1,721,133 research outputs found
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AS A BRIDGE BETWEEN SCIENTISTS AND NON-SCIENTISTS TO REMOVE BARRIERS AND PREJUDICE
No full textAdvancing communication in solid waste management: leveraging life cycle thinking for environmental sustainability
No full textCommunication is often taken for granted, yet its importance in solid waste management cannot be underestimated. This article explores the importance of effective communication in the field and delves into how Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) can enhance communication and decision-making. It provides a departure from the traditional technical approach, introducing novel perspectives. Through a systematic review of the literature studies published on the topic, the paper examines key aspects of communication and emphasises its critical role in promoting sustainable waste management practices, highlighting the need for competent and well-prepared communication across all sectors. It concludes with compelling recommendations on utilising LCT as a powerful tool to improve communication, enabling stakeholders to gain a holistic understanding of the environmental impacts of their decisions and facilitating informed choices. Through the integration of LCT and effective communication, solid waste management can move closer to achieving sustainable production and consumption practices, reducing environmental impact, and embracing circular economy principles. This article contributes to the literature on solid waste management by shedding light on the crucial link between LCT and communication. LCT, integrated into communication strategies, is instrumental in comprehensively conveying the environmental and social impacts of waste management, fostering understanding and engagement among stakeholders. Collaborative involvement of experts in solid waste management and communication is vital for effective communication. The study recommends investigating LCT and awareness campaigns, communication channels, multi-sector collaboration, technology, cross-cultural communication, policy integration, public-private partnerships, and communication scalability
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Two Different Packaging Systems for Extra-Virgin Olive Oil: Glass Bottle vs. 100% Recycled Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Bottle
No full textUsing the Life Cycle Assessment methodology, this study assesses the environmental sustainability of two packaging alternatives for extra virgin olive oil: the glass bottle and the PET bottle produced with 100% of recycled PET granulate. Six scenarios were compared varying on the type of packaging system and the distribution phase (in terms of distribution country and logistics). The life cycle impacts of the scenarios were estimated with the ReCiPe 2018 H evaluation method, using both the midpoint and endpoint approaches. The findings highlighted the higher environmental sustainability of the recycled PET system compared to the glass system for all the impact categories considered, but especially in terms of the global warming potential, particulate formation, terrestrial acidification, and fossil fuel scarcity for which life cycle impacts of the R-PET were lower than 40% compared to those of the glass system. In terms of global warming, the glass system was responsible for 790-1137 kg CO2 eq. (in function of the destination country considered); while the R-PET system, in the same conditions, showed impacts of 459-634 kg CO2 eq. This is mainly due to the high weight of the glass bottle that affected the impacts of both the production and distribution phases. The mode of transport affected the impacts of the distribution phases highlighting how ship transport was more sustainable than truck transport, even when considering greater distribution distances. The LCA results can help consumers make more informed choices with a view to sustainability, as well as disprove the prejudices that consumers often have towards glass bottle packaging alternatives
Environmental assessment of the recycled paper production: The effects of energy supply source
No full textThe main aim of the study was to assess the environmental performance, through the application of the life cycle assessment, of a recycled paper production process focusing on the energy aspect. The production process occurred in a paper mill that produces packaging paper using paper and cardboard from source separation of municipal solid waste as raw materials. Two scenarios (S1 and S2) were defined by their energy supply sources. A cogeneration (CHP) system using natural gas for the combined production of thermal and electric energy was the source in S1. The Italian electricity grid (using the Italian country mix) and a natural gas boiler were the separate sources for electric and thermal energy, respectively, in S2. Finally, in order to evaluate the environmental effects on the results of the study about the variation in the natural gas supply source, four alternative Italian import mixes (M1, M2, M3, and M4) were defined by varying the contribution of the supplier countries. The environmental impacts were evaluated with ReCiPe 2016 (H) using both midpoint and endpoint approaches. The results showed that for both the scenarios, the energy consumption was the main cause of impacts mainly because of the natural gas contribution. The presence of the cogeneration (CHP) system generated significant environmental benefits compared with the use of energy provided by more conventional sources. The production and use of chemicals as well as the disposal of waste produced during the paper production were other environmental hotspots. The variation in the composition of the Italian import mix of natural gas, in terms of the supplier country’s contribution, had a significant influence on the results. The import of natural gas from Russia was the most impactful option. Since Russia is the country that contributes to the Italian import mix the most, in the next years, the use of natural gas in Italy could become increasingly impactful. Therefore, the replacement of natural gas with renewable sources is an urgent priority
A procedure minimizing the wasting of space for the siting of hazardous waste landfills as a part of a solid waste management system
No full textComparison between the perceived and actual environmental sustainability of beverage packagings in glass, plastic, and aluminium
No full textThis study analysed the perceived environmental sustainability of alternative packaging systems for beverages (glass bottle, plastic bottle, and aluminium cans) from a sample of young Italian consumers with a sociological survey. In parallel, a life cycle assessment was conducted to compare the perceived and actual environmental sustainability as well as to identify any discrepancies, with comparison indicators for different environmental issues. The sample of Italian students perceived glass bottles as the most environmentally sustainable compared to aluminium cans and plastic bottles (the worst perceived option). Similar results were recorded for a sample of environmentalists from the same region with an even greater perception of environmental sustainability for single use glass bottles. Therefore, there was an overwhelming confirmation of how glass is perceived as very sustainable from an environmental point of view and of how plastic is perceived as having little or no environmental sustainability. However, the life cycle assessment study showed that the positive perception in favour of single-use glass is completely unfounded since glass packaging was clearly the worst option both in terms of midpoint impact categories as well as macro-categories of damage. The definition of indicators useful for the comparison between the perceived and actual sustainability were able to confirm that the environmental sustainability of glass bottles was widely overestimated by the respondents for both midpoint and endpoint environmental issues. There is a misperception of environmental sustainability by consumers that could be due to a lack or incorrect communication between the scientific community and citizens. Effective communication initiatives are therefore needed to enable consumers to move beyond prejudices that are excessively pro-glass and excessively anti-plastic
Attitudes of a sample of consumers towards more sustainable wine packaging alternatives
No full textGlass is the most commonly used packaging for wine worldwide. However, one of the main causes of environmental impacts of the wine life cycle is the production of glass bottles due to the high incidence of its weight and the consequent huge consumption of energy for its production. Using lighter packaging alternatives (such as bag-in-box, aseptic carton or PET bottles) significantly decreases the environmental impact of the wine life cycle. In Italy, there is widespread scepticism towards wine bottled in alternative packaging. For this reason, this study presents a preliminary survey addressed to a sample of 1000 wine consumers to explore their attitudes and willingness to purchase wine in packaging alternatives that are more sustainable than glass bottles. The results show how most of the respondents (91%) are not willing to consider packaging alternatives for wine and want to buy only wine packaged in glass bottles mainly because they consider alternative packaging not suitable. Despite this, about 62% of them state that they would be willing to re-evaluate the purchase of wine in alternative packaging after being informed that, for most wines, the quality of the wine does not change in alternative packaging and that by using them the wine sustainability could improve. This last sample fraction drinks a little (less than one wine glass a day); their buying choices are affected by neither the main wine features (such as producer company, country of origin and information on label) nor those of the glass bottle (such as weight, colour, and shape). Therefore, this preliminary study has identified and characterized a less traditionalists wine consumer fraction that, therefore, could change their mind regarding the purchasing of wine in alternative packaging. This result shows that these consumers could be favourable towards a greater presence of wine in alternative packaging on the market. This could be a useful hint for wine producers who want to differentiate themselves from competitors by using alternative packaging and gaining interesting market niches
- …
