Heather Jackson Bank of Canada Coppelia Marincovic PE International, Inc.
Bank of Canada Comparative LCA of polymer vs. paper bank notes LCA XI conference, October 2011
1. Background, goals & challenges 2. Scope of the project 3. Results and conclusions 4. Reactions to the study
Bank of Canada Comparative LCA of polymer vs. paper bank notes LCA XI conference, October 2011
1. Background, goals & challenges 2. Scope of the project 3. Results and conclusions 4. Reactions to the study
Bank of Canada Comparative LCA of polymer vs. paper bank notes LCA XI conference, October 2011
Background
The Bank of Canada, Canada’s central bank, is issuing a new series of bank notes starting in 2011 Major change Cotton-based paper to polypropylene substrate Distinctly different design (clear window areas) Different supply chain Increased longevity in circulation
10.10.2011
4
New designs considerations
Current Design - Paper
Resistance to counterfeiting Cost Production process capability Environmental impact
New Design - Polymer 10.10.2011
5
Goals of the study
Evaluate the environmental impacts of producing and distributing Canadian bank notes based on two different substrates – cotton�based paper vs. polymer Identify substances of concern whether in the form of bank note components or emissions arising from bank note production Reveal those aspects of banknote production and distribution that could be targeted to further reduce environmental impact Follow ISO standard Life Cycle Assessment procedures
10.10.2011
6
Challenges
Confidentiality Bank note manufacturers and suppliers are necessarily secretive about materials and processes Central banks do not divulge bank note details Worldwide supply chain Two supply chains (paper and polymer) Defining “representative data” “Comparative assertion” Simplifying model for bank note distribution and use phases
10.10.2011
7
1. Background, goals & challenges 2. Scope of the project 3. Results and conclusions 4. Reactions to the study
Bank of Canada Comparative LCA of polymer vs. paper bank notes LCA XI conference, October 2011
Scope of the study
Functional Unit: “Provision of $2,000 (CDN) of cash value over a time span of 7.5 years�
Paper bank note
Lifetime (years)
Weight (kg/100 bank notes)
Reference flow
3
0.102
250 pieces of 20 CAD bank notes (2000/20*7.5/3)
Polymer bank note
7.5
0.093
100 pieces of 20 CAD bank notes (2000/20 *7.5/7.5)
Time coverage: 2009 (current), projected based on 2009 tests (new) Geographical coverage: Canada (distribution/use/EoL), specific countries for production Data sources: Primary data from suppliers whenever possible, otherwise from available databases and literature Background data: GaBi database Allocation: mass Environmental Indicators: Primary Energy Demand, Global Warming Potential, Eutrophication Potential, Acidification Potential, Smog Potential, USETox, Ozone Depletion Potential Deliverable: ISO compliant LCA report 10.10.2011
9
System overview
Resources (materials and energy resources)
Foil Cotton production Foil Thread Ink Plates
Polymer production
Thread Paper production
Polymer conversion
Foil
Bank note printing
Bank note printing
Ink
Distribution
Distribution
Use
Use
End of Life
End of Life
Plates
Printing
Bank note
Emissions to air, discharges to water and soil 10.10.2011
10
Scope of the study
Bank note life cycle step
Representativeness
Data source
Cotton paper production
100%
Supplier (primary data)
Polymer substrate production
100%
Supplier (primary data)
Foil production
100%
Supplier (primary data)
Thread production
100%
Supplier (primary data)
Thread conversion
100%
Supplier (primary data)
Printing
100%
Supplier (primary data)
Ink production
100%
Supplier (primary data)
Distribution logistics
100%
Bank of Canada (primary data)
Armored cars
100%
Contractor (primary data)
Use phase
n/a
Bank notes equipment manufacturers (primary data)
End of Life - landfills
57%
Contractor (primary data)
10.10.2011
11
1. Background, goals & challenges 2. Scope of the project 3. Results and conclusions 4. Reactions to the study
Bank of Canada Comparative LCA of polymer vs. paper bank notes LCA XI conference, October 2011
High level results All life cycle steps included
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
CML2001 - Nov. 09, Global Warming Potential (GWP 100 years) [kg CO2-Equiv.]
69.5%
Primary energy from resources (net cal. value) [MJ]
61.1%
TRACI, Acidification Air [mol H+ Equiv.]
TRACI, Ozone Depletion Air [kg CFC 11Equiv.] TRACI, Smog Air [kg NOx-Equiv.] USETox2008, Ecotoxicity [PAF m3.day] USETox2008, Human toxicity [cases]
10.10.2011
100.0%
67.3%
Primary energy from renewable raw materials (net cal. value) [MJ]
TRACI, Eutrophication (Air & Water) [kg NEquiv.]
80.0%
Current Design
New Design
71.7% 40.0% 55.2% 61.0% 62.9% 69.1% 13
Detailed results for the LC phases
Manufacturing
Primary energy TRACI, Primary from TRACI, TRACI, Ozone energy renewable Global TRACI, Depletion Eutrophica Acidificatio from Warming raw tion Smog Air n Air Air resources materials Potential
0%
10.10.2011
10%
current
4%
new
4%
current
5%
new current new current
20%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
43% 44%
52% 52% 59%
3%
34%
23%
34%
5%
43%
52%
17%
52% 40%
14%
36%
24%
24%
7%
new
End of Life
43%
20%
6%
new
new
Use
53%
current
current
30%
17%
new
current
Distribution
64% 26%
5%
29% 58%
22%
29%
36% 36% 14
Sensitivity analysis - lifetime
120%
Base scenario: 100% = current design (lifetime = 3 years) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
Current New design New design New design New design New design New design New design New design design (3 (3 years) (4 years) (5 years) (6 years) (7 years) (8 years) (9 years) (10 years) years) CML2001 - Nov. 09, Global Warming Potential (GWP 100 years) [kg CO2-Equiv.]
Primary energy from renewable raw materials (net cal. value) [MJ]
Primary energy from resources (net cal. value) [MJ]
TRACI, Acidification Air [mol H+ Equiv.]
TRACI, Eutrophication (Air & Water) [kg N-Equiv.]
TRACI, Ozone Depletion Air [kg CFC 11-Equiv.]
TRACI, Smog Air [kg NOx-Equiv.]
USETox2008, Ecotoxicity [PAF m3.day]
USETox2008, Human toxicity [cases] 10.10.2011
15
Conclusions
The new design (based on a polymer substrate) shows benefits over the current design (based on a cotton paper substrate) because of: Manufacturing: increased lifetime ďƒ lower overall impact (even if the manufacturing of the polymer bank note has a higher environmental impact) Distribution: - polymer bank note has to be transported 2.5 less times than the cotton paper bank notes (less transport of fresh notes to the system, and fewer unfit bank notes sent back to the banking system) - weight of the polymer bank note is lighter; shipments are limited by value and not weight, then a lighter weight ďƒ environmental benefit over time End-of-life: the polymer is mostly made of inactive carbon, which in contrary to cotton paper, does not contribute to GHG emissions in landfill.
10.10.2011
16
1. Background, goals & challenges 2. Scope of the project 3. Results and conclusions 4. Reactions to the study
Bank of Canada Comparative LCA of polymer vs. paper bank notes LCA XI conference, October 2011
Reactions to results
Internally at the Bank of Canada Surprised by dominance of the transportation distances, ATM power usage Critical Review Panel gave insightful feedback External reactions Suppliers appreciated the thoroughness of the study
Full report published on the Bank of Canada website (June 20, 2011) http://www.bankofcanada.ca/banknotes/bank-note-series/polymer/life-cycle-assessment-lca/
10.10.2011
18
Questions?
Heather Jackson Bank of Canada hjackson@bank-banque-canada.ca
Coppelia Marincovic PE International, Inc. c.marincovic@pe-international.com
Bank of Canada Comparative LCA of polymer vs. paper bank notes LCA XI conference, October 2011