Bekaert expert examines LCA challenges in tire sustainability

Prague – Bekaert has warned that life cycle assessment (LCA) is at risk of becoming a misleading rather than a guiding tool for tire sustainability unless the industry agrees on ‘common calculation rules’, ‘transparent data sources’ and “independent validation”.

Speaking at the Future Tire Conference 2025 in Prague, Rodrigo Sancho, global sustainability lead at Bekaert Rubber Reinforcement, said LCA has become the main reference point for comparing environmental performance across the tire and materials industries.

However, methodological inconsistencies mean that identical products can show very different carbon footprints.

“Life Cycle Assessment is our compass – but unless it's calibrated the same way, we’ll all head in different directions,” he noted.

According to Sancho, Bekaert’s steel cord is a key structural element inside tires, providing strength, durability and lower rolling resistance.

As steel production dominates the footprint of reinforcement materials, the credibility of carbon numbers depends heavily on how steel emissions are calculated.

In his presentation, Sancho showed that even when the physical product is identical, changing only the calculation rules can shift the reported footprint by double-digit percentages.

Using three plausible scenarios for the same steel cord, Bekaert found variations of between about 12% and 26%, depending on factors such as the time horizon used for global warming potential, allocation rules and background databases.

For instance, using a 20-year climate horizon instead of a 100-year horizon, or changing cut-off rules, allocation methods or background datasets, can materially change the reported CO2 value for the same product.

According to Sancho, ISO 14067 requires carbon footprints to be based on a 100-year climate horizon, but many declarations in the market still mix standards or omit key methodological details.

Another challenge, Sancho said, is the lack of transparency in primary data from upstream suppliers.

Examining steel wire rod carbon footprints, he showed that different data sources for the same product can produce dramatically different results, even when all comply with ISO standards.

“With transparent data provenance, LCA results become meaningful,” he said, calling for “turning assumptions into evidence and insights into action.”

A third challenge is obtaining trustworthy data.

By advocating for “clear quality criteria and independent validation”, the industry can strengthen the credibility of carbon reporting across the tire value chain.

Here, Sancho stressed that factors such as reliability, completeness, temporal correlation, geographical correlation and technical relevance should be assessed when evaluating LCA data.

He also pointed to challenges linked to database modelling, noting that a PET bottle can have three different numbers for its ‘climate change environmental footprint’ depending on what model is used.

While data source choice matters, he said harmonisation of databases and stricter guidance on modelling are also needed to improve consistency.

Sancho further highlighted ‘transparency gaps’ in the upstream value chain, where suppliers often fail to provide primary product-specific data, forcing downstream users to rely on generic averages.

He also warned of ‘loopholes’ linked to database shopping, which can allow companies to select whichever dataset gives the most favourable result.

To address this, Sancho said product carbon footprint data must be “exchangeable, auditable, and verifiable”.

“When assumptions are transparent and footprints can be checked independently, everyone plays by the same rules,” he added.

Sancho concluded by calling for closer collaboration across the value chain, including inviting partners to work together towards a shared ambition of transparency and credible carbon measurement.

He said there was a need to strengthen understanding of LCA principles among decision-makers, so that sustainability insights guide strategic and commercial choices.

In addition, he called for the industry to align on what is feasible today.

To this end, he said, "a common realistic roadmap" should be defined to balance ambition with practicality, rather than "imposing top-down granularity that few companies can meet."

Sancho added that progress will also depend on meaningful demand signals from customers.

Finally, he said the industry should continue advancing independent third-party validation of product carbon footprints in order to build confidence, comparability and trust across supply chains.