Document 8ka5RJb1x12xrw6k0Vdqa7Zy

COPPE BACKGROUNDER ASS&SStT16nt What is the Issue? Environmental professionals, policy makers, and the general public are very interested in having the means to accurately and comprehensively measure the environmental consequences of products and packages. These include the raw materials, energy and emissions related to each step of a product's lifecycle. One devel oping procedure for doing this is termed "product life cycle analysis," "ecobalance," "cradle-to-grave" or "life cycle assessments" (LCA). Such studies can be valuable tools for evaluating the environmental consequences and opportunities for making meaningful improvements in a product, process, or activity. However, the concept can benefit from further development. Additional research will enhance our understanding of how to conduct life cycle assess ments and how to better interpret the results. Of immediate importance is how LCAs are used while the methodology is being further developed and refined. More to the point: should legislators and solid waste officials consider LCAs--as they are currently conducted--to formulate public policy? What are `Life Cycle Assessments'? , LCAs are an objective, three-part process used to evaluate the environmental impact of a product, process, or activity. The first step involves an inventory of energy, resource use and emissions during each step of a product's "life," starting with the extraction of raw materials from the ground and continuing with the various processing, manufacturing, fabrication, and transportation steps, including the acts of consumption, disposal, or recovery for recycling. The second step involves measuring and assessing the environmental impact of the energy, materials use and emissions inventory. Step three evaluates opportu nities and areas for improvement. Most LCAs conducted today focus on the inventory component only. These studies are useful sources of information on resource usage and environmental 'missions, and can serve as the basis for improvement .nalysis. To date, LCAs have been effectively used to evaluate packaging options and thereby reduce en ergy use and solid waste. A complete life-cycle assessment consists of three separate, but interrelated components. Inventory Most attempts to develop life cycle assessments have focused on the inventory component. Consid erable research is needed to develop the impact and improvement analysis. Life Cycle Inventory. An objective, data-based process of quantifying energy and raw material requirements, air and water emissions, solid waste and other environmental releases incurred through out the life cycle of a product, process or activity. Life Cycle Impact Analysis. A technical, quantita tive, and/or qualitative process to characterize and assess the environmental effects of energy, materials and emissions identified in the life cycle inventory. The assessment should include both environmental and human health considerations. Life Cycle Improvement Analysis. A systematic evaluation of opportunities to reduce the environ mental impact associated with energy and raw materials use and emissions throughout a prod uct's, process's or activity's entire "life." ___ SPI-07494 So"rce: STAC'1991 However, such studies do not qualify all envi ronmental consequences of a product. In 1990, lead ing LCA experts meeting in a workshop sponsored by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemis try (SETAC) proposed a technical framework for meas uring each step of a life cvcle inventory (sec figure?). \c it o\ plastic? and packaging in ti ie enn ikonmeni mm t lnnectk n an km. 1.. \w, v. ah-hnc-ton. tx The major life cycle imentory Mages are 1) raw materials acquisition; 2) manufacturing, processing, and formulation; 3) distribution and transportation; 4) use/ re-use/maintenance; 5) recycling; and 6) emissions and waste management. In general, each stage receives injuits of materials and energy and output* materials or energy and waste emissions. product or packaging options do indeed result in mean ingful environmental improvements. An LCA helps to confirm that a gain in one direction (e.g., reduced solid waste generated by a manufacturer) is not compro mised bv a step backward in another. In this way, LCAs are a valuable internal decision-making tool for process design, product modifications and even the in venting of new products. Input* Energy Raw Materials Life Cycle Inventory Output* ' Water Effluent* Airbornt Emission* Solid Wastes Other Reissse* Usibls Products The largest number of LCAs performed today are for use by private companies to examine their own products in comparison to a modified version of the same product, or to new or pro posed products. Specifically, LCAs are valuable tools to; Provide a broad view of the trade-offs asso ciated with product modifications (such as source reduction/lightweighting, use of recycled content and material substitution), raw material sourcing (agricultural vs. fossil fuel derived), technology changes (in process or materials) and different waste management options; Serve as a baseline for comparison with future modifications; Develop a method to quantify and monitor product's energy consumption and emissions. System Boundary Source: SETAC. 1997 In addition, LCAs can be used to develop information on a single product in an effort to identify potential resource and waste reductions associated with individual steps of the manufac turing process (raw material extraction, fabrica tion, transportation, etc.). Resources needed to construct buildings and manu facturing equipment are generally not included in LCA studies. To do so would require averaging these re sources over a very large number of items produced during the life of the equipment, and therefore would be too small to measure. Activities of plant personnel, such as space condition ing, lunchroom trash and water pollution from sanitary facilities are not included since they would occur whether the product is manufactured or not. One major result from the SETAC workshop was agreement that data from the inventory assessment, such as air and water emissions, have different environ mental impacts and should be reported individually. Results of inyentory assessments have sometimes been added together without "weighing" the relative envi ronmental impact of these emissions. However, the comprehensive nature of LCAs makes objective, scientifically-sound "weighing" schemes difficult. CA? as s Flcrr.iro Toe! A key benefit of LCAs is that they prov ide compa nies a method to ensure new manufacturing processes, Beyond the life cycle inventory', complete LCAs need to include impact and improvement analysis. However, the inventories alone have led to significant environmental progress by uncovering opportunities to reduce energy and waste. Comparing the impact of products or processes that use different technologies is extremely difficult. For example, one process may have mostly air emissions, and another, water borne releases. No scientific guide lines have been established to objectively compare these results. Both the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and SETAC recommend further effort in these areas. In addition, LCAs do not "weigh" the relative im portance of inputs or emissions (such as making energy consumption more important than raw material con sumption). Nor do LCAs include risk assessments of each step of the manufacturing process, since no scien tific system has been established to apply risk assess ments to LCAs or to evaluate the results. Also impor tant is a thorough understanding of all assumptions made about LCA's inputs, processes and emissions is required to quantify and judge impacts. SPI-07495 Case Study: Evaluating Product Packaging Through LCA One of the most important uses of LCAs is to provide companies with a method to ensure that new product formulations or pactiging options do indeed result in meaningful environmental impwvements. In the following simplified example, an LCA was conducted on various packaging strategics for a liquid fabric conditioner product. Only four of the many opt ions studied are shown here. (For a uniform comparison, the data is based upon 1,000 liters of single-strength product.) The table indicates percent decreases for each energy and emission category as compared to a non-recycled, 64 oz. bot tle made of virgin, high-density polyethylene (HDPE). Percent Decrease in Energy Usage Strategies for Packaging Improvement: Process Transport Feedstock ]. Incorporate 257c recycled HDPE 30 9 into the virgin HDPE bottle. 2. Assume 25Pc consumer recycling of the virgin HDPE bottle. 32 11 3. Market a concentrated (3x) product in smaller, virgin HDPE bottles. 55 53 56 4. Market concentrated (3x) product in 53 virgin paper carton to refill HDPE bottle. 58 94 Percent Decrease in Emissions Solid Waterborne Airborne 9 (+4) 4 11 (+4) 5 55 54 55 91 40 62 These results indicate that the source reductions made possible by product concentration offered greater reductions in life cycle energy requirements and emissions than either incorporation of 25 percent recycled HDPE or a 25 percent recycling rate. Product concentration plus the reuse of existing containers offered additional benefits. Relative to the non-recycled virgin bottles, each of the four packaging options studied had reduced energy requirements and solid waste emissions. It is important to note that the emissions associated with each packaging option differ in composition, and thus require a more detailed examination for meaningful interpretation. This case study illustrates the merits of LCA in: (1) providing a baseline as a reference for improvement; (2) guiding product/package development efforts; and (3) lending better understanding of the unique environmental attributes of different packaging strategies. _________________________________________Source: Data compiled by Franklin Associates, Ltd., and provided courtesy of the Procter & Gamble Company. While the LCA concept is useful in developing in formation on resource usage and environmental emis sions, the concept requires further development. Therefore, using LCAs--as they are currently con ducted--as an instrument of public policy is premature. Yet, LCAs are currently being suggested as the basis for "green" labeling of products. Because LCA methodology includes assumptions and average values, results may not be exact or apply to all situations. As such, results are best characterized as a range of values. In addition, LCA results are "snap shots" in time of processes and technology, and quantify most, but not all environmental consequences of a product. Therefore, specific comparisons between material types must be interpreted carefully and have a limited usefulness. LCAs should not be used to evalu ate products as either "good" or "bad," but rather to provide the perspective that environmental issues are not black and white. For example, LCAs can provide a basis for compar ing different products, and can illustrate that everv product consumes energy and has an environmental impact. Furthermore, LCAs are only one of the major studies required to obtain a complete and objective analysis of a product or process. Other questions, such as product protection and safety, product/ package functionality, value, convenience, personal choice and need are more appropriately addressed by other types of studies. Recent efforts, like those of the SETAC Product LCA Advisory Group--which include's industry, government, academia, and special interest groups-- are helping to bring more focus toward refining and improving the LCA process. The SETAC group's stated goal is to, "advance the science, practice, and application of LCAs to reduce the environmental burden and resource consumption associated with products, packaging, processes or activities." LCA practitioners in North America and Europe are moving forward to refine the LCA inventory methodology, develop impact and improvement analysis, clarify definitions and terms, improve the emissions data base, develop a peer review process, and identify future research needs. SPI-07496 Thu L'.S. Environmental Protection Agency has also for:-,icd .1 task force to address the practice and use of LCAs The task force includes representatives of federal and state government agencies, industry, academia, environmental and consumer research groups. The goal of the EPA task force is to "develop a method that can be used by industry and government to inform consumers about product choices, by product and packaging designers and manufacturers to produce products with fewer environmental effects, and by gov ernment policy makers to evaluate pollution prevention policy options. This project is part of an overall effort to create market-driven incentives for pollution preven tion." However, industry, environmental groups and academicians have expressed concern with the use of LCAs to address broad, public policy questions--as LCAs were not designed for this purpose. Summary While LCAs hold great promise, the concept is relatively new' and requires further development. LCA inventory methodology has been developed, and significant improvements can be achieved using data from an inventory, but complete LCAs need to include impact and improvement analyses--which have not been developed. As such, until impact and improvement assessments can be incorporated, LCAs must be used very carefully when comparing different products or packages. Industry, environmental groups and academicians have expressed concern with the use of LCAs to address broad public policy questions. LCAs are ideal for evaluating specific improvements made to reduce resource and environmental effects, and for this reason are being used by industry. Products or packages may best be judged on their own merits and on improvements sought to reduce their total environmental consequences and energy/resource requirements. F.eierer.ces A Comparison of Energy Consumption by the Plastics Indus try to Total Energy Consumption in the U.S., Franklin Associates, Ltd., November 1990. "An Overview of LCA," William E. Franklin, Franklin Associates, Ltd., 1991. A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle Assessment, Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Janu ary 1991. Background Document on Clean Products Research and Im plementation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, October 1990. Comparative Energy and Environmental Impacts for Soft Drink Delivery Systems, Franklin Associates, Ltd., March 1989. Environmental Impacts of Polystyrene Foam and Molded Pulp Meat Trays, Midwest Research Institute, Project No. 3554-D, April 1972. "The Life Cycle Analysis Methodology," Jere D. Sellers, et. al., Franklin Associates, Ltd., 1991. News Release, R. Parrish and J.Fava, Society of Environ mental Toxicology and Chemistry, August 30, 1990 and March 8, 1991. "Outline of Presentation at Lifecycle Assessment: A Tool for the '90s Conference--SETAC," Bruce Vigon, Battelle Columbus, 1991. Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis of Foam Poly styrene and Bleached Paperboard Containers, Franklin Associates, Ltd., June 1990. Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis of Polyethylene and Unbleached Paper Grocery Sacks, Franklin Asso ciates, Ltd., June 1990. Resource <& Environmental Profile Analysis of Plastics & Non-Plastics Containers, R.G. Hunt and R.O. Welch, Midwest Research Institute, Project No. 3714-D, November 1974. SETAC Product LCA Advisory Group Mission Statement, SETAC Foundation for Environmental Education, Inc., Pensacola, Fla., September, 1991. Written Testimony of Dr. James A. Fava, Chair, SETAC Product LCA Advisory Group, before the Federal Trade Commission, July 17, 1991. What is COPPE? COPPE is the Council on Plastics and Packaging in the Environment, a coalition of packaging manufacturers, plastic resin producers, corporate packaging users, recyclers, consumer products companies, retailers and trade associations. It recognizes that the challenges in dealing with post consumer plastic packaging waste are both a fact of life and a societal issue hat must be addressed. We hope that through sharing information on problems and solutions to them, we will help increase the foundation of knowledge upon which sound decisions will be made. For More Information: COPPE 1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 401 Washington, D.C. 20036 September 1991 Printed on recycled paper SPI-07497