Evaluation of environmental impacts of citric acid and glycerol outdoor softwood treatment: Case-study

Abstract Over the last few decades, wood modification has been performed to improve wood product technical performance. Using renewable based chemicals for wood modification is an innovative alternative to the non-renewable petrochemicals commonly used. However, it should be kept in mind that having the raw material from renewable sources does not guarantee zero environmental impacts. In this study, the treatment considered uses citric acid and glycerol mixture; two chemical products derived from renewable sources. In the residential building context of Quebec-Canada, the cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment for untreated and treated lodgepole pine wood siding was performed and compared. The results obtained show that the treated wood siding has higher environmental impacts than the untreated wood siding, in spite of its longer service life. This is partially caused by the high contribution of citric acid production used for treatment. The current service life expectancy of treated wood siding was estimated to be 2.8 times longer than the one of untreated wood siding based on standardized durability test and classification (AWPA E 10–12 and ASTM D 2017-05). Sensitivity analysis showed that life cycle impacts of treated wood siding become lower than those from untreated wood siding when service life expectancy reaches 5-times that of untreated wood siding. Life cycle assessment could be used for guidance in developing better treatments to improve their environmental impacts.

[1]  R. S. Williams,et al.  Wood properties affecting finish service life , 2000 .

[2]  Lina Nunes,et al.  Life cycle assessment of thermally treated and untreated maritime pine boards: a Portuguese case study , 2014 .

[3]  Aline Cobut,et al.  The environmental footprint of interior wood doors in non-residential buildings – part 1: life cycle assessment , 2015 .

[4]  Mi Hyung Kim,et al.  Analysis of the global warming potential for wood waste recycling systems , 2014 .

[5]  Li Yu,et al.  The wood from the trees: The use of timber in construction , 2017 .

[6]  Adolf Acquaye,et al.  How do end of life scenarios influence the environmental impact of product supply chains? comparing biomaterial and petrochemical products , 2012 .

[7]  Kevin McDonnell,et al.  Greenhouse gas and energy based life cycle analysis of products from the Irish wood processing industry , 2015 .

[8]  George J. Venta,et al.  LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS OF BRICK AND MORTAR PRODUCTS , 1998 .

[9]  Robert J. Ross,et al.  Wood handbook : wood as an engineering material , 2010 .

[10]  G. Sonnemann,et al.  Life cycle assessment of producing emulsion-templated porous materials from Kraft black liquor – comparison of a vegetable oil and a petrochemical solvent , 2015 .

[11]  Pål Börjesson,et al.  Life cycle assessment in green chemistry - A comparison of various industrial wood surface coatings , 2007 .

[12]  C. Hill,et al.  Wood Modification: Chemical, Thermal and Other Processes , 2006 .

[13]  Pål Börjesson,et al.  Wax production from renewable feedstock using biocatalysts instead of fossil feedstock and conventional methods , 2008 .

[14]  P. Blanchet,et al.  Pine wood treated with a citric acid and glycerol mixture : biomaterial performance improved by a bio-byproduct , 2016 .

[15]  Philip D. Evans,et al.  The Search for Durable Exterior Clear Coatings for Wood , 2015 .

[16]  Pinki Anand,et al.  A comparative study of solvent-assisted pretreatment of biodiesel derived crude glycerol on growth and 1,3-propanediol production from Citrobacter freundii. , 2012, New biotechnology.

[17]  Fangxia Yang,et al.  Value-added uses for crude glycerol--a byproduct of biodiesel production , 2012, Biotechnology for Biofuels.

[18]  Jamie Meil,et al.  Prospects for carbon-neutral housing: the influence of greater wood use on the carbon footprint of a single-family residence , 2009 .