JRC Ispra site Environmental Footprint (OEF): Application of the Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU and of the OEFSR Guidance v.6.3- Reporting year 2015 -

This report represents the summary of a work carried out over the last few years involving different Units of the Joint Research Centre and a team of external consultants and reviewers. The OEF method (Organisation Environmental Footprint), together with the PEF method (Product Environmental Footprint), was developed by the JRC Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Team (now in the Land Resources Unit, D3). Both methods were published in annex to the Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations. The JRC Ispra is the 3rd largest site of the European Commission. The site is a combination of scientific activities and a broad set of supporting operations, ranging from power generation to water supply and wastewater treatment up to nuclear decommissioning. The site applies EMAS (the EU Environmental Management and Audit Scheme) to continuously improve its environmental performance and communicate it to the public. The application of the OEF, started in 2012 and reiterated over time, was a natural process and turned out to be quite beneficial for both tools. EMAS, in fact, has been getting complementary life cycle based information from the OEF while the latter has been gaining hands-on experience from EMAS in view of testing and possibly improving its methodological foundations. The JRC is therefore a unique field of play, a sort of “living-lab” where research and administration cooperate in a “win-win” perspective. This third version of the OEF study was submitted to an external review panel of distinguished experts in the domain of environmental footprinting. We are happy to present the report to the external public and hope to encourage other organisations to follow our path towards sustainability.JRC.D.3-Land Resource

Weighting environmental effects: Analytic survey with operational evaluation methods and a meta-method

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to supply an open method for weighting different environmental impacts, open to basically different evaluation approaches and open to easy revisions. From the partial, diverse and conflicting weighing methods available, a most consistent and flexible meta-method is constructed, allowing for a transparent discussion on weighting. Methods The methods incorporated are as general as possible, each single one being as pure as possible. We surveyed encompassing operational methods for evaluation, applicable in LCA and in larger systems like countries. They differ in terms of modelling, as to midpoint or as to endpoint; as to evaluation set-up, in terms of collective preferences or individual preferences; and as to being either revealed or stated. The first is midpoint modelling with collectively stated preferences, with operational weighting schemes from Dutch and US government applications. Second is the LCAtype endpoint approach using individual stated preferences, with public examples from Japan and the Netherlands. The third is the integrated modelling approach by economists. Results All methods are internally inconsistent, as in terms of treatment of place and time, and they are incomplete, lacking environmental interventions and effect routes. We repaired only incompleteness, by methods transfer. Finally, we combined the three groups of methods into a metaweighting method, aligned to the ILCD Handbook requirements for impact assessment. Application to time series data on EU-27 consumption shows how the EU developed in terms of overall environmental decoupling. Conclusions The disparate methods available all can be improved substantially. For now, a user adjustable metamethod is the best option, allowing for public discussion. A flexible regularly updated spreadsheet is supplied with the article.JRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmen

The contribution of food waste to global and European nitrogen pollution

International audienceThe global demand for food is responsible for a massive increase in the anthropogenic nitrogen input to the environment, with negative impacts on human and ecosystem health. However, despite the economic and environmental costs, the quantity of food that is wasted is substantial. This study quantifies the nitrogen loss to the environment related to food waste at consumption at the global and European scale and analyses its relative impact on the environment. We estimated that globally 2.7 Tg of nitrogen (N) are lost per year due to food waste at consumption (i.e. 9% of global food consumption), and that the virtual nitrogen (nitrogen delivered to the environment) associated with the global food waste is 6.3 TgN/yr. We performed a streamlined life cycle assessment on nitrogen emissions related to food waste in the European Union (EU27) to assess the impact on different environmental compartments. The results of this study are relevant for resource efficiency and pollution control policies related to nutrients, water, energy, climate, biodiversity and land use, as well as for scenario analysis of societal change in diet. The case of the EU27 is discussed. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Evaluation of Life Cycle Approaches for the Development of Environmental Indicators in Policy and Decision Making Support

The integration of life cycle thinking into policy and decision making processes requires the development of credible and scientifically robust environmental indicators, capable to define targets and monitor results. The potential range of such indicators is very broad, depending on the level of policy/decision-making and the type of information needed. Indicators may apply from micro level situations (a single product/process/technology/site) to macro scale policy areas (e.g., EU thematic strategies). A further differentiation can be made for each level, depending on the life-cycle phase under consideration: resources, products, or waste. The present study compares process-based life-cycle assessment (LCA), economic input-output analysis-based LCA (EIO-LCA), materials flow analysis and some relevant hybrid methods in order to assess their suitability for building up environmental indicators in different policy and decision-making contexts. The evaluation has been carried out along a comprehensive set of criteria, covering methodological, technical and data availability issues. The outcomes of the study will contribute to the definition of a sound approach towards the development of the three sets of decoupling indicators, as announced in the EU Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources.JRC.H.5-Rural, water and ecosystem resource