Life cycle assessment of converting waste plastics into activated carbon: A comparative analysis of HDPE, LDPE, PS, and PP feedstocks

Activated carbon (AC) is an important adsorbent for environmental treatment; however, the traditional method of production is energy-consuming and chemical-intensive. AC from valorized post-consumer plastics is a promising waste-to-resource route. This study presents a cradle-to-gate LCA of AC derived from polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE), evaluated across three scenarios—baseline, recycling-integrated, and landfill disposal. The effects of polymer type and char yield are demonstrated. PP had the highest global warming potential (31.41 kg CO 2 eq) in the baseline, and HDPE presented the lowest global warming potential (17.79 kg CO 2 eq). Including 20% recycling, all polymers had consistently lower burdens, with percentage reductions of 6.3% for PP, 7.2% for PS, 9.5% for LDPE, and 7.2% for HDPE. At 30% recovery, LDPE and HDPE showed the greatest reductions, at 14.2% and 12.7%. In contrast, landfill resulted in apparently lower GWPs (0.5–2.4 kg CO 2 eq versus 18–31 kg CO 2 eq, 92 to 97% reduction), but higher toxicological burdens for freshwater ecotoxicity (+78%), marine ecotoxicity (+74%), and human non-carcinogenic toxicity (+192%). Sensitivity analysis confirmed electricity consumption as the dominant driver, with effects evident at a 1%. At the ±10% accounting for electricity variation, PP’s GWP varied from 29.33 (–6.6%) to 33.45 (+6.5%) kg CO 2 eq, and HDPE ranged from 17.72 (–0.4%) to 18.29 (+2.8%) kg CO 2 eq. Overall, the results indicate that polymer-to-AC valorization, when coupled with recycling and electricity-saving, provides an opportunity to mitigate climate without the unsustainable practice of landfilling.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cleaner Environmental Systems
Published
2026-04-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2026.100436
Primary Topic
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Life cycle assessment of converting waste plastics into activated carbon: A comparative analysis of HDPE, LDPE, PS, and PP feedstocks

Paisan Kittisupakorn, Wachira Daosud, Anuchit Wuttitrairat, Soottiwan Thamsakon
Cleaner Environmental Systems
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
article

Life cycle assessment of converting waste plastics into activated carbon: A comparative analysis of HDPE, LDPE, PS, and PP feedstocks

Paisan Kittisupakorn, Wachira Daosud, Anuchit Wuttitrairat, Soottiwan Thamsakon
article en

Abstract

Activated carbon (AC) is an important adsorbent for environmental treatment; however, the traditional method of production is energy-consuming and chemical-intensive. AC from valorized post-consumer plastics is a promising waste-to-resource route. This study presents a cradle-to-gate LCA of AC derived from polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE), evaluated across three scenarios—baseline, recycling-integrated, and landfill disposal. The effects of polymer type and char yield are demonstrated. PP had the highest global warming potential (31.41 kg CO 2 eq) in the baseline, and HDPE presented the lowest global warming potential (17.79 kg CO 2 eq). Including 20% recycling, all polymers had consistently lower burdens, with percentage reductions of 6.3% for PP, 7.2% for PS, 9.5% for LDPE, and 7.2% for HDPE. At 30% recovery, LDPE and HDPE showed the greatest reductions, at 14.2% and 12.7%. In contrast, landfill resulted in apparently lower GWPs (0.5–2.4 kg CO 2 eq versus 18–31 kg CO 2 eq, 92 to 97% reduction), but higher toxicological burdens for freshwater ecotoxicity (+78%), marine ecotoxicity (+74%), and human non-carcinogenic toxicity (+192%). Sensitivity analysis confirmed electricity consumption as the dominant driver, with effects evident at a 1%. At the ±10% accounting for electricity variation, PP’s GWP varied from 29.33 (–6.6%) to 33.45 (+6.5%) kg CO 2 eq, and HDPE ranged from 17.72 (–0.4%) to 18.29 (+2.8%) kg CO 2 eq. Overall, the results indicate that polymer-to-AC valorization, when coupled with recycling and electricity-saving, provides an opportunity to mitigate climate without the unsustainable practice of landfilling.

Cleaner Environmental SystemsVol. 21
Burapha University (TH), Chulalongkorn University (TH)
Chulalongkorn University
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.