Scribd
Upload
183 views2 pages

Running Shoe CO2 Emissions Analysis

The document discusses ways to reduce CO2 emissions from running shoes. It finds that: 1) Changing the upper part material from polyurethane to another material would have the greatest impact on reducing CO2 emissions, since the upper part and polyurethane production contribute most to emissions. 2) Plastic shoes result in greater total emissions than leather shoes based on data in Table 1. Emissions from EVA plastic production are higher than emissions from leather production. 3) Considering only CO2 emissions, Shoe B made with EVA, plastic laces, rubber sole and pig leather tongue has a smaller carbon footprint than Shoe A made with cow leather, interlining, plastic laces and

Uploaded by

John Joseph
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
183 views2 pages

Running Shoe CO2 Emissions Analysis

The document discusses ways to reduce CO2 emissions from running shoes. It finds that: 1) Changing the upper part material from polyurethane to another material would have the greatest impact on reducing CO2 emissions, since the upper part and polyurethane production contribute most to emissions. 2) Plastic shoes result in greater total emissions than leather shoes based on data in Table 1. Emissions from EVA plastic production are higher than emissions from leather production. 3) Considering only CO2 emissions, Shoe B made with EVA, plastic laces, rubber sole and pig leather tongue has a smaller carbon footprint than Shoe A made with cow leather, interlining, plastic laces and

Uploaded by

John Joseph
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

4.

a. Which part and what material would you change to have the greatest reduction in CO2 emissions
for running shoes.

From Figure 1.A, we see that the upper part production emits the highest CO2 emissions, and from
Figure 1.B, the manufacture of polyurethane emits the highest CO2, therefore we would change the
upper part and polyurethane material to have the greatest reduction in CO2 emissions.

b. Using Table 1 does a leather shoe or a plastic shoe result in greater total emissions.

Now we assume that the leather and plastic shoes only differ in the material they are made up of.
Everything else such as the laces, the rubber sole, the fabric within the shoe, the glue, the solvents
used, the paper used for the shoe box and the transportation are the same.

Therefore, the emissions only differ in the plastic production and the leather production.

From table 1, EVA production (plastic shoes) give 1.81552 kg of CO2, 0.01199 kg of CH4 and
1.925*10^-5 kg of N2O. Summing them up, the net emissions for a plastic shoe is 1.8275 kg

For a leather shoe, considering cow leather,


CO2 emissions= 0.12280 kg, CH4 emissions=9.28*10^-8 kg and N2O emissions=2.58*10^-6 kg
Summing them up, total emissions for a shoe made up of cow leather= 0.12280 kg

Similarly for a shoe made up of pig leather, the total emission is 0.00543 kg.
Comparing the three,

Plastic shoes result in greater total emissions.

c. Considering only CO2 emissions, which shoe has a smaller carbon footprint. )Ignore chemical
production, paper production and transport)

Shoe No1: A cow leather shoe


(0.25 kg cow leather), interlining (0.10 kg), plastic laces (0.010 kg), rubber sole (0.50 kg)

Given CO2 emissions per kg of material in table 1, Therefore

CO2 emissions= mass of material*CO2 emissions per kg material.

CO2 emissions (cow leather)= 0.25 kg*0.12280 kgCO2/kg cow leather=0.0307 kg CO2
CO2 emissions (interlining)=0.10 kg*22.28644 kg CO2/kg interlining= 2.23 kg CO2
CO2 emissions (plastic laces)= 0.010 kg*5.46984 kg CO2/kg plastic lace=0.0547 kg CO2
CO2 emissions(rubber sole)=0.50 kg* 2.45643 kg of CO2/kg rubber sole=1.228 kg CO2
Total CO2 emissions= 0.0307+2.23+0.0547+1.228=3.5434 kg CO2

Shoe No2: An Eva shoe


(0.10 kg EVA), plastic laces(0.010 kg), rubber sole (0.30 kg ), pig leather tongue (0.15 kg)

From table 1.
CO2 emissions(EVA)=0.1kg*1.81552kgCO2/kg EVA=0.181552 kg CO2
CO2 emissions(plastic laces)= 0.010 kg*5.46984 kg CO2/kg plastic lace=0.0547 kg CO2
CO2 emissions(rubber sole)=0.30 kg* 2.45643 kg of CO2/kg rubber sole=0.7369 kg CO2
CO2 emissions(pig leather)=0.15 kg* 0.00512 kg of CO2/kg rubber sole=0.000768 kg CO2
Summing them up ,
Total CO2 emissions= 0.182+0.0547+0.7369+0.000768=0.9743 kg of CO2

Shoe B has a smaller carbon footprint than shoe A.

d. For this, it is a simple google search, no wrong answer.

You might also like