Carbon Footprint: Concept, Methodology and Calculation
19
Fig. 3 Example of a CFP calculator data entry interface (https://www.vegansociety.com/take-act
ion/campaigns/plate-planet/carbon-calculator)
[38] reviewed 8 carbon calculators for measuring and communicating indirect GHG
emissions from food consumption and included U.S. users among the target audience. Their findings confirm a general lack of consideration of diet-related emissions
among CF calculators, under-representing the significance of diet in contributing to
indirect GHG emissions, thus highlighting that there is room for improvement and a
need for more rigorous methodologies.
Another recent study by in the scientific literature [63], analyzed 18 available
calculators (out of 44 environmental assessment calculators identified for agricultural
products) conceived for assessing GHG emissions from energy crop cultivation based
on CFP approaches. Results of the study show that 9 out of 18 CF calculators were
developed for product assessment and that all of them allow an assessment with a
“cradle to (farm) gate” approach, while only 8 calculators are able to extend the
system boundary to the end of life of the assessed production chain. In conclusion,
from the study emerged that calculators address different goals and user groups, with
differences in the level of complexity (both in terms of use and data required) and
also in the accuracy of results, confirming the abovementioned difficulty to have a
calculator generally valid different kind/categories of products.
5.2 Other CF Calculation Tools
Between the available CF calculators regarding study subjects different from organizations and products, the majority is focused on individuals, according to the
constantly increasing attention paid to individual behavior as a source of global
CO 2 emissions.
19
Fig. 3 Example of a CFP calculator data entry interface (https://www.vegansociety.com/take-act
ion/campaigns/plate-planet/carbon-calculator)
[38] reviewed 8 carbon calculators for measuring and communicating indirect GHG
emissions from food consumption and included U.S. users among the target audience. Their findings confirm a general lack of consideration of diet-related emissions
among CF calculators, under-representing the significance of diet in contributing to
indirect GHG emissions, thus highlighting that there is room for improvement and a
need for more rigorous methodologies.
Another recent study by in the scientific literature [63], analyzed 18 available
calculators (out of 44 environmental assessment calculators identified for agricultural
products) conceived for assessing GHG emissions from energy crop cultivation based
on CFP approaches. Results of the study show that 9 out of 18 CF calculators were
developed for product assessment and that all of them allow an assessment with a
“cradle to (farm) gate” approach, while only 8 calculators are able to extend the
system boundary to the end of life of the assessed production chain. In conclusion,
from the study emerged that calculators address different goals and user groups, with
differences in the level of complexity (both in terms of use and data required) and
also in the accuracy of results, confirming the abovementioned difficulty to have a
calculator generally valid different kind/categories of products.
5.2 Other CF Calculation Tools
Between the available CF calculators regarding study subjects different from organizations and products, the majority is focused on individuals, according to the
constantly increasing attention paid to individual behavior as a source of global
CO 2 emissions.