Environmental impact assessment for manufacture of plant fiber honeycomb core

doi:10.19491/j.issn.1001-9278.2022.06.017

Abstract

Abstract:

The environmental impact of plant fiber honeycomb core was assessed using a life?cycle assessment method using eleven environmental impact categories for the characterization of environmental performance of two manufactured honeycomb cores. The results indicated that after using plant fiber and polyester fiber to replace partial aramid fiber， the environmental impact of plant fiber honeycomb core decreases with a reduction rates ranging from 0.68 % to 49.41 % in terms of the eleven categories. The weighting results indicated that the overall environmental impact of plant fiber honeycomb core was 18.77 %， which was lower than that of aramid paper honeycomb core. The environmental impact of aramid paper honeycomb cores was mainly influenced by the aramid paper production and electricity consumption. Partially replacing aramid fiber with plant fiber and polyester fiber is the reason accounting for the environmental impact reduction.

Key words: assessment of environmental impact, life cycle assessment, plant fiber honeycomb core, aramid paper honeycomb core, honeycomb core manufacturing

CLC Number:

TQ320

DONG Shaoce, LI Chenggao, ZHANG Xufeng, XIAN Guijun. Environmental impact assessment for manufacture of plant fiber honeycomb core[J]. China Plastics, 2022, 36(6): 108-115.

Figures/Tables 8

References 28

1	马科峰，张广成，刘良威，等. 夹层结构复合材料的吸波隐身技术研究进展［J］. 材料开发与应用， 2010， 25（6）： 53⁃57.
	MA K， ZHANG G， LIU L， et al. Research progress of technology for sandwich structural absorbing stealthy composite materials［J］. Development and Application of Materials， 2010， 25（6）：53⁃57.
2	黄钧铭，孙茂健，朱敏英，等. 蜂窝结构材料用国产芳纶纸性能分析［J］. 高科技纤维与应用， 2008， 33（6）： 33⁃38
	HUANG J， SUN M， ZHU M， et al. Performance analysis of the domestic meta⁃aramid paper （pmia） used for honeycomb structure material［J］. Hi⁃Tech Fiber and Application， 2008， 33（6）：33⁃38.
3	郝巍，罗玉清. 国产间位芳纶纸蜂窝性能的研究［J］. 高科技纤维与应用， 2009， 34（6）： 26⁃30.
	HAO W， LUO Y. Study on the properties of china's meta⁃aramid paper honeycomb［J］. Hi⁃Tech Fiber and Application， 2009， 34（6）：26⁃30.
4	李瑞敏，刘杰，罗玉清，等. 植物纤维纸蜂窝芯材的制备及性能［J］. 工程塑料应用， 2017， 45（8）： 55⁃59+69.
	LI R， LIU J， LUO Y， et al. Preparation and properties of plant fiber honeycomb core［J］. Engineering Plastics Application， 2017， 45（8）： 55⁃59+69.
5	余金光，马兴运，张旭锋，等. 植物纤维纸蜂窝的性能研究［J］. 航空制造技术， 2018， 61（10）： 80⁃83.
	YU J， MA X， ZHANG X， et al. Performance analysis of the domestic meta⁃aramid paper （pmia） used for honeycomb structure material［J］. Aeronautical Manufacturing Technology， 2018， 61（10）：80⁃83.
6	NICOLLIER C T， LABAN G B， LUNDQUIST L， et al. Life cycle assessment of biofibres replacing glass fibres as reinforcement in plastics ［J］. Resources Conservation & Recycling， 2001， 33（4）： 267⁃287.
7	STRATTON W R， WOLFE P J， HILEMAN J I. Impact of aviation non⁃CO₂ combustion effects on the environmental feasibility of alternative jet fuels ［J］. Environmental Science & Technology， 2011， 45（24）： 10 736⁃10 743.
8	AGUSDINATE B D， ZHAO F， LLELEJI K， et al. Life cycle assessment of potential biojet fuel production in the United States ［J］. Environmental Science & Technology， 2011， 45（21）： 9 133⁃9 143.
9	FORTIER M O P， ROBERTS W G， WILLIAMS S M S， et al. Life cycle assessment of bio⁃jet fuel from hydrothermal liquefaction of microalgae ［J］. Applied Energy， 2014， 122： 73⁃82.
10	COX K， RENOUF M， DARGAN A， et al. Environmental life cycle assessment （LCA） of aviation biofuel from microalgae， pongamiapinnata， and sugarcane molasses ［J］. Biofuels， Bioproducts and Biorefining， 2014， 8（4）： 579⁃593.
11	FENG P P， KINSEL W C， THAL A E， et al. Jet propellant 8 versus alternative jet fuels： a life⁃cycle perspective ［J］. Air & Space Power Journal， 2011， 25（2）： 47⁃56.
12	FAN J， SHONNARD D R， KALNES T N， et al. A life cycle assessment of pennycress （thlaspiarvense l.）⁃derived jet fuel and diesel ［J］. Biomass and Bioenergy， 2013， 55： 87⁃100.
13	BECK J A， HODZIC A， SOUTIS C， et al. Influence of implementation of composite materials in civil aircraft industry on reduction of environmental pollution and greenhouse effect ［C］. London： IOP Publishing Ltd， 2011：1⁃9.
14	LIU Z. Life cycle assessment of composites and aluminium use in aircraft systems ［D］. Cranfield： Cranfielduniversity， 2013.
15	VIDAL R， MOLINER E， MARTIN P P， et al. Life cycle assessment of novel aircraft interior panels made from renewable or recyclable polymers with natural fiber reinforcements and non‐halogenated flame retardants ［J］. Journal of Industrial Ecology， 2017， 22（1）： 132⁃144.
16	ISO. Environmental management⁃life cycle assessment⁃principles and framework：［S］. ［2021⁃9⁃29］. .
17	ISO. Environmental management⁃life cycle assessment⁃requirements and guidelines：［S］.［2021⁃9⁃29］. .
18	Centre of Environmental Science， Leiden University （CML） and National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection （RIVM）. LCA impact assessment of toxic releases： generic modelling of fate， exposure and effect for ecosystems and human beings with data for about 100 chemicals ［R］. 1996： 1⁃100.
19	Gabi software ［EB/OL］. ［2020⁃11⁃16］. .
20	Balance table of electricity in 2017［EB/OL］. ［2020⁃11⁃16］. .
21	XU X， JAYARAMAN K， MORIN C， et al. Life cycle assessment of wood⁃fibre⁃reinforced polypropylene composites ［J］. Journal of Materials Processing Technology， 2008， 198（1）：168⁃177.
22	FROUNCHI M， MEHRABZADEH M， PARVARY M. Toughening epoxy resins with solid acrylonitrile⁃butadiene rubber ［J］. Polymer International， 2015， 49（2）：163⁃177.
23	WILSON J B. Life⁃cycle inventory of formaldehyde⁃based resins used in wood composites in terms of resources， emissions， energy and carbon ［J］. Wood & Fiber Science， 2010， 42： 125⁃143.
24	NGUYEN T H T， YASUNORI K， HIROKAZU S， et al. Techno⁃economic and environmental assessment of bioethanol⁃based chemical process： a case study on ethyl acetate ［J］. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy， 2010， 30（4）： 675⁃684.
25	KIM S， OVERCASH M. Energy in chemical manufacturing processes： gate‐to‐gate information for life cycle assessment ［J］. Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology， 2003， 78（9）： 995⁃1 005.
26	JONKERS N， KROP H， VAN E H， et al. Life cycle assessment of flame retardants in an electronics application ［J］. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment， 2016， 21（2）： 146⁃161.
27	HOWE S， KOLIOS A J， BRENNAN F P. Environmental life cycle assessment of commercial passenger jet airliners ［J］. Transportation Research Part D， 2013， 19： 34⁃41.
28	SCELSI L， BONNER M， HODZIC A， et al. Potential emissions savings of lightweight composite aircraft components evaluated through life cycle assessment ［J］. eXPRESS Polymer Letters， 2011， 5（3）： 209⁃217.

环境影响类别指标	权重值
ADPE/kg Sb eq	6.4
ADPF/MJ	7
AP/kg SO₂ eq	6.1
EP/kg P eq	6.6
FAEP/kg DCB eq	6.8
GWP/kg CO₂ eq	9.3
HTP/kg DCB eq	7.1
MAEP/kg DCB eq	6.8
OLDP/kg R11 eq	6.2
POCP/kg Ethene eq	6.5
TEP/kg DCB eq	6.8

环境影响类别指标	权重值
ADPE/kg Sb eq	6.4
ADPF/MJ	7
AP/kg SO₂ eq	6.1
EP/kg P eq	6.6
FAEP/kg DCB eq	6.8
GWP/kg CO₂ eq	9.3
HTP/kg DCB eq	7.1
MAEP/kg DCB eq	6.8
OLDP/kg R11 eq	6.2
POCP/kg Ethene eq	6.5
TEP/kg DCB eq	6.8

环境影响类别指标	芳纶纸蜂窝/1 kg	植物纤维纸蜂窝/1 kg	植物纤维纸蜂窝环境影响指标降低率/ %
ADPE/kg Sb eq	3.35×10^-5	1.99×10^-5	40.64
ADPF/MJ	7.73×10²	6.53×10²	15.57
AP/kg SO₂ eq	7.92×10^-2	6.96×10^-2	12.16
EP/kg P eq	1.17×10^-2	1.09×10^-2	6.57
FAEP/kg DCB eq	9.17×10^-2	7.10×10^-2	22.52
GWP/kg CO₂ eq	59.34	49.60	16.38
HTP/kg DCB eq	1.71	1.57	7.88
MAEP/kg DCB eq	3.19×10³	2.57×10³	19.48
OLDP/kg R11 eq	1.21×10^-9	6.11×10^-10	49.41
POCP/kg Ethene eq	7.52×10^-3	7.47×10^-3	0.68
TEP/kg DCB eq	3.83×10^-2	3.02×10^-2	21.31

环境影响类别指标	芳纶纸蜂窝/1 kg	植物纤维纸蜂窝/1 kg	植物纤维纸蜂窝环境影响指标降低率/ %
ADPE/kg Sb eq	3.35×10^-5	1.99×10^-5	40.64
ADPF/MJ	7.73×10²	6.53×10²	15.57
AP/kg SO₂ eq	7.92×10^-2	6.96×10^-2	12.16
EP/kg P eq	1.17×10^-2	1.09×10^-2	6.57
FAEP/kg DCB eq	9.17×10^-2	7.10×10^-2	22.52
GWP/kg CO₂ eq	59.34	49.60	16.38
HTP/kg DCB eq	1.71	1.57	7.88
MAEP/kg DCB eq	3.19×10³	2.57×10³	19.48
OLDP/kg R11 eq	1.21×10^-9	6.11×10^-10	49.41
POCP/kg Ethene eq	7.52×10^-3	7.47×10^-3	0.68
TEP/kg DCB eq	3.83×10^-2	3.02×10^-2	21.31

环境影响类别指标	电能	芯条胶	乙酸乙酯	浸胶	芳纶纸	乙醇
ADPE/kg Sb eq	8.50×10^-7	9.14×10^-7	1.10×10^-7	4.35×10^-7	3.10×10^-5	2.65×10^-7
ADPF/MJ	1.12×10²	7.50	18.38	22.08	5.77×10²	36.57
AP/kg SO₂ eq	1.47×10^-2	4.21×10^-4	6.27×10^-4	9.24×10^-4	6.11×10^-2	1.45×10^-3
EP/kg P eq	2.23×10^-3	7.76×10^-5	9.75×10^-5	1.37×10^-4	8.94×10^-3	2.18×10^-4
FAEP/kg DCB eq	7.20×10^-3	1.43×10^-3	2.54×10^-3	4.48×10^-3	6.82×10^-2	7.82×10^-3
GWP/kg CO₂ eq	11.19	0.36	0.73	0.75	44.99	1.31
HTP/kg DCB eq	0.30	2.26×10^-2	5.18×10^-2	5.79×10^-2	1.17	0.10
MAEP/kg DCB eq	6.32×10²	12.68	10.44	17.65	2.49×10³	26.44
OLDP/kg R11 eq	2.56×10^-12	1.16×10^-13	4.50×10^-14	1.05×10^-13	1.20×10^-9	8.19×10^-14
POCP/kg Ethene eq	1.18×10^-3	6.21×10^-5	1.04×10^-4	1.57×10^-4	5.76×10^-3	2.50×10^-4
TEP/kg DCB eq	6.12×10^-3	2.27×10^-3	9.55×10^-5	2.17×10^-4	2.94×10^-2	2.67×10^-4