Prospective Environmental Analyses of Emerging Technology: A Critique, a Proposed Methodology, and a Case Study on Incremental Sheet Forming

Prospective environmental assessment of emerging technology is necessary in order to inform designers of beneficial changes early in a technology's development, and policy makers looking to fund projects and nudge manufacturers toward the most sustainable application of a technology. Existing analyses often have shortcomings such as failing to consider the environmental impacts in all stages of a product's life cycle; implicitly assuming that the emerging technology will be cost‐effective wherever it is technically viable; and assuming optimistic application scenarios that discontinue long‐established trends in human behavior. In this article, we propose a new approach, complementary to the prospective and anticipatory life cycle assessment literature, addressing the above concerns and attempting to make sense of the large uncertainties inherent in such analyses by using distributions to model all the inputs. The paper focuses on emerging manufacturing technologies, such as incremental sheet forming (ISF), but the issues examined are also applicable to new end‐use products, such as autonomous vehicles. This paper makes use of approaches (such as Bass modeling and product cannibalization considerations) familiar to those in the business community who anticipate market diffusion of a new technology and the effect on existing technology sales. The proposed methodology is demonstrated by estimating the potential environmental impacts in the U.S. car industry by 2030 of an emerging double‐sided ISF process. Energy and cost models of ISF and drawing are used to estimate potential mean savings of around 100 TJprimary and 60 million U.S. dollars per year by 2030.

[1]  Robert J. Thomas,et al.  Estimating Market Growth for New Products: An Analogical Diffusion Model Approach , 1985 .

[2]  R. Geyer,et al.  Circular Economy Rebound , 2017 .

[3]  R. Geyer,et al.  A Market‐Based Framework for Quantifying Displaced Production from Recycling or Reuse , 2016 .

[4]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  Sensitivity-based research prioritization through stochastic characterization modeling , 2018, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[5]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  Towards prospective life cycle assessment: Single wall carbon nanotubes for lithium-ion batteries , 2011, Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology.

[6]  J. Roy.  The rebound effect : some empirical evidence from India , 2000 .

[7]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  Anticipatory life-cycle assessment for responsible research and innovation , 2014 .

[8]  Randolph Kirchain,et al.  A dynamic process-based cost modeling approach to understand learning effects in manufacturing , 2010 .

[9]  Peter J. G. Pearson,et al.  The Long Run Demand for Lighting:Elasticities and Rebound Effects in Different Phases of Economic Development , 2012 .

[10]  Sujit Das,et al.  Energy and emissions saving potential of additive manufacturing: the case of lightweight aircraft components , 2016 .

[11]  Igor Linkov,et al.  Illustrating anticipatory life cycle assessment for emerging photovoltaic technologies. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[12]  Gerard J. Tellis,et al.  A Critical Review of Marketing Research on Diffusion of New Products , 2007 .

[13]  J. Trancik,et al.  Statistical Basis for Predicting Technological Progress , 2012, PloS one.

[14]  Roland W. Scholz,et al.  Environmental rebound effects of high-speed transport technologies: a case study of climate change rebound effects of a future underground maglev train system , 2008 .

[15]  Michael F. Ashby,et al.  Chapter 7 – Multiple Constraints and Conflicting Objectives , 2011 .

[16]  J. Bergh,et al.  Re-spending rebound: A macro-level assessment for OECD countries and emerging economies , 2014 .

[17]  S. Grasman,et al.  Identifying the effects of cannibalization on the product portfolio , 2005 .

[18]  Julian M. Allwood,et al.  A structured search for applications of the incremental sheet-forming process by product segmentation , 2005 .

[19]  Michael E. Coltrin,et al.  Solid-state lighting: an energy-economics perspective , 2010 .

[20]  Timothy G. Gutowski,et al.  An Environmental and Cost Analysis of Stamping Sheet Metal Parts , 2017 .

[21]  T. P. Wright,et al.  Factors affecting the cost of airplanes , 1936 .

[22]  E. Hertwich.  Consumption and the Rebound Effect: An Industrial Ecology Perspective , 2005 .

[23]  Jeffrey B. Dahmus,et al.  Can Efficiency Improvements Reduce Resource Consumption? , 2014 .

[24]  Yann Tambouret,et al.  Energy savings and emissions reductions associated with increased insulation for new homes in the United States , 2016 .

[25]  Ben A. Wender,et al.  Tradeoff Evaluation Improves Comparative Life Cycle Assessment: A Photovoltaic Case Study , 2016 .

[26]  A. Fremstad,et al.  Does Craigslist Reduce Waste? Evidence from California and Florida , 2017 .

[27]  Timothy G. Gutowski,et al.  The energy requirements and environmental impacts of sheet metal forming: An analysis of five forming processes , 2017 .

[28]  Sujit Das,et al.  Vehicle lightweighting energy use impacts in U.S. light-duty vehicle fleet , 2016 .

[29]  Mohammed A. Omar,et al.  The Automotive Body Manufacturing Systems and Processes: Omar/The Automotive Body Manufacturing Systems and Processes , 2011 .

[30]  Carl Vadenbo,et al.  Let's Be Clear(er) about Substitution: A Reporting Framework to Account for Product Displacement in Life Cycle Assessment , 2017 .

[31]  M. Ashby.  MULTI-OBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION IN MATERIAL DESIGN AND SELECTION , 2000 .

[32]  Inês L. Azevedo,et al.  Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects for U.S. households with input–output analysis Part 1: Theoretical framework , 2013 .

[33]  H. Müller,et al.  Rapid tooling approaches for small lot production of sheet-metal parts , 2001 .

[34]  R. Scholz,et al.  Reducing energy consumption in road transport through hybrid vehicles: investigation of rebound effects, and possible effects of tax rebates , 2007 .

[35]  D. Greene,et al.  Energy efficiency and consumption — the rebound effect — a survey , 2000 .

[36]  V. Thomas.  Demand and Dematerialization Impacts of Second‐Hand Markets , 2003 .

[37]  Brandon Kuczenski,et al.  Common Misconceptions about Recycling , 2016 .

[38]  Michael Zwicky Hauschild,et al.  Implementing life cycle assessment in product development , 2003 .

[39]  V. Mahajan,et al.  Innovation diffusion and new product growth models: A critical review and research directions , 2010 .

[40]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Multigeneration innovation diffusion: The impact of intergeneration time , 2003 .

[41]  Charlotte H. Mason,et al.  An approach for identifying cannibalization within product line extensions and multi-brand strategies , 1994 .

[42]  Jérôme Massiani,et al.  The Choice of Bass Model Coefficients to Forecast Diffusion for Innovative Products: An Empirical Investigation for New Automotive Technologies , 2015 .