1 / 69

Governance committee for the ADEME’s database Technical Committee Database management and quality

Governance committee for the ADEME’s database Technical Committee Database management and quality - 6 th of June 2011. Service Eco-Conception & Consommation Durable (SECCD) ADEME Avec RDC Environment. Goal of the meeting.

dorie
Télécharger la présentation

Governance committee for the ADEME’s database Technical Committee Database management and quality

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Governance committee for the ADEME’s database Technical Committee Database management and quality - 6th of June 2011 Service Eco-Conception & Consommation Durable (SECCD) ADEME Avec RDC Environment

  2. Goal of the meeting • General goal : write a specification document to any provider of LCA datasets in order to supply the database • Goal of the meeting : Define / validate the proposals of guidelines for the ADEME’s database management and quality • These requirements will have to be fulfilled by any provider of LCA data • These requirements will be in annex to all technical specification document in every future calls to tender. 2

  3. General approach • Analysis of the ADEME’s database needs : • Recognition at national and international level • Tool to help environmental labeling • Compliance to the guidelines of the BPX 30-323 referential and the general principles of LCA • How do the existing databases answer to these needs ? (ILCD, EcoInvent, GaBi, DEAM, CODDE-BV-TEX) • Analysis of the data quality guidelines that the databases have developed • Proposal of quality and management guidelines for the ADEME’s database

  4. Agenda • Background and goal • The ADEME’s database • Content of the ADEME’s database • Goal for management and quality guidelines • Database building guidelines • Format • Homogeneity • Quality • Database utilization guidelines • Update • Integration of data • Need for « default datasets » • Confidentiality

  5. Background and goal • Support environmental labeling for consumers goods • Help to make a LCA assessment (based on several impact categories and on a life cycle approach) by providing : • A methodology • Common methodology : BPX 30-323 • Sector-specific methodology : one per product category referential • Some generic LCA data The ADEME’s database will be the recognized generic LCA database in France and at international level : • Quality of the database • Co-construction : governance

  6. Links between the ADEME’s work and the ADEME-AFNOR platform’s work ADEME-AFNOR methodological referentials ADEME –AFNOR platform Calculation tools Common ref. BPX 30-323 + Sector-specific ref. Sectorial technical committees ADEME’s database Governance Committee (advisory) avis

  7. Database governance • Sector-specific working groups of ADEME-AFNOR platform • Definition of needs from : a preliminary study and some specification in the specific product category referentials • Technical Committees • Needs refinement • Confrontation to available data • Till the specification document redaction that will explain the data that are needed (precise type of process) and the management and quality requirements • Governance Committee • Administration • NGO • Enterprises

  8. Content of the ADEME’s database • Some processes • One reference flow (unit of the process) • An elementary flows list • An impact categories list • Some metadata • Some characterization factors

  9. Content of the ADEME’s database Processes LCI (inventories) Flows*, flow property*,Unitgroups Unit Reference flow, Unitgroups Metadata Sources, contacts, external documents X Characterization factors* LCIA Method *Common data to any data provider (to come from JRC) Result by impact category

  10. Data sources : 3 channels of supply • Existing or adapted data from databases • Coming from existing databases developers : PE, Ecoinvent, PWC, BV, federations (ex WorldSteel, PlasticsEurope) • Modality : framework agreement and subsequent contracts (call to tender to select candidates and then estimation of costs per sectorial technical committee) • Co-produced data • To fill the pointed out lacks for some specific sectors • The studies will be launched by ADEME (e.g. AgriBalyse for agricultural productions) • Industrial date (from third part) • Help to integrate some data that are still not available in the existing databases • Incentive to develop LCA

  11. Planning

  12. Questions that have structured the work • Content of the database (substance) : Which data ? • Content of the database (form) : • Which format ? • Which building rules ? • IT development • Which integration rules ? • Which management rule over the time ?

  13. Content of the « ADEME’s database management and quality guidelines » document • Structure of the database : which criteria? • Format • Homogeneity • Quality of data • Methodological conformity • Inventorities clarity • Recognition • Transparency • Utilization practice • Update • Integration of data • Need for « default » datasets • Confidentiality

  14. Agenda • Background and goal • The ADEME’s database • Content of the ADEME’s database • Goal for management and quality guidelines • Database building guidelines • Format • Homogeneity • Quality • Database utilization guidelines • Update • Integration of data • Need for « default datasets » • Confidentiality

  15. Format – Definition of needs • Format must help to : • Structure information • Exchange data (import/ export) • Be internationally recognized • Provide impact categories results • Provide transparency on methodology and more especially on BPX • 30-323 referential

  16. Format – How do the databases answer to the needs ? • 2 major formats : • XML – ILCD : complete architecture that will be the future European exchange format • Problem : the today format does not provide a mandatory flows list and does not contain many mandatory fields for metadata • GaBi, CODDE-BV-TEX et DEAM are also developing processes in the ILCD format. • XML – Ecospold (EcoInvent) : format with a different structure from ILCD • Problem : the format is not the European exchange format. However some conversion systems to ILCD format exist.

  17. Format – Proposal for ADEME DB • The selected format is ILCD format because : • It is developed by European commission • It ensures international recognition • It is easy to export in XML or Excel files • The metadata are well and finely structured • It provides a tool for industrial (third part) providers : ILCD Editor • A new « Extension » file is added to check compliance with BP X 30-323 referential (Cf. homogeneity) • Requirements for the providers • LCI delivery according to the elementary flows list defined by the ADEME • Some fields of metadata are mandatory because they need to be visible at first glance • Rules in matter of reference (UUID, URI, links to other files…) • Uniqueness of reference flows in the processes • Uniqueness of the value for an elementary flow • Can these rules be easily fulfilled ?

  18. Agenda • Background and goal • The ADEME’s database • Content of the ADEM’s database • Goal for management and quality guidelines • Database building guidelines • Format • Homogeneity • Quality • Database utilization guidelines • Update • Integration of data • Need for « default datasets » • Confidentiality

  19. Homogeneity – definition of needs Sector-specific data Transverse data (upstream data) • How are the data linked together ? • The data sources can be different and therefore the choices of building the data either. • The level of aggregation can be different. The data must respect the same quality rules and methodology. Shoes Energy Transport ? Textile End of life EEE

  20. Homogeneity – How do the databases answer to the needs ? • Processes data can be divided into elementary processes (e.g. : EcoInvent) e.g.: electrical mix, infrastructures …. -> All the data are linked together and the modification of one elementary process generates a modification chain all over the database Elem. process 1 « Aggregated » process (to integrate into ADEME DB) … Elem. process. i • The data convergence is provided.

  21. Homogeneity – Proposal for ADEME DB • Constrain for ADEME DB : • No complete dynamic structure that will link all the data. • Proposal : • Homogeneity could at least be ensured by industrial sector Selection of a unique provider by sector (ex : Energy, Textile, Chemistry, Plastics …) • Limit desaggregation of the data to upstream data such as : • Electrical mix : all (or only a part of) processes could be delivered as desaggregated processes to which electrical mix from the database would be added • Infrastructures • Fulfillment of common quality guidelines (including methodology)

  22. Homogeneity – Questions • Sectorial homogeneity Can only one provider per industrial sector ensure homogeneity? • Limited desaggregation Must these desaggregation rules be fulfilled for all the processes or only for a part ? Is it possible to make such a desaggregation ? Must ADEME ask to provider for all processes (1 per country) or only one, that any user of the database could adapt with the correct electrical mix ? • Common quality requirements (cf. quality)

  23. Agenda • Background and goal • The ADEME’s database • Content of the ADEM’s database • Goal for management and quality guidelines • Database building guidelines • Format • Homogeneity • Quality • Database utilization guidelines • Update • Integration of data • Need for « default datasets » • Confidentiality

  24. Quality criteria proposed by ADEME • Inherent quality • Methodology conformity • Inventories clarity • Recognition • Transparency

  25. Data quality – definition of needs • Temporal representativeness : typical data for the considered period • Geographical representativeness : representation of the considered zone • Technological representativeness : typical data for the considered technology (market representativeness) • Completeness of environmental impacts covered by the inventory • Precision / reproductibility variability and error on data • Uncertainty • Consistency (norme ISO 14044)

  26. Data quality – How do the databases answer to the needs ? The common criteria : geographical, technological and temporal representativeness.

  27. Data quality – How do the databases answer to the needs ? • 2 major evaluation systems : • On documentation (qualitative) • On ratings

  28. Data quality – How do the databases answer to the needs ? According to the organisations, either the database provider checks by himself or asks for an external peer review (no mandatory accreditation for reviews)

  29. Data quality – Proposal forADEME DB • Minimum criteria to take into account : • Temporal, geographical, technological representativeness Must there be other requirements (uncertainty/precision, completeness) ? How can these criteria be proposed and checked? • Quality evaluation • Short term : qualitative approach What is the proof mode? In long term, must we develop also the quantitative approach ? Who will establish the threshold values : the data provider ? By what kind of review process ?

  30. Quality of data – Proposal for ADEME DB • Proof mode for quality, for eachchannel of data supply : • Data comingfromdatabases: the providers’ reviewisenough Can wevalidthat the ADEME’sdatabasecanbesatisfiedwith the providers’review? • Co-produced data : requirethat a peerreviewisavailable • Data comingfrom industries (third part) : need to get an externalpeerreview to be sure of quality Can werequire a peerreview to industries without the riskthatthiswilllimitthischannel for data supply ? Must werequire « accreditation » reviewersfrom ADEME?

  31. Quality criteria proposed by ADEME • Inherent quality • Methodology conformity • Inventories clarity • Recognition • Transparency

  32. Methodology conformity – Definition of needs • The data must fulfill: • The ISO 14040-44 norm • Choice for impact categories • Choice for methodologies (allocation rules, cut-off criteria…) • The Annex A of BPX 30-323 referential • The requirements of the ADEME AFNOR platformMethodology and Product CategoryWorking groups and of the TechnicalCommittees for the ADEME’sdatabase. Can theserequirementsbefulfilled ? Can the databaseaccept to integratesome data that do not fulfill all the criteria ? For whichcriteria ?

  33. Methodology conformity – Réf. BPX 30-323 • Le référentiel BP X 30-323 s données doivent respecter :

  34. Methodology conformity – Other requirements • Common methodologicalrules for anyproduct (included in the methodologicalreferential) • Impacts allocation rulesbetweenco-products (e.g. : allocation leather / meat / milk) • Sectorialrules (included in the productcategoryreferential) • If they have a big influence on the environmental balance (e.g : allocation betweenleather and split leather) • TechnicalCommitteesrecommendations for upstream data • Energy • End of life • Transport Must werequirethat the rulesdefined in a productcategoryreferentialshouldbevalidated by the ADEME AFNOR MethodologicalWorking Group in order to get more homogeneity?

  35. Methodology conformity – How do the databases answer to the needs ? • Follow the ISO 14040-44 norm The normprinciples are followed by anydatabase. • Fulfill the rules of BP X 30-323 referential Do theserequirementsneed to beadapted in so far as the data are not always able to pass the criteria ?

  36. Methodology conformity – Proposal for AEME DB • Follow the ISO 14040-44 norm • Choice of impact categories : from the product group and based on impact categoriesfrom JRC (LCIA) • Fulfill the rules of BP X 30-323 referential • Proposal to make visible all information linked to the BPX fulfillment : possibility to have a complete vision of the Extension file Can weaccept non-conform data ? • Follow the common and sector- specificmethodologicalchoices • In general, requirementswillbedefined in specificaions and call to tender

  37. Fictive example of BP X 30-323 fulfillment

  38. Quality criteria proposed by ADEME • Inherent quality • Methodology conformity • Inventories clarity • Recognition • Transparency

  39. Inventories clarity – Definition of needs • Criteria for inventories quality : • Completeness of flows : have all the major contributing flows been taken into account ? • Reliability of data (order of magnitude) • Background precision : explanation of process specificity in terms of representativeness, yields, sources

  40. Inventories clarity – How do the databases answer to the needs? • Completeness of flows: qualitative check (cf. quality) • Reliability of data in terms of order of magnitude : qualitative check (cf. quality) • Background details : metadata well structured with fine level of detail • Metadata fields structuration : ILCD, EcoInvent, GaBi • Provided documentation : all databases

  41. Inventories clarity – Proposal for ADEME DB • Access to the elementary flow list that can be classified

  42. Inventories clarity– Proposal for ADEME DB • Automatic checks in order to check orders of magnitude : if the checks are not fullfilles , then alerts are created • Check links between CO2 emissions and use of fossile fuels burning • Check links between combustion processes and NOX and SOX emissions • Check links between electricity processes and resource depletion • Check links between transport, oil consumption and CO2 emissions • Check links between water emissions and water consumption • Check values for« Exotic flows » (usually very weak)

  43. Inventories clarity – Proposal for ADEME DB • ILCD format used for metadata with some « at first glance » criteria (fields must be filled and visible) Unit Géo & techno representativeness Source Does the first vision of the Extension file fieldsseemeasy to reach?

  44. 2nd visibility access Unit Temporal representativeness Geographical representativeness Technological representativeness Are the mandatoryfields relevant ?( )

  45. Méthodo 2nd visibility access Sources & Representativeness Are the mandatoryfields relevant ( )? Completeness for flows

  46. Type of revision 2nd visibility access Les champs obligatoires ( ) sont-ils pertinents?

  47. Quality criteria proposed by ADEME • Inherent quality • Methodology conformity • Inventories clarity • Recognition • Transparency

  48. Recognition – Definition of needs • The ADEME’s database will be public • National recognition • ADEME would like to join the ILCD Network • International recognition • What steps to check recognition ? • Data supply • Data quality requirement • Calendar

  49. Recognition –How do the dabases answer to the needs ? • Quality and peer acceptance • Documentation • Provide a documentation • Structure data into the ILCD fields (ILCD, EcoInvent)

  50. Recognition – Proposal for ADEME DB • Recognition is insured because of: • Governance (data supply) • Data quality validation • Use of ILCD format

More Related