Advertisement

Transportation in LCA

A comparative evaluation of the importance of transport in four LCAs
  • Anne-Mette M. Jørgensen
  • Peter E. Ywema
  • Niels Frees
  • Stephan Exner
  • Rolf Bracke
LCA case studies

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether transport and logistics substantially contribute to the environmental interventions and impacts identified in LCAs. Four LCAs, encompassing very different products in different countries, were screened for the relative contribution of transport to the overall environmental interventions and impacts. Aside from this, the contribution of transport within individual life cycle phases was investigated.

In none of the LCAs did transport contribute to less than 5% of the energy related interventions or impacts, whereas contributions with more than ten percent occurred regularly, especially in events involving NOx related impact. The importance of transport strongly depends on the kind of product studied. It seems to be especially important for agricultural products. With respect to individual phases of the life cycle, the study indicates that special attention is required for the transport of raw materials, for use phase of electronics and for the disposal phase of recyclable products.

Keywords

Transportation relative contribution to environmental impact inventory relative contribution to emissions impact assessment relative contribution of transportation to impact areas life cycle phases relative impact of transportation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dall, O. &Toft, J. (1996): Kortlægning af miljøbelastningen ved en families aktiviteter. Miljøstyrelsen og Forbrugerstyrelsen. København (forthcoming, title preliminary)Google Scholar
  2. Frees, N. (1996): Screening of Transportation in the Life Cycle of a TV. Internal paper for the project LCA-Gaps on Transportation. Institute for Product Development, Life Cycle Center. LyngbyGoogle Scholar
  3. Hoffmann, O. &Karsten, N. (1995): Ansätze für einen ökologischen Vergleich von Flachsfasern und Glasfasern als Kunststoffverstärkung. TU Berlin und Bereich Abfallwirtschaft/Forschungszentrum für Daimler-Benz AG. BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. Institute for Product Development — IPU (1996): Case Stusy of a B& Television LCA. EDIP Programme. Lyngby (forthcoming, title preliminary)Google Scholar
  5. Ywema, P.E. (IMSA) (1994): Eindrapportage Levenscyclusanalyse Koffiemelkverpakkingen. EcoBalance Nederland for the Durch Diary Association. AmsterdamGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ecomed Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne-Mette M. Jørgensen
    • 1
  • Peter E. Ywema
    • 1
  • Niels Frees
    • 2
  • Stephan Exner
    • 3
  • Rolf Bracke
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute for Environment and Systems AnalysisIMSA Amsterdam, Environmental Consult & InnovationAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.IPU, Technical University of DenmarkLyngbyDenmark
  3. 3.ECOS Umwelt GmbHAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations