&EPA
United States Office of Research and EPA/600/R-95/107
Environmental Protection Development July 1995
Agency Washington DC 20460
Life Cycle Design
Framework and
Demonstration Projects
Profiles of AT&T and
AlliedSignal
Cycl
*> -*8«
-------
CONTACT
Mary Ann Curran is the EPA contact for this report. She is presently with the newly organized National
Risk Management Research Laboratory, new Sustainable Technology Division in Cincinnati, OH (for-
merly the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory). The National Risk Management Research Laboratory
is headquartered in Cincinnati, OH, and is now responsible for research conducted by the Sustainable
Technology Division.
_
-------
EPA/600/R-95/1.07
July 1995
LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
AND DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS
Profiles of AT&T and AlliedSignal
National Pollution Prevention Center
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Ml 48109-1115
Gregory A. Keoleian
Jonathan E. Koch
Dan Menerey
AT&T
Bell Laboratories
Engineering Research Center
Princeton, NJ
AlliedSignal
Filters and Spark Plugs
Perrysburg, OH
Cooperative Agreement #817570
Project Officer
Mary Ann Curran
Sustainable Technology Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
US Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
1. 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
publication 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 constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
II. FOREWORD
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's
land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to
formulate arid implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability
of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet these mandates, EPA's research program is provid-
ing data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a science knowl-
edge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our
health, and prevent or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency's center for investigation of
technological and management approaches for reducing risks from threats to human health and the envi-
ronment. The focus of the Laboratory's research program is on methods for the prevention and control of
pollution to air, land, water, and subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water systems;
remediation of contaminated sites and groundwater; and prevention and control of indoor air pollution!
The goal of this research effort is to catalyze development and implementation of innovative, cost-effec-
tive environmental technologies; develop scientific and engineering'information needed by EPA to sup-
port regulatory and policy decisions; and provide technical support and information transfer to ensure
effective implementation of environmental regulations and strategies.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan It
is published and made available by EPA's Office of Research and Development^ assist the user commu-
nity and to link researchers with their clients.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
-------
III. PREFACE
This life cycle design project is part of the US Environmental Protection Agency's Pollution
Prevention Research Program. Through such research EPA seeks to facilitate the development of
product systems with reduced environmental burdens across all media and through each stage of
the product life cycle. The life cycle design project was conducted in two phases: Phase I -•
preparation and publication of the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual (EPA/600/R-92/226) and
Phase n - completion of two life cycle design demonstration projects. This report covers Phase
II demonstration projects with AT&T and AlliedSignal which tested the design framework dis-
cussed in the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual, evaluated management practices that affect life
cycle design, applied multicriteria requirements matrices, identified ways to improve the life cycle
design process, and reported the findings of the demonstration projects.
Life cycle design is a proactive approach for integrating pollution prevention and resource
conservation strategies into the development of more ecologically and economically sustainable
products. The specific goal of life cycle design is to minimize the aggregate risks and impacts
created by a product life cycle from raw materials acquisition through materials processing,
manufacture and assembly, use and service, retirement, disposal, and the ultimate fate of residu-
als. This is a major challenge to design teams because many complex factors influence the design
process, such as government regulations, market demand, public and scientific understanding of
environmental risk, existing infrastructure, a firm's environmental management system, availabil-
ity of data and tools for environmental analysis, the dynamic nature of a life cycle system, con-
flicts between classes of design criteria, and the diverse self interests of life cycle stakeholders.
Multicriteria requirements matrices were developed as a tool for systematically addressing
these issues. These matrices were the focal point for both the AT&T and AlliedSignal Demon-
stration Projects. Balancing environmental, performance, cost, legal, and cultural requirements is
essential for achieving successful designs. These requirements can best be identified and evalu-
ated by a cross-functional design team with fully participating members. Accordingly, successful
implementation of life cycle design will require changes in a firm's design and environmental
management systems.
The life cycle design framework presented in this document is a refinement of the one origi-
nally proposed in the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual. AT&T and AlliedSignal demonstration
projects contributed substantially to our understanding of the practical application of life cycle
design. We hope the insights gained from this process will encourage other firms to adopt new
approaches for developing cleaner products and processes.
The research team of the National Pollution Prevention Center, based at the University of
Michigan, welcomes your comments and suggestions. Please direct your comments to:
Dr. Gregory A. Keoleian
National Pollution Prevention Center
University of Michigan
Dana Building 430 E. University
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1115
IV
-------
IV. ABSTRACT
This document offers guidance and practical experience for integrating environmental
considerations into product system development. Life cycle design seeks to minimize the
environmental burden associated with a product's life cycle from raw materials acquisition
through manufacturing, use, and end-of-life management.
The following key elements of the life cycle design framework are outlined: a firm's
environmental management system, needs analysis and project initiation, specification of
design requirements, selection and synthesis of design strategies for minimizing environmen-
tal burden, and evaluation of design alternatives using environmental analysis tools.
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. As an extension of concurrent design, life
cycle design addresses both product and process design across the full product life cycle.
Two demonstration projects with industry were conducted to test, evaluate, and refine the
life cycle design framework presented in Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual (EPA/600/R-
92/226); the predecessor to this report. Both AT&T Bell Labs and AlliedSignal, Filters and
Spark Plugs applied this framework to the development of cleaner products. AT&T focused
on achieving greater material and energy efficiency, improving recyclability, and using and
releasing fewer toxic constituents in their design of a business telephone terminal.
AlliedSignal developed design criteria to guide the improvement of future engine oil filters
The AlliedSignaJ team considered a cartridge filter with a reusable housing and a single-use,
spin-on design. Both AT&T and AlliedSignal concluded that multicriteria requirements
matrices are a useful tool for organizing, identifying, and evaluating the complex set of life
cycle issues affecting the design of a product system. Major accomplishments and difficul-
ties in implementing life cycle design are highlighted for each project.
Research for this report covers the period from January 1992 to August 1994.
-------
-------
V. CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION i
Description of the Report 1
Purpose -|
Audience 2
Content and Organization 3
Foundations of Life Cycle Design 4
Challenges Facing Life Cycle Design 4
2. LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK 6
Product Life Cycle System 6
Life Cycle Stages Q
Product System Components 8
Interconnected Product Systems 10
Life Cycle Design Goals 11
Reduce Total Environmental Burden 11
Achieve Sustainable Development 12
Life Cycle Design Principles 16
Use a Systems Approach 16
Multicriteria Analysis 17
Multistakeholder Participation 18
Life Cycle Management 13
Life Cycle Development Process 18
3. LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT 20
Internal Factors in Life Cycle Management..... 20
Vision 21
Organization 24
Continuous Improvement 29
External Factors in Life Cycle Management 31
Government 31
Public Demand 32
Infrastructure 33
Supplier Relationships 33
National/International Standards 34
4. LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 35
Needs Analysis and Project Initiation 36
Identify Significant Needs 36
Define Project Scope and Purpose 36
Baseline and Benchmark Environmental Performance 37
Identify Opportunities and Vulnerabilities 39
Requirements 41
Checklists 42
Matrices 42
Assigning Priority to Requirements 48
Design Solution 50
Design Strategies 50
Evaluation 52
LCA and Its Application to Design 53
Other Design Evaluation Approaches 60
Cost Analysis 62
Presenting Design Evaluation Results 63
Implementation w 64
vii
-------
5. AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 65
Project Origin and Background 66
Origin of the Life Cycle Design Project 66
Formation of the Cross Functional Team 66
Selection of the 8403 Terminal 67
Description of the 8403 Digital Communications
Protocol (DCP) Terminal 67
Environmental Management System 68
AT&T Business Description 69
AT&T Environmental Policy 69
Corporate Environmental Goals 71
Corporate Resources 72
Project Description 75
Needs Analysis 76
Establishing Design Requirements 77
Life Cycle Design Strategies for the 8403 Terminal 85
Design Evaluation 90
Major Findings and Conclusions 91
Environmental Management System 91
Design Requirements 92
Design Strategies 93
Design Evaluation ; 93
6. ALLIEDSIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 94
Project Origin and Background 95
AlliedSignal Participation 95
Cross-Functional Team & Product Development 95
Selection and Description of Products 95
Environmental Management System , 98
Business Description of AlliedSignal 98
Environmental Policy and Goals 98
Environmental Management Organization 99
Product Responsibility Guide 99
Project Description 100
Needs Analysis and Project Initiation 100
Scope and System Boundaries 101
Baseline Analysis 103
Establishing Design Requirements ,... 103
Evaluation , 110
Comparison of Design Alternatives 111
Action Plan for New Design 112
Major Findings and Conclusions 112
Environmental Management System 112
Design Requirements 113
Design Evaluation 114
Literature Cited in Sections 1-6 116
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES 119
GLOSSARY 124
viii
-------
VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We wish to thank both AlliedSignal and AT&T Bell Labs for testing the practical application
of the life cycle design framework. At AlliedSignal, Gordon Jones, Director of Filter Engineering
and Anthony Caronia, Vice-President of Engineering, were instrumental in championing life cycle
design. In addition, we acknowledge Allen Wright, Gary Bilski, Bijan Kheradi, Ed Cote, Paul
Manning, Russ Burke, Anthony D'Amico, Gerry Lamarre, Ken Conti, and Mike McCracken for
their contributions to the enhancement of our framework.
At AT&T Bell Labs, Werner Glantschnig took the lead role in coordinating this project. We
wish to acknowledge his valuable contributions to enhancing the life cycle design framework. In
addition, we wish to thank GBCS (Global Business Communications Systems) designers Bill
McCann (the physical designer for the 8403 terminal) and Jacob Sheinblat, and other members of
the Green Project Realization Team. Furthermore, we would like to thank Janine Sekutowski and
Neil Sbar at the Engineering Research Center, and Prat Kasbekar, Bob Martina, John Mikulak,
Paul Stalets, Ted Snydal, Jim Strype, and Bill Zakowski from GBCS, for their support and coop-
eration.
We wish to recognize Jonathan Bulkley, Director of the National Pollution Prevention Center
for his valuable contributions to this research and his assistance in reviewing this document.
Bruce Vigon of Battelle and Kenneth R. Stone and Terri Hoagland of US EPA's Risk Reduction
Engineering Lab assisted us by reviewing this document and providing helpful comments. At the
University of Michigan, Erica Phipps assisted in reviewing and editing, and Dwayne Overmyer,
Julie Grannis, and Michael Kania also provided input on graphic design.
IX
-------
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
Life cycle design integrates environmental considerations into product development. To
achieve this integration most effectively, practitioners of life cycle design should consider all
stages of a product's life cycle from raw materials acquisition through manufacturing, use, and
end-of-life management (retirement through disposal). In addition, development efforts should
focus on the entire product system, which includes three components: product, process, and
distribution.
Life cycle design emphasizes requirements which are developed through a team-oriented
process involving as many stakeholders as possible. Understanding the relationship between
environmental, performance, cost, cultural, and legal requirements of the product system is
critical to successful design. Selecting strategies that satisfy all the various design criteria is a
major challenge.
Life cycle design and related approaches, such as Design for Environment (DFE), are needed
because of the inherent limitations of conventional industrial practices aimed at protecting the
environment. Traditional pollution control and waste management programs do not prevent
pollution from being generated. Companies are now realizing that simply striving to comply with
ever more complex environmental regulations amounts to playing a costly and never-ending game
of catchup. In response, industry leaders have begun to minimize pollution at the source through
better design and manufacturing processes rather than relying on "end-of-pipe" controls and
treatment.
Product takeback and recycling regulations proposed by several major industrialized countries
provide additional impetus for improved design. Industry leaders planning for the future
increasingly recognize that designing reusability, remanufacturability, and recyclability into
products is a more cost effective and environmentally sound way to conduct business. Such
proactive solutions are likely to be technically superior and also less costly than solutions
developed by reacting to crises or new regulations.
Many innovative companies are beginning to implement life cycle design concepts and
principles. A few of these companies have already initiated effective programs in life cycle
design that have resulted in significant reductions in environmental burden and substantial cost
savings to the company. Examples of industry programs that contain key elements of the life
cycle design framework will be highlighted throughout this report.
DESCRIPTION OF THE REPORT
Purpose
The EPA Life Cycle Design Project developed the Life Cycle Design Guidance
Manual (EPA 600/R-92/226) in Phase I, then applied and tested this design framework in
two demonstration projects during Phase II. Companies contributing to the development
of the guidance manual were invited to participate in a Phase 2 demonstration project.
1
-------
ONE: INTRODUCTION
The specific objectives of the demonstration projects included: evaluating the life cycle
design guidance manual, applying multicfiteria requirements matrices, exploring
strategies for reducing environmental burden, and evaluating environmental management
systems that support life cycle design. Feedback from the demonstration projects was
used to improve the original manual (sections 1-4 of this document).
AT&T Bells Labs and AlliedSignal were selected for the demonstration projects based
on a set of criteria that included: upper management commitment to applying elements of
the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual, substantially different product systems to
demonstrate the range of life cycle design, significant participation of the product
realization team, and willingness to share environmental information. Both companies
were enhancing their environmental management systems and had already undertaken
design initiatives to reduce environmental burdens at the time of the demonstration
projects. The AT&T demonstration project.applied the life cycle design framework to a
business telephone terminal. The AlliedSignal demonstration project applied the life cycle
design framework to an engine oil filter. Sections 5 and 6 of this report discuss
demonstration project results. In summary, this report serves to:
• refine the life cycle design framework introduced in the Life Cycle Design
Guidance Manual[\],
• show the relationship between the life cycle design framework and other major
environmental design initiatives /tools,
• summarize key lessons learned from the demonstration projects, and
• provide a list of resources and glossary of terms related to life cycle design.
Because life cycle design is a dauntingly large, rapidly expanding subject, this report
only attempts to highlight major principles and state-of-the-art approaches. Recognizing
that no single design method has universal appeal, product realization teams should use
the concepts described in the report as guidelines rather than prescriptions. Individual
designers and design teams who recognize the benefits of pollution prevention are invited
to adapt appropriate ideas and methods for their own specific applications.
The Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual serves as a useful reference document for a
number of topics discussed in this report.
Audience
This manual is intended for the following decision makers:
• product designers
• industrial designers
• process design engineers
• packaging designers ,
• product development managers
• managers and staff in accounting; marketing; distribution; corporate strategy;
environmental, health, and safety; law; purchasing; and service
• government officials who are active, in pollution prevention
-------
Description of the Report
Content and Organization
.Section 1. Introduction,
The remainder of this section introduces the foundations of life cycle design and some
of the major challenges that must be overcome to achieve successful LCD.
Section 2. Life Cycle Design Goals, System, Framework, and Principles
Presents the life cycle design framework which includes the product life cycle system,
goals, principles, environmental management systems, and the development process.
Sections. Life Cycle Management
The fundamentals of a corporate environmental management system are reviewed in
sections. Management plays a key role in the success of life cycle design by setting
appropriate priorities, measures, and responsibilities.
Section 4. Life Cycle Development Process
This section describes an iterative development process that encompasses a needs
analysis, requirements setting, design solution (including strategies), and implementation.
Design evaluation tools are also reviewed.
Sections. AT&T Demonstration Project
This chapter presents the AT&T demonstration project for designing a business
telephone. It begins with an overview of AT&T's corporate environmental management
system before discussing how multicriteria matrices were used to identify design
requirements and resolve conflicts throughout the life cycle design process. The benefits
gained as a result of the project are then outlined.
Section 6. AlliedSignal Demonstration Project
The resu\\s of the AlliedSignal demonstration project include an overview of
AlliedSignal's corporate environmental management system, a list of design requirements
identified by using multicriteria matrices, a discussion of two oil filter design alternatives,
and the benefits gained and lessons learned in testing the life cycle design framework.
Additional References
Selected references for further information on the following topics are presented:
corporate environmental management, life cycle design and Design for Environment, and
life cycle assessment.
Glossary
-------
ONE: INTRODUCTION
FOUNDATIONS OF LIFE CYCLE DESIGN
Accomplishing pollution prevention by design is the antithesis of end-of-pipe remedial action.
By integrating environmental requirements into the earliest stages of product development,
adverse environmental impacts associated with the manufacture, use, and end-of-life management
of a product may be reduced or eliminated. Life cycle design can also provide significant benefits
such as enhanced resource efficiency, reduced liabilities, and enhanced competitiveness. Thus,
life cycle design offers significant opportunities for achieving sustainable development. However,
many organizational and operational changes within both society and companies must take place
before environmentally improved design can be fully realized.
Life cycle design will usually be undertaken by teams that may include the following range
of disciplines: industrial design, process engineering, product development management,
accounting, purchasing, marketing, and specialists in ecosystem and human health, safety, and
regulatory compliance. Product system development flows from a series of decisions made
individually and collectively by design participants. These choices range from the selection of
materials and manufacturing processes to decisions relating to the shape, form, and function of the
product. Each choice shapes the overall environmental profile of the product system. At the same
time, design decisions must lead to a product that meets its functional requirements and is
competitive in the market place.
Existing knowledge and experience guide individual and group design decisions. Both new
information and new approaches for synthesizing and evaluating this information are essential to
achieve sustainable development through design.
CHALLENGES FACING LIFE CYCLE DESIGN
Product development teams face many challenges integrating environmental considerations
into product system design. Successful life cycle design must address the following issues.
Pressure to reduce
development time
Expanding global economy
and competitiveness
Quantity and diversity of
more stringent regulations
Shifting market demand for
environmental improvements
How do we consider environmental issues when the time
to conduct a detailed assessment may extend beyond the
development cycle or the time-to-market needed to be
competitive?
How can we meet different preferences, requirements, and
regulations for an increasingly international marketplace?
How is it possible to keep track of all environmental,
health, and safety regulations at the local, state, national,
and international level?
Willingness to pay for environmental premiums is highly
variable. Even so, green marketing campaigns are being
used to gain competitive advantage. How can we balance
customer desires for environmental improvements with
affordability and convenience?
-------
Description of the Report
System boundaries
Allocating burdens
Data availability
Characterizing and assessing
environmental impacts
Assigning priority to
environmental problems
How far upstream or downstream in the product life
cycle should a design effort encompass ? Should the
environmental burdens associated with the equipment
used to manufacture the product be accounted for?
How are impacts allocated between products and
coproducts from the same process?
How are environmental data accessed? Compared?
Verified? What about the use of proprietary data?
How does the analyst aggregate or compare impact data?
How do decision makers weigh disparate environmental
impacts, such as kg of solid waste, joules of energy, one in
a million risk of lung cancer, or loss of biodiversity?
These issues represent a small sampling of the difficult problems that must be overcome
in life cycle design.
-------
2. LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
The life cycle provides a logical framework for guiding the management and design of
sustainable product systems because it systematically considers the full range of environmental
consequences associated with a product. By focusing on the entire life cycle, designers and
managers can prevent the shifting of impacts between media (air, water, land) and between stages
of the life cycle. The life cycle design framework also encompasses information from multiple
stakeholders whose involvement is critical to successful design improvement. The primary
elements of the framework are:
• Product life cycle system
• Goals
• Principles
• Life cycle management systems
• Development process
The product life cycle system provides context for the goals of life cycle design. Principles
to guide life cycle design combine the goals and system with the best traditional design methods.
Life cycle management systems that adopt these general principles then enable and support the
specific activities necessary for successful development.
PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE SYSTEM
A systems approach that considers the entire life cycle of a product is the foundation
of life cycle design. All components of the product, including the product itself,
processing, and distribution are also included in this system for every aspect of design.
Successful life cycle design must then recognize how product systems are interconnected
with others in the larger industrial web of activities.
Life Cycle Stages
Figure 2-1 presents a general flow diagram of the product life cycle organized into the
following stages:
• raw material acquisition
• bulk and specialty processing
• manufacturing and assembly
• use and service
• retirement
• disposal
-------
Product Life Cycle System
M,E
:
•if
Raw Material
Acquisition
t
w
M,B
Y
Ma
Proc
i
erial
3ssing
;
' T
W
M, E
\
if
Mani
* &AS
ifacture
sembly
;
W
— ft
M,E
:
if
M,E
*
Use&
Service
-
' t
w
Retirement
& Recovery
reuse
remanufacttire
closed-loop recycle
»
w
M,E
|
Treatment
Disposal
t
w
open-loop
recycle
M, E material and energy inputs for process and distribution
w waste (gaseous, liquid, solid) output from product, process and distribution
—>- material flow of product component ..,, ; . •",
Figure 2-1. Product Life Cycle Stages
Raw materials acquisition includes mining nonreriewable material and harvesting
biomass. These 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 specialty materials.
Examples include polymerization of ethylene into polyethylene pellets and the production
of high-strength steel. Base and specialty 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 eventually decide to retire a product. After
retirement, a product can be reused 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 processing facilities, and oil
spills are examples of direct releases. Residuals may also undergo physical, chemical or
biological treatment. Treatment processes are usually designed to reduce volume and
toxicity of waste. The remaining residuals, including those resulting from treatment, are
then typically disposed in landfills. The ultimate form that the residuals take depends on
how they degrade after being released into the environment.
The life cycle system is complex due to its dynamic nature and its geographical scope.
Activities within each stage of the life cycle change continuously, often independently of
change in other stages. Life cycle stages are also widely distributed on a geographical
basis, and environmental consequences occur on global, regional, and local levels.
-------
TWO: LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
Product System Components
The product system is defined by the material, energy, and information flows and
conversions associated with the life cycle of a product. This system can be organized into
three basic components in all life cycle stages: product, process, and distribution. As
much as possible, life cycle design seeks to integrate these components.
Product
The product component consists of all materials constituting the final product.
Included in this component are all the forms that these materials might take throughout
the various life cycle stages. For example, the product component for a wooden baseball
bat consists of the tree, stumpage, and unused branches from raw material acquisition;
lumber and waste wood from milling; the bat, wood chips, and sawdust from
manufacturing; and the broken bat discarded in a municipal solid waste landfill. If this
waste is incinerated, gases, water vapor, and ash are produced.
The product component of a complex product such as an automobile consists of a
wide range of materials and parts. These may be a mix of primary (virgin) and secondary
(recycled) materials. The materials contained in new or used replacement parts are also
included in the product component.
Process
Processing transforms materials and energy into a variety of intermediate and final
products. The process component includes any direct and indirect material inputs used in
making a product. Catalysts and solvents are examples of direct process materials that are
not significantly incorporated into the final product. Plant and equipment are examples of
indirect material inputs for processing. Resources consumed during research,
development, testing, and product use are included in the process component.
In the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual, management was considered a separate
component. Experience gained in the demonstration projects (discussed in sections 5 and
6) resulted in a simplification of product system components to make it more intuitive.
Management, including the entire information network that supports decision making,
occurs throughout the process and distribution components in all life cycle stages. It is
thus best considered an element of process and distribution rather than a separate
component. Within a corporation, management responsibilities include financial
management, personnel, purchasing, marketing, customer services, legal services, and
training and education programs. These activities may generate substantial environmental
burden and therefore should not be ignored.
Distribution
Distribution consists of packaging systems and transportation networks used to
contain, protect, and transport products and process materials. Both packaging and
-------
Product Life Cycle System
transportation result in significant adverse environmental impacts. In 1990, containers
and packaging accounted for 32.9% (64.4 million tons) of municipal solid waste generated
in the US.[2] Rail, trucks, ships; airplanes, and pipelines constitute the major modes of
transport; each consumes energy and causes environmental impacts. Material transfer
devices such as pumps and valves, carts and wagons, and material handling equipment
(forklifts, crib towers, etc.) are part of the distribution component, as are storage facilities
such as tanks and warehouses.
Selling a product is also considered part of distribution. This includes both wholesale
and retail activities.
Subcomponents of Process and Distribution
Both the process and distribution components of the product system share the
following subcomponents:
• facility, plant, or offices
• unit operations, process steps, or procedures (including administrative services
and office management)
• equipment and tools
• human resources (labor, managers)
• direct and indirect materialand energy inputs ,
These elements can have an important influence on product system development. For
example, existing process equipment can constrain material options and make some
improvements more difficult. In addition, facility siting, process design, and equipment
selection may contribute significantly to a product's total environmental burden.
Figure 2-2 presents an example of product system elements across life cycle stages.
The distribution component is shown between connecting life cycle stages to indicate that
either transportation and/or packaging has been used to carry the product or process
materials.
Product
Process
Distribution
Raw Material
Extraction
Material
Processing
Manufacturing
Use
Retirement/
Disposal
Petroleum
Natural gas
Drilling
equipment,
labor, energy
HOPE pellets
Stabilizers,
pigments
Ethylene
production,
polymerization
Cup
Injection molding
withSPI
markings for
recycling
Cup
Handling, filling,
cleaning
Cup or residuals
from recycle,
incineration
Collect, process
recycle, burn,
or landfill
'RaH,boae,' - jf^spif;^ ^IrlSsPp:
• * W, ,
^M?^i-* ;< containers p$3l^pKgj:;-: ^.!5^j:^;s.vf
Figure 2-2. Several Product System Elements for a Reusable Plastic Cup Over its Life Cycle
-------
TWO: LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
PRODUCT 1
Closed-Loop
Recycling
Virgin
Materials
<
postconsumer
closed loop: recovered
material recycled into —
the same product
preconsumer
I
postconsumer
PRODUCT 2
Open-Loop
Recycling
open loop: recovered
material used to make
different products
before eventual disposal
Figure 2-3. Product Systems Linked Through Recycling
Interconnected Product Systems
Each product system contains many product life cycles within it. The
interconnections among these subsystems complicates analysis but also offers
opportunities for reducing environmental impact. Different product systems are often
connected through material exchange or common processes activities. Figure 2-3 shows
how product systems can be linked through recycling. An important objective of life
cycle design is addressing how a product system fits into the larger industrial web of
highly integrated activities.
In addition to the type of links shown in Figure 2-3, product systems may be linked
within an interconnected system of multiple manufacturers. Organized networks or
symbioses of facilities have been demonstrated to improve material use efficiency, reduce
costs, and reduce environmental burdens
The town of Kalundborg, Denmark contains a well-recognized example of such a
successful network. Kalundborg's industrial symbiosis consists of four companies:
Asnses Power Plant, Statoil Refinery, Novo Nordisk, and Gyproc, as shown in Figure 2-4.
The eco-industrial network developed in Kalundborg includes the transfer of excess waste
heat, process gasses, residual materials, water, and processed sludge among the
participants, local farmers, and the municipal heating system. Kalundborg has benefited
from reduced air emissions, water use and discharges, nonrenewable energy use, and
chemical fertilizer application. In addition, participants benefit from the sale of waste
materials, avoidance of disposal costs and capital improvements required by regulation,
and local and international recognition for their actions.
10
-------
Life Cycle Design Goals
Ecological
Components
Not to Scale
Not an Accurate Geographic Depiction
Air Emissions
Materials Transfer
Extraction anoVor
Discharge of Water
Figure 2-4. Kalundborg's Industrial Symbiosis
LIFE CYCLE DESIGN GOALS
Life cycle design seeks to reduce the total environmental burden from product system
development and thus find sustainable solutions for significant societal needs.
Reduce total Environmental Burden
The environmental goal of life cycle design is to minimize the aggregate life cycle
environmental burden associated with product systems. Environmental burden can be
classified into the following impact categories:
. • resource depletion
• ecological and human health effects
These impacts are the result of resource use and environmental releases to air, water,
and land. Conceptually, an environmental profile can be developed that characterizes the
aggregate impacts for each life cycle stage and the cumulative impacts for the entire life
cycle.
11
-------
TWO: LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
I
m
UJ
D Cumulative! Environmental
Burden
• Component Contribution
Raw Materials Manufacture Use&
Material Processing Service
Acquisition
Disposal
Figure 2-5. Environmental Burden in Hypothetical Units of a Product System
Although there are no universal methods for precisely characterizing and aggregating
environmental burdens, Figure 2-5 shows a hypothetical example of an environmental
profile. As illustrated, impacts are generally not uniformly distributed across the life
cycle. For example, the major environmental burdens associated with automobiles are
caused by the consumption of petroleum and resulting air pollutant emissions during use.
By contrast, environmental burdens resulting from furniture use are minimal, but
significant impacts occur from manufacture and disposal of these products.
This figure also shows how burdens in all life cycle stages are aggregated to arrive at
the full environmental consequences of a product system. It is important to recognize that
human communities and ecosystems are also impacted by many product life cycle systems
at once.
Achieve Sustainable Development
Sustainable development meets the needs of the present generation without
compromising the ability of future generations to fulfill their needs.[3] Determining what
constitutes significant societal need depends on collective value judgments and
preferences, which are outside the scope of this report. Sustainable development can be
furthered by life cycle design, but sustainability also requires evolving societal values,
such as a willingness to forgo products or activities that create large environmental
burdens. •
Necessary elements for sustainability include: sustainable resource use (conserve
resources, minimize depletion of non-renewable resources, use sustainable practices for
managing renewable resources), pollution prevention, maintenance of ecosystem structure
and function, and environmental equity. All of these elements are interrelated and highly
complementary.
12
-------
Life Cycle Design Goals
as
3.
<£
14 -,
12-
10-
8 -
6 -
4 -
2 -
-14
-12
- 10
-8
-6
-4
-2
-------
TWO: LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
Promote Pollution Prevention
Pollution prevention focuses on reducing or preventing pollution at the source. It is a
proactive approach that avoids the transfer of pollutants across media (air, water, land).
The US Environmental Protection Agency has adopted pollution prevention as a
principal strategy for environmental protection. EPA's pollution prevention programs,
such as the Source Reduction Review Program (SRRP), address multimedia risks and
consider pollution prevention principles in rule-making. Pollution prevention offers
numerous advantages over traditional end-of-pipe treatment mechanisms because it
minimizes raw material losses, may eliminate the need for expensive pollution control
equipment, and reduces long-term liabilities.
Protect Ecological and Human Health
Healthy, functioning ecosystems are essential for supporting life on earth.
Recognizing that we depend on a properly functioning and healthy ecosystems for our
ultimate survival, the EPA's Science Advisory Board determined that biodiversity and
species loss are among the most severe risks to human health and the environment.
Specific human health risks occur through exposure to contaminants via inhalation,
ingestion, and direct contact. Exposures can result in both acute and chronic health
effects. Individuals are exposed to health risks in the workplace, at home, and during
recreation. Life cycle design and other related approaches to preventing pollution seek to
minimize or eliminate risks posed to workers, consumers, and the general public.
Promote Environmental Equity
The issue of environmental equity is related to sustainable development and is equally
complex. A major challenge in sustainable development is achieving intergenerational,
intersocietal, and intrasocietal environmental equity.
Intergenerational Equity
Intersocietal Equity
Intrasocietal Equity
Meet current needs of society without compromising the
ability of future generations to satisfy their needs.
Achieve more equal pattern of distribution between
societies in developed and less developed countries.
Address the disparity among socioeconomic groups within
a country.
Depleting resources and polluting the planet in such a way that it enjoins future
generations from access to reasonable comforts irresponsibly transfers problems to the
future in exchange for short-term gain.
In addition to such intergenerational conflict, enormous intersocietal inequities in the
distribution of resources and exposure to environmental degradation continue to exist
between developed and less-developed countries.
14
-------
Life Cycle Design Goals
8 -
7 -
6 -
1990 Energy 5 .
Use
Tons of Oil 4 .
Equivalent
per Capita 3 -
2 -
i
0 -
f>
f
7.82
1
n
V *> :%*> &
m
,VH ^ •
ill
Jorth
^merlce
-4-
l
5.01
81
fe^,*?, \;
Si
T'f /, ;^
f^|
CIS
3'22 2.91
'v. % >0 ,^
S S3 1'29 I-" 1.02 Jlfi
1 W\ fi^ \^ ( ^ •. ."Cto'- *. | i ^f*1'^'1 v-^ ^\"C*''^JJ^ i s*"* ^*< U**sVi i |*V*^" 5^*^*1 I'li""*"^"""") &•$* I'si^rf*
West Central Latin Middle Pacific Sub- South WORLD
Europe & East America East & Saharan Asia AVERAGE
In this graph, Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) also
Includes Baltic States and Georgia (the former USSR)
Figure 2-7. ,1990 Energy Demand per Capita in Various World Regions[9]
Intrasocietal inequities occur when pollution and other impacts from production are
unevenly distributed among different socioeconomic groups within countries. Studies
show that low-income communities in the US are often exposed to higher health risks
from industrial activities than are higher-income communities.[6, 7] Inconsistent
regulations in the US also have led to different definitions of acceptable risk for workers
and consumers.[8] In an effort to redress such disparities, President Clinton signed an
Executive Order in 1993 requiring regulators to consider equity impacts during the rule
development process.
Figures 2-7 and 2-8 show several aspects of environmental equity. Figure 2-7 offers a
clear example of intersocietal inequity by demonstrating how the developed portions of
the world use substantially more energy than less-developed regions.
15
-------
TWO: LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
O
Figures 2-8. Annual Municipal Solid Waste Generation in Selected Countries (kg/capita)[10]
Both intergenerational and another facet of intersocietal environmental equity are
implied in Figure 2-8. Here, only countries in the same general economic class are
considered. Because waste production reflects both resource consumption and efficiency,
this graph shows how different countries in the developed world vary in combined levels
of consumption and resource efficiency. Nations that squander resources affect both
future generations and their contemporaries in other nations who produce fewer
environmental burdens by using resources less profligately.
LIFE CYCLE DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Principles for life cycle design are derived from the life cycle system outlook and the goals
previously discussed. There are three main principles for guiding environmental improvement of
product systems in life cycle design:
• Systems analysis of the product life cycle
• Multicriteria analysis for identifying and evaluating environmental, performance,
cost, cultural, and legal requirements
• Multistakeholder participation and cross-functional teamwork throughout design
Use a Systems Approach
A systems approach is essential to achieving sustainable development goals.
Understanding the interrelationships between societal needs, industrial systems that
provide goods and services, political and regulatory systems, and the ecological systems
impacted by human activities is a complex challenge.
16
-------
Life Cycle Design Principles
Table 2-1. Organizational Hierarchies
Political
UNEP
US
(EPA.DOE)
: State of
Michigan
(MDNR)
- Washtenaw
County
City of Ann
Arbor
Individual
Voter
' Social
Organizations
World human
population
Cultures
Communities '
Households
Individuals/
consumers
Industrial
Organizations
ISO
Trade
associations
Corporation/
companies
Divisions
Product develop-
ment teams
Individuals
Industrial
Systems
Global human
material &
energy flows
Sectors (e.g.
transportation &
•'• health care)
• Corporations &
institutions
Product systems
Life cycle stages
Unit steps
Ecological
Systems
Ecosphere
Biosphere
\ * • •
Biogeographic
al region
Biome
landscape
Ecosystem
Organism
Table 2-1 shows organizational hierarchies for each of these systems, A table of
hierarchies can be useful for examining interactions between systems and exploring how
decisions and processes at different system levels influence higher and lower levels!
Life cycle design focuses on the product systems level in the industrial systems
hierarchy. .However, understanding the contribution of product systems to higher order
levels (i.e., global flows of materials and energy, economic sectors, corporations) as Well
as the influence of individual subsystems (specific life'cycle stages, unit operations), is
crucial to effective life cycle design. Successfully reducing net environmental impacts
from product systems while still meeting societal needs requires an awareness of the
complex interactions that exist among different hierarchical levels and between the' '
various organizational categories (e.g., economic, ecological, and sociological structures).
Metrics and other comparative methods of evaluation enable product designers to
determine the advantages and disadvantages of design options. Comparisons across all
stages of the product life cycle are necessary to accurately assess environmental burden
. and develop priorities for improvement.
Multicriteria Analysis
Life cycle design seeks to meet environmental objectives while also best satisfying
cost, performance, cultural, and legal requirements. Specification of requirements is one
of the most critical design functions. Requirements guide designers in translating needs
and environmental objectives into successful designs. Environmental requirements should
focus on minimizing natural resource consurnption,,energy consumption, waste
generation, and human health risks as well as promoting the sustainability of ecosystems.
The challenge is to apply design strategies that resolve conflicting requirements.
17
-------
TWO: LIFE CYCLE DESIGN FRAMEWORK
Multistakeholder Participation
Interdisciplinary participation is key to defining requirements that reflect the
diverse needs of multiple stakeholders such as suppliers, manufacturers, consumers,
resource recovery and waste managers, the public, and regulators. Within corporations,
successful life cycle design requires the full participation of all members of a cross-
functional development team.
LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
Life cycle management includes all decisions and actions taken by multiple
stakeholders which ultimately determine the environmental profile and sustainability of
the product system. Each stakeholder has an important role in guiding improvement, as
indicated in the following list.
Users and Public
Policymakers and Regulators
Suppliers, Manufacturers,
End-Of-Life Managers
Investors/Shareholders
Service Industry
Insurance Industry
Advance understanding and values through education
Modify behavior and demand towards more sustainable
lifestyles
Develop policies to promote sustainable economies
and ecological systems
Apply new regulatory instruments or modify existing
regulations
Apply new economic instruments or modify existing
ones
Research and develop more sustainable
technologies
Design cleaner products and processes
Produce sustainable products
Improve the effectiveness of environmental
management systems
Support cleaner product system development
Maintain and repair products
Assess risk and cover losses
A major challenge for product manufacturers is coordinating the diverse interests of
these stakeholder groups.
LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
The development process varies widely depending on the type of product and
company, the design management organization within a company, and many other factors.
In general, however, most development processes, as shown in Figure 2-9, begin with a
needs analysis, then proceed through formulating requirements, employing selected
18
-------
Life Cycle Development Process
Sustainable Development
Consequences
Development
Process
Figure 2-9. The Life Cycle Development Process
strategies, and performing evaluations to find design solutions. The design is then
implemented, and various economic and environmental consequences result from
production, use, and retirement of the product. .. ,
During the needs analysis or initiation phase, the purpose and scope of the projdct are
defined, and customer needs are clearly identified. Needs are then expanded into a full set
of design criteria including environmental requirements. Various strategies that act as a
lens for focusing knowledge and new ideas into a feasible solution are then explored to
meet these requirements. The development team continuously evaluates alternatives
throughout the design process. Environmental analysis tools ranging from single
environmental metrics to comprehensive life cycle assessments (LCA) may be used in
addition to other analysis tools.
The development process is best characterized by an iterative process rather than a
linear sequence of activities. Ideas, requirements, and solutions are continuously '
modified and refined until the detailed design is fixed or, in some instances, until the
project is terminated or abandoned. Successful designs must ultimately balance
environmental, performance, cost, cultural, and legal requirements.
Appropriate designs are then implemented. Product systems satisfy societal needs and
result in environmental and other consequences which feed back into the process to
influence future designs and guide continuous improvement.
19
-------
3. LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
Internal Factors
• Vision
• Organization -
• Continuous
improvement
Sustainable Development
Life Cycle Management
'
Development Process
External Factors
• Government
• Public demand
• Infrastructure
• Suppliers
• Various standards
Figure 3-1. Internal and External Factors Influencing the Development Process
A range of internal and external factors influence the product development team's ability to
effectively address environmental considerations through design. These factors, which are shown
in Figure 3-1, form the context for the design process. Within a company, an environmental
management system that includes goals and performance measures provides the organizational
structure for implementing life cycle design. External factors that strongly influence life cycle
management, but may be beyond the firm's immediate control, include government regulations
and policy, infrastructure, and market demand. These external factors depend on the state of the
economy, state of the environment, scientific understanding of environmental risks, and public
perception of these risks.
INTERNAL FACTORS IN LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
Environmental stewardship issues are increasingly addressed within corporations by formal
environmental management systems.[ll, 12] Ideally, the environmental management system is
interwoven within the corporate structure and not treated as a separate function.[12]
An integral relationship between a company's design management structure and its
environmental management system is essential for implementing life cycle design. Successful life
cycle design projects require commitment from all employees and all levels of management. A
corporation's environmental management system supports environmental improvement through a
number of key components including its environmental policy and goals, performance measures,
and a strategic plan. This system must also provide access to accurate information about
environmental impacts. An effective environmental information system is critical to guiding the
20
-------
Internal Factors in Life Cycle Management
Continuous Improvement
Performance Measures
Reward & Recognition
Audits, Monitoring & Reporting
Research and Development
Training and Education
Vision
Mission
Environmental Policy
Strategic Planning
Core Competency
Organization
Planning
Organizational Design
Concurrent Design
Information Management
System •
Figure 3-2. Internal Elements of Life Cycle Management adapted from [13]
design process in the direction of environmental improvement. Three main attributes .of a well-
designed environmental management system are: vision, organization, and continuous
improvement.[13] Figure 3-2 summarizes these issues.
Vision
Broadly defined, corporate vision includes four key attributes: mission statement,
environmental policy, strategic planning, and focus on core competence. Each of these
elements influences and supports life cycle design. When blended together in a focused
program, they can lead to improved corporate environmental performance.
Mission Statement
A mission statement containing environmental principles helps communicate to
internal and external stakeholders the importance of environmental issues and provides a
context for evolving corporate cultures.[14] Statements that promote environmentally ''•
responsible practices and include sustainable development are an important component of
setting vision for companies. Such mission statements demonstrate that top management
is committed to protecting, preserving, and restoring the environment.
For example, a proposed mission statement from AT&T declares that:
AT&T's vision is to be recognized by customers, employees,
shareowners and communities worldwide as a responsible company
which fully integrates life cycle environmental consequences into each
of our business decisions and activities.
Designing for the environment is a key in distinguishing our
processes, products, and services.
21
-------
THREE: LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
Environmental Policy
Policies that support pollution prevention, resource conservation, and other life cycle
principles foster life cycle design. However, such principles must be linked to guidelines
and procedures at an operational level to be effective. Vague environmental policies may
not result in much action on their own.
A well-known example of a corporate environmental policy was developed by 3M in
1975. This policy stated that 3M would prevent pollution at the source, develop products
with minimal environmental effects, conserve resources, and assure that facilities and
products meet all regulations while also assisting government agencies and others in their
environmental activities. Recently, several companies have recognized the life cycle
framework in their policy as shown in the following boxed statements.
The Valdez Principles, the Global Environmental Management Initiative, and the
Responsible Care program developed by the Chemical Manufacturers Association provide
examples of cooperative effort among companies and within industrial sectors to develop
cohesive environmental policies. Major elements of the Valdez principles pledge
companies to: protect the biosphere through safeguarding habitats and preventing
pollution, conserve nonrenewable resources and make sustainable use of renewable
resources, reduce waste and follow responsible disposal methods, reduce health risks to
workers and the community, disclose incidents that cause environmental harm, and make
public annual evaluations of progress toward implementing these principles.
Strategic Planning
Strategic planning requires that companies first recognize three important factors:
their own internal capabilities, customer needs, and the competitive environment. After
assessing current company performance against these criteria, strategic planning then
focuses on where the company wants to go in the long term and how it can get there. This
exercise positions companies for the future; it is essential for managing the complex and
dynamic nature of the life cycle system.
If » mjift TIT Tag, t'"^il^«^S!^»J'1jE^-i'irwla-^ 45 3W*$4 ^ jjW"j|(f t 1 "V^W */>,';• o "•!; /f ' ' • / t
- L , - MtMim^-xERpX ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ,wl, ', ,
\ " Xerox Corporation Is committed to the protection of theshvfronm&nt and the health and $afoty of "'
"]ts employees, customers and neighbors, TTws commitm&'nt is appli&d worldwide in d&v&loplng new
"products and processes. * " » «» ,« _• » /•
• Environmental heafthand safety'coriceFnstake prio'rity ov¥r economic considerations. ''
. ,« M , ,,.,...„,s,« *V «• '«" ,''•>-*'''.<• * •
eualf '
r "^i; ,/M^f 91 iK^B-'**'* ** JfL^^^.JTfj^f *,! v*^**^**^ ^^^k^2*A i«»ck»4A wi
-------
Internal Factors in Life Cycle Management
Table 3-2. Time Scales of Events That Can Influence Design
Business cycles on a macro and micro scale
(e.g., recovery, inflation, recession and net income,
cash flow, debt, equity)
Product life cycle
(R&D, production, termination, service)
Useful life of the product
Facility life
Equipment life
Process changes
Cultural trends
(fashion obsolescence)
Regulatory change
Technology cycles
Environmental impacts
Effective planning can seem overwhelming given the different time scales affecting
product system components. Shorter term and longer term environmental goals should be
defined based on various time cycles. Understanding and coordinating time scales can be
a key element in improved design. „ '
For life cycle design to be effective, corporations must also make long-term
investment decisions that assure corporate survival. Actions include:
• Identifying and planning reduction of a company's environmental impacts
• Discontinuing/phasing out product lines that have unacceptable environmental
impacts
• Investing in research and development of low-impact technology
• Investing in improved facilities/equipment
• Recommending regulatory policies that assist life cycle design
• Educating and training employees in life cycle design
Management should develop short- and long-term environmental goals that are
sufficiently detailed to guide design. Corporate goals, which often focus on in-house
activities, should not lead to increased burdens in other life cycle stages. Examples of
23
-------
THREE: LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
well-defined environmental goals include phasing out the use of specific chemicals under
a specific timeline, reducing Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) chemicals by set targets,
enhancing the energy efficiency of the product in use, and reducing packaging waste from
suppliers to a specific target level. An example of corporate environmental goals is
provided in Section 5, which profiles the AT&T Demonstration Project.
Core Competency
Effective strategy requires management to correctly assess the company's strengths,
capabilities, and resources. If an environmentally responsible strategy is to succeed, the
underlying technological capability and human skills or "core competence" of a
corporation must be reconfigured to support that strategy. [15] Focus on core competence
is also a commitment to guide product and process improvements by working across
organizational boundaries. [15] Life cycle design initiatives thus benefit from corporate
efforts to improve core competence.
Organization
Designing an organization that can successfully fulfill its vision requires effective
planning processes and the appropriate organizational structure and responsibilities.
Planning
Corporate programs striving to improve environmental performance must integrate
environmental issues into all planning processes. Investment, marketing, and research and
development initiatives should include environmental considerations in addition to other
business concerns. Effective planning depends on including all of the appropriate internal
stakeholders. An organizational structure that supports all necessary communication and
matches environmental goals with corporate culture enables successful planning.[ll, 13]
Organizational Design
Environmental management systems should be buttressed by an appropriate
organizational structure including an environmental officer at the highest level of the
organization and management that supports cross-functional cooperation. Ideally, each
unit of the organization has environmental responsibilities that cascade down to all levels
of management and production. Organizational structure also provides accountability for
environmental improvement and avenues for continuous feedback from employees and
external sources. Figure 3-3 shows the organizational structure for Xerox's environmental
leadership program.
24
-------
Internal Factors in Life Cycle Management
Senior V.P.
Corporate Strategic
Services
Director
EH&S Policy
& Strategy
Program
Coordination
and Integration
Environmental
Leadership
Steering Committee
Senior Management
From:
Manufacturing
Research
Product Delivery Units
Operating Companies
EH&S
Facilities
Supplies
Project
Asset
Management
(Equipment &
parts)
Toner containers
Toner waste
Recycled paper
Toner
reformulation
Site recycling
program
Packaging
materials
Invitation to
recycle
Purchase recycle
Quality network
Employee
communication
Competitive
benchmarking
Figure 3-3. Xerox's Organization Chart
Concurrent Design and Cross Functional Teams
Traditionally, product and process design have been treated as two separate functions.
This can be characterized by a linear design sequence: product design followed by
process design. In the last two decades, much progress has been made through process-
oriented pollution prevention and waste minimization approaches. Product-oriented
approaches are also now gaining recognition. Concurrent design seeks to reduce
environmental impacts associated with the entire product system by integrating product
and process design.
Concurrent design is a logical extension of concurrent manufacturing, 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 unified team. By having all actors responsible for separate
stages or components of a product's life cycle participate in a project from the outset,
problems that often develop between different disciplines can be reduced. Product quality
can also be improved through such cooperation, while efficient teamwork helps reduce
development time and lower costs.
Figure 3-4 depicts the various members of the design team that could participate in
25
-------
THREE: LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
External Stakeholders
Customers
Suppliers
Service Industry
Waste Managers
Public
Investors
Regulators
Insurers
Cross-Functional Team
• Environmental, Health, & Safety
• Quality Assurance
• Workers & Management
• Engineering • R & D
• Designers
• Quality Control
• Purchasing
•Accounting
• Legal
• Marketing
• Sales
• Service
Stakeholder Interests
- significant needs to be met
- a steady demand
- ease of maintenance and service
- ease of recovery and disposal
- clean environment
- a profit
- protect human and ecological welfare
- minimize liabilities
Requirements Specification
Environmental
Performance
Cost
Legal
Cultural
Figure 3-4. Cross-Functional Design Team Interacts with External Stakeholders
to Develop Product System Requirements
product development and graphically shows how the cross-functional team translates the
interests and needs of external stakeholders into product system requirements. The
product system links these diverse groups together.
Information Management Systems
Collecting, analyzing, and reporting/disseminating information are functions of
information management systems. Communications links that support environmental
management systems are also part of an effective information system.
As a first step, material, energy, cost, performance, and legal/permitting data are
collected from all life cycle stages of the product system. This information is then placed
in a comprehensive, accessible information system and used for compliance reporting and
continuous improvement analyses. Effective information management systems are
capable of meeting all internal communications purposes and external reporting /permit
requirements. Information management systems also provide a data bank that may be
used to respond to public inquires or other external stakeholder questions. Figure 3-5
illustrates how data may be collected from various sources and used for internal and
external purposes.
A properly administered and updated information system supports life cycle design
26
-------
Internal Factors in Life Cycle Management
Internal Uses
Corporate management
- strategic planning
- performance measures
Product development
- design inputs
Operations management
- process efficiency
- quality control
- compliance
Product stewardship
- input/output analysis
- impact assessment
Data Collection System
Supplier data
Customer requirements
Regulations
Purchasing records
Inventory
Auditing, monitoring
Cost accounting
Data Storage,
Processing, and Use
External Uses
Shareholders
- annual environmental reports
Internal revenue service
- financial statements
Regulators
- TRI and other reporting
Universities
- research needs
Customers
- environmental labels
Suppliers
- environmental requirements
Public
Figure 3-5. Internal and External Uses for an Information Management System
efforts by providing the data needed to analyze baseline conditions and determine which
design strategies will minimize the environmental burden of the product system. An
information system should also record results of the life cycle design process so that
future improvement efforts may benefit from previous initiatives. Corporate
communications efforts can take advantage of information management systems by using
them to provide feedback on progress or problems to all levels of the organization.
In addition to internal communication, an information system facilitates
communication of environmental results to external stakeholders including regulators and
potential customers.
Marketing and product labeling provide opportunities to communicate environmental
information to customers. Environmental marketing activities can be classified according
to Figure 3-6. Examples of several ecologos are presented in Figure 3-7.
Award of these logos is based on various criteria ranging from a qualitative
Environmental Marketing
First Party"
Environmental Marketing
Product-related
Corporate-related
Claims
(e.g.
recyclable)
Cause-related
marketing
(e.g. proceeds
donated to...)
Cause-related
marketing
(e.g. company
supports WWF)
Promotion of
corporate
environmental
activity or
performance
Third Party
Environmental Labeling
Programs
Mandatory Voluntary
Hazard or Information Environmental
warning disclosure certification
(e.g. 03, (e.g. EPA programs
pesticides, fuel economy / \
prop. 65) label) / \
Report Seal of
Single
card approval attribute
certification
Figure 3-6. Environmental Marketing [16]
27
-------
THREE: LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
Canada (Environmental Choice) Nordic Countries (White Swan)
West Germany (Hue Angel) Japan (EcoMaik)
TM
United States (Scientific
Certification Systems)*
United States (Green Seal)
Figure 3-7. Ecologos
28
-------
Internal Factors in Life Cycle Management
assessments to quantitative measures. Most are intended to help consumers make more
informed purchasing decisions. Some logos attempt to reflect life cycle information, but
cost and data limitations currently limit the efficacy of such efforts.
Unfortunately, some firms have responded to public concern for the environment with
improper environmental advertising, prompting several State Attorneys General to file law
suits against them.
In related action, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued guidelines "to help
reduce consumer confusion and prevent the false or misleading use of environmental
terms such as "recyclable," "degradable," and "environmentally friendly" in the
advertising and labeling of products in the marketplace." For example, the guidelines
state, "In general, a product or package should not be marketed as recyclable unless it can
be collected, separated, or otherwise recovered from the solid waste stream for use in the
form of raw materials in the manufacture or assembly of a new product or package.
Unqualified recyclable claims may be made if the entire product or package, excluding
incidental components, is recyclable."
Continuous Improvement
Total Quality Management (TQM) is widely recognized as an effective strategy for
improving corporate performance. The basic elements of TQM are as follows: [17-22]
• Primacy of the customer
• Measurement systems that provide continuous feedback
• Mpre extensive use of external information (benchmarking)
• A focus on processes rather than departments or events
• Strong emphasis on training
• Extensive use of teams
• Suggestions systems designed to promote continuous improvement
, • A robust program of recognition and reward
• CEO commitment and involvement
Environmental issues are increasingly seen as an integral component of continuous
improvement in both the corporate and environmental fields. This has lead to a movement
called Total Quality Environmental Management (TQEM). TQEM extends traditional
quality tenets to the management of corporate environmental matters as well as those of
process efficiency and product performance.
TQEM can help lay the groundwork for implementing life cycle design. By including
the environment as a customer, TQEM focuses company attention on continuously
improving environmental performance. A discussion of several aspects of corporate
environment improvement programs that are critical to life cycle design follows.
29
-------
THREE: LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
Performance Measures: Environmental Metrics
The progress of design projects should be clearly assessed with appropriate measures
to help members of the design team achieve environmental goals. Consistent measures of
impact reduction in all phases of design provide valuable information for design analysis
and decision making. It is important to establish measures that cover resource efficiency,
waste generation in all media, ecosystem sustainability, and human health.
Companies can measure progress toward stated goals in several ways. In each case,
life cycle design is likely to be more successful when environmental aspects are part of a
firm's incentive and reward system.
Reward & Recognition
Even though life cycle design can cut costs, increase performance, and lead to greater
profitability, it may still be necessary to include discrete measures of environmental
responsibility when assessing an employee's performance. If companies claim to follow
sound environmental policies, but never reward and promote employees for reducing
adverse environmental impacts, managers and workers will naturally focus on other areas
of the business.
Auditing, Compliance Monitoring & Reporting, and Emergency Preparedness
Effective environmental management system require auditing, compliance monitoring
and reporting systems to fulfill regulatory mandates. Audit teams should include
individuals with environmental credentials and expertise in pollution prevention.
Compliance monitoring and reporting is usually undertaken as often as necessary to meet
regulatory or permit mandates. However, all companies, even those not involved in
regulated activities, may want to track significant materials so that evaluations may be'
made on their use and disposal as well. Assessment of nonregulated materials should be
driven by strategic planning and policy.
Emergency preparedness systems must also exist to control accidents. Emergency
preparedness protocols should follow guidelines at least as stringent as those set by the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Companies may find that reducing
accidental risks provides monetary benefit as well as maintaining and improving staff
morale.
Research and Development
To help assure that current and future environmental needs are translated into
appropriate designs, priorities for global, regional, and local environmental problems
developed by the scientific community and the general public should be used to guide
product improvement. Research and technology development can then identify new
approaches for reducing adverse environmental impacts, while the state of the
environment provides a context for design.
30
-------
External Factors in Life Cycle Management
Thus corporate research and development properly includes pollution prevention
projects such as source reduction, materials/energy reuse, and materials/energy recycling.
Investigating methods to reduce environmental burden throughout the entire product life
cycle is also part of effective research and development. Companies that participate in
industrial technology consortiums, research sponsored by trade associations, and
government assisted or public-private collaboration position themselves to gain many
potential benefits. Knowledge gained from these activities may yield improved product
performance, reduced costs, and reduced pollution.
Training & Education
An effective environmental improvement program also includes training and
education programs. Environmental science, policy, and strategy may not be familiar to
employees. Education and training helps employees understand the relationship between
environmental quality and their own work, and may foster interest in proactive efforts.
Training should provide guidance for corporate compliance and pollution prevention
programs as well as innovative initiatives such as life cycle design, life cycle inventory
analysis, and full-cost accounting. Motorola recently instituted a corporate-wide
educational program on environmental awareness for all employees. [23]
EXTERNAL FACTORS IN LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
A corporate environmental program capable of furthering life cycle design must also deal
with myriad external factors including government policy and regulations, market demand,
infrastructure, and supplier relationships. The success of life cycle design depends on how well
corporations communicate their expectations and objectives to these multiple stakeholders. The
following section summarizes the key challenges facing corporate environmental leaders in
managing external concerns and advancing life cycle design.
Government
Government plays an important role in promoting life cycle design through both
regulatory and voluntary programs. The US Congress Office of Technology Assessment
(OTA) recently conducted a thorough study of policy options for promoting green product
design. [24] Although existing market incentives and environmental regulations have been
somewhat effective in promoting sustainable practices, OTA concluded that Congress can
foster further progress in this area by: supporting research, providing information for
consumers, developing policies that internalize environmental costs, and harmonizing
various programs.
Government policies and regulations have become increasingly stringent over the past
two decades and will continue in this direction. Companies must make investment
decisions under a great deal of uncertainty because it is difficult to predict the regulatory
31
-------
THREE: LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
landscape of the future. Companies should make good-faith efforts with regulators to
develop and test the most effective regulatory strategies.
Clearly the greatest role government now plays in promoting sustainability is
regulating environmental protection. The EPA Pollution Prevention Policy and recent
voluntary programs represent significant new approaches to achieving environmental
protection. It remains to be seen whether regulations can be rewritten to promote the life
cycle design approach for reducing environmental burdens. The EPA Source Reduction
Review Project (SRRP) and the new Common Sense Program represent advancements in
this direction.
Other countries are pursuing a variety of strategies to promote life cycle design. In
Germany, a packaging ordinance, several ecolabeling programs, and various proposed
waste ordinances promote extended producer responsibility and thus foster corporate
action to reduce environmental impacts associated with products.
Public Demand
Manufacturers must be aware of rising levels of concern for the environment among
consumers. Market demand for environmentally responsible products or the boycott of
harmful products has forced companies to consider the environment as a core business
issue. Product design strategies that reduce environmental impacts as well as costs will
provide the greatest potential for manufacturers to meet rising consumer expectations.
However, companies may have to implement environmental programs even if no cost
advantages are gained merely to stay competitive. Innovative companies may find that
adopting life cycle design gains them an advantages in the marketplace.
VOLUNTARY INITIATIVES IN POLLUTION PREVENTION BY THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ^ '
• 33/50 program „
• Green Lights
• Energy Star Computers
• Energy Star Buildings
• Corporate Environmental LeadeVship Program
• Golden Carrot Award ' „ ,
• Natural Gas Star *
• Building Air Quality Alliance '
• Waste W$e ^ ;^s ^\t
• WAVE (Water Alliances for Voluntary Efficiency)
• Mobility Partners ' "
• Design for the Environment (DFE) program
32
-------
External Factors in Life Cycle Management
Infrastructure
Companies must deal with infrastructure factors that impede environmental efforts,
such as inadequate networks to support reuse and recycling. For example, companies may
find that the necessary collection, handling, and sorting facilities for recycling are
inadequate or not economically viable without public support. In such cases, it may be
prohibitively expensive for companies to develop the needed infrastructure on their own.
Moreover, secondary markets for some recycled materials are volatile, increasing the risk
of investing in a recycling or recovery program.
Supplier Relationships
Life cycle design requires companies to take a systems view of all their operations
including upstream and downstream impacts. Manufacturers need to understand the
impacts of their products at each stage of the life cycle. Supplier management is a critical
component of external environmental management. Corporations should evaluate their
suppliers' environmental performance to determine if there are liability risks in
conducting business with them or if there are means by which the company may
encourage or require the supplier to achieve improved environmental performance. Often
opportunities identified in the design process require supplier participation. Effective and
open communication with suppliers or substantial influence over supplier activities may
be instrumental in reducing the environmental burden of many product systems.
rfi>J|piB|^
ft^«fe*.^A^?«*i:*Csi.'>-*^ '<* V-^^^K-f^^- -i»5-cvf f v,--,-'-?-Af-«4'5,v,T ;v-;, v ,'< lr&' v"5>r •°£K* :'*•"; '•- ;>V:: K<"SS •>'.-,'',
33
-------
THREE: LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
National/International Standards
Companies must develop programs to meet national or international standards in order
to remain viable competitors in the marketplace. A number of organizations have
introduced, or are. in the process of developing, standards for implementing environmental
management systems or for conducting life cycle analysis including: the International
Standards Organization (ISO), the British Standards Association, the Canadian Standards
Association, National Sanitation Foundation, the Society for Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry, and the American National Standards Institute, among others.
The following box contains a summary of the subcommittee structure and related
topics being addressed by the International Standards Organization.
ISO TC 207 ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
SECRETARIAT; Canada (CSA for SCO)
TAG Administrator; USA (ASTM)
I
SC1 Environmental Management Systems (EMS)
Secretariat: United Kingdom
US TAG: ASQC
Scope: Establish standards for activities to set
environmental policy, objectives, and responsibilities
and to implement them through planning, measures of
effectiveness and control of environmental impact.
SC 2 Environmental Auditing
Secretariat: Netherlands
US TAG: ASQC
Scope: Establish standards for measuring
organizational compliance with an environmental
management system and for establishing the policies,
directives and goals expressed by organizational
policy.
SC 3 Environmental Labeling
Secretariat; Australia
US TAG: ASTM
Scope: Develop standard terminology, definitions,
symbols, test methods, test summary, reporting
standards, etc.
SC 4 Environmental performance Evaluation (EPE)
Secretariat: USA
US TAG: ASTM * „
Scope: Guidance for evaluating environmental effects
of products and services and the effect of business
operations on the environment
sc 5 Life-cycle Analysis (LCA)
Secretariat: France ' ^
US TAG; ASTM , , „ „ '
Scope:". Standardized prograrns'foi' analyzing •
environmental impaqts of products, processes arid
services during their life cycle, including toe'productton '
and use of raw materials, manufacturing practices,,
distribution methods and options refated to disposal or
recycling,1
• .^ -y- . f",.^/s:.V' . . ' • '
SC 6 Terms and Definitions,
Secretariat: Norway
''
_ , , , .,...
Scope: To standardize terminology and coordinate the
use of standards with other committee within ISO,
WG Environmental Aspects in Product Standards *'
(EAPS) ' " , "
J- * . * f ,t, v >/ ^
Secretariat: Germany - * <
''
. to cfevelop guidance for,use by other
committees for inoju|ingeHvlronmfptaJ*4eJ§me^j^
existing or forthcoming product ftsncjaras/
"S?/'4
34
-------
4. LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Evaluation occurs
throughout the
Development Process
(see Figure 4-5)
Sustainable Development
,
1
Life Cycle Management
(
'
: • ' 'Needs Analysis
(
'
" / Requirements
i
'
," , , Design Solutions •
i
i
. « Implementation
* * i •"? o
Consequences
1 social welfare
1 resource depletion
• ecosystem & human
health effects
Feedback for next-generation
design improvement and
strategic planning
Figure 4-1. Life Cycle Development Process
The life cycle development process, which occurs in the context of sustainable development
and life cycle management, is shown in Figure 4-1. Design begins with a needs analysis, then
includes specification of requirements, selection and synthesis of strategies, evaluation, and final
choice of a solution, as introduced in section 2. The design team seeks a solution that satisfies the
full set of design requirements while minimizing environmental burden. At this point, an
environmental profile for the product system can be estimated.
Implementation of the design solution requires material and energy inputs .throughout all life
cycle stages and results in outputs of products, coproducts, and waste. Environmental
consequences of these inputs and outputs include positive and negative social welfare effects,
resource depletion, and ecological and human health effects. The actual environmental burden
resulting from design implementation then feeds back into the process to guide future design
improvements.
Product development is a dynamic, extremely complex process. Each of the steps from the
needs analysis through implementation undergo continuous change. Figure 4-1 shows the iterative
nature and feedback mechanisms of the development process.
35
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND PROJECT INITIATION
A product design project should first clearly identify customers and their needs, then focus on
meeting those needs. Ideas for design projects come from many sources, such as customer focus
groups and research and development efforts. Environmental assessment of existing products may
also uncover opportunities for design improvements that target major impacts for reduction or
elimination.
Identify Significant Needs
Life cycle development projects should focus on filling significant customer and
societal needs in a sustainable manner. Avoiding confusion between trivial desires and
basic needs is a major challenge of life cycle design. Unless life cycle principles such as
sustainable development shape the needs analysis, design projects may not create low-
impact products. By including environmental criteria in the set of customer requirements
that must be satisfied, designers are motivated to focus on environmental improvement.
Product development managers should first recognize that environmental impacts can
be substantially reduced by ending production of environmentally damaging product lines
for which lower-impact alternatives are available. In the short term, this may conflict
with corporate economic goals.
Define Project Scope and Purpose
Set System Boundaries
Setting system boundaries requires determining which stages of the product life cycle
will be emphasized by the design team as well as setting appropriate spatial and temporal
scales. In choosing an appropriate system boundary, the development team should
initially consider the full life cycle from raw material acquisition to the ultimate fate of
residuals. Beginning with the most comprehensive system, design and analysis can focus
on the:
• full life cycle,
• part of the life cycle, or
• individual stages or activities.
Choice of the full life cycle system provides the greatest opportunities for overall adverse
impact reduction.
In some cases, the development team may confine analysis to a part of the 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.
36
-------
Needs Analysis and Project Initiation
After life cycle endpoints are decided, the project team should define how analysis
will proceed. Depth of analysis determines how far back indirect inputs and outputs will
be traced. Materials, energy, and labor are generally traced in a first level analysis. A
second level analysis accounts for facilities and equipment needed to produce items on the
first level.
The basis for analysis should be equivalent use, defined as the delivery of equal
amounts of product or service. This allows alternate designs to be accurately compared.
Spatial and temporal boundaries must also be determined prior to system evaluation. '
The time frame or conditions under which data were gathered should be clearly identified.
Often performance of industrial systems varies over time, so it is best to gather data that
reflect the appropriate range of possibilities. Presenting worst- and best-case scenarios or
using well-considered averages helps avoid distortions caused by gathering data under
unusual conditions.
In regard to spatial conditions, the design team must recognize that the same activity
may 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.
Establish Schedule and Allocate Budget
After a project has been well defined and deemed worth pursuing, a project time line
and budget should be proposed. Life cycle design requires funds for environmental
analysis of designs. Managers should recognize that budget increases for proper
environmental analysis can pay future dividends in avoided costs and added benefits that
outweigh the initial investment. However, the choice of analysis tools may be limited by
reasonable financial considerations. For example, most small firms can not yet afford the
substantial cost of a comprehensive life cycle assessment.
Baseline and Benchmark Environmental Performance
Evaluating baseline conditions of manufacture, use/service, and end-of-life
management helps life cycle designers gain an understanding of the environmental profile
of an existing or future product system. Benchmarking activities properly target design
improvements by gathering information about the best products that fulfill similar
customer needs. While companies have programs that compare their product performance
and cost against the competition, environmental criteria are generally more difficult to
benchmark due to lack of information, insufficient scientific understanding, and limited
availability of resources.
Baseline Analysis
The purpose of a baseline analysis is to understand the environmental profile of the
existing product system. Baseline analysis of existing products may indicate
opportunities for improving a product system's environmental performance. [25, 26]
37
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Baseline analysis may consist of a life cycle inventory analysis, audit team reports, or
monitoring and reporting data. In all cases, process flow diagrams are useful for
synthesizing data. Baseline analysis can be used to help the design team formulate both
general design goals and detailed design requirements. Section 6 describes how
AlliedSignal's life cycle design team conducted a baseline analysis of an existing product.
The following sources of environmental data for baseline analysis can be helpful in
evaluating internal environmental performance:
• life cycle inventory
• purchasing and accounting records
• monitoring reports
• quality assurance and quality control
• legal department
• audit reports
• compliance records
• community relations activities
Benchmarking
Benchmarking is the practice of comparing programs or processes with the intent of
establishing reference points for continuous improvement. Because benchmarking
activities have been widely practiced by industry, many sources of information on
methodologies exist. However, corporations may not have experience in benchmarking
competitor's environmental performance or practices.
Life cycle assessment is one means of performing a comprehensive comparative
analysis. LCA inventories have been used for comparing products such as polyethylene
and paper grocery sacks or hard surface and mix-your-own cleaning systems.[27, 28]
However, this tool has several limitations, not the least of which is that LCA activities are
influenced by the availability of company resources. Regardless of methods chosen, the
following basic guidelines apply to benchmarking: [25]
• Plan and determine goals and scope of benchmarking study
• Collect preliminary-data
• Select "best-in-class"
• Ascertain data on best-in-class
• Review and assess data in teams
• Develop implementation plan
• Assess program performance continuously
38
-------
Needs Analysis and Project Initiation
Sources of data useful for benchmarking the environmental performance of existing
product lines include:
• clearinghouses
• published surveys
• published consulting reports and corporate magazines
• workshops, conferences, and roundtables
• EPA programs e.g., 33/50, Green Lights, DFE
• government reports and task force papers
• annual reports and SEC filings
• periodicals and journals
• global environmental management initiative
• state and local regulatory agencies
• census data
• interviews with academia and industry
In addition to these sources, companies can apply reverse engineering analysis to
competitors' products. This approach offers specific information about material
composition and other aspects of design, such as performance and assembly details,
Baselining and benchmarking may reveal significant vulnerabilities associated with
environmental risks or liability, performance standards, cost, or cultural issues such as
brand-name recognition or image. An equally important aspect of these exercises is
indicating opportunities for improvement in environmental and other design criteria.
Identify Opportunities and Vulnerabilities
In this phase of the life cycle development process, current and future design goals are
stated explicitly. Design goals must be compatible with a, company's overall strategic
direction. Elements of strategy that have to be addressed when identifying design goals
include corporate goals, consumer markets, the competition, image, and other fundamental
business criteria.
39
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Table 4-1. Systematic Evaluation of Overall Product Design Strategy (with examples)
Benchmark
"Best-In-Class"
Baseline Existing
Product Line
Current Design Goals Future Design Goals
Analysis of Competitor Current Opportunities for Strategic Goals & Direction
Position Operations Incremental Improvement
Environmental
programs,
performance, arid
technology
Results of Reduce TRI emissions by Abandon current product
environmental 20% and introduce improved
profile Improve resource design
efficiency of product
Performance rating Performance rating Attain highest product
including product test including product rating in class
test results and
consumer
feedback
results and substitute
products
Financial comparison
including economies
of scale, government
subsidy, excess
cash, fixed costs
Legal advantage from
government or
patents and liabilities
Cost per unit output,
labor and materials
Legal liabilities
Hold product at current
cost
Improve performance and
maintain superiority
Reduce life cycle cost to
users
Meet or exceed existing Influence regulations and
regulatory requirements policy to promote
sustainable products
Cultural advantage
including consumer
preference or brand
name recognition
Market niche or
cultural
advantages
Expand into multicultural
market
Market environmental
claims; capture global
market share
The results of the design team's baseline analysis and benchmarking activities can
serve as a basis for developing a short- and long-term goal horizon. Table 4-1 presents a
format for integrating baseline and benchmarking information with current and future
design goals. Examples of opportunities and vulnerabilities for product improvement are
indicated as well.
The goals established during the needs analysis serve as guides to setting performance
requirements and weighting product design requirements.
Dow Chemical Company has developed a matrix tool for assessing environmental
opportunities and vulnerabilities across the major life cycle stages of the product system.
Opportunities and vulnerabilities are assessed for the following core environmental issues:
safety, human health, residual substances, ozone depletion, air quality, climate change,
resource depletion, soil contamination, waste accumulation, and water contamination.
Corporate resource commitments may then be changed to more closely match the assessed
opportunities and vulnerabilities.
Figure 4-2 shows a tool that Dow has developed to prioritize resource allocation for
environmental improvement. Areas that represent the greatest environmental deltas (i.e.,
40
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
reduced by developing environmental requirements that address the full life cycle at the outset of
a project. Life cycle design also seeks to integrate environmental requirements with traditional
performance, cost, cultural, and legal requirements. All requirements must be properly balanced
in a successful product. An environmentally preferable product that fails in the marketplace
benefits no one.
Regardless of the project's nature, the expected design outcome should not be overly
restrictive nor should it be too broad. Requirements defined too narrowly eliminate potentially
attractive designs from the solution space. On the other hand, vague requirements (such as those
arising from corporate environmental policies that are too broad to provide specific guidance),
lead to misunderstandings between potential customers and designers while making the search
process inefficient.
The majority of product system costs are fixed in the design stage. Activities through the
requirements phase typically account for 10-15% of total product development costs, yet
decisions made at this point can determine 50- 70% of costs for the entire project.[30, 31]
Requirements matrices, design checklists, and other methods are available to assist the
design team in establishing requirements. Requirements can also be established by formal
procedures such as Quality Function Deployment (QFD).
Checklists
Checklists are usually a series of questions formulated to help designers be
systematic and thorough when addressing design topics. Environmental design
checklists that accommodate quantitative, qualitative, and inferential information in
different design stages have been offered for consideration. As an example, AT&T
developed proprietary checklists for Design for Environment (DFE) that are similar to
the familiar Design for Manufacturability (DFM) checklists. In the AT&T model, a Toxic
Substance Inventory checklist is used to identify whether a product contains a select
group of toxic metals.
The Canadian Standards Association is currently developing a Design for the
Environment standard which includes checklists of critical environmental core principles.
A series of yes/no questions are being proposed for each major life cycle stage: raw
materials acquisition, manufacturing, use, and waste management.
Checklists are not difficult to use but they must be compiled carefully to avoid
placing excessive demands on designers' time. Generic checklists can also interfere with
creativity if designers rely on them exclusively to address environmental issues, thereby
failing to focus on the issues that are most important to their specific project.
Matrices
Matrices allow product development teams to study the interactions between life
cycle requirements. Figure 4-3 shows a multilayer matrix for developing requirements.
The matrix for each type of requirement contains columns that represent life cycle stages.
42
-------
' Requirements
r-
1 pnal ^
(
Cultural
^
/^ r*n^ ^\ 1
, ^L s __
'/ ^
f^&xzd'z^^
' ^O^f^i'''/'*''^' £&o£c>t •%
V"*; *&?*'£+&&%'' &P
%« . .¥.x**??$k*ft.A ^^sr?
Product
• /A/PUTS
• OUTPUTS
Process
• /wpurs
• OUTPUTS
Distribution
• ;wpt/rs
•OUTPUTS
Raw Material
Acquisition
Material
Processing
Assembly &
Manufacture
'erformance
Use&
Service
v -— i
-/" Environmental "V,
Retirement
& Recovery
Treatment &
Disposal
Figure 4-3. Conceptual Multilayer Matrix for Developing Requirements
Rows of each matrix are formed by the product system components described in Section
2: product, process, and distribution. Each row can be subdivided into inputs and outputs.
Elements can then be described and tracked in as much detail as necessary, fable 4-2
shows how each row in the environmental matrix can be expanded to provide more detail
for developing requirements.
Table 4-2. Example of Subdivided Rows for Environmental Requirements Matrix.
Product
Process
Distribution
/npufs
Mater/a/s
Energy
Human
Resources
Content of Direct: process materials
final Indirect:
product 7sr level (equipment and
facilities, office supplies,)
2nd level (capital and resources
to produce 1st level)
Embodied Process energy (direct and
energy indirect)
Labor (workers, managers)
Users, consumers
Packaging
Transportation
Direct (e.g., oil & brake fluid)
Indirect (e.g., vehicles and
garages)
Office supplies
Equipment and facilities
Embodied in packaging
Consumed by transportation
(Btu/ton-mile)
Consumed as power for
administrative services, etc.
Labor (workers, managers)
Outputs
Products
Coproducts
Residuals
Residuals
Generated energy
Residuals
43
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
The requirements matrices shown in Figure 4-3 are strictly conceptual. 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 suppliers and the original equipment manufacturer. The distribution
component of this stage might also include receiving, shipping, and wholesale activities.
Retail sale of the final product might best fit in the distribution component of the use
phase.
There are no absolute rules for organizing matrices. Information may be classified
according to quantitative/qualitative, present/future, and must/want requirements.
Development teams should choose a format that is appropriate for their project. Sections
5 and 6 describe the application of requirements matrices for the AT&T and AlliedSignal
Demonstration Projects.
Following is a discussion of the environmental, performance, cost, legal, and cultural
requirements that constitute the matrices.
Environmental Requirements
Environmental requirements should be developed to minimize:
• the use of natural resources (particularly nonrenewables)
• energy consumption
• waste generation
• health and safety risks
• ecological degradation
By translating these goals into clear functions, environmental requirements help
identify and constrain environmental impacts and health risks.
Table 4-3 lists issues that can help development teams define environmental
requirements. This manual cannot provide detailed guidance on environmental
requirements for each business or industry. Although the lists in Table 4-3 are not
complete, they introduce many important topics. Depending on the project, teams may
express these requirements quantitatively or qualitatively. For example, it might be useful
to state a requirement that limits solid waste generation for the entire product life cycle to
a specific weight.
In addition to criteria uncovered through needs analysis or benchmarking, government
policies can also be used to set requirements. For example, the Integrated Solid Waste
Management Plan developed by the EPA in 1989 targets municipal solid waste disposal
for a 25% reduction by 1995.[2] Other initiatives, such as the EPA's 33/50 program are
aimed at reducing toxic emissions. It may benefit companies to develop requirements that
match the goals of these voluntary programs.
It can also be wise to set environmental requirements that exceed current government
regulations. Such requirements may have been identified while investigating
opportunities and vulnerabilities early on in the needs analysis. Designs based on such
44
-------
Requirements
Table 4-3. Issues to Consider When Developing Environmental Requirements
Materials and Energy
Amount
Type
Renewable
Nonrenewable
Residuals
Type
Solid waste
Air emissions
Waterborne
Ecological Health
Ecosystem Stressors
Physical
Biological
Chemical
Character
Virgin
Reused/recycled
Reusable/ recyclable
Characterization
Nonhazardous
- constituents, amount
Hazardous, Radioactive
- constituents, amount,
concentration, toxicity
Impact Categories
Diversity
Sustainability, resilience
to stressors
Resource Base
Location
- local vs. other
Scarcity
Quality
Management/
restoration practices
Environmental Fate
Containment
Bioaccumulation
Degradability
Mobility/transport
Impacts
System structure
and function
Sensitive species
Impacts Caused By
Extraction and Use
Material /energy use
_Residua|s
Ecosystem health
Human health
Treatment/disposal
impacts
Scale
Local
Regional
Global
Human Health and Safety
Population at Risk Exposure Routes
Workers Inhalation, skin contact,
Users ingestion
Community Duration & frequency
Toxic Character
Acute effects
Chronic effects
Morbidity /mortality
Accidents
Type & frequency
Nuisance Effects
Noise & odors
proactive requirements offer many benefits. Major modifications dictated by regulation
can be costly and time consuming. In addition, such changes may not be consistent with a
firm's own development cycles, creating even more problems that could have been
avoided.
Performance Requirements
Performance requirements define the functions of the product system. Functional
requirements range from size tolerances of parts to time and motion specifications for
equipment. Performance requirements for an automobile include fuel economy, maximum
driving range, acceleration and braking capabilities, handling characteristics, passenger
and storage capacity, and ability to protect passengers in a collision. Environmental
requirements are closely linked to and often constrained by performance requirements.
Performance is limited by the following technical factors:.
• thermodynamic limits (e.g., first and second laws of thermodynamics)
• best available technology
• best affordable technology
45
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Practical performance limits are usually defined by best available technology or best
affordable technology. Absolute limits to performance are determined 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 must also be considered. In many cases, process design
is constrained by existing facilities and equipment. This constraint affects many aspects
of process performance. It can also limit product performance by restricting the range of
possible materials and features. In such cases, the success of a major design project may
depend on upgrading or investing in new technology.
Designers should also be aware that customer behavior and social trends affect real
and perceived product performance. Innovative technology might increase 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, yet 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 environmental gain, poor
performance usually produces more impacts. Inadequate products are retired quickly in
favor of more capable ones. Development programs that fail to produce products with
superior performance can therefore contribute to excess waste generation and resource
use.
Cos* Requirements
Meeting all performance and environmental requirements does not ensure project
success. Regardless of how environmentally responsible a product may be, many
customers will choose another if it cannot be offered 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 better reflect environmental costs and benefits are
important to life cycle design. With more complete accounting, many low-impact designs
may show financial advantages. Methods of life cycle accounting that can help companies
make better design decisions are discussed later in this section.
Cost requirements should guide designers in adding 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 stated 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,
46
-------
Requirements
Table 4-4. Example of General Cost Requirements over Product Life Cycle
Life Cycle Stages
Stakeholders
Manufacturers
Consumers
Raw Materials/Supply
Manufacturing
Use
Service
End-Of-Life
Management
Minimize unit cost of materials or
parts
Minimize unit cost of production
- waste management costs
- cost of packaging
Administrative.
Product and environmental liability Purchase price
Operating cost
- energy
- maintenance
- repair
Minimize warranty costs
Environmental liabilities
Disposal cost
although it does not address full environmental costs. By providing an estimate of total
user costs over the product's useful life, quality products may be judged on more than
least first cost, which addresses only the initial purchase price or financing charges. Table
4-4 lists some cost requirements over the product life cycle.
Cultural Requirements
Cultural requirements define the shape, form, color, texture, and image that a product
projects. Material selection, product finish, colors, and size are guided by consumer
preferences. In order to be successful, a product must meet the cultural requirements of
customers.
Decisions concerning physical attributes and style have direct environmental
consequences. However, because customers usually do not know about the full
environmental consequences of their preferences, creating pleasing, environmentally
superior products is a major design challenge. Successful cultural requirements enable the
design itself to promote an awareness of how it reduces impacts.
Cultural requirements may overlap with other types of requirements. 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
therefore determine whether demand for perceived convenience and environmental
requirements conflict.
47
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Legal Requirements
Local, state, and federal environmental, health, and safety regulations 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. Firms may also be liable for punitive damages.
Paying attention to legal requirements is clearly an important part of design
requirements. Environmental professionals, health and safety staff, legal advisors, and
government regulators can identify legal issues for life cycle design. Local, state, federal
, and international regulations that apply to the product system provide a framework for
legal requirements. Legal and quasilegal requirements include:
• international regulations
• national regulations (US)
• state and local regulations
• voluntary standards
Federal regulations are administered and enforced by agencies such as the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). In addition to such federal authorities,
many other political jurisdictions enforce environmental regulations. For example, some
cities have imposed bans on certain materials and products. Regulations also vary
dramatically among countries. The take back legislation in Germany is beginning to draw
more attention to end-of-life issues in product design.
Whenever possible, legal requirements should consider the implications of 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.
Assigning Priority to Requirements
Ranking and Weighting
Ranking and weighting design requirements helps distinguish between critical and
merely desirable requirements. After assigning requirements a weighted value, they
should be ranked and separated into several groups.' An example of a useful classification
scheme follows: after[29]
• Must requirements are conditions that designs have to meet. No design is
acceptable unless it satisfies all of these must requirements.
• Want requirements are less important, but still desirable traits. Want require-
ments 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 perceptions of quality.
48
-------
Requirements
• Ancillary functions are low-ranked in terms of relative importance. Designers
should be aware that such desires exist, but ancillary functions can only be
expressed in design when they do not compromise more critical functions.
Once must requirements are set, want and ancillary requirements can be assigned
priority. 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. Judgments based on the values and experience of the
design team must be used to arrive at priorities.
The process of making tradeoffs 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.
Organizing Requirements'
Various approaches can be taken to organize requirements. The must versus want
distinction can be a useful guide. The following list provides some additional methods for
organizing requirements in each component of the matrix.
Must
Want
Qualitative
Quantitative
Present
Future
General Criteria
Environmental
Metric
Compliance with existing environmental laws
Beyond Compliance
Reduce the use of toxic constituents
Specify a 25% reduction in the use of lead
Current regulations
Future regulations (promulgated phase-out of CFC or
take back legislation)
Component recyclable
Energy efficiency and energy used per unit of operation
Resolving Conflicts
Development teams can expect conflicts between requirements. If conflicts between
must requirements can not be resolved, there is no solution space for design. When a
solution space exists but it is so restricted that little choice is possible, must requirements
may have been defined too narrowly. The absence of conflicts usually indicates that
requirements 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.
49
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Solution Space
Figure 4-4. Design Solution Space
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 overly broad requirements.
Only projects with practical, well-considered requirements should be pursued. Successful
requirements usually result from resolving conflicts and developing new priorities that
more accurately reflect customer needs.
DESIGN SOLUTION
Needs analysis and requirements specification provide the ideas, objectives, and criteria that
eventually define the design solution space which then shapes the development process from the
conceptual design phase through detailed design. The solution space is the intersection of
potential design solutions that meet all key environmental, performance, cost, legal, and cultural
requirements. Figure 4-4 illustrates this point graphically. The space in the diagram that each
criteria overlaps is the solution space. At this point in development, designers select and
synthesize strategies that fulfill the multicriteria design requirements defining the solution space.
Design Strategies
Selecting and synthesizing design strategies for meeting the full spectrum of
requirements is a major challenge of life cycle design. Presented by themselves, strategies
may seem to define the goals of a design project. 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.
50
-------
Design Solution
Table 4-5. Summary of Design Strategies
General Categories
Specific Strategies
Product Life Extension
Material Life Extension
Material Selection
Reduced Material
Intensiveness
Process Management
Efficient Distribution
Improved Management
Practices
Extend useful life
Increase durability
Ensure adaptability
Increase reliability
Expand service options
Simplify maintenance
Facilitate repairability
Enable remanufacture of products
Accommodate reuse of product
Develop recycling infrastructure
Examine recycling pathways
Use recyclable materials
Use substitute materials
Devise reformulations
Conserve resources
Substitute better processes
Increase process energy efficiency
Increase process material efficiency
Improve process control
Control inventory and material handling
Plan facilities to reduce impacts
Ensure proper treatment and disposal
Optimize transportation systems
Reduce packaging
Use alternative packaging materials
Use office materials and equipment
efficiently
Phase out high-impact products
Choose environmentally responsible
suppliers or contractors
Encourage eco-labeling and advertise
environmental claims
General strategies for fulfilling environmental requirements are shown in Table 4-5.
An explanation of each strategy is provided in the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual
published by EPA. Most of these strategies reach across product system boundaries; life
extension, for example, can be applied to various elements in all three product system
components.
In most cases, a single strategy will not be best for meeting all environmental
requirements. Recycling illustrates this point. Many designers, policymakers, and
consumers believe recycling is the best solution for a wide range of environmental
problems. Yet, even though recycling can conserve virgin materials and divert discarded
51
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
material from landfills, it also causes other impacts and thus may not always be the best
way to minimize waste and conserve resources.
Single strategies are unlikely to improve environmental performance in all life cycle
stages; they are even less likely to satisfy the full set of cost, legal, performance, and
cultural requirements. Appropriate strategies need to satisfy the entire set of design
requirements shown in Figure 4-3, thus promoting integration of environmental
requirements into design. For example, essential product performance must be preserved
when design teams choose a strategy for reducing environmental impacts. If performance
is so degraded that the product fails in the marketplace, the benefits of environmentally
responsible design are only illusory.
In most cases, successful development teams adopt a range of strategies to meet
design requirements. As an example, design responses to an initiative such as extended
producer responsibility [32, 33] are likely to include waste reduction, reuse, recycling,
and aspects of product life extension.
EVALUATION
Analysis and evaluation are required throughout the product development process. If
environmental requirements for the product system are well specified, design alternatives can be
checked directly against these requirements. Tools for design evaluation range from
comprehensive analysis tools such as life cycle assessment (LCA) to the use of single
environmental metrics. In each case, design solutions are evaluated with respect to the full
spectrum of requirements.
Figure 4-5 shows different applications of environmental evaluation tools throughout the
development process. Note that the actual environmental burden associated with a product system
may differ from the environmental profile estimated during design. Such variation is likely in a
dynamic system.
Environmental <,
Evaluation Tools * -
Needs Analysis
Requirements
Design Solutions
Implementation
Baseline and benchmark
environmental performance
Help define design criteria
Estimate environmental
profile of design solution
Determine actual
environmental burden of
product system
Figure 4-5. Environmental Evaluation In the Development Process
52
-------
Evaluation
INVENTORY
ANALYSIS
IMPROVEMENT
ASSESSMENT
IMPACT
ASSESSMENT
Figure 4-6. LCA Framework[34]
LCA and Its Application to Design
Methodology
Life cycle assessment consists of several techniques for identifying and evaluating the
adverse environmental effects associated with a product system. [34-39] The most widely
recognized framework for LCA, shown in Figure 4-6, consists of inventory analysis,
impact assessment, and improvement assessment components.
At present, inventory analysis is the most established methodology of LCA. The
following steps for performing a life cycle inventory are described in EPA's Life Cycle
Assessment: Inventory Guidelines and Principles [37]:
• Define the purpose and scope of the inventory
• Devise an inventory checklist
• Institute a peer review process
• Gather data
• Develop stand-alone data
• Construct a computational model
• Present the results
• Interpret and communicate the results
For an inventory analysis, a process flow diagram is constructed and material and
energy inputs and outputs for the product system are identified and quantified.[37]
A template for constructing a detailed flow diagram for each life cycle subsystem is
53
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Process materials, reagents,
solvents, & catalysts (including
reuse & recycle from another
Energy Sta9e>
L .
Reuse/Recycle
Product Material
Inputs
(including reuse &
recycle from another
stage)
V
Single Stage or
Unit Operation
J
Reuse/Recycle
<
P i
)
-^-*
^ Primary
Product
Useful Co-product
Vaste
Fugitive & Treatment
Untreated
Waste
Figure 4-7. Template for Flow Diagram of Life Cycle Subsystem
shown in Figure 4-7. This template can be used to conduct an input/output analysis for
each substage.
The impact assessment component of the LCA framework, which is still under
development, applies quantitative and qualitative techniques to characterize and assess the
environmental effects associated with inventory items. EPA and the Society of
Environmental Toxicologists and Chemists (SETAC) have classified the impact
assessment into three steps: classification, characterization, and valuation. The impact
assessment conceptual framework taken from the EPA Impact Assessment Guidelines [40]
is shown in Figure 4-8.
Impacts are usually classified as resource depletion, human health and safety effects,
ecological degradation, and other social welfare effects relating to environmental
DESIGN EVALUATION TOOLS ,,7
Life Cycle Assessment -
EPA/SETAC Framework (inventory analysis, impact and Improvement assessment) v
DFEIS in matrix (Ailenby) ' "/>,*'**
EPS system (Federation of Swedish Industries) ' f '
,- General Environmental Metrics o /'*.,",,."
Resource Productivity Index (Sony) , '" ' ', ; ,.'
Waste/unit product ' ^
' °% <•" , v i
Specific Metrics , ,
Energy consumed in use stage per unit product % •
Percent recycled content; weight of recyclable components/weight of product
Cost Assessment t k- ^' -'t \ ,,
Life cycle costing •„'•<• , ^
Environmental accounting ' *' " "" 'I*
54
-------
Evaluation
C
Develop Impact
Networks
Classify Inventory Items
by Impact Category
Determine Assessment
Endpoints
Select Measurements
Endpoints
Apply Conversion Models to
Develop Impact Descriptors
Apply Valuation
Methods to Synthesize
Stakeholder Values and
Impact Descriptors
Life Cycle Improvement
Assessment
LU
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Enhanced
Greenhouse
Effect
Global
Warming
Tropospheric
Ozone
Acid
Precipitation
Regional
Climate Change
r
Sea Level Rise I
Increased Risk of
Tropical Disease
r
\
Decreased
Visibility
Respiratory
System Damage
Tree Damage I
Acidification of
Water Bodies
Corrosion of
Materials
Leaching of
Metals from Soils
Figure 4-9. Impact Network Examples[40]
56
-------
Evaluation
An example of an impact network is provided in Figure 4-9. A wide range of models
can be used to characterize impacts such pollutant transport, exposure assessment, and
risk assessment models.
Improvement analysis uses life cycle inventory and/or impact assessment methods to
identify opportunities for reducing environmental burdens. This component is under
development; there are no widely accepted practices for performing improvement analysis
at present.
Other efforts have also focused on developing streamlined tools that are not as
rigorous as LCA (e.g. Canadian Standards Association).
LCA and more streamlined approaches can potentially be applied in the needs
analysis, requirements specification, and evaluation of conceptual through detailed design
phases. Specific uses of LCA are summarized below.
Needs Analysis
Specifying
Requirements
Evaluating Design
Alternatives
Project definition: use streamlined LCA for initial project screening;
use improvement analysis to identify opportunities for reducing
environmental burdens (e.g., target major impacts).
Baseline environmental profile: conduct LCA on the existing
product system to establish a baseline for comparative
analysis.
Use LCA information for the existing product system to guide
improvement of new designs.
Conceptual design: use streamlined LCA techniques to formulate
and evaluate design concepts; at this stage the system is not
sufficiently defined to conduct a full-scale LCA.
Detailed design: full-scale LCA is possible at this stage, but the
design is fixed and opportunities for improvement are limited.
57
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Difficulties
General difficulties and limitations of the LCA methodology are characterized in the
following list. [41]
Goal Definition and Scoping
Data Collection
Data Evaluation
Information Transfer
Costs to conduct an LCA may be prohibitive to small firms; time
required to conduct LCA may exceed product development
constraints especially for short development cycles; temporal
and spatial dimensions of a dynamic product system are difficult
to address; definition of functional units for comparison of
design alternatives can be problematic; allocation methods used
in defining system boundaries have inherent weaknesses;
complex products (e.g., automobiles) require overwhelming
resources to analyze.
Data availability and access can be limiting (e.g., proprietary
data); data quality including bias, accuracy, precision, and
completeness are often not well addressed.
Sophisticated models and model parameters for evaluating
resource depletion and human and ecosystem health may not
be available or their ability to represent the product system may
be grossly inaccurate. Simpler models may be more available,
but they can also be less representative or accurate.
Uncertainty analyses of the results are often not conducted.
Design decision makers often lack knowledge about
environmental effects, and aggregation and simplification
techniques may distort results. Synthesis of environmental
effect categories is limited.because they are incommensurable.
In principle, LCA represents the most accurate tool for design evaluation in life cycle
design and DFE. Many methodological problems, however, currently limit LCA's
applicability to design.[41] Costs to conduct a LCA can be prohibitive, especially to small
firms, and time requirements may not be compatible with short development cycles. [42,
43] Although significant progress has been made towards standardizing life cycle
inventory analysis,[34-38] results can still vary significantly.[44, 45] Such discrepancies
can be attributed to differences in system boundaries, rules for allocation of inputs and
outputs between product systems, and data availability and quality issues. LCA also
generally lacks uncertainty analysis of results.
Incommensurable data presents another major challenge to LCA and other
environmental analysis tools. The problem of evaluating environmental data remains
inherently complicated when impacts are expressed in different measuring units (e.g.,
kilojoules, cancer risks, or kilograms of solid waste). Furthermore, different conversion
models for translating inventory items into impacts are required for each impact. These
models vary widely in complexity and uncertainty. For example, risk assessment and fate
and transport models are required to evaluate human and ecosystem health effects
associated with toxic emissions. Model sophistication dictates whether additional data
beyond inventory results is needed for proper evaluation. Simplified approaches for
impact assessment, such as the "critical Volume or mass" method [39] have fundamental
58
-------
Evaluation
Streamlined LCA
•*• Comprehensive or
full scale LCA
upper bound to hypothetical solution space
Time
convergence to design solution
more design freedom
lower bound to hypothetical solution space
Conceptual design stage.
-*• Detailed design stage
Figure 4-10. Design Solution Space as Function of Time[41]
limitations. These general models are usually much less accurate than more elaborate
site-specific assessment models, but full assessment based on site-specific models is not
presently feasible.
Other simple conversion models, such as those translating emissions of various gases
into a single number estimating global warming potential or ozone depleting potential, are
available for assessing global impacts.[46, 47]
Even if much better assessment tools existed, LCA has inherent limitations in design,
because the complete set of life cycle environmental effects associated with a product
system can not be evaluated until the design has been specified in detail. But at this stage,
the opportunities for design change become drastically limited. This condition is
represented graphically in Figure 4-10.
In the conceptual design phase, the design solution space is wide, whereas in detailed
design, the solution space narrows. Thus the feasibility of a comprehensive LCA is
inversely related to the opportunity to influence product system design. In addition to
these limitations, many of the secondary and tertiary inventory items of a life cycle system
that are often neglected in an LCA, such as facilities and equipment, are significant forces
that greatly affect product development.
59
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Case Examples of LCA Use in Design
Although numerous life cycle inventories have been conducted for a variety of
products,[45] only a small fraction have been used for product development. Proctor and
Gamble is one company that has used life cycle inventory studies to guide environmental
improvement for several products.[48] One of their case studies on hard surface cleaners
revealed that heating water resulted in a significant percentage of total energy use and air
emissions related to cleaning.[28] Based on this information, opportunities for reducing
impacts were identified which include designing cold water and no-rinse formulas and
educating consumers to use cold water.
The Product Ecology Project, a collaboration between European industry and
academia, is another example where life cycle inventory and a valuation procedure are
used to support product development.[49] For this project, the Environmental Priority
Strategies (EPS system) in product design is used to evaluate the environmental impact of
design alternatives using a single metric based on environmental load units. An inventory.
is conducted using the LCA Inventory Tool developed by Chalmers Industriteknik, and
valuation is based on a willingness-to-pay model that accounts for biodiversity, human
health, production, resources, and aesthetic values. This system enables the designer to
easily compare alternatives, but the reliability of the outcome is heavily dependent on the
valuation procedure.
LCA Computer Software Tools
LCA software tools and computerized databases may make it easier to apply LCA in
design.[37] Examples of early attempts in this area include: SimaPro, developed by the
Centre of Environmental Science (CML), Leiden University, Netherlands; LCA Inventory
Tool, developed by Chalmers Industriteknik in Goteborg, Sweden, PIA, developed by the
Institute for Applied Environmental Economics (TME) in the Hague, Netherlands
(available from the Dutch Ministry for Environment and Informatics (BMI)); and PEMS,
developed by Pira International in the UK. These tools can shorten analysis time when
exploring design alternatives, particularly in simulation studies, but data availability and
quality are still limiting factors. In addition to these tools, a general guide to LCA for
European businesses has been compiled that provides background and a list of sources for
further information.[50]
Other Design Evaluation Approaches
Environmental Indicators and Metrics
In contrast to a comprehensive life cycle assessment, environmental performance
indicators or metrics can be used to evaluate design alternatives. Navin-Chandra [51]
introduced the following set of environmental indicators: percent recycled, degradability,
useful life, junk value, separability, life cycle cost, potential recyclability, possible
recyclability, useful life and utilization, total and net emissions, and total hazardous
60
-------
Evaluation
fugitives. Many of these indicators can be calculated relatively easily; the last two,
however, require life cycle inventory data to compute.
Watanabe [52] proposes a Resource Productivity measure for evaluating "industrial
performance compatible with environmental preservation." Resource productivity is a
dimensionless parameter defined as:
Resource Productivity =
(Economic value added) x (Product lifetime)
(Material consumed-Material recycled) + (Energy consumed for production, recycling) +
(Lifetime energy used)
where the individual terms in the denominator are expressed in monetary units. Longer
product life, increased material recycling, and less material and energy consumption all
contribute to a higher resource productivity. Watanabe has applied this metric in
evaluating three rechargeable battery alternatives.
While resource productivity incorporates many environmental concerns, it is not
comprehensive because costs associated with toxic emissions and human and ecosystem
health are ignored. In addition, the value added component of the numerator includes
other factors besides environmental considerations. Despite'these limitations, this metric
is relatively simple to evaluate and it accounts for resource depletion, which correlates
with many other environmental impacts.
Another design evaluation approach is to develop general classes of environmental
criteria and then attempt to measure specific aspects of the criteria with a variety of
metrics. This produces data that can be used to evaluate the design against environmental
requirements. Some environmental metrics, such as those measuring efficiency, can also
serve as metrics for assessing performance and cost requirements. Examples of both
environmental criteria and metrics are shown in Table 4-6.
Table 4-6. Examples of Environmental Metrics
Criteria
Metrics
Energy
Materials
Energy
Efficiency in use (energy consumed/unit of use)
Production energy efficiency (energy consumed/unit product)
Material efficiency (mass of material in part/mass of material required for
fabrication)
Water use efficiency (water/unit of product)
Recycling
- recycled content (mass of recycled material/mass of product)
- recyclability (mass of material in product actually recycled at projected
retirement/total product mass)
Cumulative, all media (kg waste/unit product) •
Ozone depleting potential (OOP)
Global warming potential (GWP)
kg of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)/unit product
61
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Matrix Approaches
DFE methods developed by Allenby [53, 54] use a semiquantitative matrix approach
for evaluating life cycle environmental impacts. A graphic scoring system weighs
environmental effects based on available quantitative information for each life cycle
stage. In addition to an environmental matrix and toxicology/exposure matrix,
manufacturing and social/political matrices are used to address both technical and non-
technical aspects of design alternatives.
Computer Tools
ReStar is a design analysis tool for evaluating recovery operations such as recycling
and disassembly. [55] A computer algorithm determines an optimal recovery plan based on
tradeoffs between recovery costs and the value of secondary materials or parts.
Cost Analysis
Cost analysis for product development is often the most influential tool guiding
decision making. Key issues of environmental accounting are:
• Measuring environmental costs
• Allocating environmental costs to specific cost centers
• Internalizing environmental costs
Life cycle costs can be analyzed from the perspective of three stakeholder groups:
manufacturers or producers, consumers, and society at large. Definitions for some
accounting and capital budgeting terms relevant to life cycle design are shown below. [57]
Accounting
Full Cost Accounting
Life Cycle Costing
Capital Budgeting
Total Cost Assessment
A method of managerial cost accounting that allocates both direct and
indirect environmental costs to a product, product line, process,
service, or activity.
Not everyone uses this term the same way. Some include only costs
that affect the firm's bottom line, while others include the full range
of costs throughout the life cycle, some of which do not have any
indirect or direct effect on a firm's bottom line.
In the environmental field, this has come to mean all costs associated
with a product system throughout its life cycle, from materials
acquisition to disposal. Where possible, social costs are
quantified; if this is not possible, they are addressed qualitatively.
Traditionally applied in military and engineering to mean estimating
costs from acquisition of a system to disposal. This does not
usually incorporate costs further upstream than purchase.
Long-term, comprehensive financial analysis of the full range of
internal (i.e. private) costs and savings of an investment. This tool
evaluates potential investments in terms of private costs, excluding
social considerations. It does include contingent liability costs.
62
-------
Evaluation
For life cycle design to be effective, environmental costs need to be allocated
accurately to product centers. Environmental costs are commonly treated as overhead.
Methods such as activity based costing (ABC) may be useful in properly assigning
product costs in many situations, resulting in improved decision making.[57,58] Properly
allocating environmental costs can be one of the most powerful motivators for addressing
environmental issues in design.
Unfortunately, the current market system does not fully account for environmental
costs, so prices for goods and services do not reflect total costs or benefits. A design that
minimizes environmental burden may thus appear less attractive in terms of cost than an
environmentally inferior alternative.
The most significant unrealized costs in design are externalities, such as those
resulting from pollution, which are borne by outside parties (society) not involved in the
original transaction (between manufacturers and customers). Corporations choosing to
reduce emissions and internalize the associated costs can find themselves at a competitive
disadvantage unless their competitors do so as well. [59] Despite this problem,
manufacturers can benefit from pursuing design initiatives which produce tangible savings
through material conservation, or reduction in waste management and liability costs.
A number of resources are available to identify full environmental costs.[60, 61] In
the EPA Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual, costs are divided into four categories:
usual costs, hidden regulatory costs, liability costs, and less tangible costs. Usual costs
are standard capital and operating expenses and revenues for the product system, while
hidden costs represent environmental costs related to regulation (e.g., permitting,
reporting, monitoring). Costs due to noncompliance and future liabilities for forced
cleanup, personal injury, and property damage as well as intangible costs/benefits such as
effects on corporate image are difficult to estimate. In any case, methods for evaluating
and internalizing externalities are limited.
From a consumer's perspective, life cycle costing is a useful tool for making product
selection decisions. In traditional use, life cycle costs consist of the initial purchase price
plus operating costs for consumables (e.g. fuel, electricity, lubricants), servicing not
covered under warranty, and possible disposal costs.[62] Providing estimates of life cycle
cost can be a useful marketing strategy for environmentally sound products.
The most comprehensive definition of life cycle costs is the sum of all internal and
external costs associated with a product system throughout its entire life cycle.[56, 63] At
present, government regulation and related economic policy instruments appear to be the
only effective methods of addressing environmental costs to society.
Presenting Design Evaluation Results
Life cycle design teams rely on existing, inrhouse design evaluation protocols. Life
cycle design seeks to expand these protocols to include methods that systematically
evaluate the environmental performance of a design solution. Although several factors
complicate the comparison of alternatives, such as different units of measurement and
63
-------
FOUR: LIFE CYCLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Cultural
Performance
-• Option 1
-4 Option 2
Legal
Environmental
Figure 4-11. Assessing Two Hypothetical Design Options
uncertain health or ecological impacts, product realization teams need some mechanism
for comparing each design option. Effective evaluation tools document a particular
design's ability to meet a varied set of design requirements and elicit more feedback
regarding the potential tradeoffs or conflicts arising from design alternatives.
Figure 4-11 presents a simple graphic method for showing how well two design
alternatives satisfy requirements. Results in this form can be used for further review by
all members of the life cycle design team.
The axes of the Requirements Profile are on a scale of 0-5, representing the ability of
the design to meet the stated requirements. Rankings in each requirements class are
determined by the design team. The challenge in using this type of simplified decision
making tool is to establish a method for accurately assigning numerical scores.
IMPLEMENTATION
After formal approval, designs are implemented. Implementation includes production and
distribution of the product along with marketing and labeling. Building or planning infrastructure
and recommending policy changes to regulators is also a part of implementation.
Product development is a continuous process that does not end at this point. Existing
products, even if newly implemented, should be viewed as the starting point for new initiatives.
64
-------
5. AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
The AT&T Life Cycle Design Demonstration Project explored the feasibility of applying the
life cycle design framework. This demonstration project focused on integrating environmental
issues into the design of a business telephone terminal.
Like all manufactured products, telephone terminals contribute environmental burdens
throughout their life cycle. These burdens range from health hazards caused by toxic constituents
such as lead solder to impacts associated with the end-of-life management of various product
components. Reducing the environmental burden associated with this or any other electronic
product represents a significant challenge to corporate management, designers, and other
participants in product development. Some of these challenges are technical in nature, such as
those posed by the complexity of the product and the wide array of materials required, some of
which are hazardous. Others have more to do with external forces acting on the product
realization process. For example, there are safety standards and regulatory requirements the
product must comply with and market expectations it must live up to.
In practice life cycle design can denote a very comprehensive analytical exercise, or it can
imply something more modest. Clearly, if one approaches a "green concept telephone" as a
unique experimental concept that explores unconventional green design goals without regard to
cost or marketability, then a very diverse set of issues can be considered. But if the life cycle
design approach is applied to a marketable and competitive product that is on a strict development
and introduction schedule, then obviously one must operate in a much more constrained
environment. In such cases, design objectives are necessarily more modest.
Having chosen a next-generation business telephone terminal as the product, it became clear
that a comprehensive life cycle analysis was not going to be feasible for this project. Instead,
.AT&T's goal was to address some of the practical issues of life cycle design as they exist in a
present-day corporate setting.
In addition, the participants in this joint project had their own more specific objectives. As
the authors of the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual, the University of Michigan researchers
were interested in evaluating the applicability and utility of their life cycle design framework.
The AT&T participants, on the other hand, wanted to explore how certain life cycle design
methodologies, such as using multicriteria requirements matrices, might enhance and expand their
own Design for Environment (DFE) processes. In addition, the AT&T team wanted to explore and
document to what extent AT&T was already positioned to address various product life cycle
issues, given the multitude of its environmental programs. Furthermore, the AT&T team wanted
to study how the delivery of these programs might be improved and better coordinated.
This profile was written jointly by Dr. Werner Glantschnig, the Life Cycle Design Demonstration Project
coordinator at AT&T Beli Labs Engineering Research Center, and the research group at the University of
Michigan. *
65
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
PROJECT ORIGIN AND BACKGROUND
Origin of the Life Cycle Design Project
AT&T's participation in the demonstration phase of the Life Cycle Design Project
came about for three reasons. First, the principle investigators, Greg Keoleian
(University of Michigan) and Werner Glantschnig (Bell Laboratories) had interacted
previously, which paved the way for initial discussions about a possible collaboration.
Second, AT&T had already embarked on a "green product initiative". The goal of this
initiative was to baseline the "greenness" of a recent AT&T product, namely the 8503
Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) terminal, and to explore opportunities for
improvements in the environmental design of future generation telephone terminals.
Finally, the Global Business Communication Systems (GBCS) product line management
team, which had been involved in the 8503 baseline study, was supportive of this joint
project as well. Questionnaires returned by present and potential customers attending a
Special Interest Group session on "green products" at a Definity® Users Group Forum in
October 1991 indicated that customers were quite aware of environmental issues and that
environmental concerns might start to influence purchasing decisions. Thus, product-line
management saw merit in supporting a project that would explore green product and life
cycle design issues.
While the goals of the original AT&T green product realization project were not as
comprehensive as those proposed for the life cycle design study, there were sufficient
similarities between the existing AT&T initiative and the project proposed by the
University of Michigan researchers to justify building on the AT&T project. The present
Life Cycle Demonstration Project represents the consolidation of these two initiatives.
Formation of the Cross Functional Team
Rather than forming a new team, the project team originally assembled for AT&T's
Green Product Realization initiative remained intact and become involved in the joint
AT&T/EPA/University of Michigan Life Cycle Design Demonstration Project. Not only
had this team already become familiar with many environmental issues as they pertain to
the product life cycle of a typical telephone, but it was also a well balanced and highly
interdisciplinary team. The business unit responsible for the 8403 terminal, AT&T GBCS,
was represented by members of product-line management, marketing, design, and product
engineering. For purposes of this project, representatives from Corporate Environmental
and Safety Engineering and the environmental research team at Bell Laboratories joined
the business unit team. The Green Product Realization Group at AT&T Bell Labs
Engineering Research Center in Princeton, New Jersey assumed responsibility for
coordinating the Life Cycle Design Demonstration Project on the AT&T side.
66
-------
Project Origin and Background
Selection of the 8403 Terminal
The initial goal of the AT&T team in embarking on its green product initiative was to
baseline the "greenness" of the 8503 terminal. The purpose of this step was to determine
to what extent environmental concerns were already being addressed either through design
or, at product end-of-life, via the activities of AT&T service and reclamation centers. An
additional goal was to identify ways in which the life-time impact of a telephone product
could be further reduced. At the time of the conclusion of the 8503 terminal study
(December 1991), the 8403 DCP (Digital Communications Protocol) voice terminal was
still on the drawing board. Thus, this terminal seemed to be a good candidate for the
AT&T/EPA/University of Michigan life cycle design study. Furthermore, the 8403
terminal was to be designed by the same physical design group which was involved in the
8503 green baseline study. Finally, the design, manufacturing, and product introduction
schedule for the 8403 fit well with the time line for the Life Cycle Design Project. For
these reasons the product team decided to select the 8403 terminal as a vehicle for the life
cycle design study.
Description of the 8403 Digital Communications Protocol (DCP) Terminal
The 8403 terminal is a digital voice terminal designed to work with the AT&T
DEFINITY® large business communications system. The DEFINITY® System supports
a large range of applications and features including call center applications, networking
capabilities, system management, and desktop and voice processing solutions. The
combination of voice, data, and conferencing capabilities available to every DEFINITY®
System user depends, among other things, on the terminal he or she uses. The
DEFINITY® System supports communication protocols such as ISDN, Digital, and
Analog; AT&T offers a line of terminals compatible with each protocol.
The 8403 is a 3-line digital voice terminal. The features of this 24-button set, pictured
in Figure 5-1, include:
• 2- and 4-wire connectivity
• international portability
• a one way speaker for hands-free listening
• 3 call appearance or flexible feature buttons, (two with LED)
• 12 additional features via dialpad
• message waiting indicator
• 8 personalized ringing styles
• push button mute feature
• digital volume control rocker
• textured, scratch-resistant, finish
• adjunct jack for headset or speakerphone
67
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Figure 5-1. 8403 Terminal
The 8403 terminal is a more feature rich and versatile replacement for the 7401
Digital Voice Terminal which was introduced in 1982. Specific environmental design
features which differentiate the 8403 from the 7401 will be discussed later.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
An effective environmental management system is required to establish a successful
environmental design program. Following a brief business description, several key elements of
AT&T's environmental management system are discussed below, including environmental policies
and goals, and organizational structure and responsibility.
It should be noted that discussions of the organizational structure and the Design for
Environment (DFE) program that follow describe the state of affairs in early 1993 when the life
cycle project began. Several changes to organizational structure and the DFE program have been
made since. These modifications are the result of lessons learned with early green design
projects, the corporation's realization that the introduction of an effective DFE program required a
68
-------
Environmental Management System
more forceful and better organized approach, and ongoing efforts to better align certain corporate
resources with the needs of AT&T's business units. One example is the appointment of a chief
environmental officer by each business unit.
If the accomplishments of the AT&T/EPA/University of Michigan Life Cycle Design Project
seem modest, this in no small part due to applied life cycle design being such a novel concept
when the project began that sufficient support for it within the corporation was still missing.
AT&T Business Description
AT&T provides domestic and international information movement and management
services and products, as well as leasing and financial services. In 1993 59% of AT&T's
business resulted from telecommunications services, 27% from sales of products, 10%
from rentals and other services, and 4% from financial services and leasing. The company
provides longrdistance communications services throughout the .US and internationally.
AT&T manufactures a range of customer equipment, data communications and computer
products, switching and transmission equipment, and components for high-technology
products and systems. The Bell Laboratories,of AT&T design and develop new products
and carry out fundamental research.
AT&T Environmental Policy
In order for a corporation to make progress in its environmental performance, clearly
articulated environmental goals are necessary. Historically, AT&T's environmental
programs were shaped by US environmental laws and regulations and by its unique
position prior to 1984 as the monopoly supplier of telephone equipment and services.
Much changed in the 1980s. Not only did divestiture start a telecommunications
revolution that has had a significant impact on AT&T's manufacturing businesses and
product development strategies/but environmentalism became a mainstream movement.
Industry realized that the old end-of-pipe approach to pollution control had its limits.
Pollution control did little to prevent the creation of pollution and waste, and it had
become exorbitantly expensive. While pollution control legislation and the resulting
industrial pollution control practices had resulted in significant improvements, it had also
become clear that in order to reach the next level of industrial environmental stewardship,
new approaches were needed.
Some of the changes in environmental thinking that have evolved during the past
decade are reflected in AT&T's original environmental policy statement. This statement
was developed as a result of the corporation and its senior management becoming aware
of the need to articulate a broad policy which would set the stage for specific action on
environmental issues. This policy statement, as signed on 14 November 1988 by Robert
E. Allen, CEO and Chairman of the Board, reads as follows:
69
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
AT&T Environmental Policy
AT&T is committed to the protection of human health and environment in
all areas where it conducts operations. Implementation of this policy is a
primary management objective and the responsibility of every AT&T
employee.
Guidelines:
• Comply with all applicable laws governing environmental protection.
• Support and contribute to the development of reasonable, cost-effective
environmental laws and regulations.
• Evaluate on a continuing basis AT&T's compliance with applicable laws and
regulations in all its operations.
• Encourage the use of non-polluting technologies and waste minimization in
the design of products and processes.
• Include environmental considerations among the criteria by which projects,
products, processes, and purchases are evaluated.
• Develop in our employees an awareness of environmental responsibilities
and encourage their adherence to sound environmental practices.
New Proposed Environmental Policy Statement
While AT&T has made great progress with its pollution prevention and waste
minimization initiatives, management recognized that in order to reach the next level of
environmental performance, a broader and more holistic approach to environmental
stewardship needs to be developed and implemented. Accordingly, the following revised
policy statement outlining more ambitious environmental goals has been developed,
though not yet formally adopted.
Proposed AT&T Environmental Policy
AT&T is committed to fully integrating life cycle environmental
consequences into our design, development, manufacturing, marketing and
sales activities worldwide. Implementation of this policy is a primary
management objective and the responsibility of every AT&T employee.
Guidelines:
• Utilize Design for Environment principles to design, develop,
manufacture and market products and services worldwide with
environmentally preferable life cycle properties.
• Promote achievement of environmental excellence by designing every
new generation of product, process, and service to be environmentally
preferable to the one it replaces.
• Determine the environmental impacts of products, processes and services
on an individual basis to prioritize the order in which they can be
effectively addressed within technological and economic constraints.
• To the extent that proven and efficient technology allows, eliminate or
reduce production of waste; seek economic uses of materials which would
otherwise become wastes; where it is produced, eliminate or reduce
discharge of waste.
70
-------
Environmental Management System
• Design, develop and market products and services worldwide which
support our customers in their efforts to reduce or eliminate harmful
environmental impacts of their activities.
• Integrate applicable life cycle environmental considerations into each of
our business decisions and planning activities, including acquisition/
divestiture activity, and into the measurement standards applied to
management performance.
• Work with suppliers, customers, governments, the scientific community,
educational institutions, public interest groups and the general public
worldwide to develop and promote environmental management policies
and environmental standards based on life cycle, system-based principles.
As compared to the original policy statement, the proposed statement is more specific,
with greater emphasis on forward-looking and preemptive approaches. A central goal is
the avoidance of environmental impacts through sound design, planning, and management
practices. Note that terms such as Design for Environment and life cycle are explicitly
stated. This reflects the corporation's belief that Design for Environment or life cycle
design practices are crucial in enhancing and solidifying AT&T's competitiveness and
position in the vanguard of environmentally-conscious, global businesses.
Corporate Environmental Goals
While broad policies put in place by top management are certainly steps in the right
direction, policies with no measurable and time-bound goals are often not very effective.
Accordingly, at the 1990 Annual Shareholders Meeting, Chairman Allen announced the
following aggressive environment and safety goals for AT&T:
• CFC phaseout
- 50% reduction by 1991 .
- 100% reduction by 1994
• Total toxic air emissions
- 50% reduction by 1993
- 95% reduction by 1995
- striving for 100% reductions by 2000.
• Decrease total manufacturing process waste disposed by 25% by 1994
• Paper use and recycling
- increase the recycling of paper 35% by 1994
- decrease paper use 15% by 1994
These environmental policy and associated goals have been very effective. By the end
of 1992, all of the goals had been either met or surpassed, with the exception of the goal
on paper use. At the conclusion of 1992, paper use had decreased by 10%.
71
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Corporate Resources
When the Life Cycle Design Project began, the following organizations within AT&T
concerned themselves in a major way with environmentally related activities:
• Corporate Environment and Safety Engineering
• Environmental Health, Environmental Management & Safety (EHEM&S)
organization of Bell Laboratories (responsible for activities of Bell
Laboratories only)
• Environmental Technologies Department of the Engineering Research Center
• Environmental and safety engineering groups at all AT&T manufacturing
locations
With the exception of the Environmental Technologies Department, which is involved in
research and technology development, all of these entities have historically helped AT&T
achieve compliance with environmental and safety regulations in all its operations.
In the past, these organizations performed their duties without interacting much with
the product realization community. However, if effective life cycle design is ever to
become a reality, processes for better information exchange and interaction between
design and environmental and safety engineering organizations will have to be developed.
This is going to be a major challenge. The incorporation of environmental thinking into
product development inevitably adds a layer of complexity to the product realization
process. This runs counter to the desire to simplify and shorten product development
cycles.
In discussing organizational resources, the focus shall be on the two entities primarily
concerned with environmental issues as they affect AT&T business units: the Corporate
Environment and Safety Engineering Center (E&SEC) located in Basking Ridge, New
Jersey, and the Environmental Technologies Department of the Engineering Research
Center (ERC) in Princeton, New Jersey. Both organizations belong to AT&T's Global
Manufacturing and Engineering (GM&E) organization and as such constitute corporate-
wide resources.
Corporate Environment and Safety Engineering Center
The Environment and Safety Engineering Center (E&SEC) develops the
environmental and safety policies of AT&T and serves all AT&T business units and
divisions. It is also the main corporate entity concerned with compliance and regulatory
affairs. Its mission is to:
• Ensure that all business units, country units, and divisions are in compliance
with environmental and safety laws and regulations
• Establish environmental and safety direction through the development and
worldwide deployment of policies, standards, and goals
72
-------
Environmental Management System
• Maintain a worldwide environmental and safety center of excellence for
interpreting current regulations and anticipating future requirements, providing
technical support and delivering a range of environmental and safety services
• Manage certain environmental liabilities
• Protect and enhance AT&T's brand image worldwide
A fundamental objective of E&SEC is to foster the development of a corporate culture in
which environmental protection and safety are central to all aspects of business.
ERC's Environmental Technologies Department
The Engineering Research Center (ERC), a Bell Laboratories entity, was originally
chartered in 1952 to conduct manufacturing and process research and development. Most
of the Center's work is still in support of AT&T's major manufacturing businesses such as
AT&T Network Systems, AT&T Microelectronics, and the Communication Products
group. Now subdivided into three Centers of Excellence, each with its own customer-
focused roadmap, ERC's mission is to develop critical processes and tools that will
provide AT&T's manufacturing organizations with a sustained competitive edge.
The Environmental Technologies Department's mission is to provide technologies for
minimizing the environmental impact of products throughout their entire life cycle.
Current research and development programs focus on Green Product Realization and
Manufacturing Pollution Prevention. Each of these two project areas consists of the
following portfolio of subprojects:
• Green Product Realization
- Design for Environment
- Pb-free interconnect
- Product take-back and recycling
• Manufacturing Pollution Prevention
- Systems methodology for waste minimization
- Solvent replacement and effluent management
- Environmental monitoring and reporting
Clearly, all these activities support the goal of minimizing the aggregate
environmental impact of designing, manufacturing, and marketing products. Design for
Environment is the most forward-looking approach, and the one most akin to life cycle
design. For this reason, the Design for Environment program being developed by the
Green Product Realization group of the Environmental Technologies Department will be
singled out and described in the next section.
Design for Environment
DFE is a design philosophy and practice whose goal is to minimize the
environmental impact of the manufacture, use, and eventual disposal of products without
73
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Design
Manufacture
Use
Disposal
Reduced process waste
- air emissions
- liquid waste
- solid waste
Water conservation
Energy conservation
Minimize packaging
Minimize waste
from
maintenance and
repair
Product energy'
efficient
Design toxic materials
out (disposability)
Make product or its
components reusable,
refurbishable, or
recyclable
While design for environment principles and tools are applied during the design
stage, the intended impact is felt during subsequent product life stages.
Figure 5-2. Conceptual Diagram of DFE
compromising essential product functions, and, ideally, without significantly affecting the
life cycle cost of the product in a negative way. The goal of DFE is to apply methods of
concurrent engineering in order to solve some of the environmental problems typically
associated with manufacturing. At AT&T Bell Laboratories DFE is considered a part of
"Design for X" or DFX, AT&T's approach to concurrent engineering. The "X" in DFX
can stand for manufacturability, testability, serviceability, or any other downstream
concern. Environmental concern is just the latest component to be added for
consideration early in the product realization process. Figure 5-2 shows a conceptual
diagram of DFE.
Since virtually no current product developers are environmental design experts, they
need to be provided with DFE tools and training that will enable them to consider the
environmental ramifications of their designs and make informed design choices. To meet
this need, researchers in the Environmental Technologies Department are currently
making a major effort to develop DFE guidelines, checklists, and the "Green Index"
scoring system. , ,
DFE Guidelines and Checklists
The primary purpose of guidelines and checklists is to help designers practice DFE.
The more aids like guidelines and checklists present and explain green design in an easily
understandable and useful form, the more useful and effective they will be. Ideally,
guidelines should list specific design choices relevant to accomplishing a certain
objective, such as minimizing the lead content of a printed wiring board. Furthermore, the
guidelines should not just outline choices but also rank them in terms of preference. This
helps designers make unfamiliar environmental tradeoff decisions.
74
-------
Project Description
DFE checklists are typically appended to major guideline segments. The model for
DFE checklists are various Design for Manufacturability (DFM) checklists that are widely
used by AT&T Bell Laboratory designers today. By reviewing a checklist item by item, a
designer can quickly ascertain whether he or she has taken the most important
environmental design issues into consideration. Furthermore, the checklists offer a means
of organizing information for design reviews. Some checklists can also serve to
document the incorporation of green design features in the product system.
Green Index Scoring System
The "Green Index" scoring system is an AT&T proprietary, software-based design
tool which enables designers to compute an environmental figure of merit for a product
and/or its major components. This tool evaluates a select group of criteria including
reusability, recyclability, and toxicity to gage environmental merit. This scoring system is
one of several DFE tools being developed by AT&T.
The inspiration for the Green Index came from a quantitative "design for simplicity"
assessment method by Watson et. al.[64], which itself was inspired by "design efficiency"
or "design for assembly" scoring systems as proposed by Boothroyd and Dewhurst [65]
among others. Rather than having the designer make judgments as to the desirability of a
certain design feature, a computer program provides a greenness score based on factors
such as material variety, whether or not parts are marked with symbols identifying their
material, percent weight of recyclable to total materials, and many others.
The Green Index rating system mentioned above is not based on life cycle analysis but
rather on a common-sense analysis of empirical data and the operating experience of
AT&T factories, service centers, and product reclamation and recycling operations. Thus
the rating scheme is highly subjective. If it is consistently applied, however, the scoring
system allows one to track progress in green design from one product generation to the
next. Much work remains to be done, both in terms of refining and testing the system and
making it more user friendly. As concerns the latter, a better graphical user interface as
well as the capability to import design data are the most needed improvements. Because
of its current limitations, the Green Index system is not yet of much use to practicing
designers. However, it is a vehicle for exploring approaches to rating the environmental
merit of products, and it constitutes a kernel around which more sophisticated and useful
tools can be constructed in the future.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
In exploring the integration of environmental issues into the development of the 8403
terminal, the project team pursued a dual-track approach. It tried to both follow the life cycle
design framework, and use elements of AT&T's DFE program. This dual-track approach is
possible because life cycle design and DFE are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, there is
a significant overlap between DFE and life cycle design.
75
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Life cycle design is the most comprehensive approach for incorporating environmental
thinking into product development. According to the framework proposed in the Life Cycle
Design Guidance Manual, the identification and specification of requirements using a multicriteria
matrix is a crucial step in the initial phases of a life cycle design project The multicriteria matrix
system affords a unique way of presenting a diverse set of design requirements organized by
product life cycle stages. In order to explore the usefulness of this matrix system and its
relevance to a real design environment, the project team decided to make the development of
design requirements using this matrix system a major task of the joint AT&T/EPA/University of
Michigan Life Cycle Design Project.
Needs Analysis
Any product development process necessarily starts with identifying market and
customer needs. Beyond that, clearly defined boundaries for other needs, such as those of
the environment, and requirement analysis must be established.
Setting System Boundaries
The product life cycle starts with raw material extraction and bulk material
processing. However, the project team narrowed the system boundaries by excluding the
raw material acquisition and bulk and virgin engineered material processing stages from
detailed analysis. Good data and information about the impacts associated with these life
cycle stages are not readily obtainable at this point. Certainly they are not available in a
form that is useful for helping designers make sound material choices.' The project team
also decided not to consider the management component of the product system, which
includes administrative services, in depth. To be consistent with the modified product
system organization presented in this report, the University of Michigan researchers
folded the limited management criteria developed for this project into the process and
distribution components for each class of requirements.
Baseline Analysis
A good first step in embarking on a life cycle design project is to conduct a baseline
analysis of an existing, similar product. This helps establish to what extent
environmental concerns are already being taken into account and what further
improvements might be possible. The baseline analysis, which was performed on the
8503 ISDN terminal as part of the Green Product Realization initiative mentioned
previously, consisted of both a conventional analysis of the environmental impacts
associated with the 8503 terminal and the application of an early version of the "Green
Index" system to obtain a "green" score for this product. The conventional part of the
analysis included establishing an inventory of all materials and parts used for the product,
as well as all waste streams and emissions created as part of its manufacture.
76
-------
ProjectDescription
Customer Focus Groups
AT&T periodically organizes customer focus groups to survey attitudes about
preferable products and product features. Recently AT&T has begun to study customer
attitudes about environmentally-conscious products. In one survey, the participants were
first introduced to AT&T's environmental program. This served as a basis for discussing
issues such as whether customers considered environmental attributes when purchasing
products, were willing to pay more for environmentally-preferable products, found the
concept of using refurbished or remanufactured components acceptable, would be willing
to participate in recycling programs, and would accept documentation printed on recycled
paper. While current and potential customers appeared to support these concepts, their
willingness to pay for environmental premiums was rather limited. In this focus group
survey, only slightly more than half of 17 participants were willing to pay somewhat (no
more than 5%) more for an environmentally-preferred product.
This is in line with the results of other green marketing surveys. While most people
consider themselves environmentalists, few are willing to pay a premium for
environmentally superior products. However, the perceived environmental merit of a
product is increasingly becoming a differentiator when people make purchasing decisions.
Thus, to the extent that a product's environmental profile can be improved without
appreciably increasing its cost, this should be done.
Establishing Design Requirements
Requirements Matrices
A major focus of the AT&T demonstration project was identifying design
requirements with multicriteria matrices consisting of environmental, performance, cost,
cultural, and legal requirements. Design requirements, of course, have always existed.
Traditionally, designers focused primarily on performance and cost requirements, although
for many products cultural and legal requirements are important as well. The multicriteria
matrices used in this project provide a novel tool for including specific environmental
requirements in design, organizing all other requirements, and facilitating discussion of
how to make design tradeoffs.
Matrix dimensions are defined by product system components and life cycle stages.
The conceptual matrix proposed in the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual can be
organized using different formats. For this project, life cycle stages under consideration
were consolidated into manufacturing, use, and end-of-life management.
77
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
A set of matrices containing environmental, performance, legal, cost, and cultural
requirements for telephone terminals are presented in Tables 5-1 through 5-5. Many of the
environmental and legal requirements apply to telephone products in general. On the other
hand, some performance, cost, and cultural requirements are specific to the 8403.
The matrices shown in Tables 5-1 through 5-5 were compiled using information
contributed by members of our multidisciplinary project team during seven "green product
realization" meetings at Bell Laboratories in Holmdel, New Jersey. (Project participants
from outside New Jersey were teleconferenced into those meetings). Clearly, a variety of
competencies are required to develop such a breadth of requirements. This is why
multidisciplinary teams are crucial to life cycle design projects.
The environmental requirements presented in Table 5-1 amount, for the most part, to
"want" requirements. In other words, unlike legal requirements, they are not statutory.
(Design requirements having their origin in environmental regulations are included in the
legal requirement matrix). They represent things an environmentally-conscious company
should do to go beyond mere compliance.
Many of the requirements in Table 5-1 follow from the basic "reduce-reuse-recycle"
philosophy. Others are based on AT&T's corporate environmental goals for manufacturing
and office management. As discussed earlier, these goals set quantitative targets for
reductions in CFC emissions, toxic air emissions, process wastes, and paper consumption,
as well as increased use of recycled paper. Still other requirements specify mechanisms
that, according to our current understanding, facilitate the reuse of parts/components and
the recycling of materials such as plastic housings. Not all environmental requirements
listed in Table 5-1 can be met today.
78
-------
Project Description
Table 5-1. Environmental Requirements
Product
Manufacture ,
- Use recyclable materials
- Maximize onsite recycling of
molding scrap
- Use recycled materials to the
extent possible
- Choose ODS free components
- Eliminate the use of toxic materials
(e.g., Pb)
- Minimize defective products
Use/Service
- Extend useful life through
modular design with
sufficient forward and
backward capability
End-of-Life Management
- Reuse parts
- Standardize parts to facilitate
remanufacture
- Product components recyclable
(after consumer use)
- Open-loop recycling into fiber
cables, spools and reels
- Easy to disassemble: no rivets,
glues, ultrasonic welding, and
minimal use of composites
- Components easy to sort by
marking and minimal use of
materials
Process
Manufacture
- Minimize process wastes
including air emissions, liquid
.effluents and hazardous and
nonhazardous solid wastes
- Minimize resource consumption
- Minimize power consumption
- Meet corporate environmental
goals of CFG phaseout, reduced
toxic air emissions, decreased
process waste disposal, reduced
paper use, and increased paper
recycling
- Use greener processes R&D:
ERC developing environmental
technology; also use design
guidelines, checklists, DFE tools,
Green Index
- Purchasing records to monitor
ODS; encourage suppliers to
discontinue ODS use
Use/Service
- Energy efficient operation
(operate on line power
only)
- Manual printed on
recycled paper
End-of Life-Management
- Service or reconditioning
operations should minimize use
of solvents
Distribution
Manufacture
- Minimize supplier packaging
• non hazardous
- Packaging containing recycled
. material (postconsumer content
specified)
- Reusable trays for parts in factory
Use/Service
- Minimize product
packaging
• use Electronic
Packaging Guidelines
• non hazardous
- Optimize number of
phones per package
- Specify packaging
containing recycled
material (post-consumer
content specified)
- Use recycled paper for
manual (list environmental
features^
End-of-Life Management
- Recyclable packaging
79
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Table 5-2. Performance Requirements
Product
Manufacture
- Avoid discoloration of housing by
specifying maximum blend of recycled
plastics with virgin resins
Use/Service
- Compatible with AT&T
Definity Communications
Systems (both current
and earlier)
- International portability
- Digital voice technology
- 3-line operation
- Ensure reliable
components and
subsystems
- Ensure structural integrity
- Environmental conditions;
Temperature: 40-120° F
Humidity: 5-95%
noncondens.
End-of-Life Management
- Maximize component reuse
- Maximize material recycling of
components that are not reused
Process
Manufacture
• Identify requirements related to
following programs:
• Maximum product yield
• Just-in-time manufacture
• TQM
• Statistical quality control
• Manufacturing cells (production
layout)
• Ergonomics
- New product engineering requirements
- Concurrent design requirements
Use/Service
- NESOC
- Business performance
functional criteria
- Fatigue testing
- Electrical testing
- Systems engineering
specs
- Ergonomics
- Manual should contain
information on
installation and
appropriate use
End-of-Life Management
- Minimize repair cost (mostly
labor)
- Maximize material recycling of
components not reused:
• easy disassembly, i.e. no
face plate cement
• clean with water to remove
contaminants which cause
porous molds
• touch-up paint is a problem
for recycling
Distribution
Manufacture
- Inventory control requirements
- Just-in-time manufacturing
requirements
Use/Service
- Product packaging must
protect product surface
appearance
End-of-Life Management
- Minimum variety of materials
used in packaging (e.g. attempt
to eliminate cellophane wrap)
The performance requirements shown in Table 5-2 focus on product functions and
features, reliability of the electrical system, physical and operating integrity of the product
under different conditions, and other efficiency and quality measures. Many of these
requirements can also to be found in AT&T internal product standards. However,
requirements spelling out features and functions typically get established anew for each
product generation based on input from customers and market research.
80
-------
Table 5-3. Legal Requirements
Project Description
Product
Manufacture
- US Regulations/Product Safety
Standards
• Clean Air Act Amendments: CFC
labeling requirement (April 15,
1993)
• Underwriter Laboratories
- UL 746D fabricated parts: use of
regrind and recycled materials
• Green Seal
- Foreign Regulations/Product Safety
Standards
• Blue Angel and other relevant
standards
Use/Service
- Underwriter Laboratories
• UL 1459-product safety
• UL 94-flammability test
(must meet UL94-HB at
minimum)
- FCC requirements
- Limits on polybrominated
fire retardants (EC).
- Canadian Safety Specs
•CSAC22.2
- European Safety Specs
• EN 60 950 (IEC950; .
safety, network
capability, EMC,
susceptibility)
•EN 41003
• EN 71 (lead pigments
and stabilizers in plastic
parts)
End-of-Life Management
- Product should meet applicable
statutory requirements
• product should not contain
hazardous materials under
RCRA
• pigments and other plastic
additives should not contain
; heavy metals
- Electronic Waste Ordinance
(Germany, Jan. 1,1994) and
Packaging Ordinance
- UL flammability test: approval of
recycled resins difficult
- Previous flame retardant banned
in Europe which prohibits
recycling of old terminals
Process
Manufacture
- Clean Air Act
- Clean Water Act
- CERCLA (SARA-313)
- RCRA
- EPCRA
- OSHA
- ISO Marking Codes for plastics
Use/Service
- FTC Guidelines:
definitions for labeling
End-of-Life Management
- Easy to disassemble
- Sherman Anti-Trust Act
responsible for developing
market for rernanufactured
phones
- Recycled content
- ISO Marking Codes for plastics
Distribution
Manufacture
- DOT (transportation of hazardous
materials)
Use/Service
End-of-Life Management
- Specific claims on packaging
• Green Dot Program
Local, state, federal, and international regulations comprise a significant fraction of
the legal requirements outlined in Table 5-3. The balance are quasilegal requirements,
mostly product and communication standards a business telephone must comply with.
Legal requirements range from EPA regulations and FTC rules pertaining to green product
marketing claims to Germany's Packaging Ordinance. Standards such as ISO marking
codes for plastics and product safety standards championed by Underwriter Laboratories
(UL) and other organizations constitute the set of quasilegal requirements. The large
diversity in legal requirements, the frequent inconsistency in those requirements from
jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and the fact that many of the rules and regulations have their
origin in pollution control legislation, can be a barrier to realizing proactive
environmental improvements for a design. ,
81
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Table 5-4. Cost Requirements
Product
Manufacture
- Cost of virgin resin
- Cost of recycled resin
- Cost of parts, components, and
materials from suppliers
Use/Service
• Competitive purchase price
of new product using virgin
materials
- Competitive rate for leased
product
• Competitive purchase price
of reconditioned product
End-of-Life Management
• Cost of replacement parts
Process
Manufacture
- Unit cost of manufacturing
capital costs
operating expense
waste management costs
- Un t cost of managing:
monitoring and reporting
training
preparedness
environmental liabilities
- Corporate image
Use/Service
• Service costs
• Improved corporate image
• Improved consumer
acceptance and loyalty
End-of Life-Management
• Cost of remanufacturing at service
center
- Cost of recycling at service center
- Cost of disposition of materials
from service center
- Unit cost of managing:
• training
• manifesting
• environmental liabilities
• Corporate image
Distribution
Manufacture
- Unit cost of packaging
Use/Service
• Packaging cost to
consumer is included in
total product cost
End-of-Life Management
- Disposal cost to consumer
Specific cost data were not provided to the University of Michigan researchers since
cost data are proprietary. Thus Table 5-4 is not so much a compilation of specific cost
requirements or cost targets as a list of costs incurred in connection with the product
throughout its life. The lack of good life cycle cost data is a major impediment to
implementing life cycle design. Because cost is always a factor in design decisions, it is
frequently difficult to make a sound case for life cycle design at present, given that life
cycle costs are poorly understood and life cycle accounting systems are at best in their
infancy..
82
-------
Project Description
Table 5-5. Cultural Requirements
Product
Manufacture
Use/Service
• 8403 must have "look and
feel" of other 84xx series
phones and ensure
compatibility with:
• color palette
• shape of housing,
handset, and cable
• design of faceplate
• Style, form, appearance
,. • no scratches
• high quality finish
- Volume control
- 8 personalized ringing
; options
- Raised buttons
- Ease of use
End-of-Life Management
• Refurbished 8403 coming from
service center must look like new
- Color matching important
Process
Manufacture
Use/Service
- Input from user focus
groups
End-of Life-Management
Distribution
Manufacture
Use/Service
• AT&T mail order catalogue
shipments should minimize
use of packaging for small
orders
End-of-Life Management
Some of the cultural requirements applicable to the 8403 terminal are listed in'Table
5-5. Cultural requirements are what make the product palatable to the consumer. They
address ease and convenience of use, desirable extra features, and aesthetic appeal. While
it is tempting to consider some of the cultural requirements frivolous, they are very
important in terms of a product's market acceptance.
In general, well-developed requirements should be comprehensive without being so
restrictive that they exclude practical and economically feasible solutions. Note that there
is considerable overlap in the requirements listed in the different matrices. This is a result
of environmental requirements often being closely linked with legal (e.g., regulations),
performance (e.g., material efficiency), cultural (e.g., public concern), and cost (e.g., cost
competitiveness) requirements.
Ranking and weighting can be used to distinguish between critical and merely
desirable requirements. Must requirements are conditions that designs have to meet while
want requirements are less important, but still desirable traits. In many cases, significant
83
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
conflicts may exist between these requirements. The challenge for the development team
is to resolve these conflicts and minimize the disharmony between requirements through
tradeoff analysis.
Conflicting Design Requirements
In principle, the matrices provide a systematic way of organizing must and want
requirements of the product system. (In Tables 5-1 through 5-5, no explicit distinction was
made between must and want requirements). Inevitably some requirements conflict with
others. While the matrices themselves are not a tool for resolving conflicts, they are useful
in identifying conflicts and assessing tradeoffs. Two examples of conflicting requirements
shall be discussed here.
First consider the environmental want requirement that recycled materials be used
for the production of new products. This conserves virgin resources and minimizes
impacts due to material extraction and refining. For example, recycled resins should
ideally be selected for molding new telephone housings. However, recycled plastics,
particularly postconsumer recycled plastics, cannot be used for this purpose because
another must requirement for telephone housing is compliance with Underwriter
Laboratories (UL) specifications UL 746, Standard for Polymeric Materials - Fabricated
Parts. Unlike virgin resins, recycled resins that meet the necessary UL specifications are
currently not readily available and AT&T internal recycling programs do not yet have in
place the necessary material tracking, testing and certification procedures required by UL
746 for recycled materials.
Even if product safety standards would not impede the use of recycled plastic, other
want requirements still might. Cultural requirements were specified in Table 5-5. In order
to be marketable, a desktop product must be visually appealing. However, housings with
flawless surface quality and perfectly matched colors are difficult to obtain with recycled
materials.
As an example of another conflict, consider the options of a service center in
refurbishing a business phone. Assuming the phone still works and only the housing
needs to be reconditioned, the old housing can either be scrapped and replaced with a new
one, or the original housing can be cleaned and, if necessary, painted. If one scraps the
original housing, virgin resin is consumed in molding a new replacement housing, but the
use of solvents for cleaning and painting the original housing, and any resulting emissions
and waste streams from the refurbishing operation, are avoided. On the other hand, if the
housing is cleaned and painted to cover up wear and other small surface blemishes, virgin
resin is conserved, but some undesirable impacts will be incurred as part of the
refurbishing operation. Which option is better? At this time, nobody really knows, and
AT&T feels it is too costly to perform an analysis to settle questions like this on a routine
basis.
Typically, in the absence of useful methods for settling such questions quickly,
companies usually choose the less expensive option, which may or may not be the
84
-------
Project Description
environmentally superior, one. This is merely one tradeoff concerning one component at
one particular point in its life. The dilemma with practicing life cycle design is that there
are virtually countless such tradeoff decisions to be made for the whole product over its
entire life.
Life Cycle Design Strategies for the 8403 Terminal
In general, a product's life-time environmental impact can be reduced through, among
other things, designing the product to be appropriately durable, repairable, and made of
recycled or easily recyclable materials. Furthermore, all waste streams resulting from any
material processing, manufacturing, and recycling operations should be as small as
possible, both in volume and number, while the use and emission of toxic substances
should be minimized. Finally, the packaging should consist of a minimal number of
different materials, be reusable or recyclable, and weigh as little as possible, while still
meeting its basic product protection function.
A program intended to minimize the lifetime environmental impact of products must
by necessity not only involve traditional product* design teams, but also all corporate
entities and resources that have an impact on the product's life downstream from
manufacturing. One of the great challenges in establishing an effective life cycle design
program is coordinating design, manufacturing, service, repair, and product disposition
activities in such a way that the aggregate corporate product delivery program amounts to
more than the sum of its parts. Understanding the life cycle of one's products, and the
role various corporate re'sources play in it, is a necessary step in devising sound life cycle
design strategies.
Current Life Cycle of an AT&T Telephone
As mentioned in the project introduction, one of the objectives of the AT&T team in
participating in the life cycle design project was to investigate and document to what
extent AT&T was already addressing life cycle issues as they pertain to a telephone.
Having a thorough understanding of the life cycle of a product is a prerequisite for better
executing life cycle design strategies and for understanding how specific design changes
are compatible with the existing product life cycle infrastructure.
AT&T is fortunate to have a well-developed, internal life cycle infrastructure in
place. This infrastructure provides for both product life extension of still-serviceable and
reconditionable telephones as well as the proper recycling of those telephones which can
no longer be repaired. From a life cycle perspective, product life extension is preferable
to once-through use and recycling. Several AT&T and non-AT&T resources are in place
that extend the life of a business telephone. Some of these, such as the various AT&T
service and reclamation centers, have their origins in the prediyestiture days before the
break up of the Bell System (in 1984) when AT&T products could only be leased and
85
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
AT&T maintained control and ownership of all the products it manufactured. While these
installations were originally not conceived as environmentally-sound product disposition
centers, they nevertheless can now be used in that capacity.
The life cycle of a business telephone, complete with product reuse and material
recovery loops, is shown schematically in Figure 5-3. Business phones, which tend to
have more value than consumer phones, rarely have just one life. At the end of their
initial tour of duty, many of these phones end up at an AT&T service center. This is not
just true of leased phones, but also, increasingly, of purchased phones that are returned as
part of trade-in arrangements when customers upgrade their systems. Depending on age
and condition, the returned phones are either refurbished and sold or leased again, or they
are scrapped and recycled.
Scrapped phones are torn apart and the metal and plastic components recycled. Fully
automated product shredding and postshred separation processes are increasingly used to
recover materials from phones no longer refurbishable. Telephone housings, for example,
become postconsumer acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) regrind. Traditionally, most
of the postconsumer material recovered from scrapped phones was sold in the secondary
material markets. AT&T is now actively exploring the feasibility of closing the loop
internally on some of the recovered materials.[66] This effort is an example of
development work intended to lead to better resource use in the future, thus improving
AT&T's management of the product and/or material life cycle.
Even if AT&T business phones do not end up at an AT&T service or reclamation
center (today many don't), they may still get refurbished and reintroduced to the market.
Many independent companies have moved into this field since the breakup of the Bell
System. Thus the average life of business phones and whole business phone systems is
usually longer than the duration of their initial tour of duty with the first leaseholder or
owner.
An inspection of Figure 5-3 will suggest many ways to improve the life cycle
profile of a telephone. There are waste streams generated at every stage of the life cycle
that can be eliminated or at least reduced. Although Figure 5-3 contains repair and reuse
loops as well as a material recovery system, it does not depict a closed-loop system.
Almost nothing but virgin materials are used for the production of new telephones, and
virtually all the materials that are eventually captured are recycled in an open-loop, rather
than a closed-loop fashion. From a life cycle perspective, it would be desirable to achieve
more closed-loop recycling.
The following discussion focuses on two specific design strategies for the 8403
terminal; redesign of its packaging and design improvements to its housing.
86
-------
Project Description
Figure 5-3. Life Cycle of Business Telephones
87
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Packaging Redesign
One of the recommendations made as a result of the 8503 baseline study was to
improve the packaging for business terminals. However, by the time the project team
began investigating improved packaging options for the 8403, a new packaging system
was already under development. System installers' complaints about excessive packaging
and product documentation traditionally used for business phones lead to this
improvement. Because the Definity® communications system is intended for large
businesses, dozens or hundreds of office terminals may be purchased by a customer and
installed at a single site. In such situations, it clearly makes no sense to ship individually
packaged terminals with an installation guide in each package. Doing so results in
maximum rather than minimum packaging for the customer or AT&T technician installing
the phones to discard. The new packaging system allows several terminals to be shipped
in a single box with a single installation guide. Individually-packaged sets are also still
available for customers purchasing single add-on sets through the AT&T Sourcebook (a
catalog for business telephone products and accessories). This new dual system, which
reduces packaging for quantity shipments of telephone terminals, was first used for the
8403 terminal.
Improved Telephone Housing Design
The most comprehensive life cycle design strategy implemented by the design team
addressed the housing of the 8403 DCP terminal. This is no accident. As a result of
AT&T having been involved in molding, refurbishing, and recycling telephone housings
for many years, the green product realization team learned a good deal about which
features enhance the environmental aspects of a plastic housing. This knowledge is now
being fed back into the design process through the DFE program.
In this project, environmental requirements for the manufacturing stage specify that
housing material be recyclable and nontoxic and that measures be taken to minimize
molding scrap to conserve resources and reduce waste. Environmental requirements for
the end-of-life stage specify that the housing be reusable, reconditionable, or at least
recyclable.
To mold housings for central-office, line-powered telephone sets such as the 8403,
AT&T uses ABS resin, a thermoplastic material with good recyclability. The specific ABS
resin used contains no heavy metal stabilizers or colors formulated with heavy metals.
The resin also does not incorporate any of the polybrominated flame retardants for which
restrictions or bans have been proposed in Europe. Table 5-6 contains a comparison of the
housing designs for the 8403 terminal and its predecessor, the 7401 DCP terminal.
The first feature listed, a textured housing surface, helps reduce manufacturing scrap.
Sprues, runners, defective parts, and other scrap are an inevitable byproduct of any
molding operation. This clean and uncontaminated preconsumer plastic waste can, in
principle, be shredded and recycled on-site by mixing the regrind with virgin material and
using the blend for new production. In practice, however, the use of regrind material for
88
-------
Project Description
Table 5-6. Comparison Between The 7401 And 8403 DCP Terminals
7401 Terminal
8403 Terminal
Feature
High gloss housing surface
Improved Feature
Textured housing surface
Rubber feet glued to stand Rubber feet snapped on
UL listing symbol on paper
housing
UL listing symbol molded into
housing
Acoustic foam piece glued to Acoustic foam piece press fit
inside of top part of housing over speaker
Transparent polycarbonate
sheet used as light diffuser
glued to housing
-No light diffuser used •
Housing material not identified ISO plastic marking code
molded in
Impact/Effect
Molding waste reduced
Rubber contamination
removable
Contamination of plastic
housing minimized
Contamination of plastic
housing minimized
Contamination of plastic
housing minimized
Plastic identifiable by non-
AT&T reclamation or
recycling center
new housings is problematic because the regrind component, having experienced at least
one previous heat cycle, makes color control difficult. Thus, although regrind can
sometimes be used for nonappearance parts, outside uses for the excess regrind material
must be found.
Clearly, minimizing the amount of molding scrap in the first place is desirable. A
small contribution to this end can be made by specifying textured surfaces for external
plastic parts. All other things being equal, a textured surface tends to hide minor molding
flaws better than a high-gloss, smooth surface. Thus, the yield for parts with textured
surfaces is generally higher and the amount of molding waste smaller. Textured surfaces
also tend to be more scratch resistant, which is a factor that may help extend the life of the
housing.
The next four features for the 8403 DCP listed in Table 5-6 make the part more
recyclable. These features are intended to ensure that at end of life, the housing can be
turned into high-value, uncontaminated regrind material with near-virgin properties by
means of low-cost, automated processes. To accomplish this, the housing of the 8403 was
designed to require no glue joints. It also incorporates no foreign materials (with the
exception of the serial number label) that are difficult to separate from the base polymer.
Finally, the molded-in ISO plastic identification code is intended to facilitate material
identification by a non-AT&T-affiliated service or reclamation center.
Compared to the 7401 terminal, the 8403 also has a significant new electrical feature -
both 2- and 4-wire connectivity - that makes it a more versatile product. Compatibility
89
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
with both 2- and 4-wire installations means that the set works with earlier 4-wire
Definity® Systems as well as the new 2-wire Definity® G3V2 and G3V3 Systems and
future releases. Thus the new 8403 terminal allows users to gain access to additional
features and capabilities, but does not necessarily require customers to junk their older
Definity® PBX (Private Branch Exchange) and its associated wiring. By retaining this
compatibility, the 8403 is designed to protect a customers' investment in, and extend the
life of, older Definity® Systems.
Design Evaluation
The design evaluation of the 8403 terminal did not involve a rigorous life cycle
assessment (LCA). Such an assessment would have been costly, time intensive, and given
the controversies which still surround LCA, of questionable value. Instead, the project
team used their best judgment and understanding to select design strategies for improving
the product's overall environmental profile. The project team also investigated currently
existing corporate activities and programs that affect a product's life cycle and studied
how those programs could be improved and better coordinated. For example, the design
for recyclability enhancements implemented on the 8403 are intended to maximize
material recovery and minimize nonrecyclable residue generation rates for the specific
processes AT&T uses to recycle telephone housings.
At the time of this project, AT&T had not yet developed a comprehensive set of
environmental metrics or a streamlined life cycle assessment tool for design evaluation,
although the ongoing development of the Green Index Scoring System is a step in that
direction. Performance measures are needed to determine improvements in environmental
performance and assess the effectiveness of a DFE program. Performance measures are
clearly a weak link at present. Good performance measures can only be defined once a
consensus has been obtained on what constitutes proper green design for a particular
product. Such a consensus does not presently exist. Accordingly, performance measures,
to the extent that they are used, are of questionable validity. In principle, systems such as
design rating or product assessment methods, could constitute suitable measures for the
moment.
Scoring systems, like all quantitative environmental assessment methods, are still
quite controversial for several reasons. Often the data necessary for a reasonably rigorous
analysis do not exist, or they are suspect. Even when data are available, there are
currently no commonly agreed upon methods for assessing the environmental merit or
impact of a material, let alone a complex product. Among the more complex issues
which remain to be resolved are issues of how to assess incommensurable impacts and
where to draw boundaries for analysis of a product Recognizing these difficulties,
AT&T is actively developing a matrix tool for life cycle assessment of products,
processes, and facilities. The matrix is constructed of five columns for life cycle stages
and 5 rows for impacts including resource use, energy use, and environmental releases to
90
-------
Major Findings and Conclusions
air, water and land. Until the Green Index tool and the DFE Assessment Matrix are
completed, the company is relying on its design guidelines, checklists, and environmental
professionals for design evaluation.
MAJOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Having explored at least some life cycle design issues using the 8403 DCP terminal as a
vehicle, the joint AT&T/University of Michigan team gained considerable insights into the issues
and challenges of practicing life cycle design in the "real world". The research team discovered
that life cycle design is very difficult to practice at present. A study of AT&T's DFE program
showed that there is a strong focus on developing specific tools to aid designers in addressing
environmental issues. AT&T's efforts have primarily focused on design checklists and guidelines,
and more recently on streamlined life cycle assessment tools. The origination of DFE from DFX
roots at AT&T is apparent, but now emphasis on the life cycle system is gaining momentum.
AT&T's environmental management is beginning to extend further beyond the manufacturing
domain. The structure of AT&T's DFE program is essentially similar to the life cycle design
framework presented in chapters 1-4. The major difference is that LCD addresses the interactions
between environmental, performance, cost, legal and cultural requirements more explicitly.
Major findings and conclusions will now be discussed for each of the key elements of the life
cycle design framework.
Environmental Management System
First and foremost, a well structured environmental management system suitable for a
particular company's size, culture, and product portfolio, along with clearly articulated
life cycle goals, are absolutely essential to support a nascent life cycle design program.
The AT&T development team faced difficulties caused by the embryonic state of "green"
design, and the lack of an adequate environmental management system. Many companies
have good environmental management systems in place, but because these systems
evolved in response to escalating regulations, they are primarily equipped to handle
compliance matters. Current corporate environmental management systems are typically
not structured to support company-wide life cycle design practices. As a result, designers
and engineers who attempt to address life cycle issues today lack adequate support.
AT&T is currently attempting to redress this problem by reorganizing its
environmental management system and internal infrastructure to address issues associated
with the life cycle of products and services. AT&T's newly proposed environmental
policy explicitly recognizes the life cycle framework for environmental management. The
proposed environmental policy, DFE guidelines and checklists, and simplified life cycle
assessment tools clearly demonstrate significant progress toward raising awareness about
the importance of the life cycle system throughout the corporation and among its external
stakeholders.
91
-------
FIVE: AT&T DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
AT&T's corporate environmental goals are now focused primarily on the
manufacturing domain along with two goals which address office management. From a
life cycle design perspective, these goals are not comprehensive because they do not
address materials supplied to AT&T or end-of-life management issues. For example,
goals have been set for recycling office paper but goals for reusing or recycling plastic
components from retired AT&T products have not been set. This distinction between
reduction in environmental burden of AT&T's manufacturing and service domain versus
total reduction across the life cycle should also be recognized when the next set of
corporate environmental goals is established.
Design Requirements
The multicriteria requirements matrices explored in this demonstration project are an
attempt to assist the design team in systematically addressing environmental issues over
the product life cycle. Multicriteria requirements matrices were recognized by the AT&T
project team .as a useful organizing tool for identifying and analyzing the key
requirements that shape the design of a product system. These matrices provided an
effective framework for exploring the complex interactions and conflicts between
requirements and for investigating strategies to optimize the overall design with respect to
these requirements. All requirements classes must be specified explicitly to successfully
guide life cycle design. Without stating requirements explicitly, the design team is less
likely to have a cohesive understanding of the design space.
The information in the multicriteria matrices shown in Tables 5-1 through 5-5
represent some of the key design issues but is by no means comprehensive. Proper
management of information for design assessment requires the institutionalization of an
elaborate new information system that spans across the full product life cycle. As
discussions with different members of the cross-functional team revealed, improved
communications functions need to be formalized and responsibilities clearly defined.
Reorganization of the matrices could greatly facilitate their use. It is recommended
that a computerized tool be developed to store and access requirements. Rules for
organizing matrices provided in Table 4-5 should be explored to help guide the design
process. For example, present versus future- requirements can be distinguished.
Anticipated legal requirements such as the German Waste Ordinance for Electronic
Products can be listed separately from CFC labeling requirements which are now in effect.
Computerizing the matrices and making them available as part of a DFE package could be
very useful for a large, decentralized corporation such as AT&T. A summary matrix may
also be used to highlight key issues; more detailed requirements could then be accessed in
a hierarchical fashion. In addition, checklists and other detailed specifications could
potentially be stored in a user-friendly data base.
92
-------
Major Findings and Conclusions
Design Strategies
While AT&T is facing many of the same challenges other companies face in
implementing an environmental management structure that effectively supports a life
cycle design program, the company is relatively well positioned to address product take
back and broader product life cycle issues. This is a result of AT&T having inherited both
extensive manufacturing, product service, refurbishing, and recycling operations from the
Bell System. Furthermore, through its DFE and "green technologies" development
programs, AT&T is actively establishing green design and manufacturing capabilities.
However, while large pieces of the necessary internal infrastructure are in place, these
pieces need to be better integrated in order to more effectively deliver products with
minimum aggregate environmental impact.
The design strategies that AT&T has implemented to reduce environmental burden
mainly target factory waste streams and emissions, and preconsumer and postconsumer
recycling. Strategies such as product life extension, which include reuse of components,
adaptability for upgrading, and appropriate durability, were not emphasized by the design
team. '
However, AT&T has recently introduced the Signature® Series telephones, which are
a line of more robust phones designed.specifically for the lease market. Maintaining
ownership through leasing products clearly allows for better life cycle management.
However, in a free market with no strict product take back regulations, there are limits to
maintaining control of the product AT&T manufactures. This restricts the product life
extension strategies AT&T can realistically implement.
Design Evaluation
• •. • ' >' • • :
Product realization stakeholders, most of whom are not environmental experts, need
help evaluating design strategies for reducing environmental burden. Perhaps most
critically, design teams must have access to environmental data of the same quality and
utility that is available for other classes of requirements. AT&T has recognized this need
by developing streamlined tools for environmental assessment such as the Green Index
and more recently a life cycle assessment scoring system. Unfortunately, life cycle design
is much further advanced as a concept than as a practice. The lack of a broad consensus
in the scientific and engineering community on what really constitutes environmentally-
conscious products and services is clearly an impediment to companies moving more
aggressively on life cycle design. Nonetheless, judgment will always be required to
weigh environmental impacts (resource use, energy use, environmental releases) along
with other design issues. Life cycle design offers a framework to address this challenge in
a more systematic way.
93
-------
6. ALLIEDSIGNAL DEMONSTRATION
PROJECT
The purpose of the Life Cycle Design Demonstration Project with AlliedSignal, Filters and
Spark Plugs (ASFSP) was to explore opportunities to reduce environmental burdens associated
with oil filters. AlliedSignal's project team used the life cycle design framework outlined in the
Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual to compare two alternative oil filter designs. The specific
objective of the demonstration project was to establish design criteria that would determine if a
new design alternative offered significant environmental benefits over the existing filter design.
Because the project team members had extensive experience with the design and manufacture
of an existing standard filter design, the group decided to baseline this product. After identifying
material and energy inputs and outputs and residuals for the life cycle of the product system, the
team evaluated multicriteria requirements for guiding environmental improvement of
AlliedSignal's filter products. The team applied its knowledge of a newer prototype model with a
reusable housing to help establish design criteria for future products. Although the group did not
compare the environmental profile of the two filters in the demonstration project, criteria were set
for developing a cleaner product in the future. AlliedSignal selected an oil filter for this
demonstration because of growing concern about the environmental impacts associated with
disposing used filters.
Oil filters are a vital component of automotive engine systems. They protect engine
components from abrasive contaminants by removing grit and dirt from the lubricating oil of the
engine. Well designed and maintained filtration systems can extend the life of the engine and thus
play an important role in overall vehicle performance. In addition to performance, design
engineers are becoming increasingly concerned about the environmental burdens associated with
these systems.
The automobile is one of the most significant contributors to global, regional, and local
environmental problems through its intense resource use, energy consumption, pollution, and
waste. A successful reduction in environmental impacts from the life cycle of an oil filter
represents one improvement in the environmental profile of the automobile.
Approximately 400 million oil filters are sold annually in the United States. At present, the
majority of used oil filters are disposed in landfills. The residual oil associated with a retired oil
filter presents a potential landfill leaching problem. Currently, only a relatively small fraction of
used filters are recycled. AlliedSignal estimated that as of June 1993, 750 tons per month of filter
scrap are being recycled into steel and iron products. This equates to approximately 18 million
filters recycled annually in the US.
94
-------
Project Origin and Background
PROJECT ORIGIN AND BACKGROUND
AlliedSignal Participation
AlliedSignal's participation in this project was linked directly to their prior
recognition of the life cycle framework as an important element of their environmental
management system. In 1991, AlliedSignal hosted a life cycle analysis (LCA) meeting of
representatives from aerospace and automotive business units to discuss critical issues in
LCA and its application to product development. Dr. Keoleian presented the life cycle
design framework at this meeting. After a series of informal meetings about life cycle
design, Filters and Spark Plugs decided to participate in a demonstration project. The
Engineering arm of Filters and Spark Plugs took lead responsibility for this project.
Cross-Functional Team & Product Development
AlliedSignal organized a multidisciplinary team from Filters and Spark Plugs to ,
participate in this project. Members of this core group were located at the Perrysburg,
Ohio and East Providence, Rhode Island facilities. The following lists contains the titles
of the AlliedSignal team members.
AlliedSignal Project Team Members
Vice President, Engineering
Director, Filter Engineering
Engineering Manager, Labs
Engineering Manager, Materials
Engineering Manager, Air Filters
Product Engineers
Director, HS&E
Vice President, Product Marketing
Vice President, Passenger Car Product Marketing
Manager, Heavy-duty Product Marketing
Manager, Passenger Car Product Marketing
Engineering Manger, Liquid Filters
Plant Business Center Managers
Director, Original Equipment Sales
SELECTION AND DESCRIPTION OF PRODUCTS
The demonstration project team selected a spin-on oil filter to evaluate for design
improvement because they were already testing a prototype cartridge filter design as a
replacement. The spin-on oil filter unit is a single-use product whereas the cartridge filter
features a reusable housing in combination with a single-use filter media. The cartridge filter
design, also referred to as a quick disconnect filter, can be disassembled, allowing the filter media
to be removed and replaced and the entire unit remounted to the engine. Figures 6-1 and 6-2
illustrate both designs.
The primary components of the spin-on filter are the filter media, steel housing, steel base
(puck) which mounts the engine, and a gasket. The primary components of the quick disconnect
filter are the filter cartridge, steel shell, steel base which mounts to the engine, o- ring, gasket, and
a retaining ring that locks the assembly together.
95
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Bearings
Full Flow Filter '
Pressure
Regulating
Valve
Full Flow Lube Oil System
(Spin-on Filter)
Figure 6-1. Schematic of the Spin-On Type Filter
96
-------
Selection and Description of Products
Bearings
Filter
Relief Valve
Filter
. .Pressure
Regulating
Valve
Full Flow Lube Oil System
(Replaceable Cartridge Filter)
Figure 6-2. Schematic of the Quick Disconnect Filter (Cartridge Filter with Reusable Housing)
The PH3612 model spin-on type oil filter was selected as a basis for design improvement.
This filter is used with heavy-duty truck engines. It has an outside diameter of 4 19/32" and
height of 10 15/64", which is considerably larger than the models used on cars. However, the
heavy-duty truck filter is functionally identical to the car filter design except for size.
97
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Several key elements of AlliedSignal's environmental management system, including
environmental policies and organizational structure, will be described in this section. First, a
short business description is provided.
Business Description of AlliedSignal
AlliedSignal is a $12 billion international company with 110,000 employees. The
company is organized into three major business sectors: chemicals, aerospace products,
and automotive products. The AlliedSignal Filters & Spark Plugs (ASFSP) business unit
is part of AlliedSignal's Automotive Sector. ASFSP is responsible for designing,
manufacturing, marketing, and selling all filters and spark plugs.
Environmental Policy and Goals
AlliedSignal addresses environmental protection through both a vision statement and
an environmental policy. A section of the AlliedSignal mission statement entitled Our
Values includes seven areas: customer integrity, people, teamwork, speed, innovation, and
performance. Environmental protection is addressed under "integrity" with the following
statement:
We are committed to the highest level of ethical conduct wherever
we operate. We obey all laws, produce safe products, protect the
environment, practice equal employment, and are socially responsible.
AlliedSignaPs health, safety, and environmental policy, effective April 1992, states:
It is the worldwide policy of AlliedSignal Inc. to design, manufacture
and distribute all its products and to handle and dispose of all materials
without creating unacceptable health, safety or environmental risks.
The corporation will:
• Establish and maintain programs to assure that laws and regulations
applicable to its products and operations are known and obeyed;
• Adopt its own standards where laws or regulations may not exist or
be adequately protective;
• Conserve resources and energy, minimize the use of hazardous
materials and reduce wastes
• Stop the manufacture or distribution of any product or cease any operation
if the health, safety or environmental risks or costs are unacceptable.
To carry out this policy, the corporation will:
1. Identify and control any health, safety or environmental hazards related
to its operations and products;
2. Safeguard employees, customers and the public from injuries or health
hazards, protect the corporation's assets and continuity of operations,
and protect the environment by conducting programs for safety and
loss prevention, product safety and integrity, occupational health, and
98
-------
Environmental Management System
pollution prevention and control, and by formally reviewing the
effectiveness of such programs;
3. Conduct and support scientific research on the health, safety and
environmental effects of materials and products handled and sold by the
corporation; and
4. Share promptly with employees, the public, suppliers, customers,
government agencies, the scientific community and others significant
health, safety or environmental hazards of its products and operations.
Every employee is expected to adhere to the spirit as well as the
letter of this policy. Managers have a special obligation to keep informed
about health, safety and environmental risks and standards, so that they
can operate safe and environmentally sound facilities, produce quality
products and advise higher management promptly of any adverse situation
which comes to their attention.
Environmental Management Organization
The responsibility for environmental management is decentralized to each operating
unit within AlliedSignal. Health, Environment and Safety (HS&E) is headed by a
corporate vice president, and HS&E presidents for automotive, aerospace, and chemical
sectors report to the corporate vice president. There are counterpart organizations within
the sectors. Each operating unit has an HS&E manager who reports directly to both its
president and the HS&E sector president.
Product Responsibility Guide
AlliedSignal has an established mechanism for addressing environmental
considerations in product development. This mechanism is documented in their Product
Responsibility Guide. This guide provides key elements for implementing effective
"product safety and integrity programs" at AlliedSignal. Its contents include:
• New Product Review
• Customer/User Application
• Design Review
• Product Testing and Evaluation
• Reliability Review
• Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
• Process Review
• Process Control
• Purchased Parts and Material
• Product Quality Assurance
• Product Literature
• Product Hazard Communications
• Transportation
99
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
• Customer Complaints, Returns, Failures and Warranty.
• Product Recall
• Regulatory Affairs
• FDA Regulatory Compliance for Medical Devices
• Compliance with The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory and
. Premanufacture Notification (PMN)
• AID-Free Products
• TRAC - Risk Identification and Reporting System
• Product Responsibility Evaluation Review
The guide "recognizes that each employee has an obligation to contribute to the
manufacture of quality products and to protect himself (and herself) and other employees,
customers, the public at large, and the environment in the design, manufacture, marketing
and distribution, use and disposal of Allied's products."
For each section of the Product Responsibility Guide, guidelines, scope, purpose,
requirements and responsibilities are presented. This manual has a number of
shortcomings, such as an orientation toward compliance and safety rather than pollution
prevention, and lack of guidance on implementing design strategies that reduce aggregate
environmental burden.
To address these concerns, AlliedSignal is currently developing a Design for the
Environment guidance manual to facilitate the integration of environmental considerations
into product and process design in a more comprehensive manner. A draft version of this
document includes a series of DFE checklists for research and engineering design, process
engineering, manufacturing, marketing, and packaging.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Needs Analysis and Project Initiation
The AlliedSignal team's stated objectives for this project were:
We will use the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual to contrast the quick
disconnect design (cartridge filter with reusable housing) and the standard
PH3612 (spin-on oil filter), from manufacturing and assembly through
treatment and disposal stages of the product's life cycle. Our goals are to
evaluate the EPA Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual and to satisfy our
customer's needs.
The core team from Filters & Spark Plugs initiated the demonstration project by
defining the project objective and identifying critical issues to address in improving oil
filter design. A list of issues was formulated during a brainstorming exercise of the core
team. The resulting list highlights in general terms some of the important design issues
for oil filter design.
100
-------
Project Description
Significant Needs and Functional Attributes of Oil Filter Design Identified by Brainstorming
Filter oil Trouble free operation
Reduced operating Expenses
Warrantee concerns
Availability
Education/training
Comfort acceptability
Support
Peace of mind
Product differentiation
Used Filter disposal
Convenient handling
Convenient servicing
Economical
Engine protection
Reduce disposal
Scope and System Boundaries
At the onset of the project, the development team decided to limit its focus to the
manufacturing through disposal stages of the product life cycle. Although the group
recognized the importance of the raw materials acquisition stage, limited time and
resources :did not permit a full investigation of this stage.
A simplified process flow diagram for both the spin-on and cartridge filter designs is
shown in Figure 6-3. For the spin-on type filter landfill disposal is currently the most
MANUFACTURE
USE
END-OF-LIFE
CARTRIDGE WITH
REUSABLE HOUSING
MEDIA
HOUSING REUSED
Figure 6-3. Process Flow Diagram for Spin-on and Cartridge Filter Designs
101
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
widely practiced end-of-life management option. Other options include recycling the
metal housing with and without separation of the filter media. Steel mills have different
specifications for recycling. Some require removal of gaskets, while others accept only
shredded or cubed filters, and/or pucks. The filter media may be separated and
incinerated with or without energy recovery. For the cartridge filter design, a durable
housing is reused and the filter cartridge may be incinerated or disposed in landfills after
the residual oil is drained or pressed out. In either case, residual oil may be refined or
incinerated.
It is also important to recognize that the oil filter is a component of the powertrain,
which is a subsystem of the total vehicle. This interrelationship adds complexity to the
design process for a filter product and points out the importance of establishing an
effective supplier (filter manufacturer) and automotive manufacturer relationship.
The following two options for the oil filter/engine interface can be considered in
redesigning the oil filter system:
• retrofit the oil filter to the existing engine mount
• redesign the filter and engine concurrently
The scope of this demonstration project was limited to the consideration of the
existing engine mount. Major oil filter design changes would require engine design
modifications. The development team indicated that is difficult to get OEMs (original
equipment manufacturers) to redesign the engine because of the large capital investment
necessary for tooling.
The hierarchy of systems in Table 6-1 shows how the oil filter is part of several higher
order systems, each of which has its own complex set of design requirements that must be
addressed. Understanding some of the higher level design requirements and the
distribution of environmental impacts across each level is useful for achieving a
successful oil filter design.
Table 6-1. Oil Filter System Within Higher Level Systems
System Level
Need
Oil Filter Product System
Power Train System
Automotive Product System
Transportation System Level
Remove contaminants from engine oil
Convert fuel to mechanical energy to propel the
vehicle
Provide mobility (independence In setting time and
destination)
Provide for the movement of people and goods via
automobiles, buses, trains, planes, ships,
bicycles, etc.
102
-------
Project Description
Baseline Analysis
The project team conducted an inventory analysis that identified the material and
energy inputs and outputs for the spin-on filter product system. The input/output analysis
was conducted using the framework defined in the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual.
Inventory items were identified for each component of the product system (product,
process, and distribution) across each stage of the life cycle considered in this project
(manufacture, use/service, retirement, and disposal). Multicriteria requirements matrices
were used to organize information and guide the analysis.
Table 6-2 summarizes the results of the baseline analysis as compiled by the
University of Michigan researchers. To simplify presentation, retirement and disposal are
combined into one stage: end-of-life management. Changes in the matrices were also
made to reflect the modified product system components introduced in this report. In the
current version of the product system, management functions are included in both the
process and distribution components. Although the project team was very thorough in
identifying inputs and outputs, a quantitative inventory analysis was not performed.
Establishing Design Requirements
After identifying inventory items for the spin-on filter, the project team used the
guidelines offered in the Life Cycle Design Guidance Manual to develop design
requirements for filters that they referred to as "directions for new designs." They
completed all environmental requirements for the entire life cycle first, then developed
full sets of performance, legal, cost, and cultural criteria, one matrix at a time. This
complete set of requirements established a framework for evaluating and comparing the
spin-on and cartridge filter designs.
Weekly meetings were scheduled to identify and formulate requirements for each
element of the multicriteria matrix. The design requirements developed by the project
team are summarized in Tables 6-3 through 6-7. As in the baseline analysis, the
information provided by the project team was reorganized into a three column matrix
(retirement and disposal stages combined into end-of-life management) to simplify
presentation of the results. Some of the design requirements used for comparative
analysis of the two design alternatives are discussed in the following sections.
103
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Table 6-2. Results of Baseline Analysis
Manufacture
Use/Service
End-of-Life Management
Product
Input
- Steel e.g., tin plated, HRPO, heat treated
1050
- Gasket with nltrile rubber and adhesive
- Element and end disc
• Sealant (solvent based)
- Paint and litho
Oulput
- PH3612
Residuals
- See retirement stage
- PH3612
Input
Output
N/A
Residuals
N/A
Input
Used PH 3612
Storage materials
Oil retained in filter
Output
Retired PH 3612
Residuals
Process
Energy tor plant operations Including ovens,
conveyors, wire He, welding, tapping,
pleating, compressors, curing,
painting/printing
Materials I.e., wire ties, die lubricants,
solvents, and cleaning chemicals,
compressed air, tapping coolant, and test
Energy for facilities I.e., lighting, heat, air,
computers, lab equipment
Labor from engineers, designers, sales,
quality, maintenance, purchasing, finance,
MIS, HR/ER, scheduling, clerks
- Office materials e.g., paper, lab
supplies, microfilm, samples
Output
• Scrap steel, product, paper
• Materials containers
• Wire ties .
• Information including budgets, reports, and
specs
Residuals
• Generated and tost heat from processes
• Waste paint, roll cores, coolant and
plastlcsol
• Stack emissions, waste water,
. Worn tools and rejected materials
• Spltl absorbent
• Lab wastes
- Packaging
- Oil
Input
Energy to power shop equipment and
facility
Labor from installers
Solvents
Rags and clean up materials
Speedi-dri
Output
- Oil change
- Rlter change
Residuals
Used oil (stored) and solvents
Oil containers
Waste water
Packaging
Dirty rags and uniforms
Used hygiene materials and speedi-dri
(stored)
Input
Energy to power equipment such as
crusher and cutter and shop,
environment
Labor from handler
Rags, speedi-dri, uniforms, and clean-
up materials
Solvent
Oil and used oil containers
Drain rack and drums
Energy for facilities and equipment
Labor from HS&E, safety, service
center, office, and scheduler
Office supplies
Output
Processed used oil filter
Dirty oil removed from processed filter
Barrels to hold processed filters
Policy, compliance reports, and
schedules
Residuals
Dirty rags, uniforms, and hygiene
- materials
Used filters, used oil and containers,
sludge
• Packaging
• Used solvent and waste water
• Paper and packaging
Distribution
- Energy for machines
• shrink wrapping, boxing carton ID,
and labeling
• pallettzers. forklifts, pick/place,
materials handling
• EOlandWMS
• transportation
Labor from operators, drivers, maintenance,
shippers/pickers, receivers, forklift, and
data entry and administrative services.
Office materials e.g., paper, lab supplies,
microfilm, samples
• Materials Including boxes, cartons, staples,
glue, shrink wrap, banding, pallets, inks,
rabeis, cleaning fluid, andsolvents
Output
• PH 3612 packaged and delivered
• Information Including budgets, reports, and
specs
Residuals
- Waste oil, heat, water, and
solvents
- Used tires and maintenance
parts
- Emissions from 1C motors
- Scrap shrink wrap, packaging,
pallets
Input
Energy for facilities and equipment
Travel and parts pick-up
Delivery system
Labor from sales, service manager,
counter people, office and quality staff,
scheduler, safety and engineering, and
warrantee staff
• Office materials e.g., paper and
computers
Output
- Paperwork e.g., billing,
schedules
Residuals
• Paper and packaging
Input
Energy for handling equipment and
facilities
Labor from handler and driver
Output
Stored "processed" filters moved to
removal point
Residuals
Used oil and emissions from handling
equipment
104
-------
Project Description
Table 6-3. Environmental Requirements
Product
Manufacture
- Commonize/homogenize materials
- Reduce amount of material used in
product
- Use lower impact materials
- Eliminate/reduce paper use, travel,
and testing
- Decrease variability
- Streamline procedures
- Reduce cycle time
Use/Service
- Reduce usage rate
- Increase service intervals
- Eliminate need for oil and filter
changes
- Reduce materials
- Use "greener" materials
End-of-Life Management
- Eliminate need for
retirement
- Reduce materials
- Use greener materials
Process
Manufacture
- Lower energy requirements
- Reduce material needs
- Use more efficient processes
- Investigate recycle/reuse of residuals
Use/Service
- Reduce usage rate/increase
service intervals
- Reduce oil/filter change cycle
time
- Less messy, "neat and clean"
filter change
- Eliminate need for oil and filter
change
- Use recyclable residuals
End-of-Life Management
- Less messy/'neat and
clean" retirement process
- Eliminate need for
retirement
- Recyclable residuals
Distribution
Manufacture .'.''.
- Lower energy requirements
- Commonize/homogenize materials
used
,- Reduce materials needed
- Use low impact materials
- Use more efficient processes
- Reuse, recycle residuals
- On-site manufacturing and
distribution
Use/Service
- Direct ship to customer
- Reusable, recyclable,
returnable packaging
End-of-Life Management
- Eliminate need for
retirement
- Recyclable residuals
Environmental
Environmental requirements were specified to reduce the environmental burden of
manufacturing, use, and end-of-life management of the oil filter. These environmental
requirements also address key issues relevant to each of the stakeholder groups including
the auto manufacturers, vehicle owners, and service personnel. For example, criteria to
reduce material intensiveness may ultimately be set by the OEM. This requirement relates
to powertrain weight constraints. Light weighting the vehicle can increase fuel efficiency
and reduce emissions accordingly.
Other requirements targeted the environmental burdens associated with filter changes.
Frequency of filter changes and impacts related to spilled oil and used rags were
addressed. The frequency of filter changes is a critical requirement that affects the total
environmental burden associated with the filter life cycle. Clearly, less frequent filter
105
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
changes would reduce burden but only so far as this doesn't shorten engine life. Explicit
instructions on how frequently to change filters is not provided by AlliedSignal. Instead,
customers are instructed to change the filter according to vehicle manufacturers
recommendations. Better guidance to filter users could lead to more optimal use.
The project team even formulated some idealized requirements such as eliminating the
need for oil and filter changes.
Recognizing the importance of eliminating landfill disposal of oil filters, AlliedSignal
created a special task force on Used Oil Filters (UOF). At present, UOF scrap is being
recycled into rebar, fence posts, steel billets, construction channel steel, cast iron manhole
covers, and cast iron pipe. The task force focused on recycling the spin-on filter. A
survey was conducted to evaluate the recycling infrastructure available to process used
filters and also identify mill specifications for processing the filter metal. AlliedSignal
compiled a list of steel mills and foundries that accept used oil filters. This list included
the following information:
• mill location
• furnace type
• filter specs for mill use (e.g., pucks, shredded, cubed)
• transporter/processor requirements, price paid or charge ($/ton),
• transport mode
• geographic are of used oil filters (UOF's) received
• UOF quantity consumed
• use more UOF scrap (yes or no)
• product manufacturer and general comments
The recycling task force made the following observations about used oil filter
recycling markets:
• Increasing number of mills testing or purchasing UOF scrap
• All user mills require UOF free of residual oil
• Most mills want filters crushed or cubed to min. 20,000 psi. Some accept
shredded scrap (free of oil and paper media)
• Scrap pricing varies
106
-------
Table 6-4. Performance Requirements
Project Description
Product
Manufacture
- Processable materials
- Meets FMSs
Use/Service
- Meet minimum internal and
external specs
- Meet customer specs
- Serviceable
- Protect engine
- Safety factors
- Withstand environment
End-of-Life Management
- Easily removed
- Drainable
- Crushable
- Disassemblable
- Appropriate life span
Process
Manufacture
- Warehouse management
- Information flow
- Staffing
- Schedules and quotes
- Inspection - QC instructions
- Training
- Certification
- TQM
Use/Service
- Robust
- Reliable
- No leaks
- Effective filtration
- Technical information
- Performance information
- Application information
- Customer service
End-of-Life Management
- Simple
- Minimize spills
- No special tools required
- Instructions
- Training
- Scheduling
- Safety
Distribution
Manufacture
- Identifiable components'
- Traceable components
- Appropriate lot sizes
- Packaged for manufacture
- J.I.T.
- Minimum inventory
- Appropriate storage environment
Use/Service
- Available
- Appropriate carton quantity
- Appropriate packaging i.e., size
and protection
- Bar coding
- Identification
End-of-Life Management
- Appropriate storage area
prior to treatment/disposal
Performance
The main performance requirement of the oil filter is to protect the engine. It is useful
to understand the function of engine oil before addressing performance requirements for
the oil filter. Engine oil has the following functions:
• lubricates moving parts
• acts as cleaning agent (flushes contaminants)
• protects against corrosion
• cools (heat transfer media)
• seals (combustion seal)
Maximum engine life depends on correctly using and maintaining oil filters to protect
vital engine components by filtering out abrasive contaminants that accumulate in the
lubricating oil.
An important set of performance requirements focus on the process for replacing the
filter. The time requirement, tools, and level of difficulty are all key factors in guiding
design choices.
107
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Table 6-5. Cost Requirements
Product
Manufacture
- Cost effective materials
- Preferred suppliers
- Common materials
- Design for assembly
Use/Service
- Extend service life
- Ease of service
- Reduce total cost
- No warrantee problems
End-of-Life Management
- Easily removed
- Minimize time
- Minimize spills
- No special tools
Process
Manufacture
- Use existing equipment
- Flexible manufacturing
- Low maintenance
- Short set-up times
- Minimize labor
- Optimum throughput/line speed
- Minimize scrap
- Waste disposal
- Use of self-managed work groups
- Training
Use/Service
- Easy installation
- No special tools
- Warrantee/recalls
End-of-Life Management
- No special tools
- Drainable
- Easily removed
- Simple
- Instructions
- Scheduling
- Training
- Safety
Distribution
Manufacture
• Common parts
- No specialized storage
- Minimize handling
- Optimize material flow
- Minimize packaging/reusable
packaging
Use/Service
- Optimize distribution
- Appropriate packaging
End-of-Life Management
- Storable
Cost
Cost criteria weigh heavily in decisions regarding design of an oil filter product
system. For example, the retooling cost for manufacturing processes can be significant.
Unit production costs and replacement costs to users must be competitive for the product
to succeed. In addition to costs to manufacturers and service facilities, the total life cycle
cost to the vehicle owner should also be considered. For each case, it is also important to
recognize which stakeholder will accrue costs or savings.
108
-------
Project Description
Table 6-6. Legal Requirements
Product ,
Manufacture
- MSDS sheets
- Meets published claims
- Use of non-toxic materials
- Non-infringement on patents
Use/Service
-: Warrantee
- Safety
- Labeling
- Warnings
End-of-Life Management
- EPA requirements
- Local regulations and
ordinances
Process ,
Manufacture
- OSHA requirements
- EPA requirements
- ICC requirements
- EEOC requirements
- Other government regulations
- Record keeping
- Evacuation/emergency plans
- Corporate ethics
Use/Service
- Easy/safe installation
- Clear, concise instructions
- Materials
- MSDS sheets
- Correct application published
End-of-Life Management
- EPA requirements
- Local regulations and
ordinances ;
Distribution
Manufacture
- OSHA requirements
- EPA requirements
- ICC requirements
- EEOC requirements
- Other government regulations
Use/Service
- Labeling on packaging
- CC packaging rules
- Warnings on packaging
End-of-Life Management
- EPA requirements
- Local regulations and
ordinances
Legal
Legal requirements for the filter product system are constantly changing. During the
course of the demonstration project several new legal requirements were set. For
example, EPA ruled on hazardous waste management of used oil on 20 May 1992 (40
CFR Part 261 Hazardous Waste Management System; General; Identification and Listing
of Hazardous Waste; Used Oil; Rule). EPA decided not to list used oils destined for
disposal as hazardous waste. The EPA also finalized an exemption for used oil filters.
This exemption is limited to nonterneplated filters. Terneplate steel coating is a lead
compound which could cause a used filter of this type to exceed acceptable lead levels.
AlliedSignal uses no terneplate in any liquid filter they manufacture.
EPA's exemption applies only to used oil filters that have been drained of free flowing
oil. If an oil filter is picked up by hand or lifted by machinery and used oil immediately
drips or runs from the filter, the filter should not be considered to be drained.
In addition to federal regulations, many states have passed their own regulations on
used oil and used oil filters. Life cycle designers should be aware of current and likely
regulations to avoid costly redesign at any stage of the development process.
109
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Table 6-7. Cultural Requirements
Product
Manufacture
- Old vs. new product
- Old vs. new paradigms
Use/Service
- Customer perceptions
- Graphical instructions
- OE look-alike vs. different look
- Brand recognition/preference
End-of-Life Management
- Lack of environmental
concern
- Safety
- Eliminate retirement
Process
Manufacture
• Pride in work
- Old vs. new paradigms
- Diverse workforce
- Change the way we do business
- Us vs. them attitudes
Use/Service
- DIYornotDlY
- Clear, concise instructions
- Multilingual instructions
End-of-Life Management
- Clear, concise instructions
Distribution
Manufacture
- Old vs. new paradigms
Use/Service
- Availability
- Tradition channels
End-of-Life Management
- Safely handled
- Reuse/recycle vs. throwaway
Cultural
The project team identified several cultural criteria that should be considered when
comparing the spin-on and cartridge filter designs. The level of difficulty for changing a
filter and the convenience in making a filter change was identified as an important factor.
Both service centers and customers who are "do-it-yourselfers" prefer to have a design
that is easy to find, take off, and replace.
The project team also indicated that packaging of the filter product was an important
marketing factor. AlliedSignal's research revealed that consumers may be influenced by
packaging design when determining which filter to buy at a store. The design team's
effort to simplify or reduce packaging were limited by this marketing constraint. Less
environmentally harmful packaging designs that limited the product's marketability were
not considered a feasible business strategy in this case. However, innovative responsible
packaging designs may be a marketing tool for future product design efforts.
EVALUATION
The matrices described in the preceding tables include a comprehensive set of design
requirements which must then be assigned priority to properly guide design. In AlliedSignal's
judgment, the following criteria were the key drivers for making design decisions in this project:
• Satisfy regulations that ban landfill disposal of used filters
• Minimize life cycle cost to user, including replacement parts, labor, and retirement costs
• Make filter design compatible with current OEM design of filter-engine interface
• Extend useful life of filter system
• Minimize total waste associated with filter use
110
-------
Evaluation
Table 6-8. Total Costs for Heavy-Duty Fleet Use of Several Oil Filter Alternatives
Spin On
(crushed at disposal)
Cartridge (filter media
crushed at disposal)
Change
(Clean)
Interval
in Miles
20,000
20,000
Engine
Life
in Miles
500,000
500,000
Filter Cost
with
disposal
$377
$265
Labor
Cost
$350
$569
Associated
Servicing
Costs1
$87
$87
Total
User
Cost
$814
$921
Cleanable Filter
Option A: filter lasts
500,000 miles
Option B: filter replaced
at 250,000 miles2
20,000 500,000 $240 $438 $193 $871
20,000 500,000 $288 $263 $251 $802
11ncludes crushing equipment, cleaning fluids and equipment
2 Filter less durable than option A, but requires less cleaning labor
Comparison of Design Alternatives
Our analysis indicates that the cartridge filter best meets the environmental design
requirements developed for this project. However, the cartridge filter does not appear to
offer compelling advantage when other requirements are considered. In terms of total
user cost, the cartridge filter is somewhat more expensive compared to the spin-on
alternative. Table 6-8 shows total user costs associated with each filter. A cleanable filter
that does not rely on a single-use medium is also included in this table to demonstrate a
possible future design direction that reduces landfill disposals related to filter use.
The project team identified the following key results of the design evaluation:
• The primary conflict in changing to a new filter design is the culture of the
producer and, more importantly, the customer. It is difficult to promote a
change from a system (spin-on filters) which has worked well for so many
years to a less attractive alternative unless there are overriding drivers like
government regulation.
• Functionally, a change from a spin-on filter to an alternative like the quick
disconnect with a cartridge has little impact on the design or manufacturing
communities; these products are already produced in slightly different forms.
• Within the identified requirements there is little conflict. AlliedSignal is
already driven to use materials and processes with minimum environmental
impact by legislation governing our manufacturing operations as well as our
own corporate directives.
• The critical requirements are for the performance of the filter to meet the
required engine specification needs and for the product to be salable to our
customers.
111
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
• There is only a trivial difference between the two products' performance,
because the designs in effect only alter the "packaging" of the filter by
changing the pressure housing from non-opening to opening.
• Customer acceptance is a much more important and difficult issue to resolve.
Without a regulatory driver, the new product must be sold on the basis of a cost
benefit to the final customers. This is not a product to product cost compari-
son, but a life cycle cost analysis, incorporating all aspects of filter life and
associated cost, as shown in Table 6-8. Unless a cost benefit can clearly be
demonstrated, this is not a salable product, and it is of no use to anyone.
• Under current filter disposal regulation, the cartridge filter does not clearly
meet the requirements as a salable product. With the broadening of landfill
bans, this situation would change.
• In Europe the cartridge filter is gaining popularity, probably due to a different
regulatory climate.
Action Plan for New Design
The cartridge concept can be extended to encompass a totally non-metallic cartridge
construction which simplifies waste disposal or incineration. A further extension
incorporates a cleanable filter medium which eliminates all filter waste disposal. This is
currently a very active area of investigation for ASFSP.
AlliedSignal plans to continue pursuing environmentally compatible filter design with
the emphasis on a reusable filter system., ASFSP is now field testing this design while
also further developing cleanable filter media and the supporting cleaning process.
MAJOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The AlliedSignal demonstration project was an important test of multicriteria requirements
matrices for guiding the reduction of environmental burdens. Although AlliedSignal had been
investigating the application of the life cycle framework to environmental assessment and design,
most members of the project team had not been exposed to this concept at the initiation of the
project. Although an HS&E professional from Filters and Spark Plugs was a member of the core
team, the demonstration project was conducted independently of corporate HS&E involvement.
Environmental Management System
Both AlliedSignal's existing product realization process and its total quality
management program provided a basis for implementing life cycle design. AlliedSignal
has a comprehensive product review process which covers HS&E issues. The product life
cycle concept is expressed in AlliedSignal's HS&E policy statement, but the term "life
cycle" is not stated explicitly. The objective to reduce waste was well defined in the
context of TQM, but corporate environmental goals with quantitative targets were not
identified by the project team.
112
-------
Major Findings and Conclusions
A draft Design for the Environment Guidance Document indicates, that the company
wishes to place additional emphasis on integrating environmental issues into product and
process design. A corporate-wide educational training program on DFE and life cycle
design is essential to institutionalizing such a program.
Design Requirements
The project team did not use assistance from corporate HS&E or the University of
Michigan research group in developing the matrices. After one introductory presentation
on life cycle design, the project team relied exclusively on the Life Cycle Design
Guidance Manual for instructions on using the matrices. The project team concluded that
matrices are useful for specifying requirements, but identifying material and energy inputs
and outputs during the baseline phase was very time consuming.
The interaction between members of the cross-functional team may have been better
facilitated if the participants had identified and discussed the full set of requirements for
one life cycle stage at a time rather than complete all environmental requirements for the
entire product system before addressing another entire class of requirements.
The team indicated that the matrices would be particularly useful for guiding a major
design change because of the amount and complexity of issues that need to be analyzed.
Interviews with team members indicated that a major benefit of applying the multicriteria
approach was that it enabled each member of the team to understand the full set of
requirements affecting the filter product life cycle.
The matrix approach also served to close communication gaps between design and
manufacturing. One member of the project team recommended involving AlliedSignal's
suppliers and customers (auto manufacturers and service industry) in the process of
specifying requirements. This involvement could potentially strengthen the relationship
between stakeholders in the product life cycle.
Although use of the requirements matrices was initially cumbersome and time
intensive, this process will be simplified in the future. Problems encountered here were
due in part to the level of detail used by the AlliedSignal team. Focusing on major issues
can greatly streamline this process, but project teams should be aware that important
criteria may be overlooked if requirements development is oversimplified. In the end, the
ASFSP team identified a small number of critical requirements to guide their decision
making.
After the initial set of requirements has been established, they can be modified easily
during the next development cycle. Entering these requirements into a computerized
database could greatly facilitate both their modification and accessibility.
The project team indicated that it was difficult in the beginning to understand the
organization of the matrices, particularly the distinction between product and process
components. Part of the confusion was due to the association of the term "process" with
manufacturing alone and not the use and end-of-life management stages of a product.
Only qualitative requirements were specified for this demonstration project. In the future,
113
-------
SIX: ALLIED SIGNAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
quantitative constraints for guiding environmental improvement could better serve the
design team in comparing alternative design solutions.
The project team recognized that the requirements matrices could also be useful for
strategic planning purposes. By organizing the matrix requirements along a time
dimension, design objectives can be differentiated according to present, short-range, and
long-range issues (or' other business plan horizons). This type of organization can
facilitate effective strategic planning of product improvements.
Design Evaluation
Members of the project team indicated that legal requirements were primary factor
driving the design. If used oil filters were classified as a hazardous waste, the cartridge
filter design would become more attractive due to increased cost for hazardous waste
disposal.
Economics is also a critical factor in evaluating design alternatives. The cartridge
filter design is currently being implemented on many heavy-duty vehicles. For large truck
fleets there is no clear economic incentive, because total user costs are slightly higher for
cartridge filters. In addition, production of a cartridge filter may not be the most
profitable strategy for a manufacturer. Economic analysis is complicated because costs
and benefits accrue to multiple stakeholders (e.g., OEMs, suppliers, customers,
automotive service industry).
The project team was confident that the quick disconnect is an environmental
improvement over the spin-on design because it allows easier recovery of used oil and
results in less metal waste. Even though the spin-on filter housings may be recycled, the
environmental impacts associated with collection, processing, and transportation can be
significant. A rigorous comparative life cycle assessment of the two designs, however,
was not performed.
Clearly, the spin-on filter itself represents an investment of more steel and rubber
gasket material compared to the cartridge filter. Although the cartridge filter is a more
material-intensive design initially, over the life of the filter fewer resources are used.
With a vehicle and cartridge housing life of 500,000 miles and a filter change every
20,000 miles (as shown in Table 6-8), one cartridge filter housing would be required
compared to 25 housings for the spin-on design over vehicle life. The cartridge filter may
require replacement of gaskets, but the housing would not need replacement.
One tradeoff to be considered in terms of material intensiveness is the overall effect of
the differential weight of the two systems. The increased weight of the cartridge design
results in a decrease in fuel economy and an increase in associated vehicle emissions,
although this differential for heavy-duty vehicles is slight (1-2 pounds). The project team
is very sensitive to weight specifications, but the significance of this factor was not
discussed. A similar weight differential would be more important for passenger cars.
Even so, ASFSP is confident that the weight of cartridge or cleanable filters can be
reduced if the OEMs cooperate in redesigning the filter interface.
114
-------
Major Findings and Conclusions
As previously mentioned, since the completion of this study of spin-on and cartridge
oil filters, ASFSP has focused on designing a cleanable filter. This design may have lower
total costs to users compared to either the cartridge or spin-on alternative, and thus be a
more attractive product. Although no analysis of environmental burden has been done on
this alternative, it seems to be a clear improvement over current filters.
115
-------
LITERATURE CITED IN SECTIONS 1-6
1. Keoleian, Gregory A., and Dan Menerey. Life
Cycle Design Manual: Environmental
Requirements and the Product System. US
EPA, Office of Research and
Development, Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH,
EPA/600/R-92/226, 1993.
2. 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, 1990.
3. United Nations World Commission on
Environment and Development. Our
Common Future. Oxford University
Press, New York, 1987.
4. Holdren, John P. Energy in transition.
Scientific American 263 (3): 157-163
(1990).
5. Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to
Save Our Planet, ed. Daniel
Sitarz.Boulder, CO: Earthpress, 1993.
6. Environmental Equity: Reducing Risk for all
Communities, Volume 1. US
Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, EPA230-R-92-008,
1992.
7. Environmental Equity: Reducing Risk for all
Communities, Volume 2. US
Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, EPA230-R-92-008A,
1992.
8. Rodricks, Joseph V., and Michael R. Taylor.
Comparison of risk management in US
regulatory agencies. Journal of
Hazardous Materials 21: 239-253
(1989).
9. World Energy Council. Energy for
Tomorrow's World: The Realities, the
Real Options, and the Agenda for
Achievement. New York: St. Martin's,
1993.
10. Environmental Indicators: A Preliminary
Set. Paris: Organisation for Economic
Co-Operation and Development, 1991.
11. Marguglio, B. W. Environmental
Management Systems. New York: Marcel
Dekker, 1991.
12. Rothery, Brian. Implementing the
Environment Management Standard and
the EC Eco-Management Scheme.
Brookfield, VT: Gower, 1993.
13. Newman, John C., and Kay M. Breeden.
Managing in the environmental era:
Lessons from environmental leaders.
Columbia Journal of World Business 27
(3&4): 210-221 (1992).
14. Schmidheiny, Stephan. Changing Course: A
Global Business Perspective on
Development and the Environment.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992.
15. Prahalad, C. K., and G. Hamel. The core
competence of the corporation. Harvard
Business Review 68 (3): 79-91 (1990).
16. Abt Associates. Status Report on the Use of
Environmental Labels Worldwide. US
Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, Washington, DC, EPA 742-R-9-
93-001, 1993.
17. Deming, W Edwards. Quality, Productivity
and Competitive Position. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Center for Advanced
Engineering Study, 1982.
18. —. Transformation of western style of
management. Interfaces 15 (3): 6-11
(1985).
19. Juran, J. M. The quality trilogy. A universal
approach to managing for quality.
Quality Progress 19 (8): 19-24 (1986).
20. Mizuno, Shigeru, and Yoji Akao. Quality
Function Deployment: Approach for
Total Quality. Tokyo: JUSE, 1978.
21. Imai, Masaaki. Kaizen, the Key to Japan's
Competitive Success. New York:
Random House, 1986.
22. Ishikawa, Kaoru. What is Total Quality
Control? The Japanese Way. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1985.
23. International Symposium on Electronics
and the Environment, San Francisco, 2
May. Piscataway, NJ: Institute of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers,
1994.
116
-------
24. US Congress Office of Technology
Assessment. Background Document on
Clean Products Research and
Implementation. US Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC, EP
1.23/2:600/2-90/048,1990.
25. Klafter, Brenda, Pollution prevention
benchmarking: AT&T and Intel work
together with the best. Total Quality
Environmental Management 2 (1): 27-34
(1992).
26. Williams, Marcia E. Why- and how- to
benchmark for environmental
excellence. Total Quality Environmental
Management 2 (2): 177-185 (1992).
27. Resource and Environmental Profile .
Analysis of Polyethylene and.
Unbleached Paper Grocery Sacks,
Franklin Associates, Prairie Village,
Kansas, 1990.
28. Resource and Environmental Profile
Analysis of Hard Surface Cleaners and
Mix- Your-Own Cleaning Systems.
Franklin Associates, Prairie Village, KS,
1993.
29. Gause, Donald G., and Gerald M. Weinberg.
Requirements: Quality Before Design.
New York: Dorset House, 1989.
30. Hollins, Bill, and Stuart Pugh. Successful .
Product Design: What to Do and When.
Boston: Butterworths, 1989.
3 i. Fabrycky, Wolter J. Designing for the life
cycle. Mechanical Engineering 109(1):
72-74(1987).
32. Kreuzberg, Georg, and Hans, Sas. Shared
responsibility for life-cycle
management. Extended Producer
Responsibility as a Strategy to Promote
Cleaner Products, 22-26. Trolleholm
Castle, Sweden, 4 May. Lund, Sweden:
Dept. of Industrial Environmental
Economics, Lund University, 1992.
33. Pizzocaro, Silvia. Learning from undoing:
An industrial strategy. Extended
Producer Responsibility as a Strategy to
Promote Cleaner Products, Trolleholm
Castle, Sweden, 4 May. Lund, Sweden:
Dept. of Industrial Environmental
Economics, Lund University, 1992.
34. A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle
Assessment - SETAC Workshop,
Smugglers Notch, VT, 18 August 1990.
Washington, DC: Society of
Environmental lexicologists and
Chemists Foundation for Environmental
Education, 1991.
35. Heijungs, R., J. B. Guinee, G. Huppes, R.
M. Lankreijer, H. A. Udo de Haes, A.
Wegener Sleeswijk, A. M. M. Ansems, P.
G, Eggels, R. van Duin, and H. P. de
Goede. Environmental Life Cycle
Assessment of Products - Guide. Center
of Environmental Science, Leiden,
Netherlands, 1992.
36. —. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of
Products - Backgrounds. Center of
Environmental Science, Leiden,
Netherlands, 1992.
37. Vigon, B. W, D. A. Tolle, B. W. Cornary,
H. C. Latham, C. L. Harrison, T. L.
Bouguski, R. G. Hunt, and J. D. Sellers.
Life Cycle Assessment: Inventory
Guidelines and Principles. US
1 Environmental Protection Agency, Risk
Reduction Engineering Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH, EPA/600/R-92/245,
1993.
38. Workshop on Guidelines for Life-Cycle
Assessment: A Code of Practice,
Sesimbra, Portugal, 3 IMarch.
Pensacola, FL: Society of
Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry, 1993.
39. Guinee, J. B., H. A. Udo de Haes, and G.
Huppes. Quantitative life cycle
assessment of products 1: Goal
definition and inventory. Journal of
Cleaner Production 1 (1): 3-13 (1993).
40. Weitz, Keith A., and John L. Warren. Life
Cycle Impact Assessment: Framework
Issues, Draft. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air
Quality, Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC, 1993.
41. Keoleian, Gregory A. The application of
life cycle assessment to design. Journal
of Cleaner Production 1 (3-4): 143-149
(1994).
117
-------
42. Sullivan, Michael S., and John R.
Ehrenfeld. Reducing life-cycle
environmental impacts: An industry
survey of emerging tools and programs.
Total Quality Environmental
Management 2 (2): 143-157 (1992).
43. White, Allen L., and Karen Shapiro. Life
cycle assessment: A second opinion.
Environmental Science & Technology 27
( 6): 1016-1017 (1993).
44. Svensson, G6ran. Experience from the
inventory phase of LCA studies. First
NOH European Conference: Design for
the Environment, 1.1.1, 1-8. Nunspeet,
Netherlands, 21 September. 1992.
45. Curran, Mary Ann. Broad-based
environmental life cycle assessment.
Environmental Science and Technology
27 (3): 430-436 (1993).
46. Climater Change. The IPCC Scientific
Assessment, eds. J. T. Houghton, G. J.
Jenkins, and J. J. Eprhaums.Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press,
1990.
47. Assessment Chairs for the Parties to the
Montreal Protocol. Synthesis of the
Reports of the Ozone Scientific,
Environmental Effects, and Technology
and Economic Assessment Panels.
UNEP, New York, 1991.
48. Kuta, C. C. Role of LCA in industry and
case studies. LCA Technical Workshop,
Tokyo, 21 May. 1993.
49. The Product Ecology Report:
Environmentally-Sound Product
Development Based on the EPS System.
Federation of Swedish Industries,
Stockholm, Sweden, 1993.
50. The LCA Sourcebook. SustainAbility,
Society for the Promotion of LCA
Development (SPOLD), and Business in
the Environment, London, 1993.
51. Navin-Chandra, D. Design for
environmentability. ASME Design
Theory and Methodology Conference,
Miami, FL, 1991. Pittsburgh, PA: School
of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
University, 1991.
52. Watanabe, Seiichi. Resource Productivity as
a New Measure for Industrial
Performance. Sony, 1993.
53. Allenby, Braden R. Design for
environment: A tool whose time has
come. SSA Journal (September): 6-9
(1991).
54. Allenby, Braden R., and Ann Fullerton.
Design for environment - A new strategy
for environmental management.
Pollution Prevention Review 2 (1): 51-
61 (1991).
55. Navin-Chandra, D. The recovery problem in
product design. Journal of Engineering
Design 5 (1): 67-87 (1994).
56. Workshop on Accounting and Capital
Budgeting for Environmental Costs,
Dallas, TX, 5 December. 1993.
57. Kaplan, Robert S. Management accounting
for advanced technological
environments. Science 245: 819-823
(1989).
58. Cooper, Robin, and Robert S. Kaplan.
Measure costs right: Make the right
decision. Harvard Business Review 66
(5): 96-103 (1988).
59. Popoff, Frank P., and David T. Buzzelli.
Full-cost accounting. Environmental
Science and Technology 27 (1): 8-10
(1993).
60. Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual. US
Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Policy, Planning, and
Evaluation & Office of Solid Waste,
Washington, DC, 1989.
61. White, Allen L., Monica Becker, and James
Goldstein. Total Cost Assessment:
Accelerating Industrial Pollution
Prevention Through Innovative Project
Financial Analysis. US EPA, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Washington, DC, 1992.
62. Lund, Robert T. Life-cycle costing: A
business and societal instrument.
Management Review 67 (4): 17-23
(1978).
63. Sandia. Life Cycle Cost Assessment-
Integrating Cost Information into LCA,
Project Summary. Sandia National
Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1993.
64. Watson, R. G., E. M. Theis, and R. J.
Janick. Mechanical equipment design
for simplicity. AT&T Technical Journal
69: 14-27 (1990).
118
-------
65. Boothroyd, G., and P. Dewhurst. Design for
Assembly: A Designer's Handbook.
Boothroyd Dewhurst, 1983.
66. Glantschnig, Werner J., and Louis DAnjou.
Recycling telephone housings into wall
mounts for the MERLIN LEGEND and
PARTNER II communication systems.
International Symposium on Electronics
and the Environment, San Francisco, 2
May. Piscataway, NJ: Institute of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers,
1994. :
67. US EPA. Guidance for the use of the terms
"recycled" and, "recyclable" and the
recycling emblem in environmental
marketing claims. Federal Register 56
(191): 49992-50000 (1991).
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES
CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Environmental Management Systems
Allenby, Braden R. Achieving sustainable
development through industrial ecology.
International Environmental Affairs 4 (1): 56-
68 (1992).
—. Supporting environmental quality: Developing
an infrastructure for design. Total Quality
Environmental Management 2 (3): 303 - 308
(1993).
Deming, W. Edwards. Quality, Productivity and
Competitive Position. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Center for Advanced Engineering Study, 1982.
—. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center
for Advanced Engineering Study, 1986.
Environmental Behavior, North America: Canada,
Mexico, United States. The Roper
Organization, 1993.
Environmental Standards. Green Seal, Inc.,
Washington, DC, 1992.
Feigenbaum, A. V. Quality: Managing the modern
company. Quality Progress 18 (3): 18-21
(1985).
Green Cross Environmental Seal of Approval:
Draft Certification Criteria. Green Cross
Certification Company, Oakland, CA, 1991.
Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing
Claims. Federal Trade Commission,
Washington, DC, 1992.
Hauser, J., and Don Clausing. The house of
quality. Harvard Business Review 66 (3): 63-73
(1988).
Ishikawa, Kaoru. What is Total Quality Control?
The Japanese Way. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, 1985.
—. Guide to Quality Control. Tokyo: Asian
Productivity Organization, 1986.
Jelinski, L. W., T. E. Graedel, R. A. Laudise, D. W.
McCall, and C. K. N. Patel. Industrial ecology:
Concepts and approaches. Proceeings of the
National Academy of Sciences USA 89: 793-
797(1992).
Juran, J. M. Juran on Planning for Quality. New
York: McMillan, 1988.
Kaplan, Robert S. Measures for Manufacturing
Excellence. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Press, 1990.
Marguglio, B. W. Environmental Management
Systems. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1991.
Mizuno, Shigeru, and Yoji Akao. Quality Function
Deployment: Approach for Total Quality.
Tokyo: JUSE, 1978.
Prahalad, C. K., and G. Hamel. The core
competence of the corporation. Harvard
Business Review 68 (3): 79-91 (1990).
119
-------
Rothery, Brian. Implementing the Environment
Management Standard and the EC Eco-
Management Scheme. Brookfield, VT: Gower,
1993.
Schmidheiny, Stephan. Changing Course: A
Global Business Perspective on Development
and the Environment. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press, 1992.
Total Quality Management: A Framework for
Pollution Prevention. President's Commission
on Environmental Quality, Quality
Management Subcommittee, Washington, DC,
1993.
Assessing the Environmental Consumer Market.
US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Policy, Planning and Evaluation, Washington,
DC, 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 (1991).
Watanabe, Seiichi. Resource Productivity as a New
Measure for Industrial Performance. Sony,
1993.
Cost Accounting
Brown, Robert L, and Rudolph R. Yanuck.
Introduction to Life Cycle Costing. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1985.
Cooper, Robin, and Robert S. Kaplan. Measure
costs right: Make the right decision. Harvard
Business Review 66 (5): 96-103 (1988).
Dhillon, B. S. Life Cycle Costing: Techniques,
Models, and Applications. New York: Gordon
and Breach, 1989.
Lund, Robert T. Life-cycle costing: A business and
societal instrument. Management Review 67
(4): 17-23 (1978).
Popoff, Frank P., and David T. Buzzelli. Full-cost
accounting. Environmental Science and
Technology 27 (1): 8-10 (1993).
Sandia. Life Cycle Cost Assessment: Integrating
Cost Information into LCA, Project Summary.
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque,
NM, 1993.
Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Policy, Planning, and Evaluation & Office of
Solid Waste, Washington, DC, 1989.
White, Allen L., Monica Becker, and James
Goldstein. Total Cost Assessment: Accelerating
Industrial Pollution Prevention Through
Innovative Project Financial Analysis. US
EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, Washington, DC, 1992.
Wilkinson, John. Life cycle costing. Process
Engineering 61 (2): 42+ (1986).
Industry Standards
Book ofASTM Standards. Philadelphia, PA:
American Society for Testing and Materials.
Annual publication.
Catalog of American National Standards. New
York: American National Standards Institute.
Annual publication.
Industry Standards and Engineering Data.
Englewood, CO: Information Handling
Services. Updated bimonthly.
International and Non-US National Standards.
Englewood, CO: Information Handling
Services. Updated bimonthly.
120
-------
LIFE CYCLE DESIGN AND DESIGN FOR ENVIRONMENT
Alting, L. Cleaner technology - An integrated
environmental philosophy. CIRP Annals 39 (2):
589-591(1990). •
—. Life cycle design. Concurrent Engineering 1
(6): 19-27 (1991).
—. Life cycle design of products: A new
challenge/opportunity for manufacturing
enterprises. First International Congress on
Environmentally Conscious Engineering
Design, Boston, MA, 4 May. 1992.
Asimow, Morris. Introduction to Design.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1962.
Boothroyd, G., and L. Alting. Design for assembly
and disassembly. CIRP Annals 41 (2): 625-636
(1992).
Brezet, H., and J. Krozer. Manual for
Environmentally Oriented Product
Development. SOU, Gravenhagen, Netherlands,
1994.
Burall, Paul. Green Design. London: The Design
Council, 1991.
Conn, W. David. Product design and municipal
solid waste. Journal of Resource Management
and Technology 16 (2): 100-103 (1988).
Design for the Environment (DFE) 1st Draft.
Canadian Standards Association, Toronto,
Ontario, 1994.
The Product Ecology Report: Environmentally-
Sound Product Development Based on the EPS
System. Federation of Swedish Industries,
Stockholm, Sweden, 1993.
Frosch, Robert A., and Nicholas E. Gallopoulos.
Strategies for manufacturing. Scientific
American26l (3): 144-152 (1989).
GeiBler, S., Ch Harant, G. Hrauda, Ch Jasch, and
S. Millonig. ECODESIGN-Fibel fur Anwender.
Institut Fur Okologische Wirtschaftsforschung,
Wien, 1993.
Glantschnig, Werner J., and Janine C. Sekutowski.
Design for Environment: Philosophy, program,
and issues. Green Engineering, ed. D. Navin-
Chandra, Academic Press, 1994.
Glantschnig, W. J. Green design: A review of
issues and challenges. International
. Symposium on Electronics and the
Environment, Arlington, VA. Piscataway,
NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineers, 1993.
Keoleian, Gregory A., and Dan Menerey. Life
Cycle Design Guidance Manual:
Environmental Requirements and the Product
System.. US EPA, Office of Research and
Development, Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH EPA/600/R-92/226,
1993.
—. Sustainable development by design: Review of
life cycle design and related approaches.
Journal of the Air and Waste Management
Association 44 (5): 645-668 (1994).
Keoleian, Gregory A. The application of life cycle
assessment to design. Journal of Cleaner
Production 1 (3-4): 143-149 (1994).
MacKenzie, Dorothy. Green Design: Design for
the Environment. China: Laurence King, 1991.
McHarg, Ian L,. Design with Nature. New York:
John Wiley, 1992.
Navin-Chandra, D. Design for environmentability.
ASME Design Theory and Methodology
Conference, Miami, FL, 1991. Pittsburgh, PA:
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
University, 1991.
—. ReStar: A design tool for environmental
recovery analysis. International Conference on
Engineering Design, The Hague, Netherlands,
17 August. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon
University, 1993.
—. The recovery* problem in product design.
Journal of Engineering Design 5 (1): 67T87
(1994).
Oakely, Brian T. Total quality product design:
How to integrate environmental criteria into
product realization. Total Quality
Environmental Management 2 (3): 309-321
(1993).
121
-------
Overby, Charles. Design for the entire life cycle: A
new paradigm? ASEE Conference Proceedings,
552-563. Washington, DC, Pittsburgh, PA:
American Society for Engineering Education,
1990.
Sauer, Beverly J., Robert G. Hunt, and Marjorie A.
Franklin. Background Document on Clean
Products Research and Implementation. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Risk
Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati,
OH EPA/600/2-90/048, 1990.
Stahel, Walter R. Design as an environmental
strategy. IDSA Design as Strategy Conference,
Santa Barbara, CA, 8 August. Geneva,
Switzerland: The Product-Life Institute, 1990.
te Riele, R., A. Zweers, et. al. Eco-Design: Eight
Cases. TNO Product Centre, Delft,
Netherlands, 1994.
Tipnis, V. A. Evolving issues in product life cycle
design. CIRP Annals 42 (1): 169-73 (1993).
US Congress Office of Technology Assessment.
Background Document on Clean Products
Research and Implementation. US Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC, EP 1.23/
2:600/2-90/048, 1990.
—. Green Products by Design: Choices for a
Cleaner Environment. US Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC, 1992.
Design for the Environment. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC EPA
744F-93-002, 1993.
van Weenen, J.C., C. A. Bakker, and I. V. de
Keijser. Eco-design, an exploration of the
environment in product design. Expert
Workshop on Eco-Design of Products, 28
February 1991. Delft, Netherlands; Netherlands
Ministry of Economic Affairs, 1992.
van Weenen, J. C., and J. Eckels. Design and waste
prevention. The Environmental Professional
11:231-235(1989).
van Weenen, J.C., and M. C. C. Lafleur.
Environmentally responsible development of
electronic products. EUREKA-ECODESIGN
Workshop on Electronic Products, Stuttgart,
Deutschland, 29 March. Amsterdam,
Netherlands: Milieukunde, Universiteit van
Amsterdam, 1993.
Wenzel, Henrik. Procedure for life cycle design of
products/method for life cycle evaluation of
products. Proceedings of First NOH European
Conference: Design for the Environment, 1.3.2,
1-5. Nunspeet, Netherlands, 21 September.
1992.
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT
Boustead, Ian, and G. G. Hancock. Handbook of
Industrial Energy Analysis. New York: Wiley,
1979.
Canadian Standards Association. Environmental
Life Cycle Assessment - Part 1: Draft Life
Cycle Review Guideline. Small & Nedium
Business Edition, 1992.
Guine"e, J. B., H. A. Udo de Haes, and G. Huppes.
Quantitative life cycle assessment of products
1: Goal definition and inventory. Journal of
Cleaner Production 1 (1): 3-13 (1993).
Guine"e, J. B., R. Heijungs, H. A. Udo de Haes, and
G. Huppes. Quantitative life cycle assessment
of products 2: Classification, valuation and
improvement analysis. Journal of Cleaner
Production 1 (2): 81-91 (1993).
Heijungs, R., J. B. Guine"e, G. Huppes, R. M.
Lankreijer, H. A. Udo de Haes, A. Wegener
Sleeswijk, A. M. M. Ansems, P. G. Eggels, R.
van Duin, and H. P. de Goede. Environmental
Life Cycle Assessment of Products - Guide.
Center of Environmental Science, Leiden,
Netherlands, 1992.
—. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of «
Products - Backgrounds. Center of
Environmental Science, Leiden, Netherlands,
1992.
Hunt, Robert G., Jere D. Sellers, and William E.
Franklin. Resource and environmental profile
analysis: A life cycle environmental assessment
for products and procedures. Environmental
Impact Assessment Review Spring: (1992).
122
-------
Kuta, C. C. Role of LCA in industry and case
studies. LCA Technical Workshop, Tokyo, 21
May. 1993.
Pederson, Bo, and Kim Christiansen.
Methodological framework and process aspects
of LCA. UNEP Expert Seminar: Life cycle
Assessment and its Applications, Amsterdam,
Netherlands, 9 June. 1993.
A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle
Assessment - SETAC Workshop, Smugglers
Notch, VT, 18 August 1990. Washington, DC:
Society of Environmental Toxicologists and
Chemists Foundation for Environmental
Education, 1991.
Workshop on Guidelines for Life-Cycle
Assessment: A Code of Practice, Sesimbra,
Portugal, 31 March. Pensacola, FL: Society of
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry,
1993.
Sullivan,.Michael S., and John R. Ehrenfeld.
Reducing life-cycle environmental impacts:
An industry survey of emerging tools and
programs. Total Quality Environmental
Management 2 (2): 143-157 (1992).
The LCA Sourcebook, SustainAbility, Society for
the Promotion of LCA Development (SPOLD),
and Business in the Environment, London,
1993.
Vigon, B. W, D. A. Tolle, B. W. Cornary, H. C.
Latham, C. L. Harrison, T. L. Bouguski, R. G.
Hunt, and J. D. Sellers. Life Cycle Assessment-
Inventory Guidelines and Principles. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Risk
Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati,
OH EPA/600/R-92/245, 1993.
Ziist, R., and Wagner R. Approaches to
identification and quantification of
environmental effects during product life. CIRP
Annals 41 (1): 473-476 (1992).
123
-------
GLOSSARY
checklists A series of questions or criteria
formulated to help designers be systematic
and thorough when addressing design topics
such as environmental issues. Proprietary
checklists for DFE have been developed by
AT&T which are similar to the Design for
Manufacturability (DFM) checklists widely
used by designers.
cross-disciplinary team A design team
that includes representatives from all the
major participants in the product
development and implementation process
(e.g., product designers, process
engineering, marketing, legal, environmental
health and safety).
concurrent design Simultaneous design of
all components of the product system
including processes and distribution
networks. Concurrent design requires an
integrated team of specialists from various
areas.
Design for Environment DFE has been
defined as "a practice by which
environmental considerations are integrated
into product and process engineering design
procedures" Life cycle design (LCD) and
DFE are difficult to distinguish from each
other; they are usually considered different
names for the same approach. Yet, despite
their similar goals, the genesis of DFE is
quite different from that of LCD. DFE
evolved from the design for X (DFX)
approach, where X can represent
manufacturability, testability, reliability, or
other downstream design considerations.
design strategies Approaches that explore
and synthesize ways to translate design
requirements into products. Strategies act
as a lens for focusing knowledge and new
ideas on a feasible design solution.
downcycle To recycle for a less demanding
use. Degraded materials are downcycled.
embodied energy Energy contained in a
material that can be recovered for useful
purposes through combustion or other
means.
environmental equity Addresses the
distribution of resources and environmental
risks among generations and elements of
society. Issues of equity apply both within
and between nations.
environmental management system An
organization's plan and programs for
achieving environmental improvement and/
or ensuring regulatory compliance.
Environmental management systems include
environmental policies and goals,
performance measures, strategic plans,
environmental information management
systems, and training and education
programs. .
environmental accounting Accounting
practices used to measure environmental
burdens. Costs may accrue to manufacturers,
consumers, and/or society at large. Key
challenges relate to methods for estimating
and allocating environmental costs. Some
confusion surrounds the use of terms such as
full cost accounting, life cycle costing, and
total cost assessment.
124
-------
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 detergent 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 -
commonly recycled within an original
manufacturing process.
industrial ecology Study of the
interactions and relationships between
industrial systems and natural ecosystems
based on analysis of material and energy
flows and transformations. Industrial
ecology is founded on the assumption that
industrial systems should be patterned after
the highly integrated, efficient cycling of
natural ecosystems.
life cycle assessment (LCA) A
comprehensive method for evaluating the
full environmental consequences of a
product system. LCA consists of four
components: goal definition and scoping,
inventory analysis, impact assessment, and
improvement analysis.
life cycle costing In the environmental
field, this has come to mean all costs
associated with a product system throughout
its life cycle, from materials acquisition to
disposal. Where possible, social costs are
quantified; if this is fot possible, they are
addressed qualitatively. Traditionally
applied in military and engineering to mean
estimating costsfotn acquisition of a
system to disposal.
life cycle design (LCD) Life cycle design
seeks to minimize environmental burdens
associated with a product's life cycle. It
offers a framework for integrating
environmental requirements more effectively
into product system design and management.
Key principles are:
• Systems analysis of the product life
cycle from raw materials acquisition
through manufacturing, use, service, and
end-of-life management (reuse,
recycling, disposal). The product system
for design includes product, process, and
distributions components
• Multicriteria analysis for identifying and
evaluating environmental, performance,
cost, cultural, and legal requirements
• Multistakeholder participation and cross-
functional teamwork throughout design
life cycle impact assessment A
quantitative and/or qualitative process to
characterize and assess the effects of the
environmental burdens jdentified in the
inventory analysis.
life cycle improvement assessment A
process that identifies and evaluates
opportunities to reduce environmental
burdens based on the results from an
inventory analysis and impact assessment.
life cycle inventory analysis Identifies
and quantifies all inputs and outputs
associated with a product system. Items
inventoried include resource and energy
inputs, air emissions, waterborne effluents,
solid waste, products, coproducts, and
energy produced.
125
-------
life cycle management Life cycle
management includes all decisions and
actions taken by multiple stakeholders
which ultimately determine the
environmental profile and sustainability of
the product system.
needs analysis The process of defining
societal needs that will be fulfilled by a
proposed development project.
physical life cycle The material and
energy flows in a product life cycle. See
product life cycle.
pollution Any byproduct or unwanted
residual produced by human activity.
Residuals include all hazardous and
nonhazardous substances generated or
released to the air, water, or land.
pollution prevention Any practice that
reduces 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 producing a
good or providing a service.
postconsumer material In recycling,
material 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. [67]
product life cycle The life cycle of a
product system begins with the acquisition
of raw materials and includes bulk and
specialty processing, manufacture and
assembly, use and service, retirement, and
disposal of residuals produced in each stage.
product system Consists of product,
process, and distribution components. The
product includes all materials in the final
product and all forms of those materials in
each stage of the life cycle. Processes
transform materials and energy. Distribution
includes packaging and transportation
networks used to contain, protect, and
transport products and process materials.
Wholesaling and retailing are part of
distribution. Equipment and administrative
services related to managing, including
developing and conveying information,
occur throughout processing and
distribution and are included in these
components.
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
manufacture of new products other than
fuel."[67]
renewable Capable of being replenished
quickly enough to meet present or near-term
demand. Time and quantity are the critical
elements in measures of rehewability.
126
-------
requirements The functions, attributes,
and constraints used to define and bound the
solution space for design. General
categories of requirements include
environmental, performance, cost, cultural,
and legal. Requirements can be classified
as follows:
Must requirements Conditions that designs
have to meet. Arrived at by ranking all
proposed functions and choosing only the
most important.
Want 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 con-
flict 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
recovery options are decided in this stage.
Products 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 development Seeks to meet the
needs of the present generation without
compromising the ability of future
generations to fulfill their needs. Principles
include: sustainable resource use (minimize
the depletion of non-renewable resources and
use sustainable practices for managing
renewable resources), pollution prevention,
maintenance of ecosystem structure and
function, and environment equity.
system boundaries Define the extent of
systems or activities. Boundaries delineate
areas for design or analysis.
total cost assessment A comprehensive
method of analyzing costs and benefits of a
pollution prevention or design project. TCA
includes:
• 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
• use of standard procedures such as net
present value and internal rate of return
to measure profitability
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.
*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1995-650-006/22055
127
-------
------- |