Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 9/2019

12.01.2019 | POLICIES AND SUPPORT IN RELATION TO LCA

Development of Eco-factors for the European Union based on the Ecological Scarcity Method

verfasst von: Marco Muhl, Markus Berger, Matthias Finkbeiner

Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Ausgabe 9/2019

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Purpose

Weighting as an optional step in life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) has recently gained momentum through increased policy requirements in the European Union. In this context, the existing Ecological Scarcity Method (ESM), published and developed in Switzerland, is one method for Distance-to-Target (DtT) weighting which is based on the ratio of desired policy targets to the current environmental situation. The purpose of this study is the application of the ESM to the European Union (EU) as well as its application in a case study.

Methods

Based on the ESM, a baseline set of eco-factors was determined, including weighting factors for a broad set of substances and resource uses based on the current environmental situation and policy targets of the EU. This includes data collection for a wide range of emissions and resource uses, as well as the identification of corresponding binding and non-binding policy targets. In addition to the baseline set, two other sets, considering the short-term and binding character of targets, were compiled for a sensitivity analysis. By applying all sets to the current European environmental situation, a comparative case study was conducted.

Results and discussion

A baseline set including eco-factors for various emissions and resource uses for a total of 11 environmental issues was developed. The application of this baseline set to the current environmental situation of the EU showed a high relative importance of climate change (28%) and main air pollutants (30%) in the aggregated results. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated that if only short-term or binding targets are considered, weighting results in comparison to the baseline set are 43 to 60% lower, respectively. The main reasons for this shift are less restrictive reduction targets (e.g., climate targets) from a short-term perspective or non-existing binding targets.

Conclusions

The ESM was transferred to the EU as a DtT weighting method. The presented eco-factors take into account long-term targets, which could make it a meaningful method for decision-makers promoting forward-looking actions in the EU. Nonetheless, it was not possible to cover all substances (e.g., nitrogen and phosphorus inputs into surface waters and soil, heavy metals and pesticides in soil, mineral primary resources, and radioactive waste) due to the lack of quantitative policy targets and current emission data. Such missing substances or environmental issues should be integrated in the development of future methodologies.
Vorheriger Artikel Environmental impact assessment of biomass process chains at early design stages using decision trees
Nächster Artikel Determining the climate impact of food for use in a climate tax—design of a consistent and transparent model

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
Ahbe S, Schebek L, Jansky N et al (2014) Methode der ökologischen Knappheit für Deutschland – Eine Initiative der Volkswagen AG. Logos Verlag, Berlin
Ahbe S, Weihofen S, Wellge S (2017) The ecological scarcity method for the European Union—a Volkswagen research initiative: environmental assessments. Springer
Ahlroth S (2014) The use of valuation and weighting sets in environmental impact assessment. Resour Conserv Recycl 85:34–41CrossRef
Bare J (2011) TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Techn Environ Policy 13:687–696CrossRef
Bare JC, Norris GA, Pennington DW, McKone T (2002) TRACI—the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6:49–78CrossRef
Benini L, Mancini L, Sala S et al (2014) Normalisation method and data for environmental footprints. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxemburg, Luxemburg
Berger M, Pfister S, Bach V, Finkbeiner M (2015) Saving the Planet’s climate or water resources? The trade-off between carbon and water footprints of European biofuels. Sustainability 7:6665–6683CrossRef
Büsser S, Frischknecht R, Hayashi K, Kono J (2012) Ecological scarcity Japan. ESU-Services Ltd., Uster
Castellani V, Benini L, Sala S, Pant R (2016) A distance-to-target weighting method for Europe 2020. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:1159–1169CrossRef
Cheroennet N, Pongpinyopap S, Leejarkpai T, Suwanmanee U (2016) A trade-off between carbon and water impacts in bio-based box production chains in Thailand: a case study of PS, PLAS, PLAS/starch, and PBS. J Clean Prod 167:987–1001CrossRef
EC (2011) COM(2011) 112 final. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050. European Commission
EC (2016) Environmental Footprint Pilot Guidance document - Guidance for the implementation of the EU Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) during the Environmental Footprint (EF) pilot phase, version 5.2. European Commission
EP (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Off. J. Eur. Comm. 327:0001-0073.
EP (2009) Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC (Text with EEA relevance). Off. J. Eur. Union 140:16–62.
EP (2013) Directive 2013/39/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 August 2013 amending Directives 2000/60/EC and 2008/105/EC as regards priority substances in the field of water policy Text with EEA relevance. Off. J. Eur. Union 226:1–17.
EP (2016) Directive 2016/2284 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016 on the reduction of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants, amending Directive 2003/35/EC and repealing Directive 2001/81/EC (Text with EEA relevance). Off. J. Eur. Union 344:1–31.
EU (2013) 2013/179/EU: Commission Recommendation of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations Text with EEA relevance. 124:1–210.
Finkbeiner M, Ackermann R, Bach V et al (2014) Challenges in life cycle assessment: an overview of current gaps and research needs. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 207–258
French Ministry for Agriculture. Food and Forests (2010) Ecophyto 2018. Progress Report. Initial changes 2008-2009 in the NODU, the Ecophyto 2018 progress indicator. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries (MAAP)
Frischknecht R, Büsser Knöpfel S (2013) Swiss Eco-Factors 2013 according to the Ecological Scarcity Method. Methodological fundamentals and their application in Switzerland. Environmental studies no. 1330. Federal Office for the Environment, Bern
Goedkoop M, Spriensma R (2001) The eco-indicator 99 A damage oriented method for life cycle impact assessment. Methodology Report. B.V. Amersfoort, The Netherlands
Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M et al (2013) ReCiPe 2008. A LCIA method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. First edition (version 1.08). Report I: characterisation
Grinberg M, Ackermann R, Finkbeiner M (2012) Ecological scarcity method: adaptation and implementation for different countries. Sci J Riga Tech Univ Environ Clim Technol 10:9–15
Hauschild M, Potting J (2005) Spatial differentiation in Life Cycle impact assessment - The EDIP2003 methodology. Danish Ministry of Environment, Environmental Protection Agency
Hauschild M, Wenzel H (1998) Environmental assessment of products: scientific background (Vol. 2). Chapman & Hall, United Kingdom/ Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham, MA, USA
Huppes G, Van Oers L, Pretato U, Pennington DW (2012) Weighting environmental effects: analytic survey with operational evaluation methods and a meta-method. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:876–891CrossRef
IPCC (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA
ISO 14044 (2006) ISO 14044—environmental management—life cycle assessment— requirements and guidelines. International Standard Organization.
Itsubo N, Sakagami M, Washida T, Kokubu K, Inaba A (2004) Weighting across safeguard subjects for LCIA through the application of conjoint analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9:196–205CrossRef
Itsubo N, Sakagami M, Kuriyama K, Inaba A (2012) Statistical analysis for the development of national average weighting factors—visualization of the variability between each individual’s environmental thoughts. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:488–498CrossRef
Kägi T, Dinkel F, Frischknecht R, Humbert S, Lindberg J, de Mester S, Ponsioen T, Sala S, Schenker UW (2016) Session “Midpoint, endpoint or single score for decision-making?”—SETAC Europe 25th Annual Meeting, May 5th, 2015. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:129–132CrossRef
Lecksiwilai N, Gheewala SH, Silalertruksa T, Mungkalasiri J (2017) LCA of biofuels in Thailand using Thai Ecological Scarcity method. J Clean Prod 142:1183–1191CrossRef
Lindfors LG, Kim Christiansen K, Hoffman L et al (1995) Nordic guidelines on life-cycle assessment. Nordic Council of Ministers, Århus
Miyazaki N, Siegenthaler C, Schoenbaum T, Azuma K (1994) Japan Environmental Policy Priorities Index (JEPIX) – Calculation of Ecofactors for Japan: Method for Environmental Accounting based on the EcoScarcity Principle. 7. International Christian University Social Science Research Institute, Tokyo
Modahl IS, Askham C, Lyng K-A, Brekke A (2012) Weighting of environmental trade-offs in CCS? An LCA case study of electricity from a fossil gas power plant with post-combustion CO2 capture, transport and storage. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:932–943CrossRef
Müller-Wenk R (1978) Die ökologische Buchhaltung: Ein Informations- und Steuerungsinstrument für umweltkonforme Unternehmenspolitik. Campus-Verlag, Frankfurt
OECD (2003) Environmental performance reviews: water; performance and challenges in OECD countries. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD, Paris
Payen S, Basset-Mens C, Perret S (2015) LCA of local and imported tomato: an energy and water trade-off. J Clean Prod 87:139–148CrossRef
Pizzol M, Weidema B, Brandão M, Osset P (2015) Monetary valuation in life cycle assessment: a review. J Clean Prod 86:170–179CrossRef
Pizzol M, Laurent A, Sala S, Weidema B, Verones F, Koffler C (2017) Normalisation and weighting in life cycle assessment: quo vadis? Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:853–866CrossRef
Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin FS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B, de Wit CA, Hughes T, van der Leeuw S, Rodhe H, Sörlin S, Snyder PK, Costanza R, Svedin U, Falkenmark M, Karlberg L, Corell RW, Fabry VJ, Hansen J, Walker B, Liverman D, Richardson K, Crutzen P, Foley JA (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475CrossRef
Sala S, Benini L, Mancini L, Pant R (2015) Integrated assessment of environmental impact of Europe in 2010: data sources and extrapolation strategies for calculating normalisation factors. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1568–1585CrossRef
Sandin G, Peters GM, Svanström M (2015) Using the planetary boundaries framework for setting impact-reduction targets in LCA contexts. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1684–1700CrossRef
Steen B, Arvidsson P, Nobel Gunnar Borg A, et al (1999a) A systematic approach to environmental priority strategies in product development (EPS). Version 2000 – General system characteristics. Centre for Environmental Assessment of Products and Material Systems. Chalmers University of Technology, Technical Environmental Planning
Steen B, Arvidsson P, Nobel Gunnar Borg A, et al (1999b) A systematic approach to environmental priority strategies in product development (EPS). Version 2000 – Models and data of the default method. Centre for Environmental Assessment of Products and Material Systems. Chalmers University of Technology, Technical Environmental Planning
Tuomisto HL, Hodge ID, Riordan P, MacDonald DW (2012) Exploring a safe operating approach to weighting in life cycle impact assessment—a case study of organic, conventional and integrated farming systems. J Clean Prod 37:147–153CrossRef
UNEP (2016) Handbook for the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Tenth edition (2016). Secretariat for The Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer & The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi
Weidema BP (2009) Using the budget constraint to monetarise impact assessment results. Ecol Econ 68:1591–1598CrossRef
Zhang C, Anadon LD, Mo H, Zhao Z, Liu Z (2014) Water-carbon trade-off in China’s coal power industry. Environ Sci Technol 48:11082–11089CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Development of Eco-factors for the European Union based on the Ecological Scarcity Method
verfasst von
Marco Muhl
Markus Berger
Matthias Finkbeiner
Publikationsdatum
12.01.2019
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Ausgabe 9/2019
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Elektronische ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1577-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2019

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 9/2019 Zur Ausgabe

BUILDING COMPONENTS AND BUILDINGS

A bottom-up approach for implementation of Environmental Product Declarations in Mexico’s housing sector

LCIA OF IMPACTS ON HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS

IMPACT World+: a globally regionalized life cycle impact assessment method

LAND USE IN LCA

An LCA impact assessment model linking land occupation and malnutrition-related DALYs

ENVIRONMENTAL LCC

Estimation of shadow prices of soil organic carbon depletion and freshwater depletion for use in LCA

COMMENTARY AND DISCUSSION ARTICLE

Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?

LCA FOR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND FOOD PRODUCTS

Life cycle assessment with primary data on heavy rare earth oxides from ion-adsorption clays