Life Cycle Assessment of flax fibre for the reinforcement of composites

1
Life Cycle Assessment of flax fibre for the
reinforcement of composites
Nilmini Dissanayake,John Summerscales, Stephen
Grove and Miggy Singh
2
Earth Overshoot Day

• the day in which we exhaustour ecological budget
  for the year
• 19 December 1987
• 21 August 2010
• days/earth used by human populationMathis
  Wackernagel

3
Robert Costanza et al, The value of the world's
ecosystem services and natural capital  Nature,
1997, 387, 253 - 260.

• estimated the value of the non-marketed
  contributionof the worlds ecosystem services to
  human welfareat US16-54 trillion per year (with
  a mean of US33 trillion) in 1994. 
• corresponding global GNP at 18 trillion per
  year.
• US33 trillion considered to be an underestimate.
• Toman 2 suggested that "economic assessment of
  ecosystem benefits and opportunity costs must
  go into social decision making and"a default
  value of zero for a difficult-to-measure
  ecological value is no more defensible
  scientifically than a default value of infinity.
• Michael Toman, Why not to calculate the value of
  the world's ecosystem services and natural
  capital, Ecological Economics, 1998, 25(1), 57-70.

4

• ML Imhoff and L Bounoua J Geophysical Research,
  2006, 111, D22S13
• human species constitutes 0.5 oftotal biomass
  of organisms that require organic compounds for
  growth and development
• globally they consume 20 of the net primary
  production from the land
• M Kern, J Agronomy and Crop Science,2002, 188
  (5), 291305.summarised the debate about food,
  feed, fibre, fuel and industrial products.

5
Fibre-reinforced compositestypical applications
J-boats Poma-Otis mass
transit Images from www.tpicomp.com
Reitnouer flat bed trailer NABI
30-foot bus
6
Content

• Flax
• Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
• goal and scope
• system boundaries
• Life Cycle Inventory analysis (LCI)
• 3 scenarios
• energy
• Environmental Impact Classification Factors
  (EICF)
• Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) - results
• Conclusions

7
Flax

• Linum usitatissimum
• temperate zone plant
• flax grown for fibre
• linseed grown for seed oil
• sown in March-May in UK
• life cycle of the plant
• 45-60 day vegetative period
• 15-25 day flowering period
• 30-40 day maturation period

8
Why Flax ?

• flax is the
• most agro-chemical intensive
• bast fibre used as reinforcement
• other bast fibres may be greenerprovided
  yield/hectare andperformance/durability are
  satisfactory

9
Growth stages

• Life cycle of the flax plant consists of
• a 45 to 60 day vegetative period,
• a 15 to 25 day flowering period and
• a maturation period of 30 to 40 days
• From J A Turner Linseed Law BASF (UK) Limited,
  1987via http//www.flaxcouncil.ca/images

UK harvest
10
Flax grown on campus

• 4 x 4 x 2 replicates behind Portland Villas
• three fertilisers (N, P, K) or none
• 0, 0.5, 1.0 or 2.0 times recommended level
• ? no significant differences (soil too good ?)

11
Flax from plant to fibre

• tillage and growth
• harvest (combining or pulling)
• retting
• (dew-, wet-, stand- or enzyme-retting)
• enzymes (e.g. pectinase digests pectin binder)
• decortication/scutching
• (hammer mill, fluted rollers, willower)
• cleaning (removal of shive)
• carding (brushing/combing aligns fibres)
• gt sliver
• spinning (twisting binds fibres)
• gt yarn/filament

12
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
13
Goal and Scope

• To determine the sustainability of natural
  fibres as reinforcement in polymer matrix
  composites (referenced to glass fibres)
• Cradle-to-factory gate
• agricultural operations (from ploughing to
  harvest)
• fibre extraction operations (retting and
  decortication)
• fibre preparation operations (hackling and
  carding)
• fibre processing operations (spinning or
  finishing)
• The functional unit one tonne of flax fibres
  for reinforcement in polymer matrix
  composites (assumes Eflax 42 GPa ? equal
  specific modulus)
• Co-products allocated burdens only for
  post-separation handling

14
System Boundaries
seed, fertiliser, pesticides, diesel machinery
Crop Production
Dry, green flax stems
Retting
diesel, machinery, water
Dry, retted flax
atmospheric emissions, emissions into
water, co-products and waste
Scutching
electricity
Scutched long fibre
Hackling
electricity
SLIVER
Wet Spinning
electricity, water
YARN
15
Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)

• Three scenarios linking
• different tillage and retting methods
• No-till water retting
• - minimum impact?
• 2. Conservation till (chisel) stand/dew
  retting
• - average impact?
• 3. Conventional till (mouldboard) bio-retting
• - maximum impact?

16
Tillage Methods
17
Fibre Processing
18
Mass loss during the production
lt Sliver
19
LCI results energy consumption
20
Energy consumption - breakdown
Scenario 1- Sliver (54 GJ/tonne)
21
LCI results energy consumption
22
Energy consumption - breakdown
Scenario 1- Yarn (80GJ/tonne)
23
Energy consumption
Mat .. sliver GJ/t
Glass fibre mat 54.7
No-till water retting 54.4
Conservation stand retting 113
Conventional bio-retting 119
Continuous fibre yarn GJ/t
Glass fibre 31.7
No-till water retting 80.4
Conservation stand retting 142
Conventional bio-retting 148
24
Energy consumption
Energy source in UK in France
Coal/Solid fuels 25.8 5
Natural Gas 47.7 14
Oil - 33
Nuclear 18.0 40
Renewables 6.6 6
Other 1.9 2
UK http//www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statisti
cs/fuel_mix/fuel_mix.aspx France
http//ieepa.org/news/Other/20100917174353200.pdf
25
Environmental Impact Classification Factors

• From Adisa Azapagic (and ISO 14047)
• Acidification Potential (AP)
• Aquatic Toxicity Potential (ATP) ecotoxicity
• Eutrophication Potential (EP) - nitrification
• Global Warming Potential (GWP) - climate change
• Human Toxicity Potential (HTP)
• Non-Renewable/Abiotic Resource Depletion
  Potential (NRADP)
• Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP)
• Photochemical Oxidants Creation Potential (POCP)
  smog
• Draft BS8905 adds land use

26
EICF definitions I

• Acidification Potential (AP)consequence of acids
  (and other compounds which can be transformed
  into acids)being emitted to the atmosphere and
  subsequently deposited in  surface soils and
  water
• Aquatic Toxicity Potential (ATP)
  ecotoxicitybased on the maximum tolerable
  concentrations of different toxic substances in
  water by aquatic organismswhat about insects and
  birds ?
• Eutrophication Potential (EP) nitrificationthe
  potential of nutrients to cause
  over-fertilisation of water and soil which in
  turn can result in increased growth of biomass
• Global Warming Potential (GWP) - climate
  changecaused by the atmosphere's ability to
  reflect some of the heat radiated from the
  earth's surfacereflectivity is increased by the
  greenhouse gases (GHG) in the atmosphererelativel
  y difficult to quantify climate change

27
EICF definitions II

• Human Toxicity Potential (HTP)persistent
  chemicals reaching undesirable concentrations in
  each of the three elements of the environment
  (air, soil and water) leading to damage to
  humans, animals and eco-systems
• Non-Renewable/Abiotic Resource Depletion
  Potential (NRADP)depletion of fossil fuels,
  metals and minerals
• Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP)potential for
  emissions of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) compounds
  and other halogenated hydrocarbons to deplete
  the ozone layer
• Photochemical Oxidants Creation Potential (POCP)
  summer smogrelated to the potential for VOCs
  and oxides of nitrogen to generate photochemical
  or summer smog

28
Environmental Impact for Flax fibre
Environmental Impact Classification Factor Land clearance Ploughing Sowing Water Herbicides Pesticides Fertiliser Dessication Harvest Rippling Retting Decortication Hackling Carding Spinning
Acidification Potential (AP)                              
Aquatic Toxicity Potential (ATP)                              
Eutrophication Potential (EP)                              
Global Warming Potential (GWP)                              
Human Toxicity Potential (HTP)                              
Non-Renewable/Abiotic Resource Depletion (NRADP)                              
Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP)                              
Photochemical Oxidants Creation Potential (POCP)                              
   
Noise and Vibration                              
Odour                              
Loss of biodiversity                              
   
                             
Very High Effect                              
Low Effect                              
No Effect                              

See also http//www.netcomposites.com/downloads/03
Thurs_Summerscales.pdf - slide 15
29
Life Cycle Inventory Analysis (LCI)
INPUTS INPUTS
Materials Value (per tonne of yarn)
Seed Fertilisers Lime Ammonium nitrate Triple superphosphate Potassium chloride Pesticides Diesel (using no-till water retting) Electricity 423 kg 2445 kg (4GJ) 444 kg (25 GJ) 400 kg (6GJ) 305 kg (3 GJ) 9 kg (2 GJ) 5 GJ 36 GJ
OUTPUTS OUTPUTS
Yarn Co-products Short Fibres Shive Dust Coarse plant residues Direct Emissions CO2 NH3 N2O NOx SO2 1000 kg 4497 kg 7104 kg 2824 kg 2304 kg 9334 kg 68 kg 14 kg 6 kg 3 kg
30
Life Cycle Impact Assessment LCIA methodology
In the impact assessment interpretation of the
LCI data,
Environmental impact potential,
where Bjx burden (release of emission j or
consumption of resource j per functional
unit) ec1 characterisation factor for emission
j continues
31
Non-renewable/abiotic resource depletion
potential is calculated using
Where Bj burden (consumption of resource j
per functional unit) ec1 estimated total
world reserves of resource j.
As defined by Adisa Azapagic et al (2003, 2004)
in Polymers, the Environment and Sustainable
Development and Sustainable Development in
practice case studies for engineers and
scientists
32
For the production of flax sliver
Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)
continues
33
Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)
For the production of flax yarn
34
No-till/water-ret flax vs glass fibres
GF data from Sustainability at Owens Corning
2008 Summary Progress Report
35
However .

• our analysis uses100 burden to long fibre
• economic apportionmentIf long fibre 10
  weight at 90 p/kgand short fibre/dust 90 at
  10p/kg,then burdens on long fibre halved
• if mass apportionment (indefensible?), then long
  fibre burden reduced to 10

36
A Le Duigou et al, JBMBE, 2011.

• environmental impact analysis onFrench flax
  fibers using different underlying assumptionsto
  Dissanayake et al for UK fibersconcluded
  thatwithout the allocation procedurethe
  results from the two studieswould be similar.

37
Le Duigou vs Dissanayake key differences

• UK plants desiccated at mid-point flowering
  but French plants allowed to set seed
• UK yield only 6000 kg/ha but French yield
  7500 kg/ha at harvest
• UK study excluded photosynthesis and CO2
  sequestration
• Higher level of nuclear power in the French
  energy mix
• UK study allocated all burdens to fiberFrench
  study allocated on mass of product and co-products

38
This study did not address

• sequestration of CO2
• use phase assumed comparable to glass
• disposal flax could be compostedbut
  degradation leads to biogas which is
  typically 60-65 methane, 35 carbon dioxide and
  a small amount of other impurities Jana et al,
  2001
• S Jana, NR Chakrabarty and SC Sarkar, Removal of
  Carbon Dioxide from Biogas for Methane
  Generation, Journal of Energy in Southern Africa,
  August 2001, 12(3).

39
This study did not address

• glass fibres are inert
• natural fibres burn GJ/tonne
• Flax (Top-F) 16.360.05
• Hemp (Strick H) 17.200.24
• Jute (Wingham) 17.460.14
• Jute (Virk) 17.750.17
• but that will release the sequestered CO2

Parr 1356 bomb calorimeter data by Adam
Smith
40
However

• long flax fibre could bea by-product/co-producti
  f flax grown for seed (O3 health food)
• but more difficultto separate fibre from stem

41
Conclusions I

• no-till and water retting scenario
• lowest global warming potential
• using bio-retting process
• increased global warming
• reduced eutrophication, acidification and
  toxicity
• fibre mass as green flax stems
• 5 in bio-retting
• 4 in water retting
• 2 in dew retting
• the embodied energies for flax (no-till
  agriculture)
• 54 GJ/tonne for sliver (55 GJ/tonne for
  glass mat)
• 80 GJ/tonne for yarn (32 GJ/tonne for
  continuous glass)

42
Burdens from

• minimum lt average lt maximum
• no till lt conservation agriculture lt
  mouldboard plough
• organic fertiliser lt agro-chemicals
• biological control of pests lt pesticides
• water- lt dew- lt bio-retting
• sliver lt spun yarn

43
Conclusions II

• the validity of the green case for
  substitution
• of glass fibres by natural fibres is
  dependent on
• the chosen reinforcement form, associated
• processes and allocation of burdens
• no-till with water retting is identified as
• the most environmental friendly option
• conservation agriculture, organic fertiliser and
  
• biological control of pests
• will improve environmental credentials of
  flax

44
PhD thesis as free download

• http//pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/handle/10026.1/483

45
References

• Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment
  - principles and frameworks, ISO 140402006.
  2006.
• Environment Management - Life Cycle Assessment -
  requirements and guidelines, ISO 140442006.
  2006.
• Azapagic, A., Perdan, S., Clift, R., Polymers,
  the Environment and Sustainable Development.
  2003 John Wiley Sons.
• Azapagic, A., Perdan, S., Clift, R. , Sustainable
  Development in Practice - Case Studies for
  Engineers and Scientists. 2004 John Wiley
  Sons.
• Azapagic, A., Aquatic Toxicity Potential. Private
  Communication, 25/02/2009.
• Dissanayake, N.P.J., Summerscales, J., Grove,
  S.M., Singh, M.M., Energy use in production of
  flax fibre for the reinforcement in composites.
  Journal of Natural Fibres, October 2009, 6(4),
  331-346.
• Dissanayake, N.P.J., Summerscales, J., Grove,
  S.M., Singh, M.M., Life cycle impact assessment
  of flax fibre for the reinforcement of
  composites. Journal of Biobased Materials and
  Bioenergy, 2009, 3(3), 245-248
• A Le Duigou, P Davies and C Baley, Environmental
  impact analysis of the productionof flax fibres
  to be used as composite material reinforcement,
  Journal of Biobased Materials and Bioenergy ,
  2011, 5,153165.
• Turner, J.A., Linseed Law A handbook for growers
  and advisers. 1987 BASF (UK) Limited, Hadleigh.
• West, T.O. and A.C. McBride, The contribution of
  agricultural lime to carbon dioxide emissions in
  the United States dissolution, transport, and
  net emissions. Agriculture, Ecosystems
  Environment, 2005. 108(2) p. 145-154.

46
Thank you for your attention. Any
questions? http//www.tech.plym.ac.uk
/sme/acmc/lca.htm