Improving Life Cycle Assessment by Considering Worker Health and Comparing Alternatives Based on Relative Efficiency

Conference paper

Abstract

Designing automobiles to support sustainability requires assessment of life cycle economic, environmental, and social impacts. Environmental and economic performance is increasingly evaluated with life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis. Analytical methods are needed to assess the associated life cycle social impacts. Additional sustainability criteria will make it more difficult to compare alternatives and select the “best” option. To enhance the evaluation of social impacts, a method for considering life cycle worker health impacts is proposed. To reduce reliance on subjective weighting, an approach using data envelopment analysis is proposed for comparing alternatives across multiple sustainability criteria. Conceptual approaches for both are presented as part of a case study focused on lightweighting vehicles through material selection.

Keywords

Life Cycle Assessment Life Cycle Inventory Life Cycle Impact Assessment Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Cumulative Energy Demand 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bare, J.C., Gloria, T.P.: Critical Analysis of the Mathematical Relationships and Comprehensiveness of Life Cycle Impact Assessment Approaches. Environmental Science & Technology 40(4), 1104–1113 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E.: Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units. European Journal of Operational Research 2(6), 429–444 (1978)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Kim, H.J., McMillan, C., Keoleian, G.A., Skerlos, S.J.: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Payback for Lightweighted Vehicles Using Aluminum and High-Strength Steel. Journal of Industrial Ecology 14(6), 929–946 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Lewis, H., Sexton, T.: Network DEA: efficiency analysis of organizations with complex internal structure. Computers & Operations Research 31(9), 1365–1410 (2004)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lloyd, S.M., Lave, L.B.: Life Cycle Economic and Environmental Implications of Using Nanocomposites in Automobiles. Environmental Science & Technology 37(15), 3458–3466 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Luhmann, N.: Ökologische Kommunikation, 3rd edn. Auflage, Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen/Wiesbaden (1990)Google Scholar
  7. Pfeffer, J.: Building Sustainable Organizations: The Human Factor. Academy of Management Perspectives 24(1), 34–45 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sexton, T.R., Lewis, H.F.: Two-stage DEA: an application to major league baseball. Journal of Productivity Analysis 19(2/3), 227–249 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Concurrent Technologies CorporationJohnstownUSA

Personalised recommendations