Guido Sonnemann

Bio: Guido Sonnemann is an academic researcher from University of Bordeaux. The author has contributed to research in topics: Life-cycle assessment & Sustainability. The author has an hindex of 33, co-authored 161 publications receiving 4814 citations. Previous affiliations of Guido Sonnemann include United Nations Environment Programme & Rovira i Virgili University.

What Do We Know About Metal Recycling Rates

Abstract: Summary The recycling of metals is widely viewed as a fruitful sustainability strategy, but little information is available on the degree to which recycling is actually taking place. This article provides an overview on the current knowledge of recycling rates for 60 metals. We propose various recycling metrics, discuss relevant aspects of recycling processes, and present current estimates on global end-of-life recycling rates (EOL-RR; i.e., the percentage of a metal in discards that is actually recycled), recycled content (RC), and old scrap ratios (OSRs; i.e., the share of old scrap in the total scrap flow). Because of increases in metal use over time and long metal in-use lifetimes, many RC values are low and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Because of relatively low efficiencies in the collection and processing of most discarded products, inherent limitations in recycling processes, and the fact that primary material is often relatively abundant and low-cost (which thereby keeps down the price of scrap), many EOL-RRs are very low: Only for 18 metals (silver, aluminum, gold, cobalt, chromium, copper, iron, manganese, niobium, nickel, lead, palladium, platinum, rhenium, rhodium, tin, titanium, and zinc) is the EOL-RR above 50% at present. Only for niobium, lead, and ruthenium is the RC above 50%, although 16 metals are in the 25% to 50% range. Thirteen metals have an OSR greater than 50%. These estimates may be used in considerations of whether recycling efficiencies can be improved; which metric could best encourage improved effectiveness in recycling; and an improved understanding of the dependence of recycling on economics, technology, and other factors.

Towards a life cycle sustainability assessment: making informed choices on products

Abstract: In this introduction to the concept of life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), we acknowledge the foundations laid by previous works and initiatives. One such initiative has been the ISO 14040 series (Environmental management -- Life cycle assessment -- Principles and framework), which in addition to the ISO 26000: Social Responsibility Guidance Standard, and the contribution of a number of international initiatives (Appendix A) have been essential for the development of this publication. The life cycle of a product involves flows of material, energy and money. Nonetheless, the picture is not complete unless we look also at the production and consumption impacts on all actors along the 'value chain' -- workers, local communities, consumers and society itself. Different life cycle assessment techniques allow individuals and enterprises to assess the impact of their purchasing decisions and production methods along different aspects of this value chain. An (Environmental) life cycle assessment (LCA) looks at potential impacts to the environment as a result of the extraction of resources, transportation, production, use, recycling and discarding of products; life cycle costing (LCC) is used to assess the cost implications of this life cycle; and social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) examines the social consequences. However, in order to get the 'whole picture', it is vital to extend current life cycle thinking to encompass all three pillars of sustainability: (i) environmental, (ii) economic and (iii) social. This means carrying out an assessment based on environmental, economic and social issues -- by conducting an overarching life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). This publication shows how all three techniques -- which all share similar methodological frameworks and aims -- can be combined to make the move towards an overarching LCSA possible. Because it is holistic, systemic and rigorous, (environmental) LCA is the preferred technique when it comes to compiling and assessing information about potential environmental impacts of a product. It has been standardized in the ISO 14040 and 14044 and is applied by practitioners globally. Life cycle costing as a technique to calculate and manage costs, especially for large investments has been used to support decision-makers in procurement for decades, with a rigorous focus on private costs. Prerequisites for better alignment with (environmental) LCA are currently being researched and will help the further development of the method. As an emerging technique, S-LCA will play a key role in complementing material- and energy-flow-related information. Since the late 1990s, the Life Cycle Initiative partnership of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) has enhanced the role of life cycle based approaches and thinking in several ways. Two examples are the partnership's contributions to the Marrakech Process on Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) and inputs for the development of a 10-Year Framework of Programmes on SCP (10YFP). This current publication, Towards a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment, expands this work by bringing the concept of LCSA methods to the fore. In doing so, it will contribute to the sustainable development discussions of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Summit) in 2012 ('Rio+20'). The text will also contribute to the UNEP Green Economy Initiative -- which strives to build economies that bring improved human well-being, reduce inequalities over the long term and which keep future generations safe from environmental risk and ecological scarcity. The publication includes eight case studies to illustrate how current and emerging life cycle assessment techniques are being implemented worldwide from Asia through Europe and Latin America.

Toward meaningful end points of biodiversity in life cycle assessment.

Abstract: Halting current rates of biodiversity loss will be a defining challenge of the 21st century. To assess the effectiveness of strategies to achieve this goal, indicators and tools are required that monitor the driving forces of biodiversity loss, the changing state of biodiversity, and evaluate the effectiveness of policy responses. Here, we review the use of indicators and approaches to model biodiversity loss in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), a methodology used to evaluate the cradle-to-grave environmental impacts of products. We find serious conceptual shortcomings in the way models are constructed, with scale considerations largely absent. Further, there is a disproportionate focus on indicators that reflect changes in compositional aspects of biodiversity, mainly changes in species richness. Functional and structural attributes of biodiversity are largely neglected. Taxonomic and geographic coverage remains problematic, with the majority of models restricted to one or a few taxonomic groups and geographi...

Input Output Analysis Foundations And Extensions

Abstract: Thank you very much for reading input output analysis foundations and extensions. As you may know, people have search hundreds times for their chosen readings like this input output analysis foundations and extensions, but end up in infectious downloads. Rather than reading a good book with a cup of coffee in the afternoon, instead they are facing with some malicious virus inside their desktop computer.

Life Cycle Assessment: Past, Present, and Future†

Abstract: Environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) has developed fast over the last three decades. Whereas LCA developed from merely energy analysis to a comprehensive environmental burden analysis in the 1970s, full-fledged life cycle impact assessment and life cycle costing models were introduced in the 1980s and 1990s, and social-LCA and particularly consequential LCA gained ground in the first decade of the 21st century. Many of the more recent developments were initiated to broaden traditional environmental LCA to a more comprehensive Life Cycle Sustainability Analysis (LCSA). Recently, a framework for LCSA was suggested linking life cycle sustainability questions to knowledge needed for addressing them, identifying available knowledge and related models, knowledge gaps, and defining research programs to fill these gaps. LCA is evolving into LCSA, which is a transdisciplinary integration framework of models rather than a model in itself. LCSA works with a plethora of disciplinary models and guides selecting t...

Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review

Abstract: This review summarizes and organizes the literature on life cycle assessment (LCA), life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) and life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) studies carried out for environmental evaluation of buildings and building related industry and sector (including construction products, construction systems, buildings, and civil engineering constructions). The review shows that most LCA and LCEA are carried out in what is shown as “exemplary buildings”, that is, buildings that have been designed and constructed as low energy buildings, but there are very few studies on “traditional buildings”, that is, buildings such as those mostly found in our cities. Similarly, most studies are carried out in urban areas, while rural areas are not well represented in the literature. Finally, studies are not equally distributed around the world.