Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment Recycling Allocation Methods

Life cycle assessment practitioners struggle to accurately allocate environmental burdens of metals recycling, including the temporal dimension of environmental impacts. We analyze four approaches for calculating aluminum greenhouse gas emissions: the recycled content (RC) or cut‐off approach, which assumes that demand for recycled content displaces primary production; end‐of‐life recycling (EOLR), which assumes that postuse recycling displaces primary production; market‐based (MB) approaches, which estimate changes in supply and demand using price elasticities; and value‐corrected substitution (VCS), which allocates impact based on price differences between primary and recycled material. Our analysis suggests that applications of the VCS approach do not adequately account for the changing scrap to virgin material price ratio over time, whereas MB approaches do not address stock accumulation and depletion. The EOLR and RC approaches were analyzed using two case studies: U.S. aluminum beverage cans and vehicle engine blocks. These approaches produced similar results for beverage cans, which have a closed material loop system and a short product life. With longer product lifetimes, as noted with the engine blocks, the magnitude and timing of the emissions differs greatly between the RC and EOLR approaches. The EOLR approach indicates increased impacts at the time of production, offset by negative impacts in future years, whereas the RC approach assumes benefits to increased recycled content at the time of production. For vehicle engine blocks, emissions using EOLR are 140% higher than with RC. Results are highly sensitive to recycled content and future recycling rates, and the choice of allocation methods can have significant implications for life cycle studies.     

Life Cycle Assessment Software: Selection Can Impact Results

When software is used to facilitate life cycle assessments (LCAs), the implicit assumption is that the results obtained are not a function of the choice of software used. LCAs were done in both SimaPro and GaBi for simplified systems of creation and disposal of 1 kilogram each of four basic materials (aluminum, corrugated board, glass, and polyethylene terephthalate) to determine whether there were significant differences in the results. Data files and impact assessment methodologies (Impact 2002, ReCiPe, and TRACI 2) were ostensibly identical (although there were minor variations in the available ReCiPe version between the programs that were investigated). Differences in reported impacts of greater than 20% for at least one of the four materials were found for 9 of the 15 categories in Impact 2002+, 7 of the 18 categories in ReCiPe, and four of the nine categories in TRACI. In some cases, these differences resulted in changes in the relative rankings of the four materials. The causes of the differences for 14 combinations of materials and impact categories were examined by tracing the results back to the life cycle inventory data and the characterization factors in the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods. In all cases examined, a difference in the characterization factors used by the two programs was the cause of the differing results. As a result, when these software programs are used to inform choices, the result can be different conclusions about relative environmental preference that are functions purely of the software implementation of LCIA methods, rather than of the underlying data.     

Let's Be Clear(er) about Substitution: A Reporting Framework to Account for Product Displacement in Life Cycle Assessment

The multifunctional character of resource recovery in waste management systems is commonly addressed through system expansion/substitution in life cycle assessment (LCA). Avoided burdens credited based on expected displacement of other product systems can dominate the overall results, making the underlying assumptions particularly important for the interpretation and recommendations. Substitution modeling, however, is often poorly motivated or inadequately described, which limits the utility and comparability of such LCA studies. The aim of this study is therefore to provide a structure for the systematic reporting of information and assumptions expected to contribute to the substitution potential in order to make substitution modeling and the results thereof more transparent and interpretable. We propose a reporting framework that can also support the systematic estimation of substitution potentials related to resource recovery. Key components of the framework include waste‐specific (physical) resource potential, recovery efficiency, and displacement rate. End‐use–specific displacement rates can be derived as the product of the relative functionality (substitutability) of the recovered resources compared to potentially displaced products and the expected change in consumption of competing products. Substitutability can be determined based on technical functionality and can include additional constraints. The case of anaerobic digestion of organic household waste illustrates its application. The proposed framework enables well‐motivated substitution potentials to be accounted for, regardless of the chosen approach, and improves the reproducibility of comparative LCA studies of resource recovery.     

Life Cycle Assessment of ICT

The use of information and communication technology (ICT) is growing throughout society, and new products and solutions are developed at an increasing rate. To enable environmental assessment of specific ICT products and other products that rely on ICT in some way, a more complete, detailed, and up‐to‐date study based on real measurements is needed. To date, similar studies have not been readily available or fully comprehensive. This study assessed the overall operational electricity use and life‐cycle–based carbon footprint (CF) relating to ICT in Sweden, including activities not commonly addressed previously, such as shared data transport networks and data centers and manufacturing of network infrastructure. Specific, detailed inventory data are presented and used for assessment of the Internet Protocol core network, data transmission, operator activities, and access network. These specific data, in combination with secondary, more generic data for end‐user equipment, allow a comprehensive overall assessment. The majority of the ICT network CF is the result of end‐user equipment, mainly personal computers, followed by third‐party enterprise networks and data centers and then access networks. The parts closest to the user proved to be clearly responsible for the majority of the impact. The results are presented for Swedish ICT networks and for ICT networks in general based on a global average electricity mix.     

Consequential Life Cycle Assessment of Policy Vulnerability to Price Effects

The application of life cycle assessment (LCA) in a policy context highlights the need for a “consequential” LCA (CLCA), which differs from an “attributional” LCA (ALCA). Although CLCA offers some advantages over ALCA, such as a capacity to account for emissions resulting from both substitution and price effects, it entails additional assumptions and cost and may yield estimates that are more uncertain (e.g., estimates of impact of biofuel policies on greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions). We illustrate how a CLCA that relies on simple partial equilibrium models could provide important insights on the direction and magnitude of price effects while limiting the complexity of CLCA. We describe how such a CLCA, when applied early in the policy life cycle, could help identify policy formulations that reduce the magnitude of adverse price effects relative to the beneficial substitution effect on emissions because—as the experience with biofuel regulations indicates—regulating price effects is costly and controversial. We conclude that the salient contribution of CLCA in the policy process might lie in warning policy makers about the vulnerabilities in a policy with regard to environmental impact and to help modify potentially counterproductive formulations rather than in deriving the precise estimates for uncertain variables, such as the life cycle GHG intensity of product or average indirect emissions.     

Methodological Aspects of Applying Life Cycle Assessment to Industrial Symbioses

In view of recent studies of the historical development and current status of industrial symbiosis (IS), life cycle assessment (LCA) is proposed as a general framework for quantifying the environmental performance of by‐product exchange. Recent guidelines for LCA (International Reference Life Cycle Data System [ILCD] guidelines) are applied to answer the main research questions in the IS literature reviewed. A typology of five main research questions is proposed: (1) analysis, (2) improvement, and (3) expansion of existing systems; (4) design of new eco‐industrial parks, and (5) restructuring of circular economies. The LCA guidelines were found useful in framing the question and choosing an appropriate reference case for comparison. The selection of a correct reference case reduces the risk of overestimating the benefits of by‐product exchange. In the analysis of existing systems, environmentally extended input‐output analysis (EEIOA) can be used to streamline the analysis and provide an industry average baseline for comparison. However, when large‐scale changes are applied to the system, more sophisticated tools are necessary for assessment of the consequences, from market analysis to general equilibrium modeling and future scenario work. Such a rigorous application of systems analysis was not found in the current IS literature, but would benefit the field substantially, especially when the environmental impact of large‐scale economic changes is analyzed.     

Implementing a Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment Methodology with a Case Study on Domestic Hot Water Production

This work contributes to the development of a dynamic life cycle assessment (DLCA) methodology by providing a methodological framework to link a dynamic system modeling method with a time‐dependent impact assessment method. This three‐step methodology starts by modeling systems where flows are described by temporal distributions. Then, a temporally differentiated life cycle inventory (TDLCI) is calculated to present the environmental exchanges through time. Finally, time‐dependent characterization factors are applied to the TDLCI to evaluate climate‐change impacts through time. The implementation of this new framework is illustrated by comparing systems producing domestic hot water (DHW) over an 80‐year period. Electricity is used to heat water in the first system, whereas the second system uses a combination of solar energy and gas to heat an equivalent amount of DHW at the same temperature. This comparison shows that using a different temporal precision (i.e., monthly vs. annual) to describe process flows can reverse conclusions regarding which case has the best environmental performance. Results also show that considering the timing of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduces the absolute values of carbon footprint in the short‐term when compared with results from the static life cycle assessment. This pragmatic framework for the implementation of time in DLCA studies is proposed to help in the development of the methodology. It is not yet a fully operational scheme, and efforts are still required before DLCA can become state of practice.     

The Design of a Sustainability Assessment Standard Using Life Cycle Information

Sustainability assessment standards are currently being developed for a range of building products. This activity has been stimulated through the considerable success of the U.S. Green Building Council's (USGBC) LEED? standard. Transparent life cycle–based standards can guide manufacturers to design products that have reduced environmental impact. The use of a sustainability standard can certify performance and avoid green washing. In this article we present a logical framework for designing a sustainability assessment standard through the creation of tables that award points in the standard to be consistent with life cycle information. Certain minimum principles of consistency are articulated. In the case that the life cycle impact assessment method maps the life cycle inventory to impact through a linear weighting, two design approaches—impact category and activity substitution—are constructed to be consistent with these principles. The approach is illustrated in a case study of a partial redesign of a carpet sustainability assessment standard (NSF/ANSI‐140).     

Exploring the Use of Ecological Footprint in Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Ecological footprint (EF) is a metric that estimates human consumption of biological resources and products, along with generation of waste greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in terms of appropriated productive land. There is an opportunity to better characterize land occupation and effects on the carbon cycle in life cycle assessment (LCA) models using EF concepts. Both LCA and EF may benefit from the merging of approaches commonly used separately by practitioners of these two methods. However, few studies have compared or integrated EF with LCA. The focus of this research was to explore methods for improving the characterization of land occupation within LCA by considering the EF method, either as a complementary tool or impact assessment method. Biofuels provide an interesting subject for application of EF in the LCA context because two of the most important issues surrounding biofuels are land occupation (changes, availability, and so on) and GHG balances, two of the impacts that EF is able to capture. We apply EF to existing fuel LCA land occupation and emissions data and project EF for future scenarios for U.S. transportation fuels. We find that LCA studies can benefit from lessons learned in EF about appropriately modeling productive land occupation and facilitating clear communication of meaningful results, but find limitations to the EF in the LCA context that demand refinement and recommend that EF always be used along with other indicators and metrics in product‐level assessments.     

Life Cycle Assessment of End‐of‐Life Management Options for Construction and Demolition Debris

A life cycle assessment (LCA) of various end‐of‐life management options for construction and demolition (C&D) debris was conducted using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Municipal Solid Waste Decision Support Tool. A comparative LCA evaluated seven different management scenarios using the annual production of C&D debris in New Hampshire as the functional unit. Each scenario encompassed C&D debris transport, processing, separation, and recycling, as well as varying end‐of‐life management options for the C&D debris (e.g., combustion to generate electricity versus landfilling for the wood debris stream and recycling versus landfilling for the nonwood debris stream) and different bases for the electricity generation offsets (e.g., the northeastern U.S. power grid versus coal‐fired power generation). A sensitivity analysis was also conducted by varying the energy content of the C&D wood debris and by examining the impact of basing the energy offsets on electricity generated from various fossil fuels. The results include impacts for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, criteria air pollutants, ancillary solid waste production, and organic and inorganic constituents in water emissions. Scenarios with nonwood C&D debris recycling coupled with combustion of C&D wood debris to generate electricity had lower impacts than other scenarios. The nonwood C&D debris recycling scenarios where C&D wood debris was landfilled resulted in less overall impact than the scenarios where all C&D debris was landfilled. The lowest impact scenario included nonwood C&D debris recycling with local combustion of the C&D wood debris to generate electricity, providing a net gain in energy production of more than 7 trillion British thermal units (BTU) per year and a 130,000 tons per year reduction in GHG emissions. The sensitivity analysis revealed that for energy consumption, the model is sensitive to the energy content of the C&D wood debris but insensitive to the basis for the energy offset, and the opposite is true for GHG emissions.     

Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of a Canned Sardine Product from Portugal

This study aims to assess the environmental impacts of canned sardines in olive oil, by considering fishing, processing, and packaging, using life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. The case study concerns a product of a canning factory based in Portugal and packed in aluminum cans. It is the first LCA of a processed seafood product made with the traditional canning method. The production of both cans and olive oil are the most important process in the considered impact categories. The production of olives contributes to the high environmental load of olive oil, related to cultivation and harvesting phases. The production of aluminum cans is the most significant process for all impact categories, except ozone depletion potential and eutrophication potential, resulting from the high energy demand and the extraction of raw materials. To compare to other sardine products consumed in Portugal, such as frozen and fresh sardines, transport to the wholesaler and store was added. The environmental cost of canned sardines is almost seven times higher per kilogram of edible product. The main action to optimize the environmental performance of canned sardines is therefore to replace the packaging and diminish the olive oil losses as much as possible. Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by half when plastic packaging is considered rather than aluminum. Frozen and fresh sardines represent much lower environmental impacts than canned sardines. Nevertheless, when other sardine products are not possible, it becomes feasible to use sardines for human consumption, preventing them from being wasted or used suboptimally as feed.     

Life Cycle Assessment of Biomass‐based Combined Heat and Power Plants

Norway, like many countries, has realized the need to extensively plan its renewable energy future sooner rather than later. Combined heat and power (CHP) through gasification of forest residues is one technology that is expected to aid Norway in achieving a desired doubling of bioenergy production by 2020. To assess the environmental impacts to determine the most suitable CHP size, we performed a unit process‐based attributional life cycle assessment (LCA), in which we compared three scales of CHP over ten environmental impact categories—micro (0.1 megawatts electricity [MWe]), small (1 MWe), and medium (50 MWe) scale. The functional units used were 1 megajoule (MJ) of electricity and 1 MJ of district heating delivered to the end user (two functional units), and therefore, the environmental impacts from distribution of electricity and hot water to the consumer were also considered. This study focuses on a regional perspective situated in middle‐Norway's Nord‐ and Sør‐Trøndelag counties. Overall, the unit‐based environmental impacts between the scales of CHP were quite mixed and within the same magnitude. The results indicated that energy distribution from CHP plant to end user creates from less than 1% to nearly 90% of the total system impacts, depending on impact category and energy product. Also, an optimal small‐scale CHP plant may be the best environmental option. The CHP systems had a global warming potential ranging from 2.4 to 2.8 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of thermal (g CO₂‐eq/MJ_th) district heating and from 8.8 to 10.5 grams carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of electricity (g CO₂‐eq/MJ_el) to the end user.     

Confronting Uncertainty in Life Cycle Assessment Used for Decision Support

The aim of this article is to help confront uncertainty in life cycle assessments (LCAs) used for decision support. LCAs offer a quantitative approach to assess environmental effects of products, technologies, and services and are conducted by an LCA practitioner or analyst (AN) to support the decision maker (DM) in making the best possible choice for the environment. At present, some DMs do not trust the LCA to be a reliable decision‐support tool—often because DMs consider the uncertainty of an LCA to be too large. The standard evaluation of uncertainty in LCAs is an ex‐post approach that can be described as a variance simulation based on individual data points used in an LCA. This article develops and proposes a taxonomy for LCAs based on extensive research in the LCA, management, and economic literature. This taxonomy can be used ex ante to support planning and communication between an AN and DM regarding which type of LCA study to employ for the decision context at hand. This taxonomy enables the derivation of an LCA classification matrix to clearly identify and communicate the type of a given LCA. By relating the LCA classification matrix to statistical principles, we can also rank the different types of LCA on an expected inherent uncertainty scale that can be used to confront and address potential uncertainty. However, this article does not attempt to offer a quantitative approach for assessing uncertainty in LCAs used for decision support.     

Using the Lashof Accounting Methodology to Assess Carbon Mitigation Projects With Life Cycle Assessment

As governments elaborate strategies to counter climate change, there is a need to compare the different options available on an environmental basis. This study proposes a life cycle assessment framework integrating the Lashof accounting methodology, which enables the assessment and comparison of different carbon mitigation projects (e.g., biofuel use, a sequestering plant, an afforestation project). The Lashof accounting methodology is chosen amid other methods of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission characterization for its relative simplicity and capability to characterize all types of carbon mitigation projects. Using the unit of megagram‐year (Mg‐year), which accounts for the mass of GHGs in the atmosphere multiplied by the time it stays there, the methodology calculates the cumulative radiative forcing caused by GHG emission within a predetermined time frame. Basically, the developed framework uses the Mg‐year as a functional unit and isolates impacts related to the climate mitigation function with system expansion. The proposed framework is demonstrated with a case study of tree ethanol pathways (maize, sugarcane, and willow). The study shows that carbon mitigation assessment through life cycle assessment is possible and that it could be a useful tool for decision makers, as it can compare different projects regardless of their original context. The case study reveals that system expansion, as well as each carbon mitigation project's efficiency at reducing carbon emissions, are critical factors that have a significant impact on the results. Also, the framework proves to be useful for treating land‐use change emissions, as they are considered through the functional unit.     

Life Cycle Attribute Assessment

Practitioners of life cycle assessment (LCA) have recently turned their attention to social issues in the supply chain. The United Nations life cycle initiative's social LCA task force has completed its guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products, and awareness of managing upstream corporate social responsibility (CSR) issues has risen due to the growing popularity of LCA. This article explores one approach to assessing social issues in the supply chain—life cycle attribute assessment (LCAA). The approach was originally proposed by Gregory Norris in 2006, and we present here a case study. LCAA builds on the theoretical structure of environmental LCA to construct a supply chain model. Instead of calculating quantitative impacts, however, it asks the question “What percentage of my supply chain has attribute X?” X may represent a certification from a CSR body or a self‐defined attribute, such as “is locally produced.” We believe LCAA may serve as an aid to discussions of how current and popular CSR indicators may be integrated into a supply chain model. The case study demonstrates the structure of LCAA, which is very similar to that of traditional environmental LCA. A labor hours data set was developed as a satellite matrix to determine number of worker hours in a greenhouse tomato supply. Data from the Quebec tomato producer were used to analyze how the company performed on eight sample LCAA indicators, and conclusions were drawn about where the company should focus CSR efforts.     

Analyzing the Practice of Life Cycle Assessment

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a quantitative tool used to evaluate the environmental impacts of products or processes. With respect to buildings, LCA can be used to evaluate the environmental impacts of an entire building's life cycle. Currently LCA in the building area is used in a limited capacity, primarily to select building products. In order to determine the causality for the lack of whole‐building LCAs, focus groups with members of the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) communities were held. This article investigates the current level of knowledge of LCA in the AEC community and then discusses the benefits and barriers to the practice of LCA. In summary, the goal of the research was to identify why LCA is not used to its fullest potential in a whole‐building LCA. In an open forum and moderated setting, focus group participants were asked individually to self‐identify their experience with LCA, a brief education session on LCA was held, and then benefits and barriers to LCA were discussed. The focus group sessions were transcribed and systematically coded by social researchers in order to analyze the results. Hybrid flow and radar charts were developed. From the focus group results, the most important benefit to LCA was “provides information about environmental impacts.” The results did not identify a prominent barrier; however, building‐related metrics were ascertained to be one of the more crucial barriers. The benefits and barriers classified by this analysis will be utilized to develop a subsequent online survey to further understand the LCA and AEC community.     

