By Vishal Mehta, Director, Sustainable Materials Program at STEER World
Plastic has permeated almost every facet of human existence, serving purposes ranging from packaging to electronics. The remarkable versatility of plastics continues to drive their increasing production.
However, the grave repercussions of plastic waste, particularly its detrimental effects on the environment, have fueled significant concerns over the past decade.
Did you know that the United Nations reports that a staggering 430 million tonnes of plastic is produced each year? Shockingly, about two-thirds of this is used for a very short amount of time before being tossed aside.
This results in more than 2,000 garbage trucks worth of plastic ending up in our water bodies. While many are making the switch to plastic alternatives, it’s important to note that these seemingly eco-friendly options may not be as perfect as they seem. The urgent issue of the accelerating climate crisis needs to be tackled at a much deeper level.
The breakdown of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2016 reveals that the energy sector is accountable for a staggering 73.2% of emissions, while Agriculture, Forestry, and Land Use contribute 18.4%.
This substantial share of emissions from agriculture raises skepticism about the widespread promotion of biomaterials as a replacement for plastics. A more rigorous assessment of the sustainability of each product is imperative, regardless of whether it’s plastic or an alternative material.
Everything Green is Not Really Green: The Perils of Greenwashing:
Electric vehicles are often touted as a sustainable innovation, but let’s take a closer look. While it’s true that EVs don’t emit greenhouse gases directly, it’s important to consider that the electricity they run on is often generated from fossil fuels. Additionally, the manufacturing process, especially for their batteries, requires a significant amount of energy.
The sustainability of EVs is a complex topic, with varying findings from different studies depending on the region and its primary form of energy generation.
It’s important to consider the impact of electric vehicles (EVs) through tools like Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Conducting an LCA for a specific EV in a particular region is crucial, as no single study can be universally applied to all EVs.
For instance, in the UK, greenhouse gas emissions from electricity have decreased by 38% and are expected to drop by 70%, which will significantly reduce emissions from EVs when LCAs are performed. This emphasizes that EVs alone cannot solve the climate crisis; they are closely tied to the need for alternative energy sources.
Similarly, paper bags are advocated as substitutes for single-use plastic bags. However, their usage is just as problematic. Studies have found that though paper bags decompose quicker than plastic, they are resource-intensive. This implies that they require substantial quantities of water and energy for smooth production and contribute to deforestation.
These examples clearly necessitate the importance of conducting Life Cycle Assessments before promoting any material or product as more dependable and sustainable in order to analyse their true impact on the environment.
Life Cycle Assessment: The What and Why
Source: European Commission
Life Cycle Assessment, or LCA, is a process used to determine a product’s environmental impact throughout its life cycle, from raw material extraction to production, usage, disposal, and recycling. It is carried out by defining the goal and scope, combining data related to material inputs and outputs, evaluating the impact on the environment, and then interpreting the results to make informed decisions.
LCA can be an instrumental tool to create truly sustainable products and even policies. It can help in identifying the core areas that can be prioritised for maximum sustainability. It can help in preventing the creation of products that might at first seem like a sustainable alternative but later found to be causing more harm than good.
Take the example of polylactic acid or PLA that was popularised as a sustainable plant-based packaging material but later it was realised that PLA required an elaborate end of life treatment and can only be composted in an industrial setup. If this is not done, they cause similar harm as plastics ending up in the ecosystem taking years to decompose.
An LCA at the outset could have prevented the damage in the first place. With growing customer awareness and conscious buying, an LCA can also be used as a tool to inform consumers about the sustainability of the products that they are buying to make informed choices.
A truly comprehensive LCA would successfully cover a wide range of impact categories.
The Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) and Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF) has delineated 16 categories that can be taken as a skeletal structure to conduct an LCA.
These include resource use, human toxicity, ozone depletion, water use, ecotoxicity and so on.Check out Apple’s Environmental Progress Report 2024.
The detailed report reveals Apple’s estimated total greenhouse gas emission in 2023- a massive 15.6 million metric tons. The report further provides details into the materials and production of the products and their corresponding emissions.
This transparency provides valuable insights into the environmental impact of the products, and helps to take actions in the right direction and improving the effectiveness towards the goal of net Zero.
Source: Apple Environmental Progress Report, 2024
A study published in the International Journal of Lifecycle Assessment analysed uncertainty in a comparative life cycle assessment of hand drying systems. It compared five hand-drying systems: hands-under (HU) dryers, high-speed hands-under (HSHU) dryers, high-speed hands-in (HSHI) dryers, cotton roll towels, and paper towels.
It concluded that “high-speed dryers have a lower impact than paper towels and cotton roll towels.” However, in some conditions, HSHI dryers had a lower impact than HU and HSHU dryers. This makes it clear that comparative LCAs need to take into account probabilistic scenarios and elements like scenario uncertainty and parameters, because an LCA’s result would always differ based on differing contexts.
The Way Forward:
Only avoiding plastic as a material is unlikely to help us substantially mitigate the climate crisis. The entire life cycle of plastic – from production to disposal – plays a crucial role in addressing the plastic waste problem.
It’s important to consider that completely ditching plastic and transitioning to alternatives could have unintended consequences such as increased deforestation and higher consumption, in addition to elevated costs.
To navigate these potential risks, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) becomes invaluable. By using this approach, we can create innovative and environmentally friendly products.
It’s time for innovators, manufacturers, and consumers to come together and shift focus towards creating a circular economy that reduces waste and encourages sustainable use of resources.
