Purpose
Achieving sustainability by rethinking products, services and strategies is an enormous challenge currently laid upon the economic sector, in which materials selection plays a critical role. In this context, the present work describes an environmental and economic life cycle analysis of a structural product, comparing two possible material alternatives. The product chosen is a storage tank, presently manufactured in stainless steel (SST) or in a glass fibre reinforced polymer composite (CST). The overall goal of the study is to identify environmental and economic strong and weak points related to the life cycle of the two material alternatives. The consequential win–win or trade-off situations will be identified via a life cycle assessment/life cycle costing (LCA/LCC) integrated model.Methods
The LCA/LCC integrated model used consists in applying the LCA methodology to the product system, incorporating, in parallel, its results into the LCC study, namely those of the life cycle inventory and the life cycle impact assessment.Results and discussion
In both the SST and CST systems, the most significant life cycle phase is the raw materials production, in which the most significant environmental burdens correspond to the Fossil fuels and Respiratory inorganics categories. The LCA/LCC integrated analysis shows that the CST has globally a preferable environmental and economic profile, as its impacts are lower than those of the SST in all life cycle stages. Both the internal and external costs are lower, the former resulting mainly from the composite material being significantly less expensive than stainless steel. This therefore represents a full win–win situation. As a consequence, the study clearly indicates that using a thermoset composite material to manufacture storage tanks is environmentally and economically desirable. However, it was also evident that the environmental performance of the CST could be improved by altering its end-of-life stage.Conclusions
The results of the present work provide enlightening insights into the synergies between the environmental and the economic performance of a structural product made with alternative materials. Furthermore, they provide conclusive evidence to support the integration of environmental and economic life cycle analysis in the product development processes of a manufacturing company or, in some cases, even in its procurement practices. 相似文献The purpose of this study is to provide an integrated method to identify the resource consumption, environmental emission, and economic cost for mechanical product manufacturing from economic and ecological dimensions and ultimately to provide theoretical and data support of energy conservation and emission reduction for mechanical product manufacturing.
MethodsThe applied research methods include environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost (LCC). In life cycle environmental assessment, the inventory data are referred from Chinese Life Cycle Database and midpoint approach and EDIP2003 and CML2001 models of life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) are selected. In life cycle cost assessment, three cost categories are considered. The proposed environment and cost assessment method is based on the theory of social willingness to pay for potential environmental impacts. With the WD615 Steyr engine as a case, life cycle environment and cost are analyzed and evaluated.
Results and discussionThe case study indicates that, in different life cycle phases, the trend of cost result is generally similar to the environmental impacts; the largest proportion of cost and environmental impact happened in the two phases of “material production” and “component manufacturing” and the smallest proportion in “material transport” and “product assembly.” The environmental impact category of Chinese resource depletion potential (CRDP) accounted for the largest proportion, followed by global warming potential (GWP) and photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP), whereas the impacts of eutrophication potential (EP) and acidification potential (AP) are the smallest. The life cycle “conventional cost” accounted for almost all the highest percentage in each phase (except “material transport” phase), which is more than 80% of the total cost. The “environmental cost” and “possible cost” in each phase are relatively close, and the proportion of which is far below the “conventional cost.”
ConclusionsThe proposed method enhanced the conventional LCA. The case results indicate that, in a life cycle framework, the environment and cost analysis results could support each other, and focusing on the environment and cost analysis for mechanical product manufacturing will contribute to a more comprehensive eco-efficiency assessment. Further research on the life cycle can be extended to phases of “early design,” “product use,” and “final disposal.” Other LCIA models and endpoint indicators are advocated for this environmental assessment. Environmental cost can also be further investigated, and the relevant social willingness to pay for more environmental emissions is advocated to be increased.
相似文献The introduction of renewable materials into automotive applications is perceived as an innovative lightweight solution. Wood-based materials are advantageous in that they have potentially lower environmental impacts as compared with other materials such as steel. However, using wood per se does not automatically ensure more sustainability. Few prospective sustainability assessment methods or studies on the use of wood-based materials in automotive applications have been carried out, although these are needed to reduce unintended, negative sustainability effects and to support sustainable oriented research and innovation. Therefore, this study was conducted to assess the potential sustainability effects and consequences of introducing a wood-based component into an automotive application.
MethodsA combination of methods was used to analyze the potential sustainability effects when introducing wood into automotive applications. This prospective life cycle sustainability analysis solely relied on secondary data. The environmental impacts were analyzed using a simplified environmental life cycle assessment on the product level. A multi-regional input-output-based assessment was conducted to model the country-specific environmental and socioeconomic consequences. The potential shift in social risks and opportunities on a national scale was analyzed by conducting a generic social life cycle assessment. Various aspects of each approach differ, with each providing a specific perspective of the system under study.
Results and discussionThe results indicate that implementing wood into automotive application can have environmental, social, and economic benefits, according to most of the indicators analyzed. Mostly due to the product weight reduction due to the use of a wood-based component, the results show that environmental impacts decrease. Some possible consequences of using wood-based materials are increased value added and increasing the number of jobs in European countries. Similarly, the social risks and opportunities are shifted from countries all over the world to European countries, which perform better than developing countries according to several indicators. However, some indicators, such as migrant acceptance or local supplier quantity, perform better in the current situation.
ConclusionsThe presented case study is particularly notable, because the results clearly indicate the advantages of using wood-based materials in automotive applications, although the application of such relatively holistic and complex approaches often may lead to rather indifferent pictures. Policy makers, researchers, and companies can apply this combination of methods that rely solely on generic data to obtain both feasible and informative results. These methods also allow users to link the product level assessment with a regional and social perspective and screen critical topics to support sustainability research and innovation.
相似文献Purpose
With the increasing concerns related to integration of social and economic dimensions of the sustainability into life cycle assessment (LCA), traditional LCA approach has been transformed into a new concept, which is called as life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). This study aims to contribute the existing LCSA framework by integrating several social and economic indicators to demonstrate the usefulness of input–output modeling on quantifying sustainability impacts. Additionally, inclusion of all indirect supply chain-related impacts provides an economy-wide analysis and a macro-level LCSA. Current research also aims to identify and outline economic, social, and environmental impacts, termed as triple bottom line (TBL), of the US residential and commercial buildings encompassing building construction, operation, and disposal phases.Methods
To achieve this goal, TBL economic input–output based hybrid LCA model is utilized for assessing building sustainability of the US residential and commercial buildings. Residential buildings include single and multi-family structures, while medical buildings, hospitals, special care buildings, office buildings, including financial buildings, multi-merchandise shopping, beverage and food establishments, warehouses, and other commercial structures are classified as commercial buildings according to the US Department of Commerce. In this analysis, 16 macro-level sustainability assessment indicators were chosen and divided into three main categories, namely environmental, social, and economic indicators.Results and discussion
Analysis results revealed that construction phase, electricity use, and commuting played a crucial role in much of the sustainability impact categories. The electricity use was the most dominant component of the environmental impacts with more than 50 % of greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption through all life cycle stages of the US buildings. In addition, construction phase has the largest share in income category with 60 % of the total income generated through residential building’s life cycle. Residential buildings have higher shares in all of the sustainability impact categories due to their relatively higher economic activity and different supply chain characteristics.Conclusions
This paper is an important attempt toward integrating the TBL perspective into LCSA framework. Policymakers can benefit from such approach and quantify macro-level environmental, economic, and social impacts of their policy implications simultaneously. Another important outcome of this study is that focusing only environmental impacts may misguide decision-makers and compromise social and economic benefits while trying to reduce environmental impacts. Hence, instead of focusing on environmental impacts only, this study filled the gap about analyzing sustainability impacts of buildings from a holistic perspective. 相似文献Background, aim and scope
A relatively broad consensus has formed that the purpose of developing and using the social life cycle assessment (SLCA) is to improve the social conditions for the stakeholders affected by the assessed product’s life cycle. To create this effect, the SLCA, among other things, needs to provide valid assessments of the consequence of the decision that it is to support. The consequence of a decision to implement a life cycle of a product can be seen as the difference between the decision being implemented and ‘non-implemented’ product life cycle. This difference can to some extent be found using the consequential environmental life cycle assessment (ELCA) methodology to identify the processes that change as a consequence of the decision. However, if social impacts are understood as certain changes in the lives of the stakeholders, then social impacts are not only related to product life cycles, meaning that by only assessing impacts related to the processes that change as a consequence of a decision, not all changes in the life situations of the stakeholders will be captured by an assessment following the consequential ELCA methodology. This article seeks to identify these impacts relating to the non-implemented product life cycle and establish indicators for their assessment. 相似文献With many policies in Germany steering towards a bioeconomy, there is a need for analytical tools that assess not only the environmental and economic implications but also the social implications of a transition to a bioeconomy. Wood is expected to become a major biomass resource in bioeconomy regions. Therefore, this paper develops a social life cycle assessment (sLCA) framework that can be applied specifically to a wood-based production system in one of Germany’s bioeconomy regions.
MethodsThis paper reviews and analyses existing sLCA approaches, in terms of how applicable they are for assessing a wood-based production system in a German bioeconomy regional context. The analysis is structured according to the standard phases of environmental life cycle assessment (LCA). However, we use the term social effects rather than social impacts, to acknowledge the unknown cause–effect relationship between an organisation’s activities and its social impacts. We also consider the establishment of regional system boundaries, as well as the relationship between the social effects and the product being assessed. Additionally, an approach for the development and selection of social indicators and indices is outlined. Furthermore, we discuss data requirements and present an approach for a social life cycle impact assessment method.
Results and discussionA new conceptual framework for a context-specific sLCA to assess wood-based products manufactured in a bioeconomy region was developed. It enables sLCA practitioners to identify “social hotspots” and “social opportunities” from a regional perspective. The location and characteristics of these social hotspots and opportunities can be analysed, in particular, for major production activities in a bioeconomy region in Germany. Therefore, according to this framework, the development of social indices and indicators, the collection of data and the approach used for characterising social effects need to relate to the geographical context of the product being assessed. The proposed framework can, thus, help to identify, monitor and evaluate the social sustainability of wood-based bioeconomy chains in a regional context.
ConclusionsThis framework requires a high level of detail in the social inventory and impact assessment phase, in order to assess the regional foreground activities in a German wood-based bioeconomy region. It enables sLCA studies to identify which social hotspots and social opportunities occur and where they are located in the wood-based production system of a regional bioeconomy.
相似文献Purpose
Sustainability of a material-based product mainly depends on the materials used for the product itself or during its lifetime. A material selection decision should not only capture the functional performance required but should also consider the economical, social, and environmental impacts originated during the product life cycle. There is a need to assess social impacts of materials along the full life cycle, not only to be able to address the “social dimension” in sustainable material selection but also for potentially improving the circumstances of affected stakeholders. This paper presents the method and a case study of social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) specialized for comparative studies. Although the authors’ focus is on material selection, the proposed methodology can be used for comparative assessment of products in general.Methods
The method is based on UNEP/SETAC “guidelines for social life-cycle assessment of products” and includes four main phases: goal and scope definition, life cycle inventory analysis, life cycle impact assessment, and life cycle interpretation. However, some special features are presented to adjust the framework for materials comparison purpose. In life cycle inventory analysis phase, a hot spot assessment is carried out using material flow analysis and stakeholder and experts’ interviews. Based on the results of that, a pairwise comparison method is proposed for life cycle impact assessment applying analytic hierarchy process. A case study was conducted to perform a comparative assessment of the social and socio-economic impacts in life cycle of concrete and steel as building materials in Iran. For hot spot analysis, generic and national level data were gathered, and for impact assessment phase, site-specific data were used.Result and discussion
The unique feature of the proposed method compared with other works in S-LCA is its specialty to materials and products comparison. This leads to some differences in methodological issues of S-LCA that are explained in the paper in detail. The case study results assert that “steel/iron” in the north of Iran generally has the better social performance than “concrete/cement.” However, steel is associated with many negative social effects in some subcategories, e.g., freedom of association, fair salary, and occupational health in extraction phase. Against, social profile of concrete and cement industry is damaged mainly due to the negative impact of cement production on safe and healthy living condition. The case study presented in this article shows that the evaluation of social impacts is possible, even if the assessment is always affected by subjective value systems.Conclusions
