07 de Abril, 2015

Materiales Avanzados en Manufactura.

Evidencia #6: Eco auditoria.

Profesor: Dr. Eduardo Crdenas Alemn.

Alumno: Ulisses Alberto Heredia Rivera

A00818188

NOTE: Differences of less than 20% are not usually significant.

See notes on precision and data sources.

Page 1 / 3
Tuesday, April 7, 2015

ECO AUDIT

The figure shows a 1700 Watt steam iron. It weighs 1.3Kg, 98% of which is
accounted for by the 7 components listed in the table. The iron heats up on full power
in 4 minutes, is then used, typically, for 20 minutes on half power. At end of life the
iron is dumped as landfill. Create an eco-audit for the iron assuming that is used once
per week over a life of 5 years, using data from the data sheets of Chapter 12. Use
PVC as a proxy for polyurethane.
What conclusions can you draw? How might the energy be reduced?
Steam iron: bill of materials.

Component

Mas
s
( Kg
)

Material

Body

0.15

Heating
element
Base
Cable
sheath , 3
meters
Cable core, 3
meters
Plug body
Plug pins

Shaping
process

Material
energy
(MJ/Kg)

Process energy
(MJ/Kg)

Polypropyle
ne

Molded

97

8.6

0.03
0

Ni chrome

Drawn

134

2.65

0.80

Stainless
steel

Cast

82

3.35

0.18

Polyuretha
ne

Molded

82

10.1

0.05

Copper

Drawn

71

2.0

Phenolic

Molded

92

12.7

Brass

Rolled

71

2.0

0.03
7
0.03

CONCLUSIONS.
Based in the Detailed Eco Audit Report generated for a commercial steam iron, its observed that the major amount of
energy used over the life cycle is in the use phase followed by the material process. A way to reduce energy in product
life cycle might be obtained by means of recycle metal components and reduce the power used to iron.

NOTE: Differences of less than 20% are not usually significant.

See notes on precision and data sources.

Page 1 / 3
Tuesday, April 7, 2015

Eco Audit Report

Product Name

Steam Iron

Product Life (years)

Energy and CO2 Footprint Summary:

Energy Details...

CO2 Details...
Phase

Energy (MJ)

Energy (%)

CO2 (kg)

CO2 (%)

Material

97.2

16.0

5.2

20.8

Manufacture

17.6

2.9

1.32

5.3

0.0

0.0

493

81.1

18.5

73.8

0.255

0.0

0.0179

0.1

608

100

25

100

Transport
Use
Disposal
Total (for first life)
End of life potential

NOTE: Differences of less than 20% are not usually significant.

See notes on precision and data sources.

Page 1 / 3
Tuesday, April 7, 2015

NOTE: Differences of less than 20% are not usually significant.

See notes on precision and data sources.

Page 1 / 3
Tuesday, April 7, 2015

Eco Audit Report

Energy and CO2 Summary

Energy Analysis

Energy (MJ/year)
Equivalent annual environmental burden (averaged over 5 year product life):

122

Detailed breakdown of individual life phases

Energy and CO2 Summary

Material:
Component
Body
Heating element
Base
Cable shealth

Part
Recycled
mass
content* (%)
(kg)

Material

Qty.

Total mass
processed** Energy (MJ)
(kg)

PP (copolymer, impact, flame

retarded HB)

Virgin (0%)

0.15

0.15

16

16.4

Nickel-chromium alloy,
NICHROME V, annealed
(resistance alloy)

Virgin (0%)

0.03

0.03

5.8

6.0

Stainless steel, austenitic,

ASTM CE-30, cast, as cast

50.0%

0.8

0.8

56

57.9

PVC (flexible, Shore A60)

Virgin (0%)

0.18

0.18

12

12.2

Cable core

Copper, C10100, wrought,

hard (electrolytic tough-pitch
h.c. copper)

50.0%

0.05

0.05

1.8

1.9

Plug body

Plug, inlet and outlet

Virgin (0%)

0.037

0.037

4.3

4.4

Plug pins

Brass, CuZn10, C22000,

wrought, soft (gilding metal)

50.0%

0.03

0.03

1.1

1.1

1.3

97

100

Total
*Typical: Includes 'recycle fraction in current supply'
**Where applicable, includes material mass removed by secondary processes

Energy and CO2 Summary

Manufacture:
Component
Body

Process

% Removed

Energy (MJ)

Polymer molding

0.15kg

3.4

19.1

Wire drawing

0.03kg

0.74

4.2

Heating element
Base
Cable shealth

Casting

0.8kg

9.2

52.0

Polymer molding

0.18kg

3.3

18.9

Cable core
Plug pins
Tormilleria

Amount processed

Wire drawing

0.05kg

0.72

4.1

Rough rolling, forging

0.03kg

0.031

0.2

Fasteners, small

10

0.28

1.6

18

100

Total

Energy and CO2 Summary

Transport:
Breakdown by transport stage
Stage name

Transport type

Distance (km)

NOTE: Differences of less than 20% are not usually significant.

See notes on precision and data sources.

Energy (MJ)

Page 1 / 3
Tuesday, April 7, 2015

NOTE: Differences of less than 20% are not usually significant.

See notes on precision and data sources.

Page 1 / 3
Tuesday, April 7, 2015

Eco Audit Report

Energy and CO2 Summary

CO2 Footprint Analysis

CO2 (kg/year)
Equivalent annual environmental burden (averaged over 5 year product life):

Detailed breakdown of individual life phases

Energy and CO2 Summary

Material:
Component
Body
Heating element
Base
Cable shealth

Material

Part
Recycled
mass
content* (%)
(kg)

Qty.

Total mass
processed**
(kg)

CO2
footprint
(kg)

PP (copolymer, impact, flame

retarded HB)

Virgin (0%)

0.15

0.15

0.74

14.2

Nickel-chromium alloy,
NICHROME V, annealed
(resistance alloy)

Virgin (0%)

0.03

0.03

0.37

7.0

Stainless steel, austenitic,

ASTM CE-30, cast, as cast

50.0%

0.8

0.8

3.4

65.7

PVC (flexible, Shore A60)

Virgin (0%)

0.18

0.18

0.29

5.6

Cable core

Copper, C10100, wrought,

hard (electrolytic tough-pitch
h.c. copper)

50.0%

0.05

0.05

0.12

2.3

Plug body

Plug, inlet and outlet

Virgin (0%)

0.037

0.037

0.19

3.7

Plug pins

Brass, CuZn10, C22000,

wrought, soft (gilding metal)

50.0%

0.03

0.03

0.071

1.4

1.3

5.2

100

Total
*Typical: Includes 'recycle fraction in current supply'
**Where applicable, includes material mass removed by secondary processes

Energy and CO2 Summary

Manufacture:
Component
Body

Process

% Removed

Polymer molding

Wire drawing

Heating element
Base
Cable shealth

Tormilleria

0.15kg

0.25

19.1

0.03kg

0.055

4.2

Casting

0.8kg

0.69

52.0

Polymer molding

0.18kg

0.25

18.9

Wire drawing

0.05kg

0.054

4.1

Rough rolling, forging

0.03kg

0.0023

0.2

Fasteners, small

10

0.021

1.6

1.3

100

Cable core
Plug pins

CO2
footprint (kg)

Amount processed

Total

Energy and CO2 Summary

Transport:
Breakdown by transport stage
Stage name

Transport type
Distance (km)
NOTE: Differences of less than 20% are not usually significant.
See notes on precision and data sources.

CO2 footprint (kg)

%
Page 1 / 3
Tuesday, April 7, 2015

NOTE: Differences of less than 20% are not usually significant.

See notes on precision and data sources.

Page 1 / 3
Tuesday, April 7, 2015