A consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessment

Comparing the potential climate impacts of different technologies is challenging for several reasons, including the fact that any given technology may be associated with emissions of multiple greenhouse gases when evaluated on a life cycle basis. In general, analysts must decide how to aggregate the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dharik Mallapragada, Bryan K Mignone
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: IOP Publishing 2017-01-01
Series:Environmental Research Letters
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7397
_version_ 1797748227693346816
author Dharik Mallapragada
Bryan K Mignone
author_facet Dharik Mallapragada
Bryan K Mignone
author_sort Dharik Mallapragada
collection DOAJ
description Comparing the potential climate impacts of different technologies is challenging for several reasons, including the fact that any given technology may be associated with emissions of multiple greenhouse gases when evaluated on a life cycle basis. In general, analysts must decide how to aggregate the climatic effects of different technologies, taking into account differences in the properties of the gases (differences in atmospheric lifetimes and instantaneous radiative efficiencies) as well as different technology characteristics (differences in emission factors and technology lifetimes). Available metrics proposed in the literature have incorporated these features in different ways and have arrived at different conclusions. In this paper, we develop a general framework for classifying metrics based on whether they measure: (a) cumulative or end point impacts, (b) impacts over a fixed time horizon or up to a fixed end year, and (c) impacts from a single emissions pulse or from a stream of pulses over multiple years. We then use the comparison between compressed natural gas and gasoline-fueled vehicles to illustrate how the choice of metric can affect conclusions about technologies. Finally, we consider tradeoffs involved in selecting a metric, show how the choice of metric depends on the framework that is assumed for climate change mitigation, and suggest which subset of metrics are likely to be most analytically self-consistent.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T16:01:53Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b06431b327d4402b8a1ad237e9ac84d9
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1748-9326
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T16:01:53Z
publishDate 2017-01-01
publisher IOP Publishing
record_format Article
series Environmental Research Letters
spelling doaj.art-b06431b327d4402b8a1ad237e9ac84d92023-08-09T14:35:23ZengIOP PublishingEnvironmental Research Letters1748-93262017-01-0112707402210.1088/1748-9326/aa7397A consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessmentDharik Mallapragada0Bryan K MignoneAuthor to whom any correspondence should be addressed.Comparing the potential climate impacts of different technologies is challenging for several reasons, including the fact that any given technology may be associated with emissions of multiple greenhouse gases when evaluated on a life cycle basis. In general, analysts must decide how to aggregate the climatic effects of different technologies, taking into account differences in the properties of the gases (differences in atmospheric lifetimes and instantaneous radiative efficiencies) as well as different technology characteristics (differences in emission factors and technology lifetimes). Available metrics proposed in the literature have incorporated these features in different ways and have arrived at different conclusions. In this paper, we develop a general framework for classifying metrics based on whether they measure: (a) cumulative or end point impacts, (b) impacts over a fixed time horizon or up to a fixed end year, and (c) impacts from a single emissions pulse or from a stream of pulses over multiple years. We then use the comparison between compressed natural gas and gasoline-fueled vehicles to illustrate how the choice of metric can affect conclusions about technologies. Finally, we consider tradeoffs involved in selecting a metric, show how the choice of metric depends on the framework that is assumed for climate change mitigation, and suggest which subset of metrics are likely to be most analytically self-consistent.https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7397climate change metricsgreenhouse gas abatementmethanenatural gastechnology assessment
spellingShingle Dharik Mallapragada
Bryan K Mignone
A consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessment
Environmental Research Letters
climate change metrics
greenhouse gas abatement
methane
natural gas
technology assessment
title A consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessment
title_full A consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessment
title_fullStr A consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessment
title_full_unstemmed A consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessment
title_short A consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessment
title_sort consistent conceptual framework for applying climate metrics in technology life cycle assessment
topic climate change metrics
greenhouse gas abatement
methane
natural gas
technology assessment
url https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7397
work_keys_str_mv AT dharikmallapragada aconsistentconceptualframeworkforapplyingclimatemetricsintechnologylifecycleassessment
AT bryankmignone aconsistentconceptualframeworkforapplyingclimatemetricsintechnologylifecycleassessment
AT dharikmallapragada consistentconceptualframeworkforapplyingclimatemetricsintechnologylifecycleassessment
AT bryankmignone consistentconceptualframeworkforapplyingclimatemetricsintechnologylifecycleassessment