Best Foot Forward

As the article rightly points out, the basic concepts behind carbon fooptprinting have been around for decades - but have just been called something different (i.e. "the result of the life cycle impact category indicator global warming potential"). However something about the carbon footprint - in combination with the rise of climate change as the number one environmental challenge - has brought this subset of life-cycle analysis to the masses.

BFF has applied the principles of LCA but not the popular models and software packages which often mask often unjustifiable assumptions. With the focus of some in the LCA community being on the ‘7th decimal place’ of accuracy, it tends to miss the point that if we are needing to cut carbon emissions of 80%, even the first decimal point is largely irrelevant.

The author correctly highlights many of the methodological issues that have dogged the development of carbon footprinting standards, such as PAS2050 (many of which have not been satisfactorily resolved) ... but he also admits that LCA practitioners might learn something from this new breed of life-cycle thinkers. In short, it could encourage a re-assessment of some of the fundamental assumptions which have become accepted and unchallenged.

As environmental accountants - but not 'traditional' LCA practitioners, BFF welcomes this dialogue between the two approaches and is certain that both groups can use their common aim - to capture life-cycle impacts - to strengthen both disciplines.

The article can be accessed via SpringerLink.