A unified framework of life cycle assessment

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - The dichotomy between the attributional approach and the consequential approach is one of the major unsettled questions in life cycle...     

Functional unit influence on building life cycle assessment

Purpose

The building sector is one of the most relevant sectors in terms of environmental impact. Different functional units (FUs) can be used in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies for a variety of purposes. This paper aimed to present different FUs used in the LCA of buildings and evaluate the influence of FU choice and setting in comparative studies.

Methods

As an example, we compared the “cradle to grave” environmental performance of four typical Brazilian residential buildings with different construction typologies, i.e., multi-dwelling and single dwelling, each with high and basic standards. We chose three types of FU for comparison: a dwelling with defined lifetime and occupancy parameters, an area of 1 m² of dwelling over a year period, and the accommodation of an occupant person of the dwelling over a day.

Results and discussion

The FU choice was found to bias the results considerably. As expected, the largest global warming indicator (GWi) values per dwelling unit and occupant were identified for the high standard dwellings. However, when measured per square meter, lower standard dwellings presented the largest GWi values. This was caused by the greater concentration of people per square meter in smaller area dwellings, resulting in larger water and energy consumption per square meter. The sensitivity analysis of FU variables such as lifetime and occupancy showed the GWi contribution of the infrastructure more relevant compared with the operation in high and basic standard dwellings. The definition of lifetime and occupancy parameters is key to avoid bias and to reduce uncertainty of the results when performing a comparison of dwelling environmental performances.

Conclusions

This paper highlights the need for adequate choice and setting of FU to support intended decision-making in LCA studies of the building sector. The use of at least two FUs presented a broader picture of building performance, helping to guide effective environmental optimization efforts from different approaches and levels of analysis. Information regarding space, time, and service dimensions should be either included in the FU setting or provided in the building LCA study to allow adjustment of the results for subsequent comparison.

     

Integration of working environment into life cycle assessment framework

Background, aim, and scope  Life cycle assessment (LCA) has been considered one of the tools for supporting decision-making related to the environmental aspects of a product system. It has mainly been used to evaluate the potential impacts associated with relevant inputs and outputs to/from a given product system throughout its life cycle. In most cases, LCA has not considered the impacts on the internal environment, i.e. working environment, but only the external environment. Recently, it has been recognized that the consideration of the impacts on the working environment as well as on the external environment, is needed in order to assess all aspects of the effects on human well-being. To this end, this study has developed a total environmental assessment methodology which enables one to integrate both the working environment and the external environment into the conventional LCA framework. Materials and methods  In general, the characteristics of the impacts on the external environment are different from those on the working environment. In order to properly integrate the two types into total environmental impacts, it is necessary to define identical system boundaries and select impact category indicators at the same level. In order to define the identical system boundary and reduce the uncertainties of LCI results, the hybrid IOA (input–output analysis) method, which integrates the advantages between conventional LCI method and IOA method, is introduced to collect input and output data throughout the entire life cycle of a given product. For the impact category indicators at the endpoint level, LWD (Lost Work Days) is employed to evaluate the damage to human health and safety in the working environment, while DALY (disability-adjusted life years) and PAF (Potentially Affected Fraction) are selected to evaluate the damage to human health and eco-system quality in the external environment, respectively. Results and discussion  The environmental intervention factors (EIFs) are developed not only for the data categories of resource use, air emissions, and water emissions, but also for occupational health and safety to complete a life cycle inventory table. For the development of the EIFs on occupational health and safety, in particular, the number of workers affected by i hazardous items and the number of workers affected at the i magnitude of disability are collected. For the characterization of the impact categories in the working environment, such as occupational health and safety, the exposure factors, effect factors, and damage factors are developed to calculate the LWD of each category. For normalization, the normalization reference is defined as the total LWD divided by the total number of workers. A case study is presented to illustrate the applicability of the proposed method for the integration of the working environment into the conventional LCA framework. Conclusions  This study is intended to develop a methodology which enables one to integrate the working environmental module into the conventional LCA framework. The hybrid IOA method is utilized to extend the system boundary of both the working environment module and the external environment module to the entire life cycle of a product system. In this study, characterization models and category indicators for occupational health and safety are proposed, respectively, while the methodology of Eco-indicator 99 is used for the external environment. In addition to aid further understanding on the results of this method, this study introduced and developed the category indicators such as DALY, and LWD, which can be expressed as a function of time, and introduced PAF, which can be expressed as a probability. Recommendations and perspectives  The consideration of the impacts not only on the external environment, but also on the working environment, is very important, because the best solution for the external environment may not necessarily be the best solution for the working environment. It is expected that the integration of occupational health and safety matters into the conventional LCA framework can bring many benefits to individuals, as well as industrial companies, by avoiding duplicated measures and false optimization.     

Costructal law,exergy analysis and life cycle energy sustainability assessment: an expanded framework applied to a boiler

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) is one of the most relevant tools delving in sustainability science, based currently on the triple...     

Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 1: methodological framework

Purpose

The aim of this work is to propose an objective method for evaluating subcategories in social life cycle impact assessment (S-LCIA). Methods for assessing subcategories have been available since 2006, but a number of these either fail to include all the subcategories envisaged in the guidelines for S-LCA (UNEP/SETAC 2009) or are subjective in their assessment of each subcategory.

Methods

The methodology is characterized by four steps: (i) the use of the organization as unit process, in which it was decided to assess the social profile of the organization responsible for the processes involved in the product life cycle, (ii) definition of the basic requirement to assess each subcategory, (iii) definition of levels based on the environment context or organizational practice and the data availability and (iv) assignment of a quantitative value.

Results and discussion

The result of the method applied was the development of the subcategory assessment method (SAM). SAM is a characterization model that evaluates subcategories during the impact assessment phase. This method is based on the behaviour of organizations responsible for the processes along the product life cycle, thereby enabling a social performance evaluation. The method, thus, presents levels for each subcategory assessment. Level A indicates that the organization exhibits proactive behaviour by promoting basic requirement (BR) practices along the value chain. Level B means that the organization fulfils the BR. Levels C and D are assigned to organizations that do not meet the BR and are differentiated by their context. The greatest difficulty when developing SAM was the definition of the BR to be used in the evaluation of the subcategories, though many indications were present in the methodological sheets.

Conclusions

SAM makes it possible to go from inventory to subcategory assessment. The method supports evaluation across life cycle products, thereby ensuring a more objective evaluation of the social behaviour of organizations and applicable in different countries.

Recommendations

When using SAM, it is advisable to update the data for the context environment. The method might be improved by using data for the social context that would consider not only the country, but also the region, sector and product concerned. A further improvement could be a subdivision of the levels to better encompass differences between organizations. It is advisable to test SAM by applying it to a case study.     

Variance-based global sensitivity analysis and beyond in life cycle assessment: an application to geothermal heating networks

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Global sensitivity analysis increasingly replaces manual sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment (LCA). Variance-based global sensitivity...     

Analytical uncertainty propagation in life cycle inventory and impact assessment: application to an automobile front panel

Background, aim, and scope

Uncertainty information is essential for the proper use of life cycle assessment (LCA) and environmental assessments in decision making. So far, parameter uncertainty propagation has mainly been studied using Monte Carlo techniques that are relatively computationally heavy to conduct, especially for the comparison of multiple scenarios, often limiting its use to research or to inventory only. Furthermore, Monte Carlo simulations do not automatically assess the sensitivity and contribution to overall uncertainty of individual parameters. The present paper aims to develop and apply to both inventory and impact assessment an explicit and transparent analytical approach to uncertainty. This approach applies Taylor series expansions to the uncertainty propagation of lognormally distributed parameters.

Materials and methods

We first apply the Taylor series expansion method to analyze the uncertainty propagation of a single scenario, in which case the squared geometric standard deviation of the final output is determined as a function of the model sensitivity to each input parameter and the squared geometric standard deviation of each parameter. We then extend this approach to the comparison of two or more LCA scenarios. Since in LCA it is crucial to account for both common inventory processes and common impact assessment characterization factors among the different scenarios, we further develop the approach to address this dependency. We provide a method to easily determine a range and a best estimate of (a) the squared geometric standard deviation on the ratio of the two scenario scores, “A/B”, and (b) the degree of confidence in the prediction that the impact of scenario A is lower than B (i.e., the probability that A/B<1). The approach is tested on an automobile case study and resulting probability distributions of climate change impacts are compared to classical Monte Carlo distributions.

Results

The probability distributions obtained with the Taylor series expansion lead to results similar to the classical Monte Carlo distributions, while being substantially simpler; the Taylor series method tends to underestimate the 2.5% confidence limit by 1-11% and the 97.5% limit by less than 5%. The analytical Taylor series expansion easily provides the explicit contributions of each parameter to the overall uncertainty. For the steel front end panel, the factor contributing most to the climate change score uncertainty is the gasoline consumption (>75%). For the aluminum panel, the electricity and aluminum primary production, as well as the light oil consumption, are the dominant contributors to the uncertainty. The developed approach for scenario comparisons, differentiating between common and independent parameters, leads to results similar to those of a Monte Carlo analysis; for all tested cases, we obtained a good concordance between the Monte Carlo and the Taylor series expansion methods regarding the probability that one scenario is better than the other.

Discussion

The Taylor series expansion method addresses the crucial need of accounting for dependencies in LCA, both for common LCI processes and common LCIA characterization factors. The developed approach in Eq. 8, which differentiates between common and independent parameters, estimates the degree of confidence in the prediction that scenario A is better than B, yielding results similar to those found with Monte Carlo simulations.

Conclusions

The probability distributions obtained with the Taylor series expansion are virtually equivalent to those from a classical Monte Carlo simulation, while being significantly easier to obtain. An automobile case study on an aluminum front end panel demonstrated the feasibility of this method and illustrated its simultaneous and consistent application to both inventory and impact assessment. The explicit and innovative analytical approach, based on Taylor series expansions of lognormal distributions, provides the contribution to the uncertainty from each parameter and strongly reduces calculation time.     

Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to photovoltaic modules

Purpose

The main goal of the paper is to carry out the first implementation of sustainability assessment of the assembly step of photovoltaic (PV) modules production by Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) and the development of the Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard (LCSD), in order to compare LCSA results of different PV modules. The applicability and practicability of the LCSD is reported thanks to a case study. The results show that LCSA can be considered a valuable tool to support decision-making processes that involve different stakeholders with different knowledge and background.

Method

The sustainability performance of the production step of Italian and German polycrystalline silicon modules is assessed using the LCSD. The LCSD is an application oriented to the presentation of an LCSA study. LCSA comprises life cycle assessment (LCA), life cycle costing and social LCA (S-LCA). The primary data collected for the German module are related to two different years, and this led to the evaluation of three different scenarios: a German 2008 module, a German 2009 module, and an Italian 2008 module.

Results and discussion

According to the LCA results based on Ecoindicator 99, the German module for example has lower values of land use [1.77 potential disappeared fractions (PDF) m²/year] and acidification (3.61 PDF m²/year) than the Italian one (land use 1.99 PDF m²/year, acidification 3.83 PDF m²/year). However, the German module has higher global warming potential [4.5E?C05 disability-adjusted life years (DALY)] than the Italian one [3.00E?05 DALY]. The economic costs of the German module are lower than the Italian one, e.g. the cost of electricity per FU for the German module is 0.12??/m² compared to the Italian 0.85??/m². The S-LCA results show significant differences between German module 2008 and 2009 that represent respectively the best and the worst overall social performances of the three considered scenarios compared by LCSD. The aggregate LCSD results show that the German module 2008 has the best overall sustainability performance and a score of 665 points out of 1,000 (and a colour scale of light green). The Italian module 2008 has the worst overall sustainability performance with a score of 404 points, while the German module 2009 is in the middle with 524 points.

Conclusions

The LCSA and LCSD methodologies represent an applicable framework as a tool for supporting decision-making processes which consider sustainable production and consumption. However, there are still challenges for a meaningful application, particularly the questions of the selection of social LCA indicators and how to weigh sets for the LCSD.     

The application of life cycle assessment to public policy development

Purpose

Despite the potential value it offers, integration of life cycle assessment (LCA) into the development of environmental public policy has been limited. This paper researches potential barriers that may be limiting the use of LCA in public policy development, and considers process opportunities to increase this application.

Methods

Research presented in this paper is primarily derived from reviews of existing literature and case studies, as well as interviews with key public policy officials with LCA experience. Direct experience of the author in LCA projects with public policy elements has also contributed to approaches and conclusions.

Results and discussion

LCAs have historically been applied within a rational framework, with experts conducting the analysis and presenting results to decision-makers for application to public policy development. This segmented approach has resulted in limited incorporation of LCA results or even a broader approach of life cycle thinking within the public policy development process. Barriers that limit the application of LCA within the public policy development process range from lack of technical knowledge and LCA understanding on the part of policy makers, to a lack of trust in LCA process and results. Many of the identified barriers suggest that the failure of LCAs to contribute positively to public policy development is due to the process within which the LCA is being incorporated, rather than technical problems in the LCA itself. Overcoming the barriers to effective use of LCAs in public policy development will require a more normative approach to the LCA process that incorporates a broad group of stakeholders at all stages of the assessment. Specifically, a set of recommendations have been developed to produce a more inclusive and effective process.

Conclusions

In an effort to effectively incorporate LCA within the overall public policy decision-making process, the decision-making process should incorporate a multi-disciplinary approach that includes a range of stakeholders and public policy decision-makers in a collaborative process. One of the most important aspects of incorporating LCA into public policy decisions is to encourage life cycle thinking among policy makers. Considering the life cycle implications will result in more informed and thoughtful decisions, even if a full LCA is not undertaken.

     

Solid waste treatment within the framework of life cycle assessment

Due to a lack of available methods and data, the Inventory Analysis in many Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) often exclude important information concerning emissions from landfills. In light of this, a method for estimating emission factors for metals from municipal solid waste has been developed and is presented herewith. Emission factors, expressing the emitted fraction of the landfilled amount of the element during a surveyable time period (corresponding to several decades or a century), is suggested for several metals. It is suggested that these can be used in initial (screening) LCAs where the aim is to identify key-issues, i.e. important aspects of the system under study.     

Comparative life cycle assessment of conventional and Green Seal-compliant industrial and institutional cleaning products

Purpose  

The goal of this study was to use life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology to assess the environmental impacts of industrial and institutional cleaning products that are compliant with the Green Seal Standard for Cleaning Products for Industrial and Institutional Use, GS-37, and conventional products (non-GS-37-compliant) products.     

Using GaBi 3 to perform life cycle assessment and life cycle engineering

The growing availability of software tools has increased the speed of generating LCA studies. Databases and visual tools for constructing material balance modules greatly facilitate the process of analyzing the environmental aspects of product systems over their life cycle. A robust software tool, containing a large LCI dataset and functions for performing LCIA and sensitivity analysis will allow companies and LCA practitioners to conduct systems analyses efficiently and reliably. This paper discusses how the GaBi 3 software tool can be used to perform LCA and Life Cycle Engineering (LCE), a methodology that combines life cycle economic, environmental, and technology assessment. The paper highlights important attributes of LCA software tools, including high quality, well-documented data, transparency in modeling, and data analysis functionality. An example of a regional power grid mix model is used to illustrate the versatility of GaBi 3.     

Criteria for the evaluation of life cycle assessment software packages and life cycle inventory data with application to concrete

Purpose

Life cycle assessment (LCA) software packages have proliferated and evolved as LCA has developed and grown. There are now a multitude of LCA software packages that must be critically evaluated by users. Prior to conducting a comparative LCA study on different concrete materials, it is necessary to examine a variety of software packages for this specific purpose. The paper evaluates five LCA tools in the context of the LCA of seven concrete mix designs (conventional concrete, concrete with fly ash, slag, silica fume or limestone as cement replacement, recycled aggregate concrete, and photocatalytic concrete).

Methods

Three key evaluation criteria required to assess the quality of analysis are adequate flexibility, sophistication and complexity of analysis, and usefulness of outputs. The quality of life cycle inventory (LCI) data included in each software package is also assessed for its reliability, completeness, and correlation to the scope of LCA of concrete products in Canada. A questionnaire is developed for evaluating LCA software packages and is applied to five LCA tools.

Results and discussion

The result is the selection of a software package for the specific context of LCA of concrete materials in Canada, which will be used to complete a full LCA study. The software package with the highest score is software package C (SP-C), with 44 out of a possible 48 points. Its main advantage is that it allows for the user to have a high level of control over the system being modeled and the calculation methods used.

Conclusions

This comparative study highlights the importance of selecting a software package that is appropriate for a specific research project. The ability to accurately model the chosen functional unit and system boundary is an important selection criterion. This study demonstrates a method to enable a critical and rigorous comparison without excessive and redundant duplication of efforts.

     

Advances in application of machine learning to life cycle assessment: a literature review

Purpose

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is the process of systematically assessing impacts when there is an interaction between the environment and human activity. Machine learning (ML) with LCA methods can help contribute greatly to reducing impacts. The sheer number of input parameters and their uncertainties that contribute to the full life cycle make a broader application of ML complex and difficult to achieve. Hence a systems engineering approach should be taken to apply ML in isolation to aspects of the LCA. This study addresses the challenge of leveraging ML methods to deliver LCA solutions. The overarching hypothesis is that: LCA underpinned by ML methods and informed by dynamic data paves the way to more accurate LCA while supporting life cycle decision making.

Methods

In this study, previous research on ML for LCA were considered, and a literature review was undertaken.

Results

The results showed that ML can be a useful tool in certain aspects of the LCA. ML methods were shown to be applied efficiently in optimization scenarios in LCA. Finally, ML methods were integrated as part of existing inventory databases to streamline the LCA across many use cases.

Conclusions

The conclusions of this article summarise the characteristics of existing literature and provide suggestions for future work in limitations and gaps which were found in the literature.

     

Environmental life cycle assessment of a commercial office building in Thailand

Background, aim, and scope  To minimize the environmental impacts of construction and simultaneously move closer to sustainable development in the society, the life cycle assessment of buildings is essential. This article provides an environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of a typical commercial office building in Thailand. Almost all commercial office buildings in Thailand follow a similar structural, envelope pattern as well as usage patterns. Likewise, almost every office building in Thailand operates on electricity, which is obtained from the national grid which limits variability. Therefore, the results of the single case study building are representative of commercial office buildings in Thailand. Target audiences are architects, building construction managers and environmental policy makers who are interested in the environmental impact of buildings. Materials and methods  In this work, a combination of input–output and process analysis was used in assessing the potential environmental impact associated with the system under study according to the ISO14040 methodology. The study covered the whole life cycle including material production, construction, occupation, maintenance, demolition, and disposal. The inventory data was simulated in an LCA model and the environmental impacts for each stage computed. Three environmental impact categories considered relevant to the Thailand context were evaluated, namely, global warming potential, acidification potential, and photo-oxidant formation potential. A 50-year service time was assumed for the building. Results  The results obtained showed that steel and concrete are the most significant materials both in terms of quantities used, and also for their associated environmental impacts at the manufacturing stage. They accounted for 24% and 47% of the global warming potential, respectively. In addition, of the total photo-oxidant formation potential, they accounted for approximately 41% and 30%; and, of the total acidification potential, 37% and 42%, respectively. Analysis also revealed that the life cycle environmental impacts of commercial buildings are dominated by the operation stage, which accounted for approximately 52% of the total global warming potential, about 66% of the total acidification potential, and about 71% of the total photo-oxidant formation potential, respectively. The results indicate that the principal contributor to the impact categories during the operation phase were emissions related to fossil fuel combustion, particularly for electricity production. Discussion  The life cycle environmental impacts of commercial buildings are dominated by the operation stage, especially electricity consumption. Significant reductions in the environmental impacts of buildings at this stage can be achieved through reducing their operating energy. The results obtained show that increasing the indoor set-point temperature of the building by 2°C, as well as the practice of load shedding, reduces the environmental burdens of buildings at the operation stage. On a national scale, the implementation of these simple no-cost energy conservation measures have the potential to achieve estimated reductions of 10.2% global warming potential, 5.3% acidification potential, and 0.21% photo-oxidant formation potential per year, respectively, in emissions from the power generation sector. Overall, the measures could reduce approximately 4% per year from the projected global warming potential of 211.51 Tg for the economy of Thailand. Conclusions  Operation phase has the highest energy and environmental impacts, followed by the manufacturing phase. At the operation phase, significant reductions in the energy consumption and environmental impacts can be achieved through the implementation of simple no-cost energy conservation as well as energy efficiency strategies. No-cost energy conservation policies, which minimize energy consumption in commercial buildings, should be encouraged in combination with already existing energy efficiency measures of the government. Recommendations and perspectives  In the long run, the environmental impacts of buildings will need to be addressed. Incorporation of environmental life cycle assessment into the current building code is proposed. It is difficult to conduct a full and rigorous life cycle assessment of an office building. A building consists of many materials and components. This study made an effort to access reliable data on all the life cycle stages considered. Nevertheless, there were a number of assumptions made in the study due to the unavailability of adequate data. In order for life cycle modeling to fulfill its potential, there is a need for detailed data on specific building systems and components in Thailand. This will enable designers to construct and customize LCAs during the design phase to enable the evaluation of performance and material tradeoffs across life cycles without the excessive burden of compiling an inventory. Further studies with more detailed, reliable, and Thailand-specific inventories for building materials are recommended.     

Social life cycle assessment framework for evaluation of potential job creation with an application in the French carbon fiber aeronautical recycling sector

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Due to the increased consumption of carbon fibers, it is expected that an important amount of carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP)-based...     

Social life cycle assessment for material selection: a case study of building materials

Purpose

Sustainability of a material-based product mainly depends on the materials used for the product itself or during its lifetime. A material selection decision should not only capture the functional performance required but should also consider the economical, social, and environmental impacts originated during the product life cycle. There is a need to assess social impacts of materials along the full life cycle, not only to be able to address the “social dimension” in sustainable material selection but also for potentially improving the circumstances of affected stakeholders. This paper presents the method and a case study of social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) specialized for comparative studies. Although the authors’ focus is on material selection, the proposed methodology can be used for comparative assessment of products in general.

Methods

The method is based on UNEP/SETAC “guidelines for social life-cycle assessment of products” and includes four main phases: goal and scope definition, life cycle inventory analysis, life cycle impact assessment, and life cycle interpretation. However, some special features are presented to adjust the framework for materials comparison purpose. In life cycle inventory analysis phase, a hot spot assessment is carried out using material flow analysis and stakeholder and experts’ interviews. Based on the results of that, a pairwise comparison method is proposed for life cycle impact assessment applying analytic hierarchy process. A case study was conducted to perform a comparative assessment of the social and socio-economic impacts in life cycle of concrete and steel as building materials in Iran. For hot spot analysis, generic and national level data were gathered, and for impact assessment phase, site-specific data were used.

Result and discussion

The unique feature of the proposed method compared with other works in S-LCA is its specialty to materials and products comparison. This leads to some differences in methodological issues of S-LCA that are explained in the paper in detail. The case study results assert that “steel/iron” in the north of Iran generally has the better social performance than “concrete/cement.” However, steel is associated with many negative social effects in some subcategories, e.g., freedom of association, fair salary, and occupational health in extraction phase. Against, social profile of concrete and cement industry is damaged mainly due to the negative impact of cement production on safe and healthy living condition. The case study presented in this article shows that the evaluation of social impacts is possible, even if the assessment is always affected by subjective value systems.

Conclusions

Application of the UNEP/SETAC guidelines in comparative studies can be encouraged based on the results of this paper. It enables a hotspot assessment of the social and socio-economic impacts in life cycle of alternative materials. This research showed that the development of a specialized S-LCA approach for materials and products comparison is well underway although many challenges still persist. Particularly characterization method in life cycle impact assessment phase is challenging. The findings of this case study pointed out that social impacts are primarily connected to the conduct of companies and less with processes and materials in general. These findings confirm the results of Dreyer et al. (Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(2):88–97, 2006). The proposed approach aims not only to identify the best socially sustainable alternative but also to reveal product/process improvement potentials to facilitate companies to act socially compatible. It will be interesting to apply the UNEP/SETAC approach of S-LCA to other materials and products; materials with a more complex life cycle will be a special challenge. As with any new method, getting experience on data collection and evaluation, building a data base, integrating the method in software tools, and finding ways for effective communication of results are important steps until integrating S-LCA in routine decision support.     

An inventory framework for inclusion of textile chemicals in life cycle assessment

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Toxicity impacts of chemicals have only been covered to a minor extent in LCA studies of textile products. The two main reasons for this...