Eco-costs are the costs of the environmental burden of a product on the basis of prevention of that burden. They are the costs which should be made to reduce the environmental pollution and materials depletion in our world to a level which is in line with the carrying capacity of our earth.
For example: for each 1000kg CO2 emission, one should invest €150,- in offshore windmill parks (plus in the other CO2 reduction systems at that price or less). When this is done consequently, the total of CO2 emissions in the world is expected to be reduced to a level that is in compliance with the Paris agreement. As a result, global warming will stabilize (at a level of 2 degrees C). In short: "the eco-costs of 1000kg CO2 are € 150,-".
The eco-costs of a product are the sum of all eco-costs of emissions and use of resources during the life cycle "from cradle to cradle". The widely accepted method to make such a calculation is called life cycle assessment (LCA), which is basically a mass and energy balance, defined in the ISO 14040, and the ISO 14044 (for the building industry the EN 15804). The eco-costs method is in compliance with ISO 14008 (“Monetary valuation of environmental impacts and related environmental aspects”).
The practical use of eco-costs is to compare the sustainability of several product types with the same functionality. The advantage of eco-costs is that they are expressed in a standardized monetary value (€) which appears to be easily understood 'by instinct'. Also the calculation is transparent and relatively easy, compared to damage based models which have the disadvantage of extremely complex calculations with subjective weighting of the various aspects contributing to the overall environmental burden.[1][2]
Fig 2: Eco-costs are based on marginal prevention costs at the no-effect-level (the costs in euro/kg of the technical measure) .
The eco-costs system has been introduced in 1999 on conferences, and published in 2000-2004 in the International Journal of LCA,[3][4] and in the Journal of Cleaner Production.,[5][6] The eco-costs system has been uptated in 2007, 2012, 2017, 2022 (2023), and 2025. It is planned to update the system every 5 years to incorporate the latest developments in science. The system is summarized at the website www.ecocostsvalue.com, and published in two text books.[7][8] Scientific elaborations can be found in 10 PhD theses, see the eco-costs website tab books and references
The method of the eco-costs is based on the sum of the marginal prevention costs (end of pipe as well as system integrated) for toxic emissions related to human health as well as ecosystems, emissions that cause global warming, and resource depletion (metals, rare earths, fossil fuels, water, and land-use). For a visual display of the system see Figure 1.
Marginal prevention costs of toxic emissions are derived from the so-called prevention curve as depicted in Figure 2. The basic idea behind such a curve is that a country (or a group of countries, such as the European Union), must take prevention measures to reduce toxic emissions (more than one measure is required to reach the target). From the point of view of the economy, the cheapest measures (in terms of euro/kg) are taken first. At a certain point at the curve, the reduction of the emissions is sufficient to bring the concentration of the pollution below the so-called no-effect-level. The no-effect-level of CO2 emissions is the level that the emissions and the natural absorption of the earth are in equilibrium again at a maximum temperature rise of 2 degrees C. The no-effect-level of a toxic emission is the level where the concentration in nature is well below the toxicity threshold (most natural toxic substances have a toxicity threshold, below which they might even have a beneficial effect), or below the natural background level. For human toxicity the 'no-observed-adverse-effect level' is used. The eco-costs are the marginal prevention costs of the last measure of the prevention curve to reach the no-effect-level. See the abovementioned reference 4 and www.ecocostsvalue.com for a full description of the calculation method (note that in the calculation 'classes' of emissions with the same 'midpoint' are combined, as explained below).
The classical way to calculate a 'single indicator' in LCA is based on the damage of the emissions. Pollutants are grouped in 'classes', multiplied by a 'characterisation' factor to account for their relative importance within a class, and totalised to the level of their 'midpoint' effect (global warming, acidification, nutrification, etc.). The classical problem is then to determine the relative importance of each midpoint effect. In damage based systems this is done by 'normalisation' (= comparison with the pollution in a country or a region) and 'weighting' (= giving each midpoint a weight, to take the relative importance into account) by an expert panel.
The calculation of the eco-costs is based on classification and characterisation tables as well. Most of these tables stem from the Environmental Footprint system: for acidification, eutrophication, greenhouse gasses IPCC AR6 GWP 100 years 2021 (), and the USEtox model (). However, the eco-costs system has a different approach to the normalisation and weighting steps. Normalisation is done by calculating the marginal prevention costs for a region (i.e. the European Union), as described above. The weighting step is not required in the eco-costs system, since the total result is the sum of the eco-costs of all midpoints. The advantage of such a calculation is that the marginal prevention costs are related to the cost of the most expensive Best Available Technology which is needed to meet the target, and the corresponding level of Tradable Emission Rights which is required in future. From a business point of view, the eco-costs are the costs of non-compliance with future governmental regulations. Example from the past: NOx emissions of Volkswagen diesel.
The eco-costs have been calculated for the situation in the European Union. It is expected that the situation in some states in the US, like California and Pennsylvania, give similar results. It might be argued that the eco-costs are also an indication of the marginal prevention costs for other parts of the globe, under the condition of a level playing field for production companies.
Eco-costs 2025
The method of the eco-costs 2023 (version 1.0) comprises tables of over 58.000 emissions and 2200 materials and processes. It has been made operational by special databases for SimaPro and OpenLCA. Excel look-up tables are provided at www.ecocostsvalue.com. To provide quick benchmarking on materials in Cradle-to-cradle systems, Idematapp and IdematLightLCA have been developed for mobile telephones in IOS and Android.
For emissions of toxic substances, the following set of multipliers (marginal prevention costs) is used in the eco-costs 2025 system:
eco-costs of
equivalent
acidification
7.65 euro / mol H+ equivalent
eutrophication
5.38 €/kg phosphate equivalent
ecotoxicity
2.89 E-3 €/CTUe
human toxicity, cancer
920000 €/ CTUh
human toxicity, non cancer
216000 €/ CTUh
summer smog (Photochemical oxidant formation)
6.12 euro per kg NMVOS equivalent
fine dust
40.1 €/kg fine dust PM2.5
global warming (GWP 100)
0.150 €/kg CO2 equivalent
The characterization ('midpoint') tables which are applied in the eco-costs 2025 system, are recommended by the ILCD:[9]
IPPC 2021, 100 years, for greenhouse gasses (EF version)
USETOX 2 (EF version), for human toxicity (cancer and non-cancer), and ecotoxicity
EF tables for acidification, eutrification, and photochemical oxidant formation
EF tables plus UNEP/SETAC 2016,[10] for fine dust PM2.5.
In addition to abovementioned eco-costs for emissions, there is a extra set of eco-costs to characterize the 'midpoints' of resource depletion and protection of Nature:
eco-costs of metal scarcity (including rare earth)
eco-costs of uranium and transport fuels
eco-costs of water scarcity (based on the Baseline Water Stress indicator - BWS - of countries [11])
eco-costs of loss of biodiversity (of vascular plants and mammals), based on land-use change
eco-costs of the plastic soup
The abovementioned marginal prevention costs at midpoint level can be combined to 'endpoints' in three groups, plus global warming as a separate group:
eco-costs of human health
= the sum of cancer and non-cancer, summer smog, fine dust
eco-costs of protecting Nature (biodiversity)
= the sum of acidification, eutrophication, ecotoxicity, plastic soup, biodiversity
eco-costs of resource scarcity
= the sum of metals scarcity, water, uranium and transport fuels, land-fill
eco-costs of global warming
= the sum of CO2 and other greenhouse gases (the GWP 100 table)
total eco-costs
= the sum of human health, ecosystems, resource scarcity and global warming
Since the endpoints have the same monetary unit (e.g. euro, dollar), they are added up to the total eco-costs without applying a 'subjective' weighting system. This is an advantage of the eco-costs system (see also ISO 14044 section 4.4.3.4 and 4.4.5). So called 'double counting' (ISO 14044 section 4.4.2.2.3) is avoided. The eco-costs system is in compliance with ISO 14008 (“Monetary valuation of environmental impacts and related environmental aspects”), and uses the ‘averting costs method’, also called ‘(marginal) prevention costs method’ (see section 6.3).
The eco-costs of global warming (also called eco-costs of carbon footprint) can be used as an indicator for the carbon footprint. The eco-costs of resource scarcity can be regarded as an indicator for 'circularity' in the theory of the circular economy. However, it is advised to include human toxicity and eco-toxicity, and include the eco-costs of global warming in the calculations on the circular economy as well. The eco-costs of global warming are required to reveal the difference between fossil-based products and bio-based products, since biogenic CO2 is not counted in LCA (biogenic CO2 is part of the natural recycle loop in the biosphere). Therefore, total eco-costs can be regarded as a robust indicator for cradle-to-cradle calculations in LCA for products and services in the theory of the circular economy. Since the economic viability of a business model is also an important aspect of the circular economy, the added value of a product-service system should be part of the analysis. This requires the two dimensional approach of Eco-efficient Value Creation [12] as described at the Wikipedia page on the model of the ecocosts/value ratio, EVR.
