Page 22 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition
P. 22

16                            1. Introduction. Life cycle thinking

                   Emerging approaches combining LCT, triple bottom line, and sustainable development
                 goals prove that some difficulties remain to solve. Focusing on LCSA, its application requires
                 proper and quantitative data and methods for LCSA indicators, including dealing with value
                 choices and subjectivity and the guidelines for external communication (Guin  ee, 2016).



                 References
                 Benoıˆt, C., Mazijn, B. (Eds.), 2009. Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. Social and Socio-Economic
                   LCA Guidelines Complementing Environmental LCA and Life Cycle Costing, Contributing to the Full Assess-
                   ment of Goods and Services within the Context of Sustainable Development. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative,
                   Paris, France.
                 Bjørn, A., Owsianiak, M., Molin, C., Laurent, A., 2018a. Main characteristics of LCA. In: Hauschild, M.Z.,
                   Rosenbaum, R.K., Olsen, S.I. (Eds.), Life Cycle Assessment: Theory and Practice. Springer, ISBN: 978-3-319-
                   56474-6, pp. 9–16. Chapter 2.
                 Bjørn, A., Owsianiak, M., Molin, C., Hauschild, M.Z., 2018b. LCA history. In: Hauschild, M.Z., Rosenbaum, R.K.,
                   Olsen, S.I. (Eds.), Life Cycle Assessment: Theory and Practice. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, ISBN: 978-3-319-
                   56474-6, pp. 17–30. Chapter 3.
                 Blanchard, B., Fabrycky, W.J., 1998. Systems Engineering and Analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
                 Bonan, G.B., Doney, S.C., 2018. Climate, ecosystems, and planetary futures: The challenge to predict life in earth sys-
                   tem models. Science. 359 (6375), eaam8328. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam8328.
                 Boustead, I., 2003. Chapter 3: Polymers and energy. In: Andrady, A.L. (Ed.), Plastics and the Environment. Wiley
                   Interscience, Hoboken, NJ, ISBN: 0-471-09520-6, pp. 123–135.
                 Bulle, C., Margni, M., Patouillard, L., Boulay, A.M., Bourgault, G., De Bruille, V., Cao, V., Hauschild, M.,
                   Henderson, A., Humbert, S., Kashef-Haghighi, S., Kounina, A., Laurent, A., Levasseur, A., Liard, G.,
                   Rosenbaum, R.K., Roy, P.O., Shaked, S., Fantke, P., Jolliet, O., 2019. IMPACT World+: a globally regionalized life
                   cycle impact assessment method. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01583-0.
                                                 €
                 BUS, 1984. Bundesamt f€ ur Umweltschutz: Okobilanzen von Packstoffen (Life-cycle assessment of packaging
                   materials) (in German). In: Schriftenreihe Umweltschutz. Bern, Switzerland, p. vol. 24.
                 Carsol, R., 1962. Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston, MA.
                 Del Borghi, A., Moreschi, L., Gallo, M., 2019. Communication through ecolabels: how discrepancies between the
                   EU PEF and EPD schemes could affect outcome consistency. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/
                   s11367-019-01609-7.
                 EC, 2003. Integrated Product Policy. Building on Environmental Life-Cycle Thinking. Communication from the Com-
                   mission to the Council and the European Parliament COM/2003/0302 final. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
                   content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri¼CELEX:52003DC0302&from¼EN. (Accessed 19 May 2019).
                 EC, 2013. ANNEX II: Product environmental footprint (PEF) guide to commission recommendation on the use of
                   common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and orga-
                   nisations. In: European Commission (Ed.), Official Journal of the European Union.
                 Elkington, J., 1997. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Capstone, New Society.
                 Fava, J., Denison, R., Jones, B., Curran, M.A., Vigon, B., Selke, S., Barnum, J. (Eds.), 1994. SETAC Workshop Report:
                   A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle Assessment. Smugglers Notch, Vermont, August 18–23 1990. SETAC Press.
                 Fava, J.A., 2016. Will the next 10 years be as productive in advancing life cycle approaches as the last 15 years? Int. J.
                   Life Cycle Assess. 11 (Special Issue 1), 6–8. https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2006.04.003.
                 Finkbeiner, M., 2009. Carbon footprinting—opportunities and threats. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 14, 91–94. https://doi.
                   org/10.1007/s11367-009-0064-x.
                 Guin  ee, J.B., Udo de Haes, H.A., Huppes, G., 1993. Quantitative life cycle assessment of products: 1. Goal definition
                   and inventory. 2. Classification, valuation and improvement analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 1 (1), 3–13. https://doi.org/
                   10.1016/0959-6526(93)90027-9.
                 Guin  ee, J.B., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Zamagni, A., Masoni, P., Buonamici, R., Ekvall, T., Rydberg, T., 2011. Life cycle
                   assessment: past, present, and future. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45 (1), 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1021/es101316v.
                 Guin  ee, J., 2016. Life cycle sustainability assessment: what is it and what are its challenges? In: Clift, R., Druckman, A.
                   (Eds.), Taking Stock of Industrial Ecology. Springer, Cham, ISBN: 978-3-319-20570-0, pp. 45–68.
   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27