Bio-based plastics and nanostructured polymers as promising options for reducing energy use and related environmental impacts

Transcription

1 Bio-based plastics and nanostructured polymers as promising options for reducing energy use and related environmental impacts Conférence de l Institut pour l Environnement de l École Polytechnique, Paris, 21 mars 2011 Dr. Martin Patel Utrecht University, Department of Science, Technology and Society (STS) /, Utrecht, Netherlands Tel.: , Fax , m.k.patel@uu.nl

2 Contents Introduction Nano Bio Energy and climate perspective

3 Contents Introduction Nano Bio Energy and climate perspective

4 Production of bulk materials in Europe (EU-27, 2004; 920 million t) Plastics 6% (60 Mt) Wood 10% (90 Mt) Aluminum 1% (9 Mt) Bricks & Tiles 21% (190 Mt) Paper & board 11% (100 Mt) Glass 4% (30 Mt) Crude steel 22% (200 Mt) Cement 25% (240 Mt) Shen, L.; Haufe, J.; Patel, M. K.: PRO-BIP Report Product overview and market projection of emerging bio-based plastics.

5 Energy for producing bulk materials Non-renewable energy use (NREU), cradle-to-factory gate, GJ/t Cement 3-6 Steel - Primary Secondary Paper/board Plastics*) <70 - >85 Glass 6-8 Aluminium - Primary Secondary 25 *) Examples: HDPE: 77 LDPE: 78 LLDPE: 73 PP: 73 PET: 81 PS: 86 PVC: 56 PA: Sources: various; for plastics: PlasticsEurope, see

6 Energy use by the industrial sector OECD, Total Million tonnes of oil equivalents (Mtoe) Process energy Feedstock Chem. & pchem. Iron & steel Paper, pulp, printing Fossil fuels - Process energy and Feedstocks Primary energy equivalents*) Non-metallic minerals Non-ferrous metals All others *) Including primary energy equivalents of electricity; assumed efficiency of power generation: 35% Source: Energy Balances of OECD Countries 2006, IEA/OECD, Paris, 2008

7 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) resource extraction, manufacture, use, final disposal Image from

8 Contents Introduction Nano Bio

9 Contents Introduction Nano - Energy use for making nanoobjects - Methodology - Case studies - Conclusions Bio

10 Is nano worthwhile? Adding nanofillers to polymers Improved material properties But: possibly higher environmental impacts Tradeoff? (worthwhile?)

11 Making nanoobjects: Energy use and GHG Nanoobjects NREU**) (MJ/kg) GWP 100 ***) (kg CO 2 -eq/kg) Organophilic montmorillonite Silica*) SWNT MWNT *) Including the following silica nanoobjects: silica sol, silica gel, precipitated silica, pyrogenic silica **) NREU = Non-renewable energy use = fossil + nuclear energy, here cradle-to-factory gate ***) GWP = Global Warming Potential, 100 years timeframe Roes, A. L. et al.: Influence of using nanoobjects as filler on functionality-based energy use of nanocomposites. Accepted for publication in J Nanopart Res.

12 Functional unit 1 kg as functional unit is insufficient Account for improved material properties, i.e. simultaneously take into account material properties AND environmental impact

13 Ashby s material indices Type of loading Material index MI for minimal weight design Stiffness Strength E/ρ σ f /ρ E 1/2 /ρ σ f /ρ E 1/2 /ρ σ f 2/3 /ρ Plate F E 1/3 /ρ σ f 1/2 /ρ F Plate F E 1/3 /ρ σ f /ρ Source: M.F. Ashby

14 Stiffness-limited design at minimum mass E 1/3 /ρ Source: M.F. Ashby

15 Polymer nanocomposites for structural applications Functionality based NREU of panels with stiffness-limited design Two ways of application a) For a concrete product b) As indicator: Functionality based environmental impact = Environmental impact Material quality index Roes, A. L.; Marsili, E.; Nieuwlaar, E.; Patel, M. K.: Environmental and cost assessment of a polypropylene nanocomposite. Journal of Polymers and the Environment 15 (2007), pp with Environmental impact = Non-renewable energy use (NREU) and with Material quality index = MI panel = E 1/3 /ρ for stiffness-limited design (acc. to M.F Ashby, Univ. of Cambridge)

16 Polymer nanocomposites for structural applications Functionallity based NREU (NREU/MIpanel) PP-MMT TPS-MMT Stiffness limited design, MI panel = E 1/3 /ρ Functionality based NREU of panels with stiffness-limited design PC-MMT NREU (MJ/kg), E (MPa), ρ (kg/l) PTT-MMT HDPE-MMT LLDPE-MMT PHB-MMT 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Filler content (wt%) Functionality based environmental impact = Environmental impact Material quality index PHB-BGS PP-GF Roes, A. L. et al.: Influence of using nanoobjects as filler on functionality-based energy use of nanocomposites. J. Nanopart Res., Volume 12, Issue 6, 2010, pp

17 Nanocomposites for structural applications (2/3) Functionality based NREU (NREU/MI panel ) PS-SWNT Stiffness limited design, MI panel = E 1/3 /ρ NREU (MJ/kg), E (MPa), ρ (kg/l) PCL-MMT LDPE-MMT PU-MMT Ep-Si XLDPE-MMT 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Filler content (wt%) Roes, A. L. et al.: Influence of using nanoobjects as filler on functionality-based energy use of nanocomposites. J. Nanopart Res., Volume 12, Issue 6, 2010, pp

18 Nanocomposites for structural applications (3/3) Functionality based NREU (NREU/MI panel ) Stiffness limited design, MI panel = E 1/3 /ρ NREU (MJ/kg), E (MPa), ρ (kg/l) PET-MMT Nylon 66-MMT 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% Filler content (wt%) Nylon 6-MMT PLA-MMT PLA-Si Roes, A. L. et al.: Influence of using nanoobjects as filler on functionality-based energy use of nanocomposites. J. Nanopart Res., Volume 12, Issue 6, 2010, pp

19 Conclusions on polymer nanocomposites In best cases: NREU decreases by 3-6% per % nanofiller In most cases worthwhile: Benefits from material savings overcompensate the impacts related to producing and inserting the nanoparticles. Overall savings may be in the order of 20% NREU. Health and environmental aspects of free nanoparticles remain to be studied!

20 Contents Introduction Nano Bio - Methodological foundations - Allocation as methodological challenge - Case studies - Conclusions

21 Foundations and recent developments (1/2) ISO & Life cycle assessment framework Goal & scope definition Inventory analysis Impact assessment Interpretation Direct applications Product development & innovation Strategic planning Public policy making Other New: * ISO (Principles & Framework) * ISO (Requirements & Guidelines) Old: ISO 14040, 14041, and 14043

22 Bio-based carbon Two alternative approaches Method 1: Consider bio-based carbon as neutral w.r.t. global warming Method 2: Consider carbon sequestration

23 Bio-based carbon Method 2: Consider carbon sequestration CO 2 release CO 2 uptake from atmosphere

24 What is allocation? 1 tonne chemical A Process 0.2 tonnes chemical B 16 GJ fuels Relevant options 50 GJ power 150 GJ fuels a) Partitioning: Mass Economic value Energy content (calorific value) b) System expansion: Credits for chemical B and for power

25 Allocation acc. to ISO ISO 14044: Environmental management Life cycle assessment Requirements and guidelines Allocation procedure The study shall identify the processes shared with other product systems and deal with them according to the stepwise procedure presented below. a) Step 1: Wherever possible, allocation should be avoided by 1) dividing the unit process to be allocated into two or more subprocesses and collecting the input and output data related to these sub-processes, or 2) expanding the product system to include the additional functions related to the co-products, taking into account the requirements of b), c): Step2 & 3: Allocation

26 Allocation acc. to the Biofuels Directive DIRECTIVE 2009/28/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC Co-products from the production and use of fuels should be taken into account in the calculation of greenhouse gas emissions. The substitution method [= system expansion] is appropriate for the purposes of policy analysis, but not for the regulation of individual economic operators and individual consignments of transport fuels. In those cases the energy allocation method is the most appropriate method, as it is easy to apply, is predictable over time, minimises counter-productive incentives and produces results that are generally comparable with those produced by the substitution method. For the purposes of policy analysis the Commission should also, in its reporting, present results using the substitution method.

27 BREW project White Biotechnology - Environmental attractiveness All products from maize starch Non-renewable energy use (NREU, cradle-to-factory gate) 90% 80% Savings of cradle-to-factory gate NREU in % (bio-based Energy compared savings to petrochemical) in % *) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% -10% -20% -30% 1 TODAY 2 FUTURE 3 Adipic acid Succinic acid Acrylic acid PDO ABE Caprolactam PLA PTT Ethyl lactate Ethanol Acetic acid Ethylene *) Savings of cradle-to-factory gate non-renewable energy compared to petrochemical Hermann, B.G.; Blok, K. and Patel, M. K.; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, pp

