IMPACT World+: a globally regionalized life cycle impact assessment method

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - This paper addresses the need for a globally regionalized method for life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), integrating multiple state-of-the-art...     

Evaluation of sugar feedstocks for bio-based chemicals: A consequential,regionalized life cycle assessment

Fermentable sugars are an attractive feedstock for the production of bio-based chemicals. However, little is known about the environmental performance of sugar feedstocks when demand for sugars increases, and when local conditions and sensitivities of receiving ecosystems are taken into account. Production of monosaccharides from various first- and second-generation feedstocks (sugar beet, sugar cane, wheat, maize, wood, residual woodchips, and sawdust) in different geographic locations was assessed and compared as feedstock for monoethylene glycol (MEG) using consequential, regionalized life cycle assessment. Sugar cane grown in Thailand performed best in all three areas of protection, that is, for life cycle impacts on human health, ecosystem quality, and resources (respectively, equal to −7.6 × 10⁻⁵ disability-adjusted life years, −1.2 × 10⁻⁸ species-years and −0.046 US dollars per amount of feedstock needed to produce 1 kg of MEG). This was mainly due to benefits from by-products—incineration of sugar cane bagasse generating electricity and use of sugar cane molasses for the production of bioethanol. The wood-based feedstocks and maize performed worse than sugar cane and sugar beet, but their evaluation did not consider that sugar extraction technology from lignocellulose is immature, while identification of marginal suppliers of the marginal crop is particularly uncertain for maize. Wheat grown in Russia performed the worst mainly due to low agricultural yields (with impacts equal to 8.9 × 10⁻⁵ disability-adjusted life years, 6.9 × 10⁻⁷ species-years, and 1.8 US dollars per amount of feedstock required to produce 1 kg of bio-based MEG). Our results suggest that selection of sugar feedstocks for bio-based chemicals should focus on (i) the intended use of by-products and functions they replace and (ii) consideration of geographic differences in parameters that influence life cycle inventories, while spatial differentiation in the life cycle impact assessment was less influential.     

Land use and biodiversity indicators for life cycle impact assessment

Background  The primary purpose of environmental assessment is to protect biological systems. Data collected over the last several decades indicates that the greatest impacts on biological resources derive from physical changes in land use. However, to date there is no consensus on indicators of land use that could be applicable worldwide at all scales. This has hampered the assessment of land use in the context of LCA. Objectives  The Institute for Environmental Research and Education and its partner Defenders of Wildlife have begun an effort to develop the necessary consensus. Methods  In July 2000, they held a workshop attended by a diverse group of interested parties and experts to develop a preliminary list of life cycle indicators for land use impacts. Results  Their preliminary list of impact indicators includes: protection of priority habitats/species; soil characteristics: soil health; proximity to & protection of high priority vegetative communities; interface between water and terrestrial habitats/buffer zones; assimilative capacity of water and land; hydrological function; percent coverage of invasive species within protected areas; road density; percent native-dominated vegetation; restoration of native vegetation; adoption of Best Management Practices linked to biodiversity objectives; distribution (patchiness; evenness, etc.); and connectivity of native habitat. Conclusion  The list of indicators conforms well to other efforts in developing indicators. There appears to be convergence among experts in the field and in related fields on the appropriate things to measure. Future Prospects  These indicators are currently being tested in the United States. Further workshops and testing is planned towards developing internationally recognized indicators for land use.     

Future scenarios and life cycle assessment: systematic review and recommendations

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Future scenarios and life cycle assessment (LCA) are powerful tools that can provide early sustainability assessments of novel products,...     

