IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i10p1725-d113257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment between a Metered Dose Inhaler and Electric Nebulizer

Author

Listed:
  • Brandon Goulet

    (Department of Biomedical Engineering, Marquette University and Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53233, USA)

  • Lars Olson

    (Department of Biomedical Engineering, Marquette University and Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53233, USA)

  • Brooke K. Mayer

    (Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI 53233, USA)

Abstract

Life cycle assessment (LCA) evaluates the environmental impact of a product based on the materials and processes used to manufacture the item as well as the item’s use and disposal. The objective of this LCA was to evaluate and compare the environmental impact of a metered dose inhaler, specifically the Proventil ® HFA inhaler (Merk & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA), and an electric nebulizer, specifically the DeVilbiss Pulmo-Aide ® nebulizer (DeVilbiss, Port Washington, NY, USA). GaBi LCA software was used to model the global warming potential (GWP) of each product by using substantiated data and well-justified assumptions for the components, manufacturing, assembly, and use of both devices. The functional unit used to model each device was one dose of the active drug, albuterol sulfate. The inhaler’s GWP, 0.0972 kg CO 2 -eq, was greater than the nebulizer’s even when uncertain parameters were varied ±100×. During the use phase ofa the inhaler, which accounted for approximately 96% of the inhaler’s total GWP, HFA 134a is used as a propellant to deliver the drug. The total GWP for the electric nebulizer was 0.0294 kg CO 2 -eq assuming that the mouthpiece was cleaned in a dishwasher, while it was 0.0477 kg CO 2 -eq when the nebulizer mouthpiece was hand washed between uses. The GWP breakeven scenario between dishwashing and hand washing occurred when the mouthpiece accounted for 10% of the dishwasher load.

Suggested Citation

  • Brandon Goulet & Lars Olson & Brooke K. Mayer, 2017. "A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment between a Metered Dose Inhaler and Electric Nebulizer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-13, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1725-:d:113257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/10/1725/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/10/1725/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1725-:d:113257. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.