IPCC Expert Meeting: Application of 2006 IPCC Guidelines to Other Areas
1-3 July 2014. Sofia, Bulgaria
Hosted by Executive Environment Agency of Bulgaria and the Task Force on
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (TFI)
Hilton Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria

Ricardo-AEA
Topic (3): Calculation of mitigation potential / carbon
footprint / Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), including
application of 2006 IPCC Guidelines
John Watterson
Christine St John Cox. With contributions from Judith Bates

www.ricardo-aea.com© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

TodayGeneral context
Carbon footprinting• Scope and boundaries• Interpretation• Calculations• Emission factors• Standards
LCA• Benefits of LCA• Calculations• Standards
Mitigation potential• Drivers• How is it approached?
Key observations
Discussion points
2

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Preamble• Many thanks to the IPCC for the invitation to this meeting• My background – technical advisor to the UK GHG inventory (former manager), andlead author of the stationary combustion chapter IPCC 2006 GLs• Work in a company that provides the UK Inventory Agency role, and delivers carbon
foot printing work and LCA analysis – so have insights into the delivery of all this typeof work

3

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

General Context

4

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Definitions

Topic (3): Calculation of mitigation potential/carbon footprint / Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA), including application of 2006 IPCC Guidelines• Mitigation potential - Climate change mitigation are actions to limit the magnitude
and/or rate of long-term climate change. The mitigation potential is an estimate of thepossible reduction that can be achieved.
• Carbon Footprint - A carbon footprint is historically defined as the total sets ofgreenhouse gas emissions caused by an organisation, event, product or person.
• LCA – Life Cycle Assessment - Life-cycle assessment (LCA, also known as life-cycle
analysis, ecobalance, and cradle-to-grave analysis) is a technique to assess
environmental impacts associated with all the stages of a service, function or product's
life from-cradle-to-grave.

5

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

More Definitions• Boundary – a carbon footprint boundary is defined as the emissions that will be
captured associated with the organisation, event, person or product.
• Scope – the scope of a carbon footprint is defined as the types of emissions sourcesthat will be captured within a carbon footprint. This could be defined as all scope 1 or 2
emissions or simply based on emissions sources i.e. electricity, gas, shipping, but notwaste, company travel or water.

6

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

What’s the difference between a carbon footprint and an
LCA?
Carbon footprint• only assesses the global warming potential of an organization, product, project orservice
Life cycle assessment (LCA)• assesses multiple environmental impact categories, includes– global warming,– but may also include• human health impacts,• ecosystem quality,• acidification,• land use, etc.
• There are different standards and organizations around each assessment.

7

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Differences and similarities
Issue

IPCC guidelines

Carbon footprint

LCA

Environmental
impact / Emission
sourcesCO2, CH4, N2O
HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3

CO2, CH4, N2O
HFCs, PFCs, SF6

Includes wider range of impacts
including, emissions to air, water andland, human health impacts,
ecosystem quality, land use andresource use. These impacts areevaluated for their CO2e

Enforcement

Mandatory for those reporting
under the UNFCCC

variable at a national or regional level– mainly voluntary, though increasing

Voluntary

Boundary

Political boundary geographical/
regional

Define boundary via equity share,
operational or financial control

Product / service or system

Principles

Transparency
CompletenessConsistency
Comparability
Accuracy

Relevance
CompletenessConsistency
Transparency
Accuracy

Relevance
CompletenessConsistency
Transparency
Accuracy

Reporting scopes

From source (“production” based)

Scope 1, 2 and 3

Whole life assessment

Activity Data
sources

Activity data from wide range ofsources – national energybalances, industrial production,
animal numbers etc.

Activity data based on consumption
across business and wider impacts

From cradle to grave assessment
based on activity data

QA / QC

Expectations and methodologies
set out in the GLs

Assurance and verification,materiality assessment.
Accountancy/ISO standards

Sensitivity assessment

8

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Definition of carbon footprint• Carbon Footprint - A carbon footprint is historically defined as the total sets ofgreenhouse gas emissions caused by an
1. organisation,
2. event,
3. product or
4. person.
• Applied mostly to footprints
of organisations• Product footprints
being adopted slowly– More complex and– More expensive– Offers less benefits
9

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Why are organisations reporting LCA or carbon footprints?

10

Legislation

StakeholderpressureCostefficiency
andprofitability

Reputation

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Why are organisations reporting LCA or other footprints?

11

Legislation

StakeholderpressureCostefficiency
andprofitability

Reputation

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Carbon footprint

12

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Cradle to Grave diagram

1
2

13

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence3© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Carbon Footprint – mapping emissions sources
The first step is mapping out emissions sources for product, event or organisation
Example A
Head officeBusiness travel

Stores, warehouses
etc.

