Journal cover Journal topic
Biogeosciences An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

IF value: 3.480
IF 5-year value: 4.194
IF 5-year
CiteScore value: 6.7
SNIP value: 1.143
IPP value: 3.65
SJR value: 1.761
Scimago H <br class='widget-line-break'>index value: 118
Scimago H
h5-index value: 60
Volume 9, issue 8
Biogeosciences, 9, 3247–3276, 2012
© Author(s) 2012. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Special issue: REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes (RECCAP)

Biogeosciences, 9, 3247–3276, 2012
© Author(s) 2012. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 23 Aug 2012

Research article | 23 Aug 2012

A synthesis of carbon in international trade

G. P. Peters1, S. J. Davis2,3, and R. Andrew1 G. P. Peters et al.
  • 1Center for International and Environmental Research Oslo – CICERO, PB 1129 Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway
  • 2Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
  • 3Department of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA

Abstract. In a globalised world, the transfer of carbon between regions, either physically or embodied in production, represents a substantial fraction of global carbon emissions. The resulting emission transfers are important for balancing regional carbon budgets and for understanding the drivers of emissions. In this paper we synthesise current understanding in two parts: (1) CO2 emissions embodied in goods and services that are produced in one country but consumed in others, and (2) carbon physically present in fossil fuels, petroleum-derived products, harvested wood products, crops, and livestock products. We describe the key differences between studies and provide a consistent set of estimates using the same definitions, modelling framework, and consistent data. We find the largest trade flows of carbon in international trade in 2004 were fossil fuels (2673 MtC, 37 % of global emissions), CO2 embodied in traded goods and services (1661 MtC, 22 % of global emissions), crops (522 MtC, 31 % of total harvested crop carbon), petroleum-based products (183 MtC, 50 % of their total production), harvested wood products (149 MtC, 40 % of total roundwood extraction), and livestock products (28 MtC, 22 % of total livestock carbon). We find that for embodied CO2 emissions, estimates from independent studies are robust, and that differences between individual studies are not a reflection of the uncertainty in consumption-based estimates, but rather these differences result from the use of different production-based emissions input data and different definitions for allocating emissions to international trade. After adjusting for these issues, results across independent studies converge to give less uncertainty than previously assumed. For physical carbon flows there are relatively few studies to be synthesised, but differences between existing studies are due to the method of allocating to international trade, with some studies using "apparent consumption" as opposed to "final consumption". While results across studies are sufficiently robust to be used in further applications, more research is needed to understand differences and to harmonise definitions for particular applications.

Please read the corrigendum first before accessing the article.
Publications Copernicus
Notice on corrigendum

The requested paper has a corresponding corrigendum published. Please read the corrigendum first before downloading the article.

Final-revised paper