posted on 2021-03-16, 16:03authored byGeorge Bishop, David Styles, Piet N.L. Lens
There is currently a shift from petrochemical to bio-based plastics (bioplastics). The application of compre hensive and appropriately designed LCA studies are imperative to provide clear evidence on the comparative
sustainability of bioplastics. This review explores the growing collective of LCA studies that compare the envi ronmental footprints of specific bioplastics against those of petrochemical plastics. 44 relevant studies published
between 2011 and 2020 were reviewed to explore important methodological choices regarding impact category
selection, inventory completeness (e.g. inclusion of additives), boundary definition (e.g. inclusion of land-use
change impacts), representation of biogenic carbon, choice of end-of-life scenarios, type of LCA, and the
application of uncertainty analysis. Good practice examples facilitated identification of common gaps and
weaknesses in LCA studies applied to benchmark bioplastics against petrochemical plastics. Many studies did not
provide a holistic picture of the environmental impacts of bioplastic products, thereby potentially supporting
misleading conclusions. For comprehensive evaluation of bioplastic sustainability, we recommend that LCA
practitioners: embrace more detailed and transparent reporting of LCI data within plastic LCA studies; adopt a
comprehensive impact assessment methodology pertaining to all priority environmental challenges; incorporate
multiple plastic use cycles within functional unit definition and system boundaries where plastics can be recy cled; include additives in life cycle inventories unless there is clear evidence that they contribute <1% to all
impact categories; apply biogenic carbon storage credits only to long-term carbon sinks; account for (indirect)
land-use change arising from feedstock cultivation; prospectively consider realistic scenarios of deployment and
end-of-life, preferably within a consequential LCA framework.