Please wait a minute...
 首页  期刊列表 期刊订阅 开放获取 关于我们
English
在线预览  |  当期目录  |  过刊浏览  |  热点文章  |  下载排行
Frontiers of Engineering Management    2019, Vol. 6 Issue (3) : 406-415     https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-019-0025-4
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Environmental and human health impact assessment of major interior wall decorative materials
Bingqing ZHANG1, Ruochen ZENG2, Xiaodong LI1()
1. Department of Construction Management, School of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
2. School of Construction Management, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
全文: PDF(719 KB)   HTML
导出: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Despite the growing interest in green products in the interior wall decorative material market, knowledge gaps exist because determining which product is more environmental and user friendly than the others is difficult. This work assesses the environmental and human health profiles of interior latex and wallpaper. Two interior latex products of different raw material ratios and one non-woven wallpaper product are considered. The environmental impact assessment follows life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology and applies Building Environmental Performance Analysis System (BEPAS). The human health impact is based on impact-pathway chain and is performed using Building Health Impact Analysis System (BHIAS). The assessment scope, associated emissions, and territorial scope of various emissions are defined to facilitate comparison study of interior wall decorative products. The impacts are classified into 15 categories belonging to three safeguard areas: ecological environment, natural resources, and human health. The impacts of categories are calculated and monetized using willingness to pay (WTP) and disability-adjusted life year (DALY) and summarized as an integrated external cost of environmental and human health impacts. Assessment results reveal that the integrated impact of interior latex is lower than that of non-woven wallpaper, and the interior latex of low quality causes low life cycle integrated impact. The most impacted categories are global warming, respiratory effects, and water consumption. Hotspots of product manufacturing are recognized to promote green product design.

Keywords life cycle assessment      human health impact      integrated assessment      interior wall decorative material      green product     
最新录用日期:    在线预览日期:    发布日期: 2019-09-04
服务
推荐给朋友
免费邮件订阅
RSS订阅
作者相关文章
Bingqing ZHANG
Ruochen ZENG
Xiaodong LI
引用本文:   
Bingqing ZHANG,Ruochen ZENG,Xiaodong LI. Environmental and human health impact assessment of major interior wall decorative materials[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(3): 406-415.
网址:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/10.1007/s42524-019-0025-4     OR     http://journal.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/Y2019/V6/I3/406
Fig.1  Schematic of BHIAS
Fig.2  Sources and territorial scopes of emissions
Fig.3  Integrated assessment model for interior wall decorative products
Impact categories External costs (CNY/functional unit)
Interior latex product 1 Interior latex product 2 Non-woven wallpaper
Ecological damage 0.42 0.71 0.86
Resource depletion 0.12 0.20 0.20
Human health impact 0.28 0.30 0.21
Integrated impact 0.82 1.20 1.27
Tab.1  External costs of safeguard areas
Safeguard areas Raw material acquisition Total
Coarse whiting Kaolin Titanium dioxide Coalescer Styrene-acrylic emulsion Water Talcum powder
Ecological damage 4.45E−02 8.13E−02 1.78E−01 1.37E−02 9.05E−02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.08E−01
Resource depletion 2.28E−02 1.40E−03 7.37E−02 1.73E−03 1.26E−02 3.79E−03 1.62E−05 1.16E−01
Human health impact 5.23E−03 1.65E−01 9.01E−02 2.78E−03 1.82E−02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.81E−01
Integrated impact 7.25E−02 2.48E−01 3.42E−01 1.82E−02 1.21E−01 3.79E−03 1.62E−05 8.06E−01
Proportion 8.79% 30.07% 41.53% 2.21% 14.71% 0.46% 0.00% 97.77%
Safeguard areas Manufacturing Use phase
Electricity Solid waste treatment Cleaning Sewage treatment Total
Ecological damage 6.45E−03 1.60E−05 8.84E−06 2.47E−03 8.95E−03 1.09E−05
Resource depletion 4.64E−03 4.74E−04 1.05E−03 −5.34E−04 5.63E−03 1.51E−03
Human health impact 1.94E−03 4.32E−06 0.00E+00 2.37E−04 2.18E−03 7.85E−05
Integrated impact 1.30E−02 4.95E−04 1.05E−03 2.17E−03 1.68E−02 1.60E−03
Proportion 1.58% 0.06% 0.13% 0.26% 2.03% 0.19%
Tab.2  External costs (yuan/functional unit) of impact sources of interior latex product 1
Safeguard areas Raw material acquisition Total
Coarse whiting Kaolin Titanium dioxide Coalescer Styrene-acrylic emulsion Water Talcum powder
Ecological damage 1.43E−02 2.80E−02 3.46E−01 1.41E−01 1.71E−01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 7.00E−01
Resource depletion 7.30E−03 4.84E−04 1.43E−01 1.77E−02 2.38E−02 1.31E−03 5.95E−04 1.94E−01
Human health impact 1.68E−03 5.68E−02 1.75E−01 2.84E−02 3.43E−02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.96E−01
