Miljøprojekt, 1053 – Ressourceeffektivitet - forslag til definition samt praktiske eksempler på anvendelse af begrebet

Ressourceeffektivitet - forslag til definition samt praktiske eksempler på anvendelse af begrebet

Summary and conclusions

Background and Objective
Definition of the Concept
Examples
Prevention of waste
Discussion

Background and Objective

The background of the project is to focus on the exploitation of resources in waste and the reduction of the volumes of waste and to relate this knowledge to products in a life cycle perspective.

The project aims to set-up a tool which is as simple as possible and can be used by companies, trade organisations, and authorities etc. to identify the loss of resources based on existing data. By identifying the most significant losses of resources it is possible to consider waste prevention where it is most relevant.

The project has the following sub targets:

To list specific examples of how resource efficiency can be assessed based on a survey of a typical life cycle of a product.

The survey of the life cycle has been made with different settings for the selected examples in order to illustrate the importance of the basis of the data.
To identify the possibilities of reducing the volumes of waste for the selected examples.

This phase is based on the survey of waste and the assessment of resources included in the determination of the resource efficiency.

The project is therefore primarily to determine if a single operational method can be laid down, point out the necessary data basis, and outline for what and by whom the method developed can be used.

Specific instructions on how an individual company or trade can use the method and a description of the data and documentation available within a certain sector are outside the scope of the project.

The target group of the present project report is not companies but authorities, experts within environmental assessments and waste and others with interest in the subject. Working in practice with resource efficiency in companies will require a more specific description of what to do and especially how to procure data e.g. as in the handbook on environmental assessments, "Håndbog i miljøvurderinger - en enkel metode" (Pommer et al., 2001), in which several data are available in reference tables.

Definition of the Concept

Resource efficiency can generally be defined as the ratio in percentage of the material content in the product and the resources used in the entire life cycle of the product.

The specification of the consumption of resource is based on life cycle principles. In this context materials and energy are regarded as resources. The connection between the elements can be illustrated as follows:

The life cycle of a product includes four phases:

Extracting and processing raw materials
Manufacturing the product
Using the product
Waste treatment and processing

In the life cycle, focus is on input material and energy flows.

The actual product is defined as the product leaving the production enterprise and the resource efficiency is related to the product unit in all cases.

It was decided to define two types of resource efficiency - one based on the consumption of materials and raw materials, and one based on the prioritised assessment of resource consumption under the UMIP method - in this context determined as an estimated assessment. The first type is based on assessment of the consumption of materials (M) showing the direct loss of raw materials and materials throughout the life cycle. The other type, based on prioritised assessments (V), shows the resources that are scarce and therefore need special attention.

The following six definitions on resource efficiency have been used, cf. table 0.1.

Table 0.1 Six definitions on resource efficiency

Description	Includes	Note
1. M_{Mat. P+B}	The consumption of materials in manufac-ture and use of the product.	Can be used by production enterprises who wish to compare themselves with similar enterprises or who wish to asses a change in the manufacturing process.
2. M_{Mat. P+B+A/N}	The consumption of materials in manufac-ture and use of the product, deducting the recovered materials.	Can be used by production enterprises who wish to asses a change in the manufacturing process leading to better possibilities for recycling. Comparison of recycling within a product group or between different product groups.
3. M_{Mat. R+P+B+A/N}	Extraction of raw materials, manufacture and use of the product, deducting the recovered materials.	Show the products that require a large consumption of raw materials. Can be used for comparison within a product group in which different materials are used.
4. V_{Mat. R+P+B}	Assessment of materials at extraction and manufacture and use of the product.	Gives companies information on which materials are scarce and therefore burden the environment. Comparison within a product group in which different materials are used.
5. V_{Mat.+energi, R+P+B}	Assessment of materials and energy at extraction and manufacture and use of the product.	Gives an opportunity to compare consumption of material and energy for a product or a product group in which the consumption of materials and energy is different.
6. V_{Mat.+energi, R+P+B+A/N}	Assessment of materials and energy at extraction and manufacture and use of the product deducting the recovered materials and energy.	Gives an opportunity to select the materials that, on the basis of scarcity can be significant to reuse. Compares recycling within a group of products for which the possibilities are different.

Note for table 0.1:
R: Raw materials
P: Manufacture
B: Phase of utilization
A/N: Waste treatment/ recovery

Examples

It was decided to work with very different examples with a view to testing the definition of the product itself and the requirement for the data basis. The examples cover very different products and different life cycles. Some examples illustrate products for which the user phase is important. Other examples illustrate products for which recycling is important. Finally, there are examples that include products in which chemicals that are normally difficult to handle in an LCA context are important.

Data for the survey of the products' life cycle are based on different materials. Some examples are based on environmental assessments carried out previously; others on data retrieved from green accounts, and finally some are based on contact with trade organisations and companies.

The following examples are included in the project:

Table 0.2

Example	Note
Manufacturing of 1 tonne of medicine	A representative average product for this type of product is difficult to point out and the information on the products is therefore insufficient. The data used is based on green accounts, which do not give sufficient information.
Manufacturing of 1 tonne of furniture	Three representative products have been used for which life cycle assessments have been carried out.
Manufacturing of 1 kg of printed circuit boards, 1 kg of transformer	Two products have been selected within the electronics sector. The data were partly based on life cycle assessments that have been carried out and partly on information from the manufacturers.
Galvanic finishing surface treatment	The product was defined as treatment of a certain surface/quantity of materials. The survey was carried out in co-operation with an expert from the trade.
Cooling agents and lubricants	The product has been defined as removal of 1 tonne of metal shavings. The survey was not sufficient and the definition of the product can only be used for limited purposes.

The best basis for an assessment of resource efficiency is that:

the product, its performance and life cycle is well defined.
a rather detailed survey of the life cycle and consumption of raw materials, additives, and energy in the entire life cycle of the product is available. Green accounts are not sufficient.
the product does not consist of large quantities of chemical substances, for which data are usually insufficient.

The calculated resource efficiencies are shown in Table 0.3.

Table 0.3 Resource efficiency

	Medicine	Furniture	Trans- former	Nickeling/ Chroming
Material statement
M_{Mat. P+B}	28 %	83 %	60%	39 %
M_{Mat. P+B+A/N}	43 %	91 %	224 %	39 %
M_{Mat. R+P+B+A/N}	8 %	32 %	109 %	10%
Assessed statement
V_{Mat. R+P+B}	27-52 %	69 %	96%	93 %
V_{Mat.+energi R+P+B}	17-33 %	24 %	56 %	91 %
V_{Mat.+energi, R+P+B+A/N}	17-33 %	40 %	178 %	91 %

Calculations for printed circuit boards, zinc electroplating and hot-dip galvanizing are not shown in the table as they are similar to other examples. The calculations for cooling agents and lubricants are also excluded as the definition of the product is difficult to manage and the data are insufficient. (cf. also chapter 8).

When manufacturing medicine, about 75% of the materials are lost when the medicine is manufactured. When extracting raw materials in the area of the 75% is also lost so that the total resource efficiency is about 5-10%. Efficiency assessed as estimated values is very uncertain as the composition of the medicine is unknown.
For furniture the loss is about 20%. As a small part of the materials for manufacturing furniture consist of metals, only limited recycling takes place. When extracting raw materials and oil, felling forest and processing of iron ore further losses are 2/3. In the estimated assessments wood is not included as a renewable resource. If the energy consumption and contents are included (especially in wood), the efficiency declines significantly. Recycling of steel and exploitation of the thermal value of the wood are important.
For transformers it is crucial that the copper is reused. Recycling of the large content of iron is less important to V_{Mat.+energi, R+P+B+A/N} than high recycling of the rather small content of tin of 0.1%. The performance of the transformer also has a decisive influence on the resource efficiency. A highly efficient transformer will therefore be able to increase resource efficiency by a factor 2-3 compared to an inefficient (and cheap) transformer.
For the process of surface finishing with nickel/chrome, the loss of materials is about 60%. There is no recycling of metals and other rejected materials from the process. When extracting metals and auxiliary constituents about 75% is lost so that the total efficiency based on materials is about 10%. The metals are most important in the estimated statement. The additives used up and are not present in the product. The efficiency for the estimated statements is therefore larger than those based on quantities of materials. The energy consumption has less influence on the use of resources than the consumption of materials.

Generally speaking the following conclusion can be drawn:

The resource efficiency for electronics and coating stated above can be used as benchmarking for companies working with the selected products.
When it has been clarified whether the data for resource efficiency within the furniture sector are up-to-date, the efficiency above can be used as a benchmark.
The resource efficiency of pharmaceutical products and cooling agents and lubricants cannot be used. The pharmaceutical industry is not homogenous and with regard to cooling agents and lubricants it has not been possible to define a product.

