Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Ethylene Glycol Production in the Petrochemical Industry

Authors

1 PhD Student, Department of Energy Systems and Environment, Kish Campus, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor, Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

4 Department of Environmental Research, Environmental Research Institute, Kerman Graduate University of Advanced Technology, Kerman, Iran

10.48306/juem.2026.579283.1151
Abstract
This study was conducted to perform a life cycle environmental assessment of ethylene glycol production in Iran’s petrochemical industry. Using a quantitative and systematic life cycle assessment approach, it aimed to identify and quantify the environmental impacts associated with producing one tonne of ethylene glycol and to determine the key hotspots. The methodology was developed in accordance with the ISO 14040 series. The system boundary was defined as gate-to-gate, and the functional unit was set as “production of one tonne of ethylene glycol.” The results indicated that the environmental impact profile of ethylene glycol production is significantly influenced by utility units and supporting processes. In the global warming impact category, electricity generation—and subsequently steam generation—accounted for the largest share of CO₂-equivalent emissions, highlighting the dominant role of fossil fuel–based energy supply in shaping the product’s carbon footprint. In human health–related categories, including carcinogenic effects and inorganic and organic respiratory impacts, electricity generation was also identified as the primary hotspot, reflecting the substantial contribution of combustion-related emissions and associated pollutants. By contrast, in the non-carcinogenic category, the industrial water production unit was the dominant contributor, underscoring the importance of chemical consumption and management of water-related flows in health-oriented impacts. Overall, the findings confirm that improving the environmental performance of ethylene glycol production requires an integrated approach that simultaneously focuses on optimizing energy use (electricity and steam), reducing combustion emissions, enhancing water and wastewater management, and improving waste management.

Keywords


1.Horne, R., T. Grant, and K. Verghese, Life cycle assessment: principles, practice, and prospects. 2009: Csiro Publishing.
2.Roes, A., et al., Environmental and cost assessment of a polypropylene nanocomposite. Journal of Polymers and the Environment, 2007. 15(3): p. 212-226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-007-0064-5
3.Ingarao, G., et al., Life cycle energy and CO2 emissions analysis of food packaging: an insight into the methodology from an Italian perspective. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 2017. 10(1): p. 31-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2016.1233296
4.Yin, S., et al., A life cycle assessment of recycled polypropylene fibre in concrete footpaths. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016. 112: p. 2231-2242. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.073
5.Xu, X., et al., Life cycle assessment of wood-fibre-reinforced polypropylene composites. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2008. 198(1-3): p. 168-177.
6.Khoshnava, S.M., et al., A cradle-to-gate based life cycle impact assessment comparing the KBFw EFB hybrid reinforced poly hydroxybutyrate biocomposite and common petroleum-based composites as building materials. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2018. 70: p. 11-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2018.02.002;
7.Chen, L., R.E. Pelton, and T.M. Smith, Comparative life cycle assessment of fossil and bio-based polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016. 137: p. 667-676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.094
8.Tähkämö, L., et al., Life cycle assessment of renewable liquid hydrocarbons, propylene, and polypropylene derived from bio-based waste and residues: Evaluation of climate change impacts and abiotic resource depletion potential. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022. 379: p. 134645. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134645
9.Alsabri, A., F. Tahir, and S.G. Al-Ghamdi, Environmental impacts of polypropylene (PP) production and prospects of its recycling in the GCC region. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2022. 56: p. 2245-2251. DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2021.11.574
10.Galve, J.E., et al., Life cycle assessment of a plastic part injected with recycled polypropylene: A comparison with alternative virgin materials. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 2022. 9(3): p. 919-932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-021-00363-2
11.Saleem, J., et al., Assessing the environmental footprint of recycled plastic pellets: A life-cycle assessment perspective. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 2023. 32: p. 103289. DOI:
10.1016/j.eti.2023.103289
12.Wang, W., et al., Life cycle assessment and process optimization for polypropylene off-gas membrane separation. Chemical Physics Letters, 2023. 821: p. 140475. DOI: 10.1016/j.cplett.2023.140475
13.Mufarrij, F., et al., Development and lifecycle assessment of various low-and high-density polyethylene production processes based on CO2 capture and utilization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2023. 414: p. 137624. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137624
14.Yang, K., et al., Collaborative optimization of pollution and carbon reduction through carbon flow tracking integrated with life cycle assessment for petrochemical production. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2024. 488: p. 151123. DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2024.151123
15.Äkräs, L., et al., A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of polyamide-starch biocomposites: carbon footprint as an indicator of sustainability. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 2024. 26(10): p. 3297-3312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-024-02884-1
16.Wang, M., Y. Wu, and B. Wang, Carbon emission accounting model of three-stage mechanical products for manufacturing process. Sustainability, 2024. 16(18): p. 8101. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16188101
17.Fitriasari, E.I. and J.J. Liu, Techno-Economic and Life Cycle Assessments of the Utilization of Carbon-Free Energy Sources as an Alternate Fuel in Naphtha Cracker, in Computer Aided Chemical Engineering. 2024, Elsevier. p. 1231-1236. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-443-28824-1.50206-4
18. Duan, C., et al., Global polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic supply chain resource metabolism efficiency and carbon emissions co-reduction strategies. Sustainability, 2024. 16(10): p. 3926. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16103926
19.Soekotjo, E.S., et al. Potential research of study PVC products life cycle assessment in Indonesia. in AIP Conference Proceedings. 2024. AIP Publishing LLC. DOI: 10.1063/5.0199436
20.Shen, Q., et al., Carbon emissions and low-carbon development in Olefin industry. Environmental Research, 2024. 244: p. 117841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.117841
21.Cai, Y., et al., China's carbon peak analysis and life-cycle greenhouse gas emission estimation under the plastics limit order. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2025. 53: p. 190-202. DOI: 10.1016/j.spc.2024.12.005
22.Arvanitoyannis, I.S., ISO 14040: life cycle assessment (LCA)–principles and guidelines. Waste management for the food industries, 2008: p. 97-132.

Articles in Press, Corrected Proof
Available Online from 20 June 2026

  • Receive Date 21 April 2026
  • Revise Date 10 May 2026
  • Accept Date 16 June 2026
  • First Publish Date 20 June 2026
  • Publish Date 20 June 2026