A protocol to perform usage oriented ecodesign

G Model

CIRP-1207; No. of Pages 4 CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology jou rnal homep age : ht t p: // ees .e lse vi er . com /ci r p/ def a ult . asp

A protocol to perform usage oriented ecodesign Emmanuelle Cor, Lucie Domingo, Daniel Brissaud (1)*, Peggy Zwolinski Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Laboratoire G-SCOP, Grenoble, France

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Keyword: Design Environment Usage

Ecodesin strategies only based on technology efficiency have reached a steady state in improving product environmental impacts in use. New solutions should be investigated in order to consider the contribution of the users themselves to the actual environmental impacts of the product during the use phase. This paper presents a protocol to perform usage oriented eco-design. Combining in depth analysis of tasks realization with a more holistic model of the entire use phase, this protocol can support the design activities. An application to an espresso coffee maker illustrates the protocol implementation and show how this protocol contributes to help designers to perform usage oriented ecodesign. ß 2014 CIRP.

1. Introduction Consumer products, their design and their environmental impacts, have been studied widely in the last period. Mass customization was proposed to increase customers’ satisfaction with acceptable production costs [1]. The environmental burden was studied through their manufacturing and end-of-life phases and solutions were proposed for smart manufacturing energy consumption [2–4], greener processes [5,6] and reuse and remanufacturing strategies [7]. Many improvements have already been done but the environmental impact of most consumer products is dominated by their use phase [8]. What do industry and academy to improve the environmental performance throughout the use phase of products? Eco-design strategies were developed based on product technology performance: substitution of technologies, process efficiency and architecture transformation [9]. The decrease of in-use energy consumption is strongly focused [10,11]. Manufacturing processes are also studied to improve the in-use technology performance. A part of the product environmental impacts tend to be driven by the manufacture of the product components since components fabricated with higher precision typically allow the product to operate at higher efficiencies [12]. Helu and Dornfeld [8] investigated the relationship between manufacturing process precision, functional product performance and life cycle environmental impacts. Those strategies based only on technology have reached a steady state in improving product environmental impacts in the use phase. New solutions should be investigated in order to consider the contribution of the users themselves in the actual environmental impacts of the product during the use phase. Interest on product innovation and usage oriented innovation has grown [13] alongside with questioning users in the design process [14]. Design for sustainable behavior [15] has led to several solutions for adapting usage oriented innovation on the product for * Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 4 76 82 70 06. E-mail address: [email protected] (D. Brissaud).

environmental improvements (Fig. 1). This area of research seeks a technology based solution where technology is the core element in bringing a higher environmental performance, influencing users’ behavior toward more sustainable routines and compensating usage drifts when necessary. Leaning on those research results, we propose to go further in the direction of addressing user experience as part of the eco-design process. We postulate that the dramatical decrease of environmental impacts of products during the use phase will only be effective by the simultaneous design of the product and its user experience. This paper aims at giving a protocol to perform usage oriented ecodesign. The protocol is described in Section 2. Section 3 illustrates the core steps of the protocol on a coffee maker eco-design process. Section 4 concludes the paper in discussing results and perspectives.

Fig. 1. DfSB strategies. Adapted from [15].

2. The protocol for usage oriented ecodesign Improving product usage and user experience can be a new source for enhancing product environmental performance. First of all, the evaluation of what is impacting over the use phase is fundamental and we propose a task-oriented model of the use

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.096 0007-8506/ß 2014 CIRP.

Please cite this article in press as: Cor E, et al. A protocol to perform usage oriented ecodesign. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.096

G Model

CIRP-1207; No. of Pages 4 2

E. Cor et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

phase to identify product and users parameters that significantly contribute to environmental impact at a macro level. Then, task contents (micro level) are deepened to define design interventions that mix product, user behavior and experience with the product. The proposed protocol is a 6-steps method split into two main phases that address the macro and the micro levels respectively. 2.1. Phase 1 (macro level): break the use phase down to moments that can be assessed then classified Step 1. Identify the types of moments and the initial usage scenario A model of the continuous usage of the product throughout the use phase is needed to have a full representation of the phase from the purchase action to when the product is of no need for the user and is brought to the end-of-life collector. The use phase is defined in smaller units of time called moments, which are similar to what ergonomics defines as tasks and other authors as sub-phases of the use phase. The granularity of the moments depends on both the accuracy expected and the data available. The set of the moments cover the entire use phase. A moment characterises activities that start when input conditions are there and stop when the expected state is achieved. Domingo et al. [16] have defined seven different types of moments for classical consumer products: installation, learning, core use, maintenance and cleaning, storage, upgrade, decommissioning. The number and type of moments are defined depending on product functions and on users’ routines. Finally, the set of moments creates the scenario of the use phase when moments are coordinated together to cover the whole lifetime of the phase. Fig. 2 gives the general model of the product lifecycle for eco-design activity based on the environmental assessment of moments performed throughout the use phase.

Fig. 2. Product usage modeling for eco-design.

Step 3. Select the most impacting and improvable user moments With the environmental assessment, the most impacting moments can be identified. The impact can be broken down into impacts related to users’ solicitation and impact related to product flows. This differentiation between users’ and product impacts is helpful to identify the most improvable moments. If the contribution to the environmental impact is mainly associated to product flows, technical improvements should be made (Fig. 1 – strategy 1). If there are few technical improvements identified by the design team, the moment with high product contributions is considered not improvable. Nevertheless, if the contributions are mainly associated to user behavior, strategies that directly connects product in use and users (Fig. 1 – strategies 2–4) should be considered. 2.2. Phase 2 (micro level): improve the in-use environmental performance by design interventions Step 4. Identify possible design interventions to improve product usage The main objective of the protocol is to decrease the environmental impacts of the most impacting users’ moments by modifying user’s behavior thanks to the implementation of design intervention strategies. According to studies led on design strategies for sustainable behavior, a detailed classification of the intervention strategies found in literature can be made depending on: the objective of the intervention on the user, the possible design for sustainable behavior strategies to employ for the implementation, the implementation format for the design intervention. All this information has been grouped and summarized in Table 1. Table 1 New features implementation format related to DfSB strategies. Interventions objective Selvefors et al. [21]

DfSB strategies Tang et al. [15]

Implementation format Selvefors et al. [15]

Increase knowledge

Eco-information Eco-information Eco-information Eco-choice

Adapted information Written information Oral information Demonstration

Engage

Eco-feedback Eco-choice Eco-spur Eco-steer Eco-spur

Comparative feedback Self-monitoring Social validation Objective to reach Competition

Steer and spur

Eco-spur Eco-steer Eco-spur Eco-choice Eco-technology Eco-steer

Guilt Constraints Penalties Motivation Persuasive Technology Behavior steering

Create attention

Eco-technology Eco-feedback Eco-feedback

Affordance Real time-feedback Personalized feedback

Step 2. Use phase environmental impact assessment A product lifecycle has been defined as the succession of the following phases: raw material acquisition, manufacturing, trade and delivery, use/maintenance and re-use, recycling, energy recovery, disposal [17]. Improvements of product environmental impact are based on an assessment of its lifecycle and modifications of product according to the most impacting aspects of it. Even when focusing on the use phase, the contribution of the other lifecycle phases should be considered additionally. Each one of the 7 types of moments has been parameterized to give easily the in-use environmental burden from specific LCA modules pre-defined for the product category. Every task is given an in-use environmental performance. Environmental performances of moments over use are evaluated depending on the different types of consumption (energy, water, etc.) and wastes, i.e. flows, that will be needed to perform them and how those different flows will be solicited by users The solicitation of users can be identified based on different sources of information: tasks analysis, literature, online polls. . . [16]. Then, the environmental impact of the whole use phase is generated by the repetition of all the different moments over the product lifetime and finally the elementary environmental performance of moments are summed against the scenario studied for the whole use phase.

Then for each moment previously identified as a most impacting moment and depending on the design strategies retained, designers can select possible format to realize new product features to influence users’ behavior. In the next step of the protocol, an experimental procedure has to be developed to observe environmental performance during the usage of those new features. So, each design intervention has then to be implemented on the product to be tested and assessed from an environmental behavior point of view. Step 5. Connect user’s experience activity to product features Designers have to retrieve information about the use phase to determine how new features on the product influence the behavior and decrease the environmental impact. For this, an observation of the use phase has to be realized. The following schema (Fig. 3) adapted from [15,18], lists the elements chosen to be recorded during the experiment. At the end of the experiment, a statistical

Please cite this article in press as: Cor E, et al. A protocol to perform usage oriented ecodesign. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.096

G Model

CIRP-1207; No. of Pages 4 E. Cor et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

3

mainly to power management and power consumption (automatic stand-by, maximum power consumption in ‘‘standby and off modes’’. . .) [20]. These technical improvements are a first step to reach environmental objectives in the use phase by decreasing the impact for maintaining the coffee machine ready to use. We can consider that product based improvements have been important, driven by the regulation and that moment improvements by technical improvement does not provide a large amount of benefits. In order to decrease the coffee machine use environmental impacts, the strategies 2–4 of Fig. 1 have to be tested. 3.2. Identification of possible design interventions to improve coffee machine usage (step 4) Fig. 3. Environmental impacts related to use behavior influenced by users’ variables and design intervention strategies.

analysis has to be conducted to establish links between all the variables, to understand how the user is responding when confronted to an instrumented product. At the end of this stage, designers are able:  To measure the efficiency of the design intervention strategies from an environmental point of view.  To identify the best implementation for intervention strategies considering environmental behavior during the usage. Step 6. Calculate the environmental benefits related to the design interventions implementations At this stage, it is essential for designers to adopt a life cycle vision to select the final solution. So, the life cycle environmental impacts of added technologies related to the implementation of intervention strategies have to be finally balanced with the in-use environmental benefits observed. Then, the right design solutions for environmental performances can be realized. 3. Case study: the eco-design of a coffee maker to reduce in-use environmental impacts An espresso coffee maker has been chosen as a case study for evaluating the environmental impacts in the use phase and proposing design intervention strategies to improve environmental impacts of the product. The coffee maker environmental issue is very well-known based on common knowledge formalized in [19,20]. This literature gave inputs for steps 1–3, meaning that the macro-level of the use phase can be easily characterized. In this section, we start from those results concerning phase 1 and then the following sections will explain more in details the findings in implementing steps 4 and 5 of the protocol. 3.1. Results of the phase 1: identification of the most impacting and improvable moments For the initial scenario of the coffee machine, the following moments would happen: installation, learning, making coffee (as the core usage), decalcification (for maintenance), storage and decommissioning. In the case of the coffee machine, the most impacting moment can be associated to the core use moment ‘‘making a coffee’’ that is repeated three time a day over a lifetime of three years (hypothesis of [19]). The other moments have low to no environmental impacts. The impacts of making a coffee are due to both the product flow needed to realize the task and user behavior with the coffee machine, both influencing the energy consumption. For a hard cap espresso coffee machine [19], energy consumption can be broken down in two elements: consumption to make the coffee and for maintaining the machine ready to make the coffee. The first element is associated to a total consumption, for one occurrence of 73 Wh. The second one is associated to a product parameter of 10 W and a user behavior of keeping the machine ready for 3.6 h. The European Commission is proposing a regulation based on product technical improvements related

Four design intervention strategies have been retained to be tested and implemented to identify the possible design solutions for achieving environmental performances during the use phase by the modification of user behavior: two from strategy 2 (ecofeedback and written information), one from strategy 3 (incentive solutions based on the reaching of a specific objective), and one from strategy 4 (persuasive technology) [15,21]. Table 2 illustrates their implementation on the coffee maker. Table 2 Instrumentation of intervention strategies on the coffee maker. Intervention strategy Eco-feedback (S2)

Objective

Diminution of electricity consumption Persuasive technology Diminution of electricity (S4) and water consumption Diminution of electricity Written information (S2) and water consumption

Implementation Sensor + screen on the machine Automatic switch-off Information on a paper sheet, provided to the user

