The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 28–42

Assessing freshwater use impacts in LCA: Part I—inventory modelling and characterisation factors for the main impact pathways

Authors

    • Unilever – Safety & Environmental Assurance Centre
    • Centre for Environmental StrategyUniversity of Surrey
  • Jonathan Chenoweth
    • Centre for Environmental StrategyUniversity of Surrey
  • Ashok Chapagain
    • WWF-UK, Panda House
  • Stuart Orr
    • WWF-UK, Panda House
  • Assumpció Antón
    • IRTA, ctra. Cabrils
  • Roland Clift
    • Centre for Environmental StrategyUniversity of Surrey
WATER USE IN LCA

DOI: 10.1007/s11367-008-0030-z

Cite this article as:
Milà i Canals, L., Chenoweth, J., Chapagain, A. et al. Int J Life Cycle Assess (2009) 14: 28. doi:10.1007/s11367-008-0030-z

Abstract

Background, aim and scope

Freshwater is a basic resource for humans; however, its link to human health is seldom related to lack of physical access to sufficient freshwater, but rather to poor distribution and access to safe water supplies. On the other hand, freshwater availability for aquatic ecosystems is often reduced due to competition with human uses, potentially leading to impacts on ecosystem quality. This paper summarises how this specific resource use can be dealt with in life cycle analysis (LCA).

Main features

The main quantifiable impact pathways linking freshwater use to the available supply are identified, leading to definition of the flows requiring quantification in the life cycle inventory (LCI).

Results

The LCI needs to distinguish between and quantify evaporative and non-evaporative uses of ‘blue’ and ‘green’ water, along with land use changes leading to changes in the availability of freshwater. Suitable indicators are suggested for the two main impact pathways [namely freshwater ecosystem impact (FEI) and freshwater depletion (FD)], and operational characterisation factors are provided for a range of countries and situations. For FEI, indicators relating current freshwater use to the available freshwater resources (with and without specific consideration of water ecosystem requirements) are suggested. For FD, the parameters required for evaluation of the commonly used abiotic depletion potentials are explored.

Discussion

An important value judgement when dealing with water use impacts is the omission or consideration of non-evaporative uses of water as impacting ecosystems. We suggest considering only evaporative uses as a default procedure, although more precautionary approaches (e.g. an ‘Egalitarian’ approach) may also include non-evaporative uses. Variation in seasonal river flows is not captured in the approach suggested for FEI, even though abstractions during droughts may have dramatic consequences for ecosystems; this has been considered beyond the scope of LCA.

Conclusions

The approach suggested here improves the representation of impacts associated with freshwater use in LCA. The information required by the approach is generally available to LCA practitioners

Recommendations and perspectives

The widespread use of the approach suggested here will require some development (and consensus) by LCI database developers. Linking the suggested midpoint indicators for FEI to a damage approach will require further analysis of the relationship between FEI indicators and ecosystem health.

Keywords

EcosystemEvaporative useFDFEIFreshwater ecosystem impactLCALCILCIAVirtual waterWater footprintWater resource

Supplementary material

11367_2008_30_MOESM1_ESM.doc (190 kb)
Table A-1Values for WRPC and WUPR for world countries (DOC 190 KB)
11367_2008_30_MOESM2_ESM.doc (101 kb)
Table A-2Values for WSI for the main world river basins (kindly provided by V. Smakhtin) (DOC 101 KB)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008