Production of fine and speciality chemicals: procedure for the estimation of LCIs

  • Georg Geisler
  • Thomas B. Hofstetter
  • Konrad Hungerbühler
LCA Methodology with Case Study

Abstract

Goal, Scope, Background

To improve the environmental performance of chemical products or services, especially via comparisons of chemical products, LCA is a suitable evaluation method. However, no procedure to obtain comprehensive LCI-data on the production of fine and speciality chemicals is available to date, and information on such production processes is scarce. Thus, a procedure was developed for the estimation of LCIs of chemical production process-steps, which relies on only a small amount of input data.

Methods

A generic input-output scheme of chemical production process-steps was set up, and equations to calculate inputs and outputs were established. For most parameters in the resulting estimation procedure, default values were derived from on-site data on chemical production processes and from heuristics. Uncertainties in the estimated default values were reflected as best-case and worst-case scenarios. The procedure was applied to a case study comparing the production of two active ingredients used for crop protection. Verification and a sensitivity analysis were carried out.

Results and Discussion

It was found that the impacts from the mass and energy flows estimated by the procedure represent a significant share of the impacts assessed in the case study. In a verification, LCI-data from existing processes yielded results within the range of the estimated best-case and worst-case scenarios. Note that verification data could not be obtained for all process steps. From the verification results, it was inferred that mass and energy flows of existing processes for the production of fine and speciality chemicals correspond more frequently to the estimated best-case than to the worst-case scenario. In the sensitivity analysis, solvent demand was found to be the most crucial parameter in the environmental performance of the chemical production processes assessed.

Conclusion

Mass and energy flows in LCIs of production processes for fine and speciality chemicals should not be neglected, even if only little information on a process is available. The estimation procedure described here helps to overcome lacking information in a transparent, consistent way.

Recommendations and Outlook

Additional verifications and a more detailed estimation of the default parameters are desirable to learn more about the accuracy of the estimation procedure. The procedure should also be applied to case studies to gain insight into the usefulness of the estimation results in different decision-making contexts.

