IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8896-d867400.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Cost of an Innovative Carbon Paper Sensor for 17α-Ethinylestradiol and Comparison with the Classical Chromatographic Method

Author

Listed:
  • Florinda Martins

    (Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto, Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal)

  • Álvaro Torrinha

    (REQUIMTE-LAQV, Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto, Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal)

  • Cristina Delerue-Matos

    (REQUIMTE-LAQV, Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto, Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal)

  • Simone Morais

    (REQUIMTE-LAQV, Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto, Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal)

Abstract

Nowadays there is a growing concern with the environment and sustainability, which means that better methods, including pollutants analysis, with less consumption of materials, organic solvents, and energy, need to be developed. Considering the almost inexistent information about the topic, the main goal of this work was to compare the environmental impacts of two analytical methods, a traditional one based on liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection and a newly developed carbon paper sensor. The selected analyte was 17α-ethinylestradiol, which is a contaminant of emergent concern in aquatic ecosystems due to its endocrine disruptor behavior. The life cycle assessment data showed that the sensor detection presents an almost negligible environmental impact when compared with the extraction step (the same for both methods) and the liquid chromatographic determination (roughly 80 times higher than with the sensor). The sensor values for all categories of damage are below 3% of the total method impacts, i.e., 1.6, 1.9, 2.4, and 2.9% for resources, climate change, human health, and ecosystem quality. The extraction represents 98.1% of the sensor environmental impacts (and 99.6% of its life cycle costing) and 38.8% of the chromatographic method. This study evidences the need of developing and applying greener analytical (detection and extraction) strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Florinda Martins & Álvaro Torrinha & Cristina Delerue-Matos & Simone Morais, 2022. "Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Cost of an Innovative Carbon Paper Sensor for 17α-Ethinylestradiol and Comparison with the Classical Chromatographic Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-13, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8896-:d:867400
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8896/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8896/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simone Blanc & Stefano Massaglia & Filippo Brun & Cristiana Peano & Angela Mosso & Nicole Roberta Giuggioli, 2019. "Use of Bio-Based Plastics in the Fruit Supply Chain: An Integrated Approach to Assess Environmental, Economic, and Social Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Siti Jamilah Hanim Mohd YUSOF & Ahmad Muhaimin Roslan & Khairul Nadiah Ibrahim & Sharifah Soplah Syed ABDULLAH & Mohd Rafein Zakaria & Mohd Ali Hassan & Yoshihito Shirai, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment for Bioethanol Production from Oil Palm Frond Juice in an Oil Palm Based Biorefinery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Ashoka Gamage & Anuradhi Liyanapathiranage & Asanga Manamperi & Chamila Gunathilake & Sudhagar Mani & Othmane Merah & Terrence Madhujith, 2022. "Applications of Starch Biopolymers for a Sustainable Modern Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-33, May.
    4. Eglantina Hysa & Alba Kruja & Naqeeb Ur Rehman & Rafael Laurenti, 2020. "Circular Economy Innovation and Environmental Sustainability Impact on Economic Growth: An Integrated Model for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elena Surra & Álvaro Torrinha & Cristina Delerue-Matos & Simone Morais, 2023. "Analysis of Ketoprofen in Fish: Life Cycle Assessment Using Sensors vs. Conventional Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.

    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. Wei Wang & Kehui Wei & Oleksandr Kubatko & Vladyslav Piven & Yulija Chortok & Oleksandr Derykolenko, 2023. "Economic Growth and Sustainable Transition: Investigating Classical and Novel Factors in Developed Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Firoz Alam & Shahid Alam & Mohammad Asif & Umme Hani & Mohd Naved Khan, 2023. "An Investigation of Saudi Arabia’s Ambitious Reform Programme with Vision 2030 to Incentivise Investment in the Country’s Non-Oil Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Hana Urbancová & Pavla Vrabcová, 2023. "Sustainability-oriented Innovation: Crucial Sources to Achieve Competitiveness," Journal of Economics / Ekonomicky casopis, Institute of Economic Research, Slovak Academy of Sciences, vol. 71(1), pages 46-64, January.
    4. Egla Mansi & Eglantina Hysa & Mirela Panait & Marian Catalin Voica, 2020. "Poverty—A Challenge for Economic Development? Evidences from Western Balkan Countries and the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    5. Ángela Triguero & María C. Cuerva & Francisco J. Sáez‐Martínez, 2022. "Closing the loop through eco‐innovation by European firms: Circular economy for sustainable development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2337-2350, July.
    6. Nerajda Feruni & Eglantina Hysa & Mirela Panait & Irina Gabriela Rădulescu & Alina Brezoi, 2020. "The Impact of Corruption, Economic Freedom and Urbanization on Economic Development: Western Balkans versus EU-27," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-22, November.
    7. Abdelmohsen A. Nassani & Crenguta Sinisi & Loredana Paunescu & Zahid Yousaf & Mohamed Haffar & Ahmad Kabbani, 2022. "Nexus of Innovation Network, Digital Innovation and Frugal Innovation towards Innovation Performance: Investigation of Energy Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-11, April.
    8. Luigi Aldieri & Mohsen Brahmi & Bruna Bruno & Concetto Paolo Vinci, 2021. "Circular Economy Business Models: The Complementarities with Sharing Economy and Eco-Innovations Investments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-13, November.
    9. Giuseppe Craparo & Elisa Isabel Cano Montero & Jesús Fernando Santos Peñalver, 2024. "Trends in the circular economy applied to the agricultural sector in the framework of the SDGs," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(10), pages 26699-26729, October.
    10. Monika Hejna & Elisabetta Onelli & Alessandra Moscatelli & Maurizio Bellotto & Cinzia Cristiani & Nadia Stroppa & Luciana Rossi, 2021. "Heavy-Metal Phytoremediation from Livestock Wastewater and Exploitation of Exhausted Biomass," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-16, February.
    11. Jianjia He & Thi Hoai Thuong Mai, 2021. "The Circular Economy: A Study on the Use of Airbnb for Sustainable Coastal Development in the Vietnam Mekong Delta," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, July.
    12. Luiz C. Terra dos Santos & Adrielle Frimaio & Biagio F. Giannetti & Feni Agostinho & Gengyuan Liu & Cecilia M. V. B. Almeida, 2023. "Integrating Environmental, Social, and Economic Dimensions to Monitor Sustainability in the G20 Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.
    13. Ewa Mazur-Wierzbicka, 2021. "Towards Circular Economy—A Comparative Analysis of the Countries of the European Union," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-25, May.
    14. Danilo Boffa & Antonio Prencipe & Armando Papa & Christian Corsi & Mario Sorrentino, 2023. "Boosting circular economy via the b-corporation roads. The effect of the entrepreneurial culture and exogenous factors on sustainability performance," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 523-561, June.
    15. Xiaohui Chen & Yiqing He, 2022. "The Impact of Financial Resilience and Steady Growth on High-Quality Economic Development—Based on a Heterogeneous Intermediary Effect Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-19, November.
    16. Nestor Shpak & Oleh Kuzmin & Olga Melnyk & Mariana Ruda & Włodzimierz Sroka, 2020. "Implementation of a Circular Economy in Ukraine: The Context of European Integration," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Xiaomin Sun & Jing Qing & Syed Ahsan Ali Shah & Yasir Ahmed Solangi, 2023. "Exploring the Complex Nexus between Sustainable Development and Green Tourism through Advanced GMM Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-20, July.
    18. Ekaterina Blinova & Tatyana Ponomarenko & Valentin Knysh, 2022. "Analyzing the Concept of Corporate Sustainability in the Context of Sustainable Business Development in the Mining Sector with Elements of Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-30, July.
    19. Teodora Stillitano & Emanuele Spada & Nathalie Iofrida & Giacomo Falcone & Anna Irene De Luca, 2021. "Sustainable Agri-Food Processes and Circular Economy Pathways in a Life Cycle Perspective: State of the Art of Applicative Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-28, February.
    20. Victor Platon & Florin Marius Pavelescu & Marius Surugiu & Simona Frone & Raluca Mazilescu & Andreea Constantinescu & Florina Popa, 2023. "Influence of Eco-Innovation and Recycling on Raw Material Consumption; Econometric Approach in the Case of the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, February.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8896-:d:867400. 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.