Developing Global Consensus on Life Cycle Impact

Assessment Indicators and Methods

Bruce Vigon, SETAC

Rolf Frischknecht, treeze, Ltd.

Olivier Jolliet, University of Michigan

Sonia Valdivia, UNEP

LCA XIII Conference

Orlando, FL

October, 2013

Outline

1. Introduction and history of the activity

2. Motivation for the project3. Activity/Workstream map4. Accomplishments so far5. Expected outputs and benefits6. Getting involved

Phase 3: Mission, Vision, Objectives and Programmes

5. Communication & stakeholder outreach

3. Product

sustainability

information

4.

Capabili

tyD

evelo

pm

ent

&

imple

menta

tion

2. Data

1. Methodologies

Vision:A world where life cycle approaches are mainstreamed

Mission: Enable the global use of credible life cycle knowledge for more sustainable societies.

Objective 1: Enhance the global

consensus and relevance of existing and

emerging life cycle methodologies and data management

Objective 2: Expand capability worldwide to apply and to improve life cycle approaches;

making them operational for organisations

Objective 3: Be the global voice of the Life Cycle community to influence and partner with stakeholders through broad communication of current life cycle knowledge

a. Global capability

development

a. Communication strategy

b. LC Platform: clearing

house and social media

Phase 3 Flagship Projects: Urgency &

Relevance

5. Communication &

stakeholder outreach

4. Capability Development &

implementation

a. Product sustainability information

meta guidance

b. Knowledge mining

a. Global database management

network & training

a. Integrating LCC, S-LCA, E-LCA and

linking with CSR

b. Key environmental LCIA

indicators based on mature

environmental approaches

c. LCA in organizations

1. Methodologies

2. Data

3. Product sustainability information

All projects in bold are flagship ones

Activity/Accomplishment History

Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Mainstreamed

Life Cycle

Approaches

Intensive work on life cycle impact

assessment in Phase 1 and Phase 2 –

• LCIA tools, such as the USEtox model

for life cycle toxicity impact assessment

• Also, carbon footprint and water and

land use and impact assessment along

the life cycle.

Motivation for the Project

• A number of related indicators initiatives are advancing on

proposing and disseminating indicators worldwide (e.g.

materials and energy consumption)

• Consistency in how impacts are determined is critical for

global practices (especially regarding product policies)

• The Life Cycle Initiative has a track-record of organizing

expert and stakeholder forums for advancing methods

and providing consensus recommendations

• In particular, the Global Guidance Principles for LCA

Databases demonstrates that practitioners and users are

demanding more interoperability

Rio+20 Commitment to Key

Environmental Indicators

…measurement

and monitoring of

progress …

…consensus building on a

limited number of LCA-based

key environmental indicators…

Activity/Workstream Map

Task 1 - Scoping and Impact Category Selection

• create a consensus list of environmental impact category indicators – don’t overreach

• embed in a consistent methodological framework

• Technical workshops e.g May, Glasgow, Scotland

Task 2 -Working Groups

• Per environmental impact indicator

• Per process, e.g. normalization and weighting

Task 2 - Major (Pellston-type) Workshops•systematic analysis and comparison of available methods- selection of the most appropriate mid-point and end-point indicators- data sources used, model parameters, temporal and geographical scope in the models (both from inventory to midpoint and from midpoint to endpoint)

Task 3 -Publication

Development and

Dissemination

Start with work done by the

European Commission, The

Sustainability Consortium,

as well as the Swiss and

Japanese governments

Scoping phase Consensus finding Ph 1 Consensus finding Ph 2 Dissemination

2012-2013 2013-2015 2015-2017 2018

Cross-cutting Criteria to pre-select

starting impact categories

• Environmental relevance

– Importance to overall environmental

impacts

• Scientific validity (how mature is the

science; peer reviewed publications)

• Potential for consensus

• Stakeholder needs

• Applicability

Uniform framework both at

midpoint and endpoint (damage) Midpoint categories

Human toxicity

Accidents

Noise

Oxidant creation

Ozone depletion

Global warming

Acidification

Nutrification

Ecotoxicity

Land use&habitat losses

Species & organism

dispersal

Natural resources:

- minerals

- energy

- water

- soil

soil erosion

soil salinisation & dessic.

- biotic resource use

Damage categories

Human health

Morbidity

Mortality

Biotic natural

environment

Species and

ecosystems

Natural

resources

Man made

abiotic & biotic

environment

Buildings & crops

Abiotic natural

environment

Landscape

LCI

Results

Midpoint categories

Human toxicity

Accidents

Noise

Oxidant creation

Ozone depletion

Global warming

Acidification

Nutrification

Ecotoxicity

Land use&habitat losses

Species & organism

dispersal

Natural resources:

- minerals

- energy

- water

- soil

soil erosion

soil salinisation & dessic.

- biotic resource use

Damage

Human health

Morbidity

Mortality

Biotic natural

environment

Species and

ecosystems

Natural

resources

Man made

abiotic & biotic

environment

Buildings & crops

Abiotic natural

environment

Landscape

LCI

Results

3.

Normalization

and weightingComparison to

references

Societal values

1. LCI to

midpoint

characteriza-

tionHigher precision

lower relevance

2. Midpoint - to damageLower precision, but higher relevance

Natural science with higher uncertainty

Tentative list of selected impact categories

and their relationship/relevance to endpoints(high***,intermediate**,lower* relevance. In red: endpoints to be represented in priority)

Phase Impact category

Human

health

Biodiversity Resources /

ecosystem

services

1 Global warming *** *** *

1 Respiratory inorganics

(incl. PM indoors) *** *

1 Land use (Focus on land

occupation impacts on

biodiversity)* *** ***

1 Water use (Starting with

midpoint proxy) *** *** ***

2 Human toxicity

(incl. indoor) **

2 Acidification,

eutrophication and

ecotoxicity

**starting with terrestrial

acid. and freshwater

eutroph.

*

2 Energy resources **

Scoping workshop findings

• Establish a guidance document on

how to reach consensus, ensuring

consistency across categories

• The UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle

Initiative takes a leading role in

creating global guidance on LCA-

based footprints.

• Footprints could also possibly be

used to communicate results on

indicators or groups of indicators.

12

Cross-cutting issues

• Focus is to reach consensus on priority for midpoint indicators,

positioning and relating these indicators within a consistent

midpoint-endpoint framework, building on earlier LCIA

consensus work in the Initiative.

• Working groups in specific categories are invited to also

describe how midpoint indicators qualitatively or quantitatively

relate to common and as far as possible consistent endpoints

across categories as complementary information (integration).

• Interface between inventory and impact assessment indicators

needs to be analyzed,

identifying possible short term solutions and

rules to link LCIA indicators/methods to current primary

LCI databases and longer term data requirements

• Mitigation of impacts in one impact category can lead to impact

reduction to several area of protection and co-benefits in other

impact categories.

Task 3 - Dissemination

• The consensus based life cycle impact category indicators

and associated methods are documented in a publication of

the UNEP SETAC Life Cycle Initiative with recommendations

and guidance for LCIA.

– additional 6 to 8 months of working group activity is

foreseen to publish these recommendations.

• Five Workshops will be organized during the first three years.

– coordinated with workshops on life cycle database

development and capacity building in LCA in general

and/or SETAC short courses (Asia, North America,

Europe).

– takes place in all regions of the world

(Africa, Latin America, North America,

Asia and Europe).

Anticipated Benefits

• Build on Phase 1 LCIA framework through expanding a

consensus process for several impact categories to be

selected and vetted

• Connect to The European Commission and The

Sustainability Consortium who have developed similar lists of

indicators

• Bring together organizations such as IUCN, Global Footprint

Network, Wuppertal Institute, UNEP Resource Panel, OECD,

among others, contributing to the international discussion

• Realize commitment made during the Rio+20 UN

Conference, through the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative,

to expand the use of life cycle-based key environmental

indicators (and harmonized measurement methods and

models).

Deliverables and Messages

16

Deliverables:

• consensus impact category indicators where possible to achieve, and

• guidelines on how to best reach consensus in LCIA indicators

What this flagship will NOT deliver:

No universal, complete LCIA method but major contribution to

consensus finding in selected areas of environmental importance

and where consensus is within reach.

Our SponsorsGovernment Platinum Sponsors and Strategic Partners:

Gold Sponsors:Gold Sponsors:Gold Sponsors:Gold Sponsors:

Private Sector Platinum Sponsors:

International Associations & Chemistry Company:

Gold Sponsors: Academic Private Partnerships as Platinum Sponsors:

13 Corporate Sponsors, Advisory Members within CIRAIG:

Contact us to see how you can

become involved

For more information and resources, see

http://lcinitiative.org/

Office of the Secretariat - SCP Branch, UNEP DTIE, Paris

• Sonia Valdivia: svaldivia@unep.org

UNEP – Life Cycle Initiative Programme Officer

• Llorenҫ Mila-i-Canals

UNEP – Initiative Co-Chair

• Sylvie Lemmet

SETAC – Initiative Co-Chair

• Bruce Vigon: bruce.vigon@setac.org