1 / 82

Application of Life Cycle Assessment to Waste Management Christina Seidel Executive Director

Application of Life Cycle Assessment to Waste Management Christina Seidel Executive Director. What is Life-Cycle Assessment?. LCA: Quantify total burdens of a product or project including everything from: -upstream effects of sourcing materials, to

lilac
Download Presentation

Application of Life Cycle Assessment to Waste Management Christina Seidel Executive Director

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Application of Life Cycle Assessment to Waste ManagementChristina SeidelExecutive Director

  2. What is Life-Cycle Assessment? LCA: Quantify total burdens of a product or project including everything from: -upstream effects of sourcing materials, to -downstream effects of disposal after the project or product is finished. “CRADLE to GRAVE” Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  3. What is Life-Cycle Assessment? PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE Core Activity S Emissions_ Functional Unit Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  4. Life Cycle Assessment for Sustainable Design • Supportable, reliable decisions must be made between alternative projects or designs based on Real Environmental Consequences • Life Cycle Assessment now provides a broadly accepted framework for complex decisions involving direct and indirect (societal) costs. Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  5. The Common Link:Life-Cycle Thinking • Product / project evaluation including upstream and downstream burdens and/or costs associated with your project / product even if they are paid elsewhere. • Using Life Cycle Thinking to improve design and/or make a better decision between options. Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  6. History of LCA (1) • 1969: Coca-Cola commissioned the first “REPA” • (Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis) • What’s the best pop container? • A re-usable glass bottle or a recyclable steel can? (Note that both alternatives are long obsolete) Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  7. History of LCA (2) • Following the Coca-Cola study: • REPA studies focus on solid waste and recycling • Mobil Chemicals, (plastics manufacturer), compared plastic meat trays vs. pulp trays SOME RESULTS MAY NOT BE AS EXPECTED !

  8. History of LCA (3) 1975 - 88: Corporate Focus on product improvement • Companies applied REPA for product design. • 1970's energy crisis spurred interest in “full fuel cycle analysis”. • What is the actual environmental cost to switch 10 million cars from petroleum gasoline to natural gas ? • Or to battery electric ? • Or to synthetic fuel? Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  9. History of LCA (4) • 1990 : LCA is Born • Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) : “Life-Cycle Assessment” (LCA) • Emphasis on life cycle thinking for new chemicals … Resources, Manufacture, Deployment, Use, Disposal, Fate Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  10. History of LCA (5) • Complexity of LCA work and data scarcity led to a desire for standards. • 1994: Canadians were involved early, leading to … • CSA Z760-94 Life Cycle Assessment • CSA PLUS 1107 User's Guide to Life Cycle Assessment: Conceptual LCA in Practice Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  11. History of LCA (6) • ISO added LCA to their series of environmental standards … • 1997 ISO 14040: LCA - Principles and framework • 11 pages with two references • 1998 ISO 14041: LCA - Goal & Scope Def. and Inventory Analysis • 2000 ISO 14042: LCA - Life Cycle Impact Assessment • 2000 ISO 14043: LCA - Life Cycle Interpretation • 2000 ISO 14049: LCA - Examples of Application Credit: Dr. David Checkel

  12. LCA Outputs – Paper Recycling

  13. LCA Outputs – Paper Recycling

  14. LCA Outputs – Paper Recycling

  15. LCA Outputs – Paper Recycling

  16. What is Waste?And How Should We Manage it?

  17. What is Waste? • Represents system failure/ inefficiency • Design to eliminate waste • Zero Waste movement

  18. Zero Waste Definition • Zero Waste is a goal that is both pragmatic and visionary, to guide people to emulate sustainable natural cycles, where all discarded materials are resources for others to use.  Zero Waste means designing and managing products and processes to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste and materials, conserve and recover all resources, and not burn or bury them.  Implementing Zero Waste will eliminate all discharges to land, water or air that may be a threat to planetary, human, animal or plant health." Zero Waste International Alliance

