Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The relative mass-energy-economic (RMEE) method for system boundary selection Part 1: A means to systematically and quantitatively select LCA boundaries

  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is being used more and more as a decision making tool to compare alternative systems of providing a given product or service. Each system is theoretically made up of a near infinite number of elements or unit processes to produce the product or service. In practice, time and resources to complete an LCA are limited, hence the need to draw practical boundaries on the systems being analyzed. However, how does the LCA practitioner draw fair boundaries on two or more different systems being compared? In other words, how does one decide which unit processes to include in each system? A consistent quantitative method of selecting boundaries is essential for comparative LCA studies.

This paper first outlines the requirements for a system boundary selection methodology and then demonstrates the shortfalls of existing methods. The primary objective is to present the Relative Mass-Energy-Economic (RMEE) method for system boundary selection. This concise, repeatable and quantitative method for selecting system boundaries for LCA is demonstrated on a life-cycle system for ethanol fuel. Unlike many other methods of selecting system boundaries, the RMEE method is practical to use and quantitatively ensures different systems have similar system boundaries to ensure a fair comparison between options. The RMEE method has been designed specifically for LCA studies of energy systems

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Curran, M.A. (1996): Environmental Life-cycle Assessment. McGraw-Hill, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  2. Young, S.B. (1996): Life-cycle Management Approaches in Canadian Industry. Environment Canada, Ottawa

    Google Scholar 

  3. ISO 14041 (Draft) (1997): Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Goal and Scope Definition and Inventory Analysis. International Organization for Standardization [629]

  4. Young, S.B. (1998): The Goods, the Bads and the Uglies: The coproduct problem in Life Cycle Inventory. SETAC News, September 1998

  5. Fava, J.A.;Denison, R.;Jones, B.;Curran, M.A.;Vicon, B.;Selke, S. (1991): A Technical Framework for Life-cycle Assessments. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Pensacola, FL [247]

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boguski, T.K.,Hunt, R.G.,Cholakis, J.M.,Franklin, W.E. (1996): Chapter 2- LCA Methodology. In: Curran, M.A.: Environmental Life-cycle Assessment. McGraw-Hill, Toronto [601]

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hendrickson, C.T.;Horvath, A.;Joshi, S.;Lave, L.B. (1998): Economic Input-Output Models for Environmental Life-cycle Assessment. Environmental Science & Technology, pp. 184A–191A, April 1998

  8. ISO 14040 (Final Draft) (1997): Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and Framework. International Organization for Standardization [628]

  9. Hocking, Martin B. (1994): Reusable and Disposable Cups: An Energy-based Evaluation. Environmental Management 18 (6) 889–899. Springer-Verlag, New York [150]

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Deloitte Touche (1991): Energy and Environmental Impact Profiles in Canada of Tetra Brik Aseptic Carton and Glass Bottle Packaging Systems. Tetra Pak Inc. [600]

  11. Hunt, R.G.;Sellers, J.D.;Franklin, W.E. (1992): Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis: A Life-cycle Environmental Assessment for Products and Procedures. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 12: 245–269, Elsevier Science Publishing, New York [599]

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Mann, M.K.;Spath, P.L.;Craig, K.R. (1996): Economic and Life Cycle Assessment of an Integrated Biomass Gasification Combined Cycle System. Proceedings of the 31st Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC)Vol. 3, IEEE [581]

  13. Besnainou, J.,Coulon, R. (1996): Chapter 12 - Life Cycle Assessment: A System Analysis. In: Curran, M.A.: Environmental Life-cycle Assessment. McGraw-Hill, Toronto [601]

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vicon, B.;Tolle, D.;Evers, P.;Freeman, S.;Landucci, R. (1996): Life Cycle Assessment of Biomass Conversion to Feedstock Chemicals. Proceedings of the 31st Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC) Vol. 3, IEEE [580]

  15. Tyson, K.S.;Riley, C.J.;Humphreys, K.K. (1992): Fuel Cycle Evaluations of Biomass-Ethanol and Reformulated Gasoline Fuels, Vol. I&II, National Renewable Energy Lab. Golden, CO

  16. Raynolds, M.A.,Checkel, M.D.,Fraser, R. (1999): Application of Monte Carlo Analysis to Life Cycle Assessment. SAE International Congress & Exposition, March 1999

  17. Raynolds, M.A.,Checkel, M.D.,Fraser, R. (1998): A Case Study for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as an Energy Decision Making Tool: The Production of Fuel Ethanol from Various Feedstocks. SAE 982205, Total Life-cycle Conference SAE Dec. 1998

  18. Tillman, A.M.,Ekvall, T. Baumann, H.,Rydberg, T.: Choice of System Boundaries in Life Cycle Assessment. Submitted to Journal of Cleaner Production, Appendix 1 (date unknown) [104]

  19. Raynolds, M.A.,Checkel, M.D.,Fraser, R. (2000): The Relative Mass-Energy-Economic (RMEE) Method for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) System Boundary Selection — Part 2: Selecting the Boundary Cut-off Parameter (Zrmee) and its Relationship to Overall Uncertainty. Int. J. LCA 5 (2), in production. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/l0.1065/lcal99911.003

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, 4-9 Mechanical Engineering Building, T6G 2G8, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Marlo Raynolds

  2. University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada

    Roydon Fraser

  3. Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, T6G 2G8, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    David Checkel

Authors
  1. Marlo Raynolds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roydon Fraser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Checkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marlo Raynolds.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Raynolds, M., Fraser, R. & Checkel, D. The relative mass-energy-economic (RMEE) method for system boundary selection Part 1: A means to systematically and quantitatively select LCA boundaries. Int. J. LCA 5, 37–46 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978559

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978559

Keywords

Search

Navigation