Comparative evaluation of Life Cycle Impact assessment methods with a South African case study

Goal and Background  LCIA procedures that have been used in the South Africa manufacturing industry include the CML, Ecopoints, EPS and Eco-indicators 95 and 99 procedures. The aim of this paper is to evaluate and compare the applicability of these European LCIA procedures within the South African context, using a case study. Methods  The five European methods have been evaluated based on the applicability of the respective classification, characterisation, normalization and weighting approaches for the South African situation. Impact categories have been grouped into air, water, land and mined abiotic resources for evaluation purposes. The evaluation and comparison is further based on a cradle-to-gate Screening Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) case study of the production of dyed two-fold wool yarn in South Africa. Results and Discussion  Where land is considered as a separate category (CML, Eco-indicator 99 and EPS), the case study highlights this inventory constituent as the most important. Similarly, water usage is shown as the second most important in one LCIA procedure (EPS) where it is taken into account. However, the impact assessment modelling for these categories may not be applicable for the variance in South African ecosystems. If land and water is excluded from the interpretation, air emissions, coal usage, ash disposal, pesticides and chrome emissions to water are the important constituents in the South African wool industry. Conclusions  In most cases impact categories and procedures defined in the LCIA methods for air pollution, human health and mined abiotic resources are applicable in South Africa. However, the relevance of the methods is reduced where categories are used that impact ecosystem quality, as ecosystems differ significantly between South Africa and the European continent. The methods are especially limited with respect to water and land resources. Normalisation and weighting procedures may also be difficult to adapt to South African conditions, due to the lack of background information and social, cultural and political differences. Recommendations and Outlook  Further research is underway to develop a framework for a South African LCIA procedure, which will be adapted from the available European procedures. The wool SLCA must be revisited to evaluate and compare the proposed framework with the existing LCIA procedures.     

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.