Can carbon footprint serve as proxy of the environmental burden from urban consumption patterns?

Pradip Kalbar, Morten Birkved, Subhankar Karmakar, Simon Elsborg Nygaard, Michael Zwicky Hauschild

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    174 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Carbon footprint (CFP) is widely applied as an indicator when assessing environmental sustainability of products and services. The objective of the present study is to evaluate the validity of CFP as overall environmental indicator for representing the environmental burden of residents from urbanized areas. Applying four different Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods environmental impact profiles were determined for the consumption patterns of 1281 Danish urban residents. Six main consumption components were distinguished including road transport, air travel, food, accommodation (covering consumption of materials for the construction of dwellings) and use of energy in terms of thermal energy, and electricity. The results for the individual consumption components showed a strong correlation between CFP and nearly all other impact indicators for all the applied LCIA methods However, upon aggregation of the indicator results across consumption components, the impact indicators for the total consumption showed no significant correlation between CFP and the other impact scores for any of the four impact assessment methods. These findings suggest that while CFP can be a good indicator of the environmental burden associated with specific activities, this is not the case for more complex activities (such as consumption patterns related to urban life styles). This conclusion discourages the use of CFP as sustainability measure in relation to regulation of private or public consumption.
    Original languageEnglish
    JournalEcological Indicators
    Volume74
    Pages (from-to)109-118
    ISSN1470-160x
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2017

    Keywords

    • Carbon footprint
    • Life cycle assessment
    • Sustainability
    • Urban resource consumption
    • Urban systems

    Cite this

    Kalbar, Pradip ; Birkved, Morten ; Karmakar, Subhankar ; Nygaard, Simon Elsborg ; Hauschild, Michael Zwicky. / Can carbon footprint serve as proxy of the environmental burden from urban consumption patterns?. In: Ecological Indicators. 2017 ; Vol. 74. pp. 109-118.
    @article{fda5f5e1255d49e8b2d0dbdbe731b23e,
    title = "Can carbon footprint serve as proxy of the environmental burden from urban consumption patterns?",
    abstract = "Carbon footprint (CFP) is widely applied as an indicator when assessing environmental sustainability of products and services. The objective of the present study is to evaluate the validity of CFP as overall environmental indicator for representing the environmental burden of residents from urbanized areas. Applying four different Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods environmental impact profiles were determined for the consumption patterns of 1281 Danish urban residents. Six main consumption components were distinguished including road transport, air travel, food, accommodation (covering consumption of materials for the construction of dwellings) and use of energy in terms of thermal energy, and electricity. The results for the individual consumption components showed a strong correlation between CFP and nearly all other impact indicators for all the applied LCIA methods However, upon aggregation of the indicator results across consumption components, the impact indicators for the total consumption showed no significant correlation between CFP and the other impact scores for any of the four impact assessment methods. These findings suggest that while CFP can be a good indicator of the environmental burden associated with specific activities, this is not the case for more complex activities (such as consumption patterns related to urban life styles). This conclusion discourages the use of CFP as sustainability measure in relation to regulation of private or public consumption.",
    keywords = "Carbon footprint, Life cycle assessment, Sustainability, Urban resource consumption, Urban systems",
    author = "Pradip Kalbar and Morten Birkved and Subhankar Karmakar and Nygaard, {Simon Elsborg} and Hauschild, {Michael Zwicky}",
    year = "2017",
    doi = "10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.022",
    language = "English",
    volume = "74",
    pages = "109--118",
    journal = "Ecological Indicators",
    issn = "1470-160X",
    publisher = "Elsevier",

    }

    Can carbon footprint serve as proxy of the environmental burden from urban consumption patterns? / Kalbar, Pradip; Birkved, Morten; Karmakar, Subhankar; Nygaard, Simon Elsborg; Hauschild, Michael Zwicky.

    In: Ecological Indicators, Vol. 74, 2017, p. 109-118.

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Can carbon footprint serve as proxy of the environmental burden from urban consumption patterns?

    AU - Kalbar, Pradip

    AU - Birkved, Morten

    AU - Karmakar, Subhankar

    AU - Nygaard, Simon Elsborg

    AU - Hauschild, Michael Zwicky

    PY - 2017

    Y1 - 2017

    N2 - Carbon footprint (CFP) is widely applied as an indicator when assessing environmental sustainability of products and services. The objective of the present study is to evaluate the validity of CFP as overall environmental indicator for representing the environmental burden of residents from urbanized areas. Applying four different Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods environmental impact profiles were determined for the consumption patterns of 1281 Danish urban residents. Six main consumption components were distinguished including road transport, air travel, food, accommodation (covering consumption of materials for the construction of dwellings) and use of energy in terms of thermal energy, and electricity. The results for the individual consumption components showed a strong correlation between CFP and nearly all other impact indicators for all the applied LCIA methods However, upon aggregation of the indicator results across consumption components, the impact indicators for the total consumption showed no significant correlation between CFP and the other impact scores for any of the four impact assessment methods. These findings suggest that while CFP can be a good indicator of the environmental burden associated with specific activities, this is not the case for more complex activities (such as consumption patterns related to urban life styles). This conclusion discourages the use of CFP as sustainability measure in relation to regulation of private or public consumption.

    AB - Carbon footprint (CFP) is widely applied as an indicator when assessing environmental sustainability of products and services. The objective of the present study is to evaluate the validity of CFP as overall environmental indicator for representing the environmental burden of residents from urbanized areas. Applying four different Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods environmental impact profiles were determined for the consumption patterns of 1281 Danish urban residents. Six main consumption components were distinguished including road transport, air travel, food, accommodation (covering consumption of materials for the construction of dwellings) and use of energy in terms of thermal energy, and electricity. The results for the individual consumption components showed a strong correlation between CFP and nearly all other impact indicators for all the applied LCIA methods However, upon aggregation of the indicator results across consumption components, the impact indicators for the total consumption showed no significant correlation between CFP and the other impact scores for any of the four impact assessment methods. These findings suggest that while CFP can be a good indicator of the environmental burden associated with specific activities, this is not the case for more complex activities (such as consumption patterns related to urban life styles). This conclusion discourages the use of CFP as sustainability measure in relation to regulation of private or public consumption.

    KW - Carbon footprint

    KW - Life cycle assessment

    KW - Sustainability

    KW - Urban resource consumption

    KW - Urban systems

    U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.022

    DO - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.022

    M3 - Journal article

    VL - 74

    SP - 109

    EP - 118

    JO - Ecological Indicators

    JF - Ecological Indicators

    SN - 1470-160X

    ER -