Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 177: Line 177:  
the calculations and spreadsheet described above should be checked against the values publish by Eco-score. This can be achieved by recalculating the values for France.
 
the calculations and spreadsheet described above should be checked against the values publish by Eco-score. This can be achieved by recalculating the values for France.
   −
The first take at the calculations can be seen in the graph below:
+
The second take at the calculations can be seen in the graph below:
[[File:EcoscoreFrancecheck.png|thumb|center|Eco-score France check]]
+
[[File:EcoscoreCalculation.png|thumb|center|eco-score France check]]
   −
From the graph it can be seen there is still work to be done:
+
The graph shows that the calculation roughly follows what has been presented by Eco-score. There are some small differences:
* The eco-score values are in general lower than my calculation. This can be due to a different normalisation: what should be used as maximum, that corresponds to eco-score value 0. I used the impact to islands in the Pacific;
+
* The eco-score seems a bit more positive, which can be due to addition of rail in the modal mix;
* Is there a cutoff distance, where we rather transport by boat than road;
+
* For may countries a population based centroid was used, which sometimes increases the distance (countries in the South) and sometimes decreases the distance (countries in the north);
* I did not use any modal mix and assumed the worst option by road;
+
* No road cutoff distance was used. Above this cutoff distance transport by sea is preferred. This introduces worse values at the lower end. By adding a cutoff distance of 2000km, these values fall in line.
* There might be centroid issues, for instance why has Monaco (south of France) a worse eco-score than Denmark? Would also imply that internal transport should be taken into account.
  −
* There are many large individual differences reflecting other choices that have been made in centroids, distances, impact, etc. We really need to be more transparency and thus might get more consistency.
      
== Thoughts ==
 
== Thoughts ==
3,390

edits

Navigation menu