Combining Material Flow Analysis,Life Cycle Assessment,and Multiattribute Utility Theory

Three assessment methods, material flow analysis (MFA), life cycle analysis (LCA), and multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) are systematically combined for supporting the choice of best end‐of‐life scenarios for polyethylene terephthalate (PET) waste in a municipality of a developing country. MFA analyzes the material and energy balance of a firm, a region, or a nation, identifying the most relevant processes; LCA evaluates multiple environmental impacts of a product or a service from cradle to grave; and MAUT allows for inclusion of other aspects along with the ecological ones in the assessment. We first systematically coupled MFA and LCA by defining “the service offered by the total PET used during one year in the region” as the functional unit. Inventory and impacts were calculated by multiplying MFA flows with LCA impacts per kilogram. We used MAUT to include social and economic aspects in the assessment. To integrate the subjective point of view of stakeholders in the MAUT, we normalized the environmental, social, and economic variables with respect to the magnitude of overall impacts or benefits in the country. The results show large benefits for recycling scenarios from all points of view and also provide information about waste treatment optimization. The combination of the three assessment methods offers a powerful integrative assessment of impacts and benefits. Further research should focus on data collection methods to easily determine relevant material flows. LCA impact factors specific to Colombia should be developed, as well as more reliable social indicators.     

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.     

A Hybrid Approach for Assessing the Multi‐Scale Impacts of Urban Resource Use: Transportation in Phoenix,Arizona

Life cycle assessment (LCA) and urban metabolism (UM) are popular approaches for urban system environmental assessment. However, both approaches have challenges when used across spatial scales. LCA tends to decompose systemic information into micro‐level functional units that mask complexity and purpose, whereas UM typically equates aggregated material and energy flows with impacts and is not ideal for revealing the mechanisms or alternatives available to reduce systemic environmental risks. This study explores the value of integrating UM with LCA, using vehicle transportation in the Phoenix metropolitan area as an illustrative case study. Where other studies have focused on the use of LCA providing upstream supply‐chain impacts for UM, we assert that the broader value of the integrated approach is in (1) the ability to cross scales (from micro to macro) in environmental assessment and (2) establishing an analysis that captures function and complexity in urban systems. The results for Phoenix show the complexity in resource supply chains and critical infrastructure services, how impacts accrue well beyond geopolitical boundaries where activities occur, and potential system vulnerabilities.     

Application of the impact pathway analysis in the context of LCA

Current LCA practice is mass oriented, i.e. is focused on the amount of chemicals released, disregarding place and time of release. Life cycle impact assessment aims at evaluating potential impacts, and a variety of weighting schemes is discussed to he used for ranking and aggregation of impacts. To establish a closer link between the quantity of a burden released and a decision making context, we propose to follow a detailed impact pathway analysis to estimate actual impacts for some priority impact categories, and use measured individuals’ preferences for impact valuation. Results from a case study illustrate the relevance of site specific impact assessment in the context of LCA.     

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.     

Entity Normalization in Life Cycle Assessment: Hybrid Schemes Applied to a Transportation Agency Case Study

Government agencies, companies, and other entities are using environmental assessments, like life cycle assessment (LCA), as an input to decision‐making processes. Communicating the esoteric results of an LCA to these decision makers can present challenges, and interpretation aids are commonly provided to increase understanding. One such method is normalizing results as a means of providing context for interpreting magnitudes of environmental impacts. Normalization is mostly carried out by relating the environmental impacts of a product (or process) under study to those of another product or a spatial reference area (e.g., the United States). This research is based on the idea that decision makers might also benefit from normalization that considers comparisons to their entity's (agency, company, organization, etc.) total impacts to provide additional meaning and aid in comprehension. Two hybrid normalization schemes have been developed, which include aspects of normalization to both spatially based and entity‐based impacts. These have been named entity‐overlaid and entity‐accentuated normalization, and the schemes allow for performance‐based planning or emphasizing environmental impact types that are most relevant to an entity's operational profile, respectively. A hypothetical case study is presented to demonstrate these schemes, which uses environmental data from a U.S. transportation agency as the basis for entity normalization factors. Results of this case study illustrate how entity‐related references may be developed, and how this additional information may enhance the presentation of LCA results using the hybrid normalization schemes.     

农业生命周期评价研究进展

作为评价产品系统全链条环境影响的有效工具,生命周期评价（LCA）方法已广泛用于工业领域。农业领域也面临着高强度的资源和环境压力,LCA在农业领域的应用应运而生。旨在综述已有农业LCA研究的基础上,鉴别农业LCA应用存在的问题,并为农业LCA未来的发展提出建议。目前农业LCA存在系统边界和功能单位界定不明晰、缺少区域清单数据库、生命周期环境影响评价模型（LCIA）不能准确反映农业系统环境影响、结果解释存在误区等方面的问题。为了科学准确地衡量农业系统的环境影响,促进农业系统的可持续发展,文章认为农业LCA应该从以下几个方面加强研究,即科学界定评价的参照系、系统边界的扩大及功能单位的合理选取、区域异质性数据库构建与LCIA模型开发、基于组织农业LCA的开发以及对于利益相关者行为的研究。     

Integrating life cycle cost analysis and LCA

The private sector decision making situations which LCA addresses mustalso eventually take theeconomic consequences of alternative products or product designs into account. However, neither the internal nor external economic aspects of the decisions are within the scope of developed LCA methodology, nor are they properly addressed by existing LCA tools. This traditional separation of life cycle environmental assessment from economic analysis has limited the influence and relevance of LCA for decision-making, and left uncharacterized the important relationships and trade-offs between the economic and life cycle environmental performance of alternative product design decision scenarios. Still standard methods of LCA can and have been tightly, logically, and practically integrated with standard methods for cost accounting, life cycle cost analysis, and scenario-based economic risk modeling. The result is an ability to take both economic and environmental performance — and their tradeoff relationships — into account in product/process design decision making.     

Evaluating Human and Ecological Impacts of a Product Life Cycle: The Complementary Roles of Life-Cycle Assessment and Risk Assessment

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is a tool for evaluating various health and environmental impacts throughout a product's life. When used as a screening tool, LCA can potentially identify the processes and materials most likely to pose a threat to human health and the environment, and to determine where a risk assessment is warranted. The European Union has issued a ban on lead-based solder from use in electronic equipment beginning in July 2006. In response, the Lead-Free Solder Partnership, involving the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, several electronics manufacturers, and the University of Tennessee afforded a vehicle for conducting a thorough LCA of leaded and lead-free solders used in the electronics industry. Sixteen impact categories were evaluated in the LCA, including human toxicity.

A primary conclusion of the assessment for human and aquatic toxicity, across the entire life cycle of tin-lead solder, was the potential for impacts derived from the landfilling of lead. These results, based on broad assumptions about exposure, suggest that a more detailed risk assessment of the landfilling process would assist in better understanding the potential for health and environmental risks. We believe LCA data can be used to identify the need for focused risk assessments, allowing the two tools to effectively complement one another. Use of both methods could assist in understanding the effectiveness of the European ban on lead solder and its potential to improve public health.     

A Stochastic Approach to Model Dynamic Systems in Life Cycle Assessment

This article presents a framework to evaluate emerging systems in life cycle assessment (LCA). Current LCA methods are effective for established systems; however, lack of data often inhibits robust analysis of future products or processes that may benefit the most from life cycle information. In many cases the life cycle inventory (LCI) of a system can change depending on its development pathway. Modeling emerging systems allows insights into probable trends and a greater understanding of the effect of future scenarios on LCA results. The proposed framework uses Bayesian probabilities to model technology adoption. The method presents a unique approach to modeling system evolution and can be used independently or within the context of an agent‐based model (ABM). LCA can be made more robust and dynamic by using this framework to couple scenario modeling with life cycle data, analyzing the effect of decision‐making patterns over time. Potential uses include examining the changing urban metabolism of growing cities, understanding the development of renewable energy technologies, identifying transformations in material flows over space and time, and forecasting industrial networks for developing products. A switchgrass‐to‐energy case demonstrates the approach.     

Life-Cycle Assessment: Constraints on Moving from Inventory to Impact Assessment

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is a technique for systematically analyzing a product from cradle-to-grave, that is, from resource extraction through manufacture and use to disposal. LCA is a mixed or hybrid analytical system. An inventory phase analyzes system inputs of energy and materials along with outputs of emissions and wastes throughout life cycle, usually as quantitative mass loadings. An impact assessment phase then examines these loadings in light of potential environmental issues using a mixed spectrum of qualitative and quantitative methods. The constraints imposed by inventory's loss of spatial, temporal, dose-response, and threshold information raise concerns about the accuracy of impact assessment. The degree of constraint varies widely according to the environmental issue in question and models used to extrapolate the inventory data. LCA results may have limited value in two areas: (I) local and/ortransient biophysical processes and (2) issues involving biological parameters, such as biodiversity, habitat alteration, and toxicity. The end result is that impact assessment does not measure actual effects or impacts, nor does it calculate the likelihood of an effect or risk Rather, LCA impact assessment results are largely directional environmental indicaton. The accuracy and usefulness of indicators need to be assessed individually and in a circumstance-specific manner prior to decision making. This limits LCAs usefulness as the sole basis for comprehensive assessments and the comparisons of alternatives. In conclusion, LCA may identify potential issues from a systemwide perspective, but more-focused assessments using other analytical techniques are often necessary to resolve the issues.     

Three Strategies to Overcome the Limitations of Life-Cycle Assessment

Many research efforts aim at an extension of life‐cycle assessment (LCA) in order to increase its spatial or temporal detail or to enlarge its scope. This is an important contribution to industrial ecology as a scientific discipline, but from the application viewpoint other options are available to obtain more detailed information, or to obtain information over a broader range of impacts in a life‐cycle perspective. This article discusses three different strategies to reach these aims: (1) extension of LCA—one consistent model; (2) use of a toolbox—separate models used in combination; and (3) hybrid analysis—combination of models with data flows between them. Extension of LCA offers the most consistent solution. Developments in LCA are moving toward greater spatial detail and temporal resolution and the inclusion of social issues. Creating a supertool with too many data and resource requirements is, however, a risk. Moreover, a number of social issues are not easily modeled in relation to a functional unit. The development of a toolbox offers the most flexibility regarding spatial and temporal information and regarding the inclusion of other types of impacts. The rigid structure of LCA no longer sets limits; every aspect can be dealt with according to the logic of the relevant tool. The results lack consistency, however, preventing further formal integration. The third strategy, hybrid analysis, takes up an intermediate position between the other two. This strategy is more flexible than extension of LCA and more consistent than a toolbox. Hybrid analysis thus has the potential to combine the strong points of the other two strategies. It offers an interesting path for further discovery, broader than the already well‐known combination of process‐LCA and input‐output‐LCA. We present a number of examples of hybrid analysis to illustrate the potentials of this strategy. Developments in the field of a toolbox or of hybrid analysis may become fully consistent with LCA, and then in fact become part of the first solution, extension of LCA.     

Extending the Life Cycle Methodology to Cover Impacts of Land Use Systems on the Water Balance (7 pp)

Goal, Scope and Background Whilst initially designed for industrial production systems, environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) has recently been increasingly applied to agriculture and forestry projects. Several authors suggested that the standard LCA methodology needs to be refined to cover the particularities of agri- and silvicultural production systems. Until now, water quantity received little attention in these methodological revisions, notwithstanding the well-known impact of agriculture and forestry on issues like water availability, drought and flood risk. This paper proposes an add-on to existing LCA methods in the form of an indicator set that integrates water quantity impacts of agri- and silvicultural production. Method First, system boundaries are discussed in order to identify the water flows between the production system and the environment. These flows are attributed to impact categories, linked to environmental burdens and to the areas of protection. Appropriate indicators are selected for each potential burden. Results and Discussion At the present, two input related impact categories deal with water quantity: Abiotic resource depletion and land use. The list of output related impact categories presented by Udo de Haes et al. (1999) does not include water quantity impacts like flood and drought risk. A new impact category “regional water balance” is introduced to cover these risks. Exceedance probabilities are used as indicators for these temporal variations in streamflow. Conclusion and Outlook The method presented in this paper can bring a life cycle assessment closer to real world concerns. The main drawback, however, is the increasing data requirement that might hinder the feasibility of the method. Future research should focus on this problem, for instance by applying a relatively simple numerical model that can calculate the indicator scores from more easily accessible data.     

Life cycle assessment of contaminated sites remediation

For the federal state of Baden-Wiirttemberg, Germany, the decision tool “Umweltbilanz von Altlastensanierungsverfahren” has been developed and found suitable for the quantification and evaluation of environmental impacts caused by remediation of contaminated sites. The developed tool complements the remediation toolbox of Baden-Wiirttemberg. The tool includes a streamlined life cycle assessment (LCA) and a synopsis of the LCA results with the results of a risk assessment of the contaminated site. The risk assessment tool is not explained here. The data base for the life cycle inventory includes several techniques used in remedial actions. The life cycle impact assessment utilises 14 impact categories. The method allows comparisons between remedial options for specific contaminated sites. A software tool has been developed to be available in 1999.     

No Matter – How?: Dealing with Matter‐less Stressors in LCA of Wind Energy Systems

The portfolio of impacts that are quantified in life cycle assessment (LCA) has grown to include rather different stressors than those that were the focus of early LCAs. Some of the newest life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) models are still in an early phase of development and have not yet been included in any LCA study. This is the case for sound emissions and noise impacts, which have been only recently modeled. Sound emissions are matter‐less, time dependent, and bound to the physical properties of waves. The way sound emissions and the relative noise impacts are modeled in LCA can show how new or existing matter‐less impacts can be addressed. In this study, we analyze, through the example of sound emissions, the specific features of a matter‐less impact that does not stem from the use of a kilogram of matter, nor is related to the emission of a kilogram of matter. We take as a case study the production of energy by means of wind turbines, contradicting the commonly held assumption that windmills have no emissions during use. We show how to account for sound emissions in the life cycle inventory phase of the life cycle of a wind turbine and then calculate the relative impacts using a noise LCIA model.     

Comparison of Tools for Quantifying the Environmental Performance of an Urban Territory

To support effective urban policies aimed at decreasing the environmental impacts of cities, it is important to develop robust tools for accounting those impacts. Environmentally extended input‐output analysis (EEIOA) is among the most used tools for this purpose, allowing the quantification of both direct and indirect impacts. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is also a holistic and comprehensive tool that accounts for direct and indirect impacts—but its application to cities is still very recent. This study aims at applying EEIOA and LCA to the municipality of Aveiro (Portugal) in order to compare the outcomes of the two tools in terms of total impacts (climate change and fossil fuel depletion) and hotspots (sectors/products contributing most to the impacts), to identify limitations and advantages of the tools when applied to Aveiro, and to illustrate how LCA can be applied to cities. The total impacts estimated with LCA and EEIOA were similar and the hotspots were also the same: transports, food, construction, and electricity. However, the relative contribution of some sectors was very different in the two tools due to methodological differences mainly in system boundaries, type of activities or products considered in each sector, and geographical coverage of impact data. This study concludes that the analyzed tools can provide complementary results to support decision making concerning urban planning and management.     

Local risks and global impacts considering plant-specific functions and constraints: a case study of metal parts cleaning

Background, aim, and scope  

To achieve sustainable development in industrial processes, attributed chemical risks as well as environmental impacts should be managed. Such non-monetary issues have been analyzed by scientific assessment methodologies such as various risk assessment (RA) and life cycle assessment (LCA) procedures. Local risks to be addressed in RA are microenvironments, including the workplace and neighborhood. Although a comprehensive interpretation of such risks is necessitated in industrial decision making, no practical method has been developed to interpret various types of risk with sufficient understandings of plant-specific functions and constraints. Because elaborate model-based approaches are inevitable for practical process development, actual case studies on chemical risks and detailed plant-specific functions and constraints should be performed. Manufacturing processes require that metal parts must be cleaned in preparation for surface treatments or the completion of metal processing. The significant amount of cleansing agents utilized in cleaning processes has become an issue in Japan. Almost all cleaning processes in Japan are carried out by small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Machinery processes have not been systematically analyzed in terms of chemical risks and, in addition, the environmental management skills of SMEs are generally far behind those of large enterprises. The objective of this study is to reveal the relationships between chemical risks and plant-specific conditions for a practical risk reduction carried out by industrial decision makers. For this purpose, we aimed at the analysis of such relationships in metal-cleaning processes. Through this analysis, the correlation between local risks and global impacts were discussed in terms of plant-specific conditions.     

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 data quality assessment methods to an LCA of electricity generation

Background, Goal and Scope  For the life cycle assessment (LCA) tool to provide maximum benefit for decision makers, the uncertainty of its results should be reported. Several methods for assessing uncertainty have been developed, but despite recent efforts, there remains disagreement about their merits. Objectives  The objectives of the study were to review several assessment methods for estimating numerical and qualitative uncertainty of impact scores and recommend an appropriate uncertainty assessment scheme. The methods review has been conducted on the basis of an LCA case study regarding the comparison of the use of either brown or black coals in Australian electricity generation. Results and Discussion  Each assessment method indicated greater uncertainty in the impact scores calculated for black coal use than for brown coal use. Due to overlap of the uncertainty ranges in calculated impact scores neither of the coals could be regarded environmentally preferred. Conclusions  Both qualitative and quantitative methods were found to provide useful information about the uncertainty of calculated impact scores for the case study. Methods that combine qualitative and quantitative uncertainty provided no additional benefits, and obscured much of the information gained from using qualitative methods. Recommendation and Outlook  It is recommended that LCA results should include separate numerical (using Monte-Carlo simulation) and qualitative uncertainty assessments. When the ranges of calculated impact scores for compared options overlap, the normalised difference method is recommended.