IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v21y2017i6p1578-1590.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lessons Learned from a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Rare Earth Permanent Magnets

Author

Listed:
  • Christina Wulf
  • Petra Zapp
  • Andrea Schreiber
  • Josefine Marx
  • Holger Schlör

Abstract

In order to address methodological challenges during life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), this article combines the results of a life cycle assessment (LCA), a life cycle costing, and a social LCA using the example of a complex product: a rare earth permanent magnet for use in wind turbines. The article presents different approaches for combining the results of separate assessments with its attendant methodological challenges. Different normalization, aggregation methods, and weighing factors are applied and their impacts on the results are compared. The underlying case study makes an evaluation of these different methodologies more concrete. Results show that the normalization method applied has a greater influence on the overall results than the aggregation method or weighting factors. Additionally, this study shows that indifference thresholds should be applied to avoid overestimation of small impacts. Indifference thresholds ensure that impact categories with nearly the same results for all analyzed options are treated as identical results. The study also indicates the importance of the question of how much compensation between impacts is desirable. Despite the impact of these factors, the chosen case study of an LCSA for permanent magnets with different supply routes for rare earths shows that the ranking of Chinese production is the most problematic irrespective of the approaches applied.

Suggested Citation

  • Christina Wulf & Petra Zapp & Andrea Schreiber & Josefine Marx & Holger Schlör, 2017. "Lessons Learned from a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Rare Earth Permanent Magnets," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 21(6), pages 1578-1590, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:21:y:2017:i:6:p:1578-1590
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12575
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.12575?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tobias Naegler & Lisa Becker & Jens Buchgeister & Wolfgang Hauser & Heidi Hottenroth & Tobias Junne & Ulrike Lehr & Oliver Scheel & Ricarda Schmidt-Scheele & Sonja Simon & Claudia Sutardhio & Ingela T, 2021. "Integrated Multidimensional Sustainability Assessment of Energy System Transformation Pathways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-28, May.
    2. Christian Thies & Karsten Kieckhäfer & Thomas S. Spengler, 2021. "Activity analysis based modeling of global supply chains for sustainability assessment," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(2), pages 215-252, March.
    3. Schlör, H. & Venghaus, S. & Zapp, P. & Marx, J. & Schreiber, A. & Hake, J.-Fr., 2018. "The energy-mineral-society nexus – A social LCA model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 999-1008.
    4. Datu Buyung Agusdinata & Wenjuan Liu & Sinta Sulistyo & Philippe LeBillon & Je'anne Wegner, 2023. "Evaluating sustainability impacts of critical mineral extractions: Integration of life cycle sustainability assessment and SDGs frameworks," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 746-759, June.
    5. Buchmayr, A. & Taelman, S.E. & Thomassen, G. & Verhofstadt, E. & Van Ootegem, L. & Dewulf, J., 2023. "A distance-to-sustainability-target approach for indicator aggregation and its application for the comparison of wind energy alternatives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    6. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    7. Christina Wulf & Jasmin Werker & Christopher Ball & Petra Zapp & Wilhelm Kuckshinrichs, 2019. "Review of Sustainability Assessment Approaches Based on Life Cycles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-43, October.
    8. Stefan Gold & Thomas Chesney & Tim Gruchmann & Alexander Trautrims, 2020. "Diffusion of labor standards through supplier–subcontractor networks: An agent‐based model," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(6), pages 1274-1286, December.
    9. Thies, Christian & Kieckhäfer, Karsten & Spengler, Thomas S. & Sodhi, Manbir S., 2019. "Operations research for sustainability assessment of products: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 1-21.
    10. Bonfante, Mariele Canal & Raspini, Jéssica Prats & Fernandes, Ivan Belo & Fernandes, Suélen & Campos, Lucila M.S. & Alarcon, Orestes Estevam, 2021. "Achieving Sustainable Development Goals in rare earth magnets production: A review on state of the art and SWOT analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    11. Louisa Pollok & Sebastian Spierling & Hans-Josef Endres & Ulrike Grote, 2021. "Social Life Cycle Assessments: A Review on Past Development, Advances and Methodological Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-29, September.
    12. Zuo, Zhili & Cheng, Jinhua & Guo, Haixiang & Li, Yonglin, 2021. "Knowledge mapping of research on strategic mineral resource security: A visual analysis using CiteSpace," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    13. Roberta Olindo & Nathalie Schmitt & Joost Vogtländer, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessments on Battery Electric Vehicles and Electrolytic Hydrogen: The Need for Calculation Rules and Better Databases on Electricity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:inecol:v:21:y:2017:i:6:p:1578-1590. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    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.