Advertisement

Regionalization in LCA: current status in concepts, software and databases—69th LCA forum, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, 13 September, 2018

  • Rolf Frischknecht
  • Stephan Pfister
  • Jonas Bunsen
  • Adrian Haas
  • Josef Känzig
  • Martin Kilga
  • Jens Lansche
  • Manuele Margni
  • Christopher Mutel
  • Jürgen Reinhard
  • Philippe Stolz
  • Rosalie van Zelm
  • Marisa Vieira
  • Gregor Wernet
CONFERENCE REPORT: 69TH DISCUSSION FORUM ON LCA

Introduction and overview

The 69th LCA forum was opened with a welcome address given by Stephan Pfister (ETH Zürich, Switzerland). He summarized the current state of regionalization and developments since the last LCA forum on regionalization in 2009.

In a first session, challenges and opportunities of regionalized life cycle impact assessment were presented (Section 2). The speakers of the second session showed how current information and tools for regionalized LCA are being used (Section 3). In the third and fourth sessions, regionalized LCA in background databases (Section 4) and software solutions for regionalized LCA (Section 5) were presented.

Challenges and opportunities of regionalized LCIA

Josef Känzig (Swiss Federal Office for the Environment, FOEN, Switzerland) presented a policy maker’s perspective on regionalization in life cycle assessment (LCA). LCA is an important instrument to provide credible information to policy makers and stakeholders. Regionalized life cycle...

Notes

References

  1. Boulay A-M, Bare J, Benini L, Berger M, Lathuillière M, Manzardo A, Margni M, Motoshita M, Núñez M, Pastor AV, Ridoutt B, Oki T, Worbe S, Pfister S (2018) The WULCA consensus characterization model for water scarcity footprints: assessing impacts of water consumption based on available WAter REmaining (AWARE). Int J Life Cycle Assess 23(2):368–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chaudhary A, Pfister S, Hellweg S (2016) Spatially explicit analysis of biodiversity loss due to global agriculture, pasture and forest land use from a producer and consumer perspective. Environ Sci Technol 50:3928–3936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Frischknecht R, Fantke P, Tschümperlin L, Niero M, Antón A, Bare J, Boulay A-M, Cherubini F, Hauschild MZ, Henderson A, Levasseur A, McKone TE, Michelsen O, Milà i, Canals L, Pfister S, Ridoutt B, Rosenbaum RK, Verones F, Vigon B, Jolliet O (2016) Global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators: progress and case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21(3):429–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Frischknecht R, Jolliet O (eds) (2016) Global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators, vol 1. United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP, ParisGoogle Scholar
  5. Frischknecht R, Nathani C, Alig M, Stolz P, Tschümperlin L, Hellmüller P (2018) Umwelt-Fussabdrücke der Schweiz: Zeitlicher Verlauf 1996–2015. Umwelt-Wissen. treeze Ltd/Rütter Soceco AG, im Auftrag des Bundesamts für Umwelt (BAFU), Uster/RüschlikonGoogle Scholar
  6. Jolliet O, Antón A, Boulay A-M, Cherubini F, Fantke P, Levasseur A, McKone T, Michelsen O, Milà i, Canals L, Motoshita M, Pfister S, Verones F, Vigon B, Frischknecht R (2018) Global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators: impacts of climate change, fine particulate matter formation, water consumption and land use. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23(11):2189–2207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Nemecek T, Bengoa X, Lansche J, Mouron P, Riedener E, Rossi V, Humbert S (2015) Methodological guidelines for the life cycle inventory of agricultural products. World Food LCA Database (WFLDB), vol Version 3.0. Quantis and Agroscope, Lausanne and Zurich, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  8. Reinhard J, Zah R, Faist Emmenegger M, Hilty LM (2017) Regionalized LCI modeling: the case of regionalized cotton datasets. In: Otjacques B, HItelberger P, Naumann S, Wohlgemuth V (eds) EnviroInfo2017, from science to society: the bridge provided by environmental informatics. Shaker Verlag., Springer Berlin HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  9. Weidema B, Bauer C, Hischier R, Mutel C, Nemecek T, Reinhard J, Vadenbo CO, Wernet G (2013) Overview and methodology. In: Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3 (final). The ecoinvent Centre, St. Gallen, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rolf Frischknecht
    • 1
  • Stephan Pfister
    • 2
  • Jonas Bunsen
    • 3
  • Adrian Haas
    • 2
  • Josef Känzig
    • 4
  • Martin Kilga
    • 5
  • Jens Lansche
    • 6
  • Manuele Margni
    • 7
  • Christopher Mutel
    • 8
  • Jürgen Reinhard
    • 9
  • Philippe Stolz
    • 1
  • Rosalie van Zelm
    • 10
  • Marisa Vieira
    • 11
  • Gregor Wernet
    • 12
  1. 1.treeze Ltd.UsterSwitzerland
  2. 2.Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  3. 3.GreenDelta Ltd.BerlinGermany
  4. 4.Swiss Federal Office for the EnvironmentIttigenSwitzerland
  5. 5.Sinum AGSt. GallenSwitzerland
  6. 6.AgroscopeZurichSwitzerland
  7. 7.CIRAIGPolytechnique CanadaMontrealCanada
  8. 8.Paul Scherrer InstitutVillingenSwitzerland
  9. 9.QuantisZurichSwitzerland
  10. 10.Radboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands
  11. 11.Pre consultantsAmersfoortThe Netherlands
  12. 12.ecoinvent centreZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations