day 3/topic 1: life cycle thinking & assessment€¦ · 26.10.2018 · day 3/topic 1: life...

1

Day 3/Topic 1: Life Cycle

Thinking & Assessment

Dr. Anthony Halog Source: UNEP, ABC of

SCP. 2010

10/26/2018 Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Engineering Course

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=400&nr=945&menu=35

Green and Circular Economy Challenges

Sustainable Consumption and

Production‘use of goods and services that respond to

basic needs and bring a better qualify of life, while

Minimizing the use of

natural resources, toxic materials

and emissions of waste and pollutants over the life

cycle, so as not to

jeopardize the needs of future

generations.’

10/26/2018Industrial Ecology and Sustainable

Engineering Course2

Sustainable Mining

Planning for the Future - Sustainable Mining


Engineering Course3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDkCcfpcBSM&feature=related

Overview

Environmental Politics

Outline

I. Sustainable Development / SustainabilityII. Systems/Holistic Thinking Methods

I. LCA PrinciplesII. Steps of LCA ProcedureIII. How LCA works

III. Pros and Cons of LCAIV. Application of life cycle thinking to

assessing mine tailings management plans


Engineering Course4


Engineering Course5

6 10/26/2018

Avoid...

...solving a problem...

(Un)Sustainable developmentLife Cycle Thinking I

Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Engineering Course

Avoid...

...solving a problem...

... by creating

a problem.

(Un)Sustainable developmentLife Cycle Thinking II

A reductionist/silo/

Short-sighted/short-

term thinking approach


Engineering Course7

Life Cycle/Systems/Holistic/Closed Loop Thinking

• Production and consumption strategies that aim at

quantifying and accounting all potential Impacts

(environmental, economic, social, etc.) that products

or technologies will have throughout their life cycles, “

from cradle to grave/cradle”. Thus, improves process

and product designs.

• Minimizing environmental impacts and resource

depletions while avoiding transferring the problem

from one life cycle stage to another.

• Vital for the pursuit of sustainable consumption and

production, sustainable energy/industrial/urban

systems, sustainable mining.10/26/2018


8

Life Cycle/Systems Thinking Approaches

•Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) -

Environmental

•Life Cycle Costing (LCC) - Economic

•Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA)

•Eco-labeling

•Design for the Environment (DfE) or

Eco-design or Design for Sustainability


Engineering Course9

Free LCA Software to UseCMLCA is a software tool that supports the calculation of:

• life cycle assessment (LCA), including social life cycle assessment (SLCA) and life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA)

• input-output analysis (IOA), including environmental input-output analysis (EIOA)

• life cycle costing (LCC) and eco-efficiency analysis (E/E)• hybrid LCA, combining LCA and EIOAhttp://www.cmlca.eu/

OpenLCA is a free, professional Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and footprint software with a broad range of features and many available databases, created by GreenDelta since 2006. It is an open source software; the software and its source code is freely available. The software is fully transparent and can be modified by anyone.http://www.openlca.org/


Engineering Course10

http://www.cmlca.eu/

http://www.openlca.org/

11

LCA Definition of Life Cycle Assessment from ISO 14040:

Life Cycle Assessment is the compilation and evaluation of the

inputs and outputs and the potential environmental impacts of

a product system during its lifetime.

Principle of Life Cycle AssessmentWhat is LCA about?

LCA provides a way of quantifying the diverse effects on the environment caused

by products throughout their entire life cycle.


Engineering Course

http://www.steeluniversity.org/content/html/eng/default.asp?catid=146&pageid=2081271423

LCA MethodologyLCA methodology is based upon ISO Environmental

Management Systems, tools and standards on LCA:

• ISO 14040 (2006): Environmental management - Life cycle assessment -Principles and framework, International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO)

• ISO 14044 (2006): Environmental management - Life cycle assessment -Requirements and guidelines, International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO)

• ISO 1404010/26/2018


12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Fak8QI6Ww

ISO 14044• ISO 14044:2006 specifies requirements and

provides guidelines for life cycle assessment (LCA) including: definition of the goal and scope of the LCA, the life cycle inventory analysis (LCI) phase, the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) phase, the life cycle interpretation phase, reporting and critical review of the LCA, limitations of the LCA, relationship between the LCA phases, and conditions for use of value choices and optional elements.



