Tools of DfE

Many methods have been developed for integrating environmental considerations in the design of new products. Many authors have developed approaches to design for environment. The variety of methods and tools ranged from the general to the specific, focusing on parts of the life cycle (typically use and disposal) or on certain types of products or services. Some methods were intended for use early in the design process while others were aimed at use during the detailed design phase. Classifications of DfE tools are proposed by Byggeth and Hochschorner (2006), Knight and Jenkins (2009), and Ilgin and Gupta (2010). The most update taxonomy on DfE tools is proposed by Bovea and Pérez-Belis (2012). According to the authors, DfE tools aims at integrating environmental aspects into the design process, and are defined as the combination of “methods for integrating environmental and other traditional requirements” and “methods for evaluating the environmental aspect”.

3.2.4.1 Methods for integrating environmental and other traditional requirements

This group considers methods like Design Matrix, Quality Function Deployment (QFD), Value Analysis (VA), and Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA).

Tools based on design matrix are descriptive techniques that concern the qualitative evaluation of the design team for different requirements of a product (including the environmental one) throughout its life cycle. QFD is applied in order to consider environmental requirements during the early stages of product development. These tools are applied to check that the product satisfies the customer requirements, including the environmental requirements. VA and allow a product to be designed or redesigned at low cost, while including all the functions for which the customer is willing to pay in order to obtain perceived environmental benefits. The Failure Mode and Effect Analysis is a methodology usually used to identify, assess and prevent deficiencies related with product safety. However, component failure safety factors can be replaced by environmental issue factors.

3.2.4.2 Methods for evaluating the environmental aspect

These methods are dedicate to the measurement of the environmental performance of products. These techniques range from environmental indicators focused on specific environmental problems, to more comprehensive methods that consider a wide range of environmental categories throughout the whole product life cycle. This group can be classified in three main categories: qualitative, semi-qualitative, and quantitative techniques. This classification is reported in Table 3.2.1. Qualitative or semi- quantitative methods are simple to use, fast, and offer advantages in situations where the environmental performance of the product is easy to evaluate. According to Bovea and Pérez-Belis (2012), they are, however, not very reliable. Quantitative methods are proper whether a detailed environmental profile of a product is needed. On the other hand, qualitative techniques require a large amount of data on the analysed product. Therefore, these methods have a tendency to enter the design process at a late stage, such as in the prototypal phase, when only minor changes can be made. This conflict defines the so-called “design process paradox” (Hauschild et al., 2005; Lagerstedt, 2003), described in 3.2.5.

Tool Reference Description

Qualitative techniques

Checklists Keoleian et al. (1995)

Series of questions formulated to help designers work in addressing environmental issues during design process. Matrix Element Checklist

for ERP

Graedel and Allenby (1998)

Combination of questions that generates a relation between environmental problems and the product life stages. MET-Matrix Brezet and van

Hemel (1997)

Method based on two matrices. The first considers three environmental concern categories (materials cycle, energy use and toxic emissions) and three life cycle stages (production, use and disposal). The second matrix indicates the severity of the abovementioned environmental effects. Ten Golden Rules Luttropp and

Lagerstedt (2006)

It is a summary of main guidelines. This tool shows ten rules that should be applied into the product development process

Semi-quantitative techniques Environmentally Responsible Product/Process Assessment Matrix (ERP) Graedel and Allenby (1998)

Method based on two matrices: one for products and another for processes. Rows represent life cycle stages, columns indicate environmental concerns on a numerical scale. The overall rating is computed as the sum of the matrix element values.

Environmental Product Life Cycle Matrix (EPLC)

Gerstakis et al. (1997)

Similar to the ERP matrix. No distinction is made between processes or products and environmental concern columns are replaced by proper impact categories.

Ecodesign Checklist

Method (ECM) Wimmer (1999)

A checklist is applied at three different levels: parts, product and function. A semi-quantitative assessment is then applied quantify the fulfilment of Ecodesign requirements. Streamlined Life Cycle

Assessment (SLCA)

Bennett and Graedel (2000)

Tool for identifying hot spots and highlighting key opportunities to effect environmental improvements. It is particularly helpful when comparing different products. Product Investigation, Learning and Optimization Tool (PILOT) Wimmer et al. (2004)

New multimedia tool based on ECM. PILOT includes more Ecodesign guidelines then ECM.

Quantitative techniques

Environmental Indicators Navinchandra (1991)

These environmental parameters allow different alternative designs to be evaluated from the environmental point of view, thus facilitating the decision-making process during product development.

Oil Point Method (OPM) Lenau and Bey (2001)

Indicators in the OPM are defined as the energy

consumption or energy content measured in kilograms of crude oil (1 Oil Point [OP] = energy content of 1 kg crude oil = 45 MJ).

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

ISO 14040-44 (2006)

LCA considers the entire life cycle of the product, usually from cradle-to-grave, and allows to obtain environmental indicator obtained for each impact category or to calculate a single indicator grouping all the impact categories

considered.