农业生命周期评价研究进展

作为评价产品系统全链条环境影响的有效工具,生命周期评价（LCA）方法已广泛用于工业领域。农业领域也面临着高强度的资源和环境压力,LCA在农业领域的应用应运而生。旨在综述已有农业LCA研究的基础上,鉴别农业LCA应用存在的问题,并为农业LCA未来的发展提出建议。目前农业LCA存在系统边界和功能单位界定不明晰、缺少区域清单数据库、生命周期环境影响评价模型（LCIA）不能准确反映农业系统环境影响、结果解释存在误区等方面的问题。为了科学准确地衡量农业系统的环境影响,促进农业系统的可持续发展,文章认为农业LCA应该从以下几个方面加强研究,即科学界定评价的参照系、系统边界的扩大及功能单位的合理选取、区域异质性数据库构建与LCIA模型开发、基于组织农业LCA的开发以及对于利益相关者行为的研究。     

城市生活垃圾综合管理决策研究进展

城市生活垃圾综合管理主要是指选择合适的方案、政策手段等来实现特定的管理目标。选择适宜的研究方法是开展城市生活垃圾管理科学决策的重要基础和保障。综述了近年来该领域常用的相关研究方法和研究进展，总结分析了以统计分析、多准则决策分析、全生命周期分析、费用效益分析等为代表的传统数学模型方法和以系统动力学、基于Agent的建模等为代表的复杂系统模拟方法两大类方法的适用场景、优缺点和研究进展，分析了未来该领域研究的趋势和需重点关注的方向。研究发现：传统的数学模型方法被广泛应用于生活垃圾管理决策领域，成为支撑决策的重要研究工具，但这类方法通常大多以单一主体为研究对象，难以解释各种因素对其它主体及整个生活垃圾管理系统的作用，且大多为静态的或对某个或某几个时间点进行分析，容易忽略系统性和系统中各主体间的非线性关系、行为的交互作用及随时空的动态变化等。未来研究需充分关注城市生活垃圾管理系统的复杂性和系统不同主体间的行为交互作用，加强系统模拟模型开发，开展系统性政策评估分析等，为城市生活垃圾精细化管理决策提供科学支撑。     

基于在线供应链调查的产品生命周期评价

产品生命周期评价(LCA)中的供应链数据收集非常困难而且效率低下,因而在产品LCA研究中常常近似处理、甚至忽略供应链实际生产过程,严重影响了LCA的数据质量与可信度。开发专门的供应链数据收集工具是解决这一问题的有效途径。介绍了可进行在线供应链调查、建模与计算分析的LCA系统e Footprint,基于该系统提出了在线的LCA工作方法,通过长虹美菱冰箱的应用案例验证了系统与方法的可行性,为提高产品LCA的效率和质量提供了新的解决方案。     

基于GIS的产业生态学研究述评

产业生态学由于缺少关于空间分析的工具,使得研究结果因缺乏空间维度信息而影响对管理效率和精准度的支持。基于GIS的产业生态学相关研究已成为产业生态学研究的一个新的方向。为总结已有的研究成果并展望未来的研究方向,运用文献计量及对比分析的手段,系统分析了国内外基于GIS的产业生态学的相关研究进展,得出以下结论:当前基于GIS的产业生态研究主要集中在物质代谢、产业共生和生命周期评价3个方面,将GIS技术引入到物质代谢研究中,可以更好的展示物质代谢的时空分布格局,为物质代谢研究提供了一种新的方法;基于GIS技术,不仅可以更加高效地挖掘潜在的产业共生机会,还可应用于生态产业园的规划管理如企业的选址、空间布局等以及废弃物的回收再利用方面;将GIS与LCA耦合在一起,可以很好地补充、完善和管理传统数据,有助于探索产品、活动或工艺的环境影响的空间特性以及进行土地利用相关的环境影响评价。另外,国内外研究的侧重点也不尽相同。在物质代谢研究中,国内研究较少,仅在城市尺度上进行了基础设施的物质代谢及其存量分析,国外在国家、城市尺度上研究了铜、锌等金属的物质代谢情况;在产业共生研究中,国内侧重于生态产业园的研究,而国外侧重于城市尺度的产业共生机会识别的研究;在LCA的研究中,国内开展了基于GIS的生命周期评价数据库和产品材料信息管理系统的研究,而国外侧重于进行区域化的生命周期评价、进行土地利用影响类型的相关评价以及污染物的追踪,国内在该方面尚处于起步阶段。国内外在研究方法上存在共性,都是基于GIS的空间分析方法、缓冲区分析方法以及数据库技术等。未来将GIS作为一个平台,面向产业转型展开产业生态学综合理论方法的研究,可以为产业的可持续性管理提供有效支持。     

