Life cycle management of energy-consuming products in companies using IO-LCA
Background, aim, and scope
Today, the effective integration of life cycle thinking into existing business routines is argued to be the most critical step for more sustainable business models. The study tests the suitability of an input–output life cycle assessment (IO-LCA) approach in screening life cycle impacts of energy-using products in companies. It estimates the life cycle impacts of three products and assesses the suitability of such approach in a company environment.
Materials and methods
The multiple case studies evaluate the suitability of an IO-LCA method in a company environment. A comprehensive life cycle cost and impact study of three product systems (building ventilation system, information and communication technology (ICT) network product, and welding machine) is conducted and the life cycle phases with highest economical and environmental contribution are determined. Scenario analysis is performed in order to assess the sensitivity of the results to major changes in the studied systems. Finally, the usability of the IO-LCA approach for environmental evaluations in companies is assessed by collecting data on workload and interviewing the participating workers and managers.
The results showed that the use phase with operating energy was environmentally important in all evaluated energy-using products. However, only in one case (ICT network product) the use was the single most significant life cycle phase. In two other cases, the sourcing was equally important. The results also indicated that the IO-LCA approach is much easier to adapt by current management of companies because it automatically links life cycle costs to environmental indicators and, by order of magnitude, reduces the workload in companies.
It appears that the IO-LCA approach can be used to screen environmentally significant life cycle phases of energy-using products in companies by utilizing readily available accounting or other documented data. The IO-LCA approach produced comparable results with the ones published in traditional process-based LCA literature. In addition to the main results, some practical benefits of using the IO-LCA could also be suggested: the approach was very fast to use and would thus allow an easier adoption of environmental evaluations in companies as well as wider environmental testing of products in early conceptual design phase.
The results indicated that the IO-LCA approach could clearly offer added value to the environmental management of companies. The IO-LCA was found to provide a very fast access to the key life cycle characteristics of products. Similarly, it offered practical means to integrate life cycle thinking into existing business routines and to activate the decision makers in companies by giving them easily comprehendible results.
Recommendations and perspectives
The results would suggest that similar environmental IO tables, besides the US ones used here, would have value and should be collected for other major geographical and economical regions. The tables would enable a much larger share of companies to manage their environmental issues. It also seems that, because the user profile is so dominant in the case of energy-using products, more studies, both theoretical (How to valuate the future behavior in environmental studies?) and empirical (What really creates value for users?), should focus on the behavior of users.
KeywordsCompanies Energy-consuming products ICT network Input–output LCA IO-LCA LCC Life cycle costing Life cycle management Ventilation system Welding equipment
- Consoli F, Allen D, Boustead I, Fava J, Franklin W, Jensen A, de Oude N, Parrish R, Perriman R, Postlethwaite D, Quay B, Seguin J, Vigon B (1993) Guidelines for life-cycle assessment: a ‘code of practice’, 1st edn. SETAC, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
- Emmenegger M, Frischknecht R, Stutz M, Guggisberg M, Witschi R, Otto T (2006) Life cycle assessment of the mobile communication system UMTS. Int J LCA 11(4):265–276Google Scholar
- EuP (2005) Directive 2005/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-using productsGoogle Scholar
- Håkansson H, Gadde L-E (1994) The changing role of purchasing: reconsidering three strategic issues. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 1(1):109–117Google Scholar
- Hendrickson C, Lave L, Matthews S (2006) Environmental life cycle assessment of goods and services: an input–output approach. RFF, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Hunkeler D, Rebitzer G (2005) The future of life cycle assessment. Int J LCA 10(5):305–308Google Scholar
- IPP (2003) Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, COM (2003), 302 final, http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ipp/ippcommunication.htm, accessed 1.8.2004
- Junnila S (2003) Workload of commercial LCAs. Contracts of 9 commercial LCAs. Pöyry Consulting and Engineering, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
- Junnila S (2007) Environmentally significant processes of consulting, banking and facility management companies in Finland and the U.S. Int J LCA 12(2):18–27Google Scholar
- Kommonen F, Svan T (2002) The environmental aspects of Ambiotica. Senate Properties. Helsinki, Finland, Interviewed January 2002Google Scholar
- LIHAS project (2006) 3rd steering group meeting, August 18, Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
- LIHAS project (2007) 4th steering group meeting, March 2, Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
- Malmodin J (2004) Summary of the study ‘Life cycle assessment of a third generation (3G) system at Ericsson’. Ericsson, StockholmGoogle Scholar
- MEEup Methodology report, final (28.11.2005), Methodology study eco-design of energy-using products. VHK for European Commission. Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
- Saari A, Mäkelä J (2000) Eco-economic valuation of building components. Helsinki University of Technology, Construction Economics and Management, Publication 192. Espoo, FinlandGoogle Scholar
- SimaPro 7 (2006) USA input output data base 98. PRé Consultants. Amersfoort, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- SimaPro 7 (2006a) Ecoinvent data base. PRé Consultants. Amersfoort, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- SimaPro 7 (2006b) Dutch input output data base 95. PRé Consultants. Amersfoort, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- SimaPro 7 (2006c) DK input output data base 99. PRé Consultants. Amersfoort, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- Tucker A, Huppes G, van Oers L, Heijungs R (2006) Environmentally extended input–output tables and models for Europe. EUR 22194 EN. Joint Research Center (DG JRC), Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, European Commission, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
- UNEP (2004) Why take a life cycle approach? Life cycle initiative. United Nations Environment Programme, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, Production and Consumption Branch, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
- Valkama J (2002) The LCA of a TIG welding equipment (in Finnish). Department of Electronics, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, FinlandGoogle Scholar
- Wong M (2004) Implementation of innovative product service systems in the consumer goods industry. Dissertation. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar