IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v13y2024i4p50-d1368678.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Circularity of Materials from the Perspective of a Product Life Cycle: A Life Cycle Assessment Case Study of Secondary Fence Boards—Part 1 (Baseline Scenario)

Author

Listed:
  • Joanna Kulczycka

    (Mineral and Energy Economy Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, 31-261 Kraków, Poland)

  • Anna Lewandowska

    (Institute of Management, Poznan University of Economics and Business, 61-875 Poznań, Poland)

  • Katarzyna Joachimiak-Lechman

    (Institute of Management, Poznan University of Economics and Business, 61-875 Poznań, Poland)

  • Przemysław Kurczewski

    (Faculty of Civil and Transport Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, 60-965 Poznań, Poland)

Abstract

In the era of the circular economy, solutions aimed at increasing the circularity of materials and products are highly welcome. Eco-design and waste management strategies are crucial for ensuring circularity and resource-saving. Strategies should be driven by assessing life cycle-based environmental performance. Tools to measure this performance should take into account two recycling-oriented parameters: recycled content and recycling rate. This paper presents the results of a life cycle assessment case study for a secondary fence board (baseline scenario). The circular footprint formula has been used to allocate burdens and credits between the supplier and the user of recycled materials. The potential environmental impact and the most significant issues have been calculated, identified, and presented. A general recommendation for further environmental development of the secondary fence board is to improve the production-related energy efficiency of recycling processes and increase the recycling rate of the board (to avoid landfilling).

Suggested Citation

  • Joanna Kulczycka & Anna Lewandowska & Katarzyna Joachimiak-Lechman & Przemysław Kurczewski, 2024. "The Circularity of Materials from the Perspective of a Product Life Cycle: A Life Cycle Assessment Case Study of Secondary Fence Boards—Part 1 (Baseline Scenario)," Resources, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:50-:d:1368678
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/13/4/50/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/13/4/50/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antonio Carlos Farrapo & Thiago Teixeira Matheus & Ricardo Musule Lagunes & Remo Filleti & Fabio Yamaji & Diogo Aparecido Lopes Silva, 2023. "The Application of Circular Footprint Formula in Bioenergy/Bioeconomy: Challenges, Case Study, and Comparison with Life Cycle Assessment Allocation Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Shen, Li & Worrell, Ernst & Patel, Martin K., 2010. "Open-loop recycling: A LCA case study of PET bottle-to-fibre recycling," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 34-52.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yuantao Peng & Jie Yang & Chenqiang Deng & Jin Deng & Li Shen & Yao Fu, 2023. "Acetolysis of waste polyethylene terephthalate for upcycling and life-cycle assessment study," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Allacker, K. & Mathieux, F. & Manfredi, S. & Pelletier, N. & De Camillis, C. & Ardente, F. & Pant, R., 2014. "Allocation solutions for secondary material production and end of life recovery: Proposals for product policy initiatives," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 1-12.
    3. Toniolo, Sara & Mazzi, Anna & Niero, Monia & Zuliani, Filippo & Scipioni, Antonio, 2013. "Comparative LCA to evaluate how much recycling is environmentally favourable for food packaging," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 61-68.
    4. Chih-Ming Chen & Huey-Ling Chang, 2022. "Environmental Impact Assessment of an Ignition Pencil Coil by a Combination of Carbon Footprint and Environmental Priority Strategies Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, April.
    5. Marie Kampmann Eriksen & Anders Damgaard & Alessio Boldrin & Thomas Fruergaard Astrup, 2019. "Quality Assessment and Circularity Potential of Recovery Systems for Household Plastic Waste," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(1), pages 156-168, February.
    6. Lagioia, Giovanni & Calabrò, Grazia & Amicarelli, Vera, 2012. "Empirical study of the environmental management of Italy's drinking water supply," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 119-130.
    7. Komly, Claude-Emma & Azzaro-Pantel, Catherine & Hubert, Antoine & Pibouleau, Luc & Archambault, Valérie, 2012. "Multiobjective waste management optimization strategy coupling life cycle assessment and genetic algorithms: Application to PET bottles," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 66-81.
    8. Toniolo, Sara & Mazzi, Anna & Garato, Valentina Giulia & Aguiari, Filippo & Scipioni, Antonio, 2014. "Assessing the “design paradox” with life cycle assessment: A case study of a municipal solid waste incineration plant," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 109-116.
    9. Toniolo, Sara & Mazzi, Anna & Pieretto, Chiara & Scipioni, Antonio, 2017. "Allocation strategies in comparative life cycle assessment for recycling: Considerations from case studies," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 117(PB), pages 249-261.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:50-:d:1368678. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.