d5.1. report on the current situation analysis: … d5.1.pdf · conceptual framework for...

Contract No.: 214660 (NMP2-11-2008-214660)Project acronym: SustainComp

Project title: Development of Sustainable Composite Materials

Funding scheme: Collaborative Project

Thematic Priority: NMP

Starting date of project: 1st of September, 2008

Duration: 48 months

Deliverable reference number and title:

D5.1. Report on the current situation analysis: recyclability, socialand economic requirements evaluation and how it can affect new

developments

Due date of deliverable: September 30, 2009Actual submission date: September 30, 2009

Organisation name of lead contractor for this deliverable: ITENE

Dissemination LevelPU Public X

PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the CommissionServices

RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including theCommission Services)

CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including theCommission Services)

Report on the current situation

analysis: recyclability, social and

economic requirements evaluation

and how it can affect new

developments

Deliverable 5.1

Antonio Dobon Lopez

Francesco Razza

Dorotea Slimani

Mercedes Hortal Ramos

Pilar Cordero Gordillo

María Calero Pastor

i

Colophon

TitleReport on the current situation analysis: recyclability, social and economic

requirements evaluation and how it can affect new developments

Author(s) Antonio Dobón López (ITENE)

Francesco Razza (Novamont SpA)

Dorotea Slimani (Innventia AB)

Mercedes Hortal Ramos (ITENE)

Pilar Cordero Gordillo (ITENE)

María Calero Pastor (ITENE)

Date of publication September 2009

Packaging, Transport & Logistics Research Centre (ITENE)

Parque Tecnológico de Valencia (Paterna)

C/ Albert Einstein, 1

46980 Paterna – Valencia (Spain)

Tel: +34 96 390 54 00

Fax: +34 96 390 54 01

Internet: http://www.itene.com

Deliverable 5.1. Report on the current situation analysis

ii

List of abbreviations

PVC Polyvinyl chloride

EU European Union

SME Small and Medium Enterprises

LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gases

LDPE Low Density Polyethylene

HDPE High Density Polyethylene

LLDPE Linear Low Density Polyethylene

US United States

PP Polypropylene

FCC Fluid Catalytic Cracking

PDH Propane dehydrogenation

GPPS General Purpose Polystyrene

HIPS High Impact Polystyrene

EPS Expandable polystyrene

PS Polystyrene

IT Information Technology

GDP Gross Domestic Product

ABS Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene Copolymer

VCM Vinyl Chloride Monomer

ABS Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene Copolymer

SAN Styrene Acryolonitrile

E/E Electric/Electronics

TSE Twin-Screw Extruder

RIM Reaction Injection Moulding

SMC Sheet Moulding Compound

BMC Bulk Moulding Compound

LMC Liquid Moulding Compound

LFRT Long Fibre Reinforced Thermoplastic

UHMWPE Ultrahigh Molecular Weight Polyethylene

VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds

HAPs Hazardours Air Pollutants

IPP Integrated Product Policy

SCP/SIP The EU Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan

EMAS European Management Audit Scheme

LCT Life Cycle Thinking

LCA Life Cycle Assesment

LCC Life Cycle Costing

SLCA Social Life Cycle Assessment

ISO International Standards Organization

CBA Cost Benefit Analysis

LCSA Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

IC Impact Categories

LCIA Life Cycle Impact Assessment

LCI Life Cycle Inventory

GW Global Warming

POF Photo-Chemical Ozone Formation

OD Ozone Depletion

AC Acidification


iii

EU Eutrophication (as Impact Category)

UV Ultraviolet

NRERC Non Renewable Energy Resources Consumption

RERC Renewable Energy Resources Consumption

POF Photochemical Ozone Formation

NHW Non Hazardous Waste

HW Hazardous Waste

LO Land Ocuppation

HT Human Toxicity

EIONET European Environment Information and Observation Network

LCM Life Cycle Management

IC Internal Costs (as cost for LCC)

CC Conventional Costs

HC Hidden Costs

LTC Less Tangible Costs

LCAA Life Cycle Attribute Assessment

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

SETAC Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

GRI Global Reporting Initiative

UN United Nations

NACE Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community


iv

List of contents

List of abbreviations iiList of contents ivList of figures viiList of tables ixExecutive summary 11. Introduction 52. Current plastic materials: uses and market issues 62.1 Plastics 62.1.1. Definition and classification 62.1.2. Plastic production and market demand in a global context 72.1.3. Production demand in Europe 72.1.4. Key actors in plastic market 92.2. Polyethylene 102.2.1. Definition 102.2.2. Application 112.2.3. Market 122.3. Polypropylene 132.3.1. Definition 132.3.2. Application 132.3.3. Markets 142.4. Polystyrene 142.4.1. Definition 142.4.2. Application 152.4.3. Market 182.5. Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene Copolymer (ABS) 192.5.1. Definition and manufacturing process 192.5.2. Applications 192.5.3. Markets 192.6. Polyvinylchloride (PVC) 202.6.1. Definition and manufacturing process 202.6.2. Applications 202.6.3. Market 212.7. Polycarbonate (PC) 222.7.1. Definition and manufacturing process 222.7.2. Applications 222.7.3. Market 232.8. Polyamide (PA) 232.8.1. Definition and manufacturing process 232.8.2. Applications 242.8.3. Markets 253. Current plastic materials: processing 253.1. Introduction to plastic processing techniques 253.2. Extrusion 253.2.1. Definition 253.2.2. Description of the process 263.2.3. Raw materials 263.2.4. Current technology/equipment 263.2.5. Applications 273.2.6. Markets 273.3. Injection moulding 27


v

3.3.1. Definition 273.3.2. Description of the process 283.3.3. Raw materials 283.3.4. Current technology equipment 283.3.5. Applications 293.3.6. Markets 293.4. Compression moulding 303.4.1. Definition 303.4.2. Description of the process 303.4.3. Raw material 323.4.4. Current technology/equipment 323.4.5. Applications 344. Current plastic materials: end-of-life issues 344.1. Introduction to the end-of-life of plastics 344.1.1. End-of-life of plastic packaging 354.1.2. Agricultural films 364.1.3. Automotive 364.1.4. Electrical & electronic 364.1.5. Construction 364.2. Non renewable energy resource consumption 374.3. Plastic production 374.4. End-of-life: recycling and recovery 395. Life cycle definition 425.1. Why a life cycle thinking approach 425.2. Ecodesign 445.3. Life cycle modelling 456. How the sustainability is measured? A sustainability model 506.1. What does the sustainability concept means 506.2. The environmental aspects: (Environmental) Life Cycle Assessment, LCC 526.3. The economic aspects: Life Cycle Costing, LCC 526.4. The social aspects: Social Life Cycle Assessment, SLCA 536.5. The sustainability model in SustainComp project 547. Environmental parameters 547.1. Measuring the environmental dimension of sustainability 547.2. LCA methodology 557.3. Environmental parameters in SustainComp 567.3.1. Impact categories 577.3.2. Discussion on impact categories considered 617.4. Biogenic carbon accounting in a LCA 668. Economic parameters 668.1. The life cycle costing approaches 668.2. Conceptual framework for Environmental Life Cycle Costing 678.3. Types of LCC costs 688.4. Choosing economic indicators for SustainComp’s Life Cycle Costing 709. Social parameters 719.1. SLCA approaches 719.2. Types of social aspects 759.3. Types of social indicators 789.4. Choosing social parameters for SustainComp project 7810. A qualitative measurement for sustainability 8210.1. Introduction to a sustainability model for SustainComp 8210.2. Environmental aspects: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) 8310.2.1. Introduction 83


vi

10.2.2. Goal and scope 8410.2.3. Life cycle inventory and data elaboration 8710.2.4. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) results 8810.2.5. Conclusions from LCA results 9010.3. Economic aspects: Environmental-LCA type Life Cycle Costing (LCC) 9210.3.1. Goal and scope 9210.3.2. Life cycle cost inventory 9410.3.2.1. Costs related to plastic resin manufacturing 9410.3.2.2. Costs related to plastic converting 10010.3.3. Life cycle cost results and conclusions 10610.4. Social aspects: Social Life Cycle Assessment 10710.4.1. Introduction 10710.4.2. Social life cycle inventory analysis 10710.4.3. Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment 11310.4.4. Conclusions from Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment 11511. Future expectations 12612. Conclusions 128References 130


vii

List of figures

Figure 1. World plastics production 1950-2007 7Figure 2. Demand by converter by End Use Segment. 8Figure 3. World plastics production 2007. 8Figure 4. End use applications for plastics in Europe 2007. 9Figure 5. Ethylene molecule 10Figure 6. Segments of polypropylene, showing examples of isotactic (above) and syndiotactic (below) tacticity. 13Figure 7. The reaction scheme for producing polystyrene from styrene monomer. 14Figure 8. Outline flow chart for the production of polystyrene. 15Figure 9. EPS application in Europe 16Figure 10. Polystyrene market in Europe. 18Figure 11. PVC sales in Western Europe and Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia in 2007 21Figure 12. Nylon 6,6 structure. 23Figure 13. Nylon 6 structure. 24Figure 14. Main stages of the extrusion process 26Figure 15. Single-screw extruder 26Figure 16. Main stages in injection moulding process. 28Figure 17. Diagram of an injection moulding machine. 28Figure 18. Distribution of injection moulding sites in Europe in 2005. 30Figure 19. Compression moulding process. 31Figure 20. Process equipment for long fibre reinforced direct production of structural parts. 33Figure 21. Plastic from cradle to cradle (EU25+NO/CH 2 007). 34Figure 22. Flow chart showing the most relevant inputs used for manufacturing PS virgin pellets 37Figure 23. The life cycle of a product 43Figure 24. Interconnections between Eco-design and life cycle steps of a product 44Figure 25. Life Cycle stages and System boundaries in LCA evaluation. 55Figure 26. Example of characterization process of inventory data in the framework of Eco-indicator 95 method. 57Figure 27. Overall scheme of IMPACT 2002+ linking LCI results via the midpoint categories to damagecategories

58

Figure 28. The conceptual Framework of LCC based on the physical product life cycle 67Figure 29. System boundaries considered in the LCA 85Figure 30 Normalization of LCIA results 91Figure 31. Cost structure (expressed as % of total expenditure) for the European basic chemical subsector,NACE DG 24.1

98

Figure 32. Cost structure (expressed as % of total expenditure) for the European manufacture of rubber andplastic products sector NACE DH 25.

102

Figure 33. Preliminary streamlided LCC results for plastic family materials. (Source: Estimated personalcompilation)

106

Figure 34. HIPS cradle-to-gate LCC variations as function of the converting technique. (Source: Estimatedpersonal compilation)

107


viii

List of tables

Table 1. EPS properties - EPS product types without intended specific application 16Table 2. Plastic packaging resin codes 41Table 3. Life cycle description for each current plastic family material in SustainComp project 46Table 4. Impact categories within SustainComp project. 59Table 5. Economic parameter values for external costs (EC). 69Table 6. LCC aspects to be considered within an Environmental LCC 70Table 7. Midpoint categories and measurement methods for social impact indicators 73Table 8. Technical framework for conducting a SLCA 75Table 9. Assessment framework for conducting a SLCA 77Table 10. Social parameters for conducting SLCA in SustainComp project 81Table 11. Environmental parameters for conducting LCA in SustainComp project 84Table 12. Source of inventory data used in streamlided cradle-to-gate prelyminary LCA 87Table 13. LCIA results for plastic family materials expressed as impact categories defined in SustainComp 89Table 14. Economical indicators considered in the Life Cycle Cost (LCC) within SustainComp project 94Table 15. NACE Subsections DG classification codes for chemicals and chemical and man-made fibresproducts sector

95

Table 16. Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products (DG 24): Structural profile, EU-27, 2004 96Table 17. Total number of enterprises, value added and number of persons employed in the EU-27.Manufacture of basic chemicals, fertilisers and nitrogen compounds, plastics and synthetic rubber in primaryforms subsector 2004.

96

Table 18. Estimated LCC results for plastic family materials manufacturing in primary form 99Table 19. NACE Subsections DH 25 classification codes for manufacturing of rubber and plastic products sector 101Table 20. Manufacture of rubber and plastic products (DH 25): Structural profile, EU-27, 2004 101Table 21. Total number of enterprises, value added and number of persons employed in the EU-27. Manufactureof plastic products (DH 25.2.) 2004.

102

Table 22. Estimated LCC results for plastic family materials converting 103Table 23. Average specific energy consumption by plastic converting business. 105Table 24.Average company size in the plastic converting sector 109Table 25. Breakdown of total European production capacity of primary resins and analysed reports by plasticfamily material

110

Table 26. List of stakeholder categories, types of impacts and impact subcategories in SustainComp SLCA 111


1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Nowadays the sustainability concept has become as usual term in the daily life. The concept of

sustainability include three main dimensions: environment, economy and society, together aimed at meets

the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations.

The technological development during the latest decades has shown that some technologies have

the some challenges on the environmental protection. Nevertheless technological developments has also

support the minimization of resource use, waste generation and/or minimization of their environmental

impact. One of these technological developments is the use of new sustainable materials aimed at less

global environmental impact and optimising the use of resources and energy. Therefore a root question

that raises when talk about new materials is: “Why should they be better than current products?”.

Probably because they use less non-renewable resources? Produce less pollution? They cost less?. Actually,

all these issues are important and need to be assessed properly since environmental, economic and social

aspects, are the inseparable and interdependent components of human progress.

The core objective of SustainComp project is the development of a series of completely new wood-

based sustainable composite materials. Therefore a sustainability evaluation is required for such new

materials. This is sound since the materials will have a broad range of applications, and consequently will

be processed by several converting techniques, will be distributed to different markets, will have different

options at the reuse, recycling and end-of-life stages.

If it is considered the wide range of variables that influence the material and their subsequent

product a life cycle thinking approach is also needed. In fact products may have totally different

environmental impacts during each stages of their own cycle.

Linked with the life cycle environmental impact and product development, a new concept has

emerged: the ecodesign. The ecodesign is an approach where environmentally sustainable criteria are

applied in the design step in order to maximally reduce the environmental stress coming from a product

life cycle. In fact part of the environmental impacts in the life cycle of products can be avoided in the

design stage of the product, and ecodesing is a powerful technology for such purposes. Furthermore

economic and social aspects related to the new product made of the new material should be also

considered in order to get new sustainable solutions. Consequently the sustainability evaluation should not

be not comprised exclusively by a final assessment of the materials obtained, but an integrated work since

the beginning of material development to product design. This is the reason why the Sustainability

Assessment in SustainComp projects is developed under the life cycle thinking approach, based on the

ecodesign of new sustainable materials/products. Three well-known assessment techniques are considered

as support for sustainability assessment and ecodesign:


2

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): for environmental issues

Life Cycle Costing (LCC): for economic issues

Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA): for social issues

In summary, SustainComp’ WP5 objectives are focused on the development of these new materials,

taking sustainable criteria into account in the design step. It means that environmental, economic and

social/market aspects associated with these new materials will be studied, evaluated and improved in order

to ensure their sustainability.

In this first Deliverable the sustainability model for SustainComp project is described in detail. This

model is based in the three pillars of sustainability (environment, economy and society), being the

sustainability assessment the results of the integration of the results coming from LCA, LCC and SLCA in

accordance to the following scheme:

LCSA = LCA + LCC + SLCA (1)

Where:

LCSA = Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

LCA = Life Cycle Assessment (according to SETAC/ISO)

LCC = Life Cycle Costing (an environmental LCA type life cycle costing assessment)

SLCA = Social Life Cycle Assessment

Apart from the definition of sustainability model, a preliminary cradle-to-gate sustainability

evaluation of some plastics family materials (PE, PP, EPS, HIPS, ABS, PVC, PC and PA) has been also

made, based in the already described assessment techniques. This will serve as a basis for future

sustainability evaluations of new materials as well as ecodesign of products made of new materials

developed in SustainComp project.

Since a life cycle approach has been considered for the Sustainability evaluation a general

description and markets of plastic family materials as well as the most common processing techniques is

provided in this Deliverable.

Due to the wide range of plastic grades, converting techniques, applications, final products, the

cradle-to-gate sustainability assessment is not intended to be a comparative assessment among materials,

but a point of departure for ecodesing and sustainability assessment of new sustainable materials. In fact

the sustainability assessment for plastic family materials are based on a cradle-to-gate point of view from

raw material extraction to plastic primary resin production (except in case of LCC on which the system


3

boundaries have been expanded to converting of plastic primary resins by means of general processing

techniques).

With regard to the environmental aspects, the main environmental concerns about life cycle stages

of plastics were analysed in a qualitative way. The most important issues are those related to polymer resin

production, raw material extraction included, and disposal. Finally a preliminary cradle-to-gate streamlined

LCA from raw material extraction to primary resin production was carried out. Some plastic resins like PA

and PC show the highest impacts in some categories like GWP, NRER, EU and POF. On the other hand

PP shows the lowest values in LCIA results.

Regarding the economic aspects, a streamlined cradle-to-gate LCC was carried out. The system

boundaries were expanded from raw material extraction to converting of plastics resins, since rough data

for general converting techniques were available. The main conclusion was that engineered plastics like

PC, PA or ABS show the highest LCC. On the other hand general purpose plastics like PE or PP. Other

important result from the LCC was that the use of specific converting techniques may affect the LCC of a

plastic material, as is shown for HIPS.

The social aspects were analysed by conducting a qualitative cradle-to-gate Social Life Cycle

Assessment of family products based on UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Guidelines for SLCA as well

as the GRI indicators. Due to the profile of the European plastic sector, mainly comprised by

multinational companies that produce primary resins, compounders (generally SME if they are not

integrated into multinational companies) and converters, the SLCA was limited to resin manufacturers. In

fact, the European converting sector is mainly based on SME a lack of data was detected for such kind of

companies, since most of them do not report social issues at the time being. A total of 13 plastic resins

manufacturers with facilities in Europe were considered analysing their CSR reports, sustainability reports,

annual reports or corporate websites. Several limitations were detected for conducting SLCA since

generally the reporting of social indicators is made in a worldwide scope, and several business activities

different from resin production (like oil extraction or chemicals) are included within the reports.

Furthermore most of the data is reported in a qualitative way. In case of use of quantitative indicators

some of them may use different scales. Therefore comparison of data is hardly difficult. Main conclusions

from the SLCA were that at European sites take a wide range of actions for assure labour practices and

decent work. For instance a most of the workers are covered by collective bargaining and/or have social

benefits like medical insurance. Health and safety issues are a key aspect for most of the companies, and

many actions for training activities to employees on this area are taken. With regard human rights these are

covered by the European legislation. Many companies state that they respect human rights inside their

organisations and some of them demand the same commitment to its suppliers. With regard to social

performance indicators, the European resin producers took several actions for enhancing communication

between community environment like education, cultural activities, participation with local communities

and authorities, codes of conduct, etc. Another key issue for resin manufacturers is the product


4

responsibility. All the analysed companies inform customers about the risk of hazardous chemical by

labelling, material safety data sheets (MSDS), SDF, ADR and REACH.

To sum up, apart from the analysis of the current situation about plastics sector in Europe, in this

deliverable a sustainability model that lay the foundations for future assessment and development of a

completely new series of wood-bases sustainable composite materials in SustainComp project is provided.

These new materials seem to have a good potential to be an alternative to current plastic materials and the

sustainability model developed in this Deliverable will serves as a basis for analysing the sustainability of

these new materials.


5

1. Introduction

The present document constitutes the Deliverable D5.1 “Report on the current situation analysis:

recyclability, social and economic requirements evaluation” and overall, it has the following objectives:

Provide a clear picture of the “starting point” by describing actual/available products that fall

within the project focus, marking the state of the art, trends and developments of such materials;

Describe the methodological approach such as identified sustainable parameters, available tools

and methodologies;

Describe the sustainability model that will be used for carrying out evaluations for both

SustainComp products and current products;

Provide a semi-qualitative assessment of current materials according to Sustainability model

previously defined;

Describe the expectations by SustainComp materials and conclusions.

The intended use of this document is therefore to get all SustainComp partners acquainted on

project starting point what main concerns about plastic sector are and what tools and methodologies will

be used for the development of SustainComp products. The audience of this document is represented by

all SustainComp partners, in particular industrial partners, which are directly involved in developing new

products. Before getting to the heart of the matter of Work package 5 activities, it is fundamental for them

to know the basic concepts of sustainability, the main concerns about plastic sector (e.g. waste

management) as well as the existing tools for assessing products sustainability. The report refers to

activities carried out within Workpackage 5, and specifically within Task 5.1

2. Current plastic materials: uses and market issues

In this chapter a general description of the most common plastic materials that fall within

SustainComp focus is reported. For each material a brief description of the polymer as well as production

processes, applications and market share is given. According to PlasticsEurope [1] working group

Statistics and Market research plastic materials, here addressed, cover more than 70% of the total world

plastic production (2003).

2.1. Plastics


6

2.1.1. Definition and classification

Plastics are synthetic polymers, high-molecular-weight organic compound whose structure can be

represented by a repeated small unit, called monomer.

A polymer is a network in one, two or three dimensions and the repeating units are often composed

of hydrocarbons, compounds of carbon and hydrogen. Polyethylene, polypropylene, polybutylene,

polystyrene and polymethylpentene are examples of polymers that contain only carbon and hydrogen

atoms. These polymers are specifically made of carbon atoms bonded together, one to the next, into long

chains and, because of the nature of carbon, one or more other atoms can be attached to these chains, for

example chlorine (e.g.: Polyvinyl chloride - PVC) or fluorine (e.g.: Teflon). It is also possible to have

manufactured polymers which contain elements other than carbon in the repeated unit, for example

nylons contain nitrogen, polyesters and polycarbonates contain oxygen.

The crucial element for the production of plastics is naphtha, one of the lighter groups (fractions)

derived from the distillation process of heavy crude oil. Each fraction is a mixture of hydrocarbon chains,

which differ in terms of the size and structure of their molecules.

Polymerization and polycondensation are the two major processes used to produce plastics, both of

them require specific catalysts. Polymerisation consist in a chemical reaction which links the molecules of

a simple substance together to form large chains , polycondensation is a process in which water or some

other simple substance separates from two or more of the polymer molecules upon their combination.

Each polymer has its own properties, structure and size depending on the various types of basic

monomers used, but at some stage in its manufacture, every plastic is capable of flowing, under heat and

pressure if necessary, into the desired final shape.

There are many different types of plastics but they can be classified into two main polymer families:

Thermoplastic: materials capable of being repeatedly softened by heat and hardened by

cooling. Typical of the thermoplastic family are the styrene polymers and copolymers,

acrylics, cellulosics, polyethylenes, polypropylene, vinyls and nylons [2]. Plastic bottles,

films, cups, and fibers are thermoplastic plastics.

Thermoset: materials, also called “linear polymers”, which will undergo or has undergone a

chemical reaction through the application of heat and pressure, catalysts, ultraviolet light,

etc., leading to a relatively infusible state. Typical of the plastics in the thermosetting family

are the aminos (melamine and urea), most polyesters, alkyds, epoxies, and phenolics [2].

Epoxy resins used in two-part adhesives are thermoset plastics.


7

2.1.2. Plastic production and market demand in a global context

A global average increase of about 9% every year has been registered in production and

consumption of plastics since 1950. The Figure 1 shows clearly that the total global production of plastics

grew from around 1.5 million tones in 1950, to million tones in 2007.

Includes: thermoplastics,

polyurethanes, thermosets,

elastomers, adhesives,

coatings, sealants and PP-fibres

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year

Mill

ion

so

fto

ns

World

Europe (WE+CEE)

Figure 1. World plastics production 1950-2007 (Adapted from Plastics Europe Market Research Group [1]).

2.1.3. Production and demand in Europe

The global plastic production in EU27 plus Norway and Switzerland is about 65 million tones/year.

Packaging is the largest market for plastics with a value of 37%, as shown in Figure 2, followed by

Building and Construction at 21%. In volume terms plastics is estimated to account for 21% of all

packaging materials.


8

Electrical and

Electronic

6%

Automotive

8%

Building and

Construction

21%

Packaging

37%

Others

28%

Figure 2. Demand by converter by End Use Segment (Adapted from Plastics Europe Market Research Group [1]).

The pie chart below (Figure 3) shows that Germany is the major producer (7.5% of global

production), followed by the Benelux (4.5%), France (3%), Italy (2%) and the UK and Spain (1.5%).

Japan

5,5%

Latin America

4,0%

Benelux

4,5%

France

3,0%

Other EU 27+NO, CH

5,0%

Spain

1,5%

Italy

2,0%

UK

1,5%Germany

7,5%

Rest of Asia

16,5%

China

15,0%

CIS

3,0%

Middle East, Africa

8,0%

NAFTA

23,0%

Europe

(WE+CE)

25%

Figure 3. World plastics production in 2007 (Adapted from Plastics Europe Market Research Group [1]).

In Western Europe, according to AMI [3] the market for packaging plastics has reached a state of

maturity, even if in 2007, its markets still accounted for 89% of polymer demand for packaging purpose.

Eastern European markets, instead, are registering a dynamic growth driven by lower labour costs,

rising consumer spending and recent accession to the EU.


9

The market within the Central European countries of Poland, Hungary, Czech and Slovak

Republics, Baltic States, Slovenia, Bulgaria and Romania registered a significant growth since the early

1990s and the recent growth of Western owned supermarket and hypermarket chains in these countries,

have also influenced consumer choices and expectations. Strongest growth has occurred in the use of

PET for bottles and in PE stretch films and packaging films.

The main market served by plastics packaging is the food and drink industry, as shown in Figure 4,

and almost all types of plastics materials find some application in this sector. The major non-food

packaging markets for plastics are industrial products, household chemicals, cosmetics/toiletries and

medical/pharmaceutical.

Other non-food

19%

Household

chemicals

6%

Industrial

5%

Beverages

25%

Dairy

9%Other food

36%

Figure 4. End use applications for plastics in Europe 2007.

2.1.4. Key actors in plastic market

The plastic industry in Europe is comprised by three main actors: primary resin producers,

plastic compounders and masterbatch producers, and plastic converters (also called processors).

The first ones are mainly big international corporations which produce pellets of base resins and some

specialties for enhancing or adding additional properties. The second ones (compounders and

masterbatch producers) most often prepare plastic formulations, by mixing or/and blending polymers

and additives in a molten state. The company profile for compounders vary from companies owned by

multinational polymer producers, independent compounders to Small and Medium sized Enterprises

(SME) [4]. Finally, plastic converters produce semi-finished and finished plastics products with a specific

shape and properties by using a wide range of plastic converting processed. These products are aimed at a


10

very wide range of industrial and consumer markets - the automotive electrical and electronic, packaging,

construction and healthcare industries, to name but a few. Plastics converters buy in raw material in

granular or powder form, subject it to a process involving pressure, heat and/or chemistry and apply

design expertise to manufacture their products. They often undertake additional finishing operations such

as printing and assembly work to add further value to their activities.

2.2. Polyethylene

2.2.1. Definition

Polyethylene is a derivative of ethylene, which in turn is a product derived from the refining of

crude oil. This process, from which petrol, diesel and LPG are obtained, creates heavy naphthas, which

are transformed into ethylene through a procedure called cracking. After a series of processes, ethylene

becomes polyethylene, a long chain of the monomer ethylene, whose molecule is C2H4.

Figure 5. Ethylene molecule

This thermoplastic product is a semi-finished industrial material used to be transformed into a range

of finished goods and it evolves into two forms, low density polyethylene (LDPE) and high density

polyethylene (HDPE).

2.2.2. Application

Polyethylene is one of the most common plastic materials and accounts for 40% of the total volume

of world production of plastic materials due to its characteristics. Polyethylene has a low cost, being also

flexible, durable, and chemically resistant. Furthermore polyethylene can be ease processed into various


11

packaging forms with a wide range of processing techniques. Due to these characteristics polyethylene is

one of the most widespread materials in the food packaging field

LDPE

The largest outlet for LDPE (low density polyethylene) is the film market, which is split roughly 50-

50 between packaging and non-packaging applications. Some food packaging applications are for instance

meat and poultry wrapping, frozen food bags and bag-in-box packaging for liquids.

Non-food packaging applications are instead carry-out bags, waste bin liners and construction and

agricultural films, even if there’s a big competition with linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) whose

higher strength properties allow down-gauging, saving material and reducing costs.

A growth area for LDPE is the extrusion coating of paper and paperboard, the second largest

application segment. This is largely due to innovations in packaging technology for paperboard coating,

and paper and foil composites.

Also injection molding, the third-largest application, is a growth area for LDPE. Household goods,

toys and sporting goods, caps, closures and medical appurtenances are included in this area.

HDPE

High density polyethylene (HDPE) is the third largest commodity thermoplastic after polyvinyl

chloride and polypropylene. Its major outlet for HDPE is in blow-molding applications such as milk

bottles, packaging containers, drums, fuel tanks for automobiles, toys and house wares. Its second

application segment is injection-molding, which includes articles such as crates, pallets, packaging

containers and caps, paint cans, house wares and toys.

The third-largest application field is extrusion, which typically is used to produce pipe for water, gas

and irrigation, and electrical conduit. Film and sheet made from HDPE are used in a wide range of

applications including wrapping, refuse sacks, carrier bags and industrial liners.

2.2.3. Market

The European market of polyethylene covers the 29% of total plastics consumption. Details on

LDPE and HDPE market are provided in the following subchapters.

LDPE


12

With regard to LDPE, in 2006, just over 17m tones were consumed globally. In particular US exports

in 2005 were 737,000 tones while imports were 185,000 tones.

In Western Europe, market growth has been stagnant although growth of up to 3-4%/year has been

seen in central and eastern Europe. The trade association Plastics Europe [5] reported that production of

LDPE in Europe (EU15 and Norway, Switzerland, Malta and Cyprus) fell from 4.57m tones in 2005 to

4.43m tones in 2006. Demand data is not reported.

HDPE

HDPE global demand was around 25m tones in 2004. In particular the US demand was expected to

grow at 3%/year to 2009 and according to ICB Americas [6], domestic demand had to increase from

6.45m tones in 2005 to 7.26m tones in 2009.

The US has become a net importer of HDPE with imports accounting for 1.24m tones in 2005

while exports were 953,000 tones.

On the other hand, demand in Europe, saw small growth in 2006 following flat demand in 2005.

Data from the trade association Plastics Europe [5] showed HDPE demand in Europe (EU15 plus

Norway and Switzerland) grew from 5.12m tones in 2005 to 5.22m tones in 2006. However, production

fell from 5.11m tones in 2005 to 4.89m tones in 2006. Imports from the Middle East are expected to grow

as new capacity builds up in this region.

2.3. Polypropylene

2.3.1. Definition

Polypropylene (PP) is a thermoplastic polymer which has excellent chemical resistance, is strong

and has the lowest density of the plastics used in packaging. It has a high melting point, making it ideal for

hot-fill liquids. In film form it may or may not be oriented (stretched). PP is found in everything from

flexible and rigid packaging to fibers and large molded parts for automotive and consumer products [7].


13

Polypropylene (PP), discovered in the early 1950s, is the dominant outlet for propylene which has

two main sources: a byproduct from the steam cracking of liquid feedstock’s such as naphtha as well as

LPGs, and from off-gases produced in fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) units in refineries. The remainder of

propylene is produced using on-purpose technologies such as propane dehydrogenation (PDH) and

metathesis.

Figure 6. Segments of polypropylene, showing examples of isotactic (above) and syndiotactic (below) tacticity.

2.3.2. Application

Polypropylene (PP), accounts for around 63% of global propylene consumption, it is one of the

most versatile of the bulk polymers due to a combination of good mechanical and chemical properties.

Polypropylene is similar to its ancestor, polyethylene, and shares polyethylene's low cost, but it is much

more robust. For this reason its applications are very wide, it is used in several applications from plastic

bottles to carpets to plastic furniture, and is commonly used in cars.

There are three forms of PP that can be produced – isotactic, syndiotactic and atactic – but isotatic

PP is the main form manufactured. Small amounts of other monomers (most usually ethylene) can be

added to make either random or block PP copolymers.

Injection molded PP, the largest of the PP grades, can be used in electronic and electrical

appliances, house wares, bottle caps, toys and luggage. The second largest outlet for PP is the fibers

sector, used in products such as carpets, clothing and for the replacement of sisal and jute in ropes and

string. Both the film and sheet markets have seen good growth over recent years, film grade PP can be

found in the packaging of sweets and cigarettes, tapes and labels. Copolymer PP is used in car and truck

bumpers, instead PP sheet is used in thermoformed food containers, which can be blow or injection

molded.

2.3.3. Markets


14

In 2007, the global market for polypropylene had a volume of 45.1 million tons which led to a

turnover of about 65 billion US $ (47.4 billion €).

In Europe, PP demand recovered in 2006 and 2007 following a disappointing year in 2005.

However, demand in 2008 was likely to be poor. According to the association of plastics manufacturers,

Plastics Europe [5], PP demand in the EU 15, Norway, Switzerland, Malta and Cyprus fell from 8.0m

tones in 2004 to 7.90m tones in 2005 before recovering to 8.10m tones in 2006. Production has been

growing from 8.97m tones in 2004 to 9.14m tones in 2005 and 9.26m tones in 2006. Western Europe was

expected to become a net importer by 2009.

2.4. Polystyrene (PS)

2.4.1. Definition

Polystyrene belongs from Styrenics or Styrenic Polymers which is a family of major plastic products

that use Styrene as their key building block. The production of Styrene monomer can be thought of as

replacing one of the hydrogen atoms in ethylene by a benzene ring (C6H6) as shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. The reaction scheme for producing polystyrene from styrene monomer.

Polystyrene, whose production route is shown in Figure 8, is sold in three main forms: crystal or

general purpose polystyrene (GPPS), high impact polystyrene (HIPS) and expandable polystyrene (EPS).


15

GPPSproduction

Aromaticsplant

Ethylbenzene

production

Styreneproduction

Reformingfor benzene

EPSproduction

Cracking

HIPSproduction

Pentaneproduction

Polybutadieneproduction

Natural gas Naphtha Naphtha

Ethylene Benzene

Benzene

Styrene

HIPS GPPS EPS

GPPSproduction

Aromaticsplant

Ethylbenzene

production

Styreneproduction

Reformingfor benzene

EPSproduction

Cracking

HIPSproduction

Pentaneproduction

Polybutadieneproduction

Natural gas Naphtha Naphtha

Ethylene Benzene

Benzene

Styrene

HIPS GPPS EPS

Figure 8. Outline flow chart for the production of polystyrene.

In particular expanded Polystyrene, is a lightweight and strong thermoplastic product. This material

is a rigid and plastic foam insulation material produced from solid beads of polystyrene. In this procedure

the expansion of polystyrene beads is achieved by virtue of small amounts of pentane gas dissolved into

the polystyrene base material during production. The gas expands under the action of heat, applied as

steam, to form perfectly closed cells of EPS which occupy approximately 40 times the volume of the

original polystyrene bead. The EPS beads are then molded into appropriate forms according to custom.

2.4.2. Application

As commented in Chapter 2.4.1. polystyrene is sold in three main forms (GPPS, HIPS and EPS)

having each of them different uses. With regard to EPS, this material used in a wide range of applications

on which thermal isulation and/or cushioning properties is required. Some examples of EPS are thermal

insulation board in buildings, packaging, or cushioning of valuable goods and food packaging. Due to its

properties, the main uses of EPS are focused on the building and construction sector (70%) and packaging

sector (25%). It has to be pointed out that Polystyrene is the fourth biggest polymer produced in the

world after polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride and polypropylene. The total demand in 2001 was around 10.6

million tons.


16

Building and

Construction

70%

Packging

25%

Other applications

5%

Figure 9. EPS application in Europe (Adapted from Plastics Europe [8]).

An overview of some EPS properties per EPS type, according to EN 13163 [9] is given in the

Table 1:

Table 1. EPS properties - EPS product types without intended specific application [9]

EPS TYPE EN 13163 [unit] EPS 60 EPS 100 EPS 150 EPS 200 EPS 250

Thermal

conductivity

EN 12667 or

EN 12939

'Lambda'

mW/mºK38 36 35 34 34

Compressive

stress 10%EN 826

CS(10)

kPa60 100 150 200 250

Bending

strengthEN 12089

BS

kPa100 150 200 250 350

Dimensional

stabilityEN 1603

DS(N)

%0,5% 0,5% 0,5% 0,5% 0,5%

Approximate

Densitykg/m³ 15 20 25 30 35

General purpose polystyrene (GPPS) is a glasslike polymer with a high processability. When

modified with rubber it results in a high impact polystyrene (HIPS) with a unique combination of

characteristics, like toughness, gloss, durability and an excellent processability.

High-impact polystyrene (HIPS) is a specific type of polystyrene that has been modified with

elastomerics molecules such as butadiene [10]. These modifications allow significantly improved impact

qualities, although at the expense of clarity. This material is used for several daily life products like toys,

household appliances, cases, boxes, and calculators, computer housings, etc.


17

Due to the large number of applications of polystyrene, some of the most common uses of this

material are described as follows.

Building and construction

Polystyrene, especially in form of EPS, is widely used in building and construction sector due to

their main properties: thermal insulation ability and low weight. The combination of both properties allow

its use for insulation foams, roofing, siding, panels, bath and shower units, lighting, plumbing fixtures

In addition to its traditional insulation application in the construction industry, EPS foam also finds

other uses in civil engineering and building like road foundations, void forming, flotation, drainage, impact

sound insulation, modular construction elements, cellular bricks, etc.

Packaging

Typical packaging applications for PS are windowed cartons, blister packs, trays, closures,

disposable dishware and single-service food containers. PS is used as packaging in various sectors like

toys, jewellery and food packaging, like crystal thin-wall containers for bakery goods, or thermoformed

thicker-sheet containers for diary products, like yoghurt. But also, due to its protective properties,

polystyrene (in form of EPS) is widely used in every industrial sector as a cushioning material for

distribute and protect goods.

Other applications

Apart from PS uses in building & construction and packaging sectors, there are some other

applications like uses for household and office appliances like fridges, microwaves, air conditioners,

computers, and other IT equipment. Other durable goods like toys, kitchen & bath accessories, etc. are

also made of polystyrene. Some polystyrene resins are also used for medical applications for their clarity

and post-sterilization aesthetics.

2.4.3. Market

In accordance with Plastics Europe [11] the global market for polystyrene is 10.6 million tons and is

expected to grow at 4 percent per year to approximately 15 million tons in 2010. Europe contributes 26

percent to the global demand for polystyrene and was approximately 2.7 million tons in 2001. Although


18

the average annual growth is expected to be 3-4 percent per annum up to 2010, the actual annual growth

in Europe is 4-5 percent, slightly ahead of the GDP.

In Figure 10 main PS market applications are showed. The major part is in packaging applications,

like dairy products. As can be drawn from this figure packaging uses of PS plays an important role in the

polystyrene market in Europe, accounting a 36% of the uses of polystyrene resins, followed by consumer

electronics, appliances and construction markets respectively.

Construction

11%

Medical

1%

Consumer

Electronics

13%

Appliances

12%

Packaging

37%

Other

26%

Figure 10. Polystyrene market in Europe. (Source: Adapted from Plastics Europe [11]).

2.5. Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene Copolymer (ABS)

2.5.1. Definition and manufacturing process

ABS, also called Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene Copolymer is an opaque, thermoplastic polymer

material made from the monomers Acrylonitrile, 1,3-Butadiene and Styrene. There are about 15 grades of

ABS varying in composition and mode of manufacture [12]. The most common grade of ABS is produced

either by grafting the copolymer styrene-acrylonitrile, or by blending SAN with nitrile rubber [12]. ABS

shows a high impact strength (more than HIPS) as well as better chemical and thermal properties, but is

not transparent and needs stabilization for external exposure [12]. ABS can be converted into different


19

shapes by injection, extrusion, blow moulding, thermoforming, and cold pressing, metallic coating and

structural foam [12].

2.5.2. Applications

ABS is a very versatile material and therefore very popular among designers. It is scratchproof,

highly resistant, dimensionally stable, glossy and easy to colour [13]. Due to its properties ABS is

considered as engineering-like plastic [12] aimed to a wide range of uses, including pipelines, cabinets for

TV and radio, phones, machine bodies, luggage, helmets, sport and leisure accessories, toys, kitchen

appliances, etc. But the most common applications of ABS are the automotive industry, on which ABS is

used in car and motorcycle bodies, as well as in the electrical/electronics sector [13].

2.5.3. Markets

Within the group of styrene co-polymers, ABS is the biggest product in terms of volume. In

accordance with Plastics Europe in 2008 global consumption was about 5.4 million tons and it is expected

that ABS will continue to show above average growth rates. Until 2010 the average annual growth rate is

estimated at 5.5% [13].

For Europe, it is expected that ABS consumption will rise from its present 750,000 tons to

800,000 tons within the next five years. It should be taken into account that automotive, appliances and

E/E account for almost 50% of European ABS consumption.

2.6. Polyvinylchloride (PVC)


PVC is a polymer that has an amorphous structure with polar chlorine atoms in the molecular

structure. PVC has completely different features in terms of performance and functions compared with

olefin plastics, which have only carbon and hydrogen atoms in their molecular structures [14].

PVC (Polyvinyl-chloride) is a plastic produced by the suspension, or emulsion polymerisation, of

vinyl chloride monomer [10]. The process for producing PVC starts from the reaction of chlorine –

produced when salt water is decomposed by electrolysis – with ethylene, which is obtained from oil or gas


20

via a ‘cracking’ process [15]. After several processes, this leads to the production of another gas: vinyl

chloride monomer (VCM) which is polymerised to form a fine white powder called PVC. On its own

PVC is a hard, brittle and essentially unusable material unless compounded with a number of additives

[10]. This is the reason because PVC powder is mixed with additives (stabilisers and/or plasticizers) to

achieve the precise properties required for specific applications. The resulting PVC granules (compounds)

or ready-to-use powders (pre-mixes) are then converted into the final product. By adding other materials

to PVC it is possible to change the strength, rigidity, colour and transparency of the final product.

PVC resins have a high chemical stability due to chlorine atoms within their structure, providing fire

retarding properties, durability, and oil/chemical resistance.

2.6.2. Applications

As stated above PVC resins have good properties like fire resistance, low permeability and

isulating properties as a result of their structure. By varying the use of additives in the manufacturing of

PVC products, features such as strength, rigidity, colour and transparency can be adjusted [13] to meet

different applications, including:

Packaging applications like highly plasticised films for hand-wrapping, sterilised packaging for

medical and pharmaceutical products (e.g.: blister packs for pills and tablets), thermoformed

blister-packaging shells [10], or labels [15]. Approximately 500,000 tons of PVC are used in

packaging across Europe each year [15]. Its major packaging applications are rigid film (about

60%), flexible film such as cling film (11%) and closures (3 %).

Leisure products, including garden hoses, footwear, inflatable pools, tents.

Building products, like window frames, floor and wall coverings, roofing sheets, linings for

tunnels, swimming-pools and reservoirs. PVC is the most widely used polymer in building and

construction applications and over 60 % of Western Europe’s annual PVC production is used in

this sector [15].

Piping, including water and sewerage pipes and fittings, and ducts for power and

telecommunications.

Medical products like blood bags, transfusion tubes and surgical gloves. In accordance with

PCV.org [15] in Europe the consumption of PVC for medical devices is approximately 85.000

tons every year, being also 1/3 of plastic based medical devices made from PVC. Such figures are

based on the chemical stability of PVC which enables safe sterilisation or use inside the body.

Coatings, including tarpaulins, rainwear, and corrugated metal sheets.


21

Insulation and sheathing for low voltage power supplies, telecommunications, appliances, and

automotive applications.

2.6.3. Market

At global level, demand for PVC is about 35 million tonnes per year and it is in constant growth

(+5% on global average), with higher growth rates in the developing countries.

In accordance with PVC.org [15], in Europe (EU-27), the production of PVC products – including

exports – totals about 8 million tonnes per year. European PVC resin consumption totals some 6.5 million

tonnes per year, or 15% of all plastics use in Europe, with an average growth of 2-3% per year.

Others paste

3%Others non paste

4%Rigid films

8%

Rigid plates

2%

Coated fabrics

3%

Flooring

5%

Cables

8%

Flex tubes and

profiles

2%

Flex film & sheet

6%

Misc. rigid &

bottles

4%Profiles

30%

Pipes

25%

Figure 11. PVC sales in Western Europe and Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia in 2007 (Adapted from

PVC.org [15])

The total PVC production and conversion industry in Western Europe comprises more than 21.000

companies with more than 530,000 jobs and a turnover of more than 72 billion euro.

2.7. Polycarbonate (PC)


Polycarbonate is a polymer made by reacting phosgene and bisphenol A [16]. The chemical

structure is composed by many units of bisphenol A connected by carbonate-linkages in its backbone


22

chain. Polycarbonates are amorphous resins which do not require orientation to develop optimum

properties [16]. Main properties of polycarbonate are transparency, strength, processability and

recyclability. Furthermore polycarbonate shows outstanding mechanical properties at both high and low

temperatures. As a result of that, polycarbonate is widely used in several engineering applications like

automotive uses or on electric and electronic appliances.

Polycarbonate shows also dimensional rigidity and inertness to food components. These are the

reasons why polycarbonate has been used for some food rigid packaging applications like refillable bottles

for water and milk [16]. Polycarbonate can be transformed into different shapes by extrusion or injection

moulding.

2.7.2. Applications

As previously stated there is a wide range of uses for polycarbonate, ranging from applications on

which transparency, strength, rigidity and scratch resistance is highly appreciated like in headlights for cars,

to applications on resistance to high temperature is required, like plastic containers for food products that

must be retorted for sterilization [16]. But there are many other applications [17]:

Automotive: mirror housings, tail lights, turn signals, back-up lights, fog lights, bumpers, etc.

Packaging: Polycarbonate bottles, containers and tableware can withstand extreme stress during

use and cleaning, including sterilisation, shatterproof packaging, etc.

Appliances & Consumer Goods: electric kettles, fridges, food mixers, electrical shavers and

hairdryers, while fulfilling all safety requirements such as heat resistance and electrical

insulation.

Electrical & Electronics: cell phones, computers, fax machines, optical data storage applications

(e.g. CDs, DVDs), etc.

Protective glazing and sheets: these are use to prevent damage and injury like protective

panelling, windscreens for automobiles, bullet-resistant windows, leisure and sport sunglasses,

etc.

2.7.3. Market

Polycarbonate is a high quality, engineering plastic with a unique combination of properties.

Therefore is expensive than other plastics materials like polypropylene or polyethylene. In accordance


23

with Plastics Europe [17], the global market for polycarbonate has grown from 600,000 tonnes in 1990 to

1,800,000 tonnes in 2000. Market growth is expected to continue with an average growth rate of

approximately 10%.

2.8. Polyamide (PA)


Polyamide is a group of polymer resins made by the condensation polymerization of an organic acid

and an amine [16]. In their backbone chain polyamides (or Nylons) have amide groups which are very

polar and can hydrogen bond with each other.

Figure 12. Nylon 6,6 structure.

Because of this, and because the nylon backbone is so regular and symmetrical, nylons make great

fibers because they are crystalline.

The nylon in the Figure 12 is called nylon 6,6, because each repeat unit of the polymer chain has

two stretches of carbon atoms; each is six carbon atoms long. Other nylons can have different numbers of

carbon atoms in these stretches. Nylon 6,6 is made by reacting hexamethylene diamine and adipic acid.

Another kind of nylon is nylon 6. It is a lot like nylon 6,6 except that it only has one kind of carbon

chain, which is six atoms long (Figure 13).


24

Figure 13. Nylon 6 structure.

2.8.2. Applications

Nylons are used in a wide range of applications, including [18]:

Electrical connectors

Valve seats, cams

Gear, slide, cams, and bearings

Cable ties and film packaging

Fluid reservoirs

Fishing line, brush bristles

Automotive oil pans

Fabric, carpeting, sportswear

Sports and recreational equipment

Sterilisable mouldings for medical or pharmaceutical uses

2.8.3. Markets

The polyamide market in Europe has growth from 2004 to 2007 at an average of 3.7% per annum,

compared with average GDP growth of 2.2% during the same period [19]. Demand for PA compounds or

polymer at the processor level in 2006 reached 863,000 tonnes. Market demand for PA is expected to

grow to 986,000 tonnes in 2010 (based on PA6, PA66, and high temperature nylon types only) [19].

3. Current plastic materials: processing

3.1. Introduction to plastic processing techniques

As stated in Chapter 2, plastics materials can be processed into different shapes and objects by a

vast number of processing techniques. These processing techniques may show differences as function of

the processed polymer and the intended use of the final plastic product. Therefore in this Chapter is just

intended to provide a general and brief overview of the most common converting techniques for plastic


25

materials. It should be taken into account that several differences may be found as function of the

processed polymer and the product to be obtained. Even the same polymer could be processed into a

wide range on techniques, and this process may depend directly on polymer grades and the final product.

3.2. Extrusion

3.2.1. Definition

The extrusion process is probably the most important polymer processing technique used today in

which an Archimedean screw rotates within a cylindrical barrel. It is a continuous process used for the

production of semi-finished goods such as films, sheet, profiles and pipes. The extrusion technique is also

used in several plastic transformations as a previous process.

3.2.2. Description of the process

Firstly, polymer is fed through the hopper into an extruder. Plastic is continuously conveyed to a

heated barrel and carried along by a rotating screw where it is compressed and melted. The resulting hot

plastic is then forced out thorough a die and directly led into cool water where the product solidifies.

There are similar stages of production in extrusion technique even though the die and some

components of an extrusion line may differ depending on the type of extruded product.

Polymerfeed

ExtrusionCalibration

unitCooling

Haul offrollers

Stacking,sawing and

reeling

Converted productPolymerfeed

ExtrusionCalibration

unitCooling

Haul offrollers

Stacking,sawing and

reeling

Converted product

Figure 14. Main stages of the extrusion process (Adapted from euRECIPE [20]).

3.2.3. Raw materials

This process is used mainly for thermoplastics, but elastomers and thermosets are also may be

extruded. Plastics are introduced in the hopper as pellets, granules or powder.


26

3.2.4. Current technology/equipment

Figure 15 shows components and features of a single-screw extruder.

Die

Extrudate

Polymer f eed

Heaters

Feed section

Polymer melt andscrew

Breaker plateCompressionsection

Meeteringsection

Die

Extrudate

Polymer f eed

Heaters

Feed section


Breaker plateCompressionsection

Meeteringsection

Figure 15. Single-screw extruder. (Adapted from: Fellers et. al [21])

Examples of specific extruders are: co-extrusion, extrusion air bubble machines, multiple-screw

extruders, plastic lumber extrusion/moulding machines, ram extruders, rotary screwless extruders, sheet

extrusion machines, single-screw extruders, web extrusion machines, co-rotating twin-screw extruder

(TSE) and planetary extruders.

3.2.5. Applications

Extrusion is used to manufacture continuous profiles such fibres, tubing, hose, and pipe; to apply

insulation to wire; to coat or laminate paper or other webs. It also has building applications as door and

window profiles, fencing, cladding or siding, roofing and marine structures.

3.2.6. Markets

Almost a quarter of all thermoplastics are consumed by film extrusion process, particularly within

the packaging industry. For pipe production the total market demand was 3.4 million tonnes of polymers

in Europe for 2008, of which PVC was the main material processed. Thermoplastics profile and tube

processing in Europe has currently reached over 2 million tonnes of polymers used in the building sector

alone, accounting for almost 90% of overall demand in Western Europe [22]. Other end use markets are


27

self-assembly retail furniture and flexible profiles for automotive, domestic appliances and buildings

sectors.

3.3. Injection moulding

3.3.1. Definition

Injection moulding is a continuous and fast process used to produce large numbers of identical

items from high precision engineering components, to disposable consumer goods [20].

The process involves clamping two moulds together into which a molten polymer is injected. High

pressure is used to obtain fast filling speeds and to ensure the mould is completely filled. Once the

polymer has been cooled in the shape of the cavity, the mould is opened, the part ejected and the process

restarts.


Injection moulding involves feeding plastic resin to a rotating screw in a heater barrel. There the

plastic is melted and mixed while the mould is previously clamped under pressure. The softened plastic is

then injected at high pressure into a closed mould that has one or more cavities in the shape of the desired

part. The mould within the plastic is cooled, and when the plastic solidifies, the mould is opened and the

part is ejected. The process, defined as a “cycle” can then repeat itself.

There are six main stages in the injection moulding process as shown Figure 16.

Clamping Injection Dwelling CoolingMould

openingEjection

Converted productClamping Injection Dwelling Cooling

Mouldopening

EjectionConverted product

Figure 16. Main stages in injection moulding process. (Adapted form euRECIPE [20]).

3.3.3. Raw materials

Injection moulding is used mainly for thermoplastics, but elastomers and thermosets are also may

be processed.


28

3.3.4. Current technology equipment

The sequence of the process and the different parts of an injection machine is shown in Figure 17.

Nozzle

Polymer feed

Heaters

Injection unit


Clampingcylinder

Tie rods

MoldCylinder, gearand motot forscrew rotation

Clamping unit

Nozzle

Polymer feed

Heaters

Injection unit


Clampingcylinder

Tie rods

MoldCylinder, gearand motot forscrew rotation

Clamping unit

Figure 17. Diagram of an injection moulding machine. (Adapted from: Fellers et. al [21])

An injection moulding machine consists of three main elements: injection unit, clamp and controls.

The injection unit plasticizes and injects the resin at high pressure into the closed mould. The clamp unit

supports the mould halves, closes and clamps them together during injection, and opens them for

ejection. Controls consist of electrical, electronic, and hydraulic systems for machine operation. All of

these elements are mounted on the machine base, which can be of either a single -or split- base design.

Modular machine designs allow a wide variety of combinations of injection units, clamps, and controls to

meet the individual requirements of specific applications [23]. A specific example of injection moulding

machine is the reaction injection moulding (RIM) equipment [24].

3.3.5. Applications

Injection moulding is used for manufacturing DVDs, pipe fittings, battery casings, toothbrush

bases, bottle lids, disposable razors, automobile bumpers and dash boards, power-tool housing, television

cabinets, electrical switches, telephone handsets, automotive power brake, automotive fascias,

transmission, and electrical parts, mirror housings, steam irons, washer pumps, spoilers, butter tubs,

moisture vaporizers, yogurt containers, toilet seats, cell-phone housings, cradles or bases for personal

digital assistants, case of a notebook-computer, computer mouse, electrical connector housings, lawn

chairs, automotive ashtrays, and cookware appliance handles and knobs, aerosol caps, household items,

bottle caps, toys.


29

3.3.6. Markets

Applied Market Information Ltd. (AMI) estimates that there are around of 13,000 injection

moulders in Europe. Injection moulding consumes 8.6 million tonnes of polymers in Europe worth over

45€ billion [25]. Despite, injection moulding market has been decreasing 9% over the past six years due to

relocation of manufacturing to lower cost regions outside of Europe, especially Asia and to overcapacity

in some sectors and increasing manufacturing costs. Distribution of injection moulding in Europe is

explained in Figure 18.

Hungary

2%Czech & Slovak

Republics

2%France

10%

Poland

5%

Other Western

European Countries

7%

Spain

9%Scandinavia

3%

Benelux

2%United Kingdom

9%Italy

32%

Germany

19%

Figure 18. Distribution of injection moulding sites in Europe in 2005. (Adapted from: AMI [25])

3.4. Compression moulding

3.4.1. Definition

It is a process in which the moulding material is preheated and then placed in a mould cavity. A top

force closes the mould and pressure is applied to force the material into contact with all mould areas. Heat

and pressure are maintained until the moulding material has cured.


30


The sequence of the process is shown in Figure 19.

Upper mold half

Punch

Lower moldhalf

Knock-out pin

1) Charge loading 2) Compression and curing 3) Ejection

Upper mold half

Punch

Lower moldhalf

Knock-out pin

1) Charge loading 2) Compression and curing 3) Ejection

Figure 19. Compression moulding process. (Adapted from: Fellers et. al [21]).

The compression moulding technique is comprised by four consecutive steps. The first one consists

of polymer charge. In the second and third step, the polymer is compressed and cured respectively. The

fourth and final step is the ejection and removing of the shape by applying pressure on the other side of

the mould. This general process has some specific aspects as function of the product to be obtained by

conversion in the compression moulding process. Three main compression moulding methods are

described below.

Sheet Moulding Compound (SMC)

With this method the material is purchased in sheet form. Typically the material is a rubber or

rubber like material. The material is cut to a near net shape, slightly larger than the mould area, in a

predetermined sheet thickness, based on mass needed for finished part. This cut shape is placed into the

bottom mould cavity. Both Top and Bottom cavities are kept at an elevated temperature. The press is then

activated and the material is pressed into the cavities under high compression. The heated cavities activate

the curing of the material. The part is then removed and sometimes post cured in a post cure oven.

Bulk Moulding Compound (BMC)


31

With this method a bulk material is used. Often this material is moulded in to a preformed slug that

would meet the material mass requirements for the finished part. This preform is placed in the lower

mould cavity and the press is then activated in the same manner as the SMC process. Again, the cavities

are heated to cause the material to start its curing process.

Liquid Moulding Compound (LMC)

With this method a two component thermoset liquid is used. The LMC material is kept at an

elevated temperature as are the upper a lower moulding cavities. During the moulding process the 2

components are mixed and poured into both halves of the heated mould. When the proper gel occurs, the

mold is closed and the press is activated. These parts are demoded and typically post cured to achieve full

cure of product [24].

3.4.3. Raw material

This technology is the main processing method used with thermoset resin but it also can process

some thermoplastics. Materials that are typically manufactured through compression moulding include:

Ticona’s Compel R and Celstran R long fibre reinforced thermoplastic (LFRT) and GUR R ultrahigh

molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) and polyester fiberglass resin systems (SMC sheet moulding

compound /BMC bulk moulding compound / LMC Liquid Moulding Compound).

Raw material is usually used in the form of granules, putty-like masses, powder or performs. This

method allows processes high-strength fiberglass reinforcement. In addition, advanced composites

thermoplastics can be compression moulded with unidirectional tapes. Compression moulding processes

also woven fabrics, randomly orientated fibre mat and chopped strand.

3.4.4. Current technology/equipment

An example of compression-moulding equipment is shown in Figure 20.


32

Converted product

Extruder

Polymer andadditive feed

Glass fiberroving

Mixing-Extruder

LFT strand

Compressionmoulding

Converted product

Extruder

Polymer andadditive feed

Glass fiberroving

Mixing-Extruder

LFT strand

Compressionmoulding

Figure 20. Process equipment for long fibre reinforced direct production of structural parts. (Adapted from: euRECIPE

[20])

The compression-moulding machine comprises of a control unit that manages five main elements: a

hydraulic alignment controlled high speed press, a heating and cooling system for the mould, an extruder

or plasticizing unit for processing un- and reinforced thermoplastics, a mould unit and a transfer unit for

putting the plasticized material into the mould.

Examples of specific compression-moulding machines are: compression moulding press with safety

guards, double station compression moulding press, acofab - double station compression moulding press -

fabricate three side closed, multiplatens compression moulding press with die loader, multiplatens

compression moulding press, fabricated body compression moulding press, fabricated body compression

moulding press with multi cylinders, compression moulding press with mould platen sliding & ejector,

compression cum transfer moulding press, fabricated type downstroking press for composite materials, 4-

pillars type downstroking pres for Bakelite moulding, fabricated type downstroking press for Bakelite

moulding [24].

3.4.5. Applications


33

Compression moulding is used in electrical components, automotive and aircraft body panels, bottle

caps, jar closures, electric plugs and sockets, toilet seats and trays, radio and appliance knobs and ash trays.

For metal replacement, this technology is mostly used to make larger flat or moderately curved parts such

as hoods, fenders, scoops, spoilers, lift gates and the like for automotive end-uses.

4. Current plastic materials: key figures on environmental

concerns about plastics

4.1. Introduction to the end-of-life of plastics

As stated in previous chapters the properties of plastics materials have lead to an increase on the

plastic consumption and application. Nevertheless their increasing use has resulted in concern with the

consumption of non renewable natural resources (i.e. oil and natural gas), the toxicity associated with their

manufacture and use, and the environmental impact arising from plastic waste, in particular littering

phenomena as it has been the recent accumulation of enormous quantities of plastic trash in ocean gyres.

