Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Applying multi-objective planning in low-carbon product design

  • 306 Accesses

  • 24 Citations

Abstract

In low-carbon product design, product environment, as well as economic and manufacturing capabilities, should be considered simultaneously. The purpose of this paper is to improve the product carbon footprint calculation efficiency. This study not only considers cost, supplier manufacturing capacity, and transport modes of product components from the viewpoint of low-carbon product design, but it also provides information on product GHG values, design phase cost, as well as the product decisions made by enterprises. In this way, enterprise objectives about carbon footprints and product cost can be met. Based on the product life cycle and product category specifications, this study, following the actual industry process flow, collects and calculates data on GHG emissions of components within the product life cycle, cost and supplier production capacity. The aim is to determine the operational parameters and constraint equations. Multi-objective planning is used to establish a low carbon optimal evaluation model. By reviewing carbon emissions in each phase, the study further determines whether or not to modify product structure and consumption in order to improve the efficiency of product carbon footprint calculation, reduce R&D cost, and help enterprises design low-carbon products. Finally, the findings are used for a case analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.

    IPCC, “Mitigation of Climate Change Report,” 2007.

  2. 2.

    ISO 14064-1, “Greenhouse gases e Part 1: Specification with Guidance at the Organization Level for Quantification and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Removals,”2006.

  3. 3.

    BSI, “PAS 2050 Specification for the Assessment of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Goods and Services,” 2008.

  4. 4.

    ISO/TS 14067, “Greenhouse Gases — Carbon Footprint of Products — Requirements and Guidelines for Quantification and Communication,” 2013.

  5. 5.

    Verdantix Ltd, “HP Achieves Leadership on Carbon Reductions Outpaces Tech and Telecoms Competitors on Sustainability,” http://www.hp.com/canada/corporate/hp_info/environment/commitment/verdantixstudy.pdf (Accessed 24 DEC 2013)

  6. 6.

    Stutz, M., “Carbon Footprint of a Typical Business Laptop,” Dell, 2010.

  7. 7.

    AU Optronics Corp., “Auo’s Green Story,” http://www.acmepoint.eu/medien/files/AUO/AUOs%20GreenStory_en.pdf (Accessed 24 DEC 2013)

  8. 8.

    Asus, “U6V Bamboo,” 2009. http://www.asus.com/Notebooks_Ultrabooks/U6V_Bamboo/ (Accessed 20 JAN 2014)

  9. 9.

    Song, J. S. and Lee, K. M., “Development of a Low-Carbon Product Design System based on Embedded GHG Emissions,” Resource, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 54, No. 9, pp. 547–556, 2010.

  10. 10.

    WSP, “Product & Supply Chain Management Services,” https://www.wspgroup.com/Globaln/USA/Environmental/Sustainability/Documents/Product_Supply_Factsheet_Oct13.pdf (Accessed 20 JAN 2014)

  11. 11.

    Tang, D., Song, P., Zhong, F., and Li, C., “Research on Evaluation Index System of Low-carbon Manufacturing Industry,” Energy Procedia, Vol. 16, Part A, pp. 541–546, 2012.

  12. 12.

    Hekkert, M. P., Joosten, L. A. J., and Worrell, E., “Reduction of CO2 Emissions by Improved Management of Material and Product Use: the Case of Transport Packaging,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 1–27, 2000.

  13. 13.

    Xu, C. and Cang, D. Q., “A Brief Overview of Low CO2 Emission Technologies for Iron and Steel Making,” Journal of Iron and Steel Research, International, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 1–7, 2010.

  14. 14.

    Nieuwenhuis, P., Beresford, A., and Choi, A. K. Y., “Shipping or Local Production? CO2 Impact of a Strategic Decision: An Automotive Industry Case Study,” International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 140, No. 1, pp. 138–148, 2012.

  15. 15.

    Van Vliet, O. P. R., Kruithof, T., Turkenburg, W. C., and Faaij, A. P. C., “Techno-economic Comparison of Series Hybrid, Plug-in Hybrid, Fuel Cell and Regular Cars,” Journal of Power Sources, Vol. 195, No. 19, pp. 6570–6585, 2010.

  16. 16.

    Lin, D. Y. and Ng, K. H., “The Impact of Collaborative Backhaul Routing on Carbon Reduction in the Freight Industry,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 17, No. 8, pp. 626–628, 2012.

  17. 17.

    Elhedhli, S. and Merrick, R., “Green Supply Chain Network Design to Reduce Carbon Emissions,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 370–379, 2012.

  18. 18.

    Streimikiene, D. and Volochovic, A., “The Impact of Household Behavioral Changes on GHG Emission Reduction in Lithuania,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 15, No. 8, pp. 4118–4124, 2011.

  19. 19.

    Kuo, T. C., “Waste Electronics and Electrical Equipment Disassembly and Recycling using Petri Net Analysis: Considering the Economic Value and Environmental Impacts,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 65, No. 1, pp. 54–64, 2013.

  20. 20.

    Bocken, N. M. P., Allwood, J. M., Willey, A. R., and King, J. M. H., “Development of an Eco-Ideation Tool to Identify Stepwise Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Options for Consumer Goods,” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 19, No. 12, pp. 1279–1287, 2011.

  21. 21.

    Zhang, X. F., Zhang, S. Y., Hu, Z. Y., Yu, G., Pei, C. H., and Sa, R. N., “Identification of Connection Units with High GHG Emissions for Low-Carbon Product Structure Design,” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 27, pp. 118–125, 2012.

  22. 22.

    Su, J. P., Chu, C. H., and Wang, Y. T., “A Decision Support System to Estimate the Carbon Emission and Cost of Product Designs,” Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf., Vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 1037–1045, 2012.

  23. 23.

    Chu, C. H., Luh, Y. P., Li, T. C., and Chen, H., “Economical Green Product Design based on Simplified Computer-Aided Product Structure Variation,” Computers in Industry, Vol. 60, No. 7, pp. 485–500, 2009.

  24. 24.

    Fixson, S. K., “Product Architecture Assessment: a Tool to Link Product and Supply Chain Design Decisions,” Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 23, No. 3–4, pp. 345–369, 2005.

  25. 25.

    Delarue, E., Lamberts, H., and D’haeseleer, W., “Simulating Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Allowance Cost and GHG Emission Reduction in Western Europe,” Energy, Vol. 32, No. 8, pp. 1299–1309, 2007.

  26. 26.

    Hwang, C. L. and Masud, A. S. M., “Multiple Objective Decision Making, Methods and Applications: a State-of-the-Art Survey,” Springer-Verlag, pp. 2, 1979.

  27. 27.

    Benayoun, R., Tergny, J., and Keuneman, D., “Mathematical Programming with Multi-Objective Functions: a solution by POP (Progressive Orientation Procedure),” Revue Metra, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 279–299, 1070.

  28. 28.

    Kuo, T. and Chu, C. H., “Risk Management of Hazardous Substances in Selection of Green Suppliers,” Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf., Vol. 14, No. 6, pp. 1057–1063, 2013.

  29. 29.

    Lee, G. B., Ko, M. J., and Ku, T. J., “Analysis of Energy Efficiency in PCB Manufacturing Process,” Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf., Vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 1215–1220, 2012.

  30. 30.

    Linke, B., Huang, Y. C., and Dornfeld, D., “Establishing Greener Products and Manufacturing Processes,” Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf., Vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 1029–1036, 2012.

  31. 31.

    Park, Y. J. and Lee, G. B., “Application of Heuristic Approaches to Minimization of Energy Consumption in Inner Layer Scrubbing Process in PCB Manufacturing,” Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf., Vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 1059–1066, 2012.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Tsai Chi Kuo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kuo, T.C., Chen, H.M., Liu, C.Y. et al. Applying multi-objective planning in low-carbon product design. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. 15, 241–249 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-014-0331-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Lower carbon product design
  • Multi-objective planning
  • GHG emissions
  • Product design