Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Freight transport in the context of industrial ecology and sustainability: evaluation of uni- and multi-modality scenarios via life cycle assessment

  • ROADWAYS AND INFRASTRUCTURE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims at comparing, from an environmental point of view, four different scenarios of freight transport at the Italian level, on an equal base of route between supplier and customer. The first scenario included freight movements by truck and mainly ship, the second included track and mainly train, the third was the three-modal based scenario, whilst the fourth scenario was the only uni-modal, based only upon truck movement.

The study was conducted to find the environmentally sustainable solution, or at least a sustainable trade-off, as well as the most environmentally burdening issues, associated with the geographic dimension of transport in Italy, towards sustainability.

Methods

Using uni‐ and multi-modal freight movements by truck, rail and ship, a life cycle assessment (LCA) was developed to estimate the related environmental burdens both at the midpoint and at the endpoint levels from the consumption of primary energy and natural resources along with the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and of other pollutants. Primary data were compiled as part of the inventory analysis and consisted in the transport flows associated with the system investigated: those were calculated from the distance travelled and the goods load transported. Primary data were then combined with secondary data that were modelled with the transport life cycle modules contained in Ecoinvent: from those modules, the fuel consumption amounts associated transport flows were extrapolated, and used for the assessment.

Results

Results showed that the environmental impact of the multi-modal scenarios is lower compared with the uni-modal scenario. The best performing option was found to be the third scenario providing use of all the three freight means, namely ship, train and truck. However, this scenario is not being practiced for several reasons, mainly due to control and monitoring difficulties of each step and higher operational costs. The first and second scenarios showed a quite comparable environmental behaviour and so are to be considered as viable options.

Conclusions

Apart from highlighting the most environmentally viable transport options, the study contributed to finding the indicators of environmental impact and damage that best describe the system investigated and are recommended by this author team to be accounted for in future assessments in the transport sector. Finally, although site-specific, the results of this study may be useful to logistics companies, policy and decision makers of other regions and countries towards identifying and promoting environmentally optimal freight transport solutions, contributing to sustainability of the transport sector.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig.4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ambarwati L, Verhaeghe R, Arem BV, Pel AJ (2017) Assessment of transport performance index for urban transport development strategies — incorporating residents’ preferences. Environ Impact Assess Rev 63:107–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen O (2002) Transport of fish from Norway: energy analysis using industrial ecology as the framework. J Clean Prod 10:581–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcidiacono C, Porto SMC (2010) A model to manage crop-shelter spatial development by multi-temporal coverage analysis and spatial indicators. Biosyst Eng 107(2):107–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcidiacono C, Porto SMC (2012) A set of landscape indicators to describe environmental impacts of crop-shelter coverage. Acta Hortic 937:1011–1018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ardente F, Cellura M, Brano VL, Mistretta M (2010) Life cycle assessment-driven selection of industrial ecology strategies. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6(1):52–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Arzoumanidis I, Petti L, Raggi A, Zamagni A (2013) Life cycle assessment for the agri-food sector. In: Salomone R, Clasadonte MT, Proto M, Raggi A (eds) Product-oriented Environmental Management Systems (POEMS). Springer Science+Business Media, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 105–122

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Asdrubali F, Baldinelli G, Scrucca F (2015) Comparative life cycle assessment of an innovative CSP air-cooled system and conventional condensers. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1076–1088

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu ASF, Yong G (2004) On the industrial ecology potential in Asian developing countries. J Clean Prod 12:1037–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clasadonte MT, Lo Giudice A, Matarazzo A (2013) Guidelines for environmental labels in the agri-food SMEs. In: Salomone R, Clasadonte MT, Proto M, Raggi A (eds) Product-oriented Environmental Management Systems (POEMS). Springer Science+Business Media, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 203–243

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • De Benedetto L, Klemeš J (2009) The Environmental Performance Strategy Map: an integrated LCA approach to support the strategic decision-making process. J Clean Prod 17(10):900–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desrochers P (2004) Industrial symbiosis: The case for market coordination. J Clean Prod 12:1099–1110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duan H, Hu M, Zhang Y, Wang J, Jiang W, Huang Q, Li J (2015) Quantification of carbon emissions of the transport service sector in China by using streamlined life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 95:109–116

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ecoinvent (2018) The Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories. Ecoinvent v3.5

  • European Commission (EU) (2018) Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the European council, the council, the European economic and social committee, the committee of the regions and the European investment bank - A Clean Planet for all A European strategic long-term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive and climate neutral economy. COM 2018:773

    Google Scholar 

  • European Environmental Agency (EEA) (2019) Greenhouse gas emissions from transport in Europe. Available: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-emissions-of-greenhouse-gases/transport-emissions-of-greenhouse-gases-12 (Accessed: September 28, 2020)

  • Forsberg A, von Malmborg F (2004) Tools for environmental assessment of the build environment. Build Environ 39:223–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geyer R, Stoms DM, Lindner JP, Davis FW, Wittstock B (2010) Coupling GIS and LCA for biodiversity assessments of land use. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(5):454–467

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heinonen J, Junnila S (2011) A carbon consumption comparison of rural and urban lifestyle. Sustainability 3(8):1234–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingrao C, Messineo A, Riccardo B, Yigitcanlar T, Ioppolo G (2018) How can life cycle thinking support sustainability of buildings? Investigating life cycle assessment applications for energy efficiency and environmental performance. J Clean Prod 201:556–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingrao C, Selvaggi R, Valenti F, Matarazzo A, Pecorino B, Arcidiacono C (2019) Life cycle assessment of expanded clay granulate production using different fuels. Resour Conserv Recy 141:398–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO (International Organization for Standardization) (2006a) 14040-Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment e Principles and Framework

  • ISO (International Organization for Standardization) (2006b) 14044-Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Requirements and Guidelines

  • Jolliet O, Manuele M, Raphael C, Sébastian H, Jérome P, Gerald R, Rosenbaum R (2003) IMPACT 2002+: a new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(6):324–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaack LH, Vaishnav P, Morgan MG, Azevedo IL, Rai S (2018) Decarbonizing intraregional freight systems with a focus on modal shift. Environ Res Lett 13(8):083001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamal-Chaoui L, Alexis R (eds.) (2009) Competitive Cities and Climate Change, OECD Regional Development Working Papers N° 2, 2009, OECD publishing, © OECD

  • Kreutzberger E, Macharis C, Vereecken L, Woxenius J (2003) Is intermodal freight transport more environmentally friendly than all-road freight transport? A review. NECTAR Conference No 7

  • Lee S-Y, Klassen RD (2008) Drivers and enablers that foster environmental management capabilities in small- and medium-sized suppliers in supply chains. Prod Oper Manag 17(6):573–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lifset R, Graedel TE (2002) Industrial ecology: goals and definitions. In: Ayres RU, Ayres LW (eds) A Handbook of Industrial Ecology, 1st edn. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., Cheltenham, pp 3–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattila T, Helin T, Antikainen R, Soimakallio S, Pingoud K, Wessman H (2011) Land use in life cycle assessment, THE FINNISH ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE 24 | Helsinki ISBN 978–952–11–3926–0 (available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/14925706.pdf. Accessed on 18 November 2019)

  • Nahlik MJ, Kaehr AT, Chester MV, Horvath A, Taptich MN (2015) Goods movement life cycle assessment for greenhouse gas reduction goals. J Ind Ecol 20(2):317–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patella SM, Scrucca F, Asdrubali F, Carrese S (2019) Carbon Footprint of autonomous vehicles at the urban mobility system level: A traffic simulation-based approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 74:189–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pizzol M (2019) Deterministic and stochastic carbon footprint of intermodal ferry and truck freight transport across Scandinavian routes. J Clean Prod 224:626–636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prè (2019) LCA software and database manual. Prè Consultants BV, Amersfoort, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson GL (2013) Food packaging – principles and practice, 3rd edn. Taylor & Francis Group LLC, Boca Raton, FL, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarwat AI, Sundararajan A, Parvez I, Moghaddami M, Moghadasi A (2018) Toward a smart city of interdependent critical infrastructure networks. In: Amini MH, Boroojeni KG, Iyengar SS, Pardalos PM, Blaabjerg F, Madni AM (eds) Sustainable Interdependent Networks - from Theory to Application, Studies in Systems, Decision and Control 145. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 21–45

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Seroka-Stolka O, Ociepa-Kubicka A (2019) Green logistics and circular economy. Transp Res Proc 39:471–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steadieseifi M, Dellaert NP, Nuijten W, Van Woensel T, Raoufi R (2014) Multimodal freight transportation planning: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 233(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang B-J, Li X-Y, Yu B, Wei Y-M (2019) Sustainable development pathway for intercity passenger transport: a case study of China. Appl Energy 254:113632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taptich MN, Horvath A, Chester MV (2015) Worldwide greenhouse gas reduction potentials in transportation by 2050. J Ind Ecol 20(2):329–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traverso M, Finkbeiner M, Jørgensen A, Schneider L (2012) Life cycle sustainability dashboard. J Ind Ecol 16(5):680–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trombulak SC, Frissell CA (2000) Review of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conserv Biol 14(1):18–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udo de Haes HA (2002) Industrial ecology and life cycle assessment. In: Ayres RU, Ayres LW (eds) A Handbook of Industrial Ecology. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 138–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal R, López-Mesa, B (2006) Impact indicators in transport infrastructures: a new market for engineering design researchers. International Design Conference - Design 2006 Dubrovnik - Croatia, May 15 - 18, 2006

  • Zamagni A, Masoni P, Buttol, P, Raggi A, Buonamici R (2012) Finding Life Cycle Assessment Research Direction with the Aid of Meta-Analysis. J Ind Ecol 16(SUPPL.1):S39–S52

Download references

Acknowledgements

Dr. Carlo Ingrao wishes to warmly thank his co-authors for their invaluable commitment and support in this study development. The whole team of authors is grateful to the logistics company for having actively supported them in this LCA development, by defining the routes and the related means utilised, and by providing all the information and data that were needed for conducting the LCA itself. Furthermore, also on behalf of his team of authors, Dr. Carlo Ingrao would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their invaluable comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. Finally, special thanks are given to Prof. Matthias Finkbeiner and Prof. Marzia Traverso, for so kindly and professionally handling this paper submission.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Business, University of Catania, Corso Italia, 55 - 95129, Catania, Italy

    Carlo Ingrao & Agata Matarazzo

  2. Department of Sustainability, ENEA - Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development, Lungotevere Thaon Di Revel, 76 – 00196, Rome, Italy

    Flavio Scrucca

  3. Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment (Di3A), University of Catania, Via S. Sofia, 100 - 95123, Catania, Italy

    Claudia Arcidiacono

  4. Biomass Group, Department of Chemical Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Anastasia Zabaniotou

Authors
  1. Carlo Ingrao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Flavio Scrucca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Agata Matarazzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Claudia Arcidiacono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anastasia Zabaniotou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Carlo Ingrao: Study conceptualisation; life cycle assessment setting and development; data curation; original draft writing; supervision. Flavio Scrucca: life cycle impact assessment; software; original draft writing. Agata Matarazzo: data curation. Claudia Arcidiacono: original draft writing; reviewing and editing. Anastasia Zabaniotou: reviewing and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claudia Arcidiacono.

Additional information

Communicated by Marzia Traverso

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ingrao, C., Scrucca, F., Matarazzo, A. et al. Freight transport in the context of industrial ecology and sustainability: evaluation of uni- and multi-modality scenarios via life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26, 127–142 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01831-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01831-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation