Lifecycle Assessment:
reusable mugs vs. disposable cups"
Refiller, Bern!
25 April 2013!
The comparisons"
4 comparisons are made in this document"
#"
Reusable"
1!
ceramic mug!
paper cup!
2!
KeepCup!
paper cup!
3!
ceramic mug!
styrofoam cup!
4!
KeepCup!
styrofoam cup!
25 April 2013!
VS"
Disposable"
2!
Lifecycle Assessment:
reusable mugs vs. disposable cups!
ASSUMPTIONS"
25 April 2013!
3!
Ceramic mug"
Reusable"
Brand!
IKEA Färgrik!
Material!
ceramic!
Weight!
300g/mug!
25 April 2013!
4!
KeepCup"
Reusable"
Brand!
Materials!
Total
weight!
25 April 2013!
KeepCup!
Lid (PE-Plastik): 20g !
Cup (PP-Plastik): 41g !
Plug (TPU): 9g!
Band (Silicone): 15g !
85g/cup!
5!
Paper cup"
Disposable"
Brand!
Material!
Total
weight!
25 April 2013!
standard!
Lid (HIPS): 3g !
Cup (paper): 12g !
Coating (PE-plastic): 0.1g !
15.1g/cup!
6!
Styrofoam"
Disposable"
Brand!
Materials!
Weight!
25 April 2013!
standard!
Lid (HIPS): 3g !
Cup (EPS): 10g!
13/cup!
7!
Lifecycle description 1"
Manufacturing / Use / Disposal"
Same assumption for all ceramic mug, paper cup, styrofoam cup:!
-  Transport from production to place of use: 800km (truck) – for example from Germany.
Transport from place of use to waste treatment: 20km (truck) – to the next incineration!
!
Assumptions for KeepCup:!
-  Transport from production to place of use: 25’000km by boat + 1’000km by truck
(produced in Australia). Transport from place of use to waste treatment: 20km (truck) –
to the next incineration!
!
!
25 April 2013!
8!
Lifecycle description 2"
Manufacturing / Use / Disposal"
It is assumed that no transport is involved each time reusables are washed (washing
machine usually located in the same place of consumption). !
!
Potential energy recovered from incineration not taken into account as: “Incineration of
materials does not save much energy while producing a lot of CO2” (Source: http://
www.dunand.northwestern.edu/courses/Case%20study/Scott%20Cronin%20-%20Coffee%20Cup
%20Comparison.pdf”) !
!
!
!
25 April 2013!
9!
LCA Indicators"
Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Non-renewable Energy (NRE)"
Global Warming Potential (GWP) "
Impact based!
Unit: kg CO2-Eq / kg!
!
Non-renewable Energy (NRE) "
Resource based!
Unit: MJ-Eq / kg!
25 April 2013!
10!
Washing machine"
For ceramic mugs"
Based on the canteen in the University Basel (Petersgraben 1, Basel, CH) of the firm SV
Group AG, the model used for this comparison is: Winterhalter GS515 (http://www.winterhalter.co.uk/index.php?id=768)!
Energy use: 0.12 kWh/rinse cycle!
Capacity: 20 mugs per basket!
Water use: 2.4L water/rinse cycle"
Environmental impact of washing:"
0.00094 kg CO2-eq/mug (GWP)!
0.058 MJ-eq/mug (NRE)!
!
25 April 2013!
11!
Hand washing"
For KeepCups"
Water use: 0.5L water use per cup washed!
"
Environmental impact of washing:"
50% hot water (0.25L):!
-  0.005 kg CO2-eq/mug (GWP)!
-  0.281 MJ-eq/mug (NRE)!
50% cold water (0.25L):!
-  0.00022 kg CO2-eq/mug (GWP)!
-  0.005 MJ-eq/mug (NRE)!
25 April 2013!
12!
Break-even"
The minimum number of times a reusable cup/mug has to be reused (and washed) in
order to be environmentally friendlier than using the same amount of disposable cups. !
!
!
!
!
!
Source:
http://www.dunand.northwestern.edu/courses/Case%20study/Scott%20Cronin%20-%20Coffee%20Cup%20Comparison.pdf!
!
!
25 April 2013!
13!
Lifespan"
Reusable / Disposable"
Reusable"
It is assumed that the lifespan of reusable ceramic mugs or KeepCups is 500 uses.!
-  1 year, 48 weeks/year, 5 workdays/week, ~2 coffees/day!
-  Ceramic mugs have usually a max. lifespan of 1000 uses!
-  The firm KeepCup offers a warranty of 1 year, the cups are meant to be used several
times a day!
!
Disposable"
Disposables are only used once and thereafter disposed in the garbage.!
25 April 2013!
14!
Lifecycle Assessment:
reusable mugs vs. disposable cups!
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT"
25 April 2013!
15!
