A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach was used to study the environmental performance of 0.5-liter aseptic carton bottle for drinking water distribution. The bottle is formed by an aseptic carton container and a PP closure. The geographical scope of the study is Northern Italy and collected data are related to the years 2017-2019. The foreground system was mainly described with data collected for previous analyses and adopted here due to lack of data relative to aseptic carton. Primary data about the primary and secondary packages (mass and material) were gathered by collecting samples of 0.5 L Tetra Pak Prisms and cartonboard boxes from Acqua Smeraldina. The assessment is based on 14 impact categories from the Environmental Footprint Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method, version 2.0 (Fazio et al., 2018). The analysis includes the manufacturing of the primary and secondary packaging, as well as its transportation, distribution and end-of-life. As a result, the most important burden to the total impact of the system is given by the life cycle of the aseptic carton container, especially for the production and transportation of paperboard and aluminum. Three scenarios for end-of-life of aseptic carton container are analysed: collection with the residual waste followed by incineration, collection with paper and recycling in a conventional paper mill, collection with paper and recycling in a dedicated paper mill. The latter results the best scenario, the recycling in conventional paper mill the worst. By applying a sensitivity analysis on the water and energy consumption, it was discovered that the dedicated paper mill would remain the best scenario even if the request of water of a dedicated paper mill is 30 times higher than a conventional paper mill. So, the results of sensitivity analysis depend only on the request of energy. Dedicated paper mill is the best scenario even in case of a-four times increase of energy consumption of a conventional paper mill. If the energy consumption increases by five times or more, the best scenario for end-of-life of aseptic carton container becomes the incineration together with the residual waste. Finally, the aseptic carton bottle is compared with the PET bottle. For water distribution in Italy, PET bottle results the best option.
Le prestazioni ambientali di una bottiglia d’acqua in materiale poliaccoppiato da 0,5 litri sono state analizzate con l’approccio del ciclo di vita (Life Cycle Assessment – LCA). La bottiglia è composta da un contenitore in cartone asettico (comprensivo di uno strato il polietilene e uno in alluminio) e da una chiusura in polipropilene. L'ambito geografico dello studio è quello del Nord Italia e i dati raccolti sono relativi agli anni 2017-2019. Il sistema è descritto principalmente con dati raccolti per precedenti analisi e adottati in questa a causa della difficoltà di reperimento di dati relativi al cartone asettico. Acqua Smeraldina è l’unica azienda italiana che distribuisce acqua in bottiglie da 0.5 L in cartone asettico. I dati primari sull’imballaggio primario e secondario (massa e tipo di materiale) sono stati raccolti acquistando dei campioni di Tetra Pak Prism consegnati in scatole di cartone da Acqua Smeraldina. La valutazione è basata su 14 categorie d’impatto suggerite dall’Environmental Footprint Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method, versione 2.0 (Fazio et al., 2018). L’analisi include la produzione dell’imballaggio primario e secondario, il trasporto, la distribuzione e il fine vita. Dai risultati, il contributo più impattante è dato dal ciclo vita del contenitore in cartone asettico, specialmente per la produzione e il trasporto della carta e dei fogli di alluminio. Sono stati analizzati tre scenari per il fine vita del contenitore in cartone asettico: raccolta con il rifiuto residuo e avvio a incenerimento, raccolta con la carta e riciclo in cartiera convenzionale, raccolta con la carta e riciclo in cartiera dedicata. Quest’ultimo risulta il miglior scenario; il riciclo in cartiera convenzionale il peggiore. Da un’analisi di sensitività sui consumi di acqua ed energia di una cartiera dedicata, la cartiera specializzata rimarrebbe il miglior scenario anche se il consumo di acqua fosse 30 volte più elevato di quello di una cartiera convenzionale. Quindi il risultato dell’analisi di sensibilità dipende solo dal consumo di energia. A riguardo, la cartiera dedicata rimane il miglior scenario fino a consumi di energia pari a quattro volte quelli di una cartiera convenzionale. Se il consumo di energia della cartiera dedicata fosse uguale a cinque volte o più di quello di una cartiera convenzionale, l’incenerimento sarebbe la miglior soluzione. Nella seconda parte della tesi, la bottiglia in cartone asettico è confrontata con la bottiglia in PET. Per la distribuzione nazione, la bottiglia in PET risulta la migliore soluzione.
Life cycle impacts of aseptic carton used for drinking water delivery
PERSICO, LAVINIA PIA
2018/2019
Abstract
A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach was used to study the environmental performance of 0.5-liter aseptic carton bottle for drinking water distribution. The bottle is formed by an aseptic carton container and a PP closure. The geographical scope of the study is Northern Italy and collected data are related to the years 2017-2019. The foreground system was mainly described with data collected for previous analyses and adopted here due to lack of data relative to aseptic carton. Primary data about the primary and secondary packages (mass and material) were gathered by collecting samples of 0.5 L Tetra Pak Prisms and cartonboard boxes from Acqua Smeraldina. The assessment is based on 14 impact categories from the Environmental Footprint Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method, version 2.0 (Fazio et al., 2018). The analysis includes the manufacturing of the primary and secondary packaging, as well as its transportation, distribution and end-of-life. As a result, the most important burden to the total impact of the system is given by the life cycle of the aseptic carton container, especially for the production and transportation of paperboard and aluminum. Three scenarios for end-of-life of aseptic carton container are analysed: collection with the residual waste followed by incineration, collection with paper and recycling in a conventional paper mill, collection with paper and recycling in a dedicated paper mill. The latter results the best scenario, the recycling in conventional paper mill the worst. By applying a sensitivity analysis on the water and energy consumption, it was discovered that the dedicated paper mill would remain the best scenario even if the request of water of a dedicated paper mill is 30 times higher than a conventional paper mill. So, the results of sensitivity analysis depend only on the request of energy. Dedicated paper mill is the best scenario even in case of a-four times increase of energy consumption of a conventional paper mill. If the energy consumption increases by five times or more, the best scenario for end-of-life of aseptic carton container becomes the incineration together with the residual waste. Finally, the aseptic carton bottle is compared with the PET bottle. For water distribution in Italy, PET bottle results the best option.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
TesiPersicoDefinitiva.pdf
accessibile in internet per tutti
Descrizione: tesi completa
Dimensione
2.19 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.19 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in POLITesi sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/10589/154534