Inventory and life cycle assessment of an Italian automotive painting process

  • Isabella Bianco
  • Deborah PanepintoEmail author
  • Gian Andrea Blengini
  • Maurizio Onofrio
  • Mariachiara Zanetti
Original Paper


In the current context of the European Environmental legislation and standards, the automotive sector is expected to continuously improve the vehicles life cycle with solutions able to minimise emissions of greenhouse gases and other negative effects on the environment and on human health. The vehicle painting process has been identified to be responsible of significant potential impacts, but recent primary inventory data and impact results are currently scarcely available in the literature. The novelty of this paper is the provision of a comprehensive life cycle inventory and life cycle assessment (LCA) of a painting process, with reference to a large and highly automated plant located in Turin (Italy). To achieve these goals, the highly recognised methodology of LCA has been followed, as indicated in ISO 14040-44. A detailed inventory is disclosed (both as input/output table and ILCD file) for the four main phases of the painting process (electrodeposition, primer application, top coat application and final drying and revision). Impact results on the categories of climate change, acidification, terrestrial eutrophication and photochemical ozone creation potential are quantified as well. These latter show that the major hot points are the high-energy consumption (specifically, the integrated provision of technological heating and chilled water is responsible of almost half of the total emissions of greenhouse gases), the direct emission of volatile organic compounds into air (for a total of 7.44 kg/car) and the waste production and treatment [giving a significant contribution to the impact categories of ozone depletion (99%), freshwater eutrophication (66%) and freshwater ecotoxicity potential (60%)]. This study contributes to increase the pool of publicly available life cycle data for specific applications in the automotive sector. In addition, the easy replicability and adaptation of the provided inventory is expected to boost enterprises to increase their overall sustainability. Finally, this study provides data and tools for the development of further research in alternative painting technologies.

Graphic abstract


Automotive painting process Italian automotive sector Life cycle assessment Painting environmental profile 



Authors are pleased to thank the people working in the Turin automotive plant who collaborated to the project. In particular, authors thank them for their availability in sharing detailed inventory data on the painting process.

Supplementary material

10098_2019_1780_MOESM1_ESM.docx (67 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 66 kb)


  1. ACEA (2018) 2018–2019. The automobile industry pocket guide. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  2. Alkaya E, Demirer GN (2014) Improving resource efficiency in surface coating/painting industry: practical experiences from a small-sized enterprise. Clean Technol Environ Policy 16:1565–1575. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Avci H, Ghorbanpoor H, Topcu IB, Nurbas M (2017) Investigation and recycling of paint sludge with cement and lime for producing lightweight construction mortar. J Environ Chem Eng 5:861–869. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dehning P, Thiede S, Mennenga M, Herrmann C (2017) Factors influencing the energy intensity of automotive manufacturing plants. J Clean Prod 142:2305–2314. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dinh T-V, Choi I-Y, Son Y-S, Song K-Y, Sunwoo Y, Kim J-C (2016) Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in surface coating materials: their compositions and potential as an alternative fuel. J Environ Manag 168:157–164. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. European Commission (2010) ILCD handbook—general guide for life cycle assessment—detailed guidance. Via E. Fermi, 2749—21027 Ispra (VA) ItalyGoogle Scholar
  7. European Commission (2011) Recommendations for life cycle impact assessment in the European context—based on existing environmental impact assessment models and factors. In: International reference life cycle data system—ILCD handbook. Publications Office of the European Union.
  8. European Commission (2014) Commission decision 2014/955/EUGoogle Scholar
  9. Feng L, Mears L (2016) Energy consumption modeling and analyses in automotive manufacturing plant. J Manuf Sci Eng 138:101005–101011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Finlayson-Pitts BJ, Pitts JN Jr (1993) Atmospheric chemistry of tropospheric ozone formation: scientific and regulatory implications. Air Waste 43:1091–1100. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Geffen CA, Rothenberg S (2000) Suppliers and environmental innovation: the automotive paint process. Int J Oper Prod Manag 20:166–186. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Giampieri A, Ling-Chin J, Taylor W, Smallbone A, Roskilly AP (2019) Moving towards low-carbon manufacturing in the UK automotive industry. Energy Proc 158:3381–3386. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hao H, Qiao Q, Liu Z, Zhao F, Chen Y (2017) Comparing the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle production in China and the USA: implications for targeting the reduction opportunities. Clean Technol Environ Policy 19:1509–1522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kampa M, Castanas E (2008) Human health effects of air pollution. Environ Pollut 151:362–367. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kellens K, Paraskevas D, Dewulf W, Duflou JR (2015) Environmental comparison of metal coating processes. Proc CIRP 29:420–425. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li J, Uttarwar RG, Huang Y (2013) CFD-based modeling and design for energy-efficient VOC emission reduction in surface coating systems. Clean Technol Environ Policy 15:1023–1032. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Maroušek J, Stehel V, Vochozka M, Maroušková A, Kolář L (2018) Postponing of the intracellular disintegration step improves efficiency of phytomass processing. J Clean Prod 199:173–176. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Maroušek J, Stehel V, Vochozka M, Kolář L, Maroušková A, Strunecký O, Peterka J, Kopecký M, Shreedhar S (2019a) Ferrous sludge from water clarification: changes in waste management practices advisable. J Clean Prod 218:459–464. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Maroušek J, Strunecký O, Stehel V (2019b) Biochar farming: defining economically perspective applications, V. Clean Technol Environ Policy 21:1389–1395. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mohtashami R, Shang JQ (2019) Treatment of automotive paint wastewater in continuous-flow electroflotation reactor. J Clean Prod 218:335–346. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Papasavva S, Kia S, Claya J, Gunther R (2001) Characterization of automotive paints: an environmental impact analysis. Prog Org Coat 43:193–206. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Papasavva S, Kia S, Claya J, Gunther R (2002) Life cycle environmental assessment of paint processes. J Coat Technol 74:65–76. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Poozesh S, Akafuah N, Saito K (2018) Effects of automotive paint spray technology on the paint transfer efficiency—a review. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D J Automob Eng 232:282–301. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Prendi L, Henshaw P, Tam EKL (2006) Automotive coatings with improved environmental performance. Int J Environ Stud 63:463–471. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rao PP, Gopinath A (2013) Energy savings in automotive paint ovens: a new concept of shroud on the carriers. J Manuf Sci Eng 135:45001–45009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rivera JL, Reyes-Carrillo T (2014) A framework for environmental and energy analysis of the automobile painting process. Proc CIRP 15:171–175. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rivera JL, Reyes-Carrillo T (2016) A life cycle assessment framework for the evaluation of automobile paint shops. J Clean Prod 115:75–87. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Roelant GJ, Kemppainen AJ, Shonnard DR (2004) Assessment of the automobile assembly paint process for energy, environmental, and economic improvement. J Ind Ecol 8:173–191. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Salihoglu G, Salihoglu NK (2016) A review on paint sludge from automotive industries: generation, characteristics and management. J Environ Manag 169:223–235. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Salihoglu NK, Ucaroglu S, Salihoglu G (2018) Bioconversion of industrial wastes: paint sludge from automotive manufacturing. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 20:2100–2109. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. The International Standards Organisation (2006a) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework, ISO 14040. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. The International Standards Organisation (2006b) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines, ISO 14044. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zanetti M, Ruffino B, Vercelli A, Dalmazzo D, Santagata E (2018) Reuse of paint sludge in road pavements: technological and environmental issues. Waste Manag Res 36:0734242X1880462. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Web resources

  1. ACEA—European Automobile Manufacturers Association.
  2. OICA—International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isabella Bianco
    • 1
  • Deborah Panepinto
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gian Andrea Blengini
    • 1
  • Maurizio Onofrio
    • 1
  • Mariachiara Zanetti
    • 1
  1. 1.Politecnico di Torino, DIATITurinItaly

Personalised recommendations