Environmental Issues

There are many ways of assessing the environmental impact of a product. Such assessments should relate to the manufacturing environment and the conditions under which the product is made, its period of use, and its disposal. The objective of this work package was to consider the environmental impact of multimaterial applications in three broad areas, between which there was often overlap.

The area of clean manufacture relates mainly to the exposure of the workers to unhealthy materials used in the manufacture. Life-cycle-assessment relates more to the overall impact of the product on the environment, while recycling involves the remanufacture of the product or its constituent materials, thus avoiding landfill.

The interaction and influence of political and socio-economic factors remains a variable, the behaviour of which is difficult to predict.

Contents (updated 12.02.2001)

1 Clean manufacture

Introduction

Swedish thermosetting ordinance 

Volvo's black list (Chemical substance which must not be used within the Volvo group)
Volvo'sgrey list (Chemical substance whose use within the Volvo group shall be limited)

2 Life cycle assessment (LCA)

 

Introduction 

History of LCA

An overview of different quantitative valuation/weighting methods for LCA
Some LCA-software packages

Information on links, literature, reports, conferences etc.

3 Recycling

Introduction

Case studies

4 Information on links, literature, reports, conferences etc

Clean manufacture

Introduction

When a product is being manufactured, the workers may be exposed to a wide variety of solvents, gases, powders, acids, alkalis, and other noxious materials. It is the responsibility of the employer to guard the health of the employees so that they are not adversely affected by their contact with these materials. Various international, national, industry, and company standards and regulations exist, but their application is by no means uniform.

A multimaterial application inevitably requires means of joining by using solvents, adhesives, or melting, all of which imply 'active' chemicals will be used.

The experience of two, major companies has been drawn on to give guidelines as to how a responsible employer should act.

Provisions for the handling of thermosetting plastic components constituting deleterious chemical products according to the Swedish Thermosetting Ordinance (valid for the date 2001-01-01):  Translation and Summary of the updated provision:

Volvo's black list (Chemical substance which must not be used within the Volvo group)

Volvo'sgrey list (Chemical substance whose use within the Volvo group shall be limited)

See also Reducing the Use of Solvents and Chrome (Vi) in Aerospace Manufacturing. Today, Tomorrow and the Future.  Peter Morgan and Jeffrey Sargent, BAE SYSTEMS (pdf)

 

Life cycle assessment (LCA)

Introduction

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a method of assessing and quantifying the environmental impact of products taking into account the methods and materials used for manufacture. It will also consider the impact on the environment during use of the product and its disposal, whether it is through recycling, incineration or dumping in a landfill site. Much of the necessary data for performing an LCA can be found in various software packages available commercially; however, there is some debate as to the accuracy of this information as the technique is still in its relative infancy. The main use of LCAs is to provide a comparison between the use of different materials or manufacturing processes for a given product to determine the benefits or disadvantages or adopting a specific design strategy. It is, however, very difficult to assess the impact caused by a single product without a comparison, since the impact scores obtained in the analysis cannot be taken as absolute. This occurs because no way exists to quantify an exact damage to the environment from a particular process or emission. This means that the best way to interpret the data is to have a comparison with a similar product or design. There is also the potential problem that the impact factors calculated for the same product in different commercial packages may be different as the parameter and data used in the analysis are unique to that package. A point which is increasingly important is the issue of cost and no package yet includes any method of inputting cost into the equation.

The main potential problems with LCAs are the lack of international standards. The ISO14000 series of standards are currently being created to deal with these areas but until that process is completed, there will be no definitive answer to many of the problems faced by users of the LCA software. There is no standard method of applying the weightings to the different environmental effects that occur to take into account the seriousness and potential for environmental damage. Each package has its own weightings and, without years of research, these cannot be discounted or recommended. There is also the issue of whether to include the internal environment of the manufacturing facility within the LCA. A lot of work has been done in Sweden, particularly with the WEST package, to apply the internal environment to an LCA, but there is a question of how worthwhile this is to an overall LCA for a designer. The main emphasis of LCA is also in question as different reports have suggested different ways of looking at the environmental impacts. These can be either defined as the risk to human health or the potential damage to the earth's ecosystem and again there are convincing arguments for both ideas. As with any method, the data used are of critical importance, particularly in respect of the disposal of the products at the end of their use.

The main problem facing designers when working with multimaterials will be deciding on how to input the material into the LCA. This could be done either by calculating and measuring a new set of data for this multimaterial, or by calculating the data from the constituents of the material summed together. This second method has a number of potential flaws in that the processes used during manufacture may be completely different, or because by adding materials together certain benefits or disadvantages could be gained in terms of environmental impact. Equally, the disposal of the multimaterial product after use could result in significantly different data for assessing the environmental impact. Also, the processes that can be used to dispose or recycle the components may be significantly different from single materials. The way forward in the short term for using LCA tools with multimaterials is to concentrate on comparing the impact of the multimaterial with the impact of the equivalent single material. This will allow designers to see how they can possibly use multimaterials to benefit the 'greenness' of their products. The main aim should therefore be to produce a set of guidelines that designers can utilise to help them design with multimaterials by using LCA tools. Hopefully, this will show designers how to reduce the environmental impact damage of their products whilst letting them explore the possibilities of multimaterials. The long term aim would be to incorporate comprehensive data for a range of multimaterials in the software LCA tools that are available so that designers have to think less about how to use and interpret the data.

Of course, if the LCA is strongly based on the use of hydrocarbons, it will give very different results depending on whether the product moves or is stationary. For instance, a motor car may cost 10,000 Euros to make, and cover 200,000 km in its lifetime. Assuming the car uses 10 litres per 100 km, and fuel costs 1 Euro per litre, then the total fuel used will be 20,000 Euros, or twice the manufacturing cost. It is therefore obvious that a lightweight car has environmental advantages over a heavy car. However, for a building panel, there is no movement and no fuel consumption. There will be hydrocarbon (fuel) benefits if the panel is well insulated, especially in colder countries. These two examples show how LCA must incorporate some aspect of usage, as well as manufacture.

History of LCA with a key:   

An overview of different quantitative valuation/weighting methods for LCA

Summary

How do different products affect the environment? It is important to consider the overall influence in any effort to improve products; from raw material extraction, manufacture and use right through to waste disposal. Different life cycle assess-ments, LCA, are used for such overall assessment. Their though exist different LCA methods. The following sections will give some ideas of available methods/"tools". Most of the summaries are taken from the report "Värderingsmetoder i LCA - Metoder för viktning av olika slags miljöpåverkan - en översikt", Magnus Bengtsson, February 1998, CPM, 1998:1, Chalmers University of Technology. ISSN 1403-2686. ("Quantitative weighting principles for environmental effect in LCA - an overview".)

This chapter gives an idea of which LCA methods/"tools" that are available, how old the methods are, where they originally were developed and in which situation they work best. This is presented in two table-matrix. Note that the different methods/"tools" are presented in alphabetic order and not in order of importance.

The need for environmental certification as for example ISO 14000 will certainly be a demand in a couple of years. This in comparison with the situation for ISO 9000 today. What is extra important is to get a common internal "language" for environmental impact. Using this "language" the presented methods/"tools" in this overview can be a help to make budget estimates for environmental impact. A common internal environmental "language" also simplifies communication and improves comprehension of environmental discussion by everyone in the company. The most important goal is to "talk the same language".

Existing overviews of valuation/weighting methods for LCA

It is primarily referred to the Chalmers report CPM, 1998:1, see text in summary. It though exist a number of other overviews on LCA methods. Here follows a presentation of seven other existing overviews. The presentation is made in chronological order.

