Comparative LCA of feather treatment processes (Steam Explosion, Microbial Fermentation, Mechanical Grinding) for sustainable bioplastic feedstock production

IF 5.3 Q2 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Cleaner Environmental Systems Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-11-28 DOI:10.1016/j.cesys.2025.100372
Sahand Hosouli , Damian Gajdarenko , Klas Ingstorp , Jonna Almqvist , Pietro Bartocci , João Gomes , Philip B. Farrelly , Karen McGillicuddy , Daniel Traas
{"title":"Comparative LCA of feather treatment processes (Steam Explosion, Microbial Fermentation, Mechanical Grinding) for sustainable bioplastic feedstock production","authors":"Sahand Hosouli ,&nbsp;Damian Gajdarenko ,&nbsp;Klas Ingstorp ,&nbsp;Jonna Almqvist ,&nbsp;Pietro Bartocci ,&nbsp;João Gomes ,&nbsp;Philip B. Farrelly ,&nbsp;Karen McGillicuddy ,&nbsp;Daniel Traas","doi":"10.1016/j.cesys.2025.100372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Poultry feathers represent a substantial keratin-rich waste stream with potential for valorisation into bio-based materials. This study evaluates the environmental performance of three novel feather treatment processes ((Steam Explosion (SE), Microbial Fermentation (MF) and Mechanical Grinding (MG)) intended for producing sustainable bioplastic feedstock, using Life Cycle Assessment. A gate-to-gate analysis compared the processes per 1000 kg feather input across multiple impact categories, including GWP, Acidification Potential (AP), Eutrophication Potential (EP), Respiratory Inorganics, and Water Scarcity. The scope was expanded to cradle-to-gate to include upstream farming impacts and compare results with conventional plastics. Gate-to-gate results showed MG had the lowest impacts for GWP (475 kg CO<sub>2</sub> eq.), AP (0.65 kg SO<sub>2</sub> eq.), EP (0.08 kg Phosphate eq.), and Respiratory Inorganics, driven by lower energy use. However, MG showed the highest Water Scarcity (7787 m3 world eq.) due to feather washing. MF exhibited the highest GWP (2035 kg CO<sub>2</sub> eq.) and Respiratory Inorganics, while SE showed the highest AP (1.25 kg SO<sub>2</sub> eq.). Cradle-to-gate, MG and SE offered significant GWP advantages over conventional plastics like PP, LDPE, and HDPE (up to 59 % and 27 % lower GWP, respectively). Similarly, MG and SE demonstrated lower AP (up to 56 % and 48 % lower, respectively) compared to these plastics. However, feather routes showed higher EP when upstream farming impacts were included. In conclusion, MG is the most favourable process regarding climate impact, though its water use is significant. SE provides a balanced alternative. Valorising feather waste offers environmental benefits over conventional plastics, but optimising energy efficiency and water consumption is crucial for enhancing the sustainability of these technologies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34616,"journal":{"name":"Cleaner Environmental Systems","volume":"19 ","pages":"Article 100372"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleaner Environmental Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666789425001187","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Poultry feathers represent a substantial keratin-rich waste stream with potential for valorisation into bio-based materials. This study evaluates the environmental performance of three novel feather treatment processes ((Steam Explosion (SE), Microbial Fermentation (MF) and Mechanical Grinding (MG)) intended for producing sustainable bioplastic feedstock, using Life Cycle Assessment. A gate-to-gate analysis compared the processes per 1000 kg feather input across multiple impact categories, including GWP, Acidification Potential (AP), Eutrophication Potential (EP), Respiratory Inorganics, and Water Scarcity. The scope was expanded to cradle-to-gate to include upstream farming impacts and compare results with conventional plastics. Gate-to-gate results showed MG had the lowest impacts for GWP (475 kg CO2 eq.), AP (0.65 kg SO2 eq.), EP (0.08 kg Phosphate eq.), and Respiratory Inorganics, driven by lower energy use. However, MG showed the highest Water Scarcity (7787 m3 world eq.) due to feather washing. MF exhibited the highest GWP (2035 kg CO2 eq.) and Respiratory Inorganics, while SE showed the highest AP (1.25 kg SO2 eq.). Cradle-to-gate, MG and SE offered significant GWP advantages over conventional plastics like PP, LDPE, and HDPE (up to 59 % and 27 % lower GWP, respectively). Similarly, MG and SE demonstrated lower AP (up to 56 % and 48 % lower, respectively) compared to these plastics. However, feather routes showed higher EP when upstream farming impacts were included. In conclusion, MG is the most favourable process regarding climate impact, though its water use is significant. SE provides a balanced alternative. Valorising feather waste offers environmental benefits over conventional plastics, but optimising energy efficiency and water consumption is crucial for enhancing the sustainability of these technologies.
可持续生物塑料原料生产的羽毛处理工艺(蒸汽爆炸、微生物发酵、机械研磨)的LCA比较
家禽羽毛代表了大量富含角蛋白的废物流,具有转化为生物基材料的潜力。本研究利用生命周期评估方法,评估了用于生产可持续生物塑料原料的三种新型羽毛处理工艺(蒸汽爆炸(SE)、微生物发酵(MF)和机械研磨(MG))的环境性能。一项门对门的分析比较了每1000公斤羽毛输入的过程,涉及多个影响类别,包括GWP、酸化势(AP)、富营养化势(EP)、呼吸无机物和水资源短缺。范围扩大到从摇篮到大门,包括上游农业影响,并与传统塑料进行比较。从门到门的结果显示,MG对GWP (475 kg CO2当量)、AP (0.65 kg SO2当量)、EP (0.08 kg磷酸盐当量)和呼吸无机物的影响最低,这是由于能量消耗较低所致。然而,由于羽毛洗涤,MG表现出最高的缺水程度(7787 m3世界当量)。MF表现出最高的GWP (2035 kg CO2当量)和呼吸无机物,而SE表现出最高的AP (1.25 kg SO2当量)。与PP、LDPE和HDPE等传统塑料相比,从摇篮到大门,MG和SE具有显著的GWP优势(GWP分别降低59%和27%)。同样,与这些塑料相比,MG和SE表现出更低的AP(分别降低56%和48%)。然而,当考虑上游养殖影响时,羽毛路线显示出更高的EP。综上所述,MG工艺对气候的影响是最有利的,尽管它的用水量很大。SE提供了一个平衡的选择。与传统塑料相比,羽毛废物的价值增值具有环境效益,但优化能源效率和水消耗对于提高这些技术的可持续性至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cleaner Environmental Systems
Cleaner Environmental Systems Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
52 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书