Joshua Sohn

Persistent plastic micro- and nanoparticle (MNP) pollution poses a serious threat to global health. Yet they typically cannot be considered in conventional life cycle assessments (LCAs), which weakens decision-making. To avoid waiting for consensus on the MNPs’ fate and impacts required by LCA, an innovative framework has been developed to conservatively estimate the plastic particle footprint (PPF), i.e., the total MNP emissions during the plastic’s lifetime of an item, up to the very long-term fate. Reporting the PPF as an elementary flow alongside other indicators shows to improve the ability to weigh up the alternatives’ benefits. Applying the calculation to four everyday items—kettles, crates, beverage containers, and T-shirts—radically changes the best material option for the three of them whose carbon footprints are close. This also raises trade-off questions such as: Are the 280 grams of greenhouse gas emissions saved by using a reusable plastic crate instead of a wood crate worth the 21 grams of additional MNP pollution?

The circular economy has become an important topic in the building industry, and life cycle assessment (LCA) is often used to quantify its benefits. Through chemical analysis, this article demonstrates that the current LCA is not yet well-adapted to assess the circular economy of building materials and components. It is shown that current inventory data and models are insufficient because they do not consider the uptake and emission of chemicals during use, the migration of chemicals within the value chain across the multiple phases in the circular economy, and because current characterization models lack a large fraction of the potentially emitted chemicals from said uptake and emission identified in the tested building material samples. Thus, it is shown that impacts relevant for LCA in the circular economy of buildings remain unaddressed because they are currently either omitted in the LCA that covers a limited number of impact indicators, or are ostensibly covered in the LCA covering a full set of indicators but missed due to inadequate characterization models. To ameliorate this, a definition of embedded toxicity and its relationship to the toxicological footprint is presented and a method for measurement is proposed, illustrating how assessing embedded toxicity can yield information for facilitating safe building-material reuse. Finally, a suggestion for the improvement of life cycle impact assessment methods is proposed.

An efficient use of biomass resources is a key element of the bioeconomy. Ideally, options leading to the highest environmental and economic gains can be singled out for any given region. In this study, to achieve this goal of singling out an ideal technology for a given region, biotechnologies are assessed by a combination of techno-economic assessment (TEA) and territorial metabolism life cycle assessment (TM-LCA). Three technology variations for anaerobic digestion (AD) were assessed at two different scales (200 kW and 1 MW) and for two different regions. First, sustainable feedstock availability for two European regions was quantified. Then, the environmental impact and economic potential of each technology when scaled up to the regional level, considering all of the region’s unique sustainably available feedstock, was investigated. Multiple criteria decision analysis and internalized damage monetization were used to generate single scores for the assessments. Preference for the technology scenario producing the most energy was shown for all regions and scales, while producing bioplastic was less preferable since the value of the produced bioplastic plastic was not great enough to offset the resultant reduction in energy production. Assessing alternatives in a regional context provided valuable information about the influence of different types of feedstock on environmental performance.

Despite advances in the data, models, and methods underpinning environmental life cycle assessment (LCA), it remains challenging for practitioners to effectively communicate and interpret results. These shortcomings can bias decisions and hinder public acceptance for planning supported by LCA. This paper introduces a method for interpreting LCA results, the Argumentation Corrected Context Weighting-LCA (ArgCW-LCA), to overcome these barriers. ArgCW-LCA incorporates stakeholder preferences, corrects unjustified disagreements, and allows for the inclusion of non-environmental impacts (e.g., economic, social, etc.) using a novel weighting scheme and the application of multi-criteria decision analysis to provide transparent and context-relevant decision support. We illustrate the utility of the method through two case studies: a hypothetical decision regarding energy production and a real-world decision regarding polyphenol extraction technologies. In each case, we surveyed a relevant stakeholder group on their environmental views and fed their responses into the model to provide decision support that is relevant to their perspective. We found marked differences between results using ArgCW-LCA and results from a conventional analysis using an equal-weighting scheme, as well as differentiation between stakeholder preference groups, indicating the importance of applying the perspective of the particular stakeholder group. For instance, there was a rank reversal of alternatives when comparing between an equal weighting approach for all environmental and economic dimensions and ArgCW-LCA. ArgCW-LCA provides opportunity for both public and private sector incorporation of LCA, such as in developing enlightened stakeholder value measures. This is achieved through enabling the LCA practition to provide public and private actors’ interpreted LCA results in a manner that incorporates educated stakeholder perspectives. Furthermore, the method encourages stakeholder multiplicity through participatory design and policymaking that can enhance public backing of actions that can make society more sustainable.

Durable goods last for years, decades, or even centuries. The environmental implications of the changing social, economic, and material conditions in which these goods are embedded can be overlooked by conventional life cycle assessment (LCA) that assumes a static world. To avoid this oversight, methods such as dynamic LCA (DLCA) are increasingly being used. Despite the growing use of DLCA, numerous questions remain, including how this dynamism is incorporated and what aspects of any given DLCA are dynamic. To answer these questions, we performed a review of 56 DLCAs, of which 44 propose a framework for DLCA covering all International Organization for Standardization phases of an LCA or that carry out a DLCA. Three types of LCA dynamism are identified and assessed for the reviewed literature: dynamic process inventory, dynamic systems, and dynamic characterization, while a further 2 types of LCA dynamism, dynamic scope and dynamic weighting, are proposed but not applied in the assessed literature. We found that the implementation of DLCA varies widely, and inventories accounting for dynamic characteristics are by far the most prevalent expression of DLCA. To reduce confusion surrounding the discussion of DLCA, we propose a definition of DLCA and its subtypes: full DLCA, partial DLCA, and prospective LCA. It is concluded that, among the current array of DLCA definitions, the implementation of partially dynamic LCA (PDLCA), which applies dynamism in only some parts of the LCA, is common and likely to continue. This is because PDLCA offers quantifiable marginal utility in terms of increased validity of the assessment, in relation to conventional LCA methods, but caution is needed in applying PDLCA because of potential for introducing bias into the LCA. To avoid this problem, we propose incorporating system dynamism as part of a sensitivity analysis, particularly in PDLCA that are limited by missing data. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2020;16:314–323. © 2019 SETAC

In order to compare the maximum potential environmental impact savings that may result from the implementation of innovative biorefinery alternatives at a regional scale, the Territorial Metabolism-Life Cycle Assessment (TM-LCA) framework is implemented. With the goal of examining environmental impacts arising from technology-to-region (territory) compatibility, the framework is applied to two biorefinery alternatives, treating a mixture of cow manure and grape marc. The biorefineries produce either biogas alone or biogas and polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), a naturally occurring polymer. The production of PHA substitutes either polyethylene terephthalate (PET) or biosourced polylactide (PLA) production. The assessment is performed for two regions, one in Southern France and the other in Oregon, USA. Changing energy systems are taken into account via multiple dynamic energy provision scenarios. Territorial scale impacts are quantified using both LCA midpoint impact categories and single score indicators derived through multi-criteria decision assessment (MCDA). It is determined that in all probable future scenarios, a biorefinery with PHA-biogas co-production is preferable to a biorefinery only producing biogas. The TM-LCA framework facilitates the capture of technology and regionally specific impacts, such as impacts caused by local energy provision and potential impacts due to limitations in the availability of the defined feedstock leading to additional transport.