Page 244 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition
P. 244

228  4 Life Cycle Impact Assessment

                    Table 4.8  List of hemerobic levels . a 138)

                    Hemerobic level  Level of naturalness      Use/examples


                    Ahemerobic      Natural           Uninfluenced ecological system
                    Oligohemerobic  Nearly natural    No or occasional use
                    Mesohemerobic   Semi-natural      Forestry (mixed woodlands), meadows and
                                                      pastures (extensive)
                    β-Euhemerobic  Partly nature-remote  Forest mono-cultures, natural fruit
                                                      cultivation and biological agriculture
                    α-Euhemerobic  Nature-remote      Arable land and garden areas
                                                      (conventional agriculture) and viniculture
                                                      (intensive)
                    Polyhemerobic   Xenonatural b     Sporting areas and landfills
                    Metahemerobic   Artificial         Sealed areas

                     a By insertion of intermediate levels in between levels 2 and 3, 3 and 4, 4 and 5 as well as 5 and 6 an
                    overall of 11 hemerobic levels (H0–H10) according to Brentrup et al. (loc. cit.) are obtained. In
                    Table 1 Brentrup et al., provide examples for each level, which can also be useful for the seven-level
                    system proposed here.
                    b Analogy to ‘xenobiotic’ (used for persistant man-made chemicals in the environment). 138)

                    as an indicator for the protection of nature and (terrestrial) species.Korte et al.
                    (1992) and Kl¨ opffer (2012b) Additionally soil has other basic functions like its
                    mere availability for agricultural and other human activities (land occupation) or
                    functions, regulating water regimes, offering recreation areas, and so on. 139)
                      There are no unambiguous decisions possible either for an operationalisation
                    of this impact category or with regard to the choice of a simple parameter that
                    quantitatively describes all or at least its most important functions. There are
                    numerous grades between the extremes of completely natural and completely
                    sealed areas (‘between jungle and parking lot’), which make an application of a
                    simple pattern difficult or impossible. A demand for natural space related to a fU is
                    to be assigned to the type of use and the duration of use. Two of these figures can
                    be expressed by numerical values: space and time. The third figure of qualitative
                    type is used to characterise the nearness or remoteness towards nature. For this
                    purpose, the well-known hemerobic levels of ecological landscape assessment can
                    be used (Table 4.8). 140)






                    138) Brentrup et al. (2002b), suggest a 11-level scale
                    139) Kl¨ opffer and Renner (1995), M¨ uller-Wenk (1999a), Koellner (2000), Schenk (2001), Brentrup
                        et al. (2002b), Lindeijer, M¨ uller-Wenk and Steen (2002), Pennington et al. (2004), Mil` a i Canals
                        et al. (2007a), Koellner and Scholz (2007) and Michelsen (2008).
                    140) Peper, Rohner and Winkelbrandt (1985), Kl¨ opffer and Renner (1995), Kowarik (1999), Giegrich
                        and Sturm (2000) and Brentrup et al. (2002a).
   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249