Life cycle sustainability assessment: Lessons learned from case studies

Alejandrino, Clarisa; Mercante, Irma Teresa; Bovea, Marı́a D.

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106517

Cited by 57 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 109 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Life Cycle Assessment is a quantitative methodology used to estimate the relative potential environmental aspects of products, processes, and services, as clearly stated in the standards that are regulating it [ 21 , 22 ]. Now, the LCA has reached a high level of maturity and is accepted worldwide as one of the most effective methods to assess the environmental sustainability [ 23 , 24 ] within the framework of the three-pillars theory of sustainability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Cellulose Nanofibres Production Routes from Virgin and Recycled Raw Materials

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanocellulose-based materials are attracting an increasing interest for the positive role they could play in sustainable development; being originated from renewable resources. Moreover, cellulose has a high potential of recycling from both post-consumer waste and industrial waste. Both factors, i.e., recyclability and renewable resources; results are also extremely favourable in the perspective of circular economy. Despite all these positive aspects, an industrial production has yet to start. At the lab scale, many preparation methods of cellulose nanofibres (CNF) are available; here, the three most common are analysed: (1) enzymatic pre-treatment followed by homogenisation (ENZHO), (2) oxidative pre-treatment combined with homogenisation (TOHO) or (3) oxidative pre-treatment followed by sonication (TOSO). All three processes have been experimentally carried out starting from both virgin and recycled cellulose from industrial waste sludge. The environmental sustainability of these three routes is estimated by the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) using experimental lab scale data. In this scenario, the comparative LCA has pointed out a superior performance of the ENZHO process, followed by TOHO and, lastly, by TOSO. The influence of energy consumption on the final results has been further investigated by a sensitivity analysis, showing that the TOHO and TOSO routes could reach similar performances by scaling-up the process from the laboratory. The different typology of CNF obtained by conducting the ENZHO process with respect to the TEMPO-mediated oxidation approach is also outlined as an additional element to be considered for the final selection of a suitable process.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Cellulose Nanofibres Production Routes from Virgin and Recycled Raw Materials

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Just one-fifth of the economic indicators used in LCSAs conducted until the end of 2018 used macroeconomic indicators, such as effect on gross domestic product (GDP) growth, employment, tax, imports, exports, and research and development . Visentin et al (2020) and Alejandrino et al (2021) obtained similar results in their reviews: The main economic indicators used in LCSA refer to internal costs, only few studies used, e.g. external environmental costs, net present value (NPV), profit, revenues or GDP as economic indicators.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…external environmental costs, net present value (NPV), profit, revenues or GDP as economic indicators. Amongst these review papers, only Alejandrino et al (2021) mentioned 'added value' explicitly as economic indicator. Our literature review on economic indicators used in LCSA in recent years (2020 onwards) leads to a similar conclusion (see Table 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Domestic value added as an indicator for sustainability assessment: a case study on alternative drivetrains in the passenger car sector

Harzendorf

Wulf

Haase

et al. 2022

Clean Techn Environ Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To strengthen the economic pillar in sustainability assessment, the indicator ‘domestic value added’ is introduced. It aims at comparing established and less developed technologies regarding their prospective value added in a country. This is done by classifying a technology’s value added to the developed categories: domestic, potential domestic and non-domestic. Within this paper, two methods for assessing this indicator are introduced focussing on their applicability in a sustainability assessment context. Both methods are tested on a case study comparing two alternative drivetrain technologies for the passenger car sector (battery and fuel cell electric vehicle) to the conventionally used internal combustion engine. The first method is life cycle cost-based whereas the second is based on Input Output analysis. If a life cycle cost assessment is already available for the technology under assessment, the easier to implement life cycle cost-based approach is recommended, as the results are similar to the more complex Input Output-based approach. From the ‘domestic value added’ perspective, the battery electric vehicle is already more advantageous than the conventional internal combustion engine over the lifecycle. Fuel cell electric vehicles have the highest potential to increase their ‘domestic value added’ share in the future. This paper broadens the economic pillar in sustainability assessment by introducing a new indicator ‘domestic value added’ and giving practical information on how to prospectively assess it for existing and less developed technologies or innovations. Graphical abstract

show abstract

“…where LCA is the environmental life cycle assessment, LCC is the life cycle cost, and SLCA is the social life cycle assessment, detailed information about LCA, LCC, and SLCA is provided in the section "The Procedure of the Study" in steps 7-9, respectively. It is worthwhile to note that the system boundary for all three aspects of the assessment is consistent, i.e., the system boundary is ideally identical in all of them [22,48]. After calculating the LCSA of each scenario, the scenarios are compared and prioritized to select the most sustainable one.…”

Section: Sustainability Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the sustainability of urban infrastructures was neglected in the past, the concept of sustainability and its aspects have widely gained attention in water systems in the last decades [21]. Many publications deal with the water systems' sustainability using different approaches such as the life cycle perspective, and there is an ever-increasing number of papers in this regard [22]. Some of them only have considered one aspect of sustainability in urban water systems, like environment [23][24][25], economic [26][27][28], or social [29,30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Wastewater Systems under Applying Water Demand Management Policies

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability assessment of urban water and wastewater infrastructures, especially when it comes to managing existing systems, is of paramount importance. Hence, this study presents a comprehensive approach to investigate the sustainability of a real wastewater system under different water demand management policies (WDMPs) in the operation and maintenance stage. In this regard, life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) is used through its three main pillars, which are (1) environment, (2) economy, and (3) society. Accordingly, (1) Environmental assessment is conducted using life cycle assessment (LCA) considering a thorough inventory dataset; (2) The economic assessment results are analyzed by the life cycle cost (LCC) method; and (3) Social life cycle assessment (SLCA) is conducted using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method, in which three main stakeholders “public and local community”, “workers and employees”, and “treated wastewater and sludge consumers” are considered. Finally, to prioritize scenarios, the results of LCA, LCC, and SLCA for every scenario are aggregated to account for the sustainability score using the AHP. The results of applying the proposed method to a real case study show that scenarios leading to less reduction in wastewater production are more sustainable options as they represent better performance regarding economic and social aspects. The proposed framework provides a better insight into the integrated sustainability analysis of urban water infrastructures. In addition, it can be used as a guideline for exploring the effects of WDMPs on wastewater systems in different study areas.

show abstract

Life cycle sustainability assessment: Lessons learned from case studies

Cited by 57 publications

References 109 publications

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Cellulose Nanofibres Production Routes from Virgin and Recycled Raw Materials

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Cellulose Nanofibres Production Routes from Virgin and Recycled Raw Materials

Domestic value added as an indicator for sustainability assessment: a case study on alternative drivetrains in the passenger car sector

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Wastewater Systems under Applying Water Demand Management Policies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About