The most important GHG accounting concept you may not have heard of: the attributional-consequential distinction
There are two major types of GHG accounting, attributional methods and consequential methods. Often practitioners are not aware of the distinction and use an inappropriate method for a given purpose. Attributional methods are inventories of emissions and removals within a defined inventory boundary...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Group
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Carbon Management |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2022.2088402 |
| Summary: | There are two major types of GHG accounting, attributional methods and consequential methods. Often practitioners are not aware of the distinction and use an inappropriate method for a given purpose. Attributional methods are inventories of emissions and removals within a defined inventory boundary and are appropriate for allocating carbon budgets and setting reduction targets. However, attributional methods can lead to actions that unintentionally increase emissions as they only provide information on emissions/removals within the inventory boundary. Consequential methods aim to provide information on the system-wide or global change caused by actions and are the appropriate method for informing decisions aimed at reducing emissions. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1758-3004 1758-3012 |