Carbon accounting: Difference between revisions

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: confusing structure and lead. Please help improve this article if you can. (June 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Carbon accounting or greenhouse gas accounting refers to processes used to measure how much carbon dioxide equivalents an organization emits. It is used by states, corporations, and individuals to create the carbon credit commodity traded on carbon markets (or to establish the demand for carbon credits). Examples of products based on forms of carbon accounting may be found in national inventories, corporate environmental reports, and carbon footprint calculators.

Carbon accounting is likened to sustainability measurement, as an instance of ecological modernisation discourses and policy. Carbon accounting is hoped to provide a factual ground for carbon-related decision-making. However, social scientific studies of accounting challenge this hope,^[1] noting practical issues in implementing abstract accounting schemes, due to the socially constructed character of carbon conversion factors.^[2]

While natural sciences claim to know and measure carbon, for organisations it is usually easier to employ forms of carbon accounting to represent carbon. The trustworthiness of accounts of carbon emissions can easily be contested.^[3] Thus, how well carbon accounting represents carbon is difficult to exactly know.

Initial efforts to create greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting methods was done largely at the national level. In 1995 the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) required Annex 1 countries to report annually on their emissions for six industrial categories. That same year the FCCC under took a pilot program where countries could experiment with carbon offset projects. In 1997 the Kyoto protocol created a Carbon offset program called the Clean development mechanism, and also defined the greenhouse gases that are the central focus of greenhouse gas accounting methods: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, nitrogen trifluoride, hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorocarbon’s. This raised awareness about the need for measuring the amount of carbon removed from projects designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.^[4]

In 1997 BP developed a protocol for measuring and reporting CO2 emissions as part of an internal admissions trading scheme. In 1998 the “Safe Climate Sound Business: An Action Agenda” challenged businesses to measure, track and openly report greenhouse gas emissions from their operations. That year the World Resources Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) initiated a multi stakeholder process to develop a protocol to support this goal. The first edition of Greenhouse Gas Protocol was published in September 2001, and included over 200 organizations in its development. ^[5] It establishes a comprehensive, global, standardized framework for measuring and managing emissions from private and public sector operations, value chains, products, cities, and policies.^[6]

Other NGOs have also played a role in driving corporate participation GHG accounting. The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) was founded in the UK in 2002, and started with 35 investors signing a request for environmental information, and  245 companies responding. It is now a multinational organization with thousands of companies disclosing their GHG emissions, along with other data.^[7] The Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) was formed in 2015 as a collaboration between CDP, World Resources Institute (WRI), the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), and the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC), with the goal to establish science-based environmental target setting as a standard corporate practice.^[8]

Since the 2015 Paris agreement there has been an increased focus on standards for financial risk from GHG emissions. The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) was created as a follow-up to the Paris agreement. It has created a framework of recommendations on the types of information that companies should disclose to support investors, lenders, and insurance underwriters.^[9] More recently, governments such as the EU and US have developed regulations that specify corporate financial disclosure requirements and the use of accounting protocols to meet them.^[10][11]

Participation in greenhouse gas accounting and reporting has grown significantly over time. In 2020, 81% of S&P 500 companies reported Scope 1 and 2 emissions. ^[12] Globally, over 22,000 companies disclosed environmental data to CDP in 2022.^[13]

A number of internal drivers have been described for corporate carbon accounting. These include: standing in published rankings,^[14] preparation for regulatory requirements and use in emissions trading,^[15] managing climate change related risks, investment due diligence, shareholder and stakeholder communication, staff engagement, energy cost savings, , and due diligence consideration in acquisitions. Accounting for greenhouse gas emissions is increasingly framed as a standard requirement for business.^[16][17]

Corporate greenhouse gas accounting is driven in part by a variety of legal requirements. These are typically introduced through specific laws on reporting, or within wider governmental environmental and sustainability requirements. Greenhouse gas emission trading schemes are also a factor in broadening the use of these accounting and reporting protocols.^[18] In 2015 these requirements covered more than 40 countries.^[19]

Regulatory reporting examples include the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), part of a broader set of rules to make EU countries carbon neutral by 2050, and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 55 percent compared with 1990 levels by 2030. It will require many large companies and companies with securities listed on EU-regulated markets to disclose a broad array of ESG information, including GHG emissions.^[11] The UK’s Environmental Reporting Guidelines update and clarify requirements in earlier laws that required companies to report information on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in their Directors’ Reports. These rules require companies with listings on stock exchanges, as well as other large companies to report their global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and an intensity ratio through their annual reports. Additionally, they are now required to report their total global energy use and information relating to energy efficiency and reporting methods used.^[20][21] In the US the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) requires requires facility based reporting (as opposed to corporate wide reporting) of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from large industrial facilities, fuel and gas suppliers, and CO2 injection sites.  Facilities determine whether they are required to report based factors such as the types of industrial operations located at the facility and their emission levels. A total of 41 facility categories are covered by the GHGRP.^[22]

Recent regulations are also coming from agencies that traditionally have had a financial focus. The Security Exchange Commission (SEC) 2022 proposed rule would require all companies, regardless of size, to report their Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions. Larger companies would be required to disclose Scope 3 emissions only if they are material to the company, or if the company has set a reduced emissions target that includes Scope 3 emissions.^[23] Japan’s Financial Services Agency’s (FSA) also issued rules in 2022 that require financial disclosure of climate related information. These are expected to cover around 4,000 companies, including those listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange. ^[24]

Government procurement requirements have also begun to incorporate greenhouse gas reporting requirements. Both the US^[25] and the UK^[26] governments have recently issued executive type orders that require this practice.

Emission trading schemes and in various countries also play a role in promoting greenhouse gas accounting, as do international carbon offset programs. The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is a "cap and trade" system where a limit is placed on the right to emit specified pollutants over an area and companies can trade emission rights within that area.^[27] It incorporates principles from GHG Protocol.^[28] California’s cap-and-trade program operates along similar principles and is designed to help achieve the state’s goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.^[29] International offset programs also contain requirements for identifying and quantifying emission reductions for a proposed project. The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM-established under the Kyoto protocol), has a detailed set of Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification procedures,^[30]as does the Reduction in Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) program.^[31] Similar procedures to document project reductions under Article 6 of the Paris agreement are yet to be determined.^[32]

A number of NGOs have developed programs that both promote greenhouse gas accounting/reporting and help define the ways in which it is carried out. The Carbon Disclosure project allows a range of protocols that can be designated when reporting, ^[33]although most companies report GHG emissions using GHG protocol or a protocol based on it.^[34] The Science Based Targets initiative specifically cites GHG protocol guidance as part of its criteria and recommendations ^[35] Similarly, the TCFD cites GHG protocol in its recommended metrics and targets.^[36]

Process LCA is the most popular method, currently, for conducting life-cycle assessment, and is often referred to as the SETAC-EPA method because of the role played by SETAC^[37] and EPA in this method's development.^[38] The inputs and outputs of multiple stages of a product's life are investigated in turn, and the results are aggregated into single metrics of impact such as eutrophication, toxicity, and greenhouse gas emissions. Tools exist on the market to assist researchers in conducting process LCA (such as GaBi, Ecoinvent, and Umberto). These tools contain data from previous researchers on the environmental impact of materials and processes that are then strung together by the user to form a system.^[38]

Input-output LCA utilizes economic input-output tables^[39] and industry-level environmental data to construct a database of environmental impacts per dollar sold by an industry. The boundary problem of process LCA is solved in this method because the economic input-output table captures the interrelations of all economic sectors;^[40] however, aggregated industrial categories limit the specificity of the results.^[41] Input–output analysis is a very powerful tool for the upfront screening of corporate carbon footprints, for informing streamlined supply-chain GHG accounting and for setting priorities for more detailed analyses.^[42][43]

Many methods for hybrid life-cycle assessments have been discussed, which aim to combine the infinite boundary of EIO-LCA with the specificity of Process LCA.^[44][45]

At its core, ECA is essentially a hybrid life-cycle assessment; however, rather than the traditional bottom-up approach of life-cycle assessment, ECA links financial data directly to LCA data to produce a snapshot of the companies' operations. Rather than probing at areas thought to be problematic, ECA quickly identifies problem areas in the supply chain so that rapid action can be taken. This fundamental shift in thinking enables decision makers to rapidly address critical areas within the enterprise and supply chain.

Socialised supply chain accounting is the term generally applied to Enterprise Carbon Accounting Solutions that provide a collaborative mechanism for supply chain participants to engage, expose and determine supply chain emissions through the process of shared knowledge. The term "Socialised Supply Chain" was coined by the CEO of Nootrol, Mark Kearns, to describe a platform where supply chain participants exposed Process LCA and embedded emissions.^{[citation needed]}

A special case of carbon accounting is the accounting process undertaken to measure the amount of carbon dioxide equivalents that will not be released into the atmosphere as a result of flexible mechanisms projects under the Kyoto Protocol.^[46] These projects thus include (but are not limited to) renewable energy projects and biomass, forage and tree plantations.

Carbon emissions reporting measures the emissions produced by a certain activity or process.^{[clarification needed]} It can identify factors that contribute to climate change, and help outline subsequent policies to limit climate change.

Typically, carbon emissions reporting captures outputs from processes such as the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, agricultural practices including the use of fertilizer and raising livestock, industrial processes, refrigeration, and the use of various consumer products.^[47][48]

There are laws and policies in various countries which require large power stations and manufacturing plants to report their emissions to appropriate authorities, including the European Union as part of the Emissions Trading System,^[49] or in the US as part of the Environmental Protection Agency's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.^[50]

The examples and perspective in this section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this section, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new section, as appropriate. (January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

In the United States, despite several attempts to institute mandatory reporting legislation, none were implemented until after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Due to this oil spill and increasing social awareness about the environment, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) started the environmental Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which became law in 2010. It forces 85% of the nation's top emitters to report how much greenhouse gas they have emitted.

In the first year of this legislation, only 85% of the nation's leading emitters were required to report their annual emissions. Plans were to slightly increase this number each year to increase the information available on the amount of emissions produced.

This program was the initial step into countering the rising emissions rate. While many^[who?] believe that if companies are forced to report their emissions, they will be more inclined to lower their impact; this effect has not been thoroughly studied. The ability to attract more investment as consumers prefer environmentally friendly products is another possible incentive, but again there is little evidence to support any strong claims.

In 2013, the UK coalition government implemented mandatory carbon reporting, requiring all UK companies listed on the Main Market of the London Stock Exchange – around 1,100 of the UK's largest listed companies – to report their greenhouse gas emissions every year.^{[51] [52]}

Streamlined Energy and Carbon Reporting (SECR) is a UK government requirement for mandatory annual reporting and disclosure of energy and carbon information from companies. SECR came into effect in 2019. Whilst the over-riding intention of SECR is around public awareness, cost reduction and reduced carbon emissions, the BEIS also wanted to introduce a more simplified process.^[53]

The ISO 14064 standards for greenhouse gas accounting and verification published in 2006 by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) provide government and industry with an integrated set of tools for programmes aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as well as for emissions trading.^[54]

Part 1 (Specification with guidance at the organization level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals)

ISO 14064-1:2006 specifies principles and requirements at the organization level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals. It includes requirements for the design, development, management, reporting and verification of an organization's GHG inventory.^[55]

Part 2 (Specification with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements)

ISO 14064-2:2006 specifies principles and requirements and provides guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of activities intended to cause greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions or removal enhancements. It includes requirements for planning a GHG project, identifying and selecting GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs relevant to the project and baseline scenario, monitoring, quantifying, documenting and reporting GHG project performance and managing data quality.^[56]

Part 3 (Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions)

ISO 14064-3:2006 specifies principles and requirements and provides guidance for those conducting or managing the validation and/or verification of greenhouse gas (GHG) assertions. It can be applied to organizational or GHG project quantification, including GHG quantification, monitoring and reporting carried out in accordance with ISO 14064-1 or ISO 14064-2.^[57]

Many companies have adopted the standards put forth by the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHGP),^[58] a partnership between the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). The Greenhouse Gas Protocol provides accounting and reporting standards, sector guidance, calculation tools, and training for businesses and government. It establishes a comprehensive, global, standardized framework for measuring and managing emissions from private and public sector operations, value chains, products, cities, and policies.^[59] A new universal method for logistics emissions accounting was launched in 2016^[60] in collaboration with the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Greenhouse Gas protocol.^[61] It's called the GLEC framework (Global Logistics Emissions Council).^[62] The Greenhouse Gas Protocol is recognized by the UK government as an independent standard for reporting greenhouse gases.^[63] The Greenhouse Gas Protocol^[64] divides emissions into 3 Scopes.

Scope 1

Direct GHG emissions

Scope 1 covers all direct GHG emissions by a company.^[65] It includes fuel combustion, company vehicles and fugitive emissions.^[66] These emissions are direct GHG emissions that happen from sources owned or controlled by an organization including fuel combustion in boilers, furnaces, vehicles.^[4]

Scope 2

Electricity indirect GHG emissions

Scope 2 covers indirect GHG emissions from consumption of purchased electricity, heat, cooling or steam.^[65] These emissions are a result of a company's activities but often occur outside a company's physical facility (e.g. at an electricity utility plant), hence scope 2 emissions are considered an indirect emission source.^[4] Scope 2 emissions amount to at least one third of global GHG emissions due to the high demand for and consumption of electricity.^[11]

The GHG Protocol has issued standardized guidelines on how an organization can calculate its Scope 2 emissions to ensure transparency and consistency between organizations. The Corporate Standard "recommends multiplying activity data (MWhs of electricity consumption) by source and supplier-specific emission factors to arrive at the total GHG emissions impact of electricity use."^[11]

Scope 3

Other indirect GHG emissions

Scope 3 covers other indirect emissions, such as the extraction and production of purchased materials and fuels, transport-related activities in vehicles not owned or controlled by the reporting entity, electricity-related activities (e.g. transmission and distribution (T&D) losses) not covered in Scope 2, outsourced activities, waste disposal, etc.^[65] Scope 3 emissions (also known as value chain emissions) often represent the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions and in some cases can account for up to 90% of the total carbon impact.^[67][68] Scope 3 emission sources include emissions both upstream and downstream of the organization's activities (e.g. suppliers, product use, and transportation of goods). The largest part of a typical corporate GHG footprint is in the company's value chain.

Based on the GHG Protocol, Scope 3 includes all emissions not covered by scope 1 and scope 2. There are 15 scope 3 categories, though not every category will be relevant to all organizations.^[69]

1. Purchased Goods and Services
2. Capital Goods
3. Fuel- and Energy-Related Activities Not Included in Scope 1 or 2
4. Upstream Transportation and Distribution
5. Waste Generated in Operations
6. Business Travel
7. Employee Commuting
8. Upstream Leased Assets
9. Downstream Transportation and Distribution
10. Processing of Sold Products
11. Use of Sold Products
12. End-of-Life Treatment of Sold Products
13. Downstream Leased Assets
14. Franchises
15. Investments

Upstream activities

Cradle-to-gate (sometimes referred to as "upstream") emissions, which include all emissions that occur in the life cycle of a material/product up to the point of sale by the producer.^[70]

Downstream activities

Emissions that occur in the life cycle of a material/product after the sale by the producer. This includes distribution and storage, use of the product and end-of-life.^[71]

ISO (International Organization for Standardization), the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) under which they have agreed to jointly promote the ISO 14064 standards and the WRI and WBCSD GHG Protocol standards. The move is in response to concerns among businesses and GHG program designers that the two standards might not be consistent and mutually supportive. In fact, for corporate accounting, requirements and guidance contained in ISO and GHG Protocol standards are consistent and they are designed so that they can be used in a complementary manner.^[72]

Whilst specific critiques of carbon reporting have emerged, the actual practice of how organisations account for and report emissions remains understudied.^[73][74] Studies of practices of carbon accounting and reporting point to systemic externalities and raise issues about accountability.^[75]

When two or more individuals or organizations claim ownership of specific emission reductions or carbon offsets.^[76] Double-counting occurs when the greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) resulting from a particular activity are allocated to multiple parties in a supply chain, so that the total allocated emissions exceed the total actual emissions of that activity.^[77] For investors and according to cross-asset footprint calculations, double-counting can reach about 30-40% of an institutional investor's portfolio emissions.^[78]

A 2004 study on corporate disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions found that only 15 percent of companies that disclose GHG emissions report them in a manner that the authors consider complete with respect to the scope of emissions, type of emissions, and reporting boundary.^[79]

• Greenhouse gas inventory
• Greenhouse gas monitoring
• Carbon footprint
• Verified Carbon Standard
• Accounting
• Carbon Disclosure Project
• Flexible Mechanisms
• Life Cycle Assessment
• Regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act
• Carbon tax
• Low-carbon economy
• Carbon price

• Garvin, Peter. "Carbon Accounting: Beyond The Calculation and Looking To The Future." Green Economy Post 9 Feb. 2010. < http://greeneconomypost.com/carbon-accounting-7439.htm >
• Ma, Chunbo; Stern, David (2008). "Biomass and China's carbon emissions: A missing piece of carbon decomposition". Energy Policy. 36 (7): 2517–2526. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.03.013. S2CID 153578176.
• Smith, Done (2009). "US sets the standard". Renewable Energy Focus. 10 (4): 26–27. doi:10.1016/s1755-0084(09)70147-4.

• Business Leadership Criteria on Carbon Pricing
• UK Mandatory Carbon Reporting
• Defra
• The GHG Protocol
• The Carbon Trust
• Carbon Reporting
• Verisai
• EPA Regulations
• Greenhouse emissions report
• Energy and environment

• Murphy, B, Edwards, A, Meyer, CP (Mick),Russell-Smith, J (Eds) 2015, Carbon Accounting and Savanna Fire Management, CSIRO Publishing, ISBN 9780643108516
• Renewable Fuels Association (12 December 2011). "Dance of the ethanol giants: US and Brazil in shuffle game". Western Farm Press. Retrieved 17 December 2011.
• "Carbon accounting provides sustainable outlook". TAFE SA, Government of South Australia. 4 November 2011. Retrieved 17 December 2011.^{[permanent dead link]}
• Cobas-Flores, E. 1996. Life-cycle assessment using input-output analysis. Ph.D. dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University.
• Cumberland, J. H. and B. Stram. 1976. Empirical applications of input-output models to environmental protection. In Advances in input-output analysis: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on input-output techniques, Vienna, April 22–26, 1974, edited by K. R. Polenske and J. V. Skolka, pp. 365–382. Cambridge: Ballinger.
• Hendrickson, C.; Horvath, A.; Joshi, S.; Lave, L. (1998). "Economic Input-Output Models for Environmental Life Cycle Assessment". Environmental Science and Technology. 32 (7): 184A–191A. doi:10.1021/es983471i.
• Heijungs, R. and S. Suh, The Computational Structure of Life Cycle Assessment, Springer, 2002.
• IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 1995. IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, vol. 1–3. UNEP, OECD and IPCC.
• Lave, L. B.; Cobas-Flores, E.; Hendrickson, C. T.; McMichael, F. C. (1995). "Using input-output analysis to estimate economy-wide discharges". Environmental Science and Technology. 29 (9): 420A–426A. Bibcode:1995EnST...29..420L. doi:10.1021/es00009a748.
• Molloy, E. (2000). Management Technologies: Ideas, Practices and Processes. PhD thesis, Lancaster University, Lancaster.
• Suh, S (2004). "Functions, commodities and environmental impacts in an ecological–economic model". Ecological Economics. 48 (4): 451–467. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.10.013.
• The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative
• UN (United Nations). 1993. Integrated environmental and economic accounting. New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis, Statistics Division.
• Hufschlag, K.: Global Carbon Accounting at DP DHL (Weltweites Carbon Accounting bei Deutsche Post DHL), uwf - Umweltwirtschaftsforum 18, H.1, 2010, S. 29-33