IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v222y2011i17p3071-3081.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recycling flows in emergy evaluation: A mathematical paradox?

Author

Listed:
  • Amponsah, N.Y.
  • Le Corre, O.
  • Lacarriere, B.

Abstract

This paper is a contribution to the emergy evaluation of systems involving recycling or reuse of waste. If waste exergy (its residual usefulness) is not negligible, wastes could serve as input to another process or be recycled. In cases of continuous waste recycle or reuse, what then is the role of emergy? Emergy is carried by matter and its value is shown to be the product of specific energy with mass flow rate and its transformity. This transformity (τ) given as the ratio of the total emergy input and the useful available energy in the product (exergy) is commonly calculated over a specific period of time (usually yearly) which makes transformity a time dependent factor. Assuming a process in which a part of the non-renewable input is an output (waste) from a previous system, for the waste to be reused, an emergy investment is needed. The transformity of the reused or recycled material should be calculated based on the pathway of the reused material at a certain time (T) which results in a specific transformity value (τ). In case of a second recycle of the same material that had undergone the previous recycle, the material pathway has a new time (T+T1) which results in a transformity value (τ1). Recycling flows as in the case of feedback is a dynamic process and as such the process introduces its own time period depending on its pathway which has to be considered in emergy evaluations. Through the inspiration of previous emergy studies, authors have tried to develop formulae which could be used in such cases of continuous recycling of material in this paper. The developed approach is then applied to a case study to give the reader a better understanding of the concept. As a result, a ‘factor’ is introduced which could be included on emergy evaluation tables to account for subsequent transformity changes in multiple recycling. This factor can be used to solve the difficulties in evaluating aggregated systems, serve as a correction factor to up-level such models keeping the correct evaluation and also solve problems of memory loss in emergy evaluation. The discussion deals with the questions; is it a pure mathematical paradox in the rules of emergy? Is it consistent with previous work? What were the previous solutions to avoid the cumulative problem in a reuse? What are the consequences?

Suggested Citation

  • Amponsah, N.Y. & Le Corre, O. & Lacarriere, B., 2011. "Recycling flows in emergy evaluation: A mathematical paradox?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(17), pages 3071-3081.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:222:y:2011:i:17:p:3071-3081
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380011003310
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.06.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ingwersen, Wesley W., 2010. "Uncertainty characterization for emergy values," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(3), pages 445-452.
    2. Johnson, Jeremiah & Reck, B.K. & Wang, T. & Graedel, T.E., 2008. "The energy benefit of stainless steel recycling," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 181-192, January.
    3. Baral, Anil & Bakshi, Bhavik R., 2010. "Emergy analysis using US economic input–output models with applications to life cycles of gasoline and corn ethanol," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(15), pages 1807-1818.
    4. Odum, Howard T., 2000. "Emergy evaluation of an OTEC electrical power system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 389-393.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, XiaoHong & Hu, He & Zhang, Rong & Deng, ShiHuai, 2014. "Interactions between China׳s economy, energy and the air emissions and their policy implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 624-638.
    2. Lacarrière, Bruno & Deutz, Kévin Ruben & Jamali-Zghal, Nadia & Le Corre, Olivier, 2015. "Emergy assessment of the benefits of closed-loop recycling accounting for material losses," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 315(C), pages 77-87.
    3. Wang, Xiaolong & Li, Zhejin & Long, Pan & Yan, Lingling & Gao, Wangsheng & Chen, Yuanquan & Sui, Peng, 2017. "Sustainability evaluation of recycling in agricultural systems by emergy accounting," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 117(PB), pages 114-124.
    4. Agostinho, Feni & Almeida, Cecília M.V.B. & Bonilla, Silvia H. & Sacomano, José B. & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2013. "Urban solid waste plant treatment in Brazil: Is there a net emergy yield on the recovered materials?," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 143-155.
    5. Amponsah, N.Y. & Lacarrière, B. & Jamali-Zghal, N. & Le Corre, O., 2012. "Impact of building material recycle or reuse on selected emergy ratios," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 9-17.
    6. Jamali-Zghal, N. & Lacarrière, B. & Le Corre, O., 2015. "Metallurgical recycling processes: Sustainability ratios and environmental performance assessment," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 66-75.
    7. Gala, Alba Bala & Raugei, Marco & Ripa, Maddalena & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2015. "Dealing with waste products and flows in life cycle assessment and emergy accounting: Methodological overview and synergies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 315(C), pages 69-76.
    8. Zhang, Xiaohong & Wu, Liqian & Zhang, Rong & Deng, Shihuai & Zhang, Yanzong & Wu, Jun & Li, Yuanwei & Lin, Lili & Li, Li & Wang, Yinjun & Wang, Lilin, 2013. "Evaluating the relationships among economic growth, energy consumption, air emissions and air environmental protection investment in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 259-270.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Duian Lu & Jie Cheng & Zhenzhou Feng & Li Sun & Wei Mo & Degang Wang, 2022. "Emergy Synthesis of Two Oyster Aquaculture Systems in Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    2. John A. Mathews, 2020. "Schumpeterian economic dynamics of greening: propagation of green eco-platforms," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 929-948, September.
    3. Lou, Bo & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2013. "Identifying the environmental support and constraints to the Chinese economic growth—An application of the Emergy Accounting method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 217-233.
    4. Changbo Wang & Lixiao Zhang & Shuying Yang & Mingyue Pang, 2012. "A Hybrid Life-Cycle Assessment of Nonrenewable Energy and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions of a Village-Level Biomass Gasification Project in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 5(8), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Chen, G.Q. & Chen, Z.M., 2011. "Greenhouse gas emissions and natural resources use by the world economy: Ecological input–output modeling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(14), pages 2362-2376.
    6. Gasparatos, Alexandros, 2011. "Resource consumption in Japanese agriculture and its link to food security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1101-1112, March.
    7. Barbir, Frano, 2009. "Transition to renewable energy systems with hydrogen as an energy carrier," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 308-312.
    8. Carlos Scheel & Bernardo Bello, 2022. "Transforming Linear Production Chains into Circular Value Extended Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, March.
    9. Zhou, Kaile & Yang, Shanlin, 2016. "Emission reduction of China׳s steel industry: Progress and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 319-327.
    10. Tao Li & Yimiao Song & Jing Shen, 2019. "Clean Power Dispatching of Coal-Fired Power Generation in China Based on the Production Cleanliness Evaluation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-19, November.
    11. Torres, César & Valero, Antonio & Valero, Alicia, 2013. "Exergoecology as a tool for ecological modelling. The case of the US food production chain," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 255(C), pages 21-28.
    12. Tan, Hao & Sun, Aijun & Lau, Henry, 2013. "CO2 embodiment in China–Australia trade: The drivers and implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1212-1220.
    13. Campbell, Elliott T. & Tilley, David R., 2014. "The eco-price: How environmental emergy equates to currency," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 128-140.
    14. He, Jiaxin & Liu, Ying & Lin, Boqiang, 2018. "Should China support the development of biomass power generation?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 416-425.
    15. Ling-Chin, Janie & Roskilly, Anthony P., 2016. "Investigating the implications of a new-build hybrid power system for Roll-on/Roll-off cargo ships from a sustainability perspective – A life cycle assessment case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 416-434.
    16. Cristiano, S. & Ulgiati, S. & Gonella, F., 2021. "Systemic sustainability and resilience assessment of health systems, addressing global societal priorities: Learnings from a top nonprofit hospital in a bioclimatic building in Africa," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    17. Wang, Xiaolong & Chen, Yuanquan & Sui, Peng & Gao, Wangsheng & Qin, Feng & Zhang, Jiansheng & Wu, Xia, 2014. "Emergy analysis of grain production systems on large-scale farms in the North China Plain based on LCA," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 66-78.
    18. Ulgiati, Sergio & Zucaro, Amalia & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2011. "Shared wealth or nobody's land? The worth of natural capital and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 778-787, February.
    19. Du, Hailong & Yang, Liu & Wang, Wenzhong & Lu, Lunhui & Li, Zhe, 2022. "Emergy theory to quantify the sustainability of large cascade hydropower projects in the upper Yangtze," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 468(C).
    20. Qiang Wang & Thomas Dogot & Xianlei Huang & Linna Fang & Changbin Yin, 2020. "Coupling of Rural Energy Structure and Straw Utilization: Based on Cases in Hebei, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:222:y:2011:i:17:p:3071-3081. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.