Impact Assessment of Biodiversity and Carbon Pools from Land Use and Land Use Changes in Life Cycle Assessment,Exemplified with Forestry Operations in Norway

There is a strong need for methods within life cycle assessment (LCA) that enable the inclusion of all complex aspects related to land use and land use change (LULUC). This article presents a case study of the use of one hectare (ha) of forest managed for the production of wood for bioenergy production. Both permanent and temporary changes in above‐ground biomass are assessed together with the impact on biodiversity caused by LULUC as a result of forestry activities. The impact is measured as a product of time and area requirements, as well as by changes in carbon pools and impacts on biodiversity as a consequence of different management options. To elaborate the usefulness of the method as well as its dependency on assumptions, a range of scenarios are introduced in the study. The results show that the impact on climate change from LULUC dominates the results, compared to the impact from forestry operations. This clearly demonstrates the need to include LULUC in an LCA of forestry products. For impacts both on climate change and biodiversity, the results show large variability based on what assumptions are made; and impacts can be either positive or negative. Consequently, a mere measure of land used does not provide any meaning in LCA, as it is not possible to know whether this contributes a positive or negative impact.     

Life Cycle Assessment of Diesel and Electric Public Transportation Buses

The Clean Air Act in the United States identifies diesel‐powered motor vehicles, including transit buses, as significant sources of several criteria pollutants that contribute to ground‐level ozone formation or smog. The effects of air pollution in urban areas are often more significant due to congestion and can lead to respiratory and cardiovascular health impacts. Life cycle assessment (LCA) has been utilized in the literature to compare conventional gasoline‐powered passenger cars with various types of electric and hybrid‐powered alternatives, however, no similarly detailed studies exist for mass transit buses. LCA results from this study indicate that the use phase, consisting of diesel production/combustion for the conventional bus and electricity generation for the electric bus, dominates most impact categories; however, the effects of battery production are significant for global warming, carcinogens, ozone depletion, and eco‐toxicity. There is a clear connection between the mix of power‐generation technologies and the preference for the diesel or electric bus. With the existing U.S. average grid, there is a strong preference for the conventional diesel bus over the electric bus when considering global warming impacts alone. Policy makers must consider regional variations in the electricity grid prior to recommending the use of battery electric buses to reduce carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. This study found that the electric bus was preferable in only eight states, including Washington and Oregon. Improvements in battery technology reduce the life cycle impacts from the electric bus, but the electricity grid makeup is the dominant variable.     

Ecosystem Services in Life Cycle Assessment while Encouraging Techno‐Ecological Synergies

Life cycle assessment (LCA) has enabled consideration of environmental impacts beyond the narrow boundary of traditional engineering methods. This reduces the chance of shifting impacts outside the system boundary. However, sustainability also requires that supporting ecosystems are not adversely affected and remain capable of providing goods and services for supporting human activities. Conventional LCA does not account for this role of nature, and its metrics are best for comparing alternatives. These relative metrics do not provide information about absolute environmental sustainability, which requires comparison between the demand and supply of ecosystem services (ES). Techno‐ecological synergy (TES) is a framework to account for ES, and has been demonstrated by application to systems such as buildings and manufacturing activities that have narrow system boundaries. This article develops an approach for techno‐ecological synergy in life cycle assessment (TES‐LCA) by expanding the steps in conventional LCA to incorporate the demand and supply of ecosystem goods and services at multiple spatial scales. This enables calculation of absolute environmental sustainability metrics, and helps identify opportunities for improving a life cycle not just by reducing impacts, but also by restoring and protecting ecosystems. TES‐LCA of a biofuel life cycle demonstrates this approach by considering the ES of carbon sequestration, air quality regulation, and water provisioning. Results show that for the carbon sequestration ecosystem service, farming can be locally sustainable but unsustainable at the global or serviceshed scale. Air quality regulation is unsustainable at all scales, while water provisioning is sustainable at all scales for this study in the eastern part of the United States.