An investigation into the environmental impact of product recovery methods to support sustainable manufacturing within small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)

School of Engineering

Associated organisational unit

Manufacturing

Electronic data

IJMMME IGI Paper of Year Award 2011
Final published version, 1.05 MB, PDF document

Text available via DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4018/ijmmme.2011040101
Final published version

Keywords

Automotive Components, Carbon Footprinting, EOL Products, Product Recovery, remanufacturing, Repairing, SMEs, Sustainable Manufacturing, Waste Management

View graph of relations

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

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

Bibtex

@article{9b658b39330d4b9cb6c00bb1ade2df26,

title = "An investigation into the environmental impact of product recovery methods to support sustainable manufacturing within small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)",

abstract = "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.",

keywords = "Automotive Components, Carbon Footprinting, EOL Products, Product Recovery, remanufacturing, Repairing, SMEs, Sustainable Manufacturing, Waste Management",

author = "Michaela Appleby and Christopher Lambert and Allan Rennie and Adam Buckley",

note = "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.",

year = "2011",

month = apr,

doi = "10.4018/ijmmme.2011040101",

language = "English",

volume = "1",

pages = "1--18",

journal = "International Journal of Manufacturing, Materials, and Mechanical Engineering (IJMMME)",

issn = "2156-1680",

publisher = "IGI Publishing",

number = "2",

}

RIS

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 -

Research

Associated organisational unit

Electronic data

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords