IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v22y2018i6p1365-1377.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment of Aerogel Manufacture on Small and Large Scales: Weighing the Use of Advanced Materials in Oil Spill Remediation

Author

Listed:
  • Osman Karatum
  • Md Mainul H. Bhuiya
  • Mary K. Carroll
  • Ann M. Anderson
  • Desiree L. Plata

Abstract

Recent studies demonstrated that advanced aerogel composites (Aspen Aerogels® Spaceloft® [SL]) have the potential to transform oil remediation via high oil uptake capacity and selectivity, excellent reusability, and high mechanical strength. Understanding the life cycle environmental impacts of advanced aerogels can enable a more holistic decision‐making process when considering oil recovery technologies following a spill. Here, we perform a cradle‐to‐grave streamlined life cycle assessment (LCA) following International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14040 2006 for SL weighed against the conventional oil sorbent material, polyurethane foam. The model included alternative use and disposal scenarios, such as single or multiple uses, and landfill, incinerator, and waste‐to‐energy (WTE) approaches for cleaning 1 cubic meter (m3) of light crude oil. Results showed that the ideal case for SL application was comprised of multiple use and WTE incineration (68% reduction in material use, approximately 7 × 103 megajoules [MJ] of energy recovery from WTE), but SL offered energy and materials savings even when used once and disposed of via traditional means (i.e., landfill). In addition to evaluating these already‐scaled processes, we performed an anticipatory LCA for the laboratory‐scaled aerogel fabrication process that might inform the sustainable design of next‐generation aerogels. In particular, the model compared rapid supercritical extraction (RSCE) with two conventional supercritical extraction methods—alcohol and carbon dioxide supercritical extraction (ASCE and CSCE, respectively)—for silica aerogel monoliths. Our results showed that RSCE yielded a cumulative energy savings of more than 76 × 103 and 100 × 103 MJ for 1 m3 of monolithic silica aerogel manufacturing compared to ASCE and CSCE, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Osman Karatum & Md Mainul H. Bhuiya & Mary K. Carroll & Ann M. Anderson & Desiree L. Plata, 2018. "Life Cycle Assessment of Aerogel Manufacture on Small and Large Scales: Weighing the Use of Advanced Materials in Oil Spill Remediation," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(6), pages 1365-1377, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:22:y:2018:i:6:p:1365-1377
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12720
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.12720?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dowson, Mark & Grogan, Michael & Birks, Tim & Harrison, David & Craig, Salmaan, 2012. "Streamlined life cycle assessment of transparent silica aerogel made by supercritical drying," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 396-404.
    2. Joanna Kulczycka & Łukasz Lelek & Anna Lewandowska & Herbert Wirth & Joseph D. Bergesen, 2016. "Environmental Impacts of Energy-Efficient Pyrometallurgical Copper Smelting Technologies: The Consequences of Technological Changes from 2010 to 2050," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(2), pages 304-316, April.
    3. Hyung Chul Kim & Timothy J. Wallington & Sherry A. Mueller & Bert Bras & Tina Guldberg & Francisco Tejada, 2016. "Life Cycle Water Use of Ford Focus Gasoline and Ford Focus Electric Vehicles," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(5), pages 1122-1133, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, Chunbo & Hu, Mingming & Laclau, Benjamin & Garnesson, Thomas & Yang, Xining & Tukker, Arnold, 2021. "Energy-carbon-investment payback analysis of prefabricated envelope-cladding system for building energy renovation: Cases in Spain, the Netherlands, and Sweden," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Karel Struhala & Miroslav Čekon & Richard Slávik, 2018. "Life Cycle Assessment of Solar Façade Concepts Based on Transparent Insulation Materials," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Maryam Ghodrat & Bijan Samali & Muhammad Akbar Rhamdhani & Geoffrey Brooks, 2019. "Thermodynamic-Based Exergy Analysis of Precious Metal Recovery out of Waste Printed Circuit Board through Black Copper Smelting Process," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Ma, Xin & Talluri, Srinivas & Ferguson, Mark & Tiwari, Sunil, 2022. "Strategic production and responsible sourcing decisions under an emissions trading scheme," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(3), pages 1429-1443.
    4. Silvia Vilčeková & Monika Čuláková & Eva Krídlová Burdová & Jana Katunská, 2015. "Energy and Environmental Evaluation of Non-Transparent Constructions of Building Envelope for Wooden Houses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-29, October.
    5. Kong, Yong & Shen, Xiaodong & Cui, Sheng & Fan, Maohong, 2015. "Development of monolithic adsorbent via polymeric sol–gel process for low-concentration CO2 capture," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 308-317.
    6. Spiller, Elisheba & Sopher, Peter & Martin, Nicholas & Mirzatuny, Marita & Zhang, Xinxing, 2017. "The environmental impacts of green technologies in TX," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 199-214.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:22:y:2018:i:6:p:1365-1377. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.