This document discusses different approaches to greenhouse gas emission inventories, including production-based, activity-based, consumption-based, and lifecycle approaches. It provides examples of comparing jurisdictions' emissions calculated using production versus consumption-based methods. While consumption-based accounting provides useful information, it is not consistent with state targets and thresholds. The document recommends including consumption-based emissions in local climate action plans and CEQA reviews for disclosure purposes only until methods and data are further developed. It concludes by outlining conditions under which consumption-based accounting could be more formally incorporated into CEQA reviews.

1. CaliforniaAEPAnnualConference
March26,2018
Rich Walter, Senior Fellow, ICF International
on behalf of AEP Climate Change Committee
Consumption and Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas
Inventories: Implications for Climate Action Plans
and CEQA

2. Problem Statement
 What is the proper role of consumption-
based emission inventories and lifecycle
analysis in CEQA review of greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions and in local Climate
Action Plans in California?

3. GHG Inventory Approaches
 Production-Based
Accounting
 Includes emissions produced
within the subject jurisdiction.
 Most common approach for
nations and states; previously
used for communities.
Image: Reuters (Smokestack) and ruigsantos/iStock/Thinkstock (tailpipe)

4. GHG Inventory Approaches
 Activity-Based Accounting
 Emissions related to land use
activity in a jurisdiction even if
the emissions occur outside the
jurisdiction.
 Limited to most immediate
direct/indirect emissions; does
not include more remote
upstream and downstream
emissions.
Image: Rao, George, Shandas and Rosenstiel, 2017

5. GHG Inventory Approaches
 Consumption-Based
Accounting
 Includes lifecycle GHG
emissions of consumed
goods and services in
jurisdiction.
 Usually focused on
residential and government
consumption only.
Image: thinglink

6. Image: USDN Sustainable Consumption Toolkit

7. GHG Inventory Approaches
 Lifecycle Accounting
 Lifecycle analysis include all
upstream, use, and
downstream emissions
associated with a product.
 Commonly used by
corporations; not applied at
community scale.
Image: USDN Sustainable Consumption Toolkit

8. OVERLAP
Emissions associated
with
residential/institutional
consumption:
Electricity generation
emissions
Natural gas combustion
and other fuel use
Transportation fuel
combustion
Upstream and
downstream water
transport//treatment
emissions
Disposal emissions of
waste generated
CONSUMPTION-BASED
EMISSIONS INVENTORY
ONLY
Emissions associated
with
residential/institutional
consumption:
Fuel production and
transportation emissions
for electricity consumed
Fuel production and
transportation emissions
for natural gas/fuel use
Fuel production and
transportation emissions
for transportation fuel use
Water infrastructure
construction emissions
Embedded emissions in
consumed goods and
services
ACTIVITY-BASED
EMISSIONS INVENTORY
ONLY
Commercial and industrial
activity emissions
Electricity generation
emissions
Natural gas combustion
and other fuel use
Transportation fuel
combustion
Upstream and
downstream water
transport./treatment
emissions
Disposal emissions of
waste generated
Land use change
emissions

9. Example: Transportation
Production:
Only emissions in
jurisdiction
Consumption:
Lifecycle emissions for
residential +
government fuel use
Activity-Based:
Fuel Use Emissions
related to Land uses
Lifecycle:
All upstream and use
emissions
Upstream Emissions
Use
Emissions

10. Comparing Results: International
Nation Year
Production Consumption
Consumption/
Production
Production
per capita
Consumption
per capita
MMT C02e MMT C02e %
MTCO2e/
person
MTCO2e/
person
United
States 2004 5,800 6,500 112% 19.7 22.0
China 2004 5,100 3,950 77% 3.9 3.0
India 2004 1,360 1,260 93% 1.3 1.2
United
Kingdom 2004 555 808 146% 9.3 13.6

11. International flows of emissions embodied in trade (MT CO2/year)
(Peters et al. 2011).

12. Comparing Results: State/Community
Jurisdiction Year
Community Consumption
Cons./
Com
Community
per capita
Consumption
per capita
MMT C02e MMT C02e %
MTCO2e/
person
MTCO2e/
person
Denver 2005 11.1 14.6 132% 19.2 25.2
San
Francisco 2008 5.9 21.7 370% 7.3 26.9
King 2008 23.4 55.0 235% 12.4 29.3
Oregon 2010 62.8 74.7 119% 16.4 19.5
Portland 2011 7.9 15.8 200% 10.6 21.2
Oakland 2013 2.7 7.6 278% 6.7 18.6
BAAQMD 2013 88.2 115.2 131% 12.4 16.2
NOTE: Methodologies used for community and consumption inventories differ and thus may not
be strictly comparable. See AEP White paper for sources and discussion.

13. Implications for Climate Action
Plans
 Consumption-based accounting is a complement to, but not a
replacement of, Activity-based or Production-based accounting.
 Consumption-based methodologies do not have “rough”
consensus yet and data is incomplete or general in nature.
 Consumption-based inventories cannot be compared to state
inventory or state reduction targets.
 Recommendations:
 Consumption-based accounting provides useful information for the
upstream emissions consequences of local consumption for
consideration by residents, businesses, and institutions.
 Include in local CAPs as informational item at discretion of lead
agency.

14. Implications for CEQA
 Consumption-Based Accounting not consistent with State
inventory and Thresholds based on State target
 Embodied emissions often remote and are rarely under the
control of project proponents or CEQA lead agencies.
 Consensus does not exist for methodologies to estimate
project-level consumption emissions.
 Publically available data sparse to estimate project-level
consumption emissions.
 Recommendation: Voluntary inclusion of consumption-
based element at discretion of CEQA lead agency for
disclosure purposes only….for now.

15. When would it work for CEQA?
 California completes statewide consumption inventory and
forecasts.
 California legislature adopts a GHG reduction target based
on a statewide consumption inventory.
 California adopts a plan (like the 2030 Scoping Plan) for the
reduction of consumption-based GHG emissions.
 Reasonable consensus on methods and sufficient
reasonably-available public data.
 Suitable consumption-based CEQA project consumption
thresholds.

16. Thanks…and Contact Information
 Rich Walter, ICF
 Rich.Walter@icf.com
 Tel: 510-290-1860
Link to AEP Climate Change
Committee White Papers:
https://www.califaep.org/climate-change