Post-consumer waste (24.6 Mt)Converter demand(EU 27+NO/CH)

52.5 Mt

Packaging (37%)

Building andconstruction (21%)

Electric/electronic (6%)

Automotive (8%)

Others (28%)

Energy recovery (7.2 Mt)

Recycling (5 Mt)

Disposal (12.4 Mt)

Import

Export

Post-consumer waste (24.6 Mt)Converter demand(EU 27+NO/CH)

52.5 Mt

Packaging (37%)



Automotive (8%)

Others (28%)

Packaging (37%)



Automotive (8%)

Others (28%)

Energy recovery (7.2 Mt)

Recycling (5 Mt)

Disposal (12.4 Mt)

Import

Export

Figure 21. Plastic from cradle to cradle (EU25+NO/CH 2 007). (Source: Plastics Europe [1])

Figure 21 illustrates the flow of plastics from conversion to the end-of-life phase. The data is valid

for EU27 plus Norway and Switzerland. The converters used 52.5 million tonnes of plastics in 2007, up 3

% on 2 006. Of all plastics used by consumers, 24.6 million tonnes ended up as post-consumer waste, up

from 23.7 million tonnes in 2006.


34

A 50% of the post-consumer used plastic was recovered and 50% went to disposal. Of the quantity

recovered, 5 million tonnes were recycled – as material and feedstock – and 7.2 million tonnes were

recovered as energy.

The overall material recycling rate of post-consumer plastics in 2007 was 20.4%, with mechanical

recycling at 20.1% (up 1 .2% points from 2 006) and feedstock recycling at 0.3% (down 0.3% points from

2 006).

The energy recovery rate remained stable at 29.2% reflecting how the sensitivity and planning

complexity of this resource management technology has led to slow progress in society.

In 2007, 12.4 million tonnes of plastics were wasted in landfill.

The end-of-life of plastics varies as function of the previous use of the material. That is the end-of-

life of an automotive plastic product may be totally different to than used for a plastic packaging. This fact

is described in the following Subchapters for packaging, agriculture, automotive, electric/electronic and

construction sector

4.1.1. End-of-life of plastic packaging

The packaging application is one of the most important applications on which the recovery and

recycling practices are applied, contributing about 63% of end-of-life quantity. In fact most of what is

recycled comes from packaging.

The post consumer plastic waste implies the depletion of non-renewable fossil raw material

resources [26]. In addition they have also a short useful lifetime and soon become cumbersome waste that

must be treated or disposed off with additional energy inputs [27].

Moreover, their non-biodegradable / non compostable nature associated with the short life of

packaging products (e.g. cushion packaging) rises up fundamental concerns regarding waste disposal.

Recycling is the solely and the most preferable solution for preventing those synthetic materials entering

the waste stream [28].

In accordance with Plastics Europe [1] streams of bottles and industrial film are being mechanically

recycled to approximately 40% across EU27+NO/CH. Other plastic packaging like crates and boxes are

recycled at well over 90%.

A key issue for plastic packaging recycling is the remaining mixed plastics, that still have a low

recycling rate (below 1.0%) across EU27+NO/CH.


35

4.1.2. Agricultural films

Plastics are used in agriculture for a wide range of applications, like waste silage. These types of

plastic products are a good source for mechanical recycling as it is made from a limited range of plastics,

mostly polyolefins [1]. Also the amount of plastics make it viable the plastic recycling, despite the high

levels of contamination by soil, that pose technical and financial challenges for the recycling process.

4.1.3. Automotive

Automotive plastics are other important source of materials for recovery and recycling, and the

recycling rates continued to increase during the last years. Automotive plastics can be separated from

other parts and subsequently used for manufacturing of new plastic products, even new automotive parts

like panels, bumpers, etc.

4.1.4. Electrical & electronic

Recycling in the electrical and electronic sector is limited by complex products with mix of wide

range of materials. Since plastic are mixed with metals, glass, etc, it makes sorting an intensive and

expensive activity. For the majority of waste streams, thermal treatment via feedstock recycling or energy

recovery is the most appropriate procedure [1]. There is also some uncertainty about the actual volumes of

discarded E&E equipment.

4.1.5. Construction

Plastics used in construction are for long-term use and hence do not generate as much waste.

Nevertheless increased recycling is being achieved in e.g. window profiles and pipes of 13 % in 2 007.

4.2. Non renewable energy resource consumption


36

Despite plastics consume only a small fraction (4%) of Europe’s annual oil and gas production, the

absolute amount is however significant. According to PlasticEurope Eco-profile of polystyrene, for

producing 1 kg of polystyrene pellets about 1 kg of oil is needed, of which about 0.63 kg is used as

feedstock (i.e. fossil carbon contained in material) and the remaining amount for energy production (i.e.

electricity and heat) consumed in the process.

Figure 22. Flow chart showing the most relevant inputs used for manufacturing PS virgin pellets (source: Razza F. 2008

adjusted [29])

Together with oil also other fossil fuels, both for feedstock and energy purposes, are consumed as

shown in Figure 22. Considering the consumption of fossil fuels used as a feedstock only (i.e. oil and gas)

the world production of polystyrene in 2001 (i.e. 10,6 millions of ton) has required about 6.7 and 3.5

million of tons of oil and gas respectively.

4.3. Plastic production

Environmental concerns from resin production depend on the types of monomers involved, and on

the processes used in the polymerization reactions.

Some of the impacts are associated with properties of the monomer. For example, vinyl chloride, a

gas, is a carcinogen [30]. Fugitive emissions in the workplace must be carefully controlled. Traces of the

monomer may exist in the polymer, so PVC is regulated by Council Directive 78/142/EEC which fixes a

very low concentration limit (i.e. 1 ppm) for the presence of the monomer in the polymer as well as in the

food, making the application of PVC in contact with food or drinking water a very challenge task.

Another big issues related to PVC, is the use of phthalates esters as plasticizers. Some of these substances

have endocrine disruption effects and are listed (DMP DMEHP BBT) in the “candidate list of

substances of very high concern for authorization” within the new chemical regulation known as REACH

[31]. One of the monomer types involved in polyurethane production, molecules containing isocyanate


37

groups, is also a health hazard [30]. The most commonly used monomer, toluene diisocyanate, is a

relatively nonvolatile compound, and is thus of concern as a constituent of solid waste, although release of

vapours into the atmosphere from polyurethane production can also affect people in close proximity to

the production facility, as well as plant workers [30].

Other impacts are associated with the production process [30]. Polymerizations can be carried out

with only the monomer and polymer, along with lesser quantities of catalysts and other production aids.

This is referred to as "bulk polymerization". The typical environmental impact comes from escaped

monomer. Alternatively, polymerizations can be carried out in a solvent phase. Not surprisingly, the

greatest environmental impact in such cases is often associated with release of the solvent (either to air or

wastewater). In some cases, synthesis of the active monomer from precursor materials is carried out in the

same facility that then carries out the polymerization reaction.

Plastic production concerns are listed below:

Air emissions of monomer and volatile solvent

Wastewater bearing solvent residues from separation processes, and from wet scrubbers

Slow release into the environment, for example, by leaching slowly into water, of:

Residual monomer in product

Small molecules (plasticizers, stabilizers, etc.) incorporated into product

Plasticizers in particular have been implicated in human health and environmental impacts

by their action as endocrine mimics and reproductive toxins

Air emissions data for key pollutants (i.e. ozone precursors) are available from the National

Emission Trends (NET) database (1999), and hazardous air pollutant emissions data are available from

the National Toxics Inventory (NTI) database (1996 is the most recent year for which final data are

available). Since the technologies can be considered similar to ones used in Europe, the following data

will be taken into account even if they are referred to USA. For plastics materials and resins, the total

emissions are:

Criteria pollutants:

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs): 40187 tons per year

Nitrogen oxides (NOx): 31017 tons per year

Hazardous air pollutants (HAPs): 19493 tons per year (e)

The plastics sector contributes to greenhouse gas emissions from both fuel and non-fuel sources. Another

document in this series, Greenhouse Gas Estimates for Selected Industry Sectors, provides estimates

based on fuel consumption information from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the U. S.


38

Department of Energy, and the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, issued by the

EPA. (The EIA document is sector-specific for energy intensive sectors, but does not provide emission

data, while the EPA document provides emission data, but not explicitly on a sector-specific basis. See

the estimates document for details of how the calculation was carried out). Based on those calculations,

the plastics sector in 2000 was responsible for 68.1 teragrams (million metric tons, Tg) of carbon dioxide

equivalent emissions from fuel consumption, and 9.9 Tg CO2 equivalent emissions (as nitrous oxide) from

non-fuel sources (mostly for the production of adipic acid, a constituent of some forms of nylon), for a

total of 78.0 Tg CO2 equivalent. In comparison, the chemical sector as a whole (including plastics)

accounted for 531.1 Tg CO2 equivalent. Thus plastics are a sizeable contributor, but not the dominant

contributor, to greenhouse gas emissions compared with the entire chemical sector.

4.4. End-of-life: recycling and recovery

Recycling is the collection, separation, clean up and processing of waste materials to produce a

marketable material or product. Recycling can take place within the manufacturing process (e.g. the plastic

scraps within manufacturing plastic industry). Alternatively, recycling takes place at the post consumer

stage where plastics can be collected and can then re-enter the plastic making process. Litter results from

careless disposal, and decomposition rates in landfills can be extremely long.

Recycling of plastics is desirable because it avoids, at the same time, their accumulation in landfills

and the use of virgin plastic materials. It is a matter of fact that the success of recycling is limited by the

development of successful strategies for collection and separation.

It is estimated that only about 50% of the plastic produced in Western Europe each year is available

for collection and recycling, the reminder accumulating in the environment for long term use such as in

building works including plastic windows frame, pipe, electrical wiring etc. [32].

According to Plastics Europe (formerly APME) [33], in 2004 about of 19.9 million of ton of plastic

waste were produced in view of about 38 million of consumption. In 2006 about 23 million of ton of

plastic waste were produced (an increasing by 15.6%) of which about 4.5 million of ton were recycled and

7 million were incinerated with energy recovery, whereas 11.5 million of ton were land-filled. These

figures indicate that the recycling rate is almost 20% of the total plastic waste produced amount, a

percentage quite low even if in some countries like Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands, Austria, Swedish

the recycling rate is higher (up to 30%). About 50% of plastic waste is therefore land – filled where may

remain intact for hundreds of years, adding to the problem of landfills filling to capacity.


39

Considered that about 40% of plastic products produced by plastic transformers are related to

“short service life” and in 2006 the amount of plastic produced in Europe was about 60 million of ton.

The waste management is becoming more and more a significant environmental concern.

Two types of plastic recycling exist: mechanical and chemical recycling (also called feedstock

recycling). Mechanical recycling of plastics refers to processes which involve the melting, shredding or

granulation of waste plastics. Plastics must be sorted prior to mechanical recycling. Sorting for mechanical

recycling can be done both by trained staff who manually sort the plastics into polymer type and/or

colour or automatically. Several technologies are being introduced to sort plastics such as X-ray

fluorescence, infrared and near infrared spectroscopy, electrostatics and flotation. Following sorting, the

plastic is either melted down directly and moulded into a new shape, or melted down after being shredded

into flakes and than processed into granules called regranulate.

Feedstock recycling describes a range of plastic recovery techniques to make plastics, which break

down polymers into their constituent monomers. These in turn can be used again in refineries, or

petrochemical and chemical production. A range of feedstock recycling technologies is currently being

explored. These include: pyrolysis, hydrogenation, gasification and thermal cracking. Feedstock recycling

has a greater flexibility over composition and is more tolerant to impurities than mechanical recycling,

although it is capital intensive and requires very large quantities of used plastic for reprocessing to be

economically viable (e.g. 50,000 tonnes per year).

In many countries, plastic is collected from commercial and industrial sources as a separate plastic

fraction, much of which is recycled back into the plastic product manufacturing process. This is relatively

simple and economical to recycle, as there is a regular and reliable source and the material is relatively

uncontaminated.

However the recycling of post-use plastic, which is a plastic material arising from products that have

undergone a first full service life prior to being recovered, is not always an easy task due to technical

and/or economic issues. Post – consumer plastic in municipal solid waste make up between 5 and 15

wt% of municipal solid waste it comprises 20-30% of the volume due to their low density.

For example disposable catering items (i.e. cups, cutlery etc.) as well as food packaging are

potentially recyclable but practically it is almost impossible due to their contamination by food that makes

the process counter-productive also because the collection of such objects involves the development of an

infrastructure, often not in place.

Beyond contamination problems, plastics are composed of numerous families (about 50) of

materials with each grade tailored to be resource efficient and to meet a specific balance of end-use

properties. Different plastics are not compatible with each other and mixtures give poorer properties. The

costs of separating such mixtures both in economic and environmental terms (energy, water use etc.) are


40

very high and are unattractive compared to other recovery options such as using the high calorific value of

the plastics as a source of fuel to generate heat or power.

The recycling process is greatly influenced by the type of plastic, which is identified by means of a

numbering system initiated in 1988 by the Society for Plastics Industry. Plastics are categorized as seven

different types: plastics #1-#6 account for 96% of all packaging plastics (see Table 2)

Table 2. Plastic packaging resin codes.

However, the presence of the plastic resin code does not indicate that the plastic can actually be

recycled. In addition, it was developed by the plastic manufacturing industry, not by the recycling industry.

Although two plastics may have the same number, they may not necessarily be able to be recycled

together. A good example is a 2 HDPE yogurt tub (wide-mouth) and 2 HDPE milk jug (narrow mouth).

Yogurt tubs are “injection molded,” and milk jugs are “blow molded.” Both resins are made out of

HDPE, but because the different processing methods require different material characteristics, each resin

contains different additives. Each of the resins cools and melts at a different temperature, and therefore,

they cannot be reprocessed together.

A major problem with plastics is in their design. When the manufacturing industry designs plastics,

it rarely considers how these plastics will be recycled, causing many problems in the recycling process [34].

Even when only considering HDPE resins, several problems become apparent. Narrow-mouth HDPE

containers need to be separated from wide-mouth ones, colored containers from uncoloured ones. The

bottle cap is made out of a different resin than the bottle itself; therefore they must be separated before

recycling. Afterwards, the labels need to be removed and the adhesive needs to be extracted to

contaminate the product.

These aspects represent a crucial problem related to plastics recycling, for these reasons one of the

SustainComp project aims is to develop innovative products taking into account the eco-design criteria in

order to improve their recyclability.

5. Life cycle definition


41

5.1. Why life cycle thinking approach?

From the first industrial revolution up to first 80s the production of goods aimed at fulfilment of

the current demands without asking about environmental burdens related to their manufacturing

processes. Fortunately since Eighties several things have changed, in particular, a “new” awareness about

the importance of ecosystems protection, reasonable use of natural resources, reductions of pollutants and

waste management has increased more and more.

In recent years (starting from Nineties), several actions and measures have been implemented by

industries and governments. In the field of product and process assessment, some methodologies,

techniques and tools have been developed in order to support policies and strategies for the social,

economic and environmental dimension of sustainable development.

On 7th February 2001, the European Commission adopted a Green Paper on Integrated Product

Policy (IPP) [35]. Since all products cause environmental degradation in some way, during manufacturing,

transports, use and disposal also known as product life cycle, the IPP aim was to launch a debate on role

and possible measures that could be taken on a European Union level in order to reduce environmental

footprint of products and services along their supply chain (life cycle) IPP tries to minimize the

environmental impacts by looking at all phases of a products' life-cycle and focusing on the most effective

ones.

The product life-cycle is often long and complicated. It covers all the areas from the extraction of

natural resources, through their design, manufacture, assembly, marketing, distribution, sale and use till

their eventual disposal as waste (end-of-life). At the same time it also involves many different actors such

as designers, industry, marketing people, retailers and consumers. The IPP attempts to stimulate each part

of these single phases to improve their environmental performance.

On 16 July 2008 the European Commission presented the Sustainable Consumption and

Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy (SCP/SIP) Action Plan [36] This Plan includes several

proposals on sustainable consumption and production that will contribute to improve products

environmental performances and to increase the demand for more sustainable goods and production

technologies. Within SCP, IPP represents a building block of the European Union's policy on SCP itself

together with others instruments such as Eco-management and audit scheme (i.e. EMAS), Ecolabel

scheme, eco-design etc.

As stated previously, all products cause environmental degradation in some way. The product life

cycle scheme in Figure 23 shows five distinct phases, each one interacting with the environment.


42

Raw materialextraction

Materialprocessing

Manufacturingprocesses

Use andmanteinance

Reuse &recycling

Final disposal &incineration

Reuse

Material/componentrecycling

RecoveryRaw materialextraction

Materialprocessing

Manufacturingprocesses

Use andmanteinance

Reuse &recycling

Final disposal &incineration

Reuse

Material/componentrecycling

Recovery

Figure 23. The life cycle of a product.

Furthermore, not only environmental loads but also social and economic aspects such as the

opportunities for cost reduction often lie beyond the company gates (i.e. along the supply chain) therefore

when products and services are considered in a sustainable development perspective, a life cycle

perspective (i.e. LCT) brings powerful insights. It aims to provide increased knowledge on the three pillars

of sustainability: environment, economy and society.

This is the reason why a life cycle thinking approach is needed, because products may have totally

different environmental impacts during each stages of their own cycle. For example, some materials may

have an adverse environmental consequence when extracted or processed, but be relatively benign in use

and easy to recycle. Aluminium is one of them. By considering the whole life cycle, the shifting of

problems among life cycle stages, geographic areas and environmental media or protection targets is

avoided: systems are contained within the carrying capacity of planet ecosystem.

According to IPP and SCP principles the LCT concept as well as Eco-design methodology and the

most modern approach for economic and social assessments, will be used in SustainComp project in

order to guarantee the sustainability of the new products developed within the project.

5.2. Eco-design

Within life cycle viewpoint-based methodologies and tools, Eco-designing is an approach where

environmentally sustainable criteria are applied in the design step in order to maximally reduce the

environmental stress coming from a product life cycle. For example, products that are easier to recycle, or


43

products that can be made with recycled materials or scrap materials, processes that use fewer resources

and produce less waste are all instances where eco-design works.

To accomplish reductions, it is quite clear that such considerations must be included in the design

process, in addition some tools are necessary as help to estimate these impacts properly, because it is

important to know the starting position and the ending point after the improvements are carried out. The

overall life cycle phases of products and their interconnections with Eco-design methodology are shown

in Figure 24.

Raw material supply Manufacturing Selling and distribution Use Recycling

Disposal

Eco-design

Environment

Environmentalimpact flows

Material

flows

Information

flows

Raw material supply Manufacturing Selling and distribution Use Recycling

Disposal

Eco-design

Environment

Environmentalimpact flows

Material

flows

Information

flows

Figure 24. Interconnections between Eco-design and life cycle steps of a product (Adapted from: Depius project [37])

Beyond analytical analysis of environmental loads, also economic and social aspects can be analyzed

alongside supply chain by using the same holistic approach used in Eco-designing.

In product and process assessment field, one of the most used tools to analyze the environmental

loads of products along their supply chain is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology. Concerning

economic aspects a rather new tool is Life Cycle Costing (LCC) which is primarily focused on the direct

costs and benefits from economic activities for “people, planet and profit or prosperity”, whereas until

now, no commonly accepted methodology was available for assessing internalities and externalities of the

production of goods and services for “people” and “profit/prosperity”. Starting from May 2009

Guidelines concerning so called Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) were freely available [38]. These

guidelines have been developed by SETAC together with UNEP in order to fill the void on how to assess

a product, according to social and socio-economic indicators on the basis of the most current and state of

the art methodological developments. By doing so, together with LCA and LCC it contributes to the full

assessment of goods and services within the context of the sustainable development.

Unlike LCA, LCC and SLCA do not have an ISO standard, which is why within SustainComp

project, some efforts have been spent in order to address sustainability of SustainComp products properly.


44

A sustainability model, based on the most modern and updated methodologies available at the time

of this document, has been worked out and set in order to be, at the same time, useful for industrial

partners and coherent, as much as possible, from a scientific point of view. A detailed description of the

sustainable parameters as well as the model itself is given in this document.

A schematic diagram related to the life cycle phases for each current plastic materials is shown in

Chapter 5.3. For almost all plastic materials/products (i.e. polyolefins etc.) it is possible to specify more or

less the same stages. The Sustainability of current materials/products as well as SustainComp

materials/products will be carried on by considering the same holistic approach (i.e. LCT) for the three

dimensions of sustainability (environment LCA, Social S-LCA and economic LCC ).

5.3. Life cycle modelling

In Table 3 the life cycle stages for each current plastic family material in SustainComp project is

shown together with a brief description of each phase.

These examples aim to clarify the meaning of a life cycle modelling. The intended approach within

Work Package 5 will be to analyze and evaluate every single life cycle stage (as the ones described) through

the implementation of methodologies based on Life Cycle Thinking.

Table 3. Life cycle description for each current plastic family material in SustainComp project (Source: personal compilation)

Life cycle stepPlastic

family

material

Raw material extraction

and manufacturing

Processing of raw

materialsUse End-of-life

PE


45

The polyolefins such as PEand PP are chemically thesimplest of all polymerstructures. They can beproduced commerciallyfrom olefin (alkene)monomers because theolefins contain a reactivedouble bond. The doublebond in the ethylenemolecule is opened toform a reactive radical,which then attaches itselfto another radical. Theprocess repeats itself toproduce a long chainmolecule or polymer.

PE evolves into differentforms: low densitypolyethylene (LDPE),linear low densitypolyethylene (LLDPE) andhigh density polyethylene(HDPE).

Polymers are solidthermoplastics that canbe processed in twoways – by film extrusionor moulding. PE couldbe processed by bothprocesses

During film extrusionthe polymer is heatedand forced, in a moltenstate, through a die toproduce thick sheet, thinfilm or fibres. Thethickness of the film canbe varied to producedifferent series ofproducts

The moulding processinvolves heating andcompressing thepolymer in an extruder,and then forcing it into amould where it solidifiesinto the required shape.

Some of the mainapplications for PE are[39]:

LDPE: cling film, carrierbags, agricultural film, milkcarton coatings, electricalcable coating, and heavyduty industrial bags.

LLDPE: stretch film,industrial packaging film,thin walled containers, andheavy-duty, medium- andsmall bags.

HDPE: crates and boxes,bottles (for food products,detergents, cosmetics),food containers, toys,petrol tanks, industrialwrapping and film, pipesand houseware

In general mechanicalrecycling procedures areused in order to obtain newpackaging for personal careand house cleaningproducts, caps, waste bagswrapping films...

Energy recovery is alsoanother procedure for theend-of-life of plastics

PP

Polymerization process forPP is based on the samemechanism of PE one.The only difference isolefin used (polypropyleneinstead of ethylene).

There are three forms ofPP that can be produced –isotactic, syndiotactic andatactic – but isotatic PP isthe main formmanufactured. Smallamounts of othermonomers be added tomake either random orblock PP copolymers

Like PE, PP is a solidthermoplastic that canbe processed in twoways – by film extrusionor moulding [39].

Most common uses of PPare [39]: food packaging,including yoghurt,margarine pots, sweet andsnack wrappers,microwave-proof,containers, carpet fibres,garden furniture, medicalpackaging and appliances,luggage, kitchen appliances,and pipes.

Recycling in order to obtaincars industry goods andfibres production.

Energy recovery (46Mj/Kg) is used as well

EPS


46

EPS is a rigid and plasticfoam insulation materialproduced from solid beadsof polystyrene.

Polystyrene is produced bypolymerising styrene andduring polymerisationpentane is added asfoaming agent. The finalproduct is spherical beadsof PS [39].

Before being formedinto the final article, theEPS beads need to beprocessed. When theseexpandable pearls areheated with steam, theyexpand to about 40times their original size.After a stabilisationperiod - maturing - theexpanded beads are thentransferred to a mould.Further steam-heatingmakes them fusetogether to form a rigidfoam containing 98%air. Finally, the foam canthen easily be cut intothe desired shape [39].

EPS is used in a wide rangeof applications on whichthermal isulation and/orcushioning properties arerequired so its main usesare focused on the buildingand construction sector(70%) and packaging sector(25%) [39].

100% recyclable. Ifcontamined by othermaterials it is mixed withconcrete to obtain a speciallighter concrete [40].

HIPS

High-impact polystyrene(HIPS) is a specific type ofpolystyrene that has beenmodified with elastomericsmolecules such asbutadiene. They act toabsorb energy when thepolymer gets hit withsomething. This makes itstronger, not as brittle, andcapable of taking harderimpacts without breakingthan regular polystyrene.The high impact form istranslucent or opaquebecause of rubbercompounds added to thereaction and incorporatedinto the resin [41].

HIPS can be processedthrough extrusion,injection moulding orvacuum forming, aprocess in which athermoplastic sheet isheated to theappropriate temperature,stretched around or intoa mold/pattern, andconformed to the moldby applying vacuumpressure between themold surface and theplastic sheet. Becauseheating of the materialto be formed is required,vacuum forming isconsidered athermoforming process[42]

Thanks to its uniquecombination ofcharacteristics liketoughness, gloss, durabilityand an excellentprocessability, it is used forseveral daily life productslike toys, householdappliances, cases, boxes,and calculators,computer housings, etc.

Recyclable material. Thepresence of flameretardants in electronicsplastics may alsocomplicate recovery,separation, and reuse.

bbbbbb

bbbbA

BS


47

ABS is made by emulsionor continuous masstechnique. The emulsionprocess is a two-stepmethod in which the ABSrubber component isproduced in emulsion andafterwards combined withSAN on suitable meltmixing aggregates likeextruders or kneaders [39].

ABS can be processedby injection moulding orextrusion technique[39].The first processinvolves clamping twomoulds together intowhich a molten polymeris injected. In the secondone the polymer is fedthrough the hopper intoan extruder. Plastic iscontinuously conveyedto a heated barrel andcarried along by arotating screw where it iscompressed and melted.The resulting hot plasticis then forced out anddirectly led into coolwater where the productsolidifies.

ABS has many consumerapplications such as:

Automotive parts Domestic appliances Kitchen appliances Furniture Telephones Toys Pipes

Easily recyclable if notcontaminated by otherincompatible plastics [40]

PVC

The PVC polymer isproduced from vinylchloride by a processessentially similar to thatused in the production ofPE and PP. There arethree commercialprocesses for theproduction of PVC: Suspension

polymerisation Emulsion

polymerisation Bulk or mass

polymerisation

PVC powderobtained afterpolymerisation ismixed withadditives(stabilisers and/orplasticizers) toachieve the preciseproperties requiredfor specificapplications. Byvarying the use ofadditives in themanufacturing ofPVC products,features such asstrength, rigidity,colour andtransparency can beadjusted to meetmost applications.The resulting PVCgranules(compounds) orready-to-usepowders (pre-mixes) are thenconverted into thefinal product.

PVC has many applications including: Packaging, Leisure products Building products Piping, and ducts for power and

telecommunications. Medical products, Coatings, Insulation and

sheathing for low voltage powersupplies, telecommunications,appliances, and automotiveapplications.

In 2007 thevolume of post-consumer PVCwaste beingrecycled acrossEurope 149,500tonnes. Sincemany PVCapplications likewindow framesand pipes arelong-lifeproducts that canlast for manydecades thequantity of end-of-life material iscurrently limited.[39]. Many PVCwindows aretreated bymechanicalrecycling

PC


48

Polycarbonate iscommonly produced bythe reaction of phosgenewith bisphenol-A.Phosgene is produced byreacting chlorine from theelectrolysis of sodiumchloride with carbonmonoxide produced by thepyrolysis of coal, oil or gas.Phosgene is usuallymanufactured as neededon-site to avoid transportand storage. Theproduction route forbisphenol-A is however

more complex.

Polycarbonate istransformed into therequired shape bymelting it and forcing itunder pressure into amould or die (PlasticsEurope, 2008) [17]depending on theapplication. Thisprocess is repeatedthousands andthousands of times fora given part, such ascell phone housing.The part is generallythen shipped to amanufacturer whoassembles the finalproduct (PlasticsEurope, 2008) [17].

Typical applications are: Housings for

domestic appliances Office equipment Electrical systems,

switches andhousings

Compact discs andoptical storage

Medical devices Food container and

packaging Glazing and lighting

applications Safety glasses

Recycling not reallywidespread because ofdifficulties in finding it [40]

PA

The polyamides are agroup of polymerscharacterised by a carbonchain with -CO-NH-groups interspersed atregular intervals along it.They are commonlyreferred to by the genericname nylon and may beproduced by the directpolymerisation of amino-acids or by the reaction ofa diamine with a dibasicacid, any way there are anumber of different routesto the production of nylon6. In relation to Nylon 66it's usually made byreacting adipic acid withhexamethylene diamine.

The characteristicamide groups in thebackbone chain arevery polar, and canhydrogen bond witheach other. Because ofthis, and because thenylon backbone is soregular andsymmetrical, nylons areoften crystalline, andmake very good fibers.A polymeric fiber is apolymer whose chainsare stretched outstraight (or close tostraight) and lined upnext to each other, allalong the same axis.Polymers arranged infibers like this can bespun into threads andused as textiles. Nylonis also used in the formof a thermoplastic.

About two thirds of thenylon produced inEurope is used for fibres(textiles, carpets, etc.)while most of theremainder is used ininjection mouldedcomponents (automotiveparts, consumer goods,etc.) Other smaller usesare films and filaments.

The end-of-life of PA mainlyconsists of recycling in orderto obtain cars components,furniture goods , sheets [40]

Energy recovery (19/37MJ/kg) is also applied

6. How does the sustainability measured? A sustainability model

6.1. What does the sustainability concept means?


49

In accordance with Kloepffer [43] “the term sustainability is much used, and sometimes misused, in the political

discussion concerning global development and the environment”. There are several definitions about what

sustainability means. One of the most famous and widespread definitions is coming from WCED (World

Commission on Environment and Development) in Brundtland report [44], which relates this term to

global development:

“Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of present without compromising the ability of future

generations to meet their own needs.”

Finally the United Nations declared sustainability as the guiding principle for the 21st Century in

1992 in Rio de Janeiro [43]. This fact was confirmed in Johannesburg in 2002, but introducing the life

cycle thinking and management within the sustainability concept. As a result of that several methods have

been published related to measuring the sustainability in various approaches (world, countries, regions,

companies, products, services, etc.). This is the reason why some authors called this as sustainability

science [45].

At industry level one of the well-accepted interpretation of sustainability concept is the triple

bottom line, also called three-pillar model. This model says that for assess sustainability, the

environmental, economic and social aspects have to be tuned and checked against each another.

Nevertheless there are several interpretations for sustainability concept and consequently to assess it

depending on where focus on.

Due to the existence of several approaches in the sustainability assessment, a classification is needed

for each method, indicator or tool used to measure it. In accordance with Ness [46] sustainability

assessment (as method, tool or indicator) can be categorised as follows:

Indicators and indices: Commonly used as simple measures, most often quantitative that

represent a state of economic, social and/or environmental development in a defined

region (i.e.: Ecological Footprint, Environmental Pressure Indicators, Environmental

Sustainability Index, UNCSD 58, etc.)

Product-related assessment: That focus on flows in connection with production and

consumption of goods and services (i.e.: Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Costing,

Product Material Flow Analysis, etc.)

Integrated assessment methods: They are used for supporting decisions related to a policy

or a project in a specific region (i.e.: Environmental Impact Assessment, Multi-criteria

Analysis, EU Sustainability Impact Assessment, etc.)


50

Furthermore monetary valuation tools can be used as a part of many of the

methods/indicators/tools described above [46]. Monetary valuation tools comprise techniques like

Contingent Valuation, Travel Cost, Hedonic Pricing, Avoided Cost, etc. These are not sustainability

assessment techniques themselves, but they can be used to assist other tools when monetary values are

needed for goods and services not found in the marketplace.

Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) adds a new approach into sustainability assessment since

considers social aspects under life cycle approach. Further description of SLCA and its origin and

characteristics is provided in Chapter 6.4.

Due to the complexity of sustainability assessment, a suitable approach should be selected

depending on what is assessed under the sustainability point of view. In case of product-related

assessment, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) [46] are tools that can be used for

such purpose. Additionally product Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) [38] is a tool for “assessing the

social and socio-economic aspects of products and their potential positive and negative impacts along their life cycle”.

If it is also considered the triple bottom line or three-pillar approach (environment, economy and

society), the Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing, as well as Social Life Cycle Assessment

(SLCA) can support sustainability assessment under the following scheme [43]:


Where:





An important prerequisite for using this scheme is that system boundaries of the three assessments

are consistent. This scheme is know as Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. Regarding the Social Life

Cycle Assessment (SLCA) is generally considered to be still in its infancy, and consequently several

methodological difficulties can be founded. Despite of these difficulties this approach has been considered

within the SustainComp project in order to obtain a complete assessment of the product sustainability in a

life cycle perspective. In the following chapters a brief description for the three components of the LCSA

approach is provided.


51

6.2. The environmental aspects: (Environmental) Life Cycle Assessment,

LCA

At this point it is important to consider that LCA is the only internationally standardized

environmental assessment method [43]. This is a key factor for the environmental assessment of

products/services since a common, well-known and recognized methodology for LCA is available. First

standards related to LCA were published between 1996 and 2000 providing a common framework for

several LCA studies, even comparative LCA intended to be disclosed to the public. These standards were

slightly revised and superseded in October 2006 by two new standards (ISO 14040 and ISO 14044). ISO

14040 [47] provides a general framework for LCA development as well as main terminology used in this

kind of studies. On the other hand, ISO 14044 [48] is much more specific than ISO 14040, describing

LCA methodology more deeply.

Despite of the presence of a standardized framework for LCA studies, the life cycle field of research

is still active and several improvements are expected in a near future. Some of these improvements are

related to several common difficulties observed over these 12 years of use of LCA standards. For instance

definition of land impact categories, absence of an impact category for loss biodiversity assessing, or the

need that all impacts have to be related quantitatively to a functional unit are common problems on LCA

practice. Further research on LCA field will probably give a reply to this issue.

6.3. The economic aspects: Life Cycle Costing, LCC

The economic aspect is another key issue in the sustainability assessment of a product or a service.

In accordance with Norris [49] Life Cycle Cost “compares the cost-effectiveness of alternative investments or business

decisions from the perspective of an economic decision maker such as a manufacturing firm or a consumer”. An important

issue is that the concept of life cycle diverges as function of the LCC method considered. In a financial

approach the life cycle of a product considers only the economic lifetime of the investment (can be even

shorter than the use stage in a LCA) whether in a LCA approach the life cycle considers all the physical

life cycle steps of the product (from cradle-to-grave).

Due to these differences on the life cycle concept for both LCC and LCA it is important to

emphasize that in a LCSA approach an environmental (or LCA-type) Life Cycle Costing (LCC) is needed.

An environmental LCC diverges from other traditional environmental accounting approaches CBA (Cost

Benefit Analysis), Hedonic prices, etc. In Chapter 8 such question is discussed deeply, providing an

overview of environmental LCC approach.


52

6.4. The social aspects: Social Life Cycle Assessment, SLCA

Social Life Cycle Assessment is the third pillar of LCSA. As stated above the social LCA is still in its

infancy [43]. One of the main difficulties on SLCA practice is the absence of a common framework and a

set of indicators. Nevertheless several papers and methods have been developed in recent years, but there

are just few studies considering a complete social life cycle assessment point of view [50] or on which

socio-economic indicators have been considered to complement traditional environmental LCA [51]. In

Chapter 9 are described some of these attempts for describing indicators and methods for SLCA.

Other authors, like Kloepffer [43] have identified main methodological problems on SLCA:

How to relate quantitatively the existing indicators to the functional unit of the system.

How to obtain specific data for the (necessarily) regionalized SLCA.

How to decide between many indicators (most of them qualitative) or a few ones that can

be quantified.

How to quantify all impacts properly.

How to valuate the results (see the example of very low payment).

Nevertheless, despite of these problems, UNEP and SETAC has recently published the first

Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products [38]. These guidelines provide the first

framework for conducting product-aimed SLCA, giving a technical framework for this kind of studies.

6.5. The sustainability model in SustainComp project

As stated in previous Chapters, the selection of a sustainability model for SustainComp project is a

complex process since several aspects have to be considered. This deliverable is aimed to provide an

overview on the current situation analysis and how it can affect new developments in SustainComp.

Therefore this will provide a reference point for future sustainability assessments. In any case, the

preliminary sustainability assessments included in this report are not intended to be used as a comparative assertion and other

comparative purposes.

In spite of the material development in SustainComp project is still in an early stage, a reference

point is required to establish a sustainability model for future ecodesign demonstrator preparation and


53

detection of potential applications. In this way, a common framework for future sustainability assessments

of new sustainable composite materials is required. After a carefully review of the state-of-the-art, the

sustainability model proposed by Kloeppfer [43] has been selected for sustainability assessment in

SustainComp project.


Such selection is supported on each parameter (environmental, economic and social) and their

derived indicators, which are directly connected to the materials to be considered within the project and

methodological aspects. As a result of that further description on each parameter is provided in Chapters

7, 8 and 9, showing their relations with the sustainability model.

7. Environmental parameters

7.1. Measuring the environmental dimension of sustainability

In relation to the assessment of sustainability environmental dimension, a wide range of tools and

procedures exist, nevertheless all of them are based on the life cycle approach because it gives a complete

overview about impact sources. Even if some methodological issues are still under development, the Life

Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology is one of the most used tools for this purpose.

7.2. LCA methodology

According to SETAC "Life Cycle Assessment is a process to evaluate the environmental burdens associated with a

product, process, or activity by identifying and quantifying energy and materials used and wastes released to the environment;

to assess the impact of those energy and materials used and releases to the environment; and to identify and evaluate

opportunities to affect environmental improvements. The assessment includes the entire life cycle of the product, process or

activity, encompassing, extracting and processing raw materials; manufacturing, transportation and distribution; use, re-use,

maintenance; recycling, and final disposal" [52].

LCA is an internationally standardized methodology (ISO 14040 and ISO 14044) which allows the

estimation of the cumulative environmental impacts resulting from Product Life Cycle stages.


54

System boundaries, here represented within grey box (see Figure 25), describe which phases will be

taken into account in the LCA evaluation.

Manufacturing

Use/reuse/manteinance

Raw materialsRaw materials

Recycling/waste management

Energy

Atmospheric emissions

Waterborne emissions

Solid waste

Coproducts

Other refuses

System boundaries

Manufacturing

Use/reuse/manteinance

Raw materialsRaw materials

Recycling/waste management

Energy

Atmospheric emissions

Waterborne emissions

Solid waste

Coproducts

Other refuses

System boundaries

Figure 25. Life Cycle stages and System boundaries in LCA evaluation. (Adapted from: EPA [53])

By taking into account all life cycle stages of a product a “cradle-to-grave” evaluation is carried out.

LCA methodology is therefore a powerful tool because it helps to identify processes and resources that

contribute significantly to the overall impacts. In this way it is possible to identify the points on which the

biggest efforts for reducing the environmental loads can be done.

Direct applications are:

Product development and improvement

Strategic planning

Marketing

According to the ISO standard the framework for LCA consists of the following elements:

Goal and scope definition defines the goal and intended use of the LCA, and scopes the

assessment concerning system boundaries, function and flow, required data quality,

technology and assessment parameters.

Life Cycle Inventory analysis, LCI is an activity for collecting data on inputs (resources and

intermediate products) and outputs (emissions, wastes) for all the processes in the product

system.

Life Cycle Impact Assessment, LCIA is the phase of the LCA where inventory data on

inputs and outputs are translated into indicators about the product system’s potential

impacts on the environment, on human health, and on the availability of natural resources.


55

Interpretation is the phase where the results of the LCI and LCIA are interpreted according

to the goal of the study and where sensitivity and uncertainty analysis are performed to

qualify the results and the conclusions.

Life Cycle Inventory (LCI), in general, represents the most important and time consuming phase of

LCA. The data used in LCA should be consistent and quality assured and reflects actual industrial process

chains.

The next stage is the conversion of these inventory items into impact categories (LCIA). This

simplifies the information, converting many separate entries into a smaller number of environmental

impacts. This step is referred to as ‘characterisation’ (by using equivalence factor), and the output is an

analysis by subassembly of how the impact is generated. Methodologies used for LCIA should reflect a

best consensus based on current practice. A detailed description of the method used in SustainComp is

given in Chapter 7.3.

7.3. Environmental parameters in SustainComp

The aim of this Chapter is to describe the LCIA method and to provide a list of Impact

Categories (IC) that have been identified within this research. The IC will be used for assessing

environmental performance of SustainComp products as well as current products (benchmarks).

7.3.1 Impact categories

The IC represents, as far as possible, environmental issues of concern to which Life Cycle

Inventory (LCI) results may be assigned. These categories provide indicators of potential environmental

impacts (i.e. impact indicators). Impact indicators are typically characterized using the following equation:

Inventory Data x Characterization Factors = Impact Indicators (2)

An example of “characterization” process is shown in Figure 26, where characterization factors for

Eco-indicator 95 method are provided.


56

CO2

N2O

CH4

NO3

Ntot

Ptot

NH3

NOx

SO2

VOC

Components

Global warming (CO2-eq)

Effects

Eutrophication (PO4-eq)

Acidification (SO2-eq)

Summer smog (C2H4-eq)0.42

Equivalence factor

1

0.7

1.88

0.13

0.33

3.06

0.42

0.42

21

310

1CO2

N2O

CH4

NO3

Ntot

Ptot

NH3

NOx

SO2

VOC

Components

Global warming (CO2-eq)

Effects

Eutrophication (PO4-eq)

Acidification (SO2-eq)

Summer smog (C2H4-eq)0.42

Equivalence factor

1

0.7

1.88

0.13

0.33

3.06

0.42

0.42

21

310

1

Figure 26. Example of characterization process of inventory data in the framework of Eco-indicator 95 method. [54]

For example, all greenhouse gases shown in Figure 26 (i.e. CO2, N2O and CH4) can be expressed in

terms of CO2 equivalents by multiplying the relevant LCI results by a CO2 characterization factor and

then combining the resulting impact indicators to provide an overall indicator of global warming potential

[53]. The link between a substance and one or more impact categories depends on the knowledge of cause

– environmental effect relation of the substance itself. A substance can contribute to more than one

impact category like NH3 which contributes for Eutrophication and Acidification.

As there is no international agreement on the different approaches regarding the impact categories,

different methods can be applied in current LCAs, however, the selection of impacts categories has been

carried out considering the following conditions:

International consensus has been reached;

The characterisation methods of the different impact categories are scientifically robust, well

documented and available.

Within this frame work, two main schools of methods have evolved:

Classical impact assessment methods where LCI results are classified and characterized in

so-called ‘mind point’ categories;


57

Damage oriented method which try to model the cause-effect chain up to the damage (end-

point categories)

The Figure 27 below should clarify these differences.

LCI results

Damage categoriesMidpoint categories

Human toxicity

Respiratory effects

Ionizing radiation

Ozone layer depletion

Photochemical oxidation

Aquatic ecotoxicity

Terrestrial ecotoxicity

Aquatic acidification

Acquatic eutrophication

Terrestrial acid/nut

Land occupation

Global warming

Non-renewable energy

Mineral extraction

Human health

Ecosystem quality

Climate change

Resources

LCI results

Damage categoriesMidpoint categories

Human toxicity

Respiratory effects

Ionizing radiation

Ozone layer depletion

Photochemical oxidation

Aquatic ecotoxicity


Aquatic acidification

Acquatic eutrophication

Terrestrial acid/nut

Land occupation

Global warming

Non-renewable energy

Mineral extraction

Human health

Ecosystem quality

Climate change

Resources

Figure 27. Overall scheme of IMPACT 2002+ linking LCI results via the midpoint categories to damage categories

(Adapted from: IMPACT 2002+) [55].

The term “midpoint” expresses the fact that this point is located somewhere on an intermediate

position between LCI results and the damage on the impact pathway. In consequence, a further step may

allocate these midpoint categories to one or more damage categories, the latter representing quality

changes of the environment. A damage indicator result is the quantified representation of this quality

change of the environment, sometimes with high uncertainties.

By using midpoint score the uncertainty of LCIA results is lower if compared to damage score, for

this reason within SustainComp project only midpoint categories will be used.

The IC selected for SustainComp project are shown in Table 4:

Table 4. Impact categories within SustainComp project.

Impact categoriesMidpoint reference

substance (unit)Source Characterization factors

Global WarmingPotential

(GWP 100)Kg CO2 eq.

Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange (IPCC) http://www.ipcc.ch/

Climate change factors of IPCC with a timeframe of 100 years.

Climate Change 2007: The Physical ScienceBasis. IPCC fourth assessment report

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm


58

Non renewableEnergy Resource

consumption(NRER)

MJ eq.IMPACT 2002+ method or Cumulative

Energy Demand (CED) method(SimaPro 7.1 software)

Calculated as Low Heat Value (LHV) of fossilfuels

Renewable EnergyResource

consumption(RER)

MJ eq.Cumulative Energy Demand (CED)

method (SimaPro 7.1 software)Calculated as Low Heat Value (LHV) of

renewable energy resources.

Eutrophication(EU)

Kg PO4 eq.EPD Supporting Annexes for

Environmental Product Declaration,EPD® (Version 1.0 2008-02-29)

CML, 1999 ; Heijungs et al. 1992

Acidification(AC)

Kg SO2 eq.EPD Supporting Annexes for

Environmental Product Declaration,EPD® (Version 1.0 2008-02-29)

CML, 1999; Huijbregts, 1999; average Europetotal, A&B

Stratospheric OzoneDepletion

(OD)Kg CFC-11 eq.

EPD Supporting Annexes forEnvironmental Product Declaration,

EPD® (Version 1.0 2008-02-29)

Solomon & Albritton, 1992, in NordicGuidelines on Life-Cycle Assessment, Nord

1995:20, Nordic council of Ministers,Copenhagen

PhotochemicalOzone Formation

(POF)Kg C2H4 eq.

EPD Supporting Annexes forEnvironmental Product Declaration,

EPD® (Version 1.0 2008-02-29)

References: Heijungs et al., 1992, in NordicGuidelines on Life-Cycle Assessment, N of

Ministers, Copenhagen.

Andersson-Sköld et ord 1995:20, Nordiccouncil al., 1992, in Environmental Assessment

of Products, Institute for ProductDevelopment, Copenhagen, Denmark

Non HazardousWaste Production

(NHW)Kg Based on the European waste codes

Hazardous WasteProduction

(HW)Kg Based on the European waste codes

Land use (LU) m2a CML 2001 method adaptedAgricultural and silvicultural land related toRenewable Raw Material (RRM) production

Human toxicity(HT)

Kg chloroethylene eq. IMPACT 2002+ methodIMPACT 2002+ method

Acquatic ecotoxicity(AT)

Kg Triethylen glycol eq.IMPACT 2002+ method IMPACT 2002+ method

Terrestrialecotoxicity

(TT)Kg Triethylen glycol eq

IMPACT 2002+ method IMPACT 2002+ method

The ordinary potential impact including global warming (GW 100), photo-chemical ozone

formation (POF), ozone depletion (OD), acidification (AC) and eutrophication (EU) are based on well-

acknowledged approaches as well as the amount of energy resources consumption which directly reflects

the inventory data. The degree of certainty of these potential impacts can be considered high.

In addition to ordinary potential impacts, also other impact categories were included in order to

better understand the environmental performance of studied products even if for human toxicity the

uncertainty is higher compared to ordinary potential impact categories. These are:

Waste production

Hazardous

Non hazardous

Land use Toxicity


59

Human toxicity

Aquatic ecotoxicity


Concerning Toxicity measuring, different methods are available, anyway to follow this research

IMPACT 2002+ [55] [56] method has been chosen. Such a choice appears reasonable considering the

following reasons:

It allows calculating the environmental impacts for human toxicity at midpoint level (midpoint

characterization factor); this is coherent with other impact categories considered. Eco-Indicator

99 method uses damage score, therefore Human toxicity impacts are given as endpoint results, for

this reason it has not been considered;

IMPACT 2002+ has been especially developed for the comparative assessment of Human

toxicity and Eco-toxicity. Beyond Human toxicity (i.e. Carcinogens), there are other two impact

categories covering toxicity issues. These are Aquatic ecotoxicity and Terrestrial ecotoxicity;

IMPACT 2002+ is a combination of Eco-indicator and CML methods;

The source is well documented and freely available

It has been recently updated (year 2002).

Finally, in order to facilitate the interpretation of LCIA results a normalization process could be

considered. The idea of normalization is to analyze the corresponding share of each impact to the overall

damage by applying normalization factors to midpoint. In other words, normalization is the impact

potentials expression relative to a reference situation. Normalization can be done by dividing the impact

by the corresponding normalization factor which represents the total impact of the specific category

divided by the total Europeans. The following example should clarify the issue

Example: An average European has an annual global warming impact of 9’950 kgeq-CO2 (through

all activities in Europe). Thus if a substance A emitted into the air has a normalized characterization

factors of 2 point/kg emitted into the air, it means that the emission into air of 1 kg of that substance

A will have the same impact (effect) on global warming as two Europeans during one year (2 • 9’950

kgeq-CO2 = 19’900 kgeq-CO2).

7.3.2 Discussion on impact categories considered

This chapter provides a brief description of potential impacts considered in LCA. The

environmental problems (i.e. Impact Categories) can act in different spatial scales:


60

Local, problems which arise close to a factory, a road or a landfill (i.e. Land occupation)

Regional, problems that occur at a regional scale, for example a period of smog in the air in an

industrial region (i.e. Photochemical ozone creation);

Continental, problem which became evident on a continental scale, for example acidification in

Europe (i.e. Acidification);

Global, problems that act in a worldwide scale such as climatic change (i.e. Global warming

potential and ozone depleting)

A brief description of each impact indicator is reported in the following paragraphs.

Global warming (GWP 100)

The Global warming is an average increase in the temperature of the atmosphere near the Earth's

surface and in the troposphere, which can contribute to climate changes and have serious consequences

for many ecosystems. Global warming can be caused by a variety of factors, both natural and human-

induced.

Greenhouse gases (e.g., water vapour H2O, carbon dioxide CO2, methane CH4, nitrous oxide N2O and

chlorofluorocarbons CFCs) absorb infrared rays reducing Earth's radiation that escapes into space. So

greenhouse gases are useful for life on earth because they keep the planet's surface approximately 30°C

warmer than it otherwise would be. However, their concentrations in the atmosphere increased

significantly in the last 200 years, mostly because of fossil fuels burning and deforestation. As a

consequence there’s an enhanced greenhouse effect which causes Earth's temperature increase. The

greenhouse effect is a global effect.

Non renewable energy resources consumption (NRER)

Much of energy supply comes from fossil fuels, such as coal, oil and natural gas, which are

considered non-renewable, because their deposits took millions of years to form and once removed from

the ground, they cannot be replaced within human time scales. Uranium, which is used for nuclear energy,

has limited supply as well. Non renewable resources are used to produce energy or raw materials (e.g.

petrochemical sector).

Renewable energy resources consumption (RER)


61

Energy sources (i.e. wind, hydropower, solar etc.) or other natural resources (e.g. timber) that can be

replaced after being used by environmental processes in a time frame meaningful to humans. Renewable

resources are used to produce energy or raw materials.

Eutrophication (EU)

Eutrophication refers to an increase in the rate of supply of organic matter to an ecosystem, which most

commonly is related to nutrient enrichment enhancing the primary production in the system [57]. It can

occur on land or in water. Nitrogen (in the form of nitrate, nitrite or ammonium) and phosphorus (in the

form of ortho-phosphate) are the main nutrients causing eutrophication. They enter the environment and

stimulate plant growth but a considerable increase in nutrients supply, means for example in rivers and

lakes, an increase of algae growth and decay. The consequently shortage of oxygen results in the

disappearance of varieties of fish. The result in water as well as on land is that biodiversity could diminish

considerably. Eutrophication is a regional problem.

Acidification (AC)

Several human activities and natural sources (such as volcanoes and decaying vegetation) cause acid

substances to be emitted in the atmosphere, in this way its content in nitric and sulphuric acids become

higher than normal amounts. It affects a variety of plants and animals.

The main chemical forerunners of acidification are SOx, generated by combustion of oil and coal

(which have high sulphur content), NOx, originates at high temperatures (especially in combustion

engines) and NH3 which is produced mainly by agricultural activities.

Gases react in the atmosphere with water, oxygen, and other chemicals to form various acidic

compounds. If the acid chemicals are blown into areas where the weather is wet, they can fall to the

ground in the form of acid rain, snow or fog (wet deposition). Otherwise, in dry areas, they may become

incorporated into dust or smoke and fall through dry deposition, sticking to the ground, buildings and

trees. Rain can wash the particles from these surfaces, leading to increased runoff.

As a consequence serious damage to woodlands, lakes and rivers ecosystems occur. Acidification of

the soil cause the dissolution of several chemicals, naturally present in the soil, which are toxic to plants

and animals. Acidification is a typical continental problem.

Stratospheric Ozone Depletion (OD)


62

There is a natural shield located 10 to 50 km above the Earth's surface, this layer, rich in ozone, is

the stratosphere and it works as protection against UV radiation and X-rays radiated from the Sun. Their

amounts would be extremely dangerous but ozone uses some of the more dangerous forms of solar

radiation to dissociate into oxygen atoms. The same radiation is also a constant source of ozone

formation. The ozone layer is affected by halogenated substances which can reduce its thickness

increasing the risk of skin cancers.

Chlorine (Cl), fluorine (F), and bromine (Br) stable compounds (e.g CFC), emitted in the

troposphere, migrate to stratosphere through slow diffusion processes. Here, thanks to the Sun radiation,

they release halogens radicals which reacts with other chemicals, and become stabile compounds. They

can be decomposed only under specific circumstances, for example on the surface of ice crystals which are

abundant in the polar region especially near the South Pole. Particularly during spring, thanks to solar

radiation, these stable compounds release again halogen radicals which rapidly decompose the ozone.

Causing a very intense depletion of the ozone layer in this region. Ozone layer depletion is typically a

global problem.

Photochemical Ozone Formation (POF)

The main mechanism of tropospheric ozone production and disappearance is a natural cycle

through reactions in which NOx (nitric oxide NO and nitrogen dioxide NO2) and sunlight are involved. A

higher concentration in the troposphere of NOx and VOC (hydrocarbons, such as gasoline, solvents, and

biogenic substances) breaks the natural equilibrium, resulting in an increasing formation of ground-level

ozone, which is particularly dangerous. VOC and NOx control ozone concentrations in a complicated

way.

Tropospheric, or ground-level ozone production occurs in particular periods of the year due to a

complex reaction in which a combination of hydrocarbons (CxHy, mostly emitted by motor vehicles,

vegetation, industrial processes), nitrogen oxides (NOx, derived from motor vehicles, power plants,

industrial facilities, biomass burning, lightning), sunlight and high temperatures leads to the formation of

ozone. This phenomenon is also known as ‘summer smog’.

Ozone is a very corrosive substance at this level. It is a strong oxidant which is capable of damaging

virtually any material and cause serious damage to human health, animals and plants (its corrosiveness can

affect the lung tissue of humans and others animals). Photochemical ozone creation is a regional problem.

Non Hazardous Waste production (NHW)


63

Non-hazardous waste is waste which does not feature on the list of hazardous waste in the

European Waste Catalogue (EWC) 2002 [58].

Hazardous Waste production (HW)

According to the European Waste Catalogue and Hazardous Waste List (valid since 1 January

2002) [58] waste substances are considered hazardous if they are explosive, oxidizing, flammable, irritant,

harmful, toxic, carcinogenic, corrosive, infectious teratogenic, mutagenic or ecotoxic. If they are

characterized at least by one of those features they are classified as hazardous waste. In this category are

also included those substances and preparations which release toxic or very toxic gases in contact with

water, air or an acid and substances and preparations capable by any means, after disposal, of yielding

another substance (e.g. a leachate) which possesses any of the characteristics listed above.

This kind of waste needs to be handled stored, transported, and disposed of in a controlled manner,

because it’s know to be harmful to human health and the environment when not managed properly,

regardless of its concentrations.

Land use (LU)

Land can be defined as the terrestrial bio-productive system that comprises soil vegetation, other

biota, and the ecological and hydrological processes that operate within the system [59].

Today, there is a society’s need for resources and space, and the capacity of the land to support and

absorb these needs. Economic development, demand for housing and extension of transport networks

continue to alter landscape and environment, leaving large and often irreversible land-use footprints. This

is leading to unprecedented changes in landscapes, ecosystems and the environment.

However in our research we focus on land use for agriculture and for (sustainable) forestry only.

Land take by the expansion of artificial areas and related infrastructure, industrial plants, waste

management plants etc. has been assumed comparable for current plastic materials and SustainComp ones

and thus not taken into account. The different types of land use (i.e. agriculture and forestry) are

aggregated 1:1. It means that no weighting of different types of land use is carried out according to the

CML 2001 method.

Human toxicity1 (HT)

1 Generic description. For more details about Toxic indicators of IMPACT 2002+ method see IMPACT 2002+ UserGuide (forv2.1), Draft (October2005).doc [56]


64

Human toxicity - in LCA context - covers a number of different effects: acute toxicity,

irritation/corrosive effects, allergenic effects, irreversible damage/organ damage, genotoxicity,

carcinogenic effects, toxicity to reproductive system/teratogenic effects, and neurotoxicity in a single

parameter (toxic equivalency factors, EF). The equivalence factors are determined for emission to

different compartments: air, water, and soil and exposure via different media: air water, and soil. Human

toxicity does not include indoor consumer exposure or work environment. Human toxicity is considered

as a local as well as a regional impact

Acquatic and Terrestrial ecotoxicity1 (AT and TT)

Ecotoxicity, according to the EIONET (European Environment Information and Observation

Network), is defined as a quality of some substances or preparations which present or may present

immediate or delayed risks for one or more sectors of the environment. In particular two categories of

ecotoxicity have been considered in SustainComp project in order to evaluate environmental impacts of

certain substances: ‘terrestrial ecotoxicity’ and ‘aquatic ecotoxicitiy’.

7.4. Biogenic carbon accounting in a LCA

Bio-based materials/products obtained from renewable feedstock have biogenic carbon as a

building block, which is captured from the atmosphere by plants (i.e. photosynthesis) during the growth

process and converted into the required raw materials. The amount of biogenic carbon depends on what

bio-based materials/products are dealt with. When the materials/products are being incinerated at their

end-of-life, the biogenic carbon, defined as carbon derived from biomass, but not fossilized or from fossil

sources, is returned to the atmosphere – or in other words, cycled in a closed biogenic CO2 loop, referred

to as being carbon-neutral [60]. On the contrary, if the bio-based products are recycled (i.e. material

recycling) or composted (i.e. transformation of bio-based products into compost) the biogenic carbon is

(totally or in part) sequestered: if the sequestration lasts more than 100 years, this result may be counted as

a true contribution to Global Warming Potential reduction [61]. For this reason the biogenic carbon

intake and emitted should be considered in a LCA. Within SustainComp project biogenic carbon will be

taken into account just like any other input or output of the system.

8. Economic parameters

8.1. The life cycle costing approaches


65

Integration of LCC into LCA involves several critical issues and an environmental (or LCA-type)

Life Cycle Costing is required if Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment is performed on a basis analogous to

LCA. Consequently the LCA must be based on the physical life cycle inventory of the good or service.

Due to the nature of SustainComp project and their related demonstrators, an Environmental Life

Cycle Costing (LCC) approach has been selected for the sustainability assessment. The use of this LCC

approach means the analysis of various economic parameters to compile the LCC. Furthermore a deep

knowledge on the environmental LCC framework and indicators is required. In the following Chapters all

these aspects are described.

8.2. Conceptual framework for Environmental Life Cycle Costing

In accordance with Rebitzer and Kloepffer [62] [43], Life Cycle Costing (LCC) “is an assessment of all

costs associated with the life cycle of a product that are directly covered by any one more of the actors in the product life cycle

(supplier, producer, user/consumer, EOL-actor), with complimentary inclusion of externalities that are anticipated to be

internalized in the decision-relevant future” (Figure 28). In this context, the term “life cycle” is not synonymous to

the product system in LCA, since the terms and boundaries for economic, as well as social and natural

systems can be different.

