ALBERT

Description: Purpose Current patterns of household goods consumption generate relevant environmental pressures and impacts. Environmental impacts are not only limited to the European territory but also to third countries from where products are imported. Assessing the entire life cycle of products enables considering trade-related transboundary effects along supply chains. The goal of this paper is to illustrate the assessment of the environmental impacts of household goods consumption in Europe, modelled through the consumption footprint indicator. Methods The consumption footprint indicator was designed to assess the environmental impact of household consumption by covering five areas of consumption (food, mobility, housing, household goods and appliances), each of them modelled as a basket of products (BoP) representing the most consumed products by EU citizens. This paper focuses on the BoP household goods, entailing a large variety of products from clothes to personal care products. Consumption intensity was obtained from consumption statistical data for years 2010 and 2015. Life cycle inventory data for 30 representative products were obtained from EU Ecolabel background reports, screening reports of the Product Environmental Footprint pilots and literature. The 16 impact categories of the Environmental Footprint 3.0 method were employed for the impact assessment. Results and discussion Main impacts generated by household goods in EU (calculated after normalization and weighting) were on climate change, fossil resource use and water use. Components’ manufacture was the most impacting stage for several impact categories. Paper products, detergents, furniture and clothes were the product groups contributing the most due to a combination of consumption intensity and environmental profile of products. Environmental impacts due to household goods consumption were higher in 2015 than in 2010. Conclusions The impacts of EU household goods consumption are driven by both consumption intensity and the environmental impact profile of products. Therefore, sustainable actions should focus not only on the environmental profile of products, but also on consumer choices and behaviours. Recommendations The BoP household goods model can be used as a baseline to assess the effect of consumer choices, by creating and comparing consumers’ profiles that differ in the composition of the BoP and in the apparent consumption (defined as Production—Exports + Imports). The availability of detailed inventories for all the life cycle phases allows for modelling scenarios to assess the potential effect of innovations in the production phase and of the choice of alternative raw materials and ingredients.

Description: Purpose Currently, social, environmental, and economic risks and chances of bioeconomy are becoming increasingly a subject of applied sustainability assessments. Based on life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) aims to combine or integrate social, environmental, and economic assessments. In order to contribute to the current early stage of LCSA development, this study seeks to identify a practical framework for integrated LCSA implementation. Methods We select possible indicators from existing suitable LCA and LCSA approaches as well as from the literature, and allocate them to a sustainability concept for holistic and integrated LCSA (HILCSA), based on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In order to conduct a practical implementation of HILCSA, we choose openLCA, because it offers the best current state and most future potential for application of LCSA. Therefore, not only the capabilities of the software and databases, but also the supported methods of life cycle impact assessments (LCIA) are evaluated regarding the requirements of the indicator set and goal and scope of future case studies. Results and discussion This study presents an overview of available indicators and LCIAs for bioeconomy sustainability assessments as well as their link to the SDGs. We provide a practical framework for HILCSA of regional bioeconomy, which includes an indicator set for regional (product and territorial) bioeconomy assessment, applicable with current software and databases, LCIA methods and methods of normalization, weighting, and aggregation. The implementation of HILCSA in openLCA allows an integrative LCSA by conducting all steps in a single framework with harmonized, aggregated, and coherent results. HILCSA is capable of a sustainability assessment in terms of planetary boundaries, provisioning system and societal needs, as well as communication of results to different stakeholders. Conclusions Our framework is capable of compensating some deficits of S-LCA, E-LCA, and economic assessments by integration, and shows main advantages compared to additive LCSA. HILCSA is capable of addressing 15 out of 17 SDGs. It addresses open questions and significant problems of LCSAs in terms of goal and scope, LCI, LCIA, and interpretation. Furthermore, HILCSA is the first of its kind actually applicable in an existing software environment. Regional bioeconomy sustainability assessment is bridging scales of global and regional effects and can inform stakeholders comprehensively on various impacts, hotspots, trade-offs, and synergies of regional bioeconomy. However, significant research needs in LCIAs, software, and indicator development remain.

Description: Purpose New environmental strategies are emerging for cities to become more self-sufficient, such as hydroponic crop production. The implementation of such systems requires materials that usually originate in countries with low labour costs and other legal regulations. To what extent could these strategies be shifting problems across the globe? To answer this question, we performed a comprehensive environmental and social assessment of the various extended soilless systems used to grow vegetables on urban roofs. Methods Three different growing media constituents were chosen for this study: perlite, peat and coir; which are produced in three countries, Turkey, Germany and the Philippines, respectively, and are imported to Spain. By using a life cycle assessment, we evaluated the environmental performances of the production and transport of these growing media. Additionally, we performed a social life cycle assessment at different levels. First, we used the Social Hotspots Database to analyse the constituents in aggregated sectors. Second, we performed a social assessment at the country and sector levels, and finally, we evaluated primary company data for the social assessment of the constituents through questionnaires given to businesses. Results and discussion The coir-based growing medium exerted the lowest environmental burden in 5 out of 8 impact categories because it is a by-product from coconut trees. In contrast, perlite obtained the highest environmental impacts, with impacts 44 to 99.9% higher than those of peat and coir, except in the land use. Perlite is a material extracted from open-pit mines that requires high energy consumption and a long road trip. Regarding the social assessment, peat demonstrated the best performance on all the social assessment levels. In contrast, coir showed the worst scores in the Social Hotspots Database and for the impact categories of community infrastructure and human rights, whereas perlite displayed the lowest performance in health and safety. Nevertheless, coir and perlite evidenced much better scores than peat in the impact subcategory of the contribution to economic development. Conclusions This study contributes to a first comparison of three imported growing media constituents for urban rooftop farming from environmental and social perspectives to choose the most suitable option. Peat appears to be the best alternative from a social perspective. However, from an environmental standpoint, peat represents a growing medium whose availability is aiming to disappear in Germany to preserve peatlands. Therefore, we identify a new market niche for the development of local growing media for future rooftop farming in cities.

Description: Purpose In this work, we study a land use impact model with the aim of obtaining spatially differentiated as opposed to default average characterisation factors. In particular, we study the application of LANCA®, a multi-indicator model with available country average characterisation factors expressing the alteration of the soil quality level of the current land use of one kind with respect to a reference situation. Method To this purpose, we use the LANCA® method documentation at a higher spatial resolution and apply all the required elemental steps. From a user perspective, we score the transparency of the method down to the basic methodological references and single out the source of errors that the user may incur when: (i) collecting the input data, (ii) selecting the appropriate soil/land classes and (iii) applying the individual calculation steps. For a greater insight, we couple the source of errors with a sensitivity analysis. Results In the comparison between a site-specific test area and the related country default values, we obtained relevant discrepancies regarding the erosion resistance and the physicochemical filtration of the soil. For example, we find that the erosion resistance potential is −1.06 * 10−3 kg m2 a−1 locally while the country default value is 13.1. We explain differences through the sensitivity analysis and having analysed in depth the underpinned soil erosion equation and the critical steps for its calibration. Together with systematic errors, we find that the method generally implies 9 scarcely guided steps out of 42, and one-third of the basic methodologies are not fully explained or accessible. These factors make the results related to Biotic Production, Mechanical Filtration, Physicochemical Filtration and Groundwater Regeneration user dependent and — in this sense — difficult to replicate. Conclusions From the analysis, we distil 7 main directions for improvement addressed to LANCA® and soil models especially in sight of a broader application of a regionalised life cycle impact assessment.

Description: Purpose The inclusion of insect protein into the food system has been proposed as a promising solution to ensure future food security and mitigate negative environmental impacts related to food production. However, the market volume for edible insects in Europe is still small; consequently, producers need a decision-support system to ensure the sustainable upscaling of the sector. The study analyzed environmental and economic impacts of insect production to identify the most eco-efficient production scenarios. Methods A novel modular eco-efficiency assessment approach was developed to analyze the production of dried Hermetia illucens larvae. An exemplary, industrial-scale insect production system was disaggregated into a total of 29 module variants that can be combined into 4608 distinct production scenarios, which are characterized by different feeds, energy efficiencies, and processing technologies. Environmental life cycle and cost assessments were carried out for each module variant, and eco-efficiency assessment was used to jointly assess these two sustainability dimensions. Additionally, the influence of the insect feed on the production system performance and impact was investigated by employing feed-specific scaling factors. These were used to aggregate module results into production scenario results. Results and discussion The most eco-efficient production scenarios include energy-efficient rearing facilities that rely on blanching and microwave drying for processing. The insect feed is the largest contributor to the environmental impacts and costs, but from an eco-efficiency standpoint, the choice of feed might not be crucial. Waste-type feeds (e.g., manure, fruit, and vegetable waste) have low environmental impacts and costs, but the production scenarios based on these feeds are less efficient. The low impacts of the feed are offset by higher impacts during the rearing and processing stages. Conversely, scenarios based on higher quality feeds (e.g., by-products like wheat middlings or distiller’s grains) require less resources, but the initial feed impacts and costs are higher. Moreover, of the feed types studied, only highly processed ones, such as compound chicken feed, should be avoided for insect rearing. Conclusions The developed modular assessment approach is efficient in assessing multiple potential insect production scenarios. It can be adapted to incorporate additional variations of the production system via additional modules. Limitations include the potential for redundant module combinations and the up-front time investment needed. Finally, the results are sensitive to methodological choices: thus, these should be carefully considered and communicated during the design of the modular assessment system.

Description: Purpose Life cycle assessment (LCA) literature evaluating environmental burdens from lithium-ion battery (LIB) production facilities lacks an understanding of how environmental burdens have changed over time due to a transition to large-scale production. The purpose of this study is hence to examine the effect of upscaling LIB production using unique life cycle inventory data representative of large-scale production. A sub-goal of the study is to examine how changes in background datasets affect environmental impacts. Method We remodel an often-cited study on small-scale battery production by Ellingsen et al. (2014), representative of operations in 2010, and couple it to updated Ecoinvent background data. Additionally, we use new inventory data to model LIB cell production in a large-scale facility representative of the latest technology in LIB production. The cell manufactured in the small-scale facility is an NMC-1:1:1 (nickel-manganese-cobalt) pouch cell, whereas in the large-scale facility, the cell produced in an NMC-8:1:1 cylindrical cell. We model production in varying carbon intensity scenarios using recycled and exclusively primary materials as input options. We assess environmental pollution–related impacts using ReCiPe midpoint indicators and resource use impacts using the surplus ore method (ReCiPe) and the crustal scarcity indicator. Results and discussion Remodelling of the small-scale factory using updated background data showed a 34% increase in greenhouse gas emissions — linked to updated cobalt sulfate production data. Upscaling production reduced emissions by nearly 45% in the reference scenario (South Korean energy mix) due to a reduced energy demand in cell production. However, the emissions reduce by a further 55% if the energy is sourced from a low-carbon intensity source (Swedish energy mix), shifting almost all burden to upstream supply chain. Regional pollution impacts such as acidification and eutrophication show similar trends. Toxic emissions also reduce, but unlike other impacts, they were already occurring during mining and ore processing. Lastly, nickel, cobalt, and lithium use contribute considerably to resource impacts. From a long-term perspective, copper becomes important from a resource scarcity perspective. Conclusions Upscaling LIB production shifts environmental burdens to upstream material extraction and production, irrespective of the carbon intensity of the energy source. Thus, a key message for the industry and policy makers is that further reductions in the climate impacts from LIB production are possible, only when the upstream LIB supply chain uses renewable energy source. An additional message to LCA practitioners is to examine the effect of changing background systems when evaluating maturing technologies.