Enhancing life cycle impact assessment from climate science: Review of recent findings and recommendations for application to LCA

Since the Global Warming Potential (GWP) was first presented in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) First Assessment Report, the metric has been scrutinized and alternative metrics have been suggested. The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report gives a scientific assessment of the main recent findings from climate metrics research and provides the most up-to-date values for a subset of metrics and time horizons. The objectives of this paper are to perform a systematic review of available midpoint metrics (i.e. using an indicator situated in the middle of the cause-effect chain from emissions to climate change) for well-mixed greenhouse gases and near-term climate forcers based on the current literature, to provide recommendations for the development and use of characterization factors for climate change in life cycle assessment (LCA), and to identify research needs. This work is part of the ‘Global Guidance on Environmental Life Cycle Impact Assessment’ project held by the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative and is intended to support a consensus finding workshop. In an LCA context, it can make sense to use several complementary metrics that serve different purposes, and from there get an understanding about the robustness of the LCA study to different perspectives and metrics. We propose a step-by-step approach to test the sensitivity of LCA results to different modelling choices and provide recommendations for specific issues such as the consideration of climate-carbon feedbacks and the inclusion of pollutants with cooling effects (negative metric values).     

Impacts of onshore wind energy production on birds and bats: recommendations for future life cycle impact assessment developments

Purpose

Models for quantifying impacts on biodiversity from renewable energy technologies are lacking within life cycle impact assessment (LCIA). We aim to provide an overview of the effects of wind energy on birds and bats, with a focus on quantitative methods. Furthermore, we investigate and provide the necessary background for how these can be integrated into new developments of LCIA models in future.

Methods

We reviewed available literature summarizing the effects of wind energy developments on birds and bats. We provide an overview of available quantitative assessment methods that have been employed outside of the LCIA framework to model the different impacts of wind energy developments on wildlife. Combining the acquired knowledge on impact pathways and associated quantitative methods, we propose possibilities for future approaches for a wind energy impact assessment methodology for LCIA.

Results and discussion

Wind energy production has impacts on terrestrial biodiversity through three main pathways: collision, disturbance, and habitat alterations. Birds and bats are consistently considered the most affected taxonomic groups, with different responses to the before-mentioned impact pathways. Outside of the LCIA framework, current quantitative impact assessment prediction models include collision risk models, species distribution models, individual-based models, and population modeling approaches. Developed indices allow scaling of species-specific vulnerability to mortality, disturbance, and/or habitat alterations.

Conclusions

Although insight into the causes behind collision risk, disturbance, and habitat alterations for bats and birds is still limited, the current knowledge base enables the development of a robust assessment tool. Modeling the impacts of habitat alterations, disturbance, and collisions within an LCIA framework is most appropriate using species distribution models as those enable the estimation of species’ occurrences across a region. Although local-scale developments may be more readily feasible, further up-scaling to global coverage is recommended to allow comparison across regions and technologies, and to assess cumulative impacts.

     

User needs analysis and development of priorities for life cycle impact assessment

The development of the LCIA programme of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative started with a global survey of LCA practitioners. There were 91 LCIA-specific responses from all global regions. Respondents gave an indication of how they use LCA with respect to both the stage of LCA that they base decisions on (LCI, LCIA or a combination of both) as well as the types of decisions which they support with LCA information. The issues requiring immediate attention within the UNEP SETAC Life Cycle Initiative identified from this User Needs analysis are the need for transparency in the methodology, for scientific confidence and for scientific co-operation as well as the development of a recommended set of factors and methodologies. Of interest is the fact that results from the different regions highlighted the need for different impact categories. Based on this information proposals were made for new impact categories to be included in LCA (and thus LCIA). The LCIA programme aims to enhance the availability of sound LCA data and methods and to deliver guidance on their use. More specifically, it aims to 1) make results and recommendations widely available for users through the creation of a worldwide accessible information system and 2) establish recommended characterisation factors and related methodologies for the different impact categories, possibly consisting of sets at both midpoint and damage level. The work of the LCIA programme of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative has been started within four task forces on 1) LCIA information system and framework, 2) natural resources and land use, 3) toxic impacts, and 4) transboundary impacts. All participants willing to contribute to these efforts are invited to contact the LCIA programme manager or to join the next LCIA workgroup meeting that will take place in at the world SETAC congress in Portland on Thursday 18 November 2004.     

OMNIITOX concept model supports characterisation modelling for life cycle impact assessment

Goal Scope Background  The main focus in OMNIITOX is on characterisation models for toxicological impacts in a life cycle assessment (LCA) context. The OMNIITOX information system (OMNIITOX IS) is being developed primarily to facilitate characterisation modelling and calculation of characterisation factors to provide users with information necessary for environmental management and control of industrial systems. The modelling and implementation of operational characterisation models on eco and human toxic impacts requires the use of data and modelling approaches often originating from regulatory chemical risk assessment (RA) related disciplines. Hence, there is a need for a concept model for the data and modelling approaches that can be interchanged between these different contexts of natural system model approaches. Methods. The concept modelling methodology applied in the OMNIITOX project is built on database design principles and ontological principles in a consensus based and iterative process by participants from the LCA, RA and environmental informatics disciplines. Results. The developed OMNIITOX concept model focuses on the core concepts of substance, nature framework, load, indicator, and mechanism, with supplementary concepts to support these core concepts. They refer to the modelled cause, effect, and the relation between them, which are aspects inherent in all models used in the disciplines within the scope of OMNIITOX. This structure provides a possibility to compare the models on a fundamental level and a language to communicate information between the disciplines and to assess the possibility of transparently reusing data and modelling approaches of various levels of detail and complexity. Conclusions  The current experiences from applying the concept model show that the OMNIITOX concept model increases the structuring of all information needed to describe characterisation models transparently. From a user perspective the OMNIITOX concept model aids in understanding the applicability, use of a characterisation model and how to interpret model outputs. Recommendations and Outlook  The concept model provides a tool for structured characterisation modelling, model comparison, model implementation, model quality management, and model usage. Moreover, it could be used for the structuring of any natural environment cause-effect model concerning other impact categories than toxicity.     

Assessing potential desertification environmental impact in life cycle assessment

Background, aim and scope  

Life cycle assessment (LCA) enables the objective assessment of global environmental burdens associated with the life cycle of a product or a production system. One of the main weaknesses of LCA is that, as yet, there is no scientific agreement on the assessment methods for land-use related impacts, which results in either the exclusion or the lack of assessment of local environmental impacts related to land use. The inclusion of the desertification impact in LCA studies of any human activity can be important in high-desertification risk regions.     

Towards social life cycle assessment: a quantitative product social impact assessment

Purpose

The main goal of this paper is to present the feasibility of the quantitative method presented in the Product Social Impact Assessment (PSIA) handbook throughout a case study. The case study was developed to assess the social impacts of a tire throughout its entire life cycle. We carried out this case study in the context of the Roundtable for the Product Social Metrics project in which 13 companies develop two methodologies, a qualitative and a quantitative one, for assessing the social impact of product life cycle.

Methods

The quantitative methodology implemented for assessing the social impact of a Run On Flat tire mounted in a BMW 3 series consists of 26 indicators split in three groups. Each group represents a stakeholder group. Primary data of the quantitative indicators were collected along the product life cycle of the Run On Flat by involving the companies, which owned the main steps of the product life cycle. Throughout this case study, an ideal/worst-case scenario was defined for the distance-to-target approach to compare the social performances of more products when they are available.

Results and discussion

The implementation of the PSIA quantitative method to a Run On Flat illustrated the necessity to have a referencing step in order to interpret the results. This is particularly important when the results are used to support decision-making process in which no experts are involved. It frequently happens in a big company where the management level has to take often decisions on different topics. Reference values were defined using ideal or worst-case-target scenarios (Fontes et al. 2014). For those topics where it was possible, an ideal/ethical scenario was defined, e.g., 0 h of child labor per product. In other cases, we defined a worst-case scenario, e.g., 0 training hours per product. It was then possible to interpret the results using a distance-to-target approach. A matrix was developed in the case study for identifying in which step of the product life cycle data is not available; that means we need more transparency in the supply chain.

Conclusions

Each value of the matrix can be compared to the ideal/worst scenario to compare the step to each other and to identify along the product life cycle which step and the relative supplier that needs further measures to improve the product performance. Furthermore, a quantitative value for each indicator related to the product life cycle is calculated and compared with the ideal/worst scenario. The case study on Run On Flat represents the first implementation of the quantitative method of PSIA.

     

Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment

Purpose

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) is a field of active development. The last decade has seen prolific publication of new impact assessment methods covering many different impact categories and providing characterization factors that often deviate from each other for the same substance and impact. The LCA standard ISO 14044 is rather general and unspecific in its requirements and offers little help to the LCA practitioner who needs to make a choice. With the aim to identify the best among existing characterization models and provide recommendations to the LCA practitioner, a study was performed for the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission (JRC).

Methods

Existing LCIA methods were collected and their individual characterization models identified at both midpoint and endpoint levels and supplemented with other environmental models of potential use for LCIA. No new developments of characterization models or factors were done in the project. From a total of 156 models, 91 were short listed as possible candidates for a recommendation within their impact category. Criteria were developed for analyzing the models within each impact category. The criteria addressed both scientific qualities and stakeholder acceptance. The criteria were reviewed by external experts and stakeholders and applied in a comprehensive analysis of the short-listed characterization models (the total number of criteria varied between 35 and 50 per impact category). For each impact category, the analysis concluded with identification of the best among the existing characterization models. If the identified model was of sufficient quality, it was recommended by the JRC. Analysis and recommendation process involved hearing of both scientific experts and stakeholders.

Results and recommendations

Recommendations were developed for 14 impact categories at midpoint level, and among these recommendations, three were classified as “satisfactory” while ten were “in need of some improvements” and one was so weak that it has “to be applied with caution.” For some of the impact categories, the classification of the recommended model varied with the type of substance. At endpoint level, recommendations were only found relevant for three impact categories. For the rest, the quality of the existing methods was too weak, and the methods that came out best in the analysis were classified as “interim,” i.e., not recommended by the JRC but suitable to provide an initial basis for further development.

Discussion, conclusions, and outlook

The level of characterization modeling at midpoint level has improved considerably over the last decade and now also considers important aspects like geographical differentiation and combination of midpoint and endpoint characterization, although the latter is in clear need for further development. With the realization of the potential importance of geographical differentiation comes the need for characterization models that are able to produce characterization factors that are representative for different continents and still support aggregation of impact scores over the whole life cycle. For the impact categories human toxicity and ecotoxicity, we are now able to recommend a model, but the number of chemical substances in common use is so high that there is a need to address the substance data shortage and calculate characterization factors for many new substances. Another unresolved issue is the need for quantitative information about the uncertainties that accompany the characterization factors. This is still only adequately addressed for one or two impact categories at midpoint, and this should be a focus point in future research. The dynamic character of LCIA research means that what is best practice will change quickly in time. The characterization methods presented in this paper represent what was best practice in 2008–2009.     

The formulation of life cycle impact assessment framework for Malaysia using Eco-indicator

Background, aim, and scope  

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an emerging supporting tool designed to help practitioner in systematically assessing the environmental performance of selected product’s life cycle. A product’s life cycle includes the extraction of raw materials, production, and usage, and ends with waste treatment or disposal. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) as a part of LCA is a method used to derive the environmental burdens from selected product’s stages. LCIA is structured in classification, characterization, normalization and weighting. Presently most of the LCIA practices use European database to establish the characterization, normalization and weighting value. However, using these values for local LCA practice might not be able to reflect the actual Malaysian’s environmental scenario. The aim of this study is to create a Malaysian version of normalization and weighting value using the pollution database within Malaysia.     

A semi-quantitative method for the impact assessment of emissions within a simplified life cycle assessment

