Environmental Product Declarations

An environmental product declaration (EPD) presents quantified

environmental data for products or systems based on information
from an LCA that was conducted using a standard approach defined
by ISO
• The format is governed by ISO 14025
• Environmental Labels and Declarations – Type III Environmental
Declarations – Principles and Procedures
• EPD is the equivalent of a nutrition label for products and
materials and is issued by independent third-party organizations
that ensure uniformity and transparency in the process.
• EPDs allow a comparison between products being used for the
same purpose.
• An EPD is not a certification, a green claim or a
promise – it simply shows product information in a
consistent way, certified to a public standard and
verified by a credible third party.
• An EPD is thus a document primarily based on the LCA
methodology and is developed by following a
“Product Category Rule.”
 “Product Category Rule.”
PCRs are a set of specific rules, requirements, and guidelines for
developing Type III EPDs for one or more product categories, or a
group of products that can fulfill an equivalent function, thus
enabling fair product comparisons

• PCRs make calculation rules as clear as possible so that impacts

are quantified consistently across multiple studies.
 Carbon and Water Foot printing
• Footprints are life cycle based, narrow scoped, and
environmental metrics focusing on an area of concern.
• They are widely used and easily applicable, as well as understood
by non environmental experts and easy to communicate.
• However, they have a narrow scope and limited
representativeness for a comprehensive set of environmental
indicators.
Carbon footprint represents the net emissions of CO2 and other
GHGs over the full life cycle of a product, process, service, or
organization The life cycle concept of carbon footprint means all
direct (on-site, internal) and indirect (off-site, external) emission
sources, sinks, and storage, within the specified spatial and
temporal system boundary need to be taken into account.
The GHG Protocol is the most commonly used international tool for business
leaders and governments to comprehend, quantify, and control GHG emissions.
The accounting framework looks at both direct (Scope 1) and indirect emissions
(Scopes 2 and 3), which are explained further below

Scope 1 – Direct GHG emissions – these occur from sources that are owned or
controlled by the company, for example, emissions from combustion in owned or
controlled boilers, furnaces, and vehicles, or emissions from chemical production in
owned or controlled process equipment.
• Scope 2 – Electricity and heat indirect GHG emissions – this account for GHG
emissions from the generation of purchased electricity and heat consumed by
the company. Purchased electricity is defined as electricity that is purchased or
otherwise brought into the organizational boundary of the company. Scope 2
emissions physically occur at the facility where the electricity is generated.
• Scope 3 – Other indirect GHG emissions – this is a reporting category that
allows for the treatment of all other indirect emissions. Scope 3 emissions are a
consequence of the activities of the company, but occur from sources not
owned or controlled by the company. Some examples of Scope 3 activities are
the extraction and production of purchased materials, the transportation of
purchased fuels, and the use of sold goods and services
At the product level, the widely used standards are
Publicly Available Specifications (PAS) 2050 (BSI, 2011),
GHG Protocol – Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard (WRI/WBCSD,
2011), and
ISO 14067 (ISO 14067, 2018).
In recent years, water use has become an area of increased interest in life cycle
inventories and assessments.
Water foot printing requires a different approach than carbon and it can be more
complicated to calculate.
Water is not an emission, but a resource, so we must consider both supply and
rationality.
The first step in calculating a water footprint is the inventory stage where we add
up the total volume of water used to produce a good in the supply chain. This
provides valuable insight on its own, as it is important to understand how much
water a product, process, or company consumes.
The next step is impact assessment. What does using this much water
mean? And what are the implications and impact of this? Water quality and
water availability are the main considerations that need to be taken into
account using impact assessment.
Water is unequally distributed, meaning that using water in one area might
be worse than using water in another area.
In addition, water scarcity is driven by competition – the more water you
use, the less there is left for others..
Opinions differ on how best to take these considerations into account. Therefore,
while there is basically one accepted method for calculating a carbon footprint,
there are several methods for calculating a water footprint. For guidance on how
to calculate a water footprint, ISO published ISO 14046: Water footprint:
Principles, requirements, and Guidelines in August 2014. This is an international
standard that defines the principles, requirements, and guidelines for conducting
an LCA-based water footprint for products, processes, or organizations
Energy systems embody a wide range of systems and technologies
and can be regarded as a supporting sector, that is, a sector that
feeds all other applications sectors, for example, transportation,
building sectors, and industrial sectors.
The application of LCA to energy systems is a vibrant research
pursuit that is likely to continue as the world seeks ways to meet
growing electricity demand with reduced environmental and
human health impact
categorized into two major groups (1) electricity and heat
production systems and (2) fuels for transportation.
LCA studies on electricity and heat systems can roughly be divided into three
main categories:

(i) Studies assessing a specific energy technology/source/system at a power

plant level or sub-power plant level (e.g., specific component of the system).
The goals typically include eco-design opportunities, reporting/documentation
of environmental performances of a newly developed technology, and
benchmarking. There is now a good amount of research reporting the life cycle
environmental and economic aspects of specific renewable energy technologies
ii) Studies providing accurate and transparent LCA data for electricity
supply in a region, thereby increasing the robustness of LCA results for a
multitude of products producing or consuming electricity throughout
the life cycle.
iii) “Whole systems” appraisal of national energy sectors and transition
pathways with goals oriented toward policy making. For example these
studies look at energy scenarios and penetration of renewables into
electricity grid mixes or assesses changes in impacts due to policy
initiatives such as increased public transport and increased CHP
production.
 Buildings and the Built Environment
LCA is used in the evaluation of the environmental impacts of building
materials, building products, whole buildings, and the built environment.
The built environment is understood as a collection of autonomous
buildings along with the infrastructure and human activity between those
buildings (e.g., mobility, leisure, etc.).
There are four main applications of LCA in the building industry:
(1) evaluating manufacturing processes;
(2) developing environmental product declarations and product labels;
(3) comparing materials and methods; and
(4) analyzing whole buildings.
 Drinking Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment
1. To identify hotspots in water supply: Several studies have shown that water
production has the highest contribution to the impacts of the entire water
supply system and desalination in particular. However, in some cases, the
distribution subsystem can have the highest impacts due to pumping electricity
consumption.
2. LCA of water reuse: LCA has been used to show the reduced environmental
burden from water systems turning toward water reuse instead of expanding
surface water treatment or turning to desalination.
3. LCA as a tool in water supply management: LCA is also used in cases where there
is a lack of water and the need for strategic choices in the planning of future
water supplies
 Solid Waste Management
Following the waste hierarchy will generally lead to the most resource efficient and
environmentally sound choice. However, in some cases, refining decisions within the
hierarchy or departing from it can lead to better environmental outcomes.
• Waste management is an area where local conditions often influence the choice of
policy options.
• LCA can be used to decide on policy options in a specific local or regional situation
such as whether it is better to recycle waste or to recover energy from it or are the
GHG emissions created when collecting waste justified by the expected benefits.
• LCA has been used to determine the impact of municipal solid waste management
under different scenarios such as landfilling with and without biogas collection,
incineration, composting, anaerobic digestion, recycling, and different
combinations of recycling, landfill, composting, anaerobic digestion, and
incineration.
 Chemical and Chemical Production

LCA has been applied to evaluate the environmental performance of chemicals as well as
of products and processes where chemicals play a key role.
The life cycle stages of chemical products are differentiated into extraction of abiotic and
biotic raw materials, chemical synthesis and processing, material processing, product
manufacturing, professional or consumer product use, and finally end-of-life.
A large number of LCA studies focus on contrasting different feedstock's or chemical
synthesis processes, thereby often conducting a cradle to (factory) gate assessment.
In many studies, LCA is discussed in relation to other chemicals’ management frameworks
and concepts including risk assessment, green and sustainable chemistry, and chemical
alternatives assessment
Automotive Industry
Reducing consumption of energy and material resources is crucial for achieving
sustainability.
The automotive industry is considered one of the most strategic contributors to reach
this objective.
On the one hand, the automotive sector plays an important role for the economic
stability and social welfare of several countries; on the other hand, with its huge supply
chain, it is often a cause of negative environmental as well as social impacts.
The environmental impacts of vehicles and their components show more significant
contributions during the use-phase compared to the manufacturing.
Automotive manufacturers are investing more and more resources in
vehicles light-weighting, which brings important environmental
advantages in terms of fuel consumptions and emissions reductions
during the use-phase of cars.
However, the environmental effects of light materials involve not only
the use-phase, but also production and end-of-life treatment, so that a
correct evaluation of environmental advantages – in terms of fuel
consumptions and emissions reductions – must be extended to the
whole life cycle of the vehicle
Food and Agriculture Food production systems and consumption patterns are
among the leading drivers of impacts on the environment and LCA has been used
extensively to assess and improve food-related supply chains as much as possible.
The life cycle of a food product is split into six stages:
production and transportation of inputs to the farm,
cultivation,
processing,
distribution,
consumption, and
waste management.
A large number of LCA studies focus on the two first stages in cradle-to-farm gate
studies, as they are the stages where most impacts typically occur, due to animal
husbandry and manure handling, production and use of fertilizers and the
consumption of fuel to operate farm machinery. In the processing step, the raw
agricultural product leaving the farm gate is converted to a food item that can be
consumed by the user. Distribution includes transportation of the food product
before and after processing. In the consumption stage, environmental impacts
arise due to storage, preparation, and waste of the food. In the waste
management stage, food waste can be handled using a number of technologies,
such as landfilling, incineration, composting, or digestion. LCA is an excellent tool
for generating the evidence to help the selection of interventions toward more
sustainable agri-food.
 What Is Environmental Economics?
To produce the goods and services that humans want, resources
such as land, labor, and raw materials are necessary. However, these
resources exist in limited supply and scarcity arises when the
demand exceeds supply. At any point in time, there is only a finite
amount of resources available.

• Economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources, of

how markets function, and of how incentives can affect the
behavior of people, businesses, and institutions.
• It had been the practice in the past to consider the resources
and services provided by the environment to be limitless,
having no cost, and not scarce
1. However, this is not the case. Environmental economics deals
specifically with the application of the principles of economics to
the study of how environmental and natural resources are
developed and managed.
2. It focuses on the incentives rational humans have when deciding to
use our natural environment’s scarce resources.
Although economics is often blamed for many of the problems we are
currently facing, it helps us to explain the perverse incentives present in
society that increase unsustainable behavior and can help us change these
incentives that support the desired, more sustainable behavior. In 2002,
for example, Ireland introduced a tax on the consumer for plastic bags. The
results were significant: one year after the introduction of the fee, the
consumption of plastic bags decreased by more than 90% ( Convery et al.,
2007). By putting a tax on plastic bags, the Irish government created
economic incentives for environmentally friendly behavior
It must be noted that in environmental economics we
distinguish between two types of costs:
private costs and social costs,
Valuing the Environment
➢ Assessing the economic value of the environment is a major topic in
environmental economics and it raises technical questions reflecting the nature
of environmental goods.
➢ Because environmental goods are typically not priced, estimates of the value of
environmental changes – improvements or degradation – must be measured by
some sort of indirect means.
➢ Some of the benefits cannot readily be quantified at all, let alone in monetary
terms. Furthermore, there are different conceptual types of “value”, all of which
should be taken into account. Figure 5.2 gives the components of total economic
value. The first component is use value in use of environmental goods, such as
the value in use of water for irrigation, or the value of wetlands in providing
natural filtration and treatment of water. Use value refers to attributes of the
environment that provide some service now. In addition, there is the
 The following methodologies are used to estimate the economic
value associated with ecosystems

• market price method: This method estimates economic values for ecosystem
products or services that are bought and sold in commercial markets. For
example, a cultural site could be valued based on the entrance fees collected.
• Productivity method: This method estimates economic values for ecosystem
products or services that contribute to the production of commercially marketed
goods. For example, the benefits of different levels of water quality improvement
would be compared to the costs of reductions in polluting runoff.
• Hedonic pricing method: This method estimates economic values for ecosystem or
environmental services that directly affect market prices of some other good. Most
commonly applied to variations in housing prices that reflect the value of local
environmental attributes.
• Travel cost method: This method estimates economic values associated with
ecosystems or sites that are used for recreation. Assumes that the value of a site is
reflected in how much people are willing to pay to travel to visit the site. For
example, adding up the costs people would expend to travel and recreate at a
particular area.
• Damage cost avoided, replacement cost, and substitute cost Method: This method estimates
economic values based on costs of avoided damages resulting from lost ecosystem services,
costs of replacing ecosystem services, or costs of providing substitute services, for example,
the costs avoided by providing flood protection
• Contingent valuation method: This method estimates economic values for virtually any
ecosystem or environmental service. It is the most widely used method for estimating non-
use, or “passive use” values. It asks people to directly state their willingness to pay for
specific environmental services, based on a hypothetical scenario. For example, people
would state how much they would pay to protect a particular area.
• Contingent choice method: This method estimates economic values for virtually
any ecosystem or environmental service. It is based on asking people to make
trade-offs among sets of ecosystem or environmental services or characteristics.
It does not directly ask for willingness to pay – this is inferred from trade-offs
that include cost as an attribute. For example, a person would state their
preference between various locations for siting a landfill.
• Benefit transfer method: This method estimates economic values by
transferring existing benefit estimates from studies already completed for
another location or issue. For example, an estimate of the benefit obtained by
tourists viewing wildlife in one park might be used to estimate the benefit
obtained from viewing wildlife in a different park.
Market-based Incentives (or Economic Instruments) for Sustainability
The importance of the internalization of external costs in sustainable
development and the critical role of economic instruments in bringing it
about was duly recognized by the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, June 1992. Principle 16
of the Rio Declaration states:
National authorities should endeavor to promote
the internalization of environmental costs and the
use of economic instruments, taking into account
the approach that the polluter should, in principle,
bear the cost of pollution with due regard to public
interest and without distorting international trade
and investment
1.Taxes or Charges
2.Marketable or Tradable Permits
3.Deposit–Refund systems
4.Subsidies
5.Financial enforcement incentives
 Command-and-Control versus Economic Instruments
Environmental regulations in most countries have traditionally relied
on command-and-control policies where standards or limits are set by
governments and which are applied uniformly to a broad category of
sources.
We distinguish between the following three types of command-and-control
mechanisms:
1. ambient,
2. emissions,
3. technology standards.
An ambient standard sets the amount of a pollutant that can be present within a
specific environment.
Emission standards seek to limit the amount of emissions released by a firm,
industry, or area.
Finally, a technology-based standard can be implemented, which will force
polluters to use a particular pollution control technology that they deem
reasonably cost-effective, such as installing scrubbers on smokestacks.
The main advantage of the command-and-control approach is that the
1. final outcome is defined.
2. Compliance monitoring is simple since regulators only have to make sure that the
standard has been met or else the polluters pay a fine.
There are three main drawbacks of command-and-control mechanisms.
• First, it can be very costly for regulators to gather all the necessary information about
polluters.
• Second, polluters have very little choice about how to meet the standard and there is no
incentive for innovation to further reduce emissions. However, in the case of emission
standards, sources are often able to decide how they can best meet the standard.
• Finally, since command-and-control mechanisms are uniformly applied across broad
categories of sources, it is unlikely that it can be the most cost-effective way to decrease
Limitation
➢ Regulations, especially in developing countries, are generally based on
command-and-control instrument which are often not effective due to the fact
that monitoring and enforcement are inadequate.
➢ Even if monitoring may be technically feasible, this is impeded by economic
and cultural factors, such as limited budget, manpower and administrative
constraints, centralization, and, of course, corruption.
➢ The potential to reduce costs by applying economic instruments instead of
regulations is an important consideration for polluters due to the fact that
there is more flexibility for selection of optimal levels of pollution.
➢ Economic instruments provide continuing motivation to reduce pollution
below the levels set by regulations.
➢ They also encourage new pollution control technology, production
processes, and new nonpolluting products by providing incentives for
research and development.
➢ While command-and-control regulation is still common, more and more
legislation is beginning to use market mechanisms, or a combination of
command-and-control along with market mechanisms
A Simple Model of Pollution Control Abatement costs are costs incurred to reduce
pollution to a lower level so that there are fewer damages. They include labor, capital,
energy needed to lessen emissions as well as opportunity costs from reducing levels
of production or consumption. Marginal abatement costs are the additional cost
caused by an additional unit of abatement. For example, if total abatement costs
increase from $10,000 to $20,000 when abatement increases from 5 tones per week
to 10 tones per week, the marginal abatement cost is $2,000 per ton. The marginal
abatement cost function represents the costs of reducing pol