The Open Collections website will be unavailable July 27 from 2100-2200 PST ahead of planned usability and performance enhancements on July 28. More information here.

Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The environmental impact of end-of-life vehicle legislation and vehicle use in Europe and North America Gerrard, Jason 2005

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_2005-0447.pdf [ 3.43MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0092183.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0092183-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0092183-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0092183-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0092183-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0092183-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0092183-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF END-OF-LIFE VEHICLE LEGISLATION AND VEHICLE USE IN EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA by JASON GERRARD B.Eng. (Hons), Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, 1997 B.Comm., Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, 1997 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Resource Management and Environmental Studies) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 2005 © J a s o n Gerrard, 2005 ABSTRACT This 'manuscr ip t -based ' thesis investigates the environmental consequences of current pract ices and recent developments in the automotive industry. The first manuscript (Chapter 2) ana lyses the effect of the European End-of-Li fe Vehic le Directive (2000) on the environmental per formance and level of 'green' innovation in the European automotive industry. The research methodology consis ts primarily of a review of publicly available academic , governmental and commerc ia l literature. The results show that legislative factors and market forces have led to innovations in recycl ing, increased hazardous substance removal and improved information d isseminat ion. S u c h act ions may be sufficient to reach E L V Directive targets and could have spil l-over benefits to other industries. Carmakers are a lso taking steps to design for recycling and for d isassembly . However, movement towards design for re-use and remanufacturing is limited. This research a lso highlighted the lack of knowledge about the major economy-wide heavy metal re leases resulting from car use. The analysis behind the second manuscript (Chapter 3) was conducted in order to fill this information gap. The methodology involved using Economic Input-Output Life Cyc le A s s e s s m e n t in conjunction with other life cycle techniques to a s s e s s the economy wide re leases of lead, cadmium and their compounds during the life cycle of an average light-duty> vehic le in the United States. The results show that lead and cadmium are re leased into the environment primarily during manufacturing of the original vehicle and replacement parts. L o s s of wheel balance-weights during use, battery recycling inefficiencies and lead emitted during d isposal of other end-of-life parts a lso contribute significantly to lead d ischarges. Consequent ly , mitigation efforts should focus on minimising re leases from metal mining, maximis ing col lection and recycling eff iciencies of lead-acid batteries, implementing alternatives to lead wheel weights and minimising the lead content of other components. A significant portion of re leases resulted from sources other than the lead and cadmium contained in the car. Thus legislating heavy metals out of vehic les will not eliminate all the lead and cadmium emitted due to automobi le use . Accordingly, these manuscr ipts reinforce the importance of developing environmental management strategies that reflect the economy-wide impacts of vehicle manufacture, use and recovery. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS A B S T R A C T ii T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S iii L IST O F F I G U R E S iv A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S v C O - A U T H O R S H I P S T A T E M E N T vi I N T R O D U C T O R Y C H A P T E R 1 C H A P T E R 2: T H E I M P A C T O F T H E E U R O P E A N E N D - O F - L I F E V E H I C L E D I R E C T I V E O N ' G R E E N ' I N N O V A T I O N A N D V E H I C L E R E C O V E R Y 9 C H A P T E R 3: E C O N O M Y - W I D E R E L E A S E S O F L E A D A N D C A D M I U M R E S U L T I N G F R O M P R O D U C T I O N , U S E A N D D I S P O S A L O F A U T O M O B I L E S 31 C O N C L U D I N G C H A P T E R 48 iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1: Take-back Legislation and the Product Value Chain 2 Figure 2.1: Breakdown of a Passenger Vehicle 10 Figure 2.2: Recovery Requirements for Vehicles Produced After 1980 by Weight 11 Figure 2.3: ELV Legislation Timeline 12 Figure 2.4: New Passenger Car Registrations in Western Europe, 2003 14 Figure 2.5: Theoretical Recovery Hierarchy 20 Figure 3.1: Material Flow in a Vehicle Life Cycle 34 Figure 3.2: Lead Releases from the Manufacture of an Average Light-Duty Vehicle 37 Figure 3.3: Cadmium Releases from the Manufacture of an Average Light-Duty Vehicle 38 Figure 3.4: Lead and Cadmium Releases as a Result of Use, Servicing and Part Replacement 40 Figure 3.5: Lead and Cadmium Released at PanWehicle End-of-Life 42 Figure 3.6: Comparison of Life Cycle Stages 43 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I s incerely thank Milind Kandl ikar for the guidance, support and insight he has consistently provided over the past two years. This research has benefited significantly from the additional input suppl ied by Hadi Dowlatabadi. In addition, I a m indebted to Mark J a c c a r d , J o h n Rob inson , Ralph Matthews, Les Lavkul ich, Terre Satterfield, J a m e s Tansey and Heather Mac lean for their contribution to the knowledge and skil ls I have gained throughout this degree, which have in turn been employed in this thesis. The numerous d iscuss ions that have occurred over the past two years with co l leagues and friends have also greatly influenced the thought behind this work. I remain grateful for the funding provided by the Auto21 Network of Cen t res of Exce l lence . Lastly, I am immensely appreciative for the encouragement, understanding, copy-edit ing prowess and unending moral support provided by my wife, Ruth. CO-AUTHORSHIP STATEMENT Dr. Kandl ikar co-authored the manuscr ipts presented in Chapters 2 and 3 of this thesis. In both papers, Dr. Kandl ikar contributed to the research des ign and to the manuscript review. My contribution to the manuscripts presented in Chapters 2 and 3 and the overall thesis included: • identification and des ign of the research program (with guidance from Mil ind Kandlikar) • research • data analysis • the literature review for all manuscripts and additional information in this thesis • manuscript preparation, review and editing • formatting for journal submiss ion • Manuscr ipt revision based on comments provided as part of the journal review p rocess INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER This thesis investigates the environmental implications of automotive waste. The 'manuscr ipt-based thesis ' format (specif ied by the Faculty of Graduate Studies) was adopted to utilise the two completed journal manuscr ipts in which the research is documented. The first manuscr ipt , contained in Chapter 2, ana lyses the implications of the European End-of-Li fe Vehic le Directive (2000) on the environmental performance of the European automotive industry. The analys is revealed the lack of exist ing knowledge about life-cycle heavy metal re leases resulting from vehic le use. The study uncovered little ev idence that the economy-wide implications of vehic le use were well understood, especial ly with respect to heavy metal d ischarges. Consequent ly , this topic b e c a m e the focus of the second manuscript, included as Chapter 3, which evaluates lead and cadmium re leases resulting from vehicle use in the United States. Both papers have been submitted to peer-reviewed journals. The Journal of C leaner Product ion has accep ted the Chapter 2 manuscript for publication. The Chapter 3 manuscript has been recently submit ted to Environmental Sc ience and Technology. This introduction provides an overview of the research topic and the context for the following chapters. It includes a brief summary of automotive waste, extended producer responsibil i ty legislation and life cycle analysis. This information is supplementary to that which is presented in chapters 2 and 3. A d iscuss ion of the research objectives and hypotheses conc ludes this sect ion. The Automotive Industry and its Waste The vo lume of cars produced annually is substantial and cont inues to expand quickly. The importance of effectively managing automotive waste will continue to grow as the cars being produced are eventually retired. By 2002, the stock of vehic les worldwide (excluding buses and trucks) was over 500 million vehic les and was growing at roughly 3 percent [1]. Th is growth is likely to continue well into the future. The number of light-duty vehic les is anticipated to expand by 300 -500% over the next 50 years [2]. During 2002, automobile manufacture e x c e e d e d 58 million units globally (excluding commerc ia l vehic les such as trucks) [3]. Of these, North A m e r i c a produced over 16 million vehic les (2.6 million in C a n a d a , 12.3 million in the U .S . and 1.8 mill ion in Mexico) [4]. Europe assemb led a similar number [3]. Consequent ly , motor vehicle manufacture, including parts and equipment, accounts for a large proportion of manufacturing value in both Europe and North Amer i ca (12% of Canad ian G D P and over 1 0 % of both E U and U S manufacturing value) [3-5]. 1 r The treatment of a vehicle at its end-of-life has a substantial impact on its overal l environmental impact. Economic and environmental considerat ions have lead manufacturers to re-use and recover old car parts and thereby reduce waste. However, determining the optimal recovery strategy for end-of-life vehic les ( 'ELVs') is not an easy task and poses a number of strategic and logistical puzz les for manufacturers. A variety of recovery methods exist. Parts may be re-used, remanufactured, recycled, used as fuel for energy recovery or land filled. E a c h p rocess has different environmental and economic impacts. The attractiveness of a given recovery option is also dependant upon legislative requirements, the prevailing market dynamics and the character ist ics of the product itself. Product Recovery and Take-back Legislation Tak ing responsibil i ty for products at the end of their useful life is becoming a necessi ty in severa l industries around the world. This movement is being driven by a broadened understanding of the environmental, impacts of waste, which in turn has led to the establ ishment of numerous legislative measures targeting waste minimisation, including ' take-back' legislation. A s the name sugges ts , take-back legislation requires the producer to take back its products at the post-consumer -use stage in order to minimise environmental impact (usually through re-use, recycl ing or recovery). S u c h regulations fall under the umbrel la concept of Ex tended Producer Responsibi l i ty ( 'EPR ' ) . Figure 1.1 outl ines this schematical ly. Figure 1.1: Take -back Legislat ion and the Product Value Cha in The O E C D def ines E P R as "a policy concept in which a producer 's physical and/or f inancial responsibil i ty for a product is extended to the post -consumer phase of the product 's l i fecycle" [6]. The features of this policy are twofold, firstly, to provide an incentive for producers to incorporate environmental considerat ions into the des ign of their products and secondly, to shift the responsibil i ty for the end-of-life product (physically and/or financially) upstream to the producer and away from municipalit ies. E P R L E G I S L A T I O N Resource Extraction & Production Disposal & Recovery > 2 Take -back legislation is already having a direct impact on recovery strategies throughout the E U as well as in J a p a n , Ta iwan and Korea . Many states in North Amer i ca ' a lso have extended producer responsibil i ty legislation in p lace. European environmental policy is in transition from waste control to a more comprehens ive approach, whereby environmental protection will be integrated broadly in to all policy a reas [7]. The most recent Environmental Act ion Plan outl ines two main object ives. Firstly, to ensure that the consumpt ion of renewable and non-renewable resources does not exceed the carrying capaci ty of the environment, and secondly to achieve a de-coupl ing of resource use from economic growth through significantly improved resource efficiency and the reduction of waste [7]. European take-back legislation in both electrical equipment and automotive industries has s temmed from the objectives of the E U ' s Environmental Act ion P lans . Due to the vo lume and toxicity of vehicle waste, end-of-life vehic les remain a key focus of European waste management efforts. A s early as 1989, the European Commiss i on ' s 'Communi ty Strategy for W a s t e Management ' identified E L V as a 'priority waste st ream' . Whi le automobi le shredder residue (the roughly 2 5 % of an E L V that is shredded after the car has been d ismant led and the metal content recovered) constitutes less than 1% of the total waste generated in the E U , it is est imated to account for 1 0 % of E U hazardous waste [8]. European automotive take-back legislation was enacted by the European Par l iament on the 18 t h of Sep tember 2000, in the form of the End-of-Li fe Vehic le Directive [9]. It a ims to prevent waste from end-of-l ife vehic les and to protect the environment through promoting the col lect ion, re-use and recycl ing of their components . Central to the Directive are the joint goals of restricting both the increasingly expens ive landfill operations and the burning of waste, typically cal led ' thermal recovery' by the industry [10]. Take-back legislation has more recently been imposed ac ross the European Electr ical Industry v as well . The W a s t e Electrical and Electronic Equipment ( W E E E ) Directive was introduced in 2003 and was model led on the E L V Directive. Pollution and waste legislation is a lso starting to appear in North Amer i ca . T h e Cal i fornian Zero Emiss ion Vehic le mandate (ZEV) , which s e e k s to drive innovation of low emiss ion vehic les, has prompted similar mandates in Vermont, Massachuset ts and New York [11]. Regulat ions in N e w Jersey , Flor ida and Minnesota require rechargeable battery manufacturers to take back and manage the batteries they produce. At least ten states have introduced electronics recycl ing and deposit s c h e m e s [12]. In total, extended producer responsibil ity bills have been introduced in nearly half of the 50 state legislatures in the United States [13]. 3 There is no national E L V legislation in North Amer i ca (as d i scussed in Chapter 3). Yet , car production is becoming increasingly global, thus the North Amer ican automotive industry is being affected by international regulations. Vehic le sub-sys tems are often shared among vehic le mode ls and combine to form what is known as a 'vehicle platform'. O n c e a des ign is altered it may be reflected in car production globally. It is est imated that one third of all vehic les produced in 2004 will c o m e from global platforms. A recent report has found that the E U E L V Directive is influencing activities in the U S automotive market. In particular, the E L V Directive's aim to remove toxic and hazardous subs tances such as lead, mercury and cadmium have resulted in international efforts to el iminate their use in vehicle manufacturing [14]. The Role of LCA in Analysing Automotive Waste Improving the treatment of E L V s is beneficial, yet a vehic le 's environmental per formance is not determined solely by the extent of end-of-life vehicle recovery. Automotive manufacturers and regulators must cons ider the ecological and human health implications though out a vehic le 's l ifecycle. This includes manufacturing waste, emiss ions re leased while the car is on the road as well as waste generated from end-of-life vehic les. Life-cycle A s s e s s m e n t ( 'LCA') is often used to ana lyse the cumulat ive impact of these re leases. Li fe-cycle thinking is grounded in evaluating the environmental effects of a product, serv ice or activity during its life cycle. The life cycle of a product typically includes the extraction and process ing of raw materials, fol lowed by manufacturing, transportation and use , and ending with waste management including recycling and final d isposal [15]. A life cycle approach prevents a p iece-meal attitude to environmental management . It enables a dialogue about the total impacts (usually environmental impacts) of a product over its entire l i fespan, rather than looking solely at one step of the production chain. Li fe-cycle A s s e s s m e n t has evolved to enable industry to operat ional ise the l ife-cycle concept . The United Nat ions Environment Program defines L C A as an analytical tool for the systemat ic evaluat ion of the environmental aspects of a product or serv ice system through all s tages of its life cycle [16]. The first studies of waste d isposa l , energy use and raw material use date back to the late 1960s and early 1970s [17]. One of the first ana lyses, undertaken by C o c a C o l a in 1969, investigated resource consumpt ion and environmental re leases assoc ia ted with soft drink containers. Initially compan ies used L C A s to evaluate product alternatives with respect to speci f ic criteria. L C A s were a lso utilised to highlight problem complexity in defence against externally enforced environmental requirements [18]. Life Cyc le thinking and L C A continue to be used in an 4 increasing number of appl icat ions and contexts [19]. S o m e surveys indicate that roughly half of the large compan ies in Northern Europe and the U S conduct L C A s for their products [18]. Signif icant resources are being dedicated to making L C A access ib le and useful in industry and policy [20]. L C A s typically consist of four components : goal definition and scop ing, inventory analys is , impact assessmen t , and interpretation [21]. The scoping phase is used to set the boundar ies for the analys is . Fol lowing this, an inventory of the inputs and outputs at each stage in the product life cycle is created - the inventory analysis. O n c e this data has been acquired, the effect on the environment of e a c h pollutant is evaluated (the Impact Assessmen t ) . The results are then interpreted in relation to the quest ion at hand in order to guide the act ions of dec is ion makers . Var ious forms of L C A exist. The most appropriate form depends on the sca le of the problem, the aud ience and the scope of the analysis being undertaken. E a c h type of L C A has its benefits and drawbacks . For instance, Economic Input Output L C A ( 'E IOLCA' ) is typically used for industry-wide analysis, but is less amenab le to product design compar isons [22]. Alternately, Screen ing L C A (a simplif ied L C A methodology) is often used in environmental labell ing to identify the environmental "hot spots", i.e. the criteria for which labell ing.efforts are a s s u m e d to have the greatest effects [17]. The data and time requirements for an L C A depend on the form and scope of the analys is , but are usually significant. L C A s can cost thousands to mill ions of dol lars [17]. Notwithstanding the profusion of different techniques avai lable, there are ongoing efforts at national and international levels to establ ish c o m m o n databases and methodologies for L C A . Robust and useful L C A tools and data are provided by the U .S . E P A L C A c c e s s Sys tem portal [21]. Additionally, the ISO14000 Environmental Management framework now includes a trusted L C A methodology detai led in the standards IS014040-14049 [23]. However, it is worth noting that such standards do not regulate every methodological Choice, and as a result, al low for the production of virtually any L C A result [24]. In order to keep L C A analysis manageable , practitioners general ly limit the scope of the analysis to the major inputs at each stage. The process of setting bounds (scoping) is v iewed by s o m e as arbitrary and indefensible, making it impossible to know whether the boundar ies that are drawn e n c o m p a s s all important effects [19]. The subjectivity of defining assessmen t boundar ies can a lso make it difficult to compare L C A studies [25]. Notably, s o m e L C A methodologies, such as E I O L C A (used in Chapter 3) circumvent such problems by manipulating mode ls of the whole economy [22]. 5 Research Focus and Hypotheses The manuscr ipts contained in this thesis focus upon the environmental impact of vehic le use and the manner in which recent European legislative developments have altered E L V p rocesses . T h e first manuscr ipt presented in Chapter 2 evaluates the extent to which the recent European E L V Directive has inf luenced vehicle des ign, the level of E L V recovery, and the extent of 'environmental information' provision. A comprehens ive literature review, including journal papers, news articles and government, industry and not-for-profit reports, was conducted in order to test the hypotheses that the E L V Directive has resulted in: Design changes: 1. C h a n g e s in the material composi t ion of new cars i. Increased use of recyclable and environmental ly beneficial materials ii. Increased use of recycled material iii. Remova l of 'banned' subs tances (lead, cadmium, mercury and hexavalent chromium) 2. Increased 'design for d isassembly , re-use and remanufacture' Changes in the extent of EL V recovery: 3. Increased levels of re-use and remanufacture 4. Increased levels of recycling of E L V materials Improved information provision: 5. Provis ion of the following information: a . Part coding standards b. D isassembly p rocesses , d isposal and recovery of vehicle parts c. E L V environmental performance, targeted at vehic le users /purchasers The above analysis highlighted the need for further research into the interdependencies between the car use and other industrial activities, such as metal mining and infrastructure provision (e.g. road building). It remained unclear to what extent removing heavy metals from cars would reduce the economy-wide heavy metal burden of vehicle use. A s a result, the second manuscr ipt evaluates the lead and cadmium emiss ions resulting from vehicle production, use , maintenance and end-of-l ife vehicle recovery in the United States. The paper uses life-cycle techniques (with a focus on E I O L C A ) to determine the key drivers of these re leases. 6 References [I] Harrington, W . and V . McConne l l , Motor Vehicles and the Environment. Resou rces for the Future: Wash ington, D.C. 2003, p. 96. [2] McAu ley , J . W . , Global Sustainability and key needs in future automotive design. Environmental Sc ience & Technology, 2003; 37(23): p. 5414-5416. [3] W e n g e l , J . and P. Warnke , The Future of Manufacturing in Europe 2015-2020: The Challenge for Sustainability. Case Study: Automotive Industry - Personal Cars. Fraunhofer Institute for Sys tems and Innovation R e s e a r c h : Sevi l la. 2003, p. 64. [4] Anonymous , Cars on the Brain: Canada's Automotive Industry 2003. Industry C a n a d a : Ontario. 2003, p. 12. [5] B E A , Gross-Domestic-Product-by-lndustry Accounts. U S Bureau of Economic Ana lys is . 2003. [6] Extended Producer Responsibility: A Guidance Manual for Governments. Organisat ion for Economic Co-operat ion and Development ( O E C D ) : Par is . 2001 , p. 159. [7] European Commission Website - Sixth Environment Action Programme. Environment 2010: Our future, our choice. European Commiss ion . 2002. [8] Zobol i , R., et a l . , Regulation and Innovation in the area of end-of-life vehicles, in The impact of EU regulation on innovation of European Industry, F. Leone, Editor. The European C o m m i s s i o n : Mi lan. 2000, p. 428. [9] Directive 2000/53/EC on end-of-life vehicles, in 2000/53/EC. 2000, p. 9. [10] Be l lmann, K. and A . Khare , European response to issues in recycling car plastics. Technovat ion, 1999; 19: p. 721-734. [ I I ] Boon , J . E . , J .A . Isaacs, and S . M . Gup ta , End-of-Life Infrastructure Economics for "Clean Vehicles" in the United States. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2003 ; 7(1): p. 25-45. [12] Toffel, M.W. , The growing strategic importance of end-of-life product management. Cal i fornia Management Review, 2003; 45(3): p. 102 - 1 1 3 . [13] Toffel , M.W. , Strategic Management of Product Recovery. Cal i fornia Management Rev iew, 2004; 46(2): p. 120. [14] Anonymous , Product Stewardship Opportunities within the Automotive Industry. F ive W i n d s International. 2003, p. 151. [15] C I R A I G , What is Life Cycle Thinking? C\RA\G. 2002. [16] U N E P , Life Cycle Thinking as a Solution. United Nat ions. 2003. [17] J e n s e n , A .A . , et a l . , Life Cycle Assessment: A guide to approaches, experiences and information sources. European Environment Agency : Denmark. 1997, p. 116. [18] He iskanen , E. , The institutional logic of life cycle thinking. Journal of C leaner Product ion, 2002; 10(5): p. 427-437. [19] Faruk, A . C . , et a l . , Analyzing, Mapping and Managing Environmental Impacts along Supply Chains. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2002; 5(2): p. 13 - 36. 7 [20] F a v a , J . A . and J . S . Cooper , Life-Cycle Assessment in North America. Journa l of Industrial Ecology, 2004; 8(3): p. 8-10. [21] E P A , Life-Cycle Assessment - LCAccess. United States Environmental Protect ion Agency . 2001 . [22] Hendr ickson, C , et a l . Economic Input-Output Models for Environmental Life Cycle Assessment. Environmental Sc ience & Technology, 1998; 32(7): p. 184A-191 A. [23] ISO, Environmental Management - The ISO 14000 Family of International Standards. , International Standards Organisat ion. 2002. [24] Editorial, Cleaner Production Tools: LCA and beyond. Journal of C leaner Product ion, 2002; 10: p. 403-406. [25] J o s h i , S , Product Environmental Life-Cycle Assessment Using Input-Output Techniques. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2000; 3(2&3): p. 95-120. CHAPTER 2: THE IMPACT OF THE EUROPEAN END-OF-LIFE VEHICLE DIRECTIVE ON 'GREEN' INNOVATION AND VEHICLE RECOVERY N O T E : A vers ion of this paper has been accepted for publication. Gerrard J , Kandl ikar M. Is European End-of-Life Vehicle Legislation Living Up to Expectations? Assessing the impact of the ELV Directive on 'green' innovation and vehicle recovery, Journal of C leaner Product ion, 2006. Await ing publication. 1. Introduction Since its introduction five years ago, the global automotive industry and durable goods manufacturers in general have been carefully monitoring the effects of the European Union 's E n d -of-Life Vehic le (ELV) Directive. The legislation a ims to increase recovery of E L V s in order to reduce waste and improve environmental performance. Th is analysis presents a framework for assess ing the level of environmental per formance generated by E L V regulations. It evaluates progress on five expected ou tcomes of European E L V legislation. Whi le much of the literature has focused on the effects of the E L V Directive on recycl ing, the directive a ims to generate environmental gains through recovery in genera l . Thus , each recovery option (e.g. recycl ing, re-use, energy recovery) should be v iewed as a means of moving toward environmentally sustainable production, rather than as an end in itself. Accordingly, this paper hopes to broaden the d iscuss ion of E L V legislation away from a narrow focus on recycl ing to one that incorporates green innovation and other vehic le recovery alternatives. The E L V Directive may have heralded the start of a new era of waste management legislation for durable goods world-wide. The E U has already reinforced its intentions through the introduction of further regulations. Enac ted in 2003, the W a s t e Electr ical and Electronic Equipment Directive [1] was model led on the E L V Directive. J a p a n , Ta iwan and South Ko rea have instituted similar Ex tended Producer Responsibi l i ty ( E P R ) legislation over the past three years. E P R legislation is also becoming increasingly prevalent in North Amer ica . E P R bills have been introduced in nearly half of the 50 state legislatures in the United States [2]. Thus insights ga ined from evaluating the early impact of E L V may provide an indication of the future eff icacy of E P R regulations worldwide. Additionally, such regulations may have ramifications for vehicle des ign and production globally as ca rmakers and regulators learn from the European exper ience. 9 2 . EU Take-back Legislation and ELV Targets The E L V Directive [3] c a m e into force on the 18 t h of September 2000. it a ims to prevent waste from end-of-l ife vehic les and to protect the environment through promoting the col lect ion, re-use and recycling of their components . The directive states that vehicle manufacturers and material and equipment manufacturers must meet the following object ives: 1. Endeavour to reduce the use of hazardous substances when designing vehic les 2. Des ign and produce vehic les which facilitate the dismantl ing, re-use, recovery and recycl ing of end-of-l ife vehic les 3. Increase the use of recycled materials in vehicle manufacture 4. Ensure that components of vehic les p laced on the market after 1 July 2003 do not contain mercury, hexavalent chromium, cadmium or lead (with a few except ions as listed in Annex II of the Directive). Currently 7 5 - 8 0 % of each end-of-life vehicle is recycled or re-used, the vast majority of which is ferrous metal, as shown in Figure 2.1 [4]. The Directive requires an increase in the rate of re-use and recovery (which includes energy recovery), as outl ined in Figure 2.2. L e s s stringent object ives may be set for vehic les produced before 1980. Profess ional importers of foreign vehic les are a lso required to comply with the above. To ensure that the 2015 recovery target is met, the C o m m i s s i o n of European Communi t ies has recently proposed that future vehic le approval be contingent on the vehic le 's ability to be 9 5 % re-usable or recoverable. S u c h approval procedures will apply to vehic les put on the market 3 years after the new Directive enters into force (i.e. not before 2007) [5]. Sal ient dates for European E L V legislation are represented in Figure 2.3. Figure 2.1 : Breakdown of a Passenge r Vehic le Mater ial % by Weight Ferrous Metal P last ics Light Non-Fer rous Metal 6 8 . 3 % 9 . 1 % 6 .3% 3 .5% 2 .9% 2 . 1 % 1.6% 1.5% 1.5% 1.1% 1.1% 0 .7% 0 .4% Tyres G l a s s Flu ids Rubber Heavy Non-Fer rous Metal Other Battery P rocess Po lymers Electr ica l /Electronics Carpet Source : [6] 10 Figure 2.1 shows the breakdown of an average car. C l o s e to 100% of the steel within a vehicle is recycled. Due to their economic value, nearly 100% of car batteries are a lso already col lected and recycled [7]. Additionally, the vast majority of tyres are recovered. The E U is on track to meet the objective to abol ish the land filling of old tyres by 2006 [8]. Shredding facilities p rocess c rushed E L V s and other sc rap metal-r ich feedstock, such as white-goods. Seventy percent of shredder output is shredded steel , 2 5 % is 'shredder fluff and the remaining 5 % is referred to as 'heavy media ' . Shredder fluff is made up on foam and a range of lightweight non-metal l ic materials, such as plastic and composi te products that are difficult to recycle. This fluff is typically d i sposed of to landfill, although efforts are underway to develop methods of identification, separat ion, wash ing and recycl ing. The 'heavy media ' is a mixture of non-ferrous materials and dense non-metal l ic material including rubber and concrete. This heavy fraction is sent for further process ing at heavy med ia plants where copper, a luminium, magnes ium, g lass and s o m e plast ics are removed. Figure 2.2: Recovery requirements for vehic les produced after 1980 by weight Cu r ren t 2006 2015 R e - u s e and recovery 75-80%* 8 5 % 9 5 % R e - u s e and recycling 8 0 % 8 5 % Implied al lowable energy recovery 5 % 1 0 % * [4] N O T E : Energy recovery involves using the waste material to generate energy. Th is often involves utilising the heat generated from combust ion of waste. The E L V Directive requires a 5 - 10% increase in recovery from current levels by 2006, and a 15-2 0 % increase by 2015. S u c h improvements need to come from the 2 0 - 2 5 % of the vehic le that is not currently recycled. This non-recycled component consis ts mainly of polymers, rubber, g lass and electronic parts (most metals, including batteries, are already recycled). T o reach the 2015 targets roughly half of these materials will need to be recoverable or vehicle material composi t ion will need to shift toward materials that are already recyclable. A s plastic compr ises the largest proportion of the non-recycled component it is the logical focus of much of the current R & D directed toward recycl ing. T o aid recycl ing efforts, vehicle and component manufacturers are required to use material coding standards, which allow identification of the various materials during dismantl ing. Additionally, vehic le manufacturers and importers must provide prospect ive purchasers of vehic les with 11 information on the recovery and recycling of vehicle components, the treatment of end-of-life vehic les and progress with regard to re-use, recycling and recovery. Figure 2.3: E L V Legislat ion Timel ine June 2002: Amendment to ELVD Annex II Feb 2003: EC decision establishing coding standards based on ISO Dec 31s', 2005: Re-examination of 2015 targets before this date T April 2002: Deadline for Member State transposition of ELV Directive into national legislation (unmet by various countries) 2008 Estimated date for 'design approval based recycling requirements' to come into effect (3yrs after directive proposed in 2004 is enacted) J 2000: ELV Directive (ELVD) -2000/53/EC passed March 2004: Proposal for Directive on Approval of Vehicles w.r.t. design for 2015 recovery targets - COM(2004) 162 final July 2003: ELVD ban on heavy metals comes into force Jan 2007: Free take-back for vehicles put on the market before July 2002 2006: ELVD Target: 85% recoverability 80% recyclability / re-use 2015: ELVD Target: 95% recoverability 85% recyclability / 2.1 What Should We Expect will Happen? If legislation has been effective we should see progress toward the objectives outl ined above. Under this scenar io one could reasonably expect the legislation to have resulted in the following changes ("expectations"): Design changes: 1. C h a n g e s in the material composi t ion of new cars i. Increased use of recyclable and environmentally beneficial materials ii. Increased use of recycled material ("recyclate") iii. Remova l of 'banned' substances 2. Increased 'design for d isassembly , re-use and remanufacture' Changes in the extent of EL V recovery: 3. Increased levels of re-use and remanufacture 4. Increased levels of recycling of E L V materials 12 Improved information provision: 5. Provis ion of the following information: a . Part coding standards b. D isassembly p rocesses , d isposal and recovery of vehic le parts c. E L V environmental performance, targeted at vehicle users /purchasers For each expectat ion we provide (i) an analysis of the ev idence needed to test ou tcomes, and (ii) an evaluat ion of the extent to which observed data provides empir ical support for that expectat ion. In sect ion 3 we examine if the available data is sufficient to establ ish whether change has occurred. In sect ion 4 we a s s e s s the extent to which the five expected ou tcomes have material ized in the aftermath of the E L V directive. Conc lus ions are provided in sect ion 5. 3. What is the Evidence? S o , what would constitute compel l ing ev idence that the expectat ions above are being met? In genera l , transposit ion of the E L V Directive into member state legislation has occurred too recently to enable statistically rigorous quantitative ana lys is 1 . Th is partially explains the a b s e n c e of such analys is to date, notwithstanding the abundance of existing commentary. Yet , an aggregat ion of publicly avai lable information can provide an emerging picture of future ou tcomes. S u c h ev idence is most compel l ing when either a large number of smal ler European car manufacturers or a number of larger parent company manufacturers are moving in the s a m e direction. Here 'parent company ' refers to a company that owns and operates a number of smal ler subsidiary car brands. For instance, Vo lkswagen is the parent company of the following brands that it manufactures: Vo lkswagen , Aud i , Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini , S E A T and S k o d a [10]. Our analys is uses data on European carmakers including company reports and websi tes, a s s e s s m e n t s made by governments and industry groups, and public media s o u r c e s 2 . The parent company and brand reports reviewed in this analysis account for over 8 0 % of the 2003 new passenger vehicle registrations shown in Figure 2.4. Many car compan ies , including Toyota, Vo lkswagen , DaimlerChrysler , Ford, Genera l Motors and the Fiat Group now publ ish detai led environmental reports. A growing number of carmakers a lso have dedicated environment/sustainabil i ty websi tes. E a c h of the 'expectat ions' above has been evaluated based on the ev idence found in these sources and other publicly avai lable reports (as listed in the references). In s o m e c a s e s , industry wide trends facilitate the assessmen t of environmental 1 A large number of Member States have now enacted laws relating to the EU ELV Directive, though many did so after April 2002, the date specified for compliance in the ELV Directive itself [9] ACEA, ELV Country Report Charts. ACEA. 2004. 2 Extensive searches were conducted on information databases including: Science Citation Index, LexisNexis, ABI/lnform and Business Source Premier. 13 performance. In others, the available data is insufficient to clearly determine whether a given expectat ion will be met in the future. Figure 2.4: New Passenge r C a r Registrat ions in Weste rn Europe, 2003 Parent Manufacturer Share of New Registrations, 2003 (%) Brands included Volkswagen 18.2% PSA 14.8% Japanese Manufacturers 12.7% Ford 11.0% Renault 10.6% GM 9.8% FIAT 7.4% DaimlerChrysler 6.5% BMW 4.4% Korean Manufacturers 3.3% MG Rover 1.0% Other 0.3% Audi, SEAT, Skoda, Volkswagen, others Citroen, Peugeot Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Suzuki, Toyota, others Ford, Jaguar, Landrover, Volvo, others Dacia, Renault OPEL, SAAB, others Alfa Romeo, Fiat, Iveco, Lancia, others Chrysler, JEEP, Mercedes, Smart, other BMW, Mini, others Daewoo, Hyundai, Kia, others Rover Source:[11] The attribution of legislation as a driver of observed change a lso requires that such changes be dist inguishable from trends that may occur regardless of regulatory impacts. Numerous factors can influence a company 's decis ion to act. T h e s e include cost sav ings, brand image, regulatory constraints, consumer preferences and competit ive pressures. Even without appropriate legislation, the 'invisible hand of the market' may move the automotive industry toward more (or less) sustainable pract ices. A decrease in the level of waste, energy use and water use c a n yield economic benefits in addition to being environmentally desirable. Decreas ing resource requirements per unit output can mean lower costs of production and higher profits. Determining the level of influence of such factors vis-a-vis regulation is often difficult. Whi le the conc lus ions of this study provide early ev idence of the effect iveness of E L V legislation, the long-term implications of the E L V Directive are only beginning to unfold. A fuller understanding of the impact of E L V legislation will develop over the next decade . 4. Assessing Expected Outcomes The automotive industry has had advanced notice that E L V legislation was on the agenda s ince at least 1989 [12]. Industry was a lso heavily involved in the legislative p rocess that culminated in the E L V Directive. Improvements in E L V recovery have been inf luenced by national pol ic ies s ince the nineties. E L V regulations and/or voluntary agreements existed in ten European countr ies prior to 2000 (Austria, Belg ium, France, Germany , Italy, the Nether lands, Portugal , Spa in , S w e d e n and the UK) . Of these, Austr ia, France, Italy and the Nether lands had introduced 14 national pol ic ies and agreements prior to the debate over the E U E L V directive proposal , which was put forward in 1997. The other six countries establ ished voluntary agreements and legislation between 1997 and 1999, in parallel with the debate over the E L V Directive. A s a result, a number of technological and organisational innovations occurred in the 1990s. T h e s e included the creat ion of E L V treatment infrastructures and efforts to des ign for dismantl ing and recycl ing [12]. Current advances should be seen in the light of such innovations, which might have been st imulated by pending E L V legislation for over a decade . Increases in the amount of industry-wide Resea rch and Development (R&D) into des ign for end-of-life would provide strong ev idence that E L V legislation is having an effect. R & D into environmental protection can makeup a significant portion of a manufacturer 's total R & D budget. For example , Renault states that around 4 0 % of R & D programs are devoted to environmental protection [13]. In fact, recent information reveals that European automakers and suppl iers are investing up to half of their R & D budgets on reducing carbon dioxide emiss ions [14]. Yet , there is little ev idence that R & D expenditure on environmental management (including waste treatment, E L V recovery and emiss ions technologies) is increasing. Neither did publicly avai lable da ta show strong trends toward increased levels of environmental investment. For instance, Vo lkswagen operating costs for environmental protection increased by 3 0 % between 1999 and 2003 (from Euro 150m to 195m). Of this 3 7 % was spent on waste management . However Vo lkswagen ' s investment in environmental protection has remained relatively steady over the past 4 years, ranging from Euro 24m to Euro 33m [15]. The environmental protection investments of M e r c e d e s Ca r Group (part of DaimlerChrysler) jumped significantly from 2002 to 2003. Yet the level of its investments in 2001 and 2002 were smal ler than those of 1998 to 2000 [16]. Industry and country-wide f igures are a lso flat. R & D investment in the U K automotive industry has remained steady over the past 3 years at around £1 billion [17]. This represents approximately 2 . 3 % of the total automotive manufacturing turnover, which held relatively constant between 1999 and 2002 at £42-44 billion [17]. Similarly, R & D by European automotive suppl iers has remained steady at around 3 .5% of revenue [18]. There is a lack of data on E L V specif ic R & D expenditure. Furthermore, due to the strong drive toward emiss ions reduction, fuel eff iciency and energy consumpt ion there are few c lear s igns that automotive manufacturers are making E L V recovery an R & D priority 3. Whi le a c c e s s to detai led R & D investment da ta on E L V recovery would have been useful, there are other indicators (d iscussed in expectat ions 1 to 5 below) that provide insight into the impact of E L V legislation on 'green' innovation and vehic le recovery. 3 For example, the majority of Renault's efforts are targeted at emissions reduction, fuel efficiency and energy consumption. Similarly, the Fiat Group's 2003 Environmental Report states five research priorities targeted at environmental stewardship (p.19). These deal with fuel efficiency, emissions, safety and traffic flow improvement. Efforts to increase the level of end-of-life vehicle recovery are not listed as a priority. 15 Expectation 1: Changes in the Material Composition of New Cars Legislat ive, economic , technological and societal factors have all contributed to s o m e distinctive material t rends over the past few decades . The use of materials such as plast ics and aluminium are increasingly being utilized due to their light weight (resulting in less energy and fewer emiss ions to power a given vehicle) and desirable mechanica l properties. P last ics are becoming central to vehicle production. The use of plastics has increased by 5 0 % over the past 20 years [19]. European cars contained an average of 133kg of plastics parts in 2003 [20]. Po lymers are now used in over 1000 parts including bumpers, seats , dashboards, interior trim, fuel sys tems and upholstery. Plast ic has prevai led despite its material p redecessors being either eas ier to recycle (e.g. metals) or produced from renewable sources (e.g. wood). A lumin ium use in cars is a lso expected to increase dramatical ly over the coming decade [21]. E L V legislation may provide further incentives for this, as aluminium is easi ly and cost effectively recyclable to near 1 0 0 % quality. A s a result, E L V regulations may s low the use of composi te materials, which could be replaced by metals such as aluminium [20]. Consequent ly , it is predicted that the average European car will contain 240kg of aluminium by 2010; a 1 2 0 % increase from 2003 [20]. In addition to decreas ing the amount of automotive waste going to landfill, recycl ing aluminium saves up to 9 5 % of the energy needed to produce primary metal . Recyc l ing one ki logram of aluminium can a lso save about 8 ki lograms of bauxite and four k i lograms of chemica l products [22]. All of this adds up to sufficient economic sav ings to make the use of aluminium attractive. Veh ic le des ign remains driven by cost and functional properties. This is not surprising g iven that many experts bel ieve that the environmental awareness of consumers is in decl ine [23]. A s a result consumer demand is not a primary driver of environmental change in the automotive industry [23]. Stil l, s o m e progress in des ign for end-of-life is being made, driven in part by regulatory pressures. Three ways in which change in a vehic le 's material composi t ion c a n manifest itself are d i scussed below. i) Increased Use of Recyclable and Environmentally Beneficial Materials Increased emphas is on recyclability is leading to a rationalisation of plastic use. Fiat Group 's 2003 Environmental Report states that the group's des ign efforts aim to max imise component recyclability, with hard-to-handle polymers being 'sca led back' in favour of other more easi ly recyclable plast ics [24]. Similarly, Peugeot-Ci t roen state that efforts are made to a) reduce the variety of materials to facilitate resource recovery after shredding, b) use single family plast ics per major function to enable entire sub-assembl ies to be recycled without d isassembly and c) to reduce the variety of plastics in order to ensure optimal and profitable recovery p rocesses [25]. G M and O P E L a lso aim to minimise the number of different plast ics and to use non-b lended compounds where possib le [26, 27]. S u c h efforts will impact a substantial number of car parts. 16 For instance, Chrys ler bel ieves that by 2007, the company will modify up to 1,000 parts per vehic le to ensure compl iance with the E L V Directive [28]. A recent report by the S M M T includes numerous additional examp les of environmentally friendly des ign and p rocess improvements [29]. Notwithstanding the above, it is difficult to gauge the true extent of eco-des ign efforts and of the impact of such efforts (on a vehic le 's material composit ion for example) . It is similarly difficult to ascerta in whether E L V legislation or cost improvements are driving these changes. The impetus to minimise E L V waste may also fall counter to a company 's desire to reduce the weight of a vehic le. A s a rule of thumb a 10% weight reduction can lead to a 3 -7% improvement in fuel eff iciency and a subsequent reduction in air pollution [30]. A movement toward using recycled components could result in the need for heavier parts if recycled materials have inferior mechanica l propert ies. A recent study by the A P M E found that such behaviour is counterproduct ive [31]. Us ing more recyclable materials that have poor mechanica l properties would have the s a m e effect. This has led s o m e commentators to argue that E L V legislation could result in a movement away from plastics (which are light but often hard to recycle) toward metals such as aluminium (which is light and easi ly recycled) [23]. The drive toward recycling can also be at odds with other design trends. For instance the use of electronics in vehic les is increasing. S u c h parts typically contain metal-plastic compos i tes and f lame-retardant chemica ls . This makes them difficult to separate and recover at the end of a vehic le 's life. Similarly, products that use recycled content may a lso compromise recyclability. Compos i te products that are compr ised of plastics reinforced with inorganic f ibres such as f ibreglass are increasingly being used due to their superior mechanica l properties and light weight. A s a result, composi te use is expected to rise by roughly 5 % each year until 2008 [20]. However the fibres themselves and the fillers used in the manufacturing process currently prohibit such materials from being economical ly recycled [32]. This has driven Ford to work on creating nanocomposi te materials that are more recyclable, lighter and have better mechanica l properties than regular compos i tes [32]. Mater ials made of natural fibres have recently been making their way into car production. Ca rmake rs have been testing hemp, flax, purified cel lulose and native prairie g rasses for automotive uses [33]. Whi le the vo lumes are still relatively smal l , such fibres represent valuable alternatives to synthetic f ibres. They are renewable, display excel lent mechanica l propert ies, are light in weight and can be combined with other materials to form natural-f ibre-reinforced compos i tes . For these reasons, the Mercedes E -C lass has more than 50 components produced in whole or in part from renewable materials [32]. Renault 's Scen ic II a lso contains 12kg of renewable materials [13]. More than 140 auto parts at DaimlerChrysler contain natural fibres [34]. However , concerns have been raised that the E L V Directive may impede the use of raw materials, as recycl ing natural-f ibre-reinforced composi tes through means other than combust ion 17 is not currently commercia l ly viable. A s a result s o m e experts are concerned that des igners may switch to less favourable materials in order to meet mandatory recycling quotas [35]. It is a lso unclear whether E L V legislation will have a beneficial effect on the use of other new materials like bio-plast ics. S u c h plastics are made from plant matter such as sugarcane, corn or soy and can be given biodegradable properties that allow them to be broken down by micro-organ isms. They may also have environmental benefits such as reduced carbon emiss ions [36]. For instance, Ford is developing cano la and soy based foams as an alternative to polyurethane foams widely used car seats and cushions [33]. However bio-plastics are not highly recyclable to date and as a result are not desirable from an E L V Directive standpoint [32]. Ev idence that environmental concerns are being incorporated into the des ign p rocess , as a first step towards the use of "green" materials is a lso instructive. The Society for Motor Manufacturers and Traders ( S M M T ) in the U K notes that 'Des ign for recycl ing' principles are gradually being adopted and implemented in the product des ign process [17]. Ca rmake rs are increasingly using life cycle tools as part of the des ign process . For instance, all the materials in the Fiat Idea, a new compact car, were se lected using Life Cyc le A s s e s s m e n t (LCA) [24]. B M W is developing a life-cycle simulat ion tool for the long-term design and maintenance of an environmental ly safe recycling system [37]. Volvo has started to conduct l ife-cycle ana lyses for all newly re leased models . This data is presented on Volvo 's website for easy compar ison between models [38]. In s o m e c a s e s speci f ic tools have been dev ised to improve part recyclability. Renaul t 's 'Index of Recyclabi l i ty by Funct ion (IRF)' was used on the Megane II functions and will be used to set c o m m o n progress targets for suppl iers. N issan and Renault have a lso jointly dev ised the O P E R A application (Overseas Project for Economica l Recycl ing Analys is) . O P E R A is being used to simulate costs and recycling rates in the E L V recycling process [13]. G M ' s European operat ions have a lso adopted 'Des ign for Recycl ing ' [27]. Overa l l , we conc lude that E L V legislation has contributed to greater considerat ion of recyclability in the des ign process . This is already leading to a rationalisation of plastic use . Recylabil i ty and mechanica l des ign considerat ions might also hasten the trend towards greater use of a lumin ium. However , the extent of movement toward recyclable materials is difficult to gauge. E L V regulation may a lso negatively impact the use of novel "green materials" like bio-plastics and natural f ibres. ii) Increased use of Recycled Materials ("Recyclate") A lack of industry and company- level data on recyclate use requires rel iance on the aggregat ion of statements of intent and car-speci f ic information. Ev idence suggests that recyclate is increasingly being used in car parts [19]; [32]. For instance, Peugeot-Ci t roen state 'using recycled materials' as a criteria by which polymers are chosen in current des igns [25]. B M W has 18 also stated that it p lans to gradually increase the share of recyclates in plastic components for future models [37]. Most E L V metals are relatively easi ly recycled (as d i scussed further below). However, the use of non-metal l ic recycled material remains low. Roughly 9 % of the weight of a passenger car is plastic [6] and a c o m m o n car weighs about 1,100kg [19]. Thus , even 30kg of recycled material would equate to less than a third of the total plastics in a car. Most automobi les contain less than this amount. For example , Renault 's Scen ic II (an industry leader in terms of recyclability accord ing to their 2003 annual report) contains 16kg of recycled plastics out of a total of 150kg (i.e. just over 10%) of plastic used in the car [13]. The Ford Focus also incorporates 39 recycled plastic parts, account ing for 21 ki lograms of the car 's weight [39]. Notably, Volvo has been providing externally verif ied Environmental Product Declarat ions (EPDs ) for a number of their vehic les s ince 1998. B a s e d on these E P D s , Volvo 's 2004 vehic les contain between 7kg of recycled non-metal l ic materials (the S 8 0 model) and 23kg (the S 4 0 model) [38]. The B M W 3 Ser ies contains 1 4 % recycled plast ics by weight [37]. Recyc la te tends to be used in parts that do not require high structural /mechanical per formance and in parts that are not generally visible to the occupant. For instance, the fuel tank and inner wheel housings contain the largest amount of recycled material in a Volvo [38]. The Volvo C a r Corporat ion est imates that only 30kg of recycled non-metall ic materials could be used in a new car, subject to prevail ing quality standards and the availability of materials [40]. Thus a figure of 1 0 0 % non-metal l ic recycled materials as shown on Volvo 's E P D s would signify 30kg of recycled material being used. Similarly, O P E L ' s 2002 Sustainabil ity Report outl ines their goal to increase the share of recycled materials to 2 0 % of the total plastic mass in the vehic le [26]. Wh i le it is possib le to obtain high quality recyclate, it is rare to find automotive parts made from 1 0 0 % recycled plastic. It is much more c o m m o n to use a blend containing 2 5 - 5 0 % recycled content [19]. Th is suggests that automotive plastics are being 'downcycled' rather than ' recycled' . Recyc la te is increasingly being used in car production. In the absence of E L V legislation the incentive to use such material would be significantly reduced. However, there is still a considerable way to go. A number of technological and economic barriers must be overcome before ca rmakers can replace existing plastics with their recycled counterparts. iii) Removal of 'Banned' Substances The E L V Directive requires that components of vehic les p laced on the market after 1 July 2003 do not contain mercury, hexavalent chromium, cadmium or lead. O n the 2 7 t h of J u n e 2002 the Directive was amended to modify the except ions in Annex II, yet the target of heavy metal removal remains the s a m e [41]. Ev idence indicates that automotive manufacturers and their suppl iers are complying with the E L V Directive's requirement [24, 25, 37, 42]. Nor are s u c h 19 changes restricted to European cars . A recent report has found that the E U E L V Directive is, to s o m e extent, driving activities in the U S automotive market. In particular, the E L V Direct ive's aim to remove toxic and hazardous substances has resulted in international efforts to el iminate their use in vehic le manufacturing [32]. Expectation 2: Increased "Design for Disassembly, Re-use and Remanufacture" The E L V Directive states that manufacturers must design and produce vehic les which facilitate the dismant l ing, re-use and recovery (including recycling) of end-of-life vehic les [3]. To this end there are indications that automotive manufacturers are investing resources to improve vehic le d isassembly . However, there is little compel l ing proof that carmakers are designing vehic les to facilitate re-use and remanufacture. Severa l reasons for this are explored below. T o accurately understand the benefits of re-use and barriers to it in the automotive industry it is useful to p lace re-use in context with other forms of E L V recovery. Many authors have attested that there is strong ev idence that the 3R framework (Reduce, Re -use , Recycle) is robust and general isable [43]. Implicit within it is the notion that less material and energy use is usual ly better for the environment. Genera l ly speak ing, the higher up the p rocess in the hierarchy the more environmental ly friendly it is [44]. Hence re-use is theoretically preferable to recycl ing (see Figure 2.5). Additionally, studies have shown that traditional recycling s a v e s ten t imes more energy than performing energy recovery [45]. Figure 2.5: Theoret ical Recovery Hierarchy Low Whi le the 3 R ' s provide a useful starting point, a more granular breakdown of ' re-use' would include upgrading, reprocess ing, remanufacture, refurbishment, recondit ioning, revalorisation and repair [46]. However in order to strike a balance between simplicity and comprehens iveness this paper will consider remanufacture in detail. The aim of remanufacturing is to reprocess used products in such a manner that the quality of the products is as good or better than new in terms of appearance , reliability and performance [46]. Remanufactur ing can often save more than half the energy and 8 0 % of the material that would otherwise have been used to make a new product from scratch [47]. A recent study found that remanufactured engines could be produced with 6 8 % 20 to 8 3 % less energy and 2 6 % to 9 0 % less raw materials than the manufacture of a new engine [48]. Figure 2.5 incorporates remanufacturing and energy recovery into the 3 R concept. Veh ic le manufacturers real ise that there is a lot to be learnt from d isassembl ing vehic les and analysing wear on old vehic le parts. B o t h . F o r d and B M W have establ ished recycl ing and dismantl ing centres in Europe to integrate learning from end-of-life vehic les into des ign methods. B M W already has over 100 official dismantl ing facilities in Ge rmany alone [49]. The information is used to benchmark and improve vehicle recovery (recycling in particular) [2, 37]. DaimlerChrys ler are a lso gaining d isassembly and recycling knowledge from dismantl ing vehic les at C a n a d a ' s Automotive R & D Center in Windsor [34]. Avai lable information suggests that manufacturers are trying to improve des ign for d i sassemb ly 4 . For example , P S A Peugeot Citroen claim to have embraced the principles of des ign for d i sassemb ly and reuse, with at least 9 5 % of the average mass of new Peugeot and Ci t roen vehic les being reusable and recoverable. Renault a lso states that 9 5 % of the S c e n i c II is recoverable [13]. Additionally, they profess to be contributing to a 'dual sys tem' that incorporates part recovery for the used part trade in addition to material recovery for recycl ing. Similarly, O P E L engineers are encouraged to design for d isassembly by avoiding the use of bonding agents and welded joints where possib le and by using easi ly detachable cl ips or sc rews [26]. There is little ev idence that car compan ies are investing in 'design for remanufacture' . Moreover , we have not c o m e ac ross any ev idence that car parts are being des igned to be remanufactured and then ' re-used' in the production of future new vehic les. S u c h 'c losed- loop' remanufactur ing typically requires a significant change in des ign, operations and possibly industry structure. For instance, parts with inbuilt electronic components and des ign optimisation using finite e lement analysis have resulted in components becoming less economical ly feasible to remanufacture [46]. However, remanufactur ing can be economical ly viable and is occurr ing in other industries. New electronic equipment such as photocopiers already contain a significant proportion of remanufactured parts; enabl ing the manufacturer to cut costs and increase the environmental per formance of their products [50]. Remanufactured parts are a lso used in safety-crit ical appl icat ions such as aeroplane engines [46]. There may be a lack of remanufacturing because carmakers may not be the main benef ic iar ies of remanufacturing revenue. Until carmakers commit to remanufacturing their parts, increased profits will accrue to independent remanufacturers. S u c h a commitment could take the form of 4 Improving the ease of disassembly is only one part of designing for re-use and remanufacture. The ability to re-use and remanufacture parts can be facilitated by designing them for greater durability. By doing so, a larger proportion of parts will be candidates for re-use when a vehicle reaches the end of its life. 21 direct involvement in the manufacturing process or through c lose relationships between Original Equipment Manufacturers ( O E M s ) and remanufacturers. At least three additional barriers exist to remanufacturing in a c losed loop context. Firstly, the average age of E L V s in Europe is est imated to be approximately 10-12 years (with signif icant variability among countries) [12]. Yet car designs change regularly; dr iven by consumer preferences and technological innovation. The combinat ion of a long useful life and rapid technological change can inhibit c losed loop remanufacturing, as by the t ime remanufactured parts are avai lable many of the parts will be outdated. Yet this barrier a lone need not prevent remanufactur ing. Product leasing (which dec reases the time before parts can be returned to the manufacturer) has been utilised effectively in conjunction with c losed loop remanufactur ing in the photocopier industry. Additionally, vehicle parts that are not forecast to change significantly may be better candidates for c losed loop remanufacturing. S e c o n d , remanufactured parts are often perceived as being of poor quality and/or being 'old technology'. In high technology industries such as the automotive industry compan ies appear very caut ious about doing anything that may affect their brand image of being an innovative company. It would be useful to understand the extent to which these percept ions continue to reflect customer sentiment. Finally, des ign for c losed loop remanufacturing must occur in parallel with a change in operat ions and logistics to be effective. Supply chains and inventory management p rocesses must be altered to integrate remanufactured parts with new parts. 'Reverse supply chains ' must be estab l ished to enable automotive manufacturers to collect used vehic les and then supply remanufactured parts back to the manufacturer. The remanufacturing process itself may require the acquisi t ion of speci f ic (and proprietary) knowledge and skil ls needed for d isassembly and recovery, in addit ion to investment in cus tomised equipment. Expectation 3: Increased Levels of Remanufacture and Re-use R e u s e and remanufacture remains a smal l part of automobile recovery, partly due to the high cost of labour. But the industry is growing [51] [52]. If E L V regulation has significantly affected reuse and remanufacture we would expect to see a jump in the vo lume of parts being used for this purpose. Observab le changes in the eagerness of carmakers to participate in the after-use market would a lso suggest that the E L V Directive has had a direct effect in this a rea . However such behaviour may be expla ined by economic motives as well , as d i scussed below. Remanufactured parts typically end up in repair and aftermarket industries rather than going into new car production. In the U K , 6 9 % by weight of total d isposed vehic les is recyc led/ recovered, 1 1 % is parts that were able to be re-used and the remaining 2 0 % goes to landfill [29]. There may also be an opportunity to increase automotive remanufacturing in Europe. A compar ison with U S data suggests that the U K remanufacturing industry may generate revenues of severa l billion 22 pounds [46]. However, market penetration for remanufactured products is higher in the United States than in Europe. Amer icans buy approximately 60 million remanufactured automotive products annually, while Europeans buy only 15 million. Yet, the total stock of veh ic les is roughly comparab le [51]. Th is highlights the potential for increased use of remanufactured components in Europe O E M participation in remanufacturing remains smal l , but there are encouraging s igns that O E M s are taking a greater interest in remanufacturing and reuse because of the opportunit ies afforded by remanufactur ing to increase profits and to gain feedback on failure modes and durability. In the United States, O E M s account for less than 5 % of remanufacturing activity. Independent third parties make up the majority of the 73,000 U .S . remanufacturing firms [53]. The percentage of automotive remanufacturing undertaken by carmakers in Europe is a lso likely to be smal l . Nonethe less , remanufacturing by car compan ies is occurr ing. Volvo C a r s ' exchange system for remanufactured parts is one example. Through this system Volvo remanufactures used parts (obtained from dealers) to the s a m e quality as new parts. Over 2,000 different components , from gearboxes to conso les , are remanufactured in this manner and so ld to consumers with a full warranty [54]. Remanufactured engines are a lso used by one O E M as rep lacements for under-warranty eng ines, resulting in considerable cost sav ings [51]. B M W also remanufactures 15,000 engines e a c h year at its Landshut plant [37, 49]. But, while the company supports component re-use in secondary markets, it does not do so in new cars [32]. C o m p a n i e s such a s Mercedesr Benz and Ford currently harvest and sell spare parts as well. Notably, Ford has done s o by buying sa lvage yards in North Amer i ca and Europe [2]. There remain at least four obstac les to the widespread adoption of remanufactur ing. Firstly, most products that currently arrive at the end of their life were not des igned to be recycled or remanufactured [55]. Secondly , there has been an explosion in the number of car mode ls over the past two d e c a d e s [51]. Th is has lead to the production of fewer vehic les of each model . The result is that remanufacturers are less able to take advantages of economies of sca le . Their ability to meet stringent supply requirements for just-in-time production p rocesses is a lso d imin ished. Third, there is significant supply-chain uncertainty assoc ia ted with remanufactur ing and re-use, including: the supply of remanufacturable parts, the quality of the returned parts and var iable process ing t imes [2, 51]. A s a result, remanufacturers are forced to keep large inventories to mitigate against such variability. Yet , s o m e of this uncertainty is likely to dec rease in the future. Analys is of experiential data in addition to advances in technology such as electronic da ta logs will al low a more expedient and accurate assessmen t of the quality of returned parts. B M W is already moving in this direction. The new B M W 7 Ser ies contains an on-board computer which constantly monitors component wear and alerts the driver when action is required [37]. 23 Finally, alternate recovery methods are becoming more financially attractive. The development of sophist icated post-shredder technology is increasing the economic feasibility of recycl ing and energy recovery [52]. The E L V Directive could hasten this p rocess . Thus s o m e carmakers are becoming progressively more involved in the bus iness of col lect ing and sell ing used parts. Similarly, a few compan ies are a lso taking the next step of rejuvenating these ' in-house' and sell ing them as remanufactured components . But it is too early to tell whether recent act ions constitute the beginning of an enduring swing toward greater levels of re-use and remanufacture. Expectation 4: Increased Levels of Recycling of ELV Materials Ideally, annual E L V recycl ing rates, publ ished at E U , national or company-wide levels would provide sol id ev idence as to whether or not E L V recycling has increased as a result of regulation. In the a b s e n c e of such data, it is possib le to gauge progress by assess ing the level of R & D and innovation in recycling technologies. There is mounting ev idence that innovation in recycling is occurr ing. It is being driven by high recycl ing rate requirements in both the E L V Directive and the W a s t e Electr ical and Electronic Equipment Directive. End-of-pipe recycling solutions are needed as vehic les already in use will reach their end of life by 2006. Hence , B M W has been working on recycling of pyrotechnic components (such as ai rbags and belt tensioners) in addition to new, automatic sorting techniques for plast ics, metals and shredder residues [37]. Vo lkswagen has des igned a new separat ion and recycling p rocess , known as the V W - S i C o n P r o c e s s [56]. Not surprisingly, recent efforts have focused on extraction and recycling of polypropylene as it compr ises the largest fraction of automotive plast ics [57]. Yet there are except ions. For instance, Dupont is developing technology to recycle nylon composi tes to produce resin that is "essential ly equivalent" to virgin nylon [58]. P r o c e s s e s for d isposing of plastics with brominated f lame retardants are a lso being tested [59]. A wide variety of additional methods are being deve loped to sort and recycle plast ics as well [60]. The automotive industry need only attain a 5 -10% improvement in the rate of re-use and recycl ing to meet the 2006 recycl ing target of 8 0 % set out in the E L V Directive. Current da ta is insufficient to a s s e s s whether carmakers are on track to reach this goal . What is clear is that one or both of the following will need to take place in order to reach the 2015 target of 9 5 % recovery: (i) a dramatic increase in the recovery of plastic, rubber, g lass and other non-metal l ic materials, and (ii) a movement away from these materials toward more easi ly recycled materials such as a luminium. Notably, the 2015 recovery target may be partially ach ieved through increased rates of energy recovery. Th is is detai led in Figure 2.2. Stil l, the variety of recycling innovations taking p lace point towards an improved ability to recycle current materials on a commerc ia l sca le in the 24 not too distant future. Th is , in combinat ion with a modest increase in the level of re-use and remanufactur ing may make it feasible to reach the 2006 target. Expectation 5: Increased Level of Publicly Available Information The E L V Directive requires that producers use material coding standards, which allow identification of the var ious materials during dismantl ing. It a lso requires that information on the treatment of end-of-life vehic les and progress with regard to re-use, recycling and recovery be provided to prospect ive vehicle buyers. Is such information being provided? Information avai lable to vehicle recovery operators does appear to be improving. The International Dismantl ing Information Sys tem ('IDIS') and the International Material Data Sys tem ('IMDS') are two key automotive initiatives a imed at improving data col lection and d isseminat ion. The IDIS database and assoc ia ted software is produced by the IDIS 2 Consor t ium, which cons is ts of 24 carmakers . IDIS enables the identification of component materials to improve the efficient treatment of end of life vehic les. The database currently lists around 44,000 car components for 888 vehic le models from 24 car manufacturers. The 40 brands referenced in IDIS represent more than 9 5 % of the current automotive European market, as well as all the major manufacturers from J a p a n , Ko rea and the United States [61]. C a r compan ies are currently undertaking the signif icant p rocess of gathering the required information from their suppl iers and updating this information for distribution to those involved in end-of-life vehicle recovery. Auto parts suppl iers a lso use another da tabase, the IMDS to catalogue the composi t ion of car parts (including their sur face coat ings). IMDS was developed by a number of European carmakers , though North Amer i can and A s i a n manufacturers have s ince embraced the system [62]. Cod ing s tandards are a lso being instituted to enable identification of components that are suitable for-recovery, reuse and recycl ing [24, 27]. The European Counci l for Automotive R & D ( E U C A R ) is currently working with its members to collect information on E L V treatment sys tems as well [24]. C a r manufacturers are a lso making s o m e efforts to communicate a vehic le 's environmental per formance to the customer. A s noted above, Volvo has been providing Environmental Product Declarat ions ( E P D s ) , verified by Lloyd's Register Quality Assu rance , for a number of their vehic les s ince 1998. E P D s are seen as a potentially useful tool for communicat ion of a product 's environmental impact and may form part of an integrated European Product Pol icy accord ing to the European Commiss ion ' s Integrated Product Pol icy (IPP) white paper [63]. However , in order for E P D s . to be useful and credible they require verification and standardisat ion of approach ac ross the industry [64]. Th is remains to be accompl ished. 25 In general, it appears that car manufacturers are improving industry's access to information on vehicle disassembly and recovery. Further effort is needed to provide the same level of information to car buyers. Consumers face a deficit of accurate, comprehensive and easily available information pertaining to the ecological impact of their potential purchase. This lack of verified data hinders the ability of a consumer to purchase a vehicle that is environmentally friendly. 5 . Conclusion ELV legislation is having a discernible effect on numerous 'end-of-pipe' solutions such as innovation in recycling methods and shredder residue separation techniques. These new technologies are likely to be used to recycle material from a broad range of industries and particularly from white-goods, which are already processed in shredders alongside automobile hulks. However, end-of-life design considerations are not a high priority for car manufacturers. Economic imperatives and a drive toward customisation remain the key motivations in automotive design. Furthermore, eco-design efforts may be restricted by the delayed payback associated with long vehicle lifetimes and the fact that innovations in end-of-pipe recycling technologies will be required to process older cars regardless of design changes. This raises the possibility that car manufacturers might get locked-in to sub-optimal solutions that favour recycling over remanufacture and reuse. Nonetheless, there are some important impacts of ELV legislation on design, particularly on material choice. There are strong indications that ELV legislation is leading to a reduction in toxic substance use. Numerous life cycle design tools, indicators and processes focused on improved material use are being utilised in the design process. Carmakers are reducing the number of different plastics being used in order to improve recyclability. It is also likely that ELV legislation will increase the use of aluminium, in part due to its ability to be easily recycled. Though the ELV directive does not specify targets for the use of recyclates in vehicles there is evidence that recyclates are increasingly being used in car parts, albeit at low total volumes. There also appears to be a focus on increasing the proportion of materials that can be recycled or downcycled, rather than on the quality of recyclate. The impact of ELV legislation on design for re-use and remanufacturing is limited. Embracing remanufacturing requires significant changes to organisational processes and an approach to design that incorporates remanufactured parts. Remanufacturing is likely to only be economically attractive to carmakers if they are able to share directly in the profits. To capture such benefits carmakers will need to actively participate in the remanufacture of their own parts or develop close financial and operational ties with existing remanufacturing organisations. At least initially, 26 most remanufactur ing activity will continue to be limited to the provision of replacement parts for existing vehic les. There is ev idence that the E L V Directive is resulting in improved col lection and d isseminat ion of data that enab les efficient material and part identification. S o m e initiatives to communica te a vehic le 's environmental per formance to the customer are also appear ing. However , in order for these to be useful to the end consumer such information will need to be avai lable and standardised ac ross models and brands. Pol icy instruments can influence the choice of innovation path and "may work as 'select ion dev ices ' by constraining s o m e innovative options while providing incentives to pursue other innovation solut ions" [12]. In the c a s e of the automotive industry the interplay of legislative and economic factors has led to an increased emphas is on recycling and hazardous subs tance removal . The resultant innovation may be sufficient to reach E L V Directive targets and may a lso have spil l-over benefits to other industries. The next step toward sustainable vehic le management lies in increasing the levels of re-use and remanufacturing. References [1] Directive 2002/96/EC on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), in 2002/96/EC. 2002, p. 15. [2] Toffel, M.W. , Strategic Management of Product Recovery. Cal i fornia Management Rev iew, 2004; 46(2): p. 120. [3] Directive 2000/53/EC on end-of-life vehicles, in 2000/53/EC. 2000, p. 9. [4] Funazak i , A . , et a l . , Automobile life cycle assessment issues at end-of-life and recycling. J s a e Review, 2003; 24(4): p. 381 -386. [5] Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to their re-usability, recyclability and recoverability and amending Council Directive 70/156/EEC, in COM(2004) 162 Final. 2004, p. 43 . [6] DTI, End of Life Vehicle Waste Arisings and Recycling Rates. Department of Trade and Industry: London. 2002, p. 4. [7] Proposal for a Directive on Batteries and Accumulators and Spent Batteries and Accumulators. Commiss i on of the European Communi t ies : Brusse ls . 2003, p. 54. [8] Paving the way for EU enlargement, in Environmental Issue Report. European Environment Agency . 2002, p. 64. [9] A C E A , ELV Country Report Charts. A C E A . 2004. [10] Schul t ies, B., CarsCarsCars: Who Owns Who. 2004. 27 [11] A C E A , Year 2003 by group and by type: New vehicle registrations. A C E A . 2004, p. C a r registrations in Wes te rn Europe by manufacturer and type for 2003. [12] Zobol i , R., et a l . , Regulation and Innovation in the area of end-of-life vehicles, in The impact of EU regulation on innovation of European Industry, F. Leone, Editor. The European C o m m i s s i o n : Mi lan. 2000, p. 428. [13] Renault 2003 Annual Report. Renault : B O U L O G N E - B I L L A N C O U R T . 2004, p. 252. , [14]. Bolduc, D.A., Europeans use much of r&d budgets to meet 2008 emissions standards. Automotive News , 2003; V o l . 78(6073): p. 16D. [15] Vo l kswagen , Annual Report 2003. Vo lkswagen A G : Wol fsburg, Germany . 2004, p. 188. [16] DaimlerChrysler , Environmental Report 2004 - Facts & Figures: Environmental investments and expenditures. DaimlerChrysler . 2004. [17] S M M T , Towards Sustainability: SMMT Fourth Annual Report. The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders Ltd: United K ingdom. 2003, p. 28. [18] Kosdrosky , T., Analysts: U.S. suppliers face r&d quandary. Automotive News , 2003 ; 77(6050): p. 22d. [19] W a s t e W a t c h , Plastics in the UK Economy: A guide to polymer use and the opportunities for recycling: United K ingdom. 2003, p. 80. [20] D iem, W. , 'Fierce'Competition, in Ward's Auto World Detroit. 2004, p. 26-27. [21] K im, H.C. , et a l . , Life cycle optimization of automobile replacement: Model and application. Environmental Sc ience & Technology, 2003; 37(23): p. 5407-5413. [22] A S S U R R E , Aluminium Manufacturing and Recycling. A S S U R R E . 2003. [23] Wenge l , J . and P. Warnke , The Future of Manufacturing in Europe 2015-2020: The Challenge for Sustainability. Case Study: Automotive Industry - Personal Cars. Fraunhofer Institute for Sys tems and Innovation R e s e a r c h : Sevi l la. 2003, p. 64. [24] 2003 Fiat Group Environmental Report. Fiat Group : Turin. 2004, p. 65. [25] 2003 Business Review - Managing Board Report. P S A Peugeot Ci t roen: Par is . 2003, p. 159. [26] OPEL: Sustainability Report 2002 - Ecological Efficiency and Climate Change. O P E L . 2003, p. 41-81 . [27] General Motors Corporate Responsibility & Sustainability Report 2003. Genera l Motors. 2004, p. 133. [28] DaimlerChrysler , 360 Degrees - Environmental Report 2003. DaimlerChrys ler : Stuttgart, Germany . 2003, p. 98. [29] S M M T , Towards Sustainability: SMMT Third Annual Report. The Society of Motor. Manufacturers and Traders Ltd: United K ingdom. 2002, p. 40. [30] McAu ley , J . W . , Global Sustainability and key needs in future automotive design. Environmental Sc ience & Technology, 2003; 37(23): p. 5414-5416. [31] A P M E , Recovery Options for Plastic Parts from End-Of-Life vehicles: An Eco-Efficiency Assessment. A P M E : Berl in. 2003, p. 130. 28 Anonymous , Product Stewardship Opportunities within the Automotive Industry. F ive W i n d s International. 20.03, p. 151. Ford 2003/4 Corporate Citizenship Report: Our Principles, Progress and Performance. Ford Motor Companhy . 2004, p. 88. DaimlerChrysler , 360 Degrees - Environmental Report 2004. DaimlerChrys ler : Stuttgart, Germany . 2004, p. 86. B M W , Renewable raw materials in car production. B M W Group. 2002, p. 6. Toyota to Build Pilot Bio-plastic Plant. Toyota Motor Corporat ion: Tokyo. 2003. B M W , Sustainable Value Report 2003/04. B M W Group : Munich. 2003, p. 113. Environmental Product Declaration. Volvo Ca r Corporat ion. Ford: Environment - End of Life Vehicles. Ford Motor Company . Volvo, Use of Recycled, Non-metallic Materials. Commission Decision amending Annex II of Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on end-of-life vehicles, in 2002/525/EC. 2002, p. 4. Corbett, B., Heavy Metals, in Ward's Auto World. 2003, p. 8. Faruk, A . C . , et a l . , Analyzing, Mapping and Managing Environmental Impacts along Supply Chains. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2002; 5(2): p. 13 - 36. Ferrer, G . , On the widget remanufacturing operation. European Journa l of Operat ional R e s e a r c h , 2001 ; 135(2): p. 373 . Bel lmann, K. and A . Khare, European response to issues in recycling car plastics. Technovat ion, 1999; 19: p. 721-734. Park inson, H .J . and G . Thompson , Analysis and taxonomy of remanufacturing industry practice. Proceed ings of the Institution of Mechan ica l Engineers Part E-Journal of P r o c e s s Mechan ica l Engineer ing, 2003; 217(E3): p. 243-256. E P A , WasteWise Update: Remanufactured Products: Good as New. U .S . Environmental Protection Agency : Washington. 1997, p. 12. Smith, V . M . and G .A . Keole ian, The Value of Remanufactured Engines: Life-Cycle Environmental and Economic Perspectives. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2004; 8(1-2): p. 193-221. Kimberley, W . , European Vehicle Manufacturers Face Recycling Requirements. Automot ive Des ign & Product ion, 2004; 116(8): p. 20. Kerr, W . and C . Ryan , Eco-efficiency gains from remanufacturing: A case study of photocopier remanufacturing at Fuji Xerox Australia. Journal of C leaner Product ion, 2001(9 (2001)): p. 75-81. Seitz, M.A. and K. Peatt ie, Meeting the Closed-Loop Challenge: • The Case of Remanufacturing. Cal i fornia Management Review, 2004; 46(2): p. 74. Krikke, H., I. Ie B lanc, and S . van de Ve lde, Product modularity and the design of closed-loop supply chains. Cal i fornia Management Review, 2004; 46(2): p. 23-39. 29 [53] S o u z a , G . C . , M .E . Ketzenberg, and V . D . R . Gu ide Jr , Capacitated remanufacturing with service level constraints. Product ion and Operat ions Management , 2002; 11(2): p. 231 -249. [54] Clean for Life - Recycling. Volvo Ca rs . [55] Ferrer, G . and R . U . Ayres , The Impact of Remanufacturing in the Economy. Eco log ica l Economics , 2000(32): p. 413-429. [56] Vo lkswagen , The Volkswagen Environment Report 2003/4. 2004: p. 123. [57] R E C O U P , Plastics from End of Life Vehicles. R E C O U P : Peterborough. 2002, p. 4. [58] V inas , l.,DuPont Recycles for Autos, in Industry Week. 2004, p. 56. [59] R E C O U P , Plastics from Electrical and Electronic Equipment. R E C O U P : Peterborough. 2003 , p. 4. [60] S joberg, C , Post-Shredder Treatment Technologies. Volvo Technology Corporat ion. 2003 , p. 14. [61] IDIS Official Homepage. IDIS 2 Consor t ium. 2004, p. International Dismantl ing Information Sys tem for E L V . [62] W y n n , P., The End of Life Vehicle Directive and International Material Data System. Products Finishing, 2003 ; 67(8): p. 58-63. [63] Integrated Product Policy: Building on Environmental Life-Cycle Thinking. C o m m i s s i o n of the European Communi t ies : Brusse ls . 2003, p. 30. [64] Cas te l l , A . , R. Clift, and C . France, Extended Producer Responsibility Policy in the European Union: A Horse or a Camel? Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2004; 8(1-2): p. 4-7. 30 CHAPTER 3: ECONOMY-WIDE RELEASES OF LEAD AND CADMIUM RESULTING FROM PRODUCTION, USE AND DISPOSAL OF AUTOMOBILES NOTE: A vers ion of this paper has been submitted for publication. Gerrard J . , Kandl ikar M. Economy-wide Releases of Lead and Cadmium Resulting from Production, Use and Disposal of Automobiles. Environmental Sc ience & Technology. Currently in review. 1. Introduction Governments have dedicated considerable effort toward reducing industrial heavy metal use through regulation and voluntary programs for decades . The automotive industry remains a focus of this work, with legislative tools continuing to influence vehicle manufacture and operat ion. Leaded gasol ine was first banned in New York City for over 3 years during the 1920s due to health concerns [1]. Yet it wasn't until the 1970s that most countr ies began restricting the lead content in gasol ine [2]. More recently, the European Union establ ished the End-of-Li fe Vehic le Directive (2000) in order to increase levels of vehicle recovery and to reduce the use of heavy metals including lead and cadmium [3]. End-of-l ife vehicle recovery has received less regulatory interest in the U S , though regulations pertaining to the d isposal of lead-acid batteries, used tire management and the d isposal of free liquids to landfills are in force [4]. S o m e state level restrictions on heavy metal containing dev ices a lso exist. The effect iveness of these and future initiatives relies upon a thorough understanding of the dominant lead and cadmium d ischarges that result from light-duty vehic les. This paper provides insight into the quantity and nature of these life-cycle emiss ions . Whi le other heavy metals such as mercury and chromium are also environmental ly harmful, we focus on lead and cadmium as they are re leased throughout the vehicle life-cycle and industrial emiss ions of these metals now dwarf natural atmospher ic f luxes (e.g. from erosion and volcanic activity). It has been est imated that 8 5 % of cadmium emiss ions and 9 6 % of lead emiss ions c o m e from industrial activity, while anthropogenic sources of mercury and chromium account for only 5 9 % and 4 1 % respectively of total atmospher ic emiss ions [5]. Lead and C a d m i u m are a lso mobi l ized when automotive components , such as tires and brake pads, wear. In contrast, other heavy metals (e.g. mercury contained in switches, lighting and antilock braking systems) are less likely to be re leased as a result of car part abrasion and are arguably more easi ly control led [4, 6]. 31 Similarly, while mercury content of crude oil is high, removal of mercury during refining results in gasol ine, d iesel and other oils containing very little mercury (0.7 - 50 ppb) [7]. Both lead and cadmium are metals of significant concern to policy makers , health profess ionals and environmental groups al ike. Infants and young children are often exposed to lead through dust and soil (to which lead binds strongly) and can absorb as much as 5 0 % of their dietary lead intake [8]. In adults, approximately 1 0 % of the dietary lead is absorbed. Lead is readily taken up into the blood s t ream, is stored in bones and can result in impaired neuropsychological development, kidney damage and death [9]. Unl ike lead, cadmium bio-accumulates, is relatively water soluble compared to other metals and is cons idered carc inogenic [8]. For non-smokers , the major route of cadmium exposure is v ia food. Plants take up cadmium from the soi l . It accumula tes in the human body, especial ly the kidneys, resulting in renal damage . Notably, as much as 5 0 % of inhaled cadmium may be absorbed; while on average only 5 % of total oral intake is absorbed [8]. 2. Methodology In this work we provide a comprehens ive assessmen t of re leases resulting from light vehic le manufactur ing, use , servicing and end-of-life s tages. Prev ious studies of heavy metal emiss ions fall into one of two categor ies, general life cycle studies of the automotive industry and speci f ic heavy metal studies of automotive parts (with a few notable except ions as cited below). To date, much of the literature in the first category has focussed on toxic emiss ions in aggregate, highlighting the need for identification of dominant sources of speci f ic toxic subs tance re leases such as those of heavy metals. S u c h analysis either does not capture lead and cadmium emiss ions , or aggregates them as part of an overall toxic waste index [10-12]. Stud ies in the second category often specify lead and cadmium emiss ions only for a given part of the life cycle [13-18], again drawing attention to the need for a more systemat ic and speci f ic source identification and character izat ion. T o construct a sys tems view of the life-cycle emiss ions , we integrated Economic Input Output Life Cyc le A s s e s s m e n t ( 'E IOLCA' ) with est imates of metal emiss ions during vehic le use and end-of-life, which are not captured by economic input-output tables. This approach ana lyses the impact of each life-cycle stage including vehicle production, use, servic ing, part replacement and ultimately vehic le recovery (e.g. material recycling). The benefit of E I O L C A is its ability to a s s e s s the economy-wide impact of a change in demand for a given commodity or industry. It mode ls industry interdependencies in the production of goods and serv ices [19]. E I O L C A requires the specif icat ion of each and every input used in the manufacture of a given unit of output. In doing so , it accounts for both direct and indirect interactions between industry sectors . T h e method is 32 b a s e d on a linear relationship between the amount of product produced (calculated in dollars) and the corresponding resource usage and environmental burden [19]. The history and assumpt ions behind Input-Output analysis and the E I O L C A methodology have been comprehensive ly covered by previous authors [10, 12, 19, 20]. Key limitations of the E I O L C A approach as it pertains to this analysis are d i scussed in the body of this paper, particularly the final sect ion. Our E I O L C A analysis uses 1997 Input-Output data (the most recent comprehens ive data set) provided by the U .S . Bureau of Economic Analys is ( 'BEA') [21]. This data d isaggregates the U .S . economy into 491 industry sectors, each of which represents one or more 6-digit North Amer i can Industrial Classi f icat ion Sys tem ( 'NAICS') product s t ream. This is combined with 2002 emiss ions data from the U .S . Tox ic R e l e a s e Inventory (TRI ' ) in order to ascerta in the lead and cadmium re leases attributable to each industry that directly or indirectly contributes to light vehic le manufacture and use [22]. The TRI data (based on Standard Industrial Classi f icat ion ' S I C codes) was converted to B E A 1997 data format by using convers ion tables based on the U . S . C e n s u s Bureau N A I C S - S I C Bridge website [23, 24]. The next sect ion provides an overview of lead and cadmium use throughout the life cycle of a vehic le. The sect ions thereafter expand upon the lead and cadmium emiss ions arising from e a c h life-cycle stage. The emiss ions from these stages are then compared . Limitations and implications of this research are presented in the D iscuss ion and Conc lus ion . 3. Lead and Cadmium in the Vehicle Life Cycle Both lead and cadmium are emitted throughout the life cycle of a vehicle. In addition to their p resence in the vehic le, lead and cadmium may be used in the machinery and/or p rocess materials (e.g. catalysts, solvents, cooling fluids etc.) employed in vehic le and replacement part production [25]. They are a lso re leased during the mining and refining of other metals and raw materials used in car manufacture. The production of energy (e.g. electricity) can re lease lead and cadmium as well [25]. In addition to toxic re leases emanat ing from product ion, lead and cadmium are re leased as parts wear and when end-of-life parts are recycled. The key material f lows are depicted in Figure 3.1. A full picture of cadmium and lead re leases resulting from vehic le use must account for all such material transfers. Lead appears in a large number of vehicle parts, including: batteries, brake pad linings, vibration dampeners , fuel hoses , soldering and wheel balance weights [26, 27]. It is a lso found as an alloying element or impurity in steel, z inc coat ings, lead-bronze bearing shel ls and bushes , aluminium and copper alloys used in vehic les [28]. It is a stabil izer in plast ics such as polyvinyl chlor ide ( P V C ) , is found in g lass and ceramic matrices in electronic parts and is a lso used in 33 piston coat ings and spark plugs. However, 9 0 - 9 5 % of the total lead used in vehic les res ides in the car battery [27]. C a d m i u m is present in both brake pads and tires and is a lso used as a pigment in plastic, a stabil izer in P V C and is present in thick film pastes (used in electronic circuit boards) [26, 28, 29]. Additionally, cadmium and lead are by-products of the production of var ious metal ores [30, 31]. For example , lead is present in z inc, copper, gold, si lver and molybdenum ores whose metals are used in the automotive industry [32]. Aluminium alloys and recycled aluminium also contain lead as an impurity [27]. Similarly, cadmium is re leased in iron and steel operat ions and is present in trace amounts in iron ore, z inc ore, l imestone and coal [25, 33]. O n e of the main advantages of the E I O L C A method is that it captures these emiss ions , which may otherwise go undetected. Figure 3.1: Material F low in a Vehic le Life Cyc le MATERIAL PROCESSING I MANUFACTURING USE END-OF-LIFE Raw Material Extraction and Production Recycled Materials Vehicle Manufacture Parts / Fluids Fuel Manufacture Infrastructure Construction (e.g: roads) Vehicle Use I Service & Maintenance Vehicle/Parts End-of-Life Waste Management / Recovery Landfill / Unrecovered Scrap 34 4. Manufacturing The manufacturing stage captures all activities involved in the production of the original vehic le, from process ing of raw materials up until the final sa le of the automobi le to the consumer . F igures 3.2 and 3.3 show a breakdown of the sources of lead and cadmium emiss ions during vehicle production, based on an E I O L C A of the manufacture of an average light-duty vehic le, weighing 1400kg [4]. The data represents onsite re leases of lead, cadmium and their compounds . W a s t e transported offsite and not subsequent ly recovered appears in the 'Was te management and remediat ion serv ices ' category. The E I O L C A methodology determines environmental re leases based on the industry output required as if all of the commodi ty were domestical ly suppl ied [34]. Implications arising from this treatment of imports and exports are d i scussed in the final sect ion of this paper. Total metal d ischarges are calculated by combining metal and metal compound re leases provided in the TRI data. Analys is of 2002 data shows that the vast majority (76%) of lead compounds c a m e from 'Copper , N icke l , Lead and Z inc Mining'. More than 6 5 % of cadmium compounds c a m e from the s a m e mining p rocess or the primary refining and smelt ing of nonferrous metal, except copper and aluminium. The average metal content of both lead and cadmium compounds provided in the TRI da ta must be est imated in order to analyse metal re leases in aggregate. Due to the high atomic m a s s of both cadmium and lead (112 and 207 respectively), the metal itself compr ises a high proportion of the molecular m a s s of both cadmium and lead compounds . In what follows we use est imated proportions of cadmium and lead in cadmium and lead compounds (by mass) by a s s e s s i n g the empir ical formula of metal compounds that are likely to be the most abundant. Lead sulphide and lead ox ides are expected to constitute a significant proportion of lead compounds , due to the oxidation of lead ore, normally ga lena (lead sulphide) that takes place in the beneficiat ion, sintering and smelt ing s tages of lead refining [30, 33]. Lead compr ises 9 3 % by m a s s of lead oxide and 8 7 % of lead sulphide. Consequent ly we have conservat ively est imated that 8 0 % of Lead C o m p o u n d s are lead (by mass) . Cadmium represents 7 8 % by m a s s of the main cadmium mineral , Greenock i te (CdS) . The production of cadmium is usually a by-product of the production of other metals such as z inc, copper and lead, with Greenock i te being nearly a lways assoc ia ted with the z inc mineral Sphaler i te (ZnS) [33]. It is re leased in flue dust created during refining a n d ' in electric arc furnace baghouse dust. Identifying cadmium's major compounds is more difficult than is the c a s e for lead. However, its large atomic weight (112 amu) means that cadmium is likely to constitute 6 0 % or more, on average of cadmium compounds . W e have thus conservat ively est imated that 6 0 % of the m a s s of cadmium compounds is attributable to cadmium. 35 Using these approximat ions, the E I O L C A results in Figures 3.2 and 3.3 show that mining of metals contributes by far the majority of lead and cadmium re leased, 9 1 % and 7 8 % respectively. Pr imary smelt ing and refining and secondary metal production (recycling) a lso contribute significantly. The higher proportion of cadmium re leases coming from waste management and remediat ion may be due to the difficulty in, and cost of, recovering this metal when it appears in very low concentrat ions in any given part (e.g. as a coating on steel, an impurity in z inc or as a pigment/stabi l iser in plastic). F igures 3.2 and 3.3 highlight the importance of capturing tertiary suppl iers in life cycle a s s e s s m e n t s , especia l ly when assess ing heavy metal re leases from metal intensive products and p rocesses . Typical L C A methodologies risk missing significant waste re leases unless they include emiss ions from mining and metal production. Interestingly, our calculat ions (d iscussed in the End-of-l ife Vehic le Recovery sect ion below) show that as little as 6 % (77g) of lead re leased may be due to manufacturing of the car battery. Thus while the battery is the biggest single source of lead in a car, the results indicate that it m a k e s a relatively smal l contribution to total lead re leased from car production. Th is ou tcome may be expla ined by both 'real ' factors and methodological uncertainty. Severa l 'Rea l factors' contribute to the non-battery related lead emiss ions . Firstly, lead may be re leased as a result of the production and use of manufacturing machinery. Second ly , lead is contained in by-products and waste generated from car manufacture. Thirdly, lead might be re leased as a result of mining and refining of other metals used in car production (as d i scussed above), and finally, lead may be emitted from the generation of energy (mainly electricity) that is consumed during vehicle production. Aggregat ion in B E A data (which represents economic activity in 491 sectors) introduces uncertainty into input-output ('l-O') analysis [19]. For instance, it is difficult to separate the emiss ions due to the production of copper from those that are due to the production of lead, as both lead and copper mining fall into the s a m e B E A category. Additionally, copper , nickel , lead and z inc ores are often mined from the s a m e mine site. This co- locat ion and co-process ing of metal ores inhibits a more detai led attribution of emiss ions . A more f ine-grained attribution would require the use of data at the level of an individual process ing facility. E I O L C A uses the price of a commodity as a proxy for the quantity of production, and hence inputs, for that production process . This in turn determines the level of toxic re leases. However , changes in the relative pr ices of inputs to production can skew E I O L C A results. Cons ider for example , the price differential (per kg) between lead, copper, nickel and plat inum. A s at J u n e 8, 36 2005 the pr ices of these metals varied greatly and were: lead $1.00, copper $3.53, nickel $17.05 and platinum $31,000 (or $880 per ounce) [35, 36]. Plat inum in North Amer i ca is mined as a co -product of nickel and copper [36]. Thus emiss ions from facilities that are primarily engaged in Nickel production but a lso produce platinum group metals are c lassi f ied under the 'Copper , N icke l , Lead and Z inc Mining' category. The difference in unit price between metals may result in a disproportionately high allocation of lead emiss ions being attributed to metals other than lead that are used in the production of a vehicle (i.e. copper, nickel, z inc and plat inum-group metals). If re leases were al located based on m a s s rather than on the product's value, a greater portion of a facility's environmental d ischarges would be attributed to heavy yet cheap metals, such as lead. Consequent ly , the p resence of platinum-group metals in vehicle catalytic converters (which remove hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides from vehic le exhaust) may be contributing to non-battery related lead emiss ions in the E I O L C A results. However, re leases s temming from car production are only a part of a vehic le 's total lifetime emiss ions . D ischarges from vehic le use, serv ice and repair must a lso be accounted for and are d i s cussed in the following sect ion. Figure 3.2: Lead R e l e a s e s from the Manufacture of an Average Light-Duty Vehic le P b C o m b i n e d Indus t r y S e c t o r % Copper , n ickel , lead, and z inc mining G o l d , s i lver, and other metal ore mining Pr imary smelt ing and refining of copper Pr imary nonferrous metal , except copper and a luminum W a s t e management and remediat ion serv ices Ferrous metal foundries Secondary smelt ing and al loying of a luminum Iron and steel mil ls Secondary process ing of other nonferrous Power generat ion and supply T o p 10 S u b - t o t a l 1192 999 95 32 22 12 11 6 5 4 4 3 % 2 % 1% 1% 1% 0 % 0 % 0 % 9 9 % T o t a l 1203 1 0 0 % 37 Figure 3.3: C a d m i u m R e l e a s e s from the Manufacture of an Average Light-Duty Vehic le C o m b i n e d Indus t ry S e c t o r (g) % Copper , n ickel , lead, and z inc mining 6.67 7 3 % W a s t e management and remediat ion serv ices 1.07 1 2 % G o l d , s i lver, and other metal ore mining 0.50 5 % Pr imary smelt ing and refining of copper 0.26 3 % A lum ina refining 0.19 2 % Secondary smelt ing and al loying of a luminum 0.11 1% Iron and steel mi l ls 0.08 1% Pr imary nonferrous metal , except copper and a luminum 0.07 1% Seconda ry process ing of other nonferrous 0.07 1% Synthet ic dye and pigment manufactur ing 0.05 1% T o p 10 S u b - T o t a l 9.07 9 9 % T o t a l 9.18 1 0 0 % 5. Use, Servicing and Replacement Parts The U s e , Serv ic ing and Rep lacement Parts phase captures emiss ions from day-to-day car use , from the t ime the car leaves the showroom until it reaches the end of its life. Est imates for N 'Serv ice and Rep lacement Parts ' , ' Insurance' and 'Road Construct ion' contained in Figure 3.4 were obtained using E I O L C A . Other est imates represent direct re leases during the use of the part in quest ion. Whi le brake pads, tires and oil all fall under 'Serv ice and Rep lacement Par ts ' they have been broken down in Figure 3.4 to provide an indication of toxic re leases that occur in driving environments (such as urban areas) . A n al location of road infrastructure has a lso been attributed to the use phase of a car. T h e impact of infrastructure development is often omitted from life-cycle assessmen ts , yet it is essent ia l to car use and thus has been accounted for in this analysis. Determining the optimal al location method for infrastructure costs is not a trivial task. The relationship between the number of cars on the road and road infrastructure requirements is not linear, and numerous allocation methods are plausible. For instance, the proportion of road construction costs born by any given vehic le could be based on distance travelled, passengers carr ied, weight carr ied, contribution to road wear or s o m e comb ined measure . W e have al located annual road construction costs equal ly to e a c h U .S . registered vehic le (private and commercial ) to provide a rough est imate of the contribution of road construct ion to vehicle use. B a s e d on this measure , each vehic le accounts for approximately $2,600 worth of road construction over the vehic le 's lifetime. 38 Insurance cos ts are represented by the insurance carrier sector, and are est imated to be $11,239 (1997$) over a vehic le 's life, based on previous research [10]. A s the insurance sector does not report to the TRI , only indirect re leases are represented. W e agree with previous authors that other f ixed costs such as l icense fees and f inance charges have few suppl ier impacts and thus have been exc luded from the analysis [10]. It was not possib le to conduct an E I O L C A on gasol ine use as gas stations are aggregated with many other Retai l outlets in B E A l-O data. Hence , the figures shown below relate only to the lead and cadmium contained in the gasol ine, and re leases occurr ing during the production, and distribution of gasol ine are not represented. A s a result, total emiss ions from gasol ine use will be higher than the f igures shown here. However, the difference between the va lues presented in Figure 3.4 and E I O L C A est imates is expected to be smal l , as both the oil and gas extraction industry and petroleum refineries emit lead and cadmium compound at levels that are four orders of magnitude lower than those from the Copper , Nickel , Lead and Z inc mining sector on a 'per dollar output' bas is . The loss of wheel ba lance weights and emiss ions resulting from vehicle servic ing (including the manufacture and installation of replacement parts) dominate the lead re leased during a vehic le 's use. R o a d construct ion and the dust created from brake wear also contribute significantly. 'Serv ice and replacement parts', ' Insurance' and 'Road construct ion' are the primary contributors to cadmium emitted in this phase. A s is the c a s e in vehicle manufacturing, the vast majority of cadmium re leased as a result of vehicle servicing and part replacement c o m e s from the metal mining and refining p rocesses . Both cadmium and lead are found in brake pads and tires (cadmium is a contaminant in the z inc oxide used in the tire rubber) [17, 26, 33]. Yet tire wear re leases only a very smal l amount of cadmium to the environment. Cadmium and lead a lso appear in used oil (through corrosion and wear of al loys contained in vehic les and as a result of impurities in the z inc used to provide wear protection to the engine) [16, 17]. However negligible amounts of lead and cadmium are emitted in this manner. Similarly, the prohibition of lead addit ives in gasol ine (for highway use) in the United States has a lso removed lead from gasol ine [37]. The cadmium re leased through gasol ine is an upper est imate and is based on a minimum detection limit of 0.01 parts per mill ion in a previous study [16]. Unfortunately, re leases from repair shops are not captured in the TRI and thus are not accounted for here. However, suppl iers to the serv ice and repair sector, including replacement part manufacturers are included in the serv ice and replacement parts est imate. The 'Serv ice and Rep lacement Parts ' re leases are based on a lifetime serv ice cost of $11,544 (in 1997$), which 39 has been adjusted to exclude the 14% of insurance premiums that go toward collision repair, to avoid double counting [10]. Figure 3.4: Lead and Cadmium Releases as a Result of Use, Servicing and Part Replacement Cd(q) Pb (g) Lead Wheel Balance Weight losses 140 Gasoline 0.15 0 Road Construction 0.37 39 Insurance 0.38 26 Service and Replacement Parts (excl. battery replacement) 2.43 127 - Brakes 0.02 34 - Tires 0.04 1 - Used Oil 0.00 0 Total 3.34 333 Sources: [14, 16, 17, 26, 38] 6. End-of-Life Vehicle Recovery At the end of a vehicle's life, parts that can be re-used (e.g. electronics, lights, mirrors) and valuable materials (e.g. large castings, batteries and catalytic converters) are removed by the dismantler and sold. The car hulk is then shredded and the recoverable metals are also typically sold and recycled. The non-metallic components, called automotive shredder residue ('ASR') are not presently recycled due to high plastic recycling costs, and are sent to landfills for disposal [4, 39]. High disassembly, sorting and cleaning costs play a major role in preventing plastic recycling from being economically viable. r Lead and cadmium releases at the end-of-life of a vehicle or part result from automotive material that (a) ends up in landfill, (b) escapes to the environment during processes such as recycling, or (c) does not enter the vehicle salvage process (such as parts left to deteriorate in backyards). Of these, emissions to air and water will dissipate more quickly than releases that are well contained. Yet, waste containment methods are not permanent nor failsafe [25]. Figure 3.5 shows that all three categories contribute significantly to emissions at vehicle/part end-of-life. Parts containing lead that do not enter the recovery stream (including car batteries that are not recycled) generate the majority of lead releases during the end-of-life phase. We use a battery collection efficiency of 98%, which is consistent with other sources, and lower than the figure of 95% derived from 1998 US Geological Survey data [30, 40]. The impact of this uncertainty can be great - the 450g lead loss from batteries that are not recovered (shown in Figure 3.5) would rise to 1125g if a collection of 95% was used. 40 Lead losses resulting from recycling of vehicle batteries have been previously est imated at 2 % of lead recycled [10]. Figure 3.5 compares our results (using this value) to the lead re leases arising from the production of a car battery using E I O L C A . The latter includes losses from secondary lead production (i.e. recycling). B E A data aggregates the production of car batteries with other storage batteries (such as c o m p u t e r a n d mobile phone batteries). Our analysis adjusts for this by assuming that lead re leases from storage batteries are primarily due to the production of vehic le batteries (as other storage batteries are typically based on n icke l -cadmium, nickel metal hydride or lithium ion technology) [40]. The value o M 5 6 g (in Figure 3.5) accounts for the production of two replacement batteries over the life of a car. This E I O L C A value is very sensi t ive to the average cost of a replacement car battery. W e est imate that in 2002 an average light-duty vehicle battery cost $80, though little reliable data is available to verify this figure. A battery cost of $120 would increase the life-cycle lead emiss ions to 230g. This value may be more representative of a light truck battery (which tends to be larger and more costly than those used in passenger vehic les) . Roughly two thirds of sc rap tires are " recovered" with nearly two thirds of these (i.e. 4 4 % of the total number of tires) being used as fuel in a variety of industrial facilities [4]. E v e n when tires are recycled we can a s s u m e that a portion of the heavy metals that they contain will be re leased to the environment. For example , pollutants such as fly ash , which result when attempting to recover energy from end-of-l ife products (often through combustion) are usually d i sposed of in landfills, which can and often do leak [25]. This analysis captures the full metal content of the used tires. Nonethe less , total metal dissipat ion from end-of-life tires remains smal l relative to other sources (this is d i scussed further in the next section). S o m e non-ferrous metal is covered from post-shredder material. However separat ion of non-ferrous metal is not 1 0 0 % efficient. Studies have found that A S R contains between 2700 and 7050 mg/kg of lead [4]. A typical E L V weights roughly 1400kg (without tires) of which approximately 2 0 - 2 5 % will become A S R [4]. Thus as much as 1200g of lead may be sent to landfill per vehic le, assuming an A S R lead content of 4000 mg/kg. Hence our f igures may represent a lower est imate of E L V lead losses . W e a s s u m e that lead from all parts other than batteries is re leased to the environment. However our est imates of the total lead conta ined in an E L V (roughly 8 kg) is significantly lower than that used in a previous study (which est imated that 13kg of lead was present in a 1995 model vehicle) [4]. Similarly, there is ev idence to suggest that cadmium is a lso present in parts other than tires and brake pads, for instance in thick film pastes used in electronics [28]. However no data was available to a s s e s s the amount of cadmium contained in a vehic le as a result of such materials. A s a result end-of-life cadmium emiss ion est imates may also be higher than stated. 41 Figure 3.5: Lead and C a d m i u m Re leased at Part /Vehicle End-of-Li fe Cd(g) Contained in part Pb (g) Contained in part E I O L C A Losses during recycling: Replacement car batteries Not recovered and assumed to dissipate to the environment: Batteries that don't enter the recycling stream Tires Brake pads Other parts 0.03 0.01 unknown 294 153 450 1 11 597 Total Metal Released 0.04 1352 1211 7. Comparison of Life Cycle Stages The majority of cadmium emiss ions occur during the manufacture of the original vehic le (Figure 3.6). Th is suggests that there are either high losses assoc ia ted with the production of parts that include cadmium or that cadmium may be used and re leased in the manufacture of non-cadmium parts (through the mechan isms d i scussed above). The majority of the cadmium re leased during vehicle use c o m e s from servicing and the production and installation of replacement parts. In both vehic le and part production, cadmium re leases occur mainly during the metal mining and refining p rocess . The removal of tetra-ethyl and tetra-methyl lead from gasol ine, which began in the 1970s, dramatical ly reduced the amount of lead re leased as a result of car use. Prior to gasol ine lead regulations, the lead content in gasol ine was as high as 0.6 g/l in Europe [2]. B a s e d on U S E P A est imates, an average 2004 model light-duty vehicle has a fuel eff iciency of 11.3 litres per 100 km (20.8 miles per gallon) [38]. Over a 12-year vehicle lifetime, driving 15,000 km per year, this would result in 12.2 kg of lead being emitted to the atmosphere. Today, lead re leases from vehic le use are roughly a quarter of this. Lead emiss ions from manufacture and end-of-l ife p rocesses now contribute the majority of re leases to the environment. Whi le the use phase of a vehicle results in only 1 2 % of total lead losses , a significant proportion of these occur in urban environments making the lead from this phase more avai lable to the general populat ion. 42 Figure 3.6: Compar i son of Life Cyc le S tages C d (g) P b (g) Original veh ic le manufacture 9.2 1203 U s e , ser ivce & replacement parts 3.3 333 Vehic le /par ts recovery and end-of-l i fe 0.04 1352 T o t a l l o s s e s 12.6 2888 % C o n t r i b u t i o n : Or ig inal veh ic le manufacture 7 3 % 4 2 % U s e , ser ivce & replacement parts 2 7 % 1 2 % Vehic le /par ts recovery and end-of-l i fe 0 . 3 % 4 7 % 8. Discussion The results shown here should be interpreted within the context of severa l methodological and data based limitations. Mode l and data constraints assoc ia ted with the E I O L C A methodology have been d i scussed by previous authors [10, 12, 19]. Arguably the most limiting of these is that the level of d isaggregat ion may be insufficient in s o m e instances, resulting in l-O sectors that are too heterogeneous to correctly reflect certain industrial p rocesses . The al location of environmental burdens based on market value can also be problematic, especia l ly during per iods of signif icant technological change. E I O L C A a lso a s s u m e s that waste generated from the production of imports is the s a m e as that created in the manufacture of U .S . equivalents, per dollar of the good produced. Th is may introduce errors where product costs or waste generation levels differ significantly from those in the U .S . For example, in the c a s e of products and materials produced in developing countr ies, pr ices are likely to be lower and emiss ions higher than for similar U .S . made products. In such instances, E I O L C A would understate emiss ions . Product ion eff ic iencies and toxic emiss ions a s s u m e d in E l O L C A s may a lso differ ac ross North Amer i ca . A ' recent report found significant dif ferences in the relative contribution to on-site lead air emiss ions between U S and Canad ian facilities [9]. However the overall lead emiss ions (on land, air, sur face water and underground injection) are roughly proportional to the number of f irms in e a c h country, suggest ing that the E I O L C A assumpt ion of equivalent emiss ions may be reasonable with respect to Canad ian imports. Uncertaint ies are a lso assoc ia ted with the use of TRI data, though these have dec reased s ince the reporting thresholds for lead and its compounds were reduced to 100 pounds in 2001 [32, 41]. Lastly, uncertainty is a lso assoc ia ted with convert ing 2002 TRI data (provided in the S IC format) into a format consistent with B E A Input-Output data (based on the N A I C S format). S u c h 43 attribution errors may be especial ly prevalent when assess ing re leases of individual chemica ls , as the al location of heterogeneous N A I C S sectors to S IC sectors may not accurately reflect the nature of the production p rocesses being represented. However, such i ssues will d isappear as TRI reporting moves to the N A I C S format over the coming years. This paper should be v iewed in light of both the significant uncertainty introduced by the above limitations and the context of the research. The assumpt ions and est imates used to represent an 'average light-duty vehic le manufactured in North Amer ica ' may need to be modif ied when applying this analysis to speci f ic vehicle types or alternate geographical regions. In genera l , larger vehic les generate greater environmental burdens. Yet, the s ize and m a s s of a vehic le are not a lways proportional to its cost (e.g. sports cars may be smal l but expensive) . Thus care must be taken to avoid inaccurate general isat ions of E I O L C A results, as the methodology sca les environmental burden based on the cost of the vehicle. In addit ion, a vehic le 's heavy metal content may vary ac ross different car makes and models. The results of this analysis may a lso be less pertinent to regions outside of North Amer ica . The data and many of the assumpt ions used in this analys is (e.g. vehicle lifetime, distance travelled per year, vehicle cost, infrastructure requirements, fuel efficiency, recycling rates etc.) are speci f ic to North Amer i ca , and may not be appl icable to other continents. The road condit ions, weather patterns, product pr ices, production p rocesses , legislative requirements and material composi t ion of products may all differ ac ross the globe. 