by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Concrete In Australia : March 2013
50 Concrete in Australia Vol 39 No 1 footprints for construction products will not continue to increase significantly: Carbon footprinting will continue to be a popular and fashionable subject. However, with no unified methodology there is a substantial concern that not all information available to industry is trusted and the probability of coming up with an incorrect finding leading to an incorrect decision will be high. As noted above, ISO 14067 should present a unified methodology, but the take-up of ISO 14067 will take time and even if that standard is published there is a possibility that different parties within the industry may still report on greenhouse gas emissions using other forms of non-third party accredited means of reporting (such as Type II Environmental Labels). e ability of ISO 14067 to regulate factors affecting the carbon footprint of concrete products is yet to seen. So even with an ISO 14067 (or any other standard accreditation) users will still need to exercise care and understand the background of values quoted by different manufacturers and academics. e challenge is not restricted to standard based and non- standard based carbon footprints. Potential differences also exist between the coming ISO 15804, the European EN 15804 and the current UK PAS2050 in boundary rules, allocation and end- of-life scenario treatment. e industry may need more years to sort out the inherent differences in methods of reporting carbon dioxide emissions. However, by adhering to the main data quality characteristics (such as time coverage, space and technology coverage) users can eliminate a substantial amount of risk when dealing with carbon footprints. REFERENCES Alexander, S.; Skjelle, A.; Suikka, A.; Vamberski, J. (2003) Environmental Issues in Prefabrication; State-of-art report prepared by Task Group 3.1 (Ninth Draft), FIB; ISSN 1562- 3610, ISBN 2-88394-061-4 Bijen, J.M (2002) Environmental information on concrete. In Dhir R. K., Dyer, T.D and Halliday, J.E (eds): Proceedings of the International Congress on Challenges of Concrete Construction; Sustainable Concrete Construction, University of Dundee. 5-11 September, pp 57-67. Börjesson, P; Gostavsson, L (2000) Greenhouse Gas Balanaces in Building Construction: Wood versus Concrete, Life-Cycle and Forest Land-use Perspectives. Energy Policy 28(9): 575-588. BSI (2006) ISO 14044: Environmental Management -- Life Cycle Assessment -- Requirements and Guidelines. BSI, Chiswick, UK. BSI (2008) Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services -- PAS 2050. BSI, Chiswick, 2008. Carbon Clear Ltd (2010) Cradle-to-Gate Carbon Footprint Analysis for Concrete Pipeline, Manhole Ring and Cover Slab. Prepared for the Concrete Pipeline Systems Association (CPSA), December 2010. Carbon Trust (2007) Carbon Footprint Measurement Methodlogy, Version 1.1. e Carbon Trust, London, UK. 2007. Cited by Weidmann & Minx (2008). Elhag, H (2006) Business improvement through a structured approach to sustainability in the precast concrete flooring industry. Doctoral thesis. Loughborough University. Finkbeiner, M (2009) Editorial: Carbon Footprinting -- Opportunities and reats. Int J Life Cycle Assess (2009) 14:91-94. Hammond, G (2007) Time to give due weight to the carbon footprint issue. Nature 445 (7125): 256. Hammond, G; Jones, C (2011) Embodied Carbon: e Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE). BSRIA BG 10/2011. ISBN 978 0 86022 703 8. MPA (2009a) Embodied carbon dioxide (ECO2) of concrete mixes. Version 1.4. Mineral Products Association (MPA), Sustainable Concrete Website (www.sustainableconcrete. org.uk) MPA (2009b) Sheet P1 -- Embodied CO2 of UK cement, additions and cementitious material. MPA Parkes, C; Kershaw, H; Hart, J; Sibille, R; Grant, Z (2010) Evidence: Energy and carbon implications of rainwater harvesting and greywater recycling. Environment Agency. Report SC090018. Peters, G P (2010) Carbon footprints and embodied carbon at multiple scales. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. Volume 2, Issue 4. October 2010, Pages 245-250. Peters, G; Minx, J: Weber, C; Edenhofer, O (2011) Growth in emission transfers via international trade from 1990 to 2008. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 26 April, 2011, 109 (16) Specht, E; Lorenz, N (2010) Energy contents and CO2 emission in pipe production -- comparison of concrete with other materials. Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik (02) 2010. Pages 170-171. UKWIR (2008) Carbon Accounting in the UK Water Industry: Guidelines for Dealing with Embodied Carbon' and Whole life Carbon Accounting. Ref: 08/CL/01/6 ISBN 1 84057 495 X.UKWIR. London. Vares, S.; Hakkinen, T. (1998) Environmental Burden of concrete and concrete products. Technical paper from Technical Research Centre, Finland. VTT building Technology. Published by Nordic Concrete Research; Publication No.21. Weidmann, T.O; Minx, J (2008) A definition of "carbon footprint". In: C.C. Pertsova, Editor, Ecological Economics Research Trends, Nova Science, Hauppauge, NY (2008).