The Experts below are selected from a list of 1587 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Michele Germani - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Comparative life cycle assessment of metal arc welding technologies by using engineering design documentation
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019
    Co-Authors: Claudio Favi, Federico Campi, Michele Germani
    Abstract:

    PurposeThe paper aims to analyze and compare the environmental performances of metal arc welding technologies: gas metal arc welding (GMAW), shielded metal arc welding (SMAW), gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW), submerged arc welding (SAW), and flux-cored arc welding (FCAW). Welding is considered one of the most energy-intensive processes in manufacturing. This study was performed in accordance with the international standard ISO 14040/14044 by using attributional life cycle assessment (aLCA).MethodsThe functional unit is defined as the “the development of 1 metre of welding seam (qualified by ASME section IX requirements) to join 25 millimetres thick of metal plates made in carbon steel material and considering a V-bevel configuration.” Different configurations of base/filler materials and standardized bevel geometries have been analyzed as welding scenarios. The inventory considers all inputs (e.g., electric energy and filler material) and outputs (e.g., fume emissions and slags) involved in each welding process. A framework for data collection starting from available project documentation is presented as an innovative solution for the inventory phase. The impact assessment includes the human health, resources (midpoints/Endpoint), and ecosystems (Endpoint) categories from the ReCiPe (H) and cumulative energy demand (CED) methods.Results and discussionThis study reveals a notable dominance in terms of the environmental burdens of GTAW and SMAW processes, as they present higher impacts in most of the impact categories. SMAW is the most energy-consuming process, and this aspect is reflected in the environmental performance. Conversely, GMAW presents the least environmental load, accounting for less than one third compared with GTAW in terms of the CED Indicator and performing very well in terms of the ReCiPe Endpoint Indicator. Via analysis of different scenarios, the main outcomes are the following: (i) the use of V bevels significantly increases the environmental load when the metal plate thickness increases and (ii) the use of specific materials such as Inconel alloy exacerbates the environmental concerns associated with welding processes.ConclusionsThe use of project documentation allows robust analysis of welding activity. Sensitivity analysis shows how the range of values for specific parameters (e.g., volts and amps) affects each technology in a different manner. Indeed, those ranges have a limited impact on the result accuracy (up to 20%) for more automatized welding processes (e.g., GMAW, SAW, and FCAW), in which only a small number of parameters are set by the operator, and the operator skills are less influential on the quality of the weld.

  • Comparative life cycle assessment of metal arc welding technologies by using engineering design documentation
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019
    Co-Authors: Claudio Favi, Federico Campi, Michele Germani
    Abstract:

    The paper aims to analyze and compare the environmental performances of metal arc welding technologies: gas metal arc welding (GMAW), shielded metal arc welding (SMAW), gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW), submerged arc welding (SAW), and flux-cored arc welding (FCAW). Welding is considered one of the most energy-intensive processes in manufacturing. This study was performed in accordance with the international standard ISO 14040/14044 by using attributional life cycle assessment (aLCA). The functional unit is defined as the “the development of 1 metre of welding seam (qualified by ASME section IX requirements) to join 25 millimetres thick of metal plates made in carbon steel material and considering a V-bevel configuration.” Different configurations of base/filler materials and standardized bevel geometries have been analyzed as welding scenarios. The inventory considers all inputs (e.g., electric energy and filler material) and outputs (e.g., fume emissions and slags) involved in each welding process. A framework for data collection starting from available project documentation is presented as an innovative solution for the inventory phase. The impact assessment includes the human health, resources (midpoints/Endpoint), and ecosystems (Endpoint) categories from the ReCiPe (H) and cumulative energy demand (CED) methods. This study reveals a notable dominance in terms of the environmental burdens of GTAW and SMAW processes, as they present higher impacts in most of the impact categories. SMAW is the most energy-consuming process, and this aspect is reflected in the environmental performance. Conversely, GMAW presents the least environmental load, accounting for less than one third compared with GTAW in terms of the CED Indicator and performing very well in terms of the ReCiPe Endpoint Indicator. Via analysis of different scenarios, the main outcomes are the following: (i) the use of V bevels significantly increases the environmental load when the metal plate thickness increases and (ii) the use of specific materials such as Inconel alloy exacerbates the environmental concerns associated with welding processes. The use of project documentation allows robust analysis of welding activity. Sensitivity analysis shows how the range of values for specific parameters (e.g., volts and amps) affects each technology in a different manner. Indeed, those ranges have a limited impact on the result accuracy (up to 20%) for more automatized welding processes (e.g., GMAW, SAW, and FCAW), in which only a small number of parameters are set by the operator, and the operator skills are less influential on the quality of the weld.

Claudio Favi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Comparative life cycle assessment of metal arc welding technologies by using engineering design documentation
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019
    Co-Authors: Claudio Favi, Federico Campi, Michele Germani
    Abstract:

    PurposeThe paper aims to analyze and compare the environmental performances of metal arc welding technologies: gas metal arc welding (GMAW), shielded metal arc welding (SMAW), gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW), submerged arc welding (SAW), and flux-cored arc welding (FCAW). Welding is considered one of the most energy-intensive processes in manufacturing. This study was performed in accordance with the international standard ISO 14040/14044 by using attributional life cycle assessment (aLCA).MethodsThe functional unit is defined as the “the development of 1 metre of welding seam (qualified by ASME section IX requirements) to join 25 millimetres thick of metal plates made in carbon steel material and considering a V-bevel configuration.” Different configurations of base/filler materials and standardized bevel geometries have been analyzed as welding scenarios. The inventory considers all inputs (e.g., electric energy and filler material) and outputs (e.g., fume emissions and slags) involved in each welding process. A framework for data collection starting from available project documentation is presented as an innovative solution for the inventory phase. The impact assessment includes the human health, resources (midpoints/Endpoint), and ecosystems (Endpoint) categories from the ReCiPe (H) and cumulative energy demand (CED) methods.Results and discussionThis study reveals a notable dominance in terms of the environmental burdens of GTAW and SMAW processes, as they present higher impacts in most of the impact categories. SMAW is the most energy-consuming process, and this aspect is reflected in the environmental performance. Conversely, GMAW presents the least environmental load, accounting for less than one third compared with GTAW in terms of the CED Indicator and performing very well in terms of the ReCiPe Endpoint Indicator. Via analysis of different scenarios, the main outcomes are the following: (i) the use of V bevels significantly increases the environmental load when the metal plate thickness increases and (ii) the use of specific materials such as Inconel alloy exacerbates the environmental concerns associated with welding processes.ConclusionsThe use of project documentation allows robust analysis of welding activity. Sensitivity analysis shows how the range of values for specific parameters (e.g., volts and amps) affects each technology in a different manner. Indeed, those ranges have a limited impact on the result accuracy (up to 20%) for more automatized welding processes (e.g., GMAW, SAW, and FCAW), in which only a small number of parameters are set by the operator, and the operator skills are less influential on the quality of the weld.

  • Comparative life cycle assessment of metal arc welding technologies by using engineering design documentation
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019
    Co-Authors: Claudio Favi, Federico Campi, Michele Germani
    Abstract:

    The paper aims to analyze and compare the environmental performances of metal arc welding technologies: gas metal arc welding (GMAW), shielded metal arc welding (SMAW), gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW), submerged arc welding (SAW), and flux-cored arc welding (FCAW). Welding is considered one of the most energy-intensive processes in manufacturing. This study was performed in accordance with the international standard ISO 14040/14044 by using attributional life cycle assessment (aLCA). The functional unit is defined as the “the development of 1 metre of welding seam (qualified by ASME section IX requirements) to join 25 millimetres thick of metal plates made in carbon steel material and considering a V-bevel configuration.” Different configurations of base/filler materials and standardized bevel geometries have been analyzed as welding scenarios. The inventory considers all inputs (e.g., electric energy and filler material) and outputs (e.g., fume emissions and slags) involved in each welding process. A framework for data collection starting from available project documentation is presented as an innovative solution for the inventory phase. The impact assessment includes the human health, resources (midpoints/Endpoint), and ecosystems (Endpoint) categories from the ReCiPe (H) and cumulative energy demand (CED) methods. This study reveals a notable dominance in terms of the environmental burdens of GTAW and SMAW processes, as they present higher impacts in most of the impact categories. SMAW is the most energy-consuming process, and this aspect is reflected in the environmental performance. Conversely, GMAW presents the least environmental load, accounting for less than one third compared with GTAW in terms of the CED Indicator and performing very well in terms of the ReCiPe Endpoint Indicator. Via analysis of different scenarios, the main outcomes are the following: (i) the use of V bevels significantly increases the environmental load when the metal plate thickness increases and (ii) the use of specific materials such as Inconel alloy exacerbates the environmental concerns associated with welding processes. The use of project documentation allows robust analysis of welding activity. Sensitivity analysis shows how the range of values for specific parameters (e.g., volts and amps) affects each technology in a different manner. Indeed, those ranges have a limited impact on the result accuracy (up to 20%) for more automatized welding processes (e.g., GMAW, SAW, and FCAW), in which only a small number of parameters are set by the operator, and the operator skills are less influential on the quality of the weld.

Morten Birkved - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Environmental assessment of Smart City Solutions using a coupled urban metabolism—life cycle impact assessment approach
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019
    Co-Authors: Kikki Lambrecht Ipsen, Regitze Kjær Zimmermann, Per Sieverts Nielsen, Morten Birkved
    Abstract:

    Purpose The purpose of the study is to quantify the environmental performance of Smart City Solutions at urban system level and thus evaluate their contribution to develop environmentally sustainable urban systems. Further, the study illustrates how this quantification is conducted. Methods The case city chosen in our modeling is Copenhagen, where seven Smart City Solutions are introduced: Green Roofs, Smart Windows, Pneumatic Waste Collection, Sensorized Waste Collection, Smart Water Meters, Greywater Recycling, and Smart Energy Grid. The assessment is conducted using a fused urban metabolism (UM)-life cycle assessment (LCA) approach, referred to as UM-LCA. The UM-LCA uses metabolic flows across an urban system as inputs and outputs in an LCA. All life cycle stages of the metabolic flows can be accounted for by using this approach and burden shifting from one stage to another is made quantifiable and hence transparent. The impact assessment is conducted using the ReCiPe method. Results and discussion The results obtained for the midpoint Indicator, global warming potential (GWP), show reduced environmental performance effect at 75% relative to a business as usual reference scenario by introducing Smart Windows. Furthermore, the GWP Indicator shows an environmental improvement of 10% for a Smart Energy Grid solution. Introduction of Pneumatic Waste Collection or Greywater Recycling reveals a minor negative performance effect of 0.76 and 0.70%, respectively, for GWP. The performance changes in terms of GWP for the remaining solutions are so small that these are expected to be within the uncertainty of the calculations. To obtain Endpoint Indicators (damages), the entire palette of ReCiPe Indicators is included. The results of the Endpoint Indicator assessment yield a tendency similar to the one observed for climate change. Conclusions It is found that the implementation of Smart City Solutions generally has a negative influence on the environmental sustainability performance of an urban system. The limited positive influence from the Smart City Solutions is due to burden shifting from the direct impacts of the urban system to embedded impacts which are out of sight for most policy makers. The influence of the Solutions on Copenhagen is generally small, due to a focus on reducing in areas that are not a large environmental burden in Copenhagen. The results are not sufficient to discard the idea of using Smart City Solutions to reduce environmental impacts, but highlight the importance of choosing solutions with the right focus and optimizing the design to best fit the intensions.

  • Environmental assessment of Smart City Solutions using a coupled urban metabolism—life cycle impact assessment approach
    International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2018
    Co-Authors: Kikki Lambrecht Ipsen, Regitze Kjær Zimmermann, Per Sieverts Nielsen, Morten Birkved
    Abstract:

    The purpose of the study is to quantify the environmental performance of Smart City Solutions at urban system level and thus evaluate their contribution to develop environmentally sustainable urban systems. Further, the study illustrates how this quantification is conducted. The case city chosen in our modeling is Copenhagen, where seven Smart City Solutions are introduced: Green Roofs, Smart Windows, Pneumatic Waste Collection, Sensorized Waste Collection, Smart Water Meters, Greywater Recycling, and Smart Energy Grid. The assessment is conducted using a fused urban metabolism (UM)-life cycle assessment (LCA) approach, referred to as UM-LCA. The UM-LCA uses metabolic flows across an urban system as inputs and outputs in an LCA. All life cycle stages of the metabolic flows can be accounted for by using this approach and burden shifting from one stage to another is made quantifiable and hence transparent. The impact assessment is conducted using the ReCiPe method. The results obtained for the midpoint Indicator, global warming potential (GWP), show reduced environmental performance effect at 75% relative to a business as usual reference scenario by introducing Smart Windows. Furthermore, the GWP Indicator shows an environmental improvement of 10% for a Smart Energy Grid solution. Introduction of Pneumatic Waste Collection or Greywater Recycling reveals a minor negative performance effect of 0.76 and 0.70%, respectively, for GWP. The performance changes in terms of GWP for the remaining solutions are so small that these are expected to be within the uncertainty of the calculations. To obtain Endpoint Indicators (damages), the entire palette of ReCiPe Indicators is included. The results of the Endpoint Indicator assessment yield a tendency similar to the one observed for climate change. It is found that the implementation of Smart City Solutions generally has a negative influence on the environmental sustainability performance of an urban system. The limited positive influence from the Smart City Solutions is due to burden shifting from the direct impacts of the urban system to embedded impacts which are out of sight for most policy makers. The influence of the Solutions on Copenhagen is generally small, due to a focus on reducing in areas that are not a large environmental burden in Copenhagen. The results are not sufficient to discard the idea of using Smart City Solutions to reduce environmental impacts, but highlight the importance of choosing solutions with the right focus and optimizing the design to best fit the intensions.

Federico Campi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Comparative life cycle assessment of metal arc welding technologies by using engineering design documentation
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019
    Co-Authors: Claudio Favi, Federico Campi, Michele Germani
    Abstract:

    PurposeThe paper aims to analyze and compare the environmental performances of metal arc welding technologies: gas metal arc welding (GMAW), shielded metal arc welding (SMAW), gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW), submerged arc welding (SAW), and flux-cored arc welding (FCAW). Welding is considered one of the most energy-intensive processes in manufacturing. This study was performed in accordance with the international standard ISO 14040/14044 by using attributional life cycle assessment (aLCA).MethodsThe functional unit is defined as the “the development of 1 metre of welding seam (qualified by ASME section IX requirements) to join 25 millimetres thick of metal plates made in carbon steel material and considering a V-bevel configuration.” Different configurations of base/filler materials and standardized bevel geometries have been analyzed as welding scenarios. The inventory considers all inputs (e.g., electric energy and filler material) and outputs (e.g., fume emissions and slags) involved in each welding process. A framework for data collection starting from available project documentation is presented as an innovative solution for the inventory phase. The impact assessment includes the human health, resources (midpoints/Endpoint), and ecosystems (Endpoint) categories from the ReCiPe (H) and cumulative energy demand (CED) methods.Results and discussionThis study reveals a notable dominance in terms of the environmental burdens of GTAW and SMAW processes, as they present higher impacts in most of the impact categories. SMAW is the most energy-consuming process, and this aspect is reflected in the environmental performance. Conversely, GMAW presents the least environmental load, accounting for less than one third compared with GTAW in terms of the CED Indicator and performing very well in terms of the ReCiPe Endpoint Indicator. Via analysis of different scenarios, the main outcomes are the following: (i) the use of V bevels significantly increases the environmental load when the metal plate thickness increases and (ii) the use of specific materials such as Inconel alloy exacerbates the environmental concerns associated with welding processes.ConclusionsThe use of project documentation allows robust analysis of welding activity. Sensitivity analysis shows how the range of values for specific parameters (e.g., volts and amps) affects each technology in a different manner. Indeed, those ranges have a limited impact on the result accuracy (up to 20%) for more automatized welding processes (e.g., GMAW, SAW, and FCAW), in which only a small number of parameters are set by the operator, and the operator skills are less influential on the quality of the weld.

  • Comparative life cycle assessment of metal arc welding technologies by using engineering design documentation
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019
    Co-Authors: Claudio Favi, Federico Campi, Michele Germani
    Abstract:

    The paper aims to analyze and compare the environmental performances of metal arc welding technologies: gas metal arc welding (GMAW), shielded metal arc welding (SMAW), gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW), submerged arc welding (SAW), and flux-cored arc welding (FCAW). Welding is considered one of the most energy-intensive processes in manufacturing. This study was performed in accordance with the international standard ISO 14040/14044 by using attributional life cycle assessment (aLCA). The functional unit is defined as the “the development of 1 metre of welding seam (qualified by ASME section IX requirements) to join 25 millimetres thick of metal plates made in carbon steel material and considering a V-bevel configuration.” Different configurations of base/filler materials and standardized bevel geometries have been analyzed as welding scenarios. The inventory considers all inputs (e.g., electric energy and filler material) and outputs (e.g., fume emissions and slags) involved in each welding process. A framework for data collection starting from available project documentation is presented as an innovative solution for the inventory phase. The impact assessment includes the human health, resources (midpoints/Endpoint), and ecosystems (Endpoint) categories from the ReCiPe (H) and cumulative energy demand (CED) methods. This study reveals a notable dominance in terms of the environmental burdens of GTAW and SMAW processes, as they present higher impacts in most of the impact categories. SMAW is the most energy-consuming process, and this aspect is reflected in the environmental performance. Conversely, GMAW presents the least environmental load, accounting for less than one third compared with GTAW in terms of the CED Indicator and performing very well in terms of the ReCiPe Endpoint Indicator. Via analysis of different scenarios, the main outcomes are the following: (i) the use of V bevels significantly increases the environmental load when the metal plate thickness increases and (ii) the use of specific materials such as Inconel alloy exacerbates the environmental concerns associated with welding processes. The use of project documentation allows robust analysis of welding activity. Sensitivity analysis shows how the range of values for specific parameters (e.g., volts and amps) affects each technology in a different manner. Indeed, those ranges have a limited impact on the result accuracy (up to 20%) for more automatized welding processes (e.g., GMAW, SAW, and FCAW), in which only a small number of parameters are set by the operator, and the operator skills are less influential on the quality of the weld.

Kikki Lambrecht Ipsen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Environmental assessment of Smart City Solutions using a coupled urban metabolism—life cycle impact assessment approach
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019
    Co-Authors: Kikki Lambrecht Ipsen, Regitze Kjær Zimmermann, Per Sieverts Nielsen, Morten Birkved
    Abstract:

