Land use and biodiversity indicators for life cycle impact assessment

Background  The primary purpose of environmental assessment is to protect biological systems. Data collected over the last several decades indicates that the greatest impacts on biological resources derive from physical changes in land use. However, to date there is no consensus on indicators of land use that could be applicable worldwide at all scales. This has hampered the assessment of land use in the context of LCA. Objectives  The Institute for Environmental Research and Education and its partner Defenders of Wildlife have begun an effort to develop the necessary consensus. Methods  In July 2000, they held a workshop attended by a diverse group of interested parties and experts to develop a preliminary list of life cycle indicators for land use impacts. Results  Their preliminary list of impact indicators includes: protection of priority habitats/species; soil characteristics: soil health; proximity to & protection of high priority vegetative communities; interface between water and terrestrial habitats/buffer zones; assimilative capacity of water and land; hydrological function; percent coverage of invasive species within protected areas; road density; percent native-dominated vegetation; restoration of native vegetation; adoption of Best Management Practices linked to biodiversity objectives; distribution (patchiness; evenness, etc.); and connectivity of native habitat. Conclusion  The list of indicators conforms well to other efforts in developing indicators. There appears to be convergence among experts in the field and in related fields on the appropriate things to measure. Future Prospects  These indicators are currently being tested in the United States. Further workshops and testing is planned towards developing internationally recognized indicators for land use.     

Economic modelling and indicators in life cycle sustainability assessment

Purpose

Sustainability assessment in life cycle assessment (LCA) addresses societal aspects of technologies or products to evaluate whether a technology/product helps to address important challenges faced by society or whether it causes problems to society or at least selected social groups. In this paper, we analyse how this has been, and can be addressed in the context of economic assessments. We discuss the need for systemic measures applicable in the macro-economic setting.

Methods

The modelling framework of life cycle costing (LCC) is analysed as a key component of the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) framework. Supply chain analysis is applied to LCC in order to understand the relationships between societal concerns of value adding and the basic cost associated with a functional unit. Methods to link LCC as a foreground economic inventory to a background economy wide inventory such as an input–output table are shown. Other modelling frameworks designed to capture consequential effects in LCSA are discussed.

Results

LCC is a useful indicator in economic assessments, but it fails to capture the full dimension of economic sustainability. It has potential contradictions in system boundary to an environmental LCA, and includes normative judgements at the equivalent of the inventory level. Further, it has an inherent contradiction between user goals (minimisation of cost) and social goals (maximisation of value adding), and has no clear application in a consequential setting. LCC is focussed on the indicator of life cycle cost, to the exclusion of many relevant indicators that can be utilised in LCSA. As such, we propose the coverage of indicators in economic assessment to include the value adding to the economy by type of input, import dependency, indicators associated with the role of capital and labour, the innovation potential, linkages and the structural impact on economic sectors.

Conclusions

If the economic dimension of LCSA is to be equivalently addressed as the other pillars, formalisation of equivalent frameworks must be undertaken. Much can be advanced from other fields that could see LCSA to take a more central role in policy formation.     

A proposal for accounting for biodiversity in life cycle assessment

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a methodology for assessing the environmental impacts associated with products throughout their lifecycle. Many impacts are accounted for within the LCA framework, but to date biodiversity impacts have received little attention. There are a number of existing direct and indirect measures of biodiversity within the ecological field, some of which have the potential to be developed into a useable method for LCA. However, our assessment is that considerable development would be required and their implementation for LCA is not likely in the foreseeable future. Here an alternative approach is proposed for rapidly incorporating biodiversity impacts into LCA. The approach relies on expert opinions through a series of questions which aim to encapsulate the main issues relating to biodiversity within a disturbance impact framework. While the technique is in its infancy we outline a foundation for the approach and identify the steps required to develop this method for implementation into LCA.     

Applying soil quality indicators in the context of life cycle assessment in a Finnish case study

Purpose

In this paper, we present a case study of soil quality assessments for Finnish arable crop production. The aim was to assess the applicability of three soil quality indicators by testing available assessment models and data in the context of a life cycle assessment (LCA). The indicators were erosion, soil organic matter (SOM) and compaction, which are crucial effects of soil cultivation in Finland, strongly affecting the cultivation fitness of soil especially in the long run.

