Life cycle impacts of WEEE plastics recycling within the PLAST2bCLEANED project

The aim of the EU Horizon 2020 PLAST2bCLEANED project is to develop a recycling process for WEEE plastics in a technically feasible, environmentally sound, and economically viable manner. To fulfill this aim, PLAST2bCLEANED addresses the recycling of the most common WEEE plastics: Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) and High Impact Polystyrene (HIPS). These materials contain up to 20wt% brominated flame retardants (BFR) and up to 5wt% of the synergist antimony trioxide (ATO). Therefore, PLAST2bCLEANED aims to close three material loops: (1) polymer, (2) bromine, and (3) ATO. With PLAST2bCLEANED technology, the WEEE plastics is first pretreated using a combination of innovative sensor-based and traditional sorting techniques. In the next step, the polymers containing BFR and ATO fractions are dissolved with a new dissolution process. The ATO and BFR are separated from the polymers and the solvents are recovered. To assess the environmental impacts of the dissolution route developed within the PLAST2bCLEANED project, two perspectives have been used: The waste perspective (gate to grave) and the product perspective (cradle to gate). The waste perspective will give insight into the impacts of processing WEEE plastics by the PLAST2bCLEANED dissolution process route. The product perspective will quantify the environmental impacts of using recycled ABS in a door frame of a washing machine and recycled HIPS in the inner liner of a fridge versus the use of virgin polymers. In this presentation, a detailed goal and scope definition of the LCA will be presented. Currently, the data collection for the full scan LCA is in progress. At the conference, the first LCA results are presented. In the quick scan, only the polymer loops (ABS and HIPS) are ‘closed’. The quick scan LCA already shows the environmental benefits of using recycled polymers compared to a virgin. Additionally, detailed results are given for the multiple process steps, including sorting and dissolution, to identify hotspots for environmental impact. For the closing of the BFR and ATO loop, potential environmental benefits are presented. Furthermore, sensitivities will be discussed to go from Quick scan to Full LCA, in particular on data needs and effects of scale

Carbon Dioxide Capture and Air Quality

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is one of the most important greenhouse gases (GHG). The most dominant source of anthropogenic CO2 contributing to the rise in atmospheric concentration since the industrial revolution is the combustion of fossil fuels. These emissions are expected to result in global climate change with potentially severe consequences for ecosystems and mankind. In this context, these emissions should be restrained in order to mitigate climate change. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a technological concept to reduce the atmospheric emissions of CO2 that result from various industrial processes, in particular from the use of fossil fuels (mainly coal and natural gas) in power generation and from combustion and process related emissions in industrial sectors. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) regards CCS as “an option in the portfolio of mitigation actions” to combat climate change (IPCC 2005). However, the deployment of CO2 capture at power plants and large industrial sources may influence local and transboundary air pollution, i.e. the emission of key atmospheric emissions such as SO2, NOX, NH3, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10). Both positive as negative impacts on overall air quality when applying CCS are being suggested in the literature. The scientific base supporting both viewpoints is rapidly advancing. The potential interaction between CO2 capture and air quality targets is crucial as countries are currently developing GHG mitigation action plans. External and unwanted trade-offs regarding air quality as well as co-benefits when implementing CCS should be known before rolling out this technology on a large scale. The goal of this chapter is to provide an overview of the existing scientific base and provide insights into ongoing and needed scientific endeavours aimed at expanding the science base. The chapter outline is as follows. We first discuss the basics of CO2 capture, transport and storage in section 2. In section 3, we discuss the change in the direct emission profile of key atmospheric pollutants when equipping power plants with CO2 capture. Section 4 expands on atmospheric emissions in the life cycle of CCS concepts. We provide insights in section 5 into how air quality policy and GHG reduction policy may interact in the Netherlands and the European Union. Section 6 focuses on atmospheric emissions from post-combustion CO

Assessing the social impacts of nano-enabled products through the life cycle: the case of nano-enabled biocidal paint

Purpose: Assessment of the social aspects of sustainability of products is a topic of significant interest to companies, and several methodologies have been proposed in the recent years. The significant environmental health and safety concerns about nano-enabled products calls for the early establishment of a clear benefit-risk framework in order to decide which novel products should be developed further. This paper proposes a method to assess the social impacts of nano-enabled products through the life cycle that is (a) quantitative, (b) integrates performance and attitudinal dimensions of social impacts and (c) considers the overall and stakeholder balance of benefits and costs. Social life cycle assessment (s-LCA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) are integrated to address this need, and the method is illustrated on a case study of a nano-enabled product. Methods: The s-LCA framework comprises 15 indicators to characterize the social context of the product manufacture placed within the classification structure of benefit/cost and worker/community. The methodology includes four steps: (a) normalization of company level data on the social indicator to country level data for the year, (b) nested weighting at stakeholder and indicator level and its integration with normalized scores to create social indicator scores, (c) aggregation of social indicator scores into benefit score, cost score and net benefit scores as per the s-LCA framework and (d) classification of social indicator scores and aggregated scores as low/medium/high based on benchmarks created using employment and value-added proxies. Results and discussion: A prospective production scenario involving novel product, a nano-copper oxide (n-CuO)-based paint with biocidal functionality, is assessed with respect to its social impacts. The method was applied to 12 indicators at the company level. Classification of social indicator scores and aggregated scores showed that the n-CuO paint has high net benefits. Conclusions: The framework and method offer a flexible structure that can be revised and extended as more knowledge and data on social impacts of nano-enabled products becomes available. The proposed method is being implemented in the social impact assessment sub-module of the SUN Decision Support (SUNDS) software system. Companies seeking to improve the social footprint of their products can also use the proposed method to consider relevant social impacts to achieve this goal

Sustainable nanotechnology decision support system: bridging risk management, sustainable innovation and risk governance

The significant uncertainties associated\ud with the (eco)toxicological risks of engineered nanomaterials\ud pose challenges to the development of nanoenabled\ud products toward greatest possible societal\ud benefit. This paper argues for the use of risk governance\ud approaches to manage nanotechnology risks and\ud sustainability, and considers the links between these\ud concepts. Further, seven risk assessment and management\ud criteria relevant to risk governance are defined:\ud (a) life cycle thinking, (b) triple bottom line, (c) inclusion\ud of stakeholders, (d) risk management, (e) benefit–\ud risk assessment, (f) consideration of uncertainty, and (g) adaptive response. These criteria are used to\ud compare five well-developed nanotechnology frameworks:\ud International Risk Governance Council framework,\ud Comprehensive Environmental Assessment,\ud Streaming Life Cycle Risk Assessment, Certifiable\ud Nanospecific Risk Management and Monitoring System\ud and LICARA NanoSCAN. A Sustainable Nanotechnology\ud Decision Support System (SUNDS) is\ud proposed to better address current nanotechnology risk\ud assessment and management needs, and makes.\ud Stakeholder needs were solicited for further SUNDS\ud enhancement through a stakeholder workshop that\ud included representatives from regulatory, industry and\ud insurance sectors. Workshop participants expressed\ud the need for the wider adoption of sustainability\ud assessment methods and tools for designing greener\ud nanomaterials

Beyond Mechanical Recycling: Giving New Life to Plastic Waste

Increasing the stream of recycled plastic necessitates an approach beyond the traditional recycling via melting and re-extrusion. Various chemical recycling processes have great potential to enhance recycling rates. In this Review, a summary of the various chemical recycling routes and assessment via life-cycle analysis is complemented by an extensive list of processes developed by companies active in chemical recycling. We show that each of the currently available processes is applicable for specific plastic waste streams. Thus, only a combination of different technologies can address the plastic waste problem. Research should focus on more realistic, more contaminated and mixed waste streams, while collection and sorting infrastructure will need to be improved, that is, by stricter regulation. This Review aims to inspire both science and innovation for the production of higher value and quality products from plastic recycling suitable for reuse or valorization to create the necessary economic and environmental push for a circular economy

Greenhouse gas benefits from direct chemical recycling of mixed plastic waste

Dealing with heterogeneous plastic waste – i.e., high polymer heterogeneity, additives, and contaminants – and lowering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from plastic production requires integrated solutions. Here, we quantified current and future GHG footprints of direct chemical conversion of heterogeneous post-consumer plastic waste feedstock to olefins, a base material for plastics. The net GHG footprint of this recycling system is −0.04 kg CO2-eq./kg waste feedstock treated, including credits from avoided production of virgin olefins, electricity, heat, and credits for the partial biogenic content of the waste feedstock. Comparing chemical recycling of this feedstock to incineration with energy recovery presents GHG benefits of 0.82 kg CO2-eq./kg waste feedstock treated. These benefits were found to increase to 1.37 kg CO2-eq./kg waste feedstock treated for year 2030 when including (i) decarbonization of steam and electricity production and (ii) process optimizations to increase olefin yield through carbon capture and utilization and conversion of side-products

Greenhouse gas benefits from direct chemical recycling of mixed plastic waste

Dealing with heterogeneous plastic waste – i.e., high polymer heterogeneity, additives, and contaminants – and lowering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from plastic production requires integrated solutions. Here, we quantified current and future GHG footprints of direct chemical conversion of heterogeneous post-consumer plastic waste feedstock to olefins, a base material for plastics. The net GHG footprint of this recycling system is −0.04 kg CO2-eq./kg waste feedstock treated, including credits from avoided production of virgin olefins, electricity, heat, and credits for the partial biogenic content of the waste feedstock. Comparing chemical recycling of this feedstock to incineration with energy recovery presents GHG benefits of 0.82 kg CO2-eq./kg waste feedstock treated. These benefits were found to increase to 1.37 kg CO2-eq./kg waste feedstock treated for year 2030 when including (i) decarbonization of steam and electricity production and (ii) process optimizations to increase olefin yield through carbon capture and utilization and conversion of side-products

LICARA nanoSCAN : a tool for the self-assessment of benefits and risks of nanoproducts

The fast penetration of nanoproducts on the market under conditions of significant uncertainty of their environmental properties and risks to humans creates a need for companies to assess sustainability of their products. Evaluation of the potential benefits and risks to build a coherent story for communication with clients, authorities, consumers, and other stakeholders is getting to be increasingly important, but SMEs often lack the knowledge and expertise to assess risks and communicate them appropriately. This paper introduces LICARA nanoSCAN, a modular web based tool that supports SMEs in assessing benefits and risks associated with new or existing nanoproducts. This tool is unique because it is scanning both the benefits and risks over the nanoproducts life cycle in comparison to a reference product with a similar functionality in order to enable the development of sustainable and competitive nanoproducts. SMEs can use data and expert judgment to answer mainly qualitative and semi-quantitative questions as a part of tool application. Risks to public, workers and consumers are assessed, while the benefits are evaluated for economic, environmental and societal opportunities associated with the product use. The tool provides an easy way to visualize results as well as to identify gaps, missing data and associated uncertainties. The LICARA nanoSCAN has been positively evaluated by several companies and was tested in a number of case studies. The tool helps to develop a consistent and comprehensive argument on the weaknesses and strengths of a nanoproduct that may be valuable for the communication with authorities, clients and among stakeholders in the value chain. LICARA nanoSCAN identifies areas for more detailed assessments, product design improvement or application of risk mitigation measures

Beyond Mechanical Recycling: Giving New Life to Plastic Waste

Increasing the stream of recycled plastic necessitates an approach beyond the traditional recycling via melting and re-extrusion. Various chemical recycling processes have great potential to enhance recycling rates. In this Review, a summary of the various chemical recycling routes and assessment via life-cycle analysis is complemented by an extensive list of processes developed by companies active in chemical recycling. We show that each of the currently available processes is applicable for specific plastic waste streams. Thus, only a combination of different technologies can address the plastic waste problem. Research should focus on more realistic, more contaminated and mixed waste streams, while collection and sorting infrastructure will need to be improved, that is, by stricter regulation. This Review aims to inspire both science and innovation for the production of higher value and quality products from plastic recycling suitable for reuse or valorization to create the necessary economic and environmental push for a circular economy