IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i23p15704-d984105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Simplify Life Cycle Assessment for Industrial Applications—A Comprehensive Review

Author

Listed:
  • Steffen Kiemel

    (Fraunhofer-Institute for Manufacturing Engineering and Automation IPA, Nobelstraße 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Chantal Rietdorf

    (Fraunhofer-Institute for Manufacturing Engineering and Automation IPA, Nobelstraße 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Maximilian Schutzbach

    (Fraunhofer-Institute for Manufacturing Engineering and Automation IPA, Nobelstraße 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
    Institute for Energy Efficiency in Production (EEP), University of Stuttgart, Nobelst. 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Robert Miehe

    (Fraunhofer-Institute for Manufacturing Engineering and Automation IPA, Nobelstraße 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

Abstract

Life cycle assessment (LCA) has established itself as the dominant method for identifying the environmental impact of products or services. However, conducting an LCA is labor and time intensive (especially regarding data collection). This paper, therefore, aims to identify methods and tools that enhance the practicability of LCA, especially with regard to product complexity and variance. To this end, an initial literature review on the LCA of complex products was conducted to identify commonly cited barriers and potential solutions. The obtained information was used to derive search strategies for a subsequent comprehensive and systematic literature review of approaches that address the identified barriers and facilitate the LCA process. We identified five approaches to address the barriers of time and effort, complexity, and data intensity. These are the parametric approach, modular approach, automation, aggregation/grouping, and screening. For each, the concept as well as the associated advantages and disadvantages are described. Especially, the automated calculation of results as well as the automated generation of life cycle inventory (LCI) data exhibit great potential for simplification. We provide an overview of common LCA software and databases and evaluate the respective interfaces. As it was not considered in detail, further research should address options for automated data collection in production by utilizing sensors and intelligent interconnection of production infrastructure as well as the interpretation of the acquired data using artificial intelligence.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:15704-:d:984105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/15704/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/15704/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Malmqvist, Tove & Glaumann, Mauritz & Scarpellini, Sabina & Zabalza, Ignacio & Aranda, Alfonso & Llera, Eva & Díaz, Sergio, 2011. "Life cycle assessment in buildings: The ENSLIC simplified method and guidelines," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1900-1907.
    3. Lara Waltersmann & Steffen Kiemel & Julian Stuhlsatz & Alexander Sauer & Robert Miehe, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence Applications for Increasing Resource Efficiency in Manufacturing Companies—A Comprehensive Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-26, June.
    4. Rafael Horn & Sebastian Ebertshäuser & Roberta Di Bari & Olivia Jorgji & René Traunspurger & Petra von Both, 2020. "The BIM2LCA Approach: An Industry Foundation Classes (IFC)-Based Interface to Integrate Life Cycle Assessment in Integral Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-30, August.
    5. José Pedro Carvalho & Fernanda Schmitd Villaschi & Luís Bragança, 2021. "Assessing Life Cycle Environmental and Economic Impacts of Building Construction Solutions with BIM," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-23, August.
    6. Patrik J G Henriksson & Reinout Heijungs & Hai M Dao & Lam T Phan & Geert R de Snoo & Jeroen B Guinée, 2015. "Product Carbon Footprints and Their Uncertainties in Comparative Decision Contexts," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-11, March.
    7. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    8. Anita Naneva & Marcella Bonanomi & Alexander Hollberg & Guillaume Habert & Daniel Hall, 2020. "Integrated BIM-Based LCA for the Entire Building Process Using an Existing Structure for Cost Estimation in the Swiss Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, May.
    9. Peters, Jens F. & Baumann, Manuel & Zimmermann, Benedikt & Braun, Jessica & Weil, Marcel, 2017. "The environmental impact of Li-Ion batteries and the role of key parameters – A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 491-506.
    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. Ana Fonseca & Edgar Ramalho & Ana Gouveia & Filipa Figueiredo & João Nunes, 2023. "Life Cycle Assessment of PLA Products: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-19, August.

    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. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    2. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    3. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    5. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    6. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    7. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    8. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    9. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    10. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    11. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.
    12. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    13. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.
    14. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    15. Qing Ye & Bao-Xin Qian & Wei-Li Yin & Feng-Mei Wang & Tao Han, 2016. "Association between the HFE C282Y, H63D Polymorphisms and the Risks of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, Liver Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis o," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    16. Bishal Mohindru & David Turner & Tracey Sach & Diana Bilton & Siobhan Carr & Olga Archangelidi & Arjun Bhadhuri & Jennifer A. Whitty, 2020. "Health State Utility Data in Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 13-25, March.
    17. Subramaniam, Mega & Pang, Natalie & Morehouse, Shandra & Asgarali-Hoffman, S. Nisa, 2020. "Examining vulnerability in youth digital information practices scholarship: What are we missing or exhausting?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    18. Neal R. Haddaway & Matthew J. Page & Chris C. Pritchard & Luke A. McGuinness, 2022. "PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020‐compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), June.
    19. Ding Zhu & Mindan Wu & Yuan Cao & Shihua Lin & Nanxia Xuan & Chen Zhu & Wen Li & Huahao Shen, 2018. "Heated humidification did not improve compliance of positive airway pressure and subjective daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Pelai, Ricardo & Hagerman, Shannon M. & Kozak, Robert, 2020. "Biotechnologies in agriculture and forestry: Governance insights from a comparative systematic review of barriers and recommendations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    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:23:p:15704-:d:984105. 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.