Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeRecently, an update of the Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) method ReCiPe was released: ReCiPe 2016. The aim of this study was to analyse the effect of using this update instead of the previous version: ReCiPe 2008. Do the absolute outcomes change significantly and if so, does this lead to different conclusions and result-based recommendations?MethodsLife cycle assessments (LCAs) were conducted for 152 foods for which cradle-to-plate inventories were available and that together are estimated to account for 80% of the total greenhouse gas emissions, land use and fossil resource depletion of food consumption in the Netherlands. The LCIA was performed on midpoint and endpoint level, with both ReCiPe 2008 and 2016, and using the three perspectives provided by ReCiPe. Both the uses of the global-average characterisation factors (CFs) and the Dutch-specific CFs were explored.Results and discussionResults showed a strong correlation between LCAs performed with ReCiPe 2008 and with 2016 on midpoint and endpoint level, with Spearman’s rank correlation between 0.85 and 0.99. Ranking of foods related to their overall environmental impact did not differ significantly between methods when using the default hierarchist perspective. Differences on endpoint level were largest when using the individualist perspective. The predicted average absolute impact of the foods studied did change significantly when using the new ReCiPe, regardless of which perspective was used: a larger impact was found for climate change, freshwater eutrophication and water consumption and a lower impact for acidification and land use. The use of Dutch CFs in ReCiPe 2016 leads to significant differences in LCA results compared with the use of the global-average CFs. When looking at the average Dutch diet, ReCiPe 2016 predicted a larger impact from greenhouse gas emissions and freshwater eutrophication, and a lower impact from acidification and land use than ReCiPe 2008.ConclusionsThe update of ReCiPe leads to other LCIA results but to comparable conclusions on hotspots and ranking of food product consumption in the Netherlands. Looking at the changes per product due to the update, we recommend updating endpoint-level LCAs conducted with ReCiPe 2008, especially for products that emit large amounts of PM2.5 or consume large amounts of water within their life cycle. As new and updated methods reflect the scientific state of art better and therefore include less model uncertainty, we recommend to always use the most recent and up-to-date methodology in new LCAs.

The huge plastic production and plastic pollution are considered important global issues due to environmental aspects. One practical and efficient way to address them is to replace fossil-based plastics with natural-based materials, such as cellulose. The applications of different cellulose products have recently received increasing attention because of their desirable properties, such as biodegradability and sustainability. In this regard, the current study initially reviews cellulose products’ properties in three categories, including biopolymers based on the cellulose-derived monomer, cellulose fibers and their derivatives, and nanocellulose. The available life cycle assessments (LCA) for cellulose were comprehensively reviewed and classified at all the stages, including extraction of cellulose in various forms, manufacturing, usage, and disposal. Finally, due to the development of low-carbon materials in recent years and the importance of greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions, the proposed solutions to make cellulose a low carbon material were made. The optimization of the cellulose production process, such as the recovery of excessive solvents and using by-products as inputs for other processes, seem to be the most important step toward making it a low carbon material.

Buildings consume large amounts of materials and energy, making them one of the highest environmental impactors. Quantifying the impact of building materials can be critical to developing an effective greenhouse gas mitigation strategy. Using Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings (IE4B), this paper compares cradle-to-grave life-cycle assessment (LCA) results for a 12-story building constructed from cross-laminated timber (CLT) and a functionally equivalent reinforced concrete (RC) building. Following EN 15978 framework, environmental impacts for stages A1–A5 (product to construction), B2, B4, and B6 (use), C1–C4 (end of life), and D (beyond the building life) were evaluated in detail along resource efficiency. For material resource efficiency, total mass of the CLT building was 33.2% less than the alternative RC building. For modules A to C and not considering operational energy use (B6), LCA results show a 20.6% reduction in embodied carbon achieved for the CLT building, compared to the RC building. For modules A to D and not considering B6, the embodied carbon assessment revealed that for the CLT building, 6.57 × 105 kg CO2 eq was emitted, whereas for the equivalent RC building, 2.16 × 106 kg CO2 eq was emitted, and emissions from CLT building was 70% lower than that from RC building. Additionally, 1.84 × 106 kg of CO2 eq was stored in the wood material used in the CLT building during its lifetime. Building material selection should be considered for the urgent need to reduce global climate change impacts.

PurposeThe textiles industry is a substantial contributor to environmental impacts through the production, processing, use, and end-of-life of garments. Wool is a high value, natural, and renewable fibre that is used to produce a wide range of garments, from active leisure wear to formal wear, and represents a small segment of the global fashion industry. Woollen garments are produced by long, global value chains extending from the production of ‘greasy’ wool on sheep farms, through processing to garment make-up, retail, consumer use, and end-of-life. To date, there have been limited life cycle assessment (LCA) studies on the environmental impacts of the full supply chain or use phase of garments, with the majority of wool LCA studies focusing on a segment of the supply chain. This study aimed to address this knowledge gap via a cradle-to-grave LCA of a woollen garment.MethodsThis study investigated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, fossil fuel energy, and water stress associated with the production, use, and end-of-life of a lightweight woollen sweater (300-g wool), together with inventory results for freshwater consumption and land occupation. Primary datasets were used for the wool production and wool processing stages, while primary datasets relating to consumer garment use were supplemented with literature data. Impacts were calculated and reported per garment wear event.Results and discussionImpacts per wear were 0.17 (± 0.02) kg CO2-e GHG, 0.88 (± 0.18) MJ fossil energy, and 0.96 (± 0.42) H2O-e water stress. Fossil fuel energy was dominated by wool processing, with substantial contributions of energy also arising from retail and garment care. Greenhouse gas emissions from wool production (farming) contributed the highest proportion of impacts, followed by lower contributions from processing and garment care. Contributions to water stress varied less across the supply chain, with major contributions arising from production, processing, and garment use.ConclusionsOpportunities to improve the efficiency of production, processing, and garment care exist, which could also reduce resource use and impacts from wool. However, the number of garment wear events and length of garment lifetime was found to be the most influential factor in determining garment impacts. This indicated that consumers have the largest capacity to influence the sustainability of their woollen garments by maximising the active garment lifespan which will reduce overall impacts.

PurposeComposites consist of at least two merged materials. Separation of these components for recycling is typically an energy-intensive process with potentially significant impacts on the components’ quality. The purpose of this article is to suggest how allocation for recycling of products manufactured from composites can be handled in life cycle assessment to accommodate for the recycling process and associated quality degradations of the different composite components, as well as to describe the challenges involved.MethodThree prominent recycling allocation approaches were selected from the literature: the cut-off approach, the end-of-life recycling approach with quality-adjusted substitution, and the circular footprint formula. The allocation approaches were adapted to accommodate for allocation of impacts by conceptualizing the composite material recycling as a separation process with subsequent recycling of the recovered components, allowing for separate modeling of the quality changes in each individual component. The adapted allocation approaches were then applied in a case study assessing the cradle-to-grave climate impact and energy use of a fictitious product made from a composite material that in the end of life is recycled through grinding, pyrolysis, or by means of supercritical water treatment. Finally, the experiences and results from applying the allocation approaches were analyzed with regard to what incentives they provide and what challenges they come with.Results and discussionUsing the approach of modeling the composite as at least two separate materials rather than one helped to clarify the incentives provided by each allocation approach. When the product is produced using primary materials, the cut-off approach gives no incentive to recycle, and the end-of-life recycling approach and the circular footprint formula give incentives to recycle and recover materials of high quality. Each of the allocation approaches come with inherent challenges, especially when knowledge is limited regarding future systems as in prospective studies. This challenge is most evident for the circular footprint formula, for example, with regard to the supply and demand balance.ConclusionsWe recommend modeling the composite materials in products as separate, individual materials. This proved useful for capturing changes in quality, trade-offs between recovering high quality materials and the environmental impact of the recycling system, and the incentives the different approaches provide. The cut-off and end-of-life approaches can both be used in prospective studies, whereas the circular footprint formula should be avoided as a third approach when no market for secondary material is established.

Purpose Bio-based insulation materials are one of the most promising solutions for reducing the environmental impacts of building envelopes. Among these materials, the environmental benefits of mycelium-based materials have merely been investigated, despite their promising technical and thermal properties. In this paper, we perform a first prospective cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment (LCA) of mycelium-based composite blocks. Methods An attributional cradle-to-gate LCA of the laboratory production of mycelium-based composites was first performed, including 11 environmental impact indicators. Then, scenarios were defined to scale up the technology to the level of industrial production, including the remaining life cycle modules to perform a cradle-to-grave analysis. Biogenic and metabolic carbon were considered by applying the static −1/+1 approach and following the current LCA standards. Future-oriented energy and transport mixes were also included as an additional scenario, systematically modifying both the foreground and background data. Finally, the industrially scaled-up technology and alternative insulation materials were compared with these future conditions (as applied to both materials). Results and discussion Considering climate change, the results are encouraging in comparison to those for traditional plastic insulation, but do not necessarily surpass those for other existing materials such as rock wool. However, trade-offs are observed in other indicators, for which mycelium-based composites tend to perform worse than traditional insulation materials. The industrial scale-up reduced impacts for most indicators, but a considerable trade-off was observed with regard to terrestrial ecotoxicity. The main driver for the remaining greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions was found to be the electricity use during the manufacturing phase. We consider the inclusion of the other life cycle stages as relevant, as this increased the GHG emissions by 10%. Limitations of the current LCA standards, however, are noted and discussed, especially regarding the cascading use of biogenic materials, and highlight the relevance of this case study. Conclusions Mycelium-based composites show a potential for future development, but careful attention should be paid to reducing electricity needs in their manufacturing process. Further improvements could also be made by using fast-growing biogenic materials as a substrate. In particular, we encourage researchers to include all of the life cycle stages in future studies, especially if biogenic emissions are considered.

Purpose In a world where the population is expected to peak at around 9 billion people in the next 30 to 40 years, carefully managing our finite natural resources is becoming critical. We must abandon the outdated ‘take, make, consume and dispose’ mentality and move toward a circular economy model for optimal resource efficiency. Products must be designed for reuse and remanufacturing, which would reduce significant costs in terms of energy and natural resources. Methods To measure progress in achieving a circular economy, we need a life cycle approach that measures the social, economic and environmental impact of a product throughout its full life cycle—from raw material extraction to end-of-life (EoL) recycling or disposal. Life cycle thinking must become a key requirement for all manufacturing decisions, ensuring that the most appropriate material is chosen for the specific application, considering all aspects of a products’ life. The steel industry has been developing LCI data for 20 years. This is used to assess a product’s environmental performance from steel production to steel recycling at end-of-life. The steel industry has developed a methodology to show the benefits of using recycled steel to make new products. Using recycled materials also carries an embodied burden that should be considered when undertaking a full LCA. Results and discussion The recycling methodology is in accordance with ISO 14040/44:2006 and considers the environmental burden of using steel scrap and the benefit of scrap recycling from end-of-life products. It considers the recycling of scrap into new steel as closed material loop recycling, and thus, recycling steel scrap avoids the production of primary steel. The methodology developed shows that for every 1 kg of steel scrap that is recycled at the end of the products life, a saving of 1.5 kg CO 2 -e emissions, 13.4 MJ primary energy and 1.4 kg iron ore can be achieved. This equates to 73, 64 and 90 %, respectively, when compared to 100 % primary production. Conclusions Incorporating this recycling methodology into a full LCA demonstrates how the steel industry is an integral part of the circular economy model which promotes zero waste; a reduction in the amount of materials used and encourages the reuse and recycling of materials.

Amid COVID-19, there have been rampant increase in the use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) kits by frontline health and sanitation communities, to reduce the likelihoods of infections. The used PPE kits, potentially being infectious, pose a threat to human health, terrestrial, and marine ecosystems, if not scientifically handled and disposed. However, with stressed resources on treatment facilities and lack of training to the health and sanitation workers, it becomes vital to vet different options for PPE kits disposal, to promote environmentally sound management of waste. Given the various technology options available for treatment and disposal of COVID-19 patients waste, Life Cycle Assessment, i.e., cradle to grave analysis of PPE provides essential guidance in identifying the environmentally sound alternatives. In the present work, Life Cycle Assessment of PPE kits has been performed using GaBi version 8.7 under two disposal scenarios, namely landfill and incineration (both centralized and decentralized) for six environmental impact categories covering overall impacts on both terrestrial and marine ecosystems, which includes Global Warming Potential (GWP), Human Toxicity Potential (HTP), Eutrophication Potential (EP), Acidification Potential (AP), Freshwater Aquatic Ecotoxicity Potential (FAETP) and Photochemical Ozone Depletion Potential (POCP). Considering the inventories of PPE kits, disposal of PPE bodysuit has the maximum impact, followed by gloves and goggles, in terms of GWP. The use of metal strips in face-mask has shown the most significant HTP impact. The incineration process (centralized−3816 kg CO2 eq. and decentralized−3813 kg CO2 eq.) showed high GWP but significantly reduced impact w.r.t. AP, EP, FAETP, POCP and HTP, when compared to disposal in a landfill, resulting in the high overall impact of landfill disposal compared to incineration. The decentralized incineration has emerged as environmentally sound management option compared to centralized incinerator among all the impact categories, also the environmental impact by transportation is significant (2.76 kg CO2 eq.) and cannot be neglected for long-distance transportation. Present findings can help the regulatory authority to delineate action steps for safe disposal of PPE kits.

A massive increase in the use and production of masks worldwide has been seen in the current COVID-19 pandemic, which has contributed to reducing the transmission of the virus globally. This paper aims to evaluate the life cycle environmental impacts of disposable medical masks to identify the life cycle stages that cause the highest impact on the environment. A further goal is to estimate the total environmental impacts at the global level in 2020. The inventory data was constructed directly from the industry. The system boundary of the study is from cradle to grave comprising raw material extraction and processing, production, packaging, distribution, use, and disposal as well as transport and waste management along the supply chain. Eleven environmental impacts have been estimated. The results suggest that the global warming potential of a disposable medical mask is 0.02 g CO 2 -eq. for which the main contributor is the raw material supply (40.5%) followed by the packaging (30.0%) and production (15.5%). Sensitivity analysis was carried out to test the environmental impacts. In total, 52 billion disposable medical masks used worldwide consumes 22 TJ of energy in 2020. The global warming potential of disposable medical masks supplied in a year of the COVID-19 pandemic is 1.1 Mt CO 2 eq. This paper assessed the hotspots in the medical mask. The findings of this study will be of interest to policymakers, global mask manufacturers, and users, allowing them to make more informed decisions about the medical mask industry. Graphical abstract

PurposeProducing biochar from forest residues can help resolve environmental issues by reducing forest fires and mitigating climate change. However, transportation and storage of biomass to a centralized facility are often cost-prohibitive and a major hurdle for the economic feasibility of producing biobased products, including biochar. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the environmental impacts and economic feasibility of manufacturing biochar from forest residues with small-scale portable production systems.MethodsThis study evaluated the environmental performance and economic feasibility of biochar produced through three portable systems (biochar solutions incorporated (BSI), Oregon Kiln (OK), and air curtain burner (ACB)) using forest residues in the United States (US). Cradle-to-grave life-cycle assessment (LCA) and techno-economic analysis (TEA) were used to quantify environmental impacts and minimal selling price (MSP) of biochar respectively considering different power sources, production sites, and feedstock qualities.Results and discussionsThe results illustrated that the global warming (GW) impact of biochar production through BSI, OK, and ACB was 0.25–1.0, 0.55, and 0.61-t CO2eq/t biochar applied to the field, respectively. Considering carbon-sequestration, 1-t of biochar produced with the portable system at a near-forest site and applied to the field reduced the GW impact by 0.89–2.6 t CO2eq. For biochar production, the environmental performance of the BSI system improved substantially (60–70%) when it was powered by a gasifier-based generator instead of a diesel generator. Similarly, near-forest(off-grid) biochar production operations performed better environmentally than the operations at in-town sites due to the reduction in the forest residues transportation emissions. Overall, the net GW impact of biochar produced from forest residues can reduce environmental impacts (i.e., 1–10 times lower CO2eq emissions) compared with slash-pile burning. The MSP per tonne of biochar produced through BSI, OK, and ACB was $3,000–$5,000, $1,600, and $580 respectively considering 100 working days per year. However, with improved BSI systems when allowed to operate throughout the year, the MSP can be reduced to below $1000/t of biochar. Furthermore, considering current government grants and subsidies (i.e.,$12,600/ha for making biochar production from forest residues), the MSP of biochar can be reduced substantially (30–387%) depending on the type of portable system used.ConclusionThe portable small-scale production systems could be environmentally beneficial and economically feasible options to make biochar from forest residues at competitive prices given current government incentives in the US where excess forest biomass and forest residues left in the forest increase the risk of forest fires.