Evaluating the variability of aquatic acidification and photochemical ozone formation characterization factors for Canadian emissions

Background, aim, and scope  The Canadian life cycle impact assessment method LUCAS proposes a characterization of the impact categories aquatic acidification and photochemical ozone formation using a resolution scale based on 15 terrestrial ecozones. Each ecozone represents areas of the country which can be identified easily by general living (biotic) and nonliving (abiotic) characteristics. The three main purposes of this research are to improve the characterization models of both impact categories including regional exposure and effect factors, to investigate what is the best resolution scale between Canadian provinces or ecozones, and to analyze the extent of spatial variability. Materials and methods  A model framework accounting for variability in fate, exposure and effect factors has been elaborated. The same fate factor, based on Advanced Statistical Trajectory Regional Air Pollution matrices, applies to both impact categories. For the aquatic acidification impact category, the fate factor also accounts for the fraction of the deposition transferred to the aquatic ecosystem. The exposure factor for this impact category is considered to be 1 and the effect factor is based on the critical load exceedance, where the potential impacts are only considered in provinces or ecozones in which the critical load is exceeded. For the photochemical ozone formation impact category, the exposure factor is considered to be proportional to the population density in each province or ecozone, and the effect factor is represented by the chemical reactivity estimated with the maximum incremental reactivity model. The calculation of the new characterization factors using both a province-based and ecozone resolution scale was performed using a matrix which converts data from one resolution scale to another. Results  Results with the inclusion of the effect and the exposure factors show that the spatial variability between provinces remains within a factor of 10 and 5 for aquatic acidification and photochemical ozone formation, respectively. Discussion  Analysis of the results show that regionalization by province is preferable to regionalization by ecozone. It is more accurate in regard to atmospheric modeling and more representative of population distribution. However, averaging the fate factor and the population density over a whole province results in a serious limitation. Conclusions  The spatial variability of characterization factors between provinces is in the same order of magnitude as the overall range between chemicals for aquatic acidification while much smaller for photochemical ozone formation. Hence, at this stage of knowledge, province-based regionalization seems to be more relevant for the aquatic acidification impact category than for photochemical ozone formation. Recommendations and perspectives  Research must be pursued to integrate a better transport and deposition model with improved spatial capabilities and a successive modeling step properly describing the cause–effect chain up to the damage level, such as the biotic environment and the human population.     

Impact Characterization in the Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts

The tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts (TRACI) is a set of life-cycle impact assessment (LCIA) characterization methods that has been developed by a series of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency research projects. TRACI facilitates the characterization of stressors that may have potential effects, including ozone depletion, global warming, acidification, eutrophication, tropospheric ozone (smog) formation, eco-toxicity, human particulate effects, human carcinogenic effects, human non-carcinogenic effects, fossil fuel depletion, and land-use effects. This article describes the methodologies developed to address acidification, eutrophication, and smog. Each of these methods offers the ability to take account of differences in expected strength of impact as a function of pollution release location within North America. Specifically, the methods employ regionalized fate and transport modeling. The resulting factors differ regionally by up to more than an order of magnitude.     

Accounting for transportation impacts in the environmental assessment of waste management plans

Background, aim, and scope  Many recent studies on waste management have described in detail the potential impacts of recycling and final treatment of municipal waste. In public debates, the attention has also been focused on the choice of final disposal technologies (e.g. landfilling vs. incineration). However, a comprehensive assessment of the impacts of waste collection and transport was still lacking. In the present study, we use LCA to evaluate the potential impact of the provincial waste management plan of Varese (northern Italy). Particular attention is devoted to the estimation of environmental impacts generated during waste transport. Materials and methods  A detailed Life Cycle Inventory was built for the transportation phase, based on primary data collected by interviewing the agencies involved in waste collection. To model the recycling and final disposal phase we relied on the BUWAL 250 database. Impacts were evaluated with the Eco-Indicator 99 method in its egalitarian formulation. Results  The results of our analysis reveal that the major potential impacts of the plan are associated with waste collection and transport. These impacts are partially compensated by reduced resource consumption through recycling and energy recovery through incineration. Discussion  The outputs of the LCIA were compared with those obtained by using other ecoindicators (Eco-Indicator 99 hierarchist and individualist, CML2, EPS2000). Although not comparable on a quantitative basis, they are qualitatively consistent. Conclusions  Neglecting the effects of collection and transport might result in a severe underestimation of the environmental impacts of a waste management system, especially as refers to depletion of fossil fuels, emission of respiratory inorganics and climate change. To reduce the environmental impact of waste management systems, an accurate optimisation of waste transport is required. Recommendations and perspectives  Effective waste management planning requires the explicit inclusion of waste collection and transport when comparing alternative management policies.     

Characterisation and Normalisation Factors for Life Cycle Impact Assessment Mined Abiotic Resources Categories in South Africa: The manufacturing of catalytic converter exhaust systems as a case study (10 pp)

Goal and Background Current Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) procedures have demonstrated certain limitations in the South African manufacturing industry. The aim of this paper is to propose new characterisation and normalisation factors for classified mined abiotic resource depletion categories in the South African context. These factors should reflect the importance of mined resources as they relate to region-specific resource depletion. The method can also be applied to determine global factors. Methods The reserve base (as in 2001) of the most commonly produced minerals in South Africa is used as basis to determine characterisation factors for a non-renewable mineral resources category. The average production of these minerals from 1991 to 2000 is compared to economically Demonstrated and Demonstrated Marginal Reserves (and not ultimate reserves) to obtain the characterisation factors in equivalence units, with platinum as the reference mineral. Similarly, for a non-renewable energy resources category, coal is used in South Africa as equivalent unit as it is the most important fossil fuel for the country. Crude oil and natural gas resources are currently obtained from reserves elsewhere in the world and characterisation factors are therefore determined using global resources and production levels. The normalisation factors are based on the total economic reserves of key South African minerals and world non-renewable energy resources respectively. A case study of the manufacturing of an exhaust system for a standard sedan is used to compare LCIA results for mined abiotic resource categories that are based on current LCIA factors and the new South African factors. Results and Discussion The South African LCIA procedure differs from current methods in that it shows the importance of other mined resources, i.e. iron ore and crude oil, relative to PGMs and coal for the manufacturing life cycle of the exhaust system. With respect to PGMs, the current characterisation factors are based on the concentrations of the metals in the ores and the ultimate reserves, which are erroneous with respect to the actual availability of the mineral resources and the depletion burden placed on these minerals is consequently too high. Conclusions The South African LCIA procedure for mined abiotic resources depletion shows the significance of choosing a method, which is inline with the current situation in the mining industry and its limitations. Recommendations and Outlook It is proposed to similarly investigate the impacts of the use of other natural resource groups. Water, specifically, must receive attention in the characterisation phase of LCIAs in South African LCAs.     

Evaluating options in LCA: The emergence of conflicting paradigms for impact assessment and evaluation

LCA aims to help direct decisions in an environmentally sustainable direction. It indicates the environmental effects of choices and evaluates these against this background. Approaches to evaluation in LCA differ substantially, related to the way of modelling environmental effects and to the way these effects are combined into an overall judgement on alternative options. Several approaches are now operational, which are linked to different paradigms in decision making. It is shown that the choice of paradigm is quite decisive on the outcome of the analysis. Also within similar paradigms, different methods now operational may lead to different outcomes. These latter differences may be alleviated more easily than those related to paradigmatic choices, as they are partly a matter of refinement, and they partly result from legitimate differences in subjective priorities. The more basic paradigmatic differences can hardly be bridged. The practical relevancy of the subject is proven by applying different operational methods to one case, showing widely differing outcomes. The paradigm behind evaluating environmental effects is either values based, directly or through policy decisions, or economics based, as individual preferences measured in the monetary terms of willingness-to-pay. Accordingly, the different methods are “policy-oriented” or “monetary”. It may be doubted if the differences between these can be overcome in standardisation.