Several interfaces have been proposed by designers and a set of new design features have been realized and implemented on coffee machines. The design features have been chosen depending on the available technology on the machine and depending on ergonomic recommendations. 3.3. Influence of eco-information on users’ behavior (step 5) Here, a focus is done on written information provided to coffee makers, to illustrate the way a design intervention can modify the in-use environmental impacts. The micro-analysis of the moment ‘‘making a coffee’’ was carried out by the users’ activities analysis methodology [22]. Ergonomic observations were conducted to capture users’ behavior in practice with espresso coffee makers and to measure environmental impacts during the activities for making one coffee. This observation aims to understand and identify the possible environmental impacts variations during the use. It aims also to see the influence of an informative design intervention on the environmental behavior of the user. Three technologies of espresso coffee makers (PP capsules, paper pod, and grounded coffee) were tested in this study. 12 users (50% male) were recruited to participate to the observations. All participants were regular espresso coffee maker users. Three experiments were carried out in a row. In the first trial, every participant was asked to prepare one coffee on the espresso coffee machine with which he/she makes coffee as at his/her home without any instruction and was monitored. In the second trial, technological information on the three coffee makers was given to the participant, and then he/she chose one of three machines to make coffee and was monitored. For the last trial, information about environmental impacts of each espresso machine was given and then he/she chose one of three machines to make coffee and was monitored once more. During each trial, two environmental parameters were measured: - The energy consumption for making one coffee (from the end of the preheating of the machine until the stop of the machine after making one coffee) (Wh).

Please cite this article in press as: Cor E, et al. A protocol to perform usage oriented ecodesign. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.096

G Model

CIRP-1207; No. of Pages 4 E. Cor et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

4

implementation. In all the cases, he will make the final decision avoiding impact transfers [11] that is essential either like here, when focusing on the energy consumption in the use phase. 4. Conclusions

Fig. 4. Evolution of the energy consumption’s mean (Wh) for the three trial of the experiment.

- The quantity of water used by the participant to fill in the tank of the coffee maker (ml). Fig. 4 shows the evolution of the energy consumption mean for all 12 participants for the three trials. It demonstrates that when technical and environmental information is given to the user, the environmental impacts of the use phase tend to significantly decrease. The same tendency is observed with water consumption. It shows that informative design intervention on the product could lead to the modification of the user’s behavior to lower impacts and that the format of the eco-information influences a lot the level of environmental benefits. 3.4. Calculate the environmental benefits related to the design interventions (step 6) The final step of the procedure is to select the design solution from a life cycle vision. An LCA has been carried out with the following functional unit: ‘‘to realize 4 cups of coffee per day for 5 years’’ and the ecoindicator99 method has been used for the environmental impacts calculation. This analysis has been realized to evaluate the potential environmental benefit peaks that a right use of the product can reach. This peak can be reached from all four design strategies and must be balanced with the impact of the technologies newly encapsulated in the solution (see Table 3). The added impacts related to the sticker are negligible compared to the potential energy gains during the usage. However the long term efficiency of this solution on the user tends to decrease (shortness effect). With the persuasive technology (automatic switched off), the maximum environmental benefits are achieved in any case and consistently over time. Nevertheless, this design solution can be frustrating for the user who cannot control the way his coffee is made. The screen solution proposes an adapted message to the user over time and avoiding the shortness effect and the user’s frustration. But its environmental impact is higher than the two other solutions and if we consider the single score calculation with ecoindicator99, the impacts generated by the screen are not completely compensated by the energy gains during the use phase. The increase of the highest normalized impacts (Respiratory inorganics, Minerals and Fossil fuels) is balancing the decrease of the impacts related to the energy consumption. This means that the designer has now to choose the final solution depending on the way he wants to communicate on its product or that he has to define a less impacting solution to provide the eco-feedback knowing the potential gains related to its Table 3 Qualitative analysis of intervention strategies. Intervention strategy

User’s Potential Potential increase energy of life cycle environmental perception gains Impacts generated by the design interventions

Eco-feedback (S2)

+20%

Persuasive technology (S4) Written information (S2)

