CICLOG publishes in the Int. Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
All activities performed by a person require an amount of energy expenditure (E.E.) on the part of the human body, but few life cycle assessment (LCA) studies discuss this issue. The analysis of this variable can provide valuable information for consumers to achieve more sustainable lifestyles, including the adoption of mobility habits with lower environmental impacts.
The article published in Int J of Life Cycle Assessment aimed to verify the sensitivity of the environmental impacts of lifestyles with mobility to the inclusion of E.E. human in LCA.
For that purpose, a Consumption LCA was carried out considering as a functional unit the mobility of a person to four destinations using a transport alternative for each location during a period of 1 year. The mobility alternatives considered were walking, cycling, car (private and shared), bus and plane trips. A baseline scenario evaluated seven midpoint and three endpoint indicators, while the E.E. human was simulated using a two-level sensitivity variable, evaluated based on a sampled set of mobility lifestyles.
Among the results obtained with the study, it was found that some mobility lifestyles were more sensitive to E.E. human, especially when transport modes had low input and output inventory parameters. The inclusion of E.E. increased impacts by approximately 4-33% on climate change, 6-62% on particulate matter formation, and 1-42% on human toxicity, depending on the mobility lifestyle. "Ecosystems" proved to be the most sensitive damage category. The phases and processes of the agricultural life cycle were the main contributors to the lower performance of environmental indicators. Furthermore, a vegetarian meal as an energy income substitute had lower sensitivity and environmental impacts compared to a regular meal. Although walking and cycling were the most sensitive transport habits, both alternatives had the lowest environmental impacts in absolute values.
The study concluded that the proxy variables had a significant influence mainly on the environmental profile of mobility activities with greater demand for body energy, although lifestyles that give priority to cycling or walking habits continue to have less impact than mobility habits based on motor vehicles. The impact categories most influenced by E.E. additional growth had a greater contribution from the phases of the agricultural life cycle. The study also highlighted the importance of defining sensitivity parameters under multiple factors and levels to observe possible outcomes for the same product system.
CICLOG continues to expand the boundaries of LCA knowledge.
Congratulations to Júlia, Roni and especially Prof. Sebastião Soares for this great research!
More information? Access: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-02015-8
►
By Eula Jurca, with contribution of Roni M. Severis
Florianópolis, 11/01/2022.
