LiSET: A framework for early-stage life cycle screening of emerging technologies

While life cycle assessment (LCA) is a tool often used to evaluate the environmental impacts of products and technologies, the amount of data required to perform such studies make the evaluation of emerging technologies using the conventional LCA approach challenging. The development paradox is such that the inputs from a comprehensive environmental assessment has the greatest effect early in the development phase, and yet the data required to perform such an assessment are generally lacking until it is too late. Previous attempts to formalize strategies for performing streamlined or screening LCAs were made in the late 1990s and early 2000s, mostly to rapidly compare the environmental performance of product design candidates. These strategies lack the transparency and consistency required for the environmental screening of large numbers of early‐development candidates, for which data are even sparser. We propose the Lifecycle Screening of Emerging Technologies method (LiSET). LiSET is an adaptable screening‐to‐LCA method that uses the available data to systematically and transparently evaluate the environmental performance of technologies at low readiness levels. Iterations follow technological development and allow a progression to a full LCA if desired. In early iterations, LiSET presents results in a matrix structure combined with a “traffic light” color grading system. This format inherently communicates the high uncertainty of analysis at this stage and presents numerous environmental aspects assessed. LiSET takes advantage of a decomposition analysis and data not traditionally used in LCAs to gain insight to the life cycle impacts and ensure that the most environmentally sustainable technologies are adopted

On the financial balance of input–output constructs: revisiting an axiomatic evaluation

Financial balance is fundamental to input–output (IO) analysis, and consequently the respect of this balance is one of the dominant criteria in evaluating IO constructs. Kop Jansen, and ten Raa [(1990) The Choice of Model in the Construction of Input–Output Coefficients Matrices. International Economic Review 31, 213] proved that the byproduct-technology construct (BTC) and the industry-technology construct (ITC) do not generally conserve financial balance. In contrast, Majeau-Bettez et al. [(2016) When do Allocations and Constructs Respect Material, Energy, Financial, and Production Balances in LCA and EEIO? Journal of Industrial Ecology 20, 67–84] demonstrated that the BTC necessarily respects financial balance and that the ITC is always financially balanced when applied to data recorded in monetary units. The present article resolves this paradox

Lifting the veil on the correction of double counting incidents in hybrid life cycle assessment

Life cycle assessment (LCA) and environmentally extended input–output analyses (EEIOA) are two techniques commonly used to assess environmental impacts of an activity/product. Their strengths and weaknesses are complementary, and they are thus regularly combined to obtain hybrid LCAs. A number of approaches in hybrid LCA exist, which leads to different results. One of the differences is the method used to ensure that mixed LCA and EEIOA data do not overlap, which is referred to as correction for double counting. This aspect of hybrid LCA is often ignored in reports of hybrid assessments and no comprehensive study has been carried out on it. This article strives to list, compare, and analyze the different existing methods for the correction of double counting. We first harmonize the definitions of the existing correction methods and express them in a common notation, before introducing a streamlined variant. We then compare their respective assumptions and limitations. We discuss the loss of specific information regarding the studied activity/product and the loss of coherent financial representation caused by some of the correction methods. This analysis clarifies which techniques are most applicable to different tasks, from hybridizing individual LCA processes to integrating complete databases. We finally conclude by giving recommendations for future hybrid analyses

Substitution modelling in life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is gaining importance worldwide in guiding waste management policies. The capacity of co-products such as recycled materials and recovered energy to avoid primary production of equivalent products largely determines the environmental performance of waste treatment technologies. Estimating the reductions in resource use, emissions, and impacts enabled by this substitution of primary production is often the most influential and controversial factor in quantifying the overall environmental performance of a waste management strategy. This study aims to critically evaluate the modelling of substitution in LCAs of recovered material from municipal solid waste management systems (MSWMS) by answering two questions. First, to what extent is substitution modelling transparently documented in the literature? Second, are the substitution ratios justified to represent physically realistic replacement of one product by another? To address these questions, we performed a systematic analysis of 51 LCA studies on MSWMS published in the peer-reviewed literature. We found that 22% of the substitution ratios are only implicitly expressed. A significant proportion of substitution ratios is not justified (65%), while for the remaining 35%, justifications do not represent physically realistic substitutions. We call for more rigor and transparency, and we propose guidance for the documentation of substitution ratios, with the aim of reaching more credible and robust analyses. For the justification of a substitution ratio to be considered physically realistic, information should notably be provided concerning loss of quality, the function performed by substitutable materials, and the sector of use

Balance issues in input–output analysis: A comment on physical inhomogeneity, aggregation bias, and coproduction

