Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Policy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies

Malte Gebler, Anton J.M. Schoot Uiterkamp, Cindy Visser n
Center for Energy and Environmental Sciences, University of Groningen, Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG, Groningen, The Netherlands

H I G H L I G H T S

Global sustainability aspects of 3DP in manufacturing are assessed in two ways.

3DP will strongly influence manufacturing in aerospace, medical components, tooling.

3DP re-shifts production to consumer countries due to decreased labour costs.

Regulatory frameworks have to be adjusted to new technological environments.

3DP leads to cost reductions, energy saving and reduced CO2 emissions.

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Three-dimensional printing (3DP) represents a relative novel technology in manufacturing which is
Received 9 April 2014 associated with potentially strong stimuli for sustainable development. Until now, research has merely
Received in revised form assessed case study-related potentials of 3DP and described specific aspects of 3DP. This study represents
15 July 2014
the first comprehensive assessment of 3DP from a global sustainability perspective. It contains a
Accepted 25 August 2014
qualitative assessment of 3DP-induced sustainability implications and quantifies changes in life cycle
costs, energy and CO2 emissions globally by 2025.
Keywords: 3DP is identified to cost-effectively lower manufacturing inputs and outputs in markets with low
3D printing volume, customized and high-value production chains as aerospace and medical component manufac-
Costs
turing. This lowers energy use, resource demands and related CO2 emissions over the entire product life
TPES
cycle, induces changes in labour structures and generates shifts towards more digital and localized
CO2 emissions
Life cycle supply chains.
Industrial manufacturing The model calculations show that 3DP contains the potential to reduce costs by 170–593 billion US $,
the total primary energy supply by 2.54–9.30 EJ and CO2 emissions by 130.5–525.5 Mt by 2025. The great
range within the saving potentials can be explained with the immature state of the technology and the
associated uncertainties of predicting market and technology developments. The energy and CO2
emission intensities of industrial manufacturing are reducible by maximally 5% through 3DP by 2025,
as 3DP remains a niche technology. If 3DP was applicable to larger production volumes in consumer
products or automotive manufacturing, it contains the (theoretical) potential to absolutely decouple
energy and CO2 emission from economic activity.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction in manufacturing products kept evolving. Industrial metabolism –

the transformation of matter, energy and labour into goods,
1.1. Industrial metabolism services, waste and ambient emissions – has generated high levels
of wealth but at the same time accounts for increasing human
Since the start of the industrial era manufacturing processes interference with the biosphere (Ayres and Simones, 1994;
have shown a rapid development. Existing processes and practices Solomon et al., 2007; UNEP, 2012). Industrial activity accounts
were improved, new technologies were introduced and the size for 22% in total final energy consumption (IEA, 2012) and for about
and scale of industrial production expanded enormously. And 20% in global CO2 emissions (Barker et al., 2007). The industrial
above all the relative share of raw materials, energy and labour sector should therefore be considered as one of the major sectors
where transformative changes are needed towards sustainability,
as defined by the World Commission on Environment and Devel-
n
Corresponding author Tel.: þ 31 50 363 4614. opment (WCED, 1987). This implies a shift to more resource-
E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Visser). efficient means of production, which will lead to a decreasing

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033
0301-4215/& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
2 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎

input and output intensity per unit of gross domestic product democratizing manufacturing processes through online-distributed
(GDP) to prevent climate change impacts, exhaustion of natural blueprints and localized production. Gershenfeld (2012) describes
resources and disruptions of ecological systems (Ayres and 3DP as part of a social transition, which “turns data into things and
Simones, 1994; Parry et al., 2007). A recent addition to industrial things into data” and therefore contributes to a knowledge-based
practices is three dimensional printing (3DP). This paper aims to economy. He envisions a world where decentralized physical pro-
assess the current state of the art of 3DP in the context of duction and globally-shared information redefine the boundaries of
sustainability. To the best of our knowledge this is the first socio-economic activity (Gershenfeld, 2012).
sustainability-based study of this kind. Despite the current issues with 3DP, markets for 3DP are
expected to grow rapidly (Wohlers, 2013). The mid-term global
1.2. Three dimensional printing market potential of 3DP by 2025 is estimated at 230–550 billion
US $ (McKinsey Global Institute, 2013). The main identified
3DP is an industrial manufacturing process with the potential markets for 3DP are consumer products (100–300 billion US $),
to significantly reduce resource and energy demands as well as direct product manufacturing of medical components and trans-
process-related CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (Baumers et al., portation (100–200 billion US $), and tool and mould manufactur-
2011; Baumers, 2012; Campbell et al., 2011; Petrovic et al., 2011; ing (30–50 billion US $; McKinsey Global Institute, 2013).
Kreiger and Pearce, 2013). Contrary to conventional manufacturing If 3DP applications grow rapidly in the next 10 years questions
subtractive processes, 3DP encompasses additive means of produc- may arise about the sustainability of 3DP manufacturing processes.
tion. Three-dimensional physical objects are produced through layer- Therefore, research into the sustainability of 3DP needs to be
by-layer formation of matter based on a digital blueprint (usually a performed before the markets explode, so adjustments can be
CAD file). The technology evolved during the mid-1980s when made at an early stage. Thus, this research aims to identify
computing and control systems progressed (Hopkinson et al., sustainability aspects of 3DP in manufacturing on a global scale
2006). 3DP has recently gained much attention as the process has by 2025 and to understand their influence on the industrial
proven to be compatible with industrial manufacturing beyond manufacturing. It represents a novel approach as the impacts of
prototyping (Berman, 2012; Gershenfeld, 2012; Reeves, 2008). 3DP on sustainability have only been assessed in specific case studies
Hopkinson et al. (2006) describe 18 different 3DP processes. or described from a specific perspective. The study contains a
These can be divided by the physical state of the printed matter qualitative description of various 3DP-induced sustainability implica-
(liquid-, solid- and powder-based processes) and by the applied tions and a quantification of 3DP-induced changes in costs, energy
method to fuse matter on a molecular level (thermal, ultra violet and CO2 emissions to identify sustainability potentials. The study also
(UV)-light, laser or electron beam; Hopkinson et al., 2006). The presents risks for a sustainably sound decision-making.
most commonly applied processes are stereolithography (SLA),
selective laser sintering (SLS), digital light processing (DLP), fused
deposition modelling (FDM), selective laser melting (SLM) and
electron beam melting (EBM; Petrovic et al., 2011). Polymers, 2. Methodology
alloys of aluminium, steel and titanium, as well as ceramic
composites are currently printable at a minimum layer thicknesses 2.1. Qualitative assessment
of 20–100 μm—depending on the process and the physical state of
the material (Hopkinson et al., 2006). Therefore, 3DP can be A descriptive sustainability evaluation is performed to qualita-
applied to various manufacturing markets. It enables a potential tively identify implications of 3DP on the three sustainability
substitution of conventional processes. 3DP has the great advan- dimensions economy, environment and society as defined by the
tage of enabling the realization of complex freeform geometries, as WCED (1987). The evaluation is based on a defined set of criteria
the process is not constrained by the technological limitations of for which identified implications are described. The criteria are
conventional manufacturing processes (Reeves, 2008). obtained from studying relevant literature in the field of 3DP and
sustainability as a comprehensive sustainability evaluation of 3DP
1.3. Socio-economic outlooks of 3D printing has not yet been performed. An aspect has been chosen valid to
become a criterion if a 3DP-related sustainability implication has
At present, due to limited production speeds and other tech- been associated with the aspect (see Table 1).
nological bottlenecks 3DP is mainly applicable to small produc-
tion volumes, customized products and/or high-value products 2.2. Quantitative assessment: Modelling of sustainability
(Berman, 2012; Hopkinson et al., 2006). Future outlooks describe implications
3DP as a new technology projected to generate shifts in product
designs towards more complex geometries (Berman, 2012; Sustainability aspects that can be determined quantitatively
Hopkinson et al., 2006), incentives for the customer involvement will be treated as such. The social dimension will necessarily only
in production processes through online platforms (“Maker move- be dealt with in a qualitative manner since 3DP is still being
ment”, see Anderson, 2012), as well as restructuration of supply developed. The other two sustainability dimensions economy and
chains towards more digital and localized processes (Campbell environment will be quantified through costs, energy and CO2
et al., 2011; Reeves, 2008). emissions. A top-down model will be applied. In this study the
Rifkin (2011) considers the digitalization and democratization top-down approach was chosen as the values for costs, energy and
of manufacturing steered through 3DP an important aspect of the CO2 emissions for the separate processes in the 3DP chain are not
“Third Industrial Revolution” (TIR). He describes the TIR as an age available in literature yet, so the bottom-up approach would yield
of a renewable energy-powered economy, which shares its infor- a lot of uncertainties. The model relates economic information
mation online. 3DP enables a change in material, energy and GHG- (3DP market potential; see McKinsey Global Institute, 2013) to
intensities with the same significance as labour productivity expected changes in process-related energy and CO2 emission inten-
increases during the First Industrial Revolution (FIR) or the growth sities. Global average energy and CO2-intensities and their trends
in information distribution speed during the Second Industrial until 2025 are based on the IEA (2012) and Barker et al. (2007).
Revolution (Rifkin, 2011). Anderson (2012) considers 3DP as The relative changes in costs, energy and CO2 emissions through
a “new industrial revolution” as he emphasizes the potential of 3DP in manufacturing are obtained from case studies. The following

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎ 3

Table 1
Set of criteria for sustainability evaluation of 3D printing-induced sustainability implications.

Criterion Description Source

Economy
Market outlook Estimated market potential in the time frame of assessment McKinsey Global Institute (2013)
Applications Suitable applications for 3DP process Berman (2012)
Changes in production processes through additive printing Hopkinson et al. (2006)
Supply chain management Changes in supply chain structures Berman (2012)
Production costs Changes in costs per piece and process (comparison of different process) Hopkinson et al. (2006)
Material costs Changes in purchase costs of raw materials Castle Islands (2013)
Machinery costs Purchasing prices of different additive manufacturing machinery Hopkinson et al. (2006)
Production time Changes in production time per piece Berman (2012)
Environment
Resource demands Changes of material inputs in comparison to subtractive processes Hopkinson et al. (2006)
Process energy Changes in energy requirements per piece Hopkinson et al. (2006)
Process emissions Changes in ambient process emissions Reeves (2013)
Life cycle energy Changes in life cycle energy demands of a product Reeves (2013)
Life cycle emissions Changes in life cycle ambient emissions of a product Reeves (2013)
Recyclable waste Changes in amount and type of recyclable waste Berman (2012)
Non-recyclable waste Changes in amount and type of non-recyclable waste Berman (2012)
Society
Development benefits Suitability for open source appropriate technologies (OSAT) Gershenfeld (2012)
Implications for self-directed sustainable development Pearce et al. (2010)
Labour patterns Changes in labour intensity, employment schemes, and types of work Gershenfeld (2012)
Impacts Social impacts generated through 3DP (positive and negative) Vanclay (2002)
Acceptance Socio-economic, community and market acceptance Wüstenhagen et al. (2007)
Health Changes in medical treatments or medical components Petrovic et al. (2011)
Ethics Ethical questions on morality of stem cell technology Simon (2013)
Copyright, patent and trade mark Questions concerning copyrights/shifts in Weinberg (2013)
Impacts of OSAT on patents/copyrights Pearce et al. (2010)
Licensing Shifts in licensing generated through OSAT applications Pearce et al. (2010)
Product quality Changes in product quality Reeves (2008)

formulae are applied: Table 2

Scenario characteristics.
Changes in costs : ΔC ¼ GDP3DP  ΔC 3DP ð2:1Þ
Market Process-intensities
where ΔC is the absolute change in costs; GDP3DP the market potential
potential of 3DP; ΔC3DP the relative change in costs through 3DP Change in cost Change in Change in CO2
compared to conventional processes. intensity energy intensity emission intensity

GDP3DP  TPES Scenario Low Low Low Low

Changes in energy : ΔE ¼ ð2:2Þ
GDP  ΔE3DP 1
Scenario Low High High High
where ΔE is the absolute change in energy; TPES/GDP the total 2
primary energy supply-intensity per GDP; ΔE3DP the relative change Scenario High Low Low Low
3
in energy through 3DP compared to conventional processes.
Scenario High High High High
GDP3DP  CO2 4
Changes in CO2 emissions : ΔCO2 ¼ ð2:3Þ
GDP  ΔCO2;3DP

where ΔCO2 is the absolute change in CO2 emissions; CO2/GDP the sustainability implications on costs, energy and CO2 emissions.
CO2 emission-intensity per GDP; ΔCO2,3DP the relative change in CO2 Table 3 contains the quantified parameters per 3DP market in
emissions through 3DP compared to conventional processes. accordance with the established scenarios. The cost saving poten-
The quantified sustainability implications are first calculated as tials were directly obtained from McKinsey (McKinsey Global
absolute changes per identified market applicable for 3DP manu- Institute, 2013), whereas the energy and CO2 emissions were
facturing. Second, absolute changes are related to the total market calculated using data from Baumers (2012) and Reeves (2008,
size to quantify the relative implication. Third, the total relative 2008a). The values are obtained through a study of relevant
influence of 3DP on industry is calculated by weighting the literature and divided into a low and a high end of the range to
previously calculated relative implications per market. Fourth, integrate uncertainties into the model.
relative changes in TPES/GDP and CO2/GDP-intensities through
3DP are defined by relating the absolute changes in energy and 3. Results
CO2 emissions to the total market size.
To fully understand the sustainability implications of 3DP the The results are divided into two parts. First, the qualitative
lifecycle phases consist of production (raw materials, manufacturing results of the sustainability evaluation are described. Second, the
and distribution), usage and decommissioning. Decommissioning is quantified sustainability implications on costs, energy and CO2
considered when sustainability implications are quantifiable, which emissions through 3DP are explained.
is not always the case. Furthermore, four scenarios are established
(Table 2), as both market potential and process-intensities are 3.1. Results of the sustainability evaluation
associated with uncertainties or are based on case studies (see
McKinsey Global Institute, 2013; Reeves, 2013). These scenarios The evaluation has identified various 3DP-related implications
represent a sensitivity analysis to show the range of potential among all three sustainability dimensions. The implications

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
4 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎

Table 3
Model parameters per 3DP market.

Market Market potential Change in cost Change in energy Change in CO2 emission
(in billion US $) intensity (in %) intensity (in %) intensity (in %)

Low High Low High Low High Low High

Consumer products 100 300 35 60 19 38 19 38

Aerospace industry 58 116 40 55 38 75 38 75
Automotive industry 5 10 40 55 38 75 38 75
Medical components 38 76 35 60 20 40 20 40
Tooling 30 50 15 30 20 40 20 40
Source McKinsey Global Institute Lindemann et al. (2012), McKinsey Global Baumers et al. (2011), Reeves Reeves (2008, 2012, 2013)
(2013), Reeves (2013) Institute (2013), Reeves (2013) (2008a, 2012, 2013)

Table 4
Break-even points of 3DP compared to conventional manufacturing processes (3DP represents the more cost-efficient method below the break-even point).

Break-even point (in pieces) Printed material Process comparison Source

279–5,800 Polymer SLA compared to injection moulding Hopkinson et al. (2006)

7,500 Polymer FDM compared to injection moulding Hopkinson et al. (2006)
14,000 Polymer SLS compared to injection moulding Hopkinson et al. (2006)
42 Aluminium SLS compared to high-pressure die casting Atzeni and Salmi (2012)
190 Steel SLM compared to milling Lindemann et al. (2012)

should be considered dynamic, as they might change over time designs as well as complex and improved geometries (Petrovic
due to changing societal environments. As the assessment is et al., 2011; Reeves, 2012). This generates fuel savings in e.g.
global, the quality and scale of some 3DP-induced implications aviation, where every kg of saved material lowers the annual
vary depending on the socio-economic context. It will be explicitly kerosene expenses by 3000 US$ (Reeves, 2012).
mentioned when the implication shows a contradicting pattern in 3DP generates shifts in labour patterns, as the process is highly
developed and developing countries. automated and only requires human workforce in pre- and post-
processing (Lindemann et al., 2012; Petrovic et al., 2011). Labour-
related implications show different patterns in developed and devel-
3.1.1. Economic implications of 3DP oping countries. The high degree of automation could be economically
As stated earlier, 3DP is considered a 230–550 billion US $ market beneficial for developed countries with ageing societies, but destabi-
by 2025, whose main economic impacts are stated for markets with lize developing countries if the production and thereby the production
high-value, low volume and customized products (McKinsey Global volumes re-shift to consumer countries (Campbell et al., 2011). Open-
Institute, 2013) as 3DP enables more costs-effective manufacturing source-based applications of 3DP could contribute to a sustainable
process for these products (Hopkinson et al., 2006). Five key markets development in rural areas with low-economic profiles, as 3DP bridges
for 3DP by 2025 are identified (McKinsey Global Institute, 2013; the spatial gap to the next market of spare parts, consumer products
Reeves, 2013): consumer products, aerospace manufacturing, auto- or tools (Pearce et al., 2010).
motive production, medical components and tooling. A further reduc- Through 3DP supply chains are expected to become shorter, as
tion in production-related capital investment is stated for 3DP due to the need for centralized manufacturing and tooling is reduced
reduced needs for tooling, shorter production chains and related (Reeves, 2008). Furthermore, supply chains shift from physical
processes (Atzeni and Salmi, 2012). goods to digital ideas/designs (Campbell et al., 2011). This shift
When 3DP is compared to conventional processes, the break- increases supply chain dynamics by reducing the “time-to-market”
even points depicted in Table 4 of different case studies represent (Petrovic et al., 2011) and by inducing furthermore a relative
a central measure to describe the maximum size of production decline in imports/exports (Campbell et al., 2011). Exports are
volumes below which 3DP represents the more costs-effective projected to shift back to consumer countries as 3DP reduces the
manufacturing process. The break-even point of a production labour cost-related comparative advantage of countries such as
series is case-specific and depends on technological aspects like China and the technological advantage of countries like Germany
part complexity, material and built volume (Hopkinson et al., or Japan (Campbell et al., 2011). Global supply chains are further-
2006). more expected to relatively shift from final products to raw
In general, production costs are determined by various aspects materials as goods manufacturing becomes more localized while
as machinery, labour, materials, and pre- and post-processing material raw production is spatially bound to its reserves
(Lindemann et al., 2012). 3DP is projected to generate shifts in (Campbell et al., 2011). Lastly, supply chains are expected to
production cost structures towards high shares (45–75%) of become less transport intensive (Birchnell et al., 2013).
machinery costs in the total production costs, depending on the
case (Lindemann et al., 2012). Material costs are case-specific and
estimated at (only) 12% of the total 3DP-production costs 3.1.2. Environmental implications of 3DP
(Lindemann et al., 2012). Prices for 3DP materials are significantly 3DP has the potential to significantly lower life cycle energy
higher than raw materials for conventional processes, but amor- demands of goods and their CO2 emissions (Reeves, 2012). Manu-
tize due to much higher material efficiencies (Reeves, 2008). facturing-related energy demands and CO2 emissions are lowered
Product life cycle costs can be lowered, as 3DP enables lightweight through shortened processes and more direct manufacturing.

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎ 5

This reduces the need for tooling (Petrovic et al., 2011), the need Therefore, information technology education is needed as compa-
for handling (Baumers et al., 2011) and it lowers indirect material- nies are projected to shift their product portfolios towards more
related energy demands through higher resource efficiency digital ideas/designs (Campbell et al., 2011).
(Reeves, 2013). Energy demands and CO2 emissions of the usage Pearce et al. (2010) emphasize the potential of sustainable
of especially airplanes but also cars can be reduced as 3DP enables development through 3DP. Online applied 3DP in an open-source
the cost-effective manufacturing of complex free form geometries, manner (considered as open-source appropriate technology
which enables lightweight designs (Reeves, 2013). Reeves (2012) (OSAT)) could contribute to socio-economic development in rural
has demonstrated in a case study of a structural airplane compo- areas with rather low economic profiles. 3DP combined with
nent that manufacturing-related energy demands and CO2 emis- online open-source information bridges the gap to the next
sions can be lowered by up to 75%. The 3DP-induced lightweight market and increases the accessibility of objects needed to
design further adds usage savings which amount to 63% savings in improve living conditions (Pearce et al., 2010).
energy and CO2 emissions over the entire life cycle of the product. Open-source 3DP applications are expected to offer various
This shows that 3DP has a great environmental potential beyond opportunities for private users (Anderson, 2012). Spare parts,
just the manufacturing of products. design objects or lab equipment can be produced on-demand at
3DP lowers manufacturing-related resource inputs as it solely home. Unfortunately, open-source platforms can also be used to
requires the amount of material which ends up in the printed good generate security threats. Open-source blueprints of weapon
without too many losses (Reeves, 2008). Support materials can designs offer the private and uncontrolled manufacturing of fire
usually be reused (except for FDM, as the support material is arms without governmental approval or control, which violates
fused; Hopkinson et al., 2006). In aerospace manufacturing high the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR; Simon, 2013).
buy-to-fly ratios, which relate raw material requirements to 3DP in combination with open-source based blueprints requires
amounts of material in final products, of 20:1 are common adjustments of current copyright, patent and trademark systems
(Reeves, 2008). 3DP enables a buy-to-fly ratio of almost 1:1 and comparable to the evolution of digitalization of music (Korkki,
thereby induces a significant reduction in resource demands and 2013). This is especially the case, if 3D scanners are used to
manufacturing-related waste amounts. Case studies indicate that generate the digital blueprint (Simon, 2013; Weinberg, 2013).
up to 40% of the raw material-related waste can be avoided The social acceptance (in accordance with its conceptual
through 3DP while 95–98% of the unfused raw material can be reused foundation of Wüstenhagen et al. (2007)) of 3DP varies with the
(Petrovic et al., 2011). Further indirect manufacturing inputs can be societal entity. Governmental acceptance is considered high as
avoided as 3DP does not require adjuvants as coolants, lubricants or governments have an interest to reduce the resource-intensity of
other partly environmentally harmful substances. manufacturing and stimulate promising new market develop-
ments as potential re-shifts of production capacities to domestic
markets (Campbell et al., 2011). High governmental funding in
3.1.3. Social implications of 3DP R&D (US DOE, 2012) indicates high governmental interest, but
3DP induces changes in social and labour structures due to high security threats due to open-source available fire arms have raised
degrees of automation and an expected shift towards more concerns concerning stricter control of 3D printing technologies
localized means of production in consumer countries. In devel- (Simon, 2013). Market acceptance is high as new opportunities
oped countries with ageing societies, high degrees of automation arise and cost reductions in technology enable further applications
might have beneficial effects while unemployment and social of 3DP. Markets for mass customization and new supply chain
insecurity might be the consequence in developing countries. structures offer opportunities for new business ideas (Gartner,
The changing supply chain structures require an adjustment of 2013; Reeves, 2012; US DOE, 2013). Community acceptance is
labour structures (Campbell et al., 2011). Labour will mostly be considered mixed. A constantly growing community for open-
required for pre- and post-processing (Lindemann et al., 2012). source applications of 3DP indicates increasing public interest,

Fig. 1. Modelled implications of 3DP on costs: annual avoided costs through 3DP in industry (A); relative change in costs through 3DP per market (B).

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
6 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎

which is reflected as well in the growing sales numbers of 3.2.2. Sustainability implications of energy
consumer 3D printers (Peerproduction, 2013). But security threats Sustainability implications of energy are expressed as total
have induced reservations against the currently hyped technology primary energy supply (TPES). Fig. 2A shows that TPES savings
(Gartner, 2013; Simon, 2013). through 3DP are obtainable over the entire life cycle of a product.
Production-related TPES savings account to 0.85–2.77 EJ, usage
saving to 1.46–5.72 EJ and decommissioning to 0.22–0.81 EJ
3.2. Results of the model depending on the scenario in 2025. In total, TPES are reducible
through 3DP by 2.54–9.30 EJ over the entire life cycle. Roughly one
3.2.1. Sustainability implications of costs third of the TPES savings applies to the production phase, 55–60%
Quantified sustainability implications of life cycle costs through of the total savings can be harvested during the use phase and 8%
3DP show saving potentials mainly during the production and use are obtainable during decommissioning. The reasons for the TPES
phase of a product (Fig. 1A). Depending on the scenario, produc- savings through 3DP are similar to those associated with costs, but
tion savings by 2025 are quantified at 113–370 billion US $, use due to the higher energy density per monetary unit, total usage
phase savings at 56–219 billion US $ and decommissioning at 1–4 savings are higher compared to total production savings. The
billion US $. This leads to total cost savings of 170–593 billion US $ largest production-related TPES savings apply to consumer pro-
over the entire life cycle. The cost savings of the production phase ducts and aerospace industry followed by medical components
(two thirds of the total) are due to reduced handling, shorter and tooling. Usage TPES savings apply exclusively to aerospace
supply chains and reduced material demands. 3D printed light- energy demands due to the above mentioned reason for costs.
weight designs generate fuel cost savings during usage, which Aerospace production contains the largest TPES saving potential in
account for one third of the total cost savings. The largest share in decommissioning as high buy-to-fly ratio reduction potentials
production-related cost savings is for consumer products. This is decrease the TPES requirements for industrial waste processing
also the largest overall market. The second highest share is for or material recycling.
aerospace production. Fuel cost savings almost exclusively apply to Fig. 2B shows that the largest relative influence of 3DP on the
aerospace fuel demands due to the high influence of weight on TPES of a market is identified for aerospace fuel demands (9–35%),
energy demands in aviation compared to cars. Medical compo- followed by aerospace production (8–19%), medical components
nents and tooling also play a part in the production savings. (5–19%) and tooling (3–10%). 3DP does not lead to strong relative
The largest relative influence of 3DP-induced cost savings on influences on consumer products and automotive industry (pro-
markets is identified for aerospace fuel demands (9–33%), followed duction and usage) as these markets contain high shares of mass
by aerospace production (5–14%) and medical components (4– production, for which 3DP is not cost- and energy-effective yet.
15%) depending on the scenario (Fig. 1B). Consumer products and
automotive industry (production and usage) would represent the 3.2.3. Sustainability implications of CO2 emissions
largest markets for a potential influence of 3DP. However, the The implications of 3DP of CO2 emissions are coherent with
relative influence through 3DP on costs is small (consumer TPES (Fig. 3). This is because data are obtained from the IEA who
products) or marginal (automotive industry). This is due to several relate CO2 emissions directly to the TPES. 3DP induces CO2
factors. First, the products in these markets are usually manufac- emission reduction potentials over the entire life cycle of a
tured in large series, which are well above their break-even point product. The potentials are quantified at 34.3–151.1 Mt (produc-
(Table 4). Second, the speed of obtaining products using 3DP is a tion), 84.1–328.5 Mt (use phase) and 12.1–44.5 Mt (decommis-
lot lower than for conventional manufacturing. Third, a limited sioning) in 2025 depending on the scenario (Fig. 3A). The total life
number of materials are suitable for 3DP, making it difficult to cycle savings account for 130.5–525.5 Mt in 2025. Production-
replace all products. related CO2 emissions savings represent about one quarter of the

Fig. 2. Modelled implications of 3DP on TPES: annual avoided costs through 3DP in industry (A); relative change in TPES through 3DP per market (B).

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎ 7

Fig. 3. Modelled implications of 3DP on CO2 emissions: annual avoided CO2 emissions through 3DP in industry (A); relative change in CO2 emissions through 3DP per
market (B).

total potential. Roughly two thirds of the total saving potentials are the (near) equal TPES/GDP- and CO2/TPES-intensity reduction poten-
realizable during usage due to the high energy saving potentials in tial of Scenario 2 and 3.
aviation through lightweight designs. Decommissioning accounts
for 8%. Comparing CO2 emission with TPES saving potentials, the
slightly lower share of production and slightly higher share of 4. Discussion
usage in the total life cycle potential can be explained with the
relative differences in carbon intensity per TPES. This study aimed to present a comprehensive and global sustain-
Relative implications of 3DP in CO2 emissions on identified ability assessment of 3DP. Until now, publications have mainly
markets can be obtained from Fig. 3B. Identical to the TPES, focussed on case-specific aspects of sustainability (e.g. Reeves, 2013),
aerospace fuel (9–35%), aerospace production (8–19%), medical using descriptive methods (e.g. Berman, 2012; Petrovic et al., 2011) or
components (5–19%) and tooling (3–10%) represent the markets describing technology-specific gains in costs, energy and CO2 emis-
with the largest sustainability implications through 3DP in 2025. sions (e.g. Baumers, 2012; Lindemann et al., 2012; Kreiger and Pearce,
Consumer products and automotive industry (production and 2013). Our study therefore represents a new approach to understand
usage) show little or no influence due to the reasons mentioned the sustainability implications of 3DP and is the first sustainability-
earlier. based study of this kind. A global (top-down) perspective has been
chosen as 3DP represents a technology in an early maturation phase
(Gartner, 2013) as it is still developing and rapidly growing, implying
that existing practical knowledge is still limited making a bottom-up
3.2.4. Total sustainability implications approach difficult, let alone trying to compare a top-down approach to
The relative influence of 3DP on sustainability by 2025 on total bottom-up. Furthermore, economic assessments on market-related
manufacturing is rather small. This is due to the low share of 3DP aspects of 3DP have chosen the same global perspective, making it
in mass production markets as consumer products and automotive possible for us to use their data (McKinsey Global Institute, 2013;
industry despite significant reduction potentials over the life cycle Wohlers, 2013).
in aerospace industry, medical components and tooling. Fig. 4 The sustainability implications of 3DP have first been assessed
shows the relative influence of 3DP on the TPES/GDP- and CO2/ qualitatively on the three sustainability dimensions economy, envir-
GDP-intensity over the product life cycle in 2013–2025. The onment and society (according to the WCED, 1987). The applied
production and usage are shown, as well as a weighted total sustainability evaluation consists of a set of 23 criteria based on
which takes into account the size of the phases. The decommis- literature considered to be 3DP-relevant. The chosen set of criteria
sioning phase is excluded as no data are available for the size of represents a first approach for a systematic evaluation of the subject
global decommissioning markets. Without 3DP, the TPES/GDP- and might therefore be considered too general or incomplete. How-
intensity is expected to decrease by 10% in 2013–2025. 3DP could ever, the set of criteria has proven to be useful as it has led to the
contribute an additional 1.1–3.7% during production and 1.3–5.0% detection of various 3DP-related sustainability implications on a global
during usage, which accounts for 1.2–4.1% in total terms by 2025 scale. These are described related to the quality (positive or negative)
(Fig. 4A). The CO2/GDP-intensity decreases stronger as it is influenced and scale (significant or rather insignificant) of the implication. The
by both the TPES/GDP-intensity and the CO2/TPES-intensity. Without chosen global perspective partly neglects the dynamic nature of some
3DP, the CO2/GDP-intensity is therefore expected to decrease by 13%. implications, which may lead to results with too little variability. The
3DP could add 1.2–3.7% during production and 1.3–5.1% during mentioned implications might vary in different regional, socio-
usage, which summarizes as 1.2–4.5% in total (Fig. 4B). The relative economic environments and over time. The detected relevant
difference in saving potential per criterion (costs, energy and CO2) sustainability-related issues are worth assessing in a more distinctive
has a larger influence on sustainability implications than the overall spatial, temporal or economic context. The sustainability implications
difference in market potentials. In Fig. 4 this can be concluded from of 3DP have been assessed quantitatively by top-down modelling of

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
8 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎

Fig. 4. Modelled implications of 3DP on production process-related intensities in 2013–2025: relative change in TPES/GDP-intensity (A); relative change in CO2/GDP-
intensity.

costs, energy and CO2 emissions. The model relates economic informa- and we are not yet convinced that 3DP-related energy and CO2
tion on market developments of 3DP to process intensities and 3DP- emission savings potentials of 75% during production (Reeves,
related changes in process intensities obtained through case studies. 2012) are generalizable. The chosen data input for 3DP market
Top-down modelling represents a common methodology to quantify outlooks for 2025 (McKinsey Global Institute, 2013) are stated as a
developments when available data are limited. Even though the risk is range as various uncertainties are associated with the diffusion of
that it yields too general results, it also induces completeness. 3DP. Therefore, it has been considered necessary to understand the
The global data on process-related energy and CO2 emission relative change in process intensities as a range, where the
intensities were obtained from the IEA (2012). However, these are literature value represents the higher end and half the value the
average values. The actual values for OECD countries where 3DP is lower end of the range. This led to the establishment of four
mainly applied are about half the global average. On the other scenarios, which should be understood as an integration of
hand, China represents a non-negligible market for 3DP (Wohlers, sensitivity considerations to the assessment. The model results
2013), and China’s energy and CO2 emission intensities are more of absolute changes in costs, energy and CO2 emissions show that
than double the global average. Therefore, the model results on the quantified sustainability implications represent a significant
sustainability gains might be too optimistic if 3DP is mainly range. The implications of the high end of the range (Scenario 4)
applied in OECD countries or too pessimistic if China holds a large are about four to five times greater than the implications of the
share in global 3DP. However, if the ratio between 3DP in OECD low end (Scenario 1). This underlines the rather mundane nature
countries and China reflects current economic activities our model of this assessment but as well induces the need for societal
results are valid. Developments in energy and CO2 emission decision-makers to identify critical issues to harvest the full
intensities in 2013–2025 are based on trend extrapolations with potentials of 3DP.
relative global annual change factors obtained from Barker et al. The total impact of 3DP on industrial manufacturing by 2025 is
(2007). The model also takes into account life cycle considerations quantified to be rather small (below 5% reduction in overall
as 3DP induces sustainability gains beyond manufacturing. These process intensities) as 3DP at the moment is primarily directed
can be achieved through lightweight designs mainly in aviation, at low volume production series, customized or and high-value
but only, if a consistent “[c]hange in the designers’ way of products. Its sustainability implications would be higher if the
thinking” (Petrovic et al., 2011) is applied. The results on usage technology was applicable to larger production volumes in mass
savings might be too optimistic as a uniform lightweight design production markets as consumer products and automotive man-
approach is assumed. In practice such a lightweight design might ufacturing. It should therefore be considered a central issue in
not be practicable or economically feasible, or it might interfere 3DP-related sustainability policies to identify possibilities and
with other design-related requirements. Therefore, future assess- develop strategies how 3DP could be applied to these markets.
ments on usage implications of 3DP should focus on the extent to
which 3DP-induced lightweight design is applied in aerospace
manufacturing. 5. Conclusion
The internal validity of the model is considered high as every
value (absolute or relative) is based on the same mathematical This study has assessed the sustainability implications of 3DP
relation. All fields of influence (consumer products, aerospace concerning industrial manufacturing in a systematic and compre-
manufacturing, automotive production, medical components and hensive manner both qualitatively and quantitatively from a global
tooling) were subjected to the same systematic error, so the ratio perspective by 2025.
of their implication per total implication represents a valid value. 3DP in manufacturing is expected to mature within the
Therefore, sound conclusions can be drawn from identifying the upcoming decade and to change the input and output intensities
most promising field of application per specific sustainability of production processes of low volume, customized and high-value
implication. products (as in aerospace manufacturing, medical components
Various uncertainties are associated with the model results due and tooling). It is associated with a strong lowering of financial
to the presently immature state of the technology. The relative and energy resource inputs into production processes, which
changes in process intensities are based on specific case studies decreases product costs and mitigates CO2 emissions. Resource

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎ 9

demands and process-related waste amounts can be significantly implying that its sustainability potentials would significantly rise. Of
lowered as the technology applies additive means of production. course, one should be cautious as positive sustainability gains risk
Production-related labour demands are reduced and are only to be neutralized through an increasing overall activity (“Rebound
required for pre-and post-processing due to the highly automated effect”), especially if the sustainability gains are re-invested (Paech,
function principle of the process. Supply chains are vastly affected 2012). In that case, sustainability gains contribute maximally to a
as 3DP is projected to shorten supply chains through inducing relative decoupling.
more direct means of production. Furthermore, 3DP is expected to Despite its early maturation phase, societal decision-makers
induce shifts towards more localized production and to re-shift should become aware of the sustainability potentials of 3DP as it
production to consumer countries as the share of labour costs in represents a technology which can greatly lower the input and
the total production costs decreases. Combined with online plat- output intensities of industrial manufacturing. Sustainability poli-
forms, supply chains will become more dynamic and they will be cies on 3DP should focus on the following three aspects to harvest
digitalized as pre-chains will shift to digital processing of informa- the sustainability potentials of 3DP: (1) technology, (2) labour and
tion while physical pre-chains will be eliminated. Labour implica- (3) regulatory frameworks.
tions in developed countries with ageing societies are considered Additional funds for research are needed to improve the
potentially beneficial while reduced labour demands in developing technological capacities of 3DP. Funds are also needed for research
countries are projected to contribute to socio-economic instability. on sustainability implications of 3DP from an LCA perspective,
On the other hand, 3DP offers development opportunities for a micro-economic perspective or a bottom-up approach. Research
remote areas with low economic profiles as it bridges the gap to is needed to understand the crucial determinants of direct and
the next market and it supplies these areas with objects needed to indirect energy use and CO2 emissions in 3DP and how these can
improve the quality of life. Another important industrial market be reduced on a technological level and on a societal scale. The
segment 3DP will influence in the future is that of spare parts. production speed (build rate) of 3DP represents a central aspect in
Printing hard-to-obtain spare parts and precious components will research as it is directly connected to the applicable size of
stimulate the manufacturing, preservation and restoration of rare production volumes. Faster 3DP processes would be applicable to
and/or antique objects. An example is Cuba where people drive a larger production series in an economically feasible manner and
lot of cars from the 1950s or the international space station (ISS) offer significant sustainability potentials. Furthermore, the range
where a 3D printer is now on board. In the first example spare of applicable materials has to be broadened to enable printing of
parts are very hard to come by as these cars are not being advanced materials, high-performance alloys, nano-materials and
produced anymore and in the second case delivering spare parts hybrid material structures. Cost drivers in machinery costs have to
from Earth to the ISS is very expensive. Designing in a modular be identified and strategies to reduce machinery costs should be
fashion may now be quite common, but most old equipment was developed, as machinery costs represent the largest share in
not designed in a modular way. This means that when one part is overall 3DP production costs. Strategies should be developed for
broken and its spare part is not produced anymore by the industry, the logistics sector on opportunities to benefit from 3DP-induced
the whole object needs to be thrown away, leading to adverse changes in supply chains (e.g. focus on localized structures).
environmental impacts. But when the spare part can be printed, Changing supply chains induce the need for more information
the object will last longer which is very good from a sustainability technology-related skills in labour. This includes both a paradigm
point of view. shift in design-thinking as well as the need to increase training
Licensing, patent, trademark and copyright frameworks are and education in digital manufacturing. Therefore, educational
strongly affected as 3DP induces an easy manner to reproduce systems and programs have to be adjusted to meet these new
objects especially in combination with 3D scanning. Therefore, knowledge demands. This can furthermore be considered an
regulatory frameworks have to be adjusted to integrate various opportunity to compensate for the elimination of manual work
aspects concerning the digitalization of objects and ideas. This in manufacturing due to the high degree of automation in 3DP.
includes considerations how the distribution of harmful technol- Regulatory frameworks have to be adjusted to new technolo-
ogies can be regulated or constrained through these frameworks. gical environments, in which the digitalization of objects and ideas
Quantified results of the sustainability implications of 3DP is of great importance. This includes the establishment of clear
concerning costs, energy and CO2 emissions show that sustain- legal rules and regulations concerning 3D scanning, digital blue-
ability potentials occur over the entire life cycle of 3D-printed prints of objects and online distribution of ideas.
products. This amounts to cost reductions of 170–593 billion US $, Concluding, 3DP represents a manufacturing technology with a
avoided TPES of 2.54–9.30 EJ and avoided CO2 emissions of 130.5– large sustainability potential, especially if it becomes applicable to
525.5 Mt by 2025 in the markets identified for 3DP. This repre- mass production markets and if social impacts are fully addressed.
sents about 5% overall reduction of the respective categories.
Aerospace production, medical components and tooling represent
manufacturing markets with the highest relative potential for 3DP.
Fuel demands in aviation show the largest relative reduction potential References
through 3DP-induced lightweight design. Moreover, aerospace pro-
duction has the largest potential to reduce decommissioning-related Anderson, C., 2012. Makers—The New Industrial Revolution. Crown Business, New
TPES demands and CO2 emissions. Consumer products and automo- York/USA.
tive manufacturing represent the largest potentially applicable mar- Atzeni, E., Salmi, A., 2012. Economics of additive manufacturing for end-usable
metal parts. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 62, 1147–1155.
kets for 3DP as they are predicted to have a combined share of 86% in Ayres, R.U., Simones, U.E., 1994. Industrial Metabolism—Restructuring for Sustain-
the total manufacturing market. But by 2025, 3DP is still considered a able Development. The United Nations University, Tokyo/Japan.
small niche technology in these markets due to problems in printing Barker, T., Bashmakov, I., Bernstein, L., Bogner, J.E., Bosch, P.R., Dave, R., Davidson, O.R.,
Fisher, B.S., Gupta, S., Halsnæs, K., Heij, G.J., Kahn Ribeiro, S., Kobayashi, S.,
high production volumes.
Levine, M.D., Martino, D.L., Masera, O., Metz, B., Meyer, L.A., Nabuurs, G.-J.,
3DP holds the potential to absolutely decouple energy Najam, A., Nakicenovic, N., Rogner, H.-H., Roy, J., Sathaye, J., Schock, R., Shukla, P.,
demands and CO2 emissions from economic activity once applied Sims, R.E.H., Smith, P., Tirpak, D.A., Urge-Vorsatz, D., Zhou, D., 2007. Technical
on large scale in industry. If critical technological parameters like Summary. In: Metz, B., Davidson, O.R., Bosch, P.R., Dave, R., Meyer, L.A. (Eds.),
Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth
production speed and availability of raw printable materials Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
increase, then 3DP would be applicable to larger production series, University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY.

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i
10 M. Gebler et al. / Energy Policy ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎

Baumers, M., Tuck, C., Wildman, R., Ashcroft, I., Hague, R., 2011. Energy inputs to Reeves, P., 2008. Additive Manufacturing—A Supply Chain Wide Response to Economic
additive manufacturing: does capacity utilization matter? In: Conference Uncertainty and Environmental Sustainability. Econolyst Ltd., Derbyshire, UK 〈http://
Paper: Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium 2011, Austin (TX)/USA. www.econolyst.co.uk/resources/documents/files/Paper___2008__AM_a_supply_
Baumers, M., 2012. Economic Aspects of Additive Manufacturing: Benefits, Costs chain_wide_response.pdf〉 (Online accessed, 21.5.2013).
and Energy Consumption (Doctoral Thesis). Loughborough University, Leices- Reeves, P., 2008a. How the Socio-economic Benefits of Rapid Manufacturing
tershire, United Kingdom. Can be Used to off-set the Technological Limitations. Additive Manufacturing
Berman, B., 2012. 3-D printing: the new industrial revolution. Bus. Horiz. 55, Platform Europe 〈http://www.rm-platform.com/index2.php?option=com_doc
155–162. man&task=doc_view&gid=626&Itemid=5〉 (Online Accessed, 22.5.2013).
Birchnell, T., Urry, J., Cook, C., Curry, A., 2013. Freight Miles. The Impacts of 3D Reeves, P., 2012. Example of Econolyst Research—Understanding the Benefits of AM
printing on Transport and Society. Economic & Social Research Council (ERSC). on CO2. Econolyst Ltd., Derbyshire, UK 〈http://www.econolyst.co.uk/reso-
In: ERSC Project ES/J0074551. University/United Kingdom, Lancaster.
urces/documents/files/Presentation___2012___AM_and_carbon_footprint.pdf〉
Campbell, T., Williams, C., Ivanova, O., Garrett, B., 2011. Could 3D Printing Change
(Online accessed, 21.5.2013).
the World? Technologies, and Implications of Additive Manufacturing. Atlantic
Reeves, 2013. 3D Printing in Aerospace and Automotive. Econolyst Ltd., Derbyshire,
Council, Washington DC/USA.
UK 〈http://www.econolyst.co.uk/resources/documents/files/Inside%203D%
Castle Islands, 2013. Comparison Chart of All 3D Printer Choices for Approximately
20printing%20industry%20conference%20New%20York%20-%203D%20Printing
$20,000 or Less. Castle Island C., Arlington, MA, USA. Online accessed,
16.5.2013. 〈http://www.additive3d.com/3dpr_cht.htm〉. %20in%20aerospace%20&%20automotive.pdf〉 (Online accessed, 25.7.2013).
Gartner, 2013. Gartner Says Early Adopters of 3D Printing Technology Could Gain an Rifkin, J., 2011. The Third Industrial Revolution—How Lateral Power is Transforming
Innovation Advantage Over Rivals. Gartner Inc., 〈www.gartner.com/newsroom/ Energy, the Economy and the World. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Hamp-
id/2388415〉 (Online accessed 23.5.2013). shire, UK.
Gershenfeld, N., 2012. How to make almost anything—the digital fabrication Simon, M., 2013. When Copyright Can Kill: How 3D Printers Are Breaking the
revolution. Foreign Policy 91 (6), 42–57. Barriers Between “Intellectual Property and the Physical World”. Pace I.P. Sports
Hopkinson, N., Hague, R.J.M., Dickens, P.M, 2006. Rapid Manufacturing. An & Entertainment Law Forum 3 (1), 60–97.
industrial Revolution for the Digital Age. John WIley and Sons Ltd., Chischester, Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Alley, R.B., Berntsen, T., Bindoff, N.L., Chen, Z.,
West Sussex. UK. Chidthaisong, A., Gregory, J.M., Hegerl, G.C., Heimann, M., Hewitson, B.,
IEA, 2012. Key World Energy Statistics. International Energy Agency, Paris/France. Hoskins, B.J., Joos, F., Jouzel, J., Kattsov, V., Lohmann, U., Matsuno, T.,
Korkki, P., 2013. Beyond 3-D printers’ magic, possible legal Wrangling. N.Y. Times. Molina, M., Nicholls, N., Overpeck, J., Raga, G., Ramaswamy, V., Ren, J.,
(Online accessed, 26.3.2014) 〈http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/business/ Rusticucci, M., Somerville, R., Stocker, T.F., Whetton, P., Wood, R.A., Wratt, D.,
beyond-3-d-printers-magic-possible-legal-wrangling.html?action=click&module= 2007. Technical summary. In: Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z.,
Search&region=searchResults%230&version=&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffanyv88.com%3A443%2Fhttp%2Fquery.nytimes. Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M., Miller, H.L. (Eds.), Climate Change 2007:
com%2Fsearch%2Fsitesearch%2F%23%2Fbeyond%2B3-D%2Bprinters%2F&_r=0〉. The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth
Kreiger, M., Pearce, J.M., 2013. Environmental life cycle analysis of distributed Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
three-dimensional printing and conventional manufacturing of polymer pro- University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY.
ducts. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 1 (12), 1511–1519. UNEP, 2012. Annual Report 2012. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi,
Lindemann, C., Jahnke, U., Moi, M., Koch, R., 2012. Analyzing product lifecycle costs Kenya.
for a better understanding of cost drivers in additive manufacturing. In: US DOE, 2012. Additive Manufacturing: Pursue the Promise. U.S. Department of
Conference Paper: Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium 2012, Austin, TX, Energy 〈http://www.1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/pdfs/additive_manufacturing.
USA. pdf〉 (Online accessed, 22.5.2013).
McKinsey Global Institute, 2013. Disruptive Technologies: Advances That Will US DOE, 2013. Obama administration launches competition for three
Transform Life, Business and the Global Economy. McKinsey Global Institute
new manufacturing innovation institutes. U.S. Department of Energy. /http://
& Company, Seoul/South Korea.
energy.gov/articles/obama-administration-launches-competition-three-new-
Paech, N., 2012. Liberation From EXCESS—The Road to a Post-growth Economy.
manufacturing-innovation-institutesS. (Online accessed, 23.05.13).
Oekom, Verlag/Munich.
Vanclay, F., 2002. Conceptualizing social impacts. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 22,
Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., et al., 2007. Technical summary. Climate
Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptations and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working 183–211.
Weinberg, M., 2013. What’s the Deal With Copyright and 3D Printing?. Institute for
Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. In: Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., van der Linden, P.J., Technology Innovation, Washington, USA 〈http://publicknowledge.org/files/
Hanson, J.E. (Eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 23–78. What’s%20the%20Deal%20with%20Copyright_%20Final%20version2.pdf〉
Pearce, J.M., Blair, C.M., Laciak, K.J., Andrews, R., Nosrat, A., Zelenika-Zovko, I., 2010. (Online accessed, 14.4.2013).
3-D printing of open source appropriate technologies for self-directed sustain- WCED, 1987. Our Common Future. World Commission on Environment and
able development. J. Sustainable Dev. 3 (4), 17–29. Development. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Peerproduction, 2013. Manufacturing in Motion. First Survey on 3D Printing Wohlers, 2013. Wohlers Report 2013—Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing
Community. 〈http://surveys.peerproduction.net/2012/05/manufacturing-in-mo State of Industry Annual Worldwide Progress Report. Wohlers Associates, Fort
tion/〉 (Online accessed, 22.5.2013). Collins, CO, USA.
Petrovic, V., Gonzales, J.V.H., Ferrado, O.J., Gordillo, J.D., Puchades, J.R.B., Ginan, L.P., Wüstenhagen, R., Wolsnik, M., Bürer, M.J., 2007. Social acceptance of renewable
2011. Additive layered manufacturing: sectors of industrial application shown energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 35,
through case studies. Int. J. Prod. Res. 49 (4), 1071–1079. 2683–2691.

Please cite this article as: Gebler, M., et al., A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy (2014), http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.033i