Current status and needs for life cycle assessment development in Asian/Pacific Regions

Conclusion  In conclusion, LCA that is conducted and used appropriately is an indispensable tool to assist decision-makers in making an informed decision about the environmental impacts of their activities, products or services. A global effort towards LCA use should be encouraged and countries in the Asian/Pacific Regions should not be left out. LCA-related activities reported in the symposium were described     

Overview and recommendations for regionalized life cycle impact assessment

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Regionalized life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) has rapidly developed in the past decade, though its widespread application, robustness, and...     

Correlation analysis of life cycle impact assessment indicators measuring resource use

Introduction  

Even though the necessity of a sustainable use of natural resources is widely accepted, there is neither consensus on how “resource use” is clearly defined nor how it should be measured. Depending on the definition, it can comprise raw material consumption only or the consumption and pollution of natural resources. Consequently, lots of indicators can be applied, and the result of a life cycle assessment study aiming to quantify resource use seems to depend on the selection of impact categories. Therefore, this paper aims at analyzing life cycle impact assessment results obtained by means of several indicators to check if different indexes lead to similar results and if the number of indicators can be reduced.     

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.     

OMNIITOX concept model supports characterisation modelling for life cycle impact assessment

Goal Scope Background  The main focus in OMNIITOX is on characterisation models for toxicological impacts in a life cycle assessment (LCA) context. The OMNIITOX information system (OMNIITOX IS) is being developed primarily to facilitate characterisation modelling and calculation of characterisation factors to provide users with information necessary for environmental management and control of industrial systems. The modelling and implementation of operational characterisation models on eco and human toxic impacts requires the use of data and modelling approaches often originating from regulatory chemical risk assessment (RA) related disciplines. Hence, there is a need for a concept model for the data and modelling approaches that can be interchanged between these different contexts of natural system model approaches. Methods. The concept modelling methodology applied in the OMNIITOX project is built on database design principles and ontological principles in a consensus based and iterative process by participants from the LCA, RA and environmental informatics disciplines. Results. The developed OMNIITOX concept model focuses on the core concepts of substance, nature framework, load, indicator, and mechanism, with supplementary concepts to support these core concepts. They refer to the modelled cause, effect, and the relation between them, which are aspects inherent in all models used in the disciplines within the scope of OMNIITOX. This structure provides a possibility to compare the models on a fundamental level and a language to communicate information between the disciplines and to assess the possibility of transparently reusing data and modelling approaches of various levels of detail and complexity. Conclusions  The current experiences from applying the concept model show that the OMNIITOX concept model increases the structuring of all information needed to describe characterisation models transparently. From a user perspective the OMNIITOX concept model aids in understanding the applicability, use of a characterisation model and how to interpret model outputs. Recommendations and Outlook  The concept model provides a tool for structured characterisation modelling, model comparison, model implementation, model quality management, and model usage. Moreover, it could be used for the structuring of any natural environment cause-effect model concerning other impact categories than toxicity.     

Power series expansion and structural analysis for life cycle assessment

Goal, Scope and Background The usefulness of power series expansion for an LCA system has often been doubted, as those systems may not possess the unique properties that enable power series expansion and analyses based on the power series. This paper surveys the existing literature on power series expansion of monetary input-output system and discusses how the power series expansion can be utilized for more general systems including the LCA model. Methods The inherent properties of matrices that are capable of producing power series forms for their inverse and, further, can utilize structural path analysis are analyzed. Using these analyses, the way how a matrix that is not eligible for structural analyses is converted into an eligible form is investigated. A numerical example is presented to demonstrate the findings. Results The necessary and sufficient condition for an indecomposable, real square technology matrix can be expressed using power series was identified. Two additional conditions for a technology matrix to be utilized for structural analyses using power series expansion are discussed as well. It was also shown that an LCA system that fulfills the Hawkins-Simon condition can be easily converted into the form that is eligible for structural analysis by rescaling the columns and rows. Discussion As a numerical example, an application of accumulative structural path analysis for an LCA system is shown. The implications of the results are discussed in a more plain language as well. Conclusions The survey presented in this paper provides not only the conditions under which a linear system is expressed using a power series form but also the way to appropriately convert a system to utilize the rich analytical tools using power series expansion for structural analyses. Recommendations and Perspectives Widely used LCA databases and software tools have employed the linear systems approach as the basis. Much of these developments in the domain of LCA have been made, however, in isolation of the rich findings of IOA. There will be much to benefit LCA through an active dialogue between the two disciplines. There are rich analytical tools available through the use of power series expansion. The current survey will help software developers and LCA practitioners to apply such tools in LCA.     

