Inclusion of soil erosion impacts in life cycle assessment on a global scale: application to energy crops in Spain
Despite the fundamental role of ecosystem goods and services in sustaining human activities, there is no harmonized and internationally agreed method for including them in life cycle assessment (LCA). The main goal of this study was to develop a globally applicable and spatially resolved method for assessing land use impacts on the erosion regulation ecosystem service.
Soil erosion depends much on location. Thus, unlike conventional LCA, the endpoint method was regionalized at the grid cell level (5 arcmin, approximately 10 × 10 km2) to reflect the spatial conditions of the site. Spatially explicit characterization factors were not further aggregated at broader spatial scales.
Results and discussion
Life cycle inventory data of topsoil and topsoil organic carbon (SOC) losses were interpreted at the endpoint level in terms of the ultimate damage to soil resources and ecosystem quality. Human health damages were excluded from the assessment. The method was tested on a case study of five 3-year agricultural rotations, two of them with energy crops, grown in several locations in Spain. A large variation in soil and SOC losses was recorded in the inventory step, depending on climatic and edaphic conditions. The importance of using a spatially explicit model and characterization factors is shown in the case study.
The regionalized assessment takes into account the differences in soil erosion-related environmental impacts caused by the great variability of soils. Taking this regionalized framework as the starting point, further research should focus on testing the applicability of the method through the complete life cycle of a product and on determining an appropriate spatial scale at which to aggregate characterization factors in order to deal with data gaps on the location of processes, especially in the background system. Additional research should also focus on improving the reliability of the method by quantifying and, insofar as it is possible, reducing uncertainty.
KeywordsEcosystem services Land use impacts Regionalized life cycle impact assessment Soil organic carbon Soil loss
This work was carried out within the framework of the national and strategic On Cultivos Project, funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and the European Regional Development Fund, and the LC-IMPACT project—Improved Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods (LCIA) for Better Sustainability Assessment of Technologies (grant agreement no. 243827), funded by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme on the Environment, ENV.2009.3.3.2.1. We would like to thank the staff at IRTA-Experimental Station Mas Badia Foundation (Spain) and Dr. Asunción Usón for their help with the case study.
- Beck T, Boss U, Wittstock B, Baitz M, Fischer M, Sedlbauer K (2010) LANCA©. Land use indicator value calculation in life cycle assessment. University of Stuttgart, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- Brandão M, Milà i Canals L (2012) Global characterisation factors to assess land use impacts on biotic production. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-012-0381-3
- COM, Commission of the European Communities (2002) Towards a thematic strategy for soil protection. COM 179. 16/04/2002. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2002:0179:FIN:EN:PDF. Accessed 9 January 2012
- Dregne HE, Chou NT (1992) Global desertification dimensions and costs. In: Dregne HE (ed) Degradation and restoration of arid lands. Texas Tech University, Lubbock, pp 249–282Google Scholar
- EEA (2005) Agriculture and environment in EU-15. The IRENA indicator report no. 6. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark. http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/eea_report_2005_6. Accessed 20 September 2011
- EEA (2006) How much bioenergy can Europe produce without harming the environment? Report no. 7. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark. http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/eea_report_2006_7. Accessed 9 January 2012
- FAO, UNESCO, ISRIC (1990) Revised legend of the soil map of the world. World Soil Resources Report, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
- FAO, IIASA, ISRIC, ISSCAS, JRC (2009) Harmonized world soil database (version 1.1). http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/External-World-soil-database/HTML/index.html?sb=20. Accessed 15 October 2011
- FAO/UNEP (1984) Provisional methodology for assessment and mapping of desertification. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. United Nations Environmental Programme, RomeGoogle Scholar
- FAO/UNESCO (2007) Effective soil depth raster map. http://www.fao.org/geonetwork/srv/en/main.home. Accessed 2 November 2011
- Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Althaus HJ, Doka G, Dones R, Hischier R et al (2007) Overview and methodology. Final report ecoinvent data v2.0, no. 1. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, DübendorfGoogle Scholar
- Gobin A, Govers G (2003) Pan European soil erosion risk assessment. 3rd Annual Report. EU 5th Framework Programme, project no. QLK5-CT-1999-01323Google Scholar
- Goedkoop M, Spriensma R (2001) The Eco-indicator 99. A damage oriented method for life cycle impact assessment: methodology report, 3rd edn. Amersfoort, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, De Schryver A, Struijts J, van Zelm R (2009) ReCiPe 2008, 1st edn. the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- Jenny H (1994) Factors of soil formation. A system of quantitative pedology. Dover Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- JRC (2010) ILCD Handbook. Framework and requirements for life cycle impact assessment models and indicators. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, IspraGoogle Scholar
- Koellner T, Scholz R (2008) Assessment of land use impacts on the natural environment. Part 2: generic characterization factors for local species diversity in Central Europe. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(1):32–48Google Scholar
- Koellner T, Baan L, Beck T, Brandao M, Civit B, Goedkoop M, Margni M, Milà i Canals L, Müller-Wenk R, Weidema B, Wittstock B (2012) Principles for life cycle inventories of land use on a global scale. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-012-0392-0
- Le Bissonais Y, Thorette J, Bardet C, Daroussin J (2002) L’erosion hydrique du sols en France. Technical Report, INRA et IFENGoogle Scholar
- MERMA (2012) Soil erosion map. Spanish Ministry of the Environment and Rural and Marine Affairs. http://www.marm.es/es/biodiversidad/servicios/banco-de-datos-biodiversidad/informacion-disponible/descargar_mapa_perdidas_suelo.aspx. Accessed 9 January 2012
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Mokma DL, Sietz MA (1992) Effects of soil erosion on corn yields on Marlette soils in south-central Michigan. J Soil Water Conserv 47(4):325–327Google Scholar
- Morgan RPC (1992) Soil erosion in the northern countries of the European Community. EIW Workshop Elaboration of a framework of a code of good agricultural practices. Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
- Muys B, García Quijano J (2002) A new method for land use impact assessment in LCA based on ecosystem exergy concept. Internal report. Laboratory for Forest, and Landscape Research, Leuven, Belgium. http://www.biw.kuleuven.be/lbh/lbnl/forecoman/pdf/land%20use%20method4.pdf. Accessed 9 January 9 2012
- Odum HT (1996) Environmental accounting: emergy and environmental decision making. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Reich P, Eswaran H, Beinroth F (2001) Global dimensions of vulnerability to wind and water erosion. In: Stott DE, Mohtar RH, Steinhardt GC (eds) Sustaining the global farm. Selected papers from the 10th International Soil Conservation Organization Meeting 24–29 May 1999, Perdue University and USDA-ARS National Soil Erosion Research Laboratory, United States, pp 838–846Google Scholar
- Renard KG, Foster GR, Weesies GA, Mc Cool DK, Yoder DC (1997) Predicting soil erosion by water: a guide to conservation planning with the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Agricultural Handbook no. 703. Department of Agriculture, USAGoogle Scholar
- UNEP (2003) Evaluation of environmental impacts in life cycle assessment. Meeting report. Brussels, 29–30 November 1998, and Brighton, 25–26 May 2000, United Nations Environment Programme, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, Production and Consumption BranchGoogle Scholar
- Weidema BP, Bauer C, Hischier R, Mutel C, Nemecek T, Vadenbo CO et al (2011) Overview and methodology. Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3 (final draft_revision 1). Ecoinvent Report 1 (v3). The Ecoinvent Centre, St. GallenGoogle Scholar
- Williams JR, Izaurralde RC (2005) The APEX model. BRC report no. 2005-02. Texas A&M University, Texas Agricultural Extension Service, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Blacklands Research Center, Temple, USAGoogle Scholar
- Williams JR, Jones CA, Dyke PT (1984) A modeling approach to determining the relationship between erosion and soil productivity. Trans ASAE 27(1):129–144Google Scholar
- Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1978) Predicting rainfall erosion losses—a guide to conservation planning. Agricultural Handbook no. 537. Department of Agriculture, USAGoogle Scholar