scholarly journals Life Cycle Assessment of Apparel Consumption in Australia

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-111
Author(s):  
Shadia Moazzem ◽  
Enda Crossin ◽  
Fugen Daver ◽  
Lijing Wang
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Agricultural Land ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment Methodology ◽  
Land Occupation ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
The Impact

Abstract This study presents the environmental impact of apparel consumption in Australia using life cycle assessment methodology according to ISO14040/14044:2006. Available published references, the Ecoinvent v3 dataset, the Australian life cycle assessment dataset and apparel country-wise import data with the breakdown of apparel type and fibre type were used in this study. The environmental impact assessment results of the functional unit were scaled up to the total apparel consumption. The impact results were also normalized on a per-capita/year basis. The Total Climate Change Potential (CCP) impact from apparel consumption of 2015 was estimated to be 16 607 028 tonnes CO2eq and 698.07 kg CO2eq/per capita-year. This study also assessed the impact of acidification potential (AP), water depletion (WD), abiotic resource depletion potential (ADP) - fossil fuel and agricultural land occupation (ALO) using the same methodology. The market volume of cotton apparel in Australia is 53.97 %, which accounts for 45 %, 96 %, 40 %, 46 % and 79 % of total CCP, WD, ADP, AP and ALO impact, respectively. Apparel broad categories of cotton shirt, cotton trouser, polyester shirt and polyester trouser have a high volume in the apparel market as well as a high environmental impact contribution. These high-volume apparel products can be included in the prioritization list to reduce environmental impact throughout the apparel supply chain. It was estimated that from 2010 to 2018 the per capita apparel consumption and corresponding impact increased by 24 %.

scholarly journals Life-Cycle Assessment of the Breezhaler® Breath-Actuated Dry Powder Inhaler

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 6657
Author(s):  
Brett Fulford ◽  
Karen Mezzi ◽  
Andy Whiting ◽  
Simon Aumônier
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
Dry Powder Inhaler ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
Life Cycle Stage ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Dry Powder ◽  
The Impact

The Breezhaler® dry powder inhaler (DPI) has a low carbon footprint compared with other inhalation therapies, consistent with the literature on other DPIs. This life-cycle assessment was conducted in France, Germany, the UK, and Japan using a “cradle-to-grave” technique to evaluate six environmental impact categories (global warming potential; acidification; ozone depletion; use of resource, minerals, and metals; eco-toxicity; and freshwater use) associated with the use of the Breezhaler®. Three variants of the Breezhaler® (30-day packs with and without the digital companion and a 90-day pack without the digital companion) were evaluated to identify major hotspots in the device life-cycle and to provide realistic solutions to reduce the environmental impact. Although no single life-cycle stage dominated the climate change impact of the 30-day device with the digital companion, the inhaler’s raw materials and packaging contributed to 96% of the resource depletion impact for the 30-day device without the digital companion. For the 90-day device without the digital companion, packaging contributed 42–62% of the impact across all categories. Overall, the Breezhaler® inhaler with the 90-day pack had the lowest environmental impact. The environmental impact of the device did not vary significantly among the considered markets. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of active pharmaceutical ingredients and improvement in clinical outcomes on the environment.

scholarly journals Eco-Investments - Life Cycle Assessment of Different Scenarios of Biomass Combustion

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomasz Nitkiewicz ◽  
Agnieszka Ociepa-Kubicka
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Agricultural Land ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Biomass Combustion ◽  
Steam Boiler ◽  
Land Occupation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Natural Land

Abstract The article presents the results of life cycle assessment of different scenarios of biomass use to produce energy in a selected company. The study is made on the case of Lesaffre Polska S.A. and its facility in Wolczyn which is one of the most modern biomass plants in Central Europe. The company is one of the leaders of using the environmental criteria in its strategic decision-making. Its goal is to avoid any waste and to form its own circular business system. One of its recent investments is a biomass fired steam boiler that uses agricultural and woody biomass to produce energy. Previously, biomass was sold to power plant and co-fired with coal. The scope of the paper is to assess the actual change in the environmental impact of biomass use in the Wolczyn facility. For that purpose, the life cycle assessment is used with the ReCiPe endpoint indicator. The assessment is based on the comparison of two scenarios: one assuming the biomass combustion in a new boiler, and the second one, assuming co-firing biomass with coal. The results of the study show that the investment is making a significant difference as far as the overall environmental impact is. Through avoiding the co-firing related emissions the company makes a big step ahead towards the decrease of their environmental impacts. The analysis shows that the significant impact in the co-firing scenario is posed in such categories as fossil depletion, climate change with impacts on human health and on ecosystems, particulate matter formation and agricultural land occupation. In the biomass combustion scenario, the above categories are complemented with metal depletion, natural land transformation, urban land occupation and human toxicity categories but with 4 times decrease of the overall impact. The study also shows that the change of the combustion system makes the most significant difference, while all the other factors, like biomass cultivation and processing, biomass transport have much lesser impact.

scholarly journals Life cycle assessment of cucumber irrigation: unplanned water reuse versus groundwater resources in Tipaza (Algeria)

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-238
Author(s):  
Latifa Azeb ◽  
Tarik Hartani ◽  
Nassim Aitmouheb ◽  
Ludivine Pradeleix ◽  
Nouredddin Hajjaji ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Water Reuse ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Groundwater Resources ◽  
Reclaimed Water ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment Methodology ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Effective quantitative and qualitative management of water for irrigation is crucial in many regions and the use of reclaimed water is a possible solution. Quantifying the impact of the use of such water is thus important. Using life cycle assessment methodology, this study analyzes the impact of water reuse irrigation and farmers’ practices in greenhouse cucumber production. Three scenarios concerned sources of water for irrigation and agricultural practices: the first scenario used surface water including reclaimed water, the second used groundwater. The third scenario resembled the first but also accounted for fertilizer application based on theoretical cucumber requirements. The third scenario showed 35% less fertilizer is required than the quantities farmers actually use. Our results show that the higher environmental impact of irrigation using reclaimed water than using groundwater is mainly due to over-fertilization. Comparison of the first and third scenarios also showed that the reduction in the environmental impact under the third scenario was significant. We conclude that LCA is a useful tool to compare the impacts of different water sources and farmers’ irrigation/fertilization management practices, and in particular, that the quantity of nutrients in reclaimed water should be deducted from the actual amount applied by the farmers.

scholarly journals Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of an Innovative Compact Hybrid Electrical-Thermal Storage System for Residential Buildings in Mediterranean Climate

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 5322
Author(s):  
Gabriel Zsembinszki ◽  
Noelia Llantoy ◽  
Valeria Palomba ◽  
Andrea Frazzica ◽  
Mattia Dallapiccola ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Mediterranean Climate ◽  
Residential Buildings ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
Storage System ◽  
Hot Water ◽  
Electrical Consumption ◽  
The Impact

The buildings sector is one of the least sustainable activities in the world, accounting for around 40% of the total global energy demand. With the aim to reduce the environmental impact of this sector, the use of renewable energy sources coupled with energy storage systems in buildings has been investigated in recent years. Innovative solutions for cooling, heating, and domestic hot water in buildings can contribute to the buildings’ decarbonization by achieving a reduction of building electrical consumption needed to keep comfortable conditions. However, the environmental impact of a new system is not only related to its electrical consumption from the grid, but also to the environmental load produced in the manufacturing and disposal stages of system components. This study investigates the environmental impact of an innovative system proposed for residential buildings in Mediterranean climate through a life cycle assessment. The results show that, due to the complexity of the system, the manufacturing and disposal stages have a high environmental impact, which is not compensated by the reduction of the impact during the operational stage. A parametric study was also performed to investigate the effect of the design of the storage system on the overall system impact.

scholarly journals Attributional & Consequential Life Cycle Assessment: Definitions, Conceptual Characteristics and Modelling Restrictions

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (13) ◽  
pp. 7386
Author(s):  
Thomas Schaubroeck ◽  
Simon Schaubroeck ◽  
Reinout Heijungs ◽  
Alessandra Zamagni ◽  
Miguel Brandão ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Product Life Cycle ◽  
Sustainability Assessment ◽  
Consequential Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Modelling Framework ◽  
Potential Environmental Impact ◽  
Reference Environment ◽  
The Impact

To assess the potential environmental impact of human/industrial systems, life cycle assessment (LCA) is a very common method. There are two prominent types of LCA, namely attributional (ALCA) and consequential (CLCA). A lot of literature covers these approaches, but a general consensus on what they represent and an overview of all their differences seems lacking, nor has every prominent feature been fully explored. The two main objectives of this article are: (1) to argue for and select definitions for each concept and (2) specify all conceptual characteristics (including translation into modelling restrictions), re-evaluating and going beyond findings in the state of the art. For the first objective, mainly because the validity of interpretation of a term is also a matter of consensus, we argue the selection of definitions present in the 2011 UNEP-SETAC report. ALCA attributes a share of the potential environmental impact of the world to a product life cycle, while CLCA assesses the environmental consequences of a decision (e.g., increase of product demand). Regarding the second objective, the product system in ALCA constitutes all processes that are linked by physical, energy flows or services. Because of the requirement of additivity for ALCA, a double-counting check needs to be executed, modelling is restricted (e.g., guaranteed through linearity) and partitioning of multifunctional processes is systematically needed (for evaluation per single product). The latter matters also hold in a similar manner for the impact assessment, which is commonly overlooked. CLCA, is completely consequential and there is no limitation regarding what a modelling framework should entail, with the coverage of co-products through substitution being just one approach and not the only one (e.g., additional consumption is possible). Both ALCA and CLCA can be considered over any time span (past, present & future) and either using a reference environment or different scenarios. Furthermore, both ALCA and CLCA could be specific for average or marginal (small) products or decisions, and further datasets. These findings also hold for life cycle sustainability assessment.

scholarly journals Applying Harmonised Geothermal Life Cycle Assessment Guidelines to the Rittershoffen Geothermal Heat Plant

Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (13) ◽  
pp. 3820
Author(s):  
Mélanie Douziech ◽  
Lorenzo Tosti ◽  
Nicola Ferrara ◽  
Maria Laura Parisi ◽  
Paula Pérez-López ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Heat Production ◽  
Hot Spot ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
Potential Contribution ◽  
Geothermal Systems ◽  
Geothermal Heat ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Impact

Heat production from a geothermal energy source is gaining increasing attention due to its potential contribution to the decarbonization of the European energy sector. Obtaining representative results of the environmental performances of geothermal systems and comparing them with other renewables is of utmost importance in order to ensure an effective energy transition as targeted by Europe. This work presents the outputs of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) performed on the Rittershoffen geothermal heat plant applying guidelines that were developed within the H2020 GEOENVI project. The production of 1 kWhth from the Rittershoffen heat plant was compared to the heat produced from natural gas in Europe. Geothermal heat production performed better than the average heat production in climate change and resource use, fossil categories. The LCA identified the electricity consumption during the operation and maintenance phase as a hot spot for several impact categories. A prospective scenario analysis was therefore performed to assess the evolution of the environmental performances of the Rittershoffen heat plant associated with the future French electricity mixes. The increase of renewable energy shares in the future French electricity mix caused the impact on specific categories (e.g., land use and mineral and metals resource depletion) to grow over the years. However, an overall reduction of the environmental impacts of the Rittershoffen heat plant was observed.

scholarly journals Criticality and LCA – Building comparison values to show the impact of criticality on LCA

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Björn Koch ◽  
Fernando Peñaherrera ◽  
Alexandra Pehlken
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
Resource Consumption ◽  
Impact Indicator ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Critical Materials ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Abiotic Depletion

