TY - JOUR
T1 - Eco-indicator 99, ReCiPe and anova for evaluating building technologies under lca uncertainties
AU - Verbitsky, Oleg
AU - Pushkar, Svetlana
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, Gheorghe Asachi Technical University of Iasi, Romania. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - The Eco-Indicator 99 (EI99) method and the ReCiPe method are used to determine the fundamental uncertainties in the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) model through the configurations of the following six methodological options: egalitarian/egalitarian (e/e), egalitarian/average (e/a), hierarchist/hierarchist (h/h), hierarchist/average (h/a), individualist/individualist (i/i), and individualist/average (i/a). In this study, the aforementioned options were presented as (i) a set of methodological options with their particular weighting set (e/e, h/h, and i/i) and (ii) a set of methodological options with the average weighting set (e/a, h/a, and i/a), thereby creating a hierarchical design of both the EI99 and ReCiPe methods. The first goal of this study is to provide the appropriate statistical test as a supplemental method to EI99 and ReCiPe for the evaluation of the different environmental damage caused by four building technologies. The second goal is to compare the two damage oriented methods of EI99 and ReCiPe when the same building technologies are compared. Two-stage nested mixed ANOVA rather than a t-test is recommended as a supplemental method in both evaluations of EI99 and ReCiPe due the hierarchical structure of the methodological options. ReCiPe rather than EI99 is suggested as a damage oriented method of building technologies due to its extended list of impacts of the ecosystems damage category and its accounting for more reliable cost parameters in the resources damage category instead of the vague supplement of the energy requirement in a distant future that is applied in EI99.
AB - The Eco-Indicator 99 (EI99) method and the ReCiPe method are used to determine the fundamental uncertainties in the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) model through the configurations of the following six methodological options: egalitarian/egalitarian (e/e), egalitarian/average (e/a), hierarchist/hierarchist (h/h), hierarchist/average (h/a), individualist/individualist (i/i), and individualist/average (i/a). In this study, the aforementioned options were presented as (i) a set of methodological options with their particular weighting set (e/e, h/h, and i/i) and (ii) a set of methodological options with the average weighting set (e/a, h/a, and i/a), thereby creating a hierarchical design of both the EI99 and ReCiPe methods. The first goal of this study is to provide the appropriate statistical test as a supplemental method to EI99 and ReCiPe for the evaluation of the different environmental damage caused by four building technologies. The second goal is to compare the two damage oriented methods of EI99 and ReCiPe when the same building technologies are compared. Two-stage nested mixed ANOVA rather than a t-test is recommended as a supplemental method in both evaluations of EI99 and ReCiPe due the hierarchical structure of the methodological options. ReCiPe rather than EI99 is suggested as a damage oriented method of building technologies due to its extended list of impacts of the ecosystems damage category and its accounting for more reliable cost parameters in the resources damage category instead of the vague supplement of the energy requirement in a distant future that is applied in EI99.
KW - Hierarchical design structure
KW - LCIA uncertainty
KW - Sampling design
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066040947&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.30638/eemj.2018.253
DO - 10.30638/eemj.2018.253
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:85066040947
SN - 1582-9596
VL - 17
SP - 2549
EP - 2559
JO - Environmental Engineering and Management Journal
JF - Environmental Engineering and Management Journal
IS - 11
ER -