life cycle assessment of acrylic fibre and garment in...

Life Cycle Assessment of Acrylic Fibre and

Garment in Thailand

Thai Acrylic Fibre Co. Ltd., Aditya Birla Group, India

Dr Jagadish Barik, Chief Sustainability Officer, Thai Acrylic Co. Ltd, Thailand

Dr Rajesh K Singh, Managing Director, thinkstep Sustainability Solutions Pvt. Ltd., India

Session TU-303: Improving the life cycle performance of chemical products

and materials through data exchange along the value chain

LCM 2017, 5th Sept Luxembourg

Aditya Birla Group

• 41 billion USD Indian Multinational, operating in 36

countries, 120000 employee with 42 nationals

• India largest and most reputed and league of fortune 500

• Metal, Mining, Carbon black, textile, chemicals, acrylic,

Insulators, financial services, VSF, Cement, telecom,

fashion and Retail sector

• World largest aluminum rolling company and Novelis being

world largest aluminum recycling facility

• World largest in Carbon black and Viscose Staple Fibre

• Among the top 5 cement players globally

• Globally 4th largest in acrylic fibre and insulators

229.11.2017

Goal and Scope

Quantification of environmental impacts for:

• One tonne of Acrylic Fiber (3 denier regular birlacril bright

and semidull Staple Acrylic Fibre )

• Manufactured at Thai Acrylic Fibre Co. Ltd., Saraburi,

Thailand (cradle to gate)

• One piece of Acrylic Garment entire life cycle i.e. cradle to

grave (450 grams), 100 washes

• Life Cycle Assessment’ as per ISO 14040/44 standard.

• Hot-spot analysis in the value chain (raw materials,

manufacturing, transport, packaging, use nd end of life)

across the various identified environmental impacts

• Development of LCA Report for Communication to

stakeholders

329.11.2017

4

System Boundary

Acrylic Fibre (Cradle to Gate)

5

System Boundary

Acrylic Garment (Cradle to Grave)

6

(Cradle to Gate)Source wise environmental impacts breakup

Environmental Impacts1 tonne of Acrylic Fibre

7

(Cradle to Gate)

Environmental Impacts1 tonne of Acrylic Fibre

Unit process wise environmental impacts breakup

Life Cycle Impacts (CML) Total Dope Making Polymerization Solvent

Recovery

Textile- Wet

Spinning

Abiotic Depletion (ADP elements)

[kg Sb-Equiv.]

0.001 - 0.001 - -

Acidification Potential (AP) [kg

SO2-Equiv.]

32.7 1.6 17.7 4.1 9.0

Eutrophication Potential (EP) [kg

Phosphate-Equiv.]

3.2 0.09 2.3 0.2 0.6

Global Warming Potential (GWP

100 years) [kg CO2-Equiv.]

9428.8 389.3 5889.5 990.3 2159.6

Human Toxicity Potential (HTP

inf.) [kg DCB-Equiv.]

156.4 4.2 112.2 11.3 28.5

Photochem. Ozone Creation

Potential (POCP) [kg Ethene-

Equiv.]

2.6 0.08 1.9 0.2 0.4

Terrestric Ecotoxicity Potential

(TETP inf.) [kg DCB-Equiv.]

5.2 0.04 1.4 0.1 3.6

Primary energy demand (net cal.

value) [MJ]

164421.5 4731.8 121048.2 12015.9 26625.5

Blue water consumption [kg] 38924.1 1005.1 26727.7 3921.3 7269.9

8

(Cradle to Gate)

Environmental Impacts1 tonne of Acrylic Fibre

Electricity; 315,62 Electricity; 362,04 Electricity; 453,81Steam ; 322,13

Steam ; 1442,80

Steam ; 619,19

Steam ; 1652,01

Acrylonitrile; 3859,00

Vinyl acetate; 186,10

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Dope Making Polymerization Solvent Recovery Textile- Wet Spinning

Life phase wise GWP breakup for 1 ton of fibre [kg CO2-Equiv.]

9

(Cradle to Grave)

Environmental Impacts1 pc of Acrylic Garment

Source wise environmental impacts breakup

74,39%

32,43%

57,28%

68,67%

68,26%

44,84%

11,13%

91,49%

14,90%

57,09%

18,64%

28,91%

20,56%

93,41%

37,80%

84,29%

10,35%

7,93%

22,97%

10,86%

16,77%

-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Abiotic Depletion (ADP elements) [kg Sb-Equiv.]

Acidification Potential (AP) [kg SO2-Equiv.]

Eutrophication Potential (EP) [kg Phosphate-Equiv.]

Global Warming Potential (GWP 100 years) [kg CO2-Equiv.]

Human Toxicity Potential (HTP inf.) [kg DCB-Equiv.]

Photochem. Ozone Creation Potential (POCP) [kg Ethene-…

Terrestric Ecotoxicity Potential (TETP inf.) [kg DCB-Equiv.]

Primary energy demand (net cal. value) [MJ]

Blue water consumption [kg]

Abiotic Depletion(ADP elements)[kg Sb-Equiv.]

AcidificationPotential (AP) [kg

SO2-Equiv.]

EutrophicationPotential (EP) [kg

Phosphate-Equiv.]

Global WarmingPotential (GWP100 years) [kgCO2-Equiv.]

Human ToxicityPotential (HTPinf.) [kg DCB-

Equiv.]

Photochem.Ozone CreationPotential (POCP)

[kg Ethene-Equiv.]

TerrestricEcotoxicity

Potential (TETPinf.) [kg DCB-

Equiv.]

Primary energydemand (net cal.

value) [MJ]

Blue waterconsumption [kg]

Electricity 6,38% 74,39% 32,43% 57,28% 68,67% 68,26% 6,07% 44,84% 11,13%

EoL 0,13% 0,10% 0,89% 0,26% 0,06% 0,23% 0,26% 0,22% 0,00%

Packaging 0,05% 0,02% 0,02% 0,07% 0,02% 0,05% 0,03% 0,10% 0,01%

Process 0,00% 0,00% 0,33% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 1,49%

Raw Materials 91,49% 14,90% 57,09% 18,64% 28,91% 20,56% 93,41% 37,80% 84,29%

Steam 1,35% 10,35% 7,93% 22,97% 2,16% 10,86% 0,14% 16,77% 0,71%

Transport 0,00% 0,09% 0,14% 0,08% 0,04% -0,29% 0,00% 0,06% 0,00%

Waste Disposal 0,60% 0,14% 1,18% 0,69% 0,15% 0,33% 0,10% 0,23% 2,37%

Electricity EoL Packaging Process Raw Materials Steam Transport Waste Disposal

10

(Cradle to Grave)

Environmental Impacts1 pc of Acrylic Garment

Unit process wise environmental impacts breakup

Life Cycle Impacts (CML) TOTAL

Acrylic

Garment

Production

Transport

(To Use)

Garment

Use

Transport

(To

Disposal)

Garment

Disposal

Abiotic Depletion (ADP elements) [kg Sb-

Equiv.]4.84E-06 1.48E-06 4.99E-11 3.35E-06 4.99E-11 6.28E-09

Acidification Potential (AP) [kg SO2-Equiv.] 9.33E-02 3.58E-02 2.73E-05 5.73E-02 2.73E-05 9.52E-05

Eutrophication Potential (EP) [kg

Phosphate-Equiv.]9.94E-03 3.14E-03 8.86E-05 6.70E-03 4.32E-06 4.32E-06

Global Warming Potential (GWP 100 years)

[kg CO2-Equiv.]12.67 7.76 3.29E-03 4.86 3.29E-03 0.03

Human Toxicity Potential (HTP inf.) [kg

DCB-Equiv.]1.80 0.46 2.11E-04 1.34 2.11E-04 0.00

Photochem. Ozone Creation Potential

(POCP) [kg Ethene-Equiv.]0.005185 0.002461 -4.8E-06 0.002722 -4.8E-06 1.18E-05

Terrestric Ecotoxicity Potential (TETP inf.)

[kg DCB-Equiv.]0.25 0.02 2.20E-06 0.23 2.20E-06 6.46E-04

Primary energy demand (net cal. value) [MJ] 238.2 133.3 0.05 104.2 0.05 0.52

Blue water consumption [kg] 547.1 39.4 7.77E-03 507.6 7.77E-03 1.35E-03

11

(Cradle to Grave)

Environmental Impacts1 pc of Acrylic Garment

Value Chain Assessment

22,99%

1,52% 3,87%8,43%

5,74%

11,83%

5,26%1,65% 0,03%

38,39%

0,03% 0,26%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Global Warming Potential- 1 piece of Acrylic Garment (Cradle to grave) [kg CO2-Equiv.]

12

(Cradle to Grave)

Environmental Impacts1 pc of Acrylic Garment

Electricity ; 0,16 Electricity ; 0,18

Electricity ; 0,22

Electricity ; 0,40

Steam ; 0,71

Steam ; 0,16Steam ; 0,31

Steam ; 0,82Landfill (plastics); 0,03

Electricity grid ; 0,70 Electricity

grid ; 0,46

Electricity grid ; 0,13

Electricity grid ; 4,97

Acrylonitrile (AN); 1,91

Tap water; 0,25

Steam (NG); 0,91

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Polymerization Dope Making SolventRecovery

Textile- WetSpinning (with

packaging)

Yarn Spinning Yarn Dyeing Knitting andLinking

Washing

Acrylic Garment Production Transport (ToUse)

Garment Use Transport (ToDisposal)

GarmentDisposal

Life phase wise GWP breakup for one pc of garment [kg CO2-Equiv.]

13

Conclusion

• LCI profile of acrylic fibre for the specific process

has been developed using actual plant data

• Acrylonitrile, electricity and steam consumption are

major hot-spots

• Improvement in captive power plant efficiency

• Improvement in steam and electricity consumption

in polymerisation, solvent recovery and wet-

spinning processes.

• Use stage electricity and water consumption are

also hot-spots in cradle to grave

14

Future Scope

Scenarios for usage of AN produced through propane

route will be analysed in future to understand the

following aspects :

• SOHIO process propylene ammoxidation route versus

Propane route.

• Yield of Propane based production route in comparison to

SOHIO process.

• Advantage over propylene (difference between propylene

and propane)

• Fractional distillation of petroleum versus propylene goes

through cracking or catalytic dehydrogenation.

• Ammonia and electricity consumption in both process

Thank you For Your Kind

Attention

thinkstep Sustainability Solutions Pvt Limited, a subsidiary of

thinkstep AG Germany

Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East,

Mumbai, India 400059

Phone +91 22 42667693

Website: www.thinkstep.com

15