Green biz lca workshop

Life Cycle Assessment A Tutorial GreenBiz

Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:30-4:30PM

Tom Gloria, Ph.D. Industrial Ecology Consultants

Industrial Ecology Consultants 2

Agenda Introductions General Introduction to LCA Concepts Interface Case Study The Importance of the Goal & Scope Definition Step Life Cycle Inventory Analysis Break Life Cycle Impact Assessment Interpretation Hands on exercise Practical Guidance Q&A


Industrial Ecology Consultants • Industrial Ecology is an interdisciplinary field that focuses on the

sustainable combination of Business, Environment & Technology • Corporate Sustainability Strategy • Life Cycle Assessment

– Conduct Studies – Capacity Building – Expert Review

• Green Marketing and Eco-Labeling – PCR/EPD development – Expert Review

• Carbon Management • Design For X (DfE, DfR, DfD, DfS) • www.industrial-ecology.com & www.life-cycle.org

http://www.industrial-ecology.com/

http://www.life-cycle.org/


Background – Client Base


Background – Affiliations



The “Grand Objectives” of Sustainability

Ω1 Maintaining the existence of the human species Ω2 Maintaining the capacity for sustainable development Ω3 Maintaining the diversity of life Ω4 Maintaining the aesthetic richness of the planet

Agenda 21 http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?documentid=52


Ω1 Societal Concerns

Human species extinction

Global climate change

Human organism damage

Water availability and quality

Resource depletion: fossil fuels

http://www.getty-images.com/source/Search/14','1','



Sustainable Development

Water availability and quality

Resource depletion of fossil fuels Soil depletion

Optimal land use

Additional resource depletion (minerals, metals, species extinction)



Biodiversity of living things

Global climate change

Stratospheric ozone depletion Water availability and quality Acid deposition

Thermal pollution



Aesthetic Richness Smog

Aesthetic degradation

Habitat protection and open space Oil Spills

Odor


Focus on Crucial Concerns

• Human Health • Global Climate Change • Water availability and quality • Loss of biodiversity • Depletion of fossil fuel resources • Stratospheric ozone depletion


Targeted Activities in Connection with Environmental Concerns

Global Climate Change

• Fossil fuel combustion• Cement manufacture• Rice cultivation• Coal mining• Ruminant populations• Waste treatment• Biomass Burning• Emissions of CFCs, HFCs, N2O• • • • • •

http://creative.gettyimages.com/source/Search/34','2','


Key is to identify specific recommendations related to targeted activities

Energy Use(Fossil Fuel

Combustion)

• Practice modular product design• Develop Energy Star Products• Utilize recycled materials• Use energy efficient equipment• • • • • • • •


Conceptual Sequence

SocietalConsesus

Environmental Science

Design for Environment

GrandObjectives Concerns Activities Recommendations

Graedel and Allenby (2010): Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Engineering

Company Community National Global

http://creative.gettyimages.com/source/Search/34','2','



Life cycle perspective Raw Materials

Materials Manufacture

Product Manufacture

Transportation & Distribution Use Recycling End Disposition

http://creative.gettyimages.com/source/Search/112','52','2','














http://creative.gettyimages.com/source/Search/8','8','1','DV48


Why LCA is a useful tool?

1. Whole system consideration 2. Framework based on Function

and Business Value 3. Examine tradeoffs among

multiple human health and environmental issues

4. Presentation of tradeoffs for design decision-making

5. Support communication and marketing, branding, etc.

6. Support policy initiatives


Why LCA is a useful tool?

1. Whole system consideration 2. Framework based on Function

and Business Value 3. Examine tradeoffs among

multiple human health and environmental issues

4. Presentation of tradeoffs for design decision-making

5. Support communication and marketing, branding, etc.

6. Support policy initiatives


LCA Background • LCA is a technique for assessing the environmental

and human health aspects and potential impacts associated with a product, where we: 1. Define goal, function & boundary to assess 2. Compile inventory of relevant inputs and outputs of a

product system, 3. Evaluate impacts to the environment and human health 4. Interpret the results of the inventory analysis and

impacts in the context of the objectives of the study – state what has been proven.


How to do LCA according to ISO

Goal andScope

Definition

InventoryAnalysis

ImpactAssessment

Interpretation

Life cycle assessment framework

• Goal & Scope Definition: – Determination of scope and

system boundaries • Life Cycle Inventory:

– Data collection, modeling & analysis

• Impact Assessment: – Analysis of inputs and outputs

using category indicators • Interpretation:

– Draw conclusions – Checks for: completeness,

contribution, sensitivity analysis, consistency w/ goal and scope, analysis, etc.

ISO 14040 and ISO 14044

ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines


ISO Standards • ISO 14020 (1998) Environmental labels and declarations - General Principles • ISO 14021 (1999) Environmental labels and declarations - Self-declared environmental claims (Type II

environmental Labelling) • ISO 14024 (1999) Environmental labels and declarations - Type I environmental labelling - Principles and

procedures • ISO 14025 (2006) Environmental labels and declarations - Type III environmental declarations - Principles

and procedures • ISO 14031 (1999) Environmental Management - Environmental Performance Evaluation - Guidelines • ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and Framework • ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Requirements and guidelines • ISO 14046 () Environmental Management - Water Footprint - Requirements and guidelines • ISO/TS 14048 (2002) Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Life Cycle Assessment Data

Documentation Format • ISO/TR 14049 (2000) Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Examples of Application of ISO

14041 to Goal and Scope Definition and Inventory Analysis • ISO/WD 14067-1 (2009) Carbon footprint of products -- Part 1: Quantification • ISO/WD 14067-2 (2009) Carbon footprint of products -- Part 2: Communication • ISO 14071 () Critical review processes and reviewer competencies -- Additional requirements and

guidelines to ISO 14044:2006 • ISO 21930 (2007) Sustainability in building construction - Environmental declaration of building products


LCA Study Steps Process Flow

Diagram

Data collected in a spreadsheet

LCA Specific Software

Charts aggregated Charts

normalized




Interface – Overarching Goals “We strive to make sure every new Interface product is conceived within [our] Sustainable Design Model “

“Since 1996, Interface has reduced its total carbon dioxide emissions by 56% on an absolute basis through improved energy efficiency, increased use of renewable energy, and utilizing carbon dioxide offsets from a landfill gas project near the company's LaGrange, Georgia facility. “


Interface, Inc.

Goal: For Interface to understand their

product’s environmental impact Identify areas to focus on for

improvement Support external claims of environmental

performance via EPDs Scope: The assessment utilizes a cradle to grave

methodology. Functional Unit: The functional unit for this study was 1m2

of vinyl backed carpet with a 15yr life.


Starts with a process flow diagram


Data Gathering and Impact Assessment

Data: Interface used internal process data

combined with LCA proprietary databases in order to perform this assessment.

Impact Assessment: The impact assessment methodology

chosen was US EPA TRACI Method


Global Warming Potential of a typical Vinyl-backed Carpet Tile

Raw Material Breakdown

Overall Product Breakdown

Nylon 6,6 46%

Plasticizer 18%

Latex Polymer

13%

Vinyl Resin 10%

Polyester 7%

Other 7%

**Identified Nylon 6,6 as largest material impact

80% Raw Materials

10% Process Energy

10% Other


Potential Reductions Base Case: Avg. of 26oz Virgin N 6,6 on Vinyl

Reduced Weight: Avg. of 22oz Virgin N 6,6 on Vinyl

Blended Reduced Weight: 22oz (20%PLA and 80%PC Recycled N 6,6) on Vinyl

100% 91%

52%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Base Case Reduced Weight Blended ReducedWeight

Perc

ent o

f Bas

e C

ase

Global Warming Potential Reductions


Resulting Actions – Focus on Nylon

•Design changes to reduce fiber weight while still keeping functionality •Material substitution

–Post consumer nylon 6,6 –Eventual phase out of virgin nylon – Industry limitations of PC materials –Continue to look at alternatives


Environmental Product Declaration ISO 14020 and ISO 14025

http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/offerings/businesses/environment/


Agenda

Introductions General Introduction to LCA Concepts Interface Case Study The Importance of the Goal & Scope Definition Step Life Cycle Inventory Analysis Life Cycle Impact Assessment & Weighting Break Hands on exercise Practical Guidance Q&A


How to do LCA according to ISO 14040/44

Goal and Scope

Definition

Inventory Analysis

Impact Assessment

Interpretation


• Goal & Scope Definition: – Determination of purpose,

scope and system boundaries • Life Cycle Inventory:







Goal & Scope - The most important step in LCA • Document purpose:

– Internal/external, eco-design, support marketing, comparison of products, support policy

• Identify stakeholders: – Internal (design, marketing, mfg.) – External (consumers, NGOs, gov’t,

suppliers) • LCA coverage:

– scope (e.g., cradle-to-gate) – cut-off criteria, – data quality requirements, – functional unit /reference flow, – time frame, – geographical boundary, – allocation rules


Life Cycle Scope

• Extraction of raw materials

• Processing of materials

• Production

• Transport & Distribution

• Use

• Reuse or recycle

• Disposal


Life Cycle Scope – Cradle to Grave or Cradle



• Production


• Use


• Disposal


Life Cycle Scope – Cradle to Gate



• Production


• Use


• Disposal


Life Cycle Scope – Cradle to Input Gate



• Production


• Use


• Disposal


Life Cycle Scope – Cradle to Output Gate



• Production


• Use


• Disposal


Life Cycle Scope – Gate to Gate



• Production


• Use


• Disposal


Life Cycle Scope – Upstream



• Production


• Use


• Disposal


Life Cycle Scope – Downstream



• Production


• Use


• Disposal


What is the context?


What is the context?


Functional unit / Reference flow

• Per vehicle? • Per passenger-mile? • Cargo-capacity?

– Passenger + cargo

• Work productivity? • Boundary

– Per person/family – Local – Regional Area – National – International



• Per vehicle? • Per passenger-

mile? • Cargo-capacity?


• Work productivity? • Mid-life crisis

mitigation?



• Per vehicle? • Per passenger-

mile? • Cargo-capacity?


• Work productivity? • Mid-life crisis

mitigation?


Making Comparisons

to


Making Comparisons

to


Making Comparisons

to


Making Comparisons

to


Balancing the Functional Ledger


Balancing the Functional Ledger


Plastic vs. Woven Reusable bags Functional Unit

• Functional unit: facilitating the transport of groceries purchased over 4 years.

• Assumptions – The two plastic bags can lift the same weight and volume as woven

bag – 2080 uses / lifespan (520/year uses or 10 per week) – Woven bag is 100% cotton, Reusable woven bags lasts 4 years. – Plastic is 100% recycled LDPE content & recycled at end of life


Coffee cup: Paper vs. Reusable Plastic Functional Unit

• Functional unit: 5 years’ usage for an equivalent amount of coffee drinking

• Assumptions: • Usage for each product is 2 cups of coffee per day X 250

workdays per year = 500 usages per year • Reusable cup life span is 5 years before getting broken or

sufficiently soiled to require disposal • Reusable cup is washed once per day (250 times per year)

– Half of these washes are by hand and half are as part of a full dishwasher load

• Paper cups are disposed of after each use


MAC vs. PC Functional Unit

• Functional unit: Similar usage levels over an assumed 6-year usable life.

• Assumptions: – Assumes overall product can be used 6 years, but certain

components (memory, non-solid-state hard drive, possibly LCD monitor) would need to be replaced / upgraded during that time

– Will use industry averages for costs/impacts of extraction, manufacture, transportation, etc.

– Will use as much brand & model-specific input & impact information as possible

– Are they the same? iTunes, iCloud, look and feel, reliability, etc.


System Boundaries

Included Excluded • Raw materials extraction • Processing of materials • Production of product • Transportation of finished

product • Use of product • Maintenance/Cleaning of the

product • Recycling collection and

processing • Product disposal • Ancillary materials • All energy • All Transport links

• Capital equipment • Infrastructure • Maintenance of equipment


When do you stop collecting data?

The cut-off criteria for the study could be as follows: 1. Mass – If a flow is less than X% of the cumulative mass of

the model it may be excluded, providing its environmental relevance is not a concern.

2. Energy – If a flow is less than X% of the cumulative energy of the model it may be excluded, providing its environmental relevance is not a concern.

3. Environmental relevance – assumed high – If a flow meets the above criteria for exclusion, yet is thought to potentially have a significant environmental impact, it will be included.


Data Quality – basis for comparability • Technology/Time Coverage :

– Example: Representative of 2012 manufacturing activities. – Example: Secondary data to be representative within 5 years of the

technology coverage. • Geographic Coverage:

– Example: North American general conditions • Precision:

– Example: log normal and Geometric Standard Deviation (GSD) • Representativeness: degree data represents reality • Consistency • Reproducibility • Sources of the data – Primary, Secondary (average & technical

literature), Tertiary (aggregated databases) • Uncertainty – overall uncertainty of data, model and assumptions • Treatment of missing data – non-zero, zero, based on proxy


Allocation of Burden


Co-Product Allocation

1. If possible avoid allocation by either: dividing the unit processes so that inputs and outputs can be assigned to specific products OR expand the system to include the function of co-products.

2. If dividing the unit processes and system expansion are not possible, the inputs and outputs of co-products should be divided based on physical relationships between the co-products (e.g. mass).

3. If allocation cannot be accomplished based on physical relationships, then other relationships between the co-products should be used (e.g. economic value).

Source: ISO 14040 Standard


Recycling Allocation

• Closed Loop Recycling (amortized over loops - metals) – L(1) = L(2) = L(3) = 1/3V(1) + 1/3W(3) + 1/3 (R(1) + R(2))

• Open Loop Recycling ( 50 / 50 or cut-off method - paper, plastics) – L(1) = (V(1) + W(3))/2 + R(1)/2 – L(2) = (R(1) +R(2))/2 – L(3) = (V(1) + W(3))/2 + R(1)/2

V(1)

P(1)

Use(1)

R(1) P(2) R(2)

Use(2)

P(3)

Use(3)

W(3)


• Document purpose: – Internal/external, eco-design,

support marketing, comparison of products, support policy

• Identify stakeholders: – Internal (design, marketing, mfg.) – External (consumers, NGOs,

gov’t, suppliers) • LCA coverage:

– Scope, cut-off criteria, data quality requirements, functional unit, reference flow, time frame, geographical boundary, allocation rules

Goal & Scope Summary – the path forward





Goal and Scope

Definition

Inventory Analysis

Impact Assessment

Interpretation










Life cycle perspective Raw Materials

Materials Manufacture

Product Manufacture

Transportation & Distribution Use Recycling End Disposition















http://creative.gettyimages.com/source/Search/8','8','1','DV48


Process Level Inventory

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M

M = Materials E = Energy W = Wastes (air, water, & soil)


#1. Determine materials in product – by mass

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M

Bill of Materials (pounds, kg, ton, tonne)



#2. Determine Energy Use

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M

Energy Bills (electricity, NG, heating oil)

(kWh, ccf or therms, gallons)



#3. Determine Process Efficiency

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M

Typically measured as a percent of waste generated – i.e., how much falls on the floor, down a

pipe, or up a stack.



#4. Transportation Hops

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M

Mode (truck, train, boat, plane) Distance (miles, km)

Weight shipped (lbs., kg)



#5. Allocation of activities

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M

Data is at the facility level



#6. Use phase assumptions

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M

How long does the product last? Does it use energy in the use phase?

Does it use other resources?



#7. Ancillary Materials

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M

Materials not in entrained in the product (fertilizers, pesticides, water,

lubricating oils, catalysts)



Hybrid LCI – EIO and Process Level

EIO-LCA CMU Database Center for Resilience – The Ohio State University CEDA Database – access in SimaPro PAS 2050 LC GHG of goods and services WRI/WBSCD Supply Chain / Product Carbon Footprint OECD Sustainable Materials Management Sustainability Consortium/ Wal-Mart/Earthster

http://eiolca.net/

http://resilience.osu.edu/CFR-site/index.htm

http://www.cedainformation.net/CEDA_origins.asp


What do the datasets represent?

Primary Aluminum Production

First-tier Aluminum Product

Production

Product Manufacture

Use Phase

End of Life

Secondary Aluminum Recovery/

Reprocessing

Unit Process





Production

Product Manufacture

Use Phase

End of Life


Reprocessing

Cradle-to-Gate





Production

Use Phase

End of Life


Reprocessing Aluminum product manufacture including

scrap and recovery flows

Product Manufacture

Use Phase

Product Manufacture

“Rolled –up” Dataset or System

Level





Production

Use Phase

End of Life


Reprocessing Aluminum product manufacture including

scrap and recovery flows

Product Manufacture

Use Phase

Product Manufacture

Electricity Fuels Materials

Comprehensive LCI Database


Types of Data

• Primary Data Sources – Data directly collected – Actual measurements or meter readings

• Secondary Data Sources – Data that compiles primary data sources – Assembly of primary data into LCA databases

• Tertiary Data Sources – These are sources that compile or digests secondary

sources. – LCA databases


Available LCI Databases • Proprietary

– ecoinvent Swiss database (2000+) – PE GaBi 5.0 (2000+ up to 5000 special order) – Boustead (claims 13,000 in 41 regions → ~300)

– (not updated anymore) • Public Databases

– North American LCI Data base (US DOE NREL) [~139] www.nrel.gov/lci

– LCA Digital Commons www.lcacommons.gov – European Reference Life Cycle Database (ELCD) [300]

http://lca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/lcainfohub/datasetArea.vm • More comprehensive list:

– www.life-cycle.org under “Resources”

http://www.nrel.gov/lci

http://www.lcacommons.gov/

http://www.life-cycle.org/


Guidance by DQ in Set in Goal & Scope

• Cut-off Criteria • Primary, Secondary, Tertiary Data Sources • Technology/Time Coverage :

– Example: Representative of 2012 manufacturing activities.

– Example: Secondary data to be representative within 5 years of the technology coverage.

• Geographic Coverage: – Example: North American general conditions


Allocation: WRI Protocol


Recycling Allocation

• Closed Loop Recycling (amortized over loops) – L(1) = L(2) = L(3) = 1/3V(1) + 1/3W(3) + 1/3 (R(1) + R(2))

• Open Loop Recycling ( 50 / 50 method) – L(1) = (V(1) + W(3))/2 + R(1)/2 – L(2) = (R(1) +R(2))/2 – L(3) = (V(1) + W(3))/2 + R(1)/2

V(1)

P(1)

Use(1)

R(1) P(2) R(2)

Use(2)

P(3)

Use(3)

W(3)


Product Carbon Footprinting WRI Product Accounting and Reporting Standard

100/0 Method – Recycled input is known, downcycling is likely


Product Carbon Footprinting WRI Product Accounting and Reporting Standard

0/100 Method – Recycled content unknown, closed loop cycling occurs

Recycled displaces virgin


Process Level Inventory Analysis

• Goal & Scope Definition • Preparation for data collection

– Data collection sheet

• Data collection • Validate collected data • Relate the data to the unit process • Relate the data to the functional unit

– Defining the reference flow

• Data aggregation • Refine system boundary

MATERIALSMANU-

FACTURE

PRODUCTMANU-

FACTUREUSERAW

MATERIALSFINAL

DISPOSITION

E

W W W W W

E E E EM MMM M



15 minute break



Goal and Scope

Definition

Inventory Analysis

Impact Assessment

Interpretation










Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Classification - Assignment of Life Cycle Inventory results

Characterization - Calculation of category indicator results

Normalization - Calculation of the magnitude of category indicator results relative to reference information

Grouping - Assignment of impact categories to groups of similar impacts

Weighting - Assignment of relative values or weights to different impacts, allowing integration across all impact categories.

Data Quality Check - Analysis of the significance, uncertainty and sensitivity of LCIA results

Elements of Impact AssessmentSelection - Determination of relevant impact categories, category indicators, and characterization models Mandatory Elements

Methodology Dependent (Academic Institutions, Gov’t

Agencies, International NGOs (IPCC))

Study Context Dependent

Optional Elements Methodology Dependent (Academic Institution, Gov’t Agency, Industry Consortia

(USGBC))


Inventory

• Carbon dioxide (CO2) • Nitrous oxide (N2O) • Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)

2,000 kg 20 kg 2 kg

Emission Amount Importance Share

98.90 % 0.10 % 0.01 %

! - -

Necessity of LCIA


Impact Assessment

• CO2 • N2O • SF6

Emission Equivalence Share GWP contribition (FAR CO2-e)

1 298

22800

2,000 5,960

45,600

3.7 % 11.1 % 85.1 %

Inventory

• Carbon dioxide (CO2) • Nitrous oxide (N2O) • Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)

2,000 kg 20 kg 2 kg

Emission Amount Importance Share

98.90 % 0.10 % 0.01 %

! - -

Necessity of LCIA


LCIA Framework

Adapted from Jolliet et al. (2004) The LCIA Midpoint-damage Framework of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, IJLCA 9 (5) 394-404.


Midpoints vs. Endpoints Emissions (CFCs, Halons)

Chemical reaction releases Cl- and Br-

Cl-, Br- destroys ozone MIDPOINT measures ozone depletion potential (ODP)

Less ozone allows increased UVB radiation which leads to following ENDPOINTS

immune system suppression

skin cancer cataracts

marine life damage

damage to materials like plastics

crop damage


In LCIA General Fate and Transport is considered


Toxicity Regionalization Example: Nested transboundary model for USEtox


Water Consumption Regionalization Water Stress Index


Regionalization in LCIA

98

Bulle et al. (2012) World + Impact Assessment Methodology


Classification and Characterization of Inputs and Outputs Multiplication & Addition

Life Cycle Inventory Classification Resources

Copper

Zinc

Airborne Emissions

Carbon Dioxide

Carbon Monoxide

Methane

Nitrous Oxide

Carbon Tetrachloride (CFC-10)

Sulfur Hexafluoride

Benzene

Toluene

Xylenes

o-Xylene

m-Xylene

p-Xylene

Waterborne Emissions

XXX

Soil Emissions

XXX

Global Warming Potential Characterization (CO2-e)

CO2: 1

CO: 1.53

CH4: 25

N2O: 298

CCl4: 1,800

SF6: 22,800 Human Health Toxicity Characterization (1,4 DCB-e)

CCl4: 220

C6H6:1,900

C7H8: 0.327

C8H10: 0.000

C8H10: 0.125

C8H10: 0.043

C8H10: 0.043

Abiotic Depletion Potential (Sb-e)

Cu: 1.94 E-3

Oil, Crude: 2.01E-2

Ag: 1.84 E+0

Zn: 9.92E-4

Σ GWP

Σ HHTP

Σ ADP

Why zero?


Focus on US EPA and European Commission LCIA Impact Categories US EPA TRACI • Climate Change • Acidification • Human Health

Particulate (Respiratory) • Eutrophication • Ozone Depletion • Smog Formation • Ecotoxicity • Human Health Toxicity • Fossil Fuel Use

European Commission • Climate Change • Acidification • Human Health Particulate

(Respiratory) • Eutrophication • Ozone Depletion • Smog Formation • Ecotoxicity • Human Health Toxicity • Resource Depletion – mineral

& fossil • Resource Depletion – Water • Land Transformation

Same Method*

Diff. Method

Diff. Method

Diff. Method

Diff. Method

Same Method*

Same Method*

Diff. Method

Same Method*

No Equivalent

No Equivalent *minor model differences


Background on the European Commission (EC) Product Environmental Footprint Organization Environmental Footprint

• The EC Environment Directorate General makes sure that EC Member States correctly apply EU environmental law

• In its Integrated Product Policy, the EC concluded that LCA is the best framework for assessing impacts of products

• Environment DG is working with the Joint Research Centre (JRC) Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES) to develop: – Product Environmental Footprint and – Organization Environmental Footprint guidance.

• JRC IES created European Platform on Life Cycle Assessment to – Build consensus on methodological approach and – Improve data availability


European Commission Portfolio of LCIA Methodologies

• The CML 2002 or CML or “Dutch” methodology, – developed by Leiden University, Institute of Environmental Science (CML).

• The Environmental Design of Industrial Products (EDIP) methodology – developed at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU)

• Impact Assessment of Chemical Toxics (IMPACT) 2002+ and IMPACT World+ methodologies

– created through the collaboration of the Centre Interuniversitaire de recherché sur le cycle de vie des produits, procédés et services (CIRAIG), Polytechnique Montreal, University of Michigan, Quantis International, and Ecole Polytechnique de Lausanne (EPFL);

• The ReCiPe methodology (2008) – created by Dutch Government National Institute for Public Health and the Environment

(RIVM), Radboud University, CML, and PRé Consultants;

• USEtox method (2008) – created by Radboud University, University of Michigan, Dutch Government National

Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), UC Berkeley, Technical University of Denmark (DTU), the Centre Interuniversitaire de recherché sur le cycle de vie des produits, procédés et services (CIRAIG), Polytechnique Montreal,


European Commission Portfolio of LCIA Methodologies (Product and Organization)

Impact Category Methodology

Climate Change Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 (revised 2011)

Ozone Depletion Environmental Design of Industrial Products (EDIP) (based on World Meteorological Organization (WMO))

Ecotoxicity USEtox model

Human Health Toxicity (cancer and non-cancer)

USEtox model

Particulate Matter RiskPoll model in IMPACT 2002+ (Humbert)

Ionizing Radiation (human health) Human health effects model (Dreicer et al.)

Photochemical Ozone Formation ReCiPe (Radboud University, CML, RIVM, PRe Consultants) (Dutch Method)

Acidification Accumulated Exceedance (Seppällä et al.)

Eutrophication (terrestrial) Accumulated Exceedance (Seppällä et al.)

Eutrophication (aquatic) ReCiPe (Radboud University, CML, RIVM, PRe Consultants) (Dutch Method)

Resource Depletion (water) Swiss Ecoscarcity (Frischknecht et al.)

Resource Depletion (mineral, fossil) Leiden University (CML 2002) (van Oers et al.)

Land Transformation Soil Organic Matter (SOM) model (Milà i Canals et al.)


US EPA TRACI Background • Developed by US EPA National Risk

Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) • Provides US / North American based

characterization factors in response to European activities in late 1990s.

• Regulatory driven – Toxicity (Toxics Release Inventory) – Smog formation – Criteria Pollutants – Non-point pollution sources (eutrophication) – Ozone Depletion

• Strives for comprehensive coverage • Site specific to the extent possible

– Reduced support in latest version

• Funding is limited, relies on outside developers


USEPA TRACI Portfolio of Methodologies

Impact Category Methodology

Climate Change Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 (revised 2011)

Ozone Depletion World Meteorological Organization (WMO) 2003 and the US EPA 2008

Ecotoxicity USEtox model (2010) and USEPA

Human Health Toxicity (cancer and non-cancer)

USEtox model (2010) and USEPA

Particulate Matter Respiratory Effects Humbert (2009) adjusted for North America

Photochemical Ozone (Smog) Formation

Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR) method, Carter (2007/2008)

Acidification USEPA (2003)

Eutrophication USEPA (2003)

Fossil Fuel Depletion USEPA (2003) and Eco-Indicator 99, Institute of Environmental Sciences (CML) Leiden University and PRe Consultants (1999)


Climate Change Environmental Mechanism Emissions to the

atmosphere

Time integrated concentration

Radiative forcing

Climate change

Effects on Ecosystems Effects on humans

Net Primary Production

Changing biomes

Decreasing biodiversity

Water stress Wild fires Other impacts malnutrition Flooding Infectious

Diseases Heat Stress

- Direct effects- Indirect effects

- temperature changes- extreme weather- increased precipitation- drought conditions

Midpoint

Endpoint


LCA – State of the Practice Water Withdrawal

• Water historically neglected by LCA field – Not a scarce resource in areas of study – Renewable – Limited to water withdrawal vs. net consumption

• Water Withdrawal defined as water lost for a catchment area by: – evaporation, – transpiration, – product integration, or – discharge into another river basin or sea water.


Add up all the water withdrawal “flows”


Resource Depletion Environmental Mechanism

Midpoint

Endpoint

Resource Use

Decreased Availability

Recovery (urban & waste mining)Regeneration

Damage to availability of resource for human wealth

Future availability & effort needed

Future provision of needs

Damage to human health Damage to ecosystems


Water Resource Depletion – Swiss Ecoscarcity

• Basic method: a measure of the ratio of current freshwater consumption to critical flow (20% of available resource)

• The model is relatively complete for water depletion in a regionally-specified way for several countries.

– Frischknecht, R., Steiner, R., Jungbluth, N. (2009). The Ecological Scarcity Method: Eco-Factors 2006: A method for impact assessment. Environmental studies no. 0906. Federal Office for the Environment, Bern: 188 pp.

– OECD 2004: Key environmental indicators. OECD Environment Directorate, Paris, retrieved 16.06.2005 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/32/20/31558547.pdf.


Human Health Toxicity Environmental Mechanisms

ground-, fresh-, or marine water

vegetation crop

animal meat

ingestion (gastrointestinal tract)

agricultural or natural soil outdoor air indoor air

algae

crustacae

vertebrates (fish)

circulatory system inhalation (lung, nose)

target organs

cancer cases non-cancer type cases

overall cancer overall non-cancer

human health damage

Intake Fraction

Fate

Exposure

Dose-response

Disease severity

Midpoint

Endpoint


Toxicity Factors

Air

Water

Soil

Emissions

Chemical Fate

Intake Fraction Human Effect Factor

Human Exposure

Dose

Response

Fate Factor

Concentration

Ecotox Effect Factor

Potentially Affected Fraction

Incidence of Disease

Industrial Ecology Consultants 113 2/19/2013

LCIA Optional Elements • Normalization: calculation of the

magnitude of each indicator result relative to reference information

• Grouping: sorting and ranking of impact categories

• Weighting: conversion and often aggregation of indicator results across categories using numerical factors based on value-choices



Normalization

• Divide the emissions by the total emissions of the region of concern. – Global warming the globe – Toxicity Regional areas specific to fate and

transport

• Benefit Relative contribution • Issues of incongruence

– In practice we use geo-political boundaries


Weights Developed for BEES (NIST Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability)

Weights by Stakeholder Grouping

05

101520253035404550

Ozone

Dep

letion

Acidific

ation

Indoo

r Air Q

uality

Smog Fo

rmati

on

Nonca

ncero

us Effe

cts

Land

Use

Eutrop

hicati

on

Ecolog

ical T

oxicit

y

Cance

rous E

ffects

Water In

take

Criteria

Air Poll

utants

Fossil

Fuel

Deplet

ion

Global

Warm

ing

Perc

ent

ProducersUsersLCA Experts

Gloria, Lippiatt, Cooper (2007) Life Cycle Assessment Weights to Support Environmentally Preferable Purchasing in the US, ES&T, 41 7551-7557.





Goal and Scope

Definition

Inventory Analysis

Impact Assessment

Interpretation











Goal and Scope

Definition

Inventory Analysis

Impact Assessment

Interpretation


Identification of Significant

Issues

Evaluate:CompletenessSensitivityConsistency

Conclusions, Limitations, and Recommendations


Sensitivity Analysis


Pedigree Matrix – lognormal distribution Indicator Score 1 2 3 4 5Reliability Verified data based

on measurementsVerified data partly based on assumptions or non-verified data based on measurements

Non-verified data partly based on qualified estimates

Qualified estimate (e.g. by industrial expert)

Non-qualified estimate

Completeness Representative data from all sites relevant for the market considered, over an adequate period to even out normal fluctuations

Representative data from >50% of the sites relevant for the market considered, over an adequate period to even out normal fluctuations

Representative data from only some sites (<<50%) relevant for the market considered or >50% of sites but from shorter periods

Representative data from only one siterelevant for the market considered or some sites but from shorter periods

Representativeness unknown or data from a small number of sites and from shorter periods

Temporal Correlation Less than 3 years of difference to the time period of the dataset

Less than 6 years of difference to the time period of the dataset



Age of data unknown or more than 15 years of difference to the time period of the dataset

Geographical Correlation Data from area under study

Average data from larger area in which the area under study is included

Data from area with similar production conditions

Data from area with slightly similar production conditions

Data from unknown or distinctly different area

Technical Correlation Data from enterprises, processes and materials under study

Data from processes and materials under study (i.e. identical technology) but from different enterprises

Data from processes and materials under study but from different technology

Data on related processes or materials

Data on related processes on laboratory scale or from different technology

Indicator 1 2 3 4 5Reliability 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.20 1.50Completeness 1.00 1.02 1.05 1.10 1.20Temporal Correlation 1.00 1.03 1.10 1.20 1.50Geographical Correlation 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.05 1.10Technical Correlation 1.00 1.05 1.20 1.50 2.00

Geometric Standard Deviation Values

Ecoinvent Data Quality


Monte Carlo Uncertainty Analysis

Characterization Climate change

method: ReCiPe Midpoint (H) V1.03 / World ReCiPe H, confidence interval: 95 %Uncertainty analysis of 1 p 'MPI 1005 Roll',

MPI 1005 Roll

kg CO2 eq361 364 367 369 372 374 377 380 382 385 387 390 393 395 398 400 403 406 408 411 413 416 419 421 424 426 429 432 434 437 439 442 445 447 450 452 455 458 460 463 465 468 471 473 476 478 481 484 486 489

Pro

babilit

y

0.065

0.06

0.055

0.05

0.045

0.04

0.035

0.03

0.025

0.02

0.015

0.01

0.005

0


Uncertainty Analysis




Hire or DIY?

• First time through • Number of assessments

– 10 or more is the tipping point for economy of scale

• Limited resources – Personnel – Software – Data repository

• Complex assessments • Time limit • Review or third party verification of conformance.


Data gathering – the black hole of LCA

• There are only two databases: – GaBi 5 and ecoinvent

• Minimize the data to be collected – Conduct Goal & Scope carefully – Examine only areas that are different

• Make your requests clear and concise – Spreadsheet – Websheets – Documentation

• Request early and often • Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good (finishing).

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Accretion_disk.jpg&imgrefurl=http://norsefire-nemesis.blogspot.com/&usg=__P-QSCP7e1p-2u5ebi_vnL6ggnkw=&h=2400&w=3000&sz=112&hl=en&start=30&um=1&tbnid=k6nAi-EI8IFDqM:&tbnh=120&tbnw=150&prev=/images?q=back+hole&ndsp=20&hl=en&safe=off&sa=N&start=20&um=1


Report Writing ISO14040 §6.0 and ISO14044 §5.0

• Introduction – Summary that could be stand alone

• Goal & Scope – Captured as part of G&SD exercise

• Life Cycle Inventory – Process Flow Diagram – Data sources – Appendix / Spreadsheet

• LCIA results – Tables / charts / graphs

• Interpretation – Results


Software Tools

• SimaPro – PRé Consultants • GaBi Software & Database – PE International AG • Umberto • Quantis Web 2.0 Tool • Carnegie Mellon - EIO-LCA Tool • The Ohio State University - Eco-LCA tool • OpenLCA Software

– Used by USDA for digital commons


LCA for Environmental Labels, Claims, and Declarations

Type I Type II Type III Environmental Labels Environmental Product

Declarations Environmental Declarations PCRs and EPDs

Selected criteria as hurdles, demonstrating environmental excellence

Single issues, describing specific environmental characteristics

Life Cycle Performance data, aiming for continuous improvement

Life Cycle Thinking Life Cycle Thinking Life Cycle Assessment Mandatory Certification Issued by a private or public,

accredited institution

Certification possible Issued by the manufacturer

May include 3rd party verification

Issued by a private, accredited institution

Like: Blue Angel, European Eco-label, SCS

Like: water consumption of a washing machine, or energy use of a computer.

Like: UL Environment Earthsure, ASTM, NSF, FPInnovations, Environdec


EPD Areas of Activity • USGBC V4 LEED Pilot Credit Program • ISO 21930 / ASTM E60 - EPD for building products • European Commission product footprinting guidance • France Grenelle de l’Environnement Law (2007) –omnibus législation

– All high volume consumer products sold in France have an EPD effective 7/1/11

– Anticipate that the program will spread to all of the EU • The Sustainability Consortium SMRS (Sustainability Measurement &

Reporting Systems) for major product groups – TSC Psuedo Operator • Sustainable Apparel Coalition – Higg Index and beyond • Business Institutional Furniture Manufacturers Association (BIFMA) – NSF

Operator


LCA - limitations • Expensive & Time Consuming

– Cost to value ratio may not tip in the right direction • LCA is based on averages

– Innovation may be challenging to model • Cannot address localized impacts

– new developments • Based on linear modeling

– Less is better • Focus on physical characteristics

– not market mechanisms or technological development • Caveat emptor!

– It involves many technical assumptions • Too much information that leads to catatonia!

– Needs to be integrated into management systems



LCA Applications An exhaustive environmental analysis of a product or

process to support DfE Science-based analysis Brings structure to the investigation Highlights tradeoffs Challenges conventional wisdom Captures the knowledge base

Allows for ceteris paribus (all things being equal) assessment – to look at what’s different or new.

Hot spot identification Alignment and Emergence

Support communication and discourse ( external and internal) Establish the ground rules for environmental claims in the

marketplace Support / refute new policy




[email protected]

Thank You and Good Luck!