Corporate and Product Carbon Footprint under Compound Hybrid Analysis: Application to a Spanish Timber Company

Abstract

The European Union (EU) is advancing steadily toward the stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. Various sectors are now obliged to make reductions, and new policies based on the carbon footprint are being encouraged. However, voluntary reporting of so-called scope 3 emissions is hindering successful implementation of these policies. In this study, we present a tiered hybrid analysis to report emissions according to the ISO/TR 14069 standards and to obtain complete measures of scope 3 emissions. A process analysis for scope 1 and scope 2 emissions is complemented with a multiregional input-output analysis for upstream scope 3 emissions. This novel approach is applied to the case study of a Spanish timber company. Its total carbon footprint in 2011 was 783,660 kilograms of carbon-dioxide equivalent, of which 88% correspond to scope 3 emissions. These emissions are globally distributed; 71% are from European countries, followed by 8% from emerging economies (Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia, Australia, and Turkey), 5% from China, and, finally, 16% from the rest of the world. We identify and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this novel approach, the European implementation of which could be highly effective in reducing global carbon emissions. Keywords:carbon emissions corporate environmental reporting environmental input-output analysis hybrid life-cycle assessment input-output life cycle assessment (IO-LCA) timber company Supporting information is linked to this article on the JIE website

Value chain carbon footprints of Chinese listed companies

“…Future studies could also apply the proposed method to the Analytical AMNE database to trace the carbon footprints of overseas operations of Chinese listed companies. In addition, future studies could adopt the hybrid LCA method 35 , which combines EIO-LCA and process LCA, to reflect the difference in production technologies among listed companies.…”

Corporate scope 3 carbon emission reporting as an enabler of supply chain decarbonization: A systematic review and comprehensive research agenda

“…Scholars further identified the currently voluntary nature of corporate scope 3 emission reporting as an inhibitor for scope 3 emission reduction. For example, Alvarez et al (2019) claim that because it is voluntary, many firms currently do not report their scope 3 emissions, which in turn slows down scope 3 emission reduction.…”

“…Vasquez et al (2015), Clabeaux et al (2020), Kulkarni (2019), and Robinson et al (2018) all conducted similar analyses on the advantages of a bottom‐up approach for calculating a university's carbon footprint and confirmed Brander's view. Alvarez et al (2019) analyzed the application of a compound hybrid analysis for the improvement of carbon footprint calculations as part of a case study of a Spanish timber firm. They found that their approach improves accuracy and efficiency, and reduces costs.…”

Worse is worse and better doesn't matter?: The effects of favorable and unfavorable environmental information on consumers’ willingness to pay

“…Besides, with product carbon footprints (PCFs) a tool has been developed in the field of industrial ecology which allows consumers to judge climate change-related impacts of products (e.g., Draucker et al, 2011;Lenzen, 2014). Drawing on Alvarez et al (2018), the PCF can be defined as an indicator measuring the direct and indirect green-house gas emissions caused by a specific product along its entire life cycle. Unlike most environmental labels, PCFs provide quantitative and not only qualitative environmental information.…”