Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Margni, Manuele; Curran, Mary Ann

doi:10.1002/9781118528372.ch4

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It represents the limitations and applications of the LCA and sets out the guidance and requirement for the LCA. In addition, the quantity and quality of the collected data are also provided by this standard [20,21].…”

Section: Methods For Lcamentioning

confidence: 99%

Abiotic Depletion of Boron: An Update Characterization Factors for CML 2002 and ReCiPe

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The risk of resource depletion for future generations of humanity is often cited as an important issue. The choice of impact categories and characterization models for resource extraction in LCA is no more precise than other impact categories and models. This means that more discussion is needed on the use of resources. In this article, the potential depletion of Boron and Boron minerals (Colemanite, Ulexite, Tincal) are studied. These minerals have a big role for the world and for Turkey; however, this resource is limited. Using the life cycle assessment methodology, one can estimate the resource depletion through the indicator “abiotic resource depletion”. Several models can evaluate this indicator, but the most used models are ReCiPe and CML (that is the previous attempt of ReCiPe) methods. Here, we estimated the damage that is done to natural resource scarcity. The values that are calculated by these two methods were compared to identify the potential evolution of the model and to observe the gap between these two models. The ReCiPe method refers to the average amount of extra ore that is produced in the future to extract 1 kg of boron ore or boron minerals resource. On the other hand, The CML method depends on the final reserve amount in terms of depletion. The results show no depletion shortly for boron ore and boron minerals. Correlation coefficients were calculated in the ReCiPe method, and ‘high uncertainty’ was estimated since R2 < 0.8. This research highlights the fact that there is the necessity to propose different impact factors for the various minerals and not only for boron (that is done today).

show abstract

Section: Methods For Lcamentioning

confidence: 99%

Abiotic Depletion of Boron: An Update Characterization Factors for CML 2002 and ReCiPe

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the second phase of LCA, compiling the inventory data can be very resource and time-intensive. Lack of readily available inventory data or poor data quality and lack of spatial and temporal considerations in inventory data are the main limitations in LCA methodology [7,12,13,16]. In the third phase of LCA, one of the limitations is the missing data that link emissions to different impact categories.…”

Section: Major Limitations Of Lca Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the third phase of LCA, one of the limitations is the missing data that link emissions to different impact categories. Besides, the impact models and impact assessment approaches do not consider the spatial and temporal differentiation in inventory data [16,17]. Assumptions about global homogeneity and steady-state conditions introduce the most severe errors in impact assessment.…”

Section: Major Limitations Of Lca Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysing Temporal Variability in Inventory Data for Life Cycle Assessment: Implications in the Context of Circular Economy

Shoaib-ul-Hasan¹,

Roci²,

Asif³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is used frequently as a decision support tool for evaluating different design choices of products based on their environmental impacts. A life cycle usually comprises several phases of varying timespan. The amount of emissions generated from different life cycle phases of a product could be significantly different from one another. In conventional LCA, the emissions generated from the life cycle phases of a product are aggregated at the inventory analysis stage, which is then used as an input for life cycle impact assessment. However, when the emissions are aggregated, the temporal variability of inventory data is ignored, which may result in inaccurate environmental impact assessment. Besides, the conventional LCA does not consider the environmental impact of circular products with multiple use cycles. It poses difficulties in identifying the hotspots of emission-intensive activities with the potential to mislead conclusions and implications for both practice and policy. To address this issue and to analyse the embedded temporal variations in inventory data in a CE context, the paper proposes to calculate the emission intensity for each life cycle phase. It is argued that calculating and comparing emission intensity, based on the timespan and amount of emissions for individual life cycle phases, at the inventory analysis stage of LCA offers a complementary approach to the traditional aggregate emission-based LCA approach. In a circular scenario, it helps to identify significant issues during different life cycle phases and the relevant environmental performance improvement opportunities through product, business model and supply chain design.

show abstract

“…According to industrial evaluations, in a comparison with Fused Alumina, the energy consumption for one tonne of tabular alumina is in the range 20-35% the energy required by Fused Alumina, which is in the range from For the successive analysis of LCIA, the chosen methodology is "ReCiPe Midpoint (H)", which covers 18 mid-point impact indicators, and adopting the perspective approach "hierarchist". The "ReCiPe" methodology ( [11,12]), acronym for the four developers "RIVM" (Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment [13]), Radboud University, CML (Centruum voor Milieukunde Leiden at the Leiden University's Institute of Environmental Sciences) and Prè Consultants, represents an "alignment of two families of methods for LCIA: the midpoint-oriented CML 2002 method and the endpoint-oriented Eco-indicator 99 method". For this reason, it exists in two versions, as both a midpoint approach and as a damage-oriented (endpoint) approach.…”

Section: Processes For Alumina-based Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle Assessment Comparison of Two Refractory Brick Product Systems for Ladle Lining in Secondary Steelmaking

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to compare the environmental performance of two types of refractory bricks for the internal lining of ladles in secondary steelmaking, where the dissolved inclusions coming from the refractory material require fine control to obtain the target steel quality. In this context, magnesia-carbon-based refractories are largely utilized, thanks to the adequate durability of the ladle lining in terms of number of heats before re-lining, but the utilization of organic binders in the mixture (pitch, resins) arises ecological and human health concerns. Concurrently, research efforts in refractory material science look at improving the quality of steel by reducing the content of dissolved carbon due to the release from the bricks, thus focusing on different refractory materials and specifically on alumina-based materials. The European Commission funded the research project “LeanStory”, aiming to promote such new lines of refractories through the cooperation between industrial partners and scholars where different recipes are considered. In the present paper, two representative systems of the refractory types considered, magnesia-carbon and magnesia-alumina, are compared with a preliminary Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Suppliers and transports for the two product systems have been taken into account, referring to one tonne of refractory material as the functional unit for comparison. Preliminary impact results (adopting the ReCiPe Midpoint–Hierarchist perspective methodology for calculating the impact indicators) show that the new solution performs largely better almost for each indicator. Further investigations are required in order to assess the ecological performance of the two systems, considering the effective consumption of bricks for the production of steel.

show abstract

Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Cited by 17 publications

References 35 publications

Abiotic Depletion of Boron: An Update Characterization Factors for CML 2002 and ReCiPe

Abiotic Depletion of Boron: An Update Characterization Factors for CML 2002 and ReCiPe

Analysing Temporal Variability in Inventory Data for Life Cycle Assessment: Implications in the Context of Circular Economy

Life Cycle Assessment Comparison of Two Refractory Brick Product Systems for Ladle Lining in Secondary Steelmaking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About