Global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators: progress and case study
- 2k Downloads
The life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) guidance flagship project of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Life Cycle Initiative aims at providing global guidance and building scientific consensus on environmental LCIA indicators. This paper presents the progress made since 2013, preliminary results obtained for each impact category and the description of a rice life cycle assessment (LCA) case study designed to test and compare LCIA indicators.
The effort has been focused in a first stage on impacts of global warming, fine particulate matter emissions, water use and land use, plus cross-cutting issues and LCA-based footprints. The paper reports the process and progress and specific results obtained in the different task forces (TFs). Additionally, a rice LCA case study common to all TF has been developed. Three distinctly different scenarios of producing and cooking rice have been defined and underlined with life cycle inventory data. These LCAs help testing impact category indicators which are being developed and/or selected in the harmonisation process. The rice LCA case study further helps to ensure the practicality of the finally recommended impact category indicators.
Results and discussion
The global warming TF concludes that analysts should explore the sensitivity of LCA results to metrics other than GWP. The particulate matter TF attained initial guidance of how to include health effects from PM2.5 exposures consistently into LCIA. The biodiversity impacts of land use TF suggests to consider complementary metrics besides species richness for assessing biodiversity loss. The water use TF is evaluating two stress-based metrics, AWaRe and an alternative indicator by a stakeholder consultation. The cross-cutting issues TF agreed upon maintaining disability-adjusted life years (DALY) as endpoint unit for the safeguard subject “human health”. The footprint TF defined main attributes that should characterise all footprint indicators. “Rice cultivation” and “cooking” stages of the rice LCA case study contribute most to the environmental impacts assessed.
The results of the TF will be documented in white papers and some published in scientific journals. These white papers represent the input for the Pellston workshop™, taking place in Valencia, Spain, from 24 to 29 January 2016, where best practice, harmonised LCIA indicators and an update on the general LCIA framework will be discussed and agreed on. With the diversity in results and the multi-tier supply chains, the rice LCA case study is well suited to test candidate recommended indicators and to ensure their applicability in common LCA case studies.
KeywordsFootprint Guidance Impact indicators LCIA Life cycle impact assessment Rice cultivation
The authors acknowledge the contributions from the participants of the Basel, Barcelona and Adelaide workshops and of the different TFs, as well as the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative for funding this activity.
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision or the stated policy of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, nor does citing of trade names or commercial processes constitute endorsement.
- Blonk Agri-footprint BV (2014) Agri-footprint—part 2—description of data—Version 1.0. GoudaGoogle Scholar
- Boulay A-M, Bare J, Benini L, Berger M, Klemmayer I, Lathuilliere M, Loubet P, Manzardo A, Margni M, Núñez M, Ridoutt B, Worbe S, Pfister S (2014) Building consensus on a generic water scarcity indicator for LCA-based water footprint: preliminary results from WULCA. In: LCA Food 2014, San Francisco, 2014Google Scholar
- Boulay A-M, Bare J, De Camillis C, Döll P, Gassert F, Gerten D, Humbert S, Inaba A, Itsubo N, Lemoine Y (2015) Consensus building on the development of a stress-based indicator for LCA-based impact assessment of water consumption: outcome of the expert workshops. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:577–583Google Scholar
- Burnett RT, Pope CA, Ezzati M, Olives C, Lim SS, Mehta S, Shin HH, Singh G, Hubbell B, Brauer M (2014) An integrated risk function for estimating the global burden of disease attributable to ambient fine particulate matter exposure. Environ Health Perspect 122:397–403Google Scholar
- Fantke P, Jolliet O, Apte JS, Cohen AJ, Evans JS, Hänninen OO, Hurley F, Jantunen MJ, Jerrett M, Levy JI, Loh MM, Marshall JD, Miller BG, Preiss P, Spadaro JV, Tainio M, Tuomisto JT, Weschler CJ, McKone TE (2015) Health effects of fine particulate matter in life cycle impact assessment: conclusions from the Basel guidance workshop. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:276–288Google Scholar
- Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo de Haes HA, de Bruijn H, van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ, Lindeijer E, Roorda AAH, Weidema BP (eds) (2001) Life cycle assessment; An operational guide to the ISO standards; Part 3: scientific background. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment (VROM) and Centre of Environmental Science (CML), Den Haag and Leiden, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- Hodas N, Loh M, Shin H, Li DS, Bennett D, McKone TEM, Jolliet O, Weschler CJ, Jantunen M, Lioy P, Fantke P (2015) Indoor inhalation intake fractions of fine particulate matter: review of influencing factors. Indoor Air. doi: 10.1111/ina.12268
- IPCC (2013) The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report—climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Working Group I, IPCC Secretariat, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- Jolliet O, Frischknecht R, Bare J, Boulay A-M, Bulle C, Fantke P, Gheewalaf S, Hauschild M, Itsubo N, Margni M, McKone T, Milà i Canals L, Postuma L, Prado-Lopez V, Ridoutt B, Sonnemann G, Rosenbaum RK, Seager T, Struijs J, van Zelm R, Vigon B and Weisbrod A (2014) Global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators: Findings of the Glasgow scoping workshop. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:962–967. doi: 10.1007/s11367-014-0703-8
- Jungbluth N (1997) Life-cycle-assessment for stoves and ovens. Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule, ZürichGoogle Scholar
- Motoshita M, Ono Y, Pfister S, Boulay A-M, Berger M, Nansai K, Tahara K, Itsubo N, Inaba A (2014) Consistent characterisation factors at midpoint and endpoint relevant to agricultural water scarcity arising from freshwater consumption. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-014-0811-5
- Myhre G, Shindell D, Bréon F, Collins W, Fuglestvedt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque J, Lee D, Mendoza B (2013) Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing, chapter 8 in climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC Secretariat, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- Nemecek T, Heil A, Huguenin O, Meier S, Erzinger S, Blaser S, Dux D, Zimmermann A (2007) Life cycle inventories of agricultural production systems. Agroscope FAL Reckenholz and FAT Taenikon. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, DübendorfGoogle Scholar
- OECD/FAO (2014) OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2014. doi: 10.1787/agr_outlook-2014-en
- Ridoutt B, Fantke P, Pfister S, Bare J, Boulay A-M, Cherubini F, Frischknecht R, Hauschild M, Hellweg S, Henderson A, Jolliet O, Levasseur A, Margni M, McKone T, Michelsen O, Milà i Canals L, Page G, Pant R, Raugei M, Sala S, Saouter E, Verones F, Wiedmann T (2015a) Area of concern: a new paradigm in life cycle assessment for the development of footprint metrics. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-015-1011-7
- Ridoutt B, Fantke P, Pfister S, Bare J, Boulay A-M, Cherubini F, Frischknecht R, Hauschild M, Hellweg S, Henderson A, Jolliet O, Levasseur A, Margni M, McKone T, Michelsen O, Milà i Canals L, Page G, Pant R, Raugei M, Sala S, Saouter E, Verones F, Wiedmann T (2015b) Making sense of the minefield of footprint indicators. Environ Sci Technol 49:2601–2603Google Scholar
- Shantappa D, Tirupataiah K, Yella RK, Sandhyrani K, Mahendra KR, Malamasuri K (2014) Yield and water productivity of rice under different cultivation practices and irrigation regimes. Irrigated Water Resources Management (IWRM-2014)Google Scholar
- TERI (2013) TERI energy data directory & yearbook 2012/13. TERI (The Energy and Resource Institute), New DelhiGoogle Scholar