Indicators to measure sustainability of an industrial manufacturing

E. Raizer Neto, M.T.Mariotte and R.T.P.Hinz

Sociedade Educacional de Santa Catarina, raizerneto@ig.com.br

Abstract: Most of the industries have mechanisms to measure their economical efficiency through economical and financial indexes, consolidated globally. The same does not happen with the measure of their efficiency in relation to sustainable development. The sustainability indicators foreseen in the ISO series, are difficulty to measure, have high cost for determination of some indicators, they turn impracticable to use for a great part of the world companies and without conditions of being applied by the small industries and services companies. In this work it is proposed 25 indexes, easily measurable, as electric power consumption, water, material balance, mass of liquid, solids and gaseous effluents generated. Keywords: Indicators, eco-efficiency, LCA

Introduction

All of the industrial or services companies, well structured, measure their efficiency from several indicators consecrated by the use. Among the main ones, we mentioned the profitability, the return on the investment, the participation of the company in the market and profitability. The easiness found to establish the financial and economical indexes, is not found when you intend to measure the evolution of the measures of social and environmental behavior. When the company applies any modification in the productive process aiming reach an environmental requirement or a Clean Production program or LCA, there is need to measure the effects of the decisions taken and their evolution. How to know to choose between two processes, which the more environmentally soundly? A lot of proposed indicators appeared in the last ten years and the main is that foreseen in the ISO 14000 series. However, some of the indicators foreseen in this regulation are complex for their determination and many of them ex-

2 E. Raizer Neto, M.T.Mariotte and R.T.P.Hinz

tremely expensive as, for instance, to identify the contribution of the company on to deterioration of ozones layer. This work, besides revising, to comment on the indicators developed in other research centers, it still presents the indicators which we established to accompany the eco-efficiency measures in a small company of metals heat treatment and a great company of compressors, both of the State of Santa Catarina, Brazil.

Review

The need to monitoring the industrial activities and development has been motivating many researchers in the creation of sustainability indicators. Daly [1] summarizes three indicators, that for us, are confused with the objectives of the sustainable development: 1. the rate of use of natural renewable resources should not be larger than the rate of renewal of the resource. 2. the rate of use of the no renewable resource does not exceed the renewable substitute's rate. 3. the pollution generated should not exceed the assimilation capacity of the environment. After `92 the United Nations (UN) has been multiplying efforts to measure the sustainability degree. UN created in 1995 the Work Programme on Indicators of Sustainable Development, with the intention of defining the indicators and their application methodology in five years. In a first attempt, United Nations [2] 134 indicators were presented, what was done with that Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment [3] (SCOPE) organism of International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU), it presented a work proposing: 1. an agreement on the terminology to be adopted 2. the identification, definition of a group of indicators with political and analytical relevance, contained in three great groups (environmental impact and environmental and social conditions), as well as the measuring methodology. In the literature there are several meanings for indicators, "a parameter, a value, an index, a relative weight of information etc." Olsthoorn [4], Moldan, Billharz and Matravers [5] Adriaanse, [6] they make an extensive revision, including some discrepancies in relation to the conceptual aspect of the indicators. Wackernagel and Onisto [7] affirm: We are far away of reaching the sustainability. But, how much far away? If we are not capable to measure we don't have as taking decisions. This study proposes a methodology and makes the analysis of the sustainability degree in 52

Indicators to measure sustainability of an industrial manufacturing 3

countries that together represent 80% of the population and 95% of world GDP. Other important works present the fundamental concepts on the indicators, among them we mention Berkhout and others [8] they present countless considerations for the establishment of indicators. MEPI - Measuring the Environmental Performance of Industry) looking for an answer for some very important subjects, about the comparison of indicators for different companies from identical industrial activities. They also discuss the hypothesis of Porter and Linde , if these is or not some relationship between the economical performance and the environmental sound. Wehrmeyer, Tyteca and Wagner [9], Ditz & Ranganathan, [10]; Azzone & Noci, [11] Wehrmeyer & Tyteca, [12] present a great revision about the necessary amount of indicators. Gee & Moll, [13]; Wright, Allen, Clift, and Healthy, [14]. present application in very specific examples. This article intends to present some indicators which we adopt in a small company of heat treatment of metals as well as in a company of compressors. These indicators were taken in consideration of values physically easy to measure and their relationship to sustainability.

Indicators structure

The initial concern was to establish indicators for productive systems. In our attempt to understand initially some hypotheses should be made for the validation of these indicators, what presented to proceed. In this first work we present as boundary condition, the space for the producing unit. The impact on the sustainable development due to the manufactures has Internal influences, referred to the control volume and external influences, related with the external variables. The main internal influences are: 1. the input of raw material in natural state. 2. source of electric power generation. 3. transformation process. 4. generation of residues and toxicity. External influences are: a. industrialized raw material inputs. b. product usage by the consumer c. final disposition of the product after reaching the useful life. There is not a priori, a greater or smaller importance on one above the other. There are cases, for instance, which the industry of the breadmaking, whose larger impact is concentrated in the planting tasks, crop and storage of the wheat than in the breads production and, where the external influences are preponderant. In these cases, the indicators improvement

4 E. Raizer Neto, M.T.Mariotte and R.T.P.Hinz

should also be driven where the influence is preponderant. When the dispersion of these external influences is high, the actions depend much more on government plans than on the producers, properly it would be impossible the application of individualized plans of improvement.

Source of indicators
PRODUCT

PRODUCTION

USE

FUNCTION

Raw Material Renewable Industrialized Transport Water Energy

Useful Life Recyclable rate Reuse

Essential Accessory Not Essential

Fig. 1. Variables concerned to the product indicator

An indicator represents a tendency and only this. The purpose of an indicator is the establishment of the initial value and their continuous evolution after accomplished modifications. The comparison of a series of the same indicator however, can supply a scene of the factory is a national or world level, as well as to identify how this industry is in comparison with similar one. This will serve, for instance, to indicate which unit operations need to concentrate efforts to reach the wanted degree of sustainability. The indicators established contemplate the following aspects:
PRODUCT Production Uses Function PROCESS Transformation Generation of Residues Pollution MANAGEMENT Investments in technology Investments and operational costs of the waste treatment Economical dependence regarding the raw materials Dependence regarding the consumer market

Indicators to measure sustainability of an industrial manufacturing 5

UNIT OPERATION

TRANSFORMATION

WASTE

POLLUTION

Raw Material Renewable Industrialized Water Energy

Liquid Solid Gas

Inert Toxic Nutrient

Fig. 2. Variables of the process indicators

MANAGEMENT

INVESTMENT and COSTS

TECHNOLOGY

MINIMIZATION

LIFE CYCLE

Production Waste treatment

Raw material Waste Energy

Function Use Ecodesign

Fig. 3. Management influences on indicators

Accomplished the justifications and the conception used, to establish the indicators, will be to proceed their presentation and a brief interpretation of each one and their influence on the sustainability and development of the industry.

6 E. Raizer Neto, M.T.Mariotte and R.T.P.Hinz

Indicator establisment

We have imposed as a rule that the indicators should have the following properties: 1. dependent on variables easy to measure and on any enterprise scale-up. 2. to use physical greatness as mass, volume, flow, heat etc. 3. when this is not possible coefficients are used where valuation can be objected and improved however of concept universally accepted. 5.1 Product Indicators We have established the following indicators related with the production. IMPD = relative Impact to the direct materials used to manufacture the product. This indicator allows to identify the contribution of each material for the sustainability of the process and globally, allowing to take eco-design actions, minimization and substitution procedures.

IMPDi =

mi IMNi * m p

(1)

Total indicator of raw materials

IMPD =

1 mp

IMN
1

mi

(2)
i

IMNi -rate of renewal of the material i. mi - mass of the natural resource i in the mass of the product p mp - mass of the product p IMN =rate of renewal of the material.

IMN i =

vu p nri

(3)

nr - necessary time for the renewal of the material in the nature vu - useful life of the product. IMA = relative Impact of the water used in the product

IMA =

ma mp

(4)

ma - mass of water in the product p mp - mass of the product p IME = relative Impact to the consumption of energy.

Indicators to measure sustainability of an industrial manufacturing 7

IME i =

cei (kwh/kg) CEN i * mp

(5)

Total impact due to the energy

IME =

1 n cei mp 1 CEN i

(6)

The electric power, thermal or mechanics have different origins, in some cases with the combustion of fossil fuels, water in hydroelectric, radioactive material, coal, wood etc. The mass equivalent consumption of the fuel is given for: ce i (kg) (7) C =
CEN
I

* IEN

This value represents a consumption of combustible, raw material, that it should be added IMPD. cei - expense with energy of the type i in a period t mp - mass of products manufactured in the period t CENI unitary cost of the energy i IENI energy produced by unit mass of combustible. (wind, water, nuclear, coal, fuel) IMT - Impact due to the transport of materials and products. This indicator, like the previous, also transforms the values of financial expenses in fuel mass equivalent consumed for the transport and it also represents consumption of raw materials and, should be added to IMPD.

IMT =

(tm + tp ) * 0,5 cd * mp

(8)

tm - expense with transport of raw materials tp - expense with transport of products mp mass of products transported with the expenses (tm+tp) cd - unitary cost of the fuel mass The value of the total impact of raw materials used will be, therefore

IMPT = IMPD +

C IMT + IMN c IMN t

(9)

5.2 Relative to the Use Most of indicators does not contemplate the raw materials consumed by the user. We thought that the development of a product should take into account this factor. As example, we mentioned the case of the electric coffeepot and extraction coffee (Italian) with direct steam. Figures 4 and 5

8 E. Raizer Neto, M.T.Mariotte and R.T.P.Hinz

represent the flow of these two machines. It is easy to be observed, that steam coffee machine produces smaller amount of wastes. It has larger useful life and it should present a larger sustainability level than an electrical machine. We intend to demonstrate that to the same function we can have many products with different amount of raw material consumed by the end user. Therefore not always when production or process indicator are appropriate does not mean that the product really contributes to the sustainable development.
Water Coffee powder Filter

Electric Power

Electric Coffee Machine

Hot Coffee

WASTES Coffee powder Paper filter Cleaner water

Fig. 4. Flowchart of an electric coffee machine

Water Coffee powder

Thermal energy

Steam Coffee Machine

Hot Coffee

WASTES Coffee powder

Fig. 5. Flowchart of a steam coffee machine

These indicators have the same structure of the previous (series IM_), differentiates only in term of calculation base, raw material and goods produced by the final consumer.

IUPDi =

mi IMN i * m p

(10)

Indicators to measure sustainability of an industrial manufacturing 9

IUPD = IUA =

1 mp

IMN
1

mi

(11)
i

ma mp cei CEN i * m p

(12) (13) (14)

i

IUE i = IUE =
C =

1 mp

CEN
1

cei

CEN

ce i I * IEN

(15)
I

IUPT = IUPD +

C IEN c

(16)

The notation is similar than the production indicator the only difference is: the series IU are related to the consumption and production of the end user. 5.3 Indicators of technology

Relative to the transformation

(rate of transformation of the raw material by mass of product) IPM = rate of raw material (i) transformation. This indicator is indirectly associated to the applied technology.

IPM i =

miT mp * fi

(17)

miT total mass of raw material i acquired in a certain time(t) to produce product p mp total mass of product p manufactured in certain time(t) fi fraction of raw material i in the product p

m IPM =
mp

T o

(18)

10 E. Raizer Neto, M.T.Mariotte and R.T.P.Hinz Relative to the Residues and Pollution

It relates the conversion of raw material in liquid, solid or gaseous wastes. IPL = Indicator of liquid effluent generation

IPL =

me m a + mil

(19)

me mass of liquid effluent in a certain time(t) ma mass of consumed water in a certain time(t) mil mass of liquid raw material consumed in a time(t) IPS = Indicator of the generation of solid residue

IPS =

ms mis

(20)

ms mass of solid waste in a time (t) mis mass of solid raw material consumed in a certain time (t) IPG = Indicator of the generation of gaseous effluents.

IPG =

mg mig

(21)

mg mass of gaseous effluents in a time(t) mig mass of gaseous raw material consumed in a time(t) 5.4 Indicators of Management Many times mistakes in administration of an effective technology interfere in an entire process. We put in evidence some indicators which allow to show these cases. IGP - it indicates the investment evolution in technologies.

IGP =

IGN IGT

(22)

IGN - investments in innovation in a elapsed time(t) IGT - total investments in technologies in a certain time (t) IGR = Evolution of Investment in Waste Treatment

IGR =

IGW IGP

(23)

IGW- Investment in Waste Treatment IGP Investment in Production IGM - Evolution of Investment in waste minimization

Indicators to measure sustainability of an industrial manufacturing 11

IGM =

IMR IGN

(24)

IMR Investment in Waste Minimization. TGM - Rate of improvements caused by the investment in waste minimization.

TGM =

IMR VM (mt mt 1 )

(25)

VM - value of the material i mt - consumed mass of raw material after innovation mt-1 - consumed mass of raw material before innovation

Conclusion

These indicators are easy to obtain because they are current of the mass and energy balances, already accomplished by most of the companies. We have been applying in two types of industries of Santa Catarina, Brazil, and we did not have difficulties in the attendance of their monthly evolution. Some of them needs to be perfect to best assist the needs of the companies, especially those when operate for production systems for order, without a continuous production line. In the case of the unit of metals thermal treatment there is a need to adapt it to the countless variations of the process in function of the several applied materials. Although they are not still perfect they have shown better than those foreseen in ISO 14040, especially for the difficulty of measurement. Our team continues to research the adaptations which should suffer the indicators previously presented, as well as we are developing for a company of hermetic compressors, works about identification of eco-design application starting from the established indicators which allows to identify which that components should be firstly modified, function of their contribution to the sustainable development.

References
1. 2. 3. 4. Daly H., - Steady State Economics - Island Press, 1991 United Nations, - Indicators of Sustainable Development - U.N. 1996 Projection Indicators of Sustainable Development SCOPE, Wiley & Sounds. 1997 Olsthoorn, X., Tyteca, D., Werhmeyer, W., Wagner, M. Environmental Indicators for Business, A Review of the Literature and Standardisation Methods - Journal of Cleaner Production November 2000

12 E. Raizer Neto, M.T.Mariotte and R.T.P.Hinz

5. Moldan, B., Billharz, S., and R. Matravers, - Sustainability Indicators: Report on the Porter, M., van Linde, C.. Green and competitive: ending the talement. Harvard Business Review (September-October), 120-134. 1995 Adriaanse A., - Environmental Policy Performance Indicators - SUK -1993. Wackernagel, M., Onisto, L. - La Ecologica impronta. Quanta natura viene utilizzata e quanta anchor disponibile? - Dossier of WWF 1995. Berkhout, F. et alli. Measuring the Environmental Performance of Industry(MEPI) EC Environment and Climate Research Programme:Research Theme 4 - 2001 Wehrmeyer, W., Tyteca, D., Wagner, M. How many (and which) does Indicators are necessary to compares the Environmental Performance of Companies? The sectoral and statistical answerer. The 7th European Roundtable on Cleaner Production, 2-4 May 2001, Lund, Sweden Ditz, D., & Ranganathan, J. Measuring Up: Toward Common Framework goes Tracking Corporate Environmental Performance. Washington: World Resources Institute. (1997) Azzone, G., & Noci, G. Defining Environmental Performance Indicators: An Integrated Framework. Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 5, 69-80. (1996) Wehrmeyer, W., & Tyteca, D. Measuring Environmental Performance goes Industry: From Legitimacy to Sustainability? The International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, Vol. 5, 111-124. . (1998) Gee, D., & Moll, D. Information goes Sustainability: Eco-Efficiency Indicators. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency (EEA). (1998) Wright, M., Allen, D., Clift, R., and Healthy, H. Measuring Corporate Environmental Performance: The ICI Environmental Burden System. Journal Industrial of Ecology, Vol. 1(4), 117-127. (1997)

6. 7. 8. 9.

10.

11. 12.

13. 14.