Life cycle assessment of single-use surgical and embedded filtration layer (EFL) reusable face mask

© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Resources, conservation, and recycling. - 1999. - 170(2021) vom: 16. Juli, Seite 105580
1. Verfasser: Lee, Amos Wei Lun (VerfasserIn)
Weitere Verfasser: Neo, Edward Ren Kai, Khoo, Zi-Yu, Yeo, Zhiquan, Tan, Yee Shee, Chng, Shuyun, Yan, Wenjin, Lok, Boon Keng, Low, Jonathan Sze Choong
Format: Online-Aufsatz
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: 2021
Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk:Resources, conservation, and recycling
Schlagworte:Journal Article Carbon footprint Environmental impact Life cycle assessment Reusable face mask Single-use face mask Waste generation
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented amount of face mask consumption around the world. The increase in face mask consumption has brought focus to their environmental impact. To keep up with the increased demand for face masks, different variations of reusable face masks such as the embedded filtration layer (EFL) reusable face mask have emerged in the market. This study quantifies the environmental impact of the EFL reusable face mask and the single-use surgical face mask
METHODS: The life cycle assessment (LCA) study of the entire value chain from cradle-to-grave is applied to each face mask. Both face masks are evaluated over 1 functional unit (FU) of 31 12-h days for a single person. The ReCiPe method with the Hierachist perspective was applied. A total of nine impact categories as well as the generated waste of each face mask are evaluated
RESULTS: The results show that for 1 functional unit, the use of single-use surgical face mask and EFL reusable face mask will contribute 0.580 kg CO2-eq and 0.338 kg CO2-eq to climate change and generate 0.004 kg and 0.0004 kg of waste respectively
CONCLUSION: Comparing both face masks, the EFL reusable face mask will have a lower emission of at least 30% in terms of the generated waste and the impact categories considered, except for water depletion, freshwater eutrophication, marine eutrophication, and human toxicity
Beschreibung:Date Revised 08.09.2024
published: Print-Electronic
Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE
ISSN:0921-3449
DOI:10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105580