definition of the classes of performance on a statistically representative sample of
PEF profiles calculated for real products.
The third presentation was delivered by Mr. Quentin De Hults, speaking on
behalf of PlasticsEurope. PlasticsEurope has been committed in LCA for decades
by managing a dataset program for plastics, and by contributing to LCA developments e.g. through the UNEP SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. PlasticsEurope also
believes in LCA to be completed by other tools like risk assessment. With this
constructive state of mind, PlasticsEurope is participating to the European Product
Environmental Footprint, officially in 3 pilots and in many other working groups
and workshops. According to Mr. De Hults the EF pilot phase contributed to
improve the best practice in the LCA domain thanks to the transparency of the
approach and the high quality of the technical discussions that take place at the
Technical Advisory Board. He also mentioned a number of issues to be further
improved, referring e.g. to the improvement of the toxicity impact categories, with
the development of more reliable characterisation factors. He mentioned that the
approach taken in PEF should be complemented with other approaches like
Proscale (a specific presentation of Proscale took place during the same conference). Another area of improvement referred to the development of secondary
datasets when there are only few companies running certain processes, taking into
account the associated industrial confidentiality issues to be addressed. According
to PlasticsEurope, there is room for the use of PEF into existing or new product
policies provided that it remains a voluntary approach.
The fourth presentation was delivered by Mr. Pau Huguet Ferran from
Ecomatters. Mr. Ferran spoke on behalf also of PRé Consultants. The two companies supported the European Commission during the EF pilot phase by reviewing
a number of PEF studies carried out by companies on real products to test the
feasibility of implementation of the draft PEFCR developed. The shortcomings
identified when reviewing these studies have been very important to improve the
quality of the PEFCRs and to correct some flaws in the methodological requirements developed during the pilot phase. Some of the most relevant problems
highlighted by the reviewers were that (i) the PEFCRs were not strict enough in
terms of modelling requirements, (ii) the DNM was not systematically implemented, (iii) the Circular Footprint Formula, that is the single formula to calculate
credits and burden related to the end of use of a product, was too complicated and
wrongly implemented by some companies, (iv) the way how the representative
product has been modelled by the stakeholders leading the PEFCR development is
not necessarily supported the companies implementing it.
Based on the outcome of these reviews a number of changes have been
implemented in the Guidance documents supporting the pilot phase.
The fifth and last presentation was delivered by Ms. Mihaela Thuring from
VITO, institute actively involved in two pilots and some supporting contracts.
According to Ms. Thuring environmental information on organisations and products are important tools that companies can use for achieving environmental goals
towards a sustainable society. Both ISO 14001 (Environmental management
systems) and PEF are aimed at providing such information to market players.
518
M. Guiton and E. Benetto
PEF profiles calculated for real products.
The third presentation was delivered by Mr. Quentin De Hults, speaking on
behalf of PlasticsEurope. PlasticsEurope has been committed in LCA for decades
by managing a dataset program for plastics, and by contributing to LCA developments e.g. through the UNEP SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. PlasticsEurope also
believes in LCA to be completed by other tools like risk assessment. With this
constructive state of mind, PlasticsEurope is participating to the European Product
Environmental Footprint, officially in 3 pilots and in many other working groups
and workshops. According to Mr. De Hults the EF pilot phase contributed to
improve the best practice in the LCA domain thanks to the transparency of the
approach and the high quality of the technical discussions that take place at the
Technical Advisory Board. He also mentioned a number of issues to be further
improved, referring e.g. to the improvement of the toxicity impact categories, with
the development of more reliable characterisation factors. He mentioned that the
approach taken in PEF should be complemented with other approaches like
Proscale (a specific presentation of Proscale took place during the same conference). Another area of improvement referred to the development of secondary
datasets when there are only few companies running certain processes, taking into
account the associated industrial confidentiality issues to be addressed. According
to PlasticsEurope, there is room for the use of PEF into existing or new product
policies provided that it remains a voluntary approach.
The fourth presentation was delivered by Mr. Pau Huguet Ferran from
Ecomatters. Mr. Ferran spoke on behalf also of PRé Consultants. The two companies supported the European Commission during the EF pilot phase by reviewing
a number of PEF studies carried out by companies on real products to test the
feasibility of implementation of the draft PEFCR developed. The shortcomings
identified when reviewing these studies have been very important to improve the
quality of the PEFCRs and to correct some flaws in the methodological requirements developed during the pilot phase. Some of the most relevant problems
highlighted by the reviewers were that (i) the PEFCRs were not strict enough in
terms of modelling requirements, (ii) the DNM was not systematically implemented, (iii) the Circular Footprint Formula, that is the single formula to calculate
credits and burden related to the end of use of a product, was too complicated and
wrongly implemented by some companies, (iv) the way how the representative
product has been modelled by the stakeholders leading the PEFCR development is
not necessarily supported the companies implementing it.
Based on the outcome of these reviews a number of changes have been
implemented in the Guidance documents supporting the pilot phase.
The fifth and last presentation was delivered by Ms. Mihaela Thuring from
VITO, institute actively involved in two pilots and some supporting contracts.
According to Ms. Thuring environmental information on organisations and products are important tools that companies can use for achieving environmental goals
towards a sustainable society. Both ISO 14001 (Environmental management
systems) and PEF are aimed at providing such information to market players.
518
M. Guiton and E. Benetto