The Experts below are selected from a list of 24240 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sarah Sojka - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
life cycle assessment of a commercial rainwater harvesting system compared with a municipal water supply system
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017Co-Authors: Santosh R. Ghimire, Wesley W. Ingwersen, John M. Johnston, Sarah SojkaAbstract:Abstract Building upon previously published life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, we conducted an LCA of a commercial rainwater harvesting (RWH) system and compared it to a municipal water supply (MWS) system adapted to Washington, D.C. Eleven life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators were assessed, with a functional unit of 1 m 3 of rainwater and municipal water delivery system for toilets and urinals in a four-story commercial building with 1000 employees. Our assessment shows that the benchmark commercial RWH system outperforms the MWS system in all categories except Ozone Depletion. Sensitivity and performance analyses revealed pump and pumping energy to be key components for most categories, which further guides LCIA Tradeoff Analysis with respect to energy intensities. Tradeoff Analysis revealed that commercial RWH performed better than MWS in Ozone Depletion if RWH's energy intensity was less than that of MWS by at least 0.86 kWh/m 3 (249% of the benchmark MWS energy usage at 0.35 kWh/m 3 ). RWH also outperformed MWS in Metal Depletion and Freshwater Withdrawal, regardless of energy intensities, up to 5.51 kWh/m 3 . An auxiliary commercial RWH system with 50% MWS reduced Ozone Depletion by 19% but showed an increase in all other impacts, which were still lower than benchmark MWS system impacts. Current models are transferrable to commercial RWH installations at other locations.
-
life cycle assessment of a commercial rainwater harvesting system compared with a municipal water supply system
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017Co-Authors: Santosh R. Ghimire, Wesley W. Ingwersen, John M. Johnston, Sarah SojkaAbstract:Abstract Building upon previously published life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, we conducted an LCA of a commercial rainwater harvesting (RWH) system and compared it to a municipal water supply (MWS) system adapted to Washington, D.C. Eleven life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators were assessed, with a functional unit of 1 m 3 of rainwater and municipal water delivery system for toilets and urinals in a four-story commercial building with 1000 employees. Our assessment shows that the benchmark commercial RWH system outperforms the MWS system in all categories except Ozone Depletion. Sensitivity and performance analyses revealed pump and pumping energy to be key components for most categories, which further guides LCIA Tradeoff Analysis with respect to energy intensities. Tradeoff Analysis revealed that commercial RWH performed better than MWS in Ozone Depletion if RWH's energy intensity was less than that of MWS by at least 0.86 kWh/m 3 (249% of the benchmark MWS energy usage at 0.35 kWh/m 3 ). RWH also outperformed MWS in Metal Depletion and Freshwater Withdrawal, regardless of energy intensities, up to 5.51 kWh/m 3 . An auxiliary commercial RWH system with 50% MWS reduced Ozone Depletion by 19% but showed an increase in all other impacts, which were still lower than benchmark MWS system impacts. Current models are transferrable to commercial RWH installations at other locations.
Santosh R. Ghimire - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
life cycle assessment of a commercial rainwater harvesting system compared with a municipal water supply system
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017Co-Authors: Santosh R. Ghimire, Wesley W. Ingwersen, John M. Johnston, Sarah SojkaAbstract:Abstract Building upon previously published life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, we conducted an LCA of a commercial rainwater harvesting (RWH) system and compared it to a municipal water supply (MWS) system adapted to Washington, D.C. Eleven life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators were assessed, with a functional unit of 1 m 3 of rainwater and municipal water delivery system for toilets and urinals in a four-story commercial building with 1000 employees. Our assessment shows that the benchmark commercial RWH system outperforms the MWS system in all categories except Ozone Depletion. Sensitivity and performance analyses revealed pump and pumping energy to be key components for most categories, which further guides LCIA Tradeoff Analysis with respect to energy intensities. Tradeoff Analysis revealed that commercial RWH performed better than MWS in Ozone Depletion if RWH's energy intensity was less than that of MWS by at least 0.86 kWh/m 3 (249% of the benchmark MWS energy usage at 0.35 kWh/m 3 ). RWH also outperformed MWS in Metal Depletion and Freshwater Withdrawal, regardless of energy intensities, up to 5.51 kWh/m 3 . An auxiliary commercial RWH system with 50% MWS reduced Ozone Depletion by 19% but showed an increase in all other impacts, which were still lower than benchmark MWS system impacts. Current models are transferrable to commercial RWH installations at other locations.
-
life cycle assessment of a commercial rainwater harvesting system compared with a municipal water supply system
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017Co-Authors: Santosh R. Ghimire, Wesley W. Ingwersen, John M. Johnston, Sarah SojkaAbstract:Abstract Building upon previously published life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, we conducted an LCA of a commercial rainwater harvesting (RWH) system and compared it to a municipal water supply (MWS) system adapted to Washington, D.C. Eleven life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators were assessed, with a functional unit of 1 m 3 of rainwater and municipal water delivery system for toilets and urinals in a four-story commercial building with 1000 employees. Our assessment shows that the benchmark commercial RWH system outperforms the MWS system in all categories except Ozone Depletion. Sensitivity and performance analyses revealed pump and pumping energy to be key components for most categories, which further guides LCIA Tradeoff Analysis with respect to energy intensities. Tradeoff Analysis revealed that commercial RWH performed better than MWS in Ozone Depletion if RWH's energy intensity was less than that of MWS by at least 0.86 kWh/m 3 (249% of the benchmark MWS energy usage at 0.35 kWh/m 3 ). RWH also outperformed MWS in Metal Depletion and Freshwater Withdrawal, regardless of energy intensities, up to 5.51 kWh/m 3 . An auxiliary commercial RWH system with 50% MWS reduced Ozone Depletion by 19% but showed an increase in all other impacts, which were still lower than benchmark MWS system impacts. Current models are transferrable to commercial RWH installations at other locations.
Wesley W. Ingwersen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
life cycle assessment of a commercial rainwater harvesting system compared with a municipal water supply system
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017Co-Authors: Santosh R. Ghimire, Wesley W. Ingwersen, John M. Johnston, Sarah SojkaAbstract:Abstract Building upon previously published life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, we conducted an LCA of a commercial rainwater harvesting (RWH) system and compared it to a municipal water supply (MWS) system adapted to Washington, D.C. Eleven life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators were assessed, with a functional unit of 1 m 3 of rainwater and municipal water delivery system for toilets and urinals in a four-story commercial building with 1000 employees. Our assessment shows that the benchmark commercial RWH system outperforms the MWS system in all categories except Ozone Depletion. Sensitivity and performance analyses revealed pump and pumping energy to be key components for most categories, which further guides LCIA Tradeoff Analysis with respect to energy intensities. Tradeoff Analysis revealed that commercial RWH performed better than MWS in Ozone Depletion if RWH's energy intensity was less than that of MWS by at least 0.86 kWh/m 3 (249% of the benchmark MWS energy usage at 0.35 kWh/m 3 ). RWH also outperformed MWS in Metal Depletion and Freshwater Withdrawal, regardless of energy intensities, up to 5.51 kWh/m 3 . An auxiliary commercial RWH system with 50% MWS reduced Ozone Depletion by 19% but showed an increase in all other impacts, which were still lower than benchmark MWS system impacts. Current models are transferrable to commercial RWH installations at other locations.
-
life cycle assessment of a commercial rainwater harvesting system compared with a municipal water supply system
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017Co-Authors: Santosh R. Ghimire, Wesley W. Ingwersen, John M. Johnston, Sarah SojkaAbstract:Abstract Building upon previously published life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, we conducted an LCA of a commercial rainwater harvesting (RWH) system and compared it to a municipal water supply (MWS) system adapted to Washington, D.C. Eleven life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators were assessed, with a functional unit of 1 m 3 of rainwater and municipal water delivery system for toilets and urinals in a four-story commercial building with 1000 employees. Our assessment shows that the benchmark commercial RWH system outperforms the MWS system in all categories except Ozone Depletion. Sensitivity and performance analyses revealed pump and pumping energy to be key components for most categories, which further guides LCIA Tradeoff Analysis with respect to energy intensities. Tradeoff Analysis revealed that commercial RWH performed better than MWS in Ozone Depletion if RWH's energy intensity was less than that of MWS by at least 0.86 kWh/m 3 (249% of the benchmark MWS energy usage at 0.35 kWh/m 3 ). RWH also outperformed MWS in Metal Depletion and Freshwater Withdrawal, regardless of energy intensities, up to 5.51 kWh/m 3 . An auxiliary commercial RWH system with 50% MWS reduced Ozone Depletion by 19% but showed an increase in all other impacts, which were still lower than benchmark MWS system impacts. Current models are transferrable to commercial RWH installations at other locations.
John M. Johnston - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
life cycle assessment of a commercial rainwater harvesting system compared with a municipal water supply system
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017Co-Authors: Santosh R. Ghimire, Wesley W. Ingwersen, John M. Johnston, Sarah SojkaAbstract:Abstract Building upon previously published life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, we conducted an LCA of a commercial rainwater harvesting (RWH) system and compared it to a municipal water supply (MWS) system adapted to Washington, D.C. Eleven life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators were assessed, with a functional unit of 1 m 3 of rainwater and municipal water delivery system for toilets and urinals in a four-story commercial building with 1000 employees. Our assessment shows that the benchmark commercial RWH system outperforms the MWS system in all categories except Ozone Depletion. Sensitivity and performance analyses revealed pump and pumping energy to be key components for most categories, which further guides LCIA Tradeoff Analysis with respect to energy intensities. Tradeoff Analysis revealed that commercial RWH performed better than MWS in Ozone Depletion if RWH's energy intensity was less than that of MWS by at least 0.86 kWh/m 3 (249% of the benchmark MWS energy usage at 0.35 kWh/m 3 ). RWH also outperformed MWS in Metal Depletion and Freshwater Withdrawal, regardless of energy intensities, up to 5.51 kWh/m 3 . An auxiliary commercial RWH system with 50% MWS reduced Ozone Depletion by 19% but showed an increase in all other impacts, which were still lower than benchmark MWS system impacts. Current models are transferrable to commercial RWH installations at other locations.
-
life cycle assessment of a commercial rainwater harvesting system compared with a municipal water supply system
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017Co-Authors: Santosh R. Ghimire, Wesley W. Ingwersen, John M. Johnston, Sarah SojkaAbstract:Abstract Building upon previously published life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies, we conducted an LCA of a commercial rainwater harvesting (RWH) system and compared it to a municipal water supply (MWS) system adapted to Washington, D.C. Eleven life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators were assessed, with a functional unit of 1 m 3 of rainwater and municipal water delivery system for toilets and urinals in a four-story commercial building with 1000 employees. Our assessment shows that the benchmark commercial RWH system outperforms the MWS system in all categories except Ozone Depletion. Sensitivity and performance analyses revealed pump and pumping energy to be key components for most categories, which further guides LCIA Tradeoff Analysis with respect to energy intensities. Tradeoff Analysis revealed that commercial RWH performed better than MWS in Ozone Depletion if RWH's energy intensity was less than that of MWS by at least 0.86 kWh/m 3 (249% of the benchmark MWS energy usage at 0.35 kWh/m 3 ). RWH also outperformed MWS in Metal Depletion and Freshwater Withdrawal, regardless of energy intensities, up to 5.51 kWh/m 3 . An auxiliary commercial RWH system with 50% MWS reduced Ozone Depletion by 19% but showed an increase in all other impacts, which were still lower than benchmark MWS system impacts. Current models are transferrable to commercial RWH installations at other locations.
J J Stoorvogel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
coupling the Tradeoff Analysis model with a market equilibrium model to analyze economic and environmental outcomes of agricultural production systems
Agricultural Systems, 2012Co-Authors: Roberto O Valdivia, John M Antle, J J StoorvogelAbstract:Analysis of the economic and environmental outcomes of agricultural systems requires a bottom-up linkage from the farm to market, as well as a top-down linkage from market to farm. This study develops this two-way linkage between the Tradeoff Analysis Model of agricultural systems and a partial equilibrium market model. The resulting model can determine the effects of technology and policy interventions on the spatial distribution of environmental and economic outcomes at market equilibrium quantities and prices. The approach is demonstrated with a case study of Tradeoffs between poverty and nutrient depletion in a semi-subsistence agricultural system (Machakos, Kenya). The results suggest that the linkage of market equilibrium Analysis to farm level Integrated Assessment Models can be important in the Analysis of agriculture–environment interactions.
-
the Tradeoff Analysis model integrated bio physical and economic modeling of agricultural production systems
Agricultural Systems, 2004Co-Authors: J J Stoorvogel, John M Antle, Charles C Crissman, Walter BowenAbstract:Abstract There is an increasing call for tools that provide insight into the complex nature of agricultural systems and that deal with a broad range of sustainability issues related to policy intervention, technological innovations, and changes in environmental conditions (e.g., climate change). Sustainability indicators are useful, but only if their number is limited and the interactions between indicators are taken into consideration. In this context, we propose a methodology for an integrated Analysis of Tradeoffs between economic and environmental indicators. The Analysis to quantify these relationships should be based on a multi-disciplinary approach and as such requires the usage of bio-physical as well as econometric-process simulation models. The communication between these very different models is based on explicit definitions of spatial and temporal scales and model integration software. The methodology is based on spatially explicit econometric simulation models linked to spatially referenced bio-physical simulation models to simulate land use and input use decisions. The methodology has been applied for the potato–pasture production system in the Ecuadorian Andes. Results of the Analysis are presented in the form of Tradeoff curves between different indicators, but also as maps, and risks diagrams. Besides an Analysis of the current status, the approach allows for the Analysis of alternative scenarios showing the effect of those scenarios on the position and slope of the Tradeoff curve.