Wulf-Peter Schmidt

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

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

Life Cycle costing as part of design for environment environmental business cases

BackgroundIn developing products various requirements have to be integrated including functionality, quality, affordability as well as environmental aspects. Often conflicting requirements have to be fulfilled. Therefore, multi-dimensional decision support approaches are necessary.MethodsHere, one approach is to relate the conflicting requirements to each other. Life Cycle Costing (LCC) has the potential to support the trade-off between some environmental targets and overall affordability targets by including all monetary flows along the product life cycle (going beyond the well-known costs of ownership by integrating also long-term use and end-of-life costs). Those solutions can be identified that (a) have the highest efficiencies (where do we get most environmental improvements per Ϊ and (b) have the highest affordability for the customer along the life cycle. Furthermore, on-costs in the design phase can be justified in terms of future savings either for the customer or for the recycling of the products. These represent real business cases for environmental actions. Three types of environmental business cases can be differentiated.Results and DiscussionThis paper presents various examples where LCC is integrated into product design. However, there are a number of open issues in the implementation of LCC within real product development including data availability and uncertainty (future costs/ savings), level of discounting, accounting and compensation. Various internal case studies done in the last years showed that already few changes in the costs structure can significantly affect the identi-fied future costs.Recommendation and OutlookUncertainties in LCC are higher than in LCA and highest when applied in the stage of product develop-ment, i.e. used to support DfE action. As a consequence, the result-ing figures can only be seen as directional. Therefore, the use of LCC in Design for Environment cannot be recommended without major restrictions in terms of guidance, experience/training. The link-age between LCC and DfE can either be established via (1) experts supporting design teams or (2) as part of a DfE tool. The DfE tool has to include detailed guidance for interpretation, and its application should be based on a solid training for DfE engineers.

Environmental considerations on battery-housing recovery

A simplified LCA is conducted hased on the methodology of simplified LCAs according to SETAC (Europe). The case study is about the recovery of automotive battery housings. As a result of the simplified LCA, the current situation of material recycling is preferred to the past situation of landfilling. However, energy recovery could be an option, too.

Integrating environmental aspects into product design and development the new ISO TR 14062

ConclusionIt is recommended to transfer the general standard to the company-specific management systems, tools and cultures. Practical experience is necessary to identify its limits in each case. The future development of this Technical Report to a management system standard may not be difficult — and even necessary as shown in the paper. The problem occurs in the variety of opportunities to be implemented. Again, the integration shall be tailored to the existing management systems, in particular ISO 9001/14001. In addition, the design

Data collection format for life cycle assessment of the german association of the automotive industry (VDA)

Abstract. The subcommittee for Life Cycle Assessment of the German Association of the Automotive Industry (Verband der Automobilindustrie-VDA) developed a Data Collection Format for Life Cycle Assessment which has been adopted by the VDA Environmental Management Committee, representing not only the German automobile manufacturers, but also their development partners, the suppliers, and manufacturers of trailers, body superstructures and containers.This paper introduces the background and some main aspects of the VDA LCA data collection format. All documents including a manual, a checklist and the data collection format as such can be downloaded from the VDA website (http://wvyw.vda.de/ en/vda/intern/organisation/abteilungen/umwelt_04.html).

Integrated product policy (IPP) Workshop and Conclusions for the International Journal of LCA

Looking at the on-going discussions, integrated product policy seems to become important for the LCA community and should therefore be reflected in the International Journal of LCA. Reasons include that IPP:clearly follows life cycle thinking,encourages the usage of the life cycle tool box, e.g. for product-innovation,could become a political umbrella for a new co-operation along the life cycle - beyond the old roles of life cycle stakeholders acting on their own,faces similar issues as the LCA community looking e.g. at environmental value / objective setting.