ASTM E3066-2016a Standard Practice for Evaluating Relative Sustainability Involving Energy or Chemicals from Biomass《评价生物质能源或化学品相对可持续性的标准实施规程》.pdf

《ASTM E3066-2016a Standard Practice for Evaluating Relative Sustainability Involving Energy or Chemicals from Biomass《评价生物质能源或化学品相对可持续性的标准实施规程》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASTM E3066-2016a Standard Practice for Evaluating Relative Sustainability Involving Energy or Chemicals from Biomass《评价生物质能源或化学品相对可持续性的标准实施规程》.pdf（6页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Designation: E3066 16aStandard Practice forEvaluating Relative Sustainability Involving Energy orChemicals from Biomass1This standard is issued under the fixed designation E3066; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the

2、year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This standard practice provides a science-based meth-odology for evaluating the relative sustainability of opt

3、ionsinvolving energy or chemicals derived from biomass. Optionsmay involve products, processes, or projects.1.2 The methodology includes setting goals and objectives,identifying stakeholders, selecting appropriate indicators, andevaluating the relative sustainability of options where at leastone opt

4、ion is available from biomass.1.3 The objectives are to facilitate fair comparison ofoptions, focus efforts on practical indicators reflecting stake-holder priorities, and support continual improvement for moresustainable outcomes.1.4 The purpose of this standard practice is not to declaresomething

5、as sustainable or not sustainable but to help usersassess, compare, and rank options based on specific goals andobjectives.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro

6、-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2E1705 Terminology Relating to Biotechnology2.2 ISO Standards:3ISO 14040 Environmental ManagementLife CycleAssessmentPrinciples and frameworkISO 14044

7、 Life Cycle AssessmentRequirements andGuidelinesISO 13065 Sustainability Criteria for Bioenergy3. Terminology3.1 For general terminology, refer to Terminology E1705.NOTE 1The user is advised that the definitions used by variousindustries, marketers, and regulatory bodies can differ from those in thi

8、sstandard. It is the responsibility of the user to ensure that the terms usedin a particular context are clearly understood.3.2 Definitions:3.2.1 biomass, nsubstance wholly comprised of living orrecently living (nonfossil) material.3.2.1.1 DiscussionSometimes referred to as “renewableorganic materia

9、l,” examples of biomass include whole or partsof plants, trees, aquatic organisms, animals, algae, and micro-organisms.3.2.2 continual improvement, na systematic, iterative pro-cess of identifying and evaluating options and selecting thosethat provide incremental improvements toward achieving de-fin

10、ed goals and objectives.3.2.3 context, nthe historical conditions, trends, and otherforces that influence or define the measurement and interpre-tation of environmental, economic, and social indicators in aspecific place and time.3.2.4 indicator, nspecific, science-based, observable andmeasurable ch

11、aracteristic.3.2.4.1 DiscussionIndicators can be used to assess condi-tions of a system, effects of activities on phenomena ofconcern, or to monitor trends in conditions over time. (1)43.2.5 measure, vquantify the size, amount, or degree usinga science-based approach and appropriate unit(s).3.2.6 sc

12、ience-based, adjapplying principles and practicesthat employ the scientific method.3.2.6.1 DiscussionThe scientific method is a process oftesting a hypothesis based on evidence and typically involvesobjective observation, experiment, critical analysis,verification, repetition, and induction.1This pr

13、actice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E48 on Bioenergyand Industrial Chemicals from Biomass and is the direct responsibility of Subcom-mittee E48.80 on Sustainability of Bioenergy and Industrial Chemicals fromBiomass.Current edition approved Dec. 1, 2016. Published January 2017. Origina

14、llyapproved in 2016. Last previous edition approved in 2016 as E306616. DOI:E306616A.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary

15、page onthe ASTM website.3Available from International Organization for Standardization (ISO), ISOCentral Secretariat, BIBC II, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier,Geneva, Switzerland, http:/www.iso.org.4The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to a list of references at the end ofthis stan

16、dard.Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United StatesThis international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for theDevelopment of

17、International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.13.2.7 stakeholder, nindividual, group, or organization thatcan affect or be directly affected by the options being evalu-ated.3.2.7.1 DiscussionThe identification o

18、f stakeholders de-pends on the specific product, process, or project, and itscontext. Stakeholders may vary over time and can includeregulatory bodies, customers, neighbors, employees, suppliers,and surrogates.3.2.8 sustainability, naspirational concept denoting thecapacity to meet current needs whi

19、le maintaining options forfuture generations to meet their needs. (2); (3); (4)3.2.8.1 DiscussionFor additional information see 4.2.1.3.2.9 relative sustainability, na comparison of two ormore options that enables the evaluation of costs, benefits, andtrade-offs that apply goals, objectives, and ind

20、icators within aspecified context.3.2.9.1 Discussionfor additional information see 4.2.3.3.3 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:3.3.1 assessment, ncollecting data for the indicators se-lected in an evaluation plan.3.3.2 evaluation, na systematic, iterative process for com-paring options

21、using prioritized science-based indicators andcomparing the assessments while considering the trade-offsbased on identified goals and boundary conditions.3.3.2.1 DiscussionWithin this standard practice, theevaluation may be referred to as the “evaluation plan” orsimply “the plan.”4. Discussion of Co

22、ncepts4.1 Concepts used in this practice can differ from their usein other sustainability certification standards and schemes.4.2 Evaluating Relative Sustainability4.2.1 Sustainability does not imply a steady state or anabsolute value; for human activity to be “sustainable,” changeor adaptation over

23、 time is required. To make the concept ofsustainability operational, objectives must be defined within aspecified context, stakeholders engaged, and consistent ap-proaches applied to facilitate comparable, science-based as-sessments (2-5).4.2.2 Environmental, economic, and social changes areinevitab

24、le. Staying on course toward goals entails an iterativeprocess and adaptation to changing contextual conditions.4.2.3 Evaluation of relative sustainability is supported byscience-based analysis of environmental, economic, and socialindicators of conditions associated with the options underconsiderat

25、ion. The evaluation process includes documentingcosts, benefits, and trade-offs among selected environmental,economic and social indicators.4.3 Context and Stakeholders4.3.1 Determining the context for evaluating the relativesustainability is a critical step. A decision or action that resultsin a mo

26、re sustainable outcome under one set of conditions maynot produce a more sustainable outcome under other condi-tions.4.3.2 Defining context and identifying stakeholders dependon the proposed goals of an evaluation. Typically, the evalua-tion goals are directly linked to the options to be assessed.Ob

27、jectives and context help establish the appropriate scopeincluding the temporal and spatial boundaries. Assessmentsshould focus on a scale that facilitates stakeholder engagementand enables researchers to collect and analyze data for activi-ties that are causally linked to locally defined problems a

28、ndobservable values.4.3.3 A clearly defined project purpose, addressing a clearlyarticulated problem, will help establish boundaries that facili-tate constructive stakeholder engagement.4.3.4 Stakeholder input is important to help identify andprioritize indicators and evaluation goals. Stakeholders

29、alsocontribute to considering trade-offs, identifying sources ofinformation, and supporting ongoing work (monitoring) to-ward continual improvement.4.3.5 Transparent communication is a prerequisite for con-structive stakeholder engagement. Transparency helps developtrust among parties and is a corne

30、rstone for an evaluation ofrelative sustainability and the future monitoring and evaluationrequired for continual improvement.4.4 Science-based Indicators4.4.1 The assessment of options shall be based on relevantindicators. Separate standards should be cited and employed toassure replicable, science

31、-based methods are used to measureeach indicator.4.4.2 This standard practice encourages the development ofnew science-based indicators for areas of stakeholder concernthat are not yet adequately defined in standards.4.4.3 See Appendix X1 for examples of science-based,measurable indicators.4.5 Compa

32、rison of Options4.5.1 Comparing the relative sustainability of options typi-cally involves the interpretation of data related to past eventsand conditions (historical baseline) as well as goals andexpectations about the future that are inherent when document-ing and comparing the effects of a propos

33、ed option to theeffects of an alternative or “business as usual” option.4.6 More Sustainable Outcomes4.6.1 An evaluation of relative sustainability is limited toidentifying what appears to be a better way of achievingspecified goals within a defined context and based on selectedindicators. More sust

34、ainable outcomes necessarily consider thevalue of conserving non-renewable resources for future gen-erations (1). The ability to compare options and guide deci-sions to support more sustainable outcomes is compromised ifthe assessment of one or more options relies on generalizeddata that do not capt

35、ure the priorities and trade-offs involved inthe specified context.4.6.2 An evaluation of relative sustainability involves en-gaging stakeholders to identify priorities and build consensusaround what being “more sustainable” means within thespecified context.4.7 Continual Improvement4.7.1 This stand

36、ard practice requires users to describe themechanisms that will be applied to advance continual improve-ment. Because data about the past are limited and knowledgeE3066 16a2of the future is still more uncertain, indicators should beselected and monitored in a manner that supports timelycorrective ac

37、tions.4.7.2 The evaluation process and selected indicators shouldbe reviewed and updated when new information and techno-logical options offer opportunities to improve monitoring andanalysis.5. Summary of Practice5.1 Basic Principles for Evaluating the Relative Sustain-ability of OptionsEvaluating r

38、elative sustainability involvescomparing assessments of two or more options involving aproduct, process or project. Each option shall be assessed usingthe following principles. One option could be the currentconditions or status quo as a reference case.5.1.1 Several basic principles improve the valu

39、e of assess-ment outcomes for each option and thus the evaluation of therelative sustainability of the options.5.1.2 TransparencyIt is essential that the assessment ofeach option be documented in a way that allows forreproduction, with clearly communicated procedures and re-sults.5.1.2.1 The expecta

40、tion of transparency does not stipulatethat all information is made public. There may be situationswhere information could be considered proprietary or confi-dential under standard business practices. Confidential busi-ness information is not included under the transparency prin-ciple.5.1.3 Stakehol

41、der EngagementThe evaluation and associ-ated assessments shall identify and engage stakeholders whoare relevant to the evaluation scope and context.5.1.4 Timely CommunicationA system should be in placeto share information on the status of priority indicators foroptions being assessed. Untimely repor

42、ting or delayed com-munication with stakeholders can hamper the effectiveness andvalue of the evaluation and increase the cost of correctiveactions.5.1.5 Equivalent TreatmentAll assessments shall be de-veloped and conducted using consistent approaches to examineeffects relevant to the stated goals a

43、nd in a manner that isreplicable and facilitates objective comparisons.5.2 Six Steps for Assessing Sustainability Aspects of EachOptionThe following six steps shall be used to plan andconduct an assessment of each option. Fig. 1 provides adiagram of the evaluation plan.5.2.1 Step 1: Define the Evalu

44、ation Plan5.2.1.1 The evaluation plan shall clearly specify: who isinitiating the plan; contact information for questions andcommunications about the plan; the time line; sources ofFIG. 1 Representation of Process for Evaluating Relative SustainabilityE3066 16a3support to carry out the plan; the pri

45、mary purpose and contextof the plan; goals relevant to sustainability; and other aspects ofthe scope that are pertinent for subsequent steps, for examplestakeholders, data sources, related surveys and studies, andspecial requirements or limitations imposed by external fac-tors.5.2.1.2 The evaluation

46、 plan shall propose the options to becompared including the reference case option.5.2.1.3 The context description should include geographicareas and events associated with project activities; availabledata on current and historic conditions relevant to projectobjectives and activities; relevant regu

47、latory requirements;sphere of influence and foreseeable effects associated with theactivities; stakeholders and their concerns and priorities.5.2.1.4 The scope of the evaluation should be achievablewith available resources.5.2.1.5 The plan and options to be assessed can be modifiedbased on stakehold

48、er engagement and new information discov-ered as the evaluation proceeds.5.2.2 Step 2: Identify Stakeholders and Invite Input5.2.2.1 Based on the plan purpose, objectives and context,and the scope of the evaluation, identify stakeholders and givethem access to timely information on the evaluation pl

49、an andthe options to be assessed.5.2.2.2 Engaging stakeholders can be challenging becauseof the range of potential interest groups and the physical,financial and social-cultural barriers to constructive participa-tion. If key stakeholders cannot participate, their perspectivesshould be represented through an alternate mechanism orsurrogate.5.2.2.3 Some sustainability indicators may involve globaland regional issues such as climate, air, and water. Althoughevaluation processes call for stakeholder engagement, it is notpractical for each assessment to re