Applicability of Membranes in Protective Face Masks and Comparison of Reusable and Disposable Face Masks with Life Cycle Assessment

Abstract

In the COVID-19 pandemic period, the role of face masks is critical as a protective physical barrier to prevent droplets and filtrate exhalations coming from infected subjects or against various environmental threats, including the SARS-Cov-2 virus. However, the plastic and microplastic waste from the used face masks pollute the environment, cause a negative impact on human health and the natural ecosystem, as well as increase landfill and medical waste. The presented paper focuses on providing an overview of the application of membrane technology in face mask products as well as the development of protection mechanisms in the future. The authors performed an environmental analysis of reusable (cloth) masks and disposable masks (surgical masks and filtering facepiece respirators) using the Life Cycle Assessment methodology to assess the impacts on the environment, human health, and ecosystem. IMPACT 2002+ V2.14, ReCiPe 2016 Endpoint (H) V1.02, IPCC 2013 GWP 100a V1.03 methods were applied using specialized software (SimaPro V9.1). The disposable masks consistently provide higher protection, though they also carry several multiple environmental burdens. Conversely, reusable masks improve environmental performance, reduce 85% of waste, have a 3.39 times lower impact on climate change, and are 3.7 times cheaper than disposable masks.

Environmental Impact of Surgical Masks Consumption in Italy Due to COVID-19 Pandemic

“…It requires less data input to obtain a preliminary evaluation of the environmental impact of materials and processes [ 29 ]. On the contrary, LCA is a complex and onerous procedure that requires the knowledge of extensive data to evaluate the full process from extraction of raw material to disposal [ 30 ]. Scheme 1 represents the system boundary considered in this work.…”

Carbon footprint assessment of face masks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: Based on different protective performance and applicable scenarios

“…A meta-analysis on betacoronavirus (including SARS-CoV-2) concluded that while masks are generally effective in preventing virus transmission, respirators such as N95 are more protective than disposable medical masks or reusable multilayer (12-16-layer) cotton masks ( Chu et al, 2020 ). Similarly, Do Thi et al (2021) noted that reusable/washable (cloth) masks and disposable masks (both surgical masks and respirators) did help control the spread of SARS-CoV-2, although the highest protection was provided by respirators, followed by surgical masks, and finally cloth masks. Ho et al (2020) concluded, based on experiments with cotton versus medical masks worn by respiratory infected persons, that cotton masks could be a potential substitute for medical masks in air-conditioned micro environments and, given their washable and reusable nature, could be used by healthy individuals in community settings.…”

“…Previous studies have confirmed that cotton masks can offer protection against certain bacteria or viruses ( Chughtai et al, 2020 ; Ho et al, 2020 ), as well as reduce aerosol exposure ( Davies et al, 2013 ). The filtration capacity of these masks varies from 50% to 90% ( Do Thi et al, 2021 ), depending on the closeness of the gauze/cloth threads, the number of gauze/cloth layers, and the type of gauze/cloth ( Chughtai et al, 2013 ). While most cotton masks on the market are still not as effective as disposable products (e.g., medical masks) in terms of filtration, they can be reused after washing and maintain the desired protective performance over a certain number of washes if designed properly and used correctly ( Chughtai et al, 2020 ).…”

“…Medical masks, surgical masks and KN95 respirators are all single-use and need to be replaced regularly ( Do Thi et al, 2021 ). Both medical and surgical masks are composed of three layers of polypropylene (PP) non-woven fabrics, i.e., PP spun-bond, PP melt-blown and PP spun-bond non-woven.…”

“…Therefore, it is somewhat meaningless to compare the environmental performance of different masks, such as cloth masks and filtering facepiece respirators (e.g., N95, KN95, etc.) ( Do Thi et al, 2021 ), apart from the applicable scenarios of face masks.…”