4.7 Article

Sustainability evaluation of secondary lead production from spent lead acid batteries recycling

期刊

RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING
卷 140, 期 -, 页码 13-22

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.09.012

关键词

Recycling industry; Sustainability; Spent lead acid batteries; Emergy analysis; Circular economy; Governance

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71690241, 71810107001, 71603165, 71325006]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities through Shanghai Jiao Tong University [16JCCS04]
  3. Shanghai Municipal Government [17XD1401800]
  4. 1000 Talents Program of Qinghai Province
  5. Yunnan Research Academy of Environmental Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In China, rapid development of electric vehicles resulted in large consumption of lead and lead products such as lead acid batteries (LABs). Recycling LABs is one option to mitigate natural resource depletion and corresponding environmental issues. However, few studies have been conducted to measure the operation of LABs recycling industry. Consequently, it is necessary to initiate such a study so that key barriers on promoting this industry can be identified. Under such a circumstance, this study proposes an emergy-based evaluation framework to evaluate one LABs recycling firm in Yunnan so that the emissions' impact on human health and ecosystem from this firm can be quantified. A set of emergy-based indicators are established to evaluate the sustainability of this recycling firm. The results show that the investigated system had a higher emergy efficiency compared with that primary ore exploitation system. However, the extremely low values of emergy indicators indicate that this recycling system could not achieve sustainable development goals due to its heavy dependence on nonrenewable resources. Based upon such results and local realities, policy suggestions are raised in order to improve the overall sustainability of such a recycling system.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据