Application of uncertainty and variability in LCA

  • Mark A. J. Huijbregts
LCA methodology

Abstract

As yet, the application of an uncertainty and variability analysis is not common practice in LCAs. A proper analysis will be facilitated when it is clear which types of uncertainties and variabilities exist in LCAs and which tools are available to deal with them. Therefore, a framework is developed to classify types of uncertainty and variability in LCAs. Uncertainty is divided in (1) parameter uncertainty, (2) model uncertainty, and (3) uncertainty due to choices, while variability covers (4) spatial variability, (5) temporal variability, and (6) variability between objects and sources. A tool to deal with parameter uncertainty and variability between objects and sources in both the inventory and the impact assessment is probabilistic simulation. Uncertainty due to choices can be dealt with in a scenario analysis or reduced by standardisation and peer review. The feasibility of dealing with temporal and spatial variability is limited, implying model uncertainty in LCAs. Other model uncertainties can be reduced partly by more sophisticated modelling, such as the use of non-linear inventory models in the inventory and multi media models in the characterisation phase.

Keywords

Framework parameter uncertainty LCA LCA parameter uncertainty Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) parameter uncertainty model uncertainty LCA parameter uncertainty LCA uncertainty LCA uncertainty importance analysis variability parameter uncertainty LCA 

References

  1. Albritton, D., R. Derwent, I. Isaksen, M. Lal &D. Wuebblk (1996): Trace gas radiative forcing indices. In:Houghton, J.T., L.G. Meira Filho, B.A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg &K. Maskell. Climate change 1995: the science of climate change. University Press, Cambridge, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson-Sköld, Y., P. Grennfelt &K. Pleijel (1992): Photochemical ozone creation potentials: a study of different concepts. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 42 (9): 1152–1158Google Scholar
  3. Beccali, G., M. Beccali amp:M. Cellura (1997): Fuzzy set application in life cycle inventory of building materials. Paper. Building and the Environment: Proceedings of the Second International Conference. Volume 1: Assessment methods and natural resources. Centre Scientifique et Technique du Bâtiment, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  4. Boustead, I. (1993): Eco-profiles of the European plastics industry. Report 3: polyethylene and polypropylene. A report for the European Centre for Plastics in the Environment (PWMI), Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  5. Bretz, R. &P. Frankhauser (1996): Screening LCA for large number of products: estimation tools to fill data gaps. Int. J. LCA 1 (3): 139–146Google Scholar
  6. Chevalier, J.L. &J.F. Le Téno (1996): Life cycle analysis with illdefined data and its application to building products. Int. J. LCA 1 (2): 90–96Google Scholar
  7. Decisioneering Inc. (1996): Crystal Ball version 4.0. Forecasting and risk analysis for spreadsheet users. Denver, Colorado, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. Funtowics, S.O. &J.R. Ravetz (1990): Uncertainty and quality in science for policy. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  9. Guinée, J.,R. Heijungs,L. van Oers,D. van de Meent,T. Vermeire &M. Rikken (1996): LCA impact assessment of toxic releases. Generic modelling of fate, exposure and effect for ecosystems and human beings with data for about 100 chemicals. Publication serie: Product policy 1996/21. Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment, The Hague, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. Hanssen, O.J. &O.A. Asbjørnsen (1996): Statistical properties of emission data in life cycle assessments. J. Cleaner Prod. 4 (3-4): 149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heijungs, R.,J.B. Guinee,G. Huppes,R.M. Lankreijer,H.A. Udo de Haes,A. Wegener Sleeswijk,A.M.M. Ansems,A.M.M. Eggels,R. van Duin & H.P. de Goede (1992): Environmental life cycle assessment of products. Guidelines and backgrounds. Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  12. Heijungs, R. (1996): Identification of key issues for further investigation in improving the reliability of life cycle assessments. J. Cleaner Prod. 4 (3-4): 159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hoffman, L. B.P. Weidema, K. Kristiansen &A.K. Ersbøll (1995): Statistical analysis and uncertainties in relation to LCA. Special reports no. 1. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  14. Huijbregts, M.A.J. (1998): Application of uncertainty and variability in LCA. Part II: Dealing with parameter uncertainty and uncertainty due to choices in life cycle assessments. Int. J. LCA, in pressGoogle Scholar
  15. ISO (1997a): Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Principles and framework. ISO/FDIS 14040Google Scholar
  16. ISO (1997b): Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Goal and scope definition and inventory analysis. ISO/FDIS 14041Google Scholar
  17. ISO (1997c): Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — part 3: Life cycle impact assessment. ISO/CD 14042.3Google Scholar
  18. ISO (1997d): Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Life cycle interpretation. ISO/CD 14043.2Google Scholar
  19. Janssen, P.H.M., W. Slob &J. Rotmans (1990): Gevoeligheid-sanalyse en onzekerheidsanalyse: een inventarisatie van idee#x00EB;n, methoden en technieken. Rapport no. 958805001. Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieuhygiëne, Bilthoven, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  20. Kennedy, D.J., D.C. Montgomery &B.H. Quay (1996): Data quality. Stochastic environmental life cycle assessment modelling. A probabilistic approach to incorporating variable input data quality. Int. J. LCA 1 (4): 199–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kortman, J.G.M., R G. Eccels, G. Huppes, L. van Oers, E.W. Lindeijer, B.L. van der Ven &J.B. Guinêe (1996): Inschatting milieu-effecten van de afdankfase van langcyclische produkten. SPA Programma rapportnr. 96.005. Rijksinstituut voor Integraal Zoetwaterbeheer en Afvalwaterbehandeling Werkdocument nr. 96.155x. Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  22. Lindfors, L.-G.,K. Christiansen,L. Hoffman,Y. Virtanen,V. Juntilla,O.-J. Hanssen,A. Rønning &T. Ekvali. (1995a): Technical reports no. 1-10. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  23. Lindfors, L.-G.,K. Christiansen,L. Hoffman,Y. Virtanen,V. Juntilla,O.-J. Hanssen,A. Running &T. Ekvali. (1995b): Nordic guidelines on life-cycle assessment. Nordic Council of Ministers, Nord 1995: 20, Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  24. Lindeijer, E. (1996): Normalisation and valuation. In:H.A. Udo de Haes (ed.), Towards a methodology for life cycle impact assessment. SETAC-Europe, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  25. Morgan, M.G. &M. Henrion (1990): A guide to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and policy analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  26. Nichols, P., M. Hauschild, J. Potting &P. White (1996): Impact assessment of non toxic pollution in life cycle assessment. In:H.A. Udo de Haes (ed.), Towards a methodology for life cycle impact assessment. SETAC-Europe, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  27. Owens, J.W. (1996): LCA impact assessment categories: technical feasibility and accuracy. Int. J. LCA 1 (3): 151–158Google Scholar
  28. Petersen, E.H. (1997): Life-cycle assessment of building components. Handling uncertainties in LCAs. Paper. Building and the Environment: Proceedings of the Second International Conference. Volume 1: Assessment methods and natural resources. Centre Scientifique et Technique du Bâtiment, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  29. Potting, J. &K. Blok (1994): Spatial aspect of life-cycle impact assessment. In:H.A. Udo de Haes, A.A. Jensen, W. Klöpffer &L.-G. Lindfors (eds.), Integrating impact assessment in LCA, Proceedings of the LCA symposium held at the Fourth SETAC- Europe Congress, 11-14 April 1994, Free University of Brussels (Belgium), SETAC-Europe, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  30. Potting, J., W. Schöpp, K. Blok &M. Hauschild (1997): Site-dependent life cycle impact assessment of acidification. In:B.J.M. Ale, M.P.M. Janssen &M.J.M. Pruppers (eds.), Mapping Environmental Risks in Risk Comparison, Book of papers of the International Conference RISK 97, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  31. Powell, J.C., D.W. Pearce &A.L. Craighill (1997): Approaches to valuation in LCA impact assessment. Int. J. LCA 2(1): 11–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Singhofen, A., C.R. Hemming, B.P. Weidema, L. Grisel, R. Bretz, B. de Smet &D. Russell (1996): Life cycle inventory data: development of a common format. Int. J. LCA 1 (3): 171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Solomon, S., D. Wuebbles, I. Isaksen, J. Kiehl, M. Lal, P. Simon &N.-D. Sze (1995): Ozone depletion potentials, global warming potentials and future chlorine/bromine loading. In: Scientific Assessment of ozone depletion: 1994. C.A. Ennis (ed.): World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  34. US-EPA (1997): Exposure Factors Handbook. Volume I, Chapter 2: p 2.1-2.7. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. Wegener Sleeswijk, A. &R. Heijungs (1996): Modelling fate for LCA. Int. J. LCA 1 (4): 237–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Weidema, B.P. &M.S. Wesnæs (1996): Data quality management for life cycle inventories: an example of using data quality indicators. J. Cleaner Prod. 4 (3-4): 167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wrisberg, N., H.A. Udo de Haes, R. Clift, R. Frischknecht, L. Grisel, P. Hofstetter, A.A. Jensen, L.G. Lindfors, F. Schmidt-Bleek &H. Stiller (1997): A strategic research programme for life cycle assessment. Final document for the concerted action LCANET. Centre for Environmental Science (CML), Leiden, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ecomed Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark A. J. Huijbregts
    • 1
  1. 1.Interfaculty Department of Environmental Science, Faculty of Environmental ScienceUniversity of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Prinsengracht 130VZ AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations