Publikasjonsdetaljer
Tidsskrift: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, vol. 31, 196, 4. november 2026
Doi: doi.org/10.1007/s11367-026-02752-8
Arkiv: hdl.handle.net/11250/5595114
Arkiv: nva.sikt.no/registration/01a1a799075c-e1838380-e691-44f5-a48e-e31c2b6601c3
Sammendrag:
Spatially explicit Life Cycle Assessment aims to integrate the spatial context into the sustainability assessment, but limited standardization and software integration hinder its application in practice. This study proposes a framework that operationalizes spatialization through application typologies and demonstrates its use for Life Cycle Engineering, in the planning and sustainability analysis of industrial applications.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is originally site-generic: spatial detail is typically aggregated, and location effects not propagated into impact results. However, spatial differentiation can occur through differences in the technosphere and biosphere. Silicon production, globally distributed among six major producing countries with varying conditions, provides a relevant example for the use of spatially explicit LCA. Through Brightway and LC-IMPACT, elementary flows can be spatially allocated to their emission locations, capturing both spatial distribution and magnitude of environmental impacts. Using application typologies, this framework separates the effects of technology implementation, upstream supply chains, and location-dependent ecosystem sensitivity. This helps identify impact hotspots and prioritize mitigation measures. It also reveals location-dependent outcomes, highlighting data and software gaps to guide future research.
Spatially-explicit attributes strongly influence LCA results for silicon production. Applying the proposed typologies shows that (i) under a technology focus LCA, shifting to biocarbon and decarbonized electricity allows decreasing silicon production net climate change effect by approximately half; (ii) under a background impact focus LCA, supply-chain hotspots emerge, notably land occupation in Brazil as a dominant charcoal supplier across countries; and (iii) under a foreground impact focus LCA, territorial sensitivity to plant locations becomes explicit, with the greatest vulnerability to water stress observed in China’s Xinjiang region. The main implementation challenge is that inventory databases often lack the geographical granularity needed to attribute upstream burdens to specific production locations. Another constraint is the limited availability of spatially explicit impact categories and methods in LCA software.
Because they address different questions, accounting for spatial variation in both the technosphere and biosphere is essential for Life Cycle Engineering, without neglecting supply chain impacts and where these occur. Although this study examined different focus areas separately, a holistic implementation that integrates technology, foreground, and background dimensions is ultimately required to capture interrelated effects and support more robust mitigation decisions. Future research should target the gaps identified in this article to enable such integrated assessments.