0 votes

I wrote a comment here but I think this deserves its own thread. 

I noticed that while the 'EF Method (adapted)' (b0f6a3ba-a0be-3bfe-ae43-4e23c241e4b6) has normalisation factors corresponding to the per person values provided in the EF 3.0 method package (specifically the ones listed in the 'PEFCR_guidance_v6.3.pdf' document in chapter 'ANNEX B.1 – List of EF normalisation and weighting factors'), the values in 

  • 'EF 3.0 Method' (86178ce0-93bf-4555-9818-800a7b07b0c9) and 
  • 'EF 3.0 Method (adapted)' (b4571628-4b7b-3e4f-81b1-9a8cca6cb3f8)

differ. (e.g. climate change ~8097 vs. ~7757.9). 

why is that? 

kind regards, Matthias

in openLCA by (280 points)
edited by

1 Answer

0 votes
by (5.1k points)
selected by
Best answer
The PEFCR Guidance v6.3 came out in 2018, before the EF 3.0 reference was released in 2019. Therefore, the normalization values in the guidance are the ones from the EF 2.0 reference. The normalization values in the corresponding openLCA methods "EF 2.0 Method (adapted)" and "EF 3.0 Method (adapted)" are the same as for the official reference data of EF 2.0 and EF 3.0.

Original EF 3.0 reference from JRC: 8096 kg CO2eq/person

Original EF 2.0 reference from JRC: 7758 kg CO2eq/person
by (5.1k points)
edited by
No, there is no reason for that, and yes, for consistency reasons you can insert the value from your download of the spreadsheet. Maybe there was a difference in a different spreadsheet for the method 5 years ago, I don't know. The difference is 0.02%.

You could also round both values to 8100 and then they will be equal. Of course the values should be used consistent, but 4 significant digits or more might be overrated. It's a simple ratio of world emission estimates and world population from old official data. Also in the new EF 3.1 the official normalization values slightly changed compared to 3.0, because some characterization factors changed, but world population and total emissions are still based on the year 2010 data as far as I know.