A macro-level life cycle environmental-economic impact and benefit assessment of sponge cities in China

被引:2
|
作者
Xu, Changqing [1 ,2 ]
Lin, Wei [1 ]
Zhu, Yifei [3 ]
Zhang, Bin [4 ]
Wang, Zhaohua [1 ,2 ]
Jia, Haifeng [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Beijing Inst Technol, Sch Econ, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
[2] Minist Ind & Informat Technol, Digital Econ & Policy Intelligentizat Key Lab, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
[3] Tsinghua Univ, Inst Environm & Ecol, Tsinghua Shenzhen Int Grad Sch, Shenzhen 518055, Peoples R China
[4] Beijing Inst Technol, Sch Management, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
[5] Tsinghua Univ, Sch Environm, Beijing 100084, Peoples R China
[6] Suzhou Univ Sci & Technol, Jiangsu Collaborat Innovat Ctr Technol & Mat Water, Suzhou 215009, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Sponge City; Urban runoff source control facilities; Rainfall volume control rate; Life cycle assessment; Life cycle cost; GREEN ROOFS;
D O I
10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107859
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Urban runoff source control facilities (URSCFs) are integral components of Sponge City (SC), playing a pivotal role in providing ecosystem services and managing water quality and quantity. To accurately assess the performance of URSCFs, it is crucial to quantify their environmental and economic impacts. However, previous studies have predominantly focused on location-specific case studies, lacking a macro-level perspective necessary for informing public policy development pertaining to SC initiatives. This study aims to bridge this gap by conducting a macro-level life cycle assessment across China's 16 initial pilot SCs, categorized into three zones based on their annual rainfall volume control rate alpha (i.e., Zone II (80 % to 85% for alpha), Zone III (75% to 85% for alpha), and Zone IV (70 % to 85 % for alpha)). By simulating five rainfall drainage scenarios, we delve into the environmental benefits of SC construction. The results indicate that Zone III incurs the highest environmental and economic costs during the construction phase, followed by Zones II and IV. In Zone III, bioretention contribute significantly to the environmental impact and economic cost, while constructed wetland and detention cells are the key contributors for Zone II. During the operation phase, Zone III demonstrates the largest environmental and economic benefits, with Zone IV and II trailing behind. The investment payback period for SCs in all zones is less than eight years, with Zone IV recovering costs the fastest (3.9 years) and Zone II the slowest (7.5 years). Facilities like detention cells, green roofs, and permeable pavements tend to have longer payback periods. Based on our findings, we recommend that Zone II exercise caution in constructing detention cells, permeable pavements, and wetlands, while Zone III should carefully consider green roofs and bioretention to optimize SC investments. Due to the fewer URSCFs constructed in Zone IV, it exhibits the lowest environmental impact compared to Zones II and III. Our research provides valuable insights to support policymaking with regards to future SC planning and development.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Integrating life cycle assessment and life cycle cost: a review of environmental-economic studies
    Wagner Teixeira França
    Murillo Vetroni Barros
    Rodrigo Salvador
    Antonio Carlos de Francisco
    Maria Teresa Moreira
    Cassiano Moro Piekarski
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2021, 26 : 244 - 274
  • [2] Integrating life cycle assessment and life cycle cost: a review of environmental-economic studies
    Franca, Wagner Teixeira
    Barros, Murillo Vetroni
    Salvador, Rodrigo
    de Francisco, Antonio Carlos
    Moreira, Maria Teresa
    Piekarski, Cassiano Moro
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2021, 26 (02): : 244 - 274
  • [3] Integrating life cycle assessment and life cycle cost: a review of environmental-economic studies
    Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná , Ponta Grossa
    Paraná, Brazil
    不详
    Paraná, Brazil
    不详
    Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 1600, 2 (244-274):
  • [4] An integrated life cycle emergy analysis for environmental-economic sustainability assessment
    Theng, Mary Lina
    Tan, Lian See
    Liew, Peng Yen
    Tan, Jully
    JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY, 2024, 28 (04) : 695 - 708
  • [5] Carbon emissions of macro-level buildings in China by life cycle energy analysis
    Wei, Z. (ttomcc@gmail.com), 2012, Sila Science, University Mah Mekan Sok, No 24, Trabzon, Turkey (30):
  • [6] Environmental-economic total factor productivity of vegetable production in China from the life cycle perspective
    Zhang, Tianzuo
    Jia, Yuke
    Ren, Ke
    Wang, Shuo
    Li, Ziheng
    Chen, Wei
    Hong, Jinglan
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2024, 477
  • [7] Promoting sustainable potato production - Insights from an integrated life cycle environmental-economic assessment
    Zhang, Tianzuo
    Li, Changting
    Wang, Shuo
    Cheng, Ziyue
    Li, Ziheng
    Xu, Tianshu
    Zhou, Xinying
    Chen, Wei
    Hong, Jinglan
    AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS, 2024, 219
  • [8] Cradle to grave environmental-economic analysis of tea life cycle in Iran
    Soheili-Fard, Farshad
    Kouchaki-Penchah, Hamed
    Raini, Mahmoud Ghasemi Nejad
    Chen, Guangnan
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2018, 196 : 953 - 960
  • [9] Life cycle environmental and economic assessment of Phosphogypsum utilization in China
    Chen, Lu
    Luan, Xiaoyu
    Han, Feng
    Zhao, Yuwei
    Yang, Huiying
    Zhang, Long
    Yin, Yongquan
    Liu, Wei
    Cui, Zhaojie
    RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING, 2025, 212
  • [10] Life cycle environmental and economic assessment of lead refining in China
    Jingmin Hong
    Zhaohe Yu
    Wenxiao Shi
    Jinglan Hong
    Congcong Qi
    Liping Ye
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2017, 22 : 909 - 918