Promoting Resource Efficiency in Small & Medium size ... - UNEP

Figure 13: Life cycle analysis of a product shows material and energy flows of material extraction, processing, manufacturing, use and disposal as a basis to
develop Resource Efficiency strategies. 15
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Production Distribution Use Disposal
Figure 14: LCA of a washing machine 16
2.3 Life cycle analysis
Energy Consumption
Air Pollution
Water Poluttion
Solid Waste
Water Consumption
Resource Efficiency involves the consideration of all the stages of the
life cycle of a product including extraction of resources, production, the
use of the product and disposal or recycling.
Fabrication of a product with minimal use of resources involves: reducing
up-take of raw material, reusing materials from other processes, recycling
products into new products and repairing products instead of replacing
them with new ones. To be effective, such considerations must be built
into industrial processes and the life cycle planning of a product.
The product life cycle in Figure 13 is shown in five distinct phases,
all of which interact with the environment. Figure 13 also shows, as
feedback loops, the potential for recycling, remanufacturing and reuse.
Reuse is the strategy that potentially has the lowest environmental
impact, based on the fact that this involves fewer processes; each stage
absorbs energy and has an environmental impact.
Depending on the type of product, major environmental and social
impacts might originate from different stages. With some materials
such as copper or aluminium, the extraction phase has the biggest
impact because of the energy intensity of this step. With batterypowered
products the phase of use might have the biggest impact
because of the use of consumable batteries, which are generally
classified as hazardous waste. A car, for example, has equal energy
consumption in production and use. The environmental impact of
different phases for each product should be understood
to identify the priority areas, to reduce the environmental
impact and to increase Resource Efficiency.
Figure 14 shows a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of a washing
machine in terms of the energy and water used, of the
contribution to air and water pollution, and of solid waste.
As you might expect, most of the environmental impact is
during use. You might have predicted that most of the solid
waste impact would be the two stages of delivery (when
the packaging is removed and disposed of) and eventual
end-of-life disposal. Whilst the solid waste levels are indeed
significantly higher than other contributors at these stages,
in fact they total less than 15% of the solid waste produced
by the washing machine. Just think of the many packets of
washing powder and other consumables that are thrown out during
the machine’s life. This illustrates that every aspect of use must be
considered carefully and that the ‘system boundary’ must be drawn
broadly enough to cover all relevant externalities.
2.4 Indicators for Resource Efficiency
2.4.1 Dematerialisation: Material intensity per unit
of service
As outlined in Agenda 21 of the United Nations Conference on
Environmental and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992,
there is a need for sustainability indicators to provide a solid basis for
decision-making and to measure progress.
In 1992, Prof. Schmidt Bleek proposed the Material (including energy)
Intensity Per unit of Service (utility or function) - the MIPS - as a measure
for “estimating the ecological stress potential of goods and services
from cradle to grave”. MIPS is computed in material input per total
unit of services delivered by the product over its entire useful life span
(Resource extraction, manufacturing, transport, packaging, operating,
reuse, recycling and remanufacturing are accounted for, and so is the
final waste disposal). From the material inputs of resource extraction,
manufacturing, transport, etc., the ‘ecological rucksack’ of a product or
service is calculated. Ecological rucksack means the consumption of
resources and energy during the extraction of the resources in the ground
and its processing. 17
15) Source: Martin Tarr
16) Source: Andrew Sweatman
17) Schmidt-Bleek F., The Factor 10/MIPS-Concept, Bridging Ecological, Economic,
and Social Dimensions with Sustainability Indicators’, F., 2000
15