1 / 18

The Development of Environmental Policy

Life Cycle Management The Development of Environmental Policy 1970s - Introduction of environmental regulations (single process, single site and single medium) 1990 - Integrated pollution control (single process, single site, all mediums) 1999 - Integrated pollution prevention and control

JasminFlorian
Download Presentation

The Development of Environmental Policy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Life Cycle Management The Development of Environmental Policy 1970s - Introduction of environmental regulations (single process, single site and single medium) 1990 - Integrated pollution control(single process, single site, all mediums) 1999 - Integrated pollution prevention and control (whole environmental performance of a plant) 2004 - Integrated product policy (adoption of life cycle perspective) Environmental product declarations Economicinstruments Extendedproducerresponsibility Voluntaryagreements Substance bans Productdesignguidelines

  2. Integrated Product Policy (Based on Environmental Life-Cycle Thinking) Life Cycle Improvements Implement & realize Identify & quantify • Why product-based policy: • Overall product quantity is increasing • Variety is increasing • Innovation creates new product types • Products are traded globally • Product complexity is increasing • Use phase and disposal can have large impacts • Great variety of actors involved • Approach: • Life-cycle thinking • Working with the market • Stakeholder involvement • Continuous improvement • Variety of policy instruments Source: European Commission COM(2003) 302 final July 2003 http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ipp/home.htm

  3. Example: Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles Industrial Ecology – Winter 2005 – 2nd weekend – 5 February

  4. Example: Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles Industrial Ecology – Winter 2005 – 2nd weekend – 5 February

  5. Example: Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles US CO2 emissions from transportation vs. total (in MMT) 32.3% 27.6% Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/

  6. Example: Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles US Greenhouse Gas Emission by Sector (in million metric tons) Source: US Emission Inventory 2005, EPA

  7. Example: Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles • European Union • Goal: Average of 193 g CO2eq per km driven for passenger cars by 2010 • 1999/2000: Negotiated self-commitments with the European, Japanese and Korean automobile industries.). • Comment: Does not mention life cycle or other greenhouse gases. • California - Assembly Bill 1493 • Goal: Average of 205 g CO2eq per mile driven for passenger cars by 2016 • 2002: AB 1493 passes Assembly and Senate • 2004: AB 1493is approved by Governor • Comment: Is formulated for CO2 eq. emissions and accounts for ‘upstream emissions’, which means emissions of fuel production but not life cycle emissions of the vehicle. • New York State • June 2005: Official proposal to adopt California’s regulation

  8. Example: Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles Typical Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of a ICE Passenger Car 10.3 % 4.3 % 85.3 % 0.1 % Source: Development Bank of Japan, 2004

  9. Example: Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles Typical Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of a Hybrid Passenger Car 14.7 % 5.7 % 79.5 % 0.1 % Source: Bren Group Project on HEV (Class of 2005)

  10. Example: The Impact of Material Choice on GHG Emissions from Vehicles MaterialCurrent AverageGHG Emissions (in kg CO2eq / kg of material) Primary Production Secondary Production Steel 2.3 – 2.7 0.7 – 1.0 AHSS 2.3 – 2.7 0.7 – 1.0 Aluminum 13.9 – 15.5 1.4 – 2.0 Materials Production Vehicle Manufacturing Vehicle Use Vehicle Disposal Material Choice Source: IISI, IAI

  11. Example: The Impact of Material Choice on GHG Emissions from Vehicles MaterialAll Estimates for Material in Body-in-White Applications Recycled Content Weight Savings Potential Steel 11 % – 15 % AHSS 11 % – 15 % ~ 25 % Aluminum 0 % – 11 % 30 – 50 % Materials Production Vehicle Manufacturing Vehicle Use Vehicle Disposal Material Choice

  12. Example: The Impact of Material Choice on GHG Emissions from Vehicles ParameterValue Range Fuel Savings per Weight Savings *) (in l/100km per 100kg saved) 0.11 – 0.48 (in % fuel savings per % weight savings) 0.19 – 0.84 Total vehicle mileage 100,000 – 291,543 km (used in previous studies) 62,150 – 181,195 miles Materials Production Vehicle Manufacturing Vehicle Use Vehicle Disposal Material Choice *) Source: fka

  13. Example: The Impact of Material Choice on GHG Emissions from Vehicles MaterialRecycling rate Scrap mainly used for Market Size Steel 90 – 96 % Long Products and Growing AHSS 90 –96 % Engineering Steels Growing Aluminum 83 –90 % Castings Limited Materials Production Vehicle Manufacturing Vehicle Use Vehicle Disposal Material Choice

  14. Challenges and Limitations of Life Cycle ManagementThe Problem of Agency in Industrial Ecology: Industrial Ecology needs to have some idea who the actors in the industrial ecologyare, and what motivates their actions. (Tim Jackson & Roland Clift, 1998, JIE, Vol. 2 No. 1) • Industrial and consumer activities are process-based but agent-driven • One production and consumption system consists of many agents • Environmental impact is based on whole system performance (life cycle perspective) • Agents, however, usually base their decisions on criteria other than environmental (e.g. economic performance), which are applied to smaller sub-systems Perspective Objective Whole System Individual Agents (Sub-System) Driver Environmental Economic or Other Performance

  15. Challenges and Limitations of Life Cycle ManagementIs Life Cycle Management win-win?

  16. Challenges and Limitations of Life Cycle ManagementOpportunities for Win-Win Scenarios: • Cost savings (e.g. ARM, 3P, WRAP, SMART) • - Reducing waste • - Saving energy • - Product take-back • Environmental risk management (Union Carbide, Exxon, Shell) • - Industrial accident • - Consumer boycott • - Environmental lawsuit • Product differentiation (e.g. organic produce, FSC, HEVs) • - Customer willing to pay more for environmental benefits • - Environmental benefits are credible • - Protection from imitators • Managing the competition (e.g. DuPont) • - Private regulatory programs • - Government regulation • Redefining markets (e.g. Xerox, Interface, Mobility, StattAuto) • - Products into services • - Product innovations (Source: F L Reinhardt, HBS)

  17. Arcelor (steel company) Nokia Xerox Take-backentrepreneur Inter Steel (steel broker) Challenges and Limitations of Life Cycle ManagementOne Life Cycle, many Actors Raw materials mining Primary materials production Component manufacture Final product assembly Product sale and delivery Product demand & use Materials re- processing Component re- processing Product re- processing Eol product collection & inspection End-of-life product disposal • Life Cycle Management - Objective: High environmental performance of the product system - Boundaries: Product Life Cycle • Economic agent • - Objective: High financial performance of the business • - Boundaries: Financial boundaries of the business

  18. Challenges and Limitations of Life Cycle ManagementOne Life Cycle, many Actors Measures to coordinate the actors in a product life cycle • Coordination of the life cycle through policy • - Extended producer responsibility (e.g. WEEE Directive) • - Environmental standards based on life cycle performance (e.g. polices based on life cycle emissions) • - Policies that internalize external cost of businesses • Coordination of the life cycle through business management • - Contracts based on service level instead of product sales (e.g. Xerox, Interface, chemical suppliers) • - Profit or cost sharing schemes • - Vertical integration of business activities • (e.g. corporate product take-back) • - Information brokers • Coordination of the life cycle through consumer behavior • - Environmental product declarations based on life cycle performance • - Consumer awareness of the life cycle impacts of products

More Related