Search

This study contrasts two different approaches to inform European‐scale decision‐making to mitigate the environmental impacts of the end‐of‐life tires (ELT) management system. The first analysis is a traditional life cycle assessment (LCA) that compares the environmental performances of the 12 main available European end‐of‐life (EOL) technologies in ELT processing while restricting the boundaries to the EOL stage. The second analysis has a broader scope, addressing the optimization of the ELT distribution within the 12 considered pathways to minimize the environmental impacts of the total tire use in Europe under present capacity and constraints. The results of the traditional LCA show that, except for landfill, all the tested EOL routes present environmental benefits. Material recovery pathways bring the most environmental credits, whereas civil engineering pathways are the least promising. The LCA results that emerged from the optimization of ELT management technologies yield two optimal technological mixes that maximize the quantity of ELT recycled in molded objects production: such results represent a hypothetical case with no constraints. When considering constraints, that is, limitations on maximum quantities of ELT that can undergo retreading, pyrolysis, or recycling in synthetic turfs, in molded objects and in production, the number of optimal technology mixes increases to five. The type of technologies favored depends on the minimized impact categories (climate change, fossil and nuclear energy use, human health, and ecosystem quality). A comparison between constrained and unconstrained scenarios shows that achieving the best environmental performances is conditional to the accessibility of the EOL technologies as well as their individual environmental impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) is a lively field of research, and data and models are continuously improved in terms of impact pathways covered, reliability, and spatial detail. However, many of these advancements are scattered throughout the scientific literature, making it difficult for practitioners to apply the new models. Here, we present the LC‐IMPACT method that provides characterization factors at the damage level for 11 impact categories related to three areas of protection (human health, ecosystem quality, natural resources). Human health damage is quantified as disability adjusted life years, damage to ecosystem quality as global species extinction equivalents (based on potentially disappeared fraction of species), and damage to mineral resources as kilogram of extra ore extracted. Seven of the impact categories include spatial differentiation at various levels of spatial scale. The influence of value choices related to the time horizon and the level of scientific evidence of the impacts considered is quantified with four distinct sets of characterization factors. We demonstrate the applicability of the proposed method with an illustrative life cycle assessment example of different fuel options in Europe (petrol or biofuel). Differences between generic and regionalized impacts vary up to two orders of magnitude for some of the selected impact categories, highlighting the importance of spatial detail in LCIA. This article met the requirements for a gold – gold JIE data openness badge described at http://jie.click/badges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), normalization calculates the magnitude of an impact (midpoint or endpoint) relative to the total effect of a given reference. The goal of this work is to calculate normalization factors for Canada and the US and to compare them with existing European normalization factors. The differences between geographical areas were highlighted by identifying and comparing the main contributors to a given impact category in Canada, the US and Europe. This comparison verified that the main contributors in Europe and in the US are also present in the Canadian inventory. It also showed that normalized profiles are highly dependent on the selected reference due to differences in the industrial and economic activities. To meet practitioners'' needs, Canadian normalization factors have been calculated using the characterization factors from LUCAS (Canadian), IMPACT 2002+ (European), and TRACI (US) respectively. The main sources of uncertainty related to Canadian NFs are data gaps (pesticides, metals) and aggregated data (metals, VOC), but the uncertainty related to CFs generally remains unknown. A final discussion is proposed based on the comparison of resource extraction and resource consumption and raises the question of the legitimacy of defining a country by its geographical borders. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Multimedia fate and multipathway human exposure models are widely adopted in assessments of toxicological risks of chemical emissions at the regional scale. This paper addresses the question of how much spatial detail is necessary in such models when estimating the intake by the entire population in large, heterogeneous regions such as Europe. The paper presents a spatially resolved multimedia fate and multipathway exposure model for Western Europe, available as IMPACT 2002. This model accounts for relationships between the location of food production and drinking water extraction as well as where population cohorts live relative to where chemical emissions occur. The model facilitates estimation of environmental concentration distributions, related levels of contaminants in foods, and the fraction of a chemical release that will be taken in by the entire human population (the intake fraction) at the regional scale. To evaluate the necessary spatial resolution, the paper compares estimates of environmental concentrations and the intake fraction from the spatially resolved model with the results of a consistent clone without spatial resolution. An evaluation for disperse emissions of PeCDF (2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran, CAS# 5120731-4) suggests reasonable agreement with monitoring data for most impact pathways with both versions of the model, but that the generic vegetation models for estimating contaminant concentrations in agricultural produce require improvement. A broader comparison for a range of organic chemicals demonstrates that the nonspatial models are likely to be appropriate in general for assessing dispersed sources of emissions. However, it is necessary to include generic compartments in such nonspatial models to account separately for emissions that enter lakes with long residence times versus rivers that feed directly into seas. For assessing an emission source in a specific location, using models that are not spatially resolved can result in underestimation, or overestimation, of the population's intake by at least 3 orders of magnitude for some chemicals.