Lca Teaching Guide Final

8/2/2019 Lca Teaching Guide Final

1/29

1511 Wisconsin Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20007

Telephone 202-338-3131Fax 202-338-2800Email [email protected] http://MTS.sustainableproducts.com

_____________________________________________

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Teaching Guide

AuthorAlison Dillon, MTS, Washington D. C.

Contents

Value of LCA

LCA DefinedCritical LCA ElementsProduct criteria rulesInventoryImpact assessment

Product Criteria Rules to Use in Any LCADefine functional unitChoose & describe system boundaryChoose cut off criteriaChoose allocation rulesDescribe data quality requirements

Select ISO compliant LCI data baseChoose & document selected LCI resultsDeclare use stage of productIdentify quantities & units

LCA ExampleLCA UsesFrequently Asked Questions

References

Appendices

1 What Are Sustainable Products & Life Cycle Assessment?2 LCA Thinking3 Legal Requirements and Enforcement

Life Cycle Assessment TrainingPrinted on Recycled Paper

1
mailto:[email protected]://mts.sustainableproducts.com/http://mts.sustainableproducts.com/mailto:[email protected]


2/29

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Teaching Guide 2007

Value of LCA:

Facilitates wise choices for product designers, manufacturers andpurchasers

Helps further sustainable material use through scientific rigor Supports selection of materials using holistic comparison process Advances sustainable product design & improvement Establishes priorities for investments in product improvement &

technology

1. LCA Defined: Holistic process evaluating in detail a products environmentalattributes and impacts over all product stages: resource extraction to end of life /reuse.

2. Critical LCA Elements are:

Product Criteria Rules - set rules of what inputs are to be captured foreach category type - the roadmap for a product LCA, including statementof assumptions and uncertainties. An example is what is the expected lifeof a product and how is this conclusion reached?

Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) - inventory of data on all exchanges a producthas with the environment over its entire life cycle- the nuts and bolts of anLCA. LCI is collected data bases by a limited number of Specialty LCI

Firms and used by LCA professionals.

Life Cycle Impact Assessment The results of converting mass weightdata into environmental impacts of a given product used to assess itsenvironmental performance. Data are consistent across all materials dueto an agreed upon unit measure of weight.

3. Product Criteria Rules to use in the LCA Evaluation of any Product:

o Define functional unit(s) such as pounds per square foot.

o Choose and describe system boundaries. E.g., establish weighted average energyusage for selected raw materials such as steel from multiple North Americansuppliers.

o Choose cut-off criteria. E.g., for evaluating raw formed steel, weighted averageenergy usage would not include de minimis energy for weld points.


2


3/29


o Choose allocation rules for life cycle impacts that make data gathering moreefficient. E.g., recycled content of steel is taken into account at the raw materialstage and not the end of life /reuse stage.

o Describe data quality requirements. Data should be accurate. E.g., where there aremultiple steel suppliers, industry average energy use should calculated as opposed

to using energy data from just one steel source.

o Select ISO Compliant LCI data base.

o Choose and document selected LCI results describing environmental performance.Provide these results if requested. E.g., embodied energy parameters or climatechange parameters from specified LCI databases.

o Declare use stage of product. E.g., for lamps, it is the energy consumption over thelife of the lamp.

o Identify quantities and units in which the results are to be expressed, such aspounds of CO2 generated over the products life.

4. LCA ExampleIn the lamp example, product criteria rules were established identifying useful lamp lifein hours with the assumption that lamp efficiency deteriorates over the life of the lamp.

Raw material extraction impacts are identified including water and air pollution frommining iron ore for steel. These impacts are considered in the cradle to gate analysis.


3


4/29


Impacts of the manufacturing process are identified such as impacts of energy use forheating glass as well as energy impacts from transporting raw materials to themanufacturing facility. These impacts are considered in the gate to gate analysis.

Impacts of lamp use are identified such as energy consumed during lamp use. These

are the use stage impacts or gate to grave / cradle.

Note: steel or any raw material recycled content should only be counted once at onestage and must be stated.

5. LCA Uses

Design sustainable products Improve sustainability of existing products Qualify for sustainable product certification

6. Questions & Answers Including Those Raised During Pilots:

Frequently Asked Questions

Q. How can I identify products with ISO Compliant LCAs?

A. See the ISO Compliant LCAs in the handout or ask your manufacturer rep to have an LCA completedfor its products.

Q. Where can I receive more information?

A. Copies of slides are available from your manufacturers/A&D rep.Questions not answerable at the training session will be promptlyanswered by the Training Resource Center [email protected] or by purchasing the TrainingGuide.

Q. Should all products identified as sustainable, green, environmentally preferable or environmentallyfriendly make these claims based on an LCA?

A. Yes. This provides accurate environmental information in compliance with the Federal TradeCommission Environmental Marketing Guides. Consumers believe that such products are

environmentally beneficial in all respects.

Q. What is the relationship to a product certified as low in VOCs compared to an LCA?A. VOC emissions in the product use stage are just one of 12 environmental impacts identified by an

LCA at not only the use stage of a product, but also at raw materials extraction, manufacturing and

end of life/reuse.


4


5/29


References

ISO 14040:2006, Life cycle assessment Principles and framework, provides aclear overview of the practice, applications and limitations of LCA to a broad range ofpotential users and stakeholders, including those with a limited knowledge of life cycle

assessment.

ISO 14044:2006, Life cycle assessment Requirements and guidelines, isdesigned for the preparation of, conduct of, and critical review of, life cycle inventoryanalysis. It also provides guidance on the impact assessment phase of LCA and on theinterpretation of LCA results, as well as the nature and quality of the data collected.

LCA 101: Life Cycle Principles & Practices. EPA (2006).http://www.epa.gov/ORD/NRMRL/lcaccess/lca101.htm

LCA Whitepaper. IDCE (2001) prepared under contract by Sustainable Products

Corporation.

SMART Consensus Sustainable Product Standards 2004-2006. Institute forMarket Transformation to Sustainability. See ANSI.org:http://webstore.ansi.org/ansidocstore/dept.asp?dept_id=3144

Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other EnvironmentalImpacts (TRACI). EPA LCI Tool: http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/sab/traci/

Introduction to Tools for Sustainable Product Design, Manufacture & Selection.IDCE, MTS & NRDC (2006).


5
http://webstore.ansi.org/ansidocstore/dept.asp?dept_id=3144http://webstore.ansi.org/ansidocstore/dept.asp?dept_id=3144


6/29


APPENDICES

Appendix 1 What Are Sustainable Products & Life Cycle Assessment?Appendix 2 LCA ThinkingAppendix 3 Legal Requirements and Enforcement

Appendices are from the Sustainable Products Training Manual2000-2007 bySustainable Products Corporation.


6


7/29


APPENDIX 1What Are Sustainable Products & Life Cycle Assessment?

_______________

What is Sustainability?

In summary, sustainability is acting today in a manner to protect and preserve ourplanet tomorrow. This is an international consensus definition from the 1992 Rio EarthSummit. For sustainable products, it means products that improve global human healthand environment as measured over their entire life cycle. Social and economic issuesare also part of sustainability, but for the most part, products that improve global humanhealth and environment over their life cycle are sustainable, e.g., wood certified ascomplying with Forest Stewardship Principles.

To ensure that actions toward a more sustainable future will have the desired effect, it isobvious that life cycle assessment (LCA) or an LCA approach must be used (EuropeanEnvironmental Agency, LCA & Public Policy Making1998). LCA is seen by allstakeholders as a necessary, integral part of the environmental management toolkit(Ibidand Synthesis Report on the Social Value of LCA 1997). The United NationsEnvironment Program concludes that although for several decades LCA has beenapplied to production processes, product design, and policy issues, it is far fromachieving its full potential. Greater LCA use allows consumers, NGOs, governments,and industry to more fully recognize the consequence of buying, making, designing, andspecifying products to accelerate the path to sustainability (United Nations, Towards theGlobal Use of Life Cycle Assessment1999).

What is the Relationship of Sustainable Products to Environmentally Preferableand Green Products, & How are They Measured?

According to the FTC Guides, Attorneys General Green Reports, and case law, thesemeanings are the same plus social equity for sustainable products. They are generalbenefit communications that must be substantiated by competent scientific evidenceand life cycle assessment (LCA) unless the communication is qualified to clearly meanless than a sustainable, environmentally preferable or friendly, or green product. LCAmust be used to identify sustainable products as required by federal, state and commonlaw to prevent misleading communications about public health and environmentalbenefits.

For example, a product communication that it is good for the environment,environmentally better, or environmentally friendly must be substantiated by LCAinformation showing that it is good, better, and environmentally friendly in everyrespect for all environmental attributes. In contrast, single attribute communications arenot broad communications of environmental preferability and need not be based on


7


8/29


LCA. Examples of single attribute communications are recycled content, non toxic,and biodegradable. However, care must be exercised in making broader singleattribute communications because the public may confuse them with communications ofenvironmental preferability. Thus, these communications could be misleading under thelaw unless environmental preferability can be substantiated.

The trend in government programs, product labels, and ecolabels is toward broadcommunications of environmental preferability than single attribute communications,because sustainable, environmentally preferable, and green have more marketvalue, and if the communications are true, more benefit to human health andenvironment.

To make the point and contemplate the absurd, one of the most misleadingcommunications is the Defense Departments purported development of a greenbomb. The common denominator for sustainable products is that they have no orminimal adverse impacts to global human health and environment over their entire life

cycle evaluating potential releases to air, water, and land, impacts to habitat, andenergy use. See Figure 1. LCA Overview for Wallboard Containing Gypsum or FlyAsh, and Figure 2 Description of the LCA Process.

Example of a Comparative LCA: Grain Ethanol v. Petroleum Fuels

A streamlined or abbreviated LCA of ethanol v. petroleum fuels was conducted in 1995for the grain alcohol industry (Sustainable Product Corp. Client Data). The grainindustry uses by products primarily from corn, in making distilled spirits and fuels. Forexample, ethanol is made from corn and thus on its face appears to be environmentallypreferable in comparison to petroleum fuels, but pesticide & fertilizer impacts of growingcorn identified in the LCA show different. Ethanol from organically grown corn has apreferable LCA because no pesticides or fertilizers are used.

Using LCA, Ethanol Made From Corn was no BetterEnvironmentally than Petroleum-Based Fuels. However, Ethanol

from Organically-Grown Corn is More Preferable.

Prior to making a decision to conduct a comparative LCA, the grain alcohol industry wasinformed that grain alcohol is negligibly or moderately reactive generating only modestamounts of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Nonetheless, ethanol is regulated as aprecursor of ground level smog or ozone, a criteria pollutant under the Clean Air Act andState Implementation Plans. Accordingly, because it generates little or no VOCs, thegrain alcohol industry was interested in pursuing an exemption to VOC rules that couldderegulate ethanol providing it a competitive advantage. A streamlined LCA was


8


9/29


performed to determine overall environmental benefits because EPA started using anLCA approach in evaluating VOC exemptions after Congress and industry in 1994forced the exemption of perchloroethylene from VOC rules because it is non reactive;however, it is also very toxic and a known carcinogen which was the reason for EPAsreluctance to grant the exemption. Perchloroethylene is a powerful halogenated

cleaning solvent primarily used in dry cleaning.

The streamlined LCA of grain ethanol shows that environmental burdens of pesticideand fertilizer manufacture and subsequent impact on groundwater and surface waterafter application, have greater or equal environmental burdens compared to petroleumfuels refining and use. Underlying this conclusion is the fact that many companies overthe years divested pesticide manufacturing divisions due to in large part substantialhazardous waste liability. Even though ethanol has an environmental advantage overpetroleum based fuels in terms of VOC generation, pesticide and fertilizer impactsnullified any overall environmental advantage for ethanol based on the LCA. The LCAdemonstrated that organically grown corn without pesticides and fertilizers was the only

solution for the grain alcohol industry to show an overall environmental advantage whencompared to petroleum based fuels, and as a positive environmental factor in pursuinga VOC exemption from EPA.

This example of a comparative LCA highlights LCA as a powerful tool promoting fullenvironmental disclosure over the life of products, thus resulting in global human healthand environmental improvements.

Important Issues Raised by LCA in Product Evaluations: Case Examples Certified Wood, Recycled Wallboard, and Plastic Lumber

Three products are discussed below as examples showing the value of LCA thinking inevaluating products. The first product is wood certified pursuant to Forest StewardshipCouncil Principles, followed by wallboard and plastic lumber.

Wood independently certified pursuant to Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) program isgrown and harvested in well-managed forests in conformity with stringent standardsaddressing environmental, social, and economic issues. The FSC certification systemaddresses the life cycle of the forest ecosystem -- from the growth, harvest, andregeneration of trees to the impact of forest operations on the plants and animalsinhabiting the forest fostering conservation, protecting biodiversity, and ensuringforests for future generations. Metafore, an international nonprofit business initiative,defined independently certified forest products as

[T]hose products originating in forests that have been independentlyaudited and verified as well managed. Certification is based oninternationally applicable principles that assure forests are managed in anenvironmentally responsible, socially beneficial and economically viablemanner. Certification audits are carried out by independent, third party


9


10/29



10

certifiers accredited by an internationally recognized body, and must besite specific and evaluate on-the-ground forest management practices.(Metafore Brochure 1998).

Although wood production on a life cycle assessment basis is somewhat different than

for manufactured products because wood is renewable, the holistic approach of certifiedwood is consistent with LCAs use to evaluate broad environmental communicationsabout a products environmental benefits as required by the FTC Guides, States, andEPA in its 1999 Final Environmentally Preferable Product (EPP) Guidance. Thus forpurposes of product purchase and specification, certified wood absent other materials,is as close to a sustainable product as any.

Figure 1 is an LCA graphic depiction of wallboard showing how LCA evaluatesenvironmental impacts of all product components from raw materials extraction,manufacturing, transportation, installation and use in the building, and reuse or disposal.

LCA of lamps shows that energy efficiency vastly overwhelms all other environmentalimpacts and thus is the most important factor in purchasing lamps. The bestenvironmental choice is the longest life, most energy efficient, lowest mercury lamp(Philips Sustainable Lighting, 2000).

For example, mercury releases to the environment from fluorescent lamps is aboutseven times less than incandescent lamps if they contained no mercury due to all of themercury released from the power generated to operate the lamp, i.e., primarily coal firedpower plants. Given that lighting consumes about 40%-50% of energy use in a typicaloffice building, high energy efficient, low mercury, long life lamps have a substantialpositive effect on reduced mercury and climate change pollution to the environment(Ibid).

LCA of Lamps Shows that Energy EfficiencyOverwhelms all other Environmental Impacts. The

Best Environmental Choice is the High EnergyEfficiency, Longest Life, Lowest Mercury Lamp.


11/29


Figure 1: Life Cycle Assessment of Wallboard



12/29



Figure 1: Life Cycle Assessment of Wallboard (Continued)


13/29


Figure 2: The General Product Life Cycle

Reprinted from DfE TookitMinn.Office of Environ. Assistance (circa 1995)


13


14/29


Figure 3: Level of Detail of LCA Applications

Level of detail in some applications of LCA. x in bold indicates the most frequently used

level.Level of detail in LCA

Application Conceptual Simplified Detailed CommentsDesign for Environment x x No formal links to LCAProduct development x x x Large variation in

sophisticationProduct improvement x Often based on already

existing productsEnvironmental claims(ISO type II-labeling)

x Seldom based on LCA

Ecolabelling

(ISO type I-labelling)

x Only criteria development

requires an LCAEnvironmentaldeclaration(ISO type III-labeling)

x Inventory and/or impactassessment

Organization marketing x x Inclusion of LCA inenvironmental reporting

Strategic planning x x Gradual development ofLCA knowledge

Green procurement x x LCA not as detailed as inecolabeling

Deposit/refund schemes x Reduced number ofparameters in the LCA isoften sufficient

Environmental (green)taxes

x Reduced number ofparameters in the LCA isoften sufficient

Choice betweenpackaging systems

x x Detailed inventory, ScopedisputedLCA results not the onlyinformation

Is the LCA evaluation for plastic lumber vs. certified wood similar to the results for wallboard?Plastic lumber is made from post-consumer milk jugs, soda bottles, grocery bags, plastic wrap,bubble wrap, detergent bottles, water bottles, and other plastic commodities (MassachusettsEPP Program Product Information Sheet 1999). It is used in construction, e.g., park benches,play ground equipment. Plastic lumber with the highest post consumer waste content (wastethat is discarded) has the least environmental impacts because it removes more waste fromthe wastestream and does not use virgin plastic feedstock. However, because most plastic


14


15/29


wood is not 100% post consumer content and virgin plastic feedstock is used, plastic woodperpetuates the manufacture of plastic thus requiring from an LCA perspective, the evaluationof plastic production and manufacturing. Reuse of plastic lumber is limited due to downcyclingof the plastic, i.e., additional use is limited due to degrading quality. Further, manyenvironmental groups argue that use of recycled plastic perpetuates plastic use. Only by using

LCA thinking is this issue addressed. The environmental impacts of plastic manufacture andexposure and the petroleum refining industry from which it originates must be considered.Plastics are being evaluated by EPA under its Endocrine Disrupter research on chronicreproductive health effects; this should be an LCA impact category for plastic notwithstandingthe potential uncertainties of the impacts.

These issues are important when comparing certified wood versus plastic lumber. Plasticshould continue to be removed from the wastream since reuse is better environmentally thanlandfilling or incinerating plastic. It means that on an LCA basis, plastic lumber is lesssustainable than certified wood due to the environmental and health burdens of plasticmanufacturing and use. It is likely for this reason that Cargill makes plastic from corn at its

Blair, Nebraska facility. Customers can request organically produced corn, so as shown earlierin this Chapter, organically grown corn without pesticides, fertilizers, and genetically modifiedorganisms is much better environmentally than plastic produced from petroleum.

Importance of LCA Improvement & Nordic Swan Approach; Relationship to Total QualityManagement Principles

ASTM and ISO LCA standards do not contain an improvement component that was originallyin drafts of the standards. However, manufacturers using LCA using it for productimprovement to improve the sustainability of its products. As shown by the grain ethanol LCAabove, the Improvement component for grain alcohol shows that substantial productenvironmental benefits can be gained by producing ethanol from organically grown corn.

Also for this reason, the Nordic Swan Ecolabel requires companies awarded the label tocommit to product improvements during the three year time frame between Nordic Swan Labelrecertification. The improvement component of LCA is also consistent with internationallyaccepted total quality management principles promoting a continuous improvement cycle forbusiness whereby a business should continually undergo self and third party evaluation toimprove products and processes. The same rationale applies to LCA of products.

What Are Important LCA Principles?

Based on national and international LCA standards, the following is a list of importantprinciples LCAs should follow:

1. Define unambiguous purpose of LCA, intended use, scope, and boundaries

Life Cycle Assessment Training

2. Define functional unit or measure of service or function performed by the productunder consideration. For example, the functional unit for floor covering could be insquare feet with installation requirements, aesthetic qualities, and maintenance

Printed on Recycled Paper

15


16/29


properties over a specified design life. Durability and take back/leasing provisionsare also important.

3. Define and record data quality.

4. Define target audience and relevant stakeholders for LCA

5. Define all LCA assumptions, methodologies, and data gaps so they aretransparent, i.e., fully disclosed.

6. Ensure LCAs are accurate, verifiable, reproducible, relevant, and non-deceptive

7. Ensure LCAs are based on competent scientific evidence

8. Ensure LCAs are not misleading

9. Ensure comparative LCAs are based on comparable products or services servingsimilar functions

Suggested Outline of an LCA Report

LCA reports should address all of the consensus principles noted above and generally containthe following information as recognized in the ASTM Standard for Product Life CycleAssessment/ISO 14025 LCA Standards:

1. Report Goals, Objectives, Scope, Purpose, Boundaries, Assumptions, FunctionalUnit, Methodology, and Data Quality and Data Quality Indicators

2. Summary

3. Identify Life Cycle Assessment Stages Considered and Rationale

4. Product/system life cycle description including flow diagrams

5. Describe LCA Inventory of Environmental Releases Including From Energy Use foreach LCA Stage Over the Products Life Cycle

6. Describe LCA Impacts from the Inventory Data

7. Interpret the LCA Including Significant Impacts for the Product or Process that is theSubject of the LCA

8. LCA Improvement Discussion

9. Interpretation and Conclusions. Recommendations are optional.

10. References and Data Sources


16


17/29


APPENDIX 2LCA Thinking

_______________

Advantages and Widespread Utility of LCA Thinking

The simplest level of LCA can be the most powerful because it is qualitative and useful foridentifying major environmental impacts, comparing products, developing a sustainable productmarketing strategy, and identifying unequivocal environmental benefits. Key decisions aboutnew product development and sustainable marketing do not necessarily need a highlyquantitative analysis, but rather an understanding of the relative advantages, disadvantages, anduncertainties for an existing or new product (Conceptual LCA, European Environmental Agency1998).

Results of a conceptual LCA based on LCA thinking can be presented using qualitativestatements or simple scoring systems, indicating which components or materials have thelargest environmental impact and why. For example, in the comparative LCA of grain ethanoland petroleum based products, LCA thinking identifies the substantial environmental benefits ofusing organically grown corn without pesticides and synthetic chemicals. LCA thinking identifieswhich products have a competitive advantage in terms of reduced environmental impacts.

How to Select Products Without a Full LCA

Using LCA principles or thinking by looking at multiple environmental attributes over theproducts life cycle can be done (1) by professionals with basic knowledge of the raw materialsand production process of a product, (2) by requesting it from the increasing number ofmanufacturers that have these data, or (3) by contacting LCA professionals to provide qualitativeinformation. More and more manufacturers are including this information on their brochures.The LCA tools in this chapter can help depending on the time and effort available for theprofessional in selecting products. Although efficiently obtaining LCA information on productsmay seem challenging, it is becoming easier due to the demand for this information. Given timeconstraints and deadlines, entities should consider (1) assigning sustainable product selectionresponsibilities to a single individual who can then acquire the necessary skills to incorporateLCA thinking in product decisions, and (2) build up information on this process in a library.

Using LCA Despite Deadlines and Cost Constraints: Why do it?

Learning the basics of LCA may not be a panacea for professionals selecting products today, buthaving this knowledge imparts the ability to ask the right questions and to be more facile with aprocess that is increasing in use, ease of use, and efficacy for non LCA professionals. It allowsdecisions to be based on all effects which provides greater benefits to human health and


17


18/29


environment. Furthermore, professionals selecting products who are familiar with LCA have acompetitive advantage.

For manufacturers and entities setting up sustainable product purchasing programs,incorporating an LCA based approach is much more important because it directly affects

profitability of manufacturers and effectiveness of sustainable product purchasing programs.Accordingly, for manufacturers and purchasers, it is worthwhile training staff on the use of LCAand where needed, obtaining competent advice. Furthermore, manufacturers certifying theirproducts as sustainable pursuant to consensus sustainable product standards will need either anISO compliant LCA or actual LCA data from it suppliers.

