United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 2O46O
EPA/600/R-92/226
January 1993
Life Cycle Design
Guidance Manual

Environmental
Requirements and
The Product System

-------

-------
                                                EPA600/R-92/226
                                                   January 1993
                          LIFE  CYCLE DESIGN
                          GUIDANCE MANUAL
              Environmental Requirements and The Product System
                                              Gregory A. Keoleian
                                                  DanMenerey

                                    National Pollution Prevention Center
                                             University of Michigan
                                         AnnArbor, Ml 48109-1115
Cooperative Agreement #817570

Project Officer

Mary Ann Curran
Pollution Prevention Research Branch
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OH 45268
                                            Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
                                                                       NOTICE
    The information in this document was funded wholly by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) under Cooperative Agreement #817570 to the University of Michigan. It
has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review and has been approved for publica-
tion as an EPA document.  This approval does not necessarily signify that the contents reflect the
views and policies of the US EPA. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not consti-
tute endorsement or recommendation for use.

-------
                                                                         PREFACE
    This guidance manual was developed as part of the US Environmental Protection Agency's
Pollution Prevention Research Program. Through such research the EPA seeks to facilitate the
development of technologies and products that result in reduced aggregate generation of pollutants
across all media. The Life Cycle Design project was initiated to reduce environmental impacts and
health risks through product and process design and development.
    For the last two decades the life cycle framework has been used principally for environmental
analysis of products. Resource use and the generation of residuals or wastes have been quantified by
performing inventory analyses of product life cycle systems. The basic methodology for inventory
analysis is documented in Product Life-Cycle Assessment: Inventory Guidelines and Principles
(EPA/600/R-92/036) which was published by the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory of the
EPA. Life cycle design is the application of the life cycle framework to product system design. The
product system includes product, process, distribution, and management/information components.
    This project has been organized into two phases:  Phase I - preparation of the first edition of this
manual and Phase II - life cycle design demonstration projects.  In Phase I, an investigation of the
design literature and interviews with design professionals contributed to the development of goals,
principles and a framework for life cycle design.
    Life cycle design is a proactive approach for integrating pollution prevention and resource
conservation strategies into the development of more ecologically and economically sustainable
product systems. Cross media pollutant transfer and the shifting of other impacts can be avoided by
addressing the entire life cycle, which includes raw materials acquisition, materials processing,
manufacturing and assembly, use and service, retirement, disposal and the ultimate fate of residuals.
    The goal of life cycle design is to minimize aggregate risks and impacts over this life cycle.  This
goal can only be attained through the balancing of environmental, performance, cost, cultural, legal,
and technical requirements of the product system. Concepts such as concurrent design, total quality
management, cross-disciplinary teams, and multi-attribute decision making are essential elements of
life cycle design that help meet these goals.
    The complexity of product system design is a function of the conflict between various classes of
design criteria, self-interests of the life cycle participants, and the time-cycles affecting product
system development and implementation.  Consequently, design activities to reduce aggregate
environmental impacts and risks must be coordinated using a systems-oriented approach.
    The framework for life cycle design was developed to be applicable for all product domains.
Individual firms are expected to interpret the manual for their own specific applications.  The manual
was written to assist not only design professionals but all other constituents who have an important
role in life cycle design including corporate executives, product managers, production workers,
distributors, environmental health and safety staff, purchasers, accountants, marketers, salespersons,
legal staff, consumers, and government regulators. A coordinated effort is required to institute
changes needed for successful implementation of life cycle design.

                                              iii

-------
    Both AT&T Bell Labs and Allied Signal are participating in Phase II: Life Cycle Design Demon-
stration Projects.  The purpose of these projects is to demonstrate the efficacy of life cycle design,
and encourage its use by other firms.
    The University of Michigan research group also welcomes comments and suggestions from other
readers. Please direct your comments to Dr. Greg Keoleian at the address given below.

National Pollution Prevention Center
University of Michigan
Dana Building 430 E. University
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1115
Greg Keoleian and Dan Menerey
December 1992
                                           IV

-------
                                                                    ABSTRACT
    This document seeks to promote the reduction of environmental impacts and health risks through
a systems approach to design. The approach is based on die product life cycle, which includes raw
materials acquisition and processing, manufacturing, use/service, resource recovery, and disposal A
life cycle design framework was developed to provide guidance for more effectively conserving
resources and energy, preventing pollution, and reducing the aggregate environmental impacts and
health risks associated with a product system.  This framework addresses the product, process,
distribution, and management/information components of each product system.
    Concepts such as concurrent design, cross-disciplinary teams, multi-objective decision making,
and total cost assessment are essential elements of the framework.
    Life cycle design emphasizes integrating environmental requirements into the earliest phases of
design and successfully balancing these requirements with all other necessary performance, cost,
cultural, and legal criteria. A multi-layer requirements matrix is proposed to assist the design team in
identifying design requirements and resolving the conflicts between them. Design strategies for
meeting environmental requirements are then provided. Finally, environmental analysis tools and life
cycle accounting methods are presented for evaluating design alternatives.
    This report was submitted in fulfillment of Cooperative Agreement #817570 by the University of
Michigan under the sponsorship of the US Environmental Protection Agency. Research for this
report covers the period from January 1991 to December 1991. A draft report was submitted in April
1992, and the final report was completed in December 1992.

-------
                                   CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 New Demands on Design                        2
    Public Opinion	3
    Competition and Costs	4
    The Environment	•	5
1.2  Description of the Manual                       6
    Purpose	•	6
    Scope	6
    Audience	'
    Content and Organization	••••••	8

CHAPTER 2  LIFE CYCLE DESIGN BASICS
2.1 The Life Cycle Framework                       12
    Life Cycle Stages	13
2.2 Product System Components                    16
    Product	16
    Process	••	17
    Distribution	1J
    Management	17
2.3 Goals                                       18
    Resource Conservation	18
    Pollution Prevention	19
    Environmental Equity	19
    Sustainable Ecosystems	19
    Viable Economic Systems	20

 CHAPTER 3 THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
 3.1 Development Activities                         22
     Management	24
    Needs Analysis	32
    Requirements	34
    Design Phases	35
    implementation	37
    Limitations	37
                VI

-------
CHAPTER 4  DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
4.1  Formulating Requirements                       40
    Key Elements	40
    Scope and Detail	-	41
    Use of Requirements Matrix	43
4.2 Types of Requirements                           46
    Environmental	••	.....46
    Performance	49
    Cost	50
    Cultural	•	50
    Legal Requirements	•	51
    Example of Partial Matrix	.-52
4.3 Ranking and Weighing                           57
    Organizing	•	57
    Resolving Conflicts	58

CHAPTERS DESIGN STRATEGIES
5.1 Overview                                       62
5.2 Product System Life Extension                    63
    Appropriately Durable	64
    Adaptable	—	66
    Reliable	67
    Serviceable	-—68
    Remanufacturable	70
    Reusable	•	72
5.3 Material Life Extension                           73
    Recycling	•	73
5.4 Material Selection                               79
    Substitution	79
      Reformulation	•	80
5.5 Reduced Material Intensiveness                   81
5.6 Process Management                            81
    Process Substitution	81
    Process Control	-	•	•	84
    Improved Process Layout	84
    Inventory Control  and Material Handling	84
    Facilities, Planning	85
    Treatment and Disposal	-	:	86
 5.7 Efficient Distribution                             87
    Transportation	87
     Packaging	—88
                                         VII

-------
5.8 Improved Management Practices                   91
    Office Management	91
    Phase Out High Impact Products	92
    Choose Environmentally Responsible Suppliers or
     Contractors	92
    Information Provision	...92

CHAPTER 6  ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS TOOLS
6.1 Elements of Design Analysis                       98
    Scope of the Analysis	100
6.2 Inventory Analysis                             102
    Identifying Streams and Constituents	...103
    Quantification	....104
    Limitations	107
6.3 Impact Assessment                             108
    Resource Depletion	109
    Ecological Effects	110
    Human Health and Safety Effects	113
    Limitations	116

CHAPTER 7  LIFE CYCLE ACCOUNTING
7.1 Traditional Accounting Practices                120
    Financial Cost Structures	:	120
    Unidentified Costs	121
    Externalities	121
7.2 Life Cycle Accounting                          122
    Usual Costs	,	125
    Hidden Costs	126
    Liability Costs	...126
    Less Tangible Costs	128
    Limitations	128

Appendix A. Sources of Additional Information        131
Appendix B. Surnary of Major Federal Environmental
            Laws                                134
Appendix C. Overview of Environmental Impacts      150
Appendix D. Decision Making                       165
Appendix E. Environmental Labeling                 176
Appendix F. Glossary                             179
               VIII

-------
                            TABLES

Table 5-1. Generation and Material Recovery of MSW in Millions
         Of Tons, 1988	.	76

Table 7-1. Incandescent and Fluorescent Life Cycle Costs for
          9000 Hours of Illumination	-.122





                            FIGURES

 Figure 2-1. The Product Life Cycle System	14
 Figure 2-2. Material Downcycling: One Way Life Cycles of 3 Product
           Systems May Be Linked...	15
 Figure 2-3. Interrelationship of Life Cycle Design Goals	18

 Figure 3-1. Life Cycle Design Process	23
 Figure 3-2. Relative Time Scales Affecting Hypothetical
           Product System..	30

 Figure 4-1. Product Development Costs	42
 Figure 4-2. Conceptual Requirements Matrices	44
 Figure 4-3. Example of Subdivided Rows for Environmental
           Requirements Matrix	45

 Figure 6-1. Limited Life Cycle Flow Diagram for Hypothetical
              Detergent Product System	103
 Figure 6-2. Single Stage Flow Diagram	104
 Figure 6-3. Impact Assessment Process	108

 Figure 7-1. Assigning Life Cycle Costs to Specific Product Systems ... 123
 Figure 7-2. Life Cycle Costs in Product Development	124
                                            IX

-------
                                                 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    A review of design methodologies and a series of interviews with the following design profes-
sionals helped identify current approaches to environmental impact reduction and major barriers to
adoption of life cycle design. We also thank Dr. Jonathan W. Bulkley and Doug Moody of the
National Pollution Prevention Center at the University of Michigan and Teresa Harten, Lisa Brown,
and Jordan Spooner from the EPA RREL for reviewing the manual.  Views contained in this docu-
ment may not necessarily reflect those of the individuals interviewed or the reviewers.
Brad Agry
  Henry Dreyfuss Associates

Robert Brunner
  Apple Computer

R. Lee Byers
  ALCOA

Joel B. Charm
  Allied Signal Inc.

Frank Cassidy
 Digital Equipment Corp.

Lewis T. Dixon
  Ford Motor Company

Terry Duncan
  Duncan Industrial Design

Greg Eyring
  US Congress, Office of
  Technology Assessment

Harry Fatkin
  Polaroid Corporation

Bob Ferrone
  Digital Equipment Corp.

Dennis Foley
  Herman Miller

Werner Glantschnig
  AT&T Bell Labs

Andy Glickman
  Chevron Corporation
Charles Jones
  Haworth Inc.

Greg Jones          '--•.'•
  General Electric Company

Linda Keefe
  3M Company

Howard Klee
  Amocp Corporation

Rudolph Krolopp
  Motorola Inc.

John Paul Kusz
  Safety-Kleen Corp.

Eric Larson
  Dupont

Joseph A. Lindsly
  The Dow Chemical Company

Don McCloskey
  Black ;and Decker

Tom Newhouse
  Thomas J. Newhouse Design

Kathleen Nicholson
  General Motors

Rick Noller
  Fitch RichardsonSmith

Charles Overby
  Ohio University

Bruce Paton
  Hewlett Packard Co.
Marilyn Perchard
  Ford Motor Company

Earl N. Powell
  Design Management Inst.

Dennis B. Redington
  Monsanto Company

Barry Rope
  Rope & Associates

T. Michael Rothgeb
  Procter & Gamble

V. Wayne Roush
  Shell Oil Company

Allen Samuels
  The University of Michigan

George Simons
  Steelcase, Inc.

Budd Steinhilber
  Industrial Designers Society of
  America

TedTuescher
  Smith & Hawken

J.C. van Weenen
  University of Amsterdam

William W. Walton
  US Consumer Product Safety
  Commission

John Wesner
  AT&T Bell Laboratories

-------
                                                    Chapter 1
                                    Introduction
   Designs that reduce total environmental
impacts must also satisfy other customer
needs. In life cycle design, environmental
needs are balanced with performance, cost,
cultural, and legal criteria.
   The life cycle framework provides the
most complete environmental profi le of
goods and services.  The life cycle consists
of each step from acquisition of raw
materials through processing, manufacture,
use, and final disposal of all residuals.  This
broad framework helps designers identify
and reduce the environmental
consequences of their designs.
                                             Hew Demands on
                                                       {Design
                                             Description of the
                                                       Manual

-------
Chapter 1
                              INTRODUCTION
Environmental criteria are
often not considered until
the end of a development
project As a result,
companies spend too
much time fixing problems
instead of preventing them.
Innovative firms are
adopting environmental
design policies. But
without clear definitions,
these policies may not
translate into successful
design programs.
1.1 NEW DEMANDS ON DESIGN

    Most environmental impacts result from design decisions made
long before manufacture or use. Yet environmental criteria often are
not considered at the beginning of design when it is easiest to avoid ad-
verse impacts. Waiting until the end of a project to think about environ-
mental matters reflects past practice. Until recently, most
environmental impacts were reduced through end-of-pipe controls and
process design rather product design.
    By tolerating poor coordination between product and process de-
sign, many companies still spend too much time fixing problems rather
than preventing them.  Critical environmental impacts may be all too
easy to overlook when design proceeds through a series of isolated
groups.
    One experience at 3M shows the pitfalls of this linear design ap-
proach. In the mid-seventies, 3M designed an instant fire extinguisher
for jet airplane cockpits. The product worked very well, but failed to re-
ceive a permit from the EPA because it harmed fish and other aquatic
life.  In only a week, 3M scientists identified the toxic chemicals in their
first design and found  substitutes that were one fortieth as harmful.  The
new product was just as effective, and actually cost less to produce [1].
If environmental experts had participated in design, regulatory action
might have been avoided. 3M's noted Pollution Prevention Pays pro-
gram is founded on the lessons learned from this incident.
    In the past fifteen years, many firms have begun to focus more on
pollution prevention. Some innovative businesses are already respond-
ing to new challenges by adopting ambitious environmental design poli-
cies. But translating these policies into action is a major challenge.
Without proper support, many "green" design programs can founder.
Similar problems develop when environmental design projects lack spe-
cific objectives, definitions, or measurements.  Unless a development
team can clearly define what it is trying to accomplish, and has the sup-
port of management, they may find it difficult to reduce the environ-
mental impacts of their designs.

-------
                                                                                Introduction
    Not all new design methods take a broad view. In contrast to the
ambiguity of "green" design, programs such as design for recyclability
are specific strategies. A restricted design strategy can be beneficial, but
it may not be ideal. The net results of product development can be ob-
scured when design teams focus on a single environmental aspect. For
example, a product that is easy to recycle may reduce solid  waste after
customer use, but it may not reduce overall impacts. If the  ultimate goal
is environmental preservation, such projects may be pointless.
     There is thus a need for designs that reduce total environmental im-
pacts while also satisfying other criteria.  The life cycle framework pro-
vides the most complete environmental profile of goods and services.
The life cycle consists of each step in the life of a product from acquisi-
tion of raw materials  through processing, manufacture, use, and final dis-
posal of all residuals. Designers who use this broad framework help
ensure that the environmental impacts of their products are  discovered
and reduced, not merely shifted to other places.
    A life cycle, or "cradle to grave" approach is systematic.  Building
on this systems base, life cycle design also draws on ideas such as con-
current development and cross-disciplinary teams. Each is  needed to
successfully balance environmental issues with cost, performance, cul-
tural, and legal criteria.
    As emphasis shifts from end-of-pipe controls and remedial actions to
pollution prevention, design will play an increasingly important role in
preserving our environment.

Public Opinion

     Is there a demand for low-impact products? Even though people
may behave differently from how they describe themselves in a poll, sur-
veys can still be useful.  A nationwide Wall Street Journal/NBC poll con-
ducted in the summer of 1991 found that 80% of Americans describe
themselves as environmentalists. Fifty percent of respondents claimed to
be strong environmentalists [2].   Most people polled said they recognize
the need for substantial changes in their habits  and are not waiting for fu-
ture technological fixes.
    Manufacturers can help translate such environmental awareness into
demand for lower-impact products by producing and marketing improved
designs.  Designers who embrace environmental quality will be at the
center of this activity. Future environmental progress depends on design-
ers' ability to improve the environmental performance of products.
    Of course, many other people involved in making and marketing
products play a vital role in achieving environmental quality. For ex-
The life cycle framework
recognizes each step in
product development
from extraction of raw
materials through final
disposal of all residuals.
Life cycle design focuses
on discovering and
reducing environmental
impacts, not merely
shuffling them between
various media or
activities.

-------
Chapter 1
Environmental quality can
be critical to product
success. Reducing
environmental "defects"
may also lower costs.
ample, education will increasingly be needed to overcome the confusion
surrounding environmentally responsible design.  Advertising can help
meet this need. Rather than misrepresenting products as "environmen-
tally friendly" or "green", the benefits of a design improvement can be
clearly described, thus enabling customers to make informed choices.

Competition  and Costs

    A prudent development program recognizes that environmental fac-
tors are increasingly considered part of product quality. In the current
competitive climate, all companies know that quality products are criti-
cal to success. As Taiichi Ohno, former VP of Toyota said, "Whatever
an executive thinks the losses of poor quality are, they are actually six
times greater" [3]. Ignoring the environmental dimensions of quality
could be a major disadvantage to companies in competitive markets.
    Best-in-class manufacturers already recognize that there is no "op-
timal" level of quality in terms of cost; the fewer defects the lower the
costs. Business and industry may also discover that reducing environ-
mental "defects" produces similar benefits.
    Total cost assessment can help companies determine development
costs with more accuracy [4,5]. This type of accounting adds hidden, li-
ability, and less tangible environmental costs to those costs usually iden-
tified by standard methods.  Such costs are generally not. included in
development projects, but they can be  substantial.
    In addition, some conventional environmental costs, such as those
for pollution abatement and control, are expanding. In 1989, $91.3 bil-
lion was spent in the US  for this purpose, and the US EPA estimates that
annual expenditures for abatement and control will rise to $200 billion
by 1995 [6]. Chapter 7 contains a more detailed discussion of life cycle
accounting methods useful in product design.
    Fortunately,  many strategies for preventing damage before it occurs
are cost effective. INFORM, INC. documented the results from 139
source reduction  activities at 22 chemical plants [7].  Box 1-A shows
what 15 activities at 4 large chemical plants accomplished. Source re-
ductions outlined in the full study include changes in processes, opera-
tions, equipment, and products, as well as chemical substitutions.
                                             4

-------
                                                                              Introduction
           BOX1-A, COST AND WASTE SAVINGS FROM
                SOURCE REDUCTION
          Average waste reduction
          Average saved/activity/year'
          Average payback, ?n months
               e: {5]
    68%
$267,000
       4
    Products with minimal environmental impacts are also well suited to
the global marketplace. Sound environmental practices result in designs
that meet or exceed regulations in all countries where they will be sold or
produced. When a product meets all regulations, costly changes or de-
lays that might affect market penetration can be avoided.  This helps en-
sure long-term corporate viability in a rapidly changing world.
    Legislation in Germany provides an example of the issues global
companies may soon face in many locations. Manufacturers will be re-
quired to retain responsibility for disposal of products after they are re-
tired by users.  The German Minister of the Environment has also urged
customers to remove unnecessary packaging from products and let mer-
chants pay for discarding this waste. Companies wishing to make a profit
selling products in Germany will have to make the needed adjustments.
In this new context, only those products consistent with changing laws
and public demand are likely to be successful.

The Environment

    Understanding the range of impacts caused by human activity puts
the need for responsible product development in perspective. Every
product causes multiple environmental jmpacts. To begin with, products
consume both renewable and nonrenewable resources. The consequences
of extracting resources can be  severe. For example, rare plants and ani-
mals may become extinct, or nonrenewable resources, such as petroleum,
may be exhausted.
    Other impacts accompany resource use. Both nonhazardous and haz-
ardous wastes are generated during product development and use. Many
wastes are released directly to  the environment in the form of air emis-
sions or water discharges, while others are disposed in landfills. Pollu-
tion and waste in all forms degrade ecosystems and harm  human health.
Effects range from acute to long  term and can occur on local, regional, or
global scales. Greenhouse warming and ozone depletion are examples of
                       Every product causes
                       multiple environmental
                       impacts. Understanding
                       the range of these
                       impacts underscores the
                       need for life cycle design.

-------
Chapter 1
                          long-term effects with severe global consequences. Environmental is-
                          sues that designers should understand are discussed further in Appendix
                          C.
                              Environmental objectives for design that reflect current and future
                          environmental problems help promote sustainable resource manage-
                          ment and also ensure environmental quality for future generations.

                          1.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE MANUAL

                          Purpose

                              The main purposes of this manual are to:

                              • Reduce total environmental impacts and health risks caused by
                                product development
                              • Encourage the inclusion of environmental requirements at the
                                earliest stage of design rather than focusing on end-of-pipe solu-
                                tions
                              • Integrate environmental, performance, cost, cultural, and legal re-
                                quirements in effective designs

                          Scope

                              This manual focuses on environmental requirements for product
                          design.  In life cycle design, products are defined as systems that in-
                          clude the following components:

                              • the product
                              • processing:steps by which products are made, used, and retired
                              • distribution networks  (packaging and transportation)
                              • management

                              The design framework discussed in the manual can be applied to:

                              • improvements, or minor modifications of existing products or
                                processes;
                              • new features associated with developing the next generation of
                                an existing product or process; and
                              • innovations characteristic of new product and process design.

                              The life cycle framework addresses upstream and downstream con-
                          sequences of all activities related to a product system, not just those im-

-------
                                                                                 Introduction
pacts resulting from production and use. When design considers each
stage of the life cycle from raw material extraction to final disposal and
fate of residuals, full product impacts can be understood and reduced.
    No single design method or set of rules applies to all types of prod-
ucts. For that reason, this manual provides general guidelines and tools
rather than prescriptions. Design professionals should use the manual to
develop specific tools best suited to their projects.
    Environmental design is complex; there are rarely easy solutions.
Ideally, designers could use a database or a simple procedure to select
environmentally preferred materials.  Unfortunately, no such database ex-
ists, and there is no simple procedure for evaluating materials.
    Architecture and similar areas  of design are not specifically ad-
dressed in this manual, although the life cycle approach for reducing en-
vironmental impacts and risks applies to many disciplines.

 Audience

    All partners in product development have an important role to play in
achieving impact reduction.  The manual is primarily intended for the fol-
lowing decision makers:

     • product designers
     • industrial designers
     • process design engineers
     • packaging designers
     • product development  managers
     • managers and staff in accounting, marketing, distribution, strategy,
      environmental, health and safety, legal, purchasing, and service

     The manual assumes some familiarity with design, but it may also be
read by individuals with no prior knowledge of design. A glossary of im-
portant terms is provided in  Appendix F.
When design considers all
stages of the life cycle
from raw material
extraction to final disposal
and fate of residuals, the
full consequences of
products development can
be understood and acted
on.
 This manual provides
 general guidelines rather
 than prescriptions.
 Design professionals
 should use the manual to
 develop tools best suited
 to their specific projects.

-------
Chapter 1
                          Content and Organization

                          Chapter 1.  Introduction

                          Chapter 2. Life Cycle Design Basics
                              Three basic elements of life cycle design are introduced.  First, the
                          life cycle system is outlined. Then the product system used for design
                          is defined. Finally, the goals of life cycle design are presented.

                          Chapter 3. The Development Process
                              Discussion begins by introducing concurrent design and total qual-
                          ity programs as a management function of life cycle design. Manage-
                          ment also plays a vital role in project success by setting policies,
                          strategies, and measures of success that are compatible with life cycle
                          goals.  Design projects typically begin with a needs analysis.  Require-
                          ments, the key element in design, are next set to translate needs into
                          products.  Design then proceeds through several interactive phases that
                          integrate environmental criteria with traditional cost, performance, cul-
                          tural, and legal criteria.

                          Chapter 4.  Environmental Requirements
                              The most important stage of design is developing requirements.
                          Construction and use of a multi-layer matrix is recommended for for-
                          mulating environmental requirements. Other classes of requirements
                          are briefly discussed as part of integrated design.

                          Chapter 5.  Design Strategies
                              After the design team develops requirements, they choose strate-
                          gies to satisfy those requirements. General life cycle design strategies
                          discussed in this chapter include product life extension, material life ex-
                          tension, material selection, reduced resource use, process management,
                          efficient distribution, and improved management practices.

                          Chapter 6. Environmental Analysis Tools
                               This chapter describes a method for evaluating environmental crite-
                          ria in life cycle design. Key elements of inventory analysis and impact
                          assessment are presented and discussed.

-------
                                                                           Introduction
Chapter 7. Life Cycle Accounting
    Life cycle environmental accounting is contrasted with traditional ac-
counting practices. Aspects of life cycle accounting are introduced and
suggestions made for assessing the comprehensive costs and benefits of
development projects.

Appendix A. Sources of Additional Information

Appendix B. Summary of Major Federal Environmental Laws

Appendix C. Overview of Environmental Impacts

Appendix D. Decision Making
    Two major decision-making methods for establishing requirements
and evaluating design alternatives are briefly introduced.

Appendix E. Environmental Labeling
    Several third-party programs are outlined.

Appendix F. Glossary

-------
Chapter 1
                             References
                                1.  Wilson, Edward 0.1984. Biophilia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
                                     Press.
                                2.  Gutfeld, Rose. 2 August 1991. Shades of Green. The Wall Street Journal,
                                     Midwest Edition, A, 1.
                                3.  Taguchi, Genichi, and Don Clausing. 1990. Robust Quality. Harvard
                                     Business Review January-February: 65-75.
                                4.  US EPA. 1989. Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual (Draft), US Environ-
                                     mental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation &
                                     Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC.
                                5.  White, Allen L., Monica Becker, and James Goldstein.  1992. Total Cost
                                     Assessment: Accelerating Industrial Pollution Prevention Through
                                     Innovative Project Financial Analysis, US Environmental Protection
                                     Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC.
                                6.  Rutledge, Gary L., and Mary L. Leonard. 1991. Pollution Abatement and
                                     Control Expenditures. Survey of Current Business 71 (11): 46-50.
                                7.  Dor&nan, Mark H., Warren R. Muir, and Catherine G. Miller. 1992.
                                     Environmental Dividends: Cutting More Chemical Waste. New York:
                                     Inform, Inc.

-------
                                                 Chapter 2
         Life Cycle  Design Basics
Engineered &
Speciality
Materials
                                              The Life Cycle
                                                 Framework

                                            Product System
                                               Components

                                                     Goals
                                   Material downcydfng f
                                   (fife anoflter product '""
                                   system
   FugMve and untreated residuals

   Airborne, waferborne, and solid residuals

       l, energy, and labor inputs for Process and Management
   Transfer of materials between stages for Product, includes
 -  transportation and packaging (Distribution)

-------
Chapter 2
                   LIFE CYCLE DESIGN BASICS
Life cycle design is rooted
in systems analysis.
 Life cycle design couples
 the product development
 cycle used in business
 with the physical life cycle.
    Several key elements form the foundation of life cycle design.
First, design takes a systems approach based on the life cycle frame-
work. This expanded view considers all upstream and downstream ef-
fects of design actions. Every activity related to making and using
products is included in design. As a result, the product is combined
with processing, distribution, and management to form a single system
for design. The full consequences of a development project are thus
identified so environmental objectives can be better targeted.

2.1 THE LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK

    The term life cycle sometimes causes confusion because it has been
applied to both business activities and material balance studies.
    In business use, a product life cycle begins with the first phases of
design and proceeds through the end of production.  Research, market-
ing, and service to support products are also included in the life cycle.
Retirement and disposal of products are generally not considered. Busi-
nesses track costs, estimate profits, and plan  strategy based on this type
of product life cycle.
    In contrast, environmental inventory and impact analysis follows
the physical system of a product. Such life cycle analysis tracks mate-
rial and energy flows and transformations from raw material acquisition
to the ultimate fate of residuals. Life cycle analysis produces Resource
and Environmental Profile Analyses, Life Cycle Assessments,  or cradle-
to-grave studies [e.g. 1-3].
     Life cycle design combines the standard business use of a life cycle
with the physical system. In this manual, the life cycle of a product be-
gins with  raw material acquisition and includes all activities through  fi-
nal dispersal of residuals. The life cycle framework is a system for
assessing the full environmental, economic, and social consequences of
design. In its most complete form, life cycle design evaluates total in-
puts, outputs, and effects for all stages of the life cycle.
                                             12

-------
                                                    Life Cycle Framework and Principles
Life Cycle Stages

    The product life cycle can be organized into die following stages:

    • raw material acquisition
    • bulk material processing
    • engineered and specialty materials production
    • manufacturing and assembly
    •use and service
    • retirement
    •disposal

    These stages represent one scheme for classifying activities over a
product life cycle. All stages may not apply to every product system.
    Figure 2-1 is a general flow diagram of the product life cycle. As
this figure shows, a product life cycle is circular.  Designing and using
products consumes resources and converts them into residuals that accu-
mulate in the earth and biosphere.
    Most products require a wide range of direct and indirect materials.
Direct materials are used to make the product; indirect materials in the
life cycle framework are incorporated in facilities and equipment. Ei-
ther type of material may come from primary (virgin) or secondary (re-
cycled) sources.
    Raw materials acquisition includes mining nonrenewable material
and harvesting biomass.  These bulk materials are processed into base
materials by separation and purification steps. Examples include flour
milling and converting bauxite to aluminum. Some base materials are
combined through physical and chemical means into engineered and
specialty materials.  Examples include polymerization of ethylene into
polyethylene pellets and the production of high-strength steel. Base and
engineered materials are then manufactured through various fabrication
steps, and parts are assembled into the final product
    Products sold to customers are consumed or used for one or more
functions. Throughout their use, products and processing equipment
may be serviced to repair defects or maintain performance.  Users even-
tually decide to retire a product.  After retirement, a product can be re-
used or remanufactured.  Material and energy can also be recovered
through recycling, composting, incineration, or pyrolysis. Materials
can be recycled into the same product many times (closed loop) or used
to form other products before eventual discard (open loop).
    Some residuals generated in all stages are released directly into the
environment. Emissions from automobiles, waste water discharges from
Product systems consume
resources and converts
them into residuals that
accumulate in the earth
and biosphere.
                                             13

-------
Chapter 2
                                                                         Closed-loop
                                                                         recycling
                                                                                Material downcycling
                                                                                into another product
                                                                                system
                      Fugitive and untreated residuals
                      Airborne, waterbome, and solid residuals
                      Material, energy, and labor inputs for Process and Management
               	>  Transfer of materials between stages for Product, includes
                      transportation and packaging (Distribution)

               Figure 2-1. The Product Life Cycle System

                            some processes, and oil spills are examples of direct releases.  Residu-
                            als may also undergo physical, chemical or biological treatment.
                            Treatment processes are usually designed to reduce volume and toxic-
                            ity of waste. The remaining residuals, including those resulting from
                            treatment are then typically disposed in landfills. The ultimate form of
                            residuals depends on how they degrade after release.
                                When a product is retired, its materials or parts can enter other
                            product life cycles. Figure 2-2 illustrates how one type of material can
                            be recovered and used for different applications. The choices made in
                            design strongly influence whether this type of material recovery can
                            actually take place.

                                                14

-------
       Life Cycle Framework and Principles
                                       T3
                                       I
                                       0)
                                       m
                                       CO
                                       0)
                                       I
                                       S
                                       Q.
                                       eo
                                       o
                                       8
                                       I
                                       o>
                                       I
                                       S
                                       O
                                       • •
                                       DJ

                                       I
                                       I
                                       Q
                                       1
                                       =5
15

-------
Chapter 2
Life cycle design relies on
an expanded definition of
a product.  All activities
needed to make, use, and
retire products are
considered a single unit.
Design then addresses
this entire product system.
The product component
consists of all materials in
the final product.
2.2 PRODUCT SYSTEM COMPONENTS

    Life cycle design also relies on an expanded definition of a product.
All activities needed to make, use, and retire products are considered a
single unit. Design then addresses the entire product system, not just
isolated components. This is the most logical way to reduce total envi-
ronmental impacts.  A short description of each component in the prod-
uct system follows.

Product

    The product component consists of all materials in the final product.
Every form of these inputs in each life cycle stage is included. For ex-
ample, the product component for a simple wooden  spoon consists of
the tree, stumpage, and unused branches from raw material acquisition;
lumber and waste wood from milling; the spoon, wood chips, and saw-
dust from manufacturing; and the discarded spoon in a municipal solid
waste landfill. If this waste is incinerated, gases, water vapor, and ash
are produced.
    The product jcomponent of a complex product such as an automo-
bile consists of a wide range of materials. These may be a mix of pri-
mary (virgin) and secondary (recycled) materials. The materials in new
or used replacement parts are also included in the product component.
Some materials, such as plastics, contain energy that could be recovered
by combustion.  This energy is embodied in the material.
    The remaining three components of the product system share com-
mon categories of subcomponents:

    •Facility or plant
    • Unit operations or process steps
    • Equipment and tools
    •Labor
    • Direct and indirect material inputs
    • Energy

Labor is not just manual work.  It also includes all physical and mental
tasks that earn wages.
                                            16

-------
                                                     Life Cycle Framework and Principles
 Process

    Processing transforms materials and energy into a variety of inter-
 mediate and final products. The process component includes direct and
 indirect materials used to make a product. Catalysts and solvents are ex-
 amples of direct process materials.  They are not significantly incorpo-
 rated into the final product. Plant and equipment are examples of
 indirect material inputs for processing. Resources consumed during re-
 search, development, testing, and product use are included in processing.

 Distribution

    Distribution consists of packaging systems and transportation net-
 works used to contain, protect, and transport products and process mate-
 rials. Transportation networks include modes and routes.  Trains, trucks,
 ships, airplanes, and pipelines are some major modes of transport. Mate-
 rial transfer devices such as pumps and valves, carts and wagons, and
 material handling equipment (forklifts, crib towers, etc.) are part of the
 distribution component.
    Storage facilities, such as vessels and warehouses are necessary for
 distribution. Selling a product is also considered part of distribution.
 This includes both wholesale and retail activities.
    The distinction between process and distribution may not always be
 clear. For example, it may be more logical to classify a pipe within a
 single piece of process equipment as part of the process component.
 Also, cement mixing is a process that takes place in a truck during deliv-
 ery.

 Management

    Management responsibilities include administrative services, finan-
 cial management, personnel, purchasing, marketing, customer services,
 legal services, and training and education programs. Office equipment,
 such as computers and photocopiers, supports management functions.
    The management component also develops information and provides
 it to others in the life cycle. Information is a key element of life cycle
 design. Even so, its importance is often  overlooked. Reducing environ-
 mental impacts and risks depends on developing and using accurate in-
 formation. The need for information extends throughout design.
Marketing, labeling, and similar activities are included in information
provision.
Processing transforms
materials and energy into a
variety of intermediate and
final products.
Materials and energy are
transferred between life
cycle stages and locations
via distribution.
                                             17

-------
Chapter 2
                              Pollution
                              Prevention
• Resource
Conservation


Sustainable
Ecosystems


                                               Viable Economic
                                                     Systems
                                                 [  Environmental  I
                                                 I      Equity     I


                          Figure 2-3. Interrelationship of Life Cycle Design Goals
Life cycle design seeks to
reduce the total
environmental burdens
associated with product
systems.
2.3  GOALS

    The primary environmental objective of life cycle design is to re-
duce the total impacts and health risks caused by product development
and use. This objective can only be achieved in concert with other life
cycle design goals.  Life cycle design seeks to:

     • Conserve resources
     • Prevent pollution
     • Support environmental equity
     • Preserve diverse, sustainable ecosystems
     • Maintain long-term, viable economic systems

    Figure 2-3 demonstrates how the goals of life cycle design are
linked.

Resource Conservation

    There could be no product development or economic activity of any
kind without available resources. Except for solar energy, the supply of
resources is finite. Efficient designs conserve resources. In this way,
impacts caused by material extraction and related activities throughout
the life cycle are also reduced.
                                             18

-------
                                                    Life Cycle Framework and Principles
Pollution Prevention
    Pollution is any by-product or unwanted residual produced by hu-
man activity. In contrast to managing pollution after it has been pro-
duced, pollution prevention focuses on reducing or preventing pollution
at the source. This is the most direct means of reducing the complex im-
pacts caused by pollution. Pollution prevention is a multi-media means
of reducing impacts. It preserves the quality of air, land, and water si-
multaneously. Pollution prevention can often be cost effective because
it minimizes raw material losses, the need for expensive end-of-pipe so-
lutions, and long-term liability. Designing pollution out of product sys-
tems also reduces the possibility that impacts will be shifted between
media or life cycle stages.

Environmental Equity

    Enormous inequities in the distribution of resources continue to ex-
ist between developed and less-developed countries. Inequities also oc-
cur within national boundaries. A significant fraction of the world has
only limited access to the basics needed for survival. This sometimes
happens even when resources are locally abundant.
    Pollution and other impacts from production are also unevenly dis-
tributed [4]. Studies show that low-income communities in the US are
often exposed to higher health risks from industrial activities than are
higher-income communities [5]. Inconsistent regulations in the US lead
to different definitions of acceptable risk levels for workers and con-
sumers [6].
    In addition, acceptable levels of environmental impacts and health
risks vary greatly in different countries.  Short-sighted corporations add
to inequities when they locate manufacturing operations in less-devel-
oped countries to take advantage of inadequate environmental regula-
tions.
    Inequities may also develop over time. Wasting resources or heed-
lessly creating pollution can burden future generations with the impacts
of past consumption. Inequities can easily be created between genera-
tions when resources and functioning ecosystems are only assigned
present value.

Sustainable Ecosystems

    Resource conservation, pollution prevention, and equitable distribu-
tion of risks help preserve diverse, sustainable ecosystems. In general,
Pollution is most
effectively prevented in
the earliest stages of
design.
                                            19

-------
Chapter 2
                           sustainability measures the ability of a system to maintain itself over
                           time. Sustainable ecosystems are the planet's life support system. It is a
                           mistake to believe that basic human needs can be met without relying on
                           healthy, functioning ecosystems. Sufficient food, potable water, clean
                           air, and adequate shelter and clothing are all derived from the biosphere.

