Journal of Industrial Ecology · 2023 · 27 citations · 23 references
ManagementEnvironmental EngineeringSystems EngineeringDatabasesLife Cycle AssessmentSoftware EngineeringAlternatives AnalysisLife Cycle Impact AssessmentLife Cycle Inventory AnalysisLifecycle AssessmentSoftware EvolutionTechnology Life Cycle AnalysisComparative Life Cycle InventoryData Migration StrategiesEnvironmental Impact IndicatorsLife Cycle Assessment DatabasesLife Cycle Assessment SoftwareLife Cycle Inventory DatabasesLife Cycle Inventory ModelingTechnology Alternatives
Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) databases and software evolve. We analyzed to which extent software and evolving life cycle inventory databases affect the comparison of technology alternatives, using a comparative LCA on permanent magnets as a case study, with two selected software tools: CMLCA and Brightway LCA. We migrated the system models from the CMLCA to Brightway LCA software and alternated between the ecoinvent database versions 2.2 and 3.1 to 3.6 in the system background. When using ecoinvent v3.6 instead of v2.2, the change of the indicator results ranged from to 283%. The evolution of the ecoinvent database impacted the absolute amounts of the characterized results and the relative performance between alternatives. The impact category with the highest variability was ionizing radiation, which even showed a ranking inversion with ecoinvent v3.4. In contrast, the impact of using CMLCA or Brightway was negligible because the same data and modeling assumptions caused percentage differences below 0.4%. During the semi‐automated data migration to Brightway, we identified 23 environmental flows in the CMLCA model that were not paired with their corresponding characterization factors in the published study of reference. This error had led to an underestimation of 63% in the photochemical oxidation indicator of one of the alternatives. This underestimation relates to an interoperability issue regarding the nomenclature of environmental flows in software alternatives and is a matter of data implementation rather than an issue intrinsic to the selected software. Finally, we identified improvement opportunities for the transparency and reusability of LCA models. This article met the requirements for a Gold‐Gold JIE data openness badge described at http://jie.click/badges .
23
The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship
Mark D. Wilkinson, Michel Dumontier, IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg et al. · Scientific Data · 2016 · 17.8K citations · Full text