LCA - Science topic

you can perform LCA by using both, however, in Open LCA you must have to import the Ecoinvent database for better results, while in commercially available software (i.e., SimaPro, GaBi, Umberto, etc.) you may not need to import, since the database is already existing. Additionally, the interface of commercially available software is quite friendly.

You can use free learning resources provided by the open LCA website, I provide you the links below:

Learning and Support

You can download the ecoinvent Database for openLCA for free from a few different sources. The Nexus website provides access to the database, which contains international industrial life cycle inventory data on energy supply, resource extraction, material supply, chemicals, metals, agriculture and more. Additionally, the ecoinvent website provides information about how to access and use the database. Finally, GreenDelta offers a guide on how to use ecoinvent 3 in openLCA.

If you are looking for databases specifically for Simapro and openLCA software, then you can download them from Ecocosts Value. This includes eco-costs method databases, Idemat LCIs and Ecoinvent LCIs.

Basically, there are several sources available online where you can download the ecoinvent Database for openLCA for free.

hope this helps

1. This article has details of the compounds generated during the incineration of PVC ( 1. pdf).

2. This ES& T article has details of the Combustion Products of Plastics (2. pdf).

3. This review paper has pretty nice details about the pyrolysis and end-products of the most commonly used polymer types.

4. A different angle- One of the first studies that showed evidence

of greenhouse gas production under environmental conditions (4. pdf).

5. This ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering paper will be very helpful for your LCA work; Critical Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment Analyses of Plastic Waste Pyrolysis.

Dear Shiva,

I recommend examining End-of-Life sections for plastic waste with LCA software. If you do not have software, I recommend OpenLCA software. I myself use GaBi software, but the demo version of it cannot create an LCA plan for you, you can only set up an LCA process in it. I investigated the EoL section of plastic waste, I recommend this article to you. Best wishes, Viktoria

You may check in ecoinvent 3.8

1) cable production, three-conductor cable | cable, three-conductor cable

(2e126ede-916d-3769-a1be-fb09ecce216f)

or

2) cable production, unspecified | cable, unspecified

(bdba88b7-c2d2-36de-a6b9-30d62d0a26e0)

Both datasets use copper, cathode (fbb039f7-f9cc-46d2-b631-313ddb125c1a) as input flow

Crisis and emergency alert http://youtu.be/Ng1-KJueYiU Time for the people to stand together to bypass, help us build the bypass. We have the foundation's know

There are many tools that one can use for impact analysis (e.g., doi:10.1088/1755-1315/506/1/012002).

As Aryan Shahabian noted, this description of GREET is from a DOE website: "The Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model is a tool that examines the life-cycle impacts of vehicle technologies, fuels, products, and energy systems".

'In life cycle assessment (LCA), it is recommended to examine emissions from both stocks (materials and infrastructure used in a process) and flows (process inputs and outputs). Emissions from flows are easier to quantify than emissions from stocks, which are typically disregarded. An LCA can be used to evaluate a process or product's environmental impact more thoroughly and accurately by taking into account both types of emissions.'

Read the following for theoretical background:

Have a look at the following paper for theoretical background:

The most suitable ecoinvent module for burners energies is the Combustion of fuels module. This module contains datasets for burning different fuels, such as natural gas, diesel, and others. It also has datasets for different types of combustion technologies, such as boilers, furnaces, and so on

One manifestation of material 'upcycling' can be 'chemical recycling'. Recent studies have been published by companies like BASF, Plastic Energy, and independent think tanks like The Consumer Goods Forum that will be useful to read for this.

Dear Lina,

What LCA software do you use exactly? Maybe I can help you.

Best wishes, Viktoria

Dear Nafisa,

I think this may refer to better-known impact assessment methods in the phase of LCIA (Recipe, CML, Traci...) or normalization/weighting methods. By the way, I use Gabi, but that's how I feel. To my knowledge, OpenLCA uses 43 different LCIA methods. Best wishes, Viktoria

Utkarsh Ghate

Thank you for hour response but I'm not sure if it really answers my question? Can you pelase elaborate?

- We already calculate and include emissions due to farm application. I think the bigger thing here is emissions due to conversion of nitrogen fertilizer to nitrous oxide, rather than carbon release from soil. Of course, this can happen to but requires too much analysis for this project to really understand the net gain/losses. Because it is also possible to get increased plant growth, thus increased carbon sequestration in the soil.

- About the production stage emissions: Yes, I'm trying to compute it using the ecoinvent emission factors. But I'm not sure how to correctly apply it to a NPK fertilizer, see my original question above. I'm fairly sure it is as follows:

1. Look at the fertilizer SDS to identify its main ingredients.

2. Record the NPK concentration of the fertilizer (e.g., 8-5-8)

3. Calculate the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium based on (2)

4. Apply the emission factor which closest aligns to (1) and multiply it with (3).

But it would be nice to get some confirmations or comments.

For walls - I assume it´s water-based polyvinylacetate or derivatives - I have no information.

Good afternoon.

This is a common problem in wastewater treatment impact assessment. To the best of my knowledge I have not found a database for wastewater treatment specific of the petrochemical industry.

If you don't expect wastewater treatment to have a significant contribution to the life cycle of your product/service/good, you can use a proxy database as a simplification approach to fill the data gap.

I like the approach of Fernández-daCosta et. al (2018) :

"Due to absence of data for treatment of wastewater as an effluent of the processes in question, the impacts of wastewater are assumed to be those

of wastewater as an effluent of soft fireboard production. This process was chosen as it has the median impacts out of a group of class 3, industrial

wastewater treatment processes in the Ecoinvent database"

This can help avoiding an under-estimation of the total life cycle impacts while being not too conservative.

Kind regards,

Gustavo Rangel

Dear Paola,

SimaPro provides a guide to perform LCC with their software. I share the link to this document below. I hope it helps can help you with your question.

Best regards

Jaume

I'm sorry, the question is not in my area of ​​expertise

Hey,

The other answer is very descriptive and to the point, but I would recommend reading the following article:

Its a very robust survey and discusses all the different perspectives to look at the problem statements. Its very highly recommenced to read this article, its very valuable.

Here is an excellent use case to get a general understanding:

Good luck!

It will depend on the country and the type of license that you are using. We have SimaPro, in the research version, which allows you to publish your results. It costs around 7,500 USD for a couple of year and a limited number of users.

You might try deleting the current product system and make new flows, processes and product system. Seems like some mistake has been made in previous steps.

Hello,

First of all, all the input-potput flows (material, energy, and emission) should be listed precisely for the system under evaluation. Then, you need to model your system in Simapro based on the foreground data that you have already collected. Modelling could be different according to the LCA methodology that you choose for your study.

for calculate phosphorus emissions, you can use SALCA model.

Have you looked in Environmental Product Declarations? These are summary LCA documents mainly used by the construction industry. For example look at the website Environdec.

If the four class solution fits better, is more coherent, and if the small class is plausible and interpretable, I would go with the four class solution. I don't see how the small class could be problematic other than that there may be limited power for statistical comparisons with the other classes.

In general, BIC tends to be a more reliable indicator of the number of classes in LCA than AIC (Nylund et al., 2007). Regardless of which index you choose, I would still compare the different class models also in terms of the actual class profiles (conditional response probabilities) to see which solution makes the most sense given your theoretical expectations, the nature of the classes, their average assignment probabilities, etc.

In your application, the values of the AIC/BIC indices are pretty close for different numbers of classes, respectively, and the solutions with the lowest BIC values may not be the ones that make the most sense theoretically or empirically. So if your 5-class solution contains the classes that you expect theoretically and looks good otherwise as well, you could make a case for it over the 3-class solution.

Another thing that people sometimes do is look at a "scree plot" of the BIC (and sometimes AIC) values for different numbers of classes to see when the initial sharp drop in the values levels off.

Tobias Manuel Prenzel Cradle-to-gate is an evaluation of a portion of a product's life cycle from resource extraction (cradle) through factory gate (ie, before it is transported to the consumer). Cradle-to-gate evaluations are occasionally used as the foundation for business-to-business environmental product declarations (EPDs).

A very interesting question! Generally, the selected system boundaries should reflect goal and scope of your study. As far as I understand at the moment, you are setting the focus solely on the technosphere. If you want to be precise, the use-stage also includes the chemical conversion of food during the metabolism and the teatment of all resulting waste streams (e.g. sewage) at the end-of-life.

Without knowing your goal and scope definition in detail, I consider it valid to argue for either perspective. In any case, I would suggest to transparently communicate what system boundaries you chose and comprehensivly explain what led to that decision. Happy to discuss this further.

Shuraik,

Thanks for the reply

António Martins

Green Extraction of Natural Products: Concept and Principles

Dear Aashlesha,

yes, you can if you have accurate input-output data for material- and energy flows in units. In this case, you can build an LCA process for this (LC Inventory), even in a free demo version of GaBi. You can build an LCA plan on this LCA process, which will run analytical data on emissions, primary energies, environmental impact categories. Since you would perform this analysis for only the production stage, delimit the system from cradle-to-gate beforehand.

Best wishes, Viktoria

Dear Sofia,

the CML 2013 impact assessment method also takes ecotoxicity into account, I know. Why do you want to combine impact assessment methods? From a professional point of view, I would like to ask this question because I am interested, I do not want to argue, of course. Best wishes, Viktoria

Hi Jeremy,

Maybe start first with composition of Coconut shell.

Coconut shell is a raw material containing:

and ash (0.6%).

The first three biochemical compounds are carbon based. Should check out carbon content of uronate!

I calculated the CO2 emission from the total combustion of 1 kg of Coconut shells to be: 344 g CO2, take or leave 5% confidence.

Check it out.

Cheers,

Frank

Hello!

First of all, I'd argue that results for toxicity impact categories should not be compared directly among each other, as they reflect different midpoint impact categories entirely. Many compounds will only have characterization factors (CF) for some of the impact categories, and those that have CFs for more than one, might have disproportionately larger CFs for one (e.g. marine ecotoxicity), compared to for example freshwater ecotoxicity.

Given that these CFs depend on:

1) Dose-response relationship (effective dose causing a disease probability of 50% for a specific intake of the emission).

2) Exposure and Fate (fraction of the mass emitted into a specific compartment and assimilated by the population, by ingestion and inhalation).

The CFs will vary among different categories according to how these two variables are affected, respectively. Also, human toxicity factors many times are extrapolated from those of animal species, thus results for human and animal toxicities, probably should not be directly compared.

I'd suggest you read this thorough manual on the USEtox tool if you want to learn more on the CFs behind toxicity impact categories.

(https://usetox.org/sites/default/files/support-tutorials/USEtox_Manual.pdf). The toxicity model in CML uses the same rationale that USEtox uses.

Moreover, it is also important to note that similar models to USEtox derive CFs for marine and terrestrial ecotoxicity which deviates from consensus in the sense that data for dose-response curves in marine and soil species is more limited. Tipically, there is more data for freshwater species dose-response curves, as well as for humans.

ILCD discusses this a bit more in detail in their 2011 recommendations (https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/ILCD-Recommendation-of-methods-for-LCIA-def.pdf).

Hope my answer is helpful!

Kind regards,

Gustavo

for me, OpenLCA is easier to learn, agree with Justus Caspers , data availability/compatibility with your model would be the main concern

Beatriz Lopo Teixeira Muchas gracias!!

Dear Dhruva Dulani ,

A good LCA study will always have a clearly defined scope, phases and indicators and your study related with graphene composites are no exceptions. I would like to recommend you the following paper as a prototype:

Ahmed Naser

For FDM SimaPro modelling in gate-to-gate first you should have clear system boundaries based on the research scope. I would like to suggest the following research articles for in-depth study:

Hope them helps you

Best regards,

Shuraik

Thanks for the link Shuraik!

Dear Rahul Ravi ,

I would like to suggest you this resource:

take a look to this article, it could help you

Dear, Calculating the environmental impact or circularity or carbon footprint is based on 1001 assumptions. What is the accurancy of these numbers??? fe impact is related to the energy source (nuclear power, renewables, ...)

It is impossible to express the complexity in one number. Environmental impact is also always a compromise with other needs of the product. The way we prefer is the evalation with the lifecycle based ecodesign rules of thumb gathered in checklists.

Good luck

Dear Joan Manuel F. Mendoza

Recently a tool has been provided - using Python, available on GitHub - to perform prospective LCA by making use of the outputs of integrated assessment models (IAMs, both IMAGE and REMIND) to modify the background life cycle inventory (LCI) database ecoinvent using different socio-economic pathways. Please have a look at https://github.com/polca/premise.

Further, this recently published paper in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews provides a description as well as a couple of case studies of the tool:

Hope this helps,

Tom

Dear Leonhard Koelz ,

I would like to recommend you the research material from my publications that you could get a comprehensive knowledge on C2G production of raw materials (in constructions):

Really, its depend on your branch and your interesting,...

Check study the effect of sudden collapse on building..

Please refer to the database manual attached in the following link:

"Life cycle assesment (LCA)" could be jointly addressed with the "circular economy (CE)" and the "ecosystem service valuation (ESV)", as an integrated tool to "quantify the resource-based benefits due to carbon based methane (CH4) production". Besides, this integrated approach can better control the excessive use of material, lowering the energy needs for new products, saving natural sources from overexploitation and environmental degradation, managing labour's capital, and proving the resource efficacy of carbon capture.

The only weakness in my opinion is that all the software are proprietary and two different software cannot communicate with each other without compatibility issues.

Road construction and its usage has a variety of environmental consequences. Consequently, it is critical to understand the origins of these burdens in order to implement appropriate mitigation policies. The life cycle analysis (LCA) approach is a useful tool for obtaining verifiable, accurate, and non-misleading data.

Expertise in decision-making are working "Cradle to gate as a alternative" is one such option in LCA of a provincial government.

During the long service life, the vehicle has been on the road. to take into account Construction and maintenance stages, illumination, and vehicle usage on the established road all have an impact.

As a result, it is necessary to implement ecologically friendly practises. methods for road planning, the use of low-impact procedures in material manufacture, and the usage of secondary raw materials could have the greatest influence on the environment. Therefore, it is vital to propose environmental solutions, In order to obtain a comprehensive sustainability assessment, this approach must be linked with social and economic factors simultaneously. Shuraik Kader

Dear Dr Tobi La, see the following useful link:→LCA software:: openLCA

Done

Done!

Good luck with your research.

Check on this paper

Sorry question outside of my field

Dear Hamza Karmoum,

The study sounds interesting. You might try to go to the enterprise and do field research to get the emission factors. Some LCA emission factors can only be obtained through field research.

- fast detection (remote sensor) techniques for water contaminations.

- oil separation from water resources.

- low cost wastewater treatment process.

- micro plastic detection and control.

First I recognize that ISO 14040-44 type LCA may be a limited method to assess circularity. While product category rules (PCR) are important to standardize LCA and allow comparison between products they may be slow to update with the current state of knowledge and society's needs. Given that circularity assessment methods are still in a state of consolidation (e.g., the ISO standards for CE are still under development https://www.iso.org/committee/7203984.html) this is rather normal that standardized LCA and PCR are still limited in providing answers to circularity-type questions.

However, I disagree that LCA as a method cannot assess circularity in a research context. LCA researchers are fond of using a (very) wide range of methods in combination with the basic LCA framework. To name just a few: optimization techniques (multiple-criteria decision analysis, linear programming...), material flow analysis, system dynamics, agent-based modeling, partial and general equilibrium models, input-output analysis, and so on. The reasons are simple: it brings an original methodological contribution (always useful when trying to publish academic articles) and enables the researchers to apply LCA to a more difficult question/product system to analyze (say a fleet of vehicles (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es5060868?casa_token=uJ0zllzDrL8AAAAA:UcvFPy8NI7kDSnrXEnSF2mvSP90tGRFbKXCfPcZJzJzeuBiOvSyoDWt7BfSa08D1rWSFS-gImEHKiPJg)) than what a standardized LCA would allow. Therefore, with appropriate goal & scope and functional unit definitions (see the still very relevant 1999 report from Goedkoop et al. on product-service systems https://simapro.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Product-Service-Systems-main-report.pdf) and the use of appropriate methods to complement LCA, I can't see why LCA would not be able to assess the environmental performance of any CE strategies (but I remain open to being clearly demonstrated why not!)

Second, regarding CE indicators I will just repeat what I understood from the excellent article by Boyer et al. ( ) as I quite agree with their proposition. In the same way that sustainability assessment should include economic, social, and environmental aspects, circularity assessment should include three dimensions: recirculation, utilization, endurance. According to the authors, developing indicators around these dimensions would provide enough flexibility to adapt to specific product systems and enough standardization and transparency to enable product comparison. I think such standardized indicators in those three dimensions could complement existing LCA-based environmental product declarations (EPD) (in the same way that french EPDs (FDEP) include additional information on indoor air quality and water and soil pollution).

In the end, I think new standards and PCR need to be developed to i) define how CE systems should be assessed (with an emphasis on the goal & scope and functional unit definitions), ii) define what CE indicators should be used to assess the three dimensions of circularity for the particular product system.

I do not have an answer to this question as it is not within my competence.

Accept my best regards

Dear Hamza Karmoum ,

You can try the free case studies of openLCA Nexus, it is free and reasonable.

Please go through this link:

Best wishes,

Dear Muhammad Naufal Nurliyan ,

The CMLCA is very old software, which is seldom used recently in research. The most popular ever is Simapro, and then GaBi, however, they are NOT free. Instead, you can use openLCA, it is free and quite reasonable. Also, if you are from a CEO country, you can have access to the Ecoinvent database for free (1 year).

Best of luck!

1) Control laws (or controllers) can be applied to any plant (aircraft, vehicle, spacecraft, missile, etc.).

2) The term of flight control law applies to all air vehicles.

3) The flight control law design concept is diverse. Each control concept has advantages and disadvantages. While the differential PI control you asked about has some advantages, it has the disadvantage of being susceptible to noise due to differential effects. And while the NDI (Nonlinear Dynamic Inversion) control applied to the F-35 is sensitive to model uncertainty, if the model is accurate, it has the advantage that it can be commonly applied to A, B, and C versions with one control structure. This is because only OBM (On-Board Model) needs to be replaced. In addition, sensor-based INDI (Incremental NDI) is a method that is quite robust to model uncertainty, but it is difficult to obtain the measured angular acceleration, and the use of a filter that minimizes noise is essential when the angular velocity is differentiated from the IMU sensor. is. And although it has the characteristic of reducing the stability margin of the system (especially the phase margin), the stability margin is quite robust against uncertainty. Hybrid INDI, which takes advantage of these two control methods, is sometimes used.

4) IFS (In Flight Simulator) is a method that can be safely verified with an aircraft platform that has already been tested when developing a flight control computer or a new flight control rule. In other words, new functions can be efficiently verified while ensuring flight safety by using the already verified flight control system for take-off and landing and verifying the function with the newly developed flight control rule in a specific flight condition.

This scientific contribution presents a very timely analysis in the context of this scientific discussion, for this reason I recommend it. I hope it is useful to everyone.

Abstract

Reducing inequality, eradicating poverty and achieving a carbon-neutral society are recognized as important components of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals. In this study, we focus on carbon and energy inequality between and within ten Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries. Detailed carbon and energy footprint were estimated by combining the consumption profiles (2014) in ten LAC countries with environmental extended multi-regional input-output (MRIO) analysis. Our results show significant inequality of regional total and per capita carbon and energy footprint across the studied LAC countries in 2014. The top 10% income category was responsible for 29.1% and 26.3% of the regional total carbon and energy footprint, and their per capita carbon and energy footprint were 12.2 and 7.5 times of the bottom 10% earners in that region. The average carbon footprint of studied LAC countries varied between 0.53 and 2.21 t CO2e/cap (ton of CO2 equivalent, per capita), and the energy footprint ranged from 0.38 to 1.76 t SOE/cap (ton of Standard Oil Equivalent, per capita). The huge difference in total and per capita carbon emissions and energy consumption of different income groups suggests notable differences in climate change responsibility, and supports policies for achieving sustainable consumption in terms of carbon tax, renewable energy subsidy, and decarbonizing the consumption structure in different LAC countries.

yes SimaPro is better but costly

Dear Rahul,

I have performed LCA analysis for food product in recent months from raw material extraction through use phase to EoL stage. But I did not use OpenLCA, but GaBi 10.5 software for the analyzes. In the theoretical background, maybe I could help. Best wishes, Viktoria Mannheim

Thank you Edwin! I know that the SHDB does not work in the same way as a typical LCA (i.e., process based). However, we are trying a material based approach weighted by the most important countries for respectvie raw material extraction.

Maybe to clarify the question. We are looking for data from SHDB for a few, specific countries. At the current stage, we are evaluating the potential of the approach and thus cannot get a proper licence (yet).

Hello,

Yassine Bahi Did you get help with this? I need some guidance as well.

Thanks.

hello to use OpenLCA, how can i get Ecoinvent license ?

Please follow the papers below for your reference:

Jamieson, Evan, Benjamin McLellan, Arie Van Riessen, and Hamid Nikraz. "Comparison of embodied energies of Ordinary Portland Cement with Bayer-derived geopolymer products." Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015): 112-118.

Tempest, Brett, Olanrewaju Sanusi, Janos Gergely, Vincent Ogunro, and David Weggel. "Compressive strength and embodied energy optimization of fly ash based geopolymer concrete." In world of coal ash (WOCA) conference, pp. 1-17. 2009.

Cabeza, Luisa F., Camila Barreneche, Laia Miró, Josep M. Morera, Esther Bartolí, and A. Inés Fernández. "Low carbon and low embodied energy materials in buildings: A review." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 23 (2013): 536-542.

Harvard

Dabaieh, Marwa, Jukka Heinonen, Deena El-Mahdy, and Dalya M. Hassan. "A comparative study of life cycle carbon emissions and embodied energy between sun-dried bricks and fired clay bricks." Journal of Cleaner Production 275 (2020): 122998.