Change search
Refine search result
1 - 34 of 34
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • 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
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Global Industrial Ecology - the North-South Link: lessons from research and education2007In:  , 2007, p. (abstract)-Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 2.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Identifying Areas for Optimisation of Water Management at the Building and Urban Level2008In:  :  , 2008Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 3.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Chemical Science and Engineering (CHE), Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    On sustainability assessment of technical systems: experience from systems analysis with the ORWARE and ecoeffect tools2005Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Engineering research and development work is undergoing a reorientation from focusing on specific parts of different systems to a broader perspective of systems level, albeit at a slower pace. This reorientation should be further developed and enhanced with the aim of organizing and structuring our technical systems in meeting sustainability requirements in face of global ecological threats that have far-reaching social and economic implications, which can no longer be captured using conventional approach of research. Until a list of universally acceptable, clear, and measurable indicators of sustainable development is developed, the work with sustainability metrics should continue to evolve as a relative measure of ecological, economic, and social performance of human activities in general, and technical systems in particular. This work can be done by comparing the relative performance of alternative technologies of providing the same well-defined function or service; or by characterizing technologies that enjoy different levels of societal priorities using relevant performance indicators. In both cases, concepts and methods of industrial ecology play a vital role.

    This thesis is about the development and application of a systematic approach for the assessment of the performance of technical systems from the perspective of systems analysis, sustainability, sustainability assessment, and industrial ecology.

    The systematic approach developed and characterized in this thesis advocates for a simultaneous assessment of the ecological, economic, and social dimensions of performance of technologies in avoiding sub-optimization and problem shifting between dimensions. It gives a holistic picture by taking a life cycle perspective of all important aspects. The systematic assessment of technical systems provides an even-handed assessment resulting in a cumulative knowledge. A modular structure of the approach makes it flexible enough in terms of comparing a number of alternatives at the same time, and carrying out the assessment of the three dimensions independently. It should give way to transparent system where the level of quality of input data can be comprehended. The assessment approach should focus on a selected number of key input data, tested calculation procedures, and comprehensible result presentation.

    The challenge in developing and applying this approach is the complexity of method integration and information processing. The different parts to be included in the same platform come in with additional uncertainties hampering result interpretations. The hitherto tendency of promoting disciplinary lines will continue to challenge further developments of such interdisciplinary approaches.

    The thesis draws on the experience from ORWARE, a Swedish technology assessment tool applied in the assessment of waste management systems and energy systems; and from the EcoEffect tool used in the assessment of building properties; all assessed as components of a larger system. The thesis underlines the importance of sustainability considerations beginning from the research and development phase of technical systems. The core message of this thesis is that technical systems should be researched as indivisible parts of a complex whole that includes society and the natural environment. Results from such researches can then be transformed into design codes and specifications for use in the research and development, planning and structuring, and implementation and management of technical systems.

  • 4.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    On Sustainability Assessment of Technical Systems: Experience from Systems Analysis with the ORWARE and EcoEffect Tools2006In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainability Measurement and Modelling: ICSMM 2006, 2006Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 5.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Some Reflections on Six Graduate Programs from the Perspective of Education for Sustainability.2006In: Proceedings of the Fourth African Roundtable on Sustainable Consumption and Production (ARSCP). May 29-31, 2006, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia., 2006Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 6.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Chemical Science and Engineering (CHE), Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    Systems analysis of technology chains for energy recovery from waste2006In: WMSCI 2006: 10TH WORLD MULTI-CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMICS, CYBERNETICS AND INFORMATICS, VOL VII, PROCEEDINGS / [ed] Callaos N; Lesso W; Tremante A; Baralt J; Rebielak J, ORLANDO: INT INST INFORMATICS & SYSTEMICS , 2006, p. 183-188Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This contribution is based on the result of a project entitled "Systems Analysis: Energy Recovery from waste, catalytic combustion in comparison with fuel cells and incineration" is financed by The Swedish National Energy Administration. The aim of the project was to assess the energy turnover as well as the potential environmental impacts of biomass/waste-to-energy technologies. Four technology scenarios are be studied: (1) Gasification followed by low temperature fuel cells (i.e. Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) fuel cells) (2) Gasification followed by high temperature fuel cells (i.e. Solid Oxide fuel cells (SOFC)) (3) Gasification followed by catalytic combustion (CC) and (4) Incineration with energy recovery. Looking at the result of the four technology chains in terms of the impact categories considered with impact per GWh electricity produced as a unit of comparison and from the perspective of the rank each scenario has in all the four impact categories, SOFC appears to be the winner technology followed by PEM and CC as second and third best respectively with incinerations as the least of all. On other hand, looking at the three important emissions (CO,. NOx and SOx) from the total systems (include both the core system and the external system), SOFC is the best technology equally followed PEM and CC as the second best. A comparison of the same emissions from the core systems places CC on equal level with SOFC as the best technologies with PEM as the second best.

  • 7.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Systems Analysis of Waste Management: The Swedish Experience Something for Waste Management Studies in Africa?2006In: Proceedings of the Fourth African Roundtable on Sustainable Consumption and Production (ARSCP). May 29-31, 2006, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia., 2006Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 8.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, Superseded Departments, Infrastructure.
    Towards a systematic approach for technology assessment by combining material flow analysis, life cycle assessment and life cycle costing2002Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other scientific)
  • 9.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Björklund, Anna
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Eriksson, Ola
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    ORWARE: an aid to Environmental Technology Chain Assessment2005In: Journal of Cleaner Production, ISSN 0959-6526, E-ISSN 1879-1786, Vol. 13, no 3, p. 265-274Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article discusses the ORWARE tool, a model originally developed for environmental systems analysis of waste management systems, and shows its prospect as a tool for environmental technology chain assessment. Different concepts of technology assessment are presented to put ORWARE into context in the discussion that has been going for more than two decades since the establishment of the US Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). An even-handed assessment is important in different ways such as reproducibility, reliability, credibility, etc. Conventional technology assessment (TA) relied on the judgements and intuition of the assessors. A computer-based tool such as ORWARE provides a basis for transparency and a structured management of input and output data that cover ecological and economic parameters. This permits consistent and coherent technology assessments. Using quantitative analysis as in ORWARE makes comparison and addition of values across chain of technologies easier. We illustrate the application of the model in environmental technology chain assessment through a study of alternative technical systems linking waste management to vehicle fuel production and use. The principles of material and substance flow modelling, life cycle perspective, and graphical modelling featured in ORWARE offer a generic structure for environmentally focused TA of chains and networks of technical processes.

  • 10.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    A systematic approach for addressing input data uncertainties in technology assessment of new technologies: the case of ORWAREManuscript (Other academic)
  • 11.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    A systematic approach for addressing input datauncertainties in technology assessment of new technologies: the case of ORWARE.In: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, ISSN 0948-3349, E-ISSN 1614-7502Article in journal (Other academic)
  • 12.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, Superseded Departments, Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, Superseded Departments, Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    Social Impact Assessment within Life Cycle Technology Assessment2004In: 4th SETAC World Congress, 2004Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Life cycle technology assessment provides a conceptual structure for different ecological, economic and social impact assessment (SIA) tools for acting together in determining the importance, size, or value of ecological, economic and social impacts of technology - doing and making things with materials and energy. In compatibly incorporating SIA with Material /Substance Flow Analysis, Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing, different views of SIA are studied. An important difference between this exercise and conventional SIAs is that in the former case, there is no official plan or intention of implementing the technology in a specific time and place. This poses operational difficulty due to the poor knowledge about the community that will be affected by the technology in question. Besides, compatibility with LCA adds complexity associated with a requirement for the SIA to account for a number of communities associated with each portion of the life cycle. Thorough analysis of the opportunities and challenges involved led to the use of zooming analogy. Based on this analogy, in the absence of knowledge of detailed spatial and temporal coordinates of a specific community that will be affected by the technology, a reasonable level of zooming out is done. This enables identification and characterization of the most important social impact variables for the given technology in the zoomed out area ( e.g. say a country or region of a country). As an illustration, one variable from each of five categories of SIA variables will be used to characterize the social impacts of energy technologies in small municipalities in Sweden. These categories are population impacts; community and institutional arrangements; communities in transition; individual and family impacts; and community infrastructure needs. The knowledge from damage-based weighting of environmental impact categories using concepts such as Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY) will be tested in characterizing the variables.

