4.7 Article

Life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of sanitary ware manufacturing: A case study in China

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 238, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117938

Keywords

Ceramic industry; LCA; LCC; Material flow analysis; Material efficiency

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51705428, 71671180]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2018QNA4007]
  3. International Clean Energy Talent Program (iCET) of China Scholarship Council [Liujinfa [2017] 5047, Liujinfa [2018] 5023]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sanitary ware industry consumes vast amounts of energy and materials; however, little is known about the environmental impacts and economic costs associated with the production of sanitary ware. Selecting a factory of a leading Chinese sanitary ware company, Huida Co. Ltd., this paper employs a combined cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) methodology to evaluate the environmental impacts and economic costs related to the production of one tonne of sanitary ware. The LCA results indicate firing and drying are the processes with the greatest environmental impacts, attributing to the combustion of coke oven gas. The LCC results show that casting, body preparation and firing are the greatest contributors to the total equipment, material and energy costs, respectively. The results of sensitivity analysis confirm that increasing fuel efficiency, natural gas usage and recycling rates can reduce the overall environmental impacts, but the total costs would be increased by 13.8% if coke oven gas is fully replaced by natural gas, even considering carbon tax. Based on the findings, recommendations such as using green materials and improving energy efficiency, are provided to promote both the environmental and economic sustainability of sanitary ware production. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available