A Classroom Simulation to Teach Economic Input−Output Life Cycle Assessment

Life cycle assessment (LCA) methods and tools are increasingly being taught in university courses. Students are learning the concepts and applications of process-based LCA, input−output-based LCA, and hybrid methods. Here, we describe a classroom simulation to introduce students to an economic input−output life cycle assessment (EIO-LCA) method. The simulation uses a simplified four-industry economy with eight transactions among the industries. Production functions for the transactions and waste generation amounts are provided for each industry. Students represent an industry and receive and issue purchase orders for materials to simulate the actual purchases of materials within the economy. Students then compare the simulation to mathematical representations of the model. Finally, students view an online EIO-LCA tool ( http://www.eiolca.net ) and use the tool to compare different products. The simulation has been used successfully with a wide range of students to facilitate conceptual understanding of one EIO-LCA method.     

中国省域环境可持续性时空格局及其影响因素

人类活动已成为人类世背景下全球环境变化的主要驱动力,因此将其合理调控在地球环境边界之内是实现可持续发展的前提条件。作为全球尺度的环境边界,行星边界秉持\"地球系统观\",为统筹不同区域的环境可持续性评估提供了新视角。以行星边界为切入点,评估中国省域主要人类活动的环境可持续性状况,揭示其时空格局演变及社会经济影响因素。结果表明：（1）中国省域碳、氮、磷排放的不可持续性北部整体高于南部,分异程度随时间逐步拉大,不可持续省份数量的占比均已超出2/3;省域水、土地利用的可持续性南部整体高于北部,保持相对稳定,可持续省份数量的占比均已超出3/4。（2）中国省域环境可持续性大体受人口、经济、技术等因素的综合影响,且各类环境要素的可持续性之间存在一定的协同效应。其中,各类环境可持续性均受人口规模的正向驱动,同时氮、磷、水和土地的可持续性均受农业活动的负向驱动。（3）碳排放可持续性主要受能源消费强度的负向驱动,而磷排放可持续性同时受人口城镇化率的负向驱动,水可持续性受二产占比的负向驱动。基于行星边界的环境可持续性研究,可为区域合理界定和有效承担全球环境可持续性责任提供科学参考。     

The Role of Washing Machines in Life Cycle Assessment Studies

A key requirement for those in industry and elsewhere who wish to reduce the environmental impact of a product is to develop priorities for action. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is increasingly used to identify such priorities but can be misleading. This article draws attention to two effects that can occur when the system boundary for a product LCA is not defined correctly. We illustrate the washing machine effect by showing that in separate life cycle studies of clothing, detergents, and washing machines, the use of energy is dominated by operation of the washing machine. All three studies prioritize the use phase for action, but in an aggregated study, double counting of the use-phase impact occurs. We demonstrate the inverse washing machine effect with an example related to energy used in transport. We show that some activities that are significant on a cumulative basis consistently fall outside the chosen system boundary for individual products. A consequence is that when LCA studies are used for prioritization, they are in danger of overemphasizing the use-phase impacts and overlooking the impacts from indirect activities. These effects, which are broadly understood by LCA developers, appear not to be understood properly by those who use LCA to direct priorities for action. Therefore, practitioners should be wary of using LCA for prioritizing action, and LCA guidance documents should reflect this caution.     

Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard

One method to assess the sustainability performance of products is life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), which assesses product performance considering the environmental, economic, and social dimensions of the life cycle. The results of LCSA can be used to compare different products or to support decision making toward sustainable production and consumption. In both cases, LCSA results could be too disaggregated and consequently too difficult to understand and interpret by decision makers. As non‐experts are usually the target audience of experts and scientists, and are also involved in decision‐making processes, the necessity for a straightforward but comprehensive presentation of LCSA results is becoming strategically important. The implementation of the dashboard of sustainability proposed in this article offers a possible solution. An outstanding characteristic of the dashboard of sustainability is the communicability of the results by means of a graphical representation (a cartogram), characterized by a suitable chromatic scale and ranking score. The integration of LCSA and the dashboard of sustainability into a so‐called Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard (LCSD) is described here. The first application of LCSD to a group of hard floor coverings is presented to show the applicability and limitations of the methodology.     

Ecological Footprint Policy? Land Use as an Environmental Indicator

This article argues that policies aimed at sustainability need to address the spatial dimensions of environmental problems and their solutions. In particular, spatial configurations of economic activities deserve attention, which means addressing land use, infrastructure, trade, and transport. Unfortunately, good theory and indicators to support the analysis and design of spatial‐environmental policies are not fully developed. One approach that has become very popular in the last decade is the ecological footprint (EF). It is both an environmental accounting tool and aggregate indicator, which is used by scientists, environmental organizations, and popular media. Despite criticisms of the EF method in the past, its popularity has only increased. In fact, an increasing number of publications with an application of the EF appear in scientific journals. We review the EF approach from indicator‐methodology and welfare angles and assess its policy relevance. Our conclusion is that it does not offer any meaningful information for public policy.     

Circular economy: A new research field?

Action to pursue the circular economy (CE) transition is burgeoning in the government and the private sector. Does this action signal that CE is a distinct field of research with a unique disciplinary identity? This article argues that CE has reached field status, through its own epistemic communities characterized by increasingly shared methodological perspectives and normative ideals, and through institutionalized knowledge development through research journals and authority structures. The recent growth of CE research points toward more contextualized and nuanced operationalizations of the concept, evidence that the field is approaching a threshold state of maturity. Drawing on observations from academic literature and discussions with researchers and experts, we trace the process by which CE has arrived at the status of a field. The article concludes with reflections on research directions.     

Assessing the Sustainability of the Lithuanian Hazardous Waste Management System

Human activities generate waste, whose amounts tend to increase as the demand for quality of life becomes greater and greater. Hazardous waste (HW) generally makes up only about 1% of all waste in Europe; nevertheless, it presents a serious risk to the ecosystem and human health unless managed and treated safely. Several countries of the European Union (EU) report treatment rates of HW in excess of 40%; the others export a large portion of it. Notwithstanding that lots of efforts have been made to properly identify, treat, recycle, store, transport, and dispose of HW, this is still a hot topic faced by the governments of many EU countries. The objective of this article is to present a sustainable indicators system to assist in the implementation of a modern and sustainable hazardous waste management (HWM) system in Lithuania. The specific goals are (1) to promote the development of a comprehensive monitoring and enforcement system for timely implementation of HWM rules and other related pieces of legislation and (2) to assist in the implementation of training and awareness of the programs of HWM in support of the development of background data for policy making, including improvement of a hazardous waste identification scheme. The emphasis is put on preventing future discharges of HW by promoting the actions that will result in avoidance, recycling, or recovery of the otherwise hazardous waste.