Search

The goal of this study was to assess the environmental impact of cellulose carbamate fiber production, using discarded cotton textiles as raw material, and compare the results to reference cotton and viscose fibers. Life cycle inventory and assessment was conducted for two production process scenarios within a cradle-to-gate system. Carbon footprint, water use, and water scarcity footprint were assessed. The results show that the carbon footprint of a cellulose carbamate factory integrated with a pulp mill, and that recycles water and chemicals in energy-intensive operations, is comparable to viscose production in Europe. Cellulose carbamate fiber production consumes less than 2% and 25% of the water consumed by cotton and viscose fiber production, respectively. For a factory located in Äänekoski in Finland, the water scarcity footprint was 15 m 3 water eq. per 1000 kg carbamate fiber. For Augsburg, Germany, a likely alternative location, the water scarcity footprint was 18 m 3 water eq. per 1000 kg carbamate fiber. Carbon footprint and local impact of water use give information that can be utilized to determine optimal locations for a carbamate factory. The study also indicated that discarded cotton textiles can be used as a cellulosic feedstock without increasing the carbon footprint and water use compared to the commercial viscose process. Additionally, by using cellulose carbamate technology, occupational health risks and the environmental burden of carbon disulfide and hydrogen sulfide emissions from viscose process vents can be avoided.

Allocating environmental impacts within life cycle assessment (LCA) is a recognised methodological problem. Different allocation methods have been developed to fulfil the various goals of LCA studies. At present, there is neither a consensus regarding the method to be used nor a one-fits-all method for dealing with recycling in LCA. The paper discusses some of the main allocation procedures practised in the pulp and paper industry, namely those covered by ISO/TS 14067:2018, GHG Protocol/PAS 2050, and the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF). All in all, the allocation method described in the ISO/TS 14067:2018 standard was considered the most appropriate to account for open-loop recycling of paper products. However, the method neither considers the number of subsequent uses of recycled fibres, nor the recycled fibre age. Yet, both of them are considered especially important in the open-loop recycling of paper products. In order to account for these aspects, the present study proposes an advanced, step-wise approach to handle allocation in LCAs accounting for the open-loop recycling of paper products. The advanced approach is based on the fibre mass flow model used to calculate the mean fibre age and the mean number of uses of paper products within the European context. The approach was validated with the data from the pulp and paper industry, particularly examining the newsprint paper grade with different contents of recycled fibre and fibre age. The paper, however, introduces all the parameters required to perform allocation based on the proposed method for other paper grades. The categpory of global warming potential was considered in the study as an illustrative example. yet the method could be applied to other impact assessment categories. The results calculated using the proposed allocation approach were compared to those obtained with the allocation methods described in the GHG Protocol/PAS 2050 and the PEF. The proposed allocation method can be used to guide further development of available standards and the product category rules, which will contribute to increased harmonisation and consistency of LCA studies in the pulp and paper sector, as well as to the enhanced practical implementation of LCA in industry.

A large part of the lifecycle environmental impacts of a product are determined at the design stage, why The EU Eco design Directive’s potential for application to non-energy related themes has come under the spotlight in recent years with Nordic countries at the forefront. In this report potential eco design requirements that can be drawn up for non-energy-related products are in focus. Textiles are here used as an example, and a light application of the approach has subsequently been applied to the furniture sector. Clothing and home textiles were chosen due to significant wastage in the value chain due to fast fashion, dropping quality and relatively low repair and reuse rates.The project was initiated and financed by the Nordic Council of Ministers and led by its Working Group for Sustainable Consumption and Production. A separate Policy Brief (ANP2018:739) is also published.

Goal and Background: The treatment of allocation in the descriptive LCA of wood-based products has been discussed for a long time and different solutions have been presented. In general, it is accepted that the influence of different allocation procedures on the results of LCA of wood-based products can be very significant. This paper is a result of the Cost Action E9 'Life cycle assessment of forestry and forest products' and represents the experience of involved Cost E9 delegates. Objective: Wood is a renewable material that can be used for wood products and energy production. Consistent methodological procedures are needed in order to correctly address the twofold nature of wood as a material and fuel, the multi-functional wood processing generating large quantities of co-products, and reuse or recycling of paper and wood. Ten different processes in LCAs of wood-based products are identified, where allocation questions can occur: forestry, sawmill, wood industry, pulp and paper industry, particle board industry, recycling of paper, recycling of wood-based boards, recycling of waste wood, combined heat and power production, landfill. Methodology: Following ISO 14 041 a step-wise procedure for system boundary setting and allocation are outlined. As a first priority allocation should be avoided by system expansion, thus adding additional functions to the functional unit. Alternatively, the avoided-burden approach can be followed by subtracting substituted functions of wood that are additionally provided. If allocation cannot be avoided, some allocations methods from case studies are described. Conclusions: The following conclusions for allocation in LCA of wood-based products are given. 1) Avoid allocation by expansion of system boundaries by combining material and energy aspects of wood, meaning a combination of LCA of wood products and of energy from wood with a functional unit for products and energy. 2) Substitute energy from wood with conventional energy in the LCA of wood products to get the func-tional unit of the wood product only, but identify the criteria for the substituted energy. 3) Substitution of wooden products with non-wooden products in LCA of bioenergy is not advis able, because the substitution criteria can be too complex. 4) If avoiding allocation is not possible, the reasons should be documented. 5) Different allocation procedures must be analysed and documented. In many cases, it seems necessary to make a sensitivity analysis of different allocation options for different environmental effects. It can also be useful to get the acceptance of the chosen allocation procedure by external experts. 6) Different allocation factors, e.g. mass or economic value, are allowed within the same LCA. 7) For allocation of forestry processes it is necessary to describe the main function of the forest where the raw material is taken out. In some cases different types or functions of forests must be considered and described. 8) Regarding the experiences from the examples, the following most practical allocation for some specific processes are identified: forestry: mass or volume; sawmill: mass or volume and proceeds; wood industry: mass and proceeds

Policy Brief: Ecodesign Requirements for Textiles and Furniture The EU Eco design Directive’s potential for application to nonenergy related themes has come under the spotlight in recent years with ...

Fossil energy depletion and growing environmental concerns have brought up increasing interest in bio-based eco-efficient and high technology materials. Among them, starch nanocrystals (SNC) consist of crystalline nano-platelets produced from the hydrolysis of starch and mainly used as nano-fillers in polymeric matrix. New applications have brought up the need for scaling-up the SNC preparation process. However, for this new bio-based nano-material to be sustainable, its preparation and processing should have limited impacts on the environment. Thus, together with analyzing and making recommendations for the scaling-up of SNC production process, it is worth identifying “environmentally sensitive” steps using life cycle analysis (LCA). To that purpose, different scenarios have been proposed and compared according to different environmental impacts. Also, a comparison to its main competitor, i.e. organically modified nanoclay (OMMT), is proposed. From a LCA point of view, SNC preparation requires less energy than OMMT extraction, but global warming and acidification indicators were higher than for OMMT. However, SNC have the added advantages to be renewable and biodegradable contrary to OMMT which contribute to non-renewable energy and mineral depletion. Thus, used as filler, SNC have a positive impact on the end of life of the filled material. From these observations, recommendations for the scaling-up of the SNC preparation process are made and deal mainly with the use of land and water.

This paper outlines guidelines for the treatment of energy in LCAs of forest products. The paper is a result of the Cost Action E 9 ‘Life cycle assessment of forestry and forest products’ and reflects the experience of Cost E9 delegates, contributing to Working Group ‘End of life — recycling, disposal and energy generation’. After overviewing different aspects of energy in LCA of forest products, the most important aspects are identified: 1) energy and carbon balance, 2) energy generation, 3) energy substitution and 4) comparison with other waste management options. For these aspects, guidelines are developed and examples are given to demonstrate the practical application of recommended guidelines. Beside the proper treatment of the above mentioned aspects, the following conclusions for the LCA practitioners are given: 1) Draw attention to losses of potential energy in carbon flows. 2) Compared to heating value of biomass the auxiliary energy need is low (

Goal and Background: The treatment of allocation in the descriptive LCA of wood-based products has been discussed for a long time and different solutions have been presented. In general, it is accepted that the influence of different allocation procedures on the results of LCA of wood-based products can be very significant. This paper is a result of the Cost Action E9 ‘Life cycle assessment of forestry and forest products' and represents the experience of involved Cost E9 delegates. Objective: Wood is a renewable material that can be used for wood products and energy production. Consistent methodological procedures are needed in order to correctly address the twofold nature of wood as a material and fuel, the multi-functional wood processing generating large quantities of co-products, and reuse or recycling of paper and wood. Ten different processes in LCAs of wood-based products are identified, where allocation questions can occur: forestry, sawmill, wood industry, pulp and paper industry, particle board industry, recycling of paper, recycling of wood-based boards, recycling of waste wood, combined heat and power production, landfill. Methodology: Following ISO 14 041 a step-wise procedure for system boundary setting and allocation are outlined. As a first priority allocation should be avoided by system expansion, thus adding additional functions to the functional unit. Alternatively, the avoided-burden approach can be followed by subtracting substituted functions of wood that are additionally provided. If allocation cannot be avoided, some allocations methods from case studies are described. Conclusions: The following conclusions for allocation in LCA of wood-based products are given. 1) Avoid allocation by expansion of system boundaries by combining material and energy aspects of wood, meaning a combination of LCA of wood products and of energy from wood with a functional unit for products and energy. 2) Substitute energy from wood with conventional energy in the LCA of wood products to get the functional unit of the wood product only, but identify the criteria for the substituted energy. 3) Substitution of wooden products with non-wooden products in LCA of bioenergy is not advisable, because the substitution criteria can be too complex. 4) If avoiding allocation is not possible, the reasons should be documented. 5) Different allocation procedures must be analysed and documented. In many cases, it seems necessary to make a sensitivity analysis of different allocation options for different environmental effects. It can also be useful to get the acceptance of the chosen allocation procedure by external experts. 6) Different allocation factors, e.g. mass or economic value, are allowed within the same LCA. 7) For allocation of forestry processes it is necessary to describe the main function of the forest where the raw material is taken out. In some cases different types or functions of forests must be considered and described. 8) Regarding the experiences from the examples, the following most practical allocation for some specific processes are identified: forestry: mass or volume; sawmill: mass or volume and proceeds; wood industry: mass and proceeds

The rapid and continuous development of information and communication technology (ICT) in society today is providing new means for various societal activities. To facilitate that new ICT solutions reduce environmental impacts and bring social improvements the potential impacts of those new solutions should be assessed. One way of making environmental assessments is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This paper presents and discusses challenges in assessing, comparing, communicating and acting on the results of an LCA of traditional media products and of new ICT solutions for media products, based on case studies of three newspapers in their printed and online versions. The case studies revealed the complexity in assessment and comparison of online and printed newspapers due to differences in functions and characteristics, choice and availability of data (specific and generic data, data gaps and quality), methodological choices (functional unit, allocation, scope) and assumptions on reader profile. Often no single answer can be given regarding the best option from an environmental perspective, leading to challenges in communicating the results to different stakeholders. A particular challenge is how to combine easily communicated messages with robust, transparent background information.

Oil-based barrier coatings were replaced by lignin-based coatings, and packaging materials made of recycled fibers were reinforced by lignin addition. A solvent fractionation method was developed to produce pure and homogeneous lignin fractions with increased thermoplasticity compared to the starting material. Another way to successfully increase lignin's thermoplasticity was chemical modifications by esterification reactions. Lignins esterified with fatty acids formed films without any external plasticizers. Lignin fatty acid esters coatings on paper board reduced significantly water vapour and oxygen transmission rates. Barrier properties against water vapour were as good as, or even better, than those of commercial PLA (poly lactic acid). Unmodified softwood and hardwood kraft lignins precipitated on recycled fibers increased strength, bonding and water resistance of packaging materials, e.g. corrugated boards. Accordingly, at least 20% of fibers can be replaced by lignins. The carbon footprint results for two new lignin-based products indicated reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by including lignin either in the furnish to compensate fibres and gain lighter weight or as barrier material to replace oil-based barrier coatings.

The paper presents the main results and findings from a sustainability assessment conducted as a part of an EU-funded project Flexpakrenew. The goal of the Flexpakrenew project was to develop a flexible packaging paper from renewable resources to reduce packaging industry's reliance on barrier films that are derived from petroleum. The goal of the sustainability assessment was to lead the development towards environmentally friendly raw materials and to communicate the sustainability of the packaging material developed. Based on the experiences from the project, challenges related to building a sustainability assessment framework for an emerging technological solution will be discussed. The technical challenge in the project was to develop a flexible paper, based on multilayered structure that achieves barrier properties competitive with those of plastic films. There are multiple uses for which thin and flexible packages with barrier capacity are needed. The study focussed on packages for dry foodstuff, such as dehydrated soup or flour. The goal was to substitute the petroleum based layers with bio based materials and to increase the biodegradability of the new packaging material. To be able to evaluate the sustainability of the new packaging material, a sustainability assessment framework was defined. In the assessment framework, the specific sustainability goals of the Flexpakrenew project were complemented with more general sustainability demands related to fibre based packaging. The whole life cycle of the packaging material was considered. Potential environmental aspects and impacts were evaluated applying life cycle assessment (LCA). Furthermore, screening of the potential economic and social impacts and evaluation of the competitiveness of the new packaging material was conducted. The results were summarized applying SWOT analysis. Three cases were included in the assessment: a reference case and two Flexpak cases (Case 1 and Case 2). The results of Cases 1 and 2 indicated positive trends in terms of environmental sustainability. The percentage of bio based materials was increased from zero to circa 50-60% in both Flexpak cases. However, there seemed to be uncertainty and thus weaknesses in terms of economic and technical dimensions of the solutions. At the moment, the solutions are not available in industrial production scale. The main challenges in the sustainability assessment were related to defining a suitable reference case for assessing the performance of the new packaging material and in gathering data for the assessment. Other challenges were related to assessing the potential impacts of a product that is only available in laboratory scale. An important aspect was also the timing of the sustainability assessment. The results of the sustainability assessment should be available at an early stage of the project to be able to communicate the results and to guide the R & D work towards sustainable solutions. However, the ability to conduct the sustainability assessment is dependent of the progress within the project since the assessment requires data from the experimental work conducted.