Water in life cycle assessment—50th Swiss Discussion Forum on Life Cycle Assessment—Zürich, 4 December 2012

Water use, its impacts and management, have become a focus of attention in the past decade in the context of climate change and increasing consumption (in particular of food and agricultural products) due to a growing global population. Many efforts have been made to include water-related issues in life cycle assessment (LCA) in various ways, from the long-standing eutrophication, acidification, and ecotoxicity methods, to the more recent water consumption aspects. Four years on from the first discussion forum on water in LCA (35th Swiss Discussion Forum on LCA, Zürich, 5 June 2008), numerous developments have occurred, resulting in a rich palette of approaches. Significant challenges still remain, related to the complexity of water systems and ecosystems, and certain impacts are still not considered. New challenges have emerged, such as how to fit these "pieces” together to form a coherent and comprehensive approach for assessing the impacts of water use (both degradative and consumptive). Practice has started to apply certain water consumption-related approaches and an early feedback between practitioners and developers is essential to ensure a harmonious further development. The 50th Swiss Discussion Forum on Life Cycle Assessment (DF-50) gave a brief overview of the current status of water use in LCA, and then focused on the following topics in three main sessions: (1) a selection of recent research developments in the field of impact assessment modeling; (2) identification of new and remaining challenges where future effort could be concentrated, with a focus on spatial and temporal resolution; (3) and experiences and learnings from application in practice. Furthermore, several short presentations addressed the issues of inventory requirements and comparison of impact assessment approaches. The DF-50 was concluded with a discussion workshop, focusing on four issues: which degree of regionalization is desirable, how to address data gaps in inventories, the comparability of different impact assessment approaches, and the pros and cons of including positive impacts (benefits). Numerous recent developments in life cycle impact assessment have tackled impact pathways, spatial and temporal resolutions, and uncertainties. They have lead to an increase of the completeness of impact assessment, but also of its complexity. Although developments have also occurred in inventories, the gap between impact assessment and inventory is challenging, which in turn limits the applicability of the methods. Regionalization is confirmed as an essential aspect in water footprinting; however, its implementation requires concerted effort by impact assessment developers and software developers. Therefore, even though immense progress has been made, it may be time to think of putting the pieces together in order to simplify the applicability of these tools: enabling the support of improvements in companies and policy is the ultimate goal of LCA. The recordings and presentations of the DF-50 are available for download from www.lcaforum.c

Retrieval operations of derelict fishing gears give insight on the impact on marine life

Abandoned, lost and discarded fishing gear (ALDFG), significantly impacts marine ecosystems and biodiversity by incidental capture known as ghost fishing. Such impacts were quantified during the Norwegian Directorate of Fisheries' annual ALDFG cleanup operation in September 2023 by examining the characteristics of retrieved ALDFG and recording the taxonomically sorted catch abundance and biomass. A total of 307 specimens equaling 382 kg of biomass were caught in the recovered gillnets and king crab pots. Gillnets exhibited a 27.3 % greater catch abundance and 50.3 % higher biomass per ALDFG unit mass compared to king crab pots. Margalef, Menhinick, Simpson, Shannon, and Pielou diversity indices showed a more pronounced impact on species richness and biodiversity associated with recovered gillnets. This study introduces an approach to assess the impact of ghost fishing on ecosystems and biodiversity through ALDFG retrieval operations, instrumental in developing estimates of the total ghost fishing capture by ALDFG

A case study of life cycle impacts of small-scale fishing techniques in Thailand

<p>Fish provides an important source of protein, especially in developing countries, and the amounts of fish consumed are increasing worldwide (mostly from aquaculture). More than half of all marine fish are caught by small-scale fishery operations. However, no life cycle assessment (LCA) of small-scale fisheries and no LCA of marine fishery operations in Asia (Thailand) exists today. We perform LCAs to compare the impacts of three different fishing techniques: crab gill-nets, squid traps, and fish traps. Primary data sourced from four different fishers were used. We distinguished the life cycle inventories for three different seasons (northeast monsoon, southwest monsoon and pre-monsoon), since the time spent on the water and catch varied significantly between the seasons. Our results showed the largest impacts from artisanal fishing operations affect climate change, human toxicity, and fossil and metal depletion. Our results are, in terms of global warming potential, comparable with other artisanal fisheries. Between different fishing operations, impacts vary between a factor of 2 (for land transformation impacts) and up to a factor of more than 20 (fossil fuel depletion and marine eutrophication). This shows that the way in which operations are performed have a very strong influence on results. Seasonality plays a relevant role for the assessment. Our results highlight that it is important to account for seasonal aspects in LCAs. We encourage a continual effort for collecting and modeling inventory processes, as well as making them available, in order to guarantee that LCA studies outside of Europe can be performed more easily.</p

Biodiversity Impact Assessment Considering Land Use Intensities and Fragmentation

Land use is a major threat to terrestrial biodiversity. Life cycle assessment is a tool that can assess such threats and thereby support environmental decision-making. Within the Global Guidance for Life Cycle Impact Assessment (GLAM) project, the Life Cycle Initiative hosted by UN Environment aims to create a life cycle impact assessment method across multiple impact categories, including land use impacts on ecosystem quality represented by regional and global species richness. A working group of the GLAM project focused on such land use impacts and developed new characterization factors to combine the strengths of two separate recent advancements in the field: the consideration of land use intensities and land fragmentation. The data sets to parametrize the underlying model are also updated from previous models. The new characterization factors cover five species groups (plants, amphibians, birds, mammals, and reptiles) and five broad land use types (cropland, pasture, plantations, managed forests, and urban land) at three intensity levels (minimal, light, and intense). They are available at the level of terrestrial ecoregions and countries. This paper documents the development of the characterization factors, provides practical guidance for their use, and critically assesses the strengths and remaining shortcomings

Spatially and taxonomically explicit characterisation factors for greenhouse gas emission impacts on biodiversity

In life-cycle impact assessment, currently available characterisation factors (CF) for climate change impacts on biodiversity are highly simplified and do not consider spatial and taxonomic differentiation of species or local climate variability. We develop the first spatially and taxonomically specific CFs for the impacts of 20 GHGs on biodiversity considering 26,648 species across terrestrial and marine ecosystems. Generally, CFs are higher in the tropics, and marine species are affected more severely than terrestrial ones. When global GHG emissions from 2020 are assessed in a scenario with a global temperature rise of 3 °C by 2100, an average of 0.25%, 0.15% and 0.03% of species are negatively affected in 2100 from CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions, respectively, across the globe. The new CFs can be used at different levels of spatial and taxonomic aggregation to quantify co-benefits for biodiversity of climate change mitigation in tools such as life-cycle assessment, input-output analyses, or integrated assessment models

Towards harmonizing natural resources as an area of protection in life cycle impact assessment

Purpose. In this paper, we summarize the discussion and present the findings of an expert group effort under the umbrella of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Life Cycle Initiative proposing natural resources as an Area of Protection (AoP) in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). Methods: As a first step, natural resources have been defined for the LCA context with reference to the overall UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) framework. Second, existing LCIA methods have been reviewed and discussed. The reviewed methods have been evaluated according to the considered type of natural resources and their underlying principles followed (use-to-availability ratios, backup technology approaches, or thermodynamic accounting methods). Results and discussion. There is currently no single LCIA method available that addresses impacts for all natural resource categories, nor do existing methods and models addressing different natural resource categories do so in a consistent way across categories. Exceptions are exergy and solar energy-related methods, which cover the widest range of resource categories. However, these methods do not link exergy consumption to changes in availability or provisioning capacity of a specific natural resource (e.g., mineral, water, land etc.). So far, there is no agreement in the scientific community on the most relevant type of future resource indicators (depletion, increased energy use or cost due to resource extraction, etc.). To address this challenge, a framework based on the concept of stock/fund/flow resources is proposed to identify, across natural resource categories, whether depletion/dissipation (of stocks and funds) or competition (for flows) is the main relevant aspect. Conclusions. An LCIA method—or a set of methods—that consistently address all natural resource categories is needed in order to avoid burden shifting from the impact associated with one resource to the impact associated with another resource. This paper is an important basis for a step forward in the direction of consistently integrating the various natural resources as an Area of Protection into LCA