Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
Responsible editor: Matthias Finkbeiner
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11367-015-0845-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
While lasting mitigation solutions are needed to avoid climate change in the long term, temporary solutions may play a positive role in terms of avoiding certain climatic target levels, for preventing the crossing of critical and perhaps irreversible climatic tipping points. While the potential value of temporary carbon storage in terms of climate change mitigation has been widely discussed, this has not yet been directly coupled to avoiding climatic target levels representing predicted climatic tipping points. This paper provides recommendations on how to model temporary carbon storage in products in life cycle assessment (LCA), in order to include the potential mitigation value relative to crossing critical climatic target levels. Further, estimates are made on potential magnitude of this value, highlighting the importance of including this aspect in climate change impact assessment of biomaterials.
The recently developed approach for quantifying the climate tipping potential (CTP) of emissions is used, with some adaption, to account for the value of temporary carbon storage. CTP values for short-, medium- and long-term carbon storage in chosen biomaterials are calculated for two possible future atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentration development scenarios. The potential magnitude of the temporary carbon storage in biomaterials is estimated by considering the global polymer production being biobased in the future.
Both sets of CTP values show the same trend; storage which releases the carbon again before the climatic target level is reached increases the CTP value of the product compared to a situation with no storage of the product, whereas storage extending beyond the time where the climatic target level is predicted to be crossed according to the GHG concentration scenarios contributes with negative CTP values, which means mitigation. The longer the duration of the storage, the larger the mitigation potential.
Temporary carbon storage in biomaterials has a potential for contributing to avoid or postpone the crossing of a climatic target level of 450 ppm CO2e, depending on GHG concentration development scenario. The potential mitigation value depends on the timing of sequestration and re-emission of CO2. The suggested CTP approach enables inclusion of the potential benefit from temporary carbon storage in the environmental profile of biomaterials. This should be seen as supplement to the long-term climate change impacts given by the global warming potential which does not account for temporary aspects like benefits from non-permanent storage in terms of avoiding a critical climatic target level.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Bos HL, Meesters KPH, Conijn SG, Corré WJ, Patel MK (2012) Accounting for the constrained availability of land: a comparison of bio-based ethanol, polyethylene, and PLA with regard to non-renewable energy use and land use. Biofuels Bioprod Bioref 6:146–158 CrossRef
Brandão M, Levasseur A, Kirschbaum MUF, Weidema BP, Cowie AL, Jørgensen SV, Hauschild MZ, Pennington DW, Chomkhamsri K (2012) Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:230–240 CrossRef
Bright RM, Cherubini F, Strømman AH (2012) Climate impacts of bioenergy: inclusion of carbon cycle and albedo dynamics in life cycle impact assessment. Environ Impact Asses Rev 37:2–11 CrossRef
Cherubini F, Bright RM, Strømman AH (2012) Site-specific global warming potentials of biogenic CO 2 for bioenergy: contributions from carbon fluxes and albedo dynamics. Environ Res Lett 7(045902):11
EPA (2013a) Clean Energy, Calculations and References. Accessible at: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/refs.html. Accessed Dec 21 2013
EPA (2013b) National Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data. Energy. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990–2011. Accessible at: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html. Accessed Dec 21 2013
Forster P, Ramaswamy V, Artaxo P, Berntsen T, Betts R, Fahey DW, Haywood J, Lean J, Lowe DC, Myhre G, Nganga J, Prinn R, Raga G, Schulz M, Van Dorland R (2007) Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007 - The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Fujino J, Nair R, Kainuma M, Masui T, Matsuoka Y (2006) Multi-gas mitigation analysis on stabilization scenarios using aim global model. (Special Issue: Multi-Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Climate Policy). Energ J 343–353
Guest G, Cherubini F, Strømman AH (2013) Global warming potential of carbon dioxide emissions from biomass stored in the anthroposphere and used for bioenergy at end of life. J Indust Ecol 17:20–30 CrossRef
Hansen J, Sato M, Kharecha P, Beerling D, Berner R, Masson-Delmotte V, Pagani M, Raymo M, Royer DL, Zachos JC (2008) Target atmospheric CO 2: where should humanity aim? Open Atmos Sci J 2:217–231 CrossRef
Harmsen P, Hackmann M (2013) Green building blocks for biobased plastics. Wageningen UR. Accessible at: http://www.groenegrondstoffen.nl/Serie_GG.html. Accessed Dec 21 2013
Jørgensen SV, Hauschild MZ (2013) Need for relevant timescales when crediting temporary carbon storage. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:747–754 CrossRef
Jørgensen SV, Cherubini F, Michelsen O (2014a) Biogenic CO2 fluxes, changes in surface albedo and biodiversity impacts from establishment of a miscanthus plantation. J Environ Manag 146:346–354 CrossRef
Jørgensen SV, Hauschild MZ, Nielsen PH (2014b) Assessment of urgent impacts of greenhouse gas emissions– the climate tipping potential (CTP). Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:919–930 CrossRef
Meehl GA, Stocker TF, Collins WD, Friedlingstein P, Gaye AT, Gregory JM, Kitoh A, Knutti R, Murphy JM, Noda A, Raper SCB, Watterson IG, Weaver AJ, Zhao ZC (2007) Global Climate Projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007 - The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 747–845
Meinshausen M, Smith SJ, Calvin K, Daniel JS, Kainuma MLT, Lamarque J-F, Matsumoto K, Montzka SA, Raper SCB, Riahi K, Thomson A, Velders GJM, van Vuuren DPP (2011) The RCP greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300. Clim Chang 109:213–241
PlasticsEurope (2011) Plastics – the Facts 2011, An analysis of European plastics production, demand and recovery for 2010. Accessible at: http://www.plasticseurope.org/documents/document/20111107101127-final_pe_factsfigures_uk2011_lr_041111.pdf. Accessed Apr 9 2013
van Vuuren D, den Elzen M, Lucas P, Eickhout B, Strengers B, van Ruijven B, Wonink S, van Houdt R (2007) Stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations at low levels: an assessment of reduction strategies and costs. Clim Chang 81:119–159 CrossRef
- The potential contribution to climate change mitigation from temporary carbon storage in biomaterials
Susanne V. Jørgensen
Michael Z. Hauschild
Per H. Nielsen
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Elektronische ISSN: 1614-7502