A consequential approach to life cycle sustainability assessment with an agent-based model to determine the potential contribution of chemical recycling to UN Sustainable Development Goals

Chemical recycling (CR) could support a circular approach for municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment. In promoting the recirculation of recyclable carbon-containing waste as secondary feedstock for chemical production, it could contribute to resource conservation, emissions reduction, and supply security. To evaluate CR's contribution to the transition from a linear to a circular carbon economy—and correspondingly to the achievement of environmental, economic, and social sustainability as indicated in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (UN-SDGs)—this study builds on extant literature of life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) to investigate consequential environmental, economic, and social CR impacts. Specifically, an integrated approach whereby process-based life cycle assessment, techno-economic analysis, and social indicators are linked in the framework of an agent-based model is developed to investigate sustainability consequences of CR via gasification of residual MSW in Germany. Results suggest that CR contributes to reducing climate change and to addressing terrestrial acidification and fossil resource scarcity. However, its deployment will be associated with significant system costs. Hence, to promote CR implementation, measures such as obliging direct waste incineration to trade CO₂ certificates—provided that certificate prices increase sharply in the future—as well as implementing a recycling rate are found to be necessary to gap economic disadvantages. This study not only contributes to extending life cycle approaches for LCSA methodologically, it furthermore provides valuable insights into temporal and spatial interactions in waste management systems to inform science, industry, and politics about the sustainability impacts of CR on the achievement of the UN-SDGs. This article met the requirements for a gold-gold JIE data openness badge described at http://jie.click/badges .      

基于混合生命周期评价的生活垃圾处理系统生态效率分析

基于混合生命周期评价(Hybrid life cycle assessment,HLCA)提出一种改进生态效率模型,系统评价卫生填埋、卫生填埋⁃填埋气利用、焚烧发电、堆肥+卫生填埋和堆肥+焚烧发电5种我国典型生活垃圾处理情景的生态效率,并探究可持续性包含的环境、经济和社会多维权衡关系。结果表明,具有最大生态效率的生活垃圾处理情景因可持续性维度选取不同而异,如考虑人体健康损害影响,焚烧发电情景具有最大经济生态效率,而卫生填埋⁃填埋气利用情景具有最大社会生态效率。生活垃圾处理系统的可持续性评价维度之间具有显著的权衡关系,忽略某些影响类型可能带来问题转移。5种生活垃圾处理情景的环境影响各异,非焚烧情景气候变化影响和焚烧情景人体毒性影响突出。机器设备和燃料使用对资源消耗影响贡献最大,而生活垃圾处理过程对经济效益和其他环境影响贡献最大。本文提出的改进生态效率模型可以定量评价生活垃圾管理系统生态效率及权衡关系,为有效制定生活垃圾管理政策提供全面的信息支持。     

Life cycle management: UNEP-workshop

On August 30, 2001, the first in a series of planned global workshops on Life Cycle Management was organized in Copenhagen by UNEP in cooperation with dk-TEKNIK. The workshop provided an international forum to share experiences on LCM. The specific purpose of the workshop was to define the focus of a possible UNEP programme on Life Cycle Management under the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. Life Cycle Management has been defined by the SETAC Europe Working Group on LCM as an integrated framework of concepts, techniques and procedures to address environmental, economic, technological and social aspects of products and organizations to achieve continuous environmental improvement from a life cycle perspective. Life Cycle Management has been requested as an additional component for the Life Cycle Initiative by business organizations as well as governments in order to provide practical approaches for management systems in this area. The breakout groups of the workshop focussed on the role of integrating environmental management practices, concepts and tools in a life cycle perspective, on the integration of socio-economic aspects of sustainability in life cycle approaches, including the definition of adequate indicators for these aspects, on the communication strategies to promote life cycle thinking, and on the demand side of LCA. The workshop closed with a consensus that the UNEP/ SETAC Life Cycle Initiative should really include a programme on Life Cycle Management with the proposed areas of work. UNEP in cooperation with SETAC should function as a global catalyser of knowledge transfer and cooperation on life cycle approaches. The key issue behind all activities would be the promotion of Life Cycle Thinking since all break-out groups mentioned the importance of well-prepared communication strategies. Another interesting outcome of the workshop is the clear interest of different stakeholders in the consideration of social and institutional effects of products, in addition to environmental and economic impacts, i.e. a sustainable development perspective.     

Influence of assumptions about selection and recycling efficiencies on the LCA of integrated waste management systems

Background, aim, and scope  Life cycle assessment (LCA) applied to alternative waste management strategies is becoming a commonly utilised tool for decision makers. This LCA study analyses together material and energy recovery within integrated municipal solid waste (MSW) management systems, i.e. the recovery of materials separated with the source-separated collection of MSW and the energy recovery from the residual waste. The final aim is to assess the energetic and environmental performance of the entire MSW management system and, in particular, to evaluate the influence of different assumptions about recycling on the LCA results. Materials and methods  The analysis uses the method of LCA and, thus, takes into account that any recycling activity influences the environment not only by consuming resources and releasing emissions and waste streams but also by replacing conventional products from primary production. Different assumptions about the selection efficiencies of the collected materials and about the quantity of virgin material substituted by the reprocessed material were made. Moreover, the analysis considers that the energy recovered from the residual waste displaces the same quantity of energy produced in conventional power plants and boilers fuelled with fossil fuels. Results  The analysis shows, in the expanded model of the material and energy recovering chain, that the environmental gains are higher than the environmental impacts. However, when we reduce the selection efficiencies by 15%, the impact indicators worsen by a percentage included between 10% and 26%. This phenomenon is even more evident when we consider a substitution ratio of 1:<1 for paper and plastic: The worsening is around 15–20% for all the impact indicators except for the global warming for which the worsening is up to 45%. Discussion  Hypotheses about the selection efficiencies of the source-separated collected materials and about the substitution ratio have a great influence on the LCA results. Consequently, policy makers have to be aware of the fact that the impacts of an integrated MSW management system are highly dependent on the assumptions made in the modelling of the material recovery, as well as in the modelling of the energy recovery. Conclusions  LCA allows to evaluate the impacts of integrated systems and how these impacts change when the assumptions made during the modelling of the different single parts of the system are modified. Due to the significant impacts that hypotheses about material recovery have in the results, they should be expressed in a very transparent way in the report of LCA studies, together with the assumptions made about energy recovery. Recommendations and perspectives  The results suggest that the hypotheses about the value of the substitution ratio are very important, and the case of wood should therefore be better analysed and a substitution ratio of 1:<1 should be used, as for paper and plastic. It seems that the assumptions made about which material is replaced by the recycled one are very important too, and in this sense, more research is needed about what the recycled plastic may effectively substitute, in particular the polyolefin mix.     

生命周期评价方法在城市生活垃圾管理中的应用研究述评

结合城市生活垃圾管理系统特征,系统归纳基于生命周期评价(Life cycle assessment,LCA)方法的城市生活垃圾管理模型的发展现状,并对LCA方法在城市生活垃圾管理中的实践以及在我国开展城市生活垃圾管理LCA研究的应用前景进行评述。分析表明,LCA是城市生活垃圾管理领域的重要工具之一,基于LCA方法的城市生活垃圾管理模型在全生命周期环境影响评价与识别、处置工艺选择与改进、可持续生活垃圾管理决策支持等方面具有十分重要的应用价值。中国在本地化生活垃圾管理系统LCA模型开发、清单数据库和评价指标体系构建以及与其他研究方法集成等方面面临挑战。     

Identifying Stakeholders’ Views on the Eco‐efficiency Assessment of a Municipal Solid Waste Management System

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is one of the most popular methods of technical‐environmental assessment for informing environmental policies, as, for instance, in municipal solid waste (MSW) management. Because MSW management involves many stakeholders with possibly conflicting interests, the implementation of an LCA‐based policy can, however, be blocked or delayed. A stakeholder assessment of future scenarios helps identify conflicting interests and anticipate barriers of sustainable MSW management systems. This article presents such an approach for Swiss waste glass‐packaging disposal, currently undergoing a policy review. In an online survey, stakeholders (N = 85) were asked to assess disposal scenarios showing different LCA‐based eco‐efficiencies with respect to their desirability and probability of occurrence. Scenarios with higher eco‐efficiency than the current system are more desirable and considered more probable than those with lower eco‐efficiency. A combination of inland recycling and downcycling to foam glass (insulation material) in Switzerland is desired by all stakeholders and is more eco‐efficient than the current system. In contrast, institutions of MSW management, such as national and regional environmental protection agencies, judge a scenario in which nearly all cullet would be recycled in the only Swiss glass‐packaging factory as more desirable than supply and demand stakeholders of waste glass‐packaging. Such a scenario involves a monopsony rejected by many municipalities and scrap traders. Such an assessment procedure can provide vital information guiding the formulation of environmental policies.     

