Comparative life cycle assessment of conventional and Green Seal-compliant industrial and institutional cleaning products

被引:21
作者
Kapur, Amit [1 ]
Baldwin, Cheryl [1 ]
Swanson, Mary [1 ]
Wilberforce, Nana [1 ]
McClenachan, Giovanna [1 ]
Rentschler, Mark [1 ]
机构
[1] Green Seal, Washington, DC 20036 USA
关键词
Cleaning products; Ecolabel; Environmentally preferable; Environmental impact; Green; Green seal; GS-37; Institutional; LCA; Standard;
D O I
10.1007/s11367-011-0373-8
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The goal of this study was to use life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology to assess the environmental impacts of industrial and institutional cleaning products that are compliant with the Green Seal Standard for Cleaning Products for Industrial and Institutional Use, GS-37, and conventional products (non-GS-37-compliant) products. The scope of the study was "cradle-to-grave," to encompass the energy and material resources required for the production of raw material and packaging components to use and final disposal of the cleaning product. The generic functional unit for this study was annual cleaning of 100,000 ft(2) of office space. The ReCiPe 2008 Midpoint (hierarchist perspective) impact assessment methodology was used including the following impact categories: climate change, ozone depletion, photochemical oxidant formation, particulate matter formation, human toxicity, terrestrial acidification, freshwater eutrophication, freshwater ecotoxicity, agricultural land occupation, natural land transformation, water depletion, and fossil depletion. General-purpose, glass, and restroom cleaning products were included in the study. Model products of GS-37-compliant, conventional concentrate, and conventional ready-to-use versions of each cleaning product were evaluated in the study. The conventional ready-to-use industrial and institutional cleaning product had the highest environmental impact in all product types and for the most impact categories analyzed. The GS-37-compliant products were lower than the conventional products in most impact categories studied. Furthermore, normalization of the results showed that the impact categories of marine ecotoxicity, human toxicity, and freshwater ecotoxicity were dominant, and the conventional products led these impact categories. The packaging and distribution stages were dominant for the conventional products, whereas the product formula (i.e., chemicals used in the product) contributed significantly to overall impacts for GS-37-compliant products. This is because the GS-37 standard addresses packaging and distribution, but could potentially further address the formula considerations. The comparative life cycle assessment performed in this study showed that the Green Seal Standard for Cleaning Products for Industrial and Institutional Use, GS-37, identifies products with notably lower environmental impact compared to typical alternatives in the market. This reduced impact was a result of the requirements in the Green Seal standard that addressed the leading sources of the impacts (namely packaging, transportation) and is not included in any other standard or recognition program in North America.
引用
收藏
页码:377 / 387
页数:11
相关论文
共 44 条
  • [31] Comparative life cycle assessment and route optimization modeling of smart versus conventional municipal waste collection: Environmental impact analysis in an urban context
    Nematollahi, Hossein
    Gitipour, Saeid
    Mehrdadi, Nasser
    RESULTS IN ENGINEERING, 2024, 24
  • [32] A comparative Life Cycle assessment of building insulation products made of stone wool, paper wool and flaxPart 1: Background, goal and scope, Life Cycle inventory, impact assessment and interpretation
    Anders C. Schmidt
    Allan A. Jensen
    Anders U. Clausen
    Ole Kamstrup
    Dennis Postlethwaite
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2004, 9 : 53 - 66
  • [33] Environmental benefits of remanufacturing mechanical products: a harmonized meta-analysis of comparative life cycle assessment studies
    Peng, Shitong
    Ping, Jinfeng
    Li, Tao
    Wang, Fengtao
    Zhang, Hongchao
    Liu, Conghu
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2022, 306
  • [34] Life Cycle assessment of LPG Cook-stove with Porous Radiant Burner and Conventional Burner-A comparative study
    Shaik, Sofia Rani
    Muthukumar, P.
    Kalita, Pratul Chandra
    SUSTAINABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES AND ASSESSMENTS, 2022, 52
  • [35] Comparative life cycle assessment of denim manufacturing: Evaluating conventional vs. recycled cotton in the context of renewable energy
    Cundubey, Fatma Seda
    Azgin, Sukru Taner
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2024, 434
  • [36] Extended Life Cycle Assessment of Southern Pink Shrimp Products Originating in Senegalese Artisanal and Industrial Fisheries for Export to Europe
    Ziegler, Friederike
    Emanuelsson, Andreas
    Eichelsheim, John Lucas
    Flysjo, Anna
    Ndiaye, Vaque
    Thrane, Mikkel
    JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY, 2011, 15 (04) : 527 - 538
  • [37] Life cycle assessment of agro-industrial by-product reuse: a comparison between anaerobic digestion and conventional disposal treatments
    Valenti, Francesca
    Liao, Wei
    Porto, Simona M. C.
    GREEN CHEMISTRY, 2020, 22 (20) : 7119 - 7139
  • [38] Comparative organic pollutants removal efficiency and life cycle assessment of pyrolysis and solvent elution for industrial waste salt recycling
    Huang, Xinyu
    Wang, Hao
    Song, Min
    Chen, Rui
    Lv, Saijun
    Zhang, Haoqing
    Wang, Chuqi
    Ramirez, Jerome
    Ruan, Xiuxiu
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2024, 371
  • [39] Comparative Life-Cycle assessment of microalgal biomass production in conventional growth media versus newly developed nanoemulsion media
    Nigam, Harshita
    Jain, Rahul
    Malik, Anushree
    Singh, Vikram
    BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, 2022, 352
  • [40] Data Transfer Reliability from Building Information Modeling (BIM) to Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)-A Comparative Case Study of an Industrial Warehouse
    Rodriguez, Juan Francisco Fernandez
    Picardo, Alberto
    Aguilar-Planet, Teresa
    Martin-Mariscal, Amanda
    Peralta, Estela
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2025, 17 (04)