Verification of the results of environmental life cycle assessment of bulky waste management technologies using sensitivity analysis

I. Samson-Bręk, Marta Gabryszewska
{"title":"Verification of the results of environmental life cycle assessment of bulky waste management technologies using sensitivity analysis","authors":"I. Samson-Bręk, Marta Gabryszewska","doi":"10.2478/oszn-2023-0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The calculation aimed to verify the life cycle assessment (LCA) results of the bulky waste management technology by using sensitivity analysis. Different sensitivity analyses for LCA were carried out to point out which of the tested methods gave the most reliable LCA results. The main factor that helped to find the best-fitted method was CO2 emissions. The LCA analyses were performed by IOŚ-PIB using SimaPro software based on the technology data obtained during the Urbanrec project. The sensitivity analysis was conducted twofold: the LCA analysis was carried out for different time horizons in the frame of the ReCiPe method egalitarian (E), individual (I), and hierarchic (H). In the second step, the LCA results for the ReCiPe method were compared with the LCA results for methods: CML-IA, Impact 2002+, and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GGP). The results of the LCA for all endpoints are sensitive to changes in the time horizon, which is reflected in the change in impact assessment methods used in calculations. The biggest differences are visible between the egalitarian and individual perspectives. In the second case of the sensitivity analysis, differences in results between the individual analytical methods used for LCAs can be observed. The obtained results show a high sensitivity of LCA results from the adopted time horizon, as well as moderate sensitivity of the carbon footprint depending on the method of analysis used.","PeriodicalId":235641,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Protection and Natural Resources","volume":"2 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Protection and Natural Resources","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/oszn-2023-0018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The calculation aimed to verify the life cycle assessment (LCA) results of the bulky waste management technology by using sensitivity analysis. Different sensitivity analyses for LCA were carried out to point out which of the tested methods gave the most reliable LCA results. The main factor that helped to find the best-fitted method was CO2 emissions. The LCA analyses were performed by IOŚ-PIB using SimaPro software based on the technology data obtained during the Urbanrec project. The sensitivity analysis was conducted twofold: the LCA analysis was carried out for different time horizons in the frame of the ReCiPe method egalitarian (E), individual (I), and hierarchic (H). In the second step, the LCA results for the ReCiPe method were compared with the LCA results for methods: CML-IA, Impact 2002+, and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GGP). The results of the LCA for all endpoints are sensitive to changes in the time horizon, which is reflected in the change in impact assessment methods used in calculations. The biggest differences are visible between the egalitarian and individual perspectives. In the second case of the sensitivity analysis, differences in results between the individual analytical methods used for LCAs can be observed. The obtained results show a high sensitivity of LCA results from the adopted time horizon, as well as moderate sensitivity of the carbon footprint depending on the method of analysis used.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用敏感性分析验证大件废物管理技术的环境生命周期评估结果
计算旨在利用敏感性分析验证大件废物管理技术的生命周期评估(LCA)结果。对生命周期评估进行了不同的敏感性分析,以指出哪种测试方法的生命周期评估结果最可靠。帮助找到最合适方法的主要因素是二氧化碳排放量。LCA 分析由 IOŚ-PIB 根据 Urbanrec 项目期间获得的技术数据,使用 SimaPro 软件进行。敏感性分析分两步进行:在 ReCiPe 方法的框架内,针对不同的时间跨度进行 LCA 分析,即平均法 (E)、个体法 (I) 和分层法 (H)。第二步,将 ReCiPe 方法的生命周期评估结果与其他方法的生命周期评估结果进行比较:CML-IA、Impact 2002+ 和温室气体议定书 (GGP) 的生命周期分析结果进行比较。所有终点的生命周期评估结果对时间跨度的变化都很敏感,这反映在计算中使用的影响评估方法的变化上。平均主义视角和个体视角之间的差异最大。在敏感性分析的第二种情况下,可以观察到生命周期评估所使用的各种分析方法之间的结果差异。结果表明,从所采用的时间跨度来看,生命周期分析结果的敏感性较高,而碳足迹的敏感性则适中,这取决于所采用的分析方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Climate change as the subject of citizens’ assemblies in Polish cities Accessibility of green infrastructure at the city scale on the example of Łomża and Siedlce Potentially Harmful Elements Content in Soil and Stream Sediments in Southwestern Districts of Katowice (Southern Poland) – Geochemical Record of Historical Industrial Plants’ Activity Municipal Wastewater Quality Control: Heavy Metal Comparative Analysis—Case Study Torrefaction of Flax Shives as a Process of Preparation Waste Vegetable Biomass for Energy Purposes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1