38 th WFK International Detergency Conference Frefeld 1998 Life Cycle Inventory on laundry detergents: An analysis of LCI profiles of liquids and powder detergents. E. Saouter 1, G. Van Hoof 1, T. Feijtel 1, M. Stalmans 1, J.C. Uhl 2 L. H. M. Vollebergt 3 and J. Westra 3 1. Procter and Gamble, Eurocor, Temselaan 1, B-1853 Strombeek-Bever, Belgium 2. Procter and Gamble European Service GmbH, Schwalbach, Germany. 3. Chemiewinkel. Consultancy and Research Center on Chemistry, Occupational Health and Environment. Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, 118 WV Amsterdam 1
Objectives Get an overview of energy consumption and environmental emissions associated with production, use and disposal of P&G compact liquid and compact powder laundry detergents on a country basis. Identify major contributing phases in the detergent LCI for improvement opportunities. Get accurate evaluation of the effect of product design and consumer habits on the environmental profile of a product. 2
Main Flow-Chart Transportation Transportation Production Manufacture Use phase Disposal Making of the ingredient Making of the final detergent Use of the detergent in washing machine Treatment of the grey water 3
Detailed Flow-Chart Virgin material Recycled material Surfactant 1 Surfactant 2 Surfactant 3 Builder 1 Step Production of ingredients Refill system 1 Dosage/wash Packaging sludge Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Formulation Product use Product disposal Builder 2 Bleach activator Pre-wash Wash 4 C Water emissions No treatment Bleach Wash 6 C Primary treatment Enzyme Wash 9 C Secondary treatment Perfume Tertiary treatment 1: Packaging inv entory data are not yet integrated into the SIMAPRO system 4
Data collection Energy + raw materials consumption Air Emissions CO Ox NO Ox So Ox VOICE etc.. Process 1 Waterborne Emissions BO COD Metals Suspended particles etc.. Solid Emissions Sludge Solid waste 5
Databases and modules within SIMAPRO 4. Phase Scale In SIMAPRO 4. - Production of ingredients - Formulation of products - Washing habits - Energy/washing machines - Wastewater treatment (% of connection) - Ingredient removal - Energy WWTP Supplier Manufacturer Use Use WWTP WWTP WWTP European European Country Country Country Country Country Excel spreadsheet - Transportation - Packaging Transportation Packaging European Country 6
Databases used Surfactants: Stalmans et al. 1995 Builders: Landbank 1994, EMPA 1997, FAL 1992. Polymers: Landbank 1994, FAL 1992. Bleaches: EMPA (1998? to be published). Proteases: Kluppel et al. 1995, Schmidt 1996. Brighteners: Ciba Geigy 1997. Formulation: Franke et al. 1995. Washing machines: Group for Efficient Appliances, Moller 1995 Wastewater treatment: European Technical Guidance Document of the Risk Assessment Directive (EEC 93/67) Consumer habits: P&G internal database. 7
Main assumptions Functional Unit: 1 wash cycles. Cleaning performance not included, but product performance comparable. Detergent ingredient LCIs are mainly from published studies complemented with internal P&G and supplier data. BUWAL 25 is used as the energy database source for all new processes, but other databases have been used (BUWAL 13, Dr. I. Boustaed, ETH). Product packaging data (detergent box) are not integrated in current work. However, some data will be presented, originating from other applications. 8
Main assumptions Solid waste is related to energy production, intermediate packaging and sludge generation during wastewater treatment. Solid waste from energy production has been calculated from ETH database. Water consumption during the washing process (related to heating) is included in this study, but energy consumption and associated environmental emissions due to the preparation of drinking water are not included in this study. All disposal of detergents is assumed to be into sewer system. 9
Product assumptions Dosage Use Prewash 1 Temperature 1 4C 6C 9C Transport P&G to retail Retail to consumer Compact liquid 1 ml/wash 5 % 64 % 28 % 6 % 5 km truck not considered Compact powder 75 g/wash 11 % 37 % 47 % 15 % 5 km truck not considered 1. P&G Market Research Database 1994 1
Product assumptions Packaging 1 Wastewater Treatment 2 Direct discharge Primary Secondary Tertiary Compact liquid 1 bottle 9 refills 1 % 5 % 82 % 3 % Compact powder 1 carton 4 refills 1 % 5 % 82 % 3 % 1. From EU ecolabel scheme scenario. 2. From Technical Guidance Document for Notification of new substances. 11
Results 12
1 Liquid compact detergent Overview for selected endpoints. 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 9 8 7 SUPPL. MANUF. TRANSP. USE Solid BOD CO2 ENERGY WWTP 6 Powder compact detergent 5 4 3 2 1 SUPPL. MANUF. TRANSP. USE Solid BOD CO2 ENERGY WWTP 13
Main Conclusion > 75% of Energy consumption occurs at consumer phase, due to heating of water. Most of the air emissions occur at the use phase and are mainly energy related. > 98% of the BOD emissions occur at the WWTP, but this represents less than 8% of total BOD present in product (weighted average). Solid waste represents ashes from energy combustion, packaging and sludge generation. 14
Energy consumption: Liquid vs Powder 14 GJ 12 1 8 6 4 2 Liquid Powder Suppl. Manuf. Trans. Use Pack. WWTP Less energy consumption at the use phase due to lower wash temperatures. 15
Total solid waste: Liquid vs Powder - Total solid waste at supplier higher for liquid detergent due to type of ingredients used (high surfactant level). GJ 14 12 1 8 6 Liquid Powder - At use phase, solid wastes are energy related and therefore higher for powder. 4 2 Suppl. Manuf. Trans. Use Pack. WWTP - Higher generation of sludge for the powder detergent due to the builder system (Zeolithe). kg 25 2 15 1 Liquid Powder 5 Suppl. Manuf. Trans. Use Pack. WWTP 16
Waterborne and Air emissions: Liquid vs Powder Supplier Wastewater 25 14 2 15 Liquid Powder 12 1 8 Liquid Powder 1 6 5 4 2 BOD5 COD N Metals BOD5 COD N Metals Manufacturer Use 12 3 1 8 6 Liqu id Powder 25 2 15 Liqu id Powder 4 1 2 5 CO2 SOx NOx CxHy CO2 SOx NOx CxHy 17
Index of liquid versus powder: Liquid vs Powder Suppl. Manuf. Trans. Use Pack. WWTP Total Energy Air Emissions CO 2 SOx NOx 165 127 165 146 34 33 34 33 144 142 144 141 76 76 76 76 166 555 12 72 92 197 92 9 87 85 89 97 Water emissions BOD5 COD Tot N Metals 231 232 293 89 133 139 141 141 78 76 75 76 21 45 289 259 92 78 287 258 241 77 Solid waste Sludge Total 119 7 56 142 76 122 57 59 58 73 18
Main Conclusions: Liquid vs Powder Supplier Manufacturer Transportation Use Packaging WWTP -- + + + -- + - - and + - LCI study showed a balanced environmental profile of compact liquid and powder detergents. - There is clear opportunity to improve the overall LCI by promoting lower wash temperature. - Compacting of liquid detergents has improved drastically their overall environmental profile. 19
Conclusions: still a need for data... Formula incomplete : LCI are not available for all ingredients (65 to 75% of the ingredients on a weight basis). Ingredient LCIs should be updated. Discriminative power of the technique does not allow a strict comparison of products within same category but allow a relative comparison. Need to integrate a sensitivity analysis. 2