Carbon footprint comparison of sign substrate made from recycled e-waste plastic versus aluminium

Honglei Wang, Elizabeth K. Walker, Alex Abadi, Guanghong Duan, Hong chao Zhang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Two types of sign substrate material used for road signs and road safety markers, one constructed of reclaimed e-waste plastic and the other of the most commonly used aluminium, are compared in the context of life cycle assessment methodology. This paper also compares the different types of tools available, and determines a suitable tool for use in calculating the carbon footprint (CF) of the two types of sign substrate material. An estimate for the CF of each type of sign substrate material is calculated as the carbon dioxide equivalent. After calculating the CF of each type of sign substrate, a sensitivity analysis is conducted. The ultimate aim of the analysis was to indicate which parameters of the substrate manufacturing system have the strongest influence on the CF results in order to find ways for lowering the environmental impact such as climate change potential. The main finding of this study is that blank signs constructed of reclaimed e-waste plastic materials are more attractive in climate change potential than those made of aluminium. Also, this paper documents a quantity assessment method for the climate change potential of using sign substrate material constructed of reclaimed e-waste plastic in roadside applications instead of conventional aluminium.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)76-83
Number of pages8
JournalInternational Journal of Sustainable Engineering
Volume5
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2012

Keywords

  • carbon footprint
  • climate change potential
  • e-waste plastic

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Carbon footprint comparison of sign substrate made from recycled e-waste plastic versus aluminium'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this