431
Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
The incorporation of the “final sink” concept into a metric for
sustainable resource management
Ulrich Kral* and Paul H. Brunner
Institute for Water Quality, Resource and Waste Management
Vienna University of Technology
Vienna 1040, Austria
Key Words: Sink, substance flow analysis, resource management, copper, PFOS
ABSTRACT
Several metrics exist to evaluate the environmental performance of products, processes and
systems. A deficiency of the present evaluation schemes is that they do not follow materials to “the
very end” in the anthroposphere such as mineralization in incinerators for organic substances, and to
.
final storage in underground structures for inorganic substances.
The goal of the article is to propose a new metric for evaluating material use in view of longterm sustainability based on the sink concept. The core idea is to determine the fraction of a
substance that is directed towards an appropriate final sink, and to put this fraction into relation to
the fraction of the substance that is totally lost in sinks. The authors advocate applying such a metric
to entire urban systems and nations. Finally, all non-recyclable wastes and emission have to find final
.
sinks no matter if they are placed in the anthroposphere or environment.
First, the term sink and (appropriate) final sink is defined taking into account that the definition
must be substance specific, must include long time frames, and must distinguish (i) between transformation and storage processes as well as (ii) between anthropogenic and geogenic sinks. Hence, an
approach for the identification of sinks within substance flow systems is presented as well as an
approach to calculate the indicator “Final Sink Ratio”. Next, two urban metabolism case studies are
presented to illustrate the concept: The first substance is well managed and nearly completely
directed into appropriate final sinks. The second substance is an example of high risk for sink
overloading in the near future. In both cases the paths of the selected substances through anthropo.
sphere and loads on environment have been modeled by substance flow analysis.
The case studies demonstrate: a) how the new metric can be used to support sustainability
assessments on multilevel scale, b) that waste management plays a key role for directing hazardous
substances into final sinks, and c) that substance flows lacking of appropriate final sinks are difficult
.
to manage and pose a certain risk for men and environment.
INTRODUCTION
Human activities such as nourishing, cleaning, residing and working, and transport and communicating
require the utilization of matter. Building materials,
food, energy carriers and water are exploited and processed in order to satisfy human needs. The use of goods
and substances goes hand in hand with waste and
emissions. Even though many of them are recycled,
there is a certain fraction of non-recyclables that have
to be disposed of. Non-recyclables matter addresses a)
waste fractions that lack of utilization as second life
product such as air-pollution-control (APC) residues
*Corresponding author
Email: [email protected]
from incineration, and b) emission flows such as
carbon, heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants
(POPs). This poses the fair question: “Where should
the non-recyclables finally end up?” In general, they
have to enter appropriate final sinks no matter if they
.
are placed in the anthroposphere or environment.
The importance and relevance of final sinks have
been highlighted by the German Expert Committee for
Environmental Concerns who formulated proposal for
an European resource strategy [1]. Therefore, the
future need of final sinks will be of increasing concern
due to the fact that waste and emission increase with
ongoing increase of resource consumption. The experts
432
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
pinpointed the consequences of missing final sinks:
the restriction of material use. Presently, carbon is a
prominent example that enters the atmosphere as intermediate sink with global consequences of climate
change. Even though final sinks are identified, they are
not fully utilized due to technological, economic and
regulative constraints. Apart from carbon, several
other substances are utilized nowadays without the
identification and utilization of final sinks. Up to
know, a systematic metric for sustainable resource use
.
with respect to final sinks is missing.
The aim of the article is to present a final sink
oriented metric for sustainable resource use. The
objective and motivation includes: (1) defining and
categorizing the terms sink/final sink and make them
ready for waste management policy and practice,
supporting this with an indicator, and (2) demonstrating the application of the indicator through case
studies.
.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
1. Sinks as Constituent of Substance Flow Systems .
to environmental chemistry terminology into
“advection”, “diffusion” and “source/sink” [e.g., 6].
The law of mass conservation is applied to each process based on the thermodynamic principles [e.g., 7]: .
(1)
where s is a specific substance of interest,
is the
.
sum of flows into the process in mass per time,
is the sum of flows leaving the process in mass per
time, and
is the alteration of mass within the
stock. Figure 1 presents a generic process which is
.
defined in space and time, including the flows.
Individual processes can be compiled in order to
represent entire substance flow systems. An example is
given in Fig. 2. As stated by Brunner and Rechberger
[3], substance flow systems can be created on
multilevel scale (e.g., nations, regions, plants). In
common, they include the definition of spatial and
temporal system boundaries, the identification of
.
single processes and their linkages called flows.
1.2. Identification of “sinks” and “final sinks” within
substance flow systems
The term “sink” and “final sink” is used by several
disciplines and definitions are more or less linked with
operationalized concepts. For example, environmental
scientists use sink terms to model the fate of substances
in environmental media [e.g., 8]. Waste policies and
representatives in the waste sector highlight specific
end-of-pipe technologies such as landfills as sink for
hazardous materials [e.g., 9,10] and incinerators as
final sinks for specific pollutants [e.g., 11,12]. Recently, Baccini and Brunner [2] defined the term “sink”
within the framework of anthropogenic metabolism as
the “antonym for the term source, which stands for the
origin of an import of a substance into the anthroposphere”. Hence, the authors located sinks (i) within the
anthroposphere, (ii) on the border between anthroposphere and environment, and (iii) in the environment. .
For this article, the term “substance” is defined
according to Brunner and Rechberger [3] as “any
(chemical) element or compound composed of uniform
units”. We propose a distinction between sinks, final
.
In this section, we (i) explain a generic, single
process for modelling the fate of substances, and the
compilation of single processes that represent an entire
substance flow system, and (ii) the identification and
definition of “sources”, “sinks” and “final sinks” as
.
specific processes within substance flow systems.
1.1. The metabolism of matter represented on both the
process and system level
At root, the utilization of matter and the impact of
human activities on environment are chemical and
physical phenomena. The presence of substances and
their characteristics are prerequisite for anthropogenic
and natural cycling of elements. Several tools have
been developed and put forward to evaluate resource
use as wells as emission flows. For example, tools like
Life Cycle Assessment and Risk Assessment are used.
Assessing the significance and importance of substance flows follows the analytical representation of
fluxes in the anthroposphere and the environment.
For the anthroposphere, substance flow analysis (SFA)
has been proven to be a practical tool for analyzing the
material sources, pathways and stocks [e.g., 2-4]. For
the environmental spheres, multi media fate modelling
and single medium modelling [5] are used to yield
predicted environmental concentrations. Those
methods track selected substances through predefined
systems and improve an understanding regarding the
fate of substances.
.
In common, the basic modelling unit is a metabolic process (Fig. 1). It is bounded by a spatial and
temporal scale. Process functions can be categorized
according to SFA terminology into “transport”,
“transformation”, and “storage” [3], or according
.
Fig. 1. Plot of a generic SFA process, defined in space
and time including
as the substance flow in
mass per time entering the process,
as the
substance flow in mass per time leaving the
process and
as the resulting alteration of
mass within the process. The generic metabolic
process includes substance flows and stocks.
.
433
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
Fig. 2. The generic substance flow system includes processes within the anthroposphere and the environment. Flows are
given in [mass time-1] and stocks in [mass].
sinks and appropriate final sinks:
A sink is either a process accumulating
materials, or it is a transformation of “destroying” substances, e.g., by mineralization.
A final sink is a special kind of sink that either
holds a substance no longer able to leave the
sink by transport, or transforms (e.g., by mineralization or degradation) a substance so that it
does not exist in their original form anymore.
An appropriate final sink for a substance is a
final sink where the concentration, speciation
and mobility of a substance pose accepted
environmental and human health risks.
The categorization of process as “source” or
“sink” is derived from the defined substance flow
system. The toolbox for flow and stock calculation
includes SFA to assess anthropogenic processes,
multimedia and single medium fate models to assess
environmental processes. The categorization of process
as “appropriate final sink” is derived from assessment
tools such as risk assessment or even by legal
thresholds derived from suitable evaluation schemes. .
To classify a process as “source” or “sink” within
a substance flow system, we use the difference of input
and output flows, namely the net flow Ä in mass per
time. A positive net flow characterizes a sink process;
a negative net change characterizes a source process. .
(2)
To identify a “sink” process as “final sink” within a
substance flow system, we separate “final sinks” that
(a) hold substances. In this case the condition of Ä =
must be fulfilled. And (b) transform substances
so that they do not exist in their original form any-
more. In this case, the efficiency ( ) of the final sink is
assessed by
.
(3)
To give some practical examples for sink process,
we classify them into intermediate/final and anthropogenic/geogenic sinks (Fig. 3):
Intermediate/final sinks. It is a question of time
which refers to the retention time of a substance
within a process. It depends on the substance
characteristics interacting with the process
functions (e.g., chemical transformation).
Anthropogenic/geogenic sinks. Final sink functions are determined by site-specific physical,
chemical and biological processes on the one
hand, and substance characteristics on the other
hand. Those functions can be found in environmental spheres as well as in anthropogenic endof-pipe technologies. It is a question of physical
allocation of individual processes. End-of-pipe
technologies such as incinerators, waste water
treatment plants are uniquely coined “anthropogenic”. The allocation of environmental media
into “anthropogenic” or “geogenic” depends on
local circumstances and subjective classification
schemes. For example, it can be argued that
agricultural or urban soil relates to the anthroposphere because it is intensively used by humans.
2. Final Sinks as Metric for Sustainable Resource
Management
.
To assess long-term strategies for the use of sub-
434
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
stances, Döberl and Brunner [13] stated that the “finalsink-problem should be considered when monitoring
sustainability”. In addition, they proposed a simple
indicator to assess substance flows on multilevel scale
by relating the “amount of substances a region/process
directs in final sinks” to the “total amount of substances emitted by a region/process”. We take up this
idea and propose a refined version of the indicator. The
new indicator (ë) quantifies a mass share of a substance in non-recyclable material flows. It puts the
amount of substance flows into appropriate final sinks
in relation to the total amount of flows into waste management and environmental sinks. The indicator strives
for the regional assessment of non-recyclable material
flows. Therefore, it deliberately focuses on a specific
region without taking the whole life cycle of a substance into account. Exports from one region into another region are not assessed. These flows cross the
spatial system boundary of the selected region and are
allocated to the export region. If they need to be taken
into account in the assessment, the systems boundaries
.
must be expanded to include the export region.
Where ë is the Final Sink Ratio in [%],
is
the sum of all non-recyclables flows i on a substance
specific level s, namely waste and emissions in mass
per time. The term “sink” refers to the definition given
in Sec. 1.2 and addresses a positive net flow of a substance in a process. The sinks provided by waste
management refer to end-of-pipe technologies. Those
in the environment refer to soil, water, and air. The
term (appropriate) final sink refers to the definition
.
given in Sec. 1.2.
From a policy point of view, the level of the ë
provides long-term strategies that dispose of nonrecyclable wastes and emissions with valuable
.
guidance (Table 1).
.
3. Case Studies
In this section, we exemplify the metric for sustainable resource use, supporting this with two case
studies. They demonstrate that non-recyclables
(wastes, emissions) have to find appropriate final
sinks. They highlight the need for vital sinks provided
by the waste management sector and pinpoint environmental media as uncontrolled intermediate sinks for
.
substances.
The first substance - copper (Cu) - mainly enters
appropriate final sinks which have to be managed to a
(4)
Anthropogenic
(End-of-pipe technologies)
- Storage:
Storage facilities of waste
- Transport: Sewer channels for
nutrients
- Storage:
Sanitary Landfills for persistent
substances
- Transformation:
Thermal Treatment for organic
substances
Intermediate
Final
- Storage:
Urban Soil for persistent substances
- Transportation:
Two environmental compartments
that exchange heavy metals
- Storage:
Deep Sea Sediments for persistent
substances
- Transformation:
Ambient air for formaldehyde in smoke
from cigarettes
Geogenic
(Environmental media)
Fig. 3. Framework for categorization of sinks and examples.
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
435
Table 1. Interpretation of the indicator results and conceivable options for long-term strategies
Indicator (Final
Sink Ratio) score
ë=1
0<ë<1
Interpretation and options for action
All non-recyclable wastes and emission are directed to appropriate final sinks.
Strategies and measures have to be developed that increase ë by shifting certain substance
flows into appropriate final sinks, and/or transforming non-recyclables flows into recyclable
flows that become second life products, and/or increasing the capacity of appropriate final sinks.
If these three options are not sufficient to bring ë to a score of “l”, the substance has to be
managed in intermediate sinks or final sinks.
ë=0
If non-recyclables exist but appropriate final sinks cannot be identified and/or utilized, the
substance use has to be restricted and existing stocks have to be managed.
certain extent. The second substance - perfluorinated
surfactants perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) - is an
example of high risk for potential sink overloading. In
both cases the paths of the selected substances through
anthroposphere and the loads on environment have
been modeled by SFA. We structure each case study as
follows: (1) Background, (2) Determination of the
substance flow system, and (3) Calculation of the
.
indicator ë.
3.1. Cu in Vienna
.
(1) Background
Cu is a subject of interest because of its relevance
from both a resource and an environmental point of
view. In this case study we focus on the urban scale
exclusively, because Cu is used in infrastructures and
.
electronics, and Cu is a tracer of urban emissions.
Two anthropogenic sinks are of special interest:
The surface landfill taking up Cu in bottom-ash and
APC residues, and underground storage facilities (e.g.,
salt mines) taking up selected APC residues from solid
and hazardous waste incineration (landfill as sink). .
Two environmental sinks are of special interest:
(1) Hydrosphere: Cu has to be removed from waste
water streams in order to meet quality standards in both
effluents from waste water treatment and receiving
waters. To do so, waterborne Cu is outward transferred
with the sewage sludge that could be applied on land
(soil as Cu sink) or thermal treated and disposed of in
landfills (landfill as sink). This raises the question
regarding the efficiency to route Cu into appropriate
final sinks. (2) Urban soil: Cu emissions from goods in
use enter urban soil. On the one hand Cu is used as
construction material such as roof sheds, cullies and
water spouts. Those surfaces are exposed to weathering
and corrosion resulting in Cu emissions. On the other
hand, brake pad wear covers Cu that enters urban soil
and sewer systems via surface runoff. So, urban soil
act as Cu sink as long as non-point sources emit Cu
and as long as site specific soil characteristics render
.
the Cu immobile.
.
(2) Determination of the substance flow system
Figures 4 and 5 represent the Cu metabolism of the
.
City of Vienna on an annual base. The spatial system
.
boundary is set with the city limits.
.
(3) Calculation of the indicator ë
Figure 6 shows each SFA process from Figs. 4 and
5 categorized as “source” or “sink” process according
to Eq. 2. Cu import into the city and releases from industry and commerce act as main Cu sources. In the
production and use phase, private households, technical infrastructure and vehicles act as consumer sinks.
Waste management provides the “anthropogenic sinks”
of landfill and underground storage as well as recycling facilities for out of town sources. Environment
provides the “geogenic sinks” of hydrosphere, soil and
.
atmosphere.
We assume that all non-recyclable wastes are
routed into appropriate final sinks. In other words, Cu
fractions in landfills and underground storage facilities
pose an acceptable ecological risk. Environmental
media are not classified as “appropriate final sink”
because there are no stringent monitoring data and
legal thresholds available (for urban soil and river
sediments). So, the classification follows a strong
.
interpretation of the precautionary principle.
3.2. PFOS in Switzerland
.
(1) Background
Perfluorooctane sulphuric acid and its derivatives
are collectively named PFOS which are persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic. They become regulated under
the POPs Regulation 850/2004 [14] and Regulation
2006/122/EG [15]. According to the British Environment Agency [16] it regulates banning of production,
placing on the market and use of some chemicals
controls on stockpiles of POP chemicals requirements
to reduce, minimise and eliminate releases of the POP
content of waste. In 2010, PFOS has been added to the
convention with some exemptions for specific applications [17]. Therewith, PFOS “shall be disposed of or
recovered, without undue delay in such a way as to
ensure that the POP content is destroyed or irreversibly
transformed so that the remaining waste and releases
do not exhibit the characteristics of POP” [14]. In
other words, PFOS flows have to enter appropriate
.
436
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
Fig. 4. Substance flow system for copper, representing Vienna on an annual base for the year 2008 [data taken from 21].
Values for copper flows and changes in stocks are given in t yr -1, for copper stocks in tons. The flows are
represented as Sankey arrows proportional to the flow rate; figures for stocks are given within the process boxes. .
Fig. 5. Substance flow system for copper, representing the waste management system of Vienna on an annual base for
the year 2008. Values for Cu flows and changes in stocks are given in t yr-1, for copper stocks in tons. The flows
are represented as Sankey arrows proportional to the flow rate; figures for stocks are given within the process
boxes.
.
437
Source
Sink
Ä = Inputflow - Output flow [t yr-1]
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
Production and Use
Waste Management
Environment
Fig. 6. Sources and sinks of copper, representing Vienna on an annual base for the year 2008. Copper sinks
accommodate 21,303 t yr-1 in total of which 65% are exported to external regions, 30% accumulate in the
households, technical infrastructure, and vehicles. 5% in landfills and 0.08% accumulate in the environment. .
Fig. 7. Substance flow system for PFOS, representing Switzerland on an annual base for the year 2007 [data taken from
18]. Values for PFOS flows and changes in stocks are given in kg yr-1, for PFOS stocks in kg. The flows are
represented as Sankey arrows proportional to the flow rate; figures for stocks are given within the process boxes.
438
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
Ä = Inputflow - Output flow [kg yr-1]
In the sections that follow, the results are presented
and discussed on a case study base.
.
Non-recyclable copper flows account for 1,130 t
yr-1, of which 1,114 t yr-1 enter appropriate final sinks
such as landfills and underground storage facilities,
About 16 t yr-1 enter environmental compartments.
Based on this information, the ë is calculated to be
.
99% (1114/1130).
The high score of ë indicates that (a) much Cu is
part of non-recyclables (waste) entering appropriate
final sinks (landfill, underground storage), and (b) less
Cu enters intermediate sinks such as environmental
.
media.
For Vienna, we classify Cu in bottom-ash from
solid waste incineration as “non-recyclable” because
recovering technologies to gain metals are not in place.
The mixture of bottom-ash fractions, APC residues,
cement and water is sent to landfill. This appropriate
final sink has to be managed by a special containment
system combined with an operational concept. It
requires the pumping of groundwater in order to send
it to the waste water treatment plant. Consequently, the
status of the landfill as “appropriate final sink” is only
valid as long as the containment system is intact and
the operation concept takes place. If one of the two
fails, the landfill becomes an intermediate sink. In this
case, the indicator ë decreases to a level of 1.5%. It
can be increased if metal recovery from bottom-ash
fractions takes place. Different technologies are under
development in order to bring them on the market
.
[e.g., 19].
Sink
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
.
1. Cu in Vienna
Source
final sinks such as physio-chemical treatment, incineration on land, and use principally as a fuel or other
means to generate energy, excluding waste containing
PCBs. Consequently, European Union urges member
states to implement strategies in view of PFOS management. The representation of the individual state
regarding PFOS in stockpiles and waste flows serves
(a) as valuable base for the elaboration of risk reduction measures, and (b) as baseline for the assessment
.
of the efficiency of future measures.
.
(2) Determination of the substance flow system
In Switzerland, the Federal Office for the Environment conducted a national study regarding the determination of stockpiles and waste fractions containing
PFOS in 2007 [18]. Figure 7 visualizes the results,
namely the annual PFOS balance from a system
.
perspective.
.
(3) Calculation of the indicator ë
Figure 8 shows each SFA process categorized as
“source” or “sink” process according to Eq. 2. The
production and use phase as well as the waste water
treatment plant acts as main PFOS sources. The landfill releases PFOS too, which is due to disposal of
hazardous materials. Waste management provides the
“anthropogenic sink” of incineration. Environment
provides the “geogenic sinks” of hydrosphere, soil and
.
atmosphere.
Fig. 8. Sources and sinks of PFOS, representing Switzerland on an annual base for the year 2007. PFOS sinks
accommodate 2,284 kg yr-1 of which 76% enter incineration, 22% the environment and 1% is exported abroad. .
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
Cu in non-recyclable waste fractions is mainly
routed to appropriate final sinks such as underground
storage facilities or surface landfills. Those types of
landfills are “appropriate final sinks” for specific
substances depending on site-specific circumstances
such as barrier functions and operational concepts.
From an ecological risk point of view, both landfill
.
types have to be actively managed.
Underground storage provides long-term encapsulation of hazardous material from biosphere due to
natural barriers. The probability of exposure cannot be
fully excluded, because the heavy metals are still
present. But, the efforts to control the fate of substances are minimized in contrast to landfills on the
surface. In the case of underground landfills, the longterm accessibility is a key element of sustainable landfill management. This ensures two folds: (i) Substances can be recovered and utilized or rendered
harmless if proper technologies become technical and
economical feasible. (ii) Subsurface processes can be
investigated and monitored in the case of accidents. .
The long-term environmental risks from surface
landfills can be assessed in detail through a combination of site-specific risk assessments and monitoring
.
data in order to design management options [20].
In this case study, all Cu loads into environment
reduce the ë, because environmental media are simply
classified as intermediate sink. To increase the ë by
shifting certain Cu emissions to “appropriate final
sinks”, long-term risk assessment studies that yield
predicted environmental concentrations and corre.
sponding risks are needed.
2. PFOS in Switzerland
.
Non-recyclable PFOS flows account for 2,254 kg
yr-1, of which 1,744 kg yr-1 enter appropriate final sinks
such as incineration. About 507 kg yr-1 enter environmental compartments. Based on this information, the ë
.
is calculated to be 78% (1744/2254).
The incinerators are appropriate final sinks for
PFOS, because they are mineralized. The efficiency of
degradation is äincineration = 99.5% (Eq. 3). The rest of
0.5% (9 kg yr-1) is covered by incineration residues
.
that enter landfills.
European Regulations urges member states to
phase-out PFOS and to treat the wastes through, e.g.,
incineration. This technology is an appropriate final
sink for PFOS, because it transforms these hazardous
substances into less toxic ones. To assess the efficiency
of present and future measures, the Swiss Authorities
conducted a national PFOS balance. It visualizes
annual PFOS fluxes and stocks. We use those data and
calculate the proposed indicator ë from a national
system perspective. Results show the ratio ë with 78%.
439
In other words, about three quarters of PFOS fluxes
enter final sinks with respect to European Legislation.
The rest of 22% enters intermediate sinks such hydrosphere and soil. This poses ecological and health risks
because the intermediate sinks are uncontrolled. The
final whereabouts of PFOS and the impacts on protec.
tive goods are hardly ponderable.
The benefit of combining SFA with the ë is two
folds: (1) SFA determines the sources, pathways and
sink of PFOS in a rigid and transparent way. This
enables the identification of risk reduction measures.
(2) The proposed indicator ë assesses the actual
efficiency of measures that route PFOS containing
waste into final sinks. Hence, it serves as monitoring
indicator that yields the temporal evaluation of efficiency driven by measures taken in the future.
.
CONCLUSIONS
Human activities in general and waste management in special produce two types of material flows:
recyclables and non-recyclables. Recyclables end up in
second life products. Non-recyclables such as specific
waste fractions and emissions have to be disposed of
in appropriate final sinks. This article presents a new
metric for sustainable resource use, namely the "Final
Sink Ratio" ë. The methodology of calculation is
based on SFA. It is a practical tool for analyzing the
substance sources, pathways and stocks on multilevel
scale from nations, to regions and single plants. The
applicability of the indicator has been tested in two
case studies, namely for Cu in the city of Vienna and
.
for PFOS in Switzerland.
First, the indicator shows the efficiency of measures to get rid of non-recyclable waste and emissions
in a sound way. It reveals the importance of sinks,
provided by the waste management sector and those
.
in the environment.
Second, the combination of the indicator with SFA
is two-fold beneficial: (i) Results can be used to
identify risk reduction measures. (ii) The indicator
serves as monitoring score to assess measures taken in
.
the future.
Third, appropriate final sinks in the anthroposphere have to be managed to a certain extent in order
to achieve accepted environmental risks. For example,
landfills are needed to store inorganic substances.
They require technical barriers and operational concepts. The combination of site-specific risk assessment
and monitoring is essential for sound and economic
management. Incinerators are needed to mineralize
organic substances. They require effective and sophisticated waste collection schemes in order to route
.
organic substances to the plant.
Fourth, we propose a resource strategy that incorporates the ë as indicator. It can be used to benchmark
nations and individual regions. In the case of carbon,
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change aims to manage the carbon content in the
440
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
atmosphere. So, nations periodically update and
publish national inventories of anthropogenic carbon
emissions and removals by sinks. Even though, there
are conventions for other substances like POPs and
heavy metals, we propose a systematic and consistent
sustainable resource strategy on European and national
level that incorporates the final sink viewpoint. Such
an accounting scheme considers (i) selected substances
such as heavy metals, POPs, nitrogen and compounds,
and so on, (ii) all non-recyclable flows which means
the incorporation of wastes and emissions, (iii) all
available sinks, final sinks and appropriate final sinks,
(iv) an indicator to assess the ratio of substance flows
that enter “appropriate final sinks” whether they are
located in the anthroposphere (end-of-pipe technologies) or in the environment, and (v) regulative
measures (e.g., risk reduction, substitution) if a
specific substance cannot be routed to an “appropriate
final sinks” completely. This article should serve as
starting point for a critical discussion on the way to
sustainable resource use.
.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
This study was supported by the Austrian Science
Fund (FWF): I 549-N21.
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
SRU, On the Way to an European Resource
Strategy: Orientation Based on a Substance
Oriented Environmental Policy. German Advisory
Council on the Environment, Berlin, Germany
.
(2005) (in German).
Baccini, P. and P.H. Brunner, Metabolism of the
Anthroposphere: Analysis, Evaluation, Design.
.
2nd Ed., MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2012).
Brunner, P.H. and H. Rechberger, Practical
Handbook of Material Flow Analysis. CRC Press,
.
Boca Raton, FL (2004).
Månsson, N., B. Bergbäck, D. Hjortenkrans, A.
Jamtrot and L. Sörme, Utility of substance stock
and flow studies. J. Ind. Ecol., 13(5), 674-686
.
(2009).
Hertwich, E., O. Jolliet, D. Pennington, M.Z.
Hauschild, C. Schulze, W. Krewitt and M.A.J.
Huijbregts, Fate and exposure assessment in the
life-cycle impact assessment of toxic chemicals.
In: H.A. Udo de Haes, S. Kotaji, A. Schuurmans
and S. Edwards (Eds.). Life-Cycle Impact
Assessment: Striving Towards Best Practice.
.
SETAC Press, Pensacola, FL (2002).
Maniak, U., Hydrology and Water Resource
Management - Introduction for Engineers.
Springer, Berlin, Germany (2010) (in German). .
Lucas, K., Thermodynamics. 7th Ed., Springer,
.
Berlin, Germany (2008) (in German).
USEPA, Total Risk Integrated Methodology.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
TRIM.FaTE Technical Support Document.
Volume I: Description of Module. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
.
(2002).
Scharff, H., Landfills as sinks for (hazardous)
substances. Waste Manage. Res., 30(12), 1234.
1242 (2012).
UBA, Waste Management - Treatment Processes.
Federal Environment Agency, Dessau, Germany.
www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/abfallressourcen/entsorgung/deponierung-lagerung
.
(2011) (in German).
Morf, L.S. and P.H. Brunner, Municipal Solid
Waste Incineration as Sink for Substances Substance Flow Analysis for Hg in an Incinerator
at Würzburg. Vienna University of Technology,
Vienna, Austria. http://www.zvaws.de/infos/hg_
.
bilanz2005.pdf (2005) (in German).
UBA, Role of Waste Incineration in Germany.
Federal Environment Agency, Dessau, Germany.
http://www.umweltdaten.de/publikationen/fpdf-l/
.
3649.pdf (2008) (in German).
Döberl, G. and P.H. Brunner, Substances and
their (final) sinks - A new indicator for monitoring
sustainability.
Indicators
for
Evaluating
Sustainable Development - The Ecological
Dimension. Berlin, Germany, Nov. 1-2 (2004). .
EU, Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 29
April 2004 on Persistent Organic Pollutants and
Amending Directive 79/117/EEC. European
.
Union, Brussels, Belgium (2004).
EU, Directive 2006/122/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 12 December
2006 Amending for the 30th Time Council
Directive 76/769/EEC on the Approximation of
the Laws, Regulations and Administrative
Provisions of the Member States Relating to
Restrictions on the Marketing and Use of Certain
Dangerous
Substances
and
Preparations
(Perfluorooctane Sulfonates). European Union,
.
Brussels, Belgium (2006).
BEA, EU POPs Regulation Guidance: Guidance on
Regulation (EC) 850/2004 on Persistent Organic
Pollutants (as amended). British Environment
.
Agency, Bristol, UK (2012).
EC, COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No
756/2010 of 24 August 2010 Amending Regulation
(EC) No 850/2004 of the European Parliament and
of the Council on Persistent Organic Pollutants as
Regards Annexes IV and V. European Union,
.
Brussels, Belgium (2010).
Buser, A. and L.S. Morf, Substance Flow
Analysis for Switzerland. Federal Office for the
.
Environment, Bern, Switzerland (2009).
Morf, L.S., R. Gloor, O. Haag, M. Haupt, S.
Skutan, F. Di Lorenzo and D. Böni, Precious
metals and rare earth elements in municipal solid
waste - Sources and fate in a Swiss incineration
Kral and Brunner, Sustain. Environ. Res., 24(6), 431-441 (2014)
.
plant. Waste Manage., 33(3), 634-644 (2013).
20. Laner, D., Understanding and Evaluating Longterm Environmental Risks from Landfills. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Institute for Water Quality, Resource
and Waste Management, Vienna University of
.
Technology, Vienna, Austria (2011).
21. Kral, U., C.Y. Lin, K. Kellner, H.W. Ma and P.H.
Brunner, The copper balance of cities: Exploratory
insights into a European and an Asian city. J. Ind.
441
Ecol., 18(3), 432-444 (2014).
Discussions of this paper may appear in the discussion section of a future issue. All discussions should
be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief within six months
of publication.
.
Manuscript Received: November 8, 2013
Revision Received: March 6, 2014
and Accepted: March 13, 2014