Life cycle assessment 279
based on mechanisms in the production process, or on different characteristics
of the outputs, such as the mass of the different flows, their energetic or
nutritional content or their economic market value. Choosing the most suitable approach to deal with multiple outputs is not necessarily easy, and since a
division can be considered an artefact without equivalent in reality, the choice
can be considered arbitrary or subjective (Heijungs & Guinee, 2007). To
further complicate the picture, the choice often affects the LCA results, particularly in a system such as a biorefinery (Cherubini, Stromman & Ulgiati,
2011; Sandin, Røyne, Berlin, Peters & Svanström, 2015). The ISO standards
state a general prioritisation scheme, and, although widely used, it has also
been criticised as incoherent (Schrijvers, Loubet & Sonnemann, 2016) and
not providing enough guidance (Weidema, 2014). Since a universally correct
and unproblematic approach is not likely to be agreed upon, the tailoring of
methods to the study purpose is essential. Nevertheless, in order to function
as a more direct policy instrument, the EU Renewable Energy Directive has
set this type of parameter in order to minimise incomparability among results
for biofuels.
14.3.5 What data and data for what?
Intrinsically connected to the method is the data used as input to perform an
LCA. Standards specify how a life cycle inventory should be collected and
provide example data sheets for practitioners to use. The methods for impact
assessment define the lists of components that must be studied. In a business
perspective, the specificity of the data used is an important aspect. The more
data that can be collected from the specific production, use and end of life of
a product will affect how realistic the results are. The specificity of the results
is one of the possible strengths of LCA.
When LCA is used for policy development, however, generalisation or use
of average data is necessary. When using generalised or average data, the specificity may be lost, resulting in non- representativeness for some producers. It
can also lead to frontrunners not being identified (Modahl, Askham, Lyng,
Skjerve- Nielssen & Nereng, 2013). Challenges related to data also exist in
dimensions other than the distinction between general and specific data. The
quality of data, including age, geographical location, representativeness and
other aspects, will determine the results from assessments.
14.3.6 From environment- only to “holistic” sustainability
Within the framework of LCA, all sorts of impacts connected to a product
life cycle can potentially be studied. In the environmental sphere, impact
categories have grown from mainly including energy to waste and water
quality in the 1990s, to greenhouse gases, land use and ecosystem services
(Sala, Reale, Cristóbal & Pant, 2016).
1
Adding to the scope is the development of social LCA and attempts at coupling LCA and life cycle costing
based on mechanisms in the production process, or on different characteristics
of the outputs, such as the mass of the different flows, their energetic or
nutritional content or their economic market value. Choosing the most suitable approach to deal with multiple outputs is not necessarily easy, and since a
division can be considered an artefact without equivalent in reality, the choice
can be considered arbitrary or subjective (Heijungs & Guinee, 2007). To
further complicate the picture, the choice often affects the LCA results, particularly in a system such as a biorefinery (Cherubini, Stromman & Ulgiati,
2011; Sandin, Røyne, Berlin, Peters & Svanström, 2015). The ISO standards
state a general prioritisation scheme, and, although widely used, it has also
been criticised as incoherent (Schrijvers, Loubet & Sonnemann, 2016) and
not providing enough guidance (Weidema, 2014). Since a universally correct
and unproblematic approach is not likely to be agreed upon, the tailoring of
methods to the study purpose is essential. Nevertheless, in order to function
as a more direct policy instrument, the EU Renewable Energy Directive has
set this type of parameter in order to minimise incomparability among results
for biofuels.
14.3.5 What data and data for what?
Intrinsically connected to the method is the data used as input to perform an
LCA. Standards specify how a life cycle inventory should be collected and
provide example data sheets for practitioners to use. The methods for impact
assessment define the lists of components that must be studied. In a business
perspective, the specificity of the data used is an important aspect. The more
data that can be collected from the specific production, use and end of life of
a product will affect how realistic the results are. The specificity of the results
is one of the possible strengths of LCA.
When LCA is used for policy development, however, generalisation or use
of average data is necessary. When using generalised or average data, the specificity may be lost, resulting in non- representativeness for some producers. It
can also lead to frontrunners not being identified (Modahl, Askham, Lyng,
Skjerve- Nielssen & Nereng, 2013). Challenges related to data also exist in
dimensions other than the distinction between general and specific data. The
quality of data, including age, geographical location, representativeness and
other aspects, will determine the results from assessments.
14.3.6 From environment- only to “holistic” sustainability
Within the framework of LCA, all sorts of impacts connected to a product
life cycle can potentially be studied. In the environmental sphere, impact
categories have grown from mainly including energy to waste and water
quality in the 1990s, to greenhouse gases, land use and ecosystem services
(Sala, Reale, Cristóbal & Pant, 2016).
1
Adding to the scope is the development of social LCA and attempts at coupling LCA and life cycle costing