Full Text

A Life Cycle Assessment Comparing End
of Life Treatment for Paper and Plastic

Bags
BY Olivia Tsamparlis
ADVISOR • Dan McNally

EDITORIAL REVIEWER • Gaytha Langlois
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation

with honors in the Bryant University Honors Program
May 2021
Table of Contents
Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2
Literature Review ...................................................................................................................... 3
Paper or Plastic Debate ......................................................................................................... 3
Life Cycle of Polyethylene.................................................................................................... 4
Eco-Impact of Plastic and Paper Shopping Bags .................................................................. 5
EPA Waste Facts and Figures ............................................................................................... 7
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) .............................................................................................. 9
The Product Life Cycle ....................................................................................................... 10
LCA Limitations ................................................................................................................. 10
Environmental Impact Assessment ..................................................................................... 11
Goals and Scope ...................................................................................................................... 11
Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 12
Life Cycle Assessment ........................................................................................................ 12
Data Collection.................................................................................................................... 13
Life Cycle Impact Assessment ............................................................................................ 14
Inventory Analysis .............................................................................................................. 15
Results and Discussion............................................................................................................ 16
Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 16
Project limitations ............................................................................................................... 21
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 22
Interpretation ....................................................................................................................... 22
Appendices .............................................................................................................................. 24
References ............................................................................................................................... 26
A Life Cycle Assessment Comparing End of Life Treatment of Paper and Plastic Bags
Honors Thesis for Olivia Tsamparlis
ABSTRACT
This research focuses on the effects paper, plastic, and textile grocery bags have on our
environment. This project aims to answer two questions: Based on an LCA approach of the
disposal stage, which is better for the environment: plastic or paper? Which type of grocery
bag, paper or plastic has a higher sustainability potential based on end of life data? LCA
software and assessment tools identified the risks paper, plastic, and textile waste has on the
environment in the disposal stage. OpenLCA was used as a platform to compile the life cycle
data. To obtain the data needed, the European reference Life Cycle Database (ELCD) was
used for raw data collection while the ReCiPie – Endpoint HA impact assessment method was
used to analyze the results. The results indicate that despite common beliefs and the original
hypothesis that stated paper and textile bags were better for the environment, paper, plastic,
and textile waste have very similar impacts on the environment when disposed in a landfill.
However, this analysis only looks at the disposal stage of these products. Therefore, these
same conclusions about the effects each product have on the environment throughout their
entire life cycle (e.g. during raw material extraction, production, and transportation stages)
may not hold true.
-1-
INTRODUCTION
Plastic pollution has filled coastlines, landfills, and oceans for decades. It is found that
approximately 100 billion plastic bags are used in the United States every year (Penn State).
Over the last decade, government regulation, individual businesses, and conscientious
shoppers have made the decision to stop using plastic bags due to their perceived impact on
the environment; and instead, have switched to paper or reusable bags to carry goods.
However, the question often arises what type of bag is better for the environment? The
question of paper or plastic echoes in every checkout lane, as customers are forced to make a
choice every day.
Although it may seem paper bags are better for the environment than plastic, a deeper analysis
of each product is necessary due to the complex production and degradation process. It is
known that plastic is a persistent material. That is, it does not break down easily due to its
stable chemical structure which is created with the use of nonrenewable resources such as
crude oil or other fossil fuels. Plastics do not easily break down by biodegradation. It takes up
to 450 years for plastic in a landfill to break down by physical and chemical means. However,
paper bags often include harsh chemicals that were added during the production stage which
can leach into water and topsoil as they degrade after being thrown out. In addition, paper
bags require millions of trees to be cut down to produce the product and high emissions are
released into the atmosphere during production.
In addition to literature research, a Life Cycle Assessment and Environmental Impact

Assessment will be conducted to aid in the comparison. An in depth analysis will provide
evidence on which products have a higher sustainability potential and are more ecologically
friendly when looking specifically at the disposal stage of their life cycles. Although there are
similar studies, databases continuously add new information every year therefore, more
current analysis was needed. To conclude, this thesis will look at two main questions: Based
on an LCA approach of the disposal stage, which is better for the environment: plastic or
paper? Which type of grocery bag, paper or plastic has a higher sustainability potential based
on end of life data?
-2-
LITERATURE REVIEW
Paper or Plastic Debate
In 2013 a large debate emerged comparing paper and plastic grocery bags. The debate
highlighted the positive and negative aspects on plastic bags and began to shift the focus of
conscientious shoppers and researchers. Research shows that once plastic bags are disposed
“this process can release toxins that contaminate soil and water, stunt plant growth, and make
water undrinkable” (Should Plastic Bags Be Banned, 2018). Even though plastic bags can be
recycled, PEW Research Center reports that only 13.5% of plastic bags were recycled in
2013. Studies also show that the average bag is used for 12 minutes while the chemicals that
come from the plastic bags live in oceans for thousands of years (Plastic Bag Bans All the
Rage).
As more information on plastic bags has been exposed to the public, there seems to have
been a shift in people’s opinions regarding plastic bags. As years progress, more and more
shoppers are opting to utilize kraft paper grocery bags instead of plastic. With research
confirming the facts about plastic bag pollution on coastlines and in oceans, countries like the
United States, Argentina, UK, India, Bangladesh, Kenya, and Australia have all set some sort
of plastic bag ban on the industry to reduce the amount of waste. Today, many more countries
have joined this initiative. Focusing on just the U.S, states like California and Hawaii have
banned plastic bags all together while states like Delaware, Maine, Rhode Island, and New
York have created mandatory recycling programs. Statistics show that over 10 states have
placed preemptive bans on banning plastic bags as well (Plastic Bags All the Rage). However,
despite conscientious consumer’s efforts to switch to kraft paper bags, research shows that
paper bags still negatively affect our environment.
Despite the evidence that plastic bags are hurting the environment and have an overall
negative effect on our planet, there are still people who believe that banning plastic bags is not
the answer. “Because they are light weight, plastic bags only constitute a tiny percentage of
the overall waste stream (less than 1%), but they tend to be in the spotlight because they are
-3-
an icon of modern convenience culture and lifestyles. Plastic bags are popular with consumers
and retailers because of all the practical advantages they offer; they are light, cheap, strong,
and a hygienic way to transport food and products home” (Rujnic-Sokele).
According to the debate “Should Plastic Bags be Banned”, some believe that “if we ban
plastic bags, many people will switch to using paper ones. But to manufacture those, we must
cut down millions of trees. Research supporting their viewpoint has shown that paper bags
have a higher carbon footprint than plastic ones because it takes more energy to produce and
transport them (Should Plastic Bags Be Banned).
Life Cycle of Polyethylene
Polyethylene is the most popular plastic in the world and makes up most plastic bags and
plastic materials. This plastic was discovered by Reginald Gibson and Eric Fawcett in the
1930s. It is created in two ways: modifying natural gas, either methane, ethane, propane mix,
or from the process of catalytic cracking of crude oil into gasoline (Rujnic-Sokele, 2014). The
flow chart in Figure 1 below shows the complete production cycle of polyethylene from
natural gas and oil extraction to the production of plastic film. There are different variations
of plastic that change in toughness, flexibility and resistance depending on what the plastic is
used for. Plastics produced can range from various food packaging to shopping bags,
overwraps, lamination, and more (Rujnic-Sokele 2014).
-4-
Eco-Impact of Plastic and Paper Shopping Bags
A Life Cycle Assessment titled “Eco-Impact of Plastic and Paper Shopping Bags” by
Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu published in 2012 was completed comparing paper and
plastic bags. This study was examined to narrow the scope of this project, gain a better
perspective on what information an LCA would provide, and what steps were necessary to
complete the analysis.
The research works to discover which material is better for the environment based on
guidelines such as ozone layer, land use, fossil fuels, climate change, etc. A life-cycle
assessment (LCA) is a “tool which can help researchers to understand the environmental
impact of a product from the acquisition of raw materials to final disposal” (Muthu,
Subramanian Senthilkannan, 2012). The article begins with a general background about
plastics. Plastic bags are made from non-renewable fossil fuel sources. The main sources to
produce these bags are petroleum and natural gas, with the most popular form of plastic being
made from polyethylene. As stated before, polyethylene is one of the most common materials
-5-
used to produce plastic grocery bags specifically due to its ideal thickness and glossy finish.
However, the bags often cause lots of plastic waste considering they are disposed quickly
after their single use mission (Rujnic-Sokele, 2014).
According to the 2012 study by Muthu, the Environmental Protection Agency in Hong Kong
reported that about 8 billion bags are disposed of every year. Similar statistics match what
China and India are witnessing, and it was found that China could save up to 3 million metric
tons of crude oil every year and cut 7.6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions every
year if limitations were introduced (Muthu Subramanian Senthilkannan, 2012). It is estimated
that 100 billion to 1 trillion plastic bags are produced each year worldwide (Muthu,
Subramanian Senthilkannan, 2012).
On the other hand, to produce paper bags in the quantity that is demanded, it is found that an
estimated 4 billion trees, almost 35% of total trees around the world would need to be cut
down to produce enough bags for the world. As of 2012 Americans use about 10 billion paper
bags each year which totals about 400 per family (Penn State). To keep up with this demand,
it is required to cut down approximately 14 million trees to produce 10 billion bags (Penn
State). Both paper and plastic bags utilize enormous amounts of natural resources and it can
only get worse if we were to look at current statistics, considering this data was released about
8 years ago. However, to gain a more accurate understanding, another analysis should be run
to update the current published research.
The next step in Muthu’s research was to conduct a Life Cycle Assessment, or LCA. There
are 4 universal stages in an LCA and are as follows: 1) goal and scope; 2) inventory analysis;
3) impact assessment; 4) interpretation. Following these 4 phases allowed the team to
conclude how each type of bag affected the environment. The study “Eco-Impact of Plastic
and Paper Shopping Bags” completed in 2012 mentioned there was a hole in the research that
had been complied on grocery bag research and the information that is published for the
public to see.
-6-
EPA Waste Facts and Figures
To narrow the scope further, this project will be looking at just the effects plastic, paper, and
textiles have on the environment after they are deposited into a landfill. Textile waste was
taken into consideration to represent cloth reusable bags in a landfill once disposed.
According to the EPA, the total generation of municipal solid waste (MSW) in 2018 was
292.4 million tons, 23.7 million tons more than the 2017 total. Although there was an
approximate 30% recycling rate, high quantities of waste still end up in landfills. The EPA
specifically defines “trash” as “as various items consumers throw away after they are used”
(EPA). Figure 2 below shows a pie chart published by the EPA breaking down total MSW by
percentage based on weight generated in 2018.
Figure 2
Total Municipal Solid Waste Reported for 2018 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
After analyzing the graph, paper, and cardboard products, including paper bags, account for a
total of 23.05% (wt.) of total MSW. Although paper and cardboard are recyclable, it should be
-7-
noted that it does rank number one in disposable products. Plastic accounts for 12.02% (wt.)
of total MSW and textiles come in third with 5.38% (wt.) of total MSW.
The graph in Figure 3 displays the overall tonnage of various waste categories over the time
of 1960-2018. In general, all categories have increased in tonnage. However, plastic and
textile waste have shown percentage growth while paper has remained steady in but just
makes up a large portion of the waste stream throughout.
Figure 3
Overall tonnage of various waste categories from 1960-2018 (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency)
In addition to general waste data, the EPA highlights specific plastic waste data. According to
the graph published by the EPA, plastic packaging, bags, and containers had the highest
tonnage in the national waste stream at over 14.5 million tons in 2018 (EPA). “This category
includes bags, sacks and wraps; other packaging; polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles and
jars; high-density polyethylene (HDPE) natural bottles; and other containers” (EPA). A data
table shown in Appendix A displays the total number of tons of plastic generated, recycled,
-8-
composted, combusted, and landfilled from the years 1960 to 2018. As expected, the tonnage
increased overtime as plastic production and single use product demand increase.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
An LCA, is a factual analysis of a product’s life cycle in terms of sustainability. It is an

assessment that evaluates the impacts of a product (or service) from the beginning to the end
of its life cycle. According to the standardized methodology, there are four main phases.
1. goal and scope
2. inventory analysis
3. impact assessment
4. interpretation
Often, an LCA assists individuals in deciding which product is the least impactful to the
environment based on the product type, the process, and technology involved. (“Life Cycle
Assessment: The Basics”).
The first step in the assessment is establishing the goal and scope which focuses on the reason
for completing the LCA and includes a description of the best way to deal with the situation
or problem at hand. The second step in the assessment is the inventory analysis, which looks
at the different environmental inputs and outputs associated with the product. The goal of this
step is to identify what flows into the system and what flows out (“Life Cycle Assessment:
The Basics”). Such inputs and outputs might include the use of the raw materials, emissions,
various pollutants, and energy. The third step looks at the impact assessment where
conclusions are evaluated and drawn in hopes to gain better business decisions. These impacts
could then be shown through different themes such as global warming or health. The fourth
and final step in the LCA is interpretation (“Life Cycle Assessment: The Basics”). During this
stage, the conclusions formed during the previous stages can be evaluated and the results from
the assessment can be shared.
-9-
The Product Life Cycle
Within a product life cycle, there are typically five phases: raw material extraction,
manufacturing and processing, transportation, usage and retail, and finally waste disposal.
This sequence of phases is often called “cradle to grave”, meaning the assessment is all-
encompassing, staring with the inception of the product and ending with the disposal of the
product (Liebsch). When looking at the complete life cycle of a product there are different
groupings of the phases, which can be configured to obtain a deeper understanding of the
different stages of the product. Figure 2 below displays a diagram which compares the various
phases side by side.
Figure 4
LCA Limitations
Although Life Cycle Assessments provide key information in the assessment of a product,
there are some limitations. The accuracy and dependability of the assessment depends on the
availability of the data which can be difficult to collect or can be dated. In addition to data
limitations, an LCA does not consider the cost of the product so an LCA should be combined
with a cost analysis and evaluation to gain a better understanding if the product under
consideration is a logical solution (“Life Cycle Assessment: The Basics”).
- 10 -
Environmental Impact Assessment
In addition to a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), another assessment tool called an

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) can be used to determine more information about
how a certain product impacts the environment. This additional step provides information to
properly address our research questions and does not appear to be a part of LCAs conducted
in the past, according to the literature search. According to the Convention on Biological
Diversity, an EIA, is a process of evaluating the likely environmental impacts of a proposed
project.
The fundamental components if an EIA are as follows:
1. screening
2. scoping
3. assessment and evaluation of impacts and development of alternatives
4. reporting the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or EIA report
5. reviewing the impact statement
6. decision making
7. monitoring compliance and enforcement
The screening process will determine what objects or materials require an impact assessment.
Then, throughout the stages it is determined what impacts the product has on our
environment. (“What is an Impact Assessment”).
GOALS AND SCOPE
Goal:
The goals of this project are 1) determine the environmental impact for each product in the
disposal stage, 2) determine the sustainability potential by looking at sustainability
opportunities, and 3) compare the products to determine which product impact the
environment less. The significance of this project is to address the debate regarding which
grocery bag, paper, or plastic, impacts the environment less. In general, there is a stigma that
paper grocery bags have a higher sustainability potential.
- 11 -
Scope:
A traditional Life Cycle Assessment takes multiple processes into consideration. However, to
narrow the scope of this project the software will only look at the plastic and paper bags in
their disposal stage once the products enter a landfill. Although an LCA can look at the entire
life cycle of a product, cradle to grave, only one section will be examined due to time
constraints and availability of data. The depth of this analysis relies heavily on the number of
subprocesses, and number of flows entered in the life cycle calculation. However, the number
of flows entered in the calculation will only be factors that provide a serious contribution to
the life cycle impact.
Relevance:
The application of this project’s findings may be useful to a variety of professionals. Policy
makers and local governments can use this information to assess current business practices
and establish various policies and regulations regarding plastic and paper bag consumption. In
addition, corporations and conscientious customers can use this information to make private
decisions regarding which bags to use in retail spaces. Although life cycle assessments of
grocery bags have already been conducted, the findings here can fill gaps in the existing
research or provide individuals with an up to date analysis.
METHODOLOGY
Life Cycle Assessment
To complete this research project a Life Cycle Assessment, or LCA, will be used to compare
plastic bags to paper bags to determine their impact on the environment and sustainability
potential. An LCA is an established process which can evaluate the environmental impacts of
a product. As stated earlier, there are four main stages in an LCA: goal and scope, inventory
analysis, impact assessment, and interpretation. (“Life Cycle Assessment: The Basics”).
The first stage in an LCA is to determine the goal and scope of the project. This stage focuses
on the reason for completing the research, the boundaries, and establishes what the research
- 12 -
will focus on. The second stage in an LCA is considered inventory analysis. This stage looks
at the various inputs and outputs for each product which can later be used to analyze the
effects each product has on the environment (“Life Cycle Assessment: The Basics”).
Examples of various inputs and outputs include but are not limited to raw materials,
emissions, pollutants, chemicals, and energy. The third stage in an LCA considers the impact
assessment where conclusions can be made about the product (“Life Cycle Assessment: The
Basics”). The assessment looks at various categories such as human health impacts, marine
and freshwater eutrophication, climate change, and ozone depletion. Through the program,
this research will be able to complete a side by side comparison between plastic and paper
grocery bags to see which product performs better throughout the various categories. The
fourth and final stage in an LCA is interpretation where conclusions are formed from the
previous stages and results from the assessment can be published (“Life Cycle Assessment:
The Basics”).
In addition to an LCA, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) method will also be

conducted. This process evaluates likely environmental impacts that would take place during
each project or development (“What is an Impact Assessment”). This research will be looking
at plastic and paper bags in their disposal stage, meaning the products will be assessed on
degradation processes and their effects on the environment at that stage of life.
Data Collection
Due to a lack of public information regarding paper and plastic bag production and raw
material use, the data for this project was supplied with databases available to import into the
OpenLCA platform. The eligible databases considered were all free of charge due to the
financial restrictions of this project. For this project, elcd_3_2_greendelta_v2_18 database
was used provided by the European reference Life Cycle Database (ELCD) to analyze paper,
plastic, and textile landfill waste. Since the creation of the database, ELCD has uploaded data
from EU-level business associations and other sources regarding energy carriers, waste
management and transport (OpenLCA). In addition to these products, metal and glass end of
life data will be added to the analysis to show contrast in results.
- 13 -
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
A Life Cycle Impact Assessment, or LCIA is a method for transforming the inventory data
into condensed sets of potential impacts. The LCIA Method utilized to analyze the impact
categories in this project was ReCiPie Midpoint – (H), while ReCiPie – Endpoint (H-A) for
damage categories by subtotal and total points.
Paper, plastic, and textile products were looked upon individually to decipher the top impact
categories to determine the environmental impact for each product. Impact categories include
but are not limited to natural land transformation, ozone depletion, human toxicology, climate
change, and fossil depletion. Once landfill plastic, paper, and textile were looked at
individually, all products were entered into a report where a side by side comparison can be
conducted.
Within this method, ReCiPie will determine the various indicators at two different levels.
After comparing various methods ReCiPie midpoint includes the most impact categories
within its impact assessment method. ReCiPie endpoint is used to make comparisons using
normalized points for damage categories and total point indexes. After the products were
selected from the database each product was turned into a product system which could then be
analyzed for their top impact category results. Paper, plastic, and textile products were looked
upon individually to decipher the top impact categories to determine the environmental
impact for each product. Impact categories include but are not limited to natural land
transformation, ozone depletion, human toxicology, climate change, and fossil depletion.
Once landfill plastic, paper, and textile were looked at individually, all products were entered
into a report where a side by side comparison can be conducted.
It should also be noted that each method includes factors based on cultural perspectives. The
individualist (I) perspective looks at products short term and has an overall optimistic look
upon technology and its ability to avoid problems. The hierarchical (H) perspective is often
encountered in scientific models as it is considered the default model. Finally, there is the
egalitarian perspective which looks at situations long term. This project will be using the
- 14 -
hierarchical model, therefore the LCIA methods used are ReCiPie –Midpoint (H) and
Endpoint (H-A).
Inventory Analysis
Figure 5 below is a municipal landfill site flow chart which displays inputs and outputs within
the system boundaries. It should be noted that although this project looks at three different
products in their disposal stage, the software provided the same municipal landfill site flow
chart for all products being examined even though the input and output amounts are different.
Here, we can see various inputs that are entered into the landfill body as well as the leachate
treatment and landfill gas collection which are converted into sludge treatment, waste fill
deposit, and power, respectively. In addition to the broad flowchart displayed above, the LCA
software looks at the inputs and outputs for each product individually to gain a better
understanding of the specific impact paper, plastic, and cloth have on the environment.
Figure 5 Municipal Landfill Site flow chart inside the system boundary (OpenLCA)
- 15 -
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Impact Analysis
The LCA software displays the finalized data in various ways. To gain a better understanding
of the effects the plastic, paper, and textiles had on the environment once they entered the
landfill, the products were compared to one another by looking at the top single impact
categories. The analysis included 17 different impact categories (midpoint) and then
compared plastic, paper, and textiles by analyzing the 3 different damage categories:
ecosystems, human health, and resources (endpoint). It should be noted that the charts
displayed below use a point system to normalize all the different units when comparing the 3
products. If one normalized point system were not used as an index, it would be impossible to
compare the 3 products.
Figure 6 below compares all the relative indicator results. For each impact and damage
category the maximum result is set to 100% and the results of the other materials are
displayed on relation to this result. Impact categories that do not have any data indicate that
the impact category is not affected by paper, plastic, or textile waste once disposed. For
example, the impact category resources (fossil depletion) is not affected by paper, plastic, or
textile waste because no resources are being used to create a product. Again, this LCA is only
looking at the products once they enter a landfill. Ecosystem quality (terrestrial
ecotoxicology) and ecosystem quality (freshwater ecotoxicology) appear to be the only impact
categories where plastic waste effects the environment the most with points totaling 2.46 and
3.08, respectively. As shown in the chart, all other categories, plastic, paper, and textile waste
are scored almost identically. A full list of the numerical indicator results data can be found in
Appendix B.
- 16 -
Figure 6 Side by side comparison of all impact and damage categories (OpenLCA)
Note: The following chart shows the relative indicator results of the respective project
variants. For each indicator, the maximum result is set to 100% and the results of the other
variants are displayed in relation to this result.
According to the data found in the ELCD database, the top 3 categories of paper, plastic, and
textile waste have the greatest impact on human health and climate. The top 3 categories were
determined by comparing the numerical data found in Appendix B. The largest numbers
recorded in the table indicate the largest impacts the products have on the environment once
disposed of in a landfill.
Figure 7 displays a graph that shows the impact category human health (particulate matter
formation). In addition to the 3 products of focus, glass and metal products are included in the
graph as a comparison between the products of interest and other materials that would be
found in a landfill. As displayed in the graph, glass, and metal products both have a much
smaller impact than plastic, paper, or textile waste. Here, the table shows that plastic, paper,
and textile waste products all score much higher than glass or metal waste products. However,
- 17 -
plastic, paper, and textile products scores were virtually identical to one another. According to
the results, plastic scored 0.0217 points while paper and textile both scored 0.0222 points.
Therefore, according to the report, paper and textile waste are 2.2% more impactful to human
health (particulate matter).
Figure 7 Product comparison looking specifically at the impact category human health
(particulate matter formation) (OpenLCA).
Figure 8 below shows the impact category of human health (human toxicity). Like the human
health (particulate matter formation), all three products are virtually identical when looking at
their impact on the environment once disposed of. According to the numerical data found in
Appendix B, all three products totaled 0.0057 points, significantly higher than the glass and
metal products provided for comparison which totaled 0.0029 and 0.0005 points, respectively.
- 18 -
Figure 8 Product comparison looking specifically at the impact category human health
(human toxicity) (OpenLCA).
Figure 9 Product comparison looking specifically at the impact category ecosystem quality
(climate change, ecosystems) (OpenLCA).
- 19 -
The third impact category examined was ecosystem quality (climate change, ecosystems). Out
of the three impact categories examined in Figure 9, the chart displays the largest difference
between plastic, paper, and textile products. Although the difference is extremely small,
compared to the other results, it appears plastic waste has less of an impact on climate change
within ecosystems compared to paper and textile waste. According to the data, plastic totaled
0.00036 points, and paper and textile totaled 0.00032 points. Therefore, according to the data,
plastic waste has a little more than 10% less of an impact than paper or textile waste. These
results can be explained when the inputs and outputs for paper and plastic products are looked
at individually. For this particular impact category, paper bag waste releases more harmful gas
emissions than plastic waste would release which helps explain the results this graph shows.
Figure 10 below displays a graph displaying the total (total) results when looking at paper,
plastic, textile products in a side by side comparison regarding overall environmental impact
once the product is entered into the landfill. For comparison purposes, glass and metal
products are displayed on the graph as well.
Figure 10 Product comparison looking specifically at the total (total) damage indicator of all
impact categories (OpenLCA).
- 20 -
After running the LCA software, plastic total point value equaled 0.0291 points, paper
equaled 0.0292 points, and textile equaled 0.0292 points. Glass and metal products disposed
of in a landfill scored significantly lower. These results show that overall, plastic, paper, and
textile all have a relatively large impact on the environment once disposed of in a landfill,
especially when they are compared to glass and metal products. However, it appears that not
one specific product is impacting the environment more than the others. Looking solely at the
numerical values of all categories, plastic may have a slight edge with less impact on the
environment when it comes to waste disposal.
Project limitations
Although this project aims to answer several important questions regarding the sustainability
of paper and plastic, there are still limitations. Interestingly, Europe is further along using
LCA that the United States. In fact, there have been few databases established for the U.S and
they are primarily small databases for specialized products.
It should also be noted that the LCA could only be conducted with the data that was provided
via a published database. A search was conducted to find the best match for both paper and
plastic bags to get the most accurate results possible. Data could not be found to conduct a full
cradle to grave LCA regarding paper and plastic bags so only end of life landfill data was
utilized. It should also be noted that since the databases only provide a finite amount of
information there could be more current and accurate data elsewhere that this LCA program
did not have access to. If additional information about paper and plastic bags could be found
within the database, a more holistic, cradle to grave analysis could be completed. Future
studies will provide additional data on all facets of materials management and allow for more
complete analysis.
- 21 -
CONCLUSION
Interpretation
For years, it has been assumed to us that plastic bags, and plastic materials in general are more
detrimental to the environment than paper products. This problem has grown even more over
the recent years with the explosion of microplastics and other plastic materials littering our
oceans and effecting the entire food chain. However, after examining similar studies and
running various reports using the OpenLCA software, the impact results on landfill waste has
shown that paper may have significant negative environmental effects as well. When looking
at the results, paper, plastic, and textile waste all scored very similar which was different than
what was originally expected.
Due to various sustainability articles, one would expect that the plastic waste would have a
much larger impact on the environment compared to paper or cloth waste due to its complex
and durable chemical structure. However, the results from the software analysis show a
different story. Once entering a landfill, paper, plastic, and cloth bags seem to rank very
similarly to one another in terms of environmental impact. But again, this analysis was only
conducted for the waste disposal stage of the life cycle. Plastic could very well have a much
higher impact on the environment with the rest of its life cycle.
Since this analysis only looks at the waste disposal stage of the paper, plastic, and textile life
span a more complete analysis is needed to gain a better idea of the effects each product has
on the environment during raw material extraction, production, and transportation stages. It
has been found that paper and textile production often add chemical and synthetic materials
added to products which leach out into the environment once disposed of. In addition to the
destructive practices that comes with the extraction of raw materials to produce all paper,
plastic, and cloth bags, the products can also be destructive to multiple ecosystems when
being produced or transported to various locations. Taking these steps of the life cycle into
consideration may alter the results of this project.
- 22 -
If more time were permitted, additional research would have been conducted on the recycling
and reuse of these products. For example, well developed recycling programs could
significantly reduce the amount of paper and plastic waste from being entered into a landfill.
If public sediment toward either of these products led to different recycling patterns, this
could also reduce the overall environmental impacts. Although the LCA software utilized can
take these factors into consideration, this additional step did not fit in the timeframe of the
project. Along with the consideration of recycling, it would have been interesting to narrow
the data to just plastic and paper bag waste within a landfill. The data provided looks at
broader categories in which the products fit into, however looking at how bags specifically
effect our waste stream would be helpful information. Finally, the report results may vary if a
complete Life Cycle Assessment is conducted. This last step in this project would be to
complete an analysis on raw material extraction, production, and transportation of the
products to gain a clearer picture regarding which product has the highest impact on the
environment.
- 23 -
APPENDICES
Appendix A – 1960 – 2018 Data on Plastics in MSW by Weight
- 24 -
Appendix B – LCA Indicator Results
- 25 -
REFERENCES
EPA. “National Overview: Facts and Figures on Materials, Wastes and Recycling.” United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Protection Agency, 28 Jan.
2021, www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/national-
overview-facts-and-figures-materials.
EPA. “Plastics: Material-Specific Data.” United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Protection Agency, 5 Jan. 2021, www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-
materials-waste-and-recycling/plastics-material-specific-data.
“Greenhouse Gas Emission from Plastics.” TCE: The Chemical Engineer, no. 935, May 2019,
p.5. search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=137801281&site=e
ost-live.
Liebsch, Tobby. “Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) - Complete Beginner's Guide.” Ecochain, 15
Apr. 2020, ecochain.com/knowledge/life-cycle-assessment-lca-guide/.
“Life Cycle Assessment: The Basics.” Quantifying Sustainability ,
www.presustainability.com/sustainability-consulting/lca-methodology-basics.
Macur, Beata, and Zenon Pudlowski. “Plastic Bags – a Hazard for the Environment and a
Challenge for Contemporary Engineering Educators.” World Transactions on
Engineering and Technology Education, vol. 7, no. 2, 2009, pp. 122–126.,
http://www.wiete.com.au/journals/WTE&TE/Pages/Vol.7, No.2 (2009)/2-08-
Macur.pdf.
Muthu, Subramanian Senthilkannan. “Eco-Impact of Plastic and Paper Shopping Bags.” Sage
Journals, 1 Mar. 2012, journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/155892501200700103#.
OpenLCA . OpenLCA Nexus: The Source for LCA Data Sets, nexus.openlca.org/databases.
OpenLCA. “OpenLCA Software.” OpenLCA.org, www.openlca.org/.
Penn State. “Preserve the Environment.” Tax The Plastic, sites.psu.edu/taxtheplastic/statistics-

