Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Introduction
The NUS ECO-1 will be used as a case study for the feasibility assessment of our
project as it would be a closest gauge to the Urban Concept Vehicles that our
team intends to design. This assessment uses the Design for Environment
(DFE) tools to evaluate NUS ECO-1s impact on the environment.
Assessment Factors
The assessment factors are listed below. The 3 main assessment factors are the
Production Impacts (20%), the Recyclability (20%) and the Usage Impacts (60%).
Aluminium
Synthetic Materials (Acrylic(Outer Shell); Fibre);
and Carbon 14% 15%
Rubber (Tires); 9%
Metal Componentry
Ra
w
Mat
eria
l Pro
Rec
ces
ycle
sed
Pr
Scr od
ap uc
t
Like steel, aluminium is also fully recyclable (Norgate, Jahanshahi, & Rankin,
2006). Any aluminium not derived from recycled materials is obtained from
bauxite ores. Like in the case with steel, the mining and processing of bauxite
into usable aluminium is extremely energy intensive (Norgate, Jahanshahi, &
Rankin, 2006). Based on this, aluminium can be considered to have relatively low
production impacts and high recyclability.
Synthetic Materials
Acrylic was chosen to construct the windshield due to its high durability and easy
processing, as compared to glass (Peregrine Custom Plastics, 2007). However,
acrylic cannot be easily recycled (Fresno). Conventional acrylic recycling process
necessitates huge amounts of heat, and also generates a plethora of toxins,
making it an unfeasible process (Achilias, 2012). In contrast, glass has a nontoxic
emission during recycling which seems to be a more environmentally feasible
material than acrylic (Glass Packaging Institute, 2017).
Usage Impacts
NUS ECO-1 utilises the Yanmar L48AE, gas-to-liquid (GTL) diesel engine. GTL fuels
are synthetic fuels that has much lesser impact on air pollution and carbon
emissions as compared to non-GTL fuels (Cherrillo, Dahlstrom, & Coleman,
2007). Figure 3 below shows a recent study on the difference in the Nitrogen
Oxides emission, a family of poisonous and highly reactive gases, between
traditionally used CARB fuels and Shells GTL fuel.
Figure 3. Difference in the NOx emission between Shell GTL and CARB ULSD
reference fuel. (Cherrillo, Dahlstrom, & Coleman, 2007)
Therefore, based on the aforementioned discussions and its type of engine used,
the NUS ECO-1 was awarded a score of 80% to its Usage Impacts factors.
Overall Score
References
Achilias, D. S. (2012). Recent Advances in the Chemical Recycling of Polymers.
Thessaloniki: Laboratory of Organic Chemical Technology, Department of
Chemistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.
Audi. (2011). Life Cycle Assessment - Audi A6. Audi. Retrieved from
http://www.audi.com/content/dam/com/EN/corporate-
responsibility/product/audi_a6_life_cycle_assessment.pdf
Baviskar, J. (2015, November 5). Advantages & Disadvantages of 4 stroke & 2
stroke engine. Retrieved from MechStuff: http://mechstuff.com/differences-
advantages-disadvantages-of-4-stroke-2-stroke-engine/
Chemonics International Inc. (2004). The Cairo Air Improvement Project . Cairo:
United States Agency for International Development.
Cherrillo, R. A., Dahlstrom, M. A., & Coleman, A. T. (2007). Verification of Shell
GTL Fuel as CARB Alternative Diesel. US: Shell Global Solutions.
Fresno. (n.d.). The Categories of Plastics. Retrieved September 6, 2016, from
Fresno: The Categories
Glass Packaging Institute. (2017). Why Recycle Glass. Retrieved from Glass
Packaging Institute: http://www.gpi.org/recycling/why-recycle-glass
Gupta, N., & Zeltmann, S. (2016, March). The Carbon-Fiber Future: It's About
More Than Speed. Retrieved from Live Science:
http://www.livescience.com/53995-carbon-fiber-may-finally-be-coming-to-
cars-everywhere.html
Karian, H. (2003). Handbook of Polypropylene and Polypropylene Composites,
Revised and Expanded. CRC Press.
Louis Brimacombe, N. C. (2005). Recycling, reuse and the sustainability of steel.
Thailand: Millennium Steel.
Marsh, G. (2009). Recycling carbon fibre composites. Retrieved from Recycling
carbon fibre composites: http://www.materialstoday.com/carbon-
fiber/features/recycling-carbon-fibre-composites/
Meredith, J., Bilson, E., Powe, R., Collings, E., & Kirwan, K. (2015). A performance
versus cost analysis of prepreg carbon fibre epoxy energy absorption
structures. Composite Structures, 212-213.
Norgate, T., Jahanshahi, S., & Rankin, W. (2006). Assessing the environmental
impact of metal production processes. South Victoria: CSIRO Minerals.
Peregrine Custom Plastics. (2007). Peregrine Custom Plastics. Retrieved from
http://www.peregrine.build/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/MATERIALS-
AcrylicVsGlass.pdf
Pyper, J. (2012). To Boost Gas Mileage, Automakers Explore Lighter Cars.
ClimateWire.
Recycling of Polypropylene. (2012, 6 25). Retrieved 9 4, 2016, from AZO
Cleantech: http://www.azocleantech.com/article.aspx?
ArticleID=240#The_Environmental_Benefits_of_Recycling
Salazar, F. (1998). Internal Combustions in Engines. Notre Dame: Department of
Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering University of Notre Dame.
Tan, T. (2009). NUS ECO-1 GTL City Concept Car . HOT DRIVE, 101.
Yang, J., Christiansen, K., & Luchner, S. (2013, October). Renewable, Low-Cost
Carbon Fiber for Lightweight Vehicles. Retrieved from U.S. Department of
Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy:
https://www1.eere.energy.gov/bioenergy/pdfs/carbon_fiber_summary_repo
rt.pdf