Skip to content
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
87 changes: 78 additions & 9 deletions benchmarking/index.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,24 +1,93 @@
---
title: "Why we benchmark"
label: benchmarking-hub
---

:::{tip} Summary
*To be written.*
Validation ensures the model’s parts mathematically check out. Benchmarking asks whether emissions and economic data line up with real-world conditions, by comparing our direct emission factors to independent sources.
:::

:::{note} Draft placeholder
:class: dropdown
Plan §3.6.1 · target: **RC (Oct 27)**
Both [](../validation/index.md) and benchmarking feed the same loop into the next release: build → validate → benchmark → investigate → methodology change.

## What we compare

**Planned content**
To benchmark our model, we compare direct emission factors to indepdnent sources. We usually do not benchmark full supply-chain (cradle-to-gate) factors here as matching scope across sources is much harder.

- Validation asks "did we build the model correctly?"; benchmarking asks "are the results plausible compared with independent evidence?" Both feed the next release
- Headline v0.6 benchmark results for the RC
:::{important} Direct factors, not full supply chains
The comparisons on this page are about what each sector emits itself (`D`), not the full upstream intensity (`N`).
:::

## Kinds of sources we compare against

| Kind of source | What it usually is | Why it’s useful |
|---|---|---|
| National inventories and accounts | Official country reports of emissions and economic output | Closest match to "total emissions for a sector ÷ total sales of that sector" |
| Government factor databases | Official numbers on how much a plant or activity emits | Measured or regulated; good for electricity, cement, steel, and similar |
| International datasets | Cross-country emissions and energy statistics | Easy to compare across countries; strong for large emitting sectors |
| Peer-reviewed studies | Academic papers on sector or product emissions | Independent of our model; check that they measure the same thing |
| Other EEIO / multi-country models | Similar models from other teams | Same *kind* of number we publish; strongest when they don’t reuse our inputs |
| Industry association studies | Sector-wide studies from trade groups | Useful physical intensities; often need care converting to “per dollar” |
| Product declarations (EPDs) | Emissions for a specific product | Good for one product; usually too narrow for a whole national sector |
| Company reports | Sustainability or ESG reports from firms | Helpful when one company dominates a sector; weak as a country average |
| Simple derived estimates | Emissions per tonne or kWh divided by a market price | Easy to find, but often not comparable to our per-dollar factors |
| Reviews and secondary web pages | Summaries that quote other studies | Starting points only; follow them back to the original source |

:::{tip} Prefer like-for-like denominators
The strongest comparisons already look like emissions divided by national-accounts output. Estimates built from a market price or a company’s revenue are different objects unless they are restated to match that same scope and denominator.
:::

## What benchmarking can lead to

1. **Sharper benchmark** — The comparison isn’t quite like-for-like in scope or assumptions, so we adjust the external number to match what the model measures.
2. **Model improvement** — The gap points to a place to improve the model (for example, bringing in additional data).
3. **Documented, valid difference** — The model and the benchmark are measuring different things on purpose; we maintain the model and record why they diverge.

:::{note}
These three outcomes are the point of the exercise. Benchmarking is not a single pass/fail score for the whole model.
:::

## Challenges in assessing a fair comparison

### Scope and boundary (what emissions count)

- Direct only vs full life cycle (purchased power, upstream fuels)
- Territorial vs residence accounting (especially international transport)
- Whether related activities count in this sector or elsewhere (for example a steel mill’s own power plant, or coke making counted with steel vs with chemicals)
- Whole industry vs one product line (for example steel mills vs re-rollers)

### What “per dollar” means

- National-accounts output (our basis) vs a market price route (e.g.,mass × price). Price routes often look higher.
- Producer vs purchaser prices; mill gate vs retail
- Company revenue is not the same as sector output
- Commodity vs industry output; private vs government producers; blended products under one label

:::{important} Output route vs price route
Many apparent disagreements come from the denominator, not from missing emissions. We divide official emissions by the sector’s gross output from national accounts. A common alternative divides physical intensity (for example grams per kWh) by a retail price. Retail prices carry taxes and margins that output does not, and sales between firms inside the sector are missing from a price-based denominator while emissions are counted once, so the price route almost always looks larger.
:::

### Currency and year

- Converting to USD and to the model’s dollar year
- Emissions year often lags the dollar year — a small gap is not always agreement
- Which price index is used to rebase

### Sector definitions

- Broad foreign categories vs our finer sectors
- Re-scoping with shares adds assumptions
- Same name, different contents (for example heat counted with electricity; private fleets vs for-hire trucking)

## How we judge agreement

The goal is not an exact match to one external number. It is whether our estimate aligns with the **preponderance of the evidence**, after fair scope and dollar treatment.

## Results for this release

**Key visuals**
*Headline counts and a figure will be added for the RC.* See [](../releases/rc.md) for the release summary once those numbers are in.

- 🖼 Feedback loop: build → validate → benchmark → investigate → methodology change → next release
:::{seealso} Related
Internal accounting checks live on [](../validation/index.md). Version-specific headlines will also appear in the [](../releases/index.md).
:::

+++
Expand Down
Loading