Page 226 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition

Comparing Various Indicators for the LCA 215
Table 2 Normalization and weighting factors for the three perspectives
Normalization Weight (%)
Hierarchist (H,A) Egalitarian (E,E) Individualist (I,I) (H,A) (E,E) (I,I)
HH 0.0154 DALY’s a 0.0155 DALY’s 0.00825 DALY’s 40 30 55
2
2
2
EQ 5; 130 PDF m y 5,130 PDF * m * y 4,510 PDF * m * y 40 50 25
b

R 8,410 MJ surplus c 5,940 MJ surplus 150 MJ surplus 20 20 20
(Source Ecoinvent report n°3 (Frischkneicht and Jungbluth 2007); (PRé consultants 2001))
a
Disability Adjusted Life Years: Years of life lost trough disability or early death
b
Potentially Disappeared Fraction: % of species that disappear due to environmental load
c
Mega Joules surplus (increase in energy needed for resource extraction)
three different perspectives were developed: Hierarchist, Individualist and Egali-
tarian. Each perspective is based on a different ranking of preferences, values, and
attitudes (Table 3).
The weighting and normalization factors for the three perspectives (Table 2)
used in the Ecoinvent database (Ecoinvent report n°3) are taken directly from the
original report by PRé consultants (2001). Notice the big difference between the
normalization factor for resources used in the Individualist perspective (150 MJ)
compared to the Hierarchist (8,410 MJ) and Egalitarian perspective (5,940 MJ).
This difference in normalization will have a big impact on the results.
The Individualist does not consider the risk of a near fossil fuels depletion as
credible. To the Individualist, the only resource depletion that matters is mineral
extraction. With a share of 20 % in total impact, the amount of mineral extraction
will have a big influence on the total score, especially for the production of PV
systems, which is quite mineral-intensive.
The Hierarchist perspective is considered to represent the view of the ‘‘average
scientist’’ and is used as the default setting. The Hierarchist, therefore, follows the
IPPC assessment reports to consider the effects of climate change ((PRé consul-
tants 2001), methodology report, p 18).
The Egalitarian view pays more attention to future generations and is considered
as rather risk averse. The Egalitarian looks at the very long term and puts a high
value on ecosystem quality. However, this can result in overestimating risk. This
short discussion already illustrates that the outcome of an environmental analysis
should always be evaluated with care. PRé consultants, the developers of the EI 99
method, stated that researchers should use the 3 different perspectives and carefully

Table 3 General properties of the different EI 99 perspectives
Perspective Timeframe Manageability Evidence
Hierarchist Short and long term are Proper policy can avoid many Based on
(H,A) balanced problems consensus
Egalitarian Very long term Problems can lead to catastrophe All possible
(E,E) effects
Individualist Short term Technology can avoid many Only proven
(I,I) problems effects
(Source (PRé consultants 2001))