A method to ecodesign structural parts in the transport sector based on product life cycle management

Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

A method to ecodesign structural parts in the transport sector based on product life cycle management Hery Andriankaja*, Flore Vallet, Julien Le Duigou, Benoît Eynard Universit e de Technologie de Compi egne, Department of Mechanical Systems Engineering, Mechanical Laboratory Roberval UMR CNRS 7337, CS 60319 e 60203 Compi egne Cedex, France

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 20 May 2014 Received in revised form 20 October 2014 Accepted 7 February 2015 Available online 17 February 2015

Lightweight construction could be a pathway towards more sustainability. The production of high-end structural components poses a challenge to bring about the closed loop recycling of worn components and increase the use of recycled aluminum scraps. Designers will need to integrate the environmental dimension in the design of aluminum-alloyed parts over their entire lifecycle. Although many ecodesign methods and tools are currently available, there is a gap in their integration into the design process in industry, as well as in the daily practice of the designers. Moreover, existing ecodesign methods are not tailored to the lightweight context. This paper proposes a holistic approach to ecodesign geared to operate within a PLM (Product Life cycle Management) system. A PLM system is a set of tools used to create and manage the product information through its whole life cycle. Within the mechanical design area, a PLM system is composed of the traditional design tools such as Computer-aided design (CAD), Computer-aided manufacturing (CAM), Computer-aided engineering (CAE), etc … and allows bidirectional informational flows between the embedded tools. The proposition aims to foster sustainable design solutions for high-end structural parts used in the transport sector, especially in the automotive and aeronautic industries. It consists on developing a PLM-based single-block ecodesign method in order to achieve: (1) a simplified environmental assessment of a reference product and its design alternatives by providing results in a comparative way; and (2) the stimulation of improvement ideas and a solutionsgeneration phase thanks to dedicated environmental guidelines. The expected result is an efficient iterative and continuous ecodesign tasks between the environmental assessment and improvement. The proposition is conceived to be handled by the design team and to exchange product information with their traditional design tools within a PLM platform. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Ecodesign Lightweight solution Environmental assessment Environmental improvement Closed loop PLM

1. Introduction European directives and stakeholders' needs regarding the environmental performances of products have greatly evolved in the automotive and aeronautics industries. European directives have been evolving since the early 2000's, and the current applicable environmental standards in the automotive and aeronautics industries have indeed been identified as powerful incentives (EC 715/2007; 2008/33/EC; EC 1753/2000/EC; EC 2006/121/EC; CE 2002/95/CE; EC 2008/101/EC; Clean Sky JTI). These standards have resulted in an increased number of environmental specifications which manufacturers must specify to their suppliers. Indeed,

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Andriankaja). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.026 0959-6526/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Gerrard and Kandlikar (2007) have foreseen substantial changes in the design activities within the transport sectors. Among these changes are: - The design of new products, involving a change in the materials composition: promoting the use of lightweight, recycled, recyclable or even renewable materials, eliminating prohibited substances and promoting design-oriented disassembly, reuse, and remanufacturing; - Extending the value of EOL (End Of Life) products: reuse and remanufacturing of components, product made of single and recyclable materials; and - Improving the environmental communication about products: codification of materials and declarable substances, dismantling and disposal routes for different components and the environmental performance of EOL treatment processes.

166

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

The current focus in the transport sector is to produce lightweight vehicles. Lighter weights for vehicles started in the seventies to insure better fuel efficiency (EAA, 2013) after the 1973 OPEC oil crises. As a reduction in weight leads to a decrease in fuel consumption (and thus in less CO2 and other pollutant emissions), the automotive and aeronautics sectors have started to use lightweight materials such as matrix or ceramic-based composites, aluminum and other non-ferrous alloys. Aluminum thus appears to be a good candidate material to improve the sustainability and safety of future generations of vehicles. Already, the average amount of aluminum used per car produced in Europe has reached 140 kg (EAA, 2013). It is acknowledged that designers usually have to balance safety, feasibility, energy efficiency, technical performance and cost criteria throughout the product design process. Unfortunately, they rarely get to the point of thinking about the entire life cycle of products, and especially about their environmental impacts. SuPLight, an FP7 project, aims to increase the use of recycled aluminum in the production of high-end structural parts while integrating a closed-loop recycling of lightweight components. Since the designers need to integrate life cycle thinking into their practices, a holistic approach for ecodesign must be established to verify the environmental merits of technical solutions, such as the integration of recycled aluminum or weight reduction strategies. Although many ecodesign methods currently exist, these are not tailored to match the context of ‘lightweight design’. Moreover, there are serious concerns regarding their integration into the daily practices of automotive/aeronautic designers. The main issues are: - the lack of information about the usage of ecodesign tools (Fargnoli et Kimura, 2007); - the lack of compatibility among the tools (Le Pochat et al., 2007); - the difficult appropriation of LCA by designers (Millet et al., 2007); and - the stand-alone position of eco-design against others design and engineering tasks. Overall, there is no information system to link eco-design approaches with the design actors, the design process and the design tools. Closed loop PLM (Kiritsis, 2011) could partially respond to those issues. PLM is a concept that appeared in the late 1990s, and has since been defined as a strategic business approach that applies a consistent set of business solutions in support of the collaborative creation, management, dissemination, and use of product definition information across an extended enterprise, from concept to end of life, integrating people, processes, business systems and information (Terzi et al., 2010). Even if the information flow is quite complete during the beginning of life phase (BOL, including design and production), it becomes unidirectional and non-continuous during the middle of life (MOL, including distribution, use, service and maintenance) and during the end of life (EOL, including reverse logistics, remanufacturing, reuse, recycling and disposal) (Le Duigou et al., 2012; Demoly et al., 2013). This situation hinders the feedback of information to the designers about a product's use or its end of life (Zhou et al., 2009). Closed-loop PLM aims to overcome those issues by providing feedback from a product's whole life cycle. This is achieved by using PEID (Product Embedded Information Devices) to track and trace processes, store product information in ‘real time way’ over the whole life cycle of product, as is done with RFID. PEID will allow designers to use MOL and EOL product lifecycle information, such as the usage mode or the retirement and disposal conditions of similar products to improve product design (Jun et al., 2007). The paper reports on an on-going research work which aims to develop a PLM-based ecodesign method. This new business model

