QuantisParc scientifique EPFL, Bat A

CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerlandsebastien.humbert@quantis-intl.com

www.quantis-intl.com

Water footprinting,life cycle assessment,and standardisation

Review of the state-of-play regarding LCA-based water accounting

CEO Water MandateNew York, USAApril 14, 2010Sebastien Humbert, Scientific director & ISO convenerJon Dettling, Director USQuantisLausanne, SwitzerlandBoston, USA

Contact: sebastien.humbert@quantis-intl.com, +41-79-754-7566

“global warming” … “global drying”

Introduction:Examples of water footprint results

Water footprint?

Meaning?

Elovena100 liters/100 g

0.2 liters/100 g (excluding green water)

Carbon footprint: 80 gCO2eq/100 g

Which value is correct?

• Differences?

Chapagain and Hoekstra

Humbert et al.

29

4

Environmental product declaration• Carbon footprint

CO2 N2O

CFCCH4

Water

CO2 N2O

CFCCH4

Water

Life cycle assessment and water footprinting

The life cycle concept

History of water footprinting

Water in life cycle assessment• Few developments until 5 years ago• Assessed mainly through water

inventory/accounting• Recognized by LCA community:

– « … urgent need for methodological solutions to properly account for water-use related to environmental impacts of a product’s life cycle and globalised value chains, many of which exhibit unsustainable use of water resources. »

– International Journal of LCA (Koehler 2008)

Initiatives in water footprinting

Examples of water related initiatives

!Non exhaustive list!

UNEP-SETAC Frameworkand

Review of existing methods

UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative• International initiative for LCA• Review of different methods

– Under review– Any method to add?

• Recommendations (mid 2010) for:– Science– Practitioners (incl. industry)

• Contact: – Sebastien Humbert, Quantis, Switzerland

Impact assessment perspective

Future generations

Less water for future generations

EcosystemsWater use

Less water for ecosystems

Less water for humans

Human health

Ecosystems

Natural resources

All impact categories

Compensation

Human use

Mod

ifica

tion

of a

vaila

bilit

ies

UNEP-SETAC framework

Humans(health and welfare)

Ecosystems(biotic environment)

Resource(abiotic environment)

Boulay

Maendly Humbert Boesch

(CExD)

Van Zelm

Endpoint (Damage)

Pfister

Motoshita

Pfister Pfister

Water Use Per Resource

Seckler

Scarcity indexes

Smakhtin

FalkenmarkOhlsson

Alcamo

Sullivan

Pfister

Water Poverty Index

Gleick

Water Resources Vulnerability Index

Raskin

Indexes

How much (m3)/ What?

Can it be / Potential problem?

Actual conse-quences?

Ecoinvent

Bayart Vince

Chapagain HoekstraGaBi

Inventory (~accounting)Global

Water ToolMila-I-Canals

Ecosystems(biotic environment)

Humans(health and welfare)

Boulay

Resource(abiotic environment)

RidouttPfister

Mila-I-CanalsMila-I-Canals

Chapagain Hoekstra / WFN Frischknecht

RidouttPfister

Midpoint (~benchmarking)

RidouttPfister

Bayart

Verones

Water footprinting at different levelsCompany vs. Product

DISTRIBUTION

Company vs Product perspective

21

SUPPLY CHAIN PRODUCTION USE PHASE END OF LIFE

COMPANYPRODUCT

In practice!

Impacts on human health

Pfister et al. (2009): Impact on human health caused by malnutrition and hygens.

Boulay et al. (2010): Impact on human health caused by (malnutrition) and compensation scenarios.

Impacts on ecosystem qualityPfister et al. (2009): Impact on ecosystem quality caused by water quantity reduction.

Verones et al. (2010): Impacts on aquatic biodiversity from release of cooling water warmer than receiving environment (reduction in dissolved O2).

Van Zelm et al. (2010): Impacts on terrestrial plants caused by reduction of ground water level.

Maendly and Humbert (2010): Impacts on aquatic biodiversity from dams.

Impacts on resources for future generations• « Black water » / fossil ground water

Pfister et al. (2009): Impact on future availability of water from non-renewable ground water abstraction.

« Screening » approach(Water stress index, WSI)

Screening vs full assessment

Turbined water

DE CH DE CH DE CH

Regionalization of impacts

Greenhouse gases emissions

Greenhouse gases emissions (from deforestation)

Water use (including “green water”)

Water impact (human health and ecosystems)

Risks associated with

water use:Water pollution

Risks associated with water use:

Water rightsWater pollution

Ground water over exploitation

Risks associated with water use:

Water pollutionGround water over

exploitationReduced availability for

nutrition

Risks associated with water use:

Water pollutionGround water over

exploitationRiver drying

Offsetting measures• LCA-based framework allows to compare benefits

from offsetting measures (compensation actions) with impacts associated with activity

• E.g., Factory in India (50% evap., 50% poll.)

Pollution Consumption

1’000’000 m3/y with DF 10 1’000’000 m3/y (bleu water)

10’000’000 m3/y grey water 20 DALY/y (Pfister et al.)

Reduced runoff b/c organic farming over 1’0000 ha

Clean freshwater supply to 10’000 people

Benefits: 2’000’000 m3/y (grey water avoided) 100 DALY/y (@ 0.01 DALY/p-y)

LCA and risk assessment related to water use

LCA for risk assessment related to water use

• Basic concept of LCA: Supply chain– Same approach for strategic risk assessment

• Knowing and understanding the supply chain

– Risk quantified as % of revenue

Framework for risks related to water use

Physical risks

Deficiency or CompensationScarcityQuality

T-shirt produced in India and Turkey

Example: Biofuel

Ecosystem damage potential (CFEQ)• Per m3 of water consumed• Damage factors on watershed level

Pfister, Koehler & Hellweg (2009), ES&T  43(11): 4098–4104

Rape seed cultivation for biodiesel production

MendozaReference region

Mendoza region

Koehler, Pfister et al. 2008

Environmental impact of rapeseed production on country and watershed level

Aggregated im

pacts (EI99) pt/kg

> 50% increase

Water impacts

Other impacts

Mendozaproduction

LCIA                             LCIA                                Swiss watershed                   Argentina                      production

level                    country average           Koehler, Pfister et al. 2008

Environmental impact of rapeseed production on country and watershed level

> 50% increase

LCIA                                   LCIA                               Swiss watershed                          Argentina                  production

level                              country average           

Water impacts

Other impacts

Mendozaproduction

ecosystem quality impacts

Aggregated im

pacts (EI99) pt/kg

Koehler, Pfister et al. 2008

Rapeseed-based methyl ester (biodiesel)Overall environmental damage

Koehler, Pfister et al. 2008

ISO:Towards an international

standard for water footprinting

ISO: In summary• “Water Footprint: Requirements and Guidelines”• International standard for water footprinting

– This International Standard specifies requirements and guidelines to assess and report water footprint based on LCA

• Terminology, communication• Important stages to consider• Consistency with carbon footprinting and other LCA

impact categories– Scope, system boundary

• Review/Validation• Reporting

• Begin 2009, end 2011• Towards industry and practitioners

Planning• Past events

– 09.Mar.2009: Circulated in ISO/TC 207/SC 5– 09.Jun.2009: Submitted to vote– 26.Jun.2009: Cairo: Accepted as a Preliminary Working Item (PWI)– 25+.Sep.2009: List of P and O participants

• Working meetings– 19-21.Nov.2009: First working meeting

• (Stockholm, Sweden)• Title, Scope• Draft structure

– 11-18.Jul.2010: Second working meeting• (Leon, Mexico)• Detailed sections

– Nov(TBC).2010: Third working meeting• (Location TBC)• Finalization of draft

– Mar/Apr(TBC).2011: Fourth working meeting• (Location TBC)• Finalization of public consultation?

– Jun/Jul/Aug/Sep(TBC).2011: Fifth working meeting• (Russia)• Finalization?

• Vote on the PWI draft to advance it to Advance WI: Date TBD

Organization• WG 8, part of ISO / TC 207 / SC 5

– ISO 14046• Contact:

– Proposer & Secretariat: • SNV, Swiss Association for Standardization• Marcel Schulze, marcel.schulze@snv.ch

– Convener: • Sebastien Humbert, Quantis, Lausanne, Switzerland,

sebastien.humbert@quantis-intl.com, +41-79-754-7566– Co-convener:

• Nydia Suppen Reynaga, Centro de analisis de cyclo de vida y diseno sustentable, Mexico, nsuppen@centroacv.com.mx

• List P and O members– App. 40 members

• To participate– As a national delegation or liaison member to TC207/SC5

Questions?

Questions?

Questions?

4848

Water! Any problem?

Companies under pressure?

Introduction

Life cycle assessment – the footprint concept

50

End of life Use phase Distribution

ProductionTransportsRaw materials

Introduction

51

Life cycle assessment – Characterization of the environmental impacts

Climate change Ecosystems Natural

resources Human healthWaterfootprint

52

Human toxicityRespiratory effectsIonizing radiationOzone layer depletionPhotochemical oxidation

Mineral ExtractionNon-renewable energy

Human health

Ecosystem quality

Resource consumption

Climate change

CO2

Crude oil

NOx

Iron ore

Phosphates

And hundreds more . Water impact

Irrigation water

Dams water

Damage categoriesMidpoint categories

Aquatic ecotoxicityTerrestrial ecotoxicityAcidificationEutrophicationTerrestrial acidi/nitriLand occupation

52

IMPACT 2002+ (Jolliet et al. 2003)

Water• Key element for:

– Humans– for household, agricultural and industrial activities – affects human health through hydrical diseases

– Ecosystems– Future generations

• 3rd UN World Water Development Report (2009)

– Scarcity - low available water per capita – is forecast to worsen where population growth is still high, as in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and some countries in South America and the Middle East

Women bringing water back to their home, Ethiopia,

www.waterencyclopedia.com

Off-stream water use

DefinitionsIn-stream water use

Green water

Green water

Blue water

Grey water

Water footprint

Blue water Grey water

WithdrawalDegradative use

Consumptive use

Process

(1) Withdrawal = 1’000 l

(2) Evaporated = 25 l

(3) Degraded (thermally, from cooling) = 475 l

50% is used for cooling25% is used for cleaning, with degradation to the legal limit25% is released without alteration

(4) Degraded (bio-chemically, from cleaning) = 250 l

(5) Released w/o degradation = 250 l

Industry perspective: type of water in a screening assessment

Milk-based beverage production

Watershed 1(Pakistan, high WSI)

Watershed 2(France, low WSI)

Results: inventory vs impact

Example: Coffee

Coffee: LCA

1 cupof coffeeat home

© Sebastien Humbert, Quantis, Switzerland, 2009Based on Humbert et al. (2009, J Clean Prod 17, 1531)

Coffee: Evaluate greenhouse gases (CO2, N2O, etc.) emissions

CO2 N2O

CFCCH4

© Sebastien Humbert, Quantis, Switzerland, 2009Based on Humbert et al. (2009, J Clean Prod 17, 1531)

Coffee: Evaluate water use

© Sebastien Humbert, Quantis, Switzerland, 2009Based on Humbert et al. (2009, J Clean Prod 17, 1531)

Coffee: Inventory analysis of water use (m3 of water per ton of green coffee – see Humbert et al. 2009)

• Withdrawal (non-turbined) water use– Coffee supply + Irrigation: 46 + 2’200

• Consumed*: 4.6+1’100• Green water*: 7’000• Grey water*: 41? + 1’100?

– Packaging: 38• Consumed*: 3.8• Green water*: 0 (no wood based product)• Grey water*: 34?

– Coffee processing + Distribution: 56 + 6• Consumed*: 6.2• Grey water*: 56?

– Use phase + EoL: 460 – 34• Consumed*: 43• Grey water*: 390?

• Turbined water use– Coffee supply + Irrigation: 2’900 + 16’000– Packaging: 2’700– Coffee processing + Distribution: 7’900 + 1’200– Use phase + EoL: 59’000 – 2’500

* = Water footprint from WFN, “consumed” being the bleu water© Sebastien Humbert, Quantis, Switzerland, 2009

Water withdrawal

-15

0

15

30Co

ffee

supp

ly

Irrig

atio

n

Pack

agin

g

Proc

essin

g

Dist

ribut

ion

Use

Disp

osal

Wat

er u

se (l

iters

per

cup

of co

ffee)

GreenConsumedReturned

80

company

Water turbined (hydropower)

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700Co

ffee

supp

ly

Irrig

atio

n

Pack

agin

g

Proc

essin

g

Dist

ribut

ion

Use

Disp

osal

Wat

er u

se (l

iters

per

cup

of co

ffee)

company

Coffee: Characterization factors

Colombia: (supply and irrigation)Frischknecht: 0.26 UBP/m3

wPfister (HH): 1.8E-8 DALY/m3

cPfister (EQ): 0.05 PDF·m2·yr/m3

cMaendly and Humbert: 0.007 PDF·m2·yr/m3

t

India: (supply and irrigation)Frischknecht: 1’100 UBP/m3

wPfister (HH): 2.2E-6 DALY/m3

cPfister (EQ): 0.4 PDF·m2·yr/m3

cMaendly and Humbert: 0.007 PDF·m2·yr/m3

t

Switzerland: (pack., proc., distri., use, EoL)Frischknecht: 22 UBP/m3

wPfister (HH): 9.0E-11 DALY/m3

cPfister (EQ): 0.05 PDF·m2·yr/m3

cMaendly and Humbert: 0.007 PDF·m2·yr/m3

t

© Sebastien Humbert, Quantis, Switzerland, 2009

Coffee: Impact assessment(impact per 1’000’000 ton of green coffee)

• Impact = Inventory * Characterization factors

Country

Water stress(in UBP)

Stress on human health

(in DALY)

Stress on ecosystems quality(in PDF-km2-yr)

(water consumed) (water turbined)

Frischknecht et al. 2006 (water

stress)

Pfister et al. (malnutrition from water availability

reduction)

Pfister et al. (reduction of biodiversity from water availability

reduction)

Maendly and Humbert (reduction of

biodiversity from daming)

Colombia (supply) 10 0.1 0.2 20Colombia (irrigation) 600 20 60 100

India (supply) 50’000 10 2 20India (irrigation) 2’000’000 2000 400 100

Switzerland (pack, proc, distr, use, EoL) 12000 0.005 3 500

© Sebastien Humbert, Quantis, Switzerland, 2009

Water Stress Index as characterization factor

• Takes into account water availability, use, and seasonal/annual variation in precipitation

Pfister, Koehler & Hellweg (2009), ES&T  43(11): 4098–4104

NWIP accepted in Cairo (June 2009)The proposed International Standard will deliver

principles, requirements and guidelinesfor a water footprint metric of

products, processes and organisations, based on the guidance of

impact assessment as given in ISO 14044. It will define how the different types of water sources (for example

ground, surface, lake, river, green, blue, gray, etc.) should be considered, how the different types of water releases should be considered, and how the local environmental conditions (dry areas, wet areas) should be treated. For products, it will apply the life cycle approach and will be based on the same product system as specified in ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. At the organisation level, it will consider the guidance given by ISO 14064 for greenhouse gases.

The standard will also address the communication issues linked to the water footprint