Transcript www.unica-network.eu

Environmental life cycle assessesment
and carbon footprinting
- Green IT School
Hogne Nersund Larsena*, Christian Sollia, Johan Pettersena
aMiSA
AS, Innherredsveien 7b, NO-7014 Trondheim, Norway
* Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected]
2
Outline
1. History
- A little bit of history of:
- global warming
- mitigation actions
2. Introduction to LCA
- Introduction to life cycle calculations at:
- national level
- organizational level
- product level
3. Examples
- Some examples, at the:
- organizational level (NTNU)
- general product level
- specific LCA’s for computers
Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, Fourth Assessment Report, Climate change
2007—the physical science basis, Chapter 2 Changes
in atmospheric constituents and radiative forcing,
Figure 2.23, p. 208.
The Kiehl and Trenberth (1997)
Kilde: IPCC
Present carbon dioxide levels are likely higher now than at any time
during the past 20 Ma and certainly higher than in the last 800,000
This was the time of a great collision of
continents. North America and Greenland hit
Europe, creating the mountains we now find in
Norway, Scotland and Greenland.
8
So, what do we do?
"Chimneys, bridges and factory smoke blocked out most of the light in the towns. A layer
of dirty smoke often covered the streets like a blanket. This came from the factories that
used steam to power their machines. The steam was made by burning coal to heat
water. Burning coal produces a lot of dirty, black smoke."
Recent
History
Big lake
60-tallet: Fortynningsstrategi (longer pipes!)
70-tallet: Filtreringsstrategi (filters!)
80-tallet: Gjenvinningsstrategi (recycle!)
90-tallet: Forebygging (efficiency)
00-tallet: Helhetsperspektiv: LCA
Small lake
10
Introduction to the life cycle perspective
- First, how do we account for GHG emissions?
Carbon Footprint definition
The life-cycle GHG emissions caused by the production of goods and services
consumed by a geographical defined population or activity, independent of
whether the GHG emissions occur inside or outside the geographical borders
of the population or activity of interest
11
Different methods for applying the life cycle
perspective exists
Peters, G. P. 2010. Carbon footprints and embodied
carbon at multiple scales. Environmental Sustainability.
12
Accounting for GHG emissions at the national scale
• Two perspective dominates:
1) The geographical (Kyoto) perspective
- emissions allocated to the producer
2)
The footprint/life cycle perspective
- emissions allocated to the consumer
The problem with
the geographical
perspective…
13
Carbon Footprint
60000
2
Mtonn CO2e diff from 2000
50000
30000
0
-1
Oil and gas
-2
-3
-4
Industry
-5
-6
Energy
20000
Heating
10000
Transport
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
0
1990
ktonn CO2e
40000
TOTAL
1
Where are the
emissions located:
Who is causing the
emissions:
30
If European electricity
20
If Nordic electricity
15
2
Tonn CO ekv. per innbygger
25
10
5
0
Hertwich, E.G., Peters, G.P., 2009. Carbon Footprint of Nations: A Global. Trade-Linked Analysis. Environmental Science &
Technology 43 (16), 6414–6420. www.carbonfootprintofnations.com/
15
The footprint perspective: connecting consumption
and emissions!
Hertwich, E.G., Peters, G.P., 2009. Carbon Footprint of Nations: A Global. Trade-Linked Analysis. Environmental Science & Technology 43 (16), 6414–6420.
www.carbonfootprintofnations.com/
16
Other calculation perspective exists…
Interestingly, using this indicator we find that Norway, a country whose
electricity is obtained mostly from hydropower and which has an otherwise very
‘clean’ economy (Peters and Hertwich, 2006; Yamakawa and Peters, 2011), has
the highest per-capita income-based GHG responsibility in the world.
11/25/2010
Pettersen et al. MILEN 2010: From analysis to action
17
Accounting for emissions at the organizational level
• Several guidelines/protocols exist, most widely used is the GHG
protocol.
• Indirect emissions (scope 3) is defined, but not always accounted
for (voluntarily reporting)
• Scope 3 emissions is found very important in most sector and is
increasingly accounted for
• Hybrid methods of LCA and IOA is usually being applied for
compete carbon footprint analysis of organizational level
An example of a carbon footprint analysis of NTNU will be
provided later! 
How do we calculate the Carbon Footprint
WRI and WBCSD. 2004. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol - A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard:
World Resources Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD).
Total Carbon Footprint
Scope 1
Direct emissions
CO2-equivalents (CO2e): {CO2 N2O CH4 CO SF6 HCFs PFCs }
Scope 2
The purchase of energy
Scope 3
Indirect emissions
Combustion of fossil
fuels
Pettersen, J., H.N. Larsen, and C. Solli. From
analysis to actions - Carbon footprint and green
procurement in public administration in MILEN
International Conference: Visions and strategies to address
sustainable energy and climate change, Oslo 2010.
Supplies
Services
Food
Transport
Energy
*Larsen, H.N. and E.G. Hertwich, The
case for consumption-based accounting of
greenhouse gas emissions to promote local
climate action. Environmental Science &
Policy, 2009. 12(7): p. 791-798.
Direct emissions
energy
Scope 1
indirect emissions
Scope 2
19
Scope 3
Manufacture of medical, precision and optical equip.
Manufacture of radio, television and com. equip.
Real estate activities
Manufacture of office machinery and computers
Manufacture of electrical machinery and apparatus n.e.c.
Research and development
Manufacture of other transport equipment
Manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c.
Manufacture of motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers
Collection, purification and distribution of water
Manufacture of furniture; manufacturing n.e.c.
Computer and related activities
Other business activities
Manufacture of wearing apparel
Manufacture of fabricated metal products
Publishing, printing and reproduction of recorded media
Activities of membership organisation n.e.c.
Sale, maintenance and repair of motor vehicles and fuel
Retail trade
Education
Manufacture of food products and beverages
Supporting and auxiliary transport activities
Wholesale trade and commission trade
Hotels and restaurants
Renting of machinery and equipment
Manufacture of rubber and plastic products
Activities auxiliary to financial intermediation
Manufacture of textiles
Recycling
Construction
Public administration and defence
Financial intermediation
Post and telecommunications
Insurance and pension funding
Health and social work
Recreational, cultural and sporting activities
Tanning and dressing of leather
Manufacture of wood and of products of wood and cork
Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products
Other service activities
Forestry, logging and related service activities
Other mining and quarrying
Manufacture of basic metals
Mining of metal ores
Fishing, operating of fish hatcheries and fish farms
Mining of coal and lignite; extraction of peat
Manufacture of coke, refined petroleum and chemical products
Manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products
Air transport
Water transport
Pettersen, J., H.N. Larsen, and C. Solli. From analysis to actions
Land transport; transport via pipelines
- Carbon footprint and green procurement in public administration in Sewage and refuse disposal, sanitation and similar activities
Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas
MILEN International Conference: Visions and strategies to
Agriculture, hunting and related service activities
address sustainable energy and climate change, Oslo 2010.
Electricity, gas, steam and hot water supply
1) A large fraction of life cycle
emissions occur upstream in the
supply chain
- Scope 1, 2 and 3 contribution of
all Norwegian sectors
- Indirect, Scope 3, contributions
dominates
- Direct, Scope 1, GHG emissions
dominate only; energy, agriculture,
waste and transport sectors
- Supply Chain Management and
inclusion of Scope 3 emissions are
hence important!
0
Larsen et al. Technoport 2012: Supply Chain Management
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Percent of total carbon footprint
Fraction of total
1
20
Accounting for emissions at the product level
• The Life Cycle perspective dominates!
• Databases and software tools widely available
• ISO standards exists
What is LCA?
LCA definition according to ISO 14040
"A systematic set of procedures for compiling and examining the inputs and outputs of materials
and energy and the associated environmental impacts directly attributable to the functioning of a
product or service system throughout its life cycle”.
Cradle
Grave
Ancillary inputs and outputs:
processes, energy, material, …
Reuse
Raw materials
Production
Distribution
Use
Logistics
Waste
treatm.
System life-cycle
Goal & scope
Inventory
analysis
Impact
assessment
CO2
Interpretation
1
CH4
23
CO2-equiv
Global
warming
N2 O
296
Recycling
Goal &
scope
Impact assessment in LCA
Inventory
analysis
Interpretation
Impact
assessment
Vurdering av miljøpåvirkning
Global
Warming
-Classify
-Characterize
*23
*1
Andre
”impact”
kategorier
Human
toxicity
*296
GWP100
CO2- eq.
HTP
Dioxin
Benzene eq. N2O
X
Andre
CO2
-Normalize
-Weight
GWP100
Nasjonalt
HTP
Pb
Nasjonalt
Z
Y
CH4
weighting: summerizing ”impact” categories. Often excluded.
23
A few examples!
11/25/2010
Pettersen et al. MILEN 2010: From analysis to action
24
Example 1: organizational level: the carbon footprint
of NTNU
Trondhjem Tekniske Høiskole med elven aug.
1911
Motivation:
A complete Carbon
Footprint inventory
aimed to identify
target areas
Key elements:
- Klimakost model
- Environmentally extended input-output model
- Norwegian domestic tech., EU27 import tech.
- Uses financial numbers
on purchases as main
source of data
- Identifies all purchases,
and also the buyer
27
Some key data on the NTNU study
Indicator
Value
Comment
# students
22 349
Autumn 2012
# employees
4971,6
I 2012
Budget
5,3 billion NOKs
Includes salary etc
Products and services
1,835 billion NOKs
Included in calculations
Carbon Footprint, t CO2e.
97 882 tonnes
Carbon Footprint per student
4,38 tonnes
Carbon Footprint per employee 19,7 tonnes
28
Overall results, carbon footprint
Category
[t CO2e.]
Energi
(energy)
24 551
Transport og reise
(transport and travels)
22 165
Bygg, drift, vedlikehold
(buildings)
12 329
Forbruksmateriell
(consumables)
18 165
Utstyr og inventar
(equipment and machinery)
14 877
Tjenester
(services)
Totalt
Energi
Transport og reise
6%
25%
15%
Bygg, drift og
vedlikehold
Forbruksmateriell
18%
5 796
97 882
23%
Utstyr og inventar
13%
Tjenester
29
Detailed results, carbon footprint of consumables
Sub-categories
[t CO2e.]
Lab-materiell
(lab materiel)
2 853
Gass og kjemikalier
(gass and chemicals)
1 998
Generelt forbruksmat.
(misc. consumables)
1 890
Rekvisita
(office supplies)
1 324
Trykk og kopi
(print and copy)
959
Bøker og publikasjoner
(books and publications)
2 079
Servering og kurs
(food etc., courses)
4 209
Tele, post og datakom.
(post, data, telecom.)
1 628
Tilskudd, gaver, kont.
(other)
1 224
SUM
18 165
Lab-materiell
Gass og kjemikalier
7%
16%
9%
Generelt forbruksmat.
Rekvisita
11%
Trykk og kopi
23%
10%
Bøker og publikasjoner
Servering og kurs
7%
12%
5%
Tele, post og datakom.
Tilskudd, gaver,kont
30
Detailed results, carbon footprint of equipment
Subkategorier
Teknisk-vitenskapelig utstyr
(Sci.tec. equipment)
Datautstyr
(Computer equipment)
Audio og teleutstyr
(Audio and telecom equip.)
Maskiner
(Machinery)
Inventar
(Furniture etc.)
SUM
11/25/2010
[t CO2e.]
7%
6 559
Teknisk vitenskaplig utstyr
13 %
Datautstyr
3 693
44 %
Audio og teleutstyr
11 %
1 665
Maskiner
1 931
25 %
1 029
14 877
Pettersen et al. MILEN 2010: From analysis to action
Inventar
31
Even more detail available (breakdown of computer
equipment)
1%
'4721 Datautstyr, kjøp'
18%
'4722 Dataprogram, kjøp'
'6451 Datautstyr, leie'
'6524 Dataprogrammer og lisensavtaler'
5%
3%
0%
'6622 Serviceavtaler, datautstyr'
2%
'6623 Øvrig vedlikehold, datautstyr'
1%
70%
'6625 Serviceavtaler, dataprogr samt lisensavgift'
'6626 Øvrig vedlikehold dataprogram'
32
The carbon footprint per faculty
Fakultet for
ingeniørvitenskap og
teknologi
11.6 %
Fakultet for
naturvitenskap og
teknologi
Fakultet for
8.1 %
Det medisinske
samfunnsvitenskap og
fakultet
teknologiledelse
9.9 %
5.4 %
Rektor, 0,4 %
Prorektor for forskning og nyskaping,
0,6 %
Prorektor for utdanning
og
læringskvalitet
0,1 %
Studieavdelingen
7.1 %
Fakultet for inf.tek.,
matematikk og
elektroteknikk
6%
Det humanistiske fakultet
2.4 %
Administration
16 %
Direktør for organisasjon
og informasjon, 4 %
Fakultet for arkitektur og
billedkunst
1.2 %
Finances and Property
39,6 %
Vitenskapsmuseet, 2 %
BIBSYS, 1 %
Spesielle enheter1 %
'000000 Uspesifisert'
0.4 %
33
Normalized carbon footprint per faculty
energy
Energi
transport
Transport og reise
buildings
Bygg, drift og vedlikehold
consumables
Forbruksmateriell
equipment
Utstyr og inventar
services
Tjenester
Fakultet for samfunnsvit. og
teknologiledelse
Fakultet for naturvitenskap og
teknologi
Det medisinske fakultet
Fakultet for ingeniørvitenskap og
teknologi
Fakultet for inf. tek., matematikk
og elektro.
Det humanistiske fakultet
Fakultet for arkitektur og
billedkunst
0
1
2
3
4
5
Tonn CO2e per student
6
7
8
9
34
Carbon footprint of computer equipment per
purchasing department
700000
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
'4721 Datautstyr, kjøp'
'4722 Dataprogram, kjøp'
'6451 Datautstyr, leie'
'6524 Dataprogrammer og lisensavtaler'
'6622 Serviceavtaler, datautstyr'
'6623 Øvrig vedlikehold, datautstyr'
'6625 Serviceavtaler, dataprogr samt lisensavgift'
'6626 Øvrig vedlikehold dataprogram'
35
Comparing normalized results
90
Faculty of Architecture and Fine Art
Faculty of Humanities
Faculty of Information Technology, Mathematics and Electrical Engineering
Faculty of Engineering Science and Technology
Faculty of Medicine
Faculty of Natural Sciences and Technology
Faculty of Social Sciences and Technology Management
80
70
tCO2e
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
per 10 students
per phd
per employee
per publicationpoint
A few product LCA examples
Example 2: LCA production of energy
38
Example 3: Electric cars (only GHG)
USE PHASE
PRODUCTION
direct indirect
ELECTRIC
ELECTRIC
0
GASOLINE
DISPOSAL
El, coal
El, gas
European
el.mix
ELECTRIC
Hawkins et. al (2012), doi 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00532.x
GASOLINE
39
Electric cars and climate change
Disposal
Use, direct and
indirect
Production, car
Hawkins et. al (2012), doi 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00532.x
A few computer related LCA examples
41
42
43
Fra «Framtiden i våre hender»
44
KTH:Screening environmental life cycle assessment of printed,
web based and tablet e-paper newspaper
a systems perspective to
environmental research and consulting
www.misa.no
46
Supplement, if necessary
11/25/2010
Pettersen et al. MILEN 2010: From analysis to action
What is a life cycle?
Production
Waste treatment
Health
Environment
Resources
Transport
Use
Source: Strømman (2007)
What is a life cycle?
System boundary
G
A
F
Subsupplier
Supplier
User
E-O-L
User
E-O-L
D
Subsupplier
Supplier
Focal
company
B
C
Subsupplier
H
E
User
Supplier
TIØ4195
E-O-L
Source: Michelsen (2008)
Why use LCA?
• Product improvement
– Shows where the environmental loads occur (is the problem the
choice of materials, processes, energy carriers, suppliers?)
– Value chain development
• Comparison of products
– Product development
– Competitive advantage
• Advertisement / product information
– Environmental Product Declaration (EPD)
– Environmental labelling (the Swan, EU Flower, etc.)
1
LCA methodology
1
2
3
ISO 14040
2
3
4
4
1. Goal and scope
1
Functional Unit
2
3
• The Functional unit is a quantitative measure of the (FU, eng) function
that is to be delivered
– It is the basis for comparison among alternative product solutions
– It should be neutral to alternatives, but specific to location, quality and
duration of the function
• Example:
– house painting “Protect an outer wooden house wall, at given location, while
exposed to sun, rain and wind, against deterioration for a duration of 10
years”.
– 1 MWh el generated
– 1 MWh el delivered to a custumer in a specified geographical location.
– 1 MWh heat delivered to a custumer in a specified geographical location
– 15000 km annual road transportation for one person in the Trondheim region
4
1
Functional unit (FU)
2
Purpose?
3
• Example, paint: The function is preserving
the wall. The functional unit is not ‘a can of
paint’ or ‘1 liter of paint’, but rather
‘conserving 10 m2 wall for 10 years’.
• Three dimensions
– Quantity (‘how much?’)
– Quality (‘how good?’)
– Duration (‘how long?’)
4
2. Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)
1
2
Process inventory
3
Flows of material or energy
Iron ore, bauxite, chlorine, wood,
air, peat, gold, grain, heat, etc.
Emissions to air
Energy
Material resources
4
Products
Prosess
CO2
SOx
NOx
CH4
benzen
HF
heat
dust
etc.
Bi-products
Process chemicals
Emissions to water
Elementary flows are flows
from nature to man-made
systems, and vice versa
Source: Baumann & Tillman
Emissions to land
Wastes
nitrogen, arsenic, hydrogen
chlorie, pesticides, heat,
carbon dioxide, particles,
oil, process water, etc.
1
Life Cycle Inventory
Iron ore, copper ore, sand, bauxite,
silicon, chlorine, kaolin, wood, water,
air, peat, corn, gold, stone, soil,
etc.
By-products,
By-products,
S
waste
Energy
waste
2
S
Emissions to
By-products,
waste
Technosphere
CO32
SOx
NOx
CH4
air
Technospherebenzene
HF
dust
etc.
Material resources
S
Extraction
Machinery,
Calculate
elementary
fuel,the
etc.
inputs and outputs for all
processes we have in our
system.
Production
Distribution
S
Intermediaries, etc.
S
4
Product
Emissions to water
Fuel,
trucks to soil
Emissions
nitrogen, arsenic, hydrogen
chloride, pesticides, oil, process
water, hydrogen chloride, etc.
1
2. Inventory
Flow diagram
2
3
The criteria for system boundaries are defined in the goal and scope
phase. A simple criterion can be:
– Include all significant processes
Wood frame
Foam mattress
Brass zipper
Textiles
Paint
Nails
Packaging
Packaging
Price tag
Zippers
Electricity
Which processes are significant for our study?
Bed production
4
1
2. Inventory
Foreground and background system
2
3
• Foreground: specific data gathered by you
• Background: generic data from databases
Wood frame
Foam mattress
Brass zipper
Textiles
Paint
Nails
Packaging
Packaging
Price tag
Zippers
Bed production
Electricity
Example: here our goal is to improve the mattress in a bed,
we therefore decide to use generic/average data for the rest of the bed
4
1
LCI: Complexity
7/17/2015
2
3
4
1
Computations – Flows between
nodes in a network
2
3
4
1
An open Leontief model
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
2. Inventory
Complexity*
2
3
Inventory (technosphere)
The Leontief inverse
Inventory:
Total for whole
system,
per =
elementary
flow
type
Inventory
(nature
elementary
flows)
y
Bed
1
Wood frame
Foam matress
Impact assessment:
Impact assessment:
Textiles
Characterisation
Total impact for whole system,
per category
Nails
yx = demand vector
Goal and scope
1,003
A = process dependency matrix
x = output vector
12,5 kg
F = elementary flow matrix
e6 =kgelementary flow vector
C = characterisation matrix
0,5 kg
d = impact vector
0,08 kg
Source: Solli and Strømman (2005)
TIØ4195
*you don’t need to remember this for the exam 
4
3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)
1
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
• The life cycle inventory: all elementary flows, e.g.:
– Inputs: Coal, iron ore, energy, biomass, etc.
– Outputs: CO2 and SO2 to air, particles to water, tailings, etc.
• To understand the impact on the environment, we need to
know the effect of every elementary stream
• Impact assessment
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Identify environmental impact categories
Classification
Characterisation
Normalisation
Weighting
NB: Normalisation and weighting are non-scientific (they are value based).
2
3
4
1
a) Identify impact categories
2
3
Example: copy machine
Production
Use
Disposal
Climate change?
