Gert Van Hoof

Comparison between three different LCIA methods for aquatic ecotoxicity and a product Environmental Risk Assessment – Insights from a Detergent Case Study within OMNIITOX

Background and ObjectiveIn the OMNIITOX project 11 partners have the common objective to improve environmental management tools for the assessment of (eco)toxicological impacts. The detergent case study aims at: i) comparing three Procter &c Gamble laundry detergent forms (Regular Powder-RP, Compact Powder-CP and Compact Liquid-CL) regarding their potential impacts on aquatic ecotoxicity, ii) providing insights into the differences between various Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods with respect to data needs and results and iii) comparing the results from Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) with results from an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA).Material and MethodsThe LCIA has been conducted with EDIP97 (chronic aquatic ecotoxicity) [1], USES-LCA (freshwater and marine water aquatic ecotoxicity, sometimes referred to as CML2001) [2, 3] and IMPACT 2002 (covering freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity) [4]. The comparative product ERA is based on the EU Ecolabel approach for detergents [5] and EUSES [6], which is based on the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) of the EU on Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) of chemicals [7]. Apart from the Eco-label approach, all calculations are based on the same set of physico-chemical and toxicological effect data to enable a better comparison of the methodological differences. For the same reason, the system boundaries were kept the same in all cases, focusing on emissions into water at the disposal stage.Results and DiscussionSignificant differences between the LCIA methods with respect to data needs and results were identified. Most LCIA methods for freshwater ecotoxicity and the ERA see the compact and regular powders as similar, followed by compact liquid. IMPACT 2002 (for freshwater) suggests the liquid is equally as good as the compact powder, while the regular powder comes out worse by a factor of 2. USES-LCA for marine water shows a very different picture seeing the compact liquid as the clear winner over the powders, with the regular powder the least favourable option. Even the LCIA methods which result in die same product ranking, e.g. EDIP97 chronic aquatic ecotoxicity and USES-LCA freshwater ecotoxicity, significantly differ in terms of most contributing substances. Whereas, according to IMPACT 2002 and USES-LCA marine water, results are entirely dominated by inorganic substances, the other LCIA methods and the ERA assign a key role to surfactants. Deviating results are mainly due to differences in the fate and exposure modelling and, to a lesser extent, to differences in the toxicological effect calculations. Only IMPACT 2002 calculates the effects based on a mean value approach, whereas all other LCIA methods and the ERA tend to prefer a PNEC-based approach. In a comparative context like LCA the OMNIITOX project has taken the decision for a combined mean and PNEC-based approach, as it better represents the ‘average’ toxicity while still taking into account more sensitive species. However, the main reason for deviating results remains in the calculation of the residence time of emissions in the water compartments.Conclusion and OutlookThe situation that different LCIA methods result in different answers to the question concerning which detergent type is to be preferred regarding the impact category aquatic ecotoxicity is not satisfactory, unless explicit reasons for the differences are identifiable. This can hamper practical decision support, as LCA practitioners usually will not be in a position to choose the ’right’ LCIA method for their specific case. This puts a challenge to the entire OMNIITOX project to develop a method, which finds common ground regarding fate, exposure and effect modelling to overcome the current situa-tion of diverging results and to reflect most realistic conditions.

A Database for the Life-Cycle Assessment of Procter & Gamble Laundry Detergents

A Life-Cycle Inventory (LCI) and Assessment (LCA) database for laundry detergents of the Procter & Gamble Company (P&G) was constructed using SimaPro software. The input data needed to conduct a product LCI came from several different, supporting databases to cover supplier (extraction and manufacturing of raw materials), manufacturing of the detergent product, transportation, packaging, use and disposal stages. Manufacturing, packaging and transportation stages are usually representative of European conditions while the use and disposal stages are country specific and represent how consumers are using a specific product and how wastes are disposed of. The database has been constructed to allow Procter & Gamble managers to analyse detergent products from a system-wide, functional unit point of view in a consistent, transparent and reproducible manner. For demonstrative purpose, a life cycle inventory and a life cycle impact assessment of a P&G laundry detergent used in Belgium is presented. The analysis showed that more than 80% of the energy consumption occurs during the consumer use stage (mainly for heating of the water). Air and solid waste follow the same pattern, most of these being associated with die energy generation for the use stage. More than 98% of the biological oxygen demand, however, is associated with the disposal stage even after accounting for removal during treatment. Future challenges are the completion and/or updating of all detergent ingredient inventories.

The effect of compact formulations on the environmental profile of Northern European granular laundry detergents Part II: Life Cycle assessment

The environmental profile of laundry detergents at three time points (1988, 1992, and 1998) were compared on the basis of two distinct, complementary approaches: Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) and Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA). The results are presented in this paper and its accompanying paper in this issue (Part I: Product Environmental Risk Assessment). Life-Cycle Inventory (LCI) data from The Netherlands and Sweden were used for this retrospective analysis. The chosen time period studied (1988 - 1998) spans significant, multiple formulation and process change in laundry detergents, including the introduction of compact, then super-compact, granular detergents. Cradle-to-Gate LCAs based on 1 kg of finished product (from raw material supply to packaged finished product leaving the suppliers site) revealed no significant differences between the products themselves, as manufactured between 1988, 1992 and 1998. Cradle-to-Grave LCAs based on 1000 wash cycles (from raw material supply to disposal of used product) indicated that the consumption of raw materials and energy, as well as environmental emissions (air, water and solid waste), decreased after the introduction of compact detergents in 1988. The LCAs revealed that a number of category indicator values decreased (for acidification, aquatic toxicity greenhouse effects, eutrophication, toxicity, ozone depletion and smog). Furthermore, the results of the LCAs support the conclusion that the differences between The Netherlands and Sweden are due to (1) differences in electrical generation between the countries, (2) differences in energy consumption during consumer use, (3) differences in detergent dosage per wash and (4) differences in the wastewater treatment infrastructure.

Indicator selection in life cycle assessment to enable decision making: issues and solutions

PurposeWith an ever increasing list of indicators available, life cycle assessment (LCA) practitioners face the challenge of effectively communicating results to decision makers. Simplification of LCA is often limited to an arbitrary selection of indicators, use of single scores by using weighted values or single attribute indicators. These solutions are less attractive to decision makers, since value judgments are introduced or multi-indicator information is lost. Normalization could be a means to narrow the list of indicators by ranking indicators vs. a reference system. This paper shows three different normalization approaches that produce very different ranking of indicators. It is explained how normalization helps maintain a multi-indicator approach while keeping the most relevant indicators, allowing effective decision making.MethodsThe approaches are illustrated on a hand dishwashing case study, using ReCiPe as the impact assessment method and taking the European population (year 2000) as the reference situation. Indicators are ranked using midpoint normalization factors, and compared to the ranking from endpoint normalization broken down by midpoint contribution.Results and discussionEndpoint normalization shows Resources as the most relevant area of protection for this case, closely followed by Human Health and Ecosystem. Broken down by their key driving midpoints, fossil depletion, climate change and, to a lesser extent, particulate matter formation and metal depletion, are most relevant. Midpoint normalization, however, indicates Freshwater Eutrophication, Natural Land Transformation and Toxicity indicators (marine and freshwater ecotoxicity and human toxicity) are most relevant.ConclusionsA three-step approach based on endpoint normalization is recommended to present only the most relevant indicators, allowing more effective decision making instead of communicating all LCA indicators. The selection process breaks out the normalized endpoint results into the most contributing midpoints (relevant indicators) and reports results with midpoint level units. Bias due to lack of data completeness is less of an issue in the endpoint normalization process (compared to midpoint normalization), while midpoint results are less subject to uncertainty (compared to endpoint results). Focusing on the relevant indicators and key contributing unit processes has proven to be effective for non-LCA expert decision makers to understand, use, and communicate complex LCA results.

LCA-measured environmental improvements in Pampers® diapers

PurposeThe aim of this study was to investigate the factors that influence the sustainability of disposable baby diapers (nappies) using life cycle assessments (LCAs). Size 4 Pampers® Cruisers (North American name) and ActiveFit (European name) from 2007 are compared to new versions made in 2010 to determine if the design and materials changes intended to improve performance also lead to reductions in the most relevant environmental indicators.Materials and methodsCradle-to-grave LCAs, consistent with ISO 14040/14044 Standards, are conducted. The functional unit is “the number of diapers needed to collect excreta over a child’s diapering lifetime.” Input data come from P&G, suppliers, trade association reports, Franklin and ecoinvent databases, and Google. SimaPro 7 is used to model the LCA. Several life cycle impact assessments (LCIA) methods, sensitivity analyses, normalization to annual consumption, and Monte Carlo analysis are used to produce and check results.Results and discussionThe consumption normalization identified that the diaper’s “environmental footprint” should include the IMPACT2002+ indicators: nonrenewable energy, global warming potential (GWP), respiratory effects from inorganics, total solid waste, and cumulative energy demand (CED). Other indicators are insignificant. Contribution analysis shows that the sourcing and production of diaper materials contribute most to the environmental indicators evaluated, accounting for ∼84% of all non-renewable energy uses and ∼64% of global warming potential. Diaper disposal is a small contributor (1–12%) to potential environmental impacts. Reductions observed for the 2010 US product are: CED—8%, solid waste—12%, non-renewable energy—1%, GWP500—4%, and respiratory inorganics—6%. For the European product, reductions are: CED—11%, solid waste—8%, non-renewable energy—3%, GWP500—5%, and respiratory inorganics—14%.ConclusionsThe new Pampers® diapers sold in the USA and Europe have a reduced environmental footprint versus the previous versions (2007). Significant reductions are achieved in non-renewable energy use and global warming potential, as well as other environmental indicators by optimizing the diaper design and the materials. Although some of the results are single digit reductions, Monte Carlo analysis indicates that there is a high probability that the differences are real. The use of multiple LCIA methods to compare products is helpful to confirm consistency of results. Normalizing the LCIA scores to annual consumption also helps prioritize which environmental indicators can be impactful and affected by changing a product.

The effect of compact formulations on the environmental profile of northern european granular laundry detergents

Regular (1988) and compact granular (1992, 1998) laundry detergents were compared on the basis of two distinct, complementary approaches: Environmental Risk Assessment and Life-Cycle Assessment. The results are presented in this paper and an accompanying paper in this volume (Part II: Life-Cycle Assessment). Exposure data from The Netherlands and Sweden were used for this retrospective analysis. The time period studied (1988–1998) spans many innovations in laundry detergents, one of which was the introduction of compact detergents. The aquatic risk assessment resulted in risk quotients below 1 for all detergent ingredients in both countries over the period studied. Furthermore, it showed that risk quotients decrease two to five-fold between 1988 and 1998 in each country due to the introduction of compact detergents. Slightly lower risk quotients were observed in Sweden, when compared to The Netherlands, attributable to the lower water hardness resulting in lower detergent usage per wash cycle in that country. If water hardnesses were equal, the outcome of the product risk assessments would also be the same in the two countries.

A model and tool to calculate life cycle inventories of chemicals discharged down the drain

PurposeThe aim of this article is to present a new model and tool to calculate life cycle inventories (LCIs) of chemicals discharged down the drain. Exchanges with the technosphere and the environment are attributed for based on the predicted behaviour of individual chemicals in the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and following discharge to the aquatic environment, either through the treated effluent or directly when there is no connection to WWTP. The described model is programmed in a stand-alone spreadsheet, WW LCI.MethodsThe model includes treatment in a modern WWTP and sludge disposal as well as the greenhouse gas (GHG) and nutrient emissions from degradation in the environment. The model fundamentals are described, and its application is shown with six industrial chemicals: sodium carbonate, ethanol, tetraacetylethylenediamine (TAED), diethylenetriamine penta(methylene phosphonic acid) (DTPMP), zeolite A and sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP). This application considers two scenarios: Germany, with full connection to WWTP, and a generic direct discharge scenario. The scenario with WWTP connection is assessed with WW LCI as well as with the wastewater treatment model developed for ecoinvent. Results are presented for key LCI flows and for life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), focusing on GHG emissions, freshwater ecotoxicity and marine and freshwater eutrophication.Results and discussionGHG emissions predicted by WW LCI differ to those predicted by the ecoinvent model, with the exception of sodium carbonate. For zeolite A and DTPMP, WW LCI predicts GHG emissions 330 higher and 12.5 times lower, respectively. Eutrophication scores are lower for WW LCI as the German scenario considers more optimistic nutrient removal rates than the default ones from the ecoinvent model. Freshwater ecotoxicity is mainly driven by the magnitude of the USEtox characterization factors; however, the ecoinvent model cannot accommodate chemical-specific toxicity assessments. When WW LCI is used to compare a direct discharge scenario with the German scenario, differences are found in all three impact categories.ConclusionsWW LCI provides a comprehensive and chemical-specific inventory, constituting an advance over previous models using generic descriptors such as biological oxygen demand. This level of detail comes at the price of an increased effort for collecting input data as well as the need to identify individual chemicals in wastewater prior to the assessment. The LCIs generated through this model can then be applied in the context of LCA studies where each chemical contributes to the total life cycle impacts of a product or service.

A Review of the Airborne and Waterborne Emissions from Uncontrolled Solid Waste Disposal Sites

ABSTRACT The objective of this review is to critically analyze literature, data, and models on the environmental releases from the uncontrolled disposal and burning of solid waste. Major concerns include releases of greenhouse gases, particulate matter, and leachate. Many factors influence these releases including waste composition, site depth, and climate. While the impact of these factors is understood qualitatively, there is little data and considerable uncertainty in model predictions. One limitation is that in general, predicted emissions are not responsive to changes in waste composition. Estimating impacts to human health and the environment from the predicted emissions results in additional uncertainty.

Driving forces for data exchange

The subgroup ‘Driving Forces for Data Exchange’ as part of the SETAC LCA Workgroup on Data Availability and Quality is finishing its final report with recommendations and guidelines to stimulate availability and exchange of LCI data. Activities in the past three years involved a literature review, interviews with LCI data publishers and stakeholder discussions. The final report will be part of a SETAC ‘Code of Life Cycle Inventory Practice’, dealing with LCI data availability and quality aspects in a broader sense.