A comparative analysis of recent life cycle assessment guidelines and frameworks: Methodological evidence from the packaging industry

被引:4
作者
Tascione, Valentino [1 ]
Simboli, Alberto [1 ]
Taddeo, Raffella [1 ]
Del Grosso, Michele [2 ]
Raggi, Andrea [1 ]
机构
[1] G dAnnunzio Univ Chieti Pescara, Dept Econ Studies, Pescara, Italy
[2] Aptar Italia SpA, Pescara, Italy
关键词
Comparative analysis; Frameworks; Guidelines; Life cycle assessment; Multinational companies plastic packaging; industry; PRODUCT ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE; CARBON FOOTPRINT; UNRESOLVED PROBLEMS; RELIABILITY; LCA;
D O I
10.1016/j.eiar.2024.107590
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In recent years, a number of new guidelines and frameworks for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) have emerged, trying to support analysts in dealing with certain methodological issues and "gaps" of the ISO 14040-44, that are still the main LCA reference standards. This trend can be considered as positive, because the lack of shared, standardised and more detailed rules regarding LCA has affected for years the consistency of LCA analyses and their potential comparisons. However, the proliferation of guidelines and frameworks can also have negative consequences, first of all related to the potential resulting confusion and the lack of a clear reference for LCA analysts. These potential risks are particularly accentuated for multinational companies, which deal with many clients, in different markets, countries and sectors, and have to conform their analyses to different requirements each time. Focusing on the plastic packaging industry, this study compares six LCA guidelines and frameworks to highlight their similarities and differences. The documents selected to be analysed were: three documents applicable to products in general (ILCD, PAS 2050 and PEF), two packaging-specific guidelines (Pathfinder Framework and SPICE Methodological Guidelines) and a product specific standard for the packaging industry (PCR 2013:19). The methodological aspects analysed and compared, grouped according to the LCA stages, are: units of analysis; system boundaries; allocation methods; cut-off criteria; end-of-life; packaging; storage; biogenic CO2 emissions; carbon removals and carbon content; land use; offsets; impact categories and indicators; LCA methods and models; normalisation and weighting; data quality; sensitivity analysis. The aim is to understand to what extent potential differences may impact on companies and LCA analysts who conduct the assessments. Results highlight that the six guidelines and frameworks analysed are not always aligned and that, although some misalignments can be easily addressed, others could negatively affect the reliability of the analyses conducted.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 69 条
[1]   Allocation solutions for secondary material production and end of life recovery: Proposals for product policy initiatives [J].
Allacker, K. ;
Mathieux, F. ;
Manfredi, S. ;
Pelletier, N. ;
De Camillis, C. ;
Ardente, F. ;
Pant, R. .
RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING, 2014, 88 :1-12
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2006, ISO 14040 2006 ENV M
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2011, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. Evaluation of EU readmission agreements
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2010, International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook-General guide for Life Cycle Assessment-Detailed guidance
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2006, ISO 14025: Environmental labels and declarations-Type III environmental declarations-Principles and procedures
[6]   Survey of approaches to improve reliability in LCA [J].
Björklund, AE .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2002, 7 (02) :64-72
[7]   The influence of impact assessment methods on materials selection for eco-design [J].
Bovea, MD ;
Gallardo, A .
MATERIALS & DESIGN, 2006, 27 (03) :209-215
[8]   Single-use plastics: Production, usage, disposal, and adverse impacts [J].
Chen, Yuan ;
Awasthi, Abhishek Kumar ;
Wei, Fan ;
Tan, Quanyin ;
Li, Jinhui .
SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2021, 752
[9]  
Chomkhamsri K., 2011, Towards life cycle sustainability management, P107, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-1899-9_11
[10]   Management practices for compostable plastic packaging waste: Impacts, challenges and recommendations [J].
Cristobal, Jorge ;
Albizzati, Paola Federica ;
Giavini, Michele ;
Caro, Dario ;
Manfredi, Simone ;
Tonini, Davide .
WASTE MANAGEMENT, 2023, 170 :166-176