Skip to main content
Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 10/2018

08.01.2018 | UNCERTAINTIES IN LCA

Uncertainty in LCA case study due to allocation approaches and life cycle impact assessment methods

verfasst von: Edivan Cherubini, Davide Franco, Guilherme Marcelo Zanghelini, Sebastião Roberto Soares

Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Ausgabe 10/2018

Einloggen

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

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Purpose

Uncertainty is present in many forms in life cycle assessment (LCA). However, little attention has been paid to analyze the variability that methodological choices have on LCA outcomes. To address this variability, common practice is to conduct a sensitivity analysis, which is sometimes treated only at a qualitative level. Hence, the purpose of this paper was to evaluate the uncertainty and the sensitivity in the LCA of swine production due to two methodological choices: the allocation approach and the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) method.

Methods

We used a comparative case study of swine production to address uncertainty due to methodological choices. First, scenario variation through a sensitivity analysis of the approaches used to address the multi-functionality problem was conducted for the main processes of the system product, followed by an impact assessment using five LCIA methods at the midpoint level. The results from the sensitivity analysis were used to generate 10,000 independent simulations using the Monte Carlo method and then compared using comparison indicators in histogram graphics.

Results and discussion

Regardless of the differences between the absolute values of the LCA obtained due to the allocation approach and LCIA methods used, the overall ranking of scenarios did not change. The use of the substitution method to address the multi-functional processes in swine production showed the highest values for almost all of the impact categories, except for freshwater ecotoxicity; therefore, this method introduced the greater variations into our analysis. Regarding the variation of the LCIA method, for acidification, eutrophication, and freshwater ecotoxicity, the results were very sensitive. The uncertainty analysis with the Monte Carlo simulations showed a wide range of results and an almost equal probability of all the scenarios be the preferable option to decrease the impacts on acidification, eutrophication, and freshwater ecotoxicity. Considering the aggregate result variation across allocation approaches and LCIA methods, the uncertainty is too high to identify a statistically significant alternative.

Conclusions

The uncertainty analysis showed that performing only a sensitivity analysis could mislead the decision-maker with respect to LCA results; our analysis with the Monte Carlo simulation indicates no significant difference between the alternatives compared. Although the uncertainty in the LCA outcomes could not be decreased due to the wide range of possible results, to some extent, the uncertainty analysis can lead to a less uncertain decision-making by demonstrating the uncertainties between the compared alternatives.

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!

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!

Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
Some authors argue that system expansion and the substitution method are equivalent concepts (Tillman et al. 1994; Ekvall and Tillman 1997; Ekvall and Finnveden 2001). However, equivalent does not mean equal, and the two concepts will not generate the same results, so the concepts can be compatible (Wardenaar et al. 2012; Heijungs 2014).
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Bare JC, Norris GA, Pennington DW, McKone T (2003) TRACI: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6:49–78CrossRef Bare JC, Norris GA, Pennington DW, McKone T (2003) TRACI: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6:49–78CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gac A, Salou T, Espagnol S, Ponchant P, Dollé JB, van der Werf HMG (2014) An original way of handling co-products with a biophysical approach in LCAs of livestock systems. ACLCA, Vashon, WA, USA, San Francisco, USA Gac A, Salou T, Espagnol S, Ponchant P, Dollé JB, van der Werf HMG (2014) An original way of handling co-products with a biophysical approach in LCAs of livestock systems. ACLCA, Vashon, WA, USA, San Francisco, USA
Zurück zum Zitat Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ, De Schryver A, Struijs J, van Zelm R (2013) ReCiPe 2008: a life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. First edition report I: characterisation. RIVM, Bilthoven, May 2013. At http://www.lcia-recipe.net/file-cabinet Accessed 05 January 2015 Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ, De Schryver A, Struijs J, van Zelm R (2013) ReCiPe 2008: a life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. First edition report I: characterisation. RIVM, Bilthoven, May 2013. At http://​www.​lcia-recipe.​net/​file-cabinet Accessed 05 January 2015
Zurück zum Zitat Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo de Haes HA, de Bruijn JA, van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment: operational guide to the ISO standards. Series: eco-efficiency in industry and science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0228-9; Paperback, ISBN 1-4020-0557-1) Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo de Haes HA, de Bruijn JA, van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment: operational guide to the ISO standards. Series: eco-efficiency in industry and science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0228-9; Paperback, ISBN 1-4020-0557-1)
Zurück zum Zitat Hauschild M, Potting J (2005) Spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment—the EDIP2003 methodology. Environmental News no. 80. The Danish Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen Hauschild M, Potting J (2005) Spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment—the EDIP2003 methodology. Environmental News no. 80. The Danish Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen
Zurück zum Zitat Hauschild MZ, Goedkoop M, Guinée JB, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ, Jolliet O, Margni M, De Schryver A, Humbert S, Laurent A, Sala S, Pant R (2013) Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(3):683–697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0489-5 CrossRef Hauschild MZ, Goedkoop M, Guinée JB, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ, Jolliet O, Margni M, De Schryver A, Humbert S, Laurent A, Sala S, Pant R (2013) Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(3):683–697. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11367-012-0489-5 CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Huijbregts MAJ, Gilijamse W, Ragas AMJ, Reijnders L (2003) Evaluating uncertainty in environmental life-cycle assessment. A case study comparing two insulation options for a Dutch one-family dwelling. Environ Sci Technol 37(11):2600–2608. https://doi.org/10.1021/es020971+ CrossRef Huijbregts MAJ, Gilijamse W, Ragas AMJ, Reijnders L (2003) Evaluating uncertainty in environmental life-cycle assessment. A case study comparing two insulation options for a Dutch one-family dwelling. Environ Sci Technol 37(11):2600–2608. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1021/​es020971+ CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat ISO (2006a) 14040:2006 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. International Standards Organization, Geneva (Switzerland) ISO (2006a) 14040:2006 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. International Standards Organization, Geneva (Switzerland)
Zurück zum Zitat ISO (2006b) ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. International Standards Organization, Geneva (Switzerland) ISO (2006b) ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. International Standards Organization, Geneva (Switzerland)
Zurück zum Zitat Jungbluth N, Chudacoff M, Dauriat A, Dinkel F, Doka G, Faist-Emmenegger M, Gnansounou E, Kljun N, Schleiss K, Spielmann M, Stettler C, Sutter J (2007) Life cycle inventories of bioenergy. Ecoinvent report no. 17. Swiss Centre for the Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, Switzerland Jungbluth N, Chudacoff M, Dauriat A, Dinkel F, Doka G, Faist-Emmenegger M, Gnansounou E, Kljun N, Schleiss K, Spielmann M, Stettler C, Sutter J (2007) Life cycle inventories of bioenergy. Ecoinvent report no. 17. Swiss Centre for the Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, Switzerland
Zurück zum Zitat Mendoza Beltran A, Chiantore M, Pecorino D, Corner RA, Ferreira JG, Cò R, Fanciulli L, Guinée JB (2017) Accounting for inventory data and methodological choice uncertainty in a comparative life cycle assessment: the case of integrated multi-trophic aquaculture in an offshore Mediterranean enterprise. Int J Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1363-2 Mendoza Beltran A, Chiantore M, Pecorino D, Corner RA, Ferreira JG, Cò R, Fanciulli L, Guinée JB (2017) Accounting for inventory data and methodological choice uncertainty in a comparative life cycle assessment: the case of integrated multi-trophic aquaculture in an offshore Mediterranean enterprise. Int J Life Cycle Assess. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11367-017-1363-2
Zurück zum Zitat Rosenbaum RK, Bachmann TM, Gold LS, Huijbregts MAJ, Jolliet O, Juraske R, Köhler A, Larsen HF, MacLeod M, Margni M, McKone TE, Payet J, Schuhmacher M, van de Meent D, Hauschild MZ (2008) USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(7):532–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-008-0038-4 CrossRef Rosenbaum RK, Bachmann TM, Gold LS, Huijbregts MAJ, Jolliet O, Juraske R, Köhler A, Larsen HF, MacLeod M, Margni M, McKone TE, Payet J, Schuhmacher M, van de Meent D, Hauschild MZ (2008) USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(7):532–546. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11367-008-0038-4 CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Santos FA (2004) Glúten de milho na alimentação de aves e suínos. R Eletrônica Nutritime 1:79–100 Santos FA (2004) Glúten de milho na alimentação de aves e suínos. R Eletrônica Nutritime 1:79–100
Zurück zum Zitat Schmidt JH, Dalgaard R (2012) National and farm level carbon footprint of milk—methodology and results for Danish and Swedish milk 2005 at farm gate. Arla Foods, Aarhus, Denmark Schmidt JH, Dalgaard R (2012) National and farm level carbon footprint of milk—methodology and results for Danish and Swedish milk 2005 at farm gate. Arla Foods, Aarhus, Denmark
Zurück zum Zitat Würdinger E, Roth U, Wegener A, Peche R, Rommel W, Kreibe S, Nikolakis A, Rüdenauer I, Pürschel C, Ballarin P, Knebel T, Borken J, Detzel A, Fehrenbach H, Giegrich J, Möhler S, Patyk A, Reinhardt GA, Vogt R, Mühlberger D, Wante J (2002) Kunststoffe aus nachwachsenden Rohstoffen: Vergleichende Ökobilanz für Loose-fill-Packmittel aus Stärke bzw. Polystyrol, Umwelt Stiftung Würdinger E, Roth U, Wegener A, Peche R, Rommel W, Kreibe S, Nikolakis A, Rüdenauer I, Pürschel C, Ballarin P, Knebel T, Borken J, Detzel A, Fehrenbach H, Giegrich J, Möhler S, Patyk A, Reinhardt GA, Vogt R, Mühlberger D, Wante J (2002) Kunststoffe aus nachwachsenden Rohstoffen: Vergleichende Ökobilanz für Loose-fill-Packmittel aus Stärke bzw. Polystyrol, Umwelt Stiftung
Zurück zum Zitat Zamagni A, Buonamici R, Buttol P, Masoni P (2009) Main R&D lines to improve reliability, significance and usability of standardised LCA. ENEA, Italian National Agency on new technologies, energy and the environment Zamagni A, Buonamici R, Buttol P, Masoni P (2009) Main R&D lines to improve reliability, significance and usability of standardised LCA. ENEA, Italian National Agency on new technologies, energy and the environment
Metadaten
Titel
Uncertainty in LCA case study due to allocation approaches and life cycle impact assessment methods
verfasst von
Edivan Cherubini
Davide Franco
Guilherme Marcelo Zanghelini
Sebastião Roberto Soares
Publikationsdatum
08.01.2018
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Ausgabe 10/2018
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Elektronische ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1432-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2018

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 10/2018 Zur Ausgabe