title: Environmental assessment of used oil management methods.
abstract: The 1 billion gal of used oil generated in the U.S. each year are managed in three primary ways: rerefined into base oil for reuse, distilled into marine diesel oil fuel, and marketed as untreated fuel oil. Management of used oil has local, regional and global impacts. Because of the globally distributed nature of fuel markets, used oil as fuel has localized and regional impacts in many areas. In this paper, the human health and environmental tradeoffs of the management options are quantified and characterized. The goal of this study was to assess and compare the environmental impacts and benefits of each management method in a product end-of-life scenario using a life-cycle assessment (LCA) approach. A life-cycle inventory showed that 800 mg of zinc and 30 mg of lead air emissions may result from the combustion of 1 L of used oil as fuel (50-100 times that of crude-derived fuel oils). As an example, up to 136 Mg of zinc and 5 Mg of lead air emissions may be generated from combustion of over 50 M gal of California-generated used oil each year. While occurring elsewhere, these levels are significant (of the same magnitude as reported total stationary source emissions in California). An impact assessment showed that heavy metals-related toxicity dominates the comparison of management methods. Zinc and lead emissions were the primary contributors to the terrestrial and human toxicity impact potentials that were calculated to be 150 and 5 times higher, respectively, for used oil combusted as fuel than for rerefining or distillation. Low profits and weak markets increasingly drive the used oil management method selection toward the untreated fuel oil market. Instead, both the rerefining and distillation methods and associated product markets should be strongly supported because they are environmentally preferable to the combustion of unprocessed used oil as fuel.
authors.affiliation: California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Pollution Prevention and Technology Development, 1001 I Street, P. O. Box 806, Sacramento, California 95812, USA. bboughto@dtsc.ca.gov
authors.forename: Bob
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Boughton
authors.forename: Arpad
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Horvath
mesh_terms: D000393:Air Pollutants / Q000032:analysis; D003246:Conservation of Energy Resources / Q000191:economics; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004777:Environment; D004785:Environmental Pollutants / Q000032:analysis*; D005648:Fuel Oils; D006801:Humans; D019216:Metals, Heavy / Q000032:analysis* / Q000633:toxicity; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D018570:Risk Assessment
chemical_list: D000393:Air Pollutants; D004785:Environmental Pollutants; D005648:Fuel Oils; D019216:Metals, Heavy