I run life cycle assessments (LCA) for companies, SMEs, and research consortia that need to quantify the environmental impact of a decarbonisation technology, a product, or a process — from cradle to grave or cradle to gate. The work follows ISO 14040 and ISO 14044, so the results stand up to grant reviewers, regulators, customer audits, and journal peer review.

Most clients come to me when they have a product or process that needs an environmental claim defended, a low-carbon hydrogen route, a captured-CO₂-derived fuel, a circular waste-to-energy chain, and a board, investor, or customer who wants to see the numbers, not just the narrative.

If you already know you need an LCA, book a scoping call at the bottom of this page. If you are still working out whether you need one, the rest of this page is written for you.

When you need a life cycle assessment

An LCA is the right next step in four common situations.

• Before publishing an environmental claim. If you want to say a product is “low carbon”, “net negative”, or “30% lower than the incumbent”, you need an ISO-compliant LCA behind that number, or it will not survive scrutiny.
• Before a grant or tender that requires environmental impact data. Innovate UK, DESNZ, Horizon Europe, IDRIC, and CBAM-affected procurement all increasingly require quantified Scope 1, 2, and 3 figures with documented system boundaries.
• Before choosing between technology routes. Blue hydrogen versus green hydrogen versus pink hydrogen. CCS at the source versus DAC. Solvent capture versus solid sorbents. A paired LCA gives you a like-for-like environmental comparison on the same functional unit.
• Before an Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) or carbon footprint label. EPDs are built on LCA data following ISO 14025 and product category rules. If you want an EPD, the LCA comes first.

What a life cycle assessment answers

Every LCA is built around a goal and scope statement we agree in the scoping call. The goal sets the question; the scope sets the boundary. Typical questions:

• What is the global warming potential, in kg CO₂e per functional unit, of this product or process, cradle to grave (or to whatever boundary we agree)?
• Which life-cycle stages contribute most to the total impact — manufacture, use phase, or end of life?
• How does this option compare to the incumbent technology or one or two benchmark alternatives, on the same functional unit?
• What is the impact in non-GHG categories — acidification, eutrophication, ozone depletion, water scarcity, mineral resource depletion?
• How sensitive is the result to electricity grid mix, transport distances, feedstock origin, or end-of-life assumptions?
• What are the Scope 1, 2, and 3 splits, for clients who need to map results into corporate emissions inventories?

You do not get a single number. You get a contribution analysis, a sensitivity analysis, and a clear view of which assumptions matter and which do not.

How I run a life cycle assessment

The methodology follows the four phases of ISO 14040 and ISO 14044, with software-supported inventory and impact assessment.

1. Goal and scope definition

We agree the purpose of the study, the functional unit (the precise unit the impact will be expressed against — for example, 1 kg of H₂ produced at 99.97% purity at the plant gate), the system boundary (cradle to gate, gate to gate, or cradle to grave), allocation rules for co-products, and the impact assessment method. The scope locks what is in and what is out before any data is collected.

2. Life cycle inventory (LCI)

Data collection for every input and output flow in the system: materials, energy, emissions, waste. Foreground data (the process itself) comes from you. Background data (electricity grid, transport, common raw materials) comes from established databases — ecoinvent, GaBi/Sphera, ELCD, and sector-specific databases where appropriate. Where data is uncertain, I flag it, and uncertainty is propagated through to the final result.

3. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)

Inventory flows are converted into impact category indicators using characterisation methods — typically IPCC AR6 for GWP, ReCiPe 2016 or CML for the broader impact set, depending on what the client needs. Results are reported per functional unit and broken down by life-cycle stage so contribution analysis is visible.

4. Interpretation, sensitivity, and benchmarking

Contribution analysis (which stages drive the result), sensitivity analysis (how the answer changes under alternative assumptions), uncertainty analysis (Monte Carlo or pedigree-matrix-based), and comparison against benchmark technologies or reference cases. Conclusions are framed as decisions — “if you do X, the carbon footprint drops by Y” — not as data tables.

What you receive

The standard deliverable set has three components.

• ISO-compliant LCA report. Full goal and scope, inventory, impact assessment, interpretation, and assumptions. Written so a third-party reviewer or peer reviewer can audit the work line by line. Where third-party verification is needed (for EPDs or external claims), the report is structured to support that verification.
• Presentation deck. Twenty to thirty slides for your internal stakeholders — board, sustainability committee, customer-facing teams. Pitched at a decision-maker who needs the result and the implications, not the derivation.
• Inventory model and calculation files. The LCI database extract plus the LCIA calculation files, so your team can re-run scenarios after the engagement ends.

Where a life cycle assessment sits alongside techno-economic work

A life cycle assessment answers the environmental question. A techno-economic assessment answers the economic question. A feasibility study packages both with business modelling and market analysis to answer the strategic question.

Service	What it answers
Techno-economic assessment	Is this project economically viable, and under what assumptions?
Life cycle assessment	What is the cradle-to-grave environmental impact, including embodied emissions?
Feasibility studies	Should we do this at all — technically, economically, environmentally, commercially?
Process modelling and design	Does the process work on paper, and what are the design choices?

Most decarbonisation clients need a TEA and an LCA together — they are usually delivered as a paired analysis so the assumptions stay aligned. If you are not sure which you need, the scoping call will sort it.

Sectors and technologies I cover

I have run life cycle assessments across a wide span of decarbonisation technologies. The strongest published track record is in:

• Hydrogen production — comparative LCAs of blue, green, and pink routes; well-to-tank and well-to-wheel boundaries
• Carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) — including LCA of captured-CO₂-derived fuels and chemicals
• Direct air capture (DAC) — full life-cycle environmental footprint including energy supply chain
• Waste-to-energy with and without CCS — including biogenic CO₂ accounting
• Industrial process electrification and heat decarbonisation — including grid-mix sensitivity
• Power-to-X — synfuel, ammonia, methanol from renewable electricity

If your product or process is not on this list, ask anyway. The ISO methodology is the same; the inventory data is the part that changes. Most novel technologies need bespoke foreground data collection, which I cost transparently in the proposal.

How we work together

Every engagement follows the same five-step shape, scaled to the size of the project.

Step 1. Scoping call

A free 30-minute call. We agree what you need, who the audience is, what decision the work is feeding, and roughly how big the engagement is. I will tell you honestly if a life cycle assessment is the wrong tool for your question.

Step 2. Outline proposal

A short written proposal: three to five key questions, numbered tasks, deliverables, hours per task, day rates, total cost, and timeline. Payment is usually structured as 50% on commissioning and 50% on delivery, though terms can be adjusted for institutional clients with longer procurement cycles.

Step 3. Engagement

Work proceeds through the agreed tasks with fortnightly check-ins for engagements over four weeks. Larger projects use a Gantt schedule. I flag risks early — particularly when an assumption I had to make at the start turns out to be wrong.

Step 4. Deliverables

Final report, deck, and calculation files. A presentation session with your team to walk through findings and answer questions.

Step 5. Follow-up

A 30-day window for follow-up questions on the work, included in the engagement. Many clients then commission a follow-on scope.

Common questions

What is a life cycle assessment?

A life cycle assessment is a structured method for quantifying the environmental impact of a product or process across its full life cycle — raw material extraction, manufacture, distribution, use, and end of life. The method is standardised by ISO 14040 (principles and framework) and ISO 14044 (requirements and guidelines). The output is one or more impact category indicators, typically including global warming potential expressed in kg CO₂e, reported per functional unit.

What is the difference between an LCA and a carbon footprint?

A carbon footprint is a single-indicator LCA focused on global warming potential (GWP). A full LCA usually reports multiple impact categories — acidification, eutrophication, ozone depletion, water scarcity, and others — alongside GWP. If your stakeholder only needs CO₂e, a carbon footprint is a faster and cheaper deliverable. If they need a full environmental picture or an EPD, you need the full LCA.

How long does a life cycle assessment take?

A focused single-product LCA with reasonable data availability usually takes six to twelve weeks. A comparative LCA across multiple routes, with primary data collection and third-party verification, can take three to six months. The biggest variable is foreground data collection — if you already have it documented, the work moves faster.

What does an LCA cost?

Engagements range from roughly £6,000 for a focused single-product carbon footprint, up to £60,000 or more for a full multi-route comparative LCA with primary data collection, uncertainty quantification, and third-party verification support. The proposal stage gives you a transparent breakdown of hours and day rates.

Will my LCA be third-party verifiable?

Yes. Every report is structured to meet ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 requirements and to support third-party verification (for example, to produce an EPD or to underpin an external environmental claim). I do not provide the verification itself, but the documentation is complete enough that a verifier can do their job efficiently.

Can you do consequential LCA as well as attributional?

Yes. The scope agreed in step 1 sets which is appropriate. Attributional LCA is the standard for product-level claims, EPDs, and corporate reporting. Consequential LCA is used when the question is about the system-wide consequences of a decision — for example, whether a new bioenergy plant displaces fossil electricity or marginal renewable capacity.

What software and databases do you use?

Primarily SimaPro and openLCA for inventory and impact modelling, with ecoinvent as the default background database. Custom Python is used where the project requires bespoke modelling that does not fit into off-the-shelf LCA software (for example, time-resolved grid-mix modelling for electrolytic hydrogen). You receive the files in whatever format is most useful for your internal team to continue working with.

Get started

If you have a decarbonisation project that needs a life cycle assessment, the next step is a 30-minute scoping call. No fee, no obligation, and I will tell you honestly if a life cycle assessment is the wrong shape of work for your question.

If you would rather follow the work first, sign up for the newsletter at join.drhanak.com — monthly editions on decarbonisation technology, CCUS economics, and net zero strategy, written for engineers and decision makers.