  19. Cradle to Cradle • Biological nutrients • Organics • Designed to return safely to the environment • Technological nutrients • Closed loop recycling

  20. Sources of Waste Materials generated in Alberta Source: Stats Canada

  21. Composition of Residential Waste • Meat & fish waste • Diapers • HHW • Textiles • Dust ~ 50 % of paper is newsprint Source: Action on Waste, % composition by weight

  22. ICI Waste Composition • HHW • Misc. Organics • Yard Waste Source: Action on Waste, % composition by weight

  23. C&D Waste Composition Source: CRD Waste Characterization Study, CH2M Gore & Storrie Ltd.

  24. MSW Waste Composition Municipal solid waste composition in Alberta (1994)Source: Alberta Environment, SOER for Alberta

  25. Reduce Reuse Recycle Recover Landfill Waste Management Hierarchy 3Rs Residuals Management Disposal Options

  26. 3Rs Hierarchy • Reduce • Source reduction can be achieved by purchasing durable, long-lasting goods, as well as seeking products and packaging that represent a reduction in materials, energy consumption or toxicity • Reuse • Reusing involves the use of a product more than once without altering its form, either for the same or for a different purpose • Recycle • Diverting products from disposal at the end of their useful lives, sorting, transporting and processing them to produce secondary sources of materials that are subsequently used in the production of new goods

  27. Mobius Loop collection resale remanufacture

  28. Net GHG Emissions from MSW Management Options (tonnes eCO2/tonne)

  29. Energy Use: Recycled & VirginContent Products (MJ/kg) Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  30. CO2 Emissions: Recycled &VirginContent Products (kg eCO2/kg) Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  31. Energy Savings: Recyclingversus WTE Incineration(MJ/kg) Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  32. CO2 Emissions: Recycling versus Disposal (kg eCO2/kg) Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  33. CO2 Emissions: Composting versus Disposal (kg eCO2/kg) Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  34. Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  35. Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  36. Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  37. Value of Pollution Reductions from Recycling & Composting Source: Dr. Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management

  38. Beyond LCA • Genuine progress indicator (GPI) developed in 1995 • GDP inadequate measure of a nation’s health • needed a more comprehensive measurement system to monitor the total well-being of society • more than just economic output • Genuine Wealth (well-being) model developed by Mark Anielski to assess the overall economic, social, health and environmental well-being of communities.

  39. Typical Company of the 20th Century suppliers Processes (technology) market $ $ VALUES customers products raw materials people capital Source: The Interface Model based on Ray C. Anderson. 1999, Mid-Course Correction.: Toward a Sustainable Enterprise: The Interface Model. Interface Inc. model Mark Anielski

  40. Closing the Waste Loop suppliers NATURAL CYCLE EARTH’S BIOSPHERE x natural materials NATURAL CYCLE Compostable products  waste materials waste to landfill or incinerator x waste x x emissions  x x  Solar energy market Processes (technology) $ $ VALUES customers products raw materials people capital x x x inorganic organic x  x  TECHNICAL CYCLE Wages $ laws employees Investments $ Taxes $ dividends $ EARTH’S LITHOSPHERE  COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY LINK TECHNICAL CYCLE Source: The Interface Model based on Ray C. Anderson. 1999, Mid-Course Correction.: Toward a Sustainable Enterprise: The Interface Model. Interface Inc. model

  41. Human Capital Social Capital Financial Capital Natural Capital Suppliers Produced Capital The Genuine Wealth process examines the life-cycle of the relationships of your organization to other stakeholders Natural Materials Waste to Landfill Biosphere Waste Emissions Solar Energy Market $ $ Customers Raw Material Products Organic & Inorganic Employees Wages Investments Taxes Laws and Values Service Sensitivity Expectations Lithosphere Community Source: Based on Interface Inc. model

  42. Alberta Stewardship Program Full Cost Accounting Assessment • Study Purpose: An accounting of the full range of economic, social and environmental benefits, costs and impacts of Alberta’s waste stewardship programs for beverage containers, electronics, tires and used oil materials. • Intended Use: To assess the true societal value of these stewardship programs to Albertans, and to serve as an accounting framework for assessing the sustainability of waste stewardship programs.

  43. Research Process • Used Genuine Wealth Assessment full cost benefit accounting tool • Itemized the costs and benefits • Monetary estimates assigned where data exists • Estimates: low, medium (average), high • Net value then calculated • Result: relative “return” on a per unit recycled, per Albertan basis

  44. Genuine Wealth AccountingFramework for Alberta’s Stewardship Programs • Sales of recovered/recycled materials • Program Administration and Operating Costs, Investment Costs, Amortized Costs and Aftercare Costs: • Alberta Used Oil Mgmt. Assoc. • Beverage Container Mgmt. Board • Alberta Recycling Mgmt. Authority • Government spending on services and support • Industry/retail sector costs (fee collection and other financial costs) • Household costs (direct costs associated with cleaning, sorting, delivery, and transportation) • Transportation costs: fuel costs to transport wastes to collection points. • Market disruption costs (due to reduced competition and costs incurred by industry) • Savings (forgone operating costs) from extended landfills • Avoided costs from siting and operational costs • Financial Liabilities: Debt and Accounts payable • Time-use spent in cleaning, sorting, delivery and transportation of recycled materials. • Direct and indirect employment (employees, contractors, suppliers) • Full-time vs. part-time employment • Productivity • Creativity and entrepreneurship • Workplace safety • Training and professional development • Personal self-development Financial (Economic) Capital Human Capital 100 50 0 Social Capital • Health effects (raw material extraction and waste management) • Civic pride and responsibility (e.g. participation rates as a proxy) • Equity and fairness: the equitable distribution of costs and benefits of programs amongst various stakeholders. • Improved overall quality of life (e.g. perceived value of cleaner/healthier environments) • *Customer relationships (value, loyalty and commitment by customers) • *Supplier relationships (value and commitment by suppliers) • *Reputation • *Work place climate (e.g. Employee interrelationships, meaningful work, workplace stress, teams and team spirit) • *Workplace equity (incomes, age-sex distribution, women in management) • *Employee family quality of life • *Financial investment/giving/donations to the community Natural Capital Built Capital • Buildings • Machinery and equipment • Technology • Patents • Brands • Intellectual property (ideas, innovations) • Management processes • Production processes • Databases • Reduced landfill and incineration • Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Energy consumption • Reduction in pollutants to air, land and water. • Environmental quality risk • Ecosystem integrity/environmental protection • Local disamenity (odor, vermin, traffic) Note: Items marked with an asterisk and italicized are items that are part of the Genuine Wealth framework for businesses but which will not necessarily be assessed for the Alberta Stewardship Program evaluation due to data limitations.

  45. The benefits side of the GPI “income statement”: • Value of recovered materials in end markets. • Reduced landfill development and operational costs • Reduced environmental contamination and associated health risks of environmental impairment • Reduced environmental risks • Reduced costs of extraction/processing of virgin materials for products • Overall value of a cleaner/healthier environment • Employment benefits of a growing recycling industry • Avoided greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants • Resource conservation • Increased employment • Economic spin-offs such as tourism • Reduced liability • Energy savings

  46. The cost side of the GPI “income statement”: • Program administrative and operational costs (direct and indirect) • Costs to government in the oversight role of Stewardship Programs • Costs to other parties (i.e., retail sector to collect eco-fees, public/household participation) • Any increased environmental impacts associated with the programs • Disruptions to the marketplace • Operating and amortized capital costs, including costs associated with collection, transportation, storage, recycling, reuse, and recovery of materials • Reduced employment • Nuisance or increased risk management costs • Energy use • Other unaccounted environmental and social costs

  47. Summary of Monetized Costs / Benefits

More Related