Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6587cd75c8-rlsgg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T03:36:42.819Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Accounting for Resource Use by Thermodynamics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2011

By
Bhavik R. Bakshi ,
Anil Baral  and
Jorge L. Hau
Edited by
Bhavik R. Bakshi ,
Timothy G. Gutowski  and
Dušan P. Sekulić
Bhavik R. Bakshi
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Anil Baral
Affiliation:
International Council on Clean Transportation
Jorge L. Hau
Affiliation:
Catalyst Lend Lease
Bhavik R. Bakshi
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Timothy G. Gutowski
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dušan P. Sekulić
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky
Get access

Summary

Motivation

Given the crucial role played by natural resources in any economic activity, many efforts have focused on accounting for their contribution to individual industrial processes and broader life cycles. These include traditional engineering approaches such as pinch [1, 2], exergy (see Chap. 2) and exergoeconomic analysis (see Chap. 15 by Tsatsaronis), that are used extensively for equipment and process design. Because environmentally conscious decisions require consideration of a broader boundary that accounts for the whole life cycle, many of these approaches have also been extended from the equipment to the life-cycle scale.

Most methods that analyze the life cycle of industrial products focus on emissions and their impact and the use of nonrenewable resources such as fossil fuels and minerals. More recent efforts also account for the role of land, soil, etc. [3]. Although sophisticated methods have been developed and standardized for assessing the life-cycle impact of emissions [4, 5], methods for resource accounting have been lagging behind. Even with many resource aggregation methods developed over the past several decades, consensus about the most appropriate method is still nonexistent. In addition, most resource accounting methods fail to consider some of the most critical resources, namely, ecosystem goods and services, that sustain all life on Earth. This “natural capital” includes provisioning services such as minerals, fossil fuels, water, biomass; supporting services such as biogeochemical cycles, carbon sequestration, pollination; regulating services such as regulation of pests, climate, and soil fertility; and cultural services.

Type
Chapter
Information
Thermodynamics and the Destruction of Resources , pp. 87 - 110
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Linhoff, B., “Pinch analysis – a state-of-the-art overview,” Chem. Eng. Res. Design 71a, 503–522 (1993).Google Scholar
El-Halwagi, M. M.Process Integration (Academic, New York, 2006).Google Scholar
Stewart, M. and Weidema, B. P. “A consistent framework for assessing the impacts from resource use – a focus on resource functionality,” Intl. J. Life Cycle Assess. 10, 240–247 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bare, J. C. and Gloria, T. P., “Critical analysis of the mathematical relationships and comprehensiveness of life cycle impact assessment approaches,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 40, 1104–1113 (2006).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
,International Organization for Standardization, Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1998).Google Scholar
2005 ,Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA), Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis (Island Press, Washington, D.C., 2005). Available at www.maweb.org, accessed Jan. 12 2008.Google Scholar
Williams, E. D., Ayres, R. U., and Heller, M. “The 1.7 kilogram microchip: Energy and material use in the production of semiconductor devices,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 36, 5504–5510 (2002).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthews, E., Amanu, C., and Bringezu, S.The Weight of Nations: Material Outflows from Industrial Economies (World Resources Institute, Washington D.C., 2000).Google Scholar
Schmidt-Bleek, F. “MIPS. A universal ecological measure?” Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2, 306–311 (1993).Google Scholar
Müller-Wenk, R. “Depletion of abiotic resources weighted on base of “virtual” impacts of lower grade deposits used in future,” Tech. Rep. (Institut für Wirtschaft und Ökologie, Universität St. Gallen, Switzerland, 1998).Google Scholar
Guinée, J. B., editor, Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2002).Google Scholar
Costanza, R., R, R. d'Arge, Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P., and Belt, M. “The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital,” Nature (London) 387, 253–260 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daily, G. C. and Ellison, K.The New Economy of Nature (Island Press, Washington, D.C., 2002).Google Scholar
Balmford, A., Bruner, A., Cooper, P., Costanza, R., Farber, S., Green, R. E., Feriss, M. Jenkins, Jessamy, V., Madden, J., Munro, K., Myers, N., Naeem, S., Paavola, J., Rayment, M.Rosendo, S., Roughgarden, J., Trumper, K., and Turner, R. K. “Economic reasons for conserving wild nature,” Science 297, 950–953 (2002).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casler, S. and Hannon, B., “Readjustment potentials in industrial energy efficiency and structure,” J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 17, 93–108 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullard, C. W. and Herendeen, R. A., “The energy cost of goods and services,” Energy Policy 3, 268–278 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannon, B., “Analysis of the energy cost of economic activities: 1963–2000,” Energy Syst. Policy J. 6, 249–178 (1982).Google Scholar
Spreng, D. T.Net-Energy Analysis (Praeger, New York, 1988).Google Scholar
Hill, J., Nelson, E., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., and Tiffany, D., “Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 11206–11210 (2006).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farrell, A. E., Plevin, R. J., Turner, B. T., Jones, A. D., O'Hare, M., and Kammen, D. M., “Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals,” Science 311, 506–508 (2006).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costanza, R., “Embodied energy and economic valuation,” Science 210, 1219–1224 (1980).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costanza, R. and Herendeen, R. “Embodied energy and economic value in the United States economy – 1963, 1967 and 1972,” Resources Energy 6, 129–163 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baral, A. and Bakshi, B. R., “Thermodynamic metrics for aggregation of natural resources in life cycle analysis: Insight via application to some transportation fuels,” Env. Sci. Technol. 44, 2, 800–807 (2010).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szargut, J., Morris, D. R., and Steward, F. R.Exergy Analysis of Thermal, Chemical and Metallurgical Processes (Hemisphere, Washington, D.C., 1988).Google Scholar
Dewulf, J., Langenhove, H., and Velde, B., “Exergy-based renewability assessment of biofuel production,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 39, 3878–3882 (2005).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berthiaume, R., Bouchard, C., and Rosen, M. A., “Exergetic evaluation of the renewability of a biofuel,” Exergy Intl. J. 1, 256–268 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewulf, J., Bosch, M., Meester, B., Vorst, G., Langenhove, H., Hellweg, S., and Huijbregts, M. “Cumulative exergy extraction from the natural environment (CEENE): A comprehensive life cycle impact assessment method for resource accounting,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 8477–8483 (2007).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belli, M. and Sciubba, E., “Extended exergy accounting as a general method for assessing the primary resource consumption of social and industrial systems,” Intl. J. Exergy 4, 421–440 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odum, H. T.Environmental Accounting: EMERGY and Environmental Decision Making (Wiley, New York, 1996).Google Scholar
Brown, M. T. and Ulgiati, S. “Emergy-based indices and ratios to evaluate sustainability: Monitoring economies and technology toward environmentally sound innovation,” Ecol. Eng. 9(1–2), 51–69 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakshi, B. R., “A thermodynamic framework for ecologically conscious process systems engineering,” Comput. Chem. Eng. 26, 269–282 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odum, H. T. “Folio # 2, emergy of global processes,” Tech. Rep., (University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 2000). Available at www.emergysystems.org.Google Scholar
Bastianoni, S., Campbell, D. E., Ridolfi, R., and Pulselli, F. M., “The solar transformity of petroleum fuels,” Ecol. Model. 220, 40–50 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Y., Baral, A., and Bakshi, B. R. “Accounting for ecosystem services in life cycle assessment, part ii: Toward an ecologically-based LCA,” Tech. Rep. (Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 2009).Google Scholar
Ayres, R. U., “On the life cycle metaphor: Where ecology and economics diverge,” Ecol. Econ. 48, 425–438 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cleveland, C. J., Kaufman, R. K., and Stern, D. I., “Aggregation and the role of energy in the economy,” Ecol. Econ. 2, 301–317 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermann, W. A. “Quantifying global exergy resources,” Energy 31, 1685–1702 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, G. Q. “Exergy consumption of the earth,” Ecol. Model. 184, 363–380 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szargut, J. T. “Anthropogenic and natural exergy losses (exergy balance of the Earth's surface and atmosphere),” Energy 28, 1047–1054 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ukidwe, N. U. and Bakshi, B. R. “Thermodynamic accounting of ecosystem contribution to economic sectors with application to 1992 US economy,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 38, 4810–4827 (2004).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Odum, H. T. and Odum, E. P., “The energetic basis for valuation of ecosystem services,” Ecosystems 3, 21–23 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soddy, F.Virtual Wealth and Debt – the Solution of the Economic Paradox(Allen and Unwin, London, 1926).Google Scholar
Boulding, K. E., “The economics of the coming spaceship earth,” in Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy, Jarrett, edited by H. (Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., 1966).Google Scholar
Odum, H. T. “Self-organization and maximum empower,” in Maximum Power: The Ideas and Applications of H.T. Odum, edited by C.A.S. Hall (University of Colorado Press, Niwot, CO, 1995).Google Scholar
Boltzmann, L.. Theoretical Physics and Philosophical Problems: Selected Writings of Ludwig Boltzmann (Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lotka, A. J., “Elements of Physical Biology” (Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore 1925).Google Scholar
Mansson, B. A. and McGlade, J. M., “Ecology, thermodynamics and Odum's, H. T.conjectures,” Oecologia 93, 582–596 (1993).Google ScholarPubMed
Emblemsvag, J. and Bras, B.Activity-Based Cost and Environmental Management: A Different Approach to ISO 14000 Compliance (Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sciubba, E. and Ulgiati, S. “Emergy and exergy analyses: Complementary methods or irreducible ideological options?” Energy 30, 1953–1988 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hau, J. L. and Bakshi, B. R. “Expanding exergy analysis to account for ecosystem products and services,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 38, 3768–3777 (2004).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bastianoni, S., Facchini, A., Susani, L., and Tiezzi, E., “Emergy as a function of exergy,” Energy 32, 1158–1162 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hau, J. L. and Bakshi, B. R., “Promise and problems of emergy analysis,” Ecol. Model. 178, 215–225 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daily, G. C., editor, Nature's Services (Island Press, Washington, D.C., 1997).Google Scholar
Arrow, K., Bolin, B., Costanza, R., Dasgupta, P., Folke, C., Holling, C. S., Jansson, B. O., Lavne, S., Mäler, K. G., Perrings, C., and Pimentel, D., “Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment,” Science 268, 520–521 (1995).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carpenter, S. R., Mooney, H. A., Agard, J., Capistrano, D., DeFries, R., Diaz, S., Dietz, T., Duriappah, A., Oteng-Yeboah, A., Pereira, H. M., Perrings, C., Reid, W. V., Sarukhan, J., Scholes, R. J., and Whyte, A., “Science for managing ecosystem services: Beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 106, 1305–1312 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suh, S., Lenzen, M., and Treloar, G. J., Honda, H., Horvath, A., Huppes, G., Jolliet, O., Klann, U., Krewitt, W., Moriguchi, Y., Munksgaard, J., Norris, G., “System boundary selection in life-cycle inventories using hybrid approaches,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 38, 657–664 (2004).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, M. T. and Herendeen, R. A. “Embodied energy analysis and emergy analysis: A comparative view,” Ecol. Econ. 19, 219–235 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haberl, H., Weisz, H., Amann, C., Bondeau, A., Eisenmenger, N., Erb, K. H., Fischer-Kowalski, M., and Krausmann, F., “The energetic metabolism of the European Union and the United States: Decadal energy input time-series with an emphasis on biomass,” J. Ind. Ecol. 10(4), 151–171 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giampietro, M. “Comments on ‘The Energetic Metabolism of the European Union and the United States by Haberl and Colleagues: Theoretical and Practical Considerations on the Meaning and Usefulness of Traditional Energy Analysis,’” J. Ind. Ecol. 10, 173–185 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, W. “The costs of biofuels,” Chem. Eng. News 85(51), 12–16 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G., and Moran, M.Thermal Design and Optimization(Wiley, New York, 1996).Google Scholar
Grubb, G. F. and Bakshi, B. R. “Improving the improvement assessment step in LCA,” Tech. Rep. (Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 2009).Google Scholar
Ukidwe, N. U. “Thermodynamic input output analysis of economic and ecological systems for sustainable engineering,” Ph.D. dissertation (Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 2005).Google Scholar
Cleveland, C. J., “Net energy from the extraction of oil and gas in the United States,” Energy 30, 769–782 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×