Assessing burden of disease as disability adjusted life years in life cycle assessment

Yumi Kobayashi; Greg M Peters; Nicholas J Ashbolt; Sean Shiels; Stuart J Khan

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.05.017

Assessing burden of disease as disability adjusted life years in life cycle assessment

Sci Total Environ. 2015 Oct 15:530-531:120-128. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.05.017. Epub 2015 May 29.

Authors

Yumi Kobayashi¹, Greg M Peters², Nicholas J Ashbolt³, Sean Shiels⁴, Stuart J Khan⁵

Affiliations

¹ School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
² School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia; Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden.
³ School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia; School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton T6G 2G7, Alberta, Canada.
⁴ Knowledge, Technology & Innovation, Environment Protection Authority Victoria, 200 Victoria Street, Carlton, VIC 3053, Australia.
⁵ School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia. Electronic address: s.khan@unsw.edu.au.

PMID: 26042893
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.05.017

Abstract

Disability adjusted life years (DALYs) have been used to quantify endpoint indicators of the human burden of disease in life cycle assessment (LCA). The purpose of this paper was to examine the current use of DALYs in LCA, and also to consider whether DALYs as used in LCA have the potential to be compatible with DALYs as used in quantitative risk assessment (QRA) to facilitate direct comparison of the results of the two approaches. A literature review of current usage of DALYs in LCA was undertaken. Two prominent methods were identified: ReCiPe 2008 and LIME2. The methods and assumptions used in their calculations were then critically reviewed. The assumptions used for the derivation of characterization factors in DALYs were found to be considerably different between LCA methods. In many cases, transparency of these calculations and assumptions is lacking. Furthermore, global average DALY values are often used in these calculations, but may not be applicable for impact categories where the local factors play a significant role. The concept of DALYs seems beneficial since it enables direct comparison and aggregation of different health impacts. However, given the different assumptions used in each LCA method, it is important that LCA practitioners are aware of the differences and select the appropriate method for the focus of their study. When applying DALYs as a common metric between LCA and QRA, understanding the background information on how DALYs were derived is crucial to ensure the consistency of DALYs used in LCA and QRA for resulting DALYs to be comparable and to minimize any double counting of effects.

Keywords: Climate change; Human health impacts; Human toxicity; LIME2; Ozone depletion; ReCiPe 2008; Respiratory effects.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review

MeSH terms

Cost of Illness*
Disabled Persons*
Humans
Quality-Adjusted Life Years*
Risk Assessment