Valuing Biodiversity in Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Erratum published on 13 March 2020, see Sustainability 2020, 12(6), 2270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205628In this article, the authors propose an impact assessment method for life cycle assessment (LCA) that adheres to established LCA principles for land use-related impact assessment, bridges current research gaps and addresses the requirements of different stakeholders for a methodological framework. The conservation of biodiversity is a priority for humanity, as expressed in the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Addressing biodiversity across value chains is a key challenge for enabling sustainable production pathways. Life cycle assessment is a standardised approach to assess and compare environmental impacts of products along their value chains. The impact assessment method presented in this article allows the quantification of the impact of land-using production processes on biodiversity for several broad land use classes. It provides a calculation framework with degrees of customisation (e.g., to take into account regional conservation priorities), but also offers a default valuation of biodiversity based on naturalness. The applicability of the method is demonstrated through an example of a consumer product. The main strength of the approach is that it yields highly aggregated information on the biodiversity impacts of products, enabling biodiversity-conscious decisions about raw materials, production routes and end user products

Biologische Vielfalt in Ökobilanzen verankern

Akteure der öffentlichen Hand sowie der Wirtschaft benötigen Instrumente, mit denen sie die Wirkung ihrer Tätigkeit auf die biologische Vielfalt steuern können. Dabei muss der Blick auf ganze Wertschöpfungsketten gelegt werden. Eine neue Methode setzt hier an und ermöglicht die Abbildung der biologischen Vielfalt in Ökobilanzen

Die Ökobilanz als Instrument für informierte Konsumentscheidungen - bewusster Konsum kann Biodiversität schützen

Eine der größten globalen Herausforderungen ist aktuell der Schutz und die Erhaltung von Biodiversität. Dabei stellt der Konsum von Gütern und Dienstleistungen einen zentralen Risikofaktor für Biodiversität und Ökosystemleistungen dar. Biodiversität ist eine komplexe Größe, die sich über die Vielfalt der Arten, die Vielfalt der Lebensräume und die genetische Vielfalt innerhalb der Organismen definiert. Zur Risikoabschätzung bedarf es einer möglichst genauen Erfassung, die sich aufgrund der inhärenten Komplexität jedoch oftmals schwierig gestaltet. Welche Möglichkeiten für biodiversitäts-bewussten Konsum gibt es aktuell? Grundsätzlich können die Auswirkungen von Produkten und Produktionsprozessen auf die Umwelt in Ökobilanzen analysiert werden. Wir schlagen für das Instrument der Ökobilanz eine anwenderfreundliche Methode zur Bewertung von Biodiversität vor. Diese beruht auf der Erfassung der Veränderung der Qualität einer bestimmten Fläche über einen bestimmten Zeitraum, die durch die Herstellung eines bestimmten Produkts verursacht wird. In angemessener Form kommuniziert können Ökobilanzergebnisse dazu beitragen, Konsum durch gezielte Information bewusster und damit potenziell nachhaltiger zu gestalten

Life cycle assessment of innovative materials for thermal energy storage in buildings

The politically endorsed reduction of greenhouse gas emissions entails the transformation of thermal energy systems towards renewable energies, especially in the building sector. This comes along with a demand in energy storage, as there is a time offset between energy availability and demand. As sensible heat storages induce major losses and have limited energy density, current water-based solutions are only partially sufficient to meet these demands. Within the project “Speicher-LCA” the environmental performance of a variety of innovative materials available for energy storage in buildings is assessed. The project provides the first extensive comparison of environmental profiles of various thermal energy storage materials, including phase change, thermochemical and sorption materials. The specific performances in the storage cycle are taken into account. All results will be publically accessible through a spreadsheet tool including a comprehensive set of materials, components as well as their integration into different building types. This paper discusses the methodological framework of the study and presents the environmental assessment results for selected materials. It highlights the main challenges in the assessment of innovative storage materials on different system levels which require specific definition of functional units accordingly. The first assessment results on material level for selected phase change (PCM) and thermo-chemical materials (TCM) allow an environmental characterization regarding their potential application in thermal storages. In addition, ranges of required numbers of storage cycles for amortization have been calculated for the non-renewable primary energy demand. For PCMs amortization cycles range between ∼20 to 150 cycles for salt hydrates and up to ∼280 cycles for paraffins. Regarding TCM, energetic amortization of silica gel and zeolite 13x is reached after ∼60 and ∼260 cycles respectively. Since the realization of storage components and systems which can actually be used in real applications will further increase the cycle number required for amortization, these storage materials may thus not be suitable for applications with a low number of cycles over lifetime, such as seasonal storage

Non-Standard Errors

In statistics, samples are drawn from a population in a data-generating process (DGP). Standard errors measure the uncertainty in estimates of population parameters. In science, evidence is generated to test hypotheses in an evidence-generating process (EGP). We claim that EGP variation across researchers adds uncertainty: Non-standard errors (NSEs). We study NSEs by letting 164 teams test the same hypotheses on the same data. NSEs turn out to be sizable, but smaller for better reproducible or higher rated research. Adding peer-review stages reduces NSEs. We further find that this type of uncertainty is underestimated by participants

Peri-operative red blood cell transfusion in neonates and infants: NEonate and Children audiT of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe: A prospective European multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND: Little is known about current clinical practice concerning peri-operative red blood cell transfusion in neonates and small infants. Guidelines suggest transfusions based on haemoglobin thresholds ranging from 8.5 to 12 g dl-1, distinguishing between children from birth to day 7 (week 1), from day 8 to day 14 (week 2) or from day 15 (≥week 3) onwards. OBJECTIVE: To observe peri-operative red blood cell transfusion practice according to guidelines in relation to patient outcome. DESIGN: A multicentre observational study. SETTING: The NEonate-Children sTudy of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe (NECTARINE) trial recruited patients up to 60 weeks' postmenstrual age undergoing anaesthesia for surgical or diagnostic procedures from 165 centres in 31 European countries between March 2016 and January 2017. PATIENTS: The data included 5609 patients undergoing 6542 procedures. Inclusion criteria was a peri-operative red blood cell transfusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was the haemoglobin level triggering a transfusion for neonates in week 1, week 2 and week 3. Secondary endpoints were transfusion volumes, 'delta haemoglobin' (preprocedure - transfusion-triggering) and 30-day and 90-day morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Peri-operative red blood cell transfusions were recorded during 447 procedures (6.9%). The median haemoglobin levels triggering a transfusion were 9.6 [IQR 8.7 to 10.9] g dl-1 for neonates in week 1, 9.6 [7.7 to 10.4] g dl-1 in week 2 and 8.0 [7.3 to 9.0] g dl-1 in week 3. The median transfusion volume was 17.1 [11.1 to 26.4] ml kg-1 with a median delta haemoglobin of 1.8 [0.0 to 3.6] g dl-1. Thirty-day morbidity was 47.8% with an overall mortality of 11.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate lower transfusion-triggering haemoglobin thresholds in clinical practice than suggested by current guidelines. The high morbidity and mortality of this NECTARINE sub-cohort calls for investigative action and evidence-based guidelines addressing peri-operative red blood cell transfusions strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02350348

Les droits disciplinaires des fonctions publiques : « unification », « harmonisation » ou « distanciation ». A propos de la loi du 26 avril 2016 relative à la déontologie et aux droits et obligations des fonctionnaires

The production of tt‾ , W+bb‾ and W+cc‾ is studied in the forward region of proton–proton collisions collected at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeV by the LHCb experiment, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 1.98±0.02 fb−1 . The W bosons are reconstructed in the decays W→ℓν , where ℓ denotes muon or electron, while the b and c quarks are reconstructed as jets. All measured cross-sections are in agreement with next-to-leading-order Standard Model predictions.The production of $t\overline{t}$, $W+b\overline{b}$ and $W+c\overline{c}$ is studied in the forward region of proton-proton collisions collected at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeV by the LHCb experiment, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 1.98 $\pm$ 0.02 \mbox{fb}^{-1}. The $W$ bosons are reconstructed in the decays $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$, where $\ell$ denotes muon or electron, while the $b$ and $c$ quarks are reconstructed as jets. All measured cross-sections are in agreement with next-to-leading-order Standard Model predictions

Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362