Life cycle assessment of light-emitting diode downlight luminaire—a case study

  • Leena TähkämöEmail author
  • Manuel Bazzana
  • Pierre Ravel
  • Francis Grannec
  • Christophe Martinsons
  • Georges Zissis



Light-emitting diode (LED) technology is increasingly being used for general lighting. Thus, it is timely to study the environmental impacts of LED products. No life cycle assessments (LCA) of recessed LED downlight luminaires exist in the literature, and only a few assessments of any type of LED light source (component, lamp and luminaire) are available.


The LCA of a recessed LED downlight luminaire was conducted by using the data from the luminaire manufacturer, laboratory measurements, industry experts and literature. The assessment was conducted using SimaPro LCA software. EcoInvent and European Reference Life Cycle Database were used as the databases. The LCA included a range of environmental impacts in order to obtain a broad overview. The functional unit of the LCA was one luminaire used for 50,000 h. In addition, the sensitivity of the environmental impacts to the life was studied by assessing the LED downlight luminaire of 36,000 h and 15,000 h useful life and to the used energy sources by calculating the environmental impacts using two average energy mixes: French and European.

Results and discussion

The environmental impacts of the LED luminaire were mostly dominated by the energy consumption of the use. However, manufacturing caused approximately 23 % of the environmental impacts, on average. The environmental impacts of manufacturing were mainly due to the driver, LED array and aluminium parts. The installation, transport and end of life had nearly no effect on the total life cycle impacts, except for the end of life in hazardous waste. The life cycle environmental impacts were found to be sensitive to the life of the luminaire. The change from the French to the European average energy mix in use resulted to an even clearer dominance of the use stage.


The case study showed that the environmental impacts of the LED downlight luminaire were dominated by the use-stage energy consumption, especially in the case of the European energy mix in use. Luminous efficacy is, thus, a relatively appropriate environmental indicator of the luminaire. As LED technology possesses generally higher luminous efficacy compared to conventional ones, the LED luminaire is considered to represent an environmentally friendly lighting technology. However, data gaps exist in the data in LED product manufacturing and its environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of different LED products need to be analysed in order to be able to precisely compare the LED technology to the conventional lighting technologies.


Environmental impact Life cycle assessment Light-emitting diode Light source Lighting Luminaire 



The work is part of the Citadel research project carried out by CSTB (Centre Scientifique et Technique du Bâtiment) in Grenoble in collaboration with LAPLACE (Laboratory on Plasma and Conversion of Energy) in University Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, and other French laboratories. This project is funded by ADEME, the French Agency for the Environment and Energy Management. In addition, the work is funded by the doctoral program in electrical energy engineering (DPEEE) in Finland.


  1. Aalto University (2010) Guidebook on energy efficient electric lighting for buildings. Aalto University School of Science and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  2. Association P.E.P. (2011) PCR Règles de définition des catégories des produitsGoogle Scholar
  3. AIMCC (French Construction Products Manufacturers' Association) (2009) Vademecum pour la réalisation des analyses de cycle de vie (AVC) dans le cadre de l'élaboration des fiches de déclaration environnementale et sanitaire (FDE&S) des produits de constructionGoogle Scholar
  4. Dale A, Bilec M, Marriot J et al (2011) Preliminary comparative life-cycle impacts of streetlight technology. J Infrastruct Syst 17:193–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. EC (European Commission) (2011) Commission Staff Working Paper, Digital Agenda Scoreboard, SEC (2011) 708Google Scholar
  6. EC, JRC (Joint Research Centre) (2008) European Reference Life Cycle Database (ELCD), version 2.0. Accessed 21 Mar 2012
  7. Ecoinvent (2010) database version 2.2Google Scholar
  8. EN 15193 (2007) Energy performance of buildings—energy requirements for lightingGoogle Scholar
  9. Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R et al (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment, operational guide to the ISO standards. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  10. IEA (2006) Light's labour's los. Policies for energy-efficient lighting. IEA, ParisCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. IESNA (Illuminating Engineering Society of North America) (2008) LM-80-08, Measuring lumen maintenance of LED light sourcesGoogle Scholar
  12. ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and frameworkGoogle Scholar
  13. ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelinesGoogle Scholar
  14. Lim SR, Kang D, Ogunseitan OA et al (2011) Potential environmental impacts of light-emitting diodes (LEDs): metallic resources, toxicity, and hazardous waste classification. Environ Sci Technol 45:320–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Martinsons C (2009a) CITADEL lighting program targets LED longevity, optoElectronics Reports, March 15, 2009Google Scholar
  16. Martinsons C (2009b) Lighting enters the nanotechnologies era, CSTB online journal, February 2009. Accessed 3 Aug 2012
  17. Martinsons C (2010) Latest results of the Citadel Project, Proc. ForumLED conference, Lyon, France, December 2010Google Scholar
  18. Navigant Consulting Europe Ltd. (2009) Life cycle assessment of ultra-efficient lamps. DEFRAGoogle Scholar
  19. NF P01-010 (2004) Environmental quality of construction products—environmental and health declaration of construction productsGoogle Scholar
  20. Osram (2009) Life cycle assessment of illuminants—a comparison of light bulbs, compact fluorescent lamps and LED lamps, OSRAM Opto Semiconductors GmbHGoogle Scholar
  21. Pradal N, Chadeyron G, Potdevin A, Deschamps J, Mahou R (2012) Study of ce-doped Y3Al5O12 nanopowders dispersion. submitted to ChemPhysChemGoogle Scholar
  22. PRé Consultants (2012) SimaPro LCA software, version 7.3.2Google Scholar
  23. Quirk I (2009) Life-cycle assessment and policy implications of energy efficient lighting technologies. University of CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  24. US DOE (2012a) Life-cycle assessment of energy and environmental impacts of LED lighting products—part 1: review of the life-cycle energy consumption of incandescent, compact fluorescent, and LED lamps. February 2012. US Department of EnergyGoogle Scholar
  25. US DOE (2012b). Life-cycle assessment of energy and environmental impacts of LED lighting products—part 2: LED manufacturing and performance. June 2012. US Department of EnergyGoogle Scholar
  26. XP P01-020-3 (2009) Environmental quality of construction products and buildings—part 3: evaluation of environmental performances of a buildingGoogle Scholar
  27. ZVEI (German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers' Association) (2012) Umbrella specification. Accessed 26 Mar 2012

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leena Tähkämö
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Manuel Bazzana
    • 3
  • Pierre Ravel
    • 3
  • Francis Grannec
    • 3
  • Christophe Martinsons
    • 3
  • Georges Zissis
    • 2
  1. 1.Lighting Unit, School of Electrical EngineeringAalto UniversityAaltoFinland
  2. 2.Université de Toulouse, LAPLACE (Laboratoire Plasma et Conversion d’Energie), UMR 5213 CNRS-INPT-UPSToulouseFrance
  3. 3.CSTB (Centre Scientifique et Technique du Bâtiment)Saint Martin d’Heres, GrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations