Table 2.
Goal and scope definition of studied LCAs.
| Reference | Study Type | Goal | Scope | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCA | LCI | CS | Int. | Ext. | System Boundary | Functional Unit | Cut-off Criteria | Allocation | ICD | CRD | |||||||
| Inputs | Outputs | Open Loop | Closed Loop | ||||||||||||||
| M | E | ES | M | E | ES | ||||||||||||
| Cavallaro et al. (2007) | √ | - | - | √ | - | X-grave | System | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | √ | √ | - |
| Douglas et al. (2008) | - | √ | √ | √ | - | X-grave | Undefined1 | - | √ | √ | - | √ | √ | - | √ | N.A. | - |
| Rule et al. (2009) | - | √ | √ | - | √ | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | √ | √ | - | - | - | - | √2 | N.A. | - |
| Howell et al. (2013) | √ | √ | √ | X-grave | System | √ | - | - | √ | - | - | √3 | N.A. | - | |||
| Hans et al. (2007) | √ | √ | - | √ | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | - | - | - | - | - | √4 | √4 | √ | - | |
| Parker et al. (2007) | √ | √ | √ | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | √ | √ | - | - | - | √3 | - | N.A. | - | ||
| Thomson et al. (2011a) | √ | - | √ | √ | √ | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | √ | √ | - | - | - | √5 | - | √ | - |
| Thomson et al. (2011b) | √ | - | - | √ | √ | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | √ | √ | - | - | - | √5 | - | √ | - |
| Thomson et al. (2019) | √ | - | √ | √ | - | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | √ | √ | - | √ | √ | √5 | - | √ | - |
| Dahlsten et al. (2009) | √ | - | - | √ | - | X-grave | 1 kWh | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √6 | - | √ | - |
| Walker et al. (2011) | - | √ | - | √ | - | X-grave | Undefined | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | √7 | N.A. | - |
| Ombach et al. (2014) | - | √ | √ | √ | - | X-grave | Undefined | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | √8 | N.A. | - |
| Zhai et al. (2018) | √ | - | √ | √ | - | X-grave | System | √ | - | - | √ | - | - | - | √ | √ | - |
| Elginoz et al. (2017) | √ | - | √ | √ | √ | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | √9 | √ | - |
| Curto et al. (2018) | √ | - | √ | √ | - | X-gate | System | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | √ | - |
| Patrizi et al. (2019) | - | √ | - | √ | - | X-gate | System | - | - | √ | - | - | √ | - | - | √ | - |
| Uihlein et al. (2016) | √ | - | √ | √ | - | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | √10 | √ | - |
| Douziech et al. (2016) | √ | - | √ | - | √ | X-grave | 1 kWh | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | √11 | √ | - |
Abbreviations: CS, comparative study; Int., internal; Ext., external; X, cradle; ICD, impact category definition; CRD, critical review definition; M, materials; E, Energy; ES, environmental significance; √, yes; -, not reported; N.A., not applicable. Notes: 1/kWh used for energy and carbon intensities; 2No recycling for disposal of field equip., reuse of half of turbines. 3Recycling only for steel. 4Steel, copper, aluminum, bronze, plastics used for other processes; concrete reused for road construction. 5Recycled content approach for both foreground and background processes. 6Polluter pays (EPD); no allocation for foreground data. 7Replacing primary material with recycled material in future. 8Recycling rate for metals is 90%, some materials not recycled, and instead incinerated or taken to land fill. 9Ninty percent recycling for metals, otherwise incineration or landfill. 10Various recycling rate for ferrous and nonferrous metals. 11ISO/TS 14067 closed-loop procedure.