Back to Search Start Over

Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment : defining the path forward

Authors :
Drielsma, Johannes A
Russell-Vaccari, Andrea J.
Drnek, Thomas
Brady, Tom
Weihed, Pär
Mistry, Mark
Simbor, Laia Perez
Drielsma, Johannes A
Russell-Vaccari, Andrea J.
Drnek, Thomas
Brady, Tom
Weihed, Pär
Mistry, Mark
Simbor, Laia Perez
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

Purpose: Despite 20 years of research, there remains no robust, globally agreed upon method—or even problem statement—for assessing mineral resource inputs in life cycle impact assessment (LCIA). As a result, inclusion of commonly used methods such as abiotic depletion potential (ADP) in life cycle assessment (LCA)-related evaluation schemes could lead to incorrect decisions being made in many applications. In this paper, we explore in detail how to improve the way that life cycle thinking is applied to the acquisition of mineral resources and their metal counterparts. Methods: This paper evaluates the current body of work in LCIA with regard to “depletion potential” of mineral resources. Viewpoints from which models are developed are described and analyzed. The assumptions, data sources, and calculations that underlie currently used methods are examined. A generic metal-containing product is analyzed to demonstrate the vulnerability of results to the denominator utilized in calculating ADP. The adherence to the concept of the area of protection (AOP) is evaluated for current models. The use of ore grades, prices, and economic availability in LCIA is reviewed. Results and discussion: Results demonstrate that any work on resource depletion in a life cycle context needs to have a very clear objective or LCIA will not accurately characterize mineral resource use from any perspective and decision-making will continue to suffer. New, harmonized terminology is proposed so that LCA practitioners can build better mutual understanding with the mineral industry and recommendations regarding more promising tools for use in life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) are given. Conclusions: The economic issue of resource availability should be evaluated in parallel with traditional LCA, not within. LCIA developers should look to economists, the market, and society in general, for broader assessments that consider shorter-time horizons than the traditional LCIA methods. To do so<br />Correction in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 21, Issue 1, page 133DOI: 10.1007/s11367-015-1006-4

Details

Database :
OAIster
Notes :
English
Publication Type :
Electronic Resource
Accession number :
edsoai.on1233386058
Document Type :
Electronic Resource
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007.s11367-015-0991-7