No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
DURABOT: THE TOOL TO INTRODUCE DURABILITY IN THE DESIGN PROCESS
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 June 2023
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
The extension of the product lifecycle is crucial in the application of Circular Economy principles. However, when Energy Related Products are concerned, managing a durable product does not necessarily mean dealing with sustainable products. This happens because components and/or materials are affected by aging and lead to increased requirement of resources to run (i.e. electricity); there are certain trends that, although distinct from the previous facts, balance the effects of aging, i.e. energy grid mix decarbonization. In the present work an approach that considers both the economic and environmental consequences of durable products is proposed. The Durabot tool has been developed to accomplish the environmental analysis. The work overcomes the main literature criticalities: enables the assessment of environmental consequences of durability ; the evolution of energy grid mix is introduced; the environmental consequences of durable products in different lifecycle scenarios can be assessed during the design phase; therefore, the components to substitute and to make accessible are identified. The tool is intended to be used aiming at design for product lifecycle extension, maintaining both economic and environmental convenience
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.- Copyright
- The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Ardente, F. and Mathieux, F. (2014), “Environmental assessment of the durability of energy-using products: method and application”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 74, pp. 62–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.03.049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alfieri, A., Cordella, M., Sanfelix, J. and Dodd, N. (2018), “An Approach to the Assessment of Durability of Energy-related Products”, Proc. CIRP, Vol. 69, pp. 878–881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alejandre, C., Akizu-Gardoki, O. and Lizundia, E. (2022), “Optimum operational lifespan of household appliances considering manufacturing and use stage improvements via life cycle assessment”, Sustainable Production and Consumption, Vol. 32, pp. 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.04.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappelletti, F., Rossi, M., Germani, M. and Hanif, M. (2021), “A methodology to support companies in the first steps towards de-manufacturing”, Proceedings of the Design Society, Vol. 1, pp. 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2021.14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappelletti, F., Manes, F., Rossi, M. and Germani, M. (2022), “Evaluating the environmental sustainability of durable products through life cycle assessment. The case of domestic refrigerators”, Sustainable Production and Consumption, Vol. 34, pp. 177-189, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.09.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capros, P., De Vita, A., Tasios, N., Siskos, P., Kannavaou, M., Petropoulos, A., Evangelopoulou, A., Zampara, M., Papadopoulos, D. and Ch, Nakos (2016), “EU Energy, Transport And Ghg Emissions - Trends to 2050, European Commission Directorate-General for Energy, Directorate-General for Climate Action and Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport”Google Scholar
Ciccarelli, M., Papetti, A., Germani, M., Leone, A. and Rescio, G. (2022), “Human work sustainability tool”, Journal of Manufacturing System, Vol. 62, pp. 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.11.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Ayala, A., Foudi, S., Solà, M. López-Bernabé, E. and Galarraga, I. (2021), “Consumers' preferences regarding energy efficiency: a qualitative analysis based on the household and services sectors in Spain”, Energy Efficiency, Vol. 14, No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-020-09921-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haines-Gadd, M., Chapman, J., Lloyd, P., Mason, J. and Aliakseyeu, D. (2018), “Emotional Durability Design Nine—A Tool for Product Longevity”, Sustainability, MDPI AG, Vol. 10 No. 6, p. 1948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iraldo, F., Facheris, C. and Nucci, B. (2017), “Is product durability better for environment and for economic efficiency? A comparative assessment applying LCA and LCC to two energy-intensive products”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 140, No. 3, pp. 1353–1364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, M. A., Mittal, S., West, S. and Wuest, T. (2018), “Review on upgradability – A product lifetime extension strategy in the context of product service systems”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 204, pp. 1154–1168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanatli, M. A. and Karaer, Ö. (2021), “Servitization as an alternative business model and its implications on product durability, profitability & environmental impact”, European Journal of Operation Resources. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.10.052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkizoğlu, Z. and Karaer, Ö, (2022), “After-sales service and warranty decisions of a durable goods manufacturer”, Omega, Vol. 113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2022.102719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mesa, J. A., Gonzalez-Quiroga, A., Aguiar, M. F. and Jugend, D. (2022), “Linking product design and durability: A review and research agenda”, Heliyon, Vol. 8, No. 9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richter, J. L., Van Buskirk, R., Dalhammar, C. and Bennich, P. (2019), “Optimal durability in least life cycle cost methods: the case of LED lamps”, Energy Efficiency, Vol. 12, pp. 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-018-9662-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez, B. N and Favi, C. (2022), “Eco-design guidelines takeaways from the analysis of product repairability and ease of disassembly: a case study for electric ovens”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 105, pp. 595–600, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2022.02.099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossi, M., Cappelletti, F., Marconi, M. and Germani, M. (2022), “A Design for De-manufacturing Methodology to Improve the Product End of Life Environmental Sustainability”, in: Rizzi, C., Campana, F., Bici, M., Gherardini, F., Ingrassia, T., Cicconi, P. (eds) Design Tools and Methods in Industrial Engineering II. ADM 2021. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91234-5_38Google Scholar
Schischke, K., Berwald, A., Dimitrova, G., Rückschloss, J., Nissen, N. F. and Schneider-Ramelow, M. (2022), “Durability, reparability and recyclability: Applying material efficiency standards EN 4555x to mobile phones and tablet computers”, Proc. CIRP, Vol. 105, pp. 619–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2022.02.103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sihvonen, S. and Partanen, J. (2017), “Eco-design practices with a focus on quantitative environmental targets: An exploratory content analysis within ICT sector”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 143, pp. 769–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access
Open access