Life Cycle Assessment

1. Life Cycle Assessment

2. “Apple's Environmental Technologies Department is an integral part of Apple's product teams, providing input that guides product teams toward more • environmentally-friendly product design. • The Department performs industry-leading work in • reducing the amount of toxic substances in its products, • increasing the energy efficiency of its products, • and lowering the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by its products. • In support of this latter effort, the Environmental Technologies Department seeks • an engineer to support its life cycle analysis (LCA) initiative.” • 20 November 2008, Jean L. Lee, Ph.D., Environmental Technologies Department, Apple Inc.

3. The BIG picture: Needs & Wants Services Source of: Materials Energy Water Land Sink for: Wastes & Emissions Products Production Anthroposphere Ecosphere Industrial production and consumption systems use the environment as source of resources and sink for wastes and emissions

4. Note: The following case study is for teaching purposes only Question: Which beverage container has the lowest environmental impact?

5. Material choice for beverage containers Processes causing environmental impacts: Material production Container manufacturing Use & distribution Recycling or disposal Environmental impact indicator: Primary energy requirements

6. Material choice for beverage containers Materials can not be compared on a mass basis. Definition of Functional Unit: Containing 1 liter of beverage • Reference flows: • 40.2 gram of aluminum cans • 44.0 gram of PET bottles • 433.3 gram of glass bottles

7. Material choice for beverage containers How much energy is required to produce the beverage containers? How much energy is required to transport the beverage containers?

8. Material choice for beverage containers How much energy is saved through beverage container recycling?

9. Material choice for beverage containers Results: • Based on 500 km transportation • Based on current recycling rates

10. Material choice for beverage containers Conclusion: Products create environmental impacts at all stages of their life cycles→ It is important to consider the entire life cycle of products

11. Material choice for beverage containers Question: How do we know that primary energy requirements is the right environmental impact indicator? Results from a more comprehensive life cycle assessment: Conclusion: Products create different types of environmental impacts→ It is important to consider a wide range of environmental impacts

12. Life cycle assessment aims at quantifying the environmental impacts acrossall relevant environmental concerns and all relevant life cycle stages. Environmental impact categories Life cycle stages

13. History and definition of Life Cycle Assessment • Late 1960s, first Resource and Environmental Profile Analyses (REPAs) (e.g. in 1969 Coca Cola funds study on beverage containers) • Early 1970s, first LCAs (Sundström,1973,Sweden, Boustead,1972, UK, Basler & Hofmann,1974,Switzerland, Hunt et al.,1974 USA) • 1980s, numerous studies without common methodology with contradicting results • 1993, SETAC publishes Guidelines for Life-Cycle Assessment: A ‘Code of Practice’, (Consoli et al.) • 1997-2000, ISO publishes Standards 14040-43, defining the different LCA stages • 1998-2001, ISO publishes Standards and Technical Reports 14047-49 • 2000, UNEP and SETAC create Life Cycle Initiative • 2006 ISO publishes Standards 14040 & 14044, which update and replace 14040-43 Definition of LCA according to ISO 14040: LCA is a technique […] compiling an inventoryof relevant inputs and outputs of a product system;evaluating the potential environmental impactsassociated with those inputs and outputs;and interpreting the results of the inventory and impact phases in relation to the objectives of the study.

14. Life cycle assessment terminology (ISO 14040:2006) Elementary flows (e.g. resource extractions) – input flows Functional unit Economy-environment system boundary economic process economic process economic process economic process Intermediate flow Intermediate flow Intermediate flow Product system Elementary flows (e.g. emissions to air) – output flows

15. Life Cycle Assessment Framework Four different phases of LCA are distinguished: Goal and scopedefinition Interpretation • Direct application: • product development and improvement • Strategic planning • Public policy making • Marketing • Other Inventoryanalysis Impactassessment Source: ISO 14040

16. Life Cycle Assessment Goal and scopedefinition Interpretation Inventoryanalysis Impactassessment

17. Goal and Scope DefinitionFunctional unit and reference flows Procedure: 1. Identify the function of the product system studied 3. Specify the function in SI units 4. Determine an appropriate amount of the function 5. Determine and identify the alternative systems studied in terms of reference flows Previous example: Functional Unit: Containing 1 liter of beverage Reference flows: 40.2 g of alu cans, 44.0 g of PET bottles, 433.3 g of glass bottles What are functional units for the comparison of Various paints? Paper versus plastic bags in supermarkets? What are the resulting reference flows? 20m2 of wall covering with a coloured surface of 98% opacity and a lifetime of 5 years Comfortable carrying of X kg and Y m3 of groceries (what about durability?)

18. Inventory analysis In the inventory analysis the elementary flows of a product life cycle are quantified. These are all natural resource inputs and waste & emission outputs of all economic processes within the system boundaries. Functional unit (Reference flows) Process flow diagram Unit processes Inventory table for each unit processes Aggregate inventory table for product system

19. wood chips Wood yard trees logs pulp paper cup Landfill, recycling Harvesting Digester, washing, bleaching Forming Cup use adhesive, coating, heat steam, chlorine (?) gas, naphta styrene oil gas Refinery Styrene production oil, gas PS cup Landfill, recycling Drilling Poly- merization, blowing Cup use catalyst catalyst solvent, blowing agent Inventory AnalysisProcess flow diagram Definition: The process flow diagram is an illustration of all the unit processes to be modeled, including their interrelationships, which are intermediate product flows.

20. Information contained in a process inventory Unit Process INPUTS OUTPUTS Intermediate flows Intermediate flows Materials Energy Materials Energy Emissions to air Emissions to water Emissions to soil Elementary flows Elementary flows Biotic resources Abiotic resources

21. Main challenges of inventory analysis • Even though the methodology of inventory analysis seems relatively • straightforward, it is – in fact – complicated by two important issues: • Defining boundaries for the system under analysis: Which processes to include and which to exclude (cut-off problem in LCA) • Allocation of elementary flows if process has more than one economic output: Which output gets which burdens (Allocation problem in LCA) materials energy wastes emissions unit process product A product B

22. Allocation There are 3 types of processes where allocation is necessary: co-production, waste treatment, recycling and reuse in an open loop. The 3 are treated on the basis of the same allocation rules. open loop closed loop materials energy wastes emissions waste A waste B Life Cycle B Life Cycle A unit process materials energy wastes emissions unit process product A product B A hierarchy of preferred approaches has been defined in ISO14044, Section 4.3.4: 1. Avoiding allocation by dividing the unit process 2. Avoiding allocation by system expansion 3. Allocation on the basis of physical relationship 4. Allocation on the basis of other relationship, i.e. economic value

23. Mass-based allocation Example: allocated process Emissions 0.2 kg unit process Emissions 1 kg 20 kg product A 20 kg product A 80 kg product B allocated process Emissions 0.8 kg 80 kg product B On a mass basis, product A is allocated 20% of the emissions.

24. Economic allocation Example: allocated process Emissions 0.9 kg unit process Emissions 1 kg 20 kg product A $900 20 kg product A $900 80 kg product B $100 allocated process Emissions 0.1 kg 80 kg product B $100 On an economic basis, product A is allocated 90% of the emissions.

25. Goal and scopedefinition Interpretation Inventoryanalysis Impactassessment

26. Life Cycle Impact Assessment Life Cycle Inventories (LCIs) by themselves do not characterize the environmental performance of a product system. Impact Assessment (IA)aims at connecting the emissions and extractions listed in LCIs on the basis of impact pathways to their potential environmental damages. Life Cycle Inventory results Classification Impact categories Characterization Category indicator results Normalization Environmental profile Valuation One-dimensional environmental score

27. Elements of LCIA according to ISO 14044 Mandatory elements Selection of impact categories, category indicators and characterization models Classification: Assignment of LCI results to impact categories Characterization: Calculation of category indicator results Category indicator results (LCIA profile) Optional elements: Normalization of category indicator results relative to reference information Grouping Weighting Data quality analysis

28. Classification LCI Impact Categories 20kg CO2 Climate change 2kg Methane Stratospheric ozone depletion 5g CFC-11 Photochemical oxidant formation 2kg NO2 1kg SO2 Acidification

29. Classification Characterization LCI Impact Categories Characterization factors GWP (global warming potential) 20kg CO2 Climate change 2kg Methane Stratospheric ozone depletion ODP (ozone depletion potential) 5g CFC-11 POCP (photochemical ozone creation potential) Photochemical oxidant formation 2kg NO2 AP (acidification potential) 1kg SO2 Acidification

30. Classification Characterization LCI Impact Categories Characterization factors GWP 20kg CO2 Climate change 2kg Methane Stratospheric ozone depletion ODP 5g CFC-11 POCP Photochemical oxidant formation 2kg NO2 AP 1kg SO2 Acidification 20·1 = 20 kg CO2eq (20 + 42 + 20) kg CO2eq = 82 kg CO2eq 2·21 = 42 kg CO2eq 0.005·4000 = 20 kg CO2eq Indicator Result

31. Classification Characterization LCI Impact Categories Characterization factors Indicator results GWP 82kg CO2 eq 20kg CO2 Climate change 2kg Methane 0.005kg CFC-11 eq Stratospheric ozone depletion ODP 5g CFC-11 0.068kg ethylene eq POCP Photochemical oxidant formation 2kg NO2 AP 2.4kg SO2 eq 1kg SO2 Acidification

32. Impact Assessment The environmental impact pathway Impact pathways consist of linked environmental processes, and they express the causalchain of subsequent effects originating from an emission or extraction (environmental intervention). Examples: Increase in effectiveness of communication of results (generally) SO2 emissions Acidrain Acidifiedlake Dead fish Loss ofbiodiversity Source Endpoint Midpoint CFC emissions Tropospheric OD Stratospheric OD UVBexposure Humanhealth Increase in uncertainty for predicting the environmental impact from the initial interventions

33. Impact Assessment Impact Categories According to ISO14044, LCI results are first classified into impact categories that are relevant and appropriate for the scope and goal of the LCA study. Example: Carbon dioxide Climate change Methane Stratospheric ozone depletion CFCs Photochemical oxidant formation Nitrogen oxides Sulphur dioxide Acidification • A category indicator, representing the amount of impact potential, can be located at any place between the LCI results and the category endpoints. There are currently two main Impact Assessment methods: • Problem oriented IA methods stop quantitative modeling before the end of the impact pathway and link LCI results to so-defined midpoint categories (or environmental problems), like acidification and ozone depletion. • Damage oriented IA methods, which model the cause-effect chain up to the endpoints or environmental damages, link LCI results to endpoint categories.

34. Impact AssessmentClassification and characterization – Example 1 Impact categoryClimate change LCI results Emissions of greenhouse gases to the air (in kg) Characterization model the model developed by the IPCC defining the global warming potential of different gases Category indicator Infrared radiative forcing (W/m2) Characterization factor Global warming potential for a 100-year time horizon (GWP100) for each GHG emission to the air (in kg CO2 equivalents/kg emission) Unit of indicator result kg (CO2 eq) Substance GWP100 (in kg CO2 equivalents/kg emission) Carbon dioxide 1 Methane 21 CFC-11 4000 CFC-13 11700 HCFC-123 93 HCFC-142b 2000 Perfluoroethane 9200 Perfluoromethane 6500 Sulphur hexafluoride 23900 Source: (Guinée et al., 2002)

35. Impact AssessmentClassification and characterization – Example 2 Impact categoryAcidification LCI results Emissions of acidifying substances to the air (in kg) Characterization model RAINS10 model, developed by IIASA, describing the fate and deposition of acidifying substances, adapted to LCA Category indicator Deposition/acidification critical load Characterization factor Acidification potential (AP) for each acidifying emission to the air (in kg SO2 equivalents/kg emission) Unit of indicator result kg (SO2 eq) Substance AP (in kg SO2 equivalents/kg emission) ammonia 1.88 hydrogen chloride 0.88 hydrogen fluoride 1.60 hydrogen sulfide 1.88 nitric acid 0.51 Nitrogen dioxide 0.70 Nitrogen monoxide 1.07 Sulfur dioxide 1.00 Sulphuric acid 0.65 Source: (Guinée et al., 2002)

36. Outlook and future developments for LCA • Issues to be solved: • Money and time required to do LCAs (especially important of SMEs) • Data availability (public databases, e. g. ELCD and U.S. LCI) • Impact assessment methodology not fully mature (especially toxicity indicators) • Multidimensionality (multi criteria decision making) • Relationship with Environmental Management Systems • Product perspective is not whole system perspective (Most important example: economic relationships) • Technical developments: • Consequential LCA (to resolve allocation issues) • Hybrid LCA (Process+I/O LCA) (to resolve cut-off issues) • Modeling economic relationships in and between product systems • Modeling non-linear and dynamic relationships in and between product systems • Modeling spatial aspects of LCI and LCIA

37. Environmental Product Design – Example: Cell Phones

38. Material Composition of Cell Phones

39. Cell Phone Evolution

40. Cell Phone Components • Plastic housing and keypad • Liquid crystal display (LCD) • Printed wiring board (PWB) • Connectors • Active electronic components (e.g. integrated circuits) • Passive electronic components (e.g. capacitors and resistors) • Microphones and speakers

41. Global Cell Phone Market

42. Life Cycle of a Cell Phone Integrated Product Policy (IPP) Pilot Project (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/mobile.htm)

43. Environmental Assessments of Cell Phones at Nokia • Wright 1999: Life cycle energy analysis • Scope: ‘92-’94 (160 gr) and ‘95-’96 (130 gr) cell phones, production, use, eol management, exclude battery, charger, network infrastructure • Functional unit: Use of the cell phone for 2.5 years • Impact categories: Primary energy consumption (PEC) • Frey 2002: Environmental footprint analysis • Scope: ‘92-’94 (160 gr) and ‘95-’96 (130 gr) cell phones, production, use, eol management, exclude battery, charger, network infrastructure • Functional unit: Use of the cell phone for 2.5 years • Indicator: Total area required to produce required resources and assimilate generated wastes • McLaren & Piukkula 2003: Life cycle assessment (using GaBi3) • Scope: 2000 cell phone (90 gr), production and use, no eol management include battery and charger, exclude network infrastructure • Functional unit: Use of the cell phone for 2 years • Impact categories: Primary energy consumption (PEC), global warming potential (GWP), Ozone depletion potential (ODP), acidification potential (AP), human toxicity potential (HTP), photochemical oxidant creation potential (POCP)

44. Summary of environmental hotspots of a cell phone • Life cycle stages: Component manufacture, use phase, end of life • Environmental concern: energy consumption, hazardous wastes & emissions • Use phase: Stand-by power consumption of the charger • Component manufacture: Energy consumption of manufacturing processes • Components with highest environmental impacts: PWB, ICs, LCD • Transportation: Airfreight accounts for almost all of environmental impacts • End-of-life: Hazardous substances in products (e.g. Pb, Cr, Ni, Cu, Sb) • Beyond the handset: Energy consumption of radio base station

45. Cell Phone Life Cycle: Primary Energy Requirements (PER) 1) 2003 Nokia study gives only 150 MJ for product manufacture. Breakdown is from an earlier Nokia study from 1999, as is the end-of-life assessment. Perspective: 275 MJ is the gross calorific value of 7.9 liters of gasoline, or 52 km in a Lincoln Navigator, or 185 km in a Toyota Prius.

46. Options for improving life cycle environmental performance of cell phones • Improvement in cell phone design • Optimizing the in-use life-span of cell phone • Less energy and problematic chemicals during component manufacture • Change buying, usage and disposal behavior of consumers • Improve eol management of cell phones • Reduce energy consumption of network infrastructure • Develop environmental assessment methods/tools • Need for policies to support environmental performance improvements

47. Component market Cell phone end-of-life management options Phonedemand & use Primary materialsproduction Componentsmanufacture Final phoneassembly End-of-life phone disposal Phone refurbishment Component reuse End-of-life phone collection Inspection & sorting Metalsmarket Phone recycling

48. Economics of cell phone end-of-life management Cost Revenue Cost Revenue Cost Revenue £ Recycling Component reuse Refurbishment

49. Handset mass and gold content have been declining over the past ten years gr % Gold contains: 60% - 80% of the economic value of the materials (depending on the palladium content) 65% - 75% of the energy embodied in the materials

50. Therefore economic and environmental benefitsdue to gold recycling has been declining as well MJ £