Life Cycle Assessment of Paperboard

Pratibha Goyal

Degree Thesis
Material Processing Technology
2021
Förnamn Efternamn
DEGREE THESIS
Arcada

Degree Programme: Material Processing Technology

Identification number: 22675

Author: Pratibha Goyal
Title: Life cycle assessment of Paperboard

Supervisor (Arcada): Stewart Makkonen-Craig

Commissioned by:

Abstract:
The research focuses on the life cycle assessment (LCA) of paperboard followed by the
ISO 14040 series standards. Every aspect of environmental effects of a material within the
“cradle to grave” were recognized in stages of the paperboard from origin to disposal. The
research was finalized after collecting the data related to material. The estimation of the
data was analysed with support of LCA software. The extensive research was performed
to retrieve information. The outcome represented environmental burden points. In addition,
the information could be supportive to know which part of whole life cycle should consider
to further modifications. The scenario design was revealing a result by comparing all the
different aspects. The visible difference was comparing the impacts from different
scenarios. Transportation was a major part of the impact in complete study. The grid
electricity was one of the parts can be replaced by biomass energy from wood waste that
clearly making visible difference in total impacts.

The implication of the life cycle assessment was understandable with the operation. Life
cycle assessment in GaBi’s LCA software was providing easy access to database with
limitations for students. GaBi’s LCA software made it easy to learn the basic characteristics
of the LCA. Also, the advancement in recycling procedures reduce the emissions from the
landfill and incineration.

Keywords: Life cycle assessment,

Paperboard, paperboard packaging
GaBi’s LCA Software.

Number of pages: 41
Language: English
Date of acceptance:
Contents

Figures ..................................................................................................................................... 4

List of tables ............................................................................................................................ 5

List of abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 5

1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 6

1.1 Aim of the Thesis. ...................................................................................................... 6

2 Literature review ............................................................................................................. 8

2.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 8

2.1.1 Paperboard ........................................................................................................ 8
2.1.2 Life cycle assessment ...................................................................................... 10
2.2 Paperboard production ............................................................................................ 10
2.2.1 Kraft Pulping (chemical pulping) ....................................................................... 11
2.2.2 Bleached chemi-thermomechanical pulping (BCTMP) ...................................... 11
2.2.3 Pulp to Paperboard manufacturing ................................................................... 12
2.2.4 Classification of Paperboard ............................................................................. 12
2.3 Impact categories and definitions ............................................................................. 14

3 Methodology .................................................................................................................. 16

3.1 Goal and Scope definition ........................................................................................ 16

3.2 Boundaries .............................................................................................................. 17
3.2.1 Functional unit.................................................................................................. 18
3.3 Inventory analysis .................................................................................................... 18
3.4 Transport and energy Scenario ................................................................................ 21

4 Results and interpretation............................................................................................. 23

4.1 Impacts categories results ....................................................................................... 27

4.2 Interpretation ........................................................................................................... 31

5 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 34

References ............................................................................................................................. 36

Appendices ............................................................................................................................ 39
FIGURES

Figure 1: European Recycling (EPRC 2019). ................................................................ 9

Figure 2: Top 10 pulp producers in Europe 2019 (Koreneff, Suojanen & Pirita Huotari
2019). ........................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 3: Overview of kraft pulping process (Vakkilainen 2012) ................................. 11
Figure 4: Folding box board layers (Kirwan & MJ, 2013). .......................................... 12
Figure 5: Rigid box (Ivory print 2020). ....................................................................... 13
Figure 6: Corrugated box (Wikipedia 2020). ............................................................... 13
Figure 7: System boundary of paperboard manufacturing, consumption and recycling
processes..................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 8: Plastic free eco-barrier FBB (Metsä Board 2020) ......................................... 18
Figure 9: LCA of paperboard created in GaBi. ............................................................ 19
Figure 10: GaBi’s LCA electricity parameter and formula generation. ........................ 22
Figure 11: Transport parameters .................................................................................. 22
Figure 12: Scenarios created in GaBi’s LCA. .............................................................. 22
Figure 13: Parameter cargo plane calculation for benchmark. ...................................... 23
Figure 14: Parameter option 1. .................................................................................... 24
Figure 15: Parameter option 2. .................................................................................... 24
Figure 16: Primary energy. .......................................................................................... 25
Figure 17: Global warming impact of basline plan. ..................................................... 27
Figure 18: Acidification potential ................................................................................ 27
Figure 19: Eutrophication potential. ............................................................................ 28
Figure 20: Ozone layer depletion potential .................................................................. 28
Figure 21: human toxicity potential. ............................................................................ 28
Figure 22: Photochemical ozone potential ................................................................... 29
Figure 23: Ecotoxicity of air........................................................................................ 29
Figure 24: Human toxicity (cancer) ............................................................................. 29
Figure 25: Human toxicity (noncancer) ....................................................................... 30
Figure 26: Smog air .................................................................................................... 30
Figure 27: Global warming potential comparison for scenarios. .................................. 30
Figure 28: LCA of Paperboard with electricity from biogas......................................... 33
Figure 29: Global warming potential for electricity from biogas. ................................. 33
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Impacts and definitions (Curran 2015) ........................................................... 14

Table 2: Environmental impact categories ................................................................... 15
Table 3: List of input and output flows linking the processes in the LCA plan of this study.
................................................................................................................................... 20
Table 4: Calculated Impact categories according to CML 2001-2016 in Gabi’s LCA based
on scenarios. ............................................................................................................... 25
Table 5: Inventory of emissions and resources calculated in GaBi. .............................. 25
Table 6: Contribution in global warming in emissions from paperboard production input
flows. .......................................................................................................................... 31

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BCTMP: Bleached chemi-thermo mechanical pulping

EPA: Environmental Protection Agency

EPRC: European Paper recycling council

FBB: Folding box board

GWP: Global Warming potential

ISO: International Organization for Standardization

LCA: Life cycle assessment

LCI: Life cycle inventory

LCIA: Life cycle impact assessment

NMVOC: Non- Methane volatile organic compounds

OBA: Optical brighteners

ODP: Ozone depletion

TCF: Totally chemical free

US: United States

VOC: Volatile organic compounds

1 INTRODUCTION

Industries focus immensely on sustainability, which is a key aspect associated with the produc-
tion of various products from initiation to end. This is achieved with an extensive study about
the adverse effects a product can have on the environment. The life cycle assessment (LCA) is
a tool to understand these effects and take decisions efficiently to create quality products while
adhering to international standards.

This study relied on the environment management ISO standards (14040 series) describing four
main factors; goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, life cycle impact assessment, and
interpretation. The phases are interrelated, so once hotspots are located in the results, they can
be applied at any phase of the cycle to reduce the environmental consequences.

ISO described paperboard which is over grammage of 200 gm/m2, but some companies pro-
duced less than grammage of 200 gm/m2. Europe is consuming approximately 40% of paper
and paperboard for packaging purposes. (Coles & Kirwan 2011). Paperboard is the most sus-
tainable product for the packaging industry because it fulfils the ecological and economical
requirements of society. The significance of packaging choice is rising these days because of
environmental factors.

In this study, a life cycle assessment of the paperboard has been done with GaBi’s LCA soft-
ware. Paperboard is very common in use worldwide for food and beverages packaging. The
model of the whole procedure of manufacturing paperboard was designed with help of the GaBi
tool. GaBi is one of the best tools to perform life cycle assessment and analyse the
sustainability of product and process. It has the most updated database to follow and advanced
the product characteristics. The research concentrated on the Metsä group procedures for fold-
ing box paperboard for food packaging, which is one of the well-known companies in Europe.

1.1 Aim of the Thesis.

The main objective of the study was to perform a life cycle assessment of paperboard packaging
from cradle to grave by executing GaBi’s software. Targets to achieve were:

6
  To follow the ISO standard’s framework.
 Define interdependent phases:
 Goal and scope - it can frequently define each level.
 Inventory analysis - to observe extractions and emissions, create a list of inputs and
outputs of the product.
 Impact assessment - quantification of application of resources and emissions
 Interpretation - evaluation of collected data from other dependent phases.
 The environmental impacts points that can be observed.
 Future goals can determine by applying better production methods.

The research paper is divided into 5 chapters. Chapter 1 is covering the purpose of the thesis
with important information on life cycle assessment and some information on the GaBi LCA
software application in the research.

Chapter 2 is explaining the literature review with a background of the life cycle assessment.
The manufacturing of paperboard is researched from previous articles, books and Metsä group
procedures. Types of paperboard and impact categories information are also included in this
chapter.

Chapter 3 clarifies the methodology of the research. This chapter can clear the goal and scope,
boundaries of research. The baseline plan is established in GaBi with extensive research. The
scenario is created and explained to compare with the basic plan.

Chapter 4 describes results observed in GaBi LCA. The impact assessment. Inventory analysis,
amount of emission, and results from taking different scenarios are explained in it.

Chapter 5 concludes the observations and finding from the research. The chapter outlines if
changes possible in the life cycle of paperboard.

7
2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Background

2.1.1 Paperboard

Paperboard is the most sustainable product. Most of the packaging manufacturing industries
are creating different designs and sizes and shapes of paperboard. Paperboard is one of the best
choices to implement for sustainability. Paperboard can be applied in the development of dif-
ferent kind of packagings like delivery boxes, egg packaging, electronics packages, cosmetic
packages and many more.

Paper is the best packaging product and in demand. Paper-based products are ecological, but
plastic is not. Paper products can replace plastic packaging to a large extend. It is recyclable,
reusable. (Forbes 2020).

Some paperboard packages are laminated with plastic film or aluminium film to create a barrier
from moisture and make packaging attractive. Colour additives are involved to create visuals.
After filling the package glue is applied to avoid spill and contamination. For corrugated boxes,
staples clip made with aluminium are also attached so the box can not open in a long shipping
time and increase strength. (Kirwan 2012).

The paperboard waste effect is very less than other any packaging product. It is the most
demanding packaging material, but recycling is very easy. If paper waste disposed of in landfill
it just changes into composites and no harm to the land. If the manufacturing industries can
recycle all the paper-based products. Then there could no impact on the environment. Recycled
paper is mostly applied to produce corrugated boxes or newspapers. (Prestonboard 2021).

Paper and paperboard should be preferred for packaging industry because it is light in weight,
environment-friendly, easy to use, recyclable, compostable, stack properly, safe in use,
cheaper. (European packaging preferences 2020).

The graph below shows that recycling of paper and paperboard was higher in Europe compared
to outside Europe. The recycling rate was reached 72% in 2019. It is visible in Figure 1 that
consumption of paper and board in Europe was increasing gradually from the year 1991 to

8
2005 but it was decreased in the year 2010. Recycling in Europe was very high compared to
outside Europe.

Figure 1: European Recycling (EPRC 2019).

According to a previous study, the top 10 countries of pulp production is in Figure 2. Sweden
and Finland together manufacture 61% of virgin pulp.

Figure 2: Top 10 pulp producers in Europe 2019 (Koreneff, Suojanen & Pirita Huotari 2019).

9
Finland has well structures and large mills. Germany 21%, Finland 15%, and Sweden 13%
produce of paper production of Europe. (Koreneff, Suojanen, & Huotari, 2019). The research
motivates packaging industries in the World to manufacture paper-based packaging than plastic
packaging.

2.1.2 Life cycle assessment

LCA is a valuable tool to model a product to improve environmental aspects and is based upon
creating an inventory with inputs and outputs. The impacts can include global warming,
acidification, eutrophication, ozone depletion, material and energy carriers and others that can
be quantified.

The concept of life cycle assessment was introduced in the late 1960s because of the increasing
issues of waste and pollution. The Coca-Cola company organized research for the beverage
containers to calculate the recourses, emissions, and waste products with the help of the
Midwest research institute (MRI) in 1969 which was not published anywhere. Then similar
research happened in 1974 for the US EPA and in the same year, Basler and Hofman researched
in Switzerland. The study was named Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis (Curran
2015). After many different studies, the first LCA software GaBi was introduced in 1989. The
term “Life Cycle Assessment” was named in 1990.

Later, the international standard organization (ISO) was organized to establish global standards
for the companies to produce more sustainable products. The four standards were generated:
principal and framework (ISO 14040), goal and scope (ISO 14041), life cycle impact analysis
(ISO 14042), life cycle interpretation (ISO 14043). In 2006 besides ISO 14040 the other three
were gathered and included in ISO 14044 without making any change. (Bjorn et al. 2018).

2.2 Paperboard production

Paperboard is manufactured with pulp which is a mixture of fibres (cellulose and lignin) found
in trees. From past studies, mechanical and chemical pulping methods are used by manufactur-
ers to separate fibres from wood. The globally applicable method is chemical pulping which is
also known as the kraft pulping method. (Kirwan 2013). Metsä Board manufactures the paper-
board with the bleached chemi-thermomechanical pulp (BCTMP) method. (Metsä board 2020).

10
Europe manufactures approximately 49% of cartons from pure fibre and the remainder from
recycled paper. (Procarton 2020).

2.2.1 Kraft Pulping (chemical pulping)

The most appropriate method is kraft pulping to produce pulp from wood chips. The chips are
cooked in sodium sulphite and sodium hydroxide solution (white liquor) at appropriate
temperature and pressure. After the cooking process the mixture of lignin and some solids in
black liquor proceeds for evaporation, and residue continues the further procedure of screening,
bleaching and drying that infuses the final product pulp. The bleaching method implemented
is totally chemical-free (TCF) with oxygen and peroxide. (Kirwan 2013). Figure 3 is explaining
the whole process overview.

Figure 3: Overview of the kraft pulping process (Vakkilainen 2012)

2.2.2 Bleached chemi-thermomechanical pulping (BCTMP)

Metsä Board mainly operates a BCTMP method which produces 70% of folding box paper-
board and the chemical pulping method creates 30% of folding box paperboard from their total
production. (Metsä Board 2020). BCTMP method is a combination of chemical and mechanical
processes. The mechanism is almost the same as chemical pulping, but the addition of chemi-
cals and temperature is lower. In this process, many refineries attached to grind chips where
mechanical force crush wood chips to form a pulp. It produces a higher amount of yield than
chemical pulping. The resultant pulp can be bleached. (Britannica Academic 2020). The pulp

11
contains cellulose and lignin fibres. Lignin is brown in colour, so it makes pulp brownish in
pigment. The chlorine dioxide, oxygen and peroxide achieve bleaching of pulp to synthesize
white fibres. (Metsä Board 2020).

2.2.3 Pulp to Paperboard manufacturing

The pulp stock is prepared and moved to the processes of refining, pressing, drying (sheet
flattened and increased stability), glazing and coating to make the surface smoother, and then
a reeled makes a reel of sheets. Reels are manufactured to the requirements of the customer.
(Metsä Board 2020).

2.2.4 Classification of Paperboard

There are three main categories of paperboards:

 Folding box board (FBB): The thickness of folded cartons is varying between 200µm
to 1000µm. Figure 4 shows the thickest one FBB. FBB can use for a single unit of
product. Wildly applied in the food packaging industry. The coating could be alumin-
ium, glassine paper or greaseproof paper. (Kirwan & MJ, 2013).

Figure 4: Folding box board layers (Kirwan & MJ, 2013).

 Rigid boxes: cardboard with a thickness of 1 mm to 2.5 mm and weight 400 to 1600
gm/m2. It is used for luxury items, medical equipment, video games and gifts packag-
ing.

12
 Figure 5: Rigid box (Ivory print 2020).

 Corrugated box: it is the most useful packaging material because it has the strength to
carry heavy and multiple items for delivery purposes. thickness starts from 0.7 mm to
6.5 mm. (Kirwan & MJ, 2013).

Figure 6: Corrugated box (Wikipedia 2020).

13
2.3 Impact categories and definitions

The phases of the production system are interrelated, collected data from inventory explains
environmental impacts. Table 1 is created below to understand the impacts and definition:

Table 1: Impacts and definitions (Curran 2015)

Type of impacts Definition
Global warming The burning of fossil fuels and other industrial
processes are encouraging emissions of CO2, and other
greenhouse gases So, earth temperature is increasing by
the time globally.

Acidification the pH of water and soil decreases because of a

combination of acidic compounds.

Eutrophication the increment of phosphorous, nitrogen and some other

plant nutrients in water bodies.

Ozone depletion the ozone layer is getting thinner because of the

emission of chlorine from industries.

Smog the air is getting polluted with emissions of gaseous

chemicals creating smoke in the environment

Human health It involves cancer or non-cancer causes, breathing

issues because of toxic emissions

Photochemical Ozone When the reaction occurs in different compounds and

Creation ozone creation occurs, mainly from ethene and acrolein

Ecotoxicity The environmental toxicity because of emission in soil

or water

14
Environmental impact categories included emissions of substances that affecting climate in
given table 2 below.

Table 2: Environmental impact categories

Impact category Unit Substances included

Climate change kg CO2 eq CO2, N2O, CH4 etc.

Ozone depletion kg CFC-11 eq CH4, ethane, HC, etc.

Human toxicity kg 1,4-DB eq Heavy metals, toxic

compounds etc.

Photochemical kg NMVOC eq Non-metals, volatile organic

oxidant formation compounds

Particulate matter kg PM10 eq Ammonia, NOx, SO2,

particulates

Ionising radiation kg U235 eq Radioactive isotopes

NOx, SO2,

Terrestrial acidification kg SO2 eq NOx, SO2, NH4

Freshwater eutrophication kg 1,4-DB eq P, PO4

Seawater ecotoxicity kg 1,4-DB eq Ammonia, nitrate, N, NOx

(Simonen 2014)

15
3 METHODOLOGY

The LCA of the paperboard was performed by following ISO 14040 and 14044 to estimate the
environmental effects within the whole process. This research examines the cradle-to-grave
processes that include raw material, manufacturing, consumption, and end of life of folding
box board (Paperboard). The process is easy to outline environmental burden points.

The model was designed in GaBi’s tool for the life cycle assessment of the paperboard. The
research has been done from different pieces of literature and Metsä group processing methods.
Then most significant steps were applied to produce paperboard. The process of manufacturing
paperboard box was not enclosing any additives, but the coating of eco-friendly layer has
chosen from Metsä group website pages. According to Metsä Board, the eco-friendly coating
is plastic-free. (Metsä Group 2020).

3.1 Goal and Scope definition

Metsä group is situated in Finland, 80% of the wood as a raw material for Metsä Group comes
from Finland forests. (Metsäboard 2020).
Following parameters were established to study the system:
 The LCA is performed to investigate the environmental hotspots in the system in Fin-
land. Metsä Group branch is situated in Finland, so all process followed by the produc-
tion units of Finland.
 The product applied for LCA is solid bleached folding box paperboard. The layer of
lamination is a plastic-free eco- barrier film. The material is not treated with any fluo-
rochemical and optical brighteners (OBA).
 The wood arrives from Metsä forest to Lappeenranta sawmill. From Lappeenranta
sawmill to Äänekoski fibre mill 258 km (Metsä Group mill) from google Maps. Other
distances are not known so assumed 200 km.

The LCA exemplifies the environmental burdens areas in the cycle. The paperboard is a sus-
tainable product as it comes to form renewable resources. The study is held to concentrate on
the cycle which starts from wood, transport and production of the paperboard continues to
consume, recycle or end of life. An improvement is possible at the stage where the hotspots
can be identified. The whole study limits between given system boundaries.
16
 3.2 Boundaries

The system boundary illustrated in Figure 7 used in this study is close to the FBB manufactured
by metsä Board. The significant information of paper board size and weight obtained from the
website of Metsä Board, and other processes of production like kraft pulping, BCTMP method
is collected from some kinds of literature and articles. The data is analyzed and calculated by
GaBi’s LCA software.

Wood as raw
Pulping/ material
Pulp
bleach-
ing/drying

Manufacturing paperboard Emissions

plant

Packaging Energy
Transportation

Folding box Water

paperboard

Use Waste

Recycle

Figure 7: System boundary of paperboard manufacturing, consumption and recycling pro-

cesses.

17
3.2.1 Functional unit

From previous research, after the BCTMP process, 1 m3 of wood provides 2.7 m3 pulp. The
density of yield in wood chips of spruce is 140 kg/m3. Mass can be calculated with density and
volume. (Oliveira 2017).

As, Mass of pulp = density ×volume = 140 × 2.7 = 378 kg.

Figure 8: Plastic-free eco-barrier FBB (Metsä Board 2020)

Food storage box Figure 5 created by Metsä Board is plastic-free, light in weight, safe for
food.

3.3 Inventory analysis

The research has done for knowledge and understands of the procedure of LCA, and to operate
GaBi’s software which contains a big database to get results. The quantification of inventory
will provide an impact assessment.

The inventory analysis is the most challenging part of the LCA because data need to collect
with immense investigation. Gabi’s LCA software is an advanced approach, and it contains a
large database. Most of the processes can find easily with the search option and just drop at the
18
process window. The life cycle significant stages are explained clearly in GaBi’s LCA, but
many different inputs and outputs are not visible. Processes can be created and added.

The Metsä Group paperboard box manufacturing system was studied for research. The data
was collected from the Metsä Board webpage. This research paper outlines the information that
is accessible.

Previous research interprets that the average unit energy consumption for one tonne of pulp
and paper was 3.7 MWh for European country but in Finland, it is 9% less which was 3.4
MWh. After converting the energy MWh to MJ resultant is 12.240 MJ. (Koreneff, Suojanen &
Huotari, 2019). Every unit process was quantified with the input. The unit process with several
inputs is a black box unit process that leads to many outputs. All the inputs and outputs are
calculated in GaBi’s LCA graphs in the balance chart in Figure 9:

Figure 9: LCA of paperboard created in GaBi.

19
The LCA software database has many available processes. A cradle to grave approach is ap-
plied in the study, which includes raw material, manufacturing process, use and end of life.
Every level is identified with detailed research.

Table 3: List of input and output flows linking the processes in the LCA plan of this study.
LCA Stages Inputs Outputs
Raw material Wood logs Wood chips
Electricity Wood waste
Transport
Digester Electricity pulp,
Heat, wastewater,
White liquor by-product-
(sodium hydroxide, tall oil,
sodium Black liquor
sulphite), Wood chips, lake wa-
ter
Refining and bleaching bleaching (hydrogen peroxide), Pulp fibers,
electricity, pulp, wastewater
lake water
Paperboard sheet forming electricity, pulp fibers packaging pa-
per
Folding box paperboard electricity, packaging paper packaging pa-
per

Consumption electricity, packaging paper, packaging

transportation waste

End of life packaging box, waste incin-

heat eration
transportation Repulping

20
Table 3 shows all the inputs and outputs visible or invisible with stages of the process. Where
visible inputs or outputs can be noticed in Figure 8 and some are not visible, but they are in the
model.
The first procedure starts with raw material. The tree needed to cut down first which consume
energy. All logs collected at one place then transport to the manufacturing branch. Diesel con-
sumption of truck is maximum because of distance travelled from forest to plant is largest.
After wood chipping transportation of chips to manufacturing plant, that is the second-highest
amount of consumption of diesel. At the next stage, major electricity consumption takes place
and, a lot of emissions occurs while production. Harmful chemicals added and removed in this
section. But the whole process occurs at the same place that saves emission through transport.
After production final product moves towards the customer. The waste of product contributes
to recycling, 2 % of waste released to the environment. GaBi software supported well making
the plan according to Metsä Group procedure. In case any substance was not available in the
database, a new process was created. The white liquor was created in the software to show the
flow which contains hydrogen sulphite and hydrogen peroxide. Refining and bleaching, paper-
board sheet forming, folding box paperboard had also to be created because every stage is
important to understand the procedure.

3.4 Transport and energy Scenario

Scenarios could support analysing and predict the consequences that may occur in the complete
LCA if circumstances are replaced or modified. Transportation and energy are a major part of
the LCA of paperboard. So, some parameters were added to electricity. The transportation
method was modified, and a cargo plane added to it. The process in Figure 8 has done only in
Finland. The scenario analysis included in GaBi’s LCA to compare the impacts by adding dis-
tinct parameters. Process parameters contribute to making changes in specific parameters in
GaBi like distance or power or amount. Free parameters are editable but fixed parameters
change themselves in GaBi after editing the free parameter.

First electricity consumption added in the free parameters section. There is an option to add a
parameter and create a formula depends on the requirement. Figure 10 is showing parameters
for electricity in GaBi. The consumption of electricity is added in the process of refining and
bleaching. The formula can generate in this part and the calculation completed itself.
21
 Figure 10: GaBi’s LCA electricity parameter and formula generation.
The distance parameters can vary by adding a scroller to get a difference that occurs by chang-
ing a distance, visible in Figure 11. The plane cargo included in the scenario and distance was
set from 0 to 7408 km. Any parameter can be involved by adding a benchmark and other op-
tions to compare results, which clarifies impact, and it will support creating a better plan by
comparing all options. GaBi’s LCA software is very impressive to create a scenario and com-
pare the results to find the best option.

