Life Cycle Thinking for Sustainable Consumption and Production Shabbir H. Gheewala Professor and Head Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Lab The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi Eighth Researchers Meeting of the International Research Network for Low Carbon Societies Wuppertal, Germany, 6-7 September, 2016 WHY LCA? Six blind-folded men and the elephant Why are biofuels considered green? CO2e CO2e Solar Energy CO2e CO2e Biomass Biomass conversion Distribution Biofuel Biomass harvesting to Biofuel use production CO2e Land use change Life Cycle Management Gade and Mortensen, 2003 Product life cycle - Emissions to air - Emissions to water - Use of resources Impacts on: - Human health - Ecosystems - Resources Adapted from UNEP (2012) APPLICATIONS OF LCA FOR SCP IN THAILAND Summary: Life Cycle Thinking - Pathway of Thailand 1990 Cleaner Technology Technological Institute for LC Sustainability & Trade ?? 2012 2014- 1993 Sustainable Development Life Cycle Thinking (Type I) • National committee on SD • Green label 2011 • Water Footprint • Env. Footprint, • Government Green Procurement • Green GDP, SAFA 1997 • Sustainability Biofuel Study • SCP/SD indicators • LCA Pilot Projects 2010 • Carbon Footprint Organization Life Cycle Network 2000 • Thai LCA Network • LCA in academics LCA Applications (+ in Policy) • National Carbon Footprint • Eco-Product Directory 2009 2005 • Thai Eco-Design Award 2002 2007 2008 LCI Database Project • Supported by MoI LCA/Eco-Design Capacity Building • National LCI Database • Thai Green Design Network • Supported by JP government. • Eco-design8 excellent center Source: STI Courtesy: Dr Thumrongrut Mungcharoen, NSTDA LCA Applications & Initiatives SCP-SD 1 7 Indicators/ Carbon Institutional Footprint framework (since 2009) (since 2013) 2 GHG emission Water/ factors EcoProducts Environmental Directory Footprint (since 2009) (since 2010) LCA 6 Inventory data 3 Policy Green Public Procurement Justification 5 4 (since 2012) (since 2012) Sustainability • Food vs. Feed vs. Fuel ? assessment (Biofuels, •Green GDP/Green Industry AgriFood,..) • Eco-efficiency/ Factor X (since 2006) • Adder/ Externalities ? • Env. Tax, etc. Courtesy: Dr Thumrongrut Sugar cane/ Molasses/ Cassava/ Oil palm/ Jatropha Mungcharoen, NSTDA LCA-based labels in Thailand Type 1 Type 3 Ecolabel Carbon footprint labels based on LCT based on LCA Green label: 460 products from 65 companies (117 product criteria valid) Product carbon footprint label: About 1,800 products from 400 companies! Progression of carbon labels Carbon footprint reduction label: Carbon offset and neutral program: GHG reduction = 880,000 t CO e 2 GHG reduction – 12,000 t CO e 122 products from 32 companies 2 Personal carbon neutral program: GHG reduction – 325 persons / 1,600 t CO2e - Low carbon municipality program started since 2011.; 100 municipalities joined this program. - total GHGs reduction is 12,000 t CO2e, accounted from electricity and fuel saving, solid waste management, etc. Water footprint and impact of water consumption for food, feed, fuel crops production in Thailand Water requirement for crop Potential impact on water use cultivation • water stress index (WSI) • crop water requirement (CWR) • ETc = Kc × ET0 • Effective rainfall • Water deprivation 3 -1 3 -1 Water deprivation (m H2Oeq unit ) = Water deficit (m unit ) × WSI Gheewala et al. (2014), Water 6(6): 1698-1718 Multiple impacts in Life Cycle Assessment Life Cycle Environmental Sustainability Assessment of Oil Palm Plantations in Thailand Life Cycle Inventory Data Collection Sustainability Assessment Outputs Independent Life cycle inventory Smallholders LC-GHG emissions (Carbon Footprint) Group of Water requirement, footprint Land use and and impact potential Smallholders conversion Water requirement, footprint Data for supporting Thailand Materials and National LCI Database of Oil fuel used and impact potential palm plantations (Province/Region levels) Mini Estates Fertilizers & Land use and HCV areas Agrochemical Water use Identification of Environmental sustainability Mills with plantation environmental hotspots indicators and baseline data Wastes for oil palm plantation in and recommendations Thailand for supporting Agricultural for supporting certification of RSPO and/or practices sustainable oil palm other sustainability standards production Sustainability Assessment of Sugarcane Complex for Enhancing Competitiveness of Thai Sugarcane Industry Life cycle of sugarcane systems Scenarios for sustainability assessment Land use for sugarcane plantation GIS data/ LUC scenarios for (1) Sustainability sugarcane plantation in Statistic Thailand indicators & Baseline data for Sugarcane cultivation & Harvesting Comparative assessment Thai sugarcane Field data for different agricultural industry practices, varieties, Sugarcane yields (2) Life cycle GHG Sugarcane complex Comparative assessment for different production emission method systems and different by- and GHG emission Sugar milling products utilization factors for the systems. The scope of Thai sugarcane Agr. impact assessment Bagasse Filter cake Wastewater residues Cane juice includes industry (1)GHG emissions (2)Water use Bio-electricity Sugar Waste/By-products (3)Eutrophication generation processing utilizations Field data (4)Acidification (3) Roadmap for (5)Eco-toxicity sustainable (6)Human-toxicity sugarcane Molasses Bio-ethanol Spent wash (7)Photo-chemical production oxidation bioenergy (8)Socio-economic impact production in (9)Other aspects related Thailand to BSI, GBEP Bio-electricity Sugar Bio-ethanol Value-added products Sustainability Assessment of Sugarcane Complex for Enhancing Competitiveness of Thai Sugarcane Industry Environment Economic Social 1. Climate change 1. Sugarcane productivity 1. Wages paid in sugarcane system 2. Acidification 2. Processing efficiency 2. Income from selling products 3. Eutrophication 3. Net energy ratio (NER) of 3. Employment generation in bioenergy products sugarcane system 4. Human toxicity 4. Product cost/unit of product 4. Working conditions and standards 5. Photo-oxidant 5. Land tenure of farmers formation 6. PM formation 7. Ecotoxicity 8. Fossil depletion 9. Water consumption 10. Chemicals used Research Network for LCA and Policy on Food, Fuel and Climate Change • Development of capacity and human resources for LCA in Thailand • Policy recommendations on food and fuel issues vis-à-vis climate change • Commitment to continue activities on LCA of the researchers and partners Production Systems Policies Climate change mitigation Resources Feedstocks Rice Products Efficient resources use Land Energy Cassava Food Ensuring food security Sugar cane Fuel Enhancing energy security Chemical Water Bio-refinery Oil palm Towards Green Economy products & Poverty reduction Rubber Support country’s SCP Tools used Life Cycle Assessment, Carbon Footprint, Water Footprint, Ecological Footprint, Biodiversity Footprint, Material Flow Analysis. Consequential LCA, Social LCA, Cost Benefit Analysis Research Network for LCA and Policy on Food, Fuel and Climate Change JGSEE/KMUTT Mahidol U CLCA (biomass) U Phayao Kasetsart U MFA (cassava) CF, WF, BDF (rice) Mahasarakham U Prince of Songkla U SLCA (sugarcane) CF, WF, EF (oil palm, rubber) Green GDP Hybrid LCA approach : Applied National Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) incorporated with I/O table to assess the environmental impacts by LCA to quantify environmental damage cost • Convert environmental impact in physical unit to monetary unit by valuation technique. • Develop environmentally extended input-output analysis (EEIOA) • Done in broadly economic sectors, 16x16 and elaborating in detail of major industrial sectors and agriculture sectors i.e. petrochemical, paper, stable crops, livestock, etc. Advantages of life cycle thinking » Prevents problem shifting – to other life cycle stages – to other environmental problems – to other sustainability pillars – to other countries – to the future generations THANK YOU.