IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p3746-d777036.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Modular Tool to Support Data Management for LCA in Industry: Methodology, Application and Potentialities

Author

Listed:
  • Davide Rovelli

    (Engineering, ICT and Technologies for Energy and Transportation Department, Institute of Intelligent Industrial Technologies and Systems for Advanced Manufacturing (STIIMA), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Alfonso Corti 12, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Carlo Brondi

    (Engineering, ICT and Technologies for Energy and Transportation Department, Institute of Intelligent Industrial Technologies and Systems for Advanced Manufacturing (STIIMA), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Alfonso Corti 12, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Michele Andreotti

    (Engineering, ICT and Technologies for Energy and Transportation Department, Institute of Intelligent Industrial Technologies and Systems for Advanced Manufacturing (STIIMA), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Alfonso Corti 12, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Elisabetta Abbate

    (Engineering, ICT and Technologies for Energy and Transportation Department, Institute of Intelligent Industrial Technologies and Systems for Advanced Manufacturing (STIIMA), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Alfonso Corti 12, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Maurizio Zanforlin

    (ORI Martin Ltd., Via Cosimo Canovetti 13, 25128 Brescia, Italy)

  • Andrea Ballarino

    (Engineering, ICT and Technologies for Energy and Transportation Department, Institute of Intelligent Industrial Technologies and Systems for Advanced Manufacturing (STIIMA), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Alfonso Corti 12, 20133 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) computes potential environmental impacts of a product or process. However, LCAs in the industrial sector are generally delivered through static yearly analyses which cannot capture any temporal dynamics of inventory data. Moreover, LCA must deal with differences across background models, Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods and specific rules of environmental labels, together with their developments over time and the difficulty of the non-expert organization staff to effectively interpret LCA results. A case study which discusses how to manage these barriers and their relevance is currently lacking. Here, we fill this gap by proposing a general methodology to develop a modular tool which integrates spreadsheets, LCA software, coding and visualization modules that can be independently modified while leaving the architecture unchanged. We test the tool within the ORI Martin secondary steelmaking plant, finding that it can manage (i) a high amount of primary foreground data to build a dynamic LCA; (ii) different background models, LCIA methods and environmental labels rules; (iii) interactive visualizations. Then, we outline the relevance of these capabilities since (i) temporal dynamics of foreground inventory data affect monthly LCA results, which may vary by ±14% around the yearly value; (ii) background datasets, LCIA methods and environmental label rules may alter LCA results by 20%; (iii) more than 10 5 LCA values can be clearly visualized through dynamically updated dashboards. Our work paves the way towards near-real-time LCA monitoring of single product batches, while contextualizing the company sustainability targets within global environmental trends.

Suggested Citation

  • Davide Rovelli & Carlo Brondi & Michele Andreotti & Elisabetta Abbate & Maurizio Zanforlin & Andrea Ballarino, 2022. "A Modular Tool to Support Data Management for LCA in Industry: Methodology, Application and Potentialities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3746-:d:777036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3746/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3746/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Pauer & Bernhard Wohner & Manfred Tacker, 2020. "The Influence of Database Selection on Environmental Impact Results. Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Using GaBi, Ecoinvent 3.6, and the Environmental Footprint Database," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Eric Masanet & Yuan Chang, 2014. "Who Cares About Life Cycle Assessment?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(6), pages 787-791, December.
    3. Peng Wang & Morten Ryberg & Yi Yang & Kuishuang Feng & Sami Kara & Michael Hauschild & Wei-Qiang Chen, 2021. "Efficiency stagnation in global steel production urges joint supply- and demand-side mitigation efforts," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Eric Copius Peereboom & René Kleijn & Saul Lemkowitz & Sven Lundie, 1998. "Influence of Inventory Data Sets on Life‐Cycle Assessment Results: A Case Study on PVC," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 2(3), pages 109-130, July.
    5. Felice Diekel & Natalia Mikosch & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2021. "Life Cycle Based Comparison of Textile Ecolabels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, February.
    6. Johan Rockström & Will Steffen & Kevin Noone & Åsa Persson & F. Stuart Chapin & Eric F. Lambin & Timothy M. Lenton & Marten Scheffer & Carl Folke & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber & Björn Nykvist & Cynthia , 2009. "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7263), pages 472-475, September.
    7. Thomas A. Tsalis & Kyveli E. Malamateniou & Dimitrios Koulouriotis & Ioannis E. Nikolaou, 2020. "New challenges for corporate sustainability reporting: United Nations' 2030 Agenda for sustainable development and the sustainable development goals," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1617-1629, July.
    8. Bartzas, Georgios & Komnitsas, Kostas, 2015. "Life cycle assessment of ferronickel production in Greece," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 105(PA), pages 113-122.
    9. Jana Gerta Backes & Julian Suer & Nils Pauliks & Sabrina Neugebauer & Marzia Traverso, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of an Integrated Steel Mill Using Primary Manufacturing Data: Actual Environmental Profile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    10. Oda, Junichiro & Akimoto, Keigo & Tomoda, Toshimasa, 2013. "Long-term global availability of steel scrap," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 81-91.
    11. Kristina Henzler & Stephanie D. Maier & Michael Jäger & Rafael Horn, 2020. "SDG-Based Sustainability Assessment Methodology for Innovations in the Field of Urban Surfaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-32, June.
    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. Tamíris Pacheco da Costa & James Gillespie & Katarzyna Pelc & Abi Adefisan & Michael Adefisan & Ramakrishnan Ramanathan & Fionnuala Murphy, 2022. "Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Food Supply Chain Environmental Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Steffen Kiemel & Chantal Rietdorf & Maximilian Schutzbach & Robert Miehe, 2022. "How to Simplify Life Cycle Assessment for Industrial Applications—A Comprehensive Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-26, November.
    3. Michele Andreotti & Carlo Brondi & Davide Micillo & Ron Zevenhoven & Johannes Rieger & Ayoung Jo & Anne-Laure Hettinger & Jan Bollen & Enrico Malfa & Claudio Trevisan & Klaus Peters & Delphine Snaet &, 2023. "SDGs in the EU Steel Sector: A Critical Review of Sustainability Initiatives and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-23, May.
    4. Simone Cornago & Yee Shee Tan & Carlo Brondi & Seeram Ramakrishna & Jonathan Sze Choong Low, 2022. "Systematic Literature Review on Dynamic Life Cycle Inventory: Towards Industry 4.0 Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-22, May.

    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. Huiyuan Guan & Yongping Bai & Chunyue Zhang, 2022. "Research on Ecosystem Security and Restoration Pattern of Urban Agglomeration in the Yellow River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Filipa Correia & Philipp Erfruth & Julie Bryhn, 2018. "The 2030 Agenda: The roadmap to GlobALLizaton," Working Papers 156, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    3. Birgit Kopainsky & Anita Frehner & Adrian Müller, 2020. "Sustainable and healthy diets: Synergies and trade‐offs in Switzerland," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 908-927, November.
    4. Hervé Corvellec & Johan Hultman & Anne Jerneck & Susanne Arvidsson & Johan Ekroos & Niklas Wahlberg & Timothy W. Luke, 2021. "Resourcification: A non‐essentialist theory of resources for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 1249-1256, November.
    5. Larona S. Teseletso & Tsuyoshi Adachi, 2022. "Long-Term Sustainability of Copper and Iron Based on a System Dynamics Model," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, April.
    6. Carina Mueller & Christopher West & Mairon G. Bastos Lima & Bob Doherty, 2023. "Demand-Side Actors in Agricultural Supply Chain Sustainability: An Assessment of Motivations for Action, Implementation Challenges, and Research Frontiers," World, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-20, September.
    7. Agnieszka Strzelecka, 2021. "The Field of “Public Health” as a Component of Sustainable Development—Poland Compared to the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-20, September.
    8. Janet Judy McIntyre‐Mills, 2013. "Anthropocentrism and Well‐being: A Way Out of the Lobster Pot?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 136-155, March.
    9. Hametner, Markus, 2022. "Economics without ecology: How the SDGs fail to align socioeconomic development with environmental sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    10. Ronja Teschner & Jessica Ruppen & Basil Bornemann & Rony Emmenegger & Lucía Aguirre Sánchez, 2021. "Mapping Sustainable Diets: A Comparison of Sustainability References in Dietary Guidelines of Swiss Food Governance Actors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    11. Barbara Predan & Petra Černe Oven, 2023. "Developing a Pedagogical Approach with the Aim of Empowering Educators and Students to Address Emerging Global Issues such as Climate Change and Social Justice: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-22, December.
    12. Hörisch, Jacob & Ortas, Eduardo & Schaltegger, Stefan & Álvarez, Igor, 2015. "Environmental effects of sustainability management tools: An empirical analysis of large companies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 241-249.
    13. Telmo José Mendes & Diego Silva Siqueira & Eduardo Barretto Figueiredo & Ricardo de Oliveira Bordonal & Mara Regina Moitinho & José Marques Júnior & Newton La Scala Jr., 2021. "Soil carbon stock estimations: methods and a case study of the Maranhão State, Brazil," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 16410-16427, November.
    14. Sergio Genovesi & Julia Maria Mönig, 2022. "Acknowledging Sustainability in the Framework of Ethical Certification for AI," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-10, March.
    15. Ethan Gordon & Federico Davila & Chris Riedy, 2022. "Transforming landscapes and mindscapes through regenerative agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 809-826, June.
    16. Jean-François Ruault & Alice Dupré La Tour & André Evette & Sandrine Allain & Jean-Marc Callois, 2022. "A biodiversity-employment framework to protect biodiversity," Post-Print hal-03365820, HAL.
    17. Pires, Aliny P.F. & Rodriguez Soto, Clarita & Scarano, Fabio R., 2021. "Strategies to reach global sustainability should take better account of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    18. Mehmet Ünal & Fatma Ünal, 2022. "Ecological Footprint Reduction Behaviors of Individuals in Turkey in the Context of Ecological Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, December.
    19. Kostas Bithas & Panos Kalimeris, 2022. "Coupling versus Decoupling? Challenging Evidence over the Link between Economic Growth and Resource Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-11, January.
    20. Alan Randall, 2022. "Driving with Eyes on the Rear-View Mirror—Why Weak Sustainability Is Not Enough," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-13, August.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3746-:d:777036. 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.