Summary of environmental impacts"
At 500 uses"
GWP [kg CO2-eq./cup]"
NRE [MJ/cup]"
Product"
Production"
Washing"
Total"
Production"
Washing"
Total"
Paper cup"
29.502745!
0!
29.503!
284.61303!
0!
284.613!
Styrofoam cup"
59.21435!
0!
59.214!
692.8754!
0!
692.875!
Ceramic mug"
0.75269!
0.291!
1.043!
13.41948!
15.845!
29.264!
KeepCup"
0.55321!
0.291!
0.844!
8.453808!
15.845!
24.299!
25 April 2013!
16!
Lifecycle Assessment:
reusable mugs vs. disposable cups!
COMPARISONS"
25 April 2013!
17!
Comparison"
#1 ceramic mug vs paper cup"
Break-even"
LCA indicator!
Number of uses!
GWP!
13!
NRE!
25!
Comparison (at 500 uses)"
Ceramic mugs emit 28 times less CO2-eq.
emissions than disposable cups!
Ceramic mugs require 10 times less nonrenewable energy than disposable cups!
25 April 2013!
18!
Comparison"
#2 KeepCup vs paper cup"
Break-even"
LCA indicator!
Number of uses!
GWP!
9!
NRE!
16!
Ecological comparison (at 500 uses)"
KeepCups emit 35 times less CO2-eq. emissions
than disposable cups!
KeepCups require 12 times less non-renewable
energy than disposable cups!
25 April 2013!
19!
Comparison"
#3 ceramic mug vs styrofoam cup"
Break-even"
LCA indicator!
Number of uses!
GWP!
6!
NRE!
25!
Ecological comparison (at 500 uses)"
Ceramic mugs emit 57 times less CO2-eq.
emissions than styrofoam cups!
Ceramic mugs require 24 times less nonrenewable energy than styrofoam cups!
25 April 2013!
20!
Comparison"
#4 KeepCup vs styrofoam cup"
Break-even"
LCA indicator!
Number of uses!
GWP!
5!
NRE!
16!
Ecological comparison (at 500 uses)"
KeepCups emit 70 times less CO2-eq. emissions
than styrofoam cups!
KeepCups require 29 times less non-renewable
energy than styrofoam cups!
25 April 2013!
21!
Lifecycle Assessment:
reusable mugs vs. disposable cups!
SAVINGS ESTIMATION OF THE PILOT PROJECT
“REFILLER-FRIENDLY UNIVERSITY OF BASLE”"
25 April 2013!
22!
Estimation of potential savings"
Based in the pilot project “Refiller-Friendly University Basel”"
The coffee at the university is either served in ceramic mugs or paper cups. The status
quo is (same period of last year), that 70% of the coffee is served in paper cups. During a
pilot project, the introduction of communication measures aim to change people’s habits
and bring them to have their coffee in ceramic mugs instead of paper cups. During the
pilot project the amount of coffees served in paper cups drop from 70% to 10%.!
Assumption: total coffee consumption doesn’t change. Only ceramic mugs and paper
cups are taken into account.!
Timespan of pilot project: 9 weeks (25. Februar bis 26. April 2013) !
Total amount of coffee served in 9 weeks: 20’000!
25 April 2013!
23!
Calculations (only GWP)"
Status quo"
!
% of total!
# coffee sold!
GWP (kg)!
Waste (kg)!
Waste bags (60L)!
Paper Cup!
70%!
14,000 !
826.08 !
210.0 !
70 !
Ceramic mug!
30%!
6,000 !
12.52 !
!
!
Total!
100%!
20,000 !
838.60 !
!
!
Pilot project"
!
% of total!
# coffee sold!
GWP (kg)!
Waste (kg)!
Waste bags (60L)!
Paper Cup!
10%!
2,000 !
118.01 !
30.0 !
10 !
Ceramic mug!
90%!
18,000 !
37.56 !
!
!
Total!
100%!
20,000 !
155.57 !
!
!
Difference (Status quo – Pilot project)"
!
% of total!
# coffee sold!
GWP (kg)!
Waste (kg)!
Waste bags (60L)!
Paper Cup!
60%!
12,000 !
708.07 !
180.0 !
60 !
Ceramic mug!
-60%!
(12,000)!
(25.04)!
!
!
683.03 !
!
!
Total!
25 April 2013!
0%!
- !
24!
Conclusions"
By changing consumption from single-use paper cups to porcelain mugs, the 9 weeks of
pilot project at the University of Basle improved the situation in three main ways:!
"
-  12’000 paper cups were substituted by reusing ceramic mugs"
-  180 kg less waste produced from paper cups (corresponding to 60 waste bags (60L)!
-  680 kg of CO2-equivalent emissions have been saved (corresponding to driving a standard car almost 7’000 km) "
25 April 2013!
25!