Abstract
Purpose
Planning a transition towards sustainable carbon neutrality at the organization level raises several accounting challenges. This paper aims to shed light on key challenges, highlight answers from current accounting standards and guidance, point out potential inconsistencies or limits, and outline potential solutions from the industrial ecology community through systemic environmental assessment tools, such as life cycle assessment (LCA) and environmentally-extended input–output (EEIO) analysis.
Method
The study is based on the accounting difficulties related to GHG emissions as well as other sustainability concerns (environmental, social, and financial), reported to the authors by multiple organizations in developing carbon neutrality plans. The study then draws on a literature review of carbon neutrality-related standards and guidelines, as well as industrial ecology studies, to identify answers to these reported challenges.
Results and discussion
We propose a “Measure-Reduce-Neutralize-Control” sequence allowing organizations to plan their sustainable net-zero strategy, and discuss 24 accounting challenges occurring within this sequence. We then outline ways forward for organizations planning their carbon neutrality trajectory—pointing to existing resources—and for guidelines providers and the industrial ecology communities to address current limitations in the development of future accounting methods and guidelines. Overarching solutions to many accounting issues are to develop comprehensive, open-source, and high-quality life cycle inventory databases, to enable improved dynamic assessments and prospective LCA through integrated assessment models, to refine methods for assessing mineral scarcity and environmental impacts—the supply in some metals being expected to be a bottleneck to the energy transition—and to identify the appropriate climate metrics for planning sustainable carbon neutrality pathways at the organizational level.
Conclusion
Organizations are currently facing difficulties in robustly accounting for emissions in the context of carbon neutrality goals, and these difficulties appear to be partially caused by discrepancies between standards, tools, and databases. The industrial ecology community has a key role to play in harmonizing these resources and making them more useful for planning sustainable carbon neutrality pathways.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
No dedicated data are part of this study.
Notes
In this study, the terms carbon neutrality and net zero are used interchangeably for a state where an organization’s greenhouse gas emissions are either zero or balanced out by removals of CO2 from the atmosphere.
References
Abernethy S, Jackson RB (2022) Global temperature goals should determine the time horizons for greenhouse gas emission metrics. Environ Res Lett 17:024019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac4940
Aboumahboub T, Auer C, Bauer N et al (2020) REMIND — Regional model of investments and development — version 2.1.0. https://www.pik-potsdam.de/research/transformation-pathways/models/remind>. Accessed 14 Apr 2022
Absar SM, McManamay RA, Preston BL, Taylor AM (2021) Bridging global socioeconomic scenarios with policy adaptations to examine energy-water tradeoffs. Energy Policy 149:111911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111911
ADEME (2022) Utilisation de l’argument de « neutralité carbone » dans les communications
Agez M (2021) OpenIO-Canada
Aguirre Unceta R (2021) The economic and social impact of mining-resources exploitation in Zambia. Resour Policy 74:102242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102242
Alexeew J, Bergset L, Meyer K et al (2010) An analysis of the relationship between the additionality of CDM projects and their contribution to sustainable development. Int Environ Agreem Polit Law Econ 10:233–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-010-9121-y
Allacker K, Mathieux F, Pennington D, Pant R (2017) The search for an appropriate end-of-life formula for the purpose of the European Commission Environmental Footprint initiative. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:1441–1458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1244-0
Andrews J (2014) Greenhouse gas emissions inventory reports: FY 14 Briefing. Sustain Inst
Arendt R, Bach V, Finkbeiner M (2022) The global environmental costs of mining and processing abiotic raw materials and their geographic distribution. J Clean Prod 361:132232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132232
Ayoub AN, Gaigneux A, Le Brun N et al (2020) The development of a low-carbon roadmap investment strategy to reach Science-Based Targets for commercial organisations with multi-site properties. Build Environ 186:107311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107311
Azapagic A, Stamford L, Youds L, Barteczko-Hibbert C (2016) Towards sustainable production and consumption: a novel DEcision-Support Framework IntegRating Economic, Environmental and Social Sustainability (DESIRES). Comput Chem Eng 91:93–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2016.03.017
Bach V, Krinke S (2021) Call for papers for a special issue: life cycle assessment in the context of decarbonization and carbon neutrality
Badgley G, Freeman J, Hamman JJ et al (2021) Systematic over-crediting in California’s forest carbon offsets program. Ecology
Baitz M, Bos U (2020) Impact methods, data collection and data requirements
Bamber N, Turner I, Arulnathan V et al (2020) Comparing sources and analysis of uncertainty in consequential and attributional life cycle assessment: review of current practice and recommendations. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25:168–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01663-1
Banza Lubaba Nkulu C, Casas L, Haufroid V et al (2018) Sustainability of artisanal mining of cobalt in DR Congo. Nat Sustain 1:495–504. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0139-4
Baral A (2012) Environmental burden shifting and sustainability criteria for biofuels. the internaitonal council on Clean Transportation
Bare J (2011) TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Technol Environ Policy 13:687–696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-010-0338-9
Ben Dror M, Qin L, An F (2019) The gap between certified and real-world passenger vehicle fuel consumption in China measured using a mobile phone application data. Energy Policy 128:8–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.12.039
Berger M, Pfister S, Bach V, Finkbeiner M (2015) Saving the planet’s climate or water resources? The trade-off between carbon and water footprints of European biofuels. Sustainability 7:6665–6683. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7066665
Berger M, Sonderegger T, Alvarenga R et al (2020) Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment: part II—recommendations on application-dependent use of existing methods and on futuremethod development needs. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25:798–813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01737-5
Bio Intelligence Service (2011) Analyse comparée des impacts environnementaux de la communication par voie électronique. ADEME
Bjørn A, Lloyd S, Matthews D (2021) From the Paris Agreement to corporate climate commitments: evaluation of seven methods for setting ‘science-based’ emission targets. Environ Res Lett 16:054019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abe57b
Bjørn A, Lloyd SM, Brander M, Matthews HD (2022) Renewable energy certificates threaten the integrity of corporate science-based targets. Nat Clim Change 12:539–546. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01379-5
Bolay A-F, Bjørn A, Weber O, Margni M (2022) Prospective sectoral GHG benchmarks based on corporate climate mitigation targets. J Clean Prod 376:134220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134220
Bonan GB (2008) Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science 320:1444–1449. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121
Bonsai Home. In: BONSAI. https://bonsai.uno/. Accessed 8 Jun 2022
Brander M, Burritt RL, Christ KL (2019) Coupling attributional and consequential life cycle assessment: a matter of social responsibility. J Clean Prod 215:514–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.066
Bright RM, Zhao K, Jackson RB, Cherubini F (2015) Quantifying surface albedo and other direct biogeophysical climate forcings of forestry activities. Glob Change Biol 21:3246–3266. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12951
BSI (2014) PAS 2060:2014—Specification for the demonstration of carbon neutrality. British Standard Institution
BSI (2011) PAS 2050:2011 - Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services. British Standard Institution
BSI (2012) PAS 2050–1:2012—Greenhouse gas emissions from horticultural products. British Standard Institution
Buchmayr A, Verhofstadt E, Van Ootegem L et al (2022) Exploring the global and local social sustainability of wind energy technologies: an application of a social impact assessment framework. Appl Energy 312:118808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118808
Budinis S, Krevor S, Dowell NM et al (2018) An assessment of CCS costs, barriers and potential. Energy Strategy Rev 22:61–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2018.08.003
Business Declares. Business Declares an Emergency. https://businessdeclares.com/. Accessed 14 Jun 2022
Butt A, Harvey J, Saboori A et al (2020) Lessons learned from the supply curve approach. CRC Press
Cadarso M-Á, Monsalve F, Arce G (2018) Emissions burden shifting in global value chains—winners and losers under multi-regional versus bilateral accounting. Econ Syst Res 30:439–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/09535314.2018.1431768
Cames M, Harthan RO, Juerg Fuessler et al (2016) How additional is the clean development mechanism? Analysis of the application of current tools and proposed alternatives. Study prepared for DG CLIMA. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.23258.54728
CDP (2022a) Are companies being transparent in their transition? 2021 climate transition plan disclosure. Carbon Disclosure Project
CDP (2021) A climate disclosure framework for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Carbon Disclosure Project
CDP (2022b) Engaging the chain: driving speed and scale. Carbon Disclosure Project
Chang Y-J, Sproesser G, Neugebauer S et al (2015) Environmental and social life cycle assessment of welding technologies. Procedia CIRP 26:293–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.07.084
Chang-Ke W, Xin-Zheng L, Hua Z (2013) Shares differences of greenhouse gas emissions calculated with GTP and GWP for major countries. Adv Clim Change Res 4:127–132. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1248.2013.127
Cherry C, Scott K, Barrett J, Pidgeon N (2018) Public acceptance of resource-efficiency strategies to mitigate climate change. Nat Clim Change 8:1007–1012. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0298-3
Cherubini F, Bird ND, Cowie A et al (2009) Energy- and greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: key issues, ranges and recommendations. Resour Conserv Recycl 53:434–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.03.013
Cherubini F, Bright RM, Strømman AH (2012) Site-specific global warming potentials of biogenic CO2 for bioenergy: contributions from carbon fluxes and albedo dynamics. Environ Res Lett 7:045902. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/045902
Ciroth A (2013) Refining the pedigree matrix approach in ecoinvent: towards empirical uncertainty factors
Collins WJ, Frame DJ, Fuglestvedt JS, Shine KP (2020) Stable climate metrics for emissions of short and long-lived species—combining steps and pulses. Environ Res Lett 15:024018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6039
Cornago S, Tan YS, Brondi C et al (2022) Systematic literature review on dynamic life cycle inventory : towards Industry 4.0 applications. Sustainability 14:6464. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116464
Cranmer A, Ericson JD, Ebers Broughel A et al (2020) Worth a thousand words: presenting wind turbines in virtual reality reveals new opportunities for social acceptance and visualization research. Energy Res Soc Sci 67:101507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101507
Creutzig F, Roy J, Lamb WF et al (2018) Towards demand-side solutions for mitigating climate change. Nat Clim Change 8:260–263. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0121-1
Curran MA, Mann M, Norris G (2005) The international workshop on electricity data for life cycle inventories. J Clean Prod 13:853–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2002.03.001
Day T, Mooldijk S, Smit S et al (2022) Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2022—Assessing the transparency and integrity of companies’ emission reduction and net-zero targets. New Climate Institute and Carbon Market Watch
de Bortoli A (2021) Environmental performance of shared micromobility and personal alternatives using integrated modal LCA. Transp Res Part Transp Environ 93:102743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102743
de Bortoli A, Baouch Y, Masdan M (2023) BIM can help decarbonize the construction sector: life cycle evidence from Pavement Management Systems. J Clean Prod 136056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136056
de Bortoli A, Christoforou Z (2020) Consequential LCA for territorial and multimodal transportation policies: method and application to the free-floating e-scooter disruption in Paris. J Clean Prod 273:122898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122898
de Bortoli A, Feraille A, Leurent F (2022a) Towards road sustainability—part I : principles and holistic assessment method for pavement maintenance policies. Sustainability 14:1513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031513
de Bortoli A, Féraille A, Leurent F (2022b) Towards road sustainability—part II: applied holistic assessment and lessons learned from french highway resurfacing strategies. Sustainability 14:7336. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127336
De La Peña L, Guo R, Cao X et al (2022) Accelerating the energy transition to achieve carbon neutrality. Resour Conserv Recycl 177:105957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105957
Dirnaichner A, Rottoli M, Sacchi R et al (2022) Life-cycle impacts from different decarbonization pathways for the European car fleet. Environ Res Lett 17:044009. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac4fdb
Ekvall T, Azapagic A, Finnveden G et al (2016) Attributional and consequential LCA in the ILCD handbook. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:293–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-1026-0
European Commission (2018) OEFSR Guidance document,—Guidance for the development of Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rules (OEFSRs)
European Commission. Joint Research Centre. Institute for Energy and Transport (2014) Carbon accounting of forest bioenergy: conclusions and recommendations from a critical literature review. Publications Office, LU
European Standards (2019) CSN EN 15804+A2— Sustainability of construction works— Environmental product declarations— Core rules for the product category of construction products
Exponential roadmap. Innovators, disruptors & transformers. https://exponentialroadmap.org/. Accessed 14 Jun 2022
Ferrari AM, Volpi L, Settembre-Blundo D, García-Muiña FE (2021) Dynamic life cycle assessment (LCA) integrating life cycle inventory (LCI) and Enterprise resource planning (ERP) in an industry 4.0 environment. J Clean Prod 286:125314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125314
Finkbeiner M, Bach V (2021) Life cycle assessment of decarbonization options—towards scientifically robust carbon neutrality. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26:635–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01902-4
França Pimenta AA, Demajorovic J, Saraiva de Souza MT et al (2021) Social licence to operate model: critical factors of social acceptance of mining in the Brazilian Amazon. Resour Policy 74:102237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102237
Gabrielli P, Gazzani M, Mazzotti M (2020) The Role of Carbon Capture and Utilization, Carbon Capture and Storage, and Biomass to Enable a Net-Zero-CO 2 Emissions Chemical Industry. Ind Eng Chem Res 59:7033–7045. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.9b06579
GHG Protocol. Life Cycle Databases. https://ghgprotocol.org/life-cycle-databases. Accessed 8 Jun 2022
GHG Protocol (2016) Global Warming Potential Values
GHG Protocol (2013) Technical Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions—Supplement to the Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting & Reporting Standard
GHG Protocol (2022) Greenhouse Gas Protocol—Land Sector and Removals Initiative—Project Overview
GHG Protocol (2003) GHG Protocol guidance on uncertainty assessment in GHG inventories and calculating statistical parameter uncertainty
GHG Protocol (2011a) Quantitative inventory uncertainty
GHG Protocol (2011b) Scope 3 uncertainty calculation tool—worksheet
Giesekam J, Norman J, Garvey A, Betts-Davies S (2021) Science-based targets: on target? Sustainability 13:1657. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041657
Goulouti K, Padey P, Galimshina A et al (2020) Uncertainty of building elements’ service lives in building LCA & LCC: what matters? Build Environ 183:106904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106904
Haya B, Cullenward D, Strong AL et al (2020) Managing uncertainty in carbon offsets: insights from California’s standardized approach. Clim Policy 20:1112–1126. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1781035
He G, Mol APJ, Lu Y (2016) Public protests against the Beijing—Shenyang high-speed railway in China. Transp Res Part Transp Environ 43:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.11.009
Heath GA, Mann MK (2012) Background and reflections on the life cycle assessment harmonization project. J Ind Ecol 16:S8–S11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00478.x
Heijungs R (2020) On the number of Monte Carlo runs in comparative probabilistic LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25:394–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01698-4
Heras-Saizarbitoria I, Zamanillo I, Laskurain I (2013) Social acceptance of ocean wave energy: a case study of an OWC shoreline plant. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 27:515–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.07.032
Hertwich EG (2021) Increased carbon footprint of materials production driven by rise in investments. Nat Geosci 14:151–155. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00690-8
Hertwich EG (2008) Consumption and the rebound effect: an industrial ecology perspective. J Ind Ecol 9:85–98. https://doi.org/10.1162/1088198054084635
Hertwich EG, Gibon T, Bouman EA et al (2015) Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:6277–6282. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1312753111
Hertwich EG, Wood R (2018) The growing importance of scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions from industry. Environ Res Lett 13:104013. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aae19a
Hörtenhuber SJ, Theurl MC, Piringer G, Zollitsch WJ (2019) Consequences from land use and indirect/direct land use change for co2 emissions related to agricultural commodities. In: Carlos Loures L (ed) Land Use—Assessing the Past, Envisioning the Future. IntechOpen
Hottenroth H, Sutardhio C, Weidlich A et al (2022) Beyond climate change. Multi-attribute decision making for a sustainability assessment of energy system transformation pathways. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 156:111996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111996
Huijbregts MAJ (2001) Uncertainty and variability in environmental life-cycle assessment. PhD Dissertation, University of Amsterdam
HydroQuébec (2021) FAITS SUR L’ÉLECTRICITÉ D’HYDRO-QUÉBEC : Taux d’émission de CO2 associés aux approvisionnements en électricité d’Hydro-Québec 1990–2021
HydroQuébec. Taux d’émission de GES associés à l’électricité d’Hydro-Québec. https://www.hydroquebec.com/developpement-durable/documentation-specialisee/taux-emission-ges.html. Accessed 15 Jun 2022
International Organization for Standardization (2006a) ISO 14040:2006a—Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Principles and framework
International Organization for Standardization (2006b) ISO 14044:2006b—Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Requirements and guidelines
IPCC (2019) Glossary. In: Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. International Panel of experts in Climate Change
IPCC (2021) CHAPTER 7—The earth’s energy budget, climate feedbacks, and climate sensitivity. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis (WG1). p 125
IPCC (2022) Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change.
IPCC (2020) Climate Change and Land—An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems
Jackson DJ, Brander M (2019) The risk of burden shifting from embodied carbon calculation tools for the infrastructure sector. J Clean Prod 223:739–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.171
Järviö N, Henriksson PJG, Guinée JB (2018) Including GHG emissions from mangrove forests LULUC in LCA: a case study on shrimp farming in the Mekong Delta. Vietnam Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:1078–1090. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1332-9
Joly M, De Jaeger S (2021) Not in my backyard: a hedonic approach to the construction timeline of wind turbines in Flanders, Belgium. Land Use Policy 108:105527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105527
Junne T, Simon S, Buchgeister J et al (2020a) Environmental sustainability assessment of multi-sectoral energy transformation pathways: methodological approach and case study for Germany. Sustainability 12:8225. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198225
Junne T, Wulff N, Breyer C, Naegler T (2020b) Critical materials in global low-carbon energy scenarios: the case for neodymium, dysprosium, lithium, and cobalt. Energy 211:118532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118532
Kaddoura M, Majeau-Bettez G, Amor B et al (2022) Investigating the role of surface engineering in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions of energy technologies: an outlook towards 2100. Sustain Mater Technol 32:e00425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2022.e00425
Kaplan R, Ramanna K (2022) We need better carbon accounting. Here’s how to get there. https://hbr.org/2022/04/we-need-better-carbon-accounting-heres-how-to-get-there. Accessed 4 May 2022
Kesicki F, Strachan N (2011) Marginal abatement cost (MAC) curves: confronting theory and practice. Environ Sci Policy 14:1195–1204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2011.08.004
Kollmuss A, Schneider L, Zhezherin V (2015) Has joint implementation reduced GHG emissions? Lessons learned for the design of carbon market mechanisms
Laurent A, Olsen SI, Hauschild MZ (2012) Limitations of carbon footprint as indicator of environmental sustainability. Environ Sci Technol 46:4100–4108. https://doi.org/10.1021/es204163f
LégisQuébec (2021) Q-2, r. 15 - Règlement sur la déclaration obligatoire de certaines émissions de contaminants dans l’atmosphère
Leimbach M, Bauer N, Baumstark L, Edenhofer O (2010) Mitigation costs in a globalized world: climate policy analysis with REMIND-R. Environ Model Assess 15:155–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-009-9204-8
Levasseur A, Cavalett O, Fuglestvedt JS et al (2016) Enhancing life cycle impact assessment from climate science: review of recent findings and recommendations for application to LCA. Ecol Indic 71:163–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.06.049
Levasseur A, Lesage P, Margni M et al (2010) Considering Time in LCA: Dynamic LCA and Its Application to Global Warming Impact Assessments. Environ Sci Technol 44:3169–3174. https://doi.org/10.1021/es9030003
Lloyd S, Hadziosmanovic M, Rahimi K (2022) Trends show companies are ready for scope 3 reporting with us climate disclosure rule. In: World Resour. Inst. https://www.wri.org/update/trends-show-companies-are-ready-scope-3-reporting-us-climate-disclosure-rule
Lueddeckens S, Saling P, Guenther E (2020) Temporal issues in life cycle assessment—a systematic review. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25:1385–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01757-1
Lynch J, Cain M, Pierrehumbert R, Allen M (2020) Demonstrating GWP*: a means of reporting warming-equivalent emissions that captures the contrasting impacts of short—and long-lived climate pollutants. Environ Res Lett 15:044023. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6d7e
Ma J, Li L, Wang H et al (2022) Carbon capture and storage: history and the road ahead. Engineering S2095809922001357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2021.11.024
Mancini L, Sala S (2018) Social impact assessment in the mining sector: review and comparison of indicators frameworks. Resour Policy 57:98–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.02.002
Marino BDV, Bautista N (2022) Commercial forest carbon protocol over-credit bias delimited by zero-threshold carbon accounting. Trees For People 7:100171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2021.100171
Marino BDV, Mincheva M, Doucett A (2019) California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets. PeerJ 7:e7606. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7606
Markusson N, Kern F, Watson J (2011) Assessing CCS viability—a socio-technical framework. Energy Procedia 4:5744–5751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.570
Meyer R, Benetto E, Igos E, Lavandier C (2017) Analysis of the different techniques to include noise damage in life cycle assessment. A case study for car tires. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:744–757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1188-4
Moshrefi S, Abdoli S, Kara S, Hauschild M (2020) Product portfolio analysis towards operationalising science-based targets. Procedia CIRP 90:377–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2020.02.127
Naegler T, Buchgeister J, Hottenroth H et al (2022) Life cycle-based environmental impacts of energy system transformation strategies for Germany: are climate and environmental protection conflicting goals? Energy Rep 8:4763–4775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.03.143
NewClimate Institute, Oxford Net Zero, Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, Data-Driven EnviroLab (2022) Net Zero stocktake 2022—Assessing the status and trends of net zero target setting across countries, sub-national governments and companies.
Pedneault J, Majeau-Bettez G, Krey V, Margni M (2021) What future for primary aluminium production in a decarbonizing economy? Glob Environ Change 69:102316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102316
Peri E, Becker N, Tal A (2020) What really undermines public acceptance of wind turbines? A choice experiment analysis in Israel. Land Use Policy 99:105113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105113
Piróg D, Fidelus-Orzechowska J, Wiejaczka Ł, Łajczak A (2019) Hierarchy of factors affecting the social perception of dam reservoirs. Environ Impact Assess Rev 79:106301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106301
Planet Mark. Net zero is COMPLEX. We make it simple. https://www.planetmark.com/. Accessed 14 Jun 2022
Plevin RJ, Delucchi MA, Creutzig F (2014) Using attributional life cycle assessment to estimate climate-change mitigation benefits misleads policy makers: attributional LCA can mislead policy makers. J Ind Ecol 18:73–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12074
Potma Gonçalves DR, de Moraes C, Sá J, Mishra U et al (2018) Soil carbon inventory to quantify the impact of land use change to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and ecosystem services. Environ Pollut 243:940–952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.07.068
Quantis (2012) Scope 3 Evaluator | Greenhouse Gas Protocol
Quantis (2021) Documentation of the data and calculations to support the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Scope 3 Screening Tool. GHG Protocol
Radun J, Maula H, Saarinen P et al (2022) Health effects of wind turbine noise and road traffic noise on people living near wind turbines. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 157:112040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.112040
Reisinger A, Meinshausen M, Manning M (2011) Future changes in global warming potentials under representative concentration pathways. Environ Res Lett 6:024020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/2/024020
Renaud-Blondeau P (2022) La carboneutralité n’est pas une fin en soi ! In: Agence Sci.-Presse. https://www.sciencepresse.qc.ca/blogue/2022/06/06/carboneutralite-fin-soi. Accessed 9 Jun 2022
Ritchie H, Roser M, Rosado P (2020) CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Our World Data
Rose SK (2014) Integrated assessment modeling of climate change adaptation in forestry and pasture land use: a review. Energy Econ 46:548–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.09.018
Rovelli D, Brondi C, Andreotti M et al (2022) A modular tool to support data management for LCA in industry: methodology, application and potentialities. Sustainability 14:3746. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073746
Russell S (2019) Estimating and reporting the comparative emissions impacts of products. World Resources Institute
Sacchi R, Terlouw T, Siala K et al (2022) Prospective environmental impact assement (premise) : a streamlined approach to producing databases for prospective life cycle assessment using integrated assessment models. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 160:112311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112311
Sandén BA, Karlström M (2007) Positive and negative feedback in consequential life-cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 15:1469–1481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.03.005
Santero NJ, Masanet E, Horvath A (2011) Life-cycle assessment of pavements. Part I: Critical review. Resour Conserv Recycl 55:801–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.03.010
Sathre R, Masanet E, Cain J, Chester M (2011) The role of Life Cycle Assessment in identifying and reducing environmental impacts of CCS
SBT (2019) Foundations of Science-based Target Setting
SBT (2021) SBTi corporate net-zero standard. Science-Based Targets
SBT. Business ambition for 1.5 °C. https://sciencebasedtargets.org/business-ambition-for-1-5c/. Accessed 14 Jun 2022
SBTi (2022) Net-zero tool. Version v1.0.3URL https://sciencebasedtargets.org/resources/files/Net-Zero-tool.xlsx
Schivley G, Azevedo I, Samaras C (2018) Assessing the evolution of power sector carbon intensity in the United States. Environ Res Lett 13:064018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabe9d
Schlamadinger B, Spitzer J, Kohlmaier GH, Lüdeke M (1995) Carbon balance of bioenergy from logging residues. Biomass Bioenergy 8:221–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/0961-9534(95)00020-8
Schlör H, Venghaus S, Zapp P et al (2018) The energy-mineral-society nexus—a social LCA model. Appl Energy 228:999–1008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.06.048
Schneider L (2009) Assessing the additionality of CDM projects: practical experiences and lessons learned. Clim Policy 9:242–254. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2008.0533
Science-Based Targets Companies taking action. In: Sci. Based Targets. https://sciencebasedtargets.org/companies-taking-action. Accessed 31 Jan 2023
Seymour F (2020) Seeing the forests as well as the (trillion) trees in corporate climate strategies. One Earth 2:390–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.05.006
Shahariar GMH, Bodisco TA, Zare A et al (2022) Impact of driving style and traffic condition on emissions and fuel consumption during real-world transient operation. Fuel 319:123874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123874
Shiquan D, Amuakwa-Mensah F, Deyi X et al (2022) The impact of mineral resource extraction on communities: how the vulnerable are harmed. Extr Ind Soc 10:101090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2022.101090
Singh B, Strømman AH, Hertwich EG (2011) Comparative life cycle environmental assessment of CCS technologies. Int J Greenh Gas Control 5:911–921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.03.012
Soimakallio S, Kiviluoma J, Saikku L (2011) The complexity and challenges of determining GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions from grid electricity consumption and conservation in LCA (life cycle assessment)—a methodological review. Energy 36:6705–6713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.10.028
Sotos ME (2015a) GHG Protocol scope 2 guidance—an amendment to the GHG Protocol corporate standard. GHG Protocol and WRI
Sotos ME (2015b) Scope 2: changing the way companies think about electricity emissions
Stadler K, Wood R, Bulavskaya T et al (2018) EXIOBASE 3: developing a time series of detailed environmentally extended multi-regional input-output tables: EXIOBASE 3. J Ind Ecol 22:502–515. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12715
Steubing B, de Koning D (2021) Making the use of scenarios in LCA easier: the superstructure approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26:2248–2262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01974-2
Subramanian K, Yung WKC (2018) Modeling Social Life Cycle Assessment framework for an electronic screen product—a case study of an integrated desktop computer. J Clean Prod 197:417–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.193
Tanzer SE, Blok K, Ramirez A (2021) Decarbonising industry via BECCS: promising sectors, challenges, and techno-economic limits of negative emissions
The Climate Pledge Net-Zero carbon by 2040. https://www.theclimatepledge.com/#main-navigation. Accessed 14 Jun 2022
Thonemann N, Schulte A, Maga D (2020) How to conduct prospective life cycle assessment for emerging technologies? A systematic review and methodological guidance. Sustainability 12:1192. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031192
Timmer M (2012) World Input‐Output Database (WIOD): 2009 world multiregional estimate of average environmental impacts by region-sector
Tong X, Dai H, Lu P et al (2022) Saving global platinum demand while achieving carbon neutrality in the passenger transport sector: linking material flow analysis with integrated assessment model. Resour Conserv Recycl 179:106110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.106110
TSC (2011) The sustainability consortium completes enhanced open input output (open IO) project. https://sustainabilityconsortium.org/tag/open-io/. Accessed 11 Jun 2022
UNEP/SETAC (2015) Guidance on organizational life cycle assessment
UNFCCC. Race To Zero Campaign. https://unfccc.int/climate-action/race-to-zero-campaign#eq-2. Accessed 14 Jun 2022
United Nations (2015) Paris Agreement
Valdivia S, Ugaya CML, Hildenbrand J et al (2013) A UNEP/SETAC approach towards a life cycle sustainability assessment—our contribution to Rio+20. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1673–1685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0529-1
van der Giesen C, Cucurachi S, Guinée J et al (2020) A critical view on the current application of LCA for new technologies and recommendations for improved practice. J Clean Prod 259:120904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120904
van der Meide M, Harpprecht C, Northey S et al (2022) Effects of the energy transition on environmental impacts of cobalt supply: a prospective life cycle assessment study on future supply of cobalt. J Ind Ecol jiec.13258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13258
Vandepaer L, Treyer K, Mutel C et al (2019) The integration of long-term marginal electricity supply mixes in the ecoinvent consequential database version 3.4 and examination of modeling choices. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24:1409–1428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1571-4
Verones F, Bare J, Bulle C et al (2017) LCIA framework and cross-cutting issues guidance within the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. J Clean Prod 161:957–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.206
Victor DG, Zhou D, Ahmed EHM et al (2014) Introductory chapter in climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change.
Vita G, Ivanova D, Dumitru A et al (2020) Happier with less? Members of European environmental grassroots initiatives reconcile lower carbon footprints with higher life satisfaction and income increases. Energy Res Soc Sci 60:101329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101329
Wang P, Wang H, Chen W-Q, Pauliuk S (2022a) Carbon neutrality needs a circular metal-energy nexus. Fundam Res 2:392–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fmre.2022.02.003
Wang S, Su D, Wu Y (2022b) Environmental and social life cycle assessments of an industrial LED lighting product. Environ Impact Assess Rev 95:106804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106804
Watari T, McLellan B, Ogata S, Tezuka T (2018) Analysis of potential for critical metal resource constraints in the international energy agency’s long-term low-carbon energy scenarios. Minerals 8:156. https://doi.org/10.3390/min8040156
Watari T, Nansai K, Nakajima K (2020) Review of critical metal dynamics to 2050 for 48 elements. Resour Conserv Recycl 155:104669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104669
WBCSD, WRI (eds) (2004) The greenhouse gas protocol: a corporate accounting and reporting standard, Rev. ed. World Business Council for Sustainable Development ; World Resources Institute, Geneva, Switzerland : Washington, DC
WBCSD, WRI (eds) (2011a) Product life cycle accounting and reporting standard, Rev. ed. World Business Council for Sustainable Development ; World Resources Institute, Geneva, Switzerland : Washington, DC
WBCSD, WRI (eds) (2011b) Corporate value chain (scope 3) accounting and reporting standard—supplement to the GHG Protocol corporate accounting and reporting standard, Rev. ed. World Business Council for Sustainable Development ; World Resources Institute, Geneva, Switzerland : Washington, DC
Weber CL, Jaramillo P, Marriott J, Samaras C (2010) Life cycle assessment and grid electricity: what do we know and what can we know? Environ Sci Technol 44:1895–1901. https://doi.org/10.1021/es9017909
Wei Y-M, Chen K, Kang J-N et al (2022) Policy and management of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality: a literature review. Engineering S2095809922001333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2021.12.018
Weidema BP (1998) Multi-user test of the data quality matrix for product life cycle inventory data. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3:259–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02979832
Weidema BP (2017) Estimation of the size of error introduced into consequential models by using attributional background datasets. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:1241–1246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1239-x
Weidema BP, Pizzol M, Schmidt J, Thoma G (2018) Attributional or consequential life cycle assessment: a matter of social responsibility. J Clean Prod 174:305–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.340
Weidema BP, Wesnæs MS (1996) Data quality management for life cycle inventories—an example of using data quality indicators. J Clean Prod 4:167–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(96)00043-1
Weinzettel J, Hertwich EG, Peters GP et al (2013) Affluence drives the global displacement of land use. Glob Environ Change 23:433–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.12.010
West TAP, Börner J, Sills EO, Kontoleon A (2020) Overstated carbon emission reductions from voluntary REDD+ projects in the Brazilian Amazon. Proc Natl Acad Sci 117:24188–24194. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2004334117
Wilson C, Guivarch C, Kriegler E et al (2021) Evaluating process-based integrated assessment models of climate change mitigation. Clim Change 166:3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03099-9
World Bank (2020) State and trends of carbon pricing 2020. World Bank Group
WRI, WBCSD (2013) Required greenhouse gases in inventories—accounting and reporting standard amendment
Yang Y, Bae J, Kim J, Suh S (2012) Replacing gasoline with corn ethanol results in significant environmental problem-shifting. Environ Sci Technol 46:3671–3678. https://doi.org/10.1021/es203641p
Yang Y, Ingwersen WW, Hawkins TR et al (2017) USEEIO: a new and transparent United States environmentally-extended input-output model. J Clean Prod 158:308–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.150
Yuan X, Su C-W, Umar M et al (2022) The race to zero emissions: can renewable energy be the path to carbon neutrality? J Environ Manage 308:114648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114648
Zamagni A, Guinée J, Heijungs R et al (2012) Lights and shadows in consequential LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:904–918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0423-x
zerotracker.net Net Zero Tracker | Welcome. https://zerotracker.net/. Accessed 14 Apr 2022
Zhang C, He G, Johnston J, Zhong L (2021) Long-term transition of China’s power sector under carbon neutrality target and water withdrawal constraint. J Clean Prod 329:129765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129765
Acknowledgements
Several ideas presented in this paper originate in a workshop dedicated to the carbon neutrality of organizations prepared at CIRAIG, with the participation of some of its partners. The authors also want to thank Maxime Agez for his advice on EEIO and GHG flows, Anne-France Bolay for her knowledge on CDP and green investments, Dominique Maxime for reviewing the LULUC subsection, Sara Russo-Garrido for her advice on S-LCA, and Titouan Greffe for his references on metal LCIA.
Funding
This study was funded by the International Research Consortium on Life Cycle Assessment and Sustainable Transition at CIRAIG.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization: ADB, AB; methodology: ADB, AB; formal analysis and investigation: ADB; writing—original draft preparation: ADB, AB; writing—review and editing: ADB, AB, FS, MM; funding acquisition: MM.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Communicated by Vanessa Bach
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
de Bortoli, A., Bjørn, A., Saunier, F. et al. Planning sustainable carbon neutrality pathways: accounting challenges experienced by organizations and solutions from industrial ecology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 28, 746–770 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-023-02147-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-023-02147-z