Integrating ecosystem service losses into life cycle assessment on the treatment of 40 categories of hazardous waste: A China case study

IF 7 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Ecological Indicators Pub Date : 2025-03-29 DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113401
Xincong Liu , Mengdi Zhang , Wenyue Hou , Ran Fang , Li Zeng , Wei Xiao
{"title":"Integrating ecosystem service losses into life cycle assessment on the treatment of 40 categories of hazardous waste: A China case study","authors":"Xincong Liu ,&nbsp;Mengdi Zhang ,&nbsp;Wenyue Hou ,&nbsp;Ran Fang ,&nbsp;Li Zeng ,&nbsp;Wei Xiao","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The 16th Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention indicated the need to manage hazardous waste using a life cycle approach to control environmental impacts. However, the environmental impacts of hazardous waste treatment have not yet been adequately assessed, particularly regarding the lack of an evaluation framework for the impacts on ecosystem services. This study employs a life cycle assessment (LCA) framework integrating ecosystem service losses, to assess the environmental impacts of a case hazardous waste treatment plant in southwest China. The results show that in the lifecycle stages of hazardous waste treatment, the operation stage has the largest environmental impact. Among the different treatment processes, incineration has the largest environmental impact, while rigid landfilling has the lowest. Besides, the losses of the treatment of hazardous waste on ecosystem services are 77.12 yuan per ton, accounting for approximately 6.43% to 38.56% of the treatment costs. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis demonstrate the robustness of the results. Finally, the implications including expanding the LCA boundaries of hazardous waste treatment, ecological compensation for ecosystem service losses, and co-regulations of multiple departments for hazardous waste treatment are proposed. This study proposes a new indicator for assessing the ecosystem service losses within the LCA of hazardous waste treatment and offers the government and the public a quantification of the ecological costs associated with hazardous waste treatment, provides the basis of lifecycle environmental impacts after product decommissioning for trade negotiations, and makes inventory data available for hazardous waste treatment processes during the whole lifecycle.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 113401"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X25003310","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The 16th Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention indicated the need to manage hazardous waste using a life cycle approach to control environmental impacts. However, the environmental impacts of hazardous waste treatment have not yet been adequately assessed, particularly regarding the lack of an evaluation framework for the impacts on ecosystem services. This study employs a life cycle assessment (LCA) framework integrating ecosystem service losses, to assess the environmental impacts of a case hazardous waste treatment plant in southwest China. The results show that in the lifecycle stages of hazardous waste treatment, the operation stage has the largest environmental impact. Among the different treatment processes, incineration has the largest environmental impact, while rigid landfilling has the lowest. Besides, the losses of the treatment of hazardous waste on ecosystem services are 77.12 yuan per ton, accounting for approximately 6.43% to 38.56% of the treatment costs. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis demonstrate the robustness of the results. Finally, the implications including expanding the LCA boundaries of hazardous waste treatment, ecological compensation for ecosystem service losses, and co-regulations of multiple departments for hazardous waste treatment are proposed. This study proposes a new indicator for assessing the ecosystem service losses within the LCA of hazardous waste treatment and offers the government and the public a quantification of the ecological costs associated with hazardous waste treatment, provides the basis of lifecycle environmental impacts after product decommissioning for trade negotiations, and makes inventory data available for hazardous waste treatment processes during the whole lifecycle.
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
将生态系统服务损失纳入40类危险废物处理的生命周期评价——以中国为例
《巴塞尔公约》缔约方第十六次会议指出,需要采用生命周期方法管理危险废物,以控制对环境的影响。但是,危险废物处理的环境影响尚未得到充分评价,特别是缺乏对生态系统服务的影响的评价框架。本研究采用生命周期评价(LCA)框架,结合生态系统服务损失,对西南某案例危险废物处理厂的环境影响进行了评价。结果表明,在危险废物处理的生命周期阶段中,操作阶段对环境的影响最大。在不同的处理工艺中,焚烧对环境的影响最大,而刚性填埋对环境的影响最小。危险废物处理对生态系统服务的损失为77.12元/吨,约占处理成本的6.43% ~ 38.56%。灵敏度和不确定性分析证明了结果的稳健性。最后,提出了扩大危险废物处理的LCA边界、生态系统服务损失的生态补偿以及多部门共同监管危险废物处理的建议。本研究提出了评估危险废物处理LCA内生态系统服务损失的新指标,为政府和公众量化危险废物处理的生态成本提供了依据,为贸易谈判提供了产品退役后全生命周期环境影响的依据,并为危险废物处理过程提供了全生命周期的清单数据。
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
Ecological Indicators
Ecological Indicators 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1163
审稿时长
78 days
期刊介绍: The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published. • All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices. • New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use. • Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources. • Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators. • Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs. • How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes. • Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators. • Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.
期刊最新文献
Vulnerability of different Colorado plateau land types to drivers of change Nature-based adaptation in human dominated coastal ecosystems Research on Water Resources Carrying Capacity in the Hexi Inland River Basin of China Based on "Four Waters and Four Determinations"-System Dynamics and Improved TOPSIS Model Tracking biodiversity footprints embodied in the global supply chains of agricultural commodities: the examples of Germany and China Internal phosphorus loading drives long-term eutrophication trends and short-term deviations in a shallow hypertrophic lake
×
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:604180095
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