首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Cleaner Production >Comparison of the ecological footprint and a life cycle impact assessment method for a case study on Brazilian broiler feed production
【24h】

Comparison of the ecological footprint and a life cycle impact assessment method for a case study on Brazilian broiler feed production

机译:巴西肉鸡饲料生产的生态足迹和生命周期影响评估方法的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Environmental variables are increasingly being used in decision-making. An important way to generate environmental information involves Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), methodology that measures the environmental impacts of a product throughout its life cycle. Parallel to this, Wackernagel and Rees developed a methodology to assess the environmental sustainability of regions, the Ecological Footprint (EF) method. Recently, this methodology has also been applied to product evaluations. It is believed that there are differences in the interpretation of the results when using the EF method compared to LCA methods. Therefore, the objective of this work was to compare the different interpretation that can be obtained from CML 2001 and EF, using a case study of four scenarios of broiler feed production in Brazil. The inventory was collected with secondary data, and the main difference among the four scenarios was the origin of the maize and soybeans used (the center-west and south regions of Brazil). As a result, the worst scenario (with maize and soybeans from the center-west) and the best scenario (with maize and soybeans from the south) were the same for both methods, although the second and the third rankings were different. Additionally, we observed that different hotspots were identified. CML (modified) and EF were similar from a broad point of view, but higher differences emerged between them when a deeper analysis was considered. We conclude that the use of EF is not suitable for the agricultural sector, since misleading decisions can be taken as a result of neglecting some important environmental impacts (e.g.: eutrophication and acidification) for this economic sector.
机译:在决策中越来越多地使用环境变量。产生环境信息的一种重要方法涉及生命周期评估(LCA),该方法可测量产品在整个生命周期中对环境的影响。与此平行,瓦克纳格尔(Wackernagel)和里斯(Rees)开发了一种方法来评估区域的环境可持续性,即生态足迹(EF)方法。最近,这种方法也已应用于产品评估。可以认为,与LCA方法相比,使用EF方法的结果解释有所不同。因此,这项工作的目的是,通过对巴西肉鸡饲料生产的四种情况的案例研究,比较可以从CML 2001和EF获得的不同解释。清单是使用辅助数据收集的,四种情况之间的主要区别是所使用的玉米和大豆的产地(巴西的中西部和南部地区)。结果,这两种方法的最坏情况(中西部地区的玉米和大豆)和最佳情况(南部地区的玉米和大豆)是相同的,尽管第二和第三等级不同。此外,我们观察到发现了不同的热点。从广义上讲,CML(修改的)和EF相似,但是当考虑进行更深入的分析时,它们之间会出现更大的差异。我们得出的结论是,EF的使用不适合农业部门,因为忽视该经济部门的一些重要环境影响(例如富营养化和酸化)可能导致误导性决定。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Journal of Cleaner Production》 |2012年第2012期|p.25-32|共8页
  • 作者单位

    Departamento de Engenharia Sanitaria e Ambiental, Centra Tecnologico, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Campus Universit&rio, Trindade, Caixa Postal 476, Zip Code:88040-970, Floriandpolis, SC, Brazil,Research Croup EnVOC, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering,Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Gent, Belgium;

    Departamento de Engenharia Sanitaria e Ambiental, Centra Tecnologico, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Campus Universit&rio, Trindade, Caixa Postal 476, Zip Code:88040-970, Floriandpolis, SC, Brazil,INRA, UMR 1069, Sol Agro et hydrosystime Spatialisation, F-35000 Rennes, France,EPAGRI/CEPA, Rod. Adrnar Conzaga, 1347, 88034901 Floriandpolis, Brazil;

    Departamento de Engenharia Sanitaria e Ambiental, Centra Tecnologico, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Campus Universit&rio, Trindade, Caixa Postal 476, Zip Code:88040-970, Floriandpolis, SC, Brazil;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    LCA; ecological footprint; CML; broiler feed; agriculture;

    机译:LCA;生态足迹;CML;肉鸡饲料农业;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号