Life Cycle - LCA Forum

Transcription

Life Cycle Analysis for Green Investment
Data quality, key impacts &
benchmarking
Damien Friot ([email protected]), Josef Kaenzig, Myriam Saade,
Manuele Margni, Olivier Jolliet
EPFL, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Environmental science and technology institute
Industrial Ecology - Life Cycle Systems
Green Investment forum -EPFL, 07.06.05
Outline
From a quantitative perspective:
1. What can be the use of & how to check Environmental Reports ?
2. How to assess the environmental impacts of companies ?
3. How to benchmark corporate environmental performances ?
With examples from automotive & pharmaceuticals industries
(collaboration with Centre-Info)
“Mainstream” assessment: qualitative
1. Company’s environmental characteristics
– Large panel of heteroclite issues
– Partial view
– Focus on the company
0%
company
external
100 %
2. Selection procedure
– Based on exclusions & common sense
3. Ranking
– Among companies of the same “investment sector”
– Preferences rather than true performance
A life cycle perspective: key issues
Supply chain
Production
Use
Disposal
=> a chain of actors/activities to deliver a service
• Holistic: direct + indirect (up & downstream)
• Function: equivalent services (vs same sector)
• Aggregation: impact assessment: reduction of indicators
• Model + data: bottom-up & top-down approaches + use of
engineering & technical data
=> On the hedge of maturity: Increasing standardisation &
development of databases
1. Quality of environmental reporting
Coverage of Environmental Reporting (ER)
Environmental indicators in the automotive industry
Frequency (12)
Energy (GWh) & Water (m3 ) consumption, Industrial waste (tons)
10-12
GHG & VOC emissions (tons), Common waste (tons), Discharges
to water (m3)
8–5
Environmental expenditures (Euro), NOx, C, PM (tons)
4–1
• Geography (1 site/area), Turnover (geog.), Life Cycle (on-site)
• Energy: Final vs grey (+30% per MJ)
– Non renewable primary energy (hydro vs fossils fuels)
• Green House Gases: CO2 or CO2 equivalent?
• Meta-data: Units, structural issues
Validation techniques
First attempts
• Evolution over time: structural changes (M&A) ?
• Comparisons within the same inv. sector: diversified activities?
– Median value (1st est.)
– Example: BMW 80% auto, 17% finance, 3% motorbike
LCA intelligence
• References values per sector
– Data transformation
– Basis for comparison (value-added, turnover, EBIT,
employee, units produced)
• Ratios:
[CO2/non renewable primary energy]
– Internal coherence
Basis for comparison (energy cons.)
Automotive industry
Per added value
2002
2001
Energy consumption [MJ/ million $ of value
added]
1600000
2000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0.23
2002
2001
2000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
330
0.8
8200
0
0
BMW
Daimler
Chrysler
Fiat
Ford
Generalmotors Mitsubishi PSA Peugeot Volkswagen
Citroën
BMW
Daimler
Chrysler
Fiat
Ford
Citroën
Per unit produced (car)
Energy consumption [MJ/car]
Energy consumption [MJ/million $]
Per turnover
1200000
40000
2002
2001
2000
30000
20000
10000
0.014
23
0
BMW
Daimler
Chrysler
Fiat
Ford
Citroën
Ratio [CO2 /non ren. primary energy]
Ratio [gCO2 / MJ non renewable primary energy]
250
Cement
(analysis based on ecoinvent 1.1, 2004)
200
Electricity
mix
150
Nuclear
power
100
50
Pesticides
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
About 2500 products and services (use stage and disposal not
taken into account) Number of product or service
2500
Ratio [CO2 (eq.) / final energy]
Banks
Ratio: GHG / final
energy
[gCO2 / MJ]
Automotive companies
Ratio: GHG / final
energy
[gCO2 / MJ]
ABN AMRO
56
BMW
89
Banca Monte Paschi Siena
141
Daimler Chrysler
108
Citigroup
115
Ford
Credit suisse group
141
Generalmotors
79
PSA Peugeot Citroën
35
HBOS
111241
KBC
48
Royal Bank of Scotland
87
San Paolo IMI
117
UBS
106
Westpac Banking
345
97212
Expected values: 30 – 150 gCO2 (eq.) /MJ final energy
2. Identification of key impacts
1
2
3
Industry chain
Profile
Relevant
Indicator
Company
Model
-Hybrid Screening
- Process LCA
- Input-Output
- Reference
- Processes
- Sectors
- Product
- Company
- Function oriented
- Upstream: suppliers
- Prod: on-site
- Use: products
- Disp: products
- Reconstruction
- processes
- activities
- products
-Selection /Aggreg.
of indicators
Synthesis: Life Cycle & impacts
Pharmaceuticals
Life cycle
Ressources
Global Warming
Human health
E x t r a c t io n d e s m a t iè r e s
C h a î n e d e s f o u r n is s e u r s
P r o d u c t io n
U t ilis a t io n
F in d e v ie
+
E ffe t d e
s e rre
+
P r o d u c t io n
U t ilis a t io n
F in d e v ie
S a n té
h u m a in e
Q u a lit é d e s
é c o s y s tè m e
s
I n d ic a t e u r s c lé s
du médicament
Toxicité et écotoxicité
l'environnement
relarguée dans
médicaments
R e j e t d e m é d ic a m e n t s
Quantité de
Masse de l'emballage
P a c k a g in g
C o n s o m m a ti
on de
m a t iè r e s
p r e m iè r e s
k g s u b s t a n c e e x t r a it e / e m b a lla g e
k g d 'e m b a lla g e / k g s u b s t a n c e a c t iv e
+
+
+
++
++
T a u x d e r e c y c la g e
K m p a rc o u ru s
M J é n e r g ie p r im a ir e n o n - r e n o u v e la b le o u / e t
é m is s io n s d e C O 2 / 1 0 0 k m
+
+
+
P r o d u c t io n
U t ilis a t io n
F in d e v ie
Ecosystems
quality
Distance
+ : I n f lu e n c e f a ib le
+ + : I n f lu e n c e m o y e n
+ + + : I n f lu e n c e im p o r t a n t
Type de transport
T ra n s p o rt d e s
re p ré s e n ta n ts
P h a s e d a n s le c y c le d e v ie
Key indicators
P o in t s c lé s p o u r l'im p a c t e n v ir o n n e m e n t a l
l'emballage
Im p a c ts c lé s
Composition de
Key impacts
++
+++
k g s u b s t a n c e r e la r g u é e / k g p r o d u it
E C 5 0 s u b s ta n c e
1
+++
+++
k g s u b s t a n c e r e la r g u é e / k g p r o d u it
E C 5 0 s u b s ta n c e
1
+++
P r o d u c t io n
U t ilis a t io n
F in d e v ie
I n d ic a t e u r s c lé s
¾ Main impacts: Human health & ecosystem quality
¾ Travel of sales people is dominant
Env. impacts from economic data
Econ. & technical data
Purchases, on-site, sales, products
LCA data
+
LCI DB, LCIA methods
Pharmaceuticals: Energy balance & costs (Green-e)
100%
R&D (énergie)
Sales representants
80%
Transport of produits
Transport of raw materials
Business travel
60%
Employees commuting
Waste treatement
40%
Buildings
Packaging
Heating
20%
Raw materials
Electricity
0%
Primary
Energy
CO2
Emissions
Costs
Data comparison: automotive ind.
Energy consumption due to 1 million $ output of the automotive industry
Process-LCA: Schweimer et al., 2000
Process-LCA: Humbert et al., 2003
Process-LCA: ecoinvent 1.01, 2003
I/O-LCA 1997: Vehicles & car bodies, 2004
Env. reports: Median
Env. reports: Average
Env. reports: max (Ford 2000)
Env. reports: min (BMW 2002)
On-site and energy supply
Supply chain
Services (excluded in process LCA)
Use stage
Road infrastructure
Disposal
Env. reports: General Motors, 2002
0
Env. reports: PSA Peugeot Citroen, 2002
I/O-LCA 1997: 4 sectors, 2004
0
4000
8000
12000
16000
20000
24000
28000
32000
36000
40000
Non renewable primary energy [GJ /million $]
Hypothesis: 1.59 passenger/vehicle, 150000 km/vehicle, ~21’000 $/vehicle
Energy efficiency: USA / Average of industrial countries = 360/238 = 1.5
Covered by environmental reports
Supply chain
Use stage
Road infrastructure
Disposal
0
0
4000
8000
12000
16000
20000
24000
28000
32000
36000
40000
Use phase
Supply chain
Use stage
Road infrastructure
Disposal
0
0
4000
8000
12000
16000
20000
24000
28000
32000
36000
40000
3. Benchmarking for the use phase
Automotive industry
“Average emissions of a generic car
per company [gCO2/km]”
Technology Eff.
vs
Marketing Strategy
Required data: 1. CO2 emissions per vehicle
2. Composition of the car fleet of each
company
3. Sales per vehicle
Partial results: different rankings
gCO2/km
(class A, B, …)
Ranking based
on env. reports
DonnéesSam
CI
Ranking
and WRI
%
Etiqu. A&B
Energy-Label
FIAT
160
2
5
?
VW
176
1
2
6
TOYOTA
179
4
3
1
DC
209
3
4
5
BMW
212
5
1
8
Life cycle stage:
Use
Use
Production
Use
¾ The ranking based on the use phase: opposite to the ranking
established with data from environmental reports
¾ Evaluations with high quality expectations are time intensive
Conclusion
• Low reliability of current corporate environmental data
– Incomplete coverage
– No focus on key impacts & key phase
=> Monitoring of companies effort/compliance
=> Low comparability: No benchmarking
• Life-cycle data for Identification of key impacts & aggregation
– Multiple approaches are required
• Benchmarking: complement a qualitative approach
– Open questions:
• Relative vs absolute
• Sum of activities or average/optimal profile

Life Cycle - LCA Forum

Transcription

Documents pareils

FCI Group finals - VDH

changes in soil aggregation, soil water

DFID IED presentation 8th November