Life Cycle Assessment of FFP 3 Mask

Introduction:

An FFP3 mask is a type of respirator mask that provides a very high level of protection against airborne particles and aerosols. It is part of the European standard for respiratory protective equipment, also known as EN 149.

The "FFP" stands for "Filtering Facepiece Particle," and the number "3" indicates that it has the highest level of filtration efficiency among the FFP masks. Specifically, an FFP3 mask must filter at least 99% of airborne particles with a minimum efficiency of 99% for both non-oily and oily aerosols.

FFP3 masks are widely used by healthcare professionals when caring for patients with infectious respiratory diseases, such as tuberculosis, and influenza, to protect themselves from exposure to airborne pathogens.

The usage of FFP3 masks has increased significantly in recent years, primarily due to the COVID-19 pandemic and heightened awareness of the importance of respiratory protection in various settings.

Many countries and organizations have revised their guidelines and regulations to promote the use of higher-level respiratory protection, such as FFP3 masks, in certain high-risk environments. This has driven an increase in demand for these masks across various industries.

Method:

A life cycle assessment was conducted in accordance with International Organization for Standardization 14044 Guidelines and modelled using our own AI LCA software using modified Exiobase/ ILCD database emission factors. We performed a ‘cradle to grave’ life cycle assessment including raw material extraction, manufacture, transport and disposal.

Key Components:

Key Assumptions

We have assumed manufacturing location to be UK (online evidence) and raw materials were sourced from China. The transport medium is assumed to be shipping and road transport. In some case, the supply chain does have air transport for effective use of manufacturing capacity.

Inventory Analysis:

We have used publicly available information such as total weight of the product, technical product sheet from the manufacturer, and density of materials to model the weight of individual components. External studies have also been used to find the typical weight of individual components

Almost all polymers have additives added during the manufacturing process. The additives used in the components have been split based on standard manufacturing process procedures.

The energy for manufacturing each component has been estimated based on energy ratings of standard machines as well as standard manufacturing process.

Shipping transport assumed for the raw materials to manufacturing site. Lorry transport has been assumed for port to use location. Incineration at UK NHS facility for the FFP3 mask has been considered for analysis, as mentioned by Milton Keynes University NHS Hospital

Emissions Analysis

We see the use of raw materials and manufacturing process being the key drivers of emissions for the mask. By changing the raw materials that are less energy intensive to manufacture considerable amount of emissions can be reduced for FFP3 mask.

Feel free to contact us at contact@ecomedic.io if you would like further information on the study.

Sources:

1. http://www.jeeng.net/Energy-Inputs-on-the-Production-of-Plastic-Products,151815,0,2.html

2. https://www.sensorfact.eu/blog/benchmarking-the-first-step-in-saving-energy-in-the-plastic-and-packaging-industry/#:~:text=Injection%20moulding%20is%20one%20of,0.8%20%E2%80%93%201.3%20kWh%2Fkg

3. https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:119698&datastreamId=FULL-TEXT.PDF

4. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10.1177/01410768211001583

5. https://www.hygenic.com/hysynalr-synthetic-rubber-sheeting.html

6. https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/GB/en/product/aldrich/gf29773963

7. https://angelnonwoven.en.made-in-china.com/product/FxGrIRhJutkH/China-Ventilator-Breathing-Filter-Silicone-Rubber-Respirator-Exhalation-Air-Valve-for-Face-Mask.html

8. https://www.mdpi.com/2311-5637/7/4/204