Future of Bioplastics

Transcription

1 3rd International PLASTiCE Conference Future of Bioplastics October 1-2 nd 2013, Warsaw, Poland COBRO Packaging Research Institute Konstancińska 11 Street, Warsaw Poland Projekt współfinansowany jest ze środków Unii Europejskiej - Europejskiego Funduszu Rozwoju Regionalnego w ramach Programu dla Europy Środkowej, 3CE368P1, This project is implemented through the CENTRAL EUROPE Programme and co-financed by the ERDF

2 Plastice project Life cycle assessment of grocery bags Opportunity of biodegradable plastics? Mitja Mori

3 Agenda 1.The scope of the study and methodology and boundary conditions a. Basic materials b. Transport c. Production processes d. Waste management 5. Gabi 5 numerical models used in the study and analysis and recommendations 9. Basic measures 2

4 1. The scope and target audience The goal and the scope of the study 3 plastic grocery bags (LDPE as basic bag) LCA methodology from CRADLE to GRAVE Environmental impact - environmental indicators Life cycle of bags basic scenarios Variations in the end of life phase (waste management) Target audience: Bags producers Customers Waste management companies Policy 3

5 of the study Functional unit: 1 grocery bag LCA methodology: Gabi 6 From cradle to grave 4

6 and boundary conditions Cut of criteria: Process / Materials Production materials TiO2, inks & dies Storehouse activity Transport: store - customers Industrial power plants Auxiliary materials Human labor Auxiliary activities 5 Simple scheme of LCA model

7 basic materials 6

8 4. Materials: PP vs. LDPE vs. Mater-BI 1 kg of virgin granulate From cradle to door Mater-BI seems competitive: Less energy demand Additional absorption of CO 2 -> GWP = 0,93 More water consumption: agriculture

9 production processes Electricity consumption in production process of LDPE bag, source: Plasta d.o.o. 8

10 transport (LDPE, Mater-BI) 9

11 transport (PP-Life) 10

12 End Life Scenarios Mechanical recycling: 50 % share: LDPE, PP-Life 0 % share: Mater-BI Include: Transport (recyclate) El. energy consumption Grinding of recyclate source: Plasta d.o.o., Vietnam, literature 11

13 End Life Scenarios Landfill of municipal solid waste, EU 27 The use of landfill gas environmental credits: Electrical energy production Question!: How many landfills have this installed? Mass: 43 % of grocery bags to landfill (EU27 data) 12

14 End Life Scenarios Waste incineration, EU 27 Plastics, paper, municipal waste, biodegradable waste fraction Environmental credits: Heat Electricity Mass: 7 % of grocery bags to incineration (EU27 data) 13

15 End Life Scenarios Industrial composting (source: literature) Additional burdens: Transport: diesel fuel Diesel/Electricity consumption in composting process: Grinding & Air supply CO 2 in NH3 emissions NO environmental credits as in the case of landfill/incineration NOT suitable for agricultural Opportunity: Credits the case of HOME compost (Mater-BI)! 14

16 : Mater-BI base case 15

17 : PP-Life base case 16

18 : LDPE base case 17

19 6. Environmental indicators (CML 2001) Global warming potential (100 years), GWP / kg CO2-eq Abiotic Depletion, ADP elements / kg Sb-eq Acidification Potential, AP / kg SO2-eq Eutrophication Potential, EP / kg PO4-eq Ozone Layer Depletion Potential, ODP steady state / kg R11-eq Photochem. Ozone Creation Potential, POCP / kg Eten-eq Primary energy demand from ren. and non ren. resources, MJ Global warming potential (GWP) for greenhouse gases 18

20 GWP / kgco2-eq. : GWP, 1 bag - functional unit 3,0E-01 2,5E-01 2,0E-01 0,2978 waste management transport manufacturing material ABSOLUTE VALUE 1 bag Different masses 1,5E-01 Base scenarios 1,0E-01 5,0E-02 0,0224 0,0406 Industrial composting 0,0E+00 LDPE PP-Life Mater-BI RELATIVE CONTRIBUTION Granulate production Bag manufacturing Waste management Transport 100% 9% 6% 2% 15% 34% 80% 24% 3% 38% 60% 19% 40% 66% 41% 45% 20% 0% LDPE PP-Life Mater-BI 19

21 GWP / kgco2-eq. : Break-even analysis (LDPE as base) Primary reuse of PP-Life & Mater-BI bag till GWP drops below GWP of LDPE bag 2,5E-02 0,0224 0,0213 0,0203 2,0E-02 1,5E-02 1,0E-02 5,0E-03 0,0E+00 waste management transport manufacturing material 14x primary reuse of PP-Life 2x primary reuse of Mater-BI LDPE, 1x PP-Life, 14x Mater-BI, 2x

22 The share / % : Environmental indicators (Mater BI) 90% 0% 4% 1% 1% 3% 3% 12% 34% 0% 1% 1% 4% 70% 3% 50% 100% 83% 93% 19% 99% 96% 30% 45% 10% -10% 0% ADP elements [kg Sb- Equiv.] AP [kg SO2-Equiv.] EP [kg Phosphate- Equiv.] GWP 100 years [kg CO2-Equiv.] ODP, steady state [kg R11-Equiv.] Waste management Transport Manufacturing Materials -2% POCP [kg Ethene- Equiv.] Relative contribution of life cycle phases for Mater-BI bag

23 Share / % : Environmental indicators (PP-Life) 90% 9% 5% 6% 4% 4% 15% 20% 41% 70% 60% 59% 38% 50% 79% 17% 30% 20% 10% 72% 41% 43% 10% -10% 14% 22% -2% -1% ADP elements [kg Sb- Equiv.] AP [kg SO2-Equiv.] 26% EP [kg Phosphate- Equiv.] GWP 100 years [kg CO2-Equiv.] ODP, steady state [kg R11-Equiv.] Waste management Transport Manufacturing Materials -1% POCP [kg Ethene- Equiv.] Relative contribution of life cycle phases for PP-Life bag

24 Share / % : Environmental indicators (LDPE) 90% 1% 2% 38% 25% 19% 4% 9% 8% 2% 0% 5% 14% 24% 70% 21% 50% 30% 66% 77% 57% 66% 87% 91% 10% -10% -5% -4% ADP elements [kg Sb- Equiv.] AP [kg SO2-Equiv.] EP [kg Phosphate- Equiv.] GWP 100 years [kg CO2-Equiv.] ODP, steady state [kg R11-Equiv.] Waste management Transport Manufacturing Materials -4% -2% POCP [kg Ethene- Equiv.] Relative contribution of life cycle phases for LDPE bag

25 : Indicators for 1 bag Mass influence: 14,8 g 127 g 20,2 g Mater-BI vs. LDPE bag: Mater-BI inferior to LDPE 37 % more mass of granulate Influence of industry composting (relatively 34 %): NO credits, Energy consumption (electricity, diesel)

26 : Mass equality - 20 g Theoretical approach; Equality / Competitiveness of Mater-BI bag! Opportunity Implementation of agricultural composting credits! 34 % of overall burden (GWP) comes from industry composting

27 GWP / kgco2-eq. : GWP of Mater-BI (potential) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 9% 6% 4% 1% 2% 15% 28% 24% 38% 66% 67% 41% NO industrial composting influence. Equal to LDPE! 0% LDPE PP-Life Mater-BI 3,0E-01 2,5E-01 0,2978 ravnanje z odpadki transport proizvodnja material 2,0E-01 1,5E-01 1,0E-01 5,0E-02 0,0224 0,0269 0,0E+00 LDPE PP-Life Mater-BI 26

28 : Primary & Secondary REUSE Primary REUSE (All bags) As many as possible. Proportional reduction of environmental burdens. Secondary reuse (LDPE, Mater-BI) As bin linears Separate LCA model Same manufacturing process 50 % material mass 1x use end life: landfill of municipal waste REDUCTION of environ. burdens in average for 40 % LDPE REDUCTION of environ. burdens in average for 46 % Mater-BI

29 : Waste management scenarios All scenario analysis are done as comparison to base scenario.

30 : Waste management scenario LDPE Mechanical recycling lowers burdens significantly Landfill all indicators are worse (not GWP? Why: time) Incineration: all indicators are better Why? (credits) GWP excluded reason? (emissions)

31 : Waste management scenario Mater-BI BASE industrial composting Landfill - Credits are included (electricity) - Some indicators are worsen, some stay the same Incineration - Credits are included (electricity, heat) - In the range of industrial composting

32 : Actual bags consumption in Slovenia (9,2 bags/month household) 5 years life expectancy of long life PP bag Superiority of PP-Life: x differnece in most indicators

33 MANUFACTURERS! Enlarge the share of recyclate Energetic efficiency of manufacturing : Less electricity; Heat consumption; CONSUMERS: Which bag to pick?? PP Life advantages: 14x primary reuse reaches the GWP of LDPE In 5 years (lifetime) 41x less GWP of LDPE

34 CONSUMERS: REUSE! Primary: proportional reduction of burdens Secondary: reduction of burdens in both cases more for LDPE, bit less for Mater-BI! CONSUMERS: How to properly dispose the bag? LDPE & PP-Life: yellow litter bin!! Mater-BI: 1st alternative = home compost avoid fertilizers production reduction of burdens 2st alternative = brown litter bin (industrial comp.) NOT IN YELLOW LITTER BIN!

35 CONSUMERS Inappropriate waste management! LDPE in black linear bin: 7 % incensement of burdens PP-Life black linear bin: 3 % incensement of burdens Mater-BI in black linear bin: GWP +13 %, 0 % < others < +49 %

36 9. Basic recommendations: 3R

37 10. Further research 1. Exclude all environmental credits: - Landfill - Incineration 2. Compare Mater-BI with PLA: Polylactic acid (PLA) (based on literature, modified PE) next steps

38 Relativity of results 140 m 1 LDPE bag in whole LIFE CYCLE = 140 m average car drive