Carbon accounting for negative emissions technologies
Carbon accounting for negative emissions technologies
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/14693062.2021.1878009
复制
发表时间：
2021-02-02
期刊：
影响因子：
7.1
通讯作者：
Tett, Simon
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Brander, Matthew;Ascui, Francisco;Tett, Simon
负排放技术（NET）是实现巴黎协定将升温限制在2摄氏度以下的目标的大多数情景以及将升温限制在1.5摄氏度的所有情景的重要组成部分。这些技术的部署需要碳核算方法用于一系列不同的目的，例如确定特定技术的有效性或激励NET。虽然在关于网络的文献中讨论了碳核算方法的必要性，但似乎对不同核算挑战的范围没有明确的认识。基于系统的文献回顾，本研究确定了五个不同的会计问题与NET：1。估计全系统排放量/清除量的总体变化; 2.非永久性; 3.“无过冲”和“过冲和去除”的不等价性; 4. 5.为母语英语教师提供的奖励;排放量/清除量的时间分布。这些会计挑战的解决方案提出，或者，进一步研究和解决方案的发展领域突出。一项关键建议是，碳核算方法应遵循“现实原则”，报告排放量和清除量实际发生的时间和地点，一个重要的总体结论是，必须为适当目的使用正确的核算方法。例如，如果目的是为关于部署或激励NET的决定提供信息，则应使用考虑到全系统排放量/清除量总体变化的相应方法。然而，如果目的是构建可能的净零世界的静态描述，则应使用归因方法。关键政策见解负排放技术（NET）提出了一些独特的碳核算挑战，不同的母语英语教师，其重要性各不相同。归因生命周期评估并不是评估系统的适当方法-应使用相应的温室气体核算方法来估计全系统的变化，温室气体核算方法应遵循“现实原则”，在下列情况下报告排放量和清除量：以及它们实际发生的地方。
Negative emissions technologies (NETs) are an essential part of most scenarios for achieving the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to below 2 degrees C and for all scenarios that limit warming to 1.5 degrees C. The deployment of these technologies requires carbon accounting methods for a range of different purposes, such as determining the effectiveness of specific technologies or incentivising NETs. Although the need for carbon accounting methods is discussed within the literature on NETs, there does not appear to be a clear understanding of the range of different accounting challenges. Based on a systematic literature review this study identifies five distinct accounting issues related to NETs: 1. estimating total system-wide change in emissions/removals; 2. non-permanence; 3. non-equivalence of 'no overshoot' and 'overshoot and removal'; 4. accounting for incentives for NETs; and 5. the temporal distribution of emissions/removals. Solutions to these accounting challenges are proposed, or alternatively, areas for further research and the development of solutions are highlighted. One key recommendation is that carbon accounting methods should follow a 'reality principle' to report emissions and removals when and where they actually occur, and an important overall conclusion is that it is essential to use the correct accounting method for its appropriate purpose. For example, consequential methods that take account of total system-wide changes in emissions/removals should be used if the purpose is to inform decisions on the deployment or incentivisation of NETs. Attributional methods, however, should be used if the purpose is to construct static descriptions of possible net zero worlds.Key policy insightsNegative emissions technologies (NETs) raise a number of distinct carbon accounting challenges, the importance of which varies across different NETs.Attributional life cycle assessment is not an appropriate method for estimating the system-wide changes caused by the deployment of NETs.Consequential greenhouse gas accounting methods should be used to estimate system-wide changes, and should be used as much as possible for guiding incentives for NETs.Greenhouse gas accounting methods should follow a 'reality principle' to report emissions and removals when and where they actually occur.