a life cycle study on disposable polystyrene cup and ceramic mug

1、<p>　　A life cycle study on disposable polystyrene cup and ceramic mug</p><p>　　Summary: This Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is performed in order to identify which type of cup, disposable polystyrene or cer

2、amic mug, should be used for a self-dispensing Hospital canteen is providing to its 10,000 staff population. Currently, the hospital is using disposable cups, however, with issues on environmental effects particularly as

3、 solid waste, the use of reusable ceramic mug is proposed. This paper selected European Eco-indicator 95 evaluation method from Simapro 6.0 software to expres</p><p>　　Keywords: Life cycle analysis; disposab

4、le polystyrene cup; ceramic mug; eco-indicator 95 </p><p>　　中圖分類號：N941文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識碼： A </p><p>　　PRODUCT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION </p><p>　　In this life cycle analysis, the environmental

5、and financial issues in the use of disposable polystyrene cup versus the use of reusable ceramic mug will be elaborated. The purpose of this LCA is to identify which type of cup should be used in the Hospital, taking int

6、o account the environmental effects and cost effectiveness of each selection. </p><p>　　For the purpose of this LCA, the functional unit can be used as 150 cups, or the approximate usage life time of a ceram

7、ic cup.Using the chosen functional unit, it is presumed that 150 disposable cups are used equivalent to one ceramic cup. </p><p>　　The life cycle of both the polystyrene and ceramic cups comprise of many pro

8、cesses. Generally speaking, the life cycle of both cups consist of the following five life stages covered in the system boundary: </p><p>　　1) Raw materials (cradle) – Activities related to the acquisition o

9、f natural resources from the Earth. </p><p>　　2) Production of materials – Subsequent processing of raw materials to yield usable polystyrene and ceramic for the manufacturing stage. </p><p>　　3

10、) Production of polystyrene and ceramic cups </p><p>　　4) Use of the product – Use of cups as hot water container. </p><p>　　5) Disposal of the product (grave) – Disposition of used cups at the

11、end of its useful life, e.g.re-use and landfilling. </p><p>　　LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY </p><p>　　The inventory analysis[ Note:The data used on this paper are based on a life cycle of 3000 PS cups an

12、d a porcelain mug.For the purpose of this LCA, all the data are projected to 150 PS cups and 1 ceramic cup.It is assumed that the materials used in ceramic cup and porcelain mug are the same. </p><p>　　] for

13、 each product provides a list of natural resources taken from the environment and the emissions brought into the environment by during the life cycles of the products (Cornelissen, 1997).All the transportation of materia

14、ls during the life cycles of each product was also taken into account. </p><p>　　LIFE CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT </p><p>　　Characterization </p><p>　　The life cycle impac

15、t assessment aims at determining the environmental impact potentials of the emissions in the inventory, not the real effects (Hauschild & Wenzel, 2000).Hence, to characterize all the actual effects of the life cycle

16、inventory, the potential contributions from the emissions of the life cycle should be calculated for all impact categories.In order to perform this characterization, the following formula was used: </p><p>　

17、　EP = Q x EF (Hauschild & Wenzel, 2000) </p><p>　　Where: EP = emission potential </p><p>　　Q = Magnitude of emission </p><p>　　EF = Characterization factor/value for impact cate

18、gory </p><p>　　The tabulated calculations of the EP for each emission substances categorized per environmental impact, was detailed in Figure 1.The characterization factor used in the calculation of EP is ba

19、sed on the characterization values contained in Eco-Indicator 95. </p><p>　　Impact Category Emission Substances polystyrene Cups Ceramic Cups Characterization Factor </p><p><b>　　EP EP <

20、;/b></p><p>　　Green House Effect 2.7596515 1.56502 282 </p><p>　　% TOTAL(FOR BOTH CUPS) 66.81 33.19 </p><p>　　Depletion of the Ozone layer No emission </p><p>　　Acid

21、ification 0.021429305 0.00330128 6.06 </p><p>　　% TOTAL 86.65 13.35 </p><p>　　Eutrofication 3.23125E-05 0.00225 1.482 </p><p>　　% TOTAL 1.42 98.58 </p><p>　　Heavy metal

22、s 1.19675E-07 4.49E-09 15.345 </p><p>　　% TOTAL 96.38 3.62 </p><p>　　Carcinogenic 1.66512E-09 - 2.000033 </p><p>　　% TOTAL 100 0 </p><p>　　Winter smog 0.022580775 0.003

23、5715 3 </p><p>　　% TOTAL 86.34 13.66 </p><p>　　Summer Smog 0.001615927 0.00046982 3.122011 </p><p>　　% TOTAL 77.47 22.53 </p><p>　　Pesticides No emissions </p>&

24、lt;p>　　Figure 1.CHARACTERIZATION – ENVIRONMENTAL POTENTIAL FOR EACH EMISSION SUBSTANCES </p><p>　　Following, in Figure 2, is the graphical representation of the emission potential, expressed in percentage

25、, for each environmental impact category: </p><p>　　Figure 2.Characterization of Environmental Potential </p><p>　　Based on Figure 2, it can be shown that the use of polystyrene cups has the mor

26、e impact to the environment based on its environmental potential.Its effect is higher compared to the ceramic cup in most aspects, particularly greenhouse effect, acidification, and heavy metals.However, it can be seen t

27、hat the major effect of ceramic cup to the environment is eutrofication, which is very high compared to the eutrofication effect of polystyrene cup. </p><p>　　Normalization </p><p>　　The referen

28、ce system to be used is the daily usage cups for the Hospital. The hospital has approximately 10,000 staff who drinks water once to three times a day.Hence, for the purpose of this study, it is assumed that on a maximum,

29、 the hospital uses 30,000 disposable cups per day.This means that, with the 150 usage lifetime of the ceramic cup, 30,000 disposable cup is equivalent to 200 ceramic cups. </p><p>　　For normalization, all EP

30、 values for both polystyrene and ceramic cups shall be multiplied by 200 (30,000/150 disposable cups, and 200 equivalent ceramic cups).However, based on computation of the normalized values (which were not shown anymore)

31、, they are the same to the calculated characterized values. </p><p>　　INTERPRETATIONS/CONCLUSIONS </p><p>　　The outcome of this study was that the air pollution, energy use and amount of solid w

32、aste were higher for the polystyrene disposable cup, as have shown in the graphical representation of environmental impact categories.Disposable polystyrene cups are higher in environmental effect particularly in greenho

33、use effect, acidification of air, heavy metals, carcinogenic effect, and winter and summer smugs. </p><p>　　On the other hand, the only setback for the reusable ceramic cup is its high eutrofication potentia

34、l compared to the polystyrene cup, particularly the effects of phosphates resulting from dishwashing of cups. </p><p>　　Considering the result of the LCA, that the use of the disposable cup has significant e

35、nvironmental impact compared to the use of reusable ceramic cup,. Therefore, the reusable ceramic cup is highly recommended for the Hospital. </p><p>　　REFERENCES: </p><p>　　Cornelissen, R.L. (1

36、997).Thermodynamics and Sustainable Development: The Use of Energy Analysis and the Reduction of Irreversibility.Retrieved from: http://doc.utwente.nl/fid/1562 on 03 June 2004. </p><p>　　Eco-Indicator 95.Ret

37、rieved from: http://www.pre.nl/download/EI95FinalReport.pdfNovember 2013. </p><p>　　Hauschild, M. & Wenzel, H. (2000).Life Cycle Assessment – Environmental Assessment of Products.In Jorgensen, S.E. (ed.)