Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
G
en
era
l righ
ts
Copyrig
ht a
nd m
ora
l rights
for th
e p
ublic
atio
ns m
ade a
ccessib
le in
the p
ublic
porta
l are
reta
ined b
y th
e a
uth
ors
and/o
r oth
er c
opyrig
ht
ow
ne
rs a
nd it is
a c
onditio
n o
f accessin
g p
ublic
atio
ns th
at u
sers
recognis
e a
nd a
bid
e b
y th
e le
gal re
quire
ments
associa
ted w
ith th
ese rig
hts
.
Users
ma
y d
ow
nlo
ad a
nd p
rint o
ne c
opy o
f any p
ublic
atio
n fro
m th
e p
ublic
porta
l for th
e p
urp
ose o
f priv
ate
stu
dy o
r researc
h.
You m
ay n
ot fu
rther d
istrib
ute
the m
ate
rial o
r use it fo
r any p
rofit-m
akin
g a
ctiv
ity o
r com
merc
ial g
ain
You m
ay fre
ely
dis
tribute
the U
RL id
entify
ing th
e p
ublic
atio
n in
the p
ublic
porta
l If y
ou b
elie
ve th
at th
is d
ocum
ent b
reaches c
opyrig
ht p
lease c
onta
ct u
s p
rovid
ing d
eta
ils, a
nd w
e w
ill rem
ove a
ccess to
the w
ork
imm
edia
tely
and in
vestig
ate
your c
laim
.
Dow
nloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Jul 15, 2020
Case stu
dy o
n p
rinted
matter
Including chemical-related im
pact categories in LCA
on offset printed matter
Larsen
, Hen
rik Fred
Publication date:
2010
Docum
ent Version
Publisher's P
DF
, also known as V
ersion of record
Link back to DT
U O
rbit
Citation (A
PA
):Larsen, H
. F. (A
uthor). (2010). Case study on printed m
atter: Including chemical-related im
pact categories inLC
A on offset printed m
atter. Sound/V
isual production (digital) http://ww
w.w
adef.com/projects/riskcycle/
Case study on printed material
Including chemical-related impact categories in LCA on offset printed matter
1 st “RiskCycle” workshop Hanoi University 4th-5th May 2010, Hanoi Vietnam Risk-based management of chemicals and products in a circular economy at a global scale
Henrik Fred Larsen
Quantitative Sustainability Assessment
DTU Management Engineering
Technical University of Denmark
Outline
� The background for this presentation
� The life cycle of printed matter
� The product system for sheet fed offset printed matter
printed matter
�What is product life cycle assessment (LCA)
� Results of the LCA study on printed matter. Does it matter whether or not we include toxic effects of chemical emissions
� Conclusions and further research
� Literature references
This presentation is based on the following work:
� A Danish project on Ecolabelling of printed matter� Partners: The Graphics Association of Denmark (GA), IPU, and the Technical University of Denmark (DTU).
� Financed by: The Danish EPA and the Danish Agency for Development of Trade and Industry
� Timeframe: May 2003 – May 2004� Purpose: Analyze the existing Scandinavian Swan label
� Purpose: Analyze the existing Scandinavian Swan label criteria for printed matter from an LCA perspective and produce a well founded basis for revision of the Swan label criteria and the coming European Union Flower label criteria
� The PhD dissertation “Assessment of chemical emissions in life cycle impact assessment” (Larsen 2004)
� The paper: “Life-cycle assessment of offset printed matter with EDIP97 – how important are emissions of chemicals? “ (Larsen et al. 2009)
Characteristic features of LCA are:
� A decision supporting tool� Focus on services typically represented by a product (the
“functional unit”) This study: 1 ton printed matter� Comparative (relative statements). This study:
What is Life Cycle Assessment, LCA?
� Comparative (relative statements). This study: Distribution of relative impacts from emissions and resource consumption during the life cycle
� Holistic perspective� life cycle from cradle to grave� all relevant environmental impacts This study: Global warming,
acidification, ecotoxicity…..…� resource consumption (biotic and abiotic) This study: Kaolin, Al, Ag,
coal….
� Aggregation over time and space� life cycle is global� life cycle may span over decades or even centuries
Elements of LCA
Direct application
e.g. product development
marketing
ecolabelling
public policy making
Goal & scope
definition
InterpretationInventory
analysis
Impact
Impact
assessment
Goal and Scope definition� defining goal: This study: Identify the distribution of potential
impacts… defining the product system: This study: See figure� decisive for interpretation and use of results: This study: Model,
ecolabelling, chemical related impact categories included
Inventory analysis (LCI)� collecting in- and output data for all processes: This study: See Figure
Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)
Classification: “What does this emission contribute to?”
� Assignment of emissions to impact categories according to their potential effects
� Global warming (e.g. CO2, CH4)
� Acidification (e.g. NO2, SO3)
Application:
Decision supporting tool
Goal & scopedefinition
InterpretationInventoryanalysis
Impactassessment
� Acidification (e.g. NO2, SO3)
� Ecotoxicity (e.g. pharmaceuticals, heavy metals)
� Human toxicity (e.g. benzene, PAH’s)
� ………..
Characterisation: “How much may it contribute?”
� Quantification of contributions to the different impact categories by estimating impact potentials, IPs (e.g. multiplying the characterisation factors (CFs) for each chemical by the emitted amount (Q) per functional unit (fu):
IP = Q*CF
� Example (GWP):Substance Q (g/fu) CF (g CO2-eq/g) IP (g CO2-eq/fu)
Carbon dioxid (CO2) 250 1 250
Methane (CH4) 10 25 250
Total 500
Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)and interpretation
Normalisation: “Is that much?”� Expression of the impact potentials relative to a reference situation (person-equivalence,
PE), e.g. normalisation reference (NR) for GWP: 8,700 kg CO2-eq/pers/year. The normalised impact potential (nIP):
nIP = IP/NR
Application:
Decision supporting tool
Goal & scopedefinition
InterpretationInventoryanalysis
Impactassessment
nIP = IP/NR
Valuation: “Is it important?”� Ranking, grouping or assignment of weights (weighting factors, WFs) to the different
impact potentials (EDIP: political reduction targets), e.g. for global warming a targeted 10 years reduction of 20% => WF=1/(1-0.2) = 1.3. The weighted impact potential (wIP):
wIP = nIP*WF
Interpretation: “Where is the hotspots in the life cycle and for what reason?”� Is paper production a hotspot for printed matter life cycle? Due to energy consumption?
Impact category WF nIP (mPE/fu) wIP (mPET/fu)
Global warming (GWP) 1,3 0,057 0,074
Impact category NR (kg CO2-eq/pers/year) IP/fu (kg CO2-eq/fu) nIP (mPE/fu)
Global warming (GWP) 8700 0,5 0,057
ResultsDistribution of potential environmental impact
Weighted values
Acidification
Photochemical ozone
Ozone depletion
Global warming
Repro
Chemical-related or toxic-related impact categories
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Radioactive waste
Hazardous waste
Slags and ashes
Bulk waste
Persistent toxicity
Eco-toxicity
Human toxicity
Nutrient enrichment
Acidification
mPETWDK2000
Platemaking
Printing
Finishing
Cleaning
Energy at print
Water excl. process water
Incineration
Recovery
Paper prod.
