Environmental impacts of examination gloves made of natural rubber and nitrile rubber, identified by life‐cycle assessment

Abstract

Medical examination gloves made of natural rubber (NR; powdered and nonpowdered) and synthetic nitrile rubber (NBR) were compared in terms of their environmental impact using life cycle assessments spanning material extraction, transportation to the glove production factory, the production process, and disposal by total incineration. ReCiPe Midpoint (H) V1.13/World Recipe H life cycle assessment method implemented using the SimaPro 9.0.0.48, was used.Single scores of each glove type and stage were determined by using weighting factors specifically obtained from a 2014 survey in Thailand. With current technologies, the overall environmental impact, or the total single score, of NR gloves was higher than of NBR gloves, because the glove production stage of NR gloves required more energy and sulfur use. In addition, the overall environmental impact of both types of gloves was found to be lower if powder coating was used rather than chlorination to reduce stickiness, and if glove production relied on natural gas for energy rather than coal. The single score approach revealed the hotspots for potential improvements for each glove type.

The effects of the cross‐linking mechanism of low doses of gamma irradiation on the mechanical, thermal, and viscoelastic properties of the natural rubber latex/poly(styrene‐block‐isoprene‐block‐styrene) block copolymer blend

“…The finding revealed that at the raw material stage, nitrile latex, a type of synthetic rubber, had a greater environmental impact than the NR latex. [ 1 ] Moreover, NRL is better than synthetic rubber because the properties of synthetic rubber depend on the supplier, making them variable and inconsistent. Furthermore, the cost of production for synthetic rubber is high when the price of input petrochemicals such as crude oil, crude petroleum, and natural gas is considered as well as the large volumes of chemicals needed.…”

Untitled

“…Reusable gowns are already available and used in healthcare settings such as operating theatres and endoscopy units 141. Furthermore, the environmental impact of gloves can be reduced by using powder coating gloves rather than chlorination to reduce stickiness 142. In addition, cohorting of COVID-19-positive patients in dedicated endoscopy lists may also minimise PPE-related waste 4.…”

“… 141 Furthermore, the environmental impact of gloves can be reduced by using powder coating gloves rather than chlorination to reduce stickiness. 142 In addition, cohorting of COVID-19-positive patients in dedicated endoscopy lists may also minimise PPE-related waste. 4 Where single-use PPE cannot be reduced, several studies have suggested recycling as a way of tackling the mass amount of single-use plastic waste generated.…”

Reusing COVID-19 disposable nitrile gloves to improve the mechanical properties of expansive clay subgrade: An innovative medical waste solution

“…Therefore, the global consumption of gloves is estimated to be more than 76 million every month due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The global demand for nitrile gloves is estimated to increase at a compound annual rate of 10.6%–11.2% until 2027 ( Patrawoot et al, 2021 ). In 2021, it was predicted that the market size for nitrile gloves would be worth about 8.76 billion USD.…”