What is the environmental impact of metal additive manufacturing?

Not so long ago, the Additive Manufacturer Green Trade Association (AMGTA) released its report on the environmental impact of metal additive manufacturing. Conducted by Jeremy Faludi of Delft University of Technology and Corrie Van Sice of Dartmouth College, the study compares metal printing processes with traditional methods and asks whether they ultimately offer environmental benefits, in addition to the economic and functional benefits they offer in some cases. By conducting this survey, the AMGTA aims to elevate the debate: can companies plan responsible additive manufacturing strategies? Do metal 3D printing technologies offer a more sustainable future?

It is certainly a growing process: according to a Grand View Research study conducted this year, metal 3D printing is estimated to be worth $1 billion by 2020, experiencing a yearly 27% growth rate over the next few years. Combining different processes such as Laser Powder Bed Fusion, Directed Energy Deposition or EBM, metal additive manufacturing offers multiple advantages in production: design freedom, reduction in the total number of components and assembly steps, reduction in the weight of parts, personalization, etc. In some cases, and particularly for the design of small production runs, it has become an obvious alternative to traditional processes (as manufacturers are freeing themselves from the need to produce an expensive mold). But it is still a manufacturing method that is less well known, with challenges that still need to be established.

Metal additive manufacturing is particularly popular in the medical sector | Photo Credits: EOS

The environmental impact is one of them, and that is the focus of this study. The AMGTA states that it was carried out to “summarize current knowledge and identify areas where information is scarce, unclear and much needed“. The authors came to compare metal 3D printing and conventional manufacturing for each stage of a part’s life cycle, looking in particular at the impact of materials (especially stainless steel, aluminum and titanium) or their transformation. They also made this comparison by sector of activity, namely aerospace, automotive and medical, three industries for which metal AM has disrupted production processes.