logging in or signing up PCvsGlass Final Biaggia Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINTLite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 277 Category: Education License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: January 08, 2008 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript Life Cycle Analysis of Glass vs. Polycarbonate Sidelights: Life Cycle Analysis of Glass vs. Polycarbonate Sidelights Natalie Henry Jaymie Meliker Mike Turnbull Melissa Vernon April 14, 1999Agenda: Agenda Goals System Overview Life Cycle Costs Impacts - Energy, Solid Waste, Air, Water Drivers Summary RecommendationsGoal: Goal Evaluate two automobile sidelight systems Sidelight = all windows except windshield Polycarbonate: 40% lighter than glass 200 times more resistant to shatter Glass: scratch resistantSystem Overview: System Overview Data Sources: Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry: polycarbonate Life Cycle Inventories for Packaging: packaging glassAssumptions: Assumptions Packaging glass data equivalent to flat glass PC does not need scratch resistant coating Equivalent mfg, recycling practices in Europe & US Identical mechanisms for window function during use phase Polycarbonate Flow Diagram: Polycarbonate Flow DiagramGlass Flow Diagram: Glass Flow DiagramVehicle of Study: Vehicle of Study Vehicle: Chevy Express G Van Total surface area of sidelights = 51 sq ft Useful life of van = 110,000 miles Fuel Economy = 16.4 mpgLife Cycle Costs: Life Cycle CostsEnergy, Solid Waste, Water Emissions Summary: Energy, Solid Waste, Water Emissions SummaryAir Emissions Summary: Air Emissions SummaryKey Drivers: Key Drivers PC GlassSummary of Results: Summary of Results Glass Lower environmental impact in Mfg phase Lower total: Particulate matter SO2 Lower total cost Polycarbonate Lower environmental impact in Use phase Lower total: NOx & HC Solid waste CO Lead in air emissions Overall: Neither product system is more environmentally friendly Recommendations: Recommendations PC Manufacturers Reduce manufacturing costs Improve scratch resistant coating Develop single unit for sidelight & encapsulation Glass Manufacturers Reduce/recover energy used in manufacturing Increase recycled content from 15% to 50% Overall: Improve mpg of automobile End of life material recovery and recycling Questions & Answers: Questions & Answers You do not have the permission to view this presentation. In order to view it, please contact the author of the presentation.
PCvsGlass Final Biaggia Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINTLite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 277 Category: Education License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: January 08, 2008 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript Life Cycle Analysis of Glass vs. Polycarbonate Sidelights: Life Cycle Analysis of Glass vs. Polycarbonate Sidelights Natalie Henry Jaymie Meliker Mike Turnbull Melissa Vernon April 14, 1999Agenda: Agenda Goals System Overview Life Cycle Costs Impacts - Energy, Solid Waste, Air, Water Drivers Summary RecommendationsGoal: Goal Evaluate two automobile sidelight systems Sidelight = all windows except windshield Polycarbonate: 40% lighter than glass 200 times more resistant to shatter Glass: scratch resistantSystem Overview: System Overview Data Sources: Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry: polycarbonate Life Cycle Inventories for Packaging: packaging glassAssumptions: Assumptions Packaging glass data equivalent to flat glass PC does not need scratch resistant coating Equivalent mfg, recycling practices in Europe & US Identical mechanisms for window function during use phase Polycarbonate Flow Diagram: Polycarbonate Flow DiagramGlass Flow Diagram: Glass Flow DiagramVehicle of Study: Vehicle of Study Vehicle: Chevy Express G Van Total surface area of sidelights = 51 sq ft Useful life of van = 110,000 miles Fuel Economy = 16.4 mpgLife Cycle Costs: Life Cycle CostsEnergy, Solid Waste, Water Emissions Summary: Energy, Solid Waste, Water Emissions SummaryAir Emissions Summary: Air Emissions SummaryKey Drivers: Key Drivers PC GlassSummary of Results: Summary of Results Glass Lower environmental impact in Mfg phase Lower total: Particulate matter SO2 Lower total cost Polycarbonate Lower environmental impact in Use phase Lower total: NOx & HC Solid waste CO Lead in air emissions Overall: Neither product system is more environmentally friendly Recommendations: Recommendations PC Manufacturers Reduce manufacturing costs Improve scratch resistant coating Develop single unit for sidelight & encapsulation Glass Manufacturers Reduce/recover energy used in manufacturing Increase recycled content from 15% to 50% Overall: Improve mpg of automobile End of life material recovery and recycling Questions & Answers: Questions & Answers