For the stochastic uncertainties, the influence on the stochastic uncertainty of final results can be assessed in two fundamentally different ways – through an analytical solution or through simulation. Both require knowledge about distribution type, mean and variation for the process and assessment data. Analytical solution When the inventory results are calculated disregarding the variation of the individual inventory data (i.e. just using the mean values), the result is the true mean value of final results, but this approach fails to give any information about the uncertainty of this mean. The analytical approach to meet this challenge develops an equation describing the distribution (and hence also variation) of the final results as function of the distributions of process data for all processes in the system


The analytical solution becomes a very complex expression for even a simple system but it can be approximated with a Taylor series expressing the error on the results as a function of the error on the process data for each process. Although it can be simplified in this way, the analytical approach requires qualified simplifying assumptions in order to be operational for the types of systems normally modelled in LCAs. Therefore, the simulation approach is normally applied in software used for modelling of systems Simulation Simulation of the error on the total results of an LCA is typically done using a Monte Carlo approach. Each peace of inventory data is varied independently of the other inventory data around its mean following the distribution that is specified for it (type of distribution and measure of variation)

European Commission – JRC, ILCD Handbook: General Guide for LCA (2010)


Each peace of inventory data is varied independently of the other inventory data around its mean following the distribution that is specified for it (type of distribution and measure of variation). A calculation of the inventory results is performed and stored, and the inventory data is varied again at random within the distributions to arrive at a new set of inventory results. The distribution of the calculated inventory results will approach the true distribution of the results when the number of calculations gets sufficiently high (often above 1000), and thus give an estimate of the variation around the mean for the final results. In Monte Carlo simulation it is a default assumption that all processes and elementary flows are independent and hence vary independently of each other, both within the system and among the systems that are compared in a comparative LCA


This is often not the case as the processes may have a technically based mutual dependency or even be the same process occurring at different places in the system (e.g. for background processes like power production or transportation). Next to positive correlation also negative correlation occurs. Rather than independent variation, these cases may have a high degree of co-variation which will tend to either reduce or increase the variation of the final results, and it must therefore be taken into account when setting up the simulation, which is often not straight forward.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 16 Annex E: Addressing uncertainties in LCA Choice-related variation The variation in the final results that is caused by choice-related differences must be handled by separate calculations for each combination of the identified relevant choices. Where the stochastic uncertainties can be handled and aggregated into one set of final results as described above, the choice-related variation thus leads to a number of discrete results that may be presented to the decision maker together with a specification of the underlying choices as possible outcomes of the LCA, dependent on which choices are made. In order to strengthen the decision-making support of the LCA results it is important to reduce the number of choices that are considered to the required minimum


In order to strengthen the decision-making support of the LCA results it is important to reduce the number of choices that are considered to the required minimum. A pragmatic approach Simulation using the Monte Carlo approach relies on the information on the distribution of the individual elementary flows that are provided by the LCA practitioner. It is often a challenge to provide good information about the statistic distribution of all elementary flows for all processes in the system and this influences the quality of the statistic information provided by a Monte Carlo simulation. Sensitivity analysis is a useful tool to identify where good basic statistic information is most needed. The processes and flows that contribute most to the final results are also the ones with the strongest potential to contribute to the uncertainty of the final results, and particularly for these key figures, it is thus crucial that the statistical information is correct


In the absence of tools to support a Monte Carlo simulation, an analysis of the uncertainty of the final results may still be performed along this line, using a sensitivity analysis to identify the key processes, key elementary flows and key choices. For each of these, the potential variation is analysed and basically handled as discrete choices (for stochastic uncertainties as realistic worst case and realistic best case values) in a number of what-if calculations. The outcome in some cases allows an indicative answer to the question of the goal definition. In other cases the outcome is inconclusive meaning that a more detailed approach is needed in a new iteration, but then it helps focus the effort on some of the identified key data and assumptions. The earlier mentioned "reasonably best case" and "reasonably worst case" can be formed in this way and help to quantify approximately the range of results and hence the robustness of the results interpretation.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 17 Annex F: System boundary template 17 Annex F: System boundary template A system boundary diagram is essential to clarify which life cycle stages and processes have been included in the system model. Technical audience For technical audience it makes sense to have a more formalised diagram. The system boundary template of Figure 35 is also available as MS PowerPointTM file for free use. It contains graphical elements that represent the ecosphere, the technosphere, the main life cycle stages and sub-stages, sets of product and waste flows that enter or leave the system boundary from or to the rest of the technosphere, respectively, and sets of excluded activity types and processes that need to be explicitly listed in complementation of the diagram. Alternatively also other diagrams can be used (e.g


Alternatively also other diagrams can be used (e.g. the one described below, that is also suitable for non-technical audience) as long as it correctly depicts the system boundary, names the fist and last process step in case of incomplete life cycle models, lists quantified but not fully modelled product and waste flows, and lists excluded items. Non-technical audience For non-technical audience it is equally useful to have a representation of what is included, while less formalised. The challenge is that a system boundary diagram ideally should show all of the following: included life cycle stages, systematically excluded activity types and elementary flows, specifically excluded processes and elementary flows, and quantified but not completely modelled product and waste flows. For in-complete life cycles (e.g. cradle-to-gate) in addition the first and/or last included process step is to be identified


For in-complete life cycles (e.g. cradle-to-gate) in addition the first and/or last included process step is to be identified. Especially to show a potentially large number of excluded activity types, processes, and flows would overload such a diagram. To provide guidance on a suitable diagram for nontechnical audience that is not misleading on what is included / excluded, it is suggested to combine a diagram with lists of excluded items. The description of the diagram shall state that it is schematic and incomplete (unless it would be complete, as possible e.g. in case of a single unit process). It would also refer to the lists of excluded items and state that in principle all relevant activities, processes and elementary flows are included in the life cycle model unless explicitly listed. .


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 17 Annex F: System boundary template Figure 35 System boundary diagram template for technical audience. This example sketches a system (e.g. it could be a partly terminated system data set of an electric heater, excluding use stage but including the main recycling step). The diagram shows that the system includes the production stages up to the production of the final product plus the recycling / recovery, while excluding specific initial waste management steps (e.g. collection) and final depositing. These excluded steps would be listed separately, referring to the boxes Ein and Eout. The system also has at least one product or waste flow in the input (Pin) that needs to be completed when using the data of that system. Additionally the fist and last process step of the end-of-life stage would need to be named to ensure correct use of the data set when completing the system


Additionally the fist and last process step of the end-of-life stage would need to be named to ensure correct use of the data set when completing the system. Ecosphere Rest of technosphere Production stage Use stage End-of-life stage Eout Ein Pin Uin Pout Uout Pin Eout Ein


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document 18 Annex G: Development of this document Based on and considering the following documents The background document has been drafted taking into account amongst others the following existing sources: Harmonised ISO standards  ISO 14040: 2006 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework  ISO 14044: 2006 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines A large number of LCA manuals of business associations, national LCA projects, consultants and research groups as well as scientific LCA publications have been analysed and taken into account. The detailed list is provided more below. Drafting This document was initially drafted by contractors (see list below) with support under the European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) contract no. contract no


Drafting This document was initially drafted by contractors (see list below) with support under the European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) contract no. contract no. 383136 F1SC concerning “Development of a technical guidance handbook on Life Cycle Assessment”. This work has been funded by the European Commission, partially supported through Commission-internal Administrative Arrangements (Nos 070402/2005/414023/G4, 070402/2006/443456/G4, 070307/2007/474521/G4, and 070307/2008/513489/G4) between DG Environment and the Joint Research Centre. Invited stakeholder consultations An earlier draft version of this document has been distributed to more than 60 organisations and groups


Invited stakeholder consultations An earlier draft version of this document has been distributed to more than 60 organisations and groups. These include the 27 EU Member States, various European Commission (EC) services, National Life Cycle Database Initiatives outside the European Union, business associations as members of the Business Advisory Group, Life Cycle Assessment software and database developers and Life Cycle Impact Assessment method developers as members of the respective Advisory Groups, as well as other relevant institutions. Public consultation A public consultation was carried out on the advanced draft guidance document from June 10, 2009 to August 31, 2009. This included a public consultation workshop, which took place from June 29 to July 2, 2009, in Brussels. Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document


Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document. Overview of involved or consulted organisations and individuals The following organisations and individuals have been consulted or provided comments, inputs and feedback during the invited or public consultations in the development of this document:


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document Invited consultation Internal EU steering committee: - European Commission services (EC), - European Environment Agency (EEA), - European Committee for Standardization (CEN), - IPP Regular Meeting Representatives of the 27 EU Member States National database projects and international organisations: - United Nations Environment Programme, DTIE Department (UNEP-DTIE) - World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) - Brazilian Institute for Informatics in Science and Technology (IBICT) - University of Brasilia (UnB) - China National Institute for Standardization (CNIS) - Sichuan University, Chengdu, China - Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry (JEMAI) - Research Center for Life Cycle Assessment (AIST), Japan - SIRIM-Berhad, Malaysia - National Metal and Material Technology Center (MTEC), Focus Center on Life Cycle Assessment and


Industry (JEMAI) - Research Center for Life Cycle Assessment (AIST), Japan - SIRIM-Berhad, Malaysia - National Metal and Material Technology Center (MTEC), Focus Center on Life Cycle Assessment and EcoProduct Development, Thailand Advisory group members Business advisory group members: - Alliance for Beverage Cartons and the Environment (ACE) - Association of Plastics Manufacturers (PlasticsEurope) - Confederation of European Waste-to-Energy plants (CEWEP) - European Aluminium Association - European Automobile Manufacturers' Association (ACEA) - European Cement Association (CEMBUREAU) - European Confederation of Iron and Steel Industries (EUROFER) - European Copper Institute - European Confederation of woodworking industries (CEI-Bois) - European Federation of Corrugated Board Manufacturers (FEFCO) - Industrial Minerals Association Europe (IMA Europe) - Lead Development Association International (LDAI) - Sustainable Landfill Foundation (SLF) - The Voice of the European Gypsum Industry


