Abstract
The LCA cookbook presents the provisions and actions from the ILCD Handbook that are central in the performance of an LCA. The selection is intended to cover all those activities that an LCA practitioner needs to undertake in a typical process-LCA , and the presentation follows the normal progression of the LCA work according to the ISO framework. For explanation of the reasoning behind the actions, the reader is referred to the presentation of the methodological elements in Part 2 of the book.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
- 1.
In the introduction to goal definition in Chap. 7, only six aspects are discussed because aspects IV and V are combined under one—“Target audience”.
- 2.
The ILCD Handbook operates with 10 scope items but here the aspect of data quality requirements, which the handbook proposes as a separate scope item, is considered under scope item 4 and 5.
- 3.
i.e. in contrast to the one that is analysed or within the system boundary in the background system.
- 4.
“Sufficient” means that the not required co-function can quantitatively be absorbed by the market. That shall be assumed to be the case, if the annually available amount of the to-be-substituted co-function is not more than the annual amount produced by the annually replaced installed capacity of the superseded alternative process(es) or system(s). Note that this refers to the amount of co-function provided by the analysed process. E.g. if the study refers to a specific producer that contributes only a small share to the total production of the co-function, only this small amount counts, i.e. it is very likely that it can be absorbed by the market. If the study refers to the total production of a certain product that has the not required co-products, there is the chance that this much larger amount of co-products cannot be absorbed by the market.
- 5.
This “market” is the market where the secondary function is provided. E.g. for products produced from end-of-life and waste management this is the market of the primary production at the time and the location (e.g. country, region or global etc. market) where the end-of-life product or waste is known or forecasted to undergo recycling , reuse, or energy recovery. If this market cannot be clearly determined, the most likely market shall be assumed and well justified; this most likely market shall be on a continental scale or at least cover a group of countries/markets.
- 6.
As is the case e.g. for wheat grain and straw production, many oil refinery products, etc.
- 7.
E.g. for NaOH, as co-product of Chlorine production, apart from NaCl electrolysis no alternative route is operated to the sufficient extent. However, NaOH provides in a wider sense the function of neutralising agent (next to some other, quantitatively less relevant functions) and hence other, technically equivalent and competing neutralising agents such as KOH, Ca(OH)2, Na2CO3, etc. can be assumed to be superseded; their mix would be used to substitute the not required NaOH. For the example of a wheat grain study and the not required co-product straw: instead of straw, other dry biomass (e.g. Miscanthus grass, wood for heating, etc.) provides equivalent functions and its market mix can be assumed to be superseded.
- 8.
“not feasible” refers to cases where many alternative processes/systems or alternatives for the function in a wider sense exist e.g. where over 10 alternative processes/systems make up over 80% of the market for the to-be-substituted function, and/or where the superseded processes/systems themselves have a number of co-functions.
- 9.
The reasoning is that in that case it is likely that the determining co-functions would be substituted.
- 10.
Large-scale (“big”) consequences shall generally be assumed if the annual additional demand or supply that is triggered by the analysed decision exceeds the capacity of the annually replaced installed capacity of the additionally demanded or supplied process, product, or broader function, as applicable.
- 11.
i.e. these scenarios and uncertainty calculation allow to apply the full range of method and modelling options of ISO 14044.
- 12.
The reasoning is that the effect of superseding alternative processes/systems is existing, other than in Situation A where an additional amount of co-function is pushed into the market, i.e. in Situation C1, the check whether alternative processes/systems are operated or produced to a sufficient extent is unnecessary, as the superseding factually already occurs.
- 13.
i.e. excluding accidents, indoor and workplace exposure, as well as impacts related to direct application or ingestion of products to humans.
- 14.
Other systems that become part of the analysed system in case system expansion is applied should not be shown in this diagram, but the quantitatively most relevant cases of multifunctional processes (as identified in the sensitivity analysis) shall be listed. This includes the quantitatively relevant cases of part-system relationships, which only exceptionally require an expanded system boundary diagram (e.g. if the analysed product would be the “part” of a part-system relationship such shall be provided).
- 15.
The respective flows shall, however, be foreseen to be identified and stay in the inventory, but without stating an amount and being marked as “missing relevant” or “missing irrelevant”, as applicable.
- 16.
Note that co-functions are initially part of the inventory and only later removed via allocation or addressed with system expansion/substitution.
- 17.
While the true absolute overall impact (i.e. the “100% completeness”) cannot be known in LCA and other such models, it can be approximated in practice in an iterative manner and with sufficient precision to serve as practical guidance and use for cut-off.
- 18.
For studies with limited impact coverage (e.g. Carbon footprint), only these categories are to be considered, accordingly.
- 19.
This also applies if a market production mix data set is developed: the fact that the data set is to represent the production mix would be achieved by combining the representative mix of producing technologies of that market according to their production share. For the data in the background system of the individual routes, nevertheless the respective consumption mix data are to be used.
- 20.
As this can be judged only in view of the LCIA results, i.e. after LCI data collection , modelling, etc., it is recommended to initially foresee the inclusion of all of the default impact categories (see next action). If the impact assessment later shows irrelevance of one of more impact categories, they can be left out; see also further provisions. For principally restricted assessments (e.g. Carbon footprint), see the respective action below.
- 21.
Under the ILCD, recommendations are under preparation on a complete set of such LCIA methods that provide characterisation factors for the ILCD reference elementary flows. These will relate to European and/or global scope, depending on their applicability.
- 22.
Examples are Noise, Desiccation/Salination, Littering of land and sea, etc.
- 23.
ISO 14044 requires that all relevant impacts are to be covered. In practice of performing LCA studies, the development of new LCIA methods is a rare case. The separate guidance document “Development of Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) models, methods and factors” supports LCIA method developers in this step.
- 24.
The inventory related to impacts that are outside the frame of LCA shall not be mixed with the inventory for LCA impacts, i.e. need separate inventorying as separate items outside the general Inputs/Outputs inventory. The LCA frame covers potential impacts on the named three areas of protection that are caused by interventions between Technosphere and Ecosphere during normal and abnormal operation, i.e. Accidents, indoor and workplace exposure, as well as impacts related to direct application or ingestion of products to humans shall not be mixed but be modelled and inventoried separately.
- 25.
The development of governmentally supported corresponding normalisation and weighting data in the different regions and countries or globally would be beneficial.
- 26.
This brings the values of the normalised impacts for goods and services down to a better communicable and interpretable level (typical value range 10–0.00001 instead of 1E−7 to 1E−14).
- 27.
This is not required for use of non-generic LCIA methods and for additionally included single elementary flows/characterisation factors , unless this would relevantly change the results, what by default can be assumed not to be the case.
- 28.
Comparisons also can occur in accounting type studies (e.g. across product groups in basket-of-product type of studies), while these shall not be used for decision support that would lead to e.g. purchases or policy measures based on superiority or inferiority of the compared alternatives.
- 29.
It depends on the chosen background system model solution whether the processes of the background system also need to be individually identified or whether—if embedding the foreground system into an existing background system—this work has been already done.
- 30.
Observe that virtual subdivision shall not be done if it “cuts” through physically not separable joint processes, as this would distort the substitution.
- 31.
E.g. for wheat grain production, many refinery products, etc.
- 32.
E.g. as for NaOH apart from NaCl electrolysis, or if for a mobile phone the individual function SMS would not be available as commercially relevant, separate consumer product. NaOH provides the general function of neutralising agent and hence other, technically equivalent and competing neutralising agents, KOH, Ca(OH)2, Na2CO3, etc. can be assumed to be superseded. For the case of wheat grain and straw production: instead of straw, other dry biomass (e.g. Miscanthus grass, wood for heating, etc.) provides equivalent functions and can be assumed to be superseded.
- 33.
This is as secondary goods often have distinctly different properties from primary produced goods (e.g. recycled aged plastics vs. primary plastics), what makes a clear assignment to the equivalent or most similar process/system more difficult.
- 34.
This serves to avoid a potentially misleading upscaling of the superseded function's inventory in case of applying market value correction when correcting for the functional differences.
- 35.
Note that this % needs to relate to the appropriate property and unit of the secondary good, e.g. Mass in kg for recycled materials, Lower calorific value in MJ for recovered energy , Pieces in number for reused parts, etc.
- 36.
That means that the earlier named constraint for already fully used, dependent co-products of joint production also applies here: since the production of e.g. a recycled metal as dependent co-product cannot be increased with that same multifunctional process/technology (i.e. by producing more e.g. metal goods, what is of course not happening), its additional provision via primary production cannot be assumed. Instead, alternative routes need to be modelled for the supply of the recycled metal. As stated for the general case, the determining co-product shall not be substituted. The following example explains what that means and why for “closed loop” and “open loop - same primary route” cases nevertheless the primary production is to be substituted: Example: the determining co- product of primary and secondary metal is the primary metal. The secondary metal, after recycling , is the dependent co-product. If this one is fully used in the same or other products and from the perspective of the metal product made of primary metal, recyclability substitution is applied, substituting the secondary good by primary metal. From the perspective of the user of the secondary good “recycled metal”, the metal primary production shall not be substituted, but alternative ways of supplying the recycled metal shall be modelled. This alternative way is, however—what makes this case apparently specific—the primary production of that metal as this is the only way to increase the availability of the required metal on a net basis. Hence in both cases, primary production is to be substituted, but for different reasons.
- 37.
The need is seen to develop supplementing practice-manuals in line with the ILCD and with explicit allocation- criteria/rules for main process and product groups, to further enhance practicability and reproducibility. This could follow the same general logic as applied when developing Product Category Rules (PCR) in support of Environmental Product Declarations (EPD).
- 38.
“Enter” in case of waste and end-of-life treatment services.
- 39.
E.g. if the market value/gate fee is “−1 US$” this would be “1 US$”.
- 40.
Note that this provision ensures fulfilling the ISO 14044 provision on considering the change in inherent properties of the secondary good.
- 41.
The emissions resulting from waste that is directly discarded into the environment shall be modelled as part of the LCI model, with the processes considered to be part of the technosphere.
- 42.
COD = Chemical oxygen demand, BOD = Biological oxygen demand, AOX = Adsorbable organic halogenated compounds, VOC = Volatile organic compounds, NMVOC = Non-methane volatile organic compounds, PAH = Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PCB = Polychlorinated biphenyls, TOC = Total organic carbon, DOC = Dissolved organic carbon.
- 43.
Default -composition tables for different process-types and industries might be developed in PCR-type or sector- specific guidance documents.
- 44.
While this document has been finalised no established and globally applicable practice was available, but several approaches with either only regional applicability or lack of practice experience. These work with fundamentally different inventorying approaches. Any specific recommendation or requirement on inventorying land use and conversion would be implemented and published via revised ILCD reference elementary flows and recommended LCIA methods, and/or a revision of this document.
- 45.
This can be visualised by having all processes connected with each other via their reference flows of interim products and wastes, in the correct amounts. Starting from central process and the amount(s) of the system's functional unit(s) or reference flow(s), all other processes are stepwise, relatively scaled. LCA software with graphical modelling interface shows the system in this way and/or the user is modelling the system explicitly by connecting the processes on that interface. Depending on the modelling approach implemented in the software, other mechanisms can be found that serve the same scaling purpose.
- 46.
Certain LCIA methods use non-linear relationships for the characterisation; if such are used the calculation is non-linear.
- 47.
Note that some weighting methods work without a separate, preceding normalisation, as the normalisation is part of the weighting step.
- 48.
Effects outside the scope of LCA may be—if available and quantified in a comparable manner (e.g. quantitatively related to the functional unit, considering the whole life cycle etc.)—integrated with LCA results in an additional evaluation and report beyond the scope of LCA and outside the scope of the ILCD. This should consider the relative accuracy and precision of the different approaches and effects.
References
EC-JRC European Commission-Joint Research Centre—Institute for Environment and Sustainability.: International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook—General guide for Life Cycle Assessment—Detailed guidance. First edition March 2010. EUR 24708 EN. Luxembourg. Publications Office of the European Union (2010)
ISO 14001:2015.: Environmental Management Systems—Requirements with Guidance for Use. The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva
ISO 14015:2001.: Environmental Management—Environmental Assessment of Sites and Organizations (EASO). The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva
ISO 14024:1999.: Environmental labels and declarations—type I environmental labelling—principles and procedures. The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva
ISO 14025:2006.: Environmental Labels and Declarations—Type III Environmental Declarations—Principles and Procedures. The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva
ISO 14031:2013.: Environmental Management—Environmental Performance Evaluation—Guidelines. The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva
ISO 14040:2006.: Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework. The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva
ISO 14044:2006.: Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Requirements and Guidelines. The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva
ISO/TR 14062:2002.: Environmental management—Integrating Environmental Aspects into Product Design and Development. The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hauschild, M.Z., Bjørn, A. (2018). LCA Cookbook. In: Hauschild, M., Rosenbaum, R., Olsen, S. (eds) Life Cycle Assessment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_37
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_37
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56474-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56475-3
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)