S I G I T A Ž I D O N I E N Ė
S U M M A R Y O F D O C T O R A L D I S S E R T A T I O N
K a u n a s2 0 1 5
E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T A S S E S S M E N T
O F P L A N N E D I N D U S T R I A L A C T I V I T Y : D E S I G N A N D A N A L Y S I S O F I N T E G R A T E D M O D E L
W I T H L I F E C Y C L E A S S E S S M E N T
T E C H N O L O G I C A L S C I E N C E S , E N V I R O N M E N T A L
E N G I N E E R I N G ( 0 4 T )
KAUNAS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
LITHUANIAN ENERGY INSTITUTE
SIGITA ŽIDONIENĖ
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PLANNED INDUSTRIAL
ACTIVITY: DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF INTEGRATED MODEL WITH
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT
Summary of Doctoral Dissertation
Technological Sciences, Environmental Engineering (04T)
2015, Kaunas
The dissertation has been prepared at the Institute of Environmental Engineering,
Kaunas University of Technology during 2006-2014.
Scientific Supervisor:
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Jolita KRUOPIENĖ (Kaunas University of Technology,
Technological Sciences, Environmental Engineering – 04T).
The Dissertation Defence Board of Environmental Engineering Sciences
Field:
Prof. Dr. Habil. Jurgis Kazimieras STANIŠKIS (Kaunas University of
Technology, Technological Sciences, Environmental Engineering – 04T) –
chairman;
Dr. Nerijus BLAŽAUSKAS (Klaipėda University, Physical Sciences, Geology -
05P);
Prof. Dr. Gintaras DENAFAS (Kaunas University of Technology, Technological
Sciences, Environmental Engineering – 04T);
Dr. Jūratė KRIAUČIŪNIENĖ (Lithuanian Energy Institute, Technological
Sciences, Environmental Engineering – 04T);
Prof. Dr. Habil. Saulius VAIKASAS (Aleksandras Stulginskis University,
Technological Sciences, Environmental Engineering – 04T).
Opponents:
Prof. Dr. Olga ANNE (Klaipėda University, Technological Sciences,
Environmental Engineering – 04T);
Prof. Dr. Arvydas POVILAITIS (Aleksandras Stulginskis University,
Technological Sciences, Environmental Engineering – 04T).
The official defense of dissertation will be held at the public meeting of the
Board of Environmental Engineering Science Field at 11 a.m. on June 29, 2015
in the Dissertation Defense Hall at the Central Building of Kaunas University of
Technology.
Address: K. Donelaičio St. 73-403, 44249 Kaunas, Lithuania
Tel. (+370) 37 300042, Fax. (+370)37 324144; e-mail: [email protected]
The summary of the doctoral dissertation was sent out on 29th of May, 2015.
The dissertation is available at the libraries of Kaunas University of Technology
(K. Donelaičio St. 20, 44239 Kaunas) and Lithuanian Energy Institute
(Breslaujos St. 3, 44403 Kaunas).
KAUNO TECHNOLOGIJOS UNIVERSITETAS
LIETUVOS ENERGETIKOS INSTITUTAS
SIGITA ŽIDONIENĖ
PLANUOJAMOS GAMYBINĖS VEIKLOS POVEIKIO APLINKAI
VERTINIMAS: INTEGRUOTO MODELIO SU BŪVIO CIKLO ĮVERTINIMU
SUKŪRIMAS IR ANALIZĖ
Daktaro disertacijos santrauka
Technologijos mokslai, aplinkos inžinerija (04T)
2015, Kaunas
Disertacija rengta 2006–2014 m. Kauno technologijos universiteto Aplinkos
inžinerijos institute.
Mokslinė vadovė:
Doc. dr. Jolita KRUOPIENĖ (Kauno technologijos universitetas, technologijos
mokslai, aplinkos inžinerija – 04T).
Aplinkos inžinerijos mokslo krypties disertacijos gynimo taryba:
Prof. habil. dr. Jurgis Kazimieras STANIŠKIS (Kauno technologijos
universitetas, technologijos mokslai, aplinkos inžinerija – 04T) – pirmininkas;
Dr. Nerijus BLAŽAUSKAS (Klaipėdos universitetas, fiziniai mokslai, geologija
– 05P);
Prof. dr. Gintaras DENAFAS (Kauno technologijos universitetas, technologijos
mokslai, aplinkos inžinerija – 04T);
Dr. Jūratė KRIAUČIŪNIENĖ (Lietuvos energetikos institutas, technologijos
mokslai, aplinkos inžinerija – 04T);
Prof. habil. dr. Saulius VAIKASAS (Aleksandro Stulginskio universitetas,
technologijos mokslai, aplinkos inžinerija – 04T).
Oponentai:
Prof. dr. Olga ANNE (Klaipėdos universitetas, technologijos mokslai, aplinkos
inžinerija – 04T);
Prof. dr. Arvydas POVILAITIS (Aleksandro Stulginskio universitetas,
technologijos mokslai, aplinkos inžinerija – 04T).
Disertacija bus ginama viešame aplinkos inžinerijos mokslo krypties tarybos
posėdyje 2015 m. birželio 29 d. 11 val. Kauno technologijos universiteto
centrinių rūmų disertacijų gynimo salėje.
Adresas: K. Donelaičio g. 73, 403 aud., 44249 Kaunas, Lietuva.
Tel. (+370)37 300042; faksas (+370) 37 324144; el. paštas: [email protected]
Disertacijos santrauka išsiųsta 2015 m. gegužės 29 d.
Su disertacija galima susipažinti Kauno technologijos universiteto bibliotekoje
(K. Donelaičio g. 20, 44239 Kaunas) ir Lietuvos energetikos instituto
bibliotekoje (Breslaujos g. 3, 44403 Kaunas).
5
INTRODUCTION
Research relevance
Manufacturing industry that provides a lot of production materials and
products for the society at the same time is related with high-energy
consumption and serious environmental contamination. As manufacturers and
industries all over the world are facing the finally voiced demand towards the
eco -friendly produce, the environmental awareness has become a critical aspect
in product and process development and an intrinsic part of any business
planning and overall strategy. In order to develop less polluting products,
services or activities, it is necessary to evaluate the possible negative pressure on
the environment in the earliest stage of development and seek for alternative
solutions or means which can help to diminish that impact without losing the
initial purpose of the action.
As a part of the current worldwide regulatory framework the Environmental
Impact Assessment (further the EIA), often defined as an environmental
management tool the main purpose of which is to identify and evaluate the
probable environmental performance of proposed development actions is a
compulsory element in project planning. In most countries, EIA is applied during
planning or permit approval phase with a goal to determine whether the project is
acceptable, unfortunately, only the formal environmental (but not social or
economical) standards play a key role (Arts and Faith-Ell 2010, Jos 2013). A
considerable research effort has gone into the analysis of the EIA since its
formulation in 1969 and a number of implementation and effectiveness
challenges have been identified through the years of practice. While the EIA
successfully assesses both positive and negative effects and also takes the local
impact of proposed projects into consideration, the evaluation of only site-
specific impact is often named as one of its main shortcomings (Bina, 2007;
Bond et al., 2010; Kvaerner et al., 2006; Wärnbäck and Hilding-Rydevik 2009). Furthermore, Steinemann (2001) highlights that the EIA neglects the
consideration of global effect and the management of natural resources, which
may affect the future generations. Pischke nad Cashmore (2006) states that the
EIA does not reflect the cumulative impacts of projects and their global
environmental implications. EIA reports are expected to delineate the
environmental impact, but in practice they usually determine whether the
amounts of concentrations of pollutants comply with the relevant standarts (Liu
et al., 2013).
6
As one of the possibilities to optimize the assessment of the environmental
impact of the planned activity is to extend the limits of the assessment by
including additional environmental management tools. The Society of
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) after discussion about the
relationships between environmental management tools in 1993 stated that there
was no single tool or approach to address all the problems of environmental
management and there was a need to find how different tools could complement
each other (SETAC 1997, Manuilova et al. 2009). One of such tools is life cycle
assessment (further LCA). LCA is an analytical tool that evaluates
environmental effects of a product, process or activity throughout its life cycle or
lifetime: from the extraction of resources, to production, consumption and
recycling up to the final disposal (UNEP, 2005). The LCA derived from an
understanding that each product, process, or activity generates impact on the
environment: from the extraction or collection of raw materials, throughout the
industrial transformation processes, until the moment when the materials are
delivered as residual waste (Ferrao, 2009). The LCA methodology does not
interpret the analysed object as an isolated phenomenon in the specific location
but rather as the system consisting of various components and independent of the
location. The life-cycle approach allows for assessing the impact of analysed
object by involving all stages of the processes of activity including secondary
ones. The essential result of the manufacturing is the product, thus inclusion of
the LCA to the activity EIA would extend analysed system boundaries: the LCA
methodology analyses the indirect impact of the activity and simultaneously the
result of the activity is analysed. The LCA allows for analysing the
environmental impact of the activity at the level of the product.
The literature analysis allows for detecting few efforts to analyse the
environmental impact assessment in general context together with life-cycle
assessment. Tukker (2000) in his practical experience of Dutch EIA projects
concluded that LCA could be a useful tool, when environmental comparisons of
processes and abatement alternatives were made. Manuilova et al. (2009)
concluded that LCA increased the level of detail and accuracy of environmental
assessment in EIA of CO2 capture and storage projects. Scipioni et al. (2009)
also proved that LCA was a useful and reliable tool for determining
environmental impacts relevant at all phases of the incineration process,
including the residues management. There is only those few research that the
main conclusion is that the LCA might be useful tool for environmental impact
assessment. No reasoned methodology on how the results of these two tools
should be combined, or model how the LCA and the EIA might complement
each other and act together to assess environmental impact of the production
7
activity was suggested. This dissertation thesis aims to fill the current gap and
seeks to apply a broader view to the environmental impact assessment of the
planned production activity by applying holistic life-cycle approach.
Aim and tasks of the research
The aim of the research is to create and test an integrated environmental
impact assessment and life-cycle assessment model for environmental impact
assessment of planned industrial activity.
Tasks:
1. To review the already performed research analyses on environmental
impact assessment performance and to identify the main problems in the
field.
2. To perform the analysis of EIA practice in Lithuania, to identify the
main strengths and weaknesses;
3. To analyse the coverage of significant environmental aspects in current
environmental impact assessments reports of manufacturing industry;
4. To develop an integrated environmental impact assessment and life
cycle assessment model which would allow systematically evaluate and
minimize the negative environmental impact of planned industrial
activity;
5. To investigate the possibilities of application and efficiency of the
developed model by applying it to environmental impact assessment of
the specific planned industrial activity.
Key theses
By integrating life cycle assessment elements into the environmental impact
assessment of planned industrial activity, it is possible not only more thoroughly
analyse the planned economic activity and quantitatively evaluate its
environmental impacted, but also to distinguish the planning scenario with the
least environmental impact.
Hypothesis
Negative environmental impact of manufacturing industry activity can be
mitigated by widening evaluated system boundaries while integrating the life-
cycle assessment into environmental impact assessment.
The research object is – environmental impact of the manufacturing industry.
8
Research methodology
Research covers the systematic literature review, the comparative analysis,
an expert survey providing standardized questionnaire. The survey data were
processed using SPSS software. The development of the integrated model was
based on cleaner production implementation principles, flow analysis was used
for data collection; and the assessment of life-cycle impact was carried out by
using SimaPro7 software; CML 2001 and Ecoindicator’99 methods were used
for data interpretation.
Scientific novelty
The essential scientific novelty element is the suggested integrated EIA and LCA
model for the environmental impact assessment of industrial activity.
The created integrated model extends the assessment limits by including
such aspects as environmental impact of the raw material production used during
activity or assessment of seemingly secondary, but related and also important
impacts.
The developed model allows for performing both the quantitative
assessment of environmental impact of the planned industrial activity and
planning the activity with the least environmental impact.
The scientific novelty also includes the fact that it was the first time when
the environmental impact assessment practice was evaluated in Lithuania.
Practical value
The created integrated model might be successfully implemented in
practice for the assessment of environmental impact and for the development of
more environmentally friendly manufacturing industry activity. The integrated
model allows for not only a comprehensive analysis of environmental impact of
the activity, but also helps to find out and choose the least polluting activity
scenario. By using created integrated model the negative impact of the activity
can be reduced.
The developed model was adapted for thermal insulation material plant
environmental impact assessment.
Structure and contents of the dissertation
Dissertation consists of introduction, five main chapters, conclusions and
recommendations, references and supplementary material. Dissertation text
covers 131 pages (without Appendixes); text illustrated by 45 Figures and 18
Tables. General structure of the dissertation is presented below.
9
CHAPTER I. Review of the recent relevant research
This chapter analyses the scientific research on dissertation topic: the
planning structure for industrial activity is reviewed, the development of
environmental impact assessment is presented, and structure of EIA with its
advantages and disadvantages is also discussed. The life-cycle assessment
methodology, its advantages and disadvantages, application possibilities are also
reviewed. At the end of this chapter, the work objective and tasks are formulated.
The literature review determined the need to optimize the assessment of
environmental impact of the planned industrial activity, using life-cycle
assessment as one of the optimization tools. The literature review showed that
there were discussions raised about the ‘collaboration’ of the EIA and the LCA
methodologies. Few authors claim that life-cycle assessment might compensate
many disadvantages of the EIA but there is no information on how these tools
should ‘work’ together. It is relevant to develop the model combining the EIA
with elements of the LCA methodology and find out what disadvantages of both
methodologies could be solved. The literature review also revealed that the
analysis of assessment practice of environmental impact in Lithuania has not
been performed, thus one more task is taken on, that is, the analysis of the
practice of environmental impact assessment in Lithuania and defining its
strengths and weaknesses.
CHAPTER II. Methodology
This chapter presents the methods and research methodology used in this work.
The study uses data collection methods: literature review, analysis of the EIA
reports and experts survey using questionnaire. The collected data was processed
using mathematical analysis. Integrated model was developed using principles of
cleaner production implementation. Life-cycle impact assessment was done
using SimaPro7 software; CML2001 and Ecoindicator‘99 methods were applied.
The created model was applied for the assessment of environmental impact of
thermal insulation material production activity. Work structure is presented in
Figure 1.
10
Fig. 1. The structure of the dissertation research
CHAPTER III. The results of the analysis of EIA practice in Lithuania and
of the analysis of significant environmental aspects coverage in current EIA
reports
This chapter presents the analysis of the EIA practice in Lithuania and the
results of the investigation of the coverage of significant environmental aspects
in current manufacturing industry EIA reports.
The EIA has existed in Lithuania since 1996, and till nowadays there are
900 EIA procedures (screening and full EIA studies) completed per year.
According to the data of the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of
Lithuania, most EIA procedures are carried out in the regions of major towns,
especially in the capital Vilnius and the port Klaipeda, where economic growth is
quite prominent.
Interviews with EIA experts and practitioners, also the analysis of EIA
studies, programmes and reports allowed identifying the main strengths and
shortcomings of EIA practice in Lithuania.
The analysis showed that the main two strengths of the Lithuanian EIA
practice are:
factual and active public participation in the process;
good legal regulation.
Literature
review
Indentification of
significant
environmental
aspects related to
manufacturing
industry
Analysis of
EIA practice
in Lithuania
Formulation of
the dissertation
problem and
tasks
Model
application
example
Creation of
the
integrated
model Conclusions and
recommendations
Planning Data collection Data analysis
Analysis of coverage
of significant
environmental aspects
in EIA reports
11
The research has also revealed a list of main shortcomings such as:
subjectivity in forecasting environmental effects;
politicization of EIA processes;
poor competence of involved authorities.
The analysis of EIA practice in Lithuania by interviewing experts was held
in 2007. Since the dissertation text was prepared no information about new or
other Lithuanian EIA evaluation system analysis have been found or
published/accessed in public sources. Since then, the EIA law in Lithuania has
changed several times, but the essential disadvantages were not solved. There is
still much subjectivity in the process; the interested parties still have many
possibilities to influence the decisions. One of the essential changes is a new
requirement for EIA documents and report compilers – to have a suitable
qualification. Another one change is that after the final decision no changes on
planned economic activity project can be done. If the changes occur, the whole
EIA procedure should be repeated. The participation of the society also raises
more controversial feelings. Although people actively participate in the EIA
process, usually it is caused by the factor “only not in my back yard” and no real
attention to the proposed activity and no analysis of its negative or positive
environmental or economic impact are displayed.
Prior the analysis of coverage of significant environmental aspects in
current EIA reports of manufacturing industry, an investigation of the significant
environmental aspects related with manufacturing industry was held. By
analysing environmental laws, initiatives and sets of environmental indicators it
was identified that significant manufacturing industry environmental aspects are:
resource consumption (as water and energy);
emissions to air, water and greenhouse gas emissions;
waste generation.
Eight manufacturing industry EIA reports (or more than 50% of total
manufacturing reports from period 2008-2013 in Lithuania) was analysed in
order to identify the significant environmental aspects coverage in reports. The
analysis showed that current manufacturing industry EIA practise has limitations
in:
evaluating planned activity impact on greenhouse gas emissions;
evaluation of negative impact of the consumption of natural
resources;
evaluation of indirect energy consumption;
evaluation of cumulative environmental impact;
evaluation of global environmental impact.
12
The research also revealed that the analysis of alternatives in EIA reports
can be stated as poor, since there are no efforts to seek for any different or more
effective solutions.
The performed analysis showed that the comprehensiveness and
assessment scope largely depended on the organizers of a EIA report. The
reports of the large consulting companies are more detailed and more additional
information is provided. But at the same time it can be stated that the reports are
prepared according to the same template as even some of the sentences coincide.
CHAPTER IV. The development of integrated environmental impact
assessment and life cycle assessment model
This chapter presents the principles of model development, model main
characteristics and application possibilities.
The main background of the integrated model is LCA and EIA
methodologies; some other additional methodological tools and techniques were
also used.
Firstly, there is a need to discuss practical application of LCA. There are
three levels of its study: standardized LCA according to the guidelines of ISO
14040, simplified LCA and Life cycle thinking. The latter is conceptual LCA
and refers to a general idea of the analyzed object in life cycle perspective.
Standardized LCA is a time and money consuming method; therefore it is rarely
applied in practice. The most popular LCA application is simplified LCA, that
provides a generic view of the whole system life cycle using general information,
normalized models, simplified evaluation covering the most important
environmental impacts and most important stages of life cycle. Development of
the LCA based software programs (like SimaPro or GaBi) helps researchers to
conduct simplified LCA and to avoid time and money waste. In order to
maintain data and assessment reliability the simplified LCA needs to be carried
out according to the commonly agreed rules, such as Product Category Rules
(PCR) used for Environmental Product Declaration (EPD). PCR is a set of rules
where the system boundary and main impact categories are defined in order to
conduct LCA for a specific category of products.
One of the additional methods suggested to use in the integrated model is
Material Flow Analysis (MFA) used for the inventory of all relevant data. MFA
is a widely applied analytical method that quantifies flows and stocks of
materials or substances in a well-defined system during a defined time period
(Brunner and Rechberger, 2004).
13
The created integrated model (Fig. 2) consists of four major steps, where
assessment of primary scenario, designing and screening the alternatives, and
selecting alternative steps evaluate site – generic or global environmental impact
of industrial activity that classical EIA methodology does not do. Step the
compatibility of the alternative and local conditions adds a site-specific or local
impact assessment perspective.
The object of the integrated model is an industrial activity that still is in the
planning process and requires full EIA procedure.
Project initiation is the background of primary information that will be used for
further assessment. The information about the aim, scope, processes and
materials of the project is provided by project developer.
The application of the integrated model starts with assessment of primary
scenario, where in the first place the data analysis is carried out and MFA is
conducted. After the data inventory the primary scenario is assessed by the
simplified Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). The outcome of the primary
scenario assessment is identification of “hot spots” of the activity that points out
the areas for major improvement and is followed by formulating a problem. At
this step the reasons of detected “hot spots” are analyzed.
Designing and screening the alternatives step is dedicated to designing and
screening of scenarios for solving the detected problem(s). Several tools and
techniques could be used for a scenario design: adaptation of existing solutions,
benchmarking, analysis of the best available or emerging techniques and
materials, conducting a search or using innovation (Nutt 2000). It is essential that
the designed scenarios would be economically and technically feasible. Each
scenario must undergo an economic evaluation consisting of the analysis of
material and technology availability on the market, its affordability and
compatibility with the project aims, its maintenance cost and other important
issues.
At this step environmental evaluation of the alternatives is made by using
LCIA methodology, at this point LCA is rather a tool for comparison of
alternatives than for analysis.
14
Fig. 2 The developed integrated LCA and EIA model
Project initiation
Proposal identification: aim, scope,
processes and etc.
Further EIA procedure
Further planning
Alternative
acceptabilit
y
Yes
No
Additional
information
Formulating
a problem
Assessment of primary scenario
LCIA of
the
activity
Hot spots
identification
Analysis of
current
information,
MFA
Local impact (Xloc)
The compatibility of local conditions and the
alternative
Global impact (Xglob)
Selecting alternative
Xglob→min
Designing and screening the alternatives
Environmental
evaluation of
alternative
(LCIA), A
Designing the alternatives, Z
Comparing and ranking
alternatives
Economic
evaluation of
the alternatives,
E
min z = f(X)
15
The selection of alternative depends on the two aspects: economical and
environmental evaluation. One of the ways to make the selection and decision is
to rank the alternatives by economical and environmental performance results.
The alternative, that has the best economical performance is awarded one
point, the less perfect – two points, while the least acceptable - n points (n – the
number of analyzed alternatives). The same ranking method should be used for
alternatives environmental performance that was designated by conducting
LCIA. Alternative ranking may be illustrated as follows:
Rr = Er + Ar → min, (1),
Where: R - rank of alternative r; Er –economical performance (rank) of
alternative r;
Ar – environmental performance (rank) of alternative r.
After selection of the most suitable scenario, the compatibility of local
conditions with the selected alternative is applied. Its main purpose is to
determine if a selected scenario can be implemented in the selected location and
to evaluate the site-dependant (or local) impact of the proposed project. The
acceptance (or rejection) of the project in a specific location depends greatly on
the local environmental and social conditions, legal regulations, protected areas,
e.g. Natura 2000 sites or local permitted pollution concentrations. Thus, at this
step the selected alternative is assessed by estimated air emissions of activity and
its contribution to local air pollution, possible water/soil contamination and its
effect on the local water/soil quality. This step also includes evaluation of how
the implemented alternative will affect the local socio-economical situation and
what impact it will have on the landscape or cultural values near the selected
area.
In case the alternative is not acceptable at the selected location, the other
opportunities for location are examined and compatibility with the selected
alternative is checked. If there is no alternative location, the procedure goes back
to the designing and screening of the alternatives phase, where the last substep,
i.e. comparison and ranking of the alternatives are analyzed, and a new most
relevant alternative is selected and tested. If an alternative is acceptable in
selected location, the further planning procedure follows, such as EIA report
arrangement by adding the missing information about the measures of negative
impact mitigation and preparation of monitoring plans.
16
The aim of the model use is to find the best of all possible (according to
criteria) alternatives of investigated system functioning. The most important
criteria are the least negative environmental impact. Therefore, the function of
the integrated model is to find planned activity implementing scenario
(alternative) that has the least negative impact on the environment and at the
same time is economically and technologically feasible. This would include the
impact on the environment both locally (business site) and globally. The
function of the model is described by the following formula:
min z = f(X), (2),
when X = (Xglob + Xlok), while Xglob = fglob(E,Z,A, t) and Xlok = flok(L,N)
and 0 < A ≤ A min., 0 < t ≤ T, 0 < N ≤ Nmax
Where z – optimality indicator; min – optimality criteria; X – environmetal
impact; Xlok – local environmental impact; Xglob – global environmental impact;
E – economic evaluation; Z – technological feasibility; A – environmental
impact assessment; t – time (LCA system boundary); T – time interval treshold
value; L – compliance with legal requirements; N – concentration of pollutants;
Nmax – Limit / maximum levels of pollutants.
The fourth chapter ends by providing the main characteristics of the created
model, its application possibilities, by describing novelty of the model and
integration possibilities.
CHAPTER V. Results – application of the model
This chapter presents results of the created integrated model application for
evaluating the performance of a new industrial project i.e. the establishment of
insulation materials manufacture in Lithuania.
The initiated project is the establishment of the manufacture of Extruded
Polystyrene (XPS) insulation boards in Lithuania, which by nature of its activity
falls under the EIA legislation and must follow a full EIA procedure. XPS
boards are produced from melted polystyrene derived from crude oil by adding
expansion gas, where the extrusion of polystyrene mass occurs through a nozzle
with a pressure release causing the mass to expand. Then the board edges are
trimmed and the product is cut into dimensions. At the end of the production line
the XPS boards are packed in plastic films and piled up on pallets.
Polystyrene granules compose about 90-95 % of a XPS board. Blowing
agents (up to 8 %) are the main compound needed for extrusion and foam
17
forming. Other additives, such as colorants, flame retardants and nucleants
constitute about 2% to contribution. Electricity is the main power source of the
extrusion process. Extrusion process uses some water in the enclosed system,
which is needed for cooling processes.
The integrated model application starts with an assessment of a primary
scenario and an analysis of the information about the planned activity. MFA is
performed to enhance the understanding of both planned activity and subsequent
environmental pressure and to ensure that all inputs and outputs are traced. A
simplified LCA analysis is carried out to evaluate environmental performance of
the primary scenario and to identify “hot spots” over its life cycle (cradle-to-gate
approach). Simplified LCA is conducted using one of the most popular LCA
software SimaPro (7.1), and two methods Ecoindicator’99 and CML2000 are
used for data analysis. Ecoindicator’99 is a damage-oriented method that allows
estimating environmental impact on human health, ecosystem quality and use of
resources, while CML2000 is a problem – oriented method analyzing the results
of individual impact categories, such as acidification, euthrophication, global
warming, ozone layer depletion and photochemical oxidation.
The environmental impact of different XPS production stages on human
health, ecosystem quality and use of resources is shown in Figure 3.
Fig.3 Environmental impact assessment of XPS production stages
(Ecoindicator’99 method)
18
The Raw materials stage and The Manufacturing stage contribute the most
to resources usage as well as to human health. The same results are obtained by
using the CML2000 method; all impact categories (see Fig. 4) display a
dominant influence (from 65 % on eutrophication up to 80 % for ozone layer
depletion) of the raw materials stage that encompasses the upstream production
of polystyrene resin, blowing agents and other additives.
Fig. 4. Environmental impact assessment of XPS production stages (CML2000
method)
The second largest impact, being similar on all impact categories (from 20
to 28 %), is caused by the manufacturing stage. Transportation has quite low
impact on all impact categories, except its major contribution to the
eutrophication potential due to emissions of nitrogen compounds during diesel
combustion. The environmental impacts associated with packaging operations
are low.
The evaluation of primary scenario has revealed that the “hot spot” of XPS
board production is raw materials. The identified areas of concern are
optimization of the use of the raw materials and availability of the raw materials
alternatives. The main raw materials of XPS production are polystyrene granules
19
and blowing agents (mixture of HFC-134a/HFC-152a and carbon dioxide).
Polystyrene granules are the background of the insulation material and cannot be
substituted, thus the central focus shall be concentrated on the choice of blowing
agents.
The four alternatives of blowing agents were highlighted after investigating
the existing solutions (blowing agents that are available on the market) and by
benchmarking. All alternatives are technologically feasible and warrant high
production quality. The scenarios designed are listed in Table 2.
Table 2 The Proposed alternatives for XPS production with different blowing
agents.
Alternatives Blowing agent
Alternative 1 HFC134a/HFC152a blend
Alternative 2 100 % CO2
Alternative 3 CO2 + ethanol
Alternative 4 Isobutane/DME blend
Direct and indirect costs were estimated to evaluate economic feasibility of
the scenarios. A direct cost includes blowing agent purchase cost, while the
indirect one includes any additional costs that derive from the use of blowing
agent (like additional energy and supplementary materials costs). These costs
have been accounted for 1kg XPS board.
With the help of the life cycle assessment, the alternatives were
environmentally assessed and compared.
In order to decide which alternative is the most acceptable, the results of
economical and environmental evaluation are summed up. Each alternative,
according to Equation 1, is ranked (R) from 1 to 4 points after the evaluation of
environmental (A) and economic performance (E), where 1 is for the best
performance and 4 for the worst. The alternative evaluation is presented in Table
3.
20
Table 3 Matrix of alternative ranking
Alternative Blowing
agent E
(Economical
performance)
A
(Environmental
performance)
R
(Alternative
ranking*)
Alternative 1 HFC134a/HF
C152a blend
3 4 7
Alternative 2 100 % CO2 2 1 3
Alternative 3 CO2 + ethanol 1 2 3
Alternative 4 Isobutane/
DME blend
4 3 7
* The lower R means the better alternative
Alternative 2 and 3 have the same R value, thus, the decision has been made
on the basis of other parameters, such as production quality and blowing agent
performance. Both alternatives of blowing agents are of high quality in XPS
production, but the mixture with ethanol (alternative 3) allows a faster extrusion
process.
The last step of the proposed model was the investigation of the
compatibility of the selected scenario and local conditions at the implementation
site. The location of the planed insulation materials production plant was in an
industrial zone, the main purpose of which is to create an industrial cluster.
Therefore, the Strategic Regional Planning Program had previously investigated
the pressure to the environment delivered from this cluster. The site-specific
evaluation of social-economic issues and cultural heritage showed that there was
no negative impact, while new manufacture had potential to create new job
opportunities in the region. The pressure on site-specific air and water qualities
did not exceed the allowed limit values.
The integrated model application example reveals a number of advantages
of integrating EIA and LCA. If EIA for the planned production of XPS boards
were performed in a traditional way, the primary scenario proposed by the
project developer could be acknowledged as acceptable by responsible
authorities without any search and analysis of alternatives (raw materials or
production technologies), as it would neither break the existing legal
requirements, nor be related to exceedance of maximum allowable emission
concentrations. The use of the LCA – EIA model for environmental assessment
of a new project makes it possible to identify the life cycle stage, which makes
the biggest environmental impact on various environmental categories, and, thus
21
urges to search for more environmentally friendly alternatives. The overall result
– the chosen alternative had 29 mPt or 40 % lower impact on human health
compared to the primary scenario and saved 100 mPt or 20 % of primary
resources (see Fig. 5).
Fig.6 Comparison of the selected alternative (scenario 3) with primary
scenario
The application of the integrated LCA-EIA framework introduces an LCA
perspective and in this way it extends the focus of assessment from the
regulatory compliance of the environmental impact to the assessment of the type
and degree of the damage that development of the project can cause. By applying
integrated model some of the EIA shortcomings can be solved as neglecting of
the global effect and management of natural resources has been solved in this
way. Revealing of the most environmentally problematic point of the planned
project and finding of a suitable alternative have allowed solving another
shortcoming of EIA - poor analysis of alternatives. The analysis based
information on the planned activity makes it easier for responsible authorities to
make decisions on development consent.
The case study was an example of the application of created methodology
for chemical industry. The LCA-EIA model enabled selection and comparison of
the new raw materials for XPS board production. Thus the suggestion for model
22
application consists of manufacturing industry that results in concrete products
that have clear raw materials and production technologies. Besides, the model
has the potential to be useful not only for enhancement of environmental
characteristics of the planned activity product and production technologies, but
also to help to choose the most acceptable in economic and environmental aspect
activity.
23
MAIN CONCLUSIONS
1. Analysis of the relevant research on environmental impact assessment
identified the following shortcomings of the current worldwide EIA system:
- the lack of overall consideration of cumulative, long term and global
impact analysis;
- the failure to identify and analyze alternatives of the proposed
projects;
- the excessive overflow of irrelevant data;
- the lack of clear, scientifically-based environmental impact
assessment methodology.
2. The analysis of Lithuanian EIA system revealed its main strengths:
- good legal regulation;
- good public participation in the process.
And its fundamental weaknesses:
- subjectivity of the process;
- process politicization;
- low competence of involved groups.
3. The review of EIA reports of planned industrial activities pointed out the
following environmental impact assessment flaws:
- the lack of evaluation of cumulative and indirect negative impact;
- disregard of the climate change assessment;
- insufficient analysis of alternatives.
4. The suggested integrated model with life cycle assessment enables:
- systematic evaluation of cumulative environmental impact of the
planned activities;
- identification and examination of significant and indirect activity’s
impact on the environment;
- identification, elimination or mitigation of activity’s hot spots;
- analysis and comparison of operational alternatives.
5. The application of an integrated model to the environmental impact
assessment of heat insulation materials manufacturing plant allowed finding
an operational alternative that is 40 percent more favourable to human health
and uses of 20 percent less resource than the primary scenario.
24
REFERENCE
1. Arts, J. and Faith-Ell, C., 2010. EIA and green procurement - EIA in Green
Procurement and Partnering Contracts, in 30th Annual Meeting of teh
International Association for Impact Assessment. Geneva (Switzerland).
Access via internet: www.iaia.org/iaia10/documents
2. Bina, O. 2007. A critical review of the dominant lines of argumentation on
the need for strategic environmental assessment. Environmental Impact
Assessesment Review 27: 585-606.
