111
discoveries that for nearly 200 years have established clear evidence linking increasing CO 2 levels to global warming.
The protracted debates, however, do not continue due to a lack of information or
knowledge. It may not even come down to a denial that a crisis exists. Rather, ecological concerns may simply be significantly lower priorities than economic ones.
Hyperbolic discounting, operating at industrial scale, needs to be acknowledged and
addressed. If both ecologically and economically acceptable product and project
options are available, then the need for a tradeoff between them disappears. This is
applicable not only to design but to all industrial disciplines. Environmental LCA
can play a part by providing midpoint indicators of environmental performance. But
there are further considerations to deal with before committing to building LCA into
a design workflow.
6.3 Taking Issue with Life Cycle Assessment
Many critics have pointed to the basic problem of data reliability and the effort it
takes to properly collect and use it as LCA’s Achilles heel. In her overview treatment
of the subject as it relates to building design and building products, Kathrina Simonen
correctly identifies barriers to fundamental accuracy, usefulness, and costeffectiveness the results issuing from study documents. She points out the arguable
pessimists’ view that LCA is being oversold and that broad extrapolations can be
consistently drawn and used from existing expensive and detailed LCA studies:
A huge effort is required to conduct an LCA and the results can be of questionable value:
uncertain with limited value to conduct change. One can argue that even in the relatively
certain field of operational energy use (with meters to track consumption), we find our ability to predict actual energy use has limited precision. How can we expect to develop credible data throughout a complex and changing supply chain and the uncertainty of building
life cycle stages?...Unless LCA can become cost-effective and integrated within existing
design and manufacturing processes, the effort of conducting an LCA can often outweigh
the benefits. (Simonen 2014)
This pointed criticism regarding the inherent complexity, uncertainty, and great
expense in time and money to conduct a full life cycle assessment is shared across
disciplines and will most likely not be solved by any single industry, profession, or
field. LCA conclusions also have the disadvantage of being applicable or valid only
to the specific product or service it studied. Change one materially important process or boundary condition in the defined life cycle and the whole profile can
change, rendering the formal LCA no longer valid to describe what it originally
assessed.
The first iterative LCA “goal and scope” phase anticipates and foreshadows the
next three. Before proceeding with a discussion and demonstration of beneficial
applications of subsequent LCA phases, it may help to pause and address the questions and concerns raised by this overall approach to evaluating what and how to
satisfy the demands of a market. Since the majority of both designers and clients are
6.3 Taking Issue with Life Cycle Assessment
discoveries that for nearly 200 years have established clear evidence linking increasing CO 2 levels to global warming.
The protracted debates, however, do not continue due to a lack of information or
knowledge. It may not even come down to a denial that a crisis exists. Rather, ecological concerns may simply be significantly lower priorities than economic ones.
Hyperbolic discounting, operating at industrial scale, needs to be acknowledged and
addressed. If both ecologically and economically acceptable product and project
options are available, then the need for a tradeoff between them disappears. This is
applicable not only to design but to all industrial disciplines. Environmental LCA
can play a part by providing midpoint indicators of environmental performance. But
there are further considerations to deal with before committing to building LCA into
a design workflow.
6.3 Taking Issue with Life Cycle Assessment
Many critics have pointed to the basic problem of data reliability and the effort it
takes to properly collect and use it as LCA’s Achilles heel. In her overview treatment
of the subject as it relates to building design and building products, Kathrina Simonen
correctly identifies barriers to fundamental accuracy, usefulness, and costeffectiveness the results issuing from study documents. She points out the arguable
pessimists’ view that LCA is being oversold and that broad extrapolations can be
consistently drawn and used from existing expensive and detailed LCA studies:
A huge effort is required to conduct an LCA and the results can be of questionable value:
uncertain with limited value to conduct change. One can argue that even in the relatively
certain field of operational energy use (with meters to track consumption), we find our ability to predict actual energy use has limited precision. How can we expect to develop credible data throughout a complex and changing supply chain and the uncertainty of building
life cycle stages?...Unless LCA can become cost-effective and integrated within existing
design and manufacturing processes, the effort of conducting an LCA can often outweigh
the benefits. (Simonen 2014)
This pointed criticism regarding the inherent complexity, uncertainty, and great
expense in time and money to conduct a full life cycle assessment is shared across
disciplines and will most likely not be solved by any single industry, profession, or
field. LCA conclusions also have the disadvantage of being applicable or valid only
to the specific product or service it studied. Change one materially important process or boundary condition in the defined life cycle and the whole profile can
change, rendering the formal LCA no longer valid to describe what it originally
assessed.
The first iterative LCA “goal and scope” phase anticipates and foreshadows the
next three. Before proceeding with a discussion and demonstration of beneficial
applications of subsequent LCA phases, it may help to pause and address the questions and concerns raised by this overall approach to evaluating what and how to
satisfy the demands of a market. Since the majority of both designers and clients are
6.3 Taking Issue with Life Cycle Assessment