4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Carbon footprint assessment of face masks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: Based on different protective performance and applicable scenarios

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Widespread concerns have been raised about the huge environmental burden caused by massive consumption of face masks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, most of the existing studies only focus on the environmental impact associated with the product itself regardless of the actual usage scenarios and protective performance of products, resulting in unrealistic conclusions and poor applicability. In this context, this study integrated the product performance into the existing carbon footprint assessment methodology, with focus on the current global concerns regarding climate change. Computational case studies were conducted for different mask products applicable to the scenarios of low-, medium- and high-risk levels. The results showed that reusable cotton masks and disposable medical masks suitable for low-risk settings have a total carbon footprint of 285.484 kgCO 2-eq/FU and 128.926 kgCO 2-eq/FU respectively, with a break-even point of environmental performance between them of 16.886, which implies that cotton masks will reverse the trend and become more environmentally friendly after 17 washes, emphasizing the importance of improving the washability of cotton masks. Additionally, the total carbon footprints of disposable surgical masks and KN95 respirators were 154.328 kg CO 2-eq/FU and 641.249 kg CO 2-eq/FU respectively, while disposable medical masks and disposable surgical masks were identified as alternatives with better environmental performance in terms of medium- and high-risk environments respectively. The whole-life-cycle oriented carbon footprint evaluation further indicated that the four masks have greater potential for carbon emission reduction in the raw material processing and production processes. The results obtained in this study can provide scientific guidance for manufacturers and consumers on the production and use of protective masks. Moreover, the proposed model can be applied to other personal protective equipment with similar properties, such as protective clothing, in the future.

          Graphical abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019

          Summary In December 2019, a cluster of patients with pneumonia of unknown cause was linked to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan, China. A previously unknown betacoronavirus was discovered through the use of unbiased sequencing in samples from patients with pneumonia. Human airway epithelial cells were used to isolate a novel coronavirus, named 2019-nCoV, which formed a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus, Orthocoronavirinae subfamily. Different from both MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, 2019-nCoV is the seventh member of the family of coronaviruses that infect humans. Enhanced surveillance and further investigation are ongoing. (Funded by the National Key Research and Development Program of China and the National Major Project for Control and Prevention of Infectious Disease in China.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

            Summary Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 and is spread person-to-person through close contact. We aimed to investigate the effects of physical distance, face masks, and eye protection on virus transmission in health-care and non-health-care (eg, community) settings. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimum distance for avoiding person-to-person virus transmission and to assess the use of face masks and eye protection to prevent transmission of viruses. We obtained data for SARS-CoV-2 and the betacoronaviruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Middle East respiratory syndrome from 21 standard WHO-specific and COVID-19-specific sources. We searched these data sources from database inception to May 3, 2020, with no restriction by language, for comparative studies and for contextual factors of acceptability, feasibility, resource use, and equity. We screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We did frequentist and Bayesian meta-analyses and random-effects meta-regressions. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane methods and the GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020177047. Findings Our search identified 172 observational studies across 16 countries and six continents, with no randomised controlled trials and 44 relevant comparative studies in health-care and non-health-care settings (n=25 697 patients). Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] −10·2%, 95% CI −11·5 to −7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; p interaction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD −14·3%, −15·9 to −10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks; p interaction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). Eye protection also was associated with less infection (n=3713; aOR 0·22, 95% CI 0·12 to 0·39, RD −10·6%, 95% CI −12·5 to −7·7; low certainty). Unadjusted studies and subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed similar findings. Interpretation The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance. Funding World Health Organization.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks

              We identified seasonal human coronaviruses, influenza viruses and rhinoviruses in exhaled breath and coughs of children and adults with acute respiratory illness. Surgical face masks significantly reduced detection of influenza virus RNA in respiratory droplets and coronavirus RNA in aerosols, with a trend toward reduced detection of coronavirus RNA in respiratory droplets. Our results indicate that surgical face masks could prevent transmission of human coronaviruses and influenza viruses from symptomatic individuals.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Clean Prod
                J Clean Prod
                Journal of Cleaner Production
                Elsevier Ltd.
                0959-6526
                1879-1786
                2 January 2023
                2 January 2023
                : 135854
                Affiliations
                [a ]State Key Laboratory for Modification of Chemical Fibers and Polymer Materials, China
                [b ]College of Fashion and Design, Donghua University, Shanghai, 200051, China
                [c ]Shanghai Customs District, Shanghai, 200135, China
                [d ]School of Fashion Design & Engineering, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310018, China
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. College of Fashion and Design, Donghua University, Shanghai, 200051, China.
                Article
                S0959-6526(23)00012-4 135854
                10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.135854
                9807258
                38e2cffa-381b-4b10-ae4f-aa5d240d93d5
                © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 10 October 2022
                : 28 December 2022
                : 2 January 2023
                Categories
                Article

                face mask,covid-19 pandemic,carbon footprint,protective performance,applicable scenario

                Comments

                Comment on this article