Environmental decision-making using life cycle impact assessment and stochastic multiattribute decision analysis: A case study on alternative transportation fuels

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 43, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1718-1723

  Rogers, Kristin ^a   Seager, Thomas P ^b  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA CHARACTERIZATIONS; DECISION MAKERS; ENERGY USE; ENVIRONMENTAL DECISION MAKINGS; FUEL DEPLETIONS; GREEN HOUSE GAS; IMPACT ASSESSMENTS; INVENTORY DATUM; LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS; MULTI ATTRIBUTES; MULTI-ATTRIBUTE DECISION ANALYSIS; NEW APPROACHES; RANK ORDERINGS; REFERENCE DATUM; REGULATED EMISSIONS; STAKEHOLDER VALUES; TRANSPORTATION FUELS; USING LIVES;

ALTERNATIVE FUELS; COMMUNICATION CHANNELS (INFORMATION THEORY); DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; FOSSIL FUELS; GAS EMISSIONS; GLOBAL WARMING; GREENHOUSE GASES; LEAKAGE (FLUID); LIFE CYCLE; RANDOM PROCESSES;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS;

FUEL;

ALTERNATIVE FUEL; DECISION ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; STOCHASTICITY;

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROP; DECISION MAKING; FOSSIL ENERGY; GREENHOUSE GAS; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT; STOCHASTIC MODEL; STOCHASTIC MULTIATTRIBUTE LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT; TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT;

BIOELECTRIC ENERGY SOURCES; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; DECISION MAKING; MODELS, THEORETICAL; MOTOR VEHICLES; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES; TIME FACTORS;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 64549093658     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es801123h     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Bare, J. C.; Norris, G. A.; Pennington, D. W.; McKone, T. TRACI: The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts. J. Ind. Ecol. 2003, 6 (3-4), 49-78.
2. Bare, J. C.; Gloria, T. P. Critical Analysis of the Mathematical Relationships and Comprehensiveness of Life Cycle Impact Assessment Approaches. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40 (4), 1104-1113.
3. Ryding, S.-O. ISO14042. Int. J. LCA 1999, 4 (6), 307.
4. Gregory, R.; McDaniels, T. Improving Environmental Decision Processes. In Decision Making for the Environment: Social and Behavioral Science Research Priorities; Brewer, G. D., Stern, P. C., Eds.; National Academies Press: Washington DC, 2005; pp 175-196.
5. Miettinen, P.; Hamalainen, R. P. How to Benefit from Decision Analysis in Environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1997, 102, 279-294.
6. Seppala, J.; Basson, L.; Norris, G. Decision Analysis Frameworks for Life-Cycle Impact Assessment. J. Ind. Ecol. 2002, 5 (4), 45-68.
7. Heijungs, R.; Guinee, J. B.; Kleijn, R.; Rovers, V. Bias in Normalization: Causes, Consequences, Detection and Remedies. Int. J. LCA 2007, 12 (4), 211-216.
8. Guitouni, A.; Martel, J.-M. Tentative Guidelines to Help Choosing an Appropriate MCDA Method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1998, 109, 501-521.
9. Seppala, J.; Hamalainen, R. P. On the Meaning of Distance-to-Target Weighting Method and Normalization in Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Int. J. LCA 2001, 6 (4), 211-218.
10. Bare, J. C.; Gloria, T.; Norris, G. A. Development of the Method and U.S. Normalization Database for Life Cycle Impact Assessment and Sustainability Metrics. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 5108-5115.
11. Brans, J.-P.; Mareschal, B. PROMETHEE Methods. In Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrogott, M., Eds.; Springer: New York, 2005.
12. Brans, J.-P.; Vincke, P.; Mareschal, B. How to select and how to rankprojects: The PROMETHEE method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1986, 24, 228-238.
13. Roy, B. Paradigms and challenges. In Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the art surveys; Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrogott, M., Eds.; Springer: New York, 2005; pp 3-24.
14. Salminen, P.; Hokkanen, J.; Lahdelma, R. Comparing Multi-criteria Methods in the Context of Environmental Problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1998, 104, 485-496.
15. Norese, M. F.; Toso, F. Group Decision and Distributed Technical Support. Int. Trans. Operational Res. 2004, 11, 395-417.
16. Hermans, C.; Erickson, J.; Noordewier; Sheldon, A.; Kline, M. Collaborative environmental planning in river management: An application of multicriteria decision analysis in the White River Watershed in Vermont. J. Environ. Manage. 2007, 84, 534-546.
17. Le Teno, J. F.; Mareschal, B. An Interval Version Of PROMETHEE For The Comparison Of Building Products' Design With Ill-Defined Data On Environmental quality. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1998, 109, 522-529.
18. Geldermann, J.; Rentz, O. Multi-criteria analysis for technique assessment: Case study from industrial coating. J. Ind. Ecol. 2005, 9 (3), 127-142.
19. Finnveden, G. A Critical Review Of Operational Valuation/ Weighting Methods For Life Cycle Assessment; Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Stockholm, 1999; pp 1-49.
20. Brewer, G. D.; Stern, P. C. Decision making for the environment: Social and behavioral science research priorities; National Academies Press: Washington DC, 2005; p 33.
21. Hofstetter, P.; Mettier, T. M. What Users Want and May Need: Insights from a Survey of Users of a Life-Cycle Tool. J. Ind. Ecol. 2003, 7 (2), 79-101.
22. Gloria, T. P.; Lippiatt, B.; Cooper, J. Life cycle impact assessment weights to support environmentally preferable purchasing in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 7551-7557.
23. Lahdelma, R.; Salminen, P. SMAA-2: Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making. Oper. Res. 2001, 49 (3), 444-454.
24. Tervonen, T.; Lahdelma, R. Implementing Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2007, 178, 500-513.
25. Schumacher, J. Oilseed, Biodiesel and Ethanol Subsidies and Renewable Energy Mandates: US Federal and Selected State Initiatives; Montana State University Bozeman, Montana, 2006.
26. Bush, G. W. Executive Order 13423-Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management. In Federal Register; United States, 2007; Vol. 72, pp 3919-3923.
27. Rahm, D.; Coggburn, J. D. Environmentally preferable procurement: Greening U.S. state government fleets. Public Works Manage. Policy 2007, 12 (2), 400-415.
28. von Blottnitz, H.; Curran, M. A. A Review Of Assessments Conducted On Bio-Ethanol As A Transportation Fuel From A Net Energy, Greenhouse Gas, And Environmental Life-Cycle Perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2007, 17 (7), 607-619.
29. Landis, A. E. Environmental and Economic Impacts ofBiobased Production; Ph.D. Dissertation, Civil and Materials Engineering, University of Illinois - Chicago: Chicago, 2007.
30. Wang, M. Q. Development and Use of GREET 1.6 Fuel-Cycle Model for Transportation Fuels and Vehicle Technologies; United States Department of Energy: 2001; p 11-13.
31. Wang, M. GREET-Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation, 1.8; Argonne National Laboratory Argonne, IL, 2007.
32. Decisioneering Inc. Crystal Ball 5.5; Littleton, CO, 2005.
33. Lippiatt, B.; Boyles, A. S. Using BEES to select cost-effective green products. Int. J. LCA 2001, 6 (2), 76-80.