Nova Abbott, Head of Marketing at Kavalan discusses how life cycle assessments can be powerful tools when used correctly
The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology has been around since the 1970s, and can serve as a powerful environmental management tool in our quest to accurately measure the environmental impact of our products and services. By examining a product’s environmental footprint from raw material extraction to disposal, LCAs are able to offer businesses, policymakers and consumers a more complete picture of environmental impact, not just on emissions, but across factors such as resource use, pollution and waste.
In the wide format printing sector, where materials such as PVC, solvents, and chemical additives have long raised sustainability concerns, LCAs offer the opportunity to confront some uncomfortable realities and forge a more responsible path forward.
However, LCAs can also be used to selectively present data that supports a desired narrative. When used well, LCAs can guide industries towards meaningful change. When used poorly, they can just as easily provide cover for greenwashing.
The evolution and purpose of the LCA
The ethos behind LCAs is straightforward and effective; define the scope, gather the data, assess the impacts, and interpret the results. Indeed, the methodology has become so entrenched in sustainability circles that governments, NGOs, and businesses alike rely on it to guide decisions, set policy, and measure progress. However, a comprehensive approach is key. A robust LCA will examine product’s life cycle, from cradle to grave. Without transparency, even well-intentioned assessments can end up telling only part of the story.
The problem with simplified PCFs
While LCAs are designed to provide a broader view of environmental impacts, Product Carbon Footprints (PCFs) often focus specifically and solely on greenhouse gas emissions, and most PCFs used in the wide format printing industry today are based on limited ‘cradle-to-gate’ data, relying heavily on standard life cycle databases that primarily factor in energy and water use during manufacturing. This creates a significant blind spot, as some of the most substantial emissions in materials like PVC arise not from energy consumption, but from complex chemical reactions, additives, and manufacturing processes that do not directly involve energy or water use. ‘Off the shelf’ PCFs simply do not capture these critical emissions.
As a result, companies can present PVC and certain textile products as having favourable carbon footprints, while entirely overlooking the far greater greenhouse gas emissions and toxic pollution generated in their production. These impacts can only be accurately assessed through detailed, site-specific testing and measurement, not through standardised databases alone. Without this level of scrutiny, many of these simplified PCFs risk contributing to outright greenwashing rather than providing a true reflection of a product’s environmental performance.
Wide format printing under the spotlight
The wide format printing industry sits at a particularly interesting crossroads. Historically reliant on materials such as PVC and a range of chemical additives, the industry is waking up to the fact that more sustainable options are available and a greener future for print is possible. LCAs have the power to be a revolutionary tool in this endeavour, but the right approach is crucial – without a comprehensive method, LCAs can also become tools of greenwashing.
The methodology is built around four stages: Goal and Scope Definition, Life Cycle Inventory (LCI), Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA), and Interpretation, and each stage is crucial to determining the overall impact of a product. One weak link in the overall assessment can mean inaccurate and misleading data.
The bigger question: Intent matters
Of course, not every LCA is designed to deceive. In some cases, a simple assessment may serve a legitimate internal purpose: guiding product design, identifying hotspots for improvement, or complying with early-stage regulations. But when LCA data is used as part of a marketing tool, presenting the most favourable version of the data can be tempting.
This isn’t just a theoretical risk. In recent years, environmental groups have increasingly criticised certain recycled content certifications for using language that sounds impressive but conceals key omissions. Terms like “up to X% recycled” or “made with recycled materials” often lack clarity around what that actually means, how the material was sourced, and what environmental impact remains.
Solutions: Towards true impact measurement
So how do we address this?
Full Disclosure: Every LCA and Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) should clearly state its scope, data sources, assumptions, and limitations.
Investment in Site-Based Data: Whenever possible, data should be collected directly from suppliers and manufacturing partners, especially for upstream activities.
Standardisation: Industry-specific guidelines should be developed to ensure consistency in how impacts are measured and reported.
Third-party verification through independent audits can help prevent companies from misrepresenting results. However, such auditors should not be regarded as ‘certified’ assessors, as this role should be reserved for a limited number of large, specialized organizations equipped to carry out the full range of assessment tasks, including comprehensive testing and measurement capabilities.
Legislation: As governments roll out climate policies, mandatory and verifiable PCFs should become standard, particularly for industries with large environmental impacts.
Conclusion: A double-edged tool
At its best, the LCA is one of the most powerful sustainability tools we have; a mechanism that can hold industries accountable, spotlight weak points, and push innovation in truly meaningful ways. At its worst, it can serve more to reassure buyers than to challenge industries.
For sectors like wide format printing, and indeed any industry facing increased scrutiny over its environmental footprint, there’s an opportunity here. Not just to meet the minimum expectations, but to lead. To demonstrate to customers, partners, and regulators that sustainability isn’t just a marketing message, but a commitment grounded in data, transparency, and continual improvement.
The conversation around LCAs and greenwashing is only going to intensify. The question now is whether businesses will engage with it honestly, or risk being left behind as consumers and policymakers demand greater accountability.