Sustainable Materials
Management:
THE ROAD AHEAD
APPENDIX:
Relative Ranking Technical
Support Document
&EPA
United Slates
Environmental Protection
Agency
June 2009
-------
Appendix:
Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead
Relative Ranking of Materials, Products, and Services Consumed in the U.S.
Using Selected Environmental Criteria
Technical Support Document
Introduction
The Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead report (referred to as the "SMM
Roadmap" herein) lays out a series of recommendations to shift our society from managing
wastes to managing materials. In developing the Roadmap, an important question arose, where
does one start? The U.S. economy is a highly complex and intertwined system in which a few
hundred raw materials are transformed into thousands of products. It would be unrealistic to
move toward life cycle materials management for all the materials and products consumed in an
entire economy simultaneously. Thus, the Workgroup chose to recommend conducting a few
well-chosen demonstration projects to show the value of life cycle materials management and
gain greater insight on integrating policies and programs around materials management. This
Technical Support Document lays out the analysis performed to identify potential candidates for
the demonstration projects.
To help identify potential candidates for these demonstration projects, the 2020 Vision Relative
Ranking of Materials, Products, and Services Using Selected Environmental Criteria (referred to
as the "Relative Ranking Analysis" herein) used the best available data and a multi-factor
analytical approach to relatively rank 480 materials, products, and services consumed in the U.S.
economy along five environmental aspects:
• Environmental impact (13 different measures)
• Energy use
• Material use
• Material waste
• Water use
This information was used to help identify materials, products, and services where taking a
materials management approach potentially could provide significant benefits across multiple
environmental aspects. It is important to note that the relative ranking described herein reflects
this objective - to help identify potential candidates for initial application of comprehensive
materials management strategies. The 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis does not rank
materials, products, and services based on their actual or absolute human health and
environmental impact, but rather on their potential to cause human health and environmental
impacts. Relative ranking based on actual human health and environmental impact would
require a common expression of impact (e.g., human health, ecosystem quality), complex
modeling, and judgments regarding the impacts of highest priority. This is outside of the scope
of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis.
It is important to note that the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis focuses on the
environmental implications of our collective consumption choices in the U.S and uses the 480
materials, products and services (which represent commodity groupings) identified by the
1
-------
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) and life cycle analysis to achieve this. The analysis is not
intended to, nor can it single-out individual companies or individual products that have relatively
high potential environmental impact or are relatively resource-intensive. Rather, the analysis is
intended to help us better understand the relationships between our consumption choices and the
environment, and help guide life cycle materials management strategies that could lessen the
negative consequences of those choices.
The following sections describe the data sources used to analyze the different environmental
aspects, methods used to cross-walk data to allow comparison across aspects, and the vector
analysis methodology used to relatively-rank the 480 materials, products, and services.
Baseline List of Materials, Products, and Services
The data and information sources available to characterize the five environmental aspects use
disparate classifications schemes, from very broad sectors as found in water use data to fairly
disaggregated commodities as found in the Comprehensive Environmental Data Archive 3.0 (the
tool used to characterize environmental impacts). Thus, a common or baseline list was needed to
which data could be cross-walked.
The 2020 Vision Workgroup decided to use the list of 480 materials, products, and services
(commodities) included in the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis' (BEA) 1998 input-output
(I-O) tables as the baseline list. The BEA I-O accounts provide the framework for preparing the
national and other economic accounts that are used for policy analysis, business planning, and
other purposes. The I-O tables serve as both the data source and the framework used to estimate
gross domestic product (GDP). The Federal Reserve formulates monetary policy and the U.S.
Government formulates fiscal policy on the basis of GDP estimates and other economic statistics
based on the I-O data. In business, macroeconomic and microeconomic forecasting models are
built using the data from the I-O accounts.1 The Workgroup decided that the use of the BEA I-O
accounts would provide a sound foundation for the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis since
it would take advantage of well-established and understood policy analysis methodologies.
Data from the BEA I-O accounts were used in conjunction with additional environmental and
life-cycle data related to these materials, products, and services. All data sources were linked in
a final analysis such that the 480 materials, products, and services could be ranked across all
environmental aspects.
Using the BEA list of 480 materials, products and services minimized the amount of data set
cross-walking and thus the uncertainties that arise from having to do so. Three sources of
information were used for characterizing the 17 criteria considered in the analysis of each of the
480 materials, products, and services:
• The Comprehensive Environmental Data Archive v. 3.0 (CEDA 3.0) software tool was
used to estimate 13 different environmental impacts criteria and the energy use criterion;
• The World Resources Institute (WRI) Material Flow Analysis (MFA) database was used
to estimate material use and waste criteria: and
1 BEA (2006). Concepts and Methods of the U.S. I-O Accounts. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
Economic Analysis; Washington, DC.
2
-------
• United States Geologic Service (USGS) water use data were used to estimate the water
use criterion.
These sources of information were selected because they provide the best available data, most of
which are from federal government sources, and coverage across the 17 criteria. Individual
sources and the rationale for their selection are described in further detail in subsequent sections
of this paper.
CEDA 3.0 contains estimates of impacts associated with the 480 commodities included in the
BEA 1998 I-O tables. Therefore, results for the 13 environmental impact criteria and the energy
use aspect were readily available for these 480 commodities without the need for further
manipulation. In addition, the commodity classification system used for defining sectors for
USGS water data was able to be readily aligned with this list of 480 commodities. The WRI
MFA database focuses on materials, rather than a broader array of materials, products, and
services, and its coding system reflects this different focus and scope. Therefore, it was decided
that the most efficient and methodologically sound approach would be to use the 480
commodities in the BEA 1998 I-O tables as the common set of materials, products, and services
to be considered in the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis.
Relative Ranking of Materials, Products and Services
A comprehensive ranking provides a comparison of the overall environmental attributes of
materials, products and services relative to each other. The overall objective is to be able to give
each item of interest a ranking that allows a direct comparison to other items of interest. This
task is far easier when comparisons are made through a single criterion. However, when using
many criteria and many data sets, all with differing units of measurement, the task becomes more
challenging.
For example, in the context of this analysis, not all of the criteria are independent nor can they
easily be expressed using a common set of measures relating to human health and ecosystem
quality without subjective choices. For example, while the ranking of a particular product may
be relatively more significant in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, it may generate relatively
little waste or may be relatively benign in terms of aquatic toxicity. Complex models that would
quantitatively unite the scope of criteria being considered herein using a common set of measures
are elusive.
After careful consideration, the 2020 Vision Workgroup chose to use an applied vector analysis
approach as the means to relatively rank the 480 materials, products and services across the five
environmental aspects (and the associated 17 criteria) of interest. The vector analysis first
looked at each of the criteria independently and identified the materials, products, and services
that were most significant in terms of each criterion (e.g., the material, product, or service whose
consumption generates the greatest amount of greenhouse gas emissions). The extent to which
each material, product, or service differed from the overall group of 480 materials, products, and
services was quantified using a statistical measure. Then, the 480 materials, products, and
services were ranked across all of the 17 criteria and the influence of each criterion on the overall
ranking was developed using vector calculus.
-------
Using this approach, some materials, products, and services may be ranked relatively high based
on more than one criterion, whereas others may be dominated by a single criterion. Vector
analysis provides a transparent, quantitative approach for identifying the criterion or criteria that
contribute the most or are the drivers behind the rankings, providing an indication of the relative
effect of different criteria.
The vector approach allows for a quantitative comparison of the 480 materials, products, and
services across the 17 criteria in a manner that reflects the underlying data. Because it ignores
the interdependence of the different criteria and weighs all criteria equally, it does not provide an
indication of overall relative human health or environmental impact. However, because it
highlights the most significant materials, products, and services within each criterion and
provides a mechanism for highlighting materials, products, and services that are significant
across multiple criteria, it meets the objectives of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis -
to help identify materials, products, and services where materials management strategies
potentially could provide significant benefits across multiple aspects.
Three System Perspectives Analyzed
At the heart of the 2020 Vision materials management approach is the concept of "life cycle" and
viewing the entire system. Life cycle refers to the major activities that occur from the point at
which raw materials are acquired through processing, manufacture, use, and end-of-life
management. In this analysis, the system of interest was the entire U.S. economy and the
materials, products and services consumed. The environmental aspects associated with the life
cycle of a material, product, or service can be evaluated using the concepts and tools of life cycle
assessment (LCA).2 Traditional "economy-wide" LCA enables the estimation of the cumulative
environmental impacts resulting from all stages in the life cycle of final products and services
consumed in the economy. For this analysis, LCA concepts were also used to assess the other
four environmental aspects - material use, material waste, water use, and energy use.
Mechanistically, input-output LCA estimates the environmental aspects associated with each
stage, and movement between, in a product or service's lifecycle and "passes" those aspects
through to more refined products and services using I-O tables until the aspects are fully
accounted for in final products and services delivered to consumers. For example, in the
production of fluid milk, water is used to grow feed grains that are then used to sustain the cattle
used to produce raw milk. Water is used to manufacture fluid milk from raw milk and to
manufacture the containers within which the milk is transported for final consumption. Water is
used in the recycling and/or disposal of used milk containers.
Using economic I-O tables, a percentage of the total water used in growing feed grains is
allocated to the production of raw milk based on the percentage of all feed grains consumed by
dairy farms. Although this water is not directly used by dairy farms, for LCA purposes, it is
considered "embedded" in the production of dairy farm products. Similarly, water directly used
in sustaining dairy cattle and producing raw milk, as well as "embedded water" from feed grains
and other materials and products consumed by dairy farms, are allocated to the product "fluid
milk" based on the percentage of raw milk consumed by fluid milk producers. Final life cycle
See, for example, EPA (2006). Life Cycle Assessment Principles and Practice. United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA/600/R06/060.
4
-------
water use is calculated as the percentage of fluid milk that is directly consumed by end
consumers (e.g., as opposed to fluid milk consumed in the production of cheese) and includes
both water directly used in the production of fluid milk and embedded water use.
However, this process of passing all environmental aspects down through each life cycle stage
and embedding them in the final products or services consumed may hide significant impacts of
upstream stages, especially when the outputs of those stages become widely dispersed across a
large number of different final products. Each of those final products will have separate material
composition profiles and life cycles. For example, copper mining potentially contributes
significantly to environmental and human health impacts. Using a product or final consumption
perspective, these potential impacts would be dispersed among the thousands of products in
which copper is used, such as currency, batteries, circuits, industrial components,
telecommunications equipment, roofing, household items, piping, and a wide variety of
electronic products. The life-cycle impacts associated with creating those products would be
captured, including the embedded impacts associated with copper mining, but because copper
comprises such a small portion of the individual products and because the copper material is so
widely dispersed among these products, the substantial impacts of copper mining as a whole
would be hidden.
Therefore, this analysis examined the U.S. economy from three system perspectives believed to
offer a higher likelihood of revealing potential environmental aspects that might be associated
with earlier life-cycle stages such as extraction (e.g., copper ore) or initial material processing
(e.g., smelting) and middle stages such as manufacturing, as well as final products or services.
They included:
• Direct impact/resource use/waste - environmental aspects directly associated with each
stage of the life cycle: extraction of raw materials, production, and consumption of
products and services. This perspective does not include environmental aspects
embedded in a material, product, or service Using the fluid milk example above, direct
water use associated with raw milk would include water used directly to produce raw
milk but would not include water used to grow feed grains.
• Intermediate consumption - environmental aspects directly associated with materials,
products, and services plus embedded environmental aspects at each stage of the life
cycle. This perspective provides insights into the environmental aspects that have
"accumulated" to a certain point in the life cycle, regardless of whether it is the point of
consumption by end consumers (e.g., households) or intermediate consumers (e.g.,
manufacturers). Using the fluid milk example above, water use associated with raw milk
from the intermediate consumption perspective would include water used directly in
producing raw milk plus water embedded in the raw milk from sources such as feed
grains.
• Final consumption - environmental aspects directly associated with materials, products,
and services plus "embedded" environmental aspects at the point of final consumption.
Unlike the intermediate perspective, the final consumption perspective does not
"accumulate" environmental aspects at stages prior to final consumption. Rather, all
aspects not associated with final consumption are "passed through" to downstream
materials, products, and services. Using the example above, water use associated with
fluid milk would include water embedded in that percentage of fluid milk consumed by
-------
households. From the final consumption perspective, water use associated with fluid
milk that is an intermediate product (e.g., used in the production of cheese) is not counted
in the life cycle water use for fluid milk but, rather, is counted as embedded water in the
downstream products (e.g., in the life cycle water use for cheese directly consumed by
households).
The 2020 Vision Workgroup decided to analyze and consider all three of these perspectives
based on their potential to provide a greater understanding of environmental aspects associated
with materials, products and services across the U.S. economy.
Figure 1 summarizes the three system perspectives and presents a summary of the types of
situations where each perspective might highlight materials, products, and services where the
others would not.
Figure 1
System Perspectives Considered in the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis
Measures direct environmental impacts, material, water
and energy use, and waste disposed at each point in the
life cycle; does not include embedded environmental
aspects
More likely than other perspectives to highlight raw
materials and intermediate products at early stages in
the life cycle where their uses are widely dispersed
throughout the economy (e.g., copper) and there is little
use as a final product.
Measures accumulated (direct and embedded)
environmental impacts, material, water and energy use,
and waste disposed at each point in the lifecycle.
This perspective allows transparent consideration of the
accumulated impacts, resource use, and waste
associated with intermediate products and processes
before these aspects are "passed on" to products
consumed by final consumers
E
-------
products and services in the U.S. economy in a mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive
manner. The sum of an environmental aspect using either of these approaches across the 480
materials, products, and services is equal and approximates the overall aspect in terms of total
consumption in the U.S.
The intermediate consumption perspective, on the other hand, does not attempt to allocate the
total life-cycle aspects of U.S. household and government consumption in a mutually exclusive,
collectively exhaustive way, but rather, shows accumulated aspects of a stage and then passes
them on to the next stage up to the point of sale of the material, product, or service. The results
of the intermediate consumption analysis cannot be summed across materials, products, and
services in a meaningful way.
The Five Environmental Aspects
The Comprehensive Environmental Data Archive (CEDA 3.0) software tool was used to develop
and allocate estimates of environmental impact based on standard Life Cycle Impact Assessment
(LCIA) methods. For the remaining aspects, data sources were identified and were cross-walked
to the 494 industries that correspond to the 480 commodities in the BEA I-O accounts. An
extension to CEDA 3.0 was then used to allocate material use, material waste, water use, and
energy use across the 480 materials, products, and services for the three system perspectives.3
The following subsections describe the data sources, cross-walking, and allocation methods used
to develop relative estimates of environmental impact, material use, material waste, water use,
and energy use for the baseline list of 480 materials, products, and services.
Environmental Impact
CEDA 3.0 is a software tool used for environmental input-output analysis, lifecycle analysis
(LCA), and other applications.4 CEDA 3.0 was chosen for the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking
Analysis due to its breadth—covering the 480 commodities from the 1998 BEA accounts— and
its depth—covering around 90 characterization methods commonly used in LCIA, 13 of which
were considered in this analysis. CEDA 3.0 is well documented and its assumptions and
methods are transparent; it has undergone significant independent peer review; it has been used
for similar economy-wide such as the European Commission's Environmental Impact of
Products (EIPRO) study; and it incorporates state-of-the art methods and best available
government and other public data.
CEDA 3.0 includes three database modules: 1) economic input-output (I-O), 2) environmental
interventions; and 3) characterization factors. The economic I-O module contains information
3 The core of the BEA I-O accounts consists of two tables: a "make" table and a "use" table. Each table includes
information about both the "industries" that operate in the U.S. economy and the "commodities" that these industries
use and produce. The 1998 make table includes information on 480 commodities produced by 494 industries. The
1998 use table shows the use of these 480 commodities by the 494 industries as well as end-users - households and
government. For more information, see BEA (2006), Concepts and Methods of the U.S. I-O Accounts, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Washington, DC. For the purposes of this analysis,
resource use and waste data were first aligned with the 494 BEA-defmed industries. The make and use tables were
used via CEDA 3.0 to associate resource use and waste data with the 480 BEA-defined commodities that were used
in this analysis as the baseline list of "materials, products, and services."
4 Suh, Sangwon (2004). CEDA 3.0 User's Guide. CML, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
-------
on the structure of inter-industry exchanges of materials and energy throughout the supply chains
of the baseline 480 commodities. It is used, in conjunction with CEDA's other two modules, to
estimate environmental impacts associated with these commodities. Commodity-to-commodity
relationships are based on the 1998 annual I-O tables and procedures that follow the standard
make and use framework defined by BEA. However, the 1998 annual I-O tables do not provide
the capital flow data that were needed for the analyses. Therefore, the BEA capital flow matrix
for 1992 was used, and the amount of capital goods used by each sector was inflated or deflated
depending on price change information and gross output differences observed between 1992 and
1998.
In the context of CEDA 3.0 and similar LCA tools, "environmental intervention" is a general
term used to capture a range of interactions between humans and the environment, including
resource extraction, land use, and emissions to air, water, and land.5 The environmental
intervention module in CEDA 3.0 includes six resource extraction categories (e.g., coal, iron
ore), a land use category, and over 1,300 categories linking specific chemical substances (e.g.,
benzene, mercury) to four media (i.e., industrial soil, agricultural soil, freshwater, and air). The
environmental interventions data are linked to the baseline 480 commodities using information
derived from environmental databases covering factors ranging from toxic releases to energy
consumption and land use.6
The CEDA 3.0 characterization factors module contains information to aggregate environmental
intervention data into environmental impact scores according to the LCA methodologies
developed by the Centre for Environmental Science, Leiden University (CML) and other widely
used methods.7 The relationships established in the economic I-O module are used with the
environmental interventions module in order to estimate environmental impacts associated with
each of the 480 materials, products, and services according to the perspective of interest (i.e.,
direct impact/use/waste, intermediate consumption, or final consumption) and methodologies
established in the characterization module.
For the purpose of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis, the following thirteen impact
criteria were used to characterize the environmental impacts associated with the 480 materials,
products, and services (see Guinee 2002 for specific definitions):
• Abiotic depletion potential (ADP)
• Land use (increase of land competition) (LUC)
• Global warming potential (GWP)
• Ozone layer depletion potential (ODP)
• Human toxicity potential (HTP)
• Freshwater aquatic toxicity potential (FAETP)
• Marine aquatic toxicity potential (MAETP)
• Terrestrial ecotoxicity potential (TETP)
• Freshwater sedimental ecotoxicity potential (FSETP)
ISO (1997). 14040:1997. Environmental management - life cycle assessment - principles and framework. Geneva,
Switzerland, International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
6
7
Suh, Sangwon (2004).
Guinee, J.B. (2002). Handbook on Lifecycle Assessment, Operational Guide to the ISO Standards. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
-------
• Marine sedimental ecotoxicity potential (MSETP)
• Photochemical oxidation (high NOX) potential (POCP)
• Acidification potential (AP)
• Eutrophication potential (EP)
Because CEDA 3.0 is already capable of estimating potential environmental impacts for all of
the 480 commodities defined as the baseline for the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis, no
re-coding or allocation of these results was necessary. As a result, CEDA 3.0 output was used
directly in the vector analysis.
For the full CEDA 3.0 environmental impact data incorporated in the 2020 Visions Relative
Ranking Analysis, please see the spreadsheet entitled "2020 Vision Multi-Factor
Scoring_May09.xls."
Material Use
For the material use aspect, the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis used World Resources
Institute (WRI) Materials Flow Analysis (MFA) data. MFA data were developed by WRI as a
comprehensive estimation of material flows for over 160 primary materials consumed in the U.S.
economy from 1975 through 2000, covering four principal sectors: agriculture, forestry, non-
renewable organic materials (e.g., fossil fuels), and metals and minerals. The WRI MFA data
were captured in the 2020 analyses by cross-walking the WRI material classification system with
the BEA-defmed industries and by using an extension to CEDA 3.0 to allocate material use to
the 480 BEA-defmed commodities for the three system perspectives.
The WRI MFA database covers physical resources entering the U.S. economy and follows them
as they undergo successive physical and chemical transformations throughout respective material
life cycles. The database systematically categorizes materials flowing through the U.S.
economy, emphasizing transparency in documenting data sources and any assumptions made in
o
estimating the flows. Data for this database come from government offices, trade associations,
and independent research institutes and, where appropriate, supplemented by estimates from
technical experts. WRI MFA data represent the most comprehensive accounting of material
flows currently available across the U.S. economy. The 2020 Vision workgroup considered the
integration of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis with the WRI MFA data to be a vital
component of the analyses, despite the challenges involved.
For the purposes of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis, material use was defined to be
consistent with the direct material consumption (DMC) measure used by WRI. WRI defines
DMC as the "sum of all inputs that enter the economy." This measure is comprised of all raw
materials required to produce commodities in the economy, including domestically extracted and
imported raw materials, less processing wastes and exports of processed materials. This is
comparable to the CEDA 3.0 approach, in that CEDA 3.0 estimates impacts associated with
domestic consumption. WRI calculates DMC by sector, and the values, reported in thousand
WRI (2008). Material Flows in the United States, A Physical Accounting of the U.S. Industrial Economy. World
Resources Institute, Washington, DC.
9
-------
metric tons, are approximately equal to the sum of the "uses" estimated for each of the WRI-
defmed materials in the WRIMFA database.9
For the 2020 analyses, WRI materials were aligned with the BEA industries that produce the
material. The BEA I-O tables define relationships among industries by quantifying how the
output from extraction industries is used as input to subsequent processing and service industries.
The WRI database defines materials both in terms of extracted raw materials and minimally
processed materials. Thus, the two systems provide alternative definitions of the material flow
during extraction and initial production stages, where the BEA I-O tables quantify these flows
based on production value, and the WRI database quantifies these flows based on physical units
(i.e., weight).
The BEA industry classification system includes a limited number of categories for extraction
industries, in some cases, representing a far less detailed breakdown of materials than the WRI
MFA data. In such cases, efforts were made to align the WRI materials with initial processing
industries, rather than extraction industries. For example, rather than align the WRI materials,
"lumber" and "paper and board" with the BEA industry "forestry products," "lumber" was
aligned with the BEA industry "sawmills and planing mills" and "paper and board" was aligned
with the BEA industry "pulp mills."
Decisions regarding correspondence between WRI uses and BEA industries were based on
information derived from the industry classification hierarchies reflected in the NAICS and SIC
systems and the following other key sources:
o USFS (2001). U.S. Timber Production, Trade, Consumption, and Price Statistics, 1965
1999. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service (forestry)
o U.S. Census (2003). Value of Construction Put in Place, May 2003, Annual (earth
moving and infrastructure)
o U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Mineral Commodity Series (metals and minerals)
WRI material flows for the year 1998 were allocated according to their correspondence between
each of the WRI materials and respective BEA industries. For example, where one or more WRI
materials were associated with a single BEA industry, 100% of the WRI material flow was
allocated to the industry. Where a single WRI material was associated with more than one BEA
industry, the material flow was allocated among the BEA industries according to each industry's
respective share of total production, using BEA economic I-O data.
For example, the WRI database allocates "copper" among five different uses, including uses in
building materials, electrical components, equipment, and consumer products. However,
because of the close correspondence between the WRI material and BEA industry definitions,
100% of the WRI MFA data were allocated to BEA industry "copper ore." Allocation among
uses was accomplished using the BEA I-O tables embedded in CEDA 3.0.
9 The WRI MFA database accounts for material flows in terms of specific uses associated with a material. For
example, the WRI database tracks five different uses of the mineral boron: glass products, soaps and detergents,
agriculture, fire retardants, and other. Tracking material flows based on specific uses provides greater resolution
than if the flows were tracked only at the material level (e.g., overall use of boron).
10
-------
In another example, the WRI database allocates "bismuth" among four different uses, including
uses of bismuth in metal alloys and chemical applications. Because bismuth is a by-product of
lead, copper, and tin ore smelting, it can be associated with the BEA industry "primary
nonferrous metals, n.e.c." However, because this is a broad category, the quantity of bismuth
associated with the WRI use "pharmaceuticals and chemicals" was allocated instead to BEA
industry "industrial inorganic and organic chemicals." These two examples and the overall
approach to the WRI-BEA crosswalk are illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2
Approach for Allocating WRI Materials to BEA Industries and Commodities
WRI-Defined Material
WRI-Defined Use
Copper
(WRI No. 26)
Bismuth
(WRI No. 8)
Building and
construction (Use 1)
Electric/electronic
(Use 2)
Industrial machinery/
equipment (Use 3)
Transportation equip
(Use 4)
Consumer products
(Use 5)
Pharmaceuticals and
chemicals (Use 1)
\
BEA-Defined Industry
100% of "Copper"
allocated to BEA
industry "Copper Ore"
/
Other (Use 4)
K'1
Fusible alloys, solders
& cartridges (Use 2)
Metallurgical
additives (Use 3)
Copper Ore
(BEA No. 60100)
l/l/R/"ose"cfafaosecf
to allocate "Bismuth"
to two BEA industries;
"Other" category
allocated based on
USGS minerals data
Industrial inorganic
and organic
chemicals
(BEA No. 270100)
Primary nonferrous
metals, n.e.c.
(BEA No. 380501)
BEA-Defined Commodities
(Baseline)
Key:
M/P/S = material, product, or service
Downstream commodity
allocations based on BEA /
industry-by-commodity
1-0 tables embedded in
CEDA3.0
Etc ...
11
-------
Once the linkage between the WRI material and BEA industries was established, BEAI-O data
were used to allocate the materials to the 480 BEA-defmed commodities based on the three
system perspectives (direct impact/resource use/waste, intermediate consumption, and final
consumption) using the CEDA 3.0 methodology. In this way, the BEA I-O data was substituted
for WRI-defined "uses." While some detail afforded by the WRI data was lost, this enabled a
consistent basis for comparing materials, products, and services across material use and other
criteria and, thus, supported the primary objectives of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking
Analysis.
The crosswalk between the WRI-defined materials and BEA-defmed industries is contained in
the spreadsheet entitled "WRI-BEA Xwalk_May09.xls." Calculated material use values for the
480 BEA commodities are contained in the spreadsheet, "2020 Vision Multi-Factor
Scoring_May09.xls."
Material Waste
The 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis incorporated WRI material waste data using the
same methodology used for material use. For the purposes of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking
Analysis, material waste was defined to be consistent with the direct process output (DPO)
measure used by WRI. WRI defines DPO as the "materials that are consumed in the domestic
economy and subsequently flow to the domestic environment." This measure is comprised of all
materials that are consumed in the U.S. economy and "exit" (e.g., through disposal in a landfill)
within 30 years after entry.10 Using the WRI-BEA crosswalk, estimates of material waste were
allocated to the 480 materials, products, and services for the three system perspectives using an
extension to CEDA 3.0.
The crosswalk between the WRI-defined materials and BEA-defmed industries is contained in
the spreadsheet entitled "WRI-BEA XwalkMay09.xls." Calculated material waste values for the
480 BEA commodities are contained in the spreadsheet, "2020 Vision Multi-Factor
Scoring_May09.xls."
Water Use
The 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis incorporated aggregated USGS water use data
allocated among the BEA-defmed industries using data from multiple, sector-specific sources.
Once water use data was linked to BEA industries, water use was allocated to the 480 materials,
products, and services for the three system perspectives using an extension to CEDA 3.0.
Historically, USGS has tracked national water use data within nine general sectors: domestic,
livestock, irrigation, aquaculture, mining, industrial, commercial, hydroelectric power
generation, and thermoelectric power generation. USGS relies on data collected at statewide
levels, and recent statistics do not exist regarding the National break-down in water use within
10 It is equal to the DMC measure used as the basis for defining "material use" for the 2020
Vision Relative Ranking Analysis, less material that remains in the economy for over 30 years
(called "net additions to stock"), less material that is recycled.
12
-------
certain sectors. The water use data were disaggregated to the level of the 494 BEA-defined
industries using the following steps:
• BEA industries associated with each of the USGS-defined sectors were identified based
on USGS water data collection guidelines, which contain detailed lists of industries
included in each of the USGS-defmed sectors.11
• Sources of information that provide water use statistics at a detailed level were identified
for each sector, and water use categories in these sources were cross-walked with USGS
sectors and BEA industries.
• Water use allocations were developed for all BEA-defined industries associated with
each of the USGS sectors, using water use statistics from detailed sources.
• Within-sector allocations were applied to total USGS water use data by sector to estimate
total water use by each of the BEA-defined industries.
The following sources of information were used to allocate water use data within sectors:
• Irrigation: USDA (1999). 7997 Census of Agriculture, 1998 Farm and Ranch Irrigation
Survey. National Agricultural Statistics Service.
• Mining: US Census (1985). 7952 Census of Mineral Industries. US Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
• Industrial: US Census (1986). 7952 Census of Manufacturers. US Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
• Commercial:
o Pacific Institute (2003). Waste Not, Want Not: The Potential for Urban Water
Conservation in California. Pacific Institute for Studies in Development,
Environment, and Security, Oakland, CA.
o Dziegielewski, B. et al. (2002). Analysis of Water Use Trends in the United States:
1950 1995. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Carbondale, IL February 28,
2002.
For the livestock sector (involving four BEA-defined industries), BEA I-O production value data
were used to allocate water use within the sector. Water use allocations were not derived for the
aquaculture sector because there were no corresponding BEA industries. Water used for power
generation was allocated to the three BEA industries, "Electric services (utilities)," "Federal
electric utilities," and "State and local government electric utilities" based on generating capacity
data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Where there were gaps within
sectors (e.g., because data were not published in order to protect confidential business
information), water use allocation was estimated based on other water use data for similar
industries or other sources of information.
Using the disaggregated USGS-BEA crosswalk, estimates of water use were allocated to the 480
materials, products, and services for the three system perspectives using the BEA industry-by-
commodity I-O tables and LCA methodology embedded in CEDA 3.0.
11 USGS (2000). Guidelines for Preparation of State Water-Use Estimates for 2000. US Department of the Interior,
US Geologic Survey, Washington, DC.
13
-------
It is important to note that although the data used to allocate water use within the industrial and
commercial sectors is outdated, it was determined that the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking
Analysis was insensitive to this issue. After the hydroelectric thermoelectric power sectors, the
agricultural sector is the dominant sector in terms of water use; therefore, in addition to electric
utilities, the vector analysis will tend to highlight agricultural materials, products, and services.
Changes in water use allocations within the highly disaggregated industrial and commercial
sectors will have little effect on this result. The basis for this conclusion is shown in Figure 3.
For the full water crosswalk for the 494 BEA industries, please see, "Water Crosswalk_May09."
Calculated water use values for the 480 baseline materials, products, and services are contained
in the spreadsheet, "2020 Vision Multi-Factor Scoring_May09.xls."
14
-------
Figure 3
Allocation Methodology for Calculating Water Use
Associated with BEA Industries and Commodities
USGS Water Use
Sectors
Industrial
(0.8%)
Irrigation
(3.9%)
Thermoelectric
and
Hydroelectric
Power
(94.1%)
Within-Sector Allocations
By BEA Industry
•Mining (0.1%)
, Livestock (0.2%
•Commercial (0.3%)
(17 categories)
Livestock
(8 categories)
Commercial
(87 categories)
Industrial
(367 categories)
Irrigation
(12 categories)
Electric utilities
(3 categories)
Because commercial and industrial
sector water use is a relatively small
percentage of the total and because
these sectors are highly
disaggregated, overall allocation of
water use among the BEA-defmed
categories will be relatively insensitive
to shifts within these sectors.
Water Use by BEA-Defined
Industry
BEA Mining Category 1
BEA Mining Category 2
BEA Livestock Category 1
BEA Livestock Category 2
BEA Commercial Category 1
BEA Commercial Category 2
BEA Industrial Category 1
BEA Industrial Category 2 I
BEA Irrigation Category 1
BEA Irrigation Category 2
BEA Electric Util. Category 1
BEA Electric Util. Category 2
BEA-Defined Commodities
(Baseline)
Etc ...
Allocation of total water use to each
BEA-defmed industry is calculated as:
(S%)*(C%)*(Total U.S. Water Use)
Where:
S% = Percent water use of sector
C% = Percent water use within sector
Key: M/P/S = material, product, or service
15
-------
Energy Use
For the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis, energy use was estimated and allocated to the
480 materials, products, and services using an extension to the CEDA 3.0 software tool. In
1998, the total energy consumed in the U.S. amounted to 95.1 quadrillion British Thermal Units
(QBtu).12 Based on data contained in the CEDA extension, the largest source of energy
consumed in 1998 was petroleum, followed by natural gas and coal (see Figure 4). For the
purposes of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis, total net primary energy consumption
data were assigned to the point within the economy at which energy was consumed, so that the
resulting data represent the total embodied energy, including renewable energy, in products and
services in the U.S.
Nuclear, 7.1
Renewable,
6.7
etroleum, Natural gas,
36.8 22.8
Figure 4. Energy consumption (QBtu) in the U.S. by sources (1998)
The following energy types were included in the analysis:
Fossil energy - coal, natural gas, and petroleum
Nuclear energy
Renewable energy - hydropower, biomass, and solar
Geothermal energy was not included in the analysis due to the uncertainties in identifying the
end-users, which are geographically constrained. Total amount of geothermal energy
consumption in 1998 was less than 0.5% of the total energy consumption.
The following procedure was used to allocate energy consumption data to the materials,
products, and services used in the analysis:
• Total energy consumption by sector data were compiled at the most detailed level
available from EIA.
• Where there was a one-to-one match between the end-use category defined by EIA and a
BEA commodity included in the 1998 I-O tables, the data were directly applied to the
12 EIA (2008). Annual Energy Review (AER). Energy Information Administration, Washington, DC: Department of
Energy.
16
-------
commodity. For example, EIA specifies the amount of coal use by blast furnaces and
power generation, which is a distinct BEA-defmed commodity used in CEDA 3.0.
• If an end-use category defined by EIA covered multiple BEA categories, a detailed I-O
table for the energy type was utilized as an allocation reference. For example, EIA
reports the amount of aggregate biomass energy used by pulp and paper mills mainly in
the form of black liquor, which is a by-product of paper production process, while BEA
distinguishes pulp mills and paper mills as a commodity. In this case, the production
value (in producer's price) was used as the allocation factor.
• When estimating energy flows by end-use categories per energy types in the previous
step, feedstock energy use was estimated and subtracted from the energy flow
information derived from I-O data. For example, the carbon black manufacturing
processes use petroleum as a feedstock, not for energy. Therefore, if the entire petroleum
flow to carbon black production was counted as energy consumption, the embodied
energy of carbon black would be overestimated. In this case, only feedstock petroleum
used in carbon black production was subtracted from the petroleum flow.
• Estimates developed using the above approach and CEDA 3.0 were cross-checked with
other literature and statistics. CEDA results were also sorted in decreasing order and the
top 30 categories were checked for abnormalities. No abnormalities were identified in
the data used in the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis.
In order to include renewable energy in the analysis, explicit choices were made regarding the
point of energy "consumption". For fossil fuels and biomass, it was assumed that energy
consumption occurs at the point of combustion. For renewable energy, the point of combustion
cannot be used as a reference. For example, hydropower uses the potential energy of water. For
hydropower and wind power, electric power generation at the power plant was considered the
point of energy consumption. For nuclear power, the nuclear power plant was considered as the
point of consumption.
Energy use was estimated for the three system perspectives. For the full CEDA 3.0 energy use
data incorporated in the multi-factor analysis, please see the spreadsheet, "2020 Vision Multi-
Factor Scoring_May09.xls".
Applying the Vector Approach to Ranking
Upon completion of the analysis of individual environmental aspects, materials, products, and
services were ranked across all aspects using the vector approach. The 480 materials, products,
and services were ranked within criteria using statistical measures, and statistical values were
combined across the 17 criteria using vector analysis. Though the bulk of criteria are the 13
categories of environmental impact, all criteria were considered equal and given the same weight
in the vector analysis.
Specifically, the following steps were employed to analyze the 480 materials, products, and
services using the vector analysis approach:
• Data were compiled for each of the 480 materials, products, and services, and for each
criterion of environmental impact, resource use, and waste, as described in the previous
section.
17
-------
• The average (mean value) for each criterion was computed and subtracted from the
criterion value for each of the 480 materials, products, and services. This approach
"mean-centered" the criterion values and, as such, addressed the potential that criteria
with large absolute magnitude would dominate the overall vector magnitude.
• The standard deviation for each criterion was calculated and the mean-centered values
were normalized by the standard deviation. This approach addressed the potential that
criteria with large variation would dominate the overall vector magnitude. This was
particularly important given the significant differences in units used for different criteria
and enabled the criteria to be compared on a dimensionless basis.
The number of standard deviations from the mean was "plotted" on different axes corresponding
to each of the different criteria, producing two pieces of information: 1) vector magnitude and 2)
direction of vector. The vector magnitude - distance from the origin or mean - indicates the
degree to which the material, product, or service is an "outlier," or how much it deviates from the
mean relative to all materials, products, and services being measured. The direction of the vector
is an indicator of the criterion/criteria that has/have the greatest effect on magnitude.
Figure 5 presents a graphical representation of the concept along two dimensions (two criteria).
The mathematical rules that apply to two dimensions can be extrapolated to the number of
dimensions of interest.
Figure 5
Graphical Representation of Vector Analysis Approach
Distance from
the origin
provides
indication of
relative strength
of combined
dimensions.
A cut-off
point (no. of
standard
deviations
from the
mean) can be
defined to
highlight
"outliers"
©
t>
The quadrant
where a point is
located indicates
the position of the
material relative to
others being
considered.
Some values may
be influenced by
more than one
factor; others may
be dominated by a
single factor.
Factor 1 (Std deviations from the mean)
18
-------
Supplemental Analyses
In addition to the core relative ranking analysis described above, several supplemental analyses
were conducted to assess the functioning of the vector analysis approach, test the sensitivity of
the analysis to different assumptions, and help interpret the findings. These supplemental
analyses are described in this section. Implications of these supplemental analyses are discussed
along with the overall findings and conclusions in the sections that follow.
Analysis of Criteria Distributions and Correlation
The relative ranking analysis using a vector approach does not involve weighting individual
criteria. Because the analysis compares a measure of outlier strength across criteria, the
influence of individual criteria will depend on the distribution of values among the commodities
within that criterion. F-tests were performed to compare the distributions of the mean-centered
values used to calculate vector magnitudes and rank materials, products, and services. All of the
distributions were statistically equivalent, with the exception of the distribution for the water use
criterion.
Observations of the distributions of mean-centered values indicated that the Electric Services
category has a significant dampening effect on certain criteria. To test this observation, the
analysis was performed without the Electric Services category. As a result, it was determined
that the dominance of the electric services industry within the water use criterion accounts for the
deviation between the distribution of this criterion from the rest. This finding explains the
limited distribution of mean-centered values and suggests that water use criterion has less
influence on the rankings relative to other criteria. When Electric Services were removed from
the analysis, the water use criterion was indicated as a driver for agricultural materials and
products based on the direct impacts/resource use/waste perspective. Water use was also
indicated as a driver across a wide range of materials, products, and services from the
intermediate and final consumption perspectives. Removal of Electric Services from the analysis
did not change the correlation among the other criteria, though this approach did result in minor
changes to the rankings.
The results of the individual criterion analyses are not normally distributed. To evaluate the
effect of the non-normal distributions, individual criteria output was log transformed and the
ranking analysis was conducted using the transformed data. When the transformed data was
analyzed using the direct impact/resource use/waste perspective, two factors tended to dominate
the analysis: abiotic depletion (ADP) and land use/land competition (LUC). The ADP and LUC
distributions are highly skewed because of the limited coverage of the materials, products, and
services by these criteria for the direct impact/resource use/waste perspective. When the data
were transformed, the distributions of the criteria other than ADP and LUC tended to flatten out,
lessening their influence compared to the original approach. The influence of log transformation
was further evaluated using the final consumption perspective. The rankings based on the log
transformed data differed only slightly from the rankings produced by the original analysis for
this perspective.
The nature of the vector analysis is such that each criterion added to the analysis will increase the
vector magnitude. Thus, the degree to which individual criteria (e.g., freshwater aquatic toxicity,
terrestrial ecotoxicity) pertain to a similar environmental impact category (e.g., ecological
19
-------
toxicity) could tend to increase the influence of that category on the overall analysis. An
analysis was conducted to assess the potential effect of the correlation among criteria on the
relative rankings. Table 1 summarizes the results of this analysis.
The analysis suggests that those materials, products, and services that rank high on one criterion
will rank high on other, correlated criteria, which will affect the overall rankings. Because the
workgroup is interested in all of the environmental issues represented by the factors, this finding
does not detract from the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis. The effect of correlation
among criteria should be taken into account when interpreting the results.
Table 1
Criteria Groupings Exhibiting Statistically Significant Correlation
By System Perspective
Direct Impact/Use/Waste
Perspective
Intermediate Consumption
Perspective
Final Consumption Perspective
GWP-MAETP-FSETP-
POCP-AP-WU-EU
FAETP-TETP
GWP-MAETP-FSETP-POCP-
AP-WU-EU
FAETP-TETP
GWP-HTP-MAETP-FSETP-
POCP-AP
GWP-MAETP-FSETP- AP-
WU-EU
ODP-HTP-MSETP
ADP-MW
GWP-EP-HTP-POCP
Sensitivity Analyses
In addition to the core relative ranking analysis presented herein, the workgroup evaluated the
following variations on the model to test its sensitivity to alternative assumptions:
• Market trends - the relative output of materials, products, and services included in the
analysis reflects market conditions as they existed in 1998. To the extent that the relative
output of materials, products, and services has changed, the analysis may under- or over-
represent the relative impacts, resource use, and waste associated with different materials,
products, and services. Table 2 identifies those industries that have undergone the most
significant growth and those that have undergone the most significant decline relative to
GDP since 1998. These rates of growth and decline were factored into the final
consumption perspective to evaluate the effect on the rankings. It was determined that
the rankings were sensitive to the relatively high rate of growth of the "information
services" industry and the relatively high rate of decline in the "photographic and
photocopying equipment manufacturing" industry. The implications of these findings are
discussed in the findings and conclusions sections below.
20
-------
Table 2
Industries Experiencing the Most Significant Growth or Decline Since 1998
%Growth/Decline*
Industry
Industries Experiencing Most Significant Growth
744%
532%
325%
254%
216%
193%
181%
173%
166%
164%
Information services
Electronic computer manufacturing
Semiconductors and related device manufacturing
Environmental and other technical consulting services
Securities, commodity contracts, investments
Copper wire, except mechanical, drawing
Management consulting services
Irradiation apparatus manufacturing
Other computer related services, including facilities management
All other miscellaneous professional and technical services
Industries Experiencing Most Significant Decline
-64%
-66%
-68%
-68%
-68%
-69%
-70%
-71%
-71%
-79%
Accessories and other apparel manufacturing
Leather and hide tanning and finishing
Electron tube manufacturing
Other apparel knitting mills
Photographic and photocopying equipment manufacturing
Software reproducing
Secondary processing of copper
Manufactured home, mobile home, manufacturing
Primary smelting and refining of copper
Tobacco stemming and redrying
* Based on 2000 quantity index, 1998-2007
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis
Abiotic depletion and land use criteria excluded - given the limitations of the abiotic
depletion and land use criteria (e.g., crude petroleum, agricultural commodities), the
analysis was run by excluding each criterion individually and by excluding both criteria.
While this variation had some influence on the ranking of criteria, the influence was
modest - some materials, products, and services shifted in rank, but there was little
change in the top 20-ranked materials, products, and services within the different
perspectives. It was determined that further development of these criteria would be
encouraged by retaining them in the analysis.
Normalized environmental impacts - the 13 environmental impacts categories were
"normalized" by dividing the vector magnitude by the number of categories, and the
results were included in a vector analysis with the material use, material waste, water use,
and energy use criteria (total of 5 criteria). Using this approach, the material use criterion
dominated the analysis and obscured the deeper insights available by treating all criteria
equally.
Maximum environmental impact only - as another approach to creating a single
environmental impact value for comparison to the other four resource use and waste
criteria, only the maximum value within the 13 categories was used in the multi-factor
analysis. This variation affected the relative rankings of materials, products, and
21
-------
services, though it tended to shift the same materials, products, and services already
ranked highest, rather than elevate new materials, products, and services to the highest
rankings. Upon review the Workgroup concluded that each of the criteria identified for
the analysis represented an important environmental issue and that the original analysis
would provide richer detail to support the objectives of the 2020 Relative Ranking
Analysis.
Other Interpretive Analyses
In support of the 2020 Vision relative ranking objectives, two additional analyses were
conducted to demonstrate the manner in which the three system perspectives and use of multiple
criteria affect the relative rankings:
• Criteria layering - A single criterion global warming potential (GWP) was used to
demonstrate how the rankings change when criteria are added. The results of the criteria
layering analysis are summarized in Appendix A and are discussed in the findings and
conclusions section below.
• System perspectives - A single criterion, GWP, was used to demonstrate how the ranks
of materials, products, and services differ based on system perspectives. The results of
the system perspectives analysis are summarized in Appendix B and are discussed in the
findings and conclusions sections below.
The spreadsheet, "2020 Vision Multi-Factor Scoring_May09.xls" presents the full vector
analysis with mean, standard deviation, and other manipulations referenced above.
Summary of Findings
This section presents a brief summary of the results of the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking
Analysis when examining individual criteria separately and all 17 criteria together and across all
system perspectives.
Observations Related to Individual Criteria
Appendix A presents the results of the individual criterion analysis. The 17 tables in Appendix
A show the 20 highest ranked materials products and services based on each individual criterion
for the three system perspectives. Different criteria tend to rank high different materials,
products, and services. High-level findings associated with each criterion and groups of criteria
are summarized below.
• The abiotic depletion (ADP) criterion tends to rank high non-renewable organic materials
(e.g., crude oil, coal) and intermediate products and services associated with industries
that consume these materials as feedstocks or fuel (e.g., petroleum refining, electric
services). As noted above, this criterion is limited in its coverage. Notably missing are
the rare metals which are in greater demand as technology advances.
• The land use/competition (LUC) criterion tends to rank high agricultural products (e.g.,
meat animals, dairy farm products, food grains) and associated products and services
22
-------
(e.g., meat packing plants, eating and drinking places, fluid milk). As noted above, this
criterion has limitations.
• The global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP) and photochemical
oxidation potential (POCP) criteria tend to rank high similar materials, products and
services, primarily petroleum materials and products, electric services, and energy-
intensive products and services such as blast furnaces and steel mills, motor vehicle and
passenger car bodies, and retail trade. However, GWP tends to also rank high
agriculture-related materials, products, and services as well (e.g., meat animals, feed
grains, meat packing plants, and eating and drinking places).
• The ozone depletion potential (ODP) criterion tends to rank high products related to
petroleum (e.g., industrial inorganic and organic chemicals, synthetic rubber, plastic
materials and resins), energy-intensive materials and products (e.g., primary aluminum,
motor vehicle and passenger car bodies), and products and services that tend to be
consolidate a widely dispersed range of intermediate products and services (e.g., eating
and drinking places, buildings, and hospitals).
• The human toxicity potential (HTP) and marine sedimental aquatic toxicity potential
(MSETP) criteria tends to rank high similar materials, products, and services, including
pulp and paper mills, chemicals, and primary metals as well as products associated with
construction and development, retail and wholesale trade, and hospitals.
• The freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity toxicity potential (FAETP) and terrestrial ecotoxicity
potential (TETP) criteria tend to rank high the similar materials, products, and services,
primarily those related to agriculture such as feed grains, cotton, paper and paperboard,
textiles, and apparel. The eutrophication potential (EP) criterion tends to rank high the
same materials, products, and services as the FAETP and TETP criteria as well as
petroleum-related and energy-intensive materials, products and services such as
petroleum refining, blast furnaces and steel mills, and retail trade.
• The material use (MU) criterion tends to rank high construction and development-related
materials, products and services such as sand and gravel, new office, industrial, and
commercial buildings construction, and real estate agents, managers, operators, and
lessors) and high volume-related materials, products and services (e.g., coal, feed grains,
and eating and drinking places.
• The material waste (MW) criterion tends to rank high a very diverse range of materials,
products and services such as coal, lime, forestry products, industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals, plastic materials and resins, new residential 1-unit structures, and
hospitals.
• The water use (WU) criterion tends to rank high agriculture-related materials products
and services such as feed grains and eating and drinking places, in addition to electric
services.
• The energy use (EU) criterion ranks high very few materials, primarily ranking high
intermediate life cycle stages (e.g., blast furnaces and steel mills), transportation-related
services (e.g., air transportation and trucking and courier services), and a range of
services (e.g., retail trade, eating and drinking places, and hospitals).
23
-------
Electric services is the highest ranked commodity for GWP, POCP, HTP, MAETP,
FSETP, AP, EP, and EU in all system perspectives. For LUC, OOP, FAETP, MSETP,
and TETP, electric services does not rank within the highest ranks (defined as top 20).
And for ADP, MU and MW, electric services ranks within the highest ranks, but not for
all system perspective.
24
-------
Table 3. Direct Impact/Resource Use/Waste Perspective
Material, Product, or Service
Electric services (utilities)
Cotton
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Coal
Meat animals
Paper and paperboard mills
Petroleum refining
Feed grains
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Pulp mills
Photographic equipment and supplies
Food grains
Dimension, crushed and broken stone
Natural gas distribution
Miscellaneous crops
Sand and gravel
Primary aluminum
Dairy farm products
Poultry and eggs
Total
Vector
Magnitude
56.30
28.85
22.76
19.17
19.06
16.39
14.57
14.45
13.43
11.49
11.18
10.45
10.15
9.98
9.09
8.84
8.79
8.65
7.92
7.10
Criteria Contributing Significantly to Vector Magnitude (> 2 standard deviations above the mean)*
Environmental Impact
ADP
•
•
LUC
•
•
•
•
•
GWP
•
•
OOP
•
•
HTP
•
•
•
•
•
•
FAETP
•
•
•
MAETP
•
•
TETP
•
•
•
FSETP
•
•
MSETP
•
•
•
•
•
POCP
•
•
AP
•
EP
•
•
•
•
•
MU
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MW
•
•
•
•
wu
•
EU
•
* Shaded cells indicate situations where a single criterion dominated the vector magnitude; for environmental impacts, the dominant criterion is highlighted.
25
-------
Table 4. Intermediate Consumption Perspective
Material, Product, or Service
Electric services (utilities)
Cotton
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Petroleum refining
Meat animals
Paper and paperboard mills
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Coal
Broadwoven fabric mills and fabric
finishing plants
Meat packing plants
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Apparel made from purchased materials
Natural gas distribution
Feed grains
Eating and drinking places
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Wholesale trade
Primary aluminum
Total
Vector
Magnitude
52.21
21.37
21.32
18.37
15.62
15.20
15.07
14.96
14.71
14.67
11.57
11.23
10.30
10.26
9.84
9.21
8.79
8.31
8.14
8.02
Criteria Contributing Significantly to Vector Magnitude (> 2 standard deviations above the mean)*
Environmental Impact
ADP
•
•
•
•
•
LUC
•
•
•
•
GWP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
OOP
•
•
•
•
•
HTP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
FAETP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MAETP
•
•
•
TETP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
FSETP
•
•
•
•
MSETP
•
•
•
•
•
•
POCP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
AP
•
EP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MU
•
•
•
•
MW
•
•
•
•
wu
EU
•
•
•
* Shaded cells indicate situations where a single criterion dominated the vector magnitude; for environmental impacts, the dominant criterion is highlighted.
26
-------
Table 5. Final Consumption Perspective
Material, Product, or Service
Electric services (utilities)
Apparel made from purchased materials
Petroleum refining
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Eating and drinking places
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Meat packing plants
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Hospitals
New highways, bridges, and other
horizontal construction
Owner-occupied dwellings
Natural gas distribution
Other new construction
Photographic equipment and supplies
Wholesale trade
New office, industrial and commercial
buildings construction
Poultry slaughtering and processing
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Food preparations, n.e.c.
Fluid milk
Total
Vector
Magnitude
54.24
27.43
22.82
22.51
21.52
17.26
16.46
14.71
13.54
12.40
11.75
11.07
10.93
9.31
7.49
7.46
7.17
7.05
6.26
5.81
Criteria Contributing Significantly to Vector Magnitude (> 2 standard deviations above the mean)*
Environmental Impact
ADP
•
•
•
•
•
LUC
•
•
•
GWP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
OOP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HTP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
FAETP
•
•
•
MAETP
•
•
TETP
•
•
•
•
FSETP
•
•
MSETP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
POCP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
AP
EP
•
•
•
•
•
•
MU
•
•
•
•
•
•
MW
•
•
•
•
wu
EU
•
•
•
* Shaded cells indicate situations where a single criterion dominated the vector magnitude; for environmental impacts, the dominant criterion is highlighted.
27
-------
Table 6. Summary of Top-Ranked Materials, Products, and Services
2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis
Material. Product, or Service
Food Products & Services
w
a>
&
Nonrenewable
Organics
°« «
i'js
'E o>
S^
Dairy farm products
Poultry and eggs
Meat animals
Food grains
Feed grains
Miscellaneous crops
Meat packing plants
Poultry slaughtering and processing
Eating and drinking places
Food preparations, n.e.c.
Fluid milk
Cotton
Apparel made from purchased materials
Broadwoven fabric mills and fabric finishing
plants
Coal
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Industrial inorganic and organic chemicals
Petroleum refining
Electric services (utilities)
Natural gas distribution
Blast furnaces and steel mills
Primary aluminum
Motor vehicles and passenger car bodies
Final Rank
Dl
19
20
6
13
9
16
...
...
...
...
...
2
...
—
5
4
3
8
1
15
...
18
...
1C
...
...
6
...
15
...
11
...
16
...
...
2
13
10
9
4
3
5
1
14
17
20
12
FC
...
...
...
...
...
...
7
17
5
19
20
...
2
...
—
...
...
3
1
12
...
...
4
Criteria Contributing Significantly to Rank
(OOO = Direct Impact/Resource Use/Waste, Intermediate Consumption, Final Consumption)
Environmental Impact
ADP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o«o
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
••o
OOO
o««
o««
o««
OOO
OOO
oo«
LUC
•oo
•oo
••o
•oo
••o
OOO
o««
oo«
o««
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
GWP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o««
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
OOO
o««
•••
OOO
o«o
OOO
o««
OOP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
o««
HTP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
OOO
•••
OOO
o«o
••o
o««
FAETP
OOO
OOO
o«o
OOO
••o
•oo
o««
OOO
o««
oo«
OOO
••o
o««
o«o
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
MAETP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
•••
OOO
OOO
••o
o««
TETP
OOO
OOO
o«o
OOO
••o
•oo
o««
OOO
o««
oo«
OOO
••o
o««
o«o
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
FSETP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
•••
OOO
OOO
o«o
o««
MSETP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o«o
o««
POCP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o««
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
o«o
o««
•••
OOO
o«o
OOO
o««
AP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o«o
OOO
o««
•••
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
EP
OOO
OOO
o«o
•oo
••o
•oo
o«
OOO
o««
oo«
OOO
••o
o««
o«o
OOO
o«o
o«o
o««
•••
OOO
OOO
OOO
o««
MU
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
•oo
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
OOO
OOO
•••
o««
••o
OOO
OOO
OOO
MW
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
••o
OOO
••o
•••
o««
•••
o«o
OOO
oo«
wu
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
•••
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
EU
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
•••
OOO
o«o
OOO
o««
28
-------
Table 6 (continued). Summary of Top-Ranked Materials, Products, and Services
2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis
Material. Product, or Service
Construction & Development
IB
o
LJ_
Other Products & Services
Dimension, crushed and broken stone
Sand and gravel
New residential 1 unit structures, nonfarm
Other new construction
Owner-occupied dwellings
New highways, bridges, and other horizontal
construction
New office, industrial and commercial buildings
construction
Pulp mills
Paper and paperboard mills
Computer and data processing services;
including own-account software!1'
Photographic equipment and supplies'2)
Wholesale trade
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Hospitals
Real estate agents, managers, operators, and
lessors
Final Ranking
Dl
14
17
10
—
—
—
—
11
7
—
12
...
...
—
—
1C
...
...
8
—
—
...
—
—
7
—
...
19
...
—
18
FC
...
...
8
13
11
10
16
—
...
—
14
15
6
9
18
Criteria Contributing Significantly to Rank
(OOO = Direct Impact/Resource Use/Waste, Intermediate Consumption, Final Consumption)
Environmental Impact
ADP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
LUC
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
GWP
OOO
OOO
o««
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o«o
oo«
oo«
o««
OOP
OOO
OOO
o««
oo«
oo«
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o««
oo«
oo«
OOO
HTP
OOO
OOO
o««
oo«
oo«
oo«
oo«
•oo
••o
OOO
•o«
o««
oo«
oo«
o««
FAETP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
MAETP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
TETP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
FSETP
OOO
OOO
o«o
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
oo«
OOO
MSETP
OOO
OOO
o««
oo«
oo«
OOO
oo«
•oo
••o
oo«
•o«
o««
oo«
oo«
OOO
POCP
OOO
OOO
o««
oo«
oo«
oo«
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o««
oo«
oo«
o««
AP
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
EP
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
oo«
OOO
MU
•oo
•oo
•••
oo«
oo«
oo«
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
o««
MW
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
oo«
OOO
wu
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
oo«
OOO
OOO
EU
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
OOO
o«o
oo«
oo«
OOO
Notes: (1)The supplemental markets trends analysis suggests that if relative output were adjusted from 1998 to 2007 levels, the "computer and data processing services" category would rank as high
as second from the final consumption perspective.
(2)The supplemental market trends analysis suggests that if relative output were adjusted from 1998 to 2007 levels, the "photographic equipment and supplies" category would be ranked
below the top 20 from the final consumption perspective.
Key: System perspectives:
Dl = Direct impact/use/waste perspective
1C = Intermediate Consumption perspective
FC = Final Consumption perspective
Rank:
— = Ranked below top 20
Symbols/Drivers:
• > 2 standard deviations from mean
O < 2 standard deviations from mean
Drivers:
ADP = Abiotic Depletion Potential
LUC = Land Use/Land Competition
GWP = Global Warming Potential
OOP = Ozone Depletion Potential
HTP = Human Toxicity Potential
FAETP = Freshwater Aquatic Ecotox. Potential
MAETP = Marine Aquatic Ecotox. Potential
TETP = Terrestrial Ecotoxicity Potential MW = Material Waste
FSETP = Freshwater Sedimental Ecotoxicity Potential WU = Water Use
MSETP = Marine Sedimental Ecotoxicity Potential EU = Energy Use
POCP = Photochemical Oxidation Potential
AP = Acidification Potential
EP = Eutrophication Potential
MU = Material Use
29
-------
Observations Related to Perspectives
Tables 3 through 5 present the top 20 highest ranked materials, products, and services when
ranked across all criteria. Each table presents the top 20 in rank order from one of the three
system perspectives, their final vector magnitude, and the criteria that had the greatest influence
on their vector magnitude and therefore relative rank. Appendix B presents results when looking
at a single criterion, specifically the Global Warming Potential criterion, across the three system
perspectives. A key for reading the tables follows Table 6. In general, the three system
perspectives, direct impact/resource use/waste, intermediate consumption, and final consumption
tend to highlight different sets of materials, products, and services according to their stage in the
supply chain. Further, all criteria significantly contribute to the vector magnitude of the highest
ranked materials, products and services. Additional high-level findings from Tables 3-5 and
Appendix B include:
• The direct impact/resource use/waste perspective tends to rank high raw materials and
less refined products such as coal, cotton, primary aluminum, and paper and paperboard
mills. Most criteria significantly contribute to the vector magnitude of two to three of the
highest ranking materials, products and services. The material use criterion significantly
contributes to the largest number of materials, products and services (i.e., seven). Most
of the top 20 materials, products or services have three or less criteria contributing
significantly to their vector magnitude. Electric services has the highest number of
criteria (i.e., nine) contributing significantly.
• The intermediate consumption perspective tends to rank high a mix of raw materials (e.g.,
meat animals and coal), material processing and manufacturing stages (e.g., industrial
inorganic and organic chemicals and broadwoven fabric mills and fabric finishing plants),
"finished" products (e.g., apparel made from purchased materials), and services (e.g.,
eating and drinking places). On average, each criterion significantly contributes to the
vector magnitude of five of the highest ranking materials, products and services. The
eutrophication potential criterion significantly contributes to the largest number of
materials, products and services (i.e., 12). Most of the top 20 materials, products or
services have, on average, five criteria contributing significantly to their vector
magnitude. Electric services has the highest number of criteria (i.e., 12) and feed grains
the second highest number (i.e., 9) contributing significantly.
• The final consumption perspective tends to rank high "finished" products (e.g., motor
vehicle and passenger car bodies) and services (e.g., eating and drinking places). No raw
materials make the highest ranks. On average, each criterion significantly contributes to
the vector magnitude of eight of the highest ranking materials, products and services.
The human toxicity potential criterion significantly contributes to the largest number of
materials, products and services (i.e., 14). Most of the top 20 materials, products or
services have, on average, six criteria contributing significantly to their vector magnitude.
Eating and drinking places has the highest number of criteria (i.e., 15) contributing
significantly, while motor vehicle and passenger car bodies and retail trade have the
second highest number (i.e., 14).
• Each perspective highlights potentially significant problematic materials, products, or
services that the other perspectives missed. For example, raw materials such as coal or
cotton are ranked highly based on the direct impact/resource use/waste perspective, but
30
-------
their rankings decrease dramatically as the perspective shifts toward final consumption.
This reflects coal and cotton not being consumed directly, for the most part, by
households or government but, rather, used to produce products that are consumed. The
impacts and other aspects associated with the extraction of coal or harvesting of cotton
are "passed through" to downstream products based on the LCA methodology. Products
such as "new office buildings" exhibit the opposite trend and reflect the fact that such
products are an amalgamation of raw materials and intermediate products.
• The system perspectives analysis summarized in Appendix B further demonstrates the
value of considering all three system perspectives, even when examining a single
criterion. Using GWP as an example, the direct impacts/resource use/waste perspective
ranks high raw materials and early processes such as feed grains and blast furnaces and
steel mills. However, when looking at embedded GWP, final products and services such
as hospitals, meat packing plants, and automotive repair shops and services tend to rank
high.
Observations Related Layering Criteria
Appendix C presents the results of the criteria laying analysis performed to provide insights
regarding the merits of integrating criteria. For the criteria layering analysis, results for a single
criterion, global warming potential (GWP), were compared to the results when all environmental
impact criteria were used, and then to the results when all seventeen criteria were used. For
GWP from the final consumption perspective, air transportation and meat packing plants ranked
high and were close in terms of their potential life cycle global warming impacts. Addressing
either from a life cycle perspective would achieve important GHG reductions. However, when
the remaining environmental impact criteria are included, the rank of meat packing plants rises
significantly while the rank of air transportation falls. When the resource use and material waste
criteria are added, meat packing plants maintain their relatively high ranking and air
transportation rises, but remains significantly lower than meat packing plants. Thus, if meat
packing plants are addressed from a life cycle perspective, significant benefits potentially could
be realized related to land use, freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity, photochemical oxidation,
terrestrial ecotoxicity and eutrophication, in addition to global warming. Addressing air
transportation, on the other hand, primarily provides only energy use and global warming
benefits.
Observations Related to Full Relative Ranking Analysis
Table 6 compiles the information from Tables 3 through 5, listing all materials, products, and
services that were ranked within the top 20 from the three system perspectives. The table
presents the individual materials, products and services grouped into seven broad categories:
construction and development, food products and services, forestry, metals, nonrenewable
organics, textiles, and other products and services. They are grouped in a manner to depict crude
direct relationships (e.g., feed grains, meat animals, meat packing plants, eating and drinking
places). For each material, product and service, the table shows its final rank within the top 20
for each perspective, as well as the criteria contributing significantly to its high ranking.
