Abstract
Growing population and consumerism have created challenges for the management of waste resulting from packaging. In order to support sustainable packaging waste management, this study aims to compare the life cycle impacts of end-of-life scenarios for six packaging materials: aluminum, glass, polypropylene, high-density polyethylene, polyethylene terephthalate, and steel. The decision-making process will take account of the three main aspects of sustainability, which are human health, environmental impact, and economic factors. What makes this work original is the investigation of packaging source reduction in single and combined scenarios for end-of-life options and also applying a novel waste reduction modeling tool. The ReCiPe2016 method is used to assess all ecosystem and human health impacts, and Water Use Life Cycle Assessment (WULCA) for water scarcity. The results indicated that, among the end-of-life packaging alternatives considered, source reduction is the most sustainable waste treatment as it mitigates climate change, leaves a low-material footprint, and consumes fewer natural resources. By contrast, landfilling and incineration have high levels of negative impact, while recycling is noticeably costly. In addition, observation of the considerable difference in the outputs of the SimaPro and WARM databases indicates that there are still extensive measures to be taken to improve LCA tools in order to present reliable information in the packaging material sector. This highlights the crucial role of sustainable waste management policies and LCA applications in the packaging industry to reduce negative life cycle impacts of such products, and that of raising public awareness about the importance of appropriate waste management.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aryan Y, Yadav P, Samadder SR (2019) life cycle assessment of the existing and proposed plastic waste management options in india: a case study. J Cleaner Product 211:1268–1283
Barinova GM, Gaeva DV, Krasnov EV (2020) Hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution and contamination. In W. Leal Filho, T. Wall, A. M. Azul, L. Brandli, & P. G. Özuyar (Eds.), Good Health and Well-Being (pp. 255–266). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95681-7_48
Boutros M, Saba S, Manneh R (2021) Life cycle assessment of two packaging materials for carbonated beverages (polyethylene terephthalate vs glass): Case study for the lebanese context and importance of the end-of-life scenarios. J Cleaner Product 314:128289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128289
Buenrostro O, Bocco G (2003) Solid waste management in municipalities in Mexico: goals and perspectives. Resour Conserv Recycl 39(3):251–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-3449(03)00031-4
Das S, Lee SH, Kumar P, Kim KH, Lee SS, Bhattacharya SS (2019) Solid waste management: scope and the challenge of sustainability. J Clean Prod 228:658–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.323
Deus RM, Mele FD, Bezerra BS, Battistelle RAG (2020) A municipal solid waste indicator for environmental impact: assessment and identification of best management practices. J Clean Prod 242:118433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118433
Emami N, Heinonen J, Marteinsson B, Säynäjoki A, Junnonen JM, Laine J, Junnila S (2019) A life cycle assessment of two residential buildings using two different LCA database-software combinations: recognizing uniformities and inconsistencies. Buildings 9(1):20
EPA. (2021) Waste Reduction Model (WARM). https://www.epa.gov/warm
Evangelisti S, Lettieri P, Borello D, Clift R (2014) Life cycle assessment of energy from waste via anaerobic digestion: A UK case study. Waste Manag 34(1):226–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.09.013
Ferrara C, De Feo G (2020) Comparative life cycle assessment of alternative systems for wine packaging in Italy. J Clean Prod 259:120888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120888
Foolmaun RK, Ramjeawon T (2013) Life cycle sustainability assessments (LCSA) of four disposal scenarios for used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Environ Dev Sustain 15(3):783–806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-012-9406-0
Guven H, Wang Z, Eriksson O (2019) Evaluation of future food waste management alternatives in Istanbul from the life cycle assessment perspective. J Clean Prod 239:117999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117999
Huijbregts MAJ, Steinmann ZJN, Elshout PMF, Stam G, Verones F, Vieira M, van Zelm R (2017) ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22(2):138–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1246-y
Iswara AP, Farahdiba AU, Nadhifatin EN, Pirade F, Andhikaputra G, Muflihah I, Boedisantoso R (2020) A comparative study of life cycle impact assessment using different software programs. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environ Sci 506(1):012002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/506/1/012002
Khandelwal H, Dhar H, Thalla AK, Kumar S (2019) Application of life cycle assessment in municipal solid waste management: A worldwide critical review. J Clean Prod 209:630–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.233
Martínez-Rocamora A, Solís-Guzmán J, Marrero M (2016) LCA databases focused on construction materials: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 58:565–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.243
Mascle C (2013) Design for rebirth (DFRb) and data structure. Int J Prod Econ 142:235–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.12.001
Nevrlý V, Šomplák R, Putna O, Pavlas M (2019) Location of mixed municipal waste treatment facilities: Cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of Cleaner Production 239:118003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118003
Pavi S, Kramer L, Gomes L, Miranda L (2017) Biogas production from co-digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste and fruit and vegetable waste. Biores Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.01.003
Saleh Y (2016) Comparative life cycle assessment of beverages packages in Palestine. J Cleaner Product 131:28–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.080
Ślusarczyk B, Kot S (2018) Solution for sustainable development: provisions limiting the consumption of disposable plastic carrier bags in Poland. J Secur Sustain Issues. https://doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2018.7.3(7)
Stefanini R, Borghesi G, Ronzano A, Vignali G (2021) Plastic or glass: a new environmental assessment with a marine litter indicator for the comparison of pasteurized milk bottles. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26(4):767–784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01804-x
UN (2015) Sustainable development goals. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
UN (2019) The role of packaging Regulations and Standards in driving the Circular Economy. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/role-packaging-regulations-and-standards-driving-circular-economy
Verstegen A, Bouzrouti M, Hensen A, Moreau G, Jansen J, Weemaels L, Van Caneghem J (2022) Estimating the packaging share in household hazardous waste: Methodology proposal and case study application. Environ Sustain Indicators 14:100167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2021.100167
Wang S, Li X, Rodrigues R, Flynn D (2014) Packaging influences on olive oil quality: A review of the literature. UC Davis Olive Center, 1–5. https://olivecenter.ucdavis.edu/media/files/PackagingInfluencesonOliveOilQuality.
WHO (2017) Fact sheets on sustainable development goals: health targets. Hazardous Chemicals. http://www.euro.who.int/data/assets/pdf_file/0007/352249/3.9-Fact-sheet-SDG-Hazardous-chemicals-26-10-2017.pdf?ua=1.
WHO (2018) Ten chemicals of major public health concern. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/ipcs/assessment/public_health/chemicals_phc/en/
Zhang J, Qin Q, Li G, Tseng CH (2021) Sustainable municipal waste management strategies through life cycle assessment method: a review. J Environ Manage 287:112238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112238
Zhao W, der Voet Ev, Zhang Y, Huppes G, (2009) Life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management with regard to greenhouse gas emissions: case study of Tianjin China. Sci Total Environ 407(5):1517–1526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.11.007
Zhou CC, Yin GF, Hu XB (2009) Multi-objective optimization of material selection for sustainable products: artificial neural networks and genetic algorithm approach. Mater Des 30:1209–1215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2008.06.006
Acknowledgment
The authors wish to thank all who assisted in conducting this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial competing interest to disclose.
Data availability statement
The data support the findings of this study are available in the article.
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Editorial responsibility: Samareh Mirkia.
Appendix
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Asadollahi, A., Tohidi, H. & Shoja, A. Sustainable waste management scenarios for food packaging materials using SimaPro and WARM. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 19, 9479–9494 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04327-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04327-0