Methods for global sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment

Purpose

Input parameters required to quantify environmental impact in life cycle assessment (LCA) can be uncertain due to e.g. temporal variability or unknowns about the true value of emission factors. Uncertainty of environmental impact can be analysed by means of a global sensitivity analysis to gain more insight into output variance. This study aimed to (1) give insight into and (2) compare methods for global sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment, with a focus on the inventory stage.

Methods

Five methods that quantify the contribution to output variance were evaluated: squared standardized regression coefficient, squared Spearman correlation coefficient, key issue analysis, Sobol’ indices and random balance design. To be able to compare the performance of global sensitivity methods, two case studies were constructed: one small hypothetical case study describing electricity production that is sensitive to a small change in the input parameters and a large case study describing a production system of a northeast Atlantic fishery. Input parameters with relative small and large input uncertainties were constructed. The comparison of the sensitivity methods was based on four aspects: (I) sampling design, (II) output variance, (III) explained variance and (IV) contribution to output variance of individual input parameters.

Results and discussion

The evaluation of the sampling design (I) relates to the computational effort of a sensitivity method. Key issue analysis does not make use of sampling and was fastest, whereas the Sobol’ method had to generate two sampling matrices and, therefore, was slowest. The total output variance (II) resulted in approximately the same output variance for each method, except for key issue analysis, which underestimated the variance especially for high input uncertainties. The explained variance (III) and contribution to variance (IV) for small input uncertainties were optimally quantified by the squared standardized regression coefficients and the main Sobol’ index. For large input uncertainties, Spearman correlation coefficients and the Sobol’ indices performed best. The comparison, however, was based on two case studies only.

Conclusions

Most methods for global sensitivity analysis performed equally well, especially for relatively small input uncertainties. When restricted to the assumptions that quantification of environmental impact in LCAs behaves linearly, squared standardized regression coefficients, squared Spearman correlation coefficients, Sobol’ indices or key issue analysis can be used for global sensitivity analysis. The choice for one of the methods depends on the available data, the magnitude of the uncertainties of data and the aim of the study.

     

Assessing potential desertification environmental impact in life cycle assessment

Background, aim and scope  

Life cycle assessment (LCA) enables the objective assessment of global environmental burdens associated with the life cycle of a product or a production system. One of the main weaknesses of LCA is that, as yet, there is no scientific agreement on the assessment methods for land-use related impacts, which results in either the exclusion or the lack of assessment of local environmental impacts related to land use. The inclusion of the desertification impact in LCA studies of any human activity can be important in high-desertification risk regions.     

中国生命周期评价理论与实践研究进展及对策分析

主要分析了我国生命周期评价的理论与实践研究进展与数据库构建现状,针对当前我国生命周期评价理论与应用研究的关键薄弱环节即不确定性分析、本土化数据库构建、本土化生命周期环境影响评价模型构建,指出了利用泰勒系列展开模型进行符合我国产业链生产现状的精确、完整、具有代表性、具有时空动态特征的生命周期数据库构建的必要性;并指出需要根据我国国情(例如:环境、地理、人口、暴露等)来构建生命周期环境影响评价模型的紧迫性。     

The formulation of life cycle impact assessment framework for Malaysia using Eco-indicator

Background, aim, and scope  

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an emerging supporting tool designed to help practitioner in systematically assessing the environmental performance of selected product’s life cycle. A product’s life cycle includes the extraction of raw materials, production, and usage, and ends with waste treatment or disposal. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) as a part of LCA is a method used to derive the environmental burdens from selected product’s stages. LCIA is structured in classification, characterization, normalization and weighting. Presently most of the LCIA practices use European database to establish the characterization, normalization and weighting value. However, using these values for local LCA practice might not be able to reflect the actual Malaysian’s environmental scenario. The aim of this study is to create a Malaysian version of normalization and weighting value using the pollution database within Malaysia.     

Assessment of toxicological risks for life cycle assessment and eco-efficiency analysis

Intention, Goal, Scope, Background  

BASF has developed the tool of eco-efficiency analysis [1] to address not only environmental issues, but also issues posed by the marketplace, politics, product strategy and research. It is based on assessing environmental behaviour, environmental impact, possible effects on human health and ecosystems, and the costs of products and processes from the cradle to the grave. The goal of eco-efficiency analysis is to quantify the sustainability of products and processes.     

A semi-quantitative method for the impact assessment of emissions within a simplified life cycle assessment

Intention, Goal and Scope: Dealing with data gaps, data asymmetries, and inconsistencies in life cycle inventories (LCI) is a general prohlem in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies. An approach to deal with these difficulties is the simplification of LCA. A methodology that lowers the requirements for data quality (accuracy) for process emissions within a simplified LCA is introduced in this article. Background: Simplification is essential for applying LCA in the context of design for environment (DfE). The tool euroMat is a comprehensive DfE software tool that is based on a specific, simplified LCA approach, the Iterative Screening LCA (IS-LCA). Within the scope of the IS-LCA, there is a quantitative assessment of energy-related processes, as well as a semi-quantitative assessment of non-energy related emissions which supplement each other. Objectives: The semi-quantitative assessment, which is in the focus of this article, aims at lowering the requirements for the quality of non-energy related emissions data through combined use of qualitative and quantitative inventory data. Methods: Potential environmental impacts are assessed based on ABC-categories for qualities (harmfulness) of emissions and XYZ-categories for quantities of emitted substances. Employing statistical methods assignment rules for the ABC/XYZ-categories were derived from literature data and databases on emissions to air, water, and soil. Statistical tests as well as a DfE case study (comparing the materials aluminum and carbon fiber reinforced epoxy for a lightweight container to be used in an aerospace application) were conducted in order to evaluate the level of confidence and practicality of the proposed, simplified impact assessment. Results: Statistical and technical consistency checks show that the method bears a high level of confidence. Results obtained by the simplified assessment correlate to those of a detailed quantitative LCA. Conclusions: Therefore, the application of the ABC/XYZ-categories (together with the cumulative energy demand) can be considered a practical and consistent approach for determining the environmental significance of products when only incomplete emission data is available. Future Prospects: The statistical base of the method is expanded continuously since it is an integral part of the DfE software tool euroMat, which is currently being further developed. That should foster the application of the method. Outside DfE, the method should also be capable of facilitating simplified LCAs in general.     

Choice of land reference situation in life cycle impact assessment

Purpose

Land use life cycle impact assessment is calculated as a distance to target value—the target being a desirable situation defined as a reference situation in Milà i Canals et al.’s (Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(1):2–4, 2007) widely accepted framework. There are several reference situations. This work aims to demonstrate the effect of the choice of reference situation on land impact indicators.

Methods

Various reference situations are reported from the perspective of the object of assessment in land in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies and the modeling choices used in life cycle land impact indicators. They are analyzed and classified according to additional LCA modeling requirements: the type of LCA approach (attributional or consequential), cultural perspectives (egalitarian, hierarchist or individualist), and temporal preference. Sets of characterization factors (CF) by impact pathway, land cover, and region are calculated for different reference situations. These sets of CFs by reference situation are all compared with a baseline set. A case study on different crop types is used to calculate impact scores from different sets of CFs and compare them.

Results and discussion

Comparing the rankings of the CFs from two different sets present inversions from 5% to 35% worldwide. Impact scores of the case study present inversions of 10% worldwide. These inversions demonstrate that the choice of a reference situation may reverse the LCA conclusions for the land use impact category. Moreover, these reference situations must be consistent with the different modeling requirements of an LCA study (approach, cultural perspective, and time preference), as defined in the goal and scope.

Conclusions

A decision tree is proposed to guide the selection of a consistent and suitable choice of reference situation when setting other LCA modeling requirements.

     

Towards social life cycle assessment: a quantitative product social impact assessment

Purpose

The main goal of this paper is to present the feasibility of the quantitative method presented in the Product Social Impact Assessment (PSIA) handbook throughout a case study. The case study was developed to assess the social impacts of a tire throughout its entire life cycle. We carried out this case study in the context of the Roundtable for the Product Social Metrics project in which 13 companies develop two methodologies, a qualitative and a quantitative one, for assessing the social impact of product life cycle.

Methods

The quantitative methodology implemented for assessing the social impact of a Run On Flat tire mounted in a BMW 3 series consists of 26 indicators split in three groups. Each group represents a stakeholder group. Primary data of the quantitative indicators were collected along the product life cycle of the Run On Flat by involving the companies, which owned the main steps of the product life cycle. Throughout this case study, an ideal/worst-case scenario was defined for the distance-to-target approach to compare the social performances of more products when they are available.

Results and discussion

The implementation of the PSIA quantitative method to a Run On Flat illustrated the necessity to have a referencing step in order to interpret the results. This is particularly important when the results are used to support decision-making process in which no experts are involved. It frequently happens in a big company where the management level has to take often decisions on different topics. Reference values were defined using ideal or worst-case-target scenarios (Fontes et al. 2014). For those topics where it was possible, an ideal/ethical scenario was defined, e.g., 0 h of child labor per product. In other cases, we defined a worst-case scenario, e.g., 0 training hours per product. It was then possible to interpret the results using a distance-to-target approach. A matrix was developed in the case study for identifying in which step of the product life cycle data is not available; that means we need more transparency in the supply chain.

Conclusions

Each value of the matrix can be compared to the ideal/worst scenario to compare the step to each other and to identify along the product life cycle which step and the relative supplier that needs further measures to improve the product performance. Furthermore, a quantitative value for each indicator related to the product life cycle is calculated and compared with the ideal/worst scenario. The case study on Run On Flat represents the first implementation of the quantitative method of PSIA.

     

Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment

Purpose

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) is a field of active development. The last decade has seen prolific publication of new impact assessment methods covering many different impact categories and providing characterization factors that often deviate from each other for the same substance and impact. The LCA standard ISO 14044 is rather general and unspecific in its requirements and offers little help to the LCA practitioner who needs to make a choice. With the aim to identify the best among existing characterization models and provide recommendations to the LCA practitioner, a study was performed for the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission (JRC).

Methods

Existing LCIA methods were collected and their individual characterization models identified at both midpoint and endpoint levels and supplemented with other environmental models of potential use for LCIA. No new developments of characterization models or factors were done in the project. From a total of 156 models, 91 were short listed as possible candidates for a recommendation within their impact category. Criteria were developed for analyzing the models within each impact category. The criteria addressed both scientific qualities and stakeholder acceptance. The criteria were reviewed by external experts and stakeholders and applied in a comprehensive analysis of the short-listed characterization models (the total number of criteria varied between 35 and 50 per impact category). For each impact category, the analysis concluded with identification of the best among the existing characterization models. If the identified model was of sufficient quality, it was recommended by the JRC. Analysis and recommendation process involved hearing of both scientific experts and stakeholders.

Results and recommendations

Recommendations were developed for 14 impact categories at midpoint level, and among these recommendations, three were classified as “satisfactory” while ten were “in need of some improvements” and one was so weak that it has “to be applied with caution.” For some of the impact categories, the classification of the recommended model varied with the type of substance. At endpoint level, recommendations were only found relevant for three impact categories. For the rest, the quality of the existing methods was too weak, and the methods that came out best in the analysis were classified as “interim,” i.e., not recommended by the JRC but suitable to provide an initial basis for further development.

Discussion, conclusions, and outlook

The level of characterization modeling at midpoint level has improved considerably over the last decade and now also considers important aspects like geographical differentiation and combination of midpoint and endpoint characterization, although the latter is in clear need for further development. With the realization of the potential importance of geographical differentiation comes the need for characterization models that are able to produce characterization factors that are representative for different continents and still support aggregation of impact scores over the whole life cycle. For the impact categories human toxicity and ecotoxicity, we are now able to recommend a model, but the number of chemical substances in common use is so high that there is a need to address the substance data shortage and calculate characterization factors for many new substances. Another unresolved issue is the need for quantitative information about the uncertainties that accompany the characterization factors. This is still only adequately addressed for one or two impact categories at midpoint, and this should be a focus point in future research. The dynamic character of LCIA research means that what is best practice will change quickly in time. The characterization methods presented in this paper represent what was best practice in 2008–2009.     

The environmental impact of activities after life: life cycle assessment of funerals

Purpose

Although the funeral market is propagating new ‘green’ alternatives and exploring innovative techniques like resomation, very little is known about the environmental impact of funerals. This research aimed to develop a benchmark of funerals, by quantifying the environmental impacts of the most common funeral techniques, i.e. burial and cremation, by identifying where the main impacts originate from and by comparing these impacts to impacts of other activities during a person’s life.

Methods

The environmental impacts of funerals were analysed by means of a life cycle assessment (LCA), based on Dutch company information, literature and expert judgements. The results were analysed per impact category but also on an aggregated level by means of shadow prices. Two sensitivity analyses were performed: one examined the high impact of cotton in funeral coffins; the other checked the results by means of another weighting method.

Results and discussion

The results showed no significant difference between the two funeral techniques in five impact categories. Burial has the lowest impact in more than half of the categories, but its impact is many times higher in the two most differing categories than for cremation. The total shadow price of burial is about 30 % higher than the shadow price of cremation, but the main cause for this difference is a highly debated category, namely land use. If the results would be considered without the shadow prices of land impact categories, burial would score 25 % lower than cremation. These results are representing average practise and may deviate on certain aspects for other countries, but as a starting point for further studies, this benchmark is well applicable.

Conclusions and recommendations

This study delivered an environmental benchmark of funerals and insights in the impacts of the individual processes, which can be used in further assessment of ’green’ funeral options. The benchmark results show that the environmental impact of funerals is largely determined by secondary processes and that the total impact can be quite small in comparison to other human activities. Besides these environmental insights, it is important to take into account social, cultural, climatic, local, economical and ethical arguments before changing policies or giving recommendations.