Assessing resource depletion in LCA: a review of methods and methodological issues

Purpose

Political interest in the future availability of natural resources has spiked recently, with new documents from the European Union, United Nations Environment Programme and the US National Research Council assessing the supply situation of key raw materials. As resource efficiency is considered a key element for sustainable development, suitable methods to address sustainability of resource use are increasingly needed. Life cycle thinking and assessment may play a principal role here. Nonetheless, the extent to which current life cycle impact assessment methods are capable to answer to resource sustainability challenges is widely debated. The aim of this paper is to present key elements of the ongoing discussion, contributing to the future development of more robust and comprehensive methods for evaluating resources in the life cycle assessment (LCA) context.

Methods

We systematically review current impact assessment methods dealing with resources, identifying areas of improvement. Three key issues for sustainability assessment of resources are examined: renewability, recyclability and criticality; this is complemented by a cross-comparison of methodological features and completeness of resource coverage.

Results and discussion

The approach of LCA to resource depletion is characterised by a lack of consensus on methodology and on the relative ranking of resource depletion impacts as can be seen from a comparison of characterisation factors. The examined models yield vastly different characterisations of the impacts from resource depletion and show gaps in the number and types of resources covered.

Conclusions

Key areas of improvement are identified and discussed. Firstly, biotic resources and their renewal rates have so far received relatively little regard within LCA; secondly, the debate on critical raw materials and the opportunity of introducing criticality within LCA is controversial and requires further effort for a conciliating vision and indicators. We identify points where current methods can be expanded to accommodate these issues and cover a wider range of natural resources.     

Life cycle assessment of a waste lubricant oil management system

Purpose

This paper compares 16 waste lubricant oil (WLO) systems (15 management alternatives and a system in use in Portugal) using a life cycle assessment (LCA). The alternatives tested use various mild processing techniques and recovery options: recycling during expanded clay production, recycling and electric energy production, re-refining, energy recovery during cement production, and energy recovery during expanded clay production.

Methods

The proposed 15 alternatives and the actual present day situation were analyzed using LCA software UMBERTO 5.5, applied to eight environmental impact categories. The LCA included an expansion system to accommodate co-products.

Results

The results show that mild processing with low liquid gas fuel consumption and re-refining is the best option to manage WLO with regard to abiotic depletion, eutrophication, global warming, and human toxicity environmental impacts. A further environmental option is to treat the WLO using the same mild processing technique, but then send it to expanded clay recycling to be used as a fuel in expanded clay production, as this is the best option regarding freshwater sedimental ecotoxicity, freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity, and acidification.

Conclusions

It is recommended that there is a shift away from recycling and electric energy production. Although sensitivity analysis shows re-refining and energy recovery in expanded clay production are sensitive to unit location and substituted products emission factors, the LCA analysis as a whole shows that both options are good recovery options; re-refining is the preferable option because it is closer to the New Waste Framework Directive waste hierarchy principle.     

Allocation issues in LCA methodology: a case study of corn stover-based fuel ethanol

Background, aim, and scope

Facing the threat of oil depletion and climate change, a shift from fossil resources to renewables is ongoing to secure long-term low carbon energy supplies. In view of the carbon dioxide reduction targets agreed upon in the Kyoto protocol, bioethanol has become an attractive option for one energy application, as transport fuel. Many studies on the LCA of fuel ethanol have been conducted, and the results vary to a large extent. In most of these studies, only one type of allocation is applied. However, the effect of allocation on outcomes is of crucial importance to LCA as a decision supporting tool. This is only addressed in a few studies to a limited extent. Moreover, most of the studies mainly focus on fossil energy use and GHG emissions. In this paper, a case study is presented wherein a more complete set of impact categories is used. Land use has been left out of account as only hectare data would be given which is obviously dominated by agriculture. Moreover, different allocation methods are applied to assess the sensitivity of the outcomes for allocation choices.

Materials and methods

This study focuses on the comparison of LCA results from the application of different allocation methods by presenting an LCA of gasoline and ethanol as fuels and with two types of blends of gasoline with ethanol, all used in a midsize car. As a main second-generation application growing fast in the USA, corn stover-based ethanol is chosen as a case study. The life cycles of the fuels include gasoline production, corn and stover agriculture, cellulosic ethanol production, blending ethanol with gasoline to produce E10 (10% of ethanol) and E85 (85% of ethanol), and finally the use of gasoline, E10, E85, and ethanol. In this study, a substantially broader set of eight environmental impacts is covered.

Results

LCA results appear to be largely dependent on the allocation methods rendered. The level of abiotic depletion and ozone layer depletion decrease when replacing gasoline by ethanol fuels, irrespective of the allocation method applied, while the rest of the impacts except global warming potential are larger. The results show a reduction of global warming potential when mass/energy allocation is applied; in the case of economic allocation, it gives contrary results. In the expanded systems, global warming potential is significantly reduced comparing to the ones from the allocated systems. A contribution analysis shows that car driving, electricity use for cellulase enzyme production, and ethanol conversion contribute largely to global warming potential from the life cycle of ethanol fuels.

Discussion

The reason why the results of global warming potential show a reverse trend is that the corn/stover allocation ratio shifts from 7.5 to 1.7 when shifting from economic allocation to mass/energy allocation. When mass/energy allocation is applied, both more credits (CO₂ uptake) and more penalties (N₂O emission) in agriculture are allocated to stover compared to the case of economic allocation. However, more CO₂ is taken up than N₂O (in CO₂ eq.) emitted. Hence, the smaller the allocation ratio is between corn and stover, the lower the share of the overall global warming emissions being allocated to ethanol will be. In the system expansion approach, global warming potentials are significantly reduced, resulting in the negative values in all cases. This implies that the system expansion results are comparable to one another because they make the same cutoffs but not really to the results related to mass, energy, and economic value-based allocated systems.

Conclusions

The choice of the allocation methods is essential for the outcomes, especially for global warming potential in this case. The application of economic allocation leads to increased GWP when replacing gasoline by ethanol fuels, while reduction of GWP is achieved when mass/energy allocation is used as well as in the system where biogenic CO₂ is excluded. Ethanol fuels are better options than gasoline when abiotic depletion and ozone layer depletion are concerned. In terms of other environmental impacts, gasoline is a better option, mainly due to the emissions of nutrients and toxic substances connected with agriculture. A clear shift of problems can be detected: saving fossil fuels at the expense of emissions related to agriculture, with GHG benefits depending on allocation choices. The overall evaluation of these fuel options, therefore, depends very much on the importance attached to each impact category.

Recommendations and perspectives

This study focuses only on corn stover-based ethanol as one case. Further studies may include other types of cellulosic feedstocks (i.e., switchgrass or wood), which require less intensive agricultural practice and may lead to better environmental performance of fuel ethanol. Furthermore, this study shows that widely used but different allocation methods determine outcomes of LCA studies on biofuels. This is an unacceptable situation from a societal point of view and a challenge from a scientific point of view. The results from applying just one allocation method are not sufficient for decision making. Comparison of different allocation methods is certainly of crucial importance. A broader approach beyond LCA for the analysis of biorefinery systems with regard to energy conservation, environmental impact, and cost–benefit will provide general indications on the sustainability of bio-based productions.     

A comparative life cycle assessment of two treatment technologies for the Grey Lanaset G textile dye: biodegradation by Trametes versicolor and granular activated carbon adsorption

Purpose

The aim of this study is to use life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the relative environmental performance of the treatment using Trametes versicolor with a common method such as activated carbon adsorption. This comparison will evaluate potential environmental impacts of the two processes. This work compiles life cycle inventory data for a biological process that may be useful for other emergent biotechnological processes in water and waste management. LCA was performed to evaluate the use of a new technology for the removal of a model metal-complex dye, Grey Lanaset G, from textile wastewater by means of the fungus T. versicolor. This biological treatment was compared with a conventional coal-based activated carbon adsorption treatment to determine which alternative is preferable from an environmental point of view.

Materials and methods

The study is based on experimental research that has tested the novel process at the pilot scale. The analysis of the biological system ranges from the production of the electricity and ingredients required for the growth of the fungus and ends with the composting of the residual biomass from the process. The analysis of the activated carbon system includes the production of the adsorbent material and the electricity needed for the treatment and regeneration of the spent activated carbon. Seven indicators that measure the environmental performance of these technologies are included in the LCA. The indicators used are climate change, ozone depletion, human toxicity, photochemical oxidant formation, terrestial acidification, freshwater eutrophication, marine eutrophication, terrestrial ecotoxicity, freshwater ecotoxicity, marine ecotoxicity, metal depletion and fossil depletion.

Results

The results show that the energy use throughout the biological process, mainly for sterilisation and aeration, accounts for the major environmental impacts with the inoculum sterilisation being the most critical determinant. Nevertheless, the biological treatment has lower impacts than the physicochemical system in six of these indicators when steam is generated directly on site. A low-grade carbon source as an alternative to glucose might contribute to reduce the eutrophication impact of this process.

Conclusions

The LCA shows that the biological treatment process using the fungus T. versicolor to remove Grey Lanaset G offers important environmental advantages in comparison with the traditional activated carbon adsorption method. This study also provides environmental data and an indication of the potential impacts of characteristic processes that may be of interest for other applications in the field of biological waste treatment and wastewater treatment involving white-rot fungi.     

Life cycle assessment in the minerals and metals sector: a critical review of selected issues and challenges

Background, aim and scope

The mining sector provides materials that are essential elements in a wide range of goods and services, which create value by meeting human needs. Mining and processing activities are an integral part of most complex material cycles so that the application of life cycle assessment (LCA) to minerals and metals has therefore gained prominence. In the past decade, increased use of LCA in the mineral and metal sector has advanced the scientific knowledge through the development of scientifically valid life cycle inventory databases. Though scientifically valid, LCA still needs to depend on several technical assumptions. In particular, measuring the environmental burden issues related to abiotic resource depletion, land use impacts and open-loop recycling within the LCA are widely debated issues. Also, incorporating spatial and temporal sensitivities in LCA, to make it a consistent scientific tool, is yet to be resolved. This article discusses existing LCA methods and proposed models on different issues in relation to minerals and metals sector.

Main features

A critical review was conducted of existing LCA methods in the minerals and metals sector in relation to allocation issues related to indicators of land use impacts, abiotic resource depletion, allocation in open-loop recycling and the system expansions and accounting of spatial and temporal dimension in LCA practice.

Results

Evolving a holistic view about these contentious issues will be presented with view for future LCA research in the minerals and metals industry. This extensive literature search uncovers many of the issues that require immediate attention from the LCA scientific community.

Discussion

The methodological drawbacks, mainly problems with inconsistencies in LCA results for the same situation under different assumptions and issues related to data quality, are considered to be the shortcomings of current LCA. In the minerals and metals sector, it is important to increase the objectivity of LCA by way of fixing those uncertainties, for example, in the LCA of the minerals and metals sector, whether the land use has to be considered in detail or at a coarse level. In regard to abiotic resource characterisation, the weighting and time scales to be considered become a very critical issue of judgement. And, in the case of open-loop recycling, which model will best satisfy all the stake holders? How the temporal and spatial dimensions should be incorporated into LCA is one of the biggest challenges ahead of all those who are concerned. Addressing these issues shall enable LCA to be used as a policy tool in environmental decision-making. There has been enormous debate with respect to on land use impacts, abiotic resource depletion, open-loop recycling and spatial and temporal dimensions, and these debates remain unresolved. Discussions aimed at bringing consensus amongst all the stake holders involved in LCA (i.e. industry, academia, consulting organisations and government) will be presented and discussed. In addition, a commentary of different points of view on these issues will be presented.

Conclusions

This review shall bring into perspective some of those contentious issues that are widely debated by many researchers. The possible future directions proposed by researchers across the globe shall be presented. Finally, authors conclude with their views on the prospects of LCA for future research endeavours.

Recommendations and outlook

Specific LCA issues of minerals and metals need to be investigated further to gain more understanding. To facilitate the future use of LCA as a policy tool in the minerals and metals sector, it is important to increase the objectivity with more scientific validity. Therefore, it is essential that the issues discussed in this paper are addressed to a great detail.     

Carbon and life cycle implications of thermal recovery from the organic fractions of municipal waste

Purpose

The aim of this research was to determine the optimum way of recovering energy from the biodegradable fractions of municipal waste. A part-life cycle study was carried out on the following wastes: paper, food waste, garden waste, wood, non-recyclable mixed municipal waste and refuse-derived fuel. The energy recovery processes considered were incineration, gasification, combustion in dedicated plant, anaerobic digestion and combustion in a cement kiln.

Methods

The life cycle assessment (LCA) was carried out using WRATE, an LCA tool designed specifically for waste management studies. Additional information on waste composition, waste collection and the performance of the energy recovery processes was obtained from a number of UK-based sources. The results take account of the energy displaced by the waste to energy processes and also the benefits obtained by the associated recycling of digestates, metals and aggregates as appropriate.

Results and discussion

For all the waste types considered the maximum benefits in terms of climate change and non-renewable resource depletion would be achieved by using the waste in a cement kiln as a substitute fuel for coal. When considering the impacts in terms of human toxicity, aquatic ecotoxicity, acidification and eutrophication, direct combustion with energy recovery was the best option. The results were found to be highly sensitive to the efficiency of the energy recovery process and the conventional fuel displaced by the recovered energy.

Conclusions and recommendations

This study has demonstrated that LCA can be used to determine the benefits and burdens associated with recovering energy from municipal waste fractions. However, the findings were restricted by the lack of reliable data on the performance of waste gasification and anaerobic digestion systems and on the burdens arising from collecting the wastes. It is recommended that further work is carried out to address these data gaps.     

Land use impact assessment in the construction sector: an analysis of LCIA models and case study application

Purpose

Land use is a potentially important impact category in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies of buildings. Three research questions are addressed in this paper: Is land use a decisive factor in the environmental impact of buildings?; Is it important to include the primary land use of buildings in the assessment?; and How does the environmental performance of solid structure and timber frame dwellings differ when assessed by distinct available models for quantifying land use impacts?

Methods

This paper compares several operational land use impact assessment models, which are subsequently implemented in an LCA case study comparing a building constructed using timber frame versus a solid structure. Different models were used for addressing the different research questions.

Results and discussion

The results reveal that contrasting decisions may be supported by LCA study results, depending on whether or not and how land use is included in the assessment. The analysis also highlights the need to include the building land footprint in the assessment and to better distinguish building locations in current land use impact assessment models.

Conclusions

Selecting land use assessment models that are most appropriate to the goals of the study is recommended as different models assess different environmental issues related to land use. In general, the combination of two land use assessment methods for buildings is recommended, i.e. soil organic matter (SOM) of Milà i Canals and Eco-indicator 99.     

Assessing freshwater use impacts in LCA: Part I—inventory modelling and characterisation factors for the main impact pathways

Background, aim and scope

Freshwater is a basic resource for humans; however, its link to human health is seldom related to lack of physical access to sufficient freshwater, but rather to poor distribution and access to safe water supplies. On the other hand, freshwater availability for aquatic ecosystems is often reduced due to competition with human uses, potentially leading to impacts on ecosystem quality. This paper summarises how this specific resource use can be dealt with in life cycle analysis (LCA).

Main features

The main quantifiable impact pathways linking freshwater use to the available supply are identified, leading to definition of the flows requiring quantification in the life cycle inventory (LCI).

Results

The LCI needs to distinguish between and quantify evaporative and non-evaporative uses of ‘blue’ and ‘green’ water, along with land use changes leading to changes in the availability of freshwater. Suitable indicators are suggested for the two main impact pathways [namely freshwater ecosystem impact (FEI) and freshwater depletion (FD)], and operational characterisation factors are provided for a range of countries and situations. For FEI, indicators relating current freshwater use to the available freshwater resources (with and without specific consideration of water ecosystem requirements) are suggested. For FD, the parameters required for evaluation of the commonly used abiotic depletion potentials are explored.

Discussion

An important value judgement when dealing with water use impacts is the omission or consideration of non-evaporative uses of water as impacting ecosystems. We suggest considering only evaporative uses as a default procedure, although more precautionary approaches (e.g. an ‘Egalitarian’ approach) may also include non-evaporative uses. Variation in seasonal river flows is not captured in the approach suggested for FEI, even though abstractions during droughts may have dramatic consequences for ecosystems; this has been considered beyond the scope of LCA.

Conclusions

The approach suggested here improves the representation of impacts associated with freshwater use in LCA. The information required by the approach is generally available to LCA practitioners

Recommendations and perspectives

The widespread use of the approach suggested here will require some development (and consensus) by LCI database developers. Linking the suggested midpoint indicators for FEI to a damage approach will require further analysis of the relationship between FEI indicators and ecosystem health.     

Do wood-based panels made with agro-industrial residues provide environmentally benign alternatives? An LCA case study of sugarcane bagasse addition to particle board manufacturing

Purpose

Sugarcane bagasse is one of the main agro-industrial residues which can be used to produce wood-based panels. However, more investigations related to its environmental performance assessment are needed, focusing on questions such as: Does it provide environmental benefits? What are its main environmental impacts? Could it substitute wood as raw material? Accordingly, this paper presents a life cycle assessment (LCA) study of particle board manufactured with sugarcane bagasse residues.

Methods

The cradle-to-gate assessment of 1 m³ of particle board made with sugarcane bagasse (PSB) considered three main subsystems: bagasse generation, bagasse distribution, and PSB production. For the inventory of PSB, dataset from two previous LCA studies related to the conventional particle board production and the ethanol life cycle for the Brazilian context were used. The allocation criterion for the bagasse generation subsystem was 9.08 % (economic base). The potential environmental impact phase was assessed by applying the CML and USEtox methods. PSB was compared with the conventional particle board manufactured in Brazil by the categories of the CML and USETox, and including land use indicators. Finally, two scenarios were analyzed to evaluate the influence of the allocation criteria and the consumption of sugarcane bagasse.

Results and discussion

All hotspots identified by CML and USETox methods are mainly related to the PSB production subsystem (24–100 % of impacts) due to heavy fuel oil, electricity, and urea-formaldehyde resin supply chain. The bagasse generation subsystem was more relevant to the eutrophication category (75 % of impacts). The bagasse distribution subsystem was not relevant because the impacts on all categories were lower than 1 %. PSB can substitute the conventional particle board mainly because of its lower contribution to abiotic depletion and ecotoxicity. Regarding land use impacts, PSB showed lower values according to all indicators (38–40 % of all impacts), which is explained by the lower demand for land occupation in comparison to that of the traditional particle board.

