Environmental evaluation of single-use and reusable cups

The objective of the study was to determine the environmental effects of the resuable cup used during a major event (which took place in Barcelona, Universal Forum of Cultures, 2004), compared with a single-use cup of the same composition (polypropylene) but with different physical characteristics s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The international journal of life cycle assessment 2007-06, Vol.12 (4), p.252-256
Hauptverfasser: Garrido, Nuria, Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 256
container_issue 4
container_start_page 252
container_title The international journal of life cycle assessment
container_volume 12
creator Garrido, Nuria
Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors
description The objective of the study was to determine the environmental effects of the resuable cup used during a major event (which took place in Barcelona, Universal Forum of Cultures, 2004), compared with a single-use cup of the same composition (polypropylene) but with different physical characteristics such as mass, shape and capacity. To perform the environmental evaluations and the comparison of both types of cups, the SimaPro software developed and marketed by PRé Consultants was used. The environmental evaluation of the reusable cup was compared with that of a single-use cup using the LCA methodology [6]. The functional unit used was: 'Serving 1000 liters of draught beverages'. The objective of the study was to find the minimum number of cycles the reusable cup has to do so that its environmental impact is smaller than that of the single-use cup. Taking into account all the hypotheses put forward, the study drew the conclusion that the minimum number of uses of the reusable cup necessary for it to have a smaller environmental impact than the single-use cup is 10. The contribution of each process taking part in the entire life cycle of the cups was also studied in detail. In the case of the single-use cup, the most important contribution to all the impact categories is due to the production of polypropylene and the fabrication of the cup, except for the heavy metals category where it is due to the management of the waste coming from the cup's use. In the case of the reusable cup being used 10 times, the contribution to the different impact categories of the waste generated by the cup's use is negligible compared to the contribution of the fabrication and washing processes. In addition, the washing process is the one which contributes most to the ozone layer depletion, heavy metals and carcinogens categories. As the number of uses of the reusable cup increases, the contribution to all the environmental impact categories decreases. However, this reduction is not as significant for the ozone layer depletion, heavy metals and carcinogens categories. This is due to the washing process and the fact that the electrical consumption associated with it increases with the number of washings and, consequently, of uses. From the environmental point of view, the reusable cup must be used at least 10 times to have less impact than the single-use cup. This is mainly due to the higher weight of the reusable cup and, therefore, the greater amount of raw material needed for it
doi_str_mv 10.1065/lca2007.05.334
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20545364</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>20545364</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c297t-51174c0891c0bf649fb00f5f72c8e86aa3373abbc809ef2e63d715e5f2cc2023</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkEtLAzEUhYMoWKtb14MLdzPevCdLKfUBBTfdh0x6I1PSTE1mCv57R-rK1YHDx-HwEXJPoaGg5FP0jgHoBmTDubggC6qoqLUEdkkWYERbz7W5Jjel7AEYBSMXpF2nU5-HdMA0uljhycXJjf2QqiFUpU-fEeupYOXSrso4FddFrPx0LLfkKrhY8O4vl2T7st6u3urNx-v76nlTe2b0WEtKtfDQGuqhC0qY0AEEGTTzLbbKOc41d13nWzAYGCq-01SiDMx7BowvyeN59piHrwnLaA998RijSzhMxTKQQnIlZvDhH7gfppzma1YpoSU1M7ckzRnyeSglY7DH3B9c_rYU7K9E-yfRgrSzLf4DYqhkMA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>664751945</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Environmental evaluation of single-use and reusable cups</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Garrido, Nuria ; Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors</creator><creatorcontrib>Garrido, Nuria ; Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors</creatorcontrib><description>The objective of the study was to determine the environmental effects of the resuable cup used during a major event (which took place in Barcelona, Universal Forum of Cultures, 2004), compared with a single-use cup of the same composition (polypropylene) but with different physical characteristics such as mass, shape and capacity. To perform the environmental evaluations and the comparison of both types of cups, the SimaPro software developed and marketed by PRé Consultants was used. The environmental evaluation of the reusable cup was compared with that of a single-use cup using the LCA methodology [6]. The functional unit used was: 'Serving 1000 liters of draught beverages'. The objective of the study was to find the minimum number of cycles the reusable cup has to do so that its environmental impact is smaller than that of the single-use cup. Taking into account all the hypotheses put forward, the study drew the conclusion that the minimum number of uses of the reusable cup necessary for it to have a smaller environmental impact than the single-use cup is 10. The contribution of each process taking part in the entire life cycle of the cups was also studied in detail. In the case of the single-use cup, the most important contribution to all the impact categories is due to the production of polypropylene and the fabrication of the cup, except for the heavy metals category where it is due to the management of the waste coming from the cup's use. In the case of the reusable cup being used 10 times, the contribution to the different impact categories of the waste generated by the cup's use is negligible compared to the contribution of the fabrication and washing processes. In addition, the washing process is the one which contributes most to the ozone layer depletion, heavy metals and carcinogens categories. As the number of uses of the reusable cup increases, the contribution to all the environmental impact categories decreases. However, this reduction is not as significant for the ozone layer depletion, heavy metals and carcinogens categories. This is due to the washing process and the fact that the electrical consumption associated with it increases with the number of washings and, consequently, of uses. From the environmental point of view, the reusable cup must be used at least 10 times to have less impact than the single-use cup. This is mainly due to the higher weight of the reusable cup and, therefore, the greater amount of raw material needed for its fabrication. If the LCA methodology had been introduced during the design of the reusable cup, its weight would have been lower. This modification would have resulted in a reduction of the environmental impact associated with the use of the reusable cup and, consequently, a smaller number of uses would have been necessary to attain the same level of impact as the single-use cup.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0948-3349</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1614-7502</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1065/lca2007.05.334</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Nature B.V</publisher><subject>Beverages ; Carcinogens ; Environmental effects ; Environmental factors ; Environmental impact ; Fabrication ; Heavy metals ; Ozone ; Ozone depletion ; Ozone layer ; Physical characteristics ; Polypropylene ; Studies</subject><ispartof>The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2007-06, Vol.12 (4), p.252-256</ispartof><rights>Ecomed 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c297t-51174c0891c0bf649fb00f5f72c8e86aa3373abbc809ef2e63d715e5f2cc2023</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c297t-51174c0891c0bf649fb00f5f72c8e86aa3373abbc809ef2e63d715e5f2cc2023</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Garrido, Nuria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors</creatorcontrib><title>Environmental evaluation of single-use and reusable cups</title><title>The international journal of life cycle assessment</title><description>The objective of the study was to determine the environmental effects of the resuable cup used during a major event (which took place in Barcelona, Universal Forum of Cultures, 2004), compared with a single-use cup of the same composition (polypropylene) but with different physical characteristics such as mass, shape and capacity. To perform the environmental evaluations and the comparison of both types of cups, the SimaPro software developed and marketed by PRé Consultants was used. The environmental evaluation of the reusable cup was compared with that of a single-use cup using the LCA methodology [6]. The functional unit used was: 'Serving 1000 liters of draught beverages'. The objective of the study was to find the minimum number of cycles the reusable cup has to do so that its environmental impact is smaller than that of the single-use cup. Taking into account all the hypotheses put forward, the study drew the conclusion that the minimum number of uses of the reusable cup necessary for it to have a smaller environmental impact than the single-use cup is 10. The contribution of each process taking part in the entire life cycle of the cups was also studied in detail. In the case of the single-use cup, the most important contribution to all the impact categories is due to the production of polypropylene and the fabrication of the cup, except for the heavy metals category where it is due to the management of the waste coming from the cup's use. In the case of the reusable cup being used 10 times, the contribution to the different impact categories of the waste generated by the cup's use is negligible compared to the contribution of the fabrication and washing processes. In addition, the washing process is the one which contributes most to the ozone layer depletion, heavy metals and carcinogens categories. As the number of uses of the reusable cup increases, the contribution to all the environmental impact categories decreases. However, this reduction is not as significant for the ozone layer depletion, heavy metals and carcinogens categories. This is due to the washing process and the fact that the electrical consumption associated with it increases with the number of washings and, consequently, of uses. From the environmental point of view, the reusable cup must be used at least 10 times to have less impact than the single-use cup. This is mainly due to the higher weight of the reusable cup and, therefore, the greater amount of raw material needed for its fabrication. If the LCA methodology had been introduced during the design of the reusable cup, its weight would have been lower. This modification would have resulted in a reduction of the environmental impact associated with the use of the reusable cup and, consequently, a smaller number of uses would have been necessary to attain the same level of impact as the single-use cup.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><subject>Beverages</subject><subject>Carcinogens</subject><subject>Environmental effects</subject><subject>Environmental factors</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Fabrication</subject><subject>Heavy metals</subject><subject>Ozone</subject><subject>Ozone depletion</subject><subject>Ozone layer</subject><subject>Physical characteristics</subject><subject>Polypropylene</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0948-3349</issn><issn>1614-7502</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkEtLAzEUhYMoWKtb14MLdzPevCdLKfUBBTfdh0x6I1PSTE1mCv57R-rK1YHDx-HwEXJPoaGg5FP0jgHoBmTDubggC6qoqLUEdkkWYERbz7W5Jjel7AEYBSMXpF2nU5-HdMA0uljhycXJjf2QqiFUpU-fEeupYOXSrso4FddFrPx0LLfkKrhY8O4vl2T7st6u3urNx-v76nlTe2b0WEtKtfDQGuqhC0qY0AEEGTTzLbbKOc41d13nWzAYGCq-01SiDMx7BowvyeN59piHrwnLaA998RijSzhMxTKQQnIlZvDhH7gfppzma1YpoSU1M7ckzRnyeSglY7DH3B9c_rYU7K9E-yfRgrSzLf4DYqhkMA</recordid><startdate>20070601</startdate><enddate>20070601</enddate><creator>Garrido, Nuria</creator><creator>Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors</creator><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070601</creationdate><title>Environmental evaluation of single-use and reusable cups</title><author>Garrido, Nuria ; Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c297t-51174c0891c0bf649fb00f5f72c8e86aa3373abbc809ef2e63d715e5f2cc2023</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Beverages</topic><topic>Carcinogens</topic><topic>Environmental effects</topic><topic>Environmental factors</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Fabrication</topic><topic>Heavy metals</topic><topic>Ozone</topic><topic>Ozone depletion</topic><topic>Ozone layer</topic><topic>Physical characteristics</topic><topic>Polypropylene</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Garrido, Nuria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology &amp; Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Garrido, Nuria</au><au>Alvarez del Castillo, M. Dolors</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Environmental evaluation of single-use and reusable cups</atitle><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle><date>2007-06-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>252</spage><epage>256</epage><pages>252-256</pages><issn>0948-3349</issn><eissn>1614-7502</eissn><abstract>The objective of the study was to determine the environmental effects of the resuable cup used during a major event (which took place in Barcelona, Universal Forum of Cultures, 2004), compared with a single-use cup of the same composition (polypropylene) but with different physical characteristics such as mass, shape and capacity. To perform the environmental evaluations and the comparison of both types of cups, the SimaPro software developed and marketed by PRé Consultants was used. The environmental evaluation of the reusable cup was compared with that of a single-use cup using the LCA methodology [6]. The functional unit used was: 'Serving 1000 liters of draught beverages'. The objective of the study was to find the minimum number of cycles the reusable cup has to do so that its environmental impact is smaller than that of the single-use cup. Taking into account all the hypotheses put forward, the study drew the conclusion that the minimum number of uses of the reusable cup necessary for it to have a smaller environmental impact than the single-use cup is 10. The contribution of each process taking part in the entire life cycle of the cups was also studied in detail. In the case of the single-use cup, the most important contribution to all the impact categories is due to the production of polypropylene and the fabrication of the cup, except for the heavy metals category where it is due to the management of the waste coming from the cup's use. In the case of the reusable cup being used 10 times, the contribution to the different impact categories of the waste generated by the cup's use is negligible compared to the contribution of the fabrication and washing processes. In addition, the washing process is the one which contributes most to the ozone layer depletion, heavy metals and carcinogens categories. As the number of uses of the reusable cup increases, the contribution to all the environmental impact categories decreases. However, this reduction is not as significant for the ozone layer depletion, heavy metals and carcinogens categories. This is due to the washing process and the fact that the electrical consumption associated with it increases with the number of washings and, consequently, of uses. From the environmental point of view, the reusable cup must be used at least 10 times to have less impact than the single-use cup. This is mainly due to the higher weight of the reusable cup and, therefore, the greater amount of raw material needed for its fabrication. If the LCA methodology had been introduced during the design of the reusable cup, its weight would have been lower. This modification would have resulted in a reduction of the environmental impact associated with the use of the reusable cup and, consequently, a smaller number of uses would have been necessary to attain the same level of impact as the single-use cup.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Nature B.V</pub><doi>10.1065/lca2007.05.334</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0948-3349
ispartof The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2007-06, Vol.12 (4), p.252-256
issn 0948-3349
1614-7502
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20545364
source SpringerLink Journals
subjects Beverages
Carcinogens
Environmental effects
Environmental factors
Environmental impact
Fabrication
Heavy metals
Ozone
Ozone depletion
Ozone layer
Physical characteristics
Polypropylene
Studies
title Environmental evaluation of single-use and reusable cups
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T09%3A50%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Environmental%20evaluation%20of%20single-use%20and%20reusable%20cups&rft.jtitle=The%20international%20journal%20of%20life%20cycle%20assessment&rft.au=Garrido,%20Nuria&rft.date=2007-06-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=252&rft.epage=256&rft.pages=252-256&rft.issn=0948-3349&rft.eissn=1614-7502&rft_id=info:doi/10.1065/lca2007.05.334&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E20545364%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=664751945&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true