(FEFCO) - Industrial Minerals Association Europe (IMA Europe) - Lead Development Association International (LDAI) - Sustainable Landfill Foundation (SLF) - The Voice of the European Gypsum Industry (EUROGYPSUM) - Tiles and Bricks of Europe (TBE) - Technical Association of the European Natural Gas Industry (Marcogaz) Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document LCA database and tool advisory group members: - BRE Building Research Establishment Ltd - Watford (United Kingdom) - CML Institute of Environmental Science, University of Leiden (The Netherlands) - CODDE Conception, Developement Durable, Environnement (now: Bureau Veritas) - Paris (France) - ecoinvent centre – (Switzerland) - ENEA – Bologna (Italy) - Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH - Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen (Germany) - Green Delta TC GmbH – Berlin (Germany) - Ifu Institut für Umweltinformatik GmbH – Hamburg (Germany) - IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute – Stockholm (Sweden) - KCL Oy Keskuslaboratorio-Centrallaboratorium Ab – Espoo (Finland) - LBP, University Stuttgart (Germany) - LCA Center Denmark c/o FORCE Technology – Lyngby (Denmark) - LEGEP Software GmbH - Dachau (Germany) - PE International GmbH – Leinfelden-Echterdingen (Germany) - PRé


University Stuttgart (Germany) - LCA Center Denmark c/o FORCE Technology – Lyngby (Denmark) - LEGEP Software GmbH - Dachau (Germany) - PE International GmbH – Leinfelden-Echterdingen (Germany) - PRé Consultants – Amersfoort (The Netherlands) - Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie GmbH – Wuppertal (Germany) Life Cycle Impact Assessment advisory group members: - CIRAIG – Montreal (Canada) - CML Institute of Environmental Science, University of Leiden (The Netherlands) - Ecointesys Life Cycle Systems - Lausanne (Switzerland) - IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute – Stockholm (Sweden) - PRé Consultants – Amersfoort (The Netherlands) - LCA Center Denmark – Lyngby (Denmark) - Musashi Institute of Technology (Japan) - Research Center for Life Cycle Assessment (AIST) (Japan) - U.S


Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (USA) Public consultation Contributors providing written feedback in the public consultation ("General guide on LCA" and "Specific guide for LCI data sets") Organisations - French Environment and Energy Management Agency (ADEME) - Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs of the UK (DEFRA) - Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) Switzerland - 2.-0 LCA Consultants (Denmark) - Alliance for Beverage Cartons and the Environment (ACE) Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document - BASF AG (Germany) - Confederation of the European Waste-to-Energy plants (CEWEP) - Chair of Building Physics (LBP), University of Stuttgart (Germany) - DuPont Life Cycle Group (USA) - ESU services (Switzerland) - European Aluminium Association (EAA) - European Container Glass Federation (FEVE) - Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), Switzerland - GreenDelta TC GmbH (Germany) - Henkel KG (Germany) - KCL/VTT (Finland) - Nestle Research Centre (Switzerland) - Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) (Norway) - Novozymes a/s (Denmark) - PE International GmbH (Germany) - PlasticsEurope - RDC Environment (Belgium) - Stahlinstitut VDEh (Germany) - Volkswagen AG, (Germany) As citizen - Sten-Erik Björling - Chris Foster (EuGeos, Macclesfield, UK) - Reinout Heijungs (CML Leiden, The Netherlands) - Philip McKeown (Unilever, UK) - Heinz Stichnothe


Volkswagen AG, (Germany) As citizen - Sten-Erik Björling - Chris Foster (EuGeos, Macclesfield, UK) - Reinout Heijungs (CML Leiden, The Netherlands) - Philip McKeown (Unilever, UK) - Heinz Stichnothe (University of Manchester, UK) - Songwon Suh (University of Michigan, USA) - Alexander Voronov (Russia) Participating in consultation workshops (written registration) SURNAME Name Organisation - COCKBURN David ACE - RETHORE Olivier ADEME - MELANIE Rimbault AFNOR - RASNEUR Anne AGC FLAT GLASS EUROPE - VAN MARCKE DE LUMMEN Guy AGC FLAT GLASS EUROPE - CREPIAT Ashley Airbus Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document - TAHARA Kiyotaka AIST - MARTIN Michelle ALSTOM Transport - PAVANELLO Romeo Ambiente Italia srl - JORNS Axel APFE – European Reinforcement Glass Fibre Producers - CHIAPPINI Mauro ARCELORMITTAL R&D - LIONEL CRETEGNY BAFU - PIEROBON Marianna BASF SE - DE LATHAUWER Dieter Belgian federal public service, DG Environment - GOREY Brendan BKG - ALLBURY Kim bre global ltd - ANDERSON Jane bre global ltd - VITAL Xavier Bureau Veritas, CODDE - MIETH Stephan BV Glas e.V. - RAMM Kevin Carbon trust - XAVIER Joppin CELABOR - JURY Colin Centre de Ressources des Technologies pour l'Environnement (CRTE) - FIESCHI Maurizio CESISP - FILARETO Assunta CEsiSP (Centro per la sostenibilità dei prodotti) - VISSER Rene Corus Staal b.v


- MAXWELL Dorothy Defra & GVSS - HARRIS Rocky Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs - NOWAK Maureen Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs - LONGO Sonia Dipartimento di Ricerche Energetiche ed Ambientali – University of Palermo - DANILA Ana EAA - LEROY Christian EAA - O'CONNELL Adrian EBB - TOMOZEI Luciana EBB - DR. TIKANA Ladji ECI - MARTIN Jean-Baptiste Ecoeff - MORENO RUIZ Emilia Ecoeff - CHAUMET Benoit EDF R&D - EROL Pinar EEA Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document - Toueix ELO2 - MASONI Paolo ENEA - AUMONIER Simon ERM LTD - FRISCHKNECHT Rolf ESU-services Ltd


- DRIELSMA Johannes Euromines - SAHNOUNE Abdelhadi ExxonMobil - KELCHTERMANS Mauritz ExxonMobil Chemical Europe - DEFOURNY Anne Federation of Enterprises in Belgium - FEB - DE BEAUFORT-LANGEVELD Angeline FEFCO - RIVET Fabrice FEVE - European Container Glass Federation - DELLE SELVE Michael FEVE AISBL - KANEMITSU Hideyuki FUJITSU - BARRUETABEÑA Leire Gaiker - DEWULF Wim Group T - Leuven Engineering College - BRUNNER Markus HeidelbergCement Group - SCHÖNE Stefan HeidelbergCement Group - HEFER Ben Hernic Ferrochrome (Pty) Ltd - TAYAH Mira IMA-Europe - SCHERHAUFER Silvia Institute of Waste Management, Department of Water, Atmosphere and Environment, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna - WATAYA Tomohisa ISSF - DOBON Antonio ITENE - NAKANO Katsuyuki JEMAI - DIEDERICHS Stefan Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries, Institute for Wood Technology and Wood Biology - BETZEL Peter Kreab Gavin Anderson


Stefan Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries, Institute for Wood Technology and Wood Biology - BETZEL Peter Kreab Gavin Anderson - FURKEL Maxime lexmark int


- GONZALO PEDRERO Gema Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, Medio Rural y Marino (Ministry of the environment and rural and marine affairs") - ARANDA MARTÍN Desiderio MITYC - NURMI Pauliina MTT Agrifood Research Finland Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document - VERSARI Marco Novamont Spa - BAITZ Martin PE International GmbH - BETZ Michael PE International GmbH - GUY Castelan PlasticsEurope - MARECHAL Freddy PlasticsEurope - DEWAELE Joost PROCTER & GAMBLE - VAN HOOF Gert PROCTER & GAMBLE - FLOCH Emilie PwC-Ecobilan - HÉBERT Jean-Michel PwC-Ecobilan - GYLLENRAM Rutger Royal Institute of Technology, KTH - SIRET Clémence SAFT - GOHY Didier Service public de Wallonie (one of the three Regions of Belgium), Département du Sol et des Déchets, Direction de la politique des Déchets (Waste policy service) - WANG Hongtao Sichuan University - KRIGSVOLL Guri SINTEF - SAU SOON Chen SIRIM - VLADIMIROV Valentin Sofia University - SVENDING Ola Stora Enso - MÜLLER Anja Sunicon AG - TARISCIOTTI Francesco Tarisciotti - FREDERIC Madry Tractebel - ROBERTZ Bénédicte Umicore - SONNEMANN Guido UNEP - ANDRIÈS Véronique UNIFE (ALSTOM


- SVENDING Ola Stora Enso - MÜLLER Anja Sunicon AG - TARISCIOTTI Francesco Tarisciotti - FREDERIC Madry Tractebel - ROBERTZ Bénédicte Umicore - SONNEMANN Guido UNEP - ANDRIÈS Véronique UNIFE (ALSTOM TRANSPORT) - MCKEOWN Philip Unilever PLC - DE CAMILLIS Camillo Università degli Studi "G


d'Annunzio" Pescara-Chieti - CASTANHO Carla University of Brasilia - STICHNOTHE Heinz University of Manchester (School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Science) - PARISI Maria Laura University of Siena - BARE Jane US EPA - GEERKEN Theo VITO - BOSSDORF-ZIMMER Benjamin Volkswagen AG - BOUREIMA Faycal Vrije Universiteit Brussel - MESSAGIE Maarten Vrije Universiteit Brussel Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document - VARES Sirje VTT - KUJANPÄÄ Marjukka VTT Technical Research Center of Finland - SOKKA Laura VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland - BENGTSSON Dan (registered without affiliation) - BOLLEN Jan (registered without affiliation) - BONAFFINI Davide (registered without affiliation) - BOVY Marcel (registered without affiliation) - CALDEIRA Carla (registered without affiliation) - HISCHIER Roland (registered without affiliation) - WEIDEMA Bo (registered without affiliation) - RICARD Olivier (registered without affiliation) Contractors as members of the initial drafting team - Michael Hauschild, DTU and LCA Center Denmark - Stig Olsen, DTU (Denmark) - Anders Schmidt, FORCE technology (Denmark) Coordinators and contributors from the Joint Research Centre (JRC, IES) - Marc-Andree Wolf (project coordinator) - Kirana Chomkhamsri - Miguel Brandão - Rana Pant - Fulvio


FORCE technology (Denmark) Coordinators and contributors from the Joint Research Centre (JRC, IES) - Marc-Andree Wolf (project coordinator) - Kirana Chomkhamsri - Miguel Brandão - Rana Pant - Fulvio Ardente - David W


Pennington - Simone Manfredi - Camillo de Camillis - Małgorzata Góralczyk Disclaimer: Involvement in the development or consultation process does not imply an agreement with or endorsement of this document.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document Existing provisions The guidance document has been drafted starting from the following existing sources: Harmonised standards  ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework  ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines  CEN/TC 261 SC4 WG1 on “Packaging – LCA” and the CEN/TR 13910 “Packaging - Report on criteria and methodologies for life cycle analysis of packaging (2000)” (under revision). Governmental guidance documents  BSI British Standards Institute (2008): PAS 2050 ”Specification for the measurement of the embodied greenhouse gas emissions of products and services” on Carbon footprinting. And: BSI British Standards (with DEFRA and Carbon Trust) (2008). Guide to PAS 2050 - How to assess the carbon footprint of goods and services. ISBN 978-0580-64636-2


And: BSI British Standards (with DEFRA and Carbon Trust) (2008). Guide to PAS 2050 - How to assess the carbon footprint of goods and services. ISBN 978-0580-64636-2.  AFNOR / ADEME France (2009): General principles for an environmental communication on mass market products. In series: Repository of good practices. BP X 30-323. ISSN 0335-3931.1st issue September 2009. National LCA database manuals  AusLCI and ALCAS: Guidelines for Data Development for an Australian Life Cycle Inventory Database. Committee Draft of 8th July 2008. (http://alcas.asn.au/auslci/pmwiki/uploads/AusLCI/AUSLCI_Data_Guidelines_CD_July0 8.doc).  Danish EPA (editor): Reports of the EDIP guidelines 2003. Environmental Project No. 216.6, 862 2003, 863 2003, 70 2004.  JEMAI (2002): Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry (JEMAI) data collection manual. 2002


Environmental Project No. 216.6, 862 2003, 863 2003, 70 2004.  JEMAI (2002): Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry (JEMAI) data collection manual. 2002.  Korea: Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation - APEC & Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy Republic of Korea (editors): Lee, Kun-Mo & Inaba, Atsushi: Life Cycle Assessment - Best Practices of ISO 14040 Series. February 2004.  Swiss ecoinvent Centre (2007) - Frischknecht, R., Jungbluth, N. (editors), Althaus, H.- J.; Doka, G.; Dones, R.; Heck, T.; Hellweg, S.; Hischier, R.; Nemecek, T.; Rebitzer, G.; Spielmann, M.; Wernet, G. (authors): Ecoinvent report No. 1: Overview and Methodology for the ecoinvent database v. 2.0. Dübendorf, 2007. (www.ecoinvent.org).  NREL: U.S. LCI Database Project Development Guidelines (Final draft). Feb. 2004. NREL/SR-33806. (http://www.nrel.gov/lci/docs/dataguidelinesfinalrpt1-13-04.doc).


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document Methodological handbooks of industry associations  ACE (no year): Guideline on Liquid Packaging Board (LPB) LCI data compilation, version 1.0. Unpublished  EUROFER (2000): European LCI Database for Coiled Flat Stainless Steel Products. Methodology Report. European Confederation of Iron and Steel Industries, Stainless Producers Group. April 2000. Unpublished.  worldsteel/IISI (2002, 2005, 2007): Worldwide LCI Database for Industry Steel Products. Final Methodology Report of the International Iron and Steel Institute. 2002. Updated annex "IISI Recycling methodology", 2005. Plus separate methodology report "Geyer, R. & Bren, D.: Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emission Assessments of Automotive Materials -The Example of Mild Steel, Advanced High Strength Steel and Aluminium in Body in White Applications" on recycling modelling methods, 2007. (www.worldsteel.org)


(www.worldsteel.org).  FEFCO, GEO, ECO (2006): European Database for Corrugated Board Life Cycle Studies, November 2006. (European Federation of Corrugated Board Manufacturers - FEFCO, European Association of makers of Corrugated Base Papers - GEO, European Containerboard Organisation - ECO). (www.fefco.org).  IAI (2003): Life Cycle Assessment of Aluminium: Inventory Data for the Worldwide Primary Aluminium Industry, March 2003. (www.world-aluminium.org).  Boustead I (2005). Eco-Profiles of the European Plastics Industry. Methodology. Report for PlasticsEurope, Last revision March 2005. (www.plasticseurope.org).  DEKRA Umwelt GmbH (2008). Final draft: PlasticsEurope Eco-profiles and Environmental Declarations - Life Cycle Inventory Methodology and Product Category Rules (PCR) for Uncompounded Polymer Resins and Reactive Polymer Precursors. December 2008. Unpublished.  Tikana L, Sievers H, Klassert A (2005). Life Cycle Assessment of Copper Products


December 2008. Unpublished.  Tikana L, Sievers H, Klassert A (2005). Life Cycle Assessment of Copper Products. Deutsches Kupferinstitut (DKI) and European Copper Institute (ECI). Unpublished. Guidance documents in the field of Life Cycle Assessment and other scientific literature  Baumann, H. & Tillman, A,-M. 2004: The Hitch Hiker's Guide to LCA. ISBN: 9144023642.  Beaufort-Langeveld, A. et al. (Eds.): SETAC Code of Life-Cycle Inventory Practice, 2001. Developed by the former SETAC WG on Data Availability and Quality 1998-2001.  CML: Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment, Operational Guide to the ISO Standards. CML 2002 (www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/projects/lca)  Curran M. A. (2007): Co-Product and Input Allocation Approaches for Creating Life Cycle Inventory Data: A literature Review. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (2007) 12:65-78.  Ecobilan: DEAMTM methodical handbook, 2005 (http://www.ecobilan.com/uk_deam.php)  Ekvall, T., Tillman; A.-M.; Molander, S. (2005)


International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (2007) 12:65-78.  Ecobilan: DEAMTM methodical handbook, 2005 (http://www.ecobilan.com/uk_deam.php)  Ekvall, T., Tillman; A.-M.; Molander, S. (2005). Normative ethics and methodology for life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) pp 1225-1234.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document Finnveden, G. (2008). A world with CO2 caps – Electricity production in consequential assessments. Editorial in: International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (2008) 13:365-367.  Frank C. et al.: SETAC Guidelines for Life Cycle Assessment: A “Code of Practice”, 1993.  Frischknecht, R. (2007): Cut-off vs. avoided burden in metals‟ recycling: in view of environmental sustainability, risk perception and eco-efficiency. Presentation held at: 33rd LCA forum. November 22, 2007, Lausanne, Switzerland.  Griesshammer R & Hochfeld C. (2009): Position statement on measurement and communication of the product carbon footprint for international standardization and harmonization purposes. (http://www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/memorandum_pcf_en_bf.pdf, accessed Jan 2010)  Guinée, J. B


(http://www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/memorandum_pcf_en_bf.pdf, accessed Jan 2010)  Guinée, J. B. (Ed.) 2002: Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment - Operational Guide to the ISO Standards. Series: Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science, Vol. 7. 2002, 708 p., Softcover. ISBN: 1-4020-0557-1.  Hauschild, M.Z. & Wenzel, H. (1998). Environmental assessment of products. Vol. 2 - Scientific background, 565 pp. Chapman & Hall, United Kingdom, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham, MA. USA. ISBN 0412 80810 2.  Heijungs, R. & Guinee, J. B. (2007). Allocation and „what-if‟ scenarios in life cycle assessment of waste management systems. Waste Management 27 (2007) pp 9971005.  Hellweg, S. & Frischknecht, R. 2004: "Evaluation of Long-Term Impacts in LCA." In Int J LCA Vol. 9 (5): 339-341.  IPCC (2006): 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 4. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use


9 (5): 339-341.  IPCC (2006): 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 4. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use. (accessed at http://www.ipccnggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol4.html)  Jensen, A. A.; Hoffmann L.; Møller B. et al. (1997): Life Cycle Assessment. A guide to approaches, experiences and information sources. Environmental Issues Series No. 6. European Environmenta Agency, 1997.  Kemna, K.; van Elburg, M.; Li, W.; van Holstein, R. (2005). MEEUP Methodology Report. Final report to the European Commission, dated 28.11.2005.  LBP University of Stuttgart / PE International: GaBi handbook and GaBi modelling principles, 2006 (www.gabi-software.com)  Lindfors, L.-G.; Christiansen, K.; Hoffman, L.; Virtanen, Y.; Juntilla, V.; Hanssen, O.-J.; Rönning, A.; Ekvall, T.; and Finnveden, G. (1995). Nordic Guidelines on Life-Cycle Assessment. (Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers)


(1995). Nordic Guidelines on Life-Cycle Assessment. (Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers).  Margni, M.; Lesage, P.; Michaud R.; Belley, C.; Clément, E.; Samson, R. (2008): Presentation at LCM2009 on “Extending System Boundaries to Capture Indirect Effects on LCA – An Enlightening Example!” (http://www.lcm2009.org/presentations/OR19%20- %20Margni.pdf, accessed online October 2009).  NN (2007): General programme instructions for an International EPD®system for environmental product declarations, Draft Version 0.3 - dated 2007-11-09.


ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance First edition 18 Annex G: Development of this document NN: Meeting report of the “International Workshop on Quality of LCI Data”; FZK; Karlsruhe, Germany, 2003  Pehnt M. (2005): Dynamic life cycle assessment (LCA) of renewable energy technologies. Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 55-71.  Reap, J.;. Roman, F.; Duncan, S.; Bras, B. (2008). A survey of unresolved problems in life cycle assessment. Part 1: goal and scope and inventory analysis. Int J LCA 13(4); June 2008.  Sanden, B.A. & Karlström, M. (2007). Positive and negative feedback in consequential life-cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) pp 1469-1481.  UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, Life Cycle Inventory programme, First phase 20012005: - Task Force 2, chapter 4"; Draft version by IVAM, Amsterdam and IKP, Stuttgart


 UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, Life Cycle Inventory programme, First phase 20012005: - Task Force 2, chapter 4"; Draft version by IVAM, Amsterdam and IKP, Stuttgart. - Task force 3: Frankl, P.; Fullana, P.; Kreissig, J.: Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors; Reviewed Final Draft version 4.2. July - Task force 3: Lundie, S.; Ciroth, A.; Huppes, G.: Inventory methods in LCA: towards consistency and improvement. Final report. June 2007  Weidema, B. (2003). Market information in life cycle assessment. Environmental Project No. 863 2003. Danish Environmental Protection Agency  Weidema, B.; Cappellaro, F.; Carlson, R.; Notten, P. Pålsson, A.-C.; Patyk, A.; Regalini, E.; Sacchetto, F.; Scalbi, S. (2004): Procedural guideline for the collection, treatment, and quality documentation of LCA data. Printed by ENEA. ISBN 88-8286-110-4  Wenzel, H. (1998)


(2004): Procedural guideline for the collection, treatment, and quality documentation of LCA data. Printed by ENEA. ISBN 88-8286-110-4  Wenzel, H. (1998). Application Dependency of LCA Methodology: Key Variables and Their Mode of Influencing the Method, International Journal of LCA 3, 281-288.  Wenzel, H.; Hauschild M.Z.; and Alting, L. (1997). Environmental assessment of products. Vol. 1 - Methodology, tools and case studies in product development, 544 pp. Chapman & Hall, United Kingdom, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham, MA. USA. ISBN 0 412 80800 5.  Zamagni, A.; Buttol, P.; Porta, P.L.; Buonamici, R.; Masoni, P., Guinee, J.; Heijungs, R.; Ekvall, T.; Bersani, R.; Bienkowska, A.; Pretato, U. (2008). Critical review of the current research needs and limitations related to ISO-LCA practice. CALCAS project report D7. Published and printed by ENEA, Italy. ISBN 88-8286-166-X


European Commission EUR 24708 EN – Joint Research Centre – Institute for Environment and Sustainability Title: International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook - General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance. Author(s): - Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2010 – 398 pp. –21.0 x 29.7 cm EUR – Scientific and Technical Research series – ISSN 1018-5593 ISBN 978-92-79-19092-6 doi:10.2788/38479 Cite as: European Commission - Joint Research Centre - Institute for Environment and Sustainability: International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook - General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance. First edition March 2010. EUR 24708 EN. Luxembourg. Publications Office of the European Union; 2010. Abstract Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) are the scientific approaches behind modern environmental policies and business decision support related to Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP)


The International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) provides a common basis for consistent, robust and quality-assured life cycle data and studies. Such data and studies support coherent SCP instruments, such as Ecolabelling, Ecodesign, Carbon footprinting, and Green Public Procurement. This guide is a component of the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook. It provides technical guidance for detailed Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies and provides the technical basis to derive product-specific criteria, guides, and simplified tools. It is based on and conforms to the ISO 14040 and 14044 standards on LCA. The principle target audience for this guide is the LCA practitioner as well as technical experts in the public and private sector dealing with environmental decision support related to products, resources, and waste management.


How to obtain EU publications Our priced publications are available from EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu), where you can place an order with the sales agent of your choice. The Publications Office has a worldwide network of sales agents. You can obtain their contact details by sending a fax to (352) 29 29-42758.

The mission of the JRC is to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of EU policies. As a service of the European Commission, the JRC functions as a reference centre of science and technology for the Union. Close to the policymaking process, it serves the common interest of the Member States, while being independent of special interests, whether private or national. LB-NA-24708-EN-C


Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment

ECO-EFFICIENCY IN INDUSTRY AND SCIENCE VOLUME 7 Series Editor: Dr. Arnold Tukker, TNO Institute of Strategy, Technology and Policy Editorial Advisory Board: Prof. Martin Charter, Centre for Sustainable Design, The Surrey Institute of Art & Design Prof. John Ehrenfeld, International Society for Industrial Ecology Dr. Gjalt Huppes, Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden University Mr. Reid Lifset, Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies Dr. Theo de Bruijn, Center for Clean Technology and Environmental Policy (CSTM), University of Twente

Guinée et al., Handbook on LCA: Operational Guide to the ISO Standards (2002)


Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment Operational Guide to the ISO Standards Jeroen B. Guinée (final editor) – Marieke Gorrée – Reinout Heijungs Gjalt Huppes – René Kleijn – Arjan de Koning – Lauran van Oers Anneke Wegener Sleeswijk – Sangwon Suh – Helias A. Udo de Haes Centre of Environmental Science – Leiden University Hans de Bruijn School of Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management – Delft University of Technology Robbert van Duin Fuels and Raw Materials Bureau Mark A.J. Huijbregts Interfaculty Department of Environmental Science, University of Amsterdam Currently employed at the University of Nijmegen - Department of Environmental Studies, Nijmegen With contributions by: Erwin Lindeijer IVAM-Environmental Research Currently employed at TNO-lndustrial Technology - Division of sustainable product development, Eindhoven Aksel A.H. Roorda – Bernhard L. van der Ven Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research Currently employed at IWACO, ’s Hertogenbosch Bo P


Roorda – Bernhard L. van der Ven Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research Currently employed at IWACO, ’s Hertogenbosch Bo P. Weidema 2.–0 LCA consultants KLUWER ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS NEW YORK, BOSTON, DORDRECHT, LONDON, MOSCOW


eBook ISBN: 0-306-48055-7 Print ISBN: 1-4020-0228-9 ©2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers New York, Boston, Dordrecht, London, Moscow Print ©2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers All rights reserved No part of this eBook may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording, or otherwise, without written consent from the Publisher Created in the United States of America Visit Kluwer Online at: http://kluweronline.com and Kluwer's eBookstore at: http://ebooks.kluweronline.com Dordrecht


Contents Preface vii Foreword ix Part 1: LCA in perspective 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Why a new Guide to LCA? Main characteristics of LCA International developments Guiding principles for the present Guide Reading guide Part 2a: Guide Reading guidance 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Management of LCA projects: procedures Goal and scope definition Inventory analysis Impact assessment Interpretation Appendix A: Terms, definitions and abbreviations Part 2b: Operational annex List of tables Reading guidance 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Management of LCA projects: procedures Goal and scope definition Inventory analysis Impact assessment Interpretation References

vi Contents Part 3: Scientific background Reading guidance 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. General introduction Goal and scope definition Inventory analysis Impact assessment Interpretation References Annex A: Contributors Appendix B: Areas of application of LCA Appendix C: Partitioning economic inputs and outputs to product systems


vii Preface Environmental policy aims at the transition to sustainable production and consumption. This is taking place in different ways and at different levels. In cases where businesses are continuously active to improve the environmental performance of their products and activities, the availability of knowledge on environmental impacts is indispensable. The integrated assessment of all environmental impacts from cradle to grave is the basis for many decisions relating to achieving improved products and services. The assessment tool most widely used for this is the environmental Life Cycle Assessment, or LCA. Before you is the new Handbook of LCA replacing the previous edition of 1992. New developments in LCA methodology from all over the world have been discussed and, where possible, included in this new Handbook. Integration of all developments into a new, consistent method has been the main aim for the new Handbook


Integration of all developments into a new, consistent method has been the main aim for the new Handbook. The thinking on environment and sustainability is, however, quickly evolving so that it is already clear now that this new LCA Handbook does not embrace the very latest developments. Therefore, further revisions will have to take place in the future. A major advantage of this Handbook is that it now also advises which procedures should be followed to achieve adequate, relevant and accepted results. Furthermore, the distinction between detailed and simplified LCA makes this Handbook more broadly applicable, while guidance is provided as to which additional information can be relevant for specialised applications. I hope that this Handbook will contribute to the necessary transition to sustainable production and consumption. On behalf of the Ministry of VROM-DGM, Mw. Mr. C.M. Zwartepoorte Director of Directorate Climate Change and Industry


Foreword ix In 1992 the Centre of Environmental Science - Leiden University (CML) collaborated with the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) and the Fuels and Raw Materials Bureau (Bureau B&G) to produce a Guide and Background document on the environmental Life Cycle Assessment methodology. Its full title was “ Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of products. Guide and Backgrounds” by R. Heijungs, J.B. Guinée, G. Huppes, R.M. Lankreijer, H.A. Udo de Haes, A. Wegener Sleeswijk, A.M.M. Ansems, P.G. Eggels, R. van Duin and H.P. de Goede, 1992. Since then, there have been many methodological developments, which are indeed still taking place. To address these ongoing developments, the “ LCA in environmental policy” project was initiated, resulting in the compilation of an entirely new Guide, which you have before you. The “LCA in environmental policy” project was funded by the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment (VROM-DGM; co-ordinator ir


The “LCA in environmental policy” project was funded by the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment (VROM-DGM; co-ordinator ir. H.L.J.M. Wijnen), the Ministry of Economic Affairs (EZ), the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries (LNV) and the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (V&W). The project was carried out between June 1997 and May 2001 by CML, with contributions by the Institute of Environmental Studies - Vrije Universiteit (IVM); the School of Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management – Delft University of Technology (TUD/TB); Bureau B&G; the Interfaculty Department of Environmental Science, University of Amsterdam (UVA); IVAM-Environmental Research (IVAM-ER); TNO; and 2.-0 LCA consultants (Denmark)


To assess the wishes and requirements of potential users of LCA and allied tools for environmental policy in general and environment-related product policy in particular, a Pilot Paper was first prepared by IVM, the findings of which defined the basic parameters for further elaboration of the project. This Pilot Paper was published as an independent document by VROM-DGM. Next, TNO prepared a comprehensive inventory of the potential uses of LCA, as well as its limitations of scope, the requirements associated with specific applications and the potential overlap with other tools. In addition, possible extensions of the scope of LCA to include multi-functional systems (for example, cascade systems) were inventoried. The report of TNO is included as an appendix to this Guide. For a number of LCA applications, TUD/TB and Bureau B&G have drawn up recommendations for embedding LCA in procedural guidelines. This is a topic that has not previously been addressed within LCA studies


This is a topic that has not previously been addressed within LCA studies. This means it is innovative work that is still at an early stage of development. The efforts by TUD/TB and Bureau B&G have resulted in two reports, which have been incorporated in the main text of the present Guide. Allocation is one of the most sensitive issues in LCA methodology. It is therefore especially important that coverage of this issue in the Guide and Background documents should enjoy the widest possible support. The topic of allocation was consequently addressed in particular detail in a desk study carried out by IVAM-ER in close collaboration with CML. The report on this desk study is included as an appendix to the present Guide. In addition, 2.-0 LCA consultants of Denmark have prepared a paper on this issue, which is likewise included in this Guide


In addition, 2.-0 LCA consultants of Denmark have prepared a paper on this issue, which is likewise included in this Guide. The treatment of the theme of toxicity in the 1992 Guide and Background document then was incomplete and unsatisfactory, lacking a fate analysis, for example. As part of a PhD project at the UVA, new toxicity factors for over 180 substances have been calculated, using the more recent USES 2.0 model as well as more sophisticated data. The results of this work have been integrated in the main text of the present document.


Foreword The new Guide consists of three parts. Part 1 - “LCA in perspective” - provides a general introduction to LCA and includes a discussion of the possibilities and limitations of LCA and the organisations involved in LCA. Part 2 consists of two parts, 2a (“Guide”) and 2b (“Operational annex”). Part 2a provides an introduction to the procedural design of an LCA project, and guidelines on the best available practice for each of the steps involved in an LCA study, at two levels of LCA sophistication: simplified and detailed. The two levels of sophistication relate to different decision situations, linked to different methodological choices. On certain points of detail there may often be good reason for undertaking a more in-depth analysis than can be provided even by the ‘standard’ detailed LCA


On certain points of detail there may often be good reason for undertaking a more in-depth analysis than can be provided even by the ‘standard’ detailed LCA. This kind of in-depth analysis has not been specified here as a separate method; instead, we provide an indication of possible extensions that can improve the quality of detailed LCA in those respects where shortcomings are most obvious. Part 2b provides the most up-to-date operational models and data associated with the best available practice for these two levels of sophistication, as a separate document. This has been done to facilitate updating of these operational elements, most of which are likely to change regularly. Part 2b thus operationalises the guidelines provided in Part 2a. Part 3 provides the scientific background to the study, as well as a reasoned justification of all the choices made in designing a best available practice for each phase of an LCA


Part 3 provides the scientific background to the study, as well as a reasoned justification of all the choices made in designing a best available practice for each phase of an LCA. Finally, we would like to thank all those active in the project resulting in this Guide, which involves, apart from the authors and editors, the steering committee, the think-tank, the supervisory committee and the international observers group. The number of people involved is so large, nearly a hundred, too many to mention individually. A list of all involved is presented in Annex A of Part 3. Two persons deserve special mention. At the top of the project pyramid, Henk Wijnen of VROM-DGM has taken care of co-ordination, budget extensions and the like. At CML, supportive work throughout the project has been carried out by Esther Philips. Leiden, July 2001 Jeroen Guinée Project Leader x


xi Acknowledgements This study was commissioned by: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM-DGM) Rijnstraat 8, P.O. Box 30945, 2500 GX Den Haag, The Netherlands Tel +31 70 3393939 Co-ordinator: ir. H.L.J.M. Wijnen Ministry of Economic Affairs (EZ) Bezuidenhoutseweg 30, P.O. Box 20101, 2500 EC Den Haag, The Netherlands Tel +31 70 3798911 Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (V&W) Plesmanweg 1-6, P.O. Box 20901, 2500 EX Den Haag, The Netherlands Tel +31 70 3516171 Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries (LNV) Bezuidenhoutseweg 73, P.O. Box 20401, 2500 EK Den Haag, The Netherlands Tel +31 70 3786868 The parties commissioning this study cannot guarantee the correctness or completeness of information nor the designs, structures, products or production methods referred to or described in this report or their suitability for any particular purpose


This study was carried out jointly by: CML (Centre of Environmental Science) Einsteinweg 2, P.O. Box 9518, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands Tel +31 71 5277 477, fax +31 71 5277 434 Bureau B&G (Fuels and Raw Materials Bureau) Pollenseveenweg 11, 8166 HT Emst, The Netherlands Tel +31 578 662227, fax +31 578 662456 School of Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management – Delft University of Technology Jaffalaan 5, P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands Tel + 31 15 2787100, fax + 31 15 2784811 with contributions by: IVM (Institute for Environmental Studies - Vrije Universiteit) De Boelelaan 1115, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands Tel +31 20 4449555, fax: +31 20 4449553 UVA (Interfaculty Department of Environmental Science, University of Amsterdam) Nieuwe Prinsengracht 130, 1018 VZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands Tel +31 20 525 6206, fax +31 20 525 6272 IVAM-ER (IVAM Environmental Research) Plantage Muidergracht 14, P.O


Box 18180, 1001 ZB Amsterdam, The Netherlands Tel +31 20 525 5080, fax +31 20 525 5850 TNO (Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research) Laan van Westenenk 501, P.O. Box 342, 7300 AH Apeldoorn, The Netherlands Tel +31 55 493 493, fax +31 55 419 837 2.-0 LCA consultants Borgergade 6, 1., 1300 København K, Denmark Tel +45 333 22822, fax +45 339 11103 English language editing (parts 1, 2a and 2b) by: Jan Klerkx Bèta Vertalingen Raccordement 120C 6221 HE Maastricht, The Netherlands Tel +31 43 3510982, fax +31 43 3510645


PART 1 LCA IN PERSPECTIVE

Contents of Part 1 1. Why a new Guide to LCA? 2. Main characteristics of LCA 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 What is LCA? Role of LCA in relation to products Role of LCA in wider applications Limitations of LCA LCA as part of a tool box Management of LCA projects: procedures 3. International developments 3.1 3.2 3.3 SETAC ISO UNEP 4. Guiding principles for the present Guide 5. Reading guide


Part 1: LCA in perspective 1. Why a new Guide to LCA? The first Dutch Guide to Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was published in 1992. It was written by the Centre of Environmental Science -Leiden University (CML), the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) and the Fuels and Raw Materials Bureau (Bureau B&G), under the auspices of the National Reuse of Waste Research Programme (NOH). It is often referred to as “the NOH Guide”, “the CML Guide”, “the Dutch Guide”, “Heijungs et al. (1992)”, and so on. It has been used extensively and has stimulated discussions in scientific and societal fora. However, there are many reasons why an updated Guide is now needed. In the past decade, there have been many advances in LCA methodology, especially through the scientific work of SETAC (the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry). In addition, there have been extensive developments in ISO standards relating to LCA


In addition, there have been extensive developments in ISO standards relating to LCA. Thirdly, there is the increasing role of UNEP, stimulating the global use of LCA. And finally there is now a broad range of applications for LCA, giving many opportunities for clarification of the original text by means of up-to-date examples. This new Guide has been commissioned by the Dutch Government, in particular by the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM-DGM), the Ministry of Economic Affairs (EZ), the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries (LNV) and the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (V&W). The production process of the new Guide has been supported by a group of over a hundred people. They guided our strategy and read and commented on our proposals and texts. They included the Supervisory Committee, the Steering Committee, the project’s Think Tank, the International Observers Group and numerous individuals


They included the Supervisory Committee, the Steering Committee, the project’s Think Tank, the International Observers Group and numerous individuals. A full list of names is to be found in appendix A of Part 3. The Document consists of three Parts: Part 1: LCA in perspective. An introduction to LCA, its purpose and background. Part 2: Guide. An overview of LCA in practice, consisting of two parts. Part 2a describes how to organise and set up a specific LCA project. Part 2b is an Operational Annex containing tables with data and other practical details. Part 3: Scientific Background. This part provides detailed materials and references in support of Parts 1 and 2. The present Part 1 further clarifies the general purpose and perspective of LCA. 2. Main characteristics of LCA This chapter explores what LCA is, and what role it can play in different types of decision situations


2. Main characteristics of LCA This chapter explores what LCA is, and what role it can play in different types of decision situations. We also examine how LCA developments are embedded within an international framework of consensus building and standardising activities. 2.1 What is LCA? In ISO 14040 (see below) LCA is defined as the "compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle". Thus, LCA is a tool for the analysis of the environmental burden of products at all stages in their life cycle – from the extraction of resources, through the production of materials, product parts and the product itself, and the use of the product to the management after it is


Part 1: LCA in perspective discarded, either by reuse, recycling or final disposal (in effect, therefore, ‘from the cradle to the grave’). The total system of unit processes involved in the life cycle of a product is called the "product system". The environmental burden covers all types of impacts upon the environment, including extraction of different types of resources, emission of hazardous substances and different types of land use. The term ‘product’ is taken in its broadest sense – including physical goods as well as services; it includes goods and services at both operational and strategic levels. It is important to note that in comparative LCA studies, it is not the products themselves that form the basis for the comparison, but the function provided by these products


It is important to note that in comparative LCA studies, it is not the products themselves that form the basis for the comparison, but the function provided by these products. LCA is, as far as possible, quantitative in character; where this is not possible, qualitative aspects can – and should – be taken into account, so that as complete a picture as possible is given of the environmental impacts involved. Most important, a cradle-to-grave analysis involves a 'holistic' approach, bringing the environmental impacts into one consistent framework, wherever and whenever these impacts have occurred, or will occur. One fundamental reason for choosing such an approach is related to the fact that the final consumption of products happens to be the driving force of the economy. Therefore, this final consumption offers core opportunities for indirect environmental management along the whole chain or network of unit processes related to a product


Therefore, this final consumption offers core opportunities for indirect environmental management along the whole chain or network of unit processes related to a product. Another fundamental reason is that a cradle-to-grave approach avoids ‘problem shifting’. It is important in eco-design not to solve one environmental problem merely by shifting it to another stage in the product’s life cycle. For instance, making a car out of aluminium instead of steel means that its gasoline consumption is reduced, but the production of aluminium requires more energy than that of steel. Only when all these facts are taken into account can it be judged whether a car made of aluminium is truly more environmentally friendly than one made of steel. The main applications of LCA are in: analysing the origins of problems related to a particular product; comparing improvement variants of a given product; designing new products; choosing between a number of comparable products


Similar applications can be distinguished at a strategic level, dealing with government policies and business strategies. The way an LCA project is implemented depends on the intended use of the LCA results. 2.2 Role of LCA in relation to products LCA can play a useful role in public and private environmental management in relation to products. This may involve both an environmental comparison between existing products and the development of new products, which also includes comparisons with prototypes. In this section, we discuss different technical types of applications; in section 2.6, we will briefly discuss procedural situations, which can be distinguished for different technical types of applications. For instance, a major application involves ‘green’ procurement – that is, a ‘green’ purchasing policy, which can be implemented by both authorities and companies. However, the ranking of resources, materials or products for purchasing reasons need not necessarily be done on


Part 1: LCA in perspective a quantitative basis, using LCA. Thus, tropical hardwood with a label from the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) can, without LCA, be compared with hardwood without such a label (as long as all other aspects remain the same), using a simpler and more focused style of analysis based on just one qualitative criterion. However, if different types of processed wood are to be compared for other reasons besides avoiding the use of tropical hardwood, LCA may well make an essential contribution. Another application concerns eco-labeling (i.e. assigning a ’green label’ to environmentallyfriendly product alternatives), enabling consumers to make comparisons between products. Eco-labeling programmes like the EU’s are increasingly based on LCA. Up to now, some of these programmes have not lived up to their expectations. Positive examples in this area are the Blue Angel eco-labeling programme in Germany and the Green Swan eco-label in Scandinavia


Positive examples in this area are the Blue Angel eco-labeling programme in Germany and the Green Swan eco-label in Scandinavia. A further application in relation to products is the design of more environmentally friendly products, otherwise known as eco-design. This is an activity of increasing importance, which imposes specific requirements on the available life cycle information: it must be very simple to use. It is generally an activity in which the results of LCA are used within the company, rather than in the market place. 2.3 Role of LCA in wider applications Apart from direct product applications, it is also possible to use LCA in a wider sense. Rather than dealing with well-defined physical goods or simple services, LCA is applied here to complex business strategies or government policies relating to consumption and lifestyle choices in various sectors of society


As in the situations described above, it is the function provided which is the core object of the LCA project, but now this function is more complex, more encompassing, and related to strategic decisions. Examples of the wider applications of LCA include: The choice of one-way packaging by an industry. The EU’s Packaging Directive allows this, on condition that it can be proved that this creates less of an environmental burden than the use of reusable packaging materials. Comparison between different types of waste management by a municipality, or the development of a waste management strategy. Assessment of the environmental benefits of different types of biomass use (including thinning wood), for instance in the production of electricity or paper. Strategic comparison between different modes of freight transport (road, rail, water) as a basis for public investment in new infrastructure. The ‘greening’ of the building industry


Strategic comparison between different modes of freight transport (road, rail, water) as a basis for public investment in new infrastructure. The ‘greening’ of the building industry. In the Netherlands, for instance, new houses must in the future meet minimum environmental requirements. In addition to energy consumption, this specifically includes requirements on the environmental burdens imposed by all materials used in the building of a house, to be based upon quantitative LCA. The difference between the two areas distinguished here, that relating to products and the wider applications, is in fact merely one of degree. For instance, the first and the last example mentioned above, that of the choice for one-way packaging and of LCA in the building industry, offers the potential of ‘greening’ every aspect of the industries involved. At the same time, it could also be seen as an example of product policy, where the product is unusually large – a whole building.


Part 1: LCA in perspective Convergence between the requirements of LCA in product policy and wider applications is also seen in eco-design. For instance, LCA is used in the design of new cars in the German automotive industry. The design process itself allows only simple criteria to be used. However, once a car has been completed, a full LCA is performed on the end product. The results of this analysis provide the basis for the establishment of – again simple – new design criteria. This process implies a ‘learning curve’. This also points at yet another type of application. In all of the above applications, LCA is used on a project basis: the goal of the project is defined, the study is performed and the conclusions are drawn. But the scope of LCA practice can also be further widened, by using LCA rather as a management tool, on a more continuous basis


But the scope of LCA practice can also be further widened, by using LCA rather as a management tool, on a more continuous basis. In this case, criteria are derived from a more extensive LCA study, which are then used for the ongoing monitoring of the management process. A specific example concerns benchmarking of business and governmental activities. 2.4 Limitations of LCA The core characteristic of LCA is its 'holistic' nature, which is both its major strength and, at the same time, its limitation. The broad scope of analysing the complete life cycle of a product can only be achieved at the expense of simplifying other aspects. First of all, LCA cannot address localised impacts. It is possible to scale down some of the results and to identify the regions in which certain emissions take place, after which differences in the sensitivity of these regions can be taken into account in the context of LCA


But LCA does not provide the framework for a full-fledged local risk assessment study, identifying which impacts can be expected due to the functioning of a facility in a specific locality. The same is true for the time aspect. LCA is typically a steady-state, rather than a dynamic approach. However, future technological developments are increasingly taken into account in more detailed LCA studies. The LCA model focuses on physical characteristics of the industrial activities and other economic processes; it does not include market mechanisms or secondary effects on technological development. In general, LCA regards all processes as linear, both in the economy and in the environment. Again, some progress is being made in reducing this limitation, but at heart, LCA is a tool based on linear modeling. Furthermore, LCA focuses on the environmental aspects of products, and says nothing about their economic, social and other characteristics


Furthermore, LCA focuses on the environmental aspects of products, and says nothing about their economic, social and other characteristics. The environmental impacts are often described as "potential impacts" (see also the ISO definition), because they are not specified in time and space and are related to an (often) arbitrarily defined functional unit. Although LCA aims to be science-based, it involves a number of technical assumptions and value choices. An important role is played by the ISO standardisation process, which helps to avoid arbitrariness (see below). An important aim is to make these assumptions and choices as transparent as possible; this is also an important element for embedding LCA in procedures (see also Part 2a). A further limitation can lie in the availability of data. Indeed, databases are being developed in various countries, and the format for databases is being standardised (see below). But in


Part 1: LCA in perspective practice, data are frequently obsolete, incomparable, or of unknown quality. More in particular, data are generally available at the level of building blocks, i.e., for combinations of processes such as ’electricity production’ or ’aluminium production’, rather than for the individual constituting processes themselves. Finally, a more fundamental characteristic concerns the nature of LCA as an analytical tool. As such, it provides information for decision support. LCA cannot replace the decision making process itself. One cannot say: ‘The LCA study has proved that this decision must be made,’ but rather ‘Based on an LCA study and other evidence, the following decision has been made.’ This last aspect calls for a clear view of the procedural aspects of the use of LCA, a point given ample attention in this Guide


2.5 LCA as part of a tool box The above limitations of LCA can be addressed by extending the analysis and/or bringing in other analytical tools to given decision situations. For instance, a product can be analysed using LCA and, at the same time, a Risk Assessment (RA) can be performed for a number of core processes in the chain, in which the emphasis is on the local environmental impacts. Both types of data may well be relevant for decision making. Another useful approach is the complementary use of LCA and Substance Flow Analysis (SFA). This is particularly appropriate if one specific substance dominates the product, such as cadmium in rechargeable batteries or phosphates in detergents. For a single substance, market mechanisms might then also become part of the analysis. Of course, the complementary use of various tools is imperative if one is interested in other aspects of a new product, such as the wider environmental implications or social and economic aspects


Of course, the complementary use of various tools is imperative if one is interested in other aspects of a new product, such as the wider environmental implications or social and economic aspects. Such aspects include public health and safety (e.g., the quality of food products) animal welfare and the use of child labour in the production stage of a product. Where economic aspects are concerned, there is the Life Cycle Costing (LCC) approach for evaluating the economics of the life cycle of a product. LCC can be expected to become a standard addition to LCA applications. The aim is to provide a tool box which offers opportunities for different types of analysis, in line with the requirements of the given decision situation. The limitations described in the previous section not only refer to the state of the art of the various tools, but also to the availability of correct data. Such a tool box is therefore a long-term goal, rather than one to be achieved in the short term


Such a tool box is therefore a long-term goal, rather than one to be achieved in the short term. Nevertheless, the aim of combining the use of different tools in one decision situation is certainly valid. 2.6 Management of LCA projects: procedures LCA studies can be performed in a whole range of different decision-making situations, ranging from mere internal use to public comparative use. These different situations also impose different requirements on the type of decision procedure which has to be followed.


Part 1: LCA in perspective The present Guide distinguishes the following decision situations (see Table). Global exploration of The LCA study is performed to get a first impression of the options environmental effect of certain options. Company-internal innovation Sector-driven innovation Strategic planning Comparison Comparative assertion disclosed to the public The LCA study is performed to assess the environmental impact of company-internal product improvements, product development or technical innovations. Similar to the above, except that it is sector-oriented (in a formal organisation representing a branch of chain of companies, it can be regarded as an internal activity). The LCA study is performed to assess the environmental impact of strategic scenarios. The LCA study is performed to assess whether a product or system meets certain environmental standards, or whether it is environmentally sounder than another product or system


The LCA study is performed to assess whether a product or system meets certain environmental standards, or whether it is environmentally sounder than another product or system. The LCA study aims to provide an environmental claim regarding the superiority or equivalence of one product versus a competing product which performs the same function. These six situations are subsequently grouped into three categories: situations with few diverging interests and with potentially strong impact; situations with many diverging interests and with potentially weak impact; and situations with many diverging interests and with potentially strong impact. Guidelines have to be set particularly for how to deal with assignment, critical reviews, process planning and management and with stakeholder participation. These procedural guidelines become stricter as one goes from the first to the third group of decision situations. LCA is a core topic in the field of environmental management


These procedural guidelines become stricter as one goes from the first to the third group of decision situations. LCA is a core topic in the field of environmental management. Its history goes back to the early seventies, though in the past, it went by different names such as Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis (REPA), Energy Analysis or Product Ecobalance. Here we review the role of a number of international bodies that have been –and are – concerned with the development and application of LCA. SETAC (the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry) was the first international body to act as an umbrella organisation for the development of LCA. It is a scientific organisation with its roots in academia, industry and government and, as such, has been able to offer a science-based platform for the coherent development of LCA as a tool


It is a scientific organisation with its roots in academia, industry and government and, as such, has been able to offer a science-based platform for the coherent development of LCA as a tool. SETAC’s aims are scientific development in specific areas of research and application of the results in the field of environmental management. SETAC’S involvement with LCA dates from 1989, when its first workshop was held in Smugglers Notch, Vermont. A year later this was followed up with a workshop in Leuven, Belgium. These workshops set the scene for the emergence of two different schools of LCA development in North America and Europe, which have dominated the scene for many years. 3. International developments 3.1 SETAC


Part 1: LCA in perspective The main activities of SETAC’s LCA section are: annual scientific meetings both in North America and Europe, which are a regular part of SETAC’s meetings calendar and include sessions focusing on LCA methodology development; an annual Case Studies Symposium, held in Brussels, focusing on the application of LCA in different branches of industry; since 1996, a number of working groups which deal with different aspects of LCA methodology and application, both in Europe and North America. The European working groups have regarded the development and harmonisation of LCA methodology as their main aim, while the North American groups have focused on analysing the limitations of LCA and warning against its unwarranted use. Despite the differences between the two SETAC branches (North America and Europe), there are also major areas of co-operation. A major example has been the development of a ‘Code of Practice’ for LCA


A major example has been the development of a ‘Code of Practice’ for LCA. This was an important step towards harmonisation of the tool, as it presented the first internationally accepted technical framework for LCA. It may be hard to recall, from today’s standpoint, but even the term LCA was not generally accepted in the late 1980s – the tool was still being called by a number of alternative names. The Code of Practice pointed out that, besides science, LCA also involves procedural aspects and value choices. Indeed, this Code of Practice was the forerunner of the activities which are now performed under ISO. 3.2 ISO ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a world-wide private organisation, including national bodies from both industrialised and developing countries, which aims to standardise a wide range of products and activities


One of its key activities is the development of the 9000 series of standards, which is aimed at the integration of quality aspects into business practice. The 14000 series of ISO standards includes the standard 14001 on Environmental Management Systems, as well as a series of standards relating to LCA (the 14040 series). These ISO activities began in 1994 and aim to produce the first complete series of LCA standards. The ISO LCA standards concern the technical as well as organisational aspects of an LCA project. The organisational aspects mainly focus on the design of critical review processes, with special attention to comparative assertions disclosed to the public. They also cover matters such as the involvement of stakeholders The following general standards and technical reports have been or are being produced by ISO in the 14040 series (Environmental management - Life cycle assessment): ISO 14040: A standard on principles and framework


Edition 1997 ISO 14041: A standard on goal and scope definition and inventory analysis. Edition ISO 14042: A standard on life cycle impact assessment. Edition 2000 ISO 14043: A standard on life cycle interpretation. Edition 2000 CD 14047: A draft technical report presenting examples for ISO 14042 on life cycle impact assessment (in preparation) CD 14048: A draft standard on data format (in preparation) TR 14049: A technical report presenting examples for ISO 14041 on the life cycle inventory phase. Edition 1999.


Part 1: LCA in perspective In addition, other ISO activities also bear a relationship to the ISO series on LCA. One example concerns the technical report TR 14025 on so-called Type III environmental declarations, which require a life cycle approach, including formal LCA. Another example concerns TR 14062, a technical report which is still in preparation, dealing with guidelines to integrate environmental aspects into product development, and also involving life cycle aspects. Scientific activities within SETAC have greatly enhanced the quality of work in ISO. At the same time, ISO has played a major role in bringing together the different schools of LCA, by requiring agreement on every single word of the different standards. The choice of wording in terms of ‘may’, ‘should’ or ‘shall’ –the three normative vehicles of any standard – was a particularly good example


The choice of wording in terms of ‘may’, ‘should’ or ‘shall’ –the three normative vehicles of any standard – was a particularly good example. The international standards and additional technical reports have also greatly enhanced the acceptance of LCA as a tool for decision support by both industry and government. It is to be expected that after the completion of the first full series of the 14040 standards and technical reports, a second, revised series will be compiled, taking account of new developments in LCA methodology. 3.3 UNEP A third international player in the field of LCA is UNEP (the United Nations Environmental Programme), represented by its Department of Technology, Industry and Economics in Paris. UNEP’s focus is mainly on the application of LCA, particularly in developing countries. An important contribution was the publication in 1996 of UNEP’s user-friendly and easy-toread guide to LCA, entitled Life Cycle Assessment: What it is, and what to do about it


An important contribution was the publication in 1996 of UNEP’s user-friendly and easy-toread guide to LCA, entitled Life Cycle Assessment: What it is, and what to do about it. A second publication of interest is Towards Global Use of Life Cycle Assessment, published in 1999. Furthermore, a series of international workshops dealing with various aspects of LCA are being organised by the Environmental Protection Agency of the US (US-EPA) and CML in the Netherlands, under the auspices of UNEP. SETAC and UNEP are now co-operating in a major new task, concerning the identification of best available practice in the field of life cycle assessment, on the initiative of a SETACEurope working group. The task involves the identification of best available practice in establishing a database for the life cycle inventory phase, and a list of environmental impact categories and accompanying factors to address these impact categories. 4


4. Guiding principles for the present Guide The following guiding principles were used in the preparation of the present Guide. It had to be based on up-to-date science, as developed within the scientific community of SETAC and its working groups. It had to operationalise the ISO standards in a ‘cookbook’ format, being as compatible as possible with the ISO standards on LCA and indicating explicitly where the present Guide goes beyond ISO. It had to be unambiguous, specifying best practice. In places, other LCA methods, leading to different outcomes, are presented. This has been done in such a way that they can easily be incorporated into a sensitivity analysis. It had to be relevant to various types of applications. This involved having a baseline practice specified, differentiating between a simplified and a detailed method. Possibilities for extensions aimed at specific applications are also considered.


Part 1: LCA in perspective It had to be a practical Guide, aiming for precise guidelines for use in practice. These are presented separately from the descriptions of operational methods and data and from the description of the scientific background. They are illustrated by a number of examples. It had to present the guidelines in the framework of a number of possible decision situations, specifying the relevant procedural steps to be taken. 5. Reading guide The present Guide consists of the following Parts. Part 1, the part in front of you, gives a general overview of LCA in perspective: the reasons for developing a new Guide, the main characteristics of LCA, the main international developments and the guiding principles for the present Guide. The main target audience of this part is those who use the results of LCA, for instance policymakers and corporate managers. Part 2 is the Guide itself, which itself consists of two parts


The main target audience of this part is those who use the results of LCA, for instance policymakers and corporate managers. Part 2 is the Guide itself, which itself consists of two parts. Part 2a deals with process management and procedural guidelines, and contains an overall description of the technical guidelines. Part 2b offers an operational annex, including elements for all LCA phases but emphasising modeling rules for the inventory phase and factors for the impact assessment phase. This part is mainly intended for those carrying out life cycle assessments. Part 3 offers an overview of the scientific background for the guidelines presented in Part 2a. Its main intended readership is scientists working on the further development of LCA and persons carrying out LCAs or using the results of LCAs who wish to understand why certain methodological choices have been made, which other options could be considered, and why the possibilities and limitations of LCA are as they are


Additional reading guides for Parts 2 and 3 are provided within these documents.


PART 2A GUIDE


Contents of Part 2a Reading guidance 1. Management of LCA projects: procedures 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Designing an LCA project Context of an LCA project Process management in LCA Organisation and assignment Reporting an LCA project Example (case history) Goal and scope definition 2..1 2.2 2.3 Topic Starting points Recipe 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 Procedures Goal definition Scope definition Function, functional unit, alternatives and reference flows Results of Goal and scope definition 3


Inventory analysis 3.1 3.2 3.3 Topic Starting points Recipe 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.5 3.3.6 3.3.7 3.3.8 3.3.9 3.3.10 Procedures Economy-environment system boundary Flow diagram Format and data categories Data quality Data collection and relating data to unit processes Data validation Cut-off and data estimation Multifunctionality and allocation Calculation method Results of Inventory analysis Impact assessment 4.1 4.2 4.3 Topic Starting points Recipe 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 Procedures Selection of impact categories Selection of characterisation methods: category indicators, characterisation models and factors 4.3.3.1 4.3.3.2 4.3.3.3 4.3.3.3.1 Depletion of abiotic resources Depletion of biotic resources Impacts of land use Land competition 2.4 3.4 4. 2.


4.3.3.3.2 4.3.3.3.3 Loss of biodiversity Loss of life support function 4.3.3.4 4.3.3.5 4.3.3.6 4.3.3.7 4.3.3.8 Desiccation Climate change Stratospheric ozone depletion Human toxicity Ecotoxicity 4.3.3.8.1 4.3.3.8.2 4.3.3.8.3 4.3.3.8.4 4.3.3.8.5 Freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity Marine aquatic ecotoxicity Terrestrial ecotoxicity Freshwater sediment ecotoxicity Marine sediment ecotoxicity 4.3.3.9 4.3.3.10 4.3.3.11 4.3.3.12 4.3.3.13 Photo-oxidant formation Acidification Eutrophication Waste heat Odour 4.3.3.13.1 4.3.3.13.2 Malodorous air Malodorous water 4.3.3.14 4.3.3.15 4.3.3.16 4.3.3.17 4.3.3.18 Noise Impacts of ionising radiation Casualties Interventions for which characterisation factors are lacking Economic flows not followed to system boundary 4.3.4 4.3.5 4.3.6 4.3.7 4.3.8 Classification Characterisation Normalisation Grouping Weighting Results of Impact assessment 5


Interpretation 5.1 5.2 5.3 Topic Starting points Recipe 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.3.4 5.3.5 5.3.6 5.3.7 Procedures Consistency check Completeness check Contribution analysis Perturbation analysis Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis Conclusions and recommendations Results of Interpretation Appendix A: Terms, definitions and abbreviations 4.4 5.4


Reading guidance This is Part 2a of the publication entitled “Handbook on life cycle assessment: An operational guide to the ISO standards”. The entire publication consists of three parts: Part 1 (“LCA in perspective”) is a short introduction describing in broad terms the purpose, role, applications and limitations of life cycle assessment. Its main intended readership consists of people who have to commission the execution of LCAs and who will use the results of such analyses. Part 2 consists of two parts: 2a (“Guide”) and 2b (“Operational annex”). Its target audience is those concerned with the actual execution of LCAs. Depending on the context and the complexity, this may be one person or an entire research team with diverging backgrounds, such as process technology, product design, end-of-pipe solutions, ecotoxicology and so on


Part 3 (“Scientific background”) provides the foundations and arguments for certain methodological choices, the alternative options available, and much more. It is intended to stimulate scientific debate and progress and to function as a reference book for those who wish to learn more about the rationale behind the Guide’s rules. The working method for LCA is structured along a framework that has become the subject of world-wide consensus and that forms the basis of a number of ISO standards. This framework divides the entire LCA procedure into four distinct phases: Goal and scope definition Inventory analysis Impact assessment Interpretation The present Guide has chapters corresponding to each of these four phases. In addition, an opening chapter on procedures for managing LCA projects has been included, bringing the total number of chapters to five. Chapter 1 presents rules that should be kept in mind during the organisation, assignment and progress of LCAs


Chapter 1 presents rules that should be kept in mind during the organisation, assignment and progress of LCAs. Chapters 2 to 5, which are devoted to the four LCA phases, each consist of four sections: Topic, describing briefly the role and function of this phase. Starting points, summarising the main methodological considerations for this phase. Recipe, providing detailed instructions for carrying out this phase. Results, describing results that will be obtained from this phase. Within each of the four phases, there are several steps (like characterisation) and elements (like a flow diagram). Because the elements also involve steps to be taken (like constructing the flow diagram), only the term "step" will be used in the remainder of this document. These steps are presented as individual subsections in the Recipe section of each phase. Their treatment is almost invariably as follows: Topic, describing briefly the role and function of this particular step


Their treatment is almost invariably as follows: Topic, describing briefly the role and function of this particular step. Main choices, summarising the basis for implementation of this step. Guidelines, providing detailed instructions for this step. Example, using a hypothetical situation to illustrate1 the application of the guidelines. 1 It should be understood that a strict application of the guidelines would mean that the examples for certain steps would require 50 pages or more. Therefore, we have chosen to give the examples an illustrative function only, without pretending to be purist. Furthermore, most – though no t all – examples are based on a simple hypothetical system, the data for which is provided with the CMLCA software. Part 2a: Guide


Since an LCA can be conducted at various degrees of sophistication, the guidelines distinguish between the baseline detailed level, a simplified level, and possible extensions to the detailed level. Note that in a detailed LCA, certain steps may be conducted at the simplified level, or that it is possible to choose, even within one step, to apply detailed guidelines for some unit processes or impact categories and simplified guidelines for others. Note also that a simplified LCA is not simple in the sense of being easy. The guidelines for simplified LCA are largely in line with the ISO standards, but not entirely. For example, the allocation procedure recommended for simplified LCA does not comply with the stepwise procedure described in ISO 14041. The guidelines for detailed LCA comply fully with the various ISO standards, however, although they are elaborated here at a more operational level. Many of the optional extensions do not fit into the ISO framework


Many of the optional extensions do not fit into the ISO framework. Application of the guidelines requires detailed working instructions and data. All data, and especially all extensive tables with substance-specific factors, and all instructions that extend beyond a few lines have been included in the operational annex (Part 2b). To ensure proper correspondence with the step to which they belong, the numbering of chapters and sections is the same for Parts 2a and 2b. Part 2a: Guide


Management of LCA projects: procedures Designing an LCA project An LCA project is more than just a study. The results of the project could be used in decision-making by industry, government and non-governmental organisations. They could guide decisions on investment, policy issues or strategy determination. So it is best to consider an LCA project as an organisational process, which can be carried out in several ways. This process approach is based on the idea that the results of an LCA will only be considered authoritative if the most important stakeholders have been involved in the analysis


This process approach is based on the idea that the results of an LCA will only be considered authoritative if the most important stakeholders have been involved in the analysis. This has to be done in a proper and correct way, necessitating a process design which should define: the parties and the individuals who will be involved in the LCA project; the tasks and responsibilities of parties/individuals involved; the points at which the parties/individuals involved can exercise their influence (decision points); how decision-making will work at these points; the arrangements for dealing with ‘bottlenecks’ during the process; the actual planning and management of the process. The execution of an LCA and the accompanying process should be carefully attuned to its ultimate goal. This requires that both the LCA client and other possible stakeholders reflect upon this goal


The execution of an LCA and the accompanying process should be carefully attuned to its ultimate goal. This requires that both the LCA client and other possible stakeholders reflect upon this goal. Meanwhile, the LCA researchers themselves should also keep the goal firmly in mind, considering how this could affect the conditions and constraints of the project itself. The LCA client also needs to consider the design, the organisational set-up and the management of the accompanying process. A suitable process design can be defined as a set of rules agreed on by the parties involved; these cover who is involved, and also when and how the process is to be carried out. A proper and transparent process can only be realised by a design that maximises all potential advantages, whilst keeping the risks of the process approach to a minimum


A proper and transparent process can only be realised by a design that maximises all potential advantages, whilst keeping the risks of the process approach to a minimum. The advantages of the process approach are that a qualitatively better LCA is realised, and that broader support for the results from the parties involved is more likely to be achieved. After all, the stakeholders are far more likely to support the results of an LCA project if they themselves have been actively involved in the execution of the analysis. Further advantages of the process approach include: the opportunity to educate stakeholders and shape their views; better quality of the data and other information used in the LCA; improved transparency of the LCA report; better quality of execution of the LCA. However, the process approach does carry some risks – mainly of improper manipulation by stakeholders or researchers of the study itself, the results of the analysis or the decisionmaking process


However, the process approach does carry some risks – mainly of improper manipulation by stakeholders or researchers of the study itself, the results of the analysis or the decisionmaking process. The process design must be clear in its objectives, which means that a distinct starting point and a distinct endpoint of the process must be defined. An optimised interaction between 1. 1.1 Part 2a: Guide


the execution of the LCA as such and the practical use of the LCA’s results should be arranged. In general, four steps can be distinguished in LCA-based decision-making processes: assignment of the research; execution of the LCA; presentation of the LCA’s results with conclusions; implementation based on the LCA’s results. All parties involved can influence the procedure and choices in these four steps. A process design should indicate who can make decisions, when they should be made, and what can be decided in each step. Context of an LCA project The organisational set-up and execution of the decision-making process should be attuned, as far as possible, to the specific nature of this kind of decision-making and to the process context. For instance, making a decision on whether to replace long-life products by disposables might require more process regulation than decision-making on product innovation, especially where there are sharply diverging views among interested parties


What determines the type of process design and development is, first of all, the nature and number of parties with diverging interests. Secondly, the possible effects of the intended use of the LCA’s results also determine the extent and manner of regulation of the development process


Part 1 (Section 2.6) distinguished six different process situations and stated that LCAs are conducted to obtain results that can be used in: global exploration of options (the LCA study is conducted to get a first impression of the environmental effect of certain options); company-internal innovation (the LCA study is conducted to assess the environmental impact of company-internal product improvements, product development or technical innovations); sector-driven innovation (similar to the above, except that it is sector-oriented, although in a formal organisation representing a branch or chain of companies, it can be regarded as an internal activity); strategy determination (the LCA study is conducted to assess the environmental impact of strategic scenarios); comparison (the LCA study is conducted to assess whether a product or system meets certain environmental standards, or whether it is more environmentally sound than another product or system); comparative assertion disclosed