Figure 11: Transport parameters

The study covered three scenarios to compare in different options. Figure 12 is showing the
benchmark which is the base plan. Option 1 is showing if the distance is 0 km for truck and
Cargo plane scenarios in GaBi and option 2 is showing if the truck distance parameter is 100
km and with cargo plane distance parameter approximately 3000 km.

Figure 12: Scenarios created in GaBi’s LCA.

22
4 RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION

Results of the impact categories and inventory of the LCA of the paperboard is analysed and
explained in his chapter. The scenarios are taken into account and compared with the base plan.
Scenarios could make it easy that what are differences could possible in the impact category.

Figure 13 is presenting the global warming potential when the procedure followed with
benchmark distance and energy. Figure 13 is showing option 1 and Figure 14 is about option 2
when the distance set to approximately 3000 km as shown in Figure 12. The consumption of
kerosine was 422 kg and that increased to 494 kg in option 2 because the requirement of fuel
is increased with distance. Changes of burden points compare to Figure 8 with Figure 14, 15
and 16 are representing the variation.

Figure 13: Parameter cargo plane calculation for the benchmark.

23
Figure 14: Parameter option 1.

Figure 15: Parameter option 2.

24
 Figure 16: Primary energy.

The below results are remodelling inventory based on scenarios created in GaBi LCA software.
Green and red colours are presenting the values compared to the benchmark value. Green de-
scribes approximately 10% below and red is 10% larger than the benchmark.

Table 4: Calculated Impact categories according to CML 2001-2016 in Gabi’s LCA based on scenar-
ios.

Emissions are calculated in software. Table 5 below is showing the resources and emissions
for the complete process.

Table 5: Inventory of emissions and resources calculated in GaBi.

Inventory Data (in kg)

Resources

Crude oil 61.7

Hard coal 0.417

25
Lignite 0.658
Natural gas 4.64

Emission to air
CO2 199
CO 0.227
NH3 0.00895
PM 0.028
H2S 0.000595
N2 0.00399
NO 1.23
NOx 0.00391
SO2 0.0623
HCl 0.000745

VOC group

Hydrocarbons 0.00133
Methane 0.26
Particles to air 0.0288
Group NMVOC to air 0.117
Emissions to water
Heavy metals to freshwater 0.00218
Inorganic emissions to water 6.57
Organic emissions to water 0.121

Emissions to seawater 55.9

Emissions to agricultural soil 0.000292

Emissions to industrial soil 0.0011

26
4.1 Impacts categories results

There are many different models to measure environmental impacts in GaBi’s LCA software
like Recipe, CML 2001-Jan 2016, environmental footprints. TRACI 2.1. CML 2001-Jan 2016
and TRACI were applied to calculate. CML covers the baseline impact categories and TRACI
is based on midpoint methodology. Bars in the graph are expressing the number of emissions
in kilograms. Where the tallest bar is the total amount of emission in the whole procedure.
Other bars are expressing emission from fuel, transportation, and the manufacturing process.
The environmental impacts expressed in the Figures below.
According to CML 2001- Jan 2016 Figure 17 total emission of CO2 contributing to Global
warming is 206 kg. Figure 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 are acidification, eutrophication, ozone layer
depletion, human toxicity potential, photochemical ozone potential respectively.

Figure 17: Global warming impact of baseline plan.

Figure 18: Acidification potential

27
 Figure 19: Eutrophication potential.

Figure 20: Ozone layer depletion potential

Figure 21: human toxicity potential.

28
 Figure 22: Photochemical ozone potential

The TRACI 2.1 applied to identify some impact categories. Figure 23, 24, 25, 26 are graphs of
ecotoxicity of air, human toxicity (cancer), human toxicity (noncancer) and smog respectively.

Figure 23: Ecotoxicity of air

Figure 24: Human toxicity (cancer)

29
 Figure 25: Human toxicity (noncancer)

Figure 26: Smog air

Global warming potential for scenarios based on Figure 10. Figure 26 shows that most of the
GWP would be possible by option 2 because the distance is more than the benchmark distance.

Figure 27: Global warming potential comparison for scenarios.

30
4.2 Interpretation

The interpretation is representing the results of inventory (LCI), impact assessment (LCIA) and
recycling or disposal. GaBi’s LCA software is applied to perform a life cycle assessment of
paperboard. The procedure was followed by the cradle to grave phase. Many processes are
assumed and added because GaBi does not have some of them. There is an option in GaBi to
create a new flow that is not available in the software. It is easy to create a new flow and add
to the plan.

The involvement of each unit process in GWP is noticeable in the performed LCA. Table 5
below can represent each stage contribution in GWP from Figure 9 and scenario Figure 14, 15
and 16.

