PPE and the Environment: Understanding Life Cycle Assessment

How can HSE managers make more sustainable PPE choices, whilst protecting their people? This is the big question facing many HSE managers in industries ranging from oil & gas and chemical processing to pharma and life tech. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), such as disposable coveralls, offers vital protection for front-line workers, but it is also a significant source of plastic waste and carbon emissions.

Meeting environmental and sustainability goals (ESGs) may seem complicated, but there are some basic steps you can follow to make your PPE more sustainable without compromising safety.

This article explains how to assess every stage of the product life cycle and defines some key terms used in PPE life cycle assessment. It also demonstrates how DuPont uses Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to inform its sustainability strategy.

What is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)?

LCA is a systematic approach to evaluating the environmental impacts associated with every stage of a product's life. This includes raw material extraction, materials processing, manufacture, distribution, use, repair and maintenance, and disposal or recycling. LCA is crucial for assessing product sustainability as it provides a comprehensive view of the garment’s environmental impacts. It helps manufacturers like us identify ‘hotspots’ during manufacturing and enables HSE managers to reduce impacts during usage through to end-of-life management. Hotspots are stages where the product has the highest environmental impact, often due to energy-intensive processes or the use of non-renewable resources. Addressing these hotspots can reduce impacts and improve overall product sustainability.

The UN Environment Programme Life Cycle Initiative is a good reference source for understanding LCA terminology and methodology.

The product life cycle for a PPE garment can be broken down into five key stages:

Fair Comparisons

When assessing different PPE solutions, it is important to ensure that any comparisons are fair and robust so that the results are reliable.

In Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), the ‘functional unit’ is the reference point that defines what exactly is being assessed. It is critical for ensuring consistency and relevance in LCA studies, particularly for PPE, where performance and usage vary widely. An example of a functional unit might be “protection of a worker for 8 hours in a hazardous environment."

The functional unit ensures that LCA comparisons focus on equivalent performance and avoid misleading conclusions by accounting for differences in lifespan, materials, or usage. For example, to compare disposable garments (used once) with reusable garments (used multiple times), the impacts per use must be normalized to reflect real-world functionality.

When reviewing LCA data for PPE, always check:

• What the functional unit is
• Whether it aligns with your actual usage scenario
• If the comparison is apples-to-apples in terms of protection, comfort, durability, and frequency of use.
   

Cradle-to-Gate or Cradle-to-Grave?

Cradle-to-gate and cradle-to-grave represent two different approaches to Life Cycle Assessment, and it is important to appreciate the difference. Both have their merits in LCA.

Cradle-to-gate assessments are based on a wealth of primary data. They consider the environmental impact of a product from the extraction of raw materials up to the factory gate, i.e., before it is transported to the consumer. As such, cradle-to-gate assessment is clearly defined and controlled. Manufacturers often use this approach to assess the impacts of their products up to the point they leave the production site so that improvements can be made.

Cradle-to-grave assessments rely more on informed assumptions around distribution and disposal. They consider the environmental impact of a product from raw material extraction through to final disposal. This approach provides a comprehensive view of the environmental impacts associated with a product, which can be used to inform decisions by consumers, businesses, and policymakers. Cradle-to-grave assessment is particularly useful for understanding the overall environmental footprint of a product and for making informed choices about product design, materials selection, and end-of-life management.

In other words, cradle-to-gate is a partial lifecycle assessment focusing on the production phase, while cradle-to-grave is a full lifecycle assessment that covers the entire lifespan of the product. It also embraces factors beyond environmental emissions to encompass aspects such as land use and water consumption, all of which contribute to the sustainability of the product.
 

Environmental Footprint

This leads us neatly into the definition of ‘Environmental Footprint’ (EF). Many people mistakenly equate this term solely with carbon (CO2) emissions, but a product or organization’s EF comprises many different parameters.

The European Commission’s EF methods provide harmonized rules for conducting a reliable and transparent assessment of the environmental impacts of products and organizations throughout their lifecycle. Developed by the Commission in 2013 and updated in 2021, the Environmental Footprint methods provide companies with a reliable framework to quantify their environmental performance. It defines 16 impact categories, including:

• Climate change - which measures total global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during a garment’s lifecycle in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent (kg CO2 eq).
• Resource use, fossils - which assesses the impact on finite resources such as coal, oil, and gas, and how consumption now will impact their availability for future generations.
• Water use - considers the availability or scarcity of water in the regions where manufacturing/product use takes place, if this information is known.
• Land use - assesses the impacts of industrial activities on the land and may encompass loss of species, soil deterioration, or loss of the soil itself (erosion).
• Ozone depletion - focuses on the potential effects on the stratospheric ozone (O3) layer that protects us from hazardous ultraviolet radiation. Its depletion increases skin cancer cases in humans and damage to plants.

The EF methodology fosters transparency, provides access to credible environmental information, and supports informed decision-making by businesses and consumers, ultimately driving the transition towards sustainability.
 

Independent Verification

Whatever your choice of methodology, when conducting an LCA, it is important to check that the manufacturer’s sustainability claims have been independently verified. Third-party certifications and external reviews of LCA data play a crucial role in ensuring the credibility, accuracy, and overall reliability of LCA findings. It means that a neutral party has analyzed the data and ensured that the claims based upon it are reasonable and factual.

Third-party certification is also invaluable in giving purchasers of PPE full transparency across the manufacturing supply chain and material sourcing. It gives assurance that the products you are buying are responsibly sourced and manufactured, and that you have clarity about the environmental impacts.
 

Conclusion

Health and safety professionals increasingly recognize the dual responsibility of protecting people and the environment. The cradle-to-grave approach to Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is instrumental in identifying and mitigating the environmental impacts of PPE throughout its lifespan. By examining each stage of the PPE life cycle—from raw material procurement to end-of-life disposal—manufacturers like DuPont are leading the way in sustainable practices.

DuPont's initiatives, such as the reduction of packaging waste and the establishment of the Tyvek® Protective Apparel Recycling Referral Program, demonstrate that it is possible to align safety with environmental stewardship. We recognize the need to address societal challenges across our entire value chain, which involves working with diverse customers, incorporating sustainability into our own operations, and advancing sustainability in our supply chains. The shift towards more sustainable PPE solutions, including the use of renewable energy in manufacturing and the extension of garment lifespan, reflects a commitment to not only meet but exceed environmental and sustainability goals.

As we move forward, it is clear that the integration of environmental considerations into health and safety practices is not just a moral imperative but also a practical one. By embracing innovative solutions and sustainable practices, HSE managers can ensure that the protection of front-line workers goes hand in hand with the preservation of our planet for future generations.