Technical report templates

Part 1: Results Report

Reducing the environmental and cost impacts of electrical products

The results of a research project for the Product Sustainability Forum to identify, quantify and understand the environmental impacts of electrical products sold on the UK market. This report summarises the research findings, identifying priority products, environmental hotspots and reduction opportunities for a wide range of electrical products.

Project code: RNF200-001 Research date: July – October 2011

Date: November 2012

The PSF is a collaboration of 80+ organisations made up of grocery and home improvement retailers and suppliers, academics, NGOs and UK Government representatives. It’s a platform for these organisations to measure, reduce and communicate the environmental performance of the grocery and home improvement products bought in the UK. Further information about the Forum can be found at www.wrap.org.uk/psf.

Written by: Will Schreiber, Richard Sheane, Leigh Holloway Analysis by: Kevin Lewis, Aida Cierco, Dr. Andrew Bodey, Xana Villa Garcia, Sam Matthews Edited by: Justin French-Brooks and Anthea Carter Document reference: [e.g. WRAP, 2006, Report Name (WRAP Project TYR009-19. Report prepared by…..Banbury, WRAP]

Front cover photography: Electrical and electronic product groups and sub-groups by technology type, developed during this project. While we have tried to make sure this report is accurate, we cannot accept responsibility or be held legally responsible for any loss or damage arising out of or in connection with this information being inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. This material is copyrighted. You can copy it free of charge as long as the material is accurate and not used in a misleading context. You must identify the source of the material and acknowledge our copyright. You must not use material to endorse or suggest we have endorsed a commercial product or service. For more details please see our terms and conditions on our website at www.wrap.org.uk.

Executive summary Introduction The purpose of this report is to help retailers and suppliers of electrical products (EPs) to identify their most significant opportunities to reduce product environmental impacts. This will enable them to focus effort when reducing business exposure to resource risks, reducing product resource costs and demonstrating corporate responsibility. This report contributes to the evidence base of the Product Sustainability Forum, which is comprised of leading retailers, suppliers and related stakeholders seeking to take an integrated approach to reducing product impacts. EPs in their broadest sense cover a wide range of sectors and industries, both domestic and commercial, encompassing electronics, lighting and heating and cooling appliances amongst others. EPs, particularly those experiencing high growth and fast turnover, are increasingly subject to environmental regulations due to their multiple environmental impacts and use of non-renewable resources. This report assesses the scale of lifecycle environmental impacts of EPs placed on the UK market, according to five key metrics using a ‘hotspot’ approach. A hotspot means an area with the highest environmental impact and potential for reduction, taking into account cost considerations. The five environmental metrics selected are: greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; energy use; material use; waste production; and water use. The hotspot approach relies on understanding the relative scale of impacts resulting from EPs being sold and used in the UK, to identify where intervention could have the greatest benefit for the least cost. It is important to note that the methodology is intended to inform high-level thinking and strategy, rather than model-specific changes, with a view to being a starting point for focused resource reduction opportunities in the EP sector. For the vast majority of current EPs, the use phase will be the dominant component of a product’s GHG and energy footprint. However, this research prioritises embodied emissions over lifecycle emissions because it is considered that sufficient attention is being placed on the use-phase impacts by existing regulatory and policy measures, such as the European Eco-Design Directive for energy related products.1 Emissions associated with the materials themselves are becoming of increasing importance to policy makers as in-use efficiency gains are realised through other reduction measures. This report forms Part 1 of three, and summarises the research findings. Part 2 looks at EP impacts on a product category-by-category basis, while Part 3 provides further information on the methodology used.

Research Findings Three principal research outputs are detailed in this report: a revised system of product categorisation, focusing on 24 categories of EP; identification of UK hotspots by environmental impact and by product category; and more specific opportunities to reduce EP impacts. EP categorisation Classifying EPs by their function, weight or hazardous material presence does not allow for the easy identification of hotspots. By contrast, grouping EPs according their dominant technological characteristic enables the available environmental impact data to be used across shared technologies. Multiplying the results by the quantities of that group that are sold each year in the UK allows the largest impacts, the hotspots, to be identified across a wide part of the EP market. The EP groups used in this research are shown in Figure (i) below. These groups were further divided into 24 product categories.

1

Directive 2009/125/EC establishing a framework for the setting of eco-design requirements for energy related products.


1

Figure (i) EP groups used in this research (for further explanation see Table 2 in Section 2.2) UK hotspots results Annual consumption of EPs in the UK increases the UK’s environmental footprint in a number of ways. The five environmental metrics investigated in this research are grouped into three for the purposes of reporting results: GHG and energy; materials and waste; and water.

GHG and energy hotspots GHG and energy impacts were assessed using representative lifecycle assessments (LCAs) for each EP category, mapped to one year of UK product sales. Figure (ii) below shows data on the embodied emissions only (i.e. excluding use phase) for the selected 24 product categories. It demonstrates that nine product categories are responsible for over three quarters of the total embodied GHG footprint of EPs purchased in the UK each year. These are (in order of greatest impact): complex processing electronics (e.g. desktop PCs, set-top boxes); spatial cooling; lighting; spatial heating; large simple processing electronics (e.g. printers, alarm systems); laptops; televisions & monitors; pumps and motors (large high power); and other multi-function appliances.

Figure (ii) Embodied GHG footprint for selected major EPs sold in the UK Products contributing more than 5% of total UK EP embodied GHG emissions for which sufficient quality data is available to recommend action are televisions (7%), vacuum cleaners (6%), washing machines (5%) and nondomestic laptops (5%).


2

Materials and waste hotspots The impacts resulting from materials used in EPs and waste produced were assessed. The analysis focuses primarily on materials used within the core products but also considers peripherals and consumables where significant. The results show that products of particular note in terms of materials and waste include:

 vacuum cleaners and PC peripherals. These appear to be a significant source of material use due to the high quantity of products sold – rather than large unit size;

 major household appliances (e.g. washing machines and fridges/freezers) as these are large units with high sales volumes; and

 non-domestic ICT which is a significant product group for six of the materials and so represents a potential target for resource efficiency initiatives.

Many of the materials included in EPs, particularly electronics, face potential supply-chain risks due to increasing demand for finite resources. The research identified a selection of key materials used in EPs and then grouped them broadly into three categories – all of which it is recommended should be targeted to mitigate environmental impacts and supply risk: 1.

High volume metals and plastics which, although not scarce, represent the most significant source of embodied emissions for the sector. These are often found in ‘simpler’ appliances (e.g. washing machines) and can be more easily recycled.

2.

Low volume elements which are high value (e.g. rare earth elements), poorly recycled and critical to the functionality of more advanced high-end electrical goods e.g. computers, televisions, mobile phones. These materials pose higher supply chain risks due to scarcity and concentration of supply.

3.

Borderline materials that have facets of both groups (e.g. tin and antimony). These materials are used in moderate quantities but also exhibit significant supply-side risk.

Water hotspots Research into water impacts focused on (a) water intensity and (b) production area water scarcity, for the key EP materials identified during the course of the research as being significant in EP design. Water consumed, or used, by EPs during their consumer use phase were assessed for the few products where this is relevant (e.g. washing machines). Water is potentially a renewable resource if used appropriately in the correct locations. In a water stressed region, a high intensity material (e.g. gold) could have significant impacts on the local water system. Understanding why these intensities are so great within each material type is highlighted as an important next step to seeing how intensity-to-scarcity ratios may be reduced. This research quantified process water use for two products for which data was available: washing machines and dishwashers. Reduction opportunities Although the use phase currently dominates the majority of GHG and energy requirements for most EPs, this will increasingly change as technology improvements required by existing and forthcoming European regulations stimulate innovation in this area. There are a number of reduction strategies that are available to manufacturers, retailers and end-users of products that could all result in a significant impact reduction for EPs. The majority of quantifiable solutions are largely technical, including materials optimisation, lightweighting and end-of-life recovery of critical materials. Specific attention should be paid towards product durability and life extension for ‘low-end’ EPs. These reduction opportunities require no technological advancement to implement, yet they have the potential to save 1 MtCO2e and 180,000 tonnes of material over single product lifespans by simply building products with comparable durability to the average product within its category.


3

Contents 1.0

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Project goals .........................................................................................................................7 1.2 Project outputs ......................................................................................................................7 1.3 Interpretation of results .........................................................................................................8 2.0 Product categorisation ................................................................................................................. 9 2.1 A new approach to grouping EPs .............................................................................................9 2.2 EP product categories ............................................................................................................9 3.0 UK Environmental Hotspots Analysis ......................................................................................... 12 3.1 How hotspots are identified .................................................................................................. 12 3.2 Environmental impacts by product group ............................................................................... 12 3.2.1 GHG emissions ..................................................................................................... 12 3.2.2 Energy consumption.............................................................................................. 13 3.2.3 Materials .............................................................................................................. 13 3.3 UK EP hotspots .................................................................................................................... 14 3.3.1 GHG and energy hotspots ...................................................................................... 14 3.3.2 Materials and waste hotspots ................................................................................. 18 3.3.3 Water hotspots ..................................................................................................... 23 3.3.4 Combined material impacts .................................................................................... 25 4.0 Reduction opportunities............................................................................................................. 28 4.1 Cost and impact reduction opportunities ................................................................................ 28 4.2 Alternative business models .................................................................................................. 31 4.3 Material opportunities .......................................................................................................... 34 5.0 Finding further information ....................................................................................................... 36 Appendix 1: Product list........................................................................................................................ 37 Report References ................................................................................................................................ 38

List of Figures Figure 1 How to use the proposed product categorisation to identify reduction opportunities ..............................9 Figure 2 EP groups and sub-groups used in this research .............................................................................. 11 Figure 3 Lifecycle stages and environmental impact indicators for EPs ............................................................ 12 Figure 4 Lifecycle GHG emissions of selected EPs sold in the UK market in one year ........................................ 13 Figure 5 Lifecycle energy consumption of selected EPs sold in the UK market in one year ................................. 13 Figure 6 Total weight of selected EPs sold in the UK market in one year ......................................................... 14 Figure 7 Approximate one-year’s UK EP sales volumes and lifecycle GHG footprints for 24 product categories and commercial lighting as a composite category. Includes in-use electricity consumption ...................................... 15 Figure 8 Approximate one-year’s UK EP sales volumes and embodied GHG footprints for 24 product categories and commercial lighting as a composite category. Excludes in-use electricity consumption ............................... 16 Figure 9 Embodied GHG footprint for selected major EPs sold in the UK .......................................................... 17 Figure 10 Distribution of priority materials in selected EP groups .................................................................... 20 Figure 11 Extraction locations of raw materials used in EPs............................................................................ 20 Figure 12 Water intensity and water scarcity for key materials used in EPs ...................................................... 24 Figure 13 Lifecycle water consumption of dishwashers and washing machines purchased in the UK in 2009 based on data referred to in Part 2 of this report (category summaries) ................................................................... 25 Figure 14 Scarcity and recycling rates of selected materials used in EPs .......................................................... 27 Figure 15 Quantified lifecycle carbon reduction opportunities, and their cost, across EPs sold in one year .......... 29 Figure 16 Lifetime carbon reduction opportunities and cost implications for one year of refrigerator/fridgefreezer/freezer sales................................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 17 Quantified water use reduction opportunities for washing machines ................................................. 31 Figure 18 Reduction priority matrix for EP categories .................................................................................... 32 Figure 19 Lifecycle GHG emissions for a television with a three-year replacement cycle (UK footprint) ............... 33 Figure 20 Television replacement cost scenario (UK footprint) ........................................................................ 33


4

Figure 21 Estimated impacts of premature product failure in key EPs (embodied GHG emissions) ..................... 34 Figure 22 Key supply and demand attributes of scarce metals used in electronics ............................................ 35

List of Tables Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table

1 Description of four main project outputs for understanding EP hotspots ................................................8 2 Categorisation of EPs by dominant technological characteristic ........................................................... 10 3 Top ten EPs with highest embodied GHG emissions on the UK market (based on available data) ........... 18 4 Top five lifecycle and embodied GHG emission EPs (based on available data) ...................................... 18 5 Estimated distribution by percentage mass of materials embodied in EPs sold in the UK in a typical year 19 6 Role of critical materials in the production of high volume materials .................................................... 21 7 Fraction of global material production used in EPs – selected critical and high volume materials ............ 21 8 Full lifetime use-phase material consumption for a selection of EPs based on one year’s UK retail sales . 22 9 Supply and environmental risk indices for key EP materials (0 = low risk, 10 = high risk) ..................... 26 10 Characterisation of reduction opportunities ..................................................................................... 29 11 Top five most cost-effective GHG reduction measures ...................................................................... 30 12 Quantified material reduction opportunities for selected EPs ............................................................. 31

