Skip to main content

Introducing Life Cycle Assessment and its Presentation in ‘LCA Compendium’

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Background and Future Prospects in Life Cycle Assessment

Abstract

This chapter spans the time from the early days of Life Cycle Assessment—LCA (the time of the so-called ‘proto-LCAs’ between about 1970 and 1990), until recent trends of simplified/streamlined LCAs, the footprint specifications (carbon footprint, water footprint) and Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment—LCSA.

Important benchmarks along this span are the harmonisation of LCA by SETAC (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry) and the standardisation of LCA by ISO (International Standardisation Organisation).

The basic discussions within SETAC occurred between 1990 and 1993.

The first attempt to develop a suitable LCA-structure was achieved during the SETAC workshop ‘A Technical Framework for Life Cycle Assessments’ in August 1990, held in Smugglers Notch, Vermont, USA. The LCA-structure, the famous ‘SETAC triangle’, consisted of three components: Inventory—Impact Analysis—Improvement Analysis.

SETAC revised the framework during the Sesimbra workshop in 1993. It was the merit of SETAC to initiate a standardisation process which culminated in the ‘Guidelines for Life-Cycle Assessment: A Code of Practice’. The LCA-structure, again a triangle, now included four components: Goal Definition and Scoping—Inventory Analysis—Impact Assessment—Improvement Assessment.

This structure was only slightly modified by the ISO standardisation process: The fourth phase ‘Improvement Assessment’ (formerly ‘Improvement Analysis’) was replaced by ‘Interpretation’.

After the harmonisation of LCA by SETAC, the International Standardisation Process was soon initiated (Autumn 1993 in Paris), but it took seven years for the first series of LCA standards to be published (ISO 14040, ISO 14041, ISO 14042, ISO 14043).

The successful first series of ISO LCA standards superseded the SETAC ‘Code of Practice’, the Nordic guidelines and several national standards and became the uncontested model of an environmental life cycle standard. The series 14040 ff was revised once and condensed into two standards 14040 and 14044 (2006).

The four-phase structure was not altered

This chapter discusses the four phases of the LCA-structure by SETAC and ISO which are the subject of four volumes—Goal and Scope Definition in LCA; Life Cycle Inventory Analysis; Life Cycle Impact Assessment; Interpretation, Critical Review and Reporting. The remaining volumes follow a structure outside the ISO-framework: Applications of LCA, Special Types of LCA, Life Cycle Management, and Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment.

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

Access this chapter

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
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.

    A pre-guideline or framework of LCSA was published by UNEP/SETAC at the end of 2011. The final version has been published in 2012 at: http://lcinitiative.unep.fr. It contains the three-pillar equation:

    LCSA = LCA + LCC + SLCA

    (SLCA = Social LCA).

  2. 2.

    Upstream processes: toward the ‘cradle’, downstream processes: toward the ‘grave’.

  3. 3.

    Use phase: e.g. driving a car for a certain time; the use phase is the centre of most life cycles defined in LCA.

  4. 4.

    Product tree: the most common form of graphical presentation of product life cycles.

  5. 5.

    Supply chain: usual, but misleading (since suggesting linearity) designation of the upper part of a product tree or branches thereof; modern economies are characterised by a high degree of work-sharing.

  6. 6.

    The system boundary separates the system to be studied from the rest of the technosphere and the environment.

  7. 7.

    Eidgenössische Materialprüfungs- und –forschungsanstalt.

  8. 8.

    Without hyphen (ISO 1997, 2006a).

  9. 9.

    Personal communication by Dr. Manfred Marsmann, chair of ISO/TC 207 ‘Environmental Management’, SC 5 ‘Life Cycle Assessment’, see also (Marsmann 2000).

  10. 10.

    The international standards as the constitution of LCA: the ISO 14040 series and its offspring by Matthias Finkbeiner.

  11. 11.

    Centrum voor Milieukunde Leiden.

  12. 12.

    Stand-alone LCC as a purely economic method is older than LCA and has been used to calculate the true costs of long lived products—including the costs of the use and end-of-life phases in addition to the purchase.

  13. 13.

    The ‘reference flow’ is the translation of the verbally defined functional unit into technical terms.

  14. 14.

    Material Intensity Per Service unit (service unit = functional unit).

  15. 15.

    Cumulative Energy Demand.

  16. 16.

    Environmental Priority System.

  17. 17.

    As adjective: nachhaltig (German) → soutenu (French) → sustainable (English) (Grober 2010).

  18. 18.

    The international standards as the constitution of LCA: the ISO 14040 series and its offspring by Matthias Finkbeiner.

  19. 19.

    The UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative by Guido Sonnemann and Sonia Valdivia.

  20. 20.

    The international standards as the constitution of LCA: the ISO 14040 series and its offspring by Matthias Finkbeiner.

  21. 21.

    The international standards as the constitution of LCA: the ISO 14040 series and its offspring by Matthias Finkbeiner.

  22. 22.

    First conceived during the French revolution.

  23. 23.

    Birgit Grahl, private communication 2011.

References

  • Ahbe S, Braunschweig A, Müller-Wenk R (1990) Methodik für Oekobilanzen auf der Basis ökologischer Optimierung. In: Bern (ed) Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL). Schriftenreihe Umwelt no 133

    Google Scholar 

  • Baitz M, Brauner E, Albrecht S, Broadbent C, Castellan G, Conrath P, Fava J, Finkbeiner M, Fischer M, Fullana i Palmer P, Krinke S, Leroy C, Loebel O, McKeown P, Mersiowsky I, Möginger B, Pfaadt M, Rebitzer G, Rother E, Ruhland K, Schanssema A, Tikana L (2013) LCA‘s theory and practice: like ebony and ivory living in perfect harmony? Int J Life Cycle Ass 18(1):5–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnthouse L, Fava J, Humphreys K, Hunt R, Laibson L, Noesen S, Norris G, Owens J, Todd J, Vigon B, Weitz K, Young J (eds) (1988) Life-cycle impact assessment: the state-of-the-art. Report of the SETAC life-cycle assessment (LCA) impact assessment workgroup, 2nd edn. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoît C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U, Prakash S, Ugaya C, Beck T (2010) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Ass 15(2):156–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger M, Finkbeiner M (2010) Water footprinting: how to address water use in life cycle assessment? Sustainability 2:919–944. doi:10.3390/su2040919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blouet A, Rivoire E (1995) L’Écobilan. Les produits et leurs impacts sur l`environnement. Dunod, Paris (ISBN 2-10-002126-5)

    Google Scholar 

  • Boustead I (1993) Eco-profiles of the European plastics industry. Report 3: polyethylene and polypropylene. Report to the European centre for plastics in the environment (PWMI), Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Boustead I (1996) LCA—how it came about. The beginning in the UK. Int J Life Cycle Ass 1(3):147–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boustead I, Hancock GF (1979) Handbook of industrial energy analysis. Ellis Horwood Ltd, Chichester (Wiley, New York)

    Google Scholar 

  • BSI—British Standards Institution (ed) (2008) Publicly available specification (PAS) 2050:2008. Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services

    Google Scholar 

  • BUS—Bundesamt für Umweltschutz (ed) (1984) Oekobilanzen von Packstoffen. Schriftenreihe Umweltschutz no 24, Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • CALCAS, Zamagni A, Buttol P, Buonamici R, Masoni P, Guinée JB, Huppes G, Heijungs R, van der Voet E, Ekvall T, Rydberg T (2009) Co-ordination action for innovation in life-cycle analysis for sustainability. D20 Blue Paper on Life Cycle Sustainability Analysis. Revision 1 after the open consultation. http://www.estis.net

  • Carlowitz HC von (1713, 2000) Sylvicultura oeconomica. Anweisung zur wilden Baum-Zucht. Johann Friedrich Braun, Leipzig, (Reprint: TU Bergakademie Freiberg. ISBN 3-86012-115-4. Freiberg, Germany)

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen K (1997) Simplifying LCA: just a cut? Final report of the SETAC-Europe LCA screening and streamlining working group. Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciambrone DF (1997) Environmental life cycle analysis. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Fleischer G, Steinbach J (2004) Uncertainty calculation in life cycle assessments. A combined model of simulation and approximation. Int J Life Cycle Ass 9(4):216–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curran MA (ed) (1996) Environmental life-cycle assessment. McGraw-Hill, New York (ISBN 0-07-015063-X)

    Google Scholar 

  • Curran MA (2008) Development of life cycle assessment methodology: a focus on co-product allocation. PhD Thesis, Erasmus University

    Google Scholar 

  • Curran MA (ed) (2012, Nov) Life cycle assessment handbook: a guide for environmentally sustainable products. Wiley, 640 p (ISBN: 978-1-1180-9972-8; also available as e-book)

    Google Scholar 

  • Curran MA, Young S (1996) Report from the EPA conference on streamlining LCA. Int J Life Cycle Ass 1(1):57–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekvall T, Tillman A-M (1997) Open-loop recycling: criteria for allocation procedures. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2(3):155–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fava JA, Denison R, Jones B, Curran MA, Vigon B, Selke S, Barnum J (eds) (1991) SETAC workshop report: a technical framework for life cycle assessments. August 18–23 1990, Smugglers Notch, Vermont. SETAC, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink P (1997) LCA—how it came about. The roots of LCA in Switzerland: continuous learning by doing. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2(3):131–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M (2009) Carbon footprinting—opportunities and threats. Int J Life Cycle Ass 14(2):91–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M (2013) From the 40s to the 70s—the future of LCA in the 14000 family. Int J Life Cycle Ass 18(1):1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M, Matsuno Y (eds) (2000a) Special issue Japan. Int J Life Cycle Assess 5(5):253–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M, Matsuno Y (2000b) LCA in Japan—the past, the present, the future. Editorial Int J Life Cycle Ass 5(5):253–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M, Inaba A, Tan RBH, Christiansen K, Klüppel H-J (2006) The new international standards for life cycle assessment: ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. Int J Life Cycle Ass 11:80–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M, Schau EM, Lehmann A, Traverso M (2010) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability 2:3309–3322. doi:10.3390/su2103309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franke M (1983) Umweltauswirkungen durch Getränkeverpackungen: Systematik zur Ermittlung der Umweltauswirkungen von Prozessen am Beispiel von Einweg- und Mehrweg-Getränkebehältern. Dissertation, Technical University Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Frischknecht R, Steiner R, Jungbluth, N (2009) Methode der ökologischen Knappheit—Ökofaktoren 2006. Methode für die Wirkungsabschätzung in Ökobilanzen. Umwelt-Wissen Nr 0906. Bundesamt für Umwelt (BAFU) Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabathuler H (1997) The CML story. How environmental sciences entered the debate on LCA. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2(4):187–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grober U (2010) Die Entdeckung der Nachhaltigkeit. Kulturgeschichte eines Begriffs. Antje Kunstmann, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Habersatter K, Widmer F (1991) Oekobilanzen von Packstoffen. Stand 1990. In: Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL) (ed), Schriftenreihe Umwelt No 132, Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauschild M, Wenzel H (1998) Environmental assessment of products. scientific background, vol 2. Chapman & Hall, London (ISBN 0-412-80810-2)

    Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Frischknecht R (1998) On the nature of the allocation problem. A special view on the nature of the allocation problem. Int J Life Cycle Ass 3(6):321–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Suh S (2002) The computational structure of life cycle assessment. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, (ISBN 1-4020-0672-1)

    Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Suh S (2006) Reformulation of matrix-based LCI: from product balance to process balance. J Clean Prod 14(1):47–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Guinée JB, Huppes G, Lamkreijer RM, Udo de Haes HA, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Ansems AMM, Eggels PG, van Duin R, de Goede HP (1993) Environmental life cycle assessment of products. Guide (Part 1) and Backgrounds (Part 2). October 1992, prepared by CML, TNO and B & G. English Version Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Settanni E, Guinée J (2013) Toward a computational structure for life cycle sustainability analysis: unifying LCA and LCC. Int J Life Cycle Ass 18(9):1722–1733, doi: 10.1007/s11367-012-0461-4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heintz B, Baisnée P-F (1992) System boundaries. In: SETAC-Europe (ed) Life-cycle assessment. Workshop Report, 2–3 December, Leiden 1991. Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochschorner E, Finnveden G (2003) Evaluation of two simplified life cycle assessment methods. Int J Life Cycle Ass 8(2):119–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hunkeler D (2006) Societal LCA methodology and case study. Int J Life Cycle Ass 11(7):371–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunkeler D, Yasui I, Yamamoto R (1998) LCA in Japan: policy and progress. Int J Life Cycle Ass 3(3):124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunkeler D, Lichtenvort K, Rebitzer G (eds) (2008) Environmental life cycle costing. CRC Press, SETAC, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt R, Franklin WE (1996) LCA—how it came about. Personal reflections on the origin and the development of LCA in the USA. Int J Life Cycle Ass 1(1):4–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt RG, Sellers JD, Franklin WE (1992) Resource and environmental profile analysis: a life cycle environmental assessment for products and procedures. Environ Impact Asses Rev 12:245–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt RG, Boguski TK, Weitz K, Sharma A (1998) Case studies examining streamlining techniques. Int J Life Cycle Ass 3(1):36–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huppes G, Schneider F (eds) (1994) Proceedings of the European workshop on allocation in LCA. Under the auspices of SETAC-Europe. Leiden, (ISBN 90-5191-078-9)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (1981) International Standard Organization: SI units and recommendations for the use of their multiples and of certain other units, 2nd edn. ISO, Geneva, (1000:1981)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (1997) International Standard Organization: environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. ISO, Geneva, (14040:1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (1998) International Standard Organisation: environmental management—life cycle assessment—goal and scope definition and inventory analysis. ISO, Geneva, (14041:1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 14042 (2000a) International Standard Organisation: environmental management—life cycle assessment—life cycle impact assessment. ISO, Geneva, (14042:2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2000b): International Standard Organisation: environmental management—life cycle assessment—interpretation. ISO, Geneva, (14043:2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2006a) International Standard Organization: environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. ISO, Geneva, (14040:2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2006b) International Standard Organisation: environmental management—life cycle assessment: requirements and guidelines. ISO, Geneva, (14044:2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2006c) International Standard Organisation: environmental management—environmental labels and declarations—Type III environmental declarations—principles and procedures ISO, Geneva (14025)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2013) International Standard Organisation: carbon footprint of products—requirements and guidelines for quantification and communication ISO/DIS, Geneva, (14067)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2012) International Standard Organisation ISO/TC 207/SC5/WG7: environmental management—eco-efficiency assessment of product systems—principles, requirements and guidelines ISO, Geneva (14045)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen AA (2007) The LCM conferences—how they came about. Int J Life Cycle Ass 12 (Suppl 1):2–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen AA, Postlethwaite D (2008) SETAC Europe LCA steering committee—the early years. Int J Life Cycle Ass 13(1):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kicherer A, Schaltegger S, Tschochohei H, Ferreira Pozo B (2007).: Eco-efficiency. Combining life cycle assessment and life cycle costs via normalization. Int J Life Cycle Ass 12(7):537–543

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (1989) Von der Emotion zur Ökobilanz. (Balancing reality and emotional response in relevant environmental issues). The Rudolf Wild International Seminars 1989. Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (1998a) Ciambrone DF (1997) Environmental life cycle analysis. Book review Int J Life Cycle Ass 3(5):280, (ISBN 1-56670-214–3)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (1998b) Subjective is not arbitrary. Editorial. Int J Life Cycle Ass 3(2):61–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (2003) Life-cycle based methods for sustainable product development. Int J Life Cycle Ass 8(3):157–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (2006) The role of SETAC in the development of LCA. Int J Life Cycle Ass 11 (Suppl 1):116–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (2007) Publishing scientific articles with special reference to LCA and related topics. Int J Life Cycle Ass 12(2):71–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (2008) Life-cycle based sustainability assessment of products. Int J Life Cycle Ass 13(2):89–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (2012) The critical review of life cycle assessment studies according to ISO 14040 and 14044: origin, purpose and practical performance. Int J Life Cycle Ass 17(9):1087–1093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W, Heinrich AB (2001) Two planets and one journal. Editorial. Int J Life Cycle Ass 6(1):1–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W, Grahl B (2009) Ökobilanz (LCA)—Ein Leitfaden für Ausbildung und Beruf. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim

    Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W, Grahl B (2014) Life cycle assessment (LCA)—a guide to best practice. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lecouls H (1999) ISO 14043: environmental management—life cycle assessment—life cycle interpretation. Int J Life Cycle Ass 4(5):245

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundholm M P, Sundström G (1985) Ressourcen und Umweltbeeinflussung. Tetrabrik Aseptic Kartonpackungen sowie Pfandflaschen und Einwegflaschen aus Glas. Malmö

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsmann M (1997) ISO 14040—the first project. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2(3):122–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsmann M (2000) The ISO 14040 family. Int J Life Cycle Ass 5(6):317–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wenk R (1978) Die ökologische Buchhaltung. Ein Informations- und Steuerungsinstrument für umweltkonforme Unternehmenspolitik. Campus, Frankfurt am Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberbacher B (1975) Ökologischer Nutzwert der Einwegflasche. Ein systemanalytischer Ansatz. Müll und Abfall Nr 8:234–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberbacher B, Nikodem H, Klöpffer W (1996) LCA—how it came about. An early systems analysis of packaging for liquids which would be called an LCA today. Int J Life Cycle Ass 1(2):62–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1934, 1959) Logik der Forschung. Springer, Wien 1934. 1st English edn: the logic of scientific discovery. Hutchison, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Potting J, Hauschild MZ (2006) Spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment—a decade of method development to increase the environmental realism of LCIA. Int J Life Cycle Ass 11(Suppl 1):11–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Remmen A, Jensen AA, Frydendal J (2007) The triple bottom line—the business case of sustainability. In: Life Cycle Management. A Business Guide to Sustainability. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. pp 10–11 (ISBN 978-92-807-2772-2)

    Google Scholar 

  • Saling P, Kicherer A, Dittrich-Krämer B, Wittlinger R, Zombik W, Schmidt I, Schrott W, Schmidt S (2002) Eco-efficiency analysis by BASF: the method. Int J Life Cycle Ass 7(4):203–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-Bleek F (1994) Wieviel Umwelt braucht der Mensch? MIPS—Das Maß für ökologisches Wirtschaften. Birkhäuser Verlag, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • SETAC-Europe (ed) (1992) Life-cycle assessment. workshop report, 2–3 December, Leiden 1991, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • SETAC-Europe (2011) Annual meeting in Milano. Founding session of an ecological footprint working group

    Google Scholar 

  • SETAC—Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (1993) Guidelines for life-cycle assessment: a ‘Code of Practice’. From the SETAC workshop held at Sesimbra, Portugal 31 March–3 April 1993. Brussels and Pensacola, Florida

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinden G (2009) The contribution of PAS 2050 to the evolution of international greenhouse gas emission standards. Int J Life Cycle Ass 14(3):195–203

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sonnemann G, Vigon B (eds) (2011) Global guidance principles for life cycle assessment databases—‘Shonan Guiding Principles’. 156 pp. ISBN: 978-92-807-3174-3. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, Paris http://lcinitiative.unep.fr

  • Steen B, Ryding S-O (1992) The EPS enviro-accounting method. IVL Report, Göteborg 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh S (2003) Input-output and hybrid life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Ass 8(5):257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swarr T, Hunkeler D, Klöpffer W, Pesonen H-L, Ciroth A, Brent A, Pagan B (2011) Environmental life cycle costing: a code of practice. SETAC Press, Pensacola

    Google Scholar 

  • Töpfer K (2002) The launch of the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative (Prague, April 28 2002). Int J Life Cycle Ass 7:191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UBA (1999) Schmitz S, Paulini I (eds) Bewertung in Ökobilanzen. Methode des Umweltbundesamtes zur Normierung von Wirkungsindikatoren, Ordnung (Rangbildung) von Wirkungskategorien und zur Auswertung nach ISO 14042 und 14043. Version `99. UBA Texte 92/99, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Udo de Haes HA, Jolliet O, Finnveden G, Hauschild M, Krewitt W, Müller-Wenk R (1999a) Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment. Part 1. Int J Life Cycle Ass 4(2):66–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udo de Haes HA, Jolliet O, Finnveden G, Hauschild M, Krewitt W, Müller-Wenk R (1999b) Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment. Part 2. Int J Life Cycle Ass 4(3):167–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udo de Haes HA, Finnveden G, Goedkoop M, Hauschild M, Hertwich EG, Hofstetter P, Jolliet O, Klöpffer W, Krewitt W, Lindeijer E, Müller-Wenk R, Olsen SI, Pennington DW, Potting J, Steen B (eds) (2002) Life-cycle impact assessment: striving towards best practice. SETAC Press, Pensacola, (ISBN 1-880611-54-6)

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP/SETAC (2007) Life cycle management. a business guide to sustainability. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. Paris, (ISBN 978-92-807-2772-2)

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP/SETAC (2009) Benoît C, Mazijn B (eds) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. Paris. 104 p. http://lcinitiative.unep.fr

  • Valdivia S, Ugaya CML, Sonnemann G, Hildenbrand J (eds) (2011) Towards a life cycle sustainability assessment. Making informed choices on products. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, Paris (ISBN: 978-92-807-3175-0)

    Google Scholar 

  • Weidema B (2000) Avoiding co-product allocation in life-cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 4(3):11–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weitz KA, Todd JA, Curran MA, Malkin MJ (1996) Streamlining life cycle assessment. Considerations and a report on the state of practice. Int J Life Cycle Ass 1(2):79–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel H, Hauschild M, Alting L (1997) Environmental assessment of products, vol 1: methodology, tools and case studies in product development. Chapman & Hall, London, (ISBN 0-412-80800-5)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our common future (The Brundtland Report), Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Wrisberg N, Udo de Haes HA, Triebswetter U, Eder P, Clift R (eds) (2002) Analytical tools for environmental design and management in a systems perspective. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walter Klöpffer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix—Glossary

Appendix—Glossary

Cradle-to-grave analysis

All important steps in the life cycle of a product are included in the analysis (extraction of raw materials from the environment (soil, water, air), the production of materials, the final products, their use and waste removal or recycling)

Downstream process

Toward the ‘grave’

Footprint studies

Footprint studies are no full LCAs (see simplified/ streamlined LCA). They mostly contain only one impact category: ‘Carbon footprint’ = Global Warming Potential. The ‘water footprint’ can be integrated into LCIA as an impact category belonging to resource use

Functional unit

The basis of comparison of product systems (goods and services) if they provide the same or a very similar function

Life cycle sustainability assessment—LCSA

In life cycle product assessment, LCA deals with the environmental aspects only. In order to give the full picture, however, an economic and a social life cycle assessment have to be added to the environmental one

In the ‘three pillar’ interpretation of sustainability, environmental, economic and social aspects have to be considered and weighted against each other

LCSA = LCA + LCC + SLCA

LCSA: Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

LCA: (environmental) Life Cycle Assessment

LCC: (environmental) Life Cycle Costing

SLCA: Social Life Cycle Assessment

Product tree

The most common form of graphical presentation of product life cycles

proto-LCAs

The early LCAs before harmonisation (SETAC) and standardisation (ISO).

SETAC triangle

Model of the phases (components) of an LCA. The first SETAC triangle was developed at the SETAC workshop ‘A Technical Framework for Life Cycle Assessments’ in August 1990, Smugglers Notch, Vermont and consisted of three components: Inventory, Impact Analysis, Improvement Analysis. The SETAC triangle 1992 (Sandestin workshop) and 1993 (Sesimbra workshop) consisted of four components: Goal Definition and Scoping, Inventory Analysis, Impact Assessment and Improvement Assessment. In the course of the ISO standardization process ‘Improvement assessment’ was replaced by ‘Interpretation’

Simplified LCA/Streamlined LCA

In 1994 the LCA Steering Committee of SETAC Europe established the Workgroup Screening and Streamlining. In the same year, the SETAC North America workgroup on Streamlining LCA was initiated. Both groups concluded their multi-year efforts on the issue of Simplifying/Streamlining by a report in each case. The approaches of the reports are different

1. The report of SETAC Europe discusses the methods for producing simplified procedures, commonly described as screening LCA studies, streamlined LCA studies and simplified LCA studies

2. The report of SETAC North America is more a description of carefully planning and stating an LCA’s goal than it is about Streamlined LCA methodology.

Simplified LCA

Simplified LCA is an application of the LCA methodology for a comprehensive screening assessment. A simplified LCA should cover three steps which are iteratively interlinked:

1. Screening: identifying those parts of the system (life cycle) or of the elementary flows that are either important or have data gaps.

2. Simplifying: using the findings of Screening in order to focus further work on the important parts of the system or of the elementary flows.

3. Assessing reliability: checking that simplifying does not significantly reduce the reliability of the overall result.

Simplifying methods can reduce the complexity of an LCA and so reduce the cost, time and effort required, by exclusion of certain life cycle stages, system inputs or outputs or impact categories, or use of generic data modules for the system under study

Streamlined LCA

Identification of elements of an LCA that can be omitted or where surrogate or generic data can be used without significantly affecting the accuracy of the results

Streamlining LCA is a practice to make a detailed/full LCA more manageable. Streamlining LCA can be achieved in a number of ways, including:

–Limiting the scope in terms of time, cost, data, analytical approach: for example, eliminating life cycle phases deemed not significant, or processes with negligible effect on the environment;

–Use of qualitative information;

–Removal of upstream and/or downstream components;

–Use of specific impact category.

Supply chain

Usual, but misleading (since suggesting linearity) designation of the upper part of a product tree or branches thereof

System boundary

The system boundary separates the system to be studied from the rest of the technosphere and the environment

Unit process

The smallest unit for which data are available.

Upstream process

Toward the ‘cradle’.

Use phase

The use phase is the centre of most life cycles defined in LCA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Klöpffer, W. (2014). Introducing Life Cycle Assessment and its Presentation in ‘LCA Compendium’. In: Klöpffer, W. (eds) Background and Future Prospects in Life Cycle Assessment. LCA Compendium – The Complete World of Life Cycle Assessment. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8697-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics