Author:
Senthil Kumaran D.,Ong S.K.,Tan Reginald B.H.,Nee A.Y.C.
Abstract
The objective of this life cycle environmental cost analysis (LCECA) model is to include eco‐costs into the total cost of the products. Eco‐costs are both the direct and indirect costs of the environmental impacts caused by the product in its entire life cycle. Subsequently, this LCECA model identifies the feasible alternatives for cost‐effective, eco‐friendly parts/products. This attempts to incorporate costing into the life cycle assessment (LCA) practice. Ultimately, it aims to reduce the total cost with the help of green or eco‐friendly alternatives in all the stages of the life cycle of any product. The new category of eco‐costs of the cost breakdown structure includes eight eco‐costs, namely cost of effluent/waste treatment, cost of effluent/waste control, cost of waste disposal, cost of implementation of environmental management systems, costs of eco‐taxes, costs of rehabilitation (in case of environmental accidents), cost savings of renewable energy utilization, and cost savings of recycling and reuse strategies. Development of a suitable cost model and the identification of the feasible alternatives are performed simultaneously. Various checklists based on multiple environmental criteria will be used to ensure the eco‐friendly nature of the alternatives. On the basis of the calculated environmental impact indices (EII), priorities will be made for the selection of suitable alternatives. The mathematical model of LCECA aims to define the relationships between the total cost of products and the various eco‐costs concerned with the life cycle of the products, and determine quantitative expressions between the above‐said costs. A computational LCECA model has been developed to compare the eco‐costs of the alternatives. This model will include a break‐even analysis to evaluate the alternatives, and sensitivity analysis and risk analysis modules. This model aims at a cost‐effective, eco‐friendly product as an end result. This LCECA model will be compatible with the existing LCA software tools.
Reference23 articles.
1. Asiedu, Y. and Gu, P. (1998), “Product life cycle cost analysis: state of the art review”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 883‐908.
2. Bras, B. and Emblemsvag, J. (1996), Designing for the Life Cycle: Activity Based Costing and Uncertainty, Design for X, Concurrent Imperatives, Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 398‐423.
3. Cobas, E., Hendrickson, C., Lave, L. and McMichael, F. (1996), “Life cycle analysis of batteries using economic input output analysis”, Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and Environment, Dallas, TX, pp. 130‐4.
4. Curran, M.A. (1996), Environmental Life Cycle Assessment, McGraw Hill, New York, NY, Chs 1‐4.
5. Dahlen, P. and Bolmsjo, G.S. (1996), “Life cycle costing analysis of the labor factor”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 46‐7, pp. 459‐67.
Cited by
52 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献