MIT’s SourceMap: The Future of Supply Chain Transparency and Accountability?

Sustainable product design – which emphasizes the importance of designing responsibly using eco-friendly materials and minimizing environmental impact – is enough of a challenge for many product designers. It requires a new way of thinking about design – and a new way of measuring a product’s success beyond conventional price/performance metrics.

At the same time, sustainable product design also requires manufacturers to be ever watchful of what may wind up in a product, from a supplier located millions of miles away. Indeed, understanding and addressing the challenges of managing sustainability across the supply chain, as well as across the product lifecycle, is no small feat.

But thanks to MIT’s Leonard Bonanni, the creator of SourceMap, the task of tracking, measuring and, in general, comprehending the environmental impact of a product across its supply chain, is getting easier. Originally conceived as a PhD project, SourceMap offers a user-generated visualization of a product’s supply chain and resultant carbon footprint.

It’s a compelling concept – one that, as a recent article describes it, “represents the future of environmentally friendly consumption, one based on transparency and accountability.” Based on its ability to provide a visual map of a product's supply chain, SourceMap just may accomplish this goal, and provide a guide for companies and consumers that are seeking more sustainable solutions.

As noted in an excerpt from the article, Bonnani’s original mission was to help consumers who wanted to be able to do so, make more sustainable choices:

“Basically,” explained Bonanni, “the idea came from the fact that people want to make sustainable choices, but there’s no place for them to go if they want to investigate products and services.” The site (www.sourcemap.org), then, acts as a “public good mission to teach sustainability and understand supply chains.”

To get the project off the ground, Bonanni and his advisers at MIT’s Center for Future Civic Media, Hiroshi Ishii and Chris Csikszentmihalyi, first focused on breaking down select commodities’ trade routes, which can often be quite convoluted. Electronics, for example, can contain components from over ten countries. Thus, Bonanni and his team started by reverse engineering products to track their origins, often by simply calling companies to find a certain item’s origins. Then, with a trail mapped out, says Bonanni, “I needed to break the problem into environmental impact,” like how much carbon shipping and packing sends in the atmosphere.

Of course Bonanni knew we live in a digital world, and wanted to create a visual guide for an easily distracted public. To that end, he reached out to graphic designer David Zorg, who drew maps laying out a product’s trade route and emissions. Now customers can look at the guide for a Giant TCR ‘04 bicycle, and see its 21 components result in a carbon footprint of 82.01 kg, or Apple’s iPod, which has seven assembly spots, and emits 9.84 kg of carbon along the way.

Three years later, SourceMap, a forthcoming 501(c)3 still funded by MIT grants, has evolved into more than just a research product aimed at consumers. It’s a resource for companies, as well.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in our upcoming research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.”

Do you have what it takes to design sustainable products? Or wish you did? Tell us more. By taking this short survey, you’ll be helping to shed light on this very important – and often highly debated – topic. Whether you’re a sustainability expert or just beginning your journey – your feedback is invaluable.

See also:

Mapping Carbon Emissions, SourceMap Paves Eco-Conscious Markets

Is Sustainability Fundamentally a Materials Problem?

New product design expert, Steven Eppinger would argue that it is. Eppinger, coauthor of the popular textbook, Product Design and Development and a professor of management science and innovation at the MIT Sloan School of Management, takes the view that “the secret [to sustainability] is to focus on materials.”

Why? While manufacturers often tend to focus on the sustainability goals and objectives that they can achieve at the operations level – energy efficiency, waste reduction, water conservation, etc. – there are real opportunities to cut costs, reduce environmental impact, and drive innovation – during the product design phase, according to Eppinger.

As noted in a recent article on the subject, Eppinger offers the following view:

“The way to think of environmental sustainability when it comes to design and product innovation is by framing it as a materials problem. It’s about the materials that we use in the products and the materials that are used to run the processes that make the products. The reason that product design has a big impact is that’s where the materials decisions are made.

If you want to have a product that uses only materials that can be recycled, you’ve got to rethink the product. You’ve got to change the design, which means new specifications and perhaps some difficult technical trade offs to deal with. If you want to use materials that are recycled in the first place instead of always using virgin materials, you’ve got to design the product differently so that can happen. If you want to reduce the use of packaging materials in operations, you’ve got to design the product differently so that it needs less packaging or no packaging; if you want to reduce the use of coatings and finishes, you’ve got to design the product so that it works properly and looks great without coatings and finishes. If you want to sell a product that your consumer can recycle, you’ve got to design the product to be easily disassembled and separated into available recycling streams.”

Ok. So it’s important to make smart design decisions with respect to materials during the product design phase in order to drive innovation and achieve sustainability goals – the question is, how can this be accomplished most easily? Are there capabilities built-in to today’s product design tools to help facilitate smart design decisions with respect to materials? Are there new tools on the horizon?

The short answer is a qualified, “yes.” The tools aren’t quite there yet, but they’re coming. Users can also expect to see a greater emphasis on not only sustainable materials selection but sustainable materials management in next-generation design tools. In fact, Autodesk's recently announced partnership with Granta Design, a organization which offers expertise in materials software, materials data, and materials databases, promises to take product design and development one step closer to this goal.

So, let’s review. As Eppinger summarizes it:

How can environmental concerns drive product design and innovation?

• Frame design and product innovation for environmental sustainability as a materials problem.
• How much material is used is less important than what material is used.
• Don’t try to eliminate environmental impacts all at once. Try to get a little better each time you design a product.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in our upcoming research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.”

Do you have what it takes to design sustainable products? Or wish you did? Tell us more. By taking this short survey, you’ll be helping to shed light on this very important – and often highly debated – topic. Whether you’re a sustainability expert or just beginning your journey – your feedback is invaluable.

See also:

How Sustainability Fuels Design Innovation

Do You Have What It Takes to Design Sustainable Products?

Eco-design Gets a Boost from Autodesk, Granta Partnership

Nike Offers a FREE Gift to Product Designers

No, it’s not free merchandise – but for product designers with an interest in designing with sustainability in mind – it just might be the perfect gift. What is it? A design tool created to help designers make better-informed decisions during the earliest stages of product design – when it matters most.

More specifically, the Environmental Apparel Design Tool reportedly gives each design an overall score, and then allows designers to tweak specific aspects of their work to improve the score, according to Nike. Built over the course of seven years, and at a cost of $6 million, it’s hard to believe that the company is making a version of the tool available for public use – but it is.

And, it’s available here: www.nikebiz.com/responsibility/nikeenvironmentaldesigntool.

Designers can also register for upcoming webinars on the Environmental Apparel Design Tool at: www.nikebiz.com/responsibility/nikeenvironmentaldesigntool.

How does it work? According to a recent article on the subject, designers simply “plug in what materials they're using, how much recycled or organic content they have, any treatments being done, how much waste will be left over from cutting the design out, and some other details, and the tool gives the design a score, which can fall into one of the following categories:  'needs improvement,'  'good,'  'better,'  or  'best.'"  Sounds almost too easy. Then, again, perhaps a great deal of effort was put into the tool in order to make it easy to use. Keep in mind, that by testing the tool out, and providing your feedback, you can make it even easier to use, and more useful.

But it gets even better. In addition to the Environmental Apparel Design Tool, Nike will also be releasing its Footwear Design Tool, Material Assessment Tool and Water Assessment Tool in 2011.

Now, really – what more could you ask for? These tools are free, good for the environment, and developed to help designers create better, more environmentally-friendly products. So, if you’re involved in designing footwear or apparel, go ahead – treat yourself! The Environmental Apparel Design Tool just might be one of the best presents you get this year. It can help you design more sustainable products and help make the world a better place!

Do you have what it takes to design sustainable products? Or wish you did? Tell us more. By taking this short survey, you’ll be helping to shed light on this very important – and often highly debated – topic. Whether you’re a sustainability expert or just beginning your journey – your feedback is invaluable.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in our upcoming research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.”

See also:

Nike Shares Environmental Scoring Tool For Product Design

Nike’s Six Million Environmental Design Tool. Now Yours. For Free.

Do You Have What it Takes to Design Sustainable Products?

Is it difficult to design sustainable products? (And by the way - what qualifies as a sustainable product anyway?) Does it require special tools? Does it involve special training? Will it change the way I design, or require additional steps in the design process? Can I still work with my existing suppliers or will I have to find new ones? And what about the materials or processes that I’m using to manufacture my products – are these sustainable? If not, what are my alternatives? And what’s all this talk about managing our environmental impact by measuring our carbon and water footprint? Or using an LCA (life cycle assessment) to help guide my product design efforts? How does all this impact my work?

If these questions sound familiar, you’re not alone… Today, product designers from across all industry sectors – from footwear and apparel to high tech/electronics and transportation – wrestle with these and other questions in their quest to support sustainability initiatives within their companies. And, right alongside these individuals are corporate sustainability officers, quality, environmental health & safety, compliance, and procurement professionals – who are also being held accountable for certain sustainability goals and objectives. It’s a challenging environment, to say the least.

But what we’d really like to know is - what’s happening in your organization? Is sustainability important? In particular, is it important at the product-level? If so – how is sustainable product design currently being tackled by your product development teams?

Tell us. By taking this short survey, you’ll be helping to shed light on this very important – and often highly debated – topic. Whether you’re a sustainability expert or just beginning your journey – your feedback is invaluable.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in our upcoming research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.”

See also:

Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing: Are We There Yet? (survey)

NOTE: This research study is being conducted by Four Winds Research, an independent market research and analysis firm dedicated to sustainable product design and manufacturing. Our research is focused on identifying the key issues and challenges facing designers and engineers today as they attempt to create sustainable products; understanding how organizations can effectively apply sustainability principles in product design and development both internally and across the supply chain; and the critical role that sustainability metrics, tools, and technologies promise to play in product design and manufacturing in the coming decade.  To learn more, visit our website.

Sustainable Product Design Tools and Technology – Free Webinar

Recently, I had the opportunity to participate as a panelist on a webinar focused on tools for sustainable product design and development. Other panelists included: Lise Laurin, founder, EarthShift; Terry Swack, founder & CEO, Sustainable Minds; and Jørgen Vos, product management director, Life Cycle Analytics, PTC InSight Product Analytics.

Hosted by Cadalyst magazine as part of its new On the Edge webinar series, “The Truth About Environmental Performance Software” attempted to address such questions as:

• Is sustainable design just a passing fad?
• Do the tools available today effectively support the kind of lifecycle thinking required to create innovative, profitable, earth-friendly products?
• To what extent do LCA (life cycle analysis), PLM (product lifecycle management), and environmental compliance tools and technology play a part in supporting sustainable product design and development today?

What was perhaps most compelling to me is that we all agreed that sustainable product development is here to stay - the real question is, what will it take for it to be embraced more widely? As a scientist and true practitioner of life cycle analysis, Earthshift’s Lise Laurin offered valuable insight regarding the evolution of LCA-based thinking, while Sustainable Minds’ Terry Swack emphasized the value of LCA as a diagnostic tool, useful for assisting product designers early in the design process. PTC’s Jørgen Vos offered a unique perspective, as the overseer of both the company’s new lifecycle analytics tool, as well as its more widely known InSight environmental compliance software.

Mostly, however, the discussion centered around what it would take, ultimately, to make sustainable product design more of a standard practice among manufacturers. And, here – the message is clear. In addition to education, communication between such diverse groups as engineering and design, quality, environmental health and safety, and corporate sustainability is key. How that will be accomplished – as well as the tools, technology, and best practices that can be employed to facilitate communication and achieve sustainability objectives – is part of the ongoing debate among practitioners in this area.

Some suggest that sustainability is destined to take much the same path as the quality movement did years ago; some suggest that taking even small steps towards meeting your company’s sustainable product design and development objectives, is what is required. In either case, tools and methodologies like PLM, LCA and environmental compliance are an important part of the solution, but only a part. Overall, a new way of viewing and supporting product design and development is what is truly necessary – one that takes into account both economic objectives and environmental/social impacts.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

On the Edge with Cadalyst #3: “The Truth About Environmental Performance Software” (Replay)

Sustainability: It’s About Having a Beneficial Footprint -- Not Necessarily a Smaller One

In a recent interview, chemist and co-author of the book Cradle-to-Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things, Dr. Michael Braungart offers the view that sustainable design isn’t about minimizing or reducing environmental impact but rather, designing a product that ultimately has a positive environmental footprint.  As noted in the following excerpt:

 “Our traditional thinking is cradle-to-grave—the way many of our current industries still operate. It’s a design paradigm that destroys the planet. With Cradle-to-Cradle thinking, products should be made with quality and beauty. We need to focus on a positive agenda. What is the positive footprint of a product or a service? Look at nature - it’s not just about reducing, avoiding, minimizing - it’s about abundance using the right materials. Nature doesn’t know waste as everything is reused. It is all about reusing and recycling nutrients. This is true both for biological cycles and industrial cycles.” - Dr. Michael Braungart

More conventional views take the stand that sustainability is about reducing environmental impact, using fewer resources, emitting fewer GHG emissions, etc. But is that really the right metric for defining a successful sustainability effort? Braungart would no doubt argue that it isn’t. Why? Because by thinking about polluting less, or being less “bad”, or reducing the degree of damage to the environment or society, the problem is that less damage is still damage. Instead, organizations need to look at the entire product lifecycle and ask, “How can products be designed in such a way as to maximize the environmental, societal, and financial benefits - rather than simply minimize negative impacts?” There’s a big difference.

Currently, companies are primarily focused on such sustainability metrics as: energy efficiency, minimizing carbon and water footprint, and reducing GHG emissions. Instead, what if companies were rated on their ability to design products that were durable, yet easily recycled once no longer in use? Not just made with safety in mind, but with environmentally-beneficial features in mind? What if sustainability was based on the ability to achieve some kind of positive environmental impact – and to achieve the equivalent of some kind of top-line environmental improvement - rather than simply a bottom-line resource reduction/savings?

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

Exclusive Interview with Dr. Michael Braungart

Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: Reporting on “Scope 3” Emissions at the Product-level and Across the Supply Chain

The recently released Carbon Disclosure Project’s 2010 Global 500 Report (pdf), which provides an annual summary of climate reporting by the world's 500 largest companies, offers some important insights on corporations' reporting about climate change and their supply chains according to BSR, a global business network and consultancy focused on sustainability.

One of the most compelling findings for 2010? As noted by BSR in a recent article on the subject, the number of companies reporting on GHG emmissions from their supply chains continues to steadily grow.

As Ryan Schuchard, manager of research and innovation at BSR, observes “Two years ago, only about a quarter of the world's top 500 companies reported on "Scope 3" greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Last year, the reporting share climbed to 42 percent, and this year it grew to nearly half.

“That's a steep change compared to reporting overall, which rose only a few percentage points this year to 82 percent,” notes Schuchard.

