Simplifying LCA Using Indicator Approaches - A ... - Semantic Scholar

CIRP seminar on life cycle engineering Copenhagen, Denmark May 2003 Engineering for sustainable development - an obligatory skill of the future engineer

Simplifying LCA Using Indicator Approaches - A Framework Wim Dewulf, Joost Duflou Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Mechanical Engineering Department Celestijnenlaan 300B, B-3001 Leuven, Belgium [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a preferred technique for assessing the environmental impact of products considering all environmental aspects over the full product life cycle. However, a number of drawbacks limit a continual and pro-active application of LCA in the design process. Indicators have been proposed as an alternative approach to LCA. This paper provides a brief survey of indicator approaches, and distinguishes three major categories: environmental indicators, environmental impact drivers, and environmental estimators. The environmental indicator approach reduces the extensive data gathering efforts connected to tracing all life cycle processes and their related elementary flows by making use of average data for common sections of a product life cycle. Environmental impact drivers can be defined as technical product attributes for which a strong relationship with the product's environmental performance is presumed or proven. The environmental estimator approach uses these readily available environmental impact drivers, which are subsequently mutually weighted and summed in order to estimate an environmental performance indicator. Finally, a framework is presented in which the indicator approaches are considered the core of a Product Oriented Environmental Management System (POEMS). This framework is illustrated with the example of a green design and supply chain management system for railway vehicles. Keywords: Ecodesign, Environmental Performance Indicators, POEMS. 1. Introduction The thorough understanding of the product life cycle's environmental impact that results from a detailed quantitative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach makes it a preferred environmental assessment technique. However, a number of disadvantages and limitations are recognised [1]: - methodological choices and assumptions made in LCA, such as system boundary setting, selection of data types and selection of impact categories, are in many cases subjective; - the limited availability and accessibility of high-quality data enforces the use of lower-quality, average data, consequently limiting the accuracy of LCA studies; - especially for local impacts, the calculated 'potential impacts' are often in poor accordance with the expected occurrence of actual impact. Moreover, detailed LCA studies are currently mainly used for post-factum analysis, providing input for a next generation of products. A more pro-active application of LCA during development of new products, allowing for iterative and real-time LCA calculation of alternatives, is hindered by the following aspects: - data availability, especially during the early stages of a product development cycle, is even worse than in conventional LCA post-factum applications. As a result, a full LCA study will be unfeasible for the study of alternatives which substantially differ from the originally assessed product;

CIRP Copenhagen 2003 Secretariat – IPL, DTU, building 424, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark Tel.: (+45) 45 25 46 60 - e-mail: [email protected] - www.cirpcopenhagen2003.dk


-

2.

the interpretation of LCA results, understanding the implications of e.g. system boundaries and data gaps, is impossible for designers lacking expert LCA knowledge and – as important – time; next to the above fundamental problems, one observes a lack of integration of LCA tools in the accustomed working environment. Consequently, data need to be entered both in PDM or CAD system and in the stand-alone LCA tool, which again hinders the acceptance and penetration of LCA into the design departments. Types of Indicator Approaches

2.1 Basic Concept

The above mentioned drawbacks of a full LCA have led to the development of a number of approaches aimed at limiting data gathering requirements. We propose to group them under the name of indicator approaches, and divide them into three categories: environmental indicators, environmental impact drivers, and environmental estimators. Figure 1 depicts these categories in comparison to the full LCA approach.

Figure 1

Overview of indicator approaches

2.2 Environmental Indicators

The "environmental indicator" approach is commonly used in industrial practice ([2], [3]). It eliminates the extensive data gathering efforts connected to tracing all life cycle processes and their related elementary flows (emissions, waste, material and energy) by making use of average data for common sections of a product life cycle. Based on these average data, an impact assessment is performed using an existing LCIA methodology, thus leading to e.g. indicator scores per kg of material or per kWh of electricity. For example, the standard Eco-indicator'99 values are calculated based on European average process conditions. They are available for materials (per kg material), production processes (e.g. per CIRP Copenhagen 2003 Secretariat – IPL, DTU, building 424, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark Tel.: (+45) 45 25 46 60 - e-mail: [email protected] - www.cirpcopenhagen2003.dk


square metre of rolled sheet or per kg of extruded plastic), transport processes (per tonnekilometre), energy generation processes (per kWh or MJ), and disposal scenarios (per kg of material). Another well-known environmental indicator approach is the EPS 2000 list [4]. Of course, also non-weighted impact category indicators, such as global warming potential, can be used. Environmental indicators lie at the basis of most material selection tools, such as IDEMAT [5], the eco-variant of the Cambridge Engineering Selector [6], or EUROMAT [7]. The added value of these material selection tools mainly lies in integrating environmental criteria in terms of environmental indicators into the techno-economical decision making process. 2.3 Environmental Impact Drivers

Environmental impact drivers can be defined as technically oriented product attributes for which a strong relationship with the product's environmental performance is presumed or proven. They are often the quantification of important ecodesign strategies and guidelines, and therefore very close to the designer's world and usually readily available. For example, the ecodesign strategy "reduce material consumption" can be translated into the impact driver "total product mass", or the ecodesign guideline "reduce energy consumption" can, for consumer electronics, be translated into the impact drivers "active power consumption" and "power consumption in stand-by mode". The relationship between environmental impact drivers and the environmental performance is, however, not always unambiguous. For example, the potential environmental impacts of products with similar total product mass are obviously not always equal. Therefore, the environmental profile of a product is usually expressed using more than one environmental impact driver. A suitable set of environmental impact drivers is then selected based on full LCA studies for specific product types. This approach lies at the basis of many ecolabelling schemes, such as the German Blauer Engel [8], the Scandinavian Nordic Swan [9], or the EU Ecolabel [10]. For example, Table 1 presents a selection of criteria set by the EU ecolabelling scheme for televisions, measured using environmental impact drivers. Environmental Impact Driver Criterion Corresponding Design Strategy Passive stand-by consumption ≤ 1,0 watt Reduce energy consumption Amount of Cadmium =0g Reduce amount of hazardous materials Having an off-switch which is Yes Reduce energy consumption placed at the front of the television and is clearly visible Availability of compatible electronic ≥ 7 years Extend life time replacement parts Table 1 Selection of EU ecolabelling criteria for television sets [10] 2.4 Environmental Estimators

The 'environmental estimator' approach is based on the same concept of environmental impact drivers, which are subsequently mutually weighted and summed in order to estimate an environmental performance indicator. For example, Kaebernick et al. [11] used the concepts of Activity Based Costing to identify environmental impact drivers for various groups of products. Subsequently, the relationships between the Eco-Indicator'95 environmental indicator and the identified impact drivers were derived using regression analysis. The Eco-Estimator, developed by Philips [2], is a structured, CIRP Copenhagen 2003 Secretariat – IPL, DTU, building 424, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark Tel.: (+45) 45 25 46 60 - e-mail: [email protected] - www.cirpcopenhagen2003.dk


quantitative questionnaire. The values in the questionnaire are added using weighting factors, derived from experience with full LCA studies using the Eco-Indicator'95 approach on similar (i.e. consumer electronic) products. The LEADS system [12] makes use of case based reasoning techniques to estimate a product's environmental profile. The estimated mix of either component types or materials of the new product is used to retrieve the most similar previous product analysis. The Eco-PaS system [13] estimates environmental indicators based on functional requirements available early in the design process. 2.5 Discussion

The major challenge of the indicator approach is to find an appropriate balance between the intended reduction of input data requirements and the resulting increase of uncertainty of the output. The different approaches cover this challenge from a different angle. On the one hand, the environmental indicator approach retains a relatively high amount of input data, resulting in a more demanding but meanwhile generally applicable tool. On the other hand, environmental impact driver and environmental estimator approaches need to reduce their generality by providing different indicators and weighting models for different product types. Another disadvantage of the environmental estimator technique is the relatively low level of flexibility: the products analysed in order to identify the weighting factors also mark the borders of the solution space that can be analysed with the estimator method: the modification of a design aspect that was identical for all analysed products will have no influence on the eco-estimator result. Within the solution space, the weighting factors do, nevertheless, provide insight in the relative importance of design strategies for the type of product under study. Moreover, while being technically oriented, environmental impact drivers are closer to the current working field of the designer, allowing an earlier and more intuitive feedback whether design alternatives will eventually score good or bad with respect to environmental performance. 3.

Product Oriented Environmental Performance Indicators

3.1 Introduction

The ISO 14000 series on Environmental Management recognises a dichotomy between organisation-oriented and product-oriented standards (Table 2). With respect to performance evaluation, the product-oriented part of the series is heavily focused on Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Impact Category Indicators (abbreviated as Category Indicators). The organisationoriented part of the ISO 14000 series, however, supports a much broader definition of environmental performance evaluation. This definition covers the different indicator approaches introduced in the previous section, and consequently allows to make a link between these approaches and the Environmental Management System of a company. Organisation oriented Environmental Management Systems (ISO 1400x) Environmental Auditing & Related Investigations (ISO 1401x) Environmental Performance Evaluation (ISO 1403x) Environmental Management in Forest management (ISO/TR 14061) Table 2

Product oriented Environmental Labels and Declarations (ISO 1402x) Life Cycle Assessment (ISO 1404x) Integrating Environmental Aspects in Product Standards (ISO/TR 62) Integrating Environmental Aspects in Product Development (ISO/TR 14062)

Overview of the ISO 14000 series on Environmental Management



The ISO 14031 standard on Environmental Performance Evaluation [14] very generically introduces Environmental Performance Indicators (EPIs) as specific expressions that provide information about an organisation's environmental performance. The standard distinguishes between two categories of EPIs: Management Performance Indicators (MPIs) and Operational Performance Indicators (OPIs). MPIs provide information about management efforts to influence the environmental performance, e.g. resources spent on environmental education per year. OPIs provide information about the actual environmental performance of an organisation's operations, e.g. quantity of electricity used, amount of greenhouse gas emissions, or amount of CO2 emissions. Selection and definition of EPIs is, according to both ISO 14031 and ISO 14001, a management process which needs to take into account the significance of the environmental aspects, the influence the organisation has over the environmental aspects, the organisation's environmental policy, the environmental legislation, and the views of other stakeholders. This definition of EPIs thus fits into the vision of the ISO 14001 standard on Environmental Management Systems, allowing companies to define and select their proper indicators and targets, and subsequently focussing on continual improvement. The absence of predefined minimum performance levels is, on the one hand, point of strong criticism, but guarantees, on the other hand, a low threshold level: companies can start the EMS with easilyunderstood EPIs and limited but achievable targets, and subsequently evolve towards environmental excellence by continual improvement. Being a part of a company's activities, products and their life cycles can also be subject of EPIs. A (Boolean) product-oriented MPI might, for example, be "the existence of a disassembly and recycling manual", while the product-oriented OPI category covers a wide range of potential indicators on different levels of the cause-effect chain, as depicted in Figure 2. Technically oriented EPIs are attributes of either product or product life cycle, for which a strong relationship with the product's environmental performance is presumed or proven. They consequently fit into the environmental impact driver approach, as introduced in the previous section. Ecologically-oriented EPIs can be distinguished on different levels of aggregation, similar to the phases of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). However, LCA requires reporting in terms of life cycle impact category indicators, which can be considered EPIs on the impact and damage levels. Reporting solely based on single substances is, within LCA, not allowed: the holistic viewpoint requires avoiding that a reported emission reduction of one substance hides a (non-reported) emission increase of another substance. In view of an integrated ecodesign framework, that takes into account not only the 'green environment' but also the 'business environment', single substance reporting can, however, also be important. For example, European legislation requires car manufacturers to provide CO2 emission data under standard conditions; it is consequently obvious that the amount of CO2 emission under the standard conditions is a valid EPI for the car design process. Finally, a value oriented EPI constitutes a weighted sum of other EPIs: the examples given in Figure 2 are both weighted sums of damage oriented EPIs. The ISO 14040 standard series on LCA is very reluctant with respect to weighting. Main reason is the lack of exact scientific foundation for deriving the weighting factors. However, it is perfectly legitimate to consider a clear company policy as a solid basis for deriving weighting factors in order to allow for single-scored EPIs.



Since a simple EPI often defines only one environmental dimension of an object of study, it is generally necessary to use a set of multiple EPIs to describe a product's environmental profile.

Figure 2

Examples of Operational Performance Indicators and their link to the technologicalenvironmental cause-effect chain

3.2 Requirements for EPIs

A number of requirements apply for selecting and defining EPIs for ecodesign applications [14], [15]: 1. An EPI should, according to the current state of understanding, drive or represent a significant environmental aspect of the product, while taking into account the environmental priorities of relevant stakeholders. Moreover, the set of EPIs should, together, cover all significant aspects over the product life cycle. 2. An EPI should be measurable. This criterion comprises a number of important elements: • unambiguous procedures and mathematical formulae to gather, measure, or calculate the EPI. The complexity thereof increases throughout the cause-effect chain of Figure 2. While being straightforward for the product attribute EPIs, it requires full scope definitions for the life cycle oriented EPIs, including decisions on e.g. product system boundaries, allocation procedures, and data quality requirements; • availability of data needed to calculate the EPI score for both supplier and customer (controllability and transparency): within the product life cycle environmental assessment domain, there is an eternal discussion on whether environmental performance assessments should be built on holistic and scientifically sound considerations, aiming at exactly quantifying an organisation's environmental impact, or whether it should be driven by practical considerations such as usability and simplicity [16]. The EPI concept allows to start with readily available product attribute EPIs and evolve towards more complex, ecologically oriented EPIs once a higher level of experience has been reached; 3. An EPI is only useful to a business situation if it can be influenced by the organisation; CIRP Copenhagen 2003 Secretariat – IPL, DTU, building 424, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark Tel.: (+45) 45 25 46 60 - e-mail: [email protected] - www.cirpcopenhagen2003.dk


4. It should be possible to accumulate EPI scores of subsystems to an overall product EPI score. While using the defined EPIs in ecodesign projects, it is important to clearly state the functional unit for which the EPI is calculated, as well as the life cycle model. 4.

Proposal for a 3-Layered Ecodesign Framework

4.1 Overview

Throughout the last decade, most ecodesign implementations have had a very prototypical character: based on an LCA, performed on an existing product, requirements for a new (green) variant were derived and, in some cases, implemented. In the past few years, interest of large companies to organise a more systematic integration of ecodesign in day-to-day business practice within the framework of a Product-Oriented Environmental Management System (POEMS) [17] has grown. This section takes the next step, presenting an ecodesign framework that can be implemented on a sector level, consequently facilitating communication of environmental requirements as well as environmental performance throughout the supply chain. Connecting elements of the framework are the EPIs introduced in the previous section (Figure 3).

Figure 3

Overview of the proposed 3-layered framework for ecodesign

4.2 Level 1 - Sector level

The sector level of the 3-layered ecodesign system plays the role of sector-wide standardisation. A number of sector-wide co-operation and standardisation efforts have been initiated over the last few years, and mark the potential acceptance of such systems in business practice: • Within the electronics sector, the Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA) developed a Material Declaration Guide [18], proposing a uniform set of materials and threshold levels to be included by manufacturers in material declaration questionnaires. This set is based on, amongst others, existing and expected legislation as well as voluntary industry commitments. The European Computer Manufacturers Association has issued the Technical Report TR/70 on "productrelated environmental attributes" advising on the contents of supplier declarations [19]; • Within the automotive industry, the ten largest European car manufacturers co-operate in the establishment of a common raw materials database and the development of methodological recommendations in view of LCA [20]. Furthermore, an International Material Data System [21] keeps archives of all materials used in the sector. Based on this system, material inventories are required from suppliers and lists of restricted or prohibited substances can be provided. The CIRP Copenhagen 2003 Secretariat – IPL, DTU, building 424, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark Tel.: (+45) 45 25 46 60 - e-mail: [email protected] - www.cirpcopenhagen2003.dk


•

International Dismantling and Info System IDIS [22] is an industry-wide system for providing centres with recycling relevant information, including parts lists, information about contained polymers, service handbooks and 3D-drawings; Within the rail sector, the Scandinavian railway operators have joint forces in developing uniform requirements for Design for Environment in the Nordic Manual for Rolling Stock Material" [23]. Moreover, the RAVEL project, described further in this paper, laid down the basis for a sector-wide co-operation based on Environmental Performance Indicators.

Tasks within the sector layer concentrate on: • the standardisation of a measurement system, comprising the development and unequivocal definition of EPIs. As explained earlier, the definition of EPIs covers a wide range of activities, comprising e.g. setting system boundaries, providing lists of restricted materials, supplying basic environmental data (e.g. EPI scores for individual materials), and guiding life cycle modelling; • standardisation of communication: many sectors are characterised by long supply chains. The above examples of sector-wide industry co-operation express the need for clear and standardised information exchange. Although the EPIs could already provide an effective means of communication, it is often necessary to provide a more detailed materials inventory. Moreover, the sector can decide to increase co-operation for e.g.: • the calculation of the EPIs scores for a baseline reference, thus providing input to target setting tasks; • the installation of a legislation and technology watch, providing up-to-date insights in state-ofthe-art and future ecodesign conditions; • the development of a set of minimum performance levels, expressed in terms of minimum EPI scores. The current draft proposal for a European Directive on establishing a framework for ecodesign for End Use Equipment [24] comprises a "presumption of conformity" for products which have been developed in accordance with non-compulsory technical specifications adopted by a recognised standards body. The sector level of the proposed 3-layered ecodesign framework could serve as a development platform for such technical specifications on the basis of the developed set of EPIs, thus creating a tangible business advantage in terms of cost reductions through facilitated regulatory compliance. Daily maintenance of the provided ecodesign support in terms of e.g. basic data and knowledge support should be supplemented with periodical review of the EPIs in view of new legislative and technical developments as well as new scientific insights in the effects of environmental aspects. This review should moreover include an update of the EPI communication vocabulary, the baseline, and potentially the targets. 4.3 Level 2 - Company level

The second layer, on the company level, represents the Product-Oriented Environmental Management System (POEMS). The efforts required from an individual company have, however, been significantly alleviated through the availability of the sector layer. Starting point of the POEMS, as for every environmental management system, is the setting of targets based on the company environmental policy, and with the aim of continual improvement. Based on its proper environmental policy, the company selects a number of EPIs from the set proposed by the sector. For all selected EPIs, minimum performance levels are defined which should be reached either on average or by each product developed or operated by the company. The CIRP Copenhagen 2003 Secretariat – IPL, DTU, building 424, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark Tel.: (+45) 45 25 46 60 - e-mail: [email protected] - www.cirpcopenhagen2003.dk


EPIs and EPI target levels form the basis of design procedures, research and development projects, supplier selection procedures, development and acquisition of adequate tools, allocation of resources, etc. Next to the POEMS audits and the follow-up of the actual product performance of company products on the market, a management level review of the POEMS and of the product-oriented environmental policy of the company is necessary. 4.4 Level 3 - Project Level

The third layer is situated on the level of individual product development projects. This level is consequently closest to most current ecodesign implementation projects. The planning phase includes organisational issues, such as the set-up of a project team, as well as the setting of targets. For a purchaser in a business-to-business relationship, this implies the selection of EPIs and the setting of quantitative EPI targets based on company decisions (Level 2) as well as on project specificities. For a supplier, this implies combining customer targets with the proper company EPIs. It should be emphasised that, in practice, the eventual environmental performance of the product is decided upon at this stage, i.e. before the actual creative design task starts. The project level targets are set at the highest level of the product structure. However, in many sectors a product is developed by a number of design teams and designers, each individually responsible for a subsystem of the final product: improvements of the environmental performance must, consequently, take place at a subsystem level [15]. It is therefore necessary to break down the overall targets into design targets on the level of individual designers. This breakdown of targets is current practice in e.g. the rail vehicle development sector with respect to system mass. Design targets are the basis for generating ideas and design proposals, as well as for assessing the performance of the designs. Moreover, regular review is needed to assess the overall product performance and the suitability of the initial EPI selection and target levels in order to adjust the breakdown of targets used. 4.5 An Example: The RAVEL System Supporting Green Design and Supply Chain Management for the Rail Vehicle Sector

This section briefly presents a green design and supply chain management system for the rail sector from the viewpoint of the above mentioned indicator centred ecodesign framework. This system was developed within the Brite-EuRam project RAVEL (RAil VEhicLe eco-efficient design) [25] as a joint effort of railway operators, a major rail vehicle manufacturer, a rail vehicle subsystem supplier, ecodesign consultants, and universities. Main driver of the project was the awareness that the environmental requirements, imposed by authorities, railway operators and - indirectly - the passengers, drastically increased over a few years' time span, while no satisfying support solutions were found on the market. At the time of starting the project, environmental requirements imposed on rail vehicle manufacturers by railway operators included maximum levels for energy consumption and exhaust emissions, recyclability scores for the vehicle and its systems, the compliance with lists of forbidden or restricted materials, obligatory marking of polymers, and the provision of full material inventories in support of a LCA screening by the customer [26].



Figure 4

Schematic overview of the RAVEL system, interpreted according to the 3-layered ecodesign framework [27]



Figure 4 depicts the RAVEL system interpreted according to the generic 3-layered model presented in the previous sections. Due to the large amount of actors involved in a rail vehicle development process, unequivocal communication was recognised to be a crucial factor early in the project. Therefore, the development of EPIs was largely withdrawn from the company specific POEMS, and centralised within the framework of what should become a sectorial standardisation body. This standardisation body is planned as a co-operation between the International Union of Railway Operators (UIC) and the European Union of Rail Vehicle Manufacturers (UNIFE) [28], and is meant to provide: • standardised definitions of EPIs; • standardised basic data needed for EPI calculations. This includes both a standardised list of materials to be used when describing products, and EPI scores for each member of this material list; • a standardised eco-efficiency definition to allow combined economical and environmental performance evaluations; • a standardised data model for improved communication. This data model (information platform) has been developed both as a relational database structure and in EXPRESS format; • a calculated baseline reference for benchmarking. 5. Discussion An integrated ecodesign framework, exemplified by means of the RAVEL system for supporting rail vehicle eco-efficient design, has been presented in this article. Characteristics of the system are the sector-widely co-ordinated effort towards standardisation as well as the core function of environmental performance indicators. Major advantages of the framework include: • the improved communication between all actors in the product development process through the availability of standardised EPI definitions as well as a common information platform structure; • the integration of environmental optimisation criteria into the design activities: the availability of a standardised information platform, that unequivocally defines the way products and their environmental properties need to be defined, allows the development of adequate software connections between an ecodesign platform and other design tools. Due to the sector-wide use of the Information Platform, the development of this connecting software can become profitable. Moreover, EPIs can be used in MCDM techniques or eco-efficiency formulae in order to integrate ecodesign criteria with other design criteria; • the importance of the first phase of a design project, i.e. the setting of requirements, is emphasised; • the framework is in line with and compatible to the successful EMS philosophy with respect to both its structure as well its focus on continual improvement: sectors and companies can start with low-threshold level EPIs before moving to more ecologically oriented EPIs such as life cycle impact category indicators; • through allowing the latter type of indicators, life cycle assessment is fully supported; • EPIs allow for including environmental aspects which are not always visible from LCA results, such as recyclability or small accident risks with important consequences, as well as for focussing on items specifically emphasised in the company policy in view of greening the company image, e.g. a ban on PVC; • while an LCA in first instance calculates the full life cycle impact, EPIs are focused on the life cycle aspects which can be influenced by the company.



Major disadvantages of the framework, however, include: • the organisational requirements in view of the sector-wide co-ordination and standardisation; • the lack of strict borders between sectors, implying a range of suppliers to follow more than one sector-wide system; • the selection of EPIs marks the limits of what environmental aspects are monitored. Consequently, major innovations in comparison to current business practice cannot be meaningfully analysed with the provided set of EPIs; • the overall evaluation level of an LCA cannot be achieved using technologically oriented EPIs. References 1. ISO, (1997), "ISO 14040, Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework", International Standard, ISO, Geneva 2. Meinders H., (1997), "Point of no return - Philips EcoDesign guidelines", Philips Electronics, Eindhoven 3. Louis S., Wendel A., (1998), "Life Cycle Assessment and Design - Experience from Volvo Car Corporation", SAE technical paper series, 980473, SAE, Detroit 4. Steen B., (1999), "EPS - A systematic approach to environmental priority strategies in product development. Version 2000 – Models and data of the default method", CPM report, 1999:5, CPM, Gothenburg 5. Remmerswaal H., (1998), "IDEMAT Software", T.U.Delft Design for Sustainability research group, Delft 6. Wegst U., Ashby M., (1998), "Environmentally-Conscious Design and Materials Selection", Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Integrated Design and Manufacturing in Mechanical Engineering, IDMME'98, Compiègne, May 27-29, pp.913-920 7. Fleischer G. (Ed.), (2000), "Eco-Design: Effiziente Entwicklung nachhaltiger Produkte mit euroMat", Springer Verlag, Berlin 8. Homepage of Der Blauer Engel: http://www.Blauer-Engel.de 9. Homepage of the Nordic Swan: http://www.svanen.nu 10. Homepage of the European Union ecolabelling system: http:// europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ecolabel/ 11. Kaebernick H., Soriano V., (2000), "An Approach to Simplified Environmental Assessment by Classification of Products", Proceedings of 7th CIRP International Seminar on Life Cycle Engineering, Tokyo, 27-29 November, pp.163-169 12. Rombouts J.P., (1998), "LEADS-II, A Knowledge-based System for Ranking DfE-Options", Proceedings of 5th IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, San Francisco, 1-4 May, 1998, pp.287-291 13. Duflou J., Dewulf W., Al-Bender F., Sas P., Vermeiren C., (2002), "Parametric eco-efficiency analysis: a DfE support tool", Proc. of 9th CIRP International Seminar on Life Cycle Engineering, Erlangen, pp.121-127 14. ISO, (1999), "ISO 14031:1999, Environmental management - Environmental performance evaluation - Guidelines", International Standard, ISO, Geneva 15. Ander Å., Bergendorff M., Mannheim V., (2001), "Overview of the RAVEL Project", in: Dewulf W., Duflou J., Ander Å. (Eds.), (2001), "Integrating Eco-Efficiency in Rail Vehicle Design", Leuven University Press, Leuven, pp.53-67 16. Jackson T., Roberts P., (2000), "A Review of Indicators of Sustainable Development: A Report for Scottish Enterprise Tayside", School of Town and Regional Planning, Dundee 17. Rocha C., Brezet H., Peneda C., (1999), "The Development of Product-Oriented Environmental Management Systems (POEMS): The Dutch Experience and a Case Study", 6th European Roundtable on Cleaner Production ERCP'99, Budapest, September 1999 CIRP Copenhagen 2003 Secretariat – IPL, DTU, building 424, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark Tel.: (+45) 45 25 46 60 - e-mail: [email protected] - www.cirpcopenhagen2003.dk


18. EIA, (2001), "EIA Material Declaration Guide", EIA, Arlington 19. ECMA, (1999), "Product-related environmental attributes", ECMA Technical Report, TR/70, 2nd Edition, ECMA, Geneva 20. See http://www.acea.be/eucar 21. See http://www.mdsystem.com/html/en/home_en.htm 22. See http://www.idis2.com 23. N., (1999), "Nordic Environmental Manual", VR/NSB/SJ/DSB 24. N., (2002), "Draft Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a framework for Eco-design of End Use Equipment", European Commission DG Enterprise, Brussels 25. Dewulf W., Duflou J., Ander Å. (Eds.), (2001), "Integrating Eco-Efficiency in Rail Vehicle Design", Leuven University Press, Leuven 26. Larsson S., Bergendorff M., Glivberg G., (2001), "Requirements for a Rail Vehicle Specific Design for Environment System", in: Dewulf W., Duflou J., Ander Å. (Eds.), (2001), "Integrating Eco-Efficiency in Rail Vehicle Design", Leuven University Press, Leuven, pp.35-50 27. Dewulf W., (2003),"A Pro-Active Approach to Ecodesign - Framework and Tools", Ph.D. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Mechanical Engineering Department 28. Lewandowski D., Ander Å., Karlson L., (2001), "Towards Standardisation and Exploitation", in: Dewulf W., Duflou J., Ander Å. (Eds.), (2001), "Integrating Eco-Efficiency in Rail Vehicle Design", Leuven University Press, Leuven, pp.155-170


Simplifying LCA Using Indicator Approaches - A ... - Semantic Scholar

Simplifying LCA Using Indicator Approaches - A ... - Semantic Scholar

Suggest Documents

Fire-LCA Guidelines - Semantic Scholar

Functional Genomic Approaches Using the ... - Semantic Scholar

Simplifying Transformations of OCL Constraints - Semantic Scholar

Towards simplifying and automating business ... - Semantic Scholar

Simplifying Concurrent Algorithms by Exploiting ... - Semantic Scholar

SIMPLIFYING DESIGN SPECIFICATION FOR ... - Semantic Scholar

A Structure Comparison of two Approaches to LCA ... - Springer Link

A Review of Approaches to Treat Uncertainty in LCA - International ...

POS Tagging Approaches: A Comparison - Semantic Scholar

Ciphering Indicator approaches and user awareness

Ciphering Indicator approaches and user awareness - Maejo ...

Approaches of using UML for Embedded System ... - Semantic Scholar

Approaches of using UML for Embedded System ... - Semantic Scholar

Two different approaches for iris recognition using ... - Semantic Scholar

Using blended learning approaches to enhance ... - Semantic Scholar

Unconventional Approaches Involving ... - Semantic Scholar

Mindfulness-Based Approaches - Semantic Scholar

An Integrated Impact Indicator (I3) - Semantic Scholar

Mindfulness-Based Approaches - Semantic Scholar

Muti-Method Approaches - Semantic Scholar

Integrating Landscape Disturbance and Indicator ... - Semantic Scholar

Quantification of Condition Indicator Performance ... - Semantic Scholar

Mammary skin oedema: a new prognostic indicator ... - Semantic Scholar

Foot rotation indicator (FRI) point: A new gait ... - Semantic Scholar