Ford of Europe's Product Sustainability Index - Wulf-Peter Schmidt Ford of Europe, Vehicle Environmental Engineering
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Ford of Europe’s
Product Sustainability Index
Society
Environment Economy
Wulf-Peter Schmidt
Ford of Europe, Vehicle Environmental Engineering
Supervisor CO2/Sustainability & Tech. Spec. Vehicle Recycling
Sustainability of Cars – The Challenges • CO2 / Climate change • Other Pollution (e.g. Summer Smog) • Oil dependency • Overcrowded streets / mobility capability per car • Safety • Affordability • Etc. 2 All dimensions of sustainability
Sustainable Product Design (SPD)
beyond Eco-Design
• Having in mind all sustainability challenges mentioned
above (not only environment / CO2).
• Reasonably limiting all of these aspects to those directly
impacted by product development m’gmt.
• Respecting company specific culture, data availability,
resources, knowledge, etc. as well as other requirements.
• Design that offers the needed functionalities and aesthetics
making sustainability attractive for all consumer groups.
Sustainable Design
Design that not only follows function and
(long-term) aesthetical aspects but meets the
need of the present without compromising
3
the ability of future generations to meet their needs.
What is PSI measuring – how and why?
Indicator Metric Why Important?
Life Cycle Global Climate Change gases along the Carbon intensity as
Warming Potential product life cycle* (LCA) main strategic issue
Life Cycle Air Summer Smog gases (NOx, VOC) Potential trade-off:
Quality Potential along the life cycle* (LCA) non-CO2 emissions
Sustainable recycled & natural materials per Resource Scarcity
Materials vehicle polymer weight
Restricted Allergy-tested label etc. Substance risk
Substances (15 point rating) management
Drive-by-Noise Drive-by exterior Noise = dB(A) Society concern
Safety Different Safety criteria Main direct impact
Mobility Capability Mobility capacity (seats, luggage) Crowded cities
to vehicle size (future: disabled)
Life Cycle Price + 3 years fuel, maintenance Consumer focus/
Ownership Costs costs, taxation - residual value Competitiveness
*(from raw material extraction through production to use (150000 km) and recovery)
4 Note: legal compliance issues are the baseline, i.e. not a topic of PSI.
Also aspects decided before PD (e.g. service aspects) cannot be covered by PSI
Ford S-MAX and Galaxy: pilots for PSI • 2002 Senior management decision for PSI piloting (all new FoE products starting with S-MAX/Galaxy) • 2002 Target discussions • 2002-2005 Tracking PSI by Vehicle Integration • 2006 ISO14040 Verification Study, external review (ISO 14040) 5
PSI – Example Galaxy diesel
Life Cycle Global
Warming
Life Cycle Cost Life Cycle Air Quality
of Ownership
Mobility Capability 20 40 60 80 100
Sustainable Materials
Restricted Substances
Safety
Key: inside worse
outside better
Prior Ford Galaxy 1.9l TDI Drive-by-exterior Noise
New Ford Galaxy 2.0 l TDCi with DPF
80% theoretical best cross-industry
B to V segment Europe
6
Improvements in all three dimensions
(described area is getting bigger)Roles & Responsibilities (PSI implementation)
Process Lead Responsibility
• PSI Methodology • Corporate Citizenship /
Product Planning
• Data Input • Individual Data owner
• PSI Calculation • Vehicle Integration (VI)
• PSI Target Setting, Reporting, • Chief Program Eng. / Project
Compliance Mg’ment / Vehicle Integration
• Integration / Awareness / Training • PD Factory
• Supplier Communication • Purchasing
• Cross Carline Co-ordination • Product Planning
• Governance • FoE Operating
Committee
After finalization of PSI methodology
7
all done by Product Development itselfImplementing Life Cycle Thinking in PD
• Calculation of PSI based on PSI-POCP [kg Ethen-eq]
simplified LCA / LCC via 46
PSI-GWP [t CO2-eq]
spreadsheet file 44
• Based on available data of PD 42
vehicle attribute target / status charts 40
plus few additional data 38
(in total approx 20 entered data)
36
• PSI included in normal Multi-Panel 34
Ford Galaxy 2.0 l TDCi with DPF
Chart managing all vehicle attributes 32
throughout the PD process KO (target range) PA PR CC Verification
• PSI run by PD engineers who are
no specialists in the area of LCA or sustainability
• Optimal fit to Ford design approach etc.
-> each company has to find its own approach
Lean management, no incremental
8
resources, fit to Ford cultureProduct Sustainability Index Conclusions • Making different corporate function accountable for their sustainability • Ensure tailored approaches requiring no additional resources and no expert knowledge • Implementation and application need to be done by affected corporate functions – making they feel owning the subject • Voluntary approach superior to mandatory one (one-size-fits all, no competitive advantage) 9
Back-up • Other answers to sustainability challenge • Organisation of sustainability in Ford of Europe • More PSI information • Evolution of Dfx 10
Sustainability of Cars – the answers
• “We, the auto industry, need to take the initiative
• Accept that consumer not ready to compromise
price or performance for green
• Accelerate low-CO2 technologies …
• Cooperate with the oil co’s
• Work with governments (integrated approach) for
support through taxation, incentives and
infrastructure”
John Fleming President and CEO Ford of Europe
Sustainability is the pre-condition
for continuing business & will finally
11
turn to an opportunityAccelerate low-CO2 technologies …
100 Fuel Cell
% CO2 Reduction
80 H2 ICE
Ethanol
60
Gasoline
Full Hybrid
40 Diesel
Real
Micro Hybr.
Diesel World
Gasoline
20 Micro Hybr. CNG
Gasoline DI LPG
0
Gasoline
Cost
12
Note: European situation only. NEDC – New European Drive CycleFord of Europe‘s functional organisation
of sustainability
d uct ility
b
Pro taina I)
s
Su x (PS
e
Ind
• Main functions are responsible for their bit of sustainability
• Tailored Sustainability Management Tools
13PSI Results Ford Galaxy & S-MAX
Indicator Previous Ford Ford Galaxy 2.0L Ford S-MAX 2.0L
Galaxy 1.9 L TDI TDCi with DPF TDCi with DPF
GWP [t CO2-eq] (1) 41 40 39
POCP [kg Ethene-eq] (1)
J
39 37 37
Sustainable Materials Approx 1 kg Approx 18 kg Approx 18 kg
Restricted Substances Subst. m’gmt, Substance management, TÜV tested pollen
pollen filter filter efficiency and allergy-tested label (2)
Drive-by Noise dB(A) 73 71 71
J
Safety Reference (3) Significant Significant
improvement improvement
Mobility Capability 9,9 m², 7 seats, 10,4 m², 7 seats, 10,25 m², 5 seats,
330l 435l 1171l
J
Theoretical Life Cycle Reference 5 % lower costs 10% lower costs
Ownership Costs(3)
(1) verified by an independently reviewed LCA according to ISO14040.
(2) independent TÜV certification, certification number AZ 137 12, TUVdotCOMID 0000007407.
(3) 3 years Cost of Ownership including residual value, no guarantee.
14PSI Verification Study • Internal LCA & LCC expert study (more details, more impacts, sensitivity, Monte Carlo analysis etc.) • Monte Carlo & Sensitivity Analysis suggested that only differences of 8% (GWP, POCP, waste), 7 % (AP, EP) respectivly 15% (ADP) are significant 15
PSI experiences
• Incremental work (tracking, calculation) due to PSI only
10 – 15 hours as perfectly fit to existing structures
(voluntary not legally mandatory).
• Facilitated new insights for PD regarding costs along
the life cycle (LCC) and trade-offs along the
environmental life cycle (LCA).
• Incremental work of verification / expert study much
higher (months, external costs etc.).
• Verification study was – as a once-off study - important
to verify the simplified calculations.
• External review allowed sharing the experience
with external world and to get scientific
confidence by external, leading scientists.
16PSI Verification Study Conclusions (exerpt) • Difference between results of non-LCA experts (PD) and expert study is below 2% • Galaxy/S-MAX 2.0l diesel versions are environmentally superior* to gasoline versions in terms of GWP (beyond 82,000 km), POCP (beyond 37,000 km) as well as AP and EP (at any mileage), • Galaxy 2.0l TDCi is environmentally superior* to the previous Galaxy 1.9l TDI in terms of POCP (beyond 450000 km), AP and EP (at any mileage) and total waste (mileage beyond 100,000 km). • Diesel versions are economically preferable beyond 255000 km in 12 years for the assumed yearly fuel, insurance and maintenance costs respectively around 200000 km at 50% of those assumed in the main scenario. 17 * Difference > 8% for GWP, POCP
Evolution of DfX – Example vehicles
• Early 90es – Df Disassembly (Accessability,
type & number of fastener, parts marking etc.)
• Mid 90es – Df Recycling
(DfD + material complexity / compatibility, recycled content)
MLife Cycle Assessment studies show minor effect of
recycling for non-metals
MReal world time measurements showed no significant
impact of DfD/design on dismantling times
MPost-Shredder Treatment is environmentally favourable
• Late 90es – Df Environment
(Life Cycle Thinking based, decreasing DfD/R content
due to development above)
• 2002 – Df Sustainability
(e.g. Product Sustainability Index )
18Sustainable Life Cycle Management
- direct life cycle stakeholder
Role of Industry Role of Role of end-
Consumer of-life
operators
Up-stream Sustainable Supply Purchasing Information to end-
Chain Management sustainable products user
in the life (social & environmental (e.g. fair trade)
cycle minimum standards) accepting premium.
Own life DfE / cradle-to-cradle Sustainable use / Establishing
design, Sustainable consumption, minimise sustainable
cycle stage design, environmental consumption of energy recovery routes,
management, social & materials social standards
standards
Product information & Directing products and Information to
Down- training, sustainable dealer materials to the producers,
stream in standards appropriate collection / sustainable supply of
the life cycle disposal / recovery recovery products.
facilities
19
Shared Life Cycle Stakeholder ResponsibilitiesSustainable Life Cycle Management
- indirect life cycle stakeholder (example vehicle)
• Governments:
• Shaping consumer purchasing and driving
behaviour,
• Create a reliable, non-contradictory legal framework.
• Investors
• Shareholder groups requiring sustainable profits
respecting environmental and social constraints.
20Motivation – Business Case • Internal voluntary tool – no external pressure to do so (no legal, no competitive pressure) -> prerequisite to find the optimal fit to Ford structure • No legal requirement is tracked by PSI • Allowing long-term perspective (life cycle environmental impacts) • Ensuring current product competitiveness (economic indicator) • Allowing a comprehensive overview about impact of design actions to sustainability aspects 21
What are the impacts of End-of-Life
technology variation on the overallNo significant OL
tw een E
environmental profile ? differenc e be
options
Global Warming Potential
100%
80% Situation today (Metal recycling,
organics/ceramics to landfilling)
60%
Mechanical Recycling
40%
MAX and MIN are representing the Energy Recovery of organics,
20% range of different vehicle scenarios
recycling of metals, landfilling
0%
900 kg of ceramics/glass
1000 kg 750 kg
Scenario Scenario Scenario
• Answer: No significant environmental difference between different EOL
technologies
• Similar results for other environmental impacts & resource depletion
• Lightweighting is more important – but less then expected
Source:
22 EU funded, ISO14040 reviewed LCA LIRECARShredders and Material Separation
Application
23Post-Shredder Treatment (PST) vs.
dismantling / mechanical Recycling
•
(refering to considered part of Life Cycle)
SiCon Process Dismantling A PST via the SiCon-
Process with mechanical
recycling & mainly feedstock
recycling the resulting
20% material streams is
environmentally superior
compared to a dismantling &
40% mechanical recycling.
Reduction of Emissions
• Sensitivity analysis
demonstrates that this
advantage remains also for
60%
bigger facilities (longer
transport distances).
80% • Note: Dismantling /
Mechanical recycling with
theoretical assumption of no
100% environmental impacts for
cleaning / separation.
Global Warm Acidification Summer Eutrophication Advantage can be only
ing Potential potential smogpot. potential established if whole process
(CO2 etc.) (SO2 etc.) (HC, NOx...) (PO4 etc.) with all materials of shredder
residue is considered.
Source: ISO14040 reviewed LCA study of VW
24You can also read
