Sustainability and laboratory consumables
Sustainability and laboratory consumables
| Author: Patrick Semadeni
In the past few decades, plastic consumables have found their way into laboratories, making laboratory work safer and more efficient.
The products are light and have good breaking strength. They have good resistance to chemical attacks. They come in all shapes and colours. In addition, the products are relatively cheap.
Many plastic laboratory products are supplied sterile and offer a high level of application safety.
With increasing concern for the environment and the desire to avoid waste, however, many laboratory assistants are asking themselves whether the use of plastic consumables is still ecologically justifiable.
Small amounts – hardly any input into the environment
The discussion about plastics arose due to the pictures of littered beaches and waters. But this litter almost exclusively pertains to consumer goods packaging and 97% of it takes place outside of Europe.
In the overall context, only a few plastics are used in the production of laboratory consumables. Only 8.54% of plastic applications in Switzerland are in the medical sector, which also includes pharmaceuticals.1
Laboratory waste hardly ever ends up in the environment. The chemical, pharmaceutical and health-care sectors have been operating established waste management systems for years.
Disposable items and climate protection
A research team from the Zürich University of Applied Sciences ZHAW has carried out a life cycle assessment of 33 Swiss acute hospitals. The study has shown that the environmental pollution is mainly caused by the building technology, the energy supply and the catering. Medical devices were of little consequence. They only account for 3% of the global climate impact of the hospitals examined. Disposable materials make surprisingly little difference.2
Disposable items can be more sustainable than reusable items
A LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) study from GE Healthcare examines the environmental impact of disposable items. It compares the effects of disposable plastic items on climate, energy and water with those of reusable items made from alternative materials. In the summary, the study states that disposable technologies generally have a lower impact on the environment than traditional stainless steel items, which were used in the study as a reusable variant.
However, the results can change depending on where the raw materials are obtained and the products are manufactured. In particular, the sustainability of the energy mix at the respective location must be taken into account, as well as the required transport routes to the laboratory.3
A LCA must be made in each individual case. In addition to environmental aspects, logistics aspects, safety aspects and operational options must of course also be taken into account.
End of Life options
The end of life options for disposable items are of great importance. Whenever possible, these should be kept in circulation:
Mechanical recycling
In this process, the products are pre-sorted, shredded, washed, dried, sorted and then extruded into plastic pellets. Degassing takes place during the extrusion process. For many waste streams, this is the end of life option of choice, especially if the groups are less contaminated and as pure as possible.
Chemical recycling
In these new processes, plastics are broken down into their monomers by thermolysis or solvolysis. The monomers serve as building blocks for new plastics. Additives, pollutants, etc. can easily be ruled out with this process. Chemically recycled plastics are identical in structure to new material and can also be used in regulated areas.
Energy recovery
Thermal recycling is recommended for chemically and/or biologically contaminated waste that cannot be recycled.
With this end of life option, the enthalpy in the plastic system can be used and, for example, used for heating purposes (district heating networks). 1 kg of polyethylene has a calorific value of up to 46 MJ/kg and is therefore higher than, for example, coal.
Climate protection and disposable items
Only a LCA can answer whether disposable or reusable items are better for climate protection. The following generally applies: the more complex the decontamination, cleaning, reprocessing and quality control, the more likely the balance will be in favour of the disposable product.
What is clear, however, is that the use of recyclates makes a significant contribution to climate protection. The production of one kilogram of polyethylene causes 1.89 kg of CO2 equivalents. The same amount of plastic from chemical recycling – a process suitable for laboratory applications – on the other hand only causes 0.45 kg of CO2 equivalents.4 Products from mechanical recycling also have a much better CO2 balance than those made from new material.
What can Semadeni offer you?
We offer you a wide range of products for your everyday laboratory work, with a very high delivery readiness. Around 70% of our products are already reusable. Do you have ideas on how disposable items can be replaced by reusable products? Please write to us at the email address given below.
Our new Circular Line laboratory bottles contain 30-40% (is determined and certified in batches using the C14 method) of plastic, 80% of which is obtained from waste in the food industry through chemical recycling.
Furthermore, depending on the volume of waste, we can jointly build models that close cycles. Do you have groups in your laboratory that you would like to recycle? Write us an email at recycling(at)semadeni.com
1 Wirtschaftsdaten [economic data] 2020, KUNSTSTOFF.swiss, Aarau, July 2021
2 NZZ am Sonntag, online edition, So steht es um die Ökobilanz der Schweizer Spitäler, Zürich [This is the case with the ecological balance of Swiss hospitals], Zürich, 2 October 2021 / 9.45 p.m.
3 Single-use technology and sustainability: quantifying the environmental impact in biological manufacturing, GE Healthcare Bio Sciences, Uppsala, 2017
4 Plastic Energy Sustainability Report, Plastics Energy, London, 2021