The number and breadth of eco-improvement methods has been steadily rising over the past decades to include design for X methods and more problem-solving oriented software, based on the Russian TRIZ methodology, and the integration of CAE software and optimization techniques. With such heterogeneous approaches, there is a need of a quantitative classification scheme to help the designer in choosing the best method for each environmental scenario. In the present paper, we propose a comparison and classification, based on the number of eco-guidelines and their distribution on standard impact categories, of 17 of the most known Eco-improvement methods. Furthermore, we propose an interactive selection software that gives the user the ability to exclude or give priority to some life cycle phases and impact categories; empowering him to select the most fitting eco-improvement method or to create a list of the relevant eco-guidelines across all the analysed methods.

(2015). Comparison and classification of eco improvement methods [conference presentation - intervento a convegno]. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10446/41245

Comparison and classification of eco improvement methods

Russo, Davide;Serafini, Marco;Rizzi, Caterina;Duci, Stefano
2015-01-01

Abstract

The number and breadth of eco-improvement methods has been steadily rising over the past decades to include design for X methods and more problem-solving oriented software, based on the Russian TRIZ methodology, and the integration of CAE software and optimization techniques. With such heterogeneous approaches, there is a need of a quantitative classification scheme to help the designer in choosing the best method for each environmental scenario. In the present paper, we propose a comparison and classification, based on the number of eco-guidelines and their distribution on standard impact categories, of 17 of the most known Eco-improvement methods. Furthermore, we propose an interactive selection software that gives the user the ability to exclude or give priority to some life cycle phases and impact categories; empowering him to select the most fitting eco-improvement method or to create a list of the relevant eco-guidelines across all the analysed methods.
2015
Russo, Davide; Serafini, Marco; Rizzi, Caterina; Duci, Stefano
File allegato/i alla scheda:
File Dimensione del file Formato  
ICED15_41.pdf

Solo gestori di archivio

Versione: publisher's version - versione editoriale
Licenza: Licenza default Aisberg
Dimensione del file 1.57 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.57 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Aisberg ©2008 Servizi bibliotecari, Università degli studi di Bergamo | Terms of use/Condizioni di utilizzo

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10446/41245
Citazioni
  • Scopus 4
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact