???? SCORE LCA’s study on taking the temporal dimension into account in LCA highlighted the need to develop and make available Life Cycle Inventory data that can be used to carry out LCA studies that take a forward-looking perspective into account.
❔ What are the key data to be developed and according to which methods?
???? The challenge is to shed light on sustainability and circular economy actions.
???? The objectives of this study are therefore:
???? to update the methodological recommendations of the first study on prospective LCA by SCORE LCA (No. 2015-07), focusing on how to develop LCI data that can be used in a prospective context, in particular by identifying published sources of information that can be used to develop LCI,
???? to apply the recommendations for generating ICV that can be used to carry out LCA studies that take into account the prospective dimension.
This work will complement the work of the first project on prospective LCA: the data can be integrated into the tools specified during this first project.

Decarbonisation technologies (solid-state batteries, carbon capture, etc.) often require significant investment to develop. Applying a forward-looking LCA approach could help justify these investments by quantifying the expected environmental gains.

How can we extrapolate the performance of new technologies that are still in the early stages of development to determine how these technologies will perform once they reach maturity?

How can we scale up pilot projects to industrial level, taking into account changes in the context in which these mature technologies will be used?

The major challenge here is to help decision-makers make investment choices that satisfy them and promote developments whose environmental benefits will be significantly useful to all. The objective of this study is therefore to further explore prospective LCA methodological choices so that they can be used to aid decision-making in the case of low TRL (Technology Readiness Level) technologies.

This involves:

– Establishing methodological recommendations for carrying out LCA modelling based on laboratory-scale data.

– Providing specifications for an assessment tool that can be used to qualify the promises behind certain technological solutions.

This work will provide input for the development of sectoral roadmaps to better allocate resources and efforts to reduce environmental impacts and decarbonisation.

Dans de nombreux secteurs, les études liées à la neutralité carbone s’appuient sur des ressources biomasse, qui ne sont pas extensibles à l’infini.Pour orienter les décisions stratégiques, notamment de substitution d’une ressource par une autre, il est impératif de quantifier à l’aide de l’ACV les bilans environnementaux des produits issus de la biomasse, c’est-à-dire des bioproduits. Il s’agit, en application des méthodologies, de rendre disponibles aux éco-concepteurs des données ICV, puisque peu de données d’Inventaires du Cycle de Vie sont disponibles aujourd’hui pour les bioproduits au sein des bases de données.L’étude vise ainsi à :- inventorier les diverses utilisations de biomasse, aujourd’hui et dans une vision prospective, tous secteurs confondus, et de les confronter aux ressources disponibles, pour disposer d’une vision claire des utilisations potentielles crédibles de la biomasse, et donc du potentiel apporté par ces usages pour la transition matière.- réaliser les ICV d’un certain nombre de matériaux biosourcés, pour permettre aux membres de SCORE LCA de réaliser des ACV en utilisant des inventaires de matériaux biosourcés de qualité.

Despite LCA work establishing methods for taking biodiversity impacts into account, providing results and interpretations, and despite the IPBES conferences held since its creation in 2012, assessments by the Stockholm Resilience Centre show no progress in terms of damage to ecosystems (Biosphere Integrity) on a global scale: the limit has been exceeded for more than 16 years, i.e. since this damage has been assessed. It is therefore necessary to give greater prominence to this endpoint in quantified environmental assessments, in the recommendations based on these assessments, and finally in decision-making, in order to minimise damage to biodiversity and limit or even reduce the exceeding of planetary boundaries. In fact, LCA experts often consider it less uncertain to work at the ‘midpoint’ level. The European PEF has published a list of recommended midpoint indicators. These midpoint indicators will serve as the basis for future European regulatory requirements for reporting the environmental performance of products within the Digital Product Passport (DPP), under the Construction Products Regulation (CPR) and the Ecodesign Regulation for sustainable products (ESPR).

Furthermore, the aggregation method proposed by PEF does not directly provide an indicator for biodiversity. However, producing LCA reports based solely on the 16 PEF indicators (common practice) does not provide comprehensive, direct support for decision-making aimed at preserving or even restoring biodiversity. How can midpoints be better used to address biodiversity issues? Are there complementary methods to the interpretation of the 16 classic PEF indicators that could be quickly and reliably integrated into LCA work in order to systematically inform decisions on biodiversity (reducing damage to biodiversity and more specifically to ecosystem services)? This formal insight would be an essential prerequisite for decision-making.

Applicable since 1 January 2024, European Directive 2022/2464 Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) sets out new specific methodological practices and non-financial reporting requirements. Life Cycle Assessment appears to be a relevant tool for addressing the environmental aspect of CSRD reporting. – What are the potential positive interactions between CSRD and LCA practices? In concrete terms, how can LCA practitioners contribute to the CSRD? And conversely, how can the expertise developed for the CSRD, the collection, measurement and reporting tools, and the associated analyses be used in LCA? – What are the practical requirements and recommendations of the CSRD (analysis of the ESRS – European Sustainability Reporting Standards), particularly with regard to: – Methodological choices: models used, in particular system boundaries, consideration of energy consumption, particularly electricity consumption, choice of allocation between co-products, choice of end-of-life, choice of impact methods for calculations, etc.? – The types of data used: primary data collected, secondary data used, impact characterisation factors for the chosen impact methods, etc.?

Sustainable procurement, particularly public procurement, is one of the pillars of European environmental policy. In fact, if public procurement, which accounts for a significant share (> 10% of GDP for OECD countries), pushes companies to improve in order to meet these demands, then companies will improve their production methods… and products will be improved for 100% of their market. One of the challenges for an LCA practitioner is to understand where the bottlenecks lie and to develop solutions so that they can recommend purchases from suppliers that are appropriate for their management. The objective of this study is to identify how to develop purchasing practices that take environmental considerations into account using all the approaches that LCA can support, presenting concrete ways to overcome the obstacles that currently exist.

For certain sectors, neglecting certain activities/stages of the life cycle in product LCAs (e.g. employee travel, infrastructure, etc.) can lead to the sum of the company’s product or service assessments being significantly different from the ‘organisation’ assessment (particularly for digital services, for example).

The aim of this workshop is therefore to discuss:

What applies to organisations and products;
Is this ‘normal’ because these assessments are completely different? To what extent is it possible to use product LCAs to reconstruct an organisational LCA?
How to evaluate feedback (from members and in the literature) and learn from it
How to use OACVs and for what purposes.

Several presentations are planned:

Presentation of ISO 14072, the link with ISO 14044, the differences between OACVs and ACVs, use cases.
Presentation of two winners of ADEME’s TORGA Call for Expressions of Interest

There will be a focus on meaningful discussion between members to share testimonials and feedback.

Contents of the workshop, which will be led by CIRAIG (in French with English support):

1. Introduction (15 min):
o Presentation of the various standards/methodologies for quantification: ISO 14040/44 and ISO 14067 for products, ISO 14072 for organisational LCA, GHG Protocol (Corporate Standard and Product Standard) and ISO 14064-1.
o Brief presentation of the uses of each methodology and the implications in terms of implementation time and the need for external verification.
2. Brief reminder of scopes 1, 2 and 3 of the Corporate Standard (15 mins)
3. Methodological differences between the GHG Protocol and LCA (30 mins):
o Comparison in terms of boundaries, capital goods depreciation, environmental indicators, biogenic carbon and LULUC, and multifunctionality.
4. Analysis of different calculation approaches and data types (30 mins):
o Presentation of the input-output approach (economic data or EEIO) and the process-based approach (physical data). Explanation of the strengths and limitations of each approach, as well as the methodological elements to consider for each approach.
o Presentation of the elements to be considered in order to adapt the emission factors drawn from a life cycle inventory database to the GHG Protocol Scope 3 emission categories.
5. Case study:
o Examples will be included throughout the presentation to illustrate the various methodological aspects presented.

The objective of this workshop is to understand the latest developments in GLAM (Global Guidance for Life Cycle Impact Assessment Indicators and Methods, launched by UNEP) and improve practices in the use of characterisation methods.

What adjustments are made to databases depending on the software with which they are used? How is the same source translated into Gabi and SimaPro in terms of inventory and then impact (different flows, different description methods, etc.)? How can we link this to the upcoming PEF database? Andres Ciroth (from GreenDelta) will lead this workshop on 6 November 2025 and will attempt to answer members’ questions, enabling them to understand the differences between the various software programmes and grasp certain limitations.
On the agenda: interoperability in LCA
o What is it? And why are we talking about it?
o Practical cases/needs
o LCA tools, databases and compliance systems
o Different LCA universes
o Solutions and practical examples
– Main solutions and workarounds
– Practical solutions
o Technical level
o Workflow, by design solutions, with examples: the same generic databases in different LCA software, conclusions
o Outlook, discussions

The purpose of the workshop is to discuss three topics chosen by the members, in the form of three rounds of discussion (one table per topic), in groups of six to seven people:

1. The human organisation of LCA within companies
2. The uses of LCA and tools for practice
3. The automation of LCA: what are the objectives? What are the risks? What tools are available?

The objective of this study will be to consolidate a specification model for the two main current LCA practices: LCA-A and LCA-C.
Based on discussions with practitioners and researchers, it will re-examine the recommendations of SCORE LCA studies in order to position them on a dual scale of practices, according to desirability and operationality (to what extent is this recommendation a desirable practice? Is it operationalisable?).
It will incorporate the results of this work into a comprehensive specification model, presenting the requirements and recommendations to be followed at each stage of an LCA study.

La méthode d’évaluation de la criticité des matériaux utilisée par la Commission Européenne inclut des critères relatifs à la disponibilité et aux risques géopolitiques, mais pas liés aux aspects environnementaux associés à ces matériaux.L’objectif de l’étude serait d’étudier dans quelle mesure les impacts environnementaux, quantifiés notamment via l’ACV, pourraient venir compléter la définition de criticités des matières premières.A voir le lien possible avec les limites planétaires appliquées aux matières premières ?

What are the alternatives for improving the consideration of different end-of-life activities using the Circular Formular Footprint (CFF)? How can standardisation and weighting practices as described in ISO 14074 and PEF (Product Environmental Footprint) be improved, in particular what methodological improvements can be proposed for standardisation factors that are compatible with weighting factors based on planetary boundaries?

LCA practitioners wishing to analyse a product in terms of its water footprint may use the AWARE LCA indicator, which is used in the PEF method. More broadly, the ISO 14046 Water Footprint standard provides a comprehensive methodological framework for taking into account the various environmental impacts associated with water consumption. The aim of the study is therefore to provide feedback on how water issues are addressed in product/system assessments: do companies/manufacturers use ISO 14046 (and if so, how?) or do they simply use an LCA indicator? In addition, it is proposed to carry out a case study using the AWARE LCA indicator, in order to analyse its advantages/limitations, particularly in terms of applicability: quality and completeness of the necessary data, geographical and temporal scales, interpretation of results, most suitable LCA software, consistency with ISO 14046?

Building products are now well documented in terms of their LCA impacts. The same cannot be said for products used in infrastructure construction or large-scale projects.
In general, very little information is available on the construction phase (on new sites). The focus is often on carbon footprint assessments.

– What recommendations can be made for the use of LCA to support decisions on this type of project?
– What recommendations can be made for the construction of a reference database (particularly for low-carbon concrete)?
– How can the LCA assessment of infrastructure be improved and its use facilitated at the various decision-making stages in a project process?

This is the subject of this study launched by SCORE LCA!

Objectif : donner les clés pour initier une démarche d’interfaçage de Simapro : – présenter les différentes solutions techniques d’interfaçage de Simapro et leurs spécifications,- Illustrer ces solutions à partir d’exemples concrets,- Répondre aux questions

Les indicateurs utilisés par l’ACV (par exemple ceux utilisés par PEF) ne sont pas tous consensuels car plus ou moins (voire pas du tout) robustes.L’objectif de ce workshop serait de faire un point sur les évolutions/avancées de ces dernières années pour revisiter la robustesse des indicateurs. Il s’agira de fournir un retour critique sur les indicateurs, avec un retour d’utilisation sur chaque indicateur des membres.Ainsi pour chaque catégorie d’impact, il s’agirait de présenter : une synthèse des méthodes existantes et en développement, une analyse de qui utilise quel indicateur et pourquoi, des recommandations quant au choix

The SCORE LCA study on carbon storage/release by biomass focuses almost exclusively on the carbon cycle of the above-ground part of wood (trunk and branches), whereas a forest ecosystem encompasses a much broader range of interactions that are not limited to the climate change indicator and can function in very different ways depending on how the forest is managed and exploited.

The strategy to combat climate change aims to rely as much as possible on bio-based resources (75% of neutralisation comes from these), particularly forests and wood products, hence the relevance of addressing these issues, which currently seem to be only partially taken into account in LCAs.

– What is the current state of databases, common practices and knowledge on the biogenic ‘carbon cycle’ in forests?

– What are the typical scenarios for forest resource exploitation?

– What recommendations can be made for integrating upstream and forest interactions into the production of wood products in LCA?

This is the subject of this study launched by SCORE LCA!

E-fuels are fuels produced from carbon-free electricity, obtained from a mix that may include renewable or nuclear sources, each of which may involve infrastructure whose construction emits CO₂. This ‘raw material’ differentiates e-fuels from biofuels, which are primarily produced from biomass. The production and use of e-fuels aims to significantly reduce the impacts associated with fuel production and use. In particular, some claim that, over their entire production cycle, ‘e-fuels have a significantly lower carbon footprint than fossil fuels’. Numerous LCA studies are being conducted to identify cases where this claim of ‘significant reduction’ is correct for e-fuels, and above all to quantify the difference in question on a case-by-case basis.