Proceedings of the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Code
Month Date, Year, City, State, Country

TEAM 17
ESTIMATION OF ENVIRONMRNTAL IMPACT OF ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
MATERIALS

1. INTRODUCTION
With the onset of the next manufacturing revolution.
There is a proliferation of 3D printers in personal use. We see
3D printers being as accessible are regular paper printers. The
modern 3D printers use different types of materials for 3D
printing. When 3D printing reaches the level of usage
comparable to conventional paper printers, large amounts of
energy will be utilized, large amount of raw material will be
needed, large amount of scrap will be generated. To alleviate
the environmental impact of production of 3D printing
filament on an industrial scale. RecycleBot is used to
manufacture filament at home by recycling scrap.
The paper attempts to predict the environmental impact of
the existing materials used in additive manufacturing obtained
from recycling the waste plastics.

materials for production. The paper also provides data for PLA
pellets and PLA containers, which will help us in deciding the
variance of the data used in the uncertainty analysis in this
paper. Madival et al. [5] conducts comparative LCA on PLA,
PET and PS. The data and conclusions related to PLA and PS
are relevant to our paper. They also provide us with empirical
relations to calculate the energy consumption. However, the
most relevant information present in their paper is the
inclusion and discussion related to impact assessment data of
PLA, PET and PS. Kreiger et al. [6] conducts LCA on HDPE
used in 3D printing filament. The goal of his LCA is to
compare the economic impact of recycling HDPE in a central
facility against recycling HDPE at home. This paper presents a
novel insight in considering the input parameters for LCA.
Since, home based recycling wouldnt require transportation.
Kreiger presents that it is much cheaper to produce an artifact
by recycling at home than purchasing it from the store. The
relevance of this paper is that, other materials that we are
considering in this paper can be subjected to the same process
to gain the same results. Although LCI data of ABS is readily
available, there is not a lot of relevant research papers to
reference. The closest scientific paper is by Wotzel et al [7].
This paper compares the environmental impact of ABS and
bio-compatible hemp fiber for an automotive side panel. As
LCA is highly sensitive to the procedure. This papers data is
not relevant although the conclusion of paper will be relevant
when we compare ABS with other bio-compatible materials in
our paper. The final material that we are considering is impact
polystyrene (HIPS) which is used as a dissolvable material in
3D printing. Even though no relevant scientific literature is
available for reference we refer to Environmental Product
Declarations of the European Plastics Manufacturer report on
General purpose Polystyrene (GPPS) and high impact
Polystyrene (HIPS) [8]. Further still a report is available on
Life Cycle Assessment of Ceroplastic Polymers &
Conventional Polymers [9] where polypropylene, PLA, PET,
HIPS and LDPE pellets are compared from cradle to grave.
This report serves as a guide for verification of data and for
confirmation of the results obtained from the conclusion of the
paper.
Although LCA approach is a great tool to assess the
environmental aspects and has helped companies to make
substantial decisions, there are some limitations along the way.
Firstly, conventional LCA technique focuses only on the
environmental impact, it does not cover the fields of financial
costs and social impacts [13, 18, 10, 17, and 11]. Secondly, it
is geographically dependent. The environmental impact of
several pollutants may depend heavily on the location, for
example, feedstock recycling may be less favorable than
incineration of plastics with regard to GWP (global potential
warming) in Denmark, and however, it is contradicted by
more recent results from Germany, where feedstock recycling
is the preferable option [13, 10]. Thirdly, LCA models are
typically linear steady-state models. There will be initial
activities and environmental burdens when a collection system
is established. LP model is not a very precise representation of