Application of the UNEP/SETAC guidelines in comparative studies can be encouraged based on the results of this paper. It enables a hotspot assessment of the social and socio-economic impacts in life cycle of alternative materials. This research showed that the development of a specialized S-LCA approach for materials and products comparison is well underway although many challenges still persist. Particularly characterization method in life cycle impact assessment phase is challenging. The findings of this case study pointed out that social impacts are primarily connected to the conduct of companies and less with processes and materials in general. These findings confirm the results of Dreyer et al. (Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(2):88–97, 2006). The proposed approach aims not only to identify the best socially sustainable alternative but also to reveal product/process improvement potentials to facilitate companies to act socially compatible. It will be interesting to apply the UNEP/SETAC approach of S-LCA to other materials and products; materials with a more complex life cycle will be a special challenge. As with any new method, getting experience on data collection and evaluation, building a data base, integrating the method in software tools, and finding ways for effective communication of results are important steps until integrating S-LCA in routine decision support. 相似文献Purpose
Used cooking oil (UCO) is a domestic waste generated as the result of cooking and frying food with vegetable oil. The purpose of this study is to compare the sustainability of three domestic UCO collection systems: through schools (SCH), door-to-door (DTD), and through urban collection centres (UCC), to determine which systems should be promoted for the collection of UCO in cities in Mediterranean countries.Methods
The present paper uses the recent life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) methodology. LCSA is the combination of life cycle assessment (LCA), life cycle costing, and social life cycle assessment (S-LCA).Results and discussion
Of the three UCO collection systems compared, the results show that UCC presents the best values for sustainability assessment, followed by DTD and finally SCH system, although there are no substantial differences between DTD and SCH. UCC has the best environmental and economic performance but not for social component. DTD and SCH present suitable values for social performance but not for the environmental and economic components.Conclusions
The environmental component improves when the collection points are near to citizens’ homes. Depending on the vehicle used in the collection process, the management costs and efficiency can improve. UCO collection systems that carry out different kind of waste (such as UCC) are more sustainable than those that collect only one type of waste. Regarding the methodology used in this paper, the sustainability assessment proposed is suitable for use in decision making to analyse processes, products or services, even so in social assessment an approach is needed to quantify the indicators. Defining units for sustainability quantification is a difficult task because not all social indicators are quantifiable and comparable; some need to be adapted, raising the subjectivity of the analysis. Research into S-LCA and LCSA is recent; more research is needed in order to improve the methodology. 相似文献In the European context, energy and climate have been prioritized by policies related to retrofitting, but social concerns such as unemployment or poverty need to be tackled. Policy makers need supporting assessment methods to comprehensively address complex processes as retrofitting, and the methodology of life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) seems an appropriate tool. However, LCSA needs further adaptation for the intended application. The objective of this work is to define socioeconomic models that, added to environmental life cycle assessment, enable LCSA. The intended application is guiding policy making related to retrofitting from a life cycle perspective.
MethodsThis study defines models to assess social and socioeconomic impacts similarly to environmental life cycle assessment. These models address social and socioeconomic concerns, relevant in housing retrofitting processes, for which a cause-effect relationship can be established. Characterization models result from the identification, combination, and adaptation of available methods, developed within various research fields. These methods analyze damages to the health of workers involved in the life cycle and to the health of the household living in the retrofitted dwelling. Impacts on human well-being and dignity are addressed by analyzing prosperity, in terms of fair employment, alleviation of fuel poverty of households, and economic growth.
Results and discussionWith the proposed LCSA methods, we have compared impacts associated to the retrofitting of a house in Brussels in two scenarios, considering a remaining life cycle of 30 years and taking into account the reference situation. Environmental damages significantly decrease in one of the scenarios, but slightly increase for households that commonly under-heat. Retrofitting prevents indoor mold and associated damages on health but implies damages on the health of workers. Fair working hours involved in the life cycle have been quantified as well as the effects on the households regarding fuel poverty. The effects on the economic growth have also been studied to provide insights for the optimization of encouraging measures.