Methods

In this case study, we assessed the effects of four Finnish arable crop rotations. The functional unit was 1 metric ton of cereal or turnip rape seed on the farm. The model used for assessing SOM was Yasso07, VIHMA for erosion and COMPSOIL for compaction. We used data from two conventional and two organic farms, collected from 4-year-long crop rotations that included turnip rape, cereals and green manure ley. Farm data were supplemented with geographic information and data from the literature.

Results and discussion

The data needed for the assessment of soil erosion and soil carbon decline was in the main readily available at farm level in the Finnish agricultural database, the Finnish Meteorological Institute, and from geographic information systems. However, more data would have been needed in the cultivation history of the field parcels for an accurate assessment of soil carbon decline. With regard to soil compaction, we had difficulties in finding suitable data especially on machinery use, which is not available in public data sources. Moreover, the reliability of the compaction model COMPSOIL was questioned, as its performance has not been validated in Finnish conditions.

Conclusions

The erosion and SOM models were found to be suitable for use in LCAs. However, the model for the assessment of compaction was considered too difficult to use. Furthermore, the compaction model results need to be validated with field measurements to be considered reliable in Finnish conditions. This study provides a starting point for developing soil quality assessment in Finnish agricultural production.

     

Clarify the nexus between life cycle assessment and circularity indicators: a SETAC/ACLCA interest group

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment -     

Impact categories for life cycle assessment research of seafood production systems: Review and prospectus

Goal, Scope and Background In face of continued declines in global fisheries landings and concurrent rapid aquaculture development, the sustainability of seafood production is of increasing concern. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) offers a convenient means of quantifying the impacts associated with many of the energetic and material inputs and outputs in these industries. However, the relevant but limited suite of impact categories currently used in most LCA research fails to capture a number of important environmental and social burdens unique to fisheries and aquaculture. This article reviews the impact categories used in published LCA research of seafood production to date, reports on a number of methodological innovations, and discusses the challenges to and opportunities for further impact category developments. Main Features The range of environmental and socio-economic impacts associated with fisheries and aquaculture production are introduced, and both the commonly used and innovative impact categories employed in published LCA research of seafood production are discussed. Methodological innovations reported in agricultural LCAs are also reviewed for possible applications to seafood LCA research. Challenges and options for including additional environmental and socioeconomic impact categories are explored. Results A review of published LCA research in fisheries and aquaculture indicates the frequent use of traditional environmental impact categories as well as a number of interesting departures from the standard suite of categories employed in LCA studies in other sectors. Notable examples include the modeling of benthic impacts, by-catch, emissions from anti-fouling paints, and the use of Net Primary Productivity appropriation to characterize biotic resource use. Socio-economic impacts have not been quantified, nor does a generally accepted methodology for their consideration exist. However, a number of potential frameworks for the integration of such impacts into LCA have been proposed. Discussion LCA analyses of fisheries and aquaculture call attention to an important range of environmental interactions that are usually not considered in discussions of sustainability in the seafood sector. These include energy use, biotic resource use, and the toxicity of anti-fouling paints. However, certain important impacts are also currently overlooked in such research. While prospects clearly exist for improving and expanding on recent additions to environmental impact categories, the nature of the LCA framework may preclude treatment of some of these impacts. Socio-economic impact categories have only been described in a qualitative manner. Despite a number of challenges, significant opportunities exist to quantify several important socio-economic impacts. Conclusion The limited but increasing volume of LCA research of industrial fisheries and aquaculture indicates a growing interest in the use of LCA methodology to understand and improve the sustainability performance of seafood production systems. Recent impact category innovations, and the potential for further impact category developments that account for several of the unique interactions characteristic of fisheries and aquaculture will significantly improve the usefulness of LCA in this context, although quantitative analysis of certain types of impacts may remain beyond the scope of the LCA framework. The desirability of incorporating socio-economic impacts is clear, but such integration will require considerable methodological development. Recommendations and Perspectives While the quantity of published LCA research for seafood production systems is clearly increasing, the influence this research will have on the ground remains to be seen. In part, this will depend on the ability of LCA researchers to advance methodological innovations that enable consideration of a broader range of impacts specific to seafood production. It will also depend on the ability of researchers to communicate with a broader audience than the currently narrow LCA community.     

Application of life cycle assessment to the LCA case studies single superphosphate production

Goal, Scope and Background  

There is a competition between wet and thermal routes for phosphate fertilizers manufacture. In the Brazilian case, the thermal route is represented by thermophosphate. This fertilizer is considered the most adequate one for Brazilian agricultural conditions; its main restriction is the intensive consumption of energy necessary for its production. The wet route uses sulfuric acid to direcdy produce the single superphosphate (SSP) or the intermediate phosphoric acid, which will be used to result in triple superphosphate (TSP) and ammonium phosphate production. The main restriction of the wet route is the large amount of phosphogypsum generated in phosphoric acid production. Envisaged is an environmental comparison of both routes using LCA methodology. This paper presents the LCA for SSP production. The goal of the study is to establish the Environmental Profile of this fertilizer. Eight impact categories were selected for the study. The system boundaries was defined for a ‘cradle to gate’ approach, including extraction of natural resources, intermediate products, and production.     

Improving environmental performance in wine production by life cycle assessment: case of Lebanese wine

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - This paper aims to carry out a Product Environmental Footprint study of a Lebanese red wine, “Coteaux Les Cedres” by HF S.A.L...     

Cost-combined life cycle assessment of ferronickel production

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Ferronickel is irreplaceable in modern infrastructure construction because of its use in stainless steel production. This study explored the...     

Comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of Tilapia in two production systems: semi-intensive and intensive

Purpose

In order to meet the upscaling demand of food products worldwide, the aquaculture industry has been expanding within the last few years in developed countries. Major expansions of aquaculture farming occurred in many developed countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Egypt. Egypt ranks ninth in fish farming production worldwide and first on Africa. Egypt has the largest aquaculture industry in Africa which represents two-thirds of African aquaculture production. Tilapia production accounts for 75.5 % of aquaculture production in Egypt. Tilapia aquaculture production has grown exponentially in recent decades until it reached 4.5 million tonnes in 2012 placing Egypt as the second worldwide producer of tilapia after China. The production of tilapia is practiced in different production systems including intensive and semi-intensive systems. These production systems require different resources and impact differently on the environment. The aim of the current study was to model the environmental performance of tilapia production and compare semi-intensive and intensive production systems. The main questions were the following: What are the different impacts of tilapia production on the environment? Which production system is more environmentally friendly? What are the preferable practices for better environmental performance and sustainable ecofriendly industry of Tilapia production?

Methods

Life cycle assessment (LCA) was employed to determine the environmental impacts of tilapia production and compare semi-intensive and intensive production systems. Data for life cycle inventory were collected from two case study farms for tilapia production in Egypt. Four impact categories were taken into consideration: Global Warming Potential (GWP), Acidification Potential (AP), Eutrophication Potential (EP), and Cumulative Energy Demand (CED).

Results and discussion

LCA revealed that production of tilapia in intensive farming has less impact on GWP, AP, and CED, while its impact on EP is higher than in semi-intensive farming. The identified impacts from 1-tonne live weight production of tilapia were the following: GWP 960.7 and 6126.1 kg CO₂ eq; AP 9.8 and 24.4 kg SO₂ eq; EP 14.1 and 6.3 kg PO₂ eq; and CED 52.8 GJ and 238.3 GJ eq in intensive and semi-intensive systems, respectively.

Conclusions

Fish meal production and energy consumption were the major contributors to different impact indicators in both systems. An overall improvement in environmental performance for tilapia production can be achieved by novel feed formulations that have better environmental performance. Energy consumption is a major area for improvement as well, as proper energy management practices will reduce the overall impact on the environment.

     

Allocation of greenhouse gas production between wool and meat in the life cycle assessment of Australian sheep production

Purpose

Australia is the largest supplier of high-quality wool in the world. The environmental burden of sheep production must be shared between wool and meat. We examine different methods to handle these co-products and focus on proportional protein content as a basis for allocation, that is, protein mass allocation (PMA). This is the first comprehensive investigation applying PMA for calculating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for Australian sheep production, evaluating the variation in PMA across a large number of farms and locations over 20 years.

Materials and methods

Inventory data for two superfine wool Merino farms were obtained from farmer records, interviews and site visits in study 1. Livestock GHG emissions were modelled using Australian National GHG Inventory methods. A comparison was made of mass, protein mass and economic allocation and system expansion methods for handling co-production of wool and sheep meat. In study 2, typical crossbred ewe, Merino ewe and Merino wether flocks in each of the 28 locations in eight climate zones were modelled using the GrassGro/GRAZPLAN simulation model and historical climatic data to examine the variation in PMA values for different enterprise types.

Results and discussion

Different methods for handling co-products in study 1 changed allocated GHG emissions more than fourfold, highlighting the sensitivity to method choice. In study 2, enterprise, climate zone and year and their interactions had significant effects on PMA between wool and liveweight (LW) sold. The wool PMA (wool protein as proportion of total protein sold) least square means (LSM) were 0.61?±?0.003 for wethers, 0.43?±?0.003 for Merino ewes and 0.27?±?0.003 for crossbred ewe enterprises. The wool PMA LSM for the main effect of Köppen climate zone varied from 0.39 to 0.46. Two zones (no dry season/warm summer and distinctively dry and hot) had significantly lower wool PMA LSM, of 0.39 and 0.41, respectively, than the four other climate zones.

Conclusions

Effects of superfine wool production on GHG emissions differed between regions in response to differences in climate and productivity. Regarding methods for handling co-production, system expansion showed the greatest contrast between the two studied flocks and highlighted the importance of meat from wool production systems. However, we also propose PMA as a simple, easily applied allocation approach for use when attributional life cycle assessment (LCA) is undertaken.

     

Solid waste treatment within the framework of life cycle assessment

Due to a lack of available methods and data, the Inventory Analysis in many Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) often exclude important information concerning emissions from landfills. In light of this, a method for estimating emission factors for metals from municipal solid waste has been developed and is presented herewith. Emission factors, expressing the emitted fraction of the landfilled amount of the element during a surveyable time period (corresponding to several decades or a century), is suggested for several metals. It is suggested that these can be used in initial (screening) LCAs where the aim is to identify key-issues, i.e. important aspects of the system under study.     

Combining ecosystem indicators and life cycle assessment for environmental assessment of demersal trawling in Tunisia

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - The present study assesses environmental performance of seafood production by demersal trawling in Tunisia (Gulf of Gabes) in order to analyze...     

A life cycle assessment case study of ground rubber production from scrap tires

Purpose

The number of scrap tires generated in China has grown dramatically every year. Generation of ground rubber from scrap tires is the dominant management option in China. It is necessary to assess the environmental impacts of ground rubber production from scrap tires to provide technical advices on a cleaner production.

Methods

Production of ground rubber from recycled scrap tires consist of three steps: rubber powder preparation, devulcanization, and refining. A process life cycle assessment (LCA) of ground rubber production from scrap tires is carried out, and Eco-indicator 99 method coupled with ecoinvent database is applied to evaluate the environmental impacts of this process.

Results and discussion

During the ground rubber production stage, the impact factor of respiratory inorganic is the most serious one. Devulcanization has the highest environmental load of about 66.2 %. Moreover, improvement on the flue gas treatment contributes to a cleaner production and a more environmental-friendly process. Applying clean energy can largely reduce environmental load by about 21.5 %.

Conclusions

The results can be a guidance to reduce environmental load when producing ground rubber from scrap tires. Meanwhile, increasing energy efficiency, improving environmental protection equipment, and applying clean energy are the effective measures to achieve this goal.     

Experiences and thoughts about life cycle assessment in the automotive industry in Japan

Experiences with-Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in the Japanese Automotive Industry and the author’s thoughts on how to apply LCA for automobiles are described. In this paper, LCA applications are categorized into three types:

Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment: a case study of high-density polyethylene production in Alberta,Canada

Purpose

The aim of this study is to develop and test the applicability of a new subcategory assessment method (SAM) for social life cycle assessment using a case study on high-density polyethylene (HDPE) production by Dow Chemical Canada facility in Alberta, Canada.

Methods

The methodology is characterized by six steps: (1) definition of the goal and scope of the assessment; (2) life cycle inventory data collection including context data at country level and company-specific data for foreground processes; (3) impact assessment where the subcategories’ results for foreground processes at company level are evaluated using a new SAM developed and the country social performance in the different subcategories is evaluated using some assessment intervals; (4) comparing the social performance of foreground processes to the social background context in sector or country; (5) evaluating the social performance of background processes using sector performance evaluation from Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSILCA) database or country performance evaluation conducted in the study; (6) and discussion and conclusion.

Results and discussion

The method developed was able to identify the subcategories that need high level or some level of improvements along the cradle-to-gate life cycle of HDPE. In addition, the stakeholders with high negative effect were highlighted in every life cycle stage. Through this approach, Dow Chemical Canada is able to prioritize its actions and focus on the areas where its performance is still low compared to its peers in the sector or compared to the situation in the country. Moreover, through using PSILCA database or country performance evaluation to investigate the social performance of background processes, Dow Chemical Canada can determine the social hotspots areas that need more focus from its suppliers.

Conclusions

Applying the new subcategory assessment approach proposed in this study provides an objective way to assess the subcategories while differentiating between two levels of assessment: (1) the commitment to the social subcategory in the company’s policy (defined as cutoff requirement) and (2) the evidence of good/bad practices of the subcategory. In addition, the comparison of performance of the companies in foreground processes to the social background in sector or country has improved the objectivity further.

     

Lead industry life cycle studies: environmental impact and life cycle assessment of lead battery and architectural sheet production

Purpose

This paper will give an overview of LCA studies on lead metal production and use recently conducted by the International Lead Association.

Methods

The lead industry, through the International Lead Association (ILA), has recently completed three life cycle studies to assess the environmental impact of lead metal production and two of the products that make up approximately 90 % of the end uses of lead, namely lead-based batteries and architectural lead sheet.

Results and discussion

Lead is one of the most recycled materials in widespread use and has the highest end-of-life recycling rate of all commonly used metals. This is a result of the physical chemical properties of the metal and product design, which makes lead-based products easily identifiable and economic to collect and recycle. For example, the end-of-life collection and recycling rates of lead automotive and industrial batteries and lead sheet in Europe are 99 and 95 %, respectively, making them one of the few products that operate in a true closed loop. These high recycling rates, coupled with the fact that both lead-based batteries and architectural lead sheet are manufactured from recycled material, have a beneficial impact on the results of LCA studies, significantly lowering the overall environmental impact of these products. This means that environmental impacts associated with mining and smelting of lead ores are minimised and in some cases avoided completely. The lead battery LCA assesses not only the production and end of life but also the use phase of these products in vehicles. The study demonstrates that the technological capabilities of innovative advanced lead batteries used in start-stop vehicles significantly offset the environmental impact of their production. A considerable offset is realised through the savings achieved in global warming potential when lead-based batteries are installed in passenger vehicles with start-stop and micro-hybrid engine systems which have significantly lower fuel consumption than regular engines.

Conclusions

ILA has undertaken LCAs which investigate the environmental impact associated with the European production of lead metal and the most significant manufactured lead products (lead-based batteries used in vehicles and architectural lead sheet for construction) to ensure up-to-date and robust data is publically and widely available.

     

Comparative life cycle assessment of fired brick production in Thailand

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Fired bricks are an essential construction material in Thailand where the majority of fired brick kilns use rice husk as feedstock. Given the...     

Cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of global manganese alloy production

Purpose

Manganese is a metal used extensively in everyday life, particularly in structural steel. Despite the importance of manganese as an essential alloying element in steel and stainless steel, the environmental profile of manganese alloys lacked globally representative, primary industry data. The International Manganese Institute (IMnI) and Hatch completed the first global life cycle assessment (LCA) of manganese alloy production, providing environmental benchmarks and a firm foundation of accurate data with which to inform other industry-led initiatives.

Methods

The study compiled primary data from 16 ore and alloy producers worldwide, covering 18 % of global ore production and 8 % of global alloy production for 2010. This peer-reviewed, ISO 14040 compliant LCA covers the cradle-to-gate life cycles of silicomanganese, ferromanganese, and refined ferromanganese. The study provides a comprehensive picture of global environmental performance, quantifying energy consumption, global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP), primary water use, and primary waste generation. A novel model architecture was devised to generate process, site, and cradle-to-gate LCAs for single and multiple sites simultaneously, extracting greater value from the LCA process by facilitating environmental and operational benchmarking within the industry.

Results and discussion

The results of the study show that total GWP, AP, and POCP for 1 kg of average manganese alloy was 6.0 kg CO₂e, 45 g SO₂e, and 3 g C₂H₄e, respectively. Electricity demand and coal and coke consumption during smelting are the dominant operating parameters contributing to environmental performance. On-site air emission measures (GWP, POCP, NO_X, and particulate matter (PM)) contributed 25 to 35 % of total life cycle emissions. Overburden and waste rock were the most significant primary solid waste flows by mass. The study provides a resource for improvement at the global industry and site scales by establishing benchmarks, identifying hotspots, and quantifying the benefits of efficiency savings through process optimization.

Conclusions

This LCA provides accurate primary data to improve steel and stainless steel product LCAs and communicate the environmental performance of the industry in quantitative terms. It facilitates dialogue between manganese producers and consumers through a shared understanding of the environmental profile of the industry. Through leveraging the study to identify hotspots within the manganese supply chain, producers can work both independently and collectively towards improving the environmental and economic performance of manganese alloys.