E-Book
88,99 €

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) E-Book

Walter Klöpffer

0,0

88,99 €

Sammeln Sie Punkte in unserem Gutscheinprogramm und kaufen Sie E-Books und Hörbücher mit bis zu 100% Rabatt.
Mehr erfahren.

Herausgeber: Wiley-VCH
Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
Sprache: Englisch

Beschreibung

This first hands-on guide to ISO-compliant Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) makes this powerful tool immediately accessible to both professionals and students. Following a general introduction on the philosophy and purpose of LCA, the reader is taken through all the stages of a complete LCA analysis, with each step exemplified by real-life data from a major LCA project on beverage packaging. Measures as carbon and water footprint, based on the most recent international standards and definitions, are addressed.

Written by two pioneers of LCA, this practical volume is targeted at first-time LCA users but equally makes a much-valued reference for more experienced practitioners.

From the content:
* Goal and Scope Definition
* Life Cycle Inventory Analysis
* Life Cycle Impact Assessment
* Interpretation, Reporting and Critical Review
* From LCA to Sustainability Assessment

and more.

Details

Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:

Android

iOS

von Legimi
zertifizierten E-Readern

Seitenzahl: 782

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2014

Bewertungen

0,0

Rezensionen(0 Rezensionen)

Leseprobe

Cover

Title Page

Related Titles

Preface

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 What Is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)?

1.2 History

1.3 The Structure of LCA

1.4 Standardisation of LCA

1.5 Literature and Information on LCA

References

Chapter 2: Goal and Scope Definition

2.1 Goal Definition

2.2 Scope

2.3 Illustration of the Component ‘Definition of Goal and Scope’ Using an Example of Practice

References

Chapter 3: Life Cycle Inventory Analysis

3.1 Basics

3.2 Energy Analysis

3.3 Allocation

3.4 Procurement, Origin and Quality of Data

3.5 Data Aggregation and Units

3.6 Presentation of Inventory Results

3.7 Illustration of the Inventory Phase by an Example

References

Chapter 4: Life Cycle Impact Assessment

4.1 Basic Principle of Life Cycle Impact Assessment

4.2 Method of Critical Volumes

4.3 Structure of Impact Assessment according to ISO 14040 and 14044

4.4 Method of Impact Categories (Environmental Problem Fields)

4.5 Impact Categories, Impact Indicators and Characterisation Factors

4.6 Illustration of the Phase Impact Assessment by Practical Example

References

Chapter 5: Life Cycle Interpretation, Reporting and Critical Review

5.1 Development and Rank of the Interpretation Phase

5.2 The Phase Interpretation According to ISO

5.3 Techniques for Result Analysis

5.4 Reporting

5.5 Critical Review

5.6 Illustration of the Component Interpretation Using an Example of Practice

References

Chapter 6: From LCA to Sustainability Assessment

6.1 Sustainability

6.2 The Three Dimensions of Sustainability

6.3 State of the Art of Methods

6.4 One Life Cycle Assessment or Three?

6.5 Conclusions

References

APPENDIX A: Solution of Exercises

Appendix B: Standard Report Sheet of Electricity Mix Germany (UBA 2000, Materials p. 179ff) Historic example, only for illustrative purposes

Acronyms/Abbreviations

Index

End User License Agreement

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Preface

Introduction

List of Illustrations

Figure 1.1

Figure 1.2

Figure 1.3

Figure 1.4

Figure 1.5

Figure 2.1

Figure 2.2

Figure 2.3

Figure 2.4

Figure 2.5

Figure 2.6

Figure 3.1

Figure 3.2

Figure 3.3

Figure 3.4

Figure 3.5

Figure 3.6

Figure 3.7

Figure 3.8

Figure 3.9

Figure 3.10

Figure 3.11

Figure 3.12

Figure 3.13

Figure 3.14

Figure 3.15

Figure 3.16

Figure 3.17

Figure 3.18

Figure 3.19

Figure 3.20

Figure 3.21

Figure 3.22

Figure 3.23

Figure 3.24

Figure 3.25

Figure 3.26

Figure 3.27

Figure 3.28

Figure 3.29

Figure 3.30

Figure 3.31

Figure 3.32

Figure 3.33

Figure 4.1

Figure 4.2

Figure 4.3

Figure 4.4

Figure 4.5

Figure 5.1

Figure 6.1

Figure A.1

List of Tables

Table 1.1

Table 3.1

Table 3.2

Table 3.3

Table 3.4

Table 3.5

Table 3.6

Table 3.7

Table 3.8

Table 3.9

Table 3.10

Table 3.11

Table 3.12

Table 3.13

Table 3.14

Table 3.15

Table 3.16

Table 3.17

Table 3.18

Table 3.19

Table 4.1

Table 4.2

Table 4.3

Table 4.4

Table 4.5

Table 4.6

Table 4.7

Table 4.8

Table 4.9

Table 4.10

Table 4.11

Table 4.12

Table 4.13

Table 4.14

Table 4.15

Table 4.16

Table 4.17

Table 4.18

Table 4.19

Table 4.20

Table 4.21

Table 4.22

Table 4.23

Table 4.24

Table 4.25

Table 4.26

Table 4.27

Table 4.28

Table 4.29

Table 4.30

Table 4.31

Table 5.1

Table 5.2

Table 5.3

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

A Guide to Best Practice

Walter Klöpffer and Birgit Grahl

Related Titles

Reniers, G. L. L., Sörensen, K., Vrancken,

K. (eds.)

Management Principles of Sustainable Industrial Chemistry

Theories, Concepts and Industrial Examples for Achieving Sustainable Chemical Products and Processes from a Non-Technological Viewpoint

2013

ISBN: 978-3-527-33099-7 (Also available in digital formats)

Hessel, V., Kralisch, D., Kockmann, N.

Novel Process Windows

Innovative Gates to Intensified and Sustainable Chemical Processes

2014

ISBN: 978-3-527-32858-1 (Also available in digital formats)

Houson, I. (ed.)

Process Understanding

For Scale-Up and Manufacture of Active Ingredients

2011

ISBN: 978-3-527-32584-9 (Also available in digital formats)

Imhof, P., van der Waal, J. C. (eds.)

Catalytic Process Development for Renewable Materials

2013

ISBN: 978-3-527-33169-7 (Also available in digital formats)

Jansen, R. A.

Second Generation Biofuels and Biomass

Essential Guide for Investors, Scientists and Decision Makers

2013

ISBN: 978-3-527-33290-8

Hites, R. A., Raff, J. D.

Umweltchemie

Eine Einf ührung mit Aufgaben und Lösungen

2014

ISBN: 978-3-527-33523-7

Klöpffer, W.

