This website uses cookies to track and improve your visitor experience. These do not hold any personal data. By using the site you accept their use. Learn more.

x

Interface

Blog

1/6

Posts tagged 'Environmental Product Declaration'

IKEA plans to produce more renewable energy than they consume by 2020

By | | No Comments

IKEA Sustainability Strategy

IKEA plans to produce more renewable energy than they consume by 2020 which is great news but what are the details? And could they do more?

More and more companies are setting ambitious targets to resolve environmental issues – IKEA is one of them. They want to produce as much renewable energy as they consume by 2020, and they have set interim targets such as 70% by 2015.

Other specific targets include:

·      Become 20% more energy efficient in own operations by the end of FY15, and encourage and enable direct suppliers to achieve the same by 2017

·      By 2015, reduce carbon emissions from own operations by 50% and those of suppliers by 20%

This initiative demonstrates real leadership but for many sustainability experts the key test is whether they will look at the full life cycle, or not. Most of the impacts of IKEA are in the supply chain (for physical products) and in customer’s homes (energy use).

Energy use:

·      Energy consuming products will be, on average, at least 50% more efficient than the 2008 range. (would be good to know whether efficiency is calculated on absolute basis or per unit of function).

·      By 2016, all electric hobs will be energy efficient induction hobs.

·      By 2016, entire lighting range will switch to LED offered at the lowest prices.

·      By 2017, offer the most energy efficient home appliances at the lowest prices (A+++?, how this is defined will be critical)

When it comes to physical products, there are some aspects to challenge – What are the raw materials with the highest environmental footprint and what are their substitutes? How will they shift consumers purchasing behaviours?

Are these targets more defensive and risk oriented than game-changing?:

·      100% of the wood used is sourced in compliance with forestry requirements.

·      By 2017 all of the leather will be fully traceable and produced according to standards that help protect forests and respect animal welfare (leather has a huge footprint, no substitute?).

·      By 2020, all palm oil currently used, in e.g. candles or as food ingredient, will either come from verified sustainable sources or be replaced by more sustainable raw materials.

·      By 2015, all cotton used in IKEA products is produced in line with the Better Cotton Initiative and we will continuously investigate complimentary fibres with improved sustainability performance relative to cotton (the second part is extremely interesting though, if they find a low impact substitute for cotton this would be huge).

·      Ensure full supply chain control (chain-of-custody) for all critical materials and processes, and have an IT system providing clear overview internally by 2015 (this might be defensive but it is critical and shows real thirst for accountability across the supply chain).

Personally I’m missing the mention of Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and Environmental Product Declaration (EPD), possibly expecting more from a Swedish company. You know when a company is really facing the elephant in the room when they tackle all impacts of all products, across all lifecycle stages.

Having an LCA for the various products, or at least for their various raw materials they use would be very welcome. This would give them a full understanding of where the real embedded carbon is, and would truly guide the prioritisation of material substitution.

In this post
, , , , , ,

Is Your Wife Cheating On You? Full Product Transparency

By | | No Comments

The Best Assurance Is Full Transparency

Expensive external assurance of CR reports is used by companies as a way to verify what they’re saying. But many stakeholders find the resulting bland, heavily caveated statements unsatisfactory.

Full Product Transparency #FPT eliminates the need for this type of assurance, which would be a relief to everyone but the self-maintaining assurers industry.

Product reporting is the ultimate in transparency, clearly showing the environmental impacts of each product. By building third-party assurance into the Environmental Product Declaration #EPD process at product level, for instance by auditing the data that goes into the EPDs, the classic CR report assurance statement becomes redundant.

What could be more reassuring than a company making a promise to cut the impacts of its products, and then annually publishing its EPDs to show whether those impacts are reducing or not? Certainly not the standard boilerplate assurance statement at the back of a CR report.

Imagine this example – You suspect your wife is cheating on you. She comes back with a certificate from her lawyer, who states that he ‘has no reason to believe that your wife is cheating’ and a few caveats in small print. On the other hand, your wife provides you with a fully itemised mobile phone bill.

Which one would you trust more? Certificate or transparency? 

In this post
, , , , , ,

Brands: Tell us the real environmental impacts of your products

By | | 4 Comments

To all companies who want to sell me their products:

I do not want to be told that a product is net positive, carbon neutral, saves the earth, or has this or that label. I don’t want to hear about green claims and marketing spin. Most of this is simply fluff. Just give me the facts. What I want to know is the real impact that your product has on this planet across its whole life cycle.

Tell me about:

GWP: Global warming potential [kgCO2-Eq.]
What is the contribution of your product to global warming? In other words, how much is your product contributing to the climate changing and becoming stranger every day? This is measured in tonnes of CO2 equivalent. So I want to know how many tonnes of CO2 equivalent are emitted as a result of obtaining all the raw materials to make your product, all the energy to process them, manufacture and transport your product, to use and maintain your product, and to dismantle and recycle your product properly.

ODP: Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer [kgCFC11-Eq.]
The stratospheric ozone layer shields the earth from ultraviolet radiation harmful to life. How much is your product responsible for depleting this ozone layer? This is measured in the equivalents of kg of CFC11, a chemical that destroys the ozone layer. The potential of 1kg of a brominated substance can me much worse, typically between 5 and 15, while HCFCs have ODPs mostly in range 0.005 – 0.2 due to the presence of the hydrogen.

AP: Acidification potential of land and water [kgSO2-Eq.]
Acid gases are taken up by atmospheric precipitations and the falling “acid rain” forms an acid input which is absorbed by plants, soil and surface waters leading to leaf damage and super-acidity of the soil, which in turn affects availability of plant nutrients and trace elements that plants can absorb. What is the acidifying effect of the substances used or released in any part of your product’s life cycle? In other words, what is their acid formation potential (ability to form H+ ions) compared with sulphur dioxide (SO2)? For example 1kg of NO2 has the 0.70 the potential of 1kg of SO2 while 1 kg H2S has 1.88 kg eq SO2.

EP: Eutrophication potential [kgPO43--Eq.]
Too many nutrients going into watercourses can cause excessive growth of weeds, free-floating plant organisms and other plants in rivers and lakes. This means the oxygen dissolved in deep water is consumed faster and can lead to serious damage to the population of fish and other species. What is your product’s eutrophication potential compared with 1kg of phosphate?

POCP: Formation potential of tropospheric ozone photochemical oxidants [kg EthenEq.]
Despite playing a protective role in the stratosphere, at ground-level ozone is classified as a damaging trace gas and, in high concentrations, ozone is toxic to humans. In life cycle assessments, photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP) is referred to in ethylene-equivalents (C2H4-Äq.)

Abiotic depletion for fossil and non-fossil resources [MJ] [kg SbEq]
How much of the earth’s limited natural resources is your product taking? How much fossil resource (measured in MJ)? And how much other resource like metals and rare earths (measured in kg of antimony equivalent)?

So please cut the fluff, change your marketing agency or sack your sustainability communication consultant and invest this money into obtaining a proper Environmental Product Declaration. That’s what I want. Just the facts.

In this post
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sustainability is not part of a company’s DNA until it is embedded in its products

By | | 2 Comments

 

Many CEOs claim that sustainability is part of their company’s DNA.

What a cliché, what an easy thing to say, impossible to prove or dispute. But how can sustainability be in a company’s DNA until the core product or service of the company has significantly less impact?

The real DNA of companies are their products or services, what they offer to customers, what they sell. The first thing is to understand the true impact of your products.

Product sustainability questions get you to that elephant in the room.

We discovered that around 70% of the overall environmental impacts of their carpet tiles were related to the raw materials used to make them.

Of these, the oil-based nylon yarn, just one single raw material, had the single biggest environmental impact. In fact, nylon production accounts for almost half of the impacts across the full lifecycle of a carpet tile, a hard pill to swallow for a carpet manufacturer (the fibre is what makes carpet a carpet).

Rather than neglecting the elephant in the room, Interface re-focused its efforts where it could make the biggest difference: reducing the amount of yarn used, finding ways to recycle old yarn into new, and looking for bio-based alternatives to nylon. Today the company has products made out of 100% recycled nylon using half the amount of yarn, cutting the overall environmental impact by half.

As a side note, some other carpet manufacturers were marketing wool carpet as a natural and sustainable option but wool has between four and six times more embodied carbon than virgin nylon.

For more on this subject, read ‘Full Product Transparency‘. This book outlines a path towards a more practical era for ‘corporate responsibility’, where companies make real environmental gains based on hard facts, using lifecycle assessment (LCA) and environmental product declarations (EPDs). 

In this post
, , , , , , , , , ,

PEF Policy Conference – 29-30 April – Berlin

By | | No Comments

Join us at the PEF Policy Conference where they will release details on the upcoming pilot phase on the development and testing of Product and Organisational Environmental Footprinting Category Rules, benchmarks and communication vehicles.

Rana Pant from the European Commission Joint Research Center will be available to assist Michele Galatola from DG Environment on the technical aspects of the pilot phase. An updated programme for the event will be posted tomorrow here.

The PEF Policy Conference will be held on 29-30 April 2013 in Berlin. Objectives include; developing an early understanding of open questions, next steps and perspectives from different stakeholders on the future use of the detailed product environmental footprinting methodology and respective policy options. All participants are invited to actively contribute to the open dialogue to sharpen the common understanding of the road ahead.

Please click on the image below to find out all about the PCF World Forum including the program of events for this coming week.

Product Environmental  Footprinting (PEF)

Registration is still available via online or Fax Form

In this post
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Helping companies and consumers navigate the green maze

By | | No Comments

The European Commission has released a fantastic initiative around the subject of ‘Building the Single Market for Green Products’. Helping companies and consumers navigate the green maze.

What is the problem for companies?

A company wishing to market its product as green in several Member State markets faces a confusing range of methods and initiatives. Let alone the hundreds of certification sharks, private labels and incumbent national systems that make a huge amount of money from this.

What is the problem for ‘Mum’ in the supermarket?

Consumers are also confused by the stream of incomparable and diverse environmental information: according to a recent Eurobarometer, 48 % of European consumers are confused by the stream of environmental information they receive. This also affects their readiness to make green purchases.

In the words of Commissioner Potocnik

“To boost sustainable growth, we need to make sure that the most resource-efficient and environmentally-friendly products on the market are known and recognisable. By giving people reliable and comparable information about the environmental impacts and credentials of products and organisations, we enable them to choose. And by helping companies to align their methods we cut their costs and administrative burdens.”

The commission has issued strong guidance on product footprinting as well as organisation footprinting. I will be commenting on these documents in the future.

The EC is launching a three-year pilot phase. Their objectives:

* Set up and validate the process of the development of product group-specific rules (Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules – PEFCRs), including the development of performance benchmarks. Where product group-specific rules already exist and are used by stakeholders, the Commission will use these as a basis for the development of the PEFCRs;

* Make the application of the environmental footprint methods easier, especially for SMEs, by testing innovative ways of managing the process and through the development of tools;

* Test different compliance and verification systems, in order to set up and validate proportionate, effective and efficient compliance and verification systems;

* Test different business-to-business and business-to-consumer communication vehicles for PEF information in collaboration with stakeholders.

I hope businesses will jump at these pilots to achieve our dream of open standards and push for full product transparency in the market without delay.

 

Links

Original press release

Draft Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Building the Single Market for Green Products – Facilitating better information on the environmental performance of products and organisations (April 2013)

Draft Commission Recommendation on The use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations (April 2013)

Annex II of the Recommendation: Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide (April 2013)

Annex III of the Recommendation: Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF) Guide (April 2013)

For more information contact: 

Joe Hennon (+32 2 295 35 93) and Monica Westeren (+32 2 299 18 30)

 

In this post
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The magic metric that changed the car industry

By | | No Comments

What has happened to the car industry using g CO2/km as a metric is a very good example of the depth of transformation that product transparency can deliver. This fascinating metric has enabled European regulators to mandate top-down targets for car companies, enabled customers to have a comparable reference for the car footprint and provide national and local legislators the means to tax what is higher impact and support what is lower.

This transparent metric has also created competition in the car sector with the focus being upon their biggest environmental impact, ‘in life use’, which in turn has created a huge level of innovation in the car industry and supply chain. A decade ago the car industry had no incentive to design cars that would consume any less petrol. It really wasn’t at the core of car manufacturers’ strategy.

The industry used to design cars that were affordable to build but not necessarily always affordable to run. Yet according to European Union (EU) research, passenger cars make up 12% of total EU CO2 emissions. And yet, according to the European Environmental Agency, around 77% of the impact of a passenger car is in the ‘use’ phase with a further 13% directly linked to the production of the fuel consumed in the ‘use’ phase.

Environmental impacts during the lifecycle of a car

SOURCEShttp://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/life-cycle-analysis-of-passenger-cars and http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/pdf/jrc_report.pdf

For this transformational change to take place an overall regulatory framework at EU, national and local level was needed. Furthermore, and crucially, a common industry metric was required that could be used in the car industry. That magic metric was to be tail-pipe (exhaust) emissions measured as grams of CO2 per kilometre driven (g CO2/km). Although incomplete, because it didn’t take into account whole-life CO2 emissions and environmental impacts, this partial transparency at least focused on the biggest issue and has transformed the industry. g CO2/ km has given a purpose to policy-making, often bureaucratic, expensive, ineffective and siloed. Below is an overview of some of the key regulatory interventions this common standardised metric has enabled.

