star-probio productspefcr guidance or the en 16751 norm. there is an avoerall good convergence...

This project is funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and innovation action under grant agreement No 727740 with the Research Executive Agency (REA) - European Commission. Duration: 36 months (May 2017 – April 2020). Work Programme BB-01-2016: Sustainability schemes for the bio-based economy

www.star-probio.eu

STAR-ProBio

Sustainability Transition Assessment and Research of Bio-based Products

Grant Agreement Number 727740

Deliverable D2.1 Report summarizing the findings of

the literature review on environmental indicators related to

bio-based products Version 1.3, [2017/10/31]

2 D2.1: Report summarizing the findings of the literature review on environmental indicators related to bio-based products

REPORT

Deliverable identifier D2.1 Document status Submitted document Authors (Organisation) Vincent Rossi, Xavier Bengoa (Quantis) Lead Beneficiary UTC Deliverable Type LCA Dissemination Level Confidential, only for members of the consortium

(including the Commission Services) Month due (calendar month) Month 3 (October 2017)

DOCUMENT HISTORY

Version Description 0.1 First draft 0.2 Second draft 0.3 – 0.6 Draft content inclusion 0.7 Final draft 1.0 Submitted document 1.1 Submitted document with 2 additional annexes 1.2 Submitted document in pdf version 1.3 Change in title formulation


Abstract

This report reviews 83 scientific articles assessing bio-based products, retained for their relevance in the framework of the STAR-ProBio project. The review presents in quantitative terms the environmental indicators used by this sample of literature, grouped by “clusters”, which are groups of similar indicators. The clusters found are compared with those suggested by the key literature sources, such as the PEFCR guidance or the EN 16751 norm. There is an avoerall good convergence between the clusters found in the reviewed articles and those that are recommended. However, the indicators belonging to the following clusters are considered highly relevant by the key literature and are not used in the reviewed articles as frequently as they should: - Water availability - Land use - Ecosystem quality Finally, the impacts of wastes are not really addressed by the reviewed articles neither by the key literature sources, mostly because of the lack of methodology for the assessment of the risk that the presence of plastic in the environment represents.

Suggested citation

Disclaimer

The content of this report does not necessarily reflect the official opinions of the European Commission or other institutions of the European Union. STAR-ProBio has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Program research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 727740. Re-use of information contained in this document for commercial and/or non-commercial purposes is authorised and free of charge, on the conditions of acknowledgement by the re-user of the source of the document, not distortion of the original meaning or message of the document and the non-liability of the STAR-ProBio consortium and/or partners for any consequence stemming from the re-use. The STAR-ProBio consortium does not accept responsibility for the consequences, errors or omissions herein enclosed. This document is subject to updates, revisions and extensions by the STAR-ProBio consortium. Questions and comments should be addressed to: http://www.star-probio.eu/contact-us/ Copyright - This document has been produced and funded under the STAR-ProBio H2020 Grant Agreement 727740. Unless officially marked both Final and Public, this document and its contents remain the property of the beneficiaries of the STAR-ProBio Consortium and may not be distributed or reproduced without the express written approval of the project Coordinator.

STAR-ProBio (2017), STAR-ProBio Deliverable D2.1, “Report summarizing the findings of the literature review on environmental indicators related to bio-based products”. Available from Internet: www.star-probio.eu.


TableofContents

1 Introduction and Background ............................................................................ 62 Relevant types of studies targeted by the review .............................................. 7

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 72.2 Life Cycle Assessment .................................................................................... 72.3 Input-output analysis .................................................................................... 92.4 Life Cycle Costing ........................................................................................... 92.5 Social Life Cycle Assessment ........................................................................ 10

3 Critical aspects considered in the review ........................................................ 113.1 Elements related to LCA scope ..................................................................... 11

3.1.1 Attributional versus Consequential LCA ........................................................ 113.1.2 Allocation procedure ................................................................................. 113.1.3 Functional unit ......................................................................................... 113.1.4 System boundaries and cut-off criteria ........................................................ 123.1.5 Indirect and Direct Land Use Change (iLUC, dLUC) ........................................ 12

3.2 Elements related to Life Cycle Inventory data .............................................. 133.2.1 Primary data ............................................................................................ 133.2.1 Secondary data - Background LCI database ................................................. 133.2.2 Data quality assessment ........................................................................... 14

3.3 Elements related to Impact Assessment ...................................................... 143.3.1 Life Cycle Impact Assessment methods ....................................................... 143.3.2 Midpoint versus Endpoint methods .............................................................. 153.3.3 Environmental indicators ........................................................................... 16

4 Key documents - International standards and guidelines ................................ 174.1 ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 ........................................................................... 174.2 International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook ............... 174.3 Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide and Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) Guidance .......................................................... 174.4 EN 16751 Bio-based products – Sustainability criteria ................................. 184.5 EN 16760 Bio-based products – Life Cycle Assessment ................................ 19

5 Relevant literature-review case studies .......................................................... 205.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 205.2 Raw materials .............................................................................................. 21

5.2.1 Oils (non-polymerized) .............................................................................. 215.2.2 Sugars and starch (non-polymerized) .......................................................... 215.2.3 Fibres ..................................................................................................... 21

5.3 Platforms ..................................................................................................... 225.3.1 Platforms obtained by fermentation route .................................................... 225.3.2 Platforms obtained by other routes ............................................................. 22

5.4 Products ....................................................................................................... 225.4.1 Plastic polymers (non-fibre) ....................................................................... 225.4.2 Fine and bulk chemicals ............................................................................ 225.4.3 Proteins .................................................................................................. 225.4.4 Others .................................................................................................... 22

6 Results of the review ...................................................................................... 236.1 Types of studies ........................................................................................... 236.2 Approaches .................................................................................................. 236.3 System boundaries ....................................................................................... 24


6.4 Land use change (LUC) ................................................................................ 256.5 LCIA methods .............................................................................................. 256.6 Reviewed environmental indicators ............................................................. 266.7 Environmental indicators found in the key international standards and guidelines ............................................................................................................. 28

6.7.1 ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 ......................................................................... 286.7.2 International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook ................... 286.7.3 Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide and Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) Guidance ........................................................................... 296.7.4 EN 16751 Bio-based products – Sustainability criteria ................................... 306.7.5 EN 16760 Bio-based products – Life Cycle Assessment .................................. 316.7.6 Recapitulation of the key international standards and guidelines ..................... 31

7 Interpretation and final conclusions ............................................................... 337.1 Synthesis of all indicators clusters ............................................................... 337.2 Interpretation .............................................................................................. 347.3 Conclusion ................................................................................................... 35

8 Reference list .................................................................................................. 369 ANNEXES ......................................................................................................... 38

9.1 List of reviewed articles ............................................................................... 389.2 Short bibliographic reports .......................................................................... 449.3 Synthesis of reviewed articles ...................................................................... 44


1 IntroductionandBackgroundTheSTAR-ProBioprojectaimstopromoteamoreefficientandharmonizedpolicyregulationframeworkforthemarket-pullofbio-basedproducts,throughthedevelopmentofadedicatedsustainabilityscheme.AnintegralpartofSTAR-ProBioistheadoptionoflife-cyclemethodologiestomeasureenvironmental,techno-economicandsocialimpactsofbio-basedproducts.TheaimofSTAR-ProBioistocovergapsintheexistingframeworkforsustainabilityassessmentofbio-basedproducts,andimproveconsumeracceptanceforbio-basedproductsbyidentifyingthecriticalsustainabilityissuesintheirvaluechains.

TheaimofWorkPackage(WP)2istodevelopanLCAapproachforstrategicandpolicydecisionsupportthatiscompliantwiththeILCDandPEFframeworks;andtoperformupstreamLCAforthecasestudiesidentifiedinWP1.Thisreportisthedeliverable(D2.1)oftask2.1whichobjectiveistocarryoutadetailedliteraturereviewfocusingonavailablepeer-reviewedstudiesbasedonenvironmentalindicatorsofbio-basedproductsobtainedfromresidues/wastesand/orrenewablesourcesandavailableLCAsoftware.AlthoughspecialattentionwaspaidtoEuropeancasestudies,thereviewcoversotherstudiesavailableworldwideinordertoobtainabroadoverviewofcurrentpractices.

Themostrepresentativeenvironmentalindicatorsandimpactcategoriesareidentified.Thisliteraturereviewwillserveasthebasisfortheselectionofimpactcategoriesandindicators,whichwillbecarriedoutinTask2.3.


2 Relevanttypesofstudiestargetedbythereview

2.1 Introduction

Thisliteraturereviewtargetsseveraltypesofstudies,whicharedescribedinthefollowingsections.

2.2 Life Cycle Assessment

EnvironmentalLifeCycleAssessment(E-LCA),normallyreferredtoasLifeCycleAssessment(LCA),isatechniquethataimsataddressingtheenvironmentalaspectsofaproductandtheirpotentialenvironmentalimpactsthroughoutthatproduct’slifecycle.Theterm“product”referstobothgoodsandservices.Aproduct’slifecycleincludesallstagesofaproductsystem,fromrawmaterialacquisitionornaturalresourceproductiontothedisposaloftheproductattheendofitslife,includingextractingandprocessingofrawmaterials;manufacturing;distribution;use;re-use;maintenance;recycling;andfinaldisposal(i.e.,cradle-to-grave).

ThetechniquenowcalledE-LCAwasoriginallydevelopedinthelate1960’sandthroughoutthe1970’stoaddressthedesireofenterprisesandpolicymakerstounderstandtherelativeenvironmentalimpactsofalternativepackagingoptions.Thescopeofenvironmentalimpactsgrewwithtimeasmorestudieswereperformedformoreaudiences.Initially,theimpactsofinterestwereenergyconsumptionandtheproductionofsolidwastes;thus,theinventorydatafocusedontheseimpactsaswell.Emissionsofregulatedairpollutantsweresoonadded,aswerereleasesofwaterpollutants.

Duringthe1970’s,1980’sandearly1990’sthisLCAtechniquewasappliedtoanincreasingvarietyofproducttypes,andmethodsforlifecycleenvironmentalimpactassessmentbegantobedeveloped.Attheendofthe1980’sandtheearly1990’s,aseriesofworkshopswereconvenedbytheSocietyofEnvironmentalToxicologyandChemistry(SETAC)inordertogeneratedocuments,includingtheinitialLCACodeofPractice,publishedbySETACin1993,whichpromotedconsistencyandawarenessofbestpracticesinE-LCA.

AsameansofconsolidatingLCAproceduresandmethods,standardsweredevelopedaspartofISO’sstandardsonenvironmentalmanagement.FourISOstandards(ISO14040-14043)werepublishedintheyears1997-2000,allofwhichwerereplacedin2006withtwostandards,ISO140401andISO140442.ThesestandardsdescribetherequiredandrecommendedelementsofE-LCAs.

TheISOstandardsidentifyfourphases(illustratedinFigure1)forconductinganLCA:

1. GoalandScope--wherethereasonsforcarryingoutthestudyanditsintendedusearedescribedandwheredetailsaregivenontheapproachtakentoconductthestudy.Notably,itisinthisphaseofthestudythatthefunctionalunit(see4.2.4)isdefined,andthatmodellingapproachesarespecified.

1 ISO, “ISO 14040:2006(E) Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Principles and Framework”. 2 ISO, “ISO 14044:2006(E) Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Requirements and Guidelines”.


2. LifeCycleInventory(LCI)--wheretheproductsystem(orsystems)anditsconstituentunitprocessesaredescribed,andexchangesbetweentheproductsystemandtheenvironmentarecompiledandevaluated.Theseexchanges,calledelementaryflows,includeinputsfromnature(e.g.extractedrawmaterials,landused)andoutputstonature(e.g.emissionstoair,waterandsoil).Theamountsofelementaryflowsexchangedbytheproductsystemandtheenvironmentareinreferencetoonefunctionalunit,asdefinedintheGoalandScopephase.

3. LifeCycleImpactAssessment(LCIA)--wherethemagnitudeandsignificanceofenvironmentalimpactsassociatedwiththeelementaryflowscompiledduringthepreviousphaseareevaluated.Thisisdonebyassociatingthelifecycleinventoryresultswithenvironmentalimpactcategoriesandcategoryindicators.LCIresults,otherthanelementaryflows(e.g.landuse),areidentifiedandtheirrelationshiptocorrespondingcategoryindicatorsisdetermined.LCIAhasanumberofmandatoryelements:selectionofimpactcategories,categoryindicators,andcharacterizationmodelsaswellasassignmentoftheLCIresultstothevariousimpactcategories(classification)andcalculationofcategoryindicatorresults(characterization).Thiscanthenbefollowedbyoptionalelementssuchasnormalization,groupingandweighting.

4. LifeCycleInterpretation,wherethefindingsoftheprevioustwophasesarecombinedwiththedefinedgoalandscopeinordertoreachconclusionsorrecommendations.

ItisimportanttonotethatE-LCAprovidesanassessmentofpotentialimpactsonthebasisofachosenfunctionalunit.

Figure 1: Framework for LCA (from ISO 14040:20063; modified)

3 ISO, “ISO 14040:2006(E) Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Principles and Framework”.


2.3 Input-output analysis

Input-outputanalysisisabranchofeconometricsusedtoanalyseinter-industryrelationshipinordertounderstandtheinter-dependenciesandcomplexitiesoftheeconomyandthustheconditionsformaintainingequilibriumbetweensupplyanddemand.

2.4 Life Cycle Costing

Lifecyclecosting,orLCC,isacompilationandassessmentofallcostsrelatedtoaproduct,overitsentirelifecycle,fromproductiontouse,maintenanceanddisposal.ItwasfirstdevelopedandusedbytheU.S.militaryinthe1960’sinordertoassessthecostsoflonglivinggoodssuchastanksandtractors4.Themotivationisthat,formanyproducts,thepurchasepricereflectsonlyaminorityofthecoststhatwillbecausedbytheproduct.Sinceitsearlybeginnings,LCCisappliedinmanydifferentindustrialsectorsandusecases,especiallyforinvestmentgoods(transport–railways,air,sea;buildingsector;generalmachinery,chemicalindustry).AnumberofindustryguidelinesandreferenceshavebeendevelopedbutanISOstandarddoesnotexistyet.Productscanrangefromcompleteofficebuildings,trainsortraincarriagestoonesquaremeterofcarpet5.

LCCcanaddresstheeconomicimpactofaproductwhoseenvironmentalperformanceisscrutinizedinaE-LCA.SincebothLCCandE-LCAbuildonanetworkofinterlinkedmaterialflowsoverthewholelifecycleoftheproduct,suchacombinationisinviting.However,itbearsparticularmodellingpitfallsinordertoobtainan“asbestaspossible”andconsistentassessment,withoutdoublecounting.

ASETACguidelineisunderpreparationatthemoment.EnvironmentalLifeCycleCostingismeanttobeappliedinparalleltoanE-LCA,andisdefinedas:

Anassessmentofallcostsassociatedwiththelifecycleofaproductthataredirectlycoveredbyanyoneormoreoftheactorsintheproductlifecycle(e.g.,supplier,manufacturer,userorconsumer,orEndofLifeactor)withcomplementaryinclusionofexternalitiesthatareanticipatedtobeinternalizedinthedecision-relevantfuture6.

SystemboundariesoftheenvironmentalLCCneedtobeequivalenttoE-LCA.Theywilloftennotbeidentical,sinceresearchanddevelopment,planningandmanagerialoverheadwillhavedecision-relevantcosts(andwillthereforebeconsidered)evenwithoutasignificantshareofenvironmentalimpacts.

ThetextofthissectionisfromUNEP7.

4 Sherif and Kolarik, “Life Cycle Costing: Concept and Practice”. 5 Ciroth, “Cost Data Quality Considerations for Eco-Efficiency Measures”. 6 Ciroth et al., Environmental Life Cycle Costing. Page 173. 7 UNEP 2009, Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products


2.5 Social Life Cycle Assessment

Asocialandsocio-economicLifeCycleAssessment(S-LCA)isasocialimpact(andpotentialimpact)assessmenttechniquethataimstoassessthesocialandsocio-economicaspectsofproductsandtheirpotentialpositiveandnegativeimpactsalongtheirlifecycleencompassingextractionandprocessingofrawmaterials;manufacturing;distribution;use;re-use;maintenance;recycling;andfinaldisposal.S-LCAcomplementsE-LCAwithsocialandsocio-economicaspects.ItcaneitherbeappliedonitsownorincombinationwithE-LCA.

S-LCAassessessocialandsocio-economicimpactsfoundalongthelifecycle(supplychain,includingtheusephaseanddisposal)withgenericandsite-specificdata.Itdiffersfromothersocialimpactsassessmenttechniquesbyitsobjects:productsandservices,anditsscope:theentirelifecycle.SocialandsocioeconomicaspectsassessedinS-LCAarethosethatmaydirectlyaffectstakeholderspositivelyornegativelyduringthelifecycleofaproduct.Theymaybelinkedtothebehavioursofenterprises,tosocio-economicprocesses,ortoimpactsonsocialcapital.Dependingonthescopeofthestudy,indirectimpactsonstakeholdersmayalsobeconsidered.

S-LCAdoesnothavethegoalnorpretendstoprovideinformationonthequestionofwhetheraproductshouldbeproducedornot.S-LCAdocumentstheproductutilitybutdoesnothavetheabilitynorthefunctiontoinformdecisionmakingatthatlevel.Itiscorrectthatinformationonthesocialconditionsofproduction,useanddisposalmayprovideelementsforthoughtsonthetopic,butwill,initself,seldombeasufficientbasisfordecision.

S-LCAisatechniquethathelpsinformincrementalimprovementsbutdoesnotinitselfprovideabreakthroughsolutionforsustainableconsumptionandsustainableliving.Thosetopicsgowellbeyondthescopeofthetool.

S-LCAprovidesinformationonsocialandsocio-economicaspectsfordecisionmaking,instigatingdialogueonthesocialandsocio-economicaspectsofproductionandconsumption,intheprospecttoimproveperformanceoforganizationsandultimatelythewell-beingofstakeholders.

ThetextofthissectionistakenfromUNEP8andFontes9.

8 UNEP, 2009, Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products 9 Fontes, Handbook for Product Social Impact Assessment 3.0.


3 Criticalaspectsconsideredinthereview

3.1 Elements related to LCA scope

3.1.1 Attributional versus Consequential LCA

3.1.1.1 Attributional LCA

AttributionalLCAinvolvesthedeterminationofburdensassociatedwithaproduct(includingproductionanduse),serviceorprocessataspecificpointintime.

ForattributionalLCAs,thereisnoperfectallocationsystembecausethedesiretoattributeimpactsorbenefitstoaspecificsystemisapurelyhumanneedthatvariescase-by-case.Thus,theallocationrulescanbemodifiedaccordingtothenatureofthestudytoavoidun-realisticresults.3.1.1.2 Consequential LCA

ConsequentialLCAsinvolvetheidentificationofenvironmentalconsequencesofadecisionorchangeinaparticularsystem.Bothmarketandeconomicimplicationsmayrequireconsideration.

3.1.2 Allocation procedure

AcommonmethodologicaldecisionpointinLCAoccurswhenthesystembeingstudiedisdirectlyconnectedtoapastorfuturesystem,orproducesco-products.Whensystemsarelinkedinthismanner,theboundariesofthesystemofinterestmustbewidenedtoincludetheadjoiningsystem,ortheimpactsofthelinkingitemsmustbedistributed—orallocated—acrossthesystems.Whilethereisnoclearscientificconsensusregardinganoptimalmethodforhandlingthisinallcases10,manypossibleapproacheshavebeendeveloped,andeachmayhaveagreaterlevelofappropriatenessincertaincircumstances.

ISO14044prioritizesthemethodologiesrelatedtoapplyingallocation.Itisbesttoavoidallocationthroughsystemsubdivisionorexpansion.Ifthatisnotpossible,thenoneshouldperformallocationusinganunderlyingphysicalrelationship.Ifusingaphysicalrelationshipisnotpossibleordoesnotmakessense,thenonecanuseanotherrelationship.

3.1.3 Functional unit

Lifecycleassessmentreliesona“functionalunit”(FU)forcomparisonofalternativeproductsthatmaysubstituteeachotherinfulfillingacertainfunctionfortheuserorconsumer.TheFUdescribesthisfunctioninquantitativetermsandservesasananchorpointofthecomparisonensuringthatthecomparedalternativesdoindeedfulfilthesamefunction.Itisthereforecriticalthatthisparameterisclearlydefinedandmeasurable.

10 Reap et al., “A Survey of Unresolved Problems in Life Cycle Assessment - Part 1: Goal and Scope and Inventory Analysis”.


3.1.4 System boundaries and cut-off criteria

Thesystemboundariesidentifythelifecyclestages,processes,andflowsconsideredintheLCAandshouldincludeallactivitiesrelevanttoattainingthestudyobjectives.

Thesystemboundariesidentifythelifecyclestages,processesandflowsconsideredintheLCAandshouldincludeallactivitiesnecessarytoprovidethespecifiedfunctionandthereforerelevanttoattainingtheabovementionedstudyobjectives,asillustratedbyFigure2.

Figure 2: Example of system boundaries describing the main process steps in bio-HDPE (left) and bio-PET (right) production (source: Tsiropoulos et al11 )

Processesmaybeexcludediftheircontributionstothetotalsystem’senvironmentalimpactarelessthan1%.Allproductcomponentsandproductionprocessesareincludedwhenthenecessaryinformationisreadilyavailableorareasonableestimatecanbemade.

3.1.5 Indirect and Direct Land Use Change (iLUC, dLUC)

Landusechange(LUC,orlandtransformation)isachangefromonelandusetypetoanotherasaresultofahumanactivity.Landusechangehasimpactsonsoilproperties(e.g.carboncontent,compaction,nutrientsleaching,N2Oemissionsamongothers),onbiodiversity,onbiotic

11 Tsiropoulos et al., “Life Cycle Impact Assessment of Bio-Based Plastics from Sugarcane Ethanol”.


production12;13andonotherenvironmentalaspectssuchaslandscape,albedoandevapotranspiration14.

Direct(dLUC)andindirect(iLUC)landusechangesareoftendistinguished.Directlandusechangecanbedefinedasachangedirectlyrelatedtothehistoryofthepieceoflandoccupied.Indirectlandusechangecanbedefinedasachangethatappearsinadifferentareathanthedirectlanduseasanindirectconsequence.TypicalexampleofiLUCistheincreaseofsoybeanproductioninBrazilthatforcescattleproductiontomovetootherregions,wheredeforestationtendstoincreaseasaconsequenceofincreasedpressureonland15.ThereisnointernationalconsensusonhowtoconsistentlyandsystematicallyaddressLUCinlifecycleinventory,despitesignificantresearchintheLCAcommunity16;17;18.

ThelackofconsensusisinnowayareasontoignoreiLUCinLCA,asarguedbyMuñozetal.19inoppositiontoFinkbeiner20.

3.2 Elements related to Life Cycle Inventory data

3.2.1 Primary data

Primarydata:Thistermreferstodatafromspecificprocesseswithinthesupply-chainofthecompanycommissioningtheLCAstudy.Suchdatamaytaketheformofactivitydata,orforegroundelementaryflows.Primarydataaresite-specific,company-specific(ifmultiplesitesforasameproduct)orsupply-chain-specific.Primarydatamaybeobtainedthroughmeterreadings,purchaserecords,utilitybills,engineeringmodels,directmonitoring,material/productbalances,stoichiometry,orothermethodsforobtainingdatafromspecificprocessesinthevaluechainofthecompany.

3.2.1 Secondary data - Background LCI database

Secondarydata:Thistermreferstodatathatisnotdirectlycollected,measured,oresti-matedbythecompanycommissioningtheLCAstudy,butsourcedfromathird-partylife-cycle-inventorydatabaseorothersources.Secondarydataincludesindustry-averagedata(e.g.,frompublishedproductiondata,governmentstatistics,andindustryassociations),literaturestudies,engineeringstudiesandpatents,andcanalsobebasedonfinancialdata,andcontainproxydata,andothergenericdata.

Primarydatathatgothroughahorizontalaggregationstepareconsideredassecondarydata.

12 Brandão and Milà i Canals, “Global Characterisation Factors to Assess Land Use Impacts on Biotic Production”. 13 Koellner and Geyer, “Global Land Use Impact Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in LCA”. 14 Spracklen, Arnold, and Taylor, “Observations of Increased Tropical Rainfall Preceded by Air Passage over Forests”. 15 Lapola et al., “Indirect Land-Use Changes Can Overcome Carbon Savings from Biofuels in Brazil.” 16 Bauen et al., A Causal Descriptive Approach to Modelling the GHG Emissions Associated with the Indirect Land Use Impacts of Biofuels. 17 Fritsche, Sims, and Monti, “Direct and Indirect Land-Use Competition Issues for Energy Crops and Their Sustainable Production - an Overview”. 18 Schmidt, Weidema, and Brandão, “A Framework for Modelling Indirect Land Use Changes in Life Cycle Assessment”. 19 Muñoz et al., “Rebuttal to ‘Indirect Land Use Change (iLUC) within Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) - Scientific Robustness and Consistency with International Standards’”. 20 Finkbeiner, Indirect Land Use Change (iLUC) within Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) – Scientific Robustness and Consistency with International Standards.


3.2.2 Data quality assessment

Thedataqualityassessmentisaprocessaimingatidentifyingthedataelementsthatareoflowqualityandthereforecouldaffecttheresultsintermsofuncertaintyifnotimproved.Itreliesonfourcriteria:reliability,temporalrepresentativeness,geographicalrepresentativenessandtechnologicalrepresentativeness

Adataqualityrating(DQR)iscalculatedastheaverageofthescoresattributedtoeachofthefivecriteria.AmoredetailedprocedureisdescribedinthePEFCRguidance21.

3.3 Elements related to Impact Assessment

3.3.1 Life Cycle Impact Assessment methods

ThisphaseisdescribedasfollowsbyISO1404022:"Phaseoflifecycleassessmentinvolvingthecompilationandquantificationofinputsandoutputsforagivenproductsystemthroughoutitslifecycle."

Theimpactassessmentclassifiesandcombinestheflowsofmaterials,energy,andemissionsintoandoutofeachproductsystembythetypeofimpacttheiruseorreleasehasontheenvironment.

LifeCycleImpactAssessment(LCIA)isthephaseinanLCAwheretheinputsandoutputsofelementaryflowsthathavebeencollectedandreportedintheinventoryaretranslatedintoimpactindicatorresultsrelatedtohumanhealth,naturalenvironment,andresourcedepletion.

ItisimportanttonotethatLCAandtheimpactassessmentisanalysingthepotentialenvironmentalimpactsthatarecausedbyinterventionsthatcrosstheborderbetweentechnosphereandecosphereandactonthenaturalenvironmentandhumans,oftenonlyafterfateandexposuresteps.TheresultsofLCIAshouldbeseenasenvironmentallyrelevantimpactpotentialindicators,ratherthanpredictionsofactualenvironmentaleffects.LCAandLCIAareequallydistinctfromriskbased,substancespecificinstruments.

AccordingtoJRC-IES23,LCIAiscomposedofmandatoryandoptionalsteps,asreflectedalsobythesubchapters:

Basedonclassificationandcharacterisationoftheindividualelementaryflows,theLCIAresultsarecalculatedbymultiplyingtheindividualinventorydataoftheLCIresultswiththecharacterisationfactors.

Inasubsequent,optionalstep,theLCIAresultscanbemultipliedwithnormalisationfactorsthatrepresenttheoverallinventoryofareference(e.g.awholecountryoranaveragecitizen),obtainingdimensionless,normalisedLCIAresults.

InasecondoptionalstepthesenormalisedLCIAresultscanbemultipliedbyasetofweightingfactors,thatindicatethedifferentrelevancethatthedifferentimpactcategories(midpointlevelrelatedweighting)orareas-of-protection(endpointlevelrelatedweighting)mayhave,obtaining

21 European Commission, Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules Guidance - Version 6.2. 22 ISO, “ISO 14040:2006(E) Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Principles and Framework”. 23 JRC-IES, ILCD Handbook - General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed Guidance.


normalisedandweightedLCIAresultsthatcanbesummeduptoasingle-valueoverallimpactindicator.Notethataweightingsetalwaysinvolvesvaluechoices.

TheLCIAphasepreparesadditionalinputfortheinterpretationphaseoftheLCI/LCAstudy.

3.3.2 Midpoint versus Endpoint methods

Themidpointmethodisacharacterisationmethodthatprovidesindicatorsforcomparisonofenvironmentalinterventionsatalevelofcause-effectchainbetweenemissions/resourceconsumptionandtheendpointlevel.

Thecategoryendpointisanattributeoraspectofnaturalenvironment,humanhealth,orresources,identifyinganenvironmentalissuegivingcauseforconcern.Hence,endpointmethod(ordamageapproach)/modelisacharacterisationmethod/modelthatprovidesindicatorsatthelevelofAreasofProtection(naturalenvironment'secosystems,humanhealth,resourceavailability)oratalevelclosetotheAreasofProtectionlevel.

Midpointandendpointlevelimpactassessment-requirements

LCIAmethodsexistformidpointandforendpointlevel,andforbothinintegratedLCIAmethodologies(seeFigure3).Bothlevelshaveadvantagesanddisadvantages.Ingeneral,onmidpointlevelahighernumberofimpactcategoriesisdifferentiatedandtheresultsaremoreaccurateandprecisecomparedtothethreeAreasofProtectionatendpointlevelthatarecommonlyusedforendpointassessments.

Commonenvironmentalimpactcategories(midpoint):

Climatechange,(Stratospheric),Ozonedepletion,Humantoxicity,Respiratoryinorganics,Ionizingradiation,(Ground-level),Photochemicalozoneformation,Acidification(landandwater),Eutrophication(landandwater),Ecotoxicity(landandwater),Landuse,Resourcedepletion(minerals,fossilandrenewableenergyresources,water).

Mostcommonlyusedenvironmentalareasofprotection(damagecategories,endpoint):

Humanhealth,Naturalenvironment,Naturalresources

Bydefault,alltheaboveimpactcategoriesshouldbecoveredbythecombinationofselectedLCIAmethods.Ifavailableandeligible,itisrecommendedtousethemtogetherwithcoherentimpactfactorsontheendpointlevel.

JRC-IES24haspublishedandin-depthanalysisofdifferentmethodologiesandindicators.

24 JRC-IES, ILCD Handbook - Analysis of Existing Environmental Impact Assessment Methodologies for Use in Life Cycle Assessment.


Figure 3: example of impact assessment method including midpoint impact categories (left) and endpoint damage categories (right). In addition, areas of concern, frequently subject to footprinting, are defined and are displayed across the areas of protection. This example is IMPACT World+ 25

3.3.3 Environmental indicators

Theenvironmentalindicatorsarethemainfocusofthepresentreview.

Thereisalargediversityofmidpointindicators,asoutlinedintheprevioussection.Manyoftheseindicatorscancarrysimilarnameswhilebeingcalculateddifferently,bydifferentLCIAmethodologiesorbythesameLCIAmethodologybutinseveralversions,duetoscientificevolutionorduetocharacterizationchoices(e.g.,usingahierarchistapproachoranother).

Thenumberofpublishedindividualmidpointindicatorsmustrangeinthehundreds.Forthesakeoftheanalysisrequiredforthisreport,agroupingofallfoundindicatorsisrealisedandpresentedintheresults,section6.6.

25 Bulle et al., “IMPACT World+: A Globally Regionalized Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method”.

Eutrophication

Ozonelayerdepletion

Climatechange

Resourceuse

Acidification

Humantoxicity

Ecotoxicity

Water scarcity

LanduseCa

rbonfootprint

Waterfootprint

Humanhealth

Ecosystemquality

Resources&ecosystemservices

IMPACTCATEGORIES DAMAGEONAREASOFPROTECTION


4 Keydocuments-Internationalstandardsandguidelines

4.1 ISO 14040 and ISO 14044

TheISO1404026and1404427normsarethereferencestandardsforenvironmentallifecycleassessment(LCA).Theydefinethetermsagreedinternationally,themethodologicalframework,keyprinciplesforlifecycleinventory(LCI)andlifecycleimpactassessment(LCIA),aswellasinterpretationandreportingrequirementforstate-of-the-artLCA.

4.2 International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook

TheILCDHandbook28;29isthefirstmethodologicalreferenceforLifeCycleAssessmentdevelopedbytheEuropeanCommission.ItprovidesgeneralguidanceonLCAandImpactAssessment(LCIA),andstandardisesnomenclatureanddataqualityrequirementsfollowingtheILCDframework.ThemethodpresentedintheILCDHandbookisupdatedinthePEFGuideandPEFCRGuidance(seebelow),whichserveasnewreferencesforallLCAstudiesconductedintheEUcontext.

4.3 Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide and Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) Guidance

TheProductEnvironmentalFootprint(PEF)InitiativeprovidesastandardisedframeworkfortheassessmentoftheenvironmentalfootprintofproductsintheEuropeanUnion.ThePEFGuide30definesthegeneralframeworkwhilethePEFCRGuidance31definesthetechnicalandmethodologicalinstructionstobeappliedwhendefiningProductEnvironmentalFootprintCategoryRules(PEFCR).

ThecurrentversionofthePEFCRGuidance,v6.2,istheresultof4yearsofcollaborationbetweentheEuropeanCommissionDG-Environment,theEuropeanCommissionJointResearchCentre,multipleindustrysectorsanddozensofLCAspecialists.ItbuildsontheexperiencefromthePEFPilotPhasewhere22sectorstestedthePEFGuideandPEFCRGuidanceindraftingPEFCRforawidearrayofconsumerandintermediateproducts.

ThePEFCRGuidancenotonlybuildsonthePEFGuide,butalsoonseveralexistingstandardssuchas:

26 ISO, “ISO 14040:2006(E) Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Principles and Framework”. 27 ISO, “ISO 14044:2006(E) Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Requirements and Guidelines”. 28 JRC-IES, ILCD Handbook - General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed Guidance. 29 JRC-IES, ILCD Handbook - Recommendations for Life Cycle Impact Assessment in the European Context. 30 Manfredi et al., Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide. 31 European Commission, Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules Guidance - Version 6.2.


l ISO 14025:2006 - Environmental labels and declarations – Type III environmentaldeclarations–Principlesandprocedures(ISO)

l BPX30-323-0:2011-Principesgénérauxpourl'affichageenvironnementaldesproduitsdegrandeconsommation(AFNOR,France)

l GreenhouseGasProductAccountingandReportingStandard(GHGProtocol,2011)l PAS2050-Specificationfortheassessmentofthe lifecyclegreenhousegasemissionsof

goodsandservices(BSI,2011)l ISO14020:2000Environmentallabelsanddeclarations–Generalprinciplesl ISO 14021:1999 Environmental labels and declarations — Self-declared environmental

claims(TypeIIenvironmentallabelling)l ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment —Principles and

frameworkl ISO14044:2006Environmentalmanagement—Lifecycleassessment—Requirementsand

guidelinesl ISO14050:2006Environmentalmanagement—vocabularyl ISO/TS14067:2013Greenhousegases--Carbonfootprintofproducts--Requirementsand

guidelinesforquantificationandcommunicationl ISO 17024:2003 Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodies operating

certificationofpersons.l ISO/TS14071:2014Environmentalmanagement—Lifecycleassessment—Criticalreview

processes and reviewer competencies: Additional requirements and guidelines to ISO14044:2006

l ISO14046:2014Environmentalmanagement--Waterfootprint--Principles,requirementsandguidelines

l ENVIFOODPROTOCOL-FoodSCPRT(2013),ENVIFOODProtocol,EnvironmentalAssessmentofFoodandDrinkProtocol,EuropeanFoodSustainableConsumptionandProductionRoundTable(SCPRT),WorkingGroup1,Brussels,Belgium.

AmongtheissuescoveredbythePEFCRGuidance,thefollowingareofparticularinteresttoSTAR-ProBio:

l Listofimpactcategoriesl Handlingmulti-functionalprocessesl Climatechangemodelling,includinglanduseandlandusechangel Agriculturalmodellingl Electricitymodellingl End-of-lifemodellingl Datarequirementsandqualityrequirements

TheimpactcategoriesrecommendedbythePEFGuidancearereportedinsection6.7.3.

4.4 EN 16751 Bio-based products – Sustainability criteria

Acknowledgingtheneedforcommonstandardsforbio-basedproducts,theEuropeanCommissioninitiatedaseriesofstandardsdevelopedbyCEN/TC411,withafocusonbio-basedproductsotherthanfood,feedandbiomassforenergyapplications.


ThestandardEN1675132ispartofthisseriesandsetshorizontalsustainabilitycriteriaapplicabletothebio-basedpartofallbio-basedproducts,excludingfood,feedandenergy,coveringallthreepillarsofsustainability;environmental,socialandeconomicaspects.

ThisEuropeanStandardcanbeusedfortwoapplications;eithertoprovidesustainabilityinformationaboutthebiomassproductiononlyortoprovidesustainabilityinformationinthesupplychainforthebio-basedpartofthebio-basedproduct.ThisEuropeanStandardsetsaframeworktoprovideinformationonmanagementofsustainabilityaspectsandcanbeusedforbusiness-to-businesscommunicationorfordevelopingproductspecificstandardsandcertificationschemes.

4.5 EN 16760 Bio-based products – Life Cycle Assessment

ThestandardEN1676033isalsopartoftheseriesdevelopedbyCEN/TC411(seeabove).Itprovidesspecificlifecycleassessmentrequirementsandguidanceforbio-basedproducts,excludingfood,feedandenergy,basedonENISO14040andENISO14044.

ThisEuropeanStandardcoversbio-basedproducts,derivedwhollyorpartlyfrombiomass.Itprovidesguidanceandrequirementstoassessimpactoverthelifecycleofbio-basedproductswiththefocusonhowtohandlethespecificitiesofthebio-basedpartoftheproduct.

32 CEN,“EN16751:2016Bio-BasedProducts-SustainabilityCriteria”. 33 CEN,“EN16760:2015Bio-BasedProducts-LifeCycleAssessment”.


5 Relevantliterature-reviewcasestudies

5.1 Introduction

Theliteraturereviewtargetsawidearrayofbio-basedproducts.BythegoalsdefinitionoftheSTAR-ProBioproject,biofuel,feedandfoodareexcluded;however,theremainingpossiblebio-basedproductsarestillverydiverse.Moreimportantly,studiesavailableintheliteraturecanberealisedatseveralpossiblelevelsofthechemicalvaluechain,dependingonthetypeoffeedstockorproduct:forinstance,afinalproductsuchasethanolisalsoaplatformthatcanbeusedforfurthersynthesistoothertypesofproducts.Figure4illustratesthisforpolymersonly.

Figure 4: Illustration of the diversity of bio-based products (here: polymers) and their chemical pathways. Source: Carus and Aeschelmann34.

Itisthereforenotasimpletasktostructurealiteraturereviewcomprehensivelycoveringallproductswhileavoidingoverlap.ThewayitwasdoneforthepresentreportisillustratedintheTable1:threerealisationlevelsofstudiedsubjecthavebeendefined(rawmaterial,platformandproduct)andeachofthemcontainfamiliesdefinedappropriatelytothelevel.Thiswayofdoing 34 Carus and Aeschelmann, Bio-Based Building Blocks and Polymers – Global Capacities and Trends Order 2016 - 2021.


hastheadvantageofsuitablyreflectingtherealpracticefoundinthevarietyofavailablestudies.Thenumberofreviewedarticlesisshowninthesametable.

Table 1: Families of bio-based products as defined for the needs of this report.

Study realised at the level of…

Defined family Number of reviewed articles

Raw material Oils (non-polymerized) 5 27

Sugars and starch (non-polymerized) 12

Fibres 10

Platform Platforms obtained by fermentation route

18 21

Platforms obtained by other routes 3

Product Plastic polymers (non-fibre) 12 35

Fine and bulk chemicals 6

Proteins 10

Others 7

Total 83 83

Notethatsomestudiedsubjectscouldfallinmorethanonefamilyinthisstructuration.Thishasanon-criticalinfluenceonthereviewanalysis.However,thisoverlapisminimisedwhenusingtherealisationlevel,thereforetheresultsofthereviewarepresentedattherealisationlevel.

5.2 Raw materials

ItisquitefrequentthatLCAsorotherstudiesfocusontheproductionofthematerialthatisatthestartofthetransformationprocess,orthatcanalreadybeconsideredasaproductatthislevel.Threemainfamiliesareidentifiedatthislevel,basedontheirfundamentalcharacteristics:

5.2.1 Oils (non-polymerized)

Oilsareveryoftenusedforfuelorfoodandthereforeoftenexcludedfromthisreview,hencetherelativelysmallnumberofreviewedarticles.

5.2.2 Sugars and starch (non-polymerized)

Sugarsandstarchcanbeusedfortheproductionofmanypolymersorotherproducts.

5.2.3 Fibres

Fibresareinterestingfortheirstructuralpropertiesandarethereforeoftenuseddirectlyasaproductorwithinacompositematerial.


5.3 Platforms

Somestudiesfocusattheintermediateproductlevel,capturingthefirststepsofthetransformationprocessuptothelevelatwhichchemical“bricks”areobtainedandcanbeusedinfurtherprocessing.Atthislevel,therouteisthekeycriterionforthetwodefinedfamilies:

5.3.1 Platforms obtained by fermentation route

Mostoftheplatformsfoundinthereviewedarticlesareproducedbythefermentationroute.

5.3.2 Platforms obtained by other routes

Onlyafewplatformsfoundareproducedbyadifferentroute,chemicalorthermal.Thethermalrouteiscommonforfuelsthatareexcludedfromthisreview.

5.4 Products

Themajorityofthestudiesarerealizedatthelevelofaparticularproduct.Atthislevel,thefamiliesaredefinedbasedonthetypeofproduct,inalargesense:

5.4.1 Plastic polymers (non-fibre)

Allbio-basedplasticpolymersingeneral.

5.4.2 Fine and bulk chemicals

Allotherformsof“simple”molecules,mostlyobtainedviabio-chemicalprocesses,tobeusedforanytypeofapplication.

5.4.3 Proteins

Allformsofcomplexmolecules,obtainedviabiologicalprocessesandmostlyintendedtomedicalapplicationsorveryspecificotherapplications.

5.4.4 Others

Intendedtoanyothertypeofmolecules,thisfamilymostlycontainsconstructionmaterials.


6 Resultsofthereview

6.1 Types of studies

Thefulllistofthe83reviewedarticlesisavailableinannex9.1.Theirshortreportsandthedataaggregationtableareavailableinseparatefiles,annexes9.2and9.3.

Thevastmajorityofthereviewedarticlesareenvironmentallife-cycleassessments(LCAs)(Table2).Mostofthetime,whenanothertypeofstudyisrealised,itisinadditiontotheLCA(combinedstudies).

Table 2: Quantitative results of the review – number of articles split by type of studies and by level. Some articles are combining several types of studies.

Typeofstudy Rawmaterial Platform Product Alllevels

LCA 25 21 35 81

Input-output 2 0 2 4

LCC 3 0 1 4

S-LCA 2 0 1 3

Other 0 1 0 1

Total 32 22 39 93

6.2 Approaches

Consequentialstudiesarerelativelyscarceinthereviewedarticles(Table3).Theattributionalapproachissignificantlymorefrequent,especiallyconsideringthatwhentheapproachisunspecifiedorunclear,itismostprobablyattributional.

Table 3: Quantitative results of the review – number of articles split by approach and by level. In one case, both approaches were compared.

Approach Rawmaterial Platform Product Alllevels

Attributional 19 6 20 45

Consequential 3 3 4 10

Unclear 5 13 11 29

Total 27 22 35 84


6.3 System boundaries

Mostofthereviewedstudiesare“cradle-to-gate”assessments,hencenotincludingstagesbeyondtransformation(Table4).Indeed,only13%ofthemincludetheusestage(whichcanbepassive,explainingthislowvalue)andonly23%ofthestudiesincludetheendoflife(EoL).Theseratesareevenlowerforstudiesrealisedatplatformlevel.

Asexpected,allstudiesatplatformandproductlevelsincludethetransformationstage.Inafewcases,notransformationisconsideredatrawmateriallevel,whichisunderstandable.

Theratesatwhichtheagriculturalactivitiesandlogisticsandtransportationareincludedintheboundariesarehighatrawmaterialandproductlevels,whilerelativelylow(lessthan50%)atplatformlevel.Thissuggeststhefollowing:

l Atrawmateriallevel,studiestendtoincludethemainsubject:therawmaterialproduction.Whenitisnotthecase,thestudyfocusesonthepre-processingstepsand/orusesbiomassresiduesconsideredtobearnoimpact.

l Atplatformlevel,studiestendtofocusonlytoprocessing.ThisisalsoshownbythelowrateofinclusionoftheEoL.

l At product level, studies tend to be more comprehensive and have the higher rate ofinclusionoftheagriculturalactivities,above90%.

Table 4: Quantitative results of the review from the perspective of the life cycle stages included in the system boundaries. Values are the number of occurrences that the stage is included relatively to the number of articles of the level.

Lifecyclestage Rawmaterial Platform Product Alllevels

R&D 7% 14% 3% 7%

Agriculturalactivities 70% 48% 94% 75%

Logisticsandtransportation 85% 43% 80% 72%

Transformation 89% 100% 100% 96%

Conditioning 33% 5% 54% 35%

Packaginganddistribution 22% 10% 17% 17%

Use 26% 5% 9% 13%

Endoflife 33% 5% 26% 23%

Advertisingandotheroverheads 0% 0% 0% 0%

Otherstage 11% 0% 0% 4%


6.4 Land use change (LUC)

TheinclusionrateofLUC(completeofdirectonly)inthereviewedarticlesissignificantlylower(Table5)thantheinclusionrateoftheagriculturalactivities(Table4).ThismeansthatLUCiseitherconsiderednegligibleorsimplyignoredbymostofthereviewedauthors.

Table 5: Quantitative results of the review – number of articles including LUC relatively to the number of articles of the level.

InclusionofLUC Rawmaterial Platform Product Alllevels

Yes 22% 10% 14% 16%

DirectLUConly 15% 5% 3% 7%

No/notmentioned 63% 86% 83% 77%

6.5 LCIA methods

ThereareimportantdisparitiesinthetypeofLCIAmethodsused,dependingontherealisationlevelofthestudiedsubject(Table6).TheCMLmethodisusedin40%ofthestudiesreferringtorawmaterials,34%forproductsbutisneverused,inthissample,forplatforms.

Table 6: Quantitative results of the review – number of articles split by LCIA methods and by level. In some cases, several methods have been used.

Rawmaterial Platform Product Alllevels

Numberofarticles 27 21 35 83StudiesusingaversionoftheCMLLCIAmethod 11 0 12 23

StudiesusingaversionoftheReCiPeLCIAmethod 7 3 4 14

StudiesusingaversionoftheILCDLCIAmethod 4 0 1 5

StudiesusinganotherLCIAmethodoracustomsetofindicators

7 18 19 44

Total 29 21 36 86


6.6 Reviewed environmental indicators

Forthesakeoftheanalysisrequiredforthisreview,the38midpointindicators35thathavebeenidentifiedhavebeengroupedintothematicclusters,asshowninTable7.Thisallowsanalysingtheresultsonamoreaccessiblebasis.

Thematicclustersaredefinedforthisreviewasgroupsofmidpointindicatorssharingsimilareffectsatalevelbelowtheareaofprotection(endpoint),onaspecificecologicaltheme.

Table7alsodisplaysthenumberofarticlesthatusetheindicatorsandclusters,ofthe83reviewedarticles.Therankingthatcanbedrawnatthisstage(Table8)representsthefrequencyatwhichanindicatorisusedinbio-basedproductsstudies,butdoesnotnecessarilyrepresenttherelevanceofthischoice.

Table 7: Grouping of all environmental indicators into thematic clusters and number of articles using this indicator / indicator cluster.

