ACV Kadjar 2015

RENAULT KADJAR - 2015
- LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT RESULTS

- RENAULT LCA METHODOLOGY
DRIVE THE CHANGE

TABLE OF CONTENT
A. NEW RENAULT KADJAR – LCA RESULTS 5
I GOAL AND SCOPE OF THE KADJAR STUDY 5
II LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY 7

II.1 Material composition 7
II.2 Plants and logistics 8
III RESULTS OF THE LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 9

III.1 New KADJAR 9
III.2 Comparison between SCENIC 3 and KADJAR 12
III.3 Results analysis 12
III.4 Normalization of the results 16
IV CONCLUSIONS AND LIMITS 18
B. RENAULT LCA METHODOLOGY 19
I INTRODUCTION / CONTEXT 19
II GOALS AND SCOPE OF RENAULT’S LCA STUDIES 20

II.1 Goals of Renault’sLCA studies 20
II.1.1 Intended applications and decision context 20
II.1.2 Limitations 20
II.1.3 Targeted audience 20
II.1.4 Vigilance for public disclosure 21
II.2 Goal & Scope of the vehicle study 21
II.2.1 Functional unit and reference flow 21
II.2.2 System boundaries 22
III LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY ASSESSMENT 24

III.1 Data collection: Methods and procedures 24
III.2 Vehicle description 25
III.3 Vehicles’ composition 25
III.3.1 vehicle material composition 25
III.3.2 Processing steps – production of parts 25
III.4 Factories and logistic 26
III.4.1 Logistics 26
III.4.2 Factories 27
III.5 Use 29
III.5.1 Use: fuel and electricity production 29
III.5.2 Use: Car use phase 29
III.5.3 Use : Maintenance 30
III.6 End of life 30
III.7 Quality of data 31
III.8 Overview of assumptions and definitions for a LCA 33
IV LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 36

IV.1 Indicators chosen for the studies 36
IV.2 indicators not chosen 38
IV.2.1 Human toxicity 38
IV.2.2 Water consumption 38
IV.2.3 Road safety 39
IV.2.4 Waste quantity from the supplY chain 39
IV.2.5 Non-exhaust emissions 40
2
V STANDARD HYPOTHESIS SENSITIVITIES 41
V.1 Considering factories? 41
V.1.1 Factories mass 41
V.1.2 Impact calculation 41
V.2 Factories allocations 42
V.3 HC additional source 43
V.3.1 Problematic 43
V.3.2 Hypotheses and calculations 43
V.3.3 Results 44
VI METHODOLOGY REPORT APPENDIX 46

VI.1 References 46
VI.2 Abbreviation list 47
VI.3 European emissions regulations 48
VI.4 List of datasets from thinkstep used in Renault model FOR TWINGO STUDY 49
3
Figures
Figure 1 : Material distribution of SCENIC 3 & KADJAR ............................................................................................... 7
Figure 2 : Repartition of environmental impact of KADJAR along its life cycle .............................................................. 9
Figure 3 : Repartition of environmental impacts of the new KADJAR along its life cycle, according to the recycling
scenario with recycling credits ........................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 4 : Comparison between SCENIC 3 & KADJAR for the selected impacts ........................................................ 12
Figure 5 : Contributions for vehicle production ............................................................................................................ 14
Figure 6 : Contributions for use phase......................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 7: contributions for end of life ........................................................................................................................... 16
Figure 8 : Normalized results for SCENIC 3 and KADJAR .......................................................................................... 17
Figure 9 : Life cycle of a product.................................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 10 : Schematic table of LCA steps [EC 2010a] ................................................................................................. 19
Figure 11: Renault vehicle LCA pattern ....................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 12: Cutoff criteria representation ...................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 13 : Systems modeling ..................................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 14 : Bom Import ................................................................................................................................................ 26
Figure 15 : Recycling modelling................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 16: Impact categories chosen for the study ...................................................................................................... 37
Figure 17: Water consumption reduction in Renault factories ..................................................................................... 39
Figure 18: Evolution of packaging waste quantities at production. Quantity in kg per vehicle from 1996 to 2010 ....... 40
Figure 19: Evolution of photochemical ozone creation potential, function of tank temperature (i.e. petrol vapors) ..... 44
Tables
Table 1 : Characteristics of the two vehicles compared: KADJAR and SCENIC ........................................................... 6
Table 2 : Emission limits according to EURO 5b and EURO 6 regulations ................................................................... 6
Table 3 : Material description for KADJAR & SCENIC .................................................................................................. 7
Table 4 : Production plants localization ......................................................................................................................... 8
Table 5 : Environmental impact of the new KADJAR and repartition ........................................................................... 10
Table 6 : Environmental impact of the new KADJAR according the recycling scenario including recycling credits ..... 11
Table 7 : Sensitivity study for inbound logistic ............................................................................................................. 27
Table 8: Comparison of environmental impacts following a modification of supply transport, applied on an average
Renault vehicle .................................................................................................................................................. 27
Table 8: Operation and frequency of maintenance operations .................................................................................... 30
Table 9: Origin and specifications of data collected during analysis ............................................................................ 32
Table 10: Origin and specifications of data collected during analysis (following and end) ........................................... 33
Table 11: Assumptions and definitions for the Life Cycle Assessment ........................................................................ 35
Table 12: Impact assessment choice matrix................................................................................................................ 36
Table 13: Environmental impacts categories selected and definition .......................................................................... 37
Table 14: EU 15 normalisation factors in accordance with CML 2001, Apr. 2013 ....................................................... 38
Table 15: Part of factory’s construction a petrol vehicle’s life cycle ............................................................................. 42
Table 16: Part of factory’s construction a diesel vehicle’s life cycle ............................................................................. 42
Table 17: Comparison of environmental impacts following a 10% increase of Renault factories’ consumptions and
emissions, applied on an average Renault vehicle ............................................................................................ 42
Table 19: Value of photochemical ozone creation potential for use phase, function of tank temperature (i.e. petrol
vapors) ............................................................................................................................................................... 44
Table 20: European emission standards for diesel engines ........................................................................................ 48
Table 21: European emission standards for petrol, LPG and NG engines .................................................................. 48
4
A. NEW RENAULT KADJAR – LCA RESULTS
This part presents the results of the life cycle assessment of the new Renault KADJAR.
It is a comparative LCA study and compares the new Renault KADJAR with an existed model in
the range. The closest one is the Renault SCENIC 3 (short, 5 passengers).
We have to precise that this comparison doesn’t followed exactly the methodology mentioned in
the second part of this report. Indeed, we are not comparing a replaced vehicle and the new one
because Kadjar is a new car in the Renault range. The comparison is based on the customer
targeted by the vehicle. KADJAR and SCENIC share the same target in term of customers (family,
young people) and propose the same kind of performances (weight, habitability, number of
passengers) despite their opposite design. To reinforce the comparison, we use the same engine
for both. Moreover, journalists and customers consider the crossover as the best alternative to
small monospace like the short SCENIC.
For all these reasons we consider the comparison with SCENIC as a good way to evaluate the
environmental performances of new Renault KADJAR.Nevertheless, the results will be lower than
a comparison with an older vehicle which was developed as long ago.
I GOAL AND SCOPE OF THE KADJAR STUDY

For all Renault studies, the goal and scope and the global guidelines of the LCA analysis are the
same and are described precisely in the methodological part of this report (from page 19, part B).
Functional unit and vehicles assessed

The functional unit for this study is the same as for other Renault studies. It is defined as the
transportation of persons in a vehicle, for a total distance of 150 000 km, during 10 years, in
compliance with type approval regulation over New European Drinving Cycle.
It is described precisely in the methodological part (page 20).
The two vehicles assessed have standard equipment and similar characteristics that are
described in the following table:
5
SCENIC KADJAR
Constructor RENAULT RENAULT
description
Denomination Scenic Kadjar
General
Production Start 2009 2015
Category VP – M1 VP – M1
Body J segment I segment
Fuel diesel diesel
Engine K9K K9K
specification
Mechanical
Gearbox BVM BVM

Max speed 180 182
Emission standard for type
approval (70/220/CEE)
EURO 5 EURO 6
Consumption (NEDC) 4,1 L/100km 3,8 L/100km
Length 4372 4449

Dimension
Width 1845 1836
Height 1683 1604

CO2 (NEDC) 105 g/km 99 g/km
Emissions
CO (NEDC) 189,6 mg/km 143,2 mg/km

HC (NEDC) 34,1 mg/km 38 mg/km
NOx (NEDC 44,2 mg/km 53,6 mg/km
Table 1 : Characteristics of the two vehicles compared: KADJAR and SCENIC
For information, the emission limits according EURO 5b and EURO 6 (category M1) for particular
vehicles equipped with diesel engines are given in the following table:
EURO 5b EURO 6
CO (g/km) 0,500 0,500
HC (g/km) 0,100 0,100
NMHC (g/km) 0,230 0,170
NOx (g/km) 0,180 0,080
Part. Mass (mg/km) 5 5
Part. Number (#/km) 6x1011 6x1011
Table 2 : Emission limits according to EURO 5b and EURO 6 regulations
All details about emissions regulations are available in appendix VI.3.
6
II LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY
II.1 MATERIAL COMPOSITION
The following table shows the different materials composition of the 2 compared vehicles:
SCENIC 3 KADJAR
Material categories Total mass (kg) Total mass (kg)

1 - Metals 1269,2 1029,7
2 - Polymers 253,8 220,0
3 - Elastomers 65,7 47,3
4 – Glass and ceramic 54,8 38,9
5 - Fluids 77,8 69,8
6 – Organic material 9,5 4,7
7 - Others 4,7 3,6
TOTAL 1735 1414
Table 3 : Material description for KADJAR & SCENIC
Figure 1 : Material distribution of SCENIC 3 & KADJAR
As described in the graphs, the distribution of the materials is almost the same between the
vehicles.
These materials compisitions allow us to conclude that KADJAR and SCENIC have the same
positioning in the range.
Although both vehicle have the same ratios, KADJAR is lighter than Scenic thanks to its new
platform and the work achieved to reduce the global weight of the vehicle. This achievement is
linked to a global roadmap in order to reduce the weight of our vehicle.
7
II.2 PLANTS AND LOGISTICS
The two vehicles are not assembled in the same factory, one is assembled in France and the
second one in Spain.
Table 4 shows also where engine and gearbox for both vehcile are manufactured.
Scenic Kadjar
Vehicle assembly factory Douai (FRANCE) Palencia (SPAIN)
Engine factory Valladolid (SPAIN) Valladolid (SPAIN)
Gearbox factory Cacia (PORTUGAL) Seville (SPAIN)
Table 4 : Production plants localization
The emissions and consumptions related to the vehicle assembly, engine and gearbox are taken
into account.
Logistic is also estimated according to those data.
8
III RESULTS OF THE LIFE CYCLE IMPACT
ASSESSMENT
III.1 NEW KADJAR
Figure 2 presents the distribution of selected impacts all along the life cycle.
Concerning the recycling phase, it is modelled according to reference scenario (see chapter III.6,
p30).
Concerning the presentation of the results:

- Vehicle production includes raw material extraction and manufacturing, the production of
parts and the assembly of the vehicle. It also includes logistics from first rank supplier to
factory and to final customer.
- The use phase includes the production of fuel and the use of the vehicle all along its life
cycle (as defined in the functional unit). It also includes the maintenance during the life
cycle
- The end of life includes the different processes to dismantle and shred the end of life
vehicle, also the recycling processes of the different specific parts of the car.
Associated data is gathered in Table 5.
Figure 2 : Repartition of environmental impact of KADJAR along its life cycle
9
QUANTITY PART IN LIFE CYCLE
ADP fossil: Abiotic depletion Potential (fossil) [MJ]

Vehicle Production 72824,68 23,10%
Use Phase 240982,99 76,34%
End of life 1773,23 0,56%
AP: Acidification Potential [kg SO2-Equiv.]

Use Phase 22,97 46,09%
End of life 2,30 4,51%
GWP: Global Warming Potential 100 years [kg CO2-Equiv.]

Use Phase 17009,70 73,53%
End of life 572,55 2,48%
EP: Eutrophication Potential [kg Phosphate-Equiv.]

Use Phase 5,60 70,99%
POCP: Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential [kg Ethene-Equiv.]

Use Phase 5,45 65,24%
Table 5 : Environmental impact of the new KADJAR and repartition
For more information about the choice of indicators, refer to the methodological part, chapter IV.1,
p 33.
As explained on the methodological part, we have chosen to give results for 2 recycling scenario.
The following figure gives the results for scenario 2 (recycling credits are estimated and included
in the recycling phase results).
10
Figure 3 : Repartition of environmental impacts of the new KADJAR along its life cycle, according to the
recycling scenario with recycling credits
QUANTITY PART IN LIFE CYCLE

ADP fossil: Abiotic depletion Potential (fossil) [MJ]
Use Phase 240982,99 79,61%
End of life 1773,23 0,59%
Recycling credits -12948,71 -4,28%
AP: Acidification Potential [kg SO2-Equiv.]
Use Phase 22,97 48,87%
GWP: Global Warming Potential 100 years [kg CO2-Equiv.]
Use Phase 17009,70 75,96%
End of life 572,55 2,56%
EP: Eutrophication Potential [kg Phosphate-Equiv.]
Use Phase 5,60 72,97%
POCP: Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential [kg Ethene-Equiv.]
Use Phase 5,45 67,49%
Table 6 : Environmental impact of the new KADJAR according the recycling scenario including recycling
credits
11
III.2 COMPARISON BETWEEN SCENIC 3 AND KADJAR
The following figure shows the comparison between the two vehicles.
Figure 4 : Comparison between SCENIC 3 & KADJAR for the selected impacts
The difference between SCENIC 3 and KADJAR is comprised for each environmental impact
between 14 and 18%.
The main difference for each impact concerns the production; the differences are relatively low
compared to other vehicles in the Renault range. We can explain this results by the choice of a
new version of SCENIC 3 equiped with a EURO 5b engine which is already respectful of the
environment. Nevertheless, we used the same LCA model, with the same hypothesis in order to
minimize the incertainties. In this situation, we can notice the significative improvement obtained
by the new ways of development applied on Kadjar. The weight reduction, and the use of a new
platform have allowed to decrease the global impact of the car.
This comparison highlights the difficulties to decrease on each vehicle its environmental impacts.
III.3 RESULTS ANALYSIS

Before the results explanations, we can notice below some details about the cut-offs application:
Regarding the non-reassembled flows:

The table below shows that cutoffs on vehicle mass are lower than 1%.
Cut off criteria ESPACE
SCENIC KADJAR
Total mass cut off (kg) 10,24 1,01
Cut off % 0,59% 0,07%
The performance in term of cut-off comes from our better knowledge of material composition. We
reached on KADJAR a high level of knowledge thanks to our system of material data sheet
collection. Indeed, compared to Scenic 3, we have a reached a high level of MDS documentation
12
(>95%) thanks to a new way of management and a favorable panel of suppliers. Furthermore, we
have to apply the same kind of datas management in our ongoing project.
Regarding the spare parts:

For the moment, we don’t take into account all the spare parts. We are thinking about a
modification of our processes. Nevertheless, we have noticed below the mass of spare parts
regarding the total weight of the vehicle. We have to keep in mind our goal which is making a
comparison between 2 vehicles with the same hypothesis in term of spare parts used.
Maintenance
KADJAR SCENIC 3
x_lead 12,9 11,4 maintenance: qté de plomb de la batterie (kg)
x_acid 5,2 6,08 maintenance: qté d'acide de la batterie (kg)
x_brake_fluid 2,3 0,479 maintenance: qté de liquide de frein (kg)
x_cooling_fluid 5,77 4,22 maintenance: qté de liquide de refroidissement (kg)
x_glass_wash 24,08 14,58 maintenance: 4 x qté de liquide lave glace (kg)
x_lubricant 33,6 26,033 maintenance: 7 x qté d'huile (pour vidange) (kg)
x_tire 177,6 136 maintenance: 3 x masse totale des pneus (kg)
Masse totale 261,45 198,792

Masse Vehicule 1413,52 1735,64
% relatif de la maintenance 18,50% 11,45%
Regarding the manufacturing scraps:

For the moment, we don’t take into account the scraps coming from plants. As the spare parts,
we are thinking about a modification of our processes.
Concerning the full LCA of cars, we can notice that the main contribution comes from the use
phase.
The results analysis shows the details of the contributions of each phase of the vehicle life cycle.
Vehicle production:
The following figure shows the different contributions for vehicle production.
13
Figure 5 : Contributions for vehicle production KADJAR
First of all, the contribution of materials is preponderant in the production phase. Logistics and
manufacturing represent less than 20% of the impacts excepting for POCP for which assembly
and logistis represent around 40%.
Within materials, metal and plastics are responsible for more than 80% of the impacts excepting
for eutrophication and POCP wherein the production of tire and the assembly are significant.
However, we notice that manufacturing is mainly impacted for POCP (around 30%) which
representative the major impact of manufacturing.
The main contributors identified are the cast aluminimum, and steel cast used for body parts for
metals.
Use phase:
The following figure presents results for the different contributions of the use phase.
14
Figure 6 : Contributions for use phase KADJAR
For the use phase, contributions are closely linked to different indicators, but the production of
fuel is the most significant for all the impact (between 40% and up to more than 95% for ADP)
excepting for the global warming which is composed mainly with the driving phase.
If we consider the driving phase of the vehicle (well to tank + tank to wheel), it represents more
than 80% of the impacts.
15
End of life:
The following figure presents the contributions of end of life for each environmental impact.
Figure 7: contributions for end of life KADJAR
Distribution of impact is specific for each type of recycling and associated credits.
The main contributions are for copper recycling ang waste treatment. These two contributors are
responsible of more than 25% of the impacts for each impact.
For recycling credits, the main benefits come from the aluminium and plastics recycling. Despite
the benefits, the process of plastics recycling is the third contributors in term of impact.
III.4 NORMALIZATION OF THE RESULTS
In order to give another interpretation of the results, it is possible to normalize the several potential
impacts presented in this study.
Normalization consists in dividing the value of the product per the value of a reference case on
each indicator.
This tool gives the contribution of the studied product on the chosen indicators.
The normalization methodology is CML2001 Western Europe, which is in line with our scope.
Normalization factors are available thanks to our GaBi software and Thinkstep database. They
are gathered in the following table:
CML2001 - Apr. 2013, Western Europe (EU)

Abiotic Depletion (ADP fossil) 3,06202 x 1013 MJ
Acidification Potential (AP) 27354100000 kg SO2-Equiv.
Global Warming Potential (GWP 100 years) 4,8832 x 1012 kg CO2-Equiv.
Eutrophication Potential (EP) 12821957276 kg Phosphate-Equiv.
Photochem. Ozone Creation Potential (POCP) 8241462011 kg Ethene-Equiv.
16
The results are presented below.
Figure 8 : Normalized results for SCENIC 3 and KADJAR

From this normalization, we can see that eutrophication burden is the lowest vehicle contribution
for European emissions.
Concerning abiotic depletion potential, the vehicles’ contribution comes from the large use of fossil
resources for fuel production.
The figure highlights improvements between the two vehicles on all environmental burdens but
also the positive contribution of recycling mainly on the first three impacts.
17
IV CONCLUSIONS AND LIMITS
We performed in this report a comparison between KADJAR & SCENIC 3 to identify the
differences in term of environmental impact by using LCA.
We have defined 5 impacts to measure and compare our vehicles, and the analysis of each of
them show us an improvement on KADJAR compared to SCENIC 3.
We can conclude (based on the following hypothesis which allow to make the comparisons) that
KADJAR has a lower environmental footprint than SCENIC despite they are both recent:
- Same market and target in term of customers despite the design modifications.
- Same vehicle range.
- Same engines and equipments.
- Same perimeters of comparison with the same use cases.
Earnings are directly linked to the vehicle and due to its improvement in term of CO2
emissions, materials using, supply chain management.
However, we have to mention some limits for the vehicle study.

- The comparison with SCENIC 3 launched in 2009 but updated in 2014 shows an
improvement in term of environmental footprint. Despite a very close target in term of
customer and application we have to mention that we are in the limit of the methodology.
Nevertheless, the improvements are directly linked to the new ways of development.
In general for the LCA performance at Renault, we have identify some ways of improvement:
- We will sudy the possibility to include all the waste (manufacturing and maintenance which
represents the main contribution to the global waste.).
- We have planned an updated of the oldest Databases with our supplier.
- We use for the moment only 5 impacts contrary to JRC. On this point, we won’t make any
modification.
- We don’t take into account the contribution of the plants in term of building, but we are
perfroming an update concerning the datas, and the values will be integrated in the future
analysis.
We are continually improving our approach of the LCA analysis at Renault to include all the new
developments and the remarks coming from experts of Solinnen.
18
B. RENAULT LCA METHODOLOGY
This part of the document presents the framework to conduct the Life Cycle Assessment studies
of Renault vehicles.
This methodology is the same for all vehicle studies.
This methodology report is the version v1.
I INTRODUCTION / CONTEXT
Based on ISO 14040-44 standards, Life Cycle Assessment is a technique to assess in a scientific
and objective way, all potential environmental impacts of a product, considering its whole life cycle:
from cradle to grave as described in Figure 9.
Figure 9 : Life cycle of a product
LCA studies comply with the ISO 14040 and 14044 standards [ISO 2006], and the following
framework shows how to conduct LCA studies.
Generally Renault LCA studies compare the results for a vehicle launched with the predecessor
vehicle.
Context: Who, why?
Goal and scope definition: Scope of the

study and its context (temporal, geographic
and technological)
Inventory analysis: Identify and quantify the

system’s incoming and outgoing flows. Identify
errors from this step.
Impacts assessment: Transcription of flows

in potential environmental impact.
Interpretation: Summary of environmental

records and their use to achieve considered
goals
Figure 10 : Schematic table of LCA steps [EC 2010a]
19
II GOALS AND SCOPE OF RENAULT’S LCA
STUDIES
II.1 GOALS OF RENAULT’S LCA STUDIES
The goal of Renault’s LCA studies is to assess the environmental impacts of all new vehicles.
When it exists, the goal of LCA studies is to compare the new vehicle with its predecessor.
The goal of the study is precisely detailed through six aspects:

• Intended application(s) and decision context
• Limitations
• Targeted audience
• Comparative studies to be disclosed to the public
• Commissioner of the study and other influential actors
II.1.1 INTENDED APPLICATIONS AND DECISION CONTEXT

LCA create new opportunities for the Group’s strategy to diverse dialogues with stakeholders,
thus improving the knowledge of the environmental impacts of Renault products.
This methodology report describes the global framework and Life Cycle Inventory data sets to be
used in Renault’s calculation model. The methodology report is common for all vehicles studies.
The life cycle is modelled by depicting the existing supply-chain attributionally. Primary physical
data will be collected and associated to generic processes.
II.1.2 LIMITATIONS
An LCA study is an image of the product as it is launched and operates for defined time and
mileage, as described in the functional unit (II.2.1).
A 10 year and 150 000 kilometers in the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) standard is usually
applied in Renault studies. It is a meanvalue and is not representative for all vehicles’
use.However, Renault use this value in accordance with the compromise established between
the CCFA and the automotive industry.
As a standard for all studies, benefits from the recycling processes, considered as potential credit,
are not allocated to products. Results will be provided for information on the potential benefit for
Renault.
Each LCA study is an attributional LCA and marginal or rebound effects are not taken into account.
Note: Limitations on new technologies (eg. Electric vehicle) are further detailed in relevant LCA
reports.
II.1.3 TARGETED AUDIENCE

LCA studies are dedicated to the Renault internal audience and will be used as a reference by
Renault management to define future environmental objectives for Renault products.
They will also provide a clear picture of the issues linked to specific parts production, and identify
critical points to help engineers with ecodesign.
LCA studies will be available to expert stakeholders in order to sustain the dialogue on life cycle
management and an executive summary can be prepared for non-expert readers.
An expert in environment and life cycle assessment will be assigned to review each report in
compliance with the ISO 14040 standard and to validate the findings. The LCA critical review
report is available with each LCA study.
20
II.1.4 VIGILANCE FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
Studies are planned to be disclosed to the public.
It is not possible to make a direct comparison between the results of two different LCA studies,
for instance from any other car manufacturer.
When a comparison is made it is described precisely in the specific vehicle study report and it
usually concerns the comparison between the new vehicle and its predecessor.
The main objective is to maintain a logic when two vehicle are compared. We have to compare
only 2 vehicles dedicated to the same market, with the same customer target and behavior. In the
case of the new comer in the range, we will compare the new vehicle with the closest existed
vehicle in the range. For example, we coul compare Kadjar and Short Scenic. They are dedicated
to the same market, with the same objectives.
Thus it is also not possible to compare two different Renault vehicle studies (different model,
technologies…).
II.2 GOAL & SCOPE OF THE VEHICLE STUDY

LCA reports detail and analyse the potential environmental impacts of different Renault models.
The results are calculated in compliance with the ISO 14040:2006 and 14044:2006 standards.
The detailed perimeter of LCA studies and data collection is presented below. All specific
information concerning the vehicle with respect to scope definition is detailed in the vehicle
dedicated LCA study.
The 2 studied vehicles are compared by using the same model. The methodologicals choices are
the same and we use the same mapping file. The results are calculated by using the same
database and also the same version. It allows us to make sure that the vehicles are compared
with the same kind of inputs and the same updated methods.
II.2.1 FUNCTIONAL UNIT AND REFERENCE FLOW

- The functional unit defines and clarifies the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the
function(s) along with some essential questions: “what”, “how much”, “how well”, and “for how
long”.
Functional unit
- What: Transportation of passengers in a vehicle
- How much: 150 000 km (Europe geographic scope)
- How long: 10 years
- How well: Respect of the norms, studied vehicle type approval
Definition of a general vehicle functional unit:

Transportation of persons in a vehicle, for a total distance of 150 000 kms (~93 000
miles), during 10 years, in compliance with studied vehicle type approval norms (e.g.
NEDC driving cycle)
- The vehicle itself defines the reference flow. It is described precisely in the chapter “Goal
and scope of the vehicle study” of the dedicated LCA study.
21
II.2.2 SYSTEM BOUNDARIES
INPUTS
OUPUTS
Consumptions:
Water Emissions
Energy (electric, thermal..) (air, water, land)
Raw material Waste
Figure 11: Renault vehicle LCA pattern
The LCA studies analyze all the necessary data to cover the 3 main steps that contribute to the
life cycle impacts:
- the production of the vehicle which include materials extraction and parts production, logistic
of parts and vehicle
- the use of the vehicle including also fuel production (Diesel, gasoline or electricity),
- the end of life treatment including dismantling and shredding
II.2.2.1 Cutoff criteria for initial inclusion of incoming

(consumption) or outgoing (emissions)
A default cutoff criteria of 95% in mass or energy is applied on all study. In addition a criteria of
99% in mass is applied on the bill of materials of the studied vehicle and all substances of
environmental signficance such as toxic substances and rare ressources shall be taken into
account (as described in Figure 12). The cut-offs values are calcultated for each vehicles as it is
mentioned in part III.3.
NB: Omitted flows will not include toxic substances and rare resources like platinum or gold (i.e.
electronic components)
- On the use of a thermal vehicle, for example with a consumption at 4L/100km, no more than 300
L can be neglected (≈250kg) (5% of a consumption of 4L/100km on a distance of 150 000 km
during 10 years is 300 L)
- For various emissions (air, water, land) calculated flows are approximated to µg/reference flow.
For more information about cutoff criteria applied to the different elements of LCA software
databases used: GaBi 6.0, report to documentation available at:
http://database-documentation.gabi-software.com/
95 % Mass
1%
99 % Mass
Vehicle’s production
Incomings
22
Figure 12: Cutoff criteria representation
II.2.2.2 System modeling

The construction of infrastructures like trucks, roads or other buildings is excluded as they are the
same for all vehicles studied.
Concerning factories, their impact is negligible and explained in the methodological report (V.1)
Figure 13 represents steps and elements constituting the system: perimeter included in the
studies and the one which is excluded such as material second life benefits or vehicle sales.
Renault plants
Not included
Figure 13 : Systems modeling
II.2.2.3 Production of parts and vehicles

The production phase gathers:
- The raw material extraction phase and also the production of the different Renault parts.
These data are based on material information
- The assembly of the vehicle, thus including manufacturing inputs and outputs.
The identification of vehicles material content enables the estimation of the total supply chain
impact from material production to processing stages.
The impact of transformation processes is proportional to the mass of material.
GaBi Thinkstep datasets are used to get the transformation impacts.It is average transformation
information.
23
When choice is possible, the supply chain is modeled as European wide. In term of supply chain
modelization, we don’t take into account the supplier’s localization. To apply a representative
impact, we choose a value of 2000km as inbound impact by trucks.
The list of all aggregated datasets used in the Renault modelling system is available in APPENDIX
VI.4.
In the case of electric vehicles studies, the battery production is treated apart and specification is
described in the relevant report.
II.2.2.4 Fuel production

Fuel production corresponds to the « well to tank (WTT) » step (whole production of fuel from
extraction to vehicle’s tank filling)
For Diesel, gasoline or electricity, Thinkstep GaBi datatsets are considered depending on the
country where the vehicle is sold (see APPENDIX VI.4).
II.2.2.5 Logistics
Logistic “inbound”, which include all logistic of parts is estimated according to logistic experts in
Renault. A sensitivity analysis shows that logistic inbound is not the main contribution of vehicle
LCA results and that the estimation is relevant. We use a value of 2000km by trucks as inputs for
logistic inbound calculation.
Logistic outbound, which include he delivery of assembled vehicles from the assembly plant to
final customer is considered.
II.2.2.6 Use
The use phase, defined for 150 000 km, includes:
- Fuel consumption (gasoline, diesel, electricity)
- Atmospheric emissions from thermal engine operation and electricity
production: CO2, CO, NOx, HC, SO2, Particles PM10 (from diesel engines)
- Maintenance detailed in chapter III.5.3 :
Oil (drain), oil filters (thermal engines), tires, windscreen washer
liquid, air conditioning
The hypothesis use for maintenance are the same for all the vehicles.
II.2.2.7 End of life

European Commission regulated the treatment of vehicles at their end of life.
Directive 2000/53/CE (through Decree n°2003-727) de fines following regulations for January 1,
2015:
- 85% of re-use and recycling
- 95% of re-use, recycling and recovery
The end of life modelling follows these regulations.
III LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

III.1 DATA COLLECTION: METHODS AND PROCEDURES
The Data collection phase consists in gathering all information on any parts of the vehicle (material
and process) but also on the manufacture and usage of the vehicle.
Once collected, this data is used in LCA software (GaBi 6.0), in a model developed by Renault,
specifically dedicated to its needs. The life cycle pattern of the vehicle is the result obtained
describing all processes and flows.
24
Collecting data to perform LCA is complex. It requires different information from all departments,
not only technical data but also marketing data, environmental reports or material and parts details.
III.2 VEHICLE DESCRIPTION

For one specific Renault vehicle, there is a large variety of models that can be explained by:
- Different levels of equipment
- Different engines
The LCA is conducted for only one model (one level of equipment, but it is possible to conduct
the LCA for one gasoline vehicle and also one Diesel vehicle).
This chosen model is the one that is concerned by the environmental Renault signature Eco2
(information on Eco 2 signature is available on Renault website).
The vehicle is also identified with a VIN number, required to obtain the homologation data,
necessary to calculate the use phase.
III.3 VEHICLES’ COMPOSITION

III.3.1 VEHICLE MATERIAL COMPOSITION
According to regulation (Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and the council on
end of life vehicles and Directive 2005/64/EC of the European Parliament and the council on
type approval of motor vehicles with regard to their reusability, recyclability and recoverability),
Renault has to know for each vehicle sold the exact vehicle material composition.
To comply with these regulations Renault and other car manufacturers use IMDS (International
Material Data System). This system gathers the information on material concerning every parts
of the vehicle (from Original Equipment Manufacturers and their suppliers) so that Renault can
have the material information for the whole vehicle.
Thanks to the IMDS material database, it is possible to describe the vehicle according different
material categories. We use, if it is necessary to complete the IMDS datas, the same datas use
for the recycling certification according to European regulation 2000/53/EC.
These data are those that are considered to get the whole impact of raw material during the
vehicle life cycle thanks to GaBi software.
III.3.2 PROCESSING STEPS – PRODUCTION OF PARTS

As no information is available on each process (stamping, water consumption, energy
consumption, emissions, etc…) specific to each part, Thinkstep developed datasets to describe
the main material processes (stamping, Aluminium parts, plastic injection moulding…). These
datasets are used and associated to the Renault‘s vehicle material description;
The updated dates are mentioned in part VI.4.
In order to carry out the LCA calculation, the vehicle material and processing steps are described
thanks to the BOM import functonnality which has been developed specifically for Renault‘s needs.
The GaBi datasets can be country specific. When the choice is possible, we prefer:
1- European datasets
2- Global dataset (world meanvalue)
25
3- If the choice is possible for different countries but there is no European or worldwide
datasets, we choose preferably Germany which presents an interesting and
representative electrical mix.
The list of all the datasets used in the vehicle model is available in APPENDIX VI.4.
Bom import is a specific tool developed by Thinkstep for Renault. This software allows to define
a relationship between the materials used in Renault’s cars (coming from IMDS) and the specific
flows defined in GaBi. The mapping uses for our LCA studies is already updated by the new
analysis.
The figure mentions below as for goal to explain how our datas are collected.
Figure 14 : Bom Import

A mapping file links a set of processes (called Gabi plan) to each material or component.
Therefore, each vehicle is fully modelled by its list of components and material (provided by the
IMDS database via the BOM import software) and the associated plans (linked with the GaBi
mapping tool).
III.4 FACTORIES AND LOGISTIC

III.4.1 LOGISTICS
Logistic is divided into inbound and outbound perimeters.
The logistic inbound is defined by all logistics of parts that are required for the assembly of
vehicules.
These informations are difficult to gather and to allocate to only one vehicle (model and dedicated
assembly plant).
Currently, in the LCA studies, we consider a mean distance value of 2000 km (by trucks) for
inbound logistic. (This value is approximately estimated by the logistic expert. A study of sensitivity
show that inbound logistic is not the main contributor for the whole vehicle LCA result.
Reference (Twingo 2): inbound according to

100%
Abiotic depletion logistic expert = 2000km)
(fossil) potential Inbound / 2 -0,18%
Inbound x 2 0,36%
26
100%
Acidification logistic expert = 2000km)
potential Inbound / 2 -0,43%
Inbound x 2 0,85%
100%
Global Warming logistic expert = 2000km)
Inbound x 2 0,32%
100%
Eutrophication logistic expert = 2000km)
Inbound x 2 1,57%
Photochemical 100%
logistic expert = 2000km)
ozone creation
Inbound / 2 -0,17%
potential
Inbound x 2 0,35%
Table 7 : Sensitivity study for inbound logistic
The logistic outbound is defined by the delivery of the vehicle in retail network. These informations
(number of km, transportation mode) are already and easily available and are used in LCA.
In order to explain our choice of a distance of 2000kms concerning the inbound and considering
multiple hypothesis made to obtain and treat data from parts transport from first rank suppliers to
the factory (assembly), it is important to verify if hypothesis were reasonable and if data was not
over or under-estimated. So, we chose to modify distance of this transport to observe if it
consequently changes our results. We doubled supply chain distance, from 2000 to 4000 km.
Following table gives results concerning impacts potentials (only global ones). We observe
changes on vehicle production phase because supply chain is only part of this step.
Relative gap Relative gap

Impacts potentials
(petrol vehicle) (diesel vehicle)
Abiotic depletion (kgSb-eq) + 0.29% + 0.33%
Acidification (kgSO2-eq) + 1.20% + 0.94%
Eutrophication (kgPO4-eq) + 2.18% + 1.31%
Global warming (kgCO2-eq) + 0.27% + 0.32%
Photochemical ozone creation (kgC2H4-eq) + 0.34% + 0.44%
Table 8: Comparison of environmental impacts following a modification of supply transport, applied
on an average Renault vehicle
We observe a logical increase of all impacts from this mileage increase. The consequences of
larger distances are larger fuel consumption and then pollutant emissions. But those increases
do not overpass 5%, our cutoff criteria.
We can highlight the low contribution of supply transport on environmental impacts over the global
life cycle and the negligibility of an approximation on this parameter.
III.4.2 FACTORIES
III.4.2.1 Impacts
Every plant participating in Renault vehicle production is ISO14001 certified.
27
Since 1998, Renault checks and controls consumptions and emissions to improve environmental
performance. Since 2012, these data are mandatory standards in France (Article 225 of Grenelle
2 French law). We use these data to conduct the LCA studies. The advantage is that all
information is available and updated each year.The detail of data is described just bellow:
- Energy consumption (electricity,

thermal),
- Water consumption (industrial,
domestic),
- Atmospheric emissions (CO, CO2,
CH4, N2O, NOx, SO2, VOC),
- Waste quantities (standard,
specials)
These values are available in the annual Energy and Environment reports, they are udated each
year.
III.4.2.2 Allocations
Renault sites are dedicated to the manufacture of different engines, gearboxes or vehicles.
Impact allocation problems occur when a factory produces different engines and gearboxes, or
when an assembly plant produces different cars.The contribution of each module needs to be
estimated and calculated.
In our panel of plants, we could find assembly lines designed for vehicles, engines and gearboxes.
In this case we have to identify the datas from vehicle and from mechanical.
Moreover, some factories produce different model on the same assembly line (vehicle or engines
or gearboxes) and in this case the assumption is made that emissions are equally shared for
vehicles that are assembled in the same factory. The same assumption is made concerning
engine and gearbox.
All data necessary for the analysis and extracted

from reports are gathered in tables’ flows. These
are available on the vehicle LCA study. These
datas are extracted from the scorecard and table
report issued from the plants management.
28
III.5 USE
III.5.1 USE: FUEL AND ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION
Fuel production step starts with oil extraction or electricity production and ends at sale to customer.
This step is named “well to tank”.
Data necessary to calculate this step are:

- Mileage done by the vehicle during its total use phase defined by the functional
unit.
- Energy type (Diesel, gasoline or electricity) and its quality (sulfur rate, electric
production mix…)
- Vehicle’s consumption, available on the homologation certificate
The environmental flows associated to these consumptions (incoming or outgoing) are included
in the software.
In addition, we take into account the country where the vehicle is used. Indeed, the electrical mix
is significantly different depending on country of use.
III.5.2 USE: CAR USE PHASE

Impacts of this phase are calculated from a mileage defined in the functional unit and according
to the NEDC (New Europeen Driving Cycle).
It requires the collection of the following data:
- CO, CO2, HC, NOx, SO2 and particles PM10 emissions
- Fuel and electricity consumption
Tailpipe emission data and fuel or electricity production are included in conformity certificates
(excluding SO2 emissions).
Those certificates contain official vehicle type homologation data of Renault cars.
SO2 emissions depend on sulfur rate of Diesel fuel. They are calculated with the following formula:
ppm of S * 2*10-6 * consumption (en g/km) = … gSO2/km
With density:
Gasoline = 747g/l
Diesel = 835g/l
In 2012, all newly launched vehicles in Europe comply with Euro V tailpipe emission regulation:
sulfur rate in gasoline and diesel is 10 ppm.
From its engine technology, an electric vehicle does not produce any tailpipe emissions like CO2,
NOX, SO2 or particles.
29
III.5.3 USE : MAINTENANCE
Maintenance operations (except crash) are described in Table 9
Life cycle frequency Life cycle frequency

according to Renault according to Renault
Operation
recommendations recommendations
(Thermal vehicle) (Electric Vehicle)
Air-conditioning fluid change 1 1
Pb-battery change 1 1
Brake fluid change 1 1
Cooling fluid change 1 1
Windscreen washing liquid change 4 4
Drain 7 0
Tire change 3 3
Table 9: Operation and frequency of maintenance operations
Concerning the wash of vehicles, as all washes are the same from one product to another, the
water consumption is not considered to calculate impacts and then, not considered in Renault’s
studies.
III.6 END OF LIFE

The end of life scenario is based on End of Life Vehicles Europeen directives (2000/53/CE and
2005/64/CE).
The recycling rate that has to be reached is 85% in term of recyclability and 95% in term of
recoverability.
The recycling process follows the recomandation of the ISO 22628.

It takes into account the depollution phase, the dismantling of the parts and the shredding of the
rest of the end of life vehicle.
Two different scenarios are modelled for the recycling phase:
- Scenario 1 – Reference scenario: we consider the processes for the dismantling and
shredding of the end of life vehicle. Are also considered the recycling processes to
produce secondary material, but recycling credits related to the production of the
secondary material are not considered.
- Scenario 2: Recycling credits are estimated and included in the recycling phase results
30
Figure 15 : Recycling modelling
Recycling Allocation:
Secondary material produced thanks to recycling processes can be considered as substitute for
new material at production and consequently associated to a recycling credit.
Particular attention:
During the modelling phase of the production of the vehicle, data set used to model the production
of raw material, provided by Thinkstep can take into account secondary material (For example,
steel production takes into account the integration of secondary material).
This secondary material must not be considered during the end of life process to avoid double
counting.
III.7 QUALITY OF DATA
31
Data specification Data source
Process Product Specific
General 1 2 3 4 5
specific to site
Vehicle’s production
Vehicle composition (vehicle + engine + RENAULT – list of m

X X
gearbox) thanks to suppliers in
THINKSTEP – Avera
Thinkstep databases
Crude oil and ores extraction X X
of databases are sav
List of used datasets
THINKSTEP – Avera
Steel production X X
THINKSTEP – Avera
Aluminum production X X
THINKSTEP – Avera
Polymers and plastics production X X
THINKSTEP – Avera
Other materials production (copper…) X X
Production activities (included assembly
X X X RENAULT - Environ
of engine, gearbox, vehicle)
Vehicle treatment and paint X X X RENAULT - Environ
Vehicle’s transport to dealer X X X RENAULT – Logistic
Notes :
1) Measures
2) Calculations from mass balances and/or incoming data for the defined process
3) Extrapolation of data from a defined process or similar technology
4) Extrapolation of a defined process or similar technology
5) Estimations
Product specific data : refers to processes specifically referring to vehicle
Site specific data : concern data from sites invorlved in the vehicle production but not specific to the vehicle
General data : what is left
Board source: Adapted from « Environmental Assessment of Products » - Volume 1 – H. Wenzel
Table 10: Origin and specifications of data collected during analysis
Data specification Data source type
Process Product Specific
General 1 2 3 4 5
specific to site
Vehicle’s use
Life time X X RENAULT – INRETS

RENAULT – NEDC
Fuel consumption X X
structure
RENAULT – NEDC
Emissions X X X
structure
Vehicle’s end of life
Elimination structures (Recovery, THINKSTEP – Avera

X X
treatment) List of used datasets
THINKSTEP – Avera
Recovery rate X X
THINKSTEP – Avera
Vehicle’s pre-treatment X X
THINKSTEP – Avera
Vehicle’s dismantling X X
Energies
32
THINKSTEP – Avera
Energy production (including electricity) X X
Notes :
Measures
2) Calculations from mass balances and/or incoming data for the defined process
3) Extrapolation of data from a defined process or similar technology
4) Extrapolation of a defined process or similar technology
5) Estimations
Product specific data : refers to processes specifically referring to vehicle
Site specific data : concern data from sites invorlved in the vehicle production but not specific to
the vehicle
General data : what is left
Board source: Adapted from « Environmental Assessment of Products » - Volume 1 – H. Wenzel
Table 11: Origin and specifications of data collected during analysis (following and end)
33
III.8 OVERVIEW OF ASSUMPTIONS AND DEFINITIONS FOR A
LCA
The table below presents a summary of all the assumptions and definitions considered in a LCA study.
Intended applications
• Complete our range of LCA studies in order to compare each new vehicle with its predecessor or
with a similar existed vehicle in the range.
• Set up new unit process and LCI data sets (eg battery) to be used in a new calculation model
• Build a comprehensive science based dialogue with expert stakeholders inside and outside of the
company
Scope of assessment
• Function of systems:
Transport of passengers in a vehicle
• Functional unit:
Transportation of persons in a vehicle, for a distance of 150 000 kms (~93 000 miles), during 10 years,
respecting vehicle type approval regulations (e.g. NEDC driving cycle)
Comparability
• Comparable performance figures
• Cars with standard equipment and fittings
System boundaries
• The system boundaries include the entire life cycle of the cars (manufacturing, service life and
recycling phase), according to cut-off criteria.
Cut-off criteria
• The assessment includes maintenance but not repairs
• No environmental impact credits are awarded for secondary raw materials produced
• Cut-off criteria applied in GaBi data records, as described in the software documentation
(www.gabi-software.com)
• Explicit cut-off criteria, such as mass or relevant emissions, are defined at 99% for the vehicle’s
definition and 95% for incoming flows.
Allocation
• Allocations used in GaBi data, as described in the software documentation (www.gabi-
software.com)
• Allocations for end of life is described in the end of life chapter of the report
Data basis
• Renault vehicle parts lists
• Material and mass information from the Renault IMDS
• Emission limits (for regulated emissions) laid down in current EU legislation
• The data used comes from the GaBi database or collected in Renault plants, suppliers or industrial
partners
Life Cycle Inventory results

• Life Cycle Inventory results include emissions of CO2, CO, SO2, NOX, NMVOC, CH4, as well as
consumption of energy resources
• The impact assessment includes the environmental impact categories eutrophication potential,
abiotic depletion potential, photochemical ozone creation potential, global warming potential for a
reference period of 100 years and acidification potential
• Normalisation of the results to average impact per inhabitant values
Software
• Life Cycle Assessment software GaBi from Thinkstep, which release and update must be precised
Evaluation
34
• Evaluation of Life Cycle Inventory and impact assessment results, subdivided into life cycle phases
and individual processes
• Comparisons of impact assessment results of the vehicles compared
• Interpretation of results
Table 12: Assumptions and definitions for the Life Cycle Assessment
35
IV LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
IV.1 INDICATORS CHOSEN FOR THE STUDIES
Environmental indicators were chosen in considering three criterias:
- Contributions known and supposed of automotive product.
- Diversity of ecosystems, local biodiversity, global resources depletion.
- Indicators positively considered by environmental experts and the European automotive industry.
The choice of indicators was validated by using the French matrix: adapted [ADEME 2011]
EVALUATION
[ADEME 2011]
Impact Assessment RELEVANCE FEASABILITY CONSISTENCY FIABILITY
Proposals
Global warming high high high high
Abiotic depletion high high high high
Water eutrophication medium medium medium medium
Photochemical pollution medium medium medium medium
Acidification medium medium medium medium
Aquatic ecotoxicity medium low medium low
Biodiversity low low medium low
Land Use Change low low medium low
Table 13: Impact assessment choice matrix
Concerning particles, even if they are a key topic for automotive industry, particularly for Diesel
vehicles, they are not considered whithin an indicator. It is explained in the paragraph IV.12.
Characterization factors chosen are CML 2001 ones (More details at

http://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/databases/cmlia/cmlia.zip)
36
Abiotic Depletion Potential Global Warming Potential
Acidification Potential Eutrophication Potential
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential
Figure 16: Impact categories chosen for the study
Indicators Definition
Global Warming 100yr Quantifies non-natural increase of greenhouse effect gas concentration (CO2,
Potential N2O, CH4, refrigerants…) in the atmosphere and consequently of global
(kg CO2 equivalent) warming potential.
Acidification Potential Characterize the acid substances increase (NOx, SO2…) in lower atmosphere,
(kg SO2 equivalent) source of acid rains and forests depletion.
Photochemical Ozone Quantify the production of pollutant ozone (≠ to ozone layer), responsible of
Creation Potential « ozone peaks », results of reaction of sunlight on NOx and volatile organic
(kg Ethene equivalent) compounds. This ozone is irritating for respiratory system.
Characterize introduction of nutrient (nitrogenous or phosphate compounds per

Eutrophication Potential
example) providing proliferation of algae, which consequence is the asphyxia of
(kg Phosphates equivalent)
the aquatic world
Abiotic Resource Depletion
Quantify non-renewable energies (crude oil, coal…) consumption leading to
Potential (fossil)
resources and abiotic depletion.
(MJ)
Table 14: Environmental impacts categories selected and definition
The environmental impacts determined in the Life Cycle Assessments are representing a specific
burden to the environment; therefore, they are measured in different units. For instance, the global
warming potential is measured in CO2 equivalents and the acidification potential in SO2
equivalents. In order to make them comparable, a normalisation process is required. In our Life
Cycle Assessments, the results are normalised with reference to the annual average
environmental impact caused by Western Europe.
37
Impact caused by Western Europe
Indicators
inhabitants x 10-6
Abiotic Resource Depletion Potential
30620200
(MJ)
Acidification Potential
27354
(kg SO2 equivalent)
Global Warming 100yr Potential
4883200
(kg CO2 equivalent)
Eutrophication Potential
12822
(kg Phosphates equivalent)
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential
8241
(kg Ethene equivalent)
Table 15: EU 15 normalisation factors in accordance with CML 2001, Apr. 2013
IV.2 INDICATORS NOT CHOSEN

IV.2.1 HUMAN TOXICITY
It includes carcinogens and atmospheric pollution.
Concerning the automotive industry and particularly the use phase of the vehicle, toxicity potential
impact is mainly coming from particulate matters.
These particles are fine dust from incomplete combustion. With a diameter inferior to 10µm, that
can penetrate animal and human airway and cause asthma, inflammations or cancers.
PM 10 is only taken into account in human toxicity indicators.
In his research F. Querini [Querini, 2012] had studied the impact of different fuels on human
toxicity (according to different methodologies). The results show that if Diesel fuel contribute to
PM10 formation, the evolution of Euro standard have considerably reduce particles quantities and
thus Diesel impact on toxicity.
On top of that, the LCA model takes into account only emission that follows Euro regulation and
particulate matters are only measures since Euro 6 regulation. The consequence is that it is not
possible to make a comparison between the wem vehicle and the replaced one.
When comparison will be possible particles and human toxicity indicator will be disclosed.
Focus on Carcinogens substances

Benzene is a substance contained in a low quantity (< 1%) in HC (unburned hydrocarbons emitted
in exhaust gas), which carcinogen factor is recognised. However, there is not any limitation value,
so it is difficult to evaluate its impact on human heath. In a prevention purpose, its concentration
should be as low as possible.
IV.2.2 WATER CONSUMPTION

Water consumption integration in a LCA is a complex problem which methodology has been
recently developed. (ISO14046). We need to identify:
- Water used, treated and returned to natural environment (like washing water), from
water consumed (demineralized water for paints)
- Process water used in multiple cycles, paying attention in considering it once.
- Water origin: groundwater cannot return there
- Geographic context: Water consumption importance is not the same in Europe or
in Africa (water scarcity indicator needed)
38
Conscious of problems linked to water consumption and in an ISO 14001 approach, Renault
works for reducing its use. In this way:
- Group’s water consumption decreased of up to 55% from 1998 to 2010, associated
to a 22,7% increase of the production
- Water consumption per vehicle produced decreased, from 11,3 m3/veh, to a small
4,14 m 3/veh, representing a 63.3% decrease from 1998 to 2010.
25000
20000
(x1000 m3)
15000
10000
5000
0
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Water consumption
Figure 17: Water consumption reduction in Renault factories
From the ISO 14001 deployment in the group, Renault obtained a large amount of data about
the different water sourcings. Water footprint integration will be the next step of the LCA
deployment at Renault, as well as human toxicity. For the time being, Renault focuses on
reducing the group’s global water consumption.
IV.2.3 ROAD SAFETY

Although Renault dedicates a lot in this problematic, it is here out of the LCA context as it is a
non-environmental issue.
IV.2.4 WASTE QUANTITY FROM THE SUPPLY CHAIN

Renault can control waste production provided on major steps of the vehicle production (assembly
line, engine and gearbox production, Figure 18), but no all along supply chain (implication in an
ISO 14001 approach or use of an eco indicator tool). For these processes and raw materials
extraction, waste quantities come from software databases.
39
30
25
ratio (Kg/véh)
20
15
10
0
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Figure 18: Evolution of packaging waste quantities at production. Quantity in kg per vehicle from
1996 to 2010
IV.2.5 NON-EXHAUST EMISSIONS

Non-exhaust emissions and especially particulate matter non-exhaust emissions are of course
part of the emissions while driving. National emission inventories include copper in their scope
and the transport sector is responsible for 87% of the total emissions. Road traffic accounts for
a little bit more than a half of this amount (CITEPA SECTEN report April 2011). Some
publications also address vegetation contaminations near road network.
Nevertheless, there are very few data, to be used as a recognized emission factor database, to
achieve reliable calculations for those emissions. As there exists no regulation addressing this
scope, industry performs tests to evaluate functional properties but those measurements do not
allow evaluating lifetime wear emissions.
Another difficulty is linked to the various origins of those wear particulates:

- Brakes seam to be the main source of emissions. But the composition of the particulate matter
is very much dependent on the technology; disc brakes are much more emissive than drum
brakes.
- Due to the geometry of clutches, the particulate emissions are virtually zero.
- The tire debris.
In addition, the composition of those wear particulates depends very much on the supplier and
some of those parts do not stand for the lifetime of the car and can be changed without any
control of the supply chain by the manufacturer.
Taking only account about the copper emission factor coming from COPERT methodology
would probably be as restrictive as not considering this source of emissions at all.
Any way, ignoring non-exhaust particulate matter probably leads to underestimate the absolute
result of the life cycle impact analyses, but this is not a problem for a wide comparative
approach, tires and break wear being included in all cars whatever there are EV or fossil fuelled.
40
V STANDARD HYPOTHESIS SENSITIVITIES
In order to ensure coherence of hypotheses performed and to measure the influence of some
parameters, we performed a sensitivity analysis. We apply an important change to a parameter
to check if the result is significant or negligible.
V.1 CONSIDERING FACTORIES?

V.1.1 FACTORIES MASS
We can consider that a factory (for example Tanger) is mainly made of concrete and steel. The
main assumptions are:
- 40 kg of steel per meter square built;
- 500 kg of concrete per meter square built
With this assumption and since we have on the one hand the information of vehicles and engines
produced for each plant, and on the other hand the estimated surface area for each plant, we can
estimate the factory mass per unit produced (per vehicle or per engine).
The results are the following one:

47 kg of the factory for diesel vehicle
49 kg of the factory for gasoline vehicle
These values are quite negligible. Moreover, concrete represents 90% of the factory’s mass and
it is mainly constituted of aggregate (sand, pebbles). Quantity of energy necessary for its
construction is low comparing to energy consumed by the system, and then negligible.
Considering now impacts, we show that the part of the factory allocated to each car is negligible
on the global life cycle.
V.1.2 IMPACT CALCULATION

Data from concrete production environmental impacts comes from report
http://www.nrmca.org/sustainability/EPDProgram/Downloads/NRMCA%20EPD%2010.08.2014.
pdf giving the impact of 1m3 of concrete composed of 80% of aggregate and needing 2187 MJ
(0,94MJ per kg).
Production process of steel is based on GaBi database corresponding to European production,
without considering an eventual recycling.
For logistics considerations, all of products are produced in Europe.
Quantities of energy consumed by machines to build the building are not included (cranes,
diggers…). However, considering results bellow, in doubling environmental impacts values of the
50kg of the factory per vehicle, we are still under 1% for each impact on the global life cycle.
Then we can consider factories construction (and other infrastructures) as negligible on the global
life cycle.
41
1,6l 16v (petrol) System’s impact on its
Proportion
Factory life cycle (without
on life
impact considering factories
Impacts potentials cycle
mass)
Abiotic depletion (kgSb-eq) 0.076 219.79 0.034%
Acidification (kgSO2-eq) 0.12 60.10 0.20%
Eutrophication (kgPO4-eq) 0.005 5.35 0.093%
Global warming (kgCO2-eq) 16.4 34762 0.047%
Photochemical ozone creation (kgC2H4-eq) 0.01 12.44 0.080%
Table 16: Part of factory’s construction a petrol vehicle’s life cycle
1,5l dCi (diesel) System’s impact on its

Proportion
Factory life cycle (without
on life
impact considering factories
Impacts potentials cycle
mass)
Abiotic depletion (kgSb-eq) 0.073 169.55 0.043%
Acidification (kgSO2-eq) 0.12 56.84 0.21%
Eutrophication (kgPO4-eq) 0.004 6.92 0.057%
Global warming (kgCO2-eq) 15.6 25463 0.061%
Photochemical ozone creation (kgC2H4-eq) 0.01 9.25 0.011%
Table 17: Part of factory’s construction a diesel vehicle’s life cycle
V.2 FACTORIES ALLOCATIONS

In order to justify established hypothesis or the need of amelioration of factories consumptions
and emissions allocations (by the eco-risk tool), we increase values of those parameters by over
10% for all factories. Variations for diesel and petrol vehicles are gathered in the following table:
Relative gap (petrol Relative gap

Impacts potentials
vehicle) (diesel vehicle)
Abiotic depletion (kgSb-eq) + 0.04% + 0.20%
Acidification (kgSO2-eq) + 0.18% + 0.39%
Eutrophication (kgPO4-eq) + 0.19% + 0.28%
Global warming (kgCO2-eq) + 0.15% + 0.33%
Photochemical ozone creation (kgC2H4-eq) + 0.44% + 0.61%
Table 18: Comparison of environmental impacts following a 10% increase of Renault factories’
consumptions and emissions, applied on an average Renault vehicle
We note that none of impacts values reaches 0.7 on the global life cycle. It reveals the weak
incidence of an allocation error of factories flows, which contribution stays under 1%.
REMARK: If part of the factories remains weak comparing to the global life cycle of a vehicle, any
reduction of consumptions or emissions is beneficial.
42
V.3 HC ADDITIONAL SOURCE
V.3.1 PROBLEMATIC
The issue deals here with the potential evaporation of hydrocarbon vapors (petrol) during tank
filling:
- From petrol delivery truck to petrol station
- From petrol station fuel pump to vehicle tank.
Because of petrol’s volatility (not concerning diesel), part of hydrocarbons is emitted in the
atmosphere bringing a potential increase of photochemical ozone creation. Moreover, presence
of benzene (0.7% in petrol vapors) brings a public heath problem because it is a carcinogen agent.
Current European legislation does not impose vapor recovery systems on those two steps (unless
recovery systems are being developed). Automotive manufacturers ensure non-evaporation of
petrol vapors once filler hose closed (canister system, tank’s sealing)
Here is a sensitivity analysis when the gas station is equipped with a recovery system for vats
filling. We only consider the impact on which the constructor can act.
REMARK: During petrol station vats filling, the emitted quantity allocated to each vehicle is the
same than the one emitted during tank filling (same quantity of petrol consumed and same
hypothesis concerning evaporation calculation. So we double variation of impact measured.
V.3.2 HYPOTHESES AND CALCULATIONS

For environmental impacts calculation, we consider hydrocarbon vapors to HC even if those are
quite different (cf remark):
This pattern considers two hypotheses:

Liquid/vapor balance of petrol responds to Clausius-Clapeyron equation or pure, which form
is: log P = A/T + B
Petrol vapor responds to ideal gas law.
1) We consider averaged over the year the vapor tension of petrol to a median summer/winter
value: 60kPa at 37.8°C (100° Fahrenheit)
Vapor tension is equally placed between Pentane and Hexane vapor tensions, which equations
are:
log Ppentane = - 1458/T + 6.27
log Phexane = - 1649/T + 6.83

with decimal log, P in kPa, T Kelvin, data from Handbook of Chemistry and Physics.
We consider petrol as a pure:

Average molar weight between pentane (72) and hexane (86): 79
Average coefficient between pentane and hexane: log Ppetrol = -1550/T + B ; we calculate B with
reference vapor tension : log Ppetrol = -1550/T + 6.76 (1)
With equation (1), we calculate vapor tension a different temperatures. At 20°C, P petrol = 30
kPa.
43
2) We consider 1 liter of atmosphere saturated of petrol vapor at atmospheric pressure (101.3
kPa) and at 20°C (average temperature supposed).
Petrol partial pressure = 30 kPa
Total pressure = 101.3 kPa
In ideal gas approximation, total number of moles of gas = 1/22.4
Number of moles of petrol = (1/22.4) x (30/101.3)
Weight of petrol’s weight

= (1/22.4) x (30/101.3) x 79 = 1.0 g of petrol vapor per liter of atmosphere in the tank.
Quantity of HC emitted during tank filling approaches 0.079 g/km for a vehicle consuming 7.9
liters/100 km.
At 20°C, this emission is very close to Euro IV emi ssion regulation. If average tank temperature
is 10°C, P petrol becomes 19 kPa and emission approaches 0.052 g/km
V.3.3 RESULTS
Figure 44 represents evolution of photochemical ozone creation’s impact during use phase, with
a tank a 10°C and 20°C considering previous hypothe sis.
Figure 19: Evolution of photochemical ozone creation potential, function of tank temperature (i.e.
petrol vapors)
Reference At 10°C (HC At 20°C (HC Relative gap

Impact potential (without = + 0,052 = + 0,079 [10°C – 20°C]
evaporation) g/km) g/km)
Photochemical ozone (kgC2H4-eq.) 14.9 17.8 19.3 + [19 - 29] %
Table 19: Value of photochemical ozone creation potential for use phase, function of tank
temperature (i.e. petrol vapors)
Fuel vapors are very far from being negligible. There is a real need of vapors recovery.
However, this emission does not have the same geographic dispersion as exhaust gas.
44
Moreover, as stated previously, in many countries (England, United States…), recovery systems
are compulsory and would be extended to rest of the Europe.
Currently in France, May 17th of 2001 order (http://aida.ineris.fr/textes/arretes/text3272.htm)

relative to reduction of volatile organic compounds emissions due to petrol tank filling mandates
recovery systems in gas station providing more than 3000 m3 per year. Moreover, any newly built
gas station must be equipped with that system if it provides more than 500 m3 per year. A bill is
currently studied to mandate those systems compulsory for any gas station.
(http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/12/propositions/pion3471.asp).
Then Renault does not consider these pollutant emissions in the vehicle life cycle.
However, this sensitivity analysis reveals the need of regulating it quickly on European perimeter.
45
VI METHODOLOGY REPORT APPENDIX
VI.1 REFERENCES
[ISO 2006] International Organization for Standardization: ISO 14040: Environmental
Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Principles and Framework.
[EC 2010a] European Commission - Joint Research Centre - Institute for Environment and
Sustainability: International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook - General guide
for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance. First edition March 2010.
[EC 2010b] European Commission - Joint Research Centre - Institute for Environment and
Sustainability: ILCD-Handbook-LCIA-Framework-requirements-online-12March2010
[Rosenbaum&al 2008] Ralph K. Rosenbaum, Till M. Bachmann, Lois Swirsky Gold, Mark A. J.
Huijbregts, Olivier Jolliet, Ronnie Juraske, Annette Koehler, Henrik F. Larsen, Matthew MacLeod
and Manuele Margni, et al.; USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended
characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact
assessment
[Querini&al 2010] USEtox relevance as an impact indicator for automotive fuels. Application on
diesel fuel, gasoline and hard coal electricity; F Querini, S Morel, V Boch and P Rousseaux
[Querini, 2012] Analyse de cycle de vie des énergies alternatives pour l’automobile et propositions
méthodologques pour une meilleure évaluation des impacts locaux, thèse soutenue le 6 juillet
2012
[Morel&al 2011] Morel S.; Adibi N.; SETAC; Ecological Over the Life Cycle, Setting the first
Product Carbon Footprint Commitment in the Automotive
[Reap,2008] Reap J., Roman F., Duncan S. and Bras B.;A survey of unresolved problems in life
cycle assessment
[Morel&al 2010] Morel S.; Dang V.; SAM4, New Electric Vehicles and Business Models – a
Consistency Analysis of Functional Unit for Vehicle LCA
[Frischknecht &al 2010] Frischknecht R. & Stucki M.; Scope-dependent modelling of electricity
supply in life cycle assessments
[CIRED 2009] Vogt Schlib A.; Sassi O.; Cassen C.; Hourcade J.C.; Electric vehicles, What
economic viability and climate benefits in contrasting futures?
[MAKISHI 2008] C. Makishi Colodel, M. Fischer, S. Morel , J. Stichling, A. Forel; (SAM3 2008),
Regional Inventories and Opportunities in the Car Industry – The Renault KOLEOS case study
[ADEME 2011] ADEME; BPX30-323-0 Environmental communication on mass market

products — Part 0: General principles and methodological framework
[Schmidt & al 2010] Schmidt WP, Morel S, Ruhland K; Krinke S., Kunne B.; Feasibility of a Global
Harmonised Environmental Friendly Vehicle Concept
[EC 2009] European Parliament & Council - DIRECTIVE 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use
of energy from renewable sources
46
VI.2 ABBREVIATION LIST
ADP: Abiotic depletion potential
AP: Acidification potential
CML 2001: name of the environmental impacts calculation method from the Institute of
Environmental Sciences of Lieden Faculty of Science
ECU: Electronic control unit
ELV: End of life vehicle
EP: Eutrophication potential
EV: Electric vehicle
GWP: Global warning potential
ICE: Internal Combustion Engine
ISO: International Organization for Standardization
LCA: Life Cycle Assessment
LCI: Life Cycle Inventory
NEDC: New Europeen Driving Cycle
POCP: Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential
Z.E.: “Zero Emission”: commercial denomination of Renault electric vehicles.
47
VI.3 EUROPEAN EMISSIONS REGULATIONS
In mg/km
Diesel
REGULATION EURO4 EURO5 EURO6
Nitrous Oxides (NOx) 250 180 80

Carbon monoxide
500 500 500
(CO)
Hydrocarbons (HC) - -
HC+NOx 300 230 170
Particulates (PM) 25 5 5
Table 20: European emission standards for diesel engines
Petrol, LPG and NG
REGULATION EURO4 EURO5 EURO6
Nitrous Oxides (NOx) 80 60 60

Carbon monoxide
1000 1000 1000
(CO)
Hydrocarbons (HC) 100 100 100
Particulates (PM) 25 5 5
Non-methanous
- 68 68
hydrocarbons
Table 21: European emission standards for petrol, LPG and NG engines
REMARK: For EV, as it is a zero emission from engine’s operation, it fits all EURO regulations.
48
VI.4 LIST OF DATASETS FROM THINKSTEP USED IN RENAULT
MODEL FOR TWINGO STUDY
For the TWINGO study, Renault vehicle model has runned with database 6.11 service pack 27.
Some datasets are not up to date since they were used previously and have moved from
Thinkstep availabled databases to paid extensions that Renault did not subscripted.
date de mise à
Process Source process jour
DE: Lead (99,995%) PE 2014
EU-27: Sulphuric acid (96%) PE 2014
EU-27: Water (desalinated,deionised) PE 2014
DE: Ceramic 2006
GLO: Palladium mix PE 2014
GLO: Platinum mix PE 2014
GLO: Rhodium mix PE 2014
EU-27: Copper Wire Mix DKI/ECI 2014
DE: Copper mix (99,999% from electrolysis) PE 2014
RER: PWB FR4 (2l; 2s; AuNi finishing) PE 2006
RER: IC unspecific (average) PE 2006
DE: Capacitor SMD ceramic (average) PE 2006
DE: Capacitor SMD tantal (average) PE 2006
DE: Resistor SMD (average) PE 2006
DE: Diode SMD small (average) PE 2006
DE: Oscillator SMD (average) PE 2006
Components mixer PE 2006
RER: Assembly line SMD (simple) throughput 1000/day PE 2006
Electronic (ABS/ESP) 2004
DE: Transistor small (average) PE PE 2006
DE: Coil SMD miniature coil (average) PE PE 2006
Card (Electronic part) PE 2006
Electronic (Sensor chases clutch release) 2004
EU-27: Aluminium clean scrap remelting & casting (2010) EAA <p-
agg> PE 2006
RER: Printed wired board FR4 (4l; 2s; AuNi finishing) PE PE 2006
DE: Capacitor AL-ELKO General purpose (Average) PE PE 2006
DE: Transistor SMD power large (average) PE PE 2006
DE: Diode SMD large (average) PE PE 2006
Airbag (Electronic part) 2004
DE: LED (average) PE PE 2006
Card reader (electronic part) 2004
DE: Filter SMD (average) PE PE 2006
Electronic (Sensor height) 2004
RER: IC unspecific (average) PE PE 2006
Electronic (Anti-theft) 2004
Plastic for electronique PE 2006
Electronic (Control panel) PE 2004
Electronic (Sensor pedals accelerator) 2004
49
Automatic parking brake (Electronic part) 2004
DE: Coil SMD chip coil (average) PE PE 2006
Relay (Electric power assisted steering) PE PE 2006
Electric power assisted steering (Electronic part) 2004
Electronic (Under hood module) 2004
Electronic (Body Control Unit) 2004
Engine Control (Electronic part) 2004
EU-27: Lubricants at refinery PE 2014
DE: Cooling liquid 2006
DE: Glass wash fluid 2006
DE: Brake fluid 2006
EU-27: Diesel mix at refinery PE 2014
EU-27: Gasoline mix (regular) at refinery PE 2014
EU-27: Gasoline mix (prenium) at refinery PE 2014
EU-27: Float glass PE 2014
DE: Ceramic 2006
DE: Steel cast part allowed (automotive) PE 2014
EU-27: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
EU-27: Thermal energy from natural gas PE 2014
DE: Steel billet (20MoCr4) PE 2014
DE: Steel billet (16MnCr5) PE 2014
DE: Steel billet (100Cr6) PE 2014
DE: Steel billet (28Mn6) PE 2014
DE: BF Steel billet/slab/bloom PE 2014
EU-27: Aluminium sheet mix PE 2014
DE: Aluminium sheet deep drawing PE 2014
EU-27: Aluminium ingot mix PE 2014
DE: Aluminium die-cast part PE 2014
DE: Cast iron part (automotive) PE 2014
EU-27: Compressed air PE 2014
DE: Steel sheet HDG PE 2014
GLO: Steel sheet stamping and bending (5% loss) PE 2014
GLO: Steel turning PE 2014
DE: Steel billet (20MoCr4) PE 2014
DE: Steel billet (16MnCr5) PE 2014
DE: Steel billet (100Cr6) PE 2014
DE: Steel billet (28Mn6) PE 2014
50
GLO: Silver mix PE 2014
DE: Zinc redistilled mix PE 2014
GLO: Gold mix (primary and copper route) PE 2014
EU-27: Brass (CuZn20) PE 2014
DE: Ferro chrome mix PE 2014
GLO: Silicon mix (99%) PE 2014
CN: Magnesium PE 2014
ZA: Feroo manganese PE 2014
GLO: Feroo silicon mix PE 2014
DE: Nd-Fe-Dt Magnet with metal alloy input PE 2014
GLO: Ferro nickel (29%) PE 2014
RER: Stainless steel cold rolled coil (304) Eurofer 2014
RER: Stainless steel cold rolled coil (316) Eurofer 2014
DE: Copper mix (99,999% from electrolysis) PE 2014
CN: Magnesium PE 2014
DE: EAF Steel billet/Slab/Bloom PE 2014
DE: Tin plate BUWAL 2006
DE: Zinc redistilled mix PE 2014
GLO: Ferro nickel (29%) PE 2014
DE: Aluminium die-cast part PE 2014
DE: Underbody protection (PVC) PE 2011
DE: Seam sealing (PVC) PE 2011
DE: Cavity preservation PE 2011
DE: Primer water-based PE 2011
DE: Coating electrodeposition mix PE 2011
DE: Base coat water-based (red; metallic) PE 2011
DE: Clear coat solvent-based (2K) PE 2011
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Nylon 6,6 granulate (PA6,6) Europe 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Nylon 6 granulate (PA6) Europe 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Nylon 6,6 GF30 compound (PA6,6 GF30) Europe 2014
ELCD/Plastics
DE: Polyamide 6,12 granulate (PA6,12) Europe 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Polyethylene low density granulate (PELD) Europe 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Polyethylene high density granulate (PEHD) Europe 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: polypropylene granulate (PP) Europe 2014
DE: polypropylene/Ethylene Propylene Diene Elastomer
Granulate (PP/EPDM TPE-O) mix PE 2014
51
DE: Nitrile rubber (NBR) PE 2006
DE: Nitrile butadiene rubber, incl. MMA (NBR-speciality) PE 2014
DE: Ethylene Propylene Diene Elastomer (EPDM) PE 2014
DE: Styrene-Butadiene Rubber (SBR) Mix PE 2014
DE: Sheet Moulding Compound resin mat (SMC) PE 2014
RER: Polyurethane flexible foam (PU) Plastics Europe 2014
RER: Polyurethane rigide foam (PU) Plastics Europe 2014
EU-27: Talcum powder (filler) PE 2014
DE: Glass fibres PE 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Polymethylmethacrylate-ball (PMMA) Europe 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Polyvinylchloride granulate (suspension, S-PVC) Europe 2014
FR: Polyoxymethylene granulate (POM) PE 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene granulate (ABS) Europe 2014
DE: Polystyrene (PS) mix PE 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Polybutadiene granulate (PB) Europe 2014
EU-25: Polycarbonate granulate (PC) Plastics Europe 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Polyethylene terephtalate granulate (PBT, amorphe) Europe 2014
RER: Epoxy resin Plastics Europe 2014
DE: Polyester Resin unsatured (UP) PE 2014
DE: Polybutylene Terephthalate Granulate (PBT) mix PE 2014
RER: Styreneacrylonitrile (SAN) Plastics Europe 2014
DE: Plastic injection moulding part (unspecific) PE 2014
EU-27: Tap water (groundwater) PE 2014
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
52
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
DE: Plastic injection moulding part (unspecific) PE 2014
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
53
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
ELCD/Plastics
DE: Latex concentrate (mix-renault) PE 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER polyvinylchloride resin (B-PVC) Europe 2014
DE: Latex concentrate (mix-renault) PE 2014
DE: Tire 175/70R13 Silica/Rayon [PP] 2000
DE: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
US: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
GB: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
ES: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
FR: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
BE: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
ENTSO: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
JP: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
CN: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
RU: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
EU-27: Gasoline mix (prenium) at filling station PE 2014
EU-27: Diesel mix at filling station PE 2014
EU-27: Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) (70% propane, 30%
butane) PE 2014
EU-27: Thermal energy from heavy fuel oil (HFO) PE 2014
EU-27: Thermal energy from LPG PE 2014
EU-27: Process steam from natural gas 85% PE 2014
EU-27: Commercial waste in municipal waste incinerator PE 2014
54
EU-27: Landfill (Commercial waste for municipal disposal; FR, UK,
FI, NO) PE 2014
RER: Articuled lorry (40t) incl. Fuel ELCD 2014
EU-27: Rail transport incl. Fuel PE 2014
EU-27: Barge incl. Fuel PE 2014
EU-27: Container ship ocean incl. Fuel PE 2014
EU-27: Gasoline mix (regular) at filling station PE 2014
EU-27: Diesel mix at filling station PE 2014
EU-27: Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) (70% propane, 30%
butane) PE 2014
DE: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
US: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
GB: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
ES: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
FR: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
BE: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
JP: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
CN: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
RU: Electricity grid mix PE 2014
DE: Cooling liquid 2006
DE: Glass wash fluid 2006
DE: Brake fluid 2006
DE: Lead (99,995%) PE 2014
EU-27: Sulphuric acid (96%) PE 2014
EU-27: Water (desalinated,deionised) PE 2014
DE: Tire 175/70R13 Silica/Rayon [PP] 2000
DE: Platinum recycling 2004
DE: Palladium recycling 2004
DE: Rhodium recycling 2004
GLO: Palladium mix (aps) PE 2014
GLO: Platinum mix (aps) PE 2014
GLO: Rhodium mix (aps) PE 2014
RER: Plastic granulate secondary (unspecific) 2001
ELCD/Plastics
RER: polypropylene granulate (PP) (aps) Europe 2014
Granulate (PP/EPDM TPE-O) mix (aps) PE 2014
ELCD/Plastics
RER: Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene granulate (ABS) (aps) Europe 2014
DE: polyethylene High Density Granulate (HDPE/PE-HD) Mix (aps) PE 2014
DE: Copper Recycling Hüttenwerke Kayser AG 2002
DE: Copper mix (99,999% from electrolysis) (aps) PE 2014
RER: Aluminum ingot secondary BUWAL 2006
EU-27: Aluminium ingot mix (aps) PE 2014
55
DE: Steel cold rolled (electric arc furnace) 2006
DE: BF Steel billet/slab/bloom (aps) PE 2014
EU-27: Waste incineration of plastics (unspecified) fraction in
municipal solid waste (MSW) ELCD/CEV 2014
EU-27: Landfill (Commercial waste for municipal disposal; FR, UK,
FI, NO) PE 2014
DE: Scrap tire recovery (cement works) 2000
EU-27: Thermal energy from hard coal renault (aps) 2014
DE: Used oil refinery 1997
RER: Incineration of used oil 2006
EU-27: Heavy fuel oil at refinery (1.0wt.% S, Copy) (aps) 2014
EU-27: Lubricants at refinery (aps) PE 2014
EU-27: Thermal energy from light fuel oil (LFO) (aps) PE 2014
EU-27: Diesel mix at refinery (aps) PE 2014
EU-27: Gasoline mix (regular) at refinery (aps) PE 2014
RER: Lead (secondary) 2001
DE: Lead (99,995%) (aps) PE 2014
EU-27: Landfill of glass/inert waste PE 2014
56

ACV Kadjar 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ACV Kadjar 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ACV Kadjar 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RENAULT KADJAR - 2015

- LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT RESULTS

DRIVE THE CHANGE

I GOAL AND SCOPE OF THE KADJAR STUDY 5

II LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY 7

III RESULTS OF THE LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 9

IV CONCLUSIONS AND LIMITS 18

B. RENAULT LCA METHODOLOGY 19

II GOALS AND SCOPE OF RENAULT’S LCA STUDIES 20

III LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY ASSESSMENT 24

IV LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 36

VI METHODOLOGY REPORT APPENDIX 46

I GOAL AND SCOPE OF THE KADJAR STUDY

Functional unit and vehicles assessed

Constructor RENAULT RENAULT

Gearbox BVM BVM

Consumption (NEDC) 4,1 L/100km 3,8 L/100km

Length 4372 4449

Width 1845 1836

Height 1683 1604

CO (NEDC) 189,6 mg/km 143,2 mg/km

Material categories Total mass (kg) Total mass (kg)

Table 3 : Material description for KADJAR & SCENIC

Figure 1 : Material distribution of SCENIC 3 & KADJAR

Table 4 : Production plants localization

Concerning the presentation of the results:

Associated data is gathered in Table 5.

Figure 2 : Repartition of environmental impact of KADJAR along its life cycle

ADP fossil: Abiotic depletion Potential (fossil) [MJ]

AP: Acidification Potential [kg SO2-Equiv.]

GWP: Global Warming Potential 100 years [kg CO2-Equiv.]

EP: Eutrophication Potential [kg Phosphate-Equiv.]

POCP: Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential [kg Ethene-Equiv.]

QUANTITY PART IN LIFE CYCLE

III.3 RESULTS ANALYSIS

Regarding the non-reassembled flows:

Regarding the spare parts:

Masse totale 261,45 198,792

Regarding the manufacturing scraps:

Figure 7: contributions for end of life KADJAR

III.4 NORMALIZATION OF THE RESULTS

CML2001 - Apr. 2013, Western Europe (EU)

Figure 8 : Normalized results for SCENIC 3 and KADJAR

However, we have to mention some limits for the vehicle study.

Figure 9 : Life cycle of a product

Context: Who, why?

Goal and scope definition: Scope of the

Inventory analysis: Identify and quantify the

Impacts assessment: Transcription of flows

Interpretation: Summary of environmental

Figure 10 : Schematic table of LCA steps [EC 2010a]

The goal of the study is precisely detailed through six aspects:

II.1.1 INTENDED APPLICATIONS AND DECISION CONTEXT

II.1.3 TARGETED AUDIENCE

II.2 GOAL & SCOPE OF THE VEHICLE STUDY

II.2.1 FUNCTIONAL UNIT AND REFERENCE FLOW

Definition of a general vehicle functional unit:

II.2.2.1 Cutoff criteria for initial inclusion of incoming

II.2.2.2 System modeling