Critical Review of Climate and Resource Costs and Benefits of Machinery and Equipment

Edgar G. Hertwich; Yiwen Liu; Meng Jiang

doi:10.1016/j.eng.2025.10.034

Engineering ›› :202510034 DOI: 10.1016/j.eng.2025.10.034

Research

research-article

Critical Review of Climate and Resource Costs and Benefits of Machinery and Equipment

Author information +

History +

PDF (1534KB)

Abstract

Environmental input-output analysis suggests that we use one-third of all metals to produce machinery and equipment (ME) and that their production causes 5% of greenhouse gas emissions globally. Yet, our empirical understanding of material use and emissions associated with ME remains limited, making it the least researched major aspect of material consumption. Machines are not represented explicitly in climate change mitigation models and there is little research considering mitigation opportunities related to ME. Meanwhile the practice and potential for circular material flows, which have dynamic interactions with machinery, have yet to be explored. ME is a very diverse category and so economic statistics and input-output models are essential for a holistic understanding. Mitigation, however, can only be understood through bottom-up engineering research. We identify data sources for future empirical research and suggest how to combine these. Future demand for ME can in part be foreseen by assuming that lower-income countries will use machines to increase their productivity to levels seen in high-income countries. Additional demand will arise from the introduction of autonomous machines, service robots, and artificial intelligence in workplaces and homes. We describe knowledge gaps and outline research questions important for anticipating the future requirements for machines and their potential contributions as both causes of and solutions to climate change and resource overconsumption.

Keywords

Automation / Industrialization / Resource efficiency / Industrial ecology / Climate change mitigation / Life cycle assessment / Construction machinery / Agricultural machinery / Home appliances / Electrical machinery and equipment

Cite this article

Download citation ▾

Edgar G. Hertwich, Yiwen Liu, Meng Jiang. Critical Review of Climate and Resource Costs and Benefits of Machinery and Equipment. Engineering 202510034 DOI:10.1016/j.eng.2025.10.034

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户忘记密码

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within

[1]	Pauliuk S, Müller DB. The role of in-use stocks in the social metabolism and in climate change mitigation. Glob Environ Change 2014;24:132-42.

[2]	Plank C, Liehr S, Hummel D, Wiedenhofer D, Haberl H, Görg C. Doing more with less: provisioning systems and the transformation of the stock-flow-service nexus. Ecol Econ 2021;187:107093.

[3]

Bashmakov IA, Nilsson LJ, Acquaye A, Bataille C, Cullen JM, de la Rue du Can S, et al. Climate change 2022: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the sixth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press; 2022.

[4]	Paris Agreement. Report. Paris: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; 2015.

[5]	Jiang M, Wang R, Wood R, Rasul K, Zhu B, Hertwich E. Material and carbon footprints of machinery capital. Environ Sci Technol 2023; 57(50):21124-35.

[6]	Hertwich EG. Increased carbon footprint of materials production driven by rise in investments. Nat Geosci 2021; 14(3):151-5.

[7]	Akobeng E. Gross capital formation, institutions and poverty in sub-Saharan Africa. J Econ Policy Reform 2017; 20(2):136-64.

[8]	De Long JB, Summers LH. How strongly do developing economies benefit from equipment investment? J Monet Econ 1993; 32(3):395-415.

[9]	Lian W, Novta N, Pugacheva E, Timmer Y, Topalova P. The price of capital goods: a driver of investment under threat. IMF Econ Rev 2020; 68(3):509-49.

[10]	Implementation plan for promoting equipment renewal in the industrial sector. Report. Beijing: Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of China; 2024. Chinese.

[11]	Costanza R, Daly HE. Natural capital and sustainable development. Conserv Biol 1992; 6(1):37-46.

[12]	Carmona LG, Whiting K, Cullen J. A stock-flow-service nexus vision of the low carbon economy. Energy Rep 2022;8:565-75.

[13]	Fanning AL, O’Neill DW, Büchs M. Provisioning systems for a good life within planetary boundaries. Glob Environ Change 2020;64:102135.

[14]	Pauliuk S, Wood R, Hertwich EG. Dynamic models of fixed capital stocks and their application in industrial ecology. J Ind Ecol 2015; 19(1):104-16.

[15]	Wiedenhofer D, Fishman T, Lauk C, Haas W, Krausmann F. Integrating material stock dynamics into economy-wide material flow accounting: concepts, modelling, and global application for 1900-2050. Ecol Econ 2019;156:121-33.

[16]	Daehn KE, Allanore A, Olivetti EA. A key feedback loop: building electricity infrastructure and electrifying metals production. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 2024; 382(2284):20230234.

[17]	Bringezu S. Possible target corridor for sustainable use of global material resources. Resources 2015; 4(1):25-54.

[18]	Gross capital formation (% of GDP) 2024. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2024.

[19]	Stadler K, Wood R, Simas M, Bulavskaya T, de Koning A, Kuenen J, et al. EXIOBASE3—developing a time series of detailed environmentally extended multi-regional input-output tables. J Ind Ecol 2018; 22(3):502-15.

[20]	Hollander S. Retrospectives: Ricardo on machinery. J Econ Perspect 2019; 33(2):229-42.

[21]	Gehrke C. Tozer on machinery. Eur J Hist Econ Thought 2000; 7(4):485-506.

[22]	James FA. On the unimportance of machinery. Explor Econ Hist 1985; 22(4):378-401.

[23]	Haskel J, Westlake S. Capitalism without capital: The rise of the intangible economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2018.

[24]	Buckley PJ, Strange R, Timmer MP, de Vries GJ. Rent appropriation in global value chains: the past, present, and future of intangible assets. Glob Strategy J 2022; 12(4):679-96.

[25]	De Long JB, Summers LH. Equipment investment and economic growth. Q J Econ 1991; 106(2):445-502.

[26]	Vu KM. Chapter 4—sources of growth in the world economy: a comparison of G7 and E7 economies. In: Fraumeni BM, editor. Measuring economic growth and productivity. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2020.

[27]	DeLong B. Economic history: the roots of growth. Nature 2016; 538(7626):456-7.

[28]	Santos J, Borges AS, Domingos T. Exploring the links between total factor productivity and energy efficiency: Portugal, 1960-2014. Energy Econ 2021;101:105407.

[29]	Escribá-Pérez FJ, Murgui-García MJ, Ruiz-Tamarit JR. The devil is in the details: capital stock estimation and aggregate productivity growth—an application to the Spanish economy. Port Econ J 2022; 21(1):31-50.

[30]	Haberl H, Wiedenhofer D, Virág D, Kalt G, Plank B, Brockway P, et al. A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights. Environ Res Lett 2020; 15(6):065003.

[31]	Krausmann F, Wiedenhofer D, Lauk C, Haas W, Tanikawa H, Fishman T, et al. Global socioeconomic material stocks rise 23-fold over the 20th century and require half of annual resource use. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2017; 114(8):1880-5.

[32]	Bruyninckx H, Hatfield-Dodds S, Hellweg S, Schandl H, Vidal B, Razian H, et al. Global resources outlook 2024:bend the trend—pathways to a liveable planet as resource use spikes. Report. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme; 2024.

[33]	Krausmann F, Wiedenhofer D, Haberl H. Growing stocks of buildings, infrastructures and machinery as key challenge for compliance with climate targets. Glob Environ Change 2020;61:102034.

[34]	Liu Y, Jiang M, Hertwich EG. Environmental impact of machinery and equipment: a comparison between EXIOBASE, national EEIO accounts models and ecoinvent. Enviro Sci Technol. In press.

[35]	Broadbent C. Steel’s recyclability: demonstrating the benefits of recycling steel to achieve a circular economy. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2016; 21(11):1658-65.

[36]	Billy RG, Müller DB. Aluminium use in passenger cars poses systemic challenges for recycling and GHG emissions. Resour Conserv Recycling 2023; 190:106827.

[37]	Wang T, Berrill P, Zimmerman JB, Hertwich EG. Copper recycling flow model for the United States economy: impact of scrap quality on potential energy benefit. Environ Sci Technol 2021; 55(8):5485-95.

[38]	Crippa M, Solazzo E, Guizzardi D, Monforti-Ferrario F, Tubiello FN, Leip A. Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat Food 2021; 2(3):198-209.

[39]	Allwood JM, Cullen JM, Carruth MA, Cooper DR, McBrien M, Milford RL, et al. Sustainable materials: with both eyes open. Cambridge: Cambridge Cambridge; 2012.

[40]	Wiedenhofer D, Streeck J, Wieland H, Grammer B, Baumgart A, Plank B, et al. From extraction to end-uses and waste management: modeling economy-wide material cycles and stock dynamics around the world. J Ind Ecol 2024; 28(6):1464-80.

[41]	Wang R, Hertwich EG, Fishman T, Deetman S, Behrens P, Chen WQ, et al. The legacy environmental footprints of manufactured capital. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2023; 120(24):e2218828120.

[42]	Södersten CJH, Wood R, Hertwich EG. Endogenizing capital in MRIO models: the implications for consumption-based accounting. Environ Sci Technol 2018; 52(22):13250-9.

[43]	Feenstra RC, Inklaar R, Timmer MP. The next generation of the Penn world table. Am Econ Rev 2015; 105(10):3150-82.

[44]	Södersten CJ, Wood R, Wiedmann T. The capital load of global material footprints. Resour Conserv Recycling 2020;158:104811.

[45]	Miller TR, Berrill P, Wolfram P, Wang R, Kim Y, Zheng X, et al. Method for endogenizing capital in the United States environmentally-extended input-output model. J Ind Ecol 2019; 23(6):1410-24.

[46]	Berrill P, Miller TR, Kondo Y, Hertwich EG. Capital in the American carbon, energy, and material footprint. J Ind Ecol 2020; 24(3):589-600.

[47]	Hertwich EG, Jiang M. The carbon footprint of machine tools and metal working machinery in U.S. manufacturing. Procedia CIRP 2025;135:420-5.

[48]	Khan AU, Huang L. Toward zero emission construction: a comparative life cycle impact assessment of diesel, hybrid, and electric excavators. Energies 2023; 16(16):6025.

[49]	Zhang Y, Wei G, Zhang Z, Jia T, Yang D. Study of hydraulic slotting technology for rapid excavation of coal seams with severe coal and gas outburst potentials. J Appl Sci 2013; 13(17):3483-9.

[50]	Ostad-Ahmad-Ghorabi H, Collado-Ruiz D. Tool for the environmental assessment of cranes based on parameterization. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2011; 16(5):392-400.

[51]	Wiik MK, Homaei S, Høyli R. A mapping of electric construction machinery and electric construction sites in Norway. J Phys Conf Ser 2023; 2600(4):042016.

[52]	Nasr N, Russell J, Bringezu S, Hellweg S, Hilton B, Kreiss C, et al. Re-defining value—the manufacturing revolution: remanufacturing, refurbishment, repair and direct reuse in the circular economy. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme; 2018.

[53]	Ólafsson A, Steingrímsdóttir Á. Emission-free construction sites:knowledge gaps and research needs. Report. Stockholm: Nordic Innovation; 2024.

[54]	Huang X, Yan W, Cao H, Chen S, Tao G, Zhang J. Prospects for purely electric construction machinery: mechanical components, control strategies and typical machines. Autom Construct 2024;164:105477.

[55]	de Souza DF, da Silva PPF, Sauer IL, de Almeida AT, Tatizawa H. Life cycle assessment of electric motors—a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 2024;456:142366.

[56]	Auer J, Meincke A. Comparative life cycle assessment of electric motors with different efficiency classes: a deep dive into the trade-offs between the life cycle stages in ecodesign context. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2018; 23(8):1590-608.

[57]	Zhang X, Gerada D, Xu Z, Zhang F, Gerada C. A review of carbon emissions from electrical machine materials. Electronics 2024; 13(9):1714.

[58]	Lai X, Chen Q, Tang X, Zhou Y, Gao F, Guo Y, et al. Critical review of life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles: a lifespan perspective. eTransportation 2022;12:100169.

[59]	Arshad F, Lin J, Manurkar N, Fan E, Ahmad A, Tariq MN, et al. Life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries: a critical review. Resour Conserv Recycling 2022;180:106164.

[60]	Porzio J, Scown CD. Life-cycle assessment considerations for batteries and battery materials. Adv Energy Mater 2021; 11(33):2100771.

[61]	Peters JF, Baumann M, Zimmermann B, Braun J, Weil M. The environmental impact of Li-ion batteries and the role of key parameters—a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;67:491-506.

[62]	Wernet G, Bauer C, Steubing B, Reinhard J, Moreno-Ruiz E, Weidema B. The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I):overview and methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2016; 21(9):1218-30.

[63]	Chen Q, Lai X, Gu H, Tang X, Gao F, Han X, et al. Investigating carbon footprint and carbon reduction potential using a cradle-to-cradle LCA approach on lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles in China. J Clean Prod 2022;369:133342.

[64]	da Silva Müller Teixeira F, de Carvalho Peres AC, Gomes TS, Visconte LLY, Pacheco EBAV. A review on the applicability of life cycle assessment to evaluate the technical and environmental properties of waste electrical and electronic equipment. J Polym Environ 2021; 29(5):1333-49.

[65]	Pérez-Martínez MM, Carrillo C, Rodeiro-Iglesias J, Soto B. Life cycle assessment of repurposed waste electric and electronic equipment in comparison with original equipment. Sustain Prod Consum 2021;27:1637-49.

[66]	Fuc P, Kurczewski P, Lewandowska A, Nowak E, Selech J, Ziolkowski A. An environmental life cycle assessment of forklift operation: a well-to-wheel analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2016; 21(10):1438-51.

[67]	Masaki MS, Zhang L, Xia X. A design approach for multiple drive belt conveyors minimizing life cycle costs. J Clean Prod 2018;201:526-41.

[68]	Ferreira H, Leite MGP. A life cycle assessment study of iron ore mining. J Clean Prod 2015;108:1081-91.

[69]	Erkayaog˘lu M, Demirel N. A comparative life cycle assessment of material handling systems for sustainable mining. J Environ Manage 2016;174:1-6.

[70]	Liu Y, Jin Q, Wen B, Huo Z, Zhu Y, Zhang M, et al. The economic and environmental assessment on production stage of quayside crane. Environ Dev Sustain 2020;22(4):2759-78.

[71]	Wen B, Jin Q, Huang H, Tandon P, Zhu Y. Life cycle assessment of Quayside Crane: a case study in China. J Clean Prod 2017;148:1-11.

[72]	Peng S, Li T, Dong M, Shi J, Zhang H. Life cycle assessment of a large-scale centrifugal compressor: a case study in China. J Clean Prod 2016;139:810-20.

[73]	Shi J, Li T, Zhang H, Peng S, Liu Z, Jiang Q. Energy consummation and environmental emissions assessment of a refrigeration compressor based on life cycle assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2015; 20(7):947-56.

[74]	Giraldi A, Delogu M, Del Pero F, Verdi A, Lombardozzi L. Comparative life cycle assessment of a centrifugal compressor impeller: hybrid technology production versus welding production. Proc Inst Mech Eng 2025; 239(5):669-82.

[75]	Biswas WK, Duong V, Frey P, Islam MN. A comparison of repaired, remanufactured and new compressors used in Western Australian small- and medium-sized enterprises in terms of global warming. J Remanuf 2013; 3(1):4.

[76]	Famiglietti J, Toppi T, Pistocchini L, Scoccia R, Motta M. A comparative environmental life cycle assessment between a condensing boiler and a gas driven absorption heat pump. Sci Total Environ 2021;762:144392.

[77]	Violante AC, Donato F, Guidi G, Proposito M. Comparative life cycle assessment of the ground source heat pump vs air source heat pump. Renew Energy 2022;188:1029-37.

[78]	Vignali G. Environmental assessment of domestic boilers: a comparison of condensing and traditional technology using life cycle assessment methodology. J Clean Prod 2017;142:2493-508.

[79]	Koroneos CJ, Nanaki EA. Environmental impact assessment of a ground source heat pump system in Greece. Geothermics 2017;65:1-9.

[80]	Lin H, Clavreul J, Jeandaux C, Crawley J, Butnar I. Environmental life cycle assessment of heating systems in the UK: comparative assessment of hybrid heat pumps vs. condensing gas boilers. Energy Build 2021;240:110865.

[81]	Masternak C, Meunier S, Reinbold V, Saelens D, Marchand C, Leroy Y. Potential of air-source heat pumps to reduce environmental impacts in 18 European countries. Energy 2024;292:130487.

[82]	Mantoam EJ, Angnes G, Mekonnen MM, Romanelli TL. Energy, carbon and water footprints on agricultural machinery. Biosyst Eng 2020;198:304-22.

[83]	Mantoam EJ, Romanelli TL, Gimenez LM. Energy demand and greenhouse gases emissions in the life cycle of tractors. Biosyst Eng 2016;151:158-70.

[84]	Pradel M. Life cycle inventory data of agricultural tractors. Data Brief 2023;48:109174.

[85]	Bortolini M, Cascini A, Gamberi M, Mora C, Regattieri A. Sustainable design and life cycle assessment of an innovative multi-functional haymaking agricultural machinery. J Clean Prod 2014;82:23-36.

[86]	Lagnelöv O, Larsson G, Larsolle A, Hansson PA. Life cycle assessment of autonomous electric field tractors in Swedish agriculture. Sustainability 2021; 13(20):11285.

[87]	Moreda GP, Muñoz-García MA, Barreiro P. High voltage electrification of tractor and agricultural machinery—A review. Energy Convers Manage 2016;115:117-31.

[88]	Beligoj M, Scolaro E, Alberti L, Renzi M, Mattetti M. Feasibility evaluation of hybrid electric agricultural tractors based on life cycle cost analysis. IEEE Access 2022;10:28853-67.

[89]	Liu W, Yang R, Li L, Zhao C, Li G. Energy and environmental evaluation and comparison of a diesel-electric hybrid tractor, a conventional tractor, and a hillside mini-tiller using the life cycle assessment method. J Clean Prod 2024;469:143232.

[90]	Huck C, Gobrecht A, Salou T, Bellon-Maurel V, Loiseau E. Environmental assessment of digitalisation in agriculture: a systematic review. J Clean Prod 2024;472:143369.

[91]	Fountas S, Mylonas N, Malounas I, Rodias E, Hellmann Santos C, Pekkeriet E. Agricultural robotics for field operations. Sensors 2020; 20(9):2672.

[92]	Pradel M, de Fays M, Seguineau C. Comparative life cycle assessment of intra-row and inter-row weeding practices using autonomous robot systems in French vineyards. Sci Total Environ 2022;838:156441.

[93]	Krupanek J, de Santos PG, Emmi L, Wollweber M, Sandmann H, Scholle K, et al. Environmental performance of an autonomous laser weeding robot—a case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2024; 29(6):1021-52.

[94]	Brucˇiene˙ I, Savickas D, Šarauskis E. Comparative environmental analysis of sugar beet production using a solar-driven robot and conventional systems from a sustainability perspective. Clean Environ Syst 2024;13:100186.

[95]	Stuhlenmiller F, Weyand S, Jungblut J, Schebek L, Clever D, Rinderknecht S. Impact of cycle time and payload of an industrial robot on resource efficiency. Robotics 2021; 10(1):33.

[96]	Wyatt H, Wu A, Thomas R, Yang Y. Life cycle analysis of double-arm type robotic tools for LCD panel handling. Machines 2017; 5(1):8.

[97]	Anwar T, Lopes AC, Silva EC, Mould ST, Sampaio AM, Pontes AJ. Cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment: a comparison of polymer and metal-based powder bed fusion for the production of a robot end-effector with internal conformal channels. Prog Addit Manuf 2024;10:561-79.

[98]	Roux C, Kuzmenko K, Roussel N, Mesnil R, Feraille A. Life cycle assessment of a concrete 3D printing process. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2023; 28(1):1-15.

[99]	Lemardelé C, Pinheiro Melo S, Cerdas F, Herrmann C, Estrada M. Life-cycle analysis of last-mile parcel delivery using autonomous delivery robots. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 2023;121:103842.

[100]

Saidani M, Bolowich A, Bednárˇová S, Gutiérrez TN, Benetto E. Life cycle assessment of a telematics box with ICT impact allocation and quantification—application to precision agriculture technology and robotics. Procedia CIRP 2024;122:455-60.

[101]

Sarkar S, Ahmed M, Chowdhury MAH, Melton G. Life cycle assessment (LCA) results of MIG and TIG welding technologies using the IMPACT 2002+ methodology. IJMERR 2022; 11(8):564-8.

[102]

Alejandre C, Akizu-Gardoki O, Lizundia E. Optimum operational lifespan of household appliances considering manufacturing and use stage improvements via life cycle assessment. Sustain Prod Consum 2022;32:52-65.

[103]

Rosenthal C, Fatimah YA, Biswas WK. Application of 6R principles in sustainable supply chain design of western Australian white goods. Procedia CIRP 2016;40:318-23.

[104]

Fatimah YA, Biswas WK. Sustainability assessment of remanufactured computers. Procedia CIRP 2016;40:150-5.

[105]

Jorge RS, Hawkins TR, Hertwich EG. Life cycle assessment of electricity transmission and distribution—part 2: transformers and substation equipment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2011; 17(2):184-91.

[106]

Allwood JM, Cullen JM, Milford RL. Options for achieving a 50% cut in industrial carbon emissions by 2050. Environ Sci Technol 2010; 44(6):1888-94.

[107]

Nilsson LJ, Bauer F, Åhman M, Andersson FNG, Bataille C, de la Rue du can S, et al. An industrial policy framework for transforming energy and emissions intensive industries towards zero emissions. Clim Policy 2021; 21(8):1053-65.

[108]

Allwood JM, Ashby MF, Gutowski TG, Worrell E. Material efficiency: a white paper. Resour Conserv Recycling 2011; 55(3):362-81.

[109]

Allwood JM, Gutowski TG, Serrenho AC, Skelton ACH, Worrell E. Industry 1.61803: the transition to an industry with reduced material demand fit for a low carbon future. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 2017; 375(2095):20160361.

[110]

Worrell E, Meuleman B, Blok K. Energy savings by efficient application of fertilizer. Resour Conserv Recycling 1995; 13(3-4):233-50.

[111]

Allwood JM, Raabe D. Sustainable metals: integrating science and systems approaches. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 2024; 382(2284):20230247.

[112]

Schanes K, Jäger J, Drummond P. Three scenario narratives for a resource-efficient and low-carbon Europe in 2050. Ecol Econ 2019;155:70-9.

[113]

Music O, Allwood JM. Connecting environmental systems analysis to manufacturing technology: a catalogue of the world’s steel and aluminium components. Resour Conserv Recycling 2025;212:107949.

[114]

Allwood JM, Music O. Material efficiency at the component level: how much metal can we do without? Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 2024; 382(2284):20230245.

[115]

Hertwich EG, Gibon T, Bouman EA, Arvesen A, Suh S, Heath GA, et al. Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2014; 120(20):6277-82.

[116]

Arvesen A, Luderer G, Pehl M, Bodirsky BL, Hertwich EG. Deriving life cycle assessment coefficients for application in integrated assessment modelling. Environ Model Softw 2018;99:111-25.

[117]

Pehl M, Arvesen A, Humpenöder F, Popp A, Hertwich EG, Luderer G. Understanding future emissions from low-carbon power systems by integration of life-cycle assessment and integrated energy modelling. Nat Energy 2017; 2(12):939-45.

[118]

Luderer G, Pehl M, Arvesen A, Gibon T, Bodirsky BL, de Boer HS, et al. Environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies. Nat Commun 2019; 10(1):5229.

[119]

van Soest HL, van Vuuren DP, Hilaire J, Minx JC, Harmsen MJHM, Krey V, et al. Analysing interactions among sustainable development goals with integrated assessment models. Glob Transit 2019;1:210-25.

[120]

Sacchi R, Terlouw T, Siala K, Dirnaichner A, Bauer C, Cox B, et al. Prospective environmental impact as sement (premise ): a streamlined approach to producing databases for prospective life cycle assessment using integrated assessment models. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2022;160:112311.

[121]

Graedel TE, Cao J. Metal spectra as indicators of development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010; 107(49):20905-10.

[122]

Ünlü G, Maczek F, Min J, Frank S, Glatter F, Natsuo Kishimoto P, et al. MESSAGEix-Materials v1.1.0: representation of material flows and stocks in an integrated assessment model. Geosci Model Dev 2024; 17(22):8321-52.