Social life cycle assessment case studies from the textile and energy sectors

Environmental Footprints and Eco-design
of Products and Processes

Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu
Editor

Social
Life Cycle
Assessment
Case Studies from the Textile and Energy
Sectors


Environmental Footprints and Eco-design
of Products and Processes
Series editor
Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu, SgT Group and API,
Hong Kong, Hong Kong


This series aims to broadly cover all the aspects related to environmental assessment
of products, development of environmental and ecological indicators and eco-design
of various products and processes. Below are the areas fall under the aims and scope
of this series, but not limited to: Environmental Life Cycle Assessment; Social Life
Cycle Assessment; Organizational and Product Carbon Footprints; Ecological,
Energy and Water Footprints; Life cycle costing; Environmental and sustainable
indicators; Environmental impact assessment methods and tools; Eco-design
(sustainable design) aspects and tools; Biodegradation studies; Recycling; Solid
waste management; Environmental and social audits; Green Purchasing and tools;
Product environmental footprints; Environmental management standards and
regulations; Eco-labels; Green Claims and green washing; Assessment of sustainability aspects.

More information about this series at />

Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu
Editor

Social Life Cycle Assessment
Case Studies from the Textile and Energy
Sectors

123


Editor
Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu
SgT Group and API
Hong Kong, Hong Kong

ISSN 2345-7651
ISSN 2345-766X (electronic)
Environmental Footprints and Eco-design of Products and Processes
ISBN 978-981-13-3232-6
ISBN 978-981-13-3233-3 (eBook)
/>Library of Congress Control Number: 2018961219
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore


This book is dedicated to:
The lotus feet of my beloved
Lord Pazhaniandavar
My beloved late Father
My beloved Mother
My beloved Wife Karpagam and
Daughters—Anu and Karthika
My beloved Brother


Contents

Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar Power
Plant in Spain—A Life Cycle Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Blanca Corona and Guillermo San Miguel
Socio-Economic Effects in the Knitwear Sector—A Life
Cycle-Based Approach Towards the Definition

of Social Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Maria Ferrante, Ioannis Arzoumanidis and Luigia Petti
Social Life Cycle Assessment of Renewable Bio-Energy
Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. Saravanan and P. Senthil Kumar

1

59

99

vii


Social Performance of Electricity
Generation in a Solar Power Plant
in Spain—A Life Cycle Perspective
Blanca Corona and Guillermo San Miguel

Abstract This publication demonstrates the practical application of Social Life
Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) methodology in the analysis of a 50 MWe
Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plant located in Spain. The assessment makes use
of two complementary analytical approaches: (1) a generic social hotspot analysis
based on the social risks related to financial flows generated by the provision of
goods and services taking place during the life cycle of the power generation
system, and then (2) a site-specific analysis focussing on the social performance of
the construction/energy company involved in the construction and operation of the
power plant. The site-specific analysis followed the procedures proposed by UNEP/
SETAC but included a new classification/characterization model suited to the

particularities of the project and the energy sector. The analysis considered four
stakeholder categories (workers; local community; society; and value chain actors)
and used the number of worker hours as activity variable for the quantification of
social risks. Worker hours attributable to each of the stages of the life cycle of the
CSP system were calculated using input-output (IO) analysis. The impact assessment phase of the S-LCA was carried out using a Social Performance Indicator
(SPI), which required the estimation of performance reference points for a series of
indicators/subcategories proposed by the UNEP/SETAC Guidelines. The SPI calculated for the CSP plant (+0.388 for a ±2 range) suggested that the use of solar
power results in an increase of social welfare in Spain, primarily with regards to
socioeconomic sustainability and fairness of relationships. The inventory data used
in the social hotspot analysis were monetary flows attributable to each of the
processes considered in the life cycle of the power system. These flows were
assigned to the corresponding sector of the producer country. The Social Hotspot
B. Corona (&)
Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development,
Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
e-mail:
G. San Miguel
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering,
ETSII, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, ES28006 Madrid, Spain
e-mail:
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019
S. S. Muthu (ed.), Social Life Cycle Assessment, Environmental Footprints
and Eco-design of Products and Processes,
/>
1


2

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

Database (SHDB) was used to link these demand values to social risks and
opportunities. The results showed that the life cycle phase contributing the most to
the social risk of the solar power system was operation and management. This is
due primarily (over 75% of the weighed risk) to the social risks associated with the
supply chain of the natural gas used as auxiliary fuel. For Spain, the main social
risks associated with the solar power plant were related to gender inequality and
corruption, and to a lesser extent to injuries and immigrants. Some of these risks
were confirmed in the site-specific assessment. The paper ends with a discussion
about the application of Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) for evaluating
the results obtained in this Social-LCA in combination with environmental and
economic oriented LCA.
Keywords S-LCA
Stakeholders

Á Electricity Á Social performance Á Spain Á Social risks

1 Introduction
The UN World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), also
known as the Brundtland Commission, developed between 1983 and 1987 the
grounds for the modern interpretation of sustainability. In its final report “Our
Common Future”, the Brundtland Commission produced a definition of Sustainable
Development that is still widely accepted today: “the development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs” (WCED 1987). That report also stated that the concept of sustainability rests on three elements: economic growth, environmental protection and
social equality.
At present, the Sustainable Development Goals (issued by the United Nations in
2015, and a continuation of the Millennium Development Goals) (Biermann et al.
2017) are in the front line of international, national and local agendas. Public
administrations and customers are exerting pressure on companies to ensure that the

principles of sustainable development are incorporated into the goods and services
that they supply to the market. The practical application of this ambition necessarily
entails the use of a systematic methodology capable of quantifying the sustainability of specific goods and services in an objective manner.
A holistic methodology referred to as life cycle sustainability assessment
(LCSA) is currently under development with the purpose of integrating the three
pillars of sustainability under a coherent life cycle approach. UNEP/SETAC Life
Cycle Initiative states in its report “Towards a Life Cycle Sustainability
Assessment” that LCSA may be seen as the summation of three analysis tools:
Environmental Life Cycle Analysis (E-LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and Social
Life Cycle Analysis (S-LCA) (UNEP/SETAC 2011). This concept is illustrated in
equation SLCA = E-LCA + LCC + S-LCA.


Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar …

3

A more advanced and flexible approach to LCSA was developed under the
Coordination Action for innovation in Life Cycle Analysis for Sustainability
(CALCAS) (2006–2009) project (Heijungs et al. 2009). This new conceptual
framework relies on expansion of the scope of conventional E-LCA to incorporate
the economic and the societal dimensions of the system under consideration.
The CALCAS project approach provides the practitioners with more flexibility in
the selection of the analytical tools employed to evaluate different aspects of the
system and provides an integrated framework where the results may be evaluated as
a whole (Guinée et al. 2011).
The ultimate purpose of S-LCA is to assess the effect of a given product on
human wellbeing. As the name suggests, the analysis applies a life cycle approach
that takes into consideration social and socio-economic effects associated with the
extraction and processing of raw materials required for the fabrication of the product, manufacturing activities, transportation and distribution, utilization and any

end-of-life actions that may be associated with the product (reuse, recycling and
final disposal). These effects considered in S-LCA are primarily those generated by
the companies participating in the different stages of the life cycle of the product
under consideration.1 This performance has an effect (positive or negative) on the
wellbeing of a series of stakeholders, which typically include Consumers, Workers,
Local Community, Value Chain Actors and Society.
S-LCA may be used on its own or, as described above, it may be part of a
broader Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) (Guinée et al. 2011; UNEP/
SETAC 2011). The scientific community recognizes E-LCA and LCC as mature
methodologies, while S-LCA is usually regarded as being at an early stage of
development in terms of methodological harmonization and acceptance (Cinelli
et al. 2013).

1.1

Key Methodological Issues in S-LCA

Since its inception in 2002, the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative has distinguished itself as a key promoter and developer of S-LCA methodology. The
Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products (from now on the S-LCA
Guidelines) have become a landmark and a key reference in the field (UNEP/
SETAC 2009). This methodology operates on the principles of ISO 14040 and
14044, with the typical four interrelated phases: (i) identification of goal and scope,
(ii) inventory analysis, (iii) impact assessment and (iv) interpretation. The practical
application of these guidelines is facilitated with the Methodological Sheets for
Sub-Categories in Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) (UNEP/SETAC 2013).
In the identification of goal and scope phase, the S-LCA practitioner needs to set
up the basis of the investigation including identifying the objectives of the

1

In addition, the ultimate utility of the product may also be considered in the analysis


4

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

assessment, describing the system under investigation and identifying the social
issues of concern that would be evaluated. These social issues can be referred to as
Impact Categories, and the S-LCA Guidelines suggest some of them, including
human rights, working conditions, health and safety, cultural heritage, governance,
and socio-economic repercussions.
The S-LCA Guidelines also define five groups of stakeholders including:
(i) worker, (ii) consumer, (iii) local community, (iv) society, and (v) value chain
actor. Each of these categories is linked to a series of sub-categories describing
social aspects that may have an effect on these stakeholder. For instance, the
stakeholder category “workers” includes the following sub-categories: (i) Freedom
of Association and Collective Bargaining, (ii) Child Labour, (iii) Fair Salary,
(iv) Hours of Work, (v) Forced Labour, (vi) Equal Opportunities/Discrimination,
(vii) Health and Safety, (viii) Social Benefit/Social Security. These subcategories
may be characterized by a series of indicators. The Methodological Sheets produced
by UNEP/SETAC provides indications about the most suitable indicators that may
be used to evaluate these sub-categories (UNEP/SETAC 2013).
Depending on the goal of the S-LCA, but also on the availability of data, time
and economic resources, the assessment may be carried out following two different
approaches. The generic S-LCA approach relies on generic data describing the
social risks or opportunities associated with the country specific sectors where
activities or unit processes of the life cycle take place. This generic approach can be
carried out using databases, such as the Social Hotspot Database (SHDB)
(Benoit-Norris et al. 2013) () and the Product Social

Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSILCA) ( The site-specific
S-LCA approach is carried out at a company level and involves an investigation of
the social performance of the organizations involved in the life cycle of the system
under investigation (Dreyer et al. 2006; Macombe et al. 2013; Martínez-Blanco
et al. 2014). Company site-specific inventory data refers to the life cycle of the
system under investigation (company, product and location), making this step very
time consuming and very demanding of time and human resources.
The aim of the impact assessment phase in the S-LCA is to transform the
inventory data into a set of social performance indicators. This may be achieved
using one of two methodological approaches (Parent et al. 2010): the first is usually
called the Taskforce approach (referred to as Type 1) and is aimed at assessing
social performance; and second is called the Impact Pathway approach (referred to
as Type 2) and it is aimed at assessing social impacts. In the characterization step,
the Taskforce approach relies on the use of Performance Reference Points (PRP) to
quantify the importance of the data collected throughout the inventory phase. In this
case, an activity variable can be used to reflects the relative importance of specific
processes in the life cycle of the product.
Different authors state their preferences regarding these two methodological
approaches. The main argument in favour of the Taskforce approach is that
“cause-effect relationships are not simple enough or not known with enough precision to allow quantitative cause-effect modelling’’ (Chhipi-Shrestha et al. 2014,
UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative 2009). Regarding the impact pathway


Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar …

5

approach, Dreyer et al. (2006) discusses the inability of social damage indicators
(QALY—Quality Adjusted Life Years) to measure the social performance of
companies and organization.

Despite its early stage of development, most authors agree that S-LCA
methodology is already at a point where it may used to address the social area of
LCSA, primarily in simple systems. Further testing and refining will be required in
order to increase precision and permit the analysis of systems that are more complex
and sophisticated (Ekener-Petersen 2013; Ekener-Petersen and Finnveden 2013;
Macombe et al. 2013).

1.2

Social and Sustainability Assessment
of Solar Power Plants

According to a review by (Petti et al. 2014), the amount of publications describing
the social life cycle assessment of goods and services is very limited. This author
identifies 7 publications dedicated to the S-LCA of energy products and technologies, 7 papers on information and communication technologies, 7 more on
products from the agri-food sector, 5 on waste management and a few others on
other varied subjects. Mattioda et al. (2015) has also published a review on S-LCA
identifying 99 publications related to S-LCA, 13 of which describing the application
of the S-LCA methodology to specific products or services, while the others were
related to theoretical and methodological issues. The case studies described by this
author focus on the energy sector (3 on biofuels and 1 on diesel and petrol) while the
rest of papers where related to the manufacturing sector (4 papers), agriculture
sector (2 papers), packaging (2 papers) and waste management (2 papers). At the
present, there have been five S-LCA publications assessing energy systems, in
particular, three on biofuels, 1 on diesel and petrol and 1 on photovoltaic systems.
Five S-LCA specifically dedicated to energy systems include those published by
Ekener-Petersen et al. (2014), Macombe et al. (2013), Manik et al. (2013a, b),
Traverso et al. (2012).
The term Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) is employed to describe a range of
technologies designed to produce electricity using direct solar radiation. The

operating principles of these plants are well documented in various publications
including (Fuqiang et al. 2017; Heller 2017; Lovegrove and Stein 2017; San Miguel
et al. 2015). CSP plants have two components: the solar field and the power block.
The solar field consists of an array of mirrors designed to concentrate the radiation
from the sun into a receiver. A thermal fluid captures this radiative energy in the
form of thermal energy, thus increasing its temperature as it makes its way through
the solar field. A heat engine (usually in the form of a Rankine cycle) transforms
this thermal energy into electricity using a generator. The form of radiation most
effectively utilized by CSP plants is direct normal irradiance (DNI) (Meyer et al.
2012).


6

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

Depending on the geometric nature of the receiver, CSP plants are usually
classified into two broad categories. CSP plants based on linear receivers (parabolic
troughs and Fresnel collectors) are the most commercially proven (primarily the
former). CSP plants based on point receivers (including central tower solar plants
and dish/engine systems) are less widespread, despite the higher concentration
ratios and temperatures that may achieve (NREL 2018).
The world leaders in CSP technology are Spain and the USA, accumulating
more than 90% of the installed capacity worldwide. Only Spain has 50 commercial
CSP power plants totalling 2300 MW of installed capacity (PROTERMOSOLAR
2018). Other countries with high solar resources in the form of DNI (such as India,
Chile and South Africa) already have or have announced the construction of new
CSP plants.
A key problem with solar energy is that it is intermittent by nature. One way of
solving this issue is by incorporating thermal energy storage (TES) systems. These

systems are charged during the day using an extended solar field, allowing the plant
to extend its operating hours. TES systems are usually based on the use of molten
nitrate salt. Additionally, CSP plants may be hybridized with auxiliary fuels that
supplement the solar radiation when it is not available. This may be done by
incorporating a combustion system to the HTF circuit. The nature of the auxiliary
fuel has a notorious effect on the economic, environmental and social performance
of the CSP plant.
The fact that CSP uses solar radiation as energy resource does not mean that it
does not produce any negative impacts on the environment. The environmental
performance of CSP plants has been investigated in various publications using life
cycle methodology (Burkhardt et al. 2011, 2012; Corona et al. 2014, 2016c; Desideri
et al. 2013; Klein and Rubin 2013; Lamnatou and Chemisana 2017; Lechón et al.
2008; Piemonte et al. 2011, 2012; San Miguel and Corona 2014). The results are
subjected to some variability due to differences in plant configuration, availability of
solar resources and LCA methodology. In general, the analyses have shown very
low global warming potential (between 25 and 50 kg CO2 eq/MWh for plants
operating with solar energy only, and higher values for hybrid plants depending on
its solar factor).
The economics of these installations has also been the subject of various publications. Information about the viability and economic costs of the technology may
be found in (IRENA 2018, 2012; San Miguel and Corona 2018). The application of
life cycle costing methodology to CSP plants may be found in Corona et al.
(2016a). The social performance of this type of technology is also evaluated in
Corona et al. (2017).
This chapter is describes the application of S-LCA methodology to evaluate the
social performance of a solar power plant, representing those deployed in Spain in
the past decade. The methodological approach of this assessment has been carried
out in coherence with earlier life cycle based investigations covering the environmental and economic dimensions of the same solar power plant, and has been
previously described in Corona et al. (2017). This chapter has been structured into
five sections as follows. Section 1 describes the state of the art of S-LCA

Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar …

7

methodology and of the solar power system investigated. Section 2 explains the
objectives, methodological approach and operational decisions taken to carry out
the generic and the site specific S-LCA. Section 3 describes the results of the two
S-LCA and provides a discussion describing in combination the outcome of this
assessment. Finally, Sect. 4 provides a set of conclusions focusing on the
methodological objectives of the exercise and also on the description of the social
performance of the solar power plant.

2 Methodology
This section describes the practical implementation of S-LCA to assess the social
consequences of the solar power plant. The investigation has been carried out in
two steps following two different, but complementary, methodological approaches.
The first one is a generic approach using the SHDB aimed at evaluating the existence of social hotspots in the life cycle (value chain) of the plant, while also
helping to prioritize data collection for the second approach. Social hotspots are
defined in the S-LCA Guidelines as “specific situations within a region that can be
regarded as a problem, a risk or an opportunity in terms of social concern”
(UNEP/SETAC 2009). The second is a site-specific approach following the recommendations stated in the S-LCA Guidelines aimed at evaluating the social
performance of the organizations involved in the life cycle of the solar plant.
Both methodological frameworks were based on the principles of ISO 14040,
which was adapted to the particularities of the social assessment approach, the
specific characteristics of the system under investigation (primarily in terms of
inventory data accessibility) and the limitations of the analysis team in terms of
time/budget availability.
This section has been structured following the four classical steps described in
ISO 14040 for life cycle assessment: Definition of objectives and scope; social life

cycle inventory analysis; social life cycle impact assessment; and interpretation.

2.1
2.1.1

Definition of Objectives and Scope
Definition of Objectives

The main objectives of this investigation are as follows:
• To explore the practical application of the Social Hotspots Database (SHDB) to
produce a generic assessment of social risks associated with the life cycle of the
solar power plant.
• To explore the practical application of the S-LCA Guidelines to produce a
site-specific S-LCA of the solar power plant.


8

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

• Based on the generic and the site-specific S-LCA analyses, to evaluate the social
and socio-economic performance of the solar power technology in Spain.
• To evaluate the integration of S-LCA results into a broader sustainability
analysis covering the environmental, social and economic dimensions.
The solar power plant investigated in this chapter has also been analysed for its
environmental and economic performance using life cycle based methodology.
Environmental Life Cycle Assessment (E-LCA) was used to evaluate the environmental dimension (Corona et al. 2014; Corona and San Miguel 2015) and Life
Cycle Costing (LCC) and Multiregional Input/Output (MRIO) were used to evaluate the economic dimension (Corona et al. 2016a, 2017). Since the ultimate goal of
this series of investigations is to analyse the overall sustainability of the system, the
approach employed in this S-LCA was consistent with the decisions taken in

previous investigations in aspects such as system characteristics, system boundaries
and functional unit.

2.1.2

Characteristics of the System

Figure 1 shows an aerial view of the system investigated in this publication, and a
map showing its geographical location. The system is a commercial hybrid
Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plant based on parabolic trough (PT) technology
based in Ciudad Real (Spain). The plant represents the CSP configuration most
widely deployed in Spain over the past decade. As a reference, 96% of the CSP
capacity installed in Spain (45 of the 49 plants) are based on PT technology (San
Miguel and Corona 2018). Other CSP technologies less mature and widely represented include Linear Fresnel Reflector Systems, Power Tower Systems and Dish/
Engine Systems (NREL 2018).
The CSP plant investigated in this publication entered into operation in 2011, it
has a nominal capacity of 50-MWe, it extends over 200 ha of unproductive rural
land and has a lifetime expectancy of 25-year. Table 1 describes the technical
characteristics of the solar plant and Fig. 2 illustrates its main components: solar
Fig. 1 Aerial view and
location of the CSP plant
investigated in this S-LCA
Source aerial image: BSMPS
2009


Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar …

9

Table 1 Technical characteristics of the CSP plant under investigation
Installed capacity
Thermal efficiency of the cycle (η)
Net efficiency
Auxiliary boiler efficiency
Lifetime
Number of solar collectors
Aperture
Area occupied
Normal direct irradiance
Thermal storage capacity
NG input (for power generation)
NG input (for maintenance)
Total NG consumption
Full load equivalent operation
Gross electricity generation
Electricity self-consumption
Net electricity generation
Direct water use

50
35
16
95
25
624
510,120
200
2030
7.5

3.01E+08
6.28E+06
7.87E+06
3290
194,926
31,188
163,738
988,660

MWe
%
%
%
year
m2
ha
kWh/m2Á year
hour
MJ/year
MJ/year
Nm3/year
h/year
MWh/year
MWh/year
MWh/year
m3/year

Fig. 2 Flow diagram describing the different components and operation of the hybrid CSP plant

field, heat transfer fluid (HTF) circuit, thermal energy storage (TES) system, auxiliary natural gas boiler and power block.

The solar field is made of 624 SENERTROUGH parabolic trough collectors
assembled into 156 loops providing a total aperture of 510,120 m2. The collectors


10

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

are mounted on stainless steel structures with sun tracking systems that maximize
the concentration of direct solar irradiation into a tube receiver. The Heat Transfer
Fluid (HTF) circulating inside the receiver absorbs the radiating energy from the
sun raising its temperature from 285 °C at the entrance of the solar field to 395 °C
at the exit. In the power block, the hot HTF circulates through various heat
exchangers to generate superheated steam at 100 bar/375 °C. This steam drives a
turbine associated with a generator for electricity generation, as in conventional
power plants. The Rankine cycle is cooled using forced-draft evaporative technology, resulting in a thermal efficiency (η) of 36.8% (San Miguel et al. 2015).
The plant also incorporates a thermal energy storage (TES) system based on
two-tank molten salt (nitrate) technology. This technology stores thermal energy
generated in the solar field during the day for use during periods of reduced irradiation (at night or during cloudy episodes) in order to increase stability and
augment the operating time of the plant. Additionally, the CSP plant incorporates an
auxiliary boiler operating on natural gas that provides heat for maintenance activities such as daily start-up operations, to avoid the freezing of the HTF and molten
salts during cold periods and to reduce system instability caused by transient
clouds. Natural gas consumption for these maintenance applications typically
represent around 1% of the thermal requirements of the plant. This auxiliary fuel is
also used as a complement to solar energy to extend with operation of the plant and
generate additional electricity when the solar radiation is not available. The Spanish
legislation regulating the generation of electricity from sustainable resources
allowed CSP plants to produce up to 15% of their electricity from auxiliary fuels.
This additional electricity was entitled to the same subsidy assigned to solar power
(feed-in tariff of 26.9 c€/kWh—Royal Decree 661/2007) (San Miguel and Corona

2018).
As explained, the plant operates in hybrid mode with natural gas for a full-load
capacity of 3290 equivalent hours per year and a gross electricity output of
194,926 MWh/year. Natural gas consumption amounts to 7.87 Â 106 Nm3/year
(equivalent to 3.01 Â 108 MJ/year of auxiliary energy). Only 2.0% of this fuel is
used for maintenance activities while the remaining 98.0% is used for extended
power generation. Net electricity sales (after subtracting power losses due to grid
inefficiencies and onsite consumption) amount to 163,738 MWh/year. Onsite water
use is rather high due to the evaporative cooling technology employed in the
Rankine cycle at 988,660 m3/year.

2.1.3

Description of the Life Cycle of the Solar Power Plant

Figure 3 shows the four stages in the life cycle of the CSP plant investigated in this
S-LCA including: (i) Extraction of raw materials and Manufacturing of components
(E&M), (ii) Construction of the facility (C), (iii) Operation and Maintenance of the
power plant (O&M), and (iv) Dismantling and Disposal (D&D). A complete list of
all the unit processes considered in the analysis may be found in the economic
inventories of Annex 1, with Table 6 corresponding to the raw materials and


Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar …

11

Fig. 3 Life cycle diagram of the CSP power plant including economic, material and energy flows

manufacturing of components phase, Table 7 to construction processes, Table 8 to

the operation and maintenance phase and Table 9 to end-of-life activities.

2.1.4

Scope of the Analysis

The scope of the generic S-LCA followed a cradle to grave approach, covering all
four stages in the life cycle of the solar power plant. The transmission, distribution
and utilization of the electricity were out of the scope of the analysis due to the fact
that impacts associated with these elements are not affected by the characteristics of
the power generation technology. For all the unit processes included within the
boundaries of the system, inventory data was available regarding economic flows
and country specific sectors where the transactions take place.
The aim of the site-specific S-LCA is to explore the social and socio-economic
performance of the organizations responsible for the activities that make up the life
cycle of the system. The promoter company is, without a doubt, the most important
organization in the life cycle of the system, known to be responsible for the project
development, construction of the power plant, operation and maintenance, and
end-of-life activities. Key unit processes in the life cycle of the solar plant not
associated with the promoter include those associated with the extraction of raw
materials (primarily natural gas employed as auxiliary fuel but also steel and
concrete for the solar collectors, glass and silver for the mirrors and nitrate salts for
the thermal energy storage system) and the manufacturing of certain plant components (e.g. absorber tubes, steam turbine, solar tracker and electronics).
Gathering primary social data from every activity and supplier involved in the
CSP life cycle would have required more time and economic resources than the


12

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

available by the analysts at the time of the study. Therefore, the scope of the
site-specific analysis was narrowed considering the findings in the social hotspot
analysis and the accessibility of data.
With the exception of natural gas, the generic S-LCA had shown that most of the
social risks associated with the life cycle of the plant were associated with unit
processes carried out by the promoter company. As explained above, the solar plant
investigated in this analysis operates in hybrid mode with natural gas, which is
responsible for 15% of the power generated. This natural gas originates from
countries (primarily Algeria but also Nigeria and Qatar) whose gas and energy
sectors are associated with high social risks (see Sect. 2.2.2).
Based on this information, and being aware of the weaknesses associated with
this pronouncement, the analysis team decided to leave the life cycle phase “extraction of raw materials and manufacturing of components” out of the scope of
site-specific S-LCA. Furthermore, the system boundaries for other life cycle phases
in the solar power plant were limited to those unit processes carried out directly by
the promoter company, which was the only organization investigated at a company
level.

2.1.5

Function and Functional Unit

For the purpose of this investigation, the function of the solar power plant is to
produce electricity and the functional unit considered was 1 MWh of electricity
poured into the Spanish electricity grid. This is consistent with the functional units
employed to evaluate from a life cycle perspective the environmental and economic
performance of the system.
However, it should be discussed at this point that this functional unit does not
take into consideration some aspects of power generation that are essential to define
the adequacy of a power generation technology. In other words, different power

generation technologies are not necessary interchangeable solely on the basis of
their capacity to generate electricity. For example, aspects like dispatchability
(ability to adapt power output to the required demand at any hour of the day without
wasting primary energy) and firmness (ability to supply electricity during peak
hours) (Servert et al. 2016) may be essential to determine the ability of a plant to
adapt effectively to a certain demand curve. These attributes, which are not readily
quantifiable, may also affect the price at which electricity is sold to the market and
the revenues earned by the plant operator.
The thermal energy storage in the solar power plant under investigation provides
this technology with a certain degree of dispatchability, which may not be attributed
to other renewable power generation technologies like photovoltaic or wind power.
However, its capacity to generate on demand is not as good as that achieved by
natural gas in combined cycles, for instance. The integration of these aspects into
the function and functional unit of the plant should be taken into consideration in
future LCA investigations.


Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar …

2.1.6

13

Selection of Impact Categories, Sub-Categories and Indicators

Regarding the generic S-LCA, the social risk assessment has been carried out
considering 17 impact categories (Child Labor, Forced Labor, Excessive Working
Time, Injuries & Fatalities, Toxics & Hazards, Poverty Wage2, Poverty Wage1,
Migrant Labor, Collective Bargaining, Indigenous Rights, Gender Equity, High
Conflict, Legal System, Corruption, Drinking Water, Improved Sanitation, Hospital

Beds) grouped into five damage categories (labour rights, human rights, health and
safety, governance and community infrastructure), as considered by New Earth in
their Social LCIA Method 1 v.1.0 (Benoit-Norris et al. 2013) (Fig. 4).
As illustrated in Fig. 5, the site-specific S-LCA analysis was based on a series of
27 social impact sub-categories classified into the following five impact categories:
Labour rights and decent work, Health and safety, Cultural and natural heritage,
Fair relations and Socio-economic sustainability. The sub-categories described
above represent social attributes susceptible to be affected by the system. The state
of these attributes were evaluated using 24 social indicators, including 11 quantitative, 10 semi-quantitative and 3 qualitative.
This selection of impact categories, sub-categories and indicators was based on
the recommendations stated in the S-LCA Guidelines (UNEP/SETAC 2009) and
the Methodological Sheets (UNEP/SETAC 2013) but also took into consideration
the availability of inventory data, the results from the generic S-LCA, the particular
characteristics of the system (importance of the unit processes making up the solar
plant) and the potential vulnerability of the stakeholders involved. Twenty six of the
sub-categories selected are explicitly mentioned in the S-LCA Guidelines. One
additional sub-category (product utility, ascribed to the stakeholder category

Fig. 4 Social impact categories and sub-categories selected for the site-specific S-LCA


14

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

Fig. 5 Diagram showing the sub-categories and indicators considered to evaluate the impact
category “Labour rights and decent work” (Adapted from Corona et al. 2017)

Society) was included due to the significance that the availability of electricity may
have on the social wellbeing of a given community. Table 2 shows these 27

sub-categories and their associated indicators, classified into the four stakeholder
categories proposed in the S-LCA Guidelines.

2.1.7

Critical Review

A critical review of the S-LCA was carried out by members of the Spanish NGO
Ingeniería Sin Fronteras (Engineers Without Borders). The reviewers involved in
the review had experience in the international implementation of sustainability and
development projects related to the energy and electricity sectors.

2.2
2.2.1

Social Life Cycle Inventory Analysis
Inventory Analysis for the Generic S-LCA

Background inventory data employed in these analyses were obtained from the
Social Hotspot Database (SHDB), which was integrated into Sima Pro v8.4 together
with the Social LCIA Method 1 v.1.0. The Social Hotspot Database (SHDB) is an
extended input/output life cycle inventory database which contains data about the


Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar …

15

Table 2 Stakeholder categories, sub-categories and indicators employed to carry out the
site-specific S-LCA

Workers

Subcategories

Indicators

Freedom of association
and collective bargaining

Existence of trade unions in the organization is
adequately supported and workers are free to join
them
% of affiliates of total employees
Presence of child labour
Wage inequality (average salary compared to
highest rank executive salary)
Average annual salary
Lowest paid worker
Hours of work
Existence of forced labour
Employment rates of people with special needs
with respect to the total employed people
Men/women occupation ratio in the company
Men/women executive managers ratio in the
company
Education, training, counselling, prevention and
risk control programs in place to assist workforce
members
Presence of a formal policy concerning health and
safety

Accident ratio per employee 2008 versus 2013
Social security provided to the employees

Child labour
Fair salary

Hours of work
Forced labour
Equal opportunities/
discrimination

Health and safety

Local
community

Social benefit/social
security
Local employment
Access to material
resources
Access to immaterial
resources
Delocalization and
migration
Cultural heritage
Safe and healthy living
conditions
Respect of indigenous
rights

Community engagement
Secure living conditions

Promotion of local employment within the
project
Based on information provided by local sources, it
has been considered that the social attributes
associated with the stakeholder category “local
community” are not affected by the solar plant.
This is so because the plant is far away from
population centres (6 km from the closest village)
and that the potential interactions with local
people (except for workers, which are assessed in
the workers stakeholder category) are very limited

(continued)


16

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

Table 2 (continued)
Society

Subcategories

Indicators

Public commitments to

sustainability issues
Corruption
Technology development

Existence of public sustainability reporting

Prevention and
mitigation of armed
conflicts
Contribution to economic
development
Product utility
Value
Chain
Actors

Fair competition
Supplier relationships
Promoting social
responsibility
Respect of intellectual
property rights

Legal actions during the assessment period
CSP Technology development, participation in
national and international projects. Investment in
R+D
There is no armed conflicts to prevent or mitigate

Multiplier effect

Relevance of the product to the satisfaction of
basic needs
Legal actions during the assessment period
Social criteria implementation in the
homologation of suppliers
Documents stating the promotion of this issue
within the company
No relevant data

social risk associated with 113 geographical regions (mainly countries) and 57
economic sectors (Benoit-Norris et al. 2013).
Input data is in the form of monetary units (2002 US$) spent on country-specific
sectors (CSS) throughout the life cycle of the system under investigation. These
monetary flows are transformed into labour intensity data (worker hours), which is
actually the activity variable employed to weigh the importance of the unit processes considered in the analysis.
The economic inventory data regarding the construction, operation and dismantling of the solar power plant was provided by an energy engineering consultancy firm specialized in CSP technology (IDIE S.L.). This included information
about the magnitude of the economic transactions associated with each of the
elements comprising the value chain of the solar power plant and information about
the economic sectors and regions (countries) where this activity takes place.
These economic flows were first converted from €2013 (data supplied by consultancy firm) to US$2002 (units employed in SHDB) using Market exchange rates
and the OECD CPI index (OECD 2014). No discount and inflation rates were
considered in financial transitions occurring at different times, since the magnitude
of social issues is not necessarily related to the variation of the value of money over
time. Annex 1 provides full details about the economic inventory with information
about the specific SHDB dataset employed for each unit process. The information
has been grouped into four tables (Tables 6, 7, 8 and 9) each one corresponding to a
different stage in the life cycle of the system.


Social Performance of Electricity Generation in a Solar …

17

One problem when gathering this inventory data was to trace with precision the
origin of each of the numerous elements and components that make the life cycle of
the system. Most of the components in the solar power plant are known to originate
from Spain. An exception to this is the heat transfer fluid (produced in Belgium),
the absorber tubes and the power block components including gas turbine (in
Germany), and the nitrate salts for the TES (from Chile). Country-specific sector
SHDB datasets were used in the generic analysis of these items.
However, some other raw materials (e.g. natural gas, steel, aluminium) and
elementary plant components (e.g. solar tracking systems, electronics) may also
originate from other countries. Tracing this information is not a simple task due to
the diversity of providers and the confidential nature of this information. Due to the
importance of natural gas in the social performance of the solar plant, the origin of
this energy resource was evaluated in detail for the generic S-LCA.
Total expenses associated with NG consumption in the solar plant were calculated at 3,595,400 US$2002/year, assuming a fuel input of 7.87E+06 Nm3/year
(see Table 1) and a market price of 3.3875 c€/kWh, as reported by the Spanish
Ministry of Industry and Energy (Ministry of Industry 2013). This source also
informs that 86.18% of industrial NG costs are attributable to the raw material
(2.9194 c€/kWh) and 13.82% to its transport and distribution to the final user
(0.4681 c€/kWh). Hence, in order to model the natural gas supply, the distribution
price was assigned to the sector Gas manufacture, distribution/ES (496,829 US
$2002/year), and the raw material component (3,098,571 US$2002/year) was
assigned to the country specific gas sector of each exporter country, considering the
following mix (MINETAD 2018): Algeria (37.1%), Nigeria (13.6%), Norway
(9.39%), Qatar (9.65%), Trinidad & Tobago (6.03%), Peru (5.60%), Egypt (1.47%)
and the Netherlands (23.19%) (MINETAD 2018).
Monetary expenses associated with the consumption of industrial water (primarily for evaporative cooling in the Rankine cycle) was based on a unit price of
0.50 €/m3, as reported by the Spanish Association for Water Supply and Sanitation

(Ciudad Real, Spain) (AEAS 2014). For the purpose of the generic S-LCA, Spain
was assumed to be the producer of all other raw materials and components whose
origin was unknown.

2.2.2

Inventory Analysis Site-Specific Assessment

The site-specific assessment was conducted in order to analyse at a company level
the potential risks detected in the generic assessment. Regarding the scope of this
investigation, it has been discussed above that it will only cover the activities
undertaken by the promoter of the solar plant, who is also responsible for the
development and construction of the installation, its operation and dismantling at
the end of its useful time.
The promoter company belongs to a holding of companies operating primarily in
the Construction and Industrial Services sectors. The promoter company also has a
number of subsidiary enterprises that operate in specific areas of this sector.


18

B. Corona and G. San Miguel

Site-specific inventory data relating to the promoter company was obtained by
searching the internet, from direct communications with company members and by
revising certain corporate reports that were made available to the S-LCA analysts as
follows:
• The annual Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Report of the holding of
companies to which the promoter belongs, drafted following the premises of the
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (year 2014).

• The annual Corporate Report of the promoter company (year 2013).
• The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) drafted by a company that is
subsidiary of the company responsible for the construction and operation of the
solar plant (year 2010).
Regarding the data quality of the site-specific inventory, it was decided that the
data employed would need to have been produced 5 years prior to the commencement of the solar power project (between 2008 and 2013).

2.3

Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment Modelling

The impact assessment stage of the S-LCA is used to transform inventory data into
social impact values. This section describes the characteristics of the impact
assessment methods employed to carry out the generic and the site-specific social
assessments.

2.3.1

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method for the Generic Social
Analysis

The impact assessment method Social LCIA Method 1 v1.0 (Benoit-Norris et al.
2013), based on New Earth’s Social Hotspots Index and adapted to SimaPro 8.4
software, was used to carry out the hotspot analysis. The input data for this modelling phase was in the form of monetary units (US$2002) spent on country specific
sectors. This method was also used to calculate worker hours associated with each
of the elements in the supply chain of the solar power plant. Worker hours was
employed as activity variable to aggregate the social performance of unit processes
(and life cycle stages) that make the life cycle of the solar power plant.

2.3.2

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method for the Site-Specific Social
Assessment

Although the S-LCA Guidelines provide information about impact categories,
sub-categories and indicators, it also recognizes that “there are no characterization