ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Opinion Article

All engineers should be life cycle engineers … mindful of maintenance

[version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]
PUBLISHED 27 Jan 2026
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS AWAITING PEER REVIEW

Abstract

Following a recent keynote on life cycle engineering, a vibrant debate arose regarding the significance of maintenance for environmental footprints. It has become clear to us that this aspect is currently overlooked in broader sustainability discussions. Evidence, for example from aviation, demonstrates that maintenance activities can materially shape the environmental performance of products. In some cases, they are a significant environmental burden; in others, a powerful lever for impact reduction. Therefore, ecologically informed maintenance concepts offer opportunities to optimize the use stage. We advocate for integrating maintenance systematically into life cycle assessments and engineering decision-making to achieve more sustainable products and processes.

Keywords

life cycle assessment, service, repair, eco-design

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 27 Jan 2026
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Rüdele K and Rahn A. All engineers should be life cycle engineers … mindful of maintenance [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]. F1000Research 2026, 15:125 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.175822.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status:
AWAITING PEER REVIEW
AWAITING PEER REVIEW
?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 27 Jan 2026
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.