Life cycle assessment of lighting equipment: A comparison of fluorescent lamp and light emitting diode lamp in Thailand

Abstract

EOL lighting equipment has been regarded as hazardous household waste (HHW) which is often disposed together with general waste in Thailand. Such improper management of EOL has caused increasing risk of environmental and health impact to Thai society. This study has two main objectives: (1) To estimate an EOL inventory of FLs and LEDs in Thailand and (2) To evaluate and compare environment impacts of FLs and LEDs throughout their life cycle and identify the appropriate approach for handling discarded FLs and LEDs at the end of life stage in Thailand. The study presents life cycle assessment (LCA) of two lighting technologies, fluorescent lamp (FL) and light emitting diode (LED) that are used widely in Thailand. The gate to grave investigation for FL and LED includes manufacturing, distribution, use and end-of-life (EOL) scenarios. The analysis used the SimaPro 7.1.8 program under the CML2001 assessment method for the midpoint and the Eco-indicator 99 assessment method for the endpoint. Furthermore, this research evaluated the potential future impact from different management schemes including: (1) 100% landfilling, (2) 10% recycling and 90% landfilling, (3) 30% recycling and 70% landfilling. The results showed that (1) the quantity of EOL FL has been continuously decreased from 60.15 million units in 2011 to 27.23 million units in 2025. The EOL LED will be increased in 2021 (365.62 million units) and decreased in 2024. Then, the quantity of EOL LED will be still increased in 2030 (250.1 million units). The finding is based on the expectation that the government will continue promoting the fluorescent replacement with LEDs as one of energy saving measures of the country. (2) the environmental impact of LED has lower in major impact categories than that of FL about 70%. The use phase caused the majority of the environmental impacts: 98.94% in FL and 96.46% in LED, followed by the manufacturing and EOL stage. For the EOL stage, FL and LED landfilling could contribute highest negative burdens to the human health, ecosystem quality and resource depletion impact compared to recycling approach. The results found that the recycling would be better than landfilling about 90.44 fold in FL and 296.36 fold in LED, respectively. Additionally, it revealed that the most benefits come from aluminum scrap recycling which can reduce 94.4% in the FL and the magnetic ballast. On the other hand, the LED recycling also distributes the profits to resources sustainability by recycling the aluminum from the heatsink and polycarbonate from tube cover of LED lamp set. Based on this study finding and leaching test result from the literature, this study recommended that LED can be considered as a non-hazardous waste which can be disposed normally with other non-hazardous waste. Given the potential of recycling LED and the hazardous composition in FL, lighting equipment should be included as one of priority products in the draft Thai WEEE management law.