Emerging technologies are expected to contribute to environmental sustainable development. However, throughout the development of novel technologies, it is unknown whether emerging technologies can lead to reduced environmental impacts compared to a potentially displaced mature technology. Additionally, process steps suspected to be environmental hotspots can be improved by process engineers early in the development of the emerging technology. In order to determine the environmental impacts of emerging technologies at an early stage of development, prospective life cycle assessment (LCA) should be performed. However, consistency in prospective LCA methodology is lacking. Therefore, this article develops a framework for a prospective LCA in order to overcome the methodological inconsistencies regarding prospective LCAs. The methodological framework was developed using literature on prospective LCAs of emerging technologies, and therefore, a literature review on prospective LCAs was conducted. We found 44 case studies, four review papers, and 17 papers on methodological guidance. Three main challenges for conducting prospective LCAs are identified: Comparability, data, and uncertainty challenges. The issues in defining the aim, functionality, and system boundaries of the prospective LCAs, as well as problems with specifying LCIA methodologies, comprise the comparability challenge. Data availability, quality, and scaling are issues within the data challenge. Finally, uncertainty exists as an overarching challenge when applying a prospective LCA. These three challenges are especially crucial for the prospective assessment of emerging technologies. However, this review also shows that within the methodological papers and case studies, several approaches exist to tackle these challenges. These approaches were systematically summarized within a framework to give guidance on how to overcome the issues when conducting prospective LCAs of emerging technologies. Accordingly, this framework is useful for LCA practitioners who are analyzing early-stage technologies. Nevertheless, further research is needed to develop appropriate scale-up schemes and to include uncertainty analyses for a more in-depth interpretation of results.

Sustaining value after the end-of-life to improve products’ circularity and sustainability has attracted an increasing number of industrial actors, policymakers, and researchers. Medical products are considered to have great remanufacturing potential because they are often designated as single-use products and consist of various complex materials that cannot be reused and are not significant in municipal recycling infrastructure. The remanufacturing of electrophysiology catheters is a well-established process guaranteeing equivalent quality compared to virgin-produced catheters. In order to measure if using a remanufactured product is environmentally beneficial compared to using a virgin product, life cycle assessment (LCA) is often used. However, focusing on one life cycle to inform on the environmental-beneficial use fails to guide policymakers from a system perspective. This study analyzes the environmental consequences of electrophysiology catheters considering two modeling perspectives, the implementation of LCA, including a cut-off approach and combining LCA and a circularity indicator measuring multiple life cycles. Investigating the LCA results of using a remanufactured as an alternative to a newly-manufactured catheter shows that the global warming impact is reduced by 50.4% and the abiotic resource use by 28.8%. The findings from the system perspective suggest that the environmental savings increase with increasing collection rates of catheters.

Post-industrial recycling (PIR) and post-consumer recycling (PCR) are measures used to sustain resources by improving material circularity and sustainability. Currently, circularity is mainly measured as the degree of reutilization of a material from 0 to 100% at the product or company level. This measure fails to assess the resource usage over multiple product life cycles. Therefore, we propose to assess circularity as (i) the frequency of resource use in products (effective circularity, eC), and as (ii) a vehicle to reduce environmental impacts (environmentally efficient circularity, eeC). Additionally, to compare the environmental impacts of using recycled materials from PIR or PCR, we analyze their impact reduction potential (IRP), indicating the environmental benefits of recycling in relation to virgin material submitted to the market. We demonstrate the suggested indicators for a case study material: polypropylene. For this polymer type, the eC ranges between 0.93 and 9.08 uses of the resource, on average, depending on collection, sorting, and recycling rates. Likewise, the eeC ranges between 0.31 and 1.50 uses per kg of CO₂ equivalents emitted. PCR has a higher IRP regarding climate change impacts than PIR in all analyzed scenarios. The results reveal the relevance of PCR and PIR beyond the product life cycle. Finally, we discuss possible embeddings of the indicators in the assessment of climate policy and environmental protection measures, such as strengthening the use of PCR in contrast to PIR materials.

Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) is a particularly difficult waste to manage, characterized by hazardous and valuable chemicals. Emerging chemical recycling technologies are developed to unveil the possibility of sustainable treatment providing valuable resources from WEEE. This study develops a framework for prospective life cycle assessment (LCA) to explore a range of future scenarios in which the technology can be operated with low environmental impact. This is demonstrated in a case study focusing on plastics from WEEE, which are currently predominantly incinerated. The results reveal environmental benefits by WEEE treated via chemical recycling. In terms of climate change impacts, the best‐case scenario of chemical recycling shows a reduction potential of 74 % compared to current treatment.