Life Cycle Assessment of a Magazine,Part II: A Comparison of Print and Tablet Editions

The rapid development of information and communications technology (ICT) is providing new ways to access media content. Electronic media are sometimes more advantageous from an environmental perspective than paper‐based media solutions, but ICT‐based media can also bring environmental burdens. This study compared the potential environmental impacts in a life cycle perspective of a print edition of a magazine and that of its electronic edition read on a tablet device. Important objectives were to identify activities giving rise to the main environmental impacts for both the print and tablet editions, determine the key factors influencing these impacts, and address data gaps and uncertainties. A detailed assessment of the tablet edition is provided in a previous article (part 1), whereas this article compares it with the print edition. The methodology used was life cycle assessment and the environmental impacts assessed included climate change, cumulative energy/exergy demand, metal depletion, photochemical oxidant formation, particulate matter formation, terrestrial acidification, freshwater eutrophication, marine eutrophication, and fossil depletion. Use of different functional units to compare the print and tablet editions of the magazine resulted in different relative environmental impacts. In addition, emerging (low number of readers and low reading time per copy) and mature (higher number of readers and higher reading time per copy) tablet editions yielded varying results. The emerging tablet edition resulted in higher potential environmental impacts per reader than the print edition, but the mature tablet edition yielded lower impacts per reader in half the impact categories assessed. This illustrates the importance of spreading the environmental impacts over a large number of readers. The electricity mix used in product system processes did not greatly affect the results of tablet/print comparisons, but overall number of readers for the tablet edition, number of readers per copy for the print edition, file size, and degree of use of the tablet device proved crucial for the comparison results.     

From Life Cycle Assessment to Life Cycle Management

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a widely accepted methodology to support decision‐making processes in which one compares alternatives, and that helps prevent shifting of environmental burdens along the value chain or among impact categories. According to regulation in the European Union (EU), the movement of waste needs to be reduced and, if unavoidable, the environmental gain from a specific waste treatment option requiring transport must be larger than the losses arising from transport. The EU explicitly recommends the use of LCA or life cycle thinking for the formulation of new waste management plans. In the last two revisions of the Industrial Waste Management Programme of Catalonia (PROGRIC), the use of a life cycle thinking approach to waste policy was mandated. In this article we explain the process developed to arrive at practical life cycle management (LCM) from what started as an LCA project. LCM principles we have labeled the “3/3” principle or the “good enough is best” principle were found to be essential to obtain simplified models that are easy to understand for legislators and industries, useful in waste management regulation, and, ultimately, feasible. In this article, we present the four models of options for the management of waste solvent to be addressed under Catalan industrial waste management regulation. All involved actors concluded that the models are sufficiently robust, are easy to apply, and accomplish the aim of limiting the transport of waste outside Catalonia, according to the principles of proximity and sufficiency.     

Consequential Life Cycle Assessment of Policy Vulnerability to Price Effects

The application of life cycle assessment (LCA) in a policy context highlights the need for a “consequential” LCA (CLCA), which differs from an “attributional” LCA (ALCA). Although CLCA offers some advantages over ALCA, such as a capacity to account for emissions resulting from both substitution and price effects, it entails additional assumptions and cost and may yield estimates that are more uncertain (e.g., estimates of impact of biofuel policies on greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions). We illustrate how a CLCA that relies on simple partial equilibrium models could provide important insights on the direction and magnitude of price effects while limiting the complexity of CLCA. We describe how such a CLCA, when applied early in the policy life cycle, could help identify policy formulations that reduce the magnitude of adverse price effects relative to the beneficial substitution effect on emissions because—as the experience with biofuel regulations indicates—regulating price effects is costly and controversial. We conclude that the salient contribution of CLCA in the policy process might lie in warning policy makers about the vulnerabilities in a policy with regard to environmental impact and to help modify potentially counterproductive formulations rather than in deriving the precise estimates for uncertain variables, such as the life cycle GHG intensity of product or average indirect emissions.     

Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment Recycling Allocation Methods

Life cycle assessment practitioners struggle to accurately allocate environmental burdens of metals recycling, including the temporal dimension of environmental impacts. We analyze four approaches for calculating aluminum greenhouse gas emissions: the recycled content (RC) or cut‐off approach, which assumes that demand for recycled content displaces primary production; end‐of‐life recycling (EOLR), which assumes that postuse recycling displaces primary production; market‐based (MB) approaches, which estimate changes in supply and demand using price elasticities; and value‐corrected substitution (VCS), which allocates impact based on price differences between primary and recycled material. Our analysis suggests that applications of the VCS approach do not adequately account for the changing scrap to virgin material price ratio over time, whereas MB approaches do not address stock accumulation and depletion. The EOLR and RC approaches were analyzed using two case studies: U.S. aluminum beverage cans and vehicle engine blocks. These approaches produced similar results for beverage cans, which have a closed material loop system and a short product life. With longer product lifetimes, as noted with the engine blocks, the magnitude and timing of the emissions differs greatly between the RC and EOLR approaches. The EOLR approach indicates increased impacts at the time of production, offset by negative impacts in future years, whereas the RC approach assumes benefits to increased recycled content at the time of production. For vehicle engine blocks, emissions using EOLR are 140% higher than with RC. Results are highly sensitive to recycled content and future recycling rates, and the choice of allocation methods can have significant implications for life cycle studies.     

Life Cycle Assessment Software: Selection Can Impact Results

When software is used to facilitate life cycle assessments (LCAs), the implicit assumption is that the results obtained are not a function of the choice of software used. LCAs were done in both SimaPro and GaBi for simplified systems of creation and disposal of 1 kilogram each of four basic materials (aluminum, corrugated board, glass, and polyethylene terephthalate) to determine whether there were significant differences in the results. Data files and impact assessment methodologies (Impact 2002, ReCiPe, and TRACI 2) were ostensibly identical (although there were minor variations in the available ReCiPe version between the programs that were investigated). Differences in reported impacts of greater than 20% for at least one of the four materials were found for 9 of the 15 categories in Impact 2002+, 7 of the 18 categories in ReCiPe, and four of the nine categories in TRACI. In some cases, these differences resulted in changes in the relative rankings of the four materials. The causes of the differences for 14 combinations of materials and impact categories were examined by tracing the results back to the life cycle inventory data and the characterization factors in the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods. In all cases examined, a difference in the characterization factors used by the two programs was the cause of the differing results. As a result, when these software programs are used to inform choices, the result can be different conclusions about relative environmental preference that are functions purely of the software implementation of LCIA methods, rather than of the underlying data.     

Analyzing the Practice of Life Cycle Assessment

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a quantitative tool used to evaluate the environmental impacts of products or processes. With respect to buildings, LCA can be used to evaluate the environmental impacts of an entire building's life cycle. Currently LCA in the building area is used in a limited capacity, primarily to select building products. In order to determine the causality for the lack of whole‐building LCAs, focus groups with members of the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) communities were held. This article investigates the current level of knowledge of LCA in the AEC community and then discusses the benefits and barriers to the practice of LCA. In summary, the goal of the research was to identify why LCA is not used to its fullest potential in a whole‐building LCA. In an open forum and moderated setting, focus group participants were asked individually to self‐identify their experience with LCA, a brief education session on LCA was held, and then benefits and barriers to LCA were discussed. The focus group sessions were transcribed and systematically coded by social researchers in order to analyze the results. Hybrid flow and radar charts were developed. From the focus group results, the most important benefit to LCA was “provides information about environmental impacts.” The results did not identify a prominent barrier; however, building‐related metrics were ascertained to be one of the more crucial barriers. The benefits and barriers classified by this analysis will be utilized to develop a subsequent online survey to further understand the LCA and AEC community.     

Modeling and Assessing Variability in Energy Consumption During the Use Stage of Online Multimedia Services

In this study, we use an improved, more accurate model to analyze the energy footprint of content downloaded from a major online newspaper by means of various combinations of user devices and access networks. Our results indicate that previous analyses based on average figures for laptops or desktop personal computers predict national and global energy consumption values that are unrealistically high. Additionally, we identify the components that contribute most of the total energy consumption during the use stage of the life cycle of digital services. We find that, depending on the type of user device and access network employed, the data center where the news content originates consumes between 4% and 48% of the total energy consumption when news articles are read and between 2% and 11% when video content is viewed. Similarly, we find that user devices consume between 7% and 90% and 0.7% and 78% for articles and video content, respectively, depending on the type of user device and access network that is employed. Though increasing awareness of the energy consumption by data centers is justified, an analysis of our results shows that for individual users of the online newspaper we studied, energy use by user devices and the third‐generation (3G) mobile network are usually bigger contributors to the service footprint than the datacenters. Analysis of our results also shows that data transfer of video content has a significant energy use on the 3G mobile network, but less so elsewhere. Hence, a strategy of reducing the resolution of video would reduce the energy footprint for individual users who are using mobile devices to access content by the 3G network.     

The Design of a Sustainability Assessment Standard Using Life Cycle Information

Sustainability assessment standards are currently being developed for a range of building products. This activity has been stimulated through the considerable success of the U.S. Green Building Council's (USGBC) LEED? standard. Transparent life cycle–based standards can guide manufacturers to design products that have reduced environmental impact. The use of a sustainability standard can certify performance and avoid green washing. In this article we present a logical framework for designing a sustainability assessment standard through the creation of tables that award points in the standard to be consistent with life cycle information. Certain minimum principles of consistency are articulated. In the case that the life cycle impact assessment method maps the life cycle inventory to impact through a linear weighting, two design approaches—impact category and activity substitution—are constructed to be consistent with these principles. The approach is illustrated in a case study of a partial redesign of a carpet sustainability assessment standard (NSF/ANSI‐140).     

Exploring the Use of Ecological Footprint in Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Ecological footprint (EF) is a metric that estimates human consumption of biological resources and products, along with generation of waste greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in terms of appropriated productive land. There is an opportunity to better characterize land occupation and effects on the carbon cycle in life cycle assessment (LCA) models using EF concepts. Both LCA and EF may benefit from the merging of approaches commonly used separately by practitioners of these two methods. However, few studies have compared or integrated EF with LCA. The focus of this research was to explore methods for improving the characterization of land occupation within LCA by considering the EF method, either as a complementary tool or impact assessment method. Biofuels provide an interesting subject for application of EF in the LCA context because two of the most important issues surrounding biofuels are land occupation (changes, availability, and so on) and GHG balances, two of the impacts that EF is able to capture. We apply EF to existing fuel LCA land occupation and emissions data and project EF for future scenarios for U.S. transportation fuels. We find that LCA studies can benefit from lessons learned in EF about appropriately modeling productive land occupation and facilitating clear communication of meaningful results, but find limitations to the EF in the LCA context that demand refinement and recommend that EF always be used along with other indicators and metrics in product‐level assessments.     

Using the Lashof Accounting Methodology to Assess Carbon Mitigation Projects With Life Cycle Assessment

As governments elaborate strategies to counter climate change, there is a need to compare the different options available on an environmental basis. This study proposes a life cycle assessment framework integrating the Lashof accounting methodology, which enables the assessment and comparison of different carbon mitigation projects (e.g., biofuel use, a sequestering plant, an afforestation project). The Lashof accounting methodology is chosen amid other methods of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission characterization for its relative simplicity and capability to characterize all types of carbon mitigation projects. Using the unit of megagram‐year (Mg‐year), which accounts for the mass of GHGs in the atmosphere multiplied by the time it stays there, the methodology calculates the cumulative radiative forcing caused by GHG emission within a predetermined time frame. Basically, the developed framework uses the Mg‐year as a functional unit and isolates impacts related to the climate mitigation function with system expansion. The proposed framework is demonstrated with a case study of tree ethanol pathways (maize, sugarcane, and willow). The study shows that carbon mitigation assessment through life cycle assessment is possible and that it could be a useful tool for decision makers, as it can compare different projects regardless of their original context. The case study reveals that system expansion, as well as each carbon mitigation project's efficiency at reducing carbon emissions, are critical factors that have a significant impact on the results. Also, the framework proves to be useful for treating land‐use change emissions, as they are considered through the functional unit.     

Implementing a Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment Methodology with a Case Study on Domestic Hot Water Production

This work contributes to the development of a dynamic life cycle assessment (DLCA) methodology by providing a methodological framework to link a dynamic system modeling method with a time‐dependent impact assessment method. This three‐step methodology starts by modeling systems where flows are described by temporal distributions. Then, a temporally differentiated life cycle inventory (TDLCI) is calculated to present the environmental exchanges through time. Finally, time‐dependent characterization factors are applied to the TDLCI to evaluate climate‐change impacts through time. The implementation of this new framework is illustrated by comparing systems producing domestic hot water (DHW) over an 80‐year period. Electricity is used to heat water in the first system, whereas the second system uses a combination of solar energy and gas to heat an equivalent amount of DHW at the same temperature. This comparison shows that using a different temporal precision (i.e., monthly vs. annual) to describe process flows can reverse conclusions regarding which case has the best environmental performance. Results also show that considering the timing of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduces the absolute values of carbon footprint in the short‐term when compared with results from the static life cycle assessment. This pragmatic framework for the implementation of time in DLCA studies is proposed to help in the development of the methodology. It is not yet a fully operational scheme, and efforts are still required before DLCA can become state of practice.     

Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of a Canned Sardine Product from Portugal

This study aims to assess the environmental impacts of canned sardines in olive oil, by considering fishing, processing, and packaging, using life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. The case study concerns a product of a canning factory based in Portugal and packed in aluminum cans. It is the first LCA of a processed seafood product made with the traditional canning method. The production of both cans and olive oil are the most important process in the considered impact categories. The production of olives contributes to the high environmental load of olive oil, related to cultivation and harvesting phases. The production of aluminum cans is the most significant process for all impact categories, except ozone depletion potential and eutrophication potential, resulting from the high energy demand and the extraction of raw materials. To compare to other sardine products consumed in Portugal, such as frozen and fresh sardines, transport to the wholesaler and store was added. The environmental cost of canned sardines is almost seven times higher per kilogram of edible product. The main action to optimize the environmental performance of canned sardines is therefore to replace the packaging and diminish the olive oil losses as much as possible. Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by half when plastic packaging is considered rather than aluminum. Frozen and fresh sardines represent much lower environmental impacts than canned sardines. Nevertheless, when other sardine products are not possible, it becomes feasible to use sardines for human consumption, preventing them from being wasted or used suboptimally as feed.     

Using Nested Average Electricity Allocation Protocols to Characterize Electrical Grids in Life Cycle Assessment

This study explored the impacts of electricity allocation protocols on the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of electricity consumption. The selection of appropriate electricity allocation protocols, methodologies that assign pools of electricity generators to electricity consumers, has not been well standardized. This can lead to very different environmental profiles of similar, electricity‐intensive processes. In an effort to better represent the interconnected nature of the U.S. electrical grid, we propose two new protocols that utilize inter‐regional trade information and localized emission factors to combine generating pools that are sub‐ or supersets of one another. This new nested approach increases the likelihood of capturing important inter‐regional electricity trading and the appropriate assignment of generator emissions to consumers of local and regional electricity. We applied the new and existing protocols to the U.S. primary aluminum industry, an industry whose environmental impact is heavily tied to its electricity consumption. Our analysis found GHG emission factors that were dramatically different than those reported in previous literature. We calculated production‐weighted average emission factors of 19.0 and 19.9 kilograms carbon dioxide equivalent per kilogram of primary aluminum ingot produced when using our two nested electricity allocation protocols. Previous studies reported values of 10.5 and 11.0, at least 42% lower than those found by our study.     

Life Cycle Assessment of Biomass‐based Combined Heat and Power Plants

Norway, like many countries, has realized the need to extensively plan its renewable energy future sooner rather than later. Combined heat and power (CHP) through gasification of forest residues is one technology that is expected to aid Norway in achieving a desired doubling of bioenergy production by 2020. To assess the environmental impacts to determine the most suitable CHP size, we performed a unit process‐based attributional life cycle assessment (LCA), in which we compared three scales of CHP over ten environmental impact categories—micro (0.1 megawatts electricity [MWe]), small (1 MWe), and medium (50 MWe) scale. The functional units used were 1 megajoule (MJ) of electricity and 1 MJ of district heating delivered to the end user (two functional units), and therefore, the environmental impacts from distribution of electricity and hot water to the consumer were also considered. This study focuses on a regional perspective situated in middle‐Norway's Nord‐ and Sør‐Trøndelag counties. Overall, the unit‐based environmental impacts between the scales of CHP were quite mixed and within the same magnitude. The results indicated that energy distribution from CHP plant to end user creates from less than 1% to nearly 90% of the total system impacts, depending on impact category and energy product. Also, an optimal small‐scale CHP plant may be the best environmental option. The CHP systems had a global warming potential ranging from 2.4 to 2.8 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of thermal (g CO₂‐eq/MJ_th) district heating and from 8.8 to 10.5 grams carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of electricity (g CO₂‐eq/MJ_el) to the end user.     

Confronting Uncertainty in Life Cycle Assessment Used for Decision Support

The aim of this article is to help confront uncertainty in life cycle assessments (LCAs) used for decision support. LCAs offer a quantitative approach to assess environmental effects of products, technologies, and services and are conducted by an LCA practitioner or analyst (AN) to support the decision maker (DM) in making the best possible choice for the environment. At present, some DMs do not trust the LCA to be a reliable decision‐support tool—often because DMs consider the uncertainty of an LCA to be too large. The standard evaluation of uncertainty in LCAs is an ex‐post approach that can be described as a variance simulation based on individual data points used in an LCA. This article develops and proposes a taxonomy for LCAs based on extensive research in the LCA, management, and economic literature. This taxonomy can be used ex ante to support planning and communication between an AN and DM regarding which type of LCA study to employ for the decision context at hand. This taxonomy enables the derivation of an LCA classification matrix to clearly identify and communicate the type of a given LCA. By relating the LCA classification matrix to statistical principles, we can also rank the different types of LCA on an expected inherent uncertainty scale that can be used to confront and address potential uncertainty. However, this article does not attempt to offer a quantitative approach for assessing uncertainty in LCAs used for decision support.     

Application of Product Data Technology Standards to LCA Data

Applications of information and communications technology (ICT) for the management of environmental data, if used during the design and at the end of the product life cycle, can improve the environmental performance of products. This specific application of ICT for data management is called product data technology (PDT) and is based on the use of international standards developed by ISO TC184/SC4. PDT enables the computerized representations of information about products, processes, and their properties that are independent of any proprietary computer system or software application. The standard product data models are designed to integrate the necessary information about materials used in the product, and such information can be accessed and used at any point in the life cycle, from design to disposal. In the article, we present how PDT can support life cycle assessment (LCA) by focusing on a series of standards for communicating data for design and manufacture and standards for business and commercial information. Examples of possibilities for using PDT and semantic web for LCA data are introduced. The findings presented here are based on DEPUIS (Design of Environmentally‐Friendly Products Using Information Standards), a project aimed at improving the eco‐design of new products and services through the innovative use of new information standards.     

Methodological Aspects of Applying Life Cycle Assessment to Industrial Symbioses

In view of recent studies of the historical development and current status of industrial symbiosis (IS), life cycle assessment (LCA) is proposed as a general framework for quantifying the environmental performance of by‐product exchange. Recent guidelines for LCA (International Reference Life Cycle Data System [ILCD] guidelines) are applied to answer the main research questions in the IS literature reviewed. A typology of five main research questions is proposed: (1) analysis, (2) improvement, and (3) expansion of existing systems; (4) design of new eco‐industrial parks, and (5) restructuring of circular economies. The LCA guidelines were found useful in framing the question and choosing an appropriate reference case for comparison. The selection of a correct reference case reduces the risk of overestimating the benefits of by‐product exchange. In the analysis of existing systems, environmentally extended input‐output analysis (EEIOA) can be used to streamline the analysis and provide an industry average baseline for comparison. However, when large‐scale changes are applied to the system, more sophisticated tools are necessary for assessment of the consequences, from market analysis to general equilibrium modeling and future scenario work. Such a rigorous application of systems analysis was not found in the current IS literature, but would benefit the field substantially, especially when the environmental impact of large‐scale economic changes is analyzed.     

Life Cycle Assessment of Diesel and Electric Public Transportation Buses

The Clean Air Act in the United States identifies diesel‐powered motor vehicles, including transit buses, as significant sources of several criteria pollutants that contribute to ground‐level ozone formation or smog. The effects of air pollution in urban areas are often more significant due to congestion and can lead to respiratory and cardiovascular health impacts. Life cycle assessment (LCA) has been utilized in the literature to compare conventional gasoline‐powered passenger cars with various types of electric and hybrid‐powered alternatives, however, no similarly detailed studies exist for mass transit buses. LCA results from this study indicate that the use phase, consisting of diesel production/combustion for the conventional bus and electricity generation for the electric bus, dominates most impact categories; however, the effects of battery production are significant for global warming, carcinogens, ozone depletion, and eco‐toxicity. There is a clear connection between the mix of power‐generation technologies and the preference for the diesel or electric bus. With the existing U.S. average grid, there is a strong preference for the conventional diesel bus over the electric bus when considering global warming impacts alone. Policy makers must consider regional variations in the electricity grid prior to recommending the use of battery electric buses to reduce carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. This study found that the electric bus was preferable in only eight states, including Washington and Oregon. Improvements in battery technology reduce the life cycle impacts from the electric bus, but the electricity grid makeup is the dominant variable.     

Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate‐Change Mitigation Benefits Misleads Policy Makers

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is generally described as a tool for environmental decision making. Results from attributional LCA (ALCA), the most commonly used LCA method, often are presented in a way that suggests that policy decisions based on these results will yield the quantitative benefits estimated by ALCA. For example, ALCAs of biofuels are routinely used to suggest that the implementation of one alternative (say, a biofuel) will cause an X% change in greenhouse gas emissions, compared with a baseline (typically gasoline). However, because of several simplifications inherent in ALCA, the method, in fact, is not predictive of real‐world impacts on climate change, and hence the usual quantitative interpretation of ALCA results is not valid. A conceptually superior approach, consequential LCA (CLCA), avoids many of the limitations of ALCA, but because it is meant to model actual changes in the real world, CLCA results are scenario dependent and uncertain. These limitations mean that even the best practical CLCAs cannot produce definitive quantitative estimates of actual environmental outcomes. Both forms of LCA, however, can yield valuable insights about potential environmental effects, and CLCA can support robust decision making. By openly recognizing the limitations and understanding the appropriate uses of LCA as discussed here, practitioners and researchers can help policy makers implement policies that are less likely to have perverse effects and more likely to lead to effective environmental policies, including climate mitigation strategies.     

Ecosystem Services in Life Cycle Assessment while Encouraging Techno‐Ecological Synergies

Life cycle assessment (LCA) has enabled consideration of environmental impacts beyond the narrow boundary of traditional engineering methods. This reduces the chance of shifting impacts outside the system boundary. However, sustainability also requires that supporting ecosystems are not adversely affected and remain capable of providing goods and services for supporting human activities. Conventional LCA does not account for this role of nature, and its metrics are best for comparing alternatives. These relative metrics do not provide information about absolute environmental sustainability, which requires comparison between the demand and supply of ecosystem services (ES). Techno‐ecological synergy (TES) is a framework to account for ES, and has been demonstrated by application to systems such as buildings and manufacturing activities that have narrow system boundaries. This article develops an approach for techno‐ecological synergy in life cycle assessment (TES‐LCA) by expanding the steps in conventional LCA to incorporate the demand and supply of ecosystem goods and services at multiple spatial scales. This enables calculation of absolute environmental sustainability metrics, and helps identify opportunities for improving a life cycle not just by reducing impacts, but also by restoring and protecting ecosystems. TES‐LCA of a biofuel life cycle demonstrates this approach by considering the ES of carbon sequestration, air quality regulation, and water provisioning. Results show that for the carbon sequestration ecosystem service, farming can be locally sustainable but unsustainable at the global or serviceshed scale. Air quality regulation is unsustainable at all scales, while water provisioning is sustainable at all scales for this study in the eastern part of the United States.