Nano-TiO2 Coatings for Limestone: Which Sustainability for Cultural Heritage?
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Goal and Scope Definition
2.2. Functional Unit and System Boundaries
2.3. Data Quality
- Installation, in the production and application processes, of HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air filter → 99.97%) air filter to minimize nanoparticle emissions to the air;
- In the application process, nano-TiO2 emissions to the air have been assumed to be 0.1%, partly retained by a HEPA filter, then disposed in a hazardous waste incinerator and partly released into the application site and inhaled by workers;
- During the application stage, a closed spray coating system has been designed;
- PPE (personal protective equipment): face mask with 95% efficiency to protect workers from dust and nanoparticle inhalations, as indicated in the European Standard EN149 [17];
- In the use phase, the durability of titania coatings has been assumed to be 10 years during which the complete nano-TiO2 emission to the air takes place; the end of life of the coating is therefore coincident with the use phase;
- The electricity energy supply has been assumed to be the generated by Ecoinvent.
2.4. Impact Assessment
- Land use has been estimated using basic indicators of Italian mixed electric energy, both land occupation and transformation; in the present study, transformation to forest intensive, normal, transformation to forest intensive and transformation to arable have been introduced;
- Mineral extraction has been characterized considering some additional resources, such as silver, gravel, sand, lithium, bromine and water in the ground, derived from the category minerals of the Eco-indicator 99 method with the same characterization factors;
- The radioactive waste damage category has been added; in particular, both this kind of waste and its occupied volume have been evaluated considering the same characterization and normalization factors of the EDIP 2003 method [20]. This category allows one to take into account the possible damage from the electric energy mix, which also includes the electricity generated by nuclear plants. This latter kind of energy produces radioactive waste, which has to be safely managed and disposed;
- The carcinogens inhaled damage category has been added with a characterization factor of 1 kg and a new damage category with the calculated damage factor 5.5557 Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY)/kg. Normalization and weighting factors remain unchanged (normalization factor: 141, weighting factor: 1).
- Nano-TiO2 emissions to the air and inhaled by workers who handle nanomaterials during the application, use and end of life phases have been considered. In particular, particulates <100 nm substance has been added to the carcinogens impact category and particulates <100 nm inhaled substance has been introduced to a new impact category (called carcinogens inhaled) with characterization factors and damage factor respectively calculated previously [21,22]. Regarding nanoTiO2 particles released to the air, the calculation of the damage to human health caused by the carcinogenic substance using the Ecoindicator 99 method [23] has been considered, which covers 3 main steps: fate analysis, effect analysis and damage analysis. Following this procedure, the resultant characterization factor is 1.09 kg C2H3Cl. For nano-TiO2 inhaled by workers, it is assumed that the same indicators used for the calculated indoor emissions considering the concentration limit of the indoor emissions in the production room, considering the average volume of the production area, the probability of contracting lung cancer with that concentration and an average of five workers in the production room have been considered. The calculated damage assessment factor is 5.56 DALY.
2.5. Life Cycle Inventory
Life Cycle Stage | Unit | Application | Use and End of Life | Data Source |
---|---|---|---|---|
Energy input | ||||
-Electricity consumption | kW h | 1.42 | – | I/O data derived from the Ecoinvent database and estimated from the literature |
Material I/O | ||||
-Input of demineralized water | kg | 64.15 × 10−2 | – | Directly from the company and estimated from the literature |
-Nano-TiO2 suspension (1 wt%) | kg | 0.75 × 10−1 | – | |
Transport | ||||
-Road | kg km | 99.14 × 10−2 | – | Directly from the company |
-Freight | kg km | 4.48 | – | |
Waste to treatment | ||||
-Disposal of hazardous dust retained by aspiration and mask filter | kg | 7.49 × 10−7 | – | Estimated from the literature |
Emissions to the air | ||||
-Particulates, <100 nm (workers outdoor) | kg | 6.75 × 10−12 | – | I/O data derived from the Ecoinvent database and estimated from the literature |
-Particulates, <100 nm | kg | 2.25 × 10−10 | 0.75 × 10−3 | |
-NOx | mg | – | −60.77 | |
-HNO3 | mg | – | −83.23 |
3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Impact Category | Unit | Total | Production and Application | Use and End of Life Phase |
---|---|---|---|---|
Carcinogens | kg C2H3Cleq | 9.38 × 10−3 | 9.11 × 10−3 [97.1%] | 2.73 × 10−4 [2.9%] |
Non-carcinogens | kg C2H3Cleq | 2.81 × 10−3 | 2.81 × 10−3 | – |
Respiratory inorganics | kg PM2.5eq | 2.75 × 10−4 | 2.72 × 10−4 [99.06%] | −2.58 × 10−6 [−0.94%] |
Ionizing radiation | Bq C-14eq | 6.19 | 6.19 | – |
Ozone layer depletion | kg CFC-11eq | 5.03 × 10−8 | 5.03 × 10−8 | – |
Respiratory organics | kg C2H4eq | 7.84 × 10−5 | 7.84 × 10−5 | – |
Aquatic ecotoxicity | kg TEG water | 19.02 | 19.02 | – |
Terrestrial ecotoxicity | kg TEG soil | 4.87 | 4.87 | – |
Terrestrial acid/nutri | kg SO2eq | 4.45 × 10−3 | 4.34 × 10−3 [96.62] | −1.11 × 10−4 [−3.38%] |
Land occupation | m2 org.arable | −1.89 × 10−2 | −1.89 × 10−2 | – |
Aquatic acidification | kg SO2eq | 1.50 × 10−3 | 1.47 × 10−3 [98.11%] | −2.83 × 10−5 [−1.89%] |
Aquatic eutrophication | kg PO4 P-lim | 3.91 × 10−5 | 3.91 × 10−5 | – |
Global warming | kg CO2eq | 34.22 × 10−2 | 34.22 × 10−2 | – |
Non-renewable energy | MJ primary | 5.86 | 5.86 | – |
Mineral extraction | MJ surplus | 6.73 × 10−3 | 6.73 × 10−3 | – |
Renewable energy | MJ | 86.46 × 10−1 | 86.46 × 10−1 | – |
Radioactive waste | kg | 1.59 × 10−5 | 1.59 × 10−5 | – |
Carcinogens inhaled | kg | 2.25 × 10−12 | 2.25 × 10−12 | – |
Damage Category | Unit | Total | Production and Application | Use and End of Life Phase |
---|---|---|---|---|
Human health | DALY | 2.28 × 10−7 | 2.26 × 10−7 | −1.04 × 10−9 |
Ecosystem quality | PDF·m2·y | 2.35 × 10−2 | 2.34 × 10−2 | −1.16 × 10−4 |
Climate change | kg CO2eq | 3.42 × 10−1 | 3.42 × 10−1 | – |
Resources | MJ primary | 5.87 | 5.87 | – |
Radioactive waste | kg | 1.59 × 10−5 | 1.59 × 10−5 | – |
Carcinogens inhaled | DALY | 1.25 × 10−11 | 1.25 × 10−11 | – |
Single score | Pt | 12.30 × 10−5 | 12.28 × 10−5 [99.87%] | −1.55 × 10−7 [−0.13%] |
4. Conclusions and Recommendations
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Quagliarini, E.; Bondioli, F.; Goffredo, G.B.; Licciulli, A.; Munafò, P. Self-cleaning materials on architectural heritage: Compatibility of photo-induced hydrophilicity of TiO2 coatings on stone surfaces. J. Cult. Herit. 2013, 14, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Niederhãusern, S.; Bondi, M.; Bondioli, F. Self-cleaning and antibacteric ceramic tile surface. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 2013, 10, 949–956. [Google Scholar]
- Bondioli, F.; Taurino, R.; Ferrari, A.M. Functionalization of ceramic tile surface by sol-gel technique. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2009, 334, 195–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Quagliarini, E.; Bondioli, F.; Goffredo, G.B.; Cordoni, C.; Munafò, P. Self-cleaning and de-polluting stone surfaces: TiO2 nanoparticles for limestone. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 37, 51–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klaine, S.J.; Koelmans, A.A.; Horne, N.; Carley, S.; Handy, R.D.; Kapustka, L.; Nowack, B.; Von der Kammer, F. Paradigms to assess the environmental impact of manufactured nanomaterials. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2012, 31, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kahru, A.; Ivask, A. Mapping the dawn of nanoecotoxicological research. Acc. Chem. Res. 2013, 46, 823–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Som, C.; Berges, M.; Chaudhry, Q.; Dusinska, M.; Fernandes, T.F.; Olsen, S.I.; Nowack, B. The importance of life cycle concepts for the development of safe nanoproducts. Toxicology 2010, 269, 160–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gottschalk, F.; Kost, E.; Nowack, B. Engineered nanomaterials in water and soils: A risk quantification based on probabilistic exposure and effect modeling. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2013, 32, 1278–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Callegari, G. Le performances energetiche ed ambientali dei materiali da costruzione per l’edilizia in ambito rurale. Ph.D. Thesis, Universita’ degli studi di Padova, City, Italy, 2008; pp. 1–58. [Google Scholar]
- Guinée, J.B. Handbook on life cycle assessment operational guide to the ISO standards. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2002, 7, 311–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sablayrolles, C.; Gabrielle, B.; Montrejaud-Vignoles, M. Life cycle assessment of biosolids land application and evaluation of the factors impacting human toxicity through plant uptake. J. Ind. Ecol. 2010, 14, 231–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Blundo, S.D.; Ferrari, A.M.; Pini, M.; Riccardi, M.P.; García, J.F.; Fernández del Hoyo, A.P. The life cycle approach as an innovative methodology for the recovery and restoration of cultural heritage. J. Cult. Herit. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2014, 4, 133–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klöpffer, W.; Curran, M.A.; Frankl, P.; Heijungs, R.; Köhler, A.; Olsen, S.I.; Nanotechnology and Life Cycle Assessment. A Systems Approach to Nanotechnology and the Environment. In proceedings Nanotechnology and Life Cycle Assessment Workshop, Washington, DC, USA, 2–3 October 2006.
