Life Cycle Assessment of Lighting Systems and Light Loss Factor: A Case Study for Indoor Workplaces in France

Electronics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 1278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bertin ◽  
Canale ◽  
Ben Abdellah ◽  
Mequignon ◽  
Zissis
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Loss Factor ◽  
Sustainability Assessment ◽  
Human Impacts ◽  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Light Loss ◽  
Lighting Systems ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Whole Life Cycle

Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology has been used to evaluate the performance of the following lighting systems: compact fluorescent lamps (CFL), light-emitting diode (LED) lamps, and fluorescent tubes (T5 type). This work covers the singularity of the French electricity mix for indoor workplaces lighting and describes the best strategy for lamp replacement. We have defined the light loss factor to integrate the following additional parameters: lumen depreciation, dirt accumulation, and risks of failure. Therefore, we propose a new definition of the functional unit (maintained megalumen hour), and we conduct this assessment to be compliant with the standards of lighting system equipment (NF EN 12464-1). Unlike previous studies, we observed that the manufacturing phase is the most impacting over the whole life cycle, thus making the extension of LED lamps’ lifetime a more effective strategy to reduce the potential environmental impacts than increasing their efficacy. This paper highlights how the light loss factor affects the LCA results and proves that it should be taken into account for subsequent assessments. Finally, this new approach includes the real usage of the lamps in the study and contributes to lay the foundation for life cycle sustainability assessment to also evaluate the economic, social, and human impacts of lighting.

scholarly journals Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Lighting Systems and Road Pavements in an Italian Twin-Tube Road Tunnel

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 4165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Cantisani ◽  
Paola Di Mascio ◽  
Laura Moretti
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Road Construction ◽  
Road Tunnel ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Pavement Materials ◽  
Environmental Consequences ◽  
Lighting Systems ◽  
Reflecting Surface

This work calculates and discusses the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of four scenarios composed of two types of road pavements and two types of lighting systems to be built in an Italian twin-tube road tunnel. A 20-year time horizon is adopted to assess the burdens of construction and maintenance of both flexible and rigid pavements and high-pressure sodium (HPS) and light-emitting diode (LED) lamps, traffic, and switching on of lamps. All considered scenarios are comparable with each other in terms of technical performances, but significantly differ regarding their environmental consequences. The geometrical and technical characteristics of the examined scenarios comply with current Italian standards for highways. In all the examined cases, LCA is carried out according to the European standard, EN 15804, and includes 19 impact categories (IC). The analysis demonstrates that the use of more reflecting surface pavement materials (i.e., concrete vs. asphalt) and more performing lighting systems (i.e., LED vs. HPS) can effectively mitigate the deleterious burdens related to road construction, maintenance, and use. For most of the examined ICs, the most environment-friendly scenario has LED lamps and concrete pavement.

scholarly journals Attributional & Consequential Life Cycle Assessment: Definitions, Conceptual Characteristics and Modelling Restrictions

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (13) ◽  
pp. 7386
Author(s):  
Thomas Schaubroeck ◽  
Simon Schaubroeck ◽  
Reinout Heijungs ◽  
Alessandra Zamagni ◽  
Miguel Brandão ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Product Life Cycle ◽  
Sustainability Assessment ◽  
Consequential Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Modelling Framework ◽  
Potential Environmental Impact ◽  
Reference Environment ◽  
The Impact

To assess the potential environmental impact of human/industrial systems, life cycle assessment (LCA) is a very common method. There are two prominent types of LCA, namely attributional (ALCA) and consequential (CLCA). A lot of literature covers these approaches, but a general consensus on what they represent and an overview of all their differences seems lacking, nor has every prominent feature been fully explored. The two main objectives of this article are: (1) to argue for and select definitions for each concept and (2) specify all conceptual characteristics (including translation into modelling restrictions), re-evaluating and going beyond findings in the state of the art. For the first objective, mainly because the validity of interpretation of a term is also a matter of consensus, we argue the selection of definitions present in the 2011 UNEP-SETAC report. ALCA attributes a share of the potential environmental impact of the world to a product life cycle, while CLCA assesses the environmental consequences of a decision (e.g., increase of product demand). Regarding the second objective, the product system in ALCA constitutes all processes that are linked by physical, energy flows or services. Because of the requirement of additivity for ALCA, a double-counting check needs to be executed, modelling is restricted (e.g., guaranteed through linearity) and partitioning of multifunctional processes is systematically needed (for evaluation per single product). The latter matters also hold in a similar manner for the impact assessment, which is commonly overlooked. CLCA, is completely consequential and there is no limitation regarding what a modelling framework should entail, with the coverage of co-products through substitution being just one approach and not the only one (e.g., additional consumption is possible). Both ALCA and CLCA can be considered over any time span (past, present & future) and either using a reference environment or different scenarios. Furthermore, both ALCA and CLCA could be specific for average or marginal (small) products or decisions, and further datasets. These findings also hold for life cycle sustainability assessment.

scholarly journals Sustainability Assessment with Integrated Circular Economy Principles: A Toy Case Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 3856
Author(s):  
Rebeka Kovačič Lukman ◽  
Vasja Omahne ◽  
Damjan Krajnc
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Circular Economy ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Product Life Cycle ◽  
Sustainability Assessment ◽  
Social Impacts ◽  
Life Cycle Costing ◽  
Social Life Cycle Assessment

When considering the sustainability of production processes, research studies usually emphasise environmental impacts and do not adequately address economic and social impacts. Toy production is no exception when it comes to assessing sustainability. Previous research on toys has focused solely on assessing environmental aspects and neglected social and economic aspects. This paper presents a sustainability assessment of a toy using environmental life cycle assessment, life cycle costing, and social life cycle assessment. We conducted an inventory analysis and sustainability impact assessment of the toy to identify the hotspots of the system. The main environmental impacts are eutrophication, followed by terrestrial eco-toxicity, acidification, and global warming. The life cycle costing approach examined the economic aspect of the proposed design options for toys, while the social assessment of the alternative designs revealed social impacts along the product life cycle. In addition, different options based on the principles of the circular economy were analysed and proposed in terms of substitution of materials and shortening of transport distances for the toy studied.

Life Cycle Assessment of Urban Wastewater Treatment

2014 ◽  
Vol 535 ◽  
pp. 346-349
Author(s):  
Mei Wang ◽  
Ming Yang ◽  
Jun Liu ◽  
Jian Fen Li
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plant ◽  
Sewage Treatment ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Urban Wastewater ◽  
Urban Sewage ◽  
Urban Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Whole Life Cycle

Effect and benefits of a product or service could be analyzed and evaluated by life cycle assessment during the whole life cycle. Urban sewage treatment plants could improve and control urban water pollution escalating, but it also had certain harm to environment. Effect and benefits of urban wastewater treatment plant A and B were analyzed and evaluated, 13 factors were selected, and comprehensive benefits were researched quantificationally using the method of analytic hierarchy process. It found that urban wastewater treatment plant A who applied A/O process had better benefits than urban wastewater treatment plant B who applied BIOLAK process.

scholarly journals Mitigation Life Cycle Assessment: Best Practices from LCA of Energy and Water Infrastructure That Incurs Impacts to Mitigate Harm

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 992 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Grubert ◽  
Jennifer Stokes-Draut
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Sustainability Assessment ◽  
Functional Unit ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Environmental Costs ◽  
Lca Results

Climate change will require societal-scale infrastructural changes. Balancing priorities for water, energy, and climate will demand that approaches to water and energy management deviate from historical practice. Infrastructure designed to mitigate environmental harm, particularly related to climate change, is likely to become increasingly prevalent. Understanding the implications of such infrastructure for environmental quality is thus of interest. Environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) is a common sustainability assessment tool that aims to quantify the total, multicriteria environmental impact caused by a functional unit. Notably, however, LCA quantifies impacts in the form of environmental “costs” of delivering the functional unit. In the case of mitigation infrastructures, LCA results can be confusing because they are generally reported as the harmful impacts of performing mitigation rather than as net impacts that incorporate benefits of successful mitigation. This paper argues for defining mitigation LCA as a subtype of LCA to facilitate better understanding of results and consistency across studies. Our recommendations are informed by existing LCA literature on mitigation infrastructure, focused particularly on stormwater and carbon management. We specifically recommend that analysts: (1) use a performance-based functional unit; (2) be attentive to burden shifting; and (3) assess and define uncertainty, especially related to mitigation performance.

scholarly journals Method for a Multi-Vehicle, Simulation-Based Life Cycle Assessment and Application to Berlin’s Motorized Individual Transport

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (18) ◽  
pp. 7302
Author(s):  
Anne Magdalene Syré ◽  
Florian Heining ◽  
Dietmar Göhlich
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Emissions ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Ecological Impacts ◽  
Transport Sector ◽  
Gas Emissions ◽  
Vehicle Simulation ◽  
Transport Simulation ◽  
Whole Life Cycle

The transport sector in Germany causes one-quarter of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions. One potential solution to reduce these emissions is the use of battery electric vehicles. Although a number of life cycle assessments have been conducted for these vehicles, the influence of a transport system-wide transition has not been addressed sufficiently. Therefore, we developed a method which combines life cycle assessment with an agent-based transport simulation and synthetic electric-, diesel- and gasoline-powered vehicle models. We use a transport simulation to obtain the number of vehicles, their lifetime mileage and road-specific consumption. Subsequently, we analyze the product systems’ vehicle production, use phase and end-of-life. The results are scaled depending on the covered distance, the vehicle weight and the consumption for the whole life cycle. The results indicate that the sole transition of drive trains is insufficient to significantly lower the greenhouse gas emissions. However, sensitivity analyses demonstrate that there is a considerable potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with higher shares of renewable energies, a different vehicle distribution and a higher lifetime mileage. The method facilitates the assessment of the ecological impacts of complete car-based transportation in urban agglomerations and is able to analyze different transport sectors.

A multi-criteria sustainability assessment for biodiesel alternatives in Spain: Life cycle assessment normalization and weighting

2021 ◽  
Vol 164 ◽  
pp. 1195-1203
Author(s):  
Francisca Fernández-Tirado ◽  
Carlos Parra-López ◽  
Mercedes Romero-Gámez
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Sustainability Assessment

Life Cycle Management and Sharing Economy

2020 ◽  
pp. 152-166
Author(s):  
Roberta Guglielmetti Mugion ◽  
Gabriella Arcese ◽  
Martina Toni ◽  
Luca Silvestri
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Service Industry ◽  
Sustainability Assessment ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Life Cycle Management ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Management Tool ◽  
Life Cycle Thinking ◽  
Sustainable Value ◽  
Definition Of

The life cycle sustainability assessment based on Life Cycle Thinking is currently considered the most crucial paradigm that includes three kinds of sustainability variables. Life cycle management (LCM) is the most holistic approach in promoting sustainable value creation, embedding the social, economic, and environmental dimensions as a management tool. LCM is mainly applied in the manufacturing and products chain, whereas it is understudied in the service industry. This chapter proposes the development of the LCM general framework and the definition of indicators for the assessment of sustainability in the urban shared mobility. The research framework has been tested in the transportation sector focusing on car sharing context.

scholarly journals Functional Unit for Impact Assessment in the Mining Sector—Part 1

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (22) ◽  
pp. 9313
Author(s):  
Julien Bongono ◽  
Birol Elevli ◽  
Bertrand Laratte
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Functional Unit ◽  
Multiscale Approach ◽  
Mining Sector ◽  
End Use ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Sector Part ◽  
Selection Of

More and more efforts are directed towards the standardization of the methods of determining the functional unit (FU) in a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). These efforts concern the development of theories and detailed methodological guides, but also the evaluation of the quality of the FU obtained. The objective of this article is to review this work in order to propose, using a multiscale approach, a method for defining the FU in the mining sector, which takes into account all the dimensions of the system under study. In this first part, the emphasis is on identifying the shortcomings of the FU. The absence of a precise normative framework specific to each sector of activity, as well as the complex, multifunctional and hard-to-scale nature of the systems concerned, are at the origin of the flexibility in the selection of the FU. This lack of a framework, beyond generating a heterogeneous definition of the FU for the same system, most often leads to an incomplete formulation of this sensitive concept of LCA. It has been found that key parameters such as the end-use of a product or process, as well as the interests of stakeholders, are hardly taken into account in the specification of the FU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document