Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Energy Consumption, Pollutant Emission, and Cost Analysis of Coal/Oil/Biomass to Ethylene Glycol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simin Xu ◽  
Zhiwei Li ◽  
Qingchun Yang ◽  
Genyun Chu ◽  
Jinliang Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Ethylene Glycol ◽  
Pollutant Emission ◽  
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment

scholarly journals Life-Cycle Assessment of Carbon Footprint of Bike-Share and Bus Systems in Campus Transit

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 158
Author(s):  
Sishen Wang ◽  
Hao Wang ◽  
Pengyu Xie ◽  
Xiaodan Chen
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Carbon Footprint ◽  
Co2 Emission ◽  
Raw Material ◽  
Transit System ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
Bus System ◽  
Bike Share

Low-carbon transport system is desired for sustainable cities. The study aims to compare carbon footprint of two transportation modes in campus transit, bus and bike-share systems, using life-cycle assessment (LCA). A case study was conducted for the four-campus (College Ave, Cook/Douglass, Busch, Livingston) transit system at Rutgers University (New Brunswick, NJ). The life-cycle of two systems were disaggregated into four stages, namely, raw material acquisition and manufacture, transportation, operation and maintenance, and end-of-life. Three uncertain factors—fossil fuel type, number of bikes provided, and bus ridership—were set as variables for sensitivity analysis. Normalization method was used in two impact categories to analyze and compare environmental impacts. The results show that the majority of CO2 emission and energy consumption comes from the raw material stage (extraction and upstream production) of the bike-share system and the operation stage of the campus bus system. The CO2 emission and energy consumption of the current campus bus system are 46 and 13 times of that of the proposed bike-share system, respectively. Three uncertain factors can influence the results: (1) biodiesel can significantly reduce CO2 emission and energy consumption of the current campus bus system; (2) the increased number of bikes increases CO2 emission of the bike-share system; (3) the increase of bus ridership may result in similar impact between two systems. Finally, an alternative hybrid transit system is proposed that uses campus buses to connect four campuses and creates a bike-share system to satisfy travel demands within each campus. The hybrid system reaches the most environmentally friendly state when 70% passenger-miles provided by campus bus and 30% by bike-share system. Further research is needed to consider the uncertainty of biking behavior and travel choice in LCA. Applicable recommendations include increasing ridership of campus buses and building a bike-share in campus to support the current campus bus system. Other strategies such as increasing parking fees and improving biking environment can also be implemented to reduce automobile usage and encourage biking behavior.

Comparative life cycle assessment of conventional, electric and hybrid passenger vehicles in Spain

2021 ◽  
pp. 125883
Author(s):  
Gonzalo Puig-Samper Naranjo ◽  
David Bolonio ◽  
Marcelo F. Ortega ◽  
María-Jesús García-Martínez
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Passenger Vehicles ◽  
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Two Different Models of a Home Appliance

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
M. Mobeen Shaukat ◽  
Hammad Masood ◽  
Necar Merah ◽  
Fadi A. Al-Badour ◽  
Abdul Qadeer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Home Appliance ◽  
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment

scholarly journals Impact of Cycle Time and Payload of an Industrial Robot on Resource Efficiency

Robotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
Florian Stuhlenmiller ◽  
Steffi Weyand ◽  
Jens Jungblut ◽  
Liselotte Schebek ◽  
Debora Clever ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Emissions ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Resource Efficiency ◽  
Life Cycle Costs ◽  
Gas Emissions ◽  
Cycle Times ◽  
The Individual

Modern industry benefits from the automation capabilities and flexibility of robots. Consequently, the performance depends on the individual task, robot and trajectory, while application periods of several years lead to a significant impact of the use phase on the resource efficiency. In this work, simulation models predicting a robot’s energy consumption are extended by an estimation of the reliability, enabling the consideration of maintenance to enhance the assessment of the application’s life cycle costs. Furthermore, a life cycle assessment yields the greenhouse gas emissions for the individual application. Potential benefits of the combination of motion simulation and cost analysis are highlighted by the application to an exemplary system. For the selected application, the consumed energy has a distinct impact on greenhouse gas emissions, while acquisition costs govern life cycle costs. Low cycle times result in reduced costs per workpiece, however, for short cycle times and higher payloads, the probability of required spare parts distinctly increases for two critical robotic joints. Hence, the analysis of energy consumption and reliability, in combination with maintenance, life cycle costing and life cycle assessment, can provide additional information to improve the resource efficiency.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document