Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Available ScienceDirect
online
Procedia atonline
CIRP
Available www.sciencedirect.com
00 (2018) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 00 (2018) 000–000
ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia CIRP 00 (2017)

Procedia 000–000
CIRP 80 (2019) 422–427
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
26th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference
26th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference
Environment and economic impacts assessment of PET waste recycling
Environmentwithand
28theconomic
CIRP Designimpacts
conventional and assessment
renewable
Conference, May 2018, sources of PET
Nantes, waste recycling
of energy
France
with conventional and renewable sources of energy
A new methodologyKailashtoChoudhary
analyzea, the K S functional
Sangwana*, Divyanshu and physical Goyala architecture of
a a*
existing products forBirla
Kailash anInstitute
assembly
Choudhary oriented
, K Sand
a
of Technology Science Pilani,,product
Sangwan Divyanshu
Pilani Goyala identification
family
333031 India
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91-1596-515205;
a fax:Institute
Birla +91-1596-244183. E-mail
of Technology address:Pilani,
and Science kss@pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in
Pilani 333031 India
Paul Stief *, Jean-Yves Dantan, Alain Etienne, Ali Siadat
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91-1596-515205; fax: +91-1596-244183. E-mail address: kss@pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in
École Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, LCFC EA 4495, 4 Rue Augustin Fresnel, Metz 57078, France
Abstract
*Abstract
Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 3 87 37 54 30; E-mail address: paul.stief@ensam.eu
The use of large amount of plastic has created environment threats and thus it needs to be recycled. The recycling of plastic waste requires
energy but the energy production with conventional sources depletes the natural resources and creates environmental degradation. This study
The use of large amount of plastic has created environment threats and thus it needs to be recycled. The recycling of plastic waste requires
aims to assess and compare the environmental and economic impacts from the recycling of PET plastic bottle waste with conventional and
energy but the energy production with conventional sources depletes the natural resources and creates environmental degradation. This study
renewable sources of electricity in India. An experiment is conducted wherein the PET bottle waste is used to make filament for 3-D printing
Abstract
aims to assess and compare the environmental and economic impacts from the recycling of PET plastic bottle waste with conventional and
by using three different scenarios. Scenario A uses the virgin PET granules with conventional Indian electricity mix, scenario B uses PET bottle
renewable sources of electricity in India. An experiment is conducted wherein the PET bottle waste is used to make filament for 3-D printing
Inwaste recycling
bytoday’s
using three
with
business
different
conventionalthe
environment, Indian
trendelectricity
scenarios. Scenario towards mix, product
more
A uses the
and scenario C uses
virgin PETvariety
granules and PET bottle waste
customization
with conventionalisIndian
recycling Due
unbroken. with solar
electricitytomix,
electricity.
thisscenario The ISOneed
development,
B usesthe
14040
of
PET bottle
guidelines
agile and are followed to
reconfigurable conduct cradle-to-grave
production systems emergedLCA to for scenario
cope with A; andproducts
various grave toand grave LCAsfamilies.
product for scenarios
To B & C.
design andThe impactproduction
optimize categories
waste recycling with conventional Indian electricity mix, and scenario C uses PET bottle waste recycling with solar electricity. The ISO 14040
considered
systems for the
as well endpoint
as to choose assessment
the optimal are ecosystem
product matches,quality, human health and resources. Climate change, fossil depletion, human toxicity,
guidelines are followed to conduct cradle-to-grave LCA forproductscenarioanalysis
A; and methods
grave to aregraveneeded.
LCAs Indeed, most
for scenarios of
B& theC.known methods
The impact aim to
categories
ozone
analyze depletion,
a product terrestrial
or one productacidification,
family on and
the water
physical depletion
level. are
Differentconsidered
product for midpoint
families, however, assessment.
may The
differ results
largely in of the
terms of study
the show and
number that
considered for the endpoint assessment are ecosystem quality, human health and resources. Climate change, fossil depletion, human toxicity,
scenario
nature B has high environmental impacts followed by scenarios C & A. The findings of this experimental study suggest the use of renewable
ozone of components.
depletion, This fact
terrestrial impedes an
acidification, andefficient comparison
water depletion areand choice offorappropriate
considered midpoint product family
assessment. Thecombinations
results of theforstudy
the production
show that
energy A
system. (solar electricity) forisrecycling of
to PET bottle wasteproducts
for filament production. The limitation of the study is that it’s aaim
regiontospecific
scenario Bnewhasmethodology
high environmental proposed
impacts analyze
followedexisting
by scenarios C & in A.
view
Theoffindings
their functional and physical
of this experimental architecture.
study suggest The
the use ofisrenewable
cluster
experiment
these products for environmental and economic impacts. for the optimization of existing assembly lines and the creation of future reconfigurable
energy (solar in new assembly
electricity) oriented
for recycling product
of PET families
bottle waste for filament production. The limitation of the study is that it’s a region specific
assembly
experiment systems. Based on Datum
for environmental Flow Chain,
and economic the physical structure of the products is analyzed. Functional subassemblies are identified, and
impacts.
a©functional
2019 Theanalysis
Authors.isPublished
performed. by Moreover,
Elsevier B.V. This isfunctional
a hybrid an open access article under
and physical the CC BY-NC-ND
architecture graph (HyFPAG)licenseis the output which depicts the
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
similarity
© 2019 The between
Authors.product families
Published by providing
by Elsevier design
B.V. This is ansupport to both,
open access production
article under the system planners and
CC BY-NC-ND product designers. An illustrative
license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/)
Peer-review
example of a under responsibility
nail-clipper is used toofexplain
the scientific
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility
committee
the proposed
of the scientific committee
of the 26th An
methodology. CIRP
of the 26th CIRP
Life Cycle
industrial
Life Cycle
Engineering
caseEngineering (LCE)
study on two(LCE) Conference.
product families of steering columns of
Conference.
thyssenkrupp
Peer-review Presta
under France is then carried out to give a first industrial evaluation of the proposed
responsibility of the scientific committee of the 26th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference. approach.
©Keywords:
2017 TheLife cycle assessment; plastic waste; recycling; economic analysis; climate change.
Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under
Keywords: Life responsibility
cycle of thewaste;
assessment; plastic scientific committee
recycling; economic of analysis;
the 28thclimate
CIRP Design
change. Conference 2018.

Keywords: Assembly; Design method; Family identification

1. Introduction consumption will reach 583 billion bottles by 2021 [4]. The
waste generated by PET packaging creates not only
1. Introduction consumption will reach 583 billion bottles by 2021 [4]. The
Plastics are replacing the conventional materials like metal, environmental issues but also disposal problems. Also, PET
waste generated by PET packaging creates not only
1.wood and glass because of their lower cost, higher flexibility, of
Introduction
Plastics are replacing the conventional materials like metal,
waste blocks drains
the product
environmental range
issues and
leading to overflowing
but characteristics
of drains
manufactured
also disposal problems.
and
Also,and/or
PET
manufacturing ease, and better performance [1,2]. Poly assembled sometimesinflooding
this [5]. In this context, the main challenge in
system.
wood and glass because of their lower cost, higher flexibility, waste blocks drains leading to overflowing of drains and
Ethylene
Due toTerephthalate
the ease,
fast and (PET) is a widely
development in the used domain form of of modellingPET bottlesanalysis can be recycled to produce fabrics,
manufacturing better performance [1,2]. Poly sometimesand flooding [5]. is now not only to cope with single
plastics to makeand
communication bottlesan for mineraltrend
ongoing water,ofsoft drink, ketchup,
digitization and monofilaments,
products, a limited bottles,
product etc. In India, discarded PETfamilies,
bottles
Ethylene Terephthalate (PET) is a widely used form of PET bottles can be range or existing
recycled product
to produce fabrics,
pickle, etc. The
digitalization, global production
manufacturing enterprises of arePETfacing
is expected
important to but are also
collected
to be by rag
able to pickersand
analyze andto sold to kabadiwallas,
compare products to who
define
plastics to make bottles for mineral water, soft drink, ketchup, monofilaments, bottles, etc. In India, discarded PET bottles
increase from
challenges in 42 millionmarket
today’s tonnes (2014) to 72 million
environments: a tonnes by new
continuing segregate
product and sort this
families. It andbesell
can to the that
observed recyclers.
classical Recyclers
existing
pickle, etc. The global production of PET is expected to are collected by rag pickers and sold to kabadiwallas, who
2020. During
tendency towards 2015-16,
reduction 900ofkilo-tonnes of PET was usedand in remove families
the caps, areneck rings in and labels; and thenorshred the
increase from 42 million tonnesproduct
(2014)development
to 72 milliontimes tonnes by product segregate and sort regrouped
this and sell function
to the of clients
recyclers. features.
Recyclers
India [3]. product
shortened Specifically, the use
lifecycles. In of PET forthere
addition,
2020. During 2015-16, 900 kilo-tonnes of PET was used in
drinking
is an bottles has However,
increasing bottles. This shredded
assembly waste
oriented is
productwashed and
families sold
are as
hardly ‘washed
to find.
remove the caps, neck rings and labels; and then shred the
increased
demand from 300 billionbeing
of Specifically,
customization, in 2000 the to 480 billion
time in 2016 and flakes’ forproduct
use as raw material
level,isfor manufacturing of fibers and
India [3]. the use ofatPET same
for drinking inbottles
a global
has On the
bottles. This shredded family waste products
washed and differsold
mainly in two
as ‘washed
it is expected
competition with that this growth
competitors all over will
the continueThis
world. and the main
trend, filaments. There are(i)more
characteristics: the than 40
number of large manufacturers
components and (ii) in
the
increased from 300 billion in 2000 to 480 billion in 2016 and flakes’ for use as raw material for manufacturing of fibers and
which is inducing the development
it is expected that this growth will continue and the from macro to micro type of components (e.g. mechanical, electrical,
filaments. There are more than 40 large manufacturers in electronical).
markets, results in diminished lot sizes due to augmenting Classical methodologies considering mainly single products
2212-8271
product © 2019 The
varieties Authors. Published
(high-volume by Elsevier B.V.
to low-volume This is an open
production) [1].accessorarticle under thealready
solitary, CC BY-NC-ND
existinglicense
product families analyze the
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
To cope
2212-8271 with
© this
2019 Theaugmenting
Authors. variety
Published by as well
Elsevier as
B.V. to
This beis able
an open toaccessproduct
article structure
under the CC
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 26th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference. on a physical
BY-NC-ND level
license (components level) which
identify possible optimization potentials
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2017.04.009 in the existing causes difficulties regarding an efficient definition and
Peer-review under
production responsibility
system, of the scientific
it is important to have committee
a preciseof the 26th CIRP Life Cycle
knowledge Engineering
comparison of(LCE) Conference.
different product families. Addressing this
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2017.04.009
2212-8271 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/)
2212-8271 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review
Peer-review under
under responsibility
responsibility of scientific
of the the scientific committee
committee of the of theCIRP
28th 26thDesign
CIRP Conference
Life Cycle 2018.
Engineering (LCE) Conference.
10.1016/j.procir.2019.01.096
 Kailash Choudhary et al. / Procedia CIRP 80 (2019) 422–427 423
2 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000

India, who use recycled PET as raw material for their 3 represents the materials and methods used for the current
products. The estimated size of the recycled PET business in research. Section 4 illustrates and discusses the results. The
India is $400-550 million [6]. study ends with conclusions in section 5.
According to NCL (National Chemical Laboratory) [3] and
PACE (PET Packaging Association for Clean Environment)
[7], India has 90% recycling rate of PET which is higher than
Japan (72.1%), Europe (48.3%) and United States (31%). PET
waste in India is recycled by the organized sector (65%),
unorganized sector (15%) and reused at home (10%).
There are life cycle assessment (LCA) studies in the
literature which investigate plastic waste treatment, packaging
production, and use of recycled plastics in buildings & roads
construction, fiber production, and flake production [8]. There
are many studies which compare the environmental and
economic impacts of various waste PET disposal methods [5].
LCA can be used as a tool to evaluate, compare and
benchmark the environmental impacts in various midpoint and
endpoint categories [9,10]. The LCA concept came into
existence during 1970-90 but the standardization of
approaches and terminologies took place during 1990-2000
[11]. Society of Toxicology And Chemistry (SETAC) played
a leading role in continuous improvement and harmonization
of LCA frameworks, terminologies and methodologies with
the help of collaboration between scientists, practitioners and
users [12,13]. SETAC and United Nations Environment
Program (UNEP) developed ‘life cycle initiatives’ containing
general and specific aims to promote life cycle thinking in
developing countries [14]. The present study is a step towards
fulfilling these aims suggested by SETAC and UNEP.
Fig. 1. System boundary and process flow model for recycling of PET bottles
This study investigates the possibility, through an
experiment, to use waste PET bottles as a raw material in
2. Literature review
additive manufacturing (3D printing). The investigation
contains environmental and economic impacts assessment of
There are a few studies related to the LCA of plastic waste
waste PET bottles when used as raw material for additive
recycling and additive manufacturing. Foolmaun and
manufacturing. This study also compares the environmental
Ramjeeawon [5] conducted a comparative LCA study in
and economic aspects of PET bottle recycling using
Mauritius of various disposal scenarios for waste PET bottles
conventional and solar energy sources. The electricity mix
and identified that 75% flake production with 25% landfill is
from Indian region is selected for the study as conventional
environmentally and economically sustainable option for the
electricity. Three scenarios have been compared for the
recycling of PET waste. Recycling of PET bottles results into
environmental and economic impacts: scenario A (virgin
the reduced consumption of virgin crude oil and natural gas;
plastic as raw material with conventional Indian electricity
and also reduces the associated carbon dioxide emissions [4].
mix), scenario B (PET bottle waste as raw material with
Gu et al. [1] compared the environmental impacts from plastic
conventional Indian electricity mix, and scenario C (PET
waste mechanical recycling using different routes. The study
bottle waste as raw material with solar energy).
identified that distributed recycling of plastic waste has higher
The conventional energy generation technologies use fossil
environmental impacts compared to centralized recycling. The
fuels. Only 14% of the total global energy demand is fulfilled
study observed that the extrusion process for filament
by the renewable sources. Conventional energy generation not
production has large contribution to the environmental
only depletes the natural resources but also contributes to
impacts in plastic waste recycling. Banavidas et al. [4]
environmental impacts. Therefore, the use of renewable
compared the environmental impacts generated during the
energy sources (solar, wind, biomass, etc.) should be increased
production of a PET bottle by fossil fuel-derived, bio-derived
for the protection of the natural resources and environment.
and recycled materials. The greenhouse gas emissions are
Among the renewable energy sources, solar is abundantly
lower by 82% in bio-derived PET production. Toniolo et al.
available clean form of energy which has the potential to
[9] compared the environmental impacts from the non-
generate three times the current global energy demand. Solar
recyclable multilayer and recyclable monolayer PET
PV system is widely used technology for the generation of the
packaging; and concluded that recyclable packaging produces
electricity due to its easy installation and low maintenance
lesser environmental impacts.
[15].
Zhao et al. [16] investigated the potential to recycle
The next section of this study shows the literature review
polylactic acid (PLA), used in 3-D printers, from the
related to the LCA of PET recycling and 3-D printing. Section
perspective of material properties and environmental
424 Kailash Choudhary et al. / Procedia CIRP 80 (2019) 422–427
Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000
performance. The study identified, through LCA, that closed
loop recycling of 3-D printed products has lower
environmental impacts as compared to the incineration or
landfill. Gaikwad et al. [17] compared the CO2 emissions and
material properties of recycled e-waste filament printing and
virgin acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) printing through
the experimental investigations. They observed 28% reduction
in CO2 emissions in the recycling of e-waste compared to
virgin ABS printing. Kreiger et al. [18] compared the
environmental impacts from the recycling of high density
polyethylene (HDPE) using 3-D printers in the distributed and
centralized production scenarios. The study found that the
centralized recycling of HDPE in low density population area
uses substantial amount of energy for the transportation of
products and collection of the waste. Kreiger and Pearce [19]
conducted a comparative LCA for the distributed and
centralized production methods using conventional and solar
electricity. The products are fabricated with ABS and PLA in
the experimental study. This study identified that distributed
production of plastic material using 3-D printer with
renewable source of energy has lower environmental impacts.
This study also claims that recycling of post-consumer
products for 3-D printer filaments results into the lower
environmental impacts, cost and resource consumption.
Cerdas et al. [20] compared the environmental impacts
generated during the production of an eyeglass frame by
centralized and distributed production systems using LCA.
The study found that most of the environmental impacts are
generated by the electricity consumed in 3-D printing. Hence,
the selection of electricity mix significantly influences the
environmental impacts from the printing process. Garcia et al.
[21] in their review article, on environmental performance of
additive manufacturing, observed that most of the studies
focused on the energy consumed by 3-D printers and its
environmental impacts. The literature review can be
summarized as:
 Most of the researchers focused on environmental impacts
assessment of energy consumption in 3-D printing because
it contributes to most of the environmental impacts.
 It is found that ReCiPe method is widely used in
environmental impact assessment studies because of its
wide coverage in midpoint category assessment and
consolidated coverage in endpoint category assessment.
 Most the research is limited to developed nations.
 Recycling of PET is environmentally beneficial compared
to landfill.
Although there are various environmental benefits from the
recycling of PET bottles but recycling always requires energy
which decreases the environmental and economic benefits of
recycling. The literature also shows that selection of
electricity mix for 3-D printing influences the environmental
performance of recycling. Therefore, this paper explores the
possibility of replacing conventional source of energy by
renewable source for sustainable recycling of PET bottle
waste.
3
3. Materials and method
LCAs for scenarios A, B & C have been performed by
following ISO 14040 guidelines [22]. Umberto NXT software
tool with eco-invent 3.0 database is used to develop process
flow models and to calculate the environmental impacts in
different categories [23]. Three different Umberto models are
developed for three different scenarios. The three scenarios
have been compared for environmental impacts. The
economic comparison has also been done by calculating the
cost of conventional and solar electricity, required in different
processes for different scenarios.
3.1. Goals and scope
This study conducts an experiment at the sustainable
manufacturing and life cycle engineering laboratory of BITS
Pilani, India to get the primary data for the environmental and
economic analysis of PET bottle waste recycling. The goal of
this study are:
 To quantify and compare the environmental impacts from
the different scenarios of PET bottle waste recycling.
 To perform the comparative economic analysis for
conventional and solar electricity use for PET bottle waste
recycling.
The scope this study is cradle to grave for scenario A and
grave to grave for scenarios B & C.
3.2. System boundaries and functional unit
Fig. 1 shows the process flow and system boundary for
three scenarios. Scenario A uses the virgin PET granules as
raw material for the manufacturing of filaments using
extrusion process. These filaments are used in 3-D printers.
Scenarios B & C use the waste PET bottle as raw material,
which are shredded and heated for the extrusion of filaments
used in 3-D printers. Scenarios A & B use the conventional
electricity produced in India and scenario C uses the
electricity produced by renewables source (solar). One
kilogram of printed PET filament is taken as the functional
unit to calculate and compare the environmental and
economic impacts of the three scenarios.
Scenario A uses the virgin granules which are directly used
in extruder for producing filaments. Shredding and heating
processes are not required in this scenario because virgin
granules have uniform size and do not contain moisture.
Wherein, scenarios B & C use shredding, washing and heating
to reduce size, remove impurities, and remove moisture from
shredded PET bottle waste respectively. It is important to
remove the impurities and moisture from the shredded PET
waste to prevent reduction of strength and formation of the
bubbles during the filament extrusion. The moisture content
also drastically reduces the melting temperature of PET,
which results into higher PET waste during extrusion process.
 Kailash Choudhary et al. / Procedia CIRP 80 (2019) 422–427 425
4 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000

3.3. Inventory analysis
The primary inventory data is collected by conducting
experiments at the sustainable manufacturing and life cycle
engineering laboratory of BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus, India.
The experiment is performed with 20 waste PET water
bottles. Emission (waste PET) and resource consumption
(electricity) values are collected at each process by close
observation (table 1). Table 1 shows the differences in input
PET material in different scenarios. This difference is because
of the absence of shredding and heating processes in scenario
A. In scenario A, there will be no PET waste from these
processes. Whereas, shredding and heating processes are
present in scenarios B & C, which emit solid PET waste. The
eco-invent database 3.0 is used as a secondary data source for
the upstream activities required during the production of
virgin PET granules, electricity, PV panels and for
downstream activities required for the treatment of waste
PET. Indian electricity mix dataset (IN) is used for electricity
production. India generates most of its electricity from coal,
hydropower, natural gas, etc. [24]. Global dataset (GLO) is
used for the production of virgin PET and treatment of waste
PET. Switzerland (CH) dataset is used for production of PV
panels as no other dataset is available for PV panel
production. Selection of datasets from other regions (GLO
and CH) is due to the unavailability of Indian dataset in
ecoivent 3.0 database for these activities.
Table 1. Inventory list for different scenarios
because it removes the barriers to select different impact
assessment methods for midpoint and endpoint assessment of
environmental impacts [11,14]. Damage to ecosystem quality,
human health and resources are taken as three endpoint
impact categories. Climate change (CC), fossil depletion
(FD), human toxicity (HT), ozone deletion (OD), Terrestrial
acidification (TA), and water depletion (WD) categories are
used to demonstrate midpoint environmental impacts from the
PET bottle waste recycling by three different scenarios. The
literature related to the LCA of plastic waste recycling is
referred [1,16,21] for the selection of these particular impact
categories.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Endpoint assessment
Assessment and comparison of the environmental impacts
is done for scenarios A, B & C in terms of endpoint
assessment categories (damage to ecosystem quality, damage
to human health, and damage to resources). Fig. 2 graphically
and table 2 numerically show the results in terms of
standardized points. The results show that scenario B creates
highest damage to environment followed by scenario C and
scenario A in selected endpoint categories. Fig. 2 shows that
manufacturing phase is mainly responsible for this
environmental damage followed by waste treatment and raw
material phases.

Resources and Quantity

Phases Unit
emissions A B C
Raw material

Virgin PET granules 1.33E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 g

Waste PET bottles 0.00E+00 1.60E+03 1.60E+03 g

Electricity shredder 0.00E+00 2.34E+03 2.34E+03 KJ

Manufacturing

Electricity oven 0.00E+00 6.96E+03 6.96E+03 KJ

Electricity extruder 4.82E+04 4.82E+04 4.82E+04 KJ

Electricity 3-d printer
2.34E+04 2.34E+04 2.34E+04 KJ
Waste PET shredder 0.00E+00 2.13E+02 2.13E+02
Waste treatment
Fig. 2. Graphical comparisons of endpoint environmental impacts from
different scenarios
g
Table 2. Numerical comparisons of endpoint environmental impacts from

Waste PET oven 0.00E+00 6.06E+01 6.06E+01 g different scenarios

Assessment Raw Manufactu- Waste Total
Scenarios
Waste PET extruder 3.30E+02 3.30E+02 3.30E+02 g category material ring treatment Impacts

Ecosystem A 1.62E-04 1.09E-03 9.12E-02 9.25E-02

Waste PET 3-D printer 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 g
quality B 0.00E+00 1.23E+00 1.10E-01 1.34E+00
(points) C 0.00E+00 7.43E-02 1.10E-01 1.84E-01
3.4. Impact assessment
A 5.77E-04 3.39E-03 2.87E-01 2.91E-01
Human health
Life cycle impact assessment has been conducted to B 0.00E+00 3.83E+00 3.46E-01 4.17E+00
(points)
quantify the environmental impacts in different midpoint and C 0.00E+00 1.18E-01 3.46E-01 4.64E-01
endpoint categories. There are various methods (ReCiPe,
A 2.54E-04 7.02E-04 2.80E-03 3.75E-03
CML, ecoindicator 99, EDIP 2003, Impact 2002+, etc.) of Resources
(points) B 0.00E+00 7.93E-01 3.37E-03 7.97E-01
LCA in the Umberto NXT software. ReCiPe (midpoint and
C 0.00E+00 5.44E-02 3.37E-03 5.78E-02
endpoint) assessment method has been selected in this study
426 Kailash Choudhary et al. / Procedia CIRP 80 (2019) 422–427
Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000 5

These results demonstrate that use of virgin material Table 3. Numerical comparisons of midpoint environmental impacts from
instead of recycled material leads to minimum damage to the different scenarios
environment in all the three endpoint categories. This shows Assessment Raw Manufactur Waste Total
Scenario
that the recycling of PET is highly energy absorbing process category material ing treatment impacts
and the damage to the environment from electricity use for A 4.37E-03 2.83E-02 2.76E+00 2.79E+00
recycling dominates the damage to environment. 3-D printing Climate change
B 0.00E+00 3.20E+01 3.32E+00 3.53E+01
(kg CO2-Eq)
using recycling of waste PET bottles creates environmental C 0.00E+00 1.62E+00 3.32E+00 4.95E+00
damage because shredding and heating processes consume
A 2.24E-03 6.46E-03 2.32E-02 3.19E-02
large amount of electricity. It can be observed that the heating
Fossil depletion B 0.00E+00 7.30E+00 2.79E-02 7.32E+00
process, used to remove moisture, consumes 8% energy. (kg oil-Eq)
C 0.00E+00 4.50E-01 2.79E-02 4.78E-01
Better technology for moisture removal can decrease the
environmental impacts of the recycling process. However, the A 1.59E-03 7.92E-03 3.57E-01 3.67E-01
scenario C creates lesser environmental impacts than scenario Human toxicity B 0.00E+00 8.94E+00 4.31E-01 9.37E+00
(kg 1,4-DCB-Eq)
B due to the use of solar electricity. Hence, from C 0.00E+00 3.96E-01 4.31E-01 8.27E-01
environmental perspective, the recycling of PET bottles is A 1.45E-10 2.48E-10 5.34E-09 5.73E-09
beneficial only if the energy used for the recycling process is Ozone depletion B 0.00E+00 2.80E-07 6.43E-09 2.87E-07
clean (renewable). (kg CFC-11-Eq)
C 0.00E+00 8.59E-08 6.43E-09 9.24E-08
A 2.00E-05 1.73E-04 8.40E-04 1.03E-03
4.2. Midpoint assessment Terrestrial
acidification (kg B 0.00E+00 1.96E-01 1.01E-03 1.97E-01
SO2-Eq) C 0.00E+00 8.41E-03 1.01E-03 9.43E-03
Fig. 3 graphically shows the comparison of environmental
impacts from the scenarios A, B & C under different phases in A 1.09E-05 8.53E-05 1.47E-03 1.56E-03
terms of percentage. The percentage bar charts are used Water depletion
B 0.00E+00 9.64E-02 1.77E-03 9.81E-02
(m3)
because midpoint impact category has different unit. Climate C 0.00E+00 9.24E-03 1.77E-03 1.10E-02
change (kg CO2-Eq), fossil depletion (kg oil-Eq), human
toxicity (kg 1,4-DCB-Eq), ozone depletion (kg CFC-11-Eq),
4.3. Economic assessment
terrestrial acidification (kg SO2-Eq), and water depletion (m3)
are selected as midpoint categories to illustrate the
Table 4 shows the economic comparison between the
environmental impacts of different scenarios.
conventional and solar electricity for the production of one
It is observed from Fig. 3 that waste treatment phase of
kilogram of filament by recycling the PET bottle waste using
PET is dominating in selected midpoint categories for
three different scenarios. As mentioned earlier, the location of
scenario A. Scenario B is dominated by manufacturing phase
experimental setup is BITS Pilani, India situated in the north-
in the selected midpoint impact categories. For scenario C,
east part of India. The cost of conventional electricity of one
waste treatment phase is dominating in climate change and
unit (1 kWh) at this location is INR 7.5. The electricity cost
human toxicity categories; and manufacturing phase is
produced from solar plant is INR 2.7 for one unit as claimed
dominating in other categories. The raw material phase has
by ministry of new and renewable energy (MNRE), India
zero impact in scenarios B & C because the waste PET bottles
[25,26]. BITS Pilani has installed a solar plant of one MWh in
are used as raw material in these scenarios. Scenario A shows
the campus. Scenario A uses the virgin granules which can be
a little impact in raw material phase due to the use of virgin
directly extruded to make wires for 3-D printing. Shredding
PET as raw material.
and heating processes are not required. Thus, for scenario A,
the cost of electricity is zero for these processes in table 4.

Table 4. Economic comparison for recycling of PET bottles

Duration Conventional electricity Solar electricity cost
Electricity
Process of work cost (per unit charges = (per unit charges =
(kWh)
(minutes) INR 7.5) INR 2.7)
Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C
Shredding 39 0.65 0.00 4.88 1.76
Heating 313 1.93 0.00 14.49 5.22
Extrusion 159 13.39 100.39 100.39 36.14
3-D
printing 6706 6.48 48.63 48.63 17.51
Total cost INR 149.02 INR 168.40 INR 60.62

It is observed that electricity produced by solar source has

Fig. 3. Graphical comparisons of midpoint environmental impacts from
one third of the cost compared to conventional electricity.
different scenarios
Thus, the filament produced by scenarios A & B is costly as
compared to scenario C due to the use of conventional
electricity in scenarios A & B.
 Kailash Choudhary et al. / Procedia CIRP 80 (2019) 422–427
6 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000
5. Conclusions
PET is the most commonly used thermoplastic for
packaging of the products. Recycling of PET is essential to
reduce the depletion of the natural resources and to enhance
sustainability by reverse logistics. This study, through
experimental investigation, assesses and compares the
environmental and economic aspects for the recycling of the
PET water bottle waste through three scenarios.
This study has found that use of virgin PET granules with
conventional form of electricity (scenario A) to make filament
for 3-D printing has least impact to the environment as
compared to other two alternates (scenarios B & C), because
of the absence of shredding and heating operations. However,
use of clean energy (solar) for recycling of PET bottle waste
(scenario C) is economically beneficial as compared to other
alternates (scenarios A & B). Hence, scenario C is a
sustainable solution for the problem of PET bottle waste
recycling when looked from combined economic and
environmental perspectives. The use of conventional Indian
electricity mix for the recycling of PET bottle waste (scenario
B) to make 3-D printing filament has higher cost as well as
higher damage to the environment. Hence, this study
concludes recycling of waste PET for 3-D printer filaments
will be beneficial only with renewable sources of electricity.
This study observed in the experiment that the quality of
the printed product is degraded with recycled material as
compared to the virgin material. Further experiments should
be conducted to identify the optimum mix of virgin and
recycled PET with additives to produce quality printed
products. However, the study is a region specific experimental
investigation. The mass production of filaments with waste
PET bottles may end-up with the different results. Better
technologies for moisture removal and filament extrusion can
reduce the environmental as well as economic impacts of
waste PET bottle recycling.
References
[1] Gu F, Guo J, Zhang W, Summers PA, Hall P. From waste plastics to
industrial raw materials: A life cycle assessment of mechanical plastic
recycling practice based on a real-world case study. Sci Total Environ
2017;601:1192-7.
[2] Civancik-Uslu D, Ferrer L, Puig R, Fullana-i-Palmer P. Are functional
fillers improving environmental behavior of plastics? A review on LCA
studies. Sci Total Environ 2018;626:927-40.
[3] CSIR-National Chemical Laboratory, Pune, Government of India 2018.
http://www.ncl-india.org/ (accessed september 11, 2018).
[4] Benavides PT, Dunn JB, Han J, Biddy M, Markham J. Exploring
Comparative Energy and Environmental Benefits of Virgin, Recycled,
and Bio-Derived PET Bottles. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 2018;6:9725-33.
[5] Foolmaun RK, Ramjeeawon T. Comparative life cycle assessment and
life cycle costing of four disposal scenarios for used polyethylene