14

Life cycle stages

Resource

extraction

Raw material

processingManufacturing Distribution Use phase Disposal


Engineering Course

LCA as a decision support tool?

Raw Materials

Raw Materials

Processing

Product

Manufacture

Transportation

& DistributionUse

Recycling

End

Disposal



http://creative.gettyimages.com/source/Search/112','52','2','














http://creative.gettyimages.com/source/Search/8','8','1','DV48

Life Cycle Assessment



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrJUpSiCOoU

A coffee maker’s life cycle

From Pré Consultants, "The Eco-indicator99: A damage oriented method for Life Cycle ImpactAssessment, Manual for Designers,“ http://www.pre.nl/eco-indicator99/index.html



WHAT LCA DOES

Life cycle assessment (LCA) evaluates the environmental interventions and potential impacts throughout a product system’s life cycle (i.e. cradle-to-grave) from raw material acquisition through production, use and disposal.

PHASES OF LCA

Inventory

analysis

Impact

assess-

ment

Direct applications:

-Product development

-Strategic planning

-Public policymaking

-Marketing

-Other

Life cycle assessment framework

Interpret-

ation

Goal and

scope

definition



19

OUTPUT

INPUT

OUTPUT

INPUT

OUTPUT

INPUT

Impact

assessment

Global Warming, Ozone Depletion, Summer Smog,

Acidification, Eutrophication, Human-Toxicity, Eco-Toxicity, Landuse

Resource Consumption (Materials and Energy Carriers)

Life Cycle

Inventory

Emissions

& Wastes

Resources

OUTPUT

INPUT

OUTPUT

INPUT

Production

of

intermediates

Raw

material

extraction

Production

of main

product

UtilisationRecycling,

recovery,

disposal ...

Life Cycle

steps

Life Cycle

phasesP r o d u c t i o n p h a s e Use phase

End-of-life

phase

Principles of Life Cycle AssessmentWhere do we start? What do we do ?


Engineering Course

LCA procedure

Goal and scope

definition

Inventory

analysis

Impact

assessment

Classification

Characterisation

Normalisation

Weighting

Interpretation

Inputs and outputs, e.g.

MJ fossil energy

g SO2

g NOx

kg waste

Final assessment e.g.

one-dimensional index

Potential environmental

impact, e.g.

resource depletion

global warming potential

acidification potential

Types of information

generated



21

1) Goal of the Life Cycle Assessment Study

Why - reason, intended application

Who - intended audience

What - product/system

Purpose - specified question

Goal and Scope

2) Scope of the study

- function of the product system

- functional unit

- description of the product system

- system boundaries

- allocation procedures

- impact categories and the impact model

- data requirements and assumptions

- limitations and data quality requirements

- peer review and the kind of reporting


Engineering Course


Functional Units

Source: Kwame Awuah-Offei & Akim Adekpedjou, Int J Life Cycle Assess (2011) 16:82–89 10/26/2018


22

23

ressourcesressources

emissionsemissions

exploitationexploitationexploitation

energyenergyenergy

emissionsemissions

Cradle to graveCradle to graveCradle to grave

use phaseuse phaseuse phase disposaldisposaldisposalpreparationpreparationpreparation

intermediatesintermediatesintermediates

ressourcesressourcesresources

emissionsemissionsemissionsemissions

exploitationexploitationexploitation

energyenergyenergy

emissionsemissionsemissionsemissions

Cradle to graveCradle to graveCradle to grave

use phaseuse phaseuse phase disposaldisposaldisposalpreparationpreparationpreparation

intermediatesintermediatesintermediates

Gate to graveCradle to gate

Unit processes

Standard processes“Gate to gate”

production

Scope of the studyDefinition of System Boundaries


Engineering Course


24

Need of allocation:

In many production processes, coupled or by-products occur

The question is, which product the environmental impacts of the

process should be allocated to.

Allocation Rules:

Allocation by mass

(the impacts are ascribed to all products according to their mass)

Allocation by heating value

(the impacts are ascribed to all products according to their heating value)

Allocation by market/economic value

(the impacts are ascribed to all products according to their market value)

Allocation by other rules

(i.e. exergy, substance content, …)

Scope of the studyAllocation


Engineering Course

25

Product n

Products

Allocation

Factor:

Example Process:

Allocation Results:

Chlor-alkali

electrolysis

1.7 t salt1 t Cl2 = 90 $

1.1 t NaOH = $261.80 (238 $/t)

0.028 t H2 = $9.89 (353 $/t)

3.8 MWh electricity

Process Input Total Process Allocation

by

1 t

Cl2

1.1 t

NaOH

28 kg

H2

Electricity 3800 kWhMass 1786 1965 50

Market value 945 2750 105

Salt (NaCl) 1700 kgMass 823 905 23

Market value 435 1267 48

Scope of the studyAllocation - Example


Engineering Course

LCA procedure

Goal and scope

definition

Inventory

analysis

Impact

assessment

Classification

Characterisation

Normalisation

Weighting

Interpretation


MJ fossil energy

g SO2

g NOx

kg waste




impact, e.g.

resource depletion




generated



Inventory Analysis

• This means that the inputs and outputs of all life-cycle processes have to be determined in terms of material and energy.

• Start with making a process tree or a flow-chart classifying the events in a product’s life-cycle which are to be considered in the LCA, plus their interrelations.

• Next, start collecting the relevant data for each event: the emissions from each process and the resources (back to raw materials) used.

• Establish (correct) material and energy balance(s) for each process stage and event.



28

Life Cycle Inventory (LCI, ISO 14041)

- data collection

- accounting of resource consumptions and

environmental emissions for each unit process in product

system

Life Cycle Inventory


Engineering Course


29

Exchanges with the environment

Resources Chemicals Chemicals Transport

Water Water Water Packaging Water Energy

Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy

Resource

extraction

Raw material


Wastes

Emissions to

air

Discharges to

water

Wastes to landfill, substances emitted to air, substances discharged to water


Engineering Course

All environmentally relevant inputs and outputs (flows) for each

step (unit/key process) are taken into consideration.

System boundary

Step

1

process

3 energy

Step

2

Step

3

Step

n

electricity

thermal energy

resources

materials

auxiliary materials

others

main products

by-products

emissions to air

emissions to water

residues

wastes

main products

by-products

emissions

waste

products

materials

energy

Life Cycle InventorySystem modelling -The basis of the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)




Life Cycle InventoryExample of a data collection sheet




32

Interactions with the environment …Resources Chemicals Chemicals Transport

Water Water Water Packaging Water Energy

Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy

Resource

extraction

Raw material


Wastes

Emissions to

air

Discharges to

water

Wastes to landfill, substances emitted to air, substances discharged to water

… aggregated across the life cycle


Engineering Course

Data collection - which data?

Unit/Key Process

energy

raw materials

process

chemicals

studied product

others product(s)

waste

emissions to water

emissions to air



Data collection

Qualitative Data

Processs Technology

Age of data

System boundaries

Localisation of process

Origin of inflows

Destination of outflows



Data flow in LCA studies

Data from the field

Data from literature,

various databases,

etc.

Data

collection/

acquisition and

interpretation

Documentation Calculation in

LCA toolResults

Report

Users

Inventory

data

Impact

assessment

data

Database Database



Inventory Data Sources

• Field Measurements

• Electronic LCI databases and models: That come with LCA software (e.g. EcoInvent (SimaPro, GABI)

National Database Projects• NREL USLCI , CORRIM (forestry)

• Literature data: LCA reports Engineering References: Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, etc.

Journal and conference papers National laboratory research reports Emission factors (AP-42, etc.) EPA sector notebooks



LCA procedure

Goal and scope

definition

Inventory

analysis

Impact

assessment

Classification

Characterisation

Normalisation

Weighting

Interpretation


MJ fossil energy

g SO2

g NOx

kg waste




impact, e.g.

resource depletion




generated



LCIA according to ISO 14042

Impact category definition

Classification

Characterisation

Mandatory Elements

LCIA profile (category indicator results)

Optional elements

Normalisation

Grouping

Weighting

Data quality analysis10/26/2018


38

Impact Assessment

• Impact assessment looks at how inventory flows (cause)contribute to impacts (effect)

• Impact assessment can include Classification

• inventory flows are placed in impactcategories

• Characterization• the contribution of each inventory flow is estimated for

each impact of interest

Normalization• the contribution of the product to each impact at the

global, national, regional, or local level is assessed Valuation/ Weighting

• subjective preferences are used to prioritize impactcategories and impacts



Impact Category Identification

Impact Categories Abrev Unit of Measure

Global Warming GW kg CO2

Acidification AC moles H+ equiv

Eutrophication EU kg N

Ozone Depletion OD kg CFC-11

Ecotoxicity EC lbs 2,4-D equiv

Human Health Cancer HHC lbs C6H6 equiv

Fossil Fuel FF MJ

Photochemical Smog PS g NOX equiv

Water Use WU gal

Land Use LU species

Human Health Noncancer HHNC lbs C7H7 equiv

Human Health Criteria HHCR total DALYs



41

Global Criteria

- Resource depletion

- Global Warming Potential (GWP)

- Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP)

Regional Criteria

- Acidification Potential (AP)

- Land use

Local Criteria

- Human- and Eco-Toxicity Potential (HTP, ETP)

- Eutrophication Potential (EP)

- Photochemical Oxidant Creation Potential (POCP)

Other Criteria

- Noise, odor, landfill demand, radiation

Life Cycle Impact AssessmentCategories - global, regional and local


Engineering Course


42

Effect: Increased warming of the troposphere due to anthropogenic

greenhouse gases e.g. from the burning of fossil fuels.

Reference Substance: Carbon Dioxide (CO2)

Reference Unit: kg CO2-Equivalent

Source: IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic

Change)

CO2 CH4

CFCs

UV - radiation

AbsorptionReflection

Infrared

radiation

Trace gase

s in th

e a

tmosphe

re

Life Cycle Impact AssessmentGlobal Warming Potential (GWP)


Engineering Course


43 10/26/2018

Effect: Increase in the pH-value of precipitation due to the wash-out of acidifiying gases

e.g. Sulphur dioxide (SO2) and Nitrogen oxides (NOx).

Reference Substance: Sulphur dioxide (SO2)

Reference Unit: kg SO2-Equivalent

Source: CML, (Heijungs, Centrum voor Milieukunde Leiden), 1992

SO2

NOX

H2SO44HNO3

Life Cycle Impact AssessmentAcidification Potential (AP)


44 10/26/2018

Effect: Excessive nutrient input into water, air, and land from substances such as

phosphorus und nitrogen from agriculture, combustion processes and effluents.

Reference Substance: Phosphate (PO4-)

Reference Unit: kg PO4- Equivalent

Source: CML, (Heijungs, Centrum voor Milieukunde Leiden), 1992

Waste water

Air pollution

Fertilisation

PO4-3

NO3-

NH4+

NOXN2O

NH3

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Eutrophication Potential (EP)


45 10/26/2018

HydrocarbonsNitrogen Oxides

Dry and warm

climate

Hydrocarbons

Nitrogen Oxides

Ozone

Effect: Formation of low level ozone by sunlight instigating the photochemical reaction

of nitrogen oxides with hyrocarbons and volatile organic compounds (VOC)

Reference Substance: Ethylene (C2H4)

Reference Unit: kg C2H4 -Equivalent

Source: Udo de Haes et al., 1999

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP) - Smog


46 10/26/2018

Effect: Continuous toxicological impact on humans

(arbitrary estimation)

Reference Substance: 1,4-Di-chloro-benzene (DCB, C6H4Cl2)

Reference Unit: kg DCB - Equivalent

Source: CML (Centrum voor Milieukunde Leiden); RIVM (National

Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection)

Heavy metals

Halogenorganic

compounds

PCBDCB

PAH

Air

Food

Products

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Human Toxicity Potential (HTP)


47 10/26/2018

Effect: Continuous toxicological impact on water and soils

(arbitrary estimation)

Reference Substance: 1,4-Di-chloro-benzene (DCB, C6H4Cl2)

Reference Unit: kg DCB - Equivalent

Source: CML (Centrum voor Milieukunde Leiden); RIVM (National

Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection)

(Terrestrial Ecosystem)

Biosphere

Heavy metals

Halogenorganic

compounds

PCB

DCB

PAH

Biosphere

(Aquatic ecosystem)

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Aquatic (AETP) and Terrestrial (TETP) = Ecotoxicity Potential (ETP)


48

Mid-point indicators End-point indicators

Non-renewable energy

Mineral extraction

Water use

Global warming Climate change

Ecotoxicity

Acidification

Nutrification

Land occupation

Carcinogenic impacts

Respiratory impacts

Ozone layer depletion

Ionizing radiation

Resource depletion

Ecosystem quality

Human health

Characterisation of impacts


Engineering Course

49 10/26/2018

Classification

Emissions are

classified into

categories

according to

their different

impacts

Characterization

Factors defining

potential of

emissions in each

impact category

Life Cycle Impact AssessmentClassification and Characterization


50

Resources.....

Emissions to airCO2

COCF4

CH4

N2ONOx

SO2

HClHF.....

Emissions to waterPhosphateNH3

NH4

.....

CO2

COCF4

CH4

N2O

GWP13

630021

270

NOx

SO2

HClHF

AP0.7

10.881.6

NOx

PhosphateNH3

NH4

EP0.13

10.330.33

GWPi * Emissioni [kg]

APi * Emissioni [kg]

EPi * Emissioni [kg]

GWP

AP

EP

Inventory

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (Classification Phase)Process of calculating the impacts from inventory parameters


Engineering Course

51

1 kg CH4 is equivalent to the impact of 23 kg CO2

Inventory value

25 kg CO2

2 kg CH4

1 Kg N2O

GWP Factor

1

23

300

*

*

*

*

Impact potential

25 [kg CO2-Equivalent]



=

=

=

=

Total: 371 [kg CO2-Equivalent]

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (Characterisation)Calculation of impact potential per category


Engineering Course

Impact Assessment

• Normalization

Characterization results are compared to important levels of impacts (at the national level, for the technology being replaced, etc.)

• Valuation

Impacts are weighted by their value to decisionmakers

•How much more important is climate change when compared to human health or endangered species?•Multi-attribute utility theory



53 10/26/2018

describe the amount of a criteriondescribe the amount of a criterion

The impact potentials quantify the potential for specific ecological problems. They are not directly comparable.

In the normalization step the relative contribution of each problem can be distinguished.

For normalization, referencefactors (RF) are used which

produced for a reference regionor country (e.g., Germany or USA)

GWPRF

GWPvalue

=

For normalization, referencefactors (RF) are used which

produced for a reference region

during a time period (e.g., 1 year)

GWPRF

GWPvalue

=

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Normalization of the results from Impact Assessment


54

Total 67 kg CO2 Equivalent

/

1.0553E+12 kg CO2-Equivalent

Normalized Global Warming Potential 6.35e-11

In this step the impact potentials are put in relation to the total

potential in a defined reference area i.e. Germany.

Result: non-dimensional quantities, which allow

comparison of impact potentials

Reference Factor (100 yrs)

GWP Example System

=

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Impact Assessment - Normalization of the impact potentials


Engineering Course

55 10/26/2018

0,0E+00

5,0E-12

1,0E-11

1,5E-11

2,0E-11

2,5E-11

3,0E-11

GWP 100

Year [-]ODP [-] AP [-] EP [-] POCP [-]

GermanyEU

World

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

GWP 100

Year [-]ODP [-] AP [-] EP [-] POCP [-]

GermanyEU

World

Impact categories

normalized for

different regions

Impact categories

normalized in

relation to GWP

Life Cycle Impact AssessmentExample of normalization for the manufacturing of a fuel tank


LCIA Impact Assessment Results

56

Cumulative environmental impacts of development, operation and a 2 year site closure phase; Bars show impacts of scenarios 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B and 2C, respectivelyThe unit pers*year indicates that the results were divided by the average per capitacontribution to the damage categories for a given region, in this case Western Europe.10/26/2018


LCA procedure

Goal and scope

definition

Inventory

analysis

Impact

assessment

Classification

Characterisation

Normalisation

Weighting

Interpretation


MJ fossil energy

g SO2

g NOx

kg waste




impact, e.g.

resource depletion




generated



58

Interpretation:

On the basis of the inventory results and the impact assessment

the analysis and interpretation of the study is performed. These are

the fundamentals for further discussions or system optimization.

Report:

Prerequisites of performing a life cycle assessment are the

definition and the specification of a large number of system

boundaries as well as the description of the system investigated.

To guarantee the traceability of the results obtained, a defined way

of reporting is necessary.

Critical Review:

If a study compares competitive products and will be published, a

critical review of the study is compulsory.

Principles of Life Cycle AssessmentThe final steps: Interpretation, Report and Critical Review


Engineering Course



Interpretation

• The final step in Life-Cycle Analysis is to identify areas for improvement.

• Consult the original goal definition for the purpose of the analysis and the target group.

• Life-cycle areas/processes/events with large impacts (i.e., high numerical values) are clearly the most obvious candidates

• However, what are the resources required and risk involved?

– Good areas of improvement are those where large improvements can be made with minimal (corporate) resource expenditure and low risk.



Limitations of LCA• LCA results are geographically dependent. Hence, the results of an

LCA carried out in Europe or Australia cannot be applied directly to China without taking into account the significant variations related to the geographical context (for example, China relies on fossil fuels while Europe employs other sources of energy such as nuclear)

• Assesses potential impacts and not real impacts. Hence, it does not provide any information on the consequences of not following regulations or on environmental risks

• The results of two LCAs on a same product system may differ according to the objectives, processes, quality of the data, and the impact assessment methods used. This is why ISO insists on transparency in performing LCA.

• A detailed LCA requires inventory data of all of the elementary processes included within the system boundary.

• Databases, LCA software, and even human resources are required to analyze all the data.



61

Who Uses LCA and Why?

Industry Hot spot identification

Product improvement

Product design

Marketing

Eco-labelling

Governments Policy formulation

NGO’s Lobbying

Public education

Consumers Purchasing choice


Application areas for LCA

Eco-design

Cleaner production

Ecoefficiency

Green procurement

Ecolabelling

Life cycle management

Green supply chain mgt

Sustainability reporting

Policy-making, ex IPP

Packaging

Waste management, Water systems

Food & agriculture & fishing

Biofuels

Transportation, vehicles

Fuels, ”well-to-wheel”

Energy production

Building materials

Buildings

Hotels, services, tourism

Textiles, ICT

Pulp & paper, graphical

Mechanical industry

10/26/2018 Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Engineering Course 62

63 10/26/2018

Internal benefits

- Detection of strategic risks and

environmental issues

- Identification of relevant steps in the

complete life cycle of products

- Development of sustainable products

based on environmental information

- Support in fulfilling laws and restrictions

- Communication with politics and

authorities

- Improvement of motivation of employees

- Support in environmental management

systems (i.e. EMAS II)

Benefits of LCA


64 10/26/2018

External benefits

- Improvement of image due to ecological

considerations

- Supporting environmental innovations and

decrease of environmental impacts

- Competitive advantage by inclusion of

environmental aspects

Benefits of LCA


Summary LCA is a systems approach that examines the potential

environmental impacts of product or service throughout its life cycle

Avoids simply shifting the source of the pollution from one life cycle stage to another or from one medium to another;

ISO standardized method

Involves goal and scope of the study, inventory analysis, impact assessment and interpretation.

Important to define functional unit, allocation procedure, system boundary explicitly

Results of LCAs on a same subject may differ according to the objectives, processes, quality of the data, and the impact assessment methods used.

Detailed LCA requires inventory data of all of the elementary processes included within the system boundary.

Databases, LCA software, and even human resources are required to analyze all the data.


Application of life cycle thinking to

assessing environmental impacts in

mining and mineral processing industry

66

“Mining companies are increasingly adopting ISO 14001

certified environmental management systems (EMSs). A

key requirement of ISO certified EMSs is continual

improvement, which can be better managed with life cycle

thinking.”

“The limited number of mining LCAs may be due to the lack

of life cycle thinking in the industry.”

-Kwame Awuah-Offei & Akim Adekpedjou, Int J Life Cycle

Assess (2011) 16:82–89


LCA of Sulphidic Tailings Management Options

The Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development (MMSD) project concluded that "LCA is a useful tool to provide an assessment of environmental considerations during decision making within the industry" (Stewart, 2001).

“The generic data used are often inadequate for a mining LCA, and cannot be used as an accurate account of mining environmental burdens contributing to more complex systems ‘‘down-stream’’, such as metals, building, chemical or food industries.” (Durucan et al, 2006)


Goal & Scope of Study

The goals of the study were to draw the inventory of these management scenarios from the development to the post-closure phase, to assess and compare their environmental impacts and to determine the importance of the land-use impact category. The functional unit (FU) was defined as the management of the total production (1994-2005) of tailings from processing copper and zinc ore, for the extraction of 15 500 000 tons of mineral ore. 10/26/2018 Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Engineering Course 68

LCA of Sulphidic Tailings Management OptionsCompared Sulphidic Tailings Management ScenariosSource: Lesage et al., Use of LCA in the Mining Industry and Research Challenges



Source: C. Reid et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 17 (2009) 471–47910/26/2018Industrial Ecology and Sustainable


Mass inputs and outputs for the development stage (taken from Reid, 2006)

Life Cycle Inventory Results



Main mass inputs and outputs for the operating stage (taken from Reid, 2006)10/26/2018Industrial Ecology and Sustainable


Main mass inputs and outputs for hypothetical closure options. All the material inputs have been calculated except for land occupation (taken from Reid, 2006)10/26/2018


73

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (Impact 2002 _ Method)

14 Mid-point Categories Considered• Human toxicity (HT) (carcinogen and non-carcinogen effects);• Respiratory effects caused by inorganics (RI);• Ionizing radiation (IR);• Ozone layer depletion (OLD);• Photochemical oxidation (PO);• Aquatic ecotoxicity (AE);• Terrestrial ecotoxicity (TE);• Aquatic acidification (AA);• Aquatic eutrophication (AEu);• Terrestrial acidification and nitrification (TAN);• Land occupation (LO);• Global warming (GW);• Non-renewable energy (NRE)• Mineral extraction (ME)

Source: C. Reid et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 17 (2009) 471–479 10/26/2018


74

75

Life Cycle Impact Assessment


76

Life Cycle Impact Assessment


LCIA – Four Damage Categories

Human Health (HH)

Ecosystem Quality (EQ)

Climate Change (CC)

Resource Use (R)


LCIA Impact Assessment Results

78

Cumulative environmental impacts of development, operation and a 2 year site closure

phase; Bars show impacts of scenarios 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B and 2C, respectively

The unit pers*year indicates that the results were divided by the average per capita

contribution to the damage categories for a given region, in this case Western Europe.10/26/2018 Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Engineering Course

Interpretation Overall damages for the three life cycle stages show, for all damage categories, that

sending all tailings to a sub-aqueous disposal area (Scenarios “1”) is environmentally

preferable than processing a fraction of the tailings for use as a paste backfill (Scenarios

“2”), although the magnitude of this preference is not the same for all damage categories.

It can be observed that this general tendency is due to higher Operation impacts, for all

Scenarios. In general, it is the operation phase that dominates impacts, and Scenarios “2”

impacts for this life cycle stage are greater because the processing of tailings requires,

overall, much more material (predominantly slag and cement) and energy than simple

disposal. The impact categories that do not follow this tendency are: “human toxicity”

associated mostly with the outflow of water from the polishing pond; “aquatic acidification”

associated mostly with the tailing disposal site seepage; and finally “land occupation”

associated mostly with the amount of land occupied by the disposal area. This particular

impact category dominates the total damages to ecosystem quality damage category for

Scenarios “1”, and explains why, for this specific damage category, the difference between

Scenarios “1” and “2” are so low.

When considering only the site closure life cycle stage, it can be observed that the

Scenarios “1” are consistently higher than impacts of Scenarios “2”. This was to be

expected since all impacts are a function of the tailings disposal area and water effluent,

which is smaller for Scenarios “2”.

Comparison of closure options B and C shows that emissions are always higher for

option C. Again, this was to be expected since the difference between these options is that 3

layers are necessary for the CCBE (C) versus 1 layer for the desulphurized cover (B), (C)

hence needing more materials and more operation of off-road equipment. In comparison to

options B and C, emissions for option A are much lower, as the intervention is much less

intensive.


80

Cumulative normalized ecosystem quality impacts of development, operation and site

closure phase over 100 years


Interpretation

81

After the 2-year closure period, the tailings disposal site will still generate potential

impacts. First, the tailings disposal site will remain in a state that prevents any return

to the initial state (hence producing long term land-use impacts). Moreover, the

tailings disposal site still produces seepage and a final effluent containing

contaminants. In order to capture these impacts, the time frame was expanded to a

100 year site closure phase.

Figure 2 show the influence of the time frame on the ecosystem quality indicator.

Whereas with a short timeframe, Scenarios “1” are clearly preferable to Scenarios

“2”, the contrary becomes true after about 10 years of site closure. In other words,

the more impactful activities of backfilling can actually be seen as an “investment”,

paying off, for this damage category, after about 10 years. This is largely due to the

land occupation impacts, which are (1) an important contributor to the ecosystem

quality damage category, (2) much higher for Scenarios “1”, and (3) are a function of

time (the more time land covered, the greater the impact). Thus, the importance of

the land-use category changes to such an extent that it affects the result

interpretation in favour of backfilling and the CCBE options (“C” options), for which

land is reclaimed. Note that this effect is not observed for the other damage

categories.


Main Results from LCA Scenario 2 options (tailings disposal site and backfill plant) lead to

higher impacts in 11 of the 14 midpoint categories since the backfill

plant operation consumes a great amount of material and energy.

The exceptions are: aquatic acidification, human toxicity and land

occupation which are more dependant upon water management

and occupied surfaces.

Closure option C (CCBE) is the most harmful over the 2-year

closure period since it requires seed production and greater

machinery work.

Damage scores over the life cycle (development, operation and 2-

year closure) show that Scenario 1A generates the least impacts,

mainly because it is the scenario which requires the least effort.

Temporal boundaries extension tends to modify the results

interpretation in favour of Scenario 2C because of land quality

improvement.


LICYMIN – Mining Life Cycle Modelling

Tool The LICYMIN model is a tool designed to build a detailed and change-

oriented Life Cycle Assessment System for mining. Three are three

subsystems into which the mining system is broken down, and are covered

by this model, namely Extraction (Production), Mineral Processing and

Waste Remediation. The present model offers the means to the LCA

practitioner to handle, manipulate, organise and analyse large amount of

mining data; as well as present the results in a coherent manner. However,

the conceptualisation of the LCA study and quality of the data used rest

entirely on the LCA practitioner.

The model integrates the mine production, processing, waste treatment and

disposal, rehabilitation and aftercare stages of a mine’s life within an LCA

framework.

More details at http://cordis.europa.eu/result/report/rcn/40797_es.html


http://cordis.europa.eu/result/report/rcn/40797_es.html

The mining life cycle impact assessment system and model boundaries

84Source: S. Durucan et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 1057e1070


Generalised mining methods, systems and operation options for surface and

underground mining in metal ore production.

85Source: S. Durucan et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 1057e1070


Challenges to LCA applications in mining LCA awareness and tools

Functional unit and scoping

Impact categories

86

Research Challenges• Mining specific LCA modelling framework

• Characterizing data uncertainty

• Mining LCA software development

• Better Integration of Temporal Aspects in LCA

• Improvement of the Land Use Impact Indicator

1. Characterization of land use impacts

2. Assessing the spatial variability

• Improvement of Metal Toxicity and Ecotoxicity

Characterization Factors10/26/2018 Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Engineering Course

day 3/topic 1: life cycle thinking & assessment€¦ · 26.10.2018 · day 3/topic 1: life...

Documents