March 16 th , 2005 OPTIMIZATION OF PRODUCT LIFE CYCLES TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN CALIFORNIA Eric Masanet, Lynn Price Stephane de la Rue du Can, Rich Brown Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Ernst Worrell Ecofys
May 15, 2015
March 16th, 2005
OPTIMIZATION OF PRODUCT LIFE CYCLES TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS IN CALIFORNIA
Eric Masanet, Lynn Price Stephane de la Rue du Can, Rich BrownLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Ernst WorrellEcofys
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
• U.S. Department of Energy research laboratory
• Managed by the University of California
• ~4000 employees
• 10 Nobel Laureates
Energy Analysis DepartmentEnvironmental Energy Technologies Division
Project Background
• California Energy Commission Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program
• Environmental Exploratory Grant Program • Program goal: “to support the early development of promising,
new scientific concepts with the potential to impact the way we understand and/or address energy-related environmental issues”
• Grant awarded to LBNL for “Optimization of Product Life Cycles to Reduce GHG Emissions” in 2003
Product Life-Cycle Optimization
Raw Materials Acquisition
Product Manufacture
Product Use
End-of-Life
Airborne and Waterborne Emissions
Raw Materials
Energy
Inputs Outputs
Solid Waste
Useable Product
Product Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA)
Product Life-Cycle Stages
Project Objectives
1) Identify 50 products manufactured in California and estimate the associated life-cycle energy consumption and GHG emissions of these products
2) Select two products (cement/concrete and personal computers) for detailed LCA case studies to identify opportunities for life-cycle GHG emissions reductions in California
3) Identify potential policy options available to California for reducing the life-cycle GHG emissions of the two case study products
Fifty Product Selection
NAICS Code
DescriptionCalifornia 2001 Value Added
($106)
% Total
Products Selected
31-33 Manufacturing (sector total) 219,584
334 Computer and electronic product manufacturing 68,054 31% Cellular phone*Cordless phone*Personal computer*Printed circuit board*Scanner*Semiconductor chip*Tape storage drive*
311 Food manufacturing 19,490 9% Beef**BreadCanned vegetablesCheese**Milk**
325 Chemical manufacturing 18,115 8% DeodorantOTC drugPaintSoap
336 Transportation equipment manufacturing 17,536 8% Airplane*
Bicycle
Car*
Sources: 2001 U.S. Economic Census, 2004 California Manufacturers Directory
* Direct consumers of energy during product use** Indirect consumers of energy during product use
Fifty Product Selection
NAICS Code
DescriptionCalifornia 2001 Value Added
($106)
% Total
Products Selected
31-33 Manufacturing (sector total) 219,584
332 Fabricated metal product manufacturing 15,555 7% Aluminum canBolt/nut/screwMetal window**
339 Miscellaneous manufacturing 12,659 6% Home blood pressure monitor*Golf club
333 Machinery manufacturing 9,752 4% Air conditioner*Commercial refrigerator*Semiconductor process machine*Water pump*
324 Petroleum and coal products manufacturing 9,021 4% AsphaltGasolineMotor oil
326 Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 7,057 3% Plastic bagPlastic bottlePlastic cupTire
Sources: 2001 U.S. Economic Census, 2004 California Manufacturers Directory
* Direct consumers of energy during product use** Indirect consumers of energy during product use
Fifty Product Selection
NAICS Code
DescriptionCalifornia 2001 Value Added
($106)
% Total
Products Selected
31-33 Manufacturing (sector total) 219,584
312 Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 6,986 3% Soft drink**Wine
323 Printing and related support activities 6,174 3% Flyer/coupon book
315 Apparel manufacturing 5,847 3% Dress
327 Nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing 4,748 2% Hydraulic cementReady-mix concrete
337 Furniture and related product manufacturing 4,337 2% Wooden table
335 Electrical equipment, appliance, and components 4,147 2% Gas stove/range*Microwave oven*
322 Paper manufacturing 3,665 2% Cardboard boxRecording paperShoe box
321 Wood product manufacturing 2,254 1% Pallet
314 Textile product mills 927 <1% Carpet
511 Publishing industries 31,125 N/A Newspaper
Sources: 2001 U.S. Economic Census, 2004 California Manufacturers Directory
* Direct consumers of energy during product use** Indirect consumers of energy during product use
Process-Based LCA
Source: http://www.howproductsimpact.net/
Economic Input-Output LCA (EIO-LCA)http://www.eiolca.net/
Fifty Product LCA Methodology
Raw Materials Acquisition
Product Manufacture
Product Use
End-of-Life
Energy
Inputs Outputs
GHG Emissions
Product Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA)
LBNL APPROACH:
EIO-LCA
Published energy consumption data
Process-based LCA data
Fifty Product LCA Results
0
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
10000000
100000000A
irpla
ne
Wate
r pum
p
Sem
iconduct
or
equip
ment
Car
Com
merc
ial r
efr
igera
tor
Gas
stove
/range
Air c
onditi
oner
Meta
l win
dow
Tape s
tora
ge d
rive
Pers
onal c
om
pute
r
Cem
ent,
hyd
raulic
Asp
halt
pavi
ng m
ixtu
res
Mic
row
ave
ove
n
Wooden t
able
Sem
iconduct
or
chip
Ready-
mix
concr
ete
Sca
nner
Printe
d c
ircu
it board
Tires
Bic
ycle
Golf
club
Cord
less
tele
phone
Cellu
lar
phone
Hom
e b
lood p
ress
ure
monito
r
Moto
r oil
Dre
ss
Pain
t
Win
e
Milk
Palle
ts
Beef
Cheese
Carp
et
OT
C d
rugs
Gaso
line
Soap
Bre
ad
Canned v
egeta
ble
s
Deodora
nt
Corr
ugate
d c
ard
board
box
Soft
drink
Bolts
, nuts
, sc
rew
s
New
spapers
Pla
stic
cup
Pla
stic
bott
le
Reco
rdin
g p
aper
roll
Shoe b
ox
Fly
er/
coupon b
ook
Pla
stic
bag
Alu
min
um
can
kg C
O2e
/unit
Disposal
Use
Manufacturing
Screening of Fifty Products: kg CO2e/unit
Fifty Product LCA Results: Manufacturing
Manufacturing
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
1,000.0
10,000.0
100,000.0
1,000,000.0
10,000,000.0
100,000,000.0A
irp
lan
eS
em
ico
nd
uct
or
Ca
rW
ate
r p
um
pA
sph
alt
pa
vin
g m
ixtu
res
Ce
me
nt,
hyd
rau
licC
om
me
rcia
l re
frig
era
tor
Ta
pe
sto
rag
e d
rive
Pe
rso
na
l co
mp
ute
rG
as
sto
ve/r
an
ge
Wo
od
en
ta
ble
Se
mic
on
du
cto
r ch
ipR
ea
dy-
mix
co
ncr
ete
Tir
es
Bic
ycle
Go
lf cl
ub
Air
co
nd
itio
ne
rM
eta
l win
do
wP
rin
ted
cir
cuit
bo
ard
Sca
nn
er
Mic
row
ave
ove
nH
om
e b
loo
d p
ress
ure
Mo
tor
oil
Dre
ssP
ain
tC
ellu
lar
ph
on
eC
ord
less
te
lep
ho
ne
Win
eM
ilkB
ee
fC
he
ese
Ca
rpe
tO
TC
dru
gs
Ga
solin
eP
alle
tsS
oa
pB
rea
dC
an
ne
d v
eg
eta
ble
sD
eo
do
ran
tC
orr
ug
ate
d c
ard
bo
ard
Bo
lts,
nu
ts,
scre
ws
So
ft d
rin
kP
last
ic c
up
Pla
stic
bo
ttle
Fly
er/
cou
po
n b
oo
kR
eco
rdin
g p
ap
er
roll
Sh
oe
bo
xP
last
ic b
ag
Ne
wsp
ap
ers
Alu
min
um
ca
n
kg
CO
2e/u
nit
Screening of Fifty Products: kg CO2e/unit
Use
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
1,000.0
10,000.0
100,000.0
1,000,000.0
10,000,000.0
100,000,000.0A
irpla
ne
Wat
er p
ump
Sem
icon
duct
oreq
uipm
ent Car
Com
mer
cial
ref
riger
ator
Gas
sto
ve/r
ange
Air
cond
ition
er
Met
al w
indo
w
Mic
row
ave
oven
Tap
e st
orag
e dr
ive
Per
sona
l com
pute
r
Sca
nner
Sem
icon
duct
or c
hip
Prin
ted
circ
uit b
oard
Cor
dles
s te
leph
one
Cel
lula
r ph
one
Hom
e bl
ood
pres
sure
mon
itor
Milk
Bee
f
Sof
t drin
k
Che
ese
kg C
O2e
/un
itFifty Product LCA Results: Use
Screening of Fifty Products: kg CO2e/unit
Disposal
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
Air
pla
ne
Wo
od
en
ta
ble
Ce
me
nt,
hyd
rau
lic
Re
ad
y-m
ix c
on
cre
te
Asp
ha
lt p
avi
ng
mix
ture
s
Pa
llets
Ca
r
Se
mic
on
du
cto
r e
qu
ipm
en
t
Wa
ter
pu
mp
Co
mm
erc
ial r
efr
ige
rato
r
Ga
s st
ove
/ra
ng
e
Pe
rso
na
l co
mp
ute
r
Ne
wsp
ap
ers
Air
co
nd
itio
ne
r
Mic
row
ave
ove
n
Tir
es
Ta
pe
sto
rag
e d
rive
Me
tal w
ind
ow
Sca
nn
er
Co
rru
ga
ted
ca
rdb
oa
rd b
ox
Sh
oe
bo
x
Re
cord
ing
pa
pe
r ro
ll
Mo
tor
oil
Bic
ycle
Pa
int
Be
ef
Ho
me
blo
od
pre
ssu
re m
on
itor
Co
rdle
ss t
ele
ph
on
e
Ch
ee
se
Go
lf cl
ub
Bre
ad
Ca
rpe
t
Pri
nte
d c
ircu
it b
oa
rd
Ce
llula
r p
ho
ne
Ca
nn
ed
ve
ge
tab
les
So
ft d
rin
k
Win
e
Dre
ss
Bo
lts,
nu
ts,
scre
ws
OT
C d
rug
s
Alu
min
um
ca
n
De
od
ora
nt
Fly
er/
cou
po
n b
oo
k
Pla
stic
cu
p
Pla
stic
bo
ttle
Se
mic
on
du
cto
r ch
ip
Pla
stic
ba
g
kg
CO
2e/u
nit
Fifty Product LCA Results: Disposal
Less than 0.1
Screening of Fifty Products: kg CO2e/unit
50 Product LCA Discussion
• Results are based on average U.S. sector data
• Latest EIO-LCA input-output tables are from 1997• End-of-life analysis does not include materials recycling• Not possible to determine California-specific GHG emissions
• Products cannot be directly compared due to varying functional units
Limitations:
• Useful for Pareto analysis of largest GHG contributors• Can be coupled with annual production volumes to estimate a GHG “footprint” for
California industry• Provides indication of the role of California-based businesses in global GHG
emissions and opportunities for green design and manufacturing improvements
Insights:
0
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
10000000
100000000A
irpla
ne
Wate
r pum
p
Sem
iconduct
or
equip
ment
Car
Com
merc
ial r
efr
igera
tor
Gas
stove
/range
Air c
onditi
oner
Meta
l win
dow
Tape s
tora
ge d
rive
Pers
onal c
om
pute
r
Cem
ent,
hyd
raulic
Asp
halt
pavi
ng m
ixtu
res
Mic
row
ave
ove
n
Wooden t
able
Sem
iconduct
or
chip
Ready-
mix
concr
ete
Sca
nner
Printe
d c
ircu
it board
Tires
Bic
ycle
Golf
club
Cord
less
tele
phone
Cellu
lar
phone
Hom
e b
lood p
ress
ure
monito
r
Moto
r oil
Dre
ss
Pain
t
Win
e
Milk
Palle
ts
Beef
Cheese
Carp
et
OT
C d
rugs
Gaso
line
Soap
Bre
ad
Canned v
egeta
ble
s
Deodora
nt
Corr
ugate
d c
ard
board
box
Soft
drink
Bolts
, nuts
, sc
rew
s
New
spapers
Pla
stic
cup
Pla
stic
bott
le
Reco
rdin
g p
aper
roll
Shoe b
ox
Fly
er/
coupon b
ook
Pla
stic
bag
Alu
min
um
can
kg C
O2e
/un
it
Disposal
Use
Manufacturing
Fifty Product LCA Results
Selected for case studies
Screening of Fifty Products: kg CO2e/unit
Case study goals
1) Perform a detailed LCA on two important California-manufactured products
2) Identify potential GHG mitigation measures at each stage of the product life cycle
3) Quantify the potential annual GHG reductions possible in California for each identified measure
4) Identify policy options in California for implementing the identified measures
Personal Computers (PCs)
Manufacturing
Use
End-of-Life
• 169 million PCs were manufactured globally in 2003• California’s role in global PC manufacturing:
Computer assembly Semiconductor chips Electronic components
• California’s “hi tech” sector employs over 700,000 people
• An estimated 16 million PCs are currently installed in California homes and businesses, more than any other US state
• An estimated 10,000 PCs become obsolete in California every day
Courtesy of Apple
PC Life-Cycle GHG Emissions
Primary Energy
Estimated California GHG Emissions
Life-Cycle Phase PJ/yr MtCO2/yr MtC/yr
Manufacturing 54.3 4.18 1.14
Use 39.4 1.72 0.47
End-of-Life 0.05 0.004 0.001
Total 93.7 5.90 1.61
• Production energy is 2.7% of 2001 primary energy consumed by California’s industrial sector
• Use energy is 1.7% of 2001 primary electrical energy consumed by California’s residential and commercial sectors
• Total estimated life-cycle GHG emissions are 1.5% of California’s 1999 gross GHG emissions
Estimated Life-Cycle Emissions
PC Case Study: Manufacturing GHG emissions
Primary energy consumption (PJ/yr) GHG emissions (MtCO2e/yr)
Bulk materials CA U.S. Int’l CA U.S. Int’l
Steel 0.04 3.85 34.30 0.00 0.23 2.01
Copper 0.00 1.07 9.96 0.00 0.06 0.56
Aluminum 0.01 3.30 12.15 0.00 0.17 0.61[1]
Plastics 0.02 1.30 3.33 0.00 0.09 0.24
Epoxy 0.09 4.84 12.30 0.01 0.34 0.86
Tin 0.00 0.04 1.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lead 0.002 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00
Silver 0.006 0.06 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00
Gold 0.05 0.50 4.53 0.00 0.00 0.00
Subtotal 0.30 15.10 79.30 0.01 0.89 4.32
Specialized materials
Silicon wafers 0.80 37.56 61.90 0.05 2.28 3.75
Specialized materials 1.93 25.59 52.70 0.16 2.15 4.44
Subtotal 2.73 63.15 114.60 0.21 4.43 8.19
Manufacturing processes
Semiconductors 40.10 169.70 339.45 2.40 10.18 20.35
GHG adjustment 0 0 0 0.87 3.67 7.35
PCBs 4.13 15.40 57.02 0.27 1.00 3.72
Final PC assembly 6.96 14.03 78.51 0.41 0.83 4.67
Subtotal 51.20 199.15 474.95 3.96 15.69 36.09
Total for PC control unit 54.30 277.60 669.35 4.18 21.01 48.60
Primary data source: Williams (2003)
PC Case Study: Use GHG emissions
ParameterPC Control Unit CRT Monitor LCD
TotalResidential Commercial Residential Commercial Residential Commercial
# of devices 8,000,000 8,000,000 6,400,000 6,400,000 1,600,000 1,600,000
Primary energy (PJ/yr)
3.61 15.60 4.48 13.90 0.49 1.35 39.4
GHG (MtCO2/yr) 0.16 0.68 0.19 0.60 0.02 0.06 1.71
GHG (MtC/yr) 0.04 0.19 0.05 0.16 0.01 0.02 0.47
• A 75:25 ratio is assumed for the ratio of CRT monitors to LCDs in California homes and businesses
• Electricity consumption is calculated using the unit energy consumption (UEC) approach based on residential and office PC usage patterns
• Electricity consumption is converted to GHG emissions using a California-specific emission factor developed by LBNL
Estimated Emissions
PC Case study: End-of-life GHG emissions
End-of-Life ProcessPrimary Energy
(TJ/yr)GHG Emissions
(ktCO2/yr)GHG Emissions
(ktC/yr)
Landfilling 18 1.33 0.36
Demanufacturing 32 2.89 0.79
Recycling (6) (0.35) (0.09)
Total 44 3.87 1.06
Estimated Emissions
• An obsolescence rate of 3.6 million PCs per year is assumed (10,000/day)
• All CRT monitors and LCDs are assumed to be recycled per California’s Electronic Waste Recycling Act of 2003
• A PC control unit recycling rate of 8% is assumed
PC Case study: Measures identified
Life-Cycle Stage
Measure
Potential Life-Cycle GHG Emission Reduction in California
MtCO2e/yr % Reduction*
Manufacturing
Improve clean room energy efficiency 0.72 12%
Reduce PFC emissions of semiconductor manufacture 0.26 4%
Use Maximize PC power management utilization 0.47 8%
Switch from CRTs to LCDs 0.48 8%
Increase control unit power management utilization 0.16 3%
Maximize the energy efficiency of PCs 0.10 2%
End-of-Life Upgrade PCs to extend their useful life 0.018 0.3%
Maximize PC control unit recycling 0.0005 0.01%
Summary of Potential Measures and GHG Reductions
* % reduction in relation to California PC life-cycle GHG emissions of 5.90 MtCO2e/yr.
Policy opportunities for California
• Increased clean room energy efficiency• Improvements to air handling systems, chillers, recirculation fans, and process controls can lead to energy savings of 30-60%
• Common barriers to implementation include compressed production cycles, inertia, and lack of awareness of benefits of energy efficiency
•Continue to promote energy efficiency progress through increased R&D, energy efficiency targets, and incentives
• Reduction of PFC emissions from semiconductor manufacture
• U.S. EPA’s voluntary PFC Reduction/Climate Partnership for the Semiconductor Industry aims to reduce U.S. PFC emissions from semiconductor manufacturing to 10% less than 1995 levels by 2010
• A high level of industry participation is critical to success
• Policy opportunities depend on level of participation by California facilities
Policy opportunities for California
• Power management awareness campaigns• Only an estimated 25% of PC control units and 75% of PC displays utilize power management features
• PCs left on overnight are also a major consumer of energy
• Awareness campaigns targeting California commercial PC users (75% of electricity consumed by California PCs) could be particularly effective
• Promotion of facility “switch off” campaigns
• Adoption and promotion of green procurement policies for PCs• Large institutional buyers could give preferential buying status for:
Certification to the most stringent Energy Star standard IEEE 1621 (power management usability) compliance Eco-label certification (TCO 99, Blue Angel, EU Eco Flower) to ensure green design (recyclability, upgradeability, etc.) LCDs instead of CRTs Manufacturers with established “take-back” systems
• US EPA Electronic Products Environmental Assessment Tool (http://www.epeat.net/)
Policy opportunities for California
• Increase PC control unit recycling in California• Only CRT monitors, notebooks, and LCDs are currently included in California’s landmark Electronics Waste Recycling Act of 2003, which aims to establish a viable e-waste recycling infrastructure in California
• The inclusion of PC control units should be considered
• Institutional policies…• Encouragement of PC reuse (“down cycling”) and upgrading within large organizations
Cement/Concrete
Manufacturing
Use• Highway road construction leads to higher CO2 emissions than asphalt roads, but
some studies show reduced resistance and increased fuel savings for heavy trucks• Insulated concrete houses have a higher thermal mass which may lead to increased
fuel savings over the lifetime of the house
End-of-Life• Energy consumed for demolition, transport, and grinding (in cases where concrete is
recycled)
Production (1000 short tons)
Employees Value of Shipments
Clinker 11,187
Cement 11,166 2,000 $0.8 billion
Concrete 80,000 16,000 $2.8 billion
Concrete Life-Cycle GHG Emissions
Estimated California GHG Emissions
Life-Cycle Phase Product MtCO2/yr MtC/yr
Manufacturing CementConcreteTotal
10.41.0
11.4
2.80.33.1
Use 0.0 0.0
End-of-Life 0.018 0.005
Total 11.4 3.1
Estimated Life-Cycle Emissions
• Increased energy efficiency improvement • Technical potential of ~20% in California based on replacing
current equipment with best practice technology
• Use of alternative or waste-derived fuels• 90% of energy use is from fuels (mostly coal); 10% electricity
• Tires, rubber, paper waste, waste oils, waste wood, paper sludge, sewage sludge, plastics and spent solvents can replace fossil fuels
• Assume 20% replacement of fossil fuels by waste fuels is possible in California kilns
Concrete Case Study: Manufacturing Measures
Concrete Case Study: Manufacturing Measures
• Blended Cement • Fly ash from coal-fired power stations, blast furnace slag from iron
production, or other materials are inter-ground with clinker
• Reduces both fuel-related and process-related emissions
• Commonly used in most countries
• Limestone or Addition to Portland Cement• Uses ground limestone to replace clinker
• CemStar© Process• Uses steel slag to replace clinker
Concrete Case Study: Use Measures
• Highway Road Construction• Some studies show that concrete roads result in reduced
resistance and increased fuel savings for heavy trucks
• Insulated Concrete Houses• Have higher thermal mass
• May lead to increased fuel savings over lifetime of the house
• Reductions depend strongly on the climate
Concrete Case Study: End-of-Life Measures
• Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregate (RCA) • Typically, concrete is landfilled, ground and used as roadbed, or
recycled as aggregate
• Allowed for use in California
• City of San Francisco recently approved the use of RCA for curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street bases
• CalTrans and other agencies are still reviewing the use of RCA
Concrete Case study: Measures identified
Life-Cycle Stage
Measure
Potential Life-Cycle GHG Emission Reduction in California
MtCO2e/yr %
Manufacturing Improve energy efficiency in cement manufacture
0.686.0
Use waste fuels in cement manufacture 0.62 5.4
Use blended cement 0.55 4.8
Add limestone to Portland cement 0.44 3.8
CemStar (steel slags) in Portland cement 0.007 0.1
Use Fuel efficiency heavy trucks 0.04 0.4
End-of-Life Increase concrete recycling 0.004 0.03
Summary of Potential Measures and GHG Reductions
* % reduction in relation to California cement/concrete life-cycle GHG emissions of 11.40 MtCO2e/yr.
