Preface to the Princeton Landmarks in Biology Edition vii Preface xi Symbols Used xiii 1. The Importance of Islands 3 2. Area and Number of Speicies 8 3. Further Explanations of the Area-Diversity Pattern 19 4. The Strategy of Colonization 68 5. Invasibility and the Variable Niche 94 6. Stepping Stones and Biotic Exchange 123 7. Evolutionary Changes Following Colonization 145 8. Prospect 181 Glossary 185 References 193 Index 201

The Theory of Island Biogeography

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) translates emissions and resource extractions into a limited number of environmental impact scores by means of so-called characterisation factors. There are two mainstream ways to derive characterisation factors, i.e. at midpoint level and at endpoint level. To further progress LCIA method development, we updated the ReCiPe2008 method to its version of 2016. This paper provides an overview of the key elements of the ReCiPe2016 method. We implemented human health, ecosystem quality and resource scarcity as three areas of protection. Endpoint characterisation factors, directly related to the areas of protection, were derived from midpoint characterisation factors with a constant mid-to-endpoint factor per impact category. We included 17 midpoint impact categories. The update of ReCiPe provides characterisation factors that are representative for the global scale instead of the European scale, while maintaining the possibility for a number of impact categories to implement characterisation factors at a country and continental scale. We also expanded the number of environmental interventions and added impacts of water use on human health, impacts of water use and climate change on freshwater ecosystems and impacts of water use and tropospheric ozone formation on terrestrial ecosystems as novel damage pathways. Although significant effort has been put into the update of ReCiPe, there is still major improvement potential in the way impact pathways are modelled. Further improvements relate to a regionalisation of more impact categories, moving from local to global species extinction and adding more impact pathways. Life cycle impact assessment is a fast evolving field of research. ReCiPe2016 provides a state-of-the-art method to convert life cycle inventories to a limited number of life cycle impact scores on midpoint and endpoint level.

/pdf/recipe2016-a-harmonised-life-cycle-impact-assessment-method-igx7h71aru.pdf

ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level

In the modern economy, international value chains--production, use, and disposal of goods--have global environmental impacts. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) aims to track these impacts and assess them from a systems perspective, identifying strategies for improvement without burden shifting. We review recent developments in LCA, including existing and emerging applications aimed at supporting environmentally informed decisions in policy-making, product development and procurement, and consumer choices. LCA constitutes a viable screening tool that can pinpoint environmental hotspots in complex value chains, but we also caution that completeness in scope comes at the price of simplifications and uncertainties. Future advances of LCA in enhancing regional detail and accuracy as well as broadening the assessment to economic and social aspects will make it more relevant for producers and consumers alike.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/344/6188/1109.full.pdf

Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment

Species Diversity in Space and Time

The first green chemistry metrics—the E factor (kgs waste/kg product) and atom economy (mol wt of product/sum of mol wts of starting materials)—were introduced in the early 1990s and were actually green chemistry avant la lettre. In the last two decades, these two metrics have been adopted worldwide by both academia and industry. The E factor has been refined to distinguish between simple and complete E factors, for example, and to define the system boundaries. Other mass-based metrics such as process mass intensity (PMI) and reaction mass efficiency (RME) have been proposed. However, mass-based metrics need to be augmented by metrics which measure the environmental impact of waste, such as life cycle assessment (LCA), and metrics for assessing the economic viability of products and processes. The application of such metrics in measuring the sustainability of processes for the manufacture of pharmaceuticals and other fine chemicals is discussed in detail. Mass-based metrics alone are not sufficient to mea...

/pdf/metrics-of-green-chemistry-and-sustainability-past-present-3hb6uxgln5.pdf

Metrics of Green Chemistry and Sustainability: Past, Present, and Future

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) is a field of active development. The last decade has seen prolific publication of new impact assessment methods covering many different impact categories and providing characterization factors that often deviate from each other for the same substance and impact. The LCA standard ISO 14044 is rather general and unspecific in its requirements and offers little help to the LCA practitioner who needs to make a choice. With the aim to identify the best among existing characterization models and provide recommendations to the LCA practitioner, a study was performed for the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission (JRC). Existing LCIA methods were collected and their individual characterization models identified at both midpoint and endpoint levels and supplemented with other environmental models of potential use for LCIA. No new developments of characterization models or factors were done in the project. From a total of 156 models, 91 were short listed as possible candidates for a recommendation within their impact category. Criteria were developed for analyzing the models within each impact category. The criteria addressed both scientific qualities and stakeholder acceptance. The criteria were reviewed by external experts and stakeholders and applied in a comprehensive analysis of the short-listed characterization models (the total number of criteria varied between 35 and 50 per impact category). For each impact category, the analysis concluded with identification of the best among the existing characterization models. If the identified model was of sufficient quality, it was recommended by the JRC. Analysis and recommendation process involved hearing of both scientific experts and stakeholders. Recommendations were developed for 14 impact categories at midpoint level, and among these recommendations, three were classified as “satisfactory” while ten were “in need of some improvements” and one was so weak that it has “to be applied with caution.” For some of the impact categories, the classification of the recommended model varied with the type of substance. At endpoint level, recommendations were only found relevant for three impact categories. For the rest, the quality of the existing methods was too weak, and the methods that came out best in the analysis were classified as “interim,” i.e., not recommended by the JRC but suitable to provide an initial basis for further development. The level of characterization modeling at midpoint level has improved considerably over the last decade and now also considers important aspects like geographical differentiation and combination of midpoint and endpoint characterization, although the latter is in clear need for further development. With the realization of the potential importance of geographical differentiation comes the need for characterization models that are able to produce characterization factors that are representative for different continents and still support aggregation of impact scores over the whole life cycle. For the impact categories human toxicity and ecotoxicity, we are now able to recommend a model, but the number of chemical substances in common use is so high that there is a need to address the substance data shortage and calculate characterization factors for many new substances. Another unresolved issue is the need for quantitative information about the uncertainties that accompany the characterization factors. This is still only adequately addressed for one or two impact categories at midpoint, and this should be a focus point in future research. The dynamic character of LCIA research means that what is best practice will change quickly in time. The characterization methods presented in this paper represent what was best practice in 2008–2009.

Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment

Halting current rates of biodiversity loss will be a defining challenge of the 21st century. To assess the effectiveness of strategies to achieve this goal, indicators and tools are required that monitor the driving forces of biodiversity loss, the changing state of biodiversity, and evaluate the effectiveness of policy responses. Here, we review the use of indicators and approaches to model biodiversity loss in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), a methodology used to evaluate the cradle-to-grave environmental impacts of products. We find serious conceptual shortcomings in the way models are constructed, with scale considerations largely absent. Further, there is a disproportionate focus on indicators that reflect changes in compositional aspects of biodiversity, mainly changes in species richness. Functional and structural attributes of biodiversity are largely neglected. Taxonomic and geographic coverage remains problematic, with the majority of models restricted to one or a few taxonomic groups and geographi...

Toward meaningful end points of biodiversity in life cycle assessment.

Human and ecosystem health damage due to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is generally poorly quantified in the life cycle assessment of products, preventing an integrated comparison of the importance of GHGs with other stressor types, such as ozone depletion and acidifying emissions. In this study, we derived new characterization factors for 63 GHGs that quantify the impact of an emission change on human and ecosystem health damage. For human health damage, the Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) per unit emission related to malaria, diarrhea, malnutrition, drowning, and cardiovascular diseases were quantified. For ecosystem health damage, the Potentially Disappeared Fraction (PDF) over space and time of various species groups, including plants, butterflies, birds, and mammals, per unit emission was calculated. The influence of value choices in the modeling procedure was analyzed by defining three coherent scenarios, based on Cultural theory perspectives. It was found that the characterization factor for human health damage by carbon dioxide (CO2) ranges from 1.1 x 10(-2) to 1.8 x 10(+1) DALY per kton of emission, while the characterization factor for ecosystem damage by CO2 ranges from 5.4 x 10(-2) to 1.2 x 10(+1) disappeared fraction of species over space and time ((km2 x year)/kton), depending on the scenario chosen. The characterization factor of a GHG can change up to 4 orders of magnitude, depending on the scenario. The scenario-specific differences are mainly explained by the choice for a specific time horizon and stresses the importance of dealing with value choices in the life cycle impact assessment of GHG emissions.

Characterization Factors for Global Warming in Life Cycle Assessment Based on Damages to Humans and Ecosystems

IMPACT 2002+: User Guide

Uncertainties in land use damage modeling are recognized, but hardly quantified in life cycle assessment (LCA). The objective of this study is to analyze the influence of various key assumptions and uncertainties within the development of characterisation factors (CFs) for land use in LCA. We assessed the influence on land use CFs of (1) parameter uncertainty and (2) the choice for a constant or land use-specific species accumulation factor z and including or excluding regional effects. A model framework was developed to analyze the uncertainties of CFs for six land use types and three agricultural practices. The CFs are expressed as potential disappeared fraction (PDF) of vascular plant species based on the species area relationship (S=c.Az). The species area relationship describes the relation between the species number and area size, with help of the species accumulation factor z and the species richness factor c. A dataset representative for Great Britain was used to quantify both modeling choices and parameter uncertainty. Modeling choices were analyzed by defining three coherent scenarios, based on cultural theory perspectives. The parameter uncertainties of average species number and species accumulation factor z were quantified using Monte Carlo simulation. Pair-wise comparison of the CFs shows that 68–85% of the CFs significantly differ from each other within each perspective. It is found that the ranking of organic, less intensive, and intensive land practices of each land use type is unaltered by the chosen model scenario. However, the absolute values of the CFs can change from negative to positive scores with an average difference of 0.8 PDF between the two extreme perspectives, i.e., individualistic and egalitarian. The difference between these scenarios is for 40% explained by the choice in z and for 60% by the choice in including regional effects. Within the egalitarian and hierarchist perspective the species accumulation factor z is for more than 80% responsible for the parameter uncertainty. Modeling choices and uncertainties within the species area relationship hardly change the ranking of the different land practices but largely influence the absolute value of the CFs for land use. The absolute change in the land use CFs can change the interpretation of land use impacts compared with other stressors such as climate change.

/pdf/uncertainties-in-the-application-of-the-species-area-c1kjh08g37.pdf

An M. De Schryver

Papers

Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment

Toward meaningful end points of biodiversity in life cycle assessment.

Characterization Factors for Global Warming in Life Cycle Assessment Based on Damages to Humans and Ecosystems

IMPACT 2002+: User Guide

Uncertainties in the application of the species area relationship for characterisation factors of land occupation in life cycle assessment