Keywords

Chemical production process estimation fine chemicals life cycle inventory analysis (LCI) product comparison speciality chemicals 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Boustead I (1999): Eco-Profiles of Plastics and Related Intermediates. Association of Plastics Manufacturers in Europe (APME), BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Stalmans M, Berenbold H, Berna JL, Cavalli L et al. (1995): European Life-Cycle Inventory for Detergent Surfactants Production. Tenside Surf Det 32, 84–109Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Frischknecht RE, Bollens U, Bosshart S, Ciot M et al (1996): ökoinventare von Energiesystemen (LCIs of Energy Systems). Swiss Federal Office of Energy, Bern, 3rd ed.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Simapro 4.0 (2001): Pré consultants B.V., Amersfoort, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Jödicke G, Zenklusen O, Weidenhaupt A, Hungerbühler K (1999): Developing environmentally sound processes in the chemical industry: a case study on pharmaceutical intermediates. J Cleaner Prod 7, 159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Kniel GE, Delmarco K, Petrie JG (1996): Life cycle assessment applied to process design: Environmental and economic analysis and optimization of a nitric acid plant. Env Prog 15, 221–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Jimenez-Gonzalez C, Kim S, Overcash MR (2000): Methodology for developing gate-to-gate life cycle inventory information. Int J LCA 5, 153–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Blickenstorfer C (1999): Analyse des Energieverbrauchs eines Mehrprodukte — Batch — Betriebes: Fallbeispiel Reaktivfarbstoffproduktion. (Analysis of Energy Use in Multipurpouse — Batch — Production: Case-Study on the Production of Reactive Dyestuffs). Dissertation, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Laboratory of Technical Chemistry, ZürichGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Grant CD (2001): Energy Management in Chemical Industry. In: Ullmann’s Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. New York. John Wiley & Sons, 6th ed.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Ullmann’s Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry (2001): John Wiley & Sons, New York, 6th ed.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Bretz R, Frankhauser P (1996): Screening LCA for a large number of products. Int J LCA 1, 139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Shonnard DR, Hiew DS (2000): Comparative environmental assessments of VOC recovery and recycle design alternatives for a gaseous waste stream. Environ Sci Technol 34, 5222–5228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Bretz R, Frankhauser P (1997): Life-cycle assessment of chemical production processes: A tool for ecological optimization. Chimia 51, 213–217Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Heinzle E, Weirich D, Brogli D, Hoffmann VH et al. (1998): Ecological and economic objective functions for screening in integrated development of fine chemical processes. 1. Flexible and expandable framework using indices. Ind Eng Chem Res 37, 3395–3407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Simond O (2001): Personal Communication. CIMO S.A.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Hischier R, Baitz M, Bretz R, Frischknecht R et al. (2003): SETAC LCA Working Group Data Availability and Data Quality, Subgroup 3: Recommended List of Exchanges (in print)Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Colomb G (2001): Emission Abatement at the Chemical Plant in Monthey. CIMO SA, Monthey, Switzerland (confidential)Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Kirk RE, Othmer DE (eds.) (1991): Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Weissermel K, Arpe H-J (1998): Industrial Organic Chemistry. Wiley-VCH, WeinheimGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Tomlin CDS (ed.) (1997): The Pesticide Manual. British Crop Protection Council, 11th ed.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Beilstein CrossFire plus Reactions (2000). MDL Information Systems GmbH, Frankfurt, 5th ed.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Production Data for an Active Ingredient for Crop Protection and its Precursor (2001): Syngenta Crop Protection SA, Basel, Switzerland (confidential)Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Standard Operation Procedure in Pilot Scale for the Production of an Active Ingredient for Crop Protection (1990): Syngenta Crop Protection SA, Basel, Switzerland (confidential)Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Utility Demands of Three Multipurpose-Batch Production Buildings, from the Years 1998–2001 (2001): CIBA Speciality Chemicals SA, Basel, Switzerland (confidential)Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Frischknecht R (1999): Umweltrelevanz natürlicher Kältemittel; ökobilanzen von Wärmepumpen und Kälteanlagen, Anhang zum Schlussbericht. (Relevance of Natural Cooling Agents; LCIs of Heat Pumps and Cooling Installations). Swiss Federal Office of Energy, Bern, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Coers KJ (2002): Personal Communication. Syngenta Crop Protection, Basel, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Technical Guidance Document in Support of Commission Directive 93/67/EEC on Risk Assessment for New Notified Sub- stances and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1488/94 on Risk Assessment for Existing Substances (1996): European Commission, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    Hofstetter TB, Capello C, Hungerbühler K (2003): Environmentally Preferable Treatment Options for Industrial Waste Solvent Management: A Case Study of a Toluene-Containing Waste Solvent. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Part B 81, 189–202Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G et al. (2001): CML-Guide to Life Cycle Assessment. Centre of Environmental Studies, Leiden University (CML), LeidenGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Morgan MG, Henrion M (1990): Uncertainty. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Data on Utility Inputs into and Emissions from the Chemical Waste Incinerator and the Wastewater Treatment Plant at the Monthey Production Site (2000): CIMO SA, Monthey, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Cost Sheets on Production Processes for Fine and Speciality Chemicals (2002): Syngenta Crop Protection, Basel, Switzerland (confidential)Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Cost Sheets on Production Processes for Fine and Speciality Chemicals (2002): SF-Chem, Basel, Switzerland (confidential)Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Standard Operation Procedure for the Pilot Production of a Speciality Chemical (1987): Syngenta Crop Protection, Basel, Switzerland (confidential)Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Database of Mass and Energy Balances of Chemical Production Processes (1996): Syngenta Crop Protection, Basel, Switzerland (confidential)Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    Busson J (1998): Position Paper on Responsible Care. International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA). http:// www.icca-chem.orgGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ecomed Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Georg Geisler
    • 1
  • Thomas B. Hofstetter
    • 2
  • Konrad Hungerbühler
    • 1
  1. 1.Swiss Federal Institute of TechnologySafety and Environmental Technology GroupETH HonggerbergSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Water Resources and Drinking WaterSwiss Federal Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (EAWAG)DübendorfSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations