Environmental life cycle assessment of nutraceuticals: A case study on methylcobalamin in different packaging types

The growing production of pharmaceuticals and nutraceuticals, e.g., methylcobalamin supplements, improves the health of people. This study assesses the environmental footprint of chewable methylcobalamin supplements in four packaging types: blister packs or bottles made of HDPE, PET, or glass. A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment is conducted to evaluate the supply to Belgian consumers of the recommended daily dose of methylcobalamin supplementation (1.2 mg) in case of deficiency. The impact of methylcobalamin manufacturing in major producing countries (China as baseline and France) is analyzed based on detailed synthesis modeling of data points coming from patents. The overall carbon footprint (CF) is dominated by the transport of consumers to the pharmacy and methylcobalamin powder manufacturing in China (while its mass share per supplement is only 1 %). The impact is the lowest for supplements in HDPE bottles (6.3 g CO₂ eq) and 1 %, 8 %, and 35 % higher for those in PET bottles, glass bottles, and blister packs, respectively. Tablets in blister packs have for other investigated impact categories (fossil resource footprint (FRF); acidification; eutrophication: freshwater, marine, and terrestrial; freshwater ecotoxicity; land use; and water use) the highest footprint and those in HDPE and PET bottles for most the lowest. The CF of methylcobalamin powder manufacturing in France is 22 % lower than in China (2.7 g CO₂ eq), while the FRF is similar in both locations (26-27 kJ). The FRF and the difference in the CF are chiefly due to energy use and solvent production emissions. Similar trends as the CF are found for other investigated impact categories. Valuable conclusions are drawn for environmental studies on pharmaceuticals and nutraceuticals: (i) including accurate data on consumer transport, (ii) using more environmentally-friendly active ingredients, (iii) choosing appropriate packaging types considering multiple aspects: convenience, environmental footprint, etc., and (iv) providing a holistic picture through assessing various impact categories.