The Abiotic Depletion Potential: Background, Updates, and Future
2. Description of the Characterization Model for ADP, Considerations, Options, and Choices
2.1. Fundamentals and Choices (1995–2002)
2.1.1. Definition of the Problem
2.1.2. Concepts for Assessing Depletion
2.1.3. Definition of Availability and Natural Stocks Versus Stocks in the Economy
2.1.4. Types of Reserves and Definitions
2.1.5. Equations for Characterization Factors
- ADPi: abiotic depletion potential of resource i (kg antimony equivalents/kg of resource i);
- mi: quantity of resource i extracted (kg);
- Ri: ultimate reserve of resource i (kg);
- DRi: extraction rate of resource i (kg·yr−1) (regeneration is assumed to be zero);
- Rref: ultimate reserve of the reference resource, antimony (kg);
- DRref: extraction rate of the reference resource, Rref (kg·yr−1).
2.2. Developments after 2002
2.2.1. Update of Impact Categories by CML: Impact Category of “Abiotic Resource Depletion” Split into Two Separate Impact Categories
- “abiotic resource depletion—elements”; and
- “abiotic resource depletion—fossil fuels”.
2.2.2. Update of ADP Values by CML
2.2.3. Update of R and DR Values by Others
3. Discussion and Possible New Approaches in Abiotic Resource Depletion in CMLIA
3.1. Depletion, Scarcity, and Criticality
3.2. Ultimate Reserve, Reserve Base, and Economic Reserve
3.3. Availability in the Broad Sense, ADP Based on Stocks in Environment and Economy
3.4. Emissions from Economic Stocks and Processes as an Indicator of Dilution
Conflicts of Interest
anthropogenic stock extended abiotic depletion potential
abiotic depletion potential
Centrum voor Milieuwetenschappen Universiteit Leiden (Institute of Environmental Sciences, Leiden University)
Centrum voor Milieuwetenschappen Universiteit Leiden Impact Assessment
Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards
extraction rate of resource, originally defined as annual de-accumulation, with de-accumulation defined as the annual extraction (e.g., in kg/yr) minus the annual regeneration (e.g., in kg/yr) of a resource, the latter of which is assumed to be zero
International Reference Life Cycle Data System
life cycle assessment
life cycle impact assessment
life cycle sustainability assessment
product environmental footprint
reserve of resource
Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
United Nations Environment Program
United States Geological Survey
Working Group on Life Cycle Impact Assessment
- Udo de Haes, H.A.; Jolliet, O.; Finnveden, G.; Hauschild, M.; Krewit, W.; Müller-Wenk, R. (Eds.) Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1999, 4, 167–174.
- Jolliet, O.; Muller-Wenk, R.; Bare, J.; Brent, A.; Goedkoop, M.; Heijungs, R.; Itsubo, N.; Pena, C.; Pennington, D.; Potting, J.; et al. The LCIA midpoint-damage framework of the UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2004, 9, 394–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guinée, J.; Heijungs, R. A proposal for the definition of resource equivalency factors for use in product Life-Cycle Assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1995, 14, 917–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. ILCD Handbook, General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment—Detailed Guidance; European Commission: Ispra, Italy, 2010; Available online: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC48157/ilcd_handbook-general_guide_for_lca-detailed_guidance_12march2010_isbn_fin.pdf (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- European Commission. European Platform on Life Cycle Assessment. 2015. Available online: http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/?page_id=86 (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- European Commission. Environmental Footprint News. 2016. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/ef_news.htm (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- Vadenbo, C.; Rørbech, J.; Haupt, M.; Frischknecht, R. Abiotic resources: New impact assessment approaches in view of resource efficiency and resource criticality—55th Discussion Forum on Life Cycle Assessment, Zurich, Switzerland, April 11, 2014. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2014, 19, 1686–1692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klinglmair, M; Sala, S.; Brandão, M. Assessing resource depletion in LCA: A review of methods and methodological issues. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2014, 19, 580–592. [Google Scholar]
- Van der Voet, E. Criticality and abiotic resource depletion in life cycle assessment. In Security of Supply and Scarcity of Raw Materials. Towards a Methodological Framework for Sustainability Assessment; Mancini, L., De Camillis, C., Pennington, D., Eds.; European Commission: Luxemburg, 2013; pp. 21–23. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Environment Programme. Environmental Risks and Challenges of Anthropogenic Metals Flows and Cycles. 2013. Available online: http://www.unep.org/resourcepanel/Publications/EnvironmentalChallengesMetals/tabid/106142/Default.aspx (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- European Commission. Critical raw materials for the EU; Report of the Ad-hoc Working Group on defining critical raw materials; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2010; Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/raw-materials/specific-interest/critical/index_en.htm (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- European Commission. In ILCD handbook: Recommendations for Life Cycle Impact Assessment in the European context—Based on Existing Environmental Impact Assessment Models and Factors; European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability: Ispra, Italy, 2011; Available online: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC61049 (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- European Commission. Report on Critical Raw Materials for the EU; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2014; Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/raw-materials/specific-interest/critical/index_en.htm (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- European Commission. Analysis of existing Environmental Impact Assessment methodologies for use in Life Cycle Assessment; European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, 2010; Available online: http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/ILCD-Handbook-LCIA-Background-analysis-online-12March2010.pdf (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- Van Oers, L.; De Koning, A.; Guinée, J.B.; Huppes, G. Abiotic resource depletion in LCA. Improving characterisation factors for abiotic resource depletion as recommended in the new Dutch LCA handbook. RWS-DWW: Delft, The Netherlands, 2002. Available online: http://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/projects/lca2/report_abiotic_depletion_web.pdf (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- Guinée, J.B.; Gorée, M.; Heijungs, R.; Huppes, G.; Kleijn, R.; de Koning, A.; van Oers, L.; Wegener Sleeswijk, A.; Suh, S.; Udo de Haes, H.A.; et al. Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment: Operational Guide to the ISO Standards; Kluwer Academic Publisher: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2002; Available Online: http://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/lca2/index.html (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- Finnveden, G. “Resources” and related impact categories. In Towards a Methodology for Life Cycle Impact Assessment; Udo de Haes, H.A., Ed.; SETAC-Europe: Brussels, Belgium, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Heijungs, R.; Guinée, J.; Huppes, G. Impact Categories for Natural Resources and Land Use; CML-report 138; Leiden University: Leiden, The Netherlands, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Drielsma, J.A.; Russell-Vaccari, A.J.; Drnek, T.; Brady, T.; Weihed, P.; Mistry, M.; Perez Simbor, L. Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment—Defining the path forward. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2016, 21, 85–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United States Geological Survey. Commodity Statistics and Information, Statistics and information on the worldwide supply of, demand for, and flow of minerals and materials essential to the U.S. economy, the national security, and protection of the environment. 2015. Available online: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/ (accessed on 29 February 2016). [Google Scholar]
- United States Geological Survey. Appendix of Commodity Statistics and Information, Statistics and information on the worldwide supply of, demand for, and flow of minerals and materials essential to the U.S. economy, the national security, and protection of the environment A Resource/Reserve Classification for Minerals. 2015. Available online: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2007/mcsapp07.pdf (accessed on 29 February 2016). [Google Scholar]
- Skinner, B.J. Exploring the resource base. In Proceedings of the workshop on “The Long-Run Availability of Minerals”, Washington, DC, USA, 22–23 April 2001; Available online: http://www.rff.org/files/sharepoint/WorkImages/Download/RFF-Event-April01-keynote.pdf (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- CML-IA Characterisation Factors. Available online: https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/research/research-output/science/cml-ia-characterisation-factors (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- Frischknecht, R.; Büsser Knöpfel, S. Swiss Eco-Factors 2013 according to the Ecological Scarcity Method. Methodological fundamentals and their application in Switzerland. Environmental studies No. 1330. Federal Office for the Environment: Bern, Switzerland, 2013; p. 254. Available online: http://www.bafu.admin.ch/publikationen/publikation/01750/index.html?lang=en (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- UNEP-SETAC. Towards a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. Making informed choices on products. 2011. Available online: http://www.unep.org/pdf/UNEP_LifecycleInit_Dec_FINAL.pdf (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- UNEP-SETAC. Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. 2015. Available online: http://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/starting-life-cycle-thinking/life-cycle-approaches/life-cycle-sustainability-assessment/ (accessed on 29 February 2016).
- Lide, D.R. (Ed.) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 71st ed.; CRC Press: Boston, MA, USA, 1990.
- Rudnick, R.L.; Gao, S. Composition of the continental crust. In The Crust; Rudnick, R.L., Ed.; Elsevier: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2005; Volume 3, pp. 1–64. [Google Scholar]
- Clarke, F.W.; Washington, H.S. The Composition of the Earth’s Crust; USGS Professional Paper 127; USGS: Washington, DC, USA, 1924; p. 117.
- Schneider, L.; Berger, M.; Finkbeiner, M. The anthropogenic stock extended abiotic depletion potential (AADP) as a new parameterisation to model the depletion of abiotic resources. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2011, 16, 929–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schneider, L.; Berger, M.; Finkbeiner, M. Abiotic resource depletion in LCA-background and update of the anthropogenic stock extended abiotic depletion potential (AADP) model. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2015, 20, 709–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wegener Sleeswijk, A.; van Oers, L.F.C.M.; Guinée, J.B.; Struijs, J.; Huijbregts, M.A.J. Normalisation in product life cycle assessment: An LCA of the global and European economic systems in the year 2000. Sci. Total Environ. 2008, 390, 227–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
|Oers et al. ||Drielsma et al. ||A Resource/Reserve Classification for Minerals, USGS [3,20,21].|
|ultimate reserve||crustal content||The quantity of a resource (like a chemical element or compound) that is ultimately available, estimated by multiplying the average natural concentration of the resource in the primary extraction media (e.g., the earth’s crust) by the mass or volume of these media (e.g., the mass of the crust assuming a depth of e.g., 10 km) .|
|ultimately extractable reserve||extractable global resource||Those reserves that can ultimately be technically extracted may be termed the “ultimately extractable reserves”. This ultimately extractable reserve (“extractable global resource”) is situated somewhere between the ultimate reserve and the reserve base [20,21].|
|reserve base||mineral resource||Part of an identified resource that meets specified minimum physical and chemical criteria relating to current mining practice. The reserve base may encompass those parts of the resources that have a reasonable potential for becoming economically available within planning horizons beyond those that assume proven technology and current economics. The reserve base includes those resources that are currently economic (reserves) or marginally economic (marginal reserves), and some of those that are currently subeconomic (subeconomic resources) (for further definitions see the original references) [20,21].|
|economic reserve||mineral reserve||The part of the natural reserve base which can be economically extracted at the time of determination [20,21].|
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Van Oers, L.; Guinée, J. The Abiotic Depletion Potential: Background, Updates, and Future. Resources 2016, 5, 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources5010016
Van Oers L, Guinée J. The Abiotic Depletion Potential: Background, Updates, and Future. Resources. 2016; 5(1):16. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources5010016Chicago/Turabian Style
Van Oers, Lauran, and Jeroen Guinée. 2016. "The Abiotic Depletion Potential: Background, Updates, and Future" Resources 5, no. 1: 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources5010016