The carbon footprint of facemasks; a billion used everyday

An independent study by the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) sheds light on the carbon footprint – facemasks – surgical masks leave behind.

Published on June 02, 2021, the study shows just how much damage the “reusable” facemasks have dealt, or are dealing to humanity’s most-talked subject.

As the World wants to zero out its carbon emissions, the media and a large majority of politicians are blaming fossil fuel industries, and avocados.

However, what’s revealed in this study is that a single facemask, washed and reused 10 times, releases about 32.7g CO₂.

The World uses over a billion masks a day. Over 3 million masks per minute, and the number is only increasing.

Environmental Experts including Global NGOs

“The carbon footprint of a surgical mask produced according to the abovementioned guidelines is 32.7 g CO2 eq. per mask, with process contributions given in Figure 2. This result aligns with the mentioned work on gowns, as emissions are about 3.60 g CO2 eq. per g of mask versus 5.58 CO2 eq. per g of gown in this work.”

How are the greenhouse gasses emitted?

The study also highlighted where most of the greenhouses gasses are emitted from during the process. Most of them coming from the textile production of the masks.

Textile Production (44%) – Mask Disposal (40%)

The remainder being allocated to the production of the cardboard boxes, composing of the packaging.

The last bit allocated to the “transportation of the fabrics to the site of sewing and electricity used for assembling and sewing of the final product.”

Other processes like the disposal of the “plastic film that makes up the packaging,” were held “negligible” in the study.

The study called the choice of material a “serious issue, which is crucial in lowering the environmental impact of masks considering their production, disposal, and recycling.”

It also detailed on how the industry can reduce the carbon footprint by reducing the size of the masks. “Shape conformation that could reduce the textile area extending toward the cheekbones, which is
unusable,” can accomplish a 50% drop in the carbon footprint.

What about the carbon footprint of single-use facemasks?

Now, we should remember that 32.7g is for a single reusable mask. The study details that a basic surgical mask, worn by the majority releases 85% more CO₂., than the ones rewashed and reused ten times in the study.

That would mean that the entire boxes of masks in our houses that we use and dispose off by wearing only once have a carbon footprint of about 60.5g per mask.

The World uses over a billion masks a day. Over 3 million masks per minute, and the number is only increasing.

“In the face of a net decrease in the carbon footprint for the single use of the mask, the contribution of polymer production ends up being almost on par with respect to the washing process and its environmental load due to consumed energy, impact of detergents,
and used water, and the impact of the disposal of the spent mask.”

“Despite everything, for a single use, the washing procedure enables a reduction in the carbon footprint of the reused mask, compared with the disposable one, by 85%. This reduction is due to the considerable load capacity of a washing machine capable of dealing with large quantities of masks per washing cycle,” it concluded.

Producing about three surgical masks is equivalent to producing a single avocado. Although, a thorough study was never conducted on single-use masks, the estimations are eye-opening.

As the World is busy discussing its favorite “trending” subject, and World leaders unite in the fight against climate change. They are keen on forgetting the impact mask production has and continues to have on the environment.

Since avocados would go back to the soil, fibers released by incarcerated masks would never do the same. They would instead be buried or dumped into the sea for fish to eat. (If they are incarcerated at all)

PPEs are not recyclable and are made of plastic, and businesses in China are booming because of their production.

As the World is getting vaccinated and herd immunity is being reached, the real question is that do we really need masks that are secretly dealing the most damage to our Planet?

Did mask mandates actually help us or did they deal the most damage to the environment? Has humanity once again, because of its selfishness and greed ended up destroying our Planet?

Would the World yet again react when it is already too late? We’re waiting to be called anti-science.

Fact is that, fear, authoritarianism and our leaders blindly following ever-changing science which is debunked by newer studies is the reason why our combating of the Pandemic has gone so bad.

Our leaders decided it best to make people wear masks, and force them to pollute the Planet. People unwilling to wear masks were forced to do so even when they were fully vaccinated.

Why does no one talk about the carbon footprint of facemasks? Does the left really care about the environment or just jump the most popular and ‘ethically right’ bandwagon?

Wait till you read about the damage gloves, sanitizers, alcohol pads, disinfectants, etc., deal…

(The independent study by MDPI has nothing to do with The Conservative or its report on the carbon footprint of facemasks. They deserve all the credit and fame for their research. We thank them for their time and effort into conducting such an extensive study).