                           Viable Economic Systems

                               A heavily polluted, resource poor, ecologically degraded world in
                           which human health is severely compromised cannot be considered sus-
                           tainable in any sense. Products should therefore be designed to balance
                           human resources, natural resources, and capital in order to achieve pol-
                           lution prevention, resource conservation, and ecosystem sustainability.
                           Limited-growth economies and stable or declining populations may well
                           be a necessary condition for economically sustainable systems [7].
                           From a long-term perspective, increasing the value added to products is
                           far wiser than promoting increased production and consumption. Mate-
                           rial goods and other traditional aspects of wealth may be a poor substi-
                           tute for the physical and emotional well being of individuals within
                           society.
                            References

                               1.  Sellers, V. R., and L D. Sellers. 1989. Comparative Energy and Environ-
                                   mental Impacts far Soft Drink Delivery Systems, Franklin Associates.,
                                   Prairie Village, KS.
                               2.  Arthur D. little. 1990. Disposdbleversus Reusable Diapers.-Health, Envi-
                                   ronmental andEconomic Comparisons, Arthur D. little, Inc., Cam-
                                   bridge, MA.
                               3.  Mekel,O.C-L.,andG.Huppes. 1990. Environmental Effects\oj"Different
                                   Package Systems for Fresh Milk, Center for Environmental Studies, Uni-
                                   versity of Leiden, Leiden, The Netherlands.
                               4.  US EPA!, 1992. Environmental Equity: Reducing Risk for All Communi-
                                   ties, Volume 1: Workgroup Report to Administrator, US Environmental
                                   Protection Agency, Washington, DC EPA230-R-92-008.
                               5.  US EPA. 1992. Environmental Equity: Reducing Risk for All Communi-
                                   ties, Volume 2: Supporting Document, US Environmental Protection
                                   Agency, Washington, DC, EPA230-R-92-008A.
                               6.  Rodricks, Joseph V., and Michael R. Taylor. 1989. Comparison of Risk
                                   Management in US Regulatory Agencies. Journal of Hazardous Materi-
                                   als 21:239-253.
                               7.  Meadows, Donella H. 1992. BeyondLimits: Confronting Global Collapse,
                                   Envisioning a Sustainable Future. Mills, VT: Chelsea Green.
                                               20

-------
                                                    Chapter 3
        The Development Process
                LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK
                   AND GOALS
                   (Chapter 2)
             Development Activities
                  MANAGEMENT
                   (Chapters)
           • Concurrent design  • Team coordination
           • Life cycle quality   -Policy and strategy
           • Measures of success
^TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS^
                flEEDf ANALYSIS
            (discontinue}
     STATE OF ENVIRONMENT
refine
                 REQUIREMENTS
                  •cast  '•:.'. "
            (discontiniie)	
refine
                   DESIGN
            (discontinue
     Contimict reassessment
refine )
                  WPIEWENT
                  • Pfodhissort-
                  •Useftsetvfce" '
                             ttomtar, plan improvements
                                                         o

-------
Chapters
               THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
 Life cycle design is a
 framework, not a set of
 rules. Designers are
 invited to adapt the ideas
 and guidelines contained
 here to their own styles
 Unless life cycle goals are
 embraced by development
 teams, true life cycle
 design is impossible.
    Design actions translate life cycle goals  into high-quality, low-im-
pact product systems.  A seemingly infinite number of design methods
have been proposed [1,2]. Supporters of formal methods assume that
following a detailed process results in better design, but no one seems
to have actually tested this belief [2]. In practice, each designer
•chooses comfortable tools and combines various design procedures as
theyseefit.
    Recognizing that no single method has universal appeal, this
manual offers guidelines rather than prescriptions. Life cycle design is
a framework, not a set of rules that everyone must follow in precisely
the same way.  Development teams interested in reducing the environ-
mental impacts1 of their designs  are invited to adapt the ideas and guide-
lines contained'here to their own styles.

3.1 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

    As Figure 3-1 shows, product development is complex. Many ele-
ments in the diagram feed back to others. This emphasizes the con-
tinual search for improvement.
    Life cycle goals are located at the top to indicate Iheir fundamental
importance. Unless these goals are embraced by the entire develop-
ment team, true life cycle design is impossible.
    Management exerts a major influence on all phases of develop-
ment. Both concurrent design and total quality management provide
models for life:cycle design.  In addition, appropriate corporate policy,
strategic planning, and measures of success are needed to support de-
 sign projects.
    Research and development discovers new approaches for reducing
environmental impacts.  The state of the environment provides a con-
 text for design. In life cycle design, current and future environmental
 needs are translated into appropriate designs.
     A typical design project begins with a needs analysis, then pro-
 ceeds through formulating requirements, conceptual design, preliminary
 design, detailed design, and implementation. During the needs analy-
 sis, the purpose and scope of the project are defined, and customers are
 clearly identified.
                                           22

-------
                                                            The Development Process
                                LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK
                                      AND GOALS
                                      (Chapter 2)
                                   MANAGEMENT
                                      (Chapters)
                        • Concurrent design    • Team coordination
                        • Life cycle quality     • Policy and strategy
                        • Measures of success
     ( TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS
       LIFE CYCLE
       STRATEGIES
         (Chapter 5)
                                 NEEOS ANALYSIS
                                    * Scope -& purpa$$
                           discontinue^
                           refine
                                  ; REQUIREMENTS ,

                                    « ©ayfronmentat
(^discontinue^
refine
                                       DESlOM
                          ^discontinue^
              Continual reassessment r
                           refine
                                     • ProdafetioB
                                     « Use"& servfce
                                     * Retireiaanl
                                  STATE OF ENVIRONMENT
EVALUATION
 • Environmental
      (Chapters)
 •Cost
      (Chapter 7)
 • Decision Making
      (Appendix D)
                             Monitor, plan improvements
Figure 3-1.  Life Cycle Design Process
                                          23

-------
Chapters
                              Needs are then expanded into a full set of design criteria that in-
                          cludes environmental requirements. Design alternatives are proposed to
                          meet these requirements. Strategies for satisfying environmental re-
                          quirements are presented in chapter 5.
                              The development team continuously evaluates alternatives through-
                          out design. Environmental analysis tools are presented in chapter 6. If
                          studies show that requirements cannot be met or reasonably modified,
                          the project should end.
                              Successful designs balance environmental, performance, cost, cul-
                          tural, and legal requirements.  Critical decisions must be made when de-
                          veloping requirements and evaluating designs.  Appendix D presents
                          two popular decision-making models.
                              Finally, designs are implemented after final approval and closure by
                          the development team.
                              The following discussion of the development process begins with
                          management before outlining other key activities shown in the shaded
                          boxes in figure 3-1.

                           Management

                              Successful life cycle design projects depend on commitment from
                          all levels of management.  Innovative managers already follow practices
                          that are fundamental to life cycle design, but some may need to expand
                          their actions to include environmental factors.  Because life cycle design
                          is compatible with the best management practices, these slight modifica-
                          tions should ultimately benefit the company.
                                             24

-------
                                                               77?e Development Process
Concurrent Design
    Life cycle design is a logical extension of concurrent manufactur-
ing, a procedure based on simultaneous design of product features and
manufacturing processes. In contrast to projects that isolate design
groups from each other, concurrent design brings participants together
in a single team [3]. By having all actors in the life cycle participate in
a project from the outset, problems that develop between different disci-
plines can be reduced. Product quality can be improved through such
cooperation. Efficient teamwork can also reduce development time and
lower costs.
    Assembling a multi-discipline group at the beginning of a project
makes  it easy to gather information from many sources as early and of-
ten as necessary during design. Life cycle design does not require that
all team members keep in daily contact. The participation of individual
members will vary  substantially during the course of a project. Some
individuals may only offer advice or assist with reviews. Even so, in-
sights offered by these team members can be vital to project success.
    When the skills and knowledge of many disciplines are available
during all stages of a project, members of the development team are not
overwhelmed by the task of including environmental criteria in their de-
sign. Box 3-A shows how various members of the design team can par-
ticipate.
By involving all life cycle
actors in design, problems
that develop between
different disciplines can be
reduced.
                                             25

-------
Chapters
                       Box 3-A
   LIFE CYCLE PARTICIPANTS

   Accounting


   Advertising

   Community


    Distribution/Packaging


    Environmental, Health and
    Safety staff

    Government regulators,
    Standards organizations

    Industrial designers


    Legal


    Management
 ROLE OF PARTICIPANTS IN LIFE CYCLE DESIGN

                DUTIES/RESPONSIBILITIES              '

Assign environmental costs to products accurately; calculate
hidden, liability, and less tangible costs

Inform customers about environmental attributes of product

Understand potential impacts and benefits; define and approve
acceptable plans and operations

Design distribution systems that limit packaging and transportation
while ensuring protection and containment

Ensure occupational, consumer, and community health and safety;
provide environmental information for other participants

Develop policy, regulations, and standards that support life cycle
design goals

 Create a design concept that meets environmental criteria while
 also satisfying all other important functions

 Interpret statutes and promote pollution prevention to minimize cost
 of regulation and possible future liability

 Establish corporate environmental policy and translate into
 operational programs; establish measures for success; develop
 corporate environmental strategy
                             Life Cycle Quality
                                Life cycle [design considers environmental aspects to be closely
                             linked with quality.  Companies who look beyond quick profits to focus
 Like TQM, life cycle design    on customers, multidisciplinary teamwork, and cooperation with suppli-
 focuses on long-term goals    ers provide a  model for life cycle design. The life cycle framework ex-
                             pands these horizons to include societal and environmental needs. It
                             may thus either build on total quality management, or be incorporated in
                             a TQM program.
                                 Because the evolution of total quality management has interesting
                             parallels to environmental design, a brief history may be instructive.
                             Prior to World War II, most industries assured quality through vigorous
                             inspection. Such efforts reduced the number of defective products sold
                             to customers. However, by waiting to find defects until after manufac-
                                               26

-------
                                                                7776 Development Process
                Box 3-A. (continued) ROLE OF PARTICIPANTS IN LIFE CYCLE DESIGN

   LIFE CYCLE PARTICIPANTS                       DUTIES/RESPONSIBILITIES
    Marketing/Sales


    Process engineers

    Procurement/Purchasing



    Production workers


    Purchasers/Customers


    Research and
    Development staff

    Service

    Suppliers

    Waste Management
    Professionals
Give designers feedback on existing products and demand for
alternatives; promote design of low-impact products

Design processes to limit resource inputs and pollutant outputs

Select suppliers with demonstrated low- impact operations; assist
suppliers in reducing impacts of their operations to ensure steady
supply at lower costs

Maintain process efficiency; ensure product quality; minimize
occupational health and safety risks

Provide information about needs and environmental preferences; offer
feedback on design alternatives

Perform basic and applied research on impact reduction technology or
product innovations

Help design product system to facilitate maintenance and repair

Provide manufacturers with an environmental profile of their goods

Offer information about the fate of industrial waste and retired
consumer products and options for improved practices
hire, inspection produced scrap and rework that wasted materials, en-
ergy, and money. One of the first statistical quality control methods for
improving normally operating processes was developed and tested in the
1930s [4]. This method was more efficient than inspection, and was
soon applied to manufacturing. Interest in evolving statistical methods
was greatest in Japan during the fifties [5].
    Although process control is still important, it quickly became ap-
parent that quality required more than controls.  Models for an expanded
vision of total quality were developed by innovative Americans in the
1950s and thereafter [6-8]. These focused attention on management's
crucial role in cutting the costs of poor quality and delivering appropri-
ate products to satisfied customers. Unfortunately, this work received
little attention in the US until recently.
                                              27

-------
Chapters
Designing waste out of
products conserves
resources and reduces
costs and liabilities.
 In life cycle design, the
 environment is also seen
 as a customer.
 Continuous improvement
 and satisfaction of all
 customers are key
 principles of life cycle
 design.
A successful design
project draws on the skills
of all team members while
balancing their diverse
interests.
    Methods for creating quality products have been refined over time.
Japanese experts added an emphasis on teamwork and continual assess-
ment and improvement.  Quality function deployment, which makes the
customer the prime driver in product development, also contributed to
the total quality movement [9,10]. TQM increasingly focuses on ensur-
ing quality and value at the earliest stages of design [11,12].
    Efforts to protect the environment followed a similar evolution.
End-of-pipe controls and clean-up strategies echo the early testing and
inspection programs for quality assurance. Statistical quality controls
are much like waste minimization; both concentrate on improved pro-
cessing rather than product changes. The advent of TQM with its ex-
panded interest in other aspects of the business suggests the broad scope
of pollution prevention.  Through emphasis on designing quality into
products, the latest versions of TQM prepare the way for life cycle de-
sign.
    In life cycle design,  the environment is also seen as a customer.
Pollution and other impacts are quality defects that must be reduced. Be-
cause the environment supports all life, pursuing harmful actions for
short-term gain threatens a firm's existence. Ultimate success depends
on preserving environmental quality while satisfying traditional custom-
ers and employees. For this reason, environmental requirements are in-
tegrated into life cycle design at the very beginning of a project.

Team Building and Coordination
    Team building may  seem beyond the reach of small companies at
first. HoweverJ genuine teamwork provides dividends for firms of all
sizes.  Teams do not have to be large, and organization need not be com-
plex or formal. Unless a company is fortunate enough to have a single
individual who extracts and refines materials; designs, makes, and as-
sembles all parts and products; and then manages to perform marketing
and distribution duties, design requires working with many others. This
cooperation takes place both within and outside every company, regard-
less  of size. Skillfully managing the diverse talents involved in a design
project is the first step toward achieving excellence.
     Beyond ensuring that a design project is well-run, managers also set
policy, develop measures of success, and plan strategy.

Policy
     Company policies that support pollution prevention, resource con-
servation, and other life  cycle principles foster life cycle design. Al-
though a step in the right direction, vague environmental policies may
not be much help. To benefit design projects, a firm's environmental
policies must be specific and clearly stated. Management should offer
                                             28

-------
                                                              The Development Process
objectives and guidelines that are detailed enough to provide a practical
framework for the actions of designers and others in the company.

Strategy
    Strategic planning positions companies for the future. Planners can
support life cycle design through an awareness of programs that help
their company reach its environmental goals.  Government agencies are
now forming partnerships with companies in several areas that affect
corporate strategy. The US EPA's 33/50 Program and Green Lights
Program are examples of this new approach. There can be many advan-
tages to such voluntary pollution prevention programs.  By meeting
regulations proactively, firms avoid time consuming and expensive
command-and-control actions. Life cycle design can be a key element
in improved relations between regulators and companies.
    Strategic planning that promotes life cycle design should also:

    • Identify and plan reduction of a company's environmental im-
      pacts
    • Include all impacts before and after development in planning
    • Discontinue/phase out product lines with unacceptable impacts
    • Invest in research and development of low-impact technology
    • Invest in improved facilities/equipment
    • Recommend regulatory policies that assist life cycle design
    • Educate and train employees in life cycle design

    Details of these activities will not be discussed here. Each requires
several layers of planning. For example, a decision to cease production
can also include job placement and retraining programs. Labor should
have an active role in such planning.  Government and other players in
the life cycle can also ease transitions and help prevent permanent job
loss.
    Beyond the duties mentioned above, strategic planners need to bal-
ance current and anticipated demands. For example, planning hazard-
ous waste disposal capacity begins with knowing current generation
rates. Estimates of future waste generation require calculating the effect
pollution prevention actions will have on reducing waste from antici-
pated production. Knowledge gained through this process may point the
company in new directions.
    Strategic planning for life cycle design can seem overwhelming
when different time cycles affecting product system components are
considered.  The relative frequency and phase of some of these cycles
are shown in Figure 3-2 for a hypothetical case.
Environmental policies
should be clear and
specific. Proper guidelines
support life cycle designs.
                                            29

-------
Chapters
                        Business Cycle
                        recovery
                                       inflation
recession
                        Product Life Cycle
                      R & D  production  termination  service
                        Inventory Turnover

                        Process Life
                        Equipment Life
                       maintenance cycle
                        Facility Life
                        Useful Life of Product
                        Cultural Trends (fashion obsolescence)
                        Regulatory Change
                        Technological Innovation
                        Environmental Impacts
                            acute
                                                    chronic
                            global
               Figure 3-2.  Relative Time Scales Affecting Hypothetical Product System
                                             30

-------
                                                                The Development Process
    Environmental impacts and health effects from pollution occur on
different time scales. Acute exposures to toxics generally produce im-
mediate effects within 24 hours, while chronic exposures may not cause
demonstrable illness for several years. Similarly, global environmental
consequences such as ozone depletion and climate change cannot be as-
sessed immediately. In the case of raw material supplies, certain nonre-
newable resources may only be available for several decades. The
consequences of present profligacy may thus be transferred to future
generations.
    Because times scales are incongruous for different elements of the
product system, successful design is a complex activity. Although chal-
lenging, understanding and coordinating time scales can be a key ele-
ment in improved design.
    More traditional aspects of strategy also affect a life cycle design
project. Effective planning requires correctly assessing company
strengths, capabilities, and resources [13]. Companies must have ac-
cess, either within or outside the firm, to the required technology and
skills before embarking on a project. In addition, successful products
must fit a firm's management, production, and sales and distribution
abilities [14].  Lofty plans for low-impact products will not benefit a
firm unless they can actually be implemented.
    Many companies are also under pressure to shorten development
times. This is due in part to competition to continuously bring new
products to market. Strategic planning must balance these factors with
the need to meet life cycle goals.

Measures of Success
    The progress of design projects should be clearly assessed with ap-
propriate measures to help members of the design team pursue environ-
mental goals.  To ensure accuracy, measures for life cycle design should
include both environmental and financial indicators.
     Consistent measures of impact reduction in all phases of design
help make analysis more accurate. The key to assessing specific im-
pacts and assigning costs properly is a tracking system that identifies
and quantifies material flows for each product. Such systems for impact
analysis and accounting procedures are discussed in chapters 6 and 7.
     Companies  may measure progress toward stated goals in several
ways. Verbal estimates can qualify results, or results can be calculated
with numbers. In either case, life cycle design is likely to be more suc-
cessful when environmental aspects are part of a firm's incentive and
reward system.  Even though life cycle design can cut costs, increase
performance, and lead to greater profitability, it may still be necessary
Because time scales are
incongruous for different
aspects of a product, it is
important to properly
coordinate time scales in
design.
Measures of success
should include both
environmental and financial
indicators. Some rewards
and promotions have to be
based on environmental
performance, or people will
focus on other areas of the
business.
                                              31

-------
Chapters
                           to include discrete environmental aspects when measuring an
                           individual's performance.  If companies claim to follow sound environ-
                           mental policies, but never reward and promote people for reducing im-
                           pacts, managers jand workers will naturally focus on other areas of the
                           business.
Adding the environment to
an exploration of customer
needs helps designers
focus on appropriate
actions.
 Life cycle design seeks to
 satisfy significant
 customer and societal
 needs in a sustainable
 manner. Avoiding
 confusion between trivial
 desires and actual needs
 is a key function of life
 cycle design.
Needs Analysis

    A development project should first clearly identify customers and
their needs. Design can then focus on meeting those needs.
    Ideas that lead to design projects come from many sources. In
some companies, research and development provide discoveries that
may prompt a needs analysis.  Many successful companies base ideas
for new or improved products on research into customer desires. When
customer satisfaction drives design, projects begin in several ways.
Marketing clinics or surveys gather vital feedback on current products
that can be used in new designs. Clinics also offer opportunities to test
new, lower-impact products. In addition, ongoing product reviews
within a company can help evaluate performance, market share, and
other key factors such as fashion changes.
    Environmental audits or regulatory reviews are also sources of
ideas for design projects. Either process can uncover opportunities for
impact reduction. Environmental audits can range from a full life cycle
analysis to an assessment of a  single process.  Major impacts identified
through audits can then be targeted for design improvement. Proposed
or anticipated regulations may also prompt a design project. However,
projects focusing solely on compliance can be inefficient. For this rea-
son, it is wise te> balance all  needs in a design  project.

Identifying significant needs
    Unless life Cycle principles shape the needs analysis, development
projects may  not create low-impact products.  By including the environ-
ment in the set of customers that must be satisfied, designers will be
motivated to focus on appropriate actions.  For example, designs based
on continued high levels of  consumption and material use are contradic-
tory to life cycle design goals and are best not pursued. Elevating per-
ceived convenience over all other needs also invites environmental
harm.         ;
    In addition,'improvement of a high-impact products that at best sat-
isfy minor needs is not the most productive use of life cycle design. In-
stead, a needs analysis may  recommend discontinuing such products.
                                             32

-------
                                                                The Development Process
After all, environmental impacts can be substantially reduced by ending
production of questionable product lines.
    Life cycle development projects properly focus on filling significant
customer and societal needs in a sustainable manner. Avoiding confu-
sion between trivial desires and actual needs is a major challenge of life
cycle design.

Define Scope of Design Project
    Once significant needs and initial ideas for a design project have
been identified, the project's scope can be defined.  This entails choos-
ing system boundaries, characterizing analysis methods, and establish-
ing a project time line and budget. Although later discoveries may
modify the original plan, it is useful at this  early stage to decide whether
the project will focus on modifying an existing product, creating the
next generation model, or developing a new product.
    In choosing an appropriate system boundary, the development team
must initially consider the full life cycle from raw material acquisition
to the ultimate fate of residuals. More restricted system boundaries may
be justified by the development team.  Beginning with the most compre-
hensive system, design and analysis can focus on the:

    • full life cycle,
    • partial life cycle, or
    • individual stages or activities.

Choice of the full life cycle system will provide the greatest opportuni-
ties for impact reduction.
    In some cases, the development team may confine analysis to a par-
tial life cycle consisting of several stages, or even a single stage. Stages
can be omitted if they are static or not affected by a new design. As
long as designers  working on  a more limited scale are aware of potential
upstream  and downstream impacts, environmental goals can still be
reached. Even so, a more restricted scope will reduce possibilities for
design improvement.
    A decision about the type of environmental analysis needed for the
project should accompany the choice of system boundaries. Regardless
of the life cycle system chosen, analysis can be both quantitative or
qualitative.  Detailed analysis can proceed through all life cycle stages,
or less rigorous methods can be used. Ultimately, the development
team's ability to evaluate design alternatives will depend directly on the
accuracy and thoroughness of the environmental analysis. Further de-
tails on project scope and environmental analysis are given in chapter 6.
Defining the project scope
includes choosing system
boundaries, characterizing
analysis techniques, and
establishing a project
timeline and budget.
Design and analysis of the
full life cycle system will
provide the greatest
opportunities for impact
reduction.
                                             33

-------
Chapters
 Requirements may be the
 most critical aspect of
 design. They define the
 expected outcome and
 help designers translate
 needs into effective
 products.
 Successful development
 teams place requirements
 before design. Rushing
 into design before
 objectives are fully defined
 by requirements invites
 failure.
    After a project has been well-defined and seems worth pursuing, a
project time line and budget should be proposed. Life cycle design re-
quires funds for environmental analysis of designs.  Managers should
recognize that budget increases for proper environmental analysis can
pay dividends in avoided costs and added benefits that outweigh the ini-
tial investment.

Establish Baseline Life Cycle Data
    Comparative analysis, also referred to as benchmarking, shows
whether a design is an improvement over the competition.
Benchmarking typically compares cost and performance; in life cycle
design it includes environmental criteria. To be useful, the life cycle
framework and type of analysis used for benchmarking should match
those chosen during the needs analysis. Environmental analysis tools
are discussed in chapter 6.

Requirements

    Formulating requirements may well be the most critical phase of
design. Requirements define the expected outcome. Whenever pos-
sible, requirements should be stated in detail to help the design team
translate the needs statement into an effective solution. Design usually
proceeds more [efficiently when the solution is clearly bounded by well-
considered requirements.  In later phases of design, alternatives are
evaluated on how well they meet requirements.
    Although some designers are ready to produce concepts before
fully understanding project objectives or customer needs, successful de-
velopment teams place requirements before design. It is important to
spend enough time to develop proper requirements. Rushing to set re-
quirements before research discloses suitable design functions can eas-
ily produce incomplete or vague requirements that lead to product
failure [15].   |
    All requirements do not have to be stated in the same detail at the
beginning.  It may be best to develop critical design functions into pro-
totypes before istating final requirements. While work in critical areas
proceeds, less vital requirements may remain in written form. This spi-
ral model of development allows more flexibility and  can produce better
results [16].   j
    Similarly, decisions made during the needs analysis can be modi-
fied during the more detailed requirements phase. Such feedback and
iteration is a necessary element of design.
                                             34

-------
                                                                The Development Process
    This manual focuses on environmental requirements. Incorporating
environmental requirements into the earliest stage of design can reduce
the need for later corrective action.  This proactive approach enhances
the likelihood of developing a lower-impact product.  Pollution control,
liability, and remedial action costs can be greatly reduced by developing
environmental requirements at the outset of a project.
    Life cycle design seeks to integrate environmental requirements
with traditional performance, cost, cultural, and legal requirements. All
requirements must be properly balanced in a successful product, A low-
impact product that fails in the marketplace benefits no one,
    The next chapter discusses requirements in more detail.

Design  Phases

    The remaining phases of development are familiar to designers.
They are not significantly altered by the environmental aspects of life
cycle design. During these phases, the development team synthesizes re-
quirements into a coherent design. Because life cycle design is based on
concurrent practices, these phases are not fully distinct. Activities in
several phases will be occurring at the same time.
    Diagrams help members of the development team understand what
is happening in other disciplines. Charts and other graphics normally
used by the various groups can be shared with the whole team  to aid
evaluation. Box 3-B shows a few examples of the types of graphics that
can assist design teams.
                                                                 This manual focuses
                                                                 on environmental
                                                                 requirements.
                                                                  Early integration of
                                                                  environmental
                                                                  requirements is the key to
                                                                  life cycle design. All
                                                                  requirements must be
                                                                  properly balanced in a
                                                                  successful product. A low-
                                                                  impact product that fails in
                                                                  the marketplace benefits no
                                                                  one.
          BOX 3-B. TYPES OF DIAGRAMS USEFUL IN PRODUCT SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

                           Show the composition and rate of material and energy flows
Energy & Material
balance flowsheets

Organizational chart

Plot plan



Process control

Process flowsheet
                           Identifies members of the development team and shows their
                           responsibilities

                           A map of the geographical location of life cycle stages and
                           substages used for siting facilities, identifying suppliers, and planning
                           distribution networks

                           Details the basic instrumentation and control elements

                           Tracks material and energy flows through a sequence of process
                           steps or unit operations
                                             35

-------
Chapters
                           Concepts
                               In the concept phase, innovative ways to meet requirements are
                           proposed. Even in improvement projects, creative insights should be
                           encouraged to avoid basing all design activity on past experience. Con-
                           cepts generated in this phase are then screened to determine their feasi-
                           bility.

                           Preliminary Design
                               More detailed synthesis and analysis are required to select the best
                           concepts. During this phase, design is decomposed into product system
                           components and life cycle substages.
                               Details of the design can only be fixed with enough certainty to
                           carry out rigorous analysis after several alternatives have been devel-
                           oped in sufficient detail. At this point, life cycle analysis of competing
                           solutions can proceed in various depths.
                               Depending on product complexity, prototypes of either parts or an
                           entire product may be constructed in this phase of design to aid evalua-
                           tion.
                               If significant problems develop during preliminary design, back-
                           tracking to the concept stage may be necessary.  Knowledge gained
                           during this phase may also reveal conflicting aspects of the initial re-
                           quirements that are difficult to resolve. When this occurs, a return to
                           the requirements phase for additional research or modified ranking
                           helps clarify issues and increases the chances of a successful outcome.

                           Detailed Design
                               The final details of the best alternative are worked out in this stage.
                           Detailed drawings, engineering specifications, and final process design
                           are then completed. Advice from manufacturing employees and cus-
                           tomers can be particularly useful during detailed design, especially
                           when prototypes &re available for examination.  Such reviews help en-
                           sure that design objectives have been translated correctly or modified to
                           meet changing conditions.
                               Before implementation, the design is compared to benchmark prod-
                           ucts. Final evaluation should clearly identify both strengths and weak-
                           nesses that are likely to impact on product success. Minor problems
                           revealed at this pbint can still be corrected. Formal closure occurs
                           when all life cycle participants support and approve a final detailed de-
                           sign.
                                           :  36

-------
                                                                The Development Process
Implementation

    After formal approval, designs are implemented. Implementation
includes production and distribution along with marketing and labeling.
Building or planning infrastructure and recommending policy changes
to regulators is also a part of implementation.
    As figure 3-1 shows, design actions don't end at this point.  Product
development is a continuous process.  Existing products, even if newly
implemented, should be viewed as the starting point for new initiatives.

Limitations

    Several factors present barriers to the full pursuit of life cycle de-
sign. As discussed in chapter 6, lack of data and models for determining
life cycle impacts make analysis difficult.
    In addition, lack of motivation may also limit life cycle design.
Public pressure, regulatory requirements, competitive advantage, and
avoiding liability provide incentives for reducing impacts within that
portion of the life cycle controlled by individual players, but interest can
rapidly dwindle when the scope is broadened to other participants.
    Similarly, a design action that reduces total impacts may increase
local impacts. Under these circumstances, it may be very difficult for
an individual participant to justify bearing the consequences while oth-
ers benefit. This can be particularly true when shareholders, local inter-
ests, or regulators are not aware of the design's full life cycle benefits.
                                             37

-------
Chapters
                              References

                                1.  Jones, J. Christopher. 1980. Managing Design Methods. New York: John
                                    Wiley and Sons.
                                2.  Finger, Susan, and John R. Dixon. 1989. A Review of Research in Mechani-
                                    cal Engineering Design. Parti: Descriptive, Prescriptive, and Computer-
                                    Based Models of Design Processes. Research in Engineering Design 1:
                                    51-67.
                                3.  Whitney, D.1 E. 1988. Manufacturing by Design. Harvard Business Review
                                    Jul-Aug: 83-91.
                                4.  Shewhart, Walter A. 1986. Statistical Method From the Viewpoint of Quality
                                       Control. New York: Dover, (originally published 1939 by USDA)
                                5.  Deming, W. Edwards. 1952. Elementary Principles of the Statistical Control
                                       of Quality: A Series of Lectures. Tokyo: Nippon Kaguku Gijutsu
                                       Remmei.
                                6.  	. 1982. Quality, Productivity and Competitive Position. Cambridge, MA:
                                       MTT Center for Advanced Engineering Study.
                                7.  Juran, J. M. ^1988. Juran on Planning for Quality. New York: McMillan.
                                8.  Feigenbaum, A. V. 1991. Total Quality Control. New York: McGraw-Hill.
                                9.  Ishikawa, Kaoru. 1986. Guide to Quality Control. Tokyo: Asian Productiv-
                                       ity Organization.
                               10.  Kogure, Mafeao, and Yoji Akao. 1983. Quality Function Deployment and
                                       CWQC in Japan. Quality Progress 16 (10): 25-29.
                               11.  Akao, Yoji, [Akira Harada, and Kazuo Matsumoto. 1990. Quality Function
                                       Deployment and Technology Deployment. Quality Function Deploy-
                                       ment: Integrating Customer Requirements Into Product Design, editor,
                                       Yoji Akao, 149-179. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.
                               12.  Shindo, Hisakazu, Yasuhiko Kubota, and YuritsugaToyoumi. 1990. Using
                                       the Demanded Quality Deployment Chart. Quality Function Deploy-
                                       ment: Integrating Customer Requirements Into Product Design, editor,
                                       Yoji Akao, 27-49. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.
                               13.  Oakely, Mafk. 1984. Managing Product Design. New York: Wiley
                               14.  Hollins, Bill 1989. Successful Product Design: What to Do and When. Bos-
                                    ton: Butterworth.
                               15,  Cause, Donald G., and Gerald M. Weinberg. 1989. Requirements: Quality
                                    Before Design. New York: Dorset House.
                               16.  Boehm, Barry W. 1988. A Spiral Model of Software Development and En-
                                    hancement Computer 221 (5): 61-72.
                                                 38

-------
                     Chapter 4
Design Requirements
                    Formulating
                   Requirements

                      Types of
                   Requirements

                    Ranking and
                      Weighing
- r
TTT
r Legal ^ Culnjra| >y 	 _ 	 	 1
( GOSJ x- D-rf«»m=«~. ^.. 	 1»_



ST
-^v
Product
•INPUTS
•OUTPUTS
Process
• INPUTS
• OUTPUTS
Distribution
• INPUTS
• OUTPUTS
Management
• INPUTS
• OUTPUTS
Raw Material
Acquisition




Bulk
Processing




Engineered
Materials
Processing




Assembly &
Manufacture




UseS
Service




Environm
Retirement




entaiy-,
Treatment &
Disposal




                        o

-------
Chapter 4
                      DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
                          4.1  FORMULATING REQUIREMENTS
 Requirements define
 product systems that
 satisfy societal needs
 efficiently and equitably.
 They are the crucial bridge
.between the needs
 statement and later design
 actions.
 Requirements should state
 what a design does, not
 /jowthis is accomplished.
 People knowledgeable
 about each area of the
 product system should aid
 in developing
 requirements. Such
 diversity often results in
 fewer casual assumptions.
    In life cycle design, requirements define product systems that sat-
isfy societal needs efficiently and equitably. Requirements are the cru-
cial bridge between the needs statement and later design actions. A
well-conceived s6t of requirements translates project objectives into a
solution space for design. In addition to setting the boundaries for de-
sign, requirements are also used to evaluate alternatives.
    Environmental aspects are critical to overall product system qual-
ity. For this reason, environmental requirements should be developed
at the same time as performance, cost, cultural, and legal criteria.
        y                          ...
Key Elements                      .

    Requirements in life cycle design, as in other forms of design, con-
tain the following elements [1]:
               I                             '-
    • Functions describe what a successful design does. Functions
      should state what a design does, not how it is accomplished.
    • Attributes are descriptions of design functions in more detail.
    • Constraints are conditions that the design must meet to satisfy
      project goals. Constraints are limits that restrict the design
      search to manageable areas.

    Proper requirements are the result of considerable research and
analysis. A clear focus on customer and societal needs  usually pro-
duces better products.
    People knowledgeable about each area of the product system
should aid in developing requirements. Such diversity often results in
fewer casual assumptions. Teamwork also makes it easier to address
all critical aspects of the product system.
    Requirements may be developed more quickly when the design
team splits into groups that concentrate on just one area, such as cost
or performance. When smaller groups are formed, all team members
should maintain close communication. Periodic meetings of the entire
team are necessary to review proposed requirements. Customers and
                                           40

-------
                                                                     Design Requirements
other players in the life cycle should also be included during some re-
views. This helps ensure that customer needs have not been obscured
by assumptions or poor interpretations.
    Designers use many different methods to develop proposed require-
ments. Some groups feel comfortable with brainstorming sessions,
while others choose to develop black box scenarios (given these condi-
tions or inputs, the design will do x). In any case, a blend of rational
analysis and creative thinking helps identify critical functions.

Scope and Detail

    The level of detail expressed in requirements depends on the scope
of the design project. Proposed requirements for a new product are usu-
ally less detailed than requirements adopted for improving an existing
product.
    The life cycle framework adds another dimension to project scope.
Development teams should consider the full life cycle when proposing
requirements.  Research during the needs analysis and requirements
phase should explore preferred life cycle scenarios for the design. By
sketching out the expected, best-case, and worst-case pathways from ac-
quisition of natural resources to die ultimate fate of product system re-
siduals, requirements can be developed that favor the lowest-impact
scenarios. When appropriate, requirements may then focus on only a
portion of the life cycle.

The Dividends of Thoroughness
     Regardless of the project's nature, the expected design outcome
should not be overly restricted or too broad. Requirements defined too
narrowly eliminate attractive designs from the solution space. On the
other hand, vague requirements lead to misunderstandings  between po-
tential customers and designers while making the search process ineffi-
cient [1].
     Details of all necessary design functions will not be known when
requirements are first developed. Discoveries made during later stages
of design should be used to modify the original requirements statement.
This type of feedback can be critical to project success.
     Although it may be necessary to rely on many qualitative descrip-
tions when formulating preliminary requirements, the design team
should not cut corners in this phase. It can be dangerous to assume that
major oversights will be dealt with later. When too little time is de-
voted to developing excellent requirements, a design project can pro-
ceed along a mistaken path.  Such false starts delay the discovery of
Requirements for a new
product are usually less
detailed than those set to
for an improvement project.
But regardless of project
type, teams should
consider the full life cycle
when proposing
requirements.
Details of all necessary
design functions will not be
known when requirements
are first developed.
Discoveries made during
later stages of design
should be used to modify
original requirements.
                                              41

-------
Chapter 4
Design teams should not
cut corners in the
requirements phase.
Oversights are far more
common and likely to be
disastrous when
requirements are set too
quickly.
critical elements. Mistaken assumptions may also shape design until it
is too late or too expensive to develop the proper product [1,2]. Sur-
prises are unavoidable in any development project, but they are far more
common and likely to be disastrous when requirements are compiled too
hastily.          :
    Activities through the requirements phase typically account for 10-
15% of total product development costs [3].  Yet decisions made at this
point can determine 50- 70% of costs for the entire project [3,4]. Fig-
ure 4-1 provides one version of how product development costs are allo-
cated.                                        ,
    Box 4-A shows how costs in development can be cut by proper re-
quirements. This software example uses different terminology for de-
sign phases than found here. Yet it still demonstrates the benefits of
discovering and solving problems at the earliest stage of development.
                                        Sales
                                        12.5%
                          Market Research 7%
                                 Requirements 5.5%

                                      Concept
                                        12%
                                                              Detailed Design
                                                                   17.5%
                                  Manufacturing
                                      45.5%
                                   Figure 4-1.  Product Development Costs
                                     Source: [3]
                                            42

-------
                                                                  Design Requirements
              BOX4-A. RELATIVE COST TO FIX AN
                    ERROR AT VARIOUS POINTS
              PHASE

              Requirements
              Design
              Coding
              Development Tests
              Acceptance Tests
              Operation

              Source: [5]
COST RATIO

         1
       3-6
        10
     15-40
     30-70
   40-1000
Use of Requirements Matrix

    Matrices allow product development teams to study the interactions
between life cycle requirements.  Matrices are also an effective means
of organizing data for later analysis and evaluation. Using the same
types of matrices to develop requirements and later evaluate designs
makes each task simpler. Information presented in a consistent manner
may also seem clearer. This can be a key aid in good design.
    Figure 4-2 shows a multi-layer matrix for developing requirements.
The matrix for each type of requirement contains columns that represent
life cycle stages. Rows of each matrix are formed by the product sys-
tem components described in Chapter 2:  product, process, distribution,
and management. Each row is subdivided into inputs and outputs.  Ele-
ments can then be described and tracked in as much detail as necessary.
    The requirements matrices shown in Figure 4-2 are strictly concep-
tual.  Practical matrices can be formed for each class of requirements
by further subdividing the rows and columns of the conceptual matrix.
For example, the manufacturing stage could be subdivided into suppli-
ers and the original equipment manufacturer. The distribution compo-
nent of this stage might also include receiving, shipping, and wholesale
activities. Retail sale of the final product might best fit in the distribu-
tion component of the use phase.
    There are no absolute rules for organizing matrices. Development
teams should choose a format that is appropriate for their project.
    Figure 4-3 is a further illustration of how categories in the matrix
can be subdivided. This example shows how each row in the environ-
mental matrix can be expanded to provide more detail for developing
requirements.
                                Requirements may focus
                                on only a portion of the life
                                cycle, when appropriate.
                                             43

-------
Chapter 4

1-
















r
1
A

CO
5


^
re
O)
3

^_


c
o
1
t
UJ
o

c
CO
E
o

Q.

