Eutrophication as an impact category

State of the art and research needs for the impact category eutrophication are discussed. Eutrophication is a difficult impact category because it includes emissions to both air and water — both subject to different environmental mechanisms — as well as impacts occurring in different types of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. The possible fate processes are complex and include transportation between different ecosystems. In some recent approaches, transportation modelling of air emissions has been included. However, in general, the used characterisation methods do not integrate fate modelling, which is a limitation. The definition of the impact indicator needs further research, too. The inclusion of other nutrients than those typically considered should also be investigated.     

Application of the impact pathway analysis in the context of LCA

Current LCA practice is mass oriented, i.e. is focused on the amount of chemicals released, disregarding place and time of release. Life cycle impact assessment aims at evaluating potential impacts, and a variety of weighting schemes is discussed to he used for ranking and aggregation of impacts. To establish a closer link between the quantity of a burden released and a decision making context, we propose to follow a detailed impact pathway analysis to estimate actual impacts for some priority impact categories, and use measured individuals’ preferences for impact valuation. Results from a case study illustrate the relevance of site specific impact assessment in the context of LCA.     

Evaluating options in LCA: The emergence of conflicting paradigms for impact assessment and evaluation

LCA aims to help direct decisions in an environmentally sustainable direction. It indicates the environmental effects of choices and evaluates these against this background. Approaches to evaluation in LCA differ substantially, related to the way of modelling environmental effects and to the way these effects are combined into an overall judgement on alternative options. Several approaches are now operational, which are linked to different paradigms in decision making. It is shown that the choice of paradigm is quite decisive on the outcome of the analysis. Also within similar paradigms, different methods now operational may lead to different outcomes. These latter differences may be alleviated more easily than those related to paradigmatic choices, as they are partly a matter of refinement, and they partly result from legitimate differences in subjective priorities. The more basic paradigmatic differences can hardly be bridged. The practical relevancy of the subject is proven by applying different operational methods to one case, showing widely differing outcomes. The paradigm behind evaluating environmental effects is either values based, directly or through policy decisions, or economics based, as individual preferences measured in the monetary terms of willingness-to-pay. Accordingly, the different methods are “policy-oriented” or “monetary”. It may be doubted if the differences between these can be overcome in standardisation.     

高盐条件下废水生物脱氮除磷及其工艺研究进展

高盐废水是指总含盐量至少为1%的废水,是目前很难处理的废水之一。国内外学者针对高盐废水做了很多研究,我们简要综述了高盐条件下废水的脱氮除磷及工艺进展,希望对高盐条件下废水的同步脱氮除磷研究提供有益的资料。     

Current issues in the characterisation of toxicological impacts

Fate, exposure and effect measures provide a basis for the calculation of characterisation factors in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Such characterisation factors provide insights into the relative concern of chemical emissions within and across life cycle inventories, in the context of toxicological stress to humans and to ecosystems. A brief overview is presented in this paper of the available options for toxicological characterisation and of associated issues that will need to be addressed in future consensus-building initiatives. An introduction is provided to issues such as: (1) the benefit of measures calculated at midpoints versus at endpoints in the toxicological cause-effect chains (sometimes termed environmental mechanisms); (2) the need to use multimedia models with spatial resolution; (3) the political consequences of accounting for variations in population density; (4) uncertainties in the toxicological potency measures; and (5) the different options for the toxicological endpoint measure(s). These issues are addressed under the headings of Fate and Exposure, Human Health and (aquatic) Ecosystem Health.     

On the limitations of life cycle assessment and environmental systems analysis tools in general

The potential and limitations of life cycle assessment and environmental systems analysis tools in general are evaluated. More specifically this is done by exploring the limits of what can be shown by LCA and other tools. This is done from several perspectives. First, experiences from current LCAs and methodology discussions are used including a discussion on the type of impacts typically included, quality of inventory data, methodological choices in relation to time aspects, allocation, characterisation and weighting methods and uncertainties in describing the real world. Second, conclusions from the theory of science are practised. It is concluded that it can in general not be shown that one product is environmentally preferable to another one, even if this happens to be the case. This conclusion has important policy implications. If policy changes require that it must be shown that one product is more (or less) environmentally preferable before any action can be taken, then it is likely that no action is ever going to take place. If we want changes to be made, decisions must be taken on a less rigid basis. It is expected that in this decision making process, LCA can be a useful input. Since it is the only tool that can be used for product comparisons over the whole life cycle, it can not be replaced by any other tool and should be used. Increased harmonisation of LCA methodology may increase the acceptability of chosen methods and increase the usefulness of the tool.