Research

Jump to: Review

327 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Life Cycle Costing in Sustainability Assessment—A Case Study of Remanufactured Alternators

by Erwin M. Schau, Marzia Traverso, Annekatrin Lehmann and Matthias Finkbeiner

Sustainability 2011, 3(11), 2268-2288; https://doi.org/10.3390/su3112268 - 18 Nov 2011

Cited by 79 | Viewed by 21253

Sustainability is on the international agenda, and is a driver for industry in international competition. Sustainability encompasses the three pillars: environment, society and economy. To prevent shifting of burden, the whole life cycle needs to be taken into account. For the environmental dimension [...] Read more.

Sustainability is on the international agenda, and is a driver for industry in international competition. Sustainability encompasses the three pillars: environment, society and economy. To prevent shifting of burden, the whole life cycle needs to be taken into account. For the environmental dimension of sustainability, life cycle assessment (LCA) has been practiced for a while and is a standardized method. A life cycle approach for the social and economic pillars of sustainability needs to be further developed. This paper investigates the application of life cycle costing (LCC) as part of a wider sustainability assessment where also social life cycle assessment (SLCA) and LCA are combined. LCA-type LCC is applied on a case study of remanufactured alternators. Remanufacturing of automobile parts is a fast growing important business with large potential for cost and resource savings. Three design alternatives for the alternator and three locations for the remanufacturing plant are evaluated. The remanufacturer perspective and the user perspective are investigated. The results for the LCA-type LCC show that the largest cost for the remanufacturer is the new parts replacing old warn parts. However, the user cost, and therein especially, cost for fuel used for the alternator’s power production dominates and should be the focus for further improvement. In conducting the case study, it was revealed that the connection between the LCA-type LCC results and the economic dimension of sustainability needs to be further investigated and defined. For this purpose, areas of protection for life cycle sustainability assessment and LCA-type LCC in particular need further development. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment)

► Show Figures

734 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Proportioning of Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete Mixes for Pavement Construction and Their Impact on Environment and Cost

by Constantia Achilleos, Diofantos Hadjimitsis, Kyriacos Neocleous, Kypros Pilakoutas, Pavlos O. Neophytou and Stelios Kallis

Sustainability 2011, 3(7), 965-983; https://doi.org/10.3390/su3070965 - 08 Jul 2011

Cited by 60 | Viewed by 18449

Abstract

Steel fibre reinforced concrete (SFRC) is a construction material investigated for more than 40 years including for pavement applications. A number of studies have demonstrated the technical merits of SFRC pavements over conventional concrete pavements; however little work has been carried out on [...] Read more.

Steel fibre reinforced concrete (SFRC) is a construction material investigated for more than 40 years including for pavement applications. A number of studies have demonstrated the technical merits of SFRC pavements over conventional concrete pavements; however little work has been carried out on the environmental and economical impact of SFRC during the pavement’s life cycle. Therefore, extended research was undertaken within the framework of the EU funded project “EcoLanes” to estimate the environmental and economical loadings of SFRC pavements. The innovative concept of the project is the use of recycled steel tyre-cord wire as concrete fibre reinforcement, which provides additional environmental benefits for tyre recycling over landfilling. Within the project framework a demonstration of a steel-fibre-reinforced roller-compacted concrete (SFR-RCC) pavement was constructed in a rural area in Cyprus. In order to assess the economical and environmental picture of the demonstration pavement, life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) and life cycle assessment (LCA) studies were undertaken, which also compared the under study pavement design with four conventional alternatives. The main output of the studies is that SFR-RCC is more environmentally and economically sustainable than others. In addition, various concrete mix designs were investigated by considering parameters such as fibre type and dosage, cement type, and transportation distances to the construction site. Fibre dosage has been highlighted as a crucial factor compared with economical and environmental loadings in SFR-RCC pavement construction. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment)

► Show Figures

266 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Integration of Social Aspects in Decision Support, Based on Life Cycle Thinking

by Annekatrin Lehmann, Daniela Russi, Alba Bala, Matthias Finkbeiner and Pere Fullana-i-Palmer

Sustainability 2011, 3(4), 562-577; https://doi.org/10.3390/su3040562 - 30 Mar 2011

Cited by 57 | Viewed by 13628

Abstract

Recently increasing attention has been paid to complementing environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) with social aspects. The paper discusses the selection of social impacts and indicators from existing frameworks like Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA). Two ongoing case [...] Read more.

Recently increasing attention has been paid to complementing environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) with social aspects. The paper discusses the selection of social impacts and indicators from existing frameworks like Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA). Two ongoing case studies, addressing sustainability assessment within decision support, were considered: (1) Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in Indonesia; and (2) Integrated Packaging Waste Management in Spain and Portugal (FENIX). The focus was put on social impacts occurring due to decisions within these systems, such as choice of technologies, practices or suppliers. Thus, decision makers—here understood as intended users of the studies’ results—are not consumers that buy (or do not buy) a product, such as in recent SLCA case-studies, but mainly institutions that decide about the design of the water or packaging waste management system. Therefore, in the FENIX project, a list of social impacts identified from literature was sent to the intended users to be ranked according to their priorities. Finally, the paper discusses to what extent the entire life cycle is reflected in SLCA impact categories and indicators, and explains how both life-cycle and on-site-related social impacts were chosen to be assessed. However, not all indicators in the two projects will assess all stages of the life cycle, because of their varying relevance in the different stages, data availability and practical interest of decision makers. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment)

► Show Figures

212 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Sustainability Assessment of a Biorefinery Complex in Thailand

by Shabbir H. Gheewala, Sébastien Bonnet, Kritana Prueksakorn and Pariyapat Nilsalab

Sustainability 2011, 3(3), 518-530; https://doi.org/10.3390/su3030518 - 21 Mar 2011

Cited by 32 | Viewed by 10554

Abstract

In this paper, a biorefinery complex in Thailand was assessed vis-à-vis sustainability. The complex studied includes plantations of sugarcane and a biorefinery system composed of several units including, a sugar mill, power plant, ethanol factory and fertilizer plant. The assessment aimed at evaluating [...] Read more.

In this paper, a biorefinery complex in Thailand was assessed vis-à-vis sustainability. The complex studied includes plantations of sugarcane and a biorefinery system composed of several units including, a sugar mill, power plant, ethanol factory and fertilizer plant. The assessment aimed at evaluating the environmental and socio-economic implications relating to molasses-based ethanol production and use, and maximized utilization of the biomass materials produced as part of the biorefinery complex. Global warming potential, human development index and total value added are the three indicators that were selected to perform the assessment. The results obtained revealed that the maximization of biomass utilization at the level of the biorefinery complex provide greenhouse gases emissions reduction benefits, enhanced living conditions for sugarcane farmers and employees of the biorefinery, and economic benefits, particularly with regard to profit and income generation. These results could serve as a first step to further improve and design indicators for sustainability assessment of biomass utilization. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment)

► Show Figures

698 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Advancing Integrated Systems Modelling Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

by Anthony Halog and Yosef Manik

Sustainability 2011, 3(2), 469-499; https://doi.org/10.3390/su3020469 - 23 Feb 2011

Cited by 210 | Viewed by 32000

Abstract

The need for integrated methodological framework for sustainability assessment has been widely discussed and is urgent due to increasingly complex environmental system problems. These problems have impacts on ecosystems and human well-being which represent a threat to economic performance of countries and corporations. [...] Read more.

The need for integrated methodological framework for sustainability assessment has been widely discussed and is urgent due to increasingly complex environmental system problems. These problems have impacts on ecosystems and human well-being which represent a threat to economic performance of countries and corporations. Integrated assessment crosses issues; spans spatial and temporal scales; looks forward and backward; and incorporates multi-stakeholder inputs. This study aims to develop an integrated methodology by capitalizing the complementary strengths of different methods used by industrial ecologists and biophysical economists. The computational methodology proposed here is systems perspective, integrative, and holistic approach for sustainability assessment which attempts to link basic science and technology to policy formulation. The framework adopts life cycle thinking methods—LCA, LCC, and SLCA; stakeholders analysis supported by multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA); and dynamic system modelling. Following Pareto principle, the critical sustainability criteria, indicators and metrics (i.e., hotspots) can be identified and further modelled using system dynamics or agent based modelling and improved by data envelopment analysis (DEA) and sustainability network theory (SNT). The framework is being applied to development of biofuel supply chain networks. The framework can provide new ways of integrating knowledge across the divides between social and natural sciences as well as between critical and problem-solving research. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment)

► Show Figures

225 KiB

Open AccessArticle

A Life-Cycle Approach to Characterising Environmental and Economic Impacts of Multifunctional Land-Use Systems: An Integrated Assessment in the UK

by Miguel Brandão, Roland Clift, Llorenç Milà i Canals and Lauren Basson

Sustainability 2010, 2(12), 3747-3776; https://doi.org/10.3390/su2123747 - 15 Dec 2010

Cited by 44 | Viewed by 13018

Abstract

An integrated environmental and economic assessment of land use for food, energy and timber in the UK has been performed using environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and economic Life Cycle Costing (LCC), to explore complementary sustainability aspects of alternative land uses. The environmental [...] Read more.

An integrated environmental and economic assessment of land use for food, energy and timber in the UK has been performed using environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and economic Life Cycle Costing (LCC), to explore complementary sustainability aspects of alternative land uses. The environmental assessment includes impacts on climate change, ecosystem services and biodiversity, all of which include soil carbon emissions. The systems explored include all processes from cradle to farm ‘gate’. The crops assessed were wheat and oilseed rape (under both organic and conventional farming systems), Scots Pine, and willow and Miscanthus. Food crops, particularly conventional food crops, are shown to have the highest climate-changing emissions per ha, whereas energy and forestry crops show negative net emissions. To a lesser extent, the same situation applies to impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity, with carbon storage in biomass playing a larger role than carbon in soils. The energy and forestry crops in this study show an overall beneficial environmental impact, in particular due to soil carbon sequestration, making these land uses the lowest contributors to climate change. Combining this with the non-renewable CO₂ emissions displaced will mean that energy crops have an even lower impact. Economically, conventional food crops present the highest costs per ha, followed by organic food crops, energy and forestry crops. Integrating the results from LCA and LCC shows that the climate impacts per monetary unit of all land uses are dominated by soil management and, in the case of food production, also by fertilisation. Taxes or incentives such as “carbon charging” will encourage changes in practice in these areas to improve the sustainability of land management, mainly by building up Soil Organic Carbon (SOC). Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

174 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

by Matthias Finkbeiner, Erwin M. Schau, Annekatrin Lehmann and Marzia Traverso

Sustainability 2010, 2(10), 3309-3322; https://doi.org/10.3390/su2103309 - 22 Oct 2010

Cited by 571 | Viewed by 54706

Abstract

Sustainability is nowadays accepted by all stakeholders as a guiding principle for both public policy making and corporate strategies. However, the biggest challenge for most organizations remains in the real and substantial implementation of the sustainability concept. The core of the implementation challenge [...] Read more.

Sustainability is nowadays accepted by all stakeholders as a guiding principle for both public policy making and corporate strategies. However, the biggest challenge for most organizations remains in the real and substantial implementation of the sustainability concept. The core of the implementation challenge is the question, how sustainability performance can be measured, especially for products and processes. This paper explores the current status of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) for products and processes. For the environmental dimension well established tools like Life Cycle Assessment are available. For the economic and social dimension, there is still need for consistent and robust indicators and methods. In addition to measuring the individual sustainability dimensions, another challenge is a comprehensive, yet understandable presentation of the results. The “Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard” and the “Life Cycle Sustainability Triangle” are presented as examples for communication tools for both experts and non expert stakeholders. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

237 KiB

Open AccessReview

The Use of Reference Values in Indicator-Based Methods for the Environmental Assessment of Agricultural Systems

by Ivonne Acosta-Alba and Hayo M. G. Van der Werf

Sustainability 2011, 3(2), 424-442; https://doi.org/10.3390/su3020424 - 16 Feb 2011

Cited by 44 | Viewed by 14927

Abstract

Many indicator-based methods for the environmental assessment of farming systems have been developed. It is not the absolute values of the indicators that reveal whether the impact of a system is acceptable, but rather the distance between these values and some reference values. [...] Read more.

Many indicator-based methods for the environmental assessment of farming systems have been developed. It is not the absolute values of the indicators that reveal whether the impact of a system is acceptable, but rather the distance between these values and some reference values. We reviewed eight frameworks for the environmental assessment of agricultural systems that define reference values for their indicators. We analyzed the methods used to establish reference values and explored how to improve these methods to increase their usage and relevance. This analysis revealed a striking diversity of terminology, sources, and modes of expression of results. Normative reference values allow the assessment of a single system with a previously defined value; Relative reference values are based on indicator values for similar systems or a reference system. Normative reference values can be Science-based or Policy-based. A science-based normative reference value can be a Target value, which identifies desirable conditions, or an Environmental limit, which is the level beyond which conditions are unacceptable. The quantification of the uncertainty of reference values is a topic which is barely explored and warrants further research. Reference values present a means of introducing site specificity into methods for environmental assessment which seems, at present, largely under-exploited. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment)

► Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editor

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Published Papers (8 papers)

Research

Review

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI