Whole Life Cycle Risk Management (original) (raw)
Related papers
Environmental management system: Risk evaluation integrated to life-cycle assessment
2014
In order to consider environmental impacts of a product's life cycle systematically, the life-cycle assessment (LCA) methodology has been developed. From this background, this present paper aims to discuss and analyze the interdependencies between risk assessment and evaluation and a process LCA. From this study, it is possible to conclude that risk assessment is a powerful tool in providing information about environmental impacts, which is used in the LCA. Furthermore, one can conclude that integration risk assessment tools (mostly vulnerability studies) with LCA help to ensure a more accurate information for the intensity of the environmental impacts, which in turn ensures a more reliable information for the overall LCA.
A framework for environmental risk management
The Aeronautical Journal, 2012
Aero engine designs can have a life time of over 45 years, which is long enough for the understanding of environmental problems to change significantly. This places the aero engine designer in a position of uncertainty, as unforeseen environmental problems could affect the viability of a design. ‘Risk’ is used to describe future uncertainties that can lead to undesirable consequences. This paper presents a framework for environmental risk management that allows the designer to answer the question: what is the risk to a design from its environmental impacts over the life cycle? The framework provides a process for turning complex environmental business hazards into a form that can be used to develop mitigating actions within the design process. The paper demonstrates the framework through two examples and discusses findings, leading to conclusions on what is required to implement the framework into a business.
Use of Risk Assessment and Life Cycle Assessment in Decision Making: A Common Policy Research Agenda
Risk Analysis, 2002
Quantitative risk assessment (RA) and life cycle assessment (LCA) are both analytical tools used to support decision making in environmental management. They have been developed and used by largely separate groups of specialists, and it is worth considering whether there is a common research agenda that may increase the relevance of these tools in decision-making processes. The validity of drawing comparisons between use of the tools is established through examining key aspects of the two approaches for their similarities and differences, including the nature of each approach and contextual and methodological aspects. Six case studies involving use of each approach in public decision making are described and used to draw out concerns about using RA and LCA in this context. The following categories of concern can be distinguished: philosophical approach of the tools; quantitative versus qualitative assessment; stakeholder participation; the nature of the results; and the usefulness of the results in relation to time and financial resource requirements. These can be distilled into a common policy research agenda focusing on: the legitimacy of using tools built on a particular perspective in decision making; recognition and role of value judgments in RA and LCA; treatment of uncertainty and variability; the influence of analytical tools in focusing attention on particular aspects of a decision-making situation; and understandability of the results for nonspecialists. It is concluded that it is time to bring together the experiences of RA and LCA specialists and benefit from cross-fertilization of ideas.
Relationships between Life Cycle Assessment and Risk Assessment
2000
There is a need for a collected and better knowledge of the environmental impacts of products. Access to credible, lifecycle-based knowledge and information is a key issue when deciding how products should be designed, used and handled when becoming waste. Relevant information is also important for purchasers, professionals as well as individuals. In order to obtain information, generating relevant data is crucial. However a more holistic view is needed in order to improve knowledge of the environmental impact from products, and to improve the dissemination of this knowledge. A starting point with this report has been the fact that Life Cycle Assessment to a high degree lacks a chemical perspective. This report aims at giving support for the process of choosing an approach for combining Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Risk Assessment (RA). The authors' perspective of the status of combining LCA and RA is therefore presented. Furthermore, the report intends to give basic information about the different methods of LCA and RA, identify related analysis methods and legal requirements that should be used etc. The reader of this report may either be LCA experts, RA experts or people working with environmental decision-making. The report has been compiled by Karolina Flemström,
Environmental science & technology, 2015
Risk assessment (RA) and life cycle assessment (LCA) are two analytical tools used to support decision making in environmental management. This study reviewed 30 environmental assessment case studies that claimed an integration, combination, hybridization, or complementary use of RA and LCA. The focus of the analysis was on how the respective case studies evaluated emissions of chemical pollutants and pathogens. The analysis revealed three clusters of similar case studies. Yet, there seemed to be little consensus as to what should be referred to as RA and LCA, and when to speak of combination, integration, hybridization, or complementary use of RA and LCA. This paper provides clear recommendations toward a more stringent and consistent use of terminology. Blending elements of RA and LCA offers multifaceted opportunities to adapt a given environmental assessment case study to a specific decision making context, but also requires awareness of several implications and potential pitfall...
Life cycle impact assessment: a challenge for risk analysts
2008
Modern technology, coupled with the global economy, gives us a choice among many goods and services, as well as many ways of producing, using, and disposing of the goods and services that we desire. These alternatives generally have different implications for health and environmental quality. To make informed decisions leading to improved public and environmental health, we need to be able to quantify these implications.
Procedia CIRP, 2015
Global and local environmental impacts of products or services can sometimes be in conflict with one another. Therefore, the importance of considering both impacts in environmental management must be recognised. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is useful in evaluating global impacts while quantitative risk assessment (QRA) is effective in local impact assessments. The benefits of combining LCA and QRA in this regard have been recognised. Advantages and disadvantages of different hybridisation approaches were critically examined in this paper. There seems to be no single best approach and a method needs to be carefully selected depending on the type of application.
Using risk assessment to facilitate and enhance the movement to sustainability
Environmental Quality Management, 2006
Sustainable development means balancing economic growth and environmental protection in a manner that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (World Commission on Environment and Development [WCED], 1987). The components of sustainable development are economic, environmental, and equity (or social) benefitthe "3 Es," or triple bottom line. Sustainability is enabled by the assessment of risks to human health and the environment. Risk assessment is simply the determination of the potential to cause harm, integrated with estimated, actual, or real-world exposure. Overview: Benefits of Using Risk Assessment Risk assessment is an integral part-and often a major driver-of sustainable development. It can and should be a significant element that contributes to the quality of processes, products, and overall operations, helping to provide confidence of safety. Use of risk assessment helps lead business organizations toward sustainability by providing them with a knowledge-based competitive edge or advantage that addresses all elements of the 3 Es. Risk assessment can offer: • relief from onerous regulatory requirements arising from extreme interpretations of the Precautionary Principle, such as chemical hazard or ban lists (economic benefit); • defense against competitor or legal claims and allegations that particular products are unsafe (economic, environmental, and equity benefits); • enhanced product quality resulting from confident scientific knowledge that products are, and will continue to be, used safely (economic, environmental, and equity benefits);
Methods and tools for environmental technologies risk evaluation: the principal guidelines—a review
International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology
The commonly used and developing engineering environmental technologies do not remain neutral for an ecosystem. The deepening climate changes are generally considered as the effects of human activities. There is thus no doubt that any human interference in the environment should be comprehensively checked at the beginning for all its positive and negative aspects for the environment as well as society health. There are two different analytical tools useful in environmental management: life cycle assessment (LCA) and risk assessment (RA). The first follows the product from “from birth to the grave” summing the environmental impact at all stages of its “life” including such elements like producing, used electricity, transport and many others. LCA refers to quantification and classification of all effects at all life stages and provides direct and indirect possible environmental interactions. On the other hand, risk assessment focuses on linking stressors and its possibilities and seve...