JLCA NEWS ENGLISH EDITION September.2009

No.8

JLCA
NEWS LETTER
Life-Cycle Assessment Society of Japan

Contents

Development of a Chair using LCA ……………………………………………………………… 1
Development of an LCI Database and LCA Activities
for Aluminium Materials……………………………………

5

Eco-Pro-Net…………………………………………………………………………………………… 10- Product Development Support Network for Creating Environmental Added Value Approx. 60% Reduction of CO2 Emissions in An Entire House ……………………… 12
Disclosure of Ajinomoto Group's ………………………………………………………………… 15
Food-Related Material CO2 Emission Factor Database
LCA of a Uniform ………………………………………………………………………………………… 20
Quantification of CO2 Reduction Effect through Carbon Fiber Usage ……………… 27- Importance of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) A Case Study of Carbon Footprint for Beer Product ……………………………………… 34

Incentive Award

Development of a Chair using LCA
Fusao Yasuda
Development Department
SANKEI, Co., Ltd.

3. Environmental Products - the 1st Attempt: Resource Recycling Chair

1. Introduction
SANKEI was established on August 15th, 1951, so it has
been 57 years since its establishment. We are in the steel
furniture manufacturing industry specialized in manufacturing of chairs. Our annual sales were 2.4 billion yen as ofJune, 2007, and we have 75 employees. The company is in
Suzuka, Mie prefecture, an area rich in nature and famousfor F1 races. As an affiliate company we have a sales company called SANKEI and an international base company
called LEECO SANKEI in Thailand.
We have been proposing "RE5" as our environmental
policy:Reduce: to not produce garbage and to reduce energy
consumption
Reuse: to design products that allow easy repair and parts
replacement, and to achieve a long product life
Recycle: to make used chairs be easily disassembled, andto allow used materials to be easily sorted
Refine: to unify materials to be used, and to actively
include recycled materials in product designs
Rebuy: to actively purchase recycled products.
By promoting this RE5, we hope to be a human as well as
environmentally-friendly company.

Resource recycling chairs developed in 1996 were disposed of after use. We then proposed to recycle the chairs
without disposing of them. More specifically, the frame,
which was the base part, of the traditional chair was metal.
Molded plywood was used in the seating surface and backrest as a core board, polyurethane foam was used in thecushion, and a polyvinyl chloride sheet or acrylic cloth wasused and fixed with staples as the chair surface. A new
resource recycling chair would also have a metal frame.
However, its cushion would have a PP injection molded
product as its core material and a PP foam product as its
filling, and the chair surface would be a PP cloth that is fixedby hot-melting of polyolefin. Parts thus produced with thesame type of material could be collected after use, groundby a grinder, made into pellets by a granulator, and returned
to resin parts. The development concept was to "produce achair, and recycle it into a chair." We also internally installeda grinder and granulator to study reproduction technology.
At that time, we believed that would be the ultimate ecologic a l a c t i v i t y. M e a n w h i l e , w e s t a r t e d t o q u e s t i o n i f"environmental-friendliness" and "recyclability" at the timereally were environmentally friendly. It was around that time
we came across the concept of life cycle assessment (LCA),
recognized the necessity to use it, and purchased LCA software that was available in the market at that time. We
started to teach ourselves to use it, but we had to give up
after a few tries as it was too difficult.

2. BackgroundIn 1992, the Rio Declaration was issued at the Earth
Summit, and that year was marked as the first year that the
global issues were fully addressed. Around the same time,in Japan, material prices dramatically increased due to thecollapse of the bubble economy. Among a wide variety ofmaterials, the price of molded plywood most strongly
affected our business. The reason for its rising price was
not deforestation control in exporting countries or increases
in the material price itself, but simply the fact that export ofproducts using this material increased. This was because
molded plywood was often used in the center part of thechair seating surface at that time; therefore, we were greatly
troubled by how much the price increased. In the midst ofthat situation, basic study on parts that could substitute forplywood began. There was also an attempt to incorporate
environmental-friendliness, which was at that time not a very
common practice, and we then started study on processingof chair cushions. The material that we chose to achieveboth environmental-friendliness and cost reduction was
polypropylene (PP). As a result of the research and development, we started to sell environmental products in 1996.
Note, however, at that time in Japan, customers did notunderstand the concept of environmental-friendliness at all.
In 1997, COP3 was held in Kyoto and Toyota released theirfirst hybrid car, Prius, and then we realized that we had toaddress environmental issues. In response to this we
further focused on development of environmental products.

4. Introduction of LCA
We were certified for ISO9001 in 1999 and then for
ISO14001 in 2000. At the same time, we announced that
we would use LCA when creating products as our environmental policy. Since no LCA-based assessment method
was established at that time, we started with the use of an
LCA check sheet. The LCA check sheet was created basedon the requirements provided in the Law Concerning thePromotion of Procurement of Eco- Friendly Goods and Services, or the Green Procurement Law for short, and the Eco
Mark criteria. The check sheet was, of course, useful only inchecking and was not enough for quantitative assessmentof environmental friendliness.

1

Around the same time, which was September, 2000, an
industry-government-academia LCA research group wasestablished in our local area, Mie. Our Development Department actively participated in the research group, anduntil the termination of the research group in 2005, welearned the basic concept of LCA and further studied it. In
2006, we were informed that companies were being sought
to participate in the "product green performance support
project," which was a project under the contract with the
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. We believed it
would be an opportunity for us to promote LCA across thecompany and that we would be able to use the LCA method
to develop chair products. We therefore applied for it andwere selected.

5. Product Development Using the LCA Method

Aluminum

Resin (PP)

Iron

Seat cushion
・PP cloth・PUR
・Wooden fiberboard
・Iron

Figure 3 Parts (SCF64)

We compared a conventional folding chair and a new product, and developed the new product so that it would be moreenvironmentally-friendly than the conventional chair.

By using the materials described above, the product weightis 2.7 kg for the conventional product and the goal for DU07
is 2.1 kg.

5-1. Objective
5-3 System boundary

・Understanding of the environmental impact of a chair generated during its life cycle
・Comparison of the impact on global warming
・Establishment of the foundation of design for environment(DfE) to be promoted together with LCA・Disclosure of the result to our customers

For both types, stages such as collection of material
resources, processing of the material, manufacturing of thechair, assembly, transportation to the customers, and disposal after use will be inside the system boundary. The
product use stage is excluded because how the chair isused depends on the user and also the chair itself does notuse any energy.

5-2. Target items
The target items are SCF64 released in 1997, which was
the latest product at that time, and DU07, which was to be
newly developed. The figure on the left shows SCF64 andthe one on the right shows DU07. Both have the basic functions of a folding chair in that they can be folded and stored.

Resource

Resource

Resource

Resource

Resource

Manufacturing of resin parts
Backrest and seating surface: PP
Small parts: PA6
Cushion: PUR

Manufacturingof aluminum pipes

Manufacturingof screws and rivets

Manufacturingof cardboard

Manufacturingof powdered paintSuper green product
Manufacturing of the chair (frame, paint, and assembly)

Product use
Transportation
Disposal

Not included
Figure 4 System boundary

Figure 1 SCF64

Figure 2 DU07

5-4 Inventory analysis
The result of inventory analysis is shown in the tablebelow. For each process, phase, stage, and emission
source, emission of global warming chemicals such ascarbon dioxide (CO 2 ), nitrous oxide (N 2 O), and methane(CH4) is calculated.
The inventory analysis result indicates that the manufacturing stage accounts for more than 98% of generation of
global warming chemicals. It also indicates that the new
product, DU07, has lower CO 2 emission than the conventional product (Figure 5).

The external appearance of the chair is shown below. To
increase storability, the rear leg of DU07 is designed to be
shorter than the front one. Both types use aluminum pipes
in the frame, and molded PP resin in the backrest and seating surface. As for the core material of the seat cushion,
SCF64 uses wooden material, and DU07 uses recycled PP
resin material. In both chairs, iron screws are used for
assembly (Figure 3).

2

A rag is not good enough to clean the dust in chair parts.

Comparison of CO2 emission between phases

The conventional
chair had many sharp
angles anddust tended
to accumulate there.

Total transportation
Disposal
Product use

The new chair does
not have sharp
angles so a single
wipe witha rag can clean it.

Manufacturing

Total transportation
Disposal
Product use
Manufacturing

Figure 5 Inventory analysis result
Figure 7 Shape improvement

5-5 Impact assessment
We used the IPCC-2001 100-year-index to characterize
the area of global warming impact.

Also, when the conventional chair was used outdoors, dirt
got into the screw holes of the stoppers attached to theparts on the pipes that would be in direct contact with theground. As a result, when it was used indoors, the dirt fell
off on the floor or scratched the floor. Therefore, we
stopped using screws to attach the stoppers and instead
started to use snap-on stoppers. By doing so, dirt would not
get into the screw holes any more and screws would not belost (Figure 8).

Comparison of the impact on global warming between emission resources

Other
Pipeline
Airplane
Train
Car
Ship
Electricity

A toothpick needs to be used to remove the dirt inside the screw holes.

Other
Pipeline
Airplane
Train
Car
Ship
Electricity

Figure 6 Impact assessment result

The graph above shows the impact assessment result. It
shows that the electricity in the manufacturing phaseaccounts for approximately 60% of the total impact on global
warming. It also shows that the new product can contributeto reduction of the impact on global warming by 27% compared to the conventional product. We were able to makethe new product lighter by changing the aluminum pipe
shape in the design phase, by using the processing technology to bend the thin wall part of the pipe, and by improving
the aluminum welding technique.

It is difficult to clean
the screw holes.

We stopped using
screwsand started
using snap-on
stoppers instead.

Figure 8 Improvement of parts attachment

We used snap-on parts on other parts of the chair; therefore, the number of screws used to attach parts decreased
from 14 to 8.

6. Conclusion
5-6 DfE

The LCA result has indicated that our new product can
reduce the impact on global warming by 27%. We can now
quantitatively show how environmentally-friendly our productis, use this result as convincing data in product promotion,
and actively disclose the result to our customers. Also, by
actively using both LCA and DfE, factories can improve theirprocessing technologies for better efficiency. For example,
they can shift from lot production to cell production in orderto reduce unnecessary stock and in-process inventory as
well as to save energy. Our product can contribute to reduction of environmental impact. At the same time, it can be

We incorporated DfE and customer input in the design.
For example, we received a comment from our customerthat "it is difficult to clean the chair with a rag because thedust accumulates where it is hard to reach." Some parts ofthe conventional product had a sharp angle, and wiping
could not sufficiently clean it; therefore, dust accumulated
there had to be removed with a toothpick. For this reason,
we removed as many sharp angles as possible from thenew product so that a single wipe with a rag can clean it sufficiently (Figure 7).
3made lighter with an extra long life. Thus, not only green
consumers but also general customers will use low environmental impact products without noticing it.
The environment that surrounds our industry will be
increasingly demanding. In the EU, for example, there are
already the RoHS, REACH, and EuP directives. What society needs will continue to change in the future.
We will use LCA to try to decrease input. We believe thatas a result we can continue producing products and contribute to establishment of a sustainable society.
Reference
1) Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry. Life cycle assessment support software "JEMAI-LCA
Pro" (2006).
2) "IPCC 100-year index (2001)" as a coefficient for characterization of global warming.

4

Incentive Award

Development of an LCI Database and LCA Activities
for Aluminium Materials
Masayoshi Nomura
Chairman, LCA Research Committee
Japan Aluminium Association

search Committee under the Energy and Environmental
Committee in June, 1993, to learn the concept and procedure of LCA, collect inventory data for individual products,
conduct LCI assessment of the manufacturing, use, andrecycling stages of products, and to release the assessment
results (Table 1). This article provides an overview of theinventory report on scrap melting released in September,
2007.

1. Introduction
Aluminium is a valuable metal resource that is essential indaily living. As there is now a growing tendency that material LCI assessment becomes mandatory under the productgreen procurement regulation and also the need for LCI
data for various types of material is growing, the Japan Aluminium Association is one of the first associations to havefocussed on LCA and used it as an important means forobjective as well as quantitative assessment of the environmental impact. The Association established the LCA Re-

No.

Month/
year of issuance1

1998/6Creation of the Rolled Aluminium Products Inventory Database2

1999/3

Study Report on Energy Saving in the Machine Industry Using Aluminium:
Saving Energy by Using Aluminium as Can Stocks

3

1999/3

4

2002/4LCI Assessment of Open-Loop Recycling of 350 ml Aluminium Cans5

2002/11LCI Analysis of Beverage Aluminium Cans Designed for Open-Loop Recycling

6

2002/11

CO2 Reduction by Using Aluminium as Auto Materials

7

2002/11

Life Cycle Inventory of Various Types of Wrought Aluminium

8

2003/1

Overview of LCI Data of Rolled Aluminium Products: Aluminium Plates and Sheets

9

2003/1

Overview of LCI Data of Aluminium Paste

10

2004/4

Overview of LCI Data of Aluminium Foil

11

2004/1012

2004/10Lightweighting Effect of Using Aluminium to Manufacture Cars,
Calculated by the CO2 Emission Assessment Method

13

2005/3

Study Report on Life Cycle Cost Calculation for Aluminium Alloy Water Gates

14

2005/3

Overview of LCI Data for Primary Aluminium and Secondary Aluminium for Wrought Aluminium

15

2005/3

LCA of Lightweighting Effect in the Ideal Condition of Automobile Aluminization

16

2006/2

Overview of LCI Data of Various Types of Rolled Aluminium Products: Aluminium Extrusion Material

17

2006/2

Overview of LCI Data for Aluminium Product Processing:Colored Aluminium Products and Colored Aluminium Roofs

18

2006/11

CO2 Emission and Economic Effect in the Business Model for Introducing Aluminium Light Vehicles

19

2007/9Inventory Report on Scrap Melting

Title

Study Report on Energy Saving in the Machine Industry Using Aluminium:
Saving Energy by Using Aluminium as Rolling Stock

Life Cycle Inventory of Aluminium and Steel Hood for Automobiles and Bumper Reinforcement

Table1 LCA related reports of Japan Aluminium Association

5

③ Calculation of the inventory
We calculated inventory per kg of product based on theweighted average. The product is the total of scrap molten
metal and solidified scrap.
④ Background data
We used the database included in the LCA software
JEMAI-LCAPro (Ver.2) created by the Japan Environmental
Management Association for Industry to calculate LCI. LCI
for electricity was obtained based on the domestic averagevalue.

2. Inventory Report on Scrap Melting

Energy and raw material production

1) Background and Objective
Japan Aluminium Association created a rolled Aluminium
product inventory database in June, 1998, and released
data on inventory of wrought Aluminium scrap melting. The
environment has changed since then as new technologies
have been brought in, and therefore, we reviewed the inventory based on the latest data.
2) Method① System boundary
The subject of the study was the melting process by themelting furnace built exclusively for scrap installed in arolled Aluminium factory, and the system boundary included
the processes from feeding of scrap raw material into thefurnace to creation of molten metal. This system boundaryis marked with thick lines in Figure 1.
② Data collection
Using the same procedure as the previous study, data wascollected from the 4 factories of the 3 companies. The study
period was FY2005.

3. Result
Table 2 shows major inventory indicators for a kilogram ofscrap melting. Only the energy directly used is included,and energy used in power generation is not included.
Table 3 shows life cycle inventory retroactively covers
resource collection.

Electricity and fuel

System boundary for scrap melting

Imported primary metal

Scrap molten metal
Scrap
melting furnace

Secondary metal

Solidified scrap
Dross

Purchased scrap
Spin scrap

Environmental
burdenAdded metals

Dross processing(by contract)(Hot charge)

Collected metal
Residual ash

Rolling mill
Meltingand casting

Hot rolling

Cold rolling

Finishing
and refining

Spin scrap
Figure 1 System boundary for scrap melting

6

Packingand shippingUnit

All melting
furnacesPrimary metalkg

0 .001

0 .001

Purchased scrap

kg

0 .483

0 .542Spin scrap

kg

0 .555

0 .500

Secondary metalkg

0 .001

0 .001

Magnesiumkg

0 .0011

0 .0012Manganesekg

0 .0004

0 .0004

Inputted raw materials (subtotal)kg

1 . 04 2

1 . 04 5Electricity

kW h0 .141

0 .046

A heavy oil

L

0 .0100 .011

B and C heavy oil

L

0 .0100 .012

KeroseneL

0 .031

0 .036LPG

kg

0 .0017

0 .0020

City gasN

0 .0240 .028Energy consumption (total)

MJ

3 .6 3

3 .8 0Electricity

MJ

0 .51

0 .17

Fuel

MJ

3 .13

3 .6 3

Scrap molten metalkg

0 .946

0 .992

Scrap block (solidified)kg

0 .0540 .008

Aluminium dross(contracted processing)
Collected steamkg

0 .0340 .032kg

0 .0440 .035CO2kg

0 .196

0 .227

Calculated value

NO x

kg

0 .00005 9

0 .00006 9

Calculated value

SOx

kg

0 .00006 0

0 .00007 0

Calculated value

Waste (industrial waste)
to be processed by contractkg

0 .0029

0 .002 4

Excluding
induction furnaces

Remarks
Including paints

Electricity: 3.6 MJ/kWh

Table 2 Inventory per 1 kilogram of scrap melting

Input

Item

OutputOutput

Input

Item

All melting
furnaces

Unit

Excluding
induction furnaces

Coal

kg

0.015

0.006

Crude oil

kg

0.051

0.059

Natural gas

kg

0.028

0.025

Uranium (resource)kg

0.0000012

0.000000004

Bauxitekg

0.00520.0059

Aluminium scrap

kg

1.038

1.041

Energy

MJ

4.80

4.44

CO2

kg

0.287

0.285

NOx

kg

0.000200.00021SOx

kg

0.000180.00020

Table 3 Life cycle inventory per 1 kilogram of scrap melting
7

4. Comparison with the Previous Study Result

5. Energy used in Melting in Terms of Life Cycle

Table 4 shows a comparison of the study results between
this time and the previous time (FY1996 data).
The specific energy consumption at factories increased by
6%, from 3.44 MJ/kg to 3.63 MJ/kg, but in terms of energy
on the basis of power generation efficiency, there was adecrease by 20%, from 5.54 MJ/kg to 4.44 MJ/kg. This is
attributed to the fact that expansion of incinerating melting
furnace led to a relative decrease in electricity consumption
and an increase in fuel consumption.

The energy directly used in scrap melting is as describedabove. Life cycle energy (LCE) consumption and life cycle
CO 2 (LCCO 2 ) emission, however, decreased by approximately 15% and approximately 7% respectively as shown in
Table 5. Energy necessary to manufacture primary metal(LCE) was 140.9 MJ/kg, and the energy required for scrap
melting accounted for approximately 3.4% of the energy
necessary to manufacture primary metal.

Item

Unit

Previous study (1996)

Present study (2005)

kt

113.7

195.4

Raw materials input (subtotal)

kg/kg

1.051

1.042

Electricity

kWh/kg

0.360

0.141

A heavy oil

L/kg

0.02850.0099B and C heavy oil

L/kg

0.00670.0103

Kerosene

L/kg

0.01860.0306

LPG

kg/kg

City gasN

Energy consumption (total)

OutputInput

Subject melting amount

0.000170.00090.0242MJ/kg

3.44(5.54)

3.63(4.44)

Electricity

MJ/kg

1.30(3.39)

0.51(1.30)

Fuel

MJ/kg

2.14

3.13

Scrap molten metal

kg/kg

0.917

0.946

Scrap block (solidified)

kg/kg

0.083

0.054

Aluminium dross

kg/kg

0.048

0.034

Collected steam

kg/kg

CO2

kg/kg

0.157

0.196

NOx

kg/kg

0.000020.000059

SOx

kg/kg

0.000200.000060

/kg

0.044

Note: for energy, the figure inside the parentheses takes power generation efficiency (38.9%) into accountTable 4 Scrap melting inventory (per kilogram of {molten metal + blocks})

Item

Unit

Previous study (1996)

Present study (2005)

Energy (LCE)

M J /k g

5 .7 04 .80 ( 4 .44 * )C O 2 (L CCO 2 )k g /k g

0 .3090 .287 ( 0 .285 * )Figures with the * symbol within parentheses represent figures without values for induction furnaces.
Table 5 LCE and LCCO2 for scrap melting

8Based on the figure above, the direct energy for scrap melting obtained in the present study, which was 3.63 MJ/kg,
would be 2.8% of the energy required for the smelting ofprimary metal.

6. Dross Assessment
Dross processing was assessed by using the input energy
obtained in the previous study, and the amount of collected
metal was assessed using the result of the present study.
Table 6 shows the inventory for processing 1 kilogram ofdross.
Table 7 shows the scrap melting inventory when the metalcollected as a result of the dross processing was assessed
and taken into account as a recycled block.

8. Conclusion
The aluminium manufacturing industry should promote
manufacturing from the LCA perspective that takes the overall life cycle into account and study the advantages ofenergy saving at the product use stage with aluminium products. As for recycling of aluminium, recycling of aluminium
cans has been widely recognized and understood insocially, but it is further necessary to review the cascade
recycling system for aluminium Automotive products (higher
rank to lower rank, wrought material -> mold or die cast) sothat a recycling system can be established in the Autodesign phase for each item type.
It is now predicted that the importance of effective use ofadvantageous characteristics of aluminium to establish asustainable society will increase in the future for our country
which relies on overseas countries for resources.

Life cycle

OutputInput

7. Summary①Although the direct energy spent at factories increased
compared to the previous study because of the increase in
the number of incinerating melting furnace, the life cycle
energy (LCE) consumption and life cycle CO 2 (LCCO 2 )emission decreased by approximately 10% to 15%. Use ofregenerative burners and improvement of incineration technologies have produced positive results.
②LCE of scrap melting is approximately 3.4% of LCE of
manufacturing of primary metal. The energy conventionallyused for manufacturing of primary metal was 132 MJ/kg,
which was primary metal smelting energy (alumina refining
and electrolytic refining) obtained by the Chemical and Economic Research Institute1). This was direct energy that did
not include energy for other raw materials or transportation.

Item
Aluminium dross
Electricity
LPG

Unit

1)
Chemical and Economic Research Institute: Report on
Analysis and Study of Energy of Basic Materials (1993)

Basic unit

kg

1.000

kWh

0.253

kg

0.0065

EnergyCollected metal
Residual ash

MJ

1.24

kg

0.304

kg

bal.

CO2

kg

0.019

NOx

kg

0.000008

SOxkg

0.000000

LCE

MJ

2.93

LCCO2

kg

0.126

LCNOx

kg

0.00006

LCSOx

kg

0.00002

Remarks
Including paints
Previous study
Electricity: 3.6 MJ/kWh
Current study
Calculated value
Calculated value
Calculated value

Table 6 Dross processing inventory

Amount of input
Scrap molten metal Scrap: 1.0 kg
Dross processing Dross: 0.04 kg
Recycled blocks Metal:(excluded)
0.0103 kg
Total

EnergyCO2 emission(MJ)(kg-CO2)

4.80

0.288

0.099

0.00450.049
4.85

0.00300.290

Table 7 Scrap melting inventory

9

Remarks

Amount equivalent
to the amountof collected metal

Incentive Award

Eco-Pro-Net- Product Development Support Network for Creating Environmental Added Value Seizo Kato
Special assistant of the president, Mie University
Representative of Eco-Pro-Net

Promotion Forum was established as an industrygovernment-academia network in 2004. The Forum had 2
working groups for "eco design leader development" and for"education and interaction for promotion of eco design" toestablish and implement specific educational programs, holdsymposiums, seminars, and exhibitions, and to carry out
Internet-based information distribution. We received a lot of
help from the Chubu Bureau of Economy, Trade and Industry (a regional bureau of METI), during the establishment of
the forum, but we then started to work on it independently
as our own project. As a result, we set a goal to create ourown eco design platform that would be useful to further
improve ourselves in the eco design field.
"Eco-Pro-Net: Product Development Support Network for
Creating Environmental Added Value" (operation started in
October, 2006) was thus created. The name of the project
was designed to include 3 "Eco-Pros" that were: "EcoProducts" for green product monozukuri culture, "Eco-Profit"
for creation of added value and markets through green products resulting in profit generation, and "Eco-Professional" fordevelopment of human resources with skills in the environmental field. The goal of the project was to create anorganic network with the above 3 Eco-Pro concepts as the
key. In the actual project activity, we would help intermediate level companies as well as medium and small companies become aware of the fun of eco design and then tolearn, start, use, and disseminate its concept. We alsoplanned and held events that would match the capability ofthe participating companies (annual symposium, 4 seminars
and lectures in total, 2 training sessions, and 8 workshop
sessions). We further provide eco design-related consulting
services to the participating companies. Member companies can always join the events and services describedabove, and also, information on these events, news, anddomestic as well as international trends are distributed not
only on the Internet but also via e-mail magazines. Currently, approximately 300 companies (70% of them are intermediate level companies, medium companies, and small
companies) are participating. There is no membershipcharge, and any company that agrees with the philosophy of
Eco-Pro-Net can become a member at any time by accessing the URL introduced earlier.
Through the Eco-Pro-Net activities, we have been producing positive outputs. For example, we have received adevelopment fund for our green performance advancement
project, examples of our eco-design product development
were exhibited at Eco-Products Exhibition or otherenvironment-based business exhibitions, the eco design
capability of the overall supply chain was improved, and weestablished the product differentiation scheme by promptly
incorporating eco-design in products. Some of the eco
products that received the LCA Japan Forum award were
included in our activity achievements. The most noteworthy

We are honored that our paper "Eco-Pro-Net: Product Development Support Network for Creating Environmental
Added Value" received the 4th LCA Japan Forum Incentive
Award for LCA dissemination and human resource development activities promoted by the industry-governmentacademia network. We would like to thank all who gave us
support. This award certainly makes us more responsible
than ever for our actions in the future, and we plan to turnthis responsibility into effective environmental practices.
Eco-Pro-Net (http://www.ecopronet.jp/) started as an activity to upgrade active "monozukuri," which could be translated as "the art of manufacturing," in the Tokai region toenvironmentally-friendly monozukuri. The Tokai region originally had an active monozukuri culture, but about 10 years
ago, improvement of management strategy was required
from the environmental perspective. Then, "Environmental
Partnership Organizing Club (EPOC)" was established andimplemented. Through its activity, we learned that many
corporate managers were highly conscious of environmental
matters, were engaged in environmental improvement
activities, and were practicing environmental management.
We also learned that a wide variety of environmental technologies had been accumulated across the supply chain.
Our awareness of environmental technologies further
increased during EXPO 2005 AICHI JAPAN, and we started
to think more and more that "although environmental measures at the end of the life cycle such as disposal and recycling are important, aren't environmental measures at the
beginning of the life cycle such as material procurement
more important?" Meanwhile, the ROHS Directive wasissued in Europe and we were required to take action to
conform to it. Under these circumstances, we had a strong
feeling that "quantitative methods such as LCA and DfEmust be incorporated into products."
Many companies that had already implemented this idea
however gave us input such as "active environmental measures including energy-saving or waste water treatment
would not raise product added value," and "the market forgreen products would not expand even though they were
produced using LCA or DfE." Meanwhile, science-based
environmental quality assurance and globalization of theeco-design method or eco product assessment standards
were required for industrial products mainly used overseas.
Not only large companies but also intermediate level companies as well as medium and small companies wererequired to do the same.
In order to overcome these issues, joint establishment ofstrategies together with the supply chain was essential. In
particular, improvement of the eco design capability of intermediate level companies as well as medium and small companies that would be playing the main role in these strategies and creation of the eco product market wereconsidered urgent tasks, and the Monozukuri Eco Design10achievement was that the collection of the eco design product examples showing 57 sample products was organizedbased on what kind of environmental aspects that werefocused on. Almost 70% of the samples were products
manufactured by medium and small companies.
As the EuP Directive intended, eco design is now the global
market standard which would decide the future of companies. Through the Eco-Pro-Net activity, however, we clearly
understood that they key to success was "to first design performance, quality, and cost that would satisfy the market
need, conform to regulations, and then release environmentally friendly products" and that, for this, human resource
development was essential. It seemed that organizational
activities to accomplish the daily goal of companies, manufacturing of products that would sell, directly resulted in eco
design, and that we should not be too pressured by theword "eco design." We hope that our Eco-Pro-Net project
would contribute to fostering of a culture where "environmentally friendly monozukuri is the daily practice" and"monozukuri automatically contributes to the environment."

11

METI Industrial Science and Technology Policy and Environment Bureau Award Winning Article

Approx. 60% Reduction of CO2 Emissions in An Entire House
Taeko Aoe
Corporate Environmental Affairs Division
Panasonic Corporation

1. Introduction

added the home energy management system (HEMS) andthe solar power generation system that can contribute to
reduction of the environmental impact.

The "Approx. 60% Reduction of CO2 Emissions in An
Entire House" project was implemented in order to examine
the technological feasibility of reduction in household greenhouse gas emissions. Here, the term "technology" refers toa wide variety of technologies as a whole incorporated into
products that have been introduced to the market byproducers and that can also be selected by consumers. In
this project, to be specific, using the data obtained in 1990
as a reference, we evaluated the greenhouse gas emissionof approximately 100 products including housing equipment
and house structure, in addition to home appliances, andmeasured the trend in reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions.

Recently, many types of products have increased theirsizes. Examples of this trend include; TVs (33 inch CRT
display to 50v inch plasma display), refrigerators (425 liters
to 550 liters), and washers and dryers (6 kg to 9 kg forwashing and 4.5 kg to 6 kg for drying).
To this house, we have also added: a dishwasher andgarbage disposal unit as household products; a fax
machine, PC, digital camera, and cell phone as
information-communication products; and a water conditioner, electric toothbrush, and massage chair as healthproducts.

In 2005, we placed 60% reduction of green house gas
emissions throughout a life cycle of those products in an
entire house by 2010 compared to 1990 level" as a corporate target. And it was achieved in 2007, three years aheadof schedule, and as of October 2008, an amount ofemissions was reduced by 62%.

Refer to the following URL for the list of products used inthis model house:
http://panasonic.jp/eco/product/co2_discharge/index.html
Greenhouse gas emissions throughout the life cycle ofthese products (excluding the house itself) including production, transportation, product use, used product transportation, and recycling and disposal phases are assessed basedon JEMAI-LCA inventory data. Note that the standard
values specified in the product specifications or by theindustry have been used as the standard service conditions
for these products, and they are supposed to incorporate
differences in usage or performance under various natural
conditions. Reference values or voluntary standard values
have been applied to those products with no specificstandard values specified in the product specifications or by
the industry.

We introduce this achievement as "Approx. 60% Reduction of CO2 Emissions in An Entire House" via TV commercials, advertisements, showrooms, and exhibitions. Furthermore, since 2004, we have been working on disseminationof what we call "life cycle thinking" by for example giving
lectures at schools on the environment based on life cycle
thinking.
This article will introduce overviews of these activities.

2. Overview of the Assessment Method
Assuming a model household, we selected a list of
products to be used in a model house.

The house used in this model is designed as an industrialized house (prefab house) with a light-gauge steel structure
and large panels. An emission and reduction assessment
was carried out on the base, building frame, exterior finish,
and interior finish of this house, and for each element, its
greenhouse gas emission throughout the life cycle of thehouse was obtained for the production, transportation,building(construction),
operation(use),
repair(maintenance), and recycling and disposal phases using the
Building LCA Calculation Software (developed by the Architectural Institute of Japan).

The household model we have set is a 3-generation familyof a grandmother, parents, and a child living in a two-story
house. We selected a 3-generation family in order to incorporate the needs of multiple generations into products to beassessed. The floor area of the house has been set to136.9 m2, which is the average floor area of a newly built
and purchased house. The floor plan contains a livingroom, dining room, kitchen, 3 bedrooms, 1 Japanese styleroom, one bath, and 2 WCs (one per floor). This house has
been assumed to be located in the central part of Honshu inJapan. Refer to the following URL for the floor plan of thismodel house:
http://panasonic.jp/eco/product/co2_discharge/plan.html

Since each product has a different length of lifetime,
greenhouse gas emission throughout a life cycle of eachproduct is first calculated, and the result obtained is thendivided by the product lifetime (in years) such that thegreenhouse gas emission of each product for each year canbe calculated. Then, by adding the yearly emission of each

Products used in this house have been selected based on
the rate of diffusion to general households. Also, we have12

decreased and therefore emission was reduced by 42%.
Furthermore, the emission was reduced by another 20%
due to the introduction of the home energy management
system (HEMS), improvement of thermal building insulation,and introduction of the solar power generation system. As aresult of these comprehensive approaches to emission
reduction, the total emission was reduced by 62% compared
to a 1990 level.

product, the greenhouse gas emission for the entire household for a year can be calculated.
3. Overview of the Assessment Result
An amount of greenhouse gas emissions per year has
increased due to the inclusion of a dishwasher, garbage
disposal unit, and massage chair, and also due to theincrease in size of appliances such as TVs and dehumidifiers. Back in 1990, air conditioners, hot water suppliers,
lighting equipment, refrigerators, washer/dryers, and heatedtoilet seats with warm water sprays were the 6 most power
consuming products, accounting for approximately 75% of
the entire greenhouse gas emission. An amount of power
consumption during the use of these products, however, has

Although this assessment result only applies to a specificmodel hosuehold, it still quantitatively suggests that greenhouse gas emission can be reduced through the introduction of the latest energy-saving technologies.

Figure 1: Breakdown of increase and decrease in greenhouse gas emission

Figure 2: Changes of the greenhouse gas emission as a result of improvement of energy-saving efficiency and breakdown by product13

4. Conclusion
Since 2004, with the goal of disseminating the concept ofwhat we call "life cycle thinking," we have been giving
lectures on the environment based on life cycle thinking. In
these lectures, we have been using the result of our study
on how CO2 emission can be reduced in an entire home.
It has been pointed out that it is more difficult to encourage
individuals to take eco-friendly actions to address global
environmental issues than to address local or regional ones.
It is assumed to be because, unlike local or regional environmental issues, it is difficult for individuals to grasp how global
environmental issues are related to their daily living, since anextremely large amount of resources are used and disposedof in an out-of-reach places, which causes negative impacts
on the environment. This means that mastering of life cycle
thinking may contribute to the promotion of eco-friendly
behavior. In fact, questionnaires administered before andafter the lectures have so far indicated that mastering of life
cycle thinking may encourage individuals to think aboutengaging in eco-friendly actions.
We will continue our project to reduce household greenhouse gas emissions which leads to a decrease in the negative impact on the environment, and will implement educational as well as awareness-raising activities by effectively
using the research results.

14

Chairman's Award

Disclosure of Ajinomoto Group's
Food-Related Material CO2 Emission Factor Database

Eiji Takahashi

Manager, Corporate Technology & Engineering Center
Ajinomoto Co., Inc.
Professional Engineer ,Japan(Environmental Engineering)

1. Introduction

to select the most appropriate CO2 emission factor for each
ingredient, but there were almost no CO2 emission factor
databases in the food industry. In light of this situation, in
September, 2006, CO2 emission factors essential in LC-CO2
calculation were disclosed in the first edition of the Ajinomoto Database, and the revised version was released in
April, 2007. In the Ajinomoto Database, a wide variety ofingredients are converted into emission factors in the unit
used in trade or measurement of respective ingredients(such as weight and volume (m3)) based on the Embodied
Energy and Emission Intensity Data for Japan Using InputOutput Table (3EID), which has been created based on the
CY 1990, CY 1995, and CY 2000 input-output tables
published by the National Institute for Environmental
Studies. As a result, information has been collected into ahighly objective and transparent database that provides CO2
emission factors of 1254 items across 124 industrial fields.
Major characteristics of the Ajinomoto Database are as
follows:

In 2003, the Ajinomoto Group released the AjinomotoGroup Zero-Emission 05/10 Plan and has been implementing various projects in order to minimize the environmentalload that is generated in a wide variety of industrial areas.
We have been actively carrying out LCA based on our belief
that minimization of the environmental load requires assessment of not only the environmental load generated in the
manufacturing process, but also the environmental load ofthe entire life cycle, which starts with raw materials andends with product disposal. In particular, starting with full
implementation of LC-CO2 calculation of packaging containers in 2003, we established in 2004 the Food Study Groupin the Institute of Life Cycle Assessment, Japan, jointly with
Mr. Atsushi Inaba, a professor at the University of Tokyo,
and Nippon Flour Mills, Co., Ltd. Since then we have beenproactively developing an academic-industrial alliance in thefield of the food LCA with relevant companies and university
researchers.

① The database has been created using highly objective
data such as the 3EID data provided by the National Institute for Environmental Studies and input-output tables
published by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communi
cations (MIC).
② Each CO2 emission factor is expressed as the CO2
emission volume per trade/measurement unit such as theamount of CO2 per kilogram.
③ The database has been made available to the public on
the Internet.

In relation to CO2 emission factors that are necessary to
calculate LC-CO2, I would like to introduce in this article an
overview of "Ajinomoto Group's Food-Related Material CO2Emission Factor Database ("the Ajinomoto Database",hereinafter)" that we publish on our group website.
We believe that the Ajinomoto Database is useful when
there are no established databases available, which is often
the case for food materials, or when approximate CO2
emission factor values that do not change with seasons orplaces are required. In this article, I would like to introduce
an overview of the database with some technical information
hoping that not only researchers but also general readers of
this article can make better use of our Ajinomoto Database.

[Note] An input-output table shows how goods andservices move between economic sectors (in Japan, thedomestic economy is divided into 400 sectors) per year andis expressed in yen. This table facilitates understanding of
the indirect environmental load associated with production.
LC-CO2 can be analyzed either by process analysis (theso-called "aggregation method") or by input-output analysis,
and in the Ajinomoto Database, emission factors are determined using input-output analysis. The basic environmentalload unit shown in the 3EID published by the National
Institute for Environmental Studies indicates the size ofenvironmental load (CO2 emission in this case) generated
directly or indirectly in association with unit production
activity (production volume equivalent to one million yen).
Here, direct and indirect emissions, in the field of agricultural
products for example, include not only direct CO2 emission
as a result of using fuel to operate agricultural machines but
also CO2 emission that can be derived from input-output
analysis such as CO2 emission in association with manufacturing of agricultural machines.

Note: the Ajinomoto Database is available at:
Ajinomoto> Corporate Information> CSR bout of>Environment>
http://www.ajinomoto.co.jp/company/kankyo/lc-co2/index.
html

2. Overview and Characteristics of the Ajinomoto
Database
Recently, as seen in the concept of food mileage (foodmiles), interest in the environment in terms of food has been
increasing, and at the same time, calculation of food
LC-CO2 has been required more and more due to, forexample, a trial project implemented by the "Carbon
Footprint System Implementation and Promotion Study
Group" of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry(METI). Note that the concept of the carbon footprint isessentially the same as LC-CO2. One of the largest
problems in calculation of a food carbon footprint was how
15

3. Usage of the Ajinomoto Database

Model ① above (= A).

Let us assume that someone wonders how much CO2 isgenerated when producing 1 kg of brown rice. The Ajinomoto Database answers this question: 0.403 kg or 403 g(the average of data obtained in CY1990, CY1995, andCY2000 ("1990", "1995","2000" , hereinafter)).

3) In order to convert the CO2 emission, the following
calculation needs to be performed:
A ｘ CO2 formula weight/C formula weight = 0.3994 ｘ44/12= 1.446 t-CO2/million yen (= B)This section provides technical information in detail inorder to answer the question we often receive from ourdatabase users: "how is this figure determined?"

4) To convert B above into a figure in [t-CO2/million
yen-food], it is necessary to multiply B by something in[million yen-food/t-food], and this "something" is a foodprice. For this, use the endogenous sector production unit
price shown in the Sector- and Item-Specific Domestic
Production Volume Chart attached to the FY1995 inputoutput table published by the MIC. For example, brown rice
is included in a basic goods category called "rice," and the1995 producer's price for brown rice was 280,198 yen/tbrown rice (= C).

When calculating a carbon footprint (LC-CO2), a CO2
emission factor is considered to be most useful when it
shows CO2 emission in its trade or measurement unit suchas [kg-CO2/kg-food]. However, CO2 emission factors basedon the 3EID are calculated using input-output tables whereflows of domestic goods called money are regarded as flows
of material, and are expressed as [t-CO2/million yen-food].
This, then, needs to be converted into weight. As an
example, the series of calculations to obtain 0.403 kg of
CO2 emission for 1 kg of brown rice are shown below. In
this example, rice produced in 1995 is used.

5) Therefore, the amount of CO2 generated from using a
ton of brown rice produced in 1995 is BｘC = 1.446ｘ
0.280198 = 0.405t-CO2/t-brown rice (= D).
Results of these calculations are summarized in Table 1
below. The value D above is indicated by an up-arrow
under 1995.

1) Basic environmental load unit based on the 3EID
published by the National Institute for Environmental Studies(there are 2 figures based on 1995 producer's price)① type I: 0.3944 t-C/million yen (= A)②type II: 0.3497 t-C/million yen

4. Structure of the Ajinomoto Database
Using the table above, this section describes the structureof the Ajinomoto Database. We believe that if you understand the two rows in the table, you will have a general
understanding of the structure of the figures shown in the
30-page Ajinomoto Database. Also, I would like to emphasize here that the Ajinomoto Database consists only of the
3EID data and producers' prices derived from the Sectorand Item-Specific Domestic Production Volume Chart
attached to input-output tables to realize high transparency
and objectivity for the database.

2) A brief description of the difference between the 2
figures above is as follows. When calculating the final
induced environmental load using input-output tables, in thefirst case, imported goods are handled in the same way as
domestically-produced goods, and the environmental load ofimported goods is included in the calculation (meaning that
it is assumed that direct and indirect CO2 emission of theimported goods is the same as that of domestically
produced goods). On the other hand, in the second case,imported goods are handled differently from domestically
produced goods so that the environmental load of theimported goods is considered to be nonexistent. Therefore,
the difference in the 2 figures above is attributed to thedifference in models used. Considering the fact that a highpercentage of products are imported in the food industry, theAjinomoto Database uses the result of the calculation using

In the table above, rice is selected as a basic category.
This basic category has been divided into 399 sectors in the
3EID (for example, there are rice, wheat, potatoes, beans,vegetables, fruits, crops as sugar materials, … otherindividual services, office supplies, and items of unknowncategory, in the order of sector number). Each of thesebasic categories is further broken down into items that are

Table 1: Structure of a CO2 emission factor in the Ajinomoto Database16

analysis. Therefore, it is important to keep the following
issues in mind when using the database.

listed with item numbers. The value B above, which is
1.446t-CO2/million yen has been fixed as FY1995 CO2emission per producer’s price in the rice category. In the
Ajinomoto Database, as seen in Table 1, such fixed values
are typed in white in blue cells. These figures are the key
figures that are applied to all items in the rice category. Alsoin the table, the value C, which is the 1995 producer’s pricefor the items under the larger category, is cited from the
Sector- and Item-Specific Domestic Production Volume
Chart attached to the 1995 input-output table and is shownas 280,198 yen. These values are used to calculate CO2
emission factors per trade/measurement unit (ton, in thisexample), and the value obtained 0.405t/t is inputted in thetable. In the same manner, values are derived from the
input-output table and the 3EID for 1990 and for 2000, andthe results obtained are then put together in sheets toconstitute parts of the Ajinomoto Database.

(1) Roughly defined industrial field-specific categories
The structure of the Ajinomoto Database is based on an
input-output table in which domestic goods and services areroughly divided into 400 sectors. Therefore, the emission
factor for brown rice in the example above is in fact determined for ordinary brown rice produced in some fiscal year,
meaning that it is not possible to compare LC-CO2 between
brown rice produced in the Kanto region (Eastern Japan)
and brown rice produced in the Kansai region (WesternJapan). To compare LC-CO2 of these two types of brown
rice, their inventories must be calculated by process analysis (aggregation method).
(2) Environmental load associated with assessment of
the influence of price differences between imported anddomestically produced products and also environmental load associated with transportation of imported
products
Except for rice, Japan depends heavily on imports forcrops and oil seeds, and in some cases, imported foodprices are several times higher than prices of domestically
produced food. When imported crops are processed, in the
3EID, calculation of their CO2 emission burdens caused bysuch processing yield lower results than the actual values
depending on the abovementioned price differences. As aresult, CO2 emission factors for primary processing ofimported foods, such as flour milling, oil pressing, and feed
production, are lower than the actual values.

Note that the rightmost column of the database shows anaverage of 1990, 1995, and 2000 figures, a standard deviation on the assumption that the data forms a standard
distribution, and a value called variation coefficient (%)
which is obtained by dividing the standard deviation by theaverage value. In this table a remarks field has been added
to record integration, creation, and deletion of industrial
categories in the input-output tables from 1990 to 2000.
Under the basic categories, there are 1254 items across
124 industrial fields for which a basic CO2 emission unit has
been created by deriving a producer's price from the Sectorand Item-Specific Domestic Production Volume Chart.
Since trade/measurement unit conversion cannot be
performed for items for which producers' prices are notavailable, the basic CO2 emission unit for these items is
expressed as "/million yen." There are still 750 of them.

Although the data may not be perfectly accurate due to thedifference between system boundaries, as seen in the table,
the 3EID method is quite likely to generate discrepancies
between the calculated values and the actual values forprimary processing of foods for which Japan depends onimports.

5. Ajinomoto Database Strengths and Issues
The Ajinomoto Database is created with data obtainedusing input-output tables. There are 5 major advantages inusing input-output tables to calculate inventory:

Furthermore, flows of goods and services that are notcovered by the input-output table may not be accurately
incorporated into the database. For example, the environmental load associated with transportation of imported
products is not incorporated.

1) All indirect environmental loads can be acquired.
2) Environmental loads can be calculated within a unified
system boundary (in the case of the Ajinomoto Database,the entire domestic economic boundary can be used as anapparent boundary).
3) If environmental load data is appropriately set, the samedata set can be used to calculate various environmentalloads.
4) Using existing data from input-output tables, it is possible
to estimate indirect environmental loads without spending
any more effort than process analysis (aggregation method).
5) An input-output table provides data with high objectivity
and transparency.

(3) Discrepancies between producer's price-based emission factors and purchaser's price-based emission
factors
Related to the above, the foundation of the Ajinomoto
Database is the volume of CO2 generated per 3EID-based
producer's price. Therefore, when the database is used interms of consumption of the products or the products being
raw materials for other products, it is necessary to incorporate the CO2 burden generated in transportation or sales ofthe products.

Listing the strengths of the database as above may seemto emphasize that CO2 emission factors provided by the
Ajinomoto Database are extremely useful, but there areissues raised by inventory calculation using input-output
17

Table 2: Example of an examination of the influence of price differences between imported and domestically produced products

data may not be perfectly accurate due to the difference
between system boundaries, as seen in the table, the 3EID
method is quite likely to generate discrepancies between thecalculated values and the actual values for primary processing of foods for which Japan depends on imports.

(4) CO2 burden generated in product use or disposal
The Ajinomoto Database is based on the 3EID, consistingof accumulated CO2 data associated with the environmental
impact caused by production such as the CO2 burden ofitems or their energy that are introduced into a particularindustrial sector. This means that the CO2 burden causedby use of these items is not included. One of the major
examples is fossil fuel. CO2 induced by use of fossil fuel is
included in its CO2 emission factor; however, CO2 emission
at the moment of fossil fuel combustion is not included.
(CO2 emission factors in both the 3EID and the Ajinomoto
Database are categorized in terms of products and also of
industrial fields, and the concept of this induced CO2 may
be understood more easily when it is viewed in terms of anindustrial field.) If it is expected that CO2 is generated whena product is used for a particular purpose, addition of CO2
data to the 3EID is important. Also note that the database
does not include any estimates of environmental impact
generated outside production activities in which financialtransactions are carried out. Environmental load associatedwith product disposal is one of the examples.

Furthermore, flows of goods and services that are notcovered by the input-output table may not be accurately
incorporated into the database. For example, the environmental load associated with transportation of imported
products is not incorporated.

6. Conclusion
The Ajinomoto Database is available for viewing at ourcompany website. When you refer to the database, pleaseindicate the database as the source. Since the publicationof the database, we have received a large number of questions regarding the usage of the database, such as how thistable should be read and understood and the rules to beobserved when using this table, from not only researchers
but also general consumers.
We, the Ajinomoto Group, truly hope that many people
access and use this database with a good understanding of
its strengths, issues, and weaknesses as described above.
We also hope that publication of a database that covers awide range of foods can contribute to reduction of environmental loads in society and also to the promotion of development of products of high value.
To conclude this article, we would like to express our
gratitude to domestic as well as international researchers,
those who are in the food or other industries, and thegeneral consumers who sent us questions and comments
after the database was published. Also, our database was(5) Discrepancies between input-output data tabulated
every 5 years and the latest environmental load data
In Japan, the input-output data is tabulated every 5 years,
and after tabulation, it takes 3 to 4 years before the new
tabulation result is published. Therefore, it is highly likelythat there are discrepancies between the actual andestimated environmental load data for industrial sectors inwhich technological innovation takes places rapidly. Taking
changes in data between different fiscal years into account,average values for the data obtained in 1990, 1995, and2000 are included in the Ajinomoto Database.Although the18

published. Also, our database was published on the Internet
after confirming that it had no problems following ourpresentation and discussion at the Food Study Group, theInstitute of Life Cycle Assessment, Japan. Therefore, we
also would like to express our gratitude to the members of
the Food Study Group.
For inquiries:
Eiji Takahashi
Technology & Engineering Center, Ajinomoto Co., Inc.
Professional Engineer ,Japan(Environmental Engineering)eiji_takahashi@ajinomoto.com

19Incentive Award

LCA of a Uniform
Kazuki Miyanohara
Chief Researcher
Environment Enhancement Office
Chikuma & Co., Ltd

out in accordance with the concept of the extended
producer responsibility and to effectively use the dataobtained to further develop environmental load reducing
products and systems.

1. Introduction
As the name suggests, a uniform is defined as clothing ofa single pattern that is worn by a group of people. Differingfrom general clothing that is selected based on tastes ofindividuals, uniforms of a particular group have the same
composition, same color, and are worn in one location;
therefore, they are characterized by being easier to becollected and recycled than general clothing.
A review of changes in recent eco-friendly activities in theuniform field has shown that around the time of implementation of the Law on Promoting Green Purchasing in 2001,
needs for the purchase of eco-friendly uniforms increased,
and as a result, manufacturing of uniforms using recycled
PET bottles has become widely practiced. At the sametime, the concept of 3R for establishing a recycling-oriented
society started to spread, and in the industrial world, activities aiming to realize zero-emission for both direct andindirect materials were further encouraged. Then, the needfor recycling of used uniforms became significant. In
response to this situation, uniforms were often simply
subjected to incineration or heat recovery; however, as thebasis for recycling developed, activities to prevent uniforms
from turning into garbage were fully implemented.
Meanwhile, the impact of greenhouse gasses on global
warming has become apparent, and therefore, measures toreduce greenhouse gasses were implemented to realize a
low-carbon society. Conventionally, uniforms were recycledoften based on the understanding that reduction of waste
was the main objective, but recently, environmentallyadvanced companies have started to request "visualizationof the CO2 status" to allow themselves to quantitatively
understand the volume of greenhouse gas reduction thatcan be achieved through recycling. We, Chikuma & Co.,
Ltd., too, concluded that not only waste reduction as a resultof uniform recycling, but also the environmental impact of
uniform recycling on global warming must be quantitatively
understood. We thus applied for the FY2007 Green Performance Advancement Promotion Project of the Ministry of
Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) and were selected;
therefore, we conducted uniform LCA.

2-3. Subject
The subject of LCA was a men's work uniform (jacket andpants), and the product feature setting for this LCA was thatthe uniform was worn in 3 seasons (8 months) excluding thesummer, worn for 8 hours a day and 5 days a week, andeach operator was given 3 sets of the uniform, and thelifetime of each uniform set was 3 years. The assessment
was carried out for a ton of the large size uniforms that weremost frequently used.

Figure 1: LCA subject

2. Uniform LCA
Using our typical products, we compared the impact of ouruniforms on global warming between two scenarios; in one
scenario, environmental measures were taken for the entire
life cycle of the uniforms, and in other scenario, no particularenvironmental measures were taken.
2-2. Objective
The main objective of LCA for us, a manufacturer ofvarious types of uniforms and a seller of uniform materials,
was to quantitatively understand the impact on global warming of the uniform recycling procedure that we are carrying
20

Table 1 shows the weight and material of the parts of the LCA
subject shown in Figure 1.

Table 1: Material and weight of parts used in the LCA subject (in grams)

The outer material of the uniform was combined woven
twill of 80% polyester and 20% cotton, and the total uniform
weight was 980.4 g (including the bag). Of which, the outermaterial was 804 g (accounting for approximately 80% of
the total weight), and the amount of waste generated by
cutting the material in the manufacturing phase wasestimated at 143.5 g (yield ratio: approximately 87%) per
uniform set. Materials for creating quality labels, hang-tags,
and loop pins were excluded from the assessment since
they represented only a small amount.
2-4. Life Cycle Scenarios (the Scope of the Assessment)
The assessment was carried out for the two life cycle
scenarios (A) and (B) that we created. Scenario (A) is the
lifecycle of a conventional product for which no particular
eco-friendly measures are implemented, and Scenario (B) isa lifecycle of an improved product for which eco-friendly
measures are implemented.
(A) Conventional productIn this scenario, virgin materials (derived from petroleum)
were used to create polyester for the outer material, waste(material loss in the manufacturing phase) was incinerated,
and the used uniform was incinerated.
(B) Improved productIn this scenario, recycled materials (derived from used PET)
were used to create polyester for the outer material, waste(material loss in the manufacturing phase) was subjected tomaterial recycling, and the used uniform was subject tochemical recycling.
*Underlines show differences between scenarios (A) and
(B).

21

2-5. System Boundary
Figure 2 shows the scope of the LCA in this article.

Figure 2: Scope of the assessment: top figure = conventional product, and bottom figure = improved product.
*Blue squares = differences between the conventional and improved products.

material (recycled DMT). ② is a comparison between the casein which the waste discharged from a sewing plant is incinerated in a neighboring area and the case in which the waste is
subjected to material recycling (MR) to be described later. It
should be noted here that a quantitative comparison under thesame set of conditions requires addition of the environmentalload to the conventional product, and the volume of theenvironmental load to be added needs to be the same as theenvironmental load generated when the items obtained as aresult of recycling are produced from the virgin material. Therefore, the environmental load thusly obtained is added inside thesystem boundary for the conventional product scenario. ③ is acomparison between the case in which used uniforms areincinerated and the case in which used uniforms are subject tochemical recycling (CR) to be described later.

Differences between the two life cycles shown in Figure 2 are:① polyester material, ② handling of waste from cutting, and ③
handling of used materials in the disposal phase. ① is acomparison between the case in which dimethyl terephthalate(DMT) is manufactured from its virgin raw material (synthetic
DMT) into polyester and the case in which used uniforms
containing polyester of 80% or more are re-used as a polyester
raw material (recycled DMT). ② is a comparison between thecase in which the waste discharged from a sewing plant isincinerated in a neighboring area and the case in which thewaste is subjected to material recycling (MR) to be describedlater. It should be which dimethyl terephthalate (DMT) is
manufactured from its virgin raw material (synthetic DMT) intopolyester and the case in which used uniforms containing
polyester of 80% or more are re-used as a polyester raw
22

2-6. Transportation Scenario
Figure 3 shows the transportation scenario for both theconventional product and the improved product.

Figure 3: Transportation scenario

technology called new raw material recycling developed by
Teijin Fibers Ltd. This is a horizontal recycling system inwhich, by separating and removing dyes and additives frompolyester products and refining the remainder, it is possible
to collect DMT of the same or higher quality than DMT
manufactured from petroleum and use it to manufacture
fibers again. Meanwhile, the MR flow on the right shows arecycling technology that subjects not only products mainly
consisting of polyester, but also blended materials such as
cotton and wool, to a felt making process known as thefiberizing process, and the felt obtained from this process isthen subject to what is called cascade use (use in multiple
phases) as soundproofing or sound absorbing materials forcars. In the improved product life cycle scenario in thisstudy, we make the assumption that used uniforms were
subject to CR and waste generated in the manufacturing
process was subject to MR.

In Figure 3, there is a transportation scenario applied toboth the conventional and improved products, but there aresome differences in the manufacturing and disposal phases;
therefore, these differences are shown separately in different colors. Incineration is assumed to be carried out in anarea near the site where the waste was generated(transporting distance assumed to be within 25 km), and if
the waste is subject to recycling, the transportation distanceto the recycling facilities is added. Note that, for CR, theenvironmental load caused by transportation is not addedsince the site of recycling and the site of recycled polyestermaterial manufacturing are the same (inside Ehime prefecture).

2-7. Two Recycling Methods
Figure 4 shows chemical recycling (CR) and material
recycling (MR) flows. The CR flow on the left shows the

Figure 4: Flow charts of chemical recycling (left) and material recycling (right)
23

input and output for the entire life cycle based on the abovementioned conventional as well as improved product inventory analysis.

2-8. Inventory Analysis Result
In this assessment, we selected CO2, N2O, and CH4 as
the materials of concern in order to focus on the impact on
global warming. Table 2 shows the result of tabulation of

Table 2: Inventory analysis result

using GWP100 (IPCC-100 years (2007)) as a global warming factor and plotted as bar graphs as shown in Figure 5.

2-9. Impact Analysis
The output volume of the three materials of concern inTable 2 were characterized (indicated as CO2 equivalent)

Figure 5: Post-characterization comparison of the impact on global warming (comprehensive comparison) in kg-CO2eq
24

Figure 6 shows the integrated environmental loads for
manufacturing raw materials for the outer material (virgin or
recycled) and those for used uniform processing(incineration or recycling). The comparison of the environmental load for the raw material phase between the conventional and improved products indicated that the environmental load for the conventional product was 1,518 CO2-kg
while it was 831 CO2-kg for the improved product, suggesting that there would be more than a 40% reduction. Whatneeds to be focused on the most is, however, that theenvironmental load caused by incineration of used uniforms
was 1,790 CO2-kg, which was approximately the same as
manufacturing virgin raw materials and approximately twice
as much as manufacturing recycled raw materials.

When the index numbers indicating the impact on global
warming were added for the entire life cycle of the conventional and improved product respectively, the impact of theconventional product was 20,824 kg-CO2eq while theimpact of the improved product was 17,928 kg-CO2eq, andthe difference between the two, which was 2,896 kg-CO2eq,
would be the volume of the impact that could be reduced,
meaning that approximately 13% of improvement could be
expected overall. Also, since for both cases, the environmental load generated during the material phase accounted
for 75% or higher of the total environmental load throughout
the life cycle, the assessment indicated that for uniforms
manufactured domestically like the ones in this study, theenvironmental load of the material (fabric) manufacturingphase was relatively higher than other phases.
Instead of the environmental load for the entire life cycle,
Figures 6 and 7 show only the differences between theconventional and improved products.

Figure 7 shows the comparison of waste processing methods between the conventional and improved products. For
the conventional product, the environmental loads generated when incinerating the waste and when manufacturing a
product having the same quality as the improved productstarting from production of the virgin raw materials wereadded. Meanwhile, the environmental load for the improved
product was the burden generated in material recycling of
the waste. The comparison between the two products
indicated that the burden could be reduced by 90% or more,
but as seen in the maximum vertical-axis value, the burden
reduction in terms of volume would not be too high.

2-10. Sensitivity Analysis
In this assessment, the conventional product was
assumed to be incinerated. When examining how uniforms
were disposed of at companies where employees wore
uniforms, there were not many cases where uniforms were
subject to simple incineration. Instead, even though they
did not recycle the uniforms, they often carried out heatrecovery. In this section, assuming that heat recovery was
adopted as the conventional product disposal method, we
compared the assessment results between the improved
product disposal method (recycling) and heat recovery.

Figure 6: Outer material manufacturing and processing ofused uniforms

Table 3: Calorific values of cotton and polyester combustion

Table 4: Conversion of calorific value for
combustion into electric power

Figure 7 Processing of waste generated when cutting material25

conventional and improved products, and also the reduction
ratio. Regardless of the power generation efficiency, thestudy showed that the impact on global warming is lower
when the product was recycled than when the product was
subject to heat recovery. Based on these findings, Figure 8
shows as bar graphs CO2 emission of the conventional
product (simple incineration), power recovery (heat recovery), and improved product (recycling).

Table 3 shows the calorific values resulting from incinerating the assessed product, and cotton and polyester
contained in the waste generated in the manufacturingphase. Then, CO2 emission resulting from recovering heat
when the power generation efficiency was 10%, 20%, 30%,
or 50% was calculated based on the national emission
factor average for 2003 and the obtained values were listed
in Table 4. Table 5 shows the differences between the

Table 5: Difference between heat recovery and recycling of the improved products

Figure 8: Comparison of CO2 emissions among the conventional products (incineration), heat recovery,
and improved products (recycling); in kg-CO2

In the future, we would like to extend the scope of theassessment to other products (wool blend products, forexample) and to quantify the environmental load in theuniform use phase in which, for example, irons may be usedor uniforms may be repaired.

3. Conclusion
Although the assessment must still be refined, the study
showed that, when the impact on global warming was quantitatively compared between the conventional product andthe improved product, the improved product could reduce
the environmental impact. In particular, the result revealed
that the uniform disposal method (incineration or recycling)
had a great impact on the environmental load.
26

Incentive Award

Quantification of CO2 Reduction Effect through Carbon Fiber Usage- Importance of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Yoji Matsuhisa
General Manager on Special Assignment
Advanced Composite Materials Technology Department Toray Industries, Inc.

The schematic diagrams shown in the bottom half of
Figure 2 suggest that new high tensile steel in cars emits
more carbon dioxide than the conventional material whenbeing manufactured, but it can contribute to a reduction ofcarbon dioxide emission as a result of product weight saving
which in turn results in mileage improvement. Also, whenusing new heat insulating glass in a house, manufacturing of
the new glass generates more carbon dioxide than conventional glass, but prevention of heat loss during product use
can lead to reduction of carbon dioxide emission from thehouse.
Therefore, in order to assess the environmental load of aparticular material, it is important to quantitatively assess theenvironmental load of the entire life cycle of the product inwhich the subject material is used.

1. Introduction
We, as a corporation in the material industry, have beendeveloping technologies to reduce greenhouse gasses
emitted during material manufacturing, to save energy, torealize recycling, and new materials for reducing theenvironmental load not only in the material sector but also inall sectors.
Figure 1 shows environmental loads such as greenhousegasses to each of the major sectors. There are the material
sector, processing and assembly sector that produces
products, commercial sector that uses the products, andpower sector that supplies energy to the sectors listed
above. As for lightweight materials, for example, use of
special steel and carbon fiber has been contributing to a
reduction of the environmental load of cars and airplanes.
Also, silicon materials used in solar batteries are one of the
major examples of clean energy generation. The environmental improvement effect achieved by new materials therefore emerges in sectors outside the material sector.
For this reason, it is important to include the assembly andproduct use phases in quantitative assessment in order toaccurately assess the impact of materials on the environment.

Figure 2: LCA of a product in which new materials are used

Figure 3 shows the material industry's recommendations
for a low environmental load society. The first recommendation is promotion of quantification of the environmental load
throughout a product life cycle. Since the environmental
improvement effect of a particular material is demonstrated
when the product is used, product LCA for quantified examination of the environmental improvement effect of material
is considerably important.
The second recommendation is generation and expansionof new materials that can contribute to environmental
improvement. The materialization of a low environmentalload society requires generation and expansion of newmaterials that can contribute to environmental improvement,
and such generation and expansion of new materials will
support the technologies of Japan, a nation based on
creativity in science and technology, and also a nation
founded on the principles of environmental protection.
The third recommendation is the establishment of a social
infrastructure that covers recycling, collection, and logistics
of waste management. This will further improve the environmental improvement effect of new materials.

Figure 1: Contribution of the material industry
to reduction of the environmental load

LCA is the method to assess the environmental impact ofmaterials including the environmental improvement effectrealized by assembling and using the products in othersectors. As shown in Figure 2, LCA allows comprehensive
assessment of the environmental load reduction effect for
the entire life cycle from the material, assembly, productuse, and disposal phases.
Compared to conventional materials, new materials forenvironmental improvement may cause an increase of theenvironmental load when being manufactured; however,they are able to contribute to environmental improvement bydramatically reducing the environmental load in the assembly, product use, and disposal phases of the life cycle.
27

2. Carbon Fiber

Finally, the fourth recommendation is innovative processdevelopment in the field of material manufacturing to reduceenergy consumption and to make low environmental loadmaterials available.

As shown in the upper left corner of Figure 4, the specificgravity of carbon fiber is one-fourth that of iron, and also, thespecific strength of carbon fiber, which is obtained by
dividing tensile strength by the density, is 10 times that ofiron; therefore, it is contributing to weight reduction of
products.
The upper right corner of Figure 4 shows the changes in
the world carbon fiber demand by application. When the
production of carbon fiber started in the 1970's, it was used
only for limited purposes such as sporting goods and spacesatellites. Its use then started to rapidly spread in theaerospace and industrial fields. As shown in the figure
below, the manufacture of carbon fiber first requires production of acrylonitrile and acrylic fiber from petroleum and thencarbonization of them at a high temperature between 1,000
and 3,000 ℃]. Manufacturing of carbon fiber therefore
requires a large amount of energy.

Figure 3: Recommendations for a low environmental load society

Figure 4: The carbon fiber industry of which Japan is the world leader and the future of said industry

power generation and also through use as a material forhigh pressure hydrogen tanks or electrode materials that are
required for fuel cell vehicles.

Next, how carbon fiber is used and how it is contributing to
the prevention of global warming are described. As seen in
Figure 5, carbon fiber contributes to the reduction of CO2
emission by achieving weight saving in airplanes and cars,
and also through use as a material for light compressed
natural gas (CNG) tanks used in buses and trucks. Furthermore, carbon fiber contributes to clean energy generation by
improving the efficiency for wind turbines as well as nuclear
28

Figure 5: Carbon fiber contributing to measures against global warming (1)Figure 6: Carbon fiber contributing to measures against global warming (2)reinforcing material for railway bridges and bridge decks.
These applications do not require use of heavy machineryand the resulting environmental load is therefore low.

Furthermore, as shown in Figure 6, carbon fiber is used asa material of ferry bodies, airplane engine parts, truck racks,
car hoods, tires, and propeller shafts. It is also used as a29

is used. Among these planes, 35% of them are manufactured by three Japanese heavy industries companies.
Also, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has been developing thesmall-size eco-friendly high-performance passenger plane
MRJ, contributing to reduction of CO2 emission by combining Japan's most advanced material, carbon fiber, andsophisticated production technologies.

As for use of carbon fiber as an airplane-related material,
as shown in Figure 7, the next-generation eco-friendly
passenger plane Boeing 787 is called an "all-composite
plane" since approximately 50% of the plane structure
weight including the fuselage and the main wings made of acarbon fiber reinforced composite, and for one airplane,
approximately 35 tons of carbon fiber reinforced composite

Figure 7: Carbon fiber contributing to measures against global warming (3)Figure 8: Carbon fiber industry with Japan as the global leader

companies survived, and currently, these three companies
manufacture approximately 70% of the carbon fiber
produced worldwide. Therefore, the carbon fiber industry
can be considered the environmental improvement industry
with Japan as the global leader.

Figure 8 shows changes in market presence of various
carbon fiber manufacturers. During the 40 year history of
the carbon fiber industry, major European and American
chemical companies entered the carbon fiber market, but allof them withdrew after being unable to endure the pressureof research and development. Finally, only three Japanese30

as an all-composite passenger jet, approximately 20% of the
airplane structural weight can be reduced.
As seen in the bar graph below, within the life cycle of an
airplane, 99% of the carbon dioxide is emitted when the
airplane is in operation. Therefore, mileage improvement asa result of weight saving can allow reduction of 27,000 tons
(7%) of carbon dioxide per airplane during a 10-year life
cycle, meaning that carbon dioxide emission can be
reduced by 2,700 tons per year. When this calculation isapplied to 430 passenger jets in Japan, approximately 1.2
million tons of carbon dioxide emission can be reduced peryear.

3. Quantification of the Environmental load Reduction Realized through the Effective Use of Carbon
Fiber
We quantified carbon dioxide reduction throughout the
product life cycle as a result of using carbon fiber as an
airplane material. This quantification was carried out withthe cooperation of the University of Tokyo, Kobe Yamate
University, All Nippon Airways, and Boeing, and it, together
with its results, has been publicized by the Japan Carbon
Fiber Manufacturers Association.
As Figure 9 shows, when carbon fiber is used in an
average passenger jet Boeing 767 in the same way that it isused in a Boeing 787 which has been under development

Figure 9: Quantification of the CO2 reduction effect realized through the carbon fiber usage

the 42 million cars currently owned in Japan, it will bepossible to reduce 21 million tons of carbon dioxide per
year.
If, therefore, carbon fiber is used in the manufacturing of
airplanes and cars owned in Japan, 1.2 million tons ofcarbon dioxide can be expected in terms of airplanes and 21
million tons in terms of cars, resulting in a total carbon
dioxide emission of 22.2 million tons. This means that it ispossible to reduce approximately 1.5% of carbon dioxidethat was emitted in 2006 (1.3 billion tons).

Figure 10 shows the effect of the use of carbon fiber as a
car material. When an average-sized Japanese car is
manufactured with carbon fiber, the weight can be reduced
by approximately 30%.
As seen in the bar graph below, although carbon dioxide
emission increases during material manufacturing, mileage
will improve due to the resulting weight saving and this inturn allows reduction of carbon dioxide emission while inmotion. As a result, for a 10-year life cycle, it is possible toreduce 5 tons (16%) of carbon dioxide per car. This means
0.5 tons of carbon dioxide emission reduction per year;
therefore, when the use of carbon dioxide is expanded to31

Figure 10: Quantification of the CO2 reduction effect realized through the effective use of carbon fiber

Figure 11: CO2 emission reduction realized by one ton of carbon fiber

emission of approximately 20 tons of carbon dioxide, butwhen it is viewed in terms of a 10-year span, 50 tons and1,400 tons of carbon dioxide emission can be reduced forcars and airplanes respectively. These values are net reduc-Figure 11 shows reduction of carbon dioxide emission thatcan be achieved per one ton of carbon fiber when it is used
to manufacture cars and airplanes.
Manufacturing of one ton of carbon fiber results in32

tion amount including manufacturing emission.
Therefore, when used as a material for cars and airplanes,
carbon fiber can reduce carbon dioxide emission by adegree far greater than the amount generated during its
production. The use of carbon fiber thus greatly contributes
to improvement of the global environment.
As described above, it is important to quantify not only theenvironmental load during material production but also thetotal environmental load throughout the life cycle in order toaccurately examine the environmental load of a particularmaterial. In future discussions regarding environmental
impact of new materials, we hope that the readers of thisarticle will thoroughly study the approach taken in LCA andunderstand the concept of generation as well as expansionof use of new materials that can contribute to protection of
the environment.
I would like to express my gratitude to Toyota Motors, All
Nippon Airways, Boeing, Professor Takahashi of the University of Tokyo, Professor Feuerherd of Kobe Yamate University, and the Japan Carbon Fiber Manufacturers Association
for advice and cooperation in the assessment carried out forthis article.

33

Case Example

A Case Study of Carbon Footprint for Beer ProductRyo Atsumi
Environmental & Social Affairs Section, CSR Department
Sapporo Breweries Limited

1. Introduction

3.2 Study Method and Data Collected

We at Sapporo Breweries have been implementing
measures against global warming for a long time, and wehave produced positive outcomes in terms of reduction of
CO2 emission during the production process. In 2003, ourbreweries achieved the environmental goal set in 1994
(reduction of the CO2 emission rate by 12% by 2010 withrespect to the emission of 1990). In 2004, in order toexpand our eco-activities to all processes included in a
product life cycle, we carried out the first beer product life
cycle assessment (LCA) in the beer manufacturing industry
in accordance with ISO14040. The LCA result was criticallyreviewed by Japan Environmental Management Association
for Industry in 2005. In 2008, the Ministry of Economy,
Trade and Industry (METI) established the Carbon Footprint
System Implementation and Promotion Study Group.
Sapporo Breweries participated in the study group andexperimentally carried out a carbon footprint calculation with
our leading product, canned Sapporo Black Label Draft ,350 ml.

3.2.1 Method
We calculated CO2 emission for the entire life cycle of the
350 ml study subject. Figure 2 shows the scope of calculation. Following the study group rule, we calculated basedon 2007 data. In this study, we included the sales phase of
the life cycle in the scope of calculation which we had notincluded in previous LCA study.

2. Calculation Method
The calculation was performed based on the temporary
rule established at the study group (December, 2008).

3. Subject and Scope of Analysis
3.1 Subject
Among the leading and the most popular products of
Sapporo Breweries, the Sapporo Black Label Draft series,
we selected a 350 ml can for this study. Figure 1 shows the
product specifications such as ingredients and container.
Note that indirect materials (materials that are used at a
breweries but are not shipped with products such as
packing materials of ingredients and cleaning chemicals)
used during the beer manufacturing process were notincluded in the analysis.

Figure 2: Process flow and system boundary

3.2.2 Environmental Load of Each Process andData Collection(1) Procurement of ingredients (growing, processing,and transportation of ingredients )This section describes the environmental load generated
as a result of growing and processing of ingredients as wellas transportation of ingredients to a brewery. The environmental load of the main ingredients of beer, malt and hops,
was calculated using the primary data, and the secondary
data was used to calculate the environmental load of
auxiliary materials that were corn, starch, and rice. Table 1
shows the description of the environmental load resulting
from the growing and processing of barley and hops. The
amount of agricultural materials (such as agrichemicals andchemical fertilizers) used for a unit quantity of barley andhops was obtained by extracting and averaging the data,collected from multiple producers from various countries,
provided in a database managed as a part ofthe"Collaborative Contract Farming System"(*).

Figure 1: Subject of the study

34

Table 1: Environmental load of growing and processingof the main beer ingredients(4) Product transportation.
This section describes the environmental load generated
as a result of transporting products from each brewery to
primary distributors (wholesalers for example). We collected
information necessary for calculation such as means anddistance of transportation. As the product transportation
distance, we used a weighted average direct shipment
distance obtained using the transportation volume for the
distance between individual breweries to primary distributors.
(5) Sales
The environmental load of sales was obtained using themethod and data provided by the study group. The environmental load of each shop was obtained using refrigerated
sales as a model case.

For the amount of fuel, power, and water used in growing
and processing malt and hops, we collected sample datafrom producers and processors. As for the amount ofagricultural materials used for malt and hops, we collected
data from contracted producers in 10 countries through the
network of the cooperative agreement-based activity.

(6) Disposal and recycling
This section describes the environmental load generated
as a result of disposal and recycling of containers. The
effect of recycling of waste containers into new containers
was included in the container production process while such
effect was not included in the process if waste containers
were recycled into other recycled materials (indirect effect).
We used the calculated values obtained by Toyo Seikan
Kaisha.

* Collaborative Contract Farming System: it is a malt andhops procurement system unique to Sapporo Breweries inorder to offer customers a "good taste" and a sense of"safety and security".
(2) Procurement of containers and exterior packaging
materials (manufacture and transportation)
This section describes the environmental load generated
as a result of manufacturing the containers and exterior
packaging materials as well as transportation thereof. The
environmental load of the container is calculated for a 350
ml aluminum DI can by Toyo Seikan Kaisha who was also amember of the study group. The secondary data was used
to calculate the environmental load of a cardboard box (for24 cans) and then the obtained value was divided such thatthe environmental load of the cardboard box per can of beer
was obtained.

4. Assessment Result
Table 2 shows CO2 emission of each process.
Table 2: CO2 emission in each life cycle process(3)Product manufacturing
This section describes the environmental load of the beer
manufacturing process at breweries. Figure 3 shows thebeer manufacturing process. The environmental load of thisprocess was calculated using data of the amount of energy
used in each process.

Among the processes listed above, CO2 emission resulting
from container procurement accounted for approximately
40%. Sales of products also generated a larger amount of
CO2. Measures for reduction of CO2 emission would be
effective if the measures targeted the process with thehighest environmental load. Although the environmentalload for this study was calculated following the temporary
rule established by the study group, we hope to examine
how CO2 emission can be reduced in each process when
the calculation rule is standardized in the future as iscurrently planned.
Figure 4 shows the tentative carbon footprint information
display designed by the study group. A prototype productwas exhibited in the METI booth of Eco-Products 2008 held

Figure 3: Beer manufacturing process
35

Figure 4: Carbon footprint information display

in December, 2008, as an achievement of the study group.
In February, 2009, we started experimental sales of thisproduct in order to examine how consumers in the market
would accept it.Among the processes listed above, CO2
emission resulting from container procurement accounted
for approximately 40%. Sales of products also generated alarger amount of CO2. Measures for reduction of CO2
emission would be effective if the measures targeted theprocess with the highest environmental load. Although theenvironmental load for this study was calculated following
the temporary rule established by the study group, we hope
to examine how CO2 emission can be reduced in eachprocess when the calculation rule is standardized in the
future as is currently planned.

contribute to the implementation and dissemination of thesystem.

5. Conclusion
METI has been designing rules for the carbon footprint
system prior to its full implementation. So far, technicalissues were identified in the experimental assessment bycompanies participating in the study group, and in March,
2009, the standardized calculation rules called the Carbon
Footprint System Policy and the Product Category Rule
(PCR) Establishment Criteria were established. The resultof our experimental assessment is considered to have beenused as basic data for these rules.
In order to implement the carbon footprint system, provide
information to consumers, and to finally realize a low-carbon
emission society, we believe it is important for companies tocooperate with each other to improve data accuracy and toestablish detailed carbon footprint calculation rules. Basedon our experience with past LCA and the carbon footprint
calculation described in this article, we at Sapporo Breweries will continue studying product CO2 emission and will
36

Information
LCM 2009
September 6- 9, 2009
Cape Town, SOUTH AFRICA

Univ. of Cape Town / Pre Consultants
http://www.lcm2009.org/

Life Cycle Assessment IX
September 29 to October 2, 2009
Boston, USA

American Center for Life Cycle Assessment
http://www.lcacenter.org/

SETAC Latin America Annual Meeting
October 5-9, 2009
Lima, PerúSETAC Latin America
http://www.setacperu.org/

Sustainable Innovation 09
October 26- 27, 2009
Farnham,UK

The Centre for Sustainable Design
http://www.cfsd.org.uk/events/tspd14/index.html

4th SETAC Africa meeting
November 2-5, 2009
Kampala, Uganda

SETAC Africa
http://kampala.setac.eu/?contentid=160

3rd International Conference on Eco-Efficiency Modelling and Evaluation for Sustainability: Guiding Eco-Innovation
November 18- 20, 2009
Egmond aan Zee, the NETHERLANDS

CML, Leiden University
http://www.eco-efficiency-conf.org/

SETAC North America 30th Annual Meeting
November 19-23, 2009
New Orleans, USA

SETAC
http://neworleans.setac.org/

1st LCM China Conference
November, 2009
Beigin, CHINA

EcoDesign2009
December 7- 9, 2009
Sapporo,JAPANthe Union of EcoDesigners and AIST, Japan,
http://www.mstc.or.jp/imf/ed/

SETAC Europe 16th LCA Case Studies Symposium
February 1-2, 2010
Poznań, Poland

Poznan University of Technology
http://lcapoznan.setac.eu/?contentid=144

International Conference on Environmental Pollution, Restoration, and Management (SETAC Asia/Pacific Joint Conference)
May 1- 5, 2010
Ho Chi Minh City, VIETNAMSETAC Asia/PACIFIC
http://vniceporm.com/

SETAC Europe 20th Annual Meeting
May 23 - 27, 2010
Seville, Spain

SETAC Europe
http://events.setac.eu/?contentid=179

SETAC Asia/Pacific Annual Meeting
June 4-7, 2010
Guangzhou, China

SETAC Asia/PACIFIC
http://www.conferencenet.org/conference/setacap.htm

7th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-Food Sector 2008
September 22-24, 2010
Bari, Maraisia

Brazilian LCM Conference 2010
October 13-15, 2010

SETAC North America 31st Annual Meeting
November 7-11, 2010
Portland, Oregon, USA

SETAC North America

37

Information
9th International Conference EcoBalance
November, 9-12, 2010
Tokyo, JAPANJLCAJ
http://www.sntt.or.jp/EcoBalance2010/

SETAC North America 32nd Annual Meeting
November 13-17, 2011
Boston, MA, USA

SETAC North America

Planning & Information Sub-Committee:
Dr. Norihiro Itsubo
Musashi Institute of Technology
United Nations University
Mr. Kiyoshi Ueno
Mr. Yasuhiko Morita
The Japan Electrical Manufacturers' Association
Chiba Institute of Technology
Dr. Kiyoshi SHIBATA
Mr. Junichi NAKAHASHI Asahi Kasei Corporation
Plastic Waste Management Institute
Mr. Hajime Nishihara
Editor's AddressLife Cycle Assessment Society of Japan (JLCA)LCA Development Office, JEMAI(Japan Environmental Management Association for Industry)
2-1, Kajicho 2-chome, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101-0044
tel: +81-3-5209-7708 fax: +81-3-5209-7716
E-mail: lca-project@jemai.or.jp
http://www.jemai.or.jp/english/
38