Biodegradable and conventional plastic packaging: Comparison of life cycle environmental impacts of poly(mandelic acid) and polystyrene.

Most of plastic packaging waste does not degrade over time, which can lead to harmful effects on aquatic life and humans, highlighting the need for packaging materials that are easily degradable. Poly(mandelic acid) (PMA) is a biodegradable polymer that has been proposed as an alternative to polystyrene for use in packaging. However, its potential to replace the existing packaging materials also depends, among other factors, on the environmental sustainability of its production. This study aims to estimate and compare the life cycle environmental impacts of the production of PMA via polymerisation of 5-phenyl-1,3-dioxolane-4-one (Ph-DOX) and o-carboxyanhydride (OCA) monomers. For each route, the impacts are evaluated for 18 ReCiPe categories for reported laboratory scales and potential scaled-up commercial production. The results suggest that most of the impacts of PMA production via the Ph-DOX route are significantly lower (≥20%) than that of the OCA route for both the laboratory and large scales. However, compared to polystyrene, the impacts of large-scale PMA production via the (better of the two) Ph-DOX route are more than five times higher. This is largely due to the use of benzaldehyde, enzymes, hydrocyanic acid and sodium phosphate in the production of mandelic acid and the solvents utilised in monomer synthesis. A sensitivity analysis shows that the bio-transformation of bio-glycerol to produce mandelic acid would reduce 16 out of 18 life cycle impacts of PMA by 6-77%. The impacts are also sensitive to the assumptions used in the scaling-up of laboratory data for solvents. However, the results indicate clearly that, despite all the uncertainties in the scaling-up method, the proposed production routes for PMA would still have several times higher environmental impacts than polystyrene. Therefore, further research would be needed to improve significantly the production process for (bio-)mandelic acid, synthesis of monomers and their polymerisation before PMA can be considered an environmentally sustainable option for packaging applications.

Energy from forest residues in Turkey: An environmental and economic life cycle assessment of different technologies.

Forest residues, as cheap and abundant feedstock, can replace current fossil-energy sources, helping to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and improve energy security. Given 27 % of total lands covered with forests, Turkey has a remarkable potential of forest residues from harvesting and industrial activities. This paper thus focuses on evaluating the life cycle environmental and economic sustainability of heat and electricity generation utilising forest residues in Turkey. Two types of forest residues (wood chips and wood pellets) and three energy conversion options are considered: direct combustion (heat only, electricity only and cogenerated heat and power (CHP)), gasification (for CHP) and co-firing with lignite. Results suggest that direct combustion of wood chips for cogeneration of heat and power has the lowest environmental impacts and levelised costs for both functional units (per MWh heat and per MWh electricity generation) considered. Compared to fossil-fuel sources, energy from forest residues has a potential to reduce the climate change impact as well as fossil-fuel, water and ozone depletion by >80 %. However, it also causes an increase in some other impacts, such as terrestrial ecotoxicity. The bioenergy plants have also lower levelised costs than electricity from the grid (except those using wood pellets and gasification regardless of the feedstock) and heat from natural gas. Electricity-only plants using wood chips achieve the lowest LCC, generating net profits. All biomass plants, except the pellet boiler, pay back in their lifetime; however, the economic feasibility of electricity-only and CHP plants is highly sensitive to subsidies for bioelectricity and efficient use of heat. Utilising the currently available forest residues in Turkey (5.7 Mt/yr) for energy provision could potentially reduce the national GHG emissions by 7.3 Mt/yr (1.5 %) and save $0.5 bn/yr (5 %) in avoided fossil-fuel import costs.

Environmental sustainability of biofuels: a review.

Biofuels are being promoted as a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels as they could help to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the related climate change impact from transport. However, there are also concerns that their wider deployment could lead to unintended environmental consequences. Numerous life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have considered the climate change and other environmental impacts of biofuels. However, their findings are often conflicting, with a wide variation in the estimates. Thus, the aim of this paper is to review and analyse the latest available evidence to provide a greater clarity and understanding of the environmental impacts of different liquid biofuels. It is evident from the review that the outcomes of LCA studies are highly situational and dependent on many factors, including the type of feedstock, production routes, data variations and methodological choices. Despite this, the existing evidence suggests that, if no land-use change (LUC) is involved, first-generation biofuels can-on average-have lower GHG emissions than fossil fuels, but the reductions for most feedstocks are insufficient to meet the GHG savings required by the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED). However, second-generation biofuels have, in general, a greater potential to reduce the emissions, provided there is no LUC. Third-generation biofuels do not represent a feasible option at present state of development as their GHG emissions are higher than those from fossil fuels. As also discussed in the paper, several studies show that reductions in GHG emissions from biofuels are achieved at the expense of other impacts, such as acidification, eutrophication, water footprint and biodiversity loss. The paper also investigates the key methodological aspects and sources of uncertainty in the LCA of biofuels and provides recommendations to address these issues.

Environmental sustainability in the food-energy-water-health nexus: A new methodology and an application to food waste in a circular economy.

Current studies on the food-energy-water nexus do not capture effects on human health. This study presents a new methodology for assessing the environmental sustainability in the food-energy-water-health nexus on a life cycle basis. The environmental impacts, estimated through life cycle assessment, are used to determine a total impact on the nexus by assigning each life cycle impact to one of the four nexus aspects. These are then normalised, weighted and aggregated to rank the options for each aspect and determine an overall nexus impact. The outputs of the assessment are visualised in a "nexus quadrilateral" to enable structured and transparent interpretation of results. The methodology is illustrated by considering resource recovery from household food waste within the context of a circular economy. The impact on the nexus of four treatment options is quantified: anaerobic digestion, in-vessel composting, incineration and landfilling. Anaerobic digestion is environmentally the most sustainable option with the lowest overall impact on the nexus. Incineration is the second best option but has a greater impact on the health aspect than landfilling. Landfilling has the greatest influence on the water aspect and the second highest overall impact on the nexus. In-vessel composting is the worst option overall, despite being favoured over incineration and landfilling in circular-economy waste hierarchies. This demonstrates that "circular" does not necessarily mean "environmentally sustainable." The proposed methodology can be used to guide businesses and policy makers in interpreting a wide range of environmental impacts of products, technologies and human activities within the food-energy-water-health nexus.

Assessing the economic and environmental sustainability of household food waste management in the UK: Current situation and future scenarios.

The value embedded in food waste is increasingly being recognised, with the UN targeting a 50% reduction in consumer food waste and the EU recycling of 60% of all household waste, both by 2030. Aiming to provide guidance on the most sustainable food waste utilisation routes, this study evaluates the life cycle environmental and economic sustainability of five plausible scenarios for the year 2030. Focusing on the UK for context, these are compared to the current treatment of food waste as well as to its potential future prevention. The scenarios consider a differing share of four widely-used treatment methods: anaerobic digestion, in-vessel composting, incineration and landfilling. The scenario with the highest anaerobic digestion share that recovers both heat and electricity is the best option for seven out of 19 environmental impacts and the second best for life cycle costs. Upgrading anaerobic digestion biogas to biomethane achieves the lowest global warming potential and life cycle costs. Net-negative global warming potential (savings) can be achieved if the heat from anaerobic digestion and incineration or biomethane are utilised to displace natural gas. Displacing a future electricity mix does not lead to significant global warming potential savings due to the expected grid decarbonisation. However, savings are still achieved for metal depletion and human and terrestrial toxicities as they are higher for decarbonised grid electricity due to the increased share of renewables. A greater share of in-vessel composting leads to higher impacts because of the high electricity consumption. Landfill reduction has an economic advantage for all the scenarios, except for the business-as-usual, with life cycle costs 11-75% lower than for the current situation. While future scenarios improve the overall sustainability compared to the current situation, halving food waste by 2030 can save 15 times more greenhouse gas emissions than the best treatment scenario without waste reduction. Therefore, any commitments to improve the sustainability of food waste treatment must be accompanied by an effective waste prevention strategy. The outcomes of this work can help waste treatment operators and policy makers towards more sustainable food waste management. Although the focus is on UK situation, the overall conclusions and recommendations are applicable to other regions.

Environmental and economic implications of recovering resources from food waste in a circular economy.

Around a third of food is wasted globally, requiring significant resources for its treatment and disposal, in addition to wasting valuable resources. Following the circular economy principles, this waste should ideally be avoided, and if not possible, treated to recover resources. This paper considers the life cycle environmental and economic implications of recovering energy and material resources from food waste, focusing on the UK situation. Four treatment methods are considered: anaerobic digestion, in-vessel composting, incineration and landfilling. The results show that per tonne of waste treated, anaerobic digestion has the lowest environmental impacts in 13 out of the 19 categories considered in the study, including net-negative global warming potential. In-vessel composting is the least sustainable option environmentally, in contrast to being preferred over incineration according to the circular economy principles. Incineration has the lowest life cycle costs (£71/t), while landfilling is the costliest option (£123/t). Managing the 4.9 Mt of food waste collected annually from UK households via the four methods generates 340,000 t CO2 eq. and costs £452 m, in addition to causing a number of other environmental impacts. However, it also saves 1.9 PJ of primary energy, primarily due to electricity generation through incineration. If all of this food waste was incinerated, £103 m and 360,000 t CO2 eq./year could be saved compared to current waste management, rendering incineration a carbon-negative technology. This would also result in savings in 14 other impacts, but would increase summer smog by 30% and metal depletion by 56%. The environmental benefits of incineration would be exceeded only if all food waste was treated by anaerobic digestion, which would save 490,000 t CO2 eq./year and produce 50% more electricity per tonne of waste than incineration. Anaerobic digestion would also lead to savings in 14 other impacts compared to the present situation, but would result in a four times higher acidification and three times greater emissions of particulate matter. In addition, it would save £251 m/year compared to the current costs. Nevertheless, prevention of avoidable food waste would realise far greater environmental and economic savings, estimated here at 14 Mt CO2 eq. and £10.7 bn annually.

A methodology for integrating the biomass balance approach into life cycle assessment with an application in the chemicals sector.

Driven by the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and dependence on fossil resources, the chemical and other industries are gradually starting to develop bio-based products. For the introduction of bio-feedstocks in existing production pathways in a cost-effective way, a simplified approach based on mass balance has been proposed. This concept is known as the biomass balance (BMB) approach and the resulting products are called BMB products. They do not necessarily contain biomass material but can contribute to sustainable sourcing and production of bio-based products in the supply chain without any performance loss in comparison to the same products derived from fossil resources. The aim of the study is to show how the BMB approach can be used in life cycle assessment (LCA) while following the requirements set out in the ISO 14040 and 14044 standards. To demonstrate that, the proposed BMB approach has been used to estimate life cycle environmental impacts of a polymer product, which can be produced using fossil or bio-feedstocks. For the polymer derived from bio-feedstocks, bio-naphtha and biogas are considered as replacement to naphtha and its impacts are compared with the fossil-based alternative. The paper demonstrates that the BMB approach provides a quick and pragmatic method for establishing the biomass content in chemical and related products while incentivising the industry to continue increasing the proportion of bio-based products in their product portfolio. It also shows that the environmental performance of BMB products is highly dependent on the particular bio-feedstock used, the way it is sourced and on key modelling assumptions, including the assumptions on biogenic carbon uptake in the bio-feedstocks.

Environmental sustainability of anaerobic digestion of household food waste.

Consumers are the leading producers of food waste (FW) in developed countries and the majority of household FW is still embedded in general waste where it is incinerated or landfilled. There is increasing awareness in the value of collecting FW as a separate waste stream for production of compost or recovery of energy through anaerobic digestion (AD). This study focuses on AD to evaluate the life cycle environmental sustainability of recovering energy and fertilisers from household FW in the UK. The analysis is carried out for two different functional units: i) treatment of 1 tonne of FW, which is compared to incineration and landfilling; and ii) generation of 1 MWh of electricity, which is compared to other electricity generation options. The former results in net negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (-39 kg CO2-eq./t) and primary energy demand (-2 GJ/t) due to the displacement of grid electricity and mineral fertilisers. AD has lower impacts than both incineration and landfilling across 15 of the 19 impacts. However, the application of digestate to land and the release of ammonia and nitrates lead to higher marine eutrophication (ME), terrestrial acidification (TA) and particulate matter formation (PMF). For the second functional unit, AD electricity emits 203 kg CO2-eq./MWh, compared to 357 kg CO2-eq./MWh for the UK grid mix. Compared to renewables, such as wind and solar, AD electricity has lower energy demand, toxicity potentials and metal depletion. However, it has higher global warming potential, ME, TA and PMF. At the UK level, treating 4.9 Mt of kerbside FW collected annually could provide 0.37% of the national electricity demand and save 190,000 t CO2-eq./yr compared to the grid electricity. The digestate produced could displace 1% of industrial nitrogen fertilisers. Although small fractions of the national demands, they represent a valuable return from a largely unutilised waste stream and help towards implementation of a circular economy.

Environmental impacts of chocolate production and consumption in the UK.

This study evaluates life cycle environmental impacts associated with chocolate products made and consumed in the UK. The paper focuses on three representative chocolate products occupying 90% of the market: 'moulded chocolate', 'chocolate countlines' and 'chocolates in bag'. The impacts were estimated using life cycle assessment (LCA) as a tool and following the ReCiPe impact assessment method. The water footprint was also considered. For example, the global warming potential ranges between 2.91 and 4.15 kg CO2 eq., primary energy demand from 30 to 41 MJ and the water footprint, including water stress, from 31 to 63 l per kilogram of chocolate. The raw materials are the major hotspot across all impact categories for all three product types, followed by the chocolate production process and packaging. The raw material impacts are mainly due to milk powder, cocoa derivatives, sugar and palm oil. The sensitivity analysis shows that the results for global warming potential are sensitive to land-use change (LUC) associated with cocoa production, increasing the impact of the chocolate products by three to four times if LUC is involved. The improvement opportunities targeting the key contributing stages suggest that GWP of chocolates could be reduced by 14%-19%. Chocolate countlines have the highest contribution to the total impacts at the UK level (37%-43%), followed by chocolates in bag (28%-33%). Moulded chocolates and other chocolate confectionary make up the rest of the impacts, with a roughly equal share each. Chocolate consumption in the UK contributes 4.7% to the primary energy consumption and 2.4% to the GHG emissions from the whole food and drink sector. The results of this work will be of interest to policy makers, chocolate producers and consumers, helping them to make more informed decisions towards sustainable production and consumption of chocolate products.

Assessing the environmental sustainability of ethanol from integrated biorefineries.

This paper considers the life cycle environmental sustainability of ethanol produced in integrated biorefineries together with chemicals and energy. Four types of second-generation feedstocks are considered: wheat straw, forest residue, poplar, and miscanthus. Seven out of 11 environmental impacts from ethanol are negative, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, when the system is credited for the co-products, indicating environmental savings. Ethanol from poplar is the best and straw the worst option for most impacts. Land use change from forest to miscanthus increases the GHG emissions several-fold. For poplar, the effect is opposite: converting grassland to forest reduces the emissions by three-fold. Compared to fossil and first-generation ethanol, ethanol from integrated biorefineries is more sustainable for most impacts, with the exception of wheat straw. Pure ethanol saves up to 87% of GHG emissions compared to petrol per MJ of fuel. However, for the current 5% ethanol-petrol blends, the savings are much smaller (<3%). Therefore, unless much higher blends become widespread, the contribution of ethanol from integrated biorefineries to the reduction of GHG emissions will be insignificant. Yet, higher ethanol blends would lead to an increase in some impacts, notably terrestrial and freshwater toxicity as well as eutrophication for some feedstocks.