Skip Navigation Links
Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management
Dmitry Kovalevsky (editor), Jiazhong Zhang(editor)
Dmitry Kovalevsky (editor)

Climate Service Center Germany (GERICS), Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon, Fischertwiete 1, 20095 Hamburg, Germany

Fax: +49 (0) 40 226338163 Email: dmitry.v.kovalevsky@gmail.com

Jiazhong Zhang (editor)

School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi Province 710049, China

Fax: +86 29 82668723 Email: jzzhang@mail.xjtu.edu.cn


Environmental Assessment of Used Lubricant Oil in Southern Brazilian Region

Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management 7(4) (2019) 381--394 | DOI:10.5890/JEAM.2019.12.003

Malaquias Zildo António Tsambe$^{1}$, Cássio Florisbal de Almeida$^{1}$, Cássia Maria Lie Ugaya$^{2}$, Luiz Fernando de Abreu Cybis$^{1}$

$^{1}$ Institute of Hydraulic Research, Post-Graduation Program in Hydric Resources and Environmental Sanitary, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul - Av. Bento Gonçalves, 9500, Porto Alegre, Brazil

$^{2}$ Federal University of Technology - Paraná, Post-Graduation Program in Mechanical Engineering and Materials, Av. Sete de Setembro, Rebouças - Curitiba, 6681, Paraná, Brazil

Download Full Text PDF

 

Abstract

Brazil is currently the sixth world largest lubricating oil consumer, as a result, the sixth largest used lubricating oil (ULO) producer, with an annual ULO production of about one million liters. Therefore, due to the environmental consequences and also to the large amount of this waste, it becomes necessary to quantify and qualify the impacts resulting from ULO management process. The study evaluates, through the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, the current ULO management system in southern Brazil. Two comparisons regarding the environmental performance scenarios were defined with the use of eight impact categories: land use, nonrenewable energy, global warming potential, aquatic acidification potential, aquatic eutrophication potential, human toxicity potential, terrestrial ecotoxicity potential and carcinogens potential. The LCA was conducted based on Simapro, using the “IMPACT 2002+ for ULO v2.12/IMPACT 2002+” method. The scenarios comprised the two ULO management models currently used in Brazil. The first, which is designated in the study, by TTR scenario and the second, regarded as TsTR scenario. The LCA results showed that the re-refine phase, in the TsTR scenario, presents lower impact when compared to the corresponding TTR scenario phase. The TsTR scenario presented the greatest impacts in seven categories (carcinogens, terrestrial ecotoxicity, land use, eutrophication, globalwarming, use of nonrenewable energy and acidification), corresponding to about 87.5% of all the impacts. On the contrary, the TTR scenario presented lower impacts in these seven categories, impacting more on only one category (human toxicity). In relation to transportation, the opposite occurs, transport in the TTR scenario presents a larger contribution, impacting 100% more than transport in the TsTR scenario. The presence of the transshipment center decreases the amount of re-refining impacts in 87.5% of the categories in the TTR scenario. Transport in the TTR scenario contributes relatively more to the fact that the collecting vehicles cover a larger average distance (789km) when compared to transport in the TsTR scenario, where the vehicles cover a smaller average distance (629.44km). The study allowed to conclude, through the LCA methodology, that the ULO life cycle with TTR type scenario causes lower impacts on the natural environment than a cycle with a TsTR type scenario.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the valuable contributions of the UTFPR Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Center (GYRO). This study was funded by Brazilian Higher Education Personnel Improvement Coordination (CAPES). The authors are grateful to all data collection sources and stakeholders of the ULO management system.

References

  1. [1]  ANP, (2017), Boletim de lubrificantes. http://www.anp.gov.br/wwwanp/images/publicacoes/boletinsanp/ Lubrificantes/n1/Boletim-Lubrificantes dezembro2016 24-04-2017.pdf (Accessed 18 May 2017).
  2. [2]  Boughton, B. and Horvath, A. (2004), Environmental assessment of used oil management methods, Environmental Science & Technology 38, 353-358.
  3. [3]  BRASIL (2004), ABNT: NBR 10.004: classificação dos resíduos sólidos. Brasil.
  4. [4]  BRASIL (2005), Resoluc¸˜ao CONAMA 362/2005: regulamentação da coleta, transporte, armazenamento e destinação dequada dos óleos lubrificantes usados e contaminados. DOU no 121. Seção 1, pag. 128 – 130. http://www.mma.gov.br/port/conama/legiabre.cfm?codlegi=466.pdf (Accessed 03 November 2015).
  5. [5]  Canchumani, G.A.L. (2013), Óleos lubrificantes usados: Um estudo de caso de avaliação de ciclo de vida do sistema de rerrefino no Brasil. Doctoral thesis. UFRJ.
  6. [6]  De Almeida, C.F., Maciel, V.G., Tsambe, M.Z.A. and Cybis, L.F. de A. (2017), Environmental assessment of a bi-fuel thermal power plant in an isolated power system in the Brazilian Amazon region, Journal of Cleaner Production 154, 41-50.
  7. [7]  EC. (2006), Integrated pollution prevention and control, Reference document on Best Available Techniques of the Waste Treatments Industries.
  8. [8]  Fehrenbach, H. (2005), Ecological and energetic assessment of re-refining used oil base oils: substituition of primarily produced base oils including semi-synthetic and synthetic compounds, Final Report. ed. GEIR - Groupement Européen de l’Industrie de la Régénération.
  9. [9]  Gaidajis, G., Angelakoglou, K., Botsaris, P.N. and Filippidou, F. (2011), Analysis of the recycling potential of used automotive oil filters using the Life Cycle Assessment approach, Resources Conservation and Recycling 55, 986-994.
  10. [10]  Grieece, L.N., Nobel, C.E., Longshore, L., Huntley, R. and DeVierno, A.L. (2014), Life Cycle Carbon Footprint of Re- Refined versus Base Oil That Is Not Re-Refined, ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering 2, 158-164.
  11. [11]  Hassanain, E.M., Yacout, D.M.M, Metwally, M.A. and Hassouna, M.S. (2017), Life cycle assessment of waste strategies for used lubricant oil, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 22, 1232-1240.
  12. [12]  ISO14041 (1998), International Organization for Standardizations: Environmental management—life cycle assessment— goal and scope. Geneva, Switzerland.
  13. [13]  ISO14044 (2006), International Organization for Standardizations: Environmental management—life cycle assessment— requirements and guidelines. Geneva, Switzerland.
  14. [14]  Kalnes, T.N., Shonnard, D.R. and Schuppel, A. (2006), LCA of a spent lube oil Re-refining process, 16th European Symposium on Computer Aided Process Engineering and 9th International Symposium on Process Systems Engineering 21, 713-718.
  15. [15]  Kanokkantapong, V., Kiatkittipong,W., Panyapinyopol, B., Wongsuchoto, P. and Pavasant, P. (2009), Used lubricating oil management options based on life cycle thinking, Resources Conservation and Recycling 53, 294-299.
  16. [16]  Liu, Q., Jiang, P., Zhao, J., Zhang, B., Bian, H. and Qian, G. (2011), Life cycle assessment of an industrial symbiosis based on energy recovery from dried sludge and used oil, Journal of Cleaner Production 19, 1700-1708.
  17. [17]  Mang, T. and Gosalia, A. (2017), Lubricant and their market in Lubricants and Lubrication., Third, completely revised and enlarged edition. Edited by MANG, T & DRESEL, W. ed. Published by Wilwy-VCH.
  18. [18]  Martins, C.R.O. (2007), Avaliação da estrutura dos postos de revenda de combustíveis do Distrito Federal quanto à geração de resíduos aliada a análise de sua citotoxicidade e genotoxicidade, PhD thesis 139, University of Brasilia, Brazil.
  19. [19]  Mendes, N.C., Bueno, C. and Ometto, A.R. (2016),Avaliação de Impacto do Ciclo de Vida: revis˜ao dos principaismétodos, Production 26, 160-175.
  20. [20]  Nakaniwa, C. and Graedel, T.E. (2002), Life cycle and matrix analyses for re-refined Oil in Japan, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 7, 95-102.
  21. [21]  Nakaniwa, C., Yagita, Y. and Inaba, A. (2001), Life cycle inventory analysis for waste oil in Japan, in: Proceedings Second International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing. Presented at the Proceedings Second International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, 962- 967.
  22. [22]  Pires, A. and Martinho, G. (2013), Life cycle assessment of a waste lubricant oil management system, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18, 102-112.
  23. [23]  Pires, A. and Martinho, G. (2012), Carbon footprint analysis for the waste oil management system in Portugal, British Journal of Environment & Climate Change 2, 278-287.
  24. [24]  Raimondi, A., Girotti, G., Blengini, G.A. and Fino, D. (2012), The contribution of lube additives to the life cycle impacts of fully formulated petroleum-based lubricants, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 17, 987-996.
  25. [25]  SINDIRREFINO, National Union of the Mineral Oil Re-refining Industry (2017), Relat´orios do Sindicato. http://www.sindirrefino.org.br.pdf (Accessed 05 February 2017).
  26. [26]  Sohn, H., (2011), Guia básico: Gerenciamento de óleos lubrificantes usados ou contaminados. GMP/SENAI.
  27. [27]  Unnasch, S. and Waterland, L. (2013), Critical review of used oil life cycle assessment study, California department of resources recycling and recovery, California.
  28. [28]  Weidema, B.P. (1998), Multi-user test of the data quality matrix for product life cycle inventory data, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 3, 259-265.