Are single global warming potential impact assessments adequate for carbon footprints of agri-food systems?

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorMcAuliffe, Graham A.
dc.contributor.authorLynch, John
dc.contributor.authorCain, Michelle
dc.contributor.authorBuckingham, Sarah
dc.contributor.authorRees, Robert M.
dc.contributor.authorCollins, Adrian L.
dc.contributor.authorAllen, Myles
dc.contributor.authorPierrehumbert, Raymond
dc.contributor.authorLee, Michael R. F.
dc.contributor.authorTakahashi, Taro
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-19T14:30:02Z
dc.date.available2023-07-19T14:30:02Z
dc.date.issued2023-07-18
dc.description.abstractThe vast majority of agri-food climate-based sustainability analyses use GWP100 as an impact assessment, usually in isolation; however, in recent years, discussions have criticised the 'across-the-board' application of GWP100 in Life Cycle Assessments (LCA), particularly of food systems which generate large amounts of methane (CH4) and considered whether reporting additional and/or alternative metrics may be more applicable to certain circumstances or research questions. This paper reports a sensitivity analysis using a pasture-based beef production system (a producer of high CH4 emissions) as an exemplar to compare various climate impact assessments: CO2-equivalents using GWP100 and GTP100, and 'CO2-warming-equivalents' using 'GWP Star', or GWP*. The inventory for this system was compiled using data from the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) National Capability, the North Wyke Farm Platform, in Devon, SW England. LCAs can have an important bearing on: (i) policymakers' decisions; (ii) farmer management decisions; (iii) consumers' purchasing habits; and (iv) wider perceptions of whether certain activities can be considered 'sustainable' or not; it is, therefore, the responsibility of LCA practitioners and scientists to ensure that subjective decisions are tested as robustly as possible through appropriate sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. We demonstrate herein that the choice of climate impact assessment has dramatic effects on interpretation, with GWP100 and GTP100 producing substantially different results due to their different treatments of CH4 in the context of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents. Given its dynamic nature and previously proven strong correspondence with climate models, out of the three assessments covered, GWP* provides the most complete coverage of the temporal evolution of temperature change for different GHG emissions. We extend previous discussions on the limitations of static emission metrics and encourage LCA practitioners to consider due care and attention where additional information or dynamic approaches may prove superior, scientifically speaking, particularly in cases of decision support.en_UK
dc.identifier.citationMcAuliffe GA, Lynch J, Cain M, et al., (2023) Are single global warming potential impact assessments adequate for carbon footprints of agri-food systems?, Environmental Research Letters, Volume 18, Issue 8, August 2023, Article Number 084014en_UK
dc.identifier.issn1748-9326
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ace204
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/20020
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherIOP Publishingen_UK
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectlife cycle assessmenten_UK
dc.subjectclimate changeen_UK
dc.subjectagricultureen_UK
dc.subjectgreenhouse gas emissionsen_UK
dc.subjectsensitivity analysisen_UK
dc.titleAre single global warming potential impact assessments adequate for carbon footprints of agri-food systems?en_UK
dc.typeArticleen_UK

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Global_warming_potential_impact_assessments-2023.pdf
Size:
1.59 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.63 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Staff publications (SWEE)