Cited by 301Environmental Impact and SustainabilityElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact

When the background matters: using scenarios from integrated assessment models in prospective life cycle assessment

Open access
Mendoza Beltran, Angelica, Cox, Brian, Mutel, Chris, van Vuuren, Detlef P., Font Vivanco, David, Deetman, Sebastiaan, Edelenbosch, Oreane Y., Guinée, Jeroen +1 more·2020·Journal of Industrial Ecology

Abstract

Summary Prospective life cycle assessment (LCA) needs to deal with the large epistemological uncertainty about the future to support more robust future environmental impact assessments of technologies. This study proposes a novel approach that systematically changes the background processes in a prospective LCA based on scenarios of an integrated assessment model (IAM), the IMAGE model. Consistent worldwide scenarios from IMAGE are evaluated in the life cycle inventory using ecoinvent v3.3. To test the approach, only the electricity sector was changed in a prospective LCA of an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) and an electric vehicle (EV) using six baseline and mitigation climate scenarios until 2050. This case study shows that changes in the electricity background can be very important for the environmental impacts of EV. Also, the approach demonstrates that the relative environmental performance of EV and ICEV over time is more complex and multifaceted than previously assumed. Uncertainty due to future developments manifests in different impacts depending on the product (EV or ICEV), the impact category, and the scenario and year considered. More robust prospective LCAs can be achieved, particularly for emerging technologies, by expanding this approach to other economic sectors beyond electricity background changes and mobility applications as well as by including uncertainty and changes in foreground parameters. A more systematic and structured composition of future inventory databases driven by IAM scenarios helps to acknowledge epistemological uncertainty and to increase the temporal consistency of foreground and background systems in LCAs of emerging technologies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jiec.12825

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Goedkoop, M., R. Heijungs, M. Huijbregts, A. de Schryver, J. Stru- ijs, and R. van Zelm. 2013. ReCiPe 2008. Report I: Characteri- sation. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment (VROM). First Edition. The Netherlands.
  2. Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)] Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Spielmann, M., R. W. Scholz, O. Tietje, and P. De Haan. 2005. Sce- nario modelling in prospective LCA of transport systems: Appli- cation of formative scenario analysis. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 10: 325-335.
  4. UNFCCC. 2010. The Cancun agreements. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: Cancun Cli- mate Change Conference. https://unfccc.int/event/cancun- climate-change-conference-november-2010-meetings-page. Ac- cessed October 2018.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mendoza Beltran, A., Cox, B., Mutel, C., van Vuuren, D. P., Font Vivanco, D., Deetman, S., Edelenbosch, O. Y., Guinée, J., & Tukker, A.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Environmental Sciences (CML), Department of Industrial Ecology Leiden University The Netherlands
  • Paul Scherrer Institute (CH)
  • Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI) Aargau Switzerland
  • Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) Den Haag The Netherlands
  • UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, The Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources University College London London UK
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (NL)
Venue
Journal of Industrial Ecology
Published
2018-11-21
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
64-79
ISSN
  • 1088-1980 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-9290
OpenAlex
W2901229363
Cited by
301
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 53 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2
FWCI
6.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Industrial Ecology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DORA PSI (Paul Scherrer Institute) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Virtual Community of Pathological Anatomy (University of Castilla La Mancha) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (H2020‐MSCA‐IF‐2015, 702869)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Keywords
prospective life cycle assessment, integrated assessment models, image models, electric vehicles, internal combustion engine vehicles, epistemic uncertainty, climate change mitigation scenarios, life cycle inventory databases, emerging technologies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review