Life cycle assessment of bioethanol‐based PVC

Abstract

Literature suggests that depletion of non‐renewable resources is the most concerning environmental impact category in the life cycle of the polyvinyl chloride (PVC), mainly due to the fossil feedstock for ethylene. Therefore, bioethanol is considered as another source for ethylene in the PVC production chain. The objective of this review was to perform a cradle‐to‐gate attributional life cycle assessment (LCA) of bioethanol‐based PVC resin. We created two scenarios for bioethanol‐based PVC (2010 and 2018), and compared them with fossil‐based PVC. We used primary data from Solvay S.A. and secondary data from the literature, for the life cycle inventory. For the impact assessment, we used several midpoint indicators and the ReCiPe Endpoint H/A. At midpoint level, bioethanol‐based PVC from 2010 and 2018 presented better results than fossil‐based PVC for non‐renewable resource use (13.8, 13.4, and 44.8 MJex/kg of PVC resin, respectively) and climate change (−0.09, –0.19, and 1.52 kg CO2eq/kg of PVC resin, respectively), but worse results for other environmental impact categories (e.g. ecotoxicity). At endpoint level, the two bioethanol‐based PVC scenarios showed better results overall than fossil‐based PVC (up to 66% lower). Within the bioethanol‐based PVC scenarios, the results for 2018 were better than for 2010 (up to 43% lower for the endpoint single score results) corroborating that higher efficiency (at the crop field and bioethanol production) and reduction of burnt harvest ought to reduce environmental impacts. Even though bioethanol‐based PVC had better results in comparison to fossil‐based, improvements should be sought to minimize other environmental impact categories, for example, biodiversity and ecotoxicity. © 2013 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Life cycle assessment of bioethanol‐based PVC

“…In the policy scenario there was an extra production of 9 408 000 ton of bioethanol, which we considered to be fully responsible for the additional 244 000 ha (267 628 000–267 384 000 ha) of land needed. Through personal communication with the authors of the report, we obtained the information that the bioethanol yield considered was 6.3 m/ha. So, to produce the extra amount of 9 408 000 ton bioethanol in the policy scenario, 1 763 403 ha was needed.…”

“…The LCI of bioethanol (and the co‐production of electricity) was based on several sources from literature and is the same one available in the first part of this work, except for data related to land‐use change (LUC), which is discussed in the next paragraph. For the (bio)ethylene production we based on primary data from Solvay S.A, and for the fossil‐based ethylene we used secondary data from the ecoinvent database .…”

“…In the consequential approach we considered the same life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods used in the attributional LCA (Table ), both for the midpoint and endpoint levels. It is important to highlight that while at midpoint level the analysis was performed at each environmental impact category (e.g.…”

“…In order to decrease its environmental footprint, the chemical industry is seeking renewable feedstocks, and for polyvinyl chloride (PVC) products, ethylene produced from bioethanol appears to be a good replacement for the fossil ethylene . In the first part of this work the environmental impacts of the Brazilian bioethanol‐based PVC were assessed through an attributional life cycle assessment (LCA), using the fossil‐based PVC as a benchmark, showing better results for the use of non‐renewable resources, climate change, and for the weighted single score endpoint results . However, by an attributional LCA we could not evaluate environmental aspects that might emerge if bioethanol‐based PVC induces an extra demand for bioethanol.…”

Evaluation of the environmental performance of alternatives for polystyrene production in Brazil

“…For the other impact categories, oil-based-polymers tend to be more eco-friendly. These assertions were made by Alvarenga et al (2013) in a comparative study of Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and by Liptow and Tillman (2012), when analyzing Low-density polyethylene (LDPE). Benefits of biopolymers in both analyses are due mainly to the high rates of carbon sequestration caused by sugarcane, a common feedstock for these resins in all analyzed scenarios.…”