GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Publication Date: 2012-02-04
    Description: Purpose   The main goal of this paper was to analyse the environmental profile of a structural component of a wooden house: a ventilated wooden wall, by combining two environmental methodologies: one quantitative, the life cycle assessment (LCA) and another qualitative, the design for the environment (DfE). Methods   The LCA study covers the whole life cycle of the ventilated wall manufacture as well as its distribution, installation and maintenance. To carry out this analysis, a Galician wood company was assessed in detail, dividing the process into four stages: the assembling stage, the packing stage, the distribution to clients as well as the final installation and maintenance of the wooden wall. Ten impact categories have been assessed in detail in the LCA study: abiotic depletion (AD), acidification (AC), eutrophication (EP), global warming (GW), ozone layer depletion (OD), human toxicity (HT), fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity (FE), marine aquatic ecotoxicity (ME), terrestrial ecotoxicity (TE) and photochemical oxidant formation (PO). Results and discussion   According to the environmental results, the assembling stage was the most important contributor to the environmental profile with contributions from 57% to 87%, followed by the production of the electricity required. The detailed analysis of the assembling stage identified the most important environmental hot spots: the production of boards used in the structure [oriented strand board and medium density fibreboard (MDF)] as well as the transportation of the cedar sheets from Brazil. Concerning the results of the DfE, a selection of different eco-design strategies was proposed from technological, economic and social points of view by an interdisciplinary team of researchers and company´s workers. The eco-design strategy considered the following improvement actions: (i) the substitution of the MDF in the wall structure; (ii) the use of German red pine sheets; (iii) the installation of solar panels in the facilities; (iv) the use of Euro 5 transport vehicles, (v) the use of biodiesel for transport; (vi) the definition of a maintenance protocol for the wooden materials; and (vii) the definition of a protocol for the separation of materials before disposal. Conclusions   The results obtained in this work allow predicting the influence of the selection and origin of the raw materials used on the environmental burdens associated with the process. Future work will focus on the manufacturing of a prototype of an eco-designed ventilated wooden wall. Content Type Journal Article Category WOOD AND OTHER RENEWABLE RESOURCES Pages 1-12 DOI 10.1007/s11367-012-0384-0 Authors Sara González-García, Department of Life Sciences, Division of Biology, Imperial College of London, South Kensington Campus, Sir Alexander Fleming Buildings, London, SW7 2AZ UK Raúl García Lozano, SosteniPrA (UAB-IRTA-Inèdit), Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), School of Engineering, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Campus de la UAB, Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), 08193 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Javier Costas Estévez, Quality Management Department, Las cinco Jotas, Avda. Camelias No 1, 6203 Vigo, Spain Rosario Castilla Pascual, Innovation and Technology Area, CIS MADEIRA, Galician Park of Technology, Avenida de Galicia 5, San Cibrao das Viñas, 32901 Ourense, Spain Ma. Teresa Moreira, Department of Chemical Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Santiago de Compostela, 15782 Santiago de Compostela, Spain Xavier Gabarrell, SosteniPrA (UAB-IRTA-Inèdit), Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), School of Engineering, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Campus de la UAB, Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), 08193 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Joan Rieradevall i Pons, SosteniPrA (UAB-IRTA-Inèdit), Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), School of Engineering, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Campus de la UAB, Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), 08193 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Gumersindo Feijoo, Department of Chemical Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Santiago de Compostela, 15782 Santiago de Compostela, Spain Journal The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Online ISSN 1614-7502 Print ISSN 0948-3349
    Print ISSN: 0948-3349
    Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Economics
    Published by Springer
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Publication Date: 2011-09-10
    Description: Purpose   At present, many urban areas in Mediterranean climates are coping with water scarcity, facing a growing water demand and a limited conventional water supply. Urban design and planning has so far largely neglected the benefits of rainwater harvesting (RWH) in the context of a sustainable management of this resource. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify the most environmentally friendly strategy for rainwater utilization in Mediterranean urban environments of different densities. Materials and methods   The RWH systems modeled integrate the necessary infrastructures for harvesting and using rainwater in newly constructed residential areas. Eight scenarios were defined in terms of diffuse (D) and compact (C) urban models and the tank locations ((1) underground tank, (2) below-roof tank, (3) distributed-over-roof tank, and (4) block tank). The structural and hydraulic sizing of the catchment, storage, and distribution subsystems was taken into account using an average Mediterranean rainfall, the area of the harvesting surfaces, and a constant water demand for laundry. The quantification of environmental impacts was performed through a life cycle assessment, using CML 2001 Baseline method. The necessary materials and processes were considered in each scenario according to the lifecycle stages (i.e., materials, construction, transportation, use, and deconstruction) and subsystems. Results and discussion   The environmental characterization indicated that the best scenario in both urban models is the distributed-over-roof tank (D3, C3), which provided a reduction in impacts compared to the worst scenario of up to 73% in diffuse models and even higher in compact ones, 92% in the most dramatic case. The lower impacts are related to the better distribution of tank weight on the building, reducing the reinforcement requirements, and enabling energy savings. The storage subsystem and the materials stage contributed most significantly to the impacts in both urban models. In the compact density model, the underground-tank scenario (C1) presented the largest impacts in most categories due to its higher energy consumption. Additionally, more favorable environmental results were observed in compact densities than in diffuse ones for the Global Warming Potential category along with higher water efficiencies. Conclusions   The implementation of one particular RWH scenario over another is not irrelevant in drought-stress environments. Selecting the most favorable scenario in the development of newly constructed residential areas provides significant savings in CO 2 emissions in comparison with retrofit strategies. Therefore, urban planning should consider the design of RWH infrastructures using environmental criteria in addition to economic, social, and technological factors, adjusting the design to the potential uses for which the rainwater is intended. Recommendations and perspectives   Additional research is needed to quantify the energy savings associated with the insulation caused by using the tank distributed over the roof. The integration of the economic and social aspects of these infrastructures in the analysis, from a life cycle approach, is necessary for targeting the planning and design of more sustainable cities in an integrated way. Content Type Journal Article Category WATER USE IN LCA Pages 1-18 DOI 10.1007/s11367-011-0330-6 Authors Sara Angrill, Sostenipra (ICTA-IRTA-Inèdit), Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), School of Engineering (EE), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Campus of the UAB, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Ramon Farreny, Sostenipra (ICTA-IRTA-Inèdit), Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), School of Engineering (EE), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Campus of the UAB, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Carles M. Gasol, Sostenipra (ICTA-IRTA-Inèdit), Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), School of Engineering (EE), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Campus of the UAB, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Xavier Gabarrell, Sostenipra (ICTA-IRTA-Inèdit), Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), School of Engineering (EE), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Campus of the UAB, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Bernat Viñolas, Department of Geotechnical Engineering and Geosciences, School of Civil Engineering (ETSECCPB), Technical University of Catalonia—Barcelona Tech (UPC), Campus Nord, C/ Jordi Girona 1-3, Building D2, 08034 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Alejandro Josa, Department of Geotechnical Engineering and Geosciences, School of Civil Engineering (ETSECCPB), Technical University of Catalonia—Barcelona Tech (UPC), Campus Nord, C/ Jordi Girona 1-3, Building D2, 08034 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Joan Rieradevall, Sostenipra (ICTA-IRTA-Inèdit), Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), School of Engineering (EE), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Campus of the UAB, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Journal The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Online ISSN 1614-7502 Print ISSN 0948-3349
    Print ISSN: 0948-3349
    Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Economics
    Published by Springer
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Publication Date: 2012-04-30
    Description: Purpose   Land use is a main driver of global biodiversity loss and its environmental relevance is widely recognized in research on life cycle assessment (LCA). The inherent spatial heterogeneity of biodiversity and its non-uniform response to land use requires a regionalized assessment, whereas many LCA applications with globally distributed value chains require a global scale. This paper presents a first approach to quantify land use impacts on biodiversity across different world regions and highlights uncertainties and research needs. Methods   The study is based on the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) land use assessment framework and focuses on occupation impacts, quantified as a biodiversity damage potential (BDP). Species richness of different land use types was compared to a (semi-)natural regional reference situation to calculate relative changes in species richness. Data on multiple species groups were derived from a global quantitative literature review and national biodiversity monitoring data from Switzerland. Differences across land use types, biogeographic regions (i.e., biomes), species groups and data source were statistically analyzed. For a data subset from the biome (sub-)tropical moist broadleaf forest, different species-based biodiversity indicators were calculated and the results compared. Results and discussion   An overall negative land use impact was found for all analyzed land use types, but results varied considerably. Different land use impacts across biogeographic regions and taxonomic groups explained some of the variability. The choice of indicator also strongly influenced the results. Relative species richness was less sensitive to land use than indicators that considered similarity of species of the reference and the land use situation. Possible sources of uncertainty, such as choice of indicators and taxonomic groups, land use classification and regionalization are critically discussed and further improvements are suggested. Data on land use impacts were very unevenly distributed across the globe and considerable knowledge gaps on cause–effect chains remain. Conclusions   The presented approach allows for a first rough quantification of land use impact on biodiversity in LCA on a global scale. As biodiversity is inherently heterogeneous and data availability is limited, uncertainty of the results is considerable. The presented characterization factors for BDP can approximate land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA studies that are not intended to directly support decision-making on land management practices. For such studies, more detailed and site-dependent assessments are required. To assess overall land use impacts, transformation impacts should additionally be quantified. Therefore, more accurate and regionalized data on regeneration times of ecosystems are needed. Content Type Journal Article Category GLOBAL LAND USE IMPACTS ON BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN LCA Pages 1-15 DOI 10.1007/s11367-012-0412-0 Authors Laura de Baan, Institute for Environmental Decisions, Natural and Social Science Interface, ETH Zurich, Universitaetsstr. 22, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland Rob Alkemade, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, P. O. Box 303, 3720 AH Bilthoven, The Netherlands Thomas Koellner, Professorship of Ecological Services, Faculty of Biology, Chemistry and Geosciences, University of Bayreuth, GEO II, Room 1.17, Universitaetsstr. 30, 95440 Bayreuth, Germany Journal The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Online ISSN 1614-7502 Print ISSN 0948-3349
    Print ISSN: 0948-3349
    Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Economics
    Published by Springer
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Publication Date: 2011-07-16
    Description: Purpose   The aim of this paper is to provide science-based consensus and guidance for health effects modelling in comparative assessments based on human exposure and toxicity. This aim is achieved by (a) describing the USEtox™ exposure and toxicity models representing consensus and recommended modelling practice, (b) identifying key mechanisms influencing human exposure and toxicity effects of chemical emissions, (c) extending substance coverage. Methods   The methods section of this paper contains a detailed documentation of both the human exposure and toxic effects models of USEtox™, to determine impacts on human health per kilogram substance emitted in different compartments. These are considered as scientific consensus and therefore recommended practice for comparative toxic impact assessment. The framework of the exposure model is described in details including the modelling of each exposure pathway considered (i.e. inhalation through air, ingestion through (a) drinking water, (b) agricultural produce, (c) meat and milk, and (d) fish). The calculation of human health effect factors for cancer and non-cancer effects via ingestion and inhalation exposure respectively is described. This section also includes discussions regarding parameterisation and estimation of input data needed, including route-to-route and acute-to-chronic extrapolations. Results and discussion   For most chemicals in USEtox™, inhalation, above-ground agricultural produce, and fish are the important exposure pathways with key driving factors being the compartment and place of emission, partitioning, degradation, bioaccumulation and bioconcentration, and dietary habits of the population. For inhalation, the population density is the key factor driving the intake, thus the importance to differentiate emissions in urban areas, except for very persistent and mobile chemicals that are taken in by the global population independently from their place of emission. The analysis of carcinogenic potency (TD 50 ) when volatile chemicals are administrated to rats and mice by both inhalation and an oral route suggests that results by one route can reasonably be used to represent another route. However, we first identify and mark as interim chemicals for which observed tumours are directly related to a given exposure route (e.g. for nasal or lung, or gastrointestinal cancers) or for which absorbed fraction by inhalation and by oral route differ greatly. Conclusions   A documentation of the human exposure and toxicity models of USEtox™ is provided, and key factors driving the human health characterisation factor are identified. Approaches are proposed to derive human toxic effect factors and expand the number of chemicals in USEtox™, primarily by extrapolating from an oral route to exposure in air (and optionally acute-to-chronic). Some exposure pathways (e.g. indoor inhalation, pesticide residues, dermal exposure) will be included in a later stage. USEtox™ is applicable in various comparative toxicity impact assessments and not limited to LCA. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-18 DOI 10.1007/s11367-011-0316-4 Authors Ralph K. Rosenbaum, Section for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Produktionstorvet, Building 426, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark Mark A. J. Huijbregts, Department of Environmental Science, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9010, 6500 GL, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Andrew D. Henderson, Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Manuele Margni, Department of Chemical Engineering, CIRAIG, École Polytechnique de Montréal, 2900 Édouard-Montpetit, P.O. Box 6079, Stn. Centre-ville, Montréal, Québec H3C 3A7, Canada Thomas E. McKone, University of California Berkeley, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Dik van de Meent, Department of Environmental Science, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9010, 6500 GL, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Michael Z. Hauschild, Section for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Produktionstorvet, Building 426, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark Shanna Shaked, Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Ding Sheng Li, Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Lois S. Gold, University of California Berkeley, and Children’s Hospital Oakland Research Institute (CHORI), Oakland, CA, USA Olivier Jolliet, Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Journal The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Online ISSN 1614-7502 Print ISSN 0948-3349
    Print ISSN: 0948-3349
    Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Economics
    Published by Springer
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Publication Date: 2011-10-08
    Description: Purpose   In general, pentachloroaniline (PCA) biodechlorination is specific to the conditions of a system; such conditions include the type and concentration of electron donors and oxidizing agents as well as nutrient availability, pH, and temperature. In the bioremediation of contaminated sediments and soil, most researchers have focused on the ability of various electron donors to remove target compounds. However, the amended electron donors and the byproduct of the anoxic/anaerobic systems may cause more environmental impact. Therefore, methods for consistently evaluating the environmental effects of such electron donors and byproducts are highly needed. Accordingly, life cycle assessment (LCA) was carried out to estimate the environmental effect of PCA biodechlorination under acidogenic/methanogenic conditions through laboratory-scale experiments. Four scenarios, intended to assess the influence of electron donors on the environment and develop laboratory experimental research, were compared. In these scenarios, four compounds were used: acetate, lactate, methanol, and glucose + methanol. Materials and methods   The LCA was carried out using IMPACT2002+ to estimate the environmental impact of PCA biodechlorination under acidogenic/methanogenic conditions. To add credibility to the study, sensitivity analysis was also conducted. Results and discussion   In all scenarios, the technologies significantly contributed to respiratory inorganics, global warming, as well as increased the adverse impact of nonrenewable energy on the environment. Specifically, the emissions from the electron donor production processes played an important role in the scenarios. PCA dechlorination and methanogenic processes substantially contributed to the aquatic/terrestrial ecotoxicity and global warming, respectively. Optimizing the concentration of amended electron donors and increasing the population size of dechlorinating microorganisms are highly important in reducing the environmental burden by PCA bioremediation. Conclusions   Results showed that the methanol scenario was the most suitable option determined in this research. In addition, results indicate amended electron donors can cause fewer environmental impacts in carcinogens and noncarcinogens categories. By contrast, the amended electron donors can significantly increase environmental impacts in respiratory inorganics, global warming, and nonrenewable energy categories. Increasing the population size of dechlorinating microorganisms and optimizing the concentration of amended electron donors are highly recommended to reduce adverse environmental impacts. Content Type Journal Article Category LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT Pages 1-10 DOI 10.1007/s11367-011-0338-y Authors Jinglan Hong, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Water Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, 250100 Shandong, People’s Republic of China Xiangzhi Li, Shandong University School of Medicine, Jinan, 250012 Shandong, People’s Republic of China Journal The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Online ISSN 1614-7502 Print ISSN 0948-3349
    Print ISSN: 0948-3349
    Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Economics
    Published by Springer
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Publication Date: 2012-03-10
    Description: Purpose   Sustainable manufacturing is practiced globally as a comprehensive strategy for improving the sustainability performance of the manufacturing industry. While sustainability is characterized into such three dimensions as economic, environmental, and social, currently, there is no quantitative method yet to measure the so-called “sustainability” in the manufacturing industry. The objective of this research is to develop a comprehensive and effective quantitative method to measure the overall sustainability performance of manufacturing companies. Methods   In this paper, an integrated methodology is presented for the development of composite sustainability indicators based on principal component analysis (PCA). In developing this integrated approach, both industry and academia surveys are conducted to identify what sustainability indicators are favored by the sustainable manufacturing community. A unique index is then generated to measure the overall sustainability performance of industrial practices. The methodology can be used for benchmarking the overall sustainability performance of various manufacturing companies. Results   A case study is conducted on a total of 11 global electronic manufacturing companies. The overall sustainability performance of these companies are measured, benchmarked, and ranked. The results showed that PCA is an effective approach for constructing composite sustainability indicators across environmental, economic, and social dimensions. Conclusions   From this research, it is found that industry and academia have different views on the sustainability measurement, evidenced by different weights put on the same indicator in industry and academia. The case study demonstrated that the methodology presented in this paper is an effective tool for comprehensive measurement of sustainability performance of manufacturing companies. Strengths and weaknesses of each company can be identified. Then, the recommended improvements can be suggested based on the study of each of the individual indicators. Content Type Journal Article Category SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Pages 1-11 DOI 10.1007/s11367-012-0394-y Authors Tao Li, School of Mechanical Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, No. 2 Linggong Road, Ganjingzi District, Dalian, Liaoning 116023, People’s Republic of China Hongchao Zhang, School of Mechanical Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, No. 2 Linggong Road, Ganjingzi District, Dalian, Liaoning 116023, People’s Republic of China Chris Yuan, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA Zhichao Liu, School of Mechanical Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, No. 2 Linggong Road, Ganjingzi District, Dalian, Liaoning 116023, People’s Republic of China Chengcheng Fan, Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA Journal The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Online ISSN 1614-7502 Print ISSN 0948-3349
    Print ISSN: 0948-3349
    Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Economics
    Published by Springer
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    Publication Date: 2013-10-09
    Description: Publication date: September 2013 Source: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Volume 66, Issue 2 Author(s): Michael Finus , Christos Kotsogiannis , Steve McCorriston Given the current trend in global emissions, the latest round of climate change negotiations at the Durban meeting of December 2011 (for the adoption of a comprehensive global treaty on climate change mitigation as soon as possible—and no later than 2015—and to come into force in 2020) has hardly shown the results one would have hoped for. Even for the most optimistic, it remains unclear whether one can expect a successful negotiating outcome by 2015. There are inherent difficulties associated with climate change negotiations, ranging from which countries should bear most responsibility for a given emission reduction target to the assessment of a globally efficient time path for pricing harmful greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). These difficulties become even more complex and challenging under the pervasive uncertainty of climate science and the uncertainty about the feedback loop between climate change damages and economic growth. During the past decades, the environmental economics literature has provided important insights regarding the design of environmental fiscal policies and treaties but there is a host of issues that remain relatively unexplored. For instance, we know little about the cooperative solution for carbon and trade policies when climate change affects the productive possibilities of countries. In this context, it is also not obvious whether observed policies could be improved upon in such a way that all countries gain in welfare. It remains also unclear what the carbon extraction path should be in the absence of a comprehensive treaty (such as, for example, if environmental policy is unilaterally chosen subject to an agreed ‘ceiling’ in global temperature). Though carbon pricing instruments like carbon taxes, cap-and-trade and hybrids have been well studied, not much is known about their properties in the presence of ‘offset’ schemes such as the Clean Development Mechanism. More work is also required to understand the strategic implications of the uncertainty surrounding climate change and how this affects, for example, the choice of climate change strategy (‘precautionary’ or ‘wait and see’), how uncertainty impacts the propensity of countries to sign a climate treaty, and the extent to which the possibility of a climate catastrophe fosters or hinders cooperation. Understanding political economy issues is also vital in tackling climate change because efficient climate policies stand little chance of being successfully negotiated and implemented if they do not receive the support of the electorate. The papers in the special issue of the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management are precisely devoted to this broad research agenda.
    Print ISSN: 0095-0696
    Electronic ISSN: 1096-0449
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Economics
    Published by Elsevier
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...