"Computer and Data Processing Services" was added to the table based on the results of the
market trends analysis due to its profound growth. Also, "Photographic Equipment and
31
-------
Supplies" is footnoted to highlight their marked decline since 1998. Compiling the information
from across Tables 3 -5 reveals the following high-level findings:
• A total of 38 materials, products and services are listed in Table 6. Eighteen are in the
highest ranks only for one perspective: seven for only the direct perspective, most of
which are raw materials; two for only the intermediate perspective, both are from the
processing stage; and nine for only the final perspective, all of which are products and
services. Fifteen materials, products and services are in the highest ranks for two
perspectives: eight for both the direct and intermediate perspectives, all are either raw
materials or processing stages; six for both the intermediate and final consumption
perspectives, all products and services; and one for both the direct and final consumption
perspectives. Four materials, products and services are in the highest ranks for all
perspectives - petroleum refining, electric services, natural gas distribution and new
residential 1 unit structures (nonfarm).
• Almost half of the top-ranked materials, products and services are directly related to food
and construction and development, although it is recognized that most of the 38
materials, products and services are likely connected.
• For the Food Products and Services, Nonrenewable Organics, and Mining and Metals
groupings, almost all criteria significantly contribute. Forestry has the fewest at two
criteria contributing significantly, which are also the two criteria that contribute
significantly to the highest ranks in all seven groupings - no criterion contributes
significantly to all 38 materials, products and services. Eating and drinking places have
the highest number of criteria significantly contributing (at 15), followed by motor
vehicles and passenger car bodies (at 14), retail trade (at 14), and electric services (at 13).
• Connections between highly ranked, closely-linked raw materials and finished products
(e.g., cotton and apparel) demonstrate the interaction of criteria and perspectives reflected
in the use of the LCA methodology. Such connections reflect the approach whereby
significant impacts, resource use, or waste at earlier stages in a supply chain are passed
through to downstream products. When the raw materials and downstream products are
closely linked, the impacts, resource use, or waste associated with early stages in the
supply chain will also affect the rankings of intermediate and final consumption
perspectives.
• As for the criteria, human toxicity potential (HTP) and eutrophication potential (EP)
significantly contribute to the greatest number of highest ranked materials, products and
services (19 of them each). They are followed by the marine sediment ecotoxicity
potential (MSETP), photochemical oxidation potential (POCP), and materials use (MU)
criteria contributing significantly, 16, 16, and 15 materials, products and services,
respectively. The marine aquatic ecotoxicity potential (MAETP) criterion is the least
influential criterion within the highest ranks, only affecting five of the 38 materials,
products and services. The freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity potential (FAETP) and
terrestrial ecotoxicity potential (TETP) criteria primarily influence food and textile-
related materials, products and services (e.g., food grains and cotton). The land use
criterion strongly influences food-related materials, products and services (e.g., food
grains, meat animals).
32
-------
• The material use criterion primarily influences the ranking of construction- and
petroleum-related materials and products as well as products and services that tend to
consolidate a variety of intermediate products and services at the point of final
consumption, such as eating and drinking places, buildings, and retail trade.
• The material waste criterion primarily influences non-renewable organic-related
materials, product and services, and energy-intensive intermediate and final products
(e.g., blast furnaces and steel mills and motor vehicle and passenger car bodies), and
services that consume non-durable goods, such as retail trade, eating and drinking places,
and hospitals.
• The water use criterion has little affect on the rankings, most likely due to the dominance
of the electric services industry in this area.
• The energy use criterion influences energy-intensive intermediate products and final
products such as blast mills and steel mills and motor vehicle and passenger car bodies,
as well products and services that tend to consolidate a variety of intermediate products
and services at the point of final consumption, such as eating and drinking places, retail
trade, and hospitals.
Discussion and Conclusions
The 38 highest ranking materials, products and services from the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking
Analysis offer a reasonable pool of candidates to be the focus of initial application of materials
management strategies. Indeed, the findings of the analysis provide a wealth of information on
which to draw when selecting targets and crafting life-cycle strategies. Tables 3 through 6
highlight materials, products, and services where materials management strategies potentially
could provide significant benefits across multiple environmental aspects. The tables in
Appendices B and C provide insights to help interpret the results of the analysis based on
different perspectives and the interaction of different criteria.
Not only do these highest ranking materials, products and services potentially offer significant
benefits across multiple environmental aspects if addressed from a life-cycle approach, but also
the opportunity to explore different facets of a sustainable approach to materials management
given their diversity (e.g., from metals to food, from single-material products to multi-material
products and services). Part of the objective of sustainable materials management is to use and
reuse resources in the most productive and sustainable manner throughout their life cycles.
However, different types of materials will have very different life spans and use/reuse
capabilities. For example, metals have the potential to be continually used and reused, thus
constantly cycling between the industrial and societal systems once removed from the ecological
system. Paper fiber, on the other hand, potentially can be used and reused, but for a limited
amount of time as the fibers begin to wear, taking a diminishing circular path between the
industrial and societal systems. And food essentially takes a linear or "one-time" path and is
returned to the ecological system not long after it was removed. Contained within the highest
ranks from the relative ranking analysis are materials and products representing varying life
spans and use/reuse capabilities and thus enable the ability to explore developing sustainable
materials management strategies in this context.
33
-------
Another way to view the findings of this analysis, and perhaps align them with different
demonstration project objectives, is to group the materials, products, and services based on their
orientation relative to the three system perspectives and the number and diversity of criteria that
may be affected. The 38 materials, products and services can be described as: "upstream
confluent" or "downstream confluent" or, alternatively, as "materials-oriented" or "products-
oriented." Table 7 defines these orientations using the terminology of the 2020 Vision Relative
Ranking Analysis, describes the implications of these orientations for decisions regarding
demonstration project priorities, and identifies materials, products, and services associated with
the two orientations that are both highly ranked and address multiple aspects and/or criteria.
Based on these considerations, Table 7 identifies nine materials, products, and services that could
provide useful insights for demonstration projects that are intended to explore upstream-
confluent or material-oriented strategies. The table identifies twelve materials, products, and
services that could provide useful insights for demonstration projects focused on downstream-
confluent or product-oriented strategies.
Regardless of orientation, demonstration projects selecting using this approach should be
designed to address the entire materials system and exert pressures using a full range of materials
management tools (e.g., consumer choice, retail pressure, subsidies/tax policy, etc). Using
cotton as an example, the table synthesizes the results of the analysis and suggests that there is a
substantial number and range of consumers of intermediate and end products containing cotton.
Given the number of individual consumers, a successful consumer-oriented strategy could exert
strong pressure to demand change from the cotton growing industry. However, to be effective,
such a strategy would need to be broadly focused on the diverse range of consumers. In
addition, such a strategy could be used in conjunction with other bold policies, such as a toxics
tax.
Conversely, a product-oriented strategy could be narrowly focused on a single end product or
service, such as health care services provided by hospitals. Rather than targeting a specific raw
material such as cotton, a focus on hospitals would have an effect on a broad range of raw
materials and intermediate products and services, with the potential to address a broad range of
environmental impacts and resource issues.
34
-------
Table 7. Material, Product, and Service Orientations Relative to System Perspectives
System Orientations
(Diagram - See Fig. 1)
Definition
2020 Vision Ranking
Analysis Characteristics
Implications for Demonstration
projects
Materials/Products/Services in
Category*
03
•^
O
"c
O)
I
Materials, products, and
services that embody
concentrated
environmental impacts,
resource use, or waste
at an early or
intermediate stage in the
material system.
Materials, products, and
services in this category
have dispersed
downstream
applications.
• Ranked high from the
direct impact/resource
use/waste perspective
but relatively low from
the intermediate or final
consumption
perspectives.
• Ranked high from the
intermediate
consumption perspective
but relatively low from
the final consumption
perspective.
• Policies/actions focused on raw
material producers or upstream
processing stages could be targeted to
a well-defined universe.
• Policies/actions focused on final or
intermediate uses would need to
consider a diverse range of uses.
• Policies/actions targeting final or
intermediate uses could have large
cumulative effects on upstream
material/product of interest.
• Targeting a single or small subset of
final or intermediate uses may have
little overall effect.
• Coal
• Cotton
• Crude petroleum and natural gas
• Feed grains
• Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
• Miscellaneous crops
• Paper and paperboard mills
• Primary aluminum
• Sand and gravel
b
ll
?!
2? -o
-5? 2
r
Materials, products, and
services that accumulate
concentrated
environmental impacts,
resource use, or waste
at the point of final or
intermediate
consumption. Materials,
products, and services in
this category embody a
dispersed range of
upstream materials,
products, and services.
Ranked high from the
final consumption
perspective but relatively
low from the direct
impact/resource
use/waste or
intermediate
consumption
perspectives.
Ranked high from the
intermediate
consumption perspective
but relatively low from
the direct impact/
resource use/waste
perspective.
• Policies/actions focused on a narrow
set of final or intermediate products or
services could have diverse upstream
impacts.
• Policies/actions focused on a limited
set of final or intermediate products or
services may have little overall effect
on a specific material.
• Policies/actions would need to be
predicated on an understanding of the
relationship between material/ product
of interest and upstream supply chain.
• Apparel made from purchased
materials
• Eating and drinking places
• Fluid milk
• Food preparations, n.e.c
• Hospitals
• Meat packing plants
• Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
• Other new construction
• Owner-occupied dwellings
• Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
• Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
• Wholesale trade
* Items identified in this list include materials, products, and services that were ranked high based on the subject supply chain perspective and based on either more
than one environmental aspect or four or more criteria.
35
-------
In addition to the 21 materials, products, and services identified in Table 7, three products and
services rank high regardless of the system perspective and rank high based on either more than
one environmental aspect and four or more criteria: electric services (utilities); new residential 1
unit structures, non-farm; and petroleum refining. This suggests that materials management
strategies in these areas could involve multiple approaches with wide-ranging effects. However,
because they are diverse and far-reaching, it may be difficult to isolate the effects of materials
management demonstration projects in these product/service sectors.
The seven groupings presented in Table 6 also offer another view when considering materials,
products, and services for demonstration projects. Each of these groupings are ranked highly
across multiple perspectives, and like the three products and services noted above, materials
management strategies in these areas could involve multiple approaches and impact multiple
environmental criteria. For example:
• The mix of highly ranked materials, products, and services within the food products and
services grouping suggests the potential for a multi-faceted strategy that could target a
range of producers of raw materials, intermediate manufacturers, and final consumers.
For example, a strategy focused on meat products could target consumers of meat
products, meat packing plants, and feed grain farmers and, thereby, allow the
examination of policy and coordination strategies in a variety of contexts. The strategy
could focus on environmental impacts relevant to this grouping (e.g., land use, freshwater
aquatic ecotoxicity, and eutrophication potential) and water use.
• The textiles grouping offers an opportunity to address highly ranked and closely linked
materials, products and services. - cotton, broad woven fabric mills, and apparel This
type of close linkage suggests the opportunity for examining a more targeted set of
policies and coordination approaches within a well-defined and narrow context. Because
there are fewer contextual variables, a focus in this area may lend clearer insights into
specific types of policies and coordination strategies.
• Like the food products and services grouping, the nonrenewable organics grouping
involves a rich mix of highly ranked raw materials and intermediate and final products.
An examination within this sector could cut across consumers and a range of producers.
The analysis suggests that a focus in this area could provide opportunity to affect multiple
aspects, including environmental impact, energy use, water use and waste.
• Construction and development grouping offers the challenge of developing materials
management strategies in the context of very long-lived "products" or infrastructure, and
areas often used as a measure of economic performance.
The 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis suggests areas of focus for the future development
of LCA methodologies and opportunities for integrating LCA in policy analysis and priority-
setting, as well as need for more complete data. For example, the analysis highlights the
limitations of criteria such as water use, abiotic depletion, and land use based on land
competition. It also points out the insights that could be gained from including criteria such as
material use and water use and considering more broadly-defined "consumers" and alternative
consumption perspectives, and the challenges that remain in developing methodologies in these
areas.
36
-------
The information generated and the tools created for the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis
provide a starting point for selecting materials, products of services for demonstration projects
that can show the value of the materials management approach. And this information generated
and these tools created can be further used in developing strategies for these pilots. For example,
structural path analysis using the CEDA 3.0 model could provide additional insights into relevant
supply chains associated with an area of policy focus. Using structural path analysis, a more
detailed understanding of the pathways within a supply-chain network through which
environmental impacts, resource use, and waste are accumulated in downstream intermediate and
end products can be constructed to help better inform materials management strategies.
On a broader level, this analysis shows the merits of and need for examining the full range of
environmental aspects on a life-cycle basis when developing government policies or business
decisions. Even when focused on a particular environmental issue, for example climate change,
and setting priorities around that issue, this analysis shows that it is possible to target approaches
that provide a greater range of benefits while still achieving a particular goal.
Limitations and Uncertainties
The 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis is intended to help identify potential candidate
materials, products, and services where materials management policies may have the greatest
potential to make a difference across multiple environmental aspects. This is a first attempt at
such an analysis. The desire was to produce reasonable choices for materials, products, and
services to serve as demonstration projects. The desire was not perfect choices or rankings, but
smart choices. Methodological decisions were based on the need for a relative-ranking analysis
among the 480 materials, products, and services included in the baseline, rather than an
assessment of absolute environmental impact, resource (material, energy, water) use, or waste.
Given its national scope, the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis employed the concepts and
methods of input-output LCA rather than process model LCA. Input-output LCA models can
incorporate the entire national economy, whereas process model LCA studies must draw
arbitrary boundaries around the analysis to make the studies viable. Economic input-output
analysis use monetary flows as a common unit to proxy for the flow of materials between
sectors. Such a level of detail is not available for physical measures of material flows between
sectors that limit process model analyses to a small number of well-defined product or processes.
Rather, the approach used in this analysis provides a comprehensive look at environmental
impact and materials flows throughout the economy.13
Because the analysis quantifies "outliers" as a basis for identifying relatively high ranking
materials, products, and services, the quality of the allocation of environmental impacts, resource
use, and waste values across the baseline commodities is critical to the quality of the results. The
mix of inputs and technologies underlying the allocations represent the mix of inputs and
technologies as they existed as of 1998, based on available data upon which the statistics for
13 For more detailed discussions of the benefits and limitations of input-output LCA, in general, see, for example,
Hendrickson, Lave and Matthews. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Goods and Services: An Input-Output
Approach. (Washington: Resources for the Future Press, 2006).
37
-------
allocations were developed. In addition, the relative output of materials, products, and services
may be different than what is reflected in the statistics used to allocate resource and material use.
To the extent that the mix of inputs and the relative output of materials, products, and services
have changed, the analysis may under- or over-represent the relative impacts, resource use, and
waste associated with different materials, products, and services. As noted under the "Sensitivity
Analyses," some industries have experienced marked growth and decline between 1998 and
2008. Further, some industries, for example electronics, have made efficiency improvements.
The system used for classifying commodities will influence the results of the analysis. All things
equal, more highly aggregated commodity categories will have a stronger influence on the results
than more finely disaggregated categories. The BEA commodity classification system used as
the baseline for this analysis is a mix of highly aggregate and less aggregated commodity
categories and was developed for economic tracking and analysis.14 Grouping of materials,
products, and services post-analysis could help assess the implications of this issue.
The analysis of different criteria depends critically on the quality of the underlying data. To the
extent that underlying data (e.g., water use statistics associated with allocations) are of good
quality, this will be reflected in the analysis. To the extent possible, the 2020 Vision Relative
Ranking Analysis relied on the best available information, but it is recognized that some criteria
may be better characterized than others and, within criteria, the data for some materials,
products, and services may be better than the data for others. Industrial and commercial water
use allocations used in this analysis rely on the least current data, though it was determined that
when used in conjunction with a vector analysis methodology, this had little effect on the relative
rankings.
Cross-walking across commodity classification systems introduces another source of uncertainty
in the analysis. This issue is most relevant to the cross-walk between WRI and BEA
classification systems, and impacts the degree of confidence in the material use and material
waste criteria. While the cross-walk developed for the 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis
relied on a detailed review of various sources of information, the crosswalk could be improved
by applying sector-specific expertise. It is hoped that this first attempt at such a crosswalk will
catalyze such efforts and future analyses of materials management priorities will benefit as a
result.
The 2020 Vision Relative Ranking Analysis was focused on better understanding the
implications of U.S. consumption. As such, exports were left out of analysis and imports were
included although assessed as if extracted, processed and manufactured in the U.S. While U.S.
economy is relatively self-sufficient, export for final consumption is still significant, particularly
for certain sectors (e.g., commercial aircraft industry). Studies of this issue suggest that
excluding imports adds a small degree of uncertainty, mainly at the individual sector level.
14 For further discussion of the limitations associated with the use of BEA I-O data for economy-wide LCA, see, for
example, Economic Input-Output Models for Environmental Life Cycle Assessment. Chris Hendrickson et al 1998.
Environmental Science and Technology, April 1, 1998, (32)7, 184-191.
38
-------
Finally, the CEDA 3.0 "characterization factors" module produces environmental impact scores
according to the LCA methodologies developed by the Centre for Environmental Science,
Leiden University (CML).15 These methodologies may represent a perspective that reflects to an
extent the European environmental experience. The degree to which this would deviate from
U.S.-derived methodologies and the effect on the relative ranking of materials, products, and
services is unclear.
15 Suh, Sangwon (2004). CEDA 3.0 User's Guide. CML, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
39
-------
Appendix A
Summary of Top-Ranked Materials, Products, and Services
Based on Individual Criterion Analysis
-------
Table A-l
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Abiotic Depletion Potential (ADP)
Abiotic Depletion (ADP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Coal
Petroleum refining
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Explosives
Dimension, crushed and broken stone
Copper ore
Iron and ferroalloy ores, and
miscellaneous metal ores, n.e.c.
Nonferrous metal ores, except copper
*only 9 materials/products/services
have ADP direct emissions >0.
Vector
Magnitude
18.72
11.21
0.96
-0.05
-0.06
-0.06
-0.06
-0.06
-0.06
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Crude petroleum and natural
gas
Petroleum refining
Coal
Electric services (utilities)
Natural gas distribution
Industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals
Blast furnaces and steel
mills
Retail trade, except eating
and drinking
Motor vehicles and
passenger car bodies
Wholesale trade
Real estate agents,
managers, operators, and
lessors
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
Eating and drinking places
Air transportation
Trucking and courier
services, except air
Miscellaneous plastics
products, n.e.c.
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
Hospitals
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Plastics materials and resins
Vector
Magnitude
16.72
7.81
7.75
6.16
5.10
1.41
1.31
0.81
0.80
0.76
0.59
0.47
0.44
0.41
0.40
0.36
0.36
0.35
0.25
0.24
Final Consumption
Description
Petroleum refining
Electric services (utilities)
Natural gas distribution
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Eating and drinking places
Hospitals
Wholesale trade
Owner-occupied dwellings
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Air transportation
Other new construction
Apparel made from purchased
materials
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Automotive repair shops and
services
New highways, bridges, and
other horizontal construction
Doctors and dentists
Computer and data processing
services; including own-account
software
Banking
Vector
Magnitude
15.52
11.87
7.51
3.22
2.54
1.91
1.89
1.10
0.99
0.97
0.95
0.92
0.89
0.63
0.62
0.50
0.41
0.41
0.39
0.38
-------
Table A-2
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Land Use/Land Competition (LUC)
Land Use/Land Competition Subfactor (LUC)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Meat animals
Dairy farm products
Food grains
Poultry and eggs
Feed grains
Miscellaneous livestock
Cotton
Miscellaneous crops
Sugar crops
General government industry
Trucking and courier services, except air
Agricultural, forestry, and fishery services
Other amusement and recreation services
Fruits
Vegetables
Oil bearing crops
Meat packing plants
Fluid milk
Local and suburban transit and
interurban highway passenger
transportation
Forestry products
Vector
Magnitude
16.34
7.90
7.10
7.08
5.95
1.71
1.16
1.08
0.91
0.75
0.69
0.56
0.32
0.24
0.20
0.11
0.04
0.03
-0.01
-0.03
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Meat animals
Meat packing plants
Dairy farm products
Eating and drinking places
Poultry and eggs
Poultry slaughtering and
processing
Food grains
Feed grains
Fluid milk
Natural, processed, and
imitation cheese
Sausages and other
prepared meat products
Miscellaneous livestock
Flour and other grain mill
products
Leather tanning and
finishing
Prepared feeds, n.e.c.
Sugar
Cotton
Prepared flour mixes and
doughs
Broadwoven fabric mills
and fabric finishing plants
Agricultural, forestry, and
fishery services
Vector
Magnitude
14.11
10.72
5.68
5.04
4.51
4.23
4.10
3.45
2.77
2.51
2.19
1.43
1.32
0.85
0.61
0.59
0.58
0.55
0.55
0.54
Final Consumption
Description
Meat packing plants
Eating and drinking places
Poultry slaughtering and
processing
Fluid milk
Sausages and other
prepared meat products
Natural, processed, and
imitation cheese
Cereal breakfast foods
Poultry and eggs
Prepared flour mixes and
doughs
Apparel made from
purchased materials
Food preparations, n.e.c.
Hospitals
General government
industry
Miscellaneous livestock
Shoes, except rubber
Dog and cat food
Bread, cake, and related
products
Other amusement and
recreation services
Frozen specialties, n.e.c.
Dry, condensed, and
evaporated dairy products
Vector
Magnitude
15.05
11.31
6.85
4.97
3.80
3.15
1.57
1.35
1.34
1.21
1.21
1.10
1.09
1.08
1.01
1.00
0.90
0.89
0.78
0.69
-------
Table A-3
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Global Warming Potential (GWP)
Global Warming Potential (GWP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Air transportation
Petroleum refining
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Feed grains
Meat animals
Coal
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Paper and paperboard mills
Fruits
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Vegetables
Cement, hydraulic
Water transportation
Poultry and eggs
Wholesale trade
Vector
Magnitude
21.03
2.78
2.72
2.49
1.53
1.45
1.41
0.95
0.95
0.65
0.63
0.54
0.48
0.38
0.36
0.31
0.30
0.30
0.28
0.28
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Petroleum refining
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Wholesale trade
Eating and drinking places
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Meat animals
Air transportation
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Meat packing plants
Natural gas distribution
Hospitals
Vector
Magnitude
18.57
4.12
3.96
3.36
3.06
2.45
2.34
2.32
2.26
2.25
2.18
2.15
1.73
1.68
1.67
1.50
1.47
1.37
1.30
1.23
Final Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Eating and drinking places
Petroleum refining
Hospitals
Other new construction
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Air transportation
Meat packing plants
Wholesale trade
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Natural gas distribution
Banking
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Automotive repair shops and
services
New highways, bridges, and
other horizontal construction
Vector
Magnitude
18.47
4.77
4.70
4.35
3.51
2.98
2.27
2.25
2.06
1.82
1.73
1.69
1.62
1.56
1.27
0.99
0.83
0.80
0.80
0.73
-------
Table A-4
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Ozone Layer Depletion Potential (ODP)
Ozone Layer Depletion Potential (ODP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals
Primary aluminum
Miscellaneous repair shops
Plastics materials and
resins
Synthetic rubber
Mineral wool
Primary nonferrous metals,
n.e.c.
Surface active agents
Cut stone and stone
products
Miscellaneous plastics
products, n.e.c.
Lead pencils and art goods
Primary metal products,
n.e.c.
Other repair and
maintenance construction
Manufacturing industries,
n.e.c.
Petroleum refining
Pesticides and agricultural
chemicals, n.e.c.
Nitrogenous and
phosphatic fertilizers
Products of petroleum and
coal, n.e.c.
Photographic equipment
and supplies
Pipe, valves, and pipe
fittings
Vector
Magnitude
19.46
5.27
4.29
3.19
3.02
2.70
2.51
2.04
1.22
1.16
1.00
0.81
0.74
0.70
0.68
0.58
0.54
0.54
0.52
0.50
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Miscellaneous plastics products,
n.e.c.
Plastics materials and resins
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Primary aluminum
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Miscellaneous repair shops
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
Wholesale trade
Synthetic rubber
Primary nonferrous metals, n.e.c.
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Hospitals
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings construction
Aluminum rolling and drawing
Mineral wool
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Petroleum refining
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Other repair and maintenance
construction
Vector
Magnitude
17.04
5.05
4.50
4.50
4.42
3.43
2.72
2.54
2.20
2.10
1.87
1.84
1.69
1.66
1.65
1.62
1.55
1.44
1.44
1.33
Final Consumption
Description
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Hospitals
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Owner-occupied dwellings
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Other new construction
Eating and drinking places
New office, industrial and commercial
buildings construction
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Wholesale trade
Petroleum refining
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
New additions & alterations, nonfarm,
construction
Drugs
Doctors and dentists
Automotive repair shops and services
Computer and data processing
services; including own-account
software
Soap and other detergents
Electric services (utilities)
Vector
Magnitude
12.22
7.21
5.97
5.38
5.06
4.95
4.37
4.15
3.24
3.12
2.89
2.85
2.63
2.40
2.35
1.76
1.74
1.70
1.68
1.65
-------
Table A-5
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Human Toxicitv Potential (HTP)
Human Toxicity Potential (HTP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Paper and paperboard mills
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Pulp mills
Photographic equipment and
supplies
Copper ore
Nonmetallic mineral products,
n.e.c.
Primary aluminum
Primary smelting and refining of
copper
Nonferrous metal ores, except
copper
Plastics materials and resins
Gum and wood chemicals
Primary nonferrous metals,
n.e.c.
New highways, bridges, and
other horizontal construction
Synthetic rubber
Wood containers, n.e.c.
Brick and structural clay tile
Sanitary services, steam
supply, and irrigation systems
Nitrogenous and phosphatic
fertilizers
Coal
Vector
Magnitude
13.70
7.53
6.57
5.64
5.40
4.87
4.54
4.01
3.40
3.38
2.66
2.50
1.97
1.41
1.28
1.19
1.18
1.09
0.87
0.84
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Paper and paperboard mills
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Primary smelting and refining
of copper
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Photographic equipment and
supplies
Pulp mills
Wholesale trade
Copper ore
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
Primary nonferrous metals,
n.e.c.
Primary aluminum
Miscellaneous plastics
products, n.e.c.
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
Plastics materials and resins
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Nonmetallic mineral products,
n.e.c.
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Nonferrous metal ores, except
copper
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Vector
Magnitude
9.62
7.41
7.03
6.17
5.27
3.35
3.34
3.27
3.26
3.18
3.13
3.11
3.02
2.95
2.69
2.62
2.49
2.46
2.17
2.14
Final Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Eating and drinking places
Hospitals
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Photographic equipment and supplies
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Other new construction
Owner-occupied dwellings
Wholesale trade
New highways, bridges, and other
horizontal construction
New office, industrial and commercial
buildings construction
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Computer and data processing
services; including own-account
software
Automotive repair shops and services
Petroleum refining
Doctors and dentists
Banking
Gum and wood chemicals
Vector
Magnitude
11.87
9.96
6.18
4.83
4.82
3.83
3.78
3.61
3.49
3.38
2.95
2.74
2.64
2.12
1.83
1.46
1.43
1.41
1.35
1.25
-------
Table A-6
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Freshwater Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential (FAETP)
Freshwater Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential (FAETP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Cotton
Feed grains
Tree nuts
Miscellaneous crops
Fruits
Vegetables
Sugar crops
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Agricultural, forestry, and fishery
services
Copper ore
Tobacco
Paper and paperboard mills
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Pulp mills
Photographic equipment and
supplies
Food grains
Other amusement and recreation
services
Nonferrous metal ores, except
copper
Primary smelting and refining of
copper
Plastics materials and resins
Vector
Magnitude
19.46
7.25
3.56
3.30
3.11
2.26
1.91
0.80
0.58
0.31
0.29
0.28
0.22
0.19
0.18
0.10
0.10
0.08
0.05
0.05
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Cotton
Broadwoven fabric mills and
fabric finishing plants
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Feed grains
Yarn mills and finishing of
textiles, n.e.c.
Meat animals
Eating and drinking places
Tree nuts
Miscellaneous crops
Fruits
Meat packing plants
Sugar
Dairy farm products
Vegetables
Knit fabric mills
Sugar crops
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Carpets and rugs
Salted and roasted nuts and
seeds
Food preparations, n.e.c.
Vector
Magnitude
14.46
9.80
6.59
5.42
4.89
2.87
2.64
2.44
2.29
2.22
2.16
1.83
1.67
1.60
1.50
1.27
1.16
1.11
1.06
1.00
Final Consumption
Description
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Eating and drinking places
Meat packing plants
Fruits
Vegetables
Food preparations, n.e.c.
Housefurnishings, n.e.c.
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Salted and roasted nuts and
seeds
Carpets and rugs
Tree nuts
Candy and other confectionery
products
Fluid milk
Hospitals
Sugar
Natural, processed, and imitation
cheese
Broadwoven fabric mills and
fabric finishing plants
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Cigarettes
Sausages and other prepared
meat products
Vector
Magnitude
17.76
7.19
3.71
3.54
3.17
2.78
2.73
2.72
2.43
2.05
2.00
1.94
1.83
1.66
1.31
1.13
1.03
0.99
0.88
0.85
-------
Table A-7
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Marine Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential (MAETP)
Marine Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential (MAETP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Primary aluminum
Brick and structural clay tile
Sanitary services, steam
supply, and irrigation
systems
Coal
Paper and paperboard mills
Industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals
Photographic equipment and
supplies
Primary metal products,
n.e.c.
Pulp mills
Plastics materials and resins
Glass and glass products,
except containers
Manmade organic fibers,
except cellulosic
Copper ore
Ceramic wall and floor tile
Cellulosic manmade fibers
Primary nonferrous metals,
n.e.c.
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Gum and wood chemicals
Chemicals and chemical
preparations, n.e.c.
Vector
Magnitude
21.38
3.30
2.63
0.74
0.62
0.49
0.47
0.32
0.29
0.24
0.23
0.22
0.13
0.12
0.12
0.10
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.02
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Primary aluminum
Brick and structural clay tile
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
Real estate agents, mgrs,
operators, and lessors
Aluminum rolling and drawing
Wholesale trade
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Eating and drinking places
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Paper and paperboard mills
Hospitals
Miscellaneous plastics
products, n.e.c.
Sanitary services, steam
supply, and irrigation systems
Owner-occupied dwellings
Coal
Vector
Magnitude
20.46
3.77
2.30
2.20
1.87
1.84
1.71
1.64
1.45
1.37
1.17
1.07
0.98
0.96
0.89
0.78
0.74
0.68
0.63
0.61
Final Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Eating and drinking places
Hospitals
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Other new construction
New office, industrial and commercial
buildings construction
Wholesale trade
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Automotive repair shops and services
New additions & alterations, nonfarm,
construction
Computer and data processing
services; including own-account
software
Petroleum refining
Banking
Doctors and dentists
Nursing and personal care facilities
Telephone, telegraph communications,
and communications services n.e.c.
Vector
Magnitude
20.63
3.62
3.43
2.00
1.93
1.85
1.62
1.30
1.28
1.04
1.00
0.84
0.61
0.53
0.51
0.51
0.44
0.43
0.38
0.37
-------
Table A-8
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Terrestrial Ecotoxicitv Potential (TETP)
Terrestrial Ecotoxicity Potential (TETP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Cotton
Feed grains
Tree nuts
Miscellaneous crops
Fruits
Vegetables
Sugar crops
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Copper ore
Paper and paperboard mills
Pulp mills
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Photographic equipment and
supplies
Agricultural, forestry, and fishery
services
Nonferrous metal ores, except
copper
Primary smelting and refining of
copper
Gum and wood chemicals
Tobacco
Plastics materials and resins
Primary aluminum
Vector
Magnitude
19.57
7.02
3.31
2.96
2.73
2.52
1.77
1.11
0.93
0.91
0.69
0.69
0.63
0.56
0.32
0.29
0.25
0.24
0.23
0.19
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Cotton
Broadwoven fabric mills and
fabric finishing plants
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Feed grains
Yarn mills and finishing of
textiles, n.e.c.
Meat animals
Eating and drinking places
Tree nuts
Meat packing plants
Miscellaneous crops
Fruits
Vegetables
Sugar
Dairy farm products
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Knit fabric mills
Paper and paperboard mills
Sugar crops
Carpets and rugs
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Vector
Magnitude
14.39
9.81
6.68
5.21
4.88
2.75
2.66
2.21
2.07
1.99
1.96
1.77
1.65
1.58
1.54
1.49
1.14
1.14
1.10
1.08
Final Consumption
Description
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Eating and drinking places
Meat packing plants
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Vegetables
Fruits
Housefurnishings, n.e.c.