  • 13.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: a case study on energy technologies2007In: Technology in society, ISSN 0160-791X, E-ISSN 1879-3274, Vol. 29, no 1, p. 63-78Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper discusses an approach for assessing indicators for the social sustainability of technical systems developed within a Swedish technology assessment tool called ORWARE. Social sustainability is approached from the perspective of one of its ingredients, namely social acceptance. The research takes the form of a case study on energy technologies conducted in the municipality of Kil in west central Sweden. Three indicators—knowledge, perception, and fear associated with four chains of energy technologies—are assessed using a questionnaire.

    The questionnaire results indicate that respondents have such a low level of information and knowledge about new energy technologies that they are unable to discriminately rank them. This was found to hamper participation in discussions and decision making about technologies for which public funds would be spent.

    The importance of assessing social indicators by engaging members of society is discussed, and an assessment approach is developed. The need to present results together with ecological and economic indicators is emphasised in order to avoid suboptimization.

  • 14.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, Superseded Departments, Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, Superseded Departments, Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    Technology Assessment: A framework for combination of tool2004In: 24th International Conference of IAIA - Impact Assessment for Industrial Development: Whose Business is it?, Vancouver, Canada: International Association of Impact Assessment , 2004Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 15.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Technology Assessment in the Journey to Sustainable Development2005In: Handbook of Sustainable Development Policy and Administration / [ed] Gedeon, M., Desta, M., Shamsul, M. H., Bosa Roca, USA: CRC Press Inc , 2005, illustrated edChapter in book (Refereed)
  • 16.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Towards a Sustainability Assessment of Technologies: Integrating Tools and Concepts of Industrial Ecology2005In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of the International Society for Industrial Ecology, Stockholm, Sweden: Industrial Ecology, Royal Institute of Technology , 2005Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 17.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    Development of a Damage-based System for Weighting Environmental Impacts from Buildings2008In: Proceedings of the World Sustainable Building Conference:  , 2008, p. 1719-1724Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 18.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Urban Planning and Environment.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Urban Planning and Environment.
    Eriksson, O.
    Quality versus impact: Comparing the environmental efficiency of building properties using the EcoEffect tool2010In: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 45, no 5, p. 1095-1103Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    There are tools that are developed for the assessment of the environmental impact of buildings (e.g. ATHENA). Other tools dealing with the indoor and outdoor environmental quality of building properties (referred to as real estates in other literature) are also available (e.g. GBTool). A platform where both the aspects of quality and impact are presented in an integrated fashion are few. The aim of this contribution is to present how the performance of different building properties can be assessed and compared using the concept of environmental efficiency in a Swedish assessment tool called EcoEffect. It presents the quality dimension in the form of users' satisfaction covering indoor and outdoor performance features against the weighted environmental impact covering global and local impacts. The indoor and outdoor values are collected using questionnaires combined with inspection and some measurements. Life cycle methodology is behind the calculation of the weighted external environmental impact. A case study is presented to show the application of EcoEffect using a comparative assessment of Lindas and a Reference property. The results show that Lindas block is better in internal environment quality than the Reference property. It performs slightly worse than the Reference property in the external environmental impact due to emissions and waste from energy and material use. The approach of integrated presentation of quality and impact as in EcoEffect provides with the opportunity of uncovering issues problem shifting and sub-optimisation. This avoids undesirable situations where the indoor quality is improved through measures that result in higher external environmental impact.

