Status of life cycle assessment and engineering research in South Africa

In view of the upcoming 2002 World Summit in Johannesburg, sustainable development is a topic of high priority in South Africa. Although the South African competency in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) has grown to some extent over the last ten years, South African industry and government have been slow to realise the benefit of LCAs and LCE as tools to support cleaner production and sustainable development. However, the local application of these tools, as well as considerations during their use, differs from practices in developed countries. The applications of LCAs and LCE, the type of organisations involved and the limitations and common problems associated with these tools in South Africa are discussed.     

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.     

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.     

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).     

Characterisation and Normalisation Factors for Life Cycle Impact Assessment Mined Abiotic Resources Categories in South Africa: The manufacturing of catalytic converter exhaust systems as a case study (10 pp)

Goal and Background Current Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) procedures have demonstrated certain limitations in the South African manufacturing industry. The aim of this paper is to propose new characterisation and normalisation factors for classified mined abiotic resource depletion categories in the South African context. These factors should reflect the importance of mined resources as they relate to region-specific resource depletion. The method can also be applied to determine global factors. Methods The reserve base (as in 2001) of the most commonly produced minerals in South Africa is used as basis to determine characterisation factors for a non-renewable mineral resources category. The average production of these minerals from 1991 to 2000 is compared to economically Demonstrated and Demonstrated Marginal Reserves (and not ultimate reserves) to obtain the characterisation factors in equivalence units, with platinum as the reference mineral. Similarly, for a non-renewable energy resources category, coal is used in South Africa as equivalent unit as it is the most important fossil fuel for the country. Crude oil and natural gas resources are currently obtained from reserves elsewhere in the world and characterisation factors are therefore determined using global resources and production levels. The normalisation factors are based on the total economic reserves of key South African minerals and world non-renewable energy resources respectively. A case study of the manufacturing of an exhaust system for a standard sedan is used to compare LCIA results for mined abiotic resource categories that are based on current LCIA factors and the new South African factors. Results and Discussion The South African LCIA procedure differs from current methods in that it shows the importance of other mined resources, i.e. iron ore and crude oil, relative to PGMs and coal for the manufacturing life cycle of the exhaust system. With respect to PGMs, the current characterisation factors are based on the concentrations of the metals in the ores and the ultimate reserves, which are erroneous with respect to the actual availability of the mineral resources and the depletion burden placed on these minerals is consequently too high. Conclusions The South African LCIA procedure for mined abiotic resources depletion shows the significance of choosing a method, which is inline with the current situation in the mining industry and its limitations. Recommendations and Outlook It is proposed to similarly investigate the impacts of the use of other natural resource groups. Water, specifically, must receive attention in the characterisation phase of LCIAs in South African LCAs.     

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.     

Evaluation of two simplified Life Cycle assessment methods

Goal, Scope and Background  Two methods of simplified LCA were evaluated and compared to the results of a quantitative LCA. These are the Environmentally responsible product assessment matrix developed by Graedel and Allenby and the MECO-method developed in Denmark. Methods  We used these in a case study and compared the results with the results from a quantitative LCA. The evaluation also included other criteria, such as the field of application and the level of arbitrariness. Results and Discussion  The MECO-method has some positive qualities compared to the Environmentally responsible product assessment matrix. Examples of this are that it generates information complementary to the quantitative LCA and provides the possibility to consider quantitative information when such is available. Some of the drawbacks with the Environmentally responsible product assessment matrix are that it does not include the whole lifecycle and that it allows some arbitrariness. Conclusions  Our study shows that a simplified and semi-quantitative LCA (such as the MECO-method) can provide information that is complementary to a quantitative LCA. In this case the method generates more information on toxic substances and other impacts, than the quantitative LCA. We suggest that a simplified LCA can be used both as a pre-study to a quantitative LCA and as a parallel assessment, which is used together with the quantitative LCA in the interpretation. Recommendations and Outlook  A general problem with qualitative analyses is how to compare different aspects. Life cycle assessments are comparative. The lack of a quantitative dimension hinders the comparison and can thereby hinder the usefulness of the qualitative method. There are different approaches suggested to semiquantify simplified methods in order to make quantitative comparisons possible. We think that the use of fabricated scoring systems should be avoided. If quantitative information is needed, one should consider performing a simplified quantitative LCA instead.     

Life Cycle Assessment of Kerosene Used in Aviation (8 pp)

Goal, Scope, and Background The main goal of the study is a comprehensive life cycle assessment of kerosene produced in a refinery located in Thessaloniki (Greece) and used in a commercial jet aircraft. Methods The Eco-Indicator 95 weighting method is used for the purpose of this study. The Eco-Indicator is a method of aggregation (or, as described in ISO draft 14042, 'weighting through categories') that leads to a single score. In the Eco-indicator method, the weighing factor (We) applied to an environmental impact index (greenhouse effect, ozone depletion, etc.) stems from the 'main' damage caused by this environmental impact. Results and Discussion The dominant source of greenhouse gas emissions is from kerosene combustion in aircraft turbines during air transportation, which contributes 99.5% of the total CO2 emissions. The extraction and refinery process of crude oil contribute by around 0.22% to the GWP. This is a logical outcome considering that these processes are very energy intensive. Transportation of crude oil and kerosene have little or no contribution to this impact category. The main source of CFC-11 equivalent emissions is refining of crude oil. These emissions derive from emissions that result from electricity production that is used during the operation of the refinery. NOx emissions contribute the most to the acidification followed by SO2 emissions. The main source is the use process in a commercial jet aircraft, which contributes approximately 96.04% to the total equivalent emissions. The refinery process of crude oil contributes by 2.11% mainly by producing SO2 emissions. This is due to the relative high content of sulphur in the input flows of these processes (crude oil) that results to the production of large amount of SO2. Transportation of crude oil by sea (0.76%) produces large amount of SO2 and NOx due to combustion of low quality liquid fuels (heavy fuel oil). High air emissions of NOx during kerosene combustion result in the high contribution of this subsystem to the eutrophication effect. Also, water emissions with high nitrous content during the refining and extraction of crude oil process have a big impact to the water eutrophication impact category. Conclusion The major environmental impact from the life cycle of kerosene is the acidification effect, followed by the greenhouse effect. The summer smog and eutrophication effect have much less severe effect. The main contributor is the combustion of kerosene to a commercial jet aircraft. Excluding the use phase, the refining process appears to be the most polluting process during kerosene's life cycle. This is due to the fact that the refining process is a very complicated energy intensive process that produces large amounts and variety of pollutant substances. Extraction and transportation of crude oil and kerosene equally contribute to the environmental impacts of the kerosene cycle, but at much lower level than the refining process. Recommendation and Perspective The study indicates a need for a more detailed analysis of the refining process which has a very high contribution to the total equivalent emissions of the acidification effect and to the total impact score of the system (excluding the combustion of kerosene). This is due to the relative high content of sulphur in the input flows of these processes (crude oil) that results to the production of large amount of SO2.     

农业生命周期评价研究进展

作为评价产品系统全链条环境影响的有效工具,生命周期评价（LCA）方法已广泛用于工业领域。农业领域也面临着高强度的资源和环境压力,LCA在农业领域的应用应运而生。旨在综述已有农业LCA研究的基础上,鉴别农业LCA应用存在的问题,并为农业LCA未来的发展提出建议。目前农业LCA存在系统边界和功能单位界定不明晰、缺少区域清单数据库、生命周期环境影响评价模型（LCIA）不能准确反映农业系统环境影响、结果解释存在误区等方面的问题。为了科学准确地衡量农业系统的环境影响,促进农业系统的可持续发展,文章认为农业LCA应该从以下几个方面加强研究,即科学界定评价的参照系、系统边界的扩大及功能单位的合理选取、区域异质性数据库构建与LCIA模型开发、基于组织农业LCA的开发以及对于利益相关者行为的研究。     

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

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

Comparing Three Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods from an Endpoint Perspective

The impact assessment methods Eco‐Indicator 99 (H), Stepwise2006, and ReCiPe2008 (H) are compared with respect to the relative and absolute importance that they assign to the different mid‐point impact categories. The comparison is done by a common monetary valuation of the three endpoints that are common to the three methods: human well‐being, nature, and resources. Land use, global warming, and respiratory inorganic pollutants together make up between 86% and 97% of the overall impacts compared in all three methods. The overall monetarized impacts amount to 30%, 28%, and 165% of the gross domestic product (GDP), respectively. Resource depletion, land use, and global warming explain 99.5% of the positive deviation of ReCiPe2008, relative to the other two methods. The main causes for these differences are investigated and discussed, pointing to possibly questionable calculations and assumptions, for example, regarding the nonsubstitutability of resources and the very long relaxation time for transformed forestland in the relatively new ReCiPe2008 method, which leads us to recommend users to be cautious and critical when interpreting the results. Sensitivity analysis is made for other cultural perspectives and normalization references.     

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 Impact assessment of land use based on the hemeroby concept

The impact category ‘land use’ describes in the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology the environmental impacts of occupying, reshaping and managing land for human purposes. Land use can either be the long-term use of land (e.g. for arable farming) or changing the type of land use (e.g. from natural to urban area). The impact category ‘land use’ comprises those environmental consequences, which impact the environment due to the land use itself, for instance through the reduction of landscape elements, the planting of monocultures or artificial vegetation, or the sealing of surfaces. Important environmental consequences of land use are the decreasing availability of habitats and the decreasing diversity of wildlife species. The assessment of the environmental impacts of land use within LCA studies is the objective of this paper. Land use leads to a degradation of the naturalness of the area utilised. In this respect the naturalness of any area can be defined as the sum of land actually not influenced by humans and the remaining naturalness of land under use. To determine the remaining naturalness of land under use, this study suggests applying the Hemeroby concept. “Hemeroby is a measure for the human influence on ecosystems” (Kowarik 1999). The Hemeroby level of an area describes the intensity of land use and can therefore be used to characterise different types of land use. Characterization factors are proposed, which allow calculating the degradation of the naturalness of an area due to a specific type of land use. Since the resource ‘nature/naturalness’ is on a larger geographical scale by far not homogeneous, the assessment of land use needs to be regionalised. Therefore, the impact category ‘land use’ has been subdivided into the impact sub-categories ‘land use in European biogeographic regions’. Following the general LCA framework, normalization values for the impact sub-categories are calculated in order to facilitate the evaluation of the characterization results with regard to their share in a reference value. Weighting factors, which enable an aggregation of the results of the different land use sub-categories and make them comparable to other impact categories (e.g. climate change or acidification) are suggested based on the assumption that the current land use pattern in the European biogeographic regions is acceptable.     

From Life Cycle Assessment to Life Cycle Management

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a widely accepted methodology to support decision‐making processes in which one compares alternatives, and that helps prevent shifting of environmental burdens along the value chain or among impact categories. According to regulation in the European Union (EU), the movement of waste needs to be reduced and, if unavoidable, the environmental gain from a specific waste treatment option requiring transport must be larger than the losses arising from transport. The EU explicitly recommends the use of LCA or life cycle thinking for the formulation of new waste management plans. In the last two revisions of the Industrial Waste Management Programme of Catalonia (PROGRIC), the use of a life cycle thinking approach to waste policy was mandated. In this article we explain the process developed to arrive at practical life cycle management (LCM) from what started as an LCA project. LCM principles we have labeled the “3/3” principle or the “good enough is best” principle were found to be essential to obtain simplified models that are easy to understand for legislators and industries, useful in waste management regulation, and, ultimately, feasible. In this article, we present the four models of options for the management of waste solvent to be addressed under Catalan industrial waste management regulation. All involved actors concluded that the models are sufficiently robust, are easy to apply, and accomplish the aim of limiting the transport of waste outside Catalonia, according to the principles of proximity and sufficiency.     

Distance-to-Target Weighting in Life Cycle Impact Assessment Based on Chinese Environmental Policy for the Period 1995-2005 (6 pp)

Background and Objective

. Values in the known weighting methods in Life Cycle Assessment are mostly founded by the societal systems of developed countries. What source of weights and which weighting methods are reliable for a big developing country like China? The purpose of this paper is to find a possible weighting method and available data that will work well for LCA practices conducted in China. Since government policies and decisions play a leading role in the process of environmental protection in developing countries, the weights derived from political statements may be a consensus by representatives of the public.

Methods

'Distance-to-political target' principle is used in this paper to derive weights of five problem-oriented impact categories. The critical policy targets are deduced from the environmental policies issued in the period of the Ninth Five-year (1996-2000) and the Tenth Five-year (2001-2005) Plan for the Development of National Economy and Society of China. Policy targets on two five-year periods are presented and analyzed. Weights are determined by the quotient between the reference levels and target levels of a certain impact category.

Results and Discussion

Since the Tenth Five-year Plan put forward the overall objective to reduce the level of regional pollution by 2005, the weights for AP, EP and POCP for 2000-2005 are more than 1. By comparison between the Ninth Five-year and Tenth Five-year period, the results show that the weights obtained in this paper effectively represent Chinese political environmental priorities in different periods. For the weights derived from China's political targets for the overall period 1995-2005, the rank order of relative importance is ODP>AP>POCP>EP>GWP. They are recommended to the potential users for the broader disparity among the five categories. By comparison with the weights presented by the widespread EDIP method, the result shows that there's a big difference in the relative importance of ozone depletion and global warming.

-

In conclusion, the weighting factors and rank order of impact categories determined in this study represent the characteristics of the big developing country. The derived weighting set can be helpful to LCA practices of products within the industrial systems of China.

     

Life Cycle assessment of bio-ethanol derived from cellulose

Objective, Scope, Background  A comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment was conducted on bio-ethanol produced using a new process that converts cellulosic biomass by enzymatic hydrolysis. Options for sourcing the feedstock either from agricultural and wood waste, or, if the demand for bio-ethanol is sufficient, from cultivation are examined. The main focus of the analysis was to determine its potential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in a 10% blend of this bio-ethanol with gasoline (E10) as a transportation fuel. Methods  SimaPro 4.0 was used as the analysis tool, which allowed a range of other environmental impacts also to be examined to assess the overall relative performance to gasoline alone. All impacts were assigned to the fuel because of uncertainties in markets for the by-products. This LCA therefore represents a worst case scenario. Results, Conclusion  It is shown that E10 gives an improved environmental performance in some impact categories, including greenhouse gas emissions, but has inferior performances in others. Whether the potential benefits of the bio-ethanol blend to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will be realized is shown to be particularly sensitive to the source of energy used to produce the process steam required to break down the cellulose to produce sugars and to distil the final product. One key area where improvements in environmental performance might be derived is in enzyme production. Recommendations and Outlook  The LCA profile helps to highlight those areas where positive and negative environmental impacts can be expected. Technological innovation can be directed accordingly to preserve the benefits while minimizing the negative impacts as development progresses to commercial scales.     

Comparative LCA of industrial objects

Goal, Scope and Background  This paper is the second part of the publication which is devoted to comparative LCA analysis of the industrial pumps. The previous paper deals with the methodological aspects concerning quality assessment and forms an independent work. This paper uses practically only the methodological suggestions made there. The main aim of the presented study is to make a comparison between the industrial pumps which are based on two different technologies. The Life Cycle Assessment method is used to check whether the differences of the manufacturing processes influence the level of the potential environmental impact during the whole life cycle of the analysed products. Methods  The Life Cycle Assessment is carried out using the Ecoindicator99 method. Additionally, an extensive quality analysis of the LCA study is made (Part I). To make the process of an identification of the data easier and faster, they are assigned to a special data documentation form. To ensure the credibility of the LCA results different methods of interpretation are used. Results and Discussion  The LCA analysis shows clear superiority of the pumps manufactured using modern technology. It seems that this superiority results not only from the differences in the emissions, but also from different characteristics of effectiveness in the usage stage. Thanks to the uncertainty analysis, each LCA result is provided with the range of uncertainty. Conclusions  The LCA results are supported by different techniques of interpretation: the sensitivity-, the contribution-, the comparative-, the discernability- and the uncertainty analysis. There is strong evidence of the superiority of the pumps based on the modern technology. Recommendations and Outlook  The main source of the environmental impact in the case of pumps is the usage stage and the consumption of energy. That is why it should be the main area to improve. The LCA results show that actions taken in the usage stage and energy consumption can lead to a considerable reduction of the environmental impacts.     

The Importance of Normalization References in Interpreting Life Cycle Assessment Results

A normalization step is widely exercised in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies in order to better understand the relative significance of impact category results. In the normalization stage, normalization references (NRs) are the characterized results of a reference system, typically a national or regional economy. Normalization is widely practiced in LCA‐based decision support and policy analysis (e.g., LCA cases in municipal solid waste treatment technologies, renewable energy technologies, and environmentally preferable purchasing programs, etc.). The compilation of NRs demands significant effort and time as well as an intimate knowledge of data availability and quality. Consequently only one set of published NRs is available for the United States, and has been adopted by various studies. In this study, the completeness of the previous NRs was evaluated and significant data gaps were identified. One of the reasons for the significant data gaps was that the toxic release inventory (TRI) data significantly underestimate the potential impact of toxic releases for some sectors. Also the previous NRs did not consider the soil emissions and nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) runoffs to water and chemical emissions to soils. Filling in these data gaps increased the magnitude of NRs for “human health cancer,” “human health noncancer,” “ecotoxicity,” and “eutrophication” significantly. Such significant changes can alter or even reverse the outcome of an LCA study. We applied the previous and updated NRs to conventional gasoline and corn ethanol LCAs. The results demonstrate that NRs play a decisive role in the interpretation of LCA results that use a normalization step.     

Life Cycle of Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticle Production

Life cycle impact of emissions, energy requirements, and exergetic losses are calculated for a novel process for producing titanium dioxide nanoparticles from an ilmenite feedstock. The Altairnano hydrochloride process analyzed is tailored for the production of nanoscale particles, unlike established commercial processes. The life cycle energy requirements for the production of these particles is compared with that of traditional building materials on a per unit mass basis. The environmental impact assessment and energy analysis results both emphasize the use of nonrenewable fossil fuels in the upstream life cycle. Exergy analysis shows fuel losses to be secondary to material losses, particularly in the mining of ilmenite ore. These analyses are based on the same inventory data. The main contributions of this work are to provide life cycle inventory of a nanomanufacturing process and reveal potential insights from exergy analysis that are not available from other methods.