Economic Impact of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicles on the U.S. Automotive Recycling Infrastructure

The use of aluminum alloys in automobile production is growing as automakers strive to lower vehicle fuel consumption and reduce emissions by substituting aluminum for steel. The current recycling infrastructure for end-of-life vehicles is mature, profitable, and well suited to steel-intensive vehicles; increased use of cast and wrought aluminum, however, will present new challenges and opportunities to the disassembler and shredder, who now comprise the first stages of the vehicle recycling infrastructure.
Using goal programming techniques, a model of the auto recycling infrastructure is used to assess the materials streams and process profitabilities for several different aluminum-intensive vehicle (AIV) processing scenarios. The first case simulates the processing of an AIV in the current recycling infrastructure. Various changes to the initial case demonstrate the consequences to the disassembler and shredder profitabilities whenever the price of nonferrous metals changes; greater fractions of the vehicle are removed as parts; the parts removed by the disassembler have increased aluminum content; the quantity of polymer removed by the disassembler is increased; the disassembly costs increase; the disposal costs for shredder residue and hazardous materials increase; the shredder processing costs increase; and different AIV designs are considered. These profits are also compared to those achieved for a steel unibody vehicle to highlight the impact of introducing AIVs into the existing infrastructure. Results indicate that the existing infrastructure will be able to accommodate AIVs without economic detriment.     

Strategies for Meeting EU End-of-Life Vehicle Reuse/Recovery Targets

Disposal of end-of-life vehicles (ELVs) is a relatively new focus of the European policy community. Technical requirements for car design and minimum reuse and recovery rates for end-of-life vehicles are the subject of a recent European Union directive on ELVs. This directive is expected to induce changes in the infrastructure required for ELV processing, and presents a substantial challenge to maintaining such an infrastructure as economically viable.
This paper assesses current and emerging ELV recycling technologies, in order to provide guidelines for the development of future ELV recycling strategies. Emphasis is given to technologies dedicated to automobile shredder residue (ASR) recovery, as an alternative/complement to more labor-intensive dismantling activities. The ultimate goal is to develop a vision of the type of ASR processing technology that could emerge in the future.
The analysis is based on a model developed to simulate ELV processing infrastructures, and shredding data are taken from full-scale experiments. The results obtained show that ASR mechanical separation and recycling technologies may enable more extensive recycling and contribute to achieving European Union recycling targets, and can thus be considered as far more promising than technologies based on energy recovery.     

Life cycle inventory analysis - A case study of steel used in Brazilian automobiles

Data acquisition to perform LCA is time and capital consuming. There is already international data about environmental aspects in several processes. This study aims to verify the possibility of adapting international data to Brazilian conditions. Therefore, a Life Cycle Inventory was conducted to compare the use of national and international data for steel used in automobiles. This was done in three steps: objective and scope definition, inventory analysis and interpretation. LCI is a simplification of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as impact assessment is not taken into account. Even so, LCI takes into account all life cycle stages of a product, that is, from its extraction through its deposition. In this study, three phases of the life cycle were considered: steel manufacturing, automobile use and disposal. In the case studied, the amount of steel evaluated was 263 kg, which would be possible to be replaced by other materials in a 1,300 kg automobile. Resources and energy consumption, atmospheric emissions and solid residues production were taken into account within the analysis done. Results show that automobile use and materials manufacturing are responsible for the bulk of energy and resources consumption. Solid residues occur mainly in the discard phase, due to the low level of recycling. Several differences were also achieved between national and international data, which implies the need of environmental databases development.     

End-of-Life Infrastructure Economics for "Clean Vehicles" in the United States

Rising fuel prices and concern over emissions are prompting automakers and legislators to introduce and evaluate "clean vehicles" throughout the United States. Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) are now on the roads, electric vehicles (EVs) have been test marketed, and niche vehicles such as high-fuel-economy microcars are being considered for introduction. As these vehicles proliferate and mature, they will eventually reach their end of life (EOL). In the United States, an extensive recycling infrastructure exists for conventional, internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. Its primary constituents are the disassembler and the shredder. These industries, as well as battery recyclers, are expected to play integral roles in the EOL processing of clean vehicles.
A model of the automobile-recycling infrastructure and goal programming techniques are used to assess the materials streams and process profitabilities for several different clean vehicles. Two-seat EVs with lead-acid or NiMH batteries are compared with two- and four-seat HEVs and microcars. Changes to the nonferrous content in the vehicle bodies are explored and compared for the effect on processing profit-ability. Despite limitations associated with the linearity of goal programming techniques, application of this tool can still provide informative first-order results. Results indicate that although these clean vehicles may not garner the same profit levels as conventional ICE vehicles, they are profitable to process if there are markets for parts and if there are sufficient quantities of nonferrous materials.     

Design for the Next Generation: Incorporating Cradle-to-Cradle Design into Herman Miller Products

In the late 1990s, office furniture manufacturer Herman Miller, Inc., entered into a collaboration with architect William McDonough to create a system for designing cradle-to-cradle products. This collaboration led to the creation of a tool—the Design for Environment (DfE) product assessment tool—that evaluates progress towards cradle-to-cradle products. The first product Herman Miller designed using the DfE product assessment tool was the Mirra chair. Over the course of the chair's development, the DfE process generated a number of design changes, including selecting a completely different material for the chair's spine, increasing recycled content in chair components, eliminating all PVC (polyvinyl chloride) components, and designing the chair for rapid disassembly using common tools.
The areas of greatest success in designing the Mirra chair for the environment were the increased use of recyclable parts and increased ease of disassembly, whereas the areas of greatest challenge were increasing recycled content and using materials with a green chemistry composition. The success in recyclability reflects the use of metals, materials that have a well-established recycling infrastructure. The success in disassembly reflects the high degree of control that Herman Miller has over product assembly. The challenge to increasing recycled content is the use of plastics in chairs. Unlike the metals, which all contain some recycled content, most plastics are made from virgin polymers. The challenge to improving materials chemistry is the limited range of green chemicals and materials on the market.
The Mirra chair exemplifies the value of incorporating the environment into design and the need for tools to benchmark progress, as well as the challenges of creating a truly cradle-to-cradle product. Herman Miller recognizes that working toward cradle-to-cradle products is a journey that will involve continuous improvement of its products.     

A comparison among different automotive shredder residue treatment processes

Background and purpose  

European Community claims for end-of-vehicles (ELVs) targets of at least 85% recycling and 95% recovery rate by 2015. At present, only about 80% of ELV total weight is being recycled, whereas the remaining fraction of 20%, which is called automotive shredder residue (ASR), is disposed by landfilling in most of the EU countries. In this study a comparison has been carried out among five ASR management strategies, chosen after a screening of the most common technologies suitable and available nowadays, aiming at proposing alternatives to the current disposal in terms of benefits resulting from the conservation of nonrenewable resources and reduction of wastes disposal. These scenarios are ASR landfill disposal, the current status quo for a further nonferrous metals recovery, ASR incineration with energy recovery, an advanced material recovery followed by thermal treatment of ASR residue and a feedstock recycling by means of gasification.     

Western European Materials as Sources and Sinks of CO2

Materials use is an important factor influencing carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions because significant amounts of carbon dioxide are released during the production of materials from natural resources, and because products and wastes can function as important sinks for CO₂. This article analyzes the impact of Western European materials use on CO₂ emissions. The material flows for steel, cement, petrochemicals, and wood products are analyzed in more detail. The analysis shows that particular characteristics of the materials system must be considered in the development of emission reduction strategies. It is important to select a relatively closed system for policymaking, as in Western Europe, in order to prevent unwanted transboundary effects. The materials stored in the form of products, and the net exports of materials, products, and waste limit the potential of a recycling strategy. Carbon storage in products and waste disposal sites is significant both for synthetic and natural organic materials, but is not accounted for in natural organic materials in current emissions statistics. Accordingly the emissions accounting practices should be modified to reflect the storage of such materials.     

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Payback for Lightweighted Vehicles Using Aluminum and High‐Strength Steel

In this article we consider interactions between life cycle emissions and materials flows associated with lightweighting (LW) automobiles. Both aluminum and high‐strength steel (HSS) lightweighting are considered, with LW ranging from 6% to 23% on the basis of literature references and input from industry experts. We compare the increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with producing lightweight vehicles with the saved emissions during vehicle use. This yields a calculation of how many years of vehicle use are required to offset the added GHG emissions from the production stage. Payback periods for HSS are shorter than for aluminum. Nevertheless, achieving significant LW with HSS comparable to aluminum‐intensive vehicles requires not only material substitution but also the achievement of secondary LW by downsizing of other vehicle components in addition to the vehicle structure. GHG savings for aluminum LW varies strongly with location where the aluminum is produced and whether secondary aluminum can be utilized instead of primary. HSS is less sensitive to these parameters. In principle, payback times for vehicles lightweighted with aluminum can be shortened by closed‐loop recycling of wrought aluminum (i.e., use of secondary wrought aluminum). Over a 15‐year time horizon, however, it is unlikely that this could significantly reduce emissions from the automotive industry, given the challenges involved with enabling a closed‐loop aluminum infrastructure without downcycling automotive body structures.     

Using LCA to Assess Eco-design in the Automotive Sector: Case Study of a Polyolefinic Door Panel (12 pp)

Goal, Scope and Background The new European legislation concerning End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) will allow, in 2015, the landfilling of only 5% of the average vehicle weight, which means that the automotive industry must make a great effort in order to design their products taking into account their recyclability when they become waste. In the present work, LCA is used to assess an existing automotive component, a plastic door panel, and to compare it with a designed-for-recycling prototype panel, based on compatible polyolefins. Main Features A \\\'cradle to grave\\\' LCA is carried out for the panel currently produced and the prototype. The following scenarios are analyzed for plastic waste: landfilling (current practice in Spain), energy recovery in a MSW incinerator or in a cement kiln, and mechanical recycling. Results and Discussion The production and use phases together contribute more than 95% in most impact indicators. When the current and prototype products are compared, a decrease in the environmental impact appears for the prototype in the production phase and also at end-of-life if recycling is considered with full substitution of virgin polymers. The overall impact reduction ranges from 18% in the toxicity indicators to 80% in landfill use. Energy recovery in cement kilns appears as a good alternative to recycling in some indicators, such as landfill use or resource depletion. A sensitivity analysis is performed on the quality of recycled plastic, and the results suggest that the benefits of recycling are substantially reduced if full substitution is not achieved. Conclusion LCA has been shown to be a very useful tool to validate from an environmental point of view a redesigned automotive component; in addition, it has allowed one to identify not only the benefits from increased recyclability, but also improvements in other life cycle phases which were not previously expected. Recommendation and Perspective From this case study several recommendations to the company have been drawn in order to design environmentally friendly components for car interiors, and ecodesign is expected to be introduced in the company procedures. - Glossary ABS: Acrilonitrile-butadiene-styrene; ASR: Automobile shredder residue; DEHP: Di(ethylhexyl)phtalate; ELV: End-of-life vehicles; EPDM: Ethylene propylene diene monomer; MSW: Municipal solid waste; MSWI: Municipal solid waste incinerator; NEDC: New European driving cycle; PA GF: Polyamide glass fiber reinforced; PE: Polyethylene; PES: Polyester; POM: Polyoxymethylene; PP T16: Polypropylene 16% talc filled; PUR: Polyurethane; PVC: Polyvinyl chloride; TPO: Thermoplastic olefin     

Plastics recycling: challenges and opportunities

Plastics are inexpensive, lightweight and durable materials, which can readily be moulded into a variety of products that find use in a wide range of applications. As a consequence, the production of plastics has increased markedly over the last 60 years. However, current levels of their usage and disposal generate several environmental problems. Around 4 per cent of world oil and gas production, a non-renewable resource, is used as feedstock for plastics and a further 3–4% is expended to provide energy for their manufacture. A major portion of plastic produced each year is used to make disposable items of packaging or other short-lived products that are discarded within a year of manufacture. These two observations alone indicate that our current use of plastics is not sustainable. In addition, because of the durability of the polymers involved, substantial quantities of discarded end-of-life plastics are accumulating as debris in landfills and in natural habitats worldwide.Recycling is one of the most important actions currently available to reduce these impacts and represents one of the most dynamic areas in the plastics industry today. Recycling provides opportunities to reduce oil usage, carbon dioxide emissions and the quantities of waste requiring disposal. Here, we briefly set recycling into context against other waste-reduction strategies, namely reduction in material use through downgauging or product reuse, the use of alternative biodegradable materials and energy recovery as fuel.While plastics have been recycled since the 1970s, the quantities that are recycled vary geographically, according to plastic type and application. Recycling of packaging materials has seen rapid expansion over the last decades in a number of countries. Advances in technologies and systems for the collection, sorting and reprocessing of recyclable plastics are creating new opportunities for recycling, and with the combined actions of the public, industry and governments it may be possible to divert the majority of plastic waste from landfills to recycling over the next decades.     

