Prioritizing regionalization to enhance interpretation in consequential life cycle assessment: application to alternative transportation scenarios using partial equilibrium economic modeling

Consequential life cycle assessment (C-LCA) aims to assess the environmental consequences of a decision. It differs from traditional LCA because its inventory includes all the processes affected by the decision which are identified by accounting for causal links (physical, economic, etc.). However, C-LCA results could be quite uncertain which makes the interpretation phase harder. Therefore, strategies to assess and reduce uncertainty in C-LCA are needed. Part of uncertainty in C-LCA is due to spatial variability that can be reduced using regionalization. However, regionalization can be complex and time-consuming if straightforwardly applied to an entire LCA model. The main purpose of this article is to prioritize regionalization efforts to enhance interpretation in C-LCA by assessing the spatial uncertainty of a case study building on a partial equilibrium economic model. Three specific objectives are derived: (1) perform a C-LCA case study of alternative transportation scenarios to investigate the benefits of implementing a public policy for energy transition in France by 2050 with an uncertainty analysis to explore the strength of our conclusions, (2) perform global sensitivity analyses to identify and quantify the main sources of spatial uncertainty between foreground inventory model from partial equilibrium economic modeling, background inventory model and characterization factors, (3) propose a strategy to reduce the spatial uncertainty for our C-LCA case study by prioritizing regionalization. Results show that the implementation of alternative transport scenarios in compliance with public policy for the energy transition in France is beneficial for some impact categories (ICs) (global warming, marine acidification, marine eutrophication, terrestrial acidification, thermally polluted water, photochemical oxidant formation, and particulate matter formation), with a confidence level of 95%. For other ICs, uncertainty reduction is required to determine conclusions with a similar level of confidence. Input variables with spatial variability from the partial equilibrium economic model are significant contributors to the C-LCA spatial uncertainty and should be prioritized for spatial uncertainty reduction. In addition, characterization factors are significant contributors to the spatial uncertainty results for all regionalized ICs (except land occupation IC). Ways to reduce the spatial uncertainty from economic modeling should be explored. Uncertainty reduction to enhance the interpretation phase and the decision-making should be prioritized depending on the goal and scope of the LCA study. In addition, using regionalized CFs in C-LCA seems to be relevant, and C-LCA calculation tools should be adapted accordingly.

[1]  J. Tukey,et al.  Variations of Box Plots , 1978 .

[2]  Leslie G. Fishbone,et al.  Markal, a linear‐programming model for energy systems analysis: Technical description of the bnl version , 1981 .

[3]  Bradley Efron,et al.  Missing Data, Imputation, and the Bootstrap , 1994 .

[4]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments , 1995 .

[5]  Groupe des Sages Guidelines for the application of life cycle assessment in the EU eco-label award scheme , 1997 .

[6]  Mark A. J. Huijbregts,et al.  Application of uncertainty and variability in LCA , 1998 .

[7]  R. Frischknecht Life cycle inventory analysis for decision-making , 1998 .

[8]  Rolf Frischknecht Life cycle inventory analysis for decision-making , 1998 .

[9]  Bo Pedersen Weidema,et al.  Marginal production technologies for life cycle inventories , 1999 .

[10]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  The computational structure of life cycle assessment , 2002 .

[11]  A. Saltelli,et al.  On the Relative Importance of Input Factors in Mathematical Models , 2002 .

[12]  Thomas J. Santner,et al.  Design and analysis of computer experiments , 1998 .

[13]  Julien Jacques,et al.  Sensitivity analysis in presence of model uncertainty and correlated inputs , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[14]  Deniz Baş,et al.  Modeling and optimization I: Usability of response surface methodology , 2007 .

[15]  J. Bilbao [Lights and shadows]. , 2008, Radiologia.

[16]  George Z. Gertner,et al.  Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for models with correlated parameters , 2008, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[17]  Paola Annoni,et al.  Variance based sensitivity analysis of model output. Design and estimator for the total sensitivity index , 2010, Comput. Phys. Commun..

[18]  Not Indicated,et al.  International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook - Specific Guide for Life Cycle Inventory Data Sets , 2010 .

[19]  R. Samson,et al.  Assessing non-marginal variations with consequential LCA: Application to European energy sector , 2011 .

[20]  Kate S. Whitefoot,et al.  Consequential Life Cycle Assessment With Market‐Driven Design , 2011 .

[21]  Luc Pronzato,et al.  Design of computer experiments: space filling and beyond , 2011, Statistics and Computing.

[22]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Lights and shadows in consequential LCA , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[23]  Daphné THE FRENCH BIOFUELS MANDATES UNDER COST UNCERTAINTY AN ASSESSMENT BASED ON ROBUST OPTIMIZATION , 2012 .

[24]  R. Samson,et al.  Macroanalysis of the economic and environmental impacts of a 2005–2025 European Union bioenergy policy using the GTAP model and life cycle assessment , 2012 .

[25]  D. Lorne The French biofuels mandates under cost uncertainty - an assessment based on robust optimization è Draft paper , 2012 .

[26]  Bertrand Iooss,et al.  Numerical studies of space-filling designs: optimization of Latin Hypercube Samples and subprojection properties , 2013, J. Simulation.

[27]  J. M. Earles,et al.  Integrated Economic Equilibrium and Life Cycle Assessment Modeling for Policy‐based Consequential LCA , 2013 .

[28]  A. Marvuglia,et al.  Modelling approaches for consequential life-cycle assessment (C-LCA) of bioenergy: Critical review and proposed framework for biogas production , 2013 .

[29]  Mélanie Guiton,et al.  ANALYSE DU CYCLE DE VIE CONSEQUENTIELLE : IDENTIFICATION DES CONDITIONS DE MISE EN OEUVRE ET DES BONNES PRATIQUES RAPPORT FINAL , 2013 .

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

[31]  Pascal Lesage,et al.  The application of the pedigree approach to the distributions foreseen in ecoinvent v3 , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[32]  Michael D. Sohn,et al.  Confronting Uncertainty in Life Cycle Assessment Used for Decision Support , 2014 .

[33]  Valérie Saint-Antonin,et al.  (How) does sectoral detail affect the robustness of policy insights from energy system models? The refining sector's example , 2014 .

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

[35]  R. Samson,et al.  Uncertainty management in a macro life cycle assessment of a 2005-2025 European bioenergy policy , 2014 .

[36]  Philippe Roux,et al.  How to conduct a proper sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment: taking into account correlations within LCI data and interactions within the LCA calculation model. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[37]  Fabio Menten,et al.  Lessons from the use of a long-term energy model for consequential life cycle assessment: The BTL case , 2015 .

[38]  Dumitru Baleanu,et al.  New Derivatives on the Fractal Subset of Real-Line , 2015, Entropy.

[39]  Yi Yang Two sides of the same coin: consequential life cycle assessment based on the attributional framework , 2016 .

[40]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Measures of Difference and Significance in the Era of Computer Simulations, Meta-Analysis, and Big Data , 2016, Entropy.

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

[42]  Cécile Bulle,et al.  Ready-to-use and advanced methodologies to prioritise the regionalisation effort in LCA , 2016 .

[43]  G. Goldstein,et al.  Documentation for the TIMES Model PART III , 2016 .

[44]  Michel Bierlaire,et al.  Characterization of input uncertainties in strategic energy planning models , 2017 .

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

[46]  Philippe Osset,et al.  Critical review and practical recommendations to integrate the spatial dimension into life cycle assessment , 2018 .

[47]  Peter Fantke,et al.  Overview and recommendations for regionalized life cycle impact assessment , 2018, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[48]  Pierre-Olivier Pineau,et al.  Integrating Energy System Models in Life Cycle Management , 2018 .

[49]  Jeroen B. Guinée,et al.  Quantified Uncertainties in Comparative Life Cycle Assessment: What Can Be Concluded? , 2018, Environmental science & technology.

[50]  C. Mutel,et al.  Effects of Distribution Choice on the Modeling of Life Cycle Inventory Uncertainty: An Assessment on the Ecoinvent v2.2 Database , 2018 .

[51]  C. Bauer,et al.  The integration of long-term marginal electricity supply mixes in the ecoinvent consequential database version 3.4 and examination of modeling choices , 2018, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[52]  Alexis Laurent,et al.  IMPACT World+: a globally regionalized life cycle impact assessment method , 2019, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[53]  Pascal Lesage,et al.  Prioritizing regionalization efforts in life cycle assessment through global sensitivity analysis: a sector meta-analysis based on ecoinvent v3 , 2019, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[54]  A. Hélias,et al.  Coupling partial-equilibrium and dynamic biogenic carbon models to assess future transport scenarios in France , 2019, Applied Energy.

[55]  R. Heijungs,et al.  Leveraging life cycle assessment and simplex lattice design in optimizing fossil fuel blends for sustainable desalination , 2020, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.