Do bioplastics have a bad reputation in terms of climate impact? Wrongly! The carbon footprint of bioplastics is already lower than that of fossil plastics. And thanks to technological advances, we expect further improvements in the carbon footprint. Did you know? The EU has now classified bioplastics as sustainable in its taxonomy.
The carbon footprint calculates, e.g. for a product, all the climate-damaging emissions it causes. However, the carbon footprint can also be calculated for an entire company, countries or one's own lifestyle. For the footprint, everything is considered that can be directly attributed to the product. This means that not only the energy consumption during use is considered, but everything from the extraction of raw materials to production, transport and disposal. This approach is also known as „Cradle-to-Grave.
The carbon footprint of bioplastics should not be confused with the life cycle assessment, short LCA, or an environmental footprint. For those, many other impact categories are assessed, such as over-fertilization, toxicity to ecosystems and humans or the consumption of fossil resources.
In this particular case, one usually considers only the processes up to the finished material. This is called from the cradle to the factory gate or "cradle-to-gate. The reason for this is that the use phase, the manufacturing of the final product and the disposal are very dependent on the final product. By excluding these steps, a largely universal comparison of the materials becomes possible. The carbon footprint of bioplastics therefore usually includes the steps from the cultivation of the plants, or extraction of the oil in the case of fossil plastics, to the finished plastic granulate.
Plants bind CO2 while growing. In the carbon footprint of bioplastics, this amount is credited proportionally to the amount of biocarbon. In the ideal case, the production of bioplastics releases less CO2 than is absorbed by the corn or sugar cane. This leads to climate-positive materials.
The next step is to produce the biopolymer from the raw plant materials. This is done either directly, e.g. via bacterial fermentation or via several intermediate steps. In this case, the individual building blocks, so-called monomores, are synthesized from pre-products and then the polymer chains are synthesized from these. Often additives or fillers are added to the polymers in order to obtain the desired properties such as colour or elasticity (more info). The finished bioplastic has the form of pellets or granules and is ready for further processing into a product.
Contact us if you are interested in results for footprints of our bioplastic.
Or download the BIOVOX Compendium here, where we we have listed results for the most important materials as a comparison!
Bioplastics also save energy in the further processing of the material into a plastic product. Many bioplastics have a lower melting point than conventional plastics. However, since the footprint depends on the manufacturing process and thus on the final product, this step and usage cannot be calculated universally.
„Mit Biokunststoffen lässt sich viel CO2 sparen – gerade bei medzinischen Kunststoffen. Wie hoch ist Ihr Einsparpotenzial? Eine Erste Abschätzung können Sie jetzt ganz einfach mit unserem CO2-Rechner herausfinden!“
Carmen Rommel, Supply Chain & Sustainability
Today, plastic products are usually incinerated at the end of their life. This releases CO2. With fossil plastics, it comes from deposits millions of years old. With bio-based plastics, however, only the amount of CO2 that was bound during cultivation is released. If the incineration is omitted, e.g. through material recycling, bio-based plastics even store atmospheric CO2 in the long term.
That bioplastics have a worse CO2 balance is a myth. They are already in most cases more climate friendly than fossil plastics with similar properties. The carbon footprint of bioplastics usually includes the cradle to gate process steps, i.e. from the cultivation of the raw materials to the finished bioplastic. This also includes a credit for the CO2 stored by the plants. But the disposal must also be considered.
The BioPolyDat tool goes into detail about the scientific background of the carbon footprint and life cycle assessment. It was created by the Institute for Bioplastics and Biocomposites at the Hanover University of Applied sciences and Arts (ifBB) and the Fachagentur Nachwachsende Rohstoffe e.V. (FNR).
Maximum patient safety and the demand for environmentally friendly, recyclable solutions are putting pressure on the pharmaceutical industry. In this article, we take a look at PLA – a bio-based polymer – and its suitability as a future-proof material solution for drug delivery devices.
Solvent bonding allows thermoplastics to be bonded permanently without any heat source and without any adhesive remaining. In this short and more technical article, we look at how it works, suitable solvents and the advantages of this technique.
Medical devices account for almost a quarter of a hospital’s greenhouse gas emissions. How can we make them more sustainable?
Verpackungen für pharmazeutische Produkte, wie Tablettenblister, Pillendosen & Flaschen stehen vor einer neuen Herausforderung: Neben dem Schutz ihres Inhaltes, ist Nachhaltigkeit von zunehmender Bedeutung. Wie das gelingt, welche Regulatorik zu beachten ist und was zwei Branchenexperten zur Zukunft der Pharmaverpackung sagen, liest Du in diesem Artikel.
Plastics are an indispensable part of the modern world. At the same time, we face the challenge of minimizing their ecological footprint and finding innovative solutions for the future. In this article, we look at the environmental impact, critical ingredients and the possibility of a climate-neutral circular economy based on renewable resources.
In this article, we look at how to generate value streams from hospital waste and recycle it into the production of new medical devices and pharmaceutical packaging. In short: how the circular economy succeeds in healthcare.