will serve the global product development process in terms of data exchange and semantics, while integrating the MOL and EOLrelated tasks within the context of lightweight design and the use of recycled aluminum alloy. The collaborative platform embeds both design and ecodesign activities and is devoted to industrial cases in the transport sector (automotive and aeronautic industries). Section 2 provides a literature background about ecodesign methods and tools, presenting a background for a suitable approach to ecodesign lightweight solutions. Section 3 presents a proposition for a holistic approach to ecodesign that is suitable for lightweight design and for the closed-loop PLM concept. The method deployment is illustrated by an automotive case test component (a lower front control arm). The paper concludes with a discussion about the findings and future work to develop a PLMbased ecodesign plugin to support the proposed ecodesign method dedicated to lightweight and recycled-material products. 2. Review of eco-design methods 2.1. Generic and specific ecodesign tools A systematic integration of the environmental dimension early in the design process is very important for a significant reduction of environmental impacts. Considering environmental criteria in the same way as conventional design criteria is an objective the ecodesign approach. Various methods and tools have been developed to enhance this integration and to provide designers with information regarding the environmental performance of products. Baumann and al. (2002) have identified ecodesign methods and tools as supports to the design process, complemented by more strategic and project organization tools. There are two main classes of tools to support the ecodesign integration process: (1) non-specific tools to support the global coherence of the project; and (2) specific tools intended to perform the critical phases of the ecodesign process, that is, the assessment and improvement of products ‘environmental quality. Le Pochat and al., (2007) have refined the classification of ‘specific tools for ecodesign’ into three categories according to their purpose: (1) environmental assessment of products, (2) environmental improvement and (3) both features at the same time. Moreover, the observation of eco-design experts performing a redesign task pointed out three activities which differentiate design from eco-design, namely: environmental assessment, solution finding and strategy definition (Vallet et al., 2013). The following review focuses on environmental assessment and improvement tools, generic or specific. The last part is dedicated to the recent developments in eco-design software tools. Environmental assessment tools are generally based on a life cycle assessment (LCA) method. Conducting LCA is a comprehensive task which requires assessing and comparing the potential environmental impacts of human activities in providing goods or services (ISO/DIS 14040, 2006). Producing an LCA method adapted to design situations is a true challenge, mainly due to the time and effort needed for the data collection phase, the LCA modeling and then the evaluation and interpretation of results. Thus, the concept of streamlined LCA has appeared to mitigate this inherent complexity of LCA. From the SETAC workgroup, Todd and Curran (1999) have reported some approaches to simplify the full concept of LCA in a guide for LCA practitioners, with a special attention to the following issues: the level of 'depth and detail' of data; the breadth and the completeness of a study; the degree of openness and comprehensiveness in the results presentation; and the sourcing and quality of data. Various LCA-based assessment tools dedicated to match specific industrial projects have been developed. In Reyes and Rohmer

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

(2009), an Excel-based ecodesign tool was co-created with the actors of a company developing medium-voltage electric equipment. They used eight indicators, derived from an iterative approach between the company and its clients. In the field of highvoltage electric equipment, Daoud (2009) selected six indicators, three of which are environmental indicators such as water withdrawal or pure engineering metrics like disassembly. On the other hand, Andriankaja and al. (2013) focus on six pure environmental indicators to assess automotive interior parts, such as dashboards. In order to support decision-making in early the phases of the development of new vehicle technologies, Arena and al. (2013) recently proposed a streamlined lifecycle assessment model: the environmental dimension was chosen to holistically capture the impacts of a technical solution over its life cycle in a factual way. The model embeds eight main sustainability dimensions (materials, energy, water, biodiversity, emissions, effluents and waste; noise, infrastructure, and vehicle characteristics), broken into a set of 48 indicators. The model provides a framework for the quantitative comparison of different technologies; hence it is adapted to the vehicle scale, as opposed to the component scale. Environmental improvement tools, on the other hand, provide guidelines and rules for helping designers to identify potential actions to improve the environmental performance of products. Classic examples of guidelines appear in 'Life Cycle Design Strategy (LiDS) Wheel' (Brezet et Van Hemel, 1997) or in the 'Ten Golden Rules' (Luttropp et Lagerstedt, 2006). According to Telenko and al. (2008), there is a real need to establish a comprehensive set of generic DfE (Design for the Environment) principles and guidelines tailored for designers. Their proposition consists of a set of 67 guidelines clustered into 6 principles. The strength of the proposition is that it covers all stages of a product's life cycle and it is actionable, that is to say it provides positive information at a correct level of abstraction. Ecodesign guides may also embed generic guidelines to help designers to create environmentally friendly solutions, for instance Ecodesign Pilot (Wimmer et Züst, 2003) and the Design for Sustainability (D4S) guide (Crul et Diehl, 2009). The previous work may be completed by the development of automotive-specific guidelines by Borchardt and al. (2011). These guidelines are in the form of operating procedures (or guidelines) dealing with both the electric-electronic and the mechanical design of automotive products. The guidelines were reviewed and updated by the company, which allowed new contributions to be included. Many LCA software tools are commercially available, but  Consultants and GaBi© from PE international SimaPro© from Pre have been known for many years and are widely used by LCA practitioners. LCA software tools have recently been modified to facilitate the implementation of ecodesign practices by designers, who are, as a rule, non-experts in LCA. Such customized tools typically embed a simplified assessment module, making it possible to visualize and compare different product versions. The TEA (Typological Environmental Analysis) or ATEP tool, developed in France at the technical centre CETIM, is dedicated to the practice of ecodesign in SMEs. It led to the French standard NF E 01 005 (AFNOR, 2010), and to the corresponding European standard (CEN/ TS 16524, 2013). The IMPULSIO software tool created by Quantis  de Technologie Ernst & Young in partnership with UTT (Universite de Troyes) is based on the same principles of environmental assessment and guideline-providing. It also includes the possibility to: (1) add regulatory requirements; (2) assess costs; (3) implement an eco-functional analysis and prioritize improvement guidelines; and (4) build new design scenarios. The associated LCA database is Ecoinvent. The Biloba web (Ginkgo 21, 2013) emphasizes the environmental assessment of product variants, relying on the European Life Cycle Database (ELCD). A wide range of flow and

167

environmental indicators is available to display the results. The eDEA software developed by EVEA is a designer-friendly medium connected to the full LCA tool SimaPro©. E-DEA makes it possible to interface with other software such as CAD, ERP or PLM systems. Within the context of the aircraft design, the web-based EcoSky tool (Ilg, 2013) has been developed by Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft to enable aircraft designers to assess the environmental impacts of existing conceptual scenarios of products. To draw the benefits of the LCA method, the EcoSky tool relies on a full LCA database (which is still managed by LCA experts) by an application programming interface. A user interface enables designers to select the type of aircraft to assess (for instance, jet, airliner or rotorcraft) and to display the assessment results. In sum, it can be observed that ecodesign methods and tools are often clustered according to their main objective: environmental assessment or environmental improvement. Within an ecodesign loop, both features have to be implemented iteratively. However, this literature review reveals a weakness, as the approaches can barely be operated by designers within a unique method or supportive tool. In next subsection the focus is on the nature of the indicators that may be found in current environmental assessment methods and tools. 2.2. Environmental indicators Various indicators are available to assess the environmental performance of products. Seiffert (2008) clearly distinguished 'environmental aspects' with 'environmental impacts' and illustrated the correlation between the two. For example, electric energy consumption (an environmental aspect) contributes to the depletion of natural resources (an environmental impact). Tam (2002) distinguishes environmental indicators according to their industrial usefulness as follows: - The indicators used in environmental reports, such as Global Warming Potential (GWP), total primary energy, eutrophication, etc …, which are generally delivered by an environment expert in public reports. Stakeholders such as institutional investors, shareholders, regulators and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have a growing interest in such reports. - The indicators used in the context of 'durability'. Sullivan and al. (1998) presented a list of indicators that may relate to environmental issues, mainly in the automotive sector. Thus, indicators such as material minimization, energy use reduction, toxic substances' use reduction, recyclability improvement, maximizing the use of renewable resources, etc … can be used in decision-making processes. - Functional indicators that cannot be measured per unit of product, but rather by the function that this product meets. For example: fuel consumption and amount of CO2 in (kilo) grams per (passenger) kilometer. These can be calculated through the ‘emission factors’. These indicators also include metrics measured on-site from the conditions needed to produce a product, such as the amount of electrical energy consumed per X hours for Y machining operation. The first category of indicators addresses more global aspects and cannot meet the specific requirements of the regulations on the differentiation between design solutions. These indicators are obtained from the realization of LCAs. They are expressed in terms of global, regional or local environmental impacts. In the following sections, these will be identified as 'environmental impact indicators'. The second and third categories seem closer to the current industry practice, or in any case, closer to the legislation targets

168

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

that industries must achieve. In the following sections, these will be called 'environmental engineering metrics'. Regarding the number of indicators, various authors recommend a range of four to ten mixed impact indicators and engineering metrics (Reyes et Rohmer, 2009; Daoud, 2009; Andriankaja et al., 2013). This mixture is supposed to guarantee a simple and easy-to-use method for designers who are not experts in the environmental field. In sum, it is important to choose a pertinent set of indicators to achieve real ecodesign actions while being aware of the design area complexity. Two classes of indicators should be represented in order to be compliant with other engineering tasks in product design: (1) environmental impact indicators based on LCA evaluation methods; and (2) environmental engineering metrics. A general summary of the research survey is presented next. 2.3. Synthesis of the research survey The state-of-the art summary presented above gives an overview of generic and project-specific ecodesign tools. Table 1 states their purpose in terms of assessment and/or environmental improvement, and identifies the nature of the indicators used: ‘environmental engineering metrics’ or ‘environmental impact indicators’. Determining what kinds of methods are the best candidates to achieve the ecodesign of lightweight solutions for the SuPLight project and identifying the gaps in existing ecodesign tools are our two main objectives. Although the cited tools and methods were developed for different purposes, they can all structure information and generate results in a systematic way. Simplified tools (LCA based) are intended to provide information relatively quicker than a full LCA in order to be usable in a design context. Many of the studied tools can be used to identify trade-offs in the design process if they are based on the users' judgment or expertise knowledge (for instance LiDS Wheel). However, the design process is not only based on tracking the trade-off situations, but is essentially a decision-making process. Hence, tools based on qualitative approaches rapidly show their limits as they use ‘subjective scoring systems’. These often lead to an unreliable strategic decision regarding a product's environmental performance. Indeed, Byggeth and Hochschorner (2006) stated that “A potential problem with qualitative results is that, most products may turn out to be rather similar. Many times it is the quantitative aspects that can differentiate between different products”. The important features of ecodesign tools are that they allow: (1) the quantitative comparison of different product concepts and (2) improvement options such as alternative materials or processes. Comparisons should cover the whole life cycle of a product to ensure that the environmental focus is bit made on a restricted (or even an insignificant part) of the product's system. In terms of indicators, many of the analyzed tools, when they are utilised for the assessment task, use ‘engineering metrics’ (such as dematerialization, hazardous waste content, weight reduction, etc …). However, if the ‘engineering metrics’ are not correlated to the ‘environmental impacts indicators’, use of these tools may lead to an inaccurate selection of concepts with uncontrolled negative environmental effects. In summary, it appears that the tools and methods presented here are complementary in terms of their assessment and/or improvement potential. It thus becomes clearer that a relevant ecodesign approach should first include a quantitative and systemic assessment tool. It is also essential to support environmental improvement options to guide the intended users in selecting a ‘truly’ environmentally friendly product concept. The following sections clarify: (1) which environmental indicators to use in this

context of ‘lightweight products’; and (2) how to build an ecodesign method adapted to a global development process, such as a PLMbased approach. 3. Development of the ecodesign method for lightweight design This section first presents the environmental indicators that are relevant within the context of the lightweight design of vehicle products. The development of the single-block ecodesign method is then presented by explaining how to create its embedded functionalities and workflows. 3.1. Choice of key environmental indicators In the automotive and aeronautic industries, environmental indicators should allow designers to not only ensure the achievement of the targets fixed in the legislation standards, but also to predict the actual environmental impacts of their products. Environmental engineering metrics must be added to the list of indicators to be in compliance with the regulations and to meet the specific demands from stakeholders. However, they cannot be used solely to establish a sustainable design approach. Additional environmental information provided by 'environmental impact indicators' are also needed and must be reported in the Environmental Product Declaration (EPD). This adjustment requires the systematic use of an environmental assessment in the developed ecodesign method. Decisions leading to the list of key environmental indicators in the context of the SuPLight project are highlighted in Table 2. 3.2. Development of the ecodesign method 3.2.1. Objectives The SuPLight platform is being created to foster the flow of information between stakeholders throughout the product life cycle. This bi-directional flow should lead to an increase in the use of recycled material (scrap sharing performance) in the production of high-end automotive and aeronautics components. As a part of this holistic life cycle model, the ecodesign methodology: - embeds life cycle structure: BOL, MOL and EOL; - shares input data with others engineering tasks (for instance scrap share, mass); and - will be technically integrated within the PLM in close connection to other environment-oriented methods: LCA/LCC and Reverse Logistics, as well as social and ethical methods; In order to achieve the implementation of the holistic ecodesign methodology, the first task is to integrate an environmental approach into a traditional engineering design approach. The ecodesign approach is aimed at product designers, it should moreover (1) provide a clear and ‘easy-to-follow’ path for users with minimal training; and (2) favor the commitment of designers in terms of understanding environmental issues, assessing and improving the environmental performance of new designs of products. The state of the art in ecodesign enhances two main actions: evaluation and improvement. To achieve these goals the ecodesign tool relies on two main connected modules (Fig. 1): - A simplified environmental assessment tool which allows designers to assess design concepts against key environmental indicators; and - An environmental improvement tool that proposes guidelines to help designers improve their concepts and go through a new

Table 1 Overview of existing ecodesign methods and tools. Categories of environmental tools for ecodesign

Analysis of the objective for generic eco-design tools Relevant tools

Description

Full LCA

Software solutions based on LCA method

LCA-based tools

Based on simplified LCA methodology in order to reduce the inherent complexity of LCA

Matrix-based tools

Guidelines Checklists

Ecodesign guides

Parametric tools

Solution Decision-making tools

Evaluation methods based on environmental aspect (energy, materials, wastes, etc.) identification on each product life cycle stage. Tools consisting of a collection, classification and prioritization of general and universal rules for eco design Composed by lists of questions for a product assessment according to its functional characteristics. They fail to conduct an assessment in its strict sense, but have the advantage of simply scoring the environmental aspects, easily creating a comparison reference. Tools grouping the general principles of ecodesign and the basic rules to successfully handle a new product design project incorporating environmental constraints Provide simplified environmental assessments based on scales or mathematical relationships between parameters or functions of the product and the associated environmental impacts. Conventional multicriteria decision-aid design tools converted into improvement tools

Environmental assessment Nature of indicators

GaBi (PE international), Simapro (PrE consultants), Umberto (ifu Hamburg) … ERPA (Graedel et Allenby, 1998); MECO (Wenzel et Hauschild, 2001) MIPS (Ritthoff et al., 2002); IMPULSIO (Quantis, 2009); EcoSky (Ilg, 2013); BILOBAWEB (Ginkgo 21, 2013) ESQCV (Qualitative and simplified life cycle analysis) MET (Brezet et Van Hemel, 1997) The Ten Golden Rules (Luttropp et Lagerstedt, 2006) Ecoconcept spider web (Tischner et al., 2000); EOD (Environmental Objectives Deployment), (Karlsson, 1997) Ecodesign Pilot (Wimmer et Züst, 2003) LiDs wheel, (Brezet et Van Hemel, 1997) information/inspiration, (Lofthouse, 2006) Eco-PaS (Eco-efficiency Parametric Screening), (Dewulf, 2003) QFDE (Masui, 2000), (Sakao, 2007); EcoTRIZ (Chen, 2002), (Jones et Harrison, 2000), (Lindeman et al., 2001)

Qualitative

environmental impacts indicators Environmental engineering metrics environmental impacts indicators

Environmental improvement

x x x

Environmental engineering metrics/Impacts' indicators Environmental engineering metrics N.A

x

Environmental engineering metrics

x

Environmental engineering metrics N.A N.A aggregated impacts' indicators

x

Environmental engineering metrics

Quantitative

x x

x x x x

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

Family of methods and tools

x

169

170

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

Table 2 Key environmental indicators for the ecodesign method. Indicators

Unit

Level

Method

Statements

Global Warming Potential (GWP100)

kg CO2-eq

LCA- Midpoint

Impact 2002 þ vQ2.2 (March 2012)

Water withdrawal

m3

LCA- Midpoint

Energy (non- renewable)

MJ

LCA- Midpoint

Impact 2002 þ vQ2.2 (March 2012) Impact 2002 þ vQ2.2 (March 2012)

Abiotic Depletion Potential (ADP)

kg Sb-eq

LCA- Midpoint

CML 2001, December. 2007

Rate of old scrap share

% rough part weight kg

Engineering metric Engineering metric

Data from other engineering tasks Data from other engineering tasks

Global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions is the most politically-debated environmental topic. Moreover, as highly used in the literature related to LCA integration projects, it is absolutely worthy of consideration. Processing aluminum consumes a great quantity of fresh water. Considering water consumption as an indicator is relevant in the context of SupLight. Non-renewable fossil resources such as coal, oil and gas are mainly used to produce thermal or electrical energy. All manufacturing industries are great consumers of such energy. Continued extraction of primary raw material depletes natural ore reserves and the process consumes energy, water and contributes to greenhouse gas emissions The use of recycled material would reduce this impact. Specific request from SuPLight partners, to deal with scrap sharing performance.

Machined part weight

assessment loop. Fig. 1 shows that guidelines should be associated either with life cycle phases (i.e. BOL, MOL or EOL), or with environmental indicators.

3.2.2. Functionalities 3.2.2.1. Environmental assessment tool. As mentioned in the previous sections, it is important for designers to iteratively assess and understand the environmental impacts of their concepts against a restricted number of indicators. The challenge is to adapt the LCA methodology and to simplify its utilization by setting up a pragmatic assessment approach without the inherent complexity of a full LCA. Building such pragmatic approaches should be feasible, based on the information already available in: - Environmental impact factors extracted from an LCA software database by evaluation methods such as ReciPe (Goedkoop et al., 2009), impact 2002þ (Jolliet et al., 2003); - Public inventory databases (for instance the US NREL life cycle inventory database or the published LCA results of case studies); and - On-site process evaluation results. The information must be adapted by an LCA practitioner for a targeted application (sector, type of products and/or services, specific projects …), in accordance with the effort that he or she contributes to model every life cycle stages and the relevant impacts drivers.

Specific request from SupLight partners considering the mass optimization performance

In order to build the environmental assessment tool, environmental impact factors (EFs) are extracted from an LCA software package by parameterizing, modeling and evaluating a reference unit of each process involved in each stage of a product's life cycle (BOL, MOL and EOL). Then, following an ‘allocation basis’ rule, an impact category m for each process p is linearly correlated to the corresponding environmental impact factor EFpm by a simple multiplication with an allocation coefficient fp (process quantity) and can be written as:

mp ¼ fp  EFpm

(1)

For example, when calculating the impact category GWP (Global Warming Potential, kgCO2 eq.) of an aluminum part turning (ref: turning, aluminum, conventional, average [kg] eRER (Ecoinvent 2.2: 8248)) with 352 g of chips to be removed, the GWP environmental impact factor (extracted from an LCA software database with the evaluation method ‘impact 2002þ’) equals 10.31 [kg CO2 eq./kg chip]. The impact GWP100 for the machined part thus equals 3.63 kg CO2 eq. Engineering metrics related to a product's weight and its rate of aluminum old scrap content (Table 2) are obtained from the project partners and returned by the environmental assessment tool. The objective is not only to transform the scientific LCA method into a practical, usable tool for impact calculation, but essentially to give a ‘meaningful’ representation of a product's life cycle profile for the designers. In this sense, the results from impact calculations must be displayed in a user-friendly graphic interface. Two types of

Fig. 1. Overview of the ecodesign method scheme.

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

171

Table 3 A sample of ecodesign guidelines for creating the improvement module e Level 1: system; Level 2: product; Level 3: component; N.A. Non Applicable. Life cycle stage BOL

Strategy

Extraction of Raw materials economy materials Production

Optimize production techniques

Strategy deployment

Guidelines (Actions/automotive & aeronautics context)

Level

Use recycled materials Use materials with lower embedded energy Reduce number of production steps Reduce energy consumption and waste generation in production

Increase fraction of recycled aluminum in raw materials Favor the use of secondary aluminum alloy

3 3

Minimize the number of components (Integrate functions) Choose an alternative process for aluminum component manufacturing (e.g. replace melting process by induction and casting for the control arm rough part); Increase efficiency of a process (e.g. increase the number of parts produced per cycle) Reuse all aluminum scraps and chips Optimize flows of lubricants, cooling water … … Choose intelligent mode of transportation (road, rail, ocean, air, or multiple combinations) Encourage in-house production of components Minimize the number of components; Fit packaging to the product embedded volume Avoid heavy metal loaded inks; use recycled cardboard

2 3

Use fuels from renewable energy sources Design light weight and easy- dismantled components for the product … Reuse non-failed component(s) by remanufacturing product (ex, prior mechanical testing approved) Design easily-dismantled components for the product (ex, ease of separation of rubber, steel and aluminum components in a control arm) Design single material product, Integrate functions; Label plastics/chemical components for quick identification and sorting (e.g. rubber components of the control arm) Shift from bulk road transport to single wagon rail transport Shift from road to intermodal short sea/road transport … Optimize transport planning (vertical collaboration between shippers and logistics service providers) Exploit flexibility of delivery dates, earlier or later. …

1 2,3

Valorize solid waste in production Reduce use of consumables … MOL Logistics and Reduce impact of logistics Choose less polluting means of Packaging transportation Reduce logistics distances Reduce impacts of Reduce quantity, number, weight of packaging packaging Choose less impacting materials for packaging Use Reduce impact during use Use less fossil fuels phase Reduce emissions and waste generated during use phase … EOL End of Life Reduce, Reuse, Recycle Favor reuse of product/components (3R)/Improve recycling through design; Encourage EOL product breakdown (e.g., reduce solid wastes) Favor recycling of materials

Improve logistics

Operate modal shift

Avoid empty returns

graphical representation of the simplified assessment results are envisaged in the further development of the ecodesign methodology: the spider-web format and barechart diagrams. With these types of outputs, designers should be able to compare two (or more) variants of the product under development. 3.2.2.2. Environmental improvement tool. The right level of information is essential to ensure that ecodesign guidelines can really help the designers to bring significant improvement to the environmental performance of their products. Too-generic information may make no sense for the designers in the precise context of product families (for instance, in the design of vehicle suspension parts). On the other hand, too-specific pieces of information will be restricted to certain actors (e.g. process designers) and may compromise their use by multidisciplinary actors of the design process. With respect to the above statement, we propose a series of tailored guidelines, derived from two main sources: generic guidelines (Telenko et al., 2008; AFNOR, 2010; CEN/TS 16524, 2013) and from our own expertise and reflection within the context of automotive and aeronautics product design. Within the improvement tool, guidelines are further refined on hierarchic levels of interventions to enhance eco-designed lightweight solutions. Level 1 refers to the global system (e.g. an automobile or aircraft model). Level 2 concerns the entire product, which is the assembled entity, required to meet a specified function in the system (e.g. the control arm for supporting the wheel motion and its permanent contact with the ground). Finally, level 3 refers to the components (ex: control arm body, bushings …). Table 3

3 3 … 2,3 3 2 2

… 3 2 2,3

N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A

shows a sample of tailored guidelines (structured by life cycle stages) that can be found in the improvement tool. Indeed, two modes of guideline selection are made available: (1) guidelines linked to life cycle stages, i.e. related to actions to reduce environmental impacts at each life cycle stage (BOL, MOL and EOL); and (2) guidelines linked to flows, i.e. related to several possible actions (e.g. the design of a single material product, reducing energy consumption) to reduce a specific withdrawal or output from or to the environment, such as water consumption, direct emissions to the air independently of the life cycle stage. 3.2.3. Embedded workflows Activities in the proposed ecodesign method embed four phases of workflows (Fig. 2): - Phase 1: define the scope, i.e. the project objective and the system boundary; - Phase 2: frame the case parameter, set up the baseline and implement the initial environmental assessment;

Fig. 2. Ecodesign method embedded workflows.

172

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

Fig. 3. Current production stages of the control arm body in aluminum alloy (SuPLight, 2013).

- Phase 3: analyze the results, select the environmental improvement guidelines and generate new design scenarios; and - Phase 4: compare new design scenarios with the baseline. 4. Case study The test case component selected to illustrate the ecodesign method workflows is a ‘lower front control arm’ for a hatchback passenger car. The control arm is a structural part of the suspension system; it is a bar used to attach the suspension members to the chassis. With the help of the pivots located at each end of the control arm, this part is capable of managing the motion of the wheels in order to be synchronized with the body of the vehicle. The following sections illustrate the ecodesign method deployment by describing the baseline creation, through the generation of alternative design scenarios and the comparative assessment of both baseline and scenarios. 4.1. Baseline creation The simplified LCA model of the baseline takes into account the current production route for the BOL stage (Fig. 3), which incorporates the following attributes:

- Raw material: Primary aluminum alloy bolt, mixed with production scrap (new scrap) at an unspecified ratio. 0% EOL scrap share; and - Manufacturing: Extrusion, hot forging and machining (turning). The use phase (MOL) is modeled by using the 'fuel reduction coefficient' allocation method from Eberle and Franze (1998). It incorporates the product mass contribution to the fuel consumption and related emissions, as well as relevant factors such as wheel rolling resistance or aerodynamism, measured in accordance with the NEDC (New European Driving Cycle) conditions. The functional unit considered for this study is expressed as follows: 2 control arm bodies (left and right sides) equipping a GM Opel Insignia e Diesel version over an average life time mileage of 200 000 km. The control arm body is recycled at its EOL, but no Reverse Logistics (RL) scenario is specified. A default RL is then set up as 100% by road truck for a distance of 1000 km. The baseline is created and assessed with the help of the environmental assessment tool according to the following scheme (Fig. 4). As described in Section 3.2.2, the EFs support the environmental impact calculations for each process as a function of the allocation coefficient(s), which are simply the technical data set as ‘free parameters’. The designers can enter these data as discrete values in the case of manual computation (beta test), or have them withdrawn automatically from the platform kernel in the case of a PLM-

Fig. 4. Overview of the Input/output data flows for displaying the assessment tool.

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

173

Fig. 5. Improvement tool: guidelines selection from the list.

integrated ecodesign approach (real operation). These outputs provide the environmental profile of the product with two engineering metrics and four impacts indicators, as defined in Table 2. The environmental assessment results for the baseline are presented in the next section. 4.2. Generation of alternative scenarios to a baseline Generating alternative scenarios to a baseline first implies an exploration of its environmental profile. High impacts, the major contributing flows/processes and critical life cycle stage(s) are identified in order to decide what kind of actions and guidelines should be followed to improve a baseline's environmental performance. Since primary aluminum extraction and parts manufacturing are known to be very environmentally-damaging processes, various alternative scenarios based on material changes or process substitutions are conceivable. To illustrate this case study, we consider an increase in the percentage of 'old' aluminum scrap in the raw material for the control arm production (old scraps may come from window frames, for instance). Additional changes are also configured, at the level of the manufacturing process and reverse logistics scenarios at the EOL. To implement the scenarios in the ‘improvement module’, guidelines are first selected from the list (Fig. 5). Next, actions are identified and applied to conceive new scenarios. Two scenarios have emerged from the guidelines/actions related to the material, process and reverse logistic alternative design, summarized as follows (Fig. 6). Scenario 1. change the material composition to 40% old scrap share: Scenario 1 uses as raw material a major proportion of primary aluminum and secondary aluminum from recycling EOL old scrap (60% primary aluminum; 40% old scrap). Primary aluminum incorporates some proportion of new scrap (production scrap) at an unspecified ratio. Reverse Logistics at EOL is taken as RL route 1 (road truck, distance 2196 km). Manufacturing processes are unchanged, so the use phase is compared to the baseline.

Scenario 2. change the material to 60% old scrap, the process and the RL route: Scenario 2 uses primary and secondary aluminum (from old scrap) in reversed proportions (40% primary aluminum; 60% old scrap). Alternative manufacturing processes are die casting preshape, hot forging and machining (instead of extrusion, hot forging and machining for the baseline). Reverse Logistics at EOL for the scenario is the RL route 2 (road truck, distance 2183 km). The simplified LCA modeling and impacts assessment for the alternative scenarios are conducted in the same way as for the baseline within the ‘assessment module’. A form of results from the assessment module (comparison between scenarios and baseline) is shown in the Fig. 7. The comparative analysis between the baseline and the scenarios completes the first loop of the eco-design implementation. The results of the assessment module will be interpreted by the designers, who will select the optimized solution (considering other design criteria) for the new product. This is called the design modification stage. The environmental performance of the new product at the end of the design process will be validated through a full LCA. Meanwhile, the assessment module database will be enriched; a new loop can start for a new ecodesign task with an upgraded tool.

5. Discussion The application scope of ecodesign tools can be discussed acrez-Belis, 2012). In the cording to different criteria (Bovea et Pe present article, we have identified and characterized some relevant tools according to (1) the nature of the indicators (environmental engineering metrics or environmental impact indicators) and (2) the ecodesign approach (qualitative or quantitative). Qualitative methods are relatively simple to use and offer advantages in tradeoff situations if the environmental problems are simple enough. They can also be deployed early in the product design process, as they do not require a large amount of input data. However, they are not reliable enough to support robust decision-making algorithms

Fig. 6. Actions considered for creating new scenarios in the improvement tool.

174

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

Fig. 7. Environmental profile of the scenarios compared to the baseline.

for the reasons developed in x1.3. On the other hand, quantitative tools are useful when a detailed environmental profile is needed to support a decision. However, they often fail early in the design process because they require a great amount of technical data about the product, but the required data cannot be completed until the last stage of the design process, where unfortunately, only minor changes can be made to the product. Overall, we postulate that there is neither absolute classification nor absolute criteria to designate which is the best tool to fit an environmental assessment or improvement of a product's environmental performance. Nonetheless, to respond to the paradox of the design process regarding the data availability versus the improvement opportunities, we propose a single-block ecodesign method which is based on an interdependent assessment and on improvement tools, both tailored to the context of lightweight design and able to operate within a PLM-based structure. Admittedly, one of the objectives is to simplify the comprehensive tasks related to LCA, but the potential of this proposition relies on its ability to easily provide the design team with a full-step ecodesign approach and to yield timely information without the help of an LCA expert. Such a full-step approach will enable them to realize several iterative loops of assessment and improvement tasks along the design process. Indeed, this continuity of ecodesign actions is materialized by the uncovered links between the guidelines and the environmental spots (guidelines linked to critical flows and life cycle stages). The other strength of this proposition is the progressive learning process within the design team, induced by the tool usage and the exploitation of its results. These elements are essentials to guarantee the effective ecodesign integration within the design team and thus to ensure a really ecodesigned product at the end of the design process. Due to the organization of the SuPLight project, the actual testing of the methodology with product designers from the target company could not be carried out thus far. This lack is indeed a limit to the study, and advocates for the need of ‘end-users’ case tests' in the near future. The ecodesign task will also be embedded in a single plugin while being connected to the other engineering tasks within the SuPLight closed-loop PLM system. Further research works are expected to report on the plugins' interconnections, providing evidence that the ecodesign task is no longer a stand-alone activity. SuPLight stands for ‘Sustainable production of Lightweight products’. Economic and social aspects are both important from a sustainability perspective, and are also some of the limits of the proposition at this stage. However, should some economic data be available across the industrial value chain, this could be rather

easily integrated into the ecodesign workflow, provided that the confidentiality requirements are solved. As to the social perspective, it is currently under development within the SupLight project. An ongoing effort to bridge the different approaches is being made thanks to the closed-loop PLM approach. This seems to be a promising way to overcome the potential issues related to the gaps of all sorts of data in the overall life cycle stages of the product.