Recycling plastics from e-waste: Implications for effective eco-design

This paper presents five case studies on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) recycling to provide a coherent overview on the likely impact of eco-design measures on recycling of plastics used in energy-related products within the EU. Whilst some eco-design measures, such as improving disassembly of plastic parts, may generally benefit recycling operations, other measures were found to be ineffective or requiring further investigation. For example, product polymer marking, and provision of product-specific information was rarely utilized by participant organizations, if at all. Additionally, this study highlights a disconnect between the aims of substance bans as an eco-design measure and the impact upon plastics recycling in practice. Future research could help with quantitative and/or statistical analysis of WEEE processing to investigate across a wider selection of recyclers and recycling processes. Despite 20 years of research on eco-design, it appears that EU eco-design policies and voluntary initiatives are still being devised without adequate understanding of their impact on different types of recycling practices. Empirical research on recycling processes can provide important insight to ensure eco-design measures are effective and avoid unintended consequences for the environment.     

Life cycle assessment of lightweight and end-of-life scenarios for generic compact class passenger vehicles

Goal, Scope and Background  The automotive industry has a long history in improving the environmental performance of vehicles - fuel economy and emission improvements, introduction of recycled and renewable materials, etc. The European Union also aims at improving the environmental performance of products by reducing, in particular, waste resulting from End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) for example. The European Commission estimates that ELVs contribute to approximately 1 % of the total waste in Europe [9]. Other European Union strategies are considering more life cycle aspects, as well as other impacts including resource or climate change. This article is summarizing the results of a European Commission funded project (LIRECAR) that aims at identifying the environmental impacts and relevance for combinations of recycling / recovery and lightweight vehicle design options over the whole life cycle of a vehicle - i.e. manufacturing, use and recycling/recovery. Three, independent and scientific LCA experts reviewed the study according to ISO 14040. From the beginning, representatives of all Life Cycle Stakeholders have been involved (European materials & supplier associations, an environmental Non-Governmental Organization, recycler’s association). Model and System Definition  The study compared 3 sets of theoretical vehicle weight scenarios: 1000 kg reference (material range of today’s end-of-life, mid-sized vehicles produced in the early 1990’s) and 2 lightweight scenarios for 100 kg and 250 kg less weight based on reference functions (in terms of comfort, safety, etc.) and a vehicle concept. The scenarios are represented by their material range of a broad range of lightweight strategies of most European car manufacturers. In parallel, three End-of-Life (EOL) scenarios are considered: EOL today and two theoretical extreme scenarios (100% recycling, respectively, 100% recovery of shredder residue fractions that are disposed of today). The technical and economical feasibility of the studied scenarios is not taken into consideration (e.g. 100% recycling is not possible). Results and Discussion  Significant differences between the various, studied weight scenarios were determined in several scenarios for the environmental categories of global warming, ozone depletion, photochemical oxidant creation (summer smog), abiotic resource depletion, and hazardous waste. However, these improvement potentials can be only realized under well defined conditions (e.g. material compositions, specific fuel reduction values and EOL credits) based on case-by-case assessments for improvements over the course of the life cycle. Looking at the studied scenarios, the relative contribution of the EOL phase represents 5% or less of the total life cycle impact for most selected impact categories and scenarios. The EOL technology variations studied do not impact significantly the considered environmental impacts. Exceptions include total waste, as long as stockpile goods (overburden, tailings and ore/coal processing residues) and EOL credits are considered. Conclusions and Recommendations  LIRECAR focuses only on lightweight/recycling, questions whereas other measures (changes in safety or comfort standards, propulsion improvements for CO₂, user behavior) are beyond the scope of the study. The conclusions are also not necessarily transferable to other vehicle concepts. However, for the question of end-of-life options, it can be concluded that LIRECAR cannot support any general recommendation and/or mandatory actions to improve recycling if lightweight is affected. Also, looking at each vehicle, no justification could be found for the general assumption that lightweight and recycling greatly influence the affected environmental dimension (Global Warming Potential or resource depletion and waste, respectively). LIRECAR showed that this general assumption is not true under all analyzed circumstances and not as significant as suggested. Further discussions and product development targets shall not focus on generic targets that define the approach/technology concerned with how to achieve environmental improvement (weight reduction [kg], recycling quota [%]), but on overall life cycle improvement). To enable this case-by-case assessment, exchanges of necessary information with suppliers are especially relevant.     

Life Cycle Inventories of Transport Services: Background Data for Freight Transport (10 pp)

Background, Goal and Scope The ecoinvent database is a reference work for life cycle inventory data covering the areas of energy, building materials, metals, chemicals, paper and cardboard, forestry, agriculture, detergents, transport services and waste treatment. Generic inventories are available for freight and passenger transport including air, rail, road, and water transport. The goal of freight transport modelling is to provide background data for transport services, which occur between nearly any two process steps of a product system. This paper presents and discusses the model structure, basic assumptions and results for selected freight transport services.Main Features Transport services are divided into several datasets referred to as transport components. In addition to vehicle operation (comprising vehicle travel and pre-combustion), infrastructure processes such as vehicle maintenance, manufacturing and disposal, as well as transport infrastructure construction, operation and disposal, are also modelled. In order to link the various transport components to the functional unit of one tonne kilometre (tkm), so-called demand factors are determined. In the case of transport infrastructure that is not exclusively used by freight transport, allocation is essential. The respective allocation parameters employed for line infrastructure construction/disposal and operation datasets (including land use) are yearly Gross-tonne kilometre performance (Gtkm) and kilometric vehicle/train performance. Results are presented for selected environmental exchanges related to gaseous emissions (climate change gases, nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons), heavy metal (zinc and cadmium) emissions to soil and air, as well as BOD (Biological Oxygen Demand), and land use. Particle emissions are further distinguished into fine (PM2.5) and coarse (diameter between 2.5 and 10 µm) particles. The results presented comprise both an intra- and inter-modal comparison.Results and Discussions A comparison of Swiss and European rail transport reveals considerably lower emissions from Swiss rail transport due to the almost exclusive use of hydropower as traction energy. For gaseous emissions, freight transport by water or rail exhibits considerably better performance than road transport (65-92% less gaseous emissions). As far as zinc and cadmium emissions to soil are concerned, water and rail transport produce less than 1% of the emissions resulting from road transport for either pollutant. For zinc and cadmium emissions to air, road transport has the highest emissions; however, the emissions due to water and rail transport range from 2 to 18% of the emission levels arising from road transport. Particle emissions show a more diverse pattern. Whilst fine particle emissions due to water and rail transport are considerably lower than road transport, rail transport with respect to coarse particles performs worse than road transport. Dominance analysis reveals the importance of infrastructure processes. For instance, the NMHC-emissions of infrastructure processes account for 40%, 30% and 50% of emissions for road, rail and barge transport, respectively. For the demand factor of infrastructure operation, a sensitivity analysis of the employed allocation factor was performed, revealing no sensitivity for gaseous emissions and particles. On the other hand, considerable changes in both emission levels and in the ranking of transport modes is observed for land occupation. Finally, we varied selected operation parameters for road transport, resulting in considerable reductions of CO2 and NOX emissions of up to 60%. In one extreme case (load factor: 100%), NOx emissions for vehicle operation of a lorry are lower than for inland water transport. Only as a result of the considerably higher NOx emissions occurring in infrastructure processes does road transport score worse than water transport, with the ranking remaining the same as for the generic data presented in ecoinvent 2000.Conclusions and Perspectives The provided datasets allow for a preliminary screening of the importance of transport processes within a product life cycle. In the cases for which transport processes are identified as sensitive for the overall outcome of certain product life cycle or for transport specific comparisons, the modular structure and transparent documentation of demand factors allows for an easy and transparent integration of more case-specific data for selected transport components.     

Application of Markov Chain Model to Calculate the Average Number of Times of Use of a Material in Society. An Allocation Methodology for Open-Loop Recycling. Part 1: Methodology Development (7 pp)

- Preamble. In this series of two papers, a methodology to calculate the average number of times a material is used in a society from cradle to grave is presented and applied to allocation of environmental impact of virgin material. Part 1 focuses on methodology development and shows how the methodology works with hypothetical examples of material flows. Part 2 presents case studies for steel recycling in Japan, in which the methodology is applied and allocation of environmental impact of virgin steel is conducted. - Abstract Goal, Scope and Background. It has been recognized that LCA has a limitation in assessing open cycle recycling of materials because of inevitable subjective judgments in setting system boundary. According with the enforcement of recycling laws, there has been a rapid increase in recycling ratio of materials at the end-of-life of products in many industrialized countries. So, materials' life cycle is getting more complicated, which makes it difficult to quantify the environmental impacts of materials used in a product in an appropriate way. The purpose of this paper is to develop a methodology to calculate the average number of times a material is used in a society from cradle to grave. The method developed in this paper derives the average number of times material is used; this value could be used for allocation of environmental burdens of virgin material as well as an indicator for assessing the state of material use in a certain year, based on material flow of material in that year. Main Features Our methodology is based on Markov chain model using matrix-based numerical analysis. A major feature of this method is that it creates transition probability matrices for a material from the way in which the material is produced, consumed, and recycled, making it possible to simply elicit indicators that assess the status of material use in products in society. Our methodology could be an alternative method to derive the average number of times material is used, which could be used for allocation of environmental burdens of virgin material. Results and Discussions The methodology was applied to hypothetical examples of material flows, in which a virgin material was produced and used in products, recycled and finally landfilled. In some cases, closed loop and open loop recycling of materials existed. The transition probability matrix was created for each material flow, and how many times a virgin material is used in products until all of the elements are ultimately landfilled. Conclusions This methodology is applicable to a complicated material flow if the status of residence of a material and its flow in a society can be figured out. All the necessary data are the amount of virgin material production, amount of the material used in products, recycling rate of the material at the end of life of each product, the amount of scrap of the material that are used for products. In Part 2 of this paper, case studies for steel were conducted.     

Life cycle assessment of Australian automotive door skins

Background, aim, and scope  Policy initiatives, such as the EU End of Life Vehicle (ELV) Directive for only 5% landfilling by 2015, are increasing the pressure for higher material recyclability rates. This is stimulating research into material alternatives and end-of-life strategies for automotive components. This study presents a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) on an Australian automotive component, namely an exterior door skin. The functional unit for this study is one door skin set (4 exterior skins). The material alternatives are steel, which is currently used by Australian manufacturers, aluminium and glass-fiber reinforced polypropylene composite. Only the inputs and outputs relative to the door skin production, use and end-of-life phases were considered within the system boundary. Landfill, energy recovery and mechanical recycling were the end-of-life phases considered. The aim of the study is to highlight the most environmentally attractive material and end-of-life option. Methods  The LCA was performed according to the ISO 14040 standard series. All information considered in this study (use of fossil and non fossil based energy resources, water, chemicals etc.) were taken up in in-depth data. The data for the production, use and end-of-life phases of the door skin set was based upon softwares such as SimaPro and GEMIS which helped in the development of the inventory for the different end-of-life scenarios. In other cases, the inventory was developed using derivations obtained from published journals. Some data was obtained from GM-Holden and the Co-operative research Centre for Advanced Automotive Technology (AutoCRC), in Australia. In cases where data from the Australian economy was unavailable, such as the data relating to energy recovery methods, a generic data set based on European recycling companies was employed. The characterization factors used for normalization of data were taken from (Saling et. al. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7(4):203–218 2002) which detailed the method of carrying out an LCA. Results  The production phase results in maximum raw material consumption for all materials, and it is higher for metals than for the composite. Energy consumption is greatest in the use phase, with maximum consumption for steel. Aluminium consumes most energy in the production phase. Global Warming Potential (GWP) also follows a trend similar to that of energy consumption. Photo Oxidants Creation Potential (POCP) is the highest for the landfill scenario for the composite, followed by steel and aluminium. Acidification Potential (AP) is the highest for all the end-of-life scenarios of the composite. Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) is the highest for the metals. The net water emissions are also higher for composite in comparison to metals despite high pollution in the production phases of metallic door skins. Solid wastes are higher for the metallic door skins. Discussion  The composite door skin has the lowest energy consumption in the production phase, due to the low energy requirements during the manufacturing of E-glass and its fusion with polypropylene to form sheet molding compounds. In general, the air emissions during the use phase are strongly dependent on the mass of the skins, with higher emissions for the metals than for the composite. Material recovery through recycling is the highest in metals due to efficient separation techniques, while mechanical recycling is the most efficient for the composite. The heavy steel skins produce the maximum solid wastes primarily due to higher fuel consumption. Water pollution reduction benefit is highest in case of metals, again due to the high efficiency of magnetic separation technique in the case of steel and eddy current separation technique in the case of aluminium. Material recovery in these metals reduces the amount of water needed to produce a new door skin set (water employed mainly in the ingot casting stage). Moreover, the use of heavy metals, inorganic salts and other chemicals is minimized by efficient material recovery. Conclusions  The use of the studied type of steel for the door skins is a poor environmental option in every impact category. Aluminium and composite materials should be considered to develop a more sustainable and energy efficient automobile. In particular, this LCA study shows that glass-fiber composite skins with mechanical recycling or energy recovery method could be environmentally desirable, compared to aluminium and steel skins. However, the current limit on the efficiency of recycling is the prime barrier to increasing the sustainability of composite skins. Recommendations and perspectives  The study is successful in developing a detailed LCA for the three different types of door skin materials and their respective recycling or end-of-life scenarios. The results obtained could be used for future work on an eco-efficiency portfolio for the entire car. However, there is a need for a detailed assessment of toxicity and risk potentials arising from each of the four different types of door skin sets. This will require greater communication between academia and the automotive industry to improve the quality of the LCA data. Sensitivity analysis needs to be performed such as the assessment of the impact of varying substitution factors on the life cycle of a door skin. Incorporation of door skin sets made of new biomaterials need to be accounted for as another functional unit in future LCA studies. Discussion contributions to this article from the readership would the highly welcome. The authors     

Application of Markov Chain Model to Calculate the Average Number of Times of Use of a Material in Society. An Allocation Methodology for Open-Loop Recycling. Part 2: Case Study for Steel (6 pp)

- Preamble. In this series of two papers, a methodology to calculate the average number of times a material is used in a society from cradle to grave is presented and applied to allocation of environmental impact of virgin material. Part 1 focused on methodology development and showed how the methodology works with hypothetical examples of material flows. Part 2 presents case studies for steel recycling in Japan, in which the methodology is applied and allocation of environmental impact of virgin steel is conducted. - Abstract Goal, Scope and Background. The life cycle of steel begins with the mining of iron ore from the earth. Steel is produced in steel works and used in various products. Some of the steels are recycled at the products' end of life and used as a resource for the production of new steel in electric furnaces, while the remaining steel is used just once in products before being discarded (landfilled). In this paper, case studies were conducted to analyze the average number of times the element of iron is used and its residence time in society, in which the methodology developed in Part 1 of the paper was applied. CO2 emissions caused by steel productions and recycling were allocated by the number of times the element of steel is used in a society. Results and Discussion On the basis of the material flows of steel in Japan in 2000, it was calculated that at least 70% of the BF crude iron produced in Japan in 2000 was ultimately exported. On the assumption that steel is used in other countries in the same way as it is in Japan, the average number of times of use and the residence time of elemental iron in society are 2.67 and 62.9 years, respectively. Both of these values depend significantly on the recycling ratios of steel from construction and automobiles. Our model indicated that if the recycling ratio of steel from civil engineering and construction increased from 50% to 60%, the average number of times used would increase to 3.17 and the residence time of elemental iron in society would increase to 75.8 years. If CO2 emissions caused by steel productions and recycling are allocated by the number of times the element of steel is used in a society, it was calculated that steel use of one time generates in average an environmental burden of 1.03 t-CO2/t. Conclusion A method was developed to calculate the average number of times a material is used in a society from cradle to grave. Our methodology is based on Markov chain model using matrix-based numerical analysis, and has been successfully applied to steel. The results obtained by this methodology, i.e. the average number of times the element of iron is used in society, could be used for allocation of environmental burdens of virgin material as well as an indicator for assessing the state of material use in a certain year, based on material flow of material in that year. Recommendation and Perspective It is recognized that further researches must be conducted to gather data on steel production, use, and recovery in other countries and incorporate them into the transition probability matrix to obtain more precise results. Although this paper deals only with steel, this method can also be applied to other materials.     

Evaluating the Potential for Harmonized Prediction and Comparison of Disposal‐Stage Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Biomaterial Products

The carbon footprint (CF) of biofuels and biomaterials is a barrier to their acceptance, yet the greenhouse gas emissions associated with disposing of biomaterials are frequently omitted from analyses. This article investigates whether harmonization is appropriate for calculating the importance of biomaterials’ disposal. This research shows that disposal stages could double a biomaterial's CF, or reduce it to the point that it could claim to be zero carbon. Incineration with combined heat and power coupled with on‐site energy production in the biorefinery are identified as prerequisites to being zero carbon. The article assesses the current UK waste infrastructure's ability to support a low‐carbon bio‐based future economy, and finds that presently it only achieves marginal net reductions when compared to landfill and so cannot be said to support low‐carbon biomaterials, though the article challenges the polluter pays principle where low‐carbon disposal infrastructure are not available. Reuse and recycling are shown to have the potential to offset all the emissions caused by landfill of biomaterials. However, the savings are not so great as to offset the biomaterial's upstream emissions. The study explores the ability to overcome the barriers to incorporating disposal into life cycle assessment while identifying limitations of using harmonization as an assessment method. Specifically, data availability and industry consensus are flagged as major barriers. The study also uses sensitivity analysis to investigate the influence of methodological choices, such as allowing additional reuse and recycling stages, classifying biomaterials into different types, and choosing between opposing allocation methods.     

Life cycle assessment of automotive lightweighting through polymers under US boundary conditions

Purpose

In the transportation sector, reducing vehicle weight is a cornerstone strategy to improve the fuel economy and energy efficiency of road vehicles. This study investigated the environmental implications of lightweighting two automotive parts (Ford Taurus front end bolster, Chevrolet Trailblazer/GMC Envoy assist step) using glass-fiber reinforced polymers (GFRP) instead of steel alloys.

Methods

The cradle-to-grave life cycle assessments (LCAs) for these studies consider a total service life of 150,000 miles for two applications: a 46 % lighter GFRP bolster on the 2010 Ford Taurus that replaced the 2008 steel and GFRP bolster, and a 51 % lighter GFRP running board for the 2007 Chevrolet Trailblazer/GMC Envoy that replaced the previous steel running board including its polymer fasteners. The life cycle stages in these critically reviewed and ISO-compliant LCA studies include the production of upstream materials and energy, product manufacturing, use, and the end-of-life treatment for all materials throughout the life cycle.

Results and discussion

The results show that the lighter GFRP products performed better than the steel products for global warming potential and primary energy demand for both case studies. In addition, the GFRP bolster performed better for acidification potential. The savings of fuel combustion and production during the use stage of a vehicle far outweigh the environmental impacts of manufacturing or end-of-life. An even greater benefit would be possible if the total weight reduction in the vehicle would be high enough to allow for the reduction of engine displacement or an elongation of gear ratio while maintaining constant vehicle dynamics. These so-called secondary measures allow the fuel savings per unit of mass to be more than doubled and are able to offset the slightly higher acidification potential of the GFRP running board which occurs when only the mass-induced fuel savings are considered.

Conclusions

The lightweight GFRP components are shown to outperform their steel counterparts over the full life cycle mainly due to the reduced fuel consumption of the vehicle in the use phase. To harvest the benefits of light weighting to their full extent, it is recommended that the sum of all mass reductions in the design process be monitored and, whenever feasible, invested into fuel economy by adapting the drive train while maintaining constant vehicle performance rather than leveraging the weight reduction to improve vehicle dynamics.     

Product Environmental Life-Cycle Assessment Using Input-Output Techniques

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) facilitates a systems view in environmental evaluation of products, materials, and processes. Life-cycle assessment attempts to quantify environmental burdens over the entire life-cycle of a product from raw material extraction, manufacturing, and use to ultimate disposal. However, current methods for LCA suffer from problems of subjective boundary definition, inflexibility, high cost, data confidentiality, and aggregation.
This paper proposes alternative models to conduct quick, cost effective, and yet comprehensive life-cycle assessments. The core of the analytical model consists of the 498 sector economic input-output tables for the U.S. economy augmented with various sector-level environmental impact vectors. The environmental impacts covered include global warming, acidification, energy use, non-renewable ores consumption, eutrophication, conventional pollutant emissions and toxic releases to the environment. Alternative models are proposed for environmental assessment of individual products, processes, and life-cycle stages by selective disaggregation of aggregate input-output data or by creation of hypothetical new commodity sectors. To demonstrate the method, a case study comparing the life-cycle environmental performance of steel and plastic automobile fuel tank systems is presented.