Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Strategic environmental assessment methodologies: applications within the energy sector
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Environmental Strategies Research (fms).
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Environmental Strategies Research (fms).ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2157-1083
Show others and affiliations
2003 (English)In: Environmental impact assessment review, ISSN 0195-9255, E-ISSN 1873-6432, Vol. 23, no 1, 91-123 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a procedural tool and within the framework of SEA, several different types of analytical tools can be used in the assessment. Several analytical tools are presented and their relation to SEA is discussed including methods for future studies, Life Cycle Assessment, Risk Assessment, Economic Valuation and Multi-Attribute Approaches. A framework for the integration of some analytical tools in the SEA process is suggested. It is noted that the available analytical tools primarily cover some types of environmental impacts related to emissions of pollutants. Tools covering impacts on ecosystems and landscapes are more limited. The relation between application and choice of analytical tools is discussed. It is suggested that SEAs used to support a choice between different alternatives require more quantitative methods, whereas SEAs used to identify critical aspects and suggest mitigation strategies can suffice with more qualitative methods. The possible and desired degree of site-specificity in the assessment can also influence the choice of methods. It is also suggested that values and world views can be of importance for judging whether different types of tools and results are meaningful and useful. Since values and world views differ between different stakeholders, consultation and understanding are important to ensure credibility and relevance.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2003. Vol. 23, no 1, 91-123 p.
Keyword [en]
Strategic environmental assessment; Applications; Energy sector
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-5562DOI: 10.1016/S0195-9255(02)00089-6OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-5562DiVA: diva2:9965
Note

QC 20100610

Available from: 2006-04-06 Created: 2006-04-06 Last updated: 2017-11-21Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Environmental systems analysis tools for decision-making: LCA and Swedish waste management as an example
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Environmental systems analysis tools for decision-making: LCA and Swedish waste management as an example
2006 (English)Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other scientific)
Abstract [en]

Decisions are made based on information of different kinds. Several tools have been developed to facilitate the inclusion of environmental aspects in decision-making on different levels. Which tool to use in a specific decision-making situation depends on the decision context. This thesis discusses the choice between different environmental systems analysis (ESA) tools and suggests that key factors influencing the choice of ESA tool are object of study, impacts considered and information type regarding sitespecificity and according to the DPSIR-framework.

Waste management in Sweden is used as an example to illustrate decision-making situations, but discussions concerning choice of tools are also thought to be of general concern. It is suggested that there is a need for a number of ESA tools in waste management decision-making. Procedural tools like Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) should be used e.g. by companies applying for development of waste management facilities and by public authorities preparing plans and programmes. Within these procedural tools analytical tools providing relevant information could be used, e.g. Risk Assessment (RA), Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) or Substance Flow Analysis (SFA). Analytical tools may also be used separately. If the decision-making situation concerns a choice between different waste management options, such as recycling, incineration and landfilling, environmental aspects could be assessed using LCA or Material Input Per unit Service (MIPS). To study certain substances within the waste system, RA or SFA could be used.

An LCA of different strategies for treatment of municipal solid waste was made. A conclusion from this study is that the waste hierarchy is valid as a rule of thumb. Suggestions resulting from this study are that decisions promoting recycling of paper and plastics should be pursued, preferably in combination with decisions promoting the use of plastics replacing plastics made from virgin sources. The study further identifies a need for limiting transportation by private car for options requiring source separation of waste. When recycling is not an alternative, incineration is in general preferable to landfilling. Key issues that may affect the ranking of the waste treatment options include alternative energy sources, the material the recycled material replaces and the time perspective chosen.

It is suggested that LCA may be a useful tool in waste management, both on its own and as a part of an SEA. Results from LCAs can provide advice on ranking of alternatives. More importantly, key assumptions and value choices that may influence the rankings can be highlighted and thus made clear to the decision-makers. In general, LCA results are not site-specific and provide information in the form of potential environmental impacts, and thus could be combined with other tools if other type of information is needed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: KTH, 2006. 56 p.
Series
Trita-SOM , ISSN 1653-6126 ; 06:002
National Category
Civil Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-3904 (URN)91-7178-304-0 (ISBN)
Presentation
2006-04-07, Sal L43, KTH, Drottning Kristinas väg 30, Stockholm, 10:00
Opponent
Supervisors
Note
QC 20100610Available from: 2006-04-06 Created: 2006-04-06 Last updated: 2010-06-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Finnveden, GöranNilsson, MånsMoberg, Åsa
By organisation
Environmental Strategies Research (fms)
In the same journal
Environmental impact assessment review
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 663 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf