Reducing waste: Repair, recondition, remanufacture or recycle?
King, A. M., Burgess, S. C., Ijomah, W. and McMahon, C. A., 2006. Reducing waste: Repair, recondition, remanufacture or recycle? Sustainable Development, 14 (4), pp. 257-267.
Related documents:This repository does not currently have the full-text of this item.
You may be able to access a copy if URLs are provided below.
Between 1980 and 1997, municipal waste in OECD countries increased by around 40%. This paper outlines the very real negative effects of this increase and then introduces the two main European Union policies that have been established to address this problem: a landfill directive and legislation on extended producer responsibility (E P R). The paper then describes and compares the four alternative strategies to reducing end-of-life waste within the context of extended producer responsibility: namely repairing, reconditioning, remanufacturing or recycling. It also introduces a more robust definition of remanufacturing, validated by earlier research, which differentiates it from repair and reconditioning. From a consideration of the different factors involved, it concludes that remanufacturing may well be the best strategy. This is because it enables the embodied energy of virgin production to be maintained, preserves the intrinsic 'added value' of the product for the manufacturer and enables the resultant products to be sold 'as new' with updated features if necessary. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
|Creators||King, A. M., Burgess, S. C., Ijomah, W. and McMahon, C. A.|
|Departments||Faculty of Engineering & Design > Mechanical Engineering|
|Additional Information||ID number: ISI:000241709000004|
Actions (login required)