On criteria for the evaluation of life cycle assessment software

On criteria for the evaluation of life cycle assessment software Int J Life Cycle Assess (2017) 22:1475–1476 DOI 10.1007/s11367-017-1358-z LETTER TO THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF 1,2 Reinout Heijungs Received: 24 April 2017 /Accepted: 20 June 2017 /Published online: 5 July 2017 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017 Seto et al. (2017) present an analysis of five software packages Bcriteria for the evaluation of life cycle assessment software for life cycle assessment (LCA). They point out that LCA packages and life cycle inventory data,^ and that concrete is software should not only be compared in an abstract way. only an Bapplication.^ Indeed, the analysis by Ciroth (2012) might be regarded as a Next, although the abstract innocently mentions that Bsoftware package C^ performed best, a closer look reveals bit clinical, as the proof of the pudding is in the end supposed to be in its eating. Three other recent publications (Speck et al. that there is a suspicious connection at work: software pack- 2015a, b and Herrmann and Moltesen 2015) in fact concen- age C is in fact GaBi, and the responsible editor of this article trate on the results delivered by different software. It is strange was Martin Baitz, who happens to be employed by Thinkstep that Seto et al. (2017) seem to http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Springer Journals

On criteria for the evaluation of life cycle assessment software

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/on-criteria-for-the-evaluation-of-life-cycle-assessment-software-NPOhZzTtQA
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 by Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany
Subject
Environment; Environment, general; Environmental Economics; Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology; Environmental Chemistry
ISSN
0948-3349
eISSN
1614-7502
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11367-017-1358-z
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Int J Life Cycle Assess (2017) 22:1475–1476 DOI 10.1007/s11367-017-1358-z LETTER TO THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF 1,2 Reinout Heijungs Received: 24 April 2017 /Accepted: 20 June 2017 /Published online: 5 July 2017 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017 Seto et al. (2017) present an analysis of five software packages Bcriteria for the evaluation of life cycle assessment software for life cycle assessment (LCA). They point out that LCA packages and life cycle inventory data,^ and that concrete is software should not only be compared in an abstract way. only an Bapplication.^ Indeed, the analysis by Ciroth (2012) might be regarded as a Next, although the abstract innocently mentions that Bsoftware package C^ performed best, a closer look reveals bit clinical, as the proof of the pudding is in the end supposed to be in its eating. Three other recent publications (Speck et al. that there is a suspicious connection at work: software pack- 2015a, b and Herrmann and Moltesen 2015) in fact concen- age C is in fact GaBi, and the responsible editor of this article trate on the results delivered by different software. It is strange was Martin Baitz, who happens to be employed by Thinkstep that Seto et al. (2017) seem to

Journal

The International Journal of Life Cycle AssessmentSpringer Journals

Published: Jul 5, 2017

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve Freelancer

DeepDyve Pro

Price
FREE
$49/month

$360/year
Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed
Create lists to
organize your research
Export lists, citations
Read DeepDyve articles
Abstract access only
Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles
Print
20 pages/month
PDF Discount
20% off