A joint use of life cycle assessment and emergy analysis for sustainability evaluation of an intensive agro-system in China

Author(s):  
Yichao Wang ◽  
Guishen Zhao
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qingsong Wang ◽  
Hongkun Xiao ◽  
Qiao Ma ◽  
Xueliang Yuan ◽  
Jian Zuo ◽  
...  

Two methods of natural ecosystem assessment—emergy analysis (EMA) and life cycle assessment (LCA)—are reviewed in this paper. Their advantages, disadvantages, and application areas are summarized, and the similarities and differences between these two evaluation methods are analyzed respectively. Their research progress is also sorted out. The study finds that EMA and LCA share common attributes in evaluation processes and research fields, but they focus on different aspects of macrocosms and microcosms. The assessment of system sustainability is valued by both EMA and LCA, but the former has unique advantages in natural system input analysis, and the latter is more convincing in assessing environmental loading capacity. If the system boundaries of the two methods are expanded, in other words, factors such as ecosystem services, labor, and infrastructure construction are integrated into the upstream of the target system, and environmental impact is further analyzed using LCA in the downstream of the system, the two approaches would complete each other. The quantified results would be more objective. Therefore, these two theories have the necessity of coupling development. After reviewing recent coupling application cases, the results show that LCA and EMA have commonality in the upstream of the target system (mainly in inventory database construction), while the environmental impact assessment methods are different in the downstream. So the overall coupling analysis method is not formed. The current paper gives rational suggestions on the coupling development of the two systems in terms of the aggregate emergy flow table, the indicator system construction and indicator evaluation methods. In addition, it is necessary to introduce sensitivity analysis and uncertainty analysis in order to improve the reliability of assessment results. At present, the research on the coupling development of the two theories is in rapid development stage, but there are still many problems that need further exploration.


2016 ◽  
Vol 562 ◽  
pp. 614-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahin Rafiee ◽  
Benyamin Khoshnevisan ◽  
Issa Mohammadi ◽  
Mortaza Aghbashlo ◽  
Hossein mousazadeh ◽  
...  

Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 2746
Author(s):  
Guadalupe Pérez ◽  
Jorge M. Islas-Samperio

Using information from an experimental planting of non-toxic Jatropha curcas (NTJC) with minimal water and fertilization resources on rural marginal soil the objective of this article is to determine the sustainability of this raw material for producing biodiesel and the possibilities for improving it through life-cycle assessment (LCA). Three production scenarios were studied: minimal resources (MR), which focuses on the obtaining of biodiesel; minimal resources and utilization of sub-products (MRUS), which includes the utilization of the residual products in order to produce food and solid biofuels, as well as biodiesel; and utilization of biofertilizers, flood irrigation, and sub-products (UBIS), which incorporates the use of bio-fertilizers and irrigation in the production system. This study includes the selection of six sustainability indicators, as well as indicators by means of LCA methodology Finally, a sustainability index (SI) for each scenario was determined on the basis of an index of environmental sustainability of energy products (IESEP). Our results indicated that the MR scenario yielded the lowest SI 0.673, while the MRUS scenario had the highest SI 0.956. It concludes that sustainability is greater when it utilizes minimal water and fertilization resources during the raw material production stage, and the residual products are used for food and energy products made possible by the non-toxic properties of Jatropha curcas.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Thu Trang Nguyen ◽  
Helmut Brunner ◽  
Mario Hirz

The transport sector is responsible for a broad range of ecologic impacts, e.g., energy consumption, greenhouse gas emission or air pollution. It is therefore highly important to assess transport solutions in terms of their sustainability. Widely used approaches for sustainability analysis in the transport sector include life cycle assessment (LCA), economic approach, multi-criteria decision analysis (MDCA), and assessments based on indicators. In practice, these approaches consist of several methods, i.e., product-based LCA, fleet-based LCA, cost benefit analysis (CBA), cost effectiveness analysis (CEA), value measurement MDCA, ideal-solution based MDCA, outranking MDCA, and indicator-based assessment. Even though there is a larger number of assessment methods, a holistic framework for sustainability evaluation of different transport solutions is still missing. Selection of suitable assessment methods depends on a vast array of factors. This paper proposes to utilise “application levels” for the selection process. Firstly, the paper provides an analysis of the application levels of the common assessment methods and evaluation criteria within the transport sector based on a literature review. The application levels are illustrated by identifying two dimensions, namely system level and decision-making level, ranging from Low to High. Afterwards, a six-step framework for a holistic evaluation of transport alternatives is proposed.  Keywords: sustainability assessment, economic approach, indicator-based assessment, life cycle assessment, multi-criteria decision analysis, sustainable transport


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document