IndEcol / RECC-ODYM

The RECC model
MIT License
21 stars 10 forks source link

4_PE_ProcessExtensions, SSP1 larger than SSP2 #38

Closed CarrerF closed 1 year ago

CarrerF commented 2 years ago

Hi, I have revising the dataset I have stumbled upon this issue. All the production sectors, with few exceptions, have lower targets for SSP2 (and consequently LED*) than SSP1. I had a look at the the corresponding target table does not explain the rationale behind it.

*This was also surprising to me. In some parameters (for instance 4_PE_GHGIntensityEnergySupply, RCP) have more ambitious values in terms of emission cuts. Here, LED is on SSP2 level. Where does LED stand?

stefanpauliuk commented 2 years ago

Hi @CarrerF, this dataset is based on a ecoinvent scenario run that is not documented. As from our conversation, we will proceed with the following steps:

Hertwich commented 2 years ago

Just a note of caution, the CED is an LCIA indicator that refers to how primary energy was extracted from nature. You do not know whether this was used a fuel, to produce electricity, or as a process input. I advise against using CED. I assume we have EcoInvent as a matrix? I would take the energy carrier inputs into the extensions (at least electricity). You can than do the LCA calculation (Leontief inverse - Multiplier) and thus get the electricity needed during the cradle-to-gate production of materials or a specific product.

stefanpauliuk commented 2 years ago

I agree @Hertwich , have prepared a proposal for building simple scenarios for material production GHG, see my email in a few minutes.

stefanpauliuk commented 1 year ago

Fixed during major update on how me model material production and energy supply.