Integrated impact 2.32E−02 8.53E−02 6.63E−01 1.87E−01 2.29E−01 1.31E−03 5.95E−04 1.19E+00
Proportion 1.93% 7.09% 55.08% 15.51% 19.03% 0.11% 0.05% 98.80%
Safeguard areas Manufacturing Total Use phase
Electricity Solid waste treatment Cleaning Sewage treatment PM
Ecological damage 3.88E−03 2.11E−05 1.32E−05 2.09E−03 1.77E−05 6.02E−03 1.09E−05
Resource depletion 7.82E−04 6.24E−04 1.66E−03 −4.52E−04 0.00E+00 2.61E−03 1.51E−03
Human health impact 1.16E−03 5.68E−06 0.00E+00 2.00E−04 4.63E−05 1.42E−03 7.85E−05
Integrated impact 5.83E−03 6.51E−04 1.67E−03 1.84E−03 6.40E−05 1.01E−02 1.60E−03
Proportion 0.48% 0.05% 0.14% 0.15% 0.01% 0.83% 0.19%
Tab.3  External costs (yuan/functional unit) of impact sources of interior latex product 2
Safeguard areas Raw material acquisition Total
Non-woven paper Crylic Water
Ecological damage 3.03E−01 8.40E−02 0.00E+00 3.87E−01
Resource depletion 9.77E−02 3.87E−03 3.49E−02 1.36E−01
Human health impact 6.39E−02 1.78E−02 0.00E+00 8.17E−02
Integrated impact 4.64E−01 1.06E−01 3.49E−02 6.05E−01
Proportion 36.48% 8.30% 2.74% 47.53%
Safeguard areas Manufacturing Total Use phase
Electricity Solid waste treatment Sewage treatment
Ecological damage 2.95E−01 1.15E−04 4.93E−02 3.44E−01 1.30E−01
Resource depletion 6.41E−02 3.41E−03 −1.07E−02 5.68E−02 9.58E−03
Human health impact 9.54E−02 3.11E−05 4.73E−03 1.00E−01 2.75E−02
Integrated impact 4.54E−01 3.56E−03 4.34E−02 5.01E−01 1.67E−01
Proportion 35.67% 0.28% 3.41% 39.35% 13.12%
Tab.4  External costs (yuan/functional unit) of impact sources of non-woven wallpaper
Fig.4  External costs of categories
1 B K Acharya, C Cao, M Xu, L Khanal, S Naeem, S Pandit (2018). Present and future of dengue fever in Nepal: mapping climatic suitability by ecological niche model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(2): 187–201
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15020187 pmid: 29360797
2 K Azuma, I Uchiyama, S Uchiyama, N Kunugita (2016). Assessment of inhalation exposure to indoor air pollutants: screening for health risks of multiple pollutants in Japanese dwellings. Environmental Research, 145: 39–49
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2015.11.015 pmid: 26618504
3 G Barberio, S Scalbi, P Buttol, P Masoni, S Righi (2014). Combining life cycle assessment and qualitative risk assessment: the case study of alumina nanofluid production. The Science of the Total Environment, 496: 122–131
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.06.135 pmid: 25068795
4 J Brandt, J D Silver, J H Christensen, M S Andersen, J H Bonlokke, T Sigsgaard, C Geels, A Gross, A B Hansen, K M Hansen, G B Hedegaard, E Kaas, L M Frohn (2013a). Assessment of past, present and future health-cost externalities of air pollution in Europe and the contribution from international ship traffic using the EVA model system. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 13(15): 7747–7764
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7747-2013
5 J Brandt, J D Silver, J H Christensen, M S Andersen, J H Bonlokke, T Sigsgaard, C Geels, A Gross, A B Hansen, K M Hansen, G B Hedegaard, E Kaas, L M Frohn (2013b). Contribution from the ten major emission sectors in Europe and Denmark to the health-cost externalities of air pollution using the EVA model system - An integrated modelling approach. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 13(15): 7725–7746
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7725-2013
6 S Brasche, W Bischof (2005). Daily time spent indoors in German homes - Baseline data for the assessment of indoor exposure of German occupants. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 208(4): 247–253
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2005.03.003 pmid: 16078638
7 C Bueno, M Z Hauschild, J A Rossignolo, A R Ometto, N C Mendes (2016). Sensitivity analysis of the use of life cycle impact assessment methods: a case study on building materials. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112: 2208–2220
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.006
8 R T Burnett, C A Pope, M Ezzati, C Olives, S S Lim, S Mehta, H H Shin, G Singh, B Hubbell, M Brauer, H R Anderson, K R Smith, J R Balmes, N G Bruce, H Kan, F Laden, A Prüss-Ustün, M C Turner, S M Gapstur, W R Diver, A Cohen (2014). An integrated risk function for estimating the global burden of disease attributable to ambient fine particulate matter exposure. Environmental Health Perspectives, 122(4): 397–403
https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307049 pmid: 24518036
9 EPLCA (2010). European platform on life cycle assessment, list of tools
10 J L Ferrao, S Niquisse, J M Mendes, M Painho (2018). Mapping and modelling malaria risk areas using climate, socio-demographic and clinical variables in Chimoio, Mozambique. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(4): 795–809
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15040795 pmid: 29671756
11 A Furberg, R Arvidsson, S Molander (2018). Live and let die? Life cycle human health impacts from the use of tire studs. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(8): 1774–1786
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15081774 pmid: 30126166
12 U Im, J Brandt, C Geels, K M Hansen, J H Christensen, M S Andersen, E Solazzo, I Kioutsioukis, U Alyuz, A Balzarini, R Baro, R Bellasio, R Bianconi, J Bieser, A Colette, G Curci, A Farrow, J Flemming, A Fraser, P Jimenez-Guerrero, N Kitwiroon, C K Liang, U Nopmongcol, G Pirovano, L Pozzoli, M Prank, R Rose, R Sokhi, P Tuccella, A Unal, M G Vivanco, J West, G Yarwood, C Hogrefe, S Galmarini (2018). Assessment and economic valuation of air pollution impacts on human health over Europe and the United States as calculated by a multi-model ensemble in the framework of AQMEII3. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 18(8): 5967–5989
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-5967-2018 pmid: 30079086
13 ISO (2006a). Environmental Management-Life Cycle Assessment- Principles and Framework. London: British Standards Institution
14 ISO (2006b). Environmental Management-Life Cycle Assessment- Requirements and Guidelines. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization
15 X Q Kong (2010). Research on the health damage assessment model of building during the life cycle. Thesis for the Master’s Degree. Beijing: Tsinghua University
16 X D Li, S Su, Z H Zhang, X Q Kong (2017). An integrated environmental and health performance quantification model for pre-occupancy phase of buildings in China. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 63: 1–11
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2016.11.003
17 X D Li, Y M Zhu, Z H Zhang (2010). An LCA-based environmental impact assessment model for construction processes. Building and Environment, 45(3): 766–775
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.08.010
18 R J Liu, Z H Zhang, L Zhou (2011). A comparative study of waterproof material’s life cycle environmental impact. Environmental Pollution & Control, 33(12):103–106
19 Y Ma, L Cao, C H Zhou (2011). Environmental impact assessment of typical chemical product using life cycle assessment-based on water-based paint. Environmental Science & Technology, 34: 189–193
20 National Bureau of Statistics of China (2016). China Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statitics Press (in Chinese)
21 National Bureau of Statistics of China (2017). China Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statitics Press (in Chinese)
22 K Sexton, J L Adgate, G Ramachandran, G C Pratt, S J Mongin, T H Stock, M T Morandi (2004). Comparison of personal, indoor, and outdoor exposures to hazardous air pollutants in three urban communities. Environmental Science & Technology, 38(2): 423–430
https://doi.org/10.1021/es030319u pmid: 14750716
23 Shanghai Bureau of Statistics (2017). Shanghai Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statitics Press
24 C Skaar, R B Jorgensen (2013). Integrating human health impact from indoor emissions into an LCA: a case study evaluating the significance of the use stage. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(3): 636–646
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0506-8
25 B Steen (2000). A systematic approach to environmental priority strategies in product development (EPS): Version 2000-General System Characteristics. Centre for Environmental Assessment of Products and Material Systems, Gothenburg
26 The Danish Environmental Protection Agency (2004). The product, functional unit and reference flows in LCA. Environmental News No. 70
27 L W Tian, G Q Zhang, Y L Lin, J H Yu, J Zhou, Q Zhang (2009). Mathematical model of particle penetration through smooth/rough building envelop leakages. Building and Environment, 44(6): 1144–1149
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.08.007
28 US EPA (2008). Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Office of Health and Environmental Assessment
29 Y W Weldu, G Assefa, O Jolliet (2017). Life cycle human health and ecotoxicological impacts assessment of electricity production from wood biomass compared to coal fuel. Applied Energy, 187: 564–574
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.11.101
30 WHO (2010). WHO Guidelines for Indoor Air Quality: Selected Pollutants. Bonn: World Health Organization
31 J X Yang, R S Wang, J R Liu (2001). Methodology of life cycle impact assessment for Chinese products. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 21(2): 234–237
32 Y Z Zhang, X F Luo, J J Buis, J W Sutherland (2015). LCA-oriented semantic representation for the product life cycle. Journal of Cleaner Production, 86: 146–162
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.053
33 Z H Zhang, X Wu, X M Yang, Y M Zhu (2006). BEPAS - A life cycle building environmental performance assessment model. Building and Environment, 41(5): 669–675
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.02.028
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 2015 高等教育出版社.
电话: 010-58556848 (技术); 010-58556485 (订阅) E-mail: subscribe@hep.com.cn