Abstract

PurposeThis study compares prior life cycle assessment (LCA) studies on graphene-based materials (GBMs) with new results from original data on ball milling of few-layer graphene. The analysis thus offers an overview of the current state of knowledge on the environmental sustainability of GBM production. Possible future development pathways and knowledge gaps are identified and explained to provide guidance for the future development of GBMs.MethodsComparable scopes, aggregation levels, and impact assessment methods are used to analyse diverse GBMs with three different functional units for graphene oxide, pristine graphene, and other GBMs with different carbon/oxygen ratios or thickness. The ecoinvent v3.4 cut-off database is used for background data in all models to provide a common basis of comparison. Furthermore, uncertainty calculations are carried out to give insights on the current level of knowledge and to check if GBM production methods can be differentiated. Finally, a sensitivity analysis is performed on the energy inputs with a detailed description of three future scenarios for the European electricity mix.Results and discussionThe general analysis of all results highlights three key strategies to improve the environmental sustainability of GBM production. (1) The use of decarbonised energy sources reduces substantially the impacts of GBMs. This benefit is decreased, however, when conservative forecasts of the future European electricity mix are considered. (2) Increased energy efficiency of production is useful mainly for the processes of electrochemical exfoliation and chemical vapour deposition. (3) The principles of green chemistry provide relevant ideas to reduce the impacts of GBMs mainly for the processes of chemical and thermal reduction and for the production of graphene oxide. Furthermore, the analysis of new data on ball milling production reveals that transforming GBM solutions into dry-mass can substantially increase the environmental impacts because of the energy-intensive nature of this conversion. The uncertainty analysis then shows that it is still difficult to differentiate all production methods with the current knowledge on this emerging technology.ConclusionsWith our current level of knowledge on GBMs, it is clear that more accurate data is needed on different production methods to identify frontrunners. Nevertheless, it seems that unknowns, like the state of future electricity mixes, might not often hinder such comparisons because conservative forecasts bring similar changes on many production options. Additionally, functional properties and toxicity for GBMs will require further attention to improve our confidence in the comparison of production methods in the future.

Highlights

  • Since 2004, graphene-based materials (GBMs), which are defined as carbon-based 2D structures, have gained a lot of attention because of their exceptional properties on, for instance, electrical and thermal conductivity (Brownson et al 2012; Novoselov et al 2004)

  • The comparison of hotspots per type of GBMs highlights that the main source of impacts is typedependent with chemical substances being critical for graphene oxide (GO), almost as important as electricity demand for Other GBMs with more atomic layers (oGBMs) and rarely important for graphene sheet (GR) sheets

  • Potential environmental impacts from GO production mainly depend on chemical substances, while impacts for oGBM production depend on its electricity demand except for the ultrasonication process, which is dominated by the use of diethyl ether

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Since 2004, graphene-based materials (GBMs), which are defined as carbon-based 2D structures, have gained a lot of attention because of their exceptional properties on, for instance, electrical and thermal conductivity (Brownson et al 2012; Novoselov et al 2004). The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (2021) 26:327–343 companies, and governments around the world have recognised that these carbon-based nanomaterials are key contenders to improve several modern devices and to offer new solutions in high-tech sectors such as photonics (Li et al 2019; Sankar et al 2019; Ye and Tour 2019). Experts around the world expect a rise of their use within the decades (Geim 2009; Novoselov et al 2012; Randviir et al 2014). With such an outlook on the future of GBMs, their environmental impacts should be well understood to evaluate if their integration into our everyday life might help in building a more sustainable future. The life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology (ISO14040 2006; ISO14044 2006; Joint Research Center 2010) is a suitable choice to perform such assessments (Ness et al 2007; Rebitzer et al 2004), and it has been previously used in the sector of nanomaterials (Salieri et al 2018)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call