Hydroponic cultivation: life cycle assessment of substrate choice

2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (8) ◽  
pp. 1801-1812 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuliana Vinci ◽  
Mattia Rapa
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Carbon Footprint ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Hydroponic Cultivation ◽  
Hydroponic Systems ◽  
Total Impact ◽  
Rock Wool

Purpose Nowadays, hydroponic cultivation represents a widely used agricultural methodology. The purpose of this paper is to study comparatively on hydroponic substrates. This study is highlighting the best substrate to be involved in hydroponic systems, considering its costs and its sustainability. Design/methodology/approach Seven substrates were evaluated: rock wool, perlite, vermiculite, peat, coconut fibres, bark and sand. Life cycle assessment (life cycle inventory, life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) and life cycle costing (LCC)) was applied to evaluate the environmental and economic impact. Through the results of the impacts, the carbon footprint of each substrate was calculated. Findings Perlite is the most impacting substrate, as highlighted by LCIA, followed by rock wool and vermiculite. The most sustainable ones, instead, are sand and bark. Sand has the lower carbon footprint (0.0121 kg CO2 eq.); instead, bark carbon footprint results in one of the highest (1.1197 kg CO2 eq.), while in the total impact analysis this substrate seems to be highly sustainable. Also for perlite the two results are in disagreement: it has a high total impact but very low carbon footprint (0.0209 kg CO2 eq.) compared to the other substrates. From the LCC analysis it appears that peat is the most expensive substrate (€6.67/1,000 cm3), while sand is the cheaper one (€0.26/1,000 cm3). Originality/value The LCA and carbon footprint methodologies were applied to a growing agriculture practice. This study has highlighted the economic and environmental sustainability of seven substrates examined. This analysis has shown that sand can be the best substrate to be involved in hydroponic systems by considering its costs and its sustainability.

Carbon footprint and financial evaluation of an aeronautic component production using different manufacturing processes

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 425-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Loukopoulos ◽  
Christos Vasilios Katsiropoulos ◽  
Spiros G. Pantelakis
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Carbon Footprint ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Labor Cost ◽  
Financial Viability ◽  
Mechanical Recycling ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Energy Demands ◽  
Alternative Scenarios ◽  
Manufacturing Technologies

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to quantify the environmental footprint and cost and thus compare different manufacturing scenarios associated with the production of aeronautical structural components. Design/methodology/approach A representative helicopter canopy, i.e., canopy of the EUROCOPTER EC Twin Star helicopter described in Pantelakis et al. (2009), has been considered for the carbon footprint (life cycle energy and climate change impact analysis) along with the life cycle costing analysis. Four scenarios – combinations of different manufacturing technologies (autoclave and resin transfer molding (RTM)) and end-of-life treatment scenarios (mechanical recycling and pyrolysis) are considered. Findings Using the models developed the expected environmental and cost benefits by involving the RTM technique have been quantified. The environmental impact was expressed in terms of energy consumption and of Global Warming Potential-100. From an environmental standpoint, processing the canopy using the RTM technique leads to decreased energy demands as compared to autoclaving because of the shorter curing cycles exhibited from this technique and thus the less time needed. As far as the financial viability of both processing scenarios is concerned, the more steps needed for preparing the mold and the need for auxiliary materials increase the material and the labor cost of autoclaving as compared to RTM. Originality/value At the early design stages in aeronautics, a number of disciplines (environmental, financial and mechanical) should be taken into account in order to evaluate alternative scenarios (material, manufacturing, recycling, etc.). In this paper a methodology is developed toward this direction, quantifying the environmental and financial viability of different manufacturing scenarios associated with the production of aeronautical structures.

scholarly journals Carbon footprint stock analysis of US manufacturing: a time series input-output LCA

2017 ◽  
Vol 117 (5) ◽  
pp. 853-872 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gokhan Egilmez ◽  
Khurrum Bhutta ◽  
Bulent Erenay ◽  
Yong Shin Park ◽  
Ridvan Gedik
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Carbon Footprint ◽  
Manufacturing Industries ◽  
Input Output ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Manufacturing Sectors

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an input-output life cycle assessment model to estimate the carbon footprint of US manufacturing sectors. To achieve this, the paper sets out the following objectives: develop a time series carbon footprint estimation model for US manufacturing sectors; analyze the annual and cumulative carbon footprint; analyze and identify the most carbon emitting and carbon intensive manufacturing industries in the last four decades; and analyze the supply chains of US manufacturing industries to help identify the most critical carbon emitting industries. Design/methodology/approach Initially, the economic input-output tables of US economy and carbon footprint multipliers were collected from EORA database (Lenzen et al., 2012). Then, economic input-output life cycle assessment models were developed to quantify the carbon footprint extents of the US manufacturing sectors between 1970 and 2011. The carbon footprint is assessed in metric tons of CO2-equivalent, whereas the economic outputs were measured in million dollar economic activity. Findings The salient finding of this paper is that the carbon footprint stock has been increasing substantially over the last four decades. The steep growth in economic output unfortunately over-shadowed the potential benefits that were obtained from lower CO2 intensities. Analysis of specific industry results indicate that the top five manufacturing sectors based on total carbon footprint share are “petroleum refineries,” “Animal (except poultry) slaughtering, rendering, and processing,” “Other basic organic chemical manufacturing,” “Motor vehicle parts manufacturing,” and “Iron and steel mills and ferroalloy manufacturing.” Originality/value This paper proposes a state-of-art time series input-output-based carbon footprint assessment for the US manufacturing industries considering direct (onsite) and indirect (supply chain) impacts. In addition, the paper provides carbon intensity and carbon stock variables that are assessed over time for each of the US manufacturing industries from a supply chain footprint perspective.

Analyzing the environmental sustainability of primary schools’ facades within the scope of life cycle assessment in Turkey and recommendations for improvement

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cagla Keles ◽  
Fatih Yazicioglu
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Primary Schools ◽  
Carbon Emission ◽  
Embodied Energy ◽  
Public Buildings ◽  
Content Type

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to identify the sustainability conditions of primary schools in Turkey within the scope of the life cycle assessment (LCA). It is aimed to develop optimum alternatives to reduce the environmental impact of primary schools and reach environmental sustainability targets of the sustainable development goals in Turkey.Design/methodology/approachFrom the construction project of 103 buildings located in Istanbul, 10 case buildings with various typical plans were chosen for analysis. The results regarding their life cycle energy and carbon emission for material production, operation and maintenance stages were calculated for a lifespan of 50 years. Results were evaluated and compared within the scope of environmental sustainability. Optimum alternatives for improving the environmental sustainability and performances of selected case buildings’ facades were developed, and the life cycle energy and carbon emission for proposed conditions were calculated. The obtained results were evaluated for current and proposed conditions.FindingsResults showed that reinforced concrete material contributes the most to the life cycle-embodied energy and CO2 emission of buildings. Cooling load increases the life cycle operational energy (LCOE) and CO2 emission of buildings. Using high-performance glazing significantly reduces LCOE and CO2 emission. Recycled and fiber-based materials have significant potential for reducing life cycle-embodied energy and CO2 emission.Originality/valueThis study has been developed in response to achieving sustainable development targets on public buildings in Turkey. In this regard, external walls of primary schools were analyzed within the scope of LCA and recommendations were made to contribute to the policies and regulations requested by the Government of Turkey. This study proves that alternative and novel materials have great potential for achieving sustainable public buildings. The study answers to questions about reducing the environmental impact of primary school buildings by using LCA approach with a holistic point of view.

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.

scholarly journals Engineering Design Process of Face Masks Based on Circularity and Life Cycle Assessment in the Constraint of the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 4948
Author(s):  
Núria Boix Rodríguez ◽  
Giovanni Formentini ◽  
Claudio Favi ◽  
Marco Marconi
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Design Guidelines ◽  
New Device ◽  
Engineering Design Process ◽  
Life Cycle Perspective ◽  
Different Types ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Negative Impacts

Face masks are currently considered key equipment to protect people against the COVID-19 pandemic. The demand for such devices is considerable, as is the amount of plastic waste generated after their use (approximately 1.6 million tons/day since the outbreak). Even if the sanitary emergency must have the maximum priority, environmental concerns require investigation to find possible mitigation solutions. The aim of this work is to develop an eco-design actions guide that supports the design of dedicated masks, in a manner to reduce the negative impacts of these devices on the environment during the pandemic period. Toward this aim, an environmental assessment based on life cycle assessment and circularity assessment (material circularity indicator) of different types of masks have been carried out on (i) a 3D-printed mask with changeable filters, (ii) a surgical mask, (iii) an FFP2 mask with valve, (iv) an FFP2 mask without valve, and (v) a washable mask. Results highlight how reusable masks (i.e., 3D-printed masks and washable masks) are the most sustainable from a life cycle perspective, drastically reducing the environmental impacts in all categories. The outcomes of the analysis provide a framework to derive a set of eco-design guidelines which have been used to design a new device that couples protection requirements against the virus and environmental sustainability.

The use of the risk assessment in the life cycle assessment framework

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Francesca Milazzo ◽  
Francesco Spina
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Biodiesel Production ◽  
Health Impacts ◽  
Complete Analysis ◽  
Transfer Factors ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Human Health Impacts

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to quantify the human health impacts of soy-biodiesel production with the aim to discuss about its environmental sustainability. Design/methodology/approach – The integrated use of two current approaches, risk assessment (RA) and life cycle assessment (LCA), has allowed improvement of the potentialities of both in obtaining a more complete analysis. The implementation of a life cycle indicator for the assessment of the impacts on the human health, integrating the features of both approaches, is the main focus of this paper. Findings – It has been found that, although the biodiesel is a green fuel, it has some criticalities in its life cycle, which cannot be disregarded. In fact, even if biodiesel is essentially a clean fuel there are some phases, prior to the industrial phase, that can cause negative effects on human health and ecosystems. Practical implications – Results suggest some measures which can be adopted to substantially reduce human health impacts. Further alternative could be analysed in future to gain more insight about the use of biodiesel fuels. Originality/value – The estimation of the impacts of a process producing biodiesel has been made by using a novel approach. The novelty is associated with the calculation of the impacts on human health by using the transfer factors applied in RA. The use of such factors, properly modified in order to estimate the impacts on a wider scale than a site-dimension, allows defining a holistic approach, as LCA and RA are used as complete units but at the same time can be related to each other.

scholarly journals Analysis of the Characteristics of Environmental Impacts According to the Cut-Off Criteria Applicable to the Streamlined Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) of Apartment Buildings in South Korea

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 2898
Author(s):  
Rakhyun Kim ◽  
Myung-Kwan Lim ◽  
Seungjun Roh ◽  
Won-Jun Park
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Impact Categories ◽  
Environmental Impact Analysis ◽  
Apartment Buildings ◽  
Environmental Impact Categories ◽  
Weight Percentile

This study analyzed the characteristics of the environmental impacts of apartment buildings, a typical housing type in South Korea, as part of a research project supporting the streamlined life cycle assessment (S-LCA) of buildings within the G-SEED (Green Standard for Energy and Environmental Design) framework. Three recently built apartment building complexes were chosen as study objects for the quantitative evaluation of the buildings in terms of their embodied environmental impacts (global warming potential, acidification potential, eutrophication potential, ozone layer depletion potential, photochemical oxidant creation potential, and abiotic depletion potential), using the LCA approach. Additionally, we analyzed the emission trends according to the cut-off criteria of the six environmental impact categories by performing an S-LCA with cut-off criteria 90–99% of the cumulative weight percentile. Consequently, we were able to present the cut-off criterion best suited for S-LCA and analyze the effect of the cut-off criteria on the environmental impact analysis results. A comprehensive environmental impact analysis of the characteristics of the six environmental impact categories revealed that the error rate was below 5% when the cut-off criterion of 97.5% of the cumulative weight percentile was applied, thus verifying its validity as the optimal cut-off criterion for S-LCA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document