waste flow analysis of nanoproducts - sustainable ... conference 2015_la… · waste flow analysis...

Waste flow analysis of nanoproducts- Cases: EU, Denmark and the UK

Laura Heggelund

Alessio Boldrin

Steffen Foss Hansen

Thomas F. Astrup

Alexander Newcombe

Sustainable Nanotechnology Conference 2015, Venice

10/04/2015Laura Heggelund, SNO Conference 20152 DTU Environment, Technical University of Denmark

Outline

• Introduction

• Aims of study

• Methodology

–Steps 1-4

• Cases

–Denmark, UK

• Perspectives


Introduction

• Nanowaste is generated in increasingamounts

– How much?

– Where does it go?

– What are the risks?

– How should we manage it?

• Mapping flows of nanoproducts to wastetreatment systems is needed

– Help to prioritize research and wastemanagement initiatives

– Ensure safe and appropriate management


Aim of this study

• Develop tools for the analysis of nanoproducts in waste flows

• Assess the relative importance of ENMs and treatment options

TextileRecycling

Incineration

Landfilling

Ag

Ag

Ag

Ag

Ag

Ag

AgAg

Ag

Ag

AgAg

AgAgAg

Ag

Ag

Ag

Ag

AgAg

Ag


• Semi-quantitative analysis of solid waste flows containing ENM

• 4 steps:

1. Categorize waste material fractions

2. ID ENM types in waste material fractions

3. ID region specific waste management of

individual waste material fractions

4. Combine steps 2 +3 to determine the

distribution of ENM routed to specific waste

management options

Methodology


www.nanodb.dk

Scope: DK and EU


Unknown ENM vs. Known ENM

• Many manufacturers/retailers use a ”nano-claim” but ENM is unknown

1425 products

483 products


Step 1: CategorizationWaste material fraction Description and examples

Batteries Typically this would be a battery for an electrical item, where the nanocomponent is only present

in the battery.

Electronics

- Large household appliances

- Small household appliances

- Toys, leisure and sports equipment

Generally products with electric connection

- Refrigerators, freezers etc.

- Toaster, hairdryer etc.

- Game consol, electric toys etc.

Glass Cosmetic products, supplements or other products sold in glass containers.

Hazardous Products which are classified hazardous according to EU regulation.Typically this will be spray cans

or household paint waste.

Metal Generally consists of containers such as cans, or metal sports equipment.

Multi material waste If the product does not have one main material fraction, but contains more materials which cannot

readily be separated e.g. camera lenses, baby carriage and water filtering unit, this category is

used.

Paper Few products exist so far, but examples would be photo paper and fire protective paper/cardboard.

Cardboard or paper from external packaging of items (not in contact with the nanoproduct) should

not be included.

Plastic, from used product containers Typically waste from used plastic containers for cleaning/cosmetic products, which have a residue

of the nanoproduct in them.

Plastic, other

- Large plastic products

- Small plastic products

Generally plastic products were the nanocomponent is embedded in/surface coating the plastic.

- E.g. hockey sticks and tennis rackets.

- E.g. baby bottles, food containers and tooth brushes.

Textile Fibrous material, typically clothing or bandage with a nanocoating or nanomaterial embedded in

the fibers.

Unknown If there no image available showing the specific product and the container it is sold in, or it cannot

be estimated from the product description, this category is used.

10 different waste material fractions

Based on online available photo or description

• Categorized according to main matrix material

• Easily categorized fractions e.g. WEEE and textile

• Not easily categorized fractions, or products combining several not separable materials e.g. camera lenses and suitcases

• Multimaterial waste

• Unknown waste material (lacking suitable photoreference)


Step 2: ENM types vs. waste material fraction

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Batteries Electronics Glass Hazardous Metal Multi materialwaste

Plastic, fromused product

containers

Plastic, other Textile Unknown

Aluminium Bamboo charcoal Bamboo charcoal, Gold Calcium Carbon

Carbon black Carbon fullerenes Carbon graphite Carbon nanotubes Carbon, Titanium

Copper Gold Gold, Platinum Gold, Titanium Iridium

Iron Lithium Nickel Palladium Phosphate

Platinum Platinum, Silver Polytetrafluoroethylene Silicone Silver

Silver, Titanium Steel Titanium Titanium, Zinc Zinc

Number of products


Step 3: Waste mangement of waste material fraction

Batteries Electronics Glass Hazardous Metal Average MSWPlastic,

packagingTextile

Compost/AD 14.86 0

Landfill 7.67 8.83 15.68 47.82 15.86 33.58 37.31 26.33

Recycling 87.57 85.13 72.8 38.25 72.5 27.4 35.3 56.49

Incineration 4.76 6.03 11.52 13.92 11.64 24.16 27.39 17.18

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

%

Waste management in EU27, EUROSTAT

Average

MSW

Plastic packagingBatteries Electronics Glass Hazardous Metal

Multi materialwaste


containersPlastic, other Textile Unknown

Compost/AD 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 8 0 6

Landfilling 3 8 3 2 1 17 44 17 18 14

Recycling 36 75 12 2 3 14 41 14 38 12

Incineration 2 5 2 1 0 12 32 13 12 10

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Num

ber

of p

rodu

cts

Distribution of nanoproducts in EU27

Incineration18%

Recycling51%

Landfilling26%

Compost/AD5%


Ref: Eurostat


Step 4: Combine steps 2. and 3.

Incineration18%

Recycling51%

Landfilling26%

Compost/AD5%


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Batteries Electronics Glass Hazardous Metal Multi materialwaste


containers

Plastic, other Textile Unknown

Aluminium Bamboo charcoal Bamboo charcoal, Gold Calcium Carbon

Carbon black Carbon fullerenes Carbon graphite Carbon nanotubes Carbon, Titanium

Copper Gold Gold, Platinum Gold, Titanium Iridium

Iron Lithium Nickel Palladium Phosphate

Platinum Platinum, Silver Polytetrafluoroethylene Silicone Silver

Silver, Titanium Steel Titanium Titanium, Zinc Zinc

+

1%

11%

3% 1%

2%

10%

1%

3%

3%

3%

1%

1%4%

40%

1%1%

10%

2%3%

Incineration

Aluminium

Bamboo charcoal

Calcium

Carbon

Carbon fullerenes

Carbon nanotubes

Copper

Gold

Gold, Titanium

Phosphate

Platinum

Polytetrafluoroethylene

Silicone

Silver

Silver, Titanium

Steel

Titanium

Titanium, Zinc

Zinc

7% 1%1% 2%

5%

3%

2%

15%

1%

1%5%

46%

2%1% 7%

1%

2%

Recycling

Bamboo charcoal

Calcium

Carbon

Carbon fullerenes

Carbon nanotubes

Gold

Gold, Titanium

Phosphate

Platinum


Silicone

Silver

Silver, Titanium

Steel

Titanium

Titanium, Zinc

Zinc

246 products88 products


Step 4. Continued 1%

6%

3%1%

2% 1%

12%

1%

3%

3%

3%

1%

2%5%

40%

1%

11%

2%4%

Landfilling

Aluminium Bamboo charcoal Calcium Carbon Carbon fullerenes

Carbon graphite Carbon nanotubes Copper Gold Gold, Titanium

Phosphate Platinum Polytetrafluoroethylene Silicone Silver

Silver, Titanium Titanium Titanium, Zinc Zinc

1% 1%

1%

1%

5% 1%

30%

1%4%

1%7%

31%

15%

1%

Composting / Anaerobic digestion

Bamboo charcoal

Bamboo charcoal, Gold

Carbon

Carbon black

Carbon fullerenes

Carbon graphite

Carbon nanotubes

Carbon, Titanium

Gold, Titanium

Nickel

Silicone

Silver

Titanium

Zinc

1%

6%

3% 1%

2% 1%

12%

1%

3%

3%

3%

1%2%

5%

40%

1%

11%

2%4%

Landfilling

Aluminium

Bamboo charcoal

Calcium

Carbon

Carbon fullerenes

Carbon graphite

Carbon nanotubes

Copper

Gold

Gold, Titanium

Phosphate

Platinum


Silicone

Silver

Silver, Titanium

Titanium

Titanium, Zinc

Zinc

21 products126 products


DENMARK & UNITED KINGDOM

Case studies:


Impact of different waste management systems


Waste management statistics: DK and UK

Batteries Electronics Glass Hazardous Metal Average MSWPlastic

packagingTextile

Compost/AD 17.8

Landfill 7.7 9.6 22.2 38.7 33.0 36.9 51.5 2.4

Recycling 87.6 86.8 67.8 48.4 52.1 28.4 25.2 92.9

Incineration 4.8 4.3 10.1 12.9 14.9 16.8 23.3 4.7

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

%

Waste management in the UK, EUROSTAT

Batteries Electronics Glass Hazardous Metal Average MSWPlastic

packagingTextile

Compost/AD 13.0

Landfill 7.7 0.5 0.1 53.3 2.2 2.5 3.3 38.9

Recycling 87.6 88.6 97.7 33.2 51.8 32.2 29.4 57.7

Incineration 4.8 10.9 2.2 13.3 46.0 52.3 67.3 3.3

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

%

Waste management in DK, EUROSTAT

Ref: Eurostat


Different compositions of landfilled waste

• What causes the differences?

– Different quanties of waste, Textile waste, Plastic waste

1% 1%

4%1%

3%1%

12%

1%

3%

3%

2%

1%

2%

5%

39%

1%

1%

12%

2%5%

Landfilling - UK

Aluminium

Bamboo charcoal

Calcium

Carbon

Carbon fullerenes

Carbon graphite

Carbon nanotubes

Copper

Gold

Gold, Titanium

Phosphate

Platinum


Silicone

Silver

Silver, Titanium

Steel

Titanium

Titanium, Zinc

Zinc

28%

1%

1%3%

5%

2%8%

3%2%

42%

1%

3%

1%

Landfilling - DK

Bamboo charcoal

Calcium

Carbon fullerenes

Carbon nanotubes

Gold

Gold, Titanium

Phosphate


Silicone

Silver

Silver, Titanium

Titanium

Zinc


Future aims

• Continue to update product inventory

• Consider mass or volume into the flow analysis

• Data generation e.g.

– Investigate fate and behavior of ENM in simulated waste treatment scenarios (e.g. artificical leachate solution)

– Perform standard waste characterization tests on nano-containing matices (e.g. spiked waste matrix or matrix of nanoproducts)

– Evaluate potential release of ENM from EOL consumer products

• Evaluate applicability of standard waste characterization methods

• Highlight possible safe by design features concerning EOL nanoproducts


THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

waste flow analysis of nanoproducts - sustainable ... conference 2015_la… · waste flow analysis...

Documents