Expanding Additive Manufacturing Applications toward Green Industrialization

The global manufacturing sector accounts for approximately one-fifth of the total energyrelated CO₂ emissions, making its decarbonization a central priority in both industrial policy and engineering research (IEA, 2023). In this context, additive manufacturing (AM) has attracted attention as a process technology with structural advantages over conventional subtractive and formative methods: it builds components layer by layer from digital models, requiring only the material the part demands, whereas conventional metal cutting can waste up to 95% of the input stock (Maware et al., 2024). Research output on AM and sustainability has grown substantially, with Scopus-indexed publications on the topic projected to exceed 900 in 2025 (Su et al., 2024). However, the carbon credentials of AM are not uniform across sectors or process types, and establishing them requires the same analytical rigor that the technology brings to engineering design.

Application Domains

AM has established a mature and growing presence. Patient-specific implants, orthopedic devices, surgical guides, and prosthetics can be directly produced from patient imaging data, enabling anatomical geometries and internal porous architectures that conventional machining cannot achieve (Li et al., 2025). The global healthcare AM market was estimated at USD 1.17 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 17.5% through 2029 (GlobalData, 2025). Bioprinting, the AM of cell-laden hydrogel constructs, has demonstrated capacity for vascularized tissue fabrication in experimental contexts, while dental AM has become commercially routine for crowns, bridges, surgical templates, and custom orthodontic devices (Elhadad et al., 2026). The production logic in healthcare AM is one of precision and personalization at low volumes, a demand profile to which AM’s design flexibility and material efficiency are well suited (Rahyussalim 2017).

AM represents an emerging application domain with notable structural implications. Three-dimensional food printing enables the deposition of edible materials in precise geometries, textures, and compositional profiles that conventional processing cannot achieve (Ehsan et al., 2025). Identified applications include personalized nutritional formulations for specific dietary requirements, textured foods for patients with dysphagia, and the fabrication of alternative protein products, including plant-based and cell-cultured meat analogs, where scaffold geometry influences consumer acceptance (Prithviraj, 2025). The on-demand production logic of food AM also reduces the overproduction and perishability losses that contribute to approximately one-third of the currently wasted global food output, a sustainability dimension that extends beyond the manufacturing process itself (Taqdissillah 2026).

AM operates at higher production volumes in the aerospace and automotive sectors, and its decarbonization implications are correspondingly more consequential (Alami 2023). The primary mechanism in aerospace is lightweighting: components designed for additive production through topology optimization can match the structural performance of conventionally manufactured parts at substantially lower mass. A model has been established that every kilogram saved in aircraft weight prevents approximately 25 tonnes of CO? over the aircraft’s operational lifetime (Menouni, 2024). GE Aerospace’s additively manufactured fuel nozzle for the LEAP engine combined 20 previously separate components into a single part (Najmon 2019). This redesign reduced weight by 25%, increased durability fivefold, and delivered measurable fuel-efficiency gains across the Airbus A320neo, Boeing 737 MAX, and COMAC C919 fleets (Metal-AM, 2025). In the automotive industry, AM primarily contributes to tooling, prototyping, and topology-optimized structural components in EV platforms, where weight reduction directly extends the operational range (Tuazon, 2022).

Carbon Question: Evidence and Conditions

The proposition that AM reduces carbon emissions relative to conventional manufacturing is supported by life cycle assessment evidence, although the relationship is conditional rather than categorical. A systematic review of 158 empirical and conceptual studies concluded that AM can achieve measurable reductions in waste generation, emission production, and carbon footprint, alongside time and cost advantages, relative to conventional manufacturing (Maware et al., 2024). AM enables reductions in material use for final parts by 35%–80%, which directly impacts energy consumption throughout the supply chain and manufacturing process (Raigar, 2025). A laser-based powder bed fusion study of precious metal components found a carbon footprint of 2.23 kg CO?e per piece against 3.17 kg CO?e by conventional methods, a reduction of approximately 30% (Schmidt et al., 2024). Aggregate modeling projected reductions of 9%–35% in primary energy consumption and 8%–19% in CO? contributions from AM deployment in aerospace and automotive manufacturing relative to conventional production baselines (Huang et al., 2023).

Additive manufacturing was not designed as a decarbonization technology (Klejnowska, 2026). In several process variants, its energy intensity per unit volume of material processed is, in several process variants, higher than that of conventional manufacturing, particularly for metal powder bed fusion systems operating under high-energy laser or electron beam conditions (Qosim 2018, Kokare 2024). The sustainability of AM depends on the comparison being made. It is generally more material-efficient and produces less waste, but its energy consumption varies with the process. The greatest environmental benefits occur in aerospace applications, where lighter parts reduce fuel use and emissions throughout the product’s life (Price 2025). Machine learning approaches for the pre-production estimation of the carbon footprint from process parameters and part geometry are being developed to address the current limitation that sustainability assessments are available only retrospectively (Hauck et al., 2025).

The production volume question also conditions the assessment. The material and supply-chain efficiencies are most pronounced for low-to-medium volume production, geometrically complex parts, and distributed manufacturing scenarios. Conventional mass manufacturing processes retain cost and energy efficiency advantages for high-volume production of geometrically simple components. Therefore, a considered green industrialization strategy would therefore apply AM selectively in applications where lifecycle analysis confirms a carbon advantage, rather than as a categorical substitute for established processes.

Al-Ajooli, S., Kassim, M. A., Khazaal, K. H., Alwash, O. A., & Al-Mashhadi, R. N. (2026). An MXene–titania nanofiltration membrane with thermocatalytic activity for water pollution removal. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1765–1779. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8534

Alami, A. H., Olabi, A. G., Alashkar, A., Alasad, S., Aljaghoub, H., Rezk, H., & Abdelkareem, M. A. (2023). Additive manufacturing in the aerospace and automotive industries: Recent trends and role in achieving sustainable development goals. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 14(102516). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2023.102516

Arviningtyas, E., & Muslim, K. (2026). The role of haptic feedback on upper extremity muscle activity, perceived exertion, and presence in VR-based exergames. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1918–1939. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8328

Blagoy, N., Dmitriev, N., Lavrova, O., Zaytsev, A., & Rodionov, D. (2026). Segmentation of manufacturing enterprises by operational–financial profiles based on digital analysis of corporate data. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1610–1627. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8239

Dash, S. K., Nanda, B., Ahmed, M. A., & Mohammed, Q. (2026). PneumaScan: A two-phase finetuning framework using DenseNet121 for pneumonia detection. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1940–1959. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8592

Dwinata, B., Budiwantoro, B., Kariem, M. A., Mahyuddin, A. I., Budi, M. N. S., & Faisham, W. I. (2026). Strain-rate-dependent behavior and constitutive modeling of stereolithography-printed polylactic acid and hydroxyapatite composites. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1628–1648. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8437

Ehsan, M., Shankar, A., Chohan, J. S., Rasheed, B., Imran, A., Usman, I., Rasheed, M., Saeed, F., Afzaal, M., Islam, F., & Ndagire, C. T. (2025). Three-dimensional (3D) food printing applications, techniques, and consumer acceptance. eFood, 6(6). https://doi.org/10.1002/efd2.70106

Elhadad, A., Cañete, R., Mena, D., Saad, M., Mogassabi, W., Dawoud, A., Fatima, F., Chowdhury, M., Almuzafar, A., Alqashouti, H., & Torres, Y. (2026). Advanced additive manufacturing and printing technologies for dental applications: A narrative review. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 143, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-025-17220-0

Galymzhan, M., Rustam, S., Ridhwan, A. M., Raushan, U., Omirserik, B., Yaseen, Z. M., Mendeke, M., & Hosseini-Bandegharaei, A. (2026). Valorization of chrysotile asbestos waste into hierarchically porous adsorbents for thermal-contact demetallization of heavy oil: Mechanistic insights and process optimization. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1841–1859. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8872

GlobalData. (2025). Game-changing 3D printing manufacturing trends for 2025. Medical Technology, 82. https://medical-technology.nridigital.com/medical technology jan25/3d printing manufacturing trends for 202

Hadiyanto, H., Sumantri, I., Djaeni, M., Widiasa, N., Suherman, Zakaria, Z. A. B., Pratama, W. D., Hafizh, D., Muzaki, R. P., & Pratiwi, W. Z. (2026). Valorization of shrimp shell waste into chitosan for efficient green harvesting of Chlorella vulgaris through physicochemical and performance evaluation. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1747–1764. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8527

Hasymi, Z., Kiswanto, G., Baskoro, A. S., Istiyanto, J., & Kurniawan, R. (2026). Predicting the high torsionality of stepped ultrasonic horn design in longitudinal-torsional vibration-assisted micro milling using finite element analysis and surrogate models. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1960–1976. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8636

Hauck, S., Greif, L., Benner, N., & Ovtcharova, J. (2025). Advancing sustainable additive manufacturing: Analyzing parameter influences and machine learning approaches for CO2 prediction. Sustainability, 17, Article 3804. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17093804

Helianty, S., Ramadhan, G., Nurulita, Y., Utama, P. S., & Nugroho, T. T. (2026). Humidified column solid-state bioreactor for enhanced laccase production under forced aeration. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1649–1666. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8658

Huang, R., Riddle, M. E., Graziano, D., Das, S., Nimbalkar, S., Cresko, J., & Masanet, E. (2017). Environmental and economic implications of distributed additive manufacturing: The case of injection mold tooling. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21, S130–S143. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12641

Hutabarat, A. M., Dalimi, R., Setiabudy, R., & Sudiarto, B. (2026). Geographic information system-adjusted rural access screening framework for solar photovoltaic intervention planning in indonesia. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1977–1996. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8726

Ibadurrohman, M., Azzahra, J., & Mumtazah, N. (2026). Promotion of nickel-modified titanium dioxide photocatalysts with graphene and graphitic carbon nitride for hydrogen production from water–glycerol mixtures. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1732–1746. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8544

IEA. (2023). Industry — tracking clean energy progress 2023. International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/energy-system/industry

Klejnowska, K., Yusufova, N., & Faludi, J. (2026). Sustainability evaluation of ambient-temperature biocomposite additive manufacturing using life cycle assessment. Sustainability, 18, 1223. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18031223

Kokare, S., Shen, J., Fonseca, P. P., Lopes, J. G., Machado, C. M., Santos, T. G., Oliveira, J. P., & Godina, R. (2024). Wire arc additive manufacturing of a high-strength low-alloy steel part: Environmental impacts, costs, and mechanical properties. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 134, 453–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-024-14144-z

Korolkov, I. V., Shumskaya, A., Bekbol, Z. A., Zhappar, N. K., Khairusheva, A. B., & Shakayeva, A. K. (2026). Silver-coated cobalt microtubes for surface-enhanced raman sensing. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1792–1805. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8449

Li, Y., Jiang, D., Zhu, R., Yang, C., Wang, L., & Zhang, L.-C. (2025). Revolutionizing medical implant fabrication: Advances in additive manufacturing of biomedical metals. International Journal of Extreme Manufacturing, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1088/2631-7990/ad92cc

Mansjur, Z., Hutasoit, X. C. A., Tengker, S. M. T., Arafat, A., Jujur, I. N., Wibisono, M., Suryadi, S., Gunawarman, G., Niinomi, M., & Akahori, T. (2026). Mechanical and surface characterization of titanium–29niobium–13tantalum–4.6zirconium alloy coated with hydroxyapatite using high-velocity oxy-fuel spraying for biomaterial applications. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1806–1821. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8696

Maware, C., Muvunzi, R., Machingura, T., & Daniyan, I. (2024). Examining the progress in additive manufacturing in supporting lean, green and sustainable manufacturing: A systematic review. Applied Sciences, 14(14), 6041. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14146041

Menouni, A. E., Kretov, A., & Zhijin, W. (2021). Assessment of the passenger aircraft mass and efficiency with a fuselage without portholes. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1780(1), Article 012011. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1780/1/012011

Metal-AM. (2025). Metal additive manufacturing in the aerospace sector. https://www.metalam.com/articles/metal-am-in-the-aerospace-sector-from-early-successes-to-the-transformation-of-an-industry/

Najmon, J. C., Raeisi, S., & Tovar, A. (2019). Review of additive manufacturing technologies and applications in the aerospace industry. In Additive manufacturing for the aerospace industry. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814062-8.00002-9

Pandyaswargo, A. H., Maghfiroh, M. F. N., Rachman, I., & Onoda, H. (2026). Perceived helpfulness of automated waste sorting in indonesia is associated with pickup-service reliability and waste-sorting behavior. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1689–1704. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8457

Pospelov, K. N., & Gintciak, A. M. (2026). Organizational systems control model with bounded rationality of the control subjects. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1705–1718. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8374

Price, C., Armstrong, K., Kamath, D., Nimbalkar, S., & Cresko, J. (2025). Novel tools for analyzing life cycle energy use, carbon emissions, and cost of additive manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing, 9, 214. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp9070214

Prithviraj, V., Díaz, L. P., Lemus-Mondaca, R., Ullah, A., & Roopesh, M. S. (2025). Emerging advancements in 3D food printing. Frontiers in Food Science and Technology, 5, Article 1607449. https://doi.org/10.3389/frfst.2025.1607449

Qolbiyah, N. S., Khoirurrijal, M. F., Faizal, F., & Purnama, I. (2026). Integration of kalman state prediction and outer-loop velocity PID control for robust autonomous monocular unmanned aerial vehicle landing. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1667–1688. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8473

Qosim, N., Supriadi, S., Saragih, A. S., & Whulanza, Y. (2018). Surface treatments of Tialloy based bone implant manufactured by electrical discharge machining. Ingeniería y Universidad, 22 (2). https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.iyu22-2.sttb

Rahmayeni, Dwitami, A. R., Stiadi, D. R., Wendari, T. P., Stiadi, Y., & Zulhadjri. (2026). Structural, optical, and magnetic characteristics of NiFe2O4 nanoparticles synthesized from natural iron sand for solar-driven photocatalysis. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1860–1878. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8395

Rahyussalim, A. J., Kurniawati, T., Aprilya, R., D. Anggraini, Ramahdita, G., & Whulanza, Y. (2017). Toxicity and biocompatibility profile of 3D bone scaffold developed by Universitas Indonesia: A preliminary study. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1817, Article 020004. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4976756

Raigar, J., Ramachandran, M. K., Kannan, M., & Velu, R. (2025). Impact of additive manufacturing on the environment and supply chain management. In Additively manufactured smart materials and structures: Design, processing, and applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-16144-5.00014-4

Samrit, C., Tirasuntarakul, N., & Joochim, O. (2026). Self-healing actuators inspired by locomotion of unicellular organisms. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1719–1731. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8499

Schmidt, M., Heinrich, J., & Huensche, I. (2024). Carbon footprint of additively manufactured precious metals products. Resources, 13(11), Article 162. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13110162

Sharipov, R., Maldybayev, G., Dagubayeva, A., Wirzal, M. D. H., Kurniawan, S. B., Yaseen, Z. M., Baigenzhenov, O., & Hosseini-Bandegharaei, A. (2026). Selective nickel recovery from the magnetic fraction of chrysotile asbestos beneficiation waste using organic acids. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1822–1840. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8880

Shlimas, D., Volodina, N., Shakirzyanov, R., Garanin, Y., Kozlovskiy, A., Kaliyekperov, M., & Zdorovets, M. (2026). Annealed-induced recrystallization and phase evolution in indented magnesia-stabilized zirconia ceramics. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1780–1791. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8413

Su, J., Ng, W. L., An, J., Yeong, W. Y., Chua, C. K., & Sing, S. L. (2024). Achieving sustainability by additive manufacturing: A state-of-the-art review and perspectives. Virtual and Physical Prototyping, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2024.2438899

Taqdissillah, D., Mubarok, W., Nurhayati, R. W., Sakai, S., & Whulanza, Y. (2026). 3D printing of cincau perdu (Premna oblongifolia) hydrogel for dysphagia patient’s food application. Foods, 15(5), Article 960. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods15050960

Tuazon, B., Custodio, N. A. V., Basuel, R., & Dizon, J. R. C. (2022). 3D printing technology and materials for automotive application: A mini-review. Key Engineering Materials, 913, 3–16. https://doi.org/10.4028/p-26o076

Wulandari, S., & Yastica, T. V. (2026). Market-oriented digital health co-creation framework for stunting prevention in developing countries: Evidence from indonesia. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1898–1917. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8369

Zhou, Z., Wang, J., Yin, G., Zhou, J., Zhang, Y., Guo, J., & Zhang, J. (2026). A deep reinforcement learning scheduling approach for production lines in series. International Journal of Technology, 17(5), 1879–1897. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v17i5.8191