Background, Aim and Scope. In 2005 a comprehensive comparison of LCIA toxicity characterisation models was initiated by the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, directly involving the model developers of CalTOX, IMPACT 2002, USES-LCA, BETR, EDIP, WATSON, and EcoSense. In this paper we describe this model-comparison process and its results-in particular the scientific consensus model developed by the model developers. The main objectives of this effort were (i) to identify specific sources of differences between the models' results and structure, (ii) to detect the indispensable model components, and (iii) to build a scientific consensus model from them, representing recommended practice. Methods. A chemical test set of 45 organics covering a wide range of property combinations was selected for this purpose. All models used this set. In three workshops, the model comparison participants identified key fate, exposure and effect issues via comparison of the final characterisation factors and selected intermediate outputs for fate, human exposure and toxic effects for the test set applied to all models. Results. Through this process, we were able to reduce inter-model variation from an initial range of up to 13 orders of magnitude down to no more than 2 orders of magnitude for any substance. This led to the development of USEtox, a scientific consensus model that contains only the most influential model elements. These were, for example, process formulations accounting for intermittent rain, defining a closed or open system environment, or nesting an urban box in a continental box. Discussion. The precision of the new characterisation factors (CFs) is within a factor of 100-1000 for human health and 10-100 for freshwater ecotoxicity of all other models compared to 12 orders of magnitude variation between the CFs of each model respectively. The achieved reduction of inter-model variability by up to 11 orders of magnitude is a significant improvement.Conclusions. USEtox provides a parsimonious and transparent tool for human health and ecosystem CF estimates. Based on a referenced database, it has now been used to calculate CFs for several thousand substances and forms the basis of the recommendations from UNEP-SETAC's Life Cycle Initiative regarding characterization of toxic impacts in Life Cycle Assessment. Recommendations and Perspectives. We provide both recommended and interim (not recommended and to be used with caution) characterisation factors for human health and freshwater ecotoxicity impacts. After a process of consensus building among stakeholders on a broad scale as well as several improvements regarding a wider and easier applicability of the model, USEtox will become available to practitioners for the calculation of further CFs. Keywords: Consensus model, life cycle impact assessment, LCIA, characterization modelling, comparison, harmonisation, human exposure, toxic impact, human toxicity, freshwater ecotoxicity, comparative impact assessment, characterization factors 1 Background, Aim and Scope In ...

The new IMPACT 2002+ life cycle impact assessment methodology proposes a feasible implementation of a combined midpoint/ damage approach, linking all types of life cycle inventory results (elementary flows and other interventions) via 14 midpoint categories ro four damage categories. For IMPACT 2002% new concepts and methods have been developed, especially for the comparative assessment of human toxicity and ecotoxicity. Human Damage Factors are calculated for carcinogens and non-carcinogens, employing intake fractions, best estimates of dose-response slope factors, as well as severities. The transfer of contaminants into the human food is no more based on consumption surveys, but accounts for agricultural and livestock production levels. Indoor and outdoor air emissions can be compared and the intermittent character of rainfall is considered. Both human toxicity and ecoroxicity effect factors are based on mean responses rather than on conservative assumptions. Other midpoint categories are adapted from existing characterizing methods (Eco-indicator 99 and CML 2002). All midpoint scores are expressed in units of a reference substance and related to the four damage categories human health, ecosystem quality, climate change, and resources. Normalization can be performed either at midpoint or at damage level. The IMPACT 2002+ method presently provides characterization factors for almost 1500 different LCI-results, which can be downloaded at http://www.epfl.ch/impact

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is a method for evaluating the environmental impacts of products holistically, including direct and supply chain impacts. The current LCA methodologies and the standards by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) impose practical difficulties for drawing system boundaries; decisions on inclusion or exclusion of processes in an analysis (the cutoff criteria) are typically not made on a scientific basis. In particular, the requirement of deciding which processes could be excluded from the inventory can be rather difficult to meet because many excluded processes have often never been assessed by the practitioner, and therefore, their negligibility cannot be guaranteed. LCA studies utilizing economic input-output analysis have shown that, in practice, excluded processes can contribute as much to the product system under study as included processes; thus, the subjective determination of the system boundary may lead to invalid results. System boundaries in LCA are discussed herein with particular attention to outlining hybrid approaches as methods for resolving the boundary selection problem in LCA. An input-output model can be used to describe at least a part of a product system, and an ISO-compatible system boundary selection procedure can be designed by applying hybrid input-output-assisted approaches. There are several hybrid input-output analysis-based LCA methods that can be implemented in practice for broadening system boundary and also for ISO compliance.