New Internet search volume-based weighting method for integrating various environmental impacts

Ji, Changyoon; Hong, Taehoon

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2015.09.008

Cited by 19 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The valuation step integrates the characterized environmental impacts expressed in different units into a single index with weighting factors to support comparisons and decision making (Ji and Hong, 2016), as shown in Table 3. Monetization, distance-to-target and panel methods are three common quantitative weighting approaches (Gu et al, 2008a;Ji and Hong, 2016). The monetization method is derived from the notion that seriousness can be measured by economic values, and the contingent valuation method, hedonic pricing method and WTP are common examples.…”

Section: ) Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

An integrated environmental and health performance quantification model for pre-occupancy phase of buildings in China

Zhang

et al. 2017

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To comprehensively pre-evaluate the damages to both the environment and human health due to construction activities in China, this paper presents an integrated building environmental and health performance (EHP) assessment model based on the Building Environmental Performance Analysis System (BEPAS) and the Building Health Impact Analysis System (BHIAS) models and offers a new inventory data estimation method. The new model follows the life cycle assessment (LCA) framework and the inventory analysis step involves bill of quantity (BOQ) data collection, consumption data formation, and environmental profile transformation. The consumption data are derived from engineering drawings and quotas to conduct the assessment before construction for pre-evaluation. The new model classifies building impacts into three safeguard areas: ecosystems, natural resources and human health. Thus, this model considers environmental impacts as well as damage to human wellbeing. The monetization approach, distance-to-target method and panel method are considered as optional weighting approaches. Finally, nine residential buildings of different structural types are taken as case studies to test the operability of the integrated model through application. The results indicate that the new model can effectively pre-evaluate building EHP and the structure type significantly affects the performance of residential buildings.

show abstract

Section: ) Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

An integrated environmental and health performance quantification model for pre-occupancy phase of buildings in China

Zhang

et al. 2017

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After normalization, the total environmental impact can be calculated by eqs and . Various studies have presented weighting factors for these five environmental impact categories and two human health impact categories, as shown in Table S9. , where TEI is the total environmental impact, w i is the weighting factor for category i , NEI i is the normalized environmental impact of category i , THI is the total human health impact, and NHI i is the normalized human health impact of category i .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…41 Various studies have presented weighting factors for these five environmental impact categories and two human health impact categories, as shown in Table S9. 43,44…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Analysis for the Wastewater Treatment Technical Route for Coal-to-Synthetic Natural Gas Industry through Zero Liquid Discharge Versus Standard Liquid Discharge

Yang

Hou

Meng

et al. 2020

ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the rapid development of the coal chemical industry has triggered problems related to supply and demand imbalances of the regional water resources in China. Water resources have become the main bottleneck restricting the sustainable development of the coal chemical industry. To achieve cleaner production, China has issued policies on zero liquid discharge for the coal chemical industry, especially for coal gasification wastewater. However, to achieve zero liquid discharge targets, coal gasification companies have to add more processes to support and complete the sustainable reuse of wastewater. To scientifically evaluate this sustainability problem, in this study, we conducted a life cycle assessment of water consumption, costs, and environmental impacts for the zero liquid discharge route of the fixed-bed coal gasification wastewater treatment process. The results reveal that the total water consumption of the zero liquid discharge route is greater than the one of the standard liquid discharge route. Reusing 1 m 3 of water would consume an extra 1.64 m 3 of water. This is because of the large amount of indirect water consumption caused by the extra high power consumption. Moreover, the life cycle cost of the zero liquid discharge route is approximately twice that of the standard liquid discharge route while the total environmental impact is 1.15 times that of the standard liquid discharge route and 1.03 times for total human health impact. The zero liquid discharge route increases water consumption, incurs higher costs, and causes more serious environmental impacts. Therefore, the zero liquid discharge route does not meet the requirements of cleaner production and sustainable development.

show abstract

“…search of a more holistic coverage of public opinion, Ji and Hong (2016) apply internet search volumes (such as Google Trends) to determine weight values. Other recent examples include the determination of weights given EU2020 targets (Castellani et al 2016a), planetary operating spaces (Tuomisto et al 2012), and MCDA panel elicitation techniques (Myllyviita et al 2014).…”

Section: Meaning Of Weightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity to weighting in life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)

Prado

Cinelli

Haar

et al. 2019

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

show abstract

New Internet search volume-based weighting method for integrating various environmental impacts

Cited by 19 publications

References 57 publications

An integrated environmental and health performance quantification model for pre-occupancy phase of buildings in China

An integrated environmental and health performance quantification model for pre-occupancy phase of buildings in China

Sustainability Analysis for the Wastewater Treatment Technical Route for Coal-to-Synthetic Natural Gas Industry through Zero Liquid Discharge Versus Standard Liquid Discharge

Sensitivity to weighting in life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About