3/.
- 26 -
“Plastic Bag Bans All the Rage.” USA Today Magazine, vol. 148, no. 2890, July 2019, p.
9. EBSCOhost,
search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=137911575&site=ehost-
live.
PLUMER, BRAD. “Paper or Plastic? Your Choice of Bag Matters Less Than What’s
Inside.” New York Times, vol. 168, no. 58282, 30 Mar. 2019, p. A25.
live.
“ReCiPe.” PRé Sustainability, 29 Aug. 2016, pre-sustainability.com/articles/recipe/.
RUJNIC-SOKELE, Maja, and Gordana BARIC. “Life Cycle of Polyethylene Bag.” Annals of
the Faculty of Engineering Hunedoara - International Journal of Engineering, vol. 12,
Feb. 2014, pp. 41–48.
live.
“Should Plastic Bags Be Banned.” Scholastic Choices, vol. 33, no. 4, Jan. 2018, pp. 2–5.
live.
Silva, Diogo Aparecido. “Comparison of Disposable and Returnable Packaging: a Case Study
of Reverse Logistics in Brazil.” Cleaner Production, vol. 47, May 2013, pp. 377–387.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.057.
WALLACE-WELLS, DAVID. “We Will Drown in Plastic.” New York, vol. 52, no. 23, Nov.
2019, pp. 22–23.
live.
“What Is Impact Assessment?” Convention on Biological Diversity, Secretariat of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, 27 Apr. 2010, www.cbd.int/impact/whatis.shtml.
- 27 -

Full Text

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Text

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Text

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Life Cycle Assessment Comparing End

of Life Treatment for Paper and Plastic

ADVISOR • Dan McNally

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation

In addition to literature research, a Life Cycle Assessment and Environmental Impact

Paper or Plastic Debate

Life Cycle of Polyethylene

Eco-Impact of Plastic and Paper Shopping Bags

EPA Waste Facts and Figures

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

An LCA, is a factual analysis of a product’s life cycle in terms of sustainability. It is an

The Product Life Cycle

Environmental Impact Assessment

In addition to a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), another assessment tool called an

GOALS AND SCOPE

Life Cycle Assessment

In addition to an LCA, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) method will also be

Life Cycle Impact Assessment

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Appendix A – 1960 – 2018 Data on Plastics in MSW by Weight

Appendix B – LCA Indicator Results

OpenLCA. “OpenLCA Software.” OpenLCA.org, www.openlca.org/.

Penn State. “Preserve the Environment.” Tax The Plastic, sites.psu.edu/taxtheplastic/statistics-

“ReCiPe.” PRé Sustainability, 29 Aug. 2016, pre-sustainability.com/articles/recipe/.

You might also like