Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) GHG Accounting Standard

SCS-002 Draft, Annex B (ANSI)

Stanley P. Rhodes, Ph.D.Scientific Certification Systems

Draft ANSI LCA GHG Accounting Standard

The LCA GHG Accounting Standard is part of an overall Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) ANSI standard that covers all human health and environmental impacts linked to industrial systems.

The standards committee has 25 members, including U.S. DOE, State of California, PG&E, U.S. steel industry, City of San Francisco, World Resources Institute.

LCA GHG Accounting Standard (Annex B) is undergoing broad scientific review and is receiving formal written comments based on outreach beyond the committee.

Final standards committee vote expected January 2010.

Important Climate Terms and LCA GHG Accounting Factors… We’ll be discussing these

Climate Measurements- Radiative Forcing (RF)- Global Mean Temperatures (GMT)- Regional Mean Temperatures

(RMT) Intensification of Anomalies Key GHG Emissions Tropospheric Ozone (TO) Black Carbon (BC) Tropospheric Sulfate Aerosols (TSA) GHG Loading GHG Fate/Transport GHG Atmospheric Lifetimes

LCA GHG Factors Global Warming Potentials

(GWP) Regional Warming

Potentials (RWP) Pulse Warming Potentials

(PWP) GHG-Precursor Conversion

Factors (PCF) Environmental

Characterization Factors (ECF)

The Current IPCC GHG Accounting System

The choice of the 100-year time horizon The IPCC framework has established GHG metrics for the 20-, 100- and 500-year time horizons, with the 100-year time horizon preferred.

Current list of key Kyoto GHGsCarbon dioxide (CO2)Methane (CH4)

Nitrous oxide (N20)Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)

Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)

GWP values are not linked to “atmospheric lifetimes”The IPCC global warming potential (GWP) index amortizes the heating effects of GHG

emissions over these three time horizons without regard to their atmospheric lifetimes (compared to an equivalent amount of CO2).

Assign GWP Values Consistent with Their Atmospheric Lifetimes

00.

51.

0

1-year 20-years 100-years (IPCC/Kyoto)

CO2, N20 and other long-lived GHGs

MethaneBC, TO, Aerosols

Fra

ctio

n R

emai

nin

g i

n A

tmo

sph

ere

Atmospheric Lifetimes of GHG Emissions

Lower Limit of IPCC Methane GWP Is Based on Atmospheric Lifetime

Industrial Designationor Common Name (years)

Chemical Formula

Lifetime(years)

Radiative Efficiency(W m–2 ppb–1)

Global Warming Potential for Given Time Horizon

SAR‡(100-yr) 20-yr 500-yr

Carbon dioxide CO2See

belowab1.4x10–5 1 1 1

Methanec CH4 12c 3.7x10–4 25 72 7.6

Nitrous oxide N2O 114 3.03x10–3 310 289 153

Substances controlled by the Montreal Protocol

CFC-11 CCl3F 45 0.25 3,800 6,730 1,620

CFC-12 CCl2F2 100 0.32 8,100 11,000 5,200

CFC-13 CClF3 640 0.25 10,800 16,400

CFC-113 CCl2FCClF2 85 0.3 4,800 6,540 2,700

CFC-114 CClF2CClF2 300 0.31 8,040 8,730

CFC-115 CClF2CF3 1,700 0.18 5,310 9,990

Halon-1301 CBrF3 65 0.32 5,400 8,480 2,760

Halon-1211 CBrClF2 16 0.3 4,750 575

Halon-2402 CBrF2CBrF2 20 0.33 3,680 503

Carbon tetrachloride CCl4 26 0.13 1,400 2,700 435

Methyl bromide CH3Br 0.7 0.01 17 1

The 100-year GWP value of 25 The 100-year GWP value of 25 amortizes the heating effects amortizes the heating effects of methane 90 years after it of methane 90 years after it

has left the atmospherehas left the atmosphere

The 100-year GWP value of 25 The 100-year GWP value of 25 amortizes the heating effects amortizes the heating effects of methane 90 years after it of methane 90 years after it

has left the atmospherehas left the atmosphere

The 20-year GWP value of 72 The 20-year GWP value of 72 represents the heating represents the heating

effects of methane during its effects of methane during its atmospheric lifetime.atmospheric lifetime.

The 20-year GWP value of 72 The 20-year GWP value of 72 represents the heating represents the heating

effects of methane during its effects of methane during its atmospheric lifetime.atmospheric lifetime.

Highlights of LCA GHG Accounting Standard

Establishes the list of “Key GHGs” based upon their contribution (>±0.1 W/m2) to 2009 global RF (+ 4.0 W/m2).

Includes the short-lived GHG emissions:

Tropospheric Ozone Global RF = +1.0 W/m2 Black Carbon Global RF = +0.9 W/m2

Tropospheric Sulfate Aerosols Global RF = –0.9 W/m2

Establishes time horizons based upon projected or current exceedances of climate anomaly thresholds.