Recently, Merciai and Heijungs (2014) demonstrated that monetary input–output (IO) analysis can lead to system descriptions that do not conserve mass when the assumption of homogeneous prices is violated. They warn that this violation of basic balance laws can lead to biased estimates of environmental impacts, and they therefore recommend performing IO analysis in a physically accounted framework. We take a broader scope on this issue and present price inhomogeneity as a special case of product mix inhomogeneity. We demonstrate that even a fully physically accounted IO analysis or lifecycle assessment will violate balance laws if it suffers from inhomogeneous aggregation. The core issue is not whether a system is described using monetary or physical units, but rather whether product groups are too aggregated to allow for the concurrent respect of energy, mass, financial and elemental balances. We further analyze the link between the violation of physical balances and the introduction of biases. We find that imbalances are neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for the presence of systematic errors in environmental pressure estimates. We suggest two ways to leverage the additional explanatory power of multi-unit inventory tables to reduce instances of imbalances and aggregation biases

Regionalized climate footprints of battery electric vehicles in Europe

The climate mitigation benefits of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) relative to internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) are highly dependent on the carbon intensity of the electricity consumed during their production and use-phase. A consistent and dynamic approach to grid-mix regionalization of BEV life-cycle assessments in Europe is therefore necessary to offer accurate guidance to consumers and policy makers. To this end, we present ReDyFEV, a simple open-source software tool that can be used to calculate attributional, regionalized lifecycle climate impacts of BEVs in Europe for user-defined time periods, including near real-time. We determine the national lifecycle carbon footprints across all EU states for four BEV size segments and compare them to those of fossil-fuelled vehicles of similar sizes. Simplified sensitivity analyses investigate the effect of lifetime assumptions, electricity demand in battery production, and of relocating battery production to Europe on the carbon footprints of BEVs

Correcting remaining truncations in hybrid life cycle assessment database compilation

Hybrid life cycle assessment (HLCA) strives to combine process‐based life cycle assessment (PLCA) and environmentally extended input–output (EEIO) analysis to bridge gaps of both methodologies. The recent development of HLCA databases constitutes a major step forward in achieving complete system coverage. Nevertheless, current applications of HLCA still suffer from issues related to incompleteness of the inventory and data gaps: (1) hybridization without endogenizing the capital inputs of the EEIO database leads to underestimations, (2) the unreliability of price data hinders the application of streamlined HLCA for processes in some sectors, and (3) the sparse coverage of pollutants in multiregional EEIO databases limits the application of HLCA to a handful of impact categories. This paper aims at offering a methodology for tackling these issues in a streamlined manner and visualizing their effects on impact scores across an entire PLCA database and multiple impact categories. Data reconciliation algorithms are demonstrated on the PLCA database ecoinvent3.5 and the multiregional EEIO database EXIOBASE3. Instead of performing hybridization solely with annual product requirements, this hybridization approach incorporates endogenized capital requirements, demonstrates a novel hybridization methodology to bypass issues of price unavailability, estimates new pollutants to EXIOBASE3 environmental extensions, and thus yields improved inventories characterized in terms of 13 impact categories from the IMPACT World+ methodology. The effect of hybridization on the impact score of each process of ecoinvent3.5 varied from a few percentages to three‐fold increases, depending on the impact category and the process studied, displaying in which cases hybridization should be prioritized. This article met the requirements for a Gold—Gold JIE data openness badge described at http://jie.click/badges

Nanotechnology for environmentally sustainable electromobility

Electric vehicles (EVs) powered by lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) or proton exchange membrane hydrogen fuel cells (PEMFCs) offer important potential climate change mitigation effects when combined with clean energy sources. The development of novel nanomaterials may bring about the next wave of technical improvements for LIBs and PEMFCs. If the next generation of EVs is to lead to not only reduced emissions during use but also environmentally sustainable production chains, the research on nanomaterials for LIBs and PEMFCs should be guided by a life-cycle perspective. In this Analysis, we describe an environmental life-cycle screening framework tailored to assess nanomaterials for electromobility. By applying this framework, we offer an early evaluation of the most promising nanomaterials for LIBs and PEMFCs and their potential contributions to the environmental sustainability of EV life cycles. Potential environmental trade-offs and gaps in nanomaterials research are identified to provide guidance for future nanomaterial developments for electromobility

Environmental screening of electrode materials for a rechargeable aluminum battery with an AlCl3/EMIMCl electrolyte

Recently, rechargeable aluminum batteries have received much attention due to their low cost, easy operation, and high safety. As the research into rechargeable aluminum batteries with a room-temperature ionic liquid electrolyte is relatively new, research efforts have focused on finding suitable electrode materials. An understanding of the environmental aspects of electrode materials is essential to make informed and conscious decisions in aluminum battery development. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the relative environmental performance of electrode material candidates for rechargeable aluminum batteries with an AlCl3/EMIMCl (1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride) room-temperature ionic liquid electrolyte. To this end, we used a lifecycle environmental screening framework to evaluate 12 candidate electrode materials. We found that all of the studied materials are associated with one or more drawbacks and therefore do not represent a “silver bullet” for the aluminum battery. Even so, some materials appeared more promising than others did. We also found that aluminum battery technology is likely to face some of the same environmental challenges as Li-ion technology but also offers an opportunity to avoid others. The insights provided here can aid aluminum battery development in an environmentally sustainable direction