Comparison of Product Carbon Footprint Protocols: Case Study on Medium-Density Fiberboard in China

Shanshan Wang, Weifeng Wang and Hongqiang Yang
Additional contact information
Shanshan Wang: College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, No. 159, Longpan Road, Nanjing 210037, China
Weifeng Wang: College of Biology and the Environment, Nanjing Forestry University, No. 159, Longpan Road, Nanjing 210037, China
Hongqiang Yang: College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, No. 159, Longpan Road, Nanjing 210037, China

IJERPH, 2018, vol. 15, issue 10, 1-14

Abstract: Carbon footprint (CF) analysis is widely used to quantify the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of a product during its life cycle. A number of protocols, such as Publicly Available Specification (PAS) 2050, GHG Protocol Product Standard (GHG Protocol), and ISO 14067 Carbon Footprint of Products (ISO 14067), have been developed for CF calculations. This study aims to compare the criteria and implications of the three protocols. The medium-density fiberboard (MDF) (functional unit: 1 m 3 ) has been selected as a case study to illustrate this comparison. Different criteria, such as the life cycle stage included, cut-off criteria, biogenic carbon treatment, and other requirements, were discussed. A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment (LCA) for MDF was conducted. The CF values were −667.75, −658.42, and 816.92 kg of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 e) with PAS 2050, GHG protocol, and ISO 14067, respectively. The main reasons for the different results obtained were the application of different cut-off criteria, exclusion rules, and the treatment of carbon storage. A cradle-to-grave assessment (end-of-life scenarios: landfill and incineration) was also performed to identify opportunities for improving MDF production. A sensitivity analysis to assess the implications of different end-of-life disposals was conducted, indicating that landfill may be preferable from a GHG standpoint. The comparison of these three protocols provides insights for adopting appropriate methods to calculate GHG emissions for the MDF industry. A key finding is that for both LCA practitioners and policy-makers, PAS 2050 is preferentially recommended to assess the CF of MDF.

Keywords: life cycle assessment (LCA); greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; carbon storage; publicly available specification (PAS) 2050; environmental hotspots (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/10/2060/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/10/2060/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:10:p:2060-:d:170981

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().