Acronyms and abbreviations CCTV CFC CRT EP ePSU GHG GPS GWh HFC HVAC ICT ktCO2e LCA LCD LED MtCO2e NiMH PDA PDP PC PV TJ WEEE

closed-circuit television chlorofluorocarbon cathode ray tube electrical product external power supply unit greenhouse gas global positioning system gigawatt hour hydro-fluorocarbon heating ventilation and air conditioning information and communications technology thousand tonnes carbon dioxide-equivalent lifecycle assessment liquid crystal display light-emitting diode million tonnes carbon dioxide-equivalent nickel-metal hydride personal digital assistant plasma display panel personal computer photovoltaic terajoule waste electrical and electronic equipment


5

Acknowledgements Stakeholders contributed from a range of industry sectors, including manufacturers, facility managers and ewaste handlers. The following organisations supported the project by providing their knowledge, guidance and data to improve the analysis and recommendations presented in this document:

            

B&Q Computer Aid Inman Interserve ISE Morphy Richards MITIE Panasonic Reliance FM Panasonic Sainsbury’s Skanska Sony


6

1.0

Introduction

1.1

Project goals

This report summarises research to identify, quantify and understand the significant environmental hotspots associated with electrical products (EPs) in the UK. EPs are considered in their broadest sense covering a wide range of sectors and industries, both domestic and commercial, encompassing electronics, lighting and heating and cooling appliances amongst others. For the purposes of this work, a hotspot means an area with the highest environmental impact and potential for reduction taking into account cost considerations. Hotspots are therefore potential targets for future research and action to achieve large-scale environmental and cost reductions. To understand EP hotspots, the research focused on determining the scale of impacts resulting from products being placed on the UK market. The outputs of the research allow for:

  

rapid diagnosis of hotspots across EP categories; identification of which product types offer the largest scope for reductions; and estimated potential environmental and cost savings for a selection of EPs.

In combination with further assessment, the research will allow decision makers in the EP sector to take action to reduce key areas of their product environmental footprint. This report provides an approximation of the impacts associated with EPs, primarily at the EP category level. As such, it is important to note that the methodology used is intended to inform high-level thinking and strategy, as the results consolidate a broad range of materials and impacts to highlight the significant EP hotspots. It is therefore a starting point for focused reduction opportunities in the EP sector. Engaging with key industry representatives in EP manufacturing, retail and facility management industries has been a priority during this research and a list of contributors is provided at the beginning of this report. Although the EP industry is constantly evolving, there is broad agreement that the hotspots approach is appropriate for sector targeting, engagement and follow-up analysis.

1.2

Project outputs

The project outputs are presented in three parts: Part 1 (this document) outlines the key research results, Part 2 presents the EP Category Summaries, identifying environmental impacts associated with individual EP categories, whilst Part 3 focuses on the methodology used in the research and provides more detailed findings. The research has resulted in four main outputs for understanding EP hotspots:

   

product classification by primary technology; hotspot analysis for selected EPs; hotspot reduction opportunities; and summaries for key EP categories.

Each of these is described in further detail in Table 1 below.


7

Product Categorisation

Categorising EPs by their dominant technological characteristic enables quick assessment of environmental impacts associated with a product group. This approach provides the basis for calculating UK hotspots and identifying reduction opportunities. It is described in section 2 of this report.

UK Hotspots Analysis

The main body of analysis that provides an overview of the significant environmental impacts associated with a range of EPs and their cost implications. It provides a directional steer to identify intervention opportunities and prioritise selected industry areas. It is presented in section 3 of this report.

Reduction Opportunities

Identifies key opportunities for reducing environmental impacts associated with EPs and realising cost savings. Quantified reduction opportunities, based on existing studies, are presented and scaled to the UK economy for a selection of products. These are presented in section 4 of this report.

Category Summaries

Summary documents are provided for each product category. These documents present an overview of the main environmental impacts, reduction opportunities and resources available for each product category. They can be found in Part 2 of this research.

Table 1 Description of four main project outputs for understanding EP hotspots

1.3

Interpretation of results

This research can be used for the following purposes:



Prioritisation. Determining what types of EP have the potential for significant reductions in environmental impact and associated cost savings.



Engagement. The results provide an accessible resource identifying the primary hotspot impacts across a range of environmental metrics. This approach has been developed specifically to support people new to product environmental impact assessment so that they can quickly assess their product range.



Assessment. Categorising products based on their dominant technological characteristics, and then using the scaling methodology developed through this research, can be used in the future to update and/or develop new hotspot analyses.



Insight. Industry engagement during the process has highlighted a number of areas where immediate action can be taken. These insights are presented throughout the research.



Further research. Areas that warrant further work have been identified and targeted. This research provides a strategic overview of the EP sector across multiple environmental metrics. Significant gaps have been highlighted and recommendations presented for follow-up actions.

Due to the limitations in the methodology used and data presented, the analysis should not be used for the following:



Product-level decision making. The scaling method applied in the analysis is indifferent to brands, models and product-specific technology (e.g. halogen and light-emitting diode (LED) bulbs), unless explicitly indicated in the report.



Organisational footprint reporting. The product categorisation and footprint methodology will enable organisations to calculate their own hotspot analysis, but does not provide a sufficiently robust method for external reporting on their supply-chain impacts.



Baseline setting. A hotspots footprint provides an approximation of impacts to identify areas for targeting. The assumptions and data applied are not appropriate for setting, or measuring against, impact reduction targets.


8

2.0

Product categorisation

2.1

A new approach to grouping EPs

This research uses a new approach to categorising EPs, grouping them according to their dominant technological characteristics. This approach is well established in organisations as a way of providing useful insights for a range of products but has not generally been applied to EPs for environmental purposes. Existing methods of classifying EPs are typically based on product function (e.g. cleaning) or waste classification (e.g. hazardous), classifications that may not enable cross-product technology transfer and assessment. For example, the European Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive2 system of classification is not useful for assessing the environmental impacts of products, because products using disparate technologies are grouped together. For example, microwave ovens, fridge-freezers and hobs are all placed in WEEE Category 1 – Large Household Appliances, despite their functional and technological differences. To identify the hotspots for a range of EPs, many of which have never been subjected to detailed lifecycle assessment (LCA), the new categorisation system groups products together by their like components. Presenting products in this manner highlights reduction opportunities across technologies and products. For example, a blender and a vacuum cleaner have been placed in the same category since each could benefit from improved motor technologies and efficiencies. Although some categories, such as heating and cooling, group together a number of products that may not have the exact same environmental profile (e.g. kettles and irons), the underlying heating technologies are close enough to allow for similar initiatives to be applied to each product.

2.2

EP product categories

Categorisation by dominant characteristic allows for the rapid identification of primary product attributes and reduction opportunities. Five broad categories have been used in this research due to their principal technology use. These five categories were selected because all EPs are underpinned by one of the stated technologies or, in the case of renewable energy, its primary output.



Electronics. Electrical circuit boards and information processing and/or display are the primary functions of these products (e.g. computer).



Pumps and Motors. Products that contain a pump or motor as its primary operational purpose (e.g. lawn mower).



Heating and Cooling. Appliances, white goods and climate control equipment that is used to change temperatures (e.g. fridge).

 

Lighting. All lighting technologies (e.g. LED bulb). Renewable Energy. For the purposes of this project, household solar PV and wind turbines.

By identifying the appropriate product category, users can quickly understand the hotspots associated with a product group, identify reduction opportunities, and understand more about the environmental implications of design and product lifespans. This approach is illustrated in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1 How to use the proposed product categorisation to identify reduction opportunities The product categorisation used to group EPs in this project is shown in Table 2 and Figure 2 below.

2

Directive 2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 27 January 2003, on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Published in Official Journal L37, 13 February 2003. Amended by Directive 2003/108/EC on 8 December 2003 - Official Journal L 345, 31 December 2003.


9

Group Electronics

Sub-group Display-based

Distinction Televisions/Monitors

Characteristic

Laptops

Technical report templates - Wrap

Technical report templates - Wrap

Suggest Documents