Cluster Environmentalindicator Numberofarticlesusingthisindicator

Acidification Acidification 49 49Airquality Particulatematter/respiratoryinorganics 19 72

Photochemicalozoneformation 44Indoorairquality 2Totalemissions 7

Climatechange Climatechange,GWP100 75 76Climateregulationpotential(CRP) 1Climatechange(endpoint) 0

Ecosystemquality(biodiversity)

Biodiversitydamagepotential(BDP) 1 10Ecosystemquality(endpoint) 8Habitatalteration 1

Ecotox Terrestrialecotox 13 47Ecotoxicityforaquaticfreshwater 19Marineecotox 9Ecotox(unspecified) 6

Eutrophication Eutrophication–terrestrial 12 75Eutrophication–aquaticandfreshwater 19Eutrophication–aquatic-marine 14Eutrophication(unspecified) 30

Humanhealth Humanhealth(endpoint) 8 45Humantoxicityandcancereffects 10Humantoxicity-non-cancereffects 8Humantox(unspecified) 19

Ionisingradiation Ionisingradiation 7 7Landtransformation Landtransformation 4 4Landuse Bioticproductionpotential(BPP) 1 18

Erosionregulationpotential(ERP) 1Agrolandoccupation 16

Mineralandfossilresources

Resourcedepletion–mineral,fossil 45 71Abioticdepletion 20

35 Several indicators actually exist in several versions. See section 3.3.3.


Resources(endpoint) 6Ozonelayer Ozonedepletion 34 34Wastes Wastes 1 1Wateravailability Freshwaterregulationpotential(FWRP) 1 21

Waterpurificationpotentialthroughphysicochemicalfiltration(WPPPCF)

1

Waterpurificationpotentialthroughmechanicalfiltration(WPP-MF)

1

Resourcedepletion–water 10Wateruse 8

Notethattheclustersreflecttheindicatorsfoundintheliterature.Someofthemaresituatedattheinventorylevel,suchaswastesorlandtransformation:theydonereflectanimpactbutonlyaquantity.

Table8showsthatindicatorsrelatedtoclimatechange,eutrophication,airqualityandmineral/fossilresourcesarealmostsystematicallyused.

Table 8: Illustration of the relative frequency of the indicator clusters found in the reviewed articles. The absolute values can be higher than the total number of articles, as several indicators of the same cluster can be cumulated in one study.

Cluster Platform Product Rawmaterial Alllevels FrequencyClimatechange 18 31 27 76Eutrophication 14 25 36 75Airquality 12 32 28 72Mineralandfossilresources 17 31 23 71Acidification 6 25 18 49Ecotox 4 16 27 47Humanhealth 3 17 25 45Ozonelayer 4 15 15 34Wateravailability 3 7 11 21Landuse 4 7 7 18Ecosystemquality(biodiv.) 1 5 4 10Ionisingradiation 0 1 6 7Landtransformation 0 1 3 4Wastes 1 0 0 1Totalarticles 21 35 27 83

Low,notoftenused

Seldomused

High,almostsystematicallyused

Medium,oftenused


6.7 Environmental indicators found in the key international standards and guidelines

6.7.1 ISO 14040 and ISO 14044

TheseISOstandardsdonotrecommendspecificindicatorsorimpactassessmentmethods,butprovidegeneralprinciplesfortheselectionofimpactcategorieswhicharerelevanttoSTAR-ProBiosuchas:

“Theselectionofimpactcategoriesshallreflectacomprehensivesetofenvironmentalissuesrelatedtotheproductsystembeingstudied,takingthegoalandscopeintoconsideration;(…)

Theimpactcategories,categoryindicatorsandcharacterizationmodelsshouldbeinternationallyaccepted,i.e.basedonaninternationalagreementorapprovedbyacompetentinternationalbody;(…)

Theimpactcategories,categoryindicatorsandcharacterizationmodelsshouldavoiddoublecountingunlessrequiredbythegoalandscopedefinition,forexamplewhenthestudyincludesbothhumanhealthandcarcinogenicity”(ISO14044,section4.4.2.2).

Thisrequirementwillbefulfilledinthetask2.3ofthisworkpackage,usingthepresentreportasabasis.

6.7.2 International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook

TheILCDHandbook36presentsalistofrecommendedmidpointfullydescribedindicators(i.e.,specifyingtheLCIAmethodologytobeused)thataresummarizedbelow:

l Climatechangel Ozonedepletionl Humantoxicity,cancereffectsl Humantoxicity,non-cancereffectsl Particulatematter/Respiratoryinorganicsl Ionisingradiation,humanhealthl Ionisingradiation,ecosystemsl Photochemicalozoneformationl Acidificationl Eutrophication,terrestriall Eutrophication,aquaticl Ecotoxicity(freshwater,terrestrialandmarine)l Landusel Resourcedepletion,waterl Resourcedepletion,mineralfossilandrenewable

Interestinglyenough,thisdocumentalsoprovidesalistofotherimpactcategoriesthatareonlyoccasionallyorneveraddressed:

36 JRC-IES, ILCD Handbook - Recommendations for Life Cycle Impact Assessment in the European Context.


l Noisel Accidentsl Desiccationl Erosionl Salination

6.7.3 Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide and Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) Guidance

ThePEFCRGuidance376.2presentsaclearchoiceoffullydescribedindicators(i.e.,specifyingtheLCIAmethodologytobeused)thatareshowninTable9.ThischoiceisbasedontheILCDlistpresentedabove,withslightmodifications.

Table 9: Impact categories recommended in the PEF Guidance

Impact category Indicator Unit

Climate change Radiative forcing as Global Warming Potential (GWP100)

kg CO2 eq

Ozone depletion Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) kg CFC-11eq

Human toxicity, cancer effects Comparative Toxic Unit for humans (CTUh)

CTUh

Human toxicity, non- cancer effects

Comparative Toxic Unit for humans (CTUh)

CTUh

Particulate matter/Respiratory inorganics

Impact on human health Deaths

Ionising radiation, human health

Human exposure efficiency relative to 235U

kBq 235U

Photochemical ozone formation

Tropospheric ozone concentration increase

kg NMVOCeq

Acidification Accumulated Exceedance (AE) mol H+ eq

Eutrophication, terrestrial Accumulated Exceedance (AE) mol N eq

Eutrophication, aquatic freshwater

Fraction of nutrients reaching freshwater end compartment (P)

fresh water: kg P equivalent

Eutrophication, aquatic marine

Fraction of nutrients reaching marine end compartment (N)

marine water: kg N equivalent

Ecotoxicity (freshwater) Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems (CTUe)

CTUe

37 European Commission, Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules Guidance - Version 6.2.


Land use

- Soil quality index

- Biotic production

- Erosion resistance

- Mechanical filtration

- Groundwater replenishment

- dimensionless

- kg biotic production

- kg soil

- m3 water

- m3 ground-water

Water scarcity User deprivation potential (deprivation-weighted water consumption)

m3 world eq. deprived

Resource use, mineral Abiotic resource depletion (ADP ultimate reserves)

kg Sb-eq

Resource use, energy carriers Abiotic resource depletion – fossil fuels (ADP-fossil)

MJ

TheimpactcategoriesrecommendedinthePEFCRGuidance6.2donotaimtorepresentstate-of-the-artimpactassessment,e.g.thelatestUSEtoxÒ2.0model38isnotrecommendedfortoxicityassessmentcategories.Theyaretheresultofascientificandpoliticalconsensus,constitutedofasetofindicatorstakenfromvariousimpactassessmentmethodswhich,insomecases,arenotfullyconsistentwitheachother.

ThePEFCRGuidance6.2remainsadraftdocument.However,givenitswidestakeholdersacceptance,itislikelytobecomethenewmethodologicalstandardforanyenvironmentalLCAstudiesconductedinaEuropeancontextfrom2018onwards.

6.7.4 EN 16751 Bio-based products – Sustainability criteria

Thisnormpresentsindicatorsonthethreepillarsofsustainability.Theenvironmentalonesarethefollowing:

l GHGemissionsandremovalsl Airqualityl Waterqualityandquantityl Soilquality,productivityanderosionl Biodiversitywithintheareaofoperationl Biodiversityprotectedareasl Efficientuseofenergyandmaterialresourcesl Useofrenewableenergyandmaterialresourcesl Responsiblewastemanagement

38 Fantke et al., 2017, USEtox® 2.0 Documentation (Version 1)


6.7.5 EN 16760 Bio-based products – Life Cycle Assessment

Thisnormgivesguidelinesforspecificimpactindicators:l Treatmentofbiogenicandnon-biogeniccarboninassessingclimatechangel Landuseimpactonnaturalenvironment/ecosystemqualityl Landuseimpactonecosystemservices/naturalresourcesl Wateruse

6.7.6 Recapitulation of the key international standards and guidelines

Thekeyinternationalstandardsandguidelinesandthereviewedarticlesareintheirlargemajorityaligned,atleastattheleveloftheindicatorsclustersthathavebeenidentifiedasrelevantbythesestandards.

Table10showsthattheEN16751and16760normscoversomegapsoftheILCD/PEFCRguidance:ecosystemqualityandrenewableresourcesaremoredirectlyaddressed.Wastemanagementisalsoreintroduced.Conversely,noiseisatypeofimpactsuggestedbyILCDbutneverretainedbytheotherstandards.

Thistablealsoshowstheevaluatedrelevanceofeachclusterforbio-basedproducts,basedonthenumberoftimestheclusterisrecommendedandbywhichreferenceitisrecommended.

Table 10: Recapitulation of the indicators clusters recommended by the key international standards and guidelines. Values are the number of indicators recommended by the reference.

Cluster ISO14040/44

ILCD PEFCRguidance

EN16751

EN16760

Evaluatedrelevance

Acidification 1 1 Medium

Airquality 2 2 1 Important

Climatechange 1 1 1 1 Important

Ecosystemquality(biodiversity)

2 1 Important

Ecotox 1 1 Medium

Eutrophication 2 3 Important

Humanhealth 2 2 Medium

Ionisingradiation 2 1 Medium

Landuse 2 3 1 Important


1 2 1 Important

Noise 1 Low


Other 1 Low

Ozonelayer 1 1 Medium

Renewableresources 1 1 1 Important

Wastes 1 Medium

Wateravailability 3 3 1 1 Important

Total 21 20 9 4


7 Interpretationandfinalconclusions

7.1 Synthesis of all indicators clusters

Table11showsinparalleltheresultsoftheliteraturereviewandrecommendationsofthekeyliterature,sortedbytheevaluatedrelevance,asevaluatedinsection6.7.6.

Table 11: Illustration of the relative frequency of the indicator clusters found in the reviewed articles and in the key literature, in order of relevance for bio-based products. The absolute values can be higher than the total number of references, as several indicators of the same cluster can be cumulated.

Fortheindicatorsjudgedashighlyrelevant,thefollowingobservationscanbemade:l There is a strong convergence between the reviewed articles and the key literature for

climate change, eutrophication, air quality and mineral and fossil resources. Theseimportantindicatorsaresystematicallyusedinthescientificstudies.

l Wateravailabilityand landuseare very important topics in thekey literature,with thehighestnumbersof indicatorssuggested,while it isonlyusedbyasmallfraction(25%orlower)ofthereviewedarticles.

Cluster Occurrencesinthereviewedarticles

Occurrencesinthekeyliterature

Evaluatedrelevance

Wateravailability 21 8 HighLanduse 18 6 HighEcosystemquality(biodiv.) 10 #N/A HighIonisingradiation 7 3 MediumWastes 1 1 MediumClimatechange 76 4 HighEutrophication 75 5 HighAirquality 72 5 HighMineralandfossilresources 71 4 HighAcidification 49 2 MediumEcotox 47 2 MediumHumanhealth 45 4 MediumOzonelayer 34 2 MediumLandtransformation 4 #N/A LowNoise 0 1 LowTotalreferences 83 4


l Ecosystemquality(biodiversity)isanimportanttopic,butasanendpointitisalsoincludedinother indicators,hencedoesnotappear in its full importance inthis table.Onlya fewreviewedarticlesusedendpoints.ThedirecteffectsonbiodiversityoflanduseandlandusechangearenotcapturedbytheindirectindicatorssuchastheecotoxicityandheavilyrelyontheLCIAmethodologyappliedtolanduse.

Fortheindicatorsjudgedofmediumrelevance,thefollowingobservationscanbemade:l There is a strong convergence between the reviewed articles and the key literature for

acidification,ecotox,humanhealthandozonelayer.Thesemoderatelyimportant(forbio-basedproducts)indicatorsareoftenusedinthescientificstudies.

l Ionisingradiationisarelativelyimportanttopicinthekeyliterature,butitisonlyusedbyaverysmallfraction(lessthan10%)ofthereviewedarticles.

l Wastesarenotstronglyrecommendedbythekeyliterature,duetothelackofmethodologyaddressingtheirimpactoutsidethosethatarecapturedbyotherindicators(suchastoxicity).Itisalmostneverusedinthereviewedarticles.

Finally,fortheindicatorsjudgedoflowrelevance,thefollowingobservationscanbemade:l Landtransformationasaninventoryflowisnotrecommendedbythekeyliterature,which

focusesontheimpactsrelatedtolandtransformation(orlandusechange).Theseimpactsarecapturedbytheotherindicatorsrecommended.However,thisindicatorisusedbyafewofthereviewedarticles.

l Noise ismentionedasadifficultenvironmentaltopictoaddressinthekeyliterature.Itisnotparticularlyrelevantforbio-basedproductsandneverusedinthereviewedliterature.

7.2 Interpretation

Mostoftheindicatorsusedinthereviewedarticlesareinlinewiththeindicatorsrecommendedbythekeyliterature.However,someimportantdiscrepanciescanbeidentifiedanddescribedbyTable12:,notablythefactthatsomeindicatorsarenotusedintheliteratureastheyshould.

Table 12: Summary assessment of the indicators clusters, comparing their use in the literature with their use as recommended by the key literature.

Evaluatedrelevance

Convergencebetweenpracticeandrecommendation

Notasusedasrecommended

Notappropriatelyaddressed

High Climatechange Wateravailability

Eutrophication Landuse

Airquality Ecosystemquality(biodiv.)


Medium Acidification Ionisingradiation Wastes

Ecotox

Humanhealth


Ozonelayer

Low Landtransformation(inventory)

Noise

Itisalsointerestingtonoticethatwastesarenotreallyaddressedoutsidetheirtoxicityeffectortheimpactsoftheirtreatment.Theproblemoflitteringandtheubiquitouspresenceofplasticparticlesinsoilorinwaterbodiesisnotaddressed.Thefactthatapartofbio-basedproductsmightbebiodegradableand,insomecases,rapidlybiodegradableinmarineenvironment,cannotbedirectlycapturedwiththerecommendedindicators.Anassessmentoftheriskthatthepresenceofplasticintheenvironmentrepresentsissomethingthatcouldbeofinteresttothepublicopinion,ifnotitsfinalimpactsontheecosystemqualityoronhumanhealth.

7.3 Conclusion

Theenvironmentalindicatorsfoundintheliteraturecoveringbio-basedproductscanbegroupedintothematicclusterscoveringsimilartypesofeffects.Theseclustersareinlargepartinlinewiththoserecommendedbythekeyliteraturesources,suchasthePEFCRguidance39ortheEN16751norm40.

However,theindicatorsbelongingtothefollowingclustersareconsideredhighlyrelevantbythekeyliteratureandarenotusedinthereviewedarticlesasfrequentlyastheyshould:

l Wateravailabilityl Landusel Ecosystemquality(biodiversity)

Ionisingradiationisalsoacluster“under-used”comparedtotherecommendedindicators.Thiscouldbeexplainedbythefactthatthisindicatorisoftendominatedbynuclearelectricity,maskinganyotherpotentialimpacts.

Finally,theimpactsofwastesarenotreallyaddressedbythereviewedarticlesneitherbythekeyliteraturesources,mostlybecauseofthelackofmethodologyfortheassessmentoftheriskthatthepresenceofplasticintheenvironmentrepresents.

39 European Commission, Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules Guidance - Version 6.2. 40 CEN,“EN16751:2016Bio-BasedProducts-SustainabilityCriteria”.


8 Referencelistl Bauen,Ausilio,ClaireChudziak,KathrineVad,andPhilipWatson,ACausalDescriptive

ApproachtoModellingtheGHGEmissionsAssociatedwiththeIndirectLandUseImpactsofBiofuels,London,UK,2010.

l Brandão,Miguel,andLlorençMilàiCanals,“GlobalCharacterisationFactorstoAssessLandUseImpactsonBioticProduction”,TheInternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,February2,2012.http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s11367-012-0381-3.

l Bulle,Cécile,ManueleMargni,SormehKashef-haghighi,Anne-MarieBoulay,VincentdeBruille,ViêtCao,PeterFantke,etal.,“IMPACTWorld+:AGloballyRegionalizedLifeCycleImpactAssessmentMethod”,Submitted,n.d.

l Carus,Michael,andFlorenceAeschelmann,Bio-BasedBuildingBlocksandPolymers–GlobalCapacitiesandTrendsOrder2016-2021,Hürth,Germany,2017.www.bio-based.eu/reports%5Cnwww.european-bioplastics.org/market.

l CEN,EN16751:2016Bio-BasedProducts-SustainabilityCriteria,2016.l ———,EN16760:2015Bio-BasedProducts-LifeCycleAssessment,2015.l Ciroth,A.,D.Hunkeler,G.Huppes,K.Lichtenvort,G.Rebitzer,I.Rüdenauer,andB.Steen,

EnvironmentalLifeCycleCosting,EditedbyD.Hunkeler,K.Lichtenvort,andG.Rebitzer,CRCPressTaylor&FrancisGroup,Webster,NY,USA,2008.https://books.google.ch/books?id=_SXNBQAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&ots=RrGoRUWbqM&dq=EnvironmentalLifeCycleCosting.SETAC-CRC&lr&hl=fr&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false.

l Ciroth,Andreas,“CostDataQualityConsiderationsforEco-EfficiencyMeasures”,EcologicalEconomics,Vol.68,No.6,2009,pp.1583–1590.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.08.005.

l EuropeanCommission,ProductEnvironmentalFootprintCategoryRulesGuidance-Version6.2,EuropeanCommission-JointResearchCentre,Ispra,Italy,2017.

l Fantke,Peter(Ed.),M.Bijster,C.Guignard,M.Hauschild,M.Huijbregts,O.Jolliet,A.Kounina,etal.,USEtox(R)2.0Documentation(Version1),EditedbyPeterFantke,Lyngby,Denmark,2017.usetox.org/documentation.

l Finkbeiner,Matthias,IndirectLandUseChange(iLUC)withinLifeCycleAssessment(LCA)–ScientificRobustnessandConsistencywithInternationalStandards,Berlin,Germany,2013.http://www.see.tu-berlin.de/menue/ueber_uns/team/.

l Fontes,João,HandbookforProductSocialImpactAssessment3.0,Amersfoort,TheNetherlands,2016.

l Fritsche,UweR.,RalphEHSims,andAndreaMonti,“DirectandIndirectLand-UseCompetitionIssuesforEnergyCropsandTheirSustainableProduction-anOverview”,Biofuels,Bioproducts&Biorefining,2010,pp.692–704.http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bbb.258/full.

l ISO,“ISO14040:2006(E)EnvironmentalManagement—LifeCycleAssessment—PrinciplesandFramework”,InternationalOrganizationforStandardization,Geneva,Switzerland,2006.

l ———,“ISO14044:2006(E)EnvironmentalManagement—LifeCycleAssessment—RequirementsandGuidelines”,InternationalOrganizationforStandardization,Geneva,Switzerland,2006.


l JRC-IES,ILCDHandbook-AnalysisofExistingEnvironmentalImpactAssessmentMethodologiesforUseinLifeCycleAssessment,Ispra,Italy,2010.

l ———,ILCDHandbook-GeneralGuideforLifeCycleAssessment-DetailedGuidance,EuropeanCommission-JointResearchCentre,Ispra,Italy,2010.

l ———,ILCDHandbook-RecommendationsforLifeCycleImpactAssessmentintheEuropeanContext,Firstedit.,PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion,Ispra,Italy,2011.

l Koellner,Thomas,andRolandGeyer,“GlobalLandUseImpactAssessmentonBiodiversityandEcosystemServicesinLCA”,TheInternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.18,No.6,April16,2013,pp.1185–1187.http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11367-013-0580-6.

l Lapola,DavidM,RuedigerSchaldach,JosephAlcamo,AlberteBondeau,JenniferKoch,ChristinaKoelking,andJoergaPriess,“IndirectLand-UseChangesCanOvercomeCarbonSavingsfromBiofuelsinBrazil.”,ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciencesoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica,Vol.107,No.8,February23,2010,pp.3388–93.http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2840431&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.

l Manfredi,Simone,KarenAllacker,KiranaChomkhamsri,NathanPelletier,andDanielleMaiadeSouza,ProductEnvironmentalFootprint(PEF)Guide,EuropeanCommission-JointResearchCentre,Ispra,Italy,2012.

l Muñoz,Ivan,JannickH.Schmidt,MiguelBrandão,andBoP.Weidema,“Rebuttalto‘IndirectLandUseChange(iLUC)withinLifeCycleAssessment(LCA)-ScientificRobustnessandConsistencywithInternationalStandards’”,GCBBioenergy,Vol.7,No.4,2015,pp.565–566.

l Reap,John,FelipeRoman,ScottDuncan,andBertBras,“ASurveyofUnresolvedProblemsinLifeCycleAssessment-Part1:GoalandScopeandInventoryAnalysis”,TheInternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.13,No.4,May20,2008,pp.290–300.%3CGo.

l Schmidt,JannickH.,BoP.Weidema,andMiguelBrandão,“AFrameworkforModellingIndirectLandUseChangesinLifeCycleAssessment”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.99,2015,pp.230–238.http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959652615002309.

l Sherif,YosefS,andWilliamJKolarik,“LifeCycleCosting:ConceptandPractice”,OMEGATheInt.JIofMgmtSci,Vol.9,No.3,1981,pp.287–296.

l Spracklen,D.V.,S.R.Arnold,andC.M.Taylor,“ObservationsofIncreasedTropicalRainfallPrecededbyAirPassageoverForests”,Nature,September5,2012.http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nature11390.

l Tsiropoulos,I.,A.PCFaaij,L.Lundquist,U.Schenker,J.F.Briois,andM.K.Patel,“LifeCycleImpactAssessmentofBio-BasedPlasticsfromSugarcaneEthanol”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.90,2015,pp.114–127.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.071.

l UNEP,GuidelinesforSocialLifeCycleAssessmentofProducts,UnitedNationsEnvironmentProgramme,2009.


9 ANNEXES

9.1 List of reviewed articles

Table 13: Full list of reviewed articles, by level of realisation

Level Reviewedarticle Definedfamily

Platform

Adom,FelixK.,andJenniferB.Dunn,“LifeCycleAnalysisofCorn-Stover-DerivedPolymer-GradeI-LacticAcidandEthylLactate:GreenhouseGasEmissionsandFossilEnergyConsumption”,Biofuels,BioproductsandBiorefining,Vol.11,2017,pp.258–268

Platformsobtainedbyfermentationroute

Platform

Cok,Benjamin,IoannisTsiropoulos,AlexanderL.Roes,andMartinK.Patel,“SuccinicAcidProductionDerivedfromCarbohydrates:AnEnergyandGreenhouseGasAssessmentofaPlatformChemicaltowardaBio-BasedEconomy”,Biofuels,BioproductsandBiorefining,Vol.8,No.1,2014,pp.16–29


Platform

Dros,A.B.,O.Larue,A.Reimond,F.DeCampo,andM.Pera-Titus,“Hexamethylenediamine(HMDA)fromFossil-vs.Bio-BasedRoutes:AnEconomicandLifeCycleAssessmentComparativeStudy”,GreenChemistry,Vol.17,No.10,October2,2015,pp.4760–4772

Platformsobtainedbyotherroutes

PlatformEkman,Anna,andPalBörjesson,“EnvironmentalAssessmentofPropionicAcidProducedinanAgriculturalBiomass-BasedBiorefinerySystem”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.19,No.11,2011,pp.1257–1265


Platform

Forte,Annachiara,AmaliaZucaro,RiccardoBasosi,andAngeloFierro,“LCAof1,4-ButanediolProducedviaDirectFermentationofSugarsfromWheatStrawFeedstockwithinaTerritorialBiorefinery”,Materials,Vol.9,No.7,2016,pp.1–22.


Platform

GezaeDaful,Asfaw,andJohannF.G??rgens,“Techno-EconomicAnalysisandEnvironmentalImpactAssessmentofLignocellulosicLacticAcidProduction”,ChemicalEngineeringScience,Vol.162,2017,pp.53–65.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2016.12.054


PlatformGroot,WimJ.,andTobiasBoren,“LifeCycleAssessmentoftheManufactureofLactideandPLABiopolymersfromSugarcaneinThailand”,InternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.15,No.9,2010,pp.970–984.


PlatformKhoo,HsienHui,ReginaldBHTan,andKevinWLChng,“EnvironmentalImpactsofConventionalPlasticandBio-BasedCarrierBags”,InternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.15,No.3,2010,pp.284–293.


Platform

Koller,Martin,DanielSandholzer,AnnaSalerno,GerhartBraunegg,andMichaelNarodoslawsky,“BiopolymerfromIndustrialResidues:LifeCycleAssessmentofPoly(hydroxyalkanoates)fromWhey”,Resources,ConservationandRecycling,Vol.73,2013,pp.64–71.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.01.017


Platform

Lokesh,K.,C.West,J.Kuylenstierna,J.Fan,V.Budarin,P.Priecel,J.A.Lopez-Sanchez,andJ.Clark,“EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentofWheatStrawBasedAlkylPolyglucosidesProducedUsingNovelChemicalApproaches”,GreenChemistry,Vol.19,No.18,September19,2017,pp.4380–4395


Platform Madival,Santosh,RafaelAuras,SherPaulSingh,andRamaniNarayan,“AssessmentoftheEnvironmentalProfileofPLA,PETandPSClamshell

Platformsobtainedby


ContainersUsingLCAMethodology”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.17,No.13,2009,pp.1183–1194.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.03.015.

fermentationroute

Platform

Morales,Merten,PierreYDapsens,IsabellaGiovinazzo,JuliaWitte,CeciliaMondelli,StavrosPapadokonstantakis,KonradHungerbuhler,andJavierPerez-Ramirez,“EnvironmentalandEconomicAssessmentofLacticAcidProductionfromGlycerolUsingCascadeBio-andChemocatalysis”,Energy&EnvironmentalScience,Vol.8,No.2,2015,pp.558–567.http://http//pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2015/EE/c4ee03352c


Platform

Morgan-Sagastume,Fernando,SaraHeimersson,GiuseppeLaera,AlanWerker,andMagdalenaSvanström,“Techno-EnvironmentalAssessmentofIntegratingPolyhydroxyalkanoate(PHA)ProductionwithServicesofMunicipalWastewaterTreatment”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.137,2016,pp.1368–1381


PlatformMoussa,HassanI.,AliElkamel,andStevenB.Young,“AssessingEnergyPerformanceofBio-BasedSuccinicAcidProductionUsingLCA”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.139,2016,pp.761–769


Platform

Mu,Dongyan,ThomasSeager,P.SureshRao,andFuZhao,“ComparativeLifeCycleAssessmentofLignocellulosicEthanolProduction:BiochemicalversusThermochemicalConversion”,EnvironmentalManagement,Vol.46,No.4,2010,pp.565–578.


Platform

Parajuli,Ranjan,MarieTrydemanKnudsen,MortenBirkved,SylvestreNjakouDjomo,AndreaCorona,andTommyDalgaard,“EnvironmentalImpactsofProducingBioethanolandBiobasedLacticAcidfromStandaloneandIntegratedBiorefineriesUsingaConsequentialandanAttributionalLifeCycleAssessmentApproach”,ScienceoftheTotalEnvironment,Vol.598,2017,pp.497–512.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.087.$


PlatformPonder,Celia,andMichaelOvercash,“Cradle-to-GateLifeCycleInventoryofVancomycinHydrochloride”,ScienceoftheTotalEnvironment,Vol.408,No.6,2010,pp.1331–1337


Platform

Sheldon,RogerA.,“UtilisationofBiomassforSustainableFuelsandChemicals:Molecules,MethodsandMetrics”,CatalysisToday,Vol.167,No.1,UtilisationofBiomassforFuelsandChemicals:TheRoadtoSustainability,June10,2011,pp.3–13.


Platform

Singh,Anoop,DeepakPant,NicholasE.Korres,Abdul-SattarNizami,ShivPrasad,andJerryD.Murphy,“KeyIssuesinLifeCycleAssessmentofEthanolProductionfromLignocellulosicBiomass:ChallengesandPerspectives”,BioresourceTechnology,Vol.101,No.13,2010,pp.5003–5012.http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960852409015673


Platform

Sun,Xiao-Zheng,TomoakiMinowa,KatsunobuYamaguchi,andYutakaGenchi,“EvaluationofEnergyConsumptionandGreenhouseGasEmissionsfromPoly(phenyllacticAcid)ProductionUsingSweetSorghum”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.87,2015,pp.208–215.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652614009718


Platform

TufvessonPar,AnnaEkman,RoyaRRSardari,KristinaEngdahl,andLindaTufvesson,“EconomicandEnvironmentalAssessmentofPropionicAcidProductionbyFermentationUsingDifferentRenewableRawMaterials”,BioresourceTechnology,Vol.149,2013,pp.556–564


Product Adom,Felix,JenniferB.Dunn,JeongwooHan,andNormSather,“Life-CycleFossilEnergyConsumptionandGreenhouseGasEmissionsofBioderived

Fineandbulkchemicals


ChemicalsandTheirConventionalCounterparts”,EnvironmentalScience&Technology,Vol.48,No.24,December16,2014,pp.14624–14631

Product

Akiyama,Minoru,TakeharuTsuge,andYoshiharuDoi,“Environmentallifecyclecomparisonofpolyhydroxyalkanoatesproducedfromrenewablecarbonresourcesbybacterialfermentation”,PolymerDegradationandStability,Vol.80,No.1,2003,pp.183–194.

Plasticpolymers(non-fibre)

Product

Batouli,SeyedMostafa,YiminZhu,MangeshNar,andNandikaAnneD'Souza,"EnvironmentalPerformanceOfKenaf-FiberReinforcedPolyurethane:ALifeCycleAssessmentApproach",JournalOfCleanerProduction,Vol.66,2014,pp.164-173.

Others

Product

Belboom,Sandra,andAngéliqueLéonard,“Doesbiobasedpolymerachievebetterenvironmentalimpactsthanfossilpolymer?ComparisonoffossilHDPEandbiobasedHDPEproducedfromsugarbeetandwheat”,BiomassandBioenergy,Vol.85,2016,pp.159–167.


ProductChen,Luyi,RylieE.o.Pelton,andTimothyM.Smith,“Comparativelifecycleassessmentoffossilandbio-basedpolyethyleneterephthalate(PET)bottles”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.137,2016,pp.667–676.


ProductFeijoo,S.,S.González-García,J.M.Lema,andM.T.Moreira,"LifeCycleAssessmentOfΒ-GalactosidaseEnzymeProduction",JournalOfCleanerProduction,Vol.165,2017,pp.204-212.

Proteins

Product

Fernández-Dacosta,Cora,JohnA.Posada,RobbertKleerebezem,MariaC.Cuellar,andAndreaRamirez,“Microbialcommunity-basedpolyhydroxyalkanoates(PHAs)productionfromwastewater:Techno-Economicanalysisandex-anteenvironmentalassessment,”BioresourceTechnologyVol.185,2015,pp.368–377.


Product

Fiorentino,G.,M.Ripa,S.Mellino,S.Fahd,andS.Ulgiati,“LifeCycleAssessmentofBrassicaCarinataBiomassConversiontoBioenergyandPlatformChemicals”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.66,No.SupplementC,March1,2014,pp.174–187.


Product

Gilpin,GeoffreyS.,andAndersS.G.Andrae,"ComparativeAttributionalLifeCycleAssessmentOfEuropeanCellulaseEnzymeProductionForUseInSecond-GenerationLignocellulosicBioethanolProduction",TheInternationalJournalOfLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.22,No.7,2016,pp.1034-1053

Proteins

Product

González-García,Sara,GumersindoFeijoo,CarolHeathcote,AndreasKandelbauer,andM.TeresaMoreira,"EnvironmentalAssessmentOfGreenHardboardProductionCoupledWithALaccaseActivatedSystem",JournalOfCleanerProduction,Vol.19,No.5,2011,p

Others

ProductH.Khoo,H.,W.L.Ee,andValerioIsoni,“Bio-ChemicalsfromLignocelluloseFeedstock:Sustainability,LCAandtheGreenConundrum”,GreenChemistry,Vol.18,No.7,2016,pp.1912–1922


Product

Harding,K,JDennis,HVonblottnitz,andSHarrison,“Environmentalanalysisofplasticproductionprocesses:Comparingpetroleum-Basedpolypropyleneandpolyethylenewithbiologically-basedpoly-β-Hydroxybutyricacidusinglifecycleanalysis,”JournalofBiotechnologyVol.130,No.1,2007,pp.57–66.


Product

Jeswani,HarishK.,TemitopeFalano,andAdisaAzapagic,“LifeCycleEnvironmentalSustainabilityofLignocellulosicEthanolProducedinIntegratedThermo-ChemicalBiorefineries”,Biofuels,BioproductsandBiorefining,Vol.9,No.6,November1,2015,pp.661–67


Product

Kim,Seungdo,ConcepciónJiménez-González,andBruceE.Dale,"EnzymesForPharmaceuticalApplications—ACradle-To-GateLifeCycleAssessment",TheInternationalJournalOfLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.14,No.5,2009,pp.392-400.

Proteins


ProductKit,Yoong,LeongPau,andLokeShow,“EconomicandEnvironmentalAnalysisofPHAsProductionProcess”,CleanTechnologiesandEnvironmentalPolicy,Vol.19,No.7,2017,pp.1941–1953.


ProductLaRosa,A.D.,G.Cozzo,A.Latteri,A.Recca,A.Björklund,E.Parrinello,andG.Cicala,"LifeCycleAssessmentOfANovelHybridGlass-Hemp/ThermosetComposite",JournalOfCleanerProduction,Vol.44,2013,pp.69-76.

Others

ProductLeceta,I.,A.Etxabide,S.Cabezudo,K.DeLaCaba,andP.Guerrero,“Bio-basedfilmspreparedwithby-productsandwastes:environmentalassessment”,JournalofCleanerProductionVol.64,2014,pp.218–227.


Product

Madival,Santosh,RafaelAuras,SherPaulSingh,andRamaniNarayan,“AssessmentoftheenvironmentalprofileofPLA,PETandPSclamshellcontainersusingLCAmethodology”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.17,No.13,2009,pp.1183–1194.


Product MarinussenandKool.“Environmentalimpactsofsyntheticaminoacidproduction”,reportfromBlonkMilieuAdviesBV,2010Netherlands Proteins

Product

MinistryofenvironmentandfoodofDenmark.DanishEnvironmentalProtectionAgency“NovoNordisk’sEnvironmentalProfitandLossaccount”.2014http://mst.dk/service/publikationer/publikationsarkiv/2014/apr/assessment-of-potentials-and-limitations-in-valuation-of-externalities

Proteins

Product

Nielsen,PerH.,KarenM.Oxenbøll,andHenrikWenzel,"Cradle-To-GateEnvironmentalAssessmentOfEnzymeProductsProducedIndustriallyInDenmarkByNovozymesA/S",TheInternationalJournalOfLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.12,No.6,2006,pp.432-438.

Proteins

ProductOxenboll,K.M.,K.Pontoppida,andF.Fru-Nji,"UseOfAProteaseInPoultryFeedOffersPromisingEnvironmentalBenefits",InternationalJournalOfPoultryScience,Vol.10,No.11,2011,pp.842-848.

Proteins

Product

Papong,Seksan,PomthongMalakul,RuethaiTrungkavashirakun,PechdaWenunun,TassaneewanChom-In,ManitNithitanakul,andEdSarobol,“ComparativeassessmentoftheenvironmentalprofileofPLAandPETdrinkingwaterbottlesfromalifecycleperspective”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.65,2014,pp.539–550.


Product

Pargana,Nuno,ManuelDuartePinheiro,JoséDinisSilvestre,andJorgedeBrito,"ComparativeEnvironmentalLifeCycleAssessmentOfThermalInsulationMaterialsOfBuildings",EnergyAndBuildings,Vol.82,2014,pp.466-481.

Others

Product

Pérez-López,P.,S.González-García,C.Jeffryes,S.N.Agathos,E.McHugh,D.Walsh,P.Murray,S.Moane,G.Feijoo,andM.T.Moreira,"LifeCycleAssessmentOfTheProductionOfTheRedAntioxidantCarotenoidAstaxanthinByMicroalgae:FromLabToPilotScale",JournalOfCleanerProduction,Vol.64,2014,pp.332-344.

Proteins

Product

Pérez-López,Paula,SaraGonzález-García,R.GabrielaUlloa,JorgeSineiro,GumersindoFeijoo,andMªTeresaMoreira,"LifeCycleAssessmentOfTheProductionOfBioactiveCompoundsFromTetraselmisSuecicaAtPilotScale",JournalOfCleanerProduction,Vol.64,2014,pp.323-331.

Proteins

Product

Pursula,Tiina,andMinnaPäällysaho,Report:LCAOfEnzymeProductionAndCalculationOfKeyPerformanceIndicatorsForMetgen,GaiaConsultingOy,2016.http://www.metgen.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Final-report-LCA-and-KPIs-for-enzyme-production-18.11.2016.pdf.

Proteins

Product Qiang,Tao,DemeiYu,AnjiangZhang,HonghongGao,ZhaoLi,ZengchaoLiu,WeixingChen,andZhenHan,"LifeCycleAssessmentOnPolylactide-Based Others


WoodPlasticCompositesToughenedWithPolyhydroxyalkanoates",JournalOfCleanerProduction,Vol.66,2014,pp.139-145

Product

Razza,Francesco,FrancescoDegliInnocenti,AntonioDobon,CesarAliaga,CarmenSanchez,andMercedesHortal,“Environmentalprofileofabio-basedandbiodegradablefoamedpackagingprototypeincomparisonwiththecurrentbenchmark”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.102,2015,pp.493–500.


Product

Sierra-Pérez,Jorge,JesúsBoschmonart-Rives,AnaC.Dias,andXavierGabarrell,"EnvironmentalImplicationsOfTheUseOfAgglomeratedCorkAsThermalInsulationInBuildings",JournalOfCleanerProduction,Vol.126,2016,pp.97-107.

Others

Product

Slater,C.Stewart,MarianoJ.Savelski,DavidHitchcock,andEduardoJ.Cavanagh,“EnvironmentalAnalysisoftheLifeCycleEmissionsof2-MethylTetrahydrofuranSolventManufacturedfromRenewableResources”,JournalofEnvironmentalScienceandHealth,PartA,Vol.51,No.6,May11,2016,pp.487–494.


ProductTsiropoulos,I.,A.p.c.Faaij,L.Lundquist,U.Schenker,J.f.Briois,andM.k.Patel,“Lifecycleimpactassessmentofbio-basedplasticsfromsugarcaneethanol”,JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.90,2015,pp.114–127.


ProductVink,ErwinTH,SteveDavies,andJeffreyJKolstad,“TheEco-ProfileforCurrentIngeoPolylactideProduction”,IndustrialBiotechnology,Vol.6,No.4,2010,pp.212–224


ProductWilson,JamesB.,EricT.Sakimoto,"Gate-to-gatelife-cycleinventoryofsoftwoodplywoodproduction"WoodandFiberScience,SocietyofWoodScienceandTechnology,37CorrimSpecialIssue,2005,pp.58–73

Others

Product

Zhang,Yanan,GuipingHu,andRobertC.Brown,“LifeCycleAssessmentofCommodityChemicalProductionfromForestResidueviaFastPyrolysis”,TheInternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.19,No.7,July1,2014,pp.1371–1381


Rawmaterial

Agyekum,EricOfori,K.p.j.(Karen)Fortuin,andEugenieVanDerHarst,“EnvironmentalandsociallifecycleassessmentofbamboobicycleframesmadeinGhana,”JournalofCleanerProductionVol.143,2017,pp.1069–1080

Fibres

Rawmaterial

Arrigoni,Alessandro,RenatoPelosato,PacoMelià,GianlucaRuggieri,SergioSabbadini,andGiovanniDotelli,“Lifecycleassessmentofnaturalbuildingmaterials:theroleofcarbonation,mixturecomponentsandtransportintheenvironmentalimpactsofhempcreteblocks,”JournalofCleanerProductionVol.149,2017,pp.1051–1061

Fibres

Rawmaterial

BenediktBuchspies,MartinKaltschmitt,“Lifecycleassessmentofbioethanolfromwheatandsugarbeetdiscussingenvironmentalimpactsofmultipleconceptsofco-productprocessinginthecontextoftheEuropeanRenewableEnergyDirective”,Biofuels,Vol7,No2,2016,pp.141-153,DOI:10.1080/17597269.2015.1122472

Sugarsandstarch(non-polymerized)

Rawmaterial

CarmenGalan-Marin,CarlosRivera-GomezandAntonioGarcia-Martinez,(2016)“UseofNatural-FiberBio-CompositesinConstructionversusTraditionalSolutions:OperationalandEmbodiedEnergyAssessment,”Materials.9.465.10

Fibres

Rawmaterial Chanetal.,2015(palmoil,bio-oilwithundefineduse,LCA) Oils(non-

polymerized)

Rawmaterial

Cherubini,FrancescoandUlgiati,Sergio,“Cropresiduesasrawmaterialsforbiorefinerysystems-ALCAcasestudy",AppliedEnergy,Vol.87,2017,pp.47-57.

Oils(non-polymerized)


Rawmaterial

CosatedeAndrade,MarinaF.,Souza,PatriciaM.F.,Cavalett,Otavio,andMorales,AnaR."LifeCycleAssessmentofPoly(LacticAcid)(PLA):ComparisonBetweenChemicalRecycling,MechanicalRecyclingandComposting",JournalofPolymersandtheEnvironment,Vol.24,No.4,2016,pp.372-384


Rawmaterial

DiegoMagalhãesdoNascimento,AmandaFerreiraDias,CelsoPiresdeAraújoJunior,MorsyleidedeFreitasRosa,JoãoPauloSaraivaMorais,MariaCléaBritodeFigueirêdo;‘Acomprehensiveapproachforobtainingcellulosenanocrystalfromcoconutfiber.PartII:Environmentalassessmentoftechnologicalpathways’;IndustrialCropsandProductsVolume93,25December2016,pp.58-65

Fibres

Rawmaterial

Gilani,Banafsheh,Stuart,PaulR.,Lifecycleassessmentofanintegratedforestbiorefinery:hotwaterextractionprocesscasestudy,Biofuels,BioproductsandBiorefining,Vol.9,No.6,2015,pp.677-695.doi:10.1002/bbb.1570


Rawmaterial

González-García,Sara.,Hospido,Almudena.,Agnemo,Roland.,Svensson,Patrik.,Selling,Eva.,Moreira,MaTeresa.,andFeijoo,Gumersindo,«EnvironmentalLifeCycleAssessmentofaSwedishDissolvingPulpMillIntegratedBiorefinery»,JournalofIndustrialEcology,Vol.15,No.4,pp.568-583.


Rawmaterial

Günther,Jasmin,NielsThevs,Hans-JörgGusovius,InaSigmund,TorstenBrückner,VolkerBeckmann,andNurbayAbdusalik,“CarbonandphosphorusfootprintofthecottonproductioninXinjiang,China,incomparisontoanalternativefibre(Apocynum)fromCentralAsia,”JournalofCleanerProductionVol.148,2017,pp.490–497

Fibres

Rawmaterial

JorgeCristobal,CristinaT.Matos,Jean-PhilippeAurambout,SimoneManfredi,andBoyanKavalov,“Environmentalsustainabilityassessmentofbioeconomyvaluechains”.BiomassandBioenergy,Vol.89,2016,pp159-171.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.02.002


Rawmaterial

Krzyżaniak,Michal,Stolarski,MariuszJerzy.,Szczukowski,Stefan,andTworkowski,Józef,“LifeCycleAssessmentofNewWillowCultivarsGrownasFeedstockforIntegratedBiorefineries”,BioenergyResearch,Vol.9,No.1,pp.224-238.doi:10.1007/s12155-015-9681-3


Rawmaterial

Mandegari,MohsenAli,Farzad,Somayeh.,vonRensburg,Eugene,andGörgens,Johann.F,«Multi-criteriaanalysisofabiorefineryforco-productionoflacticacidandethanolfromsugarcanelignocellulose,Biofuels,BioproductsandBiorefining,doi:10.1002/bbb.1801(inpress)


Rawmaterial

MartijnL.M.Broeren,StijnN.C.Dellaert,BenjaminCok,MartinK.Patel,ErnstWorrell,LiShen;“LifecycleassessmentofsisalfibreeExploringhowlocalpracticescaninfluenceenvironmentalperformance”JournalofCleanerProduction149(2017)818-827

Fibres

Rawmaterial

Martinez,S.,Bessou,C.,Hure,L.,Guilbot,J.andHelias,A.,“TheimpactofpalmoilfeedstockwithintheLCAofabio-sourcedcosmeticcream",JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.145,2017,pp.348-360.


Rawmaterial

Murphy,RichardJ,andAndrewNorton,“LifeCycleAssessmentsofNaturalFibreInsulationMaterials”PublishedbyNationalNon-FoodCropsCentre,February2008.http://nova-institut.de/news-images/20080306-05/lca_fibre.pdf

Fibres

Rawmaterial

Poopak,Sotoodehnia,andAmiriRoodan,“EnvironmentalBenefitofUsingBagasseinPaperProduction-ACaseStudyofLCAinIran,”GlobalWarming-ImpactsandFuturePerspectives,2012

Fibres


Rawmaterial

Saraiva,AnnaBernstad,ElenB.a.v.Pacheco,GabrielM.Gomes,LeilaL.y.Visconte,C.a.Bernardo,CarlaL.Simões,andAntonioG.Soares,“Comparativelifecycleassessmentofmangopackagingmadefromapolyethylene/Naturalfiber-Compositeandfromcardboardmaterial,”JournalofCleanerProductionVol.139,2016,pp.1168–1180

Fibres

Rawmaterial

Secchi,Michela,Castellani,Valentina,Collina,Elena,Mirabella,Nadia,andSala,Serenella,“Assessingeco-innovationsingreenchemistry:LifeCycleAssessment(LCA)ofacosmeticproductwithabio-basedingredient",JournalofCleanerProduction,Vol.129,2016,pp.269-281.


Rawmaterial

Souza,Alexandre.,Watanabe,MarcosDjunBarbosa,Cavalett,Otavio,Ugaya,CassiaMariaLie,andBonomi,Antonio,«Sociallifecycleassessmentoffirstandsecond-generationethanolproductiontechnologiesinBrazil»,TheInternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,(inpress),doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1112-y


Rawmaterial

SpyrosFoteinis,VictorKouloumpis,andTheocharisTsoutsos,“LifecycleanalysisforbioethanolproductionfromsugarbeetcropsinGreece”.EnergyPolicy,39,2011,4834–4841.


Rawmaterial

Suwanmanee,Unchalee,Varabuntoonvit,Viganda,Chaiwutthinan,Phasawat,Tajan,Monchai,MungcharoenThumrongrut,andThanawadeeLeejarkpai,"Lifecycleassessmentofsingleusethermoformboxesmadefrompolystyrene(PS),polylacticacid,(PLA),andPLA/starch:cradletoconsumergate",TheInternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.18,No.2,2013,pp.401-417


Rawmaterial

VercalsterenAn,BoonenKatrien,“LifeCycleAssessmentstudyofstarchproductsfortheEuropeanstarchindustryassociation(StarchEurope):sectorstudy”,Reportno.2015/SMAT/R/0083,FlemishInstituteforTechnologicalResearchNV“VITO”,pp.30


Rawmaterial

YelinDeng,YajunTian,AssessingtheEnvironmentalImpactofFlaxFibreReinforcedPolymerCompositefromaConsequentialLifeCycleAssessmentPerspective;Sustainability,2015,Vol.7,pp.11462-11483

Fibres

Rawmaterial

Zhang,Yanan,Hu,GuipingandBrown,RobertC.,“Lifecycleassessmentofacommoditychemicalproductionfromforestresidueviafastpyrolysis",InternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment,Vol.19,2014,pp.1371-1381.


Rawmaterial

Zucaro,Amalia,Forte,Annachiara,Fagnano,Massimo,Bastianoni,Simone.,Basosi,Riccardo,Fierro,Angelo,«ComparativeattributionallifecycleassessmentofannualandperenniallignocellulosicfeedstocksproductionunderMediterraneanclimateforbiorefineryframework»,IntegratedEnvironmentalAssessmentandManagement,vol.11,no.3,2015,pp.397-403.doi:10.1002/ieam.1604


9.2 Short bibliographic reports

Everyreviewedarticlehasbeensummarizedinashortbibliographicreport.Thesereportsareavailableintheannexedfile“D2.1Reviewedarticlesshortreportsannex2.pdf”.

9.3 Synthesis of reviewed articles

Thetablecollectingallthekeyinformationfromthereviewedarticlesisavailableintheannexedfile“D2.1Synthesisofreviewedarticlesannex3.xlsx”.

star-probio productspefcr guidance or the en 16751 norm. there is an avoerall good convergence...

Documents