Sustainability measurement explained

Sustainability measurement is a set of frameworks or indicators used to measure how sustainable something is. This includes processes, products, services and businesses. Sustainability is difficult to quantify.[1] It may even be impossible to measure as there is no fixed definition. To measure sustainability, frameworks and indicators consider environmental, social and economic domains. The metrics vary by use case and are still evolving. They include indicators, benchmarks and audits. They include sustainability standards and certification systems like Fairtrade and Organic. They also involve indices and accounting. They can include assessment, appraisal[2] and other reporting systems. The metrics are used over a wide range of spatial and temporal scales.[3] [4] For organizations, sustainability measures include corporate sustainability reporting and Triple Bottom Line accounting. For countries, they include estimates of the quality of sustainability governance or quality of life measures, or environmental assessments like the Environmental Sustainability Index and Environmental Performance Index. Some methods let us track sustainable development.[5] [6] These include the UN Human Development Index and ecological footprints.

Two related concepts for sustainability measurement are planetary boundaries[7] and ecological footprint.[8] If the boundaries are not crossed and the ecological footprint does not exceed the carrying capacity of the biosphere, the mode of life can be regarded as sustainable.

A set of well defined and harmonized indicators can help to make sustainability tangible. Those indicators are expected to be identified and adjusted through empirical observations (trial and error).[9] The most common critiques are related to issues like data quality, comparability, objective function and the necessary resources.[10] However a more general criticism is coming from the project management community: "How can a sustainable development be achieved at global level if we cannot monitor it in any single project?".[11]

Sustainability need and framework

Sustainable development has become the primary yardstick of improvement for industries and is being integrated into effective government and business strategies. The needs for sustainability measurement include improvement in the operations, benchmarking performances, tracking progress, and evaluating process, among others.[12] For the purposes of building sustainability indicators, frameworks can be developed and the steps are as follows:[13]

  1. Defining the system- A proper and definite system is defined. A proper system boundary is drawn for further analysis.
  2. Elements of the system- The whole input, output of materials, emissions, energy and other auxiliary elements are properly analysed. The working conditions, process parameters and characteristics are defined in this step.
  3. Indicators selection- The indicators is selected of which measurement has to be done. This forms the metric for this system whose analysis is done in the further steps.
  4. Assessment and Measurement- Proper assessing tools are used and tests or experiments are performed for the pre-defined indicators to give a value for the indicators measurement.
  5. Analysis and reviewing the results- Once the results have been obtained, proper analysis and interpretation is done and tools are used to improve and revise the processes present in the system.

Sustainability indicators and their function

See also: Sustainability metrics and indices. The principal objective of sustainability indicators is to inform public policy-making as part of the process of sustainability governance.[14] Sustainability indicators can provide information on any aspect of the interplay between the environment and socio-economic activities.[15] Building strategic indicator sets generally deals with just a few simple questions: what is happening? (descriptive indicators), does it matter and are we reaching targets? (performance indicators), are we improving? (efficiency indicators), are measures working? (policy effectiveness indicators), and are we generally better off? (total welfare indicators).

The International Institute for Sustainable Development and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development established the Committee on Sustainability Assessment (COSA) in 2006 to evaluate sustainability initiatives operating in agriculture and develop indicators for their measurable social, economic and environmental objectives.[16]

One popular general framework used by The European Environment Agency uses a slight modification of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development DPSIR system.[17] This breaks up environmental impact into five stages. Social and economic developments (consumption and production) (D)rive or initiate environmental (P)ressures which, in turn, produces a change in the (S)tate of the environment which leads to (I)mpacts of various kinds. Societal (R)esponses (policy guided by sustainability indicators) can be introduced at any stage of this sequence of events.

Politics

See also: Environmental politics and Environmental governance. A study concluded that social indicators and, therefore, sustainable development indicators, are scientific constructs whose principal objective is to inform public policy-making.[18] The International Institute for Sustainable Development has similarly developed a political policy framework, linked to a sustainability index for establishing measurable entities and metrics. The framework consists of six core areas:

  1. International trade and investment
  2. Economic policy
  3. Climate change and energy
  4. Measurement and assessment
  5. Natural resource management
  6. Communication technologies.

The United Nations Global Compact Cities Programme has defined sustainable political development in a way that broadens the usual definition beyond states and governance. The political is defined as the domain of practices and meanings associated with basic issues of social power as they pertain to the organisation, authorisation, legitimation and regulation of a social life held in common. This definition is in accord with the view that political change is important for responding to economic, ecological and cultural challenges. It also means that the politics of economic change can be addressed. They have listed seven subdomains of the domain of politics:[19]

  1. Organization and governance
  2. Law and justice
  3. Communication and critique
  4. Representation and negotiation
  5. Security and accord
  6. Dialogue and reconciliation
  7. Ethics and accountability

Metrics at the global scale

See also: Sustainability metrics and indices.

There are numerous indicators which could be used as basis for sustainability measurement. Few commonly used indicators are:

Environmental sustainability indicators:[20]

Economic indicators:[22] [23]

Social indicators:

Due to the large numbers of various indicators that could be used for sustainability measurement, proper assessment and monitoring is required.[23] In order to organize the chaos and disorder in selecting the metrics, specific organizations have been set up which groups the metrics under different categories and defines proper methodology to implement it for measurement. They provide modelling techniques and indexes to compare the measurement and have methods to convert the scientific measurement results into easy to understand terms.[24]

United Nations indicators

The United Nations has developed extensive sustainability measurement tools in relation to sustainable development [25] as well as a System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting.[26] The UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) has published a list of 140 indicators which covers environmental, social, economical and institutional aspects of sustainable development.[27]

Benchmarks, indicators, indexes, auditing etc.

In the last couple of decades, there has arisen a crowded toolbox of quantitative methods used to assess sustainability — including measures of resource use like life cycle assessment, measures of consumption like the ecological footprint and measurements of quality of environmental governance like the Environmental Performance Index. The following is a list of quantitative "tools" used by sustainability scientists - the different categories are for convenience only as defining criteria will intergrade. It would be too difficult to list all those methods available at different levels of the organization so those listed here are at the global level only.

A benchmark is a point of reference for a measurement. Once a benchmark is established it is possible to assess trends and measure progress. Baseline global data on a range of sustainability parameters is available in the list of global sustainability statistics.

A sustainability index is an aggregate sustainability indicator that combines multiple sources of data. There is a Consultative Group on Sustainable Development Indices[28]

Air quality index

Child Development Index

Corruption Perceptions Index

Democracy Index

Environmental Performance Index

Energy Sustainability Index

Education Index

Environmental Sustainability Index

Environmental Vulnerability Index

GDP per capita

Gini coefficient

Gender Parity Index

Gender-related Development Index

Gender Empowerment Measure

Gross national happiness

Genuine Progress Indicator

(formerly Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare)

Green Score City Index[29]

Gross National Product

Happy Planet Index

Human Development Index (see List of countries by HDI)

Legatum Prosperity Index

Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare

Life Expectancy Index

Sustainable Governance Indicators. The Status Index [30] ranks 30 OECD countries in terms of sustainable reform performance

Sustainable Society Index

SDEWES Index

Water Poverty Index [31]

Many environmental problems ultimately relate to the human effect on those global biogeochemical cycles that are critical to life. Over the last decade monitoring these cycles have become a more urgent target for research:

Sustainability auditing and reporting are used to evaluate the sustainability performance of a company, organization, or other entity using various performance indicators.[32] Popular auditing procedures available at the global level include:

Some accounting methods attempt to include environmental costs rather than treating them as externalities

Life cycle analysis

A life cycle analysis is often conducted when assessing the sustainability of a product or prototype.[38] The decision to choose materials is heavily weighted on its longevity, renewability, and efficiency. These factors ensure that researchers are conscious of community values that align with positive environmental, social, and economic impacts.

Resource metrics

Part of this process can relate to resource use such as energy accounting or to economic metrics or price system values as compared to non-market economics potential, for understanding resource use.[39] An important task for resource theory (energy economics) is to develop methods to optimize resource conversion processes.[40] These systems are described and analyzed by means of the methods of mathematics and the natural sciences.[41] Human factors, however, have dominated the development of our perspective of the relationship between nature and society since at least the Industrial Revolution, and in particular, have influenced how we describe and measure the economic impacts of changes in resource quality. A balanced view of these issues requires an understanding of the physical framework in which all human ideas, institutions, and aspirations must operate.[42]

Energy returned on energy invested

See main article: Energy returned on energy invested. When oil production first began in the mid-nineteenth century, the largest oil fields recovered fifty barrels of oil for every barrel used in the extraction, transportation, and refining. This ratio is often referred to as the Energy Return on Energy Investment (EROI or EROEI). Currently, between one and five barrels of oil are recovered for each barrel-equivalent of energy used in the recovery process.[43] As the EROEI drops to one, or equivalently the net energy gain falls to zero, the oil production is no longer a net energy source.[44] This happens long before the resource is physically exhausted.

Note that it is important to understand the distinction between a barrel of oil, which is a measure of oil, and a barrel of oil equivalent (BOE), which is a measure of energy. Many sources of energy, such as fission, solar, wind, and coal, are not subject to the same near-term supply restrictions that oil is. Accordingly, even an oil source with an EROEI of 0.5 can be usefully exploited if the energy required to produce that oil comes from a cheap and plentiful energy source. Availability of cheap, but hard to transport, natural gas in some oil fields has led to using natural gas to fuel enhanced oil recovery. Similarly, natural gas in huge amounts is used to power most Athabasca Tar Sands plants. Cheap natural gas has also led to ethanol fuel produced with a net EROEI of less than 1, although figures in this area are controversial because methods to measure EROEI are in debate.

Growth-based economic models

Insofar as economic growth is driven by oil consumption growth, post-peak societies must adapt. M. King Hubbert believed:[45]

Some economists describe the problem as uneconomic growth or a false economy. At the political right, Fred Ikle has warned about "conservatives addicted to the Utopia of Perpetual Growth".[46] Brief oil interruptions in 1973 and 1979 markedly slowed – but did not stop – the growth of world GDP.[47]

Between 1950 and 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed agriculture around the globe, world grain production increased by 250%. The energy for the Green Revolution was provided by fossil fuels in the form of fertilizers (natural gas), pesticides (oil), and hydrocarbon fueled irrigation.[48]

David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell University, and Mario Giampietro, senior researcher at the National Research Institute on Food and Nutrition (INRAN), place in their study Food, Land, Population and the U.S. Economy the maximum U.S. population for a sustainable economy at 200 million. To achieve a sustainable economy world population will have to be reduced by two-thirds, says the study.[49] Without population reduction, this study predicts an agricultural crisis beginning in 2020, becoming critical c. 2050. The peaking of global oil along with the decline in regional natural gas production may precipitate this agricultural crisis sooner than generally expected. Dale Allen Pfeiffer claims that coming decades could see spiraling food prices without relief and massive starvation on a global level such as never experienced before.[50] [51]

Hubbert peaks

There is an active debate about most suitable sustainability indicator's use and by adopting a thermodynamic approach through the concept of "exergy" and Hubbert peaks, it is possible to incorporate all into a single measure of resource depletion.The exergy analysis of minerals could constitute a universal and transparent tool for the management of the earth's physical stock.[52] [23]

Hubbert peak can be used as a metric for sustainability and depletion of non-renewable resources. It can be used as reference for many metrics for non-renewable resources such as:[53]

  1. Stagnating supplies
  2. Rising prices
  3. Individual country peaks
  4. Decreasing discoveries
  5. Finding and development costs
  6. Spare capacity
  7. Export capabilities of producing countries
  8. System inertia and timing
  9. Reserves-to-production ratio
  10. Past history of depletion and optimism

Although Hubbert peak theory receives most attention in relation to peak oil production, it has also been applied to other natural resources.

Natural gas

See main article: Peak gas. Doug Reynolds predicted in 2005 that the North American peak would occur in 2007.[54] Bentley (p. 189) predicted a world "decline in conventional gas production from about 2020".[55]

Coal

See main article: Peak coal. Peak coal is significantly further out than peak oil, but we can observe the example of anthracite in the US, a high grade coal whose production peaked in the 1920s. Anthracite was studied by Hubbert, and matches a curve closely.[56] Pennsylvania's coal production also matches Hubbert's curve closely, but this does not mean that coal in Pennsylvania is exhausted—far from it. If production in Pennsylvania returned at its all-time high, there are reserves for 190 years. Hubbert had recoverable coal reserves worldwide at 2500 × 109 metric tons and peaking around 2150(depending on usage).

More recent estimates suggest an earlier peak. Coal: Resources and Future Production (PDF 630KB [57]), published on April 5, 2007 by the Energy Watch Group (EWG), which reports to the German Parliament, found that global coal production could peak in as few as 15 years.[58] Reporting on this Richard Heinberg also notes that the date of peak annual energetic extraction from coal will likely come earlier than the date of peak in quantity of coal (tons per year) extracted as the most energy-dense types of coal have been mined most extensively.[59] A second study,The Future of Coal by B. Kavalov and S. D. Peteves of the Institute for Energy (IFE), prepared for European Commission Joint Research Centre, reaches similar conclusions and states that""coal might not be so abundant, widely available and reliable as an energy source in the future".

Work by David Rutledge of Caltech predicts that the total of world coal production will amount to only about 450 gigatonnes.[60] Thisimplies that coal is running out faster than usually assumed.

Finally, insofar as global peak oil and peak in natural gas are expected anywhere from imminently to within decades at most, any increase in coal production (mining) per annum to compensate for declines in oil or NG production, would necessarily translate to an earlier date of peak as compared with peak coal under a scenario in which annual production remains constant.

Fissionable materials

See main article: Peak uranium. In a paper in 1956,[61] after a review of US fissionable reserves, Hubbert notes of nuclear power:

Technologies such as the thorium fuel cycle, reprocessing and fast breeders can, in theory, considerably extend the life of uranium reserves. Roscoe Bartlett claims [62]

Caltech physics professor David Goodstein has stated[63] that

Metals

Hubbert applied his theory to "rock containing an abnormally high concentration of a given metal"[64] and reasoned that the peak production for metals such as copper, tin, lead, zinc and others would occur in the time frame of decades and iron in the time frame of two centuries like coal. The price of copper rose 500% between 2003 and 2007[65] was by some attributed to peak copper.[66] [67] Copper prices later fell, along with many other commodities and stock prices, as demand shrank from fear of a global recession.[68] Lithium availability is a concern for a fleet of Li-ion battery using cars but a paper published in 1996 estimated that world reserves are adequate for at least 50 years.[69] A similar prediction [70] for platinum use in fuel cells notes that the metal could be easily recycled.

Phosphorus

Phosphorus supplies are essential to farming and depletion of reserves is estimated at somewhere from 60 to 130 years.[71] Individual countries supplies vary widely; without a recycling initiative America's supply [72] is estimated around 30 years.[73] Phosphorus supplies affect total agricultural output which in turn limits alternative fuels such as biodiesel and ethanol.

Peak water

See main article: Peak water. Hubbert's original analysis did not apply to renewable resources. However over-exploitation often results in a Hubbert peak nonetheless. A modified Hubbert curve applies to any resource that can be harvested faster than it can be replaced.[74]

For example, a reserve such as the Ogallala Aquifer can be mined at a rate that far exceeds replenishment. This turns much of the world's underground water [75] and lakes [76] into finite resources with peak usage debates similar to oil. These debates usually center around agriculture and suburban water usage but generation of electricity [77] from nuclear energy or coal and tar sands mining mentioned above is also water resource intensive. The term fossil water is sometimes used to describe aquifers whose water is not being recharged.

Renewable resources

Sustainability gaps

Sustainability measurements and indicators are part of an ever-evolving and changing process and has various gaps to be filled to achieve an integrated framework and model. The following are some of the breaks in continuity:

See also

External links

Notes and References

  1. Book: Hardyment, Richard . Measuring Good Business . 2024-02-02 . Routledge . 978-1-003-45773-2 . London.
  2. Dalal-Clayton, Barry and Sadler, Barry 2009. Sustainability Appraisal: A Sourcebook and Reference Guide to International Experience. London: Earthscan. .
  3. Hak, T. et al. 2007. Sustainability Indicators, SCOPE 67. Island Press, London. https://books.google.com/books?id=W4o-qunretMC&dq=Hak,+T.+et+al.+2007.+Sustainability+Indicators,+SCOPE+67.+Island+Press,+London.&pg=PR5
  4. Bell, Simon and Morse, Stephen 2008. Sustainability Indicators. Measuring the Immeasurable? 2nd edn. London: Earthscan. .
  5. Wackernagel . Mathis . Lin . David . Evans . Mikel . Hanscom . Laurel . Raven . Peter . 2019 . Defying the Footprint Oracle: Implications of Country Resource Trends . Sustainability . en . 11 . 7 . 2164 . 10.3390/su11072164 . free.
  6. Web site: Sustainable Development visualized . 24 March 2022 . Sustainability concepts.
  7. Steffen. Will. 13 Feb 2015. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science. 347. 6223. 1259855. 10.1126/science.1259855. 25592418. free. 206561765. 1885/13126. free.
  8. Web site: Ecological Footprints. 19 April 2020. Sustainability concepts. 8 August 2020. https://web.archive.org/web/20200808050255/https://www.gdrc.org/sustdev/concepts/06-footprints.html. live.
  9. 2006 . An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities . Ecological Economics . 59 . 4. 406–418 . 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.11.008 . Reed . Mark S. . 18 February 2011 . https://web.archive.org/web/20110726045818/http://km.fao.org/uploads/media/An%20adaptative%20learning%20process%20for%20developing%20and%20applying%20sustainability%20indicators%20with%20local%20communities.pdf . 26 July 2011 . dmy-all .
  10. Web site: Annette Lang, Ist Nachhaltigkeit messbar?, Uni Hannover, 2003. https://web.archive.org/web/20110802135133/http://www.nse-netz.de/downloads/nachh.pdf. 2 August 2011. 28 September 2011. de.
  11. Web site: Do global targets matter?, The Environment Times, Poverty Times #4, UNEP/GRID-Arendal, 2010 . Grida.no . 28 September 2011 . https://web.archive.org/web/20110629043039/http://www.grida.no/publications/et/ep4/page/2653.aspx . 29 June 2011 .
  12. Martins. António A.. Mata. Teresa M.. Costa. Carlos A. V.. Sikdar. Subhas K.. 2007-05-01. Framework for Sustainability Metrics. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research. 46. 10. 2962–2973. 10.1021/ie060692l. 0888-5885.
  13. Web site: Archived copy . 2019-03-18 . 2017-06-19 . https://web.archive.org/web/20170619214353/https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-10/documents/framework-for-sustainability-indicators-at-epa.pdf . live .
  14. Sustainable development indicators: a scientific challenge, a democratic issue . Boulanger . P. M. . S.A.P.I.EN.S . 1 . 1 . 2008-11-26 . 2013-07-23 . 2011-01-09 . https://web.archive.org/web/20110109125624/http://sapiens.revues.org/index166.html . live .
  15. Hak, T., Moldan, B. & Dahl, A.L. 2007. SCOPE 67. Sustainability indicators. Island Press, London.
  16. Giovannucci D, Potts J . 2007 . International Institute for Sustainable Development . The COSA Project . 2020-02-28 . 2017-01-02 . https://web.archive.org/web/20170102174641/https://www.iisd.org/pdf/2007/cosa.pdf . live .
  17. Stanners, D. et al. 2007. Frameworks for environmental assessment and indicators at the EEA. In: Hak, T., Moldan, B. & Dahl, A.L. 2007. SCOPE 67. Sustainability indicators. Island Press, London.
  18. Paul-Marie Boulanger . Sustainable development indicators: a scientific challenge, a democratic issue . S.A.P.I.EN.S . 1 . 1 . 2008 . 28 September 2011.
  19. http://citiesprogramme.com/archives/resource/circles-of-sustainability-urban-profile-process Liam Magee. Andy Scerri. Paul James. James A. Thom. Lin Padgham. Sarah Hickmott. Hepu Deng. Felicity Cahill. 2013. Reframing social sustainability reporting: Towards an engaged approach. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 15. 225–243. 10.1007/s10668-012-9384-2. 153452740.
  20. Dong . Yan . Hauschild . Michael Z. . Indicators for Environmental Sustainability . Procedia CIRP . 2017 . 61 . 697–702 . 10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.173 . free .
  21. Book: Bell . Simon . Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable? . Morse . Stephen . 2012-05-04 . Routledge . 978-1-136-55602-9 . en.
  22. Tisdell . Clem . Economic indicators to assess the sustainability of conservation farming projects: An evaluation . Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment . May 1996 . 57 . 2–3 . 117–131 . 10.1016/0167-8809(96)01017-1 .
  23. Labuschagne . Carin . Brent . Alan C. . van Erck . Ron P.G. . Assessing the sustainability performances of industries . Journal of Cleaner Production . March 2005 . 13 . 4 . 373–385 . 10.1016/j.jclepro.2003.10.007 . 2263/4325 . free .
  24. Web site: Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals .:. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform. sustainabledevelopment.un.org. 2019-02-27. 2019-08-16. https://web.archive.org/web/20190816061311/https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=400&nr=2013&menu=35. live.
  25. https://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/isd.htm
  26. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seea.asp
  27. Web site: Archived copy . 2019-03-18 . 2020-09-22 . https://web.archive.org/web/20200922054303/http://www.pvsustain.org/dmdocuments/Class%203%20Singh%20Sustainable%20Assessment.pdf . live .
  28. Web site: Consultative Group on Sustainable Development Indices . . 2008-06-18 . 2019-10-12 . https://web.archive.org/web/20191012193436/http://www.iisd.org/ . live .
  29. Web site: Green Score City Index . GreenScore.eco . 2022-03-21. The Green Score City Index: development and application at a municipal scale
  30. Web site: SGI – Sustainable Governance Indicators 2011 . Sgi-network.org . 2013-07-23 . 2011-07-19 . https://web.archive.org/web/20110719090733/http://www.sgi-network.org/ . live .
  31. http://www.ceh.ac.uk/sections/ph/documents/narf_054.pdf
  32. Hill, J. 1992. Towards Good Environmental Practice. The Institute of Business Ethics, London.
  33. Web site: Global Reporting Initiative . Global Reporting Initiative . 2008-06-18 . https://web.archive.org/web/20080616060215/http://www.globalreporting.org/Home . 2008-06-16 .
  34. Web site: Global Reporting Initiative Guidelines 2002 . 2008-06-18 . https://web.archive.org/web/20081217063729/http://www.epeat.net/Docs/GRI_guidelines.pdf . 2008-12-17 .
  35. Web site: International Corporate Sustainability Reporting . 2008-06-18 . https://web.archive.org/web/20071121060925/http://www.enviroreporting.com/detail_page.phtml?page=resource2 . 2007-11-21 .
  36. [Eurostat]
  37. http://www.sustainabilityeconomics.de/publications_vjh.html
  38. Mestre. Ana. Cooper. Tim. 2017. Circular Product Design. A Multiple Loops Life Cycle Design Approach for the Circular Economy. Design Journal. 20. S1620–S1635. 10.1080/14606925.2017.1352686. free.
  39. Web site: Net energy analysis . Eoearth.org . 2010-07-23 . 2013-07-23 . 2013-04-29 . https://web.archive.org/web/20130429194936/http://www.eoearth.org/article/Net_energy_analysis . live .
  40. Web site: Environmental Decision Making, Science, and Technology . Telstar.ote.cmu.edu . 2013-07-23 . https://web.archive.org/web/20100105164509/http://telstar.ote.cmu.edu/environ/m3/s3/05account.shtml . 2010-01-05 .
  41. Web site: Exergy - A Useful Concept.Intro . Exergy.se . 2013-07-23 . 2012-07-16 . https://web.archive.org/web/20120716183551/http://exergy.se/goran/thesis/ . live .
  42. Web site: Energy and economic myths (historical) . Eoearth.org . 2013-07-23 . 2013-06-06 . https://web.archive.org/web/20130606180734/http://www.eoearth.org/article/Energy_and_economic_myths_(historical) . live .
  43. Tripathi. Vinay S.. Brandt. Adam R.. 2017-02-08. Estimating decades-long trends in petroleum field energy return on investment (EROI) with an engineering-based model. PLOS ONE. 12. 2. e0171083. 10.1371/journal.pone.0171083. 1932-6203. 5298284. 28178318. 2017PLoSO..1271083T. free.
  44. Web site: Michaux. Simon. Appendix D -ERoEI Comparison of Energy Resources . Academia . en . 2019-02-25. 2019-12-12. https://web.archive.org/web/20191212132224/https://www.academia.edu/36305455. live.
  45. Web site: Exponential Growth as a Transient Phenomenon in Human History . Hubbertpeak.com . 2013-07-23 . 2019-06-29 . https://web.archive.org/web/20190629214750/http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/wwf1976/ . live .
  46. Web site: Our Perpetual Growth Utopia . Dieoff.org . 2013-07-23 . 2019-04-28 . https://web.archive.org/web/20190428120557/http://dieoff.org/page68.htm .
  47. Web site: Archived copy . 2009-02-05 . 2016-03-03 . https://web.archive.org/web/20160303171058/http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2006/pdf/050206.pdf . live .
  48. http://wolf.readinglitho.co.uk/mainpages/agriculture.html How peak oil could lead to starvation
  49. Web site: Taggart . Adam . Eating Fossil Fuels . EnergyBulletin.net . 2003-10-02 . 2013-07-23 . https://web.archive.org/web/20070611071544/http://www.energybulletin.net/281.html . 2007-06-11 .
  50. http://www.soilassociation.org/peakoil Peak Oil: the threat to our food security
  51. Web site: The Oil Drum: Europe . Agriculture Meets Peak Oil . Europe.theoildrum.com . 2013-07-23 . 2015-12-29 . https://web.archive.org/web/20151229201243/http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/2225 . live .
  52. Alicia . Valero . Antonio . Valero . Gavin M . Mudd . 2009 . Exergy – A Useful Indicator for the Sustainability of Mineral Resources and Mining . Proceedings of SDIMI Conference . Gold Coast, QLD . 329–38 . 978-1-921522-01-7 .
  53. Brecha . Robert . Ten Reasons to Take Peak Oil Seriously . Sustainability . 12 February 2013 . 5 . 2 . 664–694 . 10.3390/su5020664 . free .
  54. News: Bill . White . State's consultant says nation is primed for using Alaska gas . December 17, 2005 . Anchorage Daily News . https://web.archive.org/web/20090221153321/http://dwb.adn.com/money/industries/oil/v-printer/story/7296501p-7208184c.html . February 21, 2009 .
  55. Viewpoint - Global oil & gas depletion: an overview . R.W. . Bentley . Energy Policy . 30 . 3 . 189–205 . 2002 . 10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00144-6 . 2009-02-05 . 2008-05-27 . https://web.archive.org/web/20080527233844/http://www.oilcrisis.com/bentley/depletionOverview.pdf .
  56. http://www.geo.umn.edu/courses/3005/resource.html GEO 3005: Earth Resources
  57. Web site: Startseite . Energy Watch Group . 2013-07-23 . https://web.archive.org/web/20130911224731/http://www.energywatchgroup.org/files/Coalreport.pdf . 2013-09-11 .
  58. Web site: Hamilton . Rosie . Peak coal: sooner than you think . Energybulletin.net . 2007-05-21 . 2013-07-23 . https://web.archive.org/web/20080522155229/http://www.energybulletin.net/29919.html . 2008-05-22 .
  59. Web site: Museletter . Richard Heinberg . December 2009 . 2013-07-23 . 2012-08-06 . https://web.archive.org/web/20120806223305/http://richardheinberg.com/museletter/179 . live .
  60. "Coal: Bleak outlook for the black stuff", by David Strahan, New Scientist, Jan. 19, 2008, pp. 38-41.
  61. Web site: Archived copy . 2014-11-10 . https://web.archive.org/web/20080527233843/http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/1956/1956.pdf . 2008-05-27 .
  62. Web site: Archived copy . 2006-11-13 . https://web.archive.org/web/20061025195932/http://www.bartlett.house.gov/uploadedfiles/5-2-06%20Oil%20Speech.pdf . 2006-10-25 .
  63. Web site: Jones. Tony. Professor Goodstein discusses lowering oil reserves. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 14 April 2013. 23 November 2004. https://web.archive.org/web/20130509063107/http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2004/s1249211.htm. 2013-05-09.
  64. Web site: Exponential Growth as a Transient Phenomenon in Human History . Hubbertpeak.com . 2013-07-23 . 2013-07-12 . https://web.archive.org/web/20130712115025/http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/wwf1976/ . live .
  65. http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/copper/mcs-2008-coppe.pdf http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/copper/mcs-2008-coppe.pdf Copper Statistics and Information, 2007
  66. Web site: Peak copper? . Salon - How the World Works . Andrew Leonard . 2006-03-02 . 2008-03-23 . 2008-03-07 . https://web.archive.org/web/20080307042349/http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2006/03/02/peak_copper/index.html . live .
  67. Web site: Silver Seek LLC . Peak Copper Means Peak Silver - SilverSeek.com . News.silverseek.com . 2013-07-23 . https://web.archive.org/web/20131104020042/http://news.silverseek.com/CharlestonVoice/1135873932.php . 2013-11-04 .
  68. http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN2747917920090129 COMMODITIES-Demand fears hit oil, metals prices
  69. Will . Fritz G. . Impact of lithium abundance and cost on electric vehicle battery applications . Journal of Power Sources . November 1996 . 63 . 1 . 23–26 . 10.1016/S0378-7753(96)02437-8 . . 1996JPS....63...23W .
  70. Web site: Department for Transport - Inside Government - GOV.UK . Dft.gov.uk . 2013-07-23 . 2006-04-27 . https://web.archive.org/web/20060427154306/http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_024056-01.hcsp . live .
  71. Web site: APDA . Apda.pt . 2013-07-23 . 2006-10-06 . https://web.archive.org/web/20061006120520/http://www.apda.pt/apda_resources/APDA.Biblioteca/eureau%5Cposition%20papers%5Cthe%20reuse%20of%20phosphorus.pdf . live .
  72. Web site: Phosphate Rock Statistics and Information. 2009-02-05. 2009-03-20. https://web.archive.org/web/20090320104612/http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/phosphate_rock/phospmcs06.pdf. live.
  73. Web site: Archived copy . 2013-12-27 . https://web.archive.org/web/20060805112847/http://ecosanres.org/PDF%20files/Fact_sheets/ESR4lowres.pdf . 2006-08-05 .
  74. Web site: The World's Water 2008-2009, Ch 1. . . Meena Palaniappan and Peter H. Gleick . 2008 . 2009-01-31 . https://web.archive.org/web/20090320104604/http://www.worldwater.org/data20082009/ch01.pdf . 2009-03-20.
  75. Web site: WorldŐs largest acquifer going dry . Uswaternews.com . 2013-07-23 . https://archive.today/20121209034549/http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcsupply/6worllarg2.html . 2012-12-09 .
  76. http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/2005/Update47_data.htm
  77. http://www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/water_resource.htm
  78. Web site: How General is the Hubbert Curve? . Aspoitalia.net . 2013-07-23 . 2007-09-29 . https://web.archive.org/web/20070929002232/http://www.aspoitalia.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34&Itemid=39 . live .
  79. Web site: Laherrere: Multi-Hubbert Modeling . Hubbertpeak.com . 2013-07-23 . 2013-10-28 . https://web.archive.org/web/20131028052636/http://www.hubbertpeak.com/laherrere/multihub.htm . live .
  80. Allen S, Bennett M, Garcia C, Giovannucci D, Ingersoll C, Kraft K, Potts J, Rue C . Everage L, Ingersoll C, Mullan J, Salinas L, Childs A . 2014-01-31 . ymd . Committee on Sustainability Assessment . The COSA Measuring Sustainability Report . 2020-02-28 . 2020-02-28 . https://web.archive.org/web/20200228201904/https://thecosa.org/the-cosa-measuring-sustainability-report-2/ . live .
  81. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.032 . Achievements and gaps in indicators for sustainability . Ecological Indicators . 17 . 14–19 . 2012 . Dahl . Arthur Lyon .
  82. 10.1002/sd.349 . Bridging the gaps between theory and practice: A service niche approach to urban sustainability indicators . Sustainable Development . 16 . 5 . 329–340 . 2008 . Keirstead . James . Leach . Matt .
  83. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.020 . 19500899 . Bridging the gaps for global sustainable development: A quantitative analysis . Journal of Environmental Management . 90 . 12 . 3700–3707 . 2009 . Udo . Victor E. . Jansson . Peter Mark . free .
  84. 10.1016/j.tree.2007.08.016. 17997188. Mind the sustainability gap. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 22. 12. 621–624. 2007. Fischer. Joern. Manning. Adrian D.. Steffen. Will. Rose. Deborah B.. Daniell. Katherine. Felton. Adam. Garnett. Stephen. Gilna. Ben. Heinsohn. Rob. Lindenmayer. David B.. MacDonald. Ben. Mills. Frank. Newell. Barry. Reid. Julian. Robin. Libby. Sherren. Kate. Wade. Alan.
  85. 10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00279-2 . Estimating sustainability gaps: Methods and preliminary applications for the UK and the Netherlands . Ecological Economics . 37 . 5–22 . 2001 . Ekins . Paul . Simon . Sandrine . 2019-07-09 . 2020-09-25 . https://web.archive.org/web/20200925135243/http://oro.open.ac.uk/39/1/Simon_Sustainability_Gap.pdf . live .

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Sustainability measurement".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.