Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A practical methodology to project the design of more sustainable products in the production stage

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Research in Engineering Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Methods and tools to develop sustainable products are ever more required by companies to balance the efficiency of its operations with its responsibilities for environmental and social actions. This work aims at achieving improved products along its production stage by the application of a methodology, which consists of three different phases: (i) sustainability assessment; (ii) product redesign; (iii) comparing designs. Different impacts are assessed, sustainability strategies are proposed and more sustainable design alternatives are projected. The procedure is supported by the use of engineering metrics and sustainability indicators, conveniently selected to quantitatively measure the three dimensions of the sustainability: environmental, economic and social. The methodology is implemented in two case studies. First, the manufacturing process of an airbrush is analyzed. Next, the cow milk production in a dairy farm is studied. Strategies to reduce impacts and to achieve an improvement in the sustainability performance of the product are addressed in each case. Both, environmental and socio-economic improvements, are obtained. Thus, a practical method to carry out sustainability-oriented decision making in production processes is developed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andriankaja H, Vallet F, Le Duigou J, Eynard B (2015) A method to ecodesign structural parts in the transport sector based on product life cycle management. J Clean Prod 94:165–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asadi S, Babaizadeh H, Foster N, Broun R (2016) Environmental and economic life cycle assessment of PEX and copper plumbing systems: a case study. J Clean Prod 137:1228–1236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azapagic A, Perdan S (2000) Indicators of sustainable development for industry: a general framework. Trans IChemE Process Saf Environ Protect Part B 78(4):243–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azapagic A, Stamford L, Youds L, Barteczko-Hibbert C (2016) Towards sustainable production and consumption: a novel decision-support framework integrating economic, environmental and social sustainability (DESIRES). Comput Chem Eng 91:93–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babaizadeh H, Haghighi N, Asadi S, Broun R, Riley D (2015) Life cycle assessment of exterior window shadings in resident building in different climate zones. Build Environ 90:168–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldini C, Gardoni D, Guarino M (2017) A critical review of the recent evolution of Life Cycle Assessment applied to milk production. J Clean Prod 140:421–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benetto E, Rousseaux P, Blondin J (2004) Life cycle assessment of coal by-products based electric power production scenarios. Fuel 83:957–970

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoît-Norris C, Vickery-Niederman G, Valdivia S, Franze J, Traverso M, Ciroth A, Mazijn B (2011) Introducing the UNEP/SETAC methodological sheets for subcategories of social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:682–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernier E, Maréchal F, Samson R (2013) Life cycle optimization of energy-intensive processes using eco-costs. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(9):1747–1761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boër CR, Pedrazzoli P, Bettoni A, Sorlini M (2013) Mass customization and sustainability. An assessment framework and industrial implementation. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovea MD, Pérez-Belis V (2012) A taxonomy of eco-design tools for integrating environmental requirements into the product design process. J Clean Prod 20(1):61–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bovea MD, Wang B (2007) Redesign methodology for developing environmentally conscious products. Int J Prod Res 45(18):4057–4072

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Brezet JC, Van Hemel CG (1997) Ecodesign: a promising approach to sustainable production and consumption. UNEP. United Nations Publications, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Capitano C, Traverso M, Rizzo G, Finkbeiner M (2011) Life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to marble products. In: Proceedings of the LCM Conference, Berlin

  • Chang Y, Sproesser G, Neugebauer S, Wolf K, Scheumann R, Pittner A, Rethmeier M, Finkbeiner M (2015) Environmental and social life cycle assessment of welding technologies. Procedia CIRP 26:293–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Franze J (2011) LCA of an Ecolabeled Notebook. Consideration of social and environmental Impacts along the entire life cycle. GreenDeltaTC GmbH, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Crul M, Diehl JC (2009) Design for sustainability. A step-by-step approach. UNEP. United Nations Publications, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Dannheim F, Grüner C, Birkhofer H (1998) Human Factors in Design for Environment. In: proceedings of the 5th international seminar on life cycle engineering stockholm

  • Dewulf W (2003) A proactive approach to ecodesign: framework and tools, PhD thesis, Katholieke universiteit Leuven, Leuven

  • Durlinger B, Koukouna E, Broekema R, van Paassen M, Scholten J (2017) Agri-footprint 3.0. Blonk Consultants, Gouda, NL

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastwood MD, Haapala KR (2015) A unit process model based methodology to assist product sustainability assessment during design for manufacturing. J Clean Prod 108:54–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elduque D, Javierre C, Pina C, Martínez E, Jiménez E (2014) Life cycle assessment of a domestic induction job: electronic boards. J Clean Prod 76:74–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M, Schau EM, Lehmann A, Traverso M (2010) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustain 2(10):3309–3322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foolmaun RK, Ramjeawon T (2012) Life cycle sustainability assessments (LCSA) of four disposal scenarios for used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Environ Dev Sustain 14(6):783–806

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagnon B, Leduc R, Savard L (2012) From a conventional to a sustainable engineering design process: different shades of sustainability. J Eng Des 23(1):49–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gan X, Fernández IC, Guo J, Wilson M, Zhao Y, Zhou B, Wu J (2017) When to use what: methods for weighting and aggregating sustainability indicators. Ecol Indi 81:491–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop M, Spriensma R (2000) The Eco-indicator 99. A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Methodology report. PRé Consultants B.V., Amersfoort

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinée J, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A et al (2001) Life cycle assessment—an operational guide to the ISO standards. Centre Environ Sci (CML), Leiden University, Leiden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hallstedt S, Ny H, Robèrt K-H, Broman G (2010) An approach to assessing sustainability integration in strategic decision systems. J Clean Prod 18:703–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunkeler D, Rebitzer G, Lichtenvort K (eds) Ciroth A, Hunkeler D, Huppes G, Lichtenvort K, Rebitzer G, Rüdenauer I, Steen B (2008) Environmental life cycle costing. SETAC Publications, New York

  • Iritani DR, Silva DAL, Saavedra YMB, Grael PFF, Ometto AR (2015) Sustainable strategies analysis through life cycle assessment. A case study in a furniture industry. J Clean Prod 96:308–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2006a) ISO 14040 International Standard. In: Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. International Organisation for Standardization, Geneva

  • ISO (2006b) ISO 14040 International Standard. In: Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. International Organisation for Standardization, Geneva

  • Johnson EF, Gay A (1995) A practical, customer-oriented DFE methodology. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on electronics and the environment. IEEE, Orlando

  • Jones E, Harrison D (2000) Investing the use of TRIZ in Eco-innovation, TRIZCON2000. Altshuller Institute, Egham

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson M (1997) Green concurrent engineering: assuring environmental performance in product development. Licentiate Thesis, IIEEE. Lund University, Lund

  • Kemna R, van Elburg M, Li W, van Holsteijn R (2005) MEEuP methodology report. VHK for European Commission, Delft

    Google Scholar 

  • Keoleian GA, Koch JE, Menerey D (1995) Life cycle design framework and demonstration projects. Profiles of AT&T and Alliedsignal. EPA/600/R-95/107. United States Environmental Protection Agency Ed., Cincinnati

  • Kjaer LL, Pigosso DCA, Niero M, Bech NM, McAloone TC (2019) Product/service-systems for a circular economy: the route to decoupling economic growth from resource consumption? J Ind Ecol 23(1):22–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kloepffer W (2007) Life-cycle based sustainability assessments as part of LCM. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on life cycle management, Zurich

  • Kloepffer W (2008) Life cycle sustainability assessment of products (with comments by Helias A. Udo de Haes, p. 95). Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo TC, Wu HH (2003) Green products development by applying grey relational analysis and green quality function deployment. Int J Fuzzy Syst 5(4):229–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacasa E, Santolaya JL, Fuentes L, Majarena AC (2015) Implementing sustainability criteria in product development. Procedia Eng 132:1029–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacasa E, Santolaya JL, Biedermann A (2016) Obtaining sustainable production from the product design analysis. J Clean Prod 139:706–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagerstedt J, Luttropp C, Lindfors LG (2003) Functional priorities in LCA and design for environment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(3):160–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lofthouse V (2006) Ecodesign tools for designers: defining the requirements. J Clean Prod 14:1386–1395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luttropp C, Lagerstedt J (2006) Ecodesign ant the ten golden rules: generic advice for merging environmental aspects into product development. J Clean Prod 14:1396–1408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez E, Sanz F, Pellegrini S, Jiménez E, Blanco J (2009) Life cycle assessment of a multi-megawatt wind turbine. Renew Energy 34:667–673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masruroh NA, Li B, Klemes J (2006) Life cycle analysis of a solar thermal system with thermochemical storage process. Renew Energy 31:537–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell D, Sheate W, Van der Vorst R (2006) Functional and systems aspects of the sustainable product and service development approach for industry. J Clean Prod 14:1466–1479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAloone T, Tan A (2005) Sustainable product development through a life-cycle approach to product and service creation: an exploration of the extended responsibilities and possibilities for product developers. In: Proceedings of Eco-X conference: ecology and economy in electronix, Kerp, Vienna, pp 1–12

  • Ng R, Yeo Z, Sze Choong Low J, Song B (2015) A method for relative eco-efficiency analysis and improvement: case study of bonding technologies. J Clean Prod 99:320–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsson J, Lindahl M, Jensen C (1998) The information flow for efficient design for environmental: analysis of preconditions and presentation of a new tool. in: proceedings of cirp, 5th international seminar on life-cycle engineering, Stockholm, Sweden

  • Oberender C, Birkhofer H (2004) The eco-value analysis. An approach to assigning environmental impacts and costs to customers’ demands. In: proceedings of the international design conference. DESIGN 2004, Dubrovnik

  • Onat NC, Kucukvar M, Tatari O, Zheng QP (2016) Combined application of multi-criteria optimization and life-cycle sustainability assessment for optimal distribution of alternative passenger cars in US. J Clean Prod 112:291–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quantis, Ernst & Young, UTT (2009). [Online] www.quantis-intl.com/waterdatabase/fr/index.php. Accessed Jan 2018

  • Reginald BHT, Hsien HK (2005) Life cycle assessment of EPS and CPB inserts: design considerations and end of life scenarios. J Env Manag 74:195–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren J (2018) Life cycle sustainability index for the prioritization of industrial systems under data uncertainties. Comput Chem Eng 113:253–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren J, Manzardo A, Mazzi A, Zuliani F, Scipioni A (2015) Prioritiation of bioethanol production pathways in China based on life cycle sustainability assessment and multicriteria decision-making. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:842–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritthoff M, Rohn H, Liedtke C (2002) Calculating MIPS: resource productivity for products and services. Wuppertal Spezial 27e, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, Science Centre North Rhine-Westphalia

  • Sakao T (2007) A QFD-centered design methodology for environmentally conscious product design. Int J Prod Res 45:4143–4162

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sakao T (2009) Quality engineering for early stage of environmentally conscious design. Total Qual Manag J 21(2):182–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Song Q, Wang Z, Li J, Zeng X (2012) Life cycle assessment of TV sets in China: a case of study of the impacts of CRT monitors. Waste Manag 32:1926–1936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tagliaferri C, Clift R, Lettieri P, Chapman C (2017) Liquefied natural gas for the UK: a life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:1944–1956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tischner U, Schmincke E et al (2000) How to do ecodesign? A guide for environmentally and economically sound design. German Federal Environmental Agency, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Traverso M, Asdrubali F, Francia A, Finkbeiner M (2012) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to photovoltaic modules. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:1068–1079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UBA (2007) Umweltbundesamt (UBA). German Environmental Protection Agency. PROBAS Database. [Online] http://www.probas.umweltbundesamt.de/php/index.php. Accessed Apr 2017

  • UNCED (1992) Agenda 21. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP-SETAC (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. United Nations Environment Programme, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Valdivia S, Ugaya CML, Hildenbrand J, Traverso M, Mazijn B, Sonneman G (2013) A UNEP/SETAC approach towards a life cycle sustainability assessment-our contribution to Rio + 20. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1673–1685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vezzoli C, Kohtala C, Srinivasan A (2014) Product-service system design for sustainability. Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • VROM (2000) Eco-indicator 99. Manual for designers. A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, The Hague

  • Wang JJ, Sun YW, Tingley DD, Zhang YR (2017) Life cycle sustainability assessment of fly ash structures. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 80:1162–1174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watz M, Hallstedt SI (2018) Integrating sustainability in product requirements. In: DS92 proceedings of the DESIGN 2018, 15th international design conference, 1405–1416

  • WCED (1987) Our common future. Report of World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford University Press, New York

  • Wenzel H, Hauschild MZ (2001) Environmental assessment of products. Methodology, tools and case studies in product development. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson MC, Wu J (2017) The problems of weak sustainability and associated indicators. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 24(1):44–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer W, Züst R (2003) Ecodesign PILOT: Product Investigation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Learn Optim Tool Sustain Product Dev

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Z, Jiang H, Qin L (2007) Life cycle sustainability assessment of fuels. Fuel 86:256–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Design and Manufacturing Engineering Department, EINA, University of Zaragoza, C/Maria de Luna 3, 50018, Saragossa, Spain

    J. L. Santolaya, E. Lacasa, A. Biedermann & N. Muñoz

Authors
  1. J. L. Santolaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. Lacasa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Biedermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. Muñoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. L. Santolaya.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Santolaya, J.L., Lacasa, E., Biedermann, A. et al. A practical methodology to project the design of more sustainable products in the production stage. Res Eng Design 30, 539–558 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-019-00320-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-019-00320-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation