Assessing Temporary Carbon Storage in Life Cycle Assessment and ...

elative importance of different GHGs and due to the various value-judgements there will not be a
perfect metric, implying that every metric will require some sacrifices.
The value judgements that are inherent in metrics imply that the future development and analysis of
metrics requires input from a variety of disciplines [2]; such as the natural sciences, economics, and
political scientists. The natural sciences can use metrics to quantify the relative weights between the
different GHGs, and how realistic those weights are to the physical realities of the climate system.
Economists can quantify how different metrics impact on economic efficiency and distribution of costs
between countries and sectors. Political scientists can assess the political feasibility of metrics. By
working together, new metrics may be designed which come closer to striking a balance between
competing issues. Importantly, an interdisciplinary approach to metrics may reinvigorate debate into
metric design which will ultimately lead to a better policy outcome.
1. Economic and policy framework
2. Economic and policy framework
Cost‐effectiveness approach (UNFCCC)
a)
Cost‐benefit approach
3. Time considerations
Fixed time horizon
20 years (IPCC)
100 years (IPCC)
a)
500 years (IPCC)
Any other period
Time‐dependent horizon
b) Discounting
c) Post‐horizon effects
4. Indicator of climate effects
Radiative forcing
Temperature change
a)
Sea level rise
Damage
End‐point
b)
Integrated
Level of change
c)
Rate of change
5. Other Assumptions
Pulse emissions
a)
Sustained emissions
Emissions scenarios
Emissions of 1kg
b)
Emissions of a larger magnitude
Constant background
c)
Transient background (emissions scenarios)
Global response
d)
Regional response
Point estimate
e)
Uncertainty
6. Issues to consider
• Forcing relationship (linear/non‐linear)
• IRF specification (linear/non‐linear)
a)
• Experimental setup
• Model specification
35