4.8 Article

Material Flows of Polyurethane in the United States

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 55, Issue 20, Pages 14215-14224

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03654

Keywords

polyurethane; material flow analysis; recycling; circular economy; biobased feedstock; sustainability

Funding

  1. Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-EE0008928, DE-AC02-06CH11357]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study highlights the challenges in recycling polyurethanes but also suggests chemical recycling methods and biobased pathways as potential solutions to reduce fossil fuel consumption and exposure to toxic precursors in polyurethane production.
Today, polyurethanes are effectively not recycled and are made principally from nonrenewable, fossil-fuel-derived resources. This study provides the first high-resolution material flow analysis of polyurethane flows through the U.S. economy, tracking back to fossil fuels and covering polyurethane-relevant raw materials, trade, production, manufacturing, uses, historical stocks, and waste management. According to our analysis, in 2016, 2900 thousand tonnes (kt) of polyurethane were produced in the United States and 920 kt were imported for consumption, 2000 kt entered the postconsumer waste streams, and 390 kt were recycled and returned to the market in the form of carpet underlayment. The domestic production of polyurethane consumed 1100 kt of crude oil and 1100 kt of natural gas. With the developed polyurethane flow map, we point out the limitation of the existing mechanical recycling methods and identify that glycolysis, a chemical recycling method, can be used to recycle the main components of postconsumer polyurethane waste. We also explore how targeting biobased pathways could influence the supply chain and downstream markets of polyurethane and reduce the consumption of fossil fuels and the exposure to toxic precursors in polyurethane production.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available