Search Results (9)

This study analyses the greenhouse gas reduction potential of different end-of-life (EoL) strategies based on a case study of light electric vehicles (LEVs). Using a shared electric moped scooter as a reference, four EoL scenarios are evaluated in a comparative life cycle assessment (LCA). The modelling of the scenarios combines different R-strategies (e.g., recycling, reusing, and repurposing) regarding both the vehicle itself and the battery. German and EU regulations for vehicle and battery disposal are incorporated, as well as EU directives such as the Battery Product Pass. The global warming potential (GWP₁₀₀) of the production and EoL life cycle stages ranges from 644 to 1025 kg CO₂ eq among the four analysed scenarios. Landfill treatment led to the highest GWP₁₀₀, with 1.47 times higher emissions than those of the base scenario (status quo treatment following EU directives), while increasing component reuse and repurposing the battery cells achieved GWP₁₀₀ reductions of 2.8% and 7.8%, respectively. Overall, the importance of implementing sustainable EoL strategies for LEVs is apparent. To achieve this, a product design that facilitates EoL material and component separation is essential as well as the development of political and economic frameworks. This paper promotes enhancing the circularity of LEVs by combining the LCA of EoL strategies with eco-design considerations. Full article

In the era of the circular economy, solutions aimed at increasing the circularity of materials and products are highly welcome. Eco-design and waste management strategies are crucial for ensuring circularity and resource-saving. Strategies should be driven by assessing life cycle-based environmental performance. Tools to measure this performance should take into account two recycling-oriented parameters: recycled content and recycling rate. This paper presents the results of a life cycle assessment case study for a secondary fence board (baseline scenario). The circular footprint formula has been used to allocate burdens and credits between the supplier and the user of recycled materials. The potential environmental impact and the most significant issues have been calculated, identified, and presented. A general recommendation for further environmental development of the secondary fence board is to improve the production-related energy efficiency of recycling processes and increase the recycling rate of the board (to avoid landfilling). Full article

Allocation methodological choices in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a relevant issue for the Circular Bioeconomy context. The recent Product Environmental Footprint Guide from the European Commission includes the Circular Footprint Formula (CFF) as a new way to deal with energy recovery/recycling processes. This paper investigated CFF vs. other different LCA allocation methods in Brazilian briquette production. A cradle-to-gate LCA study was conducted considering 1 MJ of energy from recovered and dedicated Eucalyptus briquette production. Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Cumulative Energy Demand (CED) were selected as the impact categories to evaluate the allocation methods choice that influences the potential impacts. LCA results were compared regarding four allocation methods. Eucalyptus wood as a biomass supply scenario achieved impact results up to 4.3 kg CO₂-eq. for GWP and 0.0272 MJ-eq. for CED. The recovery wood scenario presented LCA burdens reduction by up to 206% for GWP, however a 492% increase in the CED results. CFF provided the lowest results for both impact categories. However, the CFF method still doesn’t address particular aspects of circular bioenergy systems. Biomass and bioenergy LCA require further adjustments focusing on biochemical flows in the CFF calculation procedure to lead the development of innovative circular business models. Full article

A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment focused on end-of-life (EoL) was conducted in this study for three configurations of a light-duty commercial vehicle (LDCV): diesel, compressed natural gas (CNG), and battery electric vehicle (BEV). The aim is to investigate the impact of recycling under two EoL scenarios with different allocation methods. The first is based on the traditional avoided burden method, while the second is based on the circular footprint formula (CFF) developed by the European Commission. For each configuration, a detailed multilevel waste management scheme was developed in compliance with the 2000/53/CE directive and ISO22628 standard. The results showed that the global warming potential (GWP) impact under the CFF method is significantly greater when compared to the avoided burden method because of the A-parameter, which allocates the burdens and benefits between the two connected product systems. Furthermore, in all configurations and scenarios, the benefits due to the avoided production of virgin materials compensate for the recycling burdens within GWP impact. The main drivers of GWP reduction are steel recycling for all of the considered LDCVs, platinum, palladium, and rhodium recycling for the diesel and CNG configurations, and Li-ion battery recycling for the BEV configuration. Finally, the EoL stage significantly reduces the environmental impact of those categories other than GWP. Full article

Textile industries are in the spotlight due to the heavy environmental impacts along their products’ life cycle and, at the same time, they are a priority sector in the new circular economy action plan of the European Commission. In this framework, the Italian company Manteco SpA has developed a value chain based on the recycling of pre- and post-consumer discarded textiles, wh0se output is a secondary wool fiber named MWool^®. This study develops an environmental analysis of recycled wool fibers through the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology, mainly using primary data. A parallel LCA is developed of virgin wool fiber, mostly based on literature data. Sensitivity analyses have been carried out: (i) to capture the uncertainty associated with virgin fibers’ impacts and (ii) to evaluate how MWool^® impacts vary according to the origin and treatment of recycled textiles. Finally, the Circular Footprint Formula (CFF) has been applied to consider also a possible decay in quality typically affecting recycled fibers. Results show that recycled wool fibers have significantly lower environmental impacts than virgin fibers, even when the most unfavorable scenarios are considered. As climate change is concerned, 1 kg of MWool^® has a carbon footprint of 0.1–0.9 kg CO₂ eq., while producing virgin fibers releases 10–103 kg CO₂ eq. Using the CFF, it emerges that recycled wool fibers can save about 60% of the impacts of virgin fibers. This study contributes to filling data gaps regarding LCAs applied to the textile sector, which is more and more in the spotlight and needs to address these environmental issues. Full article

This article describes research done within the CIRCE2020 project, implemented under the Interreg CENTRAL EUROPE 2014–2020 Programme. The main aim is to present the results of a life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) carried out for a recycling plant in Wielkopolska. From the LCA perspective, the analyzed recycling plant performs two functions; therefore, two research approaches were adopted: from the final waste management perspective (Approach 1) and from the production of secondary products (Approach 2). From the first perspective, the total environmental impact for the reference flow (215.140 kg of multi-material waste) was 552.32 Pt. When focused on the second perspective, the environmental impact for the production of plastic boards (3.073 boards) reached 659.58 Pt. The difference in the obtained values results from the fact that the second analysis, besides waste processing, included additionally the generation of raw materials corrected by the quality factor. The total production cost of boards made of multi-material waste was PLN 165,957.23. Energy consumption is the main cost-generating element of production and also the most important environmental hot spot. To increase environmental efficiency and reduce costs, the use of technology allowing for the reduction of energy demand should be considered first. Full article

Transitioning the built environment to a circular economy (CE) is vital to achieve sustainability goals but requires metrics. Life cycle assessment (LCA) can analyse the environmental performance of CE. However, conventional LCA methods assess individual products and single life cycles whereas circular assessment requires a systems perspective as buildings, components and materials potentially have multiple use and life cycles. How should benefits and burdens be allocated between life cycles? This study compares four different LCA allocation approaches: (a) the EN 15804/15978 cut-off approach, (b) the Circular Footprint Formula (CFF), (c) the 50:50 approach, and (d) the linearly degressive (LD) approach. The environmental impacts of four ‘circular building components’ is calculated: (1) a concrete column and (2) a timber column both designed for direct reuse, (3) a recyclable roof felt and (4) a window with a reusable frame. Notable differences in impact distributions between the allocation approaches were found, thus incentivising different CE principles. The LD approach was found to be promising for open and closed-loop systems within a closed loop supply chain (such as the ones assessed here). A CE LD approach was developed to enhance the LD approach’s applicability, to closer align it with the CE concept, and to create an incentive for CE in the industry. Full article

The main goal of the European product environmental footprint (PEF) method is to increase comparability of environmental impacts of products within certain product categories by decreasing flexibility and therefore achieving reproducibility of results. Comparability is supposed to be further increased by developing product category specific rules (PEFCRs). The aim of this paper is to evaluate if the main goal of the PEF method has been achieved. This is done by a comprehensive analysis of the PEF guide, the current PEFCR guide, the developed PEFCRs, as well as the insights gained from participating in the pilot phase. The analysis reveals that the PEF method as well as its implementation in PEFCRs are not able to guarantee fair comparability due to shortcomings related to the (1) definition of product performance; (2) definition of the product category; (3) definition and determination of the representative product; (4) modeling of electricity; (5) requirements for the use of secondary data; (6) circular footprint formula; (7) life cycle impact assessment methods; and (8) approach to prioritize impact categories. For some of these shortcomings, recommendations for improvement are provided. This paper demonstrates that the PEF method has to be further improved to guarantee fair comparability. Full article

There is a lack of prescribed databases and approaches in place for performing comparable Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs) of smartphones and other electronic devices in a coherent manner. Hence there is a need within certain eco-rating initiatives for simplified, yet still precise enough, approaches that are expert independent. Here, five independently published Full LCAs (FLCA) of smartphones—and a metal content declaration of a tablet—are analyzed and compared with the simplified LCA method (Open Eco Rating LCA, OLCA) used by the open eco rating (OER) sustainability assessment. OLCA is described in detail. The comparisons use the same characterization factors that are used for climate change and abiotic resource depletion (ARD) midpoint impact categories. The tablet is only analyzed for the ARD indicator (ARDI). The results show that the difference between the FLCAs and the OLCA is up to 20% for the Global Warming Potential indicator (GWPI). The difference is explained by significantly different emission intensities used in FLCAs and OLCA, especially for integrated circuit and screen production. The life cycle use of metals relevant for ARDI is identified in one of the FLCAs of mobile phones, and used in OLCA and compared with the corresponding FLCA ARDI score. The total FLCA ARDI score is 67% (2.0 vs. 1.2 grams Sb—eq.) and 32% (4.98 vs. 3.76 grams Sb—eq.) higher than OLCA ARDI for the mobile phone and the tablet, respectively. The reason is that OLCA only captures a few of the most relevant metals (gold, silver, tin, indium, and tantalum) for the ARDI. However, cobalt—and to some degree copper and lithium—are significant gaps in the OLCA. The conclusion is that OLCA is an efficient and fair approach for LCAs that are focused on the GWPI of smartphones as the divergence to FLCA can easily be explained. However, the circular footprint formulae, renewable electricity options, and ARD characterization indices for cobalt, copper and lithium should be added to OLCA for further precision. The next step is to compare the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) FLCA method with OLCA for GWPI and ARDI evaluations of new smartphones. Moreover, the effect of adding more midpoint or single score indicators could be tested in OLCA. Full article