Policy options for California
• Increased energy efficiency improvements— Establish energy-efficiency targets or goals
• Common practice in many countries
• Government provides incentives and support in exchange for achievement of targets
— Development and use of BEST-Cement• User-friendly Excel tool to benchmark plants to best practice
• Identifies energy-efficiency technologies and measures for an individual plant
• Provides energy savings, emissions reductions, costs, and payback times
• Based on similar BEST-Steel and BEST-Winery tools developed by LBNL
Cement
ChemicalsPaper and cardboard
SugarNon-ferrous metals
Steel
GlassPlasticsDairyBrick
Beer breweries
Rubber processing
Textiles
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Percent Savings
Target
Actual
• 29 sectors signed; many met or exceeded targets• Agreements 22.3% savings over 10-year period• 2x business-as-usual
Long-Term Agreements in The Netherlands
Policy options for California
• Procurement and product specifications for changes in cement composition— Blended cements (fly-ash, blast furnace
slag, or other materials)• Change specifications to allow for non-Portland
cement (many agencies and constructors mandate Portland cement)
• City of Berkeley Resolution directing procurement of blended cement for City buildings and other construction (12/2002)
— Limestone addition• PCA has proposed to change ASTM standard to
allow 5% ground limestone in Portland cement (European standards allow 6-35% limestone)
Crews put in a new foundation, made of 50 percent fly ash, at Wurster Hall. Arleen Ng photo
Policy options for California
• Use of alternative or waste-derived fuels• Research and development of information to overcome public
concerns about hazardous air pollutants from waste-derived fuels such as tires, rubber, paper waste, waste oils, waste wood, paper sludge, sewage sludge, plastics and spent solvents
Fuels Used for Cement Production in California, 1991-2002
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
En
erg
y C
on
su
mp
tio
n (
TB
tu)
Natural Gas
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Liquid Waste
Solid Waste
Tires
Coke
Coal
Source: Hendrick van Oss, U.S.G.S
• Increased recycling of concrete• Promote the use of
recycled concrete as aggregate
Conclusions
• Systematic, life-cycle optimization approach to identifying GHG emissions and policy options provides a broader perspective
• Mitigation options for the two case studies have a technical potential savings of nearly 4 MtCO2/yr, or about 1% of California’s 1999 net GHG emissions of 398 MtCO2
• Such potential savings represent economic waste, energy losses, and pollution – all of which are important to reduce in order to maintain California’s position as both an economic and environmental global leader
Future research: general issues
• Improved data• Data on actual manufacturing output by product for California
• Updated data for EIO-LCA database (after 1997)
• California state input-output analyses
• Updated data on California GHG emissions (after 1999)
• Alternate metrics for comparison of products• Economic: per price or value added
• Total CA annual production
• Typical per capita consumption
Future research: general issues
• Evaluation of more products• Only two products evaluated in detail in this project. Other
interesting products include water pumps, semiconductor equipment, asphalt paving mixtures, tires, etc.
• Include materials recycling “credits”
• Evaluation of costs and savings associated with implementation of suggested GHG mitigation options
• Can serve as inputs for the regional economic model being developed by Berck, Roland-Holst, et al.
Future research: PCs
• Improved data and information• Information on what PC components are manufactured in
California and at what annual volumes
• Better data on the use characteristics of California’s PC stock (CRTs vs. LCDs, total number installed, usage patterns, etc.)
• Updated LCA data on PCs
• Assessment of the saturation level of the proposed GHG mitigation measures in California
• Forecasting studies to determine the most robust GHG mitigation measures in California considering expanding use, rapidly evolving technology, and shift to overseas manufacturing
Future research: cement/concrete
• Improved data and information• California-specific emissions factors for waste-derived fuels
• Information on use of cement and concrete in pavement and housing construction
• Fuel efficiency of concrete versus asphalt roads in California, especially for heavy trucks
• Further assessment of the use-phase savings (or increases) related to concrete house construction
• Study of construction and demolition waste streams in California to better understand flows of concrete and identify opportunities to recycle concrete