Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) - A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

CHAPTER 2: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

2.1.2 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

Figure.2.1 Taiwan’s Carbon footprint label extracted from Taiwan Product Carbon Footprint Website, Environmental Protection Administration

2.1.2 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

The life cycle of a product includes various stages, which are production of raw material, transformation of raw material, manufacturing of product, distribution and selling the product, consumption, and finally disposal of product’s residue. Traditionally, product life cycle is a cradle-to-grave process, where the input going into making a product will all become waste at the end of the life cycle.

However, the new concept, “cradle-to-cradle”, is transforming inputs making a product into a new input for other uses. In the process, no waste is generated, in other words, the residual or output of a process become an input for another. The analysis compiles data on volumes and quantities of materials, energy and chemicals, and emission of pollutants and waste resulting from these various life stages. All

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

pollutants are expressed as CO²a equivalent, which is commonly accepted unit for global warming potential (GWP).

Guidelines of Life Cycle Assessment

1. Life cycle inventory analysis: Quantification and compilation of GHG emission of inputs and outputs of a given product throughout its life cycle.

2. Life cycle impact assessment: Understanding and Evaluation of the magnitude and significance of the potential environmental impact of a product system.

3. Life cycle interpretation:

Life cycle interpretation is a systematic technique to identify, quantify, check, and evaluate information from the results of the LCI and the LCIA, and communicate them effectively. Life cycle interpretation is the last phase of the LCA process. The life cycle interpretation consists of two parts:

1. Analyse results, reach conclusions, explain limitations, and provide recommendations based on the findings of the preceding phases of the LCA, and to report the results of the life cycle interpretation in a transparent manner.

2. Provide a readily understandable, complete, and consistent presentation of the results of an LCA study, in accordance with the goal and scope of the study

Illustration of Life Cycle Assessment

Traditionally, the carbon emission to be included in the life cycle assessment is only the stages after the manufacturing stage. However, this way of accounting GHG has been challenged for ignoring the emission-intensive steps to producing the raw material for the product. For example, an orange juice made with imported California oranges might appear to have lower carbon emission than that with local oranges because of its more efficient manufacturing facility which uses less electricity.

This way of calculating the carbon footprint is faulted in design because it fails to

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

consider the transportation of the raw material, California oranges to Taiwan. The transportation of heavy substance such as orange will account for a significant amount of GHG emission already. Therefore, it is crucial to assess the GHG emission starting from the cultivation and acquisition of the raw material as shown in the above picture. Another input for a can is aluminium. Aluminium is mostly produced by the Hall-Heroult Process in which a great amount of energy is needed to melt the material and as a result a significant amount of carbon dioxide is generated. Thus, that portion of GHG emission must be accounted in the life cycle analysis in order to obtain the holistic picture of a product’s carbon footprint. Following the acquisition of the raw material, the raw material is transported to the manufacturing site to get processed into product. Product is also packaged at the location, then gets transported to distribution center and sold to consumers. This part causes most variance because it relies on the distance the product travels to reach its end-consumer. If the retail store is further away from the distribution center, then, the carbon emission from the transportation stage will be higher than that of a retail store near the distribution center. Following is the use/maintenance control of the product. For a drink, it will be storing the drink in cool environment, the electricity needed to maintain the low temperature. For a detergent, the water temperature used to wash the clothes will also result in different amount of carbon emission. At the last stage of a product life cycle is the use and disposal of the residue. When the final remainder of product is recyclable, it becomes an input for another process and as a result, emission will be reduced. However, when it has no further use, it needs to be picked up by garbage collecting truck and be buried in landfill, which in time will release GHG emission back into the atmosphere.

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

Figure.2.2 What is the carbon footprint of products by Japan Trade and Industry of Ministry of Economy

Product Category Rules

Identifying the scope of carbon emission assessment is the ultimate key to making carbon footprint label a widely adopted practice. Since life cycle assessment is a brand new concept, there has not been a standard for the measurement scope. The inconsistency among measurement scope is one of the reasons why carbon footprint labeling is not widely practiced yet. For businesses, the inconsistency can have impact on competitiveness. For consumers, it can be misleading and falsifying.

Therefore, setting an international standard for the scope of measurement is the key for global movement of goods. PCR is a guidance or set of rules for the collection of data and how calculation should be done to transfer the data to the climate impact and how to present the information. When the PCR for a product has been set, similar products from other brands with the same ingredient, manufacturing method, and distribution network can apply the existing PCR system and make the process more

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

efficient for other players in the market. The PCR sets the functional and declared unit, system boundaries, for each different stage of a product life cycle, cut-off rule, allocation rule, and calculation rules to ensure data quality. The system boundaries divide product life cycle into three stages: 1) Product stage 2) Building stage 3) End of life stage. The cut-off rule refers to the procedures that do not contribute more than 2 % of the total mass and 1 % of the total energy use may be omitted from the inventory analysis. However, they need to be declared and justified in order to ensure the validity of the data. The allocation rule states that if a production process generates more than one type of product, it is necessary to allocate the environmental impact (inputs and outputs) according to the product in particular in order to get product-based inventory data. When allocation is used, the economic reality and other relevant aspects shall be considered to determine if other allocation criteria would be more appropriate or lead to deviating results. A sensitivity analysis should be done if a deviation greater than 20% is foreseen. Different data sets shall be documented and reported, if different allocation options are relevant.

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

2.2 Global Status of Carbon Footprint Labelling

2.2.1 The United Kingdom 1. Carbon Reduction Label

The Carbon Reduction Label was created by the Carbon Trust, a not-for-profit company whose aims to accelerate the move to a low-carbon economy. Their work involves tasks as diverse as helping companies large and small to lower their carbon footprints, encouraging the development of new low-carbon technologies such as offshore wind and wave power and investing in the solutions of the future to develop the low-carbon economy. The first label to disclose carbon emission information on products was the Carbon Reduction Label, introduced in 2006 by the UK-based Carbon Trust organization. The label not only requires companies using the label to disclose the total carbon footprint of the product, but also requires companies to continue the reduction of product life cycle emission.

The purpose of the Carbon Reduction label in the words of Carbon Trust is “to encourage producers to cut the footprint of the things we buy and to help each of us make simple, no-cost changes that reduce our carbon footprint too.” The statement reflects Carbon Trust’s mission in engaging consumers into shaping the way business operates while consumers can feel good about their purchase decisions. Brands that want to wear the Carbon Reduction Label must conduct life cycle assessment in accordance with the PAS 2050, a set of measurement standard based on the IS0 LCA and greenhouse gas accounting standards and is consistent with GHG Protocol and developed in 2007 by the Carbon Trust in partnership with the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and BSI British Standards. The emission included contains the emission associated with raw material production,

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

transportation, packaging, through to manufacture, transportation, sale to the end user, use and disposal. Using the label comes with a commitment for emission reduction after 2 years when the license period expires. However, emission targets are agreed and set on a product-by-product basis. The license fee starts at around £5,000. The label is not a life-time certification; the emission assessment must be done every two years and reduction has to be achieved and independently certified to ensure companies strive to lower their carbon emission. If emission has not been reduced, the label is removed.

British Standard: PAS Public Available specification, at the request of the Carbon Trust and the British Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

Registration Process

Figure.2.3 Registration Process of carbon trust’s Carbon Reduction Label

‧

Table.2.1 Companies that have participated in Carbon Trust’s carbon footprint labelling project

Retail Goods Consumer goods manufactures

Walkers All varieties of standard crisps sold in single packets

Tate and Lyle 1kg bag of granulated cane sugar

PepsiCo Quaker oats and Oat so Simple Morphy Richards Range of Irons

Allied Bakeries Kingsmill wholemeal, white and 50:50 loaves

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

Levi Strauss A one off promotional bag Haymarket Magazines – Marketing and

ENDS report

Continental Clothing

-A range of over 800 t-shirts and other cotton apparel -Woven bags (USA and Japan) and t-shirt internet retailing service

Marshalls Complete range of 2,500 paving products

Mey Selections Scottish honey and shortbread Sentinel Central heating cleaning fluid Stalkmarket Biodegradable, disposable

catering serving packaging Aggregate Industries 3 varieties of paving products -

Bradstones

Axion Recycled plastic / polymer Baxter Flexbumin (healthcare)

Suzano Paper

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

3. Achievement:

In 2009, nine out of 10 households in the UK bought a carbon labelled product and the average UK household spends £78 on carbon labelled products each year. Up to 2010,the Carbon Trust has worked with more than 90 brands and 5,000 individual product lines, helping them to measure and reduce their carbon footprint – and there are many more household names keen to add the Label to their products.

The total retail value of consumer goods sold in the UK bearing the Carbon Reduction Label has just reached £2 billion, and this figure rises to nearly £3 billion if business products, like CEMEX UK and Marshalls PLC., are included. This exceeded the total sales of organic products (£1.5 billion) or Fair trade products (£800m) and is largely due to the addition by Tesco, Britain’s biggest retailer, of carbon labels to more than 100 of its own-brand products, including pasta, milk, orange juice and toilet paper. According to The Economist, A British consumer group, found that a fifth of British shoppers recognised the carbon footprint label, compared with recognition rates of 82% for Fair trade and 54% for organic labelling.

Figure.2.4 Actual Carbon Reduction Label on juice

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

Figure.2.5 Carbon Reduction Label by the Carbon Trust

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

2.2.2 United States

1. CarbonFree

^®

Product Certification

The CarbonFree logo is issued by a Washington based, not-for-profit organization called Carbonfund. The uniqueness of the CarbonFree label among others is that it comes with a carbon offsetting project, giving the product a carbon-neutral status. The method used for LCA is CarbonFree^® Product Certification Carbon Footprint Protocol, which includes any recognized process-based standards such as the GHG Protocol, PAS2050 or ISO14000. Another uniqueness of the label is that it may or may not indicate the amount of the carbon content the product contains, depending on the applicant’s preference. For subsequent products, the registration fee will be adjusted to $500 USD per product. The carbon emission for each product is monitored on a quarterly basis. If the company has not reached its committed emission target, Carbonfund will offset what the company has not reduced, to keep the product carbon neutral. Carbonfund also offers a reduction incentive which is to waive the registration fee for the product for next year if the product carbon footprint (PCF) is reduced by 10%.

2. Reduction Projects to Select From

a. Renewable energy and methane: this type of offsets support renewable energy development projects that help to reduce the amount of energy produced from emission-intensive sources like coal and oil. The project can be implemented within Annex I countries or between both Annex I and Annex II countries. An example of this type of project is the Chino Basin Dairy Farm Biodigester, which generates energy from local manure. The reduction of emission associated with each project is converted into different standards, such as Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) or credit that can be sold to or traded with countries, companies or on climate-related trade

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

centers, such as Chicago Climate Exchange. The resulting standard or credit must be verified by a third-party, such as Det Norske Veritas (DNV), First Environment or TUV in order to become valid. The renewable projects are of many different types that can be classified as the United Nations’s Framework Convention on Climate Change’s (UNFCCC) Clean Development Mechanism and Joint Implementation.

b. Energy efficiency and carbon credits: This category invests in projects which reduce the total amount of energy needed to be produced and consumed. Projects which develop efficient technology, such as fluorescent light bulb and LED lamps, are the types of projects offered in this category. For example, the New Zealand Compact Fluorescent Lightbulb (CFL) Project began in 2005 by following a Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) methodology to distribute an initial 62,000 CFLs.Between 2005 and 2007, the Project reduced around 75,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions and has come up with the goal of expanding its distribution to 3 million CFLs to reduce an estimated 1 million tonnes of CO₂. Another part of this category comes from the purchase of carbon credit on the climate exchange center. By purchasing the carbon credit, Carbonfund retires the credit which could otherwise be purchased by another company to use and gain permission to increase their GHG emission. This way, the credit will become ineffective, as a result, no emission could be generated from owning the credit.

c. Forestation and Avoided Deforestation: planting trees can sequester the atmospheric carbon dioxide in the tree body and soil and benefit the wild life, community and the entire ecosystem. Other than being a mitigation method, forestation projects also benefit economically and socially. It creates jobs, protects biodiversity, improves local environmental quality and maintains and expands wildlife habitats. Avoided deforestation includes preservation of forests from being

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

deforested. Forests are a carbon sink to store significant amount of carbon dioxide and often hosts of a variety of species and. According to Carbonfund, deforestation accounts for over 20 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions – more than the entire global transportation sector! Therefore, preservation of forests and forestation is crucial to maintain the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

3. Participating Companies:

Table.2.2 List of companies that have the CarbonFree label

Manufacturer Product

Domino Sugar EFG/Refined Sugar (Packaged) with

CarbonFree® label Anvil Knitwear, Inc. AnvilRecycled™ Tee

Florida Crystals Organic Sugar (Packaged), Evaporated Cane Juice (Packaged), Golden

Granulated Sugar (Tote)

GBS Enterprises, Inc. Mattress Protectors Twin, Mattress Protectors Twin Extra Long

Grounds for Change All Grounds for Change Coffee INTEK America, Inc. Paper Shredder, Lubrication sheet LEI Electronics / Eco Alkalines Batteries

Monarch Beverages Beverage: fruit juices

Motorola, Inc. Cell Phone, Wall Charger, Vehicle Charger Adapter

Nika Water Bottled water

Sunlyte LLC. CD, DVD and Bluray packaged discs

Tandus PowerbondCarpet

Tropical Traders Specialty Food Royal Hawaiian Honey’s jars and tubs

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

4. Label Design:

Figure.2.6 The Carbonfree label by Carbonfund

5. Registration Process:

Figure.2.7 Registration Process for Carbonfree label

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

6. Overall Approach:

In the case of the United States, the government’s clear stance on rejection of the ratification of Kyoto Protocol results in the absence of solid political power to make change to the current business-as-usual practice of the general public.

Therefore, a non-governmental force is emerged to meet the global demands on United States’ actions against climate change. Carbonfund’s approach fulfils the role of the United States as an Annex I country to engage in Clean Development Mechanism and Joint Implementation projects, which provide financial and technological assistance for both developed and developing countries in projects that will lead to a lower carbon development.

In contrast with other countries’ approach, sometimes by the government, others by an NPO, none has the approach like the Carbonfund. In which, the responsibility of mitigation is not only handled by the business which applies for carbon labels, but also by the Carbonfund which issues carbon label. Furthermore, Carbonfund also provides a marketing tool that facilitates the participating companies’

marketing plans. The companies which have registered the CarbonFree label all have the label visible on their company website stating the product is carbon neutral.

However, this also gives room to another issue. If businesses know there is always going to be someone to clean after them for their product emission, they will not have the strong will to lower their own emissions. The way Carbonfund works lies in the fact that as long as businesses pay them the registration fee, Carbonfund will neutralize their emission for them. Another issue in Carbonfund’s CarbonFree label is that applicants can choose to disclose their carbon emission information or not.

This further reduces the strength of the force to make businesses reduce their carbon emission. Therefore, no matter how much emission is generated throughout the

‧

國

立政治大學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

product’s life cycle, it will always appear to be carbon neutral. As carbon label is a communication tool to the public, CarbonFree label might become a tool to mislead the public into thinking the product is more environmental-friendly, while in fact, the product generates more GHG emission than other similar products.

Another issue with the CarbonFree label is that, applicants who register for the label will have to choose a supplier from Carbonfund’s list of partners to conduct the Lifecycle Assessment. This will all depend on the ethical standards of Carbonfund, whether they will have any means to make its partner work according to their

在文檔中由企業角度研究碳足跡標籤的導入:以宏碁與泰山為例 - 政大學術集成 (頁 24-65)