农产品水足迹研究进展

水是人类生产生活的重要资源,科学合理地评价人类活动对水资源的影响是实现水资源可持续利用的重要保障.水足迹概念的提出创新性地将人类活动消耗的水资源区分为绿水、蓝水和灰水,拓展了水资源可持续利用的评价思路.基于虚拟水(VW)的水足迹理论和基于生命周期(LCA)的水足迹理论将水质与水量的概念相结合,成为了农业水资源管理研究的热点内容.基于VW的水足迹理论主要包括绿水足迹、蓝水足迹和灰水足迹的计算,以及水环境可持续性评价,而基于LCA的水足迹理论体现了水资源的消耗和污染及其对环境造成的综合影响.本文详细介绍了这两种水足迹理论的计算方法与环境可持续评价的研究进展,对比分析两种水足迹理论在描述农产品生产用水及其环境影响方面的差异性,并对其研究前景进行了展望.     

城市生活垃圾代谢的研究进展

城市代谢是导致城市发展、能量生产和废物排放的社会、经济和技术过程的总和。生活垃圾管理系统是一类典型的、具备社会、经济、自然要素的复杂系统,它不仅同管理体制、技术水平和居民素质有关,也贯穿生产、消费、流通、还原过程,更和水体、土壤、大气、生物、矿产等自然环境紧密联系。综述了近年来基于城市生态系统代谢思路,在生活垃圾碳、重金属、营养元素和能量的城市代谢等方面的研究进展,分析了未来该领域研究需重点关注的方向。生活垃圾在城市生态系统中的能量流动、物质循环、代谢效率等方面的研究,可为生活垃圾管理系统的评价、规划、工程、管理研究提供科学基础。     

基于生命周期方法的生活垃圾资源化利用系统生态效率分析

我国生活垃圾产量大但处理能力不足,产生多种环境危害,对其资源化利用能够缓解环境压力并回收资源。为探讨生活垃圾资源化利用策略,综合生命周期评价与生命周期成本分析方法,建立生态效率模型。以天津市为例,分析和比较焚烧发电、卫生填埋-填埋气发电、与堆肥+卫生填埋3种典型生活垃圾资源化利用情景的生态效率。结果表明,堆肥+卫生填埋情景具有潜在最优生态效率;全球变暖对总环境影响贡献最大,而投资成本对经济影响贡献最大。考虑天津市生活垃圾管理现状,建议鼓励发展生活垃圾干湿组分分离及厨余垃圾堆肥的资源化利用策略。     

生命周期管理研究述评

生命周期管理起源于生命周期思想,它是生命周期思想在实践中的具体应用,是面向可持续生产和消费,对产品、工艺和服务的全生命周期环境影响进行的综合管理,是解决复合生态系统中结构无序、效率不高和代谢冗余的有效途径,是基于生命周期评价原则与框架的一种环境管理手段或环境管理体系。全面回顾了生命周期管理的起源与内涵,阐述了生命周期管理与生命周期评价的区别与联系,梳理了生命周期管理与环境管理体系的关系。对生命周期管理在产品、企业、行业及城市等层次上的具体应用进行了总结与述评,并对其今后需深入研究的方向进行了展望。     

环境足迹的核算与整合框架——基于生命周期评价的视角

环境足迹及其与生命周期评价(LCA)的关系是工业生态学关注的新热点。从探讨环境足迹与LCA的关系入手,以碳足迹、水足迹、土地足迹和材料足迹为例,分别对每一项足迹指标两个版本的核算方法进行了比较。根据清单加和过程的特点,将所有足迹指标划分为基于权重因子和基于特征因子两类,总结了两者的适用性和局限性。在此基础上提出了一个环境足迹核算与整合的统一框架。该框架基于LCA视角建立,但对系统边界和清单数据的要求相对灵活,因而也适用于生命周期不甚明确的情形。研究在一定程度上揭示了足迹指标的方法学实质,同时也为环境影响综合评估提供了一条规范化的途径。     

基于混合生命周期评价的生活垃圾处理系统生态效率分析

基于混合生命周期评价(Hybrid life cycle assessment,HLCA)提出一种改进生态效率模型,系统评价卫生填埋、卫生填埋⁃填埋气利用、焚烧发电、堆肥+卫生填埋和堆肥+焚烧发电5种我国典型生活垃圾处理情景的生态效率,并探究可持续性包含的环境、经济和社会多维权衡关系。结果表明,具有最大生态效率的生活垃圾处理情景因可持续性维度选取不同而异,如考虑人体健康损害影响,焚烧发电情景具有最大经济生态效率,而卫生填埋⁃填埋气利用情景具有最大社会生态效率。生活垃圾处理系统的可持续性评价维度之间具有显著的权衡关系,忽略某些影响类型可能带来问题转移。5种生活垃圾处理情景的环境影响各异,非焚烧情景气候变化影响和焚烧情景人体毒性影响突出。机器设备和燃料使用对资源消耗影响贡献最大,而生活垃圾处理过程对经济效益和其他环境影响贡献最大。本文提出的改进生态效率模型可以定量评价生活垃圾管理系统生态效率及权衡关系,为有效制定生活垃圾管理政策提供全面的信息支持。     

Identifying Stakeholders’ Views on the Eco‐efficiency Assessment of a Municipal Solid Waste Management System

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is one of the most popular methods of technical‐environmental assessment for informing environmental policies, as, for instance, in municipal solid waste (MSW) management. Because MSW management involves many stakeholders with possibly conflicting interests, the implementation of an LCA‐based policy can, however, be blocked or delayed. A stakeholder assessment of future scenarios helps identify conflicting interests and anticipate barriers of sustainable MSW management systems. This article presents such an approach for Swiss waste glass‐packaging disposal, currently undergoing a policy review. In an online survey, stakeholders (N = 85) were asked to assess disposal scenarios showing different LCA‐based eco‐efficiencies with respect to their desirability and probability of occurrence. Scenarios with higher eco‐efficiency than the current system are more desirable and considered more probable than those with lower eco‐efficiency. A combination of inland recycling and downcycling to foam glass (insulation material) in Switzerland is desired by all stakeholders and is more eco‐efficient than the current system. In contrast, institutions of MSW management, such as national and regional environmental protection agencies, judge a scenario in which nearly all cullet would be recycled in the only Swiss glass‐packaging factory as more desirable than supply and demand stakeholders of waste glass‐packaging. Such a scenario involves a monopsony rejected by many municipalities and scrap traders. Such an assessment procedure can provide vital information guiding the formulation of environmental policies.     

From Life Cycle Assessment to Life Cycle Management

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a widely accepted methodology to support decision‐making processes in which one compares alternatives, and that helps prevent shifting of environmental burdens along the value chain or among impact categories. According to regulation in the European Union (EU), the movement of waste needs to be reduced and, if unavoidable, the environmental gain from a specific waste treatment option requiring transport must be larger than the losses arising from transport. The EU explicitly recommends the use of LCA or life cycle thinking for the formulation of new waste management plans. In the last two revisions of the Industrial Waste Management Programme of Catalonia (PROGRIC), the use of a life cycle thinking approach to waste policy was mandated. In this article we explain the process developed to arrive at practical life cycle management (LCM) from what started as an LCA project. LCM principles we have labeled the “3/3” principle or the “good enough is best” principle were found to be essential to obtain simplified models that are easy to understand for legislators and industries, useful in waste management regulation, and, ultimately, feasible. In this article, we present the four models of options for the management of waste solvent to be addressed under Catalan industrial waste management regulation. All involved actors concluded that the models are sufficiently robust, are easy to apply, and accomplish the aim of limiting the transport of waste outside Catalonia, according to the principles of proximity and sufficiency.     

Integrated municipal waste management systems: An indicator to assess their environmental and economic sustainability

Tools based on Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) are routinely used to assess the environmental and economic performance of integrated municipal solid waste (MSW) management systems. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is used to quantify the environmental impacts, whereas Life Cycle Costing (LCC) allows financial and economic assessments. These tools require specific experience and knowledge, and a large amount of data.The aim of this project is the definition of an indicator for the assessment of the environmental and economic sustainability of integrated MSW management systems. The challenge is to define a simple but comprehensive indicator that may be calculated also by local administrators and managers of the waste system and not only by scientists or LCT experts.The proposed indicator is a composite one, constituted by three individual indicators: two of them assess the environmental sustainability of the system by quantifying the achieved material and energy recovery levels, while the third one quantifies the costs. The composite indicator allows to compare different integrated MSW management systems in an objective way, and to monitor the performance of a system over time.The calculation of the three individual indicators has been tested on the integrated MSW management systems of the Lombardia Region (Italy) as well as on four of its provinces (Milano, Bergamo, Pavia, and Mantova).     

Environmental assessment of energy production from municipal solid waste incineration

Background, Aims and Scope During the combustion of municipal solid waste (MSW), energy is produced which can be utilized to generate electricity. However, electricity production from incineration has to be evaluated from the point view of the environmental performance. In this study, environmental impacts of electricity production from waste incineration plant in Thailand are compared with those from Thai conventional power plants. Methods The evaluation is based on a life cycle perspective using life cycle assessment (LCA) as the evaluation tool. Since MSW incineration provides two services, viz., waste management and electricity production, the conventional power production system is expanded to include landfilling without energy recovery, which is the most commonly used waste management system in Thailand, to provide the equivalent function of waste management. Results The study shows that the incineration performs better than conventional power plants vis-à-vis global warming and photochemical ozone formation, but not for acidification and nutrient enrichment. Discussion There are some aspects which may influence this result. If landfilling with gas collection and flaring systems is included in the analysis along with conventional power production instead of landfilling without energy recovery, the expanded system could become more favorable than the incineration in the global warming point of view. In addition, if the installation of deNO_x process is employed in the MSW incineration process, nitrogen dioxide can be reduced with a consequent reduction of acidification and nutrient enrichment potentials. However, the conventional power plants still have lower acidification and nutrient enrichment potentials. Conclusions The study shows that incineration could not play the major role for electricity production, but in addition to being a waste management option, could be considered as a complement to conventional power production. To promote incineration as a benign waste management option, appropriate deNO_x and dioxin removal processes should be provided. Separation of high moisture content waste fractions from the waste to be incinerated and improvement of the operation efficiency of the incineration plant must be considered to improve the environmental performance of MSW incineration. Recommendations This study provides an overall picture and impacts, and hence, can support a decision-making process for implementation of MSW incineration. The results obtained in this study could provide valuable information to implement incineration. But it should be noted that the results show the characteristics only from some viewpoints. Outlook Further analysis is required to evaluate the electricity production of the incineration plant from other environmental aspects such as toxicity and land-use.     

Influence of assumptions about selection and recycling efficiencies on the LCA of integrated waste management systems

Background, aim, and scope  Life cycle assessment (LCA) applied to alternative waste management strategies is becoming a commonly utilised tool for decision makers. This LCA study analyses together material and energy recovery within integrated municipal solid waste (MSW) management systems, i.e. the recovery of materials separated with the source-separated collection of MSW and the energy recovery from the residual waste. The final aim is to assess the energetic and environmental performance of the entire MSW management system and, in particular, to evaluate the influence of different assumptions about recycling on the LCA results. Materials and methods  The analysis uses the method of LCA and, thus, takes into account that any recycling activity influences the environment not only by consuming resources and releasing emissions and waste streams but also by replacing conventional products from primary production. Different assumptions about the selection efficiencies of the collected materials and about the quantity of virgin material substituted by the reprocessed material were made. Moreover, the analysis considers that the energy recovered from the residual waste displaces the same quantity of energy produced in conventional power plants and boilers fuelled with fossil fuels. Results  The analysis shows, in the expanded model of the material and energy recovering chain, that the environmental gains are higher than the environmental impacts. However, when we reduce the selection efficiencies by 15%, the impact indicators worsen by a percentage included between 10% and 26%. This phenomenon is even more evident when we consider a substitution ratio of 1:<1 for paper and plastic: The worsening is around 15–20% for all the impact indicators except for the global warming for which the worsening is up to 45%. Discussion  Hypotheses about the selection efficiencies of the source-separated collected materials and about the substitution ratio have a great influence on the LCA results. Consequently, policy makers have to be aware of the fact that the impacts of an integrated MSW management system are highly dependent on the assumptions made in the modelling of the material recovery, as well as in the modelling of the energy recovery. Conclusions  LCA allows to evaluate the impacts of integrated systems and how these impacts change when the assumptions made during the modelling of the different single parts of the system are modified. Due to the significant impacts that hypotheses about material recovery have in the results, they should be expressed in a very transparent way in the report of LCA studies, together with the assumptions made about energy recovery. Recommendations and perspectives  The results suggest that the hypotheses about the value of the substitution ratio are very important, and the case of wood should therefore be better analysed and a substitution ratio of 1:<1 should be used, as for paper and plastic. It seems that the assumptions made about which material is replaced by the recycled one are very important too, and in this sense, more research is needed about what the recycled plastic may effectively substitute, in particular the polyolefin mix.     

Informing Packaging Design Decisions at Toyota Motor Sales Using Life Cycle Assessment and Costing

Throughout their life cycle stages—material production, package manufacture, distribution, end-of-life management—packaging systems consume natural resources and energy, generate waste, and emit pollutants. Each of these stages also carries a financial cost. Motivated by a desire to decrease environmental burdens while reducing financial costs associated with the packaging of accessory and service parts, Toyota Motor Sales (TMS) partnered with the Donald Bren School of Environmental Science & Management to build a life cycle assessment and costing tool to support packaging design decisions. The resulting Environmental Packaging Impact Calculator (EPIC) provides comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC). It allows packaging designers to identify environmentally and economically preferable packaging systems in daily decision-making. EPIC's parameterized process flow model allows users to assess many different packaging systems using a single model. Its input/output interface is designed for users without preexisting knowledge of LCA theory or practice and calculates results based on relatively few input data. The main motivation behind this environmental design tool is to provide relevant information to those individuals who are in the best position to reduce life cycle impacts and costs from TMS's packaging and distribution systems.     

Applying Life Cycle Tools and Process Engineering to Determine the Most Adequate Treatment Process Conditions. A Tool in Environmental Policy (12 pp)

Background The analysis of a wastewater treatment technology, under a expanded boundaries system which includes both the technology and the inputs required for its operation, quantifies the overall environmental impact that may result from the treatment of a wastewater stream. This is particularly useful for environmental policy makers being that a expanded boundaries system tends to provide a holistic view. The former view can be highly enriched with the use of process engineering tools, such as mathematical process modelling, process design, performance assessment and cost optimised models. Main Features The traditional approach used to assess waste treatment technologies is contrasted with a life cycle analysis (LCA) approach. The optimal design of a granular activated carbon adsorption (GAC) process is used as a model system to demonstrate the advantages of LCA approaches over traditional approaches. Further sections of the paper describe a mathematical framework for the assessment of technologies, design considerations applied in the cost optimised carbon adsorption model, the use of LCA techniques to perform an inventory of all emissions associated to the process system and, some of its environmental impacts. Results Economic and environmental considerations regarding the optimum process design are introduced as a basis for decision towards the selection and operating conditions of wastewater treatment technologies. Moreover, the use of LCA has revealed that the environmental burden associated with the wastewater treatment may produce a higher environmental impact than one that can be caused by untreated discharges. Conclusion The paper highlights the string advantages that environmental policy makers may have by combining LCA and process engineering tools. Furthermore, this approach can be incorporated into other existing treatment processes or for process designers.     

Comparative life cycle assessment of two landfill technologies for the treatment of municipal solid waste

Goal and Scope  The potential environmental impacts associated with two landfill technologies for the treatment of municipal solid waste (MSW), the engineered landfill and the bioreactor landfill, were assessed using the life cycle assessment (LCA) tool. The system boundaries were expanded to include an external energy production function since the landfill gas collected from the bioreactor landfill can be energetically valorized into either electricity or heat; the functional unit was then defined as the stabilization of 600 000 tonnes of MSW and the production of 2.56x10⁸ MJ of electricity and 7.81x10⁸ MJ of heat. Methods  Only the life cycle stages that presented differences between the two compared options were considered in the study. The four life cycle stages considered in the study cover the landfill cell construction, the daily and closure operations, the leachate and landfill gas associated emissions and the external energy production. The temporal boundary corresponded to the stabilization of the waste and was represented by the time to produce 95% of the calculated landfill gas volume. The potential impacts were evaluated using the EDIP97 method, stopping after the characterization step. Results and Discussion  The inventory phase of the LCA showed that the engineered landfill uses 26% more natural resources and generates 81% more solid wastes throughout its life cycle than the bioreactor landfill. The evaluated impacts, essentially associated with the external energy production and the landfill gas related emissions, are on average 91% higher for the engineered landfill, since for this option 1) no energy is recovered from the landfill gas and 2) more landfill gas is released untreated after the end of the post-closure monitoring period. The valorization of the landfill gas to electricity or heat showed similar environmental profiles (1% more raw materials and 7% more solid waste for the heat option but 13% more impacts for the electricity option). Conclusion and Recommendations  The methodological choices made during this study, e.g. simplification of the systems by the exclusion of the identical life cycle stages, limit the use of the results to the comparison of the two considered options. The validity of this comparison could however be improved if the systems were placed in the larger context of municipal solid waste management and include activities such as recycling, composting and incineration.     

LCA and decision making: when and how to use consequential LCA; 62nd LCA forum,Swiss Federal Institute of Technology,Zürich, 9 September 2016

The 62nd life cycle assessment (LCA) forum was held on 9 September 2016 to discuss the state of research and application with regard to consequential life cycle assessment. This conference report presents the highlights of the LCA forum. The state of the art of consequential LCA was presented from different viewpoints. It was pointed out that consequential LCA is more than marginal mixes and avoided burdens and involves causal modelling. It was also said that social responsibility calls for consequential LCA. Currently, different models are used to support decision making. It was suggested to make use of the variety of models to check the conclusiveness of their results and thus the reliability of the LCAs. Current and future implementations of consequential LCI models in background databases and linking algorithms were presented. Several speakers presented consequential LCA case studies covering the sectors energy, transport, housing and mining. Some of the LCA models used in the case studies are complemented with general and partial computable equilibrium models and agent-based models and use environmentally extended input-output data or process-based LCA data. Some of the presentations focused on elements such as constrained production, marginal market mixes and technologies or recycling and system expansion. In three parallel workshops, the needs, contents and methodology, and implementation of consequential LCA approaches were discussed. The participants seemed to generally agree on the basic goal that LCA should be able to reflect the consequences of decisions. The inquiry among the participants showed that the demand for consequential LCA studies is hardly existent. The appropriate implementation of consequential modelling in LCA databases and on the appropriate model to be used in consequential LCA case studies was debated. It revealed a need for further and extensive discussions to be able to reach (minimum) consensus.