Friday, January 27, 2023
Green Reporter
  • Home
  • Biodiversity
  • Climate Change
  • Energy
  • Filmmaking
  • Food
  • Investment
  • Management
  • Sustainability
  • Technology
  • Transportation
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Biodiversity
  • Climate Change
  • Energy
  • Filmmaking
  • Food
  • Investment
  • Management
  • Sustainability
  • Technology
  • Transportation
No Result
View All Result
Green Reporter
No Result
View All Result
Home Transportation

Reconciling human health with the environment while struggling against the COVID-19 pandemic through improved face mask eco-design

GrR by GrR
February 14, 2022
in Transportation
0
55
SHARES
239
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter


Inventory analysis

Before computing the environmental impacts, we analyzed inventory data and input them into the software program for simulations. With respect to reusable masks, on-site measurements of raw materials, energy requirements for processing (e.g., laying, cutting, sewing, etc.), packaging material configurations, reuse options, cleaning activities and transport distances were provided by the Italian Social District. In particular, requirements for washing the reusable face mask were adapted from Schmutz et al.9 in compliance with the information provided by the producer. Moreover, waste disposal scenario data for both types was collected from the preprint by Allison et al.23 Finally, inventory data for single-use masks were collected from independent producers via certified laboratories. The final set of background and foreground data are provided in “Supplementary Table S1”.

Single-use face masks consist of three layers of polypropylene non-wovens. The inner and outer fabric layers are Spunbond and the middle layer is 99% filtering Meltblown24. Reusable face masks (Type IIR) are also composed of three layers: an internal layer of antibacterial quality cotton, a middle layer of Meltblown, and an external layer of Spunbond. Mask quality is determined by the quality of the component parts and is therefore traceable to the component suppliers. Information on the suppliers and product component types (including certifications and features) is provided in “Supplementary Table S2”. Meltblown (supplied by Ramina) makes up the central part of reusable masks. This component guarantees a filtering performance of more than 99%, which—combined with the high-quality water-repellent anti-drop C6 antibacterial cotton (supplied by Olmetex) of the inner layer—resists up to 10 washes per immersion. These materials, forged together using specialized machinery, enhance Type IIR surgical masks above all others, with respect to their superior performance in the overall trade-off between filtering quality, reusability, and environmental sustainability. Furthermore, the cotton inner fabric of these masks has the same effectiveness as single-use masks in reducing the transmission of respiratory viruses25.

Regarding elastic bands, nose clip material (for single-use masks), and fabric layers, no direct datasets are available in the ecoinvent database. Thus, for the present study, non-allergenic latex-free elastic bands, produced using a “polyurethane, flexible foam” process, were assumed. Nose clip material, which is only used for single-use masks, was assumed to be modelled using a “polyvinyl chloride resin (B-PVC)” process. Finally, we assumed that a “polypropylene, granulate” process was used for the TnT Spunbond and Meltblown layers. Regarding packaging materials, reusable face masks are wrapped in biodegradable plastic bags, while single-use masks are packaged in plastic bags. Both types of masks are packaged in sets of 10 and delivered in recycled cardboard boxes. In the present study, packaging materials were introduced to the software as “polyester-complexed starch biopolymer”, “packaging film, low-density polyethylene”, and “corrugated board boxes: 16.6% primary fiber, 83.4% recycled fiber”. For transportation, a “transport, freight, lorry 16–32 metric ton, EURO6” process was assumed from the manufacturing facility and nationwide distribution by road, using Euro 6D vans.

To calculate the number of face masks used in Italy in 2020, we estimated the Italian population at 60.6 million, based on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) statistics26. We assumed one mask per person, per day, for both mask types, according to WHO recommendations27. As reusable face masks can be washed up to 10 times without losing their virus filtration performance (according to the manufacturer’s own specification), we assumed the maximum number of washes for the use phase. Accordingly, the total number of face masks used in Italy was calculated at 2.18 and 22.1 billion for reusable and single-use face masks, respectively. The total amount of waste was calculated in terms of the number of used masks, alongside their packaging materials (i.e., plastic wrap and cardboard boxes) (Table 2). Single-use face masks were found to generate almost 10 times more waste for each waste category, relative to reusable face masks.

Table 2 Total waste generated from used face masks in Italy, 2020 (kton/year).

With respect to mask use, our basic case scenario was based on WHO recommendations27, which stipulate that reusable face masks should be washed daily with soap/detergent and hot (60 °C) water. We assumed that the entire household (2.3 people for Italian case) masks are washed together with other clothes in a standard 7 kg washing machine, following both the literature9 and producer instructions. Schmutz et al.9 reported that the requirements for a half-full washing machine (a typical situation in Europe) are 84 g detergent, 52.3 L tap water and 1.1 kWh electricity per load. Accordingly, the average washing consumables required for each mask is calculated by normalizing the specified requirements with respect to one mask (i.e., via multiplying a half-full load requirement by 0.2%).

It should be noted, however, that user behavior is not easy to predict and the washing machine might not be always considered as the preferred option. Hence, as a further step, we investigated different user behaviors as sensitivity cases. First of all, hand washing was introduced as the main sensitivity scenario9,23,28. In this case, we assumed that the entire household masks will be washed together every day after use, in a bowl of 5 L filled up to 3 L level with water at 60 °C and then rinsed with water without soap/detergent. Approximately 6.24 g of liquid detergent and 6 L of water is required in each manual washing session23. Similar to the machine wash case, the average washing consumables required for each mask is calculated by normalizing the specified requirements with respect to one mask (i.e., the requirements per mask per wash are 2.609 L tap water, 2.713 g detergent, 447.7 kJ energy provided by the gas boiler).

Moreover, we also considered other possible user behavior scenarios, assuming that reusable face masks might be washed for more than the recommended lifespan (i.e., 10 washes). Accordingly, a second sensitivity case was modelled for reusable masks washed 15 times prior to disposal. Finally, with reference to single-use masks, we took into consideration a longer period of wearing. Although the recommended face mask use is one mask per day (or 4–8 h), many users wear single-use surgical masks for longer than this recommended period. Thus, in this sensitivity case, we assumed that users would wear the same mask for 2 subsequent days. It should be noted, however, that the latter two sensitivity cases, i.e., concerning longer wearing period of both types, might compromise the protection level of masks and thereby human health.

Regarding the packaging and waste disposal activities, the Italian Social District provided some data from their ongoing studies regarding the biodegradability of packaging materials for reusable (Type IIR) face masks. However, the present study could not consider actual waste disposal activities (i.e., recycling, reuse) due to the lack of approved assessments. Thus, waste disposal was based mainly on previous studies indicating incineration and landfilling as viable options23,29. We assumed that contaminated masks and discarded packaging materials would go directly to waste disposal sites, and 43% of mixed waste would be landfilled while 57% of mixed waste would be incinerated23. Regarding alternative disposal activities, we considered two sensitivity cases: one that assumed that all masks from each type would be fully incinerated9,30 and another that assumed that all masks from each type would be fully landfilled31.



Source link

Previous Post

UMaine 4-H workshop explores marshlands, climate change

Next Post

Electric air taxis are coming sooner than you think, says jet engine maker Rolls-Royce

GrR

GrR

Green Reporter is a global source for news of sustainability, green industry, green technology, clear energy, sustainable food production, and green investments. Our aim is to deliver the best news and information to you.

Next Post

Electric air taxis are coming sooner than you think, says jet engine maker Rolls-Royce

  • Trending
  • Comments
  • Latest

Climate change in our backyard: Manitoba begins to grapple with the consequences – Winnipeg

August 10, 2021

Repsol starts marketing debut sustainability-linked bond sale

June 29, 2021

Sustainability Ambitions Soaring at KCI

December 6, 2021

Chris Pratt explains where the White Spikes originated

July 3, 2021
Stop burning our rights! What governments and corporations must do to protect humanity from the climate crisis – World

Stop burning our rights! What governments and corporations must do to protect humanity from the climate crisis – World

Biden said to mull dropping corporate tax hike to fund jobs plan

Biden said to mull dropping corporate tax hike to fund jobs plan

Global investors pressure Asian utilities to cut emissions

Global investors pressure Asian utilities to cut emissions

Global inequity could derail path to net zero

Global inequity could derail path to net zero

What’s With A24’s Religious Obsession?

August 12, 2022

Governor Hochul Announces Completion of $16 Million Affordable Housing Development in Monroe County

August 12, 2022

EU ban on Russian coal enters into force

August 12, 2022

Immune system insights and Thai climate calculator: News from the College | Imperial News

August 12, 2022

Recent News

What’s With A24’s Religious Obsession?

August 12, 2022

Governor Hochul Announces Completion of $16 Million Affordable Housing Development in Monroe County

August 12, 2022

EU ban on Russian coal enters into force

August 12, 2022

Immune system insights and Thai climate calculator: News from the College | Imperial News

August 12, 2022

Recent News

What’s With A24’s Religious Obsession?

August 12, 2022

Governor Hochul Announces Completion of $16 Million Affordable Housing Development in Monroe County

August 12, 2022

EU ban on Russian coal enters into force

August 12, 2022

Browse by Category

  • Biodiversity
  • Climate Change
  • Energy
  • Filmmaking
  • Food
  • Investment
  • Management
  • Sustainability
  • Technology
  • Transportation

Follow Us

  • Privacy & Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

© 2021 Copyright Green Reporter

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Biodiversity
  • Climate Change
  • Energy
  • Filmmaking
  • Food
  • Investment
  • Management
  • Sustainability
  • Technology
  • Transportation

© 2021 Copyright Green Reporter