Refine
Year of Publication
- 2017 (23) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (9)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (8)
- Conference Object (4)
- Book (1)
- Report (1)
Language
- English (23) (remove)
Division
- Nachhaltiges Produzieren und Konsumieren (23) (remove)
Background: Global targets for reducing resource use have been set by organizations such as the International Resource Panel and the European Commission. However, these targets exist only at the macro level, e.g., for individual countries. When conducting an environmental analysis at the micro level, resource use is often neglected as an indicator. No sum parameter indicating all abiotic and biotic raw materials has been considered for life cycle assessment, as yet. In fact, life cycle assessment databases even lack some of the specific input flows required to calculate all abiotic and biotic raw materials. In contrast, the cumulative energy demand, an input-based indicator assessing the use of energy resources, is commonly used, particularly when analyzing energy-intensive product systems.
Methods: In view of this, we analyze the environmental relevance of the sum parameter abiotic and biotic raw material demand, which we call the material footprint. First, we show how abiotic and biotic raw material demand can be implemented in the Ecoinvent life cycle assessment database. Employing the adapted database, the material footprint is calculated for 12 individual datasets of chosen materials and crops. The results are compared to those of the cumulated energy demand and four selected impact categories: climate change, ozone depletion, acidification, and terrestrial eutrophication.
Results: The material footprint is generally high in the case of extracted metals and other materials where extraction is associated with a large amount of overburden. This fact can lead to different conclusions being drawn compared to common impact categories or the cumulative energy demand. However, the results show that both the range between the impacts of the different materials and the trends can be similar.
Conclusions: The material footprint is very easy to apply and calculate. It can be implemented in life cycle assessment databases with a few adaptions. Furthermore, an initial comparison with common impact indicators suggests that the material footprint can be used as an input-based indicator to evaluate the environmental burden, without the uncertainty associated with the assessment of emission-based impacts.
Energy efficiency improvements have numerous benefits/impacts additional to energy and greenhouse gas savings, as has been shown and analysed e.g. in the 2014 IEA Report on "Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency". This paper presents the Horizon 2020-project COMBI ("Calculating and Operationalising the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency in Europe"), aiming at calculating the energy and non-energy impacts that a realisation of the EU energy efficiency potential would have in 2030. The project covers the most relevant technical energy efficiency improvement actions and estimates impacts of reduced air pollution (and its effects on human health, eco-systems/crops, buildings), improved social welfare (incl. disposable income, comfort, health, productivity), saved biotic and abiotic resources, and energy system, energy security, and the macroeconomy (employment, economic growth and public budget). This paper explains how the COMBI energy savings potential in the EU 2030 is being modelled and how multiple impacts are assessed. We outline main challenges with the quantification (choice of baseline scenario, additionality of savings and impacts, context dependency and distributional issues) as well as with the aggregation of impacts (e.g. interactions and overlaps) and how the project deals with them. As research is still ongoing, this paper only gives a first impression of the order of magnitude for additional multiple impacts of energy efficiency improvements may have in Europe, where this is available to date. The paper is intended to stimulate discussion and receive feedback from the academic community on quantification approaches followed by the project.
The transformation processes towards a sustainable development are complex. How can science contribute towards new solutions and ideas leading to change in practice? The authors of this book discuss these questions along the energy transition in the building sector.
A transformative research that leaves the neutral observer position needs appropriate concepts and methods: how can knowledge from different disciplines and from practice be integrated in order to be able to explain and understand complex circumstances and interrelations? What role do complex (agent-based) models and experiments play in this respect? Which mix of methods is required in transformative science in order to actively support the actors in transformation processes?
Theses questions are illustrated by the example of the BMBF funded project "EnerTransRuhr".
The effectiveness of sustainable product and service innovations is often restricted by limited market acceptance or unexpected consumption patterns. The latter includes rebound effects, which occur when resources liberated by savings are used for further consumption. Recently emerging research from the Living Lab is striving to address and anticipate challenges in innovation design by integrating users in prototyping and field testing product and service innovations. The paper presents findings from a literature review on rebound effects and expert interviews identifying methods to monitor and measures to mitigate rebound effects in early innovation design via Living Lab research.
We find that monitoring and mitigating rebound effects in Living Lab research includes technological and behavioural triggers as well as socio-psychological and time use effects in addition to economic re-spending effects. The experts have confirmed that Living Labs contain the potential to observe complex demand systems of users within experimental designs, encompassing indirect rebound effects in terms of expenditure as well as time use. In this respect, Living Lab research can facilitate support for sustainable innovations, which aim to encourage changes in consumer behaviour, considering re-spending and time use effects simultaneously.