Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Reviewing environmental life cycle impacts of biobased polymers: current trends and methodological challenges
Peruvian LCA and Industrial Ecology Network, Peru.
Peruvian LCA and Industrial Ecology Network, Peru.
Peruvian LCA and Industrial Ecology Network, Peru.
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Bioeconomy and Health, Material and Surface Design.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6183-2017
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, ISSN 0948-3349, E-ISSN 1614-7502, Vol. 25, no 11, p. 2169-2189Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: The aim of this review is to evaluate previous life cycle assessment (LCA) studies of first- and second-generation bioplastics, to understand the state of the art and the main problems addressed during the development of new bioplastics. Furthermore, it provides an overview on land use change (LUC) impacts accounted for, methodologies chosen, and the results obtained. Methods: Studies related to the impact assessment of bioplastics and published between 2007 and 2018 were gathered. Five keyword strings were used to perform a wide search and select relevant LCA studies. The study aimed to analyze critical methodological aspects in LCA, in order to determine the most common choices made during biobased material analyses, as well as major limitations. Three filters were applied to select comparable studies, ending with a final number of 17 papers. Recommendations were obtained by comparing common practices performed by different authors with suggested best available practices mentioned in handbooks and guidelines. Interestingly, LUC metrics and impacts were, most of the time, neglected. Thus, a specific assessment and discussion was performed regarding the methods used to quantify LUC impacts, considering its importance during the production of biobased materials. Results and discussion: The study discussed the main environmental problems linked to the development of new biomaterials. LCA of agricultural products or systems, when compared with fossil-based counterparts, is expected to show higher environmental impacts in categories directly affected by fertilizer use, occupied and transformed land, among others. Thus, studies that included additional impact categories besides global warming (e.g., eutrophication or acidification) concluded that biobased materials present higher impacts, recommending improvements in farming practices to improve their overall environmental profile. Moreover, this review gathered methodologies used to account for LUC impacts and the results obtained. The main constraint of including LUC impacts was the lack of a standardized methodology, as well as large uncertainties in existing methodologies. Conclusions: Most studies concluded that improvements in farming practices might reduce the attributed environmental impacts with the reduction of the amount of land, fertilizer, pesticides, and water used. Studies computing LUC impacts agreed on the importance of including these impacts and concluded that greenhouse gas emissions of bioplastic production would increase, but in most cases would still be lower than the impact of their fossil-based counterparts. However, challenges remain when computing LUC impacts that need to be tackled when working with the available methodologies, including the collection of reliable inventory data (site-specific or regional data) and regionalized characterization factors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH , 2020. Vol. 25, no 11, p. 2169-2189
Keywords [en]
Bioplastics, Biopolymers, GHG emissions, Land use changes, Life cycle assessment, LUC
National Category
Natural Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-51311DOI: 10.1007/s11367-020-01829-2Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85095599781OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-51311DiVA, id: diva2:1516789
Note

Correction: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01887-0            

Funding text 1: The Direccion General de Investigacion (DGI) at the Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Per? (PUCP) is thanked for administrative support.

Available from: 2021-01-12 Created: 2021-01-12 Last updated: 2023-05-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Chinga-Carrasco, Gary

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Chinga-Carrasco, Gary
By organisation
Material and Surface Design
In the same journal
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 60 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf