Proposition
Let be a monoidal model category. Then the left derived functor of the tensor product exists and makes the homotopy category into a monoidal category .
If in in addition satisfies the monoid axiom, then the localization functor carries the structure of a lax monoidal functor
Proof
Consider the explicit model of as the category of fibrant-cofibrant objects in with left/right-homotopy classes of morphisms between them (discussed at homotopy category of a model category).
A derived functor exists if its restriction to this subcategory preserves weak equivalences. Now the pushout-product axiom implies that on the subcategory of cofibrant objects the functor preserves acyclic cofibrations, and then the preservation of all weak equivalences follows by Ken Brown's lemma.
Hence exists and its associativity follows simply by restriction. It remains to see its unitality.
To that end, consider the construction of the localization functor via a fixed but arbitrary choice of (co-)fibrant replacements and , assumed to be the identity on (co-)fibrant objects. We fix notation as follows:
Now to see that is the tensor unit for , notice that in the zig-zag
all morphisms are weak equivalences: For the first two this is due to the pushout-product axiom, for the third this is due to the unit axiom on a monoidal model category. It follows that under this zig-zig gives an isomorphism
and similarly for tensoring with from the right.
To exhibit lax monoidal structure on , we need to construct a natural transformation
and show that it satisfies the the appropriate associativity and unitality condition.
By the definitions at homotopy category of a model category, the morphism in question is to be of the form
To this end, consider the zig-zag
and observe that the two morphisms on the left are weak equivalences, as indicated, by the pushout-product axiom satisfied by .
Hence applying to this zig-zag, which is given by the two horizontal part of the following digram
and inverting the first two morphisms, this yields a natural transformation as required.
To see that this satisfies associativity if the monoid axiom holds, tensor the entire diagram above on the right with and consider the following pasting composite:
Observe that under the total top zig-zag in this diagram gives
Now by the monoid axiom (but not by the pushout-product axiom!), the horizontal maps in the square in the bottom right (labeled ) are weak equivalences. This implies that the total horizontal part of the diagram is a zig-zag in the first place, and that under the total top zig-zag is equal to the image of that total bottom zig-zag. But by functoriality of , that image of the bottom zig-zag is
The same argument applies to left tensoring with instead of right tensoring, and so in both cases we reduce to the same morphism in the homotopy category, thus showing the associativity condition on the transformation that exhibits as a lax monoidal functor.