Material andcomponentsuppliers

Resources(externalities) Product

manufacturerConsumersand users

End-of-lifeactors

Costs

Externalities

Costs

Externalities

Costs

Externalities

Costs

Externalities

Revenues

Externalities

Revenues

Externalities

Revenues

Externalities

Revenues

Externalities

Final disposal(externalities)

Boundaries of LCC

Boundaries of environmental andsocial assessment

Costs Costs Costs

Revenues Revenues Revenues

Material andcomponentsuppliers

Resources(externalities) Product

manufacturerConsumersand users

End-of-lifeactors

Costs

Externalities

Costs

Externalities

Costs

Externalities

Costs

Externalities

Revenues

Externalities

Revenues

Externalities

Revenues

Externalities

Revenues

Externalities

Final disposal(externalities)

Boundaries of LCC

Boundaries of environmental andsocial assessment

Costs Costs Costs

Revenues Revenues Revenues

Figure 28. The conceptual Framework of LCC based on the physical product life cycle (Adapted from: Rebitzer, 2003 [62])


66

Environmental LCC analysis is a methodology that allows:

To identify the processes that are most relevant for the overall cost

To compare life cycle costs of alternatives,

To detect direct and indirect (hidden) cost drivers,

To identify trade-offs in the life cycle of a product,

To use the full costing to identify new products

Nevertheless it is remarkable that LCC is not a method for financial accounting [62]. Moreover, in

contrast to LCA, Environmental LCC has no component Impact Assessment [43]. It is also important to

emphasize that in this LCC approach two types of costs can be distinguished [62]:

Internal costs along the life cycle of the products (i.e.: production, use or end-of-life expenses)

External costs that are envisioned to include monetized effects of environmental and social

impacts not directly billed to the company, consumer or government. These costs are also called

“externalities” on life cycle management forums.

Both types of costs are further described in Chapter 8.3.

System boundaries for economic system are in many cases not synonymous to the product system

in LCA. This issue is extremely important within the Life Cycle Management (LCM) since such

“externalities” may cause double counting and uncertainties due to their internalisation via taxes and

subsidies. As a result of that only internal and internalised costs should be accounted in an LCC [62].

However there are some examples in which “externalities” have to be considered, like projects where a

determination of potential cost in the future due to internalisation via regulatory measures (taxation,

subsidies, etc.) based on prior analysis is required.

In spite of the issue of double counting caused by “externalities” the integration of both LCC and

LCA implies that the LCC is based on the physical life cycle of the good or service. Consequently several

aspects must be included in the LCC, specifically, materials, energy and service flows from acquisition to

production, transport, use, disposal, and for very durable installations dismantling and long term disposal

[62]. In addition to the costs caused by physical processes and material and energy flows2, expenses such

as labor costs, R+D developments costs, patent costs, transaction costs or marketing expenses have to be

also considered [62]. For an environmental (or LCA-type) Life Cycle Costing (LCC) these approach can

be used being carefully with the “externalities” in order to avoid double counting as well as providing a

physical life cycle perspective.

2 These processes and flows are identified in by the Life Cycle Inventory Analysis step of LCA.


67

8.3. Types of LCC costs

There are many ways to classify LCC costs. A suggestion is to use the LCC costs classification

proposed by Bovea [63]. Following this approach, LCC costs can be classified into internal and external

costs:

Internal costs (IC): Are the costs for which the company is responsible over a period of

time. These costs include:

o Conventional costs (CC): Direct costs borne by the company when manufacturing

a product (i.e.: raw materials, electricity, transport, etc.).

o Hidden costs (HC): General costs related to license expenses, waste management

costs, etc.

o Less tangible costs (LTC): Which are often not included in the company accounts

due to their probabilistic nature. These costs include expenses on marketing,

improving the image of the product, safety measures for workers, etc.

External costs: These are costs for which the company is not responsible at a specific time.

These kinds of costs are related to depletion of natural resources, impact on human health,

etc. Most often these costs are called social costs, since in long term they fall back on

society as a whole and should be included in the company accounting. Measuring of

external can be carried out in two main ways: quantifying the negative effect of the damage

caused by pollution and quantifying the effort required to prevent damage.

Consequently the LCC can be calculated as follows:

LCC = IC + EC = ( CCi + HCi + LTCi) + ECi (3)

Quantifying of negative effect of external costs is a critical issue in LCC practice. In accordance

with Kloepffer [43] external costs to be expected in the decision-relevant near future (e.g.: cost occurring

in the future due to climate change or radioactive waste) are difficult or even impossible to estimate.

Several attempts for the monetisation of external costs have been done. For instance Craighill [64] and

Quinet [65] propose a monetisation of emissions, road congestion and noise negative effects (Table 5).

Table 5. Economic parameter values for external costs (EC). Adapted from Bovea, [63] and Craighill, 1996 [64]

Emission (Craighilland Powell, 1996)

€/kg Road congestion(Craighill and

€/km Noise (Quinet,1996)

€/100 t km


68

Powell, 1996)CO2 0.006 Motorway 0.004 Train 0.12-0.13CO 0.009 Non-central 0.189 Road 0.11-0.19CH4 0.111 Rural 0.001 Plane 2.3SO2 3.972 Road casualties

(Craighill andPowell, 1996)

₤/casualty

NOx 1.952 Mortality 744,060N2O 0.944 Serious injury 84,260

Particulate 13.804 Minor injury 6,450

Nevertheless, in SustainComp project external costs were not considered since an environmental-

type LCC has chosen. Therefore, the LCC was limited in this first stage of the project to internal costs,

that is, those referred to costs and revenues. In future Deliverables, on which more specific data will be

used, external costs will also estimate and evaluated.

8.4. Choosing economic indicators for SustainComp’s Life Cycle Costing

As stated by SETAC, crucial in any LCC are the definition of cost categories, cost “measurement

procedures”, and modelling decisions such as system boundaries settings [38]. In accordance with the

state-of-the-art on Sustainability Life Cycle Assessment, an environmental (or LCA-type) LCC has been

considered for carrying out activities within SustainComp project. In Table 6 a list of economic indicators

considered within SustainComp project is showed. These general indicators are materials, energy, service

and other expenses and are referred to each phase in the life cycle.

Table 6. LCC aspects to be considered within an Environmental LCC (source: personal compilation based on Rebitzer [62])

Life cycle phase LCC component Type of LCC component

Materials

EnergyAcquisition

Service

Materials

EnergyProduction

Service

Materials

EnergyTransport

Service

Materials

EnergyUse

Service

MaterialsDisposal

Energy

Physical flow


69

Service

Materials

EnergyDismantling and long-term

disposal

Service

Labor costs

Costs for utilizing knowledge (e.g.: patens, etc.)

Transaction costs (e.g.: information flows)

Marketing expenses

Other expenses which maybe common on each Life

Cycle phase

Other expenses

Non-physical flow

Nevertheless these LCC aspects sometimes are not easy to find, due to the data availability. In many

cases economic data is split into the previously defined LCC components. This effect has been observed

for preliminary LCC developed in Chapter 10.3.

9. Social parameters

9.1. SLCA approaches

Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) is a “social impact (and potential impact) assessment technique that aims

to assess the social aspects of products and their potential positive and negative impacts along their life cycle encompassing

extraction and processing of raw materials; manufacturing; distribution; use; re-use; maintenance; recycling; and final-

disposal” [38].

As stated in Chapter 6.4. SLCA is a relatively recent methodology for assessing the social impacts of

a product. Therefore it has some drawbacks that have to be solved [43]. Nevertheless the discussion on

how to deal with social and socio-economic criteria in LCA is nothing new. First research and discussion

on that issue started in the nineties, but the development of methodologies for cradle-to-grave assessment

of products with social criteria is a relative new. Some research groups presented their methodologies at

the beginning of this century. In fact, one of the first attempts for conducting SLCA and their integration

with (environmental) LCA started with the work prepared by Dreyer [66], who has studied deeply the

integration of social impacts over the entire life cycle of the product/system. Main relations between

social impacts and life cycle stages are described here below:

Material stage (suppliers of commodities and services): In the material stage, the Social

LCA has the strongest focus on the direct suppliers (first tier), but in some situations,

important impacts lie further upstream. All relevant social impacts in the material stage are


70

included in the Social LCA, and consideration of the first tier of suppliers is regarded as

minimum.

Manufacturing stage (product manufacturer): Here producers have the maximum influence

since changes or innovations over the manufacturing processes are highly and/or totally

dependent on themselves. Therefore, all relevant social impacts on stakeholders of the

company are included in the Social LCA [66].

Distribution (product manufacturer or distributor): The product manufacturer exerts direct

influence in the distribution stage of the product. The social impacts of the distribution

stage are included in the Social LCA at all times [66].

Use stage (consumers): Social impacts coming from use stage should be included in Social

LCA at a category product level.

Disposal stage (waste management companies): In this stage the social impacts are highly

dependent on the local or regional choice of waste management systems and companies.

The influence of the product manufacturer at this stage is highly limited. Nevertheless such

social impacts are included in Social LCA to the extent possible [66].

In accordance with Dreyer [66] Social LCA can be done using different approaches, but the

preferred option is to use a top-down approach. Use of top-down approach means that “the definition of

assessment parameters starts with an identification of what is valuable to society. This ensures an inclusion of those impacts

which are relevant from a societal point of view”.

Gauthier provided [67] other point of view. This author proposed to add social criteria to traditional

LCA in order to fall in line with the performance indicators put forward by the GRI. These social criteria

can be both external and external. External criteria mean taking the employees into consideration as well

as consider quality, health and safety at work. In case of external criteria that means relations with

contractual stakeholders and other stakeholders. In accordance with Gauthier [67]“The use of this ‘‘extended’’

LCA methodology should be part of a dynamic approach. Its use before the industrialization phase enables one to determine

the «ideal» condition of sustainability wanted for a product”. Furthermore if the methodology is used after

industrialization phase enables one to assess what is the real sustainability of the developed product.

Norris [69] has also proposed a methodology called Life Cycle Attribute Assessment (LCAA) a

rather simple concept, but already unfeasible since requires a huge amount of information based on input-

output databases. LCAA needs feedback from attributes of processes as well as specific (and sometimes

confidential) data from companies involved in the supply chain.

There are also some practical examples of use of social indicators for Social LCA. Unfortunately,

these examples are intended only case studies for the application of one of few social indicators. For

instance Hunkeler [68] published a framework for measuring Social Life Cycle Assessment based on


71

matrix theory and regional relations for each social indicator. A demonstration is made for labour hours

required for two laundry detergents in different locations. This approach considers the use of four matrix

systems in accordance with the following formula:

GiijinKj EIH (4)

Each term refer to final indicator, inventory indicator, social indicator, and relational coefficients for

social indicators and geography, respectively.

Other quantitative approach for social assessment is provided by Norris [69], which uses a method

based on “the health consequences associated with long-term changes in levels of economic activity throughout the supply

chain”. Therefore additional uses for other social indicators are rather difficult. Norris also introduced a

relatively simple quantitative methodology named Life Cycle Attributed Assessment (LCAA). “Life Cycle

Attribute Assessment (LCAA) uses existing life cycle models to assist in the aggregation of data about process attributes

across product systems” [69].

Gauthier [67] provides a qualitative example of integrating social aspects into LCA (an extended

LCA) in order to reach a sustainability measurement of a product. However this example does not take

into consideration quantitative relations between social and environmental inventory.

A specific case is the methodology proposed by Labuschagne [70] who stated a method that

combines qualitative, quantitative indicators as well as subjective risk indicators. Quantitative

measurements are made using the formula:

C X

CCCXG SNCQSII (5)

Where:

QX = Quantifiable Social Intervention (X) of a life cycle system in a midpoint impact category C.

C = Midpoint impact category (see Table 7)

X = Intervention (mining facility, chemical plant, etc.)

CC = Characterisation factor for an impact category (of intervention X) within the pathway.

NC = Normalisation factor for the impact category based on the social objectives in the region of

assessment. The information can be gathered from social footprint data of the region.

Table 7. Midpoint categories and measurement methods for social impact indicators. (Adapted from: Labuschagne [70])Social Impact Indicators (SII) Midpoint category Measurement methods to establish

equivalence unitsPermanent internal employmentpositions Quantitative

Internal Human Resources

Internal Health and Safety situationRisk Risk


72

Knowledge level / Careerdevelopment QuantitativeInternal Research and Developmentcapacity QuantitativeComfort level / Nuisances Risk RiskPerceived aesthetics QualitativeLocal employment QuantitativeLocal population migration QualitativeAccess to health facilities QuantitativeAccess to education QuantitativeAvailability of acceptable housing QuantitativeAvailability of water services QuantitativeAvailability of energy services QuantitativeAvailability of waste services QuantitativePressure on public transport services QuantitativePressure on the transport network /People and goods movement Quantitative

External Population

Access to regulatory and publicservices Quantitative

Stakeholder participation Change in relationships withstakeholders QualitativeExternal value of purchases / supplychain value/Nature of Purchases QuantitativeMigration of clients / Changes in theproduct value chain/Nature of Sales Qualitative/Quantitative

Macro-social performance

Improvement of socio-environmentalservices Quantitative

Main drawbacks for a generalized use of this methodology are:

In general it is not possible to calculate all social midpoint category indicators.

The units of equivalence cannot be fixed

This results in difficulties on allowing comparisons among case studies.

As can be drawn from the explanation above there have been many attempts to describe SLCA

methodology and to integrate with (environmental) Life Cycle Assessment, but with different approaches.

Consequently there were a need for conducting SLCA and integrating into LCA. This fact drove the

UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative to create a Task Force on the integration of social criteria into LCA.

As a result of the work of the above mentioned Task Force a first deliverable was published in May 2006

providing preliminary guidelines on methodological issues and indicators for SLCA and their integration

[71]. In May 2009 a Guideline for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products was published by

UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, giving a common framework for carrying out this analysis, and

dealing with the key issues on the integration into (environmental) Life Cycle Assessment.

In accordance with UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Guidelines for SLCA of products [38],

SLCA complements LCA with social and socio-economic aspects, and can be either be applied on its own

or in combination with LCA. In fact there are some common things between (environmental) Life Cycle

Assessment and Social Life Cycle Assessment [38]:

Both assessments share the same common framework based in ISO LCA standards:


73

o Goal and Scope

o Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)

o Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)

o Interpretation

Huge amount of data are needed to carry out assessments. Iterative procedures are required

in the assessments.

Both methodologies provide useful information for decision-making. Nevertheless do not

have the purpose to provide information on whether or not a product should be produced.

Conduct data quality and hotspots assessments.

Do not generally express impacts by functional unit, if semi-quantitative or qualitative data

are used.

In spite of these common aspects, an important difference between (environmental) LCA and

SLCA is the focus. (Environmental) LCA is focuses in the product and physical quantities. However

SLCA will collect information on organization-related aspects along the chain [38]. In Table 8 a summary

of the technical framework for conducting a SLCA is showed.

Table 8. Technical framework for conducting a SLCA (Source: personal compilation in accordance with UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle

Initiative Guidelines for SLCA of products [38]).

Phase of the study Main specific requirements for SLCAGoal of the studyScope of the study

Functional unitThe social impacts of the product use phase and function are required for a suitablefunctional unit definitionGoal and scope definition

System boundariesSubcategories are the basis for SLCA dealing with socially significant themes orattributes. On the contrary to LCA, in SLCA justification needs to be presentedwhen a subcategory is not included in the study

Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) analysisLCI process may include a mix of qualitative, quantitative and semi-quantitativedata

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)Characterization models are different from (environmental LCA). Use ofperformance reference points is specific to SLCA

Interpretation

9.2. Types of social aspects

In accordance with UNEP/SETAC [71], there are several types of social aspects that can be

considered in the sustainability evaluation of products following the past experience:


74

a) Particularly severe positive or negative effects (hotspots) at a level of resource extraction

(i.e.: destruction of systems that support human livelihoods, child labour, wages below

subsistence level, etc.)

b) Utility aspects and impacts upon consumers

c) Indirect effects of product use upon society (i.e.: changes in society due to the use of cars

or mobile phones)

An important drawback in the definition of social aspects is the faint line between what belong to

environmental or economic sphere and society sphere. One common example is the case where the health

indicator is considered. Such effect over the health can be considered both in societal and environmental

sphere. Other example is the case when the number of jobs is considered. In such a case the indicator can

both belong to the economic and societal sphere.

The social aspects are the starting point for describing the environmental indicators to be

considered in a SLCA for analysing social impacts. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative [38] has proposed

an assessment framework from system categories to unit of measurement based on social impacts,

categories, subcategories, and inventory indicators. Due to the complexity of this framework, it has been

summarized in Table 9.


75

Table 9. Assessment framework for conducting a SLCA (Source: personal compilation in accordance with UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Guidelines for SLCA of products [38]).

Social impacts Stakeholders Impact CategoriesImpact Subcategories (just

examples)Inventory indicators Inventory data

DefinitionSocial impacts are consequences of positiveor negative pressures on social endpoints(i.e. well-being of stakeholders).

Cluster of stakeholders that areexpected to have similarinterests due to their similarrelationship to the investigatedproduct system

Impact Categories are logical groupings of S-LCA results, related to social issues of interest tostakeholders and decision makers.

The subcategories are the socially relevantcharacteristic or attribute to be assessed*

They are specific definitions of the data sought.Inventory indicators have characteristics such astype (e.g. qualitative or quantitative) and unit ofmeasurement.

Data collected

Workingconditions

E.g.:- Freedom of association andcollective bargaining- Child labour- others…

Human rights

E.g.:- Respect of indigenous rights- Local employment- others…

Governance

E.g.:- Public commitments to sustainabledevelopment- Corruption- others…

Health and safety

E.g.:- Health and safety- End-of-life responsibility- others…

Impact categoriestype 1: stakeholdercategories (selectedapproach forSustaincomp SLCA)

Socio economicrepercussions

E.g.:- Fair competition- Promoting social responsibility- others…

See Table 26 for further informationSee Chapter10.4.3. for furtherinformation

Human capitalCultural heritageHuman well-beingHealthSafetyAutonomySecurity andtranquillityEqualopportunitiesParticipation andinfluence

Assessmentcomponentdescription

Threedimensionsaredistinguished:

Behaviours:social impacts arethose caused by aspecificbehaviour(decision). E.g.:allowing illegalchild labour

Socio-economicprocesses: socialimpacts are thedownstreameffect of socio-economicdecisions. E.g.: aninvestmentdecision in asector to buildinfrastructure in acommunity

Capitals: socialimpacts relate tothe originalcontext(attributespossessed by anindividual, agroup, a society).E.g.: educationlevel

Workers

Local community

Society

Consumers

Value chain actors

Impact categoriestype 2: midpoint andendpoint categories

Resource (capital)productivity

Not to be used in SustainComp SLCA model

* Comparable to GRI indicators (GRI, 2006)


76

It should be noted that in accordance with UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative [38], when

conducting the goal and scope phase of a study one should choose a stakeholder approach (type 1) and

according to this classify the indicators (comparable to GRI and other internationally recognized

schemes). In the phase of impact assessment one can also arrange the social indicators according to

impact categories (type 2).

As can be drawn from this framework, inventory data can be aggregated by two different types of

impact categories, on which the data can be classified into impact subcategories, most of them similar to

GRI and other accepted international schemes for social assessment. These impact subcategories are the

socially relevant characteristic or attribute to be assessed [38]. That means impact subcategories could

cover an impact category. Nevertheless the use of impact subcategories imply that a use of social

indicators. Social indicators to be considered in SLCA are discussed in Chapter 9.3.

9.3. Types of social indicators

There have been several attempts to define social indicators that can be integrated into LCA of

products and services. An important effort was made by Öko-Institute that collected about 3.500 social

indicators. Nevertheless many of them cannot be applied directly in a life cycle perspective since these are

created to monitor specific sectors, government or countries rather than life cycle assessment of products

or services.

Social indicators play an important role in SLCA practice. Due to social and socio-economic

mechanisms can take different forms; social indicators can be qualitative, semi-quantitative, or

quantitative. But this fact depends on how the social and socio-economic impacts are captured.

In 2006 UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative [71] has proposed a way to classify social indicators

allowing to combination with the stakeholders and conversion to impact categories as well. The use of

social indicators is comparable GRI social indicators [72]. New UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative

Guidelines in 2009 [38] follow a similar approach comparable to GRI and other international schemes.

9.4. Choosing social parameters for SustainComp project

As a result of the problems detected both in collection of social data and system boundaries

definition due to highly specific-site requirements for Social LCA use of average data for the European

industry sector for plastics has been considered for analysing the current situation. Such consideration was


77

taken in order to provide suitable approach of which are the social impacts coming from current family

products.

But the use of average data has not been the only problem that has faced. Since social data coming

from the each plastic family material is not available at European level, social indicator analysis has been

made considering social data coming from public CSR, Annual and Sustainability Reports form different

European companies. Therefore a desktop screening data collection (as described by UNEP/SETAC Life

Cycle Initiative [38]) has been conducted for this deliverable, based on literature review and web search.

Nevertheless, not all the reports follow the same structure, and the practice demonstrated that the same

social impacts can have several ways to report it as function of the scheme used by the companies.

Due to the heterogeneity of data and the fact that there is not still a reference method or a list of

internationally common accepted list for social indicators in SLCA, a framework based on GRI (Global

Reporting Initiative) has been taken for sustainability assessments in SustainComp. This decision was

based on several authors like Gauthier3 [67] or UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative4 [38]. However, it

does not mean that other social indicators and schemes have been directly omitted. Other international

schemes like UN Global Compact [72] or ISO 26000 Working Draft 4.2 (June 2008) on Guidance on

Social Responsibility (ISO 26000), were also considered.

UN Global Compact scheme was analysed, but none indicators were available for carrying out a

social indicator selection, since this scheme is based in The UN Global Compact's ten principles5. In fact

there is a guideline for making the connection between the GRI and the UN Global Compact schemes

[74]. In case of ISO 26000 Working Draft 4.2., "this international standard provides guidance on the underlying

principles of social responsibility, the core subjects and issues pertaining to social responsibility and on ways to implement

social responsibility within an organization". Therefore the draft ISO standard on Social Responsibility does not

fits with the life cycle thinking approach considered within SustainComp project.

As a result of this reviewing procedure, a proposal for social parameters to be considered in social

assessment for SustainComp was carried out. Results are summarized in Table 10. These parameters

combines both the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Guidelines on SLCA together with GRI indicator

list, providing an overview of which are the main social indicators, the stakeholders involved in the social

assessment as well as an intended list of impact categories and subcategories. However, this is an open list,

subjected to further research and may be probably updated as soon as new advances in SLCA practice will

be available.

3 “GRI set out a coherent, international reporting system for the economic, environmental and social performance of business, similar to those already inplace for financial reporting” [67].4 “The Global Reporting Initiative boundary protocol offers valuable insights for the process of setting boundaries. It recognized that boundary setting isalso a management exercise and involves considering legal, accounting, scientific and political criteria” even “They may not be the best-suited indicators forproduct based assessment such as S-LCA" [38].5 The UN Global Compact's ten principles are based on four main areas (human rights, labour, the environment and anti-corruption) and derived from: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, The International Labour Organization's Declarationon Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, The United NationsConvention Against Corruption.


78


79

Table 10. Social parameters for conducting SLCA in SustainComp project (source: personal compilation)

Key performanceaspects on GRI

Stakeholder categories Impact categories (type 1:stakeholder approach)

Impact subcategories GRI indicators Type (core/additional)*

Total workforce by employment type, employment contract, and region. CoreTotal number and rate of employee turnover by age group, gender, and region. Core

Employment

Benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to temporary or part-time employees, by major operations. AdditionalPercentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements. CoreLabour/Management RelationsMinimum notice period(s) regarding operational changes, including whether it is specified in collective agreements. CorePercentage of total workforce represented in formal joint management–worker health and safety committees that help monitor and advise on occupationalhealth and safety programs.

Additional

Rates of injury, occupational diseases, lost days, and absenteeism, and number of workrelated fatalities by region. CoreEducation, training, counseling, prevention, and risk-control programs in place to assist workforce members, their families, or community members regardingserious diseases.

Core

Occupational Health and Safety

Health and safety topics covered in formal agreements with trade unions. AdditionalAverage hours of training per year per employee by employee category. CorePrograms for skills management and lifelong learning that support the continued employability of employees and assist them in managing career endings. Additional

Training and Education

Percentage of employees receiving regular performance and career development reviews. AdditionalComposition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and otherindicators of diversity.

Core

Labour practices anddecent work

Workers Working conditions

Diversity and Equal Opportunity

Ratio of basic salary of men to women by employee category. CorePercentage and total number of significant investment agreements that include human rights clauses or that have undergone human rights screening. CoreSociety Governance Investment and Procurement PracticesPercentage of significant suppliers and contractors that have undergone screening on human rights and actions taken. Core

Training and Education Total hours of employee training on policies and procedures concerning aspects of human rights that are relevant to operations, including the percentage ofemployees trained.

Additional

Non-discrimination Total number of incidents of discrimination and actions taken. CoreFreedom of Association and CollectiveBargaining

Operations identified in which the right to exercise freedom of association and collective bargaining may be at significant risk, and actions taken to supportthese rights.

Core

Abolition of Child Labor Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of child labor, and measures taken to contribute to the elimination of child labor. CorePrevention of Forced and CompulsoryLabor

Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of forced or compulsory labor, and measures to contribute to the elimination of forced orcompulsory labor.

Core


Security Practices Percentage of security personnel trained in the organization’s policies or procedures concerning aspects of human rights that are relevant to operations. Additional

Human rights

Local community Human rights Indigenous Rights Total number of incidents of violations involving rights of indigenous people and actions taken. AdditionalLocal community Governance Community Nature, scope, and effectiveness of any programs and practices that assess and manage the impacts of operations on communities, including entering,

operating, and exiting.Core

Percentage and total number of business units analyzed for risks related to corruption. CorePercentage of employees trained in organization’s anti-corruption policies and procedures Core

Corruption

Actions taken in response to incidents of corruption CorePublic policy positions and participation in public policy development and lobbying. Core

Society Governance

Public policyTotal value of financial and in-kind contributions to political parties, politicians, and related institutions by country. Additional

Anti-competitive behaviour Total number of legal actions for anticompetitive behaviour, anti-trust, and monopoly practices and their outcomes. Additional

Society performance

Value chain actors GovernanceCompliance Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non-monetary sanctions for noncompliance with laws and regulations. Core

Life cycle stages in which health and safety impacts of products and services are assessed for improvement, and percentage of significant products and servicescategories subject to such procedures.

CoreHealth and safety Customer Health and Safety

Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and voluntary codes concerning health and safety impacts of products and services during theirlife cycle, by type of outcomes.

Additional

Type of product and service information required by procedures, and percentage of significant products and services subject to such informationrequirements.

Core

Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and voluntary codes concerning product and service information and labelling, by type ofoutcomes.

Additional

Socio economic repercussions Product and Service Labelling

Practices related to customer satisfaction, including results of surveys measuring customer satisfaction. AdditionalPrograms for adherence to laws, standards, and voluntary codes related to marketing communications, including advertising, promotion, and sponsorship. CoreMarketing CommunicationsTotal number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and voluntary codes concerning marketing communications, including advertising, promotion,and sponsorship by type of outcomes.

Additional

Customer Privacy Total number of substantiated complaints regarding breaches of customer privacy and losses of customer data. Additional

Product responsibility Consumer

Cultural heritage

Compliance Monetary value of significant fines for noncompliance with laws and regulations concerning the provision and use of products and services. Core* In accordance with GRI Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (GRI, 2006)


80

10. A qualitative measurement for sustainability

10.1. Introduction to a sustainability model for SustainComp

As previously mentioned in Chapter 6, the term sustainability includes three key aspects to be

assessed: environment, economy and society. If is there also considered a life-cycle approach, the

sustainability model should be based on internationally recognized and accepted methods. In accordance

with Kloepffer [43] the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC), as well as Social Life

Cycle Assessment (SLCA) can support sustainability assessment under the following [43]:


Where:





Following this approach, a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment scheme has been considered since

covers all the aspects of the life cycle of the product: from raw material extraction to the end-of-life of the

product. A pre-requisite for applying such scheme is that system boundaries have to be sound. In

accordance with UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative [38] system boundaries of the environmental LCC

need to be equivalent to E-LCA (Environmental Life Cycle Assessment). In case of product SLCA there

are two scope dimensions for the system boundaries definition [38]:

The processes or activities that are considered part of the (idealized or total) product life

cycle (and thus should be included in the life cycle inventory model),

The “elementary flows” or “pressures” or other attributes of those processes/activities

which may be included in the inventory data.

The first one scope dimensions have been selected for SustainComp sustainability model.

Consequently similar system boundaries have been considered for LCA, LCC and SLCA.

In the following sections the qualitative measurement for SustainComp is described. This model

will be continuously updated and will include quantitative results as soon as these are available for the

ecodesigned selected products (still on decision-making process).


81

10.2. Environmental aspects: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

10.2.1. Introduction

The study of environmental impacts related to plastic products covers several aspects from raw

materials, a wide range of processing techniques as well as different distribution, use and end-of-life stages

as function of the product to be considered. Since the project is still in its first stage of development, a

number of specific products that can be potentially be substituted with SustainComp is still not available.

Therefore the full LCA ones will be carried out as soon as more specific information on SustainComp

products is available. As a result of that only a preliminary and semi-qualitative LCA assessment of the

plastic families identified within SustainComp has been carried out in this section.

For instance the qualitative matrix in Table 11 is intended to give the reader a brief overview of the

most common environmental concerns arising from plastics. According to LCT approach (see chapter 5)

the matrix is divided into five sections which represent the main life cycle stages of any plastic products.

For each section or stage, some of most important environmental indicators are reported. Thanks to the

availability of reliable data at the time of this research [75], a quantitative measurement of environmental

loads related to plastic resin production (i.e. raw material extraction and pellets production life cycle stages

in Table 11) has been carried out.


82

Table 11. Environmental parameters for conducting LCA in SustainComp project (source: personal compilation)

Life cycle phases Main environmental concernsPlastic

MaterialsRemarks

Use of renewable resources asfeedstock

No

Use of non renewable resourcesas feedstock

Yes

E.g. for obtaining 1 kg GPPS pellets about 0,6 kg of oil areconsumed as feedstock. Overall fossil fuels consumption is 1 kgof oil, 0.72 kg of gas and 0.15 kg of coal (source: Eco-profile ofGPPS PlasticsEurope 2005 )

Renewable resource valorization(e.g. forestry industry, agricultureetc.)

No

Local and global impacts relatedto oil extraction activities

Yes E.g. gas flaring.

Transports over long distances Yes

RAW MATERIALSPRODUCTION

Local impacts of oil refinery Yes Soil contamination, air and water emissionsUse of renewable resources YesUse of non renewable resources Yes

According to the energy mix usedPELLETSPRODUCTION

Hazardous airborne emissions Yes**It depends on type of plastic produced (e.g. PVC productioncould emits vinyl chlorine)

Use of renewable resources YesUse of non renewable resources Yes

According to the energy mixPELLETSPROCESSING

Local and global impacts Yes Airborne and waterborne emissions, waste production etc.

