IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v36y2008i4p1569-1573.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disagreement over carbon footprints: A comparison of electric and LPG forklifts

Author

Listed:
  • Johnson, Eric

Abstract

Carbon footprint is an increasingly popular concept: for labelling, marketing, finance and regulation. In individual cases, carbon footprints can also be contentious, for example in the case of LPG and electric forklifts. Therefore, the fuel carbon footprints of the two were investigated to see if a fair, robust comparison could be made. This investigation yielded two conclusions: (1) definitions will continue to complicate footprint comparisons and (2) fuel carbon footprints of electric and (liquefied petroleum gas) LPG forklifts are, in principle, about equal, while in actual practice, LPG's footprint is smaller than that of electricity. The paper concludes that carbon footprint definitions should be sensible and transparent, but not prescribed.

Suggested Citation

  • Johnson, Eric, 2008. "Disagreement over carbon footprints: A comparison of electric and LPG forklifts," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1569-1573, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:36:y:2008:i:4:p:1569-1573
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(08)00017-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shapouri, Hosein & Duffield, James A. & Wang, Michael Q., 2002. "The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update," Agricultural Economic Reports 34075, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yang, Qing & Han, Fei & Chen, Yingquan & Yang, Haiping & Chen, Hanping, 2016. "Greenhouse gas emissions of a biomass-based pyrolysis plant in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1580-1590.
    2. Moataz Elshimy & Khadiga M. El-Aasar, 2020. "Carbon footprint, renewable energy, non-renewable energy, and livestock: testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for the Arab world," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6985-7012, October.
    3. Liu, Tiantian & Wang, Qunwei & Su, Bin, 2016. "A review of carbon labeling: Standards, implementation, and impact," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 68-79.
    4. Kasper Górny & Natalia Idaszewska & Zuzanna Sydow & Krzysztof Bieńczak, 2021. "Modelling the Carbon Footprint of Various Fruit and Vegetable Products Based on a Company’s Internal Transport Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-15, July.
    5. Proietti, Stefania & Sdringola, Paolo & Desideri, Umberto & Zepparelli, Francesco & Brunori, Antonio & Ilarioni, Luana & Nasini, Luigi & Regni, Luca & Proietti, Primo, 2014. "Carbon footprint of an olive tree grove," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 115-124.
    6. Ene, Seval & Küçükoğlu, İlker & Aksoy, Aslı & Öztürk, Nursel, 2016. "A genetic algorithm for minimizing energy consumption in warehouses," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 973-980.
    7. Dadhich, P. & Genovese, A. & Kumar, N. & Acquaye, A., 2015. "Developing sustainable supply chains in the UK construction industry: A case study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 271-284.
    8. Liang, Yuhan & Su, Jing & Xi, Beidou & Yu, Yajuan & Ji, Danfeng & Sun, Yuanyuan & Cui, Chifei & Zhu, Jianchao, 2017. "Life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for greenhouse gas emissions," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 117(PB), pages 285-293.
    9. Proietti, Stefania & Desideri, Umberto & Sdringola, Paolo & Zepparelli, Francesco, 2013. "Carbon footprint of a reflective foil and comparison with other solutions for thermal insulation in building envelope," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 843-855.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Šantek, Božidar & Gwehenberger, Gernot & Šantek, Mirela Ivančić & Narodoslawsky, Michael & Horvat, Predrag, 2010. "Evaluation of energy demand and the sustainability of different bioethanol production processes from sugar beet," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(11), pages 872-877.
    2. Beghin, John C. & Jensen, Helen H., 2008. "Farm policies and added sugars in US diets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 480-488, December.
    3. Burnes, Ellen & Wichelns, Dennis & Hagen, John W., 2005. "Economic and policy implications of public support for ethanol production in California's San Joaquin Valley," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1155-1167, June.
    4. Ryan, Lisa & Convery, Frank & Ferreira, Susana, 2006. "Stimulating the use of biofuels in the European Union: Implications for climate change policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3184-3194, November.
    5. Abbe Hamilton & Stephen B. Balogh & Adrienna Maxwell & Charles A. S. Hall, 2013. "Efficiency of Edible Agriculture in Canada and the U.S. Over the Past Three and Four Decades," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-30, March.
    6. Castoldi, Nicola & Bechini, Luca & Ferrante, Antonio, 2011. "Fossil energy usage for the production of baby leaves," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 86-93.
    7. Milazzo, M.F. & Spina, F. & Primerano, P. & Bart, J.C.J., 2013. "Soy biodiesel pathways: Global prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 579-624.
    8. Hermann, Weston A., 2006. "Quantifying global exergy resources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 1685-1702.
    9. Eaves, James & Eaves, Stephen, 2007. "Renewable corn-ethanol and energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5958-5963, November.
    10. Raush, Kent D. & Belyea, Ronald L. & Singh, Vijay & Tumbleson, M.E., 2007. "Corn Processing Coproducts from Ethanol Production," Biofuels, Food and Feed Tradeoffs Conference, April 12-13, 2007, St, Louis, Missouri 313708, Farm Foundation.
    11. Rausch, Kent D. & Belyea, Ronald L. & Singh, Vijay & Tumbleson, M.E., 2007. "Corn processing coproducts from ethanol production," Biofuels, Food and Feed Tradeoffs Conference, April 12-13, 2007, St, Louis, Missouri 48775, Farm Foundation.
    12. Meryemoğlu, Bahar & Hasanoğlu, Arif & Kaya, Burçak & Irmak, Sibel & Erbatur, Oktay, 2014. "Hydrogen production from aqueous-phase reforming of sorghum biomass: An application of the response surface methodology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 535-541.
    13. Sergio Madrid, 2005. "Discussion," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 401-415, September.
    14. Yang, Q. & Chen, G.Q., 2013. "Greenhouse gas emissions of corn–ethanol production in China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 176-184.
    15. Liu, Huacai & Huang, Yanqin & Yuan, Hongyou & Yin, Xiuli & Wu, Chuangzhi, 2018. "Life cycle assessment of biofuels in China: Status and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 301-322.
    16. Collotta, M. & Champagne, P. & Tomasoni, G. & Alberti, M. & Busi, L. & Mabee, W., 2019. "Critical indicators of sustainability for biofuels: An analysis through a life cycle sustainabilty assessment perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    17. R. Lal, 2007. "Carbon Management in Agricultural Soils," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 303-322, February.
    18. Kirby, Natasha & Davison, Matt, 2010. "Using a spark-spread valuation to investigate the impact of corn-gasoline correlation on ethanol plant valuation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1221-1227, November.
    19. Liu, Jin & Wu, Jianguo & Liu, Fengqiao & Han, Xingguo, 2012. "Quantitative assessment of bioenergy from crop stalk resources in Inner Mongolia, China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 305-318.
    20. Cherubini, Francesco & Strømman, Anders Hammer & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2011. "Influence of allocation methods on the environmental performance of biorefinery products—A case study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(11), pages 1070-1077.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:36:y:2008:i:4:p:1569-1573. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.