Efforts to reach net zero are being undermined by a multitude of carbon accounting systems, research has found.
Research led by University of Bath academics shows that the multiple systems increase costs and prevent well-meaning companies from effectively counting their carbon emissions, while creating loopholes that can be exploited by others.
Systems that count carbon geographically, within industrial clusters, or on a consumption or product-focused basis were also found to be limited, by making possible the outsourcing of emissions from accounts, creating inaccuracies.
The paper also calls for and makes suggestions towards a unified approach, which would allow accounts to be interlinked, meaning new circular economy processes could be reported correctly.
'One plus one does not always equal two'
Professor Marcelle McManus, professor of energy and environmental engineering at the University of Bath and director of Bath’s Sustainable Energy Systems Research Centre, is one of the paper’s authors.
Prof McManus said: “We're in a climate emergency and having different methods for measuring greenhouse gases doesn't help. One plus one does not always equal two in carbon accounting – and that’s a huge issue if we are trying to measure our progress towards net zero.
“Industries want to a level playing field and a system that helps them to decarbonise, but these systems make it really tricky to do so.
“We need consistency and transparency to make it easy for those who want to reduce their carbon impact to engage and make the innovative changes required. We also need consistency to make sure that those who want to hide, can't.
“Our work identifies where these problems occur and highlights what is needed in a consistent framework approach.”
Several standards, including the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) protocol, ISO & BSI and Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi), are currently used in carbon accounting. The researchers say these varying approaches have their own methodologies, tools and variations in flexibility, which lead to inconsistency – especially as the complexities of the systems increase.
These inconsistencies in reporting and disclosure mean extra cost to companies, and ultimately an inability to compare products and systems, and their impact on climate change.
Challenges and seven future requirements
The team say that several critical issues that need to be addressed if effective approaches to carbon accounting are to be realised. These include:
- The complexity of global supply chains, and how parts of supply chains are accounted for consistently;
- The difference between product- and region-based accounting approaches;
- The added complication of measuring and attributing credits and burdens in a more circular economy, where once company’s waste is used by another.
Challenges within the current carbon accounting landscape also include a profusion of standards, methods and tools; multiple and non-interoperable data and data formats; overburdening administrative procedures and a lack of unified oversight.
Prof McManus added: “Any carbon accounting method and activity should prioritise global emission reduction and the creation of a just transition, rather than compensation to any one company or country.”
Seven principles
Seven key principles of a unified framework are detailed in the team’s research - central to these is the need for a system to be accurate, verifiable and transparent.
Other requirements include the equitable distribution of credits and burdens; the incorporation of global trade emissions; a capability to handle emissions and storage over time; consistent data requirements; accessibility to non-experts; and adaptability to meet future needs.
The research team comprised members from Bath’s Institute of Sustainability and Climate Change, the University of Birmingham’s Birmingham Energy Institute, and the University of Warwick. The research was funded by the UKRI Industrial Decarbonisation Research and Innovation Centre (IDRIC), grant number EP/V027050/1.
The researchers are working with a range of industrial partners, including Tata Steel, and bodies including the Energy Systems Catapult, through IDRIC to facilitate simpler carbon accounting and emissions reduction at scale.
The research paper, 'Towards a unified carbon accounting landscape', is published in the journal Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society A: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsta.2023.0260#d6948318e1 (DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2023.0260)