Final published version, 1.05 MB, PDF document
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
An investigation into the environmental impact of product recovery methods to support sustainable manufacturing within small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). / Appleby, Michaela; Lambert, Christopher; Rennie, Allan et al.
In: International Journal of Manufacturing, Materials, and Mechanical Engineering (IJMMME), Vol. 1, No. 2, 04.2011, p. 1-18.Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - An investigation into the environmental impact of product recovery methods to support sustainable manufacturing within small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)
AU - Appleby, Michaela
AU - Lambert, Christopher
AU - Rennie, Allan
AU - Buckley, Adam
N1 - This paper is Winner of the Fifth Annual InfoSciR-Journals Excellence in Research Awards. Selection criteria included: contribution to the field; originality of the research; practicality of research/results; quality of writing; rigor of the research; and substantive research and methodology.
PY - 2011/4
Y1 - 2011/4
N2 - The effects of climate change and government legislation has changed the way in which manufacturers can dispose of their waste, encouraging SMEs to source alternative disposal methods such as those indicated in the waste hierarchy. It is economically and environmentally beneficial to use product recovery methods to divert waste from landfill. The environmental impact of two product recovery methods, remanufacturing and repairing, has been compared via a carbon footprint calculation for a UK-based SME. The calculation has identified that repairing has a lower carbon footprint than remanufacturing, however this only extends the original life-cycle of the product, whereas remanufacturing provides a new life-cycle and warranty, and therefore seen as the most preferable method of product recovery to support sustainable manufacturing.
AB - The effects of climate change and government legislation has changed the way in which manufacturers can dispose of their waste, encouraging SMEs to source alternative disposal methods such as those indicated in the waste hierarchy. It is economically and environmentally beneficial to use product recovery methods to divert waste from landfill. The environmental impact of two product recovery methods, remanufacturing and repairing, has been compared via a carbon footprint calculation for a UK-based SME. The calculation has identified that repairing has a lower carbon footprint than remanufacturing, however this only extends the original life-cycle of the product, whereas remanufacturing provides a new life-cycle and warranty, and therefore seen as the most preferable method of product recovery to support sustainable manufacturing.
KW - Automotive Components
KW - Carbon Footprinting
KW - EOL Products
KW - Product Recovery
KW - remanufacturing
KW - Repairing
KW - SMEs
KW - Sustainable Manufacturing
KW - Waste Management
U2 - 10.4018/ijmmme.2011040101
DO - 10.4018/ijmmme.2011040101
M3 - Journal article
VL - 1
SP - 1
EP - 18
JO - International Journal of Manufacturing, Materials, and Mechanical Engineering (IJMMME)
JF - International Journal of Manufacturing, Materials, and Mechanical Engineering (IJMMME)
SN - 2156-1680
IS - 2
ER -