Life Cycle Assessment of Man-made cellulose fibres

Life Cycle Assessment of Man-made cellulose fibres

Life Cycle Assessment of
Man-made cellulose fibres:
Modal and Tencel
Li Shen and Dr. Martin Patel
Department of Science, Technology and Society (STS)
Copernicus Institute
Utrecht University
What is Life Cycle Assessment? (LCA)
System boundaries
Emiss.
Natural
resources
System boundary of this study:
1. Cradle to factory gate
Mining/
2. Extraction
Cradle to Processing
factory gate plus post-consumer
Waste
Product recovery
Use rate
MSWI with energy recovery,
M'mt
Postconsumer
=60%
Emiss.
waste
Land
Agriculture,
Forestry
Emiss.
Landfill
Process waste
Emiss.
Sewage
Treatment
Cradle-to-Factory Gate
Cradle-to-Grave
What fibres are we studying?
Functional unit:
“One metric tonne of staple fibre”
Specialty man-made cellulose fibres
- Lenzing Modal
- Tencel
This study
- Tencel 2012
Cotton (US and China)
PET and PP fibres (Western Europe)
Other studies
Lenzing Modal and Tencel
Fibre name
Pulp source
Process
Process energy
Lenzing Modal Lenzing Pulp Integrated - Biomass
production - Energy from MSWI
- Fossil fuels
Tencel Austria
Mixed
Non- Biomass (30%)
Market pulp integrated - Natural gas (70%)
& Lenzing production - Energy from MSWI
Tencel,
pulp
Austria 2012
(100%)
Heat from MSWI
emissions
Waste
& Fuels
Waste disposal service
MSWI plant
Recovered heat
Baseline: Economic allocation for MSWI plant. 17.5%
MSWI income is from selling recovered heat.
Low case: Heat from waste is for free.
High case: If there were no MSWI plant, heat would
have to be obtained from natural gas.
What are the environmental impacts?
1.
2.
3.
Energy: Non-Renewable Energy Use (NREU)
4.
5.
Water use
Global Warming (kg CO2 equivalents)
Land use for biomass production (and land use
efficiency)
The CML environmental indicators (abiotic depletion,
human toxicity, fresh water ecotoxicity, terrestrial
ecotoxicity, photochemical oxidant, acidification and
eutrophication)
LCA result
Net NREU (GJ/t fibre), Cradle-to-factory gate
plus post-consumer waste incineration
with energy recovery (recovery rate = 60%)
100
80
93
85
60
Cradle-to-factory gate
40
41
43
20
0
-10
-14
-20
-29
-9
25
22
-9
-9
Recovered energy from
waste incineration
(energy recovery rate 60%)
-40
l
)
)
)
a
a
i
e
e
N
12
r
d
p
p
t
0
C
2
ro
&
ro
us
,
Mo
u
u
S
a
A
g
,
ri
.E
.E
(U
l
t
n
i
e
s
W
W
(
(
u
on
nz
nc
t
T
A
P
e
t
e
,
E
P
L
o
T
P
el
C
c
n
Te
Net NREU (GJ/t fibre), Cradle-to-factory gate
plus post-consumer waste incineration
with energy recovery (recovery rate = 60%)
100
80
60
78
56
34
40
Cotton
31
20
16
13
0
-20
)
ia
al
e)
e)
N
12
r
d
p
p
t
0
C
o
o
o
&
us
,2
M
ur
ur
S
a
A
i
E
g
E
.
.
(U
tr
in
e l,
s
n
z
(W
(W
c
u
T
P
en
tto
en
E
L
P
o
l, A
T
P
e
C
nc
e
T
Net GWP (t CO2 eq./t fibre), Cradle-to-factory gate
plus post-consumer waste incineration
with energy recovery (recovery rate = 60%)
6
5.5
5
4.2
4
3
Cotton
2.8
2.1
2
1
0
1.1
0.9
-0.3
-1
)
2
ia
al
e)
e)
N
r
1
d
t
p
p
0
C
s
o
2
ro
ro
&
u
M
,
u
u
ia
US
.E
.E
l, A
r
ng
(
t
i
e
s
W
W
z
c
n
(
(
u
n
n
o
t
A
e
T
e
P
t
,
L
T
P
el
PE
Co
c
n
Te
Land use
1.2
1.0
Forest land use
Agricultural land use
ha/t fibre
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
r ia
t
us
A
el,
c
n
Te
12
0
2
ce
n
Te
a
tri
s
u
l, A
g
in
z
n
Le
al
d
Mo
)
e)
N
g
a
&C
er
S
v
a
(U
d
n
l
r
o
o
tt
o
(W
C
n
to
t
Co
Net NREU savings per hectare land use, 1 t fibre
(reference system: PET fibre)
500
Based on forest land
Based on agricultural land
GJ/ha/t fibre
400
340
300
210
200
108
57
100
0
a
tri
s
u
lA
e
nc
e
T
12
0
2
al
ia
r
d
t
o
s
M
Au
g
l
n
e
i
nc
nz
e
e
T
L
n
tto
o
C
Water use, natural water origin (m3/t fibre)
7000
For process water
For cooling water
For irrigation, surface water
For irrigation, ground water
Total water use, US cotton
Total water us, CN cotton
6000
5000
5730
3967
4000
2000
1500
1724
1000
494
500
265
76
266
130
0
al
e)
e)
N)
12
ria
d
p
p
t
0
C
o
2
ro
ro
us
,
M
u
u
S&
a
A
i
E
E
g
U
,
r
.
.
(
in
el
st
n
z
(W
(W
c
u
o
n
A
T
e
tt
en
,
L
PP
o
l
T
PE
e
C
nc
e
T
Characterisation result based on the CML environmental indicators
Cradle-to-factory gate, 1 tonne fibre
Cotton = 100
250%
Cotton (US&CN) =100
PET fibre (W.Europe)
PP fibre (W.Europe)
Lenzing Modal
Tencel, Austria
Tencel, Austria 2012
200%
150%
100%
50%
0%
ab
io
tic
io
et
l
p
de
n
h
an
m
u
to
ty
ci
i
x
sh
e
r
f
w
a
r
te
ot
ec
t
o
ty
ci
i
x
s
re
r
e
o
ec
l
a
tri
ph
t
ty
ci
i
ox
o
ot
ch
al
ic
em
t
da
i
ox
n
io
id
ac
io
at
c
ifi
n
tro
u
e
p
io
at
c
hi
n
Single-score result (I)
Equally weighted, Cotton =100
1 tonne fibre, cradle-to-factory gate
Single score points, equal weighting
(no normalisation, Cotton =100)
120
100
80
60
Global warming
Abiotic depletion
Human toxicity
Fresh water ecotoxicity
Terrestrial ecotoxicity
Photochemical oxidation
Acidification
Eutrophication
Land use
Water use
40
20
0
2
al
ia
U)
N)
U)
r
d
t
01
E
E
C
.
.
o
s
2
&
M
(W
(W
ia
Au
r
g
US
,
t
e
e
(
l
n
r
r
s
i
ce
on
fib
fi b
nz
Au
n
t
e
t
,
e
T
P
l
L
o
T
e
P
C
PE
nc
e
T
Normalisation result (percentage of global impact per year )
1 tonne fibre, from cradle to factory gate
Normalisation result, World 1995
1.4E-09
1.2E-09
1.0E-09
8.0E-10
6.0E-10
CML Normalisation factors
(global impact per year) World, 1995
Global warming (kg CO2 eq.)
4.1 x 1013
Abiotic depletion (kg Sb eq.)
1.6 x 1011
Human toxicity (kg 1,4 DB eq.)
5.7 x 1013
Fresh water ecotoxicity (kg 1,4DB eq.)
2.0 x 1012
Terrestrial ecotoxicity (kg 1,4 DB eq.)
2.6 x 1011
Photochemical oxidation (kg C2H4 eq.)
9.6 x 1010
Acidification (kg SO2 eq.)
3.2 x 1011
Eutrophication (kg PO43- eq.)
1.3 x 1011
Source: Huijbregts, et al. (2003)
4.0E-10
2.0E-10
0.0E+00
global warming abiotic
(GWP100) depletion
human fresh water terrestrial
phototoxicity
aquatic ecotoxicity chemical
ecotox.
oxidation
acidification
eutrophication
Cotton (US&CN)
PET fibre (W. Europe)
PP fibre (W.Europe)
Lenzing Modal
Tencel, Austria
Tencel, Austria 2012
Single-score result, equal weighting points
(first normalised to World 1995)
Single-score result (II)
Equally weighted, normalised to World 1995
1 tonne fibre, from cradle to factory gate
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
Global warming
Abiotic depletion
Human toxicity
Fresh water ecotoxicity
Terrestrial ecotoxicity
Photochemical oxidation
Acidification
Eutrophication
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
)
)
)
ia
al
U
N
U
12
r
d
t
0
E
E
C
.
.
o
s
u
M
W
W
a2
S&
(
(
i
A
r
g
U
e
e
(
st
in
el,
n
br
br
z
u
c
i
i
o
f
f
en
tt
en
T
P
l, A
L
o
T
E
e
P
C
P
nc
e
T
Single-score result (III)
NOGEPA weighting factors (normalised to World, 1995)
1 tonne fibre, cradle-to-factory gate
NOGEPA Single-score points
(First normalised to World 1995)
10
8
6
Global warming
Abiotic depletion
Human toxicity
Fresh water ecotoxicity
Terrestrial ecotoxicity
Photochemical oxidation
Acidification
Eutrophication
Weighting factors (NOGEPA)*
Climate Change*
32
Abiotic depletion
6
Human toxicity*
16
Fresh water ecotoxicity
10
Terrestrial ecotoxicity
9
Photochemical oxidation*
8
Acidification*
6
Eutrophication*
13
Total
100
4
2
0
)
)
)
a
al
N
U
U
12
d
tri
0
E
E
C
.
.
o
s
2
&
u
M
W
W
a
S
(
(
i
A
r
g
(U
re
re
st
in
el,
n
b
b
z
u
c
i
i
f
f
A
n
en
tto
,
e
T
P
l
L
o
T
P
C
ce
PE
n
Te
Weighting factors marked with
(*) are obtained from Huppes et
al. (2003); weighting factors
without (*) is modified based on
the same study.
Discussion
Uncertainty related to impact assessment
methodology:
- The CML method: toxicity in general.
- Weighting factors of the single-score result.
- Lack of method to evaluate different forms of land use and
water use.
- Lack of method to evaluate GMO and biodiversity.
- Natural emissions from forests not account for.
Conclusion
Environmental benefits of Modal, Tencel and future Tencel fibres:
- low non-renewable energy use
- low GHG emissions
- good land use efficiency compared to cotton
- low water use
- low impact on ecotoxicity and eutrophication
Major drawbacks of Modal and Tencel:
- relatively high abiotic depletion and photochemical oxidation
Overall, we conclude (based on Single-score result I, II and III):
Modal and Tencel vs. Cotton: ☺☺
Modal and Tencel vs. Petrochemical fibres (PET, PP): ☺
Acknowledgement
Mr. Josef Schmidtbauer
Dr. Haio Harms
Additional slides
Why man-made cellulose fibres are interesting?
World fibre production 1920-2005 (kton)
35,000
Cotton
30,000
Synthetic (petro-based)
25,000
Man-made cellulosic
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1915
1925
1935
Sources: USDA (2006), JCFA (2006), Ullmann (1997), Textile
online library (2006)
1945
1955
1965
1975
1985
1995
2005
Lenzing Modal and Tencel (1/2)