Open Science Research Excellence

Open Science Index

Commenced in January 2007 Frequency: Monthly Edition: International Publications Count: 29530


Select areas to restrict search in scientific publication database:
17320
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of High Barrier Polymer Packaging for Selecting Resource Efficient and Environmentally Low-Impact Materials
Abstract:
In this study tree types of multilayer gas barrier plastic packaging films were compared using life cycle assessment as a tool for resource efficient and environmentally low-impact materials selection. The first type of multilayer packaging film (PET-AlOx/LDPE) consists of polyethylene terephthalate with barrier layer AlOx (PET-AlOx) and low density polyethylene (LDPE). The second type of polymer film (PET/PE-EVOH-PE) is made of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and co-extrusion film PE-EVOH-PE as barrier layer. And the third one type of multilayer packaging film (PET-PVOH/LDPE) is formed from polyethylene terephthalate with barrier layer PVOH (PET-PVOH) and low density polyethylene (LDPE). All of analyzed packaging has significant impact to resource depletion, because of raw materials extraction and energy use and production of different kind of plastics. Nevertheless the impact generated during life cycle of functional unit of II type of packaging (PET/PE-EVOH-PE) was about 25% lower than impact generated by I type (PET-AlOx/LDPE) and III type (PET-PVOH/LDPE) of packaging. Result revealed that the contribution of different gas barrier type to the overall environmental problem of packaging is not significant. The impact are mostly generated by using energy and materials during raw material extraction and production of different plastic materials as plastic polymers material as PE, LDPE and PET, but not gas barrier materials as AlOx, PVOH and EVOH. The LCA results could be useful in different decision-making processes, for selecting resource efficient and environmentally low-impact materials.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

References:


[1] Helén W, Fredrik W. Environmental impact of packaging and food losses in a life cycle perspective: a comparative analysis of five food items. Journal Of Cleaner Production (serial online). 2011.;19:43-48.
[2] Helén W, Fredrik W, Martin L. A life cycle perspective on environmental effects of customer focused packaging development. Journal Of Cleaner Production (serial online). 2008.;16:853-859.
[3] Valentina S, Marco Dalla R, Santina R, Pietro R, Urszula T. Life Cycle Assessment of multilayer polymer film used on food packaging field. Procedia Food Science (serial online). 2011.;1(11th International Congress on Engineering and Food (ICEF11):235-239.
[4] Jesmy Jose, Jyotishkumar P, Sajeev M. George and Sabu Thomas, Recycling of polymer blends School of Chemical Sciences, Mahatma Gandhi University, Priyadarshini Hills P.O. Kottayam-686 560, Kerala, India
[5] Sonneveld K. The role of life cycle assessment as a decision support tool for packaging. Packaging Technology and Science 2000; 13(2): 55–61.
[6] Ross S, Evans D. The environmental effect of reusing and recycling a plastic‐based packaging system. Journal of Cleaner Production 2003; 11: 561–571.
[7] Marinella Levi, Sara Cortesi, Carlo Vezzoli and Giuseppe Salvia. A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Disposable and Reusable Packaging for the Distribution of Italian Fruit and Vegetables, Packag. Technol. Sci. 2011; 24: 387–400
[8] Minghui X, Li L, Qi Q, Qihong S, Tichang S. A comparative study on milk packaging using life cycle assessment: from PA-PE-Al laminate and polyethylene in China. Journal Of Cleaner Production (serial online). n.d.;19:2100-2106. Available from: ScienceDirect, Ipswich, MA. Accessed June 1, 2013.
[9] Varžinskas V., Staniškis J.K., Lebedys A., Kibirkštis E., Bivainis V. (2009) Assessment and Minimization of the Life Cycle Based Environmental Impact of Packaging. Environmental Research, Engineering and Management, No.1(47), p.40-49
[10] Keun Taik Lee. In Special Issue: 56th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology (56th ICoMST), 15-20 August 2010, Jeju, Korea, Meat Science. 86(1):138-150
[11] Consoli, F., Allen, D., Boustead, I., et al., 1993. Guidelines for life-cycle assessment: A ‘Code of practice’. SETAC Workshop. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Portugal: Sesimbra.
[12] Erlandsson, M., Lindfors, L., 2003. On the possibilities to apply the result from an LCA disclosed to public. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 8, 65e73.
[13] Prè Consultants 2006. SimaPro 7 LCA software. Prè Consultants, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
[14] Prè Consultants 2007. The ECO-Indicator 99. A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment – Methodology, Report, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
[15] International Standardisation Organisation. ISO 14044, 2006. Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines. ISO Central Secretariat, Geneva
[16] A resource-efficient Europe – flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 strategy, COM(2011) 21

Vol:13 No:04 2019Vol:13 No:03 2019Vol:13 No:02 2019Vol:13 No:01 2019
Vol:12 No:12 2018Vol:12 No:11 2018Vol:12 No:10 2018Vol:12 No:09 2018Vol:12 No:08 2018Vol:12 No:07 2018Vol:12 No:06 2018Vol:12 No:05 2018Vol:12 No:04 2018Vol:12 No:03 2018Vol:12 No:02 2018Vol:12 No:01 2018
Vol:11 No:12 2017Vol:11 No:11 2017Vol:11 No:10 2017Vol:11 No:09 2017Vol:11 No:08 2017Vol:11 No:07 2017Vol:11 No:06 2017Vol:11 No:05 2017Vol:11 No:04 2017Vol:11 No:03 2017Vol:11 No:02 2017Vol:11 No:01 2017
Vol:10 No:12 2016Vol:10 No:11 2016Vol:10 No:10 2016Vol:10 No:09 2016Vol:10 No:08 2016Vol:10 No:07 2016Vol:10 No:06 2016Vol:10 No:05 2016Vol:10 No:04 2016Vol:10 No:03 2016Vol:10 No:02 2016Vol:10 No:01 2016
Vol:9 No:12 2015Vol:9 No:11 2015Vol:9 No:10 2015Vol:9 No:09 2015Vol:9 No:08 2015Vol:9 No:07 2015Vol:9 No:06 2015Vol:9 No:05 2015Vol:9 No:04 2015Vol:9 No:03 2015Vol:9 No:02 2015Vol:9 No:01 2015
Vol:8 No:12 2014Vol:8 No:11 2014Vol:8 No:10 2014Vol:8 No:09 2014Vol:8 No:08 2014Vol:8 No:07 2014Vol:8 No:06 2014Vol:8 No:05 2014Vol:8 No:04 2014Vol:8 No:03 2014Vol:8 No:02 2014Vol:8 No:01 2014
Vol:7 No:12 2013Vol:7 No:11 2013Vol:7 No:10 2013Vol:7 No:09 2013Vol:7 No:08 2013Vol:7 No:07 2013Vol:7 No:06 2013Vol:7 No:05 2013Vol:7 No:04 2013Vol:7 No:03 2013Vol:7 No:02 2013Vol:7 No:01 2013
Vol:6 No:12 2012Vol:6 No:11 2012Vol:6 No:10 2012Vol:6 No:09 2012Vol:6 No:08 2012Vol:6 No:07 2012Vol:6 No:06 2012Vol:6 No:05 2012Vol:6 No:04 2012Vol:6 No:03 2012Vol:6 No:02 2012Vol:6 No:01 2012
Vol:5 No:12 2011Vol:5 No:11 2011Vol:5 No:10 2011Vol:5 No:09 2011Vol:5 No:08 2011Vol:5 No:07 2011Vol:5 No:06 2011Vol:5 No:05 2011Vol:5 No:04 2011Vol:5 No:03 2011Vol:5 No:02 2011Vol:5 No:01 2011
Vol:4 No:12 2010Vol:4 No:11 2010Vol:4 No:10 2010Vol:4 No:09 2010Vol:4 No:08 2010Vol:4 No:07 2010Vol:4 No:06 2010Vol:4 No:05 2010Vol:4 No:04 2010Vol:4 No:03 2010Vol:4 No:02 2010Vol:4 No:01 2010
Vol:3 No:12 2009Vol:3 No:11 2009Vol:3 No:10 2009Vol:3 No:09 2009Vol:3 No:08 2009Vol:3 No:07 2009Vol:3 No:06 2009Vol:3 No:05 2009Vol:3 No:04 2009Vol:3 No:03 2009Vol:3 No:02 2009Vol:3 No:01 2009
Vol:2 No:12 2008Vol:2 No:11 2008Vol:2 No:10 2008Vol:2 No:09 2008Vol:2 No:08 2008Vol:2 No:07 2008Vol:2 No:06 2008Vol:2 No:05 2008Vol:2 No:04 2008Vol:2 No:03 2008Vol:2 No:02 2008Vol:2 No:01 2008
Vol:1 No:12 2007Vol:1 No:11 2007Vol:1 No:10 2007Vol:1 No:09 2007Vol:1 No:08 2007Vol:1 No:07 2007Vol:1 No:06 2007Vol:1 No:05 2007Vol:1 No:04 2007Vol:1 No:03 2007Vol:1 No:02 2007Vol:1 No:01 2007