Operational Sustainability Metrics: a Case of Electronics Recycling By
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Operational Sustainability Metrics: A Case of Electronics Recycling by Jennifer Robinson Atlee B.S. in Environmental Science Brown University, 1999 Submitted to the Engineering Systems Division and the Department of Material Science and Engineering in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of Master of Science in Technology and Policy and Master of Science in Materials Science and Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 2005 2005 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. Signature of Author…………………………………………………………………………… Department of Material Science & Engineering, and the Engineering Systems Division February 11, 2005 Certified by…………………………………………………………………………………… Randolph E. Kirchain, Jr. Assistant Professor of Materials Science & Engineering and Engineering Systems Thesis Supervisor Accepted by…………………………………………………………………………………... Gerbrand Ceder R. P. Simmons Professor of Materials Science and Engineering Chair, Departmental Committee on Graduate Students Accepted by…………………………………………………………………………………... Dava J. Newman Associate Professor of Aeronautics & Astronautics and Engineering Systems Director, Technology and Policy Program (this page intentionally left blank) 2 Operational Sustainability Metrics: A Case of Electronics Recycling by Jennifer Robinson Atlee Submitted to the Engineering Systems Division and the Department of Material Science and Engineering on February 11, 2005, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of Master of Science in Technology and Policy and Master of Science in Materials Science & Engineering Abstract In the past 15 years corporations and governments have developed a growing appreciation of the need for “sustainability” and have worked the term into their goals, strategy and mission statements. Despite extensive efforts to define the term, there is still little clarity on how to move toward sustainability or measure improvements. Further advances toward sustainability will require system specific metrics to assess both current performance and the impact of operational, technological or regulatory changes on that performance. Not only are there currently few operational metrics by which to practically assess progress toward sustainability, there is also very little understanding of how to judge the effectiveness of such metrics. Electronics recycling is used in this thesis as a case problem in developing and evaluating system specific performance metrics for sustainability. Electronics recycling is a growing national and international concern due to the increasing volume of waste, the potential toxicity of the scrap, and reports of improper handling and disposal. Despite this concern, there is limited understanding about the electronics recycling system. There is a need for systematic ways to describe system functioning and quantitative methods to assess system performance. Existing evaluations of eco-efficiency or sustainability are either too aggregated to guide operational decisions or too complex and data intensive to be performed in the context of a low-margin system. A range of performance metrics were developed and assessed for several electronics recycling operators. These included measures of resource recovery and environmental performance. These metrics were assessed for their ability to provide insights on resource efficiency comparable to more complex indicators, with minimal data required beyond that collected for normal business operations. The informative value of these metrics, their ability to capture system behavior, and the similarity between evaluations using different metrics were compared. Recovery effectiveness results for three US Electronic recycling operators are presented based on several quantitative indicators. Results show that current simple measures such as “mass percent to landfill” are not sufficient to fully assess system performance. Composite indicators of systems performance can provide valuable insights even using currently available data collected by operators for business purposes. Thesis Supervisor: Randolph E. Kirchain, Jr. Title: Assistant Professor of Materials Science & Engineering and Engineering Systems 3 Acknowledgements To Erica Fuchs who has been my ‘main man’ through this process Anup Bandivadekar, for the many exuberant arguments, philosophical and otherwise Colleen Akehurst with whom I spent the first two years at TPP reminding each other we weren’t insane – and that yes, the world still exists outside of MIT, really. Kate Parrot for getting me into this mess to begin with - It’s been an interesting ride, no doubt. The “crew” in VT and friends in the Pioneer Valley for providing a haven and a reminder of how good life can be. The NJ women for helping me stay centered and keep my own little life in perspective. Walley Williams for providing a welcoming and understanding home and the perspective of an engineer at the other side of a long and loved career. Marko Packard and also Chris Page for seeing me through this process and, at times, putting up with the worst of me. My family, of course, for providing an infinite well of support and constant cheering squad. Sydney Miller for all that she does in keeping TPP running and all of us in it on track. The lab group (Randy, Jackie, Julie, Jeremy) each of whom has also been an individual help, with Jeremy an unexpected and critical support as advisor, editor, and colleague. Joel, Frank, and Randy for encouraging me to go for the dual MS. Frank, for perspective. And Randy, for collaborating, advising, and believing in me when I didn’t. 4 Table of Contents 1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................11 1.1 Sustainability – Why it Matters..................................................................................11 1.2 Metrics for Sustainability...........................................................................................12 1.3 Electronics Recycling – Metrics to Evaluate an Industry............................................13 1.4 Central Questions (thesis roadmap)............................................................................14 1.5 Research Methods and Data Collection......................................................................16 1.6 Relevance of This Work ............................................................................................16 2. Sustainability Metrics........................................................................................................19 2.1 Defining Sustainability ..............................................................................................19 2.2 Measuring Sustainability ...........................................................................................20 2.3 Proposed Sustainability Metrics and Frameworks......................................................24 2.4 Criteria for Metrics....................................................................................................26 2.4.1 Useful....................................................................................................................28 2.4.2 Robust ...................................................................................................................29 2.4.3 Feasible .................................................................................................................31 2.4.4 Additional Criteria of Significance.........................................................................31 2.5 Summary...................................................................................................................33 3. Electronics Recycling........................................................................................................35 3.1 How Much of a Problem? EoL in Perspective............................................................36 3.1.1 Life Cycle Impact ..................................................................................................36 3.1.2 Material System.....................................................................................................37 3.1.3 Waste System ........................................................................................................38 3.1.4 Improvement Potential:..........................................................................................40 3.2 Recycling System ......................................................................................................41 3.3 Recycling Process......................................................................................................42 3.4 Economics: Recycling System Market Dynamics ......................................................46 3.5 Environment..............................................................................................................48 3.5.1 Hazardous Materials ..............................................................................................49 3.6 Regulatory Frameworks.............................................................................................53 3.6.1 USA Framework....................................................................................................53 3.6.2 Overseas Activities ................................................................................................54 3.6.3 International Agreements.......................................................................................55 3.7 Summary...................................................................................................................56