The resource efficiency M_{Mat. P+B+A/N} was compared with statistical information on Direct Material Input (DMI) to examine whether they are in conformity with each other. DMI is the intake of materials, partly from Denmark and partly imported goods. The information is divided into types of goods and materials.

The resource efficiency M_{Mat. R+P+B+A/N} was compared with Total Material Input (TMI) based on data from Wuppertal Institute to investigate whether they are in conformity with each other. The Wuppertals MIPS-concept is Material Input Per Unit Service and includes the total quantity of raw materials used to manufacture a certain product.

As seen in Table 0.3 the calculated efficiencies differ a lot for the different examples. The calculated efficiency reflects that

a chemical product like medicine requires detailed knowledge on composition, which was not the case in the study. It has therefore been difficult to compare with DMI and TMI.
a product based on ordinary materials such as furniture yields reasonable results that are comparable with DMI and TMI, when the survey is good.
as for specific electronic components such as circuit boards and transformers, data on DMI cannot be retrieved. It has not been possible to calculate TMI, as data on precious metals, which are considered to have a large impact on such a calculation, are not available.
the results of the coating processes provide reasonable efficiency. Comparison with DMI cannot be made as DMI is based on products. A comparison with TMI shows large differences due to variance in data on extraction of nickel and zinc.
when using cooling agents and lubricants it has not been possible to assess the operational efficiency as the output. "Removal of 1 tonne metal fillings" has been difficult to relate to an actual product. Furthermore, cooling agents and lubricants are chemical products for which the data are insufficient.

Prevention of waste

Based on the knowledge achieved in the survey and the tables on resource efficiency of each single example, an assessment on the possibilities for prevention of waste has been made. The most significant issues identified are shown in table 0.4.

Table 0.4

Pharmaceutical products	The survey is insufficient and it is therefore difficult to point out the possibilities to prevent waste. Efforts should be made to ensure that all materials including materials from biological sources, solvents and chemical compounds, which are present in waste and in residues from the manufacture are recovered when ever possible.
Furniture	Incineration with the use of energy of not too polluted waste wood. Increased recovery of steel and use of low-alloy steel whenever possible. Collection of plastic waste and scrap products with a view to reprocessing, alternatively incineration with the use of energy.
Transformers	Ensuring that transformers are sent for treatment where copper is separated and processed in a copper melting plant. More focus on recovery of tin from solders in the copper melting plant. Separate remelting of separated sheet metal where residues of copper are avoided as much as possible.
Nickeling/chroming	Nickel is a scarce resource and the aim should be to recover the material in waste from the manufacture and from scrap products. Chromium is especially lost in the manufacturing process and methods for recovering the materials should be developed.

Discussion

A statement of the resource efficiency and thereby identification of the phases of a product's life cycle in which resources are lost, can be used as part of the basis for decisions to optimise the resources and minimise the waste when sufficient data can be retrieved.

For products on which life cycle assessments or surveys (LCI) have already been prepared, the individual company can use resource efficiency for comparing the company's own figures.

The individual company can set-up the resource efficiency M_{Mat. P+B} immediately, while other defined resource efficiencies require data on recovery and extraction of raw materials which must be transferred to analyses. Not all companies have this knowledge.

At the level of authorities and/or experts, all six defined types of resource efficiency give information on where in the life cycle resources are lost, the importance of recovery and which materials from a scarcity perspective are most important.

It is therefore recommended to continue working on the problems concerning resource efficiency as it can become a simple and useful tool for companies, trades, authorities and other decision-makers.

One of the objectives of the LCA-knowledge centre is to build-up general knowledge encompassing relevant, existing data from life cycle assessments and surveys. When the work has been partly/fully carried out it is essential to establish a more adequate and accessible basis of data for calculation of analyses. This should include considerations of changing software (Gabi) that will replace the LCV tool in the UMIP method.

Furthermore, it is recommended to prepare accessible information materials together with trade organisations within the selected product groups/sectors so that companies can realise the concept and use it in their development work and manufacturing. It is also essential to gather as many "basic data" as possible so that the work on setting-up and calculating the efficiencies is partly based on figures from the company and partly on accessible data.