You are on page 1of 42

A Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Method
Part 2: Normalisation

November 2010

Authors:
Jonas Bengtsson and Nigel Howard

Acknowledgements
The project team wishes to thank and acknowledge the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and
Research and the Industry Cooperative Innovation Programme for their funding support for this pivotal project
for Australian construction materials and products. The team also wish to thank and acknowledge the Building
Product Innovation Council (BPIC), contributing members, and their member companies. We appreciate their
foresight and leadership in coming together to both fund and embark on this difficult and pioneering path to
establishing a comprehensive, level playing field approach to underpin a robust and authoritative
environmental assessment of building design and material/product specification. The project team also wishes
to thank and acknowledge their colleagues and volunteers engaged in all sectors of AusLCI and ALCAS
promoting the use of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in Australia and, in particular, the members of the Impact
Assessment Working Group and Jeff Foley of GHD for his review and insightful suggestions.

“This report was produced in cooperation with the Australian Life Cycle Assessment Society (ALCAS), but
should not be taken as representing the views of ALCAS and its members.”

2
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

List of Acronyms

AEGIS Australian Greenhouse Emissions Information System

ADF Abiotic Depletion Factor

AP Acidification Potential

AusLCI Australian Life Cycle Inventory

BPIC Building Products Innovation Council

CFC Chlorofluorocarbon

DALY Disability Adjusted Life Years

DCC Department of Climate Change (Australia)

FAETP Freshwater Aquatic Eco-toxicity Potential

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GWP Global Warming Potential

HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbon

HTP Human Toxicity Potential

ICIP Industry Cooperative Innovation Programme

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

LCA Life Cycle Assessment

LCI Life Cycle Inventory

LCIA Life Cycle Impact Assessment

NP Nutrification Potential

NPI National Pollution Inventory

ODS Ozone Depleting Substance

PAF Potentially Affected Fraction

PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

POCP Photo-chemical Ozone Creation Potential

SGG Synthetic Greenhouse Gases

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

WMO World Meteorological Organisation

3
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

Contents
1.  INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 8 
2.  BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................. 8 
2.1  CATEGORISATION AND CHARACTERISATION .................................................................................................... 8 
2.2  NORMALISATION .................................................................................................................................... 11 
3.  OBJECTIVE ...................................................................................................................................... 12 
4.  APPROACH/METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 12 
5.  RESULTS .......................................................................................................................................... 13 
5.1  REVIEW OF DATA SOURCES....................................................................................................................... 13 
5.1.1  National Pollution Inventory ...................................................................................................... 13 
5.1.2  Pesticides ................................................................................................................................... 15 
5.1.3  Australia greenhouse emissions information system .................................................................. 16 
5.1.4  Australian Ozone Depleting Substances ..................................................................................... 16 
5.1.5  Australian energy and mineral Production statistics .................................................................. 17 
5.2  CALCULATED RESULTS ............................................................................................................................. 17 
5.2.1  Abiotic Depletion (Minerals and Fuels) ....................................................................................... 17 
5.2.2  Global Warming (GWP100) ........................................................................................................ 19 
5.2.3  Ozone Layer Depletion ............................................................................................................... 19 
5.2.4  Human Toxicity .......................................................................................................................... 20 
5.2.5  Freshwater Aquatic Toxicity ....................................................................................................... 22 
5.2.6  Marine Aquatic Toxicity ............................................................................................................. 24 
5.2.7  Terrestrial Eco‐toxicity ............................................................................................................... 25 
5.2.8  Photo‐chemical smog ................................................................................................................. 26 
5.2.9  Acidification ............................................................................................................................... 27 
5.2.10  Eutrophication ....................................................................................................................... 27 
5.2.11  Respiratory effects ................................................................................................................. 28 
5.2.12  Water consumption ............................................................................................................... 29 
5.2.13  Land transformation and use ................................................................................................. 29 
5.2.14  IoniSing radiation ................................................................................................................... 29 
5.3  COMPARISON OF FACTORS WITH OTHER SOURCES ........................................................................................ 29 
6.  IMPORTANT MISSING EMISSION DATA ........................................................................................... 32 
7.  CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................. 33 
8.  RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................... 33 
9.  REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 34 
APPENDIX A: EMISSIONS AND RESOURCE PRODUCTION DATA ................................................................... 36 

Figures

FIGURE 1: SCHEMATIC OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDED LCIA MIDPOINT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CATEGORIES. 
NOTE: SOME IMPACT CATEGORIES AGGREGATE SEVERAL SUB‐CATEGORIES, E.G. THE ABIOTIC 
RESOURCE DEPLETION CATEGORY INCLUDES MINERAL AND FOSSIL FUEL DEPLETION, AND THE IMPACT 
CATEGORY ECO‐TOXICITY INCLUDES FRESHWATER, MARINE AND TERRESTRIAL TOXICITY. ................... 9 

4
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Tables
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF CALCULATED AND PER CAPITA NORMALISATION FACTORS USING THE INTERMEDIATE BPIC/ICIP PROJECT’S 
LCIA METHOD ................................................................................................................................................. 7 
TABLE 2: EMITTED SUBSTANCES REPORTED IN THE NATIONAL POLLUTION INVENTORY 2007/08 AND THE CORRESPONDING EMISSIONS 
IN THE SIMAPRO V7.1.8 SOFTWARE PER MEDIUM ................................................................................................. 15 

TABLE 3: ABIOTIC DEPLETION IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS .............................................................. 17 
TABLE 4: GLOBAL WARMING IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS .............................................................. 19 
TABLE 5: OZONE LAYER DEPLETION IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS ...................................................... 19 
TABLE 6: HUMAN TOXICITY IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS ................................................................ 20 
TABLE 7: FRESHWATER AQUATIC TOXICITY IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS ............................................. 22 
TABLE 8: MARINE AQUATIC TOXICITY IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS .................................................... 24 
TABLE 9: TERRESTRIAL ECOTOXICITY IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS ..................................................... 25 
TABLE 10: PHOTO‐CHEMICAL SMOG IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS ..................................................... 26 
TABLE 11: ACIDIFICATION IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS .................................................................. 27 
TABLE 12: EUTROPHICATION IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS .............................................................. 28 
TABLE 13: RESPIRATORY EFFECTS IMPACT CATEGORY NORMALISATION CONTRIBUTIONS ......................................................... 28 
TABLE 14: SUMMARY OF CALCULATED AND PER CAPITA NORMALISATION FACTORS USING THE INTERMEDIATE BPIC/ICIP METHOD . 29 
TABLE 15: NORMALISATION FACTORS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES COMPARED TO THE CALCULATED BPIC ICIP PROJECT’S LCIA FACTORS
 .................................................................................................................................................................. 30 
TABLE 16: PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCE IN NORMALISATION FACTORS COMPARED TO THE CALCULATED BPIC ICIP PROJECT’S LCIA 
FACTORS ................................................................................................................................................ 31 

TABLE 17: RESOURCES PRODUCTION DATA ENTERED INTO SIMAPRO ................................................................................. 36 
TABLE 18: AIR EMISSION DATA ENTERED INTO SIMAPRO. NO SUB‐COMPARTMENT WAS SPECIFIED (I.E. UNSPECIFIED) .................. 38 
TABLE 19: WATER EMISSION DATA ENTERED INTO SIMAPRO (NO SUB‐COMPARTMENT WAS SPECIFIED I.E. UNSPECIFIED) .............. 39 
TABLE 20: EMISSIONS TO SOIL DATA ENTERED INTO SIMAPRO ......................................................................................... 41 

5
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

Summary
This report was produced as one of the components of a three-year project jointly
funded by the Building Products Innovation Council (BPIC) and AusIndustry (referred to
as the BPIC/ICIP project). The project has established a toolkit of resources that will
permit comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of building and construction
materials and products, building elements and assemblies, and whole buildings in
Australia.
The objective of this report is to estimate and benchmark normalisation factors using the
characterisation factors identified for the BPIC/ICIP project (see Bengtsson and Howard
(2010) for more details).
The approach taken comprised the following major steps:
 Review data from:
o National Pollutant Inventory (2007/08 data)
o Australian Greenhouse Emissions Information System (2008 data) (DCC,
2009b)
o Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian
Mineral Statistics 2009 – December Quarter 2008 (ABARE, 2009)
o Pesticide Use in Australia (AACTE (2002) as reported in Lundie et al
(2007))
o ODS and SGGs in Australia – A Study of End Uses, Emissions and
Opportunities for Reclamation (DEWHA, 2008b).
 Calculate normalisation factors using the BPIC/ICIP project’s Life Cycle Impact
Assessment (LCIA) methodology using the SimaPro software v7.1.8.
 Compare the factors with the following normalisation factor sources:
o Foley and Lant (2009)
o Australian Impact Method as included in the SimaPro software
o CML 2001 for the World in Year 2000 as reported in Wegener Sleeswijk et
al (2008)
o ReCiPe (Goedkoop et al, 2009).
The table below summarises the recommended normalisation factors for use with the
BPIC/ICIP project’s LCIA method:

Impact Category Unit Australian Annual Australian Per


[Calculated] Capita
Abiotic depletion kg Sb eq 6.50E+09 300
Global warming kg CO2 eq. 6.21E+11 28,690
Ozone layer depletion kg CFC-11 eq 4.17E+04 0.002
Human toxicity kg 1,4-DB eq 6.96E+10 3,216
Freshwater aquatic eco- kg 1,4-DB eq
toxicity 3.71E+09 172
Marine aquatic eco- kg 1,4-DB eq
toxicity 2.62E+14 12,117,106
Terrestrial eco-toxicity kg 1,4-DB eq 1.90E+09 88
Photo-chemical oxidation kg NMVOC eq 1.61E+09 75
Acidification kg SO2 eq 2.67E+09 123
Eutrophication kg PO4 eq 4.16E+08 19
Respiratory inorganics PM2.5 eq 9.82E+08 45
Water consumption kl H2O - 930
Land transformation and Ha a - 26

6
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Impact Category Unit Australian Annual Australian Per
[Calculated] Capita
Ionising radiation kg U235 eq - 1,306

Table 1: Summary of calculated and per capita normalisation factors using the intermediate
BPIC/ICIP project’s LCIA method

The following factors are identified as sources of uncertainty:


 lack of characterisation factors and assessment methods for a large number of
emissions and impacts (e.g. eutrophication, land transformation and use, water
depletion and ionising radiation)
 large discrepancies with other published factors, notably in the marine aquatic
toxicity impact category
 some differences in factors cannot currently be compared to other assessment
methods
 not able to leverage of the most recent work by Lundie et al (2007) as the
presented characterisation factors are only available expressed at endpoint level
– in Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY) and Potentially Affected Fraction (PAF).

The following items are identified as topics for further research:


 Confirm the suitability of using fluoride (Cas No: 016984-48-8) as opposed to
hydrogen fluoride (Cas No: 7664-39-3) to characterise fluoride compound
emissions from coal based electricity generation and aluminium smelting.
 Update the background data for:
o eutrophication
o ecological diversity
o water depletion
o ionising radiation
when suitable Australian assessment methods have been developed (see
Bengtsson and Howard (2010) for more details).

7
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

1. Introduction
This methodology is part of a set of documents and resources developed for the
BPIC/ICIP Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) project as follows:
1. Level Playing Field Methodology Guidelines for the Construction Materials and
Building Products Life Cycle Inventory Database (BPIC/LCI Methodology Guidelines).
2. Protocol for the Correct Use of Australian Life Cycle Inventory Data for Construction
Materials and Products (Protocol for Correct Use of BPIC LCI Data in Life Cycle
Assessments).
3. Life Cycle Environmental Impact Assessment for the Correct Use of Australian Life
Cycle Inventory Data for Construction Materials and Products.
4. Weighting of Environmental Impact Categories for Assessing Construction Materials
and Products.
5. Database of generic average lifecycle data for Australian building and construction
materials and products.
6. BPIC Building Product Maintenance and Replacement Life Database
7. A web based portal providing access to all of the resources above.
This report describes the approach taken, results achieved (possible limitations) and
potential applications of the normalisation step of impact assessment under item 4 – the
recommended impact assessment methodology. This comprises the estimation of factors
to be used with the midpoint LCIA method founded on international and Australian best
practices, and with strong resemblance to leading internationally methods (i.e. CML,
IMPACT 2002+ and ReCiPe) developed in a parallel report (Bengtsson and Howard,
2010). It is recommended for use in Australia in all sectors and in the construction sector
specifically.

2. Background
2.1 Categorisation and Characterisation

The aim of the BPIC/ICIP project is to provide a nationally consistent level playing field
LCA methodology for the building and construction sector, which allows for comparison
of products and services across Australia.
It is proposed to use the 14 midpoint categories (possibly to be extended with soil
salinisation) as per the figure below:

8
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

Figure 1: Schematic overview of recommended LCIA midpoint environmental impact categories. Note: Some
impact categories aggregate several sub-categories e.g. the abiotic resource depletion category includes
mineral and fossil fuel depletion, and the impact category eco-toxicity includes freshwater, marine and
terrestrial toxicity.

The following assessment methods have been nominated as best currently available for
the BPIC/ICIP project’s LCIA method. For further details see Part 1 report: Classification
and Categorisation (Bengtsson and Howard, 2010).

 Global warming: The characterisation model adopts the Intergovernmental Panel


on Climate Change (IPCC) approach to estimating Global Warming Potential
(GWP) factors. These provide the basis for calculating emissions under Kyoto
accounting provisions and quoted in DCC (2009a). Factors are expressed for the
time horizon 100 years (GWP100), in kg CO2 equivalence in alignment with DCC
(2009a).
 Abiotic resource depletion: This impact category indicator estimates the depletion
of minerals and fossil fuels. The Abiotic Depletion Factor (ADF) is determined for
each extraction of minerals and fossil fuels (kg antimony equivalents/kg
extraction) basis. This version is based on the CML spreadsheet version 2.02,
dated September 2001.
 Land transformation and use: The Australian Impact Method supplied with the
SimaPro software v7.1.8 is used to characterise land transformation and use
impacts.

9
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

 Water depletion: The Australian Impact Method with normalisation includes CED
supplied with the SimaPro software v7.1.8, and is used to characterise water
extraction in kL of water consumed.
 Eutrophication: Nutrification Potential (NP) is based on the stoichiometric
procedure of Heijungs (1992), and expressed as kg PO4 equivalents/kg emission.
This version is based on the CML spreadsheet version 2.02, dated September
2001.
 Acidification: Acidification Potentials (AP) are expressed as kg SO2 equivalents/kg
emission. This version is based on the ReCiPe World (H) version 1.02 (Pré, 2008).
 Freshwater aquatic eco-toxicity: The Freshwater Aquatic Eco-toxicity Potentials
(FAETP) are calculated with USES-LCA, describing fate, exposure and effects of
toxic substances on nature. Characterisation factors are expressed as 1,4-
dichlorobenzene equivalents/kg emission. This version is based on the CML
spreadsheet version 2.02, dated September 2001. Toxicity values have been
recalculated for Australia using the USES model published in Huijbregts and
Lundie (2002).
 Marine aquatic eco-toxicity: Marine aquatic eco-toxicity factors estimate the
impacts of toxic substances on marine ecosystems (see description freshwater
toxicity above). This version is based on the CML spreadsheet version 2.02, dated
September 2001. Toxicity values have been recalculated for Australia using the
USES model published in Huijbregts and Lundie (2002).
 Terrestrial eco-toxicity: Terrestrial eco-toxicity factors estimate the impacts of
toxic substances on terrestrial ecosystems (see description freshwater toxicity
above). This version is based on the CML spreadsheet version 2.02, dated
September 2001. Toxicity values have been recalculated for Australia using the
USES model published in Huijbregts and Lundie (2002).
 Photo-chemical smog (photo-oxidant formation): Photo-chemical Ozone Creation
Potential (POCP) factors provide a proxy measure for the human respiratory
health impacts of tropospheric ozone (also known as photo-chemical or summer
smog). The POCP estimate for emission of substances to air is based on the
ReCiPe World (H) version 1.02 (Pré, 2008), expressed as kg non-methane Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOCs) equivalence (kg NMVOC eq).
 Ozone depletion: This characterisation model is developed by the World
Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and defines ozone depletion potential of
different gasses (kg CFC-11 equivalent/kg emission). These provide the basis for
calculating ozone depleting emissions under the Montreal Protocol. This version is
based on the CML spreadsheet version 2.02, dated September 2001.
 Ionising radiation: The assessment method and normalisation factors for ionising
radiation are adapted from the ReCiPe World midpoint1 (H) LCIA method (Pré,
2008), measured in kg of 235U equivalent.
 Human toxicity: These characterisation factors, expressed as Human Toxicity
Potentials (HTP), are calculated with USES-LCA, describing fate, exposure and
effects of toxic substances for an infinite time horizon. For each toxic substance,
HTPs are expressed as 1,4-dichlorobenze equivalents. This version is based on
the CML spreadsheet version 2.02, dated September 2001. Toxicity values have
been recalculated for Australia using the USES model and published in Huijbregts
and Lundie (2002).
 Respiratory effects: Based on the European IMPACT 2002+ method. The
supporting documents for IMPACT 2002+ (e.g. Jolliet et al, 2003).

1
The world normalisation factor is preferred as it likely more relevant to Australia than the European factor,
which almost five times higher. This is presumably due to the significant nuclear power production in Europe.

10
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

2.2 Normalisation

ISO 14044:2006 describes normalisation as the calculation of the


magnitude of category indicator results relative to some reference
information. The aim of the normalisation is to understand better the
relative magnitude for each indicator result of the product system
under study. A further major advantage of normalisation is to render all
impact categories dimensionless and therefore suitable for
dimensionless weighting. It is an optional element under the ISO
standard that may be helpful in providing and communicating
information on the relative significance of the indicator results. It may
also be useful in preparing for additional procedures, such as grouping,
weighting or life cycle interpretation.

Normalisation transforms an indicator result by dividing it by a selected


reference value. ISO 14044:2006 provides the following examples of
reference values:
 total inputs and outputs for a given area that may be global,
regional, national or local
 total inputs and outputs for a given area per capita basis or
similar measurement
 inputs and outputs in a baseline scenario, such as a given
alternative product system.
The ISO standard further states that the reference system should
consider the consistency of the spatial and temporal scales of the
environmental mechanism and reference value.

Given the aim to develop a national “level playing field” LCA methodology, the
normalisation for the BPIC/ICIP project’s LCIA methodology will be based on annual
Australian per capita averages for the respective midpoint environmental impact
categories. This is in line with most international LCIA methods where normalisation
occurs at national, larger scales such as Western Europe or globally.

Taking a national average approach to normalisation requires some compromises with


regards to what would otherwise constitute more appropriate normalisation reference
systems. For example:

 Emissions of pollutants (such as greenhouse gases (GHGs) and Ozone Depleting


Substances (ODSs) affect the global environment. By normalising product
systems’ impacts with national averages in a high GHG emitting country, the
apparent impact is reduced by several orders of magnitude compared to a global
normalisation. Australia’s per capita GHG emissions are over five times higher
than the global average, and therefore the relative magnitude of global warming
impacts varies significantly depending on the choice of reference emissions. For

11
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
comparative purposes within Australia, this may be an acceptable compromise (in
common with typical practice internationally).

 Depletion of water reservoirs is often regionally and seasonally defined. For


example, there is arguably a difference in freshwater extraction and consumption
during summer months in large parts of South Australia, compared to the tropical
north of Australia. Normalisation of water depletion (in, for instance, Adelaide and
Darwin respectively against the national average depletion) would provide a very
crude and inaccurate proportion compared to the relative impact on the region.

 Foley and Lant (2009) of the University of Queensland recommend regionally


specific environmental assessments because of Australia’s unique concentration
of urban populations.

Equally, when assessing impacts or abiotic resource depletion, national normalisation


could be more naturally appropriate in scale and scope.

Recommendations for suitable weighting factors are reported in the associated report
Weighting of Environmental Impacts in Australia (Howard et al, 2010).

3. Objective
To develop, analyse and benchmark normalisation factors based on best available
characterisation factors identified for the BPIC/ICIP project.

4. Approach/Methodology
 Review data from:

o National Pollutant Inventory (2007/08 data)


o Australian Greenhouse Emissions Information System (2008 data) (DCC,
2009b)
o Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian
Mineral Statistics 2009 – December Quarter 2008 (ABARE, 2009)
o Pesticide Use in Australia (AACTE (2002) as reported in Lundie et al
(2007))
o ODS and SGGs in Australia – A Study of End Uses, Emissions and
Opportunities for Reclamation (DEWHA, 2008b).

 Calculate normalisation factors using the BPIC/ICIP project’s LCIA methodology


using the SimaPro software v7.1.8.

 Compare the factors with the following normalisation factor sources:

o Foley and Lant (2009)


o Australian Impact Method as included in the SimaPro software
o CML 2001 for the World in Year 2000 as reported in Wegener Sleeswijk et
al (2008)
o ReCiPe (Goedkoop et al, 2008).

12
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

5. Results
5.1 Review of Data Sources

5.1.1 NATIONAL POLLUTION INVENTORY


The National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) is a cooperative reporting programme
implemented by the Australian State and Territory governments. Its aim is to provide
information about substance emissions in Australia, from both point sources (i.e. specific
facilities) as well as diffuse sources (e.g. agriculture, cigarettes, motor vehicles, dust
etc). The NPI reports emission estimates for 93 toxic substances, together with the
source and location of these emissions (Foley and Lant, 2009). The table below shows
emitted substances reported in the National Pollution Inventory 2007/08 and the
corresponding emissions in the SimaPro v7.1.8 software per medium. Cells highlighted in
red indicate that no characterisation factors are available in the defined BPIC/ICIP
project’s LCIA methodology. Cells highlighted in orange indicate that no match was
found for the substance emission in SimaPro.

NPI Substance SimaPro Air SimaPro Water SimaPro Soil


Emission Emission Emission
Acetaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acetaldehyde Acetaldehyde
Acetic acid (ethanoic acid) Acetic acid Acetic acid
Acetone Acetone
Acetonitrile Acetonitrile
Acrolein Acrolein
Acrylamide Acrylamide Acrylamide
Acrylic acid Acrylic acid Acrylic acid
Acrylonitrile (2-propenenitrile) Acrylonitrile Acrylonitrile
Ammonia (total) Ammonia Ammonia Ammonia
Aniline (benzenamine) Aniline
Antimony & compounds Antimony Antimony Antimony
Arsenic & compounds Arsenic Arsenic, ion Arsenic
Benzene Benzene Benzene Benzene
Benzene hexachloro - (HCB) – – –
[No emissions reported]
Beryllium & compounds Beryllium Beryllium Beryllium
Biphenyl (1,1-biphenyl) Biphenyl Biphenyl
Boron & compounds Boron Boron Boron
1,3-Butadiene (vinyl ethylene) Butadiene
Cadmium & compounds Cadmium Cadmium, ion Cadmium
Carbon disulfide Carbon disulfide Carbon disulfide Carbon disulfide
Carbon monoxide Carbon monoxide
Chlorine & compounds Chlorine Chlorine Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide Chlorine dioxide Chloroform
Chloroethane (ethyl chloride) Ethane, chloro- Ethane, chloro-
Chloroform (trichloromethane) Chloroform Chloroform

Chlorophenols (di, tri, tetra) Phenol, 2-chloro- Phenol, 2-chloro- Phenol, 2-chloro-
Chromium (III) compounds Chromium, ion Chromium, ion Chromium (III)
compounds
Chromium (VI) compounds Chromium VI Chromium VI
Cobalt & compounds Cobalt Cobalt Cobalt
Copper & compounds Copper Copper, ion Copper
Cumene (1-methylethylbenzene) Cumene Cumene Cumene

13
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
NPI Substance SimaPro Air SimaPro Water SimaPro Soil
Emission Emission Emission
Cyanide (inorganic) compounds Cyanide Cyanide Hydrogen cyanide
Cyclohexane Cyclohexane Cyclohexane Cyclohexane
1,2-Dibromoethane Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- Ethane, 1,2-dichloro- Ethane, 1,2-dibromo-
Dibutyl phthalate Phthalate, dibutyl-
1,2-Dichloroethane Ethane, 1,2-dichloro- Ethane, 1,2-dichloro-
Dichloromethane Methane, dichloro-, Methane, dichloro-, Methane, dichloro-,
HCC-30 HCC-30 HCC-30
Ethanol Ethanol Ethanol Ethanol
2-Ethoxyethanol Ethanol, 2-ethoxy-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-Ethoxyethyl acetate
Ethyl acetate Ethyl acetate
Ethyl butyl ketone No match found
Ethylbenzene Benzene, ethyl- Benzene, ethyl- Benzene, ethyl-
Ethylene glycol (1,2-ethanediol) Ethylene glycol Ethylene glycol Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide Ethylene oxide
Di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) Phthalate, dioctyl-
Fluoride compounds Fluoride Fluoride Fluoride
Formaldehyde (methyl aldehyde) Formaldehyde Formaldehyde
Glutaraldehyde Glutaraldehyde Glutaraldehyde Glutaraldehyde
n-Hexane Hexane Hexane Hexane
Hydrochloric acid Hydrogen chloride Hydrogen chloride Hydrogen chloride
Hydrogen sulfide Hydrogen sulfide Hydrogen sulfide Hydrogen sulfide
Lead & compounds Lead Lead Lead
Magnesium oxide fume Magnesium oxide Magnesium
Manganese & compounds Manganese Manganese Manganese
Mercury & compounds Mercury Mercury Mercury
Methanol Methanol Methanol Methanol
2-Methoxyethanol Ethanol, 2-methoxy
2-Methoxyethanol acetate No match found
Methyl ethyl ketone Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone 4-Methyl-2-pentanone
Methyl methacrylate Methacrylic acid, Methacrylic acid,
methyl ester methyl ester
4,4'-Methylene bis(2-chloroaniline) – – –
(MOCA)
[No emissions reported]
Methylenebis (phenylisocyanate) Methylenebis
(thiocyanate)
Nickel & compounds Nickel Nickel, ion Nickel
Nickel carbonyl No match found
Nickel subsulfide Nickel subsulfide
Nitric acid Nitric acid Nitric acid Nitric acid
Organo-tin compounds Tin
Oxides of Nitrogen Nitrogen oxides Nitrogen oxides
Particulate Matter <2.5 µm (PM2.5) Particulates, < 2.5 um
Particulate Matter <10.0 µm (PM10) Particulates, < 10 um
Phenol Phenol Phenol Phenol
Phosphoric acid Phosphoric acid Phosphoric acid Phosphoric acid
Polychlorinated Biphenyls – – –
[No emissions reported]
Polychlorinated dioxins and furans Dioxins, measured as Dioxins, measured as Dioxins, measured as
(TEQ) 2,3,7,8- 2,3,7,8- 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p- tetrachlorodibenzo-p- tetrachlorodibenzo-p-

14
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
NPI Substance SimaPro Air SimaPro Water SimaPro Soil
Emission Emission Emission
dioxin dioxin dioxin
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons PAH, polycyclic PAH, polycyclic PAH, polycyclic
(B[a]Peq) aromatic hydrocarbons aromatic hydrocarbons aromatic hydrocarbons
Selenium & compounds Selenium Selenium Selenium
Styrene (ethenylbenzene) Styrene Styrene Styrene
Sulfur dioxide Sulfur dioxide Sulfur dioxide Sulfur dioxide
Sulfuric acid Sulfuric acid Sulfuric acid Sulfuric acid
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Ethane, 1,1,1,2-
tetrachloro-
Tetrachloroethylene Ethene, tetrachloro-
Toluene (methylbenzene) Toluene Toluene Toluene
Toluene-2,4-diisocyanate Toluene, 2,4-
diisocyanate
Total Nitrogen Nitrogen Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus Phosphorus Phosphorus
Total Volatile Organic Compounds VOC, volatile organic
compounds
1,1,2-Trichloroethane Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro- Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro-
Trichloroethylene Ethene, trichloro-
Vinyl Chloride Monomer Ethene, chloro- Ethene, chloro- Ethene, chloro-
Xylenes (individual or mixed isomers) Xylene Xylene Xylene
Zinc and compounds Zinc Zinc, ion Zinc

Table 2: Emitted substances reported in the National Pollution Inventory 2007/08 and the
corresponding emissions in the SimaPro v7.1.8 software per medium

See Appendix A for reported emissions per substance used in this study.

5.1.2 PESTICIDES
Data on individual pesticide use in Australia are not publicly available (see Lundie et al,
2007). There are over 2,000 active ingredients approved for use in Australia, and over
250 chemicals, of which more than 1 t is imported or manufactured in Australia each
year. In a review published by the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and
Engineering (2002), important insecticides, herbicides and fungicides and the number of
substances that exceed 10 t/yr, 100 t/yr and 1000 t/yr are reported. In some cases
approximate use figures are provided for individual chemicals (e.g. 15,000 t/yr for
glyphosate, 3,000 t/yr of atrazine and 1,000 t/yr of chlorpyriphos) or classes of
chemicals (e.g. aryloxyphenoxypropionates or “fops”). This report has adopted the 12
pesticides used in Lundie et al (2007), acknowledging that this is likely to be a significant
underestimate of the real pesticide use in Australia.

 Chlorpyrifos  Atrazine  Paraquat


 Metham sodium  Simazine  Diquat
 Endosulfan  MCPA  Captan
 Glyphosate  2,4-D  Mancozeb

Substances underlined have no associated characterisation factors in the BPIC/ICIP LCIA


method defined in SimaPro, and therefore cannot yet be included in the normalisation
factor. See Appendix A for emitted quantities per substance.

15
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
5.1.3 AUSTRALIA GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS INFORMATION SYSTEM
The Australian Greenhouse Emissions Information System (AGEIS) provides
comprehensive data on Australia’s GHG emissions and is reported by state, industry and
GHG. AGEIS include emissions from the following sectors:

 Energy
 Industrial Processes
 Solvent and Other Product Use
 Agriculture
 Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry KP
 Waste.

The list below shows the GHGs tracked by AGEIS under the Kyoto Protocol. These AGEIS
data from 2007, reported by state, are used as the basis of the GHG emissions inventory
in this study:

 Carbon dioxide  HFC-143a


 Methane  Methane, tetrafluoro-, CFC-14
 Nitrous oxide  Ethane, hexafluoro-, HFC-116
 HFC-23  Butane, perfluoro-
 HFC-125  Sulfur hexafluoride
 HFC-134a

Substances underlined have no associated characterisation factors in the BPIC/ICIP LCIA


method defined in SimaPro, and therefore cannot yet be included in the normalisation
factor. See Appendix A for emitted quantities per substance.

5.1.4 AUSTRALIAN OZONE DEPLETING SUBSTANCES


Australia’s ODS report format to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Ozone Secretariat2 was not deemed suitable to calculate normalisation factors as it does
not reveal annual emissions into the atmosphere. The best available data of ODS
emissions was found in the report ODS and SGGs in Australia – A Study of End Uses,
Emissions and Opportunities for Reclamation (DEWHA, 2008b). It was calculated that the
bank of ODSs and synthetic greenhouse gases (SGGs) is incurring losses to atmosphere
of approximately 2,658 metric tonnes per annum. This quantity of losses is equal to
approximately 56% of all of the bulk imports of ODS and SGGs into Australia in 2006.
The following substance leakages were used to calculate the ODP from Australia’s
emissions of ODSs:
 HCFC 22
 HCFC 123
 HCFC-Blends.3

The DEWHA (2008b) report was not required to investigate the bank of
chorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in the economy, or estimate losses to air. However, data
collected by Refrigerant Reclaim Australia at the point of destruction of reclaimed mixed
refrigerant gases indicate that there could be a considerable bank of CFCs still in use, in
the range of some hundreds of metric tonnes. Estimated leakages of HFC 134a were
excluded to avoid double counting with the AGEIS data above. The following substance
leakages – HFC 404A , HFC 410 A, HFC 407C and R-Mix – have no associated
characterisation factors in the BPIC/ICIP LCIA method defined in SimaPro (or zero ODP)
and therefore cannot yet be included in the normalisation factor.

2
See http://ozone.unep.org.
3
The ODP of HCHF 124 was assumed for “HCFC-Blends” as no details on the composition was specified in
DEWHA (2008b).

16
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
See Appendix A for emitted quantities per substance.

5.1.5 AUSTRALIAN ENERGY AND MINERAL PRODUCTION STATISTICS


The Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE) undertakes
statistical research and economic analysis of Australia’s agricultural, fishing, forestry,
energy and minerals industries. As part of these duties, ABARE publishes national
quarterly mineral production statistics for a range of important minerals. It also
publishes annual energy production statistics, disaggregated by state (ABARE, 2009).
The list below shows the resources that are tracked in these ABARE publications, and
these are used as the basis of the abiotic resource depletion category (non-renewable
energy and mineral production) in this study:

 Bauxite  Manganese  Tin


 Coal  Nickel  Titanium
 Copper  Crude oil  Uranium
 Gold  Natural gas  Zinc
 Iron  Salt  Zircon
 Lead  Silver

Substances underlined have no associated characterisation factors in the BPIC/ICIP LCIA


method defined in SimaPro, and therefore cannot yet be included in the normalisation
factor. See Appendix A for emitted quantities per substance.

5.2 Calculated Results

5.2.1 ABIOTIC DEPLETION (MINERALS AND FUELS)

Substance Unit Total


Total of all compartments kg Sb eq 6.50E+09
Coal, 22.1 MJ per kg, in ground kg Sb eq 5.27E+09
Gas, natural, 36.6 MJ per m3, in ground kg Sb eq 7.15E+08
Oil, crude, 41.0 MJ per kg, in ground kg Sb eq 4.84E+08
Gold, in ground kg Sb eq 1.92E+07
Lead, in ground kg Sb eq 8.71E+06
Copper, in ground kg Sb eq 1.72E+06
Zinc, in ground kg Sb eq 1.47E+06
Manganese, in ground kg Sb eq 6.68E+04
Tin, in ground kg Sb eq 5.88E+04
Iron, in ground kg Sb eq 2.88E+04
Uranium, in ground kg Sb eq 2.87E+04
Nickel, in ground kg Sb eq 2.18E+04
Zirconium, in ground kg Sb eq 1.02E+04
Bauxite, in ground kg Sb eq 1.34E+02
Titanium, in ground kg Sb eq 8.98E+01

Table 3: Abiotic depletion impact category normalisation contributions

17
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

Coal (81.1%), gas (11.0%) and oil (7.4%) production constitute 99.5% of the abiotic
resource depletion score.

The calculated abiotic depletion results are based on production quantities, an important
distinction given Australia’s high export volumes of minerals and fuels.

Key findings from Foley and Lant (2009):

 The regional normalisation assessment using the CML 2001 baseline


characterisation by Foley and Lant (2009) found that in terms of abiotic depletion,
the regional profiles across cities are relatively similar. Darwin, Perth, Brisbane
and Melbourne are slightly higher than the other cities. In the case of Darwin and
Perth, this is due principally to the high use of natural gas for meeting energy
demands. In Brisbane and Melbourne, it is due to coal consumption and
particularly brown coal consumption for Melbourne.

18
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

5.2.2 GLOBAL WARMING (GWP100)


Substance Unit Total
Total kg CO2
eq. 5.96E+11
kg CO2
Carbon dioxide eq. 4.49E+11
kg CO2
Methane eq. 1.18E+11
kg CO2
Nitrous oxide eq. 2.45E+10
kg CO2
Ethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoro-, HFC-134a eq. 2.29E+09
kg CO2
Ethane, 1,1,1-trifluoro-, HCFC-143a eq. 1.41E+09
kg CO2
Ethane, pentafluoro-, HFC-125 eq. 1.22E+09

Table 4: Global warming impact category normalisation contributions

The top three substances make up 99% of Australia’s GHG emissions, with the majority
from CO2 (75.3%), followed by methane (19.7%) and nitrous oxide (4.1%).

5.2.3 OZONE LAYER DEPLETION

Substance Compartme Unit Total


nt
TOTAL kg CFC-11
eq 41716.6
HCFC-22 kg CFC-11
Air eq 39695
HCFC blends (assumed equivalent to kg CFC-11
HCFC 124) Air eq 1939.6
HCFC-123 kg CFC-11
Air eq 82
Table 5: Ozone layer depletion impact category normalisation contributions

HCFC-22 is calculated to make up 95% of Australia’s emissions of ODS, HCFC-blends


4.6% and HCFC-123 0.2%.

19
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

5.2.4 HUMAN TOXICITY

Substance Compartment Unit Total


Total kg 1,4-DB 6.98E+10
eq
PAH, polycyclic aromatic Air kg 1,4-DB 3.38E+10
hydrocarbons eq
Fluoride Air kg 1,4-DB 2.20E+10
eq
Arsenic Air kg 1,4-DB 3.15E+09
eq
Benzene Air kg 1,4-DB 2.40E+09
eq
Ethylene oxide Air kg 1,4-DB 1.82E+09
eq
Chromium VI Air kg 1,4-DB 1.50E+09
eq
Nickel Air kg 1,4-DB 1.03E+09
eq
Antimony Air kg 1,4-DB 8.04E+08
eq
Formaldehyde Air kg 1,4-DB 6.55E+08
eq
Cadmium Air kg 1,4-DB 5.59E+08
eq
Table 6: Human toxicity impact category normalisation contributions

The top five substances in the table above make up 90% of the normalisation score for
human toxicity, and PAH (48%) and fluoride (31%) contribute 80% of the overall score.

Key findings from Lundie et al (2007):

 Using DALY as the measure of impact, Lundie et al (2007) found that heavy
metals and transition metals are the major contributors to the total human
carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic impact categories on a national level. The
main contributors to the total non-carcinogenic impact are Arsenic (As) 47%,
Lead (Pb) 9%, Manganese (Mn) 26%, Mercury (Hg) 6% and Selenium (Se) 11%.

 The total carcinogenic impact category is dominated by Cadmium (Cd) 84%, with
smaller contributions from Cobalt (Co) 12%. The diffuse contributions to both
impact categories are large: 53% to the human carcinogen impact category and
33% to the human non-carcinogen impact category. The only organic compound
to make a large contribution to diffuse total human carcinogenic impact category
on a national level is formaldehyde (2%), which is a consequence of domestic
solid fuel burning.

Key findings from Foley and Lant (2009):

20
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

 The regional normalisation assessment using the CML 2001 baseline


characterisation by Foley and Lant (2009) found that in the human toxicity
category, Hobart is the capital city with the most substantial impacts per capita.
Analysis of the contributing NPI data shows this to be mainly due to diffuse
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) emissions from solid fuel burning. Hobart
is Australia’s most southerly capital with the coldest climate. Heating
requirements are at least partly met by solid fuel burning and, hence, the higher
per capita emissions of PAHs for this city. Similarly, Brisbane and Darwin
(Australia’s most northerly and warmest capital cities) have the lowest emissions
in this regard.

21
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

5.2.5 FRESHWATER AQUATIC TOXICITY

Substance Compartment Sub- Unit Total


compartment
Total kg 1,4-DB 3.68E+09
eq
Simazine Soil Agricultural kg 1,4-DB 2.67E+09
eq
Parathion, methyl Soil Agricultural kg 1,4-DB 2.80E+08
eq
Atrazine Soil Agricultural kg 1,4-DB 2.58E+08
eq
Fluoride Air kg 1,4-DB 1.16E+08
eq
Chlorpyrifos Soil Agricultural kg 1,4-DB 1.00E+08
eq
Beryllium Water kg 1,4-DB 4.93E+07
eq
Nickel Air kg 1,4-DB 4.90E+07
eq
Beryllium Air kg 1,4-DB 2.97E+07
eq
Copper Air kg 1,4-DB 2.53E+07
eq
PAH, polycyclic aromatic Water kg 1,4-DB 2.41E+07
hydrocarbons eq
Cobalt Air kg 1,4-DB 2.00E+07
eq
Cobalt Water kg 1,4-DB 1.35E+07
eq
Table 7: Freshwater aquatic toxicity impact category normalisation contributions

The pesticides simazine (72%), parathion, methyl (8%) and atrazine (7%) are the main
contributing emissions in this impact category.

Key findings from Lundie et al (2007):

 Lundie et al (2007) used Potentially Affected Fraction (PAF) of species as their


impact assessment measure and found that pesticides cause more than 85% of
freshwater eco-toxicity, with normalisation scores primarily from atrazine (52%),
metham sodium (34%) and simazine (9%).

Key findings from Foley and Lant (2009):

 The regional normalisation assessment using the CML 2001 baseline


characterisation by Foley and Lant (2009) found that freshwater aquatic eco-
toxicity is influenced by emissions of heavy metals (e.g. nickel, copper,

22
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
chromium, arsenic, mercury) from mining and minerals processing operations.
These facilities are almost exclusively located in non-urban areas.

 Based on 2005/06 NPI data, Foley and Lant (2009) report that the freshwater
eco-toxicity impacts of Darwin are specifically influenced by the reporting of six
heavy metal compounds in its Darwin Harbour water catchment survey (i.e.
estimated diffuse emissions). These heavy metals are not estimated in any other
water catchment survey in the NPI and, thus, represent a major weakness in the
reporting methodology.

23
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

5.2.6 MARINE AQUATIC TOXICITY

Substance Compartment Sub- Unit Total


compartment
Total kg 1,4-DB 2.62E+14
eq
Fluoride Air kg 1,4-DB 2.50E+14
eq
Beryllium Air kg 1,4-DB 3.92E+12
eq
Nickel Air kg 1,4-DB 3.09E+12
eq
Cobalt Air kg 1,4-DB 2.02E+12
eq
Copper Air kg 1,4-DB 1.76E+12
eq
Beryllium Water kg 1,4-DB 4.59E+11
eq
Selenium Air kg 1,4-DB 2.86E+11
eq
Zinc Air kg 1,4-DB 2.16E+11
eq
Cadmium Air kg 1,4-DB 1.30E+11
eq
Selenium Water kg 1,4-DB 7.68E+10
eq

Table 8: Marine aquatic toxicity impact category normalisation contributions

Emissions of fluoride (95%) are the main contributing emission in this impact category.

Key findings from Lundie et al (2007):

 Lundie et al (2007) found that marine eco-toxicity is dominated by fluoride


emissions (99%), mostly originating from air emissions from aluminium smelters
and coal-burning electricity plants and water emissions from sewerage treatment
plants (considered a toxicant for ecosystem protection in the Australian and New
Zealand Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality). Despite its
low toxicity, when coupled with its long-term stability in the marine environment
and large anthropogenic emissions (8500 t/yr), there is a high marginal risk in
terms of potentially affected fraction of species.

 Lundie et al (2007) further noted that essential metals contribute approximately


1% to the total where included. After fluoride, the next largest contributors to
marine eco-toxicity (excluding essential metals) are the metals beryllium and
arsenic.

Key findings from Foley and Lant (2009):

24
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

 The regional normalisation assessment using the CML 2001 baseline


characterisation by Foley and Lant (2009) found that marine aquatic eco-toxicity
is influenced by emissions of heavy metals (e.g. nickel, copper, chromium,
arsenic, mercury) from mining and minerals processing operations. These
facilities are almost exclusively located in non-urban areas.

5.2.7 TERRESTRIAL ECO-TOXICITY

Substance Compartment Sub- Unit Total


compartment
Total kg 1,4-DB 1.86E+09
eq
Mercury Air kg 1,4-DB 1.20E+09
eq
Chromium, ion Air kg 1,4-DB 2.76E+08
eq
Arsenic Air kg 1,4-DB 1.31E+08
eq
Nickel Air kg 1,4-DB 8.33E+07
eq
Cobalt Air kg 1,4-DB 5.29E+07
eq
Zinc Air kg 1,4-DB 3.24E+07
eq
Beryllium Air kg 1,4-DB 2.01E+07
eq
Copper Air kg 1,4-DB 1.32E+07
eq
Atrazine Soil Agricultural kg 1,4-DB 1.11E+07
eq
Lead Air kg 1,4-DB 9.75E+06
eq
Cadmium Air kg 1,4-DB 9.75E+06
eq
Table 9: Terrestrial eco-toxicity impact category normalisation contributions

Emissions to air of mercury (65%), chromium (15%) and arsenic (7%) are the main
contributing emissions in this impact category.

Key findings from Lundie et al (2007):

 Using PAF as impact assessment measure, Lundie et al (2007) found that


pesticide usage causes more than 49% of terrestrial eco-toxicity normalisation
scores, with metham sodium (84%) the dominant pesticide with copper
compounds (from industrial emissions) contributing 40% towards the total. The
normalisation includes 13 of the 250 pesticides imported or manufactured in
Australia, and will therefore underestimate the total toxicity.

Key findings from Foley and Lant (2009):

25
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

 The regional normalisation assessment using the CML 2001 baseline


characterisation by Foley and Lant (2009) found that:

o Terrestrial eco-toxicity is influenced by emissions of heavy metals (e.g.


nickel, copper, chromium, arsenic, mercury) from mining and minerals
processing operations. These facilities are almost exclusively located in
non-urban areas.
o The terrestrial eco-toxicity results for Darwin are also significantly higher
than the other capital cities. This can be traced to a single facility emission
in the NPI: 500 kg of mercury compounds disposed to Darwin City
Council’s Leanyer Waste Disposal Site, representing over 80% of the
nation’s estimated mercury emissions for 2005/06.

5.2.8 PHOTO-CHEMICAL SMOG

Substance Compartment Unit Total


Total kg NMVOC
eq 1.61E+09
Air kg NMVOC
Nitrogen oxides eq 1.40E+09
Air kg NMVOC
Sulfur dioxide eq 1.14E+08
Air kg NMVOC
Toluene eq 3.56E+07
Air kg NMVOC
Ethanol eq 1.82E+07
Air kg NMVOC
Hexane eq 7.81E+06
Air kg NMVOC
Formaldehyde eq 7.45E+06
Table 10: Photo-chemical smog impact category normalisation contributions

Nitrogen oxides (87%) and sulphur dioxide (7%) are the main contributing emissions in
this impact category.
The work being done by the European Commission – Joint Research Centre (2008)
recommends the LOTUS-EUROS model (as applied in the ReCiPe method) for photo-
chemical ozone formation. The method consists of a detailed fate and exposure model
for human health impacts which makes it readily adaptable for calculation of a set of
consistent characterisation factors for each continent. The characterisation and
aggregation of VOCs is the subject of ongoing current international work. AusLCI, as it
has with VOCs and photo-chemical smog, will adapt this work to Australian conditions
and circumstances. The UNECE Trajectory is a leading characterisation model for the
formation of tropospheric ozone.
In Australia, anthropogenic (man-made) releases of VOCs are generally trivial compared
to those released in nature, and it has been suggested that nitrogen oxides emissions
alone are the determinant factor for photo-chemical smog generation in Australia.

26
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Further research is needed to establish if nitrogen oxides emissions alone can be taken
as the proxy measure of potency for photo-chemical smog formation in Australia.4

Key findings from Foley and Lant (2009):

 There are potential limitations with the above approach highlighted in the regional
normalisation assessment using the CML 2001 baseline characterisation by Foley
and Lant (2009). While CO2 from fossil fuelled electricity generation is the most
dominant GHG in Australia, the per capita GHG emissions from Darwin are also
heavily affected by methane and nitrous oxide emissions from the “prescribed
burning of savannahs”. Similarly, this land management practice also creates
significant carbon monoxide emissions, making Darwin the highest per capita
emitter for photo-chemical oxidation potential (i.e. smog).

5.2.9 ACIDIFICATION

Substance Compartment Unit Total


Total kg SO2 eq 2.67E+09
Sulfur dioxide Air 1.40E+09 1.68E+09
Nitrogen oxides Air 9.94E+08 7.00E+08
Ammonia Air 2.77E+08 1.54E+08
Table 11: Acidification impact category normalisation contributions

Sulphur dioxide (66%), nitrogen oxides (28%) and ammonia (8%) emissions are the
main contributors in this impact category.
See discussion in the next section on eutrophication.

5.2.10 EUTROPHICATION

Substance Compartment Unit Total


Total kg PO4 eq 4.15E+08
Nitrogen oxides Air kg PO4 eq 1.82E+08
Nitrogen Water kg PO4 eq 1.01E+08
Phosphorus Water kg PO4 eq 9.18E+07
Ammonia Air kg PO4 eq 3.36E+07
Ammonia Water kg PO4 eq 6.65E+06
Nitric acid Air kg PO4 eq 2.10E+04
Nitric acid Water kg PO4 eq 1.70E+04
Phosphoric acid Air kg PO4 eq 2.81E+03
Phosphoric acid Water kg PO4 eq 1.36E+03
Phosphorus Air kg PO4 eq 5.20E+01

4
VOCs are accounted for their contributions as GHGs and because of methane’s particular significance to
global warming. Methane is recorded separately to the emissions of other non-methane volatile organic
compounds (NMVOCs). VOCs are also accounted for their potential human toxicity and ecotoxicity. Polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), dioxins and furans are both toxic and bioaccumulative (accumulating in nature
over time).

27
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Table 12: Eutrophication impact category normalisation contributions

Nitrogen oxides to air (44%), and nitrogen (24%) and phosphorus (22%) emissions to
water are the main contributors in this impact category.5

Key findings from Foley and Lant (2009):

 The regional normalisation assessment using the CML 2001 baseline


characterisation by Foley and Lant (2009) found that the acidification and
eutrophication categories are noteworthy because of the substantially higher per
capita emissions from outside the capital cities. In large part, these impacts are
due to nitrogen oxides and sulphur oxides emissions from coal-fired power
stations, mining and mineral processing operations. In Australia, mineral
processing and the generation of electricity is mostly undertaken in regions
outside the main urban areas. The products of these operations are, however,
largely consumed in the cities. Therefore, while the environmentally relevant
emissions from these operations occur in non-urban areas, they could be
considered part of the true environmental footprint of the urban population.

Australian fate models for eutrophication are being developed, so in the meantime
interim results using this method should be treated with care. Overestimation of
environmental burdens is likely in Australia due to the deposition of nitrogen oxides
emissions in insensitive environments (Grant and Peters, 2009).

5.2.11 RESPIRATORY EFFECTS

Substance Compartment Unit Total


Total PM2.5 eq 9.82E+08
Particulates, < 10 um Air PM2.5 eq 6.43E+08
Nitrogen oxides Air PM2.5 eq 1.78E+08
Sulphur dioxide Air PM2.5 eq 1.09E+08
Particulates, <2.5 um Air PM2.5 eq 3.40E+07
Ammonia Air PM2.5 eq 1.17E+07
Carbon monoxide Air PM2.5 eq 5.85E+06
Table 13: Respiratory effects impact category normalisation contributions

The primary emissions that cause exposure to these substances are: PM10 particulates,
PM2.5 particulates, trimethylsilyl propionate (TSP), nitrogen oxides (NOX), ammonia (NH3),
carbon monoxide (CO), VOCs and sulphur oxides (SOX). A number of international LCIA
methods include models for characterising respiratory effects. To adapt this work to
Australian conditions, it is the transport and fate of the emissions and the Australian
population exposures that result that need adaptation (the respiratory affects
themselves are probably appropriate). The authors are not aware of any work to adapt
these methods for Australian conditions.

5
The issue of double counting in calculating the total eutrophication impact was highlighted during the review
of this report by Jeff Foley (Manager – Water & Wastewater Process at GHD). For example, wastewater
treatment plants are required to report ammonia and total nitrogen emissions under NPI. However, ammonia is
a sub-component of the total nitrogen value. It is estimated that double counting of the reported ammonia
from the Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage Services would add less than 6% to the overall calculated
PO4eq emissions.

28
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

5.2.12 WATER CONSUMPTION

Australian normalisation factor: 930kL per capita based on year 2006 water abstraction
(OECD, 2009).

5.2.13 LAND TRANSFORMATION AND USE

The normalisation factor from the Australian Impact Method defined in the SimaPro
software is 26 Ha.a of use per capita is proposed as the normalisation factor.

5.2.14 IONISING RADIATION

The global normalisation factors from the ReCiPe world midpoint (H) (Pré, 2008) of
1,306 kg 235U eq per capita is proposed as normalisation factor.

5.3 Comparison of Factors With Other Sources

The table below summarises the normalisation factors calculated and per capita impacts
based on an Australian population figure of 21,644,000 for the year 2008 (ABS, 2009).
Note that the sources for water consumption, land use and transformation and ionising
radiation are quoted as per capita factors in the respective sources (see sections above).

Impact Category Unit Australian Annual Australian Per


[Calculated] Capita
Abiotic depletion kg Sb eq 6.50E+09 300
Global warming kg CO2 eq. 6.21E+11 28690
Ozone layer depletion kg CFC-11 eq 4.17E+04 0.002
Human toxicity kg 1,4-DB eq 6.96E+10 3216
Freshwater aquatic eco- kg 1,4-DB eq
toxicity 3.71E+09 172
Marine aquatic eco- kg 1,4-DB eq
toxicity 2.62E+14 12117106
Terrestrial eco-toxicity kg 1,4-DB eq 1.90E+09 88
Photo-chemical oxidation kg NMVOC eq 1.61E+09 75
Acidification kg SO2 eq 2.67E+09 123
Eutrophication kg PO4 eq 4.16E+08 19
Respiratory inorganics PM2.5 eq 9.82E+08 45
Water consumption kl H2O - 930
Land transformation and Ha a -
use 26
Ionising radiation kg U235 eq - 1306

Table 14: Summary of calculated and per capita normalisation factors using the intermediate
BPIC/ICIP method

The characterisation results for Australia calculated using the (intermediate) BPIC/ICP
project LCIA method, from Foley and Lant (2009), the Australian Impact Method v1.00

29
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
(SimaPro v7.1.8), CML 2001 World 2000 (Wegener Sleeswijk et al, 2008) and ReCiPe
0.6 using the World Egalitarian factors (Pré, 2008) are shown in
and Table 16 below.

Impact Category Unit BPIC/ICIP Foley and Australian CML 2001 ReCiPe
LCIA Lant Impact / World 2008
(2009) Method 2000 World (E)
Abiotic depletion kg Sb eq 300 289
Global warming kg CO2 eq. 28,690 28,410 20,120 6,973 5,494
Ozone layer depletion kg CFC-11 eq 0.002 0.04 0.04
Human toxicity kg 1,4-DB eq 3,216 36,700 6,042 981
Freshwater aquatic kg 1,4-DB eq
eco-toxicity 172 95 579 8
Marine aquatic eco- kg 1,4-DB eq
toxicity 12,117,106 623,500 32,366 1,923
Terrestrial eco-toxicity kg 1,4-DB eq 88 116 182 39
Photo-chemical kg NMVOC eq
oxidation 75 50
Acidification kg SO2 eq 123 126 40 42
Eutrophication kg PO4 eq 19 21 17 26 9
Respiratory inorganics PM2.5 eq 45 14
Water consumption kl H2O 930 730
Land transformation Ha a
and use 26 26 2
Ionising radiation kg 235U eq 1,306 1,306

Table 15: Normalisation factors from various sources compared to the calculated BPIC/ICIP
project’s LCIA factors

Foley and Lant Australian CML 2001/ ReCiPe 2008


(2009) Impact Method World 2000 World
Abiotic depletion 96% 0.01%
Global warming 99% 70% 24% 19%
Ozone layer depletion 1,959% 1938%
Human toxicity 1,141% 188% 31%
Freshwater aquatic eco-
toxicity 56% 337% 5%
Marine aquatic eco-
toxicity 5% 0.3% 0.02%
Terrestrial eco-toxicity 132% 208% 45%
Photo-chemical
oxidation 66%
Acidification 102% 32% 34%
Eutrophication 109% 87% 137%
Respiratory inorganics 31%
Water consumption 78%
Land transformation
and use 100% 8%
Ionising radiation 100%

30
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Table 16: Percentage difference in normalisation factors compared to the calculated BPIC ICIP
project’s LCIA factors

 Global warming: The normalisation factors are as expected higher in Australia


than the world average factors.

 Abiotic resource depletion: The calculated normalisation factors are based on the
same characterisation factors and production data source, but from a different
time period, as the Foley and Lant (2009) study and are reasonably consistent.

 Land transformation and use: The BPIC/ICIP project’s LCIA method adopts the
factors and assessment methods used in the Australian Impact Method until a
comprehensive midpoint method for assessing impacts has been developed or
adapted for Australia.

 Water depletion: No further analysis has been made into the normalisation
factors from the Australian Impact Method.

 Eutrophication: The calculated normalisation factors are based on the same


characterisation factors and production data source, but over a different time
period to the Foley and Lant (2009) study. The results are reasonably consistent.
No further analysis has been made into the normalisation factors from the
Australian Impact Method and CML.

 Acidification: The calculated normalisation factors are based on similar


characterisation factors (ReCiPe World and CML) and production data source, but
over a different time period to the Foley and Lant (2009) study. The results are
reasonably consistent. No further analysis has been made into the world
normalisation factors from CML and ReCiPe.

 Freshwater aquatic eco-toxicity: The difference in normalisation factor compared


with Foley and Lant (2009) is as expected due to the different characterisation
factors used. No further analysis has been made into the world normalisation
factors from CML and ReCiPe.

 Marine aquatic eco-toxicity: This impact category stands out most significantly
when compared to other normalisation sources. This can almost exclusively be
attributed to fluoride compound emissions to air, which make up 95% of the
normalisation factor (see the box below). The characterisation factor used in the
BPIC/ICIP project’s LCIA method is based on the Australian adapted
characterisation factors published in Huijbregts and Lundie (2002) with a toxicity
factor of 4.10E7 kg 1,4-DB eq per kg emission of fluoride (Cas No: 016984-48-8).
This is the same emission listed in, for example, main emission sources such as
the unit processes for black coal electricity production and aluminium smelting in
the Australian LCA database (included in the SimaPro software).
There are no characterisation factors for fluoride (i.e. Cas No: 016984-48-8) in
CML (2009) or ReCiPe (2008). On the other hand, CML and ReCiPe include
toxicity factors for hydrogen fluoride (Cas No: 7664-39-3). CML coincidentally has
an identical characterisation factor as the one published by Huijbregts and Lundie
(2002) in CML (i.e. 4.10E7 kg 1,4-DB eq per kg emission), and is zero (0) in
ReCiPe.
Huijbregts and Lundie (2002) propose a characterisation factor of 5.20E5 for
hydrogen fluoride (Cas No: 7664-39-3). However, this is not the fluoride emission
type used in the unit processes for coal based electricity production in the
Australian LCA database. It is essential to use consistent emission classifications
in the LCI data (i.e. unit processes) as in the national or regional emission
inventories used to derive the normalisation factors (e.g. NPI data).

