Granadero Rey, DanielGarcía Muñoz, AidaRenate AdamOmil Prieto, FranciscoFeijoo Costa, Gumersindo2025-01-202025-01-202022-09-11Granadero, D., Garcia-Muñoz, A., Adam, R., Omil, F., Feijoo, G., 2023. Evaluation of abatement options to reduce formaldehyde emissions in vehicle assembly paint shops using the Life Cycle methodology, Cleaner Environmental Systems, 11, 100139.2666-7894https://hdl.handle.net/10347/38738Recuperative thermal oxidizers, consisting of a single combustion chamber where volatile organic compounds are oxidized, and regenerative thermal oxidizers comprising several ceramic beds where the oxidation takes place, are the most common abatement technologies applied in vehicle paint shops to reduce formaldehyde emissions. In this work, a “cradle-to-grave” Life Cycle Assessment and an eco-efficiency analysis were carried out for a real paint shop to compare these two abatement technologies and identify the most environmentally sustainable option. The results show that the regenerative oxidizer leads to a decrease of the human toxicity impact category from 1329 kg 1,4-DB eq. in the initial situation without abatement to 1284 kg 1,4-DB eq., while an alternative with recuperative oxidizers achieves a significantly higher reduction to 1176 kg 1,4-DB eq. Considering the most relevant selected impact categories, the results demonstrate that the recuperative oxidizers cause a reduction from the initial situation of 2.6% of the normalized index, whereas the regenerative oxidizer implies a raise of 3.1%. This indicates that the installation of recuperative oxidizers is the most environmentally sustainable alternative from the two investigated technologies. Nevertheless, the eco-efficiency analysis confirms that the costs of the recuperative oxidizers option are 2.2 times higher.eng© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Vehicle paint shopFormaldehyde emissionsRecuperative thermal oxidationLife cycle assessment (LCA)Eco-efficiency331702 Automóvilesjournal article10.1016/j.cesys.2023.100139open access