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. All rights reserved.
Special Feature on the Kyoto Protocol
Lessons from the Kyoto Protocol: Implications for the Future
Cdric Philiberta (27 Oct 2012)
Clean Development Mechanism And Carbon CreditsA Primer
Professional Development Committee
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
(Set up by an Act of Parliament), New Delhi (29 Oct 2012)
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
41/45
32
BUILDING ON THE KYOTO PROTOCOL: OPTIONS FOR PROTECTING THE CLIMATE
Edited by Kevin A. Baumert et al., WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE OCTOBER 2002 (26
Oct 2012)
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
42/45
33
Annexure
Image 1: National and regional programs using the GHG protocol21
Table 1: Sample worksheet is for showing which operations are included in the inventory.
21https://reader009.{domain}/reader009/html5/0421/5adb142ae1198/5adb143b1358a.jpg
Identifying name assigned to this inventory:
Use this space to provide additional information helpful to understanding
the operational boundaries of the inventory.
Use this space to provide additional information helpful to understanding
how emi ssions from partial ownership situations are allocated.
Core Operations that might be included in the inventory are listed below
Place an "X" below where
appropriate to indentify operations
included in the inventory
Harvesting
Wood/chip/bark/wastepaper/other raw material transportation vehicles
Product, by-product or waste transportation vehicles
Debarking
Chipping
Mechanical pulping
Chemical pulping kraft
Chemical pulping sulfite
Chemical pulping other
Semichemical pulping
Recovery furnace kraft
Liquor furnace sulfite
Liquor furnace semichem
Lime kiln or calciner
Incinerators for noncondensible gases, etc.
Wastepaper pulping and cleaning
Deinking
Bleaching of chemical or semichemical pulp
Brightening of deinked pulp
On-site preparation of chemicals used in core operations (e.g. ClO2 or O3)
Paper and/or paperboard production
Coating (including extrusion coating)Roll trimming, roll wrapping, sheet cutting
On-site power and steam boilers
On-site combustion turbines
Gas-fired infrared dryers
Other fossil fuel-fired dryers
Wastewater treatment operations
Sludge processing
Landfill receiving mill waste
Air emissions control devices
On-site vehicles and machinery
Normal offices/workspace for mill employees
Imports of electrical power
Imports of steam or hot water
Exports of electrical power
Exports of steam or hot water
Other Operation describe:
Other Operation describe:
Other Operation describe:
Other Operation describe:
The following information is not directly used in the GHG emissions calculations, but is intended to provide
clarification of the type of facility for w hich the inventory is being performed.
Use this space to provide a general description of operational boundaries.
Operations in the Inventory
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
43/45
34
Table 2: Various required fields of information for CFP calculation
Complete for level 1 footprintAdditional requirements for level 2 footprintAutomatic calculation
Organisation name Assessor name
Date spreadsheet completed Assisted certification?
Data year end datel
0
Year -2 Year -1 Year 0
Footprint Year end date Year end date Year end date
level Comments
Direct Emissions (scope 1)
Stationary sources Source: DEFRA 2011
1 Gas kWh 0.1836
1 Oil litres 3.0595
1 Other (specify)
Owned transport
1 Diesel litres 2.6676
1 Petrol litres 2.3117
1 Other (specify)
Imported power/utilities (Required) Source: DEFRA 2011
1 Purchased Electricity kWh 0.5246
1 Imported heat or st eam kWh
Other Indirect Emissions (Optional)
Business travel Source: DEFRA 2011
2 Hire Car (Average) km 0.2046
2 Taxi (Regular) km 0.2121
2 Bus (Average) passenger km 0.14882 Rail (National Rail) passenger km 0.0565
Travel by plane:
Long haul:
2 First Class passenger km 0.3548
2 Business Class passenger km 0.2572
2 Premium Economy passenger km 0.1419
2 Economy passenger km 0.0887
Short haul:
2 Business Class passenger km 0.1509
2 Economy passenger miles 0.1619
Domestic:
2 Average passenger km 0.1797
Other business travel (specify)
2
CALCULATED EMISSIONS
Direct Emissions (scope 1)
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
Imported power/utilities (scope 2,3)
- - -
- - -
- - -
Other Indirect Emissions (scope 3)
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
Other business travel - - -
- - -
- - -
Travel by plane
Long haul
Short haul
Purchased Electricity
Imported heat or steam
Total Direct Emissions
Travel by rail
Total imported power / utilities
Business travel
Domestic
Travel by hire car
Travel by taxi
Travel by bus
TOTAL FOOTPRINT
Other (specify)
Owned transportDiesel
Total Indirect Emissions
Petrol
Other (specify)
FOOTPRINT CALCULATION
Stationary sources
Gas
Oil
Units
Emission
factor
(kgCO2e /
unit)
Spell Check
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
44/45
35
Table 3: Product Environmental Information Data Sheet (PEIDS) as prepared by Ecoleaf
-
7/30/2019 Carbon Footprint_Challenges and Opportunities
45/45
Kyoto Protocol
Image: Kyoto Protocol participation map22
Ref: Green signifies countries that have signed and ratified the treaty (Annex I and II are in dark
green), grey is not yet decided, brown is no intention of ratifying, and red is intention to
withdraw.
The details of Kyoto Protocol can be found at wikisource.23