0 votes
33 views

I have compared land use impact using EDP, EF3.0, ImpactWorld+, ReCiPe2016, ReCiPe on this process : building construction, budget hotel | building, budget hotel | Cutoff, S (BR). With ecoinvent 3.7.1.

I compared OpenLCA, Brightway2 and ecoinvent online LCIA (for the latter, only on EDP, EF3.0 and ReCiPe).

I have very different results. Brightway2 and ecoinvent results are consistent. But are much lower than OpenLCA results.

I have alreday find a small error in impactworld+ implementation in openlca, with a different naming for the flow "Occupation, forest, intensive, normal". The "normal" is not present in the labelling of the CFs. Same for "Occupation, traffic area, road network". Name differs from LCI to CF table.

Although this does not solve my problem as this leads to lower impact than expected whereas on my hostel investigation I have a higher result than with other software (sometimes several order of magnitude - see below).

OLCAbw2ecoinvent
EDP - land occupation2.43E+053.12E+043.12E+04
EDP - land transformation4.12E+033.71E+023.71E+02
EF3.0 - land use 8.57E+115.12E+065.07E+06
IW+ - land occupation2.14E+047.93E+03
IW+ - land transformation2.04E+052.10E+04
ReCiPe2016 - H - land occupation1.39E-031.18E-04
ReCiPe2016 - H - land transformation8.20E-061.00E-06
ReCiPe - H - land occupation1.52E+041.92E+031.92E+03
ReCiPe - H - land transformation-7.83E+012.10E+022.10E+02

I am trying to figure out which result is the good one, could you help me?

Thanks a lot for you reply

in openLCA by (160 points)

Please log in or register to answer this question.

...