The Experts below are selected from a list of 213081 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Lin Cheng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Stochastic Electric Vehicle Network Considering Environmental Costs
    Sustainability, 2018
    Co-Authors: Lin Cheng
    Abstract:

    In recent years, many countries have published their timetables to promote electric vehicles. Many researches have focused on the benefits of electric vehicles. Compared with gas vehicles, electric vehicles are more suitable for modern cities, because they are considered to be environment-friendly by the public. Hence we pay attention to the Environmental Costs of electric vehicles. In this paper, an electric vehicle network is established. To analyze this electric vehicle network, we define Environmental Costs for the network and propose a stochastic user equilibrium model to describe drivers’ route choice behavior. An algorithm is proposed to solve this model. The model and the algorithm are illustrated through a numerical example. We test the calculation feasibility of the proposed model and the computational efficiency of the proposed algorithm via this numerical example. A comparative analysis is conducted to show the benefits of introducing electric vehicles into traffic networks. With the sensitivity analysis, we also reveal the relationship between people’s Environmental awareness, the quantity of electric vehicles and the Environmental Costs of the overall traffic network.

Shuowen Zhou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Life Cycle Environmental Costs of Buildings
    Energies, 2020
    Co-Authors: Yuanfeng Wang, Bo Pang, Xiangjie Zhang, Jingjing Wang, Yinshan Liu, Chengcheng Shi, Shuowen Zhou
    Abstract:

    Energy consumption and pollutant emissions from buildings have caused serious impacts on the environment. Currently, research on building Environmental Costs is quite insufficient. Based on life cycle inventory of building materials, fossil fuel and electricity power, a calculating model for Environmental Costs during different stages is presented. A single-objective optimization model is generated by converting Environmental impact into Environmental cost, with the same unit with direct cost. Two residential buildings, one located in Beijing and another in Xiamen, China, are taken as the case studies and analyzed to test the proposed model. Moreover, data uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of key parameters, including the discount rate and the unit virtual abatement Costs of pollutants, are also conducted. The analysis results show that the Environmental cost accounts for about 16% of direct cost. The Environmental degradation cost accounts for about 70% of the total Environmental cost. According to the probabilistic uncertainty analysis results, the coefficient of variation of material production stage is the largest. The sensitivity analysis results indicate that the unit virtual abatement cost of CO2 has the largest influence on the final Environmental cost.

Robert Gale - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Environmental Costs at a Canadian paper mill: a case study of Environmental Management Accounting (EMA)
    Journal of Cleaner Production, 2006
    Co-Authors: Robert Gale
    Abstract:

    Abstract An Environmental Management Accounting (EMA) framework is applied to the 2000 year-end financial report for the Mackenzie Paper Division paper mill owned and operated by Abitibi-Consolidated Inc. of Montreal, Quebec. A conventional reading of the obvious Environmental Costs from this financial report is Cdn$2,196,838. This figure is derived from an analysis of effluent treatment Costs and other line item Environmental Costs. There is no “Environmental account” category that breaks out either Costs or the mass balance of inputs and outputs. For the most part, Environmental Costs are rolled up into overhead accounts such as administration, infrastructure and materials accounts. Application of the EMA framework is based on assigning Environmental Costs to one of four categories for which a tentative breakdown is as follows: (1) waste and emission treatment Costs ($3,348,902); (2) prevention and Environmental management Costs ($270,109); (3) material purchase value of non-product output Costs ($946,799); and (4) processing Costs of non-product output ($2 92,943). There is also a category called Environmental Revenues, of which none were reported. Conservative estimates thus place the total Environmental Costs at $4,858,753. What is significant about this result is that the Environmental Costs under EMA are at least twice as much as would normally be reported. This supports the view that Environmental Costs are much higher than generally considered and makes it clear that many important Environmental Costs as well as benefits are “hidden” in other accounts. More studies of a similar design are required to confirm the validity of the EMA methodology reported here.

Seung-hoon Yoo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Environmental Costs of Photovoltaic Power Plants in South Korea: A Choice Experiment Study
    Sustainability, 2017
    Co-Authors: Hee-jong Yang, Seul-ye Lim, Seung-hoon Yoo
    Abstract:

    The photovoltaic (PV) power supplies renewable and sustainable electricity without greenhouse gases and air pollutants emissions. However, the potential Environmental impacts caused by PV power plants can negatively affect both the ecosystem and human life. Thus, the Environmental Costs arising from the PV power plants should be measured and the efforts to reduce them should be made. To this end, this article seeks to assess the Environmental Costs of PV power plants using a choice experiment (CE). Four attributes chosen for this purpose are habitat loss, landscape destruction, hazardous materials, and light pollution. The trade-offs between each attribute and price were successfully assessed in the CE survey of 1000 South Korean respondents. The Environmental Costs of a one percentage point increase in habitat loss, landscape destruction, hazardous materials, and light pollution caused by PV power plants are estimated to be KRW 135 (USD 0.12), 53 (0.05), 122 (0.11), and 158 (0.14), respectively, per household per month. The findings can provide policymakers with useful information for both evaluating and planning the PV power plant-related policies.

  • Using a choice experiment to measure the Environmental Costs of air pollution impacts in Seoul
    Journal of environmental management, 2007
    Co-Authors: Seung-hoon Yoo, Seung Jun Kwak, Joo Suk Lee
    Abstract:

    Air pollution, a by-product of economic growth, has been incurring extensive Environmental Costs in Seoul, Korea. Unfortunately, air pollution impacts are not treated as a commercial item, and thus it is difficult to measure the Environmental Costs arising from air pollution. There is an imminent need to find a way to measure air pollution impacts so that appropriate actions can be taken to control air pollution. Therefore, this study attempts to apply a choice experiment to quantifying the Environmental Costs of four air pollution impacts (mortality, morbidity, soiling damage, and poor visibility), using a specific case study of Seoul. We consider the trade-offs between price and attributes of air pollution impacts for selecting a preferred alternative and derive the marginal willingness to pay (WTP) estimate for each attribute. According to the results, the households' monthly WTP for a 10% reduction in the concentrations of major pollutants in Seoul was found to be approximately 5494 Korean won (USD 4.6) and the total annual WTP for the entire population of Seoul was about 203.4 billion Korean won (USD 169.5 million). This study is expected to provide policy-makers with useful information for evaluating and planning Environmental policies relating specifically to air pollution.

David Norse - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Environmental Costs of china s food security
    Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2015
    Co-Authors: David Norse
    Abstract:

    Abstract China’s successful achievement of food security in recent decades has resulted in serious damage to the environment upstream of the agricultural sector, on farm and downstream. The Environmental Costs of this damage are not only agro-ecosystem function and the long-term sustainability of food production, but also bio-physical including human health with impacts at all levels from the local to the global, and with economic loss estimates ranging from 7 to 10% of China’s agricultural gross domestic product (GDP). This paper presents a systematic analysis of the causes and impacts of these Environmental Costs for China’s cropping systems and crop-based livestock systems, and focuses on the nitrogen management. Since the 1980s most of the Environmental Costs have been related to the intensification of first grain production stimulated by high nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation subsidies, and then vegetable production and fruit trees, with the overuse and misuse of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and manure being the dominant cause of eutrophication, soil acidification and high greenhouse gas emissions. However, during the last 10 years or so the expansion of intensive livestock production has become a serious cause of direct and indirect air and water pollution and is destined to be the main agricultural threat to China’s environment in the long-term unless a holistic strategy for sustainable intensification is adopted for the next and future 5 Year Plans. This strategy should focus on improving nutrient management to limit nitrogen overuse, which is now the main cause of the economic losses from agriculture’s damage to the environment.

  • Environmental Costs of China’s food security
    Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2015
    Co-Authors: David Norse
    Abstract:

    Abstract China’s successful achievement of food security in recent decades has resulted in serious damage to the environment upstream of the agricultural sector, on farm and downstream. The Environmental Costs of this damage are not only agro-ecosystem function and the long-term sustainability of food production, but also bio-physical including human health with impacts at all levels from the local to the global, and with economic loss estimates ranging from 7 to 10% of China’s agricultural gross domestic product (GDP). This paper presents a systematic analysis of the causes and impacts of these Environmental Costs for China’s cropping systems and crop-based livestock systems, and focuses on the nitrogen management. Since the 1980s most of the Environmental Costs have been related to the intensification of first grain production stimulated by high nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation subsidies, and then vegetable production and fruit trees, with the overuse and misuse of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and manure being the dominant cause of eutrophication, soil acidification and high greenhouse gas emissions. However, during the last 10 years or so the expansion of intensive livestock production has become a serious cause of direct and indirect air and water pollution and is destined to be the main agricultural threat to China’s environment in the long-term unless a holistic strategy for sustainable intensification is adopted for the next and future 5 Year Plans. This strategy should focus on improving nutrient management to limit nitrogen overuse, which is now the main cause of the economic losses from agriculture’s damage to the environment.