Design Life-Cycle

 Pei-Chen Huang

Ashley and Giselle

DES 40A

Professor Cogdell

December 2nd, 2021

Disposable Mask’s Life Cycle of Materials

Disposable masks have become commonplace in people's daily lives as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak. In addition to knowing more about disposable masks, it is critical to have a thorough understanding of the materials that are utilized to manufacture them. In this article, I will discuss the life-cycle of disposable mask raw materials, which includes the procurement of raw materials, manufacturing, processing, and formulation, distribution and transportation, maintenance, recycling, and waste management. According to Unicef's website, approximately 301.3 million surgical masks and 22.2 million N95 masks have been distributed to over 100 countries throughout the world. The pandemic not only altered people's life, but it also altered the things that are mass-produced. With so many masks manufactured each day, it's important to understand how they're made and recycled. Because of the materials used in their manufacture, disposable masks are causing harm and pollution in our environment. Indeed, addressing how and why disposable masks are hazardous to the environment by concentrating on the six phases in their life cycle. Furthermore, understanding the tales behind it allows us to avert significant issues and discover solutions to help conserve our world.

The procurement of raw materials is the initial stage in the life-cycle of the materials that make up disposable masks. It lays the groundwork for the entire process, as well as assisting people in understanding what materials are utilized and where they originate from. Polypropylene plastic is the most widely used material for masks. Polypropylene is "a form of cloth manufactured from a "thermoplastic" polymer," according to Jenna Sherman's article.  The article "Everything You Need to Know About Polypropylene Plastic" discusses polypropylene plastic's fundamental qualities and background information. Polypropylene is composed out of propylene monomers and is widely utilized in the packaging and textile sectors, according to the article. It was initially launched in 1951 by Paul Hogan and Robert Banks, and the scientists eventually spread it to Italy and Germany. With a high temperature, it is easy to shape, and it may be reinforced up to 450 degrees to form little pieces. Polypropylene has a low density, which is useful for reducing shipping weights to other manufacturers, and it can also be made into a living hinge. Chemical resistance, elasticity and toughness, fatigue resistance, insulation, and transmissivity are five features of polypropylene, according to the text. These properties enable polypropylene plastic to be made in a variety of sectors, and it is now widely employed by all businesses. Its unique features also enable it to adapt to various production procedures and distinguish itself from other materials. "The distillation of hydrocarbon fuels into lighter groupings called "fractions," some of which are mixed with other catalysts to form polymers. (Creative Mechanisms Staff)" is how polypropylene is made. The masks also have three layers composed of "melt-blown" textiles in addition to the core elements of polyethylene. It stands out from other textiles due to its unique manufacturing technique. Melt-blown textiles, for example, are similar to paper machines in that very thin plastic filaments are joined together to make a whole sheet. The overlapping sections form a maze-like structure that collects tiny particles. This collection of articles informs the audience about the disposable masks' basic components and the many roles they performed in protecting people. To summarize, getting raw materials is the initial step in completing the process' life cycle.

The next phase is to produce and process the raw materials at the factory after they have been gathered. The goods are formed in five steps: sourcing raw materials, folding and cutting, attaching the ear loops, sterilizing, and packaging. The three layers of "melt-blown" fabric are created first by an automobile supplier, and then the filter material and the metal element of the nose piece are combined by a "mask maker" machine. Finally, it assembles the ingredients and cuts each piece in sequence. The personnel next use sonic welders to attach the ear loops to the masks, which are subsequently put into a sterilizing chamber at a high temperature for twenty minutes. The packaging process is the last step in the manufacturing process, and it involves packing 10 masks into one bag and finishing it correctly so that it is ready for shipping. Transporting completed items to retailers and overseas is the third phase in the life cycle. Trucks, ships, and airplanes would be the transportation for exporting the final goods. Disposable masks were sold to nations that lacked and required them as a result of the outbreak. I'll concentrate on materials used in ground transportation, such as highways. Bituminous materials, soil, aggregates, and concrete are the most common materials used in highway building. The materials are created for the utmost in low-cost and weather-resistant performance. To summarize, these two processes were primarily concerned with the production of full items and their transportation to the intended location.

It's vital to remember that disposable masks are primarily designed for single use and must be discarded in the fourth phase of the life cycle. According to Lee's essay on the single-use mask's life cycle, the mask will contribute 0.580 kg of CO2 to climate change and generate 0.004 kg of garbage. According to the facts, single-use disposable masks will affect our environment and will increase waste management, which is the final phase in our life cycle. Proceed to the fifth and sixth parts of the life cycle, which are the recycling and waste management processes; however, they cause some major issues that must be addressed immediately. The recycling procedure resulted in plastic and air pollution, as well as a waste of money and effort in maintaining clarity, with some masks ending up in the seas. Plastic pollution began to impair the aquatic ecosystem, and the process of retrieving the masks had a significant impact on climate change, causing carbon dioxide levels to rise. People also trash the rubbish, which causes issues in most cities. Because the principal ingredient, polypropylene, takes more than 400 years to degrade in nature, it was difficult to keep our environment as pristine as it was before the epidemic. It is vital to give a remedy to the pollution by bringing it to light.

What can be done to limit the pollution caused by disposable masks? My response would be to create environmentally friendly masks, properly dispose of and emit them, use social media to display and warn others, use reusable masks, and educate people about life cycle assessments. Because an increasing number of individuals use social media on a daily basis, social media influencers might play a vital role in preventing harm by alerting and educating others about the severity of the situation. Recycled polyester fabric, according to Malin's essay, might be an ideal material for manufacturing eco-friendly masks. TenTree is a brand who use hemp and recycled polyester fabric, organic cotton as main materials for making the washable masks. Recent research also shows that disposable face masks could be recycled to become one of the materials that are used for building roads. 3 million disposable masks might be used to build one kilometer of two-lane road, helping to preserve the environment by preventing the majority of garbage from ending up in landfills. "There's a lot of energy that goes into creating products like plastic," says Gary Walpole, director of the Circular Economy Innovation Community Projects at Swansea University. "The longer you can keep that plastic in use, by reusing it, the less energy, the less raw material use, and thus the less carbon you emit." The audience may learn from this quotation that plastic should be recycled effectively by utilizing less energy and raw materials in order to cause less environmental impact. There are several answers to this problem; nevertheless, we must all pay attention to this situation in order to avoid climate change and pollution.

The audience should understand the six phases of the disposable mask's life cycle, as well as the difficulties that this product has caused, by the end of this paper. Everyone's objective is to safeguard the environment by recycling the massive volume of masks that must be recycled every day. Since the epidemic, the world has become increasingly concerned, and this problem might be difficult to address. It would be as simple as returning our pristine world back to a time before the COVID-19 epidemic invaded our lives if people can work together through the difficult times. I learnt a lot during the study process, and I hope my audience feels the same way after reading my research on disposable mask source materials.

Full Bibliography

• “Face Mask Production for COVID-19 Response: General Motors.” Face Mask Production for COVID-19 Response | General Motors, https://www.gm.com/stories/covid-making-a-mask. 

• Fadare, Oluniyi O, and Elvis D Okoffo. “Covid-19 Face Masks: A Potential Source of Microplastic Fibers in the Environment.” The Science of the Total Environment, Elsevier B.V., 1 Oct. 2020, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7297173/. 

• Jenna, Sherman. What Are Blue Surgical Masks Made of and Is the Material Safe?, 21 Apr. 2021, https://health-desk.org/articles/what-are-blue-surgical-masks-made-of-and-is-the-material-safe.

• Lee, Amos Wei Lun, et al. “Life Cycle Assessment of Single-Use Surgical and Embedded Filtration Layer (EFL) Reusable Face Mask.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Elsevier, 31 Mar. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344921001877?casa_token=6noHQ6-okVUAAAAA%3AZ1EazdwwjwKyjfzP9TwdTHHMD9NpTT62i6W49aP6iKc9HIiNqjVRaGrBERnVax7BvZVsFB8KQSw. 

• Malin, Zoe. “How to Reduce Face Mask Pollution, According to Experts.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 21 Apr. 2021, https://www.nbcnews.com/select/shopping/eco-friendly-face-mask-ncna1264810. 

• “Medical Masks during the COVID-19 Pandemic.” UNICEF Supply Division, 15 July 2021, https://www.unicef.org/supply/stories/world-mask-week-during-covid-19-pandemic. 

• Shanmukha. “Highway Material Types and Characteristics.” CIVIL ENGINEERING, 13 Dec. 2016, https://knowledge4civil.wordpress.com/2016/12/13/highway-material-types-and-characteristics/. 

• Staff, Creative Mechanisms. “Everything You Need to Know about Polypropylene (Pp) Plastic.” Everything You Need To Know About Polypropylene (PP) Plastic, 4 May 2016, https://www.creativemechanisms.com/blog/all-about-polypropylene-pp-plastic.

• Staff, E&T editorial. “Face Masks Can Be Recycled into Material for Building Roads - Study.” RSS, 3 Feb. 2021, https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2021/02/face-masks-can-be-recycled-into-material-for-building-roads-study/. 

• Todd, Wendy. Mask Materials Matter - Idaho Stem Action Center. Mar. 2020, https://stem.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Mask-Materials-Matter.pdf.  

Ashley Castillo 

Pei-Chen, Gisele, Ashley  

DES 40A 

Professor Cogdell 

Disposable Face Masks

Since the spread of COVID-19, disposable face masks have become more prevalent all over the world. They act as a protective barrier against the disease for all. Today, disposable face masks are still required to enter indoor facilities, which include restaurants, schools, stores, and workplaces, etc. Though there are various types and styles, most individuals buy masks in bulk because objects that are readily available and easy to dispose of are more common. These face coverings are beneficial, especially throughout the outbreak of the Coronavirus until this day, but are also associated with environmental drawbacks. In terms of waste and emissions, disposable face masks have contributed significantly through the rise of manufacture and production, only to end up in landfills or large bodies of water after single or minimal use. These environmental hazards and byproducts are mainly due to the plastic materials (polypropylene, polyethylene, and nylon) the masks consist of. 

As disposable face masks have increased in use, we tend to see them often (on the ground and in trash cans). In cities, such as Bangkok, Thailand, and Lima, Peru there have been reports of a rise in litter, mostly masks. In Tesfaldet’s study, “Assessing Face Mask Littering in Urban Environments and Policy,  Implications: The Case of Bangkok.” it asserts, “The density of face mask litter was observed to be…in Lima, Peru, where recreational beaches were found to be most polluted. However, banning single-use products was found to greatly reduce the amount of litter on beaches” (Tesfaldet). The mask ban in Peru demonstrates how excessive utilization of single-use face masks and its disadvantages. It is difficult to ban a product that is both required and a layer of safety, from the transmission of COVID, but also other common diseases or colds.

 Another region that is focussed on is Bangkok, where the number of individuals that inhabit the area becomes problematic. According to a survey conducted by Maya Taylor on Thaiger,  in 2020, “Thailand has a 95% face mask-wearing population, which is the highest number…its face mask industry has grown dramatically to satisfy the demand during the pandemic.” (Tesfaldet) This analysis of the heavily populated city aimed to examine common roads and the wastes (liter) found. The results showed that most liters were found on sidewalks, traffic lanes, street gutters, and waterways. Mask usage had Increased from 3.5 million to 4.2 million, a factor that has to be considered when discussing product waste. 

The results of single-use face masks are also detrimental to the environment, including the species that inhabit the area. For instance, aquatic life is primarily affected by the materials that make up disposable face masks. These harmful chemicals relate to the other byproducts that result in the production, and use of the product. Indirectly, transportation as well. In “Covid-19 Face Masks: A Potential Source of Microplastic Fibers in the Environment,” Oluniyi O. Fadare and Elvis D. Okoffo states, “OceansAsia, an organization committed to advocacy and research on marine pollution, reported in February 2020, the presence of face masks of different types of colors in an ocean in Hong Kong.” (Fadare, Okoffo) To reiterate the extent of the implications of face masks, the issue is worldwide. Plastics including polypropylene, polyethylene, and nylon make their way to bodies of water, becoming long-lasting remains that do not biodegrade. Disposable masks transport from the ground, turning into litter, which Fadare and Okoffo touch on, “This new emergence of face masks as environmental litter both in the terrestrial and aquatic environment is a piece of evidence that the global pandemic has not in any way reduced the challenge of increasing plastic pollution in the environment” (Fadare, Okoffo). Litter and water pollution are interconnected because when individuals do not dispose of their masks correctly, they may end up in landfills, but are frequently seen and observed in oceans. Oceans where aquatic organisms consume or develop defects from chemicals or byproducts from plastic. The message of these studies is that animal life is just as important, and the disturbance of this can be due to human impact. 

A smaller, yet overlooked effect of disposable face mask emissions and waste involves pollutants in the air. Abid Farooq’s “Valorization of Hazardous Covid-19 Mask Waste While Minimizing Hazardous Byproducts Using Catalytic Gasification” explains, “Incineration of the used masks emits hazardous air pollutants such as NOx originating from nitrogen-containing constituents of the mask (e.g., nylon)” (Farooq). So, there are disadvantages that we, as humans, endure as well. The downside of these masks is that they pollute the air we breathe, the air that helps us sustain our livelihoods. Since masks may pollute the air, this notion completely contradicts its purpose, which is to protect us from getting ill. Air pollution can also cause defects and long-term respiratory issues. Therefore, greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide from production should not be the only worrisome factor. These emissions vary, but are accountable for the large environmental footprints we are condemned with. The difference is that greenhouse gas emissions are involved with the production of disposable face coverings, whereas air pollution comes after the fact. These hazardous chemicals are generated when the mask breaks down (after-use).

A table from Amos Wei Lun Lee’s  “Life Cycle Assessment of Single-Use Surgical and Embedded Filtration Layer (EFL) Reusable Face Mask.” reflects emission factors for single-use surgical and EFL reusable face masks concluded more negative Impact categories and units. Lee mentions Climate Change (0.580 kg CO2-eq), Freshwater ecotoxicity (0.033 kg 1,4-DCB-eq), and Marine ecotoxicity (0.029 kg 1,4-DB-eq). According to Lee, the total waste generated was 0.004 kg. Despite the loads and loads of disadvantages within the mask industry, it is important to note that there are advances in strategies and alternatives people could follow to ensure better practices and eliminate waste and possible pollution. Fadare and Okoffo share their insight on the matter, “Strengthening critical thinking in research to provide eco-friendly alternatives while enhancing effective waste management system can assist in finding a sustainable solution to plastic pollution…” (Fadare, Okoffo) Fadare and Okoffo propose that individuals further their understanding on other “sustainable solutions”, which can be conducted through more research of the product, topic, and effects. The authors continue, “Mobilization and awareness on Covid-19 prevention are intense across the globe; it will indeed be laudable if the awareness on safeguarding our environment through reduction, elimination (where possible) and proper management of our disposable face masks can as well be carried along.” (Fadare, Okoffo) Another idea they mention is raising awareness because almost every person uses disposable face masks or has in their lifetimes, and with more knowledge of the matter, individuals could alter their lifestyles to assist. 

The increase in demand for disposable face masks has contributed to polluting and harming the environment, such as the life/ecosystems within it. These detrimental consequences can be controlled or assisted when considering the hazards and byproducts of the plastic materials that make up these single-use masks. Disposable face masks are significant products in today’s world as they are required in indoor buildings. Their accessibility and low production costs and transport do not necessarily aid in protecting the environment or rehabilitation of polluted waters and regions, however, more studies have been conducted and show increases in other forms of face coverings, including eco-friendly and multi-use face masks. Masks that can be washed and used several times before being discarded, if even at all. Problems still arise with the product, with areas where waste and emissions can not be reversed due to population growth and use. Plastic materials like polypropylene that the masks are made up of are harmful to marine and human life.

Bibliography 

Fadare, Oluniyi O., and Elvis D. Okoffo. “Covid-19 Face Masks: A Potential Source of 

Microplastic Fibers in the Environment.” The Science of The Total Environment, Elsevier, 16 June 2020, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720338006?via%3Dihub.

Farooq, Abid, et al. “Valorization of Hazardous Covid-19 Mask Waste While Minimizing 

Hazardous Byproducts Using Catalytic Gasification.” Journal of Hazardous Materials, Elsevier, 16 Sept. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389421021907.  

Lee, Amos Wei Lun, et al. “Life Cycle Assessment of Single-Use Surgical and Embedded 

Filtration Layer (EFL) Reusable Face Mask.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Elsevier, 31 Mar. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344921001877?casa_token=srZfL5N6MhcAAAAA%3AYUzTKaic-Q7pPk6EWAbCrbyjKDUm20M2qV1BlFmRE6Y9bPRap9NG-MJNnsCMMMXL9dVyetcqjLUD. 

Liu, Runzeng, and Scott A. Mabury. “Single-Use Face Masks as a Potential Source of Synthetic 

Antioxidants to the Environment.” ACS Publications, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.estlett.1c00422. 

Raval, Manish, and Hemali Sangani. “Certain Face Masks Contain Toxic Chemicals, Inhalation 

of Which Has the Potential to Affect the Upper Respiratory System.” Journal of Tropical Diseases & Public Health, Longdom Publishing SL, 30 July 2021, https://www.longdom.org/abstract/certain-face-masks-contain-toxic-chemicals-inhalation-of-which-has-the-potential-to-affect-the-upper-respiratory-system-82922.html. 

Rhee, Michelle S. M., et al. “Carbon Dioxide Increases with Face Masks but Remains below 

Short-Term NIOSH Limits.” BMC Infectious Diseases, BioMed Central, 16 Apr. 2021, https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-06056-0. 

Rubio-Romero, Juan Carlos, et al. “Disposable Masks: Disinfection and Sterilization for Reuse, 

and Non-Certified Manufacturing, in the Face of Shortages during the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Safety Science, Elsevier, 13 May 2020, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753520302277?casa_token=asqZcqSVGeEAAAAA%3Ax0yKazNQv7JtQlp_yVjF_wzuWTgCgZPkny4xOEPif4smCbOTrnBZUud4Cl3cphW8GDSTIZw. 

Sullivan, G.L., et al. “An Investigation into the Leaching of Micro and Nano Particles and 

Chemical Pollutants from Disposable Face Masks - Linked to the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Water Research, Pergamon, 10 Mar. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135421002311?via%3Dihub. 

Surgical Face Masks: Manufacturing Methods ... - Jairjp.com. 

http://jairjp.com/NOVEMBER%202013/02%20CHELLAMANI%201.pdf. 

Tabatabaei, Meisam, et al. “Exergy Intensity and Environmental Consequences of the Medical

Face Masks Curtailing the COVID-19 Pandemic: Malign Bodyguard?” Journal of  Cleaner Production, Elsevier, 10 June 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652621020989?via%3Dihub. 

Tesfaldet, Yacob T., et al. “Assessing Face Mask Littering in Urban Environments and Policy 

Implications: The Case of Bangkok.” Science of The Total Environment, Elsevier, 16 Oct. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969721060307?via%3Dihub. 

Zhao, Xiang, and Jiří Jaromír Klemeš. “Energy and Environmental Sustainability of Waste 

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Treatment under Covid-19.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Pergamon, 18 Oct. 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032121010558?via%3Dihub.