9 . Conclusion Most lead and cadmium re leases occur during vehicle/part manufacture and during end-of-l i fe. Thus the quantity of l ife-cycle lead and cadmium re leases is not highly dependent upon driver behaviour. Th is should be advantageous for policy makers, as changing driver behaviour is difficult and largely unnecessary in this case . Legislat ion a imed at reducing emiss ions from car production and end-of-l ife would attack the dominant drivers of lead and cadmium re leases. Metal mining and process ing is the main contributor to re leases that result from vehic le and replacement part production. Thus efforts to mitigate emiss ions from automotive manufactur ing should address the importance of minimising re leases that occur during ore extraction and metal refining. A high priority should a lso be p laced on implementing substitutes for lead wheel weights and removing lead in brake pads. The loss of lead wheel balance weights constitutes 5% of the total lead re leased as a result of car use. Brake pad dust results in an addit ional 1% of the total lead load. T h e impact on society of these re leases may be significant as they are likely to occur in urban environments. 44 Lead is rarely recovered from end-of-life components that contain lead in smal l concentrat ions. Yet in aggregate, such parts represent a considerable amount of lead. Remov ing the lead from these components would make a strong contribution to the reduction of total end-of-l ife lead re leases. Lead-ac id battery production and end-of-life p rocesses continue to play a major role in lead emiss ions . However, such batteries are likely to remain in vehic les for the foreseeab le future. Decreas ing lead re leases from car batteries will require cont inued effort to max imise col lect ion rates and minimise losses during lead recycling. Current material trends may a lso reduce lead and cadmium emiss ions . The movement away from steel toward greater plastic and aluminium use in vehic les (to minimise vehicle weight and emissions) may have the synergist ic effect of decreas ing the amount of lead and cadmium re leased during the mining and refining of 'traditional' metals. This analys is provides guidance for waste minimisation efforts by indicating the nature and quantity of lead and cadmium re leased as a result of light-duty vehicle use. It presents an integrated view of direct and indirect impacts that has previously been obscured by an a b s e n c e of systems- leve l analysis in this a rea . Reduc ing lead and cadmium emiss ions may rely on designing lead out of automotive components for which it is not essent ia l , reducing the d ischarges from current mining p rocesses and increasing the col lection and recycl ing eff iciency of car batteries. Us ing non- lead based substitutes for lead wheel-balance weights will a lso significantly reduce the re leases during vehicle use. Further research into emiss ion location, med ium, molecular form and transport mechan isms would facilitate an understanding of the impact of current re leases on the environment and sub-segments of the population. Acknowledgements The authors thank Scott Matthews and Gyorgyi C i c a s from Carneg ie Mel lon G r e e n Des ign Institute for their help and provision of N A I C S / S I C convers ion data. The help of Hadi Dowlatabadi is a lso much appreciated. Financial support for this research was provided by C a n a d a ' s Auto21 Network of Cent res of Exce l lence. References [1] Rosner , D. and G . Markowitz, A 'Gift of God'? The Public Health Controversy over Leaded Gasoline during the 1920s. Amer ican Journal of Publ ic Health, 1985; 75(4): p. 344-352. [2] Storch, H.v., et al . , Four decades of gasoline lead emissions and control policies in Europe: a retrospective assessment. The Sc ience of the Total Environment, 2003(311): p. 151-176. [3] Directive 2000/53/EC on end-of-life vehicles, in 2000/53/EC. 2000, p. 9. 45 [4] Staudinger, J . and G .A . Keole ian, Management of End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) in the US. Centre for Susta inable Sys tems, University of Mich igan: A n n Arbor, Mich igan. 2001 , p. 58. [5] Nr iagu, J . O . , A global assessment of natural sources of atmospheric trace metals. Nature, 1989; 338: p. 47-49. [6] Griffith, C , et a l . , Toxics in Vehicles: Mercury. Ecology Center. 2001, p. 69. [7] Ho lmes , M .J . , Mercury Releases from Crude Oil and Other Fuels. Energy and Environmental R e s e a r c h Centre. 2002, p. 7. [8] E C , Heavy Metals in Waste - Final Report. European Commiss i on . 2002, p. 83. ;9] C E C , TAKING STOCK: 2002 North American Pollutant Releases and Transfers. C o m m i s s i o n for Environmental Cooperat ion of North Amer i ca : Montreal, C a n a d a . 2005, p. 356. ;10] M a c L e a n , H. and L.B. Lave, A Life Cycle Model of an Automobile: Resource Use and Environmental Discharges in the Production and Use Phases. Environmental Sc i ence & Technology, 1998; 32(13): p. 322A-330A. '11] M a c L e a n , H. and L.B. Lave, Life Cycle Assessment of Automobile/Fuel Options. Environmental Sc ience & Technology, 2003; 37(23): p. 5445-5452. 12] Josh i , S . , Product Environmental Life-Cycle Assessment Using Input-Output Techniques. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2000; 3(2&3): p. 95-120. ;13] Bhagwan , D., S . H . Cad le , and P . J . Grobl ick i , Brake Wear Particulate Matter Emissions. Environmental Sc ience & Technology, 2000; 34(21): p. 4463-4469. |14] Root, R.A., Lead Loading of Urban Streets by Motor Vehicle Wheel Weights. Environmental Health Perspect ives, 2000; 108( 10): p. 937-940. ;15] Adach i , K. and Y . Ta inosho, Characterization of heavy metal particles embedded in tire dust. Environment International, 2004; 30: p. 1009-1017. ;16] S o r m e , L. and R. Lagerkvist, Sources of heavy metals in urban wastewater in Stockholm. The Sc ience of the Total Environment, 2002; 298: p. 131-145. [17] Davis , A . P . , M. Shokouh ian , and S . Ni, Loading estimates of lead, copper, cadmium, and zinc in urban runoff from specific sources. Chemosphe re , 2001 ; 44: p. 997-1009. [18] Abu-A l laban , M. , e t a l . , Tailpipe, resuspended road dust, and brake-wear emission factors from on-road vehicles. Atmospher ic Environment, 2003; 37: p. 5283-5293. [19] Hendr ickson, C , et al . , Economic Input-Output Models for Environmental Life Cycle Assessment. Environmental Sc ience & Technology, 1998; 32(7): p. 184A-191 A. [20] Ayres , R . U . and A . V . K n e e s e , Production, Consumption, and Externalities. The Amer i can Economic Review, 1969; 59(3): p. 282-297. [21] B E A , BEA Industry Economic Accounts. U .S . Bureau of Economic Ana lys is . 1997. [22] TRI , Toxic Release Inventory. U .S . Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. [23] C e n s u s , 1997 Economic Census: Bridge Between NAICS and SIC Manufacturing. U S C e n s u s Bureau. 1997. 46 [24] C M U , CMU conversion tables between SIC codes and 101997 Codes, 0 9 2 _ l 0 9 7 _ B r i d g e . z i p , Editor. Carneg ie Mel lon University, G r e e n Des ign Institute: Pit tsburgh, P A . 2005. [25] Ayres , R . U . and L .W. Ayres, Consumptive uses and losses of toxic heavy metals in the United States, 1880-1980. In: R .U . Ayres and U.E . S imon is , Editors.Industrial Metabo l ism: Restructuring for Susta inable Development. New York : United Nat ions University P r e s s , 1994: p. 376. [26] Wester lund, K . - G . , Metal emissions from Stockholm traffic - Wear of Brake Linings. Stockholm Air Quality and Noise Analys is . 2001, p. 11. [27] Sander , K., J . Lohse , and U. Pimtke, Heavy Metals in Vehicles. Okopo l , for the C o m m i s s i o n of the European Communi t ies : Hamburg. 2000, p. 51 . [28] Commission Decision amending Annex II of Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on end-of-life vehicles, in 2002/525/EC. 2002, p. 4. [29] Sche i r s , J . , End-of-life Environmental Issues with PVC in Australia - FINAL REPORT. E x c e l P l a s Polymer Technology. 2003, p. 77. [30] Smi th , G . R . , Lead Recycling in the United States 1998, in Flow Studies for Recycling Metal commodities in the United States, S . F . Sibley, Editor. U .S . Geolog ica l Survey: Res ton , Virginia. 2004, p. 10. [31] P lachy, J . , Cadmium recycling in the United States in 2000. U .S . Geo log ica l Survey: Virginia. 2003, p. 13. [32] E P A , Guidance for Reporting Releases and Other Waste Management Quantities of Toxic. Chemicals: Lead and Lead Compounds. U .S . Environmental Protection Agency : Washing ton D.C. 2001 , p. 216. [33] Ayres , R .U . , L .W. Ayres, and I. Rade , The Life Cycle of Copper, its Co-Products and By-products, in Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development. International Institute for Environment and Development. 2002, p. 174. [34] B E A , Benchmark Input-Output Accounts of the United States, 1992. U . S . Bureau of Economic Analys is . 1992. [35] Metal Prices. Meta lPr i ces .com. 2005. [36] Ang lo_Pla t inum, Anglo Platinum - Share and Metal Prices. Anglo Plat inum: London. 2005. [37] E P A , Prohibition on Gasoline Containing Lead or Lead Additives for Highway Use. U . S . Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. [38] E P A , Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 - 2004: Executive Summary. U . S . Environmental Protection Agency. 2004, p. 9. [39] Boon , J . E . , J . A . Isaacs, and S . M . Gupta , End-of-Life Infrastructure Economics for "Clean Vehicles" in the United States. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2003 ; 7(1): p. 25-45. [40] Buchmann , I., Battery Statistics and Recycling Batteries: Vancouver , C a n a d a . 2003 . [41] E P A , The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and Factors to Consider When Using TRI Data. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. CONCLUDING CHAPTER The automotive industry is coming under increasing pressure to improve its environmental per formance. Legislat ion such as the E L V Directive is changing the way that car manufacturers des ign vehic les and recover them at their end-of-life. Yet, the eff icacy of environmental management efforts depends on a concrete understanding of the emiss ions re leased during car manufacture, use and end-of-l ife. The economic and regulatory environment inf luences e a c h of these s tages. Understanding how such forces affect the life cycle of a vehic le is essent ia l to the pursuit of environmental ly, social ly and economical ly sustainable car production. By providing an emerging picture of the effects of the E L V Directive, government and industry will able to des ign improved legislation going forward. S u c h information may a lso help inform the re-examinat ion of the E L V Directive's 2015 E L V recoverability and recyclability targets. Th is p rocess is p lanned to occur by the end of 2005 (see figure 2.3). S u c h information is a lso of use outside of the European automotive industry. A n analys is of the economic and environmental changes brought about by the E L V Directive should be useful when developing product take-back legislation in other countr ies and for other durable goods . A s d i scussed above, whi te-goods such as refrigerators and washing mach ines are already recovered in the s a m e facilities and with the s a m e p rocesses as car hulks. Thus industry dynamics and technological considerat ions are likely to be similar across such durable goods. If exist ing take-back legislation is a harbinger of the legislative regime to come, obtaining timely feedback from current initiatives will be essent ia l to designing better legislation in the future. The ability to learn from exper ience would be enhanced by combining the research in Chapter 2 with similar studies of other existing take-back regulations (e.g. the E U W E E E Directive, and comparab le automotive and electrical equipment legislation in Japan) . This would allow the compar ison of differing legislative strategies and may facilitate a refined understanding of the economic drivers of 'green' innovation. Further insight may also be ga ined by contrasting the exper iences of individual European member states in implementing both W E E E and E L V regulation. E a c h country has a unique economic environment and the manner in which the E L V Directive has been t ransposed into national legislation a lso var ies slightly. S u c h disparit ies may result in discernible dif ferences in recovery outcomes. In aggregate, the above research would enable a c learer understanding of the impact of economic aspec ts (e.g. landfill costs , recovery costs , industry structure etc.) and legislative dif ferences (e.g. al location of recovery costs between industry, government and the consumer) on product recovery outcomes. 48 The ongoing globalisation of the automotive industry produces additional opportunities for research. Discerning the interrelationship between economic, legislative and social concerns and the nature of international car manufacturing may yield further insight into the future of car production. For instance, differing costs of production and varied waste management expectations across countries may influence the level of 'green' innovation as well as the structure and environmental performance of the industry. Within Europe, take-back legislation is driving a reduction in the amount of heavy metals in new vehicles (as discussed in Chapter 2). Yet, there is a need to focus on heavy metals released during the full vehicle life cycle, and not just on the metal contained in the vehicle itself. Chapter 3 helps to fill this existing gap in knowledge with respect to lead and cadmium emissions. Importantly, the analysis includes the releases that result from infrastructure use (e.g. road construction emissions). These ancillary requirements for car use have rarely been included in previous research (see Chapter 3), but nonetheless comprise an essential ingredient in the use phase of a vehicle's life cycle. Including the environmental burden imposed by infrastructure into the analysis enabled a more complete view of the quantity and nature of lead and cadmium releases at each life-cycle stage. The results show that while manufacturing and end-of-life recovery processes are important, economy-wide ramifications of automotive production (e.g. discharges from metal mining and refining) contribute substantially to overall lead and cadmium releases. These emissions do not necessarily result directly from the inclusion of lead and cadmium in the vehicle. Thus, by itself, legislation that aims to remove heavy metals from vehicles, such as the ELV Directive, will not eliminate all the lead and cadmium emitted due to automobile use. Furthermore, the analysis demonstrates that the volume of lead and cadmium in the vehicle is not the only determinant of overall, emission levels. The wear characteristics and end-of-life processes of automotive components are also important. For example, the elimination of lead wheel weights should reduce life-cycle lead releases to a greater extent than decreasing the mass of battery-lead by the same amount. These results reinforce the importance of taking a systems approach to analysing emissions from car use. Regulators are well placed to integrate these results, and life-cycle approaches in general, into the design of policies aimed at hazardous substances minimisation. While this thesis adds to the body of knowledge on the life cycle lead and cadmium releases due to automobile use, it also raises a number of questions that may be resolved by further research. Firstly, the EIOLCA methodology could be refined by an examination of the impact of metal prices on EIOLCA results. As discussed in Chapter 3, the substantial differences in unit prices between metals such as copper, nickel and platinum may give rise to a disproportionately high allocation of lead emissions being attributed to the automotive use of metals other than lead. Secondly, many mining and processing facilities extract multiple metals simultaneously. Detailed studies of these 49 operat ions would enable a more accurate attribution of re leases emanat ing from the production of speci f ic metals. Finally, the accuracy of E I O L C A results could a lso be improved by refining assumpt ions surrounding imports and exports (as d i scussed in Chapter 3). A number of opportunities exist to build on the results presented in Chapter 3. Now that basel ine data on current lead and cadmium emiss ions generated by car use has been estab l ished, it is poss ib le to use life cycle assessmen t to determine the impact on lead and cadmium dissipat ion of the material trends outl ined in Chapter 2 (e.g. increased aluminium and plastic use) . Similarly, one could evaluate the life-cycle impact of the E L V Directive itself. However, doing so would require that changes induced by the Directive be dist inguishable from trends that may occur regardless of legislative impacts. Life cyc le impacts of substitute parts could also be analysed and compared to exist ing pract ices. In particular, the introduction of hybrid electric cars may present an interesting c a s e study. S u c h vehic les require larger batteries than ordinary cars and may result in increased heavy metal d ischarges during both manufacturing and end-of-life. Evaluating the life cycle impact of hybrid vehic les will be a necessary step in anticipating the environmental implications of greater levels of hybrid-vehicle adoption. Both manuscr ipts included in this thesis highlight the need to develop environmental management strategies that take account of each industry's unique character ist ics. Anticipating the environmental implications of changing patterns of consumpt ion and production requires an appreciat ion of how economics , product usage patterns, legislative requirements and the nature of innovation interact. This thesis contributes to this field of study by using a multi-disciplinary approach to evaluate the environmental consequences of current practice and recent developments in the automotive industry. The methods used and the knowledge ga ined may a lso prove useful in assess ing the ecological impact of other durable goods. 50 \ 


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items