USE - -Not relevant impacts compared to those come from other lifecycle phases

Promotion of waste diversionfrom landfill

Not alwaysIn 2004 about 50% of plastic waste produced in EU was land-filled (11.5 million of ton of plastic). See chapter 4

Emission of fossil CO2 fromincineration

YesE.g. about 3.1 kg of CO2** per kg of polyethylene incinerated(C-content of polyethylene = 85,7%)

Suitable for recycling Yes**Not always feasible due to technical and/or economic reasons.On average the recycling rate in EU was about 20% (2006). Seechapter 4

Suitability for biologic recovery(i.e. composting or anaerobicdigestion with energy recovery)

No

Waste management optimization Not alwaysThere are many different kinds of plastics which makes difficultseparate plastic collection and recycling

END OF LIFETREATMENTS

Littering YesFor example plastic is the most common type of marine debris(http://www.epa.gov/owow/OCPD/Marine/contents.html)

** The net amount of fossil CO2 is less than 3.1 kg due to environmental credits related to electricity production from incinerator

A general consideration that can be done observing Table 11 is that the most important life cycle

stages are those related to polymer resin production, raw material extraction included, and disposal. In

relation to the former a streamlined preliminary “Cradle to gate” LCA has been carried out.

10.2.2. Goal and scope

Goal of the study

The main objective of the preliminary LCA study in SustainComp project has been to assess

potential environmental impacts related to plastic families identified within SustainComp according to

European plastic industry data. .

Product system to be studied and functional unit


83

As stated previously at this stage of development of the project is not possible to carry out a full

“Cradle-to-Grave” LCA analysis due to lack of valuable data helpful for defining system boundaries, end-

of-life treatments, functional unit etc. in other words the actual product system to be studied. However

according to the goal of this preliminary study is it possible to define the functional unit as follow:

The production of 1 tons (in form of pellets) of current plastic materials, specifically EPS, HIPS,

PE, PVC, PP, PA, ABS and PC by means of average plastic resin processes.

System boundaries and life cycle description

The system boundaries include the following life cycle phases: extraction of raw materials such as

crude oil, natural gas etc., manufacturing of costituents (e.g. monomer) and production of plastic (or

polymer) resin in form of pellets (i.e. production site output). Distribution, polymer resin processing, use,

and final disposal and dismantling/long-term disposal phases have been excluded. A description of system

boundary considered is shown in Figure 29.

Transport

Energy /MaterialEnergy /Material

WasteWaste

EmissionEmission

TransportTransport

EmissionEmissionEnergy /Material Waste


WasteWaste

EmissionEmission

UseUse ofof productproduct

EmissionEmission

POLYMERIC RESIN MANIFACTURING PHASE

Transport


WasteWaste

Granuleprocessing

Usephase

Disposal

Emission

END OF LIFEUSE PHASE

Polymer resinproduction

Manufactureof constituents

Exraction ofraw materials

INCLUDED

Transport

POLYMERIC RESINPROCESSING PHASE

Eco-profile of PlasticsEurope

NOT INCLUDED

Transport


WasteWaste

EmissionEmission

TransportTransport

EmissionEmissionEnergy /Material Waste


WasteWaste

EmissionEmission

UseUse ofof productproduct

EmissionEmission

POLYMERIC RESIN MANIFACTURING PHASE

Transport


WasteWaste

Granuleprocessing

Usephase

Disposal

Emission

END OF LIFEUSE PHASE

Polymer resinproduction

Manufactureof constituents

Exraction ofraw materials

INCLUDED

Transport

POLYMERIC RESINPROCESSING PHASE

Eco-profile of PlasticsEurope

NOT INCLUDED

Figure 29. System boundaries considered in the LCA

The environmental performances have been quantified using the environmental indicators (i.e.

impact categories) proposed and described in Chapter 7.

Data collection and limitations


84

A cradle-to-gate streamlined LCA has been developed based on the data input coming from the

Eco-profile of European plastic industry [75]. The core of the Eco-profile is represented by LCI (Life

Cycle Inventory) table, representing inputs and outputs of the product system under consideration.

PlasticsEurope, the association of European plastics manufacturers, was the first industry organization to

assemble detailed environmental data on the processes operated by its member companies with the firm

intention of making this information available for public use [75]. They are related to average industry data

and they are representative of European context. Eco-profile reports are continuously updated and there

are now more than 70 Eco-profile reports freely available from the PlasticsEurope website. Over the last

few years Eco-profiles have also been included in various commercial life cycle databases as well as in the

publicly available European Life Cycle Database (ELCD) operated by the European Commission’s Joint

Research Centre.

Critical review

Despite the inventory data quality is high as well as their representativnes of european context, it

must be said that the Life Cycle Impact Assessement (LCIA) results here reported can not be used for

comparative assertions due to the following reasons:

LCIA results are not related to a functional unit but only to a given amount of pellets (i.e. 1

ton of plastic resin).

The LCA carried out is not a fully assessment since transport of pellets, use and disposal

phases are not included in the elaboration.

For these reasons LCIA results aim to provide an idea about potential impacts that characterize polymer

resin production only.

10.2.3. Life cycle inventory and data elaboration

Inventory data contained in Eco-profile reports concerning each of plastic resin addressed by

SustainComp project have been compared with inventory data contained in a one of the most used

commercial database whose datasets related to plastic resins were in turn based on Eco-profile of

PlasticsEurope as stated in its documentation. Several cross-checks regarding inventory data on fossil fuels


85

consumption, airborne emissions such as fossil CO2, N2O, CH4 etc. , waterborne ones such COD, BOD

and waste produced have been carried out in order to verify the coherence between Eco-profile tables and

data contained in the commercial database. All cross-checks carried out have confirmed the usage of the

same figures. Only small differences have been detected however their importance is negligible.

Finally, the datasets contained in the commercial database were used since they reflect inventory

data reported in Eco-profiles reports. In addition they have passed a proof reading validation as well.

The only relevant difference noticed is that the emissions for “CFC/HCFC/HFC not specified”

reported in the Eco-profiles have not been included in the commercial database, therefore Ozone

Depleting (OD) impact category results not estimated properly (that is why for some plastic family here

studied this impact is zero). For this category it will be necessary to integrate datasets with these figures

and define an “average” characterization factor so that to estimate potential impacts for OD even if their

magnitude is expected to be negligible.

Lastly, since the commercial database consider the end of life treatment of waste produced within

system boundary rather than as elementary flows in output from the system, hazardous and non

hazardous waste (HW and NHW respectively) have been worked out from Eco-profiles directly.

In Table 12 the source of Eco-profile used both to calculate solid waste produced (NHW and HW)

and to check inventory data with those reported in the commercial database used in this study are shown.

Table 12. Source of inventory data used in streamlined cradle-to-gate preliminary LCA

Plastic familyName of the dataset used in the

studyName of Eco-profiles and reference periodb

PE“Polyethylene, LDPE, granulate, at

plant/RERa”Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry

LOW DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (LDPE) March 2005

PP“Polypropylene, granulate, at

plant/RER”Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry

POLYPROPYLENE (PP) March 2005

EPS“Polystyrene expandable, at


POLYSTYRENE (Expandable) (EPS) June 2006

HIPS“Polystyrene, high impact, HIPS, at


POLYSTYRENE (High impact) (HIPS) June 2006

ABSNo dataset used. LCIA results havebeen elaborated from Eco-profile

report directly

Eco-profiles of the European Plastics IndustryAcrylonitrile-Butadiene-StyreneCopolymer (ABS) March 2005

PVC“Polyvinylchloride, suspensionpolymerized, at plant/RER”

Eco-profiles of the European Plastics IndustryPOLYVINYLCHLORIDE (PVC)

(SUSPENSION POLYMERISATION) July 2006

PC “Polycarbonate, at plant/RER”Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry

POLYCARBONATE March 2005

PA(Nylon 6)

“Nylon 6, at plant/RER”Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry

POLYAMIDE 6 (Nylon 6) March 2005

PA(Nylon 66)

“Nylon 66, at plant/RER”Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry

POLYAMIDE 66 (Nylon 66) March 2005

a RER stands for European average datab Reference period means the data of last calculated. Source of Eco-profiles: http://lca.plasticseurope.org/index.htm[76]


86

10.2.4. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) results

As stated in above, the LCIA results for this deliverable are not intended to be used for

comparisons but they represent an estimation of environmental loads related to the production of current

plastic family materials only. These data will be used as basis for modeling the impact related to plastic

resin used for manufacturing final plastic products (i.e. benchmarks). Additional inventory data related to

transports, use and disposal phases will be added in the LCA model and their impact calculated in order to

have a complete picture of “Cradle to grave” environmental impacts of benchmarks. The same approach

will be used for SustainComp materials/products with the only difference that SustainComp

materials/products will be also ecodesigned in order to improve as more as possible environmental

performances.


87

These results are summarized in Table 13 and they refer to the functional unit which is 1 ton of plastic resin.

Table 13. LCIA results for plastic family materials expressed as impact categories defined in SustainComp

(F.U. = 1 ton of plastic resin)

Plastic familymaterial

GWP[kg CO2 eq.]

NRER[MJ eq.]

RER[MJ eq.]

EU[kg PO4 eq.]

AC[kg SO2 eq.]

ODa

[kg CFC-11eq.]

POF[kg C2H4 eq.]

NHWb

[kg]HWb

[kg]LUc

[m2a]

HT[kg

chloroethylene eq.]

AT[kg

Tryethylenglycol eq.]

TT[kg

Tryethylenglycol eq.])Remarks

PE 2080 78000 1300 0.50 6.9 0 5.06 44 4.7 0 128 13600 40

PP 1960 73700 500 0.58 5.4 0 3.83 29 4.7 0 350 2100 10

EPS 3320 88700 400 0.88 9.4 0.00016 5.56 60 30 0 100 9700 4140

HIPS 3460 87400 300 0.75 10.6 0.000002 3.94 56 28 0 180 47400 3170

ABS 3760 95000 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 105 251 0 n.a. n.a. n.a.

PVC 1890 58500 900 0.6 4.5 0 4.1 298 7.8 0 0.7 29700 2300

PC 7730 109000 500 1.91 21.7 0 4.99 171 13 0 343 3300 4590

PA (Nylon 6) 9190 122800 500 4.03 26.2 0 8.20 152 23 0 263 104700 2730

PA (Nylon66)

7970 137300 1300 7.05 25.7 0 5.46 179 6 0 102 248000 1810

a Since the emissions for “CFC/HCFC/HFC not specified” are not included in the commercial database, the OD impact category results not estimated properly (to be further revised)b Data elaborated from Eco-profile of European plastic industry (PlasticsEurope) directly, except for PVC. Negative values that correspond to the consumption of waste e.g. recycling or use in electricity generationhave not been counted.c Land use can be considered negligible for plastic materials since it is related to the use of agricultural and silvicultural land for RRM production


88

10.2.5. Conclusions from LCA results

One conclusion from the LCIA results is that the streamlined cradle-to-gate (raw material extraction

plus primary resin manufacturing) show that plastics resins like PC and PA have the highest impacts for

GWP, NRER, EU, AC and POF, also NHW produced is relevant. In relation to the latter impact

category, PVC production has the major concern (i.e. almost 300 kg of NHW per ton of plastic resin),

whereas for HW the worst performance is represented by ABS production (i.e. about 250 kg of HW per

ton of ABS). On the other hand PP show the lowest LCIA results for almost all impact categories

considered. The use of RER in pellets production is rather small. This is mainly due to:

All plastic family here addressed have a fossil feedstock (i.e. fossil-C contained in material);

On average, electricity production in European countries is dominated by the use of fossil

fuels.

Another conclusion from Table 13 is the variability observed for AT and TT results.

In order to facilitate the comprehension of LCIA results a normalization process has been carried

out. As mentioned in Chapter 6, normalisation provides a measure of the relative contribution from a

product system to one or more environmental problems. Total yearly emissions for a reference year in a

reference region are normally used to calculate normalisation figures [77]. Within our research

normalization factors related to Western europe situation (1995) coming from literature [78] were used.

Due to lack of suitable data concerning normalization factors for RER, LC, HT AT and TT the relating

LCIA results have not been normilized.

In Figure 30 the normalized LCIA results from Table 13 are reported in a logaritmic scale. For each

impact category the minimum, maximum and mean result comes from Table 13 has been normalised in

order to provide a range of the relative size of the impact scores.


89

Normalization

1,0E-04

1,0E-03

1,0E-02

1,0E-01

1,0E+00

Eq

uiv

alen

tpe

rso

n

(Wes

tern

Eu

rope

,1

995

)

MIN 1,71E-01 3,83E-01 1,20E-02 5,03E-02 0 2,31E-01 4,10E-02

MAX 8,32E-01 8,99E-01 1,70E-01 2,93E-01 1,07E-03 4,94E-01 4,34E-01

MEAN 4,16E-01 6,19E-01 4,90E-02 1,54E-01 1,35E-04 3,10E-01 1,98E-01

GWP NRERC EU AC OD POF NHW + HW

Figure 30 Normalization of LCIA results (reference situation: Western Europe, 1995)

As shown in Figure 30 for plastic families considered the categories with the highest magnitude are

NRER, GWP and POF whose minimum, maximum and mean results range from 0.17 (i.e. the minimum

value for GWP) to almost 0.9 (i.e. the maximum value NRER) equivalent person. This means that impacts

for NRER, GWP and POF related to the production of 1 ton of plastic resin are about or almost equal to

the yearly impacts caused by a citizen of Western europe in 1995. Also AC and NHW + HW have a

magnitude very similar however the minimum score is lower than 0.1 equivalent person.

Contrary to NRER, GWP and POF, the impacts for OD associated to the production of 1 ton of

plastic resin have the lowest magnitude (i.e. about 0.001 equivalent person at the maximum) followed by

EU. Among impact categories here normalized the scores for OD, EU and NHW + HW represents the

highest variability.

To summarize, a preliminary LCA evaluation based on PlastisEurope inventory data related to

plastic resin production has been carried out, however LCIA results can not be used for comparative

assertions yet. The inventory data here used will be checked again and integrated with those coming from

life cycle stages which have not been taken into account at moment of this evaluation (i.e. pellets

processing, use and final disposal). This will be done as soon as further valuable information are available.

Preliminary LCIA results show that the most important environmental concerns (i.e. magnitude) of plastic

resin production are represented by the use of non renewable energy resources consumption (i.e. NRER),

greenhouse gases emissions (i.e. GWP) and photochemical ozone creation (i.e. POF) for those impact

categories on normalisation factors were available.


90

10.3. Economic aspects: Environmental-LCA type Life Cycle Costing (LCC)


Goal of the study

The main objective of LCC study in SustainComp project has been to assess and compare costs

related to European plastic industry sector, in order to provide suitable approach of which are the

economical impacts coming from current family products.


As was explained in Chapter 8.4., an environmental (or LCA-type) LCC is has been considered for

carrying out activities within SustainComp project. The same functional unit for both LCA and SLCA has

been assumed:

The production of 1 tons (in form of pellets) of current plastic materials, specifically EPS, HIPS, PE,

PVC, PP, PA, ABS and PC by means of average plastic resin processes.

However due to the fact of available data for average plastic converting processes the system boundaries have been expanded for

the LCC to the converting processes (see next Subchapter for further information). As a result of that the functional unit

(only) for the LCC is the converting of 1.000 tons of converted current plastic materials, specifically EPS, HIPS, PE,

PVC, PP, PA, ABS and PC by means of average available plastic processing techniques.

System boundaries and life cycle description

Even the assumptions of LCA analysis, some aspects should be considered in the implementation

of the life cycle cost (LCC) for each current plastic material:

1. The system boundaries include the following life cycle phases: extraction of raw materials

and crude oil and production of plastic resin (the same as in the LCA). Additionally

compounding and plastic converting phases have been also included within the boundaries


91

of the LCC, since general estimated economic data has been found. Likewise distribution,

use, final disposal and dismantling/long-term disposal phases have been excluded.

2. As is showed in Chapter 8.4. the economic indicators proposed to each phase of the life

cycle considered within SustainComp project are materials, energy, service and other

expenses such as labour costs, R+D developments costs, patent costs, transaction costs or

marketing expenses have to be also considered. In Table 14 economic indicators that have

been considered within SustainComp project are showed.


Since cost structure data breakdown coming from each plastic family material is not available at

European level, economic indicator analysis has been made considering mainly economic data for

European Chemicals, Rubber and Plastics Manufacturing sector from Eurostat [79]. Such statistics

provide a cost breakdown based on the expenditure (also called cost structure) between purchases of

goods and services, personnel costs and gross tangible investment [80]. These costs are described in

Chapters 10.3.2.1 and 10.3.2.2.

Key assumptions

Main assumptions attending to each life cycle stages are described as follows:

In raw material extraction phases, raw material purchasing cost of each raw material has been

considered in order to estimate the economical impacts of those phases. It is assumed that

raw material purchasing cost comprises all cost related to its extraction and processing

(energy consumption, machinery and facilities repayment, salaries, indirect costs, etc.).

In plastic resin production, compounding and converting stages, the most important

economical inputs have been analysed: raw material cost, energy cost, labour cost and profit,

taking into account energy and material flows considered in life cycle assessment.

In converting phase, the purchasing cost of primary resins have been excluded in order to

avoid double counting in the calculation of the total LCC.

Profit margins related to each step have been taken into account in order to obtain an

estimation of the total LCC.

10.3.2 Life cycle cost inventory


92

In this section cost model for each current plastic material considered within SustainComp project

is described. As stated above, the life cycle begins at the point where raw materials are manufactured and

ends when the plastic are converted into different products such as packages, automotive components and

other different plastics products.

In order to calculate the cost related to physical processes, material and energy flows from life cycle

inventory of LCA have been taken into account. These costs have been obtained by multiplying those

quantities by their respective company costs or market prices (e.g., materials purchasing). In addition to

these costs, expenses such labour costs, profits, taxes, etc. have also been considered. Once cost related

with each stage of life cycle has been estimated, each cost must be added up to get the total cost or LCC.

Table 14 show the economic indicators considered in life cycle costing for each current plastic

material, including cost related to material and energy flows of Life Cycle Inventory and other expenses

such as labour cost, profit, etc. Each costs are described in detail at the following sections.

Table 14. Economical indicators considered in the Life Cycle Cost (LCC) within SustainComp project (Source: personalcompilation)

Life cycle phase Type of LCC component LCC component

Materials

EnergyPhysical flow

Service

Labour cost

Plastic manufacturing

Non-physical flowOther expenses

Materials

EnergyPhysical flow

Service

Labour cost

Plastic converting

Non-physical flowOther expenses

10.3.2.1 Costs related to plastic resin manufacturing

The chemicals & chemical products manufacturing sector (NACE6 DG 24) is composed by several

manufacturing activities (see Table 15 for further information) which transforms raw materials, notably

oils and minerals, into a wide variety of substances. Within this NACE code the manufacture of plastics in

primary forms is included (NACE DG 24.16), which relates to plastic resin production activities and it is

included within NACE DG 24.1.: Manufacture of basic chemicals.

Table 15. NACE Subsections DG classification codes for chemicals and chemical and man-made fibres products sector (source:

Eurostat [81]).

6 NACE: Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community


93

DG - SubSection DG Manufac. of chemicals, chemical products and man-made fibres

DG.24 - Manufacture of chemicals, and chemical products

DG.24.10 - Manufacture of basic chemicals

DG.24.11 - Manufacture of industrial gases

DG.24.12 - Manufacture of dyes and pigments

DG.24.13 - Manufacture of other inorganic basic chemicals

DG.24.14 - Manufacture of other organic basic chemicals

DG.24.15 - Manufacture of fertilisers and nitrogen compounds

DG.24.16 - Manufacture of plastics in primary forms

DG.24.17 - Manufacture of synthetic rubber in primary forms

DG.24.20 - Manufacture of pesticides and other agro-chemical products

DG.24.30 - Manufacture of paints, varnishes & similar coatings, printing ink & mastics

DG.24.40 - Manufacture of pharmaceuticals, medicinal chemicals and botanical products

DG.24.41 - Manufacture of basic pharmaceutical products

DG.24.42 - Manufacture of pharmaceutical preparations

DG.24.50 - Manuf. of soap, detergents & perfumes; toilet, cleaning & polishing prepar.

DG.24.51 - Manufacture of soap and detergents, cleaning and polishing preparations

DG.24.52 - Manufacture of perfumes and toilet preparations

DG.24.60 - Manufacture of other chemical products

DG.24.61 - Manufacture of explosives

DG.24.62 - Manufacture of glues and gelatines

DG.24.63 - Manufacture of essential oils

DG.24.64 - Manufacture of photographic chemical material

DG.24.65 - Manufacture of prepared unrecorded media

DG.24.66 - Manufacture of other chemical products n.e.c.

DG.24.70 - Manufacture of man-made fibres

The European enterprises within the chemicals & chemical products manufacturing sector account

for about 30 % of global chemical sales and include a large proportion of the world’s largest enterprises

(groups) that operate within a highly regulated framework that extends from the supply of the raw

materials, through their processing to the treatment of waste. Table 16 shows key indicators on the

chemicals and chemical product manufacturing sector, as well as a comparison with the global data from

chemicals, rubber and plastic products sector.

Table 16. Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products (DG 24): Structural profile, EU-27, 2004 (Source: Eurostat [79]).

Number ofenterprises Turnover Value added Employment

(thousands)(% oftotal)

(EURmillion)

(% oftotal)

(EURmillion)

(% oftotal) (thousands)

(% oftotal)

Chemicals, rubberand plastic products(DG & DH)

100.0 100.0 870 000 100.0 250 000 100.0 3 700.0 100.0

Chemicals andchemical products(DG 24)

32.0 32.0 630 000 72.4 170 000 68.0 2 000 54.1

Basic chemicals(including plastics

8.6 8.6 277 000 31.8 64 200 25.7 650.0 17.6


94

un primary forms);pesticides andother agro-chemicalproductsPharmaceuticals,medicinalchemicals andbotanicalproducts

4.4 4.4 180 171 20.7 59 541 23.8 589.8 15.9

Miscellaneouschemicalproducts

19.0 19.0 160 000 18.4 44 000 17.6 650.0 17.6

Man-made fibres 0.4 0.4 11 500 1.3 2 930 1.2 53.0 1.4

As showed in Table 16, almost 25.7% of the value added of the sector came from the manufacture

of basic industrial chemicals, pesticides and agrochemicals, where the manufacturing of plastics resin are

included.

In Table 17, the total number of enterprises, value added and number of persons employed in EU-

27 Basic chemicals is detailed by subsector.

Table 17. Total number of enterprises, value added and number of persons employed in the EU-27. Manufacture of basicchemicals, fertilisers and nitrogen compounds, plastics and synthetic rubber in primary forms subsector 2004. (Source: Eurostat [79]).

No. ofenterprises Turnover Value added Employment

(thousands)(EUR

million) (EUR million) (thousands)Basic chemicals; pesticides and otheragro-chemical products

8.6 277 000 64.200 650,0

Basic chemicals 8.0 266 702 61.927 627,9Industrial gases 0.6 --- : :Dyes and pigments --- --- : :Other inorganic basic chemicals 1.2 19 700 4.990 78,0Other organic basic chemicals 1.8 106 000 26.000 157,0Fertilizers and nitrogencompounds

--- 15 700 3.180 :

Plastics in primary forms 2.6 95 300 18.700 200,0Synthetic rubber in primary forms --- : 50,0

Pesticides and other agro-chemicalproducts

0.6 9 900 2.320 27,0

As showed in Table 17, the industry’s two main subsectors in terms of employment are ‘Plastics in

primary forms’ and ‘Other organic chemicals’. These were also the main contributors to EU-27 value added in

Basic chemicals. Making up 29,12% and 40,49% respectively of the total in the basic chemicals, fertilisers

and nitrogen compounds, plastics and synthetic rubber in primary forms sector, they together produced

three quarters of the value added in Basic chemicals in 2004.


95

In absence of detailed expenditure for each current plastic resin production7 considered within

SustainComp project, the cost structure for the European Basic chemical pesticides and other agro-

chemical products subsector has been considered in order to estimate cost related to this phase. Cost

structure for European Basic chemical subsector is sourced from Eurostat Database, where cost structure

for that subsector (that includes the manufacturing of plastic resins) is divided into the following items

[80]:

Purchases of goods and services: include the value of all goods and services purchased during

the accounting period for resale or consumption in the production process, excluding capital

goods the consumption of which is registered as consumption of fixed capital. The goods and

services concerned may be either resold with or without further transformation, completely used

up in the production process or, finally, be stocked. Purchases of goods and services are valued

at the purchase price excluding deductible VAT and other deductible taxes linked directly to

turnover. Raw material, energy costs and other expenses related to manufacturing process are

included in this cost.

Personnel cost: Total remuneration, in cash or in kind, payable by an employer to an employee

(regular and temporary employees as well as home workers) in return for work done by the latter

during the reference period. Personnel costs also include taxes and employees' social security

contributions retained by the unit as well as the employer's compulsory and voluntary social

contributions.

Gross tangible investment: Investment during the reference period in all tangible goods

including new and existing tangible capital goods, whether bought from third parties or

produced for own use (i.e. Capitalised production of tangible capital goods), having a useful life

of more than one year including non-produced tangible goods such as land. Investments in

intangible and financial assets are excluded.

Therefore the total expenditure (also called cost structure) for the chemical and chemical products

subsector (including plastic resin manufacturers) can be calculated as follows [80]:

Total expenditure = Personnel costs + Purchased goods and services + Gross investment in tangible goods (5)

In Figure 31 cost structure for European basic chemical subsector is showed:

7 It should be considered that these costs are variable, that is, depends on production volume. Fixed costs are not considered inthis study.


96

80,3%

15,7%4,0%

Purchases of goods & services Personnel cost Gross tangible investment

Figure 31. Cost structure (expressed as % of total expenditure) for the European basic chemical subsector, NACE DG 24.1(Source: Eurostat [79])

As showed in Figure 36, operating expenditure of the European Basic Chemical subsector

expressed as a percentage of a total expenditure made up of 80.3 % of purchases of goods and services

and 15.7 % of personnel costs. Capital expenditure (gross investment in tangible goods) represented the

remaining 4.0 %.

Nevertheless, in order to determine a selling price for a specific product, the company should

analyse all expenses that are related to product manufacturing and set a percentage of profit. The sum of

all expenses (fixed and variable cost8) [82] and profit is the selling price for the product. Profits or benefits

margin for a company is a factor that depends on its own strategic financial policy, economies of scale,

etc. and due to that is difficult to establish a representative value.

In this study, due to the absence of specific data about current percentage of profit margin for

plastic industry9 an estimated 10% of profit plastic resin price has been stated for all the plastic family

materials considered within this study.

Having the resin selling price for each family material, the profit margin, and the cost structure

(already described in Figure 31), an estimation of the life cycle costs related to production of plastics

family materials in primary form has been made for SustainComp prject. Results are summarized in Table

18.

8 Variable costs correspond to the production costs including purchases of goods and services (fuel costs, electricity costs,transport costs, etc.). Fixed costs are related to staff (labour costs), maintenance, and gross tangible investments among others.9 There is not data available about profit margin percentages for plastic resin industry due to this is an strategic factor for eachcompany (it is not possible to obtain an average value even for an specific sector) and is often confidential.


97

Table 18. Estimated LCC results for plastic family materials manufacturing in primary form (Source:: personal compilation)

Plastic family materialExpenditure (cost

structure)Type of cost Cost (€/ton) Source

Totalmanufacturing ofplastics in primaryform

Selling price 930(European Plastics News,

2009) [83]

Personnel costs Fixed 131

Purchased goodsand services

Variable 672

Gross investmentin tangible goods

Fixed 33

Personal compilationfrom (Eurostat, 2009) [79]

PE

Profit margin(estimated)

Fixed 93 Estimation



2009) [83]



Variable 640


Fixed 32


PP


Fixed 89 Estimation


Selling price 1 050(European Plastics News,

2009) [83]



Variable 759


Fixed 38


EPS


Fixed 105 Estimation



2009) [83]



Variable 802


Fixed 40


HIPS





2009) [83]



Variable 1 012


Fixed 50


ABS





2009) [83]


PVC


Variable 607



98


Fixed 30


Fixed 84 Estimation



2009) [83]



Variable 2 125


Fixed 106


PC




Selling price 2.750(European Plastics News,

2009) [83]



Variable 1.987


Fixed 99


PA



10.3.2.2 Cost related to plastic converting

The rubber and plastic products manufacturing sector (NACE10 DH 25) comprises manufacturing

activities related to converting of primary plastic and rubber products into a wide range of product use

(Table 19). As can be draw up from Table 19, the manufacture of plastic products is includen within

NACE code DH 25.

Table 19. NACE Subsections DH 25 classification codes for manufacturing of rubber and plastic products sector (source: Eurostat

[81]).

DH.25 - Manufacture of rubber and plastic products

DH.25.10 - Manufacture of rubber products

DH.25.11 - Manufacture of rubber tyres and tubes

DH.25.12 - Retreading and rebuilding of rubber tyres

DH.25.13 - Manufacture of other rubber products

DH.25.20 - Manufacture of plastic products

DH.25.21 - Manufacture of plastic plates, sheets, tubes and profiles

DH.25.22 - Manufacture of plastic packing goods

DH.25.23 - Manufacture of builders' ware of plastic

DH.25.24 - Manufacture of other plastic products

10 NACE: Standard nomenclature for economic activities


99

Table 20 shows key indicators on the plastic product manufacturing sector, as well as a comparison

with the global data from chemicals, rubber and plastic products sector. Up to 57,4% of the European

companies in the Chemicals, rubber and plastic products sector are plastic product manufacturers (also

called converters), being most of them SME's [84]. Therefore the influence of the plastic converting sector

in Europe is crucial also in terms of value added (24%) and employment (37,8% of Chemicals, rubber and

plastic products sector).

Table 20. Manufacture of rubber and plastic products (DH 25): Structural profile, EU-27, 2004 (Source: Eurostat [79]).

Number ofenterprises Turnover Value added Employment

(thousands)(% oftotal)

(EURmillion)

(% oftotal)

(EURmillion)

(% oftotal) (thousands)

(% oftotal)

Chemicals, rubberand plastic products(DG & DH)

100.0 100.0 870 000 100.0 250 000 100.0 3 700.0 100.0

Rubber and plasticproducts (DH 25)

65.3 65.3 243 462 28.0 75 510 30.2 1 748 47.2

Rubber products 7.9 7.9 58 000 6.7 18 000 7.2 370.0 10.0Plastic products 57.4 57.4 185 000 21.3 60 000 24.0 1 400.0 37.8

In Table 21, the total number of enterprises, value added and number of persons employed in EU-

27 Plastic product manufacturing subsector is detailed by activities.

Table 21. Total number of enterprises, value added and number of persons employed in the EU-27. Manufacture of plasticproducts (DH 25.2.) 2004. (Source: Eurostat [79])

No. ofenterprises Turnover Value added Employment

(thousands)(EUR

million) (EUR million) (thousands)Plastic products 57.4 185 000 60 000 1 400.0

Plastic plates, sheets, tubes andprofiles

8.3 50 000 14 000 280.0

Plastic packing goods : 35 500 10 700 250.0Builders' ware of plastic 11.0 28 700 9 110 240.0Other plastic products 30.0 72 000 24 000 607.0

As showed in Table 21, the plastic products manufacturing industry is comprised by several

activities as function of the use of the plastic products in a wide range of uses. This is the reason because

the other plastic product subsector shows the largest number of entrerpises and employment.

In absence of detailed expenditure for each current plastic converting11 considered within

SustainComp project, the cost structure for the rubber and plastic product sector has been taken into

11 It should be considered that these costs are variable, that is, depends on production volume. Fixed costs are not considered inthis study.


100

account. This cost structure is based on the data published by Eurostat [80] including the aforementioned

costs: Purchases of goods and services, personnel cost, gross tangible investment (see Subchapter 10.3.2.1

for further details).

In Figure 32 cost structure for European manufacture of rubber and plastic products sector is

showed:

73,3%

21,8%

4,9%

Purchases of goods & services Personnel cost Gross tangible investment

Figure 32. Cost structure (expressed as % of total expenditure) for the European manufacture of rubber and plastic products sectorNACE DH 25. (Source: Eurostat [79])

As showed in Figure 32, operating expenditure of the European manufacture of rubber and plastic

products sector as a percentage of a total expenditure made up of 73.3 % of purchases of goods and

services (including purchased plastic resin and energy) and 21.8 % of personnel costs. Capital expenditure

(gross investment in tangible goods) represented the remaining 4.9 %.

Following the LCC cost structure also applied for the plastic resin manufacturing sector, an

estimated 10% of profit margin has been stated for all the converting of plastic family materials

considered within this study.

Having the variable costs on purchased energy and other goods and services, the profit margin, and

the cost structure (already described in Figure 32), an estimation of the life cycle costs related to

converting of plastics family materials has been made for SustainComp project. Two main assumptions

have been made for the cost structure analysis of plastic converting processes: on the one hand, an

average value for electricity consumption in different converting processes as well as electricity price in

Europe has been considered for these estimations. On the other hand, the cost related to the purchasing

of plastic resins has been substracted from the purchased goods and services cost term, in order to avoid


101

double-counting12 for the total LCC. LCC results for plastic converting are summarized in Table 22

referred to each selected plastic family product in SustainComp project.

Table 22. Estimated LCC results for plastic family materials converting (Source: personal compilation)

Plastic family materialExpenditure (cost

structure)Type of cost Cost (€/ton) Source

Totalmanufacturing ofplastic products(converting)

Manufacturingcost

863Personal compilation

from (EuRecipe, 2005)[85], (Eurostat, 2009) [79]



(purchasing ofplastic resins

excluded)

Variable 225


Fixed 85


PE




Manufacturingcost






excluded)

Variable 225


Fixed 74


PP




Manufacturingcost






excluded)

Variable 225


Fixed 85


EPS




Manufacturingcost



HIPS

Personnel costs Fixed 397 Personal compilation

12 Since the purchasing cost of plastics resins is included within the LCC of plastic family materials manufacturing inprimary form. Therefore the total LCC is just add up the LCC of plastic family materials manufacturing in primaryform plus the LCC plastic family materials converting.


102



excluded)

Variable 225


Fixed 89

from (Eurostat, 2009) [79]




Manufacturingcost






excluded)

Variable 225


Fixed 109


ABS




Manufacturingcost






excluded)

Variable 225


Fixed 71


PVC




Manufacturingcost






excluded)

Variable 225


Fixed 212


PC




Manufacturingcost






excluded)

Variable 225


Fixed 199


PA




103

As can be noticed from Table 22, the cost related to purchased goods and services considers only

the cost related to energy consumption, but this value is fixed for all the plastic family materials

considered within SustainComp project. This is due to the fact that an average value of electricity

consumption for manufacturing of plastics products has been considered. Nevertheless is expected that

the LCC model will be updated with real site-specific data in the ecodesign process for demonstrators, on

which the specific converting techniques will be specified. Different energy consumption by converting

processes is provided in Table 23.

Table 23. Average specific energy consumption by plastic converting business. (Source: EuRecipe [85])

Plastic converting business

Average specificenergy

consumption(kW/kg/hr)

Thermoforming 6,179

Rotational Moulding 5,828

Compression Moulding 3,168

Injection Moulding 3,118

Profile Extrusion 1,506

Film Extrusion 1,346

Fibre Extrusion 0,85

Compounding 0,631

10.3.3. Life cycle cost results and conclusions

As stated in above, the LCC results for this deliverable are just estimations for current plastic family

materials with the analysis limited to primary resin manufacturing and converting. Nevertheless the already

described LCC model will be the basis for future updates with site-specific data aimed at ecodesign of

specific plastic products.

Main results from preliminary LCC were analysed by each plastic family material, by adding the

primary resin manufacturing costs to converting process (plastic product manufacturing). These results are

summarized in Figure 33.


104

- €

500 €

1.000 €

1.500 €

2.000 €

2.500 €

3.000 €

3.500 €

4.000 €

4.500 €

5.000 €

€p

erto

nn

e

Manufacturing of plastic products (conv.) 803 € 781 € 863 € 893 € 1.038 € 758 € 1.809 € 1.714 €

Manufacturing of plastics in primary form 930 € 885 € 1.050 € 1.110 € 1.400 € 840 € 2.940 € 2.750 €

PE PP EPS HIPS ABS PVC PC PA

Figure 33. Preliminary streamlined LCC results for plastic family materials. (Source: Estimated personal compilation)

One conclusion from the LCC results is that the streamlined cradle-to-gate (primary resin

manufacturing + converting) show that engineered plastics like PC, PA and ABS have the highest LCC.

On the other hand PVC, PP and PE show the lowest LCC. Another conclusion from Figure 33 is that the

manufacturing cost (converting) may change the LCC of plastics materials. An example is provided for

HIPS that can be processed into different products by extrusion, thermoforming or injection moulding in

Figure 34. The use of different converting techniques causes changes on the LCC for HIPS. Therefore for

future LCC of ecodesigned demonstrators sensitivity analysis could be made considering various

converting techniques.


105

2.040 €

2.408 €

1.847 €

- €

500 €

1.000 €

1.500 €

2.000 €

2.500 €

3.000 €

LCC manufacturing of extruded

HIPS products

LCC manufacturing of

thermoformed HIPS products

LCC manufacturing of injection

moulded HIPS products

€p

erto

nne

Figure 34.HIPS cradle-to-gate LCC variations as function of the converting technique. (Source: Estimated personal compilation)

10.4. Social aspects: Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA)

10.4.1. Introduction

As stated above the sustainability model for SustainComp considers all the three pillars of

sustainability and therefore a Social Life Cycle Assessment of products has been considered in

SustainComp in order to analyze the social aspects related to plastics products. Since the project is still in

its first stage of development, in this document, a qualitative SLCA of family products is presented.


Goal of the SLCA study

The main goal of the Social Life Cycle Assessment for SustainComp project is to find social

hotspots and the alternatives for reducing the potential negative impacts and risks regarding current plastic

materials and new sustainable materials developed in SustainComp project. Since the project is intended to

start from analyzing family plastic materials to specific materials for ecodesign of demonstrators, the

SLCA presented in this document is just a qualitative SLCA aimed at current plastic family materials in a

streamlined approach from cradle-to-gate.


106


As stated above, plastic family materials have been considered as product systems to be studied in

this first Deliverable. These products systems are described in Chapter 5.3. However, in this Deliverable,

product systems end at primary resin production stage. Such assumption has been considered since the

products depend directly on the new sustainable materials characteristics, and these materials are still

under development. As a result of that the SLCA presented in this deliverable is aimed at plastic family

materials.

Additionally if a cradle-to-gate approach is considered (from oil-extraction to the production of

primary resin), the function and functional unit does not have to be based on a specific product, but on

the material. Therefore the functional unit for SLCA is:

The production of 1 tons (in form of pellets) of current plastic materials, specifically EPS, HIPS, PE,

PVC, PP, PA, ABS and PC by means of average plastic resin production processes.

Unlike the LCC, the system boundaries have not been expanded to converters, since data about

social issues in this sector has not been found.

Nevertheless a flexible approach is also intended in future SustainComp’ Deliverables, so this model

will be continuously updated and extended to a complete cradle-to-grave life cycle approach for specific

plastic products.

System boundaries and allocation

As stated in Chapter 10.1 the same system boundaries used in the LCA have been considered for

SLCA, in order to assure comparable results with LCA and LCC that give a qualitative sustainability

measurement for the current European plastic industry. However, the SLCA has not been expanded to

converters since most of the European converters are small and medium companies. In accordance with

the Generalitat Valenciana [86], the average size of plastic converter companies is less than 250 employees

in the EU countries, which show the highest contribution to turnover on that sector [87]. That means that

plastic converters are SME to a large extent (Table 24).


107

Table 24.Average company size in the plastic converting sector. (Source: Personal compilation from Generalitat Valenciana [86] and

DiGITIP [87])

EU country Number of companies Average size

Turnover value(over 100% of converting

sector)Spain 4113 20 8%Italy 5300 24 14%

Germany 2771 100 29%United Kingdom 6020 31 16%

France 4190 35 17%Total 22394 84%

Data referred to year 2001

Unfortunately, SME are not still very active in the use and evaluation of CSR. In fact any CSR

report has been found for plastic converter companies.


Data collection has been one of the key issues to define the SLCA model and their first qualitative

results for SLCA of current family materials. As stated in Chapter 9.4., a selection of social parameters that

combines both the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Guidelines on SLCA together with GRI indicator

list was selected for SustainComp’ SLCA model. A desktop screening approach for social data collection

[38] has been taken into account since for this first Deliverable just a cradle-to-gate approach is considered

without being involved any specific data collection13. Therefore social data has been collected mainly from

literature review and web search of CSR reports, sustainability reports, annual reports, corporate websites,

etc. Nevertheless the use of these data sources involves some limitations since in many cases not all the

companies follow the same indicators and the information could be disaggregated in several reports.

Other limitation has been the temporal scope since not all the reports correspond to a fixed year.

Furthermore similar considerations have been observed for geographical scope, since some sustainability

reports are referred to worldwide covering, but not in all cases. Please refer to Chapter 10.4.3. for further

information.

Data quality requirements

Besides of the difficulties in data collection for SLCA, another key issue is the data quality for social

parameters. Since only social data from European plastic resin manufacturer were collected, this data must

be representative to the current situation in Europe. Such representativeness could be analysed based on

13 For the time being, only generic social data will be used for SustainComp SLCA. Site specific social data will be used in futureSustainComp ecodesign demonstrator development.


108

annual sales, annual production, market share, etc. Unfortunately such information was really difficult to

find it for each company. Therefore social data collection was made by means of the production capacity

in European locations for the main plastic resin manufacturers. In this way a total of 13 plastic resin

manufacturers were considered and analysed covering 37.293.000 tons of plastic resin production capacity

in Europe (see Table 25 for details). This assumption ensured representative estimated results of the

current situation of plastic resin production in Europe.

Table 25. Breakdown of total European production capacity of primary resins and analysed reports by plastic family material.(Source:

personal compilation)

Plastic family material

EPS HIPS PE PVC PP PA ABS PC

European resin production

capacity considered (t/yr)643.000 835.000 27.365.000 1.455.000 5.260.000 305.000 825.000 605.000

Number of analysed resin

producers6 6 7 5 6 4 8 5


109

Stakeholder categories, types of impacts and impact subcategories in the SLCA

In accordance with the previous comments on social data collection and availability, it was decided to use a list of different stakeholder categories and then classify the subcategories comparable to those considered on GRI guidelines (GRI, 2006)

guidelines (stakeholder approach). Such categories are summarized in Table 26. All relevant stakeholder categories were considered in SustainComp SLCA model, in order to have a clear overview of the social impacts related to the product systems to be

studied. The impact categories are also comprised by several impact subcategories. Finally each impact subcategory was connected to one or more inventory indicators which are in accordance with GRI indicators.

Table 26. List of stakeholder categories, types of impacts and impact subcategories in SustainComp SLCA (Source: personal compilation)

Key performanceaspects on GRI

Stakeholder categories Impact categories (type 1:stakeholder approach)

Impact subcategories Inventory indicators for SustainComp SLCA model

Total workforce by employment type, employment contract, and region.Total number and rate of employee turnover by age group, gender, and region.

Employment

Benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to temporary or part-time employees, by major operations.Percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements.Labour/Management RelationsMinimum notice period(s) regarding operational changes, including whether it is specified in collective agreements.Percentage of total workforce represented in formal joint management–worker health and safety committees that help monitor and advise on occupational health and safetyprograms.Rates of injury, occupational diseases, lost days, and absenteeism, and number of workrelated fatalities by region.Education, training, counseling, prevention, and risk-control programs in place to assist workforce members, their families, or community members regarding serious diseases.


Health and safety topics covered in formal agreements with trade unions.Average hours of training per year per employee by employee category.Programs for skills management and lifelong learning that support the continued employability of employees and assist them in managing career endings.

Training and Education

Percentage of employees receiving regular performance and career development reviews.Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and other indicators of diversity.

Labour practices anddecent work


Diversity and Equal OpportunityRatio of basic salary of men to women by employee category.Percentage and total number of significant investment agreements that include human rights clauses or that have undergone human rights screening.Society Governance Investment and Procurement PracticesPercentage of significant suppliers and contractors that have undergone screening on human rights and actions taken.

Training and Education Total hours of employee training on policies and procedures concerning aspects of human rights that are relevant to operations, including the percentage of employees trained.Non-discrimination Total number of incidents of discrimination and actions taken.Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining Operations identified in which the right to exercise freedom of association and collective bargaining may be at significant risk, and actions taken to support these rights.Abolition of Child Labor Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of child labor, and measures taken to contribute to the elimination of child labor.Prevention of Forced and Compulsory Labor Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of forced or compulsory labor, and measures to contribute to the elimination of forced or compulsory labor.


Security Practices Percentage of security personnel trained in the organization’s policies or procedures concerning aspects of human rights that are relevant to operations.

Human rights

Local community Human rights Indigenous Rights Total number of incidents of violations involving rights of indigenous people and actions taken.Local community Governance Community Nature, scope, and effectiveness of any programs and practices that assess and manage the impacts of operations on communities, including entering, operating, and exiting.

Percentage and total number of business units analyzed for risks related to corruption.Percentage of employees trained in organization’s anti-corruption policies and procedures

Corruption

Actions taken in response to incidents of corruptionPublic policy positions and participation in public policy development and lobbying.

Society Governance

Public policyTotal value of financial and in-kind contributions to political parties, politicians, and related institutions by country.

Anti-competitive behaviour Total number of legal actions for anticompetitive behaviour, anti-trust, and monopoly practices and their outcomes.

Society performance

Value chain actors GovernanceCompliance Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non-monetary sanctions for noncompliance with laws and regulations.

Life cycle stages in which health and safety impacts of products and services are assessed for improvement, and percentage of significant products and services categoriessubject to such procedures.

Health and safety Customer Health and Safety

Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and voluntary codes concerning health and safety impacts of products and services during their life cycle, by typeof outcomes.Type of product and service information required by procedures and percentage of significant products and services subject to such information requirements.Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and voluntary codes concerning product and service information and labelling, by type of outcomes.

Socio economic repercussions Product and Service Labelling

Practices related to customer satisfaction, including results of surveys measuring customer satisfaction.Programs for adherence to laws, standards, and voluntary codes related to marketing communications, including advertising, promotion, and sponsorship.Marketing CommunicationsTotal number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and voluntary codes concerning marketing communications, including advertising, promotion, and sponsorshipby type of outcomes.

Customer Privacy Total number of substantiated complaints regarding breaches of customer privacy and losses of customer data.

Product responsibility Consumer

Cultural heritage

Compliance Monetary value of significant fines for noncompliance with laws and regulations concerning the provision and use of products and services.


110

Methods for impact assessment

Impact assessment methods played an important role in SustainComp SLCA model. As stated in

previous Subchapters, data collection was limited to plastic resin manufacturers due to the lack of data for

plastic compounders and converters. Another question was that the data collected from corporate

sustainability reports, annual reports, etc. was mainly expressed a qualitative way (not in numbers). As a

result of that the use of a quantitative method for SLCA impact assessment in SustainComp was unable to

apply it.

In accordance with UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative [38], the life cycle impact assessment step

consists in a set of three main actions: 1) selection of impact categories and subcategories and impact

assessment methods, 2) classification14 and 3) characterization15. In case of characterisation, this step

involves the calculation of the subcategory results. Following the ISO 14044:2006 [48] this phase implies

that “the outcome of the calculation is a numerical indicator result”. Therefore it seems that a numerical result is

required when conducting a SLCA, and consequently results have to be expressed in quantitative terms.

Fortunately UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative [38] stated that “in social life cycle impact assessment, the

characterisation models are formalized and –not always- mathematical operationalization of the social and socio-economic

impact mechanisms. They may be a basic aggregation step, bringing text or qualitative inventory information together into a

single summary...”.

Considering that SustainComp project is still in its early stage of development, the use of general

data and the limitations on data collection as well as the absence of quantitative data, it was decided to

carry out the impact assessment step in a qualitative way and summarizing the main results. Such

assumption is sound with other existing studies like those published by Manhhart for notebook PCs [50]

and Kruse for the salmon production systems [51].

Interpretation of SLCA results

Regarding the interpretation of SLCA results, it is intended that the streamlined cradle-to-gate

SLCA presented in this deliverable shows which are the significant social issues in plastic sector in Europe

as well as the evaluation of the consistency and completeness of the results. Conclusions and

recommendations will be drawn from the SLCA results in order to provide information for future

ecodesign demonstrator development in SustainComp project.

14 The classification step is to relate the inventory data to particular social life cycle impact assessment subcategoriesand impact categories.15 The characterisation step is to determine and calculate the results for the subcategory indicators.


111

Critical review

With regard to critical review issues UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative [38] stated that an

independent critical review can enhance the quality and credibility of an SLCA. Nevertheless these

guidelines just said that the critical review process described in ISO 14044 is an adequate process for S-

LCA. As a result of that the use of critical review is suggested but this is not compulsory. Focusing on the

goal and scope of the SLCA and the data availability it does not seem necessary to carry out a critical

review process for this preliminary streamlined cradle-to-gate SLCA. In fact there is no social data

available by each plastic family material and/or company. Consequently none comparative assertions have

been made, but a general overview of the social aspects and impacts for the primary plastic resin producer

sector.

10.4.3. Social life cycle inventory analysis

As stated in Chapter 10.4.2. data collection has been one of the key issues to define the SLCA

model and their first qualitative results for SLCA of current family materials. As a result of that it was

decided to take a selection of social parameters that combines both the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle

Initiative Guidelines on SLCA together with GRI indicators for SustainComp’ SLCA model. A desktop

screening data collection procedure [38] was carried out following a cradle-to-gate life cycle thinking

approach. Consequently data has been collected from publicly available data from literature review,

corporate websites, annual reports, etc., related to the actors in the European plastic sector (plastic resin

manufacturers, compounders and converters).

In spite of the intended approach for the Social Life Cycle Assessment in SustainComp, data

collection on the social aspects of the European plastic sector has met with several difficulties. For

instance not all companies make individual reports. Furthermore bigger corporations’ reports are easier to

find than the medium and small ones. This is a key issue when social assessment for plastic compounders

and converters is made. In accordance with European Plastic Converters the average size of plastic

converter companies is less than 250 employees [84]. That means that plastic converters are SME to a

large extent. Unfortunately, SME are not still very active in the use and evaluation of CSR, as soon as they

focus their efforts to production. Then, there is a lack of social data for plastic converters in contrast to

primary resin producers. In case of plastic compounders most of the companies non-owned by plastic

resin manufacturers are small and medium enterprises. Most of them have not already published any CSR

or annual report on which social data could be extracted for Social Life Cycle Assessment.


112

As a result of that, any plastic compounders and converters reports have been found, so only social

data from plastic resin producers have been considered for the SLCA.

Another key issue on data collection for social aspects in European plastic sector is that despite

most reports are public; sometimes, they are difficult to find even in corporate internet web sites.

Moreover, since many primary resin producers belong to Responsible Care16 or Global Compact, they

demonstrate their corporate responsibility without any individual report. Thus, these companies’ reports

are not available.

On the other hand, reliability of data in analysed reports has been carefully revised due to some

unclear considerations in various indicators. Furthermore, several differences have been found among the

analysed studies. For instance some of these reports have been elaborated by the companies themselves

despite some indicators in few companies have been external audited. In some other cases, organisations

with their own social indicators do not provide the empirical formula or way of calculation. Another

important problem is that many of the social indicators are expressed in a qualitative way instead in a

quantitative way, adding subjectivity in the evaluation of social aspects.

As a result of that, data collected shall be regarded only for general guidelines since there is a lack of

homogeneity on such process. In fact most reports are related to 2007 and 2008. However, there are also

reports related to 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 and data provided is not updated at the same status.

Likewise, reports are referred to a specific geographical location: world, Europe and to specific countries.

This makes difficult to establish the isolated European plastic resin market. In addition, many multi-

national companies usually have different activities around the world and smaller companies are local and

with specific plastic dedication. Sometimes, a company belongs to a group of companies. The matter is

that reports may be made for the whole group which includes very different kind of economic activities

(some of them not related with plastic industry). Nevertheless it is expected that this analysis could

provide a first overview on the social aspects among plastic industry in Europe, being a basis for future

sustainability model in SustainComp project.

10.4.4. Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment

16 Responsible Care is an international voluntary initiative under which chemical industries, through their nationalassociations, work together to continuously improve their health, safety and environmental performance. Todemonstrate the improvement, information about their products and processes in the manufacture and supply ofsafe and affordable goods such as checklists, performance indicators and verification procedures, is shared withchemical stakeholders. Responsible Care is global managed by the International Council of Chemical Associations(ICCA) and at Europe level, by the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC).


113

The GRI structure based on performance indicators and aspects [72], has been chosen to

summarize social parameters at resin European sector from data collected from CSR reports, annual and

sustainability reports (desktop screening) . Nevertheless, some indicators have scant available data thus

companies do not provide that kind of information. For this reason, ranges, percentages and other

numeric data given next may probably not be representative of the global situation of resin manufacturers

in Europe. In the following sections, qualitative results on SLCA are summarized.

Labour practices and decent work

Labour practices and decent work is a GRI key performance aspect which include 5 aspects and up

to 14 labour indicators. They have been developed under the International Labour Organisation (ILO)

Decent Work Agenda that intend to achieve both economic growth and equity through a combination of

social and economic goals [72].

Employment

Plastic workforce in Europe varies a lot depending on the type of company. Most of them are big

corporations from a few units to some tens of thousands of employees spread through several

headquarters around Europe and some around the world with resin production among others activities

such as fuel production, plastic processing, manufacturing, etc. There are also some medium local

enterprises with unique dedication to resin production with less than 200 workers. A general lack of

information is noticed in all reports analysed regarding to the distribution of workforce by region,

employment type (full-time/part-time) and employment contract (permanent/temporary). Turnover of

employees (number of employees that leave the organisation) is a common aspect not reported by

companies. Regarding social benefits provided to full-time employees, medical care, life insurance or

pension plans are the most common offered.

Labour/ Management Relations

Between 40% and 90% of the employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements at resin

producers analysed. Some of the corporations assure to provide effective communication tools for

notifying employees of operational changes; however, minimum notice period on this matter is usually not

specified. In other cases employee/managers relations are included in bargaining agreements. There are

companies that even offer individual support to employees affected by restructuring such as early

retirement, training opportunities or placement assistance to find a new job.



114

GRI indicators on occupational health and safety are developed under the International Labour

Organisation (ILO) standards [72]. Despite most companies have developed occupational health and

safety programs focused on prevention, quality and advocacy, few of them have reported the rules it

applies in recording and reporting accident statistics or whether ILO recommendations is followed by

mandatory national law.

Overall percentage of total workforce represented in formal joint management-worker health and

safety committees that help monitor and advise on occupational health and safety programmes in plastic

producers is between 50% and 75%. Some companies join works councils in those countries where

mandatory by law or participate in worker heath and safety committees included in bargaining agreements.

Although rates of injuries, occupational diseases, lost days and absenteeism measurement are well

defined by GRI, rates provided by social reports are quite vague so every enterprise calculates it on its

own way. Most companies neither coincide on the name nor on how to measure these rates but there are

specific indexes with certain similarities.

For instance, “time recordable injury rate” (TRIR per million hour), “frequency rate accident”

(accidents with sick leave for one million hour) or MAQ (million working hour quote; injuries per million

hours worked) are quite similar. Nevertheless, “injuries”, “incidences” or “accidents” are not clearly

defined at reports so aspects considered in those rates are confusing. Most rates are given per million hour

worked (other per thousand man-hour or per 200.000 hour) and while some of them include only own

personnel, other rates include both own personnel and individual contractors. Likewise, reports do not

usually specify whether “injury” includes minor injuries (first-aid levels), illnesses, occupational diseases or

deaths. As a result, no consistent conclusion has been reached related to the injury rate of resin

manufacturers.

In the same way, “lost time injury rate” (LTIR per million hour) or “lost time injuries frequency

rate” are examples of similar rates. Lost day rate is the clearest indicator given by companies so it is usually

expressed by comparing the total lost days (due to occupational accidents and diseases) with the total

number of hours scheduled to be worked in the reporting period. The average lost day rate for resin

producers is 2,3% according to the available data. And the number of workrelated fatalities in resin

producers varies between 3 and 20 deaths per year in the resin sector.

Anyhow, those rates and numbers depend directly on the total workforce, the region considered

and the type of activity since many companies carry out other activities in addition to resin production.

The European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC) establishes the “fatality rate” for employees and

contractors as the number of fatalities (deaths) per 100,000 employees. The fatality rate in 2007 for

chemistry industries was 1.02 (data from 19 European countries). According to CEFIC, the LTIR is

reported as the number of accidents resulting in one day or more out of work per million worked hours


115

for employees and contractors. The LTIR for CEFIC companies in 2007 was 5.73 (data from 20

European countries) [88]. It has to be pointed that plastic sector is only a piece of a big group of industries

of the total chemistry sector.

Safety, security and environment programs in European plastic companies normally include health

and safety policies, emergency plans, incident reporting systems, training, counselling, prevention and risk-

control assistance. Improvement of work conditions are achieved by ongoing educational methods such as

training courses, e-learning, workshops or seminars. Other common means to train employees on health

and safety matters are through safety briefings, observation tours, open discussions, checklists, standards,

instructions, occupational health and hygiene guidelines or short video shots. Examples of learning issues

at resin companies are; emergency and rescue measures on fire protection, appropriate use of equipment,

body mechanics and posture ergonomics, handling and/or exposure to chemical substances (Registration,

Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemical Substances, REACH), road transport safety

(Agreement on Dangerous goods by Road , ADR), noise reduction and stress management.

Education, training, counseling, prevention, and risk-control programs in place to assist workforce

members, their families, or community members regarding serious diseases is not regarded at any analysed

report. This is due to the low risk of catching serious diseases in Europe.

Regular preventive, diagnostic and medical treatment services for employees and their families are

poorly covered in formal agreements with trade unions in resin producers.

Training and education

Average hours of training data are hardly available by plastic companies. Scant information

compiled establishes the average range from 16 to 86 training hours per year per employee. Staff and

workers dedicate twice the hours to training and education than managers do. Those activities include skill

and professional as well as health and safety training. Some companies provide their own trainings

indicators in the form of percentage of personnel who has participated in training activities, percentage of

expenses on vocational and advanced training or in total hours dedicated to courses.

Regarding programs for skills management and lifelong learning, most companies have procedures

to identify high employee potentials, people performance reviews, updated professional trainings or career

tracking interviews. The objective of these programs is to secure the most skilled workers simultaneously

to their development expectations as well as to create a corporate reputation which attract the most

talented people. In addition, other bigger corporations offer assessment of mobility opportunities,

development mangers programs or method resource planning for key positions. “Hay method of job

evaluation” 17 is implemented in few companies. Percentage of employees receiving regular performance

17 Hay method is a kind of job evaluation which was developed from a research programme which analysed severalthousand jobs. It is based on three key elements which impact on job size: know-how, problem solving andaccountability. Additionally, physical and environmental factors are also considered [89].


116

and career development reviews of resin producers is very variable (30% - 90%) among them so the rates

have been obtained by different methods.

Diversity and equal opportunity

Little information regarding indicators of diversity is provided by resin producers. The percentage

of women at resin companies is around 12% and 30% of the total workforce. Age groups are diverse with

most of the workers in the middle age (30 to 50 years old). Less than 20% of employees at manager’s

positions are women. Actually, men still enjoying of a higher salary than men do (from 5% to 20% more,

according to short available data). Neither young nor foreign employee presence per category is available.

Nevertheless, some companies assure to perform equal opportunity action plans that usually cover

assessing selection criteria and auditing hiring processes, maternity rights as well as to encourage the

employment of disable people and young people from underprivileged backgrounds.

Human rights

This GRI aspect includes 7 aspects divided into a total of 9 human rights performance indicators

which inform about the respect of basic rights of a human being of reporting organizations. The Aspects

are based on internationally recognized standards, primarily the United Nations Universal Declaration of

Human Rights and the ILO Declaration on the Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work of 1998 (in

particular the eight Core Conventions of the ILO) [72]. This aspect has greater importance on companies

that have production sites in third world countries. This aspect is also included in legislation from all

European countries. This could be the reason why human rights are not often regarded at social reports

studied.

Investment and procurement practices

Neither of the companies with available data, have invested on agreements that include human

rights clauses or that have undergone human rights screening at the referred date of the report. However,

some of them assure to have commitments on ethics such as codes of conducts, ethics rules or procedures

for responding to human rights violations. Resin companies usually demand their suppliers, specific

requirements for human rights, security, health and safety practices or they carry out audits to service

contractors.

Some companies have developed human rights and ethics training policies through training courses,

intranet sites or e-learning tools. Information regarding the total hours of training on human rights

procedures including the percentage of employees trained is not provided by companies.

Non-discrimination


117

Resin companies are committed to prevent and avoid discrimination situations by gender, age,

nationality, ethnics or minority group membership. They state that no incidents on discrimination have

been occurred at the reported year. Through ethics rules and other procedures usually undertake by

human resources departments, discrimination incidents are reported and remedied at resin companies.

Actions taken for this purpose are: internal communication plans, initiatives on minority groups’

integration or investigation of suspected discriminations practices.

Freedom of association and collective bargaining

Likewise, the right to freedom association and collective bargaining is usually included at European

laws and ethics and human rights policies of companies. Resin employees have the right to elect their own

representatives in Europe. No operations were identified by companies that put the freedom of collective

bargaining at risk.

Abolition of child labor and Prevention of forced and compulsory labor

Child and forced labour are forbidden practices in all European countries. Resin companies assure

no tolerate them. In addition, companies enable to maintain the same commitment on child and forced

labor with their suppliers and contractors. Nevertheless, no company analysed has reported a risk

assessment approach on child labour, neither young employee exposed to hazardous work nor type of

operations at countries risk on child and forced labor.

Security practices

Security personnel at resin companies whether proprietary or contract employee, comply with the

policies and procedures concerning human rights. Some security personnel and service suppliers are

instructed on human rights and weapon and the use of force under the United Nations (UN) Code of

Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials.

Indigenous rights

No incidents or risks regarding indigenous rights have been reported by any of the companies

analysed. Some resin producers with sites at third world countries state to follow the UN Development

Programs (UNDP).

Society performance indicators

This GRI aspect is related to interactions among stakeholders (except for employees and

customers) derived from market structures and social institutions relations. Eight Society Performance

Indicators describe the impacts organizations have on the communities in which they operate, and how

the organization’s interactions with other social institutions are managed and mediated based on OECD

principles and conventions (GRI, 2006) [74].


118

The type of economic activity influences over any society especially in countries where are under

development. Multinational companies from resin sector have production sites in non-European countries

and contribute through different ways to social sustainability.

Community

Some resin companies are carrying out programs and practices that assess and manage the impacts

of their activities on communities. The main objectives of those programs are to promote cultural,

education, technical and infrastructural developments in the region as well as strengthening relationships

with local community. Local purchases of equipment and services, social infrastructures surrender or

disaster relief are examples of community support actions taken by resin organisations. Education is also a

key issue, so hosting schools visits, school resources donation or training of young people are undertaken.

Communication with local and municipal representatives is an important issue that some companies

regard.

Corruption

Policies based on education, control and prevention as well as sharing with other multinationals is

the main action taken by resin producers to avoid bribery and corruption especially at countries and

activities with higher risk. For this purpose, they have also developed monitor procedures, guides, ethic

intranet sites or workshops. Other companies take part in international discussions and initiatives to

demonstrate their anti-corruption awareness.

Public policy

Public policy positions and participation in public policy development is varied in accordance to

each company. Participation on public debates with local public figures representing the association,

political, media, research and cultural communities on compelling issues such as Kyoto Protocol,

industrial safety and human rights is an example. Others work with academia, NGOs, communities,

competence centres and other local associations.

Most companies do not specify the amount they economically contribute with, to political parties,

politicians, and related institutions by country. They provide the qualitative nature of their investments on

social issues.

Anti-competitive behaviour

Legal actions for anti-competitive behaviour are not clearly provided by organisations’ reports.

Codes of conducts, ethic behaviour rules, practical guides or good practices are companies’ documents

which achieve to ensure compliance with competition laws and regulations and fair competition.

Regarding information of the competitors, enterprises report that they do not use unfair or unlawful

manner to obtain it.


119

Compliance

Some resin company state that non-compliance with laws or regulations has not been identified at

the report period. Direct consequences of non-fulfilment with laws such as loose of good reputation,

membership, clients and/or suppliers as well as loose of relationship with government and authorities are

regarded at some of the studied reports.

Product responsibility

This GRI aspect includes 9 indicators referred to the effect that products and services have on

customers and end-users. Organisations must design products and services to assure customers and end-

users needs, health, safety and privacy.

Costumer health and safety

Many resin companies have implemented voluntary communication programs that involve their

customers on preventive and protective measures (such advice on clean-up procedures and accidental

spills). I addition, some of them are audited by third party and customers for certain activities and

feedback is used for improvement.

There are some companies that state they have a preventive policy on their products and services

concerning all stages of its life cycle (from R&D to disposal, reuse or recycling) and specifically to

handling and transport processes. Moreover, it is emphasized in those cases where chemical substances

are considered so risk is assessed on health and safety issues on customers. Nevertheless, percentage of

significant products and services categories subject to such procedures is not provided.

Product and service labelling

Customers are informed about the risks of using hazardous chemicals in the workplace by labelling,

Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) or Security Data Files (SDF). European companies which handle

chemical substances follow the mandatory Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of

Chemical Substances (REACH) regulations. Likewise, Agreement on Dangerous goods by Road (ADR)

regulations is also established at European resin producers. Regarding voluntary certifications

implemented by resin companies on their products and activities, safety management systems or

ecoefficiency labels are some examples.

Neither the type nor percentage of products and services subject to this information requirements

are provided by European resin industry. Analysed reports do not indicate the number of incidents of

non-compliance with this kind of regulations or voluntary codes. Nevertheless, some companies have

incident reporting procedures which regulate how incidents are to be reported.


120

Feedback on health and safety of products and services and incidents reporting by end users are

used to improve customer satisfaction. Other practices consider customers’ comments obtained from

surveys or complaints forms for covering customers’ needs and interests on resin sector. However, some

aspects such as kind of feedback, frequency of measuring customer satisfaction, methodologies and results

of surveys are not specified at social reports.

Marketing communications

Marketing communications programs undertaken by resin companies are mostly under internal

ethics and compliance codes. International brands themselves are used for products and services

promotion. Advertising on local and regional radio or television, websites, literatures or new releases are

examples of occasionally marketing communications on resin sector.

There are some companies from that do not carry out marketing communications due to exclusively

dealing with business (not with end users).

Customer privacy

Scant information is provided by analysed social reports regarding breaches, leaks, thefts, losses of

customer private data. Some companies state that employees do their duty regarding the use of

confidential information received from customers.

Compliance

No companies have reported any significant fine for non-compliance with laws and regulations

concerning the provision and use of products and services.

10.4.5. Conclusions from Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Firstly, it has to be pointed that there are social aspects that have more relevance than others

depending on the kind of activity that is been carried out. For instance, health and safety of customers,

employees and society is valuable data so resin producers handle with hazardous substances and

dangerous operations. Such important issues are regulated by law at European level so most plastic

companies cover certain social indicators as a consequence of these obligations. On the other hand, since

manufacturing of resin is usually an industrial good, marketing communication may not have so much

importance. The matter is how much relevance has any of each indicator depending on the activities they

develop or if it is important that companies just are complying with their obligations.


121

Sometimes, information regarding some indicators has been found disaggregated in different

reports. Moreover, some indicators considered have an overlapped of information. “Training and

Education” and “Occupational Health and Safety” share some training issues. Another example of

overlapping is among “Diversity and equal opportunity” and “Non discrimination” which are similar

indicators.

Sustainability Reports, Annual Reports, CSR and other documents used in this SLCA have been

made by the companies themselves. Thus, a subjective assessment may threat the conclusions of this

SLCA. For instance, a lack of information has been notice in some social indicators especially on the

indicators related to non-compliance issues.

To summarize, social parameters are difficult to assess as they often depend on the region, culture

features and economic activities considered. There are some socioeconomics aspects of sustainability

which can be quantitative measured in the form of percentage, rate or numbers. However, those are useful

only to compare within the same organisation or within the same activity sector and similar conditions so

an improvement may be proved. Qualitative measurement for sustainability usually includes both social

aspects that can be and cannot be measured quantitatively. The great number of factors that influence

quantitative and qualitative social aspects makes absolute comparison among companies unreliable.

Main conclusions of the Social LCA developed in this deliverable for resin sector are summarized

below.

Labour practices and decent work

European resin producers are usually worldwide corporations that develop several activities such as

fuel production, plastic conversion, plastic manufacturing, etc. Their workforce varies between a few

units to several tens of thousands of employees.

Medical care, life insurance or pensions plans are the most common social benefits offered to full-

time employees. Regarding labour-management relations, between 40% and 90% are covered by

collective bargaining agreements and between 50% and 75% of the workforce is represented in formal

joint management-workers health and safety committees.

Since injuries, occupational disease or absenteeism measurement is not clearly defined by resin

companies, no consistent conclusion has been reached except for the lost day rate and the number of

fatalities. Regarding the lost day rate, the average for resin producers is 2,3% and fatalities varies


122

between 3 and 20 deaths per year. Usually, companies develop their own social indicators for injuries

rates and training hours so they have a starting point to self-assess their own further improvements.

Almost every plastic company under review, implement a safety, security and environment particular

program. They usually include health and safety policies, emergency plans, incident reporting systems,

training, counselling and prevention and risk-control assistance. Emergency and rescue measures on

fire protection, appropriate use of equipment, body mechanics and posture ergonomics or handling

and exposure to chemical substances are trained through several educational methods such as

briefings, tours, discussions, checklists, standards, instructions, guidelines or videos.

Despite scant information is available, the average range of hours dedicated to training activities

which include professional and health and safety issues, varies between 16 and 86 hours per year per

employee. In addition, most companies have procedures to identify high employee potentials, people

performance reviews, updated professional trainings or career tracking interviews.

Companies assure to perform equal opportunity actions plans among different society groups.

Women represent around 12% to 30% of the total workforce and men still enjoying of a higher salary

than men do. The predominant age group at resin companies is that on the middle age (30 to 50 years

old).

Human rights

Human rights indicators are usually covered by European legislation unless companies have sites in

different countries. This could be the reason why human rights are not often regarded at social

reports studied.

Generally, resin companies state that they respect human rights inside their organisations and some of

them demand the same commitment to its suppliers.

Society performance indicators

Actions taken by resin companies regarding enhancing community environment are based on cultural

activities promotion or technical and infrastructural developments in the sited region of companies.

Regarding bribery and corruption, the risk of exposure is high in those companies which produce oil

besides plastic resin. To avoid bribery and corruption, some resin producers implement policies based

on education, control and prevention and others, take part in international discussions and initiatives

to demonstrate their anti-corruption awareness.

Participation in public policy include representation in public debates, participation on political,

media, research and cultural communities on compelling issues (Kyoto Protocol), work with

academia, NGO’s, communities, competence centres and other local associations.


123

Resin companies demonstrate their anti-competitive behaviour through the use of internal documents

such as codes of conduct, ethics rules, practical guides and good practices.

Product responsibility

Voluntary communications programs involve occasionally customers on preventive and protective

measures (clean-up procedures and accidental spills) and even some companies are audited by third

party and customers for certain activities related to customer health and safety.

Only some companies state that have a preventive policy on their products and services concerning all

stages of plastic life cycle, but specifically to handling and transport processes.

Customers are informed about the risks of using hazardous chemicals in the workplace by labelling,

MSDS or SDF. European regulation such as REACH or ADR is followed by resin producers.

It has to be pointed that there are social aspects that have more relevance than others depending on

the kind of activity is been developed. For instance, health and safety of customers, employees and society

is valuable data so resin producers handle with hazardous substances and dangerous operations. On the

other hand, since manufacturing of resin is usually an industrial good, marketing communication may not

have the same importance.

Social parameters are difficult to assess as they often depend on the region, culture features and

economic activities considered. There are some socioeconomics aspects of sustainability which can be

quantitative measured in the form of percentage, rate or numbers. However, those are useful only to

compare within the same organisation or within the same activity sector and similar conditions so an

improvement may be proved. Qualitative measurement for sustainability usually includes both social

aspects that can be and cannot be measured quantitatively. The great number of factors that influence

quantitative and qualitative social aspects makes absolute comparison unreliable.

11. Future expectations

As previously stated, the main objective of SustainComp project is the development of a series of

completely new wood-based sustainable composite materials. These materials could be a sustainable

alternative for current traditional materials. However both for developing the new materials and assess

their sustainability, an analysis is required. This analysis should not be only based on the environmental

performance of such new materials, but considering also the economic and social performance. If it is

considered that the sustainability of a material depends also on their applications, products should be

analysed. This is the ecodesign point of view. In particular Eco-designing is an approach where


124

environmental sustainable criteria are applied in the design step of the product, in order to maximally

reduce the environmental stress coming from a product life cycle. For example, products that are easier to

recycle, or products that can be made with recycled materials or scrap materials, processes that use fewer

resources and produce less waste, are instances where eco-design works. To accomplish reductions, it is

abundantly clear that such considerations must be included the design process.

Following an approach on which the ecodesign perspective, the life cycle thinking and the three

pillars of sustainability (environment, economy and society), a sustainability model is required. In this

Deliverable a sustainability model that lay the foundations for future assessment and development of a

completely new series of wood-bases sustainable composite materials in SustainComp project has been

developed. These new materials seems to have a good potential to be an alternative to current plastic

materials, and the sustainability model developed in this Deliverable will serve as a basis for analysing the

sustainability of these new materials and their potential applications. Moreover an overview of what is the

current situation is provided.

Since the SustainComp project is still in its early stage of development, it is expected that the

sustainability model described in this Deliverable allow developing and assessing the sustainability of both

new wood-bases sustainability composite materials and products made of such materials.

12. Conclusions

The main conclusions drawing form the Deliverable are described below:

Currently several plastic materials are available for a wide range of applications. Each plastic

material has specific properties that allow their use on specific products. Also the market demand

is growing globally.

Plastic materials can be processed with several converting techniques. In most cases, plastics have

specific grades for each converting technique. In many cases a type of plastic can be processed by

two or more converting procedures.

Despite the different applications of plastics, there are some environmental concerns about them

ranging from plastic production to the end-of-life of plastics.

The number of end-of-life options for plastics is high: mechanical and feedstock recycling, energy

recovery, etc. Nevertheless the end-of-life issues are not the same for all plastic products. For

instance the end-of-life of plastic packaging has some differences if it is compared to the end-of-

life of plastics used for electric and electronic appliances. Moreover the recycling/recovery


125

options and their profitability depend directly on the amount of material as well as the quality of

the plastic waste. As less mixed plastics and contamination is observed more profitability is

observed.

A sustainability model on which the three pillars of sustainability are considered is necessary for

future sustainability assessments of the new series of completely new wood-based sustainable

composite materials. Integration of sustainability concept with the life cycle thinking approach

will allow sustainability assessment of new materials as well as ecodesign of products made of

these new sustainable materials developed in SustainComp. This model is comprised by LCA (for

environmental assessment), environmental-type LCC (for economic assessment) as well as SLCA

(for social assessment) in accordance with the concept of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

(LCSA) defined by Kloepffer [43]. Therefore model is based in the most recent state of the art for

each assessment technique. In case of SLCA, the guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of

Products were followed [38]. Nevertheless in this Deliverable, LCA, LCC and SLCA were

conducted in a streamlined preliminary cradle-to-gate approach. Therefore the LCA, LCC and

SLCA are not intended to a comparative assertion. The main aim of LCA, LCC and SLCA in

Deliverable 5.1. is to create a sustainability model for future evaluations, analysing in preliminary

and streamlined situation the current situation.

With regard to the environmental assessment (LCA) the main environmental concerns about life

cycle stages of plastics were analysed in a qualitative way. As a result of this analysis the most

important issues are those related to polymer resin production, raw material extraction included,

and disposal. A preliminary cradle-to-gate streamlined LCA from raw material extraction to

primary resin production was carried out. Some engineered plastics like PA and PC show the

highest impacts in some categories like GWP, NRER, EU and POF. On the other hand PP

shows the lowest values in LCIA results.

A streamlined cradle-to-gate LCC was carried out for analysing economic aspects. In this case the

system boundaries were expanded from raw material extraction to converting of plastics resins,

since rough data for general converting techniques were available. The main conclusion was that

engineered plastics like PC, PA or ABS show the highest LCC. On the other hand general

purpose plastics like PE or PP. Other important result from the LCC was that the use of specific

converting techniques may affect the LCC of a plastic material, as is shown for HIPS.

The social aspects were analysed by conducting a qualitative cradle-to-gate Social Life Cycle

Assessment of family products based on UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Guidelines for

SLCA [38] as well as the GRI indicators [72]. The profile of the European plastic sector is

comprised by multinational companies that produce primary resins, compounders (generally SME

if they are not integrated into multinational companies) and converters. The European converting


126

sector is mainly based on SME a lack of data was detected for such kind of companies, since most

of them do not report social issues at the time being. Therefore the SLCA was limited to primary

resins manufacturers. Specifically 13 primary resin producers were analysed. Apart form the

limitations on the scope of SLCA, some other were detected for conducting SLCA since generally

the reporting of social indicators is made in a worldwide scope, and several business activities

different from resin production (like oil extraction or chemicals) are included within the reports.

Furthermore most of the data is reported in a qualitative way. In case of use of quantitative

indicators some of them may use different scales. Therefore comparison of data is hardly difficult.

Main conclusions from the SLCA were that at European sites take a wide range of actions for

assure labour practices and decent work. For instance a most of the workers are covered by

collective bargaining and/or have social benefits like medical insurance. Health and safety issues

are a key aspect for most of the companies, and many actions for training activities to employees

on this area are taken. With regard human rights these are covered by the European legislation.

Many companies state that they respect human rights inside their organisations and some of them

demand the same commitment to its suppliers. With regard to social performance indicators, the

European resin producers took several actions for enhancing communication between

community environment like education, cultural activities, participation with local communities

and authorities, codes of conduct, etc. Another key issue for resin manufacturers is the product

responsibility. All the analysed companies inform customers about the risk of hazardous chemical

by labelling, material safety data sheets (MSDS), SDF, ADR and REACH.


127

References

[1] Plastics Europe. The compelling facts about plastics 2007, an analysis of plastics production, demand andrecovery for 2007 in Europe, October 2008

[2] Plastics Engineering Handbook of The Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc., edited by Michael L. Berins, 1991

[3] http://www.amiplastics.com (consulted May 2009)

[4] Applied Market Research (AMI). Press Release: Ravago leads European technical compounding. Applied MarketInformation Ldt (AMI), Bristol, 19/02/08.

[5] Plastics Europe. Annual Report 2006. Plastics – challenging the energy of youth.

[6] www.icis.com/v2/chemicals/9076152/polyethylene-high-density/uses.html (Updated: November 2006. Sources:ICB Americas Chemical Profile, 6 November 2006; ICB Chemical Profile, 23 January 2006.)

[7] Modern Plastics Encyclopedia 1995; Plastic Packaging Opportunities and Challenges, February 1992

[8] Plastics Europe. EPS - Applications overview. http://www.plasticseurope.org/Content/Default.asp?PageID=1243(consulted May 2009)

[9] EN 13163. Thermal insulation products for buildings - Factory made

products of expanded polystyrene (EPS) - Specification

[10] Soroka W. Fundamentals of Packaging Technology. The Institute of Packaging. 1995

[11] Plastics Europe. The market for PS. http://www.plasticseurope.org/Content/Default.asp?PageID=1262

[12] Ram A. Fundamentals of Polymer Engineering. Plenum Publishing Corporation. New York. 1997

[13] Plastics Europe. The market for ABS/SAN. http://www.plasticseurope.org/Content/Default.asp?PageID=1244(consulted May 2009)

[14] Plastics Europe. The market for ABS/SAN. http://www.plasticseurope.org/Content/Default.asp?PageID=1244

[15] PVC.org. http://www.pvc.org (consulted May 2009)

[16] Jenkins W.A., Harrington J.P. Packaging foods eith plastics. Technomic Publishing AG. 1991

[17] Plastics Europe. Expert Corner. Product families. Polycarbonate.http://www.plasticseurope.org/Content/Default.asp?PageID=1188 (consulted May 2009)

[18] Brydson, J.A.. Plastics materials (7th Edition), Butterworths, BH. London, 1989

[19] Plastics Engineering. Europe's PA manufacturers strengthen: European polyamide producers show signs ofsupply leadership ahead of weakening growth in demand. Press release Global News Europe. September 1st

2007.

[20] Low Energy Plastics Processing. Reduce Energy Consumption In Plastics Engineering (euRECIPE). EuropeanBest Practice Guide. October 2006.

[21] Fellers, William O.; Hunt, William W. 2000. Manufacturing Processes for Technology. Prentice Hall. 2nd Subedition. Exeter, DEV, United Kingdom. ISBN 0-13-017791-1.

[22] AMI. The thermoplastics pipe extrusion industry in Europe. 2008 www.amiplastics.com (consulted March 2009).

[23] Aaron L. Brody & Kenneth S. Marsh. The Wiley Encyclopedia of Packaging Technology. Second Edition. NewYork, 1997.

[24] Plastics Dome. http://plastics.turkavkaz.ru/equipment/ (consulted November 2008)

[25] Injection moulding set to see further rationalisation. Press Release. Applied Market Information Ltd. (AMI)January 23rd 2006.

[26] http://www.pollutionissues.com/Pl-Re/Plastic.html (consulted July 2009)

[27] Hekkert, M.P. Improving material management to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, PhD Thesis, 2000.

[28] Il riciclo ecoefficiente Performance e scenari economici, ambientali ed energetici

Duccio Bianchi Ambiente Italia edizioni ambiente 2008

[29] Razza F., Compostable cutlery and waste management: An LCA approach. Waste Management 29 (2009)1424–1433

[30] National Center for Manufacturing Sciences. Plastics Impacts, Risks and Regulations.http://ecm.ncms.org/ERI/new/IRRplastics.htm (consulted July 2009)

[31] European Chemicals Agency. http://echa.europa.eu/ (consulted July 2009)

[32] Williams P.T. Waste treatment and Disposal. Second edition. Wiley, 2005

[33] APME, Association of Plastics manufacturers in Europe. Good practices guide on waste plastic recycling, a guideby and for local and regional authorities, Brussels, Belgium, 2004.

[34] Gal Mariansky. Plastics— solution, or pollution California Engineer. Spring 2006.http://caleng.berkeley.edu/archive/84.3-spring2006/plastics.pdf (consulted July 2009)


128

[35] European Commission. Environment. Industry. Integrated Product Policy. The Green Paper on IntegratedProduct Policy, 2001. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/2001developments.htm (consulted June 2009)

[36] Commission Of The European Communities. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on theSustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan. Brussels, 16.7.2008COM(2008) 397 final.

[37] Depius project- http://standards.eu-innova.org/Files/Tools/cdromDEPUIS/datas/ch3.pdf (consulted June 2009)

[38] UNEP SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. United NationsEnvironment Programme. ISBN: 978-92-807-3021-0. 2009

[39] Plastics Europe website. http://www.plasticseurope.org (consulted August 2009)

[40] Ecotool Regione Lombardia. http://www.ecotool.it/ecodesign/ecodesign.htm (consulted August 2009)

[41] Polymer Science Learning Center. Department of Polymer Science. The University of Southern Mississippi.http://pslc.ws/styrene.htm (consulted August 2009)

[42] Di Vittorio Villavecchia, G. Eigenmann, I. Ubaldini, G. Nuovo dizionario di merceologia e chimica applicata-VOL.6

[43] Kloepffer, W. Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Products. Int J LCA 13 (2) 89-95 (2008)

[44] United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Our Common Future (1987),Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-282080-X

[45] Kasemir, B, Jaeger C.C, Jäger J. 2003. Citizen participation in sustainability assessment. In Public Participationin Sustainability Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3-36.

[46] Ness B., Urbel-Piirsalu E., Anderberg S., Olsson L., Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. EcologicalEconomics 60 (2007) 498-508.

[47] ISO 14040:2006

[48] ISO 14044:2006

[49] Norris, G.A. Integrating Economic Analysis into LCA. Int. J. LCA 6 (2) 118-121 (2001)

[50] Manhart A., Grießhammer R., Social impacts of the production of notebook PCs. Contribution to the developmentof a Product Sustainability Assessment (PROSA). Öko-Institut e.V. Freiburg, November 2006.

[51] Kruse, S.A., Flysjo, A., Kasperczyk, N., Scholz, A.J. Socioeconomic indicators as a complement to life cycleassessment-an application to salmon production systems. International Journal Of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (1):8-18 January 2009

[52] SETAC (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry) Guidelines for Life-Cycle Assessment: A Code ofPractice, 1993

[53] EPA. Life cycle assessment: principles and practice (May 2006), National risk management research laboratoryoffice of research and development U.S. environmental protection agency (EPA) Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 -www.epa.gov/ord/NRMRL/lcaccess/pdfs/chapter1_frontmatter_lca101.pdf

[54] Razza F., Personal comm. (July 2009)

[55] Olivier Jolliet et al. A New Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methodology, International J LCA 8 (6) 324-330 (2003)

[56] IMPACT2002+ UserGuide (for v2.1), Draft (October2005).doc

[57] Nixon, S. W. (1995) Coastal marine eutrophication: a definition, social causes, and future concerns. Ophelia, 41,199–219

[58] European Waste Catalogue and Hazardous Waste List Valid from 1 January 2002. Published by theEnvironmental Protection Agency, Ireland.

Download:

http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/Environment/Waste/WEEE/FileDownLoad,1343,en.pdf

[59] UN Convention to Combat Desertification. http://www.unccd.int/main.php (consulted August 2009).

[60] PAS 2050:2008 ”Specification ofr the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of good andservicies” BSI - British standards

[61] ‘Compost una fonte di nuova fertilita’ ‘– veneto Agricoltura-Arpav 2009published by Veneto Agricoltura AziendaRegionale per i Settori Agricolo, Forestale e Agroalimentare www.venetoagricoltura.org

[62] Rebitzer G. et al. Life Cycle Costing in LCM: Ambitions, Opportunities, and Limitations - Discussing aFramework, in: International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 8, No. 5, p. 253-256. 2003

[63] Bovea M.D. et al. Increasing product value by integrating environmental impact, costs and customer evaluation.Resources, Conservation and Recycling 41 (2004) 133-145

[64] Craighill et al. Lifecycle assessment and economic evaluation of recycling: a case study. Resources,Conservation and Recycling 17 (1996) 75-76.

[65] Quinet E. The social costs of transport: evaluation and links with internalisation policies. In: Internalising thesocial costs of transport. OECD/ECTM (Chapter 2), 1996.

[66] Dreyer L.C, et al. A Framework for Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment. International Journal of Life CycleAssessment 11 (2) 88 – 97 (2006)

[67] Gauthier C. Measuring Corporate and Social Environmental Performance: The Extended Life-Cycle Assessment.


129

Journal of Business Ethics (2005) 59: 199–206

[68] Hunkeler D. Societal LCA Methodology and Case Study. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11 (6)371-382 (2006)

[69] Norris G.A. Social Impacts in Product Life Cycles - Towards Life Cycle Attribute Assessment. Int J LCA 11.Special Issue 1 (2006)

[70] Labuschagne C. Social Indicators for Sustainable Project and Technology Life Cycle Management in the ProcessIndustry. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11 (1) 3-15 (2006)

[71] Griebhammer et al. Feasibility study: Integration of social aspects into LCA. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle InitiativeTask Force. Freiburg, May 2006.

[72] Global Reporting Initiative. Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. Version 3.0

[73] The United Nations Global Compact. The Practical Guide to the United Nations Global Compact Communicationon Progress (CoP) Creating, Sharing and Posting a COP. 2008.

[74] Global Reporting Initiative and UN Global Compact. Making the connection. The GRI Guidelines and the UNGCCommunication on Progress. May 2007

[75] Plastics Europe. Eco-profiles and Environmental Declarations” Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Methodology andProduct Category Rules (PCR) for Uncompounded Polymer Resins and Reactive Polymer Precursors. Version1.1 (May 2009)

[76] Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry. http://lca.plasticseurope.org/index.htm (consulted june 2009)

[77] M.A.J. Huijbregts et al. Normalisation figures for environmental life-cycle assessment The Netherlands(1997/1998), Western Europe (1995) and the world (1990 and 1995) Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2003)737–748

[78] Leo Breedveld et al. A Framework for Actualising Normalisation Data in LCA: Experiences in the Netherlands.International Journal of LCA” 4 (4) 213-220 (1999)

[79] European business - Facts and figures. Chemicals, rubbers and plasticshttp://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-BW-07-001-05/EN/KS-BW-07-001-05-EN.PDF

[80] Key figures on European business with a special feature on the factors of business success. 2008 edition.Eurostat Pocketbooks. Eurostat. European Commission. ISSN 1830-9720.

[81] European Union. List of NACE codes. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases_old/index/nace_all.html

[82] Skante G. Measuring eco-efficiency by a LCC/LCA ratio. An evaluation of the applicability in environmentaldecision-making situations. A case study at Akzo Nobel. MSc Thesis. Chalmers University of Technology.

[83] European Plastic News. Plastics Market Price Report Mar-Apr 2009.

[84] European Plastics Converters. EUPC. http://www. plasticsconverters.eu (consulted July 2009)

[85] EuRecipe. Reduced energy consumption in plastics engineering. 2005 European benchmarking survey of energyconsumption and adoption of best practice. Analysis of a survey of the European plastics processing industryconducted from April to September

[86] Plan de Competitividad del Sector de Transformados Plásticos de la Comunidad Valenciana 2006-2007.Generalitat Valenciana, 2005.

[87] DiGITIP Ministère de l'Économie, des Finances et de l'Industrie, Nº 189 - May 2004. The plastics processingindustry in Europe. Cooperation and internationalization

[88] Health and safety at work. http://www.cefic.be/en/responsible-care-performance-reporting.html. Web consulted17th July 2009.

[89] Bristol University. http://www.bris.ac.uk/personnel/reward/jobeval/ Web consulted the 21st of July of 2009.

d5.1. report on the current situation analysis: … d5.1.pdf · conceptual framework for...

Documents