The Delft University of Technology has developed a single indicator for S-LCA as well, the so-called s-eco-costs, to incorporate the sometimes appalling working conditions in production chains (e.g. production of garments, mining of metals). Aspects are the low minimum wages in developing countries (the "fair wage deficit"), the aspects of "child labour" and extreme poverty", the aspect of "excessive working hours", and the aspect of "OSH (Occupational Safety and Health)". The s-eco-costs system has been published in the Journal of Cleaner Production.[13]
Prevention costs versus damage costs
Prevention measures will decrease the costs of the damage, related to environmental pollution. The damage costs are in most cases higher compared to the prevention costs. So the total effect of prevention measures on our society is that it results in a better environment at less total costs.
Discussion
There are many 'single indicators' for LCA. Basically, they fall into three categories:
single issue
damage based
prevention based
The best known 'single issue' indicator is the carbon footprint: the total emissions of kg CO2, or kg CO2equivalent (taking methane and some other greenhouse gasses into account as well). The advantage of a single issue indicator is, that its calculation is simple and transparent, without any complex assumptions. It is easy as well to communicate to the public. The disadvantage is that is ignores the problems caused by other pollutants and it is not suitable for cradle-to-cradle calculations (because materials depletion is not taken into account). The most common single indicators are damage based. This stems from the period of the 1990s, when LCA was developed to make people aware of the damage of production and consumption. The advantage of damage based single indicators is, that they make people aware of the fact that they should consume less, and make companies aware that they should produce cleaner. The disadvantage is that these damage based systems are very complex, not transparent for others than who make the computer calculations, need many assumptions, and suffer from the subjective normalization and weighting procedure as last step, to combine the 3 scores for human health, ecosystems and resource depletion. Communication of the result is not easy, since the result is expressed in 'points' (scientific attempts to express the results in money were not very successful so far, because of methodological flaws and uncertainties). Prevention based indicators, like the system of the eco-costs, are relatively new. The advantage, in comparison to the damage based systems, is that the calculations are relatively easy and transparent, and that the results can be explained in terms of money and in measures to be taken. The system is focused on the decision taking processes of architects, business people, designers and engineers. The advantage is that it provides 1 single endpoint in euro's, without the need of normalization and weighting. The disadvantage is that the system is not focused on the fact that people should consume less.
The eco-costs are calculated for the situation of the European Union, but are applicable worldwide under the assumption of a level playing field for business, and under the precautionary principle. There are two other prevention based systems, developed after the introduction of the eco-costs, which are based on the local circumstances of a specific country:
In the Netherlands, 'shadow prices' (the "MKI") have been developed in 2004 by TNO/MEP on basis of a local prevention curve: it are the costs of the most expensive prevention measure required by the Dutch government for each midpoint. It is obvious that such costs are relevant for the local companies, but such a shadow price system doesn't have any meaning outside the Netherlands, since it is not based on the no-effect-level
In Japan, a group of universities have developed a set of data for maximum abatement costs (MAC, similar to the midpoint multipliers of the eco-costs as given in the previous section), for the Japanese conditions. The development of the MAC method started in 2002 and has been published in 2005.[14] The so-called avoidable abatement cost (AAC) in this method is comparable to the eco-costs.
Four available databases
In line with the policy of the Delft University of Technology to bring LCA calculations within reach of everybody, open access excel databases (tables) are made available on the internet, free of charge (CCBY). Experts on LCA who want to use the eco-costs as a single indicator, can download the full database for Simapro (the Eco-costs Method as well as the Idemat LCIs), when they have a Simapro licence. The eco-costs system, the Idemat LCI database, and a special version of the Ecoinvent database, are also available in OpenLCA
The following databases are available:
excel tables on www.ecocostsvalue.com, tab data (look-up tables for designers and engineers):
an excel table with data on emissions and materials depletion (more than 35.000 substances), see
2 excel tables with LCIs of products and processes: (a) an open access excel file, called Idemat, and (b) an excel file with Ecoinvent data only for students at the campus, see
an import SimaPro database for the eco-costs method and an import SimaPro database for Idemat LCIs for people who have a Simapro licence
two databases for Open LCA
the IdematApp for Sustainable Materials Selection (available in the App Store of Apple and in the Google Play store). See for more information www.idematapp.com.
Social cost in neoclassical economics is the sum of the private costs resulting from a transaction and the costs imposed on the consumers as a consequence of being exposed to the transaction for which they are not compensated or charged. In other words, it is the sum of private and external costs. This might be applied to any number of economic problems: for example, social cost of carbon has been explored to better understand the costs of carbon emissions for proposed economic solutions such as a carbon tax.
The green gross domestic product is an index of economic growth with the environmental consequences of that growth factored into a country's conventional GDP. Green GDP monetizes the loss of biodiversity, and accounts for costs caused by climate change. Some environmental experts prefer physical indicators, which may be aggregated to indices such as the "Sustainable Development Index".
Life cycle assessment (LCA), also known as life cycle analysis, is a methodology for assessing environmental impacts associated with all the stages of the life cycle of a commercial product, process, or service. For instance, in the case of a manufactured product, environmental impacts are assessed from raw material extraction and processing (cradle), through the product's manufacture, distribution and use, to the recycling or final disposal of the materials composing it (grave).
Eco-efficiency refers to the delivery of goods and services to meet human needs and improve quality of life while progressively reducing their environmental impacts of goods and resource intensity during their life-cycle.
Environment friendly processes, or environmental-friendly processes, are sustainability and marketing terms referring to goods and services, laws, guidelines and policies that claim reduced, minimal, or no harm upon ecosystems or the environment.
Green building refers to both a structure and the application of processes that are environmentally responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building's life-cycle: from planning to design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation, and demolition. This requires close cooperation of the contractor, the architects, the engineers, and the client at all project stages. The Green Building practice expands and complements the classical building design concerns of economy, utility, durability, and comfort. Green building also refers to saving resources to the maximum extent, including energy saving, land saving, water saving, material saving, etc., during the whole life cycle of the building, protecting the environment and reducing pollution, providing people with healthy, comfortable and efficient use of space, and being in harmony with nature. Buildings that live in harmony; green building technology focuses on low consumption, high efficiency, economy, environmental protection, integration and optimization.’
An emission intensity is the emission rate of a given pollutant relative to the intensity of a specific activity, or an industrial production process; for example grams of carbon dioxide released per megajoule of energy produced, or the ratio of greenhouse gas emissions produced to gross domestic product (GDP). Emission intensities are used to derive estimates of air pollutant or greenhouse gas emissions based on the amount of fuel combusted, the number of animals in animal husbandry, on industrial production levels, distances traveled or similar activity data. Emission intensities may also be used to compare the environmental impact of different fuels or activities. In some case the related terms emission factor and carbon intensity are used interchangeably. The jargon used can be different, for different fields/industrial sectors; normally the term "carbon" excludes other pollutants, such as particulate emissions. One commonly used figure is carbon intensity per kilowatt-hour (CIPK), which is used to compare emissions from different sources of electrical power.
A carbon footprint (or greenhouse gas footprint) is a calculated value or index that makes it possible to compare the total amount of greenhouse gases that an activity, product, company or country adds to the atmosphere. Carbon footprints are usually reported in tonnes of emissions (CO2-equivalent) per unit of comparison. Such units can be for example tonnes CO2-eq per year, per kilogram of protein for consumption, per kilometer travelled, per piece of clothing and so forth. A product's carbon footprint includes the emissions for the entire life cycle. These run from the production along the supply chain to its final consumption and disposal.
The Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is a voluntary environmental management instrument, which was developed in 1993 by the European Commission. It enables organizations to assess, manage and continuously improve their environmental performance. The scheme is globally applicable and open to all types of private and public organizations. In order to register with EMAS, organisations must meet the requirements of the EU EMAS-Regulation. Currently, more than 4,600 organisations and more than 7,900 sites are EMAS registered.
Cleaner production is a preventive, company-specific environmental protection initiative. It is intended to minimize waste and emissions and maximize product output. By analysing the flow of materials and energy in a company, one tries to identify options to minimize waste and emissions out of industrial processes through source reduction strategies. Improvements of organisation and technology help to reduce or suggest better choices in use of materials and energy, and to avoid waste, waste water generation, and gaseous emissions, and also waste heat and noise.
Design for the environment (DfE) is a design approach to reduce the overall human health and environmental impact of a product, process or service, where impacts are considered across its life cycle. Different software tools have been developed to assist designers in finding optimized products or processes/services. DfE is also the original name of a United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) program, created in 1992, that works to prevent pollution, and the risk pollution presents to humans and the environment. The program provides information regarding safer chemical formulations for cleaning and other products. EPA renamed its program "Safer Choice" in 2015.
Ecological design or ecodesign is an approach to designing products and services that gives special consideration to the environmental impacts of a product over its entire lifecycle. Sim Van der Ryn and Stuart Cowan define it as "any form of design that minimizes environmentally destructive impacts by integrating itself with living processes." Ecological design can also be defined as the process of integrating environmental considerations into design and development with the aim of reducing environmental impacts of products through their life cycle.
Sustainable packaging is packaging materials and methods that result in improved sustainability. This involves increased use of life cycle inventory (LCI) and life cycle assessment (LCA) to help guide the use of packaging which reduces the environmental impact and ecological footprint. It includes a look at the whole of the supply chain: from basic function, to marketing, and then through to end of life (LCA) and rebirth. Additionally, an eco-cost to value ratio can be useful The goals are to improve the long term viability and quality of life for humans and the longevity of natural ecosystems. Sustainable packaging must meet the functional and economic needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainability is not necessarily an end state but is a continuing process of improvement.
An economic input-output life-cycle assessment, or EIO-LCA involves the use of aggregate sector-level data to quantify the amount of environmental impact that can be directly attributed to each sector of the economy and how much each sector purchases from other sectors in producing its output. Combining such data sets can enable accounting for long chains, which somewhat alleviates the scoping problem of traditional life-cycle assessments. EIO-LCA analysis traces out the various economic transactions, resource requirements and environmental emissions required for producing a particular product or service.
The EVR model is a life cycle assessment based method to analyse consumption patterns, business strategies and design options in terms of eco-efficient value creation. Next to this it is used to compare products and service systems.
An Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) is a Type III environmental declaration that quantifies environmental information about the life cycle of a product. This can enable comparisons between products fulfilling the same function. The methodology to produce an EPD is based on product life cycle assessment (LCA), following the ISO 14040 series of standards.
EcoProIT is a project initiated at Chalmers University of Technology at the department of Product and Production Development. The project aims to provide production engineers a tool for detailed ecological footprint analyses, which are becoming more important in terms of marketing and legislation. A published report by MIT in 2011 showed companies thought that environmental sustainable strategy is, or will be, vital to be competitive. The report included many sectors, e.g. covering medicals, automobiles and consumer products. EcoProIT will design a tool for industrial applications used for detailed environmental footprint analyses of their production systems and the products produced using simulation. The tool will simulate the production and analyze the product's environmental footprint in a standardized way. It will also be possible to use the tool for bench marking between different sites. The aim for the tool puts high requirements on standardized methods and data management.
Sustainable products are products either sustainably sourced, manufactured or processed and provide environmental, social, and economic benefits while protecting public health and the environment throughout their whole life cycle, from the extraction of raw materials to the final disposal.
A circular economy is an alternative way countries manage their resources, in which usage of products in the traditional linear make, use, and dispose method is not implemented. Instead, resources are used for their maximum utility throughout their life cycle and regenerated in a cyclical pattern minimizing waste. They strive to create economic development through environmental and resource protection. The ideas of a circular economy were officially adopted by China in 2002, when the 16th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party legislated it as a national endeavor though the various sustainability initiatives which were implemented in the previous decades starting in 1973. China adopted the circular economy due to the environmental damage and resource depletion that was occurring from going through its industrialization process. China is currently a world leader in the production of resources, where it produces 46% of the world's aluminum, 50% of steel and 60% of cement, while it has consumed more raw materials than all the countries a part of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) combined. In 2014, China created 3.2 billion tonnes of industrial solid waste, where 2 billion tonnes were recovered using recycling, incineration, reusing and composting. By 2025, China is anticipated to produce up to one quarter of the world's municipal solid waste.
The Eco-score, like the Nutri-Score, is a food label with five categories: from A to E. The aim is to help consumers make more ecological choices when making their purchases.
↑ Characterization factors of the ILCD Recommended Life Cycle Impact Assessment methods, ILCD Archived 2013-12-04 at the Wayback Machine
↑ Global Guidance for Life Cycle Impact assessment Indicators Volume 1, United Nations Environment Programme, 2016
↑ World Resources Institute Aqueduct project. Working Paper: Aqueduct Country and River Basin rankings. A weighted aggregation of spatially distinct hydrological indicators, Gassert et al. December 2013
↑ Natascha M. van der Velden and Joost G. Vogtländer; Monetisation of external socio-economic costs of industrial production: A social-LCA-based case of clothing production; Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 153, pp 320 - 330
↑ Tosihiro Oka, Masanobu Ishikawa, Yoshifumi Fujii, Gjalt Huppes; Calculating Cost-effectiveness for Activities with Multiple Environmental Effects Using the Maximum Abatement Cost Method; Journal of Industrial Ecology, Volume 9, Issue 4, pages 97–103, October 2005
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
