Implementing a life cycle perspective in chemical alternatives assessment - the case of per- an polyfluoroalkyl substances in textile applications
Konferensbidrag (offentliggjort, men ej förlagsutgivet), 2018
Informed chemical substitution is about eliminating chemicals that give rise to unacceptable (eco)toxicological risks, while avoiding problem shifting within a product’s or chemical’s life cycle, or between types of impacts. For this reason, the life cycle perspective becomes crucial. Chemical alternatives assessment (CAA) has been increasingly in focus in the last years, and life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle thinking are part of the more comprehensive CAA methods available. However, more detailed guidance is lacking and few practical examples have been published.
A substitution case of current relevance is the phase-out of hazardous per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from durable water repellent (DWR) textile applications. Alternatives are sought which offer sustained technical performance but an improved environmental and human health profile compared to the hazardous PFAS. To support an informed substitution of hazardous PFAS, and complement our previous hazard assessment, we have conducted an LCA to compare environmental and human health impacts across DWR alternatives on a functional basis. Based on this case we were also able to further elaborate on the inclusion of the life cycle perspective in a CAA framework by identifying both possibilities and challenges.
We conclude that the inclusion of a life cycle perspective in CAA is crucial for an informed and sustainable substitution, as lack of life cycle thinking can lead to problem shifting. We show that LCA, with its focus on function, is a tool that can identify such problem shifting as well as the key chemical properties to be considered. Consideration of (eco)toxicological effects in such an assessment can however turn out to be difficult, especially for substances such as the PFAS if they are outside the domain of the LCIA model. In the case under study here we conclude that the DWR should be selected with three main considerations: (i) the intrinsic hazard properties of the chemistry, selecting the DWR associated with the lowest hazard but, (ii) providing the functionality as needed and, (iii) giving the garment the longest life length.