352
An additional, and often complementary, approach is based upon environmental
extensions to economic input-output (IO) tables, which allow a comprehensive
snapshot of the whole economy in a particular year. A further distinction is made
between attributional and consequential analyses.
An attributional analysis is a descriptive or comparative analysis of how the
world currently is, that looks at the impact of the product system under the assumption that the background economic system remains constant (e.g., the environmental
impact of one power plant using carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology).
In contrast, a consequential analysis looks at how the world could be by determining the impact of production under changes to the broader economy, for example under a scenario that all coal-fired electricity use CCS. In this case, we would to
dramatically scale up CCS technology, requiring significant structural changes
within the economy.
13.2.2 Metric Scale
Given the identification of metrics at the establishment level (e.g., from LCA), two
questions arise: are these metrics appropriate at the meso/macro scale, and how
should we translate metrics between the establishment and meso/macro scales? In
its simplest form, one can aggregate each establishment-level average or marginal
impact, such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per gallon of treated water, by the
total production of water from each establishment. In this case, any error or uncertainty at the establishment level would be transmitted to the meso/macro scale.
The computational structure of LCA provides a useful framework for defining
metrics pertinent to the FEW nexus. Within this structure, we can define two
matrices:
A: A square n × n matrix (A) depicting the technological network of interacting
processes and facilities, with n columns representing processes and n rows representing products or services being exchanged.
B: An n × m matrix (B) again with n columns representing processes but with m
rows representing interactions occurring outside the set of modeled processes—in other words, within larger-scale economic, social, or environmental
domains.
Assuming a vastly simplified technological network composed of only three processes (food, energy, and water production) generating three highly aggregated
products (food, energy, and water), as depicted in Fig. 13.1, we can quantify metrics
defined by the economy and broader social and environmental contexts.
Having defined the distinct scales of analysis as establishment and meso/macro
and having identified that LCA enables tracking of the multiple interactions between
the three key elements of food, energy, and water, we now turn to other considerations regarding different categories of metrics.
M. Carbajales-Dale and C. W. King
An additional, and often complementary, approach is based upon environmental
extensions to economic input-output (IO) tables, which allow a comprehensive
snapshot of the whole economy in a particular year. A further distinction is made
between attributional and consequential analyses.
An attributional analysis is a descriptive or comparative analysis of how the
world currently is, that looks at the impact of the product system under the assumption that the background economic system remains constant (e.g., the environmental
impact of one power plant using carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology).
In contrast, a consequential analysis looks at how the world could be by determining the impact of production under changes to the broader economy, for example under a scenario that all coal-fired electricity use CCS. In this case, we would to
dramatically scale up CCS technology, requiring significant structural changes
within the economy.
13.2.2 Metric Scale
Given the identification of metrics at the establishment level (e.g., from LCA), two
questions arise: are these metrics appropriate at the meso/macro scale, and how
should we translate metrics between the establishment and meso/macro scales? In
its simplest form, one can aggregate each establishment-level average or marginal
impact, such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per gallon of treated water, by the
total production of water from each establishment. In this case, any error or uncertainty at the establishment level would be transmitted to the meso/macro scale.
The computational structure of LCA provides a useful framework for defining
metrics pertinent to the FEW nexus. Within this structure, we can define two
matrices:
A: A square n × n matrix (A) depicting the technological network of interacting
processes and facilities, with n columns representing processes and n rows representing products or services being exchanged.
B: An n × m matrix (B) again with n columns representing processes but with m
rows representing interactions occurring outside the set of modeled processes—in other words, within larger-scale economic, social, or environmental
domains.
Assuming a vastly simplified technological network composed of only three processes (food, energy, and water production) generating three highly aggregated
products (food, energy, and water), as depicted in Fig. 13.1, we can quantify metrics
defined by the economy and broader social and environmental contexts.
Having defined the distinct scales of analysis as establishment and meso/macro
and having identified that LCA enables tracking of the multiple interactions between
the three key elements of food, energy, and water, we now turn to other considerations regarding different categories of metrics.
M. Carbajales-Dale and C. W. King