Top

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

Published in:

17-10-2017 | COMMENTARY AND DISCUSSION ARTICLE

Are we still keeping it “real”? Proposing a revised paradigm for recycling credits in attributional life cycle assessment

Authors: Christoph Koffler, Matthias Finkbeiner

Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Issue 1/2018

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Purpose

End-of-life (EoL) recycling poses a challenge to many practitioners today due to the availability of different calculation approaches and the lack of scientific consensus, which is fueled by academic research and vested industry interests alike. One of the main challenges in EoL modeling is the credible calculation of the appropriate recycling credit in open-loop and closed-loop situations.

Methods

We believe that part of the challenge is caused by a lack of understanding of the underlying recycling paradigm, which refers to the meaning that is assigned to the recycling credit. Referred to as “system expansion through substitution” and “future displacement of primary production,” the two predominant paradigms are delineated from each other followed by a discussion of their remaining challenges.

Results and discussion

Based on these considerations, we propose a revised paradigm based on embodied burdens that is able to alleviate many of the most pressing issues associated with material recycling in attributional life cycle assessment.

Conclusions

With this discussion paper, we look forward to a productive and lively debate on the matter.

previous article Identification of methodological challenges remaining in the assessment of a water scarcity footprint: a review

next article How suitable is LCA for nanotechnology assessment? Overview of current methodological pitfalls and potential solutions: 65th LCA Discussion Forum, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zürich, May 24, 2017

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

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!

inform now

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!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

The overall recycling rate (collection rate times recycling yield) of 80% does not lead to a credit of exactly 80% of the manufacturing burden in the example for neither scenario due to the way scrap inputs into the worldsteel inventories affect the mass flows under the net scrap approach (see the Electronic Supplementary Material).

From the perspective of the scrap-receiving producer, the price paid should cover more than just the collection, pre-treatment, distribution, and profit margin of the EoL value chain; first and foremost, there needs to be a cost associated with the material itself for the end-of-waste stage to be reached.

Allacker K, Mathieux F, Pennington D, Pant R (2017) The search for an appropriate end-of-life formula for the purpose of the European Commission Environmental Footprint initiative. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22(9):1441–1458CrossRef

Atherton J (2007) Declaration by the metals industry on recycling principles. Int J Life Cycle Asssess 12(1):59–60CrossRef

Attanasio A et al (2017) Towards greener concrete: the challenges of SUS-CON project. In: Hordijk D, Luković M (eds) High tech concrete: where technology and engineering meet. Springer, Berlin, pp 2373–2381

Baitz M et al (2013) LCA’s theory and practice: like ebony and ivory living in perfect harmony? Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(1):5–13CrossRef

Bohnacker J (1998) Einfluß von Recyclingverfahren auf die umweltliche Produktbilanz. Shaker Verlag, Aachen

Bontempi E (2017) A new approach for evaluating the sustainability of raw materials substitution based on embodied energy and the CO2 footprint. J Clean Prod 162:162–169CrossRef

CEN (2012) EN 15804:2012—sustainability of construction works—environmental product declarations—core rules for the product category of construction products. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization

den Hollander MC, Bakker CA, Hultink EJ (2017) Product design in a circular economy—development of a typology of key concepts and terms. J Ind Ecol 21(3):517–525CrossRef

Densley Tingley D, Davison B (2012) Developing an LCA methodology to account for the environmental benefits of design for deconstruction. Build Environ 57:387–395CrossRef

Finkbeiner M, Neugebauer S, Berger M (2013) Carbon footprint of recycled biogenic products: the challenge of modelling CO2 removal credits. Int J Sustain Eng 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2012.663414

Frischknecht R (2010) LCI modelling approaches applied on recycling of materials in view of environmental sustainability, risk perception and eco-efficiency. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(7):666–671CrossRef

Han M et al (2017) Global water transfers embodied in Mainland China’s foreign trade: production- and consumption-based perspectives. J Clean Prod 161:188–199CrossRef

Heijungs R (2014) Ten easy lessons for good communication of LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:473–476CrossRef

ISO (2006a) ISO 14040—environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization

ISO (2006b) ISO 14044—environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization

ISO (2012) ISO/TR 14049—environmental management—life cycle assessment—illustrative examples on how to apply ISO 14044 to goal and scope definition and inventory analysis. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization

Koffler C (2014) Reply to “Ten easy lessons for good communication of LCA” by Reinout Heijungs. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1170–1171CrossRef

Koffler C, Florin J (2013) Tackling the downcycling issue—a revised approach to value-corrected substitution in life cycle assessment of aluminum (VCS 2.0). Sustainability 5:4546–4560CrossRef

Koffler C, Wang JM (2017) Comment on “Toward estimating displaced primary production from recycling—a case study of U.S. aluminum” by Zink et al. (2017). J Ind Ecol. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12656

Krinke S, Bossdorf-Zimmer B, Goldmann D (2005) Executive summary—life cycle assessment of end-of-life vehicle treatment. Volkswagen AG, Wolfsburg

Lindeijer E (1994) Allocating recycling for integrated chain management: taking account of quality losses. SETAC, Brüssel

Mengarelli M et al (2017) End-of-life modelling in life cycle assessment—material or product-centred perspective? Int J Life Cycle Assess 22(8):1288–1301CrossRef

Popper KR (1972) Objective knowledge: an evolutionary approach. Revised edition ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Schrijvers D, Loubet P, Sonnemann G (2016) Developing a systematic framework for consistent allocation in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21(7):976–993CrossRef

Sitang L, Huiqiang L (2005) Quantitative assessment on the embodied environmental impact of concrete with or without fly ash. J Wuhan Univ Technol 20(3):99–103CrossRef

Sodersten C-J, Wood R, Hertwich EG (2017) Environmental impacts of capital formation. J Ind Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12532

Talens Peiro L, Ardente F, Mathieux F (2017) Design for disassembly criteria in EU product policies for a more circular economy: a method for analyzing battery packs in PC-tablet and subnotebooks. J Ind Ecol 21(3):731–741CrossRef

The Quartz Project, 2015. The Quartz Common Products Database. [Online] Available at: http://quartzproject.org/[Accessed 10 July 2017]

Vadenbo C, Hellweg S, Astrup TF (2016) Let’s be clear(er) about substitution—a reporting framework to account for product displacement in life cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12519

Weidema BP (2003) Market information in life cycle assessment, Copenhagen. Danish Environmental Protection Agency

Weidema BP (2017) In search of a consistent solution to allocation of joint production. J Ind Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12571

Werner F (2002) Treatment of aluminium recycling in LCA—development and evaluation of the value-corrected substitution procedure. EMPA, Duebendorf

Wilts H et al (2016) Benefits of resource efficiency in Germany, Wuppertal: Wuppertal Institute worldsteel (2011) Life Cycle Assessment Methodology Report, Brussels: worldsteel association

worldsteel (2011) Methodology report — Life cycle inventory study for steel products. worldsteel association, Brussels. Available at https://www.worldsteel.org/en/dam/jcr:6a222ba2-e35a-4126-83ab-5ae5a79e6e46/LCA+Methodology+Report.pdf. Accessed: Oct. 12, 2017

Wu X, Chen G (2017) Energy and water nexus in power generation: the surprisingly high amount of industrial water use induced by solar power infrastructure in China. Appl Energ 195:125–136CrossRef

Zink T, Geyer R (2017) Circular economy rebound. J Ind Ecol 21(3):593–602CrossRef

Zink T, Geyer R, Startz R (2015) A market-based framework for quantifying displaced production from recycling or reuse. J Ind Ecol 20(4):719–729CrossRef

Zink T, Geyer R, Startz R (2017) Toward estimating displaced primary production from recycling—a case study of U.S. aluminum. J Ind Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12557

Title: Are we still keeping it “real”? Proposing a revised paradigm for recycling credits in attributional life cycle assessment
Authors: Christoph Koffler
Matthias Finkbeiner
Publication date: 17-10-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1404-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results and discussion

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

How suitable is LCA for nanotechnology assessment? Overview of current methodological pitfalls and potential solutions: 65th LCA Discussion Forum, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zürich, May 24, 2017

Modelling environmental effects of selected agricultural management strategies with regional statistically based screening LCA

The effect of local climate and soil drainage on the environmental impact of grass-based milk production

Enhancing comprehensive measurement of social impacts in S-LCA by including environmental and economic aspects

Comparative life cycle assessment of re-use and replacement for video projectors

Attributional versus consequential life cycle assessment and feed optimization: alternative protein sources in pig diets