Coming in 2012: Are You Ready to Support a More Sustainable Approach to Product Design?

According to independent analyst firm, Verdantix – corporate spending on innovation to push product-level sustainability differentiation in 2012 will reach $12 billion in the U.S.; $1.6 billion in the U.K.; $500 million in Canada and $400 million in Australia.

As noted in a related article, “The Five Growth Areas for Sustainability Spending in 2012,” Verdantix reports that spending in the following sustainability-focused areas will experience significant growth in 2012:

1)      Strategic energy management

2)      Product sustainability differentiation

3)      Sustainability business consulting

4)      Smart and sustainable city projects

5)      Pyramid market innovation

In particular, Verdantix reports that as requirements for legislation such as REACH and RoHS become more stringent, and as stakeholders pay greater attention to the sustainability side of products, firms are going to spend more ensuring that their products and services are greener. For example, environmental labeling requirements set to be put in place by end of year 2012 in France will drive product-level sustainability initiatives and reporting.

So, the question is – are you ready? Are your products designed with sustainability in mind? You may not even choose to market these products as green or sustainable – the real issue is whether you are incorporating sustainable practices in your product design and manufacturing efforts.  Tools to assist you in such efforts are becoming increasingly accessible, making it much easier to embrace sustainability than in the past. For example, such tools allow you to identify and incorporate more sustainable materials in your products upfront during the design phase,  can help guide you in the selection of sustainably-sourced materials or components throughout the supply chain, can help you to identify sustainability "hot spots" (or aspects of how your product is created, manufactured or used that score high in terms of having a negative environmental impact)  throughout the lifecycle of your product, and more.

Ultimately, products that are designed and manufactured using less energy, less material and/or more sustainable materials, can be more easily disassembled for reuse or recycling, or that are made using less toxic chemicals or processes – will offer a competitive advantage. Think that’s a bit idealistic? Think again. Legislation changes everything – and it’s coming, whether we’re ready or not. If not, it means scrambling to keep up – when you could have taken the lead and put yourself out ahead of the crowd…

One way to get there? As a designer or engineer, you can begin to ask about and test out some of the new sustainable product design tools being offered by engineering software providers. We’ve mentioned them before – but for those of you “just joining” – to name a few, these include: Sustainable Minds LCA, PE International’s GaBi LCA software, Solidworks Sustainability/Sustainability Xpress, Trayak’s Eco-Designer, Autodesk’s Eco-Materials Advisor, and PTC’s Windchill LCA. Or better yet – just ask your engineering software provider to help you conduct a “sustainability audit.” That will give you an idea of just where your product development efforts might benefit most from a sustainability makeover.

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

See also:

The Five Growth Areas for Sustainability Spending in 2012

Engineers Still Trying to Make Sense of Sustainability

When it comes to sustainability, engineers are skeptics. But is that such a bad thing?

In its third annual survey exploring how mechanical engineers view the world of sustainability, the ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) found that engineers, true to their nature –are still trying to solve the sustainability puzzle. As reported in Mechanical Engineering’s November issue, prevailing attitudes among engineers are that they see the value of sustainability, show skepticism about the hype, and are searching for a better way to quantify what they are doing.

To which I say, “Bravo!” Kudos to the engineering community for being the skeptics that they are – for requiring that sustainability – and, in particular - sustainable design and manufacturing – deliver more than just promises.

As one ASME survey respondent points out:

“We do not subscribe to the politics behind the green/sustainable movement,” one engineer wrote. “We believe in using sound engineering judgment to deliver the most cost-effective means to lower our customer’s energy consumption to save them money. The CO2 savings, a meaningless metric, is simply a function of lower energy consumption.”

Engineers, by definition, are trained to question – which is why, I think, we see such a strong resistance among the engineering community to embrace sustainability simply because it is “the right thing to do.” The reality is that every day, engineers are tasked with addressing challenges like safety, reliability, and performance – and to the extent that sustainability issues have an impact on such design criteria – then sustainability matters.

It matters, for example, if counterfeit parts enter the supply chain and threaten to compromise the performance of a critical engine or electronic component. It matters if a product is dependent on the availability of a rare or scarce material, or if the cost of producing a part or product is at risk of skyrocketing due to rising energy costs. In short, the metrics that are important to engineers effectively remain unchanged – cost, performance, safety, reliability. What has changed is that there are an increasing number of external factors impacting engineering and design that lie outside the control of the engineer.

That said, what IS becoming more important to the engineering community is the ability to better predict how such external factors stand to impact their design decisions or threaten the safety or reliability of the products they make.

Which is why tools that, for example, enable engineers to more easily identify and specify sustainable or alternative materials in their design efforts, matter – and why tools that allow them to evaluate and understand the performance of these materials in context, matters. It’s why tools or processes that allow engineers to more easily develop products that either consume less energy during the use phase, or use less energy in the manufacturing or production phase, matter. It’s why if it becomes clear that “doing things the way it has always been done” is no longer sufficient, that we can expect to see our engineers come up with a new, more innovative approach to solving the problem, whether that problem relates to sustainability or something else.

So – a tool that allow us to reduce our carbon footprint may prove useful not necessarily because it shows us how to reduce our environmental impact – but because it shows us how to reduce our energy use. But is that a bad thing? Either way, whether companies are motivated to reduce their energy use to cut costs or to reduce their environmental impact, does it really matter? At the end of the day, what matters is that less energy is used, and there are quantifiable benefits. 

If embraced in this way, perhaps sustainability would have more followers among the engineering community. Perhaps we simply need to ask the question, “What are the engineering benefits of sustainable product design and manufacturing?” Or as Mechanical Engineering magazine’s recent article on this topic asks, “what could be more sustainable than improving efficiency and eliminating waste to lower the cost of new products and manufacturing processes?”

What do you think? Tell us. It’s not too late! We’re still seeking participants for our study,  “Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing: What’s Happening Now… and What’s Ahead?”

See also:

Sustainability (Mechanical Engineering magazine, November 2011 issue)

Participate in a New Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing Research Study and Be Eligible to Win an iPad 2! (survey)

The Sustainability Consortium Releases “High Impact” Profiles for 10 Product Categories

“The Sustainability Consortium (TSC) took a major step forward today when they announced the completion of 10 Category Sustainability Profiles as part of research on 50 product categories, with a commitment to develop 50 additional product categories by the end of 2011.” - source: The Sustainability Consortium

A bit of background
Several years ago, Walmart supported the creation of “The Sustainability Consortium” in an effort to drive product-level sustainability. (See earlier post on this subject.) Supplier scorecards for reporting sustainability across the supply chain were put in place – and efforts to move towards some mechanism for easily creating and comparing a product’s “sustainability score” against its competitors – was envisioned. To date, the Sustainability Consortium’s efforts have been embraced by some and criticized by others. But whether you’re a supporter or not, it’s worth paying attention to the Consortium’s latest developments because of the potential impact their work may ultimately have on the Walmart supplier community. In that light, noted below are some of the key points of their latest announcement. 

Which product categories are included?
The Sustainability Consortium announced that it has completed 10 category sustainability profiles. The categories that are a part of this initial launch include beef, coffee, cotton towels, yogurt, fashion dolls, laptops, laundry detergent, televisions, toilet tissues, and wheat cereal.

Why were these product categories selected?
TSC members chose these categories because of their business relevance, potential for improvement, and magnitude of impact.

According to the press release, “The Sustainability Consortium’s work on these profiles, which identify and prioritize the largest impacts in the life cycle of a product, is extremely valuable,” said Helen van Hoeven, director of market transformation at World Wildlife Fund and a recently appointed Consortium Board member. “This information allows retailers, manufacturers, and suppliers to focus their efforts on innovating and improving on products and their supply chains where it matters most.”

How are these profiles created? 

“The Consortium collects the best available knowledge by reviewing published life cycle assessments, scanning literature, interviewing subject matter experts, integrating life cycle models, and utilizing our large network of corporate, NGO, academic, and government partners. We turn over every rock for information to see what’s available,” said Joby Carlson, Knowledge Base manager for The Sustainability Consortium. “From that, we begin to understand the most well supported environmental and societal issues related to a product category. We also reveal relevant and actionable best practices or product attributes that organizations can implement to address these priority issues. 

What’s the objective?
TSC’s objective is to have this information serve as the basis for driving sustainable change in research and development, understanding supplier sustainability through scorecards or benchmarking, establishing sustainable sourcing policies, and guiding product designs. TSC believes that these deliverables represent a significant milestone for The Consortium’s Sustainability Measurement and Reporting System to inform retailers, buyers, manufacturers, and suppliers about the impacts various consumer goods and supply networks have on the climate, water, energy, biodiversity, toxicity, and society.

What’s the view from its membership community? Are these profiles valid?
“We are big believers in The Consortium’s approach,” said Dr. Len Sauers, vice president for global sustainability at Procter & Gamble and Consortium Board member. “Having these profiles will be immensely helpful to bring people around the table to make real progress towards product sustainability.”

What’s the key takeaway?
The impact of the efforts of the Sustainability Consortium to provide guidance around sustainability metrics for retail products like toys, electronics, and cleaning agents promises to be significant in the years ahead. While the foundation for the sustainability ratings and/or rankings to come may be questioned by some, the reality is that the groundwork is being laid to make product design more sustainable, in general – and to make more eco-friendly product options available to mainstream consumers. Ultimately, the key will be for a manufacturer to be able to provide some kind of verifiable qualifying data to back up its eco-design or sustainability claims. At the end of the day, this is a good thing – perhaps the system isn’t perfect, but it’s a start – and it’s better than what exists currently. So – we’ll be watching. And critics should be, too. If there’s something that seems totally amiss, then it is the job of the watchdogs among us to speak up.

See also:

Sustainable Product and Consumption Starts to Get Real in the Marketplace  The Sustainability Consortium Adopts PE International's GaBi Tool to Perform LCA