Materials efficiency: Use of LCA to analyze the impacts of the evolution of a Radio Accessthe evolution of a Radio Access mounting kit

ETSI 3rd Workshop on ICT Energy Efficiency and Environmental Sustainability

Elisabeth Dechenaux ORANGE R&D FranceContributors : Lauri Smalén, Timo Junno, Topi Volkov, Timo Galkin, Heikki Karvinen

Content

OperaNet2 project

Resource efficiencyResource efficiency

Radio access mounting kit and its evolution

Evaluation of new material possibilities

ConclusionsConclusions

OperaNet2 project

Eureka-Celtic project with partial funding from France and Finland: a fully environmental friendly approach for 3G and 4G networks

Funding: French Ministry for Economy, Industry and Digital (DGE) ; Finnish Funding g y y, y g ( ) ; gAgency for Technology and Innovation (Tekes); Belgium and UK partners self-funded

Project duration: 36 months Coordination by Orange

11 Partners

For this work package

Main challenge for OPERANet2 is to improve– Energy and Material efficiency– Usage of renewable energy for telecom networkUsage of renewable energy for telecom network– Energy efficiency metrics

Resource efficiencyResource efficiency is: Optimization of choice use reuse and recyclingResource efficiency is: Optimization of choice, use, reuse and recycling of materials throughout the product life cycle

Appraisal of SustainabilityAppraisal of Sustainability1. Minimizing the Environmental burden2. Minimizing the use of material including rare earth metals and conflict minerals3. Increase the use of re-cycled material4. Savings in production costs

Our approach in the assessment of sustainability – eco attributes:

Eco-attribute Environmental impact Recycled material content Mineral resource and fossil fuel depletion Embodied energy Fossil fuel depletion CO i l t Cli t h CO2 -equivalents Climate change

Main drivers for mounting kit improvements: ‒ Rising volumes - allowing the use of more efficient manufacturing technologies‒ Cost reduction‒ Weight savings

Radio access product mounting kit and evolution Used for installation of Nokia Flexi Base station modules (Radio or System Module).

REQUIREMENTS & RESTRICTIONS

Plinth

RRHPole

Environmental requirements:– UV, flame and corrosion resistance

Operational temperature 35 °C+85°C– Operational temperature -35 C +85 C– High and low humidity

Mechanical requirements Mechanical requirements– Stiffness required to carry the weight– Vibrations from earthquakes and winds– Impacts during transportation

Material restrictions:N ki N t k S b t Li t (ROHS t )– Nokia Networks Substance List (ROHS etc.)

Radio access product mounting kit and evolutionM ti kit l ti t blMounting kit evolution tableVersion of Mounting kit

101-102 103 104-105 206

Main Change Reference Material Manufacturingtechnology

Design optimizingtechnology optimizing

Manufacturingtechnology

Stainless steel (SS) sheet

Aluminum (Al) and SS sheet parts

Al die cast Al die cast

Stainless steel 6720 1550 110 110

Aluminum 0 3071 4120 2720

T t l [ ] 6 729 4 630 4 230 2 830Total [g] 6 729 4 630 4 230 2 830

Recycled materialcontent [w %]

n/a n/a 100%* 100%*

Developing was realized in six years. * based on primary data from manufacturer

Evaluation of new material possibilities: LCAFor the new joint ETSI /ITU LCA standard ES 203 199

Functional unit and system boundaries:

Functional unit for this study is “one Mounting kit”. Cradle to grave is

For the new joint ETSI /ITU LCA standard ES 203 199

Functional unit for this study is one Mounting kit . Cradle to grave is commonly used for the products and used also in this study.

The life cycles of the Flexi Mounting kits were divided into 5 life cycle stages:stages:

– Raw material acquisition

– Production

– Transportation

– Use

– End-of-life treatment

P k i d U h t i l d d i ti lif l Packaging and Use phase were not included in comparative life cycle assessment.

Evaluation of new material possibilities: System boundaries

Raw material acquisition – Secondary processing data from ore to ingot. Raw material transport included in the data.

Production – Primary data was used for energy consumption of dieProduction Primary data was used for energy consumption of die casting, and secondary data for other materials. National mix of energy (China) was used for calculating emissions during production.

Transportations – All versionsTransportations All versions– 19 500 km by ship (China-the Netherlands)– 500 km by truck (the Netherlands-Installation site in France–End

of life treatment)

Use – no environmental impact

End of life treatment and recycling credit - The metals, which l h i i h f h d l blrepresent almost the entire weight of the products, are recyclable.

Recycling is credited in raw material acquisition

Software tool- The LCA is conducted with SULCA 4.2 tool.

Evaluation of new material possibilities: results Three impact categories calculated according to CML 2013 impact assessment

th dmethod :– Global warming potential (GWP)– Abiotic depletion potential (ADP) – fossil fuels

Abiotic depletion potential (ADP) elements– Abiotic depletion potential (ADP) – elements

General observations:– Product evolution decreases environmental impactProduct evolution decreases environmental impact– Higher GWP and ADP fossil fuels for 103, because thought to be produced 100%

virgin Al, which causes more emissions than stainless steel.– High ADP elements for 101-102 due to high volume of stainless steel

30,035,040,0

GWP (carbon footprint)

300,0350,0400,0

ADP fossil fuels

0,5

0,6ADP elements

5 010,015,020,025,0

,

kg C

O2

eq.

50 0100,0150,0200,0250,0

,

MJ

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

kg S

b eq

.0,05,0

101-102 103 104-105 2060,0

50,0

101-102 103 104-105 2060

101-102 103 104-105 206

Sensitivity Analysis Finland /ChinaEffects on the environment when assumptions of the production place changes toEffects on the environment when assumptions of the production place changes to Finland.

14

GWP (carbon footprint)

Travelling distances of sensitivity

6

8

10

12

14

g C

O2

eq.

End of life treatment

Transport

Production

Travelling distances of sensitivity analysisFactory location China Finland

Transportation Ship 19500 1070

0

2

4

206 China 206 Finland

kg Production

Raw material acquisition

Transportationmode

Ship 19500 1070

Truck 500 1610

12 014,016,018,020,0

eq.

GWP (carbon footprint)

200

250

ADP fossil fuels

End of life treatment

0 02,04,06,08,0

10,012,0

kg C

O2

e

50

100

150M

JTransport

Production

0,0104-105 China

104-105 Finland

206 China 206 Finland 0206 China 206 Finland

Raw material acquisition

Evaluation of new material possibilities : CES selector 2014selector 2014

Technical requirements were translated to material properties

Material screening

translated to material properties and indices

Following selection criteria used:– Mechanical performanceMechanical performance

(Stiffness and weight)– Carbon footprint– Price

Material with the best combination of those criteria was searched.

Literature and material vendors data was necessary for avoiding unpractical material suggestions

Evaluation of new material possibilities: material comparisonWeights are adapted to respond to the required rigidity

8

9

Ranking with material indices. The lower is better.Materials comparison:

Cast aluminum - especially when recycled – is the most suitable material for

5

6

7recycled – is the most suitable material for the application

Galvanized steel is good for environmental and price point of view but it is heavy

Stainless steel is heavy and expensive

2

3

4y p

Magnesium is light and stiff, but emissions of production are high

Reinforced plastic potential option, but further reliability and durability studies are

0

1needed for approval

Recycled material content:

Aluminum 42 6 % (100%) Aluminum 42.6 % (100%) Stainless steel 37.4 % Galvanized steel 55.0 % Magnesium 37 4 %

Stiff and light Stiff and low CO2 footprintStiff and low price

Magnesium 37.4 % Thermoplastics 0.0 %

Carbon footprint of the Mounting KitCradle to grave without the use phaseCradle to grave without the use phase.

60,00

70,00

q)

40,00

50,00

rint(

kg C

O2,

eq

10,00

20,00

30,00

Car

bon

foot

pr

0,00

,

Aluminum, die cast Stainless steel, sheet

Magnesium, cast Galvanized steel, sheet metal

PC+25 % GF PTT+30 % GF

C

Material production Processing Transportation Disposal

Data from EcoAudit tool in CES Selector 2014 PC = Polycarbonate PTT = Polytrimethylene terephthalate

p g p p

PTT = Polytrimethylene terephthalate GF = Glass Fiber

Conclusions

Key improvements – Product evolution decreased weight by 58% from 6.7 kg to 2.8 kg– CO2 footprint decrease by 9,7kg CO2 eq

M ti kit i hi h l d t d i t t ti l i i ifi t– Mounting kit is high volume product and improvement potential is significant

Finding optimal material choice– Environmental and economical parameters have effect on material choicep– Production and processing have most significant effect on environmental

impacts– Materials related environmental impact can be effected through materials

recycling used energy mix and manufacturing process selectionrecycling, used energy mix, and manufacturing process selection

LCA usage in environment aware design:– Data quality has a major role in the evaluation of the reliability of the

results– Most of the environmental impacts of the Mounting kits are due to the raw

material acquisition and production.– Parameters importance, sensitivity analysisp , y y– Cases for understanding materials efficiency in different levels of telecom

infrastructure

Questions:

Elisabeth DechenauxR&D expert for ORANGE

LCA Goods and services

THANK S FOR YOUR O

elisabeth.dechenaux@orange.com

ATTENTION