Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 757

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Errors in Conventional and Input‐Output—based Life—Cycle Inventories

Lenzen, Manfred·2000·Journal of Industrial Ecology

Abstract

Summary: Conventional process‐analysis‐type techniques for compiling life‐cycle inventories suffer from a truncation error, which is caused by the omission of resource requirements or pollutant releases of higher‐order upstream stages of the production process. The magnitude of this truncation error varies with the type of product or process considered, but can be on the order of 50%. One way to avoid such significant errors is to incorporate input‐output analysis into the assessment framework, resulting in a hybrid life‐cycle inventory method. Using Monte‐Carlo simulations, it can be shown that uncertainties of input‐output– based life‐cycle assessments are often lower than truncation errors in even extensive, third‐order process analyses.

Overview

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 · 10.1162/10881980052541981

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cited by

See all 757

Metadata

Authors
Lenzen, M.
Venue
Journal of Industrial Ecology
Published
2000-10
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
127-148
ISSN
  • 1088-1980 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-9290
OpenAlex
W1974386033
Cited by
757
References
0
FWCI
9.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Errors in Conventional and Input‐Output—based Life—Cycle Inventories. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/10881980052541981
The paper
Lenzen, M. (2000). Errors in Conventional and Input‐Output—based Life—Cycle Inventories. Journal of Industrial Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1162/10881980052541981

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.