ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2025
Environmental Impact of Machinery and Equipment: A Comparison between EXIOBASE, National Environmentally Extended Input-Output Models, and Ecoinvent.
Article in Environmental science & technology, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental impact assessments of machinery and equipment (ME) are constrained by process-based life cycle assessment (LCA) with limited system coverage and by aggregated top-down models with reduced representativeness. Lack of knowledge about consistency across these approaches hampers the understanding of ME impacts and policy making. This study quantifies greenhouse gas emission multipliers (cradle-to-gate emissions per unit production) of ME using data from process LCA (ecoinvent), national environmentally extended input-output (EEIO) models, and a multiregional EEIO model (EXIOBASE) for the United States, China, Japan, and South Korea, assessing variations, reliability, and compatibility. While EXIOBASE (seven ME sectors) and national EEIO data (32-102 sectors) broadly align, national EEIO models differ more in production technologies, with deviations from 100-fold lower to 3.7-fold higher than EXIOBASE results. Ecoinvent offers broad ME product-level coverage (∼390 sectors), especially for general and electrical ME, but with uneven representation and limited geographic differentiation. Its multipliers vary widely and often exceed EXIOBASE values, challenging the assumption that process-based LCA underestimates impacts due to truncation. Overall, our results reveal cross-model variation, confirm the relative reliability of EEIO data, point to limitations in ecoinvent, and underscore the need to link technical detail with global trade representation in ME modeling.
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.