Foundry Sand Source Reduction Options: Life Cycle Assessment Evaluation

Feeding a growing, increasingly affluent population while limiting environmental pressures of food production is a central challenge for society. Understanding the location and magnitude of food production is key to addressing this challenge because pressures vary substantially across food production types. Applying data and models from life cycle assessment with the methodologies for mapping cumulative environmental impacts of human activities (hereafter cumulative impact mapping) provides a powerful approach to spatially map the cumulative environmental pressure of food production in a way that is consistent and comprehensive across food types. However, these methodologies have yet to be combined. By synthesizing life cycle assessment and cumulative impact mapping methodologies, we provide guidance for comprehensively and cumulatively mapping the environmental pressures (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions, spatial occupancy, and freshwater use) associated with food production systems. This spatial approach enables quantification of current and potential future environmental pressures, which is needed for decision makers to create more sustainable food policies and practices.

Assessing the greenhouse gas mitigation potential of urban precincts with hybrid life cycle assessment

Due to population growth, urban water demand is expected to increase significantly, as well as the environmental and economic costs required to supply it. Rainwater harvesting (RWH) systems can play a key role in helping cities meet part of their water demand as an alternative to conventional water abstraction and treatment. This paper presents an environmental and economic analysis of RWH systems providing households with water for laundry purposes in a life cycle thinking perspective. Eight urban RWH system scenarios are defined with varying population density and storage tank layout for existing buildings. Storage tank volume required is calculated using Plugrisost software, based on Barcelona rainfall and catchment area, as well as water demand for laundry, since laundry is a fairly constant demand of non-potable water. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) methodologies are applied for this study. Environmental impacts are determined using the ReCiPe 2008 (hierarchical, midpoint) and the cumulative energy demand methods. Net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), and payback (PB) time were used in LCC. Savings from laundry additives due to the difference in water hardness was, for the first time, included in a RWH study. LCA results indicate that the best scenario consists of a 24-household building, with the tank spread on the roof providing up to 96% lower impacts than the rest of scenarios considered. These results are mainly due to the absence of pumping energy consumption and greater rainwater collection per cubic meter of built tank capacity. Furthermore, avoided environmental impacts from the reduction in detergent use are more than 20 times greater than the impacts generated by the RWH system. LCC indicates that RWH system in clusters of buildings or home apartments offer up to 16 times higher profits (higher NPV, higher IRR, and lower PB periods) than individual installations. LCA and LCC present better results for high-density scenarios. Overall, avoided environmental and economic impacts from detergent reduction clearly surpass environmental impacts (in all categories except terrestrial acidification) and economic cost of the RWH system in most cases (except two scenarios). Another important finding is that 80% of the savings are achieved by minimizing detergent and fabric softener by using soft rainwater; and the remaining 20% comes from replacing the use of tap water.

The use of life cycle assessment (LCA) methods is rapidly expanding as a means of estimating the biodiversity impacts of organisations across complex value chains. However, these methods have limitations and substantial uncertainties, which are rarely communicated in the results of LCAs. Drawing upon the ecological and LCA literature on uncertainty and two worked examples of biodiversity footprinting, we outline where different types of uncertainty occur across multiple stages in LCA, from input data to the choice of biodiversity metric. Some uncertainties are epistemic, incorporating structural (e.g. the types of pressures included in models), parametric (e.g. uncertainty around characterisation factors and information gaps) and measurement uncertainty, as well as natural variability, and stochasticity. Other uncertainties are linguistic (e.g. ambiguity around definitions of biodiversity) and decision‐based (e.g. choices made when matching company data to inventory categories). Based on this review, we provide suggestions for (i) understanding, reducing and navigating uncertainties in biodiversity footprinting and (ii) ensuring the robust and appropriate use of LCA techniques as part of broader organisational biodiversity strategies. Understanding the risks posed by these uncertainties, weighing them against the costs of inappropriate action or inaction and ensuring decisions are robust to these uncertainties is vital for designing effective biodiversity strategies. By appreciating and navigating uncertainties, opportunities exist to utilise LCAs for high‐level risk screening to prioritise action and highlight areas where focused effort and more granular data are needed to track progress towards abating impacts year‐on‐year and identify low‐risk actions. However, we recommend biodiversity strategies should not be based solely on absolute LCA impact results. Instead, LCAs should be used alongside other approaches to guide location‐specific and robust action to deliver a nature‐positive future.

