Environmental and Socioeconomic Impacts of Poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) Packaging Management Strategies in the EU.

Plastics are a challenge for the circular economy due to their overall low recycling rate and high dependency on primary resources. This study analyzes the EU demand for poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) packaging from 2020 to 2030 and quantifies the potential environmental and societal savings by changing the waste management and consumption patterns compared with business-as-usual practices. The results of the life-cycle assessment and life-cycle costing show that a maximum of 38 Mt of CO2-eq and 34 kt of PM2.5-eq could be saved with a more efficient waste management system and a robust secondary material market while also avoiding 8.3 billion EUR2019 in societal costs (cumulative 2020-2030). However, limiting annual PET consumption growth appears to have a similar profound effect on improving the efficiency of waste management systems: 35 Mt of CO2-eq, 31 kt of PM2.5-eq, and 25 billion MEUR2019 societal costs could be saved, simply by keeping EU consumption of PET constant.

A life cycle assessment framework for large-scale changes in material circularity.

Increasing material circularity is high on the agenda of the European Union in order to decouple environmental impacts and economic growth. While life cycle assessment (LCA) is useful for quantifying the associated environmental impacts, consistent LCA modeling of the large-scale changes arising from policy targets addressing material circularity (i.e., recycled content and recycling rate) is challenging. In response to this, we propose an assessment framework addressing key steps in LCA, namely, goal definition, functional unit, baseline versus alternative scenario definition, and modeling of system responses. Regulatory and economic aspects (e.g., trends in consumption patterns, market responses, market saturation, and legislative side-policies affecting waste management) are emphasized as critical for the identification of potential system responses and for supporting regulatory interventions required to reach the intended environmental benefits. The framework is recommended for LCA studies focusing on system-wide consequences where allocation between product life cycles is not relevant; however, the framework can be adapted to include allocation. The application of the framework was illustrated by an example of implementing a policy target for 2025 of 70% recycled content in PET trays in EU27+1. It was demonstrated that neglecting large-scale market responses and saturation lead to an overestimation of the environmental benefits from the policy target and that supplementary initiatives are required to achieve the full benefits at system level.

An environmental and economic assessment of bioplastic from urban biowaste. The example of polyhydroxyalkanoate.

Bio-based and biodegradable plastics promise considerable reductions in our dependency on fossil fuels and in the environmental impacts of plastic waste. This study quantifies the environmental and economic consequences of diverting municipal food waste and wastewater sewage sludge from traditional management to the biorefinery-based production of polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA) in five geographical regions. The results show that PHA can outperform fossil polyurethane and PHA from first-generation biomass (sugarcane and maize) with respect to both environmental impacts and societal costs (four times lower impacts and eight times lower costs than polyurethane). To outperform other fossil polymers like low-density polyethylene (LDPE), biorefinery performance should be improved further by more efficient utilization of sodium hypochlorite during PHA extraction, minimization of methane leakage in biogas facilities, upgrading of biogas to biomethane, and more effective handling of the liquid fraction from digestate dewatering.

Environmental performance of household waste management in Europe - An example of 7 countries.

An attributional life cycle assessment (LCA) of the management of 1ton of household waste was conducted in accordance with ISO 14044:2006 and the ILCD Handbook for seven European countries, namely Germany, Denmark, France, UK, Italy, Poland and Greece, representing different household waste compositions, waste management practices, technologies, and energy systems. National data were collected from a range of sources regarding household waste composition, household sorting efficiency, collection, waste treatments, recycling, electricity and heat composition, and technological efficiencies. The objective was to quantify the environmental performance in the different countries, in order to analyze the sources of the main environmental impacts and national differences which affect the results. In most of the seven countries, household waste management provides environmental benefits when considering the benefits of recycling of materials and recovering and utilization of energy. Environmental benefits come from paper recycling and, to a lesser extent, the recycling of metals and glass. Waste-to-energy plants can lead to an environmental load (as in France) or a saving (Germany and Denmark), depending mainly on the composition of the energy being substituted. Sensitivity analysis and a data quality assessment identified a range of critical parameters, suggesting from where better data should be obtained. The study concluded that household waste management is environmentally the best in European countries with a minimum reliance on landfilling, also induced by the implementation of the Waste Hierarchy, though environmental performance does not correlate clearly with the rate of material recycling. From an environmental point of view, this calls for a change in the waste management paradigm, with less focus on where the waste is routed and more of a focus on the quality and utilization of recovered materials and energy.