MATERIALS “We publish a set of Environmental
Product Declarations (EPDs) on our website so that our customers can compare our environmental performance with other producers. They can also use our data to calculate the environmental impact of their own products and services, with IVL’s lifecycle assessment of Stilride’s chassis as an example. “Typically the data in an EPD is
valid only for a certain period of time, usually up to fi ve years, so as we update and revise our EPDs, they will refl ect our ongoing eff orts to decrease our carbon footprint. Last year we renewed our CO2
set a new, even more ambitious long- term goal. “We intend to decrease our carbon
footprint by 30% between now and 2030, which corresponds to a reduction of 42% compared with our baseline years 2014-2016. To achieve this we are initiating a number of projects, from switching to low-carbon fuels to investing in new low-emission cargo ships to transport products between Tornio and our distribution hub at Terneuzen in the Netherlands.”
LCA ANALYSIS OVER 10 YEARS While IVL found that Stilride’s scooter has a lower environmental footprint from day one, the LCA also compared the two scooters’ emissions over one year and 10 years on the road. This was calculated by taking into account energy used to charge the batteries for driving the average European annual mileage of 5,800km. The study found that the emissions
from riding form the bulk of the lifetime emissions from both scooters. When they roll off the production line, the reference scooter’s footprint
There’s no other e-scooter like it
is more than three times Stilride’s at 160kg versus 50kg CO2
reduction target, and . However, the
gap widens over time due to Stilride’s lightweighting advantage. After 10 years, the footprints have become 1,030kg versus 890kg CO2
. So, while the reference scooter may
have narrowed the gap in terms of percentage, Stilride has extended its lead in raw numbers. Nyvang comments: “Over 10 years,
both scooters consume a similar amount of energy for riding, meaning that, at a glance, it looks like the competition narrows our environmental lead – but they can never catch up. “Being a Swedish company, we
also wanted to check the impact of our energy mix compared with the European average. Sweden is rich in clean energy such as hydropower, therefore our electric power grid has an unusually low carbon footprint. “When we looked at the impact of
this energy mix over a 10-year life, we found that in Sweden, the typical rider for the reference scooter would have a climate change impact 80% higher than that of a Stilride customer. It’s an interesting point as it highlights how renewable energy infl uences the overall impact of driving any type of electric vehicle.”
A greener future for manufacturing
Stilride’s SUS1 is the fi rst application of the Stilfold technology, but it will later be made available so that designers and manufacturers can use it to build their own products – including EVs, writes Amy Mace. Stilride’s proprietary technology
28
www.engineerlive.com
will enable designers to simulate the folding process and work out how to create any desired part or structure from a metal sheet. Much like IKEA furniture, it will be possible to ship sheet metal to local manufacturers to be folded, reducing the
carbon footprint of fi nished products. Through this technology, Stilride aims to empower designers, architects and manufacturers with the tools to create and distribute sustainable products using cutting-edge steelwork, robotics and ambitious design.
AVOIDING THE RUST The fi nal sustainability advantage of using stainless steel is corrosion resistance, which is provided by alloying elements that form a microscopically thin protective layer on its surface. This prevents the iron in the steel from oxidising and even reforms immediately when scratched. Kaplin comments: “Producing
stainless steel is energy-intensive as we need to smelt steel, but it can be seen as an investment in energy. Yale University’s study found that products made from stainless steel have an average lifespan of 20 years, and often much longer. One famous example is the spire of the Chrysler Building in New York, which has remained pristine ever since it was built in the 1920s.” In contrast, the carbon steel
reference scooter will corrode much sooner, while the stainless steel bike remains pristine. Over the bike’s life, its rider will switch out motors, batteries, lights and accessories while keeping the original sheet metal structure. It’s impossible to give an accurate
estimate of how long either scooter will last as that depends on many factors such as humidity and salt in the air. However, stainless steel’s corrosion resistance will ensure it lasts much longer. Therefore, the sustainability advantage calculated by IVL could be just the tip of the iceberg in terms of its whole-life carbon footprint. ●
Learn more about the technology at
https://www.stilride.comand
https://www.outokumpu.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