4
1
b) Classification
2
3
Example: copy machine
Production
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CO2: 487 kg
NOx: 0,013 kg
SF6: 2*10^-7 kg
Methane: 1,5 kg
Particles: 0,3 kg
Propane: 0,01 kg
NMVOC: 0,6 kg
etc.
Use
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CO2: 3243 kg
NOx: 0,11 kg
SF6: 6*10^-7 kg
Methane: 9 kg
Particles: 5,3 kg
Propane: 0,03 kg
NMVOC: 5 kg
etc.
Disposal
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CO2: 2226 kg
NOx: 0,05 kg
SF6: 0 kg
Methane: 4,8 kg
Particles: 0,41 kg
Propane: 0,15 kg
NMVOC: -0,2 kg
etc.
Contributes to global warming
Life cycle inventory, emissions to air
4
Inventory * char. factor = impact
c) Characterisation
Production
Manufacturing (kg)
•
CO2: 487 kg
•
NOx: 0,013 kg
•
SF6: 2*10^-7 kg
•
Methane: 1,5 kg
2
3
Use
Use (kg)
•
CO2: 3243 kg
•
NOx: 0,11 kg
•
SF6: 6*10^-7 kg
•
Methane: 9 kg
Disposal
End of life (kg)
•
CO2: 2226 kg
•
NOx: 0,05 kg
•
SF6: 0 kg
•
Methane: 4,8 kg
Global warming potential:
1 kg NOx = 296 kg CO2
1 kg SF6 = 22200 kg CO2
1 kg methane = 23 kg CO2
Manufacturing (CO2-eq)
•
CO2: 487 kg
•
NOx: 4 kg
•
SF6: 0,005 kg
•
Methane: 36 kg
Sum: 527,005 kg CO2-eq.
1
Use (CO2-eq)
•
CO2: 3243 kg
•
NOx: 34 kg
•
SF6: 0,013 kg
•
Methane: 211 kg
Sum: 3488,013 kg CO2-eq.
End of life (CO2-eq)
•
CO2: 2226 kg
•
NOx: 15 kg
•
SF6: 0 kg
•
Methane: 110 kg
Sum: 2351 kg CO2-eq.
4
1
d) Normalisation
2
3
• Relative impact, to better understand
–
–
–
–
Relative to total Norwegian emissions
Relative to industry average
Relative to best available
etc.
• Relative to total emissions of Western Europe:
Production
1,14*10^-10
Use
7,4*10^-10
In other words: the yearly emissions of Western
European are comparable to manufcaturing 700
million copy machines.
Disposal
4,9*10^-10
4
1
e) Weighting
•
•
2
3
Aggregating impact categories to single value
Example, German expert evaluation of Northern Europe:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Abiotic Depletion (ADP)
Acidification Potential (AP)
Eutrophication Potential (EP)
Global Warming Potential (GWP)
Ozone Layer Depletion Potential (ODP)
Photochem. Ozone Creation Potential (POCP)
Radioactive Radiation (RAD)
1,5
4
7
10
4
1,5
0,5
•
The single score impact is calculated (using normalised values):
•
1,5 · ADP + 4 · AP + 7 · EP + 10 · GWP + 4 · ODP + 0,5 · RAD
•
High concern: Global warming and eutrophication
4
4. Interpretation
1
Interpretation
2
3
• Results can be broken down in all sorts of way by simple
mathematical operation
• Process/life cycle stage contribution
• Stressor contribution (aka elementary flow contribution)
• Uncertainty (monte-carlo simulation) and sensitivity analysis
• Advanced breakdowns (requires matlab or similar):
• Contributions from processes upstream of foreground
processes/value chain
• Structural path analysis (SPA)
4
1
Interpretation
2
3
• Get to know the relevant production system(s) in your model!
• Leave time for multiple iterations on goal and scope + inventory
• Errors will occur, analyze often to identify errors.
4
1
Example LCA Results Interpretation
Impact potentials
Stressors / elementray flows
Relevance of Life Cycle Stages Mercedes E-Class
Figure from: Finkenbeiner et.al, Life Cycle Design – Methods,Procedures and Examples for the
Application of Life Cycle Assessment in the Automotive Product Development Process
Proceedings of The international Conference on Ecobalance, Tskuba Japan 2002
2
3
4