The mentioned methods (and sure there are also other methods) exist for the LCIA. Does anyone have experience with their applicability ?
Dear all,
thanks to both of you for your answers.
@ Carlo: thanks for this useful link, I found the books and they make the overview much easier.
@ Phillip: I understand, that the LCIA strongly depends on goal and scope setting ... my current scope fis, that I need to present the subject in the resource lectures and it must be in an adequate way summarised.
Have a nice time,
Petra
@Carlo Ingrao : Hi Even I found your link to ILCD handbook useful. Could you help me with good references to LCC?
Currently, in my opinion is more interesting and justified the use of ReCiPe because this method combines the scientific rigor of CML2001 and the simple interpretation of the results like using the ECO-99. Furthermore, the ReCiPe method consider 18 midpoint categories (8 more than the ECO-99) which are aggregated into the three main categories (Human Health, Ecosystem Quality and Resource Depletion) which represent fields where policy and decision-making decisions are commonly taken...
@Angel: thanks for the useful and practical comments. Maybe you know some case studies on the applications of the approaches ?
@Petra: You could apply any method (ReCiPi, ECO-99, CML2001, EDIP, IMPACT2002, IPCC,...) in order to analyse the environmental impact of a service or product. Whatever method you decide to use, make the decision consciously, for example justifiying the selection because the midpoint categories are more suitable for the case study...
@Angel: I understood that generally each of the methods is applicable. My next question is: are there any criteria or support tools to understand which of those methods is the most sufficient approach for the impact assessment of a certain type of product ? Or doesn't matter this ?
@Petra: To my knowledge, I do not think there is any universal criteria to select the LCIA method. The choice of the method should be that one better adapts to you needs, taking into account the characteristics of each methodology such as impact categories included. Have you figured out any guides to select the method?
I would like just to add two points to the excellent Ángel's answer. (i) It is very important the scope of the impact assessment: midpoint indicators or endpoint indicators? Individual values or single-scored values? (ii) Consider the origin, i.e. the "school", of each method. For example Ecoindicator-99 results obsolete against ReCiPe.
In my view CML 2001 is older methodology, not used nowadays. Recipe is the developed form of Ecoindicator '99. Ecoindicator '99 is also not so used nowadays. Recipe is a commonly used method among them.
As I am a new learner in LCA domain. I want to know what actually does 'Midpoint' and 'Endpoint' indicators mean in LCIA?
(Ref: Fernando Mele's answer above)
Dear Lalit, more or less, one can say that the midpoint describes a short term impact in the LCA, while the endpoint the long term impact. An explanatory description can be found here: https://www.pre-sustainability.com/news/consider-your-audience-when-doing-lca
https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/ILCD-Handbook-LCIA-Background-analysis-online-12March2010.pdf
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Modeling