Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
-
Upload
nancy-gillis -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
1/35
Project Results Report
Product Carbon Footprinting The Right Way to Promote Low CarbonProducts and Consumption Habits?
Experiences, fndings and recommendations rom the
Product Carbon Footprint Pilot Project Germany
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
2/35
www.pcf-project.de
PublisherPCF Pilot Project Germany
c/o THEMA1 GmbH
Torstrae 154
10115 Berlin
Contact partner
Rasmus Prie
+ 49 30 779 0 779 15
The contact persons for all Project Partners can be found
in the Appendix.
Editing: Dipl.-Ing. Christa Friedl
Photography: Daniel Pasche
Graphic design: Sabine Knopp, Steffen Schler
Printed on recycling paper made of 100% recovered paper.
2009, THEMA1 GmbH
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
3/35
Abstract 2
1. Introduction 3
2. The starting point 42.1 Climate change as one o the main challenges we ace 4
2.2 Private consumption has a signicant infuence on our climate 4
2.3 Companies and consumers united to promote low carbon consumption 42.4 The consumer must be inormed - but how should this be done? 5
2.5 Product Carbon Footprinting: an extremely dynamic area o interest 5
3. Product Carbon Footprint Pilot Project Germany 63.1 Objectives 6
3.2 Project Initiators 6
3.3 Corporate Partners and case studies 7
3.4 Stakeholder dialogue 7
4. Basic methodological principles for Product Carbon Footprinting 84.1 Dening the Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) 8
4.2 Aims and uses o Product Carbon Footprinting 8
4.3 Methodological approaches or calculating the PCF 9
4.4 Approach in the PCF Pilot Project 10
4.5 Recommendations on developing a methodology 12
4.6 The limitations o PCF 18
4.7 Recommendations or standardising the PCF methodology 19
4.8 Interim conclusions 20
5. Product Carbon Footprinting as the basis for providing credible information 205.1 Carbon labelling a controversial debate 20
5.2 Requirements or climate-related product labelling 21
5.3 Recommendations or communicating climate-related product inormation 23
6. Conclusion 25
7. What next? 26
8. Appendix 278.1 Project Initiators and contact persons 27
8.2 Corporate Partners and contact persons 28
Table of contents
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
4/35
2
PCF Pilot Project Germany
1 CO2
ootprint is used as the simplifed orm o CO2e
ootprint.
AbstractIntroductionIn Germany, private consumption is responsible or approx.
40 percent o the annual per capita emissions o greenhouse gases
(source: Die CO2
Bilanz des Brgers, Federal Environment
Agency, 2007). So, what impact do the products and services
we use every day have on the climate? In an attempt to fnd an
answer to this question, researchers and companies have been
talking about so-called Product Carbon Footprinting (PCF) or
some years now. The Product Carbon Footprint, or CO2
oot-
print1
, is a unit o measurement or calculating all greenhousegas emissions which accumulate during the lie cycle o a certain
product. As such, the PCF is an appropriate instrument or deter-
mining, evaluating and communicating the eect that goods and
services have on our climate.
Despite years o experience in the area o lie cycle assessment,
the discussion on PCF has given rise to new questions. That is
why ongoing developments are a dynamic process and many
questions have not yet been resolved conclusively. For example,
we still do not have a scientifcally substantiated, consistent and
internationally harmonised convention or defning how a CO2
ootprint is to be measured.
The issuesThis report brings together the principle fndings o the German
PCF Pilot Project, which was initiated by research institutes and
environmental bodies and carried out in cooperation with ten
large companies. The project ocused on the practical experi-
ence which has been gained in measuring the CO2
ootprints o
actual products consumed and used in our day-to-day lives. It
was not the main aim o the project to develop an own method
or calculating PCF. The CO2 ootprint was measured in six stepsbased largely on the method used or lie cycle assessments.
Those involved in the Pilot Project concerned themselves mainly
with three questions:
How practicable are the methods which have been used to
calculate a CO2
ootprint up to now?
What fndings support the development o a consistent,
internationally accepted methodology?
How can the results o the PCF calculations be presented
to consumers in a way that is simple, credible and relevant
to promoting climate conscious consumption habits?
ResultsThose involved in the Pilot Project have come up with impor-
tant fndings rom the case studies; or example, that the ISO
14040/44 standard has proved to be a suitable methodological
ramework or calculating PCFs. From an international point
o view, they nevertheless see the development o a uniorm
convention to be important in the coming years, so that ProductCarbon Footprinting can be frmly established in global climate
discussions.
What is more, the work carried out in the Pilot Project has also
shown that Product Carbon Footprinting can make an impact in
many ways. For example, it increases the awareness among
company managers, employees and suppliers about what im-
pact their own products and services have on the climate. PCF
is also a key actor in recognising and developing the potential
or reductions all along the value chains. The transparent docu-
mentation o CO2
ootprints can also orm the basis or clearly
communicating the climate impact o a product.
However, above all, a communicated CO2
ootprint can raise
awareness among private consumers about low carbon
consumption - however, this will only be true, i actors such
as practical relevance to consumer decision making, credi-
bility, comprehensibility, comparability and transparency in the
communication can be guaranteed. The Pilot Project has drawn
up a series o recommendations to deal with this.
For example, inormation about the CO2
ootprint is not only
to be gathered or the entire lie cycle, but will also be brokendown into individual phases such as production, use and dis-
posal. An aggregated overall fgure in the orm o a static carbon
label is something which those involved in the Pilot Project do
not consider to be conducive to achieving aims. A fgure o
this kind suggests a precision to the consumer which cannot
realistically be achieved at the present time using the variety o
dierent methods and interpretations currently available. Com-
municating Product Carbon Footprints should also be placed
within a context which provides the consumers with a clear
idea about the climate impact o their actions.
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
5/35
Project Results Report
3
Stakeholder dialogueThe results presented in this report cannot be seen as a nal
debate on the calculation and communication o Product Car-
bon Footprints. The Corporate Partners are thereore looking
orward to intensive eedback rom interested stakeholders.
A newsletter with up-to-date inormation on the PCF Project
and on the admission o new partners is available through
registration at www.pcf-project.de. Until a uniorm convention
or calculating PCF has been established, interested compa-
nies should gather their own experiences with Product Carbon
Footprints in overarching initiatives such as the PCF Project to
ensure consistency and credibility.
Last but not least, the Project Initiators want to actively promote
international debate on the harmonisation o Product Carbon
Footprinting. PCFs can only be measured, evaluated and reliably
communicated in a consistent and comparative manner i an
internationally accepted standard is in place.
1. Introduction
The goods that we consume every day have an impact on the
climate. This is true or the bicycle in your garage, French ries in
your ridge reezer, your new pair o jeans or a modern fat screen
monitor, and even or more service-based products, such as your
holiday or a book you have ordered on the internet; in act, every
product that we use in our daily lives generates greenhouse
gases during production, transport, storage, use and when dis-
posed o. Scientists and companies have been looking or years
at the question o how to calculate and evaluate the impact that
products have on our climate. One way that has seen intensive
discussion is the calculation o a CO2
ootprint, so-called Pro-
duct Carbon Footprinting.
The Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) helps us measure all o the
greenhouse gas emissions which accumulate during the lie cycle
o a certain product. However, calculating a PCF is not simple.
Most products have covered a long and complicated way beore
they reach the end consumer. Many o them are made up o a
whole range o dierent raw materials. There are products where
the greenhouses gases are mainly caused during the production
process and, with others, such as packaging which only has
a short useul lie, the disposal or recycling o these packages
plays a signicant role or the GHG balance. Appliances that run
on electricity, like ridges, produce the highest emissions while
switched on, but less when being produced or disposed o. Thatis why a clear denition o how and how long the consumer uses
a product needs to be ound beore the PCF can be calculated.
This paper brings together the principle ndings o the German
PCF Pilot Project, which was initiated by research institutes
and environmental bodies and carried out in cooperation with
ten large companies. The project has ocused mainly on gaining
practical experience in calculating PCF by looking at consumer
goods that are used on a daily basis. In the process, it was ex-
amined how this can be done correctly and in a way that makes
sense. What is more, the project participants look at the central
question about how to present the results o such calculations
to consumers in a orm that is easy to understand so that, as a
consequence, they will be prompted to act in a way that impacts
less on the climate.
