Comparative Life Cycle Assessment among Three Polyurethane Adhesive Technologies for the Footwear Industry

被引:28
|
作者
Maciel, Vinicius Goncalves [1 ]
Bockorny, Geovana [2 ]
Domingues, Nei [2 ]
Scherer, Moara Britz [2 ]
Zortea, Rafael Batista [3 ,4 ]
Seferin, Marcus [1 ]
机构
[1] PUCRS Pontifical Catholic Univ Rio Grande Sul, Sch Chem, Postgraduat Program Mat Engn & Technol, Av Ipiranga 6681, BR-90619900 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
[2] Artecola Quim, R&D Adhes, Highway RS 239,5801, BR-93900000 Campo Bom, Brazil
[3] IFSUL Sul Rio Grandense Fed Inst, Av Piratini 100, BR-93216120 Sapucaia Do Sul, RS, Brazil
[4] 3BL Brasil Sustentabilidade & Resultado, Av Otto Klein 682, BR-93900000 Ivoti, RS, Brazil
来源
关键词
Life cycle assessment; Adhesive; Polyurethane; Footwear industry; Hot-melt; ENVIRONMENTAL-IMPACT; DAMAGE;
D O I
10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02516
中图分类号
O6 [化学];
学科分类号
0703 ;
摘要
This study presents an environmental assessment involving three polyurethane adhesive technologies used in the footwear industry: a solvent-based adhesive (SBA), a water-based adhesive (WBA), and a powder-based adhesive (PBA). SBA is a versatile adhesive, but the presence of volatile organic compounds has some disadvantages regarding both environmental and workers' welfare issues. On the other hand, PBA and WBA require more complex processing than SBA. PBA is a hot-melt adhesive in powder form and a solvent free thermoplastic material, presenting lower risks to workers' health and flammability, but its application requires electric energy because it is carried out by machine. Thus, a comparative study among these three polyurethane adhesive technologies using a life cycle assessment methodology was conducted from "cradle-to-gate". Primary data for environmental emissions, wastewater, chemical components, and technical specifications were collected during visits in local. Based on the results, PBA decreased environmental impacts in all categories evaluated except in the respiratory organic category. Therefore, if the purpose of this analysis is to look at the footwear workers' health, WBA would be considered the best technology. This work shows that any actions that seek to minimize these impacts should begin in "the footwear industry", more specifically; in the stage of use due to the electricity required during the adhesive application. Besides that, all three technologies offer possibilities to minimize some of the environmental impacts. Therefore, it is suggested that better management of the energy expended during the application step from renewable energy sources, improvement of equipment energy efficiency, and development of new formulations are potential alternatives for solutions seeking to reduce impacts involving all adhesive technologies and consequently shoe production.
引用
收藏
页码:8464 / 8472
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Industry approaches to life cycle assessment -: German experience and results of a comparative European survey
    Scholl, GU
    TOOLS AND METHODS FOR POLLUTION PREVENTION, 1999, 62 : 51 - 67
  • [42] Comparative life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of lodging in the Himalaya
    Bhochhibhoya, Silu
    Pizzol, Massimo
    Achten, Wouter M. J.
    Maskey, Ramesh Kumar
    Zanetti, Michela
    Cavalli, Raffaele
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2017, 22 (11): : 1851 - 1863
  • [43] Comparative life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of lodging in the Himalaya
    Silu Bhochhibhoya
    Massimo Pizzol
    Wouter M. J. Achten
    Ramesh Kumar Maskey
    Michela Zanetti
    Raffaele Cavalli
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2017, 22 : 1851 - 1863
  • [44] COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DIFFERENT DRINKING WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES USING LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT METHOD
    Krupnova, T. G.
    Litvinov, A. A.
    GEOCONFERENCE ON WATER RESOURCES, FOREST, MARINE AND OCEAN ECOSYSTEMS, VOL I (SGEM 2014), 2014, : 127 - 134
  • [45] Comparative life cycle assessment of metal arc welding technologies by using engineering design documentation
    Favi, Claudio
    Camp, Federico
    Germani, Michele
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2019, 24 (12): : 2140 - 2172
  • [46] Comparative study of municipal solid waste treatment technologies using life cycle assessment method
    Zaman, A. U.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2010, 7 (02) : 225 - 234
  • [47] A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Dry and Wet Anaerobic Digestion Technologies for Food Waste Management
    Abu, Rozieana
    Aziz, Muhammad Arif Ab
    Hassan, Che Hafizan Che
    Noor, Zainura Zainon
    Jalil, Rohaya Abd
    JURNAL KEJURUTERAAN, 2023, 35 (02): : 317 - 349
  • [48] Innovation in charcoal production: A comparative life-cycle assessment of two kiln technologies in Brazil
    Bailis, Rob
    Rujanavech, Charissa
    Dwivedi, Puneet
    Vilela, Adriana de Oliveira
    Chang, Howard
    de Miranda, Rogerio Carneiro
    ENERGY FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, 2013, 17 (02) : 189 - 200
  • [49] Comparative environmental assessment of methanol production technologies: A cradle-to-gate life cycle analysis
    Liu, Jing
    Zhao, Jun
    Wei, Haiqiao
    Zhu, Qiang
    Li, Yang
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT, 2024, 302
  • [50] Comparative life cycle assessment of warm mix technologies in asphalt rubber pavements with uncertainty analysis
    Cao, Ruijun
    Leng, Zhen
    Yu, Huayuang
    Hsu, Shu-Chien
    RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING, 2019, 147 : 137 - 144