ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2024
Country-Specific External Costs of Abiotic Resource Use Based on User Cost Model in Life Cycle Impact Assessment.
Article in Environmental science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abiotic resources are indispensable in society, but there are concerns regarding their depletion, scarcity, and increasing prices, resulting in potential economic damage in the future. To address these concerns, it is effective to consider the external costs of resource use. Although resource availability is different among mining sites, and local conditions are relevant in assessing resource scarcity, previous studies have assessed external costs and potential impacts of abiotic resource use globally. This study provides country-specific characterization factors (CFs) of abiotic resource use in life cycle impact assessment based on the user cost model, which represents the external costs of abiotic resource use to reflect country-specific resource scarcity. We demonstrate considerable variations in the CFs depending on the mining country, suggesting that the choice of mining country can affect external costs. The global external cost of abiotic resource use in 2020 was estimated at 1.9 trillion $, with a major contribution from the extraction of fossil fuels in the United States. Historical trends of the CFs and relevant parameters showed temporal fluctuations, emphasizing the importance of regularly updating the data underlying the calculation of the CFs. Country-level assessments of the external costs of resource use can contribute to discussions on the responsibilities of consuming countries by incorporating material footprint studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.