Conclusions

PSB can replace the traditional particle board due to its better environmental performance. The analysis of the economic allocation criterion was relevant only for the EP category, being important to reduce diesel and N-based fertilizers use during sugarcane cultivation. Regarding the influence of the sugarcane bagasse consumption, it is suggested that the sugarcane bagasse be mixed up to 75 % during particle board manufacturing so that good quality properties and environmental performance of panels can be provided.     

Environmental evaluation and comparison of selected industrial scale biomethane production facilities across Europe

Purpose

The two main reasons for producing biomethane as renewable fuel are reduction of climate impacts and depletion of fossil resources. Biomethane is expected to be sustainable, but how sustainable is it actually? This article contributes to the clarification. Therefore, the environmental impacts of several biomethane facilities all over Europe were assessed. A special focus is put on the differences between the facilities as they follow different production routes.

Methods

The method used for evaluation is life cycle assessment (LCA) applied in a well-to-wheel approach. This enables to show the overall performance in terms of global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), eutrophication potential (EP), photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP) and PE fossil. The system boundary includes the entire chain from biogas production to upgrading, distribution and use. For evaluating the different production routes several years of measuring data, calculating and improving the LCA models in close cooperation with the plant operators were carried out.

Results and discussion

The evaluation of the production routes shows a high reduction potential compared to fossil fuels. Regarding the depletion of fossil resources, the amounts vary between the sites, but the reduction is at least 50 % and reaches almost 100 % reductions at some sites. The reduction of GWP is at least 65 %, because waste flows free of environmental burdens are used almost exclusively as substrate. Other dominant factors are power and heat demand, methane losses to the environment and the use of by-products, e.g. fertilizer.

Conclusions

Despite this caveat, the evaluated systems demonstrate the possible positive results of renewable fuel production if done properly.     

Global characterisation factors to assess land use impacts on biotic production

Purpose

The inclusion of land-use activities in life cycle assessment (LCA) has been subject to much debate in the LCA community. Despite the recent methodological developments in this area, the impacts of land occupation and transformation on its long-term ability to produce biomass (referred to here as biotic production potential [BPP]) — an important endpoint for the Area of Protection (AoP) Natural Resources — have been largely excluded from LCAs partly due to the lack of life cycle impact assessment methods.

Materials and methods

Several possible methods/indicators for BPP associated with biomass, carbon balance, soil erosion, salinisation, energy, soil biota and soil organic matter (SOM) were evaluated. The latter indicator was considered the most appropriate for LCA, and characterisation factors for eight land use types at the climate region level were developed.

Results and discussion

Most of the indicators assessed address land-use impacts satisfactorily for land uses that include biotic production of some kind (agriculture or silviculture). However, some fail to address potentially important land use impacts from other life cycle stages, such as those arising from transport. It is shown that the change in soil organic carbon (SOC) can be used as an indicator for impacts on BPP, because SOC relates to a range of soil properties responsible for soil resilience and fertility.

Conclusions

The characterisation factors developed suggest that the proposed approach to characterize land use impacts on BBP, despite its limitations, is both possible and robust. The availability of land-use-specific and biogeographically differentiated data on SOC makes BPP impact assessments operational. The characterisation factors provided allow for the assessment of land-use impacts on BPP, regardless of where they occur thus enabling more complete LCAs of products and services. Existing databases on every country’s terrestrial carbon stocks and land use enable the operability of this method. Furthermore, BPP impacts will be better assessed by this approach as increasingly spatially specific data are available for all geographical regions of the world at a large scale. The characterisation factors developed are applied to the case studies (Part D of this special issue), which show the practical issues related to their implementation.     

Life cycle assessment (LCA) applied to the process industry: a review

Purpose

Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology is a well-established analytical method to quantify environmental impacts, which has been mainly applied to products. However, recent literature would suggest that it has also the potential as an analysis and design tool for processes, and stresses that one of the biggest challenges of this decade in the field of process systems engineering (PSE) is the development of tools for environmental considerations.

Method

This article attempts to give an overview of the integration of LCA methodology in the context of industrial ecology, and focuses on the use of this methodology for environmental considerations concerning process design and optimization.

Results

The review identifies that LCA is often used as a multi-objective optimization of processes: practitioners use LCA to obtain the inventory and inject the results into the optimization model. It also shows that most of the LCA studies undertaken on process analysis consider the unit processes as black boxes and build the inventory analysis on fixed operating conditions.

Conclusions

The article highlights the interest to better assimilate PSE tools with LCA methodology, in order to produce a more detailed analysis. This will allow optimizing the influence of process operating conditions on environmental impacts and including detailed environmental results into process industry.     

Life cycle assessment of concentrated solar power (CSP) and the influence of hybridising with natural gas

Purpose

Concentrating solar power (CSP) plants based on parabolic troughs utilise auxiliary fuels (usually natural gas) to facilitate start-up operations, avoid freezing of HTF and increase power output. This practice has a significant effect on the environmental performance of the technology. The aim of this paper is to quantify the sustainability of CSP and to analyse how this is affected by hybridisation with different natural gas (NG) inputs.

Methods

A complete life cycle (LC) inventory was gathered for a commercial wet-cooled 50 MWe CSP plant based on parabolic troughs. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the environmental performance of the plant operating with different NG inputs (between 0 and 35 % of gross electricity generation). ReCiPe Europe (H) was used as LCA methodology. CML 2 baseline 2000 World and ReCiPe Europe E were used for comparative purposes. Cumulative energy demands (CED) and energy payback times (EPT) were also determined for each scenario.

Results and discussion

Operation of CSP using solar energy only produced the following environmental profile: climate change 26.6 kg CO₂ eq/KWh, human toxicity 13.1 kg 1,4-DB eq/KWh, marine ecotoxicity 276 g 1,4-DB eq/KWh, natural land transformation 0.005 m²/KWh, eutrophication 10.1 g P eq/KWh and acidification 166 g SO₂ eq/KWh. Most of these impacts are associated with extraction of raw materials and manufacturing of plant components. The utilisation of NG transformed the environmental profile of the technology, placing increasing weight on impacts related to its operation and maintenance. Significantly higher impacts were observed on categories like climate change (311 kg CO₂ eq/MWh when using 35 % NG), natural land transformation, terrestrial acidification and fossil depletion. Despite its fossil nature, the use of NG had a beneficial effect on other impact categories (human and marine toxicity, freshwater eutrophication and natural land transformation) due to the higher electricity output achieved. The overall environmental performance of CSP significantly deteriorated with the use of NG (single score 3.52 pt in solar-only operation compared to 36.1 pt when using 35 % NG). Other sustainability parameters like EPT and CED also increased substantially as a result of higher NG inputs. Quasilinear second-degree polynomial relationships were calculated between various environmental performance parameters and NG contributions.

Conclusions

Energy input from auxiliary NG determines the environmental profile of the CSP plant. Aggregated analysis shows a deleterious effect on the overall environmental performance of the technology as a result of NG utilisation. This is due primarily to higher impacts on environmental categories like climate change, natural land transformation, fossil fuel depletion and terrestrial acidification. NG may be used in a more sustainable and cost-effective manner in combined cycle power plants, which achieve higher energy conversion efficiencies.     

Comparative LCA of ethanol versus gasoline in Brazil using different LCIA methods

Purpose

The main objective of this study is to expand the discussion about how, and to what extent, the environmental performance is affected by the use of different life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) illustrated by the case study of the comparison between environmental impacts of gasoline and ethanol form sugarcane in Brazil.

Methods

The following LCIA methods have been considered in the evaluation: CML 2001, Impact 2002+, EDIP 2003, Eco-indicator 99, TRACI 2, ReCiPe, and Ecological Scarcity 2006. Energy allocation was used to split the environmental burdens between ethanol and surplus electricity generated at the sugarcane mill. The phases of feedstock and (bio)fuel production, distribution, and use are included in system boundaries.

Results and discussion

At the midpoint level, comparison of different LCIA methods showed that ethanol presents lower impacts than gasoline in important categories such as global warming, fossil depletion, and ozone layer depletion. However, ethanol presents higher impacts in acidification, eutrophication, photochemical oxidation, and agricultural land use categories. Regarding to single-score indicators, ethanol presented better performance than gasoline using ReCiPe Endpoint LCIA method. Using IMPACT 2002+, Eco-indicator 99, and Ecological Scarcity 2006, higher scores are verified for ethanol, mainly due to the impacts related to particulate emissions and land use impacts.

Conclusions

Although there is a relative agreement on the results regarding equivalent environmental impact categories using different LCIA methods at midpoint level, when single-score indicators are considered, use of different LCIA methods lead to different conclusions. Single-score results also limit the interpretability at endpoint level, as a consequence of small contributions of relevant environmental impact categories weighted in a single-score indicator.     

LCA of a newsprint paper machine: a case study of capital equipment

Purpose

The environmental aspects of paper as a consumer good have been extensively studied. However, the paper machine has been mostly neglected in the literature. The purpose of this article is to present a LCA case study that explicitly focuses on the system of a newsprint paper machine and its environmental impacts and not on the system of the consumer good paper. The relevance of the paper machine as capital equipment is analyzed, and conclusions for the environmental improvement of paper machines are drawn based on identified hotspots. The article hereby answers the more general research questions of whether capital equipment has rightly been neglected in other studies regarding pulp and paper and which impact categories are important for analyzing the environmental burdens of a paper machine.