31
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

The best available LCI data for Australia for the main fluoride compound emitting
processes lists fluoride (Cas No: 016984-48-8). The normalisation factors in this
study have therefore been calculated consistently for the midpoint LCIAs with
Australian toxicity factors.

Fluoride compounds description in the NPI (2008)


Substance name: Fluoride compounds
CASR number: Not applicable
Molecular formula: Fluoride: F-
Hydrofluoric acid: HF
Sodium fluoride: NaF
Synonyms: fluoride: CASR # 16984-48-8;
Hydrogen fluoride (Hydrofluoric Acid): CASR # 7664-39-3;
Sodium fluoride: CASR # 7681-49-4

 Terrestrial eco-toxicity: The difference in normalisation factor compared with


Foley and Lant (2009) is as expected due to the different characterisation factors
used. No further analysis has been made into the world normalisation factors
from CML and ReCiPe.

 Photo-chemical smog: No further analysis has been made into the world
normalisation factors from ReCiPe.

 Ozone depletion: Following the ratification of the Montreal Protocol on Substances


that Deplete the Ozone Layer in 1987, Australia has largely phased out the use of
ODSs (DEWHA 2008a). It is therefore expected that the global average is
significantly higher.

 Ionising radiation: The BPIC/ICIP project’s interim LCIA method adopts the factor
and assessment method used in the ReCiPe method.

 Human toxicity: The normalisation factors calculated using CML’s European based
characterisation factors in Foley and Lant (2009) produce a significantly higher
result, which according to Lundie et al (2007) is to be expected. No further
analysis has been made into the world normalisation factors from CML and
ReCiPe.

Foley and Lant (2009) note that one of the weaknesses of their study is the
application of European based impact assessment models to Australian inventory
data. As demonstrated by Lundie et al (2007), toxicity characterisation factors
(expressed in DALY) for Australia can be significantly different to those estimated
under European climatic, population density, ecological and demographic
conditions.
 Respiratory effects: No further analysis has been made into the world
normalisation factors from the ReCiPe method.

6. Important Missing Emission Data


The CML impact categories in SimaPro calculate characterised data for more
substances/emissions than the available annual emissions data for Australia. For
example, as follows:
Missing emissions specifically relevant for the impact category eutrophication include:

32
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

 Bromate  Nitrite
 Chlorate  Phosphate
 Nitrate  Phosphorus pentoxide

Missing emissions specifically relevant for the impact category acidification include:
 Hydrogen iodide
 Acetic acid
 Hydrogen sulphide
 Benzoic acid
 Pentanoic acid
 Butanoic acid
 Phenol
 Formic acid
 Phosphoric acid
 Hydrogen bromide
 Propionic acid
 Hydrogen chloride
 Hydrogen fluoride

Other emissions missing include:


 Butadiene, hexachloro-1,3-  Methylmercury
 Methane, bromo-, Halon 1001  Phenol, 2-chloro-
 Methane, tetrachloro-, CFC-10  Phenol, pentachloro-

7. Conclusion
 The work presented provides an attempt to produce suitable normalisation factors
for the BPIC/ICIP project’s LCIA method.

 Confidence in the results is limited by:


o lack of characterisation factors and assessment methods (e.g.
eutrophication, ecological diversity, water depletion and ionising radiation)
for a large number of emissions
o large discrepancies with other published factors, notably in the marine
aquatic toxicity impact category
o incompatible basis for assessing some differences in factors compared to
other assessment methods – in particular unable to compare Lundie et al
(2007) since the presented characterisation factors are only available in
DALY and PAF endpoint formats
o lack of comprehensive pesticide data and ODS emissions.

8. Recommendations for Future Development


 Confirm the suitability of using fluoride (Cas No: 016984-48-8) as opposed to
hydrogen fluoride (Cas No: 7664-39-3) for emissions from coal based electricity
generation and aluminium smelting. The task of confirming the suitability is in
progress at the time of completing this report.
 Refine the methods and update the normalisation figures for:
o eutrophication
o photo-chemical smog
o acidification
o land transformation and use
o water depletion
o ionising radiation.

33
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

Further details are available in the first part of this study, which is on the
recommended Australian impact assessment methods and future developments (A
Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method for the BPIC/ICIP Project – Part 1:
Classification and Characterisation – Bengtsson, and Howard, 2010).

9. References

 AATSE, 2002, Pesticide Use in Australia, Australian Academy of Technological


Sciences and Engineering, Parkville, Australia.
 ABS, 2009, 3101.0 – Australian Demographic Statistics Jun 2009,
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3101.0Main+Features1Jun%20
2009?OpenDocument, accessed on 03 December 2009.
 Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics [ABARE], 2009, Australian
Mineral Statistics 2009 – December Quarter 2008, Commonwealth of Australia, ISSN
1447–1159,
http://www.abare.gov.au/publications_html/ams/ams_09/ams_mar09.pdf, accessed
on 20 April 2010
 Baumann, H. and Tillman, A.H., 2004, The Hitch Hiker’s Guide to LCA – An
Orientation in Life Cycle Assessment Methodology and Application, Studentlitteratur,
Sweden, ISBN 91-44-02364-2.
 Bengtsson, J. and Howard, N., 2010, A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method for the
BPIC/ICIP Project – Part 1: Classification and Characterisation, Building Products
Innovation Council, NSW, Australia. [insert hyperlink when available]
 Department of Climate Change [DCC], 2009a, National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA)
Factors – June 2009, Commonwealth of Australia, www.climatechange.gov.au,
accessed on 11 January 2010.
 Department of Climate Change [DCC], 2009b, National Greenhouse Gas Inventory –
Kyoto Protocol Accounting Framework, http://www.ageis.greenhouse.gov.au/,
accessed on 11 January 2010.
 Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts [DEWHA], 2008a,
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,
http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/ozone/legislation/montp.html, accessed
on 15 December 2009.
 Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts [DEWHA], 2008b, ODS
and SGGs in Australia – A Study of End Uses, Emissions and Opportunities for
Reclamation, Prepared by Energy Strategies with Expert Air, Commonwealth of
Australia, ISBN 978-0-642-55463-5,
http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/ozone/publications/pubs/ods-sgg-
report.pdf, accessed on 20 April 2008.
 European Commission – Joint Research Centre, 2008, Recommendation of Methods
for LCIA, Working Draft 0.7,
http://lct.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/eplca/deliverables/international-reference-life-
cycle-data-system-ilcd-handbook
 Foley, J. and Lant, P., 2009, Regional Normalisation Figures for Australia 2005/2006
– Inventory and Characterisation Data from a Production Perspective, Int J Life Cycle
Assess 14: 215–224.
 Grant, T. and Peters, G., 2009, Best Practice Guide to Life Cycle Impact Assessment
in Australia, Draft 3 for Distribution to AusLCI, Australia.

34
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

 Bengtsson, J., Howard, N. and Kneppers, B., 2010, Discussion Paper for Comment:
Weighting of Environmental Impacts in Australia, Edge Environment Pty Ltd, Manly,
NSW, Australia. [insert hyperlink when available]
 Huijbregts, M. and Lundie, S., 2002, Toxicity Values Recalculated for Australia Using
USES Model Included in the Australian Impact Assessment Method in the SimaPro
v7.1 Software for Australia, PRé Consultants, Printerweg 18, 3821 AD Amersfoort,
The Netherlands.
 IPCC, 2007, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change [S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Avery,
M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and
New York, NY, USA, 996 pp.
 ISO, 2006a, ISO 14040:2006 Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment –
Principles and Framework, Geneva, Switzerland.
 ISO, 2006b, ISO14044:2006 Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment –
Requirements and Guidelines, Geneva, Switzerland.
 Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G. and
Rosenbaum, R., 2003, IMPACT 2002+: A New Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Methodology, Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(6): 324–330.
 Leiden University, 2009, CML-IA,
http://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/databases/cmlia/cmlia.zip, accessed on 04 January
2009.
 Lundie, S., Huijbregts, M.A.J., Rowley, H.V., Mohr, N.J., Feitz, A.J., 2007, Australian
Characterisation Factors and Normalisation Figures for Human Toxicity and Eco-
toxicity. J Cleaner Prod 15: 819–832.
 NPI (National Pollutant Inventory), 2008, Catchments Emissions Data 2007-08,
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts,
http://www.npi.gov.au/index.html, accessed on 12 December 09.
 OECD, 2009, OECD Factbook 2009, ISBN 92-64-05604-1.
 Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, de Schryver A, Struijs J, van Zelm R (2009)
ReCiPe 2008—a life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised
category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level, report I: characterization.
Den Haag, The Netherlands

 Wegener Sleeswijk, A., Van Oers, L.F.C.M., Guinée, J.B., Struijs, J. and Huijbregts,
M.A.J., 2008, Normalisation in Product Life Cycle Assessment: An LCA of the Global
and European Economic Systems in the Year 2000, Science of the Total Environment
390(1): 227–240, as referenced in Leiden University, 2009, CML-IA,
http://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/databases/cmlia/cmlia.zip, accessed on 04 January
2009.

35
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation

Appendix A: Emissions and Resource Production


Data

Resource Production Sub Compartment Quantity Unit


Oil, crude, 41.0 MJ per kg, in ground In ground 24,056 kton
Gas, natural, 36.6 MJ per m3, in ground In ground 38,256 Mm3
Coal, 22.1 MJ per kg, in ground In ground 4.25E+08 ton
Uranium, in ground In ground 9,987 ton
Bauxite, in ground In ground 63,789 kton
Copper, in ground In ground 886 kton
Gold, in ground In ground 215 ton
Iron, in ground In ground 341,095 kton
Lead, in ground In ground 645 kton
Nickel, in ground In ground 202 kton
Salt, unspecified In ground 11,160 kton
Manganese, in ground In ground 4,837 kton
Tin, in ground In ground 1,783 ton
Titanium, in ground In ground 2,042 kton
Zinc, in ground In ground 1,477 kton
Zirconium, in ground In ground 550 kton

Table 17: Resources production data entered into SimaPro

Emissions to Air Quantity Unit


Acetaldehyde 5300000 kg
Acetic acid 1600000 kg
Acetone 7900000 kg
Acetonitrile 58000 kg
Acrolein 24 kg
Acrylic acid 7700 kg
Acrylonitrile 55000 kg
Ammonia 96000000 kg
Aniline 13000 kg
Antimony 120000 kg
Arsenic 150000 kg
Benzene 15000000 kg
Beryllium 5300 kg
Biphenyl 5300 kg
Boron 880000 kg
Butadiene 2800000 kg
Cadmium 65000 kg
Acrylamide 160000 kg
Carbon disulfide 420000 kg
Carbon monoxide 5.6E+09 kg
Chlorine 1400000 kg
Chlorine dioxide 640 kg
Ethane, chloro- 27000 kg
Chloroform 23000 kg
Phenol, 2-chloro- 6.4 kg
Chromium, ion 230000 kg

36
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Emissions to Air Quantity Unit
Chromium VI 7500 kg
Cobalt 230000 kg
Copper 1100000 kg
Cumene 76000 kg
Cyanide 1900000 kg
Cyclohexane 3800000 kg
Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- 82000 kg
Phthalate, dibutyl- 290000 kg
Ethane, 1,2-dichloro- 22000 kg
Methane, dichloro-, HCC-30 1400000 kg
Ethanol 27000000 kg
Ethanol, 2-ethoxy- 9100 kg
2-Ethoxyethyl acetate 190000 kg
Ethyl acetate 1900000 kg
Benzene, ethyl- 3100000 kg
Ethylene glycol 1200000 kg
Ethylene oxide 130000 kg
Phthalate, dioctyl- 3600 kg
Fluoride 6100000 kg
Formaldehyde 8500000 kg
Glutaraldehyde 43000 kg
Hexane 9600000 kg
Hydrogen chloride 46000000 kg
Hydrogen sulfide 710000 kg
Lead 1300000 kg
Magnesium oxide 25000 kg
Manganese 2900000 kg
Mercury 24000 kg
Methanol 6100000 kg
Ethanol, 2-methoxy 15000 kg
Methyl ethyl ketone 5600000 kg
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 2400000 kg
Methacrylic acid, methyl ester 11000 kg
Methylenebis (thiocyanate) 300 kg
Nickel 490000 kg
Nickel subsulfide 2600 kg
Nitric acid 210000 kg
Tin 2900 kg
Nitrogen oxides 1.4E+09 kg
Particulates, < 2.5 um 34000000 kg
Particulates, < 10 um 1.2E+09 kg
Phenol 93000 kg
Phosphoric acid 2900 kg
Dioxins, measured as 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p- 0.38 kg
dioxin
PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 1300000 kg
Selenium 8400 kg
Styrene 900000 kg
Sulfur dioxide 1.4E+09 kg
Sulfuric acid 5900000 kg
Ethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloro- 87 kg

37
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Emissions to Air Quantity Unit
Ethene, tetrachloro- 1300000 kg
Toluene 33000000 kg
Toluene, 2,4-diisocyanate 930 kg
Nitrogen 0 kg
Phosphorus 17 kg
VOC, volatile organic compounds 3.1E+09 kg
Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro- 6000 kg
Ethene, trichloro- 920000 kg
Ethene, chloro- 25000 kg
Xylene 23000000 kg
Zinc 1800000 kg

Carbon dioxide 4.49E+08 ton


Methane 5603420 ton
Nitrous oxide 78930 ton
HFC-23 - ton
HFC-125 360 ton
HFC-134a 1910 ton
HFC-143a 370 ton
Methane, tetrafluoro-, CFC-14 70 ton
Ethane, hexafluoro-, HFC-116 10 ton
Butane, perfluoro- - ton
Sulfur hexafluoride 20 ton
Methane , chlorodifluoro-, HCFC-22 1167.5 ton
Ethane, 2,2-dichloro-1,1,1-trifluoro-, HCFC-123 4.1 ton
Ethane, 2-chloro-1,1,1,2-tetra-fluoro, HCFC-124 74.6 ton

Table 18: Air emission data entered into SimaPro. No sub-compartment was specified (i.e.
unspecified)


Emissions to Water Quantity Unit
Acetaldehyde 16000 kg
Ammonia 19000000 kg
Antimony 2100 kg
Arsenic, ion 7000 kg
Benzene 47000 kg
Beryllium 1700 kg
Biphenyl 0.000026 kg
Boron 1700000 kg
Cadmium, ion 2700 kg
Carbon disulfide 150 kg
Chlorine 590000 kg
Chloroform 0.3 kg
Phenol, 2-chloro- 290 kg
Chromium, ion 7500 kg
Chromium VI 1000 kg
Cobalt 30000 kg
Copper, ion 120000 ng
Cumene 510 kg
Cyanide 5100 kg
Cyclohexane 7700 kg
Ethane, 1,2-dichloro- 0.006 kg

38
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Emissions to Water Quantity Unit
Methane, dichloro-, HCC-30 0.31 kg
Ethanol 1800000 kg
Benzene, ethyl- 3100 kg
Ethylene glycol 410000 kg
Fluoride 1100000 kg
Formaldehyde 0.5 kg
Glutaraldehyde 5300 kg
Hexane 12000 kg
Hydrogen chloride 150000 kg
Hydrogen sulfide 310000 kg
Lead 23000 kg
Magnesium 770 kg
Manganese 1400000 kg
Mercury 370 kg
Methanol 66000 kg
Nickel, ion 26000 kg
Nitric acid 170000 kg
Nitrogen oxides 8100 kg
Phenol 19000 kg
Phosphoric acid 1400 kg
Dioxins, measured as 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p- 0.011 kg
dioxin
PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 6500 kg
Selenium 4800 kg
Styrene 250 kg
Sulfur dioxide 5.8 kg
Sulfuric acid 450000 kg
Toluene 57000 kg
Nitrogen 2.4E+08 kg
Phosphorus 30000000 kg
Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro- 0.0012 kg
Ethene, chloro- 0.00048 kg
Xylene 36000 kg
Zinc 490000 kg

Table 19: Water emission data entered into SimaPro (no sub-compartment was specified i.e.
unspecified)




Emissions to soil Sub- Quantity Unit
compartment
Acetaldehyde Industrial 0.81 kg
Acetic acid Industrial 0.0045 kg
Acrylamide Industrial 2400 kg
Acrylic acid Industrial 1.1 kg
Acrylonitrile Industrial 0.38 kg
Ammonia Industrial 1800000 kg
Antimony Industrial 1100 kg
Arsenic Industrial 2800 kg
Benzene Industrial 71 kg
Beryllium Industrial 160 kg
Boron Industrial 630000 kg

39
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Emissions to soil Sub- Quantity Unit
compartment
Cadmium Industrial 1100 kg
Carbon disulfide Industrial 0.0086 kg
Chlorine Industrial 520000 kg
Ethane, chloro- Industrial 0.13 kg
Chloroform Industrial 25 kg
Phenol, 2-chloro- Industrial 97 kg
Chromium (III) compounds Industrial 61000 kg
Cobalt Industrial 8700 kg
Copper Industrial 51000 kg
Cumene Industrial 290 kg
Hydrogen cyanide Industrial 160000 kg
Cyclohexane Industrial 74 kg
Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- Industrial 0.14 kg
Ethane, 1,2-dichloro- Industrial 8.2 kg
Methane, dichloro-, HCC-30 Industrial 370 kg
Ethanol Industrial 120000 kg
Benzene, ethyl- Industrial 130 kg
Ethylene glycol Industrial 48000 kg
Fluoride Industrial 390000 kg
Glutaraldehyde Industrial 12000 kg
Hexane Industrial 44 kg
Hydrogen chloride Industrial 5000 kg
Hydrogen sulfide Industrial 2700 kg
Lead Industrial 5900 kg
Manganese Industrial 240000 kg
Mercury Industrial 110 kg
Methanol Industrial 420000 kg
Methacrylic acid, methyl ester Industrial 36 kg
Nickel Industrial 41000 kg
Nitric acid Industrial 8.6 kg
Phenol Industrial 41000 kg
Phosphoric acid Industrial 7 kg
Dioxins, measured as 2,3,7,8- Industrial 0.00047 kg
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Industrial 140 kg
Selenium Industrial 250 kg
Styrene Industrial 11 kg
Sulfur dioxide Industrial 0.068 kg
Sulfuric acid Industrial 110000 kg
Toluene Industrial 1800 kg
Ethene, chloro- Industrial 34 kg
Xylene Industrial 220 kg
Zinc Industrial 94000 kg
Parathion, methyl Industrial 1000000 kg
Chlorpyrifos Industrial 1000000 kg
Metham sodium Industrial 2000000 kg
Endosulfan Industrial 500000 kg
Glyphosate Industrial 15000000 kg
Atrazine Industrial 3000000 kg
Simazine Industrial 3000000 kg
MCPA Agricultural 500000 kg

40
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method
Part 2: Normalisation
Emissions to soil Sub- Quantity Unit
compartment
2,4-D Agricultural 500000 kg
Paraquat Agricultural 800000 kg
Diquat Agricultural 200000 kg
Captan Agricultural 500000 kg
Mancozeb Agricultural 500000 kg

Table 20: Emissions to soil data entered into SimaPro

41