Requirements on Consumer Information about Product ... - ANEC

Consumer Information about PCF
Prakash et al. (2008) 4 concluded: “There is a general dilemma when choosing between the
two indicator-systems: While energy-indicators are unable to promote renewable energies,
they are effective instruments to stimulate energy-efficiency. In contrast, CO 2 -indicators can
stimulate a shift towards renewable energies, but also bear the risk of neglecting efficiency
potentials.”
As there is no elegant way leading away from this dilemma at this point, the CO2e indicator
is not able to substitute the energy indicator and vice versa. It has to be checked in each
individual case which one of the two indicators is more suitable or whether both should be
used.
Furthermore an eye has to be kept on the supply systems, e.g. when addressing the situation
in the EU it is more suitable to use an average European electricity mix instead of the
electricity mix of single countries (e.g. France with a low value, Poland with a high value for
CO2 emissions).
Methodological questions have to be solved concerning “green” electricity and an agreement
has to be found concerning possible incentives for its use.
4 General views on the suitability of the LCA approach for environmental
labelling – what are the consequences for the PCF
approach?
Prakash (2008) worked out in detail the strengths and weaknesses of the LCA approach in
general for environmental labelling purposes. As PCF is to be seen as an indeed focussed
but basically the same approach as LCA, the findings of Prakash (2008) will be shown in the
following (see excerpt of the original text in italics). It will be discussed whether the
conclusions are the same for both the PCF and the LCA approach.
4
For a more detailed discussion on this issue see Prakash et al. 2008
11