Introduction to the UNEP/SETAC framework for life cycle impact assessment Version March 28, 2011 Sebastien Humbert Quantis

Content 1. Context 2. Problematic regarding quantificatio of water footprinting 3. Initiatives in water footprinting 4. The UNEP-SETAC WULCA work 5. Operationalization of the framework 6. Example of application [Title of the PPT] 2

LCSA, SETAC Context and Problematic 3

LCSA, SETAC “global warming” … “global drying” 4 © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC 5

Water Footprint Implications/Communication 6

LCSA, SETAC Which value is correct? Differences? 7 Chapagain and Hoekstra Humbert et al © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Elovena (Raisio, FI) liters/100 g 0.2 liters/100 g (excluding green water) Carbon footprint: 80 gCO 2eq /100 g

LCSA, SETAC A t-shirt – Exemple of Switcher Environmental labelling of Switcher products  Carbon footprint – climate change  Water footprint – water consumption and associated impacts 9 © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Environmental product declaration Carbon footprint 10 CO2 N2O CFC CH4 Water

LCSA, SETAC Water in life cycle assessment 11

LCSA, SETAC 12 The life cycle concept © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Why expand the scope of water footprint to LCA? 13 Climate change (carbon footprint) Ecosystem quality Natural resources Human health Water footprint To avoid burden shifting from one impact category to another (avoid “perverse outcomes” – WBCSD Montreux workshop key learning) © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Coffe as an example of an LCA 14 1 cup of coffee at home © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Greenhouse gases (CO 2, N 2 O, etc.) emissions 15 CO2 N2O CFC CH4 © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Water use/impacts 16 © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Methods assessing water UNEP-SETAC WULCA framework 17

LCSA, SETAC Definitions Water related definitions 18 Off-stream water use In-stream water use Green waterBlue waterGrey water Degradative use Consumptive use Process

LCSA, SETAC UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative International initiative for LCA Proposed a framework to evaluate water in LCA Review of different methods Recommendations (end 2009) for: –Science –Practitioners (incl. industry) 19

LCSA, SETAC Natural resources UNEP-SETAC framework 20 Future generations Less water for future generations Ecosystems Water use Less water for ecosystems Less water for humans Human health Ecosystems All impact categories Compensation Human use Modification of availabilities Source: Bayart et al.

LCSA, SETAC 21 Stress indexes Water Use Per Resource Seckler Smakhtin Falkenmark Ohlsson Alcamo Sullivan Pfister Water Poverty Index Gleick Water Resources Vulnerability Index Raskin Indexes (not described) Hoekstra Bayart (UNEP-SETAC framework) Human life Biotic environment Abiotic environment Frischknecht Midpoint (benchmarking) Ridoutt Pfister Mila-I-Canals Hoekstra Veolia Pfister Bayart Boulay Human life Biotic environment Abiotic environment Boulay Maendly Humbert Boesch Van Zelm Endpoint (damage) Pfister Motoshita Pfister Verones Motoshita Verones (ground) Payet Ecoinvent Bayart Chapagain Hoekstra GaBi Inventory (accounting) WBCSD Peters Boulay Vince Mila-I- Canals Quantis DatabasesMethods WFN In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this review.

LCSA, SETAC Operationalization of the framework 22

LCSA, SETAC Scope of the proposed framework 23 Endpoint (Damage) « Impact on humans, ecosystems and resources ? » Midpoint « Is it a potential problem ? » « Water stressed area ? » Inventory « What ? » « Where ? » « How much ? » Reporting & Communication « Single score in litres equivalent ? » © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Supply chain Watershed 1 Manufacturing Watershed 2 Use phase Watershed 3 End of life Watershed 4 In practice! 24 Ecosystem quality Single score Inventory Water withdrawal renewable groundwater, lake, river, … Water release Surface water,… …, Chemically and thermally polluted water Blue water Green water Different cause-effect models (Characterization factors) Human health = Resources Impact assessmentLife cycle Water stress indicator (water scarcity potential) * ** * Chemically and thermally polluted water are refered as grey water in the Water Footprint Network method. Note that grey water is a discussed indicator and sometimes refer as inventory and sometimes as impact assessment ** Water Footprint Network method (if needed) © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Blue water: evaporated Grey water Withdrawal: surface water Withdrawal: groundwater Blue water: incorporated in the product Water stress assessment (using a water stress index, WSI, based on scarcity) 25 © Quantis

LCSA, SETAC Water stress assessment (using a water stress index, WSI, based on scarcity) 26 Blue waterWSIWeighted blue water Grey water Withdrawal WSI (?) X% WSI Weighted grey water Weighted withdrawal InventoryImpact assessment Σ Weighted inventory + + = © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Water Impact Modeling 27

LCSA, SETAC Detailed assessment 28 In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Water footprint interpretation and use 29

LCSA, SETAC Regionalization of impacts 30 Water use (inventory) (m3) Scarcity weighted water use (using water stress index) (m3- eq) Risks associated with water use: Water rights Water pollution Ground water over exploitation Risks associated with water use: Water pollution Ground water over exploitation Reduced availability for nutrition Impacts on human health (DALY) Impacts on ecosystem quality (PDF-m2-y) Risks associated with water use: Water pollution Risks associated with water use: Water pollution Ground water over exploitation River drying Greenhouse gases emissions Greenhouse gases emissions (from deforestation) © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Importance to assess impacts/risk 31 © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Compensation measures LCA-based framework allows to compare benefits from compensation measures (responsible actions, offsetting measures) with impacts associated with activity e.g., factory in India (50% evap., 50% poll.) 32 PollutionConsumption 1’000’000 m 3 /y with DF 101’000’000 m 3 /y (blue water) 10’000’000 m 3 /y grey water20 DALY/y (Pfister et al.) Reduced runoff b/c organic farming over 1’000 ha Clean freshwater supply to 10’000 people Benefits: 2’000’000 m 3 /y (grey water avoided) 100 DALY/y 0.01 DALY/p-y)

LCSA, SETAC Example: Biofuel 33

LCSA, SETAC 34 Per m 3 of water consumed Damage factors at the watershed level Pfister, Koehler & Hellweg (2009), ES&T 43(11): 4098–4104 Ecosystem damage potential (CF EQ )

LCSA, SETAC 35 Mendoza Reference region Mendoza region Koehler, Pfister et al Rape seed cultivation for biodiesel production

LCSA, SETAC Aggregated impacts (EI99) pt/kg > 50% increase Water impacts Other impacts Mendoza production LCIA LCIA Swiss watershed Argentina production level country average Koehler, Pfister et al Environmental impact of rapeseed production at country and watershed level

LCSA, SETAC > 50% increase Water impacts Other impacts Mendoza production ecosystem quality impacts Aggregated impacts (EI99) pt/kg Koehler, Pfister et al LCIA LCIA Swiss watershed Argentina production level country average Environmental impact of rapeseed production on country and watershed level

LCSA, SETAC Rapeseed-based methyl ester (biodiesel) Overall environmental damage Koehler, Pfister et al

Thank you for your attention 39

LCSA, SETAC Water footprinting and life cycle assessment Examples showing Waterfootprint vs Multi-indicators 40 In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this example.

LCSA, SETAC Example: energy type 41 Natural gaz Wood ? Hydropower Coal © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Inventory 42

LCSA, SETAC >60 l/kWh (neglected in WFN method) Different types of inventory 43 © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Impact assessment Impacts of freshwater consumption on human health, ecosystem quality and resource (Pfister and al. 2009) Impact of thermal pollution in freshwater aquatic environments (Verones et al. 2010) Impact of groundwater extraction on disappearance of plant species (Van Zelm et al. 2010) Impact of hydropower water use on aquatic biodiversity damages (Maendly and Humbert 2009) 44 © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Comparison with total impacts 45

LCSA, SETAC Water stress vs Global warming vs impact on Human health from other pollutants (all at midpoint) 46 Note that when using the current midpoint approach based on a water scarcity potential, the water stress score for any other country than India would have a different absolute value, but the same ranking (same structure of the bars of the graph) because the difference between two countries is a single multiplication factor. © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Water stress (France and India) vs Global warming vs impact on Human health from other pollutants (all at endpoint) 47 © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Total impact on human health E -4 © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Water (France and India) vs Global warming vs total impact on Ecosystem quality (all at endpoint) 49 © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.

LCSA, SETAC Total impact on ecosystem quality 50 Deforestation? (in India) © Quantis. In process of being published. Please contact Quantis before citing any results from this method.