The CO2
ootprint as a way to measure the eect that goods and
services have on the climate is still a relatively new idea. That is
why we do not yet have broadly accepted standards or methods
about how a PCF can be calculated and evaluated. The ndings
that have emerged rom the Pilot Project are the result o inten-
sive research into the process o Product Carbon Footprinting
using 15 individual products rom various branches: bed linen,
insulating material, toilet paper, wine stabiliser, a rozen meal,
A Low carbon society requires maximum energy eciency or both the network
and products.
Claudia Schwab, Vice President Environmental Protection & Sustainable Development Corporate Responsibility,
Deutsche Telekom AG / T-Home
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
6/35
4
PCF Pilot Project Germany
eggs, strawberries, coee, shampoo, washing detergent, seal-
ant, packaging adhesive, a sports bag, a telephone and internet
connection and a beverage carton. Last but not least, PCF is a
subject which is moving all the time. For this reason, the project
also involved in-depth dialogue with international organisations
and interested stakeholders.
2. The starting point
2.1 Climate change as one o the main challenges we ace
Global climate change is reality and is one o the main challenges
acing society, politicians, industry and the economy. The mean
worldwide increase in temperature must be kept to a maximum
o two degrees Celsius above its pre-industrial level i we want to
contain the eects that global warming has on human beings and
our planet. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC), this means that, by 2050, we have to reduce the
worldwide emissions o greenhouse gases by more than hal
compared to what they were in the year 1990. Industrial coun-
tries in particular are called upon to act here with a recommen-
ded reduction in annual greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent
and more compared to 1990.
2.2 Private consumption hasa signicant infuence onour climate
Private consumption is one o the main actors when it comes to
protecting the climate: it is responsible or more than 40 percent
o per capita emissions o greenhouse gases (source: CO2-
Bilanz des Brgers, Federal Environment Agency, 2007). Every
citizen in Germany emitted an average o around 11 tons o CO2
equivalents in 2007 (one equivalent is equal to the total o all six
greenhouse gases included in the Kyoto Protocol converted into
the impact CO2
has on the climate). These 11 tons per year mean
about 30 kilogrammes per day. This amount includes the emissi-
ons rom areas in our lives like residential, mobility, nutrition and
the emissions rom the production and consumption o goods
and services o all kinds.
Eleven tons per year is clearly ar too high. A simple calculationshows that reducing the worldwide greenhouse gases rom 1990
by hal would require a per capita global average o a mere two
tons per year or 5.5 kilogrammes per day. The ollowing compari-
son makes it even more clear: i we want to achieve our climate
goals, it is the industrial nations, Germany among them, that
need to reduce their greenhouse gases considerably in all areas
o lie. While, in the past, debates on emission ocused mainly
on energy supply and industry as a whole, an increasing number
o players and groups in society have now come to realise the
signicance o private consumption and the role that consumers
play in protecting the climate.
2.3 Companies and consumersunited to promote low carbonconsumption
One thing is clear: companies and their suppliers carry respon-
sibility or the value chain and or how products are designed.
What is also clear, however, is that consumers buying patterns
and consumption behaviour aect what products are in demand
and thereore what is produced. Consumers also determine how
The methods or calculating PCF are partly inadequate at the present time. There is no
CO2
credit or green power, or example. In Germany, both our administration and
production acilities are supplied with 100% green power and this should be refected
in the GHG balance o our products.
Dr. Heike Schifer, Director Communication and Environment, Tetra Pak GmbH & Co. KG
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
7/35
Project Results Report
5
and or how long goods and services are used. Manuacturers
and consumers bear shared responsibility or ensuring that
products cause ewer emissions and that consumption behavi-
our changes to have less impact on our climate. Manuacturers
and suppliers can reduce the emissions during the lie cycle o
goods and services in lots o ways. Some examples are impro-
ving the resource and energy efciency o production processes,
buying materials with lower embodied emissions and reducing
materials consumption or optimising the material selection
process in the product design phase. Consumers can contribute
towards a reduction in emissions by deliberately buying long lie
goods, by asking or environmentally-riendly and low carbonproducts, and by reconsidering their everyday buying patterns
or consumption behaviour and changing these accordingly.
2.4 The consumer must beinformed - but how should thisbe done?
Consuming in a way that has little impact on the climate is only
possible i consumers are able to assess how much o an impact
the products they buy and use have on the climate. In the past
years, several very good instruments have been created or pro-
viding consumers with this kind o inormation. Some examples
are the EU Energy Label or large household appliances, energy
certifcation or buildings or the act that commercial vehicles are
required to indicate their emissions. A standardised methodology
has been developed in each case to acilitate a comparison o the
options. I consumers and companies gain a better understanding
o the eect that everyday goods and services have on the clim-
ate and adjust their consumption habits accordingly, then they
will pave the way or a systematic reduction in emissions.
In the ood and consumer goods sectors, however, there have not
had any tested and widely accepted instruments or inorming
people directly about the climate impact o such products. As a
consequence, inormation is lacking about the signifcance o pri-
vate consumption or climate change, about low-impact products
or about how to use these products correctly. This means
that companies are not yet in a position to inorm customers
about the climate impact o their products and the corresponding
value chains. Also, customers and consumers are not yet able
to identiy or compare low carbon goods and services. For this
reason, measuring the CO2
ootprint o specifc products was not
the only reason why the process o Product Carbon Footprinting
was tested and discussed as part o the PCF Pilot Project. At the
same time, the question o how results could be communicatedto end consumers and industrial customers in a way that is both
transparent and relevant to their respective decision making was
discussed.
2.5 Product Carbon Footprinting:an extremely dynamic area ofinterest
How can greenhouse gas emissions o consumer goods and
services be assessed and evaluated? In the past two years, an
increasing number o international initiatives have been set up to
deal specifcally with this subject and these have been building
upon the already existing methodological ramework provided by
the ISO standards on lie cycle assessments. Since 2007, British
organisations have been working on the PAS (publicly available
specifcation) 2050, the frst specifcation or calculating the
carbon ootprint o goods and services. We also now have the
frst instruments aiming to provide companies and consumers
with inormation. For example, Great Britain tested a carbon
label on individual products or the frst time in 2007. Ater that,
other countries ollowed suit and have been developing similarapproaches or evaluating and labelling products. However, we
still do not have any consolidated test results in most cases.
Product Carbon Footprint is an integral part o Tengelmanns climate initiative which
coordinates the numerous climate protection measures o our company.
Sieglinde Schuchardt, Head o Public Relations, The Tengelmann Group
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
8/35
6
PCF Pilot Project Germany
3. Product Carbon FootprintPilot Project Germany
The PCF debate is in ull swing. The PCF Pilot Project tookadvantage o this momentum and the plurality o ideas in itswork and discussions. The objective was to urthermore use theexperience gained by companies in dierent industries in orderto develop recommendations or a uniorm convention or Pro-duct Carbon Footprinting. The project partners were not tryingto come up with a new methodology or PCF.
In addition to examining the CO2 ootprint, other environmentalcriteria were taken into account to varying degrees. This makesit possible to estimate the relevance o greenhouse gasemissions as an individual actor compared to other types oenvironmental impact. Such a comparison also shows whetherreducing the greenhouse gas emissions o a product mightnegatively aect other environmental categories. The recom-mendations developed in the project were derived rom actualcase studies and have been tested or practicality. The meaningand the eect that these recommendations have on the resulto the PCF have been checked and documented on the internet:
www.pcf-project.de
3.1 Objectives
The parties involved in the project set the ollowing objectives:
1. Gain experience: Project Initiators and Partners use con-crete case studies to gain experience in the application oexisting methods or determining the CO2 ootprint o productsand check them or easibility (ISO standards or lie cycleassessment, PAS 2050).
2. Draft recommendations: The fndings rom the case studiesare used to compile recommendations or developing andharmonising a transparent and scientifcally sound methodo-logy. The Pilot Project explicitly rerains rom developing itsown methodology.
3. Communicate results: Consumers must be inormed in aneasily comprehensible and appropriate manner. Thoseinvolved in the Pilot Project thereore resolve to discusscredible communication at the industry, company and productlevels or the promotion o low impact purchase decisions and
use patterns. These deliberations ocus on the practicalrelevance o measures or consumers to promote low carbonconsumption. The Pilot Project explicitly avoids developingits own carbon label because the methodologicalconventions currently in place are not sufciently robust andhave limited relevance or consumer decision making.
4. Standardise internationally: By applying the knowledgeand recommendations developed in the project, the partiesresolve to make an active contribution to the internationaldebate on the assessment and communication o PCF.
3.2 Project Initiators
The Project Initiators are the WWF, the Institute or AppliedEcology (ko-Institut), the Potsdam Institute or Climate ImpactResearch (PIK) and THEMA1. They are responsible or projectmanagement as well as operational oversight o the work. Theappendix provides additional inormation about the individualProject Initiators.
By assessing the CO2
ootprint, we have gained extensive knowledge which isa good basis to urther optimise processes. In this way, we are moving towards ourgoal o manuacturing our products in a climate-compatible manner.
Stean Dierks, Senior Manager Environment, Corporate Citizenship & Corporate Governance, Tchibo GmbH
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
9/35
7
3.3 Corporate Partners andcase studies
Under the direction o the Project Initiators, ten large, multinational
companies determined the Product Carbon Footprints or indi-
vidual products in their portolio. For additional inormation about
the individual Corporate Partners, reer to the appendix or
www.pcf-project.de.
Corporate Partner Case Studies2
BASF BASF insulation material Neopor
Textile fnishing BASF Fixapret AP
dm-drogerie markt Own quality brand sant + sicher
toilet paper
DSM Wine stabiliser ClaristarTM
FRoSTA FRoSTA Tagliatelle Wildlachs (wild salmon)
Henkel Schwarzkop & Henkel shampoo
(Schauma 7 Kruter)
Henkel washing detergent(Persil Megaperls)
Sealant
(products o the Sista and Ceresit brands)
Industrial packaging adhesives (Liool)
REWE Group Best Alliance strawberries (REWE contract
arming o sustainably grown early season
strawberries in the south o Spain)
Tchibo Privat Kaee Rarity Machare
Sports bag rom an Asian supplier
The Tengelmann Group Private label certifed organic eggs
Naturkind
Tetra Pak Tetra Pak beverage carton
Tetra Brik Aseptic Slim
Deutsche Telekom/ Call & Sur Comort
T-Home (router hardware + network solution)
3.4 Stakeholder dialogueThe PCF Pilot Project sees itsel as an open platorm and is in
direct dialogue with national and international actors and stake-
holders in science, politics, business and society in the felds o
PCF and CO2
product labelling. Direct eedback rom stakeholders
and interested parties regarding the presented results and recom-
mendations is thereore expressly appreciated.
In 2008, the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World
Business Council or Sustainable Development (WBCSD) started
a comprehensive stakeholder process or developing standards
and principles or calculating Product Carbon Footprints.
Participants in the PCF Pilot Project are represented in the
steering committee and in the technical working groups. The
aim is to develop a standard by the end o 2010. The already
successully introduced Greenhouse Gas Protocol or
corporate GHG emissions serves as the basis or establishing
standards or product-specifc greenhouse gas emissions.
The International Organization or Standardization (ISO) has also
started a process or developing an international standard or
Carbon Footprints o Products. The Pilot Project is in close
contact with the involved national and international parties toensure that crucial methodological requirements are taken into
account and to ensure close coordination with other important
standardisation projects.
Project Results Report
2 Detailed documentation o the case studies is available online at www.pcf-project.de
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
10/35
8
PCF Pilot Project Germany
4. Basic methodological
principles or ProductCarbon Footprinting
Three basic questions stood at the outset o the work on calcu-
lating a Product Carbon Footprint.
What does the term Product Carbon Footprint mean?
Why is it measured?
How can a clear basic method or calculating the PCF be
developed?
4.1 Defning the Product CarbonFootprint (PCF)
The defnitions and uses o the term Product Carbon Footprint
dier internationally. Within the scope o the PCF Pilot Project
Germany, the project stakeholders agreed on the ollowing
defnition:
Product Carbon Footprint describes the sum o greenhouse
gas emissions accumulated during the ull lie cycle o a
product (good or service) in a specifed application.
In this context, greenhouse gas emissions are understood asall gaseous substances or which a Global Warming Potential
coefcient has been defned by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC). The lie cycle o a product encompasses
the entire value chain: rom the acquisition and transport o raw
materials and primary products, to production and distribution,
as well as use, recycling and disposal. The term product is
used as a generic term to describe goods and services.
The term Product Carbon Footprinting includes the calculation
and evaluation o a PCF. In Germany, the Product Carbon Foot-
print is mostly reerred to as the CO2
ootprint.
4.2 Aims and uses o ProductCarbon Footprinting
Various goals o the PCF and ideas about how it could be used
in numerous applications are discussed in the international
debate. These uses each entail specifc requirements or the
calculation method. One o the aims o the project was thereore
to examine whether the currently available set o methods is al-
ready well-developed enough to ulfl all o the goals or whether
the methodological requirements need to be adapted more to
suit the dierent uses.
Calculating Product Carbon Footprints can help a company:
to create transparency in the value chain with respect to up-
stream and downstream processes and the players involved,
to increase awareness o the greenhouse gas emissions
along the value chain and identiy emissions-intensive
phases in particular,
to identiy areas where there is potential or reducing emissi-
ons (or example, by optimising the process chains),
to come up with ideas or the (urther) development o their
own climate strategy,
to analyse and evaluate how relevant greenhouse gas emis-
sions are in comparison to other impacts that a product has
on the environment.
We will actively pursue climate protection as part o our Groupwide sustainability
strategy in the systematic selection o our production locations and methods.
Dr. Ludger Breloh, Head o Strategic Purchasing, REWE-Group
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
11/35
Project Results Report
9
Assuming that international standards are established, a PCF
can be used in the communication process between suppliers,
industrial customers and consumers:
to make clear what eect everyday goods and services have
on the climate and to emphasise the shared responsibility o
all those involved in protecting the climate,
to work together with suppliers and industrial customers to
decrease emissions in the value chain,
to inorm customers and consumers o alternatives whenthey buy and use products and, by doing so, improve their
overall competitiveness,
to provide inormation about PCF-related osetting activities,
or example, through CDM-projects,
to demonstrate the companys sense o social responsibility
with regard to climate protection using a specifc product
as an example.
The PCF can become one o the building blocks in climate-related
product communication and an important instrument in encoura-
ging low-carbon consumption, once an internationally accepted,
consistent standard is in place. Product Carbon Footprinting can
highlight potential or emission reductions throughout the entire
product lie cycle and can make consumers more aware o how
to consume in a way that impacts less on the climate.
Whether the various aorementioned goals can be achieved
in the short term with the current state o knowledge and
whether the uses named are acceptable is something that the
participants in the PCF Pilot Project discussed at great length.
They came to the conclusion that more international eorts areneeded to create a consistent methodological basis or many o
these uses. What is more, the requirements are not always the
same: communication with the end consumer, or example, has
dierent requirements or level o detail and quality o data than
would be the case with only company-internal uses.
4.3 Methodological approachesfor calculating the PCF
At the beginning o the Pilot Project, there still did not exist any
consistent and internationally coordinated method or calcula-
ting the Product Carbon Footprint. Nevertheless, the internati-
onal lie cycle assessment standard (ISO 14040/44) provides a
solid oundation or the upcoming international coordination and
standardisation process and many o the partners involved in
this process have already gained a great deal o useul experi-
ence over many years with the standard.
In 2007, a frst initiative or developing a PCF calculation method
evolved in Great Britain. British organisations drew up the
Publicly Available Specifcation 2050, the Specifcation or the
assessment o the lie cycle greenhouse gas emissions o goods
and services (PAS 2050), which goes back to an initiative set
up by the Carbon Trust and the British Department or Environ-
ment, Food and Rural Aairs and which was coordinated by the
British Standards Institution (BSI).3 The PAS 2050 is a frst step
in creating consistent basic principles or calculating the PCF.
The fnal version o the guideline was published at the end o
October 2008. Since then, other countries such as France,
Japan and Korea have been working on developing their own
methods. In the opinion o the PCF Pilot Project, the diversity
o approaches hinders their applicability and, i anything, they
are counterproductive. The project participants are thereore
pushing or the development o an internationally coordinated
and broadly accepted standard as soon as possible. Only a con-
sistent, cross-industry standard which applies to a wide range
o products can adequately serve the complex nature o value
chains and narrow down the scope or interpreting how a PCF
is to be calculated, and minimise the prolieration o dierent
inconsistent methods.
In the middle o 2008, two parallel initiatives were launched,
both with the aim o creating a scientifcally substantiated and
internationally coordinated standard or calculating the Product
Carbon Footprint.
1. The International Organization or Standardization (ISO) has
initiated a process to draw up the international standard Carbon
Footprints o Products. This standard is to be published in the
spring o 2011.
3 The PAS ranks below a national standard. In Great Britain, it is seen as the frst step
towards national and international standardisation.
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
12/35
10
PCF Pilot Project Germany
2. As part o their Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol initiative,
the World Business Council or Sustainable Development
(WBCSD) and the World Resources Institute (WRI) have
entered into a dialogue with international scientifc experts,
business experts and environmental institutions. A Product
and Supply Chain Accounting and Reporting Standard is to
be developed by the end o 2010.
Both o these processes make sense and are valuable initiatives
on the way to developing a consistent methodology and are
supported by those involved in the PCF Pilot Project, provided
that close coordination among the two processes is ensured.However, as an international standard will not be available
until two or three years rom now, the Partners in the PCF Pilot
Project have been looking at the practical easibility o existing
methods or calculating PCF based on the extensive experience
gained in lie cycle assessment. The issue o easibility is o
great importance. In the coming years, numerous companies
will decide what their position is with regard to the uses and ad-
vantages o elaborating CO2 ootprints. The project participantshave thereore exchanged ideas with manuacturers, scientifc
partners and stakeholders to discuss and come up with answers
to the practical questions concerning the urther development
and application o PCF methods as a product-specifc interpreta-
tion o the LCA standard.
4.4 Approach in the PCF PilotProjectThe Project Initiators and Corporate Partners took the internatio-
nal LCA standard (ISO 14040 and 14044) as the methodological
ramework or calculating a Product Carbon Footprint. This stan-
dard has also been the basis or the British PAS 2050 as well
as or the aorementioned dialogue processes initiated by ISO
and to a certain extent the WBCSD/WRI. Within the PCF Pilot
Project, the ISO 14040/44 was thereore an essential source o
input or the work carried out on methodology and thereby also
or the case studies.
Many o the basic methodological conditions o ISO 14040/44 can
be applied in the case o the PCF methodology, but several have
to be adapted. Some terms o reerence o the ISO 14040/44 are
loosely ormulated, making it necessary to examine whether it
is possible to develop less ambiguous terms o reerence which
have a comprehensive or product group-specifc oundation.
This would simpliy the comparability o dierent PCF studies.
This constitutes one o the greatest methodological challenges
acing international coordination, especially or all uses or
which the PCF is publicly communicated.
Every partner company in the project selected at least one pro-
duct rom its own portolio or which a PCF was then determined.
In this way, methodological rameworks or rules o interpretation
regarding ISO 14040/44 could be practically tested on specifc
case studies. In turn, the case studies also gave rise to specifc
methodological questions.
ISO 14040/44
Developing international standards
Expected in 2011
ISO TC 207"Carbon Footprint of
Products
Expected in 2010
WRI/WBCSDGHG Protocol
product accountingand reporting
standard
published29.10.2008
PAS 2050Specification for theassesment of the life
cycle GHG emissions of
goods and services
Joint methodological recommendations
Workflows using the task force methodology
Institute forApplied Ecology
Observation ofinternational and
national PCFdevelopments
CorporatePartner
Case studiesEvaluating
conclusiveness,reliability androbustness for
management andcommunication
processes
TF methodology
Agreement onuse and
adaptation of themethodology forcalculating the
PCF
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
13/35
Project Results Report
11
The broad spectrum o selected products entailed comprehen-
sive discussions. The participation o companies rom very
dierent sectors was challenging, ruitul and an essential pre-
requisite or developing and optimising a methodology with the
broadest possible range o applications. In addition, involving
well-known experts rom the area o lie cycle assessment in the
case studies proved to be an absolute bonus or the project.4
Dierent criteria were taken into consideration when choosing
the products:
transparency in the supply chain
stability o the supply chain
willingness o suppliers to cooperate
availability o primary and secondary data
possible methodological learnings
ecological signifcance o the product
potential or reducing emissions
importance o the product or the company
market relevance o a Product Carbon Footprint
The PCF was measured in the ollowing six steps basically ol-
lowing the international standard on LCA: setting up the process
networks, defning the system boundaries, collecting primary
and secondary data, setting allocation rules, calculating the
PCF, carrying out sensitivity analyses. The Institute or Applied
Ecology coordinated with the case managers ater the second
and ourth step or each case study.
Finally, the results were validated and it was examined whether
the predefned methodological conventions could be adequately
put into practice when calculating the PCF.
In order to support the current discussion on Product Carbon
Footprinting, both at national and international level, those who
worked on the Pilot Project drew up various recommendations:
1. Methodological recommendations: The Project Initiators
and Corporate Partners came up with a series o concrete
recommendations or developing a method which should be
taken into account when developing an international stan-dard (but also or the interim calculation o PCF).
2. Limitations of Product Carbon Footprinting: Experiences
gained in the (urther) development o a methodology and
during the case studies identifed areas where the PCF
comes up against limitations.
3. Recommendations on the focuses of international
standardisation: There are some issues and areas where,
because o the sheer complexity o these, the Project Part-
ners rerained rom giving comprehensive recommendations.
These are better dealt with in the international standard-
isation processes.
4 The ollowing LCA experts worked on the project: Ecoys (or the Tengelmann Group);
Institute or Energy and the Environment (IFEU, or Tetra Pak); the Institute or AppliedEcology (or Tchibo); PE International (or dm-drogerie markt); PR Consultants (or DSM);University o Bonn (or the REWE Group); University o Bremen (or FRoSTA).
Flow chart of case study coordination
Corporate Partners / service providers
Mapping ofprocess networks
Collection of primaryand
secondary data
Calculating the PCF
ProcessconsultationCoordination
Coordination
Coordination
Defining thesystem boundaries
Allocation
proposal
Validationof results
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
14/35
12
PCF Pilot Project Germany
4.5 Recommendations ondeveloping a methodology
The concrete recommendations or developing a PCF metho-
dology are based on the contents o the LCA standard and are
briey introduced in the ollowing.
PrinciplesLie cycle assessments and measurements o greenhouse gas
emissions at company or product level generally ollow certain
principles. Criteria such as completeness, consistency, precision
and transparency should all apply in equal measure when cal-culating a CO
2ootprint. In addition, it makes sense to establish
conservativeness as a principle. This principle entails that a PCF
must be calculated in such a way that the importance o certain
steps, or example, the selection o data, especially secondary
data, is not underestimated.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: It was agreed that a
conservative approach was to be ollowed in the case studies.
GoalsThe goals that are pursued when calculating a PCF are extre-
mely important with respect to their implications or methodo-
logical requirements. For this reason, the goals must be named
explicitly in each case, documented transparently and the
consequences that these have or the applied method (scope
defnition) must be discussed.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: The specifc goals o
each company are named in the case study documentation.
EmissionsEmission actors or consumed electricity
The methods currently being used to assess PCF cannot be used
to map the individual supply relationships or electricity. As the
way in which electricity is generated plays an enormous role in
climate protection, specifc supply relationships must be taken into
consideration in any uture methodology. This is particularly true or
the inclusion o electricity rom renewable sources.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: The respective natio-
nal electricity mix was taken as a basis in the case studies. Supply
relationships which provided precise proo or origin were included
in a sensitivity analysis.
Certifed green power rom renewable energy sources
There still is not a good, broadly accepted method or including
green power in the calculation o a PCF. This not only applies to
the PCF, but also or company-related GHG inventories. The emis-
sion actor or green power is oten assumed to be zero, which
generally does not constitute a correct evaluation. The Institute
or Applied Ecology is currently working together with other re-
search bodies in Germany to come up with recommendations as
to how certifed green power should be evaluated with respect to
its additional benefts or the environment. In the PAS 2050, green
power is included in the national electricity mix in order to avoid it
being accounted or twice unless it can be proven otherwise.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: In the case studies,
green power was calculated in the best case estimates accord-
ing to the national electricity mix. Following a suggestion made
by the Institute or Applied Ecology and IFEU, in the sensitivity
analyses, only those shares o renewable electricity supplied by
plants that were less than six years old were awarded the direct
emission actor o zero. The emissions rom upstream (indirect)
processes were, o course, additionally taken into account.
A products PCF makes the subject o climate protection tangible. It oers both the
company and consumers the opportunity to identiy ways in which they can make their
own personal contribution.
Uwe Bergmann, Head o CSR / Sustainability Steering, Henkel AG & Co. KGaA
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
15/35
Project Results Report
13
EXAMPLE
Tetra Pak uses certifed green power in all o its German pro-
duction and administration sites (NaturEnergie). I we were to
allocate this electricity an emissions actor o zero or the direct
emissions rom new plants supplying renewable energy (in this
case 33%), then the PCF would all rom 82g to 81.3g per pack-
age examined (Tetra Brik Aseptic Slim), that is, a reduction
o slightly less than 1%. Assuming that the total supply o green
power was calculated at zero emissions, the PCF would all by
3.7% altogether to 79g per packaging unit. This makes clear
that Product Carbon Footprinting should in the uture be refned
to display the real additional beneft or the environment rom
certifed green power where possible. As a consequence this
could also provide urther incentives or companies and people
to change their behaviour and use certifed green power.
CompensationCompensating or greenhouse gas emissions (so-called oset-
ting) must be displayed separately, as including osetting
directly in the calculation would give a alse impression o the
actual impact that a product has on the climate.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: Osetting was notlooked into in any o the case studies.
Emissions from aviation
Not only CO2, but also other substances such as water vapour
and nitrogen oxides contribute to the global warming eect o
air trafc. The eect is described using the so-called Radiative
Forcing Index (RFI). That is why the use o the more extensive
RFI instead o CO2e
emissions is so important in the case o air
trafc.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: Air trafc did not
play a role in any o the case studies looked at, because all o
the raw materials and preliminary products used were transpor-
ted and distributed via roadway, railway and waterway.
System boundariesIncluding all phases in the product life cycle
To calculate the PCF correctly, the entire lie cycle o a product
must be taken into consideration. Assessing only individual
phases can lead to alse recommendations or appropriate
action. Under certain circumstances, however, it may make
sense to display inormation about individual phases separately.When communicating with industrial customers, or example,
it may be sufcient to assess the lie cycle only as ar as the
customers actory gate (cradle to gate). However, this means
that in this case the PCF is only o limited use or corporate
communication and communication towards the end customer.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: A partial PCF is
irrelevant. All o the case studies assessed all lie cycle phases
o the respective products.
EXAMPLE
The PCF Pilot Project case studies demonstrate the importance
o looking at all lie cycle phases. The Tchibo Privat Kaffee
Rarity Machare case study, or example, clearly shows that the
PCFs lie cycle approach can open up completely new perspec-
tives. In the last years, Tchibo has been making considerable
eorts to reduce the GHG emissions o the companys logistics.
One could have assumed that carriage by sea plays a very signi-
fcant role or this coee, which comes rom Tanzania. However,
Tetra Brik Aseptic Slim
Tchibo Privat Kaffee Rarity Machare
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
16/35
14
PCF Pilot Project Germany
the results o the case study show that, with approximately 59g
o CO2
equivalents per cup o coee (taken rom the best case
estimate), the cultivation o the coee on arm accounts or the
quantitatively largest share at about 56%: here, the input o
agrochemicals (ertilisers and pesticides) are particularly relevant.
Surprisingly, this was then ollowed by preparation o the coee
by the consumer with a share o about 30%. All transports ad-
ded up along the value chain and put together with the roasting
and packaging o the coee only accounted or about 12%, a
rather low percentage. These results make clear how important
it is to keep an eye on the total PCF when deciding on priority
emission reduction potentials.
EXAMPLE
Similar ndings came rom the case study carried out by the
Tengelmann Group on their Naturkindorganic ree range
eggs (pack o 6). A more precise analysis o the PCF o a
little more than 1.1kg per pack shows that the majority o the
greenhouse gas emissions, at about 62%, are caused by the
pullet rearing and egg laying arms. The most important actor
here is the chicken eed, which had the biggest infuence. Thenext biggest driver is the use phase, accounting or approx. 21%
o emissions. Another 10% o emissions were generated in the
shops. Transportation between the individual process modules
was responsible or only 1.5%. Sensitivity analyses have shown
how important it is to create a good and transparent set o basic
data, especially or the areas that play a decisive role or the PCF.
Signifcance o the use phase
Products are used in dierent ways and or dierent lengths
o time. That is why it makes sense to assume dierent use
patterns so that we can adequately map the infuence and the
time span o this important phase, especially i the PCF is to be
communicated to the end consumer.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: In cases where the
use phase had a signicant infuence on the PCF, dierent pat-
terns o use were assumed. This made it possible to emphasise
the importance o this phase in external communication.
EXAMPLE
The case study on Persil Megaperls rom Henkel highlights the
most decisive infuences in the use phase, in particular through
the selected wash temperature. On the basis o current surveys,
the gure o 46C was chosen as the average wash temperature
in Germany. This entailed a PCF per wash cycle over all lie cyc-
le phases o around 700g CO2
equivalents.5 As such, more than
70%, or approx. 510g o CO2
equivalents accumulated during the
use phase. At a wash temperature o 30C, the energy con-
sumption is reduced in the use phase by around 50%, entailinga reduction in greenhouse gas emissions down to 240g. At a
wash temperature o 60C, emissions in the use phase increase
to almost 750g. This shows what infuence the wash tempera-
ture and the dierent patterns o behaviour can have on the PCF
while maintaining a comparable wash perormance.
5
Assuming the standard conditions o A.I.S.E.
Naturkindorganic ree range eggs
Persil Megaperls
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
17/35
Project Results Report
15
EXAMPLE
In the FRoSTA Tagliatelle Wildlachs case study, the shopping
trip, the length o time the product is stored at home beore
eating and how the meal is prepared (incl. lighting) and washing
the dishes aterwards all aect emissions during the use phase.
Best case estimates put these at approx. 430g. This is a 29%
share o the PCF over all o the products lie cycle phases. Less
avourable assumptions or the use phase were also discussed
in sensitivity analyses. Assuming these less avourable con-
ditions, emissions o up to 2,700g may be caused in the use
phase alone. This is seven times the best case estimate and
highlights how important the use phase is. In the case analysed
by FRoSTA, dierences in shopping tour assumptions had the
biggest inuence on the overall PCF.
EXAMPLE
In the T-Home case study, the PCF o a combined telephone
and internet connection (Call & Sur Comort) was assessed.
Dierent patterns o use and the inuence these had on the PCF
were analysed. With 41.4kg CO2e
emissions per year, using the
Call & Sur Comort package made up or about 46% o the PCF
o 89.6kg CO2
equivalents over all lie cycle phases. Dierent
use scenarios (low use, average use and requent callers/sur-
ers) were looked at.
Signifcance o the shopping tour
There is no systematic reason to leave the shopping tour
involved in buying a product out o the assessment, something
which was proposed in the PAS 2050. When communicating
inormation to the consumer, the signifcance o the shopping
tour and the eect this has on a products CO2
ootprint is by all
means an important aspect.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: In all o the case
studies where the shopping tour was relevant, it was included
in the calculation and assessed separately. Where concrete in-
ormation was lacking, generic assumptions were made in orderto assess the relevance o the shopping tour or the overall PCF.
As inormation on shopping tour behaviour was not accessible
in any o the case studies, a basic distance o 5km in an aver-
age passenger car was assumed. In addition to this, a shopping
volume o 20kg was taken as the basis. The greenhouse gas
emissions or the individual product were allocated according
to the mass o the respective products. The relevance o the
shopping tour or the PCF o the products that were examined
may vary signifcantly among the dierent products.
FRoSTA Tagliatelle Wildlachs (wild salmon) T-Home Call & Sur Comort
Router
+
Netzinrastruktur
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
18/35
16
PCF Pilot Project Germany
EXAMPLE
In the Best Alliancestrawberries case study o the REWE
Group, the relevance o the shopping tour or a 500g carton o
strawberries (as part o a 20kg shopping volume) was analysed
in this way. It became clear that the shopping tour, which ac-
counted or a 15% share o the overall PCF o around 442g CO2e
is very relevant and should not be excluded. This act speaks
against systematically ignoring this phase in the lie cycle when
calculating the PCF.
EXAMPLE
In the case study on sant + sicher toilet paper rom dm-
drogerie markt, under the same assumptions, the shopping
tour accounted or a 4% share o the total PCF o about 2.5kg
CO2e
or a packet containing 10 toilet rolls (3-layered). Here,
it would also be misleading to ignore this share. In this case
study, it was also assessed how this share changes when the
basic travel distance doubles rom 5km to 10km. This increases
the share taken up by the shopping tour rom 4% to 12%. I it is
assumed that the shopping tour is made only to buy the toilet
paper, this percentage changes drastically, meaning that the total
PCF could then increase by about 50%. In this case, the shopping
tour would become an essential inuencing actor on the PCF.
Signifcance o capital goods
In general, capital goods are seen to be o little signifcance or
the PCF and are thereore oten neglected when undertaking lie
cycle assessments. Capital goods may very well be relevant
or the result o PCF calculations or certain products, product
groups or services. I this is the case, they should be included
in respective product-specifc guidelines (potentially in ProductCategory Rules, PCR).
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: The relevance o
capital goods was assessed in some o the case studies with the
help o sensitivity analyses, only to fnd out that capital goods
were not relevant to the results in any o these.
Best Alliance strawberries sant + sicher toilet paper
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
19/35
Project Results Report
17
AllocationsAllocation in cases of co-production
Emissions should be allocated to their actual source in accord-
ance with the specications o the ISO 14040 standard and
then substantiated in product-specic rules. The reasons or
choosing a particular allocation method must be outlined. What
is more, it makes sense to use at least one other method and
then present and analyse the dierences in the results.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: In cases where it
seemed necessary and expedient, dierent allocation methods
were tested to nd out how relevant they were or the results.
EXAMPLE
In the DSM case study or ClaristarTM, a wine stabiliser,
dierent allocation procedures were examined in a sensitivity
analysis to see how they infuenced the result. The allocation is
relevant in the extraction o molasses as a residue in the prod-
uction o sugar. Molasses is the main raw material rom which
ClaristarTM is extracted. Allocation to the sugar and to the mo-
lasses can be done in two ways: economic allocation or mass
allocation. Both methods were examined and the dierence wassignicant. Mass allocation results in a PCF o 66g CO
2e/ hl
wine or the molasses and, using economic allocation, this
resulted in a mere 25g CO2e
/ hl wine. That is a dierence o
40g CO2e
/ hl wine or a PCF o altogether about 295g CO2e
/ hl
wine. Even though mass allocation in this case shows the results
o the conservative approach, using this would turn the real prod-
uction situation on its head. For this reason, economic allocation
or sugar and molasses was chosen. This example clearly shows
how much allocation infuences the results and demonstrates
that it is important or the comparability o a PCF to take a closer
look at the consistent denition, at least at the level o dened
product categories.
EXAMPLE
In the Fixapret case study o bed linen rom BASF, the
infuence o allocation procedures was also examined in the
co-production o cotton and recyclable organic waste products.
This examination showed that the economic allocation chosen
by BASF or the best case estimate resulted in considerably
higher PCF values than was the case with mass allocation.
The economic allocation represents the conservative approach
which is why BASF preers it, as the cotton is the end product
or which production takes place. In the best case estimate, bed
linen with Fixapret have a PCF o about 231.5kg CO2e
over
the entire lie cycle o the product using economic allocation.
I mass allocation is applied to the cotton production process,
this would result in a PCF o about 174.3kg CO2e
under the
same general conditions. BASF sees the economic allocation
as the better approach here, because it better refects the real
production situation. This example once again shows, particu-larly when compared to the example above, that generally valid
allocation procedures or all products are hard to imagine and
it also shows that a product (category) specic denition can
make sense. When aiming to make product comparisons, a con-
sistent denition or the allocation procedure is essential at the
product level (Product Category Rules). However, it is dicult
to imagine that agreements on such product category rules can
be reached soon which would acilitate the calculation o easily
reproducible single values.
wine stabiliser Claristar TM
bed linen with BASF Fixapret AP
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
20/35
18
PCF Pilot Project Germany
Allocation in open loop recycling
When using materials and products or new production proces-
ses and their transormation into other, new products (open loop
recycling), a 50:50 allocation should be applied, unless dierent
assumptions have been taken based on product-specifc aspects.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES:These rules were ol-
lowed in all o the case studies and documented where required.
The documentation processThe documentation must be transparent and understandable
i credible communication o the results o a Product Carbon
Footprinting eort is to be achieved.SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE CASE STUDIES: All o the case stu-
dies are presented in a coordinated, consistent documentation
ormat which is as transparent and comprehensible as possible.
The documentation is publicly available in the internet under
www.pcf-project.de. The Corporate Partners have agreed that,
when communicating inormation on the results o the individual
case studies, they will reer to the central documentation in the
internet and, as an option, use the uniorm visual reerence (see
Section 6.3) which has been jointly agreed on.
4.6 The limitations of PCFThe main aim o Product Carbon Footprinting is to calculate and
assess the impact products have on the climate. Other eects
on the environment or social aspects are oten not taken into
account here. This may aect how conclusive the recommenda-
tions are and how they stand up to scrutiny, and may limit their
use in decision making.
In the Fixapret case study o bed linen rom BASF, an
examination o dierent environmental categories showed that
not greenhouse gas emissions, but acidifcation potential is the
dominant environmental category or this product. This meansthat, in this case, looking at the greenhouse gas emissions alone
can lead to a alse interpretation o the environmental impact or
could lead to recommending the wrong alternatives or action
when aiming to optimise the overall environmental impact.
When comparing the impact that products have on the climate
and in public communication o PCF, the question arises, or
example, as to whether this diverts attention away rom other
environmental criteria. That is why, where possible, other
environmental impacts should also be taken into consideration,
among these, eutrophication, land use, energy and raw mater-
ials consumption and the toxicity or acidifcation o soil and
water. I other ecological criteria are examined to ascertain their
relevance, this can corroborate the reliability o PCF-related
statements and prevent incorrect decisions being taken. The
case studies in the PCF Pilot Project looked into other environ-
mental criteria at dierent levels o detail.
A comprehensive sustainability assessment o products cannot
be carried out on the basis o the PCF alone. Other useul
evaluation tools in this respect are lie cycle assessments,
eco-efciency analyses and sustainability analyses. Neverthe-
less, the PCF is a undamental indicator or some products orproduct groups. In the uture, it would be interesting to link up
It was a positive surprise or us to discover that, when compared to other similar
products and home-made meals with regard to CO2, our products stood up well to such
a comparison.
Dr. Andreas Bosselmann, Head o Research and Development, FRoSTA AG
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
21/35
Project Results Report
19
product-related assessment methods in a more modular way
and make them more compatible with one another. Companies
could build upon the conclusions on the PCF and use these or
a comprehensive environmental and sustainability assessment
at a later date. Conversely, it is also interesting to generate the
PCF as a specifc valuation module rom lie cycle or sustainabi-
lity assessments.
The PCF is subject to variances in the precision and reprodu-
cibility o calculations. This comes rom the dierent quality or
source o data used or the defnition o certain assumptions in
the individual phases o the products lie cycle. Whether all othe uncertainties and room or assumptions that arise can be re-
medied by an internationally standardised methodology remains
uncertain, i anything. This is something that is o particular
importance when communicating the PCF.
Calculating Product Carbon Footprints, like undertaking a ull
lie cycle assessment, involves a considerable amount o time,
personnel and fnancial expenses. As such, a PCF is mainly
interesting at the present time or strategic or exemplary
products whose results can be extrapolated to other goods rom
the same product group or even to other product groups. It is
unlikely that a PCF can be calculated or every single product
rom companies with a broad product portolio within an accept-
able time rame.
The Product Carbon Footprint will not be the most expedient
option or calculating the climate impact or all products. In the
area o energy-intensive goods in particular, meaningul and ade-
quate indicators have already been developed (energy efciency
labelling) and these should be extended, but not necessarily
replaced by the PCF. On the other hand, the portolio o those
products or which PCF is a suitable instrument should be more
clearly defned so that the PCF can then be implemented moresensibly and efciently in management and communication
processes.
4.7 Recommendations forstandardising thePCF methodology
The partners o PCF Pilot Project see a number o overriding
questions or international standardisation:
how to deal with other environmental impact categories
within Product Carbon Footprinting
how to handle data quality requirements
harmonising allocation rules
inclusion o green power
treatment o the greenhouse gas emissions rom air travel
dealing with compensation (osetting)
developing product category rules (PCRs)
The fndings o the PCF Pilot Project have shown that certain
provisions or the calculation o Product Carbon Footprints can-
not be equally applied to all products or product groups. What is
more, it makes sense to draw up product category rules which
speciy allocation methods or the uniorm defnition o the pro-
duct use phase, or example. Specifc rules o this kind already
exist today or some product groups or products, although the
defnition o the PCR is seen as being very time-consuming and
not easible in its present orm or Product Carbon Footprinting.
For this reason, the process or defning the PCR should be
simplifed.
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
22/35
20
PCF Pilot Project Germany
4.8 Interim conclusionsEven without an international standard, it is already possible
today to assess the PCF in a way that is both rooted in a scientifc
approach and consistent, frst and oremost to ulfl management-
related goals. However, at the present time, Product Carbon
Footprinting has to be seen as a work in progress. As the
methods or calculating PCF become increasingly standardised
internationally, the PCF itsel will be changed by the urther
development o the methodology and its increasing specifcity.
This is o particular importance or the communication with
customers and consumers and also points out how important it
is that results o a PCF are documented transparently. As such,
the documentation o the case studies presented here provides
the reader with a picture o the situation as it is today and acts
as the basis or continued discussion about what constructive
steps can be taken next. What is more, the debates on the PCF
are already providing us with a whole series o important ideas
about the uses and limitations o the PCF in communicating
corporate and product-related inormation concerning the climate
impact o goods and services.
5. Product Carbon Foot-printing as the basis forproviding credibleinformation
5.1 Carbon labelling a controversial debate
Apart rom inormation on the energy consumption o individual
appliances, it has been difcult up to now or consumers tounderstand the climate impact o goods and services and to take
this inormation into account in their consumption decisions.
How and under what conditions can goods be labelled as low
carbon? This is a question which has prompted extensive
international debate. Organisations in various countries have
developed very dierent approaches towards communicating
climate impact and labelling products, with one example being
the British Carbon Reduction Label.
Coming up with simple and reliable inormation derived rom
Product Carbon Footprinting which will enable consumers to
move towards carbon-conscious consumption is a real challenge.
On the one hand, the inormation must be communicated in a
way that is clear, unambiguous and easy to understand. On theother hand, it also has to make sure that it takes into consider-
ation all o the criteria that aect the greenhouse gas emissi-
ons o a certain product and then packages these acts in an
understandable orm so that consumers can use this inormation
to make clear decisions about what and how they consume.
At the present time, there are no consistent regulations, either
or the communication with consumers or or the labelling o
goods and services. The PCF Pilot Project had detailed discus-
sions about the dierent international approaches. Those who
took part in the Project came to the ollowing conclusion: I
undamental requirements and recommendations are taken into
account in the communication process, Product Carbon Foot-
prints can act as a strong basis or conveying product inorma-
tion which can, in turn, encourage carbon-conscious consump-
tion habits. These requirements are presently not ulflled by a
Carbon Label.
The need to change towards a low-carbon economy will challenge us to create
a low-carbon oering, create transparent and trusted insight in the Product Carbon
Footprint, invite and engage the consumer to change buying-behavior.
Fokko Wientjes, Director Corporate Susta inable Development, Royal DSM N.V.
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
23/35
Project Results Report
21
5.2 Requirements for
climate-relatedproduct labelling
Labelling products to provide inormation about their greenhouse
gas emissions makes sense i and when basic requirements or
communicating this inormation have been met:
I. Relevance to decision makingConsumer-oriented inormation on product-related greenhouse
gas emissions should be displayed in such a way that corres-
ponding consumer behaviour can actually contribute towards
reducing GHG emissions and the overall impact on the envi-
ronment. The ollowing gives some indication o the important
questions that need to be answered:
Is CO2
the most relevant aspect in the lie cycle o the
product? Or are other actors more important (such as water
consumption, or example)?
Can the kind o inormation that is presented help the consu-
mer to consciously make a contribution towards protecting
the climate?
Does the way in which the inormation is presented provide
advice and assistance which help the consumer behave in a
way that is climate compatible?
Is the inormation about the climate impact conveyed in
such a way that it can inuence decisions about buying and
using the product?
Does the inormation provided ensure that displaying the CO2
ootprint does not conceal other important environmental
impacts?
II. Credibility
Communication must be credible to generate trust and winacceptance. The ollowing questions are relevant to credibility:
Is there sufcient transparency with regards to the metho-
dology used, the process or assessing the PCF and the
people involved in this process?
Have all o the relevant greenhouse gas emissions throughout
the entire lie cycle o a product been taken into consideration?
Where was the provision or assessing the climate impact
checked and perhaps inuenced by independent third parties?
Do the guidelines or calculating and communicating the
CO2
ootprint also account or inormation on the overall
environmental impact o a product?
Does the communication o product-related greenhouse gas
emissions go beyond individual ideal cases?
III. ConsistencyThe instruments or communicating with customers, consumers
or business partners will usually be implemented across a rangeo dierent companies. This is why a consistent set o basic
principles is required:
Do the same guidelines or assessing the PCF apply or all
comparable goods and services?
Are the assumptions described and documented in a way
that is transparent, comparable and consistent?
Are any individual changes (or example, changes to units or
system boundaries) presented clearly and coherently?
The fndings rom the PCF Project show the urgent need or all partners throughout the
product lie cycle to enter into multilateral dialogue in order to continue and strengthen
existing approaches in joint activities on the way to a better uture.
Daiga-Patricia Riemer, Responsible o Environment & Resources / Logistics, dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
24/35
22
PCF Pilot Project Germany
IV. UnderstandabilityAny inormation communicated must be easy to understand or
the person it is aimed at. The instruments used to convey inor-
mation must thereore be adapted to suit both the target group
and the situation in which the inormation is being used and yet
be suciently fexible:
Does the inormation being conveyed meet the inormation
requirements o the target group?
Is the inormation presented in a way that is adequate to
the communication skills (ability to understand abstractideas, language skills, etc.) o the target group?
Is the inormation density and design adequate or the con-
text in which it is provided?
V. ComparabilityInormation about the climate impact o products oten only
makes sense i it is possible to compare the impact with other
consumption alternatives:
Does the inormation provided (or example, values or values
margins) make it possible to compare it to alternative pro-
ducts which have an identical or similar use?
Is it possible to make a comparison across products or a
comparison o dierent types o product use?
Does the inormation provide the consumer with advice
about more climate-compatible consumption options?
I we take a look at these requirements, the CO2
ootprint can
act as an expedient instrument or communicating climate-
related product inormation. Nevertheless, i we want to promote
low-carbon consumption in the long term, consistent and
internationally accepted guidelines or communicating climate-
related product inormation which are based on a standardised
method or calculating PCF will have to be established.
Experience has shown that the mere consideration o the production phase is
incomplete and misleading or many products. Thereore it is essential to assess the
environmental impact o products throughout the entire lie cycle.
Dr. Peter Saling, Head o Eco-Eciency Analysis, BASF SE
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
25/35
Project Results Report
23
5.3 Recommendations for com-municating climate-relatedproduct information
Based on their own experience gained rom an analysis o the
dierent international communication approaches and ater
in-depth talks with relevant stakeholders, the participants in the
PCF Pilot Project came up with the ollowing recommendations:
Inormation about the CO2
ootprint o a product or a service
should be presented in a dierentiated manner: on the onehand, or the entire lie cycle and, on the other hand, broken
down into individual phases, or example, the production,
use and disposal phases. This will allow conclusions to be
reached, or example, about potential reduction strategies
on the part o the manuacturer or about CO2e
reductions
during the product use phase brought about by changing
consumer behaviour.
Providing a total CO2
ootprint fgure in the orm o a static
carbon label, as is already practiced by some companies,
does not make sense and is not very relevant or consumer
decision making. A fgure o this kind suggests a precision
and conclusiveness which cannot be achieved using the
current state o methodology.
PCF is an instrument which manuacturers can use to inorm
the public about individually achieved or planned reductions in
emissions, but this can only be done i the PCF can be cal-
culated and documented consistently over a certain period
o time. Particularly important in this context is disclosure o
the underlying assumptions.
Based on the current progress in methodological develop-
ment there is still scope or interpretation and margins in the
calculation. That is why the motivation or calculating a PCF
and assumptions and quantifers used in the calculations
need to be transparently documented. Any publication o
the data must be clear, understandable, conclusive and open
to scrutiny. Last but not least, it is important to what extent
PCF calculations are reliable and/or uncertain and whether
other important environmental impacts have been taken into
consideration.
It is important to document communicated results in a trans-parent and accessible manner. The project partners have
agreed that, when communicating inormation on the results
o the case studies, they will reer to the central documenta-
tion in the internet (www.pcf-project.de) and, optionally,
use the uniorm visual reerence which was jointly agreed on:
Checks carried out by independent third parties increase
the credibility o any inormation provided about impacts
that goods and services have on the environment and
climate. Such checks are particularly recommended i
inormation is used in product-related communication and
or the purpose o product comparisons with competitors.
As soon as a generally accepted standard has been
established, checks should be carried out in the orm o
critical reviews.
It is becoming increasingly important to ensure clarity about the sources o emissions
during a products lie cycle. The act that the PCF Project recognised the dynamics o
this despite its very complex nature and that only a holistic approach to efcient and
eective reduction strategies makes sense, is very positive.
Matthias Kopp, Climate Programme, Industry and Finance Sector, WWF Germany
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
26/35
24
PCF Pilot Project Germany
Inthefaceofthedynamicinternationaldevelopmentsthat
aretakingplace,comprehensiveapproacheswhichare
notproductorbranch-specicwillbehelpfulinestablishing
credibility,inavoidingisolatedstatementsandwillstay
abreastofongoingmethodologicaldevelopments.
Withtheserecommendationsinmind,ProductCarbonFoot-
printscanactasasolidbasisonwhichtosetupanexpedient
toolforcommunicatingclimate-relatedinformationaboutpro-
ducts.Ideally,thePCFcanbeusedtoconveyasimplemessage
toconsumerswhichcanpositivelyinuencetheirconsumptionbehaviour.
ThePCFPilotProjecthasbeenahugesteptowardsreachingaconsistentmethodology.
Itisnowimportanttobuildonthisincorporatestrategiesandclimatepolicy.
Dr.FritzReusswig,HeadofLifestyleandConsumptionResearch,PotsdamInstituteforClimateImpactResearch(PIK)
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
27/35
Project Results Report
25
6. Conclusion
The German PCF Pilot Project has learned a great deal rom
the detailed and intensive work carried out in the individual
case studies:
The ISO 14040/44 standard and urther specifcations
provide a solid basis or calculating CO2
ootprints o goods
and services. On this basis and provided that all GHG
emissions over the entire lie cycle have been accounted or,
a comprehensive assessment o the climate-impact ogoods and services is possible. Other environmental aspects
must be taken into consideration i a comprehensive
ecological evaluation o products is undertaken.
To potentially allow or comparisons o individual CO2
ootprints, the Project Partners will continue to resolve open
issues in the relevant international harmonisation processes
(in particular WBCSD/WRI and ISO).
Calculating the CO2
ootprint increases awareness among
the employees, suppliers and management o a company
about what eect their products and/or services have on
the climate.
Calculating the CO2
ootprint helps to identiy emission
reduction opportunities along the value chain and creates
impetus or internal improvements and the refnement o
the corporate climate strategy.
By documenting a products carbon ootprint transparently,
a strong oundation or targeted product-related communi-
cation is established and consequently climate-compatible
consumption behaviour ostered.
The collected fndings rom the German PCF Pilot Project
provide the basis or an intensive debate with a broad circle o
stakeholders. The project participants are looking orward to
receiving direct eedback on the fndings and recommendations
presented in the report.
Ater the very successul pilot phase, the PCF Pilot Project is evolving into a platorm
or the promotion o low carbon consumption. It will enable companies to gain valuable
experience in the area o product-related climate protection.
Rasmus Prie, Project Manager PCF Pilot Project, Thema1
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
28/35
26
PCF Pilot Project Germany
7. What next?
In the PCF Pilot Project, scientists, experts and companies tooka joint look at the question o how to calculate and publiclycommunicate the impact that everyday goods and serviceshave on our climate. Looking at specifc case studies, the pro-ject participants talked about the CO2 ootprint or each one andthen, based on the results o these discussions, came up with aseries o specifcations and recommendations. The work carriedout in the Pilot Project is by no means to be regarded as the lastword on Product Carbon Footprinting. It is rather a starting pointor continued discussion on this issue. The project partners arethereore very much looking orward to comprehensive eedbackrom interested stakeholders.
At the same time, using the knowledge they have gained, theProject Initiators will actively support the international debate onthe harmonisation o a consistent Product Carbon Footprintingmethodology. Only through an internationally accepted stan-dard, will Product Carbon Footprints be calculated, evaluatedand communicated in a consistent, comparative and crediblemanner.
Until a consistent method or PCF is established, any other com-
panies who are interested in this topic shall have the opportu-nity to gain their own experience with Product Carbon Foot-printing. The Project Initiators are currently elaborating variousmodular oers within a broader platorm or climate compatibleconsumption, which will support interested companies in thepractical calculation o PCF, in the implementation o strategiesto reduce the climate impact o products once the PCF has beencalculated and in the communication o climate-related inorma-tion or products with the aim o promoting low carbon consu-mer products and carbon-conscious consumption.
A newsletter with up-to-date inormation on the PCF Project andon the admission o new partners is available through registration
at www.pcf-project.de.
The PCF is a good starting point or companies to optimise the CO2
ootprinto products throughout their lie cycle. The challenge or the uture is to promoteclimate-riendly consumption through innovative approaches beyond a CO
2label!
Christian Hocheld, Deputy Director, ko-Institut Institute or Applied Ecology, Berlin
-
8/2/2019 Germany Product Carbon Footprinting 2009
29/35
Project Results Report
27
8. Appendix8.1 Project Initiators and contact
persons
The Project Initiators are the WWF, the ko-Institut - Instituteor Applied Ecology, the Potsdam Institute or Climate ImpactResearch (PIK) and THEMA1. They are responsible or projectmanagement as well as operational oversight o the work.Additional inormation about the project is available online at
www.pcf-project.de
WWFThe WWF is one o the largest independent nature conservationorganisations worldwide. Within the global network, the WWFis involved in over 2000 projects in more than 100 countrieswith 59 partner organisations and partner ofces. The WWFosters long-term partnerships with companies and plays aconstructive role in business-driven initiatives such as the inter-national climate saver programme while maintaining its criticaldistance. For additional inormation see: www.wwf.de
Through its involvement in the project management and steeringcommittee, the WWF has ensured that the activities in the PCFPilot Project are socially and ecologically relevant. The WWFalso heads up the institutional design task orce, which workson proposals or projects ollowing the pilot phase.
CONTACT PERSONMatthias Kopp, Climate Programme, Industry andFinance Sector,[email protected]
ko-Institut - Institute for Applied EcologyThe ko-Institut Institute or Applied Ecology is one oEuropes leading independent research and consulting institu-tions or a sustainable uture. It sees itsel as a scientifc thinktank and strategic consultant or politics, business and society- specifcally or international climate protection and sustainableconsumption. For almost 25 years, the ko-Institut - Instituteor Applied Ecology has helped defne the international methodo-logical development and application o ecological accounting
rameworks or developing more sustainable goods and services.For additional inormation see: www.oeko.de