Intention, Goal and Scope: Dealing with data gaps, data asymmetries, and inconsistencies in life cycle inventories (LCI) is a general prohlem in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies. An approach to deal with these difficulties is the simplification of LCA. A methodology that lowers the requirements for data quality (accuracy) for process emissions within a simplified LCA is introduced in this article. Background: Simplification is essential for applying LCA in the context of design for environment (DfE). The tool euroMat is a comprehensive DfE software tool that is based on a specific, simplified LCA approach, the Iterative Screening LCA (IS-LCA). Within the scope of the IS-LCA, there is a quantitative assessment of energy-related processes, as well as a semi-quantitative assessment of non-energy related emissions which supplement each other. Objectives: The semi-quantitative assessment, which is in the focus of this article, aims at lowering the requirements for the quality of non-energy related emissions data through combined use of qualitative and quantitative inventory data. Methods: Potential environmental impacts are assessed based on ABC-categories for qualities (harmfulness) of emissions and XYZ-categories for quantities of emitted substances. Employing statistical methods assignment rules for the ABC/XYZ-categories were derived from literature data and databases on emissions to air, water, and soil. Statistical tests as well as a DfE case study (comparing the materials aluminum and carbon fiber reinforced epoxy for a lightweight container to be used in an aerospace application) were conducted in order to evaluate the level of confidence and practicality of the proposed, simplified impact assessment. Results: Statistical and technical consistency checks show that the method bears a high level of confidence. Results obtained by the simplified assessment correlate to those of a detailed quantitative LCA. Conclusions: Therefore, the application of the ABC/XYZ-categories (together with the cumulative energy demand) can be considered a practical and consistent approach for determining the environmental significance of products when only incomplete emission data is available. Future Prospects: The statistical base of the method is expanded continuously since it is an integral part of the DfE software tool euroMat, which is currently being further developed. That should foster the application of the method. Outside DfE, the method should also be capable of facilitating simplified LCAs in general.     

Choice of land reference situation in life cycle impact assessment

Purpose

Land use life cycle impact assessment is calculated as a distance to target value—the target being a desirable situation defined as a reference situation in Milà i Canals et al.’s (Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(1):2–4, 2007) widely accepted framework. There are several reference situations. This work aims to demonstrate the effect of the choice of reference situation on land impact indicators.

Methods

Various reference situations are reported from the perspective of the object of assessment in land in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies and the modeling choices used in life cycle land impact indicators. They are analyzed and classified according to additional LCA modeling requirements: the type of LCA approach (attributional or consequential), cultural perspectives (egalitarian, hierarchist or individualist), and temporal preference. Sets of characterization factors (CF) by impact pathway, land cover, and region are calculated for different reference situations. These sets of CFs by reference situation are all compared with a baseline set. A case study on different crop types is used to calculate impact scores from different sets of CFs and compare them.

Results and discussion

Comparing the rankings of the CFs from two different sets present inversions from 5% to 35% worldwide. Impact scores of the case study present inversions of 10% worldwide. These inversions demonstrate that the choice of a reference situation may reverse the LCA conclusions for the land use impact category. Moreover, these reference situations must be consistent with the different modeling requirements of an LCA study (approach, cultural perspective, and time preference), as defined in the goal and scope.

Conclusions

A decision tree is proposed to guide the selection of a consistent and suitable choice of reference situation when setting other LCA modeling requirements.

     

Soil salinisation: a local life cycle assessment impact category

Salinity is an increasing environmental problem in agricultural ecosystems and is not adequately represented in conventional life cycle assessment (LCA) impact categories. It is often not the total quantity of salts emitted or the proportion of salt accumulated in the soil profile that is the primary mechanism for deteriorating soil conditions for irrigated salinity, rather the ratio of major cations in the soil matrix and the potential for colloid dispersion and reduced permeability. A soil salinisation potential (SP) is proposed as an indicator for irrigated salinity and potential soil degradation from poor irrigation practices. The indicator uses the threshold electrolyte concentration concept that predicts the adjusted sodium adsorption ratio (SAR)/ Electrical conductivity (EC) ratio that soil will no longer flocculate, but potentially disperse. The SAR is converted to a threshold EC and compared to the measured EC in order to develop a site-specific irrigation equivalence factor (EF). This site/region/process specific EF is then used to weight the sodium load to soil and repeated for each stage throughout the entire life cycle to determine the overall Salinisation Potential (SP). The data required for calculating the SP is generally readily available either on site or from the water chemistry of the local watercourses. Preliminary calculations simply require the volume, pH, electrical conductivity (EC), alkalinity and the concentrations of Na, Ca, and Mg of the irrigation water. The site/process/region specific nature of the indicator ensures a quantitative measure to enable comparisons between different systems and is useful for identifying stages in the life cycle of a product (particularly food products), where the potential for soil salinisation and soil degradation is most severe.