*Y
5




























c3

|l
S o
a a.
^S

1
£
'•§
cc

.
o £

=} W

c8 S
>i2
•S S
|1

C
"co
10
^ 8
'££
73
|J
j> "J5
s S-
S o
cc<
•? ^N


i

':
!
'
;



















Product
• INPUTS
• OUTPUTS



























Process
• INPUTS
• OUTPUTS



























Distribution
•INPUTS
•OUTPUTS













,













I 
-------
                                                                   Design Requirements
    Product
Inputs
    Materials
    Energy (embodied)

Outputs
    Products, co-products, & residuals
     Process
Inputs
    Materials
        direct: process materials
        indirect: 1st level (equipment & facilities)
               2nd level (capital & resources to
                       produce 1st level)
    Energy: process energy (direct & indirect)
    People (labor)

Outputs
    Materials (residuals)
    Energy (generated)
     Distribution      Inputs
                           Materials
                               packaging
                               transportation
                                   direct (e.g. oil & brake fluid)
                                   indirect (e.g. vehicles and garages)
                           Energy
                               packaging (embodied)
                               transportation (Btu/ton-mile)
                           People (labor)

                       Outputs
                           Materials (residuals)
     Management       /nPufs
                             Materials, office supplies, equipment & facilities
                             Energy
                             People
                             Information

                         Outputs
                             Information
                             Residuals
Figure 4-3. Example of Subdivided Rows for Environmental Requirements Matrix

                                            45

-------
Chapter 4
Environmental goals
should be translated into
clear requirements that
help identify and constrain
environmental impacts.
4.2 TYPES OF REQUIREMENTS

Environmental

    Environmental requirements should minimize:

    • raw materials consumption
    • energy consumption
    • waste generation
    • health and Safety risks
    • ecological degradation

    By translating these goals into clear functions, environmental re-
quirements help identify and constrain environmental impacts and
health risks.  As discussed in chapter 2, environmental requirements
should also address environmental equity.
    Box 4-B lists: issues that can help development teams define envi-
ronmental requirements. This manual cannot provide detailed guidance
on environmental requirements for each business or industry.  Although
the lists in Box 4-|B are not complete, they introduce many important
topics. Depending on the project, teams may express these requirements
as numbers or verbal descriptions. For example, it might be useful to
state a requirement that limits solid waste generation for the entire prod-
uct life cycle to a ispecific quantity or weight.
    In addition to criteria discovered in the needs analysis or
benchmarking, government policies can also be used to set require-
ments. For example, the Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan de-
veloped by the EPA in 1989 targets municipal solid waste disposal for a
25% reduction by 1995 [6]. Other initiatives, such as the EPA's 33/50
program are aimed at reducing toxics. It may benefit companies to de-
velop requirements that match the goals of this program.
    It can also be wise to set environmental requirements that exceed
government statutes. Designs based on such proactive requirements of-
fer many benefits.  Major modifications dictated by regulation can be
costly and time consuming.  In addition, such changes may not be con-
sistent with a firm's own development cycles, creating even more prob-
lems that could have been avoided.
                                           46

-------
                                                                   Design Requirements
     BOX 4-B ISSUES TO CONSIDER WHEN DEVELOPING ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
 Amount (intensiveness)

 Type
    Direct
        product related
        process related
    Indirect
        fixed capital (bldg.
        & equipment)

 Source
    Renewable
        forestry
        fishery
        agriculture
    Nonrenewable
        metals
        nonmetals
          Materials

Character
    Virgin
    Recovered (Recycled)
    Reusable/Recyclable
    Useful Life
    Resource base factors
        location
         - locally available
         - regionally available
        scarcity
         - threatened species
         - reserve base
        quality
         - composition
         - concentration
        management/restoration
         practices
         - sustainability
       Impacts associated with
       extraction, processing, and
       use
           Residuals
           Energy
           Ecological factors
           Health and safety
Amount (energy efficiency)
Type
    Purchased
    Process by-product
    Embodied in materials
                                       Energy
      Source
          Renewable
              wind
              solar
              hydro
              geothermal
              biomass
          Nonrenewable
              fossil fuel
              nuclear
Character
    Resource base factors
        location
        scarcity
        quality
        management/restoration
         practices

Impacts associated with extraction,
processing, and use
    Materials
    Residuals
    Ecological factors
    Health and safety
    Net energy
                                           47

-------
Chapter 4
      BOX 4-B ( CONT.) ISSUES TO CONSIDER WHEN DEVELOPING ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
        Type
           Solid waste
               solid
               semi-solid
               liquid
           Air emissions
               gas
               'aerosol
               participate
           Waterborne
               dissolved
               suspended solid
               emulsified
               chemical
               biological
          : Residuals

Characterization
    Nonhazardous
        constituents
        amount
    Hazardous
        constituents
        toxicity
        concentration
        amount
    Radioactive
        potency/half life
        amount
        concentration
Environmental fate
    Containment
    Degradability (physical, biolog-
     ical, chemical)
    Bioaccumulation
    Mobility/Transport mechanisms
        atmospheric
        surface water
        subsurface/groundwater
        biological
    Treatment/Disposal
        impacts
            - residuals
            - energy
            - materials
            - health & safety effects
        Type of ecosystems impacts
            Physical (disruption of
            habitat)
            Biological
            Chemical
       Ecological Factors

    Ecological stressors
        Diversity
        Sustainabilfty
        Rarity
        Sensitive species
            Scale
               Local
               Regional
               Global
        Population at risk
            Workers
            Users
            Community
    Human Health and Safety

      Toxicological characterization
         Morbidity
         Mortality
         Exposure
              routes
                 - inhalation
           ;      - skin contact
                 - ingestion
              duration
              frequency
                  Nuisance effects
                      Odors
                      Noise

                  Accidents
                      Type
                                              48

-------
                                                                    Design Requirements
 Performance

    Performance requirements define the functions of product systems.
 Functional requirements range from size tolerances of parts to time and
 motion specifications for equipment. Typical performance requirements
 for an automobile include fuel economy, maximum driving range, accel-
 eration and braking capabilities, handling characteristics, passenger and
 storage capacity, and ability to protect passengers in a collision.
    Compatibility of components should also be addressed in perfor-
 mance. This includes making sure component interfaces fit and do not
 cause harmful reactions.
    Life cycle designs need to offer a high level of performance to sat-
 isfy customer needs. However, desired performance is limited by tech-
 nical factors. Practical performance limits are usually defined by best
 available technology. Absolute limits that products may strive to
 achieve are set by thermodynamics or the laws of nature. Noting the
 technical limits on product system performance provides designers with
 a frame of reference for comparison.
    Other limits on performance also need to be understood.  In many
 cases, process design is constrained by existing facilities and equipment.
 This affects many aspects of process performance. It can also limit
 product performance by restricting possible materials and features.
 When this occurs, the success of a major design project may depend on
 upgrading or investing in new technology.
    Useful life of product systems is often a key element of perfor-
 mance. In many cases, useful life strongly influences how well product
 systems meet life cycle goals. Environmental impacts of a design
 should be measured per unit of service or time.  When impacts are nor-
 malized on this basis, products with widely varying useful lives can be
 properly  compared.
    Designers should also be aware that customer behavior and social
 trends affect product performance. Innovative technology might in-
 crease performance and reduce impacts, but possible gains can be erased
 by increased consumption. For example, automobile manufacturers
 doubled average fleet fuel economy over the last twenty years. How-
 ever,  gasoline consumption in the US remains nearly the same because
 more vehicles are being driven more miles.
    Although better performance may not always result in environmen-
 tal gain, poor performance usually produces more impacts.  Inadequate
products  are retired quickly in favor of more capable ones.  Develop-
ment programs that fail to produce products with superior performance
Performance requirements
define the functions of
product systems.
Useful life is often a key
element of performance.
Inadequate products are
retired quickly for more
capable ones.
Development programs
that fail to produce
products with superior
performance therefore
contribute to excess waste
generation and resource
use.
                                            49

-------
Chapter 4
Most people will not
choose a low-impact
product unless it is offered
at an attractive price. Cost
requirements should
therefore help designers
add value to the product
system.
therefore contribute to excess waste generation and resource use. This
is true even when environmental criteria are integrated into the earliest
stages of development

Cost

    Meeting all performance and environmental requirements does not
ensure project success. Regardless of how environmentally responsible
a product may be, most people will choose another if it cannot be of-
fered at a competitive price. In some cases, a premium can be charged
for significantly superior environmental or functional performance, but
such premiums are usually limited.
    Modified accounting systems that fully reflect environmental costs
and benefits are important to life cycle design.  With more complete ac-
counting, many low-impact designs may show financial advantages.
Chapter 7 discusses methods of life cycle accounting that can assist in
developing requirements.
 ,   Cost requirements should help designers add value to the product
system. These requirements can be most useful when they include a
time frame (such as total user costs from purchase until final retirement)
and clearly state life cycle boundaries.  Parties who will accrue these
costs, such as suppliers, manufacturers, and customers should also be
identified.
    Cost requirements need to reflect market possibilities.  Value can
be conveyed to customers through estimates of a product's total cost
over its expected useful life. Total customer costs include purchase
price, consumables, service, and retirement costs.  In this way, quality
products are not always judged on least first cost, which addresses only
the initial purchase price or financing charges.

Cultural
 Cultural requirements
 define the shape, form,
 color, texture, and image
 that a product projects.
 Successful cultural
 requirements enable the
 design itself to promote an
 awareness of how it
 reduces impacts.
    Cultural requirements define the shape, form, color, texture, and
image that a product projects. Low-impact designs must satisfy cultural
requirements to be successful. Material selection, product finish, col-
ors, and size are Iguided by consumer preferences. These choices have
direct environmental consequences.
    However, because customers usually do not know about the envi-
ronmental consequences of their preferences, creating pleasing, envi-
ronmentally superior products is a major design challenge.  Successful
cultural requirements enable the design itself to promote an awareness
of how it reduces impacts.
                                             50

-------
                                                                     Design Requirements
     Cultural requkements may overlap with others. Convenience is
 usually considered part of performance, but it is strongly influenced by
 culture.  In some cultures, convenience is elevated above many other
- functions. Cultural factors may thus determine whether demand for per-
 ceived convenience and environmental requirements conflict

 Legal Requirements

     Local, state, and federal environmental, health, and safety regula-
 tions are mandatory requirements. Violation of these requirements leads
 to fines, revoked permits, criminal prosecution, and other penalties.
 Both companies and individuals within a firm can be held responsible
 for violating statutes.  In 1991, people convicted of violating environ-
 mental regulations served prison terms totaling 550 months [7]. Firms
 may also be liable for punitive damages.
     Federal regulations are administered and enforced by agencies such
 as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Food and Drug Admin-
 istration (FDA), and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).
 Appendix B contains a brief overview of the major federal environmen-
 tal laws.
     The responsibility for enforcing many federal programs has been
 delegated to the states; the federal government grants this authority and
 maintains oversight. Individual states may also have their own set of
 environmental statutes that must be met in design.
     Environmental professionals, health and safety staff, legal advisors,
 and  government regulators can identify legal issues for life cycle design.
Principal local, state, and federal regulations that apply to the product
 system provide a framework for requirements.  Specific details can be
defined as other design requkements are fixed.
     Legal requirements vary  in complexity depending on the type of
product system. For example, hazardous materials are subject to many
statutes over a life cycle. To  begin with,  chemical manufacturers of
hazardous substances must file a Premanufacture Notification (PMN)
under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) as part of the applica
tion  process for approval of new chemical products.  Environmental re-
leases from subsequent manufacturing are mainly regulated under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Clean Air Act
(CAA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and Emergency Planning and Com-
munity Right to Know Act (EPCR A). Transporters of hazardous mate-
rials  must then comply with the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
Regulations are must
requirements.
                                            51

-------
Chapter 4
 Legal requirements must
 meet or exceed all
 applicable laws where the
 product will be sold. They
 should also address both
 pending and proposed
 regulations likely to be
 enacted.
developed jointly by EPA and the Department of Transportation. Fi-
nally, consumer products must meet the Federal Hazardous Substances
Labeling Act.
    In addition to such national programs in the US, political bound-
aries may also affect regulations. For example, some cities have im-
•posed bans on certain materials and products.  Regulations also vary
dramatically among countries. For this reason, legal requirements
should meet and exceed all applicable laws where the product will be
sold.
    Although  essential, familiarity with the full range of applicable
regulations may not be enough to ensure excellent legal requirements.
Whenever possible, legal requirements should also take into account
pending and proposed regulations that are likely to be enacted. Such
forward thinking can prevent costly problems during manufacture or
use while providing a competitive advantage.

Example of Partial Matrix

    The following example illustrates how part of acquirements ma-
trix might be filled in. Requirements in this hypothetical example are
proposed for the next generation of a consumer refrigerator. Only re-
quirements for the use stage of the life cycle are shown in Boxes 4-C
through G.    i
    This is just a sample of possible  requirements.  In this example, re-
quirements are stated generally without numerical constraints. An ac-
tual project would likely set more requirements in greater detail.
    The requirements outlined here demonstrate some of the  conflicts
that arise in design. For example, increasing insulation in the walls
and door reduces energy use, but it can also increase material use and
waste on disposal while reducing usable space.  If cultural require-
ments dictate that refrigerators must  fit in existing kitchens and main-
tain a certain usable space, energy-saving actions that increase wall
thickness might be precluded. Also, CFCs are usually more efficient
than alternatives that do not deplete ozone. Replacing CFCs might in-
crease energy  use.
                                             52

-------
                                                                    Design Requirements
BOX 4-C. SOME USE/SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR REFRIGERATORS

   ENVIRONMENTAL MATRIX

   Product
       Material type—based on a materials inventory of components/parts (refrigerator/freezer
         compartments, refrigeration system, compressor, condenser, evaporator, fans, electric
         components)
           • eliminate high impact materials: substitute for CFC-12 with lower ozone depleting
            potential and global warming potential alternatives
       Material amount
           • reduce material intensiveness: specify Ibs of material
       Residuals—specified in Retirement stage

   Process
       Energy
           • reduce energy use: specify energy consumption for compressor, fans, anti-sweat
            heaters (average yearly energy use)
       People
           • noise: specify frequency and  maximum loudness
       Residuals
           • reduce waste: specify systems for recovering refrigerant during service; specify level of
            refrigerant loss during normal  use and service; requirements for reuse, remanufacture,
             recycle of components are stated in Retirement Stage

   Distribution
        Material type
           • reduce impacts associated with packaging materials: specify low impact materials
       Material amount
           • reduce material intensiveness of packaging: specify Ibs of material
        Energy
           • conserve transportation energy: specify constraints on energy associated with delivery
        Residuals
            • reduce packaging waste:  specify reusable, recyclable packaging
            • reduce product waste: specify maximum amount of damaged products during
             distribution
    Management
        Information
            • provide consumers with information on energy use: meet DOE labeling requirements for
             energy efficiency
                                              53

-------
Chapter 4
BOX 4-D. SOME USE/SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR REFRIGERATORS
     PERFORMANCE MATRIX

     Product
          Material
             • dimensions: H x W x D; capacity - cu. ft.; shelf area; usable storage space
             • features: ice making; meat keeping; crisper humidity

     Process
          Material
             • identify best available technology for refrigeration system components as a
               practical limit to performance
             • specify useful life of product and components
             • specify reliability
             • specify durability
          Energy
             • identify thermodynamic limits to performance (e.g. maximum efficiency determined
               by temperatures inside and outside the refrigerator)
             • specify temperature control: balance, uniformity, compensation

     Distribution
         Material
             • specify product demand
             • specify installation time and equipment requirements
             • specify packaging requirements'for protection and containment
         Energy
             • specify location of retail outlets relative to market

     Management                         ',
          Information
             • specify minimum information requirements for owner's manual
             • specify warranty period
                                             54

-------
                                                                    Design Requirements
BOX 4-E. SOME USE/SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR REFRIGERATORS

        COST MATRIX

        Product
            Material
                • Retail price
                • Cost for replacement parts

        Process
            Material and Labor
                • Service costs (cost for service and parts)
            Energy
                • Electricity ($ - kWh/yr)

        Distribution
             Material, Energy and Labor
                • Delivery and installation cost
             Residuals
                • Packaging disposal cost

        Management
             Information
                • Manufacturer's guarantee
                • Payback period to user for purchasing more expensive energy efficient unit
 BOX 4-F. SOME USE/SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR REFRIGERATORS

        CULTURAL MATRIX

        Product
             Material
                • Color preferences
                • Size  (dependent on frequency of shopping/convenience)
                • Finishes and materials (affects cleaning, appearance)

        Process
             Material
                • Manual vs. automatic defrost
                • Compartmentalization - ability to organize food
             Residuals
                • Food spoilage - ability to control temperature

        Management
             Information
                • Instructions clearly written
                                             55

-------
Chapter 4
BOX 4-G. SOME USE/SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR REFRIGERATORS

       LEGAL MATRIX

       Product                          :
           Material
              • Consumer Product Safety Commission
              • Montreal Protocol for discontinuing the use of CFCs.
              •TSCA (Refrigerants meet regulations for use)

       Process                          >                                    ,
           Energy
              • National Appliance Energy Conservation Act—January 1,1993 (maximum energy
               consumption rate = E = 16.0 AV + 355 kWh/yr (AV = adjusted volume of top
               mounted refrigerator))

       Distribution
           Residuals
              • Packaging: German Take Back Legislation; Community recycling
               ordinance

       Management
           Information
              • FTC guidelines on  environmental claims
              • DOE labeling requirements for energy efficiency
                                          56

-------
                                                                     Design Requirements
4.3 RANKING AND WEIGHING

Organizing

    When the review process concludes that all necessary functions of
the design have been described and false assumptions or omissions have
been avoided, priority should be assigned to the various requirements.
Ranking and weighting distinguishes between critical and merely desir-
able traits.  After assigning requirements a weighted value, they should
be ranked and separated into several groups. An example of a useful
classification scheme follows:

    • Must requirements are conditions that designs have to meet.  No
      design is acceptable unless it satisfies all must requirements.

    • Want requirements are less important, but still desirable traits.
      Want requirements help designers seek the best solution, not just
      the first alternative that satisfies mandatory conditions. These
      criteria play a critical role in customer acceptance and percep-
      tions of quality.

    • Ancillary functions are low-ranked in terms of relative impor-
      tance.  They are relegated to a wish list. Designers should be
      aware that such desires exist. But ancillary functions should only
      be expressed in design when they do not compromise more criti-
      cal functions. Customers or clients should not expect designs to
      reflect many ancillary requirements.

    Once must requirements are set, want and ancillary requirements
can be assigned priority. There are no simple rules for weighting re-
quirements. Assigning priority to requirements is always a difficult
task, because different classes of requirements are stated and measured
in different units. Judgements based on the values of the design team
must be used to arrive at priorities.
    The process of making trade-offs between types of requirements is
familiar to every designer. Asking How important is this function to the
design? or What is this function worth (to society, customers, suppliers,
etc.)? is a necessary exercise in every successful development project.
    Even when all team members actively help set priorities, there is no
guarantee that final requirements will accurately reflect project objec-
tives. As an example, customers or other life cycle players may claim
that virtually everything they want is absolutely necessary.  Similarly,
Ranking and weighting
distinguishes between
critical and merely
desirable traits.
There are no simple rules
for weighting requirements.
Assigning priority to
requirements is always a
difficult task, because
different classes of
requirements are stated
and measured in different
units.
                                             57

-------
Chapter 4
The ranking process helps
designers be more
productive by defining
where the design effort
should be concentrated.
Development teams can
expect conflicts between
requirements. The
absence of conflicts
usually indicates that
requirements are defined
too loosely.
 some team members might strongly favor requirements in their own
 area of expertise while downgrading others. Cooperation during the re-
 quirements phase helps reduce these difficulties.
    Systematic methods for decision making can assist the design team
 with vital ranking1 duties. Two commonly used decision-making meth-
 ods are briefly presented in Appendix D.
    After requirements have been ranked, an assessment of the results
 will reveal how successful the development team has been in properly
 defining the expected project outcome. This ranking process helps de-
 signers be more productive by defining where the design effort should
 be concentrated.
    Most design projects seek to reduce requirements to minimum. A
 limited set of design functions is easier to understand and translate into
 final products. However, this necessary duty should not be carried to
 excess. Design may be easier with few requirements, but the resulting
 product is more likely to fail because critical functions have been over-
 looked.

 Resolving Conflicts

    Development teams can expect conflicts between requirements. If
 conflicts cannot be resolved between must requirements, there is no so-
 lution space for design. When a solution space exists but it is so re-
 stricted that little choice is possible, must requirements may have been
 defined too narrowly.  The absence of conflicts usually indicates that re-
 quirements are defined too loosely. This produces cavernous solution
 spaces in which virtually any alternative seems desirable. Under such
 conditions, there is no  practical method of choosing the best design.
    In all of these cases, design teams need to redefine or assign new
 priorities to requirements. If careful study still reveals no solution space
 or a very restricted one, the project should be abandoned. It is also risky
 to proceed with oyerly broad requirements. Only projects with practi-
 cal, well-considered requirements should be pursued. Successful re-
 quirements usually result from resolving conflicts and developing new
priorities that mor;e accurately reflect customer needs.
                                            58

-------
                                                                Design Requirements
           ,
   -  Substituting plastics for $tee| in automobiles may produce conflicts
 requirements for fuel economy, safety, solid waste generation, and durability* this
 example will focus on fuel economy and solid waste. Reduction in vehicle size and weight
 account for roughly half the improvement in new car fuel economy achieved since t974
 (fuel economy Increased from 14 mpg in 1973 to %& mpg tr» 1991), A tD% weight reduction
 results fn an estimated 7% increase in fuel economy on the highway and a 4%
, improvement in the city [8].  An increased number of parts made of plastic rather than steel
 helped drive some of this decline in vehicle weight.  Reduction in material intensiveness
 and downsizing are also responsible for weigh! reduction, The curb weight of an average,
 car .declined; 25% since 1974, from over 4,100 Ibstp about 3100 Ibs, J9] Plastics are
' Estimated to aceounffor 7% ol total automobile weight or about 230 pounds.
     Although plastics help reduce vehicle weight, many automotive plastics are not
 recovered at present Plastic use thus contributes to increased solid waste generation on
 disposal. The plastic content of automobile shredder residue of "fluff" has been increasing
 steadily. If plastics cannot be practically recovered before or during shredding, increased
 plasticcontenl in automobile hulks could make shredding uneconomical, especially if fluff is
 classified as a hazardous waste, Without shredding operations, waste produced: from atffo-
 disposal will greatly Increase,
                                        59

-------
Chapter 4
                             References

                               1. Cause, Donald G., and Gerald M. Weinberg. 1989. Requirements: Quality
                                    Before Design. New York: Dorset House.
                               2. Oakely, Mark. 1984. Managing Product Design. New York: Wiley
                               3. Hollins, Bill. il989. Successful Product Design: What to Do and W7ze«. Bos-
                                    ton: Butterworth.
                               4. Fabrycky, Walter J. 1987. Designing For the Life Cycle. Mechanical Engi-
                                    neering 109 (1): 72-74.
                               5. Boehm, Barry W. 1981. Software Engineering Economics. Englewood
                                    Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
                               6. Municipal Splid Waste Task Force. 1989. The Solid Waste Dilemma: An
                                    Agenda for\ Action, US EPA Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC.
                               7. Allen, Frank fedward. 9 December 1991. Few Big Firms Get Jail Time for
                                    Polluting. The Wall Street Journal,^, 1.
                               8. Bleviss, Deborah L. 1988. The New Oil Crisis and Fuel Economy Technolo-
                                    gies. Westport CT: Quorum Books.
                               9. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 1991. Automotive Fuel
                                    Economy Program, Fifteenth Annual Report to Congress, "US Department
                                    of Transportation, Washington, DC.
                                                 60

-------
                                                 Chapters
                       Design Strategies
   Effective strategies can only be
selected after project objectives are
transited into requirements.
Strategies flow from requirements, not
the reverse.
   Most strategies presented in this
chapter reach across product system
boundaries. It is unlikely that a single
strategy will be ideal for all
requirements. For that reason,
development teams should adopt a
range of strategies to satisfy
requirements.
            Overview

  Product System Life
            Extension

Material Life Extension
     Material Selection

     Reduced Material
        Intensiveness

 Process Management
                   f
  Efficient Distribution

Improved Management
            Practices

-------
Chapters
                        DESIGN STRATEGIES
                          5.1  OVERVIEW
 Effective strategies can
 only be selected after
 project objectives are
 translated into
 requirements. Deciding on
 a course of action before
 the destination is known
 can be an invitation to
 disaster. Strategies flow
 from requirements, not the
 reverse.
 Shortcuts for Jow-impact
 designs may focus on a
 favorite strategy, such as
 recycling. In life cycle
 design, no correct answer
 is assumed for all projects.
 Appropriate strategies
 satisfy the entire set of
 design requirements.
 One strategy is not likely
to satisfy the full set of
requirements. For that
reason, most development
projects should adopt a
range of strategies.
    Presented by themselves, strategies may seem to define the goals of
a design project.  But effective strategies can only be selected after
project objectives are translated into requirements. Although it may be
tempting to pursue an intriguing strategy for reducing environmental
impacts at the outset of a project, deciding on a course of action before
the destination is known can be an invitation to disaster. Strategies flow
from requirements, not the reverse.
    Shortcuts for low-impact designs may focus on a favorite strategy,
such as recycling^ In life cycle design, no correct answer is assumed
for all projects.
    Appropriate strategies satisfy the entire set of design requirements,
thus promoting integration of environmental requirements into design.
For example, essential product performance must be preserved when de-
sign teams choose a strategy for reducing environmental impacts.  If
performance is degraded, the benefits of environmentally responsible
design may only be illusory.
    In addition, impacts on the health and safety of workers and cus-
tomers must also be considered when choosing a strategy. Design
teams need to investigate health and safety effects throughout the prod-
uct life cycle so they can avoid inadvertently increasing these risks
while pursuing other environmental goals.           ; .
    The following general strategies may tie followed to fulfill environ-
mental requirements:

     • Product System Life Extension
     • Material Life Extension
     • Material Selection
     • Reduced ftiaterial Intensiveness
     • Process Management
     • Efficient Distribution
     • Improved Management Practices

    Most of these strategies reach across product system boundaries.
Product life extension strategies can also be applied to equipment used
                                             62

-------
                                                                        Design Strategies
in processing, distribution, and management. Similarly, process design
strategies are not limited to manufacturing operations. They are also use-
ful when product use depends on processes. For example, the drive
train of an automobile functions like a miniature industrial plant with a
reactor, storage tanks, electric power generator, and process control
equipment. Process strategies can thus lower environmental impacts
caused by automobile use.
    The following sections present impact and risk reduction strategies.
It is unlikely that a single strategy will be best for meeting all environ-
mental requirements. One strategy is even less likely to satisfy the full
set of requirements.  For that reason, most development projects should
adopt a range of strategies. Examples offered here demonstrate specific
strategies; they do not necessarily illustrate the best life cycle design
practices.

5.2  PRODUCT SYSTEM LIFE EXTENSION

    Extending the life of a product can directly reduce environmental
impacts. In many cases, longer-lived products save resources and gener-
ate less waste, because fewer units are needed to satisfy the same needs.
Before pursuing this strategy, designers should understand useful life.
    Useful life measures how long a system will operate safely and meet
performance standards when maintained properly and not subject to
stresses beyond stated limits [1]. Measures of useful life vary with func-
tion. Some common measures are:

     • number of uses or duty cycles
     • length of operation (i.e. operating hours, months, years, or miles)
     • shelf life

    The life of products such as clothes washers or switches that per-
form standard functions during each operation is best described by num-
ber of uses. This helps distinguish between two products of equal age
that have experienced different numbers of duty cycles.
    Length of operation is a more accurate method of defining useful
life for products that operate continually with little variation, such as
water heaters.  Operating time also is the best measure for products with
unpredictable duty cycles, such as light bulbs.  Similarly, useful life of
automobiles can be measured in miles driven.
    Chemicals, adhesives, and some consumables can degrade before
they perform any useful function.  Shelf life may be the most appropri-
ate measure of useful life for such products.
 Examples offered here
demonstrate specific
strategies; they do not
necessarily illustrate the
best life cycle design
practices.
Extending the life of a
product can directly
reduce environmental
impacts. In many cases,
longer-lived products save
resources and generate
less waste, because fewer
units are needed to satisfy
the same needs.
                                             63

-------
Chapters
 A durable product
 continues to satisfy
 customer needs over an
 extended life.  Impacts
 caused by products should
 be divided by estimated
 useful life. Such
 normalized figures allow
 designers to properly
 compare competing
 products.
    Retirement is the defining event of useful life. Reasons why prod-
ucts are no longeron use include:

    • technical obsolescence
    • fashion obsolescence
    • degraded performance or structural fatigue caused by normal
      wear over repeated uses
    • environmental or chemical degradation
    • damage caused :by accident or inappropriate use

    A product may be retired for fashion or technical reasons,  even
Ihough it continued to perform its design functions well. Clothing and
furniture are often retired prematurely when fashions change. Technical
obsolescence is common for electronic devices.
    Users may als;o be forced to retire a product for functional reasons.
Normal wear can degrade performance until the product no longer
serves a useful purpose. Repeated use can also cause structural deforma-
tion and fatigue that finally result in loss of function.
    Some products are exposed to a wide variety of environmental con-
ditions that cause porrosion or other types of degradation.  Such biologi-
cal or chemical stresses can reduce performance below a critical level.
This type of decay may also cause products to be retired for aesthetic
reasons, even though they continue to perform adequately.
    Accidents or incorrect use also cause premature retirement. Poor
design or failure to consider unlikely operating conditions may lead to
accidents. Some of these events can be avoided through better operating
instructions or warnings.                         :
    Understanding why products are retired helps designers extend
product system life. To achieve a long service life, designs must suc-
cessfully address issues beyond simple wear and tear. A discussion of
specific strategies; for product life extension follows.

Appropriately Durable
                i                                      L        -    -
Durable items can withstand wear, stress, and environmental degrada-
tion over a long useful life.

    A durable product continues to satisfy customer needs over an ex-
tended life.  Some design actions may make a product more durable
without the use of additional resources.  However, enhanced durability
may depend on increased resource use. When this happens, impacts that
result from using more resources should be divided by the estimated in-
                                              64

-------
                                                                         Design Strategies
crease in useful life. Impacts are thus assigned on a per use or time ba-
sis. Designerscanthencomparethesenormalizedfigureswiththosefrom
competing products to assess whether total impacts are reduced. Chapter
6 discusses such analysis tools in more detail.
    Development teams should enhance durability only when appropri-
ate. Designs that allow a product or component to last well beyond its
expected useful life are usually wasteful.
    Products based on rapidly changing technology may not always be
proper candidates for enhanced durability. If a simple product will soon
be obsolete, making it more durable could be pointless. In complicated
products subject to rapid change, adaptability is usually a better strategy.
For example, modular construction allows easy upgrading of fast-chang-
ing components without replacing the entire product. In such cases, use-
ful life is expected to be short for certain components, so they should also
not be designed for extreme durability.
    In addition, materials should only be as durable as needed. Some
materials that increase product life by resisting decay may increase waste
and other impacts on disposal. Understanding the ultimate fate of materi-
als helps designers avoid choosing permanent materials for temporary
functions, unless they can be recovered for continued use.
    Durable designs must also meet other project requirements. When
least first cost is emphasized, durable products may encounter market re-
sistance. Even so, durability is often associated with high-quality prod-
ucts.  For example, garden tools with reinforced construction can
withstand higher stresses than lower-quality alternatives and thus gener-
ally last longer. Although these tools are initially more expensive, they
may be cheaper in the long run because they do not need to be replaced
as frequently.
    Enhanced durability can be part of a broader strategy focused on
marketing and sales. For some durable products, leasing may be more
successful than sale to customers. Leasing can be viewed as selling ser-
vices while maintaining control over the means of delivering those ser-
vices. Durability is an integral part of all profitable leasing.  Original
equipment manufacturers who lease their products usually have the most
to gain from durable designs.

  DfJRABUg          '                            '         '      ;
      A European company teases all the photocopiers ft manufactures.
  Drums and other key componentsof their photocopiers are designed for
  maximum durability to decrease the need for replacement or repair.
  Because the company maintains contra! of the machines,, materials are
  also selected to reduce the costs and impacts of disposal [2].
                                              65

-------
Chapters
 Adaptability can extend
 the useful life of products
 that quickly become
 obsolete. To reduce
 overall environmental
 impacts, a sufficient
 portion of the existing
 product must usually
 remain after obsolete
 parts are replaced.
Adaptable

Adaptable designs either allow continual updating or they perform sev-
eral different functions. Modular components allow single-function
products to evolve andimprove as needed.

    As previously mentioned, adaptability can extend the useful life of
products that quickly become obsolete. Products with several parts are
the best candidates for adaptable design.  To reduce overall environmen-
tal impacts, a sufficient portion of the existing product must usually re-
main after obsolete parts are replaced.
    Adaptable designs rely on interchangeable components. Inter-
changeability controls dimensions and tolerances of manufactured parts
so that components can be replaced with minimal adjustments or on-site
modifications [1]. Thus, fittings, connectors, or information formats on
upgrades are consistent with the original product. For example, an
adaptable strategy for a new razor blade design would ensure that blades
mount on old handles so the handles don't become part of the waste
stream.
    Adaptable design may be particularly beneficial for processes and
facilities. This strategy allows rapid response to changing conditions
through continual upgrades. Such adaptable manufacturing may make it
much easier to offer low-impact products that meet customer demands.
A well-designed system helps save suitable plant and equipment for con-
tinued use.
  ADAPTABLE                      - ^  ,[   ,      VA   , ~              -';,-.
      A European computer manufacturer designed a maiaframe with a portable operating system that
  delinks computer hardware and software.  This [allows a rangeof previously incompatible software to
  be used on the same hardware. In addition, the company guarantees competitive performance of their
  system over an extended period becaus'e modular components can be replaced independently.
  Continual upgrading of peripheral equipment and: User programs is thua possible,  Rapid technological
  progress can be achieved while many stable components are retained [2], This design is supported by
  innovative marketing techniques, fnlroducmg performance guarantees enhances the appeal of an
  adaptable product. Resource use and waste can thu$ be reduced in a market notoriousfor,very short
  product life and rapid turnibver;                      "           „  ',,                 ";
                                           !  ","~   ',   "   <•'  "'''""""'''/    '"'"
      A large American company designed a lelecommunicatTort control center using a modular work
  station approach. Components can be upgraded a$ needed to maintain stafe-oHhe-an performance.
  Some system components change rapidly, while others stay in service 10 years or more J3J,
                                             66

-------
                                                                          Design Strategies
Reliable

Reliability is often expressed as a probability. It measures the ability
of a system to accomplish its design mission in the intended environ-
ment for a certain period of time.

    Reliability is a major aspect of quality. Reliable designs thus have
a better chance for market success.
    Environmental impacts are also related to reliability. Unreliable
products or processes, even if they are durable, are often quickly retired.
Customers will not tolerate untrustworthy performance, inconvenience,
and expense for long. Unreliable designs can also present safety and
health hazards.
    The number of components, the individual reliability of compo-
nents, and configuration are important aspects of reliability. Parts re-
duction and simplified design can increase both reliability and
manufacturability. Simpler designs may also be easier to service. All
these factors can reduce resource use and waste. Aside from environ-
mental benefits, producers and customers can save money with reliable
products.
    Reliability cannot always be achieved by reducing parts or making
designs simple. In some cases, redundant systems must be added to
provide needed backup. When a reliable product system requires paral-
lel  systems or fail-safe components, costs may rise significantly. As al-
ways, reliable designs must meet all other project requirements.
    Reliability should be designed into products rather than achieved
through later inspection. Screening out potentially unreliable products
after they are made is wasteful because such products must either be re-
paired or discarded.  In both cases, environmental impacts and costs in-
crease.
Reliability is a major
aspect of quality.
Unreliable products or
processes, even if they are
durable, are often quickly
retired.
Reliability should be
designed Into products
rather than achieved
through later inspection.
   BEUABlfi    -                                                              <
       A targe American electronics firm discovered that many plug-fn boards or* the digital scopes il
   designed failed In use. However, when the boards were returned for testing, 30% showed flo defects
   and were sent back customers. Some boards were returned repeatedly, only to pass tests every
   time. Finally me company discovered that a bit of insulation on each of the problem boards*
   capacitors was missing, producing a short when they were installed in the scope. The cause was
   insufficient clearance between the board and the chassis of the scope; each t?me the foard Was
   instalfed it scraped against the side of the instrument.  Finding the problem was difficult and
   expensive. Preventing it during design by more thoroughly examining fit and clearance would have
   been much simpler and less cosily [4J,
                                              67

-------
Chapters
 When designing
 serviceable products, the
 team should first determine
 who will provide the
 service.
Serviceable

A serviceable system can be adjusted for optimum performance under
controlled conditions. This capacity is retained over a specified life.

    Many complex products designed to have a long useful life require
service and support. When designing serviceable products, the team
should first determine who will provide the service.  Any combination
of original equipment manufacturers, dealers, private business, or cus-
tomers may service a product. Designers should target service needs to
the appropriate group. Types of tools and the level of expertise needed
to perform tasks strongly influences who is capable of providing service.
In any case, simple procedures are an advantage.
    Design teams should also recognize that equipment and an inven-
tory of parts are a necessary investment for any service network. Ser-
vice activities may be broken into two major categories: maintainability
and repairability.

Maintainable   ;
The relative difficulty or time required to maintain a certain level of sys-
tem performance 'determines whether that system can be practically
maintained.

    Maintenance [includes periodic, preventative, and minor corrective
actions. Proper maintenance helps to conserve resources and prevent
pollution. For example, tuning an automobile engine improves fuel
economy while reducing toxic tailpipe emissions. On the other hand,
delaying or ignoring maintenance can damage a product and shorten its
useful life.
    Designers wishing to create product systems that are easy to main-
tain should addre$s the following topics:

    • downtime, tool availability, personnel skills
    • complexity of required procedures
    • potential for error
    • accessibility to parts, components, or system to be maintained
    • frequency of design-dictated maintenance

    This is not an exhaustive list, but it identifies some key factors af-
fecting maintenance.  Most of these criteria are interrelated. If mainte-
nance is complex; specialized personnel are required, downtime is likely
                                             68

-------
                                                                         Design Strategies
to be long, and the potential for error increases. Speciality tools also
make maintenance less convenient
    Similarly, if parts or components are not readily accessible, com-
plexity and costs can increase.  Spatial arrangement is the key to easy ac-
cess. Critical parts and assemblies within a piece of equipment should be
placed so they can be reached and the necessary procedures performed.
Simpler designs are usually easier to maintain.
    Maintenance schedules should balance a variety of requirements.
For an automobile, changing motor oil every 500 miles would obviously
be wasteful, but changing oil every 50,000 miles would damage the en-
gine.  Customers usually believe that the less often maintenance is re-
quired the better,  so designs that preserve peak performance with
minimal maintenance are likely to be more popular. In addition, low-
maintenance designs are more likely to stay in service longer than less
robust designs.  Products dependent on continual readjustments for an ac-
ceptable level of performance are generally considered low-quality.
Such products can be wasteful, and they are not likely to gain much mar-
ket share.

Repairable
    Repairability is determined by the feasibility of replacing dysfunc-
tional parts and returning a system to operating condition.

    A two-step process is  usually followed when a product needs repair.
First, a diagnosis identifies the defect. Then, several questions critical to
resource management should be asked:

     • Should the product be repaired or retired?
     • Are other components near the end of their useful life and likely to
      fail soon?
     • Should the defective component be replaced with a new,
      remanufactured, or  used part?

Answers to these questions should take into account life cycle conse-
quences.
    Factors relating to downtime, complexity, and accessibility are as
important in repair as they are in maintenance. Easily repaired products
also rely on interchangeable and standard parts.  Interchangeability usu-
ally applies to parts produced by one manufacturer. Standardization re-
fers to compatible parts made by different manufacturers.
Standardization makes commonly used parts and assemblies conform to
accepted design standards [1].
                                              69

-------
Chapters
 Industrial equipment or
 other expensive products
 not subject to rapid change
 are the best candidates for
 remanufacture.
    Use of standard parts designed to codes established by numerous
manufacturers greatly aids repair. Designs that feature unique dimen-
sions for common' parts can confound normal repair efforts.  Speciality
parts usually require expanded inventories and extra training for repair
people. In the burgeoning global marketplace, following proper stan-
dards enables practical repair.
    Cost also determines repairability.  If normal repair is too expen-
sive, practical repairability does not exist. Labor, which is directly re-
lated to complexity and accessibility, is a key factor in repair costs.
When labor is cosjly, only relatively high-value items will be repaired.
However, a substantial purchase price is not enough to promote repair-
ability. Designs that impede repair may still be retired prematurely re-
gardless of initial Investment.  As in maintenance, infrequent need, ease
of intervention, and a high probability of success lower operating costs,
increase customer satisfaction, and translate directly into perceptions of
higher quality.    '
    Repairable designs need proper after-sale support. Firms should of-
fer information about trouble-shooting, procedures for repair, tools re-
quired, and the expected useful life of components and parts.

Remanufacturable

Remanufacturing is an industrial process that restores worn products to
like-new condition. In a factory, a retired product is first completely
disassembled. Its usable parts are then cleaned, refurbished, and put
into inventory.  Finally, a new product is reassembled from both old and
new parts, creating a unit equal in performance and expected life to the
original or a currently available alternative. In contrast, a repaired or
rebuilt product usually retains its identity, and only those parts that have
failed or are badly worn are replaced [5].
                 I
    Industrial equipment or other expensive products not subject to
rapid change are the best candidates for remanufacture.  Typical
remanufactured products include jet engines, buses, railcars, manufac-
turing equipment,! and office furniture.  Viable remanufacturing systems
rely on the following factors [6]:

     • a sufficient population of old units (cores)
     • an available trade-in network
     • low collection costs
     • storage and inventory infrastructure
                                              70

-------
                                                                        Design Strategies
    Design teams must first determine if enough old units will exist to
support remanufacturing.  Planning for proper marketing and collection
after retirement helps ensure a sufficient population of cores.  To remain
competitive with new products, the cost of cores must be low.  Costs for
collecting cores includes transport and a trade-in to induce customer re-
turn.
    Systems for collecting and storing the needed number of cores at
competitive prices support remanufacturing. But no remanufacturing
program can succeed without design features and strategies such as:

     • ease of disassembly
     • sufficient wear tolerances on critical parts
     • avoiding irreparable damage to parts during use
     • interchangeability of parts and components in a product line

    Designs must be easy to take apart if they are to be remanufactured.
Adhesives, welding, and some fasteners can make this impossible.
Critical parts must also be designed to survive normal wear. Extra mate-
rial should be present on used parts to allow refinishing. Care in select-
ing materials and arranging parts also helps avoid excessive damage
during use. Design continuity increases the number of interchangeable
parts between different models in the same product line. Common parts
make it easier to remanufacture products.
   REMANUFAGTURING               ,                       ,                   '
      - A Midwestern manufacturer coutatnt afford to replace all its 13 aging pfastic molding machines
   with new models, so it chose to remanufacture 8 molders forone^hird the cost of new machines.
   The company also bought one new machine atthe same time. The remanufactured machines
   increased efficiency by 10-20% and decreased scrap output by 3& compared to the old equipment;
   performance was equaTw'rth the new molder. Even with updated controls, operator familiarity with
   the ramanufactured machines and use of existing foundations and plumbing further reduced costs of
   the remanufactuteri niolders {7)<

       An original equipment manufacturer of Jet engines also provides remanufactured engines to
   customers. Remanufactured engines cost $900,000 plus trade-in compared to $1.6 million for a new
   engine. Fuel efficiency in the remanufaciured engine is 4%betferthan new engine specifications,
   yielding an annual fuel savings of 92*000 gallons, based on average aircraft use J6},
                                              71

-------
Chapters
 Products only become
 reusable when a single-
 use alternative exists.
 The environmental profile
 of a reusable product does
 not always depend on the
 number of expected uses.
 If the major impacts occur
 before reuse, increasing
 the number of uses will
 reduce total environmental
 impacts. However, when
 most impacts occur
 between uses, increasing
 the number of duty cycles
 may have little effect on
 impacts.
Reusable

Reuse is the additional use of an item after it is retired from, a clearly
defined duty.  Reformulation is not reuse. However, repair, cleaning, or
refurbishing to maintain integrity may be done in transition from one
use to the next. When applied to products, reuse is a purely comparative
term. Products v>,ith no single-use analogs are considered to be in ser-
vice until discarded.

    Products only become reusable when a single-use alternative exists.
Before the advent of disposable diapers, cloth diapers were not reused as
defined above. Rather, they were laundered after wearing, like other
clothes. Similarly, cameras were originally in use until disposal. They
only became reusable when a camera designed to expose just one roll of
film was marketed. Finally, parts in a product may be reused regardless
of how the entire [product is defined.  So, although an automobile is not
reused each time pit is driven or changes owners, its parts may be recov-
ered for reuse when it is finally retired.
     Items that will be reused must first be collected after completing
their function. They are then returned to the same or less demanding
service without major alterations. Reusable products may undergo some
minor processing, such as cleaning, between services.  For example,
dishware or glass bottles can be washed before reuse.
    The environmental profile of a reusable product does not always de-
pend on the number of expected uses. If the major impacts occur in
manufacturing and earlier stages, increasing the number of uses will re-
duce total environmental impacts. However,  when most impacts are
caused by cleaning or other steps between uses, increasing the number
of duty cycles may have little effect on overall impacts.
     Convenience is often cited as a major advantage of single-use prod-
ucts. However, customers usually fail to consider the costs and time of
purchasing, storing, and disposing single-use products. Single-use prod-
ucts often cost mbre per use than reusable products.
     Several environmental comparisons between reusable and single-
use products have been done. These are mostly confined to life cycle
inventories, whicfl are discussed in the next chapter. Appendix A also
provides references of such life cycle analyses.  Results are sometimes
controversial, but these studies can be consulted by designers exploring
a reuse strategy.
                                              72

-------
5.3 MATERIAL LIFE EXTENSION
                                                                          Design Strategies
Recycling

Recycling is the reformation or reprocessing of a recovered material.
The EPA defines recycling as, "the series of activities, including collec-
tion, separation, and processing, by which products or other materials
are recovered from or otherwise diverted from the solid waste stream
for use in the form of raw materials in the manufacture of new products
other than fuel" [11].

    Many designers, policy makers, and consumers believe recycling is
the best solution to a wide range of environmental problems.  Recycling
does divert discarded material from landfills, but it also causes other im-
pacts. Before designers focus on making products easier to recycle, they
Recycling diverts
discarded material from
landfills, but it also causes
other impacts. Before
designers focus on making
products easier to recycle,
they should understand
several recycling basics.
     'REUSABLE DESIGN                                                      -      '_
      A large supplier of iridustriaf solvents designed back-flush filters that could be reused many times.
      The new design replaced single-use fitters for some of theiron-srte equipment Installing back-
      flush filters caused-an immediate reduction in Waste generation, but further information about the
      environmental Impacts associated with the entire multiple-use filter system is necessary to properly
      compares to the impacts of single-use fitters [8].                                       -   .
                —   ff   *                     <.                             %             •"-,
      THE OPPOSITE STRATEGY: CREATING A NEW SINGLE-USE PRODUCT
          A large American manufacturer designed an inexpensive camera to be disrarded'after its roll
      of film, was exposed* In. reaction to negative publicity, the manufacturer slightly modified its film
      development network to ensure that both camera and film were returned after use. Some of the
      material in the camera is now recycled or reused 19].. TTits is an improvement of the original design
      implementation, but it is not likely to redress the higher environmental impacts that may nave
      occurred by substituting a single-use alternative for a long-lived product

      REUSE DERAILED THEN REVIVED         "         J
          A foreign manufacturer of laser printers discovered that a thriving service business outside
      their authorized deafer network had sprung up to refill spent cartridges with toner. Independent
     "companies offering these low-priced refills extended the life of original cartridges to many service
      cycles  rather than one>  Instead of focusing on toner sates and a refilling infrastructure of its own,
      the company designed a new toner for original cartridges that was slightly abrasive and thus
      destroyed the cartridge drum, precluding reuse 19]. After receiving negative publicity for forcing
      spent cartridges to be disposed in landfills after a single use, the company changed its policy.  ^
          In the meantime, a rival company designed its laser printers with refltlable cartridges. Their
      product extends printer life by coating the machine's drum with silicon and using toner formulated
      to continuously clean the drum. Printouts costs less than one cent per page campare&to three
      cents for a typical laser printer |10],
                                               73

-------
Chapters
 Preconsumer material is
 usually high quality.
 Postconsumer material is
 often a much less
 desirable input for
 subsequent products.
should understand several recycling basics. Types of recovered mate-
rial, pathways, and infrastructure provide a framework for understanding
recycling.

Types of Recycled Material
    Material available for recycling can be grouped into the following
three classes:

    • home scrap
    •preconsumer
    • postconsunier

    Home scrap consists of materials and by-products generated and
commonly recycled within an original manufacturing process [11].
Many materials and products contain home scrap that should not be ad-
vertised as recycled content.  For example, mill broke (wet pulp and fi-
bers) is easily added to later batches of product at paper mills. This
material has historically been used as a pulp substitute in paper making
rather than discarded, so it is  misleading to consider it recycled content.
    Preconsumer material consists of overruns, rejects, or scrap gener-
ated during any stage of production outside the original manufacturing
process [11]. It is generally clean, well-identified, and suitable for high-
quality recovery. Preconsumer material is now recycled in many areas.
    Postconsumer material has served its intended use and been dis-
carded before recovery. Although many people believe recycling is a
postconsumer activity, postconsumer material can be a relatively low-
quality source of input for future products.
                i
Recycling Pathways
    Development teams choosing recycling as an attractive way to meet
requirements should be aware of the two major pathways recycled mate-
rial can follow.

    • closed loop:
    • open loop  ;
                i
    In closed-loop systems, recovered materials and products are suit-
able substitutes for virgin material. They are thus; used to produce the
same part or product again. Some waste is generated during each repro-
cessing, but in theory a closed-loop model can operate for an extended
period of time without virgin  material. Of course, energy, and in some
cases process materials, are required for each recycling.
                                            74

-------
                                                                          Design Strategies
    Solvents and other industrial process ingredients are the most com-
mon materials recycled in a closed loop. Postconsumer material is much
more difficult to recycle in a closed loop, because it is often degraded or
contaminated. Designs that anticipate closed-loop recycling of such
waste may thus overstate the likely benefits.
    Open-loop recycling occurs when recovered material is recycled one
or more times before disposal. Most postconsumer material is recycled
in an open loop. The slight variation or unknown composition of such
material usually causes it to be downgraded to less demanding uses.
    Some materials also enter a cascade open-loop model in which they
are degraded several times before final  discard. For example, used white
ledger paper may be recycled into additional ledger or computer paper.
If this product is then dyed or not de-inked, it will be recycled as a mixed
grade after use.  In this form, it could be used for paperboard or packing,
such as trays in produce boxes. At present, the fiber in these products is
not valuable enough to recover. Ledger paper also enters an open-loop
system when it is recycled into facial tissue or other products that are
disposed after use.

Infrastructure
     Types of recycled materials, and the major routes they follow pro-
vide an introduction to recycling. Infrastructure is the key to understand-
ing how recycling actually occurs.  Suitable programs must be in place
or planned to ensure the success of any recycling system. Key consider-
ations include:

     • recycling programs and participation rates
     • collection and reprocessing capacity
     • quality of recovered material
     • economics and markets

     It is not enough to choose materials advertised as recyclable. Such
materials may be suitable for theoretical products but little else if recy-
cling programs do not exist. As a first step,  people must have access to
recycling. When available, recycling programs vary from frequently
scheduled curbside collection to public drop-off sites.  In most cases,
convenience leads to greater participation rates. Industrial recycling also
depends on ease and cost. Recycling may be more likely when it can be
done in-house, rather than through off-site transfers. Information about
participation rates helps designers predict the fate of retired materials.
     Collection and reprocessing systems are needed to support recycling.
Estimates of present and future capacity should be made in regions
. It is not enough to choose
 materials advertised as
 recyclable. Such
 materials may be suitable
 for theoretical products
 but little else if recycling
 programs do not exist.
                                              75

-------
Chapters
                           where the design will be sold. This information also helps designers de-
                           termine the likelihood of recovery for the materials they choose.
                               Statistics aboiit actual recycling practices are a quick way to esti-
                           mate the impacts of recyclable designs. Recovery rates for materials
                           generated in MSW during 1988 are given in Table 5-1. Some materials,
                           such as plastic, are presently recovered at a very low rate.  This is due in
                           part to plastic not being collected as frequently as other items. Until
                           plastic recycling ik better established, recyclable designs based on poly-
                           mers may produce much more postconsumer waste than predicted.
                               Quality of recovered material plays a key role in viable recycling.
                           When recycled material is low quality, demand will falter. Recycling
                           may thus not be possible even if material is delivered to potential users
                           free.            !
                               Separation techniques have a major impact on the quality of recov-
                           ered material. Careful sorting before collection usually produces top-
                           quality material. Source separation is easiest for preconsumer material.
                           Achieving the same level of purity for postconsumer material requires a
                           very committed public. Most public programs allow different materials
                           to be mixed, or even try to recover material from unsorted solid waste.
                           Recovery from a mixed source  may produce only relatively low-quality
                           material.
                        Table 5-1. Generation and Material Recovery of MSW in
                                   Millions of Tons, 1988
MATERIAL CLASS
Paper, Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber, Leather
Textiles
Wood :
GENERATED
71.8
12.5

11.6
2.5
u.
15.3
14.4
4.6
3.9
6.5
RECOVERED
18.4
1.5

0.7
0.8
QJ.
2.2
0.2
0.1
neg.
0.0
% OF TOTAL
Generated
25.6
12.0

5.8
31.7
65.1
14.6
1.1
2.3
0.6
0.0
                         Source: [12]
                                              76

-------
                                                                         Design Strategies
    In addition, products or components made of several different mate-
rials, each practically recyclable by itself, may present problems. Such
products can be impossible to recycle unless individual materials are seg-
regated after retirement. The recycling rate of several materials com-
bined in a single item is almost never additive. Because many mixed
material products are composites, or joined in a complex manner, they
cannot easily be recycled.
    Economic and market factors finally determine whether a material
will be recycled. Markets for some secondary materials may be easily
saturated. Recycling programs and high rates of participation address
only collection; unless recovered material is actually used, no recycling
has occurred.
    In addition, if a material is not one of the few now targeted for pub-
lic collection, recovery could be difficult.  It may not be possible to cre-
ate a private collection and reprocessing system that competes with
virgin materials. However, if demand for recovered material increases in
the future, this will greatly aid collection efforts.

Design Considerations
   Recycling can be a very effective resource management tool. Under
ideal circumstances, most materials would be recovered many times until
they became too degraded for further use. Even so, design for
recyclability is not the ultimate strategy for meeting all environmental re-
quirements. As an example, studies show that refillable glass bottles use
much less life cycle energy than single-use recycled glass to deliver the
same amount of beverage [13].
    When suitable infrastructure appears to be in place, or the develop-
ment team is capable of planning it, recycling is enhanced by:

     • ease of disassembly
     • material identification
     • simplification and parts consolidation
     • material selection and compatibility

    Products may have to be taken apart after retirement to allow recov-
 ery of materials for recycling. However, easy disassembly may conflict
 with other project needs. As an example, snap-fit latches and other
joinings that speed assembly can severely impede disassembly. In some
 products, easy disassembly may also lead to theft of valuable compo-
 nents.
     Material identification markings greatly aid manual separation and
 the use of optical scanners. Standard markings are most effective when
 they are well-placed and easy to read.  Symbols have been designed by
Recycling can be a very
effective resource
management tool.  Even
so, design for recyclability
is not the ultimate strategy
for meeting all
environmental
requirements.
                                              77

-------
Chapters
 Waste exchange can be
 considered a form of
 recycling. Waste
 exchange is a computer
 and catalog network that
 returns waste materials to
 manufacturing by
 matching companies
 generating specific wastes
 with companies that can
 use those wastes as
 inputs.
  the Society of thejPlastics Industry (SPI) for commodity plastics. The
  Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has developed markings for en-
  gineered plastics. Of course, marked material must still be valuable and
  easy to recover or it will not be recycled.  In addition, labeling may not
  be useful in systems that rely on mechanical or chemical separation, al-
  though it can be a vital part of collection systems that target certain ma-
  terials or rely on source separation.
     Simplification and parts consolidation can also make products
  easier to recycle. This is an attractive strategy for many other reasons.
  As previously mentioned, simple designs  also ease assembly and may
  lead to more robujst, higher-quality products.
     In most projejcts, material selection is not coordinated with environ-
  mental strategies. As a result, many designs contain a bewildering
  number of materials chosen for combined cost and performance at-
  tributes. There may be little chance of recovering material from such
  complex products, unless they contain large components made of a
  single, practically recyclable material.
     When one type of material cannot be isolated in discrete design fea-
  tures, recycling is. more likely if all the materials in the feature are com-
  patible. During reprocessing, compatible materials present in moderate
  amounts do not act as  serious contaminants  in the final product. Auto-
  mobile recycling provides a useful example of compatible materials.
  Steel rolled into thin sheets for auto bodies must be formulated within
  relatively narrow tolerances.  If some ingredients change modestly dur-
  ing recycling, secondary steel can only be used for casting or other less
  demanding duties. Because aluminum acts as a  flux in steel making, it
  is compatible for recycling when present in  moderate amounts. Re-
  cycled steel that contains some aluminum can usually still be used for
  sheeting.  On the other hand, copper and tin produce brittleness in steel.
  Small amounts of copper or tin in recycled steel make it unsuitable for
  sheeting.  Of course, many other criteria need to be considered before
  making a design choice based solely on compatibility.
     Some polymers and other materials are broadly incompatible. If
  such materials are to be recycled for similar use again, they need to be
.  meticulously separated for high purity.
     Even without separation, some mixtures of incompatible or spe-
. cialty materials can be downcycled. At present, several means are avail-
  able to form incompatible materials into composites. However, the
  resulting products, such as plastic lumber, may have limited appeal.
     Designers can aid recycling by reducing the number of incompatible
  materials in a product For example, a component containing parts com-
  posed of different materials could be designed with parts made from the
                                             78

-------
                                                                       Design Strategies
same material. This strategy also applies within material types. Formu-
lations of the same material might have such different properties that
they are incompatible during recycling. Designers will usually have to
make trade-offs when selecting only compatible materials for a product.
Making single-material or compatible components may be possible in
some cases but not in others.  .

5.4 MATERIAL SELECTION

    Because material selection is a fundamental part of design, it offers
many opportunities for reducing environmental impacts.  In life cycle
design, material selection begins by identifying the nature and source of
raw materials.  Then environmental impacts caused by material acquisi-
tion, processing, use, and retirement are estimated. Depth of analysis,
and the number of life cycle stages considered varies with project scope.
Finally, proposed materials are compared to determine best choices.
    When designing modest improvements of existing products or the
next generation of a line, material choice may be constrained. Designers
may also be restricted to certain materials by the need to use existing
plant and equipment. This type of process limitation can even affect
new product design. Substantial investment may then be needed before
a new material can be used.  On the other hand, material substitutions
may fit current operations and actually reduce costs. In either case, ma-
terial choice must meet all project requirements.
    Reformulation is also an option when selecting materials. Most ma-
terials or products may be reformulated to reduce impacts, even when
material choice is constrained.

Substitution
Because material selection
is a fundamental part of
design, it offers many
opportunities for reducing
environmental impacts. In
life cycle design, material
selection begins by
identifying the nature and
source of raw materials.
Then environmental
impacts caused by
material acquisition,
processing, use, and
retirement are estimated.
    For a variety of reasons, a currently used material may have to be
replaced in design. In most cases, substitutes can readily be found that
reduce life cycle impacts but do not conflict with either cost or perfor-
mance requirements.  However, before making a final choice, substitutes
must be analyzed for environmental impacts This helps avoid shifting
impacts to other life cycle stages.  Careful screening can also uncover
significant new impacts in other areas that might have been overlooked.
    Material substitutions can be made for product as well as process
materials, such as solvents and catalysts. For example, water-based sol-
vents or coatings can sometimes be substituted for high-VOC alterna-
tives during processing. On the other hand, materials that don't require
 Substitutes can frequently
be found that reduce life
cycle impacts but do not
conflict with either cost or
performance requirements.
                                            79

-------
Chapters
                           coating, such as'some metals and polymers, can be substituted in the
                           product itself.
                               These material substitutions can address a wide range of issues,
                           such as replacing rare tropical woods in furniture with native species.
                           Of course, the effect of some substitutions may not always be immedi-
                           ately obvious.  In addition to changing a product's environmental profile
                           related to material use, many material substitutions may also require
                           process modifications that result in both upstream and downstream con-
                           sequences.

                             Reformulation
 Reformulation is an
 appropriate strategy when
 a high degree of continuity
 must be maintained with
 the original product.
    Reformulation is a less drastic alternative than substitution.  It is an
appropriate strategy when a high degree of continuity must be main-
tained with the original product. Consumables and other products that
must fit existing standards may limit design choices. Rather than en-
tirely replace one material with another, designers can alter percentages
to achieve the desired result.  Some materials can also be added or de-
leted if characteristics of the original product are still preserved.
    MATERIAL SUBSTITUTION                       "                         , , L
       An American company replaced its 5 layer finish on some products with a new 3 layer
    substitute.  The original finish contained nickel (first layer), cadmium, copper, nickel, and'btadt
    organic paint (final layer). The new finish contains nickel, zinc-nickeT alloy, and black organic paint,
    this substitution eliminated cadmium, a toxic heavy metal, and the use of a cyanide bath solution
    for plating the cadmium.  The new finish was equally corrosion resistant, it was also Cheaper to
    produce, saving the company 25% in operating costs (approximately $1 million annually) [14],
                                                      "   ','     •*+•*',/
    REFORMULATION                     -                 ,  ,       ,   '
       American petroleum companies are currently reformulating gasoline sold in areas of the Unjted
    States that do not comply with the new Clean Air Act.  This act wilt require tower mobile source'""
    emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrous oxides (NOx), Both compounds,
    produce smog and ozone. Reduced emissions of the toxic combustion products carbon monoxide
    (CO) and benzene are also mandated  [15].  Gasolines reformulated to meet these new
    requirements feature changes in aromatic and olefln composition.  Oxygenators such as methyl (erl-
    butyl-ether (MTBE), ethanof, ar$ methane) have also been added, The new gasolines vary fn their
    ability to reduce emissions of NQx, VOCs, CO, and benzene, Fleformulatfon is further complicated
    because it may reduce fuel economy and engine performance.
                                             80

-------
                                                                      Design Strategies
5.5 REDUCED MATERIAL INTENSIVENESS

    Resource conservation can reduce waste and directly lower environ-
mental impacts. A less material-intensive product may also be lighter,
thus saving energy in distribution or use. Designing to conserve re-
sources is not always simple. Reduced material use may affect other re-
quirements in complex ways.
    In some cases, using less material affects no other requirements and
thus clearly lowers impacts. When the reduction is very simple, benefits
can be determined without a rigorous life cycle assessment. However,
careful study may be needed to ensure that significant impacts have not
been created elsewhere in the life cycle.  In addition, impacts might have
been reduced further by using another material, rather than less of the
current choice.
Resource conservation
can reduce waste and
directly lower
environmental impacts.
5.6 PROCESS MANAGEMENT

    A variety of process management strategies can be used to reduce
environmental impacts. Although process design is an integral part of
product development in this manual, process improvements can be pur-
sued outside product development.

Process Substitution

    Processes that create major environmental impacts should be re-
placed with more benign ones. This simple approach to impact reduction
can be very effective. As always, substitutes should be evaluated within
the life cycle framework to make sure that total impacts are reduced.
The effect of process changes on cost and performance must also be as-
sessed.
Although process design is
an integral part of product
development in this
manual, process
improvements can  be
pursued outside product
development.
    REDUCED MATERIAL INTENSIVENESS
       Many single-use items have steadily reduced their material content overtime, although this
    may not be the most effective method of reducing impacts while meeting societal needs. Evert
    so, material reduction can be beneficial.
       For example, a fast food franchise reduced material inputs and solid waste generation by
    decreasing paper napkin weight by 21%. Two store tests revealed nochange inlhe number of
    new napkins used compared to the old design.  Attempts to reduce the gage of plastfc straws,
    however, caused customer complaints. Redesigned straws were found to be too flirnsy and dfd
    not draw well with milkshakes [16].
                                            81

-------
Chapters
Processes that create
major environmental
impacts should be
replaced with more benign
ones. As always,
substitutes should be
evaluated within the life
cycle framework to make
sure that total impacts are
reduced.
    As a first step in reducing impacts, designers should be familiar
with the best available technology and equipment to accomplish a pro-
cessing step. Engineers and designers should also consider chemical,
biological, and mechanical alternatives. For example, it may be pos-
sible to replace a chemical process with a mechanical one that reduces
impacts.
    Process alternatives should be tested theoretically before they are
selected. For chemical processes, this includes determining the stoi-
chiometric balances of reactions to indicate the minimum ratio of by-
product to desired product.  Once this information is known, alternative
pathways that reduce waste generation or by-product toxicity can be ex-
plored.
    The US EPA has published several pollution prevention manuals
for specific industries.  Each manual reviews strategies for waste reduc-
tion and provides checklists. Many of these strategies focus on process
substitution.  Appendix A contains a list of these resources.
    More efficient use of process energy and materials are also part of a
process substitution strategy.
   PROCESS SUBSTITUTION (Note: none of these cases demonstrates proper life cycle design
   practices. Substitutes have to be carefully analyzed before the impacts of new and old systems can
   be compared.)                   .             '        -          -           * /'"•
       Copper sheeting for electronic products wa$ previously cleaned with ammonium persutfate,
   phosphoric acid, and sulfuric acid at one large American company's facility.  Hazardous Waste from
   this process required special handling and disposal. The solvent system was replaced by a
   mechanical process that cleaned sheeting with rotating brushes and pumice. The new process
   produces a nonhazardous residue that is disposed in a municipal solid waste landfill Thi$ process '
   substitution reduced hazardous waste generation by 40,000 'pounds per year and saved $15/000
   annually Fn raw material and disposal costs [17],                    -  -

       Several American electronics manufacturers have eliminated the use of ozone-depleting CFOs
   by substituting semi-aqueous terpene solvents to remove liquid flux and solder paste residues,
   Some of these manufacturers have surpassed the CFC elimination goals of the amended Montreal
   Protocol[18,19].                        '               r .       .,.-«',
                                                                                <
       A large American chemical and consumer products company switched from an organic-solvent-
   based system for coating pharmaceutical pills to a water-based system. The substitution was
   motivated by the need to comply with regulations limiting emissions of volatile organic compounds.
   To prevent the pills from becoming soggy, a new sprayer system was designed to precisely control
   the amount of coating dispensed. A dryer was also installed as an additional process step, Heating
   requirements increased when water-based coatings were used. For a total cost of $60,000, the
   new system saved $15,000 in solvent costs annually and avoided $180,000 in end-of-pipe air
   emission controls that would have been required if the old solvent system had been retained [20].
                                             82

-------
                                                                         Design Strategies
Process Energy Efficiency
    Process designers should always consider energy conservation. For
example, waste heat can be used to preheat process streams or do other
useful work. In addition, energy requirements for pumping may be re-
duced by using larger diameter pipes to cut down frictional losses.
    Energy use in buildings may also be reduced through more efficient
heating, cooling, ventilation, and lighting systems.  Architects should
design these improvements into new buildings or add them during reno-
vation. Building design is briefly discussed later in this section, under
facilities planning.
    In addition, significant amounts of energy can be saved by efficient
process equipment.  Both electric motors and refrigeration systems are
prime candidates for improvement. Electric motors alone consume 65 to
70 percent of industrial electricity and more than half the electricity gen-
erated in the US [21]. Operating a typical motor usually costs from 10
to 20 times the total capital costs of the motor per year.
    Equipment choices have a major influence on energy use. High-ef-
ficiency motors and adjustable-speed drives for pumps and fans are two
means of reducing energy consumption. Maintenance and proper sizing
of motors can also greatly reduce energy use.

Process Material  Efficiency
    Processes designed to use materials in the most efficient manner re-
duce both material inputs and waste outputs.  The same actions that re-
duce material use in products can also produce similar results in process
design.
   PROCESS MATERIAL EFFICIENCY                        ,                     "
       A large American electronics company designed a flux dispensing machine for use on printed
   circuit boards. This low solids ffuxer (LSF) produces virtually no excess residue when applying
   fluxes, thus eliminating a cleaning step with GFCs and simplifying operations. Performance of the
   boards produced with Ihe new LSF was maintained and the LSF helped this manufacturer reduce
   GFC emissions by over 5Q% [22],

       A large American consumer products firm operated a resin spraybooth that produced §00,000
   tons of overspray per year at one of Us manufacturing facilities  The overspray consisted of volatile
   organic compounds which required special incineration to meet emission requirements. Newpalnf
   equipment was installed to reduce this overspray, Total savings,; consisting largely of reduced resin
        , totalled $125,000 annually for an investment of $45,000 [23],
                                             83

-------
Chapters
 Well-designed process
 controls can prevent
 pollution and conserve
 resources.
Process Control

    Control systems are an integral part of process design. Well-de-
signed process controls can prevent pollution and conserve resources.
Three basic requirements of a control system are:

    • suppressing the influence of external disturbances
    • ensuring process stability
    • keeping process performance within environmental constraints

    Mathematical models for control can be developed on any scale
from the entire life cycle to a single piece of equipment. These models
can then be adjusted to meet environmental needs.
    Processing can generate a significant amount of waste when prod-
ucts do not fit specifications.  Setting appropriate tolerances improves
accuracy, thus directly reducing environmental impacts and costs. Sev-
eral methods can help keep processing defects and waste to a minimum
[24,25]. These statistical experiments reveal proper tolerances and al-
low much more effective process control.
    Other much less complex actions can also reduce impacts. Install-
ing control devices that switch off equipment not in use is one simple
method of conserving resources.

Improved Process Layout

    Planning the best arrangement of processes within a facility is a
complicated task. Layout is the key to achieving efficient operations
and reducing risks from accidents. The spacing of processing units de-
termines material and energy transfer distances and thus affects effi-
ciency.  Layout also influences the success of loss prevention programs
by affecting worker health and safety risks. The extent of damage from
industrial fires, explosions, and chemical releases also depends on spa-
tial arrangement. Layout also influences the nature and effectiveness of
emergency response.
    Pollution prevention activities do not eliminate the need for contin-
gency plans related to industrial accidents. Emergency response is a
critical factor in plant layout and process design.

Inventory Control and Material Handling

    Improved inventory control and material handling reduces waste
from oversupply, spills, or deterioration of old stocks.  This increases ef-
                                            84

-------
                                                                          Design Strategies
ficiency and prevents pollution. Proper inventory controls also ensure
that materials with limited shelf lives have not degraded. Processes can
thus run at peak efficiency while directly reducing waste caused by re-
processing.
    On-demand generation of hazardous materials needed for certain
processes is an example of innovative material handling that can reduce
impacts.
    Storage facilities are also an important element of inventory and
handling systems.  These facilities must be properly designed to ensure
safe containment of materials. They should also provide adequate ca-
pacity for current and projected needs.

Facilities Planning

    Environmental strategies for product design can also be applied to
facilities and equipment. Extending the useful life of facilities and pro-
cesses by making them appropriately durable or adaptable is one ex-
ample.  Flexible manufacturing can be a very effective life extension
strategy for facilities and equipment. Resource conservation in facility
design can also help reduce impacts.
    Several sources of information are available on the environmental
aspects of building and lighting design.  The American Institute of Ar-
chitects offers the  Environmental Resource Guide Subscription [27].


    INVENTORY CONTROL AND MATERIAL HANDLING
       A large" American electronics firm developed an on-demand generation system for producing
    essential toxic ehemicals'for which no substitute exists. Less harmful precursors are reacted to form
    the toxic chemical for immediate consumption, the company now produces arsine, an acutely toxic
    chemical essential for semi-conductor production, as it is needed.  This avoids the transport of
    arsine^ to manufacturing sites in compressed cylinders and the use of specially designed
    containment facilities to store the arsine. The company no longer must own 3 special storage
    facilities which cost $1 million each to build and maintain {26}.

      - Ordering the proper amount of materials' required'for a task or process step can significant^
    reduce waste, tn 1985, a National Laboratory Instituted a program that requires ordering only the
    amount of solvent required for a Job. Previously, solvents could only be allocated in 55 galfon
    drums. Now, smaller quantities are available resulting in reduced use, spillage, and evappratws
    loss. Approximately 60,000 gallons of solvent were saved at the lab through this method in 1989,
                                                                                   ''
        More than a ton of PBB fire retardant was accidentally substituted for magnesium oxide animal
    feed supplement in Michigan as a result of improper material handling and inventory control.
    Thousands of animals were contaminated and either died or had to be destroyed, causing stgnjffcartf
    economic losses. Contaminated carcasses also required special landfills for burial*
                                              85

-------
Chapters
                           This quarterly publication covers energy efficiency, indoor air quality,
                           and natural resource issues.  The Environmental Resource Guide also
                           analyses common construction materials. When possible, findings are
                           based on life cycle assessments.  The focus is on energy use, toxic emis-
                           sions, resource management after retirement, and waste.
                               Government can also aid in facilities planning. For example,
                           through its Green Lights program, the EPA helps companies conserve
                           energy. Participants are recruited and educated about new lighting tech-
                           niques that save money and reduce impacts by increasing efficiency.
                               In addition to saving resources, buildings should be designed to re-
                           duce health and safety risks. Such factors as structural integrity, explo-
                           sion venting, adequate normal ventilation, fire walls, emergency exits,
                           and proper drainage help reduce risks to human health and safety. At a
                           minimum, a building must satisfy the National Building Code and Na-
                           tional Electrical Code.
                               Geographic location is also an issue in facilities planning. When sit-
                           ing a new building, it is important to determine whether adequate utili-
                           ties, transportation, infrastructure, and emergency response are available.
                           The possibility of natural disturbances such as earthquake and floods
                           should also be considered. These events can damage facilities and cause
                           releases that are a risk to nearby residents.  In addition, location is the
                           key to determining community risks from accidents or other human er-
                           rors within the facility.
                               Finally, available resources and the impacts of using them help de-
                           termine facility jlocation.  For example, industries requiring large quanti-
                           ties of process water should not be sited in drought-stricken regions.

                           Treatment and Disposal

                               After strategies for pollution prevention and waste minimization
                           have been  exhausted, process residuals must be treated and disposed.
                           Environmental impacts  and health risks can still be reduced at this stage.
                               Treatment and disposal will not be discussed here. Development
                           teams exploring this vital topic can consult a variety of readily available
                           textbooks.     !
                                             86

-------
                                                                        Design Strategies
5.7 EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTION

    Both transportation and packaging are required to transfer goods be-
tween locations.  A life cycle design project benefits from distribution
systems that are as efficient as possible.

Transportation

    Life cycle impacts caused by transportation can be reduced by sev-
eral means.  Approaches that can be used by designers include:

    • Choose an energy-efficient mode
    • Reduce air pollutant emissions from transportation
    • Maximize vehicle capacity where appropriate
    • Backhaul materials
    • Ensure proper containment of hazardous materials
    • Choose routes carefully to reduce potential exposure from spills
      and explosions

    Trade-offs between various modes of transportation will be neces-
sary.  Transportation efficiencies are shown in box 5-A. Time and cost
considerations, as well as convenience and access, play a major role in
                                A life cycle design project
                               benefits from distribution
                               systems that are as
                               efficient as possible.
      BOX 5-A. TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCIES

                MODE               Bru/ TON-MILE
           Waterborne
           Class 1 Railroad
           All Pipelines1
             Crude oil pipeline
           Truck  '
           Air2
       365
       465
       886
       259
2671-3460
     18809
      1Average figure; ranges from 236 Btu/ton mile for petroleum to
       approximately 2550 Btu/ton mile for coal slurry and natural
       gas.
      2AII-cargo aircraft only. Belly freight carried on passenger
       airlines is considered "free" because energy used to transport
       it is credited to passengers.  Thus, the efficiency figure for all
       air freight is a misleading 9548 Btu/ton-mile.
      Source: [28, 29]	
                                             87

-------
Chapters
 To avoid unnecessary
 impacts, products and
 packaging should be
 designed to compliment
 each other.
choosing the best transportation. When selecting a transportation sys-
tem, designers should also consider infrastructure requirements and their
potential impacts.

Packaging ,
              i
    Packaging must contain and protect goods during transport and han-
dling to prevent damage. Regardless of how well-designed an item
might be, damage during distribution and handling may cause it to be
discarded before use. To avoid such waste, products and packaging
should be designed to compliment each other.
    The concurrent practices of life cycle design are particularly effec-
tive in reducing impacts from packaging. As a first step, products
should be designed to withstand both shock and vibration.  When cush-
ioned packaging is required, members of the development team need to
collaborate to ensure that cushioning does not amplify vibrations and
thus damage critical parts [30]. Cooperation between design specialities
can greatly reduce such product damage.
    The following strategies may be used to design packaging within
the life cycle framework.  Most of these strategies also result in signifi-
cant cost savings.

      Packaging Reduction
        • elimination: distribute appropriate products onpackaged
        • reusable packaging
        • product modifications
        • material reduction
      Material {Substitution
       -• recycled materials
        • degradable materials         '

 Packaging Reduction
    Shipping items without packaging is the simplest approach to im-
pact reduction. Jn the past, many consumer products such as screwdriv-
ers, fasteners, and other items were offered unpackaged.  They can still
be hung on hooks or placed in bins  that provide proper containment
while allowing customer access. This method of merchandising avoids
unnecessary plastic wrapping, paperboard, and composite materials.
Wholesale packaging can also be eliminated. For example, furniture
manufacturers cjommonly ship furniture uncartoned. Uncartoned furni-
ture is protected with blankets that are returned after delivery to the dis-
tribution center.
                                            88

-------
                                                                         Design Strategies
    Reusable packaging systems are also an attractive design option.
Wholesale items that require packaging are commonly shipped in reus-
able containers.  Tanks of all sizes, wire baskets, wooden shooks, and
plastic boxes are frequently used for this purpose.
    Necessary design elements for most reusable packaging systems in-
clude:

    • collection or return infrastructure
    • procedures for inspecting items for defects or contamination
    • repair, cleaning and refurbishing capabilities
    • storage and handling systems

    Unless such measures are in place or planned, packaging may be
discarded rather than reused. Manufacturers and distributors cannot re-
use packaging unless infrastructure is in place to collect, return, inspect,
and restore packaging for another service. Producers can reduce these
infrastructure needs by offering their product in bulk. Some system will
still be required for reusable wholesale packaging, but it should be much
less complex than that needed to handle consumer packaging. When
products are sold in bulk, customers control all phases of reuse for their
own packaging.
    Even so, waste generation and other environmental impacts are only
reduced when customers reuse their container several times. Customers
who use new packaging for each bulk purchase generally consume more
packaging than customers who buy prepackaged products. This is par-
ticularly true of items distributed in single-use bulk packaging [31].
    Product modification is another approach to packaging reduction.
Sturdy products require  less packaging and may also prove more  robust
in service. Depending on the delivery  system, some products  may safely
be shipped without packaging of any kind. Even when products require
primary and secondary packaging to ensure their integrity during deliv-
ery, product modifications may decrease packaging needs. Designers
can further reduce the amount of packaging used by avoiding  unusual
product features or shapes that are difficult to protect.
    Reformulation is another type of product modification that may be
possible for certain items. Products that contain ingredients in diluted
form may be distributed as concentrates. In some cases, customers can
simply use concentrates in reduced quantities. A larger, reusable con-
tainer may also be sold in conjunction with concentrates. This allows
customers to dilute the product as appropriate. Examples of product
concentrates include frozen juice concentrates, and concentrated ver-
sions of liquid and powdereddetergent.
Product modification is
one approach to
packaging reduction.
Sturdy products require
less packaging and may
also prove more robust in
service.
                                              89

-------
Chapters
                                          i
                               Material reduction may also be pursued in packaging design.  Many
                           packaging designers have already managed to reduce material use while
                           maintaining perfprmance. Reduced thickness of corrugated containers
                           (board grade redaction) provides one example. In addition, aluminum,
                           glass, plastic, an^ steel containers have continually been redesigned to
                           require less material for delivering the same volume of product

                           Material Substitution
                               As discussed, material substitution can reduce impacts in other ar-
                           eas of design. One common example of this strategy in packaging is the
                           substitution of more benign printing inks and pigments for those con-
                           taining toxic heavy metals or solvents.  The less harmful inks are usually
                           just as effective for labels and graphic designs. When some properties
                           depend on toxic constituents, designers can develop new images that are
                           compatible with sounder pigments, inks, and solvents.
                               Whenever possible, designers can create packaging with a high re-
                           cycled content. Many public and private recycling programs currently
                           focus on collecting packaging. As a direct consequence, firms are being
                           encouraged to increase the recycled content of their packaging.
                               However, using recycled material in packaging design cannot be
                           thought of as a complete strategy in itself.  Opportunities for material re-
                           duction and packaging reduction or elimination should still be investi-
                           gated. Recycling and recycled materials were discussed in more detail
                           earlier in this chapter.
                               Degradable materials are capable of being broken down by biologi-
                           cal or chemical processes, or exposure to sunlight. At first glance, pack-
                           age designs based on degradable material appear to be an attractive
                           solution to the mounting problem of waste disposal. But the lack of
                           sunlight, oxygen, and water in modern landfills severely inhibits degra-
                           dation.
                               Degradable materials thus provide only limited benefits in packag-
                           ing that will be properly disposed. This may change if composting of
                           municipal waste becomes more widespread.
                               In any event, degradability is a desirable trait for litter deposited in
                           aesthetically pleasing natural areas. In particular, polymers or other ma-
                           terials that are noirmally resistant to decay are less of a nuisance  if they
                           can be formulated to quickly break down.  Degradable materials may
                           also benefit some aquatic species that encounter Utter. Various mam-
                           mals, birds, and f^sh can die from entrapment in such items as six-pack
                           rings and plastic sacks. Even so, it may be difficult to determine
                           whether degradable packaging is an asset, or just encourages irrespon-
                           sible behavior.   !
                                             90

-------
                                                                       Design Strategies
    Previously resistant materials that are now designed to decay may
also cause unanticipated problems.  Degradable polymers can impede re-
cycling efforts by acting as a contaminant in recovered materials. Ques-
tions have also been raised about the environmental impacts of degraded
polymers. Degradation can liberate dyes, fillers, and other potentially
toxic constituents from a material that was previously inert.

5.8 IMPROVED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

    Most product and process design strategies apply to management
activities. For example, life extension should be considered when pur-
chasing business equipment.  Some additional strategies related to man-
agement and information provision follow.

Office Management

    Designing new business procedures and improving existing methods
also plays a role in reducing environmental impacts. Business manage-
ment strategies apply to both  manufacturing and service activities. Ex-
amples of strategies for impact reduction in this area include:

     • Specify double-sided photocopying
     • Use single spacing for  final copies
     • Reduce paper requirements by circulating memos and articles
      with a routing list
     • Use backs of single-sided copies for note and memo pads.
     • Order envelopes without'cellophane or plastic window panes
     • Use FAX stickers rather than full transmission cover sheets
     • Recycle office paper, containers, and all other suitable materials
     • Purchase products made with recycled  materials
     • Reuse toner and ribbon cartridges for printers
     • Use electronic and voice mail
     • Use computer networks for sending documents
     • Turn off electronic equipment when not in use
     • Keep confidential materials in networks, or shred old hard copies
      for recycling                           ,
     • Retrofit buildings with high-efficiency climate control and light-
      ing systems
     • Illuminate only that space currently in use
Several brands of laser
printers print a title sheet
by default every time the
machine is turned on.
Such systems waste
paper and encourage
owners to leave machines
on for extended periods of
time, consuming excess
electricity.  Default printing
can be permanently turned
off via a software switch,
thus substantially reducing
paper waste.
                                            91

-------
Chapters
 A large American
 electronics company has
 developed a Supplier
 Environmental Evaluation
 Questionnaire to ensure
 that suppliers comply with
 laws and regulations and
 manage their businesses
 in an environmentally
 sound manner.
Phase Out High Impact Products

    Discontinuing the manufacture and sale of wasteful or harmful
products is the most direct action a corporation can take to eliminate life
cycle impacts. Products may be discontinued through recall, gradual
phase out (sunsetting), or ceasing production immediately.

Choose Environmentally Responsible Suppliers or
Contractors
               i
    Suppliers anjd contractors should be carefully selected to reduce up-
stream environmental consequences. This requires life cycle impact
data on raw materials and parts. However, critical data is usually not
readily available. So decisions must be based on material safety data
sheets, TRI data, and other environmental records requested from the
supplier or contractor.

Information  Provision

    Information transfer accompanies the flow of materials and energy
throughout the life cycle of a product. Proper information encourages
the use of materials and products with reduced environmental impacts
and health risks.

Labeling
Identify Ingredients
    Materials flowing through the product system change significantly
through life cycle stages.  Complex mixing, chemical reactions, and
other processes change material composition and form. Labels that
identify materials and provide concentrations of each constituent in a
product are important for health and safety reasons.
                               •
Instructions and. Warnings
    Users of goods and services, and processes operators need clear and
detailed guidance about proper procedures. Clear instructions can in-
crease performance and help reduce resource use through greater effi-
ciency. Products that are used properly can last longer and provide
more satisfaction to the user. Well-operated processes and products can
also reduce the likelihood of accidents. Significant environmental im-
pacts may result from accidental releases or misuse.
                                            92

-------
                                                                         Design Strategies
General Information
    Labels can be a primary means of informing customers about the
environmental attributes of a product. Some third party environmental
label programs are outlined in Appendix E. Federal Trade Commission
guidelines and other issues that affect this aspect of labeling are dis-
cussed next.                                                  *

Advertising
Environmental Claims                                     .
    Many manufacturers take advantage of public concern about envi-
ronmental issues by launching advertising campaigns that confuse or
mislead. Environmental claims should not be made unless they are spe-
cific, substantive, and supported by reliable scientific evidence [32].
    For example, many products are labeled "recyclable", even though
suitable collection and processing systems are not widely available, and
no substantial markets exist for the recovered material.
    The FTC issued guidelines in 1992 for environmental advertising
and labeling. These guidelines can help reduce consumer confusion and
prevent the false and misleading use of terms such as recyclable, de-
gradable, and environmentally friendly [33].
    Advertisers must also be cautious about comparative claims. Some
of these claims are based on life cycle analyses done by consulting
firms.   Results from these studies may be difficult to interpret because
methods vary and details are rarely publicly disclosed.  In addition, most
studies seem to favor the client, so questions may be raised about objec-
tivity.
                                            93

-------
Chapters
   ADVERTISING CLAIMS,                    \
   The following examples are quoted from theiFTC's
   General environmental claims are djfffcuft to 'interpret In many cases, such claims may convey that
   the product or package has spectffcand far-reaching environmental benefits*
       Exampfe: A pUmp spray product is labeled "environmentally safe". Most of its ingredients are
   volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that may cause smog and form low-level ozone. This claim fs
   deceptive, because without further explanation, consumers are" likely to believe that making and
   using the product will not cause portion or other^arm to the environment
                            'f'-            i-    * *  f        .         * ^
   Comparative marketing daims should make the basis for comparison clear. Advertisers should be
   able to substantiate th& comparison,       "     '         -  -      „ „,  ,,1  '  ,
       Example: A manufacturer claims "our plastic diaper liner has the most recycled content". The
   diaper does have more recycled content, calculated as a percentage of weight, than any other on the
   market. Provided this content is significant, and the difference foetween^the product and those of
   competitors is also significant arid can be ver/fied,_the clai'mfs not deceptive,
                      •,      •"         j.    '•       J     "~ f       \*,*. -f^ '     ""    f
   OthefBtarfipfes*.                   '"-j  "                     '*  -*   '     '-••""'"
      A product label claims, This product is ^5% less damaging to the ozone layer than past
   formulations that contained CFCs",  The manufacturer substituted HCFCs for CFC-12, and'bas valid
   scientific evidence that this will result Jn 95% bss oione depletion-  This ciaim i& not likety to be
   deceptive.                          *   I               sj      s -;   ^ ^  ",  . ,

      A container states Definable x times", ~T^e manufacturer is Capable of refilling containers and
   can show that they will withstand refill at least x times. However, this claim is deceptive because   s
   there is no means of collecting and returning ^containers to the manufacturer.
                                          I'*•" •• '  *i-  ., «i        v«^,  ,,,    '"•••: ^'
   FTCActhns                    ,        [     •              ,    "  -   „<,"   "(,,„„,  ""'  -
      In 1992, an international company settled FTC claims that it  made unsubstantiated claims about
   hs disposable diapers. The diapers were claimed to be biodegradable a'hd offer significant
   environmental benefit compared to similar products when disposed }n a landfill
                                      ' '"-^       ,      o^"*      -'  ..''•*             "  ,
      In 199t, an American cosrnetjcs company settled FTC charges that ft made fafse and
   Unsubstantiated claims by marketing cosmetics as "ozone safe" and "ozone friendly"" when the
   products contained a Class t ozone-depleting'substance.              '        ,-',<•-''
                                             94

-------
                                                                                Design Strategies
References
   1.  Moss,MarvinA. 1985. Designing For Minimal Maintenance Expense. New
        York: Marcel Dekker.
   2.  Berlin, M. 1989. Swiss Case-Studies of Product Durability Strategy. Verslag
        van het VVM/KIRVIT/RMNO Symposium, 7 September, 42-50.
   3.  Motorola. 1991. Centracom Series. Schaumberg, IL: Motorola Inc. RC-13-9.
   4.  Wheeler, Roy. 1991. Design For Reliability Reshapes Designing. Electronic
        Design 39 (2): 121-132.
   5.  Lund, Robert T. 1984. Remanufacturing. Technology Review 87:18-23+.
   6.  Haynsworth, H. C., and R. Tim Lyons. 1987. Remanufacturing by Design,
        the Missing Link. Productivity and Inventory Management 28:24-29.
   7.  Kirkland, Carl. 1986. Remanufacturing vs Buying New: One Molder's Com-
        parison. Plastics Technology 32 (10): 91-93.
   8.  Kusz, John Paul. 1990. Environmental Integrity and Economic Viability.
        Journal of Industrial Design Society of America Summer: 25-27,
   9.  Bell, Carole O., and Erica Guttman. 1990. Design For Disposal. Journal of
        Industrial Design Society of America Summer: 8-10.
 10.  Popular Science. 1992. Best of What's New. Popular Science 241(6): 65-88.
 11.  USEPA. 1991. Guidance For the Use of the Terms "Recycled" and "Recy-
        clable" and the Recycling Emblem in Environmental Marketing Claims.
        Federal Register 56 (191): 49992-50000.
 12.  	. 1990. Characterization of Solid Waste in the United States: 1990 Up-
        date, US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Wash-
        ington, DC EPA 530-SW-90-042A.
 13.  Sellers, V. R., and J. D. Sellers. 1989.  Comparative Energy and Environ-
        mental Impacts For Soft Drink Delivery Systems, Franklin Associates,
        Prairie Village, KS.
 14.  US EPA. 1991. Pollution Prevention 1991: Progress on Reducing Industrial
       Pollutants, US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Pre-
       vention, Washington, DC EPA 21P-3003.
 15.  1990. Tough Air-Quality Goals Spur Quest For Transportation Fuel
       Changes. Oil and Gas Journal 88 (23): 33-34+.
 16.  Waste Reduction Task Force. 1991. Final Report, Environmental Defense
       Fund and McDonald's Corporation.
 17.  Hunter, J. S., and D. M. Benforado. 1987. Life Cycle Approach to Effective
       Waste Minimization. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association 37
       (10): 1206-1210.
 18.  Suppelsa, A. B., and H. F. Liebman. 1991. Successful Implementation of
       Closed Loop Semi-Aqueous Cleaning, Motorola, Inc., Plantation, FL.
 19.  Humblett, Gregory W., and Glenn W. Larsson. 1989. TerpenelAqueous
       Cleaning, CalComp, Hudson, NH.
 20.  Binger, Robert P. 1988. Pollution Prevention Plus. Pollution Engineering 20:
       84-89.
 21.  Fickett, Arnold P., Clark W. Ceilings, and Amory B. Lovins. 1990.  Efficient
       Use of Electricity. Scientific American 263 (3): 65-74.
                                                95

-------
Chapters
                               22. Guth, Leslie A. 1990. Applicability of Low Solids Flux, AT&T Bell Labs,
                                     Princeton, NJ.
                               23. Zosel, Thomas W. 1990. How 3M Makes Pollution Prevention Pay Big Divi-
                                     dends. Pollution Prevention Review Winter: 67-72.
                               24. Bhote, Keki R. 1991. World Class Quality: Using Experiments to Make it
                                     Happen. New York: American Management Association.
                               25. Taguchi, Genichi. 1987. Systems of Experimental Design: Engineering
                                     Methods to Optimize Quality and Minimize Cost. Dearborn, MI: American
                                     Supplier Institute.
                               26. Ember, Lois R. 1991. Strategies For Reducing Pollution at the Source Are
                                     Gaining Ground. Chemical and Engineering News 69 (27): 7-16.
                               27. AIA. 1992.\Environmental Resources Guide Subscription, American Insti-
                                     tute of Architects, Washington, DC. (available by subscription, published
                                     quarterly)
                               28. Davis, Stacy C., and Patricia S. Hu. 1991. Transportation Energy Data
                                     Book: Edition 11, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
                                     ORNL-6<>49.
                               29. Minz, M. M., and A. D. Vyas. 1991. Forecast ofTransportation Energy De-
                                     mand Through the Year 2010, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.
                               30. Bresk, Frank C. 1992. Using a Transport Laboratory to Design Intelligent
                                     Packaging for Distribution. World Packaging Conference, Sevilla, Espana,
                                     27 January 1992, Lansinont Corporation, Monterey, CA.
                               31. Keoleian, Gregory, and Dan Menerey. 1992. Packaging and Process Im-
                                     provements: Three Source Reduction Case Studies. Journal of Environ-
                                     mental Systems 21 (1): 21-37.
                               32. Attorneys General Task Force. 1991. The GreenReport: Findings and Pre-
                                     liminary Recommendations for Responsible Environmental Advertising, St.
                                     Paul,MN,.
                               33. FTC. 1992.1 Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims, Federal
                                     Trade Commission, Washington, DC.
                                                  96

-------
                                                         Chapter 6
             Environmental AnalysisTools
                                                  Elements of Design
                                                           Analysis

                                                   Inventory Analysis

                                                  Impact Assessment
                         Energy
 ", Process Materials",
 v Reagents, Solvents,
- & Catalysts (inducting
 , reuse & recycle from
 "another stage)
             Product Material
             Inputs (includrng
             reuse & recycle
             front another stage}
                            Single Stage or Unjt
                                Operation
                Reuse/Recycle
J
Fugitive &
Untreated
Waste
                                                l
                                               Reuse/Recycle
               Primary Product
               Useful Co-product
                                            Waste
                                         Treatment&
                                        <, Disposal

-------
Chapters
          ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS TOOLS

                            Information must be gathered and analyzed from the beginning of a
                        development project Proper tools for both these tasks allow effective
                        evaluation of design choices.
                            Only a brief outline of environmental analysis tools is presented
                        here. More detailed guidance can be found in the references at the end
                        of this chapter [1- 7] and in Appendix A.

                        6.1 ELEMENTS OF DESIGN ANALYSIS

                            Environmental analysis plays a key role in:

                            • needs analysis
                            • benchmarking
                            • design evaluation

                        Strategic planning and product labeling also benefit from environmental
                        analysis.      |
                            Before selecting the proper tools and beginning analysis, objectives
                        should be clearly defined.  As part of this process, development teams
                        must also decide; who will participate in the analysis and whether out-
                        side experts are needed.
                            Once these basic decisions have been made, analysis tools are ap-
                        plied to the first ;task of a design project, which is exploring customer
                        needs. During this phase, preliminary environmental analysis may iden-
                        tify potential problem areas that warrant further attention or uncover
                        conflicts between  perceived need and environmental impacts. If these
                        conflicts are severe, the design team may decide to redefine or abandon
                        the project.
                            As a design [project progresses, increasingly detailed information
                        must be  develop^ for benchmarking. Analysis tools are then used to
                        evaluate design alternatives based on stated requirements. Finally, dur-
                        ing implementation, analysis tools help assess environmental perfor-
                        mance and target needed improvements.
                            To receive full benefits from environmental analysis, businesses
                        should develop tools suited to their own needs. This does not necessar-
                        ily require major investment. Firms can realize both cost and decision-
                                         98

-------
                                                             Environmental Analysis Tools
 making benefits from constructing a single data collection system for
 both internal analysis and external reporting.
    Environmental analysis methods discussed in this chapter are based
 on life cycle analysis. A Society of Environmental Toxicology and
 Chemistry (SETAC) workshop held on 18 August 1990, ascribed three
 elements to life cycle assessment: inventory analysis, impact assessment,
 and improvement analysis [4].
    Unfortunately, many aspects of life cycle assessment are still in their
 infancy. Life cycle inventories have been performed for over twenty
 years, but full impact analyses have not yet been done.
    Improvement analyses recommend specific actions that target prior-
 ity impacts. Improvements take place within the life cycle framework,
 so upstream and downstream consequences are addressed. However, the
 effect of these actions on other design requirements is usually not em-
 phasized in improvement analysis.  Because improvement analyses de-
 pend on both inventory and impact assessments, this aspect of life cycle
 assessment has also not been fully explored.
    Continuous improvement is an integral part of life cycle design, so
 environmental analysis in this manualincludes only the following two
 components:

    • Inventory analysis
    • Impact analysis

    An inventory analysis identifies and quantifies inputs and outputs.
 In life cycle design, this inventory tracks materials, energy, and waste
 through each product system.
    Without further assessment, data gathered during the inventory
 analysis may be misunderstood.  For this reason, an impact analysis is re-
 quired to interpret inventory data.  Impact analyses identify the main im-
pacts associated with a product.  Whenever possible, impacts are then
characterized so different designs can be compared. To fully understand
an impact, the pathways, fate, and effects of residuals must be tracked;
the environmental mobility of residuals in various media, their
bioaccumulation potential, and their toxicity are all used to determine
impact.
    Life cycle design should not be confused with life cycle assessment.
Rather than concentrating on only analytical tasks, life cycle design pro-
vides a framework and guidelines for integrating environmental require-
ments into product development.  Life cycle assessment may improve
environmental evaluation, but all environmental, performance, cost, cul-
tural, and legal requirements must still be balanced in successful prod-
ucts.
 The two major
 environmental analysis
 tools used in life cycle
 design are:
  • inventory analysis
  • impact assessment
Product system inputs and
outputs are tracked
through an inventory
analysis. Interpreting this
inventory requires an
impact analysis
Life cycle design should
not be confused with life
cycle assessment.
Analysis is only one
function of design.
                                            99

-------
Chapters
A full life cycle assessment
may not be essential for all
design activities. Scope
can vary from complete
quantification of all inputs,
outputs, and their impacts
to a qualitative description
of inventories and impacts.
The development team will
ideally base design and
analysis on the full life
cycle. Choice of more
limited system boundaries
should be justified.
 In some cases, hems that
 account for less than 1 % of
 total inputs or outputs can
 be ignored. However, this
 1% rule can lead to an
 inaccurate impact analysis
 when applied to highly
 toxic trace releases.
Scope of the Analysis

    Before development teams begin gathering data for an environmen-
tal analysis, the scope of analysis should be agreed on. As previously
discussed, the scope of environmental analysis varies for different de-
sign applications.  A full life cycle assessment is not essential for all de-
sign activities; analysis can vary from complete quantification of all
inputs, outputs, and their impacts to a simple verbal description of in-
ventories and impacts. Scope for a particular purpose is determined by
choice of system [boundaries and depth of analysis.

System Boundaries
    Boundaries tor environmental analysis are provisionally set during
the needs analysis when project objectives are defined. Boundaries used
in environmental analysis should be consistent with those chosen for de-
sign.  Ideally the; development team will base design and analysis on the
full life cycle system.
    The development team may in some cases decide to restrict system
boundaries. Instead of a full life cycle system, boundaries may be re-
stricted to a partial life cycle or even an individual life cycle stage. In
addition, boundaries may be further narrowed by limiting the number of
product system components (product, process, distribution, manage-
ment). System boundaries, however, should  not be arbitrarily reduced
without justification or proper testing of assumptions.
    System boundaries can be narrowed to streamline analysis. For ex-
ample, if the premanufacturing impacts for two competing designs are
the same, the design team may decide to restrict the analyses to life
cycle stages from manufacturing and use to the ultimate fate of the re-
siduals.
    Care must be exercised when basing a project on narrow analysis.
An analysis limited to  a single stage does not account for impacts that
are produced upstream or downstream from the stage. This analysis
may show a reduction  in impacts for the stage under investigation, but
the total life cycje impacts associated with the product system may have
increased.  Opportunities for improvement are also limited by the scope
of the analysis.
    Rules for testing which activities to include within system bound-
aries have been proposed, but there are many exceptions to these rules.
One rule of thumb suggests neglecting items that account for less than
1% of total inputs or outputs. This is reasonable in most cases. How-
                                             100

-------
                                                             Environmental Analysis Tools
ever, blindly following the 1% rule can create later problems. Ignoring
highly toxic trace releases leads to an inaccurate impact analysis.

Depth of Analysis
    After life cycle endpoints are decided, the project team should de-
fine how analysis will proceed. Depth of analysis determines how far
back indirect inputs and outputs will be traced. Facility and equipment
form the first level of indirect inputs for analysis.  Materials, energy, and
labor required for their production are included in this first level.  Facili-
ties and equipment have traditionally been neglected in life cycle assess-
ments, because they often make up less than 5% of all process inputs
and outputs [8].  Under these circumstances, inventories from capital
plant can be less than 1% of life cycle totals.  However exceptions can
occur. Drill bits used for extracting oil can account for 25% of total en-
ergy use in this stage [8].
    Analysis may also proceed to the next level.  This second level ac-
counts for the  facilities and equipment needed to produce items on the
first level.  A second level analysis would include inputs and outputs as-
sociated with  machine tools and facilities for manufacturing such items
as process pumps.  Under normal circumstances, these effects are even
less significant than first level items. Contributions from successive lay-
ers quickly become negligible. For this reason, proceeding to the second
level or beyond in  analysis is of more theoretical than practical interest.
    The following factors should also be considered when determining
scope:

    •Basis
    • Temporal Boundaries (Time scale)
    • Spatial Boundaries (Geographic)

 Basis
    Selecting the proper basis  for analysis allows accurate comparison
of alternative designs. In general, the basis for analysis should be
equivalent use, defined as the delivery of equal amounts of product or
service. Equal use estimates can be based on number, volume, weight,
or distance. For example, a worthwhile comparison of single-use and
reusable diapers should be based on the number of diapers needed to
care for an infant over a certain time period.  Similarly, toothpaste con-
 tainers can best be compared on the basis of an equal number of
brushings. Because  delivery efficiencies or amounts used may vary be-
 tween two competing containers such as tubes and pumps, total volume
 of the dispenser may not be a useful basis for analysis.
Facilities and equipment
have traditionally been
neglected in life cycle
assessments, because
they often make up less
than 5% of all process
inputs and outputs.
However exceptions can
occur.  Drill  bits used for
extracting oil can account
for 25% of total energy use
in this stage
 In general, the basis for
 analysis should be
 equivalent use. The
 delivery of equal amounts
 of product or service is the
 best basis for comparing
 designs.
                                             101

-------
Chapters
 The time frame or
 conditions under which
 data were gathered should
 be clearly Identified.
The same activity can
have quite different
impacts in different places.
For example, water use in
arid regions has a greater
resource depletion impact
than in areas where water
is abundant.
    It may hot always be obvious how patterns of use can be normal-
ized between several alternatives, so some investigation may be re-
quired. For exarnple, basing a comparison of liquid and powdered
laundry detergent on weight or volume would be pointless.  Analysis in
this case should be based on how much of each type of detergent is re-
quired to wash an equivalent number of identical loads.

Temporal Boundaries
    The time frame or conditions under which data were gathered
should be clearly identified. Past statistics may not reflect current prac-
tice, so it is best [to base analysis on the most recent information.  In ad-
dition, results from the start-up or shut-down of an industrial process
usually vary from those under normal operation. For this reason, the de-
sign team may choose to collect data that reflects average system perfor-
mance. However, impacts such as accidental releases or residuals from
abnormal operating conditions also affect analysis and should not be ex-
cluded simply because they are irregular. Whenever possible, it is use-
ful to report worst- and best-case scenarios.

Spatial Boundaries
    The same activity can have quite different impacts in different
places. For example, water use in arid regions has a greater resource
depletion impact than in areas where water is abundant. The location of
life cycle stages'affects environmental impacts in other ways. Energy
use and related impacts for distribution will be lower for local systems
than widely separated ones.
    Once  scope'has been clearly defined, both inventory and impact
analysis can then proceed.

6.2 INVENTORY ANALYSIS

    A full inventory analysis consists of two main tasks:

    • Identifying the elements in each material and energy input and
      output stream
    • Quantifying these inputs and outputs

In this section, procedures for an inventory analysis are outlined. For
more detailed guidance, see Life Cycle Assessment: Inventory Guide-
lines and Principles [7].
                                            102

-------
                                                          Environmental Analysis Tools
 Identifying Streams and Constituents
     A flow diagram helps identify important inputs, outputs, and trans-
 formations of the product system. Figure 6-1 is an example of a limited
 flow diagram that identifies general processing steps and material and
 energy streams. This diagram lists only a few of the residuals created in
 detergent production. Many more residuals would have to be noted and
 measured for a useful inventory analysis.
Figure 6-1. Limited Life Cycle Flow Diagram for Hypothetical Detergent Product System
                                         103

-------
Chapters
                               To fully track inputs and outputs, complex systems have to be de-
                           composed into a [series of subsystems that reveal more detail.  Using
                           templates makes; data gathering more efficient In life cycle design, it
                           may be best to use a different template for each product system compo-
                           nent.  Within each component, further distinctions can then be made.
                           Figure 6-2 demonstrates the type of diagram that can help development
                           teams gather moire specific inventories at the single stage or substage
                           level.

                           Quantification

                               Once the inputs and outputs associated with each activity are de-
                           scribed, they can be measured. Fust, development teams note the
                           amount and concentration of inputs entering the system. Then, useful
                           outputs, which include products and co-products, are measured. Finally,
                           the team measures residuals leaving the system as releases to air, water,
                           and land.
                               Inputs and outputs should not be grouped for reporting unless their
                           impacts are precisely the same. For example,  a single number should
                           not be used to report air emissions of sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, and
                                                            Process Materials,
                                                            Reagents, Solvents,
                                                            & Catalysts (Including
                                                            reuse & recycle from
                                                 Energy      another stage)
                                 Product Material
                                 Inputs (Including
                                 reuse & recycle
                                 from another stage)
                                                  i	t
                                                    Single Stage or Unit
                                                         Operation
                                    Reuse/Recycle
                                                  J
Fugitive &
Untreated
Waste
                                                                             Reuse/Recycle
                    Primary Product
                    	^-
                    Useful Co-product
Waste
                                                                      Treatment &
                                                                      Disposal
                              Figure 6-2. Single Stage Flow Diagram
                                             104

-------
                                                             Environmental Analysis Tools
benzene. Each of these three gases produces a very different impact.
Reporting that an activity produced x pounds of all three lumped to-
gether would be meaningless. However, outputs that have the same gen-
eral effect can be grouped. Emissions of greenhouse gases can be
reported as a single figure in pounds of carbon dioxide equivalents.
    Other types of information that assist an impact analysis should also
be compiled during the inventory analysis.  Items that may be required
for an impact analysis include physical properties such as temperature,
pressure, and density. For example, the effect of an effluent stream dis-
charged to surface water may depend on temperature. Also, the extent
of physical disturbance helps determine the impact of raw material ac-
quisition.

Assumptions
    Assumptions used in analysis should be clearly documented. The
significance of these assumptions should also be tested. Sensitivity
analyses can reveal how changing assumptions affect results. This al-
lows development teams to identify critical assumptions, and make sure
they reflect reality.

Allocation of Inputs and Outputs
    Product systems do not exist in isolation.  Many complex processes
cut across multiple product system boundaries. Allocation problems
usually occur in processes with multiple useful outputs. In such cases,
design teams should follow logical procedures for assigning inventories
to individual products. When a process produces several outputs with
economic value, allocation may be based on [2]:

    • The total weight of the main product relative to the co-products
    • The total economic value of the main product relative to the co-
      products           .      •   ._
    • The total energy value of the main product relative to the co-prod-
      ucts

The EPA recommends apportioning multiple outputs by weight in most
instances [7]. As an example, if a certain processing step yields 40% by
weight of a material used to fabricate product A and 60% other materials
that are then converted to additional products, 40% by weight of all the
materials, energy, and residuals associated with this activity are allo-
cated to product A.
Inputs and outputs should
not be grouped for
reporting unless their
impacts are precisely the
same. For example,
emissions of carbon
dioxide and sulfur dioxide
should not be lumped
together in a single figure
because they cause
different impacts.
Assumptions used in
analysis should be clearly
documented. Critical
assumptions can then be
tested to make sure they
reflect reality.
                                            105

-------
Chapters
Data should be qualified
with methods of
measurement,
uncertainties, limits of
detection, and sources.
This helps other members
of the development team
make better evaluations.
Data Sources
    Data for a process at a specific facility are often the most useful for
analysis. However, when materials or parts come from different
sources, compiling specific data for each can be time consuming.  In
many cases, the pnly data available may be averages for an entire indus-
try.
    Another issue for the design team is method of measurement. In-
ventory data may either be compiled directly or indirectly.  Indirect
means include modeling and other theoretical methods.  In any event,
data should be qualified with methods of measurement, uncertainties,
limits of detection, and sources. This helps other members of the devel-
opment team make better evaluations.
    Development teams may be able to generate their own data for in-
house activities. But detailed information-from outside sources will be
necessary for other life cycle-stages. Sources of data for an inventory
analysis include:

    Predominantly In-House
        • purchasing records
        • utility'bills
        • regulatory record keeping
        • accident reports
        • test data and material or product specifications
     Public Data
        • industry statistics
        • government reports
            statistical summaries
            regulatory reports and summaries
        • material, product, or industry studies
        • publicly available life cycle analyses
        • material and product specifications
        • test data from public laboratories

    Suppliers and customers are. usually the most accessible outside
sources of data, particularly when they are part of the development pro-
cess. For a full life cycle analysis, data will have to be gathered from
other outside sources.  Firms that do not have a stake in the project can
be approached, b'ut they may not be cooperative.
    Government reports and statistical summaries present an alternative
source.  However, the  data they contain might be outdated. In addition,
data in such reports are often presented as an average. Broad averages
may not be suitable for accurate analysis. Journal articles, textbooks,
                                             106

-------
                                                              Environmental Analysis Tools
and proceedings from technical conferences are other sources of infor-
mation for an inventory analysis, but again they may be too general or
dated. Other useful sources include trade associations and testing labo-
ratories.  Many public laboratories publish their results. These reports
cover such issues as consumer product safety, occupational health is-
sues, or aspects of material performance and specifications.
    Design teams may also look for conclusions rather than raw data.
When a life cycle study of an appropriate process or product exists, it
can greatly simplify analysis. Most existing life cycle analyses have
been conducted by private research organizations for specific,clients.
Many of these studies are for internal use and are unavailable to the pub-
lic. Others may be obtained by contacting either the sponsor or research
company. Even when available, these studies are unlikely to cover all
necessary aspects of a design project. Private life cycle studies may also
not be ideal because their sources can bexdifficult to verify. This can
lead to questions about the reliability of data and conclusions.  In addi-
tion, results from different studies often conflict because of different
methodologies.

Limitations

    As just discussed, data quality is an ongoing concern in life cycle
analysis. This problem may be due in part to the newness of the field
and the limited number of studies completed to date. Additional diffi-
culties include:

    • Lack of data or inaccessible data
    • Time and costs constraints for compiling data

    There are considerable gaps in data either because it has not been
measured or it is inaccessible.  Very few data bases similar to those for
industry standards or materials specifications exist for life cycle infor-
mation. Preliminary attempts in this area can be incomplete.
    The level of detail required for an inventory analysis can create
other problems.  Existing data from outside firms may be withheld for
proprietary reasons. The design team may thus not have access to engi-
neering and regulatory reports or detailed specifications for critical de-
sign elements.
    Given the current nature of life cycle data, compiling a full profile
of baseline data and conducting an inventory of design alternatives can
be costly and time consuming. As a result, benchmarking and life cycle
                                             107

-------
Chapters
The final result of an
impact analysis is an
environmental profile of the
product system. Data from
the inventory analysis is
evaluated to determine the
potential environmental
effects associated with
inputs and outputs.
analyses of designs will often be limited by project time lines and bud-
gets.

Establishing an Inventory Database
    Performing a life cycle analysis is complex, but the time and ex-
pense required for this task might be reduced in the future.  A public
database for a wide variety of materials, processes, and industries
would promote life cycle design. In the meantime, companies commit-
ted to reducing the environmental impacts of their activities can per-
form life cycle inventories and create their own in-house database.
    When a sufficient number of companies offer environmental data
about their products in a form similar to the Material Safety Data
Sheets now mandated for hazardous materials, preparing an inventory
for life cycle design will be much easier.   An Environmental Profile
Sheet could be constructed that protects company privacy and also pre-
serves accuracy.) This information could then be included in product or
material specifications available to all life cycle players.
    Whether firms are conducting studies for themselves or helping
create a broader database, results from inventory analyses should be
peer reviewed before they are released to the public. This helps estab-
lish credibility.

6.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

    An impact assessment evaluates impacts caused by design activi-
ties. The final result of an impact analysis is an environmental profile
of the product system.  Inventory data can be translated into environ-
mental impacts through many different models. Most impact models
are centered on hazard and risk assessment.  Figure 6-3 presents a
simple diagram of this process.
    On the most basic level, resources are depleted and residuals gen-
erated for each product system. Resource depletion and the related cre-
ation of residuals degrades both ecosystem and human health.
                              Inventory Data

                           Model Parameters
                           Environmental
                              Impact
                            Assessment
                              Models
Environmental
Effects or Impacts
                           Figure 6-3.  Impact Assessment Process

                                            108

-------
                                                            Environmental Analysis Tools
    Environmental impacts can be organized into the following catego-
ries:
    • resource depletion
    • ecological degradation
    • human health effects
    • other human welfare effects

    Other human welfare effects includes such issues as loss of recre-
ational value or scenic beauty. These issues can have a major impact on
quality of life. Although other human welfare effects can be a vital
topic in impact analysis, they are not discussed here.
    The type of models needed to evaluate impacts depends on the final
goal of the analysis. For example, releases of CFCs deplete strato-
spheric ozone, which can lead to increased levels of ultraviolet radiation
reaching the earth's surface. Such increases can cause skin cancer and
cataracts in humans, disrupt agriculture, and affect the growth of phyto-
plankton in the oceans. Complex models are needed to evaluate the
ozone-depleting potential of CFCs.  Equally complex models must be
employed to predict the related human health effects. In many projects,
a simple estimate of the ozone-depleting potential of a chemical may be
enough to compare competing designs.
    Impact analysis is one of the most challenging aspects of life cycle
design.  Current methods for evaluating environmental impacts are in-
complete. Even when models exist, they can be based on many assump-
tions or require considerable data.
    Despite these problems, some form of impact assessment helps de-
signers and planners understand the environmental consequences of a
design more fully.  The following sections describe several aspects of
impact assessment and their limitations.

Resource Depletion

    The quantity of resources extracted and eventually consumed can be
measured relatively accurately. The environmental and social costs of
resource depletion are much more difficult to assess.
    In the end, the availability of resources depends on the resource
base and extraction technology. Current and projected global demand
determines when resources will be exhausted. One method for evaluat-
ing the potential for depletion expresses product system resource use as
a fraction of global demand.
Impact analysis is one of
the most challenging
aspects of life cycle
design. Current methods
for evaluating
environmental impacts are
incomplete.
                                            109

-------
Chapters
The environmental and
social costs of resource
depletion are difficult to
assess. Depletion of
nonrenewable resources
limits their availability to
future generations.
Renewable resources used
faster than they can be
replaced are actually
nonrenewable.
The amount and
availability of resources
are ultimately determined
by geological and
energetic constraints, not
human ingenuity.
    Resources and reserves are defined as:
               i
    • Resource -j A solid, liquid, or gas in the biosphere that is in the
      proper form or sufficient amount for practical extraction now or
      in the future.
    • Reserve Bqse - The part of a resource that meets minimal criteria
      for current mining and production practices.            ,
    • Actual Reserves -  The part of a reserve base that can be economi-
      cally, technically, and legally extracted at present.

    Depletion of a nonrenewable resource limits its availability to fu-
ture generations, but because future generations are unable to bid on the
price of current resources, exploitation may proceed beyond human abil-
ity to supply alternatives. Renewable resources used faster than they
can be replaced are actually nonrenewable.
    Given recent history, this may not seem very important. In the past
two hundred years, human activity has exhausted actual reserves of
some natural resources that were vital at the time.  When this happened,
replacements were quickly found.  Most of these new resources were
both cheaper and more suitable for advancing industry.  However, it
would be unwise to assume that infinite abundance will be characteristic
of the future. It may be true that no critical shortages have yet devel-
oped in the very Ibrief history of intensive human resource use, but the
amount and availability of resources are ultimately determined by geo-
logical and energetic constraints, not human ingenuity.
    Another aspect of resource depletion important for impact assess-
ments is resourcp quality. Resource quality is a measurement of the
concentration of primary material in a resource. In general, as resources
become depleted their quality declines. Using low-quality resources
may require more energy and other inputs while producing more waste.

Ecological Effects

    Impact and risk reduction activities have largely focused on human
health and welfare rather than on ecosystems. This position may be
slowly changing'as decision makers recognize the strong links between
human health anSd the health of forests, wetlands, estuaries, and oceans.
These four main! types of ecosystems have a limited capacity to assimi-
late waste created by humans. If they are degraded by further intru-
sions, this will eventually impact human health and welfare.
                                             110

-------
                                                              Environmental Analysis Tools
    Ecological risk assessment is patterned after human health risk as-
sessment but is more complex. As a first step in analysis, ecological
stressors are identified; then the ecosystem potentially impacted is deter-
mined. Ecological stress agents can be categorized as chemical (e.g.,
toxic chemicals released to the environment), physical (e.g., habitat de-
struction through logging), and biological (e.g., introduction of an exotic
species).
    The Ecology and Welfare Subcommittee of the US EPA Science
Advisory Board developed a method for ranking ecological problems
[9].  Their report provides a valuable discussion of ecological risk as-
sessment. The Subcommittee's approach was based on a matrix of eco-
logical stress and ecosystem types [10]. Risks were classified according
to:

    • type of ecological response
    • intensity of the potential effect
    • time scale for recovery following stress removal
    • spatial scale (local, regional, biosphere)
    • transport media (air, water, terrestrial).

    The rate of recovery of an ecosystem to a stress agent is a critical
part of risk assessment.  In the extreme case, an ecological stress leads
to permanent changes in community structure or species extinction.
The subcommittee classified ecosystem responses to stressors by
changes in:

    • biotic community structure (alterations in the food chain and spe-
      cies diversity)
    • ecosystem function (changes in rates of production and nutrient
      cycling)
    • species population of particular aesthetic or economic value
   . • potential for the ecosystem to act as a route of exposure to humans
      (bioaccumulation)

    Determining potential risks and their likely effects is the first step in
ecological impact assessment. Many stressors can be cumulative, finally
resulting in large-scale problems.  Both habitat degradation and atmo-
spheric change are examples of the types of ecological impacts that gain
wide attention.
Human and ecosystem
health are strongly linked.
Ecosystems have a limited
capacity to assimilate
waste created by
humans.  If they are
degraded by further
intrusions, this will
eventually impact human
health and welfare.
                                             111

-------
Chapters
Human activities, affect
many ecosystems by
destroying habitat. When
habitat is degraded, the
survival of interrelated
species Is threatened.
 Regional and local effects
of pollution on the
atmosphere include acid
rain, and smog. Large-
scale effects include global
climate change caused by
releases of greenhouse
gases and increased
ultraviolet radiation from
ozone-depleting gases.
 Habitat Degradation
    Human activities affect many ecosystems by destroying habitat.
 When habitat is degraded, the survival of many interrelated species is
 threatened. The'most drastic effect is species extinction. Habitat degra-
 dation can be measured by losses in biodiversity, decreased population
 size and range, and decreased productivity and biomass accumulation.
    Standard methods of assessing habitat degradation focus on species
 of direct human interest: game fish and animals, songbirds, or valuable
 crops [11]. Insects or soil organisms may be a more accurate ecological
 indicator in many systems, but the rapid decline or even extinction of
 these species generates little public interest. For this reason, impact as-
 sessments generally rely on popular species.
    Ecological degradation does not result from industrial activity
 alone. Although beyond the scope or control  of design, rapid human
 population growth creates residential sprawl and can convert natural ar-
 eas to agriculture.  Both are a major source of habitat degradation. As
 in other aspects of product development, improved design practices
 must be coupled!with changes in societal values and individual behavior
 to achieve life cycle goals.

 Atmospheric Change
    A full impaqt assessment includes all scales of ecological impacts.
 Impacts can occur on local, regional, or global scales. Regional and lo-
 cal effects of pollution on the atmosphere include acid rain and smog.
Large-scale effects include global climate change caused by releases of
greenhouse gases and increased ultraviolet radiation from ozone-deplet-
ing gases.
    A relative scale is a useful method for characterizing the impact of
emissions that deplete ozone or lead to global warming. For example,
the heat-trapping ability of many gases can be compared to carbon diox-
ide. This is a logical frame of comparison because carbon dioxide is the
main greenhouse gas. Similarly, the ozone depleting effects of emis-
sions can be compared to CFC-12 [12]. Using this common scale makes
it easier for others to interpret results. An example of how such scales
can be used is in Appendix C.

Environmental | Fate Modeling
    Specific ecological impacts caused by pollution depend on toxicity,
degradation rates, and mobility in air, water, or land. Atmospheric
transport, surface water, and groundwater transport models help predict
the fate of chemical releases, but they can be extremely complex.  Al-
though crude, equilibrium partitioning models offer one relatively
                                            112

-------
                                                             Environmental Analysis Tools
simple approach for predicting the environmental fate of releases. Fac-
tors useful for predicting environmental fate include:

  • BCF (bioconcentration factor) - chemical concentration in fish/
    chemical concentration in water
  •Vapor pressure
  • Water solubility
  • Octanol/water partition coefficient - equilibrium chemical concentra-
    tion in octanol phase/equilibrium chemical concentration in aqueous
    phase                ,
  • Soil/water partition coefficients - chemical concentration in soil/
    chemical concentration in aqueous phase

    Once pathways through the environment and final fate are deter-
mined, impact assessment focuses on effects.  For example, impacts de-
pend on the persistence of releases and whether they degrade into further
hazardous by-products.

Human Health and Safety Effects

    In addition to resource depletion and ecological degradation, prod-
uct development can impact human health and safety in many ways. Im-
pacts can be assessed for individuals and small populations, or risks can
be determined for whole systems. In any event, impacts on human
health and safety are usually determined by following these steps:

    • Hazard identification - identify the hazardous agent, its chemical
      and physical characteristics, and harmful effects
    • Risk assessment - establish the dose-response relationship (what
      dose of the agent is needed to produce a certain health effect)
    • Exposure assessment - determine the route (ingestion, inhalation,
      skin contact, parenteral administration), frequency, and duration
      of the exposure
    • Risk characterization - estimate the risk  from exposure to a par-
      ticular agent

    Determining health risks from many design activities can be very
difficult. Experts, including lexicologists, industrial hygienists, and
physicians, should be consulted in this process. Data sources for health
risk assessment include biological monitoring reports, epidemiological
studies, and bioassays. Morbidity and mortality data are available from
Atmospheric transport,
surface water, and
groundwater transport
models help predict the
fate of chemical releases,
but they can be extremely
complex.
                                            113

-------
Chapters
Impacts on humans also
include safety. Unsafe
activities cause particular
types of health problems.
Safety generally refers to
physical injury caused by a
chemical or mechanical
force.
sources such as the National Institute of Health, the Center for Disease
Control, and the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health.
    The following list describes a few ways to assess health impacts:

    • TLV-TWA (threshold limit value—time-weighted average): This
      is the time-weighted average concentration for a normal 8-hour
      workday and 40-hour workweek to which nearly all workers may
    " be repeatedly exposed, day after day, without adverse effect [13].
    • LDso (meclian lethal dose):  The quantity of a chemical estimated
      to be fatal to 50% of test organisms when applied directly [13].
    • LGso (median lethal concentration): The concentration  of a
      chemical estimated to be fatal to 50% of test organisms when
      present in their environment. LCso is used to estimate acute le-
      thality of chemicals to aquatic  organisms and air-borne chemicals
      to terrestrial organisms [13].
    • NOEL (no| observed effect level)
    • NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level)
               i             •                                • "  " •
    Other methods can be used to compare health impacts of residuals.
One approach divides emissions by regulatory standards to arrive at a
simple index [2].  These normalized values could be added or compared
if the emission standard for each pollutant was based on the same level
of risk. However, this is usually not true. In addition, such an index
reveals neither severity nor whether effects are acute or chronic. Prop-
erly assessing the impact of various releases on human health usually re-
quires more sophistication than such a simple index.
    Impacts on humans also include safety. Unsafe activities cause par-
ticular types of health problems. Safety generally refers to physical in-
jury caused by a chemical or mechanical force. Sources of
safety-related accidents include malfunctioning equipment or products,
explosions, fires, and spills. Safety statistics are compiled on incidences
of accidents, incjuding hours of lost work and types of injuries. Acci-
dent data are available from industry  and insurance companies.
    In addition,'health and safety risks to workers and users depend on
ergonomic factors. In the case of tools and similar products, biome-
chanical features, such as grip, weight, and field of movement influence
user safety and health.

Assessing System Risk
    Human error, poor maintenance, and interactions of products or
systems with the environment produce consequences that should not be
overlooked. Although useful for determining human health and safety
                                            114

-------
                                                            Environmental Analysis Tools
effects, system risk assessments apply to all other categories of impacts.
For example, breakdowns or accidents waste resources and produce pol-
lution that can lead to ecological damage. Large, catastrophic releases
may have different impacts than continual, smaller releases of pollut-
ants.
    When assessing risk, predicting how something can be misused is
often as important as determining how it is supposed to function. Meth-
ods of risk assessment can either be relatively simple or quite complex.
The most rigorous methods are usually employed to predict the potential
for high-risk events in complex systems. Risk assessment models can be
used in design to achieve inherently safe products. Inherently safe de-
signs result from identifying and removing potential dangers rather than
just reducing possible risks [14]. A very brief outline of popular risk as-
sessment methods follows.
Human error, poor
maintenance, and
interactions of products or
systems with the
environment produce
consequences that should
not be overlooked.
  Simple Risk Assessment Procedures
   , • Preliminary Hazard Analysis
    • Checklists
    • WHAT-IF Analysis

    A Preliminary Hazard Analysis is well-suited for the earliest phases
of design. This procedure identifies possible hazardous processes or
substances during the conceptual stage of design and seeks to eliminate
them, thereby avoiding costly and time-consuming delays caused by
later design changes [15].
    Checklists ensure that requirements addressing risks have not been
overlooked or neglected. Design verification is best undertaken by a
multi-disciplinary team with expertise in the appropriate areas [16]. A
WHAT-IF analysis predicts the likelihood of possible events and deter-
mines their consequences through simple, qualitative means. Members
of the development team prepare a list of questions that are then an-
swered and summarized in a table [17].

 Mid-Level Risk Assessment Procedures
    • Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
    • Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP)

    The Failure Mode and Effects Analysis is also a qualitative method.
It is usually applied to individual components to assess the effect of their
failure on the system.  The level of detail is greater than in a WHAT-IF
analysis [18]. Hazard and Operability Studies systematically examine
                                            115

-------
Chapters
                          designs to determine where potential hazards exist and assign priorities.
                          HAZOPS usually focus on process design [19].

                           Relatively Complex Risk Assessment Procedures
                              • Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)
                              • Event Tree Analysis (ETA)

                              Fault Tree Analysis is a structured, logical modeling tool that exam-
                          ines risks and hazards to precisely determine undesirable consequences.
                          FTA graphically [represents the web of actions leading to each event.
                          Analysis is generally confined to a single system and used to produce a
                          single number representing the probability of that system's failure. FTA
                          does not have to be used to generate numbers; it can also be done quali-
                          tatively to improve understanding of how a system works and may fail
                          [21]. Event Tree Analysis studies the interaction of multiple systems or
                          multiple events. It provides a spectrum of possible outcomes for a se-
                          quence of events.  ETA is frequently used with FTA to provide quantita-
                          tive risk assessments [20].  Event trees are also employed to assess the
                          probability of human errors occurring in  a system.  Human Reliability
                          Analysis (HRA) can be a key factor in determining risks and hazards,
                          and also in evaluating the ergonomics of a design.  HRA can take a vari-
                          ety of forms to provide proactive design recommendations [21].
                                         i    '

                          Limitations

                              Impact assessment inherits all the problems of inventory analysis.
                          These include lajdc of data and time and cost constraints. Although
                          there are many impact assessment models, their ability to predict envi-
                          ronmental effects varies greatly. Fundamental knowledge in some areas
                          of this field is still lacking.
                               In addition to basic inventory data, impact analysis requires much
                          more information The often complex and time-consuming task of mak-
                          ing further measurements also creates barriers for impact analysis.
                               Even so, impact analysis is an important part of life cycle design.
                          For now, development teams will have to rely on simplified methods.
                          Analysts should keep abreast of developments in impact analysis so they
                          can apply the best available tools that meet time and cost constraints.
                                             116

-------
                                                                  Environmental Analysis Tools
References
   3.
   4.
 1.  Hunt, Robert G.f Jere D. Sellers, and William E. Franklin. 1992. Resource
     and Environmental Profile Analysis: A life Cycle Environmental Assess-
     ment for Products and Procedures. Environmental Impact Assessment Re-
     view Spring.
 2.  Assies, Jan A. 1991. Introduction Paper. SETAC-Europe Workshop on En-
     vironmental Life Cycle Analysis of Products, Leiden, Netherlands, 2 De-
     cember 1991, Leiden, Netherlands: Centre of Environmental Science
     (CML).
    Heijungs, R., J. B. Guinee, G. Huppes, R. M. Lankreijer, A. M. M. Ansems,
     P. G. Eggels, R. vanDuin, andH. P. deGoede. 1991. Manual For the En-
     vironmental Life Cycle Assessment of Products, Centre of Environmental
     Science (CML, Leiden), Dutch Organization for Applied Scientific Re-
     search CTNO, Apeldoorn), and Fuels and Raw Materials Bureau (B&G,
     Rotterdam), Netherlands.
    SETAC. 1991. A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle Assessment. Work-
     shop of the Society of Environmental Toxicologists and Chemists, Smug-
     glers Notch, VT, 18 August 1990, SETAC Foundation for Environmental
     Education, Washington, DC.
5.  Boustead, Ian. 1991. Ecobalances. Automotive Materials and the Environ-
     ment, Stein am Rhein, Germany, 12 November 1991.
6.  World Wildlife Fund. 1990. Product Life Assessments: Policy Issues and
     Implications, Summary of Forum, Washington, DC, 14 May 1990, Wash-
     ington, DC: World Wildlife Fund and The Conservation Foundation.
7.  Battelle and Franklin Associates. 1992. Life Cycle Assessment: Inventory
     Guidelines and Principles, US Environmental Protection Agency, Risk
     Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Office of Research and Development,
     Cincinnati, OH EPA/600/R-92/086.
8.  Boustead, Ian, and G. F. Hancock. 1979. Handbook of Industrial Energy
     Analysis. New York: Wiley.
    Science Advisory Board. 1990. The Report of the Ecology and Welfare Sub-
     committee, Relative Risk Reduction Project, Environmental Protection
     Agency, Washington, DC SAB-EC-90-021A.
    Harwell, M. A., and J. R. KeEy. 1986. Workshop on Ecological Effects from
     Environmental Stresses, Ecosystems Research Center, Cornell University,
     Ithaca, NY.
    Suter, Glenn W. U. 1990. Endpoints for Regional Ecological Risk Assess-
     ment Environmental Management 14 (1): 9-23.
   Assessment Chairs for the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. 1991. Synthesis
     of the Reports of the Ozone Scientific, Environmental Effects, and Tech-
     nology and Economic Assessment Panels, UNEP, New York.
   Hodgson, Ernest, Richard B. Mailman, and Janice E. Chambers. 1988.
     McMillan Dictionary of Toxicology. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
   9.
  10.
  11.
  12.
  13.
                                               117

-------
Chapters
                               14.  Greenberg, Harris R., and Joseph J.Cramer. 1991. Risk Assessment and Risk
                                     Management for the Chemical Process Industry. New York: Van Nostrand
                                     Reinhold.
                               15.  Hessian, Robert T. Jr., and Jack N. Rubin. 1991. Preliminary Hazards Analy-
                                     sis. Risk Assessment and Risk Management for the Chemical Process In-
                                     dustry, editors, Harris R. Greeriberg, and Joseph J. Cramer, 48-56. New
                                     York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
                               16.  	. 1991. Checklist Reviews. Risk Assessment and Risk Management for
                                     the Chemical Process Industry, editors, Harris R.  Greeriberg, and Joseph J.
                                     Cramer, 30-47. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
                               17.  Doerr, William W. 1991. WHAT-JJ? Analysis. Risk Assessment and Risk
                                     Managem&nt for the Chemical Process Industry, editors, Harris R.
                                     Greeriberg, and Joseph J. Cramer, 75-90. New York: Van Nostrand
                                     Reinhold.'
                               18.  O'Mara, Robert L. 1991. Failure Modes and Effects Analysis. Risk Assess-
                                     ment and Risk Management for the Chemical Process Industry, editors,
                                     Harris R. Greeriberg, and Joseph J. Cramer, 91-100. New York: Van
                                     Nostrand Reinhold.
                               19.  Sherrod, Robert M., and William F. Early. 1991. Hazard and Operabilily
                                     Studies. RfskAssessment and Risk Management for the Chemical Process
                                     Industry, editors, Harris R. Greeriberg, and Joseph J. Cramer, 101-126.
                                     New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
                               20.  Greeriberg, Harris R., andBarbaraB. Salter. 1991. FaultTree and Event
                                     Tree Analysis. Risk Assessment and Risk Management for the Chemical
                                     Process Industry, editors, Harris R. Greeriberg, and Cramer Joseph J., 127-
                                     166. New; York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
                               21.  Stoop, J. 19&0. Scenarios in the Design Process. Applied Ergonomics 21  (4):
                                     304-310.
                                                  118

-------
                       Chapter?
Life Cycle Accounting
               Traditional Accounting
                       Practices

                Life Cycle Accounting

-------
Chapter?
                     LIFE  CYCLE ACCOUNTING
Accounting practices need
to be modified to reflect
the actual costs of product
development.
    Products must be offered at an attractive price to be successful.
Fortunately, some strategies for reducing environmental impacts can
also lower costs yhile meeting all other critical requirements.
    However, an environmentally preferable design may not be the low-
est-cost option when measured by standard accounting methods. To as-
sist in life cycle design, accounting practices need to be modified to
reflect the actual;costs of development.

 7.1 TRADITIONAL ACCOUNTING PRACTICES
Environmental costs are
commonly gathered on the
facility level and added to
overhead. Specific product
systems are then assigned
a portion of overhead costs
for management
accounting purposes.
    Life cycle design projects rely on an accurate estimate of environ-
mental costs, but these costs are not always readily provided by standard
accounting practices. Costs can be distorted when accounting systems
are based on existing financial methods or they fail to identify the full
range of environmental costs, including externalities. A brief discussion
of these problem^ follows.
              i
Financial Cost Structures

    Accounting serves the following two functions in most firms:

    • Financial accounting: reports on the financial status of a firm for
      shareholders and the government
    • Management accounting: provides cost analysis for internal deci-
      sion-making and strategic planning

    At present, most costs systems used in business and industry are
based on financial accounting.  This focus reflects the increased impor-
tance of extemallreporting over the last 100 years [3]. Because many
accounting systems are designed to serve financial rather than manage-
ment purposes, pollution and waste management costs are usually gath-
ered on the facility level. These environmental costs are commonly
added to overhead. Specific product systems are then assigned a portion
of overhead costs for management accounting purposes.
    When only one or a few products are made in a facility, overhead
costs can be properly assigned on the basis of labor, unit volume, or
                                          120

-------
                                                                    Life Cycle Accounting,
floor space [3].  However, such simple allocation schemes are less accu-
rate in complex facilities. Poor decisions can result from methods that
conceal or distort product costs [4].
    Many companies are now adopting activity-based costing (ABC) to
improve their decisions.  ABC offers a more accurate method of deriving
product costs in complex situations [5,6]. But the choice of cost drivers
and assumptions in ABC must reflect actual costs to be more effective
than standard accounting methods [7,8].
    Rather than attempting to improve allocation methods, future ac-
counting may take advantage of advances in hardware and software to
gather product-specific costs. Going to the source avoids the need for
complex disaggregation schemes. Yet trade-offs may continue to exist
between costing methods. It may still be cheaper to allocate general
costs. The time and expense required for any accounting system should
always be weighed against its ability to improve decisions and increase
profits.

Unidentified Costs

    Many environmental costs are not considered in design, regardless
of the management accounting tools used. These include hidden costs,
liabilities, and less tangible costs [1]. In some cases, low-impact designs
are not pursued because full costs and benefits remain unknown.
    Customer awareness of unidentified costs also plays an important
role in life cycle design.  Retail price often drives purchasing decisions,
but customers can benefit from a more complete analysis. Life cycle
costing is a useful model for estimating user costs. Equipment purchases
in many firms are already evaluated on the basis of life cycle costing
methods [9].  Direct life  cycle costs beyond purchase price include ser-
vice costs not covered under warranty, cost of consumables such as fuel
or electricity, and possible disposal costs. Table 7-1 shows the differ-
ence that can exist between initial price and life cycle costs.
    Many additional costs are borne by consumers in the form of exter-
nalities.

Externalities
Simple allocation methods
can be inaccurate. Rather
than attempting to improve
allocation methods, future
accounting may take
advantage of advances in
hardware and software to
gather product-specific
costs.
Many environmental costs
are not considered in
design. In some cases,
low-impact designs are
not pursued because full
costs and benefits remain
unknown.
    The current economic system often does not reflect full environmen-
tal costs. Many such costs remain externalities. Externalities are costs
borne by society rather than those involved in a transaction. The cost of
disposal for many products is not included in the initial purchase price.
Externalities are costs not
borne by those involved in
a transaction.
                                            121

-------
Chapter?
                             Table 7-1. Incandescent and Fluorescent Life Cycle Costs
                                        for 9000 Hours of Illumination
 The cost of disposal for
 many products is not
 included in the initial
 purchase price. Society
 pays indirectly for the cost
 of disposal through taxes
 that support municipal
 waste services.
Fluorescent
9000 hrs
1
$30.00
27W
243 KWh
$24.30
$54.30
Incandescent
1000 hrs
9
$4.50
100 W
900 FCWh
$90.00
$94.50
     Expected Life
     Number of Bulbs
     Cost of Bulbs 1
     Wattage
     Electricity Use Over Life
     Cost of Electricity
               (at$0.10/KWh)

     Total Costs

  1 For the fluorescent case: reusable base ($18.00) and replaceable
   bulb ($12.00)


Society pays indirectly for the cost of disposal through taxes and fees
that support municipal waste services.
    Pollution is also a major externality. Firms are not charged for a
majority of chemical releases that contribute to serious environmental
consequences. Impacts of pollution include ozone depletion, global
warming, and habitat degradation. If the cost of pollution is less than
the cost of prevention, decision makers may choose to pollute.  If most
follow this path, the effect can be devastating.
    Society assumes and widely distributes many environmental costs
among individuals. This presents a barrier to life cycle design. Costs
that are not concentrated where they actually occur make product evalu-
ation difficult. Prices for goods that fully reflect life cycle costs would
allow customers to easily compare products and make better choices.

7.2  LIFE CYCLE ACCOUNTING
 Material and energy flows
 identified during the
 inventory analysis provide
 a detailed template for
 assigning costs to
 individual products.
    An accurate estimate of costs to develop and use a product are cen-
tral to life cycle design. Material and energy flows identified during the
inventory analysis provide a detailed template for assigning costs to in-
dividual products. In an effort to be more complete, life cycle account-
ing also uses an extended time scale. For example, equipment life and
useful product life are important factors that can be evaluated for their
impact on costs.; Costs for monitoring closed hazardous waste sites and
similar long-term activities should also be included in the analysis.
                                             122

-------
                                                                      Life Cycle Accounting
    The extent of analysis will vary, depending on the application. De-
tailed design of new products usually demands specific costs; the same
rigor is rarely needed during the concept or preliminary design. Cost
analysis can also vary between types of projects.  When modifying a cur-
rent design, an estimate of incremental costs will usually be all that is
needed.
    As previously noted, gathering product-specific costs for manage-
ment accounting is not the norm. Although detailed engineering cost
models suitable for life cycle design were developed in the late 1800s,
they were largely untested. Instead, much simpler financial accounting
methods were adopted, and these proved suitable for the production of
that era [3]. Simple methods of assigning general costs to specific prod-
ucts are still used at many firms. By making this process more accurate,
activity-based costing can promote life cycle design. However, full life
cycle accounting requires more detailed costs for management decisions.
    The EPA approach for evaluating pollution prevention costs pro-
vides a.basic model for life cycle accounting [1]. This and related indus-
trial accounting models are referred to as total cost assessment [2].
Figure 7-1 shows how costs are broken out from general categories for
single products.
    Total cost assessment recognizes several costs not usually consid-
ered by standard systems. Adding hidden, liability, and less tangible
costs broadens the scope of accounting sufficiently to match the range of
activities included in life cycle design. Time scales are also expanded to
include all future costs and benefits that might result from design.
 Life cycle accounting is
 based on product-specific
 costs that occur within the
 life cycle framework.
 Extent of analysis varies,
 depending on project
 needs.
Total cost assessment
provides the foundation for
life cycle accounting.  Full
costs are determined by
adding hidden, liability,
and less tangible costs to
usual costs. Time scales
are expanded to include
all future costs and
benefits.
                           Division or
                           Production Facility
Usual
Costs

Hidden
Regulatory
Costs
Liability
Costs
Less
Tangible
Costs
 Figure 7-1. Assigning Life Cycle Costs to Specific Product Systems
                                             123

-------
Chapter?
 Each player in the life
 cycle experiences the
 costs of product
 development in different
 ways. Many of these
 costs overlap and span
 several life cycle stages.
 In the end, all product
 development costs are
 assumed by society.
     The total cost model does not favor one set of requirements over
another.  For example, there can be instances when environmental im-
provements that; appear attractive using standard accounting are shown
to be too costly when evaluated with the total cost method [2].
    Each player in the life cycle experiences the costs of product devel-
opment in different ways. Many of these costs overlap and span several
life cycle stages* For example, user costs include all service and con-
sumables required for the product during its useful life. Purchase price,
an important element in user costs, is the result of costs incurred in
manufacturing and earlier stages.
    Some costs of manufacturing, such as liability, extend through use,
retirement, and final disposal of residuals.  In the end, all product devel-
opment costs are assumed by society.  Figure 7-2 shows how costs
spread out through some major life cycle players until they are finally
absorbed in society.
    The four main types of costs considered in life cycle analysis are
briefly outlined in the following sections.
                               Figure 7-2. Life Cycle Costs in Product Development
                                            124

-------
                                                                     Life Cycle Accounting
Usual Costs

    Life cycle accounting first identifies standard capital and operating
expenses and revenues for product systems. Many low-impact designs
offer benefits when evaluated solely by usual costs. These savings result
from eliminating or reducing pollution control equipment, non-hazard-
ous and hazardous waste disposal costs, and labor costs. In addition,
pollution prevention and resource conservation design strategies can re-
duce material and energy costs.

                SOME EXAMPLES OF USUAL COSTS [1 ]
                                                  Many low-impact designs
                                                  offer benefits when
                                                  evaluated solely by usual
                                                  costs.
  Capital Costs
      • Buildings
      • Equipment
    Expenses
        • Disposal
        • Utilities
        • Raw materials
        •Supplies
        • Labor
Revenues
    • Primary products
    • Marketable by-
     products
                     USUAL COST SAVINGS FROM POLLUTION PREVENTION
   COMPANY

  AW



   Carrier



   ClairoV




   3M
 Redesigned circuit-board
' cleaning process

 Revamped metal cutting, and
 redesigned air conditioner parts
                       8EN6FIT

          Stopped using ozone-depleting chemical,
          cut cleaning costs by$3 million annually

          Eliminated toxie solvents, out
          manufacturing cost $1,2 million annually
 Switched from water to foam balls to   Reduced waste water 70%, saving
 "tlush pipes jrj hair-care product        $240,000 annually in disposal costs
 mamifadwrirtg
 Developed adhesive for box-sealing
 tapes that doesn't require solvent
           Eliminated the need tor $2 million ,
           worth of pollution control equipment
  Polaroid
 Streamlined photographic
 chemical plants
  Reynolds Meiafs    Replaced'solvent^based ink With
                    water-based in packaging plants
  Source; (10]
           Cut waste generation 31%; and
           disposal costs by $250,000 a year

          Cut emissions 65%, saved $30
          million in pollution equipment
                                            125

-------
Chapter?
Hidden costs are mainly
related to regulation.
They are usually gathered
for whole facilities and
added to overhead. Life
cycle design can reduce
these costs.
Hidden Costs

    Many hidden costs are gathered for entire plants or business units
and assigned to general overhead.  Hidden costs are mainly related to
regulation associated with product development. Design projects based
on pollution prevention and resource conservation can reduce such regu-
latory costs.
        SOME EXAMPLES OF HIDDEN & REGULATORY COSTS [1]
                             Capital Costs ;
                                 • Monitoring equipment
                                 • Preparedness and protective
                                   equipment
                                 • Additional technology
                                 • Other
                                   Expenses
                                      • Notification
                                      • Reporting
                                      • Monitoring/testing
                                      • Record keeping
                                      • Planning/studies/modeling
                                      • Training
                                      • Inspections
                                      • Manifesting
                                      • Labeling
                                      • Preparedness and protective
                                        equipment
                                      • Closure/post closure care
                                      • Medical surveillance
                                      • Insurance/special taxes
Liability costs include fines
and future liabilities for
forced cleanup, personal
injury, and property
damage.  Avoiding liability
through design is the
wisest course.
Liability Costs

    Liability costs include fines due to non-compliance and future li-
abilities for forcejd cleanup, personal injury, and property damage. Poor
design may cause damage to workers, consumers, the community, or the
ecosystem.
    Avoiding liability through design is the wisest course.  However,
when potential environmental problems do occur, firms should disclose
this information in their financial statements. The Financial Accounting
Standards Board Statement number 5, Accounting for Contingencies,
provides a framework for reporting environmental liabilities [11].
    Because estimating potential environmental liability costs is diffi-
cult, these costs are often understated  [12]. The accounting staff must
work closely with other members of the development team to estimate
liability costs.    !
                                             126

-------
                                                                    Life Cycle Accounting
       After a Denver company's subsidiary sold a building containing
   asbestos for $20 million dollars, a shareholder initiated a lawsuit
   seeking damages, claiming that by not disclosing the asbestos
   problem thecoropany managed to look profitable enough to issue
   new stock aad debentures and inflate its stock price. At the same
   time the building's purchaser also sued, winning a $3,125,000
  lodgement which inejeded punitive damages |f t}.
    In addition to private lawsuits, companies face public liability.
Governments set penalties for violating various regulations. Superfund
cleanup costs provide a vivid example of such liability costs. Box 7-A
shows the number of Superfund sites that are awaiting action. Total
costs for cleaning these sites are estimated to be between $300 arid $700
billion dollars [13].

               SOME EXAMPLES OF LIABILITY COSTS [1 ]

        Legal Staff or Consultants
        Penalties and Fines
        Future Liabilities from Hazardous Waste Sites
             • Soil and waste removal and treatment
             • Groundwater removal and treatment            •-.:-.
             • Surface sealing
             • Personal injury (health care, insurance ramifications)
             • Economic loss
             • Real property damage
             • Natural resource damage
             •Other costs
                treatment or storage in tanks
                transportation                            ;
                disposal in landfills
                other
        Future Liabilities for Customer Injury
             BOX 7-A< TYPE AND BSTMATED NUMBER OF
                      SUPERFUND CLEANUP SITES
               TYPE
             Private
             Government
             Current action
             Underground tanks
             Source: [13]
        NUMBER
          9,000
   5,000-10,000
     2,000-5,000
350,000-400,000
                                           127

-------
Chapter?
 Estimating intangibles
 such as corporate image
 or worker morale is
 difficult. Yet addressing
 such matters during
 design can still be
 beneficial. There may well
 be instances when less
 tangible costs are the
 difference between a
 successful product and an
 unattractive one.
Less Tangible Costs

    Many less tangible costs and benefits are related to usual costs,
hidden regulatoryjcosts, and liabilities. Estimating intangibles such as
corporate image or worker morale is difficult. How these affect market
share or customer loyalty may not be clear, yet addressing such matters
during design can1 still be beneficial. There may well be instances when
less tangible costs are the difference between a successful product and
an unattractive one.
    At present, le|ss tangible environmental costs are rarely considered
in development projects. Yet, ignoring less tangible costs because they
are difficult to project may be a mistake. For example, it may not be
enough to simply comply with all regulations. If a firm is also identi^
fied as one of the largest sources of TRI releases, its image can be dam-
aged and profits reduced.  TRI data are often reported in the media, and
receive much attention.            .    _             •
    Health and safety risks caused by production or use can also have a
major effect on corporate image and product acceptance.  In addition,
some members of society are concerned about intergeneratipnal inequi-
ties that may result from resource depletion and ecological dejjradation.
Such concerns can harm sales of certain products.

        SOME EXAMPLES OF LESS TANGIBLE COSTS [1]
                                   Consumer Acceptance
                                   Customer Loyalty
                                   Worker Morale/Union Relations
                                   Corporate Image
                                       • Community relations

                           Limitations

                               Although opportunities exist for improved accounting, barriers must
                           be recognized. A full design evaluation requires identifying and measur-
                           ing usual, hidden^ liability, and less tangible costs. Determining costs
                           for many nontradiitional items and assigning these costs to specific prod-
                           ucts is a major challenge.
                               Just estimating usual costs can be difficult. Regardless of how ad-
                           vanced the costing system, business services, amount of effort devoted
                           to the project by management and design personnel, and other overhead
                           items can usually not be measured with any accuracy.
                                             128

-------
    In addition, externalities are beyond the scope of most accounting
methods. As long as the costs for pollution, resource depletion, and
other externalities do not accrue to firms, accounting systems will not
reflect these costs. Cost analysis will only be complete when all envi-
ronmental costs and benefits are routinely gathered for management and
financial accounting.
                                                                          Life Cycle Accounting
References
  2.
 3.
 4.
 5.
 6.
 1. US EPA. 1989. Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual, US Environmental
      Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation & Office
      of Solid Waste, Washington, DC.
    White, Allen L., Monica Becker, and James Goldstein. 1992. Total Cost
      Assessment: Accelerating Industrial Pollution Prevention Through Inno-
      vative Project Financial Analysis, US Environmental Protection Agency,
      Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC.
    Johnson, H. Thomas, and Robert S. Kaplan. 1987. Relevance Lost: The Rise
      and Fall of Management Accounting. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
      School Press.
    Kaplan, Robert S. 1989. Management Accounting for Advanced Techno-
      logical Environments. Science 245: 819-823.
    Cooper, Robin, and Robert S. Kaplan. 1988. Measure Costs Right Make
      the Right Decision. Harvard Business Review Sep-Oct: 96-103.
    	. 1991. Profit Priorities from Activity-Based Accounting. Harvard
      Business Review May-JUIK 130-135.
 7. Roth, Harold P., and A. Faye Borthick. 1991. Are You Distorting Costs by
      Violating ABC Assumptions? Management Accounting 73 (5): 39-42.
 8. Noreen, Eric. 1991. Conditions Under Which Activity-Based Cost Systems
      Provide Relevant Costs. Journal of Management Accounting Research 3:
      159-168.
 9. Wilkinson, John. 1986. Life Cycle Costing. Process Engineering 67 (2):
      42+.
10. Naj, Amal Kumar. 24 December 1990. Some Companies Cut Pollution by
      Altering Production Methods.  The Wall Street Journal, A, 1+.
11. Zuber, George R., and Charles G. Berry. 1992. Assessing Environmental
      Risk. Journal of Accountancy  173 (3): 43-48.
    Surma, John P., and Albert A. Vondra. 1992. Accounting For Environmen-
      tal Costs: A Hazardous Subject. Journal of Accountancy 173 (3): 51-55.
    Passel, Peter. 1 September 1991. Experts Question Staggering Costs of
      Toxic Cleanups. The New York Times, A, 1.
12.
13.
                                               129

-------

-------
         APPENDIX A:  SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL
                              INFORMATION
    Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization
US EPA. 1991. Pollution Prevention 1991:
    Progress on Reducing Industrial Pollutants,
    US Environmental Protection Agency, Office
    of Pollution Prevention, Washington, DC.
    EPA21P-3003.

t      1991. Industrial Pollution Prevention
    Opportunities for the 1990s, US EPA Office
    of Research and Development, Washington,
    DC. EPA/600/8-91/052.

	. 1989. Pollution Prevention Benefits
     Manual (Draft), US Environmental Protec-
     tion Agency, Office of Policy, Planning,
     and Evaluation & Office of Solid Waste,
     Washington, DC.

1	. 1988. Waste Minimization Opportunity
    Assessment Manual, US EPA Hazardous
    Waste Engineering Research Laboratory,
    Cincinnati, OH. EPA 625/7-88/003.
US EPA. 1990,91. Guides to Pollution Preven-
    tion, various industries, US Environmental
    Protection Agency, EPA /625/7-90,91:4 -
    17.

t     . 1992. Facility Pollution Prevention
    Guide, US EPA Risk Reduction Engineering
    Lab, Cincinnati, OH, EPA/600/R-92/088.

1	. 1991. Achievements in Source Reduction
    and Recycling for Ten Industries in the
    United States, EPA/600/2-91/052.

1	. 1990,91. Environmental Research Briefs
    (waste minimization assessments for variety
    of manufacturers), EPA/600/M-90/17, and
    EPA/600/M-015 through 025; 044-047.

t Available from:
    Center for Environmental Research
     Information
    26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
    Cincinnati, OH 45268
   Federal Laws and Regulations
  Environmental Law Institute, 1989. Environ-
     mental Law Deskbook. Washington, DC:
     Environmental Law Institute.
 Government Institutes, Inc., 1991. Environ-
    mental Law Handbook. Rockville, MD:
    Government Institutes, Inc.
                                      131

-------
Appendix A
Life Cycle Analysis and Decision Making
   Battelle, and Franklin Associates, Ltd. 1991.
      Product Life Cycle Assessment: Inventory
      Guidelines and Principles, Draft prepared
      for US EPA Risk Reduction Engineering
      Laboratory, Office of Research and Devel-
      opment, Cincinnati, OH.

   Hunt, Robert G., Jere D. Sellers, and WffliamE.
      Franklin. 1992. Resource and Environ-
      mental Profile Analysis: A Life Cycle En-
      vironmental Assessment for Products and
      Procedures. Environmental Impact Assess-
      ment Review Spring.

   SETAC. 1991. A Technical Framework for
      Life-Cycle Assessment, The Society for
      Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry,
      Washington, DC.

   Assies, Jan A. 1991. Introduction Paper.
      SETAC-Europe Workshop on Environ-
      mental Life Cycle Analysis of Products,
      Leiden, Netherlands, 2 December 1991,
      Leiden, Netherlands: Centre of Environ-
      mental Science.
 Heijungs, R., J.B. Guinee, G. Huppes, R.M.
    Lankreijer, A.M.M. Ansems, P.O. Eggels, R.
    van Duin, and H.P. deGoede. 1991. Manual
    For the Enviornmental Life Cycle Assess-
    ment of Products, Centre of Environmental
    Science (CML, Leiden), Dutch Organization
    for Applied Scientific Research (TNO,
    Apeldoorn), and Fuels and Raw Materials
    Bureau (B&G, Rotterdam), Netherlands.

 Kepner, Charles H., and Benjamin B. Tregoe.
      1965. The Rational Manager. New York:
      McGraw-Hill.

 Saaty, Thomas L. 1980. The Analytical Hierarchy
      Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

 	. 1982. Decision Making for Leaders.
      Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

 Saaty, Thomas L., and Kevin P. Keams. 1985.
    Analytical Planning. Elmsford, NY:
    Pergamon.
Life Cycle Case Studies
  Arthur D. Little. 1990. Disposable versus Reus-
     able Diapers: Health, Environmental and
     Economic Comparisons, Arthur D. Little,
     Inc., Cambridge, MA.                ;

  Franklin Associates. 1990. Resource and Envi-
     ronmental Profile Analysis of Polyethylene
     and Unbleached Paper Grocery Sacks,
     Franklin Associates, Prairie Village, Kansas.
Mekel, O.CJL., and G. Huppes. 1990. Environ-
    mental Effects of Different Package Systems
    for Fresh Milk, Center for Environmental
    Studies, University of Leiden, The Nether-
    lands.

Sellers, VJR., and J.D. Sellers. 1989. Comparative
    Energy and Environmental Impacts for Soft
    Drink Delivery Systems, Franklin Associates,
    Prairie Village, Kansas.
                                           132

-------
                                                         Sources of Additional Information
    Industry Standards
  American National Standards Institute (ANSI),
      Catalog of American National Standards,
      ANSI, New York.
      Annual publication, lists 8000 current
      ANSI standards.

  American Society for Testing and Materials
      (ASTM), Book ofASTM Standards,
      ASTM, Philadelphia, PA.
      Annual, lists more than 8000 standards.

  Information Handling Services, Industry Stan-
      dards and Engineering Data, Information
      Handling Services, Englewood, CO. Up-
      dated bimonthly.
 Information Handling Services, International
    and Non-US National Standards, Infor-
    mation Handling Services, Englewood,
    CO. Updated bimonthly.

 Information Handling Services, Military
    Specifications and Standards Service,
    Information Handling Services,
    Englewood, CO. Updated bimonthly.

 Underwriters Laboratory, Catalog for Safety,
    Underwriters Laboratory, Northbrook,
    IL. Semiannual publication.
    Occupational Safety and Health
( American Conference of Governmental and
      Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).  Cincin-
      nati OH.
      TLVs- Threshold Limit Values for Chemi-
      cal Substances in Work Air. Updated an-
      nually.
      TLV/BEIBooklet. Published semiannually.
      Documentation of Threshold Limit Values
      and Biological Exposure Indices, 5th ed.,
      1990.

  American Industrial Hygiene Association
      (AJHA). Workplace Environmental Expo-
      sure Level Guides QWEELGuides),New
      York. 188 in all, published periodically.
Cook, M. A. 1987'; Occupational Exposure
    Limits- Worldwide. New York: American
    Industrial Hygiene Association.

Occupational Safety and Health Administra-
    tion, US Department of Labor. Washing-
    ton, DC. can be contacted for regulations
    and publications. Twenty-one states and
    two territories currently administer and
    enforce OSHA provisions; in these loca-
    tions, employers are essentially subject to
    just the state OSHA agency: Alaska, Ari-
    zona, California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa,
    Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minne-
    sota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Caro-
    lina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina,
    Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virgin Islands,
    Virginia, Washington, Wyoming.
                                            133

-------
   APPENDIX B: SUMMARY OF MAJOR "FEDERAL.
                     ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
ACTS
                     Legislation established by Congress describing a policy or program.
                     The Act generally designates an agency, department or commission
                       which has more expertise than Congress to develop specific details of
                       the program.
                     Some provisions of; the Act apply directly to the public.
                     Laws are generally implemented through regulations, guidance
                       documents, policy statements, and enforcement
REGULATIONS
                       Regulations are published in the Federal Register. Each year, they are
                    compiled and placed in the Code of Federal Register.
                    Background
                       The Federal Clean Air Act was enacted in 1970, substantially amended
                    in 1977, and significantly expanded in 1990. The 1970 act contained three
                    titles: Title I dealt with stationary sources, Title II dealt with mobile
                    sources such as cars, and Title III provided definitions and standards for
                    judicial review and ciiizen suits. The 1977 amendments retained this
                    structure, adding special provisions for areas with cleaner air in subtitle C
                    of Title I, and nonattainment areas in subtitle D. The 1990 amendments
                    overhauled the nonattainment provisions in subtitle D of Title I, added
                    comprehensive technology-based regulations of toxic air pollutants in a
                    rewritten section 112j added Title IV to deal with acid rain (focused on the
                    power plants thought {to be the primary source of these emissions), and
                    added Title V to greatly strengthen enforcement provisions and set much
                    stricter requirements for nonattainment areas and emissions from mobile
                    sources. Title VI was also include to mandate the phase-out of chlorofluo-
                    rocarbons (CFCs).
CLEAN AIR
ACT

Administered by the
US EPA
                                      134

-------
Key Provisions

Sec. 3 - National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
    Establishes NAAQSs to protect public health and also secondary
NAAQSs to protect public welfare.

Sec. 4 - State Implementation Plan (SIP)
    Each state has primary responsibility for assuring air quality within
its borders by submitting a state implementation plan (SEP) specifying
how primary and secondary NAAQSs will be achieved and maintained.
SEPs are subject to EPA approval. They require reduction of emissions
from existing stationary sources to comply with NAAQSs.

Sec. 5-  New Source Performance Standard
    Federally-formulated, technology-based emission standards for new
or modified stationary sources in various industry categories are covered
in this section. Also provides requirements for solid waste combustion.

Sec. 6 - Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program (PSD)
    Requires each state's SIP to contain emission limitations and any
other necessary requirements to prevent significant deterioration of air
quality.  This statute establishes a three-tiered classification system for
certain public lands and regions with air quality levels for sulfur oxides
and particulates better than NAAQSs, and limits allowable increases in
both these pollutants for each classification. More stringent require-
ments than NSPS and NAAQS are imposed in these regions, and in no
case may allowable concentrations of any pollutant exceed NAAQSs.

Sec. 7 - Nonattainment areas
    SEPs must provide that nonattainment areas achieve compliance
with NAAQSs.  In NAAs, permits must be obtained for the construction
and operation of new or modified stationary emission sources. Technol-
ogy-based limitations more stringent than NSPs (the lowest achievable
emission rate or (LAER)) are imposed. Permits will be granted only if
total emissions from existing sources and the proposed new source will
be less than existing emissions before the application. This is the offset
requirement.  Existing  sources in NAAs are required to  use reasonably
available control technology (RACT). Standards were significantly
tightened by the 1990 amendments.
CLEAN AIR
ACT
Administered by the
USEPA
                                           135

-------
AppentSx B
CLEAN AIR
ACT
Administered by the
 US EPA
Section 8 - National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAPs)
    Addresses particularly hazardous air pollutants that may not be
covered by NAA^Ss. Pollutants covered in this section "may reason-
ably be anticipated to result in an increase in mortality, or an increase in
serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness." Standards are
imposed on both hew and existing sources for 189 listed hazardous air
pollutants or categories of pollutants.

Section 9 - Acid rain provisions
    Addresses the TitleTV acid rain program and imposes regulations
on fossil-fueled power plants.

Sect ion 10-New permitting requirements
    Explains Title V's new permit program for stationary sources and
new regulations imposed on those sources.

Section 11- Mobile source and fuel requirements
    Addresses the mobile source and fuel requirements of the 1990
amendments of Title II.

Section 12 - Ozone protection
    Requires the, phase-out of CFCs and other substances thought to
destroy the ozone layer.
 CLEAN WATER
 ACT
 Administered by the
 US EPA
 Background
    In 1972 Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act;
 the act was amended and renamed the Clean Water Act in 1977 and its
 regulatory focus! changed to control of toxic pollutants. In 1987,
 extensive amendments were added to the act to improve water quality in
 areas where existing minimum discharge standards were insufficient to
 assure attainment of stated water quality goals. The objective of the
 CWA is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
 integrity of the nation's waters.
                                           136

-------
                                        Summary of Major Federal Environmental Laws
Key Provisions

Grants for construction of treatment works
    Provides for the application of the best practicable technology, and
states that waste treatment management should be on an areawide basis,
addressing both point and nonpoint sources.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
    This is the primary mechanism for imposing limitations on pollut-
ant discharges. Under the NPDES program, discharge of any pollutant
from public or private point sources requires a permit. In addition, the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System requires all discharg-
ers to disclose the volume and nature of their discharges and report on
compliance with mandated limitations.
    Effluent standards are derived through two methods:
    • Technology -based effluent limitations require that point sources
of toxic, nonconventional, and conventional pollutants must comply
with effluent limitations based on the best available technology eco-
nomically achievable (BAT) for toxic and nonconventional sources, and
best conventional pollution control technology (BCT) for conventional
sources.
    • Water quality-related effluent limitations. If, after application of
technology-based limits, effluent discharges interfere with attainment or
maintenance of water quality, additional effluent limitations may be
established.

Water quality standards and implementation plans
    Establishes procedures for reviewing and modifying existing state
water quality standards and issuing new standards. Each state is
required to have a continuing planning process that incorporates
areawide waste treatment management and total maximum daily loads
to maintain water quality.

New source performance standards (NSPS)
    Creates and regulates new source performance standards.

Toxic and pretreatment effluent standards
    Provides for additional requirements on discharges of toxic chemi-
cals and provides for special situations such as oil spills.
CLEAN WATER
ACT
Administered by the
US EPA
                                           137

-------
Appendix B
CERCLAAND
SUPERFUND
AMENDMENT
AND
REAU1HOHZATON
ACT (SARA)
Administered by the
US EPA
Background
    The Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA) was enacted 1980. Significant revisions to
CERCLA were made through SARA in 1986. SARA substantially
expanded the scope and complexity of CERCLA, but it is part of the
original act, not a replacement.
    The goal of this legislation is to provide funding and enforcement
authority for cleaning up thousands of hazardous waste sites in the US
and responding to hazardous substances spills. Funding for these
activities is derived from special taxes on the petrochemical and
chemical industry, domestic and imported crude oil, and other basic
industries such as automobile, aircraft, and electronics manufacturers.
The act covers all environmental media (air, water, land). Federally
permitted releases under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act are
exempt from emergency response. Other than these exemptions,
CERCLA response or liability is broadly triggered by the release or
threat of release of a hazardous substance or pollutant or contaminant.

Definition of hazardous substance

    • Any substance designated as hazardous under the Clean Air Act,
Clean Water Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, or any RCRA hazard-
ous waste. By 1990, there were about 720 hazardous substances and
1500 radionuclides on the list.
    • Actions caii be triggered by any concentration of a listed sub-
stance, and this substance does not have to be a waste; it can be a
product or classified in some other manner. Thus, waste that is judged
to be RCRA nonhazardous may come under CERCLA jurisdiction.

Key Provisions

National Contingency Plan (NCP)
  States that a NCP shall be published by the President to provide for
  efficient and coordinated action and establish priorities for various
  releases.
                                         138

-------
                                    Summary of Major Federal Environmental Laws
 Liability of responsible parlies and financing options for
 remedial actions

  • Parties who may be responsible
    -past owners or operators of the site
CERCLA AND
SUPERFUND
AMENDMENT
AND
FEALTTHOHZATON
ACT (SARA)

Administered by the
US EPA
Background
    This legislation was enacted as a freestanding provision of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986.  The
December 1984 release of methyl isocyanate in Bhopal, India which
killed thousands of people was the major impetus for this act.

Key Provisions

Subtitle A -Emergency response and notification for extremely
hazardous substances

Section 302 and 304
    • Compels state and local governments to develop plans for
responding to unanticipated environmental releases of a number of
chemical substances identified as extremely hazardous. When the law
was written, 402 extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) were listed.
Mandates creation of State Emergency Response Commissions
(SERCs) and Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs).
    • Requires facilities containing EHSs in excess of specified
threshold planning quantities (TPQs) to notify state and local emer-
gency planning entities of the presence of those substances and to report
on the inventory and environmental releases (planned and unplanned) in
excess of specified reportable quantities (RQs) of those substances.
Releases of certain substances requires emergency notification to state
and local commissions and the EPA.
EMERGENCY
PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY
RIGHT TO
KNOW ACT
(EPCRA)
(SARA TITLE III)

Administered by the
US EPA
                                      139

-------
Appendix B
EMERGENCY
PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY
RIGHT TO
KNOW ACT
(EPCRA)
(SARA TITLE III)
Administered by the
US EPA
Subtitle B - Reporting and notification requirements for toxic
and hazardous substances

Section 311 and 312 - Hazardous chemical provisions
    Inventories and site-specific information on chemicals considered
physical or health hazards under OSHA's Hazard Communication
Standard must be provided through material safety data sheets (MSDS)
to state and local authorities, including fire departments.

Section 313 - Toxic chemical release reporting
    • Applies tp certain manufacturing facilities or operators with 10 or
more employees in SIC codes 20 - 39 manufacturing or using listed
chemicals in excess of specified threshold quantities.
    • The purppse of section 313 reporting is to inform government
officials and the public about releases of toxic chemicals in the environ-
ment
    • Facilities must compile a toxic chemical release inventory (TRI)
which identifies  how many pounds of chemicals identified as a concern
were released tp air, water, or land or transferred off site (chemicals
shipped off site may be sent to RCRA-regulated treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities, to public sewage treatment plants, or to other
disposal sites).
    • In 1989,122,569 facilities reported releases of 5.7 billion pounds
of the 322 listed chemicals/chemical categories. 74% of thiis total was
released on site to air, water, and land; 26% was transferred off site.  25
chemicals accounted for 83% of TRI releases in 1989. The chemical
industry accounted for 48% of total releases.
    • Threshold reporting limit was lowered from 75,000 Ibs in 1987
to 25,000 Ibs in, 1989 for facilities manufacturing or processing listed
chemicals. Facilities otherwise using listed chemicals in excess of
10,000 Ibs per year are also required to submit TRI forms.
                                          140

-------
                                      Summary of Major Federal Environmental Laws
    This act requires that all pesticides, fungicides, and rodenticides be
registered with the EPA. Manufacturers must follow proper labeling
procedures and provide information demonstrating the absence of
unreasonable adverse effects on the environment when the substance is
used. As part of the registration process, EPA classifies each substance
as being for general use, restricted use, or both.
FEDERAL
INSECTICIDE,
FUNGICIDE,
AND
RODENTICIDE
ACT(FIFRA)
Administered by the
US EPA
    Also includes the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resource
Planning Act

Key Provision

    • Establishes procedures for the sale of forest timber.
    • Mandates Department of Agriculture to maintain a Renewable
Resource Program to protect the quality of soil, air, and water in the
National Forest System while managing and developing forest re-
sources. Management plans provide for multiple use, sustained yield of
products and services that ensure consideration of environmental
consequences and restrict intensive management systems and clear
cutting.
    • Sale of timber from each national forest is limited to a quantity
that can be removed annually in perpetuity on a sustained-yield basis.
NATIONAL
FOREST
MANAGEMENT
ACT
Administered by
Department of
Agriculture
Background
    Adopted in 1970, the Occupational Health and Safety Act seeks
to ensure that "no employee will suffer material impairment of
health or functional capacity" from a lifetime of occupational expo-
sure to workplace conditions. The act covers health hazards which
are largely chemical in nature (noise is also included in this category)
and safety hazards which are largely electrical and mechanical in
nature. In 1990, the only amendment to the law was adopted. This
provision increases penalties for certain classes of violations.
    Conflicts between the Occupational Health and Safety Administra-
tion (OSHA) and EPA over commonly regulated substances are not
 OCCUPATIONAL
 HEALTH AND
 SAFETY ACT
 (OSHA)
Administered by
Occupational Health
and Safety Adminis-
tration (Dept. of
Labor)
                                        141

-------
Appendix B
 OCCUPATIONAL
 HEALTH AND
 SAFETY ACT
 (OSHA)
Administered by
Occupational Health
and Safety Adminis-
tration (Department
of Labor)
 common because EPA's mandate extends over land, water, and air,
 while OSHA's jurisdiction is limited to conditions existing in the
 workplace.  OSHA is enforcement oriented and its roles include:
   • Setting safety and health standards.
   • Enforcing standards through federal and state inspectors
   • Providing public education and consultation.

 Adoption of Standards
     Standards may be adopted in the following three ways:

 Section 6(a)
     Allowed OSHA to adopt "national consensus standards" to get
 start-up provisions on the books expeditiously. Although this authority
 expired on April 28,1973, considerable use of this provision was made
 while it was in effect. As a result, the vast majority of current OSHA
 standards were adopted under Section 6(a).

 Section 6(b)
     • Applies to all permanent standards (to remain in effect more than
 six months).
     • Regulatory actions may be instigated by .reports, studies, and
 other publications; trade association standards; National Institute of
 Occupational Safety and Health bulletins; or standards from indepen-
 dent safety and health organizations.
    • Requires advanced notification of OSHA intent to promulgate a
 regulation and allows for public comment, which may include hearings.
 Cost and technological feasibility are examined before regulations are
 issued.
            j
 Section 6(c)
    • Permits jthe adoption of "emergency temporary ;standards" where
 a grave danger exists and emergency action is necessary to protect
 employees from harm.
    • Section 6(c) standards expire 6 months after adoption. This
 authority is very limited and rarely used.

 Employer IDuties

 OSHA Standards, rules, regulations and orders
    Employers must comply with all health and safely standards
promulgated under the OSHA, including rules, regulations, and orders
                                          142

-------
                                      Summary of Major Federal Environmental, Laws
pursuant to the act. Penalties can be imposed by the government on
employers but not employees. Both record keeping and adherence to
specific standards is covered.

General Duty Clause
    Included in the act to fill gaps that might exist in standards, and
intended to cover only hazardous conditions that are obvious and
admitted by all concerned.

Inspection and Enforcement

    • Approximately 2,500 federal and state OSHA inspectors sta-
tioned at 100 locations nationwide conduct over 50,000 inspections
annually.
    • All employees are covered by the act, except those covered under
existing occupational health and safety laws at the time of the act's
adoption, and federal and state employees. Governments may adopt
measures similar to OSHA.
    • If the employer does not consent to an inspection voluntarily,
OSHA must obtain a warrant.
    • Employers in noncompliance are issued a written citation
describing the exact nature of the violation. If the violation is not
corrected within a fixed time, a penalty is proposed.

Key Standard

Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) - Worker Right to
Know Rule
    • OSHA's HCS went into effect in 1985 for manufacturers. In
1987 it was applied to all employers. The HCS alerts employees to the
existence of possibly dangerous substances in the workplace and the
proper means of protection. Unlike most OSHA standards, it does not
impose mandatory limitations or requirements on conditions, but rather
focuses on information.
    •  List of all hazardous chemicals on the premises must be pre-
pared.
    •  A material safety data sheet (MSDS) must be on hand or
prepared for each hazardous material.  This includes information about
chemical composition of a substance, physical characteristics, health
and safety hazards, and precautions for safe handling and use.
OCCUPATIONAL
HEALTH AND
SAFETY ACT
(OSHA)
Administered by
Occupational Health
and Safety Adminis-
tration (Department
of Labor)
                                        143

-------
Appendix B
OCCUPATIONAL
HEALTH AND
SAFETY ACT
(OSHA)
    • Each container of hazardous material must be properly la*beled
with hazard identification and warning along with the name and address
of the manufacturer or responsible party.
    • Workers must be trained and educated about chemical risks.
    • A written program for observing the HCS must be prepared and
maintained for, each worksite.
POLLUTION
PREVENTION
ACT OF 1990
Administered by the
US EPA
 Background
    This act greatly expands the EPA's role in encouraging pollution
 prevention (source reduction) in all its programs and activities. The act
 addresses the historic lack of attention to source reduction and states
 that "source reduction is fundamentally different and more desirable
 than waste management and pollution control". As a matter of US
 policy, the act establishes the following hierarchy; pollution preven-
 tion, recycling, treatment, and finally disposal or release, all to be ac-
 complished in an environmentally safe manner.

 Key Provisions

 Section 6604
    Creates an office within EPA (as of 1992 the Office of Pollution
 Prevention and Toxics) to coordinate all agency pollution prevention
 activities. Mandates adoption of a strategy to adopt multi-media pre-
 vention approach in all programs, offices, and activities. As a result of
 this provision, the EPA established the 33/50 program.  This program
 targets 17 chemicals reportable under TRI for a 33% reduction in re-
 leases and transfers by 1992, and a 50% reduction by the end of 1995,
 compared to 1988.  This is a voluntary program aimed at industries re-
 porting the largest releases and transfers of the 17 high-priority chemi-
 cals.

 Section 6605
            i
    Establishes a grants program to the states so technical assistance
 and training in pollution prevention can be made available to business
 and industry. Grants in this program are limited to 50% of total costs;
 states must provide the remainder.
                                          144

-------
                                       Summary of Major Federal Environmental Laws
Section 6606
    Requires the establishment of a source reduction clearinghouse to
compile and actively disseminate information on source reduction and
serve as a technology transfer resource. The Pollution Prevention Infor-
mation Clearinghouse (PPIC) now serves this function. The EPA also
established the Pollution Prevention Information Exchange System
(PIES), a computerized information database available to the public
which permits entry and retrieval of material on industrial source reduc-
tion, technology transfer, and education.

Section 6607
     Mandates that EPA collect data on source reduction, recycling, and
treatment of all chemicals listed on TRI reporting forms.  In 1991, fa-
cilities are required to report the following information on TRI forms:
    • the amount of reported chemicals entering any waste stream prior
to recycling, treatment, or disposal; the percentage change from the pre-
vious year; and estimates for the next 2 years.
    • The amount of reported chemical recycled on or off site, the pro-
cess used, and percentage change from the previous year.
    • The quantified results of source reduction practices by various
categories, and the techniques used to identify source reduction oppor-
tunities.
POLLUTION
PREVENTION
ACT OF 1990
Administered by the
US EPA
                                          145

-------
Appendix B
RESOURCE
CONSERVATION
AND
RECOVERY
ACT(RCRA)

Administered by the
US EPA
Background,
    In 1965, the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) was enacted to
ensure the environmentally sound management of solid wastes. RCRA
was enacted in 1976, and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
of 1984 expanded the act.
    The goals of RCRA are to protect human health and the environ-
ment, reduce waste and conserve energy and natural resources, and
reduce or eliminate the generation of hazardous waste as expeditiously
as possible. All hazardous waste produced is to be treated, stored, and
disposed of so as to minimize the present and future threat to human
health and the environment. RCRA imposes full life cycle management
controls on hazardous waste by addressing generators, transporters, and
operators of treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities.

Key Provisions

Subtitle C - Hazardous Waste Program

Section 3001-Identification and listing
    • Lists particularly hazardous wastes subject to regulation and
standards applicable to generators, transporters, and owners and
operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD)
facilities. Hazardous waste identified as ignitable, corrosive, reactive,
or toxic is listed lone of three ways: non-specific source wastes, specific
source wastes, and commercial chemical products. Action is based on
threshold concentrations of listed wastes.
    • Provides that all those generating or handling listed hazardous
wastes notify the EPA of the nature and location of their activities.

Section 3002,3003 - Generator and transporter provisions
    • Establishes record keeping, labeling and manifest systems, and
proper handling methods for generators and transporters.  Transporters
must also comply with regulations regarding the delivery of substances
to designated TSD facilities, as well as Department of Transportation
requirements. The amendments of 1984 significantly expanded cover-
age to include more than 200,000 companies which produce less than
1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month.
    • Over 500,000 companies and individuals who generate hazardous
waste must comply with RCRA regulations.
                                          146

-------
                                       Summary of Major Federal Environmental Laws
Section 3004,3005 - TSD facilities requirements
    Requires permits to be granted for treating, storing, or disposing
listed hazardous wastes. Also imposes standards applying to financial
aspects, groundwater monitoring, minimum technology usage, and
closure procedures.  Disposal of untreated hazardous waste is subject to
a phased-in ban. Establishes interim status provisions for existing TSD
facilities.

Sections 3007, 3008 - Site inspection and enforcement
    Authorizes site inspections and provides enforcement capabilities
through both administrative and civil actions. Criminal actions may be
brought which carry a penalty of up to $50,000 per day or from 2 to 5
years in jail.

Section 3012,3006 - State inventories and state authority
    Each state must compile an inventory describing the hazardous
waste storage and disposal sites within the state. RCRA encourages
States to take over the responsibility for program implementation and
enforcement from the Federal Government.

Subtitle D - Solid Waste Program
    Establishes guidelines and minimum requirements for state solid
waste plans as well as procedures for developing and implementing
such plans. Prohibits open dumping.

Subtitle I - Underground Storage Tanks Program
    • Regulates underground storage tanks and mandates each owner of
such a tank for regulated substances to notify the appropriate state or
federal agency of the tank's existence and describe its function.
    • Amendments of 1984 include tanks containing hazardous waste or
petroleum, affecting hundreds of thousands of facilities.
RESOURCE
CONSERVATION
AND
RECOVERY
ACT (RCRA)
Administered by the
US EPA
                                        147

-------
Appendix B
SURFACE
MINING
CONTROL AND
RECLAMATION
ACT
Administered by the
Department of the
Interior
Key Provisions

Abandoned mine reclamation
    Establishes the abandoned mine fund with fees paid by coal mine
operators and user charges to reclaim and restore land and water
resources adversely affected by past mining and to prevent and control
other impacts associated with mining. Coal mine operators are required
to pay a quarterly reclamation fee and submit statements about their
mining operations.

Regulation of surface coal mining's environmental impacts
    • Performance standards are set for surface coal mining and
reclamation activities.
    • Permits for surface and underground coal mining operations
require operators to implement measures to restore land, manage
wastes, and prevent subsidence.
                      X ». -.^X * ^"V"',^MS>.Aft. w.>* ^'V  .- *  •<•  ff ff fff f f f f f *° f    f

TOXIC
SUBSTANCES
CONTROL ACT
(TSCA)
Administered by the
US EPA
Background
    Enacted in 1976, TSCA allows EPA to acquire sufficient informa-
tion to identify and evaluate potential hazards from chemical substances
and to regulate the production, use, distribution, and disposal of such
substances where necessary.  The act may also be used to regulate
biotechnology and genetic engineering.

Key Provisions

Testing
    Manufacturers and processors are required to test certain substances
to determine whether they present an unreasonable risk of injury to
health or the environment. Based on these tests, EPA may require
manufacturing notices, develop regulations regarding distribution and
handling, or initiate civil action to address an imminent hazard.

Manufacture and processing notification for new substances
    • Manufacturers must notify EPA 90 days before producing a new
chemical substance and submit any required test data. This is referred
to as a premanufacturing notice (PMN).
                                         148

-------
                                         Summary of Major Federal Environmental Laws
     • When no testing is required, manufacturers must submit informa-
 tion such as molecular structure, categories of use, amounts of produc-
 tion, description of by-products, disposal methods and all existing data
 concerning the environmental and industrial health effects of each
 substance to demonstrate that the substance will not present an unrea-
 sonable risk.
     • If information is insufficient, EPA may issue a proposed order
 restricting manufacture until further information is developed.

 Regulation
     For substances that present an unreasonable risk, rules may be
 issued prohibiting or limiting manufacture, or regulating use and
 disposal.

 Imminent hazards
     Substances identified as imminent hazards by EPA may be seized
 through civil action. Other actions such as mandatory notification and
 recall by manufacturers and processors may be required.

 Reporting
     Regulations apply to record keeping procedures and reporting
 requirements.  Manufacturers and processors are mandated to keep
 inventories and maintain records of significant adverse reactions caused
 by their substances. The EPA compiles a list of each chemical sub-
 stance produced in the US from these records.
TOXIC
SUBSTANCES
CONTROL ACT
(TSCA)
Administered by the
US EPA
References
Government Institutes, Inc., 1991. Environmental Low Handbook. Rockville,
    MD: Government Institutes, Inc.
Environmental Law Institute, 1989. Environmental Law Deskbook. Washing-
    ton, DC: Environmental Law Institute.
                                           149

-------
APPENDIX C: OVERVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL
                               IMPACTS
                        Before development teams begin a life cycle design project, they
                    should understand the range of impacts caused by human activity.  Such
                    an understanding underlines the need for life cycle design.
                        Environmental, health, and safety impacts include:

                            • habitat and species destruction
                            • potential health risks to present and future .generations
                            • availability of resources for future generations
                            • distribution of resources among populations
                            • distribution of risks among affected populations

                        Every product and service contributes to multiple environmental
                    impacts. For example, use of agricultural pesticides results in hazardous
                    waste generation from manufacture, health risks to production workers
                    and applicators, groundwater contamination, ecological degradation
                    through bioaccumulation, and human health risks from pesticide residue
                    in food.
                        There are many ways to set environmental design priorities. Em-
                    phasis will vary among product groups and companies. Because im-
                    pacts occur on a local, regional, and global scale, priorities must also
                    address scope. JLocal and regional concerns may appear more important
                    to some development teams than global impacts, but a broader focus
                    may be indicated in many life cycle design projects.
                        Priorities based on a global view of environmental impacts may dif-
                    fer from those addressing strictly local issues. Priorities for environ-
                    mental impacts set by the Ecology and Welfare Subcommittee of the
                    Science Advisory Board of the US EPA [1] provide an example of rank-
                    ing with a global perspective:
                                     150

-------
        Relatively High-Risk Problems
             • Global climate change
             • Habitat alteration and destruction
             • Species extinction and overall loss of biological diversify
             • Stratospheric ozone depletion
        Relatively Medium-Risk Problems
             • Acid deposition
             • Airborne toxics
             • Herbicides/pesticides
             • Toxics, nutrients, biochemical oxygen demand, and
              turbidity in surface waters
        Relatively Low-Risk Problems
             • Acid runoff to surface waters
             • Groundwater pollution
             •Oil spills
             • Radionuclides
             • Thermal pollution

Items within the three groups are ranked alphabetically, not by priority.
The EPA undertook this study to target environmental protection efforts
on the basis of opportunities for the greatest risk reduction. In develop-
ing the hierarchy, EPA considered reducing ecological risk as important
as reducing human health risk.
    The following sections contain an overview of some major environ-
mental problems. This will help design teams gain a better understand-
ing of environmental impacts.

Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
    The rate of municipal solid waste generation may be related to rela-
tive wealth, but it can also measure how efficiently a society consumes
resources. In the United States,  mountains of lost resources are accumu-
lating as waste generation rates continue to rise. Increasing amounts of
solid waste provide a reminder of the consequences of single-use prod-
ucts and profligate resource consumption. In addition to being unsightly
and unpopular, landfills may require indefinite monitoring and treatment
even after closure.
    The US generated nearly 180 million tons of MSW in 1988, or 4
pounds per person per day.  This compares to 2.65 Ibs generated per
person per day in 1960. By 2010 per capita daily generation is expected
to reach 4.9 pounds [2],  As Figure 1 shows, both gross and net discards
have been trending upward for the last thirty years. Although material
recovery for recycling increased to 13% of generated MSW in 1988
                                            151

-------
Appendix C
                    Million
                     Tons
                                                                    Gross Discards

                                                                    Net Discards*
                             60
                              1960    1965    1970    1975     1980     1985     1990
                             'Material recovery only: no incineration

                             Source: [2,3]

                          Figure 1. Trends In Gross and Net Discards of US
                                 Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
                          compared to 7% in 1960, net discards without incineration nearly
                          doubled during the same period.
                              Net MSW discards after material recovery amounted to 156 million
                          tons, or 400 million cubic yards, in 1988. Tables 1-3 show the composi-
                          tion of this waste stream and the relative importance of various manage-
                          ment activities.

                          Industrial Waste and Toxic Releases
                              Consumer products and packaging are a significant fraction of mu-
                          nicipal solid waste.  But industrial production of goods and services
                          generates the vast majority of this nation's solid and hazardous waste.
                          US industries annually create 10.9 billion tons of nonhazardous waste as
                          reported under the solid waste management provisions of the Resource
                          Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Although classified as solid,
                          wastewater accounts for approximately 70% of this total. Figure 2
                          shows the major nonhazardous solid waste generating sectors in the US.
                              Industries also generate 700 million tons of hazardous waste each
                          year [4]. RCRA defines hazardous waste as either explosive, corrosive,
                          reactive, or toxic.
                                           152

-------
                                                Overview of Environmental Impacts
Table 1.  Management of MSW, 1988
ACTIVITY
  AMOUNT    PERCENT
(MILLION TONS)  OF TOTAL
Landfill
Material Recovery
Incineration
130.5
23.5
25.5
72.7
13.1
14.2
  Source: [2]
Table 2. Products Generated In MSW, 1988
CATEGORY
     AMOUNT      PERCENT
   (MILLION TONS)    OF TOTAL
Containers/Pckg.
Nondurable Goods
Durable Goods
Yard Waste
Food Wastes
Other
56.8
50.4
24.9
31.6
13.2
2.7
31.6
28.1
13.9
17.6
7.4
1.5
  Source: [2]
Table 3. Weight and Volume of Materials Discarded in MSW, 1988

CATEGORY          WEIGHT      PERCENT     VOLUME      PERCENT    RATIO OF
                (MILLION TONS)    OF TOTAL  (MILL. cu. YD.)   OF TOTAL  % voL./%wr.
Paper
Yard Waste
Plastics
Food Wastes
Glass
Ferrous Metals
Wood
Other
Rubber, Leather
Textiles
Aluminum
53.4
31.0
14.3
13.2
11.1
10.9
6.5
5.6
4.4
3.8
1.7
34.2
19.9
9.2
8.5
7.1
7.0
4.2
3.6
2.9
2.5
1.1
136.2
41.3
79.7
13.2
7.9
39.2
16.4
10.0
25.6
21.2
9.2
34.1
10.3
19.9
3.3
2.0
9.8
4.1
2.5
6.4
5.3
2.3
1.0
0.5
2.2
0.4
0.3
1.4
1.0
0.7
2.3
2.1
2.1
  Source: [2]
                                       153

-------
Appendix C
                           Manufacturing
                           6.5(59.6%)
                                                            Mining 1.7
                                                            (15.6%)
                                                            'Oil and Gas
                                                            1.4(12.8%)
                                                       Agriculture 1 (9.2%)
                                      Other .13 (1.2%)  MSW.18(1.6%)
                                    Total Generated: 10.9 Billion tons. Utility coal
                                    combustion accounts for the other category.  Mining
                                    wastes exclude mineral processing.

                                    Source: [9]

                           Figure 2.  Annual US Nonhazardous Waste
                                     Generation in Billion Tons
                              Another program, the ToxicTlelease Inventory (TRI) provision of
                          the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA),
                          provides information on 322 listed chemicals and chemical categories
                          defined as toxic. In 1989,22,569 facilities reported releases! totaling 5.7
                          billion Ibs (2.85 million tons) of TRI chemicals.  Of this total, 74% were
                          released on site to air, water, and land, while 26% were transferred off
                          site. Twenty-five of these chemicals accounted for 83% of TRI releases
                          in 1989 [5] (see Box A).
                               Box B provides the percentage of TRI releases to each medium.
                          The environmental impacts of a chemical releases depend 0111 exposure
                          and the chemical's mobility, persistence, and toxicity.

                          Ecological Degradation
                               Human activities result in ecosystem destruction and a loss of the
                          planet's biodiversity. The assault on tropical rain forests in the interest
                          of short-term goals is one of the most notorious recent examples of the
                          impacts caused by excessive resource use and poor management. This
                          "development" causes soil loss and degradation, local climate changes,
                          and disruption of native people.
                              Destroying tropical rain forests also critically affects biodiversity.
                          Although only about 6% of the earth's surface is  covered by moist
                          tropical forests,, they contain at least half of all the world's species. As
                          an extreme example, one survey in Kalimantan, Indonesia counted more
                                            154

-------
                                                      Overview of Environmental Impacts
BOX A. THE 25 MAJOR TR1 CHEMICALS
Ammonium sulfate
Hydrochloric acid
Methanol
Ammonia
Toluene
Sulfuricacid
Acetone
Xylene (mixed isomers)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Zinc compounds
Methyl ethyl ketone
Chlorine
Dichloromethane

Source: [5]
Manganese compounds
Carbon disulfida
Phosphoric acid
Nitric acid
Ammonium nitrate (solution)
Freon 113
Glycol ethers
Ethylene glycol
Zinc (fume or dust)
Copper compounds
Chromium compounds
n-Butyl alcohol
BOX B. 1989 TRI RELEASES TO
    VARIOUS MEDIA

 Air             43%
 Underground     21%
 Transfer off-site  16%
 Public sewage   10%
 Land             8%
 Surface Water    3%

Source: [5]
than 700 species of trees. The study area contained only 10 selected 1
hectare plots. One hectare equals 2.47 acres, so the total area surveyed
was slightly less than 25 acres. For comparison, all of North America
also contains about 700 native tree species [6].
    Many species in moist tropical forests are not yet catalogued, so
their natural histories remain unknown. Continued habitat destruction
may result in their extinction before they are discovered or studied.
Even if we value other species only for their potential benefits to us,
actions that lead to significant species extinction are unwise. Unless
sufficient areas are preserved, useful, perhaps even critical, substances
may be permanently removed from possible discovery.
    Tropical rain forests have already been reduced to 55% of their
original cover, and deforestation Continues at an annual rate of approxi-
mately 100,000 square kilometers, or 1% of the total remaining cover
[6]. Although extremely rich in species diversity, these ecosystems are
fragile and susceptible to long-term damage from human actions.
    Destruction of habitat is not confined to high-profile ecosystems.
Vast areas in all parts of the globe have been greatly altered by expand-
ing human populations. In the United States, old-growth forests of the
Pacific Northwest now cover only about 10% of their original range.
Continued rapid destruction of these areas threatens species such as yew
trees which grow in the understory of old-growth forests. The drug
taxol, a promising medication for treating cancer, is produced from such
trees.
                                            155

-------
Appendix C
                          Exploitation of Nonsustainable Resources
                               Products should not depend on materials derived from rare plant
                          and animal species or scarce minerals. In addition to causing degrada-
                          tion of natural habitats, exploitation of many potentially renewable re-
                          sources is proceeding at rates well in excess of their regenerative
                          capacity. Use oJF these valuable resources at the current pace cannot
                          continue indefinitely.

                          Energy  Use
                              Energy consumption is the most obvious example of human reli-
                          ance on nonrenewable resources. Product systems consume energy hi
                          all life cycle stages. Energy also becomes embodied in some materials.
                          For example, energy contained in plastics could be released by combus-
                          tion. In this way, the energy content of the petroleum used as a feed-
                          stock might not be lost. However, if the material is disposed in a
                          landfill, its energy content will be a form of waste.
                              At present, the world depends on fossil fuels for 88% of all pur-
                          chased energy. Each year,  500 million road vehicles consume half die
                          world's oil, or 19% of total energy demand [7]. Industrial processes
                          consume another 40% of world energy demand each year [8]. Table 4
                          shows how energy supplies are exploited.
                              Population increased 3.5 times and total world power use increased
                          13 times during [the last 100 years [9]. Figure 3 demonstrates these
                          trends. Calculations are based on total power use (energy per unit time).
                          Traditional biomass fuels such as wood, crop wastes, and dung are in-
                          cluded in Figure 3. Fossil fuel use rose by a factor of 20 during this pe-
                          riod.          ;
                              Although citizens of the developed countries are only about 23% of
                          world population, they use two-thirds of the world's total  energy. The
                          proportion is higher when purchased fuels alone are considered. By
                          consuming 6.8 times more power per capita than people in less devel-
                          oped countries (7.5 kW vs.  1.1 kW), each citizen of the developed world
                          annually uses thje equivalent of about 35 barrels of oil [9].

                          Climate Change
                              Combustion of fossil fuels for energy produces carbon dioxide, a
                          greenhouse gas ihat traps heat and can lead to global warming.. Human
                          activity in the last  two hundred years has dramatically increased atmo-
                          spheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane,
                          nitrous oxide, and  halocarbons. Human activity causes methane release
                          from rice fields,: cattle, landfills, and fuel production. Nitrous oxide
                          emissions result from fertilizer use and soil dynamics in agricultural and
                                           156

-------
                                                    Overview of Environmental Impacts
Table 4. Purchased World Energy Consumption, 1988
RESOURCE ANNUAL
USE
(QUADS)a
Oil 121
Coal 96
Natural Gas 20
Hydroelectric 22
Nuclear 1 7
PERCENT
OF TOTAL

38%
30%
20%
7%
5%
RESERVES'"
(QUADS)

7,000
150,000=
8,000


YEARS OF SUPPLY
AT 1988 RATES

60
1,500
120


" A quad is one quadrillion (101S) British thermal units (Btus). One Btu is the
    heat required to raise one pound of water one degree F. One billion
    barrels of oil contain 5.8 quads of energy.
b Economically recoverable: includes known and estimated undiscovered
    reserves.
0 Undiscovered coal reserves are estimated at more than ten times known
    reserves; undiscovered reserves of oil and gas are estimated at less
    than half known reserves.

Source: [7]
   14 -p


   12 ..


^ 10 ..

I
I  8
J3


|  «
Q.
  £
      4 ..
      2 ••
                     • Population

                     • Power Use
                                                      T 14

                                                      •  12

                                                      ..10  |

                                                      ..a   i
                              -4-
          1890    1910    1930    1950   1970    1990
     Source: [15]

  Figure 3. Trends in World Population and Power Use
                                          157

-------
Appendix C
                          disturbed areas, with some contribution from combustion. Halocarbons
                          containing chlorine and bromine serve as propellants, refrigerants,
                          blowing agents, and solvents (chlorofluorocarbons). Bromine-contain-
                          ing halons are used as tire retardants [11],
                              Clouds and various aerosols in the earth's atmosphere reflect about
                          one third of incoming solar radiation. Greenhouse gases allow the re-
                          maining short-wave solar radiation to pass through the atmosphere, but
                          they partially absorb outgoing long-wave radiation emitted by warm
                          earth surfaces. Absorbed radiation is then re-emitted back to the sur-
                          face, causing warming.
                              Table 5 show[s some characteristics and concentrations of various
                          greenhouse gases [capable of causing global warming.
                              Ozone is also an effective greenhouse gas, especially, in the tropo-
                          sphere (the lower;10-15 km of the atmosphere).  Because of its short
                          lifetime in the troposphere and chlorine-induced destruction in the
                          stratosphere (the atmosphere above 15 km), its global warming effects
                          are not well known.
                              Other processes caused by pollution influence global warming.
                          Sulfur aerosols reflect incoming solar radiation from the earth, resulting
                          in cooling. The effect of such aerosols on possible climate change is
                          largely unknown.! However, the atmospheric residence time of sulfur
                          aerosols is much shorter than greenhouse gases, ranging from days in
                          the troposphere to several years in the stratosphere. Decreases in sulfur
 Table 5. Characteristics of Major Greenhouse Gases
GAS
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
Nitrous Oxide
Halocarbons
TOTAL HUMAN
EMISSIONS/YR.
(MILLION TONS)
6000
300-400
4-6
1
AVERAGE
RESIDENCE
TIME
50-200 yrs.
10 yrs.
150 yrs.
65-1 30 yrs.
CONCEN-
TRATION
1765
280 ppm
.8 ppm
.285 ppm
0
CONCEN-
TRATION
1990
350 ppm
1 .7 ppm
.31 ppm
.38 ppb3
CONTRI-
BUTION TO
WARMING1
56%
11%
6%
24%
RADIATIVE
FORCING
EFFICIENCY2
1
58
206
4860
  'Estimated contributions from 1980-1990. Since preindustrial times, CO2 has contributed an estimated
   61% to potential global warming, methane 17%, nitrous oxide 4%, and CFCs 12%.
  ^n a per unit mass basis relative to CO2 (i.e. 1 kg of each gas, not an equal number of molecules).
   Radiative forcing here is positive; long-wave radiation reflected back to earth results in warming.
  3As average of CFC 11 & 12; also cause depletion of stratospheric ozone layer.
   Source: [11-13]
                                            158

-------
                                                     Overview of Environmental Impacts
aerosol emissions will therefore have an immediate effect on global
warming, but there will be a considerable lag between decreases in
emissions of most greenhouse gases and climatic effect.
    The current atmosphere can be compared to historic conditions by
several means. One method measures the concentrations of gases
trapped in glacial air bubbles. Because the age of glacial core samples
can be determined with some confidence for both recent and ancient
times, this gives a. relatively accurate picture of past atmospheres.
Through such studies, scientists have discovered that atmospheric con-
centrations of carbon dioxide rose 25% since 1765. Methane concen-
trations doubled in the same period.
    Changes in total human releases of greenhouse gases are not pre-
cisely reflected in atmospheric concentrations. The various gases are
cycled through the biosphere in a complex manner. Many details of this
cycling remain unknown.  For example, although scientists now esti-
mate that about half the 6 billion tons of anthropogenic (human-caused)
carbon dioxide released each year remains in the atmosphere, many as-
pects of the carbon dioxide cycle are still unclear.
    Based on best current estimates, about 30% of total human carbon
dioxide emissions result from land use changes, largely deforestation.
Fossil fuel combustion accounts for the remaining 70% [14].
    The Global Warming Potential (GWP) of greenhouse gas emissions
is much less well known than their radiative forcing efficiencies, shown
in Table 5.  Estimating the GWP of emissions is a difficult task given
the complex interactions of gases in the lower and upper  atmosphere.
Not knowing how long various gases remain in the atmosphere creates
more uncertainty. Table 6 gives current estimates of the  Global Warm-
ing Potential of major greenhouse gases.
    Developed countries account for 54% of all greenhouse gases
added to the atmosphere each year while developing countries contrib-
ute the remaining 46% [14]. A greenhouse index can be produced by
estimating net additions of each gas (total emissions multiplied by the
percentage eventually added to the atmosphere) then assigning a weight
to each gas based on its warming potential. Using this index, only six
countries are responsible for 50% of global greenhouse gas loading
each year [14]. Table 7 shows how greenhouse emissions are distrib-
uted among these countries.
    Greenhouse indexes are based on current emissions, not cumulative
additions during the industrial age. On a cumulative basis, the devel-
oped countries are probably responsible for a greater proportion of total
greenhouse gas releases.
                                           159

-------
Appendix C
                          Table 6. Global Warming Potential of Equal
                                    Mass Emissions Over Time
                          GAS
              20YRS    100YRS   500 YRS
                          C02
                          Methane
                 1          1         1
                63         21         9
Nitrous Oxide    270        290       190
CFC-11        4500       3500      1500
CFC-12        7100       7300      4500

 Source: [11]
                          Table 7. Top Six Producers of
                              Greenhouse Index
COUNTRY
PERCENT OF
GREENHOUSE

US
Former USSR
Brazil
China
India
Japan
INCREASES
|17.0
13.1
8.5
7.6
4.6
3.7
NET PER CAPITA
ADDITIONS
(KG co2 EQUIVALENT)
3.8
2.5
3.3
0.4
0.3
1.6
                           Source: [14]
                              As a result of increasing greenhouse gas accumulation, there is a
                          high probability of the planet wanning from 1.5 to 2.5 degrees Celsius
                          within the next 60 to 100 years [15]. Temperatures might increase by
                          as much as 4 degrees Celsius.  By comparison, average global tempera-
                          ture during the last ice age was only 4-5° C lower than today. Tempera-
                          ture increases in jthe range of 1.5-4° C may change weather patterns,
                          substantially reducing agricultural productivity in key areas.  The maxi-
                          mum abundance of some vegetation could shift as much as 300 to 600
                          miles in the next 2- 500 years. This move would equal that made over
                          1-3,000 years during the most recent period of rapid glaciation [16].
                              Weather shifts could occur suddenly, rather than in a smooth pro-
                          gression. This would make adjustment much more difficult.  Even with
                          temperature shifts in the lower range of estimates, sea levels  will rise,
                                           160

-------
                                                     Overview of Environmental Impacts
inundating heavily populated coastal areas. In the next 100 years, tem-
perature and sea levels are expected to rise five times more rapidly than
during the previous 100 years [15].
    To stabilize atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases at cur-
rent levels, anthropogenic emissions will have to be greatly reduced.
Table 8 shows how emissions of each gas are presently rising and how
they will have to be cut to avoid future increased concentrations.

Ozone Destruction
    In addition to acting as a greenhouse gas, halocarbons destroy the
stratospheric ozone that protects all life on the planet from ultraviolet
radiation. A reduction hi stratospheric ozone concentration will in-
crease cases of skin cancer, eye cataracts, and impaired immune sys-
tems, while also causing agricultural disruption. An ozone hole
(actually a 50% reduction in ozone concentration) approximately the
size of the United States now appears over the South Pole every winter.
Although some features of the Antarctic ozone hole are not fully under-
stood, CFCs are apparently the major cause.
    Human-caused ozone depletion is not confined to remote areas.
Chlorine-induced ozone destruction can be accurately estimated by mea-
suring stratospheric concentrations of chlorine monoxide. This com-
pound is both a catalyst and product of ozone destruction.  Chlorine
monoxide concentrations of 1.5 ppb, or 75 times higher than normal,
were discovered above Bangor, Maine and eastern Canada on 20 Janu-
ary 1992 [17]. This is the highest level ever recorded, exceeding even
those found during formation of the ozone hole in Antarctica. Concen-
trations of 1.2 ppb were also measured over Europe and Asia [17].
Table 8. Current Rate of Increased Green-
        house Gas Emissions and
        Reductions Required to Stabilize at
        Current Concentrations
GAS
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
Nitrous Oxide
CFG 11 &12
INCREASE
PER YEAR
0.50%
0.90%
0.25%
4.00%
REQUIRED
REDUCTION
60-80%
15-20%
70-80%
70-85%
                                           161

-------
Appendix C
                              Scientists believe that a 20-30% reduction in stratospheric ozone
                          concentrations will almost certainly develop over some populated re-
                          gions of the northern hemisphere in the next 10 years [17].  These north-
                          ern "holes" are expected to be less severe than in Antarctica as a result
                          of different weather patterns.
                              The consequences of increased ultraviolet radiation reaching the
                          earth may be far reaching.  However, little can be dpne to improve the
                          situation in the near term, because ozone-destroying compounds are so
                          persistent hi the stratosphere.
                              Table 9 shows selected characteristics of various halocarbons.
                              In 1987, developed countries signing the Montreal Protocol on Sub-
                          stances That Deplete the Ozone Layer agreed to reduce their production
                          and consumption bf CFC-11, -12, -113, -114, and -115 to 50% of 1986
                          levels by  1998. Ijhe effectiveness of the Montreal Protocol is somewhat
                          limited because India and China have not agreed to its terms.
                                           162

-------
                                                    Overview of Environmental Impacts
Table 9. Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Ozone Depleting
       Potential (OOP) of Various Halocarbons
GAS GWP: EQUAL MASS
RELATIVE TO CO2
100 YEAR HORIZON1
CFC-11
CFC-12
CFC-113
CFC-114
CFC-115
Carbon Tetrachloride
HCFC-22
HCFC-123
HCFC-124
HCFC-125
HCFC-134a
HCFC-141b
HCFC-142b
HCFC-143a
HCFC-152a
Halon-13012
H-1211
H-1202
H-2402
H-1201
H-2401
H-2311
3500
7300
4200
6900
6900 .
1300
1500
85
430
2500
1200
440
1600
2900
140

4
1.25
7
1.4
.25
.14
OOP
RELATIVE TO
CFC-11
1.00
1.00
1.07
0.80
0.50
1.08
.06
.02
.02
0
0
0.11
0.06
0
0
16.00






'Due to complex mixing in the troposphere, GWPs
  for short-lived gases are difficult to calculate.
  The radiative cooling caused by ozone loss in
  the lower stratosphere may offset the warming
  effect of ozone-depleting gases. Thus
  calculations of GWPs for ozone -depleting
  halocarbons may be much less than reported.
  At present, these GWP estimates are
  controversial.
Estimates of OOP for halons are more uncertain
  than for chlorine compounds.

Source: [11,18]
                                          163

-------
Appendix C
                             References
                               1. Science Advisory Board. 1990. Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strate-
                                    gies for Environmental Protection, US Environmental Protection Agency,
                                    Washington, DC EPA SAB-EC 90-021.
                               2. U. S. EPA. 1990. Characterization of Solid Waste in the United States: 1990
                                    Update, US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste,
                                    Washington,; DC EPA 530-SW-90-042A.
                               3. Franklin Associates. 1988. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
                                    United States 1960-2000:1988 Update, US E.P.A. Office of Solid Waste
                                    and Emergency Response, Washington, DC WH-565E.
                               4. US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment 1992. Managing Industrial
                                    Solid Waste From Manufacturing, Mining, Oil and Gas Production, and
                                    Utility Coal Combustion - Background Paper, US Government Printing
                                    Office, Washington, DC OTA-BP-Q-82.
                               5. US EPA. 1991. Toxics in the Community: National andLocal Perspectives,
                                    US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Toxic Substances, Wash-
                                    ington, DC EPA 560/4-91-014.
                               6. Wilson,Edward0.1989.ThreatstoBiodiversity.5cfewfiyicy4»J0'iican261
                                    (3): 108-116.
                               7. Fulkerson, William, RoddieR. Judkins, andManoj K. Sanghvi. 1990. En-
                                    ergy From Fossil Fuels. Scientific American 263 (3): 129-135.
                               8. Bleviss, Deborah L., and Peter Walzer. 1990. Energy For Motor Vehicles.
                                    Scientific American 263 (3): 103-109.
                               9.  Ross, Marc H;, and Daniel Steinmeyer. 1990. Energy For Industry. Scientific
                                    ylmfirfca»263(3):89-98.
                               10.  Holdren, John P. 1990. Energy in Transition. Scientific American 263 (3):
                                     157-163.
                               11.  Houghton, J.T., G.J. Jenkins, and JJ. Ephraums, editors. 1990. Climate
                                     Change-ThelPPC Scientific Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
                                     sity Press.
                               12.  Ramanauian, V. 1988. The Greenhouse Theory of Climate Change: A Test
                                     by an Inadvertent Global Experiment Science 240:293-299.
                               13.  Lashof, Daniel A., and Dilip R. Ahuja. 1990. Relative Contributions of
                                     Greenhouse Gas Emissions to Global Warming. Nature 344:529-521.
                               14.  Hammond, Allen L., Eric Rodenburg, and William Moomaw. 1990. Ac-
                                     countabilityin the Greenhouse. Nature 347:705-706.
                               15.  Wigley, T.M.L., and S.CB. Raper. 1992. Implications for Climate and Sea
                                     Level of Revised IPCC Emissions Scenarios. Nature 357(6376): 293-300.
                               16.  Overpeck, Jonathan T., Patrick J. Bartlein, and Thompson Webb HI. 1991.
                                     Potential Magnitude of Future Vegetation Change in Eastern N, America,
                                     Science 254: 692-694.
                               17.  Leary, Warren E. 4 February 1992. Record Rise in Ozone-Destroying
                                     Chemicals Found inNorth. TheNew York Times, National Edition, B, 7:
                               18.  Asessment Chairs for the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. 1991.  Synthesis
                                     of the Reports of the Ozone Scientific, Environmental Effects, and Technol-
                                     ogy and Economic Assessment Panels, UNEP, New York.
                                                 164

-------
               APPENDIX D: DECISION  MAKING
    Decision making is a fundamental design activity. Exploring needs,
setting requirements, and evaluating designs all depend on translating
complex information into successful decisions. Decision-making models
have been applied to subjects as diverse as political policy and choosing the
best home. Discussion in this appendix will focus only on design.

Key Elements
    Many decision-making models have the following elements in com-
mon:
    • Precisely defined objectives that draw boundaries around the
      problem
    • Systematic procedures that exclude casual or broad assumptions
    • Rank and weigh objectives according to priority
    • Complex problems broken into clear parts based on known func-
      tions
    • Evaluation based on analysis of similar elements

    To avoid confusion at a later stage, overall project goals have to be
negotiated and agreed on by the development team at the beginning of a
project. Precise definition is vital when important decisions must be
made quickly, because it helps focus efforts on critical areas and greatiy
increases efficiency.
    Assumptions often drive decisions. Systematic procedures can help
identify and eliminate casual assumptions that lead to poor decisions. A
systematic method greatiy aids development teams as they develop and
assign priority to requirements. Breaking complex design problems into
discrete units based on similar function is a key activity in successful
decision making. The best decisions result from focusing on vital ele-
ments and analyzing their relationships in as logical a fashion as pos-
sible.
    Because all necessary facts will often not be known, judgements
and interpretations based on incomplete information will be a central
part of many decisions. This mixture of known and uncertain data is a
common element in all complex problems. Decision-making systems
                                         165

-------
Appendix D
                         must therefore be able to compare both facts and mere estimates arising
                         from many different types of research.
                             Development teams can rely on purely intuitive methods, but a
                         practical system for organizing the diverse elements in a multi-objective
                         design problem may be a better choice. All formal decision-making
                         systems were developed to improve results, but each development team
                         should choose a method that seems compatible with its own dynamics.
                         As in other aspects of life cycle design, meeting customer needs while
                         reducing environmental impacts remains the overall goal; methods of
                         achieving this end can vary across a broad spectrum.
                              Decision making' is a large and varied field. A full exploration of it
                         is beyond the scope of this manual. However, given the importance of
                         many decisions to project success, a review of two popular models for
                         decision making may be beneficial. References at the end of this appen-
                         dix can be used for further guidance. Readers should know that many
                         other models exist beyond these few examples.

                          Rational Analysis with Uncertain Data

                              Kepner and Tregoe [1] offer one popular, systematic approach. Af-
                          ter an overall project objective is established, requirements are proposed
                          to meet that objective. Requirements are weighed and assigned priori-
                          ties based on how important they are to project goals. These priorities
                          are negotiated with the best available data.  Either quantitative or quali-
                          tative information can be used.

                          Assigning Priority to Requirements
                               As a first step in assigning priority, must requirements are distin-
                          guished from other requirements. The remaining requirements are then
                          weighed and assigned priority. These priorities reflect direct judge-
                          ments of team members.
                              Priorities can be assigned verbally, or they may be in numerical
                          form. Although preferences vary, the process of translating verbid
                          judgements into numbers can lead to more thorough and accurate repre-
                          sentations of team judgements.
                               A variety of scales may be chosen for numerical values. Ranges
                          from 1 to 10 or 0 to |l may be convenient for many development teams.
                          As an example, on a scale from 0 to 1, the following verbal and mumeri-
                          cal representations could be used to depict group judgements:
                                            166

-------
                                                                          Decision Making
              Numerical
              Weight
   Verbal
  Priority
               Must Requirements
               yes/no
Absolute need
               Want and Ancillary Requirements
               1               Highly important

               .8                Very important
               .6                     Important
               .4                     Desirable
               .2               Slightly desirable

               0                   Unimportant

    In this system, requirements might be grouped with numerical
boundaries to ease analysis. For example, want requirements might ex-
tend from .6 or .7 to 1, while ancillary requirements are assigned a prior-
ity less than .6.  The value of decisions made with any system depends
on how accurately these descriptions reflect reality. Therefore, a great
deal of effort must be made to characterize priorities and estimations
precisely.

Evaluating Designs
    After requirements are assigned priorities, competing designs can be
evaluated in several stages. First, alternatives have to meet all must re-
quirements, or they are rejected. It is likely that more than one alterna-
tive will satisfy all must requirements, so the next step involves
selecting the best choice.
    Some must requirements will be simple yes/no screens not included
in further assessment.  For example, if a product must be non-toxic in
use and produce no toxic or hazardous waste after consumer disposal,
alternatives either fail or pass this requirement. No design can be almost
non-toxic or produce less  than zero hazardous waste. However, improv-
ing on set limits for other  must requirements will be desirable, so these
requirements can be included in further evaluation.
    Alternatives are then judged on how well they meet the remaining
weighted requirements. The same systematic procedures used to weight
requirements are used to rank designs. In a numerical system, the rating
(rank) a design receives for each requirement is multiplied by the prior-
                                            167

-------
Appendix D
Want
Criteria:
Env1
Env2
Env3
wt.
(0-1)
.7
.9
.4
Design Alternatives
Sodium
Ranking
(0-1)
.9
.8
.3
Total:
•sulfur
Score
(wl*rank)
.63
.72
.12
1.47
Lead-
Ranking
(0-1)
.4
.4
.8

acid
Score
(wl*rank)
.28
.36
.32
.%
                       Figure E-1. Two Designs Evaluated Against Limited Criteria With
                                  Rational Management Method
                          ity (weight) given to that requirement These scores are added to arrive
                          at an overall score.
                              Figure E-1 presents a very simple example of two hypothetical bat-
                          tery designs for an electric automobile. Both batteries are evaluated
                          against three environmental want criteria (Env 1,2, and 3). For the pur-
                          poses of illustration, the sodium-sulfur design satisfies both high-prior-
                          ity environmental requirements significantly better than the lead-acid
                          alternative. Although the lead-acid design is a superior choice with re-
                          gard to the lowest-priority requirement, the overall weighted score obvi-
                          ously favors the design that performed best in the more important
                          criteria. Because it is unlikely that a single design alternative willl be the
                          clear choice for all high-priority requirements, evaluation in actual de-
                          sign projects will be much more complex.
                              Development teams need to evaluate designs based on requirements
                          from all classes. Hie simplest way to accomplish this task is by forming
                          a single multi-discipline group that proposes and evaluates all require-
                          ments. For complex products, this type of group is likely to be un-
                          wieldy,            i
                              As an alternative, expert groups for each broad class of require-
                          ments may be formed. If this option is selected, requirements are first
                          proposed and prioritized within a class by an expert group, then pre-
                                            168

-------
                                                                          Decision Making
seated to the entire development team for consideration. A thorough
review of proposed requirements and priorities before approval ensures
that possible conflicts are identified and resolved. Finally, the same
groups evaluate designs and present their recommendations to the full
team for a final judgement
    Some design teams may wish to add uncertainty factors to judge-
ments based on incomplete information. As an example, if two alterna-
tives appear equally preferable with regard to a requirement, but one
seems more likely to satisfy this function in actual situations, a higher
evaluation could be given to the more certain choice.
    Caution must be exercised when interpreting numerical judgements
based on verbal translations of incomplete data. In addition, summing
various factors inserts another potential for inaccuracy into the process,
because evaluations based on hard data must necessarily be combined
with others that are much less well-defined.
    Even when such problems are recognized and reduced, the develop-
ment team must decide on a level of significance for interpreting results
that corresponds with actual results. It may be tempting to analyze nu-
merical scores to many decimal places, but if this does not reflect either
the actual data or the verbal translation process, it can lead to inappro-
priate judgements. The development team.should be aware that making
fine distinctions between values based on best guesses invites distorted
judgement.
    As the final step in the Kepner Tregoe method, the best alternatives
are further analyzed for their potential adverse consequences.  Antici-
pating potential problems and including these assessments in the final
evaluation adds another dimension to decision making.

The Analytical Hierarchy Process

    The Analytical Hierarchy Process attempts to streamline and im-
prove simple, intuitive problem solving. To do so, feelings, judge-
ments, and logic are organized in a structured process capable of
handling complex situations [2,3]. Both quantitative and qualitative
elements are considered. This more accurately reflects the way people
define and attempt to solve problems. As long as such criteria are
clearly defined and agreed on, both methods  of analysis can contribute
to effective decisions.
    As a first step in properly defining a problem, a hierarchy of deci-
sion elements is formed. The top level of the hierarchy is a single ele-
ment representing the project goal; there can be as many subsequent
levels as needed. Elements on the same level must be similar and logi-
                                            169

-------
Appendix D
                          cally related so they can be directly compared. When elements on a
                          level are not readily comparable, a new level with finer distinctions
                          should be created.
                              Once elements of ihe problem have been identified, and logical
                          consistency obtained by grouping like elements on the same level, de-
                          ments are compared with each other to develop priorities and make
                          evaluations. Unlike some other systematic methods, no independent
                          judgements are made. All priorities and evaluations in this system re-
                          sult from comparing one element with another. This pairwise compari-
                          son can be extended to as many elements as required for a particulsnr
                          problem. By making all judgements strictly relative, analysis may be
                          more realistic, and decisions can be improved.

                          Using Matrices for Comparison
                              Comparing similar elements to a criterion from the next higher level
                          establishes their relative priority. Pairwise comparison answers this
                          question: How much rtjore strongly does one element contribute to
                          achieving the stated goal (or satisfying this requirement) than another1!
                          The answer is first expressed verbally then translated into a numerical
                          value based on a scale of 1 through 9. A value of 1 means both ele-
                          ments are of equal importance, while a value of 9 means that one ele-
                          ment takes absolute preference over another [4].
                                      Intensity of
                                      Importance

                                          1

                                          3
        Meaning
Elements equal

Weak importance: judgement
slightly favors one element

Strong importance: one
element strongly favored

Very strong: dominance of one
element demonstrated by fact

Absolute importance:
incontrovertible evidence
                                           From: [23,24]
                                              j

                                             170

-------
                                                                         Decision Making
    2,4,6, and 8 are intermediate values. When one element is less
 favored than another, this judgement is represented by a fraction using
 the above scale.  As an example, when one element is weakly less im-
 portant than another, it is assigned a value of 1/3. As in all decision-
 making systems, when fine distinctions must be made between
 elements, numbers have to be chosen with great care to obtain accurate
 priorities.
    A matrix is then constructed to compare elements. The simplest
 case is a 2x2 matrix (i.e. comparing 2 designs against a single criterion).
     Criterion
B
          A

          B
Comparisons are made between the first element of a pair, found in the
left hand column (in bold), and the second element, found in the top
row. Thus the first pairs compared are: A-A, then A-B. Although there
are 4 spaces in this simple 2x2 matrix, only 2 judgements will generally
have to be made because each element compared to itself is 1. In such a
simple system comparisons between A-B and B-A will usually be a re-
ciprocal such as 3 and 1/3.
    The same method is used to assign priority to requirements and then
rank designs based on how well they meet those requirements.

Synthesis and Evaluation
    An evaluation of the two previously discussed hypothetical battery
designs begins by weighting requirements. However, this illustration
will focus only on ranking designs. The priorities assigned to each re-
quirement here are obtained by the methods that follow.  These priori-
ties are consistent with the judgements expressed in Figure E-l.
    After priorities are established, designs are ranked on how well they
satisfy each environmental criterion. To begin, the ability of the two
battery designs to satisfy environmental criterion 1 is compared. Again,
values used here are consistent with those in Figure E-l.
Envl
NaS
Pb
NaS
1
1/7
Pb
7
1
                                           171

-------
AppencSxD
                             Once appropriate values have been entered into the matrix, the
                         relative importance of each element is calculated. First, values in each
                         column are added.
Env1
NaS
Pb
NaS
1
0.143
Pb
7
1
                              Column total;   1.1:43
            8
                             Then, each value in a column is divided by the sum of that column
                         ta obtain the normalized matrix. This step expresses all entries in the;
                         column as percentage of the column total.
                              Normalized;
                                   Env 1
                                   NaS
                                   Pb
  NaS     Pb
0.875   0.875
0;125   O.T25
                             To obtain meaningful comparisons, normalized values in each row
                         are added, then averaged. Final values are again expressed as percent-
                         ages, with the preference for all elements adding to 1. In this manner,
                         any number of alternatives can be compared with each other to arrive at
                         an estimation of theairpreference withregard to asingle criterion.
Envt
NaS
Pb
NaS
0.875
0.125
Pb
0.875
0.125
Row
Total
;tJ5
!0:25:
; Average
j 0.875
0.125
                            A final judgement is obtained by adding prioritized scores for each
                         alternative as showri in Figure E-2. Again, evaluation obviously favors
                         the design alternative that best satisfies the highest-priority require-
                         ments.
                                          172

-------
                                                                        Decision Making
Want
Criteria:
Env 1
Env 2
Env 3
Wt.
0.283
0.643
0.074
Design Alternatives
Sodii
Ranking
0.875
0.857
0.125
Total:
urn-sulfur
Score
(wt*rank)
0.247
0.551
0.009
0.808
Lead
Ranking
0.125
0.143
0.875

-acid
Score
(wt*rank)
0.035
0.092
0.065
0.192
Figure 5-5. Two Designs Evaluated Against Limited Criteria With
            Analytical Hierarchy Method
    Even in simple problems with few elements, perfect consistency
(that is if A-B is 3, then B-A must be 1/3) is unlikely. Inconsistency is
particularly likely when complex and subtle interconnections exist be-
tween various elements. Means have been developed to address this
problem. Final results from any matrix can be compared with values
expected from random judgements [2,3]. Additional computations can
also be performed to reflect the various types of interdependence that
arise among the elements being compared.
    Conclusions from the Analytical Hierarchy Process should always
be examined for simple logic and common sense.  Even when no obvi-
ous problems arise, design teams must select the proper scale of signifi-
cance for distinguishing between alternatives to avoid error.
    The AHP has been criticized for various technical reasons [5]. In
addition, the 1-9 judgement scale and its numerical translation can seem
inappropriate and illogical to many.  For this reason, interpreting results
can present special problems. Translation from numbers back into lan-
guage should follow the original scale [5].  That is, if one choice earns a
score that is 3 times higher than another, it should be judged as only
slightly more favorable. To be clearly preferable, the overall score for a
design would have to be fives times  that of its alternative.
                                            173

-------
Appendix D
                          Decision Making Limitations

                          Incommensurable^
                              Elements from different classes of requirements sometimes defy
                          easy comparison. For example, it can be very difficult to weigh esti-
                          mated levels of resource depletion against an aspect of performance.
                          This problem also exists within the class of environmental requirements.
                          How can energy use be compared with human health or ecological deg-
                          radation? Furthermore, what priority should one assign to different ele-
                          ments of ecological degradation or human health impacts?  References
                          such as Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental Protection
                          [6] can help in this process, but development teams will still be faced
                          with many difficult choices in weighing items that are measured with
                          different scales.

                          Data
                              Information used to develop environmental requirements and evalu-
                          ate design alternatives may be much more incomplete or uncertain than
                          data on cost or performance. Developing priorities and evaluating de-
                          sign alternatives can therefore be a proportionally more difficult task for
                          environmental requirements than for other classes of requirements.
                          There may also be no way to even estimate some important information.
                          Such gaps present problems regardless of how skilled a development
                          team is at making appropriate decisions.

                          Judgement
                              Decision-making systems can assist development teams in organiz-
                          ing and accurately translating their judgements. Yet the ultimate quality
                          of many decisions depends on the skill and experience of the team mem-
                          bers. A perfectly efficient method of organizing opinions cannot im-
                          prove on the quality of those opinions.
                                           174

-------
                                                                                Decision Making
References
  1.
  3.
  4.

  5.
Kepner, Charles H., and Benjamin B. Tregoe. 1965. The Rationed Manager
  New York: McGraw-Hill.
Saaty, Thomas L. 1982. Decision Making for Leaders. Belmont, CA:
  Wadsworth.
	. 1980. The Analytical Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
	. 1977. A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures. Jour-
  nal of Mathematical Psychology 15 (3): 234-281.
Holder, R. D. 1990. Some Comments on the Analytic Hierarchy Process.
  Journal of the Operational Research Society. 41 (11): 1073-1076.
Science Advisory Board. 1990. Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strate-
  gies for Environmental Protection, US Environmental Protection Agency,
  Washington, DC EPA SAB-EC 90-021.
                                               175

-------
APPENDIX E. ENVIRONMENTAL LABELING


                     A range of third-party programs offer environmental labeling
                 services to companies. These labels are intended to identify the least
                 damaging products in equivalent groups. Consumers can then use the
                 labels to select environmentally sound products that meet their needs.
                     Labels are awarded on the basis of standards developed by various
                 organizations. In all programs to date, participation by manufacturers is
                 voluntary. Those wishing to display a label must first pay a fee.
                 Labeling rights cover a set amount of time, usually ranging from one to
                 three years.
                     Virtually all programs claim to follow a life cycleapproach to
                 ensure reduction of total impacts. But standard setting and product
                 evaluation is actually based on a few "key" factors that may or may not
                 accurately reflect life cycle impacts. Criteria used to judge products
                 have included:

                      • recycled content
                      • recyclability or reusability
                      • degradability :
                      <•hazardous/toxic material content
                      •• pollution impacts
                      • minimal use of resources/avoidance of nonrenewable or nonsus-
                       taihable resources

                      The first three categories are particularly popular [1]. Unfortu-
                  nately, evaluating products on this basis may not result in reduction of
                  life cycle impacts. Criteria used to target product groups for labeling
                  include some or all pf the following:

                      • Major constitttent of the waste stream by volume or weighE
                      • Produces substantial impacts through toxicity, hazardousness, or
                       difficulty of disposal
                      • Easy to evaluate; can be differentiated based on a few, agreed-
                       upon criteria
                      • Commonly used, high-profile among consumers
                      • Offers opportunity for significant environmentaMmpaet reduction
                                   176

-------
    The German Blue Angel program, established in 1978, was the
pioneer in this field. As in most other programs, evaluation of products
is claimed to be based on a life cycle approach which follows the
product from raw materials acquisition to disposal.  In practice, many
products are awarded the label based on a single criterion. Although this
greatly simplifies evaluation, it cannot reflect life cycle results. Narrow
focus is encouraged by the label design, which states in one very brief
phrase why each product has received the Blue Angel. The Canadian
Environmental Choice and Japanese Ecomark programs, both begun in
1989, are based on the Blue Angel.  Neither uses any recognized life
cycle analysis despite claims of a cradle-to-grave approach [1,2].
    Other government environmental labeling programs include the
Nordic countries' Nordic Environmental Label and the Australian Green
Spot, The European Community will also introduce an environmental
label after formation of the Single European Market in 1993. All these
programs award labels based on just one or several criteria [2,3].
    In the United States, private companies, rather man government, are
developing environmental labels. Both Green Seal, Inc. and the Green
Cross Certification Company are active in this area. Each develops
standards that are supposed to be based on reducing life cycle impacts.
These criteria are set on a category by category basis and are meant to
reflect current state-of-the-art practices that are technically and economi-
cally feasible [4,5].
    As most labeling programs state, identifying key impacts for
concentrated evaluation is a vital step in producing an accurate label.
Effective use of the life cycle framework for environmental labeling
depends on narrowing the scope of analysis. However, identifying key
impacts may be difficult because life cycle data is lacking for many
products.  Labeling programs could generate their own data, but life
cycle analyses require significant costs and time, and must address
complex issues such as assigning priority to various incommensurable
criteria. Results may be too detailed for a small label.
    Until sufficient data are developed, labeling programs may have to
rely on limited criteria and uncertain information. There are several
advantages to basing labels on restricted criteria:

    • Standards can be promulgated relatively quickly
    • Evaluation costs are substantially lower
     • Consumer attention is focused on a few easily-understood choices

    However, labeling initiatives should not promise or imply more than
they can deliver.  A simple  environmental labeling system based on
                                             177

-------
Appendix E
                           restricted criteria call facilitate consumer use, but it may also undermine
                           consumer confidence if such evaluations are found to be inadequate.
                                Customer participation and interest remain the key to effective
                           environmental labeling programs. Users of any product should under-
                           stand that an environmental label is only a snapshot of a complex set of
                           issues.
                            References
                              1.  Saner, Beverly J,, Robert G. Hunt, and Marjorie A. RranTdin. 1990. Back-
                                  ground Document on Clean Products Research and Implementation, US
                                  EPA Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH EPA/600/2-
                                  90/048.      '
                              2.  Hirsbak, Stig, Birgitte B. Nielsen, and Thomas Lindhqvist 1990. ECO-Prpd-
                                  ucts, Proposal For an European Community Environmental Label, Danish
                                  Technological Institute, Department of Environmental Technology,
                                  Copenhagen, Denmark.
                              3.  1992. Amended proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) Concerning a Com-
                                  munity Award Scheme for an Ecolabel. Official Journal of the European
                                  CommunitiesilO C12 (18.1.92 ): 16-30.
                              4.  Green Seal, 1992. Environmental Standards, Green Seal, Washington, DC.
                              5.  Green Cross Certification Company. 1991. GreenCross Environmental Seal
                                  of Approval: Draft Certification Criteria, Green Cross Certification Com-
                                  pany, Oakland, CA.
                                               178

-------
                       APPENDIX F: GLOSSARY
 Biodegradable  Capable of being broken
    down by natural, biological processes. The
    lack of light, oxygen, and water in modern
    landfills severely inhibits degradation.

 Compatible Material  When combined, com-
    patible materials do not cause unacceptable
    impacts or risks. For example, materials
    should not be combined that result in delete-
    rious chemical reactions. Compatible mate-
    rials do not act as contaminants when
    recycled in moderate amounts with others.

 Cross-Disciplinary Team A design team
    that includes representatives from all the ma-
    jor players in the product life cycle.

 Concurrent Design  Simultaneous design of
    all components of the product system includ-
    ing processes and distribution networks.
    Concurrent design requires an integrated
    team of specialists from various areas.

 Downcycle To recycle for a less-demanding
    use. Degraded materials are downcycled.

 Embodied Energy Energy contained in a ma-
    terial that can be recovered for useful pur-
    poses through combustion or other means.

Equivalent Use  Delivery of an equal amount
    of product or service. Usually stated in
    terms of distance, number, volume, weight,
    or time. For example, the amount of deter-
    gent required to wash a certain number of
    identical loads.
 Externalities  Costs borne by society rather
    than those involved in a transaction.

 Home Scrap  Materials and by-products com-
    monly recycled within an original manufac-
    turing process [1].

 Impact Analysis  Assesses the environmental
    impacts and risks associated with various
    activities. An impact analysis interprets data
    from a life cycle inventory by identifying
    the main impacts associated with inputs and
    outputs.

 Inventory Analysis  Identifies and quantifies
    all inputs and outputs associated with a
    product system including materials, energy,
    and residuals.

 Life Cycle Accounting  A system for assign-
    ing specific costs to product systems within
    a physical life cycle framework. Based on
    total cost assessment.

Life Cycle Design  A systems-oriented ap-
    proach for designing more ecologically and
    economically sustainable product systems.
    It couples the product development cycle
    used in business with the physical life cycle
    of a product. Life cycle design integrates
    environmental requirements into the earliest
    stages of design so total impacts caused by
    product systems can be reduced. In life
    cycle design, environmental, performance,
    cost, cultural, and legal requirements are
    balanced. Concepts such as concurrent de-
                                         179

-------
    sign, total quality management, cross-disci-
    plinary teams, and multi-attribute decision
    making are essential elements of life cycle
    design.

Needs Analysis  The process of defining
    societal needs that will be fulfilled by a
    proposed development project

Physical Life Cycle  The series of physical
    activities that form the framework for
    material and energy flows in a product life
    cycle. The physical life cycle consists of the
    material and energy flows in a product life
    cycle. Sceproduct life cycle.

Pollution Any by-product or unwanted residual
    produced by human activity. Residuals in- [
    elude all hazardous and nonhazardous sub-
    stances generated or released to the air, water,
    or land.

Pollution Prevention Any practice that re-
    duces the amount or environmental and
    health impacts of any pollutant released into
    the environment prior to recycling, treatment,
    or disposal. Pollution prevention includes
    modifications of equipment and processes;
    reformulation or redesign of products and
    processes; substitution of raw materials; and
    improvements in housekeeping, maintenance,
    training, or inventory control. It does not
    include activities that are not integral to pro-
    ducing a good or providing a service [2].

Postconsumer Material  In recycling, mate-
    rial that has served its intended use and been
    discarded before recovery.

Preconsumer Material  In recycling, overruns,
    rejects, or scrap generated during any stage of
    production outside  the original manufacturing
    process [1].
Product Life Cycle  The life cycle of a prod-
    uct system begins with the acquisition of
    raw materials and includes bulk material
    processing, engineered materials production,
    manufacture and assembly, use, retirement,
    and disposal of residuals produced in each
    stage.

Product System   Consists of the product, pro-
    cess, distribution network, and management.
    The product includes all materials in the fi-
    nal product and all forms of those materials
    hi each stage of the life cycle. Processes
    transform materials and energy. Distribution
    includes packaging and transportation net-
    works used to contain, protect, and transport
    products and process materials. Wholesal-
    ing and retailing are part of distribution.
    Management consist of equipment and ad-
    ministrative services related to managing
    activities. It also includes developing and
    conveying information.

Recycling  The reformation, reprocessing, or
    in-process reuse of a waste material. The
    EPA defines recycling as: "..the series of
    activities, including collection, separation,
    and processing, by which products or other
    materials are recovered from or otherwise
    diverted from the solid waste stream for use
    in the form of raw materials in the manufac-
    ture of new products other than fuel [1].

Renewable Capable of being replenished
    quickly enough  to meet present or Bear-term
    demand. Time and quantity are the critical
    elements in measures of renewability. See
    Sustainable.

Requirements The functions, attributes, and
    constraints used to define and bound the so-
    lution space for  design.  General categories
    of requirements include environmental, per-
                                            180

-------
                                                                                   Glossary
    fonnance, cost, cultural, and legal.
        Requirements can be classified as fol-
    lows:
     Must requirements Conditions that designs
       have to meet  Arrived at by ranking all
       proposed functions and choosing only the
       most important
    -Wont requirements Desirable traits used to
       select the best alternative from possible
       solutions that meet must requirements.
       Want requirements are also ranked and
       used to evaluate designs.
     Ancillary requirements Desired functions
       judged to be relatively unimportant and
       thus relegated to a "wish list". Included
       in the final product only if they do not
       conflict with other criteria.

Residual The remainder. In the life cycle
    framework, those wastes remaining after all
    usable materials have been recovered.

Retirement  The transitional life cycle stage
    between use and disposal. Resource recov-
    ery options are decided in this stage. Prod-
    ucts and materials may be reused,
    remanufactured, or recycled after retirement.

Reuse The additional use of a component,
    part, or product after it has been removed
    from a clearly defined service cycle. Reuse
    does not include reformation.  However,
    cleaning, repair, or refurbishing may be
    done between uses.
        When applied to products, reuse is a
    purely comparative term. Products with no
    single-use analogs are considered to be in
    service until retired.

Sustainable  Able to be maintained through
    time.  Over use of resources may decrease
    future productivity, thereby lowering sus-
    tainable yields.  An additional factor defin-
    ing natural resources sustainability is the
    amount and kind of pollution caused by their
    use. Systems that rely on abundant re-
    sources may not be sustainable if this re-
    source use results in major impacts.

System Boundaries  Define the extent of
    systems or activities. Boundaries delineate
    areas for design or analysis.

Useful Life  Measures how long a system will
    operate safely and meet perfornance stan-
    dards when maintained properly and not
    subject to stresses beyond stated limits [4].

Total Cost Assessment  A comprehensive
method of analyzing costs and benefits of a
pollution prevention or design project. TCA
includes [3]:
    •full cost accounting,  a managerial
      accounting method that assigns both direct
      and indirect costs to specific products
    • estimates of both short and long- term
      direct, indirect or hidden, liability, and
      less tangible costs
    • costs projected over a long horizon, such
      as 10-15 years


References

 1. US EPA. 1991. Guidance For the Use of the Terms
      "Recycled" and "Recyclable" and the Recycling
      Emblem in Environmental Marketing Claims.
      Federal Register 56 (191): 49992-50000.
 2. United States Code. Public Law 101-508: The Pol-
      lution Prevention Act of1990.  (42): 13101-
      13109.
 3. White, Allen L., Monica Becker, and James
      Goldstein. 1992. Toted Cost Assessment, US En-
      vironmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollu-
      tion Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC.
 4. Moss, Marvin A. 1985. Designing for Minimal
      Maintenance Expense. New York: Marcel
      Dekker.
                                             181
                                                   * U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:  1995 - 650-006/22075

-------

-------

-------
m
-o
o
o
33
ro
en
     f?T O
     CO (D 3

     8gs:
       ^9L

       3-?
       "• to
       TJ 5'
0)

CD

C
w
CD
          W
       O O m c
       =;• CD 3 3
       O 3 < »
       2. r* ^' CD
       3 » 3 cl
       3 Z. 3 ,_
       03 3" q CO
       .— -« o g>
                    "0
                    3
                     _.

                     §
                  «
                  33 >
                  CD (Q
                  W CD
                  CD 3


                  O
                  3_
                  S"


                  £
                  o'
              w'B
              o -,
              O CD

              S °

              (U CD
              HI
              0 °
              »_I


              S 30
                    |&i
                    0.0 g

                    "fi»
                    §
                     S ro
                     9-to
                     si
                     125
                     3.0


                     II
                     II
                     CD O-
                -o
                m
                33


                H

                p

                O
                     •a

                     S
                     Qc
                    , m i—
                     m

-------