Globally, the building sector accounts for about one third of global CO2 emissions. In this context, life cycle assessment (LCA) serves as a strong instrument to quantify the environmental impacts throughout the complete life cycle of a building. Nevertheless, current LCA methods can be further refined from certain perspectives. For instance, the static calculation in the current LCA methods does not take temporal variations into account. Unlike analyses of life cycle cost and operational energy consumption, the dynamic changes of LCA results are rarely considered, which makes equivalent comparisons difficult. To deal with this problem, many studies were carried out in the last decade to discuss the dynamic LCA (DLCA) methodologies. Current studies on DLCA can be broadly divided into two main groups: dynamic life cycle inventory (DLCI) and dynamic life cycle impact assessment (DLCIA). However, this division is not sufficiently intuitive for LCA practitioners, complicating the integration and proper categorization of other various dynamic factors in practice. This leads to the lack of wider understanding about the concept of DLCA, especially within the building industry, which indirectly slows down the practical implementation of DLCA approaches in the building industry.In this research, we conduct a comprehensive review of dynamic factors that can potentially impact LCA results in the building industry and categorize the investigated dynamic factors into two types: background and foreground. This categorization directly addresses the difference of background and foreground databases. In addition, we introduce methods for modeling these dynamic factors. To demonstrate their practical applicability, we applied the categorized dynamic factors to one background database, ecoinvent, and one local foreground database, Ökobaudat. The results show that our new categorization of dynamic factors simplifies the modeling of dynamic factors and serves as a foundation for the further expansion of dynamic factors and for further development in DLCA methodologies.

This paper explores the critical relationship between data quality and the appropriateness and reliability of life cycle assessment (LCA) results. By analysing the user categories involved in LCA—namely academia, industry, consultancy and policy—it highlights the differing responsibilities and interpretations of data suitability and quality across these domains. The paper emphasizes that the selection of data is related to availability, suitability and quality, and that discrepancies in LCA results often stem from inconsistent documentation, improper engineering information, varied methodological approaches and misunderstandings surrounding data types. It advocates for the establishment of rigorous quality assurance processes and clear definitions of data types to enhance the reliability of LCA outcomes. The paper also discusses the implications of emerging data concepts and the potential of artificial intelligence to improve data quality while stressing the importance of appropriate methodological application. Ultimately, it underscores the necessity for stakeholders to take responsibility for their data usage to ensure that LCA serves its intended purpose effectively, thereby influencing critical decisions in sustainability and regulatory compliance.

Purpose. This paper aims to systematically review and synthesise existing food packaging Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) research, focusing on applications, methodologies, and results to provide insights and recommendations for researchers, policymakers, and industry stakeholders to enhance the methodological relevance, sustainability, and environmental performance of food packaging solutions. Methodology. This study employed a systematic literature review approach, comprising the following steps: data collection and selection, coding and categorisation of data to comprehensively describe and compare the methodology, and synthesis of the results. The literature search was conducted in the Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and PubMed databases; the study selection was based on defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and followed a multi-stage screening process. The data comprise 88 peer-reviewed English-language journal papers published between 2000 and 2025; results were synthesised through qualitative analysis conducted in the RStudio environment. Results. An increase in LCA studies on food packaging is noted, which is intensifying against the backdrop of stricter regulatory requirements for plastics, packaging, and environmental assessment methods. Most often, such studies are based on data from European countries, with a prevalence of studies on food in general, as well as goods with a short shelf life, which draws attention to the functional aspects of packaging, namely its ability to extend shelf life and minimise waste. Concerning packaging materials, researchers are focusing on the assessment of new and biobased materials, as well as on the comparison of reusable and single-use packaging and recycling options, biomaterials, active, and smart packaging with traditional materials. From a methodological point of view, product-based functional units, packaging assessments using the cradle-to-grave method, and comparative LCAs are typically used. A synthesis of the reviewed cases facilitated the identification of the most common approach for conducting food packaging LCAs. Originality. The typical LCA methodology for food packaging in the European context is based on the application of ISO 14040 (in combination with ISO 14044), ReCiPe, environmental footprint, and product environmental footprint methods, utilising Ecoinvent databases and SimaPro software. An impact assessment based on midpoint indicators is carried out using a combination of 10 indicators, where the most frequent are the following: ozone depletion potential, marine eutrophication, global warming, climate change, freshwater eutrophication, ionising radiation, freshwater ecotoxicity, terrestrial acidification, acidification, and particulate matter formation. It is advisable to use comparative approaches based on the cradle-to-grave method, enabling a comprehensive impact assessment across all life cycle stages, supplemented by sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Practical implications. The identified variability in assessment methodologies does not ensure the comparability of their results. Recommendations for conducting LCA should be specified in terms of requirements for disclosing information on methodological aspects of research and recommended sets of indicators. When making decisions on food packaging parameters, it is advisable for manufacturers to employ a multi-criteria approach, considering LCA results, functional properties, and economic aspects. At the policy level, decisions on restrictions (or incentives) for the use of certain types of packaging should consider the state of the secondary materials and waste management system, as well as its spatial configuration.

With the massive growth of the global capacity of photovoltaics (PV) over the last decade, the PV waste is expected to increase dramatically in the near future. Having potential to reduce the use of raw materials and preserve natural resources, PV recycling is attracting more and more attention. This being said, the environmental impacts over the life cycle of PV technologies, including the end-of-life (EoL) stage, should be evaluated carefully. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is currently the most common methodology to assess the potential environmental impacts of a product throughout its entire life cycle. However, the modelling of recycling in LCA has always been a challenge and no consensus has yet been reached, since the treatment of recycling does not only involve an EoL management of waste, but also the production of recycled material. Perovskite on silicon tandem is a widely investigated emerging PV technology having the potential to overcome the power conversion efficiency (PCE) limit of the single-junction crystalline silicon technology. The EoL modelling seems more challenging in the case of emerging technologies for which the EoL is more uncertain than for established technologies. In this article, six common and important approaches of EoL modelling in LCA were applied to future perovskite/silicon tandem modules to analyze the effect of the different EoL modelling approaches on the LCA results. The aim was to identify the most suitable methodological approaches to account for recycling, when modelling the life cycle of PV modules. The environmental performance of perovskite/silicon tandem modules was assessed over their life cycle and expressed in terms of impacts per m2of module. After testing the six EoL modelling approaches and comparing the LCA results, the EoL modelling choice was found to lead to non-negligible differences. For example, in terms of climate change, the impact of the tandem modules ranges from 45 to 59 kg CO2-eq/m2. Among the six EoL modelling options, the approaches of simple cut-off and cut-off with economic allocation are more oriented towards the promotion of high rates of recycled material integrated as an input to the assessed product among industrial actors, while the approach of closed-loop allocation provides incentives to maximize the ratio of recycling at the EoL, regardless the initial ratio of recycled content within the product. Some approaches such as the circular footprint formula (CFF) tend to provide both incentives to increase the content of recycled input material in the manufacturing of the product and the recycling ratio at the EoL of such product. After applying the different alternatives, a set of recommendations to select the relevant EoL modelling approaches are provided: 1) the CFF is recommended as a representative approach due to its wide applicability, tending to provide an intermediate result and reflecting the characteristics of materials; 2) sensitivity analysis should be applied to check the robustness of the results, 3) the cut-off approach and the closed-loop allocation should be used at least for the sensitivity analysis.

Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis of recycled solid waste materials in highway pavement: A review

Context The European Commission (EC) recognised Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as "the best framework for assessing the potential environmental impacts of products". It also identified "the need to improve data availability and quality worldwide by internationally cooperating on LCA data and methods". The life cycle approach is also part of the 2011 Communication on "A resource-efficient Europe – Flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy". To support these life cycle based EU policies, the EC has started the "European Platform on Life Cycle Assessment (EPCLA)"[1]services (e.g. consulting or research services), tools (e.g. LCA tools, ecodesign tools), databases (e.g. LCI databases) and the corresponding developers and providers. in 2005. This Platform is implemented and coordinated by the EC Directorate-General Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Environment and Sustainability, in close collaboration with DG Environment. The Platform works on the basis of coherent and quality-assured life cycle data, methods, and studies. The LCA Resource Directory is one of the deliverables of the Platform. This application has been running since 2006 and it contains lists of Novelty The LCA Resource Directory has recently been further developed so that it can contain and organize LCA case studies and metadata on these studies. The new LCA Resource Directory will be launched during the Fall 2011. Methods The new functionalities of the LCA Resource Directory allow users (LCA expert and non-expert) to browse a database of LCA studies. Thanks to the searching tool, a user can sort the information available as metadata and identify relevant LCA studies according to his/her interests. Many of the fields of the template used to characterize LCA studies are based on the ISO 1404x series. Some fields of the template are mandatory (e.g. functional unit and system boundary) in order to assure that the information showed in the application fulfills most of the requirements of the ISO 14044 for reports to be disclosed to the public. Other fields of the template include: "Intended application(s)", "LCIA impact categories" and "Compliance". The LCA study has to be uploaded on the Directory. Moreover, a final verification step is performed by the web application administrator to ensure quality and consistency. The application is open worldwide (http://lca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/lcainfohub/directory.vm). Any research group, company, university, etc. is now able, after registration, to upload studies and give metadata on them using a template. DG JRC will be in charge of the maintenance of the application and will populate the Directory with the first set of studies during the Fall 2011. An open call to relevant research groups and institutions will be send in order to populate the Directory with registered users and studies. Conclusions With these new capabilities of the Resource Directory, the EPLCA makes progress in its aim of promoting life cycle thinking when making available to all kind of LCA practitioners a good quality database of LCA studies, together with a searching tool. [1] http://lct.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

The aim of this study was to combine Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) with a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) assessment focusing on biodiversity in order to examine the environmental impacts of different pig farm types (13 breeding, 23 finishing and 27 breeding-to-finishing farms) in seven European countries. In addition, the relationship between environmental impacts and selected farm management characteristics was explored. Fossil energy depletion (FED), global warming (GWP), acidification (AP) as well as marine (MEP) and fresh water (FEP) eutrophication potential were assessed by an attributional LCA and expressed per kilogram body mass net sold (BMNS). In addition, the potential biodiversity performance of all crop-livestock farms within the sample (n = 56) was evaluated with a KPI assessment of biodiversity-related field management characteristics. We found no relationship between LCA results and biodiversity scores (KPI). LCA and biodiversity performance varied more within than across farm types (breeding, finishing, breeding-to-finishing). For example, the GWP expressed per kg BMNS of the breeding unit of breeding-to-finishing farms was on average (median) 2.77 (range: 1.40–4.78) and of breeding farms 2.57 (range: 1.91–3.23) kg CO2-eq. The average (median) biodiversity theme score for breeding farms was 51% (range: 36–70%), for breeding-to-finishing farms 38% (range: 30–68%) and for finishing farms 43% (range: 28–67%). Several farm management characteristics (e.g., FCR, productivity, proportion of solid manure) correlated with all/some LCA results. Biodiversity performance depended especially on KPIs related to ecological focus areas, fertiliser management and GMO crops. The large range regarding environmental performance in both LCA and KPI assessment across farm types indicates that farm-specific improvement measures should be implemented to enhance overall environmental sustainability on farm. In conclusion, combining LCA with KPI assessment provides a more comprehensive environmental impact assessment of pig farms.

Background, aim and scope: The environmental impact of building products made from heavy metals has been a topic of discussion for some years. This was fuelled by results of life cycle assessments (LCAs), where the emission of heavy metals strongly effected the results. An issue was that the characterisation factors of the Centre for Environmental Studies (CML) 2000 life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methodology put too much emphasis on the impact of metal emissions. We adjusted Zn characterisation factors according to the most recent insights in the ecotoxicity of zinc and applied them in an LCA using zinc gutters and downpipes as an example. Materials and methods: The CML 2000 methodology was used to assess the environmental impact of the zinc products. To adjust the Zn characterisation factors, the uniform system for the evaluation of substances (USES)-LCA model and the biotic ligand model were used. Results and discussion: The first correction was based on updating the effect values for zinc. This resulted in a reduction of the characterisation factors for zinc to 42% of their original values. Additional correcting for the bioavailability of zinc leads to final Zn characterisation factors for the freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity potential (FAETP), the marine aquatic ecotoxicity potential (MAETP) and the terrestrial ecotoxicity potential (TETP) of 25%, 42% and 0.006%, respectively, of the original values. The CML 2000 LCIA methodology is based on the predicted no-effect concentration (PNEC) of a substance. PNEC is not value-free as political considerations are used to decide on it. Using a more robust toxicity measure as the hazardous concentration at which 50% of the species is affected (HC50) will provide value-free results. The production of standard high-grade zinc shows main contributions to six of the ten environmental impact categories. The recycling of zinc at the end of the life cycle shows beneficial effects for these same categories. Despite the reduction of the characterisation factor of Zn, the runoff emissions of Zn are still dominant. Conclusions and recommendations: To improve LCA characterisation factors for ecotoxicity in the CML 2000 methodology, it is recommended to use either the geometric mean of the effect data or the HC50. The HC50 should be based upon the EC50 values from chronic ecotoxicity tests. It is proposed to include the bioavailability of metals in LCA in three steps: (1) separate soluble fraction, (2) separate dissolved fraction and (3) separate bioavailable fraction. The issue of essentiality could not be resolved in this study. However, this could be accounted for by leaving out the fraction of the emission below the maximum permissible admission. © 2010 The Author(s).

Perkembangan industri di Indonesia yang pesat memberikan dampak positif terhadap perekonomian, tetapi juga berdampak negatif pada lingkungan akibat kurangnya perhatian pengelolaan limbah dari kegiatan produksi. Untuk mengurangi dampak buruk tersebut, penerapan konsep produksi bersih menjadi sangat penting. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) merupakan pendekatan untuk mengevaluasi dan mengukur dampak lingkungan secara menyeluruh dari suatu produk sepanjang siklus hidupnya. Kegiatan pengabdian ini bertujuan untuk memberikan pengetahuan kepada Pengawas dan Analis Lingkungan di Dinas Lingkungan Hidup (DLH) Kabupaten Pangkep dalam memahami, memonitoring, dan mengevaluasi dampak lingkungan perusahaan sesuai persyaratan PROPER Nasional, s Jurusan Teknik Mesin, Fakultas Teknik dan Informatika, Universitas Patria Artha.erta mendukung tercapainya beberapa poin Sustainable Development Goals. Kegiatan pengabdian ini dilakukan dengan metode transfer IPTEKS kepada pihak mitra (DLH). Luarannya adalah kemampuan mitra dalam mengidentifikasi area perbaikan, tahapan siklus hidup penyebab dampak signifikan, melakukan penilaian dan evaluasi dampak lingkungan, menyampaikan hasil LCA, serta memberikan informasi berbasis data untuk pengambilan keputusan. Selama kegiatan pengabdian dilakukan pengukuran tingkat pemahaman peserta pelatihan tentang LCA dengan membagikan kuesioner pra kegiatan dan pasca kegiatan. Dari hasil kuesioner pra kegiatan menunjukkan 90% peserta belum pernah mendengar dan mempelajari terkait LCA. Berdasarkan kuesioner pasca kegiatan menunjukkan bahwa 100% peserta sudah mengetahui penggunaan dan pemanfaatan LCA secara umum dalam melakukan penilaian dampak lingkungan. ABSTRACT The rapid industrial development in Indonesia has a positive impact on the economy, but also has a negative impact on the environment due to a lack of attention to waste management from production activities. To reduce these adverse impacts, the implementation of cleaner production concepts becomes very important. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an approach to evaluate and measure the overall environmental impact of a product throughout its life cycle. This community service activity aims to provide knowledge to Environmental Supervisors and Analysts at the Pangkep Regency Environmental Service in understanding, monitoring, and evaluating the environmental impact of companies according to the requirements of the National PROPER, as well as supporting the achievement of several Sustainable Development Goals points. This community service activity is carried out using the Science and Technology transfer method to the party (DLH). The expected outcomes are the ability of partners to identify areas for improvement, life cycle stages that cause significant impacts, conduct environmental impact assessments and evaluations, convey LCA results, and provide data-based information to support decision-making. During the community service activity, the level of understanding of the training participants about LCA was measured by distributing pre-activity and post-activity questionnaires. The results of the pre-activity questionnaire showed that 90% of participants had never heard of or studied LCA. Based on the post-activity questionnaire, it showed that 100% of participants were aware of the general use and utilization of LCA in conducting environmental impact assessments. Keywords: Life cycle assessment, production system, environmental impact, product life cycle.

The European Commission's 2020 Green Deal aims for climate neutrality by 2050, identifying the construction sector, responsible for about 40% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as crucial in transitioning to a circular, sustainable economy. The road sector alone accounts for over 15% of these emissions, largely due to its reliance on asphalt. This dissertation hypothesizes that the road industry's sustainability can only be achieved by minimizing primary material consumption and assessing life cycle impacts early. It focuses on employing life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) for pavement materials that incorporate reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP), addressing two key challenges: optimizing RAP recycling and evaluating new pavement materials with higher RAP content. Literature review highlights the growing importance of LCA and LCCA in sustainable pavement engineering, identifying methodological inconsistencies such as the lack of standardized product category rules (PCRs), inconsistent framework boundaries, and inadequate consideration of end-of-life (EOL) phases. Monetization of environmental impacts was explored to merge LCA and LCCA. Simplified LCAs focusing on major environmental indicators could be effective for green public procurement; however, care should be taken since hotspots tend to shift. A crucial aspect of the study is incorporating durability into asphalt pavement sustainability. Three methodologies were explored: adjusting layer thicknesses while maintaining reference service lives (RSLs), calculating break-even points with performance evaluation, and using detailed predicted service life (PSL) predictions based on mechanistic-empirical pavement design. Results stress the need for holistic modelling that balances material quality with sustainability metrics. Comparing RSL and PSL showed RSL studies to be conservative, highlighting performance's impact on sustainability. The urgency of reducing emissions by 2050 necessitates immediate industry action. An industry-wide benchmark study highlighted significant variations in embodied GHG emissions, with potential yearly reductions of up to 23.7% by 2030, rising to 40% with advanced technologies and focusing on the lowest 10% of results. Economic viability and proven performance of mitigation strategies are essential for achieving carbon neutrality, requiring technological innovation and swift action. RAP's integration in pavement construction is pivotal for reducing environmental and economic impacts, substituting virgin materials without major production changes. The end-of-waste (EOW) location for RAP significantly affects sustainability comparisons. Mechanical performance simulations indicate that higher RAP recycling rates improve pavement durability, though the effect varies with mixtures and rates. Specific LCA and LCCA outcomes affirm RAP's positive impact on sustainability, highlighting its role as a key strategy for sustainable pavement construction.

Emerging products and technologies pose unique challenges for the life cycle assessment (LCA) community, given the lack of data and inherent uncertainties regarding their development. An emerging technology that has the potential to be transformative and effect broad-scale change within society, as well as the underpinning assumptions associated with its life cycle, is particularly difficult to analyze. Despite the associated challenges, LCA methods must be developed for transformative technologies. The greatest improvement potential occurs at the early phases of technology development; therefore, prospective LCA results can be used to anticipate potential unintended consequences and develop design pathways that lead to preferential outcomes. This paper identifies and categorizes ten factors that influence the LCA results of transformative technologies in order to provide a formal structure for determining appropriate factors for inclusion within an LCA. Appropriate factors for an analysis should be selected according to the overall research questions of the study and are applicable to both attributional and consequential approaches to LCA.