First, the bottom-up approach.

The EU Car Labelling directive was enacted to ensure that a label on fuel economy and CO2 emissions is attached to a car or displayed in a clearly visible manner near each new passenger car model at the point of sale. This bottom-up approach was based on driving transparent competition, which in turn enabled the customer to make an informed decision taking into account the biggest environmental impact of the product. Most customers might still choose a car mainly by the design or the brand but at least they have the right to know the impact of their decisions. What has been the main result of this transparency? It has cut off all the ‘greenwash’. No manufacturer today is doing green marketing on the little things they are doing in their factories or their recyclable seats. Why? Because this wonderful metric is allowing customers to say, ‘please cut the fluff and just tell me the g CO2/km for this car’.

Sustainability commoditized as it should be, like money: terrible news for marketing agencies, great news for the world. The beauty of such a metric goes beyond ‘point of sale’ to ‘all promotional materials’. Thanks to the same directive, today all car advertising must include the g CO2/km for that specific car being advertised. That has created consistency and transparency whilst simultaneously empowering the customer to not only become accustomed to the metric but make critical buying decisions based on this metric. My mother today knows that 160g CO2/km is too much and 100 g CO2/km is acceptable. Many Londoners know cars under 100 g CO2/km don’t pay the congestion charge. Consistent transparency creates customer literacy and awareness which leads to change.

Second, the old-school, top-down approach.

This key metric allowed an EU-wide regulation that came into law in 2009, requiring each manufacturer to decrease their average portfolio of emissions to 130 g CO2/km by 2015 and 95 g CO2/km by 2020. In 2008, the average g CO2/km for car emissions in the UK was 158.0 g CO2/km. In 2009 that figure was 149.5 g CO2/km so the change because of legislation is huge. Look at how effective those ugly technocrats from Brussels have been! How ironic that the UK Climate Change Committee highlights cars as one of the few successes of carbon reductions in the UK. This legislation came about because the EU ran out of patience with industry voluntary agreements.

Yes, those voluntary agreements so loved by politicians because they don’t have to impose any difficult decisions. In 1998, the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA), JAMA, and KAMA agreed to reduce average CO2 emissions from new cars sold to 140 g/km by 2008. That was a 25% reduction, quite considerable. But predictably when there is no stick or carrot on the table, the car manufacturers’ commitment achieved a mere 2.2% reduction between 1998 and 2006. What would you expect? So the EU set up a mandatory target and crucially gave a sensible period of time (2020) to allow companies to invest, innovate and so make the necessary widespread changes required to meet the targets of this regulatory framework.

It also came with sticks in the form of financial penalties.

Surprise, surprise, it’s working! CO2 emissions from new passenger cars have started decreasing substantially: 1.6% in 2007, 3.2% in 2008 and 5.4% in 2009. That’s the beauty of the market: tell it what you want to achieve and it will find a way to do it. The problem is that on many occasions we don’t tell the market, our supplier, what we want, or worse, we don’t have the metrics. These two combined policies, of setting agreed, clearly measurable targets and making this information clearly visible to the end customer are completely changing the playing field of competition within the car industry. And this competition through innovation will compel manufactures to meet the EU-wide target of 95 g CO2/km by 2020. Car manufacturers are doing what they are best at – designing cars – as opposed to inventing labels, patronising customers with green marketing, ‘engaging’ employees, sustainability reporting and other semi-useless stuff. But our beloved metric goes much further. It can transform national and local policy-making aimed at changing behaviours and purchasing decisions. One example at national level is the French Bonus/Malus scheme. Simply put, customers choosing to buy a heavy polluting car will pay extra tax on the price of the car, whereas customers choosing to buy a more fuel efficient car will receive a reduction in the price of the car. The tax penalty ranges from €200–2600 per car.

The incentive reductions range from €200 to €5000 and higher for even cleaner cars.

Around 31% of new vehicles will be eligible for the bonus, 25% for the malus. There are around 44% of new vehicles currently emitting between 130 and 160 g CO2/km that are not affected by the new measure. Furthermore, the bonus will be deducted from the price paid to the dealer and must be identified and visible on the bill. These facts will also provide incentives to dealers to sell cleaner cars. Another example is UK company cars.

In the UK you pay more tax for your company car if your car produces more CO2. For example, for a car of less than 75 g CO2/km the tax rate for petrol cars is 5%. For a car of 150 g it is 19% and for a car of 235 g it is 35%. This is a good example of variable tax on a clean or dirty product. The more you pollute the more tax you pay. But our magic metric is also very useful at the local level.

In London, cars which emit 100 g/km or less of CO2 and meet the Euro 5 standard for air quality qualify for zero congestion charge. A 100% exemption from congestion charge also applies to electric vehicles. In many towns in the UK such as York, Salford or Milton Keynes and Richmond, one can have discounted residents’ parking if you have a low carbon vehicle and free parking if you have an electric car.

Guess what? Customers are paying attention to the environment! Such a crazy bunch of tree-huggers…

In this post
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

5. What is an epd?

By | | 2 Comments

Full Product Transparency bookExcerpt 5 from the book ‘Full Product Transparency

‘What is an EPD?’

An environmental product declaration (EPD) is a statement of a product’s ‘ingredients’ and environmental impacts across its lifecycle. In the same way that nutritional labels help consumers compare the health benefits of food items, an EPD enables them to compare the environmental impacts of products.

Why an EPD is not just another eco-label

An EPD is not another eco-label. It is a statement of fact about the environmental impacts of a product. There are no ratings, claims or judgement calls to be made, as there are with eco-labels: an EPD itself doesn’t tell you whether a product is good or bad, green or polluting; it just provides the facts to enable better informed decisions.

In the same way that a chocolate bar with a nutritional label is not necessarily any healthier than a chocolate bar without one, having an EPD does not mean a product is ‘better’ or more sustainable. It does, however, enable customers to compare products and choose the ones that have least impact.

EPDs give you the full picture: for example, data on several environmental impact categories. Your product might be good on global warming potential (e.g. low CO2) but have a high acidification potential (e.g. high SO2) and both parameters have to be reported and not cherry-picked by the company.

How are EPDs created?
The methodology used to obtain an EPD is robust, and the assumptions used in the LCA calculations behind it are standardised. This means that manufacturers cannot manipulate assumptions to favour their own product (by calculating an artificially long life-span, for example). The methodology uses internationally recognised standards; an LCA must be conducted in accordance with ISO 14040 and the EPD must be produced in accordance with ISO 14025. All of this must be verified by an independent third party.

What does an EPD tell you?
A good EPD declaration would disclose the following:

• A list of raw materials and their origin
• A list of chemicals and their origin
• A description of raw material processing and production
• Specifications on the manufacturing of the product, including a breakdown of energy consumption and embodied energy, emissions released, treatment of waste, and packaging and transport
• Information on product use and end of life processing, including treatment of any waste and emissions released
• A table with the LCA results per impact category per lifecycle stage
• Evidence and verification for the calculations. All EPDs need to provide a report showing evidence for verification of the calculations and statements in the EPD

Once all these data about the environmental footprint of the product have been verified by an independent third party auditor, they then need to be captured in a clear and concise declaration.

How EPDs provide full product transparency and why that matters

FPT disclosure based on EPDs empowers and enables all customers, whether they are governments, businesses or consumers, to gain a clear understanding of the total environmental and social impact of a product, including at its end of life.
Providing customers with accurate, impartial third party-certified information about the total footprint of a product allows them to vote through their purchasing decision and to buy the right sustainable product. This will not only have a positive impact on the environment and society but also on competition and innovation. It creates a clearly visible level playing field for companies offering similar products within a sector, and it forces them to compete not only on price and quality but on all aspects that go into the making of a product.

EPDs are inexpensive, contrary to the urban myth

Some people argue that EPDs are very expensive and, especially if you have too many product categories, that it becomes unmanageable. This is like arguing that Unilever or Kraft would find it impossible and very expensive to provide the nutrition facts for all their products, given their product range. Yet they manage.

EPDs are expensive if you don’t do the internal work and you ask a consultant to do all the work for you. You would end up paying from €10,000 to €15,000, which is still much less that what many companies pay for some green labels. To put this into perspective, I have seen companies in the building products sector pay more than €50,000 for various types of green labels and certification schemes of dubious independence and robustness.

Once you invest internally and a small part of your corporate social responsibility (CSR) or sustainability team have the ability to perform LCAs, it becomes very inexpensive and EPDs can be done for less than €1000, sometimes even €500. And the information collected is not only of great use externally but for internal purposes and decision-making, mostly substituting for redundant internal reporting.

Example of information contained in a real EPD

Result of the LCA for Microtuft modular PA 6.6 carpet from InterfaceFlor

 

Next time ‘The Magic Metric That Changed The Car Industry’

… please revisit regularly for more excerpts from the book ‘Full Product Transparency‘ – or rent/buy by clicking here

In this post
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

An Interview with Michele Galatola – ‘EU Environmental Footprinting’

By | | No Comments

Michele Galatola from DG Environment at the European Commission provides an overview on the rationale of the EU environmental footprinting methodology.

In this short video he describes the addressed audience and possible fields of application of the methodology.

Furthermore Michele Galatola shares insights on the role of environmental footprinting in future EU policy.

From the PCF World Forum, Sep 2012 (Published Nov 2012) -

Renewable Resources in the Value Chain. A Viable Option for Reducing Environmental Footprints?”

About the PCF World Forum

Consumption of goods and services indirectly contributes to a large share of worldwide GHG emissions. Efforts are underway to better understand, manage and reduce these emissions. Standards and tools for carbon footprinting as well as more comprehensive environmental and sustainability metrics are developed, refined and practically tested.

The Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) World Forum is a neutral platform to share practical experiences and knowledge towards climate-conscious consumption and production. The international platform provides orientation in current standardisation processes and creates opportunities for discussing international corporate best practices and emerging tools to support low carbon and climate-conscious consumption models.

The PCF World Forum was created out of the ambition to talk with each other and not just about each other given the ever increasing number of initiatives around the world and often little real understanding of respective approaches and activities.

PCF World Forum is an initiative by Berlin based think-do-tank THEMA1.

www.pcf-world-forum.org

In this post
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

3. What is Full Product Transparency and How Do You Go About It?

By | | No Comments

Excerpt 3 from the book ‘Full Product Transparency

What are FPT, LCAs and EPDs? FPT IS HAVING, AND PROVIDING, a complete picture of the total environmental impact of a product throughout its life. The emphasis here is on environmental impact, because the methodology for calculating this, based on a lifecycle assessment, is much more established. It is also easier to gauge environmental impacts because most of these can be measured in a quantitative way. Give us a number of years and we will be starting to integrate better quantitative metrics for social issues, most probably sector by sector.

What do we mean by each word: Full, Product and Transparency?

Full means full disclosure, full range of products and full scope. That means that all the environmental impacts and ‘ingredients’ of a product should be disclosed. That includes materials, chemicals, installation or use methods, and of course, the combined impacts on the environment, which is the bottom line. Full product lifecycle scope is about taking accountability for all the lifecycle stages of a product made or marketed by an organisation.

The ‘product’ means focusing on products as opposed to direct company impacts. Instead of just being accountable for the direct impacts of an organisation, note that we are talking about the product and not the corporate entity. The idea is to get the mindset shifting so that organisations not only manage their impacts but manage the impacts of their products. But by ‘product’ we also mean product in the wider sense, so it could be a service rather than an actual, physical item.

The concept of FPT can be applied just as much to an internet search or a night in a hotel as much as to a t-shirt or a television. Transparency means disclosing product by product, all the ingredients and chemicals, describing the methods of production, disclosing the assumptions and following international standards and product category rules.

What is lifecycle analysis?

Lifecycle analysis (LCA, also known as lifecycle assessment) is a technique to assess environmental impacts associated with all the stages of a product’s life.

These are:

• Raw materials, extraction, processing and transport

• Manufacturing • Delivery and installation

• Customer use

• End of life (including impacts from disposal or recycling)

Lifecycle Analysis - Sustainability

LCA does not consider one single environmental impact such as carbon. It considers the most significant impacts on the environment for the system studied. These are commonly measured by quantifying the impact relative to the release in kg of the most significant molecular contributor to the impact.

Examples of categories of impacts used in LCA

2 Examples of categories of impacts used in LCA

SOURCE: Interface, Just the Facts Guide For more information see the European Joint Research Centre document. 

FIGURE 4. Example of categories of impacts in coal fired electricity generation SOURCE: Graph courtesy of Jane Anderson, PE International.

FIGURE 4. Example of categories of impacts in coal fired electricity generation

… please revisit regularly for more excerpts from the book ‘Full Product Transparency‘ – or rent/buy by clicking here

In this post
, , , , , , , , , , ,