Conventional wisdom holds that evaluating the waste produced or end-of-life disposal of a product is the main determinant of whether it is “green” or not. Reusable — green, disposable — not green. However, to get a proper assessment of the environmental impacts of a product, one must look at the whole life of the product, from production, transportation, use, and disposal. Ecosystem Analytics completed an LCA on the use of reusable cloth handkerchiefs versus disposable paper facial tissue to demonstrate the ability of LCA to evaluate the impacts of even simple household items. Using published studies on respiratory illness along with the relative properties of the products, we designed a functional unit that encompasses a year of sneezing and nose blowing using either the hankie or facial tissue during sick periods as well as well periods.
For the functional unit, we found that there is no environmental advantage to using reusable handkerchiefs versus disposable facial tissue. Facial tissue end-of-life disposal, the prime reason why many would consider switching to handkerchiefs, only accounted for 10% of climate change impacts. Using handkerchiefs exclusively was only found environmentally preferable when used for the entire useful life of the handkerchief (50 washes, or 9.4 years), following a use pattern that led to the lowest handkerchief versus facial tissue use rate for the same number of nose blows (1 handkerchief vs. 5 tissues), due to higher intensity of handkerchief use prior to washing. Even with over 9 years of handkerchief washing, 65% of the climate change impacts are still due to handkerchief production.
Outside of the most committed handkerchief user, most will find that sticking to disposable facial tissues the easier and even perhaps the more environmental option.
For more information about this LCA, see the full LCA report, which includes the goal and scope, functional unit, data used, sensitivity analysis, and limitations to this LCA.