Energy demand
Figure 29 shows that all cases assessed tend towards the similar conclusion, i.e. composting is the least
preferable option for this indicator. For landfill and anaerobic digestion the energy demand is reduced up to 50%
compared to composting. In study n°2 that focuses on the end of life stage only, recycling and incineration with
energy recovery both appear largely better than composting.
The comparison between recycling and incineration with energy recovery on Figure 30 highlights that incineration
with energy recovery appears as the second preferable option after recycling. The only case for which
incineration is preferable to recycling is case 7[MAS]. Indeed, in this case, the biopolymer waste is used as a
reducing agent in blast furnaces (open loop recycling), which is less advantageous than replacing virgin
biopolymer material.
Table 52 Relative difference between the impacts from the different end-of-life options vs. composting for energy demand for biopolymers. A
positive value means that composting is preferable to the other end-of-life option. A negative value means that composting causes more
environmental impact than the other end-of-life option.
N° case 2[PLA] 2[MB] 2[BIO] 3[PLA1]^1 3[PLA2]^2 7[MAS]^1
Recycling ‐36800% ‐40% ‐30% ‐40%
Incineration with energy recovery ‐4380% ‐5360% ‐4750% ‐50%
Incineration without energy recovery
Landfill ‐50% ‐50% ‐50%
Anaerobic digestion ‐10% ‐40%Composting versus other alternativesStudies n°1, 4, 5 and 6 do not include a comparison with composting for this indicator and thus are
not included in this table1 2 11
Feedstock recycling scenario(^2) Chemical recycling scenario
Table 53 Relative difference between the impacts from the different end-of-life options vs. incineration with energy recovery for energy demand
for biopolymers. A positive value means that incineration with energy recovery is preferable to the other end-of-life option. A negative value
means that incineration with energy recovery causes more environmental impact than the other end-of-life option.
N° case 2[PLA] 2[MB] 2[BIO] 5[PLA] 7[MAS]^1
Recycling ‐600% ‐60% 20%
Composting 100% 100% 100% 110%
Incineration without energy recovery
Landfill 100% 100% 100% 0%
Anaerobic digestion 20%
Studies n°1, 3, 4 and 6 do not include a comparison with incineration with energy recovery
for this indicator and thus are not included in this table
Incineration with energy recovery versus
other alternatives
1
(^1) Feedstock recycling scenario