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Environmental considerations should be implemented
in decision making itself. Life cycle assessment is a
methodological approach for estimating and analyzing the
environmental impacts of a product lifecycle. LCA is phased
approach, consisting of four components: goal definition and
scoping, inventory analysis, impact assessment, and
interpretation [1]. In LCA emissions and the consumption of
resources and all the environmental exchanges at each and
every phase in a products life cycle, from cradle to grave are
tabulated. This data is necessary in order to decide the impact
of the product system on the environment. System boundaries
and the processes to be included within these boundaries,
often decide the final consequence of the LCA [1,2]
The following section details the existing research
done related to the materials under consideration. This
literature is required to assert the applicability of the data to
our case and for validation of our results. It is required to keep
in mind that the materials under consideration are safe guarded
by copyright laws. Due to which most of the data available is
provided in reports rather than research papers. To foster
growth and research the material manufacturers publish
reports and papers in peer reviewed journals. One of the
materials in consideration is PLA, Natureworks is the sole
provider of PLA in North America. In their paper Erwin et al.
[3] elaborately layout the technologies involved in PLAs
production, PLAs application, and two kinds of PLA (PLA1
and PLA B/WP), LCA procedure adopted and data. They also
compare PLA with petrochemical polymers like PET. This
literature is relevant to our paper because it validates the data
used in the research by consolidating the companys attitude
towards sustainable manufacturing. The critical review by
Yates et al. [4] considers three biodegradable polymers in their
study out of which only PLA is of relevance to us. This review
paper cites four PLA based LCA results, all of which confirm
that PLA is more environmentally friendly than petrochemical
products. This is primarily due to the use of bio-degradable

the real system. As the complexity of the model increase, the

data increases, high quality data for an LP model can be
difficult to obtain [13]. Fourthly, implementing such a method
could be expensive and time consuming, it is not a good
consideration for small companies [14].
Despite the drawbacks of LCA method, there are
ways to overcome the barriers. First, it is possible to obtain a
comprehensive basis for decisions by including both the
analyses of financial costs and social aspects. Studies include
financial costs as well as environmental impacts [13, 16].
Second, an alternative to overcome geographically dependent
is by means of an environmental impact assessment (EIA).
This tool can take local aspects into account and can be used
for deciding what site for a waste management plant is best for
the environment [13]. Third, there is a way to optimize LP
models of the waste management system, which is to integrate
it by using the ORWARE (ORganic WAste Research) model
[12]. Fourth, however, the cost of implementing an LCA
method is experienced by every company, and the amount of
time it takes to conduct such method is inevitable, thus these
two cannot be avoided.

Following this the greenhouse potential is obtained which

indicates the relative impact of each of the polymers with
respect to the polymer with lowest carbon dioxide emissions.
4.1 STRUCTURAL AND THERMAL PROPERTY
EVALUATION
LCA data for AM materials is not readily available,
since it is relatively new technology. Hence environmental
impact of these materials is derived from the amount of
electricity consumed based on their mechanical properties.
The two main mechanical properties considered are Izod
impact strength and Melting temperature of the waste plastic.
These properties are considered for the two principal
processes:
4.1.1

3. RECYCLEBOT
Recyclebot extrudes filaments required for 3-D
printers from waste plastic. Recyclebot uses electricity as the
only source of energy. It consists of a heating system which
consumes electricity to heat up the 14 gauge Nichrome coil to
the shredded plastics melting temperature, once it reaches this
temperature the plastic melts and is drawn into filaments. The
waste plastic is cut into smaller pieces and then fed into the
shredder. This shredded plastic goes through the heating
system and is then drawn into filaments. This filament is then
used by FDM 3D printers. Recyclebot takes waste plastics as
input, thereby recycling the waste and minimizing the
environmental impacts due to transportation of the waste for
recycling. Also the amount of resources consumed in
producing the same filament in industrial scale is too high.
Therefore,
Recyclebot
promotes
sustainable
development by increasing the lifecycle time of plastic waste
and by reducing landfill waste.

Shredding of the Waste Plastic

Electricity required to shred the waste depends on the
wastes shape, wastes structure, motor specifications
and its efficiency. The efficiency of this motor in turn
depends on the torque applied by the motor to shred
the plastic, this torque depends on the shear strength
of the plastic.
In order to generalize the energy required to shred.
The Izod impact strength of the polymer is
considered. Izod impact is defined as the kinetic
energy needed to initiate fracture and continue the
fracture until the specimen is broken. Hence the
amount of electricity required to shred the waste is a
function of the Izod impact strength. Therefore, the
considered set of polymers are graded based on Izod
impact strength.
Melting Temperature of the Plastic
The amount of electricity consumed for drawing the
shredded plastic into filament predominantly depends
on the melting temperature of the plastic. Nichrome
14 gauge is used to heat the plastic. The amount of
electricity consumed depends on the melting
temperature of the plastic. This can be calculated as
shown below:

4.1.2

d=0.064 0.0016256 m

4. METHOD
US EPA reports that 32 million tons of plastic waste
was generated in 2012. Recyclebot produces filament by
shredding and melting this recyclable waste. As we already
know that Recyclebot only requires electricity to shred and
melt. This paper develops a model to assess the environmental
impact from the electricity required to shred and melt the
plastic. Unlike the conventional LCA model whos LCI is
secured under intellectual property rights and is difficult to
acquire, this model is based on the mechanical and thermal
properties which are readily available. Figure 1 presents a
flowchart of the suggested model. It first quantifies the
electrical energy consumption based on mechanical and
thermal properties. The carbon dioxide emissions in
production of this electrical energy is then calculated.

=0.00044 W /m. K
8

=240 10 m
l=960 2.286 m
T =T m T r
A= R2=2.0755 106 m2
V =15 V

I=

V
R

R=

l
[1+ ( T ) ]
A

Temperature Co-efficient (W/m.K)

I=

V A
l[1+ ( T )]

l Length of Nichrome wire (m)

Resistivity of Nichrome ( m
A Cross- sectional area of Ni wire (m2)
I Electric Current (Amperes)

Substituting the values for I

I=

V Applied Voltage (V)

5.6745
A
[1+ 0.00044 ( T ) ]

T Temperature Difference (K)

Tr Room Temperature (K)

Where

Tm Melting Transition Temperature of Plastic/Polymer (K)

d Diameter of 14 gauge Nichrome wire (m)

Energy Consumed in Shredding

Total Energy Consumed
Emission due to energy generation
Environmental

Impact
Energy Consumed in Melting
Figure 1 : Method

4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION

From the previous sections we obtain the amount of
energy required for processing each polymer. This section
deals with calculating the amount of carbon dioxide generated
for processing them. Following the global warming potential
is calculated with reference to the polymer that generates the
least carbon dioxide.
In Table 1, the carbon dioxide (CO2) produced per kilowatthour when generating electricity from fossil fuels as reported
by The U.S. Energy Information Administration reports is
presented.

Recyclebot is designed to recycle household plastic

waste like milk containers [16]. In Table 2 we calculate the
power required to melt these products. The data used in this
calculation represents all of these products and therefore has a
large unknown variance. The database from which this data is
acquired uses standardized procedure for calculating the Izod
strength and melting temperature. Therefore, their results can
be used as mean values of their respective polymer types.
Table 2 Data Comparison of Polymers

Polymer

Table 1: Carbon Dioxide Emission in Electricity Generation (USEIA)

Fuel

Lbs of
CO2 per
Million
Btu

Heat
Rate (Btu
per kWh)

Lbs CO2
per kWh
Acrylonitrile
Butadiene
Styrene
Polylactic
acid
Polycarbonat
e
High density
polyethylene
Nylon

Coal
Bituminous
Subbituminous
Lignite
Natural gas
Distillate Oil
(No. 2)
Residual Oil
(No. 6)
Mean

205.300

10,107

2.08

212.700

10,107

2.16

215.400
117.080
161.386

10,107
10,416
10,416

2.18
1.22
1.68

173.906

10,416

1.81

Izod
strength
,
notched
(ft-lb/in)
at 23o C
7.7

Melting
temperatur
e

Power kWh

105

82.1534

2.3

179

79.6503

14

149

80.6465

1.3

130

81.2904

1.1

216

78.4551

(1103 )

Comparison of the carbon dioxide emissions

From the previous sections we have obtained the
amount of energy required for processing each polymer. This
section deals with calculating the amount of carbon dioxide
(Table 3) generated for processing them. The global warming
potential is the calculated with reference to the polymer that
generates the least carbon dioxide emissions.

1.855

The carbon dioxide emission for each polymer can be

evaluated from equation 1
Equation 1

C O2 emission ( lbs )=C O 2 emission per kWhPower

Table 3: Carbon Dioxide Emission

CO2 emissions (lbs)

5. EVALUATION
The method presented in this paper can be applied to
compare general polymeric products used every day (milk
jugs, plastic bottles etc.), and it can also be used to compare
the 3D printing filaments. Where comparison amongst the
general product represents comparison on a global scale, and
comparison amongst the sub-categories of 3D printing
filament represents comparison on a local scale.
For conducting the evaluations it is assumed that
1. The product being recycled is homogenous and is
considered to be virgin.
2. Manufacturers data is accurate.
3. The environmental impact is only being considered
for US.

ABS

0.1016

PLA

0.0985

Polycarbonate

0.0997

HDPE

0.1005

Nylon

0.0970

5.1.2 Discussion
The goal of this study in to find that material which is
easiest to recycle. Figure 2 plots the Izod strength vs the
power required to melt. Our goal is to minimize both the
strength and power. Similar to studying a Pareto frontier, it can
be observed that Nylon is the best, followed by PLA, followed
by PC and HDPE together, the worst being ABS. We are
indifferent between PC and HDPE because PC requires less

5.1 COMPARISON OF GENERAL PRODUCTS

5.1.1
Data Collection

power but needs more energy for shredding, and HDPE has is
easier to shred but requires more power to melt.

ABS-M30
ABSplus
P430
ABSi
ABS-ESD7
ABS-MS

Izod Strength vs Melting Temperature

14

2.3

166
166

80.0789
80.0789

1.8
2.1
1.1

178
166
332

79.6831
80.0789
74.9300

Comparison of the carbon dioxide emissions

From the previous sections we have obtained the
amount of energy required for processing each polymer. This
section deals with calculating the amount of carbon dioxide
generated for processing them (Table 5). The global warming
potential is the calculated with reference to the polymer that
generates the least carbon dioxide emissions.

7.7

1.1

2.6
2.0

Table 5 : Carbon Dioxide Emission

1.3

CO2 emissions (lbs)

Figure 2 : Izod strength vs Melting Temperature

Figure 3 plots the environmental impact of melting the

polymer. The emissions are a function of power and therefore
follow the sequence of power required to melt.
Carbon dioxide emissions (lbs)

ABS-M30

0.0990

ABSplus P430

0.0990

ABSi

0.0985

ABS-ESD7

0.0990

ABS-MS

0.0927

5.2.2 Discussion
The goal of this study in to find that material which is
easiest to recycle. Figure 4 plots the Izod strength vs the
power required to melt. Our goal is to minimize both the
strength and power. Similar to studying a Pareto frontier, it can
be observed that ABS-MS is the best, followed by ABSi,
followed by ABSplus-P430, and the worst being ABS-ESD7
and ABS-M30.

Izod Strength vs Melting Temperature

Figure 3 Carbon Dioxide Emissions

5.2 COMPARISON WITHIN POLYMER TYPE

5.2.1
Data Collection
The approach defined in this paper can be extended
for comparing the different kinds of polymers within a general
class of polymers. Table 4 compare the different types of ABS
filaments.
Table 4 Data of Types of ABS

Polymer

Izod strength,
notched
(ft-lb/in)

Melting
temperature

Power kWh
3

(110 )

Figure 4: Izod strength vs Melting Temperature

Figure 5 plots the environmental impact of melting the

polymer. The emissions are a function of power and therefore
follow the sequence of power required to melt.

impact are difficult to follow and the data required for

assessing the environmental impact is not readily available.
This paper presents a technique for estimating the
environmental impact of recycling such 3d printing materials
based on readily available structural and thermal properties.
The method was successfully validated by comparing the
results with existing literature on the environmental impact of
the same materials.
Following the structure of this paper a person is now to
able to make the best judgment considering the material from
3D printing such that his carbon footprint is minimized.

Carbon dioxide emissions (lbs)

8. REFERENCES
[1] Life Cycle Assessment: Principles and Practice by
Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC)
[2] Rebitzer, Gerald, Tomas Ekvall, R. Frischknecht, D.
Hunkeler, G. Norris, T. Rydberg, W-P. Schmidt, Sangwon Suh,
B. P. Weidema, and D. W. Pennington. "Life cycle assessment:
Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory
analysis, and applications." Environment international 30, no.
5 (2004): 701-720.
[3] Vink, Erwin TH, Karl R. Rabago, David A. Glassner, and
Patrick R. Gruber. "Applications of life cycle assessment to
NatureWorks polylactide (PLA) production." Polymer
Degradation and stability 80, no. 3 (2003): 403-419.
[4] Yates, Madeleine R., and Claire Y. Barlow. "Life cycle
assessments of biodegradable, commercial biopolymersA
critical review." Resources, Conservation and Recycling 78
(2013): 54-66.
[5] Madival, Santosh, Rafael Auras, Sher Paul Singh, and
Ramani Narayan. "Assessment of the environmental profile of
PLA, PET and PS clamshell containers using LCA
methodology." Journal of Cleaner Production 17, no. 13
(2009): 1183-1194.

Figure 5 : Carbon Dioxide Emissions

6. VALIDATION
If these filaments were manufactured then the CO 2
emission would be greatest for Nylon followed by
Polycarbonate and PLA [3].
If the same filaments are recycled then the CO 2
emission is greatest for ABS followed by PC, HDPE, PLA and
Nylon.
It is observed that CO2 emission is greater if Nylon is
manufactured industrially and the emission is least if the
filament in derived from recycling the Nylon. PLA has low
CO2 emissions in either case and can be used extensively.
The similarity in the environmental impact of PLA in
both the literature and our work validates our model
sufficiently.

[6] Kreiger, M. A., M. L. Mulder, A. G. Glover, and J. M.

Pearce. "Life cycle analysis of distributed recycling of postconsumer high density polyethylene for 3-D printing
filament." Journal of Cleaner Production (2014).
[7] Wtzel, K., R. Wirth, and M. Flake. "Life cycle studies on
hemp fibre reinforced components and ABS for
automotive
parts." Die
Angewandte
Makromolekulare Chemie 272, no. 1 (1999): 121-127.
[8] PlasticsEurope, Environmental Product Declaration of
the European Plastics Manufacturers, Polystyrene, General
Purpose (GPPS) and High Impact (HIPS), November 2008.
[9] http://www.cereplast.com/wp-content/uploads/CereplastExternal-LCA-Final-Report-050412.pdf
[10] Bjorklund, Anna, and Finnveden, Goran. "Recycling
revisited-life cycle comparisons of global warming impact and
total energy use of waste management strategies."
ScienceDirect. (2005). Print.
[11] Cherubini, Francesco, and Bargigli, Silvia, and Ulgiati,
Sergio. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of waste management

7. CONCLUSION
Even though the cost of 3D printers is steadily declining,
the cost of 3D printing filament is still relatively high. The
polymeric materials used for making these filaments are
readily available as different consumer products. Recyclebot is
able to recycle these consumer products into 3D printing
filament at home [6].
With the availability of cheap and recycle filaments, we
can expect an increase in 3D printed parts. A major portion of
which would represent scrap and defective printed parts.
Therefore,
the
importance
of
environmental
consciousness cannot be understated. For a regular person the
existing techniques (LCA) for estimating the environmental

strategies: Landfilling, sorting plant and incineration.

ScienceDirect. (2008). Print.
[12] Eriksson, O., and Frostell, B., and Bjorklund, A., Assefa,
G., and Sundqvist, J., and Granath, J., and Baky, A., Thyselius,
L.. ORWARE-a simulation tool for waste management.
ELSEVIER. (2002). Print.
[13] Ekvall, Tomas, and Assefa, Getachew, and Bjorklund,
Anna, and Eriksson, Ola, and Finnveden, Goran. What lifecycle assessment does and does not do in assessments of waste
management. ScienceDirect. (2007). Print.
[14] Jensen, Allan, and Hoffman, Leif, and Moller, Birgitte,
and Schmidt, Anders. Life Cycle Assessment-A guide to
approaches, experiences and information sources.
Environmental Issues Series. (1997). Print.
[15] Leach, Matthew, and Bauen, Ausilio, and Lucas, Nigel.
A Systems Approach to Materials Flow in Sustainable Cities:

A Case Study of Paper. Journal of Environmental Planning

and Management. (1997). Print.
[16] The End of a Myth!-Cascades Life Cycle Assessment
demonstrates that Foam Packaging are an Excellent
Environmental Choice. prnewswire.com. 17 Nov. 2011. Web.
5 Mar. 2014
[17] Varzinskas, Visvaldas, and Staniskis, Jurgis, and Lebedys
Alis, and Kibirkstis, Edmundas, and Miliunas, Valdas. "Life
Cycle Assessment of Common Plastic Packaging for Reducing
Environmental Impact and Material Consumption."
Environmental Research. (2009). Print.
[18] Wang, Yuxuan, and Sun, Tianye. Life cycle assessment
of CO2 emissions from wind power plants: Methodology and
case
studies.
ScienceDirect.
(2011).
Print.