IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v5y2016i1p13-d64708.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Abiotic Resource LCIA Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Rodrigo A. F. Alvarenga

    (Departamento de Engenharia Ambiental, Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências Ambientais, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Av. Luiz de Camões, 2090 Conta Dinheiro, Lages-SC 88.520-000, Brazil)

  • Ittana De Oliveira Lins

    (Departamento de Ciências Agrárias e Ambientais, Programa de Pós-graduação em Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz (UESC), Rod. Ilhéus-Itabuna, km 16 s/n-Salobrinho-Ilhéus-BA 45.662-900, Brazil
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • José Adolfo de Almeida Neto

    (Departamento de Ciências Agrárias e Ambientais, Programa de Pós-graduação em Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz (UESC), Rod. Ilhéus-Itabuna, km 16 s/n-Salobrinho-Ilhéus-BA 45.662-900, Brazil
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

In a life cycle assessment (LCA), the impacts on resources are evaluated at the area of protection (AoP) with the same name, through life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods. There are different LCIA methods available in literature that assesses abiotic resources, and the goal of this study was to propose recommendations for that impact category. We evaluated 19 different LCIA methods, through two criteria (scientific robustness and scope), divided into three assessment levels, i.e., resource accounting methods (RAM), midpoint, and endpoint. In order to support the assessment, we applied some LCIA methods to a case study of ethylene production. For RAM, the most suitable LCIA method was CEENE (Cumulative Exergy Extraction from the Natural Environment) (but SED (Solar Energy Demand) and ICEC (Industrial Cumulative Exergy Consumption)/ECEC (Ecological Cumulative Exergy Consumption) may also be recommended), while the midpoint level was ADP (Abiotic Depletion Potential), and the endpoint level was both the Recipe Endpoint and EPS2000 (Environmental Priority Strategies). We could notice that the assessment for the AoP Resources is not yet well established in the LCA community, since new LCIA methods (with different approaches) and assessment frameworks are showing up, and this trend may continue in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodrigo A. F. Alvarenga & Ittana De Oliveira Lins & José Adolfo de Almeida Neto, 2016. "Evaluation of Abiotic Resource LCIA Methods," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:13-:d:64708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/5/1/13/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/5/1/13/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wesley W. Ingwersen, 2011. "Emergy as a Life Cycle Impact Assessment Indicator," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 15(4), pages 550-567, August.
    2. Valero, Antonio & Valero, Alicia, 2010. "Exergoecology: A thermodynamic approach for accounting the Earth's mineral capital. The case of bauxite–aluminium and limestone–lime chains," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 229-238.
    3. Huijbregts, Mark A.J. & Hellweg, Stefanie & Frischknecht, Rolf & Hungerbuhler, Konrad & Hendriks, A. Jan, 2008. "Ecological footprint accounting in the life cycle assessment of products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 798-807, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mario Schmidt, 2018. "Scarcity and Environmental Impact of Mineral Resources—An Old and Never-Ending Discussion," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Goran Finnveden & Yevgeniya Arushanyan & Miguel Brandão, 2016. "Exergy as a Measure of Resource Use in Life Cycle Assessment and Other Sustainability Assessment Tools," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-11, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kovalev, Andrey V., 2016. "Misuse of thermodynamic entropy in economics," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 129-136.
    2. Valero, Alicia & Valero, Antonio & Gómez, Javier B., 2011. "The crepuscular planet. A model for the exhausted continental crust," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 694-707.
    3. Stephen G. Wiedemann & Quan V. Nguyen & Simon J. Clarke, 2022. "Using LCA and Circularity Indicators to Measure the Sustainability of Textiles—Examples of Renewable and Non-Renewable Fibres," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Debrupa Chakraborty & Joyashree Roy, 2015. "Ecological footprint of paperboard and paper production unit in India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 909-921, August.
    5. Valero, Alicia & Valero, Antonio & Stanek, Wojciech, 2018. "Assessing the exergy degradation of the natural capital: From Szargut's updated reference environment to the new thermoecological-cost methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1140-1149.
    6. Torres, César & Valero, Antonio & Valero, Alicia, 2013. "Exergoecology as a tool for ecological modelling. The case of the US food production chain," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 255(C), pages 21-28.
    7. Domínguez, Adriana & Valero, Alicia & Valero, Antonio, 2013. "Exergy accounting applied to metallurgical systems: The case of nickel processing," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 37-45.
    8. Taelman, Sue Ellen & De Meester, Steven & Schaubroeck, Thomas & Sakshaug, Egil & Alvarenga, Rodrigo A.F. & Dewulf, Jo, 2014. "Accounting for the occupation of the marine environment as a natural resource in life cycle assessment: An exergy based approach," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Ornella Papaluca & Mario Tani & Ciro Troise, 2020. "Entrepreneurship and Sustainability in Tourism: An Interpretative Model," Journal of Management and Sustainability, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(1), pages 1-38, July.
    10. Liu, Zhe & Adams, Michelle & Cote, Raymond P. & Geng, Yong & Chen, Qinghua & Liu, Weili & Sun, Lu & Yu, Xiaoman, 2017. "Comprehensive development of industrial symbiosis for the response of greenhouse gases emission mitigation: Challenges and opportunities in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 88-95.
    11. Thomas Wiedmann & John Barrett, 2010. "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-49, June.
    12. Sophie Sfez & Jo Dewulf & Wouter De Soete & Thomas Schaubroeck & Fabrice Mathieux & Dana Kralisch & Steven De Meester, 2017. "Toward a Framework for Resource Efficiency Evaluation in Industry: Recommendations for Research and Innovation Projects," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-23, January.
    13. Mamouni Limnios, Elena Alexandra & Ghadouani, Anas & Schilizzi, Steven G.M. & Mazzarol, Tim, 2009. "Giving the consumer the choice: A methodology for Product Ecological Footprint calculation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2525-2534, August.
    14. Shyamal Gondkar & Sivakumar Sreeramagiri & Edwin Zondervan, 2012. "Methodology for Assessment and Optimization of Industrial Eco-Systems," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-21, June.
    15. Antonio Ruiz Sánchez & Ventura Castillo Ramos & Manuel Sánchez Polo & María Victoria López Ramón & José Rivera Utrilla, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Cement Production with Marble Waste Sludges," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-15, October.
    16. Meidad Kissinger & Cornelia Sussman & Jennie Moore & William E. Rees, 2013. "Accounting for the Ecological Footprint of Materials in Consumer Goods at the Urban Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-14, May.
    17. Qingsong Wang & Hongkun Xiao & Qiao Ma & Xueliang Yuan & Jian Zuo & Jian Zhang & Shuguang Wang & Mansen Wang, 2020. "Review of Emergy Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment: Coupling Development Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, January.
    18. Sofia Russo & Alicia Valero & Antonio Valero & Marta Iglesias-Émbil, 2021. "Exergy-Based Assessment of Polymers Production and Recycling: An Application to the Automotive Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-19, January.
    19. Syrovátka, Miroslav, 2020. "On sustainability interpretations of the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    20. Wesley Ingwersen & Heriberto Cabezas & Anne V. Weisbrod & Tarsha Eason & Bayou Demeke & Xin Ma & Troy R. Hawkins & Seung-Jin Lee & Jane C. Bare & Manuel Ceja, 2014. "Integrated Metrics for Improving the Life Cycle Approach to Assessing Product System Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-28, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:13-:d:64708. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.