IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i9p2712-d230725.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposed Consecutive Uncertainty Analysis Procedure of the Greenhouse Gas Emission Model Output for Products

Author

Listed:
  • Yoo-Sung Park

    (H.I.Pathway CO., LTD, Seoul 08591, Korea)

  • Sung-Mo Yeon

    (H.I.Pathway CO., LTD, Seoul 08591, Korea)

  • Geun-Young Lee

    (H.I.Pathway CO., LTD, Seoul 08591, Korea)

  • Kyu-Hyun Park

    (Department of Animal Resource Science, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 24341, Korea)

Abstract

The study objective was to develop a method for an uncertainty analysis of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission model output based on consecutive use of an analytical and a stochastic approach. The contribution to variance (CTV) analysis followed by the data quality analysis are the main feature of the procedure. When a set of data points of a certain input variable has a high CTV, but its data quality indicator (DQI) is good, then there is no need to iterate data collection of this input variable. This is because the DQI of this data set indicates that there is no room for the reduction of its variance, and the high variance must be its inherent attribute. Through the CTV analysis and data quality analysis, the identified input variables were selected as the input variables for the data from the iteration of data collection. The statistical parameters of the GHG emissions of the model were calculated using the Monte Carlo simulation (MCS). In the case study of a cattle dairy farm, the relative reduction in the CV value was 47.6%. In this study, a procedure was developed for the selection of the input variables for iteration of data collection to reduce their variance and subsequently reduce the uncertainty in the model output. The dairy cow case study showed that the uncertainty in the model output was decreased by the iteration of data collection, indicating that CTV analysis can be used to identify the input variables, contributing considerably to the uncertainty in the model output.

Suggested Citation

  • Yoo-Sung Park & Sung-Mo Yeon & Geun-Young Lee & Kyu-Hyun Park, 2019. "Proposed Consecutive Uncertainty Analysis Procedure of the Greenhouse Gas Emission Model Output for Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:9:p:2712-:d:230725
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/9/2712/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/9/2712/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric D. Williams & Christopher L. Weber & Troy R. Hawkins, 2009. "Hybrid Framework for Managing Uncertainty in Life Cycle Inventories," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 13(6), pages 928-944, December.
    2. Min Hyeok LEE & Jong Seok LEE & Joo Young LEE & Yoon Ha KIM & Yoo Sung PARK & Kun Mo LEE, 2017. "Uncertainty Analysis of a GHG Emission Model Output Using the Block Bootstrap and Monte Carlo Simulation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-12, August.
    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. Kun Mo Lee & Min Hyeok Lee & Jong Seok Lee & Joo Young Lee, 2020. "Uncertainty Analysis of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Simulated by the Parametric Monte Carlo Simulation and Nonparametric Bootstrap Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Kun Mo LEE & Min Hyeok LEE, 2021. "Uncertainty of the Electricity Emission Factor Incorporating the Uncertainty of the Fuel Emission Factors," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-14, September.

    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. Kumar, Indraneel & Tyner, Wallace E. & Sinha, Kumares C., 2016. "Input–output life cycle environmental assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from utility scale wind energy in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 294-301.
    2. Wu, X.D. & Guo, J.L. & Chen, G.Q., 2018. "The striking amount of carbon emissions by the construction stage of coal-fired power generation system in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 358-369.
    3. Akito Ozawa & Mai Inoue & Naomi Kitagawa & Ryoji Muramatsu & Yurie Anzai & Yutaka Genchi & Yuki Kudoh, 2017. "Assessing Uncertainties of Well-To-Tank Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Hydrogen Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-26, June.
    4. Wang, Changbo & Chang, Yuan & Zhang, Lixiao & Chen, Yongsheng & Pang, Mingyue, 2018. "Quantifying uncertainties in greenhouse gas accounting of biomass power generation in China: System boundary and parameters," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 121-127.
    5. Soimakallio, Sampo & Kiviluoma, Juha & Saikku, Laura, 2011. "The complexity and challenges of determining GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions from grid electricity consumption and conservation in LCA (life cycle assessment) – A methodological review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 6705-6713.
    6. Zhengping Liu & Wang Zhang & Hongxian Liu & Guohe Huang & Jiliang Zhen & Xin Qi, 2019. "Characterization of Renewable Energy Utilization Mode for Air-Environmental Quality Improvement through an Inexact Factorial Optimization Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    7. Tian, Jing & Andraded, Celio & Lumbreras, Julio & Guan, Dabo & Wang, Fangzhi & Liao, Hua, 2018. "Integrating Sustainability Into City-level CO2 Accounting: Social Consumption Pattern and Income Distribution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1-16.
    8. Kimberly Bawden & Eric Williams, 2015. "Hybrid Life Cycle Assessment of Low, Mid and High-Rise Multi-Family Dwellings," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-19, April.
    9. Kun Mo Lee & Min Hyeok Lee & Jong Seok Lee & Joo Young Lee, 2020. "Uncertainty Analysis of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Simulated by the Parametric Monte Carlo Simulation and Nonparametric Bootstrap Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-15, September.
    10. Mathieu Saurat & Michael Ritthoff, 2013. "Calculating MIPS 2.0," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-27, October.
    11. Kun Mo LEE & Min Hyeok LEE, 2021. "Uncertainty of the Electricity Emission Factor Incorporating the Uncertainty of the Fuel Emission Factors," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-14, September.
    12. J.F. Luna-Tintos & Carlos Cobreros & Álvaro López-Escamilla & Rafael Herrera-Limones & Miguel Torres-García, 2020. "Methodology to Evaluate the Embodied Primary Energy and CO 2 Production at Each Stage of the Life Cycle of Prefabricated Structural Systems: The Case of the Solar Decathlon Competition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-15, August.
    13. Meylan, Grégoire & Ami, Helen & Spoerri, Andy, 2014. "Transitions of municipal solid waste management. Part II: Hybrid life cycle assessment of Swiss glass-packaging disposal," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 16-27.
    14. Eric Williams & Vivekananda Das & Andrew Fisher, 2020. "Assessing the Sustainability Implications of Autonomous Vehicles: Recommendations for Research Community Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-13, March.
    15. Kocoloski, Matt & Mullins, Kimberley A. & Venkatesh, Aranya & Michael Griffin, W., 2013. "Addressing uncertainty in life-cycle carbon intensity in a national low-carbon fuel standard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 41-50.
    16. Ling-Chin, J. & Heidrich, O. & Roskilly, A.P., 2016. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) – from analysing methodology development to introducing an LCA framework for marine photovoltaic (PV) systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 352-378.
    17. Bianca Köck & Anton Friedl & Sebastián Serna Loaiza & Walter Wukovits & Bettina Mihalyi-Schneider, 2023. "Automation of Life Cycle Assessment—A Critical Review of Developments in the Field of Life Cycle Inventory Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-40, March.
    18. Jacqueline A. Isaacs & Carol Lynn Alpert & Matthew Bates & Christopher J. Bosso & Matthew J. Eckelman & Igor Linkov & William C. Walker, 2015. "Engaging stakeholders in nano-EHS risk governance," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 24-28, March.
    19. Marco Ugolini & Lucia Recchia & Heather E. Wray & Jan Wilco Dijkstra & Pavlina Nanou, 2024. "Environmental Assessment of Hydrothermal Treatment of Wet Bio-Residues from Forest-Based and Agro-Industries into Intermediate Bioenergy Carriers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-28, January.
    20. Man Yu & Thomas Wiedmann, 2018. "Implementing hybrid LCA routines in an input–output virtual laboratory," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 7(1), pages 1-24, December.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:9:p:2712-:d:230725. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.