Verhalten und Abbau von Umweltchemikalien

Physikalisch-chemische Grundlagen Zweite, vollständig überarbeitete Auflage

2012

ISBN: 978-3-527-32673-0

Hochheimer, N.

Das kleine QM-Lexikon

Begriffe des Qualitätsmanagements aus GLP, GCP, GMP und EN ISO 9000

Zweite, vollständig überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage

2012

ISBN: 978-3-527-33076-8

The Authors

Prof. Dr. Walter Klöpffer

LCA Consult & Review, Frankfurt, Germany

Am Dachsberg 56 E

60435 Frankfurt am Main

Germany

Prof. Dr. Birgit Grahl

Institut für Integrierte Umwelt

Forschung und Beratung

Schuhwiese 6

23858 Heidekamp

Germany

All books published by Wiley-VCH are carefully produced. Nevertheless, authors, editors, and publisher do not warrant the information contained in these books, including this book, to be free of errors. Readers are advised to keep in mind that statements, data, illustrations, procedural details or other items may inadvertently be inaccurate.

Library of Congress Card No.: applied for

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek

The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at <http://dnb.d-nb.de>.

All rights reserved (including those of translation into other languages). No part of this book may be reproduced in any form – by photoprinting, microfilm, or any other means – nor transmitted or translated into a machine language without written permission from the publishers. Registered names, trademarks, etc. used in this book, even when not specifically marked as such, are not to be considered unprotected by law.

Print ISBN: 978-3-527-32986-1

ePDF ISBN: 978-3-527-65565-6

ePub ISBN: 978-3-527-65564-9

mobi ISBN: 978-3-527-65563-2

oBook ISBN: 978-3-527-65562-5

Preface

This book is the updated translation of a textbook and monograph written in German language by the same authors.a The first version emerged from lectures at the University of Mainz.

The topic of the book, life cycle assessment (LCA), developed from modest seeds in the 1970s and 1980s to become the only internationally standardised method of ecological product assessment. The development entered its decisive phase when the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) began to harmonise diverse older methods (‘proto-LCAs’). This process culminated in 1993 in the publication of the Guidelines for Life Cycle Assessment: A Code of Practice, a result of the SETAC Workshop in Sesimbra, Portugal. In the same year started the standardisation by the International Standard Organization (ISO) involving 40 nations, resulting in the famous series of ISO LCA standards 14040ff (1997–2006). The authors of this book followed this development as members of the German mirror group ‘Deutsches Institut für Normung-Normenausschuss Grundlagen des Umweltschutzes (DIN NAGUS)’, discussing and commenting on the drafts developed by ISO/TC 207/SC 5 (TC, Technical Committee; SC, Sub Committee). In addition, German translations of the standards were checked and improved.

The topic ‘valuation’ caused heated discussions and turned out to be not consensual – surviving today as an optional element ‘weighting’ within the phase Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA), and not as originally planned as an LCA phase of its own. Moreover, ‘weighting’ is strictly prohibited for comparative LCA studies intended to be made available to the public.

The revision of the LCA standards 2006 even enforced this, so that now the intention to use a comparative LCA publicly is sufficient for banning the ‘weighting’ of results and requiring strict regulations regarding publishing, documentation and critical review (panel method).

The authors have performed several critical reviews together and necessarily studied the standards in greater detail than possibly necessary for academic lectures alone. Most standards use cumbersome wording to some extent, which is why they are not ideally suited as teaching and learning material – a good reason to write this book that is expected to help beginners entering the field of LCA and also offering advanced readers something new. The LCA standards are written in a spirit which shall prevent any misuse of the method, especially in marketing and advertisement. As a consequence, frequently we read what shall not be done and less details on how a real LCA is to be done correctly. To give an example, in the phase LCIA there is no list of impact categories, not even a default list, not to speak of indicators and characterisation factors. Therefore, LCIA is treated extensively in this book. Even so, no complete picture could be presented since several methods are still in development, cited in many references.

Equally important as reporting the mere facts seemed relating a deeper understanding of the LCA methodology including its limits. The same is true for the environmental problems forming the basis of the impact categories. The most important application of LCA is learning and understanding of environmental problems caused by product systems ‘from cradle to grave’, that is, from the raw materials to recycling and waste removal, respectively. This learning process cannot start without a good understanding of the processes and can be even worsened by thoughtlessly using software. The modern software offers great help in performing LCAs (hardly to dream of 10 years ago); it should not, however, replace the collection of original (‘foreground’) data, thorough system analysis, or selection and explanation of the impact categories.

There can be no doubt that LCA as an applied (simplified) system analysis offers much material for theoretical work, enriching the methodology. It is not, however, ‘art pour l'art’, but should rather achieve the learning effect mentioned above, the results of which should enter decision finding. Ecologically correct decisions during product development will lead to better products in the long range. The application of LCA is therefore of decisive importance. In order to demonstrate this point, the authors divided a ‘real’ LCA study into four parts, which were assigned to the four phases according to ISO 14040.

Goal and scope definition (Chapter 2)

Life cycle inventory analysis (Chapter 3)

Life cycle impact assessment (Chapter 4)

Interpretation (Chapter 5).

This ‘real-life’ LCA study in German has been provided by the Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung (IFEU), Heidelberg, by courtesy of the commissioner Fachverband Getränkekarton (FKN), Wiesbaden. The translation of the recorded textual passages has been carried out by the authors of this book. We would like to point out explicitly that this specific LCA study was chosen as example for purely didactic reasons. A specific product system is always more descriptive compared to a theoretically constructed one. Specific conclusions included in the example LCA do not belong to the learning goal set by the authors of this book.

Textbooks on LCA are rare in any language, but even in English we remember only one, originating from Sweden.b We hope that this book will contribute to academic lecturing as well as private studies and be of use in industry and governmental organisations.

We owe great thanks to Andreas Detzel (IFEU), who not only provided the example study but also carefully read and commented on the whole manuscript of the German version. Martina Krüger (IFEU) was a great help in adapting the example study to the didactic presentation needed in a textbook. Many of our friends in the LCA community contributed to the development of LCA and thus, finally, also to this book. To mention only few of them, Harald Neitzel (then at Umweltbundesamt (UBA), Berlin), the unforgettable chairman of DIN NAGUS in the 1990s; Isa Renner, main LCA practitioner at Battelle Frankfurt, later at C.A.U. Ltd. Dreieich; and Eva Schmincke, longstanding discussion partner, centrally involved in the development of environmental product declarations (EPDs) according to the ISO Type III declaration system. At the international level, the LCA-related activities of SETAC and the UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme)/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative were of great help.

Almut B. Heinrich, the managing editor of the book series ‘LCA Compendium – The whole world of Life Cycle Assessment’ helped us with the translation of the German book doing final corrections in all chapters. She was managing editor of The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment from 1996 to 2009 and contributed in that position to the proliferation of LCA world-wide.c

Last, but not least, we thank the editorial managers at Wiley-VCH for their patience and competence during the creation of this book.

Frankfurt am Main und Lübeck Walter Klöpffer and Birgit Grahl

October 2013

References

Baumann, H. and Tillman, A.-M. (2004)

The Hitch Hiker's Guide to LCA. An Orientation in Life Cycle Assessment Methodology and Application

, Studentlitteratur, Lund. ISBN: 91-44-02364-2.

Klöpffer, W. and Grahl, B. (2009)

Ökobilanz (LCA) – Ein Leitfaden für Ausbildung und Beruf

, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH, Weinheim. ISBN: 978-3-527-32043-1.

Klöpffer, W. and Curran, M.A. (2014)

LCA Compendium – The Whole World of Life Cycle Assessment

, Springer, Dordrecht.

a Klöpffer and Grahl (2).

b Baugmann and Tillmann (1).

c Klöpffer and Curran 3.

1 Introduction

To date life cycle assessment (LCA) is a method defined by the international standards ISO 14040 and 14044 to analyse environmental aspects and impacts of product systems. Therefore, the introduction of the methodology in Chapters 2–5 relates to these standards. As a prelude, the scope and development of the methodology are introduced here.

1.1 What Is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)?

1.1.1 Definition and Limitations

In the introductory part of international standard ISO 140401 serving as a framework, LCA has been defined as follows:

LCA studies the environmental aspects and potential impacts throughout a product's life (i.e. cradle-to-grave) from raw material acquisition through production, use and disposal. The general categories of environmental impacts needing consideration include resource use, human health, and ecological consequences.

A similar definition of LCA was adopted as early as 1993 by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC)2 in the ‘Code of Practice’.3

Similar definitions can also be found in the basic guidelines of4 DIN-NAGUS as well as in the ‘Nordic Guidelines’5 commissioned by Scandinavian Ministers of the Environment. Those deliberate limitations of LCA to analysis and interpretation of environmental impacts have the consequence that the method is restricted to only quantify6 the ecological aspect of sustainability (see Chapter 6). The exclusion of economical and social factors distinguishes LCA from product line analysis (PLA) (Produktlinienanalyse) and similar methods.7 This separation was made to avoid a method overload, being well aware that a decision, for example, in the development of sustainable products, cannot and must not neglect these factors.8

1.1.2 Life Cycle of a Product

The main idea of a cradle-to-grave analysis, that is, the life cycle of a product, is illustrated in a simplified manner in Figure 1.1. Usually, the starting point for building a product tree is the production of the end product and the use phase. Further diversification of the boxes in Figure 1.1 into singular processes, the so-called unit processes, as well as the inclusion of transports, diverse energy supply, co-products, and so on, turn this simplistic scheme, even with simple products, into very complex ‘product trees’ (diverse raw materials and energy supply, intermediate products, co-products, ancillary material, waste management including diverse disposal types and recycling).

Figure 1.1 Simplified life cycle of a tangible product.

Interconnected unit processes (life cycle or product tree) form a product system. The centre is a product, a process, a service or, in the widest sense, a human activity.9 In an LCA, systems that serve a specific function and therefore have a specified performance are analysed.

Therefore, the quantified performance (avail) of a product system is the intrinsic standard of comparison (reference unit). It is the sole correct basis for the definition of a ‘functional unit’.10

1.1.3 Functional Unit

Besides the cradle-to-grave analysis (thinking in terms of systems, life cycles or production trees), the functional unit is the second basic term in an LCA and is therefore to be explained here.

The function of a beverage packaging, for example, is – besides shielding of the liquid – above all, transportability and storability. The functional unit is most frequently defined as the provision of 1000 l liquid in a way to fulfil the technical aspects of the performance. This function can, for instance, be mapped with different packaging specifications (the following examples are arbitrarily chosen):

5000 0.2 l

pouches

2000 0.5 l reusable bottles of glass

1000 1 l single-use beverage carton

500 2 l PET (polyethylene terephthalate) single-use bottles.

Thus, for a comparison of packaging systems, the life cycle of 5000 pouches, 2000 reusable glass bottles, 1000 cardboards and 500 2 l PET bottles, which are four product systems that roughly fulfil the same function, needs to be analysed and compared.

Slight variations in performance (convenience, e.g. weight, user friendliness, aesthetics, customer behaviour, suitability as advertising medium or other side effects of packaging systems) are not important in this simplistic example. It is, however, important to note that systems (not products) with matchable functions are compared.12 This is the reason why tangible products (goods) can also be compared with services, as long as they have the same or a very similar function. Within an LCA, products are defined as goods and services. As with goods, services require energy, transport, and so on. Therefore, it is possible to define services as systems and compare them with tangible products on the basis of equivalent function by means of the functional unit.

1.1.4 LCA as System Analysis

LCA is based on a simplified system analysis. The simplification consists of an extensive linearisation (see system boundaries and cut-off criteria in Section 2.2). Interconnections of parts of the life cycle of a product that always exist in reality lead to extremely complex relationships in the modelling, which are most difficult to handle. There are, nevertheless, possibilities to handle the formation of loops and other deviations from the linear structure, for example, by an iterative approach or matrix calculus.13

Example

LCA deals with the comparison of product systems, and not of products. This means the following:

Within the product segment ‘towel dispenser’, for example, paper towels and cotton rolls are two possible variations. The cotton roll needs to be cleaned to fulfil its function. This means, the cleansing process (detergent, water and energy consumption) is part of the product system and must surely be considered. In addition, washing machines must be applied for cleaning.

Has the production of washing machines to be considered as well?

Their production requires, for example, steel. Steel is made from iron ore that needs to be transported, and so on. It is obvious that limitations need to be set, because every small product is linked to the entire industrial system. On the other hand, nothing essential shall be omitted.

System analysis and the meaningful selection and definition of system boundaries are therefore important and labour-intensive tasks within every LCA.

The main advantage of the life-cycle approach ‘from cradle to grave’ lies in its ability to easily detect the shifting of environmental burdens, the so-called trade-offs, which may, for example, occur owing to material substitutions. Therefore, it is of no use to seemingly solve an environmental problem if, later, in different life cycle stages or environmental media, the same or additional problems occur. The same applies when an unreasonable energy or resource consumption may be connected with the substitution. These kind of activities do not solve the problem at its base.

It is not arguable that in rare cases, especially those of health hazards (e.g. substitution of hazardous substances), such suboptimal decisions may be applicable.

Example

As fossil resources diminish, substitution of the raw material base with renewable resources is an objective of science and development. For example, variants of loose-fill packaging chips made of polystyrene and potato starch14 have been investigated through LCA. As the resources used and the production processes of both materials fundamentally differ, a thorough analysis of the product systems is necessary. For instance, on the one hand, the overall agricultural system including growth, maintenance and harvest needs to be considered during the production of renewable base products; on the other hand is the crude oil drilling or mining. Other life cycle stages of the loose-fill packaging systems differ fundamentally as well, depending on the raw material base. It cannot be decided at first sight whether substitution of the raw material base may have an ecological advantage for a product system.

1.1.5 LCA and Operational Input–Output Analysis (Gate-to-Gate)

There is always a risk of problem shift when system boundaries that are too restrictive have been chosen. This is often the case when only operational input–output analyses have been conducted (frequently misused terms are ecobalance of the enterprise, corporate-LCA or ecobalance without additional explanation).

If, for instance, the system boundary is set equal to the fence around a factory (gate-to-gate), the fundamental concept of LCA is not satisfied: Neither the production of pre-products nor the disposal of end products is considered; the same is applicable with transports (e.g. just in time), outsourcing and parts of waste management activities (e.g. municipal waste water sewage plants).

Example

Pseudo improvement by outsourcing

A manufacturer of fine foods intended to not only advertise his products for taste and salubriousness but also for environmental aspects. For this purpose, data concerning energy and water consumption were gathered in an operational input–output analysis (gate-to-gate), which allowed the allocation of on-site environmental burdens to the production of different salads. It was striking that potato salad had an immense water supply. The reason was that potatoes, usually covered by earth, had to be washed. This waste water was then assigned to the potato salad. Some weeks later, the water supply per kilogramme salad had drastically diminished. This was not due to a technical innovation at the cleaning plant but due to outsourcing of the washing to another enterprise. For this reason, washing water was not a factor anymore in the operational input–output analysis within the system boundary of the investigated site.

Nevertheless, operational input–output analyses are useful for many applications, for example, as data bases in environmental management systems.15

A simple consideration shows that operational input–output analyses also provide data bases for the LCA of products: Every production process, for example, the production of 500 g of potato salad in a screw cap glass jar, takes place at a specific company, at a specific site. If data, for example, for energy and water consumption of the system ‘1000 screw cap glasses, each containing 500 g potato salad supplemented by cucumber, egg and yoghurt dressing’ have to be procured, every company that is part of the production and transportation of the packed product as well as businesses involved in the waste management of the used packaging must have analysed their processes in such a way that the data can be allocated to the product under investigation. This is not simple: an agricultural corporation generally does not only produce milk and a dairy not only yoghurt; the manufacturer of glass jars provides glasses for diverse customers, and so on. If, however, all companies involved in manufacture, distribution and end-of-life management of the product (supply chain) had data from their specific operational input–output analysis in a product-related format, these results could be merged. Nevertheless, product-related data acquisition is not common practice in operational input–output analyses.

Coupling of such operational input–output analyses along the life cycle of products would provide the possibility of LCA chain management.16 Companies that are part of a product system could explore and realise potentials for the optimisation in co-operation. There is the hope that, in this way, life cycle thinking and, in the end, also life cycle acting, may emerge (Life Cycle Thinking and Life Cycle Management – LCM).

1.2 History

1.2.1 Early LCAs

LCA is a relatively recent methodology, but not as recent as many believe. Approaches to life cycle thinking have already been reported in early literature. The Scottish economist and biologist Patrick Geddes has developed as early as in the 1880s a procedure that can be considered as precursor for Life Cycle Inventory (LCI).17 His interest focused on energy supply, especially on coal.

The first LCAs in the modern sense were conducted around 1970, termed Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis (REPA) at Midwest Research Institute in the United States.18 As with nearly all early LCAs or ‘proto-LCAs’,19 these were an analysis of resource consumption and emissions caused by product systems, the so-called inventories without impact assessment. To date, such studies are called Life Cycle Inventory studies.20 The new methodology was first applied to compare beverage packaging. The same applies for the first LCA conducted in Germany21 in 1972 under the leadership of B. Oberbacher at Battelle-Institute in Frankfurt, Main. The new method – originally proposed by Franklin and Hunt, USA – additionally captured costs (among others, those of disposal procedures). Interestingly, light polyethylene pouches, already in use at that time, obtained best results, similar to the results in more recent studies.22

Further, early LCAs were conducted by Ian Boustead in the United Kingdom23 and Gustav Sundström in Sweden.24 In addition, Swiss studies,25 which can be considered as proto-LCAs, date back to the 1970s. They were conducted at the EMPA in St. Gallen; see memories of Paul Fink, former director of the EMPA.26

1.2.2 Environmental Policy Background

Why did the development of LCA start in the early 1970s? At least two reasons can be determined:

Rising waste problems (therefore, studies on packaging)

Bottlenecks in energy supply and acknowledgement of limited resources.

While the former issue (i) was implemented into a just-emerging environmental policy by the authorities in most developed countries, public awareness of the latter (ii) was raised by the bestseller The Limits to Growth (the report to the Club of Rome).27 Something must have been in the air because the book caused a sensation in 1972, the year of its publication. Did a change of paradigm occur? Was the throw-away mentality of post-war generation suddenly under scrutiny?

The theory in the ‘Club of Rome’ study was confirmed by reality through the first oil crisis in 1973/1974. Although the study was over-pessimistic with regard to the exhaustion of oil resources, it demonstrated the vulnerability of an industrial society which, to a great extent, relies on crude oil. To date, nothing has changed concerning this aspect, on the contrary.

System analysis, well known only to specialists, had its breakthrough as a commonly accepted method. The International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) at Laxenburg, Vienna, was founded. In Germany, car-free Sundays happened; an atmosphere of departure emerged, to date unimaginable, with a plethora of ideas on how to develop alternative energy sources as well as on how to use conventional forms of energy more efficiently. Some of them were realised, but most of them were not (yet).

1.2.3 Energy Analysis

With this mainly energy-political background, it is not surprising that, from the theoretical side, energy analysis or process chain analysis was developed first, which today is an important integral part of the LCI28 (see Chapter 3). In Germany, this development was mainly promoted by Professor Schäfer at the Technical University Munich29 and in industry before.30 The (primary) energy demand summarised through all stages of the life cycle is called cumulative energy demand (CED).31 It used to be an important part of the LCI in the time of the proto-LCAs and is still used in LCAs.

By way of political solutions to the oil crisis in the 1980s, interest in LCA with respect to its precursors declined but experienced an unexpected upswing at the end of the decade.

1.2.4 The 1980s

Studies on LCA were sparse in the first half of the 1980s in the German language area. Exceptions are the study of BUS, later Federal Agency for Environment, Forestry and Agriculture, Bern,32 which has already been named, a thesis by Marina Franke at TU Berlin33 and the development of PLA by the Ökoinstitut.34 PLA surpasses LCA as it is based on a needs assessment (NA) analysing the usefulness of a product and consumer behaviour. Here, the product-related environmental analysis is complemented by the investigation of social aspect (SA) and economical aspect (EA) of the product system:

with LCA = inventory + environmental impact assessment.

PLA therefore comprises all three aspects of sustainability according to the Brundtland Commission36 (see Chapter 6) and Agenda 21,37 which was adopted at the UNO World Conference in Rio de Janeiro, 1992.

1.2.5 The Role of SETAC

A strong upswing in the interest in LCA in Europe and North America – where the terms ‘life cycle analysis’ and ‘life cycle assessment’, originated – led to two international conferences that can be considered as the starting point for the newer development38

In 1990, a workshop was organised by SETAC in Smugglers Notch, Vermont, on A Technical Framework for Life Cycle Assessment. One month later, a European workshop took place on the same topic in Leuven.39

In Smugglers Notch, the famous LCA triangle was conceptualised, and later persiflaged as ‘holy triangle’ (Figure 1.2). From 1990 to 1993 SETAC and SETAC Europe were leading agents in the development, harmonisation and early standardisation of LCA. Their reports40 are part of the most important information sources concerning the development of the methodology. In the German-speaking part they were only equalled by the Swiss Ecobalance of Packaging Materials 1990,41 updated in 1996 and 1998.42 The UBA (Umweltbundesamt) (Berlin) study in 1992 also had a great influence.43 A French adoption of history and methodology, L'Ecobilan, was published at about the same time.44 The development of LCA in the United States45 and in Japan46was presented in special issues of the International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

Figure 1.2 The SETAC-triangle in LCA guidelines (‘code of practice’).35

The special contributions from the Centre of Environment of University Leiden (Centrum voor Milieukunde Leiden, CML) under the leadership of Professor Helias Udo de Haes were appreciated in a study on sociology of scientific knowledge by Gabathuler47 and in a supplementary issue of the International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.48 The greatest achievement of CML was, without any doubt, a stronger focus on the ecological aspects of LCA, compared to the earlier more technical ones. Nevertheless, a prior Swiss LCA had already featured a simple method of impact assessment.49 In practice, the CML method tended to overemphasise chemical releases in the impact assessment. At the same time – due to the absence of generally adhered indicators – it underestimated the impacts of the overuse of natural resources such as minerals, fossils, biota and land50 (see Chapter 4).

1.3 The Structure of LCA

1.3.1 Structure According to SETAC

A first attempt to structure LCA was by the SETAC triangle of 1990/1991 already quoted (Figure 1.2)

Inventory in the context of LCA (LCI) means material and energy analysis of the examined system from cradle to grave. The resulting inventory table contains a list of all material and energy inputs and outputs (see Figure 1.3 and Chapter 3).

Figure 1.3 Analysis of matter and energy of a product system.

These numbers of LCI need an ecological analysis or weighting. Inputs and outputs are sorted according to their impact on the environment. Thus, for instance, all releases into the air causing acid rain are aggregated (see Chapter 4). This procedure was formerly called Impact Analysis by SETAC, and later Impact Assessment.

The interpretation of the data procured in LCA has already been postulated in Smugglers Notch. It was called Improvement Analysis, later renamed Improvement Assessment. The introduction of this component was regarded as great progress because the interpretation of the data was conducted according to specific rules. The Environmental Agency Berlin (UBA)51 has included this task in 1992 in its recommendation to the conduct of LCAs as an option. The rules for interpretation were later modified during the standardisation process of ISO (see Section 1.3.2). To date this phase is named interpretation52 (see Figure 1.4).

Figure 1.4 LCA phases according to ISO 14040:1997/2006.

1.3.2 Structure of LCA According to ISO

To date, the structure developed by SETAC has essentially been maintained by ISO53 with the exception of Improvement Assessment, which was replaced by Interpretation. The optimisation of product systems was not adapted as standard content by ISO, but was listed besides other applications of the standard. The structure of the international standard is depicted in Figure 1.4.

The phases of LCA have been renamed, compared to earlier structures, and the following terms are now internationally mandatory:

Goal and Scope Definition

Life Cycle Inventory Analysis

Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Interpretation.

The arrows in Figure 1.4 allow an iterative approach that is often necessary (see Chapter 2). Direct applications of an LCA lie out of scope of the standardised components of an LCA. This makes sense because, besides foreseeable applications during the standardisation process, others were developed in practice and have been summarised as ‘other applications’. Examples can be found in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Examples of early LCA applications according to ISO 14040.

Application

Query

Project

Environmental law and – policy

Packaging regulation

Beverage packaging

Waste oil regulation

Waste oil recovery

Genetically modified organisms (GMO)

GMO in agricultural LCA

Agriculture

Weed control in viticulture

PVC

PVC in Sweden

Public procurement

Cost-benefit analysis of environmental procurement

Integrated product policy

EuP directive

Comparison of products

Surfactants

ECOSOL LCAs

Beverage packaging

Comparison of packagings

Food packaging

Comparison of packagings

Floor coverings

ERFMI survey

Insulating materials

Insulation of buildings

Communication

Consumer consultation

ISO type III declaration

Chain management

PCR

: electricity, steam, water

Ecological building

EPD

: building products

Carbon footprint

PCR: product declaration

Carbon-neutral enterprise

Waste management

Concepts of disposal

Graphic papers

Recycling

Plastics

Enterprise

Ecological valuation of business lines

Environmental achievement of an enterprise

a Schmitz et al. (1995) and UBA (2000b, 2002).

b UBA (2000a)

c Klöpffer et al. (1999).

d IFEU/SLFA (1998).

e Tukker Kleijn and van Oers (1996).

f Rüdenauer et al. (2007).

g Kemna et al. (2005).

h Stalmans et al. (1995) and Janzen (1995).

i IFEU (2002, 2004, 2007) and Detzel and Böß (2006).

j IFEU (2006) and Humbert et al. (2008).

k Günther and Langowski (1997, 1998).

l Schmidt et al. (2004).

m Schmincke and Grahl (2006).

n Product category rules.

o Vattenfall (2007).

p Environmental product declaration.

q Deutsches Institut für Bauen und Umwelt (2007).

r Svenska Miljöstyrningsrådet (2006) and BSI (2008).

s Gensch (2008).

t Tiedemann (2000).

u Heyde and Kremer (1999).

v Wright et al. (1997).

GMO, genetically modified organisms.

1.3.3 Valuation – a Separate Phase?

A special status is attached to the former component valuation,54 which has not been assigned in the standardised structure. A valuation is always necessary when the results of a comparative LCA are not straightforward. A trade-off of system A against system B needs to be made when, for example, the former has lower energy consumption, but on the other hand has releases of substances leading to water eutrophication and to the formation of near-ground ozone: What is of greater importance? For these decisions, subjective and/or normative notions of value are necessary, common in daily life, for example, during purchase decisions.55 For this reason, a valuation based on exact scientific methods cannot be made. Therefore, it was proposed by SETAC Europe at Leiden 199156 to introduce valuation as a component of its own. This proposition was seized by UBA Berlin57 and by DIN-NAGUS58 later on. However, because subjective notions of value cannot be standardised, a methodology was developed to support the process of conclusion. In the SETAC ‘Code of Practice’59 these methodological rules were subordinated to the phase ‘Impact Assessment’. No changes were made by the standardisation process of ISO: Methodological rules are integrated into the phase ‘Impact Assessment’60 (see Section 4.3). The final survey of results that leads to a conclusion61 is supposed to take place in the final phase of an LCA, ‘Interpretation’62 (see Chapter 5).

In Germany, the discussion on valuation has, during the final years of the 1990s, increased to such an extent that

the former Minister of the Environment, Angela Merkel,

joined the discussion;

the association of the German Industry (BDI) published a widely noticed policy brief

and

UBA Berlin elaborated an ISO-conformal valuation methodology.

1.4 Standardisation of LCA

1.4.1 Process of Formation

LCA standards ISO 14040 and 14044 belong to the ISO 14000 family concerning various aspects of environmental management (Figure 1.5).

Figure 1.5 ISO 14000 Model.69

The committee responsible for DIN in Germany is the NAGUS.66 Similar committees existed in other countries. National propositions are brought together in the Technical Committee 207 (TC 207) of the ISO at international level. All nations that are members of TC 207 by their standardisation organisations participate and international standards are developed. Generally, this process takes several years.

LCA standardisation by national standardisation organisations67 and, above all, by ISO has been conducted since the beginning of the 1990s with great effort.68 This was difficult to achieve because individual phases of LCA – in particular, Impact Assessment and Interpretation – were still under technical/scientific development. On a national level, only two standardisation organisations have developed their own LCA standards before ISO 14040 was enacted: AFNOR (Association Française de Normalisation, France) and CSA (Canadian Standards Association, Canada). To date, a singular internationally accepted standardisation is aimed at promoting international communication, and this is why France and Canada have stepped into the ISO process.

The most important standardisation activity for LCA is therefore conducted by ISO. European Standardisations (Comité Européen de Normalisation, CEN) and their subsequent national organisations adapt ISO regulations and translate them into their individual languages (CEN 14040 standards are available in three official languages, English, French and German). DIN-NAGUS and similar national committees' activity is focused on preliminary work for the ISO work groups, the work-out and harmonisation of supplementary comments, the translation of ISO texts and supplementary standardisation for specifically national issues.

The first series of the international LCA standards closely followed the structure of Figure 1.4:

ISO 14040 LCA – principles and framework; international standard 1997

ISO 14041: LCA – goal and scope definition and inventory analysis; international standard 1998

ISO 14042: LCA – life cycle impact assessment; international standard 2000;

ISO 14043: LCA – interpretation; international standard 2000.

1.4.2 Status Quo

A revision of the international standards in 2001–2006 led to restructuring without any essential technical changes.70 The basic standard continues to be called ISO 1404071 with no mandatory directives. Directives have been summarised in a new standard ISO 1404472 comprising all four LCA phases in Figure 1.4.

Two technical reports (TRs) and two technical specifications (TSs) have been added:

ISO/TR 14047:2012 Illustrative example on how to apply ISO 14044 to impact assessment situations

ISO/TS 14048:2002 Data documentation format

ISO/TR 14049:2012 Illustrative examples on how to apply ISO 14044 to goal and scope definition and inventory analysis

ISO/TS 14067:2013 Carbon footprint of products – Requirements and guidelines for quantification and communication.

Two new TS and one TR are under preparation:

ISO TS 14071 Critical review processes and reviewer competencies – Additional requirements and guidelines to ISO 14044 (see Section 5.5)

ISO TS 14072 Additional requirements and guidelines for organisations

ISO/AWI TR 14073 Water footprint – Illustrative examples on how to apply ISO 14046.

TRs and TSs are non-mandatory documents but meant for help and support.

The methodology of LCA according to ISO 14040/44 is also the basis for a new standard under preparation aiming at the calculation of one specific impact (called footprint analogue to ‘Carbon Footprint’ in ISO/TS 14067 (see above)):

ISO 14046 Water footprint – Requirements and guidelines.

A detailed review of ISO standards in the context of ISO 14040 has been recently published by Finkbeiner (Finkbeiner, 2013).

As many as 24 national standardisation organisations participated in the first round of ISO standardisation talks and another 16 had the observer status. The final vote led to an overall acceptance of 95%. LCA is therefore the only internationally accepted standardised method for analysing environmental aspects and potential impacts of product systems.

Chapters 2–5 focus on the objective content of individual phases of LCA, their advantages and shortcomings.

1.5 Literature and Information on LCA

Until the mid-1990s, almost only ‘grey’ LCA literature was available. Meanwhile, a series of books have been published.73 Papers from national and international organisations provide essential information to LCA, mostly SETAC and SETAC Europe,74 The Nordic Council,75 US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency),76 UBA Berlin77 BUS/BUWAL Bern,78 the European Environment Agency Copenhagen (EEA)79 and the European Commission (EC).80

Recently, the Joint Research Centre ‘Institute for Environment and Sustainability’ of the EC (Ispra, Italy) published the ILCD Handbooks (International Reference Life Cycle Data System), which can be downloaded for free (http://lct.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pdf-directory/ILCDHandbook.pdf).

Since 1996, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment has been published by ecomed publishers Landsberg/Lech and Heidelberg and, since the beginning of 2008, by Springer, Heidelberg. Current information can be found at http://www.springer.com/environment/journal/11367.

The journal has rapidly developed into a leading publication organ of the promotion of LCA methodology.81International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment is also available electronically, and quite a number of articles as well as open access papers can be downloaded free of charge.

Further journals with regular contributions to LCA are the Journal of Industrial Ecology (MIT Press, part of Wiley-Blackwell since 2008), Cleaner Production (Elsevier) and Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, IEAM (SETAC Press). Increasingly, Environmental Science and Technology (ACS) also publishes LCA-related papers. However, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment is the only journal entirely devoted to LCA.

Other specialised journals also publish LCA literature. In 1995, for instance, the comprehensive ECOSOL – Surfactants-LCI of the European surfactants producers, conducted by Franklin Associates, published two issues of the journal Tenside, Surfactants and Detergents.82

A detailed treatment of all aspects of LCA and related methods such as Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA), Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) and LCM is being published in the LCA compendium (Springer 2014ff).83 This work is conceived for 10 base volumes, and subvolumes as needed.

The significance of publication for propagation and discussion of methods, theories and results of research cannot be overestimated. Especially within new branches of science, peer reviews judge scientific validity on a day-to-day basis.84 They serve as fine adjustments for the great principles of epistemology with special focus, according to Popper, on falsifiability,85 which cannot be examined unambiguously for LCA. The scientific character of LCA is discussed critically in the following chapters dealing with the phases of LCA.

References

Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR) (1994) Analyse de cycle de vie. Norme NF X 30–300. 3/1994.

Badino, V. and Baldo, G.L. (1998)

LCA – Istruzioni per l'uso

, Progetto Leonardo, Esculapio Editore, Bologna.

Baumann, H. and Tillman, A.-M. (2004)

The Hitch Hiker's Guide to LCA. An Orientaion in LCA Methodology and Application

, Studentlitteratur, Lund. ISBN: 91-44-02364-2.

Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie e. V. (BDI) (1999)

Die Durchführung von Ökobilanzen zur Information von Öffentlichkeit und Politik

, BDI-Drucksache Nr. 313, Verlag Industrie-Förderung, Köln. ISSN: 0407-8977.

Beck, M.(Hrsg.) (1993)

Ökobilanzierung im betrieblichen Management

, Vogel Buchverlag, Würzburg. ISSN: 3-8023-1479-4.

Berenbold, H. and Kosswig, K. (1995) A life-cycle inventory for the production of secondary alkane sulphonates (SAS) in Europe.

Tenside Surf. Det.

, 152–156.

Berna, J.L., Cavalli, L., and Renta, C. (1995) A lifecycle inventory for the production of linear akylbenzene sulphonates in Europe.

Tenside Surf. Det.

, 122–127.

BIfA/IFEU/Flo-Pak (2002)

Kunststoffe aus nachwachsenden Rohstoffen:Vergleichende Ökobilanz für Loose-fill-Packmittel aus Stärke bzw. aus Polystyrol

, Bayerisches Institut für Angewandte Umweltforschung und Technik, Augsburg.

Blouet, A. and Rivoire, E. (1995)

L'Écobilan: Les produits et leurs impacts sur l'environnement

, Dunod, Paris. ISBN: 2-10-002126-5.

Boustead, I. (1996) LCA – How it came about. The beginning in UK.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(3), 147–150.

Boustead, I. and Hancock, G.F. (1979)

Handbook of Industrial Energy Analysis

, Ellis Horwood Ltd, Chichester.

Braunschweig, A. and Müller-Wenk, R. (1993)

Ökobilanzen für Unternehmungen. Eine Wegleitung für die Praxis

, Verlag Haupt, Bern.

British Standards Institution (Ed.) (2008) Publicly Available Specification (PAS) 2050:2008.

Specification for the Assessment of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Goods and Services

, British Standards Institution.

Bundesamt für Umweltschutz (BUS) (Hrsg.) (1984)

Oekobilanzen von Packstoffen.

Schriftenreihe Umweltschutz, Nr.

, BUS, Bern.

BUWAL (1990) Ahbe, S., Braunschweig, A., and Müller-Wenk, R.

Methodik für Oekobilanzen auf der Basis ökologischer Optimierung

, Schriftenreihe Umwelt, Nr.

133

, Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL), Bern (Hrsg.).

BUWAL (1991) Habersatter, K., and Widmer, F.

Oekobilanzen von Packstoffen. Stand 1990

, Schriftenreihe Umwelt, Nr.

132

, Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL), Bern (Hrsg.).

BUWAL (1996, 1998) Habersatter, K., Fecker, I., Dall'Aqua, S., Fawer, M., Fallscher, F., Förster, R., Maillefer, C., Ménard, M., Reusser, L., Som, C., Stahel, U., and Zimmermann, P.

Ökoinventare für Verpackungen

, Schriftenreihe Umwelt, Nr.

250

/Bd.

I und II. 2

. erweiterte und aktualisierte Auflage, Bern 1998, 1. Auflage, ETH Zürich und EMPA, St. Gallen, BUWAL und SVI, Bern (Hrsg.).

Canadian Standards Association (CSA): (1992)

Environmental Life Cycle Assessment

. CAN/CSA-Z760, 5th Draft Edition, May 1992.

Curran, M.A. (ed) (1996)

Environmental Life-Cycle Assessment

, McGraw-Hill, New York. ISBN: 0-07-015063-X.

Curran, M.A. (1999) The status of LCA in the USA.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(3), 123–124.

Curran, M.A. (ed) (2012)

Life Cycle Assessment Handbook a Guide for Environmentally Sustainable Products

, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. ISBN: 978-1-1180-9972-8.

Detzel, A., and Böß, A. (2006)

Ökobilanzieller Vergleich von Getränkekartons und PETEinwegflaschen

, Endbericht, Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung (IFEU), Heidelberg an den Fachverband Kartonverpackungen (FKN), Wiesbaden, August 2006.

Deutsches Institut für Bauen und Umwelt (2007)

TECU® – Kupferbänder und Kupferlegierungen

, KME Germany AG. Programmhalter Deutsches Institut für Bauen und Umwelt. Registrierungsnummer No: AUB-KME-30807-D. Ausstellungsdatum: 2007-11-01, verifiziert von: Dr. Eva Schmincke.

DIN-NAGUS (1994) DIN-NAGUS: Grundsätze produktbezogener Ökobilanzen (Stand Oktober 1993).

DIN-Mitteilungen

(3), 208–212.

EPA (1993) Vigon, B.W., Tolle, D.A., Cornaby, B.W., Latham, H.C., Harrison, C.L., Boguski, T.L., Hunt, R.G., and Sellers, J.D.

Life Cycle Assessment: Inventory Guidelines and Principles

, EPA/600/R-92/245, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH.

European Commission (2010)

ILCD Handbook

, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability,

http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu

(accessed 17 July 2007).

Eyrer, P.(Hrsg.) (1996)

Ganzheitliche Bilanzierung. Werkzeug zum Planen und Wirtschaften in Kreisläufen

, Springer, Berlin. ISBN: 3-540-59356-X.

Fink, P. (1997) LCA – How it came about. The roots of LCA in Switzerland: continuous learning by doing.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(3), 131–134.

Finkbeiner, M. (2013) The international standards as constitution of life cycle assessment: the ISO 14040 series and its offspring, in

Encyclopedia of Life Cycle Assessment

, vol. 1, Chapter 6 (ed. W. Klöpffer), Springer, Heidelberg.

Finkbeiner, M., Inaba, A., Tan, R.B.H., Christiansen, K., and Klüppel, H.-J. (2006) The new international standards for life cycle assessment: ISO 14040 and ISO 14044.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(2), 80–85.

