ECOFATTING
Use of Environmentally friendly natural products instead
of chloroparaffines in the fatting phase of the tanning cycle
Alessandra Zamagni– ENEA
Pier Luigi Porta - ENEA
Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable
Economic Development
UTVALAMB LCA and Ecodesign Laboratory (Bologna, Italy)
Ecofatting LIFE10 ENV/IT/364
Technical and Progress Meeting - Pisa, 11 December 2013
Pisa, 11 December 2013
1
Action 8 –
Study of the demonstration
about the environmental benefits from the
natural products fatting process
Purposes:
 To assess the environmental profile of the ECOFATTING
process
 To compare the ECOFATTING process with the present
technology based on chloroparaffins.
Method:
 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), according to:


ISO 14040 and 14044
Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) guide
Pisa, 11 December 2013
2
Life Cycle Assessment
Source: Lepech (2010), Stanford University,
TEMPERATURE SETTING UP TO 1650 °C






LCA is a technique for the systematic evaluation of the environmental aspects of
a product or service system through all stages of its life cycle
The only standardised method to quantify a broad range of environmental
impact categories
It provides scientific and quantitative information to identify/prevent
environmental burdens shifting among the different phases of the life cycle, and
the different impact categories
It allows for a comparative assessment between different
product/services/systems performing the same function
Detailed approach: the contribution to the different impact categories of each
elementary flows, of each unit processes, is accounted for
It support optimisation processes whenever a trade off exist.
Pisa, 11 December 2013
3
The LCA framework
Goal & Scope Definition
Definition of the purpose and
intended application of the
study.
Life cycle assessment framework
Goal
definition
Direct applications:
Scope
definition
Interpretation
Inventory
analysis
Impact
assessment
plus Documentation, Review
Pisa, 11 December 2013
• Product development
and improvement
• Strategic planning
• Public policy making
• Marketing
• Other
Inventory Analysis
Compilation and quantification
of inputs and outputs through
the life cycle.
Impact Assessment
Identification and evaluation of
the magnitudes and relative
importance of the environmental
impacts arising from the
inventory analysis.
Interpretation
The results are checked and
From ISO 14044:2006, modified
evaluated to confirm that they
are consistent with the goal of
study.
From ISO 14044:2006, the
modified
4
LCA and the Ecofatting process
Goal and Scope Definition

Objective:

to assess the environmental profile of the ECOFATTING process

To compare the ECOFATTING process with the present technology based on
chloroparaffins.
 Intended audience: ENEA, project partners, LIFE+ Project Officer
 Functional unit: 1 kg of fat liquor compound used in the retanning
process.
 Impact categories and indicators:




The emissions of greenhouse gases-GWP, kg CO -equivalents, in 100 year perspective;
Emission of ozone-depleting gases-kg CFC 11-equivalents, 20 years;
Emission of acidification gases-kg SO - equivalent;
Emissions of gases that contribute to the creation of ground level ozone-kg etheneequivalents;
 Emission of substances to water contributing to oxygen depletion-kg PO -equivalents).
2
2
4 3-
Other indicators needs to be included in order to measure important expected key results:
reduction of water consumption during the tanning process; reduction of toxicity;
reduction of energy consumption.
Pisa, 11 December 2013
5
The fatting process
The traditional and Ecofatting process differ in the types of products used in
the fatting phase during the leather tanning cycle
 Focus on the comparison between the two recipes: Chlorosulfonated products vs
esterified vegetable fatty acid derivatives
% (per ton of
leather)
COMPONENT
% (per ton of
leather)
COMPONENT
Ecofatting Product (FACL)
20,0
Ecofatting Product (FASCL)
20,0
Lecithin
2,5
Lecithin
2,5
Sulphited triglyceride oil (90%)
30,0
Sulphited triglyceride oil (90%)
30,0
Phosphated fatty alcohol
3,5
Phosphated fatty alcohol
3,5
Oleic soap
3,0
Sodium Hydroxide
10,0
Castor oil etoxilated
1,0
Castor oil etoxilated
1,0
Sulphated hydrocarbon
10,0
FAMECL2
10,0
Water
30,0
Water
23,0
FAME-Cl
SFAME-Cl
(as a substitute of CP44)
(as a substitute of SCP)
Pisa, 11 December 2013
6
Life Cycle Inventory – the approach
adopted
Leather life cycle (Source: Joseph et al. 2009)
Ecofatting
RETANNING
SAMMING
SPLITING
SHAWING
RETANNING
FATLIQUORING
DYEING
Pisa, 11 December 2013
7
Life Cycle Inventory – the approach
adopted
Fatliquoring retanning
with (sulpho)chlorinated
fatty acid from paraffin
vs
RECIPE A
CLOPARIN 44F
CLOPARTEN Z
PARAFFIN
Fatliquoring retanning
with palmkernel
(sulpho)chlorinated
methyl-fatty acid ester
RECIPE B
vs
vs
LCA-based
information
FACL
FASCL
LCA-based
information
PALM KERNEL OIL
Process-related
information
Pisa, 11 December 2013
8
Life Cycle Inventory
Data and assumptions:

Different yield for the production of (sulpho)chlorinated fatty acid from
paraffin and palmkernel (sulpho)chlorinated methyl-fatty acid ester

1 kg paraffin  1,81 kg Cloparin 44F; 1 kg FAME
 1,92 kg FACL

1 kg paraffin  1,57 kg Cloparten Z; 1 kg FAME  1,90 kg FASCL

Co-products: hydrochloric acid (presently not allocated, but it does not
affect the results

Chlorine and sulphur in excess are reduced and then sent to disposal

The disposal treatment has not been considering (optimisation at the
industrial scale)

Same quality of the leather after the treatment with the to products
(same softness, fullness, touch, dyebility, tanning power, loosen grain)

Waste water treatment: environmental impact on waste water carried
out by INESCOP
Pisa, 11 December 2013
9
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Cloparin 44F vs FACL
Characterisation results (CML, update nov. 2010)
Cloparin 44F vs FACL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
10
Abiotic Depletion
Characterisation results (CML, Nov. 2010)
Cloparin 44F vs FACL
FACL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
CLOPARIN 44F
11
Global Warming
Characterisation results (CML, Nov. 2010)
Cloparin 44F vs FACL
FACL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
CLOPARIN 44F
12
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Cloparin 44F vs FACL
Characterisation results (ReCiPe ) – focus on TOXICITY
Cloparin 44F vs FACL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
13
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Cloparin 44F vs FACL
Cloparin 44F vs FACL
Characterisation results
(USEtox )
focus on TOXICITY
FACL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
CLOPARIN 44F
14
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Cloparten Z vs FASCL
Characterisation results (CML, update Nov. 2010)
Cloparten Z vs FASCL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
15
Abiotic Depletion
Characterisation results (CML, Nov. 2010)
Cloparten Zvs FASCL
FASCL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
CLOROPARTEN Z
16
Global Warming
Characterisation results (CML, Nov. 2010)
Cloparten Zvs FASCL
FASCL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
CLOROPARTEN Z
17
Global Warming
Characterisation results (CML, Nov. 2010)
Cloparten Z vs FASCL
FASCL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
CLOROPARTEN Z
18
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Cloparten Z vs FASCL
Characterisation results (ReCiPe) – focus on TOXICITY
Cloparten Z vs FASCL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
19
Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Cloparten Z vs FASCL
Characterisation results
(USEtox) – focus on
TOXICITY
FASCL
Pisa, 11 December 2013
Cloparten Z vs FASCL
CLOROPARTEN Z
20
Energy consumption

Information on energy needed for the production of the inputs “palm kernel oil”
and “paraffin”

Life cycle-based data (Ecoinvent v2.2 database, peer reviewed articles)

Sector specific literature
PALM KERNEL OIL


Energy intensive process, with
thermal and electrical energy
being the main contributors
(dryer, cracker, roaster, crusher,
oil-pressing machine, sifter and
bottles pump)
PARAFFIN

Electricity: 0.093 MJ/kg

Thermal energy: 4.58 MJ/kg
Source: Ecoinvent v2.2
Energy to produce 1 kg of palm
kernel oil:

0.346MJ/kg (small mills)

0.217 MJ/kg (medium mills)

0.176 MJ/kg (large mills)
Pisa, 11 December 2013
21
Discussion

The results obtained will be further refined, investigating:

Toxicity impact categories (environmental models still under development)

Information on process water consumption of paraffin and palm kernel oil

Optimisation of the production process in the upscale

Allocation between product and co-product has not been applied
but the analysis carried out demonstrates that it does not affect the
results

The LCA study points out not apparent conclusions


Palm kernel oil: energy intensive production

Benefit to be discussed at a broader scale, considering the marginal use of
the palm kernel oil
Final technical report of the LCA study under preparation
Pisa, 11 December 2013
22
Thank you for your attention
Alessandra Zamagni, Pier Luigi Porta
LCA and Ecodesign Laboratory - ENEA
Via Martiri di Monte Sole, 4
40129 - Bologna
alessandra.zamagni@enea.it ; pierluigi.porta@enea.it
Pisa, 11 December 2013
23