Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Issues and Challenges in Life Cycle Assessment in the Minerals and Metals Sector: A Chance to Improve Raw Materials Efficiency

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Non-Renewable Resource Issues

Part of the book series: International Year of Planet Earth ((IYPE))

Abstract

A critical review was conducted on existing literature concerning life cycle assessment (LCA) and its application to the minerals and metals sector. This extensive literature search uncovers many of the issues that require immediate attention from the scientific community involved with LCA. The methodological drawbacks, mainly problems with inconsistencies in LCA results for the same situation under different assumptions and issues related to data quality, are considered to be the current shortcomings of LCA. In the minerals and metals sector, it is important to increase the objectivity of LCA by way of estimating and reporting those uncertainties; for example, whether land use has to be considered in detail or at a rough level. In regard to abiotic resource characterisation, the weight and time scales to be considered become a very critical issue of judgement. How the temporal and spatial dimensions should be incorporated into LCA is one of the biggest challenges ahead for those who are concerned. Addressing these issues will enable LCA to be used as a policy tool in environmental decision making. There has been enormous unresolved debate with respect to land use impacts, abiotic resource depletion, allocation procedure open-loop recycling and spatial and temporal dimensions. An example case has been presented for Australian iron ore using SimaPro software based on published inventory data to demonstrate that uniformity is required. Discussions aimed at bringing consensus amongst all the stakeholders involved in LCA (i.e. industry, academia, consulting organisations and government) have been presented. In addition, a commentary of different points of view on these issues has been provided. This review brings into perspective some of those contentious issues that are widely debated by many researchers. Finally, the authors conclude with their views on the prospects of LCA for future research endeavours.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Comment: it is already complex for two generations in the current strict monetary condition while the models are quite robust. This is a case of soft sustainability, that is, a transfer of natural capital to social and economic. The social and economic developments require natural resources including minerals and metals. One set of capital (environment) is reduced, while others are increased. Overall, we need to ensure that we can satisfy ‘the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Our Common Future. 1987.

References

  • Althaus H-J, Classen M (2005) Life cycle inventories of metals and methodological aspects of inventorying material resources in ecoinvent. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(1):43–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atherton J (2007) Declaration by the metals industry on recycling principles. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(1):59–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bare JC, Pennington DW, Udo de Haes HA (1999) Life cycle impact assessment sophistication-international workshop. Int J Life Cycle Assess 5:299–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer C, Zapp P (2005) Generic characterisation factors for land use and water consumption. In: Dubreuil A (ed) Life cycle assessment of metals – issues and research directions. SETAC USA, Pensacola, pp 147–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Bösch, M.E., Hellweg, S., Huijbregts, M.A.J., Frischknecht, R., 2007. Applying cumulative exergy demand (CExD) indicators to the ecoinvent database. Int. J.LCA12,181e190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjorklund AE (2002) Survey of approaches to improve reliability in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7(2):62–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brent AC, Hietkamp S (2006) The impact of mineral resource depletion. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(5):361–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brentrup F, Küsters J, Lammel J, Kuhlmann H (2002a) Impact assessment of abiotic resource consumption – conceptual considerations. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7:301–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brentrup F, Küsters J, Lammel J, Kuhlmann H (2002b) Life cycle impact assessment of land use based on the Hemeroby concept. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7(6):339–348

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Becker H (2006) Validation-The missing link in life cycle assessment towards pragmatic LCAs. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(5):295–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commonwealth of Australia (2007) Leading practice ­sustainable development program for the mining industry – biodiversity management. Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources, Australian Govern­ment Canberra, 88 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond ML, Gandhi N, Adams WJ, Atherton J, Bhavsar SP, Bulle C, Campbell PGC, Dubreuil A, Fairbrother A, Farley K, Green A, Guinee J, Hauschild MZ, Huijbregts MAJ, Humbert S, Jensen KS, Jolliet O, Margni M, McGeer JC, Peijnenburg WJGM, Rosenbaum R, van de Meent D, Vijver MG (2010) The clearwater consensus: the estimation of metal hazard in fresh water. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(2):143–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubreuil A (ed) (2005) Life cycle assessment of metals: issues and research directions. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Pensacola, 307 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubreuil A (2008) The dynamics of mineral reserves – The impact of demand and technology on the supply of minerals and metals. OECD-UNEP resource efficiency conference, Module 4 sustainable mining and recycling, 23–25 April 2008, Paris, France. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/13/14/40798864.pdf. Accessed 3 Jan 2012