28 Non-renewable energy use (cradle-to-factory gate) for White Biotechnology products and other bio-based products versus petrochemical products 120% max. value: 130% max. value: 150% Savings Savings of cradle-to-factory of non-renewable gate NREU in % (bio-based energy compared in to petrochemical) % *) **) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% Cellulose fibres Overall Sugar cane Overall Lignocell. Overall Maize starch 0% 1 TODAY 2 FUTURE 3 *) Without acetic acid and adipic acid. Ranges indicate values for individual products (not average values). **) Savings of cradle-to-factory gate non-renewable energy compared to petrochemical Source: Several UU studies, among them BREW

29 Bio-based materials for Outer packaging films Cradle-to-grave: incineration with energy recovery 5a) PE 5b) Bio-based PE 5c) Bio-based PE 6) OPP 7) PLA 8a) Cellulose 8b) Cellulose 9a) Paper / OPP 9b) Paper / PLA 9c) Paper / PLA 9d) Paper / PE 9e) Paper / BBP 9f) Paper / BBP 9g) Paper / BBP 9h) Paper / EVA Hermann et al., Int J Life Cycle Assess (2010) 15, pp

30 Bio-based materials for high-barrier food packaging films Global warming potential of Inner Packs including wind credits and future technology for PLA film production; cradle-to-grave: incineration with energy recovery 1a) OPP / PE / MOPP 1b) OPP / PE / MOPP 2a) Paper / PE / MOPP 2b) Cellulose / PE / MOPP 2c) PLA / PE / MOPP 3a) MPLA / PLA / PLA 3b) PLA / AlOx coated PLA 3c) PLA / SiOx coated PLA 3d) 2 x PLA SiOx coated 3e) MPLA / MPLA 4a) Paper / SiOx coated PLA / PLA 4b) Paper / Alu / PLA 4c) Paper / MPET / PPpeelable 4d) Paper / MPET / PEpeelable Hermann et al., Int J Life Cycle Assess (2010) 15, pp

31 Conclusions on bio-based chemicals/polymers Important opportunities for reducing environmental impacts (esp. NREU and GHG) Substantial differences across bio-based polymers and final products Some drawbacks still not fully understood (soil, toxicity of agricultural chain; DLUC and ILUC) Methodological & data challenges (allocation; bio-based carbon sequestration; feedstock data) Challenges: Maximize (environmental) benefits - per tonne of plastic or per hectare of land (?) - by optimal portfolio of bio-based polymers (mat. properties) - by closing loops by reuse and recycling - by avoidance of excessive material use

32 Acknowledgements/Selected publications 1. Roes, A. L.; Tabak, L. B.; Shen, L.; Nieuwlaar, E.; Patel, M.K.: Influence of using nanoobjects as filler on functionality-based energy use of nanocomposites. J Nanopart Res., Volume 12, Issue 6, 2010, pp Roes, A. L.; Alsema, E. A.; Blok, K.; Patel M. K.: Ex-ante Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Polymer Photovoltaics. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 2009; 17, pp Patel, M. K. et al.: Medium and long-term opportunities and risks of the biotechnological production of bulk chemicals from renewable resources - The BREW Project, Utrecht University, ) 4. Hermann, B.G.; Blok, K.; Patel, M. K. : Twisting biomaterials around your little finger: environmental impacts from bio-based wrappings. Forthcoming 5. Shen, L.; Worrell, E.; Patel, M. K.: Environmental impact assessment of man-made cellulose fibers. Forthcoming 6. Hermann, B.G.; Blok, K. and Patel, M. K.: Producing bio-based bulk chemicals using industrial biotechnology saves energy and combats climate change. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, pp Hermann, B.G.; Blok, K. and Patel, M.: Today s and tomorrow s bio-based bulk chemicals from industrial biotechnology A techno-economic analysis. Appl. Biochem. & Biotech., Vol. 136 (2007), pp Shen, L.; Patel, M. K.: Life cycle assessment of polysaccharide materials: A review. Journal of Polymers and the Environment 16 (2008), pp Ren T., Patel M. K.: Basic petrochemicals from natural gas, coal and biomass: Energy use and CO 2 emissions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 53 (2009), pp Ren T., Daniels B., Patel M. K., Blok K.: Petrochemicals from oil, natural gas, coal and biomass: Production costs in Resources, Conservation and Recycling 53 (2009), pp Gielen, D.; Newman, J.; Patel, M. K.: Reducing Industrial Energy Use and CO2 Emissions: The Role of Copernicus Materials Institute Science. In: MRS Bulletin April 2008 Issue entitled "Harnessing Materials for Energy MRS Bull., Vol. 33, No. 4 (April 2008), pp