ConclusionsThis LCSA proposal consists of a set of socioeconomic characterization models coupled with selected environmental ones. The models have been defined adapted to the particular application, given the context-specific nature of some of the social concerns, indicators, and characterization factors. This LCSA proposal helps adapting policies to housing typologies, household and dwelling conditions, as well as identifying potential improvements in the life cycle.
相似文献Purpose
Biopolymers are considered to be environmentally friendlier than petroleum-based polymers, but little is known about their environmental performance against petroleum-based products. This paper presents the results of a life cycle assessment (LCA) of two prototype biocomposite formulations produced by extrusion of wood fibre with either polylactic acid (PLA) or a blend of PLA and locally produced thermoplastic starch (TPS).Methods
The study followed the LCA methodology outlined in the two standards set out by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO): ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 of 2006. A life cycle inventory (LCI) for the biocomposite formulations was developed, and a contribution analysis was performed to identify the significant inputs. Environmental performances of the two formulations were then compared with each other and polypropylene (PP), a petroleum-based polymer. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s impact assessment method, “TRACI: The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts”, was combined with Cumulative Energy Demand (a European method) in order to characterize the inventory flows. Environmental impact categories chosen for the analysis were the following: global warming, stratospheric ozone depletion, acidification of land and water, eutrophication, smog, human health (respiratory, carcinogenic, and non-carcinogenic) effects and ecotoxicity.Results and discussion
We found that PLA is the significant input which contributes mostly to fossil fuel consumption, acidification and respiratory and smog effects. Impacts from PLA transport from the faraway source significantly added more burden to its contributions. TPS causes less environmental burden compared to PLA; the environmental performance of the biocomposite improved when a blend of PLA and TPS is used in formulating the biocomposite. The two formulations performed better than PP in all the environmental impact categories except eutrophication effects, which is important on a regional basis.Conclusions
The following conclusions were drawn from this study:- PLA is the environmentally significant input among the three raw materials.
- TPS causes less environmental burden than PLA. Environmental performance of the biocomposite improves in the life cycle energy consumption, fossil energy use, ozone depletion and non-carcinogenic impact categories when a blend of PLA and TPS is used.
- The biocomposite can outperform PP in all the impact categories except eutrophication effects if manufactured using hydroelectricity.
Purpose
Currently, the bio-based plastics have been drawing considerable attention from the packaging industry as a sustainable solution for replacing petroleum-based plastics in order to reduce the accumulation of plastic waste in the environment. This work has benchmarked the environmental impact of bio-based against petroleum-based plastics for single use boxes. In this paper, the cradle to consumer gate environmental impact data of these boxes was calculated and reported as part 1. End-of-life options of both bio- and petroleum-based boxes are an important subject which will be further studied for part 2. The energy sources in this work were taken from the Thailand energy database namely: Thai electricity grid mix (TEGM), Thai coal electricity (TCE), Thai natural gas combine cycle (TNGCC), and Thai coal integrated gasification combine cycle (TIGCC).Methods
The materials studied were polystyrene (PS) derived from petroleum, polylactic acid (PLA) derived from corn, and PLA/cassava starch blend (PLA/starch). The tray with lid (herein after called box) was processed in a plastic manufacturing in Thailand using cast sheet extrusion and then thermoforming techniques. The functional unit is specified as 10,000 units of 8.0?×?10.0?×?2.5 cm of PS, PLA, and PLA/starch boxes which weigh 447.60, 597.60, and 549.56 kg, respectively. Three impact categories; namely global warming potential including direct greenhouse gas, and indirect land use change (LUC) emissions, acidification, and photochemical ozone formation are investigated. Finally, the normalization results including and excluding LUC consideration were compared and reported.Results and discussion
The results from this study have shown that the total environmental impact including LUC emission of bio-based boxes were different when the various energy sources were supplied throughout the life cycle production stage. It can be seen that the PS box has lower environmental impact than PLA and PLA/starch boxes when TEGM, TCE, TNGCC, and TIGCC were used as energy supplied. LUC of renewable feedstocks, such as corn and cassava, were considered as the biggest impact of absolute scores of PLA and PLA/starch boxes. These results are consistent with Piemonte and Gironi (2010).Conclusions
PLA and PLA/starch boxes give a slightly higher environmental impact than the PS box by 1.59 and 1.09 times, respectively, when LUC was not accounted in the absolute scores and clean energy TIGCC was used throughout the life cycle. 相似文献Purpose
In this study, a life cycle assessment of a bioplastic based diaper was performed. The product has several innovative elements, due to the implementation of eco-design principles, such as: (1) introduction of biopolymers (namely polylactic acid (PLA) and Mater-bi®), (2) relevant reduction of petrochemical plastics, and (3) minimization of energy consumptions and use of renewable energy in manufacturing. The aim of the study is to evaluate the environmental benefits gained through eco-innovation, while identifying further areas of improvement.Methods
The bio-based diaper has been evaluated using a “cradle-to-gate” analysis. The functional unit is one diaper, assuming an average size among the different commercial options. A case study of an enterprise in Italy (WIP S.p.A) was carried out to collect as much reliable primary data as possible. In order to highlight potential areas of improvement and to compare the environmental performance of the product, a sensitivity analysis based on three different impact assessment methods (adopting ReCiPe 2008, IMPACT 2002+ and Cumulative Energy Demand (CED)) and a comparison with a standard commercial diaper were performed. Finally, three possible end-of-life scenarios including composting of WIP diaper were hypothesized and tested.Results and discussion
Contribution analysis suggested that sourcing and production of raw materials used in WIP diaper manufacturing contributed most significantly to the potential environmental impacts. Adopting ReCiPe method, pulp, and sodium polyacrylate present the highest environmental burdens in WIP diaper system. Applying IMPACT2002+ method, PLA relative contribution to the toxicity increases, due to the generation of the electricity used in corn production and in PLA production phases. For both methods, impacts related to energy consumption of the WIP diapers’ production process look to be negligible. WIP diaper performance has room for improvement, since critical points were detected in the life cycle stages of raw materials used. However, the results of the normalization step, according to ReCiPe method, state that WIP diapers can bring environmental benefits, compared to standard ones. Moreover, if composting end-of-life scenario is included in the assessment, there is a significant improvement in WIP diaper environmental performance compared to a standard diaper.Conclusions
Integrating eco-innovation and eco-design principles in the production of the bio-based diaper leads to a better environmental profile, compared to the standard one. Nevertheless, there are several areas of concerns to be considered in order to further improve its environmental performance. So far, the possible improvements identified from the case study are: (1) the selection of biopolymers suppliers with better production systems from an environmental point of view, (2) the reduction of distances along the supply chain, and (3) the implementation of composting procedures for the end of life. In conclusion, the introduction of biopolymers in diaper composition could lead them to be preferable compared to standard diapers, but criticisms arise, which need to be solved, to avoid the risk of burdens shifting. 相似文献Purpose
We investigate how the boundary between product systems and their environment has been delineated in life cycle assessment and question the usefulness and ontological relevance of a strict division between the two.Methods
We consider flows, activities and impacts as general terms applicable to both product systems and their environment and propose that the ontologically relevant boundary is between the flows that are modelled as inputs to other activities (economic or environmental)—and the flows that—in a specific study—are regarded as final impacts, in the sense that no further feedback into the product system is considered before these impacts are applied in decision-making. Using this conceptual model, we contrast the traditional mathematical calculation of the life cycle impacts with a new, simpler computational structure where the life cycle impacts are calculated directly as part of the Leontief inverse, treating product flows and environmental flows in parallel, without the need to consider any boundary between economic and environmental activities.Results and discussion
Our theoretical outline and the numerical example demonstrate that the distinctions and boundaries between product systems and their environment are unnecessary and in some cases obstructive from the perspective of impact assessment, and can therefore be ignored or chosen freely to reflect meaningful distinctions of specific life cycle assessment (LCA) studies. We show that our proposed computational structure is backwards compatible with the current practice of LCA modelling, while allowing inclusion of feedback loops both from the environment to the economy and internally between different impact categories in the impact assessment.Conclusions
Our proposed computational structure for LCA facilitates consistent, explicit and transparent modelling of the feedback loops between environment and the economy and between different environmental mechanisms. The explicit and transparent modelling, combining economic and environmental information in a common computational structure, facilitates data exchange and re-use between different academic fields.
下载免费PDF全文