Gasoline components

An Example Where the Interpretation is Critical: the Case of MTBE

When added to gasoline, MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether) can:
• reduce ozone emissions by 15%
• reduce benzene emissions by 50%
• reduce carbon monoxide emissions by 11%
• but, MTBE is toxic to humans
Should we use MTBE?

Despite its potential benefits on air quality when added to gasoline, MTBE has some properties that can cause health problems. MTBE is much more soluble in water than most other components of gasoline. If it gets in the ground, it can travel faster and farther through groundwater. This makes it more likely to contaminate public water systems and private drinking water wells if gasoline is spilled on the ground or leaks out of underground storage tanks. Even fairly small amounts of MTBE in water can give it an unpleasant taste and odor, making the water undrinkable. MTBE also does not break down (biodegrade) easily. As a result, it is harder to clean up once contamination occurs.

Its use has declined in the United States in response to environmental and health concerns. In Europe and Asia is still being used.

Cradle to Cradle certified products

Val, han passat gairebé dos anys des de la darrera entrada. Però avui he llegit un article que val molt la pena. I ha estat llegir-lo i pensar: vés a mirar si el teu blog sobre LCA encara funciona. I si funciona, doncs enllaça-hi aquest article per a què no quedi en l'oblit. Així que aquí teniu:

Are Cradle to Cradle certified products environmentally preferable? Analysis from an LCA approach

. Author links open the author workspace.PereLlorach-Massanaa. Numbers and letters correspond to the affiliation list. Click to expose these in author workspaceb. Numbers and letters correspond to the affiliation list. Click to expose these in author workspaceOpens the author workspaceOpens the author workspace. Author links open the author workspace.RamonFarrenya. Numbers and letters correspond to the affiliation list. Click to expose these in author workspacec. Numbers and letters correspond to the affiliation list. Click to expose these in author workspace. Author links open the author workspace.JordiOliver-Solàa. Numbers and letters correspond to the affiliation list. Click to expose these in author workspacec

Highlights

•

There are many controversies surrounding the concept of Cradle to Cradle and other scientific approaches.

•

Cradle to Cradle requirements do not tackle the environmental aspects of products from a life cycle approach.

•

Cradle to Cradle does not guarantee environmental improvements for products that consume large amounts of energy during use.

•

Cradle to Cradle does not always distinguish environmentally preferable products.

Abstract

The Cradle to Cradle (C2C) certification has gained popularity amongst companies as a way to distinguish more environmentally friendly products. This article analyzes the C2C certification by determining how successful this eco-labeling scheme is in distinguishing environmentally preferable products in order to probe if the certification informs correctly to the consumer about the environmental performance of products. Furthermore, we identify for which product types the C2C certification really results in environmental impact reduction. First a review is done in order to detect the debilities, if any, of C2C. Secondly, the fact that C2C requirements do not tackle environmental aspects of products from a life cycle approach, and concentrates exclusively on raw materials and end of life phases, is further analyzed in depth. To do so, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) already published results for different product categories are used to determine if the life-cycle stages considered under the C2C approach coincide with the most relevant stages in terms of life-cycle environmental impacts. This helps ascertain if and when C2C can be considered an appropriate ecolabel.

It is concluded that for products with high-energy consumption during use, C2C does not guarantee relevant environmental improvements, since it does not account for a substantial part of the product's environmental impact. For these reasons, we argue that C2C is not always an appropriate scheme to distinguish environmentally preferable products.

LCM 2015

As stated by the own organization: The Life Cycle Management conferences are established as one of the leading conference series worldwide in the field of environmental, economical and social sustainability. The unique feature of LCM is developing practical solutions for the implementation of life cycle approaches into strategic and operational decision-making. The Life Cycle Conference is for international decision-makers from science, industry, NGOs and public bodies.

This year, LCM 2015 edition was held in Burdeaux, France, August 30 – September 02. About 700 people were there to explain, listen and discuss about the most relevant and innovative case studies in the Life Cycle Management area.

For me, the most interesting issue of the overall conference was to understand the link between LCA and the every-day-most-fashion-concept Circular economy. If you are not talking about Circular Economy you are out of the solar system.

To summarise the relation between LCA and Circular Economy, here you are 5 tips:

• Circular Economy is not only waste.
• In CE society turns products to services.
• CE encourage solutions that make better use of resources and materials.. thus we need LCA to clearly evaluate the options and make good decisions.
• LCM streghtens the transition to circular economy
• LCA is the tool to shift to a circular economy. If we have the tool.. we need to know how to use it.

More info at:

• http://lcm2015.org/
• www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/

Meat and byproducts consumption and CO2 emissions

No more words are needed..

Rayban Sunglasses

It is summer. Your old sunglasses are a mess.. the glass is full of scratches and after asking about the possibility of repairing them, you finally decide that it is time to buy a new pair.

After trying many models, the final decision is between 2 Rayban  models: Aviator and Wayfarer.

 

Instead of choosing according to economical or esthetical reasons, you have decided to get the most environmental friendly one. You are lucky, since both models have an Environmental Product Declaration under the EPD International system: www.environdec.com

 

Here you are a summary of the results that you can find checking both studies:

 

- For both:  The declared unit is represented by a pair of sunglasses as delivered to the final costumer, i.e. with the sunglass case and cleaning cloth. Packaging is included in the declared unit, as it allows fulfilling the functionality of the product.

 

AVIATOR EPD SUMMARY:

 

 

 

 

WAYFARER EPD SUMMARY:

 

When using a methodology called Ecoindicator 99 we can obtain an aggreggated indicator. In those EPDs the total environmental of the two models was:

 

	Cradle-to-Gate Life Cycle ECOINDICATOR 99  (pt)
AVIATOR	0,345
WAYFARER	0,296

IN CONCLUSION, it seems that the WAYFARER model is more environmental friendly that the other model due to its lower non renewable resources consumption and electricity consumption during the manifacturing (check the rest of the EPC for more details).

  

 

 



LCM2013

I am sorry for not keeping my promise of writing a post every day.. In fact I am currently attending the LCM Conference 2013 in Goteborg, so I will come back to you after the conference with many new and interesting topics and I will try to catch up on time.
Thanks for your patience.

Grocery bags

Which type of bag is most sustainable?

a) a one use paper bag
b) a one use plastic bag
c) a reusable tote bag made from cotton
d) a reusable tote bag made from recycled plastic

Source: Life Cycle Assessment for Three Types of Grocery Bags - Recyclable Plastic; Compostable, Biodegradable Plastic; and Recycled, Recyclable Paper, Prepared for the Progressive Bag Alliance by Chet Chaffee and Bernard R. Yaros; Boustead Consulting & Associates  Ltd., 2007. 

 

Probably, after looking at the graphic above, we would say that we prefer the reusable cotton bag, however:

• cotton-farming process is extremely fossil-fuel-intensive
• conventionally grown cotton uses more insecticides than any other single crop (according to the Pesticide Action Network of North America)
• most cotton bags are woven in developing countries where labor conditions are controversial.

Therefore.. probably the best option would be:

d) a reusable tote bag made from recycled plastic

Source: Paper, Plastic, or Cotton Tote Bag? What Life Cycle Assessments. Tell Us About the Sustainability of Everyday Items. David Tyler, Department of Chemistry, University of Oregon (3/21/2013)
http://rubiconsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Paper-Plastic-or-Cotton-Tote-Taylor-March-21-2013.pdf


However the best option would probably be the cotton bag if it was made from sustainable cotton like the textiles from DEM COLLECTIVE, a really interesting Swedish textile Brand.