Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment—part I: a critical review of existing methods

Purpose The safeguard subject of the Area of Protection “natural Resources,” particularly regarding mineral resources, has long been debated. Consequently, a variety of life cycle impact assessment methods based on different concepts are available. The Life Cycle Initiative, hosted by the UN Environment, established an expert task force on “Mineral Resources” to review existing methods (this article) and provide guidance for application-dependent use of the methods and recommendations for further methodological development (Berger et al. in Int J Life Cycle Assess, 2020 ). Methods Starting in 2017, the task force developed a white paper, which served as its main input to a SETAC Pellston Workshop® in June 2018, in which a sub-group of the task force members developed recommendations for assessing impacts of mineral resource use in LCA. This article, based mainly on the white paper and pre-workshop discussions, presents a thorough review of 27 different life cycle impact assessment methods for mineral resource use in the “natural resources” area of protection. The methods are categorized according to their basic impact mechanisms, described and compared, and assessed against a comprehensive set of criteria. Results and discussion Four method categories have been identified and their underlying concepts are described based on existing literature: depletion methods, future efforts methods, thermodynamic accounting methods, and supply risk methods. While we consider depletion and future efforts methods more “traditional” life cycle impact assessment methods, thermodynamic accounting and supply risk methods are rather providing complementary information. Within each method category, differences between methods are discussed in detail, which allows for further sub-categorization and better understanding of what the methods actually assess. Conclusions We provide a thorough review of existing life cycle impact assessment methods addressing impacts of mineral resource use, covering a broad overview of basic impact mechanisms to a detailed discussion of method-specific modeling. This supports a better understanding of what the methods actually assess and highlights their strengths and limitations. Building on these insights, Berger et al. (Int J Life Cycle Assess, 2020 ) provide recommendations for application-dependent use of the methods, along with recommendations for further methodological development.

[1]  Gavin M. Mudd,et al.  The world's by-product and critical metal resources part I: Uncertainties, current reporting practices, implications and grounds for optimism , 2017 .

[2]  M. Hauschild,et al.  Background for spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment. The EDIP2003 methodology , 2004 .

[3]  Andrea Thorenz,et al.  How to evaluate raw material vulnerability - An overview , 2016 .

[4]  Tom Huppertz,et al.  The Social Cost of SubSoil Resource Use , 2019 .

[5]  Christoph Helbig,et al.  How to evaluate raw material supply risks—an overview , 2013 .

[6]  Mark Huijbregts,et al.  Surplus Ore Potential as a Scarcity Indicator for Resource Extraction , 2017 .

[7]  Benedetto Rugani,et al.  Integrating emergy into LCA: Potential added value and lingering obstacles , 2014 .

[8]  T. Brady,et al.  Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment—defining the path forward , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[9]  Steven B. Young,et al.  Extending the geopolitical supply risk indicator: Application of life cycle sustainability assessment to the petrochemical supply chain of polyacrylonitrile-based carbon fibers , 2016 .

[10]  Alexander Cimprich,et al.  Extending the geopolitical supply risk method: material “substitutability” indicators applied to electric vehicles and dental X-ray equipment , 2018, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[11]  Jeroen B. Guinée,et al.  Abiotic Raw-Materials in Life Cycle Impact Assessments : An Emerging Consensus across Disciplines , 2016 .

[12]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Cumulative energy demand as predictor for the environmental burden of commodity production. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  M. Reuter,et al.  Raw material ‘criticality’—sense or nonsense? , 2017 .

[14]  Stijn Bruers,et al.  Exergy: its potential and limitations in environmental science and technology. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  Mark A. J. Huijbregts,et al.  Surplus Cost Potential as a Life Cycle Impact Indicator for Metal Extraction , 2016 .

[16]  B. Reck,et al.  Six Years of Criticality Assessments: What Have We Learned So Far? , 2016 .

[17]  G. Mudd,et al.  A Detailed Assessment of Global Nickel Resource Trends and Endowments , 2013 .

[18]  J Dewulf,et al.  Exergy-based efficiency and renewability assessment of biofuel production. , 2005, Environmental science & technology.

[19]  Steven De Meester,et al.  Accounting for the occupation of the marine environment as a natural resource in life cycle assessment: An exergy based approach , 2014 .

[20]  Jeroen B. Guinée,et al.  The Abiotic Depletion Potential: Background, Updates, and Future , 2016 .

[21]  Alexander Cimprich,et al.  Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment: part II – recommendations on application-dependent use of existing methods and on future method development needs , 2020, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[22]  Roderick G. Eggert,et al.  Public policy and future mineral supplies , 2018, Resources Policy.

[23]  Markus Berger,et al.  The economic resource scarcity potential (ESP) for evaluating resource use based on life cycle assessment , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[24]  M. Hauschild,et al.  Environmental Assessment of Products: Volume 2: Scientific Background , 1997 .

[25]  Pilar Swart,et al.  Quantifying the impacts of primary metal resource use in life cycle assessment based on recent mining data , 2013 .

[26]  Mark A J Huijbregts,et al.  Resource Footprints are Good Proxies of Environmental Damage , 2017, Environmental science & technology.

[27]  M. Finkbeiner,et al.  The anthropogenic stock extended abiotic depletion potential (AADP) as a new parameterisation to model the depletion of abiotic resources , 2011 .

[28]  Alexander Cimprich,et al.  Raw material criticality assessment as a complement to environmental life cycle assessment: Examining methods for product‐level supply risk assessment , 2019, Journal of Industrial Ecology.

[29]  Stephen Northey,et al.  The exposure of global base metal resources to water criticality, scarcity and climate change , 2017 .

[30]  Jan Szargut,et al.  Exergy Analysis of Thermal, Chemical, and Metallurgical Processes , 1988 .

[31]  J Dewulf,et al.  Cumulative exergy extraction from the natural environment (CEENE): a comprehensive life cycle impact assessment method for resource accounting. , 2007, Environmental science & technology.

[32]  Bengt Steen,et al.  Calculation of Monetary Values of Environmental Impacts from Emissions and Resource Use The Case of Using the EPS 2015d Impact Assessment Method , 2016 .

[33]  Rana Pant,et al.  Rethinking the area of protection "natural resources" in life cycle assessment. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[34]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Applying cumulative exergy demand (CExD) indicators to the ecoinvent database , 2006 .

[35]  Andrea Thorenz,et al.  Import‐based Indicator for the Geopolitical Supply Risk of Raw Materials in Life Cycle Sustainability Assessments , 2016 .

[36]  Laura Schneider,et al.  Integrated method to assess resource efficiency – ESSENZ , 2016 .

[37]  J. Ober Mineral commodity summaries 2017 , 2017 .

[38]  Mary Stewart,et al.  A Consistent Framework for Assessing the Impacts from Resource Use - A focus on resource functionality (8 pp) , 2005 .

[39]  Alexander Cimprich,et al.  Extension of geopolitical supply risk methodology: Characterization model applied to conventional and electric vehicles , 2017 .

[40]  Gerald Rebitzer,et al.  IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology , 2003 .

[41]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Towards harmonizing natural resources as an area of protection in life cycle impact assessment , 2017, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[42]  Carl Vadenbo,et al.  Impact assessment of abiotic resources in LCA: quantitative comparison of selected characterization models. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[43]  Arnold Janssens,et al.  An improved calculation of the exergy of natural resources for exergetic life cycle assessment (ELCA). , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[44]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  A proposal for the definition of resource equivalency factors for use in product life-cycle assessment , 1995 .

[45]  Markus Berger,et al.  Abiotic resource depletion in LCA—background and update of the anthropogenic stock extended abiotic depletion potential (AADP) model , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[46]  Martin Faulstich,et al.  Raw Material Criticality in the Context of Classical Risk Assessment , 2015 .

[47]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Is cumulative fossil energy demand a useful indicator for the environmental performance of products? , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[48]  Jo Dewulf,et al.  Exergy-based accounting for land as a natural resource in life cycle assessment , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[49]  M. Kietzmann,et al.  Environmental Assessment of Products. Volume 2: Scientific Background , 2001 .

[50]  Eskinder Demisse Gemechu,et al.  From a critical review to a conceptual framework for integrating the criticality of resources into Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment , 2015 .

[51]  Saleem H Ali,et al.  Mineral supply for sustainable development requires resource governance , 2017, Nature.

[52]  Michael R. Overcash Environmental assessment of products, volume 1‐methodology, tools, and case studies in product development. Henrik Wenzel, Michael Hauschild, and Leo Alting, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, United Kingdom, (1997), 543 pages, [ISBN No. 0‐412‐80800‐5], U.S. List Price $150.00 , 1999 .

[53]  Howard T. Odum,et al.  Environmental Accounting: Emergy and Environmental Decision Making , 1995 .

[54]  M. Goedkoop,et al.  The Eco-indicator 99, A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 1999 .

[55]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Ore grade decrease as life cycle impact indicator for metal scarcity: the case of copper. , 2012, Environmental Science and Technology.

[56]  Pilar Swart,et al.  Abiotic Resource Use , 2015 .

[57]  Robin Gustafsson,et al.  First- and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative R&D programs , 2008 .

[58]  Antonio Valero,et al.  Thermodynamic Rarity and the Loss of Mineral Wealth , 2015 .

[59]  N. T. Nassar,et al.  Mineral Resources: Reserves, Peak Production and the Future , 2016 .

[60]  P. Crowson Some observations on copper yields and ore grades , 2012 .

[61]  M. Eckelman,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of Metals: A Scientific Synthesis , 2014, PloS one.

[62]  Zhehan Weng,et al.  A Detailed Assessment of Global Cu Resource Trends and Endowments * , 2013 .

[63]  Bengt Steen,et al.  A Systematic Approach to Environmental Priority Strategies in Product Development (EPS) Version 2000-General System Characteristics , 1999 .

[64]  Magnus Ericsson,et al.  Mineral grades: an important indicator for environmental impact of mineral exploitation , 2019, Mineral Economics.

[65]  Tom Huppertz,et al.  The Social Cost of Sub-Soil Resource Use , 2019, Resources.

[66]  Bengt Steen Abiotic Resource Depletion Different perceptions of the problem with mineral deposits , 2006 .

[67]  J. West,et al.  Decreasing Metal Ore Grades , 2011 .

[68]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Solar energy demand (SED) of commodity life cycles. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[69]  Angelo Antoci,et al.  Rural Poor Economies and Foreign Investors: An Opportunity or a Risk? , 2014, PloS one.

[70]  Jo Dewulf,et al.  Abiotic resource use in life cycle impact assessment—Part I- towards a common perspective , 2020, Resources, Conservation and Recycling.

[71]  M.D.M. Vieira Fossil and mineral resource scarcity in Life Cycle Assessment , 2018 .

[72]  Antonio Valero,et al.  Assessing the exergy degradation of the natural capital: From Szargut's updated reference environment to the new thermoecological-cost methodology , 2018, Energy.