Abstract
This research analyses the differences in impact assessment results depending on the choice of a certain software-database combination. Six packaging systems were modelled in three software-database combinations (GaBi database in GaBi software, ecoinvent 3.6 database in openLCA, Environmental Footprint database in openLCA). The chosen Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) method is EF 2.0. Differences and errors in the implementation of the LCIA method are a possible source of deviations. We compared the published characterisation factors with the factors implemented in the software-database combinations. While results for the climate change category are similar between the different databases, this is not the case for the other impact categories. In most cases, the use of the ecoinvent 3.6 database leads to higher results compared to GaBi. This is partly due to the fact, that ecoinvent datasets often include more background processes than the corresponding GaBi datasets. We found striking discrepancies in LCIA implementation, including the lack of regionalisation for water use in ecoinvent. A meaningful communication of LCIA results requires an excellent knowledge of the analysed product system, as well as of database quality issues and LCIA methodology. We fully acknowledge the constant efforts of database providers to improve their databases.
Highlights
This paper deals with the question of how the choice of a certain Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) database influences Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) results for packaging
Since the aim of this paper is to show the relative differences in the results, they are presented in percentages, with the Gabi results being arbitrarily set as 100%
Results for the sixteen Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) impact categories were calculated for each product system
Summary
Growing public pressure is leading to major efforts to reduce the negative environmental impact of packaging. To understand these impacts, Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) are carried out. The results of packaging LCAs can have far-reaching consequences. An LCA carried out by the German Federal Environment Agency [2] served as the basis for the introduction of the return deposit system for disposable beverage packaging in Germany. Since composite beverage cartons had low environmental impacts in this study, they were exempted from the mandatory deposit [3]. This paper deals with the question of how the choice of a certain Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) database influences LCA results for packaging
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