    Purpose The purpose of the study is to quantify the environmental performance of Smart City Solutions at urban system level and thus evaluate their contribution to develop environmentally sustainable urban systems. Further, the study illustrates how this quantification is conducted. Methods The case city chosen in our modeling is Copenhagen, where seven Smart City Solutions are introduced: Green Roofs, Smart Windows, Pneumatic Waste Collection, Sensorized Waste Collection, Smart Water Meters, Greywater Recycling, and Smart Energy Grid. The assessment is conducted using a fused urban metabolism (UM)-life cycle assessment (LCA) approach, referred to as UM-LCA. The UM-LCA uses metabolic flows across an urban system as inputs and outputs in an LCA. All life cycle stages of the metabolic flows can be accounted for by using this approach and burden shifting from one stage to another is made quantifiable and hence transparent. The impact assessment is conducted using the ReCiPe method. Results and discussion The results obtained for the midpoint Indicator, global warming potential (GWP), show reduced environmental performance effect at 75% relative to a business as usual reference scenario by introducing Smart Windows. Furthermore, the GWP Indicator shows an environmental improvement of 10% for a Smart Energy Grid solution. Introduction of Pneumatic Waste Collection or Greywater Recycling reveals a minor negative performance effect of 0.76 and 0.70%, respectively, for GWP. The performance changes in terms of GWP for the remaining solutions are so small that these are expected to be within the uncertainty of the calculations. To obtain Endpoint Indicators (damages), the entire palette of ReCiPe Indicators is included. The results of the Endpoint Indicator assessment yield a tendency similar to the one observed for climate change. Conclusions It is found that the implementation of Smart City Solutions generally has a negative influence on the environmental sustainability performance of an urban system. The limited positive influence from the Smart City Solutions is due to burden shifting from the direct impacts of the urban system to embedded impacts which are out of sight for most policy makers. The influence of the Solutions on Copenhagen is generally small, due to a focus on reducing in areas that are not a large environmental burden in Copenhagen. The results are not sufficient to discard the idea of using Smart City Solutions to reduce environmental impacts, but highlight the importance of choosing solutions with the right focus and optimizing the design to best fit the intensions.

  • Environmental assessment of Smart City Solutions using a coupled urban metabolism—life cycle impact assessment approach
    International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2018
    Co-Authors: Kikki Lambrecht Ipsen, Regitze Kjær Zimmermann, Per Sieverts Nielsen, Morten Birkved
    Abstract:

    The purpose of the study is to quantify the environmental performance of Smart City Solutions at urban system level and thus evaluate their contribution to develop environmentally sustainable urban systems. Further, the study illustrates how this quantification is conducted. The case city chosen in our modeling is Copenhagen, where seven Smart City Solutions are introduced: Green Roofs, Smart Windows, Pneumatic Waste Collection, Sensorized Waste Collection, Smart Water Meters, Greywater Recycling, and Smart Energy Grid. The assessment is conducted using a fused urban metabolism (UM)-life cycle assessment (LCA) approach, referred to as UM-LCA. The UM-LCA uses metabolic flows across an urban system as inputs and outputs in an LCA. All life cycle stages of the metabolic flows can be accounted for by using this approach and burden shifting from one stage to another is made quantifiable and hence transparent. The impact assessment is conducted using the ReCiPe method. The results obtained for the midpoint Indicator, global warming potential (GWP), show reduced environmental performance effect at 75% relative to a business as usual reference scenario by introducing Smart Windows. Furthermore, the GWP Indicator shows an environmental improvement of 10% for a Smart Energy Grid solution. Introduction of Pneumatic Waste Collection or Greywater Recycling reveals a minor negative performance effect of 0.76 and 0.70%, respectively, for GWP. The performance changes in terms of GWP for the remaining solutions are so small that these are expected to be within the uncertainty of the calculations. To obtain Endpoint Indicators (damages), the entire palette of ReCiPe Indicators is included. The results of the Endpoint Indicator assessment yield a tendency similar to the one observed for climate change. It is found that the implementation of Smart City Solutions generally has a negative influence on the environmental sustainability performance of an urban system. The limited positive influence from the Smart City Solutions is due to burden shifting from the direct impacts of the urban system to embedded impacts which are out of sight for most policy makers. The influence of the Solutions on Copenhagen is generally small, due to a focus on reducing in areas that are not a large environmental burden in Copenhagen. The results are not sufficient to discard the idea of using Smart City Solutions to reduce environmental impacts, but highlight the importance of choosing solutions with the right focus and optimizing the design to best fit the intensions.