See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/242123840

Ecoefficiency Analysis of Textile Coating Materials

Article  in  Journal of the Iranian Chemical Society · December 2006

DOI: 10.1007/BF03245958

CITATIONS READS
8 440

4 authors, including:

Seyed Mansour Bidoki A. A. Alamdar-Yazdi

Yazd University Yazd University
19 PUBLICATIONS   354 CITATIONS    32 PUBLICATIONS   146 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Decoloration of Textile Wastewater View project

Tissue engineering View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Seyed Mansour Bidoki on 15 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of the Iranian Chemical Society, Vol. 3, No. 4, December 2006, pp. 351-359.
JOURNAL OF THE
Iranian
Chemical Society

Eco-efficiency Analysis of Textile Coating Materials

S.M. Bidokia,*, R. Wittlingerb, A.A. Alamdara and J. Burgerb
a
Textile Department, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
b
BASF Aktiengesellschaft, D-67056 Ludwigshafen, Germany

(Received 23 July 2005, Accepted 13 September 2006)

Eco-efficiency is critical for organisations that seek to be both environmentally conscious and profitable. It helps to “produce
more out of less” to avoid wasting natural resources and to reduce emissions and damage to the environment. The textile coating
and laminating industry, utilising solvent or water-based polymeric mixtures, is one of the industries coming under extreme
environmental pressure to replace traditional procedures and use eco-efficient coating agents. In this study, eco-efficiency analysis
was used to compare the eco-effectiveness of two different coating agents, polyacrylate and polyurethane, each in organic solution
as well as aqueous dispersion forms. The “ecological fingerprint” and eco-efficiency portfolio were graphically illustrated for
these coating agents based on the customer benefit, defined as coating one square meter of a textile fabric in a conventional
laminating unit. According to the analysis results, polyacrylate dispersion in water was the most eco-efficient coating agent whilst
polyurethane resin dissolved in organic solvent was found as the coating agent with the least acceptability as an eco-efficient
product.

Keywords: Eco-efficiency analysis, Cradle to grave analysis, Life cycle assessment, Textile coating, Polyacrylate resins,
Polyurethane resins

INTRODUCTION economy is the physical volume of materials flowing through

Eco-efficiency is the leading theme in the Environmental
Cluster Program and is considered to be the underlying
operating principle of enterprises, authorities and households,
which helps to keep their goals and attitudes environmentally
friendly. Eco-efficiency, by definition, is the ratio between the
creation of economic value and ecological impact. Eco-
efficiency is also defined as the art of doing more with less or
minimizing costs and maximizing the value. It promotes the
creation of goods and services while optimizing resource use,
and reducing wastes and pollution. From the viewpoint of eco-
efficiency, the basic factor in the environmental load of the
*Corresponding author. E-mail: smbidoki@yazduni.ac.ir
the economy. These environmental aspects embrace different
issues, from an increased demand on the inherent properties of
chemicals to targeting the reduction of carbon dioxide
emissions. A search for the means to reduce the amount of
materials used in final products often results in ways to reduce
the environmental load of the economy without impairing the
competitiveness of the economy or the welfare of the
population [1,2].
Eco-efficiency is a way to maximize efficiency, while
minimizing the impact on the environment. It can be seen as
the relationship between the economic output and the
environmental impact caused by products or activities. There
are no international standards for conducting eco-efficiency
analysis, but different tools and methods can be combined to
 Bidoki et al.
assess the eco-efficiency of products or processes. Common to
all eco-efficiency studies is the comparison of different
products or processes from a life cycle perspective. The
purpose of this strategy is to show how life cycle data for
environmental impact and costs can be combined to compare
products with the same function. Since the customer benefit is
studied from a life cycle perspective, the study indicates how
the customer will benefit from the compared products. The
result of such an analysis can clearly show the most eco-
efficient alternative that provides the specific customer benefit
at the lowest cost and environmental burden.
The analysis only provides comparative information and
no absolute values, since all results are normalized in order to
visualize the comparison of the products in the resulting
diagrams. The target groups in eco-efficiency evaluations are
managers and project leaders, who might use the method for
guidance in decision making, strategy planning, investment
decisions or external communication. Using this analysis
provides guidance in deciding which products or processes are
worth developing from a long-term perspective.
Adding an economic dimension does increase the
complexity of an environmental assessment, but it also
presents an aspect that is of utmost importance in business
decisions. In practice, eco-efficiency has three core objectives:
a) increasing product or service value, b) optimizing the use of
resources and c) reducing environmental impact. Each of these
objectives has opportunities for cost savings, which is why
addressing them makes good business sense. In fact,
companies that have started integrating eco-efficient practices
and tools have demonstrated that eco-efficiency stimulates
productivity and innovation, increases competitiveness and
improves environmental performance.
Eco-efficiency analysis studies the lifecycle of a product
“from cradle to grave”, starting from the extraction of raw
materials from the earth through to recycling after usage of the
product. Six different environmental impact categories are
included in the analysis:
- Raw material consumption
- Energy consumption
- Emissions to air, water and wastes
- Toxicity potential
- Risk/ misuse potential
- Area use
352
Data acquisition and calculations are based on ISO 14040
and 14041 for the categories of raw material consumption,
energy consumption and emissions. For the other categories,
other ways to compile and assess data has been developed. For
the use of raw materials their availability and natural
occurrence are also included in the calculations. In the
calculations, a relative weighting factor also takes into account
the importance that society places on the different forms of
environmental pollution, based on public opinion surveys.
Moreover, the share of the corresponding pollution variable in
the total pollution of the country in question is included. Thus,
both qualitative factors influenced by society as well as
quantitative factors based on statistical measures are used. The
environmental impact that these six categories finally yield is
called the “ecological fingerprint” (Fig. 1a), which shows the
result of the environmental impact. Each environmental
impact category is normalized such that the worst case in each
category is assigned the value one and the others receive a
relative value between zero and one.
The overall pollution of the environment caused by a
product or process will subsequently be plotted against the
total costs in a two-dimensional graph where the resultant
position shows in a simple way the weighted eco-efficiency of
the product relative to the greenhouse warming potential (Fig.
1b) [3,4,5,6].
The scale in the portfolio (Fig. 1b) is inverted so products
with lowest price and lowest environmental impact are found
in the upper right corner. The greater the distance of the points
from the diagonal towards top-right is, the higher the eco-
efficiency of the alternatives. The diagram is easy to
understand for people not involved in the study since the
results in all categories have been normalized, weighted
together and plotted as one point for each alternative in the
diagram.
Eco-efficiency analysis provides a scientific method to
help consumers choose the right product among different
alternatives for optimum cost and environmental impact.
The textile coating industry is one of the sectors under
extreme pressure from environmentalists because of its high
consumption of chemicals combined with huge emission of
organic solvents into the air and the close contact between the
coated product and human body.
Polyacrylate (PAC), polyurethane (PUR) and polyvinyl
 Eco-efficiency Analysis of Textile Coating Materials
a dispersion forms. Dimethylformamide (DMF) is a common
b design and operation have made it possible to avoid the
Fig. 1. (a) Ecological fingerprint, (b) eco-efficiency portfolio
(diagram).
chloride (PVC) are three polymeric families mainly used for
the coating of textile fabrics. Artificial leather, water- and
rain-proof fabrics, wall paper, bath curtains and sports wear,
such as ski clothes, are some examples of the coated products.
Acrylic resins (generally known as polyacrylates) make up
one of the largest product groups used in the paint and coating
sector. Polyacrylates usually consist of copolymers of acrylate
and methacrylate esters with other unsaturated monomers (e.g.
styrene). Choice of suitable monomers allows wide variation
of physical and chemical properties of the resulting polymer.
This family of coating resins are available in solid form,
dissolved in organic solvents or as a dispersion in water.
Polyacrylate polymers do not have unstable double bonds and
do not absorb light above 300 nm; thus they not degraded by
UV radiation (as long as they do not contain styrene or similar
compounds). They are ironable (up to 100 oC), washable, and
water repellant.
Polyurethanes (PUR), another widely-used coating
polymer, is especially noted to be flexible, bulky, breathable,
leather-like, water repellent, and are used in anti-slip coating
applications. PUR polymers can be used in both solution and
solvent for PUR. Dispersion-grade PUR granules are dispersed
in water to make an environmentally compatible and safe form
from an industrial hygiene point of view, as only water (and
no organic solvent) is released into the air upon drying.
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) is among the most commonly
used and cheap materials in the coating industry. When a soft
and flexible plastic is required, especially as a textile coating
material, a plasticizer is added to allow the polymeric chains
to slide against each other. Phtalates are usually used as the
main plastisizers in PVC coating products. They migrate
easily out of PVC since they are not at all bound to the PVC
molecules, and, because of their high solubility in fats and
oils, they can easily enter into the human food cycle.
Although, it is claimed that when burnt, PVC contributes to
the formation of highly toxic dioxin, improvements to plant
formation of dioxin that results from the incineration of PVC-
containing refuse [7,8,9,10].
In the present study, PAC and PUR coating agents in two
forms, dispersed in water and dissolved in organic solvents,
were selected as alternative products and eco-efficiency
analyses were performed on them. The main goal of this
research was to evaluate and summarize the economical and
ecological advantages of using aqueous polymeric dispersions
compared to their organic solutions on the basis of eco-
efficiency rules and calculations. Although our current
research on different coating agents including PVC has shown
interesting results on eco-effectiveness of PVC in the coating
industry, because of the controversy it may cause we preferred
to report the eco-efficiency analysis of PVC in another paper
after further investigation.
353
 Bidoki et al.

METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS alternative commercial products. A schematic model of the

The costs and relating environmental impacts were
calculated in accordance with the eco-efficiency analysis
method developed by BASF [1] as a key tool, in which the
whole production chain, from cradle to grave, was considered.
Similar procedures for coating a plain-woven polyester (PET)
fabric with different coating polymers were adopted for
analysis. The coating agents considered in this procedure were
polyacrylic resins and polyurethane resins each in two forms:
dissolved in organic solvent and dispersed in water (four
alternative products in total). The dispersion forms were
BASF Aktiengesellschaft products (Lurapret Cxx) as the
acrylic dispersion and Lurapret DPS as the polyurethane
dispersion). PAC in ethyl acetate (as an acrylic solvent) and
PUR in DMF (as a PUR solvent) were also considered as
procedure for the eco-efficiency analysis used in this research
is shown in Fig. 2.
The first step in the analysis is to define the customer
benefit, which leads to a definition of the functional unit. The
related user benefit was defined as the coating of 1 m² of
textile fabric (PET woven fabric 52 g m-2) with two layers of
coating polymer and one layer of fluoropolymer (fluorocarbon
polymer) as the finishing agent in the process shown
schematically in Fig. 3. The total weight gain of the fabric
after coating and drying was 20 g per m2.
The ecological analysis starts out as a Life Cycle
Inventory, performed according to ISO 14040 and 14041 and
for each alternative (coating agent), all input during the life
cycle, such as raw materials and energy, and all output during
the life cycle, such as emissions to air, water and other

Define Determine costs Calculate

of individual life total life Normalize Costs
customer
benefit cycle segments cycle costs

Determine ecological impacts Determine relevance and

Identify of individual life cycle society factors for aggregation
products/ segments of the effects categories
processes

Aggregate impacts to form Normalize

effects categories environmental impact
Establish
Life cycle
Combine the effects categories Create eco-efficiency
for each life cycle segment portfolio

Fig. 2. Schematic model of eco-efficiency analysis used in this research (BASF [1]).

Fig. 3. Textile coating (laminating) procedure.

354
 Eco-efficiency Analysis of Textile Coating Materials
wastes, was compiled and calculated. A very sensitive step in
this calculation process is the allocation of flows e.g. releases
to air, water and land. Most of the existing technical systems
yield more than one product. Therefore, materials and energy
flows regarding the process as a whole, as well as
environmental releases must often be allocated to the different
products.
All the costs and environmental impact data were entered
into the calculations to the best of our knowledge at the time
of research while considering that future changes in cost and
impact factors can lead to reasonable changes in calculated
outputs. The data for chemical processes were taken from
publicly available databases or literature and the production
data was taken from the production plants at BASF. If no
information was available in the data sources cited above,
estimations were executed and validated by expert judgments.
The toxicity and risk potentials are also assessed in this step
which was based on European risk phrases [11,12,13].
The environmental impact categories were then combined
via a weighting scheme to form a total value for the
environmental impact. This weighting scheme is made up of
relevance and societal factors (see Fig. 4). The weighted result
is used to compare different alternatives.
First of all, the relevant and societal factors needed to be
determined. The societal factors are based on public views and
opinion polls on how important it is to avoid certain impact
categories and they are adjusted to the geographical region,
where the study is performed (Europe). A relevance factor
answers the question: How much does the product or process
contribute to the total environmental impact in the
geographical area? In the cost analysis, the costs for the end
customer including the sales price (production price), costs
related to utilization of the product and costs related to end-of-
life treatment, are summarized. The results of the analysis
were finally presented in an eco-efficiency diagram (portfolio)
that illustrates the normalized relationship between the
different products based on the cost and environmental impact.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
All consumption and life cycle assessment data was
tabulated using the Microsoft Excel software and all the
necessary inputs were linked to the relevant graphs and
“Societal factors” “Relevance factor”
qualitative quantitative
What value does society How much does the emission
attach to the reduction of the contribute to the total emission
individual potentials? in the region?
Weighting Factors =? (Societal factors x Relevance factors)
Fig. 4. Composition of the total weighting factors [13].
outputs. Relevant data for the European continent were used to
make the results as reliable as possible. Because of the huge
size of the spreadsheet created for the entire calculation, the
results are shown as graphs while detailed data and equations
are available upon request.
Total costs for coating one m2 of polyester fabric with
different coating materials is shown in Fig. 5. As the cost for
purchasing materials is usually higher than other cost sources,
such as packaging, transport and coating on-site, the latter
costs are not shown in the graph although their share in total
cost calculation has been considered.
According to the results, acrylic dispersion is the least
expensive evaluated coating agent, due to the low cost of the
raw materials. PUR in solution is the most expensive agent
because of the higher price of solvent and expensive raw
materials as well as the costly production process employed in
its fabrication.
Energy consumption was calculated as the sum of all
energy carriers although a detailed breakdown into different
fuels and feedstocks, renewable and unrenewable resources
had already been evaluated at the inventory stage. Figure 6
illustrates the energy consumption calculated over the whole
life span of each coating material regarding the consumption
of primary energies. Primary energies are the sum of fossil
forms of energy before production and of the renewable forms
of energy before harvest or use, such as hard coal, oil, gas,
brown coal, nuclear energy, hydraulic power, biomasses, and
so forth. In the case of BASF processes, the corporate
specifications were used in the calculations, while for non-
BASF processes, such as intermediate production procedures
355
 Bidoki et al.

Fig. 5. Total costs in the whole life cycle of different coating agents.

Fig. 6. Primary energy consumption in life cycle of the coated fabric using different coating agents.

performed outside the BASF plants, information supplied by
the Union for the Co-ordination of Production and
Transmission of Electricity (UCPTE) was employed.
The high demand for energy in the production of solvents
was the main disadvantage of both coating agents in solution
form compared to the dispersion form. Packaging, coating on-
site and transport have the lowest contribution to the total
energy consumption, which could not be visibly shown in the
graphical illustration.
The material balance of wastes produced in any process
can be summarized in three categories: special wastes,
domestic-like waste and building rubble/rubbish. Product
residues or leftovers that can be incinerated were also included
in the overall calculation according to the use of incineration
energy and the emissions that occur during incineration. Total
wastage in the life cycle of 1 m2 of the coated fabric according
to coating material is shown in Fig. 7.
PUR in both water and organic solvent showed higher
wastage, mainly in the production of chemicals and
polymerisation. The role of packaging as a source of waste

356
 Eco-efficiency Analysis of Textile Coating Materials

Fig. 7. Weight of wastes released in the life cycle of the coated fabric using different
coating agents.

Fig. 8. Global warming potential from different sub-categories in the life cycle of the
coated fabric using different coating agents.

production is clearly visible in Fig. 7, although its share is not
very high compared to the other sectors.
Air emissions, split up into different types of gases, were
calculated separately and finally added up over the entire life
span of each coated product. Global warming potential (GWP)
from carbon dioxide, photochemical ozone creation potential
(POCP) from methane, acidification potential (AP) from sulfur
oxide or nitrous containing oxides, acids and ammonia, ozone
depletion potential (ODP) from hydrocarbons are different
forms of air emissions considered in the present calculation.
All the above-mentioned discharges to the environment can be
presented as carbon dioxide equivalent emissions in terms of
quantity, which is illustrated in Fig. 8.
Acrylic dispersion was found to be the most favorable
coating agent due to its low emission of carbon dioxide in its
entire life cycle process and, therefore, its low global warming
potential. Acrylic solvent mixture causes the greatest number
of CO2-related problems mainly during the synthesis and

357
 Bidoki et al.

Energy consumption

1.0

Acrylic Dispersion
Area use Emissions
0.5
Acrylic Solvent

PUR Solvent
0.0
PUR dispersion

Ressource consumption Toxicity potential

Risk potential

Fig. 9. Ecological fingerprint in the life cycle of the coated fabric using different coating agents.

refining procedure for making solvents and acrylate polymer.

Following the calculation of all individual categories, the
ecological fingerprint of the alternative coating agents is
graphically presented in Fig. 9.
Acrylic dispersion possesses the highest toxicity potential
as the coated product usually contains traces of free
formaldehyde, which is harmful if it comes into contact with
the human body, although in nearly all other dimensions it
looks to be the best choice. Polyurethane in solvent causes the
highest emmision as the very toxic organic solvent will
evaporate completely into the air during the coating procedure.
Finally, for the creation of the eco-efficiency portfolio, the
figures used in the ecological fingerprint were multiplied by
weighting factors. These multiplications followed by the
addition of all individual criteria gave the necessary data, Fig. 10. Eco-efficiency portfolio for the evaluated coating
which after normalization and along with the cost inputs, agents.
allows for the illustration of the eco-efficiency portfolio. The
ultimate outcome of the analysis for four alternative coating
products is shown in Fig. 10 as an easy underestanding two acrylic dispersion causes almost the same environmental
dimentional eco-efficiency portfolio. The position of each impact as polyurethane and acrylic resins dissolved in organic
coating agent in the portfolio shows the relative cost and solvent, the low cost of production and application, and lower
simultanous environmental load of production, usage and emissions and wastes were the main reasons for the better
finally disposal of the coated textile using different coating rating of acrylic dispersion.The higher cost of polyurethane
agents. production and application may deter customers who are
According to the eco-efficiency portfolio, acrylic concerned about the environmental impact, while willing to
dispersion is the most eco-effiient coating agent. Because use the most economical product available in the market.

358
 Eco-efficiency Analysis of Textile Coating Materials
CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES
Making transparent decisions regarding development and [1]
investment, with an optimal balance for economy, ecology and
social development, is not self-evident and remains to be a
challenge for all concerned. Eco-efficiency analysis is the best [2]
way to guide policies, strategies and practical decisions toward
societal eco-efficiency, contributing to sustainability. By
indicating the cost per unit of environmental improvement, or, [3]
equivalently, the value creation as related to environmental
costs, one may discern between more and less eco-efficient [4]
forms of economic growth and environmental improvement. [5]
Moreover, using the ecology fingerprint, it is possible to find
starting points as to the areas in which improvements should [6]
be achieved in order to optimize the whole system effectively.
Using eco-efficiency analysis in the present research on
four alternative coating agents revealed the eco-efficient [7]
character of polyacrylic resin dispersed in water compared to
that of polyurethane and even polyacrylic resins dissolved in [8]
organic solvents. The higher demand for energy for the
production of solvent in all solvent-based coating processes
and higher amounts of emissions to the air are the main
disadvantages compared to the water dispersions, where water [9]
vapour is the only emission from the chemical composition of
the coating material.
Use of the present results for comparing other similar [10]
processes and chemicals is only valid if a detailed evaluation
is carried out and all the input data and factors are treated in
the same manner. [11]
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS [12]
The authors wish to thank all members of the BASF [13]
Aktiengesellschaft performance chemical group for their
helpful discussions and valuable contributions to this research.
View publication stats
A. Kicherer, H. Pfisterer, November 2000, BASF
Aktiengesellschaft Publication, Ludwigshafen,
Germany.
Finnish Ministry of Environment, August 2001, taken
from http://www.vyh.fi/eng/research/cluster/backrou/
Whatecoe.htm.
P. Saling, A. Kicherer, R. Wittlinger, Internat. J. Life
Cycle Assess. 6 (2001) 1.
R. Landsiedel, P. Saling, Int. J. LCA 7 (2002) 261.
P. Saling, A. Kicherer, Internat. J. Life Cycle Assess. 7
(2002) 203.
The BASF Eco-efficiencyAnalysis Method, November
1999, Taken from http://www.cc.jyu.fi/helsie/pdf/
salinger.pdf.
Electronic Edition of Ullmann’s Encyclopedia of
Industrial Chemistry, 5th ed., Wiley-VCH, 1999.
L. Phillip, M.D. Polakoff, NIOSH Health Hazard
Report 72-58 September 1973, taken from
http://www.ecologycenter.org/iptf/toxicity/pvcmeatwra
p.html, 1993.
P.M. Lemieux, International Plastic Task Force, taken
from http://www.ecologycenter.org/iptf/toxicity/banth
eburn.html, 1997.
S. Forsyth, Medical Waste Incineration is Poisoning
Communities, http://www.revolutionmag.com/newrev
2/hosptoxart.html.
APME Internet Pages and Information on Life Cycle
assessments, Taken from http://www.apme.org/, 2002.
I. Boustead, The Association of Plastics Manufacturers
in Europe (APME) Brussels, April 1999.
S. Bengtsson, L. Sjöborg, Akzo Nobel Product
Stewardship and Sustainability, 2004.
359