The Importance of Carbon Footprint Estimation Boundaries

H. Scott Matthews, Chris Hendrickson, Christopher L. Weber

Environmental Science & Technology · 2008 · 554 citations · 10 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

Many companies are pursuing carbon‑footprint projects to estimate their contributions to climate change, yet existing protocols typically focus only on direct and purchased‑energy emissions, leaving supply‑chain emissions largely unaccounted for and hindering firms’ ability to pursue cost‑effective mitigation strategies. The study proposes that firms use a screening‑level analysis to set the bounds of their footprinting strategy, ensuring that large sources of environmental effects across their supply chains are not ignored. This screening‑level analysis helps firms define the scope of their footprinting, guiding them to include broader supply‑chain emissions in their assessments. Comprehensive life‑cycle assessments show that direct emissions represent only 14% of total supply‑chain emissions and even adding industry energy inputs raises this to 26%, confirming that narrowly defined protocols underestimate emissions and that the analysis can inform mitigation projects both within plants and across supply chains.

Abstract

Because of increasing concern about global climate change and carbon emissions as a causal factor, many companies and organizations are pursuing "carbon footprint" projects to estimate their own contributions to global climate change. Protocol definitions from carbon registries help organizations analyze their footprints. The scope of these protocols varies but generally suggests estimating only direct emissions and emissions from purchased energy, with less focus on supply chain emissions. In contrast, approaches based on comprehensive environmental life-cycle assessment methods are available to track total emissions across the entire supply chain, and experience suggests that following narrowly defined estimation protocols will generally lead to large underestimates of carbon emissions for providing products and services. Direct emissions from an industry are, on average, only 14% of the total supply chain carbon emissions (often called Tier 1 emissions), and direct emissions plus industry energy inputs are, on average, only 26% of the total supply chain emissions (often called Tier 1 and 2 emissions). Without a full knowledge of their footprints, firms will be unable to pursue the most cost-effective carbon mitigation strategies. We suggest that firms use the screening-level analysis described here to set the bounds of their footprinting strategy to ensure that they do not ignore large sources of environmental effects across their supply chains. Such information can help firms pursue carbon and environmental emission mitigation projects not only within their own plants but also across their supply chain.

References

10