Commuting

Other suppliers

Office employees

Leeds office

Outsourced distribution

Customer
Store employee
commutingCustomer travel tostoresWarehouse employee
commutingBusiness travel

Stores ‐ UK

Manufacturing

Warehouses ‐ UK

Customer

Outsourced
distribution

Concessions ‐ UK
Outsourced freight transport

Customer

Warehouse ‐ Spain

Outsourced distribution
Store and concession
employee commuting

Wholesale
Customer
Outsourced freight transport

Stores and concessions ‐FranceCustomer

Outsourced distribution
Customer travel tostores14

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Defining interpretation of boundaries for a carbon footprint

Two approaches

Equity share

Control

Operational
control

Financial
control

15

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Carbon Footprint – defining approach(linked to example in slide 14)

Control approach (must choose one approach)

Equity Share approach

Financial control

Operational control

The company has theability to direct thefinancial and operating
policies of the operation
with a view to profitingfrom its activities.

The company, or one ofits subsidiaries, has thefull authority to introduce
and implement its
operating policies at theoperation.

Organisation A

35% ownership ofCompany X

Organisation A
reports 35% ofCompany X's total
emissions16

10% ownership ofCompany Y

Organisation A
reports 10% ofCompany Y's total
emissions

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence

100% ownership ofCompany Z

Organisation A
reports all of
Company Z's
emissions© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

What does that mean for a carbon footprint?
Calculation• Data is collected in a different way, and calculated in a different form
• Calculation

Emission = Activity Data x Emission Factor• Example A – Electricity calculation• Activity data collected as consumed electricity NOT generated (takes into transmission
loses)• Might come from a number of countries so multiple factors required• Emission Factor is “split” between Scope 2 and 3• Example B – International shipping and/or distribution calculations• Have to determine which scope emissions fall into Scope 1 or Scope 3• Calculation or output might be amalgamated into one factor for CO2 equivalent

17

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Carbon footprint reporting format• Emissions reported in:– Scope 1– Scope 2– Scope 1+2• And– Scope 3 -

Scope
1+2

Scope
1+2

Scope 3

Scope 3

• Scope 3 kept separate to
avoid double counting.
Overlap and therefore
possible double counting

Scope
1+2

Scope 318

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Data gathering for a carbon footprint
Most
accurate
Primary data

Data collected bydirectly measuring theoperation.

e.g. metered fuelconsumption, theninvoice data

Secondary data

Generic or average datafrom published sources
representative of acompany’s operations.

e.g. mileage data,
records of average fuelpricesExtrapolated
data

Data calculated byestimating a trend fromexisting data .

e.g. March data missing,
replaced by an averageof February and April

Proxy data

Where no data isavailable, using data on
some‐thing similar in its
place, without
modification.

e.g. Data for building X is
missing, use benchmark
floor area data to makean estimate for building Y

Least
accurate
19

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Sources of Emission Factors

Where are factors sourced from:• Some international factors provided by sources such as IPCC guidelines, GHG Protocol• National factors• Some nations provide factors for other countries or regions too• Research bodies such as Eco-invent, Leeds supply chain data, SimaPro• Factors cover may sources• Factors provided for materials• Varying quality

20

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

A selection of the organisational standards – a lot!
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

ABI Energia Linee Guida
Act on the Rational Use of Energy
American Petroleum Institute Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry, 2009
Australia - National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act
Bilan Carbone
Brazil GHG Protocol Programme
Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Calculating Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 2003
China Corporate Energy Conservation and GHG Management Programme
Defra Voluntary Reporting Guidelines
ENCORD: Construction CO2e Measurement Protocol
Energy Information Administration 1605B
Environment Canada, Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) Emission Estimation and Reporting Protocol for Electric Utilities
Environment Canada, Aluminum Production, Guidance Manual for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environment Canada, Base Metals Smelting/Refining, Guidance Manual for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environment Canada, Cement Production, Guidance Manual for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environment Canada, Primary Iron and Steel Production, Guidance Manual for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environment Canada, Lime Production, Guidance Manual for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Primary Magnesium Production and Casting, Guidance Manual for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environment Canada, Metal Mining, Guidance Manual for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions
EPRA (European Public Real Estate Association) guidelines, 2011
European Union Emission Trading System (EU ETS): The Monitoring and Reporting Regulation (MMR) – General guidance for installations
European Union Emission Trading System (EU ETS): The Monitoring and Reporting Regulation (MMR) – General guidance for aircraft operators
Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department, Guidelines to Account for and Report on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Removals for Buildings, 2010ICLEI Local Government GHG Protocol
India GHG Inventory ProgrammeInternational Wine Industry Greenhouse Gas Protocol and Accounting Tool
IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, 2006
IPIECA's Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions, 2003
IPIECA’s Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions, 2nd edition, 2011 ISO 14064-1
Japan Ministry of the Environment, Law Concerning the Promotion of the Measures to Cope with Global Warming, Superceded by Revision of the Act on Promotion of Global Warming Countermeasures (2005 Amendment)
Korea GHG and Energy Target Management System Operating Guidelines
New Zealand - Guidance for Voluntary, Corporate Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Philippine Greenhouse Gas Accounting and Reporting Programme (PhilGARP)
Programa GEI Mexico
Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) Model Rule
Taiwan - GHG Reduction Act
The Climate Registry: Electric Power Sector (EPS) Protocol
The Climate Registry: General Reporting Protocol
The Climate Registry: Local Government Operations (LGO) Protocol
The Climate Registry: Oil & Gas Protocol
The Cool Farm Tool
The GHG Indicator: UNEP Guidelines for Calculating Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Businesses and Non-Commercial Organisations
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition)
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Agricultural Guidance: Interpreting the Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard for the Agricultural Sector
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Public Sector Standard
The Tokyo Cap-and Trade Program
US EPA Climate Leaders: Direct Emissions from Iron and Steel Production1
US EPA Climate Leaders: Direct Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Landfilling1
US EPA Climate Leaders: Direct HFC and PFC Emissions from Manufacturing Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment1
US EPA Climate Leaders: Direct HFC and PFC Emissions from Use of Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment1
US EPA Climate Leaders: Indirect Emissions from Purchases/ Sales of Electricity and Steam1
US EPA Climate Leaders: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion1
US EPA Climate Leaders: Direct Emissions from Mobile Combustion Sources1
US EPA Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
WBCSD: The Cement CO2 and Energy Protocol
World Steel Association CO2 emissions data collection guidelines

21

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Organisational GHG Reporting Standards - rationalised• IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, 2006
• Non-for-profit– The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition)– The Climate Registry: General Reporting Protocol– ISO 140064 Parts 1, 2 and 3 (3 for assurance)• Regulation for nations or regions– European Union Emission Trading System (EU ETS): The Monitoring and Reporting Regulation (MMR) –General guidance for installations– Australia - National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act– Taiwan - GHG Reduction Act• National reporting methodologies for corporates– UK - Defra Voluntary Reporting Guidelines– Bilan Carbone - France– Brazil GHG Protocol Programme– China Corporate Energy Conservation and GHG Management Programme• Sector or industry specific– WBCSD: The Cement CO2 and Energy Protocol– World Steel Association CO2 emissions data collection guidelines– Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Calculating Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 2003
22

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Organisational GHG Reporting Standards - rationalised• IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, 2006
• Non-for-profit– The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition)– The Climate Registry: General Reporting Protocol– ISO 140064 Parts 1, 2 and 3 (3 for assurance)• Regulation for nations or regions– European Union Emission Trading System (EU ETS): The Monitoring and Reporting Regulation (MMR) –General guidance for installations– Australia - National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act– Taiwan - GHG Reduction Act• National reporting methodologies for corporates– UK - Defra Voluntary Reporting Guidelines– Bilan Carbone - France– Brazil GHG Protocol Programme– China Corporate Energy Conservation and GHG Management Programme• Sector or industry specific– WBCSD: The Cement CO2 and Energy Protocol– World Steel Association CO2 emissions data collection guidelines– Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Calculating Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 2003
23

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Widely used standards– The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard(Revised Edition)– ISO 140064 Parts 1, 2 and 3 (3 for assurance)• Small differences but very much the same approach• BUT National standards where reporting required do vary
• Challenge is that many organisations will be required to report repeatedly under numerous
formats– For example in UK:– Eachwith different reporting requirements,
scopes boundaries
different GHG
ReportingETS
UK Carbonand potentially
UK Mandatory
emissionconversion factors
mechanism
Reduction
reporting (companies
Commitment (CRC)on LSE ~1,000)

Types of emissions
required to report

Thermal heat generated

Electricity and gas usage

Scope 1 and Scope 2 – somuch wider than CRC

Emissions factors

Default to installation
specific (Tiers)

Differs until Phase 2 to
GHG reporting

DECC factors publishedannually

Boundaries

EU

UK

International

Annual Cycle

yes

April to March annually

Company’s financial year

Reporting body

Environment Agency

Environment Agency

Companies House inannual report

24

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

The Godfather - GHG Protocol• The Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol)• International accounting tool for government and business• Understand, quantify and manage GHG emissions• Most widely used
• Developed in partnership with:– WRI (World Resources Institute) and– WBCSD (World Business Council for Sustainable Development)• Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard• First generated in 2001 and updated in 2013.
• Tools are consistent with IPCC 1996 including:– hierarchy of calculation approaches and techniques ranging from the application of generic emission
factors to direct monitoring• http://www.ghgprotocol.org/• GHG Protocol calculation tools uses IPCC default EFs – which can be overidden with company specificvalues25

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

GHG Protocol• Other relevant standards GHG protocol have developed:– Value Chain and Scope 3 Accounting– Product Life Cycle Standard– Avoided Emissions– Mitigation Accounting

Was there any IPCC involvement?
(we do not think there was!)– City Accounting• Approach to reviewing standards and new standards– Highly collaborative – involving organisations, governments, NGOs and consultants• For example for the Product Life Cycle Standard and Value Chain and Scope 3
Accounting saw:
• 3 year development period– 2,300 participants from 55 countries;– 112 members formed technical working groups to draft the standards, and;– 38 companies from various industries road tested the standards in 2010.
26

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Life Cycle Assessment

27

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Definitions• Mitigation potential - Climate change mitigation are actions to limit the magnitude and/or
rate of long-term climate change. The mitigation potential is an estimate of the possible
reduction that can be achieved.
• Carbon Footprint - A carbon footprint is historically defined as the total sets ofgreenhouse gas emissions caused by an organisation, event, product or person.
• LCA – Life Cycle Assessment - Life-cycle assessment (LCA, also known as lifecycle analysis, ecobalance, and cradle-to-grave analysis) is a technique toassess environmental impacts associated with all the stages of a product's life
from-cradle-to-grave.

28

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Benefits of LCA against carbon footprint of a product• Benefits– allows you to avoid burden shifting,– encompassing the entire life cycle andAvoid carbon leakage?

– multiple environmental impact categories.
You don’t want to reduce the impacts in one impact category or life cycle phase, but
increase them in another.
• Modelling your project, product, service or organization in LCA software, might allow
you to both conduct a carbon footprint using IPCC 2006 methodologies, or Greenhouse
Gas Protocol as well as assessing other environmental impacts using one of several
J1
internationally accepted impact assessment methods,(e.g. ReCiPe, TRACI, IMPACT
2002+, Ecological footprint, Eco-indicator 99)

29

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

スライド 29
J1

Judith What about these standards? do you get asked about these as well as the ISO standards?
Chris - the ISO standard tells you how to carry out the LCA and the recommended approach to several methdlogoial issues in defining, boundary, scope,
allocations etc), the impact assessment methdologies have all been developed by differnt organisations, and use different ways to group and convert different
emissions into common environmental impacts. Once you have your lifecycle inventory results you can apply whichever Impact Assesment methdology you want(or indeed more than one). Which one you choose may depend on what impacts you are most concerned about as some cover some aspects better than others.
Have changed text slightly to take out direct refercne to SimaPro as it isi only one of several tools - if you want to put back in suggest use (e.g. SimaPro,Gabi,
Umberto)
Judith, 2014/06/26

LCA calculations• Calculations typically through proprietary lifecycle software– Gabi,– SimaPro– Umberto– Or sector specific tools such as those forwaste management (e.g. WRATE)• Ecoinvent factors– 10,000 LCI datasets– Cover a range of sectors– energy supply, agriculture, transport, biofuels and biomaterials, bulk and specialty
chemicals, construction materials, packaging materials, basic and precious metals,
metals processing, ICT and electronics, dairy, wood, and waste treatment

30

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

J2LCA standards• PAS 2050: - but limited to carbon– Publicly Available Specification (PAS)– Issued by British Standards Institute (BSI)– published first in 2008, revised in 2011 (when GHG Product Life Cycle Standard waslaunched)• GHG Protocol Product Life Cycle Standard – limited to carbon– Publically available specification launched 2011
– Globally used
– Development of standard consulted on widely• ISO standards - able to cover wider environmental impacts– International (global) Standard– Set of standards on LCA and review of LCA published (2006-2012)– Specific standard on carbon footprint of products published 2013
– Also deals with how carbon footprint should be communicated31

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

スライド 31
J2

Chris See my prvious not
ReCiPe, Traci etc are not standards as such they are just different impact assessment methodologies so not sure they belong on this slide.
Judith, 2014/06/26

ISO Standards on LCA

32

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Which standard?

• All provide requirements and guidelines• Decisions involve LCA issues, like goal and scope definition, data collection strategies,
and reporting.
• Specific issues relevant for carbon footprints, including land-use change, carbon
uptake, biogenic carbon emissions, soil carbon change, and green electricity.
• All standards build on existing life cycle assessment methods established through ISO
14040 and ISO 14044.
• But small differences exist among the standards. BSI, WRI/WBCSD and ISO
cooperated to increase alignment of the standards.
– ISO 14067 is general standard, although some requirements are quite specific, e.g.
requirements on the use of green electricity.
– PAS 2050 and GHG Protocol provide more detailed requirements and guidance withless space for interpretation.

33

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Reporting requirements

Not currently a requirement to report using LCA with a few exceptions such as
shown below:• Under EU renewable energy directive biofuels have to deliver a minimum
saving in GHG emissions calculated on a LCA basis• The EU’s Integrated Product Policy incorporates life cycle thinking, and theEcolabelling scheme for products, uses LCA when looking at criteria for thelabel• Under France’s Grenelle 2, high volume consumer products need to haveenvironmental product declarations which are produced on an LCA basis

34

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Mitigation Potential

35

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Why are organisations reporting LCA or other footprints?

36

Legislation

StakeholderpressureCostefficiency

Reputation

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

How is mitigation approached?

• Cost efficiency• Best practice /opportunity appraisal• Assessed by prioritisation through MACC or Internal rate of return (IRR) and return on
investment (ROI) or payback• What are businesses doing with the information that they have - are they using scope 1,
2 and 3?
• Timeline – typically short timelines 2-5 years average, some 10 years, few beyond –business planning on short cycles – not like a nation• Science based target setting not yet present – GHG protocol involved in developing ascience based target setting standard to encourage organisations to start setting
targets based on the need rather than the measures

37

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Key Observations andThoughts for Discussion

38

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Key observations – Carbon footprinting• Approach and principles same as IPCC Guidance• Boundaries are organisational or activity not geographical or political• Differences in scopes and therefore reporting• Generally not mandatory more voluntary- though changing• Many standards available and applicable for different purposes• Some gaps and complexity appearing– little consistency in standards, emission factors, and reporting requirements
on a geographical basis.
– At national or international level care has to be taken with double counting– Factors of higher quality for certain emissions than others

39

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Key observations – LCA• LCA covers wider environmental aspects than carbon footprinting• Value chain approach taken for activity• Less standards and less widely used
• Expensive and complex process• Software generally used
• Broad range of emissions factors available from limited number of sources• QA/QC seems less developed in comparison to IPCC GLs

40

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Key observations – Mitigation• Evaluation of mitigation done on a measure by measure basis• Estimates often made based on best practice and benchmarks• Evaluated on financial returns available• Target setting– linked to measures expected to be implemented– tend to be short to medium term and low percentage target (not typicallyambitious)• Science based target setting not widely adopted• GHG protocol pushing for adoption of science based

41

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Questions for discussion• Should there be more discussion on how methodologies are being applied?
• Can non-IPCC guidance make use of IPCC QA/QC and uncertainty methodologies –these are well developed, and often less developed in other guidance• What might the IPCC be able to learn from other guidance? EF applicability?
• Should the IPCC support the development develop of alternative approaches (“otherareas” i.e. not national GHG inventory guidance)?
• Where can IPCC support the development of alternative approaches?
• Wider adoption of consistent reporting methods? Is this necessary, or a good idea?
• Closer support of GHG protocol guidance development?
• “Science based” target setting?
• Style and form of guidance – this could affect levels of interest and uptake• Spatial resolution issues – if, and how can these be treated?
• Do “people” use the IPCC guidelines to calculate the emissions reductions that can beachieved – mitigation?

42

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Dr John Watterson
Ricardo-AEA Ltd
The Gemini Building
Fermi Avenue
Harwell, Didcot,
OX11 0QR
UK.
T: +44 1235 753595
E: john.d.watterson@ricardo-aea.com
W: www.ricardo-aea.com
www.ricardo-aea.com© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

Inside SimaPro• Inside SimaPro• Several databases• Different cover ages – some is highly processed• Main one is Ecoinvent• EFs per fuel and emissions by unit product – this means less transparency. Also by e.g.
of coal burnt to give 1MJ• Can enter EFs your self
• European Reference Lifecycle Database http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/• http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ELCD3/• http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ELCD3/processSearch.xhtml

44

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd

European Reference Lifecycle Database - example

45

Ricardo-AEA in Confidence© Ricardo-AEA Ltd