Hi team,
I have the same question in mind.
According to this support post: https://support.etool.app/index.php/knowledgebase/references-for-transportation-impact/
The default distance for quarried goods (e.g. off-site fill) is outlined as: 40km by Articulated Truck, and 15km by Rigid Truck for Australasian data. The support post also outlined: “Users can also customise transport modes and distances, but defaults are applicable for each region when products are initially added to templates or designs.”
My take on this is that we are free to alter the transport mode and distance if the supplier location is known, and we can propose this as a reduction with respect to the default transport emissions. Can you please confirm if this is a viable scenario to model?
On this note, most of our projects are registered with Green Star, where which no specific guidelines had been given with regards to the default transport distance. Do you think the default transport modes and distance published by the eTool support page are generally accepted as the reference benchmark for the GBCA?
Ny project had 151,450m3 of “Bulk earthworks – Fill (Sourced from off-site)” with the 55km default transport distance and modes, and its A4 impact was 4,476,993.79 kgCO2e. We confirmed with the project team that the actual transport distance is 5km, and thus the A4 impact is then calculated to be 814,553.98 kgCO2e, which is approximately 18% of the original emissions (LCI source is Australasian LCI – V20 – Life Cycle Strategies). Given the large emissions reduction from this alone, I just wanted to clarify that this is an acceptable method in demonstrating compliance towards carbon reduction.
Any response regarding this would be greatly appreciated.
Kind Regards,
Ray
