Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/12403
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBrandao, Men
dc.contributor.authorLevasseur, Aen
dc.contributor.authorKirschbaum, M U Fen
dc.contributor.authorWeidema, B Pen
dc.contributor.authorCowie, Annetteen
dc.contributor.authorJorgensen, S Ven
dc.contributor.authorHauschild, M Zen
dc.contributor.authorPennington, D Wen
dc.contributor.authorChomkhamsri, Ken
dc.date.accessioned2013-04-10T15:49:00Z-
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(1), p. 230-240en
dc.identifier.issn1614-7502en
dc.identifier.issn0948-3349en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/12403-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Biological sequestration can increase the carbon stocks of non-atmospheric reservoirs (e.g. land and land based products). Since this contained carbon is sequestered from, and retained outside, the atmosphere for a period of time, the concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere is temporarily reduced and some radiative forcing is avoided. Carbon removal from the atmosphere and storage in the biosphere or anthroposphere, therefore, has the potential to mitigate climate change, even if the carbon storage and associated benefits might be temporary. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and carbon foot printing (CF) are increasingly popular tools for the environmental assessment of products, that take into account their entire life cycle. There have been significant efforts to develop robust methods to account for the benefits, if any, of sequestration and temporary storage and release of biogenic carbon. However, there is still no overall consensus on the most appropriate ways of considering and quantifying it. Method: This paper reviews and discusses six available methods for accounting for the potential climate impacts of carbon sequestration and temporary storage or release of biogenic carbon in LCA and CF. Several viewpoints and approaches are presented in a structured manner to help decision-makers in their selection of an option from competing approaches for dealing with timing issues, including delayed emissions of fossil carbon. Results: Key issues identified are that the benefits of temporary carbon removals depend on the time horizon adopted when assessing climate change impacts and are therefore not purely science-based but include value judgments. We therefore did not recommend a preferred option out of the six alternatives presented here.en
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherSpringeren
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Life Cycle Assessmenten
dc.titleKey issues and options in accounting for carbon sesquestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprintingen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11367-012-0451-6en
dcterms.accessRightsGreenen
dc.subject.keywordsCarbon Sequestration Scienceen
local.contributor.firstnameMen
local.contributor.firstnameAen
local.contributor.firstnameM U Fen
local.contributor.firstnameB Pen
local.contributor.firstnameAnnetteen
local.contributor.firstnameS Ven
local.contributor.firstnameM Zen
local.contributor.firstnameD Wen
local.contributor.firstnameKen
local.subject.for2008050301 Carbon Sequestration Scienceen
local.subject.seo2008960603 Environmental Lifecycle Assessmenten
local.subject.seo2008960302 Climate Change Mitigation Strategiesen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.emailacowie4@une.edu.auen
local.output.categoryC1en
local.record.placeauen
local.record.institutionUniversity of New Englanden
local.identifier.epublicationsrecordune-20130404-125741en
local.publisher.placeGermanyen
local.format.startpage230en
local.format.endpage240en
local.url.openhttps://tinyurl.com/ya3amypxen
local.peerreviewedYesen
local.identifier.volume18en
local.identifier.issue1en
local.access.fulltextYesen
local.contributor.lastnameBrandaoen
local.contributor.lastnameLevasseuren
local.contributor.lastnameKirschbaumen
local.contributor.lastnameWeidemaen
local.contributor.lastnameCowieen
local.contributor.lastnameJorgensenen
local.contributor.lastnameHauschilden
local.contributor.lastnamePenningtonen
local.contributor.lastnameChomkhamsrien
dc.identifier.staffune-id:acowie4en
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.identifier.unepublicationidune:12610en
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
local.title.maintitleKey issues and options in accounting for carbon sesquestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprintingen
local.output.categorydescriptionC1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journalen
local.search.authorBrandao, Men
local.search.authorLevasseur, Aen
local.search.authorKirschbaum, M U Fen
local.search.authorWeidema, B Pen
local.search.authorCowie, Annetteen
local.search.authorJorgensen, S Ven
local.search.authorHauschild, M Zen
local.search.authorPennington, D Wen
local.search.authorChomkhamsri, Ken
local.uneassociationUnknownen
local.identifier.wosid000313165600021en
local.year.published2013en
local.subject.for2020410101 Carbon sequestration scienceen
local.subject.seo2020190204 Environmental lifecycle assessmenten
local.subject.seo2020190301 Climate change mitigation strategiesen
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
School of Environmental and Rural Science
Files in This Item:
2 files
File Description SizeFormat 
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

255
checked on Jun 29, 2024

Page view(s)

1,230
checked on Jul 7, 2024
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.