Consequential Life Cycle Assessment …and Other Related Topics

? Summary

? General
? Life cycle inventory (LCI) data
? Steelmaking footprint reduction
? Regional benchmarking
? LCA methodology research
? Sector-specific
? Automotive  – Packaging
? Construction

? Standardized and
comprehensive method
? Evaluates potential
environmental and human
health impacts
? Applicable to a product,
material, process or service
throughout its life cycle

1969  Coca-Cola Company performs first LCA
1970s  LCA develops from energy analysis to a
comprehensive environmental burden analysis
1980s  Full-fledged life cycle impact assessment
(LCIA) and life cycle costing models introduced
1990s  ISO standards on LCA developed
21st century Social LCA and consequential LCA gain ground
? Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) - a compilation of inputs
and outputs, typically energy, water and material
flows

Additional impacts:
? Human health toxicity
? Eco-toxicity
? Resource depletion (fossil fuel and
mineral)
? Land use change
? Biodiversity impacts/habitat
disruption

? Purpose: To reduce consumption of fuels and reduce GHG
emissions
? Current regulations: Focused only on tailpipe (use phase)
? Mid-term Review:
? 2022-2025 requirements
? EPA / NHTSA / CARB
? Final: April 2018(?)

? Powertrain
technologies
? Electrification
technologies
? Aerodynamics
?  Weight  reduction

Note: Steel, aluminum and magnesium values do not include finishing emissions. Carbon fiber reinforced plastic (Carbon FRP) automotive
parts are formed via an integrated process, which includes both production and finishing.
Sources: Aluminum Association, 2013; International Aluminum Association, 2013; Worldsteel, 2010; University of California Santa Barbara, 2017

? Purpose
? How important are material production emissions?
? Are there unintended GHG consequences due to
lightweighting vehicles when focusing only on the
use phase?
? Two-part approach
? Attributional LCA: Vehicle-to-vehicle comparisons
? Consequential LCA: Large-scale shift or decision

? Calculate total GHG emissions and energy demand of
vehicles lightweighted with AHSS and aluminum
? UCSB Automotive Materials Comparison Model v5
? Vehicles included: Mid-size Sedan, SUV, Pick-up Truck,
Mid-size HEV, Compact BEV
? Refine input parameters
? Current and conservative input parameters
? Sensitivity and Monte Carlo analyses
? Peer review by panel of LCA experts

? Cradle-to-gate material production GHG emissions
(kg CO 2 eq/kg) and energy consumption (MJ/kg)
? Domestic production vs. imports
? Primary vs. secondary production
? Lifetime driving distance (km)
? Material replacement coefficients (kg/kg)
? Secondary mass reduction (% of primary mass reduction)
? Fuel reduction values (l/100km100kg)
? Finishing/stamping yields (%)
? Material recovery and recycling rates (%)

Lightweighting with aluminum over AHSS:
? Significantly increased production emissions (~30-60%) for
all vehicle types
? Increased total life cycle GHG emissions in roughly 50% of
the cases tested…but only when using the most favorable
recycling methodology assumptions
? …In all other cases, the aluminum vehicles resulted in a net
increase in emissions vs. the AHSS vehicles

There is no certainty tailpipe-only regulations will
result in a decrease in emissions from light vehicles
… and an increase is likely.

? Vehicle-to-vehicle comparisons
may not capture complete
environmental effects
? GHG-focused Excel model
developed by Dr. Roland Geyer
? Peer-review of model structure
and methodology complete
? Manuscript under review

? Fuel economy targets becoming increasingly stringent
? Use of GHG-intensive lightweighting materials to help meet
these targets will:
? Always lead to higher GHG emissions initially
? Can result in higher total vehicle life cycle emissions
? Changes in aluminum import levels and increasing demand
point to even greater GHG consequences in the future
? Ensuring improvements in production phase emissions
while reducing driving phase emissions avoids unintended
consequences