Future-Oriented LCA

• Andersen, P.D., Bjerregaard, E.: Prospective life-cycle assessment on wind power technology 2020. In: TA-Datenbank-Nachrichten, nr. 4, vol. 10 (2001)

  Google Scholar 

• Andersen, P.D., Borup, M., Krogh, T.: Managing long-term environmental aspects of wind turbines: a prospective case study. Int. J. Technol. Policy Manag. 7(4), 339–354 (2007)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Beck, U.: Risk Society. Towards a New Modernity, 1st edn. SAGE Publications Ltd., Thousand Oaks, CA (1992). (13: 978-0803983465)

  Google Scholar 

• Bell, W.: Foundations of Futures Studies, vol. 1. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick. IBSN: 978-0-7658-0539-3 (2009)

  Google Scholar 

• Boston Consulting Group: Perspectives on Experience, Boston, MA (1972)

  Google Scholar 

• Caduff, M., Huijbregts, M.A.J., Koehler, A., Althaus, H.-J., Hellweg, S.: Scaling relationships in life cycle assessment. J. Ind. Ecol. 18(3), 393–406 (2014). doi:10.1111/jiec.12122

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Daheim, C., Uerz, G.: Corporate foresight in Europe: from trend based on logics to open foresight. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 20(3), 321–336 (2008)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Eckelman, M.J., Mauter, M.S., Isaacs, J.A., Elimelech, M.: New perspectives on nanomaterial aquatic ecotoxicity: production impacts exceed direct exposure impacts for carbon nanotoubes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46(5), 2902–2910 (2012). doi:10.1021/es203409a

  Article  Google Scholar 

• EEA: Late Lessons From Early Warning: The Precautionary Principle 1896–2000. Environmental Issues Report no. 22. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen (2001)

  Google Scholar 

• Fisher, J.C., Pry, R.H.: A simple substitution model of technological change. J. Forecast. Soc. Change 3, 75–88 (1971)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Frankl, P., Rubik, F. (eds.): Life Cycle Assessment in Industry and Business: Adoption Patterns, Applications and Implications. Springer, Berlin (2000)

  Google Scholar 

• Frischknecht, R., Büsser, S., Krewitt, W.: Environmental assessment of future technologies: how to trim LCA to fit this goal? Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 14(6), 584–588 (2009). doi:10.1007/s11367-009-0120-6

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Funtowicz, S., O’Connor, M., Ravetz, J.: Scientific communication, international cooperation and capacity building for sustainable development. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. 2(3), 363–367 (1999)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Fusfeld, A.R.: The technology progress function: a new technique for forecasting. Technol. Forecast. 1, 301–312 (1970)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Gavankar, S., Suh, S., Keller, A.A.: The role of scale and technology maturity in life cycle assessment of emerging technologies a case study on carbon nanotubes. J. Ind. Ecol. 00, 1–10 (2014). doi:10.1111/jiec.12175

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Grubb, G.F., Bakshi, B.R.: Life cycle of titanium dioxide nanoparticle production. J. Ind. Ecol. 15(1), 81–95 (2011)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Harremöes, P.: The need to account for uncertainty in public decision making related to technological change. Integr. Assess. 4(1), 18–25 (2003)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Hisschemöller, M., Hoppe, R., Dunn, W.N., Ravetz, J.R.: Knowledge, Power, and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis. Transaction Publishers, London (2001)

  Google Scholar 

• Hospido, A., Davis, J., Berlin, J., Sonesson, U.: A review of methodological issues affecting LCA of novel food products. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 15(1), 44–52 (2010). doi:10.1007/s11367-009-0130-4

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Jantsch, E.: Technological Forecasting in Perspective. OECD, Paris (1967)

  Google Scholar 

• Latour, B.: We have never been modern. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Birmingham (1993)

  Google Scholar 

• Lemons, J. (ed.): Scientific Uncertainty and Environmental Problem Solving. Blackwell Science, Oxon (1995)

  Google Scholar 

• Linstone, H., Turoff, M. (eds.): The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA (1975)

  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Miller, S.A., Keoleian, G.A.: Framework for analyzing transformative technologies in life cycle assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49(5), 3067–3075 (2015). doi:10.1021/es505217a

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Millet, S.M., Honton, E.J.: A Manager’s Guide to Technology Forecasting and Strategy Analysis Methods. Batelle Press, Columbus (1991)

