Single-use synthetic plastic and natural fibre anaesthetic drug trays: a comparative life cycle assessment of environmental impacts

被引:1
|
作者
Lightfoot, Stephen J. [1 ]
Grant, Tim [2 ]
Boyden, Anna [2 ]
McAlister, Scott [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] St George Private Hosp, Dept Anaesthet, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Lifecycles, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[3] Univ Melbourne, Dept Crit Care, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[4] Univ Sydney, Sydney Sch Populat Hlth, Sydney, NSW, Australia
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
climate change; life-cycle assessment; recycling; single-use medical equipment; sustainable healthcare; CARBON FOOTPRINT;
D O I
10.1016/j.bja.2024.05.031
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background: Single-use anaesthetic drug trays are used widely in Australia, but their environmental impact is unclear. Methods: A life cycle assessment was completed for 10 different types of single-use anaesthetic drug trays made of four materials: the synthetic plastics polypropylene and polystyrene, and the natural fibres bagasse (sugarcane pulp) and cellulose pulp. Results: Carbon emissions per tray from total life cycle with landfill disposal were 33-454 g CO2-eq, which equates to 152-2066 tonnes CO2-eq annually. Recycling mitigates this impact, reducing emissions per tray to 16-294 g CO2-eq. The tray with the least emissions for landfill and recycling was the small polystyrene injection tray. There was a significant linear relationship between the mass of a tray and its carbon emissions. For landfill, recycling, and incineration disposal, Pearson's r value was 0.98, 0.99, and 0.95, respectively. Composting natural fibres can give a carbon benefit over some synthetic plastics under specific disposal scenarios, but this benefit was not seen under all circumstances. There was a strong positive correlation between the increasing mass of a tray and its increasing environmental impacts for water consumption, particulate matter formation, and mineral depletion. Conclusions: Single-use trays with the lowest mass should be preferentially chosen. Recycling and composting will reduce environmental impacts. Natural fibre does not automatically confer any environmental benefit over plastic and sustainability claims should be carefully examined for accuracy. The practice of using a single-use drug tray for every procedure should be reconsidered.
引用
收藏
页码:1465 / 1477
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The financial and environmental costs of reusable and single-use plastic anaesthetic drug trays
    McGain, F.
    McAlister, S.
    McGavin, A.
    Story, D.
    ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 2010, 38 (03) : 538 - 544
  • [2] Carbon emissions of single-use anaesthetic drug trays: more than meets the eye in life cycle assessment
    Kelleher, Deirdre C.
    Ip, Vivian H. Y.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2025, 134 (02) : 291 - 293
  • [3] Environmental and economic life cycle sustainability assessment of reusable versus single-use anaesthetic face masks
    Webb, Christina
    Anguilano, Lorna
    Troisi, Gera
    Rivera, Ximena Schmidt
    ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 2025, 114
  • [4] A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Single-Use Fibre Drums Versus Reusable Steel Drums
    Raugei, Marco
    Fullana-i-Palmer, Pere
    Puig, Rita
    Torres, Alejo
    PACKAGING TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE, 2009, 22 (08) : 443 - 450
  • [5] Life Cycle Assessment of Banned Single-Use Plastic Products and Their Alternatives
    Goodrum, Rebecca
    Bartokova, Bibiana
    Roy, Poritosh
    MICROPLASTICS, 2024, 3 (04): : 614 - 633
  • [6] Comparative life cycle assessment of single-use cardiopulmonary bypass devices
    Nikkhah, Hasan
    Beykal, Burcu
    Stuber, Matthew D.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2023, 425
  • [7] Life cycle assessment of single-use and reusable plastic bottles in the city of Johannesburg
    Olatayo, Kunle, I
    Mativenga, Paul T.
    Marnewick, Annlize L.
    SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, 2021, 117 (11-12)
  • [8] Five Misperceptions Surrounding the Environmental Impacts of Single-Use Plastic
    Miller, Shelie A.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2020, 54 (22) : 14143 - 14151
  • [9] Comparative Life Cycle Assessment Between Single-Use and Reprocessed IPC Sleeves
    Lichtnegger, Sabrina
    Meissner, Markus
    Paolini, Francesca
    Veloz, Alex
    Saunders, Rhodri
    RISK MANAGEMENT AND HEALTHCARE POLICY, 2023, 16 : 2715 - 2726
  • [10] Comment on "Five Misperceptions Surrounding the Environmental Impacts of Single-Use Plastic"
    Walker, Tony R.
    McKay, Deirdre C.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2021, 55 (02) : 1339 - 1340