Attributional and consequential life cycle assessments in a circular economy with integration of a quality indicator: A case study of cascading wood products

The growing popularity of the concepts of circular economy and resource cascade has intensified the need for consistent handling of multifunctionality‐related challenges when modeling multiple cycles in life cycle assessment (LCA). In LCA, end‐of‐life upcycling and downcycling effects (also known as quality changes), triggered by the presence of multiple life cycles, have only recently begun to be studied from a consequential perspective, and no studies exist investigating attributional aspects. In this paper, a novel approach that considers quality in attributional LCA is proposed. The attributional, cut‐off, open loop, and proposed approaches are compared in the form of a cascading case study. The implications of integrating quality in both perspectives are contrasted by modeling the same case study under a consequential perspective. By performing sensitivity analysis on the quality parameters in attributional LCA, we found that the integration of quality influences the results of the proposed approach by up to 15%. In the case of consequential LCA, the implementation of quality yields an influence between 97% and 138% of the results for each unit variation of quality. Comparison between the two perspectives of quality shows the same trend of supporting high‐quality cascades. However, the attributional perspective of quality accomplishes this by redistributing impacts, while the consequential perspective affects the external benefits generated by the cascade. Considering the influence of quality on the results of both perspectives, future work should focus on establishing the technical or economic properties that would allow for practical use of quality in various circular economy and resource cascade applications.

[1]  Enrico Benetto,et al.  Sustainability assessment of circular economy over time: Modelling of finite and variable loops & impact distribution among related products , 2020 .

[2]  Endrit Hoxha,et al.  Comparison of environmental assessment methods when reusing building components: A case study , 2020 .

[3]  Sabrina Brullot,et al.  The Circular Economy and Cascading: Towards a Framework , 2020 .

[4]  L Rigamonti,et al.  A step forward in quantifying the substitutability of secondary materials in waste management life cycle assessment studies. , 2020, Waste management.

[5]  Guido Sonnemann,et al.  Archetypes of Goal and Scope Definitions for Consistent Allocation in LCA , 2020, Sustainability.

[6]  Luis Alberto López Ruiz,et al.  The circular economy in the construction and demolition waste sector – A review and an integrative model approach , 2020 .

[7]  S Viau,et al.  Substitution modelling in life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management. , 2019, Waste management.

[8]  J. Dewulf,et al.  Improving the resource footprint evaluation of products recovered from wastewater: A discussion on appropriate allocation in the context of circular economy , 2019, Resources, Conservation and Recycling.

[9]  M. Rehberger,et al.  Allocation Procedures for Generic Cascade Use Cases - An Evaluation Using Monte Carlo Analysis , 2019, Materials Science Forum.

[10]  Gabriele Weber-Blaschke,et al.  Eco-efficiency analysis of recycling recovered solid wood from construction into laminated timber products. , 2019, The Science of the total environment.

[11]  R. Puig,et al.  Influence of end-of-life allocation, credits and other methodological issues in LCA of compounds: An in-company circular economy case study on packaging , 2019, Journal of Cleaner Production.

[12]  Thomas F. Astrup,et al.  Dynamic accounting of greenhouse gas emissions from cascading utilisation of wood waste. , 2019, The Science of the total environment.

[13]  Hessam AzariJafari,et al.  Removing Shadows from Consequential LCA through a Time-Dependent Modeling Approach: Policy-Making in the Road Pavement Sector. , 2019, Environmental science & technology.

[14]  T. Astrup,et al.  Quality Assessment and Circularity Potential of Recovery Systems for Household Plastic Waste , 2018, Journal of Industrial Ecology.

[15]  Roland Geyer,et al.  Material Recycling and the Myth of Landfill Diversion , 2018, Journal of Industrial Ecology.

[16]  Ben Amor,et al.  Is open-loop recycling the lowest preference in a circular economy? Answering through LCA of glass powder in concrete , 2018, Journal of Cleaner Production.

[17]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Digesting the alphabet soup of LCA , 2018, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[18]  Mario Grosso,et al.  Recycling processes and quality of secondary materials: Food for thought for waste-management-oriented life cycle assessment studies. , 2018, Waste management.

[19]  Matthias Schumann,et al.  Environmental impacts of wood-based products under consideration of cascade utilization: A systematic literature review , 2018 .

[20]  Tobias Stern,et al.  Cascading Utilization of Wood: a Matter of Circular Economy? , 2017, Current Forestry Reports.

[21]  Gabriele Weber-Blaschke,et al.  Resource efficiency of multifunctional wood cascade chains using LCA and exergy analysis, exemplified by a case study for Germany , 2017 .

[22]  Carl Vadenbo,et al.  Let's Be Clear(er) about Substitution: A Reporting Framework to Account for Product Displacement in Life Cycle Assessment , 2017 .

[23]  Christopher L. Mutel,et al.  Brightway: An open source framework for Life Cycle Assessment , 2017, J. Open Source Softw..

[24]  Rana Pant,et al.  The search for an appropriate end-of-life formula for the purpose of the European Commission Environmental Footprint initiative , 2017, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[25]  Brandon Kuczenski,et al.  Common Misconceptions about Recycling , 2016 .

[26]  R. Geyer,et al.  A Market‐Based Framework for Quantifying Displaced Production from Recycling or Reuse , 2016 .

[27]  Gregor Wernet,et al.  The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[28]  Dieuwertje Schrijvers,et al.  Developing a systematic framework for consistent allocation in LCA , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[29]  Dieuwertje Schrijvers,et al.  Critical review of guidelines against a systematic framework with regard to consistency on allocation procedures for recycling in LCA , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[30]  G. Finnveden,et al.  Attributional and consequential LCA in the ILCD handbook , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[31]  Pere Fullana-i-Palmer,et al.  Introducing a new method for calculating the environmental credits of end-of-life material recovery in attributional LCA , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[32]  Gabriele Weber-Blaschke,et al.  Utilization of recovered wood in cascades versus utilization of primary wood—a comparison with life cycle assessment using system expansion , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[33]  Monia Niero,et al.  Review of LCA studies of solid waste management systems--part II: methodological guidance for a better practice. , 2014, Waste management.

[34]  F. Creutzig,et al.  Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate‐Change Mitigation Benefits Misleads Policy Makers , 2014 .

[35]  Christoph Koffler,et al.  Tackling the Downcycling Issue—A Revised Approach to Value-Corrected Substitution in Life Cycle Assessment of Aluminum (VCS 2.0) , 2013 .

[36]  Gregory A. Keoleian,et al.  Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment Recycling Allocation Methods , 2013 .

[37]  Frank R. Field,et al.  End-of-life LCA allocation methods: Open loop recycling impacts on robustness of material selection decisions , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology.

[38]  Hans-Jörg Althaus,et al.  Post-Consumer Waste Wood in Attributive Product LCA Context specific evaluation of allocation procedures in a functionalistic conception of LCA , 2007 .

[39]  Hans-Jörg Althaus,et al.  Post-consumer waste wood in attributive product LCA , 2006 .

[40]  V. Thomas Demand and Dematerialization Impacts of Second‐Hand Markets , 2003 .

[41]  Mathias Borg,et al.  Proposal of a method for allocation in building-related environmental LCA based on economic parameters , 2001 .

[42]  Kun-Mo Lee,et al.  Allocation for cascade recycling system , 1997 .

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

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

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

[46]  A. Petit‐Boix,et al.  Transforming the bio-based sector towards a circular economy - What can we learn from wood cascading? , 2020 .

[47]  Matthias Finkbeiner,et al.  Are we still keeping it “real”? Proposing a revised paradigm for recycling credits in attributional life cycle assessment , 2017, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[48]  Jutta Geldermann,et al.  Sustainable logistics network for wood flow considering cascade utilisation , 2016 .

[49]  Fulvio Ardente,et al.  Rationales for and limitations of preferred solutions for multi-functionality problems in LCA: is increased consistency possible? , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[50]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Allocation and 'what-if' scenarios in life cycle assessment of waste management systems. , 2007, Waste management.

[51]  Markus A. Reuter,et al.  Quantifying the quality loss and resource efficiency of recycling by means of exergy analysis , 2007 .

[52]  Henrikke Baumann,et al.  The hitch hiker's guide to LCA : an orientation in life cycle assessment methodology and application , 2004 .

[53]  B. Weidema Market information in life cycle assessment , 2003 .