Developing Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment methodology by applying values-based sustainability weighting - Tested on biomass based and fossil transportation fuels

The production and use of transportation fuels can lead to sustainability impacts. Assessing them simultaneously in a holistic way is a challenge. This paper examines methodology for assessing the sustainability performance of products in a more integrated way, including a broad range of social impacts. Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) methodology is applied for this assessment. LSCA often constitutes of the integration of results from social LCA (S-LCA), environmental life cycle assessment (E-LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC). In this study, an S-LCA from an earlier project is extended with a positive social aspect, as well as refined and detailed. E-LCA and LCC results are built from LCA database and literature. Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methodology is applied to integrate the results from the three different assessments into an LCSA. The weighting of key sustainability dimensions in the MCDA is performed in different ways, where the sustainability dimensions are prioritized differently priority based on the assumed values of different stakeholder profiles (Egalitarian, Hierarchist, and Individualist). The developed methodology is tested on selected biomass based and fossil transportation fuels - ethanol produced from Brazilian sugarcane and US corn/maize, and petrol produced from Russian and Nigerian crude oils, where it delineates differences in sustainability performance between products assessed. The outcome in terms of relative ranking of the transportation fuel chains based on sustainability performance differs when applying different decision-maker profiles. This result highlights and supports views that there is no one single answer regarding which of the alternatives that is most sustainable. Rather, it depends strongly upon the worldview and values held by the decision maker. A key conclusion is that sustainability assessments should pay more attention to potential differences in underlying values held by key stakeholders in relevant societal contexts. The LCSA methodology still faces challenges regarding results integration but MCDA in combination with stakeholder profiles appears to be a useful approach to build on further.

[1]  Göran Berndes,et al.  Environmental, land-use and economic implications of Brazilian sugarcane expansion 1996–2006 , 2009 .

[2]  Murray R. Hall,et al.  A transdisciplinary review of the role of economics in life cycle sustainability assessment , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[3]  Andreas Jørgensen,et al.  Is LCC relevant in a sustainability assessment? , 2010 .

[4]  Germán Aroca,et al.  Environmental assessment of the production and addition of bioethanol produced from Eucalyptus globulus to gasoline in Chile , 2017, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[5]  Andreas Ciroth,et al.  The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! , 2010 .

[6]  Alessandra Zamagni,et al.  Life cycle sustainability assessment in the context of sustainability science progress (part 2) , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[7]  Serge Domenech,et al.  Design of bioethanol green supply chain: Comparison between first and second generation biomass concerning economic, environmental and social criteria , 2016, Comput. Chem. Eng..

[8]  Till M. Bachmann,et al.  Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: drawing on the NEEDS project’s total cost and multi-criteria decision analysis ranking methods , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[9]  Karl R. Haapala,et al.  Integrating Sustainable Manufacturing Assessment into Decision Making for a Production Work Cell , 2015 .

[10]  Steven Van Passel,et al.  Social sustainability assessments in the biobased economy: Towards a systemic approach , 2018 .

[12]  Bengt Steen,et al.  A selection of safeguard subjects and state indicators for sustainability assessments , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[13]  T. Buchholz,et al.  A participatory systems approach to modeling social, economic, and ecological components of bioenergy , 2007 .

[14]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Application of the TOPSIS and intuitionistic fuzzy set approaches for ranking the life cycle sustainability performance of alternative vehicle technologies , 2016 .

[15]  Marzia Traverso,et al.  A UNEP/SETAC approach towards a life cycle sustainability assessment—our contribution to Rio+20 , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[16]  Mahmoud M. El-Halwagi,et al.  Optimal planning and site selection for distributed multiproduct biorefineries involving economic, environmental and social objectives. , 2014 .

[17]  M. Finkbeiner,et al.  From Life Cycle Costing to Economic Life Cycle Assessment—Introducing an Economic Impact Pathway , 2016 .

[18]  B. Slack,et al.  The Geography of Transport Systems , 2006 .

[19]  Walter Kloepffer,et al.  Life cycle sustainability assessment of products , 2008 .

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

[21]  Manfred Denich,et al.  Bioenergy, food security and poverty reduction: trade-offs and synergies along the water–energy–food security nexus , 2015 .

[22]  Marios K. Chryssanthopoulos,et al.  A multi-criteria decision support framework for sustainable asset management and challenges in its application , 2015 .

[23]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Integrating triple bottom line input–output analysis into life cycle sustainability assessment framework: the case for US buildings , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[24]  Gjalt Huppes,et al.  Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[25]  Sangwon Suh,et al.  Replacing gasoline with corn ethanol results in significant environmental problem-shifting. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[26]  Andreas Brekke,et al.  Testing environmental and social indicators for biorefineries: bioethanol and biochemical production , 2018, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[27]  Marco Cinelli,et al.  Analysis of the potentials of multi criteria decision analysis methods to conduct sustainability assessment , 2014 .

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

[29]  Joan Rieradevall,et al.  Application challenges for the social Life Cycle Assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment , 2014 .

[30]  Timothy A. Volk,et al.  Multi criteria analysis for bioenergy systems assessments , 2009 .

[31]  D. French,et al.  Sustainable Development Goals , 2021, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

[32]  Christopher J. Koroneos,et al.  Comparative LCA of the use of biodiesel, diesel and gasoline for transportation , 2012 .

[33]  Jiangjiang Wang,et al.  Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making , 2009 .

[34]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Ecovalue08–A new valuation set for environmental systems analysis tools , 2011 .

[35]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Weighting and valuation in selected environmental systems analysis tools - suggestions for further developments , 2011 .

[36]  Matthias Finkbeiner,et al.  Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard , 2012 .

[37]  J. Guinée.  Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment: What Is It and What Are Its Challenges? , 2016 .

[38]  Gjalt Huppes,et al.  Life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of bioethanol from sugarcane in Brazil , 2009 .

[39]  O. Cavalett,et al.  Trends in global warming and human health impacts related to Brazilian sugarcane ethanol production considering black carbon emissions , 2013 .

[40]  Alessandra Zamagni,et al.  Progress in sustainability science: lessons learnt from current methodologies for sustainability assessment: Part 1 , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[41]  Erwin M. Schau,et al.  Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment , 2010 .

[42]  David Lazarevic,et al.  Life cycle assessments, carbon footprints and carbon visions: Analysing environmental systems analyses of transportation biofuels in Sweden , 2016 .

[43]  Changsheng Li,et al.  Bioethanol from poplar clone Imola: an environmentally viable alternative to fossil fuel? , 2015, Biotechnology for Biofuels.

[44]  Anders Bjørn,et al.  Analysis of the link between a definition of sustainability and the life cycle methodologies , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[45]  J. Hansson,et al.  Addressing positive impacts in social LCA—discussing current and new approaches exemplified by the case of vehicle fuels , 2018, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[46]  B. Steen.  A Systematic Approach to Environmental Priority Strategies in Product Development (EPS) Version 2000- Models and data of the default method , 1999 .

[47]  Yi Zhang,et al.  Accounting for ecosystem services in life cycle assessment, Part I: a critical review. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[48]  Anthony Halog,et al.  Solar Photovoltaic Development in Australia—A Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Study , 2015 .

[49]  Steven Van Passel,et al.  Bridging the gap between LCA, LCC and CBA as sustainability assessment tools , 2014 .

[50]  Joaquim E. A. Seabra,et al.  Comparative LCA of ethanol versus gasoline in Brazil using different LCIA methods , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[51]  Kay Suwelack,et al.  An approach to unify the appraisal framework for biomass conversion systems , 2015 .

[52]  Roberto Dones,et al.  Life Cycle Inventories of Energy Systems: Results for Current Systems in Switzerland and other UCTE Countries , 2007 .

[53]  Yohay Carmel,et al.  Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[54]  Jinglan Hong,et al.  Uncertainty propagation in life cycle assessment of biodiesel versus diesel: global warming and non-renewable energy. , 2012, Bioresource technology.

[55]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs , 1976 .

[56]  R. Clift,et al.  Developing a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems , 2007 .

[57]  Jonathan Rosenhead,et al.  Definition of sustainability impact categories based on stakeholder perspectives , 2015 .

[58]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Screening potential social impacts of fossil fuels and biofuels for vehicles , 2014 .

[59]  Fatih Tüysüz,et al.  An Integrated Grey Based Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach for the Evaluation of Renewable Energy Sources , 2016 .

[60]  Seungdo Kim,et al.  Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol derived from corn grain via dry milling. , 2008, Bioresource technology.

[61]  Sofia Ahlroth,et al.  Developing a weighting set based on monetary damage estimates : Method and case studies , 2009 .

[62]  I. Dincer,et al.  A new model to assess the environmental impact and sustainability of energy systems , 2015 .

[63]  Nilgun Ciliz,et al.  Life cycle assessment and environmental life cycle costing analysis of lignocellulosic bioethanol as an alternative transportation fuel , 2016 .

[64]  Jingzheng Ren,et al.  Prioritization of bioethanol production pathways in China based on life cycle sustainability assessment and multicriteria decision-making , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[65]  Reginald B. H. Tan,et al.  The New International Standards for Life Cycle Assessment: ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 , 2006 .

[66]  A. Azapagic,et al.  Sustainability assessment of energy systems: Integrating environmental, economic and social aspects , 2014 .

[67]  Andreas Ciroth,et al.  Is LCC relevant in a sustainability assessment? , 2011 .

[68]  Jeroen B. Guinee,et al.  Handbook on life cycle assessment operational guide to the ISO standards , 2002 .

[69]  K. Cassman,et al.  Improvements in Life Cycle Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Corn‐Ethanol , 2009 .

[70]  Cecilia Håkansson,et al.  A new set of valuation factors for LCA and LCC based on damage costs : Ecovalue 2012 , 2013 .

[71]  A. Nizami,et al.  Key issues in estimating energy and greenhouse gas savings of biofuels: challenges and perspectives , 2016 .

[72]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Combined application of multi-criteria optimization and life-cycle sustainability assessment for optimal distribution of alternative passenger cars in U.S. , 2016 .

[73]  Stefan Hirschberg,et al.  Interdisciplinary assessment of renewable, nuclear and fossil power generation with and without carbon capture and storage in view of the new Swiss energy policy , 2016 .

[74]  Anthony Halog,et al.  Advancing Integrated Systems Modelling Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment , 2011 .

[75]  Susan Overakker,et al.  A Social Hotspot Database for Acquiring Greater Visibility in Product Supply Chains: Overview and Application to Orange Juice , 2011 .

[76]  An M. De Schryver,et al.  The influence of value choices in life cycle impact assessment of stressors causing human health damage , 2011, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[77]  Matthias Finkbeiner,et al.  Review of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment and Potential for Its Adoption at an Automotive Company , 2017 .

[78]  P. Peck,et al.  Regulating a global value chain with the European Union's sustainability criteria – experiences from the Swedish liquid transport biofuel sector , 2017 .

[79]  Lauren Basson,et al.  An integrated approach for the consideration of uncertainty in decision making supported by Life Cycle Assessment , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[80]  Nicolae Scarlat,et al.  Recent developments of biofuels/bioenergy sustainability certification: A global overview , 2011 .