Intégration de l'analyse du cycle de vie dans une approche de quantification corporative des émissions de gaz à effet de serre

RÉSUMÉ Un nombre important de méthodologies pour comptabiliser les émissions de gaz à effet de serre a suivi la mise en application d’outils de lutte contre le changement climatique proposés par le protocole de Kyoto, dont les marchés d’échange des émissions. Les méthodologies de comptabilisation des émissions GES font face à un enjeu important: quantifier, inventorier et déclarer les émissions GES d’une organisation. Ce projet de maîtrise étudie l’utilisation de l’analyse du cycle de vie pour bonifier la méthodologie de quantification corporative des émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Il est articulé autour de l’hypothèse de recherche suivante : la compatibilité de l’analyse du cycle de vie quant à la quantification corporative des émissions de gaz à effet de serre permet de l’intégrer et de la bonifier grâce à une meilleure connaissance de la chaîne logistique ainsi qu’une approche multicritère de l’évaluation des impacts environnementaux. L’hypothèse de recherche se décline sur deux objectifs de projets. En premier lieu, il s’agit de vérifier la compatibilité des éléments méthodologiques des deux approches et la possibilité théorique d’intégrer l’ACV dans la quantification des GES. Dans ce but, les deux méthodologies sont comparées de façon systématique. Par la suite, une approche conceptuelle de leur intégration est développée. En second lieu, il s’agit de vérifier la possibilité pratique de cette intégration. Pour ce faire, des bilans GES et une ACV sont réalisés sur des opérations de « Veolia Propreté ». Une comparaison systématique des résultats permet de vérifier trois critères de validation et entériner ainsi l’approche conceptuelle. Tout d’abord, la comparaison systématique des deux méthodologies identifie trois éléments méthodologiques clé qui permettent leur compatibilité : les frontières de système, l’évaluation des impacts et l’horizon temporel. En regard de ceux-ci, l’approche conceptuelle développe une représentation de l’adéquation des deux méthodologies selon trois axes : · Chaîne logistique : selon cet axe, celui du cycle de vie de l’organisation, l’ACV est déstructurée à la manière de la comptabilisation GES. Ceci rend compatibles les frontières de systèmes des deux méthodologies. · Évaluation des impacts : la compatibilité des méthodologies vient du fait que l’évaluation de l’impact sur le changement climatique est déjà incluse dans l’ACV. Qui plus est, cette dernière élargit l’éventail des impacts environnementaux considérés, de par son approche multicritères. · Horizon temporel : les deux méthodologies sont compatibles grâce à une unité fonctionnelle de l’ACV fixée par rapport aux opérations annuelles de l’organisation à l’étude.----------ABSTRACT With the implementation of Kyoto Protocol and the carbon market, greenhouse gas accounting became high on the agenda of environmental management. Corporate greenhouse gas accounting hence faces a great challenge: quantify, account and report for corporate greenhouse gas emissions. This M.Sc.A. research project focuses on the use of life cycle assessment in order to improve corporate greenhouse gas accounting methodology. Hence, the research hypothesis of this project is as follow: Being compatible one to the other, life cycle assessment can be incorporated to greenhouse gas accounting. The latter is thus improved through a better understanding of the logistic chain and a multicriteria approach of the evaluation of environmental impacts. This research hypothesis aims to attain two objectives. The first objective is to verify the compatibility of various components of both methodologies and the theoretical possibility to combine them. In order to do so, they are consistently compared. A conceptual approach of their integration is then developed. The second objective of the project is to verify the practical possibility of that integration. In order to do so, a case study is performed on “Veolia Propreté” operations. Greenhouse gas accounting and life cycle assessment are both performed. Their respective results are consistently compared over three validation criterias, thus confirming the conceptual approach. The systematic comparison of greenhouse gas accounting and life cycle assessment methodologies identifies three methodological components which enable their compatibility: system boundaries, impact assessment and temporal aspect. The conceptual approach represents the combination of both methodologies with regards to these three items. Therefore, it proposes to consider three axes: · Logistic chain : life cycle assessment product system is de-aggregated with regards of the organization logistic chain. The latter represents its life cycle. This reorganization of life cycle assessment’s product system is in adequacy to GHG accounting methodology which categorizes the emissions into three scopes of accounting. The system boundaries of both systems are thus compatible one to another. · Impact assessment : the compatibility of both methodologies comes from the fact that climate change impact assessment of greenhouse gas accounting is already included in life cycle assessment. As a matter of fact, it broadens the impact assessment through a multicriteria approach to environmental impact evaluation. · Temporal aspect : both methodologies are compatible by the means of life cycle assessment’s functional unit. As a matter of fact, it is set to the annual operations of the organization

Broadening GHG accounting with LCA: Application to a waste management business unit

In an effort to obtain the most accurate climate change impact assessment, greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting is evolving to include life-cycle thinking. This study (1) identifies similarities and key differences between GHG accounting and life-cycle assessment (LCA), (2) compares them on a consistent basis through a case study on a waste management business unit. First, GHG accounting is performed. According to the GHG Protocol, annual emissions are categorized into three scopes: direct GHG emissions (scope 1), indirect emissions related to electricity, heat and steam production (scope 2) and other indirect emis-sions (scope 3). The LCA is then structured into a comparable framework: each LCA process is disaggregated into these three scopes, the annual operating activities are assessed, and the environmental impacts are determined using the IMPACT2002+ method. By comparing these two approaches it is concluded that both LCA and GHG accounting provide similar climate change impact results as the same major GHG contributors are determined for scope 1 emissions. The emissions from scope 2 appear negligible whereas emissions from scope 3 cannot be neglected since they contribute to around 10 % of the climate change impact of the waste management business unit. This statement is strengthened by the fact that scope 3 generates 75 % of the resource use damage and 30 % of the ecosystem quality damage categories. The study also shows that LCA can help in setting up the framework for a annual GHG accounting by determining the major climate change contributors

Guidance for Product Category Rule Development

This guidance document is a response to an internationally recognized need for additional instruction on the development of rules specific to a category of products for making claims based on a life cycle assessment (LCA). The purpose is to supplement existing standards for LCA-based claims that require the development of product category rules (PCRs) or their equivalents. The aim is that PCRs can be developed in a consistent manner and used to support claims based on multiple standards. The scope of the Guidance is global. The Guidance embodies the efforts of individuals with expertise in LCA and LCA-based product claims from more over 40 organizations in 13 countries and regions under the name of The Product Category Rule Guidance Development Initiative. The Initiative received no financial support from any standard or other product claim program and this Guidance reflects no bias toward any particular standard or program. The Guidance is intended to be a living document and we hope that it will continue to improve as the application of product claims based on LCA expands and diversifies.JRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmen

Using Life Cycle Assessment to achieve a circular economy

The current global interest in circular economy (CE) opens an opportunity to make society’s consumption and production patterns more resource efficient and sustainable. However, such growing interest calls for precaution as well, as there is yet no harmonised method to assess whether a specific CE strategy contributes towards sustainable consumption and production. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is very well suited to assess the sustainability impacts of CE strategies. This position paper of the Life Cycle Initiative (hosted by UNEP) provides an LCA perspective on the development, adoption, and implementation of CE, while pointing out strengths and challenges in LCA as an assessment methodology for CE strategies