Abiotic Raw-Materials in Life Cycle Impact Assessments: An Emerging Consensus across Disciplines

Johannes A. Drielsma, Ruth Allington, Thomas Brady, Jeroen Guinée, Jane Hammarstrom, Torsten Hummen, Andrea Russell-Vaccari, Laura Schneider, Guido Sonnemann and Pär Weihed
Additional contact information
Johannes A. Drielsma: European Association of Mining Industries, Metal Ores and Industrial Minerals (Euromines), Avenue de Broqueville/Broquevillelaan 12, Brussels 1150, Belgium
Ruth Allington: Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards (CRIRSCO), c/o Pan-European Reserves & Resources Reporting Committee (PERC), c/o EFG Office, Service Géologique de Belgique, Rue Jenner 13, Brussels 1000, Belgium
Thomas Brady: Newmont Mining, 6363 South Fiddler’s Green Circle Suite 800, Greenwood Village, CO 80111, USA
Jeroen Guinée: Institute of Environmental Sciences CML, Leiden University, Einsteinweg 2, Leiden 2333 CC, The Netherlands
Jane Hammarstrom: United States Geological Survey (USGS), 954 National Center, Reston, VA 20192, USA
Torsten Hummen: Competence Center Sustainability and Infrastructure Systems, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI, Breslauer Straße 48, Karlsruhe 76139, Germany
Andrea Russell-Vaccari: Align Consulting, 1134 Cross Creek Ct., Sheridan, WY 82801, USA
Laura Schneider: econsense—Forum for Sustainable Development of German Business, Oberwallstraße 24, Berlin 10117, Germany
Guido Sonnemann: The Life Cycle Group CyVi Institut des Sciences Moléculaires (ISM), Université de Bordeaux 1—UMR 5255 CNRS, 351 Cours de la libération—Bât A12, TALENCE cedex 33 405, France
Pär Weihed: Lulea Technical University, Luleå 971 87, Sweden

Resources, 2016, vol. 5, issue 1, 1-10

Abstract: This paper captures some of the emerging consensus points that came out of the workshop “Mineral Resources in Life Cycle Impact Assessment: Mapping the path forward”, held at the Natural History Museum London on 14 October 2015: that current practices rely in many instances on obsolete data, often confuse resource depletion with impacts on resource availability, which can therefore provide inconsistent decision support and lead to misguided claims about environmental performance. Participants agreed it would be helpful to clarify which models estimate depletion and which estimate availability, so that results can be correctly reported in the most appropriate framework. Most participants suggested that resource availability will be more meaningfully addressed within a comprehensive Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment framework rather than limited to an environmental Life Cycle Assessment or Footprint. Presentations from each of the authors are available for download [1].

Keywords: abiotic natural resources; Life Cycle Assessment; minerals; mining; ore grades; reserves; resource availability; resource scarcity; safeguard subject; raw-materials (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/5/1/12/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/5/1/12/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jresou:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:12-:d:64594

Access Statistics for this article

Resources is currently edited by Ms. Donchian Ma

More articles in Resources from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().