Use of LCA as a development tool within early research: challenges and issues across different sectors

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to highlight the challenges that face the use of life cycle assessment (LCA) for the development of emerging technologies. LCA has great potential for driving the development of products and processes with improved environmental credentials when used at the early research stage, not only to compare novel processing with existing commercial alternatives but to help identify environmental hotspots. Its use in this way does however provide methodological and practical difficulties, often exacerbated by the speed of analysis required to enable development decisions to be made. Awareness and understanding of the difficulties in such cases is vital for all involved with the development cycle.MethodsThis paper employs three case studies across the diverse sectors of nanotechnology, lignocellulosic ethanol (biofuel), and novel food processes demonstrating both the synergy of issues across different sectors and highlighting the challenges when applying LCA for early research. Whilst several researchers have previously highlighted some of the issues with use of LCA techniques at an early stage, most have focused on a specific product, process development, or sector. The use of the three case studies here is specifically designed to highlight conclusively that such issues are prevalent to use of LCA in early research irrespective of the technology being assessed.Results and discussionThe four focus areas for the paper are system boundaries, scaling issues, data availability, and uncertainty. Whilst some of the issues identified will be familiar to all LCA practitioners as problems shared with standard LCAs, their importance and difficulty is compounded by factors distinct to novel processes as emerging technology is often associated with unknown future applications, unknown industrial scales, and wider data gaps that contribute to the level of LCA uncertainty. These issues, in addition with others that are distinct to novel applications, such as the challenges of comparing laboratory scale data with well-established commercial processing, are exacerbated by the requirement for rapid analysis to enable development decisions to be made.ConclusionsBased on the challenges and issues highlighted via illustration through the three case studies, it is clear that whilst transparency of information is paramount for standard LCAs, the sensitivities, complexities, and uncertainties surrounding LCAs for early research are critical. Full reporting and understanding of these must be established prior to utilising such data as part of the development cycle.

[1]  Francesco Cherubini,et al.  GHG balances of bioenergy systems – Overview of key steps in the production chain and methodological concerns , 2010 .

[2]  R D Tyagi,et al.  Engineered nanoparticles in wastewater and wastewater sludge--evidence and impacts. , 2010, Waste management.

[3]  S. Iijima Helical microtubules of graphitic carbon , 1991, Nature.

[4]  Gjalt Huppes,et al.  System boundary selection in life-cycle inventories using hybrid approaches. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[5]  Scott Duncan,et al.  A survey of unresolved problems in life cycle assessment , 2008 .

[6]  Mary Ann Curran,et al.  An examination of existing data for the industrial manufacture and use of nanocomponents and their role in the life cycle impact of nanoproducts. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[7]  G. Oberdörster,et al.  Nanotoxicology: An Emerging Discipline Evolving from Studies of Ultrafine Particles , 2005, Environmental health perspectives.

[8]  Vasilis Fthenakis,et al.  Life Cycle Energy and Climate Change Implications of Nanotechnologies , 2013 .

[9]  Maria Dusinska,et al.  The importance of life cycle concepts for the development of safe nanoproducts. , 2010, Toxicology.

[10]  Heather L MacLean,et al.  Life cycle evaluation of emerging lignocellulosic ethanol conversion technologies. , 2010, Bioresource technology.

[11]  Witold-Roger Poganietz,et al.  Towards a framework for life cycle thinking in the assessment of nanotechnology , 2008 .

[12]  Cécile Bessou,et al.  Biofuels, Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change , 2011 .

[13]  Donald Huisingh,et al.  Progress in working towards a more sustainable agri-food industry , 2012 .

[14]  Sun Olapiriyakul,et al.  Thermodynamic analysis to assess the environmental impact of end-of-life recovery processing for nanotechnology products. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  Pratim Biswas,et al.  Assessing the risks of manufactured nanomaterials. , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[16]  Esa Kunnari,et al.  Environmental evaluation of new technology: printed electronics case study , 2009 .

[17]  Konrad Hungerbühler,et al.  Ecological and Economic Objective Functions for Screening in Integrated Development of Fine Chemical Processes. 1. Flexible and Expandable Framework Using Indices , 1998 .

[18]  B. Mary,et al.  Biofuels, greenhouse gases and climate change. A review , 2011, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[19]  Kevin Robbie,et al.  Nanomaterials and nanoparticles: Sources and toxicity , 2007, Biointerphases.

[20]  Heather L. MacLean,et al.  The contribution of enzymes and process chemicals to the life cycle of ethanol , 2009 .

[21]  Thomas Ohlsson,et al.  Including Environmental Aspects in Production Development: A Case Study of Tomato Ketchup , 1999 .

[22]  K. Hungerbühler,et al.  Assessing Safety, Health, and Environmental Impact Early during Process Development , 2000 .

[23]  Geoffrey P. Hammond,et al.  Environmental life cycle assessment of lignocellulosic conversion to ethanol: A review , 2012 .

[24]  Nikhil Krishnan,et al.  A hybrid life cycle inventory of nano-scale semiconductor manufacturing. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.

[25]  Henrik Wenzel,et al.  Integration of environmental aspects in product development: a stepwise procedure based on quantitative life cycle assessment , 2002 .

[26]  Michela Gallo,et al.  The Application of the Environmental Product Declaration to Waste Disposal in a Sanitary Landfill - Four Case Studies (10 pp) , 2007 .

[27]  Almudena Hospido,et al.  A review of methodological issues affecting LCA of novel food products , 2010 .

[28]  Vicki Stone,et al.  Toxicology of nanoparticles: A historical perspective , 2007 .

[29]  D. G. Rickerby,et al.  Nanotechnology and the environment: A European perspective , 2007 .

[30]  Lester B Lave,et al.  Life cycle economic and environmental implications of using nanocomposites in automobiles. , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[31]  Tomas Ekvall,et al.  System boundaries and input data in consequential life cycle inventory analysis , 2004 .

[32]  Michael R. Overcash,et al.  Methodology for developing gate-to-gate Life cycle inventory information , 2000 .

[33]  Mary Ann Curran,et al.  Life cycle assessment as a tool to enhance the environmental performance of carbon nanotube products: a review , 2012 .

[34]  Stig Irving Olsen,et al.  Nanotechnology and Life Cycle Assessment. A systems approach to Nanotechnology and the environment: Synthesis of Results Obtained at a Workshop Washington, DC 2–3 October 2006 , 2007 .

[35]  John M. Woodley,et al.  Life cycle assessment in green chemistry: overview of key parameters and methodological concerns , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[36]  L. J. Lozano,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment Analysis of Ethanol Production from Carob Pod. , 2010 .

[37]  Jose R Peralta-Videa,et al.  Nanomaterials and the environment: a review for the biennium 2008-2010. , 2011, Journal of hazardous materials.

[38]  Anders Hammer Strømman,et al.  Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: state of the art and future challenges. , 2011, Bioresource technology.

[39]  Regina Luttge,et al.  Chapter 4 – Nanotechnology , 2011 .

[40]  Qiang Zhang,et al.  Carbon nanotube mass production: principles and processes. , 2011, ChemSusChem.

[41]  Peter C. Flynn,et al.  Processing of Straw/Corn Stover: Comparison of Life Cycle Emissions , 2008 .

[42]  D. Astruc,et al.  Gold Nanoparticles: Assembly, Supramolecular Chemistry, Quantum‐Size‐Related Properties, and Applications Toward Biology, Catalysis, and Nanotechnology. , 2004 .

[43]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  Towards prospective life cycle assessment: Single wall carbon nanotubes for lithium-ion batteries , 2011, Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology.

[44]  B. Dale,et al.  Ethanol Fuels: E10 or E85 – Life Cycle Perspectives (5 pp) , 2006 .

[45]  David Pennington,et al.  Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment. , 2009, Journal of environmental management.

[46]  Frieder Rubik,et al.  How to Do Ecodesign?: A Guide for Environmentally and Economically Sound Design , 2000 .

[47]  Marcelle C. McManus,et al.  Identifying the largest environmental life cycle impacts during carbon nanotube synthesis via chemical vapour deposition , 2013 .

[48]  G. Edwards‐Jones,et al.  Vulnerability of exporting nations to the development of a carbon label in the United Kingdom , 2009 .

[49]  Marcelle C. McManus,et al.  Using life cycle assessment to measure the environmental performance of catalysts and directing research in the conversion of CO2 into commodity chemicals: a look at the potential for fuels from ‘thin-air’ , 2013 .

[50]  T. Gutowski,et al.  Minimum exergy requirements for the manufacturing of carbon nanotubes , 2010, Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology.

[51]  Vikas Khanna,et al.  Carbon nanofiber polymer composites: evaluation of life cycle energy use. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[52]  Jaime Zufía,et al.  Life cycle assessment of food-preservation technologies , 2012 .

[53]  Sangwon Suh,et al.  Life cycle assessment at nanoscale: review and recommendations , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[54]  J. James,et al.  A Review of Carbon Nanotube Toxicity and Assessment of Potential Occupational and Environmental Health Risks , 2006, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[55]  Jamie R Lead,et al.  Manufactured nanoparticles: an overview of their chemistry, interactions and potential environmental implications. , 2008, The Science of the total environment.

[56]  S. Olsen,et al.  Limits and prospects of the "incremental approach" and the European legislation on the management of risks related to nanomaterials. , 2007, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[57]  Björn A. Sandén,et al.  Multi-level energy analysis of emerging technologies: a case study in new materials for lithium ion batteries , 2011 .

[58]  Takeo Shiina,et al.  A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. , 2009 .

[59]  Nicholas E. Korres,et al.  Key issues in life cycle assessment of ethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass: Challenges and perspectives. , 2010, Bioresource technology.