ERA

Download the full-sized PDF of An Integrated Approach for Sustainability Assessment: The Wa-Pa-Su Project Sustainability Rating SystemDownload the full-sized PDF

Analytics

Share

Permanent link (DOI): https://doi.org/10.7939/R35X25M8G

Download

Export to: EndNote  |  Zotero  |  Mendeley

Communities

This file is in the following communities:

Graduate Studies and Research, Faculty of

Collections

This file is in the following collections:

Theses and Dissertations

An Integrated Approach for Sustainability Assessment: The Wa-Pa-Su Project Sustainability Rating System Open Access

Descriptions

Other title
Subject/Keyword
sustainability assessment
sustainable development
oilsands
energy
oil and gas
Type of item
Thesis
Degree grantor
University of Alberta
Author or creator
Poveda, Cesar A
Supervisor and department
Lipsett, Michael (Mechanical Engineering)
Examining committee member and department
Suddaby, Roy (Strategic Management and Organization)
Kumar, Amit (Mechanical Engineering)
Doucette, John (Mechanical Engineering)
Brebbia, Carlos (Wessex Institute of Technology)
Department
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Specialization
Engineering Management
Date accepted
2014-08-26T15:54:55Z
Graduation date
2014-11
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree level
Doctoral
Abstract
As global demand for energy continues to rise, unconventional petroleum extraction and production of petroleum substitutes are both becoming more necessary. Development and operation of unconventional oil projects can have considerable social, economic, and environmental impacts. For example, one the largest unconventional oil deposits in the world is the Athabasca oil sands in northern Canada. Government policy makers, industrial developers, and other stakeholders generally work together to develop oil sands projects in an environmentally responsible manner; however, the projects lack an effective sustainable development (SD) measurement tool. The development of the oil sands and heavy oil projects has been shaped by different circumstances (e.g., politics, economics, social, etc.) throughout the years. As the development continues, concerns related to the projects’ sustainability increases. Developing companies, stakeholders, and society is increasingly interested in understanding the impact that the projects have on present and future generations. Government agencies have issued a series of legal requirements (e.g., regulations) as an attempt to mitigate the impact of the projects. While these provide a general guideline and decisions at senior level are made, they barely assist practitioners and developing companies to accomplish the goals of sustainability in its three fundamentals pillars (e.g., social, economic, environmental). Trends in building practice and concerns about environmental, social, economic, health, and other impacts in the building industry have led to the development of environmental and sustainability assessment approaches, strategies, models, appraisals, and methodologies. The implementation of green technology and practices towards improving SD performance and accomplishing a certification process has brought along economic, social, and environmental benefits. A series of sustainable rating systems have been developed around the world and used extensively with unquestionable benefits to stakeholders in the building industry; therefore, the framework for developing rating systems for building systems can be extended and applied in other industrial contexts. The different benefits have been studied to develop the WA-PA-SU project sustainability rating system to measure in a consistent manner the SD of the oil sands and heavy oil projects. The rating system is a decision making tool that can be used by companies, stakeholders, and policy makers to measure and understand the range of impacts that the projects may have over time. This assessment framework includes but is not limited to regulatory requirements, and includes approaches for measuring sustainability on social, economic, environmental, and health grounds. This research presents a description of the different components of the rating system including the structure, the sustainable development indicators (SDIs) pre-selection process, the credit weighting tool (CWT), and the credit and overall sustainability assessment score allocation methodology.
Language
English
DOI
doi:10.7939/R35X25M8G
Rights
Permission is hereby granted to the University of Alberta Libraries to reproduce single copies of this thesis and to lend or sell such copies for private, scholarly or scientific research purposes only. Where the thesis is converted to, or otherwise made available in digital form, the University of Alberta will advise potential users of the thesis of these terms. The author reserves all other publication and other rights in association with the copyright in the thesis and, except as herein before provided, neither the thesis nor any substantial portion thereof may be printed or otherwise reproduced in any material form whatsoever without the author's prior written permission.
Citation for previous publication
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2011). “A Review of Sustainability Assessment and Sustainability/Environmental Rating Systems and Credit Weighting Tools”. Journal of Sustainable Development. Vol 4 (6).  http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v4n6p36
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2011). “A Rating System for Sustainability of Industrial Projects with Application in Oil Sands and Heavy Oil Projects: Origins and Fundamentals”. Journal of Sustainable Development. Vol. 4 (3).  http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v4n3p59
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2011). “A Rating System for Sustainability of Industrial Projects with Application in Oil Sands and Heavy Oil Projects: Areas of Excellence, Sub-Divisions, and Management Interactions”. Journal of Sustainable Development. Vol. 4 (4).  http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v4n4p3
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2013). “The Canadian Oil sands: Environmental, Economic, Social, Health, and Other Impacts”. Sustainable Development and Planning 2013 Conference. Kos, Greece.  http://dx.doi.org/10.2495/SDP130481
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. Surface Mining Operations in Oil Sands: Establishing Sustainable Development Indicators (SDIs). WIT Press: Southampton, UK & Boston, US. ISBN: 978-1-84564-958-6; eISBN: 978-1-84564-959-3• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2013). “Using Sustainable Development Indicators (SDIs) for Sustainability Assessment of Surface Mining Operations in the Oil Sands Projects: Applicability, Usefulness and Cost”. Energy and Sustainability 2013 Conference. Bucharest, Romania.  http://dx.doi.org/10.2495/ESUS130051
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2013). “Design of Performance Improvement Factors (PIFs) for Sustainable Development Indicators (SDIs) Metrics for Oil Sands Projects with Application to Surface Mining Operations Based on Continual Performance Improvement (CPI)”. Journal of Sustainable Development. Vol 6 (8).  http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v6n8p52
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2013). “Weighting Sustainable Development Indicators (SDIs) for Surface Mining Operations Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP).” International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Vol 5 (2).• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2014). “An Integrated Approach for Sustainability Assessment: The Wa-Pa-Su Project Sustainability Rating System.” International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2013.876677
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2014). “The Wa-Pa-Su Project Sustainability Rating System: A Simulated Case Study of Implementation and Sustainability Assessment.” Environmental Management and Sustainable Development. Vol 3 (1).  http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/emsd.v3i1.4613
• Poveda, C. and Lipsett, M. (2012). “WA-PA-SU Project Sustainability Rating System: Assessing Sustainability in Oil Sands and Heavy Oil Projects”. 1st Conference in Environmental and Economic Impact on Sustainable Development, incorporating Environmental Economics, Toxicology, and Brownfields. New Forest, UK.  http://dx.doi.org/10.2495/EID120111

File Details

Date Uploaded
Date Modified
2015-01-08T08:00:43.483+00:00
Audit Status
Audits have not yet been run on this file.
Characterization
File format: pdf (PDF/A)
Mime type: application/pdf
File size: 3719162
Last modified: 2015:10:12 16:03:25-06:00
Filename: Poveda_Cesar_A_201408_PhD.pdf
Original checksum: e9765f9647416144113c4009777da7cc
Activity of users you follow
User Activity Date