But what exactly are “Scope 3” emissions? As BSR describes it, “Scope 3” emissions result from activities that companies have influence over, but are beyond direct ownership or control, such as in supply chains.

More specifically, BSR offers the following “primer” on scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions:

Greenhouse gas emissions are typically divided into three "Scopes" for the purpose of organizational and project management.

The first, Scope 1 emissions, refers to combustion (e.g. from fuels, chemicals, or other materials) that leads to GHG emissions on a company's site or other operations under ownership or control. Scope 2 emissions refer to purchased electricity at a company's site or other operations under ownership or control. Together, Scope 1 and 2 usually can be called "internal" or "operational" emissions.

"Scope 3 emissions" refers to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that a company has influence over, yet which are outside its direct control. Supply chain emissions are one component of this, and there are several others, as described below.

These definitions have been popularized by the GHG Protocol, which is the standard for the business management of GHG emissions. The GHG Protocol is currently revamping its original definition to provide more comprehensive guidance. The results are due in early 2011.

Currently, a good working definition is CDP's, which now has 17 categories of Scope 3 emissions:

2010 – "Scope 3" emissions -- proposed categories (17 categories)

1. S1: purchased goods and services – direct/tier 1 supplier emissions
2. AS: Purchased goods and services – emissions of all upstream suppliers – tier 1 and beyond
3. USP: Use of sold goods and services
4. DSP Disposal of sold products at the end of their life
5. Wa: Waste generated in operations
6. Tr: Business travel
7. EC: Employee commuting and teleworking
8. TSP: Transportation and distribution of sold products including warehousing and retail
9. Oth: Other
10. Eq: Capital Equipment
11. Fr: Frachises (scope 1 emissions of the franchisor)
12. Lr: Leased assets (scope 1 emissions of the lessor)
13. In: Investment (scope 1 emissions of the company receiving investment)
14. Fe: Franchises (scope 1 emissions of the franchisee)
15. Le: Leased assets (scope 1 emissions of the lessee)
16. EA: Energy-related activities not included in scope 2
17. TI: Transportation and distribution of inputs (goods and services) and waste generated in own operations

What’s perhaps most worth noting here is that in addition to more detailed scope 3 emissions reporting guidelines for suppliers, proposed definitions for scope 3 emissions reporting relate to a number of product-specific categories, as well – including: emissions occurring during the product use phase, emissions resulting from disposal of products at end of life, and emissions occurring during transportation and distribution of sold products.

Related to this, the WRI/WBCSD (World Resources Institute/World Business Council on Sustainable Development) GHG Protocol Initiative is currently engaged in developing two new standards that relate specifically to scope 3 emissions and emissions associated with individual products, both due for release in early 2011, as noted above:

• Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard
• Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standards

According to GHG Protocol organizers, these new standards are intended to provide a standardized method to inventory the emissions associated with individual products across their full life cycles and of corporate value chains, taking into account impacts both upstream and downstream of the company’s operations. By taking a comprehensive approach to GHG measurement and management, it is hoped that businesses and policymakers can focus attention on the greatest opportunities to reduce emissions within the full value chain, leading to more sustainable decisions about the products we buy, sell, and produce.

On November 2, 2010, WRI and WBCSD released the second drafts of these two new GHG Protocol standards for public comment. WRI and WBCSD welcome feedback from all interested organizations on these draft standards. To be considered, feedback forms must be completed by Friday, December 3. To learn more, see The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative – Product and Supply Chain Standard.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

The Latest CDP Results Reveal a Rise in Scope 3 Reporting

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 Global 500 Report (pdf)
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative – Product and Supply Chain Standard

Carbon Disclosure Project to Identify Supply Chain ‘Hot Spots’ Using Trucost Data

When it comes to sustainability reporting, one of the greatest challenges for a manufacturer is being able to track and manage carbon emissions across its supply chain.

To address this challenge, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) has partnered with environmental data provider Trucost to enable members of the CDP Supply Chain program to use Trucost’s environmental data to identify their most carbon intensive suppliers for inclusion in the disclosure process.

Large organizations often have a significant problem understanding and managing their total environmental impacts, due to their long and complex supply chains, which can encompass many thousands of suppliers, according to Trucost. Trucost solves this problem by identifying ‘hot spot' suppliers that offer the most potential emissions reduction.

As Richard Mattison, chief operating officer at Trucost states, "we regularly find that just 10% of suppliers will be responsible for around 90% of supply chain environmental impacts. Our data enables organizations to identify their ‘hot spots', even when their suppliers do not disclose data, and efficiently manage their supply chain risks."

The impact of such an initiative could be significant. Earlier this year, more than half (56 percent) of Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) members surveyed said that in the future they would stop doing business with suppliers that do not manage their carbon.

That’s a strong incentive to start tracking carbon emissions.

CDP Supply Chain currently works with 56 of the largest organizations worldwide, including Wal-mart, PepsiCo and IBM, to help them engage with their suppliers to understand risks and opportunities throughout the supply chain.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

Trucost to identify supply chain ‘hot spots’ for Carbon Disclosure Project

Survey: 56% of CDP Members May Cut Out Suppliers Who Don’t Manage Carbon

Recent Study Identifies Sustainability as a Key Competitive Differentiator

It’s one thing to embrace sustainability because it’s “the right thing to do.” It’s quite another to be able to show that sustainability programs can truly help companies achieve a competitive advantage in the marketplace. Yet that's exactly what's happening at some of the world's leading chemical companies today, according to a recent survey of over 200 chemical manufacturers, conducted by consulting firm CSC in partnership with Chemical Week magazine.

As Chuck Deise, vice president and chemical sector lead, CSC explains, “We are seeing a significant shift in the industry to reinvent the corporate sustainability agenda as a major driver of innovation. Leading companies are doing this by developing more eco-friendly products to differentiate the brand which improves top line, and reducing carbon emissions and energy to enhance the bottom line. Sustainability practices not only positively impact the environment and an organization’s public perception; they can create quantifiable competitive advantages.”

The message is clear – these companies are finding that it pays to embrace sustainability. While regulatory compliance has been the primary focus in previous years, the ability to support a much broader sustainability agenda has become a top priority because of the benefits that it can deliver – from sustainability-driven innovation to energy efficiency, cost-savings, and ultimately, revenue-growth.

Moreover, in addition to supporting sustainability initiatives at the enterprise level, many of these companies are also setting aggressive targets to reduce carbon and water in the product development cycle and throughout the supply chain to achieve even greater gains, according to the research.

The question is - how do they do it? In terms of addressing the issue of sustainability at the product-level, the research reveals that a number of key business practices have been adopted by top performers:

1. Utilize LCA (Lifecycle Analysis) to Evaluate Products, assessing their total impact on the environment through customer and consumers, and applying this knowledge to design new products and supply chains to deliver them. “Borealis at this time is assessing its impact along the supply chain via a series of life cycle assessments (LCA) of its products. It will enable us to better manage risk,” says Sylvain Lhôte, EU and Sustainability Affairs/ Strategy and Group Development.

2. Promote Growth in Eco-Premium Branding and Sustainable Products to drive additional revenue and improve the environmental footprint. AkzoNobel has built on its approach (begun about five years ago) of treating sustainability from a position only of risk management, to one of building its future business around sustainable or “ecopremium” products. The company’s risk management activities, include global product stewardship and standards for its suppliers verified by environment, health and safety audits.

3. Measure Supply Chain Sustainability Contribution by establishing criteria for suppliers and holding them accountable for materials and energy performance and specific distribution methods. DuPont has embarked on a program to assess the environmental footprint of its supply chain activities, including its raw materials and the footprint of its customers. Their initial phase involves pilot assessments of certain supply chains and will include water consumption and scarcity in certain areas as well as energy use and GHG emissions. 

4. Incorporate Environmental Conditions in Emerging Markets into Product Design associated with both climate change and the ability to increase food supply globally with minimum impact to the environment. “Dow historically had wanted to be a leader in environmental performance so as to ensure its right to operate. We had always looked at safety of our employees as a priority. Now we have discussions into the business strategy for megatrends such as sustainable energy supply, human health, housing, and water in the emerging world.” David Kepler, II, chief sustainability officer/Dow Chemical.

5. Achieve Carbon and Environmental Footprint Reductions in conjunction with energy savings and incorporate improvements into your products environmental performance and positive carbon financial benefits. Energy management and carbon emissions reduction are the most important factors financially for Borealis when it comes to environmental sustainability by virtue of the energy intensity of the company, the cost of energy, as well as the impending cost of the European Union’s (EU) emissions trading scheme (ETS). The ETS, scheduled for 2013, will oblige major chemical firms in Europe to purchase emissions allowances via public auctions. 

 So what can we learn from these chemical manufacturers? A lot. After all, much of what plagues manufacturers of consumer products, automobiles or high tech electronics when it comes to sustainability is the potential risk posed by the chemicals or substances contained within their products. Indeed, the need for "green chemistry" is at the very heart of the sustainability issue. So, it’s worth paying attention to the sustainability-related “Lessons Learned” by chemical manufacturers in this critical area.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

Sustainability Identified by Chemical Industry as Key Competitive Differentiator

Sustainable R&D (Warner Babcock Institute for Green Chemistry)

Sustainability Reporting at the Product-level Allows Companies to Substantiate ‘Green’ Product Claims

If your organization hasn’t already begun efforts to support sustainability reporting, it might want to start. Especially if it is looking to substantiate ‘green’ product claims – an increasingly important area for manufacturers of products or services that promise eco-friendly or ‘green’ benefits.

As noted in a related article on the subject, Ernst & Young says reporting on “green” product development will provide companies with the opportunity to document the basis for any claims they make. It also will help them collect environmental information about their products as their customers develop supplier sustainability initiatives.

The problem is that the use of terms like ‘green’, 'eco-friendly', or ‘made of 100% recycled materials” can be misleading. To address this growing challenge, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently proposed revisions to its “Green Guides”, including new guidance on marketers’ use of product certifications and seals of approval, “renewable energy” claims, “renewable materials” claims, and “carbon offset” claims.

As noted in the FTC announcement:

The revised Guides caution marketers not to make blanket, general claims that a product is “environmentally friendly” or “eco-friendly” because the FTC’s consumer perception study confirms that such claims are likely to suggest that the product has specific and far-reaching environmental benefits. Very few products, if any, have all the attributes consumers seem to perceive from such claims, making these claims nearly impossible to substantiate.

The proposed Guides also caution marketers not to use unqualified certifications or seals of approval – those that do not specify the basis for the certification. The Guides more prominently state that unqualified product certifications and seals of approval likely constitute general environmental benefit claims, and they advise marketers that the qualifications they apply to certifications or seals should be clear, prominent, and specific.

Next, the proposed revised Guides advise marketers how consumers are likely to understand certain environmental claims, including that a product is degradable, compostable, or “free of” a particular substance. For example, if a marketer claims that a product that is thrown in the trash is “degradable,” it should decompose in a “reasonably short period of time” – no more than one year.

The bottom line? If a product claims to be ‘green’ or ‘eco-friendly’, it better be clear on just exactly what that means, and have the documentation to prove it.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

Federal Trade Commission Proposes Revised “Green Guides”

FTC Green Guides’ Proposed Revisions Unveiled

Seven Questions to Ask about Sustainability Reports

Eco-design Gets a Boost from Autodesk, Granta Partnership

“Better, faster, cheaper…” Sound familiar? For decades now, and even – perhaps centuries – these words have guided product designers and engineers in their quest to deliver the right products to market, gain market share and drive revenue growth.

But, increasingly manufactureres are getting the message -- it's what's inside that counts.

Today, it’s simply not enough to optimize designs in terms of price/performance alone. Instead, such criteria as materials toxicity, energy efficiency, carbon footprint, and water footprint must figure into the equation as well. That’s where sustainable product design – which takes a more holistic approach to product development - can help.

Sustainable product design, however, requires new approaches to educating and equipping the next generation of engineers and designers. Fortunately, we’ve begun to see a rise in both technology to support this effort, and sustainable engineering programs and curriculums in universities and training programs to bridge this gap in understanding.

For example, as part of an effort to help engineers and designers more effectively incorporate sustainable materials during product development, Autodesk recently announced an important new partnership with leading materials information technology provider, Granta Design, Ltd. The goal? To simplify the process for specifying suitable, safe and eco-friendly materials during the product design phase – making it easier for industrial designers, mechanical engineers and others to create products through sustainable design.

According to the announcement, the companies will be working together to integrate Granta’s eco design methods into Autodesk software, helping designers to estimate the environmental impact of a product and make more sustainable design decisions. Ultimately, such technology could prove to be of great value in helping companies to both anticipate and avoid the risks and penalties associated with the use of materials that might later be identified as hazardous or restricted, as well.

Indeed, managing restricted substances during product design has become increasingly important for manufacturers. As noted by Grant Design’s Kim Marshall and David Cebon in a presentation made earlier this year:

Restricted substances legislation, such as the European Union's REACH regulation, create major challenges for engineering enterprises.  They impose stringent compliance and reporting requirements on companies.  They also introduce significant risk of withdrawal of substances and consequent obsolescence of mission-critical materials, ‘preparations’ (coatings, cleaning agents, working fluids, etc) and manufacturing processes that use them.  This can affect current products: where it can necessitate expensive materials substitution and re-qualification of components.  It can also affect the design of future products: where it is essential to avoid using substances that may become obsolete in future.  Shipping products containing banned substances – knowingly or not – can have severe legal and financial consequences for companies and responsible individuals, and can present substantial risk to business continuity.

Earlier this month, Autodesk also introduced the Autodesk Sustainability Workshop , a new online portal that offers free sustainability resources and educational content. Aimed at mechanical engineers and educators, the Autodesk Sustainability Workshop features lessons that illustrate the principles and practice of sustainable design, such as Whole Systems Design and Lightweighting.

As Jeremy Faludi, a lecturer for the Joint Program in Design at Stanford University and collaborator on the Autodesk Sustainability Workshop puts it, “Thinking back five years ago, or even one year ago, mechanical engineering students didn’t have good resources available to think about sustainable design practices.  This Workshop provides students with inspiration, technical depth on implementation, and innovative sustainable design strategies.”

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

To learn more, see:

Autodesk and Granta Partner to Help Enable Sustainable Product Design

Autodesk Introduces Free Sustainability Resources for Engineering Students, Educators

Sustainability Consortium Adopts PE International’s GaBi Tool to Perform LCA

PE Americas recently announced that it has joined The Sustainability Consortium, an independent group of research scientists and engineers dedicated to examining the issues and challenges surrounding sustainable product design and development. Spearheaded by retail giant Walmart in July 2009, one of the early charters identified for the consortium was to define standards and metrics for measuring and reporting on sustainability at the product level – in particular, for manufacturers and suppliers serving the retail market.

“One of the reasons we exist is because existing efforts to measure and report product sustainability have been fragmented and partial, in terms of their scope, the impacts of concern, or the life cycle stage being addressed,” says Dr. Kevin J. Dooley, Co-Director of the Sustainability Consortium. “Our approach seeks to capture all environmental and social impacts across the whole life cycle of a product,” he explains.

The real challenge is that the terms sustainable, environmentally-friendly, eco-friendly and green are often used interchangeably, resulting in a great deal of confusion in the marketplace as to precisely what sustainability means – both for manufacturers and for the consumer community. Ultimately, if the consortium is successful in its mission, it stands to have a significant impact on how consumer products are designed and developed if they are going to be labeled, ‘sustainable.’

One of the key questions? How such an organization might leverage existing commercial tools and methodologies to assist in this effort. With the addition of PE Americas, at least part of the answer is evident.  As Dooley puts it, "PE Americas will help us build a scientifically rigorous system to measure and report the sustainability of consumer products in a standardized manner. Together we will spur a new generation of products and supply networks that address environmental, social, and economic imperatives."

More specifically, the organization states that, “To quantify product impacts, the Sustainability Consortium will be using PE International's GaBi LCA program, a powerful, fully‐featured software platform that supports the collection, organization, analysis, and monitoring of the environmental performance of products and processes.”
 

What this means with respect to the use of other commercially available LCA tools or methodologies is unclear, since the Sustainability Consortium specifically states that it ‘advocates for a scientifically grounded process and transparent system, not for individuals or organizations.’ But it certainly serves as a tribute to both the sustainability consulting expertise of the PE Americas organization, and to the capabilities of PE International’s GaBi product lifecycle assessment tool for measuring product impacts.

See also:

PE Americas Is Now a Member of the Sustainability Consortium

Sustainability will 'Define the Next Wave of Prosperity'

“Sustainable business is not only here to stay, it will ‘define the next wave of prosperity,’ says BSR president and CEO, Aron Cramer.

Author of the new book, Sustainable Excellence: The Future of Business in a Fast-Changing World (Rodale Books, October 2010) Cramer believes that, “the businesses that build social and environmental considerations into the DNA of their companies will survive and thrive in the years to come." Examining this issue in more depth, the book describes how companies are adapting their strategies to meet the challenges of a world characterized by depleting natural resources, climate change, rising consumer expectations, and “radical transparency” and makes the case for embracing sustainability  to drive business success.

The topic is not a new one for Cramer. As noted in an excerpt from a blog post that he shared with Fast Company readers earlier this year:

…many have wondered whether the "green bubble" would burst the same way the tech bubble and the housing bubble did. Would sustainability follow Lehman Brothers into the pages of history, a relic of the good times? As we go into 2010, it's clear that sustainable business is not only here to stay, it will define the next wave of prosperity.

Consider the evidence: The number of sustainability reports--where companies report their performance against social and environmental criteria--continues to increase, according to the Global Reporting Initiative. Sustainability is everywhere on the agenda of the World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, January 27-31, 2010. And nearly nine out of ten business leaders surveyed at our recent BSR Conference said their companies' sustainability budgets would stay the same or increase this year. Suffice to say, the predictions that companies would abandon their commitments to corporate responsibility have not come true, and sustainability is as critical a business imperative as ever.

It's turned out this way for three main reasons.

There's money to be made. Recessions, even "Great" ones, come and go. When historians look back on the annus horribilis of 2009, they will likely conclude that the sharp increase in commodity prices was more a sign of the future than the sharp fall in share prices and employment. The prices of core materials like oil, wheat, and iron shot through the roof during the first part of the year. Conflict erupted as supplies of food, water, and energy dramatically dropped, and businesses battled over the competing uses of commodities such as biofuels and food. All this convinced the C-suite that resource inefficiencies are a material risk to their businesses today, and will be even more so tomorrow. To outlast the Great Recessions, companies have to improve resource efficiency to position themselves for success.

Despite (warranted) concerns about short-term thinking, business actually does look to the future. Look no further than the strong and growing business constituency for action on climate change. While governments move slowly on Capitol Hill and in Copenhagen, business leaders (and NGOs) are making the case for action. Executives responded to the tepid outcome in Copenhagen with a cry for governments to do better. Deutsche Bank Vice Chairman Caio Koch-Weser put it this way: "A strong deal is essential to create the rules, price signals, and risk-return incentives that business needs." Shell CEO Peter Voser called for "much more" to happen to build a strong deal on climate. They are doing this because they know that a price on carbon is coming, and they need to start planning their future today.

Society's expectations have changed--forever. There's just no turning back. Can you imagine the response if companies pulled back from their efforts to protect labor practices in their supply chains? If companies stopped providing information about energy and water use, or workplace diversity? Consumers--and the media--now view such activities as another dimension of product quality, and they're not considered optional.

Critics of sustainability have been planning its funeral several times in recent years. They have missed what most business leaders now know: Over the next half century, winning companies will be those that roll up their sleeves and build solutions to our most pressing global challenges. We need businesses that devote themselves to delivering a climate-friendly energy system, making efficient use of scarce natural resources, and creating efficient transportation for mega-cities. And because companies are waking up to the fact that this is where tomorrow's markets will be made, more and more are on that journey.

Wow. If you’re still not convinced that sustainability has become an important driver in today’s global business environment, think again. Cramer isn’t the only one who believes that sustainability’s time has come.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

New Book by BSR’s Aaron Cramer: Sustainable Excellence is Key to Business Success in a Fast-Changing World

How Sustainability Survived the Great Recession

It's Getting Easier to Design with 'Sustainability in Mind'

What if an engineer or designer could identify a whole assortment of safer, greener, more eco-friendly, cost-effective, energy-efficient design alternatives, materials, or sourcing options at the conceptual design stage? What if a simplified product life cycle assessment (LCA) that takes into account such aspects of product development as the cost, availability, and environmental impacts of raw materials, transportation, recycling and disposal options - could be performed at the front-end of the design process, instead of at the end of the process – after the fact? What if product design software was capable of capturing the data from such preliminary LCA assessments, allowing engineers and designers to make more informed decisions about potential environmental, social and economic impacts early in the design cycle when such decisions matter most?

The ability to perform such “what ifs” is what originally led Sustainable Minds’ CEO and co-founder Terry Swack to begin her pioneering work on integrating LCA into the design process in 2007. Less than a year later - in partnership with Autodesk – the company began working on the development of software to support this effort; and in October 2009, it officially announced the release of its flagship product, Sustainable Minds LCA 1.0, an early-stage LCA calculator and design evaluation tool. Since then, Sustainable Minds has launched several updates to its award-winning LCA software and has specifically targeted such critical disciplines as electro-mechanical design.

Several leading engineering software providers - including Siemens PLM, Dassault Systemes, and PTC have also begun to extend their reach beyond regulatory compliance with either sustainable product development tools of their own, or with offerings created through acquisitions or partnerships with others - from SolidWorks' Sustainability solution developed in partnership with PE International and PTC's acquisition of Planet Metrics to augment its InSight environmental compliance software, to the industry-specific sustainability solutions supported by Siemens PLM and Dassault Systemes’.

The result? Such capabilities promise to put key sustainability information into the hands of those involved in product design and development earlier in the design cycle – empowering them to make more informed decisions, more easily, and ultimately, enabling them to create more sustainable products and services at a competitive price. And that’s not only good for the environment, that’s good for business.

Not to be overlooked, this financial component is an essential element of the sustainability equation. Indeed, it’s worth noting here that fiscal responsibility is as much a part of sustainability as is the ability to measure and minimize negative environmental or social impact. The fact is a company must be able to accurately and effectively estimate the impact of its design decisions across the triple bottom line – taking into account environmental, social and economic concerns – in order to achieve a truly sustainable outcome. That’s why it is so important to be able to perform the kind of “what if” calculations that early stage LCA analysis affords – in order to conduct an effective cost/benefit analysis early in the design cycle and measure the impact of these early design decisions against key sustainability objectives and criteria.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

Sustainable Mind's CEO on Environmental Sustainability as a Product Innovation Driver

The EPA Turns Its Attention to Green Products

Have you heard? The Environmental Protection Agency wants to know how you feel it can best participate in and support green or sustainable product design and development. And now is the time to act – as the deadline for submissions is October 19^th, 2010.

As described in a recent federal notice, the Agency is currently soliciting individual stakeholder input to help define its role and develop a strategy that identifies how the Agency can make a meaningful contribution to the development, manufacture, designation, and use of sustainable products.

In particular, it is looking for stakeholders to respond to the following questions:

1. What do you see as the major policy and research challenges, opportunities, and trends impacting the development, manufacture, designation, and use of sustainable products?

2. What do you see as the EPA's overall role in addressing these challenges and opportunities?

3. In particular, how do you see the EPA's role in:

• Assembling information and databases.
• Identifying sustainability “hotspots” and setting product sustainability priorities.
• Evaluating the multiple impacts of products across their entire life cycle.
• Defining criteria for more sustainable products.
• Generating eco-labels and/or standards.
• Establishing the scientific foundation for these eco-labels and/or standards.
• Verifying that products meet standards.
• Stimulating the market.
• Developing end-of-life management systems (reuse, recycling, etc.).
• Measuring results, evaluating programs.

While critics may argue that the EPA’s involvement in this area may only create further roadblocks for manufacturers seeking to green their product lines, another way to view this move is that a standard means of measuring and verifying sustainability or “green” claims may be in the offing. This could be extremely valuable to organizations – especially suppliers – that are seeking to meet green mandates from manufacturers – and could well serve as a key first step in raising awareness of – and addressing some of the key challenges surrounding the design, development and manufacture of green products.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

To learn more, see:

“The EPA’s Role in Advancing Sustainable Products”

‘Sustainable Products’ to Get a Boost from the EPA