Insights on the Use of Hybrid Life Cycle Assessment for Environmental Footprinting

Establishing a comprehensive environmental footprint that indicates resource use and environmental release hotspots in both direct and indirect operations can help companies formulate impact reduction strategies as part of overall sustainability efforts. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a useful approach for achieving these objectives. For most companies, financial data are more readily available than material and energy quantities, which suggests a hybrid LCA approach that emphasizes use of economic input‐output (EIO) LCA and process‐based energy and material flow models to frame and develop life cycle emission inventories resulting from company activities. We apply a hybrid LCA framework to an inland marine transportation company that transports bulk commodities within the United States. The analysis focuses on global warming potential, acidification, particulate matter emissions, eutrophication, ozone depletion, and water use. The results show that emissions of greenhouse gases, sulfur, and particulate matter are mainly from direct activities but that supply chain impacts are also significant, particularly in terms of water use. Hotspots were identified in the production, distribution, and use of fuel; the manufacturing, maintenance, and repair of boats and barges; food production; personnel air transport; and solid waste disposal. Results from the case study demonstrate that the aforementioned footprinting framework can provide a sufficiently reliable and comprehensive baseline for a company to formulate, measure, and monitor its efforts to reduce environmental impacts from internal and supply chain operations.     

Environmental and human health impacts of growing genetically modified herbicide-tolerant sugar beet: a life-cycle assessment

There is ongoing debate concerning the possible environmental and human health impacts of growing genetically modified (GM) crops. Here, we report the results of a life-cycle assessment (LCA) comparing the environmental and human health impacts of conventional sugar beet growing regimes in the UK and Germany with those that might be expected if GM herbicide-tolerant (to glyphosate) sugar beet is commercialized. The results presented for a number of environmental and human health impact categories suggest that growing the GM herbicide-tolerant crop would be less harmful to the environment and human health than growing the conventional crop, largely due to lower emissions from herbicide manufacture, transport and field operations. Emissions contributing to negative environmental impacts, such as global warming, ozone depletion, ecotoxicity of water and acidification and nutrification of soil and water, were much lower for the herbicide-tolerant crop than for the conventional crop. Emissions contributing to summer smog, toxic particulate matter and carcinogenicity, which have negative human health impacts, were also substantially lower for the herbicide-tolerant crop. The environmental and human health impacts of growing GM crops need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis using a holistic approach. LCA is a valuable technique for helping to undertake such assessments.     

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

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

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

The influence of value choices in life cycle impact assessment of stressors causing human health damage

Purpose

This study analyzes the influence of value choices in impact assessment models for human health, such as the choice of time horizon, on life cycle assessment outcomes.

Methods

For 756 products, the human health damage score is calculated using three sets of characterization factors (CFs). The CFs represent seven human health impact assessment categories: water scarcity, tropospheric ozone formation, particulate matter formation, human toxicity, ionizing radiation, stratospheric ozone depletion, and climate change. Each set of CFs embeds a combination of value choices following the Cultural Theory, and reflects the individualist, hierarchist, or egalitarian perspective.

Results

We found that the average difference in human health damage score goes from 1 order of magnitude between the individualist and hierarchist perspectives to 2.5 orders of magnitude between the individualist and egalitarian perspectives. The difference in damage score of individual materials among perspectives depends on the combination of emissions driving the impact of both perspectives and can rise up to 5 orders of magnitude.

Conclusions

The value choices mainly responsible for the differences in results among perspectives are the choice of time horizon and inclusion of highly uncertain effects. A product comparison can be affected when the human health damage score of two products differ less than a factor of 5, or the comparing products largely differ in their emitted substances. Overall, our study implies that value choices in impact assessment modeling can modify the outcomes of a life cycle assessment (LCA) and thus the practical implication of decisions based on the results of an LCA.     

Basic quantitative risk assessment of light sources: Comparison of light exposure assessment and endpoint life cycle impact assessment

Human Health Area of Protection (HHAoP) has been receiving greater emphasis in recent years in the scope of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of products or services with more impact categories specifically dedicated to include different dimensions of HHAoP. Human health impacts of light sources, however, have received less attention despite their prevalent use for backlighting, general lighting and architectural purposes. Currently, Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) of lighting devices and electronic devices with backlit screens do not address endpoint impacts nor do they specify technical properties of the light that can enable such an assessment. This study investigates endpoint impacts of eleven lighting devices (1) due to light exposure during the use phase and (2) due to emissions throughout their life cycle. Impacts are quantified as disease burden in terms of disability adjusted life years (DALY). The burden of exposure was calculated using attributable fraction (AF) method. The burden due to life cycle emissions was quantified using GaBi software and built-in life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) method ReCiPe. Endpoint impact categories included were climate change human health, human toxicity, ionizing radiation, ozone depletion, particulate matter formation, and photochemical oxidant formation. The disease burden due to light exposure of all light sources is of two orders of magnitude greater than the disease burden due to life cycle emissions pointing to the need for its treatment.     

Risk Assessment and Life-Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) for Human Health Cancerous and Noncancerous Emissions: Integrated and Complementary with Consistency within the USEPA

The historical parallels, complementary roles, and potential for integration of human health risk assessment (RA) and Life-Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) are explored. Previous authors have considered the comparison of LCA and risk assessment recognizing the inherent differences in LCA and risk assessment (e.g., LCA's focus on the functional unit, and the differences in perspective of LCA and risk assessment), and also the commonalities (e.g., the basis for the modeling). Until this time, however, no one has proposed a coordinated approach for conducting LCA and risk assessment using models consistent with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) handbooks, policies, and guidelines. The current status of LCIA methodology development can be compared to the early days of human health RA when practitioners were overwhelmed with the model choices, assumptions, lack of data, and poor data quality. Although methodology developers can build on the shoulders of the giant, LCIA requires more innovation to deal with more impact categories, more life-cycle stages, and less data for a greater number of stressors. For certain impact categories, LCIA can use many of the guidelines, methodologies, and default parameters that have been developed for human health RA, in conjunction with sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to determine the level of detail necessary for various applications. LCIA can then identify “hot spots” that require the additional detail and level of certainty provided by RA. A comparison of the USEPA's Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental Impacts (TRACI) and the USEPA's Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) will be explored.     

LCA impact assessment categories

A technical framework is presented to evaluate the strengths and the limitations of LCA impact assessment categories to yield accurate, useful results. The framework integrates the inherent characteristics of life-cycle inventory (LCI) data sets, characteristics of individual impact categories, how impact categories are defined, and the models used to characterize different categories. The sources for uncertainty in impact assessment are derived from the basic LCI procedures and the complexity of environmental processes and mechanisms. The noteworthy LCI procedures are: (1) the collection and aggregation of data across a comprehensive product system, (2) co-product and recycling allocation for releases and resources, and (3) the conversion of these data by functional unit calculations. These operations largely remove spatial and temporal considerations, resulting in analytical and interpretive limitations that vary in magnitude for different impact assessment categories. The framework shows two groups of categories where LCA results may be insufficient for making comparisons: (1) categories that involve local and/or transient processes and (2) categories that involve non-mass loading, biological parameters, such as biodiversity, habitat alteration, and toxicity. The framework also shows that how impact categories are defined complicates their use. Some categories are based on objective stressor-effect networks using known environmental mechanisms. In contrast, other categories are defined using various levels of subjective judgment to address either highly complex or unknown mechanisms. Finally, the framework shows that differences in the quality and detail of information provided by various models used during characterization also influence the accuracy and usefulness of the results. In summary, the framework indicates that (1) the various uncertainties in each individual category have a a number of different technical origins and that (2) the degree of uncertainty varies significantly between categories. As a result, interpretation and valuation cannot presume an equivalency of processes or merit behind numerical values for different categories. The framework can be used to initially identify and track these uncertainties to improve LCA impact assessment interpretation and application.     

Renewable Energy and Carbon Management in the Cradle‐to‐Cradle Certification: Limitations and Opportunities

As part of the Cradle to Cradle^® (C2C) certification program, the C2C certification criterion, Renewable Energy and Carbon Management (RE&CM), focuses on use of electricity from renewable energy (RE) and direct greenhouse gas offsets in the manufacturing stage and, to a limited extent, on the cradle to gate only at the highest level of certification. The aim of this study is to provide decision makers with a quantified overview of possible limitations of that C2C certification requirement and potential gains by introducing a full life cycle assessment (LCA) perspective to the scheme. Scenario analysis was used to perform an LCA of an aluminum can system representing different levels of the C2C certification criterion, RE&CM, considering different strategies to achieve 100% RE in the manufacturing stage. The adoption of a broader life cycle RE perspective was considered through the implementation of electricity from renewable sources from cradle to grave. Our results show that compliance with the current RE&CM certification framework offers limited benefits, that is, significant reduction for climate change, but negligible reductions for other environmental impacts (e.g., particulate matter and acidification). However, increasing the share of RE in the primary aluminum production from a full life cycle perspective can greatly increase the environmental benefits brought up by the C2C certification not only for climate change, but also for the broader range of impact categories. In our striving toward environmental sustainability, which often cannot be approximated by climate‐change impacts alone, we therefore recommend decision makers in industries to combine the C2C certification with LCA when they define strategies for the selection of RE and raw materials suppliers.     

Value Choices in Life Cycle Impact Assessment of Stressors Causing Human Health Damage

This article investigates how value choices in life cycle impact assessment can influence characterization factors (CFs) for human health (expressed as disability‐adjusted life years [DALYs]). The Cultural Theory is used to define sets of value choices in the calculation of CFs, reflecting the individualist, hierarchist, and egalitarian perspectives. CFs were calculated for interventions related to the following impact categories: water scarcity, tropospheric ozone formation, particulate matter formation, human toxicity, ionizing radiation, stratospheric ozone depletion, and climate change. With the Cultural Theory as a framework, we show that individualist, hierarchist, and egalitarian perspectives can lead to CFs that vary up to six orders of magnitude. For persistent substances, the choice in time horizon explains the differences among perspectives, whereas for nonpersistent substances, the choice in age weighting and discount rate of DALY and the type of effects or exposure routes account for differences in CFs. The calculated global impact varies by two orders of magnitude, depending on the perspective selected, and derives mainly from particulate matter formation and water scarcity for the individualist perspective and from climate change for the egalitarian perspective. Our results stress the importance of dealing with value choices in life cycle impact assessment and suggest further research for analyzing the practical consequences for life cycle assessment results.     

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

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

Quantifying system uncertainty of life cycle assessment based on Monte Carlo simulation

Background, aim, and scope

Many studies evaluate the results of applying different life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods to the same life cycle inventory (LCI) data and demonstrate that the assessment results would be different with different LICA methods used. Although the importance of uncertainty is recognized, most studies focus on individual stages of LCA, such as LCI and normalization and weighting stages of LCIA. However, an important question has not been answered in previous studies: Which part of the LCA processes will lead to the primary uncertainty? The understanding of the uncertainty contributions of each of the LCA components will facilitate the improvement of the credibility of LCA.

Methodology

A methodology is proposed to systematically analyze the uncertainties involved in the entire procedure of LCA. The Monte Carlo simulation is used to analyze the uncertainties associated with LCI, LCIA, and the normalization and weighting processes. Five LCIA methods are considered in this study, i.e., Eco-indicator 99, EDIP, EPS, IMPACT 2002+, and LIME. The uncertainty of the environmental performance for individual impact categories (e.g., global warming, ecotoxicity, acidification, eutrophication, photochemical smog, human health) is also calculated and compared. The LCA of municipal solid waste management strategies in Taiwan is used as a case study to illustrate the proposed methodology.

Results

The primary uncertainty source in the case study is the LCI stage under a given LCIA method. In comparison with various LCIA methods, EDIP has the highest uncertainty and Eco-indicator 99 the lowest uncertainty. Setting aside the uncertainty caused by LCI, the weighting step has higher uncertainty than the normalization step when Eco-indicator 99 is used. Comparing the uncertainty of various impact categories, the lowest is global warming, followed by eutrophication. Ecotoxicity, human health, and photochemical smog have higher uncertainty.

Discussion

In this case study of municipal waste management, it is confirmed that different LCIA methods would generate different assessment results. In other words, selection of LCIA methods is an important source of uncertainty. In this study, the impacts of human health, ecotoxicity, and photochemical smog can vary a lot when the uncertainties of LCI and LCIA procedures are considered. For the purpose of reducing the errors of impact estimation because of geographic differences, it is important to determine whether and which modifications of assessment of impact categories based on local conditions are necessary.

Conclusions

This study develops a methodology of systematically evaluating the uncertainties involved in the entire LCA procedure to identify the contributions of different assessment stages to the overall uncertainty. Which modifications of the assessment of impact categories are needed can be determined based on the comparison of uncertainty of impact categories.

Recommendations and perspectives

Such an assessment of the system uncertainty of LCA will facilitate the improvement of LCA. If the main source of uncertainty is the LCI stage, the researchers should focus on the data quality of the LCI data. If the primary source of uncertainty is the LCIA stage, direct application of LCIA to non-LCIA software developing nations should be avoided.     

Implicit prioritization in life cycle assessment: text mining and detecting metapatterns in the literature

Purpose

Life cycle assessment aims to evaluate multiple kinds of environmental impact associated with a product or process across its life cycle. Objective evaluation is a common goal, though the community recognizes that implicit valuations of diverse impacts resulting from analytical choices and choice of subject matter are present. This research evaluates whether these implicit valuations lead to detectable priority shifts in the published English language academic LCA literature over time.

Methods

A near-comprehensive investigation of the LCA literature is undertaken by applying a text mining technique known as topic modeling to over 8200 environment-related LCA journal article titles and abstracts published between 1995 and 2014.

Results and discussion

Topic modeling using MALLET software and manual validation shows that over time, the LCA literature reflects a dramatic proportional increase in attention to climate change and a corresponding decline in attention to human and ecosystem health impacts, accentuated by rapid growth of the LCA literature. This result indicates an implicit prioritization of climate over other impact categories, a field-scale trend that appears to originate mostly in the broader environmental community rather than the LCA methodological community. Reasons for proportionally increasing publication of climate-related LCA might include the relative robustness of greenhouse gas emissions as an environmental impact indicator, a correlation with funding priorities, researcher interest in supporting active policy debates, or a revealed priority on climate versus other environmental impacts in the scholarly community.

Conclusions

As LCA becomes more widespread, recognizing and addressing the fact that analyses are not objective becomes correspondingly more important. Given the emergence of implicit prioritizations in the LCA literature, such as the impact prioritization of climate identified here with the use of computational tools, this work recommends the development and use of techniques that make impact prioritization explicit and enable consistent analysis of result sensitivity to value judgments. Explicit prioritization can improve transparency while enabling more systematic investigation of the effects of value choices on how LCA results are used.

     

Survey Insights into Weighting Environmental Damages: Influence of Context and Group

When one models impact pathways due to stressors that are caused by the provision of product systems, it results in indicators for environmental damages. These indicators are incommensurable and cannot be compared per se. For example, the statistical life years lost for a human population cannot necessarily be compared with the potentially affected fraction of species within an ecosystem. However, some decision makers who use life-cycle assessment (LCA) prefer a single index, because it facilitates interpretation better than a multi-indicator system. This requires a method for aggregating environmental damages of differing types, thereby confronting LCA with a valuation problem.
The article describes a nonmonetary approach to valuation in LCA that incorporates the findings of a survey among LCA practitioners and users. The survey focuses on the weighting of three safeguard subjects for Eco-indicator 99, a damage-oriented impact-assessment method: human health, ecosystem quality, and resources. Of particular interest here is what influence the context provided in the survey (framing) and an individual's characteristics have on his or her weighting of environmental damages. The results indicate that damages on the European level are easier to compare than damages on a micro level. Additionally, although only half of the survey participants could be classified unequivocally into one of three cultural perspectives, each perspective rated the damage categories presented to them significantly differently from the others. Our conclusions were that framing effects need to be more carefully considered in weighting procedures and that weighting preferences vary significantly according to a group's archetypical attitudes.     

Indicator selection in life cycle assessment to enable decision making: issues and solutions

Purpose

With an ever increasing list of indicators available, life cycle assessment (LCA) practitioners face the challenge of effectively communicating results to decision makers. Simplification of LCA is often limited to an arbitrary selection of indicators, use of single scores by using weighted values or single attribute indicators. These solutions are less attractive to decision makers, since value judgments are introduced or multi-indicator information is lost. Normalization could be a means to narrow the list of indicators by ranking indicators vs. a reference system. This paper shows three different normalization approaches that produce very different ranking of indicators. It is explained how normalization helps maintain a multi-indicator approach while keeping the most relevant indicators, allowing effective decision making.

Methods

The approaches are illustrated on a hand dishwashing case study, using ReCiPe as the impact assessment method and taking the European population (year 2000) as the reference situation. Indicators are ranked using midpoint normalization factors, and compared to the ranking from endpoint normalization broken down by midpoint contribution.

Results and discussion

Endpoint normalization shows Resources as the most relevant area of protection for this case, closely followed by Human Health and Ecosystem. Broken down by their key driving midpoints, fossil depletion, climate change and, to a lesser extent, particulate matter formation and metal depletion, are most relevant. Midpoint normalization, however, indicates Freshwater Eutrophication, Natural Land Transformation and Toxicity indicators (marine and freshwater ecotoxicity and human toxicity) are most relevant.

Conclusions

A three-step approach based on endpoint normalization is recommended to present only the most relevant indicators, allowing more effective decision making instead of communicating all LCA indicators. The selection process breaks out the normalized endpoint results into the most contributing midpoints (relevant indicators) and reports results with midpoint level units. Bias due to lack of data completeness is less of an issue in the endpoint normalization process (compared to midpoint normalization), while midpoint results are less subject to uncertainty (compared to endpoint results). Focusing on the relevant indicators and key contributing unit processes has proven to be effective for non-LCA expert decision makers to understand, use, and communicate complex LCA results.     

Heat island effects in urban life cycle assessment: Novel insights to include the effects of the urban heat island and UHI‐mitigation measures in LCA for effective policy making

Urbanization often entails a surge in urban temperature compared to the rural surroundings: the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect. Such a temperature increase triggers the formation of pollutants worsening the urban air quality. Jointly, bad air quality and UHI affect ecosystems and human health. To alleviate the impacts on the population and the environment, it is crucial to design effective UHI‐mitigation measures. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an assessment tool able to capture the complexity of urban settlements and quantify their impact. Yet, as currently implemented, LCA neglects the interactions between the built environment and the local climate, omitting the resulting impacts. This study reviews the existing literature, showing the lack of studies that organically include interactions between the built environment and local climate in LCA. This forms the basis to identify the unsuitability of the current LCA framework for comprehensively capturing the impact of urban settlements. To overcome this limitation, this research offers a pathway to expand the LCA methodology, indicating the necessity to (a) couple the LCA methodology with climate models or physical relations that quantify the interactions between the local climate and the built environment; (b) include novel impact categories in LCA to address such interactions; and (c) use existing or ad hoc developed characterization factors to assess the impacts related to the UHI effect. The LCA community can build on the frame of reference offered by this research to overcome the current limitations of LCA and enable its use for a comprehensive assessment of the impacts of UHI and its mitigation measures.     

Life cycle impact assessment and interpretation of municipal solid waste management scenarios based on the midpoint and endpoint approaches

Purpose  

Few studies have examined differing interpretations of life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) results between midpoints and endpoints for the same systems. This paper focuses on the LCIA of municipal solid waste (MSW) systems by taking both the midpoint and endpoint approaches and uses LIME (Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method based on Endpoint Modeling, version 2006). With respect to global and site-dependent factors, environmental impact categories were divided into global, regional, and local scales. Results are shown as net emissions consisting of system emissions and avoided emissions.     

