Repair is usually a less practiced solution for the end of life management of products because of technical, regulatory, aesthetic, and functional challenges; however, the characteristics of some materials and product uses can make repair feasible. This is true for auxiliary agricultural equipment that does not need to meet aesthetic requirements, in particular for bulk containers (Fig.1). This article presents the results of a screening Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) done to compare the environmental performance of repair in respect of two alternative options of recycling and incineration. The system boundaries extend from the extraction of raw materials through the three end of life options (cradle-to-cradle approach). The containers considered consist of 35–40 kg of homogeneous plastic materials (PE or HDPE). Repairing involves the use of a blend of plastic materials and a process of heat welding. The test was performed under the assumption that repair of damaged containers results in the same functionality as new containers and thus avoids their replacement. The functional unit of comparison was defined as equal to 10 years of availability of use of the container. Damage was assumed to occur during the 5th year of use, and repair was assumed to use 150 g of blend welding. The reference flow was one 35-kg container made of homogeneous HDPE. The study was based on ISO14040 series standards (ISO 2006a, 2006b). The LCIA method used was ReCiPe 2008. The repair option can reduce the total impacts considered in the LCIA method. In most of the impacts indicators these reductions range between 30 and 50% compared to the recycling solution. The benefits are even greater in the case of comparison with the solution of incineration (between 50 and 70%) (Fig.3). The positive performance is mainly related to the avoided impacts related to i) the use of a second container to cover the remaining five years of useful life and ii) the recycling and waste-to-energy processes. Results shows that, over 10 years of useful life, container repair can considerably reduce environmental impacts in respect of conventional options.
End of life of plastic products. The repairing option applied to agricultural bulk containers
TADDEO, RAFFAELLA;SIMBOLI, Alberto;MORGANTE, Anna
2015-01-01
Abstract
Repair is usually a less practiced solution for the end of life management of products because of technical, regulatory, aesthetic, and functional challenges; however, the characteristics of some materials and product uses can make repair feasible. This is true for auxiliary agricultural equipment that does not need to meet aesthetic requirements, in particular for bulk containers (Fig.1). This article presents the results of a screening Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) done to compare the environmental performance of repair in respect of two alternative options of recycling and incineration. The system boundaries extend from the extraction of raw materials through the three end of life options (cradle-to-cradle approach). The containers considered consist of 35–40 kg of homogeneous plastic materials (PE or HDPE). Repairing involves the use of a blend of plastic materials and a process of heat welding. The test was performed under the assumption that repair of damaged containers results in the same functionality as new containers and thus avoids their replacement. The functional unit of comparison was defined as equal to 10 years of availability of use of the container. Damage was assumed to occur during the 5th year of use, and repair was assumed to use 150 g of blend welding. The reference flow was one 35-kg container made of homogeneous HDPE. The study was based on ISO14040 series standards (ISO 2006a, 2006b). The LCIA method used was ReCiPe 2008. The repair option can reduce the total impacts considered in the LCIA method. In most of the impacts indicators these reductions range between 30 and 50% compared to the recycling solution. The benefits are even greater in the case of comparison with the solution of incineration (between 50 and 70%) (Fig.3). The positive performance is mainly related to the avoided impacts related to i) the use of a second container to cover the remaining five years of useful life and ii) the recycling and waste-to-energy processes. Results shows that, over 10 years of useful life, container repair can considerably reduce environmental impacts in respect of conventional options.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