Methods

The study has been executed in collaboration with Voith Paper, an original equipment manufacturer. Hence, in distinction to literature-based studies, primary data on the paper machine was available resulting in a high overall data quality. Based on the ISO 14040 (2006) and 14044 (2006) standards, this article pursues a cradle-to-grave approach for the paper machine. It assesses the environmental impacts in the impact categories defined by the ReCiPe impact assessment methodology. Different types of energy generation are examined in a scenario analysis with combined heat and power generation (CHP) as the baseline case. For interpretation, a normalization and a sectoral analysis are performed.

Results and discussion

The normalized results indicate fossil resource depletion and global warming as the most important impact categories. Global warming impacts are highly dependent on the energy processes and result to 432.7 kg CO2e per production of 1 t of paper for CHP and to 701.7 kg CO2e for EU25 grid mix. The sectoral analysis shows that the machinery's operations/use phase is clearly dominating most impact categories due to its long lifetime. An exception is the metal depletion, for which the materials and manufacturing processes are most important.

Conclusions

These findings prove that for most categories, the operations/use phase of the paper machine is the most important life cycle stage. In systems focusing on the consumer good paper, it is therefore sufficient to model the operation of the paper machine, whereas the manufacturing, transport, and end-of-life processes regarding the paper machine equipment can be neglected, unless metal depletion is important to the study.     

Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from cane molasses in Thailand

Background, aim and scope

After China and India, Thailand is considered another emerging market for fuel ethanol in Asia. At present, ethanol in the country is mainly a fermentation/distillery product of cane molasses, although cassava and cane juice are considered other potential raw materials for the fuel. This study aims to evaluate the environmental impacts of substituting conventional gasoline (CG) with molasses-based gasohol in Thailand.

Materials and methods

The life cycle assessment (LCA) procedure carried out follows three interrelated phases: inventory analysis, characterization and interpretation. The functional unit for the comparison is 1 l gasoline equivalent consumed by a new passenger car to travel a specific distance.

Results

The results of the study show that molasses-based ethanol (MoE) in the form of 10% blend with gasoline (E10), along its whole life cycle, consumes less fossil energy (5.3%), less petroleum (8.1%) and provides a similar impact on acidification compared to CG. The fuel, however, has inferior performance in other categories (e.g. global warming potential, nutrient enrichment and photochemical ozone creation potential) indicated by increased impacts over CG.

Discussion

In most cases, higher impacts from the upstream of molasses-based ethanol tend to govern its net life cycle impacts relative to CG. This makes the fuel blend less environmentally friendly than CG for the specific conditions considered. However, as discussed later, this situation can be improved by appropriate changes in energy carriers.

Conclusions

The LCA procedure helps identify the key areas in the MoE production cycle where changes are required to improve environmental performance. Specifically, they are: (1) use of coal as energy source for ethanol conversion, (2) discharge of distillery spent wash into an anaerobic pond, and (3) open burning of cane trash in sugar cane production.

Recommendations and perspectives

Measures to improve the overall life cycle energy and environmental impacts of MoE are: (1) substituting biomass for fossil fuels in ethanol conversion, (2) capturing CH₄ from distillery spent wash and using it as an energy supply, and (3) utilizing cane trash for energy instead of open burning in fields.     

Life cycle assessment of light-emitting diode downlight luminaire—a case study

Purpose

Light-emitting diode (LED) technology is increasingly being used for general lighting. Thus, it is timely to study the environmental impacts of LED products. No life cycle assessments (LCA) of recessed LED downlight luminaires exist in the literature, and only a few assessments of any type of LED light source (component, lamp and luminaire) are available.

Methods

The LCA of a recessed LED downlight luminaire was conducted by using the data from the luminaire manufacturer, laboratory measurements, industry experts and literature. The assessment was conducted using SimaPro LCA software. EcoInvent and European Reference Life Cycle Database were used as the databases. The LCA included a range of environmental impacts in order to obtain a broad overview. The functional unit of the LCA was one luminaire used for 50,000 h. In addition, the sensitivity of the environmental impacts to the life was studied by assessing the LED downlight luminaire of 36,000 h and 15,000 h useful life and to the used energy sources by calculating the environmental impacts using two average energy mixes: French and European.

Results and discussion

The environmental impacts of the LED luminaire were mostly dominated by the energy consumption of the use. However, manufacturing caused approximately 23 % of the environmental impacts, on average. The environmental impacts of manufacturing were mainly due to the driver, LED array and aluminium parts. The installation, transport and end of life had nearly no effect on the total life cycle impacts, except for the end of life in hazardous waste. The life cycle environmental impacts were found to be sensitive to the life of the luminaire. The change from the French to the European average energy mix in use resulted to an even clearer dominance of the use stage.