Table 6: Contribution in global warming in emissions from paperboard production input flows.
Flows Contribution Global Global Global Global
warming po- warming warming warming po-
tential bur- potential potential tential bur-
den Figure 9 burden burden den Figure
Baseline Figure 14 Figure 15 16 scenario
Plan (%) scenario 1 scenario option 2 (%)
(adding option 1
Cargo (%)
plane) (%)
Forest to Transport 32 4 49.9 3.5
sawmill Diesel 3.1 0.4 4.6 0.3
Electricity 0.1 0 0.1 0

Sawmill to di- Transport 26.1 3.3 40.6 2.8

gester Diesel 2.4 0.3 3.8 0.3
Electricity 0.1 0 0.1 0
Digester pro- Electricity 0.3 0 0 0
cess

31
 Folding box Transport 31.6 81.5 0.1 82.5
paperboard to Diesel 2.9 10.4 0.2 10.6
consumer
Repulping Transport 1.2 0.1 0.2 0
Diesel 0.1 0 0.3 0

The assumptions are made for LCA by collecting data from the Metsä group. It was assumed
the whole process was done in Finland only then created a plan. And distances assumed ac-
cordingly for one process to another process. Figure 8 is showing the whole process. The en-
vironmental impacts are designed by software on basis of the LCA created in it. By taking
different parameters into account scenario has been planned. Cargo plane and electricity pa-
rameter added which are visible in Figures 11 and 12. The research identified that the major
environmental problems occurred because of the use of fossil fuel for transportation. Then
electricity also contributes some amount of effects. Impact assessment clearly shows the major
emissions and quantities in Table 2.

One more comparison by replacing the electricity grid mix with electricity from biogas was
showing the clear difference of global warming potential. The red box area in Figure 28 is
showing the addition of biogas electricity in the red marked box. The impact assessment has
done based on the modification to observe the difference.

32
 Figure 28: LCA of Paperboard with electricity from biogas
GWP calculated in the baseline plan is 206 kg CO2 eq. But by substituting biogas energy as an
energy input GWP changed to 162 kg CO2 eq. The impact assessment of Figure 29 shows that
emissions are decreased with a comparison of Figure 9 which is the baseline plan.

Mainly global warming potential was calculated to observe if the addition of electricity from
biogas making any difference.

Figure 29: Global warming potential for electricity from biogas.

Eco-friendly paperboard has taken to make the plan and it was assumed that the paperboard is
completely free from harmful additives. According to previous research, 55% of energy re-
source in Europe is biomass. It can easily reduce the impact of non-renewable resources of

33
energy (Kirwan 2012). Metsä group applies to 86% of fossil-free energy by its renewable re-
sources. The leftover logs like branches and treetops, the sawdust from the chipping process in
sawmills are the best sources for them to create renewable energy (Metsä group 2020). To
make a more sustainable procedure input energy can be changed to renewable resources. Wood
waste can use as a by-product to create energy (Kirwan 2012). Recycling is significant to apply
by paper industries to decrease deforestation. Water is also one of the major parts in the pro-
cessing and wastewater can use in the process again by filtration.

If plastic and other additives are applied, then the impact can increase and need to handle the
waste more carefully. The research is limited because of the lack of data from the manufacturer.
It is not possible to check the data sensitivity.

5 CONCLUSION

The life cycle assessment of the paperboard adheres to the ISO standards and the ‘Cradle-to-
grave’ process was chosen. The research in its entirety is based on Metsä board web pages,
relevant pieces of literature, and other web pages pertinent to the topic. The study, even though
rational, was curtailed as many of the processes were missing from the database as GaBi’s
software was not of professional version and the lack of details from the manufacturer. The
paper industry is one of the least harmful industries for the environment and the plan was based
on the Metsä group procedures, which follow the least harmful and the most sustainable ways
to produce paperboard.

The paper obtained satisfactory results to fulfil the aim to learn GaBi LCA software to analyze
and conduct life cycle assessment step by step. The LCA can be modified by replacing elec-
tricity methods with renewable choices that can enhance the environmental benefits. Recycling
would be the most crucial factor to reduce energy requirements and transportation.

Some modifications are possible to reduce environmental hazards that are not visible in GaBi
LCA. For instance, landfill waste needs to be managed. Incineration releases toxic gases that
require to be controlled. Reuse of the paperboard is also one way to decrease solid waste.

34
Manufacturing procedures in the industry are majorly responsible for the generation of solid
waste. The industry is responsible for planning and executing appropriate procedures to re-
duce/eliminate or control such solid wastes.

The aim was to follow ISO standards and it was followed. The most significant part of the
assessment was to collect data. The Metsä group was the primary part of this research so, most
of the data available in their webpages were efficiently applied. Different kinds of literature,
journals, and articles were studied to complete the research. The process of collecting infor-
mation consumed the most amount of time during the research. After a lot of research, most of
the flows and process had to create and add to the plan. Some modifications were needed to be
performed. The observations look insufficient. It was not that easy as I felt when research
started, the use of the GaBi LCA software database is not an updated one, but it was useful.
Differences in results of impacts on the environment with the application of various parameters
were detectable.

The analysis could not be completed because of a lack of data about additives and coatings for
boxes from the manufacturer. That is the reason that I chose the eco barrier coating mentioned
in Metsä group web pages. There is no information about the electricity purchased by the or-
ganization. But it is found that some amount of electricity is renewable, and the planning is to
increase the renewable sources. The LCA of any product can be accomplished by the manu-
facturer or the person who conducts the LCA for the company. Because the information in
detail would be accessible for the responsible person only.

I found Metsä group is already applying methods that can decrease emissions in the environ-
ment. Society can be part of reducing harmful effects in the way to consume, reuse and recycle
the product carefully.

35
REFERENCES

Azeez, M. A., 2018. Pulping of Non-Woody Biomass. 10.5772/intechopen.79749. Available at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328089450_Pulping_of_Non-
Woody_Biomass/citations. [25.03.2021].

Bjørn A., Owsianiak M., Molin C., Hauschild M.Z., 2018. LCA History. In: Hauschild M.,
Rosenbaum R., Olsen S. (eds) Life Cycle Assessment. Springer, Cham. [18.07.2020].

Coles, R. and Kirwan, M.J., 2011. Food and Beverage Packaging Technology. 2nd ed.
[ebook] Wiley. Available at: https://www.perlego.com/book/1011211/food-and-beverage-
packaging-technology. [18.07.2020].

Curran, MA 2015, Life Cycle Assessment Student Handbook, John Wiley & Sons, Incorpo-
rated, Somerset. Available at: ProQuest Ebook Central. [18.07.2020].

European packaging preferences 2020. Available at: https://www.twosides.info/docu-

ments/research/2020/packaging/European-Packaging-Preferences-2020_EN.pdf.
[27.03.2021].

Forbes 2020. Is paper more sustainable flexible packaging than plastic? Available at:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/woodmackenzie/2020/08/24/is-paper-a-more-sustainable-
flexible-packaging-material-than-plastic/?sh=64c6f8cb12d4. [27.03.2021].

Greasley S., 2020. Common types of boxes. Available at: https://howtobuypackag-

ing.com/common-types-of-boxes/. [27.08 2020].

Ivory print 2020. Luxury rigid boxes. Available at: https://ivoryprint.com/luxury-rigid-boxes/.

[06.09.2020].

Kirwan, MJ (ed.), 2013, Handbook of Paper and Paperboard Packaging Technology, John
Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, Hoboken. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central.
[17.07.2020].

36
Koreneff, G. (VTT) Suojanen, J. & Huotari, P. (Fisher), 2019. Energy efficiency of Finnish
pulp and paper sector. Available at: https://www.motiva.fi/files/16820/Energy_Effi-
ciency_of_Finnish_Pulp_and_Paper_Sector.pdf. [03.09.2020].

Matthew, D., 2019. Available at: https://theecobahn.com/packaging/plastic-vs-cardboard-

packaging-a-complex-choice/. [16.12.2020].

Metsä Board 2020. Metsä Board prime FBB-EB. Available at:

https://www.metsaboard.com/Customers/Barrier-boards/Product-MetsaBoard-Prime-FBB-
EB/Pages/default.aspx. [21.07.2020].

EPRC Monitoring report 2019. European paper recycling council. Available at:
https://www.paperforrecycling.eu/. [26.03.2021].

Oliveira, L., 2017. Production wood chips. Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/pro-

duction-wood-chips-luciano-r-oliveira/. [03.09.2020].

Paperboard folding carton designs 2016. Available at: https://www.thoropackag-

ing.com/blog/paperboard-folding-carton-designs/. [21.08.2020].

Papermaking 2020. Britannica Academic. Available at:https://academic-eb-

com.ezproxy.arcada.fi:2443/levels/collegiate/article/papermaking/108527#82439.toc.
[22.08.2020].

Preston board packaging 2021. Environmental impact paperboard packaging. Available at:
https://www.prestonboard.co.uk/2018/08/09/environmental-impact-paperboard-packaging/.
[28.08.2021].

Procarton 2020. Available at: https://www.procarton.com/choose-cartons/sustainability/.

[27.08.2020].

37
Pulp Mill Wastewater: Characteristics and Treatment - Scientific Figure on ResearchGate.
Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Main-unit-operations-of-the-mechanical-
pulping-Light-brown-arrows-indicate-wastewater_fig4_315862695. [22.08.2020].

Simonen, K., 2014. Life Cycle Assessment. [ebook] Taylor and Francis. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/1563463/life-cycle-assessment-pdf. [28.11.2020].

Vakkilainen, Esa K. Alternative Technologies for Biofuels Production in Kraft Pulp Mills—
Potential and Prospects - Scientific Figure on ResearchGate. Available at: https://www.re-
searchgate.net/figure/Overview-of-a-kraft-pulping-process_fig1_265845338. [21.08.2020].

Wolf, K., 2012. JRC Reference Reports: The International Reference Life Cycle Data System
(ILCD) Handbook. [27.08.2020].

38
APPENDICES

Normalization calculated in GaBi:

CML 2001-Jan 2016, World.

CML 2001-Jan 2016, World. Europe.

39
ReciPe: Midpoint Normalization, Europe 2014

ReciPe: Endpoint Normalization, Europe 2014

40
LCIA Survey 2012 (weighting): Europe

LCIA Survey 2012 (weighting): World

41