Cradle-to-End-of-Life (CTEOL) Evaluation of Reusable (50 Uses/Coverall) and Disposable Cleanroom Coveralls
| CTEOL System | Reusable (PET) | Disposable (HDPE) | Disposable (PP) | Reduction from Selecting Reusable |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Process energy, MJ (kWh)/1000 uses | 4560 (1270) | 6930 (1930) | 11,100 (3080) | 34–59% |
| Natural resource energy, MJ (kWh)/1000 uses | 8380 (2330) | 10,900 (3030) | 19,200 (5330) | 23–56% |
| Carbon footprint, kg (lb) CO2eq/1000 uses | 517 (1140) | 712 (1570) | 1220 (2690) | 27–58% |
| Water consumption, blue water*, kg (lb)/1000 uses | 80.7 (178) | 304 (670) | 345 (761) | 73–77% |
| Cleanroom facility solid waste generation for disposal, kg (lb)/1000 uses | 10.2 (22.5)** | 171 (377) | 238 (525) | 94–96% |
↵* Solid waste includes disposable coveralls, biological waste, and plastic and paper packaging. Note that corrugated boxboard was not included as solid waste for any coveralls as it was considered 100% recycled.
↵** In this life cycle study, 100% of reusable cleanroom coveralls were reused in other industries at the EOL stage and therefore not included as solid waste. The EOL recycle rate had a small impact on the life cycle inventory; if 100% of reusable cleanroom coveralls were instead landfilled, the cleanroom facility solid waste generation was 17.6 kg (38.8 lb) per 1000 coverall uses, a 90–93% reduction in solid waste compared to the disposable systems.