Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
An ecodesign method for reducing the effects of hazardous substances in the product lifecycle Cover

An ecodesign method for reducing the effects of hazardous substances in the product lifecycle

Latvian Journal of Physics and Technical Sciences
Volume 49 (2012): Issue 5 (October 2012)
By: ,  ,   and    
Open Access
|Nov 2012
References

References

  1. 1(2010). IPCS project on the Harmonization of Approaches to the Assessment of Risk from Exposure to Chemicals, WHO, p. 88.
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. 2. Binetti, R.. (2008). Exponential growth of new chemicals and evolution of information relevant to risk control.(1), 13-15.
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. 3. Allanou, R.. (2003). Public availability of data on EU high production volume chemicals - Part 2., July-August, 59-64.
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. 4. Irigaray, P.. (2007). Lifestyle-related factors and environmental agents causing cancer: an overview.(10), 640-658.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  5. 5. Hwang, H.M.. (2008). Occurrence of endocrine-disrupting chemicals in indoor dust.(1), 26-35.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  6. 6. Fridén, U.E.. (2011). Chlorinated paraffins in indoor air and dust: Concentrations, congener patterns, and human exposure.6
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  7. 7. ISO 14040 (2006).-. Geneva (Switzerland): International Organisation for Standardisation.
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. 8. Technical Guidance Document in support of Commission Directive 93/67/EEC on Risk Assessment. Part I, EC, Joint Research Centre, EUR 20418 EN/2, Printed in Italy, 2003, p. 311.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. 9. Karlsson, R., & Luttropp, C. (2006). EcoDesign: what's happening? An overview of the subject area of EcoDesign and of the papers in this special issue.(15- 16), 1291-1298.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  10. 10. Adu, I.K.,. (2008). Comparison of methods for assessing environmental, health and safety (EHS) hazards in early phases of chemical process design.(2), 77-93.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  11. 11. Knight, P., & Jenkins, J.O. (2009). Adopting and applying eco-design techniques: a practitioners perspective.,(5), 549-558.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  12. 12. ECMA 341, Environmental Design Considerations for ICT & CE Products, European association for standardizing information and communication systems, [online] [accessed 14.03.2010]. Accessible: http://www.ecmainternational. org/publications/standards/Standard.htm
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. 13. The Oeko-Tex Standards, [online] [accessed 10.02.2012]. Accessible: http://www.oeko-tex.com
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. 14. BASTA, IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute & the Swedish Construction Federation, [online] [accessed 14.09.2011]. Accessible: http://www.bastaonline.se
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. 15. Nissen, N.F. (2001)., Doctoral Dissertation, Technical University of Berlin, Department of Electrical Engineering, p. 202
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. 16. Wenzel, H.. (1997).Vol 1: Methodology, Tools and Case Studies in Product Development, 564.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  17. 17. Lithner, D.. (2011). Environmental and health hazard ranking and assessment of plastic polymers based on chemical composition.(10), 3309-3324.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  18. 18. Ahrens, A.. (2003).Federal Environmental Agency, Germany, p. 66.
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. 19. ECOIT, [online] [accessed 14.04.2011]. Accessible: PRé Consultants, http://www.pre.nl/content/about-pre
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. 20. Idemat, Delft Technical University, [online] [accessed 14.04.2011]. Accessible: http://www.idemat.nl/
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. 21. Huang H.,. (2009). Materials selection for environmentally conscious design via a proposed life cycle environmental performance index.(11-12), 1073-1082.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  22. 22. Rosenbaum, R.K.. (2008). USEtox-the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment.(7), 532-546.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  23. 23. Meijer, A.. (2005). Human Health Damages due to Indoor Sources of Organic Compounds and Radioactivity in Life Cycle Impact Assessment of Dwellings. Part 1: Characterisation Factors.(5), 309-316.
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. 24. Braungart, M.. (2007). Cradle-to-cradle design: creating healthy emissions - a strategy for eco-effective product and system design.,(13-14), 1337-1348.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  25. 25. Niederl-Schmidinger, A., & Narodoslawsky, M. (2008). Life cycle assessment as an engineer’s tool?245-252.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  26. 26. Cho, K.T. (2003). Multicriteria decision methods: an attempt to evaluate and unify.1099-1119.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  27. 27. Johansson, J., & Luttropp, C. (2009). Material hygiene: improving recycling of WEEE demonstrated on dishwashers.(1), 26-35.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  28. 28(2000). United Nations, New York and Geneva, p.431.
    Search in Google Scholar
  29. 29. REACH, Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (2006. 18. XII), concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals OJ L 396 30.12.2006 1-850.
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. 30. Guinee, J.B. (ed). (2002).. Centre of Environmental Sciences (CML), Leiden University, Kluwer Academic Publishers p. 692.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. 31. Iakovoua, E.. (2009). A methodological framework for end-of-life management of electronic products.(6), 329-339.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  32. 32. Cerdan, C.. (2009). Proposal for new quantitative eco-design indicators: a first case study.(18), 1638-1643.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  33. 33. Mathieux, F.. (2008). ReSICLED: a new recovery-conscious design method for complex products based on a multicriteria assessment of the recoverability.(3), 277-298.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  34. 34. Otto, K.N., & Wood, K.L. (2001).Prentice Hall 1061
    Search in Google Scholar
  35. 35. Harmonized classification and labelling of certain hazardous substances, Annex VI, table 3.2 of regulation REACH, EC No 1272/2008 (online) (accessed 15.04.2011). Accessible: http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/esis/index.php?PGM=cla
    Search in Google Scholar
  36. 36. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, The International Agency for Research on Cancer, [online] [accessed 11.07.2011]. Accessible: http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/PDFs/index.php
    Search in Google Scholar
  37. 37. Michna J.. (2011). Management of energy and environment conservation: current methodical problems.(1), 28-41.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  38. 38. Bovea, M.D., & Pérez-Belis, V. (2012). A taxonomy of eco-design tools for integrating environmental requirements into the product design process.,(1), 61-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.07.012
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  39. 39. European Classification and Labelling Inspections of Preparations, including Safety Data Sheets, Final report, 64 p. [online] [accessed 03.07.2011]. Accessible: http://hesa.etui-rehs.org
    Search in Google Scholar
  40. 40. Hinks J.,. (2009). Views on chemical safety information and influences on chemical disposal behaviour in the UK.1299-1306.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10047-012-0029-x | Journal eISSN: 2255-8896 (formerly 0868-8257) | Journal ISSN: 0868-8257
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 81 - 93
Published on: Nov 23, 2012
Published by: Institute of Physical Energetics
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
ecodesign,
consumer health,
hazardous substances.
Related subjects:
Physics,
Technical and applied physics

© 2012 J. Simanovska, K. Valters, G. Bažbauers, C. Luttropp, published by Institute of Physical Energetics
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Volume 49 (2012): Issue 5 (October 2012)
Previous article