terephthalate bottles in Mauritius. Environ Technol 2012;33:2007-18.
[6] NCL Innovations, CSIR-National Chemical Laboratory, Pune 2018.
www.petrecycling.in (accessed september 11, 2018).
[7] PET packaging association for clean environment (PACE), PACE India
2018. http://paceindia.org.in/index.html. (accessed september 11, 2018).
[8] Toniolo S, Mazzi A, Niero M, Zuliani F, Scipioni A. Comparative LCA
to evaluate how much recycling is environmentally favourable for food
packaging. Resour Conserv Recycl 2013;77:61-8.
427
[9] Sangwan KS, Choudhary K, Batra C. Environmental impact assessment
of a ceramic tile supply chain – a case study. Int J Sustain Eng
2017;11:211-6.
[10] Sangwan KS, Choudhary K. Benchmarking environmental performance
of electric insulator supply chain in India using life cycle assessment.
Int J Life Cycle Assess 2018. doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1455-7.
[11] Guinee JB, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Zamagni A, Masoni P, Buonamici
R, Ekvall T, Rydberg T. Life Cycle Assessment : Past, Present, and
future. Environ Sci Technol 2011;45:90-6.
[12] Klöpffer W. The Role of SETAC in the Development of LCA. Int J Life
Cycle Assess 2006;11:116-22.
[13] Choudhary K, Soherwordi SA, Singh Y, Sangwan KS. Evaluation and
comparison of environmental performance for shackle insulators – a
case study. Manag Environ Qual An Int J 2018. doi.org/10.1108/ MEQ-
04-2018-0073.
[14] De Haes HAU, Jolliet O, Norris G, Saur K. UNEP / SETAC Life Cycle
Initiative Background, Aims and Scope. Int J Life Cycle Assess
2002;7:192-5.
[15] Sangwan KS, Herrmann C, Soni MS, Jakhar S, Posselt G, Sihag N,
Bhakar V. Comparative Analysis for Solar Energy Based Learning
Factory: Case Study for TU Braunschweig and BITS Pilani. Procedia
CIRP 2018;69:407-11.
[16] Zhao P, Rao C, Gu F, Sharmin N, Fu J. Close-looped recycling of
polylactic acid used in 3D printing: An experimental investigation and
life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018;197:1046-55.
[17] Gaikwad V, Ghose A, Cholake S, Rawal A, Iwato M, Sahajwalla V.
Transformation of E-Waste Plastics into Sustainable Filaments for 3D
Printing. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering. 2018;6:14432-40.
[18] Kreiger MA, Mulder ML, Glover AG, Pearce JM. Life cycle analysis of
distributed recycling of post-consumer high density polyethylene for 3-
D printing filament. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2014;70:90-6.
[19] Kreiger M, Pearce JM. Environmental life cycle analysis of distributed
three-dimensional printing and conventional manufacturing of polymer
products. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering. 2013;1:1511-9.
[20] Cerdas F, Juraschek M, Thiede S, Herrmann C. Life cycle assessment of
3D printed products in a distributed manufacturing system. Journal of
Industrial Ecology. 2017;21:80-93.
[21] Garcia FL, Moris VA, Nunes AO, Silva DA. Environmental
performance of additive manufacturing process–an overview. Rapid
Prototyping Journal. 2018;24:1166-77.
[22] ISO 14040 International Standard. Environmental management - Life
cycle assessment - Principles and framework. Geneva, Switzerland
2006.
[23] ifu hamburg. Umberto NXT Universal. ifu hamburg, Hamburg 2017.
[24] Bhakar V, Agur A, Digalwar AK, Sangwan KS. Life cycle assessment
of CRT, LCD and LED monitors. Procedia CIRP. 2015;29:432-7.
[25] Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), Government of India
2014. https://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/Scheme-Grid-
Connected-Rooftop-&-small-solar-power-plants.pdf. (accessed
september 22, 2018).
[26] Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), Government of India
2016. https://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/Draft-EPC-SBG-
19072016.pdf. (accessed september 22, 2018).