Resumen de Life cycle assessment software: Selection can impact results
Ricky Speck, Susan Selke, Rafael Auras, James Fitzsimmons
When software is used to facilitate life cycle assessments (LCAs), the implicit assumption is that the results obtained are not a function of the choice of software used. LCAs were done in both SimaPro and GaBi for simplified systems of creation and disposal of 1 kilogram each of four basic materials (aluminum, corrugated board, glass, and polyethylene terephthalate) to determine whether there were significant differences in the results. Data files and impact assessment methodologies (Impact 2002, ReCiPe, and TRACI 2) were ostensibly identical (although there were minor variations in the available ReCiPe version between the programs that were investigated). Differences in reported impacts of greater than 20% for at least one of the four materials were found for 9 of the 15 categories in Impact 2002+, 7 of the 18 categories in ReCiPe, and four of the nine categories in TRACI. In some cases, these differences resulted in changes in the relative rankings of the four materials. The causes of the differences for 14 combinations of materials and impact categories were examined by tracing the results back to the life cycle inventory data and the characterization factors in the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods. In all cases examined, a difference in the characterization factors used by the two programs was the cause of the differing results. As a result, when these software programs are used to inform choices, the result can be different conclusions about relative environmental preference that are functions purely of the software implementation of LCIA methods, rather than of the underlying data.
