Anti dandruff shampoo bar : Shampoo bars reduce plastic waste, are cost-effective, last longer, made with natural ingredients and are environmentally friendly

1. Minimal Packaging Waste:
   • Reduction in Plastic Use: Unlike traditional liquid shampoos that are typically packaged in plastic bottles, shampoo bars often come in minimalistic, biodegradable, or recyclable packaging. This significantly reduces plastic waste, a major environmental concern. According to a report by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, by 2050, there could be more plastic than fish (by weight) in the oceans if current trends continue [1].
2. Lower Water Content:
   • Conservation of Water Resources: Shampoo bars are solid and contain little to no water, whereas liquid shampoos comprise up to 80% water [2]. By eliminating water from the product, manufacturers reduce the demand for this precious resource, promoting sustainability.
3. Extended Product Lifespan:
   • Concentrated Formulation: Due to their concentrated nature, shampoo bars often last longer than their liquid counterparts. One shampoo bar can equate to 2-3 bottles of liquid shampoo, depending on usage [3]. This means fewer products are produced, purchased, and disposed of over time.
4. Reduction in Harmful Chemicals:
   • Eco-friendly Ingredients: Many shampoo bars, including anti-dandruff variants, utilize natural ingredients and avoid synthetic preservatives required for water-based products. This reduces the release of harmful chemicals into waterways during manufacturing and post-use [4].

Lower Carbon Footprint of Anti-Dandruff Shampoo Bars:

1. Efficient Transportation:
   • Reduced Weight and Volume: The absence of water and plastic packaging makes shampoo bars lighter and more compact. This efficiency means more products can be transported simultaneously, reducing the number of trips and associated greenhouse gas emissions [5].
2. Energy-efficient Production:
   • Simplified Manufacturing Process: Producing shampoo bars often requires less energy compared to liquid shampoos, which need processes like emulsification and homogenization. Lower energy consumption directly translates to reduced carbon emissions [6].
3. Biodegradable Nature:
   • Reduced Environmental Impact Post-use: Ingredients in many shampoo bars are biodegradable, ensuring they break down naturally without releasing harmful pollutants. This contrasts with some liquid shampoos that contain non-biodegradable compounds, contributing to environmental degradation [7].
4. Longevity Reduces Production Needs:
   • Fewer Units Produced: Given that shampoo bars last longer, fewer units need to be produced to meet consumer demands. This reduction in production frequency lessens the cumulative carbon emissions associated with manufacturing [8].

Scientific Explanation: The environmental benefits of shampoo bars, especially anti-dandruff variants, stem from their formulation and packaging. Traditional liquid shampoos' high water content necessitates preservatives to prevent microbial growth, leading to the inclusion of chemicals like parabens, which have been scrutinized for their environmental impact [9]. In contrast, the solid nature of shampoo bars negates this need. Moreover, the life cycle assessment (LCA) of products evaluates their environmental impact from production to disposal. Studies have shown that products with reduced packaging, longer lifespan, and efficient transportation methods (like shampoo bars) have a significantly lower LCA impact than their conventional counterparts [10].

1. Raw Material Production: Energy and emissions associated with sourcing, processing, and transporting ingredients.
2. Manufacturing Process: Energy required to produce the shampoo bar.
3. Packaging: Emissions related to packaging production and materials.
4. Transportation: Emissions from transporting the product from the manufacturing site to the consumer.
5. End-of-Life Disposal: Impact of the disposal or recycling of the product and packaging.

Assumptions for Calculation:

1. Weight of Shampoo Bar: 100g
2. Raw Materials: Based on common ingredients (e.g., oils, essential oils, surfactants)
3. Packaging: 10g of cardboard (biodegradable and recyclable)
4. Transportation: 500 km by truck (average distance from manufacturer to retail store)
5. Energy Use in Manufacturing: Approximate energy for a small-scale production facility.
6. Emission Factors:
   • Raw Materials: 1.5 kg CO₂e per kg of ingredients.
   • Manufacturing: 0.5 kg CO₂e per kg of product.
   • Packaging: 0.25 kg CO₂e per kg of cardboard.
   • Transportation: 0.2 kg CO₂e per ton-km.
   • End-of-Life Disposal: 0.05 kg CO₂e per kg of waste.

Calculation:

1. Raw Materials: $$\text{Raw Material Emissions}=0.1\text{ kg}\times 1.5\text{ kg CO₂e/kg}=0.15\text{ kg CO₂e}$$
2. Manufacturing: $$\text{Manufacturing Emissions}=0.1\text{ kg}\times 0.5\text{ kg CO₂e/kg}=0.05\text{ kg CO₂e}$$
3. Packaging: $$\text{Packaging Emissions}=0.01\text{ kg}\times 0.25\text{ kg CO₂e/kg}=0.0025\text{ kg CO₂e}$$
4. Transportation: $$\text{Transportation Emissions}=0.1\text{ kg}\times 0.5\text{ kg}\times 0.2\text{ kg CO₂e/ton-km}=0.01\text{ kg CO₂e}$$
5. End-of-Life Disposal: $$\text{Disposal Emissions}=0.1\text{ kg}\times 0.05\text{ kg CO₂e/kg}=0.005\text{ kg CO₂e}$$

Total Carbon Footprint:

$$\text{Total Carbon Footprint}=0.15+0.05+0.0025+0.01+0.005=0.2175\text{ kg CO₂e}$$ Total Carbon Footprint for a 100g Anti-Dandruff Shampoo Bar: 0.2175 kg CO₂e (or approximately 217.5 grams of CO₂e).

Explanation:

• The calculated carbon footprint of 217.5 grams of CO₂e for a 100g shampoo bar is relatively low due to minimal packaging, reduced transportation emissions, and energy-efficient manufacturing processes. The sustainability aspects (e.g., biodegradable packaging, long product life) also contribute to a lower overall environmental impact.

References:

1. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2016). The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the future of plastics.
2. Plastic Oceans International. (2018). Plastic Facts. Link
3. Lush Cosmetics. (n.d.). Naked Shampoo Bars. Link
4. Environmental Working Group. (2020). Skin Deep Cosmetics Database. Link
5. Nunes, L. J., et al. (2017). "Biomass in the generation of energy: on the path to sustainability." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 71, 737-751.
6. Chiu, M. C., & Kremer, G. E. (2011). "Investigation of the applicability of design for X tools during design concept evolution: a literature review." International Journal of Product Development, 13(2), 132-167.
7. Brausch, J. M., & Rand, G. M. (2011). "A review of personal care products in the aquatic environment: Environmental concentrations and toxicity." Chemosphere, 82(11), 1518-1532.
8. Rossi, M., et al. (2006). "Design for the Next Generation: Incorporating Cradle-to-Cradle Design into Herman Miller Products." Journal of Industrial Ecology, 10(4), 193-210.
9. Routledge, E. J., et al. (1998). "Identification of estrogenic chemicals in STW effluent. 2. In vivo responses in trout and roach." Environmental Science & Technology, 32(11), 1559-1565.
10. Laursen, S. E., et al. (1997). "EDIP—Environmental Design of Industrial Products: A new Danish LCA-methodology." Institute for Product Development, Technical University of Denmark.