The ‘Virtual Pollution Prevention Costs ‘99’

A Single LCA-Based Indicator for Emissions
LCA Discussions: A New Calculation Model for Interpreting the Results of an LCA Revised
  • 138 Downloads

Preamble

In literature, many models (qualitatively as well as quantitatively) can be found to cope with the problem of communicating results of LCA analyses with decision takers. Most models translate data on emissions in a single indicator, using a classification and charac-terisation step. More than 30 of these models have been looked at, 14 of which have been studied in detail. From these analyses, it was concluded that there is still a need for further development.

Keywords

Acidification characterisation classification communicating Dutch emissions eutrophication global warming heavy metals LCA marginal prevention costs region single indicator summer smog sustainable virtual pollution costs ’99 West European winter smog 

References

  1. Beetstra, F. (1998): Het Ecolemma Model, proefschrift, TUE, Eindhoven, 1998Google Scholar
  2. Braunschweig, A. (1996): Developments in LCA valuation, Swiss National Science Foundation, 1996Google Scholar
  3. Dellink, R.B.;van der Woerd, K.F. (1997): Kosteneffectiviteit van milieuthema’s (cost-effectivity of environmental measures) IVM-VU, Amsterdam, 1997Google Scholar
  4. ECN (1998): Optiedocument voor emissiereductie van broeikasgassen (emission reduction of greenhouse gases, options for The Netherlands), report nr. ECN–C–98–082, ECN, Petten, 1998Google Scholar
  5. Gielen, D.J. (1999): Materialising dematerialisation, Integrated energy and material-systems engineering for greenhouse gas emission mitigation, PhD thesis Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1999Google Scholar
  6. Gielen, D.J.;Lako, P.;Dinkelbach, L.;van Ree, R. (1998): Prospects for bioenergy in the Netherlands, a MARKAL analyses of the long term impact of energy and CO2 policies, ECN, Petten, 1998Google Scholar
  7. Goedkoop, M. (1995): Eco-indicator 95, final report, Pre Consultants, Amersfoort, 1995Google Scholar
  8. Goedkoop, M.;Hofstetter, P.;Muller-Wenk, R.;Spriemsma, R. (1998): The Eco-indicator 98 explained, Int. J. LCA 3 (6) 352–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Graedel, T.E. (1998): Streamlined Life-Cycle Assessment, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, and School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, publisher Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 1998Google Scholar
  10. Haas, M. (1997): TWIN Model, proefschrift, TUE, Eindhoven, 1997Google Scholar
  11. Hoogendoorn, G.P. (1998): Hoogendoorn, Inventarisatie bestaande milieukwalificatiesystemen, (inventory of existing environmental qualification systems) DIOC ‘De Ecologische Stad’, Delft, 1998Google Scholar
  12. Huppes, G.;Sas, H.;de Haan, E.;Kuyper, J. (1997): Efficient environmental investments, paper SENSE International workshop, Amsterdam 20 February 1997Google Scholar
  13. Jantzen, J.J.;Heijnes, H.; v.Duyse, P. (1995): Technische vooruitgang en milieukosten, TME, Den Haag, 1995Google Scholar
  14. Keffer, C.;Shimp, R.;Leni, M. (1999): Eco-efficiency indicators & reporting, WBCSD Web site (see below)Google Scholar
  15. Kortman, J.G.M.;Lindeijer, E.W.;Sas, H.;Sprengers, M. (1994): Towards a Single Indicator for Emissions — an Exercise in Aggregating Environmental Effects, Interfaculty Dept. Of Environmental Science, Univ. of Amsterdam, 1994Google Scholar
  16. Lehni, M. (1998): WBCSD Project on Eco-efficiency metrics & reporting, State of Play Report, WBCSD, Geneva, 1998Google Scholar
  17. Muller, J.;Griese, H.;Middendorf, A.;Nissen, N.F.;Potter, H. (1997): UmProdIKT, Umweltgerechte Produkte der IKT, Umweltgerechter Leiterplattenentwurf, Fraunhofer Gesellschaft, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  18. Nijland, J.R.P.;Dekker, K.H.;Dullemond, A. (1988): Naar een methode voor milieuwaardering in de GWW-Sector (Towards a method for environmental assessment in the civil construction sector), CUR/CROW-commissie, Ede, 1998, web site www.crow.nlGoogle Scholar
  19. Steen, B. (1996): EPS-Default Valuation of Environmental Impacts from Emission and Use of Resources, Version 1996, AFR, Naturvardsverket, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, 1996Google Scholar
  20. Tulenheimo, V.;Thun, R.;Backman, M. (1996): Tools and methods for environmental decision-making in energy production companies, Non-Waste Technology Research Group at VTT, Espoo, Finland, 1996Google Scholar
  21. Vogtländer, J.G.;Brezet, (1999): Assessing products (and services) for the future (1), to be published, 1999Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ecomed Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Delft University of Technolgoy, Faculty OCR, Section Design for SustainabiliryDelftNetherlands

Personalised recommendations