4.7 Article

The application of a multi-faceted approach for evaluating and improving the life cycle environmental performance of service industries

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 42, Issue -, Pages 263-276

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.10.039

Keywords

Industrial ecology; Life cycle assessment; Service industry; Hybrid life cycle assessment; Engineering service sector

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship, NSF IGERT [0504345]
  2. Gewalt Hamilton Associates Incorporated
  3. Division Of Graduate Education
  4. Direct For Education and Human Resources [0504345] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Service industries continue to be to be a driving force economically, both within the US and globally, yet their environmental impacts still tend to be overlooked. This article presents a hybrid life cycle assessment case study to assess and quantify the life cycle impacts of an engineering service firm. The data for the hybrid LCA of the firm's activities and operations was collected for one fiscal year, from January 2009 to December 2009. Data collection methods include an energy audit, personnel survey, and assessment of waste management practices. The results of the case study show that the impacts of employee travel and transportation as well as the building premises are the major contributors to the environmental impact of a service industry (40% and 24% of GWP, respectively) and should be the areas targeted for improvements to reduce life-cycle impacts of similar service firms. The study also reveals that in order to make specific targeted reductions to a firm's life-cycle impacts, more in depth evaluation of certain activities, such as workstation energy consumption, can be essential to identifying unnecessary wastes of resources. (C) 2012 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