  • 19.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Chemical Science and Engineering (CHE), Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    Department of Technology and Built Environment, University of Gävle.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Architecture. KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Urban Planning and Environment, Environmental Strategies (moved 20130630).
    Kindembe, Beatrice Isampete
    Department of Technology and Built Environment, University of Gävle.
    Hult, M.
    Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Landscape Architecture, Uppsala.
    Myhr, U.
    Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Landscape Architecture, Uppsala.
    Eriksson, O.
    Department of Technology and Built Environment, University of Gävle.
    Environmental assessment of building properties — Where natural and social sciences meet: the case of EcoEffect2007In: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 42, no 3, p. 1458-1464Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The EcoEffect method of assessing external and internal impacts of building properties is briefly described. The external impacts of manufacturing and transport of the building materials, the generation of power and heat consumed during the operation phase are assessed using life-cycle methodology. Emissions and waste; natural resource depletion and toxic substances in building materials are accounted for. Here methodologies from natural sciences are employed. The internal impacts involve the assessment of the risk for discomfort and ill-being due to features and properties of both the indoor environment and outdoor environment within the boundary of the building properties. This risk is calculated based on data and information from questionnaires; measurements and inspection where methodologies mainly from social sciences are used. Life-cycle costs covering investment and utilities costs as well as maintenance costs summed up over the lifetime of the building are also calculated.

    The result presentation offers extensive layers of diagrams and data tables ranging from an aggregated diagram of environmental efficiency to quantitative indicators of different aspects and factors. Environmental efficiency provides a relative measure of the internal quality of a building property in relation to its external impact vis-à-vis its performance relative to other building properties.

  • 20.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Strandberg, Larsgöran
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Industrial Ecology as a Working Concept in a Spatial and Temporal "NIMBY" Situation2005In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of the International Society for Industrial Ecology, 2005Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 21.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    KTH, Superseded Departments, Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    Wennersten, Ronald
    KTH, Superseded Departments, Chemical Engineering and Technology.
    The Impact of Flows of Resources and Products ( imports, exports, and aid) between north and south: Case study: the flow between EU and East Africa2004In: Proceedings of the African Roundtable on Sustainable Consumption and Production, 2004Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 22.
    Assefa, Getashew
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Eriksson, Ola
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Technology assessment of thermal treatment technologies using ORWARE2005In: Energy Conversion and Management, ISSN 0196-8904, E-ISSN 1879-2227, Vol. 46, no 5, p. 797-819Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    A technology assessment of thermal treatment technologies for wastes was performed in the form of scenarios of chains of technologies. The Swedish assessment tool, ORWARE, was used for the assessment. The scenarios of chains of thermal technologies assessed were gasification with catalytic combustion, gasification with flame combustion, incineration and landfilling. The landfilling scenario was used as a reference for comparison. The technologies were assessed from ecological and economic points of view.

    The results are presented in terms of global warming potential, acidification potential, eutrophication potential, consumption of primary energy carriers and welfare costs. From the simulations, gasification followed by catalytic combustion with energy recovery in a combined cycle appeared to be the most competitive technology from an ecological point of view. On the other hand, this alternative was more expensive than incineration. A sensitivity analysis was done regarding electricity prices to show which technology wins at what value of the unit price of electricity (SEK/kW h).

    Within this study, it was possible to make a comparison both between a combined cycle and a Rankine cycle (a system pair) and at the same time between flame combustion and catalytic combustion (a technology pair). To use gasification just as a treatment technology is not more appealing than incineration, but the possibility of combining gasification with a combined cycle is attractive in terms of electricity production.

    This research was done in connection with an empirical R&D work on both gasification of waste and catalytic combustion of the gasified waste at the Division of Chemical Technology, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Sweden.

  • 23.
    Carlsson-Kanyama, Annika
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Wadeskog, A.
    Carbon Dioxide Emission Associated to Swedish Import and Consumption: Calculations Using Different Methods2007Report (Other academic)
  • 24. Ekvall, Tomas
    et al.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Björklund, Anna
    KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Urban Planning and Environment.
    Eriksson, Ola
    Finnveden, Göran
    KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Urban Planning and Environment.
    What life-cycle assessment does and does not do in assessments of waste management2007In: Waste Management, ISSN 0956-053X, E-ISSN 1879-2456, Vol. 27, no 8, p. 989-996Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In assessments of the environmental impacts of waste management, life-cycle assessment (LCA) helps expanding the perspective beyond the waste management system. This is important, since the indirect environmental impacts caused by surrounding systems, such as energy and material production, often override the direct impacts of the waste management system itself. However, the applicability of LCA for waste management planning and policy-making is restricted by certain limitations, some of which are characteristics inherent to LCA methodology as such, and some of which are relevant specifically in the context of waste management. Several of them are relevant also for other types of systems analysis. We have identified and discussed such characteristics with regard to how they may restrict the applicability of LCA in the context of waste management. Efforts to improve LCA with regard to these aspects are also described. We also identify what other tools are available for investigating issues that cannot be adequately dealt with by traditional LCA models, and discuss whether LCA methodology should be expanded rather than complemented by other tools to increase its scope and applicability.

  • 25.
    Eriksson, Ola
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Carlsson Reich, M.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Björklund, Anna
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Sundqvist, J-O
    Granath, J
    Baky, A
    Thyselius, L
    Municipal Solid Waste Management from a Systems Perspective2005In: Journal of Cleaner Production, ISSN 0959-6526, E-ISSN 1879-1786, Vol. 13, no 3, p. 241-252Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Different waste treatment options for municipal solid waste have been studied in a systems analysis. Different combinations of incineration, materials recycling of separated plastic and cardboard containers, and biological treatment (anaerobic digestion and composting) of biodegradable waste, were studied and compared to landfilling. The evaluation covered use of energy resources, environmental impact and financial and environmental costs. In the study, a calculation model ( ) based on methodology from life cycle assessment (LCA) was used. Case studies were performed in three Swedish municipalities: Uppsala, Stockholm, and Älvdalen.

    The study shows that reduced landfilling in favour of increased recycling of energy and materials lead to lower environmental impact, lower consumption of energy resources, and lower economic costs. Landfilling of energy-rich waste should be avoided as far as possible, partly because of the negative environmental impacts from landfilling, but mainly because of the low recovery of resources when landfilling.

    Differences between materials recycling, nutrient recycling and incineration are small but in general recycling of plastic is somewhat better than incineration and biological treatment somewhat worse.

    When planning waste management, it is important to know that the choice of waste treatment method affects processes outside the waste management system, such as generation of district heating, electricity, vehicle fuel, plastic, cardboard, and fertiliser.

  • 26.
    Eriksson, Ola
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Björklund, Anna
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Sundqvist, Jan-Olov
    Swed. Environ. Res. Institute (IVL), Stockholm.
    Granath, J.
    Swed. Environ. Res. Institute (IVL), Stockholm.
    Carlsson, M.
    Department of Economy, Swed. Univ. for Agric. Sci. (SLU), Uppsala.
    Baky, A.
    Swed. Inst. of Agric./E. E. (JTI), Uppsala.
    Thyselius, L.
    Swed. Inst. of Agric./E. E. (JTI), Uppsala.
    ORWARE: a simulation tool for waste management2002In: Resources, Conservation and Recycling, ISSN 0921-3449, E-ISSN 1879-0658, Vol. 36, no 4, p. 287-307Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    A simulation model, ORWARE (ORganic WAste REsearch) is described. The model is mainly used as a tool for researchers in environmental systems analysis of waste management. It is a computer-based model for calculation of substance flows, environmental impacts, and costs of waste management. The model covers, despite the name, both organic and inorganic fractions in municipal waste. The model consists of a number of separate submodels, which describes a process in a real waste management system. The submodels may be combined to design a complete waste management system. Based on principles from life cycle assessment the model also comprises compensatory processes for conventional production of e.g. electricity, district heating and fertiliser. The compensatory system is included in order to fulfil the functional units, i.e. benefits from the waste management that are kept constant in the evaluation of different scenarios. ORWARE generates data on emissions, which are aggregated into different environmental impact categories, e.g. the greenhouse effect, acidification and eutrophication. Throughout the model all physical flows are described by the same variable vector, consisting of up to 50 substances. The extensive vector facilitates a thorough analysis of the results, but involves some difficulties in acquiring relevant data. Scientists have used ORWARE for 8 years in different case studies for model testing and practical application in the society. The aims have e.g. been to evaluate waste management plans and to optimise energy recovery from waste.

  • 27.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    Gävle universitet.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Borg, R. P
    University of Malta, Malta.
    Basic LCA Application: residential building case study - Gronskar, Sweden2008In: Cost Action C25 - Sustainability of Constructions: Integrated Approach to Life-Time Structural Engineering, 2008Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 28. Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Kindembe, Beatrice
    Extern miljöpåverkan: Beskrivning av olika miljöpåverkanskategorier2005Report (Other academic)
  • 29.
    Gu, Zhenhong
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Vestbro, Dick Urban
    KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Urban Planning and Environment, Built Environment Analysis.
    Wennersten, Ronald
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    A study of Chinese strategies for energy-efficient housing developments from an architect's perspective, combined with Swedish experiences and game theory2009In: Civil engineering and environmental systems (Print), ISSN 1028-6608, E-ISSN 1029-0249, Vol. 26, no 4, p. 323-338Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The energy issue is always an important factor in sustainable housing developments. Over the years, a number of energy-saving techniques have been developed to reduce consumption of primary energy and utilise renewable energy in architectural designs. However, the real situation regarding energy-efficient buildings has improved rather slowly during the recent decades, both in the developing and developed countries. Hammarby Sjostad is one of the largest urban housing developments in Europe but is built to standards twice as strict as those currently being applied for new housing, including energy consumption. Eco-villages are small-scale housing developments, usually in the suburbs, where residents also try to create highly specific ecological environments. There are two basic paradigms to solve the current housing problem: top-down (provider paradigm) or bottom-up (support paradigm). This paper analyses the differences between these, especially from an energy efficiency perspective. Housing development is a gaming process between diverse stakeholders. All the stakeholders try to choose different actions in an attempt to maximise their returns. If the proposals made by the architects and engineers are not consistent with the interests of other stakeholders, they have little chance of being applied in actual projects. This paper describes systematic development strategies for the energy-efficient housing project Jun Lin Zijin, a Chinese residential and commercial project furthering the progress of design and construction.

  • 30.
    Gu, Zhenhong
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Wennersten, Ronald
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Analysis of the most widely used building environmental assessment methods2006In: Journal of Environmental Sciences(China), ISSN 1001-0742, E-ISSN 1878-7320, Vol. 3, no 3, p. 175-192Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Building Environmental Assessment (BEA) is a term used for several methods for environmental assessment of the building environment. Generally, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an important foundation and part of the BEA method, but current BEA methods form more comprehensive tools than LCA. Indicators and weight assignments are the two most important factors characterizing BEA. From the comparison of the three most widely used BEA methods, EcoHomes (BREEAM for residential buildings), LEED-NC and GBTool, it can be seen that BEA methods are shifting from ecological, indicator-based scientific systems to more integrated systems covering ecological, social and economic categories. Being relatively new methods, current BEA systems are far from perfect and are under continuous development. The further development of BEA methods will focus more on non-ecological indicators and how to promote implementation. Most BEA methods are developed based on regional regulations and LCA methods, but they do not attempt to replace these regulations. On the contrary, they try to extend implementation by incentive programmes. There are several ways to enhance BEA in the future: expand the studied scope from design levels to whole life-cycle levels of constructions, enhance international cooperation, accelerate legislation and standardize and develop user-oriented assessment systems.

  • 31. Norrman Eriksson, Ola
    et al.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Life cycle impact assessment - damage based weighting method for environmental impact assessment2005In: Action for Sustainability. Proceedings of the 2005 World Sustainable Building Conference in Tokyo: SB05 Tokyo, 2005Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 32. Pomares, M.
    et al.
    Flyhammar, P.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    An Environmental Systems Analysis of the Solid Waste Management in Managua, Nicaragua2005In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of theInternational Society for Industrial Ecology, Stockholm, Sweden: Industrial Ecology, KTH , 2005Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 33.
    Song, Xingqiang
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Frostell, Björn
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Wennersten, Ronald
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    The Green Olympics 2008: Concerning Urban Planning and Development in Beijing2007In: Proceedings of Research for Sustainable Development: The Social Challenge with Emphasis on Conditions for Change, 2007Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 34.
    Song, Xingqiang
    et al.
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Wennersten, Ronald
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Industrial Ecology.
    Ravesteijn, W.
    Managing Water Resources for Sustainable Development: the case of integrated river basin management in China2008Conference paper (Other academic)
1 - 34 of 34
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • 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