Estamos realizando la búsqueda. Por favor, espere...

Comparative environmental life cycle analysis of stone wool production using traditional and alternative materials

Abstract: The mineral wool sector represents 10 % of the total output tonnage of the glass industry. The thermal, acoustic and fire protection properties of mineral wool make it desirable for use in a wide range of economic sectors especially in the construction industry for the creation of low energy buildings. The traditional stone wool manufacturing process involves melting raw materials, in a coke-fired hot blast cupola furnace, fiberization, polymerization, cooling, product finishing and gas treatment. The use of alternative raw materials as torrefied biomass and sodium silicate, is proposed as an alternative manufacturing process to improve the sustainability of stone wool production, particularly the reduction of gas emissions (CO2 and SO2). The present study adopts a life cycle analysis (LCA) approach to measure the comparative environmental performance of the traditional and alternative stone wool production processes; process data are incorporated into a LCA model using SimaPro 8 software with the Ecoinvent version 3 life cycle inventory database. The CML 2000 and Eco-Indicator99 methods are used to estimate effects on different impact categories. The Minerals and Land use impacts in Eco-Indicator99 and the Eutrophication impact in CML2000 increase between 2 and 4 % for the alternative process instead of the traditional one. Similarly, the ecotoxicity-related impacts increase between 9 and 24 % with the use of the alternative process. However these increases are compensated by concomitant impact decreases in other categories of impact; consequently, the three areas of impact grouped by individual Eco-indicator 99 impacts, show environmental benefits improvements between 6 and 15 % when using the alternative process based on torrefied biomass and silicate instead of the traditional process based on coke and cement use.

 Autoría: de la Hera G., Muñoz-Díaz I., Cifrian E., Vitorica R., Gutierrez San Martin O., Viguri J.,

 Fuente: Waste and Biomass Valorization, 2017, 8(5), 1505-1520

 Editorial: Springer Netherlands

 Fecha de publicación: 01/07/2017

 Nº de páginas: 17

 Tipo de publicación: Artículo de Revista

 DOI: 10.1007/s12649-016-9660-8

 ISSN: 1877-2641,1877-265X

 Url de la publicación: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-016-9660-8