Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A comprehensive life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis of fuel production using pyrolysis of polyethylene terephthalate plastic waste

  • Sajad Nezamoleslami
  • , Asadollah Akram*
  • , Mohammad Sharifi
  • , Ashkan Nabavi-Pelesaraei*
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • University of Tehran

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

This study integrates life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost (LCC) analysis for fuel production through the pyrolysis of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) waste. This novel approach examines two scenarios: advanced and simple pyrolysis, within a case study framework. The system boundary is delineated from the input of 1 t of PET waste as the functional unit (FU) through to the production of pyrolysis oil, natural gas, and petroleum coke as marginal fuels. The ReCiPe2016 impact assessment method is applied to LCA, while capital expenditures (CAPEX) and operational expenditures (OPEX) are analyzed for LCC. A key innovation of this study is the inclusion of the hidden costs associated with environmental damage disposal in the OPEX analysis. Results indicate that advanced pyrolysis, with a climate change benefit of −202 kg CO2-eq per FU, performs approximately four times better than simple pyrolysis, which shows a benefit of −47 kg CO2-eq. In most impact categories, the pyrolysis process itself is the main environmental hotspot, while the produced fuels present the primary environmental benefits. The LCC analysis reveals that the total CAPEX for advanced pyrolysis, at $149 per FU, is 50 % higher than that for the simple scenario, primarily due to the costs of purchasing and installing equipment, especially in establishing image processing steps. In terms of OPEX, the simple scenario shows slight advantages due to the absence of catalyst costs. Ultimately, the total LCC for simple and advanced pyrolysis is estimated at approximately -$643 and -$589 per FU, respectively. It can be concluded that environmentally, advanced pyrolysis is always preferable, while economically, starting with catalysts to enhance pyrolysis, followed by adopting image processing technology for automated feedstock sorting, improving purity, pyrolysis efficiency, and fuel yield, offers a strategic progression.
Original languageEnglish
Article numbere01487
JournalSustainable Materials and Technologies
Volume45
Number of pages10
ISSN2214-9937
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2025

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 7 - Affordable and Clean Energy
    SDG 7 Affordable and Clean Energy
  2. SDG 12 - Responsible Consumption and Production
    SDG 12 Responsible Consumption and Production
  3. SDG 13 - Climate Action
    SDG 13 Climate Action

Keywords

  • Economical analysis
  • Environmental damage cost
  • Impact assessment
  • Plastic waste
  • Pyrolysis oil

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comprehensive life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis of fuel production using pyrolysis of polyethylene terephthalate plastic waste'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this