The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Is Cumulative Fossil Energy Demand a Useful Indicator for the Environmental Performance of Products?
Open accessAbstract
The appropriateness of the fossil Cumulative Energy Demand (CED) as an indicator for the environmental performance of products and processes is explored with a regression analysis between the environmental life-cycle impacts and fossil CEDs of 1218 products, divided into the product categories "energy production", "material production", "transport", and "waste treatment". Our results show that, for all product groups but waste treatment, the fossil CED correlates well with most impact categories, such as global warming, resource depletion, acidification, eutrophication, tropospheric ozone formation, ozone depletion, and human toxicity (explained variance between 46% and 100%). We conclude that the use of fossil fuels is an important driver of several environmental impacts and thereby indicative for many environmental problems. It maytherefore serve as a screening indicatorfor environmental performance. However, the usefulness of fossil CED as a stand-alone indicator for environmental impact is limited by the large uncertainty in the product-specific fossil CED-based impact scores (larger than a factor of 10 for the majority of the impact categories; 95% confidence interval). A major reason for this high uncertainty is nonfossil energy related emissions and land use, such as landfill leachates, radionuclide emissions, and land use in agriculture and forestry.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Recent developments in life cycle assessment
Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M. Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., Koehler, A., Pennington, D., & Suh, S. (2009) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.06.018 · Cited by 3,444
Self-citationWhat is a green solvent? A comprehensive framework for the environmental assessment of solvents
Capello, C., Fischer, U., & Hungerbühler, K. (2007) · Green Chemistry · doi:10.1039/b617536h · Cited by 1,917
Plastics derived from biological sources: present and future: a technical and environmental review
Chen, G.-Q., & Patel, M. K. (2012) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr200162d · Cited by 997
Material efficiency: A white paper
Allwood, J. M., Ashby, M. F., Gutowski, T. G., & Worrell, E. (2011) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.11.002 · Cited by 927
Measuring circular economy strategies through index methods: A critical analysis
Elia, V., Gnoni, M. G., & Tornese, F. (2017) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.196 · Cited by 892
Metadata
- Authors
- Huijbregts, M. A. J., Rombouts, L. J. A., Hellweg, S., Frischknecht, R., Hendriks, A. J., van de Meent, D., Ragas, A. M. J., Reijnders, L., & Struijs, J.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2005-12-27
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 641-648
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2171654189
- Cited by
- 451
- References
- 0
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is Cumulative Fossil Energy Demand a Useful Indicator for the Environmental Performance of Products? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es051689g
- The paper
- Huijbregts, M. A. J., Rombouts, L. J. A., Hellweg, S., Frischknecht, R., Hendriks, A. J., van de Meent, D., Ragas, A. M. J., Reijnders, L., & Struijs, J. (2006). Is Cumulative Fossil Energy Demand a Useful Indicator for the Environmental Performance of Products? Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es051689g
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
