Methodology for PCF Calculations of Lubricants, Greases and other Specialties
• At least 95% of all mass inputs (cumulatively) shall be included (>98% recommended).
• At least 95% of all energy inputs (cumulatively) shall be included (>98% recommended).
• Not more than 5% of the total PCF shall fall under cut-off criteria.
• When the impact of inputs on the total PCF is unclear, use estimated figures in a calculation to determine if a cut-off can be applied using an iterative approach.
• Materials that would normally fall under cut-off criteria due to their low mass or energy contribution (cf. Section 3.2) must still be considered if their impact on the overall PCF exceeds 5%. For example, catalysts containing precious metals like platinum typically have a high specific carbon footprint and therefore would not be excluded under these criteria
Where data is available these should be included even if a flow’s contribution to the carbon footprint of a product is not relevant as per the above thresholds. Consider expert guesses, the global warming potentials of elementary flows and the studied region of the PCF calculation to quantify the relevance of an elementary flow.
Allocation
When evaluating the carbon footprint of products, the common issue of multifunctionality is encountered. Multifunctionality occurs when a process provides multiple functions. Multiple functions can be the production of multiple products, the treatment of multiple wastes, or the joint treatment of waste and subsequent production of a valuable product. This also includes separately produced products from a joint measurement of the utility consumption that cannot be traced back to the single production processes. To calculate product-specific carbon footprints for products from multifunctional processes, all inputs and outputs, such as raw material demands and exchanges, shall be allocated between the processes’ functions.
Several methodological approaches exist for solving multifunctionality problems: subdivision, system expansion and allocation via physical or other underlying relationships. The selection of a specific allocation method can significantly influence the PCF. Thus, the ISO standards 14040/44/67 established a hierarchy among the different allocation methods to align the selection of allocation methods. Figure 4 displays a decision tree that demonstrates the allocation hierarchy. The allocation hierarchy consists of four levels arranged in the order of preference: subdivision, system expansion, allocation via physical relationship and allocation via other criteria:
Version 1.2, 15.10.2025 © ATIEL and UEIL
Page 21 of 40 This document is a controlled document only in electronic form. Printed versions or copies are not subject to change service
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40
