Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    1/15

    1

    Contribution of Simplified LCA to Design for

    Sustainability Cases of Industrial Applica-

    tion

    Guillermo Canale,1 , Mara del Rosario Bernatene2 and Fabiana Flores 3

    (1) Industrial Design, Human Sciences and Art Dept.- Universidad Nacional de Lans - 29de Septiembre N 3901 (1826) Remedios de Escalada - Buenos Aires ARGENTINA

    (2) Industrial Design, Human Sciences and Art Dept.- Universidad Nacional de Lans - 29de Septiembre N 3901 (1826) Remedios de Escalada - Buenos Aires ARGENTINA

    (3) Center of Research and Development on Industrial Design - Instituto Nacional deTecnologa Industrial AV. Gral. Paz 5445 (B1650WAB) San Martin Buenos Aires -

    ARGENTINA +54 11 42931112

    Guillermo Canale

    [email protected]: http//:www.unla.edu.ar

    Abstract

    Purpose

    Design for Sustainability (D4S) resulted from a natural evolution of EcoDesign, Green Design or Design for the Environment, initiatives installed in other latitudes more than two decades ago,each one with common elements and differential aspects. The addition of environmental consider-ations onto Product and Service Design helped to deeply reformulate the projecting activities.

    Tools developed worldwide, especially those related to Product Life Cycle Analysis, show a sensi-ble delay in its implementation in Argentina. Also, on local Design activities, Sustainability wasmostly understood as recycling-related. Although this is a relevant strategy in EcoDesign, it actu-ally is only a part of it. By 2011, from an analysis and diagnostic on possible cause of such delay,a need was detected to go beyond a discursive approach, based on parameters of awareness.

    In order to transcend the limitations of approach it was necessary to opt for a pragmatic and cog-

    nitive framework, which implies to propose new productive practices, methods and standards aswell as new habits and interactions for developing formal learning related to cleaner technologiesand better ways of communicate and manage sustainability. (Lundvall B.-. , 2010) (Metcalfe, Theeconomic foundations of technology policy: equilibrium and evolutionary perspectives, 1995)

    Methods

    http://c/01%20Proyecto%20UNLa/http/:www.websitehttp://c/01%20Proyecto%20UNLa/http/:www.website
  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    2/15

    2

    Through a Research Project ( 1 )at the Industrial Design Dept. at Universidad Nacional de Lans,in cooperation with the Center of Research and Development on Industrial Design - Instituto Nacional de Tecnologa Industrial and the Department of Design Theory and Processes at Uni-versidad Autnoma Metropolitana (UAM) of Mexico it was organized the spreading of this ap-

    proach and tools since October 2011.The starting point is the comparative analysis of international methodology and its application toactual cases of industrial products in production, in order to measure their environmental impactand suggest improvements.

    We mainly started with European experiences2 and the D4S Guides from UNEP 3.

    On the aim of enlarge and put on focus the methods to Argentinian actual conditions, we foundthat all foreign experiences need to be adapted to local socio productive specificity.

    Initial experiences were made applying Eco It software4 in the IHOBE version and later we made some progress in using a fully blown LCA tool: SimaPro 7.3.3

    Results and Conclusions.

    This paper summarizes the approach taken and progress achieved in a journey that is just begin-

    ning. Three application cases are shown in synthetic way, related to companies based on SIPAB5 Alte. Brown Buenos Aires

    The work performed allowed to accomplish the original purpose of comparing different methodsin order to decide which perform better on each specific case. Decidedly Simplified LCA methods(Eco It) is of immediate application on metalworking and building industries, while textile prod-ucts require a specific approach the Higg Index aims to fill.

    Nevertheless, making restatements in Industrial Design a LCA (either simplified or fully blown) isnot enough, but it should be complemented at least with an Ecodesign Matrix and D4S StrategicWheel Analysis. Results obtained allow reformulating production and innovation policies.

    Keywords: Design for Sustainability, Simplified LCA, Practical industrial cases, Industrial Design, D4S

    1 Introduction

    Inclusion of environmental issues in Product and Service Design helped to deeply reformulate

    project activities.

    1 Project 33A107 - Environmental Impacts reduction on product and processes technology thoughthe use of EcoDesign Strategies - Science and Technique Secretariat, Universidad Nacional de Lans - Buenos Aires - Argentina - October 2011 2 Mainly the Bask method of 7 steps (IHOBE) and the Austrian method Pilot33 United Nations Environmental Program 4 By Pr Consultants, http://www.pre.nl 5 An Industrial Park South West Buenos Aires City SIPAB stands for Sistema Industrial Planifi-cado de Almirante Brown Buenos Aires - Argentina

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    3/15

    3

    This Project6 starts from the comparative analysis of international methodology and its application

    to specific industrial manufactured goods under production, in order to measure their environmen-

    tal impact and recommend improvement alternatives in their design.

    To that end we visited and surveyed products and processes of following establishments: A metalworking company at SIPAB7

    An Institute for Dry Construction of houses

    A textile company Northern Great Buenos Aires

    In each one we jointly selected a case for researching and then results on the application of select-

    ed tools (which include Simplified LCA) and environmental improvement suggestions were pre-

    sented back.

    2 Purpose

    2.1 General

    The objectives we set involve improving the environmental performance of products and

    processes through the application of methodological tools for sustainability.

    To articulate new practices with interdisciplinary approaches present in the INTI, in local

    companies and in UNLa Industrial Design career.

    To analyze the best way to communicate the benefits of these new practices, to promote

    its adoption and acceptance by the local productive sector.

    2.1 Specific goals

    Sort and classify tools according to their recipients, degree of applicability, complexity, cost and

    efficiency. For this we set the order of importance and recommended sequence in the applicationof methodologies (primary and secondary strategies) and proficiency in their use, time manage-

    ment and ways commensurate with the resources in each local industry.

    To meet this objective, we selected three cases where applying and comparing these tools:

    A Street advertising Frame by bus shelters, but independent of it.

    6 Project 33A107 - Environmental Impacts reduction on product and processes technology though the use ofEcoDesign Strategies - Science and Technique Secretariat, Universidad Nacional de Lans - Buenos Aires -Argentina - October 20117 Industrial Park South West Buenos Aires City SIPAB stands for Sistema Industrial Planificadode Almirante Brown Buenos Aires - Argentina

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    4/15

    4

    Analysis of a square meter of external supporting wall in two different construction methods(traditional and steel frame) used in homes, excluding the use phase.

    Two different types of sportive cotton shirts

    3 Methodology

    For each of abovementioned cases the most appropriate tools were analyzed to help in visualizing

    the aspects more influential in the Product environmental performance.

    We started mainly from European experiences, The 7 Steps method of Basque IHOBE (IHOBE

    Sociedad Pblica de Gestin Ambiental, 2000), some tips from Austrian Program PILOT

    (Wimmer, 2003), the EcoDesign Matrix (Tirschner, 2001) and UNEP D4S Guidelines (UNEP -

    T Delft, 2009).

    In the first case, on the Advertising frame close to Bus Shelters, we seek to develop with the pro-

    ducers the External and Internal Motivating Factors, showing why the organization might be inter-

    ested in implementing D4S Strategies. Then we defined the type of product we were dealing with

    following the Austrian Program PILOT. This was to define semi empirically in which phase of the

    Product Life Cycle appear the dominant impacts. Completing this definition an adaptation of

    Tirschners Ecodesign Matrix (Tirschner, 2001) was used, marking whit a color graduation (Red,

    Orange and Yellow) which impact in which phase is an area of concern (and hence focal points of

    eventual redesign).

    Methods presented so far are qualitative and greatly subjective, but we found they help in in-

    stalling Life-Cycle-Thinking .

    Finally, applying a Simplified LCA by the Eco It software let us fine tune environmental impacts

    in each case and even sketch comparisons a little bit more rigorous.

    As a result, we could support redesign proposals, marking on a Strategic Wheel, according to

    UNEP Step-by-Step Guide (UNEP - T Delft, 2009), those with more potential for improving the

    product environmental performance. On this tool in particular we found that the original use of the

    Wheel (Brezet & van Hemel, 1997) was intended for quantification as each beam on in had a scale

    of magnitude. Later versions were deprived of that use. As we ponder that this Elastic Matrix has a

    great power of visual synthesis, we coupled to it an original Qualification Guideline (Canale,

    2003), developed in the same approach of the Evaluations for the Malcolm Baldrige American

    National Quality Award (National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) , 2004). Com-

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    5/15

    5

    bined with a simple MS Excel program, the graphical comparison of alternatives is extraordinary

    straightforward.

    In the second case, relative to environmental performance evaluation of a bearing exterior wall of

    a house, both built in the traditional style (wet construction Brick and mortar) and Steel frame(Drywall), same tools as in the previous case were applied but we did not include the Strategic

    Wheel, since the intention was not to study eventual redesign. In this case we tried to establish

    which type of building technique shows bigger environmental impact in Production.

    In both cases (1 and 2) the graphics in Bar Diagram from Eco It improved the understanding of

    individual component impacts.

    The third case selected from Textile industry, we confirmed that, exception made of washing

    clothes, almost all impacts could be expected to occur on obtaining and processing fibers and fab-

    rics. In this particular context, teaching experience showed us a great difficulty on applying Eco It

    to apparel and footwear. It looks that the program is easier to use on electromechanical artifacts,

    tableware, furniture, and automobile parts than on Textiles. Examples published by IHOBE on

    Textile (IHOBE Sociedad Pblica de Gestin Ambiental, 2010) reinforce this perception.

    We decided to take advantage of the appearance of a methodology developed by The Sustainable

    Apparel Coalition in the Higg Index (The Apparel Coalition), a collective evolution of the onedeveloped by Nike globally. The Higg Index 1.0 is primarily an indicator based tool for apparel

    that enables companies to evaluate material types, products, facilities and processes based on a

    range of environmental and product design choices. The Index asks practice-based, qualitative

    questions to gauge environmental sustainability performance and drive behavior for improvement.

    It is based largely on the Eco Index and Nikes Apparel Environmental Design Tool 8.

    The tool consists mainly in an interactive set of Spreadsheets with embedded macros involving

    self-assessment for al actors in the supply value chain (except retail, to be added later).

    The core of this method is based on a Table of Environmental Impacts which conveys in a Materi-

    al Sustainability Index (MSI) which normalizes and scores 14 impacts condensed in 4 categories:

    Chemical Impact, Energy Intensity / GHG, Land and Water usage and Waste (Nike, 2012). Up to

    our knowledge, there are no case applications in our area so far.

    8 The Materials Sustainability Index (MSI) was originally developed by Nike. Nike MSI is the result of morethan eight years of materials research and analysis of a wide range of processed materials, including textilesand footwear component materials.

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    6/15

    6

    MSI is a cradle-to-gate index informed by life cycle assessment (LCA) derived inventory data to

    engage designers and the global supply chain of apparel and footwear products in environmental

    sustainability9. (The Apparel Coalition). Since in this early version results are exclusively numeri-

    cal, we added an elemental Bar Diagram to visualize results obtained against maximum scoresassigned to each factor.

    4 Results

    We summarize the results for each case analyzed:

    4.1 Advertising frame Urban Furniture

    The chosen product resultedintensive in the Use phase, because of the energy consumption of six

    fluorescent bulbs, 58W each. Main issues of interests are highlighted on the Ecodesign Matrix(Fig. 1). From the Life Cycle graphics below clearly derives that design efforts should concentrate

    in reducing this impact. See figures 2 to 4.

    4.2 Exterior wall of a house- Traditional style and Steel frame

    Though environmental impacts differ from one industry to another, it is recognized that buildings,

    since they are illuminated, heated / cooled during a number of years of useful life, are among the

    biggest generators of GHGs with up to 50% of global emissions of CO2 (Raynsford, 1999). From

    this is possible to derive that the subject of thermal insulation of walls, openings and sealing /

    infiltration patterns as well as the use of a home is decisive when making a comparative study.

    Since a lab in INTI is working on heat transmittance of different type of walls, our analysis was

    restricted to the environmental impacts of different materials pertaining to each wall considered

    excluding any consideration of the USE phase.

    4.2.1 Steel frame wall

    Steel profiles carry with good deal of the Impact in Production Phase (Eco It glues together Raw

    Materials and Manufacturing in a single Production phase), with significant contributions of

    9 This materials index is included in the Product Module of the Higg Index 1.0 to help product teams select

    materials with lower environmental impacts, as reflected by better scores on MSI.MSI is not a LCA tool nor is intended to be a substitute for LCA studies. Rather, MSI is a tool that comple-ments and is improved by traditional process LCA tools, data and methodologies to help product design-ers make informed, real-time decisions about potential environmental impacts of materials choices in the product creation process.

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    7/15

    7

    OSB10 Board, Glass Wool blanket and Gypsum Board (36 Kg of CO2 eq./m2). On the simplified

    LCA (Fig. 6) is clear that impacts on demolition /discard are negligible. (Fig. 7)

    4.2.2 Traditionally built wall (Wet method) - Type211

    Discarding use phase, the global impact of this type is almost twice that of the Steel Frame (Dry-

    wall) 69.2 vs. 36 Kg. of CO2 eq. /m2. See Fig. 8

    4.2.3 Partial conclusions on wall comparison

    The main limitation of this study is that within the limits of the matter, the defined unit (1 m2 of

    bearing exterior wall) isnot what in a conventional LCA is defined as Functional Unit.This is a

    very important concept. In a comparison through a fully blown LCA, Functionand Functional

    Unit are definitive for the whole analysis. In our opinion, for a more rigorous analysis we should

    define the Function in a more quantified manner 12.

    4.3 Performance of two sport cotton shirts

    The use of methodology by SAC13 allowed us to identify improvement opportunities to suggest

    from the responsible of the link (cutting and sewing) within the value chain to both brands A and

    B (Fig.10 Brand scoring and 11 Product scoring). Scores are compared to Maximum score alloca-

    tion suggested by SAC. Some recommendations resulted common to both brands:

    Quantity and type of materials

    Replace polyester fiber by Organic Cotton produced locally and recommend its increasing inclu-

    sion in the branded products

    Analyze color native cotton, availability in Latin America in order to replace dying.

    Reduction in tagging and unnecessary packaging

    In Manufacturing Phase

    Energy efficient machines and lightingAutomatic/ timed shutoff for energy consuming devices (Lights and machines)

    5 Discussion

    10 OSB Oriented Strand Board: Engineered wood, produced by compressing cross-oriented layers of strandsof wood with wax and resins 11 Type 2 Refers to a standardized typology as included in ARQ, the Architecture weekly supplement ofClarin Newspaper (BA- Argentina). External wall made with ceramic bricks 18 x 19 x 33 cm. and mortar. Seefigure 5 12 E.g. able to support efforts of xxxx type and magnitude, impeding rainwater transmission as per NNN Standard, having a maximum Transmission of thermal energy K of NNN Watts/m2 K 13 Sustainable Apparel Coalition

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    8/15

    8

    Conventional LCA as defined by ISO 14040 (ISO, 2006) and 14044 (ISO, 2006) are ex-

    pensive, take considerable time in order to collect and process all information in a con-

    sistent manner and even so, certain parameters remain uncertain. None of those character-

    istics would turn attractive its application by a Designer or Engineer unless balanced by asimple approach and enhanced intelligibility.

    The immediate conclusion is that a fully blown LCA is very valuable and useful for evaluating a

    Product, but it is not a Design tool (Ashby, 2012) (Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the

    Environment, 2000 ).

    Since decisions made in early stages of a Product / Service Design have great prevalence, the first

    objection to tools for complete LCA, is that for performing it they require precisely the degree of

    definition that the Project lacks (Vezzoli & Manzini, 2010).

    Despite this, since we were dealing with products already manufactured, we began some applica-

    tion of SimaPro by Pr Consultants, Netherlands, used worldwide. The experience was enlighten-

    ing for the research team but we experienced difficulties summarized below:

    Dealing with LCA software assumes detailed knowledge of many concepts uncommon

    for plain Designers or Engineers.

    We found no specific training available within our area

    Guides and Tutorials often assume detailed knowledge of underlying theory, which very

    often is not the case

    For professors and Assistants familiar with simplified LCA tools as Eco It, data loading

    resulted bewildering and very often intricate.

    Production profiles for Raw Materials and Electricity assume considerations valid for

    Northern Hemisphere, very often the European Union. Adopting them, many times made

    us dubious on validity of results.

    Results, after a laborious data entering and full of uncertainties, are grouped and ex-

    pressed in a way that complicates its interpretation and deriving specific Design recom-

    mendations from them.

    On the aim of enlarging ad focusing on the national reality, we found that also other foreign expe-

    riences (IHOBE 7 Steps method and UNEP Step-by-Step Guidelines) need to be adapted to our

    local socio productive specificity. This is an immediate need and represents a pending issue, both

    for Governmental entities as well as Academic centers.

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    9/15

    9

    6 Conclusions

    In the first case we have consensus with the company to go ahead on the next stage:

    Study the social impact of possible improvements in lighting efficiency and expenses. In our Pro-

    ject, a Design study on energy savings only could be justified in attention to social demand of

    lighting bus shelters for night urban security or other useful elements on the streets, not only ad-

    vertising.

    In the second case it was decided to advance with applying SimaPro software for enlarging and

    checking results obtained with Eco It, provided the application of those studies aim to spread the

    results around the problem of Social housing.

    In the third case conclusions are toward developing organic sourcing for organic fiber and fair

    trading. Nevertheless, in the analysis following the site visit, a remarkable issue resulted from a

    very high turnover ratio in the workforce attributable to the demanding work rhythm and probably

    rough treatment to operators.

    All three cases show that for integral reading and interpretation of data from applied tools it is

    indispensable to add an ethic component anticipated in the social variable, the third vertex of the

    Triple Bottom Line of Sustainability. Same is valid for the Social aspect of Design for Sustainabil-

    ity.

    7 Figures

    CASE 1

    Life Cycle Phase

    -

    p a c

    t s

    Raw Matls.Manufacturing

    and DistributionUse End of Life

    Emissions /

    Atmospheric

    pollution

    Dust and GHG

    associated to Iron

    mining. CO 2 from

    Raw Mtls. trans-

    portation

    GHG Emissions

    from Steelmaking

    VOCs from sol-

    vent-base paint-

    ing.

    Baked enamel-

    ing (GHG).

    Transportation

    (CO 2)

    No

    Fumes at melt-

    ing (on recy-

    cling)

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    10/15

    10

    industry (ingots

    and laminated) 14

    Liquid efflu-

    ents / Watercontamination

    No No

    Eventual

    Heavy metalson paints?

    Solid Wastes

    Iron mining de-

    bris

    Blast furnace

    slag

    Scraps of glass

    Scrap (goes to

    recycling)

    Fluorescent

    light bulbs

    (containing

    Hg)

    Steel (recycla-

    ble)

    Glass (Final

    disposition)

    Material Usage

    (including

    packaging)

    Laminated CS

    Zinc

    Stainless Steel

    Glass

    Corrugated

    cardboard

    Paints - Elec-

    trodes Film for

    Graphics - Sol-

    vent based

    paints

    Solvents (Thin-

    ner HC)

    Film Stretch

    (packaging)

    Repairings

    Shortening of

    expected use

    life because

    of Vandalism

    No

    Energy usage /

    Type

    CS casting and

    rolling (Electricity

    / Carbon 15 )16

    Blast Furnace

    (Carbon) Hot

    galvanized (Elec-

    trical)

    Electrical from

    gridElectrical

    Electrical (Arc

    furnace for

    recycling)

    Water use Iron mining Non relevant No

    Impact on Nat-

    ural landscapeNon relevant Non relevant No

    14 Manufacturing 1 kg of Steel on Electric Furnace generates about 462 g of CO2, while the inte-grated alternative while the integrated alternative (blast furnace) of same mass emits approximate-ly 2.494 g of CO2.15 Depending if it is electrical (Arc furnace) or Blast furnace.16 Energy requirement for extracting and refining 1 Kg of iron ore for steelmaking is approximately 7,2 Kw/h.

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    11/15

    11

    Other impactsUrban land-

    scape

    Fig 1 Ecodesign Matrix Advertising frame

    Fig. 2 & 3: Advertising frame Bar Diagram showing normalized impacts by each stage on LifeCycle and Impact Diagram on Production Phase (includes Raw Materials and Processing) SourceEco It 1.4

    Fig. 4: Advertising frame Graphics on Strategic Wheel assuming already implemented the im- provement proposals (New Design)

    CASE 2

    Fig. 5 Traditional construction wall Type (ARQ Weekly Architecture Supplement - Clarin Newspaper). Type 2 was selected for reference

    Rueda Estratgica D4S

    0

    2

    4

    6

    8

    10

    Desarrollo de un nuevo concepto

    Seleccin de materiales de bajo impacto

    Reduccin en el uso de materiales

    Optimizacin de la produccin

    Optimizacin del Sistema de Distribucin

    Reduccin del Impacto durante el uso

    Optimizacin de la Vida til

    Sistema de Fin de Vida

    Nuevo Existente

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    12/15

    12

    Fig. 6 Dry wall (Steel Frame) Life Cycle without USE in Kg. CO2 eq. /m2. Observe that discard /demolition impact is negligible.

    Fig. 7 Dry wall (Steel Frame) Impacts in Production

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    13/15

    13

    Fig. 8Regular wall (Wet Construction) type 2 Life Cycle without USE phase

    Fig. 9Regular wall (Wet Construction) type 2 Production Phase

    CASE 3

    Fig. 10 Brand scoring comparison on Higg Index

    Scoring Comparison - Brand aspects

    13 14

    4

    9

    3

    5

    3

    1

    4

    2 3

    2 2 2

    15

    20

    10

    20 20

    15

    10

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    G e n e r a

    l

    M a

    t e r i a

    l s

    P a c

    k a g

    i n g

    M a n u

    f a c

    t u r i n g

    T r a

    n s p o r t a

    t i o n

    P r o

    d u c

    t c a r e

    & R e p a

    i r

    s e r v

    i c e s

    E n

    d o

    f L i f e

    S c o r

    i n g

    Shirt A Shirt B Maximum

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    14/15

    14

    Fig. 11 Product scoring comparison on Higg Index

    Works Cited

    Ashby, M. (2012). Materials and the Environment: Eco-Informed Material Choice. London:Butterworth Heinemann.

    Brezet, H., & van Hemel, C. (1997). Ecodesign a promising approach to sustainable productionand consumption. Paris: UNEP/ Rathenau Instituut /TUDelft.

    Byggeth, S., & Hochschorner, E. (2006). Handling trade-offs in Ecodesign tools for sustainabledevelopment and procurement. Journal of Cleaner Production 14, 1420-1430.

    Canale, G. (2003). Seleccin de Mtodos de evaluacin en Ecodiseo. Actas del Congreso Nacional de Di seo Industrial Panorama 2003 . Mar del Plata - Argentina: Panorama

    2003 CNDI.DEFRA . (2012). Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs Defra. . In Internet:

    consulted 12/21/2012Retrieved 12 03, 2012, from Defra Economics and Statistics:http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/release-carbon-footprint-dec2012.pdf

    Fiell, C. &. (2007). Design Now! Taschen Italia 2007. Kln - Germany: Taschen.IHOBE Sociedad Pblica de Gestin Ambiental. (2000). Manual Prctico de Ecodiseo-

    Operativa de Implantacin en 7 pasos . Bilbao: IHOBE.IHOBE Sociedad Pblica de Gestin Ambiental. (03 - 2010). IHOBE Guas Sectoriales de

    Ecodiseo - Textil. Retrieved 03- 06- 2010, from http://www.ihobe.net/Publicaciones/:

    http://www.ihobe.net/Publicaciones/Ficha.aspx?IdMenu=750e07f4-11a4-40da-840c-0590b91bc032&Cod=004b18ba-5e8c-4707-8b32-5e5e006ac649

    Scoring Comparison - Product aspects

    15

    10

    19

    4

    13

    10

    1

    14

    02

    30

    10

    25

    20

    15

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    30

    35

    M a t e r i a

    l s

    P a c

    k a g

    i n g

    M a n u

    f a c t u r i n g

    T r a n s p o r t a

    t i o n

    P r o

    d u c t c a r e

    & R e p a

    i r

    s e r v

    i c e s

    E n

    d o

    f L i f e

    S c o r i n g

    Shirt A Shirt B Maximum

  • 7/27/2019 Canale Paper CILCA 2013 Rev 1a

    15/15

    15

    ISO. (2006). ISO 14040 - Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework. Geneva: International Organization for Standarization.

    ISO. (2006). ISO 14044 -Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines. Geneva: International Organization for Standarization.

    Lundvall, B.-. (2010). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Anthem Press.

    Metcalfe, J. (1995). The economic foundations of technology policy: equilibrium and evolutionary perspectives. In P. (. Stoneman, Handbook of Economics of Innovation and TechnologyChange. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment. (2000 ). Eco-indicator 99: A damageoriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment Manual for designers. Amsterdam: Netherlands - Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment.

    National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) . (2004). Malcom Baldrige National

    Quality Award Scoring Criteria. New York : NIST. Nike. (2012). Nike_MSI_2012_0724b.pdf . Retrieved 11 28, 2012, from

    http://www.apparelcoalition.org/storage/Nike_MSI_2012_0724b.pdfProject 33A107 - Environmental Impacts reduction on product and processes technology though

    the use of EcoDesign Strategies - Science and Technique Secretariat, Universidad Nacional de Lans - Buenos Aires - Argentina - October 2011. (n.d.).

    Raynsford, N. (1999). The UKs approach to sustainable development in construction. Build Res. Inf., pp. 419-423.

    The Apparel Coalition. (n.d.). Apparell Coalition.org . Retrieved 12 03, 2012, fromwww.apparelcoalition.org: http://www.apparelcoalition.org/MSI

    Tirschner, U. (2001). Tirschner, Ursula Tools for Ecodesign and Sustainable Product Design. InM. a. Charter,Sustainable Solutions- Developing Products and Services for the Future. Sheffield - UK: Greenleaf Publishing.

    UNEP - T Delft. (2009). Design for Dustainability - A Step-by-Step Approach. Paris: United Nations Environmental Programme.

    Vezzoli, C., & Manzini, E. (2010). Design for Environmental Sustainability. London: SpringerVerlag London Limited.

    Wimmer, W. a. (2003). Ecodesign Pilot - Product Investigation, Learning and Optimization Tool for Sustainable Product Development. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.