Despite large scale advancements in sustainable alternatives for high-impact industries, many organisations still lack the visibility they need to understand the true environmental impact of their products and services. This is particularly prevalent in high-impact, energy-intensive industries like mechanical and industrial engineering, automotive and construction, as well as manufacturing and packaging, where complex supply chains and production systems often conceal critical efficiency gaps. In fact, the World Economic Forum (WEF) estimates that the manufacturing and production sectors contribute to about one-fifth of global emissions and use 54% of the world’s energy resources. Understanding the carbon footprint of a product can significantly contribute to decarbonising the industry. That’s where a life cycle assessment in manufacturing plays a vital role, offering a data-driven, science-backed method to uncover hidden inefficiencies and support smarter, sustainable manufacturing.
| 1. Understanding a Life Cycle Assessment | 2. Identifying efficiency gaps in manufacturing with LCAs |
| 3. Integrating LCAs into Manufacturing Operations | 4. Case Study Example |
Understanding a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
An LCA is a scientific method used to measure the environmental impact of a product, service, or process. When conducting a Life Cycle Assessment in manufacturing, the focus is on evaluating the environmental impacts associated with all stages of a manufactured product’s life. LCA looks at energy use, emissions, water use, and material flows from cradle (raw materials) to grave (disposal or recycling) to find out where the biggest environmental effects are.
According to the UN-backed Life Cycle Initiative, LCA is a key pillar of life cycle thinking, which encourages decision-makers to “consider the full range of environmental, social, and economic impacts” throughout a product’s life cycle and not just operational stages.
An LCA typically follows four main stages:
- Goal and Scope Definition:
What is being looked at and why? For instance, looking at the embodied carbon of two different product designs. - Life Cycle Inventory (LCI):
The data collection phase is when you record all of the inputs (like materials, energy, and water) and outputs (like emissions and waste) at each stage of life. - Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA):
This takes inventory data and turns it into impact categories like global warming potential, ozone depletion, acidification and resource depletion. - Interpretation:
The results are looked at to find areas that need work, trade-offs, and ways to make things better.
This structured approach allows organisations to make evidence-based decisions that improve both environmental performance and operational efficiency.
Learn More: Life Cycle Assessment Stages: Explained
Identifying efficiency gaps in manufacturing with LCAs
Efficiency gaps in manufacturing refer to the disconnect between a system’s current performance and its maximum potential across energy use, material input, waste generation and resource allocation. In complex manufacturing environments, efficiency gaps are often buried beneath layers of process complexity, siloed data and outdated performance indicators. While manufacturers routinely track downtime, yield, or equipment utilisation, these metrics rarely expose the full environmental and operational inefficiencies hidden across the product life cycle.
These gaps often stem from:
- Over-reliance on legacy processes or under-automated equipment
- Inefficient scheduling or batch processing
- Inflexible supply chains and resource-intensive procurement
- Lack of visibility into energy, water and material consumption at a granular level
A life cycle assessment in manufacturing can be effective at revealing some of these gaps, as it quantifies the total environmental footprint of a product or process. Unlike traditional audits, LCA expands the lens beyond factory operations to assess:
- Upstream inefficiencies (e.g. sourcing energy-intensive or non-renewable raw materials)
- Midstream inefficiencies (e.g. excessive water or energy use during processing)
- Downstream inefficiencies (e.g. non-recyclable designs or high-use phase emissions)
For example, a manufacturer may discover that a component with minimal in-factory impact has a disproportionately high footprint due to the embodied carbon in its feedstock. Similarly, an LCA may highlight that a product’s biggest inefficiency lies in its use-phase energy consumption, rather than the manufacturing line itself. Research from Dataparc indicates that the most effective gap analyses are those that use integrated data to diagnose systemic inefficiencies. Life cycle assessment complements this by layering environmental metrics onto operational KPIs, providing a dual lens of sustainability and efficiency.
Integrating LCAs into Manufacturing Operations
Bringing an LCA into the manufacturing process doesn’t require overhauling your operations overnight. It starts with setting clear objectives and choosing the right partners and data sources. Here’s a practical roadmap:
- Define the Objective and Functional Unit:
What product or process are you analysing, and for what purpose? (e.g. carbon reduction, design optimisation, compliance).
- Map the Product System:
Outline all inputs and outputs from cradle to gate (or cradle to grave) including raw materials, logistics, assembly and use.
- Gather Accurate Data:
Engage suppliers for primary data or use secondary data from reliable databases.
- Conduct the Impact Assessment:
Use accredited tools or trusted third-party LCA practitioners to calculate results across impact categories like Global Warming Potential (GWP), acidification and eutrophication.
- Evaluate and Communicate Findings:
Interpret the results, develop improvement strategies and communicate outcomes to internal and external stakeholders.
- Repeat and Refine:
As your manufacturing process and supply chain evolve, so should your LCA. Treat it as a living tool, not a one-time exercise.
Case Study: How Terrafend’s Patented Ambimization® Wash Fluid (AWF) Reduces Emissions by up to 93.9% Compared to Industry Alternatives
Terrafend, a leading cleantech company focused on revolutionising industrial cleaning, partnered with global chemical manufacturer Scott Bader to assess the environmental impact of its patented Ambimization® Wash Fluid (AWF). Designed to replace traditional solvent-based cleaning agents like acetone, AWF reduces hazardous waste, enhances reusability, and supports safer working environments. With a shared commitment to sustainability, the two companies engaged Tunley Environmental to conduct a Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the AWF system versus a conventional acetone-based process, covering stages A1 to C4 of the product life cycle.
The results were impressive: the AWF system only released 6.6 tCO₂e of greenhouse gases each year, while the solvent-based system released 108.6 tCO₂e, a 93.9% reduction. Scott Bader saved a total of 101.9 tCO₂e each year because of this. The decision not only contributed to carbon savings, but it also made the workplace safer and cut down on the amount of hazardous waste sent to landfills. The LCA confirmed the environmental benefits of Terrafend's solution and empowered Scott Bader to explore a global rollout of the AWF process across its manufacturing sites, reinforcing their joint commitment to sustainability, safety and operational efficiency.
Read the full case study: Terrafend Case Study With Tunley
The Bottom Line
Research from a life cycle assessment in manufacturing can enable companies to identify and act on efficiency gaps like rethinking materials for lower embodied carbon and recyclability, streamlining supplier selection for proximity and lower upstream emissions and redesigning products for energy efficiency during use. It can also aid in optimising factory processes with targeted energy and waste interventions.