categories
ResultsRelative distribution of potential environmental impact
Weighted values (net)
Energy at print
Total paper (net)
-10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Repro
Platemaking
Printing
Finishing
Cleaning
mPETWDK2000
ResultsDistribution of resource consumption
Weighted resources
Printing house only
Oil
Anthracite
Lignite
7.23
-0,2 -0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,4 1,5 1,6 1,7 1,8 1,9 2
Silver
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Aluminium
Uranium
Nickel
Natural gas
mPRW90
Repro
Platemaking
Printing
Finishing
Cleaning
Energy at print
Water excl. process water
ResultsRelative distribution of resource consumption
Weighted resources (kaolin excluded)
Total paper (net)
-10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Repro
Platemaking
Printing
Finishing
Cleaning
Energy at print
mPRW90
Results regarding environmental impactsEffect of including chemical related impact categories
Weighted values (net)
60%
70%Chemical related impact categories excluded
Chemical related impact categories included
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Rep
ro
Pla
tem
akin
g
Prin
ting
Fini
shin
g
Cle
anin
gE
nerg
y at
pri
nt
Total
pap
er (n
et)
mPETWDK2000
Contributions to the sheet fed offset printed matter impact profile
Significant contributing chemical emissions
� Emissions of ink residues (tetradecane) and cleaning agents (hexane, tetradecane) during the printing process and cleaning (35%)
agents (hexane, tetradecane) during the printing process and cleaning (35%)
� Emissions (dichlorobenzidine, chloroaniline, cuprous chloride) during pigment production (17-20%)
� Emissions of heavy metals and AOX (as dichloro benzene) during paper production (>3%)
� Emissions of fountain chemicals (i.e. isopropyl alcohol, IPA) during the printing process (6%)
� Emissions of biocides and hydroquinone from the repro- and plate making process (3%)
Conclusions and further research
Conclusions:� The effect of including the chemical-related impact categories is compared to
earlier studies substantial: The importance of paper is reduced from 67% to 31% and the importance of printing increased from 10% to 41%
� Especially the emissions during production of printed matter and pigments are contributing
Improvements/further research
Improvements/further research� Better coverage of upstream processes:
� Ink components (and their precursors) production: siccatives, antioxidants etc.� Water emissions from paper production: softeners (BPA), other phenolic compounds
(NPE, APE), other surfactants (LAS), biocides (benzothiazoler, dibromo-compounds), wood extractions (terpenoids, resin acids) and more
� Better coverage of downstream processes including recycling:� Recycling of paper: Fate of paper chemicals, ink chemicals, glue chemicals etc.� Treatment of chemical waste: Fate of (hazardous) waste from printing (ink waste,
used cleaning agents, used rinsing water etc.) and from recycling of paper (sludge from repulping
� Including data from recent (2009) substitution-database on chemicals/products used in the printing industry: Includes 588 substances covering more than 1000 products (900 MSDS). 58 substances candidates for the REACH Annex XIV list (potential substances of very high concern, SVHC)
References
� Larsen HF, Hansen MS, Hauschild M (2009). Life-cycle assessment of offset printed matter with EDIP97 – how important are emissions of chemicals? J Clean Prod 17, 115 – 128.
� Larsen HF (2004). Assessment of chemical emissions in life cycle impact assessment- focus on low substance data availability and ecotoxicity effect indicators. Ph.D. Thesis, October 2004. Department of Manufacturing, Engineering and Management. Technical University of Denmark. Larsen, H.F., Hansen, M.S. and Hauschild, M. (2006). Ecolabelling of
� Larsen, H.F., Hansen, M.S. and Hauschild, M. (2006). Ecolabelling of printed matter. Part II: Life cycle assessment of model sheet fed offset printed matter. Working Report No. 24. Danish Ministry of the Environment. Environmental Protection Agency. (peer reviewed). http://www.mst.dk/udgiv/publications/2006/87-7052-173-5/pdf/87-7052-174-3.pdf
� Johnsen, N., Bøg, C., Poll, C. and Larsen, H.F. (2006). Ecolabelling of printed matter. Part I. Environmental Project No. 1110. Danish Ministry of the Environment. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.mst.dk/udgiv/publications/2006/87-7052-169-7/pdf/87-7052-170-0.pdf
