Green Principles for Vehicle Lightweighting - American Chemical

Subscriber access provided by YORK UNIV

Critical Review

Green Principles for Vehicle Lightweighting Geoffrey M. Lewis, Cailin A. Buchanan, Krutarth D. Jhaveri, John L. Sullivan, Jarod C Kelly, Sujit Das, Alan I. Taub, and Gregory A. Keoleian Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.8b05897 • Publication Date (Web): 20 Mar 2019 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on March 24, 2019

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 59

Environmental Science & Technology

1

Green Principles for Vehicle Lightweighting

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Geoffrey M. Lewis a, Cailin A. Buchanan a, d, Krutarth D. Jhaveri a, d, John L. Sullivan a, Jarod C. Kelly b, Sujit Das c, Alan I. Taub d, e, Gregory A. Keoleian* a, e for Sustainable Systems, School for Environment & Sustainability, University of Michigan; 440 Church St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109 b Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 S. Cass Ave., Argonne, IL 60439 c Energy and Transportation Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 d College of Engineering, University of Michigan, 2098 HH Dow, Ann Arbor, MI 48019 e Lightweight Innovations For Tomorrow, 1400 Rosa Parks Blvd., Detroit. MI 48216 *corresponding author [email protected] (734) 764-3194

16

A large portion of life cycle transportation impacts occur during vehicle operation, and key

17

improvement strategies include increasing powertrain efficiency, vehicle electrification and

18

lightweighting vehicles by reducing their mass. The potential energy benefits of vehicle

19

lightweighting are large, given that 29.5 EJ was used in all modes of U.S. transportation in 2016

20

and roughly half of the energy spent in wheeled transportation and the majority of energy spent

21

in aircraft is used to move vehicle mass. We collect and review previous work on lightweighting,

22

identify key parameters affecting vehicle environmental performance (e.g., vehicle mode, fuel

23

type, material type and recyclability), and propose a set of ten principles, with examples, to guide

24

environmental improvement of vehicle systems through lightweighting. These principles, based

25

on a life cycle perspective and taken as a set, allow a wide range of stakeholders (designers,

26

policy-makers, and vehicle manufacturers and their material and component suppliers) to

27

evaluate the tradeoffs inherent in these complex systems. This set of principles can be used to

28

evaluate tradeoffs between impact categories and to help avoid shifting of burdens to other life

29

cycle phases in the process of improving use phase environmental performance.

a Center

Abstract

ACS Paragon Plus Environment


30 31

Introduction

32

Studies on transportation vehicles (cars, trucks, buses, trains, airplanes, ships) have found that

33

the bulk of the impacts over a vehicle’s life cycle occur in the use phase (vehicle operation), so

34

improving vehicle life cycle environmental performance should focus first on reducing use-phase

35

burdens 1. Fuel economy regulations in the U.S. have helped drive technological advancements

36

to reduce use-phase impacts of individual vehicles 2. These advancements include improved

37

powertrains (high-efficiency internal combustion, electric, and hybrid) 3–7, and vehicle mass

38

reduction (lightweighting) 8–12. Vehicle fuel consumption comprises two components, one

39

associated with moving the mass of the vehicle, and one that accounts for other losses (e.g.,

40

aerodynamic drag, accessories, engine and powertrain friction) 10,13–16. Up to 50% of a wheeled

41

vehicle’s fuel consumption can be mass-dependent, depending on the vehicle type and duty

42

cycle, so lightweighting strategies are of high value in reducing use-phase fuel consumption.

43

Vehicle lightweighting provides the opportunity to reduce use-phase fuel consumption further

44

through secondary mass reduction and powertrain adaptation and resizing.

45

Lightweighting can be achieved in several ways, with material substitution and changes in design

46

and construction being the most common 4,5,8,17–20. Substitution ratios that indicate the amount of

47

lightweight (LW) material used to replace an existing material (e.g., aluminum for steel) have

48

been developed for a range of applications and materials 12,21,22. An alternative approach

49

advocates making vehicle parts using near-net-shape manufacturing pathways to reduce waste of

50

existing materials 23–27. The Appendix to the Midterm Evaluation of Light-Duty Vehicle

51

Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards for Model

52

Years 2022-2025 lists a number of mass reduction technologies for materials such as steel and


Page 2 of 59

Page 3 of 59


53

aluminum, as well as lightweighting implementation examples like Ford Motor Company’s

54

aluminum-intensive F150 28. While material substitution and other lightweighting approaches

55

can reduce use phase energy consumption and GHG emissions, they often result in higher

56

burdens in other life cycle phases. For example, an aluminum part reduces use-phase fuel

57

consumption compared to a functionally equivalent steel part, but it takes significantly more

58

energy to produce virgin aluminum (135.3 MJ/kg) than virgin steel (35.3 MJ/kg) 29.

59

Manufacturing burdens differ between materials 30, but it is also critical to understand how

60

mechanical and structural properties of materials influence factors such as durability and part

61

replacement frequency 31–34. The recoverability of a material at the end of a vehicle’s lifetime is

62

another important criterion, as it is desirable to keep materials in functional uses once they have

63

been produced and to reduce waste. Recyclability depends on material properties, ability to

64

separate materials at end-of-life, and the amount and type of contamination present after

65

separation. Lightweight material selection and design to reduce life cycle environmental impact

66

is complicated and involves evaluating tradeoffs.

67

One of the first comprehensive methods for quantifying the environmental performance of

68

products across their entire life cycles (i.e., from cradle to grave) was developed by a panel of

69

industry, regulatory, and academic stakeholders 35. This method – life cycle assessment (LCA) –

70

was standardized as ISO 14040 in 1998 and 2000, and updated in 2006 36. The LCA method is

71

used to develop environmental product declarations (EPDs) according to product category rules

72

(PCRs) under ISO 14025 37. Partly through the application of LCA, it became evident that the

73

process of improving environmental performance of a product across its life cycle often involved

74

evaluation of material production burdens, tradeoffs between life cycle phases, and

75

determination of how to account for recycled material. LCA provides guidance for navigating the



76

complex product environmental improvement process, but itself involves significant data

77

collection and analysis effort. The objective of this paper is to establish a set of principles based

78

on a life cycle framework to guide lightweighting technology development and application in

79

material selection, vehicle design, and policy.

80 81

Principles Background

82

Sets of principles, based on LCA concepts, data, methods, and applied experience, are intended

83

to simplify and guide the environmental improvement process, and have been developed in

84

several fields. Anastas and Warner developed a set of principles tailored specifically for green

85

chemistry 38, and Anastas and Zimmerman continued with 12 Principles for Green Engineering

86

39.

87

less toxic materials; and design for durability. The American Institute of Chemical Engineers

88

consolidated these principles into a set of nine focused on implementation 40, and continued the

89

consolidation with a set of four principles. This would be an academic exercise if these principles

90

had not been adopted and put into practice by practitioners who understood their value. Two

91

examples of adoption are Dow Chemical’s corporate sustainability goals 41–43 and BASF’s

92

selection of environmental categories for their Eco-efficiency analysis 44,45.

93

Green principles have been developed for other engineering disciplines. The Hannover Principles

94

focused on design for sustainability 46 and the Sandestin Conference principles were the product

95

of an effort to provide a set of green engineering principles applicable to all engineering

96

disciplines 40. A recent set of principles focuses on the development and deployment of energy

97

storage on the electricity grid 47, and these principles have been recognized as an important

98

contribution to the design of battery technologies 48,49.

Examples of principles from these sets include: use renewable materials; reduce waste; use


Page 4 of 59

Page 5 of 59


99

Principles collect, distill, and organize information in a topic area to provide useful guidance to

100

those who are making design and deployment decisions. Many economic aspects are currently

101

internalized in decision-making processes, so principles are of the highest value when they focus

102

on aspects, especially environmental and social, that are not yet internalized. Externalities such

103

as greenhouse gas emissions are one example. Material selection 50 and lightweight (LW) design

104

51

105

making that include cost, performance, and environmental factors. We present here a set of ten

106

principles, and an organizing framework, focused on guiding the environmental improvement of

107

transportation vehicle systems (including, but not limited to, passenger cars, trucks, trains, ships,

108

and planes) through lightweighting.

have both been the subject of work to develop multi-objective frameworks for decision-

109 110

Lightweighting Principles Framework

111

The principles framework (Fig 1) illustrates the relationship between the ten principles and

112

product life cycle phases (material production, manufacturing, use, and end-of-life). The

113

principles are intended for multiple stakeholders, including designers, vehicle manufacturers

114

(OEMs), the supply chain for these manufacturers (i.e., materials and component suppliers), and

115

policy-makers.



116 117

Figure 1: Vehicle Lightweighting Green Principles Framework

118

Though these lightweighting principles are focused on the environmental dimension of

119

sustainability, they have economic and social components too. For example, a principle focused

120

on reducing energy use will also have an effect on the economic performance of a product or

121

system. In addition to the tradeoff between material production and use phases, there are also

122

potential tradeoffs between other life cycle phases, between stakeholders’ interests, and between

123

part, vehicle, fleet, and transportation system scales. These principles, employed as a holistic set

124

to evaluate performance and resolve tradeoffs, provide consistent and systematic guidance on

125

lightweighting strategies to minimize life cycle environmental impacts of the vehicle system.

126 127

Lightweighting Principles

128

Each of the ten environmental principles for vehicle lightweighting are discussed below, in both

129

short (bold) and more explanatory form (italics), with background and illustrative examples for

130

each, as well as candidate tools and metrics to quantify improvement for that principle and to

131

identify potential gaps in current practice.


Page 6 of 59

Page 7 of 59


132 133

Principle 1: Resolve tradeoffs between technical, economic, and environmental performance

134

Successful and high impact lightweighting strategies must resolve tradeoffs between technical,

135

economic, and environmental performance while maintaining safety standards.

136 137

Lightweighting initiatives to improve environmental performance can result in increased

138

production costs and/or decreased technical performance, and can also affect cost of vehicle

139

ownership52. For example, while magnesium is a candidate for LW designs because of its low

140

density, its cost has traditionally been prohibitive in designs for automotive applications, and its

141

corrosive nature has limited its use in the aerospace industry 53,54. Material cost issues can be

142

addressed by designing specifically for LW applications, reducing the amount of material

143

required by near-net-shape applications and keeping costs low, and by employing efficient, low

144

cost manufacturing 53. In the case of magnesium, new cast and wrought alloys with better

145

mechanical and corrosion properties are required for implementation to expand 54,55. The

146

introduction of LW materials into vehicle designs also introduces technical issues related to LW

147

material forming and joining. For example, while aluminum has ⅓ the density of steel, it also has

148

⅓ the strength and tensile modulus 56. To counteract this lower tensile modulus, a larger hollow

149

cross section must be formed or part thickness must be increased. Many LW alloys require

150

harder tools and more rigid presses, and their lower ductility limits design options 56. Joining

151

dissimilar materials, often necessary when designing with LW materials, can be challenging due

152

to weaker connection points and dissimilar physical and chemical properties 57,58. Alternatives to

153

traditional resistance and arc welding techniques include joining by forming, stir and inertia



154

friction welding 56, and emerging reversible adhesive bonding technology. Joining is discussed

155

further in Principle 6.

156

Metrics, Tools, and Gaps in Practice

157

Despite the challenges associated with LW materials, they offer a promising path to reduce

158

environmental burdens in transportation vehicle designs. Ashby charts, which display the range

159

of selected properties for a variety of materials, can be a helpful tool in comparing candidate

160

materials 59. Figure 2 is a schematic adaptation of an Ashby chart, displaying ranges of

161

production energy (per m3) and Young’s modulus for several broad material types 60, as well as

162

material production energy data points from GREET for some selected materials 29. Ashby charts

163

help designers select LW materials with the best environmental performance that also maintain

164

specified material properties. Other metrics that could be displayed in an Ashby chart include

165

cost, energy density, GHG emissions factor, and mass.


Page 8 of 59

Page 9 of 59


166 167 168

Figure 2: Ashby chart (after 60) depicting production energy versus Young’s modulus for several material types, using material production energy data from 29.

169

Vehicle designers need to have adequate information, experience, and tools (e.g. finite element

170

models and testing facilities) to assess whether the part made from an alternative material will

171

meet vehicle structural and safety requirements. Potential data gaps include material substitution

172

factors 61, durability, and life cycle inventory data that are needed for the cradle-to-gate life cycle

173

inventory (LCI). These data are also especially important for Principle 7. Exploring several

174

alternative lower density materials for an application can help identify the “right” material when

175

resolving tradeoffs (Principle 7).

176



177

Principle 2: Source abundant and low environmental impact materials

178

Choose to use materials that are abundant and use lower impact material production energy

179

sources.

180 181

The global abundance and geographic origin of materials influences the environmental

182

sustainability of products and systems in which they are used. Steel and aluminum are currently

183

two of the most common materials (by mass) in transportation vehicles, and both of them are

184

abundant. Some predict that society’s access to aluminum will be constrained by energy

185

limitations and price before scarcity 62, though many (non-lightweight) materials used in

186

vehicles, such as copper, lead, and zinc, are far less abundant 63. Scarcity of cobalt, a critical

187

material in magnets, aircraft engines, turbines, cutting tools, and batteries is a concern due to

188

potentially widespread impacts 64,65. Lightweighting will become an even more important

189

strategy as more electric vehicles are produced, since battery performance is directly related to

190

the amount of mass being moved. Demand for battery materials (e.g., lithium) will also increase.

191

Concerns have been raised regarding the abundance of lithium 66,67, but several studies indicate

192

that the demand for lithium batteries can be supported for decades 68–70. LW materials are often

193

more scarce than traditional metals. Magnesium’s price and availability has limited its use as a

194

LW material 71,72, and there is also concern in the automotive industry regarding the scarcity of

195

rare-earth elements 73.

196

Some studies argue that resource scarcity is less of a problem than resource extraction 74,75,

197

which has been shown to have the largest environmental impact in the product supply chain 76.

198

Extraction and processing of scarce materials causes negative environmental impacts, such as

199

high energy consumption, toxic emissions, and ecosystem degradation 30,77–79, and resource


Page 10 of 59

Page 11 of 59


200

depletion exacerbates these impacts as it typically requires extraction from lower and lower ore

201

grades.

202

In addition to raw materials, sources of energy also need to be considered. Energy used in

203

extraction and processing is a primary cause of environmental impact associated with materials,

204

and fossil fuels are still the dominant energy source for this activity 80. Due to regional

205

differences in the mix of fuels used to produce electricity in the U.S., GHG emissions per kg of

206

aluminum ingot vary between 5 and 30 kg CO2e depending on production location 81. Energy

207

and GHG emissions from producing virgin aluminum will also vary over time as the grid mix

208

evolves 82. While many LCAs currently assume that aluminum is being produced in North

209

America, where hydroelectric powered production is common and thus GHG emissions are

210

lower, industry experts state that Chinese aluminum production, which is primarily coal-

211

powered, is becoming increasingly relevant, accounting for 65% of global aluminum production

212

capacity 61. This influences the production burdens of vehicles that use appreciable amounts of

213

aluminum. Processing methods and associated energy and emissions burdens also vary with

214

source ore type, which varies geographically. Variance in SOx emissions resulting from

215

extraction and processing of different nickel ores in Canada and Russia is an example of this

216

spatial variation 83.

217


218

The reserves-to-production ratio, which indicates the anticipated lifetime of a non-renewable

219

resource, characterizes material scarcity. Comparing the reserves-to-production ratio of bauxite

220

(100 years) to copper (42 years), it is evident that aluminum is more abundant at current

221

production rates 63. Material production energy (MJ/kg) is used to ensure the lowest impact

222

energy sources are being chosen. While databases such as GREET (Greenhouse gases, Regulated



223

Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation) 29 report energy and emissions factors for a range

224

of materials, data are not always available for newer and less common materials. Resource

225

depletion (RD) is an established life cycle impact category that has several issues, including

226

significant variation in characterization methods (over 20 different methods) and the lack of an

227

included recycling framework, both of which are gaps in practice. Alonso et al. describe material

228

depletion metrics and potential impacts on economies, technologies, and geographies 65. Other

229

tools include: Sankey diagrams, which highlight material flow pathways throughout their life

230

cycle; Ashby charts, which demonstrate tradeoffs in a LW material such as abundance and

231

density; and life cycle assessment databases and software, such as GREET, SimaPro or GaBi.

232 233

Principle 3: Use secondary materials

234

Secondary materials may reduce demand for virgin materials and can result in lower material

235

production impacts (e.g., energy, GHG emissions).

236 237

The use of secondary (i.e., scrap and recycled) materials reduces material production impacts

238

compared with the generally higher energy, emissions, and cost for primary material production,

239

as well as reducing the need for raw material production and processing 29. Figure 3 illustrates

240

the difference in material production energy and GHGs between primary and secondary iron,

241

steel, and aluminum.


Page 12 of 59

Page 13 of 59


GHG (kg CO2e/kg)

. Al

.

nd ar y

Al Se co

ar y Pr im

nd ar y

Pr im

ar y

St

St

ee l

Ir on nd ar y

ar Se co

(P rim Ir on Pi g

243

GHG

ee l

Energy

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Se co

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

y)

Energy (MJ/kg)

242

244 245

Figure 3: Reduction in material production energy and GHGs substituting primary with secondary materials variability due to location, processing methods, etc. is not reported in GREET to ensure source confidentiality 29

246

Secondary materials can be unsuitable for some applications. They often do not have the same

247

material properties and composition as their primary counterparts due to alloying elements and

248

contaminants remaining after the recycling process 61,84–88. Contamination by other elements

249

reduces the quality of recovered materials, limiting the application of LW secondary materials,

250

as they can often only be used in applications that accept lower quality material 89,90. For

251

example, calcium, lithium, and zirconium lower the quality of magnesium 87, and aluminum is

252

compromised by the presence of copper, iron, or zinc 90. Recycled plastics have not been widely

253

used in transportation due to a lack of effective plastic recycling infrastructure and the inability

254

to produce recycled plastic equivalent to primary material 91,92. These end-of-life issues, as well

255

as market interactions between primary and secondary materials, will be discussed further in

256

Principle 6.

257 258




259

Metrics that can be used to assess performance under Principle 3 include secondary material

260

content (%), material production energy (MJ/kg), and carbon intensity (CO2e/kg). Higher

261

percentage of secondary material is desirable in terms of reducing resource depletion and

262

material production energy. Tools that can be used to facilitate improvement on Principle 3 are

263

Sankey diagrams, which highlight how much material is being recycled for secondary use at a

264

regional, national or global scale, and GREET or other LCA software/material databases, which

265

contain energy and emissions factors.

266

A major gap in information necessary for assessing performance on this principle is the recycled

267

content of a material. While the steel and aluminum industries have well-established recycling

268

data for the automotive industry, other vehicle modes have far less information on primary and

269

secondary material flows. For instance, ship breaking is the common end-of-life process, yet the

270

flow of materials resulting from ship breaking is not well documented 93. Additionally, few

271

technologies are capable of material recovery without compromising material quality. There is a

272

need for recycling technologies that can accomplish material separation without detrimental

273

contamination, as well as identifying appropriate uses for secondary materials with degraded

274

properties. The Aircraft Fleet Recycling Association (AFRA), the global organization dedicated

275

to airplane recycling, has noted that the quality of recycled composite materials needs to

276

improve, and expanded markets need to be identified for aircraft recycling to improve 94. The

277

cost and environmental burdens of future end-of-life infrastructure are unknown, as is how these

278

will influence use of secondary materials in design. Issues with end-of-life modeling and

279

recovery of materials will be discussed further in Principle 6.


Page 14 of 59

Page 15 of 59


280 281

Principle 4: Maximize efficiency in manufacturing for lightweight technologies

282

Develop and select environmentally preferable manufacturing technologies that have high

283

material yields and match target production volumes.

284 285

Material lost as scrap through the production process necessitates production of more input

286

material than ends up in the finished product. Economics have been the primary motivation for

287

increasing material efficiency. Barriers to implementing environmental material efficiency

288

strategies include an industry perception that they raise costs and the lack of expert knowledge

289

and resources 95,96. There have been efforts to address challenges in increasing material

290

efficiency 97. Allwood et al. 74 discuss material efficiency as a pathway to reduce the

291

environmental burdens of material production and processing, and identify increasing process

292

yields as one strategy.

293

Since manufacturing operations increase embodied energy, it is important to select

294

manufacturing processes strategically based on target production volume to minimize burdens

295

per part (not per kg). Fysikopoulos et al. estimated the production energy for an automotive

296

Body-in-White (BIW) at varying production volume, and found up to 17% lower energy and cost

297

per part at higher BIW production volume 98. Kim, Keoleian, and Skerlos demonstrate how, as

298

production volume increases, the difference in BIW manufacturing cost between steel and

299

aluminum reduces, with aluminum vehicles becoming more cost advantageous at higher volumes

300

99.

301

additive manufacturing or laser sintering), can be used to produce high-value products at low

302

volumes with less material waste. While additive manufacturing may not be suitable for

Additive manufacturing, in which parts are built up layer-by-layer to near-final shape (e.g.,



303

automotive applications because of its low volume characteristic, it is well suited to aerospace

304

applications. Additive manufacturing has been adopted by aircraft component manufacturers due

305

to its capability to produce LW and cost effective designs 100. Additive manufacturing of

306

components requires as little as 33% of the energy used to produce conventionally manufactured

307

components, and the LW components could result in up to a 6.4% reduction in fuel consumption

308

100.

309

determined that they used 10% of the material used in traditional (subtractive) manufacturing

310

101,102.

311

landing gear found that, at low production volumes, sintering is more economical than die-

312

casting when producing functionally equivalent parts 103. Production volumes and part size vary

313

based on vehicle mode (i.e., higher volumes for passenger cars, lower volumes for container

314

ships), which will help determine the best manufacturing technology.

315


316

Metrics to assess progress under Principle 4 include process material yield, product rejection

317

rate, and energy intensity. Higher process material yield and lower product rejection or defect

318

rate are both indicators of improved process efficiency. The production energy intensity of a part

319

will help identify an appropriate production volume. GREET can be used for these efficiency

320

and energy metrics. Manufacturing energy data are not always available, especially on a part or

321

component basis or for new technologies or materials, and models to determine optimal

322

manufacturing technology and production volumes are not available for most industries. The

323

lack of environmental performance measurement systems (PMS) for manufacturing represents a

324

gap in Principle 4 104.

An analysis of titanium aerospace components produced by additive manufacturing

A comparison between die-casting and laser sintering methods to produce an aircraft

325


Page 16 of 59

Page 17 of 59


326

Principle 5: Don’t overdesign

327

Evaluate the potential increase in production burdens of strategies to extend service life and

328

durability against fuel savings in the use phase, design for reasonable part lifetimes, and use

329

optimal replacement strategies to reduce environmental impacts.

330 331

Avoiding overdesign of vehicle components is a well-established principle in both conventional

332

and LW vehicle design, driven by economic incentives and supported by the adoption of

333

computer-aided design and analysis to optimize vehicle parameters without the need for

334

prototypes 61,105–110. When extending the service life of a LW part or vehicle, a reasonable

335

product lifetime must be considered 111,112. For instance, a LW engine block that is designed to

336

last 30 years is overdesigned for a vehicle that will be used for 15 years 113. Optimal replacement

337

strategies are helpful in understanding the relationship between life cycle impact and product

338

lifetime. While increasing vehicle lifetime does reduce the life cycle significance of production

339

energy and emissions 61, obsolete products “can be responsible for higher impacts during the use

340

phase if compared with newer and more efficient products” 114. Older products that are less

341

efficient need to be replaced to reduce environmental burdens 115. Factors that influence a

342

vehicle’s optimal lifetime include technology improvements, vehicle deterioration with age, and

343

regulatory factors such as Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.

344

Extending the service life of a vehicle allows lightweighting benefits to accumulate longer.

345

However, strategies aimed at increasing service life, like treatments to reduce rust or improve

346

adhesion, introduce additional material production, manufacturing, and end-of-life burdens, such

347

as the release of volatile organic compounds and increased energy demand 116,117. For example,

348

aircraft and marine applications of aluminum are common, but higher mechanical strength



349

requirements compared to automotive applications necessitate the use of copper alloys, which

350

reduce corrosion resistance 118. Chromic acid anodizing of aluminum helps to reduce corrosion,

351

but chromates are environmentally toxic, and this tradeoff between strength, corrosion resistance,

352

and the use of toxins must be evaluated 118,119.

353


354

Metrics that can be used to assess progress on Principle 5 include the design life of the part,

355

durability, and remanufacturability. If design life of the part is greater than the design life of the

356

vehicle, then designs with a shorter design life should be considered to reduce unnecessary part

357

production burdens. While durability metrics are not well established, the European Commission

358

Joint Research Centre (JRC) has developed a durability index 114. This extensive approach

359

accounts for reusability / recyclability / recoverability, recycled content, use of relevant

360

resources, use of hazardous substances, and durability. A tool to assess durability is the

361

Goodman diagram, which plots alternating versus mean stress to indicate likelihood of failure

362

34,120.

363

life is to compute changes in life cycle energy or GHG emissions of the vehicle due to one more

364

or one fewer replacement parts.

365

If specific components have longer lifespans than the vehicle, remanufacturing can be considered

366

to reduce resource depletion and extend service life 121. In principle, a remanufacturability credit

367

could be included in vehicle life cycle calculations. Tracking remanufactured parts in the used

368

part marketplace is not an established practice, and uncertainty remains in how credit is applied

369

to the first use of a material 122. This gap in data and analysis method is related to end-of-life

370

allocation issues discussed in Principle 6.

A simpler approach to evaluate the environmental benefit of a part with extended service

371


Page 18 of 59

Page 19 of 59


372

Principle 6: Design for maximum material recovery

373

Select lightweight materials that are recoverable through existing and planned end-of-life

374

infrastructure and do not impede recoverability of other materials. Seek to use materials that

375

have the maximum potential to reduce demand for primary materials upon recovery and

376

minimize down-cycling.

377 378

Lightweight materials often have a complicated end-of-life phase, with issues including

379

incomplete recovery, separation challenges, contamination, and lack of a closed-loop recycling

380

path. For example, in magnesium die-casting operations, typically 50% of the initial material

381

ends up in the part, with a portion of the scrap (dross, chips, and slurry) being too impure for re-

382

melting 123. At vehicle end-of-life, magnesium remains in the nonferrous mix of metals and is

383

often too impure to be recycled 123. Recycling of cast and wrought aluminum parts generally

384

yields a mix of alloys that are currently only suitable for lower performance castings, so primary

385

aluminum is needed for all wrought and sheet applications 90. The use of LW materials in

386

conjunction with more traditional ones in vehicles has also introduced joining and separation

387

issues. For instance, overcasting (or overmolding for composites), in which two materials are

388

brought into contact to form a reaction zone that creates a continuous bond between the two 124,

389

has enabled the use of mixed material construction to reduce the mass of automotive sub-systems

390

such as engine cradles and instrument panel beams 125. Overcasting/molding can present issues at

391

end-of-life, because separating the two materials is not always technically or economically

392

feasible. Adhesive bonding is an alternative method of joining dissimilar materials (i.e., LW

393

metals, composites, and polymers) that reduces corrosion issues and improves impact resistance

394

126,

in addition to increasing BIW torsional rigidity, which improves vehicle performance 127.



395

Disassembly of composites and polymers from metals at end-of-life has been labor intensive and

396

expensive, but innovative disassembly techniques such as thermally or electrically reversible

397

adhesives or functional additives are potential solutions 126,128.

398

Principle 6 asserts that stakeholders should strive to select LW materials that limit these end-of-

399

life challenges as much as possible. Current solutions include designing for manufacturability,

400

recyclability, and durability, which emphasize reducing number of parts, ease of disassembly,

401

and increasing durability 129. Using fewer materials and reducing part count can also be effective

402

130,

403

International and Ford Motor Company, which achieved a 23.5% mass reduction using part

404

consolidation and aluminum substitution 131. Less labor-intensive dismantling can be achieved

405

through modifications to standard designs and several significant policies have promoted the idea

406

of designing for dismantling and reuse, including the European Parliament’s Directive

407

2000/53/EC, which raised the required reuse of vehicle materials to 85% 129,132. Development of

408

new aluminum alloys that better match metal streams and do not require additional processing

409

would help to address some of the current limitations with aluminum end-of-life 91.

410

Improvements in recovery processes and the ensuing improvements in recovered material quality

411

will affect markets for these materials. Ready availability of high-quality and lower cost

412

secondary material could stimulate competition with primary material and result in an overall

413

increase in demand for material.

414


415

Metrics used to assess progress on Principle 6 include % recyclability and % recoverability.

416

Other possible metrics include: the recyclability benefit rate (RBR), a ratio of environmental

417

benefits to the environmental burdens 133; the RBR with an added quality factor, assessed

as demonstrated by the Multi Material Lightweight Vehicle (MMLV), developed by Magna


Page 20 of 59

Page 21 of 59


418

through material properties or economic parameters 114,133; the circular economy performance

419

indicator (CPI), a ratio of the actual waste treatment option’s over the ideal’s environmental

420

benefit 133; remanufacturability 121; and resource longevity indicators, which measure the

421

contribution to material retention 134. Many of these environmental indicators have been

422

developed and used in academic settings to assess material reuse, but few of them are

423

operationalized or used regularly in most industry sectors. This is a gap in end-of-life materials

424

management. Recycling metrics have been used extensively in both the electronics and

425

automotive industries, including disassembly time per product, % recycled material per

426

product, % recycled or diverted from landfill 135–138.

427

Through the use of LCA, OEMs and supply chain component designers can assess the life cycle

428

benefits of LW materials, and weigh them against end-of-life burdens (energy consumed

429

separating LW material from other materials 91). Policies and regulations that advance designing

430

for recoverability as well as research in LW materials recycling should be promoted.

431

Key barriers to better LW material recovery include a lack of cost-effective technologies to

432

separate and sort materials, which leads to a greater reliance on human labor in many emerging

433

economies such as India and China, and the lack of markets for many recovered materials

434

137,139,140.

435

and reprocessing technologies, life cycle analysis tools, new materials, and coatings removal

436

technologies” 141. The Department of Energy (DoE) has recognized that as lightweight and

437

electric vehicles become more prevalent, recycling will become more challenging. DoE initiated

438

research into the effects of recycling regulations and reviewed state-of-the-art recycling

439

technologies, in addition to developing and testing new recycling technologies 137,139. DoE also

440

facilitated a 2008 workshop between automotive companies, metals suppliers and recyclers,

Reclamation of automobile shredder residue (ASR) requires identification of “sortation



441

national laboratories, and academia to identify R&D needs for improving future vehicle

442

recycling, which established future priorities 137. These included developing technologies to

443

remove detrimental impurities, creating more recycling-compatible aluminum alloys, and

444

establishing a cost-effective recycling technology for ASR.

445

Other gaps include the lack of closed-loop recycling infrastructure for many LW materials such

446

as composites 142 and plastics 143, operational metrics for assessing end-of-life recovery, and a

447

standardized end-of-life allocation method for LCA work 61. End-of-life allocation methods tend

448

to either account for burdens when they occur (the recycled content (RC) or cutoff approach) or

449

to assume that recovered materials will offset primary material production and are credited with

450

that offset (the end-of-life recycling (EoLR) or avoided burden approach) 144,145. The RC

451

approach is the more conservative approach, as it captures burdens when they occur in the

452

material life cycle and does not assume recovered material will displace primary material

453

production in the future. Life cycle energy and emissions benefits can vary significantly

454

depending on which approach is used, and the metals industry has advocated for the EoLR

455

approach as it incentivizes recycling 61,146 and can result in lower burdens due to the EoL credit

456

147.

457

material end-of-life 148, and a standardized method would add clarity and simplify quantifying

458

progress on this principle 149. There is also a significant need for research clarifying the

459

economic link between recovered material and primary material, specifically connecting

460

displacement of primary production with recovery of material at end-of-life150 as well as the

461

degree to which recovered material can displace primary material151.

There are many misconceptions around the complex task of evaluating and modeling

462


Page 22 of 59

Page 23 of 59


463

Principle 7: Evaluate tradeoffs between life cycle phases

464

To ensure reduction in overall life cycle impacts, use LCA to quantify changes across life cycle

465

phases and between impact categories due to lightweighting.

466 467

In many instances, tradeoffs between life cycle phases or metrics will occur when implementing

468

a LW component or design. These tradeoffs need to be carefully evaluated so that the option

469

with the lowest environmental impact is selected. Life cycle impact categories that might be of

470

interest or concern (other than energy and GHGs) include resource depletion, ozone depletion,

471

smog formation, and acidification 152, though availability and quality of data related to these

472

impact categories is often an issue. While weighting and normalization techniques exist to select

473

the “optimum” solution when comparing multiple impact categories, their use is controversial

474

and they are listed as optional techniques by ISO due to the subjectivity inherent in weighting

475

and normalization 153.

476

When comparing conventional and LW materials to produce a part, designers need information

477

to compute net life cycle impacts (e.g., energy or GHG emissions) associated with the weight

478

reduction to determine whether use phase fuel savings outweigh any increase in production

479

burdens 22. Data required include original and LW part masses, mass dependence of vehicle fuel

480

consumption both with and without powertrain adaptation (as measured by fuel reduction value –

481

FRV), life cycle impacts of processing original and LW materials and part manufacturing,

482

anticipated changes in part lifetime, difference in maintenance and repair schedules, and end-of-

483

life treatment employed (EoLR vs. RC). The MMLV study discussed in Principle 6 compared

484

life cycle total primary energy (TPE) and global warming potential (GWP) for the 2013 Ford

485

Fusion and MMLV, finding that the lightweight vehicle achieved 16% less TPE and GWP



Page 24 of 59

486

despite an increase in production burdens 154. The net result over all life cycle phases can

487

typically be approximated by the sum of differences in the material production, manufacturing,

488

and use phases of the life cycle. For example, a study evaluating three air intake manifolds

489

determined that the end-of-life burdens contributed very little, while the use phase accounted for

490

at least 60% of life cycle energy 155.

491

Tradeoffs between life cycle phases are influenced by differences in regional fuel mixes. Figure

492

4 compares material production and use GHG emissions for aluminum and high strength steel in

493

different regions of the U.S. 156. In the Midwest region, where coal is still a significant fuel for

494

electricity production, aluminum actually has increased lifetime GHG emissions, which would

495

not have been apparent without a life cycle approach. Variability in life cycle impacts due to

496

geography is also apparent at the global scale 82.

497 Difference in Lifetime GHG Emissions Aluminum vs. Conventional Steel Baseline Nested Average Electricity Allocation Protocol

30% Recycled Al

100 50 0

Combined

150 Material Producion Use Phase

Lifetime Difference in GHG Emissions (kg CO2eq)

200

-50 -100 Pacific Northwest Midwest Aluminum Aluminum

498 499 500

Mid-Atlantic Aluminum

Southeast Aluminum

High Strength Steel

Figure 4: Material production and use phase impacts for aluminum production in various regions of the United States 156

501


502

LCI tools such as GREET, SimaPro, and GaBi are used to assess life cycle tradeoffs. These tools

503

list important metrics such as life cycle energy and GHG emissions, as well as other life cycle


Page 25 of 59


504

indicators. Note that life cycle databases can be incomplete, outdated, or regionally specific.

505

Data on every step in material and part production should ideally be available, but typically are

506

not. Generally, the material production and use phases of the vehicle life cycle are dominant and

507

can be used as a reasonable approximation in assessing tradeoffs. Tradeoffs in cost, performance,

508

and environmental aspects should all be considered, as discussed in Principle 1, and cost/benefit

509

analyses can be used to evaluate these tradeoffs.

510 511

Principle 8: Develop lightweighting applications to maximize benefits

512

Decision-makers seeking to improve environmental performance across the transportation

513

sector should prioritize lightweighting applications that achieve the greatest environmental

514

benefit. Powertrain, mode, fleet distribution of vehicle types, and use-phase energy mix in the

515

deployment market all influence environmental benefit.

516 517

The net benefit of lightweighting will differ based on a variety of factors that influence vehicle

518

fuel consumption (and associated emissions), including powertrain, vehicle mode and duty cycle,

519

the types of vehicles within the operational fleet, and the kind of fuel being used for vehicle

520

operation. The magnitude of savings from lightweighting depends on the vehicle’s powertrain

521

type. Studies of life cycle GHG emissions of conventional and LW versions of an internal

522

combustion engine vehicle (ICEV), a hybrid electric vehicle (HEV), and a battery electric

523

vehicle (BEV) found that the more efficient electrified powertrains (HEV and BEV) result in

524

smaller fuel savings and GHG reductions from lightweighting than ICEVs 157,158.

525

FRV measures the change in fuel consumption for a reduction in mass and is a function of

526

vehicle type and duty cycle 9,10,22,159. Higher FRV implies a larger reduction in fuel consumption



Page 26 of 59

527

for a given change in vehicle mass. Figure 5 below indicates a variety of modal FRVs 15. Class 8

528

trucks are more fuel intensive (i.e., use more fuel to move a kg of cargo a given distance) than

529

rail and ships 160–163, suggesting that trucks should be prioritized for lightweighting. For freight

530

modes, the mass reduced from the vehicle may be added back on as cargo if the vehicle’s mass

531

capacity has not been reached. Life cycle inventory tools can be utilized to understand the

532

implications of lightweighting different modes based on available information, such as modal

533

FRV, how much mass can be reduced from the vehicle, and whether that reduced mass will be

534

replaced with cargo 160,164. Since different modes vary in fleet size and vehicle lifetime, it is

535

important for OEMs to consider fleetwide lightweighting effects 165,166. Even though energy

536

savings from lightweighting a single car are small relative to larger vehicles such as airplanes

537

and ferries, they could collectively realize the greatest total energy savings due to the size of the

538

automobile fleet 164. 1.4 1.2

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2

p hi ta i

sp l

on

-d i

lC

w ig h

-d

sp

Lo

H

ne rS

nk Ta

80 A

-3 8

0-

tT gh ei

er

0F

ra in

s Fr

vy

D

Tr an

sit

Bu

k ut y

y ut M

ed

.D

A

Tr uc

Tr uc

T ve

LD

Ca ve A

k

0.0

r

FRV (gal/100 ton-mi)

1.0

H

539 540

Figure 5: FRVs for transportation vehicles 15

541

Fuel type influences the life cycle impact of lightweighting. A comparison of total fuel cycle

542

burdens of petroleum, biofuel, and natural gas fuels for heavy duty trucks determined that


Page 27 of 59


543

biodiesel and compressed natural gas result in fewer emissions 167. Modes and regions that use

544

dirtier fuels (i.e., more emissions per unit of energy consumed) will experience a greater

545

reduction in emissions than those that use cleaner fuels and so lightweighting will result in the

546

greatest reduction in dirtier regions. Relying on electricity will generally reduce emissions from

547

vehicle operation 168–171, though the fuel mix (and emissions) for electricity generation varies

548

regionally and nationally 172,173. It is possible, if unlikely, that this regional variability could

549

result in higher emissions for EVs than for ICEVs 174,175. FRV, fleet size, fleet turnover, and fuel

550

type all need to be considered to ensure the most effective lightweighting strategy is deployed.

551


552

Metrics that can be used to assess progress towards maximum lightweighting benefits include

553

life cycle indicators (energy, GHG emissions, etc.) and FRV. Another physics-based approach to

554

assessing the effect of mass reduction on fuel consumption is mass-induced fuel consumption

555

(MIF) 13. MIF allocates total vehicle fuel consumption to mass by calculating mass-related

556

energy use over total energy use 13,176. Useful tools include ANL’s GREET Fleet Footprint

557

Calculator, which estimates the petroleum consumed and greenhouse gases emitted by fleets of

558

medium- and heavy-duty vehicles 177. While calculators for other modes are not currently

559

available, GREET can be used to estimate fleet wide impacts by scaling up available individual

560

vehicle values 29. ANL’s AFLEET Tool, based on GREET data, allows a determination of the

561

environmental costs and benefits of alternative fuel at the fleet scale 178, and the GREET VISION

562

Model 179 incorporates market penetration of advanced vehicles and alternative fuels. ANL’s

563

POLARIS tool models large-scale transportation systems and can reflect lightweighting benefits

564

at a fleetwide scale 180. Fleet size data by mode are not always available, which is a gap in

565

assessing progress on Principle 8. Regional and national GHG reduction policy would likely



566

promote lightweighting 160. Fuel economy regulations, such as CAFE standards in the U.S., do

567

promote lightweighting 181,182 but focus primarily on the use phase.

568 569

Principle 9: Identify broader system opportunities

570

Evaluate additional benefits resulting from component and vehicle lightweighting, including

571

secondary mass savings and resized and alternative powertrains. Identify and characterize

572

system-level benefits and costs of lighter vehicles (e.g., transportation infrastructure, vehicle

573

miles traveled (VMT) rebound effect) to provide guidance toward enhanced environmental

574

sustainability.

575 576

Vehicle lightweighting can result in additional benefits, such as secondary mass savings (SMS)

577

and powertrain adaptation and resizing 20,183–186. The size and mass of some vehicle components

578

are driven by the mass of others 183, so lightweighting one component can result in

579

lightweighting of other components. The total mass reduction in these other components is

580

known as secondary mass savings. Depending on when mass savings are identified and the

581

flexibility in altering vehicle design, it may be possible to achieve more than a kilogram of SMS

582

per kilogram of primary mass reduction 185,187, though there is a lack of agreement in the

583

literature related to the potential of SMS 188. Powertrain adaptation is another technique

584

employed in conjunction with vehicle lightweighting. Taking mass off a vehicle alters the

585

vehicle’s performance, and powertrains are often adjusted to restore the vehicle to original

586

performance, resulting in improved fuel efficiency 22,61,176,189. While powertrain adaptation is

587

promising for additional mass reduction and is recognized as significant in life cycle assessments

588

of lightweighting 61, guidelines for it do not currently exist. A manufacturer may decide to


Page 28 of 59

Page 29 of 59


589

reduce the mass of a vehicle, but if powertrains are designed without considering lightweighting

590

decisions for the full range of vehicles that will use them, then the potential benefits of SMS will

591

not be realized.

592

VMT rebound is also a potential consequence of vehicle lightweighting. Increased fuel

593

efficiency enables an increase in vehicle miles driven due to reduced fuel cost per mile. It is also

594

important to identify the potential consequences of lightweighting at the transportation system

595

level. There is a direct relationship between vehicle weight, pavement design (thickness and

596

construction and maintenance cost), and road damage 190. Lightweighting vehicles could reduce

597

damage to roads, but only if the reduced mass is not added back as additional cargo, resulting in

598

the same gross vehicle weight.

599

Another potential consequence of widespread adoption of lightweighting is a shift in demand for

600

(and cost of) materials. For materials with many non-vehicular uses (e.g., steel and aluminum),

601

these shifts may not be catastrophic for producers, but the threats and opportunities presented by

602

such a shift could be large for manufacturers of materials without many other uses. These are not

603

strictly environmental issues, but environmental effects could be assessed with a consequential

604

life cycle analysis, which is intended to evaluate systemic changes like large-scale shifts in

605

material flows and VMT rebound mentioned above.

606


607

Total vehicle mass reduction, as well as fuel economy improvements both with and without

608

powertrain adaptation, can be used to understand the overall effects of lightweighting measures

609

183.

610

adaptation on infrastructure and rebound effects. Quantified and credible fuel consumption

611

reductions resulting from lightweighting can inform policy makers concerned with these two

Gaps include challenges in isolating and quantifying the effects of SMS and powertrain



612

effects on environmental and cost drivers. There is a need to identify and understand the life

613

cycle consequences of vehicle mass on road infrastructure and maintenance and repair to fully

614

quantify lightweighting benefits 191.

615 616

Principle 10: Develop and implement policies to advance life cycle environmental

617

performance

618

Implement holistic policies that support the adoption of materials, technologies, and strategies

619

that lead to better environmental outcomes and avoid shifting burden across life cycle phases.

620 621

Legislation has been recognized as a useful strategy to influence the behavior of industry 96,192.

622

Rebitzer et al. 193 have advocated LCA in policymaking, though this would require

623

manufacturers to provide reliable certification data for compliance. The U.S. EPA light-duty

624

GHG regulation is an example of policy to improve use-phase environmental performance,

625

though it does not account for other life cycle phases. European vehicle recycling targets, while

626

focused on end-of-life, will require design, material, and recycling technology changes 194.

627

Adopting a life cycle approach helps stakeholders across the entire life cycle be better

628

environmental stewards. Legislation and funding can influence the technologies that are

629

researched, developed, and deployed. Policy is an important tool in steering attention to modes

630

and strategies that have the greatest aggregate impact on improving environmental performance.

631

Figure 6 plots total energy consumed by transportation mode in the U.S. in 2015, and shows that

632

light duty vehicles (i.e., cars and light duty trucks) present the greatest opportunity for system-

633

wide fuel consumption reduction due to the large number of these vehicles. The overall potential

634

for energy savings resulting from vehicle lightweighting is significant, given that roughly half


Page 30 of 59

Page 31 of 59


635

the energy spent in wheeled transportation vehicles and the majority of energy used in aircraft is

636

used to move vehicle mass 15 and that 28 Quads (29.5 EJ) were used for U.S. transportation in

637

2016 195. A 20% reduction in vehicle mass is estimated to reduce U.S. fleet fuel consumption in

638

cars 0.52 EJ, light duty trucks 0.55 EJ, medium and heavy-duty trucks 0.28 EJ, airplanes 0.18 EJ,

639

and buses and rail 0.03 EJ - totaling 1.56 EJ, approximately a 5% use phase energy savings 15. Air Rail Buses HDT MDT LDT1 Cars 0

2

4

6

8

10

Energy (EJ)

640

Friction_Accessories

Drag_friction_Accessories

Due to current vehicle mass

Energy saved due to weight reduction

641

Figure 6: Energy use by mode upon 20% reduction of vehicle mass (based on FRVs from 15)

642

To capture this opportunity, policy focused on lightweighting cars and light duty trucks (beyond

643

CAFE) could be prioritized and expanded. Internal industry policies can also be effective. There

644

have been individual as well as joint initiatives amongst industry stakeholders to adopt LCA to

645

guide decision-making 138,189,196,197, including those highlighting the benefits of a LW aluminum

646

pick-up truck 198.

647


648

It is a significant challenge to measure policy effectiveness directly. Metrics that can be used to

649

assess progress on Principle 10 include number of life cycle policies currently implemented and

650

metrics that measure improvement in life cycle indicators over time (e.g., fleet fuel economy,

651

mass fraction of vehicle recovered at end-of-life, amount of primary material production



652

avoided, energy intensity of materials used). Tools that can be used to characterize impacts at the

653

fleet scale include the GREET VISION model and Autonomie’s POLARIS. While there has

654

been a recognition by industry and the EPA that burdens from production and end-of-life phases

655

will likely make up a more significant share of total burdens as use-phase regulations become

656

more stringent 199, there are currently no policies addressing this issue. Other gaps include lack

657

of modal life cycle data, policies that address life cycle burdens and material recovery, and

658

industry adoption of policies.

659 660

Discussion

661

Sets of principles focused on environmental performance (i.e., green principles39,46,47) vary in

662

their generality, and some sets include both general and specific principles. Green engineering

663

principles39 are more broadly applicable, and the vehicle lightweighting principles presented here

664

are tailored to this application. Some of the examples and applications presented above are quite

665

general (e.g., the material efficiency of additive manufacturing applies to all parts produced with

666

that technology and not only vehicle parts) and some are more specific to vehicle lightweighting

667

(e.g., the tradeoff between reducing use phase burdens through lightweighting and increasing

668

material production and manufacturing burdens).

669

Green lightweighting principles synthesize models, metrics, and frameworks used to quantify

670

environmental performance 61, and they provide guidance for stakeholders (including designers,

671

manufacturers, suppliers, policy-makers, and researchers) to evaluate tradeoffs and make

672

decisions. Tradeoffs can be resolved best where complete life cycle inventory data exist for

673

lightweight materials, but principles can also provide guidance in early, less well-defined, or

674

more prospective situations when full LCAs are more difficult to conduct reliably. Pursuing each


Page 32 of 59

Page 33 of 59


675

of these principles individually can lead to enhanced environmental performance, but they are

676

intended to be a holistic set and should be used together to evaluate the inevitable tradeoffs,

677

between life cycle phases and between impact categories, that arise when pursuing a vehicle

678

lightweighting effort.

679

Current practice is to prioritize economic and vehicle performance requirements when

680

considering the design, manufacture, deployment, operation, and retirement of vehicle systems,

681

and the manufacturing and use phases dominate decision-making. These green lightweighting

682

principles raise awareness and promote the consideration of broader perspectives by those who

683

are seeking to improve life cycle environmental performance across life cycle phases, and across

684

scales from individual parts and materials to the larger transportation system.

685 686

Acknowledgments

687

This work was directly supported by LIFT, operated by ALMMII (American Lightweight

688

Materials Manufacturing Innovation Institute), which is sponsored by the U.S. Navy’s Office of

689

Naval Research through cooperative agreement number N00014-14-2-002 issued by the

690

Department of Defense. We thank Cheryl Caffrey and Kevin Bolon at the USEPA National

691

Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory for their valuable comments.

692



693

(1)

IEA. Transport Energy Efficiency; 2010.

694

(2)

EPA; NHTSA. 2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas

695

Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. In Federal Register; 2012;

696

Vol. 77.

697

(3)

Ford Motor Company. Sustainability Report 2016/2017; 2017.

698

(4)

Cheah, L.; Heywood, J. Meeting U.S. Passenger Vehicle Fuel Economy Standards in 2016

699

and Beyond. Energy Policy 2011, 39 (1), 454–466.

700

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.10.027

701

(5)

Century. 2006, 31 (April), 336–343.

702 703

Taub, A. I. Automotive Materials : Technology Trends and Challenges in the 21st

(6)

Kasseris, E. P.; Heywood, J. B. Comparative Analysis of Automotive Powertrain Choices

704

for the Next 25 Years. Soc. Automot. Eng. Int. 2007, No. 2007-01-1605, 776-0790.

705

https://doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-1605

706

(7)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6979-6

707 708

(8)

Mackenzie, D.; Heywood, J.; Zoepf, S. Determinants of US Passenger Car Weight. Int. J. Veh. Des. 2014, 65 (1), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVD.2014.060066

709 710

Sperling, D.; Cannon, J. S. Reducing Climate Impacts in the Transportation Sector; 2009.

(9)

Kim, H. C.; Wallington, T. J. Life-Cycle Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emission Benefits

711

of Lightweighting in Automobiles: Review and Harmonization. Environ. Sci. Technol.

712

2013, 47 (12), 6089–6097. https://doi.org/10.1021/es3042115

713

(10)

Koffler, C.; Rohde-Brandenburger, K. On the Calculation of Fuel Savings through

714

Lightweight Design in Automotive Life Cycle Assessments. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

715

2010, 15 (1), 128–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0127-z


Page 34 of 59

Page 35 of 59

716


(11)

Helms, H.; Lambrecht, U. L. The Potential Contribution of Light-Weighting to Reduce

717

Transport Energy Consumption. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2007, 12, 58–64.

718

https://doi.org/DOI 10.1065/lca2006.07.258

719

(12)

1995.

720 721

Sullivan, J. L.; Hu, J. Life Cycle Energy Analysis for Automobiles. SAE Pap. 951829

(13)

Kim, H. C.; Wallington, T. J. Life Cycle Assessment of Vehicle Lightweighting: A

722

Physics-Based Model of Mass-Induced Fuel Consumption. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013,

723

47 (24), 14358–14366. https://doi.org/10.1021/es402954w

724

(14)

381–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/001075197182199

725 726

Ross, M. Fuel Efficiency and the Physics of Automobiles. Contemp. Phys. 1997, 38 (6),

(15)

Sullivan, J. L.; Lewis, G. M.; Keoleian, G. A. Effect of Mass on Multimodal Fuel

727

Consumption in Moving People and Freight in the U.S. Transp. Res. Part D Transp.

728

Environ. 2018, 63, 786–808. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.06.019

729

(16)

Sovran, G.; Blaser, D. Quantifying the Potential Impacts of Regenerative Braking on a

730

Vehicle ’ s Tractive-Fuel Consumption for the U . S ., European , and Japanese Driving

731

Schedules. SAE Tech. Pap. Ser. 2006, 1 (2006-1–664). https://doi.org/10.4271/2006-01-

732

0664

733

(17)

Caffrey, C.; Bolon, K.; Kolwich, G.; Johnston, R.; Shaw, T. Cost-Effectiveness of a

734

Lightweight Design for 2020-2025: An Assessment of a Light-Duty Pickup Truck; SAE

735

Technical Paper; SAE 2015-01-0559; 2015. https://doi.org/doi:10.4271/2015-01-0559

736

(18)

Ricardo AEA. The Potential for Mass Reduction of Passenger Cars and Light Commercial

737

Vehicles in Relation to Future CO2 Regulatory Requirements. Rep. Eur. Comm. – DG

738

Clim. Action. Ref. CLIMA.C.2/FRA/2013/0006/SR1 2015, No. 3.



739

(19)

Caffrey, C.; Bolon, K.; Harris, H.; Kolwich, G.; Johnston, R.; Shaw, T. Cost-Effectiveness

740

of a Lightweight Design for 2017-2020: An Assessment of a Midsize Crossover Utility

741

Vehicle; SAE Technical Paper; SAE 2013-01-0656; 2013. https://doi.org/doi:

742

10.4271/2013-01-0656

743

(20)

Lutsey, N. Review of Technical Literature and Trends Related to Automobile Mass-

744

Reduction Technology. Inst. Transp. Stud. 2010, 1 (3), 1–40. https://doi.org/UCD-ITS-

745

RR-10-10,

746

(21)

Requirements and Gaps for Lightweight and Propulsion Materials; 2013.

747 748

Vehicle Technologies Office. Workshop Report: Light-Duty Vehicles Technical

(22)

Kelly, J. C.; Sullivan, J. L.; Burnham, A.; Elgowainy, A. Impacts of Vehicle Weight

749

Reduction via Material Substitution on Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Environ.

750

Sci. Technol. 2015, 49 (20), 12535–12542. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03192

751

(23)

2009, 9 (3), 45–48.

752 753

Fras, E.; Gorny, M. Thin Wall Austempered Ductile Iron ( TWADI ). Arch. Foundry Eng.

(24)

Eisuke, N.; Koichi, A.; Tatsuya, F.; Sadato, H. Some Basic Research for Thin-Wall

754

Casting Technology. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1997, 63 (1–3), 779–783.

755

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(96)02723-9

756

(25)

Iron Castings. Trans. Am. Foundry Soc. 2005, 113 (05-), 1–10.

757 758

Labrecque, C.; Gagné, M. Optimizing the Mechanical Properties of Thin-Wall Ductile

(26)

Labrecque, C.; Gagné, M.; Javaid, A.; Sahoo, M. Production and Properties of Thin-Wall

759

Ductile Iron Castings. Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 2003, 16 (1–3), 313–317.

760

https://doi.org/10.1080/13640461.2003.11819601

761

(27)

Jhaveri, K.; Lewis, G. M.; Sullivan, J. L.; Keoleian, G. A. Life Cycle Assessment of Thin-


Page 36 of 59

Page 37 of 59


762

Wall Ductile Cast Iron for Automotive Lightweighting Applications. Sustain. Mater.

763

Technol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2018.01.002

764

(28)

U.S. EPA; U.S. DOE; CARB. Appendix to Draft Technical Assessment Report: Midterm

765

Evaluation of Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate

766

Average Fuel Economy Standards for Model Years 2022-2025; 2016; Vol. 1.

767

https://doi.org/420d16900

768

(29)

https://greet.es.anl.gov.

769 770

Argonne National Laboratory. GREET Vehicle-Cycle Model - GREET2_2017 version

(30)

Mayyas, A. T.; Qattawi, A.; Mayyas, A. R.; Omar, M. A. Life Cycle Assessment-Based

771

Selection for a Sustainable Lightweight Body-in-White Design. Energy 2012, 39 (1), 412–

772

425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.12.033

773

(31)

Eng. Conf. Virginia Tech 2001, 1–6.

774 775

Kampe, S. l. Incorporating Green Engineering in Materials Selection and Design. Green

(32)

Allione, C.; De Giorgi, C.; Lerma, B.; Petruccelli, L. From Ecodesign Products Guidelines

776

to Materials Guidelines for a Sustainable Product. Qualitative and Quantitative

777

Multicriteria Environmental Profile of a Material. Energy 2012, 39 (1), 90–99.

778

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.08.055

779

(33)

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-3069(97)00049-6

780 781

(34)

784

Kim, J.; Yoon, H.; Lee, S.; Lee, W.; Shin, K.; Shi, U. Durability Evaluation of the Composite Bogie Frame Under Different Shapes and Loading Conditions. Structure 1–5.

782 783

Jambor, A.; Beyer, M. New Cars — New Materials. Mater. Des. 1997, 18, 203–209.

(35)

SETAC. A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle Assessment: Workshop Report. In Proceedings of the workshop held Aug 18-23, 1990 in Smuggler’s Notch, VT; Fava, J. A.,



785

Ed.; Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry: Smuggler’s Notch, VT, 1990; p

786

134 pp.

787

(36)

and Framework. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva 2006.

788 789

ISO. ISO 14040:2006 Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles

(37)

ISO. ISO 14025:2006 Environmental Labels and Declarations - Type III Environmental

790

Declarations - Principles and Procedures. International Organization for Standardization:

791

Geneva 2006.

792

(38)

Press, 1998.

793 794

(39)

Anastas, P. T.; Zimmerman, J. B. Design through the 12 Principles of Green Engineering. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37 (5), 94A–101A. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1021/es032373g

795 796

Anastas, P. T.; Warner, J. C. Green Chemistry: Theory and Practice; Oxford University

(40)

Abraham, M. A.; Nguyen, N. “Green Engineering: Defining the Principles” - Results from

797

the Sandestin Conference. Environ. Prog. 2003, 22 (4), 233–236.

798

https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.670220410

799

(41)

Hunter, S.; Helling, R.; Shiang, D. Integration of LCA and Life-Cycle Thinking within the

800

Themes of Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering. In Life Cycle Assessment Handbook: A

801

Guide for Environmentally Sustainable Products; 2012.

802

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118528372.ch17

803

(42)

Hunter, S. E.; Helling, R. K. A Call for Technology Developers to Apply Life Cycle and

804

Market Perspectives When Assessing the Potential Environmental Impacts of Chemical

805

Technology Projects. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2015, 54 (16), 4003–4010.

806

https://doi.org/10.1021/ie504102h

807

(43)

Helling, R. Driving Innovation through Life-Cycle Thinking. Clean Technol. Environ.


Page 38 of 59

Page 39 of 59


Policy 2015, 17 (7), 1769–1779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0928-7

808 809

(44)

Shonnard, D. R.; Kicherer, A.; Saling, P. Industrial Applications Using BASF Eco-

810

Efficiency Analysis: Perspectives on Green Engineering Principles. Environ. Sci. Technol.

811

2003, 37 (23), 5340–5348. https://doi.org/10.1021/es034462z

812

(45)

Saling, P.; Kicherer, A.; Dittrich-Krämer, B.; Wittlinger, R.; Zombik, W.; Schmidt, I.;

813

Schrott, W.; Schmidt, S. Eco-Efficiency Analysis by BASF: The Method. Int. J. Life

814

Cycle Assess. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978875

815

(46)

60. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

816 817

McDonough, W. The Hannover Principles: Design for Sustainability. World’s Fair 1992,

(47)

Arbabzadeh, M.; Johnson, J. X.; Keoleian, G. A.; Rasmussen, P. G.; Thompson, L. T.

818

Twelve Principles for Green Energy Storage in Grid Applications. Environ. Sci. Technol.

819

2016, 50 (2), 1046–1055. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03867

820

(48)

Arenas, L. F.; Ponce de León, C.; Walsh, F. C. Engineering Aspects of the Design,

821

Construction and Performance of Modular Redox Flow Batteries for Energy Storage. J.

822

Energy Storage 2017, 11, 119–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2017.02.007

823

(49)

Richa, K.; Babbitt, C. W.; Gaustad, G. Eco-Efficiency Analysis of a Lithium-Ion Battery

824

Waste Hierarchy Inspired by Circular Economy. J. Ind. Ecol. 2017.

825

https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12607

826

(50)

Giudice, F.; La Rosa, G.; Risitano, A. Materials Selection in the Life-Cycle Design

827

Process: A Method to Integrate Mechanical and Environmental Performances in Optimal

828

Choice. Mater. Des. 2005, 26 (1), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2004.04.006

829 830

(51)

Kaspar, J.; Vielhaber, M. Sustainable Lightweight Design - Relevance and Impact on the Product Development & Lifecycle Process. Procedia Manuf. 2017, 8 (October 2016),



409–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.02.052

831 832

(52)

Luk, J. M.; Kim, H. C.; De Kleine, R.; Wallington, T. J.; MacLean, H. L. Review of the

833

Fuel Saving, Life Cycle GHG Emission, and Ownership Cost Impacts of Lightweighting

834

Vehicles with Different Powertrains. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51 (15), 8215–8228.

835

https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b00909

836

(53)

Cole, G. S. Issues That Influence Magnesium’s Use in the Automotive Industry. Mater.

837

Sci. Forum 2003, 419–422, 43–50. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.419-

838

422.43

839

(54)

Aghion, E.; Bronfin, B. Magnesium Alloys Development towards the 21st Century.

840

Mater. Sci. Forum 2000, 350–351, 19–30.

841

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.350-351.19

842

(55)

Song, G.-L. Corrosion Behavior and Prevention Strategies for Magnesium (Mg) Alloys. In

843

Corrosion prevention of magnesium alloys; Song, G.-L., Ed.; Woodhead Publishing

844

Limited: Cambridge, 2013; pp 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857098962.1.3

845

(56)

Kleiner, M.; Geiger, M.; Klaus, A. Manufacturing of Lightweight Components by Metal

846

Forming. CIRP Ann. - Manuf. Technol. 2003, 52 (2), 521–542.

847

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60202-9

848

(57)

Beyene, A. T.; Koricho, E. G.; Belingardi, G.; Martorana, B. Design and Manufacturing

849

Issues in the Development of Lightweight Solution for a Vehicle Frontal Bumper.

850

Procedia Eng. 2014, 88, 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.11.129

851

(58)

Prod. Technol. 1995, 10 (1–2). https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMPT.1995.036437

852 853

Sun, Z. Joining Dissimilar Material Combinations: Materials and Processes. Int. J. Mater.

(59)

Ashby, M. F. Multi-Objective Optimization in Material Design and Selection. Acta Mater.


Page 40 of 59

Page 41 of 59


2000, 48 (1), 359–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(99)00304-3

854 855

(60)

Ashby, M. Material and Process Selection Charts. 2010.

856

(61)

Hottle, T.; Caffrey, C.; McDonald, J.; Dodder, R. Critical Factors Affecting Life Cycle

857

Assessments of Material Choice for Vehicle Mass Reduction. Transp. Res. Part D Transp.

858

Environ. 2017, 56 (August), 241–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.08.010

859

(62)

Sverdrup, H. U.; Ragnarsdottir, K. V.; Koca, D. Aluminium for the Future: Modelling the

860

Global Production, Market Supply, Demand, Price and Long Term Development of the

861

Global Reserves. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 103, 139–154.

862

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.06.008

863

(63)

Ziiang, Z.; Jiang, G.; Wang, X.; Ziiang, J. Development and Utilization of the World’s

864

and China’s Bulk Mineral Resources and Their Supply and Demand Situation in the Next

865

Twenty Years. ACTA Geol. Sin. 2016, 90 (4), 1370–1417.

866

(64)

Peters, J. F.; Weil, M. A Critical Assessment of the Resource Depletion Potential of

867

Current and Future Lithium-Ion Batteries. Resources 2016, 5 (46).

868

https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/resources5040046

869

(65)

Alonso, E.; Gregory, J.; Field, F.; Kirchain, R. Material Availability and the Supply

870

Chain: Risks, Effects, and Responses. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41 (19), 6649–6656.

871

https://doi.org/10.1021/es070159c

872

(66)

No. May, 1–54.

873 874

(67)

Tahil, W. The Trouble with Lithium: Implications of Future PHEV Production for Lithium Demand. Meridian Int. Res. 2006, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.33.10.396a

875 876

Tahil, W. The Trouble with Lithium 2: Under the Microscope. Meridian Int. Res. 2008,

(68)

Larcher, D.; Tarascon, J. M. Towards Greener and More Sustainable Batteries for



877

Electrical Energy Storage. Nat. Chem. 2015, 7 (1), 19–29.

878

https://doi.org/10.1038/nchem.2085

879

(69)

Energy Environ. Sci. 2011, 4 (9), 3287. https://doi.org/10.1039/c1ee01388b

880 881

Scrosati, B.; Hassoun, J.; Sun, Y.-K. Lithium-Ion Batteries. A Look into the Future.

(70)

Gaines, L.; Nelson, P. Lithium ‐ Ion Batteries : Possible Materials Issues. Scenario 2009, No. January 2009, 1–16.

882 883

(71)

U.S. Geological Survey. Mineral Commodity Summaries - Magnesium Metal; 2018.

884

(72)

Urbance, R. J.; Field, F.; Kirchain, R.; Roth, R.; Clark, J. P. Market Model Simulation:

885

The Impact of Increased Automotive Interest in Magnesium. Jom 2002, 54 (8), 25–33.

886

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02711863

887

(73)

Alonso, E.; Sherman, A. M.; Wallington, T. J.; Everson, M. P.; Field, F. R.; Roth, R.;

888

Kirchain, R. E. Evaluating Rare Earth Element Availability: A Case with Revolutionary

889

Demand from Clean Technologies. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46 (6), 3406–3414.

890

https://doi.org/10.1021/es203518d

891

(74)

Allwood, J. M.; Ashby, M. F.; Gutowski, T. G.; Worrell, E. Material Efficiency: A White

892

Paper. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55 (3), 362–381.

893


894

(75)

Sverdrup, H. U.; Ragnarsdottir, K. V.; Koca, D. An Assessment of Metal Supply

895

Sustainability as an Input to Policy: Security of Supply Extraction Rates, Stocks-in-Use,

896

Recycling, and Risk of Scarcity. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 359–372.

897

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.085

898 899

(76)

Clift, R.; Wright, L. Relationships between Environmental Impacts and Added Value along the Supply Chain. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2000, 65 (3), 281–295.


Page 42 of 59

Page 43 of 59


https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(99)00055-4

900 901

(77)

Selection. J. Mech. Des. 2004, 126 (5), 798. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1767821

902 903

(78)

Halada, K.; Ijima, K.; Yagi, K. Database for MLCA (Materials Environmental Life Cycle Analysis). ASTM Spec. Tech. Publ. 1997, 1311, 171–188.

904 905

Fitch, P. E.; Smith Cooper, J. Life Cycle Energy Analysis as a Method for Material

(79)

Azapagic, A. Developing a Framework for Sustainable Development Indicators for the

906

Mining and Minerals Industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2004, 12 (6), 639–662.

907

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(03)00075-1

908

(80)

EIA. Energy Use in Industry - Energy Explained, Your Guide To Understanding Energy

909

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=us_energy_industry (accessed Jul

910

19, 2018).

911

(81)

Colett, J. S.; Kelly, J. C.; Keoleian, G. A. Using Nested Average Electricity Allocation

912

Protocols to Characterize Electrical Grids in Life Cycle Assessment. J. Ind. Ecol. 2016, 20

913

(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12268

914

(82)

McMillan, C. A.; Keoleian, G. A. Not All Primary Aluminium Is Created Equal: Life

915

Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from 1990 to 2005. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43 (5),

916

1571–1577.

917

(83)

Benavides, P. T.; Dai, Q.; Sullivan, J. L.; Kelly, J. C.; Dunn, J. B. Material and Energy

918

Flows Associated with Select Metals in GREET 2. Molybdenum, Platinum, Zinc, Nickel,

919

Silicon; Argonne, IL, 2015. https://doi.org/doi:10.2172/1224976

920

(84)

Cui, J.; Roven, H. J. Recycling of Automotive Aluminum. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc.

921

China (English Ed. 2010, 20 (11), 2057–2063. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-

922

6326(09)60417-9



923

(85)

Amini, S. H.; Remmerswaal, J. A. M.; Castro, M. B.; Reuter, M. A. Quantifying the

924

Quality Loss and Resource Efficiency of Recycling by Means of Exergy Analysis. J.

925

Clean. Prod. 2007, 15 (10), 907–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.01.010

926

(86)

McMillan, C. A.; Skerlos, S. J.; Keoleian, G. A. Evaluation of the Metals Industry’s

927

Position on Recycling and Its Implications for Environmental Emissions. J. Ind. Ecol.

928

2012, 16 (3), 324–333. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00483.x

929

(87)

2002, 54 (2), 51–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02701075

930 931

Hanko, G.; Antrekowitsch, H.; Ebner, P. Recycling Automotive Magnesium Scrap. Jom

(88)

Coulter, S.; Bras, B.; Winslow, G.; Yester, S. Designing for Material Separation: Lessons

932

From Automotive Recycling. Proc. 1996 ASME Des. Eng. Tech. Conf. Comput. Eng.

933

Conf. 1996, 120 (September), 267–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-3069(99)00003-5

934

(89)

Paraskevas, D.; Kellens, K.; Dewulf, W.; Duflou, J. R. Environmental Modelling of

935

Aluminium Recycling: A Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Sustainable Metal

936

Management. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 105, 357–370.

937


938

(90)

Nakajima, K.; Takeda, O.; Miki, T.; Matsubae, K.; Nakamura, S.; Nagasaka, T.

939

Thermodynamic Analysis of Contamination by Alloying Elements in Aluminum

940

Recycling. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44 (14), 5594–5600.

941

https://doi.org/10.1021/es9038769

942

(91)

Limited, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1533/9781845697822.2.309

943 944 945

Das, S. Recycling and Life Cycle Issues for Lightweight Vehicles; Woodhead Publishing

(92)

Probst, L.; Frideres, L.; Cambier, B.; Solberg, S. Sustainable Supply of Raw Materials; 2016.


Page 44 of 59

Page 45 of 59

946


(93)

Ecol. Econ. 2010, 70 (2), 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.09.006

947 948

(94)

Asmatulu, E.; Overcash, M.; Twomey, J. Recycling of Aircraft: State of the Art in 2011. J. Ind. Eng. 2013, 2013, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/960581

949 950

Demaria, F. Shipbreaking at Alang-Sosiya (India): An Ecological Distribution Conflict.

(95)

Kokubu, K.; Kitada, H. Material Flow Cost Accounting and Existing Management

951

Perspectives. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 108, 1279–1288.

952

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2014.08.037

953

(96)

Bey, N.; Hauschild, M. Z.; McAloone, T. C. Drivers and Barriers for Implementation of

954

Environmental Strategies in Manufacturing Companies. CIRP Ann. 2013, 62 (1), 43–46.

955

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CIRP.2013.03.001

956

(97)

Almeida, C. M. V. .; Bonilla, S. H.; Giannetti, B. F.; Huisingh, D. Cleaner Production

957

Initiatives and Challenges for a Sustainable World: An Introduction to This Special

958

Volume. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 47, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2013.03.010

959

(98)

Fysikopoulos, A.; Anagnostakis, D.; Salonitis, K.; Chryssolouris, G. An Empirical Study

960

of the Energy Consumption in Automotive Assembly. Procedia CIRP 2012, 3 (1), 477–

961

482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2012.07.082

962

(99)

Kim, H.-J.; Keoleian, G. A.; Skerlos, S. J. Economic Assessment of Greenhouse Gas

963

Emissions Reduction by Vehicle Lightweighting Using Aluminum and High-Strength

964

Steel. J. Ind. Ecol. 2011, 15 (1), 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2010.00288.x

965

(100) Huang, R.; Riddle, M.; Graziano, D.; Warren, J.; Das, S.; Nimbalkar, S.; Cresko, J.;

966

Masanet, E. Energy and Emissions Saving Potential of Additive Manufacturing: The Case

967

of Lightweight Aircraft Components. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 135, 1559–1570.

968




969

(101) Mellor, S.; Hao, L.; Zhang, D. Additive Manufacturing: A Framework for

970

Implementation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2014, 149, 194–201.

971

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJPE.2013.07.008

972 973 974

(102) The Economist. Solid print https://www.economist.com/node/21552892 (accessed Jun 7, 2018). (103) Atzeni, E.; Salmi, A. Economics of Additive Manufacturing for End-Usable Metal Parts.

975

Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2012, 62 (9–12), 1147–1155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-

976

011-3878-1

977

(104) Azzone, G.; Noci, G. Identifying Effective PMSs for the Deployment of “Green”

978

Manufacturing Strategies. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 1998, 18 (4), 308–335.

979

https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579810199711

980

(105) Carruth, M. A.; Allwood, J. M.; Moynihan, M. C. The Technical Potential for Reducing

981

Metal Requirements through Lightweight Product Design. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011,

982

57, 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.09.018

983

(106) Lanzerath, H.; Tragsdorf, C. Body Lightweight Design and Scalability with Structural

984

Foam Solutions. SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. 2013, 6 (2), 232–241.

985

https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-0669

986

(107) Joshi, A. M.; Ezzat, H.; Bucknor, N.; Verbrugge, M. Optimizing Battery Sizing and

987

Vehicle Lightweighting for an Extended Range Electric Vehicle. SAE Int. 2011.

988

https://doi.org/10.4271/2011-01-1078

989

(108) Brecher, A.; Brewer, J.; Summers, S.; Patel, S. Characterizing and Enhancing the Safety

990

of Future Plastic and Composite Intensive Vehicles (PCIVs). 21st Int. Tech. Conf.

991

Enhanc. Saf. Veh. 2009, 1–9.


Page 46 of 59

Page 47 of 59

992


(109) Banhart, J.; Berlin, H.; Heim, K.; Seeliger, H.; Gmbh, P. M. Light-Weighting in

993

Transportation and Defence Using Aluminium Foam Sandwich Structures. 2017, No.

994

November, 1–10.

995

(110) Mario, H.; Dietrich, W.; Gfrerrer, A.; Lang, J. Integrated Computer-Aided Design in

996

Automotive Development: Development Processes, Geometric Fundamentals, Methods of

997

CAD, Knowledge-Based Engineering Data Management; Springer: Berlin Heidelberg,

998

2013; Vol. 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-11940-8

999

(111) Birchmeier, J. E.; Smith, K. V. Optimization of a Light Truck Rough Road Durability

1000

Procedure Using Fatigue Analysis Methology. SAE Tech. Pap. 1982, 187–195.

1001

https://doi.org/https://doi-org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/10.4271/820693

1002 1003 1004

(112) Tivey, C. J. The Utilization of Fatigue Life Prediction Techniques in Support of a Majaor Vehicle Project. Proc Instn Mech Engrs 1986, 200. (113) Schäfer, A.; Jacoby, H. D. Vehicle Technology under CO2 Constraint: A General

1005

Equilibrium Analysis. Energy Policy 2006, 34 (9), 975–985.

1006


1007

(114) Ardente, F.; Mathieux, F. Integration of Resource Efficiency and Waste Management

1008

Criteria in European Product Policies - Second Phase - Report 3; 2012.

1009

https://doi.org/10.2788/72577

1010

(115) Kim, H. C.; Keoleian, G. A.; Grande, D. E.; Bean, J. C. Life Cycle Optimization of

1011

Automobile Replacement: Model and Application. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37 (23),

1012

5407–5413. https://doi.org/10.1021/es0345221

1013 1014

(116) Prendi, L.; Henshaw, P.; Tam, E. K. L. Automotive Coatings with Improved Environmental Performance. Int. J. Environ. Stud. 2006, 63 (4), 463–471.



1015 1016

https://doi.org/10.1080/00207230600802098 (117) Garcia-Alonso, D.; Serres, N.; Demian, C.; Costil, S.; Langlade, C.; Coddet, C. Pre-

1017

/during-/Post-Laser Processes to Enhance the Adhesion and Mechanical Properties of

1018

Thermal-Sprayed Coatings with a Reduced Environmental Impact. J. Therm. Spray

1019

Technol. 2011, 20 (4), 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-011-9629-x

1020

(118) Mubarok, M. Z.; Wahab; Sutarno; Wahyudi, S. Effects of Anodizing Parameters in

1021

Tartaric-Sulphuric Acid on Coating Thickness and Corrosion Resistance of Al 2024 T3

1022

Alloy. J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng. 2015, 03 (03), 154–163.

1023

https://doi.org/10.4236/jmmce.2015.33018

1024

(119) Harscoet, E.; Froelich, D. Use of LCA to Evaluate the Environmental Benefits of

1025

Substituting Chromic Acid Anodizing (CAA). J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16 (12), 1294–1305.

1026


1027

(120) Nicholas, T.; Zuiker, J. R. On the Use of the Goodman Diagram for High Cycle Fatigue

1028

Design. Int. J. Fract. 1989, 80 (2), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00012670

1029

(121) Amezquita, T.; Hammond, R.; Salazar, M.; Bras, B. Characterizing the

1030

Remanufacturability of Engineering Systems. Proc. ASME Adv. Des. Autom. Conf. DE-

1031

vol. 82, Sept. 17–20 1995, No. 1993, 271–278.

1032

(122) Smith, V. M.; Keoleian, G. A. The Value of Remanufactured Engines: Life-Cycle

1033

Environmental and Economic Perspectives. J. Ind. Ecol. 2004, 8 (1–2), 193–221.

1034

https://doi.org/10.1162/1088198041269463

1035

(123) Witik, R. A.; Payet, J.; Michaud, V.; Ludwig, C.; Manson, J.-A. E. Assessing the Life

1036

Cycle Costs and Environmental Performance of Lightweight Materials in Automobile

1037

Applications. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2011, 42 (11), 1694–1709.


Page 48 of 59

Page 49 of 59

1038 1039


https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.07.024 (124) Liu, T.; Wang, Q. D.; Liu, P.; Sun, J. W.; Yin, X. L.; Wang, Q. G. Microstructure and

1040

Mechanical Properties of Overcast Aluminum Joints. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China

1041

(English Ed. 2015, 25 (4), 1064–1072. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-6326(15)63699-8

1042 1043

(125) Luo, A. A.; Sachdev, A. K.; Powell, B. R. Advanced Casting Technologies for Lightweight Automotive Applications. China Foundry 2010, 7 (4), 463–469.

1044

(126) Lu, Y.; Broughton, J.; Winfield, P. A Review of Innovations in Disbonding Techniques

1045

for Repair and Recycling of Automotive Vehicles. Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 2014, 50, 119–

1046

127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.01.021

1047

(127) Feraboli, P.; Masini, A. Development of Carbon/Epoxy Structural Components for a High

1048

Performance Vehicle. Compos. Part B Eng. 2004, 35 (4), 323–330.

1049

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2003.11.010

1050

(128) Luo, X.; Lauber, K. E.; Mather, P. T. A Thermally Responsive, Rigid, and Reversible

1051

Adhesive. Polymer (Guildf). 2010, 51 (5), 1169–1175.

1052

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2010.01.006

1053

(129) Mayyas, A.; Qattawi, A.; Omar, M.; Shan, D. Design for Sustainability in Automotive

1054

Industry: A Comprehensive Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16 (4), 1845–

1055

1862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.012

1056

(130) McAuley, J. W. Global Sustainability and Key Needs in Future Automotive Design.

1057

Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37 (23), 5414–5416. https://doi.org/10.1021/es030521x

1058

(131) Conklin, J.; Beals, R.; Brown, Z. BIW Design and CAE MMLV Lightweight Body in

1059

White Structure Multi Material Lightweight Vehicle ( MMLV ). SAE Int. 2015.

1060

https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-0408.Copyright



1061

(132) Tian, J.; Chen, M. Sustainable Design for Automotive Products: Dismantling and

1062

Recycling of End-of-Life Vehicles. Waste Manag. 2014, 34 (2), 458–467.

1063

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.11.005

1064

(133) Huysman, S.; De Schaepmeester, J.; Ragaert, K.; Dewulf, J.; De Meester, S. Performance

1065

Indicators for a Circular Economy: A Case Study on Post-Industrial Plastic Waste.

1066

Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 120, 46–54.

1067


1068

(134) Franklin-Johnson, E.; Figge, F.; Canning, L. Resource Duration as a Managerial Indicator

1069

for Circular Economy Performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 133, 589–598.

1070


1071

(135) Atlee, J.; Kirchain, R. Operational Sustainability Metrics Assessing Metric Effectiveness

1072

in the Context of Electronics-Recycling Systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40 (14),

1073

4506–4513. https://doi.org/10.1021/es050935l

1074

(136) Keoleian, G. A.; Sullivan, J. L. Materials Challenges and Opportunities for Enhancing the

1075

Sustainability of Automobiles. MRS Bull. 2012, 37 (04), 365–373.

1076

https://doi.org/10.1557/mrs.2012.52

1077 1078 1079

(137) Jody, B. J.; Daniels, E. J. End-of-Life Vehicle Recycling: The State of the Art of Resource Recovery from Shredder Residue; 2010. https://doi.org/ANL/ESD/10-8 (138) Sullivan, J. L.; Williams, R.; Yester, S.; Coba-Flores, E.; Chubbs, S.; Hentches, S.;

1080

Pomper, S. Life Cycle Inventory of a Generic U.S. Family Sedan Overview of Results

1081

USCAR AMP Project - 982160. In Total Life Cycle Conference and Exposition; SAE

1082

International: Graz, Austria, 1998. https://doi.org/10.4271/982160

1083

(139) Daniels, E. J.; Carpenter, J. A.; Duranceau, C.; Fisher, M.; Wheeler, C.; Winslow, G.


Page 50 of 59

Page 51 of 59


1084

Sustainable End-of-Life Vehicle Recycling: R&D Collaboration between Industry and the

1085

U.S. DOE. JOM 2004, 56 (8), 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-004-0177-4

1086 1087 1088

(140) Reck, B. K.; Graedel, T. E. Challenges in Metal Recycling. Science (80-. ). 2012, 337 (6095), 690–695. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1217501 (141) Gutowski, T. G.; Allen, D. T.; Bauer, D. J.; Bras, B.; Piwonka, T. S.; Sheng, P. S.;

1089

Sutherland, J. W.; Thurston, D. L.; Wolff, E. E.; Shelton, R. D.; et al.

1090

ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN MANUFACTURING. 2001.

1091

(142) Palmer, J.; Ghita, O. R.; Savage, L.; Evans, K. E. Successful Closed-Loop Recycling of

1092

Thermoset Composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2009, 40 (4), 490–498.

1093

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2009.02.002

1094

(143) Hopewell, J.; Dvorak, R.; Kosior, E. Plastics Recycling: Challenges and Opportunities.

1095

Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2009, 364 (1526), 2115–2126.

1096

https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0311

1097

(144) Frischknecht, R. LCI Modelling Approaches Applied on Recycling of Materials in View

1098

of Environmental Sustainability, Risk Perception and Eco-Efficiency. Int. J. Life Cycle

1099

Assess. 2010, 15 (7), 666–671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-010-0201-6

1100

(145) Geyer, R. Parametric Assessment of Climate Change Impacts of Automotive Material

1101

Substitution. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42 (18), 6973–6979.

1102

https://doi.org/10.1021/es800314w

1103

(146) Johnson, J. X.; McMillan, C. A.; Keoleian, G. A. Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment

1104

Recycling Allocation Methods. J. Ind. Ecol. 2013, 17 (5), 700–711.

1105

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12050

1106

(147) Santero, N.; Hendry, J. Harmonization of LCA Methodologies for the Metal and Mining



1107

Industry. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2016, 21, 1543–1553. https://doi.org/DOI

1108

10.1007/s11367-015-1022-4

1109 1110 1111

(148) Geyer, R.; Kuczenski, B.; Zink, T.; Henderson, A. Common Misconceptions about Recycling. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 20 (5), 1010–1017. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12355 (149) Koffler, C.; Finkbeiner, M. Are We Still Keeping It “Real”? Proposing a Revised

1112

Paradigm for Recycling Credits in Attributional Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle

1113

Assess. 2018, 23 (1), 181–190.

1114

(150) Vadenbo, C.; Hellweg, S.; Astrup, T. F. Let’s Be Clear(Er) about Substitution: A

1115

Reporting Framework to Account for Product Displacement in Life Cycle Assessment. J.

1116

Ind. Ecol. 2017, 21 (5), 1078–1089.

1117 1118 1119 1120

(151) Palazzo, J.; Roland Geyer; Startz, R.; Steigerwald, D. G. Causal Inference for Quantifying Displaced Primary Production from Recycling. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 210, 1076–1084. (152) Lee, K.-M.; Inaba, A. Life Cycle Assessment: Best Practices of International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14040 Series. 2004, No. February, 99.

1121

(153) Schmidt, W.-P.; Sullivan, J. Weighting in Life Cycle Assessments in a Global Context.

1122

Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2002, 7 (1), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978904

1123

(154) Bushi, L.; Skszek, T.; Wagner, D. Comparative LCA Study of Lightweight Auto Parts of

1124

MMLV Mach-I Vehicle as per ISO 14040/44 LCA Standards and CSA Group 2014 LCA

1125

Guidance Document for Auto Parts; Fergus, J. W., Mishra, B., Anderson, D., Sarver, E.

1126

A., Neelameggham, N. R., Eds.; 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48138-8_19

1127

(155) Keoleian, G. A.; Kar, K. Elucidating Complex Design and Management Tradeoffs through

1128

Life Cycle Design: Air Intake Manifold Demonstration Project. J. Clean. Prod. 2003, 11

1129

(1), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00004-5


Page 52 of 59

Page 53 of 59

1130


(156) Colett, J. S. Impacts of Geographic Variation on Aluminum Lightweighted Plug-in Hybrid

1131

Electric Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions, University of Michigan, 2013.

1132

(157) Luk, J. M.; Kim, H. C.; De Kleine, R.; Wallington, T. J.; MacLean, H. L. Impact of

1133

Powertrain Type on Potential Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions from a

1134

Real World Lightweight Glider. 2017. https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-01-1274

1135

(158) Luk, J. M.; Kim, H. C.; De Kleine, R.; Wallington, T. J.; MacLean, H. L. Greenhouse Gas

1136

Emission Benefits of Vehicle Lightweighting: Monte Carlo Probabilistic Analysis of the

1137

Multi Material Lightweight Vehicle Glider. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2018,

1138

62, 1–10. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.02.006

1139

(159) Del Pero, F.; Delogu, M.; Pierini, M. The Effect of Lightweighting in Automotive LCA

1140

Perspective: Estimation of Mass-Induced Fuel Consumption Reduction for Gasoline

1141

Turbocharged Vehicles. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 154, 566–577.

1142


1143

(160) Nahlik, M. J.; Kaehr, A. T.; Chester, M. V.; Horvath, A.; Taptich, M. N. Goods

1144

Movement Life Cycle Assessment for Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals. J. Ind. Ecol.

1145

2016, 20 (2), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12277

1146 1147 1148

(161) Facanha, C.; Horvath, A. Environmental Assessment of Freight Transportation in the U.S. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2006, 11 (4), 229–239. (162) Winebrake, J. J.; Corbett, J. J.; Falzarano, A.; Hawker, J. S.; Korfmacher, K.; Ketha, S.;

1149

Zilora, S. Assessing Energy, Environmental, and Economic Tradeoffs in Intermodal

1150

Freight Transportation. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2008, 58 (8), 1004–1013.

1151

https://doi.org/10.3155/1047-3289.58.8.1004

1152

(163) Comer, B.; Corbett, J. J.; Hawker, J. S.; Korfmacher, K.; Lee, E. E.; Prokop, C.;



1153

Winebrake, J. J. Marine Vessels as Substitutes for Heavy-Duty Trucks in Great Lakes

1154

Freight Transportation. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 2010, 60 (7), 884–890.

1155

https://doi.org/10.3155/1047-3289.60.7.884

1156 1157

(164) Helms, H.; Lambrecht, U. The Potential Contribution of Light-Weighting to Reduce Transport Energy Consumption. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2007, 12 (Special Issue), 58–64.

1158

(165) Bandivadekar, A.; Cheah, L.; Evans, C.; Groode, T.; Heywood, J.; Kasseris, E.; Kromer,

1159

M.; Weiss, M. Reducing the Fuel Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the US Vehicle

1160

Fleet. Energy Policy 2008, 36 (7), 2754–2760.

1161

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.03.029

1162

(166) Das, S.; Graziano, D.; Upadhyayula, V. K. K.; Masanet, E.; Riddle, M.; Cresko, J. Vehicle

1163

Lightweighting Energy Use Impacts in U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet. Sustain. Mater.

1164

Technol. 2016, 8, 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2016.04.001

1165

(167) Meyer, P. E.; Green, E. H.; Corbett, J. J.; Mas, C.; Winebrake, J. J. Total Fuel-Cycle

1166

Analysis of Heavy-Duty Vehicles Using Biofuels and Natural Gas-Based Alternative

1167

Fuels. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 2011, 61 (3), 285–294. https://doi.org/10.3155/1047-

1168

3289.61.3.285

1169

(168) Ou, X.; Yan, X.; Zhang, X.; Liu, Z. Life-Cycle Analysis on Energy Consumption and

1170

GHG Emission Intensities of Alternative Vehicle Fuels in China. Appl. Energy 2012, 90

1171

(1), 218–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.03.032

1172

(169) Singh, B.; Ellingsen, L. A. W.; Strømman, A. H. Pathways for GHG Emission Reduction

1173

in Norwegian Road Transport Sector: Perspective on Consumption of Passenger Car

1174

Transport and Electricity Mix. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2015, 41, 160–164.

1175

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.09.028


Page 54 of 59

Page 55 of 59

1176 1177


(170) Song, Q.; Wu, Y.; Li, J.; Wang, Z.; Yu, D.; Duan, H. Well-to-Wheel GHG Emissions and Mitigation Potential from Light-Duty Vehicles in Macau. 2017.

1178

(171) Sioshansi, R.; Fagiani, R.; Marano, V. Cost and Emissions Impacts of Plug-in Hybrid

1179

Vehicles on the Ohio Power System. Energy Policy 2010, 38 (11), 6703–6712.

1180


1181

(172) Orsi, F.; Muratori, M.; Rocco, M.; Colombo, E.; Rizzoni, G. A Multi-Dimensional Well-

1182

to-Wheels Analysis of Passenger Vehicles in Different Regions: Primary Energy

1183

Consumption, CO2emissions, and Economic Cost. Appl. Energy 2016, 169, 197–209.

1184

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.02.039

1185

(173) Woo, J. R.; Choi, H.; Ahn, J. Well-to-Wheel Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions for

1186

Electric Vehicles Based on Electricity Generation Mix: A Global Perspective. Transp.

1187

Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2017, 51, 340–350.

1188

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.01.005

1189

(174) Hawkins, T. R.; Singh, B.; Majeau-Bettez, G.; Strømman, A. H. Comparative

1190

Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and Electric Vehicles. J. Ind. Ecol.

1191

2013, 17 (1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00532.x

1192

(175) Archsmith, J.; Kendall, A.; Rapson, D. From Cradle to Junkyard: Assessing the Life Cycle

1193

Greenhouse Gas Benefits of Electric Vehicles. Res. Transp. Econ. 2015, 52, 72–90.

1194

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2015.10.007

1195

(176) Kim, H. C.; Wallington, T. J.; Sullivan, J. L.; Keoleian, G. A. Life Cycle Assessment of

1196

Vehicle Lightweighting: Novel Mathematical Methods to Estimate Use-Phase Fuel

1197

Consumption. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49 (16), 10209–10216.

1198

https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01655



1199

(177) Argonne National Laboratory. GREET Fleet - Carbon and Petroleum Footprint Calculator.

1200

(178) Argonne National Laboratory. AFLEET Tool https://greet.es.anl.gov/afleet (accessed Mar

1201 1202 1203

20, 2018). (179) Argonne National Laboratory. VISION Model https://www.anl.gov/energysystems/project/vision-model.

1204

(180) Argonne National Laboratory. Autonomie - Expertise\POLARIS.

1205

(181) Bastani, P.; Heywood, J. B.; Hope, C. Us Cafe Standards. 2012, No. January, 2016–2025.

1206

(182) Tucker, R. Trends in Automotive Lightweighting. Met. Finish. 2013, 111 (2), 23–25.

1207 1208

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0026-0576(13)70158-2 (183) Alonso, E.; Lee, T. M.; Bjelkengren, C.; Roth, R.; Kirchain, R. E. Evaluating the Potential

1209

for Secondary Mass Savings in Vehicle Lightweighting. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46

1210

(5), 2893–2901. https://doi.org/10.1021/es202938m

1211

(184) Koffler, C. Life Cycle Assessment of Automotive Lightweighting through Polymers under

1212

US Boundary Conditions. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2013, 19 (3), 538–545.

1213

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0652-7

1214

(185) Verbrugge, M.; Lee, T.; Krajewski, P.; Sachdev, A.; Bjelkengren, C.; Roth, R.; Kirchain,

1215

R. Mass Decompounding and Vehicle Lightweighting. Mater. Sci. Forum 2009, 618–619,

1216

411–418. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.618-619.411

1217

(186) Office of Transportation and Air Quality; EPA; National Highway Traffic Safety

1218

Administration; Department of Transportation; California Air Resources Board. Draft

1219

Technical Assessment Report: Midterm Evaluation of Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas

1220

Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards for Model Years

1221

2022-2025 (EPA-420-D-16-900, July 2016); 2016.


Page 56 of 59

Page 57 of 59

1222 1223 1224


(187) Malen, D. E.; Reddy, K. Preliminary Vehicle Mass Estimation Using Empirical Subsystem Influence Coefficients. Auto/Steel Partnersh. 2007. (188) Raugei, M.; Morrey, D.; Hutchinson, A.; Winfield, P. A Coherent Life Cycle Assessment

1225

of a Range of Lightweighting Strategies for Compact Vehicles. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 108,

1226

1168–1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.100

1227

(189) Kim, H. C.; Wallington, T. J. Life Cycle Assessment of Vehicle Lightweighting: A

1228

Physics-Based Model to Estimate Use-Phase Fuel Consumption of Electrified Vehicles.

1229

Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50 (20), 11226–11233.

1230

https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b02059

1231

(190) Batelle. Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight (TS&W) Study: Phase 1 - Synthesis; 1995.

1232

(191) Wilde, W. J. Assessing the Effects of Heavy Vehicles on Local Roadways. Cent. Transp.

1233 1234

Res. Implement. 2014, No. August. (192) Williamson, D.; Lynch-Wood, G.; Ramsay, J. Drivers of Environmental Behaviour in

1235

Manufacturing SMEs and the Implications for CSR. J. Bus. Ethics 2006, 67 (3), 317–330.

1236

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9187-1

1237

(193) Rebitzer, G.; Ekvall, T.; Frischknecht, R.; Hunkeler, D.; Norris, G.; Rydberg, T.; Schmidt,

1238

W.-P. P.; Suh, S.; Weidema, B. P.; Pennington, D. W. Life Cycle Assessment Part 1:

1239

Framework, Goal and Scope Definition, Inventory Analysis, and Applications. Environ.

1240

Int. 2004, 30 (5), 701–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2003.11.005

1241 1242 1243 1244

(194) Kanari, N.; Pineau, J.-L.; Shallari, S. End-of-Life Vehicle Recycling in European Union. JOM 2003, 55 (8), 15–19. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1007/s11837-003-0098-7 (195) EIA. U.S. energy flow, 2017 https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/flow/total_energy.pdf (accessed Sep



1245

21, 2018).

1246

(196) Ridge, L. EUCAR - Automotive LCA Guidelines - Phase 2. SAE Tech. Pap. Ser. 1998.

1247

(197) Schmidt, W.-P.; Dahlqvist, E.; Finkbeiner, M.; Krinke, S.; Lazzari, S.; Oschmann, D.;

1248

Pichon, S.; Thiel, C. Life Cycle Assessment of Lightweight and End-of-Life Scenarios for

1249

Generic Compact Class Passenger Vehicles. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2004, 9 (6), 405–

1250

416. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02979084

1251

(198) De Kleine, R.; Smith, J.; Kim, H. C.; Wallington, T. Life Cycle Energy Demand and

1252

Greenhouse Gas Savings from Pickup Truck Lightweighting. In Life cycle energy demand

1253

and greenhouse gas savings from pickup truck lightweighting; ISIE-ISSST 2017: Science

1254

in Support of Sustainable and Resilient Communities, 2017.

1255 1256

(199) EPA, U. S. 2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards: EPA Response to Comments; 2012.

1257


Page 58 of 59

Max Use aluate nv Page 59UsEnvironmental of Science &EvTechnology e E 59 Material Secondary , LC C able on

Ec h, Tec Env nce a orm f r Pe

fer Pre rials Mate

t lec m Se timu g Op Mf h c Te

Recovery

Materials

Don’t ign Overdes

Dev & Imp Env Policies

Trade o

ffs

Ap ho LW ps t ose Be o M ne ax fits

I Op Sys D po tem rtu nit ies

ACS Paragon Plus Environment Mat’l Prod & Mfg

Use

Broader System

EoL

Green Principles for Vehicle Lightweighting - American Chemical

Recommend Documents