  Google Scholar 

• Pesonen, H.-L., Ekvall, T., Fleischer, G., Huppes, G., Jahn, C., Klos, Z.S., et al.: Framework for scenario development in LCA. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 5(1), 21–30 (2000). doi:10.1007/BF02978555

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Phaal, R., Farrukh, C.J.P., Probert, D.R.: Technology roadmapping—a planning framework for evolution and revolution. In: Technology Forecasting and Social Change. Elsevier 71(1–2), 5–26 (2004)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Popper, R.: How are foresight methods selected? Foresight 10(6), 62–89 (2008)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Rasmussen, B., Borup, M., Andersen, P.D., Borch, K.: Prospective technology studies with a life cycle perspective. Int. J. Technol. Policy Manag. 5(3), 227–239 (2005)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Ravetz, J.: What is post-normal science. Futures 31, 647–654 (1999)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Rebitzer, G., Ekvall, T. (eds.): Scenarios in Life-Cycle Assessment. SETAC Press, Pensacola (2004)

  Google Scholar 

• Roos, S., Zamani, B., Sandin, G., Peters, G.M., Svanström, M.: A life cycle assessment (LCA)-based approach to guiding an industry sector towards sustainability: the case of the Swedish apparel sector. J. Clean. Prod. 133, 691–700 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.146

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Schwartz, P.: The art of the long view. Planning for the future in an uncertain world, p. 272. Wiley, New York (1998)

  Google Scholar 

• Tichy, G.: The over-optimism among experts in assessment and foresight. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 71, 341–363 (2004)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Utterback, J.M.: Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation. Harvard Business School Press, Harvard (1996)

  Google Scholar 

• Walker, W.E., Harremoës, P., Rotmans, J., van der Sluijs, J.P., van Asselt, M.B.A., Janssen, P., Krayer von Krauss, M.P.: Defining uncertainty. A conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Integr. Assess. 4(1), 5–17 (2003)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Weidema, B., Ekvall, T., Pesonen, H., Rebitzer, G., Sonnemann, G., Spielmann, M.: Scenarios in Life-Cycle Assessment. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Pensacola, FL (2004)

  Google Scholar 

• Weidema, B.: Market Information in Life Cycle Assessment. Environmental Project 863. Danish Environmental Protection Agency (2003). www.mst.dk

• Wender, B.A., Seager, T.P.: Anticipatory life-cycle assessment of SWCNT-enabled lithium ion batteries. In: David R. (ed.) Nanotechnology for sustainable manufacturing, CRC Press pp. 247–262 (2014)

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Wender, B.A., Foley, R.W., Prado-Lopez, V., Ravikumar, D., Eisenberg, D.A., Hottle, T.A., et al.: Illustrating anticipatory life cycle assessment for emerging photovoltaic technologies. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48(18), 10531–10538 (2014). doi:10.1021/es5016923

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Wright, T.P.: Factors affecting the cost of airplanes. J. Aeronaut. Sci. 3, 122–128 (1936)

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Zimmermann, B.M., Dura, H., Baumann, M.J., Weil, M.R.: Prospective time-resolved LCA of fully electric supercap vehicles in Germany. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 11(3), 425–434 (2015). doi:10.1002/ieam.1646

  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors and Affiliations

1. Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark

   Stig Irving Olsen

2. Division for Technology and Innovation Management, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark

   Mads Borup & Per Dannemand Andersen

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stig Irving Olsen .

Editors and Affiliations

1. Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark

   Michael Z. Hauschild

2. IRSTEA, UMR ITAP, ELSA Research group and ELSA-PACT, Environmental and Social Sustainability Assessment, Montpellier, France

   Ralph K. Rosenbaum

3. Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark

   Stig Irving Olsen

Appendix: Questions

The questions are formulated as standard questions which can be specified further in the work in the different technology areas according to the needs. The questions ensure that different types of development mechanisms can be addressed in a systematic manner. It is not expected that answers can be found to all questions in all cases. There will probably be questions which cannot be answered or where only vague guesses can be suggested. One’s first answers to the set of questions can be taken up again later in the analysis process, whereby some of the answers and the understanding of the development dynamics can be refined.

The set of questions below is an example of questions that can be used for illuminating future developments in an area (the area in the example is energy technology). The questions can either be used in a questionnaire survey, for dialogue with individual experts or for reflection internally among the LCA analysts. It is structured in three sections:

• Basics—what technology are we talking about.

• Drivers for technology change.

• Changes resulting from the drivers.

Both ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ drivers (barriers) are meant to be included. The types of driving forces addressed are:

• Technical and technological issues.

• Science and knowledge developments.

• Energy systems —infrastructures.

• Use of the technology—e.g. what role in the electricity systems?

• Where, on which markets, is the technology used—how wide spread is the use?

• Regional and geographical aspects.

• Industrial production of the technology.

• Innovation networks and innovation communities of the technology.

• Public regulation and public support.

• Societal and political concerns.

• Environmental challenges and possible risks.

Each question can be asked for (a) the near future; (b) the midterm future and (c) the long-term future.

1. 1.

   Basics (in brief)

   1. 1.1

      What technology is addressed?

   2. 1.2

      What different basic technology concepts are available or seen as possible alternatives in the future? By technology concepts we mean for example, thin-film PV, silicon PV, etc.

   3. 1.3

      What are the main elements (sub-technologies) of these technology concepts? e.g. tower, blades, foundation, net connection, etc. of off-shore wind farms, etc.

2. 2.

   Drivers for technology change

   By ‘drivers’ is both meant ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ (limiting) factors influencing the development of the technology.

   1. 2.1

      For each main element: What are the relevant developments in techniques and technological knowledge connected to this component?

   2. 2.2

      For each main element: What relevant influences from generic techno-scientific areas as material research, nanotechnology , biotechnology, biochemistry and information and communication technology can be identified as drivers for change? For example, functional surfaces, biochemical processes, corrosion knowledge, material techniques, sensor technology, microbiologic processes, etc.

   3. 2.3

      What are the relevant developments in integration of the technology in the energy systems and infrastructures? For example, integration technologies, institutional and organisational arrangements, development of fuel supply chains , regulatory procedures, etc.

   4. 2.4

      What are the relevant developments in the use of the technology: what role will it have in electricity systems? For example, central/decentral production; general purpose or specific purpose, niche markets, etc.

   5. 2.5

      What are the relevant developments in dissemination of the technology—how widespread will the use be; on what specific markets?

   6. 2.6

      What regional/national/geographical aspects can be identified as drivers for technology change? For example, specific conditions in some regional electricity systems, climatic aspects, etc.

   7. 2.7

      What relevant developments in industrial production of the technology can be identified as drivers for technology change?

   8. 2.8

      What relevant developments in the knowledge community and the network of innovators of the technology can be identified as drivers for technological change? For example, developments in the ‘industrial sector’ of the technology, industrial innovators/manufacturers, research programmes, other support institutions, etc.

   9. 2.9

      What public regulation and public support can be identified as drivers for technology change? For example, market support, development programmes, etc.

   10. 2.10

       What public, societal and political concerns can be identified as drivers for technology change? e.g. security of supply, employment, safety issues, emission restrictions, etc.

   11. 2.11

       What developments in environmental challenges and risks can be identified and become drivers for technology change?

3. 3.

   Resulting changes from the drivers

   This section concludes from section 2, sketching the picture of the technology in the short-term future, medium-term future and long-term future and pointing out relevant LCI issues.

   1. 3.1

      Taken into account the questions in section 2—What main development path can be identified for the technology?

   2. 3.2

      Taken into account the questions in section 2—What relevant alternative/extreme development paths can be identified?

   3. 3.3

      Direct changes: Technology change.

      Picture of the future technology: What will, in brief, be the characteristics of the technology, its design, costs, use and life cycle?

      • Total design and selection of technology concept (also covering material use).

      • Design and the main sub-technologies/main parts.

      • Production processes.

      • Installation, e.g. system/support structure, foundation, site preparation, power conditioning equipment, land requirement and storage requirement.

      • Operating and maintenance.

      • Dismantling and waste handling.

   4. 3.4

      Expected impacts on LCI issues

      How will these changes lead to changes in LCI issues (material/resource consumptions, environmental impacts, etc.)

      • Total design and selection of technology concept (also covering material use)

      • Design and the main sub-technologies/main parts

      • Production processes

      • Installation, e.g. system/support structure, foundation, site preparation, power conditioning equipment, land requirement and storage requirement.

      • Operating and maintenance

      • Dismantling and waste handling

Cite this chapter

Olsen, S.I., Borup, M., Andersen, P.D. (2018). Future-Oriented LCA. In: Hauschild, M., Rosenbaum, R., Olsen, S. (eds) Life Cycle Assessment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_21

Download citation

• .RIS
• .ENW
• .BIB

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_21

• Published: 02 September 2017

• Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

• Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56474-6

• Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56475-3

• eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)