LCA Allows Product Decisions to beMade Based on All Effects on the

Environment. Companies &Professionals Using LCA Have a

Com etitive Advanta e.


18


19/29


APPENDIX 3Legal Requirements and Enforcement

_______________

Benefits of sustainable products communications for manufacturers and suppliers includeincreased market share, manufacturing efficiency, and higher profits and cost savings. Costs ofmisleading communications include substantial damage to corporate good will, liability for falseor deceptive claims and risk of enforcement by regulators in cases where ecolabels orenvironmental marketing communications violate state and/or federal labeling and truth-in-advertising law.

The law regulating communications about sustainable, environmentally preferable, or greenproducts is well settled and includes a mix of both State and federal requirements. This part of

the Manual provides a general description of relevant laws and principles for avoiding and,where necessary, responding to federal and State agency enforcement. Based on ourunderstanding, the government has been successful in all enforcement cases (since circa1991) because industry communications were misleading and companies settle becauselitigation has substantial adverse impacts on corporate good will.

The Government has Won all Cases Against Companies BecauseEnvironmental Communications Were Misleading and Litigation Adversely

Affects Corporate Good Will

How to Avoid and Respond To Federal and State Agency Enforcement

To avoid enforcement the following steps are advisable:

Establish a corporate policy on sustainable/environmental communications to increase thecertainty that they are defensible and thus reduce the risk of liability. PR & Marketing staffshould work with legal and environmental experts in developing communications.

Avoid unintended implied communications. Carefully scrutinize all communicationsincluding claims made about products to ensure that any implied claims are true.

Develop substantiation for all direct or implied claims.

Fully inform consumers of any limits of claimed environmental benefits.


19


20/29


Provide appropriate qualifications and disclosures. Qualifications should be clear as tomeaning and as to the claim being qualified; when in doubt, more information is betterunless it is confusing.

Recognize that specific claims are easier to defend than general claims. General

claims of sustainability or environmental preferability are effective, can increase sales,and helpful for customers, but they should be substantiated through life cycleassessment.

In responding to enforcement, it is advisable to be forthcoming with information in a timelymanner to allay all regulators' questions as quickly as possible. If it turns out that claims madewere not supported, retract the claim promptly. Enforcement activities seldom result in monetarypenalties where manufacturers cooperate with regulatory investigation, unless the claim wasintentionally misleading. The major damage that may result from false claims is loss of consumertrust and good will. Therefore, it is best to avoid publicity as much as possible when involved inan enforcement action.

Environmental Communication or Labeling Law

Environmental labeling law is based on longstanding Federal and State truth-in-advertising lawrequirements. Section 5(a) of 1914 Federal Trade Commission Act prohibits unfair ordeceptive acts in or affecting commerce, which is the basis for regulating environmentalcommunications and why the Federal Trade Commission and State Attorney Generals havethe enforcement lead for non-pesticide matters. EPA also has FIFRA jurisdiction and statutoryauthority combining government responsibility to prevent deceptive acts with its mandate toprotect public health and environment from the recognized hazards of pesticides.

Federal Requirements and Enforcement

There is no specific Federal statute regulating ecolabels, and, unlike many other countries, theU.S. has no government-sponsored certification program for environmentally preferable products.However, the acquisition agencies of the U.S. government are considering environmentalcharacteristics in making purchasing decisions and have instituted programs for acquiringenvironmentally preferable products.

Federal regulation of sustainable product communications including ecolabels is carried out by

the FTC pursuant to its authority under the truth-in-advertising laws, under which the FTCpublished Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims. EPA has no enforcementauthority over ecolabels, except if a chemical or substance is regulated by EPA under pesticideand toxic substance statutes. EPA has worked with and provided comments to the FTC indevelopment of the Guides, with the FTC taking the lead in finalizing and implementing them. Asa result, U.S. regulation has dealt with ecolabels mainly to protect consumers from false ormisleading claims, instead of fostering ecolabel use as do most other countries to promoteenvironmental protection, pollution prevention and, in some cases, trade protectionism.


20


21/29


The important exception to this trend is President Clinton's Executive Order 13101 (Sept. 1998)requiring executive agencies to purchase "environmentally preferable" goods and services, EPA'sguidance on implementing this Executive Order, and limited implementing rules by several federalagencies. President Bush extended this with an Executive Order of January 2007 encouraging

agencies to conduct both sustainable product and environmentally preferable purchasing:http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070124-2.html

Role of the FTC Prohibiting False or Misleading Communications

Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 authorizes FTC to prevent "unfairmethods of competition" and "unfair or deceptive acts in or affecting commerce." See, 15 U.S.C.Section 45(a). This authority extends to advertising claims, including all forms of environmentalcommunications and ecolabels.

FTC regulates ecolabels through case-by-case enforcement, and has issued guidelines on usingenvironmental marketing claims. FTC does not have authority to issue legally binding regulationsfor commercial advertising, although this has had no effect its ability to enforce the law. For themost part, FTCs enforcement decisions have concentrated on claims used in marketing productsto consumers, however these principles are also relevant to institutional and other types of sales.

The 1914 Federal Trade Commission Act establishing FTC also initiated regulation of industrylabeling of products by prohibiting in Section 5(a) unfair or deceptive acts in or affectingcommerce. 15 U.S.C. 45(a). FTCs Revised Guides for the Use of EnvironmentalMarketing Claims as Amended, (May 11, 1998) set forth its regulatory test for lawful labelswhich is based initially on the Commissions Policy Statement on Deception containing criteriafor determining whether an express or implied labeling claim has been made. CliffdaleAssociates, Inc., 103 F.T.C. 110, at 176 n.8, Appendix, reprinting letter of October 14, 1983from the Commission to Hon. John Dingell, Chairman, Commerce Committee, U.S. House ofRepresentatives (1984) (Deception Statement). Part 260.5 of FTCs Revised Guides identifythe requirements for a lawful express or implied claim:

[A]ny party making an express or implied claim that presents an objectiveassertion about the environmental attribute of a product or package must, at the timethe claim is made, possess and rely upon a reasonable basis substantiating the claim.A reasonable basis consists of competent and reliable evidence. In the context ofenvironmental marketing claims, such substantiation will often require competentand reliable scientific evidence, defined as tests, analyses, research, studies or other

evidence based on the expertise of professionals in the relevant area, conducted andevaluated in an objective manner by persons qualified to do so, using proceduresgenerally accepted in the profession to yield accurate and reliable results.


21


22/29


What is a Deceptive Claim?

FTC's enforcement actions for environmental communications have concentrated on preventingdeceptive claims. According to FTC's policy statements, advertising is deceptive if it conveys arepresentation, statement, or omission that is likely to mislead a reasonable consumer in a

material manner, i.e., in a way that will affect the consumer's purchasing decision. Advertisersmust have a reasonable basis for making any claims, whether express or implied, and howeverconveyed; all claims must be supported by the level of substantiation they appear to have on theirface. A reasonable basis for a claim consists of competent and reliable scientific evidence thatsubstantiates the statement. Evidence backing a claim must be obtained and evaluated in anobjective manner by persons qualified to do so, using procedures generally accepted in theprofession to yield accurate and reliable results.

True Statements Can Still Be Deceptive

A statement or claim, while technically true, can still be misleading or deceptive if it implies factsthat are not substantiated. The test for deceptiveness is not mere truth or falsity, but whetherthere was a reasonable basis for making the representation.

For example, the FTC brought an enforcement action against a manufacturer of trash bags thatadvertised its product as being "degradable in sunlight." While it was technically true that thetrash bags would degrade in sunlight, the FTC found the statement deceptive because the bagswere likely to end up being buried in landfills where they would not be exposed to sunlight andhence would not degrade; in other words, the statement was found to be deceptive because itimplied the bags would degrade when they likely would not, given their expected manner of use.

To avoid this problem, an advertiser should fully inform consumers of any limits of claimedenvironmental benefits.

FTC Guidelines

In 1992, the FTC issued Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims, intended toassist businesses in the use of environmental advertising. In 1996, the FTC issued revisedguides, making a few minor changes from the original set. The Guides were written with thesupport of EPA, which participated with the FTC on an interagency task force on ecolabeling.They establish safe harbors from enforcement and incorporate the FTC's policy in this areaestablished through enforcement actions dating back to 1973.

Marketing claims and ecolabels that are inconsistent with the Guides could result in enforcementaction by FTC. The Guides cover all environmental claims made through labels, advertising,promotional materials, symbols, emblems, logos, pictures, brand names, etc. They cover bothdirect and indirect assertions, both packaging and products, and all sales, whether personal,commercial, industrial or institutional.


22


23/29


The Guides set forth general principles and address specific terms frequently used in advertising.

General Principles in the Guides

Claims must be precise and clearly qualified. Qualifications and disclosures aboutenvironmental claims must be "sufficiently clear and prominent to prevent deception; clearlanguage, appropriate type size, and proximity to claim being qualified are factors toconsider in assessing the qualification.

Distinguish between products and packaging. The claim must distinguish whether itrelates to the product or the packaging, or both.

Do not overstate environmental attributes or their importance, either specifically orimpliedly. For example, a claim of "no CFC propellants" made on an aerosol product maybe deceptive because CFC propellants have been banned from all aerosol products since

1977, with very few exceptions.

Substantiate claims. For comparison claims, the maker should be able to substantiate theclaim, and it should be clear what is being compared, e.g., is the current product orpackage being compared with a previous version of the same product or package, or isthe current product being compared with a competitor's product, e.g., "this productcontains 50% post-consumer recycled material, which is 40% more than it contained in1994."

The Guides Also Specify Use of the Following Commonly Used Terms

Substantiate Claims of Degradable, Biodegradable, Photodegradable. To avoid beingconsidered deceptive, a claim that a product is degradable should be backed up byscientific evidence that the entire product or package will completely break down andreturn to nature without harming the environment. In the absence of such evidence, theclaim should be qualified as to the ability of the product or package to degrade in theenvironment where it is customarily disposed of, and as to the rate and extent ofdegradation.

Qualify use of "Compostable." An unqualified claim that a product is compostable must besubstantiated by reliable scientific evidence that all the materials in the product or package

will break down into, or otherwise become part of, usable compost in a safe and timelymanner in an appropriate composting program or facility, or in a home compost pile ordevice; otherwise, the claim must be qualified.

Qualify "Recyclable." Unqualified claims will be deceptive unless supported by reasonableevidence that the entire package or product, excluding minor components, is recyclable.Claims must be qualified to avoid consumer deception about limited availability orrecycling programs and collection sites. If the shape or size of a product limits its ability to


23


24/29


be recycled, an unqualified claim is deceptive even though the product is made withrecyclable material.

Explain Recycled Content. Unqualified claims will be deceptive unless the entire productor package is made of recycled material; otherwise, the claim should be qualified to avoid

confusion as to amount, by weight, of recycled material in the product or package. TheGuides do not require distinguishing between post-consumer and pre-consumer content,but allow such a distinction to be made. Where pre-consumer content is included as partof a claim, it must be substantiated that such material otherwise would have entered thewaste stream.

Qualify "Refillable." Unqualified claims of refillability will be deceptive unless a collectionand return system for refills exists, or unless the package can be refilled by the consumer.

Fully Explain Source Reduction Claims. Source reduction claims should be qualified tofully explain amount of reduction, and comparisons with previous versions of the same

product or with a competitor's product.

Substantiate "Ozone Safe" and "Ozone Friendly." Products containing substances thatdeplete the stratospheric ozone layer should not be claimed to be safe.

General Environmental Benefit Claims Given Close Scrutiny and Must be Based on LCA

FTC's guidelines discourage making general claims of environmental benefit or preferability, e.g.,"environmentally safe," "environmentally friendly," or "environmentally preferable," unlessdocumented by consensus life cycle assessment principles. The Guides assert that unqualifiedgeneral benefit claims not based on LCA can be difficult to interpret and may convey a wide

range of meanings. They state that "every express and material or implied claim that the generalassertion conveys to reasonable consumers about an objective quality, feature or attribute of aproduct must be substantiated." A brand name, such as Sustainable, "Eco-Safe," or"Environmentally Preferable Cleaner," will likely be viewed as a general benefit claim, based onthe view of a reasonable consumer, and thus the ecological benefit of the product should besubstantiated over its entire life cycle.

During the Fall of 1995, the FTC requested comments on its Guides and held a workshop onwhether and how the Guides should be revised or expanded. The commentors were generallysupportive of the Guides and the continued need for them in light of the expanded role ofenvironmental communications in the marketplace and the increasing consumer awareness and

sophistication about them. FTC issued revised guides in the fall of 1996, which essentially madefew changes from the original guides. One significant change in the new guides is that FTCrecognizes that Life Cycle Assessment is no longer in its infancy and intimated that LCA couldbe used as a legitimate basis for full benefit claims.


24


25/29


Federal Trade Commission Enforcement

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Guide on Environmental Marketing was revised in 1996 withmuch support from industry and other commenters; many States are adopting this guidance.Thus, regulatory pressure as enforced administratively and through the courts, is forcing

companies to make bona fide claims about efficacious environmental products.

In Parts 260.6 and 260.7 the Guides also identify general principles and guidance applicable toall environmental marketing claims. The FTCs enforcement record is very strong with thecases decided as consent agreements and none overturned. See Environmental Packaging &LabelingPart 400 (Thompson Publishing 2007).

A typical FTC environmental marketing enforcement action was brought against Amoco forunsubstantiated claims that Amoco premium gasoline delivers superior engine performance andenvironmental benefits. Amoco agreed to cease these claims unless it provided competent andreliable scientific substantiation (FTC News Feb. 22, 1996). The FTC also required ARCO and

Safe Brands Corporation to cease unsubstantiated claims about the safety and environmentalbenefits of antifreeze. The companies could not substantiate that the antifreeze wasENVIRONMENTALLY SAFER, BIODEGRADABLE, or THE ULTIMATE IN ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY. The FTC complaint stated that the companies had inadequatesubstantiation on the safety of the product even though the companies could substantiate that itwas less toxic than conventional antifreeze. According to the FTC, the companies ignored that asused in cars, the antifreeze contains lead and other hazardous substances (FTC News Nov. 28,1995).

An example of an unlawful claim for a cleaning product is the Texwipe Co. claims that its PCDuster and Office Duster II products were environmentally safe. The FTC found that Texwipesclaims were false and misleading because its products contained a stratospheric ozone-depletingchemical HFC-22. In re Texwipe Co., FTC Docket No. C-3466, 58 Fed. Reg. 59042 (Nov. 5,1993). Other cases are summarized below:

FTC v. Mobil(a product is not biodegradable if it ends up in a landfill)

FTC et al. v. Gillette(ozone friendly is confusing if the product only addresses CFCs andnot smog formation)

FTC v. Tetra Pak(easy to recycle must specify where recycling facilities are, includingthe number of States & locations for recycling)

Attorneys Generals v. Revlon(environmentally safe and contains no fluorocarbonsclaims must be substantiated)

In re Zipatone("ecologically safe" claims for spray cement product were misleadingbecause the product destroys stratospheric ozone).


25


26/29


New York City v. Proctor & Gamble(Luvs & Pampers diapers were easily biodegradableand claims that disposable diapers have any environmental benefits must be backed bysubstantiated competent & reliable evidence)

Attorneys General v. General Electric(claim that Energy Choice bulbs help eliminate

pollution, save energy, and cut consumers electricity bills, must adequately disclose thatbulbs produced less light)

New York City v. S.C. Johnson(claims that household products and shaving gel containno propellant alleged to damage ozone and contains no chlorofluorocarbons weremisleading because they did not disclose that products released hydrocarbon airpollutants)

FTC v. OneSource Worldwide Network(a plastic disc filled with structured water andadvertised over the internet as an effective substitute for laundry detergent withoutpolluting waters, must be substantiated by competent evidence about the products

environmental attributes and ability to replace detergents and softeners; the settlementincludes a $7.5M avalanche clause for violations)

EPA Pesticide Requirements for Environmental Product Labeling

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires pesticide registration andproper labeling of registered pesticides. 40 C.F.R. 152.25(a)[1998]. This rule was firstpromulgated in 1988 with active enforcement since that time. 63 Fed. Reg. 19256, 19257(Apr. 17, 1998) (EPA Clarification of Treated Articles Exemption from Pesticide Registration).EPAs pesticide rules specifically apply to consumer articles. The Agency has consistently

interpreted and applied this rule to prohibit implied or explicit public health claims forunregistered products, and continues to regard any public health claims as not consistent withthe provisions of the rule. Id.

As for lawfully unregistered products, EPA policy specifies that (1) no implied or explicit publichealth claims of any kind are made; (2) the claims concerning the presence of a pesticide inthe treated article are limited to the treated article only ... . Id.,

EPA began its Consumer Labeling Initiative (CLI) in 1996 in order to help increase thepublic understanding [of pesticide labeling requirements] by presenting clear, consistent andsafe use, environmental, and health information on household consumer product labels. (EPA

Phase 1 Report (1996) and 61 Fed. Reg. 12011 (March 22, 1996). Participating agencies inthe CLI include the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Federal Trade Commission, andNational Institutes of Health. Id. Participating industries include Bayer Corporation, BioservInc., Chemical Producers and Distributors Association, Chemical Specialties manufacturersAssociation, Clorox Company, Dial Corporation, Dow Brands, North American HazardousMaterials Management Association, Proctor & Gamble Co., Reckitt 7 Coleman, RISE-Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment, Rod Products Co., S.C. Johnson Wax, Inc.,Scotts, Solaris Group, and United Industries. Id.


26


27/29


In addition, the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 sets health-based standards forpesticide residues in food and strengthens the pesticide registration process including newrequirements for the review and registration of anti-microbial pesticides.

EPA Enforcement Cases

EPA has conducted enforcement proceedings on what claims may be made for pesticidetreated articles without obtaining registration. 63 Fed. Reg. 19257 (Apr. 17, 1998). EPAissued an order to stop the sale of 3Ms O-cel-O sponges that contain public health claims onthe package because of Agency concern with their advertisements. Questions & Answers,Enforcement Action Against Hasbro, Inc., for Public Health Claims on Antibacterial Toys, EPAOffice of Pesticide Programs (April 1997). In 1997 EPA brought a successful enforcementaction against the toy manufacturer, Hasbro, Inc. for unlawful claims about the efficacy of itsanti-bacterial toys. The agency ordered Hasbro to re-label products on store shelves within 90

days and change all future packaging of Microban-treated toys that claim health benefits.Hasbro also was told to publish advertisements in Parents, Child, American Baby andParenting magazines and USA Today, stating that Microban inhibits bacterial growth on toysbut wont guard children from germs.

Plastic News(July 14, 1997) detailed an EPA enforcement action against a plastic kitchencutting board maker Joyce Chen, Inc. As a result, the manufacturer stopped selling 12 of itsproducts after EPA said the firm was making unproven claims that they prevent the growth ofbacteria. EPA usually issues unilateral stop sale orders for unregistered pesticides in violationof the FIFRA statute protecting public health from deleterious use of pesticides due tomisleading labeling. Any person violating the orders are subject to civil or criminal penalties inSection 14 of FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 1361.

State and Local Legal Requirements

Since FTC's authority does not preempt State law in this area, there is concurrent enforcementauthority by the Federal government as well as State and local government. State and localgovernments exercise their authority in a variety of ways, mainly through State truth-in-advertisinglaws, and in some case laws specifically regulating environmental claims relating to recycledcontent and recyclability. For example, thirty-nine States have laws requiring rigid plasticcontainers to indicate resin content in order to facilitate recycling. In addition, some localcommunities have enacted packaging or recycling laws.

FTC Guides Have Been Adopted by the States

Almost all States have now adopted the FTCs Guides into State law, and it is expected thatall States will have done so by the end of 1996. As a result, there is substantial conformity


27


28/29


existing between State and Federal enforcement in this area. ISSA Guide to EnvironmentalMarketingat 33 (Oct. 1997).

Attorneys General Requirements and Green Report II

Comparable to FTC, the States enforce their own truth-in-advertising statutes to counterfalse or misleading environmental claims (ISSA Guideat 33). Attorneys General from 12States jointly issued the Green Report in 1990 providing guidelines for eco or environmentallabels, and issued the revised Green Report II in 1991. Both reports called upon the FederalGovernment to adopt national standards for environmental marketing claims resulting in theFTCs first Guides promulgated in 1992 using many of the principles and recommendations inthe States two reports. Id. Some local governments have been active in enforcing misleadinglabels under consumer protection authority. New York City reached a substantial number ofsettlements with manufacturers making environmental labeling claims. EnvironmentalPackaging, Part 400

Prior to 1992, the FTC regulated ecolabels solely through case-by-case enforcement. As aresult, there was a dearth of recognized guidance in this area. The States acted to fill this voidthrough enforcement under their own truth-in-advertising laws, and by developing their owngeneral guides. Much of the Green Report IIremains viable and continues to be used in Stateenforcement actions. Subsequent developments have affected two general principles in theReport:

Claims Should be Specific. The Reportrecommended, "Generalized environmentalclaims which imply that a product has no negative or adverse impact on the environmentshould be avoided. Instead, claims should be specific and state the precise environmental

benefit that the product provides." As discussed above, the trend in this area as shown byE. O. 13101 and EPA's guidance is toward acceptance of general benefit claims, providingthey are supported by appropriate LCAs. In making such general benefit claims, itcontinues to be advisable to be as specific as possible as to the general benefit beingclaimed, and to state or imply that there are no negative environmental characteristics of aproduct only with substantiation.

Life Cycle Assessments. The Reportadvised that "the results of product life assessmentsshould not be used to advertise or promote a specific product until uniform methods forconducting such assessments are developed and a general consensus is reached ... onhow this type of environmental comparison can be advertised non-deceptively." As

discussed above, extensive work has been completed since 1991 in standardizing lifecycle assessment, and EPA recognizes LCA as the only appropriate means for makingcomparative or general benefit claims. As a result, LCA use for claims andcommunications is now a valid tool.


28


29/29


Contract Law Enforcement

When supplying products to a government or industrial or institutional customer, a false ormisleading claim can be actionable under contract law, and for Federal government procurement,under the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) and the False Claims Act. Such liability can be

avoided through compliance with FTC requirements, an effective corporate policy, and steps todevelop bona fide claims.

UCC Warranties Provide Market-Based Enforcement

A sustainable product communication can function as a product warranty, either express orimplied, giving rise to potential liability under Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Thus,where an environmental communication, is untrue, a purchaser of the product or an affectedthird party may have a cause of action against the manufacturer or seller. To date, there hasbeen very little reported activity under the UCC, but a significant potential exists for warranty

liability in connection with untrue communications.

Council of Better Business Bureaus Enforcement

The Council of Better Business Bureaus issued some 22 complaints against companies forfalse or misleading environmental labels/claims in which companies agreed to discontinue thepractice as soon as economically feasible. Environmental Packaging, Part 411 (1995).

Lif C l A t T i i

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	jaime-rosales
View:	223 times
Download:	0 times

Lca Teaching Guide Final

Documents