Conclusions

The case study showed that the environmental impacts of the LED downlight luminaire were dominated by the use-stage energy consumption, especially in the case of the European energy mix in use. Luminous efficacy is, thus, a relatively appropriate environmental indicator of the luminaire. As LED technology possesses generally higher luminous efficacy compared to conventional ones, the LED luminaire is considered to represent an environmentally friendly lighting technology. However, data gaps exist in the data in LED product manufacturing and its environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of different LED products need to be analysed in order to be able to precisely compare the LED technology to the conventional lighting technologies.     

Dynamic life cycle assessment: framework and application to an institutional building

Purpose

This paper uses a dynamic life cycle assessment (DLCA) approach and illustrates the potential importance of the method using a simplified case study of an institutional building. Previous life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have consistently found that energy consumption in the use phase of a building is dominant in most environmental impact categories. Due to the long life span of buildings and potential for changes in usage patterns over time, a shift toward DLCA has been suggested.

Methods

We define DLCA as an approach to LCA which explicitly incorporates dynamic process modeling in the context of temporal and spatial variations in the surrounding industrial and environmental systems. A simplified mathematical model is used to incorporate dynamic information from the case study building, temporally explicit sources of life cycle inventory data and temporally explicit life cycle impact assessment characterization factors, where available. The DLCA model was evaluated for the historical and projected future environmental impacts of an existing institutional building, with additional scenario development for sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of future impacts.

Results and discussion

Results showed that overall life cycle impacts varied greatly in some categories when compared to static LCA results, generated from the temporal perspective of either the building's initial construction or its recent renovation. From the initial construction perspective, impacts in categories related to criteria air pollutants were reduced by more than 50 % when compared to a static LCA, even though nonrenewable energy use increased by 15 %. Pollution controls were a major reason for these reductions. In the future scenario analysis, the baseline DLCA scenario showed a decrease in all impact categories compared with the static LCA. The outer bounds of the sensitivity analysis varied from slightly higher to strongly lower than the static results, indicating the general robustness of the decline across the scenarios.

Conclusions

These findings support the use of dynamic modeling in life cycle assessment to increase the relevance of results. In some cases, decision making related to building design and operations may be affected by considering the interaction of temporally explicit information in multiple steps of the LCA. The DLCA results suggest that in some cases, changes during a building's lifetime can influence the LCA results to a greater degree than the material and construction phases. Adapting LCA to a more dynamic approach may increase the usefulness of the method in assessing the performance of buildings and other complex systems in the built environment.     

A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of wood fibre-reinforced polylactic acid (PLA) and polylactic acid/thermoplastic starch (PLA/TPS) biocomposites

Purpose

Biopolymers are considered to be environmentally friendlier than petroleum-based polymers, but little is known about their environmental performance against petroleum-based products. This paper presents the results of a life cycle assessment (LCA) of two prototype biocomposite formulations produced by extrusion of wood fibre with either polylactic acid (PLA) or a blend of PLA and locally produced thermoplastic starch (TPS).

Methods

The study followed the LCA methodology outlined in the two standards set out by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO): ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 of 2006. A life cycle inventory (LCI) for the biocomposite formulations was developed, and a contribution analysis was performed to identify the significant inputs. Environmental performances of the two formulations were then compared with each other and polypropylene (PP), a petroleum-based polymer. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s impact assessment method, “TRACI: The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts”, was combined with Cumulative Energy Demand (a European method) in order to characterize the inventory flows. Environmental impact categories chosen for the analysis were the following: global warming, stratospheric ozone depletion, acidification of land and water, eutrophication, smog, human health (respiratory, carcinogenic, and non-carcinogenic) effects and ecotoxicity.

Results and discussion

We found that PLA is the significant input which contributes mostly to fossil fuel consumption, acidification and respiratory and smog effects. Impacts from PLA transport from the faraway source significantly added more burden to its contributions. TPS causes less environmental burden compared to PLA; the environmental performance of the biocomposite improved when a blend of PLA and TPS is used in formulating the biocomposite. The two formulations performed better than PP in all the environmental impact categories except eutrophication effects, which is important on a regional basis.

Conclusions

The following conclusions were drawn from this study:

• PLA is the environmentally significant input among the three raw materials.
• TPS causes less environmental burden than PLA. Environmental performance of the biocomposite improves in the life cycle energy consumption, fossil energy use, ozone depletion and non-carcinogenic impact categories when a blend of PLA and TPS is used.
• The biocomposite can outperform PP in all the impact categories except eutrophication effects if manufactured using hydroelectricity.

The biopolymer could be a potential alternative to PP as it could cause less of a burden to the environment on a cradle-to-gate basis. Environmental impacts at the complete life cycle levels should be looked into in order to fully understand its potential.