scs-002-1 standardization of climate metrics for greenhouse gases and particulates based on...
TRANSCRIPT
SCS-002-1
Standardization of Climate Metrics for Greenhouse Gases and ParticulatesBased on Life-Cycle Impact Assessment
by Stanley P. Rhodes, Ph.D.Scientific Certification Systems
SCS-002 Standards Committee Operating Under ANSI Process
• Armstrong World Industries
• Berkeley Analytical Associates, LLC
• BIFMA
• California Department of General Services
• California Integrated Waste Management Board
• City of San Francisco
• Collaborative for High Performance Schools (CHPS)
• Resilient Flooring Association
• HNI Corporation
• US EPA
• Pacific Gas & Electric
• Shaw Industries, Inc.
• Steel Industry
• US Department of Energy
SCS-002 LCIA FrameworkConsistent with ISO-14044
Mandatory Phases
Life-Cycle Scoping addresses all environmental and human health issues and sets appropriate boundary conditions.
Life-Cycle Inventory measures system inputs and outputs. It is the initial phase of assessment only, and should not be used for comparative assertions.
Life-Cycle Impact Assessment connects LCI and direct land use to human health and environmental impacts, and is the basis of comparative assertions.
Goal & scopedefinition
Inventoryanalysis
Impact assessment
Optional Phase
Life Cycle Interpretation involves subjective weighting and ranking
The reference flow of this unit operation is the functional unit of the entire system (name underlined)
Click
SCS-002 Life Cycle Impact Groups
Specific Issue Impact GroupsNatural Resource DepletionHabitats/Key Species LossHuman Health/Environmental Emission LevelsHuman Health Exposure Levels
Climate Change Impact GroupsGlobal Climate ImpactsRegional Climate Impacts
• Arctic • Antarctic
Required Impact Category Indicators
Creeping Death Zones — Eutrophication Kills All Sea Life
The dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is largely caused by agricultural run-off from the Mississippi River. Increases have been most pronounced since the increase in biofuel production.
Mandatory LCIA Steps
ClassificationAssign life-cycle inventory results — emissions, wastes, resource depletion — to impact categories according to their potential environmental/human health endpoints.
CharacterizationDetermine the environmental relevance of life-cycle inventory results, based on spatial/temporal differentiation and intensity of midpoints/endpoints, utilizing characterization factors (SCF and ECFs).
Impact ProfileThe output of the assessment provides a complete quantified set impact indicators.
Emission EmissionCAS.no. to air to water
Substance g g
2-hydroxy-ethanacrylate 816-61-0 0,0348
4,4-methylenebis cyclohexylamine 1761-71-2 5,9E-02Ammonia 7664-81-7 3,7E-05 4,2E-05Arsenic ( As ) 7440-38-2 2,0E-06
Benzene 71-43-2 (current)5,0E-02Lead ( Pb ) 7439-92-1 8,5E-06Butoxyethanol 111-76-2 6,6E-01Carbondioxide 124-38-9 2,6E+02
Carbonmonoxide ( CO ) 630-08-0 1,9E-01Cadmium (Cd) 7440-46-9 2,2E-07Chlorine ( Cl2 ) 7782-50-5 4,6E-04Chromium ( Cr VI ) 7440-47-3 5,3E-06
Dicyclohexane methane 86-73-6 5,1E-02Nitrous oxide( N2O ) 10024-97-2 1,7E-02
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 9,5E-02
HMDI 5124-30-1 7,5E-02Hydro carbons (electricity, stationary combustion) - 1,7E+00
Hydrogen ions (H+) - 1,0E-03i-butanol 78-83-1 3,5E-02i-propanol 67-63-0 9,2E-01copper ( Cu ) 7740-50-8 1,8E-05Mercury( Hg ) 7439-97-6 2,7E-06Methane 74-82-8 5,0E-03Methyl i-butyl ketone 108-10-1 5,7E-02
Greenhouse gases
Acidification
Ground level ozone
Ecotoxic chemical (soil/water)
Connecting Inventory Results to Impact Categories
Calculating Indicators: Classification
Establishing the Regional Acidification Biophysical Impact Pathway
Regional Acidification
Required LCIA Modeling: Establishing Stressor-Effects Network
Node 3 Indicator: Acidification Loading = Fractionof wet deposition of acid emissions in areas of exceedance of critical load
Climate Change Stressor-Effects NetworkNodeNode 1 (stressor)
Node 2 (intensification of midpoints)
Node 3 (intensification of midpoints)
Node 4 (intensification of midpoints)
Node 5(Exceedance of threshold midpoints)
Node 6 (Post threshold midpoints)
Node 7 (Post threshold multiple endpoints)
Description
Increases in global/regional GHG emissions along with continuous aerosol emissions
Intensification of accumulated global / regional GHG loading (CO2, CH4), plus tropospheric ozone & fine carbon particulates loading (soot), minus aerosols
Intensification of net global RF and net RF in regional climate zones based on various GHG loadings, minus net cooling from tropospheric aerosols
Increases in GMT, and increases in RMTs associated with climate changes in regional climate zones
Exceedance of threshold (EOT) – based on the GMT threshold and regional climate zone thresholds
Catastrophic global and regional climate changes
Impacts to human health and the environment on a global and regional basis.
Strength of LinkageStressor - strongEndpoint - none
Stressor - strong
Endpoint –weak
Stressor - strong
Endpoint - strong
Stressor - strong
Endpoint - strong
Stressor - strong
Endpoint – strong
Stressor - moderate
Endpoint - strong
Stressor - moderate
Endpoint – strong
Molecular Structures of
Greenhouse Pollutants
SootSmall Carbon
Particles
Global Warming Potentials (GWPs) Established by the IPCC GWPs represents an index of the amortized radiative forcing
over time of various greenhouse pollutants compared to an equivalent tonne of CO2.
The IPCC has established GWP values for Kyoto-listed GHG pollutants as a function of various selected time horizons: 20, 100 and 500 years.
SCS-002-1 has extrapolated the IPCC results to establish GWP values for the annual time horizon and added 20-year time horizon GWPs for soot, tropospheric ozone and aerosols.
Key Assumption Behind Climate Metrics: The Selection of the Time Horizon
00.
51.
0
1 year 20 years 100 years (Kyoto)
CO2 & other minor long-lived GHGs
Methane
Soot, TO
Fra
ctio
n R
emai
nin
g i
n A
tmo
sph
ere
Time Horizon
Politics Over Science
Key Impact Nodes for Stressor-Effect Network Modeling
Increases in Greenhouse Gas Loadings are directly linked to increased Radiative Forcing.
The increase in Radiative Forcing is being observed both globally and regionally
… which then is linked to the increase in Global Mean Temperature.
GMT Tipping
Point
Emissions Can Cause Both Positive and Negative Radiative Forcing
Required Characterization ofRadiative Forcing/Cooling Isopleths
Node 4: Justification for Separate Stressor-Effects Network for the Arctic Region
Tropospheric Ozone: The Major Contributor to Regional Arctic Warming
Rapid Loss of the Perennial Arctic Ice Sheet 2004-2005
Max. TO concentration strongly correlated to area of rapid loss of Perennial Ice
26
Soot, Methane, Tropospheric Ozone:
80% of the Arctic Warming
Justification for excluding CO2 fromArctic Stressor-Effects Network
New Major Study Findings (April 2009)Emphasize Role of Soot, Tropospheric Ozoneand Methane in Arctic Warming The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) cautions that factors like soot, ozone and methane may now be contributing to the warming of the Arctic and other parts of the world as much as carbon dioxide.
The amount of black carbon in the atmosphere, due to agricultural burning, forest fires and inefficient diesel engines, creates a haze that absorbs sunlight, warms and eventually deposits onto snow.
The darkening of the frozen surface then causes more sunlight to be absorbed, reducing the snow’s ability to reflect sunlight back into space.
"The principal (climate change) problem is carbon dioxide, but a new understanding is emerging of soot," said Nobel peace prize-winner and former U.S. Vice President Al Gore in commenting on the report.
Western Antarctica surface temperature anomaly since
1957
Brazilian Tropospheric Ozone is the
Key GHG Pollutant of Antarctica
Brazilian Tropospheric Ozone Plume
Global Carbon Black (Soot) Emissions
1875-2000
Soot: The Poor and Yellow Flames
Soot is currently 18% of total global heat (RF).2 billion more poor are expected in the next 20 years.
LCIA Nodal Characterization
58
Node 2: 2010 Annual GHG Loadings
N20 C02 CH4 Soot TO
660676
343.5
Bil
lio
n
To
nn
es C
O2
eq.
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Current Legacy CO2 and Methane Loading Compared to 1000-year
Baseline
1000 years
Adding Legacy Emissions of CO2 and Methane to Annual GHG Loadings (Node 3)
N20 C02 CH4 Soot TO
660 676
1200
1400
34
214
3.5
Bil
lio
n
To
nn
es C
O2
eq. 58
Bil
lio
n T
on
nes
CO
2
Accumulated greenhouse gases (A-GHG) over next 20 yearsAssumes 34 billion tonnes in 2010, increasing 3% per year
Accumulated CO2 Loading isLeveling Off Over the Next 20 Years
Secondary Impacts from CO2: Oceanic Acidification is Destroying the World’s Remaining Coral Reefs
2030:Shorter-Lived GHG Pollutants Will Constitute
More Than 75% of Total Warming Loading
N20 C02 CH4 Soot TO
800
1200
Bil
lio
n T
on
nes
CO
2 eq
.
1600
1400
34
214
3.5
BAU Projections, Uncertainty not determined
Applying LCIA GHG Metrics to Assessment of New Power System Deployment
• Example 1. Insertion of 556 MW IGCC Unit with Carbon Dioxide Capture Sequestration (CCS) into the SERC Regional Grid
• Example 2. Insertion of 2300 MW Nuclear Unit into SERC Regional Grid
LCIA Modeling: IGCC-CCS Unit Fuel Source: Illinois # 6 Coal Capacity: 556-MWe net Total Sequestered CO2: 453,200 tonnes
Grid Electricity
Coal mining and cleaning Rail Transport of Coal
Diesel Oil Prod (Cum.)
IGCC Power Plant with CO2 Capture
CO2 Pipeline160 km
CO2 storage Electricity Distribution to End User
CO2 Transport Pipeline Location
Coal Mining and Cleaning Site
Power Plant Site
No Code
Methane Loadings from Regional Mines:Up to 86% of Total GHG Loading of IGCC Unit
Annual Methane Loadings (Metric tonnes CO2 eq.)
Coal Bed Methane/ton
Annual Time Horizon
20-year Time Horizon
100-year Time Horizon
1.46 kg/tDOE 2008 US average
250,530 171,792 50,106
Illinois #1-64.23 kg/t average
725,850 497,664 145,152
Standard Regional 13.6 kg/t
2,333,625 1,600,200 446,740
Current Cap and Trade GHG metrics do not account for this mining-related methane loading.
The Role of Aerosols in Climate Dynamics Is Not Well Understood
Old Coal PlantsHidden Trade-offs from Aerosol Emissions: Unwanted Winter/Fall/Spring Cooling
Useful Summer Cooling
Unwanted Winter/Spring Cooling
Unwanted Fall Cooling
Tota
l A
void
ed
Em
issi
on
s -
ton
s
Comparing Current Cap & Trade Metrics to LCIA GHG Metrics
Elimination of winter aerosols alone would provide greater unrealized benefits for the SERC than the CO2 reductions recognized under proposed Cap and Trade metrics.
The Case for Transitioning from Current GHG Metrics to LCIA GHG Metrics for Cap & Trade Programs Current metrics rely upon the 100-year time
horizon.
Current GHG metrics overlook 95% of annual mitigation potential opportunities.
Cap & trade funds based on current GHG metrics will provide only marginal mitigation of CO2 while failing to seize on opportunities to mitigate other key GHGs and GHPs.
July 14 Workshop —Objectives
Inform major stakeholders about new GHG metrics.
Validate and refine the current SCS-002-1draft standard for comment.
Prepare to help shape the U.S. position for Copenhagen summit in December 2009.
Provide basis for adjustments to the current proposed U.S. Cap & Trade legislation.
Sign up at www.SCScertified.com