Approaches to fill data gaps and evaluate process completeness in LCA—perspectives from solid waste management systems

PurposeLarge data amounts are required in an LCA, but often, site-specific data are missing and less representative surrogate data must be used to fill data gaps. No standardized rules exist on how to address data gaps and process completeness. We suggest a systematic evaluation of process completeness, identification of data gaps, and application of surrogate values to fill the gaps. The study focus on foreground process data.MethodsA solid waste management (SWM) scenario was used to illustrate the suggested method. The expected input and output flows in a waste incineration model were identified based on legislation and expert judgment, after which process completeness scores were calculated and missing flows identified. To illustrate the use of different types of surrogate data to fill data gaps, data gaps were selected for 16 different parameters in five SWM processes. We compared the global warming potential (GWP) from using surrogate data, and from leaving the gap, to identify the data gaps where representative surrogate data should be used.Results and discussionThe completeness score for the material inputs to waste incineration was 78%, and the missing flows were auxiliary fuels and precipitation chemicals. The completeness score for air emissions were between 38 and 50% with and without expert judgment. If only greenhouse gases were considered (CO2, CH4, and N2O), the completeness score would be 67%. Applying weighting factors according to the greenhouse gas contribution in the USA gave a completeness score of 94%. The system-wide data gaps, where representative surrogate data should be applied, were the CH4 release from composting; electricity generation efficiency of incineration; recovery efficiencies at a material recovery facility; and composition of the plastic, metal, and paper fractions in the household waste; in these cases, leaving the gap changed the GWP results by > 5%.ConclusionsCompleteness evaluation should take into account the relevance and importance of flows; relevance depends on the considered life cycle impact methods and importance depends on the weighting of the different flows. The set of expected flows and evaluation of relevance and importance must be documented in a transparent manner. The choice of surrogate values to fill data gaps depends on the availability of secondary data and on whether the data gap matters, i.e., significantly affects the LCA results. The suggested method can be used to properly document the identification of missing flows and to select and apply surrogate values to fill the data gaps.

[1]  T. H. Christensen,et al.  Composting and compost utilization: accounting of greenhouse gases and global warming contributions , 2009, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[2]  L. Hockstad,et al.  Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks , 2018 .

[3]  Mark A. J. Huijbregts,et al.  Framework for modelling data uncertainty in life cycle inventories , 2001 .

[4]  Anders Damgaard,et al.  Linking Data Choices and Context Specificity in Life Cycle Assessment of Waste Treatment Technologies: A Landfill Case Study , 2018 .

[5]  Gjalt Huppes,et al.  Quality assessment for LCA , 2000 .

[6]  Stephen J Burnley,et al.  A review of municipal solid waste composition in the United Kingdom. , 2007, Waste management.

[7]  Niels Jungbluth,et al.  Guidelines for consistent reporting of exchanges/to nature within life cycle inventories (LCI) , 2001 .

[8]  Davide Tonini,et al.  Food waste prevention in Denmark: Identification of hotspots and potentials with Life Cycle Assessment , 2017 .

[9]  T. Astrup,et al.  Incineration and co-combustion of waste: accounting of greenhouse gases and global warming contributions , 2009, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[10]  Charlotte Scheutz,et al.  Long-Term Emission Factors for Land Application of Treated Organic Municipal Waste , 2015, Environmental Modeling & Assessment.

[11]  Jerome R. Ravetz,et al.  Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy , 1990 .

[12]  Morton A Barlaz,et al.  Estimation of waste component-specific landfill decay rates using laboratory-scale decomposition data. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  Phillip N Pressley,et al.  Analysis of material recovery facilities for use in life-cycle assessment. , 2015, Waste management.

[14]  Fabrice Mathieux,et al.  Method applied to the background analysis of energy data to be considered for the European Reference Life Cycle Database (ELCD) , 2015, SpringerPlus.

[15]  Jay S. Golden,et al.  Patching Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) data gaps through expert elicitation: case study of laundry detergents , 2016 .

[16]  T. H. Christensen,et al.  Influence of data collection schemes on the Life Cycle Assessment of a municipal wastewater treatment plant. , 2014, Water research.

[17]  Helmut Rechberger,et al.  Applying Fuzzy and Probabilistic Uncertainty Concepts to the Material Flow Analysis of Palladium in Austria , 2015 .

[18]  T. H. Christensen,et al.  Recycling of paper: accounting of greenhouse gases and global warming contributions , 2009, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[19]  Morton A. Barlaz,et al.  Evaluation of life cycle inventory data for recycling systems , 2014 .

[20]  Charlotte Scheutz,et al.  Municipal solid waste composition: sampling methodology, statistical analyses, and case study evaluation. , 2015, Waste management.

[21]  Jens Malmodin,et al.  Simplifying a life cycle assessment of a mobile phone , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[22]  Aranya Venkatesh,et al.  How to address data gaps in life cycle inventories: a case study on estimating CO2 emissions from coal-fired electricity plants on a global scale. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[23]  Nickolas J. Themelis,et al.  Greenhouse gas impact of dual stream and single stream collection and separation of recyclables , 2012 .

[24]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[25]  Fabrice Mathieux,et al.  Background qualitative analysis of the European reference life cycle database (ELCD) energy datasets – part II: electricity datasets , 2015, SpringerPlus.

[26]  Anthony G. Williams,et al.  Approaches for Addressing Life Cycle Assessment Data Gaps for Bio‐based Products , 2011 .

[27]  Anders Damgaard,et al.  An environmental assessment system for environmental technologies , 2014, Environ. Model. Softw..

[28]  R. Little,et al.  The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  Charlotte Scheutz,et al.  Physico-chemical characterisation of material fractions in household waste: Overview of data in literature. , 2016, Waste management.

[30]  James W Levis,et al.  Systematic Evaluation of Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Food Waste Management Strategies in the United States. , 2016, Environmental science & technology.

[31]  Ronald G. Prinn,et al.  The municipal solid waste landfill as a source of ozone-depleting substances in the United States and United Kingdom , 2009 .

[32]  Edgar G. Hertwich,et al.  Evaluation of process- and input-output-based life cycle inventory data with regard to truncation and aggregation issues. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[33]  Knut Conradsen,et al.  Importance of waste composition for Life Cycle Assessment of waste management solutions , 2017 .

[34]  Roberto Turconi,et al.  Life cycle assessment of thermal waste-to-energy technologies: review and recommendations. , 2015, Waste management.

[35]  T. H. Christensen,et al.  Chemical composition of material fractions in Danish household waste. , 2009, Waste management.

[36]  Réjean Samson,et al.  Statistical estimation of missing data in life cycle inventory: an application to hydroelectric power plants , 2012 .

[37]  D. Tonini,et al.  Stochastic and epistemic uncertainty propagation in LCA , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[38]  T. Nemecek,et al.  Overview and methodology: Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3 , 2013 .

[39]  Not Indicated,et al.  International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook - General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance , 2010 .