+30% +5%

From 8% to 60% depending on the impact 0% 0%

++ – +

This protocol contributes to help designers to perform usage oriented ecodesign because it allows a more efficient adaptation of product features taking into account users’ sustainable behaviors. Because of the macro and micro characterization of the use phase, it will be very easy, in a next future, to reuse the experiment results as generic results in eco-design methodology integrating the use phase [23]. In the perspective of more and more product service system approaches [24], with shared product, the environmental impact of the use phase has to be addressed carefully. Moreover, the rebound effect concerning the use is considered as negligible here in the case of a coffee machine, but it has to be considered and controlled by specific devices in other cases. References [1] Tseng M, Jiao J, Merchant M-E (1996) Design for mass customization. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 45(1):153–156. [2] Behrendt T, Zein A, Min S (2012) Development of an energy consumption monitoring procedure for machine tools. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 61(1):43–46. [3] Seow Y, Rahimifard S (2011) A framework for modelling energy consumption within manufacturing systems. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology 4(3):258–264. [4] Kara S, Manmek S, Herrmann C (2010) Global manufacturing and the embodied energy of products. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 59(1):29–32. [5] Paris H, Museau M (2012) Contribution to environmental performance of the dry-vibratory drilling technology. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 61(1):47–50. [6] Cheah L, et al (2013) Manufacturing-focused emissions reductions in footwear production. Journal of Cleaner Production 44:18–29. [7] Zwolinski P, Brissaud D (2008) Remanufacturing strategies to support product design and redesign. Journal of Engineering Design 19(4):321–335. [8] Helu M, Vijayaraghavan A, Dornfeld D (2011) Evaluating the relationship between use phase environmental impacts and manufacturing process precision. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 60(1):49–52. [9] Plouffe S, Lanoie P, Berneman C, Vernier M-F (2011) Economic benefits tied to ecodesign. Journal of Cleaner Production 19:573–579. [10] Domingo L, Mathieux F, Brissaud D (2011) A new ‘‘In-Use Energy consumption’’ indicator for the design of energy efficient electr(on)ics. Journal of Engineering Design 23(3):217–235. [11] Evrard D, Brissaud DF, Mathieux F (2013) Synergico: a method for systematic integration of energy efficiency into the design process of electr(on)ic equipment. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 6(3):225–238. [12] Aurich JC, Linke B, Hauschild M, Carrella M, Kirsch B (2013) Sustainability of abrasive processes. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 62(2):653–672. [13] Bruseberg A, MCDonagh-Philip D (2001) New product development by eliciting user experience and aspirations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 55:435–452. [14] Hara T, Shimada S, Arai T (2013) Design-of-use and design-in-use by customers in differentiating value creation. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 62(1):103–106. [15] Lilley D (2009) Design for sustainable behaviour: strategies and perceptions. Design Studies 30:704–720. [16] Domingo L, Brissaud D, Mathieux F (2013) Implementing scenario to better address the use phase in product ecodesign. International Conference on Engineering Design ICED 2013. Presented at the ICED 2013, Seoul, Korea. [17] ISO (2003) XP ISO/TR 14062: Environmental Management – Integrating Environmental Aspects into Product Design and Development. [18] Sauer J, Wiese BS, Ru¨ttinger B (2004) Ecological performance of electrical consumer products: the influence of automation and information-based measures. Applied Ergonomics 35:37–47. [19] Mudgal S, Tinneti B (2011) Preparatory studies for eco-design requirement of EuPs – Lot 25 – Non-Tertiary Coffee Machine – Final report. (No. Contract No. TREN/D3/91-2007-Lot 25-SI2.521716). [20] European Commission (2013) REGULATION No. 1275/2008 Ecodesign requirements for standby, off mode electric power consumption of electrical and electronic household and office equipment. [21] Selvefors A, Pedersen KB, Rahe U (2011) Design for sustainable consumption behaviour: systematising the use of behavioural intervention strategies. Proceedings of DPPI 11, 19–26. Presented at the 5th Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, ACM Press, Milan1. [22] Wickens CD, Gordon SE, Liu Y (2004) An Introduction to Human Factors Engineering, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. [23] Dufrene M, Zwolinski P, Brissaud D (2013) An engineering platform to support a practical integrated eco-design methodology. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 62(1):131–134. [24] Sakao T, Lindhal M (2012) A value based evaluation method for Product/ Service System using design information. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 61(1):51–54.

Please cite this article in press as: Cor E, et al. A protocol to perform usage oriented ecodesign. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.096