Including criticality into Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has always been challenging to achieve but desirable to accomplish. In this article, we present a new approach for the evaluation of resource consumption of products by building comparison values based on Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) combined with weighted criticality values to show the direct impacts of criticality on LCA results. For this purpose, we develop an impact indicator based on the Abiotic Depletion Potential (ADP) of natural resources and use the two main parameters defined by the EU to determine the criticality of a material - the economic importance and the supply risk – in our case studies to build the Criticality Weighted Abiotic Depletion Potentials (CWADPs), one for each parameter. These indicators allow identifying and measuring the impacts of criticality when comparing the results of resource depletion using the ADP methodology and the results that incorporate criticality. The comparison of the CWADPs to the corresponding EU criticality values and its thresholds it reflects the equivalent criticality of the assessed product. This information reflects the impacts of criticality on LCA and assesses the total resource consumption of critical materials in a system.Keywords: Life Cycle Assessment, criticality, resources, materials, sustainability indicator

scholarly journals Environmental Impact for 3D Bone Tissue Engineering Scaffolds Life Cycle: An Assessment

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 6504-6515
Keyword(s):  
Tissue Engineering ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Bone Tissue Engineering ◽  
Bone Tissue ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Tissue Engineering Scaffolds ◽  
Industrial Soil ◽  
The Impact

With the development of additive manufacturing technology, 3D bone tissue engineering scaffolds have evolved. Bone tissue engineering is one of the techniques for repairing bone abnormalities caused by a variety of circumstances, such as injuries or the need to support damaged sections. Many bits of research have gone towards developing 3D bone tissue engineering scaffolds all across the world. The assessment of the environmental impact, on the other hand, has received less attention. As a result, the focus of this study is on developing a life cycle assessment (LCA) model for 3D bone tissue engineering scaffolds and evaluating potential environmental impacts. One of the methodologies to evaluating a complete environmental impact assessment is life cycle assessment (LCA). The cradle-to-grave method will be used in this study, and GaBi software was used to create the analysis for this study. Previous research on 3D bone tissue engineering fabrication employing poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate (PEGDA) soaked in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), and diphenyl (2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl) phosphine oxide (TPO) as a photoinitiator will be reviewed. Meanwhile, digital light processing (DLP) 3D printing is employed as the production technique. The GaBi program and the LCA model developed to highlight the potential environmental impact. This study shows how the input and output of LCA of 3D bone tissue engineering scaffolds might contribute to environmental issues such as air, freshwater, saltwater, and industrial soil emissions. The emission contributing to potential environmental impacts comes from life cycle input, electricity and transportation consumption, manufacturing process, and material resources. The results from this research can be used as an indicator for the researcher to take the impact of the development of 3D bone tissue engineering on the environment seriously.

The use of life cycle assessment for evaluating the sustainability of the Amsterdam water cycle

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Klaversma ◽  
A. W. C. van der Helm ◽  
J. W. N. M. Kappelhof
Keyword(s):  
Drinking Water ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Water Distribution ◽  
Water Cycle ◽  
Phosphate Removal ◽  
Process Data ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
The Impact

Waternet, the water cycle company of Amsterdam and surrounding areas, uses the life cycle assessment (LCA) method to evaluate the environmental impact of investment decisions and to determine the potential reduction of direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of different alternatives. This approach enables Waternet to fulfil its corporate objective to improve sustainability and to become climate neutral by 2020. Three example studies that give a good overview of the use of LCAs at Waternet and problems encountered are discussed: phosphate removal and recovery from wastewater, pH correction of drinking water with carbon dioxide (CO2) and materials for drinking water distribution pipes. The environmental impact assessments were performed in SimaPro 7 using the ReCiPe method and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Global Warming Potential (IPCC GWP) 100a method. The Ecoinvent 2.0 and 2.2 databases were used for the material and process data. From the examples described, it can be concluded that only the phosphate removal case had a significant effect on the climate footprint. The article discusses applications and limitations of the LCA technique. The most important limitation is that the impact of water consumption and the possible impact of effluent compounds to surface water are not considered within the used methods.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document