Application of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment to Used Lubricant Oil Management in South Brazilian Region

Used Lubricant Oil (ULO) is a hazardous waste resulting from lubricant oil used in motorized equipment to reduce friction between moving surfaces that, over time, wear outs and becomes contaminated. The purpose of this study is to compare the sustainability of two ULO management systems in Brazil: one designated in this study by the TTR scenario (which includes transportation, trans-shipment, and re-refining phases), the other designated by the TsTR scenario (without the trans-shipment phase) to evaluate which scenario is socially, economically, and environmentally more efficient. The study uses the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) methodology. As a combination of life cycle assessment (LCA), life cycle cost (LCC), and social life cycle assessment (s-LCA), it integrates the three sustainability dimensions (environmental, social, and economic). The sustainability index was calculated by aggregating data from eight environmental indicators, five economic indicators, and five social indicators. The results showed that the TsTR scenario presented the best values for the sustainability assessment than the TTR scenario. The TsTR scenario had the best social and economic performance, and the TTR scenario had the best environmental performance. The differences observed in those scenarios’ performances were noted by the absence or presence of the trans-shipment center. The absence of this center improved the social and economic performance of the scenario. The social dimension was improved by the elimination of the stage that causes problems related to social and economic dimensions by reducing several costs that can be associated with it. The presence of the trans-shipment center improves the environmental performance scenario by reducing the number of hazards that could impact the re-refining phase. The LCSA methodology enables a comparative life cycle assessment of two alternative system evaluations of ULO management by the sustainability index of each scenario. This index helps to analyze the contributions of each of the 18 categories and subcategories in the perspective of the sustainability dimensions and, consequently, to carry out their integrated evaluation, aiming to define the best sustainability scenario.

Download Full-text

Application challenges for the social Life Cycle Assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment

Journal of Cleaner Production ◽

10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.044 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 69 ◽

pp. 34-48 ◽

Cited By ~ 145

Author(s):

Julia Martínez-Blanco ◽

Annekatrin Lehmann ◽

Pere Muñoz ◽

Assumpció Antón ◽

Marzia Traverso ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

The Social

Download Full-text

Comprehensive Evaluation of the Sustainable Development of Battery Electric Vehicles in China

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su11205635 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (20) ◽

pp. 5635 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Wang ◽

Zhou ◽

Li ◽

Wei

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Energy Consumption ◽

Electric Vehicles ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Rapid Development ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Battery Electric Vehicles ◽

The Social

Due to the rapid growth in the total number of vehicles in China, energy consumption and environmental pollution are serious problems. The development of electric vehicles (EVs) has become one of the important measures for solving these problems. As EVs are in a period of rapid development, sustainability research on them is conducive to the timely discovery of—and solution to—problems in the development process, but current research on the sustainability of EVs is still scarce. Based on the strategic development direction of EVs in China, battery electric vehicles (BEVs) were chosen as the research object of this study. The theory and method of the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) were used to study the sustainability of BEVs. Specifically, the indicators of the life cycle assessment (LCA) were constructed, and the GaBi software was used to assess the environmental dimensions. The framework of life cycle costing (LCC) was used to assess the economic dimensions from the perspective of consumers. The indicators of the social life cycle assessment (SLCA) of stakeholders were constructed to assess the social dimension. Then, the method of the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) was selected for multicriteria decision-making in order to integrate the three dimensions. A specific conclusion was drawn from a comparison of BEVs and internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs). The study found that the life cycle sustainability of ICEVs in China was better than that of BEVs. This result might be unexpected, but there were reasons for it. Through sensitivity analysis, it was concluded that the current power structure and energy consumption in the operation phase of BEVs had a higher environmental impact, and the high cost of batteries and the government subsidy policy had a higher impact on the cost of BEVs. Corresponding suggestions are put forward at the end of the article.

Download Full-text

Exploring the Current Challenges and Opportunities of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su11030636 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (3) ◽

pp. 636 ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

Rizal Taufiq Fauzi ◽

Patrick Lavoie ◽

Luca Sorelli ◽

Mohammad Davoud Heidari ◽

Ben Amor

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Research Gaps ◽

Hotspot Analysis ◽

Trade Offs ◽

Challenges And Opportunities

Sustainability decision making is a complex task for policy makers, considering the possible unseen consequences it may entail. With a broader scope covering environmental, economic, and social aspects, Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) is a promising holistic method to deal with that complexity. However, to date, this method is limited to the hotspot analysis of a product, service, or system, and hence only assesses direct impacts and overlooks the indirect ones (or consequences). This critical literature review aims to explore the challenges and the research gaps related to the integration of three methods in LCSA representing three pillars of sustainability: (Environmental) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC), and Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). The challenges and the research gaps that appear when pairing two of these tools with each other are identified and discussed, i.e., the temporal issues, different perspectives, the indirect consequences, etc. Although this study does not aim to remove the shadows in LCSA methods, critical research gaps are identified in order to be addressed in future works. More case studies are also recommended for a deeper understanding of methodological trade-offs that might happen, especially when dealing with the consequential perspective.

Download Full-text

The Third Wave of LCA as the “Decade of Consolidation”

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su11123283 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (12) ◽

pp. 3283 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Martina Zimek ◽

Andreas Schober ◽

Claudia Mair ◽

Rupert J. Baumgartner ◽

Tobias Stern ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Social Aspects ◽

Third Wave ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Economic Aspects ◽

The Third

Several authors have pointed out the importance of systems thinking, and have considered both environmental and social aspects (holistic perspective) of sustainability assessment in the past. Sustainability assessment tools which integrate different aspects (e.g., environmental/social aspects) in order to identify negative impacts have already been developed. Common tools used to assess environmental, social, or economic impacts include the life cycle assessment (LCA), social life cycle assessment (S-LCA), life cycle costing (LCC) and life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) approaches. The goal of the present study was to investigate how and to what extent the three dimensions of sustainability (environmental, social, economic; holistic sustainability perspective) have been integrated into the field of LCA. A topic modeling method was applied to examine whether the emphasis placed on integrating environmental, social, and economic aspects in sustainability assessment has resulted in a more comprehensive application of the LCA approach. The results show that topics related to energy and infrastructure are currently prevailing, and that topics related to methods have been decreasing since 1997. A minor discussion of social aspects and a lack of discussion on economic aspects were identified in the present study. These results do not support the predicted “decade of life cycle sustainability assessment.” Consequently, a new period of LCA extension and application is predicted, namely, the third wave of LCA as the “decade of consolidation.” During this period, the LCA framework will be enhanced to reduce existing practical and methodological difficulties and integrate environmental and social aspects in a sustainability assessment to support global sustainable development.

Download Full-text

Social Sustainability Assessment in Livestock Production: A Social Life Cycle Assessment Approach

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su11164419 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (16) ◽

pp. 4419 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Adriana Rivera-Huerta ◽

María de la Salud Rubio Lozano ◽

Alejandro Padilla-Rivera ◽

Leonor Patricia Güereca

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Production Systems ◽

Social Performance ◽

Livestock Production ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

The Social ◽

Significant Difference

This study evaluates the social performance of monoculture (MC), intensive silvopastoral (ISP), and native silvopastoral (NSP) livestock production systems in the tropical region of southeastern Mexico through a social life cycle assessment (SCLA) approach. The methodological framework proposed by the United Nations Environmental Program/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (UNEP/SETAC) (2009) was employed based on a scoring approach with a performance scale ranging from 1 (very poor) to 4 (outstanding). Twelve livestock ranches for calf production were evaluated using 18 impact subcategories associated with the categories “human rights”, “working conditions”, “health and safety”, “socioeconomic repercussions”, and “governance”. The stakeholders evaluated were workers, the local community, society, and value chain actors. The ranches had performance scores between 1.78 (very poor) and 2.17 (poor). The overall average performance of the ranches by production system was 1.98, 1.96, and 1.97 for the MC, ISP, and NSP systems, respectively. The statistical analysis shows that there is no significant difference in the social performance of the livestock production systems. This assessment indicates that the cattle ranches analyzed in Mexico have poor or very poor social performance. The results show that socioeconomic and political contexts exert a greater influence on the social performance of livestock production systems than does their type of technology.

Download Full-text

Principles for the application of life cycle sustainability assessment

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment ◽

10.1007/s11367-021-01958-2 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 26 (9) ◽

pp. 1900-1905 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sonia Valdivia ◽

Jana Gerta Backes ◽

Marzia Traverso ◽

Guido Sonnemann ◽

Stefano Cucurachi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Bottom Line ◽

Life Cycle Initiative ◽

Iso 14040 ◽

Trade Offs

Abstract Purpose and context This paper aims to establish principles for the increased application and use of life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). Sustainable development (SD) encompassing resilient economies and social stability of the global system is growingly important for decision-makers from business and governments. The “17 SDGs” emerge as a high-level shared blueprint for peace, abundance, and prosperity for people and the planet, and “sustainability” for supporting improvements of products and organizations. A “sustainability” interpretation—successful in aligning stakeholders’ understanding—subdivides the impacts according to a triple bottom line or three pillars: economic, social, and environmental impacts. These context and urgent needs inspired the LCSA framework. This entails a sustainability assessment of products and organizations in accordance with the three pillars, while adopting a life cycle perspective. Methods The Life Cycle Initiative promotes since 2011 a pragmatic LCSA framework based on the three techniques: LCSA = environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) + life cycle costing (LCC) + social life cycle assessment (S-LCA). This is the focus of the paper, while acknowledging previous developments. Identified and reviewed literature shows challenges of addressing the three pillars in the LCSA framework implementation like considering only two pillars; not being fully aligned with ISO 14040; lacking interconnectedness among the three pillars; not having clear criteria for results’ weighting nor clear results’ interpretation; and not following cause-effect chains and mechanisms leading to an endpoint. Agreement building among LCSA experts and reviewing processes strengthened the consensus on this paper. Broad support and outreach are ensured by publishing this as position paper. Results For harmonizing practical LCSA applications, easing interpretation, and increasing usefulness, consensed ten LCSA principles (10P) are established: understanding the areas of protection, alignment with ISO 14040, completeness, stakeholders’ and product utility considerations, materiality of system boundaries, transparency, consistency, explicit trade-offs’ communication, and caution when compensating impacts. Examples were provided based on a fictional plastic water bottle Conclusions In spite of increasing needs for and interest in SD and sustainability supporting tools, LCSA is at an early application stage of application. The 10P aim to promote more and better LCSA applications by ensuring alignment with ISO 14040, completeness and clear interpretation of integrated results, among others. For consolidating its use, however, more consensus-building is needed (e.g., on value-laden ethical aspects of LCSA, interdependencies and interconnectedness among the three dimensions, and harmonization and integration of the three techniques) and technical and policy recommendations for application.

Download Full-text

Building a Sustainability Benchmarking Framework of Ceramic Tiles Based on Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA)

Resources ◽

10.3390/resources8010011 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

pp. 11 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Anna Maria Ferrari ◽

Lucrezia Volpi ◽

Martina Pini ◽

Cristina Siligardi ◽

Fernando Enrique García-Muiña ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

End Users ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Strict Sense ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Ceramic Tiles

The purpose of this paper is to determine indices of environmental, economic and social sustainability related to the Italian production of ceramic tiles in porcelain stoneware in order to contribute to the construction of a reference benchmarking useful to decision makers, designers and end users of ceramic tiles. To achieve this goal, this paper is based on the Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) framework that incorporates the three dimensions of sustainability with cradle-to-grave Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) tools. The study has shown that in the production of porcelain stoneware one of the major environmental problems, in addition to production in the strict sense, is the distribution system of the product to end users and, to a lesser extent but always significant, the process of supplying raw materials. Finally, it was highlighted that the joint use of the three impact assessment tools (LCA, LCC, S-LCA) requires further methodological work to avoid the risk of double counting of sustainability performance. This research has adopted a detailed methodological approach, both in the collection and in the processing of data, keeping the main phases of the production process separate. In this way, it has been possible to highlight that the major environmental criticalities are just beyond the “gate” of the ceramic factories, along the logistics chain. The study also proposes for the Italian ceramic sector not only indicators of environmental sustainability but also economic and social.

Download Full-text

Application of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in the Construction Sector: A Systematic Literature Review

Processes ◽

10.3390/pr9071248 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (7) ◽

pp. 1248

Author(s):

Jana Backes ◽

Marzia Traverso

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Net Present Value ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Life Cycles ◽

Raw Material ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Construction Sector ◽

The Social

This paper reviews actual sustainability assessments in the construction sector to define whether and how a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) is applied and interpreted in this sector today. This industry has large shares in global energy (33%), raw material consumption (40%) and solid waste generation (40%). Simultaneously, it drives the economy and provides jobs. The LCSA is a method to identify environmental, social and economic impacts of products/services along their life cycles. The results of this study showed a mismatch between sectoral emissions and the number of LCSA-based impact evaluations. It was found that only 11% of papers reviewed assessed all three sustainability pillars. The economic and especially the social pillars were partly neglected. In Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs), 100% made use of Global Warming Potential (GWP) but only 30% assessed more than five indicators in total. In Life Cycle Costing (LCC), there were a variety of costs assessed. Depreciation and lifetime were mainly neglected. We found that 42% made use of Net Present Value (NPV), while over 50% assessed individual indicators. For the Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), the focus was on the production stage; even the system boundaries were defined as cradle-to-use and -grave. Future approaches are relevant but there is no need to innovate: a proposal for a LCSA approach is made.

Download Full-text

Integration of Sustainability Criteria and Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Method into Construction Material Selection in Developing Countries: The Case of Vietnam

International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning ◽

10.18280/ijsdp.150801 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 (8) ◽

pp. 1145-1156

Author(s):

Trong Hung Dinh ◽

Trung Hieu Dinh ◽

Uwe Götze

Keyword(s):

Sustainable Development ◽

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Material Selection ◽

Construction Material ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Sustainability Criteria

A sustainable development concerning economic, environmental, and social aspects is a global need as well as challenge in general and especially regarding the selection of construction materials. However, it is assumed that the importance of sustainability criteria is different in developed and developing countries. This is relevant for the application of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment, a method that integrates the established methods for economic, ecological, and social evaluation (Life Cycle Costing, Life Cycle Assessment, and Social Life Cycle Assessment) without explicitly including importance weightings. This paper aims to review the reality of sustainable development in construction material selection in Vietnam, a developing country. A list of 18 sustainability criteria was set up by reviewing previous studies and using a questionnaire. These criteria were ranked and used to calculate the importance of weightings based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process method and a Likert scale. The results showed that the “price of material” was ranked as the first among the sustainability criteria. It is also pointed out that 42.06, 29.96, and 27.98 are the weightings of Life Cycle Costing, Life Cycle Assessment, and Social Life Cycle Assessment results, respectively. Besides, 11 obstacles for integrating sustainability criteria into material selection were identified in the questionnaire, and 4 out of them were marked as showing “high” importance.

Download Full-text