Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Blended Lifecycle Integrated Social System Method

International Journal of Environmental Research volume 14, pages 727–749 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

Lack of a reliable database and methodology for system development and evaluation with special consideration of social impacts has led to several challenges for lifecycle assessment for any project. Implementation of social science into projects, integrating social sustainability concerns into measures of human development, and investigating the impacts of the production process and the product chain on stakeholders are complex. This study develops a robust framework for social life cycle assessment, entitled the “Blended Lifecycle Integrated Social System” framework (BLISS). The BLISS method aims to develop an overarching framework that blends in the social aspect of the decision-making process and supports businesses in minimizing the harmful impacts of social objections on the industry and people’s lives. The new method is demonstrated here on algal biofuel production, with the integration of the weight of each production stage in the final product, studying a wide variety of stakeholders involved in the life cycle, including any relevant social criteria and understanding their connection with the production line and the stakeholders in a multi-criteria analysis framework. However, by combining product systems, indicators, and stakeholders, the new method results in a more robust solution by including social sustainability hotspots, development opportunities, and minimization of social objection on various types of projects.

Graphic abstract

Article Highlights

  • An integrated social life cycle assessment methodology (BLISS model) was developed.

  • The BLISS model was demonstrated on algal biofuel production.

  • Product system, relevant social sustainability indicators, and stakeholders have been investigated in a multi-criteria analysis framework.

  • The new method results in a more robust solution by including social sustainability hotspots, development opportunities, and minimization of social objection on various types of projects.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

39,95 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

References

  • Abduli MA, Tavakolli H, Azari A (2013) Alternatives for solid waste management in Isfahan, Iran: a case study. Waste Manage Res 31(5):532–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X13477718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adenle AA, Haslam GE, Lee L (2013) Global assessment of research and development for algae biofuel production and its potential role for sustainable development in developing countries. Energy Policy 61:182–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.088

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Aparcana S, Salhofer S (2013) Development of a social impact assessment methodology for recycling systems in low-income countries. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1106–1115

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashrafi K, Motlagh MSP, Tavakolli H (2013) Analysis of dispersion of particulate matter (PM) emitted from a steel complex affecting its surrounding urban area. Case studies on specific urban areas: understanding the roles of key economic, geographic, and urban design inputs in the pollution characterization or mitigation scenarios

  • Assembly UG (2017) Global indicator framework for the sustainable development goals and targets of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Technical Report, A/RES/71/313. United Nations Statistics Division, New York, NY, USA. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list. Accessed Feb 2020

  • Assmann A, Braun A, John S, Lei A, Southard S (2011) The potential for microalgae and other “micro-crops” to produce sustainable biofuels. University of Michigan, Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  • Azari A, Noorpoor A, Bozorg-Haddad O (2018) Carbon footprint analyses of microalgae cultivation systems under autotrophic and heterotrophic conditions. Int J Environ Sci Technol 16:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Azari A, Tavakoli H, Barkdoll BD, Haddad OB (2020) Predictive model of algal biofuel production based on experimental data. Algal Res 47:101843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2020.101843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bao T, Azmoon B, Liu Z (2020) Freeze-thaw depth prediction with constrained optimization for spring load restriction. Transp Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2020.100419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry A, Wolfe A, English C, Ruddick C, Lambert D (2016) 2016 National algal biofuels technology review (No. DOE/EE-1409). USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Bioenergy Technologies Office (EE-3B)

  • Beal CM, Hebner RE, Webber ME, Ruoff RS, Seibert AF (2012) The energy return on investment for algal biocrude: results for a research production facility. BioEnergy Res 5:341–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Beal CM et al (2018) Marine microalgae commercial production improves sustainability of global fisheries and aquaculture. Sci Rep 8:15064

    Google Scholar 

  • BLS (2019) Occupational outlook handbook - Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://www.bls.gov. Accessed Oct 2020

  • Brewer WJ (2013) Induction of microalgal lipids for biodiesel production in tandem with sequestration of high carbon dioxide concentration. Michigan Technological University, Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell A, Doswald N (2009) The impacts of biofuel production on biodiversity: a review of the current literature. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, pp 309–540

    Google Scholar 

  • Chisti Y (2007) Biodiesel from microalgae. Biotechnol Adv 25:294–306

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Eisfeldt F (2016) PSILCA—a product social impact life cycle assessment database, vol 1. GreenDelta GmbH, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarens AF, Resurreccion EP, White MA, Colosi LM (2010) Environmental life cycle comparison of algae to other bioenergy feedstocks. Environ Sci Technol 44:1813–1819

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Council NR (2012) Sustainable development of algal biofuels in the United States. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/13437

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cuellar-Bermudez SP, Garcia-Perez JS, Rittmann BE, Parra-Saldivar R (2015) Photosynthetic bioenergy utilizing CO2: an approach on flue gases utilization for third generation biofuels. J Clean Prod 98:53–65

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dale VH et al (2013) Indicators for assessing socioeconomic sustainability of bioenergy systems: a short list of practical measures. Ecol Ind 26:87–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.10.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis WJ (2009) Overcoming competitive disadvantage: future commercial viability of microalgae based biodiesel. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater

    Google Scholar 

  • Delrue F, Setier P-A, Sahut C, Cournac L, Roubaud A, Peltier G, Froment A-K (2012) An economic, sustainability, and energetic model of biodiesel production from microalgae. Bioresour Technol 111:191–200

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • do Carmo BBT, Garrido SR, Arcese G, Lucchetti MC (2020) Weighting and scoring in social life cycle assessment. In: Traverso M, Petti L, Zamagni A (eds) Perspectives on social LCA: contributions from the 6th international conference. Springer, Cham, pp 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01508-4_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer L, Hauschild M, Schierbeck J (2006) A framework for social life cycle impact assessment (10 pp). Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:88–97

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI (2004) Balancing work family life: enhancing choice support for parents. Department of Trade and Industry, Makati

    Google Scholar 

  • Efroymson RA, Dale VH (2015) Environmental indicators for sustainable production of algal biofuels. Ecol Indic 49:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Efroymson RA, Dale VH, Langholtz MH (2016) Socioeconomic indicators for sustainable design and commercial development of algal biofuel systems. GCB Bioenergy. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EIA (2018) Electric power monthly. US Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=epmt_5_6_a. Accessed Oct 2020

  • Elbehri A, Segerstedt A, Liu P (2013) Biofuels and the sustainability challenge: a global assessment of sustainability issues, trends and policies for biofuels and related feedstocks. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2011) Good socio-economic practices in modern bioenergy production. Food and Agricultural Organization, Bioenergy and Food Security Criteria and Indicators Project, FAO, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2020) AquaticBiofuels. Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome. http://www.fao.org/bioenergy/aquaticbiofuels/documents/detail/en/item/48979/icode/. Accessed Feb 2020

  • Foolmaun RK, Ramjeeawon T (2013) Comparative life cycle assessment and social life cycle assessment of used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:155–171

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frank M, Laginess T, Schöneboom J (2020) Social life cycle assessment in agricultural systems—US Corn production as a case study. Perspectives on social LCA. Springer, Berlin, pp 119–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Heap B (2012) The current status of biofuels in the European Union, their environmental impacts and future prospects. European Academies Science Advisory Council, Halle

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrero M, Cifuentes A, Ibañez E (2006) Sub- and supercritical fluid extraction of functional ingredients from different natural sources: plants, food-by-products, algae and microalgae: a review. Food Chem 98:136–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.05.058

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hosseinijou SA, Mansour S, Shirazi MA (2014) Social life cycle assessment for material selection: a case study of building materials. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:620–645

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA (2018) Energy policies of IEA countries, Australia 2018 Review. OECD, International Energy Agency, Paris. http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/EnergyPoliciesofIEACountriesAustralia2018Review.pdf. Accessed 20 Apr 2018

  • ILO (1948) C087—freedom of association and protection of the right to organise convention, 1948, no. 87. International Labour Organization, Geneva

  • ILO (1964) C122—Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (no. 122). International Labour Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ILO (1973) Resolution concerning household income and expenditure surveys. International Labour Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • International Labour Office (2014) World social protection report 2014/15: building economic recovery, inclusive development and social justice. International Labour Organization, Geneva

  • ISO I (2006) ISO-14040 environmental management–life cycle assessment–principles and framework. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

  • ISO I (2010) 26000 Guidance on social responsibility, vol 3, no. 4. Ginebra, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

  • ISO (2006) Environmental management: life cycle assessment; principles and framework, no. 2006. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

  • Itoiz ES et al (2012) Energy balance and environmental impact analysis of marine microalgal biomass production for biodiesel generation in a photobioreactor pilot plant. Biomass Bioenergy 39:324–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A, Finkbeiner M, Jørgensen MS, Hauschild MZ (2010) Defining the baseline in social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:376–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-010-0176-3

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jorquera O, Kiperstok A, Sales EA, Embirucu M, Ghirardi ML (2010) Comparative energy life-cycle analyses of microalgal biomass production in open ponds and photobioreactors. Biores Technol 101:1406–1413

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Keller H, Rettenmaier N, Reinhardt GA (2015) Integrated life cycle sustainability assessment—a practical approach applied to biorefineries. Appl Energy 154:1072–1081

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Khoo H, Koh C, Shaik M, Sharratt P (2013) Bioenergy co-products derived from microalgae biomass via thermochemical conversion–life cycle energy balances and CO2 emissions. Bioresour Technol 143:298–307

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lardon L, Helias A, Sialve B, Stayer JP, Bernard O (2009) Life-cycle assessment of biodiesel production from microalgae. Environ Sci Technol 43:6475–6481

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leiby PN (2007) Estimating the energy security benefits of reduced US oil imports. Citeseer, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Horsman M, Wu N, Lan C, Dubois-Calero N (2008) Biofuels from microalgae. Biotechnol Progress 24:815–820

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Clarens AF, Colosi LM (2012) Algae biodiesel has potential despite inconclusive results to date. Bioresour Technol 104:803–806

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Malik A, Lenzen M, Ralph PJ, Tamburic B (2015) Hybrid life-cycle assessment of algal biofuel production. Biores Technol 184:436–443

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mata TM, Martins AA, Caetano NS (2010) Microalgae for biodiesel production and other applications: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 14:217–232

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mattioda R, Tavares DR, Casela J, Canciglieri O Jr (2019) Social life cycle assessment of biofuel production. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815581-3.00009-9

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald M (2004) Renewable Supply Chain Gap Analysis. Renewables Advisory Board

  • Mayer A, Tavakoli H, Fessel Doan C, Heidari A, Handler R (2020) Modeling water-energy tradeoffs for cultivating algae for biofuels in a semi-arid region with fresh and brackish water supplies. Biofuel Bioprod Biorefin. https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.2137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros DL, Sales EA, Kiperstok A (2015) Energy production from microalgae biomass: carbon footprint and energy balance. J Clean Prod 96:493–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.07.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehrvar S, Mostaghimi S, Foomani F, Abroe B, Eells J, Gopalakrishnan S, Ranji M (2020) 670 nm photobiomodulation improves the mitochondrial redox state of diabetic wounds. Quant Imaging Med Surg. https://doi.org/10.21037/qims-20-522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mostaghimi S, Nazarimehr F, Jafari S, Ma J (2019) Chemical and electrical synapse-modulated dynamical properties of coupled neurons under magnetic flow. Appl Math Comput 348:42–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy CF, Allen DT (2011) Energy-water nexus for mass cultivation of algae. Environ Sci Technol 45:5861–5868

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nations U (2019) Sustainable development goals report 2019. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2019.pdf

  • Passell H et al (2013) Algae biodiesel life cycle assessment using current commercial data. J Environ Manage 129:103–111

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Phalan B (2009) The social and environmental impacts of biofuels in Asia: an overview. Appl Energy 86(Supplement 1):S21–S29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.046

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn JC, Smith TG, Downes CM, Quinn C (2014) Microalgae to biofuels lifecycle assessment—multiple pathway evaluation. Algal Res 4:116–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez PKS, Petti L, Haberland NT, Ugaya CML (2014) Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 1: methodological framework. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1515–1523

    Google Scholar 

  • Razon LF, Tan RR (2011) Net energy analysis of the production of biodiesel and biogas from the microalgae: Haematococcus pluvialis and Nannochloropsis. Appl Energy 88:3507–3514

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Resolution A (2015) RES/70/1. Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Seventieth United Nations General Assembly, New York

  • Rodrigues LM, Angelo ACM, Marujo LG (2020) Conceptual framework to social life cycle assessment of e-waste management: a case study in the City of Rio de Janeiro. In: Singh P, Singh RP, Srivastava V (eds) Contemporary environmental issues and challenges in era of climate change. Springer, Singapore, pp 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9595-7_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sathish A (2012) Biodiesel production from mixed culture algae via a wet lipid extraction procedure. Utah State University, Logan

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-Traub G, De la Mothe Karoubi E, Espey J (2015) Indicators and a monitoring framework for the sustainable development goals: launching a data revolution for the SDGs. Sustainable Development Solutions Network

  • Schenk PM et al (2008) Second generation biofuels: high-efficiency microalgae for biodiesel production. Bioenergy Res 1:20–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-008-9008-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott SA, Davey MP, Dennis JS, Horst I, Howe CJ, Lea-Smith DJ, Smith AG (2010) Biodiesel from algae: challenges and prospects. Curr Opin Biotechnol 21:277–286

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan J, Dunahay T, Benemann J, Roessler P (1998) A look back at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Aquatic Species Program: Biodiesel from Algae. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (U.S. Department of Energy),

  • Siebert A, Bezama A, O’Keeffe S, Thrän D (2018) Social life cycle assessment: in pursuit of a framework for assessing wood-based products from bioeconomy regions in Germany. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:651–662

    Google Scholar 

  • Smeets E, Junginger M, Faaij A, Walter A, Dolzan P, Turkenburg WJB (2008) The sustainability of Brazilian ethanol—an assessment of the possibilities of certified production. Bioenergy 32:781–813

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavakoli H, Barkdoll B (2019) Sustainability-based optimization algorithm. Int J Environ Sci Technol 17:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavakoli H, Azari A, Ashrafi K, Pour MS (2013) Cementitious properties of steelmaking slags. Tech J Eng Appl Sci 3:1071–1073

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavakoli H, Azari A, Pazoki M (2016) Comparative health risk assessment of asbestos in Tehran. Iran. J Environ Treat Tech 4(2):46–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavakoli H, Azari A, Ashrafi K, Salimian M, Momeni M (2020) Human health risk assessment of arsenic downstream of a steel plant in Isfahan, Iran: a case study. Int J Environ Sci Technol 17(1):81–92

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thornley P, Rogers J, Huang Y (2008) Quantification of employment from biomass power plants. Renew Energy 33:1922–1927

    Google Scholar 

  • Traverso M, Asdrubali F, Francia A, Finkbeiner M (2012) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to photovoltaic modules. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:1068–1079

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Treasury HM (2003) The green book: appraisal and evaluation in central government. HM Treasury, British Government, London

    Google Scholar 

  • UN (2007) Indicators of sustainable development: guidelines and methodologies, 3rd edn. United Nations, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • UN (2015) Millennium development goals report. United Nations, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2011) Occupational employment statistics (OES). https://www.bls.gov/oes/. Accessed Jan 2020

  • USEPA (2011) Biofuels and the environment: the first triennial report to congress (2011 Final Report). Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-10/183F

  • USEPA (2015) US Environmental Protection Agency biotechnology algae project. http://www.epa.gov/regulation-biotechnology-under-tsca-and-fifra/us-environmental-protection-agency-biotechnology-algae

  • van Haaster B, Ciroth A, Fontes J, Wood R, Ramirez A (2017) Development of a methodological framework for social life-cycle assessment of novel technologies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:423–440

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinyes E, Oliver-Solà J, Ugaya C, Rieradevall J, Gasol CM (2013) Application of LCSA to used cooking oil waste management. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:445–455

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Visschers VH, Keller C, Siegrist M (2011) Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: investigating an explanatory model Energy policy 39:3621–3629

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang B, Li Y, Wu N, Lan C (2008) CO2 bio-mitigation using microalgae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 79:707–718

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S-W, Hsu C-W, Hu AH (2016) An analytic framework for social life cycle impact assessment—part 1: methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:1514–1528

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang X, Khameneian A, Dice P, Chen B, Shahbakhti M, Naber JD, Huberts G (2019) Control-oriented model-based burn duration and ignition timing prediction with recursive-least-square adaptation for closed-loop combustion phasing control of a spark ignition engine. In: Dynamic systems and control conference, vol 59155. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1115/DSCC2019-9073

  • Winjobi O, Tavakoli H, Klemetsrud B, Handler R, Marker T, Roberts M, Shonnard D (2018) Carbon footprint analysis of gasoline and diesel from forest residues and algae using integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion Plus Fischer-Tropsch (IH2 Plus cool GTL). ACS Sustain Chem Eng 6:10766–10777

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zanchi L, Zamagni A, Maltese S, Riccomagno R, Delogu M (2020) Social assessment in the design phase of automotive component using the product social impact assessment method. In: Traverso M, Petti L, Zamagni A (eds) Perspectives on social LCA: contributions from the 6th international conference. Springer, Cham, pp 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01508-4_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu L, Huo S, Qin L (2015) A microalgae-based biodiesel refinery: sustainability concerns and challenges. Int J Green Energy 12:595–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/15435075.2013.867406

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ziolkowska JR, Simon L (2014) Recent developments and prospects for algae-based fuels in the US. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 29:847–853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.09.021

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The completion of this undertaking could not have been possible without the support of Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Michigan Technological University. In addition, the authors acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Ulises Gracida Alvarez for consulting on the social sustainability indicators.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr., Houghton, MI, 49931, USA

    Hossein Tavakoli & Brian D. Barkdoll

Authors
  1. Hossein Tavakoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brian D. Barkdoll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hossein Tavakoli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no commercial or financial conflict of interest.

Statement of informed consent, human/animal rights

No conflicts, informed consent, or human or animal rights are applicable to this study.

Authors’ agreement to authorship and submission

All the authors agreed to the authorship and submission of the manuscript to Algal Research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tavakoli, H., Barkdoll, B.D. Blended Lifecycle Integrated Social System Method. Int J Environ Res 14, 727–749 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-020-00284-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-020-00284-z

Keywords

  • Social life cycle assessment
  • Sustainability
  • Algae
  • Biofuel
  • Stakeholder

Search

Navigation