Estimation of shadow prices of soil organic carbon depletion and freshwater depletion for use in LCA

Environmental and health-related external costs of meat consumption in Italy: estimations and recommendations through life cycle assessment

The literature on the external costs of food consumption is limited. This study aims at advancing in this field by translating the environmental and health-related impacts generated by the life-cycle of meat into external costs via monetization. The main types of meat consumed in Italy are used as a case study. The potential external costs are estimated via attributional life cycle assessment (LCA), using: i) the ReCiPe method for the environmental impact assessment (fourteen impact categories), ii) the population attributional fractions for the health damage from meat ingestion, and iii) the CE Delft environmental prices for monetization. Results show that processed pork and beef generate the highest costs on society, with an external cost of approximately 2€ per 100 g. Fresh pork and poultry follow, with a cost of 1€ and 0.5€ per 100 g, respectively. For comparison, the potential external costs of legumes (i.e., a plant-based alternative to meat) are estimated to be from eight to twenty times lower than meat (around 0.05€ per 100 g of legumes). In 2018, meat consumed in Italy potentially generated a cost on society of 36.6 bn€. The burden arises almost equally from impacts generated before meat ingestion (mainly associated with the emissions arisen from farming), and after the ingestion (due to diseases potentially associated with meat consumption). A sensitivity analysis on the main parameters revealed a large uncertainty on the final yearly cost, ranging from 19 to 93 bn€. Although more research is needed to improve the accuracy and the validity of the models used in the study (e.g., human health impact assessment, monetization) and to include potential external costs currently unaccounted for (e.g., water use, animal welfare, occupational health), results show unequivocal significant costs associated with meat consumption. We thus advocate for policies aimed at reducing these costs and allocating them properly.

Mind the Pulp: Environmental and economic assessment of a sugar beet pulp biorefinery for biobased chemical production

Sugar beet pulp, a byproduct from sugar beet refining, is used by farmers as fertilizer or sold as animal feed. Both options underestimate the potential of sugar beet pulp as a platform to produce specialty and bulky chemicals as a promising pathway for sustainable biochemicals - mind the pulp. This study proposes a biorefinery concept to produce food additives (pectin-derived oligosaccharides) and bulky chemicals (terephthalic acid). Since the biorefinery has a low technology readiness level (TRL = 1), it is relevant to evaluate the feasibility of this biorefinery concept to provide guidance (at an early stage) on the environmental and economic advantages and limitations. For this purpose, the life cycle assessment and techno-economic assessment frameworks are used to assess the environmental impact and economic performance of the biobased terephthalic acid, respectively. Moreover, environmental impacts are accounted for in economic terms using different monetary valuation methods (environmental prices, Ecovalue12, and Ecotax). The environmental impact of biobased terephthalic acid was higher in most impact categories than the fossil counterpart, depending on the selected allocation approach (mass vs economic). The economic feasibility of the proposed biorefinery is highly dependent on the pectin-derived oligosaccharides market price and the valorization of byproducts (humins and levulinic acid). The selection of the monetary valuation method is critical for monetizing environmental impacts when comparing biobased against fossil-based alternatives.

Assessment of the Feasibility of Implementing Shower Heat Exchangers in Residential Buildings Based on Users’ Energy Saving Preferences

In Poland, domestic hot water is heated mainly using fossil fuel energy sources. Such an approach results in the depletion of natural resources, pollution of the atmosphere and, consequently, irreversible changes to the climate. In response to this problem, this research identified the factors that most determine energy savings for heating water in residential buildings, as well as those that affect the choice of an alternative energy source. Additionally, the possibility of implementing shower heat exchangers in existing and newly built residential buildings was assessed, as well as society’s willingness to use such devices. The research was carried out on a sample of 462 inhabitants of the Podkarpackie Voivodeship (Poland). A questionnaire survey was used as a tool. The conducted research has shown that the perspective of environmental protection is not a sufficient motivator to save energy for heating domestic hot water. It is necessary to implement appropriate programs aimed at informing the public about the possibilities offered by the use of alternative energy sources and co-financing the purchase of appropriate devices. In the case of drain water heat recovery systems, a significant problem is also the need to develop new, highly effective designs of shower heat exchangers which can be installed under the floor linear shower drain or on the horizontal shower waste pipe.

Plastic recycling in a circular economy; determining environmental performance through an LCA matrix model approach

To ensure a circular economy for plastics, insights in the environmental impacts of recycling and optimal recycling choices for specific plastic polymers are crucial. This was obtained by determining the environmental performance of 10 selected recycling technologies with varying TRL levels, using the chemical properties of the top 25 produced polymers in Europe. The results were collected in a life cycle assessment (LCA) 'matrix' model. To simulate realistic plastic recycling challenges, case studies of PE/PP foils from municipal waste and ABS plastic with brominated flame retardants were developed, to be used as an addition to the LCA matrix model results. Potential emission reduction was assessed by combining LCA matrix outcomes with European polymer demand data. The LCA matrix model illustrates that potential environmental performance of recycling technologies varied strongly per polymer type and did not always follow the state-of-the-art recycling hierarchy. Commodity plastics performed well with tertiary recycling technologies, such as gasification and pyrolysis to monomers; secondary mechanical recycling was outperformed. A focus on primary recycling is environmentally beneficial for most engineering and high performance plastics. To enhance the performance of primary recycling technologies, a higher purity and improved sorting is required. As demonstrated in the case studies, low sorting efficiencies due to impurities reduces positive environmental impacts. Hence, optimal environmental performance of recycling is obtained where pre-treatment (sorting, cleaning) is adapted to the recycling technology. According to the model, recycling the 15 most demanded polymers in Europe reduces CO₂ emissions from plastics by 73% or 200 Mtonne CO₂ eq.

Comparison of Different Monetization Methods in LCA: A Review

Different LCA methods based on monetization of environmental impacts are available. Therefore, relevant monetization methods, namely Ecovalue12, Stepwise2006, LIME3, Ecotax, EVR, EPS, the Environmental Prices Handbook, Trucost and the MMG-Method were compared quantitatively and qualitatively, yielding results for 18 impact categories. Monetary factors for the same impact category range mostly between two orders of magnitude for the assessed methods, with some exceptions (e.g., mineral resources with five orders of magnitude). Among the qualitative criteria, per capita income, and thus the geographical reference, has the biggest influence on the obtained monetary factors. When the monetization methods were applied to the domestic yearly environmental damages of an average EU citizen, their monetary values ranged between 7941.13 €/capita (Ecotax) and 224.06 €/capita (LIME3). The prioritization of impact categories varies: Stepwise and Ecovalue assign over 50% of the per capita damages to climate change, while EPS and LIME3 assign around 50% to mineral and fossil resource use. Choices regarding the geographical reference, the Areas of Protection included, cost perspectives and the approach to discounting strongly affect the magnitude of the monetary factors. Therefore, practitioners should choose monetization methods with care and potentially apply varying methods to assess the robustness of their results.