Assigns all GWP values and other GHG factors based upon atmospheric lifetimes.

Establishes separate Arctic GHG accounting protocols distinct from the global GHG accounting.

Examples of Applications of LCA GHG Accounting Standard

Determining the environmental relevance of the CO2

Evaluating the accuracy of IPCC projections

Establishing the Arctic Climate Registry

Evaluating new power (everything from wind to IGCC), biofuel, and other major infrastructural improvement projects seeking loan approval from DOE

The List of Key GHG Emissions (Threshold of Global/Regional Forcing: > ±0.1 W/m2)

0.3W/m2

(BC)

0

-0.6 W/m2 direct-0.3 W/m2 indirect

Why Tropospheric Ozone is a Key GHG

South American TO Plume Intensity > 75 DU

Figure from NASA OMI O3 satellite plume output

This TO plume represents a heat intensity (i.e., radiative forcing, “RF”) of +3.2 W/m2,

compared to global RF for CO2 of +1.62 W/m2.

This TO Plume Appears to Be Affecting Western Antarctica

Image source: NASA; data reported in degrees centigrade

Why Black Carbon is a Key GHG Emission:Adds 18% to Total Annual Global RF

Source: Scripps Institute of Oceanography

Why is Tropospheric Sulfate Aerosols (a Coolant) Also a Key GHG

The global cooling effect of TSA is –0.9 W/m2, of which direct reflectivity is –0.6 W/m2 and indirect is –0.3 W/m2.

NASA projects an increase in TSA emissions by 2050 of 20–40% largely from coal plants. The result would be an increase in the cooling effect that is greater than the –0.1 W/m2 threshold.

TSA emission projections consistent with current U.S. regulations would reduce global TSA cooling effects and result in unintended net global RF increases that are greater than the + 0.1 W/m2 threshold.

TSA emissions can result in both beneficial summer cooling (i.e., reducing Cooling Degree Days) as well as causing unwanted winter cooling and increasing the intensity of Heating Degrees Days. In both cases, TSA emissions can cause significant indirect emissions of other Key GHG emissions.

LCA GHG Accounting Allocates TSA Cooling Between Unwanted and Beneficial Seasonal Cooling

Beneficial Summer Cooling

Unwanted Winter/Spring

Cooling

Unwanted Fall Cooling

SO

2 E

mis

sion

s -

ton

s

SO2

Fraction as Tropospheric Sulfate Aerosols

LCA GHG Accounting Metricsand Assigned GWP Values

(- )

1,2

Setting up the Global LCA Accounting System

GMT Anomaly to Exceed Threshold (>1.5oC) within 20 Years

Data Sources and Models: IPCC, NASA, Scripps, GISS and other recognized consensus climate model data only

The Arctic In Crisis

Establishing Arctic LCA GHG Accounting Protocols

Key GHG Emissions Affecting the Arctic

Regional black carbon, tropospheric ozone, and methane loadings account for 70-80% of total atmospheric warming in the Arctic. Source: AMAP 2009 (Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program)

Regional sources of black carbon in the Arctic (agricultural burning, forest fires) are creating steady-state Arctic haze. Eventual deposition onto snow decreases albedo of the Arctic perennial ice sheet, which dramatically increases melting. Source: AMAP 2009

Methane is concentrating in the Arctic at concentrations 20% higher than in lower latitudes. Source: NOAA

Tropospheric ozone is contributing up 40% of RF of the Arctic region. Source: NASA

NASA – Perennial Ice Sheet is Going

The total area covered by thick older ice that survives one or more summers (”perennial ice") shrank 42 percent or 1.54 million square kilometers (595,000 square miles) between 2004-2008, leaving thinner first-year ice ("seasonal ice") as the dominant type of ice in the region

Arctic LCA Accounting System: Exceedances of Thresholds Justify Annual Time

Horizon

CO2 as a Key GHG Emission:Determining Environmental Relevance

67% of Global Loadings are from the Shorter-Lived GHGs in 2009

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

N20 BC TO CH4CO2

214

525Annual

676Annual

1200Legacy

1400Legacy

34 Annual

42-50 Annual

3.5 Annual

Bill

ion

ton

nes

CO

2e

Background Concentrations of CO2 Show Linear Increase (+28%) over 50 Years

Annual CO2 Emissions Grew Exponentially Over the Past 50

Years Exponential

Global Economic Growth Facts Since 1950 Increases

Economy 5-foldAutomobile fleet 20-foldAir miles traveled 35-foldCoal plant capacity 4-foldPopulation 3-foldAnnual CO2 emissions 4-fold

Why?Huge Sinks:– Oceanic Acidification (carbonic acid)– Vegetative sequestration – Soil sequestration

Projections Beyond the Exponentials:2030 CO2 RF Intensification

The 50-year exponential global population growth and economic growth are expected to level off.

However, assuming continued exponential economic growth (i.e., continuation of Mauna Loa trend), CO2 background concentrations would reach levels of 425 ppm from the current 390 ppm by 2030.

This increase in background concentrations of CO2 would result in an RF increase of +0.4 W/m2 by 2030.

Projected 2030 Global/Arctic RF Increases

Key GHG Emissions Radiative Forcing % Total Increases, W/m2

CO2 (global) + 0.4 10-25%

CH4 (global) + 0.6 to +3.0

TO (global) + 0.3 to + 0.5

BC (global) + 0.2 to +0.8

TSA (global) +0.1 to – 0.6

2030 Total Projected Global RF + 1.6 to +3.9 W/m2

CH4 (Arctic) tbd

TO (Arctic) > +0.8

BC (Arctic) +1.2 , +3.0 (with albedo loss)

2030 Total Projected Arctic RF + 2.0 to + 3.8 W/m2

Evaluating the Accuracy of IPCC GHG Projections

Uncertainty in IPCC GHG Loading & RF

Projections (100-Year Time Horizon)

Uncertainties in the IPCC’s GHG Projections are Greatest for the 100-Year Time Horizon

Time Horizon Uncertainty or GHG Inventory

Uncertainty of Radiative Forcing

Uncertainty of GMT/RMT

Annual Time Horizon CO2 ±10%Methane ±10%TO ±15%BC TBDAerosols ±10%

CO2 ±10%Methane ±10%TO ±15%BC ±20%Aerosols ±10%

GMT ±10%RMT ±10%

20-year Time Horizon Projections

CO2 ±40%Methane ±200%TO TBDBC TBDAerosols ±40%

GMT ±35%

100-year Time Horizon Projections

CO2 ±600%Methane TBDTO TBDBC TBDAerosols TBD

GMT ±300%

Data from IPCC SERES Version 1.1 or Range of Major Climate Models

SRES Model Estimates for 100-Year Time Horizon GHG

Loadings

2000-2030 Estimates< 60 billion tonnes

2010 LCA Annual GHG Loading: 1,300 Billion Tonnes

IPCC: <60 billion tonnes

1500

1400

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

TO

BC

LCA: 1,300 billion tonnes

CLIMATE REGISTRY

Projections for Arctic TO and BC RF Intensification: > +2.0 W/m2

Source: Cooperative Institute for Climate Science

W/m2

2000-2050 Projections of TO and BC RF Increases

Top Registry Goal:Stopping Black Carbon Plumes Hitting the

Arctic

These peak BC plumes have 4x more RF intensity than CO2

Loss of Polar Sea Ice Increases RMT by 3°C 1,000 Miles South of the Arctic

Circle

The Russian and Alaskan Tundra will melt….

3°C Anomaly is Likely to Trigger Near-Surface Arctic Methane PulsesNear-surface methane hydrates = > 6,000 billion

tonnes CO2e

Methane bubbles observed by sonar escaping from the Arctic sea bed. (The pulses have started.)

By contrast, the IPCC global cumulative CO2 loading from 1990 through 2030 is projected to be 386 billion tonnes (as modeled by SRES Version 1.1).

A fleet of Sea Salt Injectors Injecting sea salt into the atmosphere over the newly de-iced open-water ocean would increase total cloud cover and increase cloud albedo significantly and would help re-establish the Arctic perennial ice sheet without environmental trade-offs

A fleet of Sea Salt Injectors Injecting sea salt into the atmosphere over the newly de-iced open-water ocean would increase total cloud cover and increase cloud albedo significantly and would help re-establish the Arctic perennial ice sheet without environmental trade-offs

Arctic Registry Potential InvestmentDispersion of Sea Salt, a Aerosol Coolant, Could Help Stabilize the Arctic Perennial Ice Sheet

Recovering the Methane-Hydrates Before Complete Melting of Permafrost

The Need for a Separate Arctic GHG Accounting and the Arctic Climate Registry

If the Arctic crisis is NOT addressed within the next 10 years, then attempts to mitigate global carbon dioxide and the other Kyoto GHG emissions over the next 20-to-50 Years will be too little too late …

Comparing LCA-Based GHG Accounting to IPCC GHG Accounting

IPCC GHG Accounting LCA GHG Accounting

Scientific Basis Based upon general Based upon specific climatological climatologic scientific parameters and data integrated intoprinciples LCA Impact Assessment Framework

Environmental Relevance of 6 GHG emissions 6 GHG emissions Key GHG emissions 40% of global RF anomaly 90% of global RF anomaly

Time Horizons Required None Global : 20-year time horizon Arctic : Annual time horizon

Assigns GWP Based upon No Yes Atmospheric Lifetimes

RegionalGHG Accounting No Yes

RegionalClimate Registries No Yes (e.g., Arctic)

Integrates TO, BC, and TSA Excludes Includesinto GHG Accounting

Accuracy of GHG < 10% > 90%Accounting Factors