Criticality assessment of abiotic resource use for Europe– application of the SCARCE method
Criticality assessment of abiotic resource use for Europe– application of the SCARCE method
复制标题
应用 SCARCE 方法对欧洲非生物资源利用的关键性评估
DOI：
10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101650
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
10.2
通讯作者：
Matthias Finkbeiner
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rosalie Arendt;Marco Muhl;Vanessa Bach;Matthias Finkbeiner
由于目前的消费模式和产品复杂性的增加，非生物资源的使用一直在增加，并导致包括欧洲在内的许多国家和地区的供应风险（关键性）挑战。SCARCE方法最初是为了评估德国的关键性而开发的，包括彭宁顿等人（2017）现有欧洲方法中缺失的几个关键性决定因素。具体而言，它i）考虑了额外的供应风险和脆弱性类别，如价格波动，长期可用性和未来技术的重要性ii）通过包括资源使用的环境和社会方面采取可持续性观点iii）将欧洲供应风险与全球供应风险进行比较。因此，我们应用SCARCE方法对欧洲资源使用进行了关键性评估，考虑了11种供应风险类别（如贸易壁垒和政治稳定）和六个脆弱性类别（例如经济重要性和可替代性）42种材料（包括金属、类金属和化石燃料）。在我们的评估中，欧洲最关键的材料是石油、镓、稀土和磷，因为其初级材料使用量高、贸易壁垒高、采矿国政治稳定性低以及脆弱性影响（由于其经济重要性高、未来技术利用率高和可替代性低）而造成高供应风险影响。社会性能最差的三种材料（考虑到小规模采矿、侵犯人权和地缘政治风险）是钽、钴和锡（例如，由于小规模锡矿的生产份额高），而环境性能最差的材料（考虑到温室气体排放、水资源短缺和当地生物多样性的敏感性）是黄金，铂和铌（例如，由于金的大量相关温室气体排放）。我们的研究结果表明，欧洲供应风险与全球供应风险没有显著差异，但某些评估类别显示出不同的趋势。与全球产量相比，向欧洲出口的国家的采矿能力较低，因为欧洲的进口组合往往仅由一个国家主导，而全球生产则更加多样化。此外，目前向欧洲出口的国家比主导全球生产的国家具有更高的政治稳定性，这表明欧洲可能不得不与政治不稳定的国家发展新的贸易关系，以满足其国内的物质需求。总体而言，我们的评估结果与欧盟先前对关键原材料进行的研究结果一致，但考虑到社会和环境影响，提供了一些额外的见解。
Due to current consumption patterns and increasing product complexity, the use of abiotic resources has been rising and has led to supply risk (criticality) challenges in many countries and regions including Europe. The SCARCE method, originally developed to assess criticality in Germany, includes several criticality determinants that are missing from the existing European method by Pennington et al. (2017). Specifically it i) considers additional supply risk and vulnerability categories like price fluctuations, long term availability and importance in future technologies ii) takes a sustainability perspective by including environmental and social aspects of resource use iii) enables the comparison of the European supply risk with the global supply risk. Therefore, we have applied the SCARCE method to perform a criticality assessment of European resource use considering eleven supply risk categories (e.g. trade barriers and political stability) and six vulnerability categories (e.g. economic importance and substitutability) for 42 materials (including metals, metalloids and fossil fuels).In our assessment, the most critical materials for Europe are petroleum oils, gallium, rare earths and phosphorus, because of their high supply risk impacts due to high primary material use, high trade barriers and low political stability in mining countries as well as vulnerability impacts (due to their high economic importance, high utilization in future technologies and low substitutability). The three materials with the worst social performance (considering small scale mining, human rights abuse and geopolitical risk) are tantalum, cobalt and tin (e.g. because of high production share in small scale mining for tin), while the materials with the worst environmental performance (considering greenhouse gas emissions, water scarcity and sensitivity of the local biodiversity) are gold, platinum and niobium (e.g. because of a high amount of associated greenhouse gas emissions for gold). Our findings show that the European supply risk does not differ significantly from the global supply risk, but some assessment categories show different tendencies. Compared to the global production, the mining capacity of the countries that are exporting to Europe is lower, because the European import mix is often dominated by one country only while the global production is more diverse. Further, countries that are currently exporting to Europe have higher political stability than the countries that dominate the global production, which indicates that Europe might have to develop new trade relations with politically unstable countries to meet its domestic material demand. Overall, our assessment results are in line with the finding of the previously conducted study on critical raw materials by the European Union, but provide some additional insights by considering social and environmental impacts.
登录
查看更多内容
资源效率评估的 LCA 视角
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Laura Schneider;Vanessa Bach;M. Finkbeiner
通讯作者：
M. Finkbeiner
非洲铝土矿开采
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Johannes Knierzinger
通讯作者：
Johannes Knierzinger
全球环境展望 – GEO-6：政策制定者摘要
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
J. Tooley;R. Eagle;S. Šatas;M. Thoresen
通讯作者：
M. Thoresen
玻利维亚的小规模采矿和经济援助
DOI：
--
发表时间：
1979
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
J. Brower
通讯作者：
J. Brower
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
J. Stearns;Christoph Vogel
通讯作者：
Christoph Vogel