CEI:
Sound Resource ManagementOlympia, [email protected]
Environmental Summit – May 20, 2008
A Consumer Environmental Index for Washington State
Sound Resource Management Economist Team: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, SRMG - Team Manager Dr. H. Scott Matthews, Carnegie Mellon University Dr. Frank Ackerman, Tufts University Washington State Department of Ecology, CEI Project Steering Committee: Dennis Bowhay Chris Chapman Cristiana Figueroa-Kaminsky Ivor Melmore - Project Manager Gretchen Newman Cheryl Smith Ken Zarker
Acknowledgements
The Problem Life Cycle Analysis The CEI Solution CEI graphs Consumer Pollution Intensity in 2005 A Few CEI Details CEI limitations and Data Gaps CEI Robustness
Presentation Outline
Economics – The Good, The Bad & The Ugly
1) Efficiency & Equilibrium – the magic of competitive markets (Adam Smith’s invisible hand creates optimality).
2) Externalities – pollution from free disposal (If it doesn’t have a price or cost the market ignores it).
3) Equity – dollar votes drive markets (Those without dollars don’t get to vote; those with more dollars get more votes).
The CEI Solution
An index like the CPI - except covers all consumer purchases, not just unchanging basket, and measures changes over time in environmental impacts, rather than prices.
Tracks the environmental impact of consumer choices on (1) climate change, (2) public health, and (3) ecosystems health.
Should decline when there are decreases in toxic substances, wastes and/or pollution associated with production, use, and disposal of the goods and services consumers demand.
1. US BLS 700 category CES2. US BEA 491 sector EIO3. US EPA TRI, AIRData & GHG Emissions 4. US DOE Transportation Energy Data Book 5. Carnegie Mellon EIO-LCA model6. WA Dept of Ecology air emissions data7. Process LCAs for paint, used oil, &
pesticides8. US EPA WARM & MSW DST models
Data Sources
Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)
Raw Materials Acquisition
Materials Manufacture
Product Manufacture
Product Use or Consumption
Final Disposition – Landfill,
Combustion, Recycle or
Reuse
Energy Energy EnergyEnergyEnergy
Wastes & Pollution
Wastes & Pollution
Wastes & Pollution
Wastes & Pollution
Reuse
Product Recycling
One or limited number of return cycles into product that is then disposed – open-loop recycling. Repeated recycling into same or similar product, keeping material from disposal – closed-loop recycling.
Raw Materials Acquisition
Materials Manufacture
Product Manufacture
Product Use or Consumption
Final Disposition – Landfill,
Combustion, Recycle or
Reuse
Energy Energy EnergyEnergyEnergy
Wastes & Pollution
Wastes & Pollution
Wastes & Pollution
Wastes & Pollution
Reuse
Product Recycling
One or limited number of return cycles into product that is then disposed – open-loop recycling. Repeated recycling into same or similar product, keeping material from disposal – closed-loop recycling.
Wastes & Pollution
1. Global warming (eCO2)2. Human health – particulates, SOx and NOx
(ePM2.5)3. Human health – toxins (eToluene) 4. Human health – carcinogens (eBenzene) 5. Ecosystem toxicity (e2,4-D)6. Others – acidification, eutrophication,
ozone depletion, smog formation, resource/fossil fuel depletion, land use, water use, biodiversity, habitat alteration, indoor air quality
LCA Environmental Impacts
Consumer Climate Change Index (2000 = 100)
859095
100105110115120125130135140145
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Aggregate
Per Person
Per $ Spent
Consumer Particulates Emissions Index (2000 = 100)
859095
100105110115120125130135140145
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Aggregate
Per Person
Per $ Spent
Consumer Human Toxins Index (2000 = 100)
859095
100105110115120125130135140145
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Aggregate
Per Person
Per $ Spent
Consumer Human Carcinogens Index (2000 = 100)
859095
100105110115120125130135140145
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Aggregate
Per Person
Per $ Spent
Consumer Ecosystems Toxicity Index (2000 = 100)
859095
100105110115120125130135140145
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Aggregate
Per Person
Per $ Spent
Consumer Environmental Index (2000 = 100)
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Aggregate
Per Person
Per $ Spent
%Tot$ Kg/$ %Kg Kg %Kg Kg %Kg Kg %Kg Kg %Kg
Home Heat/Cool 5.5% 5.13 30.7% 9.2E-03 46.2% 1.62 8.2% 4.2E-03 26.0% 1.7E-02 9.3%Transportation 17.7 1.63 31.5 9.2E-04 15.0 1.33 21.8 1.9E-03 37.0 2.2E-02 38.5Food 11.6 1.07 13.5 1.3E-03 14.0 1.09 11.8 4.7E-04 6.2 6.9E-03 8.0Home Furn/Sup 11.1 0.52 6.3 5.9E-04 6.1 1.50 15.4 6.9E-04 8.6 1.2E-02 13.9Shelter 19.0 0.35 7.3 4.2E-04 7.3 1.23 21.6 4.8E-04 10.2 6.2E-03 11.8Clothing 4.0 0.56 2.4 7.9E-04 2.9 1.18 4.3 6.7E-04 3.0 1.5E-02 6.0Tobacco 0.3 0.37 0.1 2.3E-03 0.6 1.04 0.3 4.2E-04 0.1 5.0E-03 0.1 Average 0.91 1.1E-03 1.08 8.9E-04 1.0E-02
Total Mg/Person 18.57 0.02 21.92 0.02 0.20
Carcinogens EcoToxicityClimate Particulates Toxins
2005 Pollution Intensity WA Consumer Spending
Implementation of US Department of Commerce published IO tables• Current benchmark: 1997 (2002 soon)
Long-term project: 10 years in making• Free, online at www.eiolca.net
Widely used for LCA research in the US• More than 100 peer-reviewed papers on
development and application• More than 1 million uses of the model
EIO – LCA Model
TRI limitations - e.g., agriculture Impacts not covered – e.g., habitat and
ecosystem services degradations Use phase coverage not complete – e.g.,
household cleaning/laundering products and pharmaceuticals
New home construction not included Differential impacts of domestic vs. foreign
production
Important Issues for Project Team & Peer Reviewers
Weber and Matthews study – US produced 22% of eCO2 in 2005, but US consumption accounted for 25-26%, about 15% more than production.
This could mean that CEI model climate change upstream impacts should be 15% higher.
If 15% higher in all years 2000-2005, then CEI climate change component only up from 118.1 to 118.4, and overall CEI up from 126.2 to 126.4.
Imports as Example of CEI Robustness
Top Related