Finkbeiner, M. and Matsuno, Y. (eds) (2000) LCA in Japan.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(5 Special Issue), 253–313.

Fleischer, G., and Schmidt, W.-P. (1996) Functional unit for systems using natural raw materials.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(1), 23–27.

Franke, M. (1984)

Umweltauswirkungen durch Getränkeverpackungen. Systematik zur Ermittlung der Umweltauswirkungen von komplexen Prozessen am Beispiel von. Einweg- und Mehrweg-Getränkebehältern

, EF-Verlag für Energie- und Umwelttechnik, Berlin.

Franke, M., Berna, J.L., Cavalli, L., Renta, C., Stalmans, M., and Thomas, H. (1995) A life-cycle inventory for the production of petrochemical intermediates in Europe.

Tenside Surf. Det.

, 384–396.

Fullana, P., and Puig, R. (1997)

Análisis del ciclo de vida

, Primera edición, Rubes Editorial, Barcelona. ISBN: 84-497-0070-1.

Gabathuler, H. (1998) The CML story. How environmental sciences entered the debate on LCA.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(4), 187–194.

Gensch, C.-O. (2008)

Klimaneutrale Weleda AG. Endbericht

, Öko-Institut Freiburg.

Giegrich, J., Mampel, U., Duscha, M., Zazcyk, R., Osorio-Peters, S., and Schmidt, T. (1995)

Bilanzbewertung in produktbezogenen Ökobilanzen. Evaluation von Bewertungsmethoden, Perspektiven

, UBA Texte 23/95, Endbericht des Instituts für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH (IFEU) an das Umweltbundesamt, Berlin, Heidelberg, März. ISSN 0722-186X.

Grahl, B., and Schmincke, E. (1996) Evaluation and decision-making processes in life cycle assessment.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(1), 32–35.

Guinée, J. B. (final editor); Gorée, M., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Kleijn, R., de Koning, A, van Oers, L., Wegener Sleeswijk, A., Suh, S., Udo de Haes, H. A., de Bruijn, H., van Duin, R., Huijbregts, M.A.J. (2002)

Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment – Operational Guide to the ISO Standards

. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. ISBN: 1-4020-0228-9.

Günther, A., and Langowski, H.-C. (1997) Life cycle assessment study on resilient floor coverings.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(2), 73–80.

Günther, A. and Langowski, H.-C. (eds) (1998)

Life Cycle Assessment Study on Resilient Floor Coverings. For ERFMI (European Resilient Flooring Manufacturers Institute)

, Fraunhofer IRB Verlag. ISBN: 3-8167-5210-1.

Hauschild, M., and Wenzel, H. (1988)

Environmental Assessment of Products

, Scientific Background, vol. 2, Chapman & Hall, London. ISBN: 0-412-80810-2.

Heijungs, R. (1997)

Economic drama and the environmental stage. formal derivation of algorithmic tools for environmental analysis and decision-support from a unified epistemological principle

. Proefschrift (Dissertation/PhD-Thesis). Leiden. ISBN: 90-9010784-3.

Heijungs, R., and Suh, S. (2002)

The Computational Structure of Life Cycle Assessment

, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. ISBN: 1-4020-0672-1.

Heinrich, A.B. (2013) Life cycle assessment as reflected by the international journal of life cycle assessment, in

Encyclopedia of Life Cycle Assess

, vol. 1, Chapter 7 (ed W. Klöpffer), Springer.

Heyde, M., and Kremer, M. (1999)

Recycling and Recovery of Plastics from Packaging in Domestic Waste. LCA-Type Analysis of Different Strategies

, vol. 5, LCA Documents, Ecoinforma Press, Bayreuth. ISBN: 3-928379-57-7.

Hirsinger, F., and Schick, K.-P. (1995a) A life-cycle inventory for the production of alcohol sulphates in Europe.

Tenside Surf. Det.

, 128–139.

Hirsinger, F., and Schick, K.-P. (1995b) A life-cycle inventory for the production of alkyl polyglucosides in Europe.

Tenside Surf. Det.

, 193–200.

Hirsinger, F., and Schick, K.-P. (1995c) A life-cycle inventory for the production of detergent grade alcohols.

Tenside Surf. Det.

, 398–410.

Hirsinger, F., and Schick, K.-P. (1995d) A life-cycle inventory for the production of oleochemical raw materials.

Tenside Surf. Det.

, 420–432.

Huijbregts, M.A.J., Guinée, J.B., Huppes, G., and Potting, J. (eds) (2006) Special issue honoring Helias A. Udo de Haes at the occasion of his retirement.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(1) Special Issue, 1–132.

Humbert, S., Rossi, V., Margni, M., Jolliet, O., and Loerincik, Y. (2008) Life cycle assessment of two baby food packaging alternatives: glass jars vs. plastic pots.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(2), 95–106.

Hunt, R., and Franklin, W.E. (1996) LCA – How it came about. Personal reflections on the origin and the development of LCA in the USA.

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

(1), 4–7.

Huppes, G. and Schneider, F. (eds) (1994)

Proceedings of the European Workshop on Allocation in LCA

, Leiden, February 1994, SETAC Europe, Brussels.

IFEU/SLFA (1998)

Ökobilanz Beikrautbekämpfung im Weinbau

. Im Auftrag des Ministeriums für Wirtschaft, Verkehr, Landwirtschaft und Weinbau Rheinland-Pfalz, Mainz, IFEU, Heidelberg, SLFA, Neustadt an der Weinstraße, Dezember 1998.

IFEU (2002) Ostermayer, A., and Schorb, A.

Ökobilanz Fruchtsaftgetränke Verbund-Standbodenbeutel 0,2 l, MW-Glasflasche, Karton Giebelpackung

. Im Auftrag der Deutschen SISI-Werke, Eppelheim, IFEU, Heidelberg, Juli 2002.

IFEU (2004) Detzel, A., Giegrich, J., Krüger, M., Möhler, S., and Ostermayer, A.

Ökobilanz PET-Einwegverpackungen und sekundäre Verwertungsprodukte

. Im Auftrag von PETCORE, Brüssel, IFEU, Heidelberg, August 2004.

IFEU (2006) Detzel, A., and Krüger, M.

LCA for Food Contact Packaging Made from PLA and Traditional Materials

. On behalf of Natureworks LLC, IFEU, Heidelberg, Juli 2006.

IFEU (2007) Krüger, M., and Detzel, A.

Aktuelle Ökobilanz zur 1,5-L-PET-Einwegflasche in Österreich unter Einbeziehung des Bottle-to- Bottle-Recycling

. Im Auftrag des Verbands der Getränkehersteller Österreichs, IFEU, Heidelberg, Oktober 2007.