lca hdpe boca

7/25/2019 lca hdpe boca

1/66

Life Cycle Assessment

a short smart guide


2/66

What is a product life-cycle?


3/66

Life-cycle assessment

Human activity

Products

Energy

Raw materials

Wastes and

emissions


4/66

Why do life-cycle assessment?

Apply the most appropriate pollutionprevention and/or abatement techniques

Develop and utilize cleaner technologies

Maximize recycling of materials and waste

Conserve non-renewable resources andecological systems

Minimize the pollution


5/66

How can I use LCA?

Manufacturers

Product improvement

Product comparison

Product development


6/66

How can I use LCA?

Public policymakers

Environmental labeling


7/66

Steps in LCA

1) GOAL AND SCOPE

2) LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY (LCI)

3) LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4) INTERPRETATION


8/66

LCA OF PACKAGING SYSTEM FOR MILKUK MARKET ANALYSIS

14 billion litres/year of raw milk6 billion processed into

liquid milk


9/66

LCA OF PACKAGING SYSTEM FOR MILK

1) GOAL AND SCOPE: to assess the potential environmental impact ofdifferent milk container for pasteurised milk

(UK market)

HDPE bottles

PET bottles

Pillow pouches and serving jug

Stand-up pouches

Cartons with screwcap

Gable-top cartons


10/66

FUNCTIONS OF THE PRODUCT SYSTEM

Primary functions:

Containment of a certain quantity of productPreservation and protectionStorage

Enabling loading and transport

Secondary functions:

Information

Image/promotionGuaranteeConsumer satisfaction


11/66

FUNCTIONAL UNIT

The functional unit for this study is typical packaging system for

containing, protecting, storing and transporting 1000 pints of pasteurisedmilk to the consumer in the UK

In the market


12/66

ANALYSIS OF MILK PACKAGING SYSTEM


13/66

SYSTEM BOUNDARIES


14/66

SYSTEM BOUNDARIES:Different waste management options


15/66

ALLOCATION

The designation of environmental loads between different parts of a system

1) divide contribution of milk andpackaging during handling

2) divide contribution of milk andother groceries duringtransportation

Example


16/66

ALLOCATION OF SECONDARY PRODUCT ANDRECYCLE

Avoided Burdens Approach


17/66

CRITICAL POINTS

How to consider the no closed loop recycling? What is the actual fate of the packaging? Consider a best case scenario PET production changes from small to high quantities

Missing data for label and seal of secondary packaging, filling process Different sources for transportation data Current waste treatment is a mix of the four ones considered in the study

It is not a comparative assessment!!!CHANGED THE GOAL AND SCOPE?? YES IT IS!!


18/66

INVENTORY ANALYSES

Identification and quantification of relevant inputs and outputs

Raw material

Water

Non renewable CO2 emissions

CH4 emissions

Energy


19/66

HDPE BOTTLESMaterial analysis

Bottle - HDPE

Cap - HDPE

Seal polyolefin foam

aluminium, PET

Label - LDPE


20/66

Material analysis


21/66

System boundaries for the HDPE bottle system


22/66

Summary life cycle inventory


23/66

IMPACT ASSESSMENTChoice of impact categories

1. Abiotic resource depletion

2. Climate change

3. Photo-oxidant formation

4. Eutrophication

5. Acidification

6. Human toxicity

7. Acquatic eco-toxicity


24/66

IMPACT ASSESSMENT RESULTS HDPE


25/66

IMPACT ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS


26/66



27/66



28/66

INTERPRETATION

1. For plastic bottles the most important environmental load is production

stage

2. For pouches the most important environmental load is distributionpackagin production

3. For the cartons the most important environmental load is laminate

production

4. Hierarchy: 1minimisation (lightweighting), 2Rec ycling, 3energyrecovery, 4disposal in landfill

5. Bottles to bottles or simply recycling?


29/66

CONCLUSION

1. For HDPE bottles the most important environmental load isproduction and associated raw material extraction

2. Recycling is the best option as waste managment options.

3. Lightweighting the bottle by 10% shows fewr potential environmentalimpacts for all impact categories (es. for climate change and abioticresource depletion 5,7% and 7,2% less respectively)

4. Although recycled and lightweighting have been considered

separately, they are not mutually exclusive

LIGHTWEIGHTING

RECYCLING+

MINIMISATION


30/66

WASTE MANAGEMENT


31/66

,

,

.

WHAT IS IT?

E ,

,

.


32/66

!

F

C


33/66

!


34/66

80 /!

156 / ()


35/66


36/66

, , 2010

, 2010

(2008 , 2008 )


37/66

E(2010)


38/66

, , 2010

, 2010

(2008 , 2008 )


39/66

, E15, 2008


40/66

EUROPEAN WASTE HIERARCHY

EU Waste Directive 2008/98/CE

PREVENTION


41/66

PREVENTION

,

EE

.

A, EE

AE AAGEE


42/66


43/66

.

C2


44/66

the negative impacts of the waste product on the environmentand human health

(Reduction of weight)

BDEGADABE


45/66

B : C2,

.


46/66

C

,

, .

.


47/66

E


48/66

RECOVERY PREPARING FOR RE-USE

PREPARING FOR RE-USE


49/66

,

.

ECE

(

, )


50/66


51/66


52/66

()


53/66

RECOVERY RECYCLING

RECYCLING


54/66

C

,

.

.

.

HE E F ECCG A AE!


55/66

B

.

A,

.

, ,

, ,

.


56/66


57/66

G

G

C


58/66

RECOVERY OTHER RECOVERY

OTHER RECOVERY


59/66

.

.

,

AE EEG

(

)

HEA EAE

G

.

INCINERATION


60/66

(,

, .), .

(2030%

);

, , .

(1925%), .

INCINERATION


61/66

PYROLISIS and GASIFICATION


62/66

( 400 1200C ).

PYROLISIS and GASIFICATION

EEG ( )

2 2

H

DISPOSAL


63/66

DISPOSAL

DISPOSAL


64/66

,

B

(.. )

(

,

)

(

;

, ,

).

SUMMING UP


65/66


66/66

THANK YOU!

lca hdpe boca

Documents

Transcript of lca hdpe boca