  • Dubreuil A, Young SB, Atherton J, Gloria TP (2010a) Metals recycling maps and allocation procedures in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(6):621–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubreuil A, Bushi L, Das S, Tharumarajah A, Xianzheng G (2010b) A comparative life cycle assessment of magnesium front end auto parts. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International publication number 2010-01-0275, 19 p

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2010) ILCD handbook, general guidance for life cycle assessment – detailed guidance. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 414 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnveden G (1996) Resources and related impact categories, part II. In: Udo de Haes HA et al (eds) Towards a methodology for life cycle impact assessment. Report of the SETAC-Europe working group on Life Cycle Impact Assessment (WIA), SETAC-Europe, Brussels, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnveden G (2005) The resource debate needs to continue. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(5):372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Althaus H-J, Doka G, Dones R, Heck T, Hellweg S, Hischier R, Nemecek T, Rebitzer G, Spielmann M (2005) The ecoinvent database: Overview and methodological framework. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(1):3–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giudice F, La Rosa G, Risitano A (eds) (2006) Product design for environment – a life cycle approach. Taylor & Francis Publishers, Boca Raton, 87 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop, M., Spriensma, R., 2001. The Eco-Indicator 99dA Damage Oriented Method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Pré Consultants, Amersfoort, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinée JB (ed) (2002) Handbook of life cycle assessment–operational guide to the ISO standards. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinée, B.J., Heijungs, R., 1995. A proposal for the definition of resource equivalency factors for use in product life-cycle assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 14, 917e925

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton M, Brown M, Nolan G (2008) Comparing bio-diversity impacts of timber and other building materials. Forests and Wood Products Australia Ltd., Melbourne, 62 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Sleeswijk AW (1999) The structure of impact assessment: mutually independent dimensions as a function of modifiers. Letters to the editor: comment and reply. Int J Life Cycle Assess 4(1):2–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellweg S, Frischknecht R (2004) Evaluation of long-term impacts in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9(5):339–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellweg S, Hofstetter TB, Hungerbühler K (2003) Discounting and the environment: should current impacts be weighted differently than impacts harming future generations? Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(1):8–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellweg S, Hofstetter TB, Hungerbühler K (2005) Time-dependent life-cycle assessment of slag landfills with the help of scenario analysis: The example of Cd and Cu. J Clean Prod 13(3):301–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huijbregts M (1998) Application of uncertainty and variability in LCA. Part I: A general framework for the analysis of uncertainty and variability in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3(5):273–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huppes G (1996) LCA yesterday, today and tomorrow. Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden University, Leiden, pp 29–49

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 14021 (1999) Environmental labels and declarations – Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling). International Organization for Standardization, ISO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework. International Organization for Standardization, ISO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization, ISO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/TS 14048 (2002) Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Data documentation format. International Organization for Standardization, ISO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/TR 14049 (2000) Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Examples of application of ISO 14041 to goal and scope definition and inventory analysis. International Organization for Standardization, ISO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/TR 14047 (2003) Environmental management – Life cycle impact assessment – Examples of application of ISO 14042. International Organization for Standard­ization, ISO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolliet O, Müller-Wenk R, Bare J, Brent A, Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Itsubo N, Peña C, Pennington D, Potting J, Rebitzer G, Stewart M, Udo de Haes H, Weidema B (2004) The LCIA midpoint-damage framework of the UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9(6):394–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Köllner T (2000) Species-pool effect potentials (SPEP) as a yardstick to evaluate land-use impacts on biodiversity. J Clean Prod 8(4):293–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambert IB, Miezitis Y, McKay AD (2009) Australia’s national classification system for identified mineral resources and its relationships with other systems. AusIMM Bull 6:52–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindeijer E, Müller-Wenk R, Steen B (2002) Impact assessment of resources and land use. Chapter 2. In: de Haes HA Udo, Finnveden G, Goedkoop M, Hauschild M, Hertwich E, Hofstetter P, Jolliet O, Klöpffer W, Krewitt W, Lindeijer E, Müller-Wenk R, Olsen I, Pennington D, Potting J, Steen B (eds) Life-cycle impact assessment: striving towards best practice. SETAC Press, Pensacola

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindfors LG, Christiansen K, Hoffman L, Virtanen Y, Juntilla V, Hanssen OJ, Rønning A, Ekvall T, Finnveden G (1995) Nordic guidelines on life-cycle assessment. Nord 1995:20. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows D, Randers J, Meadows D (2005) Limits to growth – the 30 year update. Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mila i Canals L, Clift R, Basson L, Hansen Y, Brandao M (2006) Expert workshop on land use impacts in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(5):363–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mila i Canals L, Bauer C, Depestele J, Dubreuil A, Knuchel RF, Gaillard G, Michelsen O, Muller-Wenk R, Rydgren B (2007) Key elements in a framework for land use impact assessment within LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(1):5–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moncur MC, Jambor JL, Ptacek CJ, Blowes DW (2009) Mine drainage from the weathering of sulfide minerals and magnetite. Appl Geol 24(12):2362–2373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wenk R (1998) Land use – the main threat to species. How to include land use in LCA. IWÖ–Diskussionsbeitrag No. 64, IWÖ, Universität St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  • Norgate TE, Haque N (2009) Using life cycle analysis to assess the toxicity impacts of waste streams from metal production processes. In: The proceedings of SDIMI 2009, sustainable development indicators for the minerals industry, 6–8 July 2009, Gold Coast, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Norgate T, Haque N (2010) Energy and greenhouse gas impacts of mining and mineral processing operations. J Clean Prod 18(3):266–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norgate T, Jahanshahi S, Rankin WJ (2007) Assessing the environmental impact of metal production processes. J Clean Prod 15(8–9):838–848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oberholzer H-R, Weisskopf P, Gaillard G, Weiss Fr, Freiermuth R (2006) Life cycle impact assessment method for the impact of agricultural activities on soil quality. Agroscope FAL Reckenholz (in German with English summary), 58 pp and annexes

    Google Scholar 

  • Owens W (1996) LCA impact assessment categories. Technical feasibility and accuracy. Int J Life Cycle Assess 1(3):151–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owens W (1997) Life cycle assessment. Constraints on moving from inventory to impact assessment. J Ind Ecol 1(1):37–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennington DW, Chomkhamsri K, Pant R, Wolf M-A, Bidoglio G, Kogler K, Misiga P, Sponar M, Lorz B, Sonnemann G, Masoni P, Wang H, Ling L, Castanho C, Soon CS, Fieschi M, Filareto A, Hauschild M (2010) ILCD handbook public consultation workshop – international reference life cycle data system (ILCD). Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(3):231–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pleijel K, Pleijel H, Karlsson GP (1999) Quantification of additional ozone load from local source emissions of NOx and VOC. Poster presented at the 9th annual meeting of SETAC-Europe, 25–29 May 1999, Liepzig

    Google Scholar 

  • Potting JMB (2000) Spatial differentiation in life cycle assessment. PhD thesis, University of Utrecht, Utrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Potting JMB, Hauschild M (1997) Spatial differentiation in life cycle assessment via the site dependent characterisation of environmental impact from emissions. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2(4):209–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potting JMB, Hauschild M (2006) Spatial differentiation in life cycle assessment: a decade of method development to increase the environmental realism of LCIA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(Special issue (1)):11–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Price WA (2009) Prediction manual for drainage chemistry for sulphidic geologic materials. CANMET Mining and Mineral Sciences Laboratories, Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa, 579 pp. http://www.abandoned-mines.org/pdfs/MENDPredictionManual-Jan05.pdf. Accessed March 2010

  • Schenck RC (2001) Land use and biodiversity indicators for life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 6(2):114–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze C, Matthies M (1999) Introducing spatial and temporal variations in the LCIA of household laundry. In: 9th annual meeting of SETAC-Europe, 25–29 May, Germany. Quality of life and environment in cultured landscapes. Abstracts, 86 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Steen, B.A., 1999. A Systematic Approach to Environmental Priority Strategies in Product Development (EPS), Version 2000dModels and Data. Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden. Centre for Environmental Assessment of Products and Material Systems (CPM) Report 1999(5).

    Google Scholar 

  • Steen BA (2006) Abiotic resource depletion: different perceptions of the problem with mineral deposits. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(Spec Issue (1)):49–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart M, Weidema B (2005) A consistent framework for assessing the impacts from resource use. A focus on resource functionality. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(4):240–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss K, Brent AC, Hietkamp S (2006) Characterisation and normalisation factors for life cycle impact assessment of mined abiotic resources categories in South Africa. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(3):162–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilton JE (2003) On borrowed time? Assessing the threat of mineral depletion. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilton JE, Lagos G (2007) Assessing the long-run availability of copper. Res Policy 32(1–2):19–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilton JE, Skinner BJ (1987) The meaning of resources. In: Resources and world development. Wiley, Ney York, pp 13–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner GMA (2008) A comparative of the limits to growth with 30 years of reality. Glob Environ Chang 18(3):397–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udo de Haes HA (ed) (1996) Towards a methodology for lifecycle impact assessment. Report of the SETAC Europe first Working Group on Life-Cycle Impact Assessment. SETAC-Europe, Brussels, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • Weidema B (2000) Can resource depletion be omitted from environmental impact assessment? Poster presented at SETAC world congress, 21–25 May 2000, Brighton, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Weidema BP, Lindeijer E (2001) Physical impacts of land use in product life cycle assessment. Final report of the EUROENVIRON-LCAGAPS sub-project on land use. Technical University of Denmark, Denmark

    Google Scholar 

  • Weidema B, Finnveden G, Stewart M (2005) Impacts from resource use – a common position paper. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(6):382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yellishetty M, Ranjith PG, Tharumarajah A, Bhosale S (2009) Life cycle assessment in the minerals and metals sector: a critical review of selected issues and challenges. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14(3):257–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yellishetty M, Mudd G, Ranjith PG (2011) The steel industry, abiotic resource depletion and life cycle assessment: A real or perceived issue? Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 78–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Young SB, Brady K, Fava J, Saur S (2001) Eco-efficiency and materials. International Council on Metals and the Environment (ICME), Ottawa, pp 86. ISBN 1–895720–34–6

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Civil & Environmental Engineering, School of Applied Science & Engineering, Monash University, Gippsland Campus, Churchill, 3842, VIC, Australia

    Mohan Yellishetty

  2. CSIRO Process Science & Engineering, Minerals Down Under Flagship, Clayton, VIC, 3169, Australia

    Nawshad Haque

  3. Natural Resources Canada, CANMET Mining and Mineral Sciences Laboratories, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Alain Dubreuil

Authors
  1. Mohan Yellishetty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nawshad Haque
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alain Dubreuil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohan Yellishetty .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Technology, Dept. Geology & Mineral, Norwegian University of Science &, Alfred Getz Vei 2, Trondheim, 7491, Norway

    Richard Sinding-Larsen

  2. Rohstoffe (BGR), Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und, Stilleweg 2, Hannover, 30655, Germany

    Friedrich-W. Wellmer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Yellishetty, M., Haque, N., Dubreuil, A. (2012). Issues and Challenges in Life Cycle Assessment in the Minerals and Metals Sector: A Chance to Improve Raw Materials Efficiency. In: Sinding-Larsen, R., Wellmer, FW. (eds) Non-Renewable Resource Issues. International Year of Planet Earth. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8679-2_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation