Study about textile life cycle assessment
Textile life cycle assessment
 |
| Textile life cycle assessment is needed to evaluate the environmental impacts of water and land use. Characterizing of wood-based textile also can be developed with these impacts in LCA. |
The water cycle is affected by forestry and cotton farming. So that we evaluate water use inventory analysis with an innovative approach.
The biodiversity impacts of transforming natural lands are much higher than those of land tenure. If a land change happens, and all effects are assigned to the initially gather, cotton manufacturing shows up to have an extremely high effect.
Intro
However, impacts typical for biomaterials - such as water and land use impacts - are rarely addressed in the LCA; although these impacts should be handled according to commonly used guiding principles.
The life process effect evaluation (LCIA) technique recommended in the literary works is used to define ecological effects of specific significance for biomaterials: effects of sprinkle utilize on human health and wellness, ecosystems and sources, and effects of land utilize on biodiversity.
The range of the LCA is the cradle to the entrance to fiber manufacturing, consisting of land and sprinkle utilize for biomass manufacturing (forestry or cotton planting), in addition, to sprinkle utilize in pulp and fiber manufacturing.
Because LCAs are future-oriented and do not cover a specific product chain, the geographic location of textile life cycle processes is regional, but not locally determined, so as not to engage in incorrect precision about the product system.
This study is an attempt to move beyond an inventory approach to assessing water and land use impacts and characterizing some environmental impacts further down the causal chain.
So, the aim is to assess the water and land use impacts of textile fibers and at the same time contribute to the development of the LCIA method of these impacts.
A specific methodological issue we describe is whether to use a consequential or attributional approach - a topic of debate in the LCA research community.
In brief, the substantial method maps the repercussions that choices carry the examined item system, which typically needs the addition of a larger system-scale impact (as is performed in the substantial stock method provided in Area 2.1.1), whereas the attribution method assesses the system as existence; although there are numerous various interpretations of both methods (Zamagni et alia., 2012).
Effect of Water use
Effect of Water use the evaluation of water use at LCA has traditionally been restricted to the stock degree: quantity of sprinkle utilized.
A consequential approach compared to the traditional attribution approach, in which we use textile life cycle inventory (LCI) data on plant metabolism, implicitly combining green and blue water volumes
In short: “water shortage” is a midpoint indicator calculated using the water pressure index (WSI), which is a regional correction factor for water volume that reflects the extent to which available water has been allocated for use in the extraction area.
Land use
Under the textile life cycle, land use impacts are often expressed as a product of the area of land occupied and the length of occupation, regardless of land type, what it is used for, and how it is managed.
Impacts further down the chain of cause-and-effect environmental consequences of land use are rarely taken into account.
This can be partly explained by the fact that the methods for impact assessment further down the causal chain are still in progress ap early development, although there have been many efforts, usually focuses on biodiversity impacts (see for example.
Base on the textile life cycle, we take into account the production of land productivity by allocating the required land area evenly between all the crops during the specified time period (which we assign to the average time from planting to harvest in the scenario with the longest period of time). ).
Note that this problem only arises in estimates of land use impacts, where the large impact (loss of biodiversity) occurs instantaneously in a scenario where changes from one land use type to another, and not for water use impacts, are repeated every time. year.
Its global coverage and sufficient data availability make it applicable to all scenarios set out in the case studies, conditions which are not a Transformational Impact Job impact.
Weighting refers to the vulnerability of an ecosystem, which depends on two factors: the species accumulation factor - a measure of how the number of species in a given piece of land increases with its area - and the proportion of land used at low intensity (LI) in the surrounding area.
Perhaps surprisingly, “badlands” (eg tundra) are classified as HI soils by Schmidt (2008) because they are thought not to support any of the species found in LI land.
In calculating transformational impacts, the integral is instead taken over by the time of renaturalization (the time it takes for an undisturbed ecosystem to reach its potential quality of biodiversity).
Result
Impact of water use
The resulting water use impacts are shown in Table 6. Negative values indicate that additional runoff was generated. On picture. 3, the results have been normalized and weighted using the Ecoindicator 99 approach (hierarchical perspective), as done by Pfister et al. (2009), who carry indicators on the same scale (Goedkoop and Spriensma, 2001). the same parameters but with an attribution perspective. .
Impact of land use
The biodiversity impacts of occupational land use. The transformational impacts, either fully allocated to the first crop after transformation or allocated among all harvests for 62.5 years after transformation. Note that in a land transformation scenario, the transformational impacts are at least an order of magnitude larger than the employment impacts.
From the textile life cycle perspective, the transformational impact allocation greatly influences the comparison between cotton and wood-based fibers Note also that different ecosystem vulnerability factors (low LI and high LI) greatly influence the outcome in absolute terms, but have little influence on the relative ranking of the scenarios.
Conclusion
In general, improved characterization methods for water and soil usage impacts can help in emphasizing the influence of specific characteristics of the supply chain and in counteracting trends to simplify the textile life cycle assessment.
Impact of water use
Base on textile life cycle assessment, the location of biomass production and fiber processing is a major factor for the environmental impact of water use
Whether a consequential or attributional approach is used for the water use inventory analysis significantly influences the order of magnitude of the results. The approach consequently allows the capture of the system-scale effects of forestry and crop cultivation.
This approach could be further developed if the new data allows better geographic resolution of the WSI data or a more detailed analysis of how runoff varies over time as a land use effect.
In addition, the approach adds the possibility of recognizing increased runoff as a potential benefit from certain types of land use, or as a potential loss when combined with a new index that reflects the potential problems associated with too much water in a given area.
Impact of land use
Biodiversity is mainly impacted by land use than managed land. However, the relative rankings of wood-based fiber and cotton depend on the allocation of transformational impacts.
The application of the case studies has made clear that to improve the LCIA method of land use, more site-specific data are needed, such as species richness data in finer ecosystems and the level of land management.
Source: Sadin et.al. 2013. Moving down the cause-effect chain of water and land use impacts: An LCA case study of textile fibres
Also read: Life Cycle Analysis of Building Materials Against Flood