Environmental Engineering and Management Journal July 2015, Vol.14, No. 7, 1691-1704 http://omicron.ch.tuiasi.ro/EEMJ/ “Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University of Iasi, Romania DEALING WITH LCA MODELING FOR THE END OF LIFE OF MECHATRONIC PRODUCTS Francesca Reale 1 , Patrizia Buttol 1 , Sara Cortesi 1 , Marco Mengarelli 1,2 , Paolo Masoni 1 , Simona Scalbi 1 , Alessandra Zamagni 3 1 ENEA, 4 Via Martiri di Monte Sole, Bologna, Italy 2 Università Politecnica delle Marche, 22 Piazza Roma, Ancona, Italy 3 Ecoinnovazione srl, 26 Via Guido Rossa, Padova, Italy Abstract This paper discusses end-of-life (EoL) modeling issues in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), through the application to a domestic cooker hood. Two EoL approaches are applied and discussed, namely the avoided burden and the one recommended by the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide, presently under testing. While no case studies on PEF application have been published yet, to the best of our knowledge, the scientific community is questioning the robustness and relevance of some methodological aspects, especially the EoL formula. The objective of the work is to provide a case study for supporting the scientific discussion on EoL modeling by: applying the avoided burden approach to the cooker hood EoL; testing the PEF EoL approach on a cooker hood component, the aluminum filter, and compare the results with those obtained from the avoided burden approach; evaluating how both the approaches affect the allocation of burdens/credits associated to recycling. The Global Warming Potential (GWP) and the Abiotic Depletion Potential (ADP) impact categories are investigated. The study points out that the PEF EoL approach delivers higher environmental impacts than the avoided burden one, due to a reduced contribution from the avoided impacts. Overall, the application of the PEF EoL approach is more complex, due to the additional and often not available information needed, such as the recycled content of the materials and the disposal treatments that are avoided when recycled materials are used in the product. Also the structure of the LCA datasets may limit the application of the PEF EoL. Key words: avoided burden, EoL recycling, Life Cycle Assessment, Product Environmental Footprint, recyclability rate Received: December, 2014; Revised final: June, 2015; Accepted: June, 2015  Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed: e-mail: francesca.reale@enea.it 1. Introduction The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is widely recognized as the best framework for assessing the potential environmental impacts of products, systems and services (EC Communication, 2003). By accounting for inputs (materials, energy) and outputs (emissions, waste) at each step of the product life cycle, it enables options for environmental improvements to be identified. Though the methodology is standardized by the ISO 14040 series (ISO, 2006a, 2006b), subjectivity exists on how to deal with some methodological issues. End-of-Life (EoL) modeling has been discussed for years (Allacker et al., 2014; Ardente and Cellura, 2011; Ekvall, 2000; Frischknecht, 2010; Liu and Muller, 2012), mainly in relation to the topic of multi- functionality in recycling situations. Multi- functionality arises as recycling fulfils the dual functions of waste management and secondary material production (Nakatani, 2014), and thus an allocation has to be performed. There is currently no single, generally accepted approach to modelling EoL, and this is partly justified by the fact that it is