Do wood-based panels made with agro-industrial residues provide environmentally benign alternatives? An LCA case study of sugarcane bagasse addition to particle board manufacturing

PurposeSugarcane bagasse is one of the main agro-industrial residues which can be used to produce wood-based panels. However, more investigations related to its environmental performance assessment are needed, focusing on questions such as: Does it provide environmental benefits? What are its main environmental impacts? Could it substitute wood as raw material? Accordingly, this paper presents a life cycle assessment (LCA) study of particle board manufactured with sugarcane bagasse residues.MethodsThe cradle-to-gate assessment of 1 m3 of particle board made with sugarcane bagasse (PSB) considered three main subsystems: bagasse generation, bagasse distribution, and PSB production. For the inventory of PSB, dataset from two previous LCA studies related to the conventional particle board production and the ethanol life cycle for the Brazilian context were used. The allocation criterion for the bagasse generation subsystem was 9.08 % (economic base). The potential environmental impact phase was assessed by applying the CML and USEtox methods. PSB was compared with the conventional particle board manufactured in Brazil by the categories of the CML and USETox, and including land use indicators. Finally, two scenarios were analyzed to evaluate the influence of the allocation criteria and the consumption of sugarcane bagasse.Results and discussionAll hotspots identified by CML and USETox methods are mainly related to the PSB production subsystem (24–100 % of impacts) due to heavy fuel oil, electricity, and urea-formaldehyde resin supply chain. The bagasse generation subsystem was more relevant to the eutrophication category (75 % of impacts). The bagasse distribution subsystem was not relevant because the impacts on all categories were lower than 1 %. PSB can substitute the conventional particle board mainly because of its lower contribution to abiotic depletion and ecotoxicity. Regarding land use impacts, PSB showed lower values according to all indicators (38–40 % of all impacts), which is explained by the lower demand for land occupation in comparison to that of the traditional particle board.ConclusionsPSB can replace the traditional particle board due to its better environmental performance. The analysis of the economic allocation criterion was relevant only for the EP category, being important to reduce diesel and N-based fertilizers use during sugarcane cultivation. Regarding the influence of the sugarcane bagasse consumption, it is suggested that the sugarcane bagasse be mixed up to 75 % during particle board manufacturing so that good quality properties and environmental performance of panels can be provided.

[1]  Noor-ul Amin,et al.  Use of Bagasse Ash in Concrete and Its Impact on the Strength and Chloride Resistivity , 2011 .

[2]  F. Lahr,et al.  Properties of Sugar Cane Bagasse to Use in OSB , 2012 .

[3]  Olivier Jolliet,et al.  Building a model based on scientific consensus for Life Cycle Impact Assessment of chemicals: the search for harmony and parsimony. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  Anne Marsden,et al.  International Organization for Standardization , 2014 .

[5]  Sara González-García,et al.  Environmental performance assessment of hardboard manufacture , 2009 .

[6]  Almudena Hospido,et al.  Life Cycle Inventory of Particleboard: A Case Study in the Wood Sector (8 pp) , 2006 .

[7]  J. Schweinle,et al.  Wood & other renewable resources: A challenge for LCA , 2007 .

[8]  Agnès Jullien,et al.  LCA allocation procedure used as an incitative method for waste recycling: An application to mineral additions in concrete , 2010 .

[9]  Fausto Freire,et al.  Carbon footprint of particleboard: a comparison between ISO/TS 14067, GHG Protocol, PAS 2050 and Climate Declaration , 2014 .

[10]  Michael Wang,et al.  Allocation of energy use in petroleum refineries to petroleum products , 2004 .

[11]  A. R. Ometto,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of Urea Formaldehyde Resin: Comparison by CML (2001), EDIP (1997) and USEtox (2008) Methods for Toxicological Impact Categories , 2013 .

[12]  Humberto Varum,et al.  Comparative study of the life cycle assessment of particleboards made of residues from sugarcane bagasse (Saccharum spp.) and pine wood shavings (Pinus elliottii) , 2014 .

[13]  R. Heijungs,et al.  Life cycle assessment An operational guide to the ISO standards , 2001 .

[14]  André Biazus,et al.  Panorama de mercado: painéis de madeira , 2010 .

[15]  Leo Alting,et al.  Life cycle engineering and design , 1995 .

[16]  S. R. Karade,et al.  Cement-bonded composites from lignocellulosic wastes , 2010 .

[17]  James B. Wilson.  Life-Cycle Inventory of Particleboard in Terms of Resources, Emissions, Energy and Carbon , 2010 .

[18]  Nathan Pelletier,et al.  Co-product allocation in life cycle assessments of seafood production systems: Review of problems and strategies , 2007 .

[19]  Francisco Antonio Rocco Lahr,et al.  Life cycle assessment of medium density particleboard (MDP) produced in Brazil , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[20]  Jeroen B. Guinee,et al.  Handbook on life cycle assessment operational guide to the ISO standards , 2002 .

[21]  André Luis Christoforo,et al.  Environmental performance assessment of the melamine-urea-formaldehyde (MUF) resin manufacture: a case study in Brazil , 2015 .

[22]  Aldo Roberto Ometto,et al.  Lifecycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil , 2009 .

[23]  R. Boopathy,et al.  Cellulosic ethanol production from sugarcane bagasse without enzymatic saccharification , 2008, BioResources.

[24]  Ugo Leandro Belini,et al.  Pilot study for MDF manufacture from sugarcane bagasse and eucalyptus fibers , 2011, European Journal of Wood and Wood Products.

[25]  Sara González-García,et al.  Environmental assessment of green hardboard production coupled with a laccase activated system , 2011 .

[26]  James B. Wilson.  LIFE-CYCLE INVENTORY OF FORMALDEHYDE-BASED RESINS USED IN WOOD COMPOSITES IN TERMS OF RESOURCES, EMISSIONS, ENERGY AND CARBON , 2010 .

[27]  A. Ashori,et al.  Evaluation of surface roughness and mechanical properties of particleboard panels made from bagasse , 2011 .

[28]  Mark A. J. Huijbregts,et al.  USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment , 2008 .

[29]  Aldo Roberto Ometto,et al.  Life cycle assessment of the sugarcane bagasse electricity generation in Brazil , 2014 .

[30]  Rosimeire Cavalcante dos Santos,et al.  EFEITO DA ASSOCIAÇÃO DE BAGAÇO DE CANA, DO TIPO E DO TEOR DE ADESIVO NA PRODUÇÃO DE PAINÉIS AGLOMERADOS , 2012 .

[31]  Rahul V. Ralegaonkar,et al.  Application of agro-waste for sustainable construction materials: A review , 2013 .

[32]  Lourival Marin Mendes,et al.  Hybrid chipboard panels based on sugarcane bagasse, urea formaldehyde and melamine formaldehyde resin , 2011 .