Life cycle assessment of light-emitting diode downlight luminaire—a case study

Tähkämö, Leena; Bazzana, Manuel; Ravel, Pierre; Grannec, Francis; Martinsons, Christophe; Zissis, Georges

doi:10.1007/s11367-012-0542-4

Cited by 41 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3. The results of the Tähkämö et al (2013) study were confirmed in a more recent comparative LCA for LED lighting products, which also considered an even shorter scenario of 1000 hours lifetime (compared to 15,000 and 40,000 hours lifetimes) (Casamayor et al 2017). Not only did the assumption of shorter lifetimes result in significantly higher impacts of both LED products considered, but it also resulted in the main environmental impacts coming from the manufacturing, rather than the use phase.…”

Section: Lca Approachsupporting

confidence: 60%

“…However, certain factors can influence the distributions, including lifetimes. Tähkämö et al (2013) also found that the shorter the LED lifetime, the larger the share of manufacturing in the total life cycle impacts (due to the need for manufacturing additional replacement lamps), as shown in Fig. 3.…”

Section: Lca Approachmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…However, for energy-using products for which the majority of life cycle impacts occur in the use phase, studies have indicated that increased durability may not be preferred to replacement with more efficient products (Boulos et al 2015;Cooper and Gutowski 2015;Gutowski et al 2011). Tähkämö et al (2013) examined the role of lifetime in influencing the overall environmental impact for the case of an LED downlight luminaire. The authors found that the average environmental impact of a luminaire with 50,000 hours useful life was 34% lower (with a range of 2-70% among different impact categories) and 36,000 hours useful life was 23% lower (1-47%) compared to 15,000 hours useful life.…”

Section: Lca Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Optimal durability in least life cycle cost methods: the case of LED lamps

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the European Union (EU), mandatory durability ecodesign requirements have recently been set for some products, including lighting products; further development of durability standards is also expected in the future. Durability standards can bring environmental and consumer benefits, but the question remains about what optimal durability is. In this paper, the product lifetime aspect of durability is considered, and optimal lifetimes in relation to least life cycle cost (LCC) for the consumer are analysed. The paper focusses the analysis on a case of LED lamps available in an online market in December 2016 and models optimal lifetimes from an LCC perspective. The statistical error of the regression does not allow for calculation of the optima with precision, but the calculation indicates optimal lifetime is close to 25,000 hours. The influence of smaller discount rates and more intensive use of the product are also modelled, which indicate that durability is desirable in intense-use scenarios in particular. The usefulness of the method is discussed and the findings are compared to previous literature and studies examining durability and increased lifetimes for products, including those using an alternative approach of life cycle assessment (LCA). The initial results of this LCC method indicate that longer lifetimes than those currently required by legal standards in the EU could be appropriate for LED lamps. As such, the advantages and disadvantages of different policy instruments to stimulate increased durability are also discussed. The paper concludes with suggestions for potential future research and further policy development.

show abstract

Section: Lca Approachsupporting

confidence: 60%

Section: Lca Approachmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Lca Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Optimal durability in least life cycle cost methods: the case of LED lamps

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Parson, 2006). All the comparative studies indicate this condition (Michaud andBelley, 2008, DEFRA, 2009;Ramroth, 2008;OSRAM, 2009;Weltz, et al, 2011;Elijošiutė et al, 2012;DOE, 2012b,Tähkämö et al, 2013Hadi et al, 2013;Principi e Fioretti, 2014;Sangwanet al, 2014;Tahkamo et al, 2014;Bergesen et al, 2015;Tan et al, 2015;Yu et al, 2016). DOE (2012b) and OSRAM (2009) already indicate that LED lamps will be able to reduce more emissions when achieving its technological apex.…”

Section: Results Comparisons and Influencesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…street light bulb VS household light bulb) and functional unit (as shown in Table 2). Thus, results can vary considerably, for example, 0.32 kg of CO2 equivalent (Principi and Fioretti, 2014) to 3,300 kg CO2 equivalent (Hadi et al, 2013) for LED LCAs, as can show similarities, 115.4 kg of CO2 equivalent (OSRAM, 2009) to 112 kg CO2 equivalent (Tähkämö et al, 2013). Other methodological definitions (e.g.…”

Section: Results Comparisons and Influencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of functional unit on life cycle assessment of lamps: a review of results

Nazaro

Zanghelini

Cherubini

et al. 2017

LALCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As lâmpadas foram desenvolvidas da tecnologia incandescente, para a fluorescente e para o diodo emissor de luz (LED), o que aumentou a eficiência na conversão da iluminação e estendeu a vida útil do produto, consequentemente ocasionando na diminuição dos impactos ambientais. No entanto, a melhoria da fase de uso das lâmpadas, exige um sistema de produção mais complexo, incluindo (por vezes) materiais perigosos, o que piorou também sua disposição final. Estudos de Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida (ACV) são desenvolvidos desde 1996 envolvendo lâmpadas, e agora, com a evolução da tecnologia, as comparações estão ficando mais comuns. Esses estudos geram resultados variados, em que a unidade funcional (UF) desempenha um papel fundamental para gerar essas diferenças, mesmo quando os sistemas de produto são semelhantes, dificultando a compreensão das comparações. O objetivo deste artigo é analisar a produção científica de ACVs de lâmpadas, desenvolvendo um panorama dos sistemas de produto e suas definições de UF, bem como dos resultados, para indicar tendências e padrões da aplicação neste tema. A metodologia proposta foi de uma revisão integrativa da literatura aplicada a bases de dados científicos e outros documentos. A pesquisa identificou 16 artigos, onde ficou evidente o recente aumento dos estudos de ACVs comparativos. Nesta amostragem foram encontradas quatro diferentes definições de UF. Contudo, uma descrição complementar do desempenho do produto permite equalizar a UF numa base comum, em que os valores para a mudança climática têm mostrado que as lâmpadas LED são preferíveis às lâmpadas fluorescentes, que são preferíveis às incandescentes. Embora a comparação tenha sido possível, a UF deve ser claramente indicada para representar a função dos produtos, neste caso: a quantidade de lúmen.horas. Resumen Las lámparas se han desarrollado a partir de la tecnología incandescente, fluorescente, y un diodo emisor de luz (LED), lo que significa un aumento de la eficiencia de conversión de luz, que extiende la vida útil del producto y reduce así el impacto ambiental. Sin embargo, mejorar la fase de uso de las lámparas requiere un sistema de producción más complejo, incluyendo (a veces) materiales peligrosos, lo que empeora la disposición final. La Análisis del Ciclo de Vida (ACV) se ha dirigido a las lámparas desde 1996, y ahora con su evolución, las comparaciones son cada vez más comunes. Estos estudios llevan a resultados diferentes, donde la unidad funcional (UF) tiene un papel clave para la generación de estas diferencias, mismo cuando los sistemas de productos son similares, lo que dificultaría la comprensión general de las comparaciones. El objetivo fue analizar la producción científica de ACV de lámparas, el desarrollo de un marco de sistemas de productos, la definición de UF y los resultados para indicar tendencias y normas de aplicación de la metodología del ACV, incluyendo las posibilidades de comparabilidad. La metodología propuesta fue una revisión integrativa de la literatura aplicada a bases de datos científicas y análisis de contenido de documentos adicionales. La investigación identificó 16 artículos, donde está claro el reciente aumento en los estudios comparativos de ACV dirigidos a las tecnologías de iluminación. Había 4 diferentes definiciones de UF en los documentos. Sin embargo, la descripción adicional del rendimiento del producto permite equiparar el UF a una base común, donde los valores para el cambio climático han demostrado que las lámparas LED son mejores que las fluorescentes, que a su vez son preferibles que las incandescentes. Aunque esto podría ser posible, UF debe estar siempre claramente indicado y representar la función de los productos, en este caso la cantidad lúmen.hora de una lámpara Abstract Lamps have been developed since incandescent technology, to fluorescent and light emitted diode (LED), increasing lighting conversion efficiency, extending product’s life span, and, consequently, decreasing environmental impacts. However, improving the use phase of lamps demand a more complex production system, including (sometimes) hazardous materials, what have worsened final disposal as well. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has been addressed to lamps since 1996, and now with its evolution, comparisons are getting more common. These studies lead to different results, wherein functional unit (FU) plays a key role to generate these differences, even when product systems are similar, making difficult the overall understanding of comparisons. We aimed to analyze the scientific production of LCA of lamps, developing a framework of the product systems, the FU definition and the results to indicate trends and patterns of the LCA methodology application, including comparison possibilities. The proposed methodology was an integrative literature review applied to scientific databases and further papers content analysis. The survey identified 16 papers, where it is clear the recent increase on comparative LCA studies addressed to lighting technologies. There were 4 different FU definitions in papers. However, complementary description of product performance enable one to equalize FU into a common basis, wherein values for climate change have shown that LED lamps are preferable than fluorescents, that are preferable than incandescent. Even though this was possible, FU should be clearly indicated and represent products function, in this case: an amount of lumen-hour.

show abstract

Embodied Carbon of Sustainable Technologies

Finnegan

2018

Embodied Carbon in Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Life cycle assessment of light-emitting diode downlight luminaire—a case study

Cited by 41 publications

References 4 publications

Optimal durability in least life cycle cost methods: the case of LED lamps

Optimal durability in least life cycle cost methods: the case of LED lamps

The influence of functional unit on life cycle assessment of lamps: a review of results

Embodied Carbon of Sustainable Technologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About