Food preparations, n.e.c.
Salted and roasted nuts and
seeds
Carpets and rugs
Hospitals
Tree nuts
Candy and other confectionery
products
Fluid milk
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Sugar
Natural, processed, and imitation
cheese
Broadwoven fabric mills and
fabric finishing plants
Owner-occupied dwellings
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Vector
Magnitude
17.71
7.16
3.52
3.48
3.43
3.11
2.68
2.47
2.18
2.02
2.01
1.79
1.76
1.73
1.47
1.16
1.06
0.99
0.92
0.84
-------
Table A-9
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Freshwater Sedimental Ecotoxicitv Potential (FSETP)
Freshwater Sedimental Ecotoxicity Potential (FSETP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Primary aluminum
Brick and structural clay tile
Sanitary services, steam
supply, and irrigation systs.
Paper and paperboard mills
Industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals
Coal
Photographic equipment and
supplies
Pulp mills
Copper ore
Plastics materials and resins
Primary metal products,
n.e.c.
Glass and glass products,
except containers
Gum and wood chemicals
Manmade organic fibers,
except cellulosic
Primary nonferrous metals,
n.e.c.
Cellulosic manmade fibers
Primary smelting and
refining of copper
Ceramic wall and floor tile
Nonferrous metal ores,
except copper
Vector
Magnitude
21.30
3.39
2.60
0.99
0.92
0.81
0.66
0.64
0.58
0.44
0.39
0.31
0.23
0.21
0.19
0.15
0.13
0.11
0.11
0.09
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Primary aluminum
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Brick and structural clay tile
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Wholesale trade
Paper and paperboard mills
Aluminum rolling and drawing
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Eating and drinking places
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Miscellaneous plastics products,
n.e.c.
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Hospitals
Owner-occupied dwellings
Plastics materials and resins
Vector
Magnitude
20.14
3.82
2.47
2.22
2.00
1.95
1.85
1.74
1.67
1.57
1.51
1.47
1.19
1.07
1.05
0.96
0.89
0.87
0.67
0.66
Final Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Eating and drinking places
Hospitals
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Other new construction
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
New office, industrial and commercial
buildings construction
Wholesale trade
Apparel made from purchased materials
Automotive repair shops and services
Computer and data processing
services; including own-account
software
Petroleum refining
New additions & alterations, nonfarm,
construction
Photographic equipment and supplies
Banking
Doctors and dentists
Telephone, telegraph communications,
and communications services n.e.c.
Vector
Magnitude
20.34
3.87
3.87
2.20
2.16
1.98
1.75
1.43
1.39
1.15
1.15
1.08
0.68
0.61
0.57
0.57
0.55
0.52
0.51
0.43
-------
Table A-10
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Marine Sedimental Ecotoxicitv Potential (MSETP)
Marine Sedimental Ecotoxicity Potential (MSETP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Paper and paperboard
mills
Pulp mills
Industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals
Photographic equipment
and supplies
Gum and wood chemicals
Plastics materials and
resins
Primary aluminum
Wood containers, n.e.c.
Synthetic rubber
Nitrogenous and
phosphatic fertilizers
Wood products, n.e.c.
Primary nonferrous metals,
n.e.c.
Apparel made from
purchased materials
Surface active agents
Distilled and blended
liquors
Laboratory and optical
instruments
Nonwoven fabrics
Cut stone and stone
products
Primary metal products,
n.e.c.
Cotton
Vector
Magnitude
12.20
9.56
9.32
8.88
4.38
3.42
2.80
2.39
1.98
1.49
1.34
1.29
1.23
1.12
0.78
0.76
0.65
0.58
0.58
0.54
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Paper and paperboard mills
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Pulp mills
Photographic equipment and
supplies
Miscellaneous plastics products,
n.e.c.
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Wholesale trade
Plastics materials and resins
Paperboard containers and
boxes
Gum and wood chemicals
Advertising
Primary aluminum
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Eating and drinking places
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
Hospitals
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Commercial printing
Vector
Magnitude
12.55
8.86
6.23
5.96
3.72
3.67
3.66
3.56
3.55
3.09
2.66
2.28
2.22
2.15
1.85
1.79
1.73
1.58
1.54
1.38
Final Consumption
Description
Motor vehicles and passenger car bodies
Photographic equipment and supplies
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Apparel made from purchased materials
Hospitals
Eating and drinking places
Wholesale trade
New residential 1 unit structures, nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Gum and wood chemicals
Other new construction
Sanitary paper products
Computer and data processing services;
including own-account software
New office, industrial and commercial
buildings construction
Industrial inorganic and organic chemicals
Doctors and dentists
Real estate agents, managers, operators,
and lessors
Banking
Insurance carriers
Drugs
Vector
Magnitude
9.01
8.43
6.90
6.13
6.13
5.81
4.22
3.51
3.43
3.25
3.08
2.81
2.61
2.37
2.13
1.99
1.97
1.89
1.79
1.72
-------
Table A-ll
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Photochemical Oxidation Potential (POCP)
Photochemical Oxidation Potential (POCP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Other amusement and recreation
services
Miscellaneous repair shops
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Petroleum refining
Paper and paperboard mills
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
New highways, bridges, and
other horizontal construction
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Primary aluminum
Feed grains
Wholesale trade
Meat animals
Air transportation
Carbon black
Miscellaneous plastics products,
n.e.c.
Vector
Magnitude
19.89
5.19
3.75
2.65
2.58
2.03
1.51
1.37
1.28
1.16
1.12
0.95
0.84
0.73
0.73
0.72
0.68
0.67
0.66
0.65
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Blast furnaces and steel mills
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Petroleum refining
Wholesale trade
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Eating and drinking places
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings construction
Miscellaneous plastics products,
n.e.c.
Other amusement and recreation
services
Natural gas distribution
Paper and paperboard mills
Hospitals
Vector
Magnitude
16.04
5.60
4.39
4.27
3.74
3.30
3.27
3.24
3.06
2.95
2.93
2.60
2.54
1.96
1.95
1.85
1.56
1.56
1.50
1.48
Final Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Eating and drinking places
Other amusement and recreation
services
Hospitals
Petroleum refining
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Other new construction
Wholesale trade
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Trucking and courier services,
except air
New highways, bridges, and
other horizontal construction
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Meat packing plants
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Banking
Natural gas distribution
Automotive repair shops and
services
Vector
Magnitude
15.76
6.63
5.90
5.00
3.71
3.55
3.39
3.16
2.95
2.93
2.29
2.25
2.17
2.12
2.04
1.43
1.41
1.29
1.16
1.07
-------
Table A-12
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Acidification Potential (AP)
Acidification Potential (AP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Petroleum refining
Crude petroleum and natural
gas
Paper and paperboard mills
Cement, hydraulic
Industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Railroads and related services
Natural gas transportation
Sanitary services, steam
supply, and irrigation systems
Primary aluminum
Water transportation
Primary smelting and refining
of copper
Pulp mills
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
Sugar
Plastics materials and resins
Nitrogenous and phosphatic
fertilizers
Vector
Magnitude
21.74
0.88
0.83
0.79
0.72
0.60
0.59
0.59
0.49
0.46
0.25
0.25
0.21
0.21
0.18
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.05
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Petroleum refining
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Blast furnaces and steel mills
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Wholesale trade
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Eating and drinking places
Paper and paperboard mills
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
Hospitals
Natural gas distribution
Miscellaneous plastics products,
n.e.c.
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Cement, hydraulic
Other new construction
Vector
Magnitude
20.87
2.10
2.02
1.89
1.84
1.72
1.48
1.46
1.38
1.12
1.10
1.10
1.07
0.88
0.82
0.80
0.76
0.70
0.56
0.50
Final Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Eating and drinking places
Petroleum refining
Hospitals
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Other new construction
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Owner-occupied dwellings
Wholesale trade
New office, industrial and commercial
buildings construction
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Natural gas distribution
Banking
Computer and data processing
services; including own-account
software
Automotive repair shops and
services
Doctors and dentists
Nursing and personal care facilities
Trucking and courier services, except
air
Vector
Magnitude
20.75
3.64
2.65
2.17
2.11
1.96
1.09
1.08
1.07
1.07
1.06
0.76
0.64
0.61
0.49
0.48
0.48
0.44
0.39
0.38
-------
Table A-13
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Eutrophication Potential (EP)
Eutrophication Potential (EP)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Cotton
Miscellaneous crops
Food grains
Feed grains
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Railroads and related services
Natural gas transportation
Sugar crops
Fruits
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Water transportation
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Cement, hydraulic
Petroleum refining
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Paper and paperboard mills
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Agricultural, forestry, and fishery
services
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Vector
Magnitude
14.94
8.32
7.56
7.25
6.07
2.67
2.23
2.13
2.11
1.63
1.35
1.05
0.74
0.73
0.71
0.69
0.67
0.67
0.46
0.39
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Cotton
Miscellaneous crops
Food grains
Feed grains
Broadwoven fabric mills and
fabric finishing plants
Eating and drinking places
Crude petroleum and natural
gas
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Meat animals
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Petroleum refining
Meat packing plants
Food preparations, n.e.c.
Yarn mills and finishing of
textiles, n.e.c.
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Sugar
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
Wholesale trade
Vector
Magnitude
12.29
6.29
5.59
5.53
4.90
4.58
4.16
3.62
3.28
3.11
2.90
2.71
2.46
2.44
2.37
2.12
2.11
2.02
1.91
1.83
Final Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Eating and drinking places
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Food preparations, n.e.c.
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Meat packing plants
Hospitals
Petroleum refining
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Cereal breakfast foods
Owner-occupied dwellings
Other new construction
Prepared flour mixes and doughs
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Fruits
Bread, cake, and related products
Fluid milk
Wholesale trade
Natural gas distribution
Vector
Magnitude
13.53
8.73
7.17
4.87
4.73
4.02
3.28
3.18
2.90
2.10
2.05
2.04
1.87
1.74
1.58
1.50
1.48
1.47
1.47
1.35
-------
Table A-14
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Material Use (MU)
Material Use
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Dimension, crushed and broken
stone
Sand and gravel
New highways, bridges, and
other horizontal construction
Coal
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings construction
Other new construction
Petroleum refining
Natural gas distribution
Feed grains
New additions & alterations,
nonfarm, construction
Iron and ferroalloy ores, and
miscellaneous metal ores, n.e.c.
New residential garden and high-
rise apartments construction
Cement, hydraulic
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Forestry products
Sawmills and planing mills,
general
Pulp mills
Vegetables
Dairy farm products
Vector
Magnitude
11.40
9.97
8.71
6.45
5.56
5.41
4.74
4.11
2.79
2.14
1.91
1.15
0.93
0.88
0.81
0.75
0.51
0.43
0.40
0.24
Intermediate Consumption
Description
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
New highways, bridges, and
other horizontal construction
Dimension, crushed and broken
stone
Sand and gravel
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Other new construction
Coal
Owner-occupied dwellings
Electric services (utilities)
Petroleum refining
Ready-mixed concrete
Natural gas distribution
New additions & alterations,
nonfarm, construction
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Feed grains
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Maintenance and repair of
highways & streets
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Vector
Magnitude
12.80
6.69
6.58
5.71
5.19
4.65
4.30
4.07
3.83
3.79
3.55
2.94
2.60
2.19
1.98
1.63
1.47
1.34
1.28
1.15
Final Consumption
Description
New highways, bridges, and other
horizontal construction
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Other new construction
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings construction
New additions & alterations,
nonfarm, construction
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Electric services (utilities)
Petroleum refining
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Maintenance and repair of
highways & streets
Eating and drinking places
Natural gas distribution
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Hospitals
New residential garden and high-
rise apartments construction
Meat packing plants
Wholesale trade
Maintenance and repair of farm
and nonfarm residential structures
Fluid milk
Vector
Magnitude
11.80
10.90
7.56
7.14
4.28
4.20
3.60
3.41
3.30
2.36
2.30
2.07
1.76
1.68
1.54
0.91
0.89
0.66
0.65
0.45
-------
Table A-15
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Material Waste (MW)
Material Waste
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Coal
Petroleum refining
Natural gas distribution
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Forestry products
Sand and gravel
Pulp mills
Iron and ferroalloy ores, and
miscellaneous metal ores, n.e.c.
Chemical and fertilizer minerals
Plastics materials and resins
Lime
Clay, ceramic, and refractory
minerals
Meat animals
Lubricating oils and greases
Nitrogenous and phosphatic
fertilizers
Feed grains
Minerals, ground or treated
Manmade organic fibers, except
cellulosic
Hardwood dimension and flooring
mills
Primary aluminum
Vector
Magnitude
14.30
13.59
8.64
2.05
1.71
1.09
0.80
0.73
0.56
0.45
0.35
0.27
0.25
0.22
0.18
0.16
0.12
0.12
0.09
0.06
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Coal
Petroleum refining
Electric services (utilities)
Natural gas distribution
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Wholesale trade
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Forestry products
Paper and paperboard mills
Miscellaneous plastics products,
n.e.c.
Eating and drinking places
Plastics materials and resins
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Hospitals
Sand and gravel
Vector
Magnitude
11.76
11.45
9.32
8.04
3.19
2.87
1.75
1.68
1.46
1.46
1.41
1.23
1.19
0.99
0.95
0.86
0.85
0.77
0.72
0.69
Final Consumption
Description
Petroleum refining
Electric services (utilities)
Natural gas distribution
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Eating and drinking places
Hospitals
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Other new construction
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Wholesale trade
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Air transportation
New highways, bridges, and
other horizontal construction
Meat packing plants
New additions & alterations,
nonfarm, construction
Automotive repair shops and
services
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
Vector
Magnitude
14.70
11.60
7.62
3.69
3.45
2.49
2.34
2.08
1.91
1.47
1.40
1.33
1.08
1.03
0.88
0.84
0.70
0.64
0.62
0.54
-------
Table A-16
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Water Use (WU)
Water Use
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Feed grains
Fruits
Vegetables
Cotton
Blast furnaces and steel
mills
Sanitary services, steam
supply, and irrigation
systems
Industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals
Paper and paperboard mills
Petroleum refining
Oil bearing crops
Meat animals
Food grains
Sugar crops
Crude petroleum and natural
gas
Other amusement and
recreation services
Agricultural, forestry, and
fishery services
Tree nuts
Real estate agents,
managers, operators, and
lessors
Greenhouse and nursery
products
Vector
Magnitude
8.66
0.35
0.08
0.06
0.03
-0.00
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.02
-0.02
-0.03
-0.03
-0.03
-0.03
-0.03
-0.04
-0.04
-0.04
-0.04
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Wholesale trade
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Eating and drinking places
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Hospitals
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Industrial inorganic and organic
chemicals
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Motor vehicle parts and accessories
Miscellaneous plastics products,
n.e.c.
Feed grains
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Petroleum refining
New office, industrial and commercial
buildings construction
Meat animals
Telephone, telegraph
communications, and
communications services n.e.c.
Meat packing plants
Computer and data processing
services; including own-account
software
-------
Table A-17
Summary of Individual Criterion Analysis
Energy Use (EU)
Energy Use
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Direct Emissions
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Air transportation
Paper and paperboard mills
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Petroleum refining
Wholesale trade
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Petroleum, natural gas, and solid
mineral exploration
Local and suburban transit and
interurban highway passenger
transportation
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Fruits
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Railroads and related services
Sanitary services, steam supply,
and irrigation systems
Automotive repair shops and
services
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Eating and drinking places
Other business services
Automotive rental and leasing,
without drivers
Vector
Magnitude
21.49
2.61
1.50
1.40
1.14
0.78
0.77
0.63
0.56
0.40
0.20
0.16
0.14
0.13
0.13
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.10
0.07
Intermediate Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Retail trade, except eating
and drinking
Wholesale trade
Motor vehicles and passenger
car bodies
Real estate agents,
managers, operators, and
lessors
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Petroleum refining
Air transportation
Paper and paperboard mills
New residential 1 unit
structures, nonfarm
Crude petroleum and natural
gas
Eating and drinking places
Motor vehicle parts and
accessories
Hospitals
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings
construction
Industrial inorganic and
organic chemicals
Miscellaneous plastics
products, n.e.c.
Natural gas distribution
Other new construction
Vector
Magnitude
20.14
3.78
2.72
2.53
2.30
1.82
1.73
1.70
1.68
1.66
1.53
1.51
1.39
1.14
1.00
0.93
0.74
0.71
0.69
0.62
Final Consumption
Description
Electric services (utilities)
Retail trade, except eating and
drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger car
bodies
Eating and drinking places
Hospitals
Wholesale trade
Petroleum refining
Air transportation
New residential 1 unit structures,
nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Real estate agents, managers,
operators, and lessors
Other new construction
New office, industrial and
commercial buildings construction
Apparel made from purchased
materials
Automotive repair shops and
services
Local and suburban transit and
interurban highway passenger
transportation
Computer and data processing
services; including own-account
software
Banking
Trucking and courier services,
except air
Doctors and dentists
Vector
Magnitude
19.87
5.16
3.50
2.70
2.36
1.80
1.78
1.69
1.47
1.41
1.40
1.30
0.98
0.89
0.79
0.71
0.69
0.64
0.63
0.61
-------
Appendix B
Summary of System Perspectives Analysis
-------
Table B-l
Effect of Change in Perspective on Ranking Based on Global Warming Potential
Change from Direct Impact/Waste/Use Perspective
Direct Impact/Use/Waste
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Material/Product/Service
Electric services (utilities)
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Sanitary services, steam supply, and irrigation systems
Air transportation
Petroleum refining
Trucking and courier services, except air
Feed grains
Meat animals
Coal
New residential 1 unit structures, nonfarm
Industrial inorganic and organic chemicals
Paper and paperboard mills
Fruits
New office, industrial and commercial buildings construction
Vegetables
Cement, hydraulic
Water transportation
Poultry and eggs
Wholesale trade
Motor vehicles and passenger car bodies
Water supply and sewerage systems
Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c.
Other new construction
Lime
Railroads and related services
U.S. Postal Service
Oil bearing crops
Concrete products, except block and brick
Plastics materials and resins
Iron and steel foundries
Motor vehicle parts and accessories
Food grains
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Eating and drinking places
Other State and local government enterprises
Real estate agents, managers, operators, and lessors
Hospitals
Ready-mixed concrete
Dairy farm products
Intermediate
Consumption
Rank
1
2
3
12
14
4
11
23
13
27
8
15
25
44
17
58
56
48
38
9
5
40
21
22
82
57
45
72
70
33
65
16
94
6
10
54
7
20
55
37
Change
0
0
0
4>8
4>9
*2
vl/4
vH5
4>4
vH7
^3
^3
vH2
vl/30
vl/2
vl/42
vl/39
vl/30
vH9
1M1
1M6
vH8
*2
*2
vl/57
vl/31
vH8
vl/44
vl/41
vl/3
vl/34
1M6
vl/61
^28
^25
vH8
1^30
1M8
vH6
^3
Final Consumption
Rank
1
316
370
25
11
5
18
239
435
326
8
53
182
37
14
35
435
44
90
13
3
26
95
7
406
103
73
396
369
411
391
87
346
2
4
29
10
6
435
353
Change
0
vl/314
vl/367
vl/21
vl/6
1M
vHl
vl/231
vl/426
vl/316
^3
vl/41
vH69
vl/23
1M
vH9
vl/418
vl/26
vl/71
^7
^18
vl/4
vl/72
^17
vl/381
vl/77
vl/46
vl/368
vl/340
vl/381
vl/360
vl/55
vl/313
^32
^31
^7
^27
^32
vl/396
vl/313
-------
Table B-2
Effect of Change in Perspective on Ranking Based on Global Warming Potential
Change from Intermediate Consumption Perspective
Direct
Impact/Use/Waste
Rank
1
2
3
6
21
34
37
11
20
35
7
4
9
5
12
32
15
75
189
38
23
24
8
472
13
48
10
132
61
47
49
146
30
159
50
100
40
19
70
22
Change
0
0
0
^2
vH6
vl/28
vl/30
vl/3
vHl
vl/25
/|s4
1^8
/|s4
1^9
*3
vH6
^2
vl/57
vH70
vH8
vl/2
^2
1M5
vl/448
1M2
vl/22
1M7
vH04
vl/32
vH7
vH8
vHl4
^3
vH25
vH5
vl/64
vl/3
1M9
vl/31
^18
Intermediate Consumption
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Material/Product/Service
Electric services (utilities)
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Petroleum refining
Motor vehicles and passenger car bodies
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Real estate agents, managers, operators, and lessors
New residential 1 unit structures, nonfarm
Wholesale trade
Eating and drinking places
Trucking and courier services, except air
Sanitary services, steam supply, and irrigation systems
Meat animals
Air transportation
Industrial inorganic and organic chemicals
Motor vehicle parts and accessories
New office, industrial and commercial buildings construction
Meat packing plants
Natural gas distribution
Hospitals
Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c.
Other new construction
Feed grains
Owner-occupied dwellings
Paper and paperboard mills
Other repair and maintenance construction
Coal
Telephone, telegraph communications, and communications services
n.e.c.
Automotive repair shops and services
Banking
Apparel made from purchased materials
Computer and data processing services; including own-account
software
Plastics materials and resins
Poultry slaughtering and processing
Advertising
Computer peripheral equipment
Dairy farm products
Poultry and eggs
Other electronic components
Water supply and sewerage systems
Final Consumption
Rank
1
316
370
5
3
2
10
8
13
4
18
25
435
11
53
87
14
12
16
6
95
7
239
9
182
55
326
28
19
17
15
22
411
21
274
41
353
90
321
26
Change
0
vl/314
vl/367
vH
*2
/|s4
^3
0
vl/4
1^6
vl/7
vH3
vl/422
^3
vl/38
vl/71
^3
1^6
^3
1M4
vl/74
1M5
vl/216
1M5
vH57
vl/29
vl/299
0
1MO
1M3
1M6
1MO
vl/378
1M3
vl/239
4>5
vl/316
vl/52
vl/282
1M4
-------
Table B-3
Effect of Change in Perspective on Ranking Based on Global Warming Potential
Change from Final Consumption Perspective
Direct Emissions
Perspective
Rank
1
34
21
35
6
38
24
11
472
37
5
75
20
15
49
189
47
7
61
43
159
146
151
55
4
22
233
132
36
157
98
156
174
142
16
52
14
134
187
145
Change
0
vl/32
vH8
vl/31
vH
vl/32
vH7
^3
vl/463
vl/27
1^6
vl/63
^7
vH
vl/34
vH73
vl/30
/|S11
vl/42
vl/23
vH38
vH24
vH28
vl/31
1^21
1M
vl/206
vH04
vl/7
vH27
V67
vH24
vH41
vH08
1M9
vH6
1^23
vl/96
vH48
vH05
Intermediate
Consumption
Rank
1
6
5
10
4
20
22
8
24
7
14
18
9
17
31
19
30
11
29
50
34
32
62
60
12
40
51
28
54
73
83
86
64
63
58
66
44
88
61
53
Change
0
vl/4
vl/2
vl/6
'M
vH4
vH5
0
vH5
^3
vl/3
vl/6
/|s4
vl/3
vH6
vl/3
vH3
^7
vHO
vl/30
vH3
vHO
vl/39
vl/36
^13
vH4
vl/24
0
vl/25
vl/43
vl/52
vl/54
vl/31
vl/29
vl/23
vl/30
vl/7
vl/50
vl/22
vH3
Final Consumption
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Material/Product/Service
Electric services (utilities)
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger car bodies
Eating and drinking places
Petroleum refining
Hospitals
Other new construction
New residential 1 unit structures, nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Real estate agents, managers, operators, and lessors
Air transportation
Meat packing plants
Wholesale trade
New office, industrial and commercial buildings construction
Apparel made from purchased materials
Natural gas distribution
Banking
Trucking and courier services, except air
Automotive repair shops and services
New highways, bridges, and other horizontal construction
Poultry slaughtering and processing
Computer and data processing servs.; including own-account software
Doctors and dentists
New additions & alterations, nonfarm, construction
Sanitary services, steam supply, and irrigation systems
Water supply and sewerage systems
Insurance carriers
Telephone, telegraph communications, and communications services
n.e.c.
Other State and local government enterprises
Nursing and personal care facilities
Other amusement and recreation services
Social services, n.e.c.
Fluid milk
Sausages and other prepared meat products
Vegetables
Drugs
Fruits
Bottled and canned soft drinks
Electronic computers
Automotive rental and leasing, without drivers
-------
Appendix C
Summary of Criteria Layering Analysis
-------
Table C-l
Effect of layering Criteria on Ranking, Starting with Global Warming Potential
Direct Impact/Resource Use/Waste Perspective
GWP 100
(Direct Impact/Resource Use/Waste)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Material/Product/Service
Electric services (utilities)
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Sanitary services, steam supply, and irrigation systems
Air transportation
Petroleum refining
Trucking and courier services, except air
Feed grains
Meat animals
Coal
New residential 1 unit structures, nonfarm
Industrial inorganic and organic chemicals
Paper and paperboard mills
Fruits
New office, industrial and commercial buildings construction
Vegetables
Cement, hydraulic
Water transportation
Poultry and eggs
Wholesale trade
Motor vehicles and passenger car bodies
Water supply and sewerage systems
Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c.
Other new construction
Lime
Railroads and related services
U.S. Postal Service
Oil bearing crops
Concrete products, except block and brick
Plastics materials and resins
Iron and steel foundries
Motor vehicle parts and accessories
Food grains
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Eating and drinking places
Other State and local government enterprises
Real estate agents, managers, operators, and lessors
Hospitals
Ready-mixed concrete
Dairy farm products
Environmental
Impact Criteria
(Final Consumption)
Rank
1
4
25
19
43
35
16
7
5
8
46
3
6
24
66
31
50
52
15
59
54
80
47
71
252
37
197
317
331
17
463
374
11
72
77
357
426
435
425
14
Change
0
vl/2
4>22
vH5
vl/38
vl/29
vl/9
1M
/|s4
*2
vl/35
1^9
*7
vHO
vl/51
vH5
vl/33
vl/34
/|s4
vl/39
vl/33
vl/58
vl/24
vl/47
4>227
vHl
vH70
vl/289
vl/302
1M3
vl/432
vl/342
1^22
vl/38
vl/42
vl/321
vl/389
vl/397
vl/386
1^26
All Criteria (17)
(Final Consumption)
Rank
1
4
30
26
46
8
22
9
6
5
10
3
7
33
23
38
53
60
20
61
63
93
55
29
86
44
235
415
377
24
464
390
13
69
88
365
394
440
460
19
Change
0
vl/2
4>27
vl/22
vl/41
^2
vH5
vH
^3
*5
^1
^9
^6
vH9
4>8
vl/22
vl/36
vl/42
vH
vl/41
vl/42
vl/71
vl/32
vl/5
vl/61
vH8
vl/208
vl/387
vl/348
^6
vl/433
vl/358
1^20
vl/35
vl/53
vl/329
vl/357
vl/402
vl/421
^21
-------
Table C-2
Effect of Layering Criteria on Ranking, Starting with Global Warming Potential
Intermediate Consumption Perspective
GWP 100
(Intermediate Consumption)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Material/Product/Service
Electric services (utilities)
Crude petroleum and natural gas
Blastfurnaces and steel mills
Petroleum refining
Motor vehicles and passenger car bodies
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Real estate agents, managers, operators, and lessors
New residential 1 unit structures, nonfarm
Wholesale trade
Eating and drinking places
Trucking and courier services, except air
Sanitary services, steam supply, and irrigation systems
Meat animals
Air transportation
Industrial inorganic and organic chemicals
Motor vehicle parts and accessories
New office, industrial and commercial buildings construction
Meat packing plants
Natural gas distribution
Hospitals
Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c.
Other new construction
Feed grains
Owner-occupied dwellings
Paper and paperboard mills
Other repair and maintenance construction
Coal
Telephone, communications, and communications services
n.e.c.
Automotive repair shops and services
Banking
Apparel made from purchased materials
Computer and data processing services; including own-account
software
Plastics materials and resins
Poultry slaughtering and processing
Advertising
Computer peripheral equipment
Dairy farm products
Poultry and eggs
Other electronic components
Water supply and sewerage systems
Environmental
Impact Criteria
(Final Consumption)
Rank
1
4
21
11
9
25
30
18
17
13
24
37
5
64
3
31
35
8
32
38
16
50
12
55
6
56
15
66
75
81
10
63
26
34
43
67
28
33
76
435
Change
0
*2
vH8
^7
vl/4
vH9
vl/23
vHO
4>8
vl/3
vH3
vl/25
1^8
vl/50
1M2
vH5
vH8
1MO
vH3
vH8
1^5
vl/28
1M1
vl/31
1M9
vl/30
1M2
vl/38
vl/46
vl/51
1^21
vl/31
^7
0
vl/8
vl/31
1^9
1^5
vl/37
vl/395
All Criteria (17)
(Final Consumption)
Rank
1
4
17
5
12
22
18
8
19
16
25
43
6
58
3
35
32
11
14
42
21
37
15
38
7
59
9
70
76
82
13
69
30
40
46
72
33
39
81
450
Change
0
vl/2
vH4
vH
vl/7
vH6
vHl
0
vHO
vl/6
vH4
vl/31
^7
vl/44
1M2
vH9
vH5
^7
^5
vl/22
0
vH5
^8
vH4
^18
vl/33
^18
vl/42
vl/47
vl/52
^18
vl/37
^3
vl/6
vHl
vl/36
^4
vH
vl/42
vl/410
-------
Table C-3
Effect of Layering Criteria on Ranking, Starting with Global Warming Potential
Final Consumption Perspective
GWP 100
(Final Consumption)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Material/Product/Service
Electric services (utilities)
Retail trade, except eating and drinking
Motor vehicles and passenger car bodies
Eating and drinking places
Petroleum refining
Hospitals
Other new construction
New residential 1 unit structures, nonfarm
Owner-occupied dwellings
Real estate agents, managers, operators, and lessors
Air transportation
Meat packing plants
Wholesale trade
New office, industrial and commercial buildings construction
Apparel made from purchased materials
Natural gas distribution
Banking
Trucking and courier services, except air
Automotive repair shops and services
New highways, bridges, and other horizontal construction
Poultry slaughtering and processing
Computer and data processing servs.; incl. own-account software
Doctors and dentists
New additions & alterations, nonfarm, construction
Sanitary services, steam supply, and irrigation systems
Water supply and sewerage systems
Insurance carriers
Telephone, telegraph communications, and communications
services n.e.c.
Other State and local government enterprises
Nursing and personal care facilities
Other amusement and recreation services
Social services, n.e.c.
Fluid milk
Sausages and other prepared meat products
Vegetables
Drugs
Fruits
Bottled and canned soft drinks
Electronic computers
Automotive rental and leasing, without drivers
Environmental
Impact Criteria
(Final Consumption)
Rank
1
7
3
4
5
8
12
9
11
19
45
6
15
17
2
13
34
41
32
27
14
25
30
35
72
257
40
43
80
62
23
49
18
24
22
33
21
50
54
70
Change
0
vl/5
0
0
0
^2
vl/5
vH
^2
vl/9
vl/34
1^6
vl/2
^3
1M3
^3
vH7
vl/23
vH3
vl/7
^7
^3
vl/7
vHl
vl/47
vl/231
vH3
vH5
vl/51
vl/32
1^8
vH7
1M5
1MO
1M3
*3
1M6
vH2
vH5
vl/30
All Criteria (17)
(Final Consumption)
Rank
1
6
4
5
3
9
13
8
11
18
38
7
15
16
2
12
34
41
32
10
17
26
30
23
73
222
39
43
75
61
25
50
20
27
24
35
22
51
56
68
Change
0
vl/4
vH
vH
^2
^3
vl/6
0
vl/2
vl/8
vl/27
1^5
^2
vl/2
1M3
^4
vH7
vl/23
vH3
^10
^4
vl/4
^7
^1
vl/48
vH96
vH2
vH5
vl/46
vl/31
^6
vH8
^13
^7
/|S11
^1
1M5
vH3
vH7
vl/28
-------
------- |