Hållbar utväckling = Lönsam utväckling? Symposium om Faktor 10 Loka Brunn 25. 11. 2005 Design and Services for the Future Michael Lettenmeier Managing Director D-mat Ltd. Michael. Lettenmeier@iki. fi
Michael. Lettenmeier@iki. fi • • • From Germany to Finland 1988 D-mat Ltd. Consulting, training, research, projects Factor 10, MIPS, resource productivity Companies, authorities, colleges and schools, NGOs • • Rubbish! – Handbook for waste counselling (fi) 1994 MIPS – the new arithmethics of nature (fi) 2000 Factor X - Entering markets eco-efficient 2000 -2002 Eco-efficiency - Business as Future (fi) 2002 Eco-efficient 2002 -fair FIN-MIPS Transport 2003 -2005 Der ökologische Rucksack (de) 2004
Design and Services for the Future • Hållbar utväckling: Need for Factor 10 • MIPS: Tool for Factor 10 – MI: Dematerializing our products – S: Sustainable product-service-systems • Examples of products and companies
Resource productivity: more from less • More benefit out of less material and energy • More welfare with less environmental damage • Unsustainable level of natural resource consumption • Carrying capacity of nature exceeded already • Total material consumption steadily growing • Consumption distributed unequally – increasing poverty problems – increasing social problems around the world Source: Wuppertal Institute
Finland consuming. . . • Material consumption – non-renewable materials: + 2, 5 % / a – renewable materials: + 0, 6 % / a • TMR top class: 500 000 tn / a = 100 tn / cap. / a = 300 shopping bags / cap. / week Source: Thule Institute, Univ. Oulu
. . . not alone • Industrialized countries (20 % of world population) consuming – – 86 % of all aluminium 81 % of all paper 80 % of all iron and steel 76 % of all wood materials ca. 4/5 of all natural resources
Which future? Developing countries Industrialized countries A = Present situation B = Consumption p. cap. in developing countries as in industrialized countries now C = Same as B, incl. growing population D = Halfing global resource consumption, doubling global welfare => resource productivity!
Targets in discussion (up to 2050): • Factor 4: doubling global welfare and halfing material flows • Factor 10: decreasing material flows of industrialized countries to 1/10, maintaining at least present welfare => resource productivity!
Resource productivity works already Company Virke Oy Starting solution / comparison Woman‘s blouse polyester/cotton Developed solution Factor X Woman‘s blouse polyester/viscose 1, 7 Mitron Oy Display (fluorescent Display (LED, tube, 1 year of use) 6 Finton Oy Concrete balcony (1 year of use) Wine packaging and transport in disposable bottle Steel balcony (1 year of use) Wine packaging and transport in reuseable bottle 3 Tavolo table, 1 year of use New Tavolo table, year of use Primalco Oy Zaza 1 1, 9 2
You cannot improve what you cannot measure • 60 million companies globally producing 6 million different products and offering 60 million different services which all are constantly changing • 6 billion consumers in 200 countries using these products and services Resource productivity requires handable measures
MIPS – indicator of resource productivity material input MI _____ S life-cycle-wide natural resource consumption of the commodity material input per service unit life-cycle-wide benefit produced by the commodity
Material input (MI) = life-cycle-wide natural resource consumption of the commodity expressed in mass units (e. g. kg) = commodity’s own mass + the ecological rucksack (materials that are not visible in the product, but are used somewhere in its life cycle)
Material flows indicate environmental pressure • holtistic, though rough indicator hard to make illustrative indicators out of individual environmental problems • Avoiding harmful substances is not enough material flows are threatening the environment
From environmental protection to resource productivity Traditional approach Preventative approach Resource input Production and consumption Waste water Air emissions Chemicals Nature protection From cleaning at the end of pipe to efficient resource use
MI of products: examples tuote kg abiotic kg water kg air /product /prod. kg top soil / product jeans 5, 1 1, 6 1200 0, 15 3 tooth brush 0, 12 - 1, 5 0, 03 - coffee maker 52 - 240 6, 5 - VW Golf A 4 18710 - 332000 3710 -
Examples of MI-factors rawmaterial aluminium kg abiotic kg biotic / kg water / kg air / kg top soil / / kg mat. 37 - 1050 11 - steel 9, 3 - 82 0, 8 - copper 350 - 370 1, 6 - spruce 0, 7 4, 7 9, 4 0, 2 -
Examples of MI-factors for electricity kg abiotic / kg biotic kg water kg air kg soil / k. Wh k. Wh average power (D) 4, 7 - 83 0, 6 - average power (FIN) electr. sold by Hels. Energia 0, 50 - 186 0, 21 - 0, 63 - 31 0, 37 - wind power 0, 07 - 0, 17 0, 001 -
Examples of MI-factors for goods transport kg abiotic / kg biotic kg water kg air kg soil / / ton km / tn. km ton km (Finland) ton km lorry 0, 4 3, 6 0, 06 railway 0, 54 - 15, 3 0, 02 - air (domestic) 5, 6 - 266 2, 8 - sea (short dist. ) 0, 75 - 3, 13 0, 13 -
Examples of MI-factors for person transport kg abiotic kg biotic / kg water kg air kg soil / / person (Finland) / person km km km car 1, 44 - 12, 4 0, 14 - bike 0, 38 - 12, 1 0, 02 - bus 0, 32 - 2, 79 0, 06 - train (long dist. ) 1, 37 - 29, 3 0, 04 - air (domestic) 0, 56 - 26, 6 0, 28 - sea (baltic area) 0, 26 - 2, 42 0, 31 -
Company level: decreasing MI Faxtor X -example: Finn Karelia Virke Oy 50/50 polyester/cotton -blouse (weight 231 g) • Material inputs: – – – raw materials packages electricity consumption other energy consumption transports 69, 5 % 6, 2 % 3, 3 % 7, 7 % 13, 4 % (4, 18 kg) (0, 37 kg) (0, 2 kg) (0, 46 kg) (0, 8 kg) MI total: 6, 01 kg ecological rucksack: 5, 78 kg • Changing cotton to viscose: MI 6, 01 kg 3, 54 kg (factor 1, 7)
Comparison of rucksacks (blouse 231 g) • • 1. 50/50 polyester/viscose 3, 3, kg 2. 50/50 polyester/cotton 5, 78 kg 3. 100% cotton 8, 14 kg 4. 100% wool 44, 26 kg Huom. Finn Karelia Virke Oy: n kaikki tuotteet ovat sekotteita
The blouse in use • use and maintanance by consumer: power consumption! • 50 times washing – PES/CO +40 C 981 k. Wh • MI per 1 blouse 4, 02 kg • 50 times washing + drying – PES/CO +40 C 1647 k. Wh • MI per 1 blouse 6, 75 kg – 100% cotton +60 C 3484 k. Wh • MI per 1 blouse 14, 28 kg
Service-unit (S): more out of less • S = benefit provided by a product • quantified, unit defined case by case (e. g. using times, years of use, ton-km) • target: increasing number of service-units = more use / longer life / more functions of product growing S smaller MIPS growing resource productivity MI ___ S
How to increase the service-unit (S) ? 1. Increasing longevity • • • durability repairability maintainability upgrading resusability etc.
Factor X Finland - case Primalco • MIPS-comparision of packaging systems for wines: Reuse vrs. one-way for wine bottles Bottling french wine in Finland vrs. bottling in France • Comparison of packaging systems: – Wine transport France - Finland (bottles on trailer vrs. wine in tank) – Bottling in France vrs. bottling in Finland – Transport up to the Alko retail store
Case Primalco: - packaging of french wine - solid resources kg / wine bottle
Products are only service-delivering machines Example: Cooling chamber integrated in the kitchen wall • uses cold outside air in the winter • has CFC-free insulation material • uses 50 -80 % less energy compared to a conventional refrigerator • cooling system is separated from the cooling chamber can be exchanged • long lasting (e. g. lifetime of a house) material efficiency is increased by a factor 7 compared to a conventional refrigerator Source: Wuppertal Institute
From thinking in products to thinking in services • What the consumer needs is the service the product is providing – no fridge, but cold food and drinks – no lawn mawer, but short grass – no car, but getting to another place – no washing machine, but clean clothes – no book or magazine, but the content Replace products by the use of libraries, carsharing, laundries etc.
How to increase the service-unit (S) ? 2. Business from products to services • Selling office space use instead of the building (YIT) • Selling good room-air quality instead of air-conditioning devices (Ender Gmb. H) • Selling flexible mobility instead of cars (City Car Club) • Selling office furnishing service instead of furniture (ISKU) • Selling communication solutions instead of devices (Sonera) => Combining the benefit of customer, company and environment
Factor X – Entering Markets Eco-efficient • Factor X –project 2000 -2002 – 15 companies, 10 consultants – 1 case (product or service) per company – MIPS-concept • Eco-efficient 2002 –fair • Lendable poster exhibition – 65 posters – 3 days – 100 exhibitors – 5000 visitors – 10 conference events
Factor X Finland - Case studies Mitron Oy ISKU Virke Oy Finton Oy Primalco KESKO NOKIA SLU (soccer) SLU (basket-ball) SLU (ice-hockey) Orienteering HUS Sonera YIT - Rapido VR - Group Paperipalvelu Oy Zaza information panel for public transport office furniture unit incl. packaging women blouse balcony system packaging system for wine lemonade mobile phone soccer match FIN - D training of a champions’ league team one year’s activities of a junior team World Championship 2001 in Tampere hip operation e-work facility management person-km by rail folder table
Factor X Finland - case Mitron Information display old display – – – fluorescent tube regulating card power card glass control unit LDC-module mechanical and electrical parts new display – – – led regulating card power card glass control unit LDC-module mechanical and electrical parts
Factor X Finland - case MITRON MI comparison of replacable parts fluorescent tube display: » cover 1, 65 kg (Zn. Fe) MI=14, 85 kg » back cover 0, 3 kg (Al) MI=18, 3 kg » plastic parts 0, 22 kg (Ps) MI=1, 54 kg » fluor. tube, inverter, . . . MI=35 kg MI=>70 kg Led - display: » cover 0, 96 kg (Zn. Fe) MI=8, 64 kg » back cover 0, 15 kg (Al) MI=9, 15 kg » resin (Harz? ? ) 0, 38 kg (Ps) MI=5, 2 kg » rubber, plastic parts, … MI=10 kg MI=>33 kg
Factor X Finland - case Mitron development of the service unit fluor. tube diplay vrs. led-display • life span 2 a vrs. 11 a • functionality • energy consumption - 60 % • nearly endless circumstances (IP 68) • considerably thinner construction • light regulation • phosforescence characteristics Factor 6
Case Mitron Benefits of eco-intelligent design » money savings through resource saving » marketing benefits, new markets » increasing consumer interest » increasing credibility among the employees » possibility for increasing empoyment » realizing environmental targets without legal constraints and without inevitable increase of costs
MIPS calculation for 2 buildings of Helsinki University Abiotic resources, kg/m 2/a Paula Sinivuori Helsinki University
n at io av ex c ni H cal e e Po at c qui w on pm er su e co m nt ns pti um on pt io n ch Te rth Ea Abiotic MIPS-figures, kg/m 2/a
Sensitivity analysis: Factor 4 buidling feasible Change in abiotic resource consumption • useful life 100 a => 200 a: – 31% • recycled instead of virgin metals: – 20% • longer renovation circles: – 10% • lower power and heat consumption: – 5% • average power to wind power: – 25% Total potential for improvement: Factor 4
Lindström ltd. – MIPS of drying hands MIPS = solid resource consumption / 1 times of drying hands Calculation includes: • Roll towel lasting 100 washing times • 1 paper towel / drying once (incl. packaging and waste disposal) • Hot air dryer 2110 W, drying 30 seconds Way of drying hands Roll towel narrow Roll towel wide 3, 2 2, 7 MIPS g / drying once Helsinki University 2003 Paper towel 1 p. / drying 17 Hot air dryer 30 s / drying 7, 2
Alternative options for waste policy in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area (Ville Salo, Univ. Helsinki, Env. Economics) Present sit. Prevention Recycling A Recycling B MB plant Incinerator Municipal wate in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area: resource cosumption over the lifecycle for different options, tons / a
11 th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference June 6 -8, 2005, Helsinki, Finland Dematerialising the Management of Municipal Services • Water Supply, Delivery and Wastewater Treatment • Energy Supply Adeline Maijala – Helsinki University of Technology (TKK) Tarja Teppo – Helsinki University of Technology (TKK) Michael Lettenmeier – D-mat ltd. Elina Virtanen – Helsinki University of Technology (TKK) Salla Hänninen – Helsinki University of Technology (TKK)
Results
Improvements in resource consumption • Same technology, optimisation: – Less digging (change dimensions and material) => factor 1, 1 -1, 3 – Less virgin material (reuse ground, ground material represents 70% of the material input) => factor ? – Locate under green areas => factor 1, 2 -1, 3 – Use the existing network more efficiently => factor ? • Change of technology: – No-dig => factor 7 -13 • Change of system - No network => factor 2 – 3, 5 (Reckerzügl for sewage systems) - Combination of rain water and bottled water => factor ? - Dry toilets => ca. factor 2, 5 (Reckerzügl)
No-Dig technology
Material intensity of the energy from Kymijärvi power plant in Lahti Original plant MI hard coal MI transport Incl. gasification unit Abiotic resource consumption per k. Wh of energy produced (power and heat): Original plant: Incl. gasification unit: 1, 83 kg/k. Wh 1, 53 kg/k. Wh ( – 16% ) Average Finland: Average EU 15: 0, 5 kg/k. Wh* 1, 8 kg/k. Wh** * Vihermaa 2005 ** Hacker 2003
Scenario: coal from Poland Decreasing MI-factor of hard coal: 5, 1 kg/kg => 2, 2 kg/kg Shorter railway transportat: 4000 km => 500 km Longer shop transport: 200 km => 800 km Change in process (not quantified): increasing need for desulphurication and limestone
Scenario: coal from Poland Original plant Incl. gasification Polish Coal Influence of gasification: Influence of Poland coal: Factor 1, 2 ( – 16%) Factor 3, 9 ( – 74%) Influence of Polish coal on gasification option: Factor 3, 3 ( – 69%)
Examples of Factor X project Company Virke Oy Starting solution / comparison Woman‘s blouse polyester/cotton Developed solution Factor X Woman‘s blouse polyester/viscose 1, 7 Mitron Oy Display (fluorescent Display (LED, tube, 1 year of use) 6 Finton Oy Concrete balcony (1 year of use) Wine packaging and transport in disposable bottle Steel balcony (1 year of use) Wine packaging and transport in reuseable bottle 3 Tavolo table, 1 year of use New Tavolo table, year of use Primalco Oy Zaza 1 1, 9 2
Factor X Finland - experiences: MIPS - potential for application Comparisons of eco-efficiency Product development • understandable principle • sufficiently quick tool for situations requiring selection Business development • • increasing the benefits of customer and environment product-related services (product + additional service) utilisation-related services (product owned by producer) business focus from products to services
Hållbar utväckling = lönsam utväckling?
Resource efficiency: new tools in sight • FRAME (Finnish res. and mat. efficiency agency) – Feasibility study made by ministry of the environment – Coordination and development of counselling, education, research, product development, etc. – EU LIFE-proposal for establishing • MASCO (material saving contracting services) – Working already in the energy sector (ESCO) – Feasibility study by Helsinki University
States and EU needed: shift of taxation focus from labour to resource use • High taxes on labour, low taxes on resource use (84% of the taxes in EU 15 are levied from labour and labour use) unemployment, waste of natural resources, luonnonvarojen tuhlausta, cutting down of welfare states, social problems, etc. • Shift of taxation focus from labour to resource use taxation without rising total taxation stimulation for employment, resource saving, maintaining of welfare system
Factor 10 rising to big challenges: 1. Environmental impacts are a complex entity Navigating in a jungle of environmental problems 2. The globalization of economy Directing the development into the right direction Controlling life cycles around the world 3. Price competition and production orientation bringing western enterprises down Learning to create the jobs of tomorrow
Efficiency is not enough: PC-computers in Germany 1994 el. cons. / PC / time (W) el. cons. / all PCs (TWh/a) 1998 Factor 380 55 7 2, 1 4, 1 0, 5
Factor 10 needs also sufficiency • Increasing consumption tends to waste the gains in efficiency sufficiency in consumption • Benefits of increased efficiency should be transferred to developing countries more equal distribution of welfare • Are there any limits go growth?
List of wishes - Mauritz Nylund Own house. Sauna. Swimming pool. Tennis ground Water plane. Own island. Harem. Good condition. Immortality. That’s all. So far.
Further information • www. wupperinst. org • www. mips-online. info • www. factor 10 -institute. org • http: //thule. oulu. fi/ecoef • www. product-life. org • www. seri. at • www. faktor 10. at • www. aachener-stiftung. de • www. mips-online. fi
Tack! Further information: D-mat ltd. Michael Lettenmeier Tel. +358 40 54 12 876 Michael. Lettenmeier@iki. fi Drawn pictures: www. seppo. net
Скачать презентацию Hållbar utväckling Lönsam utväckling Symposium om Faktor
b57885a871730a04c7dba9c1453f7ec0.ppt