Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Peer-reviewed

Are single global warming potential impact assessments adequate for carbon footprints of agri-food systems?

Graham A. McAuliffe; John Lynch; Michelle Cain; Sarah Buckingham; Robert M. Rees; Adrian L. Collins; Myles Allen; Raymond T. Pierrehumbert; Michael R. F. Lee; Taro Takahashi

Environmental Research Letters · 2023

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

The vast majority of agri-food climate-based sustainability analyses use global warming potential (GWP<sub>100</sub>) as an impact assessment, usually in isolation; however, in recent years, discussions have criticised the 'across-the-board' application of GWP<sub>100</sub> in Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs), particularly of food systems which generate large amounts of methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) and considered whether reporting additional and/or alternative metrics may be more applicable to certain circumstances or research questions (e.g. Global Temperature Change Potential (GTP)). This paper reports a largescale sensitivity analysis using a pasture-based beef production system (a high producer of CH<sub>4</sub> emissions) as an exemplar to compare various climatatic impact assessments: CO<su

Source type
Peer-reviewed study
DOI
10.1088/1748-9326/ace204
Catalogue ID
NRmo9rin9c-0wm
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.