3. Bond, A.J., Viegas, C.V., Coelho de Souza Reinisch Coelho, C. and Selig,
P.M., 2010. Informal knowledge processes: the underpinning for
sustainability outcomes in EIA? Journal of Cleaner Production 18: 6-13.
4. Wärnbäck, A. and Hilding-Rydevik, T., 2009. Cumulative effects in
Swedish EIA practice — difficulties and obstacles. Environmental Impact
Assessesment Review 29: 107-115.
5. Kværner, J., G. Swensen, and L. Erikstad, 2006, Assessing environmental
vulnerability in EIA—The content and context of the vulnerability concept
in an alternative approach to standard EIA procedure. Environmental
Impact Assessment Review 26: 511–527.
6. Ferrão, P. 2007. Industrial Ecology: A Step Towards Sustainable
Development, in: Pereira, M. (ed.), A Portrait of State-of-the-Art Research
at the Technical University of Lisbon. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 357-383.
7. Manuilova, A., Suebsiri, J. and Wilson, M., 2009. Should Life Cycle
Assessment be part of the Environmental Impact Assessment? Case study:
EIA of CO2 Capture and Storage in Canada. Energy Procedia 1: 4511-
4518.
8. Scipioni, A., Mazzi, A., Niero, M. and Boatto, T., 2009. LCA to choose
among alternative design solutions: The case study of a new Italian
incineration line. Waste Management 29: 2462-2474.
9. SETAC, 1997. Life cycle assessment and conceptually related programmes,
Europe Working Group on Conceptually Related Programmes. SEATC-
Europe, Brussels. Access via internet:
http://www.setac.org/?page=Publications
10. Pischke, F., and M. Cashmore, 2006, Decision-oriented environmental
assessment: An empirical study of its theory and methods: Environmental
Impact Assessment Review 26: 643–662.
11. Liu, K.R., C.Y. Ko, C. Fan, and C.W. Chen, 2013, Incorporating the LCIA
concept into fuzzy risk assessment as a tool for environmental impact
25
assessment. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment
27: 849–866.
12. Steinemann, A., 2001. Improving alternatives for environmental impact
assessment. Environmental Impact Assessessment Review 21: 3-21.
13. Tukker, A., 2000. Life cycle assessment as a tool in environmental impact
assessment. Environmental Impact Assessessment Review 20: 435-456.
14. UNEP, 2005. UNEP/ SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. Life Cycle Approaches:
The road from analysis to practice. Access via internet:
http://www.unep.fr/shared /publications/pdf/DTIx0594xPA-Road.pdf
26
LIST OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS AND PROCEEDINGS ON THE
TOPIC OF THE DISSERTATION
Publications in journals included in Institute of Science Information (ISI)
database:
1. Židonienė S., Kruopienė J. Life Cycle Assessment in Environmental
Impact Assessments of Industrial Projects: Towards the Improvement.
Journal of Cleaner production. DOI information:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.07.081
2. Kruopienė J., Židonienė S., Dvarionienė J. Current practice and
shortcomings of EIA in Lithuania. Environmental Impact Assessment
Review (2009), Nr. 5 (29), p. 305–309. ISSN 0195-9255.
3. Stasiškienė Ž., Gaižiūnienė J., Židonienė S. Assessing the sustainability
of the Lithuanian hazardous waste management system. Journal of
Industrial Ecology (2011), Nr. 15 (2), p. 268–283. Online ISSN: 1530-
9290.
Publications referred in other International databases:
1. Kruopienė J., Židonienė S., Dvarionienė J. Mikalauskas A. Evaluation of
environmental impact assessment effectiveness in Lithuania. Aplinkos
tyrimai, inžinerija ir vadyba (2008), Nr. 2 (44), p. 28–33. ISSN 1392-
1649.
2. Arbačiauskas V., Gaižiūnienė J., Laurinkevičiūtė A., Židonienė S.
Sustainable production through innovation in small and medium sized
enterprises in the Baltic Sea Region. Environmental Research,
Engineering and Management (2010), Nr. 1 (51), p. 57–65. ISSN 1392-
1649.
Publications in proceedins of international and Lithuanian scientific
conferences:
1. Kruopienė J., Židonienė S., Dvarionienė J. Mikalauskas A. The
effectiveness of Lithuanian environmental impact assessment system
2nd International Young Scientist Conference the Vital Nature Sign,
proceedings. Kaunas (2008) p. 116–118. ISBN 978-9955-25-518-5.
27
2. Ulinskaitė J., Židonienė S. Sustainability indicators for hazardous
waste management. 3rd International Young Scientist Conference the
Vital Nature Sign, proceedings. Kaunas (2009) p. 1–5.
28
INFORMATION ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Name, surname:
Sigita Židonienė (Mrs.)
Date of birth: 4 December, 1981
Place of birth: Lithuania, Kaunas
Academic background: In 2000 graduated Kaunas “Rasos”
gymnasium;
2000 – 2004 studies at Vytautas
Magnus University, Faculty of
Environmental Sciences: Bachelor of
Environmental Sciences;
2004 – 2006 studies at Vytautas
Magnus University, Faculty of
Environmental Sciences: Master of
Environmental Sciences;
2006 – 2013 Doctoral studies at
Kaunas University of Technology,
Institute of Environmental Engineering
Research interest: environmental impact assessment, life
cycle assessment, sustainable energy
and resource consumption
For contacts: [email protected]
29
REZIUMĖ
Darbo aktualumas ir temos problematika
Sparti šiuolaikinės pramonės plėtra lemia didėjančias apkrovas mūsų
gyvenamajai aplinkai. Visuomenė vis daugiau dėmesio skiria aplinkos kokybei ir
vis dažniau išsako reikalavimus išsaugoti gamtą kitoms kartoms, tai tikras iššūkis
intensyvios plėtros srityje – pramonei reikia ne tik kurti produktus, kurie būtų
palankūs aplinkai, bet ir orientuoti savo veiklą į kuo mažiau taršią gamybą. Su
šiuo iššūkiu gamintojai susiduria visame pasaulyje. Norint sukurti mažiau taršius
produktus ar paslaugas, vykdyti mažiau taršią veiklą, reikia kuo ankstesniame jų
kūrimo etape įvertinti galimą neigiamą poveikį aplinkai ir ieškoti alternatyvių
sprendimų ar priemonių, galinčių sumažinti tą poveikį neprarandant pirminio
veiklos tikslo.
Viena iš šiuo metu egzistuojančių ir teisiškai reglamentuotų bei privalomų
priemonių, padedančių įvertinti planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikį aplinkai
ir numatyti neigiamo poveikio sumažinimo priemones, yra poveikio aplinkai
vertinimas (PAV). PAV apibrėžiamas kaip prevencinis aplinkos apsaugos
instrumentas, kurio tikslas yra nustatyti, apibūdinti ir įvertinti planuojamos
ūkinės veiklos galimą poveikį aplinkai. Šiame kontekste aplinka yra ne tik
gamta, medžiai, ekosistemos, bet ir socialinė bei ekonominė aplinka. PAV
pradėtas plėtoti XX a. antrojoje pusėje, tai buvo vis didėjančio dėmesio aplinkos
apsaugai rezultatas. Poveikio aplinkai vertinimo procesas buvo nauja priemonė,
leidžianti, prieš priimant galutinį sprendimą, įvertinti ir interpretuoti net
menkiausią projekto neigiamą poveikį aplinkai.
Iš pradžių PAV buvo procedūrinė priemonė su projektu susijusiam
poveikiui vertinti, tačiau pastaraisiais metais PAV yra pripažįstama ir kaip
priemonė, galinti padėti siekti darnios plėtros. Per pastaruosius dvidešimt metų
išplito ir PAV taikymo geografinės ribos, o iš pačios metodikos išsivystė plačiai
žinomos priemonės, pavyzdžiui, Strateginis poveikio aplinkai vertinimas
(SPAV), Rizikos vertinimas, Poveikio sveikatai vertinimas.
PAV koncepcijos ištakos yra mokslinės, susijusios su įvairių mokslinių
analizės metodų praktiniu pritaikymu. Atliekant PAV svarbu identifikuoti
sprendžiamą problemą, išmanyti duomenų rinkimo, duomenų analizės ir tyrimų
metodus, atlikti duomenų modeliavimą, vadovautis sprendimų priėmimo teorija.
Tačiau po daugelio praktikos ir mokslinių tyrimų bei diskusijų metų yra aišku,
kad atotrūkis tarp PAV keliamų aukštų reikalavimų ir praktinio įgyvendinimo
yra labai didelis. Atsakingoms institucijoms laikantis verslui palankios politikos,
o verslui nesuprantant PAV esmės, ši prevencinė aplinkos apsaugos priemonė
30
funkcionuoja tik kaip dar vienas biurokratinis mechanizmas, lėtinantis projekto
įgyvendinimą.
Nenuostabu, kad mokslinėje literatūroje vis plačiau diskutuojama, kaip
reikėtų eliminuoti iškilusius PAV trūkumus ir didinti jo naudingumą, grąžinti į
vertinimą mokslinį pagrindą. Be fundamentalių trūkumų, PAV taip pat
kritikuojamas už tai, kad vertina tik lokalų veiklos poveikį aplinkai, nevertina
ilgalaikio ar sudėtinio poveikio, nėra aiškios poveikio vertinimo metodikos ar
skiriamas per mažas dėmesys alternatyvų analizei. Darnios pramonės plėtros
kontekste PAV turi būti ne tik priemonė poveikiui aplinkai identifikuoti, bet ir
priemonė, padedanti mažinti veiklos sukeliamą poveikį.
Kaip viena iš galimybių optimizuoti planuojamos gamybinės veiklos
poveikio aplinkai vertinimą yra išplėsti vertinimo ribas – įtraukiant papildomas
aplinkosaugines ar vadybines priemones. Viena iš tokių priemonių yra būvio
ciklo įvertinimas (BCĮ). Tai analitinė aplinkosauginė priemonė, skirta įvertinti
poveikį aplinkai viso produkto, proceso ar paslaugos būvio ciklo metu. BCĮ
metodika analizuojamą objektą interpretuoja ne kaip izoliuotą reiškinį tam
tikroje vietoje, o kaip įvairių sudėtinių dalių sistemą, kuri nepriklauso nuo vietos.
Taikant būvio ciklo požiūrį analizuojamo objekto poveikio vertinimas apima
visas veiklos procesų grandis, tarp jų ir šalutinius procesus. Planuojamos
gamybinės veiklos esminis rezultatas yra produktas, tad BCĮ įtraukimas leistų
išanalizuoti veiklos poveikį aplinkai ir produkto lygmenyje.
Literatūroje yra keletas bandymų bendrame kontekste analizuoti poveikio
aplinkai vertinimą ir būvio ciklo įvertinimą, tačiau dažniausiai apsiribojama
išvada, kad BCĮ gali būti naudinga priemonė PAV. Jokios pagrįstos metodikos
(pavyzdžiui, kaip šių dviejų priemonių rezultatus susieti) ar modelio (pavyzdžiui,
kaip BCĮ ir PAV gali papildyti vienas kitą ir veikti kartu), vertinant planuojamos
gamybinės veiklos poveikį aplinkai, nebuvo pasiūlyta. Šiuo disertaciniu darbu
siekiama užpildyti esančią spragą ir į planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikio
aplinkai vertinimą žiūrėti plačiau – taikant holistinį būvio ciklo požiūrį.
Darbo tikslas – sukurti ir praktikoje išbandyti integruotą planuojamos
gamybinės veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinimo ir būvio ciklo įvertinimo modelį,
skirtą gamybinės veiklos poveikiui aplinkai įvertinti ir mažinti.
Uždaviniai:
1. planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinimo srityje
atlikti tyrimų analizę ir identifikuoti aktualias problemas, susijusias su
gamybinės veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinimu;
31
2. atlikti poveikio aplinkai vertinimo praktikos analizę Lietuvoje,
identifikuoti pagrindines stiprybes ir trūkumus;
3. atlikti gamybinių veiklų poveikio aplinkai vertinimo analizę, nustatyti
vertinimo privalumus ir trūkumus;
4. sukurti integruotą planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikio aplinkai
vertinimo ir būvio ciklo įvertinimo modelį, kuris leistų sistemiškai
įvertinti ir sumažinti planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikį aplinkai;
5. pritaikyti sukurtą integruotą modelį konkrečios planuojamos gamybinės
veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinime, įvertinti jo efektyvumą.
Ginamasis disertacijos teiginys
Integruojant būvio ciklo elementus į planuojamos gamybinės veiklos
poveikio aplinkai vertinimą, galima ne tik sistemiškai išanalizuoti planuojamą
ūkinę veiklą ir kiekybiškai įvertinti jos poveikį aplinkai, bet ir išskirti planavimo
scenarijų, darantį mažiausią poveikį aplinkai.
Darbo hipotezė
Gamybinės veiklos neigiamas poveikis aplinkai gali būti sumažintas
išplečiant vertinimo ribas, tai yra integruojant būvio ciklo įvertinimą į
planuojamos veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinimą.
Tyrimų objektas – planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikis aplinkai.
Darbe naudota tyrimų metodika: integruoto modelio sudarymas remiasi
švaresnės gamybos diegimo principais, duomenims rinkti naudota medžiagų
srautų analizė, būvio ciklo poveikio įvertinimas atliekamas naudojant
programinę įrangą „SimaPro7“, duomenų interpretavimui pasirenkant CML 2001
ir Ecoindicator’99 metodus. Darbe taip pat naudota sisteminė literatūros analizė,
lyginamoji analizė, ekspertų apklausa, pateikiant standartizuotą klausimyną.
Apklausos duomenys apdoroti SPSS programine įranga.
Darbo mokslinis naujumas
Esminis mokslinio naujumo elementas – pasiūlytas planuojamos gamybinės
veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinimo konceptualus modelis, integruojant būvio
ciklo įvertinimą.
Sukurtas naujas integruotas planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikio
aplinkai vertinimo modelis neturi analogų pasaulyje. Jis išplečia vertinimo ribas,
į jas įtraukiami tokie svarbūs aspektai kaip veiklos metu naudojamų žaliavų
32
išgavimo, jų transportavimo iki gamyklos, ar kitų, net šalutinių procesų, būtinų
veiklai vykti, poveikis aplinkai.
Sukurtas integruotas modelis leidžia ne tik kiekybiškai įvertinti
planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikį aplinkai, bet ir veiklą planuoti taip, kad
ji darytų kuo mažesnį neigiamą poveikį aplinkai.
Darbo naujumas apima ir tą faktą, kad pirmąkart Lietuvoje buvo įvertinta
planuojamos ūkinės veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinimo praktika, bei atlikta
gamybinių veiklų poveikio aplinkai vertinimo analizė.
Praktinė darbo vertė
Sukurtas integruotas planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikio aplinkai
vertinimo ir būvio ciklo įvertinimo modelis gali būti pritaikytas praktikoje
planuojant gamybinę veiklą ir vertinant jos poveikį aplinkai. Vertinant
gamybinės veiklos poveikį aplinkai ir taikant sukurtą integruotą modelį galima
ne tik sistemiškai įvertinti veiklos poveikį aplinkai ir priimti su tuo susijusius
sprendimus, bet ir veiklos vykdytojui padėti surasti bei pasirinkti mažiausiai
taršų veiklos vykdymo scenarijų. Sukurtas modelis pritaikytas vertinant šilumos
izoliacinių medžiagų gamyklos poveikį aplinkai.
Darbo rezultatų aprobavimas
Disertacijos tema publikuoti 7 moksliniai straipsniai: 3 – mokslo
žurnaluose, įtrauktuose į Thomson ISI sąrašą; 2 – mokslo žurnaluose,
cituojamuose tarptautinėje duomenų bazėje, 2 – recenzuojamoje tarptautinių
konferencijų medžiagoje. Disertacijoje atliktų tyrimų rezultatai pristatyti
dviejose mokslinėse konferencijose Lietuvoje ir užsienyje.
Darbo apimtis ir struktūra
Disertaciją sudaro įvadas, penki pagrindiniai skyriai, išvados,
rekomendacijos ir trys priedai. Darbo apimtis – 131 puslapiai (be priedų), tekstas
iliustruotas 45 paveikslais ir 18 lentelių. Disertacijoje cituojami 152 literatūros
šaltinis ir 10 teisinių dokumentų.
Pirmajame skyriuje aptariami moksliniai tyrimai, atlikti disertacijos tema:
apžvelgiama gamybinės veiklos planavimo struktūra, poveikio aplinkai
vertinimo raida, PAV struktūra, privalumai ir trūkumai. Taip pat apžvelgiama
būvio ciklo įvertinimo metodika, jos privalumai ir trūkumai, taikymo galimybės.
Antrajame skyriuje pristatomi darbe taikyti metodai ir tyrimų metodologijos.
Trečiajame skyriuje pristatomi PAV praktikos Lietuvoje analizės ir PAV tyrimų
rezultatai. Ketvirtajame skyriuje aprašyti planuojamos gamybinės veiklos
integruoto poveikio aplinkai vertinimo modelio sudarymo principai ir jo
33
charakteristikos. Penktajame skyriuje pateikiami sukurto integruoto modelio
eksperimentinio tyrimo šilumos izoliacinių medžiagų gamybai pritaikymo
rezultatai. Darbo pabaigoje pateikiamos išvados ir rekomendacijos.
Išvados
1. Apžvelgus jau atliktų mokslinių tyrimų rezultatus nustatyta, kad šiuo metu
egzistuojanti planuojamos ūkinės veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinimo sistema
turi trūkumų, susijusių su:
- suminio, ilgalaikio ir globalaus veiklos sukeliamo poveikio
vertinimu;
- veiklos vykdymo alternatyvų analize;
- nepakankamu tikslingos informacijos kiekiu;
- aiškios, moksliškai pagrįstos, poveikio vertinimo
metodologijos nebuvimu.
2. Atlikus Lietuvos PAV sistemos analizę buvo nustatytos tokios sistemos
stiprybės:
- geras teisinis reglamentavimas;
- visuomenės dalyvavimas procese.
Esminiai trūkumai:
- subjektyvumas numatant poveikius;
- proceso politizacija;
- procese dalyvaujančių grupių žema kompetencija.
3. Atlikus gamybinių veiklų poveikio aplinkai vertinimo tyrimą buvo
nustatyta, kad esama PAV sistema neužtikrina:
- su gamybine veikla susijusio netiesioginio ir suminio
neigiamo poveikio įvertinimo;
- gamybinės veiklos poveikio klimato kaitai įvertinimo;
- tinkamos alternatyvų analizės.
4. Sukurtas integruotas planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikio aplinkai
vertinimo ir būvio ciklo įvertinimo modelis leidžia:
- sistemiškai įvertinti planuojamos gamybinės veiklos poveikį
aplinkai;
- išplečiant vertinimo ribas identifikuoti ir įvertinti su
gamybine veikla susijusį reikšmingą bei netiesioginį poveikį
aplinkai;
- identifikuoti veiklos „karštuosius taškus“, surasti ir įvertinti
jų eliminavimo ar sumažinimo galimybes;
- išanalizuoti ir palyginti veiklos vykdymo alternatyvas.
34
5. Pritaikius integruotą modelį šilumos izoliacinių medžiagų gamybinės
veiklos poveikio aplinkai vertinime buvo identifikuota gamybinės veiklos
alternatyva, 40 proc. palankesnė žmonių sveikatai, leidžianti sunaudoti 20 proc.
mažiau išteklių, nei veiklos alternatyva, identifikuota pasitelkus įprastinę PAV
procedūrą.
UDK 502.175+502.131.1](043.3)
SL344. 2015-05-21, 1,75 leidyb. apsk. l. Tiražas 70 egz. Užsakymas 178.
Išleido leidykla „Technologija“, Studentų g. 54, 51424 Kaunas
Spausdino leidyklos „Technologija“ spaustuvė, Studentų g. 54, 51424 Kaunas