- Colorobbia Italia S.p.A. Hompage. http://www.colorobbia.it (accessed on 22 April 2014).
- Baldi, G.; Bitossi, M.; Barzanti, A. Method for the Preparation of Aqueous Dispersions of TiO2 in the Form of Nanoparticles, and Dispersions Obtainable with This Method. US Patent 20080317959A1, 25 December 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Life Cycle Inventories, Ecoinvent Database v. 2.0. Available online: http://www.ecoinvent.ch (accessed on 12 December 2010).
- BS EN 149:2001+A1:2009 Respiratory Protective Devices. Filtering Half Masks to Protect against Particles. In Requirements, Testing, Marking; British Standards Institution (BSI): London, UK, 2011.
- SimaPro 7.3.; PRé Consultants B.V.: Amersfoort, The Netherlands, 2010.
- Jolliet, O.; Margni, M.; Charles, R.; Humbert, S.; Payet, J.; Rebitzer, G.; Rosenbaum, R. IMPACT2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2003, 8, 324–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Potting, J.; Hauschild, M. The EDIP2003 Methodology—Background for Spatial Differentiation in Life Cycle Impact Assessment; Danish Environmental Protection Agency: København, Denmark, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Pini, M.; González, E.I.C.; Neri, P.; Siligardi, C.; Ferrari, A.M. Life Cycle Assessment of Nano-TiO2 Coated Self-cleaning Float Glass. In Nanotechnology 2013: Bio Sensors, Instruments, Medical, Environment and Energy; Nano Science and Technology Institute: Danville, CA, USA, 2013; Volume 3. [Google Scholar]
- Pini, M.; Neri, P.; Montecchi, R.; Ferrari, A.M. Life Cycle assessment of nano-TiO2 functionalized porcelainized stoneware tiles. In Proceedings of 247nd ACS National Meeting & Exposition, Dallas, TX, USA; 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Goedkoop, M.; Spriensma, R. The Eco-indicator99—A Damage Oriented Method for Life Cycle Assessment. In Methodology Report, third edition 22-06-2001; PréConsultan B.V.: Amersfoort, The Netherlands, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Pini, M.; Rosa, R.; Neri, P.; Bondioli, F.; Ferrari, A.M. Environmental assessment of a bottom-up hydrolytic synthesis of TiO2 nanoparticles. Green Chem. 2015, 17, 518–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iavicoli, I.; Leso, V.; Bergamaschi, A. Toxicological effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticles: A review of in vivo studies. J. Nanomater. 2012, 2012, 964381:1–964381:36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Poon, C. Photocatalytic construction and building materials: From fundamentals to applications. Build. Environ. 2009, 44, 1899–1906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bare, J.C.; Hofstetter, P.; Pennington, D.W.; de Haes, H.A.U. Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrifices and benefits. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2000, 5, 319–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ferrari, A.M.; Pini, M.; Neri, P.; Bondioli, F. Nano-TiO2 Coatings for Limestone: Which Sustainability for Cultural Heritage? Coatings 2015, 5, 232-245. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings5030232
Ferrari AM, Pini M, Neri P, Bondioli F. Nano-TiO2 Coatings for Limestone: Which Sustainability for Cultural Heritage? Coatings. 2015; 5(3):232-245. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings5030232
Chicago/Turabian StyleFerrari, Anna Maria, Martina Pini, Paolo Neri, and Federica Bondioli. 2015. "Nano-TiO2 Coatings for Limestone: Which Sustainability for Cultural Heritage?" Coatings 5, no. 3: 232-245. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings5030232
APA StyleFerrari, A. M., Pini, M., Neri, P., & Bondioli, F. (2015). Nano-TiO2 Coatings for Limestone: Which Sustainability for Cultural Heritage? Coatings, 5(3), 232-245. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings5030232