Life Cycle Analysis of a Running Shoe
3 likes11,303 views
This document summarizes an analysis of the life cycle of Saucony Hurricane 7 running shoes. It finds that the largest environmental impacts come from disposal of metals and polymers in landfills, accounting for 95 out of 125 total eco-indicator points per shoe. Simple design changes like using natural and recyclable materials instead of polymers could reduce the production phase impact by 75% and the end of life phase impact by 85%, leading to an overall 80% reduction in impact per shoe. The document recommends consumers consider a brand's recycling program, sourcing of materials, and use of natural materials when purchasing running shoes.
Life Cycle Analysis of a Running Shoe
- 1. Kelly Kokaisel MCAD Sp ‘10
- 2. The Product: Women’s Saucony Hurricane 7 Running Shoe The Audience: Runners and health conscious people looking for a shoe that is comfortable and supportive. These people have disposable income and will not buy until they have found a well fitting shoe.
- 3. Saucony Hurricane 7 shoes are made in China, although Saucony claims to be a ‘Made in America’ company. The aluminum for the eyelets comes from Australia. The oil for the polymers (plastic, rubber, foam) comes from Saudi Arabia. The timber for the cardboard may come from Burma, through an illegal trade. Injection molding, stamping, and gluing are done in China.
- 4. LCA accounts for emissions, habitat alteration and resource depletion associated with all inputs into a product throughout the entire life cycle of a product. The goal of this LCA is to measure the ecological performance of the product and use those metrics to determine our best design options. The scope of this LCA includes packaging. I believe that, today, the main function of the running shoe is comfort. I know that shoes were originally designed for protection from the ground and from cold, but I do not think that is true for today’s modern running shoe. Mainly I believe this because no matter how protective a shoe is, a person will not buy it if it’s not comfortable. In the minds of today’s consumer, the main function is comfort, comfort during work, or walking, or exercise, mainly. Therefore, as a designer of a running shoe, this must be your utmost concern.
- 5. The Process Tree helps This process tree shows the explore the transformation resources and material flows of of resources and materials our Saucony running shoe. throughout the life of a product.
- 6. LCA accounts for emissions, habitat alteration and resource depletion associated with all inputs into a product throughout the entire life cycle of a product. This table outlines the materials and multiplies these inputs by the chemical emissions, land use, and resource depletion values collected for each type of material or process.
- 7. These impact calculations show that the largest impact of the running shoe comes from the disposal of metals and polymers into landfills; 95 eco-indicator points out of 125 total, per shoe. This shows us exactly where we can make improvements that will dramatically improve the impact of this product.
- 8. Where do you want your shoes to end up? The typical end-of-life for shoes—the landfill. *Stitching the shoe together instead of using glue not only Flooring made of recycled shoe bits at a London Nike store. helps to take the shoe apart to recycle, but also reduces the footprint!
- 9. The materials of a running shoe alone travel over 8,000 miles before they even make the 7,300+ mile journey from China to the US. Not to mention, the impacts of the illegal timber trade between Burma and China. If these materials travel by freight train, that is equivalent to 160,000 lbs, or 80 tons, of CO2 emissions per ton of materials moved. Another 55 tons of CO2 is emitted when the shoes travel by oceanic freighter from China to the US , for a total of 135 tons of CO2.
- 10. The footprint could drop 14.5 Impact 99 Factor Points just in the Production Phase (out of a total of 19.5 points) from using natural rubber and organic cotton instead of polymers, and eliminating the polymer processing. That’s a 75% impact reduction. = In addition, using recyclable, natural materials would reduce the End of Life Phase 84 of 95 Points. That’s an 85% impact reduction. = These changes would result in a total 26.5 Impact Factor per shoe, instead of 125 Points., or an 80% impact reduction.
- 11. The environmental impacts of running shoes on the planet is needlessly high. Simple changes in the design drastically reduces the footprint. When you purchase your next pair of running shoes, pay particular attention to the following: *Do the shoes have a take-back or recycling program? *Where do the materials come from and where are they assembled? *Do they use natural materials that are stitched together rather than glued? These 3 recommendations will help you make an environmentally friendly choice, keeping the Earth healthy while you keep your body healthy. Thank you. Source: Okala learning ecological design