1. Braunschweig, A; Förster, R; Hofstetter, P; Müller-Wenk, R: 1994. Evaluation und Weiterentwicklung von Bewertungsmethoden für Ökobilanzen - Erste Ergebnisse, IÖW-HSG Diskussionbeitrag Nr. 19, Universität St. Gallen, Schweiz. A comprehensive survey where eight methods are presented relatively thoroughly. A short summery is also given for some additional methods.
2. Eriksson, E; Johannisson, V; Rydberg, T: 1995. Comparison of four valuation methods, Chalmers Industriteknik, Göteborg, Sweden. A presentation of four principal different methods and their index adjusted to different countries.
3. Braunschweig, A; Förster, R; Hofstetter, P; Müller-Wenk, R: 1996. Develop-ments in LCA Valuation, IWÖ-HSG Diskussionsbeitrag Nr. 32, Universität St. Gallen, Schweiz. A summery of the previous study together with a discussion of possible ways of development of methods for valuation/weighting in LCA.
4. Finnveden, G: 1996. Valuation Methods within the Framework of Life Cycle Assessment, IVL. Rapport B 1231, Institutet för Vatten- och Luftvårdsforsk-ning, Stockholm, Sweden. A summery of some important valuation/weighting methods with a discussion of this methods on an ethical basis.
5. Lindeijer, E: 1996. "Normalisation and Valuation", Towards a Methodology for Life Cycle Impact Assessment, SETAC-Europe, Brussels, Belgium. Based upon the work done by Braunschweig et al (1994) with a discussion around which demands a good valuation/weighting method shall fulfil.
6. Hertwich, E; Pease, W; Koshland, C: 1997. "Evaluating the environmental impact of products and production processes: a comparison of six methods", The Science of the Total Environment 1996, pp 13-29. A comparison between different valuation/weighting methods for LCA and production working conditions.
7. Powell, J; Pearce, D; Craighill, A: 1997. "Approaches to Valuation in LCA Impact Assessment", International Journal of LCA 2(1), pp 11-15. A discussion around which principal valuation/weighting methods that can be considered as acceptable, seen trough a society perspective. The discussion include questions around available information for different valuation/weighting methods and the probability for practical use and evaluation of this index methods.

In 1993 SETAC (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry) sponsored a workshop at Sesimbra in Portugal, where 50 experts from 13 countries pooled their knowledge and experience in order to work out guidelines for carrying out and reporting LCA studies in a responsible and consistent manner. The workshop resulted in a publication named "Guidelines for life cycle assessment: A Code of practice" and it sets the standard for most of the LCA studies in both Europe and North America.
 

 Method/"Tool" together with country of origin/first presented/reference

Method/"Tool"	Country of origin	First presented	Reference
Critical Surface-Time	CH	1994	Jolliet, O: 1994. "Critical surface-time: an evaluation method for LCA", I: Integrating Impact Assessment into LCA, Proceedings of the LCA symposium held at the 4th SETAC-Europe Congress, 11-14 April 1994, Free University, Brussels, Belgium. Jolliet, O; Crettaz, P: 1997. Critical Surface-Time 95, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Schweiz.
Critical volume	CH	1984	BUS, 1984. Ökobilanz von Packstoffen, Schriftenreihe Umwelt 24, Bundesamt für Umweltschutz, Bern, Schweiz.
DESC (Decision model for Environmental Strategies for Corporations)	NL	1992	Krozer, J: 1992. Decision model for Environmental Strategies of Corporations (DESC), TME, Haag, The Netherlands.
Ecoscarity/Ecopoints	CH	1990	SIMA-PRO, 1993. Developed by Pre Consultancy, The Netherlands. Ahbe, S; Braunschweig, A; Müller-Wenk, R: 1990. Methodik für Oekobilanzen auf der Basis ökologischer Optimierung., BUWAL, Schriftenreihe Umwelt Nr. 133, Bern, Schweiz.
Method/"Tool"	Country of origin	First presented	Reference
Ecoscarity/Ecopoints	CH	1990	Baumann, H; Boström, C-Å; Ekvall, T; Eriksson, E; Rydberg, T; Ryding, S-O; Steen, B; Svensson, G; Svensson, T; Tillman, A-M: 1992. Miljöbedömning av förpacknings-utredningens slutsatser, (Environmental evaluation of content from the packaging industry research), FoU nr 71, Stiftelsen REFORSK, Malmö, Sweden. Baumann, H: 1992. LCA: Utvärdering med index. Beräkning av två uppsättningar norska index. (Evaluation with index. Calculation with two Norwegian index.) CIT-Ekologik 1992:2, Chalmers Industriteknik, Göteborg, Sweden. Baumann, H; Ekvall, T; Eriksson, E; Kullman, M; Rydberg, T; Ryding, S-O; Steen, B; Svensson, G: 1993. Miljömässiga skillnader mellan återvinning/återanvändning och förbränning/deponering. (Environmental differences between recycling and deposition), FoU nr 79, Stiftelsen REFORSK, Malmö, Sweden. Bengtsson, M; Lundin, M; Molander, S: 1997. Life Cycle Assessment of Wastewater Systems, Report 1997: 9, Teknisk Miljöplanering, Chalmers tekniska högkola, Göteborg, Sweden. Eriksson, E; Johannisson, V; Rydberg, T: 1995. Comparison of four valuation methods, Chalmers Industriteknik, Göteborg, Sweden.
El-95 (Eco Indicator 95), Eco-indicator 99	NL	1995, 1999	Goedkoop, M: 1995. Eco-indicator 95, Pré & DUJIF Consultancy, Amersfoort, The Netherlands. Goedkoop, M; Spriensma, R: 1997. The Eco-indicator 97: Proposal for the impact assessment methodology, Pré Consultants, Amersfoort, The Netherlands. (Non-published work version.) Goedkoop, M; Spriensma, R: 1999. The Eco-indicator 99, A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment (Preliminary internet version)
Method/"Tool"	Country of origin	First presented	Reference
Energy Consumption Reduction	NL	1993	Cramer, J; Quakernaat, J; Dokter, T: 1993. Theory and practice of integrated chain management, TNO, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands.
EPS (Environmental Priority Strategies in product design) (ELU (Environment Load Unit))	SE	1992	Steen, B; Ryding, S-O: 1992. The EPS-Enviro-Accounting method. An application of environmental accounting principles for evaluation and valuation in product design. IVL Report No. B 1080, IVL, Göteborg, Sweden. Steen, B: 1996. EPS-Default Valuation of Environmental Impacts from Emission and Use of Resources. Version 1996. AFR-REPORT 111, Naturvårdsverket, Stockholm, Sweden.
ET (Environmental Themes) - NSAEL (No Significant Adverse Effect Levels) - PANEL - MET-points	NL NL NL NL	1991 1994 1994 1994	Kalisvaart, S; Remmerswaal, J: 1994. "The MET-points method: a new single figure environmental performance indicator", I: Integrating Impact Assessment into LCA, Proceedings of the LCA symposium held at the 4th SETAC-Europe Congress, 11-14 April 1994, Free University, Brussels, Belgium. Kortman, J; Lindeijer, E; Sas, H; Sprengers, M: 1994. Towards a single indicator for emissions - An exercise in aggregating environmental effects, IVAM, Interfaculty Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Landbank Panel	UK	1994, 1996	Wilson, B; Jones, B: 1994. The Phosphate report, Landbank Environmental Research & Consulting, London, Great Britain.  Landbank: 1996. Evaluating Environmental Interventions in Finland, Sweden and Norway, Landbank Environmental Research & Consulting, London, Great Britain.
Method/"Tool"	Country of origin	First presented	Reference
MIPS (Mass Intensity Per Service unit)	NL	1994	Schmidt-Bleek, F: 1994. Wieviel Umwelt braucht der Mensch?, Birkhaüser Verlag, Berlin/Basel/Boston.
Mol-method	CH	1991	Schaltegger, S; Sturm, A: 1991. Methodik der ökologischen Rechnungslegung in Unternehmen, WWZ-studien Nr. 33, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Zentrum der Universität Basel, Schweiz.
SPI (Sustainable Process Index)/"Ecological footprint"	AT	1994	Narodoslawsky and Krotschek.
Tellus	USA	1992	Tellus: 1992. The Tellus Packaging Study, Tellus Institute, Boston, USA. Zuckerman, B; Ackerman, F: 1994. The 1994 Update of the Tellus Institute Packaging Study Impact Assessment Method, Tellus Institute, Boston, USA.
WEST (Work Environment Screening Tool)	SE	1994/1997	Bengtsson, G; Berglund, R: 1997. "WEST En metod att mäta arbetsmiljö" (WEST a method for measuring the work environment). Report IVF-skrift 97836.

Reference: IVF and the report from Chalmers University of Technology "Värderingsmetoder i LCA - Metoder för viktning av olika slags miljöpåverkan - en översikt", Magnus Bengtsson, Feb. 1998, CPM, 1998:1, ISSN 1403-2686. ("Quantitative weighting principles for environmental effect in LCA - an overview".)  Completed with "Eco-indicator 99" by Pré Consultants B.V.

Note: Some of the reports are only available with Swedish text. The English title in brackets is an English translation of the Swedish title.

In this chapter the methods/"tools" presented in the two matrix tables are not described in details. (A more detailed presentation will be given by the University of Bristol, Department of Mechanical Engineering.)

Here follows a short description of the two methods which have their origin in Sweden; EPS (Environmental Priority Strategies in product design) and WEST (Work Environment Screening Tool).

EPS (Environmental Priority Strategies)

EPS assembles all data from the inventory phase of an LCA into a single value expressed in Environmental Load Units (ELU), allowing simple comparison of designs for their impact on the environment. The impact assessment process, consisting of three consecutive steps called classification, characterisation, and weighting, is summarised using EPS in a single step.

The EPS system employs a valuation of environmental effects that is based on the Swedish Parliament’s and the United Nation’s general environmental objectives for the external environment. Five objects requiring protection have been identified:

- human health
- ecosystems
- biodiversity
- natural resources
- aesthetic values.

The basis of valuation and the weighting of environmental effects in the EPS system is the willingness to pay to restore the protected object to its original condition after it has been affected. The change in the objects is quantified through what is known as unit effects. These are clearly-defined changes in the protected objects, such as a reduction of one kilo in seed production, a drop in excessive mortality or a man-year of a particular disease. Limitations can be applied in time, space or intensity. A first step in adaptation of the EPS system to working environment applications has been to identify a number of unit effects that can be used to describe all the influences on the protected objects as a result of working environment conditions.

WEST (Work Environment Screening Tool)

Using the IVF Work Environment Screening Tool (WEST), it is possible to forecast the expected health hazard and arrive at a quantitative value of the work environment that can be employed in life cycle assessments. When performing a LCA it has earlier been the norm to draw a sharp boundary at "the factory wall". LCA analysis has in other words hitherto been employed only for the external environment, although industry is also interested in including the effects on the working environment in such assessments, as this is of considerable importance for the overall living environment.

The method is based on investigation of nine work environment factors, with points being awarded either positively or negatively, depending on whether they are regarded as having positive values or applying negative loads. A computer program has been written in order to facilitate assessments and points calculation.

Method/"Tool" together with quantitative valuation/weighting principes

	* Quantitative valuation/weighting principe
Method/"Tool"	Political decision	Technical - economical conditions	"Natural" conditions	Health effect/work environment	Panel	Behavioural studies
Critical Surface-Time	X		X
Critical volume	X
DESC (Decision model for Environmental Strategies for Corporations)	X	X
Ecoscarity/Ecopoints	X
El-95 (Eco-indicator 95)			X	X
Energy Consumption Reduction		X
EPS (Environmental Priority Strategies in product design) (ELU (Environment Load Unit))	X	X	X		X	X
ET (Environmental Themes) - NSAEL (No Significant Adverse Effect Levels) - PANEL - MET-points	X		X		X
Method/"Tool"	Political decision	Technical - economical conditions	"Natural" conditions	Health effect/work environment	Panel	Behavioural studies
Landbank Panel					X
MIPS (Mass Intensity Per Service unit)		X
Mol-method	X
SPI (Sustainable Process Index)		X
Tellus	X	X		X
WEST (Work Environment Screening Tool)				X	(X)	(X)

Reference: IVF and the report from Chalmers University of Technology "Värderingsmetoder i LCA - Metoder för viktning av olika slags miljöpåverkan - en översikt", Magnus Bengtsson, Feb. 1998, CPM, 1998:1, ISSN 1403-2686. ("Quantitative weighting principles for environmental effect in LCA - an overview".)
 
 

*A key to the quantitative valuation/weighting principes

Political decision	decision taken by the government etc
Technical - economicalconditions	energy consumption cleaning cost resources reserv (example concentration in crust)
Health effect/workenvironment	influence on health, internal environment
Panel	a group of environmental researchers or politicians population in a special geographic area algorithm - delphi, questionnaire
Behavioural studies	market changes hedonic pricing market value of resources willingness of sacrifice in travel time and travel cost

Link to list of WEST references from IVF.

Link to Life Cycle Assessment Techniques by Bristol University

Some LCA-software packages

Various commercial software packages are available:

SimaPro 4 (PRé Consultants BV) SimaPro is a full-featured LCA software tool. Complex products with complex life cycles can be compared and analysed. The process databases and the impact assessment databases can be edited and expanded without limitation. The ability to trace the origin of any result has been implemented in a very flexible and powerful way. Special features are: multiple impact assessment methods, multiple process databases, automatic unit conversion. Furthermore, there are powerful tools to analyse take-back and disassembly of products, as well as complex waste treatment and recycling scenario’s.

ECO-it:  (PRé Consultants BV) Eco-Indicator Tool for environmentally friendly design. ECO-it allows you to describe a complex product and its life cycle. Just enter the materials and processes that are used. ECO-it immediately calculates the environmental load, and shows you which parts of the product contribute most. Based on this information you can target your creativity to reduce the environmental load of the product.  Recently published is the new Eco-indicator 99 method.

Recycling

Introduction

Estimates give the annual amount of scrapped fibre reinforced (thermosetting) composites in Europe as at least 500,000 tonnes. This amount is increasing annually. The scrap of thermoplastic polymers is much greater. As these materials do not easily degrade, and also represent a considerable quantity of hydrocarbon, it is vital that technology is developed for recycling the scrap.

In structural applications, thermosetting polymers are used more than thermoplastics because of their higher stiffness and better performance at higher (100° C +) temperatures. While thermoplastics are easily melted and reformed, thermosetting polymers usually have to be ground to smaller fragments and then these (rigid) fragments are re-manufactured say by using fresh resin to produce a usable structural composite.

European activities in the field of Recycling.  See the presentation by GAIKER

Case study: Technological innovations in recycling of multilayer cellulosic packages.  See the presentation by GAIKER

Case study: Recycling Composite Materials.  See the presentation by Bristol University.

 

Information on links, literature, reports, conferences etc:

Links to Environmental Issues at Dogma Conference (pdf):

Clean Manufacture at Volvo Car Corporation. Helena Nilsson, Volvo Car Corporation

Reducing the Use of Solvents and Chrome (Vi) in Aerospace Manufacturing. Today, Tomorrow and the Future.  Peter Morgan and Jeffrey Sargent, BAE SYSTEMS

Life Cycle Assessment (Lca) - Including Work Environment. Heléne Karlsson, IVF

Sandwich Panels Using Recycled Thermoplastics. Juan Ramón Alonso, GAIKER