Post-consumer waste wood in attributive product LCA

BackgroundIn product life cycle assessment (LCA), the attribution of environmental interventions to a product under study is an ambiguous task. This is due to a) the simplistic modeling characteristics in the life cycle inventory step (LCI) of LCA in view of the complexity of our techno-economic system, and b) to the nontangible theoretical nature of the product system as a representation of the processes ‘causally’ linked to a product. Ambiguous methodological decisions during the setup of an LCI include the modeling of end-of-life scenarios or the choice of an allocation factor for the allocation of joint co-production processes. An important criterion for methodological decisions — besides the conformity with the relevant series of standards ISO 14 040 — is if the improvement options, which can be deduced from the LCI, are perceived by the decision-maker as to redirect the material flows at stake into more sustainable paths.MethodsFrom this functionalistic conception of LCA, this article develops a set of wood-specific requirements, an LCI of wood products has to fulfill to give adequate decision support under Central European conditions. These requirements serve as a basis for the evaluation of different allocation procedures in a case study related to the modeling of end-of-life scenarios in a product LCA of wood products. The case study discusses how the recycling and incineration of a creosote-treated railway sleeper (Am. tie) are modeled according to various methodological propositions for the solution of the allocation problems related to recycling and final disposal. A partial life cycle model of the railway sleeper demonstrates the effect of the different allocation procedures to the over-all result.Results and DiscussionThe most important conclusion — apart from proposing a functionalistic approach to solve allocation problems — is that under Central European conditions both the material and energy aspects of wood and the related substitution and opportunity effects (opportunity ‘cost’) should be considered for the modeling of post-consumer waste wood in attributive product LCA, even when comparing products made of different materials.

[1]  P. Johnson-Laird.  Mental models , 1989 .

[2]  Stefan Schaltegger,et al.  Eco-Efficiency of LCA. The Necessity of a Site-Specific Approach , 1996 .

[3]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Life cycle assessment of energy from solid waste—part 2: landfilling compared to other treatment methods , 2005 .

[4]  Tomas Ekvall,et al.  System Expansion and Allocation in Life Cycle Assessment With Implications for Wastepaper Management , 1999 .

[5]  K. E. Skog,et al.  Carbon cycling through wood products : The role of wood and paper products in carbon sequestration , 1998 .

[6]  Tomas Ekvall,et al.  Key methodological issues for life cycle inventory analysis of paper recycling , 1999 .

[7]  Tomas Ekvall,et al.  Choice of system boundaries in life cycle assessment , 1994 .

[8]  R. Heijungs,et al.  Life cycle assessment An operational guide to the ISO standards , 2001 .

[9]  W. Edwards,et al.  Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research , 1986 .

[10]  Walter Klöpffer,et al.  Allocation rule for open-loop recycling in life cycle assessment , 1996 .

[11]  Raymond A. Young.  Wood and Wood Products , 1992 .

[12]  Reine Karlsson.  Recycling in Life Cycle Assessment , 1995 .

[13]  Leo Alting,et al.  Life cycle engineering and design , 1995 .

[14]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[15]  Frank Werner,et al.  Allocation in lca of wood-based products experiences of cost action E9 part i. methodology , 2002 .

[16]  Dietrich Altenpohl,et al.  Materials in world perspective : assessment of resources, technologies, and trends for key materials industries , 1980 .

[17]  J. Seppälä,et al.  Forest industry and the environment: a life cycle assessment study from Finland , 1998 .

[18]  Frank Werner,et al.  Allocation in LCA of wood-based products experiences of cost action E9 , 2002 .

[19]  Glenn A. Hodgkins,et al.  Changes in the Number and Timing of Days of Ice-Affected Flow on Northern New England Rivers, 1930–2000 , 2005 .

[20]  Tomas Ekvall,et al.  Open-loop recycling: Criteria for allocation procedures , 1997 .

[21]  Roland W. Scholz,et al.  Embedded Case Study Methods , 2002 .

[22]  David Price,et al.  Forest ecosystems, forest management and the global carbon cycle , 1996 .

[23]  James A. Fava,et al.  A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle Assessment , 1994 .

[24]  Richard A. Birdsey,et al.  WG3 Summary: Evaluating the role of forest management and forest products in the carbon cycle , 1996 .

[25]  Roland W. Scholz,et al.  Ambiguities in decision-oriented Life Cycle Inventories The Role of mental models , 2002 .

[26]  Walter Klöpffer.  Subjective is not arbitrary , 1998 .

[27]  Peter J. Fraanje,et al.  Cascading of pine wood , 1997 .

[28]  Adisa Azapagic,et al.  Allocation of environmental burdens in co-product systems: Product-related burdens (Part 1) , 1999 .

[29]  Peter J. Fraanje,et al.  Towards sustainable use of the renewable resource wood in the Netherlands — a systematic approach , 1997 .

[30]  R. Heijungs,et al.  Environmental life cycle assessment of products : guide and backgrounds (Part 1) , 1992 .

[31]  E. Brunswik,et al.  The Conceptual Framework of Psychology , 1954 .

[32]  Gjalt Huppes.  Comments to ‘economic allocation in LCA’ by Frank Werner and Klaus Richter , 2000 .

[33]  Frank Werner,et al.  Reply to the ‘letter to the editor’ by Gjalt Huppes , 2000 .

[34]  Ted Sirkin,et al.  The cascade chain: A theory and tool for achieving resource sustainability with applications for product design , 1994 .

[35]  Henrik Wenzel,et al.  Application dependency of lca methodology: Key variables and their mode of influencing the method , 1998 .

[36]  Frank Werner,et al.  Economic Allocation in LCA: A Case Study About Aluminium Window Frames , 2000 .

[37]  Frank Werner,et al.  Greenhouse Gas Dynamics of an Increased Use of Wood in Buildings in Switzerland , 2006 .

[38]  William E. Franklin,et al.  General mathematical models for LCI recycling , 1994 .

[39]  L. Susskind,et al.  The consensus building handbook : a comprehensive guide to reaching agreement , 1999 .

[40]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Life-cycle assessment as a decision-support tool—the case of recycling versus incineration of paper , 1998 .

[41]  Hans-Jörg Althaus,et al.  Post-consumer wood in environmental decision-support tools , 2002 .

[42]  R. Heijungs,et al.  Economic allocation: Examples and derived decision tree , 2004 .

[43]  G. Nabuurs,et al.  Forest and forest products: the challenge for a better carbon balance , 1995 .

[44]  J. Bowyer,et al.  Wood and other raw materials for the 21st Century , 1995 .

[45]  L. Göttsching,et al.  Ökobilanzen : Lassen sich Umweltbelastungen gerecht auf die Papierkette verteilen? , 1996 .

[46]  Stefan Schaltegger,et al.  Life cycle assessment (LCA)-quo vadis? , 1996 .

[47]  T. Ekvall.  A market-based approach to allocation at open-loop recycling , 2000 .

[48]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Life cycle assessment of energy from solid waste—part 1: general methodology and results , 2005 .

[49]  J. Houghton,et al.  Climate change 1995: the science of climate change. , 1996 .

[50]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Modelling the valuesphere and the ecosphere: Integrating the decision makers’ perspectives into LCA , 2000 .