IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v22y2018i6p1286-1294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Assessment of Emerging Technologies: Recommendations for Prospective LCA

Author

Listed:
  • Rickard Arvidsson
  • Anne‐Marie Tillman
  • Björn A. Sandén
  • Matty Janssen
  • Anders Nordelöf
  • Duncan Kushnir
  • Sverker Molander

Abstract

The challenge of assessing emerging technologies with life cycle assessment (LCA) has been increasingly discussed in the LCA field. In this article, we propose a definition of prospective LCA: An LCA is prospective when the (emerging) technology studied is in an early phase of development (e.g., small‐scale production), but the technology is modeled at a future, more‐developed phase (e.g., large‐scale production). Methodological choices in prospective LCA must be adapted to reflect this goal of assessing environmental impacts of emerging technologies, which deviates from the typical goals of conventional LCA studies. The aim of the article is to provide a number of recommendations for how to conduct such prospective assessments in a relevant manner. The recommendations are based on a detailed review of selected prospective LCA case studies, mainly from the areas of nanomaterials, biomaterials, and energy technologies. We find that it is important to include technology alternatives that are relevant for the future in prospective LCA studies. Predictive scenarios and scenario ranges are two general approaches to prospective inventory modeling of both foreground and background systems. Many different data sources are available for prospective modeling of the foreground system: scientific articles; patents; expert interviews; unpublished experimental data; and process modeling. However, we caution against temporal mismatches between foreground and background systems, and recommend that foreground and background system impacts be reported separately in order to increase the usefulness of the results in other prospective studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Rickard Arvidsson & Anne‐Marie Tillman & Björn A. Sandén & Matty Janssen & Anders Nordelöf & Duncan Kushnir & Sverker Molander, 2018. "Environmental Assessment of Emerging Technologies: Recommendations for Prospective LCA," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(6), pages 1286-1294, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:22:y:2018:i:6:p:1286-1294
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12690
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12690
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.12690?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bergesen, Joseph D. & Suh, Sangwon, 2016. "A framework for technological learning in the supply chain: A case study on CdTe photovoltaics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 721-728.
    2. Rubin, Edward S. & Azevedo, Inês M.L. & Jaramillo, Paulina & Yeh, Sonia, 2015. "A review of learning rates for electricity supply technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 198-218.
    3. Staffan Jacobsson & Anna Bergek, 2004. "Transforming the energy sector: the evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 13(5), pages 815-849, October.
    4. Bruce E. Dale & Seungdo Kim, 2014. "Can the Predictions of Consequential Life Cycle Assessment Be Tested in the Real World? Comment on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate-Change Mitigation...”," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 466-467, May.
    5. Richard Plevin & Mark Delucchi & Felix Creutzig, 2014. "Response to Comments on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate-Change Mitigation …”," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 468-470, May.
    6. Ivan T. Herrmann & Michael Z. Hauschild & Michael D. Sohn & Thomas E. McKone, 2014. "Confronting Uncertainty in Life Cycle Assessment Used for Decision Support," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 366-379, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nils Thonemann & Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga, 2020. "How to Conduct Prospective Life Cycle Assessment for Emerging Technologies? A Systematic Review and Methodological Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    2. Filippo Bontadini & Francesco Vona, 2023. "Anatomy of Green Specialisation: Evidence from EU Production Data, 1995–2015," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 707-740, August.
    3. Thomassen, Gwenny & Van Passel, Steven & Dewulf, Jo, 2020. "A review on learning effects in prospective technology assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    4. Joseph Palazzo & Roland Geyer & Sangwon Suh, 2020. "A review of methods for characterizing the environmental consequences of actions in life cycle assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(4), pages 815-829, August.
    5. Buchspies, Benedikt & Kaltschmitt, Martin, 2018. "A consequential assessment of changes in greenhouse gas emissions due to the introduction of wheat straw ethanol in the context of European legislation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 368-381.
    6. Matthias Buyle & Amaryllis Audenaert & Pieter Billen & Katrien Boonen & Steven Van Passel, 2019. "The Future of Ex-Ante LCA? Lessons Learned and Practical Recommendations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-24, October.
    7. Kim, Sunwoo & Choi, Yechan & Park, Joungho & Adams, Derrick & Heo, Seongmin & Lee, Jay H., 2024. "Multi-period, multi-timescale stochastic optimization model for simultaneous capacity investment and energy management decisions for hybrid Micro-Grids with green hydrogen production under uncertainty," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 190(PA).
    8. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "The emergence of a global innovation system – a case study from the water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(09), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    9. Francesco Nicolli & Francesco Vona & Lionel Nesta, 2012. "Determinants of Renewable Energy Innovation: Environmental Policies vs. Market Regulation," Working Papers 201204, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    10. Nicolli, Francesco & Vona, Francesco, 2012. "The Evolution of Renewable Energy Policy in OECD Countries: Aggregate Indicators and Determinants," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 130897, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    11. Abolhosseini, Shahrouz & Heshmati, Almas & Altmann, Jörn, 2014. "A Review of Renewable Energy Supply and Energy Efficiency Technologies," IZA Discussion Papers 8145, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Grafström, Jonas & Poudineh, Rahmat, 2023. "No evidence of counteracting policy effects on European solar power invention and diffusion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    13. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/eu4vqp9ompqllr09j0h0ji242 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Wirth, Steffen, 2014. "Communities matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 236-246.
    15. Harborne, Paul & Hendry, Chris, 2009. "Pathways to commercial wind power in the US, Europe and Japan: The role of demonstration projects and field trials in the innovation process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3580-3595, September.
    16. Eleftheriadis, Iordanis M. & Anagnostopoulou, Evgenia G., 2015. "Identifying barriers in the diffusion of renewable energy sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 153-164.
    17. Roald A.A. Suurs & Marko P. Hekkert & Ruud E.H.M. Smits, 2009. "Understanding the build-up of a Technological Innovation System around Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 09-10, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Jun 2009.
    18. Shangfeng Han & Baosheng Zhang & Xiaoyang Sun & Song Han & Mikael Höök, 2017. "China’s Energy Transition in the Power and Transport Sectors from a Substitution Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-25, April.
    19. Daina Paulikas & Steven Katona & Erika Ilves & Saleem H. Ali, 2022. "Deep‐sea nodules versus land ores: A comparative systems analysis of mining and processing wastes for battery‐metal supply chains," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(6), pages 2154-2177, December.
    20. Frank, Alejandro Germán & Gerstlberger, Wolfgang & Paslauski, Carolline Amaral & Lerman, Laura Visintainer & Ayala, Néstor Fabián, 2018. "The contribution of innovation policy criteria to the development of local renewable energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 353-365.
    21. Frate, Claudio Albuquerque & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Stakeholder subjectivities regarding barriers and drivers to the introduction of utility-scale solar photovoltaic power in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 346-352.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:22:y:2018:i:6:p:1286-1294. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.