Dataset Information

Product carbon footprints and their uncertainties in comparative decision contexts.

ABSTRACT: In response to growing awareness of climate change, requests to establish product carbon footprints have been increasing. Product carbon footprints are life cycle assessments restricted to just one impact category, global warming. Product carbon footprint studies generate life cycle inventory results, listing the environmental emissions of greenhouse gases from a product's lifecycle, and characterize these by their global warming potentials, producing product carbon footprints that are commonly communicated as point values. In the present research we show that the uncertainties surrounding these point values necessitate more sophisticated ways of communicating product carbon footprints, using different sizes of catfish (Pangasius spp.) farms in Vietnam as a case study. As most product carbon footprint studies only have a comparative meaning, we used dependent sampling to produce relative results in order to increase the power for identifying environmentally superior products. We therefore argue that product carbon footprints, supported by quantitative uncertainty estimates, should be used to test hypotheses, rather than to provide point value estimates or plain confidence intervals of products' environmental performance.

SUBMITTER: Henriksson PJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4363321 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Product carbon footprints and their uncertainties in comparative decision contexts.

Henriksson Patrik J G PJ Heijungs Reinout R Dao Hai M HM Phan Lam T LT de Snoo Geert R GR Guinée Jeroen B JB

PloS one 20150317 3

In response to growing awareness of climate change, requests to establish product carbon footprints have been increasing. Product carbon footprints are life cycle assessments restricted to just one impact category, global warming. Product carbon footprint studies generate life cycle inventory results, listing the environmental emissions of greenhouse gases from a product's lifecycle, and characterize these by their global warming potentials, producing product carbon footprints that are commonly ...[more]

PMID: 25781175

Similar Datasets

Project description:In addition to forest ecosystems, wood products are carbon pools that can be strategically managed to mitigate climate change. Wood product models (WPMs) simulating the carbon balance of wood production, use and end of life can complement forest growth models to evaluate the mitigation potential of the forest sector as a whole. WPMs can be used to compare scenarios of product use and explore mitigation strategies. A considerable number of WPMs have been developed in the last three decades, but there is no review available analysing their functionality and performance. This study analyses and compares 41 WPMs. One surprising initial result was that we discovered the erroneous implementation of a few concepts and assumptions in some of the models. We further described and compared the models using six model characteristics (bucking allocation, industrial processes, carbon pools, product removal, recycling and substitution effects) and three model-use characteristics (system boundaries, model initialization and evaluation of results). Using a set of indicators based on the model characteristics, we classified models using a hierarchical clustering technique and differentiated them according to their increasing degrees of complexity and varying levels of user support. For purposes of simulating carbon stock in wood products, models with a simple structure may be sufficient, but to compare climate change mitigation options, complex models are needed. The number of models has increased substantially over the last ten years, introducing more diversity and accuracy. Calculation of substitution effects and recycling has also become more prominent. However, the lack of data is still an important constraint for a more realistic estimation of carbon stocks and fluxes. Therefore, if the sector wants to demonstrate the environmental quality of its products, it should make it a priority to provide reliable life cycle inventory data, particularly regarding aspects of time and location.

Project description:Europe's roadmap to a low-carbon economy aims to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Beef production is an important source of GHG emissions and is expected to increase as the world population grows. LIFE BEEF CARBON is a voluntary European initiative that aims to reduce GHG emissions per unit of beef (carbon footprint) by 15% over a 10-year period on 2172 farms in four large beef-producing countries. Changes in farms beef carbon footprint are normally estimated via simulation modelling, but the methods current models apply differ. Thus, our initial goal was to develop a common modelling framework to estimate beef farms carbon footprint. The framework was developed for a diverse set of Western Europe farms located in Ireland, Spain, Italy and France. Whole farm and life cycle assessment (LCA) models were selected to quantify emissions for the different production contexts and harmonized. Carbon Audit was chosen for Ireland, Bovid-CO2 for Spain and CAP'2ER for France and Italy. All models were tested using 20 case study farms, that is, 5 per country and quantified GHG emissions associated with on-farm live weight gain. The comparison showed the ranking of beef systems gross carbon footprint was consistent across the three models. Suckler to weaning or store systems generally had the highest carbon footprint followed by suckler to beef systems and fattening beef systems. When applied to the same farm, Carbon Audit's footprint estimates were slightly lower than CAP'2ER, but marginally higher than Bovid-CO2. These differences occurred because the models were adapted to a specific region's production circumstances, which meant their emission factors for key sources; that is, methane from enteric fermentation and GHG emissions from concentrates were less accurate when used outside their target region. Thus, for the common modelling framework, region-specific LCA models were chosen to estimate beef carbon footprints instead of a single generic model. Additionally, the Carbon Audit and Bovid-CO2 models were updated to include carbon removal by soil and other environmental metrics included in CAP'2ER, for example, acidification. This allows all models to assess the effect carbon mitigation strategies have on other potential pollutants. Several options were identified to reduce beef farms carbon footprint, for example, improving genetic merit. These options were assessed for beef systems, and a mitigation plan was created by each nation. The cumulative mitigation effect of the LIFE BEEF CARBON plan was estimated to exceed the projects reduction target (-15%).

Project description:BackgroundTo assess uncertainty in regulatory decision-making for orphan medicinal products (OMP), a summary of the current basis for approval is required; a systematic grouping of medical conditions may be useful in summarizing information and issuing recommendations for practice.MethodsA grouping of medical conditions with similar characteristics regarding the potential applicability of methods and designs was created using a consensus approach. The 125 dossiers for authorised OMP published between 1999 and 2014 on the EMA webpage were grouped accordingly and data was extracted from European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) to assess the extent and robustness of the pivotal evidence supporting regulatory decisions.Results88% (110/125) of OMP authorizations were based on clinical trials, with 35% (38/110) including replicated pivotal trials. The mean (SD) number of pivotal trials per indication was 1.4 (0.7), and the EPARs included a median of three additional non-pivotal supportive studies. 10% of OMPs (13/125) were authorised despite only negative pivotal trials. One-third of trials (53/159) did not include a control arm, one-third (50/159) did not use randomisation, half the trials (75/159) were open-label and 75% (119/159) used intermediate or surrogate variables as the main outcome. Chronic progressive conditions led by multiple system/organs, conditions with single acute episodes and progressive conditions led by one organ/system were the groups where the evidence deviated most from conventional standards. Conditions with recurrent acute episodes had the most robust datasets. The overall size of the exposed population at the time of authorisation of OMP?-?mean(SD) 190.5 (202.5)?-?was lower than that required for the qualification of clinically-relevant adverse reactions.ConclusionsThe regulatory evidence supporting OMP authorization showed substantial uncertainties, including weak protection against errors, substantial use of designs unsuited for conclusions on causality, use of intermediate variables, lack of a priorism and insufficient safety data to quantify risks of relevant magnitude. Grouping medical conditions based on clinical features and their methodological requirements may facilitate specific methodological and regulatory recommendations for the study of OMP to strengthen the evidence base.

Dataset Information

Product carbon footprints and their uncertainties in comparative decision contexts.

Publications

Product carbon footprints and their uncertainties in comparative decision contexts.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets