Characterization Factors for Water Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Based on Freshwater Fish Species Extinction

Hanafiah, Marlia Mohd; Xenopoulos, Marguerite A.; Pfister, Stephan; Leuven, R.S.E.W.; Huijbregts, Mark A. J.

doi:10.1021/es1039634

Cited by 120 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mean annual discharge or flow of rivers (hereafter abbreviated as MAF) is an important indicator of global water supply, with applications in irrigation supply assessment, climate change vulnerability assessment (Chang, 2003;Santini and di Paola, 2015), hydropower assessment (Hall et al, 2004), water footprinting (Hanafiah et al, 2011;Hoekstra et al, 2011;Jefferies et al, 2012;Pfister et al, 2009;Tendall et al, 2014), and for quantifying sediment fluxes (Syvitski et al, 2003). It also represents one of the most important factors determining the ecosystem integrity of freshwater biodiversity (Oberdorff et al, 1995;Oberdorff et al, 2011;Poff and Zimmerman, 2010;Xenopoulos and Lodge, 2006;Xenopoulos et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing and testing a global-scale regression model to quantify mean annual streamflow

Barbarossa

Huijbregts

Hendriks

et al. 2017

Journal of Hydrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantifying mean annual flow of rivers (MAF) at ungauged sites is essential for assessments of global water supply, ecosystem integrity and water footprints. MAF can be quantified with spatially explicit process-based models, which might be overly time-consuming and data-intensive for this purpose, or with empirical regression models that predict MAF based on climate and catchment characteristics. Yet, regression models have mostly been developed at a regional scale and the extent to which they can be extrapolated to other regions is not known. In this study, we developed a global-scale regression model for MAF based on a dataset unprecedented in size, using observations of discharge and catchment

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing and testing a global-scale regression model to quantify mean annual streamflow

Barbarossa

Huijbregts

Hendriks

et al. 2017

Journal of Hydrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Endpoint impact assessment methods provide specific indicators for potential damages on the areas of protection of human health (Boulay et al 2011b;Motoshita et al 2010b, a;Pfister et al 2009), ecosystem quality (Hanafiah et al 2011;Pfister et al 2009;van Zelm et al 2011), and resources (Pfister et al 2009;Boesch et al 2007). …”

Section: Endpoint Assessment Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The extent of these changes depends on the ecological value of water in the considered ecosystem. Ultimate impacts on ecosystem quality are commonly expressed in potentially disappeared fraction (PDF) of species on a given surface or volume during a given time (PDF per square meter per year or PDF per cubic meter per year) (van Zelm et al 2011;Hanafiah et al 2011).…”

Section: Ecosystem Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The cause-effect chains that current methods cover regarding damages to ecosystem quality are the decrease of terrestrial biodiversity due to freshwater consumption (Pfister et al 2009), decrease of aquatic biodiversity due to turbined water use, disappearance of terrestrial plant species due to groundwater withdrawal and related lowering of the water table (van Zelm et al 2011), and the effects of freshwater consumption on freshwater fish species (Hanafiah et al 2011). These endpoint methods do not use water scarcity indices as elements of the modeling equations.…”

Section: Ecosystem Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review of methods addressing freshwater use in life cycle inventory and impact assessment

Kounina

Margni

Bayart

et al. 2012

Int J Life Cycle Assess

Self Cite

290

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose In recent years, several methods have been developed which propose different freshwater use inventory schemes and impact assessment characterization models considering various cause-effect chain relationships. This work reviewed a multitude of methods and indicators for freshwater use potentially applicable in life cycle assessment (LCA). This review is used as a basis to identify the key elements to build a scientific consensus for operational characterization methods for LCA. Methods This evaluation builds on the criteria and procedure developed within the International Reference Life -012-0519-3 Cycle Data System Handbook and has been adapted for the purpose of this project. It therefore includes (1) description of relevant cause-effect chains, (2) definition of criteria to evaluate the existing methods, (3) development of subcriteria specific to freshwater use, and (4) description and review of existing methods addressing freshwater in LCA. Results and discussion No single method is available which comprehensively describes all potential impacts derived from freshwater use. However, this review highlights several key findings to design a characterization method encompassing all the impact pathways of the assessment of freshwater use and consumption in life cycle assessment framework as the following: (1) in most of databases and methods, consistent freshwater balances are not reported either because output is not considered or because polluted freshwater is recalculated based on a critical dilution approach; (2) at the midpoint level, most methods are related to water scarcity index and correspond to the methodological choice of an indicator simplified in terms of the number of parameters (scarcity) and freshwater uses (freshwater consumption or freshwater withdrawal) considered. More comprehensive scarcity indices distinguish different freshwater types and functionalities. (3) At the endpoint level, several methods already exist which report results in units compatible with traditional human health and ecosystem quality damage and cover various cause-effect chains, e.g., the decrease of terrestrial biodiversity due to freshwater consumption. (4) Midpoint and endpoint indicators have various levels of spatial differentiation, i.e., generic factors with no differentiation at all, or country, watershed, and grid cell differentiation. Conclusions Existing databases should be (1) completed with input and output freshwater flow differentiated according to water types based on its origin (surface water, groundwater, and precipitation water stored as soil moisture), (2) regionalized, and (3) if possible, characterized with a set of quality parameters. The assessment of impacts related to freshwater use is possible by assembling methods in a comprehensive methodology to characterize each use adequately.Int J Life Cycle Assess (2013) 18:707-721 DOI 10.1007/s11367

show abstract

“…Other proposals include Garcia-Quijano et al [75], who suggest a number of indicators, including pressure, structural and species indicators, without any further discussion of the relative importance, and Kløverpris et al [82,83], who identify in which biome the impact occurs, but without trying to quantify this impact in terms of biodiversity. Two exceptions to this are Hanafiah et al [124] and Verones et al [125], who both calculate characterization factors based on species loss caused by water use.…”

Section: Structural and Indirect Biodiversity Indicators As Quality Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Include Impacts on Biodiversity from Land Use in LCIA and How to Select Useful Indicators?

Michelsen

Lindner

2015

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Loss of biodiversity is one of the most severe threats to sustainability, and land use and land use changes are still the single most important factor. Still, there is no sign of any consensus on how to include impacts on biodiversity from land use and land use changes in LCIA. In this paper, different characteristics of biodiversity are discussed and related to proposals on how to include land use and land use changes in LCIA. We identify the question of why we should care about biodiversity as a key question, since different motivations will result in different choices for the indicators, and we call for more openness in the motivation for indicator selection. We find a promising trend in combining pressure indicators with geographic weighting and regard this as a promising way ahead. More knowledge on the consequences of different choices, such as the selection of a reference state, is still needed.

show abstract

Characterization Factors for Water Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Based on Freshwater Fish Species Extinction

Cited by 120 publications

References 33 publications

Developing and testing a global-scale regression model to quantify mean annual streamflow

Developing and testing a global-scale regression model to quantify mean annual streamflow

Review of methods addressing freshwater use in life cycle inventory and impact assessment

Why Include Impacts on Biodiversity from Land Use in LCIA and How to Select Useful Indicators?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About