Abstract
It is essential to provide quantitative decision support when pursuing environmental impact mitigation efforts, particularly when considering resource and energy-demanding sectors such as the built environment. Life cycle assessment (LCA) provides widely recognized quantitative decision support regarding environmental performance. However, for long-lived products such as buildings, the usefulness of conventional LCA is limited as it relies on databases that only give a current or past representation of industrial processes. The emerging field of prospective LCA (pLCA) allows us to evaluate the results at a future point in time based on technological and socio-economic projections. This article builds on a systematic literature screening, ongoing discussions in the pLCA academic community, and hands-on experimentation with available software. The goal of the study is to 1) understand implications of how pLCA is conducted, and how it relates to the built environment; 2) Improve the documentation and credibility of pLCA and applied scenarios; And 3) identify practical tools and workflows that can make pLCA more accessible to practitioners. The study raises ten relevant questions when considering how to use pLCA for decision support in the built environment. This list of questions is not exhaustive nor definite, and recommendations are possible answers suggested by the authors. Using scenario narratives from energy and Integrated Assessment Models allows for systematic and consistent transformation of LCA databases to represent possible futures. However, there is a need for pLCA practitioners to improve documentation to ensure that the goal and scope of the LCA are compatible with the chosen future scenario. In the case of built environment, it is relevant to consider different projection years when modeling construction, operation, renovation, and demolition phases, respectively, as they span several decades. Not doing so can misestimate the effects changing socio-economic and technological contexts have on the life-cycle impact of buildings.
| Originalsprog | Engelsk |
|---|---|
| Artikelnummer | 110535 |
| Tidsskrift | Building and Environment |
| Vol/bind | 242 |
| Antal sider | 11 |
| ISSN | 0360-1323 |
| DOI | |
| Status | Udgivet - 15. aug. 2023 |
Bibliografisk note
Funding Information:The authors thank the prospective LCA academic community for sparring on the topic. Special thanks go to the organizers of network meetings in the community. Thanks to Sarah C. Andersen for the many exciting discussions on the subject and feedback on the paper. Simon Bruhn acknowledges PhD-position funding from Innovation Fund Denmark Grand Solutions ( 0225-00003B ), The Velux Foundation ( 34214 ), and EU Horizon 2020 Alternative fuels and mobile energy sources program ( 101006799 ). Romain Sacchi acknowledges the financial support from the ATELIER project , financed by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 864374 .
Funding Information:
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Simon Bruhn reports a relationship with Innovation Fund Denmark, Velux Foundation, and EU Horizon 2020 that includes: funding grants. Romain Sacchi reports a relationship with EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Societal Challenges that includes: funding grants. Although Romain Sacchi is the main developer of premise, it should be noted that this did not influence the design of the paper or the ten questions. Initial dialogue between SB and RS was initiated after the study had identified premise as the most viable tool facilitating pLCA. Eventually, RS joined the study as co-author to provide deep knowledge on the implications of using premise.The authors thank the prospective LCA academic community for sparring on the topic. Special thanks go to the organizers of network meetings in the community. Thanks to Sarah C. Andersen for the many exciting discussions on the subject and feedback on the paper. Simon Bruhn acknowledges PhD-position funding from Innovation Fund Denmark Grand Solutions (0225-00003B), The Velux Foundation (34214), and EU Horizon 2020 Alternative fuels and mobile energy sources program (101006799). Romain Sacchi acknowledges the financial support from the ATELIER project, financed by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 864374.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors