-
Emergy and End-point Impact Assessment of Agricultural and Food
Production in the United States: A Supply Chain-linked
Ecologically-based Life Cycle
Assessment
Presenter:Gokhan Egilmez, PhD
Assistant ProfessorMechanical and Industrial Engineering
Young Professionals Chair, IISE CT ChapterUniversity of New
Haven
West Haven, CT USA
Session: IS Green BusinessesDate: Sunday, May 22, 2016
Time: 11:00 AM 12: 15 PMLocation: Oasis Adventure
Tower
Co-authors:Murat Kucukvar, PhD
Dept. of Industrial Engineering, Istanbul Sehir University,
Istanbul, Turkey
Yong Shin Park, PhD CandidateUpper Great Plains Transportation
and
Logistics InstituteNorth Dakota State University
Fargo, ND, USA
-
Part 1: Introduction
-
Why sustainability?3
http://400.350.org/
-
Why sustainability?4
•Climate Change•T > any T in last 420,000 years
•Global warming is real•Speed of T rise is > any in last
20,000 years
•Wait and see policy did not work, will never work
Old story but bitter truth
•A lot of bad things but some of them are…•Weather
fluctuations
•Disastrous events•Agri-food productivity loss•Energy, water and
land loss
•Eventually hit to the basic needs of a human according to
Maslow’s classification
Global warming will
causeIs already causinghttp://400.350.org/
-
Ecological Impacts of U.S. Manufacturing Industries
Carbon
20% of total GHG emissions
in the U.S.
The third largest industry after
transportation and electric
power industries (EPA, 2012)
Energy
The third leading sector in
energy usage with a share of
20% (with a usage of 20
quadrillion BTU)
Toxic Release
Metal Mining, Food, Beverage,
Tobacco, Primary Metals and Chemicals Manufacturing
sectors account for
approximately 71% of all toxic releases (EPA,
2010)
Water
Power Generation and
Farming industries
account for 41% of total water withdrawals in U.S (Blackhurst et
al., 2010).
Part 1: Introduction
-
Sustainable Manufacturing and Life Cycle Assessment
Sust
aina
ble
Man
ufac
turin
g “The creation of manufactured products that use processes that
are non-polluting, conserve energy and natural resources, and are
economically sound and safe for employees, communities and
consumers” (Dept. of Commerce, 2012)
Life
Cyc
le A
sses
smen
t A well-known and widely used approach to assessing the
potential environmental impacts and resources used throughout a
product’s life cycle, including raw material acquisition,
production, distribution, use, and end-of-life phases (Finnveden et
al., 2009)
Part 1: Introduction
-
Life Cycle Assessment Assess the environmental impact that goes
along
with the process, production, distribution and supplychain.
Has been used extensively today and grown rapidlyin terms of
activity and interest to assessed differentkind of products and
sectors (Westkämper, 2000).
Trace out and find the major processes involved overthe life
cycle of certain product by taking intoaccount the environmental
burden (Kraft &Kamieniecki, 2006)
Raw material acquisition
Production & Distribution
Use
End of Life• Landfill• Reuse/Recy
cle
Part 1: Introduction
-
Life Cycle Assessment Models*MRIO Models
*TBL-LCA(UCF)
Eco-LCA(OSU)
EIO-LCA(CMU)
P-LCA(U.S. EPA)
*Kucukvar, M., Egilmez, G., Onat, N. C., & Samadi, H.
(2015). A global, scope-based carbon footprint modeling for
effective carbon reduction policies: Lessons from the Turkish
manufacturing. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 1(February
2016), 47–66. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2015.05.005*Kucukvar,
M., & Tatari, O. (2013). Towards a triple bottom-line
sustainability assessment of the US construction industry. The
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 1-15.*Egilmez, G.,
Kucukvar, M., & Tatari, O. (2014).“Supply chain sustainability
assessment of the U.S. food manufacturing sectors: A life
cycle-based frontier approach”, Resources Conservation and
Recycling, Elsevier, Volume 82, January 2014, 8–20
Part 1: Introduction
-
LCA scopes
Ecosystem
Society
Economy
Supply chains
Process
Kucukvar, M., Egilmez G., and Tatari, O (2013). “Sustainable
supply chain management and the triple bottom line input-output
modeling.” INFORMS Annual Meeting, October 6-9, 2013, Minneapolis,
USA.
Part 1: Introduction
-
How to expand the LCA research?
Vertically improvements
in depth?Horizontal
improvement in breadth?
Part 1: Introduction
-
Input Output Life Cycle Assessment (EIO-LCA) Modeling
Transportation Sector
…other sectors
Wood product mfg.
Plastics Packaging
Materials Mfg.
Furniture and Related Product
Mfg.
input economicUnit output talenvironmenUnit Input $ ×
output economicUnit output talenvironmenUnit Output $ ×
PublicDatasets
EconomicInput-Output
Matrix• Life Cycle Inventory
• Carbon Footprint• Energy Use• Water Footprint• Solid Waste•
Toxic Releases• Land Use• Etc.
Part 2: Methods
-
ECO-LCA basicsEcologically based life cycle assessment Scope:
Cradle to gate
Onsite (Direct) + Supply chains (Indirect) + Ecosystem
(Exergy)
Renewable and nonrenewable resource consumption in terms of Mass
Energy Exergy
Based on thermo dynamics laws utilized for eco-system level
assessment
Part 2: Methodology
-
Part 2: Methodology
-
LCIA method Impact Category Unit of Measurement
ReCiPe midpoint Marine eutrophication kg N eq
Climate change kg CO2 eq
Ozone depletion kg CFC-11 eq
Terrestrial acidification kg SO2 eq
Photochemical oxidant formation kg NMVOC
Particulate matter formation kg PM10 eq
Ionising radiation KgU235 eq
Land occupation m2a
Metal depletion kg Fe eq
Fossil depletion kg oil eq
Fresh water ecotoxicity kg 1,4-DB eq
Marine ecotoxicity kg 1,4-DB eq
Terrestrial ecotoxicity kg 1,4-DB eq
Human ecotoxicity kg 1,4-DB eq
ReCiPe endpoint a Human health Daily
Ecosystem Species.yr
Resources Dollar ($)
Part 2: Methodology
-
Cumulative Mass Consumption• CMC
Industrial Cumulative Exergy Consumption
• I Exergy• Material and energy resources
extracted from nature and consumed in industrial activities
Cumulative Energy Consumption• I+E Exergy
• Extends I Exergy by also accounting for exergyconsumed in
ecosystems
The Aggregation Metrics
Part 2: Methodology
Center for Resilience:
http://resilience.eng.ohio-state.edu/eco-lca/index.htm
PresenterPresentation NotesAggregation. Eco-LCA includes
various aggregation schemes that are based on thermodynamic
concepts.Energy includes renewable and nonrenewable energetic
sources including fossil fuels, sunlight and wind.�I Exergy is
Industrial Cumulative Exergy Consumption, which includes material
and energy resources extracted from nature and consumed in
industrial activities. This approach is similar to exergy analysis
used in engineering (Szargut et al., 1988).�I+E Exergy is
Ecological Cumulative Exergy Consumption, which
extends I Exergy by also accounting for the exergy
consumed in ecosystems. This approach is closely related to energy
analysis developed in systems ecology (Odum, 1996).
-
Resource Intensity• E Exergy/$
Efficiency Ratio• E Exergy / I
Exergy
Loading Ratio• Nonrenewable R
/ Renewable R• By I+E Exergy
Renewability Ratio• Renewable R /
(R+NR)• By I+E Exergy
Eco-efficiency• $1M / Non-
renewable CMC• Based on DEA
Ecological Sustainability Performance Indicators
Part 2: Methodology
Center for Resilience:
http://resilience.eng.ohio-state.edu/eco-lca/index.htm
-
Eco-LCA: Hierarchy of Analysis
Raw Data Classification Aggregation Metrics
Data for $M Output of
Sectors
Renewable versus non-renewable
Mass, Energy, or
Exergy
Renewability Index,
Loading Ratio, etc.
Kucukvar, M., & Tatari, O. (2011). A comprehensive life
cycle analysis of cofiring algae in a coal power plant as a
solution for achieving sustainable energy. Energy, 36(11),
6352-6357.
Part 2: Methodology
-
Modeling with Eco-LCA:Automobile Manufacturing
http://resilience.eng.ohio-state.edu/eco-lca/index.htm
Part 2: Methodology
-
Summary of Research Methodology and Current Focus
How to integrate ecological sustainability with end point
impacts?
ECO LCA + ReCipe framework
Case Study: Agricultural and Food Production Industries in the
U.S.
1
2
3
Part 2: Methodology
-
Step-by-Step Illustration of Methodology
Part 2: Methodology
-
Agri-foodSectors
&Abbreviations
SECTOR AcronymAll other crop farming AOCFAll other food
manufacturing AOFMAnimal (except poultry) slaughtering, rendering,
and processing ASRPAnimal production, except cattle and poultry and
eggs APCPEBeet sugar manufacturing BSMBread and bakery product
manufacturing BBPMBreakfast cereal manufacturing BCMBreweries
BWCattle ranching and farming CRFCheese manufacturing CMChocolate
and confectionery manufacturing from cacao beans CCCBCoffee and tea
manufacturing CTMConfectionery manufacturing from purchased
chocolate CMPCCookie, cracker, and pasta manufacturing CCPMCotton
farming CFDistilleries DISDog and cat food manufacturing DCFMDry,
condensed, and evaporated dairy product manufacturing DCEPMFats and
oils refining and blending FORBFertilizer manufacturing FMFishing
FISHFlavoring syrup and concentrate manufacturing FSCMFlour milling
and malt manufacturing FMMFluid milk and butter manufacturing
FMBMForest nurseries, forest products, and timber tracts FBFTFrozen
food manufacturing FFMFruit and vegetable canning, pickling, and
drying FVPDFruit farming FFGrain farming GFGreenhouse, nursery, and
floriculture production GNFPHunting and trapping HTIce cream and
frozen dessert manufacturing ICFMLogging LGNonchocolate
confectionery manufacturing NCMOilseed farming OFOther animal food
manufacturing OAFMPesticide and other agricultural chemical
manufacturing PACMPoultry and egg production PEPPoultry processing
PPSeafood product preparation and packaging SPPSeasoning and
dressing manufacturing SDMSnack food manufacturing SFMSoft drink
and ice manufacturing SDIMSoybean and other oilseed processing
SOPSugar cane mills and refining SCMRSugarcane and sugar beet
farming SSBFSupport activities for agriculture and forestry
SAAFTobacco farming TFTobacco product manufacturing TPMTortilla
manufacturing TMTree nut farming TNFVegetable and melon farming
VMFWet corn milling WCMWineries WINE
Part 2: Methods
-
Rank Indicators Mean Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum 1 Detrital matter
16.76% 8.02% 0.00% 25.38% 2 CO2 (farm) 15.48% 7.41% 0.00% 23.44% 3
Soil erosion (farm) 12.06% 6.08% 0.00% 25.76% 4 Fish 11.14% 20.42%
0.10% 99.98% 5 Phosphorous mineralization 9.81% 4.03% 0.00% 14.53%
6 Water (agriculture & livestock) 8.31% 3.98% 0.00% 12.59% 7
CO2 (forest) 5.70% 13.04% 0.01% 85.97% 8 Nitrogen mineralization
3.80% 1.56% 0.00% 5.63% 9 Wood (dry) 3.46% 8.51% 0.01% 60.14%
10 Hydropotential 2.66% 6.61% 0.00% 37.21% 11 Nitrogen
deposition 2.54% 1.04% 0.00% 3.76% 12 Sunlight (farm) 1.83% 0.88%
0.00% 2.77% 13 Water (powerplant) 1.64% 3.79% 0.00% 23.59% 14 Grass
1.55% 3.20% 0.00% 11.21% 15 CO2 (ranch) 1.18% 2.44% 0.00% 8.57% 16
Sunlight (ranch) 1.10% 2.27% 0.00% 7.95% 17 Sunlight (forest) 0.78%
1.78% 0.00% 11.71% 18 Water (public supply) 0.16% 0.18% 0.00% 1.01%
19 Geothermal 0.02% 0.06% 0.00% 0.34% 20 Soil erosion
(construction) 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% 0.06% 21 Wind 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
0.02%
Part 3: Results
Renewable resource usage (% sej)
-
Rank Indicators Mean Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum 1 Crude oil
23.03% 10.56% 3.71% 70.50% 2 Natural gas 22.03% 9.19% 6.48% 75.65%
3 Crushed stone 16.35% 8.23% 2.12% 46.45% 4 Coal 7.78% 3.26% 1.76%
19.28% 5 Copper ore 7.25% 3.78% 1.79% 25.53% 6 Sand 5.59% 6.48%
0.56% 36.42% 7 Nuclear 5.54% 1.92% 1.59% 9.45% 8 Iron ore 2.46%
1.33% 0.60% 8.95% 9 Salt 1.89% 1.88% 0.27% 11.74%
10 Other Non-metallic 1.60% 1.59% 0.23% 9.94% 11 Gold ore 1.42%
0.83% 0.58% 6.83% 12 Quick lime 1.03% 1.03% 0.15% 6.42% 13 Gypsum
0.97% 0.97% 0.14% 6.07% 14 Apatite 0.96% 1.11% 0.10% 6.23% 15
Potash 0.87% 0.87% 0.13% 5.41% 16 Soda ash 0.57% 0.56% 0.08% 3.52%
17 Clay 0.24% 0.28% 0.02% 1.56% 18 Diatomite 0.09% 0.09% 0.01%
0.54% 19 Barite 0.07% 0.07% 0.01% 0.41% 20 Zinc ore 0.06% 0.03%
0.01% 0.20% 21 Molybdenum ore 0.04% 0.02% 0.02% 0.20% 22 Perlite
0.04% 0.04% 0.01% 0.23% 23 Talc and pyrophyllite 0.04% 0.04% 0.01%
0.28% 24 Alumina 0.03% 0.02% 0.01% 0.13% 25 Pumice 0.03% 0.03%
0.00% 0.19% 26 Lead ore 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.02% 27 Mica 0.01% 0.01%
0.00% 0.08% 28 Silver ore 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03% 29 Chromite 0.00%
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 30 Feldspar 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.03% 31 Garnet
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.02% 32 Titanium ore 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 33
Tripoli 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.03%
Part 3: ResultsNon-renewable resource usage (% sej)
-
Rank Sector Mean Std. Dev Minimum Maximum Rank Sector Mean Std.
Dev Minimum Maximum
1 FBFT 8.29% 24.29% 0.01% 81.34% 28 DCFM 1.24% 0.73% 0.06%
2.25%
2 CRF 7.29% 10.14% 0.03% 30.65% 29 PEP 1.10% 0.83% 0.04%
2.47%
3 LG 5.84% 19.58% 0.00% 89.24% 30 CTM 1.07% 0.74% 0.01%
1.88%
4 CM 4.18% 5.37% 0.02% 16.53% 31 FM 1.02% 1.90% 0.01% 4.90%
5 ASRP 4.16% 4.83% 0.04% 15.17% 32 SCMR 1.00% 1.87% 0.01%
5.05%
6 FMBM 4.11% 5.22% 0.02% 16.12% 33 FFM 0.98% 0.65% 0.03%
2.17%
7 FISH 3.56% 15.46% 0.02% 71.03% 34 AOFM 0.95% 0.60% 0.02%
1.96%
8 BSM 2.90% 2.47% 0.00% 8.26% 35 BCM 0.90% 0.62% 0.01% 1.69%
9 SSBF 2.90% 2.47% 0.00% 8.26% 36 PP 0.87% 0.82% 0.05% 2.36%
10 CF 2.86% 2.37% 0.01% 7.47% 37 CCCB 0.79% 0.50% 0.01%
1.59%
11 GF 2.63% 2.25% 0.00% 5.61% 38 FVPD 0.74% 0.62% 0.01%
1.89%
12 OF 2.60% 2.25% 0.00% 5.49% 39 SFM 0.67% 0.49% 0.02% 1.35%
13 AOCF 2.55% 2.16% 0.00% 5.37% 40 TM 0.67% 0.60% 0.01%
1.83%
14 FF 2.41% 2.10% 0.00% 5.32% 41 CMPC 0.64% 0.46% 0.01%
1.48%
15 TNF 2.38% 2.09% 0.00% 5.25% 42 WINE 0.64% 0.46% 0.01%
1.35%
16 VMF 2.38% 2.13% 0.00% 5.32% 43 SDIM 0.60% 0.80% 0.01%
2.22%
17 DCEPM 2.32% 2.69% 0.02% 8.45% 44 SAAF 0.59% 0.33% 0.01%
1.15%
18 GNFP 2.20% 2.18% 0.00% 5.34% 45 SDM 0.55% 0.66% 0.04%
1.86%
19 TF 2.17% 2.09% 0.00% 5.13% 46 CCPM 0.51% 0.48% 0.01%
1.42%
20 SOP 2.12% 1.65% 0.01% 4.10% 47 BBPM 0.50% 0.45% 0.02%
1.44%
21 WCM 1.89% 1.62% 0.01% 4.70% 48 NCM 0.49% 0.53% 0.01%
1.51%
22 SPP 1.75% 5.89% 0.03% 27.35% 49 PACM 0.49% 0.74% 0.01%
2.03%
23 APCPE 1.72% 1.20% 0.07% 3.56% 50 BW 0.48% 0.69% 0.01%
1.90%
24 FORB 1.55% 1.04% 0.04% 2.54% 51 HT 0.47% 0.26% 0.01%
1.06%
25 FMM 1.55% 1.10% 0.01% 2.64% 52 TPM 0.41% 0.36% 0.00%
0.97%
26 O 4 % 0 8 % 0 0 % 2 24% 3 SC 0 32% 0 24% 0 00% 0 %
Part 3: ResultsRenewable resource usage (% sej)
-
Rank Sector Mean Std. Dev Minimum Maximum Rank Sector Mean Std.
Dev Minimum Maximum
1 SCMR 27.17% 23.08% 2.80% 53.52% 28 BCM 1.12% 0.46% 0.75%
1.95%
2 FM 8.06% 12.96% 0.86% 33.75% 29 SOP 1.09% 0.44% 0.77%
2.73%
3 PACM 3.47% 2.00% 0.65% 5.72% 30 FORB 1.07% 0.52% 0.60%
2.28%
4 GF 2.75% 1.11% 1.58% 7.94% 31 DCEPM 1.00% 0.57% 0.44%
2.06%
5 BW 2.16% 2.73% 0.25% 8.31% 32 DIS 0.99% 1.99% 0.12% 6.26%
6 AOCF 2.12% 1.09% 0.69% 7.49% 33 PP 0.98% 0.50% 0.63% 2.78%
7 WCM 1.94% 1.50% 1.29% 9.22% 34 AOFM 0.97% 0.52% 0.49%
1.90%
8 BSM 1.86% 0.67% 1.48% 4.59% 35 TNF 0.95% 0.37% 0.71% 2.70%
9 SSBF 1.86% 0.67% 1.48% 4.59% 36 CTM 0.92% 0.37% 0.61%
1.71%
10 OAFM 1.83% 0.40% 1.31% 2.81% 37 VMF 0.91% 0.32% 0.70%
2.03%
11 APCPE 1.78% 0.60% 1.30% 3.55% 38 ICFM 0.85% 0.57% 0.33%
2.24%
12 SDIM 1.78% 1.93% 0.28% 6.53% 39 FBFT 0.81% 0.12% 0.54%
0.93%
13 CRF 1.71% 0.64% 1.23% 3.69% 40 FFM 0.79% 0.52% 0.32%
2.17%
14 CF 1.67% 0.41% 1.17% 3.32% 41 SFM 0.79% 0.40% 0.41% 1.58%
15 FMM 1.59% 0.51% 1.24% 4.10% 42 SPP 0.77% 0.65% 0.18%
2.77%
16 SDM 1.57% 2.06% 0.33% 6.80% 43 CCPM 0.75% 0.54% 0.25%
1.71%
17 FVPD 1.56% 1.49% 0.34% 4.33% 44 CCCB 0.74% 0.45% 0.35%
1.59%
18 TF 1.53% 0.63% 0.82% 4.21% 45 NCM 0.72% 0.50% 0.27% 1.56%
19 SAAF 1.52% 0.42% 0.84% 1.86% 46 TM 0.70% 0.34% 0.43%
1.67%
20 WINE 1.49% 2.21% 0.38% 7.29% 47 HT 0.68% 0.10% 0.46%
0.79%
21 ASRP 1.46% 0.56% 0.98% 2.80% 48 CMPC 0.64% 0.44% 0.25%
1.48%
22 DCFM 1.41% 0.91% 0.69% 3.54% 49 FISH 0.61% 0.87% 0.11%
4.80%
23 FF 1.40% 0.38% 0.95% 2.74% 50 BBPM 0.57% 0.32% 0.27%
1.37%
24 FMBM 1.34% 0.62% 0.74% 2.53% 51 GNFP 0.56% 0.34% 0.28%
1.43%
25 CM 1.28% 0.56% 0.74% 2.46% 52 LG 0.49% 0.22% 0.28% 1.08%
26 PEP 1 26% 0 51% 0 95% 3 39% 53 FSCM 0 40% 0 21% 0 20% 0
95%
Part 3: ResultsNon-renewable resource usage (% sej)
-
Part 3: Results
Emissions, land, water footprint by sector
-
Part 3: Results
Emissions, land, water footprint by sector
-
Midpoint impact results
Part 3: Results
-
End point impacts
Part 3: Results
-
0 50 100 150 200 250 300Sugar cane mills and refining
Pesticide and other agricultural…Distilleries
Seasoning and dressing…Cookie, cracker, and pasta…
Fruit and vegetable canning,…Wineries
Tortilla manufacturingConfectionery manufacturing…
Poultry processingSnack food manufacturing
Chocolate and confectionery…Frozen food manufacturingPoultry and
egg production
Flour milling and malt…Grain farming
Coffee and tea manufacturingBeet sugar manufacturing
All other crop farmingAnimal (except poultry)…
Tobacco farmingCotton farming
Fruit farmingOilseed farming
Vegetable and melon farmingLogging
Seafood product preparation…
Loading Ratio
Loading Ratio
Part 3: Results
-
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2Sugar cane mills and refining
Pesticide and other agricultural…Distilleries
Seasoning and dressing…Cookie, cracker, and pasta…
Fruit and vegetable canning,…Wineries
Tortilla manufacturingConfectionery manufacturing from…
Poultry processingSnack food manufacturing
Chocolate and confectionery…Frozen food manufacturingPoultry and
egg production
Flour milling and malt manufacturingGrain farming
Coffee and tea manufacturingBeet sugar manufacturing
All other crop farmingAnimal (except poultry)…
Tobacco farmingCotton farming
Fruit farmingOilseed farming
Vegetable and melon farmingLogging
Seafood product preparation and…
Renewability Index
Renewability Index
Part 3: Results
-
Non-renewable Resource Eco-
efficiency (NREE) scores
Part 3: Results
-
Non-renewable resource sensitivity to
NREE scores
Part 3: Results
-
The real advantage with Eco-LCA is the inclusion ofecosystem
goods and services– gives much better ‘bigpicture’ outlook of
system.
Integration of ECO-LCA and ReCipe is the novel part of
thecurrent study, which enables the possible inclusion of mid
andend point impacts along with an ecologically based
LCAframework.
The findings of current study can provide significant insights
to policy makers toward improving the overall supply chain-linked
ecological sustainability performance of AFI, which will require
more detailed analysis of processes and consumption behaviors in
the future.
From the analysis results, grain farming, dairy food, and animal
production-related sectors were found to have the greatest shares
in both environmental and ecological impact categories as well as
endpoint impact.
Conclusions
-
Many research contributions exist related to those sectors to
assess environmental impact from life cycle standpoint
(Arvanitoyannis et al., 2014).
Adjustment in the Agri-food sectors is already underway with
growth interest in renewable resources of energy to reduce
environmental pollution, and ecosystem burden (Roy et al.,
2009).
Strategies for sustainable agri-food practice should be based on
the conservation and careful management of energy, ecological
resources, water, and land needed for agri-food production.
The possible implementation would include reduction of waste
food production; improve efficiency of operation and process, use
of proper solar energy by reducing nonrenewable resource associated
with entire life cycle process in Agri-food sector.
Converting intensive agriculture into organic farming would
another possible consideration for environmentally friendly farming
that may improve landscape image and animal welfare (Arvanitoyannis
et al., 2014).
Conclusions
-
Future Work There is a strong need on analysis of ecological
and
socio-economic impacts for green manufacturing. Triple bottom
line sustainability accounting is
recommended. Stochastic IO-LCA modeling would be of importance
to
handle the critics about the uncertainty of IO results.
Conclusions
-
Thank you & Questions?Gokhan Egilmez, PhD
E-mail: [email protected] can find the presentation
available at my blog:
https://gokhanegilmez.wordpress.com/presentations/
Questions?
mailto:[email protected]://gokhanegilmez.wordpress.com/presentations/
-
References Egilmez, G., Kucukvar, M., & Tatari, O. (2013).
Sustainability assessment of U.S. manufacturing sectors: an
economic input
output-based frontier approach. Journal of Cleaner Production,
53, 91–102. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.03.037 Tarancón, M. A., del
Río, P., & Callejas Albiñana, F. (2010). Assessing the
influence of manufacturing sectors on electricity
demand. A cross-country input-output approach. Energy Policy,
38, 1900–1908. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.070 Onat, N. C.,
Kucukvar, M., & Tatari, O. (2014). Scope-based carbon footprint
analysis of U.S. residential and commercial
buildings: An input–output hybrid life cycle assessment
approach. Building and Environment, 72, 53–62.
doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.10.009
Figures
http://livinggreenmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/green-economy.jpg
http://web.asidatamyte.com/Portals/155356/images/Capability%20Study.jpg
http://blogs.rochester.edu/thegreendandelion/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/sustainable-measures1-980x600.jpg
http://csis.msu.edu/sites/csis.msu.edu/files/12-14-13%20world%20puzzle.jpg
http://c.asstatic.com/images/1541565_634833558082236250-1.jpg
https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAWYAAAAJGZjNWIwYzZiLWE4ZWItNDI0NC04M2YzLWRiM2ExMTJj
NDExMA.png
http://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ecosystem-120717081103-phpapp01-thumbnail-4.jpg?cb=1342512724
INFORMS, Annual Meeting 2015
References
http://livinggreenmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/green-economy.jpghttp://web.asidatamyte.com/Portals/155356/images/Capability%20Study.jpghttp://blogs.rochester.edu/thegreendandelion/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/sustainable-measures1-980x600.jpghttp://csis.msu.edu/sites/csis.msu.edu/files/12-14-13%20world%20puzzle.jpghttp://c.asstatic.com/images/1541565_634833558082236250-1.jpghttps://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAWYAAAAJGZjNWIwYzZiLWE4ZWItNDI0NC04M2YzLWRiM2ExMTJjNDExMA.pnghttp://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ecosystem-120717081103-phpapp01-thumbnail-4.jpg?cb=1342512724
Emergy and End-point Impact Assessment of Agricultural and Food
Production in the United States: A Supply Chain-linked
Ecologically-based Life Cycle AssessmentSlide Number 2Why
sustainability?Why sustainability?Ecological Impacts of U.S.
Manufacturing IndustriesSustainable Manufacturing and Life Cycle
Assessment�Life Cycle AssessmentLife Cycle Assessment ModelsLCA
scopesHow to expand the LCA research?Input Output Life Cycle
Assessment (EIO-LCA) ModelingECO-LCA basicsSlide Number 13Slide
Number 14The Aggregation MetricsEcological Sustainability
Performance IndicatorsEco-LCA: Hierarchy of AnalysisModeling with
Eco-LCA:�Automobile ManufacturingSummary of Research Methodology
and Current FocusStep-by-Step Illustration of
MethodologyAgri-food�Sectors �&�AbbreviationsSlide Number
22Slide Number 23Slide Number 24Slide Number 25Slide Number 26Slide
Number 27Midpoint impact resultsEnd point impactsSlide Number
30Slide Number 31Non-renewable Resource Eco-efficiency (NREE)
scoresNon-renewable resource sensitivity to NREE scoresSlide Number
34Slide Number 35Future WorkThank you &
Questions?References