Life Cycle Tools within Ford of Europe's Product Sustainability Index. Case Study Ford S-MAX & Ford Galaxy (8 pp)

Background, Aim and Scope Sustainability is a well recognised goal which is difficult to manage due to its complexity. As part of a series of sustainability management tools, a Product Sustainability Index (PSI) is translating the sustainability aspects to the organization of vehicle product development of Ford of Europe, thus allocating ownership and responsibility to that function. PSI is limiting the scope to those key environmental, social and economic characteristics of passenger vehicles that are controllable by the product development organisation. Materials and Methods: The PSI considers environmental, economic and social aspects based on externally reviewed life cycle environmental and cost aspects (Life Cycle Assessment, Cost of ownership / Life Cycle Costing), externally certified aspects (allergy-tested interior) and related aspects as sustainable materials, safety, mobility capability and noise. After the kick-off of their product development in 2002, the new Ford S-MAX and Ford Galaxy are serving as a pilot for this tool. These products are launched in Europe in 2006. The tracking of PSI performance has been done by engineers of the Vehicle Integration department within the product development organization. The method has been translated in an easy spreadsheet tool. Engineers have been trained within one hour trainings. The application of PSI by vehicle integration followed the principle to reduce the need for any incremental time or additional data to a minimum. PSI is adopted to the existing decision-making process. End of 2005, an internal expert conducted a Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) study for verification purposes using commercial software. This study and the PSI have been scrutinized by an external review panel according to ISO14040 and, by taking into consideration the on-going SETAC, work in the field of LCC. Results: The results of the Life Cycle based indicators of PSI as calculated by non-experts are fully in line with those of the more detailed expert study. The difference is below 2%. The new Ford Galaxy and Ford S-MAX shows significantly improved performance regarding the life cycle air quality, use of sustainable materials, restricted substances and safety compared to the previous model Galaxy. The affordability (Life Cycle Cost of Ownership) has also been improved when looking at the same engine types. Looking at gasoline versus diesel options, the detailed study shows under what conditions the diesel options are environmentally preferable and less costly (mileage, fuel prices, etc.). Discussion: The robustness of results has been verified in various ways. Based also on Sensitivity and Monte-Carlo Analysis, case study-specific requirements have been deduced defining criteria for a significant environmental improvement between the various vehicles. Only if the differences of LCIA results between two vehicles are larger than a certain threshold are the above-mentioned results robust. Conclusions: In general terms, an approach has been implemented and externally reviewed that allows non-experts to manage key environmental, social and economic aspects in the product development, also on a vehicle level. This allows mainstream functions to take ownership of sustainability and assigns accountability to those who can really decide on changes affecting the sustainability performance. In the case of Ford S-MAX and Galaxy, indicators from all three dimensions of sustainability (environment, social and economic) have been improved compared to the old Ford Galaxy. Recommendations and Perspectives: Based on this positive experience, it is recommended to make, in large or multinational organizations, the core business functions directly responsible and accountable for managing their own part of environmental, social and economic aspects of sustainability. Staff functions should be limited to starting the process with methodological and training support and making sure that the contributions of the different main functions fit together.     

Improving the environmental performance of bio-waste management with life cycle thinking (LCT) and life cycle assessment (LCA)

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Globally, many countries worldwide aim at increasing the environmental sustainability of waste management activities. Special attention is...     

Emergy evaluation of the impact of waste exchanges on the sustainability of industrial systems

Emergy evaluation provided global performance indicators that were used to assess the impact of waste exchanges on the sustainability of a sulfuric acid production system (SAPS) and a titanium dioxide production system (TDPS) in Pan-zhi-hua City, China. Impact of emissions was quantified in terms of emergy and integrated into the classic emergy-based indicators. Results show that waste exchanges improve the sustainability of the two systems, although the SAPS benefits more from the waste exchanges than the TDPS from an economic perspective however, the impact of emissions reduces their sustainability to some degree. This study creates awareness and brings new insight to the gains achieved with resource recovery from waste in the interrelated industrial systems, which is derived from the mutualism relationship existing in natural ecosystems. Finally, this paper puts forward some corresponding suggestions.     

基于生命周期方法的生活垃圾资源化利用系统生态效率分析

我国生活垃圾产量大但处理能力不足,产生多种环境危害,对其资源化利用能够缓解环境压力并回收资源。为探讨生活垃圾资源化利用策略,综合生命周期评价与生命周期成本分析方法,建立生态效率模型。以天津市为例,分析和比较焚烧发电、卫生填埋-填埋气发电、与堆肥+卫生填埋3种典型生活垃圾资源化利用情景的生态效率。结果表明,堆肥+卫生填埋情景具有潜在最优生态效率;全球变暖对总环境影响贡献最大,而投资成本对经济影响贡献最大。考虑天津市生活垃圾管理现状,建议鼓励发展生活垃圾干湿组分分离及厨余垃圾堆肥的资源化利用策略。     

Can carbon footprint serve as proxy of the environmental burden from urban consumption patterns?

Carbon footprint (CFP) is widely applied as an indicator when assessing environmental sustainability of products and services. The objective of the present study is to evaluate the validity of CFP as overall environmental indicator for representing the environmental burden of residents from urbanized areas. Applying four different Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods environmental impact profiles were determined for the consumption patterns of 1281 Danish urban residents. Six main consumption components were distinguished including road transport, air travel, food, accommodation (covering consumption of materials for the construction of dwellings) and use of energy in terms of thermal energy, and electricity. The results for the individual consumption components showed a strong correlation between CFP and nearly all other impact indicators for all the applied LCIA methods However, upon aggregation of the indicator results across consumption components, the impact indicators for the total consumption showed no significant correlation between CFP and the other impact scores for any of the four impact assessment methods. These findings suggest that while CFP can be a good indicator of the environmental burden associated with specific activities, this is not the case for more complex activities (such as consumption patterns related to urban life styles). This conclusion discourages the use of CFP as sustainability measure in relation to regulation of private or public consumption.     

Ranking municipal solid waste treatment alternatives based on ecological footprint and multi-criteria analysis

The selection of a municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment alternative is a complex task in which a widespread set of criteria must be taken into account. Additionally to economic or social aspects, the decision process should consider the environmental perspective. With the purpose of quantifying the environmental burdens, a wide variety of environmental and sustainability indicators have been developed in the last years. Furthermore, integrative frameworks have been highlighted as the best option to achieve more comprehensive assessments.In this work, four different options of MSW treatment were ranked from an environmental point of view applying two methods: (1) the ecological footprint (EF) as single composite indicator and (2) multi-criteria analysis (MCA) integrating the EF together with other material flow indicators related to water consumption, emissions to air and water and occupied landfill volume. The MCA methods selected were a combination of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE) aided by Geometrical Analysis for Interactive Aid (GAIA). The objective was twofold: on the one side, the identification of the most beneficial waste treatment alternative (including thermal plasma gasification which as yet has not been assessed systematically) from an environmental perspective and, on the other side, the comparison of the results yielded by the two ranking methods proposed.The ranking obtained in both cases was (from best to worst): thermal plasma gasification, biological treatment of organic fraction with energy recovery from refuse derived fuel, incineration with energy recovery and landfilling. Hence, the EF proved to be a good screening indicator although it did not provide a comprehensive measure of environmental impacts associated to the waste treatment options considered. Besides, the combined application of AHP and PROMETHEE/GAIA as MCA methodology was found to be a suitable way, not very complex at user level, to integrate the information provided by a set of environmental criteria and to aid decision making.     

生态系统健康评价的研究进展

生态系统健康评价是环境管理和生态系统监控的基础,生态系统监控可促进生态系统健康评价。首先介绍了生态系统健康概念的产生,发展及其不同的内涵,并着重回顾和讨论了生态系统健康评价指标及其存在的问题,生态系统健康评价指标包括生态指标,物理化学指标,人类健康与社会经济指标3大类,生态指标是反映生态系统特征和状态的生物指标,它分为生态系统,群落和种群与个体等不同层次的指标或指标体系,物理化学指标是检测生态系统的非生物环境的指标。人类健康与社会经济指标着眼于生态系统对人类生存与社会发展的支持作用,采用经济参数和社会发展的环境压力指标等来衡量生态服务的质量与可持续性,根据其敏感程度和功能性,生态系统健康评价指标分为早期预警指标,适宜程度指标和诊断指标3类,一个完整的生态系统评价应包括上述3大类指标或指标体系,但在具体的评价实践中往往因评价目的和对象的不同而有所选择,生态系统健康评价目前有两个亟待解决的问题,如何有效确立评价标准与参照系以及如何正确区分人为压力和自然干扰。     

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.     

Life Cycle Impact Assessment—where we are, trends, and next steps: a late report from a UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative workshop and a few updates from recent developments

Purpose

The paper provides a late report from the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Life Cycle Initiative workshop “Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)—where we are, trends, and next steps;” it embeds this report into recent development with regard to the envisaged development of global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators and related methodologies.

Methods

The document is the output of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative’s workshop on “Life Cycle Impact Assessment—where we are, trends, and next steps.” The presentations and discussions held during the workshop reviewed the first two phases of the Life Cycle Initiative and provided an overview of current LCIA activities being conducted by the Initiative, governments and academia, as well as corporate approaches. The outcomes of the workshop are reflected in light of the implementation of the strategy for Phase 3 of the Life Cycle Initiative.

Results

The range of views provided during the workshop indicated different user needs, with regards to, amongst other things, the required complexity of the LCIA methodology, associated costs, and the selection of LCIA categories depending on environmental priorities. The workshop’s results signified a number of potential focus areas for Phase 3 of the Initiative, including capacity building efforts concerning LCIA in developing countries and emerging economies, the preparation of training materials on LCIA, the production of global guidance on LCIA, and the potential development of a broader sustainability indicators framework.

Conclusions

These suggestions have been taken into account in the strategy for Phase 3 of the Life Cycle Initiative in two flagship projects, one on global capability development on life cycle approaches and the other on global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators. In the context of the latter project, first activities are being organized and planned. Moreover, UNEP has included the recommendations in its Rio + 20 Voluntary Commitments: UNEP and SETAC through the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative commit to facilitate improved access to good quality life cycle data and databases as well as expanded use of key environmental indicators that allows the measurement and monitoring of progress towards the environmental sustainability of selected product chains.     

Developing a regional environmental information system based on macro-level waste indicators

Waste information is necessary for proper management planning. However, data on waste generation and management are sometimes not reliable enough, do not exist or are not useful for the sector. This is due to the high number of waste types and flows, and actors (producers, managers and administrations), which make data collection and treatment difficult. Furthermore, data loss occurs because some waste flows have economic value and return to the second-hand markets without monitoring.The development of a waste information system for a region is more than just about establishing a routine data collection on waste. It is a way to support the challenges of decision-making on waste management. These challenges range from strategic issues of waste management in the national government to the basic challenges of running local governments.In the Cantabrian region, three indicator sets were defined to constitute the waste information system: (a) a Basic Indicator Set, which provides an overview of the status of the generation and management of the main waste streams, giving a national and international comparative analysis of the situation; (b) a Specific Indicator Set, which monitors the objectives of the different waste policies, and (c) a Transverse Indicator Set, which analyses the influence of different economic and social variables on the generation of specific waste streams.The Waste Information System of the Cantabrian Region has been created using a specific methodology for developing indicator sets with multiple objectives. This methodology consists of seven steps: (i) the synthesis, selection of the indicators sets; (ii) analysis of the system under study and data sources; (iii) evaluation of the indicators proposed; (iv) application and interpretation; (v) public review, dissemination and updating protocol; (vi) improvement of indicators sets using SWOT analysis; and (vii) aggregation of all indicators in an aggregated index.These indicator sets with a total of 27 indicators allow tracking the evolution of generation and management of waste streams and the achievement of the policy objectives, establishing a data record, evaluating the data and sources of data, monitoring proposed action and its effectiveness summarizing large amounts of data on waste in order to spread it to the public and finally, aggregate all information in a single index that allows the evaluation of the evolution of all waste sectors in time.     

An extended life cycle analysis of packaging systems for fruit and vegetable transport in Europe

Purpose

The year-round supply of fresh fruit and vegetables in Europe requires a complex logistics system. In this study, the most common European fruit and vegetable transport packaging systems, namely single-use wooden and cardboard boxes and re-useable plastic crates, are analyzed and compared considering environmental, economic, and social impacts.

Methods

The environmental, economic, and social potentials of the three transport packaging systems are examined and compared from a life cycle perspective using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and Life Cycle Working Environment (LCWE) methodologies. Relevant parameters influencing the results are analyzed in different scenarios, and their impacts are quantified. The underlying environmental analysis is an ISO 14040 and 14044 comparative Life Cycle Assessment that was critically reviewed by an independent expert panel.

Results and discussion

The results show that wooden boxes and plastic crates perform very similarly in the Global Warming Potential, Acidification Potential, and Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential categories; while plastic crates have a lower impact in the Eutrophication Potential and Abiotic Resource Depletion Potential categories. Cardboard boxes show the highest impacts in all assessed categories. The analysis of the life cycle costs show that the re-usable system is the most cost effective over its entire life cycle. For the production of a single crate, the plastic crates require the most human labor. The share of female employment for the cardboard boxes is the lowest. All three systems require a relatively large share of low-qualified employees. The plastic crate system shows a much lower lethal accident rate. The higher rate for the wooden and cardboard boxes arises mainly from wood logging. In addition, the sustainability consequences due to the influence of packaging in preventing food losses are discussed, and future research combining aspects both from food LCAs and transport packing/packaging LCAs is recommended.

Conclusions

For all three systems, optimization potentials regarding their environmental life cycle performance were identified. Wooden boxes (single use) and plastic crates (re-usable) show preferable environmental performance. The calibration of the system parameters, such as end-of-life treatment, showed environmental optimization potentials in all transport packaging systems. The assessment of the economic and the social dimensions in parallel is important in order to avoid trade-offs between the three sustainability dimensions. Merging economic and social aspects into a Life Cycle Assessment is becoming more and more important, and their integration into one model ensures a consistent modeling approach for a manageable effort.     

Integrated assessment of agricultural production practices to enhance sustainable development in agricultural landscapes

This study presents an integrated assessment approach for the sustainable development of agricultural landscapes. The approach evaluates single agricultural production practices by means of environmental, economic and social indicators. To implement the approach, a mixed method was employed that combines modelling techniques and survey methods. The economic and environmental indicators were implemented within the bio-economic modelling system MODAM (Multi-Objective Decision support system for Agro-ecosystem Management) in order to assess economic performance and the effects on the abiotic and biotic environments. The modelling approach was applied to a case study in a region of north-eastern Germany, within the state of Brandenburg. In addition, the acceptance by farmers of different production alternatives that are known to have environmental benefits was examined in the case study. To allow for a direct comparison between different indicators, the results of the assessment are dimensionless index values that indicate the suitability of certain agricultural production practices with respect to an indicator. The indicator-related indices are then aggregated into an overall index of sustainability differentiating between ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ sustainability. Results are presented for exemplarily chosen production practices for sugar beet, potato and winter rape production and set aside. Depending on the underlying concept of sustainability (‘weak’ vs. ‘strong’), different production practices were identified as the most suitable ones in a given situation. This integrated assessment enables determination of positive and negative correlations between indicators. The approach allows for the identification of production alternatives that are assessed to be economically and environmentally beneficial as well as socially accepted, although at different levels.     

Representing crop rotations in life cycle assessment: a review of legume LCA studies

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - There is an imperative to accurately assess the environmental sustainability of crop system interventions in the context of food security and...     

Indicators to support environmental sustainability of bioenergy systems

Indicators are needed to assess environmental sustainability of bioenergy systems. Effective indicators will help in the quantification of benefits and costs of bioenergy options and resource uses. We identify 19 measurable indicators for soil quality, water quality and quantity, greenhouse gases, biodiversity, air quality, and productivity, building on existing knowledge and on national and international programs that are seeking ways to assess sustainable bioenergy. Together, this suite of indicators is hypothesized to reflect major environmental effects of diverse feedstocks, management practices, and post-production processes. The importance of each indicator is identified. Future research relating to this indicator suite is discussed, including field testing, target establishment, and application to particular bioenergy systems. Coupled with such efforts, we envision that this indicator suite can serve as a basis for the practical evaluation of environmental sustainability in a variety of bioenergy systems.