The aim of this research is to use a cradle to gate life cycle assessment to determine the propor... more The aim of this research is to use a cradle to gate life cycle assessment to determine the proportion of the life cycle impacts that are attributable to the aluminium components within a piece of street furniture. This will be accomplished through the use of LCA on carefully selected publicly available aluminium-specific life cycle inventory data and primary data from a bus shelter fabrication facility in South Wales, UK. Aluminium makes up exactly 61% of the mass of a shelter but split into extrusion (57%) and sheets (4%). Steel and glass life cycle data were also included along with factors for extraction, energy use in producing alumina and smelting/electrolysis, some transport and the metal working operations in the fabrication facility. Transport of secondary aluminium components to the fabrication facility was not included because of availability of these data. Aluminium contributed the greatest part of the environmental burden of a particular bus shelter, the Principle, due to the use of fossil fuels within the life cycle of that aluminium; aluminium extrusion alone contributed 61% of the normalised environmental impact. The next greatest environmental impact is due to the metal working machine operations onsite, at 26.6% of the environmental impact. Chinese aluminium was slightly better environmentally due to 5% better energy efficiency in the smelting stage (IAI 2013), which represents the majority of the energy in manufacturing aluminium (using c14MWh electricity per tonne aluminium ingot produced out of a total of 15.16MWh electricity in the whole production from bauxite). This was not however a significant improvement and it is thought that these may be negated if transport from secondary production facility had been included. The magnitude of the assessment is affected by the electricity factors selected; a sensitivity analysis found that impacts varied considerably when different electricity factors were chosen. Future work would involve the inclusion of a reasonable transport element, which would likely balance out the seemingly better Chinese option when shipping materials to Europe is factored in.
The aim of this research is to use a cradle to gate life cycle assessment to determine the propor... more The aim of this research is to use a cradle to gate life cycle assessment to determine the proportion of the life cycle impacts that are attributable to the aluminium components within a piece of street furniture. This will be accomplished through the use of LCA on carefully selected publicly available aluminium-specific life cycle inventory data and primary data from a bus shelter fabrication facility in South Wales, UK. Aluminium makes up exactly 61% of the mass of a shelter but split into extrusion (57%) and sheets (4%). Steel and glass life cycle data were also included along with factors for extraction, energy use in producing alumina and smelting/electrolysis, some transport and the metal working operations in the fabrication facility. Transport of secondary aluminium components to the fabrication facility was not included because of availability of these data. Aluminium contributed the greatest part of the environmental burden of a particular bus shelter, the Principle, due to the use of fossil fuels within the life cycle of that aluminium; aluminium extrusion alone contributed 61% of the normalised environmental impact. The next greatest environmental impact is due to the metal working machine operations onsite, at 26.6% of the environmental impact. Chinese aluminium was slightly better environmentally due to 5% better energy efficiency in the smelting stage (IAI 2013), which represents the majority of the energy in manufacturing aluminium (using c14MWh electricity per tonne aluminium ingot produced out of a total of 15.16MWh electricity in the whole production from bauxite). This was not however a significant improvement and it is thought that these may be negated if transport from secondary production facility had been included. The magnitude of the assessment is affected by the electricity factors selected; a sensitivity analysis found that impacts varied considerably when different electricity factors were chosen. Future work would involve the inclusion of a reasonable transport element, which would likely balance out the seemingly better Chinese option when shipping materials to Europe is factored in.
Uploads
Thesis Chapters
Aluminium contributed the greatest part of the environmental burden of a particular bus shelter, the Principle, due to the use of fossil fuels within the life cycle of that aluminium; aluminium extrusion alone contributed 61% of the normalised environmental impact. The next greatest environmental impact is due to the metal working machine operations onsite, at 26.6% of the environmental impact. Chinese aluminium was slightly better environmentally due to 5% better energy efficiency in the smelting stage (IAI 2013), which represents the majority of the energy in manufacturing aluminium (using c14MWh electricity per tonne aluminium ingot produced out of a total of 15.16MWh electricity in the whole production from bauxite). This was not however a significant improvement and it is thought that these may be negated if transport from secondary production facility had been included.
The magnitude of the assessment is affected by the electricity factors selected; a sensitivity analysis found that impacts varied considerably when different electricity factors were chosen.
Future work would involve the inclusion of a reasonable transport element, which would likely balance out the seemingly better Chinese option when shipping materials to Europe is factored in.
Aluminium contributed the greatest part of the environmental burden of a particular bus shelter, the Principle, due to the use of fossil fuels within the life cycle of that aluminium; aluminium extrusion alone contributed 61% of the normalised environmental impact. The next greatest environmental impact is due to the metal working machine operations onsite, at 26.6% of the environmental impact. Chinese aluminium was slightly better environmentally due to 5% better energy efficiency in the smelting stage (IAI 2013), which represents the majority of the energy in manufacturing aluminium (using c14MWh electricity per tonne aluminium ingot produced out of a total of 15.16MWh electricity in the whole production from bauxite). This was not however a significant improvement and it is thought that these may be negated if transport from secondary production facility had been included.
The magnitude of the assessment is affected by the electricity factors selected; a sensitivity analysis found that impacts varied considerably when different electricity factors were chosen.
Future work would involve the inclusion of a reasonable transport element, which would likely balance out the seemingly better Chinese option when shipping materials to Europe is factored in.