Life Cycle Costing: An Introduction

  • Jan-Markus Rödger
  • Louise Laumann Kjær
  • Aris Pagoropoulos
Chapter

Abstract

The chapter gives an introduction to life cycle costing (LCC) and how it can be used to support decision-making. It can form the economic pillar in a full life cycle sustainability assessment, but often system delimitations differ depending on the goal and scope of the study. To provide a profound understanding this chapter describes several approaches and terms, fundamental principles and different types of costs. A brief introduction is given to conventional LCC and societal LCC but the main focus is on environmental Life Cycle Costing (eLCC) as the LCC approach that is compatible with environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in terms of system delimitation. Differences are explained and addressed, and an overview is given of the main cost categories to consider from different user perspectives. As inventory data is often sensitive in financial analyses, a list of relevant databases is provided as well as guidance on how to collect data to overcome this hurdle. In an illustrative case study on window frames, the eLCC theory is applied and demonstrated with each step along the eLCC procedure described in detail. A final section about advanced LCC introduces how to monetarise externalities and how to do discounting.

References

  1. Boardman, A., Greenberg, D., Vining, A., Weimer, D.: Cost-Benefit Analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (2010)Google Scholar
  2. Boussabaine, A., Kirkham, R.: Whole Life-Cycle Costing: Risk and Risk Responses. Wiley, Hoboken (2008)Google Scholar
  3. Dodds, K., Galtung, J.: Peace by peaceful means: peace and conflict. Int. Aff. R. Inst. Int. Aff., Development and Civilization (1997). doi: 10.2307/2623565 Google Scholar
  4. European Commission, Directorate-General Climate Action—B: European and International Carbon Markets: Guidance on Interpretation of Annex I of the EU ETS Directive (excl. aviation activities), p. 26 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. Granta Material Inspiration: CES EduPack. Granta Design, Cambridge (2016)Google Scholar
  6. Hoogmartens, R., Van Passel, S., Van Acker, K., Dubois, M.: Bridging the gap between LCA, LCC and CBA as sustainability assessment tools. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 48, 27–33 (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2014.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Huang, X.X., Newnes, L.B., Parry, G.C.: The adaptation of product cost estimation techniques to estimate the cost of service. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 25, 417–431 (2012). doi: 10.1080/0951192X.2011.596281 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hunkeler, D.D., Lichtenvort, K., Rebitzer, G., Ciroth, A.: Environmental life cycle costing. CRC Press, Pensacola (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Korpi, E., Ala-Risku, T.: Life cycle costing: a review of published case studies. Manag. Audit. J. 23, 240–261 (2008). doi: 10.1108/02686900810857703 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Langdon, D.: Life Cycle Costing (LCC) as a contribution to sustainable construction: A common methodology, Final Report. European Commission, Brussels (2007)Google Scholar
  11. Moreau, V., Weidema, B.P.: The computational structure of environmental life cycle costing. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 20, 1359–1363 (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11367-015-0952-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Niazi, A., Dai, J.S., Balabani, S., Seneviratne, L.: Product cost estimation: technique classification and methodology review. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 128, 563 (2006). doi: 10.1115/1.2137750 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Park, C.S.: Contemporary Engineering Economics. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey (2011)Google Scholar
  14. Pizzol, M., Weidema, B., Brandão, M., Osset, P.: Monetary valuation in life cycle assessment: a review. J. Clean. Prod. 86, 170–179 (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sullivan, W.G., Wicks, E.M., Luxhoj, J.T.: Engineering Economy. Pearson Education, New Jersey (2006)Google Scholar
  16. UNEP: Towards a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment: Making Informed Choices on Products. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi (2011)Google Scholar
  17. Weidema, B.P.: Using the budget constraint to monetarise impact assessment results. Ecol. Econ. 68, 1591–1598 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.01.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. White, G., Ostwald, P.F.: Life cycle costing. Manag. Account. 57(7), 39–42 (1976)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan-Markus Rödger
    • 1
  • Louise Laumann Kjær
    • 2
  • Aris Pagoropoulos
    • 2
  1. 1.Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management EngineeringTechnical University of DenmarkKongens LyngbyDenmark
  2. 2.Section of Engineering Design and Product Development, Department of Mechanical EngineeringTechnical University of DenmarkKongens LyngbyDenmark

Personalised recommendations