6. Conclusions The literature review highlighted the need to choose environmental indicators that are relevant to the industrial application, and the complexities and difficulties associated with that decision. Two key activities were identified in ecodesign: environmental assessment and improvement. It was concluded that existing methods and tools do not perform a satisfactory integration within the product development process of a specific company. In addition, the information flow throughout the product life cycle stages (namely BOL, MOL and EOL) is rather fragmented, limiting the opportunity to structure an integrated engineering eco-design approach with all of the partners of the value chain. An attempt to overcome those issues has been made in the context of the FP7 SuPLight project. The aim of the project is to foster sustainable lightweight industrial solutions based on wrought aluminum alloy. This contribution develops a new methodology for the holistic ecodesign of products and manufacturing processes. To achieve a successful implementation of a holistic ecodesign method within the global product development process, our proposal has been designed to provide a clear and an easy-to-follow ecodesign approach for any product designer with a minimal level of environmental training. Furthermore, to achieve these goals while facilitating its integration within the SupLight platform, the ecodesign methodology combines several tools needed to achieve an innovative approach to eco-design lightweight solutions into a single application, that is to say: an assessment tool (EFs database, key indicators) and an improvement tool (guidelines and actions). Indeed, it can be observed from the literature review that the existing tools and methods rarely combine both of these features. The next step of this work deals with the development of the ecodesign plugin and its integration into the SuPLight PLM platform. The customization of a support tool for the eco-design methodology is in progress through the adaptation of the current architecture and semantics to the lightweight context. The integration of the ecodesign plugin to the collaborative SupLight

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

platform is an on-going task and will be reported in future works. Further avenues for improvement include verifying the new model's reliability. Indeed, a sensitivity or uncertainty analysis should be performed with both the ecodesign plugin and the full LCA results in order to assign a confidence interval to the results from the ecodesign plugin. The importance of this validation step is reflected in the difficulty of environmental and sustainability assessment in the aluminum industry (Liu et Müller, 2012). Successful validation is a requirement to obtain the users ‘confidence in the quality of the results and the reliability of the proposed method. Acknowledgments The authors would like to acknowledge the European Commission for its financial support through the SuPLight FP7 project (grant agreement n 263302). We also wish to express our gratitude and appreciation to all the project partners for their contribution during the development of various ideas and concepts presented in this paper. References caniques e Me thodologie D'e coAFNOR, 2010. Norme NFE 01e005. Produits Me conception. AFNOR. Août 2010. Andriankaja, H., Bertoluci, G., Millet, D., 2013. Development and integration of a simplified environmental assessment tool based on an environmental categorization per range of products. J. Eng. Des. 24 (1), 1e24. Arena, M., Azzone, G., Conte, A., 2013. A streamlined LCA framework to support early decision making in the vehicle development. J. Clean. Prod. 41, 105e113. Baumann, H., Boons, F., Bragd, A., 2002. Mapping the green product development field: engineering, policy and business perspectives. J. Clean. Prod. 10 (5), 409e425. Borchardt, M., Sellitto, M.A., Medeiros Pereira, G., Calliari Poltosi, L.A., Paulo Gomes, L., 2011. Identifying and Prioritizing Ecodesign Key Factors for the Automotive Industry, New Trends and Developments in Automotive Industry. Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/books/new-trends-anddevelopments-in-automotive-industry/identifying-and-prioritizing-ecodesignkey-factors-for-the-automotive-industry. rez-Belis, V., 2012. A taxonomy of ecodesign tools for integrating Bovea, M.D., Pe environmental requirements into the product design process. J. Clean. Prod. 20 (1), 61e71. Brezet, J.C., Van Hemel, C., 1997. Ecodesign - a Promising Approach to Sustainable Production and Consumption. UNEP United Nations Publications, Paris. Byggeth, S., Hochschorner, E., 2006. Handling trade-offs in ecodesign tools for sustainable product development and procurement. J. Clean. Prod. 14, 1420e1430. CEN\TS 16524, 2013. Mechanical Products e Methodology for Reduction of Environmental Impacts in Product Design and Development Sept. 2013 [online]. http://standards.cen.eu/dyn/www/f?p¼204:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT: 37237&cs¼11EB13D6EF75D47F25D581132AA75414D (accessed 10.12.13.). Chen, J.L., 2002. Green evolution Rules and Ideality Laws for Green Innovative Design of Products. Care Innovation 2002, Vienna, Austria. Clean Sky JTI (Joint Technology Initiative), EU Program, http://www.cleansky.eu/. Crul, M., Diehl, J.C., 2009. Design for Sustainability-A Step-by-step Approach. UNEP, Paris. veloppement d'un syste me de management inte gre  de l'e coDaoud, W., 2009. De lectriques de moyenne tension. The se de docconception des appareillages e tiers ParisTech, Chambery. torat. Arts et Me Decision No 1753/2000/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 2000: Establishing a scheme to monitor the average specific emissions of CO2 from new passenger cars. Demoly, F., Dutartre, O., Yan, X.T., Eynard, B., Kiritsis, D., Gomes, S., 2013. Product relationships management enabler for concurrent engineering and product lifecycle management. Comput. Ind. 64 (7), 833e848. Dewulf, W., 2003. A Proactive Approach to Ecodesign: Framework and Tools (PhD thesis). Katholieke universiteit Leuven. en et du conseil du 27 janvier 2003 Directive 2002/95/CE du parlement europe  la limitation de l'utilisation de certaines substances dangereuses relative a quipements e lectriques et e lectroniques. (RoHS) dans les e Directive 2006/121/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 amending Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances in order to adapt it to regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of Chemicals (REACH) and establishing a European Chemicals Agency. Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation

175

activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the EU Community, OJ L 8, 13.1.2009, P. 3e21. Directive 2008/33/EC OF The European Parliament AND of the Council of 11 March 2008 amending Directive 2000/53/EC on end-of-life vehicles, as regards the implementing powers conferred on the Commission. Directive No 715/2007 of the european parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2007 on type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information - Official Journal of the European Union. Eberle, Franze, 1998. Modeling the use phase of passenger cars in LCI, Society of Automotive Engineers. European Aluminum Association (EAA), 2013. Aluminum in Cars-Unlocking the Light Weighting Potential. Report [online]. http://www.alueurope.eu/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/EAA-Aluminium-in-Cars-Unlocking-the-lightweighting-potential_2013.pdf (accessed 10.12.13.). Fargnoli, M., Kimura, F., 2007. An integrated approach for the sustainability measure of industrial products in design stages. In: International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED’07), Paris. Gerrard, J., Kandlikar, M., 2007. Is European end-of-life vehicle legislation living up to expectations? Assessing the impact of the ELV directive on ‘green’ innovation and vehicle recovery. J. Clean. Prod. 15, 17e27. Ginkgo 21, 2013 [Online]. http://www.gingko21-biloba.com/ (accessed 29.05.13.). Goedkoop, M., Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, M., et al., 2009. ReCiPe: a Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method Which Comprises Harmonized Category Indicators at the Midpoint and the Endpoint Level, First Edition, Report I: Characterization, 6 January 2009. Graedel, T.E., Allenby, B.R., 1998. Industrial Ecology and the Automobile. PrenticeHall Inc, New Jersey. Ilg, R., 2013. Modeling complex aviation systems e the Eco-Design tool EcoSky. In: rtolo, et al. (Eds.), Green Design, Materials and Manufacturing Processes. Ba Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp. 293e296. f. ISO/TC 207/SC5. ISO/DIS 14040, 2006. Environmental Management. LCA e re Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., 2003. Impact 2002þ: a new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 8 (6), 324e330. Jones, E., Harrison, D., 2000. Investing the Use of TRIZ in Eco-innovation, TRIZCON 2000. Altshuller Institute. Jun, H.B., Kiritsis, D., Xirouchakis, P., 2007. Research issues on closed-loop PLM. Comput. Ind. 58, 855e868. Karlsson, M., 1997. Green concurrent Engineering: Assuring Environmental Performance in Product Development. Dissertation. Lund University. Kiritsis, Dimitris, 2011. Closed-loop PLM for intelligent products in the era of the internet of things. Computer-Aided Des. 43, 479e501. Le Duigou, J., Bernard, A., Perry, N., Delplace, J.C., 2012. Generic PLM system for SMEs: application to an equipment manufacturer. Int. J. Prod. Lifecycle Manag. 6 (1), 51e64. Le Pochat, S., Bertoluci, G., et al., 2007. Integrating ecodesign by conducting changes in SMEs. J. Clean. Prod. 15, 671e680. Lindeman, U., Hessling, T., et al., 2001. Applicable methods for sustainable development for small and medium-sized companies, EcoDesign 2001. In: 2nd International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, Tokyo. Liu, G., Müller, D.B., 2012. Addressing sustainability in the aluminum industry: a critical review of life cycle assessments. J. Clean. Prod. 35, 108e117. Lofthouse, V., 2006. Ecodesign tools for designers: defining the requirements. J. Clean. Prod. 14, 1386e1395. Luttropp, C., Lagerstedt, J., 2006. Ecodesign and the ten Golden Rules: generic advise for merging environmental aspects into product development. J. Clean. Prod. 14, 1396e1408. Masui, K., 2000. New method developed for design for environment In: Current status of environmental accounting in Japan, Miyazaki N., newsletter environmentally conscious products. ECPNewsl. 15, 10e13. Millet, D., et al., 2007. Does the potential of the use of LCA match the design team needs? J. Clean. Prod. 15, 335e346. Quantis, Ernst&Young, UTT, 2009. [Online] www.quantis-intl.com/waterdatabase/ fr/index.php, (accessed 28.03.13.). Reyes, T., Rohmer, S., 2009. The trojan horse method as a vector of ecodesign integration: a case study at a french SME. In: ICED09, 17th International Conference on Engineering Design, Palo Alto, CA, USA. Ritthoff, M., Rohn, H., et al., 2002. Calculating MIPS: Resource Productivity of Products and Services. Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy at the Science Centre North Rhine, Westphalia. Sakao, T., 2007. A QFD-centered design methodology for environmentally conscious product design. Int. J. Prod. Res. 45, 4143e4162. Seiffert, M.E.B., 2008. Environmental impact evaluation using a cooperative model for implementing EMS (ISO 14001) in small and medium-sized enterprises. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1447e1461. Sullivan, J.L., Costic, M.M., Han, W., 1998. Automotive Life Cycle Assessment: Overview, Metrics, and Examples. In Design and Manufacture for the Environment. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, Pennsylvania. Tam, E.K.L., 2002. Challenges in using environmental indicators for measuring sustainability practices. J. Environ. Eng. Sci. 1, 417e425. Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at. http://jees.nrc.ca/. Telenko, C., Seepersad, C.C., Webber, W.E., 2008. A compilation of design for the environment principles and guidelines. In: ASME/IDETC/Design for Manufacturing and the Life Cycle Conference, New-York.

176

H. Andriankaja et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 94 (2015) 165e176

Terzi, S., Bouras, A., Dutta, D., Garetti, M., Kiritsis, D., 2010. Product life cycle management e from its history to its new role. Int. J. Prod. Lifecycle Manag. 4, 360e389. Tischner, U., Schmincke, E., et al., 2000. How to Do Ecodesign? a Guide for Environmentally and Economically Sound Design. German Federal Environmental Agency, Berlin. Todd, J.A., Curran, M.A., 1999. Streamlined Life-cycle Assessment. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC). Vallet, F., Eynard, B., Millet, D., Glatard Mahut, S., Tyl, B., Bertoluci, G., 2013. Using eco-design tools: an overview of experts' practices. Des. Stud. 34 (3), 345e377. Wenzel, H., Hauschild, M.Z., 2001. Environmental Assessment of Products, Methodology, Tools and Case Studies in Product Development. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Wimmer, W., Züst, R., 2003. Ecodesign PILOT: Product Investigation, Learning and Optimization Tool for Sustainable Product Development. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. Zhou, C.H., Eynard, B., Roucoules, L., 2009. Interoperability between PLM and RoHS compliance management based on XML and smart client. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng. 9 (3).

Glossary ADP (Kg Sb eq.): Abiotic Depletion Potential. It measures the depletion of (non renewable) ore reserve, referred to the depletion of the ore resources due to the extraction of 1 kg of virgin antimony.

BOL: Beginning of life DfE: Design for the Environment EAA: European Aluminum Association EC or CE: European Commission E-DEA: Everybody can Design with Environmental Awareness EFs: Environmental impact Factors. It is a specific term used in the research work reported here, to characterize the environmental impacts calculated for a unit quantity of a process. ELCD: European Life Cycle Database EOL: End of life ERP: Enterprise Resources Planning GWP (Kg CO2 eq.): Global Warming Potential. It measures the strength of all emitted greenhouse gases to increase the earth temperature, compared to the warming potential of 1 kg of carbon dioxide. JTI: Joint Technology Initiative LCA: Life Cycle Assessment LCC: Life Cycle Costing LCI: Life Cycle Inventory MOL: Middle of life OPEC: Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries PLM: Product Life cycle Management RL: Reverse Logistics SETAC: Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry SuPLight-FP7: is a European small-scale collaborative project in the 7th framework program. The project is aimed at reducing weight and improving the holistic eco design while using recycled aluminum in high-structural parts in the transport sector.