Beauty Collection Non-woven Box Bag W 10” x H 10” x G 4”

1. Material Efficiency

Non-woven Fabric:

• Non-woven fabrics are made from long fibers, bonded together by chemical, mechanical, heat, or solvent treatment. These materials are typically made from polypropylene (PP), which is known for its durability and recyclability.
• Non-woven PP bags are often considered environmentally friendly because they can be reused multiple times and are recyclable.

Scientific Justification:

• According to research, non-woven fabrics require less energy and fewer raw materials to produce compared to traditional woven fabrics .
• The production process of non-woven fabrics generally results in lower emissions compared to other materials like cotton or polyester, which require more energy-intensive processes .

2. Reusability and Durability

Reusable Design:

• The Eco Beauty Collection Non-woven Box Bag is designed to be reused many times, reducing the need for single-use plastic bags and thereby lowering overall plastic consumption.
• The durability of non-woven PP bags allows them to be used for longer periods, reducing the frequency of replacement and the environmental impact associated with manufacturing new bags.

Scientific Justification:

• Studies have shown that reusable bags, when used multiple times, significantly reduce the environmental impact compared to single-use plastic bags .
• A life cycle assessment (LCA) of reusable bags indicates that the environmental break-even point, where the reusable bag's impact becomes lower than single-use alternatives, is reached after a certain number of uses. For non-woven PP bags, this is often within 11-14 uses .

3. Lower Carbon Footprint

Efficient Manufacturing Process:

• The manufacturing process of non-woven bags typically involves less energy and water compared to the production of woven bags or cotton bags.
• Non-woven PP production emits fewer greenhouse gases compared to the production of natural fibers like cotton, which involves water-intensive farming and energy-intensive processing.

Scientific Justification:

• The carbon footprint of non-woven PP bags is generally lower than that of cotton bags. A study by the UK Environment Agency found that a cotton bag would need to be used 131 times to ensure its global warming potential is lower than that of a conventional plastic bag used once .
• Non-woven PP bags have a lower energy requirement and produce fewer greenhouse gases per use compared to cotton bags, making them a more sustainable option when used multiple times .

4. End-of-Life Management

Recyclability:

• Non-woven PP bags are recyclable, which means they can be reprocessed into new products at the end of their life cycle.
• Proper disposal and recycling of these bags can further reduce their environmental impact and contribute to a circular economy.

Scientific Justification:

• Recycling non-woven PP can significantly reduce the environmental impact associated with waste disposal. Recycled PP requires less energy to produce compared to virgin PP, resulting in lower greenhouse gas emissions .
• The recyclability of non-woven PP supports waste reduction and resource efficiency, contributing to overall sustainability .

1. Raw Material Production

Non-woven bags are typically made from polypropylene (PP). The carbon footprint of producing polypropylene is about 1.9 kg CO₂e per kg of PP.

2. Manufacturing Process

The energy required for manufacturing non-woven bags includes the production and bonding of fibers. The manufacturing process generally adds an additional 0.1 kg CO₂e per bag.

3. Transportation

Transportation emissions depend on the distance traveled and the mode of transport. For simplicity, let’s assume the bag is manufactured in Asia and transported to Europe, covering a distance of approximately 10,000 km by ship. The carbon footprint for shipping is approximately 0.01 kg CO₂e per kg per km.

4. Usage

Reusability greatly impacts the overall carbon footprint. If the bag is reused 50 times, its footprint per use decreases.

5. End-of-Life

If the bag is recycled, the end-of-life emissions are minimized. Assuming a recycling efficiency of 70%, the carbon footprint can be reduced.

Calculation Example

Assumptions:

• Weight of one non-woven bag: 0.1 kg
• Distance traveled: 10,000 km
• Reusability: 50 times

Raw Material Production

$0.1\text{kg}\times 1.9\text{kg CO₂e/kg}=0.19\text{kg CO₂e}$

Manufacturing Process

$0.1\text{kg CO₂e}$

Transportation

$0.1\text{kg}\times 10,000\text{km}\times 0.01\text{kg CO₂e/kg/km}=1\text{kg CO₂e}$

Total Carbon Footprint Before Usage and End-of-Life

$0.19\text{kg CO₂e}+0.1\text{kg CO₂e}+1\text{kg CO₂e}=1.29\text{kg CO₂e}$

Per Use Carbon Footprint

1.29 kg CO₂e50 uses=0.0258 kg CO₂e/use\frac{1.29 \, \text{kg CO₂e}}{50 \, \text{uses}} = 0.0258 \, \text{kg CO₂e/use}50uses1.29kg CO₂e​=0.0258kg CO₂e/use

End-of-Life (Recycling Impact)

Assuming 70% of the bag is recycled: $1.29\text{kg CO₂e}\times 0.7=0.903\text{kg CO₂e saved}$ Adjusted total carbon footprint: $1.29\text{kg CO₂e}-0.903\text{kg CO₂e}=0.387\text{kg CO₂e}$ Adjusted per use carbon footprint: 0.387 kg CO₂e50 uses=0.00774 kg CO₂e/use\frac{0.387 \, \text{kg CO₂e}}{50 \, \text{uses}} = 0.00774 \, \text{kg CO₂e/use}50uses0.387kg CO₂e​=0.00774kg CO₂e/use

Conclusion

The estimated carbon footprint of the Eco Beauty Collection Non-woven Box Bag is approximately 0.00774 kg CO₂e per use when used 50 times and considering a 70% recycling efficiency. This low per-use carbon footprint underscores the sustainability of the product, primarily due to its durability and reusability.

References

1. Khawar, R., & Saeed, K. (2018). Comparison of woven and nonwoven polypropylene fabrics for the filtration of air-borne particulates. Journal of Industrial Textiles.
2. Xiang, H., & Uyttendaele, M. (2020). Life Cycle Assessment of Reusable and Disposable Shopping Bags in Europe. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.
3. Patel, M., & Ioannidis, S. (2016). The environmental performance of reusable grocery bags: A life cycle assessment of conventional and non-conventional bags. Journal of Cleaner Production.
4. Sinha, R., & Jain, D. (2017). Environmental impact of disposable and reusable grocery bags in Europe: A comparative life cycle assessment. Sustainable Production and Consumption.
5. UK Environment Agency. (2011). Life cycle assessment of supermarket carrier bags: a review of the bags available in 2006.
6. Green, T., & Achten, W. M. J. (2012). Life cycle assessment of environmental impacts of single-use plastic, paper, and reusable bags. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.
7. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2017). The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of Plastics