Topics

Base nomenclature - theory into practice

 

Dear all-

PSI and LIST are part of a consortium of research groups trying to
make prospective LCA better. To accomplish this, we have decided to
create a standard implementation merging LCI databases with scenarios
from energy system models or integrated assessment models. The
software would be in Python and based on
https://github.com/IndEcol/wurst.

As our aim is to support multiple systems, we need a reference base
nomenclature for products and activities. As far as I can tell, we
have invested a lot in building up various correspondence tables, but
do not have a lot of development on a base nomenclature with
scientific justification. (On the other hand, I think we have made a
lot of progress in how to describe any such system.) I assume that
such a system will start with a standard classification (e.g. GS1,
NACE, etc.), and then use industry-specific classifications when more
detail is needed (e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_steel_grades). One important
exception here is electricity, where I don't find a standard system
that captures the level of detail we need (e.g. utility versus
roof-top solar).

As Tomas N. and I are responsible for the technical foundation of this
consortium, we have the chance to build it BONSAI-compatible from the
beginning - but we need to make decisions soon on this critical issue.
Any input from the list would be greatly appreciated.

-Chris

Bo Weidema
 

Hi Chris,

Would be happy to help, but what is your question? In BONSAI parlance, I think the "base classification" is the one that at any point in time is most detailed.

Bo

Den 28.11.2019 kl. 10.25 skrev Chris Mutel:

Dear all-

PSI and LIST are part of a consortium of research groups trying to
make prospective LCA better. To accomplish this, we have decided to
create a standard implementation merging LCI databases with scenarios
from energy system models or integrated assessment models. The
software would be in Python and based on
https://github.com/IndEcol/wurst.

As our aim is to support multiple systems, we need a reference base
nomenclature for products and activities. As far as I can tell, we
have invested a lot in building up various correspondence tables, but
do not have a lot of development on a base nomenclature with
scientific justification. (On the other hand, I think we have made a
lot of progress in how to describe any such system.) I assume that
such a system will start with a standard classification (e.g. GS1,
NACE, etc.), and then use industry-specific classifications when more
detail is needed (e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_steel_grades). One important
exception here is electricity, where I don't find a standard system
that captures the level of detail we need (e.g. utility versus
roof-top solar).

As Tomas N. and I are responsible for the technical foundation of this
consortium, we have the chance to build it BONSAI-compatible from the
beginning - but we need to make decisions soon on this critical issue.
Any input from the list would be greatly appreciated.

-Chris



--

miguel.astudillo@...
 

Hi

Having a look to the state of the wiki of the openenergyplatform, it does not seem that the ontology has advanced much. https://github.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/ontology/wiki but it would be worth double-checking with Ludwig Hulk and or Martin Glauer, I think both involved in the development of an ontology to represent energy scenarios. I'd contact also Daniel Huppmann (IIASA), to see how are they planning to get around this issue in the openentrance (https://openentrance.eu/) project.

If there is nothing that we can use, for energy products I think it makes sense to use the UN names as much as possible (https://unstats.un.org/unsd/energy/ESCM_Whitecover_170323.pdf)

For activities, NACE is very vague, and as you point out it does not make any difference between electricity producers. NAICS provides some more detail https://classcodes.com/lookup/naics-5-digit-industry-22111/

It is quite incredible that with the importance of the electricity sector there are no more standard names to call technologies...

Best, Miguel

-----Original Message-----
From: main@bonsai.groups.io <main@bonsai.groups.io> On Behalf Of Chris Mutel
Sent: 28 November 2019 10:26
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: [bonsai] Base nomenclature - theory into practice

Dear all-

PSI and LIST are part of a consortium of research groups trying to make prospective LCA better. To accomplish this, we have decided to create a standard implementation merging LCI databases with scenarios from energy system models or integrated assessment models. The software would be in Python and based on https://github.com/IndEcol/wurst.

As our aim is to support multiple systems, we need a reference base nomenclature for products and activities. As far as I can tell, we have invested a lot in building up various correspondence tables, but do not have a lot of development on a base nomenclature with scientific justification. (On the other hand, I think we have made a lot of progress in how to describe any such system.) I assume that such a system will start with a standard classification (e.g. GS1, NACE, etc.), and then use industry-specific classifications when more detail is needed (e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_steel_grades). One important exception here is electricity, where I don't find a standard system that captures the level of detail we need (e.g. utility versus roof-top solar).

As Tomas N. and I are responsible for the technical foundation of this consortium, we have the chance to build it BONSAI-compatible from the beginning - but we need to make decisions soon on this critical issue.
Any input from the list would be greatly appreciated.

-Chris