Laura Schneider

Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard

One method to assess the sustainability performance of products is life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), which assesses product performance considering the environmental, economic, and social dimensions of the life cycle. The results of LCSA can be used to compare different products or to support decision making toward sustainable production and consumption. In both cases, LCSA results could be too disaggregated and consequently too difficult to understand and interpret by decision makers. As non‐experts are usually the target audience of experts and scientists, and are also involved in decision‐making processes, the necessity for a straightforward but comprehensive presentation of LCSA results is becoming strategically important. The implementation of the dashboard of sustainability proposed in this article offers a possible solution. An outstanding characteristic of the dashboard of sustainability is the communicability of the results by means of a graphical representation (a cartogram), characterized by a suitable chromatic scale and ranking score. The integration of LCSA and the dashboard of sustainability into a so‐called Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard (LCSD) is described here. The first application of LCSD to a group of hard floor coverings is presented to show the applicability and limitations of the methodology.

The economic resource scarcity potential (ESP) for evaluating resource use based on life cycle assessment

PurposeIn life cycle assessment (LCA), resource availability is currently evaluated by means of models based on depletion time, surplus energy, etc. Economic aspects influencing the security of supply and affecting availability of resources for human use are neglected. The aim of this work is the development of a new model for the assessment of resource provision capability from an economic angle, complementing existing LCA models. The inclusion of criteria affecting the economic system enables an identification of potential supply risks associated with resource use. In step with actual practice, such an assessment provides added value compared to conventional (environmental) resource assessment within LCA. Analysis of resource availability including economic information is of major importance to sustain industrial production.MethodsNew impact categories and characterization models are developed for the assessment of economic resource availability based on existing LCA methodology and terminology. A single score result can be calculated providing information about the economic resource scarcity potential (ESP) of different resources. Based on a life cycle perspective, the supply risk associated with resource use can be assessed, and bottlenecks within the supply chain can be identified. The analysis can be conducted in connection with existing LCA procedures and in line with current resource assessment practice and facilitates easy implementation on an organizational level.Results and discussionA portfolio of 17 metals is assessed based on different impact categories. Different impact factors are calculated, enabling identification of high-risk metals. Furthermore, a comparison of ESP and abiotic depletion potential (ADP) is conducted. Availability of resources differs significantly when economic aspects are taken into account in addition to geologic availability. Resources assumed uncritical based on ADP results, such as rare earths, turn out to be associated with high supply risks.ConclusionsThe model developed in this work allows for a more realistic assessment of resource availability beyond geologic finiteness. The new impact categories provide organizations with a practical measure to identify supply risks associated with resources. The assessment delivers a basis for developing appropriate mitigation measures and for increasing resilience towards supply disruptions. By including an economic dimension into resource availability assessment, a contribution towards life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) is achieved.

Challenges in Life Cycle Assessment: An Overview of Current Gaps and Research Needs

This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of current gaps of and challenges for LCA structured into inventory, impact assessment, generic and evolving aspects. A total of 34 gaps and challenges were identified. These include challenges like ‘allocation’, ‘uncertainty’ or ‘biodiversity’, as well as issues like ‘littering’, ‘animal well-being’ or ‘positive impacts’ which are not covered as often in the existing LCA literature. Each of these gaps is described by a high-level overview of the topic and its relevance to LCA, and the state of the art in terms of literature and potential solutions, if any, is presented.

LCA Perspectives for Resource Efficiency Assessment

Efficient use and consumption of natural resources is an important strategy in sustainable development. This chapter discusses available methods and indicators to assess “resource efficiency” beyond the assessment of the quantities of materials used and toward available indicators in life cycle assessment (LCA). According to the classical definition in LCA, natural resources encompass input-oriented environmental interventions (e.g., extraction of abiotic resources, such as oil, ore deposits, fossil, and fresh surface water, as well as biotic resources such as fish and trees). LCA and existing life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods are seen as a good basis for measuring resource efficiency. Despite several models to assess resource use and depletion within LCA, important challenges remain. Available models do not fully evaluate resource use and availability in the context of their functional relevance for human purposes. For the efficient use of resources, all dimensions of sustainability need to be addressed. Environmental, economic, and social implications of material use and availability have to also be considered. Assessment of resource utilization and efficiency associated with product systems needs to shift toward life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA).

Design for Resource Efficiency

There are already several approaches for Design for Environment or Design for Recycling and recently also the topic of resource efficiency received increasing interest. While procedurally existing ecodesign concepts might be also applicable for Design for Resource Efficiency, the main issue is to define relevant yet practicable indicators to measure resource efficiency. Depending on the definition, it can comprise raw material consumption only or the consumption and pollution of natural resources. Consequently, there is a variety of indicators available. However, resources are not only an environmental concern. Raw material availability is a critical issue for many industrial sectors which finally leads to a new area of protection, the economic material availability. Therefore, amongst others, new characterization factors are proposed by taking into account anthropogenic material stocks in addition to the lithospheric stocks.

Messung von Ressourceneffizienz mit der ESSENZ-Methode

BMBF, 033R094A-F, r³ - Strategische Metalle, Verbundvorhaben: Integrierte Methode zur ganzheitlichen Berechnung/Messung von Ressourceneffizienz - ESSENZ

Berechnung der Ressourceneffizienz

In den folgenden Unterkapiteln wird die Berechnung der Ressourceneffizienz basierend auf den in Kap. 3 ermittelten Sachbilanzdaten und der in Kap. 4 beschriebenen Bewertung durchgefuhrt. Die Erklarung der einzelnen Berechnungsschritte wird am bereits zuvor eingefuhrten Beispiel des Aluminium- und Silberkabels exemplarisch dargestellt.

Ablauf der Ressourceneffizienzbewertung mit der ESSENZ-Methode

In Abb. 2.1 sind die in der ESSENZ-Methode betrachteten Bereiche Produktsystem und Bewertung dargestellt. Die Modellierung des Produktsystems wird in Kap. 3 erlautert und beinhaltet idealerweise den gesamten Lebensweg des Produktes. Neben der Entnahme von Rohstoffen werden die Produktion, Nutzung und Wartung, Recycling, Wieder-und Weiterverarbeitung sowie die Entsorgung des Produktes berucksichtigt. Die Bewertung der Ressourceneffizienz des Produktsystems mithilfe der ESSENZ Methode ist in Kap. 4 umfassend erklart und gliedert sich in die Teildimensionen „Physische und sozio-okonomische Verfugbarkeit“, „Gesellschaftliche Akzeptanz“ und „Umweltauswirkungen“. Die Gegenuberstellung dieser einzelnen Dimensionen mit der Dimension „Nutzen“ ermoglicht schlieslich eine Bewertung der Ressourceneffizienz.

Interpretation der Ergebnisse

Im Folgenden wird auf die Interpretation der in Kap. 5 berechneten Ergebnisse eingegangen. Dazu werden in einem ersten Schritt sowohl die Unsicherheiten der Gesamtmethode als auch der einzelnen Methodenbestandteile vorgestellt. Anschliesend gibt es Hinweise fur die Interpretation der betrachteten Kategorien und Dimensionen. Die Interpretation aller Kategorien fur die Bewertung der Ressourceneffizienz des untersuchten Produktsystems ist wichtig, um Zielkonflikte innerhalb sowie zwischen den Dimensionen transparent aufzuzeigen und in die Handlungsempfehlung einfliesen zu lassen.

Aggregation zum Vergleich von Produktalternativen

Die im Folgenden beschriebene Aggregation zum Vergleich zweier Produktalternativen ist optional. Sie kann, muss aber nicht bei vergleichenden Analysen angewendet werden.