Predicted environmental impact and expected occurrence of

The necessity of the impact assessment phase in life-cycle assessment (LCA) is presently debated. The crux of the debate lies in the poor accordance in some I.CA studies between the predicted environmental impact and the expected occurrence of actual environmental impact. That is in particular the case for impacts of a continental, regional and local character. We consider an impact assessment as being an indispensable phase of LCA, and see options for solving the identified problem. This article takes a closer look into the nature of the assessed impact in LCA in order to provide the basis for enhancement of life-cycle impact assessment. LCA is one of the analytical tools to support environmental policy focused on the control of present environmental problems. Nowadays, environmental problems are caused by concentration levels that result from the emissions of many sources together, rather than from single sources alone. The contribution from a single source is usually small or even marginal in comparison with the total contribution from all sources together. The multiple source character of the related impact categories provides the justification for the linear nature of the assessed impact in LCA. An article in the next issue of this journal will build further on this article, and will discuss the inclusion of temporal and spatial aspects (by a site-dependent approach) in order to enhance the accordance between the predicted environmental impact and the expected occurrence of actual environmental impact.     

Development of a Consumer Environmental Index and Results for Washington State Consumers

Consumer choices affect sustainability of societal systems, and state governments increasingly are interested in environmental impacts of consumption. This article describes a Consumer Environmental Index (CEI) to track the impacts of product purchase, use, and disposal and applies this initial CEI to Washington State in the United States. CEI has modules for product and service use, upstream resource extraction and manufacturing, and downstream disposal. CEI uses hybrid life cycle assessment (LCA) methods, combined with purchasing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Consumer Expenditure Survey. For Washington State, when human health and ecosystem toxicity impact was assessed with the TRACI/CalTOX methods, weighted aggregate and per consumer impacts in all categories increased during the 6 years from 2000 to 2005. For impacts per real dollar spent, only the CEI's climate change component declined, falling nearly 7% between 2000 and 2005. Purchasing details in the BLS expenditure surveys enable the CEI to track environmental impact details on 700 individual categories of products and services. For example, sugar, motor oil, and wood heat appear to have serious environmental impacts, whereas recycling of paper, cardboard, and food and beverage container discards can be as effective at reducing greenhouse gas emissions as cutting vehicle fuel usage nearly in half. Such results may serve to increase understanding of environmentally effective actions to reduce climate, human health, and ecosystem impacts of consumption.     

Heating systems LCA: comparison of biomass-based appliances

Purpose

Biomass provides an attractive solution for residential heating systems based on renewable fuels, even though biomass-based domestic heating systems are recognized as significant particulate matter emitters; thus, a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used in the study to compare two different appliances: a wood stove and a pellet stove, both modeled according to the best available technologies definition.

Methods

System boundaries of each scenario refer to a cradle-to-grave approach, including production, use and disposal of the heating appliance, as well as the preparation of biomass feedstock. The assessment of environmental impacts was performed assuming 1 MJ of thermal energy as the reference flow, considering the categories of particulate matter formation, human toxicity, climate change, and fossil fuel depletion, according to the ReCiPe 1.07 method. Finally, the comparison was extended to certain innovative heating systems in order to qualitatively evaluate potential improvements in residential heating performances.

Results and discussion

The results show that the wood stove reaches the highest scores in the categories of particulate matter formation and negative effects for human toxicity, as a consequence of the stove’s lower combustion efficiency, which would lead to a preference for the pellet stove. However, when climate change affecting human health and the ecosystem, and fossil depletion are considered, the choice appears more uncertain due to the energy consumption from the pelletizing step. Alternative technologies (e.g., solar panels in combination with a gas boiler) show better scores related to fine particles emission reduction, even if a worsening in other categories is observed. The results were validated by a sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions

The study suggests that a LCA approach can support the choice of the best domestic heating system, helping to promote policy initiatives on a sound basis and to understand which are the main key levers to act for reducing the total environmental burdens of biomass-based heating appliances.     

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

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