8.5 Module C4 – Disposal
8.5 Module C4 – Disposal
Author: Anh-Migrate
C-03 (Buildings) / C-08 (Products) LCA modelling of landfill/disposal
| Aspect | C-03 (Buildings) / C-08 (Products) LCA modelling of landfill/disposal | |||||||||||
Description |
Should general rules be defined regarding what is deposited and which LCA data to use? What is the timescale for modelling the fate of disposed material? | |||||||||||
|
related study objective |
☒ stand-alone LCA | ☒ comparative assertion | ||||||||||
|
related study phase |
☒ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |||||||
| goal and scope definition | inventory analysis (LCI) | impact assessment (LCIA) | interpretation | reporting | ||||||||
|
relevant for |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||
| new buildings | existing buildings | construction products | screening LCA | simplified LCA | complete LCA | |||||||
Provisions |
This aspect depends on the background database used. LCA practitioners need to adopt the procedures from the background database, and have no specific influence on it.The fate of materials should be based on current practice (as a baseline scenario), and not predicted practice in the future (except for sensitivity analysis purposes). | |||||||||||
Rules from: |
|
|||||||||||
Guidance |
Within building or product LCA studies, the depositing of material in landfill or other disposal mechanisms is typically not a focus of the study, and is modelled with the use of generic data from background databases. These databases have their own modelling principles concerning the fate of landfilled material. The practitioner cannot influence this aspect, but should understand the way in which landfill processes have been modeled. In some databases, emissions that occur after 100 years are identified separately, and their effect can therefore be considered separately. Databases may also have specific assumptions about the decay rates of biogenic material in landfill and the composition and capture rates for landfill gas, which may not relate to practice in the various Member States, or to current understanding. The practitioner should ensure that this aspect is not neglected. For example, organic materials should not be handled as though they were inert, as this might yield significant errors in the estimation of the fate of deposited material. The practitioner should ensure that the treatment of landfill and incineration processes is considered consistently with the datasets for the production of biogenic material (this should be the case if data are sourced from the same database). Module C4 covers the disposal of end-of-life construction material arising from the demolition of the building. The disposal of end-of-life material arising from the use phase (Modules B2–B5) is included in the individual module where the waste arises.Current landfilling rates and other disposal processes should be used to develop the scenarios for Module C4.The choice of LCA data for landfilling should correspond, as a minimum, to the different types of wastes (inert, non-hazardous and hazardous), although more detailed landfill models are available in many databases. In addition, the time period over which inputs/outputs should be inventoried from the point of disposal in landfill is 100 years [EN 15804 6.3.7]. For biogenic materials, it is of particular relevance to take account of the fate of the biogenic carbon when landfilled, considering the decay rate, the mix of carbon dioxide and methane produced from decay, and the landfill gas capture rate of the landfill. National assumptions for various materials and landfills vary widely.The extent to which biogenic carbon decays into methane at end of life also needs to be considered in LCA studies, although there is little consensus on exactly how much methane will be generated or released in an average landfill. In any event, the greenhouse gases released from biomass degradation will not be balanced by an equivalent amount of sequestered CO2, owing to the increased GWP of methane emission. National EPD programmes may prescribe landfill models, or the percentage of material that will be placed in landfill at the end of life. | |||||||||||
D-01 Inclusion of reuse, recovery or recycling potentials (Module D) in building or product LCA
| Aspect | D-01 Inclusion of reuse, recovery or recycling potentials (Module D) in building or product LCA | |||||||||||
| Description |
Module D describes the net benefits related to exported energy and secondary materials, secondary fuels or secondary products resulting from reuse, recycling and energy recovery that take place beyond the system boundary for both products and buildings. Displaying Module D separately is a very recent outcome of expert discussions. Before, in some life cycle studies, Modules C (end of life) and D were presented jointly in one life cycle stage, and different approaches were used in other situations such as the use of recycled material. As this is not necessarily done any more, under what circumstances is it necessary or mandatory to include Module D in the life cycle results? | |||||||||||
|
related study objective |
☒ stand-alone LCA | ☒ comparative assertion | ||||||||||
|
related study phase |
☒ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |||||||
| goal and scope definition | inventory analysis (LCI) | impact assessment (LCIA) | interpretation | reporting | ||||||||
|
relevant for |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
||||||
| new buildings | existing buildings | construction products | screening LCA | simplified LCA | complete LCA | |||||||
| Provisions |
EN 15978 for building level calculation states [8.8] that “If relevant and available, Module D addresses the net environmental benefits or loads resulting from reuse, recycling and energy recovery”, and [12.6] “The communication from the report may be simplified according to the following rules: […] if relevant information is provided at the product level on Module D, this information should be reported.”The first point states that Module D should be included if it is relevant, and data are available. The second suggests that if any product used in the building provides data for Module D, this must be reported at the building level, although this is not a mandatory requirement of the standard (‘should’, not ‘shall’).
In general, Module D should be reported both on the product and at the building level, but it is clear from both EN 15804 and EN 15978 that Module D is provided “to help with transparency on the benefits and loads of processes beyond the system boundary of the object of assessment”. Deviating from EN 15978 for benchmarking purposes with other studies where recycling credits have been included, Module D may be included in the building life cycle, but other aspects of system boundary and treatment of recycling (such as use of the cut-off approach for inputs) may render such comparisons invalid. |
|||||||||||
| Rules from: |
|
|||||||||||
| Guidance |
If Module D data are not provided by manufacturers within the EPD, default values can be used, or values estimated by the building assessor. As these values may be worse than the calculated values for the product, this could be an incentive for producers to provide data at a product level.It could be argued that Module D is not relevant to the life cycle assessment of both products and buildings, as it is outside the system boundary, although the TC 350 standards state that Module D can be provided as part of the building assessment information to provide additional transparency on benefits and loads beyond the system boundary.
The benefits of exported energy (for example from excess generation from integrated renewable, or from the capture of landfill gas from disposal in C4) must be reported in Module D, and this must be reported separately from any other flows, but Module D is an optional module for any product EPD, and at the building level EN 15978 states regarding Module D that “Where a material flow exits the system boundary and has an economic value or has reached the end-of-waste stage and substitutes another product, then the impacts may be calculated” [7.4.6], and 8.1 states “If information on Module D is communicated in a building assessment”, which shows that it is not a requirement that it be communicated. It is clear that Module D does not need to be calculated for all materials; only where this is defined at a product level must it also be considered in Module D at the building level. However, depending on the relevance of and attitude to the information provided in Module D, practitioners are free to generate data within Module D for products that have not provided this information within their EPD, subject to the normal rules for scenarios regarding current practice. The system boundary for the building life cycle may be extended to include Module D if full life cycle results are assessed in a context where credits due to system expansion are typically accounted for. This is, for instance, the case in the German Sustainable Building labelling system (DGNB). The practitioner should be very clear that changing the system boundary of the object of assessment may introduce the possibility of double-counting benefits or loads, and should ensure this does not occur. The other use of Module D is to assess design for dismantling or recycling building alternatives. |
|||||||||||
Back to 7 Aspects concerning Module D
D-02 Reuse – water consumption
| Aspect | D-02 Reuse – water consumption | |||||||||||
| Description |
There are different quality levels of water – freshwater, rainwater, greywater and waste water. Depending on these quality levels water, can be used for different applications (e.g. rainwater for washing clothes). How and under what circumstances is it possible to obtain benefits from the reuse of water? | |||||||||||
|
related study objective |
☒ stand-alone LCA | ☒ comparative assertion | ||||||||||
|
related study phase |
☒ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |||||||
| goal and scope definition | inventory analysis (LCI) | impact assessment (LCIA) | interpretation | reporting | ||||||||
|
relevant for |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
||||||
| new buildings | existing buildings | construction products | screening LCA | simplified LCA | complete LCA | |||||||
| Provisions |
Module D looks at the loads and benefits of the net output flow, if relevant and available. If water outputs or any output flow at EoL (not production waste) are reused, then to calculate the net output flow, any use of similar reused water or material as an input in Modules A1–C4 must be considered to calculate the net flow (output − input = net output flow).If there is a net output flow, then the impacts associated with any reuse processes after the ‘end-of-waste state’ can be included in Module D, together with a credit associated with the avoided production of the virgin product. | |||||||||||
| Rules from: |
|
|||||||||||
| Guidance |
If any water from the building is reused outside the building, then the benefits of this use (credit for virgin water extraction and treatment, together with any impacts from the system boundary before substitutive use) are included in Module D. If a waste material or waste energy is recycled, then the impacts associated with any processes after the ‘end-of-waste state’ before it can be used to substitute primary material can be included in Module D , together with a credit associated with the production of the virgin product it substitutes. |
|||||||||||
Back to 7 Aspects concerning Module D
D-03 Credits for recycling and energy recovery
| Aspect | D-03 Credits for recycling and energy recovery | |||||||||||
| Description |
How should credits for recycling and energy recovery be allowed for? | |||||||||||
|
related study objective |
☒ stand-alone LCA | ☒ comparative assertion | ||||||||||
|
related study phase |
☒ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |||||||
| goal and scope definition | inventory analysis (LCI) | impact assessment (LCIA) | interpretation | reporting | ||||||||
|
relevant for |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
| new buildings | existing buildings | construction products | screening LCA | simplified LCA | complete LCA | |||||||
| Provisions |
Where recycled material or energy recovered at end of life are also used in the production of products (A1–A3), in Modules B1–B5 or C1–C4, then the net output flow is calculated as total output − total input.If there is a net output flow that provides benefits beyond the system boundary (as it produces material or energy that substitutes for virgin production), then the processes beyond the system boundary required to produce the recycled material or recovered energy substituted can be provided in Module D, together with a credit calculated by deducting the impact of producing the material or energy from virgin resources. For materials, this will be the virgin production route. For energy, this will be the use of the typical energy mix for heating (for heat energy) or the grid mix (for electrical energy), excluding secondary energy. In practice, unless energy from waste is a significant part of the energy or grid mix, the national mix can be used. | |||||||||||
| Rules from: |
|
|||||||||||
| Guidance |
If the recycled product cannot substitute the primary product completely (e.g. it has 95% of the relevant functional equivalence), a justified value correction factor should be used to reflect this in the credit calculation.If waste is burned with less than 60% energy recovery, it has to be classified as a disposal process rather than a recovery process, and the process must be reported in Module C4. There may still be benefits for the production of energy beyond the system boundary that can be shown in Module D (as with landfilling and the recovery of gas from landfilling).
For example, if there was a net output flow of electricity, then the grid mix of electricity (excluding any secondary energy sources) should be used to credit the flow. Note that the incineration of waste (i.e. material that is considered waste because it has not reached the end-of-waste state) may also be more efficient than 60%, but it must still be considered as a disposal process. |
|||||||||||
Back to 7 Aspects concerning Module D
9 Aspects concerning Module D – Benefits and loads beyond the system boundary
This chapter addresses aspects that are related to life cycle stage D. All the aspects of this chapter provide provisions, rules and guidance for the goal and scope definition and the inventory analysis steps according to [ISO 14040] and [ISO 14044].
Module D makes it possible to quantify the reuse, recovery and recycling potential of a building or a building product. This module may be of interest in assessing and comparing designs for dismantling, or designs for recycling alternatives.
The following list describes the addressed aspects in Module D.
10 Discussions and perspectives
In this chapter some of the findings of the project are discussed, connections to other research projects are made, and possible future developments of the EeBGuide guidance document are addressed.
The original aim of the EeBGuide project was not to develop new provisions or even standards for LCA, but to summarize existing provisions from the European standards and the ILCD Handbook, and give guidance on important LCA topics. This guidance is based on the latest LCA practitioners’ experience, and on findings from the EeBGuide project partners’ research and development activities, as well as from other European research projects. LCA practitioners now have a document that gives provisions for and guidance on the critical and most relevant aspects of conducting an LCA study for buildings and building products.
The EeBGuide project’s methodological approach was to combine both the CEN TC 350 and ILCD provisions. In this context, the guidance document remains as transparent as possible by linking to original rules from these reference documents and the chosen provision and guidance. The reference documents sometimes conflict. As far as possible, provisions from CEN TC 350 were applied, but if no provisions were given there, then the ILCD Handbook provisions were also considered (e.g. for consequential modelling). In some cases, both provisions (from CEN and ILCD) were considered, as they provide complementary rules that fulfil different goals and scopes for product or building LCAs (e.g. for the choice of environmental indicators). However, more work will be needed to analyse in greater detail the implications of ILCD provisions when applied to product and building LCA studies. The need for growing consistency between standards and ILCD documentation, however, was obvious throughout the project.
The EeBGuide guidance document is a new contribution to an existing set of documents providing operational guidance for building LCA studies. For example, two previous European research projects (LoRe-LCA and ENSLIC Building) can be also considered relevant sources of information for the LCA practitioner. They provide complementary guidance for some of the aspects covered in the EeBGuide. As far as possible, existing guidance from these projects was reported in the EeBGuide, e.g. by referring to online documentation or deliverables. However, not all of the aspects addressed in the EeBGuide guidance document were covered in these two previous European projects.
Indeed, the main innovation of the EeBGuide guidance document, compared with these previous projects, is to bring together in a structured document some of the latest findings from the LCA and construction community. More than 150 aspects have been identified to be taken into account for a product or a building LCA. They are structured according to the LCA framework: i.e. goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, impact assessment, interpretation and reporting. This allows any LCA practitioner not necessarily aware of the specific wording of the CEN TC 350 standards to easily go through the document and identify the appropriate rules to follow. At the same time, the aspects are classified according to the life cycle stages of the EN 15804 and EN 15978 standards (Modules A, B, C and D). The provisions and guidance are broken down according to the study types (screening, simplified and complete LCA) so as to allow the practitioner to easily identify the main recommendations according to the stage of a project. The EeBGuide guidance document makes a distinction between stand-alone LCA and comparative assertions. This difference is very important, as comparative studies require more consistency to ensure that the results are not biased. The EeBGuide guidance document also distinguishes provisions for new buildings from those for existing buildings, as the LCA studies will not refer to the same goal and system boundaries. Reporting and review templates for case studies are also part of the guidance.
It is notable that some outcomes of the discussions of the EeBGuide project – within the consortium, with LCA experts, within the public consultation and with the review panel – proved relevant for the value of this document. Among the most important contributions to the general discussion of LCA in construction, the separation of operational guidance between product LCAs and building LCAs – and at the same time the assurance of consistency of these provisions – is one of the most relevant findings. In addition, the formulation of the concept of different study types – screening LCA, simplified LCA and complete LCA – in line with rules on when to apply which study type for what purpose, and how and what to include and exclude, reflects a common need of practitioners. The value of these concepts is given with the fact that the LCA community may now refer to uniform rules on how to conduct studies of the different types.
To summarise, the EeBGuide guidance document takes into account not only the latest findings of recent European projects and research and development works conducted at, for example CSTB (Environment department), Fraunhofer (IBP-GaBi department), PE International, the UNESCO Chair in Life Cycle and Climate Change at the University of Barcelona, and BRE Global, but also current provisions from the standards of CEN TC 350 and the ILCD Handbook. Finally, the EeBGuide guidance document is one of the first contributions at the European level towards a merging of relevant provisions from ILCD and CEN TC 350 in a consistent way. The EeBGuide partners believe that such a consistent guidance document provides a highly operational yet scientifically sound document for the building sector. The EeBGuide guidance document can now be used by the primary audience (LCA practitioners within E2B EI projects) and the secondary audience (building LCA tool developers and certification schemes).
As it is the first comprehensive contribution with the goal of merging diverging reference documents for different study types, the partners remain aware that many research topics still have to be conducted in the near future to support and more precisely specify the different definitions and guidance given as a first step in this guide. If there are any follow-on research projects in this direction, the results could be included in a new version of the EeBGuide. Also if there are new developments or outcomes from the standardization work or the ECO platform, these results will have to be incorporated in the guidance document as well. The EeBGuide guidance document has also identified issues that are not completely resolved when applying the CEN TC 350 standards. It may be a useful document for the standardization committee when revising the EN 15804/EN 15978 standards.
Further outcomes of more operational projects, such as the SBA Common Metrics project, have to be considered as very important contributions next to the EeBGuide guidance document to ensure comparability within different LCA studies. Future research projects should also focus on a common European reference building as a baseline scenario. Here, the most important parameters should be investigated (e.g. reference study periods, main EoL scenarios for materials, etc.) in order to define a European baseline scenario, providing average European values for its parameters, which will facilitate comparisons between research projects, and support the evolution of building labelling schemes.
List of abbreviations
| ADP | abiotic depletion potential |
| ADPE | abiotic resource depletion potential for elements |
| ADPF | abiotic resource depletion potential of fossil fuels |
| AP | acidification potential |
| BLBSB | benefits and loads beyond the system boundary |
| BREEAM | BRE Environmental Assessment Method |
| BWR | basic work requirements |
| CML | Centrum voor Milieukunde, Leiden (NL) |
| CPD | Construction Products Directive |
| CPR | Construction Products Regulation |
| CRU | components for reuse |
| DGNB | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (German Sustainable Building Council) |
| DSLT | dynamic surface leaching test |
| E2B EI | Energy-Efficient Building European Initiative |
| ECO | European Construction Product Organization |
| EE | exported energy per energy carrier |
| EMAS | Eco-Management and Audit System Regulations |
| EoL | end of life |
| EP | eutrophication potential |
| EPBD | Energy Performance of Buildings Directive |
| EPD | Environmental Product Declaration |
| ESL | estimated service life |
| ETAP | Environmental Technologies Action Plan |
| FW | use of net fresh water |
| GPP | Green Public Procurement |
| GWP | global warming potential (climate change) |
| HQE | Haute Qualité Environmentale (French association and certification mark) |
| HWD | hazardous waste disposed |
| IBU | Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V. (German EPD programme) |
| ID | Interpretative Documents |
| ILCD | International Reference Life Cycle Data System |
| IPP | Integrated Public Policy |
| LCA | life cycle assessment |
| LCC | life cycle costing |
| LCI | life cycle inventory (analysis) |
| LCIA | life cycle impact assessment |
| LHV | low heating value |
| MER | materials for energy recovery |
| MFR | materials for recycling |
| NHWD | non-hazardous waste disposed |
| NPP | net primary production |
| NRSF | use of non-renewable secondary fuels |
| ODP | ozone layer depletion potential |
| PCM | phase change material |
| PCR | Product Category Rules |
| PENRE | use of non-renewable primary energy (excluding non-renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials) |
| PENRM | non-renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials |
| PENRT | total use of non-renewable primary energy resources |
| PERE | use of renewable primary energy (excluding renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials) |
| PERM | use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials |
| PERT | total use of renewable primary energy resources |
| POCP | photochemical ozone creation potential |
| ReqSL | required service life |
| RSF | use of renewable secondary fuels |
| RSL | reference service life |
| RSP | reference study period |
| RWD | radioactive waste disposed |
| SBA | Sustainable Building Alliance |
| SIP | Sustainable Industrial Policy |
| SLP | service life planning |
| SM | use of secondary material |
Literature
| [ADEME 2003] | Déconstruire les bâtiments (in French), Collection: Connaître pour Agir: Guides et cahiers techniques, ADEME, 160p, 2003. |
| [AgBB 2010] | AgBB. Vorgehensweise bei der gesundheitlichen Bewertung der Emissionen von flüchtigen organischen Verbindungen (VOC und SVOC) aus Bauprodukten, 2010. Available on http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/produkte/bauprodukte/dokumente/AgBB-Bewertungsschema_2010.pdf |
| [Baitz 2002] | Baitz, M. ‘Die Bedeutung der funktionsbasierten Charakterisierung von Flächen-Inanspruchnahmen in industriellen Prozesskettenanalysen’. PhD Thesis (in German), University of Stuttgart, 2002. |
| [Bare 2003] | Bare, J.C., Norris, G.A., Pennington, D.W., McKone, T.E. ‘TRACI, The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts’, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Volume 6, 2003. |
| [Bath 2011] | Embodied Carbon: The Inventory of Carbon and Energy, University of Bath. Printed version (as of January 2011) from BSRIA BG10/2011 ISBN 978 0 86022 703 8 BS, |
| [Beck 2010] | Beck, T. et al (2010): LANCA. Land use indicator value calculation in life cycle assessment. Stuttgart: Fraunhofer-Verl. ISBN: 978-3-8396-0170-9; |
| [Berger 2010] | Berger, M.; Finkbeiner, M.:Water Footprinting: How to Address Water Use in Life Cycle Assessment?; Sustainability 2010 2(4); ISSN 2071-1050 |
| [Borg 2001] | Borg, M., Paulsen, J., Trinius, W.: Proposal of a method for allocation in building-related environmental LCA based on economic parameters. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 6 (2001) 4, pp. 219–230. Online: doi: 10.1007/BF02979378. |
| [Bos 2008] | Bos, U., and Wittstock, B. ‘Land use methodology. Report to summarize the current situation of the methodology to quantify the environmental effects of Land Use’, Report, Lehrstuhl für Bauphysics, University of Stuttgart, 2007. |
| [BRE 2011] | BRE Group: BREEAM – BRE Environmental Assessment Method. Webseite. Watford: BRE Global Ltd 2011. Online:http://www.breeam.org/page.jsp?id=176, last checked: 7.3.2011. |
| [CALCAS 2009] | CALCAS Project, 2009, Deliverable D17: Final Report: options for deepening and broadening LCA. Available online: http://www.estis.net/builder/includes/page.asp?site=calcas&page_id=8215FF89-5114-4748-BE6C-1F0F1E69DAF5 |
| [CEC 1988] | Council of the European Communities 1988, “Council directive of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to building products, 89/106/EEC |
| [CEN 2005] | CEN: CEN/TC 350 Sustainability of construction work – Executive Summary. Brussels: CEN – European Committee for Standardization 2005. Online: http://www.cen.eu/cen/Sectors/TechnicalCommitteesWorkshops/CENTechnicalCommittees/Pages/PdfDisplay.aspx, last checked: 06.11.2011. |
| [CEN 2010a] | CEN – Comité Européen de Normalisation. TR 15941. Sustainability of construction works. Environmental product declarations. Methodology for selection and use of generic data, 2010, 20p.CEN – Comité Européen de Normalisation. CEN/TC 351/WG 1/TS-2. Generic horizontal dynamic surface leaching test (DSLT) for determination of surface dependent release of substances from monolithic or plate-like or sheet-like building products, 2010a, 31p. |
| [CEN 2010b] | CEN – Comité Européen de Normalisation. CEN/TC 351/WG 1/TS-3. Generic horizontal up-flow percolation test for determination of the release of substances from granular building products, 2010b, 37p. |
| [CEN 2010c] | CEN – Comité Européen de Normalisation. CEN/TC 351/WG2. Determination of emission of dangerous substances from building products into indoor air, 2010c. |
| [Chen 2010] | Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Jullien, A., Ventura, A: ‘LCA allocation procedure used as an incitative method for waste recycling: An application to mineral additions in concrete’, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Volume 54, Issue 12, October 2010, Pages 1231–1240 |
| [Cole 1996] | R J Cole and P C Kernon, Life Cycle Energy use in Office Buildings, Building and Environment 31 (4) 1996 |
| [CPR 2011] | European Union: Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council of 9 March 2011 laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of building products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC. (CPR) (Official Journal of the European Union) Brussels: 2011. |
| [De Schryver 2009] | De Schryver and Goedkoop. Land Use. Chapter 10 in: Goedkoop, M., Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, M.A.J., De Schryver, A., Struijs, J., Van Zelm, R. ‘ReCiPe 2008 A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. Report I: Characterisation’, first edition, 2009, available online: http://www.lcia-recipe.net/ |
| [Derwent 1998] | Derwent, R.G., Jenkin, M.E., Saunders, S.M., Pilling, M.J: ‘Photochemical ozone creation potentials for organic compounds in Northwest Europe calculated with a master chemical mechanism’, Atmospheric Environment, Volume 32, 1998. |
| [DIBt 2009] | DIBt. Grundsätze zur Bewertung der Auswirkungen von Bauprodukten auf Boden und Grundwasser – Teil 1, Mai 2009. DIBt Mitteilungen 40 (2009) 4, S. 116-134. and Teil II – Juli 2009, Teil III – Mai 2009. DIBt Mitteilungen 40 (2009) 5, S. 169–179 |
| [DIN V 18599], | DIN V 18599, Energetische Bewertung von Gebäuden – Berechnung des Nutz-, End- und Primärenergiebedarfs für Heizung, Kühlung, Lüftung, Trinkwarmwasser und Beleuchtung, 2009 |
| [Earles 2011] | Earles, J-M., Halog, A ‘Consequential life cycle assessment: a review’. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Volume 16, 2011. |
| [EC 2005a] | European Commission. Harmonization of indoor material emissions labelling systems in the EU, 2005. Available on: http://www.inive.org/medias/ECA/ECA_Report24.pdf |
| [EC 2005b] | European Commission. Enterprise and Industry Directorate-General. Chemicals and Construction. M /366 EN – Horizontal Complement to the Mandates to CEN/CENELEC concerning the execution of standardization work for the development of horizontal standardised assessment methods for harmonised approaches relating to dangerous substances under the Construction Products Directive (CPD). Emission to indoor air, soil, surface water and ground water, Brussel, 24p, 2005. |
| [EC 2011] | European Commission. Enterprise and Industry Directorate-General. Chemicals and Construction. Construction. DS 041/051 rev.10. Indicative list of regulated dangerous substances possibly associated with construction products under the CPD, 2011, 29p |
| [Elliot 2008] | Elliot, L., Breslau, B., Wolody, D. Jones Lang LaSalle & CoreNet Global (Ed.): Global Trends in Sustainable Real Estate: An Occupier’s Perspective. London, Boston, Sydney 2008. |
| [EN 15643-1] | EN 15643-1: Sustainability of construction works – Assessment of buildings – Part 1: General framework. CEN – European Committee for Standardization. Brussels: CEN-CENELEC 2011. |
| [EN 15643-2] | EN 15643-2: Sustainability of construction works – Assessment of buildings – Part 2: Framework for the assessment of environmental performance. CEN – European Committee for Standardization. Brussels: CEN-CENELEC 2011. |
| [EN 15804] | EN 15804: Sustainability of construction works – Environmental product declarations – Core rules for the product category of building products. CEN – European Committee for Standardization. Brussels: CEN – CENELEC 2011. |
| [EN 15978] | EN 15978: Sustainability of construction works – Sustainability assessment of buildings – calculation method. CEN – European Committee for Standardization. Brussels: CEN – CENELEC 2010. |
| [ENSLIC 2011] | ENSLIC-Building: Energy Saving through Promotion of Life Cycle Assessment in Buildings, European project (FP7), 2011, deliverables available online: http://circe.cps.unizar.es/enslic/texto/wor.htm |
| [Foster 2007] | Forster, P., Ramaswamy, V.: Chapter 2. Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Solomon, S., Quin, D., Manning, M., et al. (Ed.): Climate change 2007. The physical science basis ; contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York: UNEP 2007, pp. 129–234. |
| [Franklin 2011] | Economic Bulletin, Franklin and Andrews March 2010;Embodied Carbon in Construction: What we know about Building Services, John Connaughton (Davis Langdon). CIBSE Technical Symposium, Leicester September 2011; |
| [Frischknecht 2000] | Frischknecht, R., Braunschweig, A., Hofstetter, P., Suter, P. Human health damages due to ionizing radiation in life cycle impact assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. (2000) 20: 159–189. |
| [Frischknecht 2007] | Frischknecht, R., Althaus, H-J., Bauer, C., Doka, G., Heck, T., Jungbluth, N., Kellenberger, D., et Nemecek, T: ‘The Environmental Relevance of Capital goods in Life Cycle Assessments of Products and Services’. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Volume 11, 2007. |
| [Frischknecht 2008] | Frischknecht et al., Swiss Ecoscarcity, 2008 |
| [Frischknecht 2010] | Frischknecht, R., Stucki, M ‘Scope-dependent modelling of electricity supply in life cycle assessments’. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Volume 15, 2010. |
| [Gomès 2012] | Gomès, F., Brière, R., Habert, G., Feraille, A., Lasvaux, S., Tessier, C: ‘Environemntal evaluation of reinforced steel sold on the French market’, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction – Civil Engineering and Buildings, 10–12 July 2012, Nantes, France, 8p. |
| [Guidance Paper F 2004] | European Union: Legislation, ‘Guidance Paper F – Durability and the Building products Directive’, Revision December 2004 |
| [Guinée 2002] | Guinée, J. B., Gorrée, M., Heijungs, R. et al: Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment Operational Guide to the ISO Standards. Dordrecht u.a. Kluwer Academic Publishers; Kluwer Acad. Publ. (Series Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science, Volume 7, 2002. ISBN: 1-4020-0557-1. |
| [Habert 2009] | Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Chen, C., Jullien, A. ‘Development of a depletion indicator for natural resources used in concrete’, Resources, Conservation and recycling, Volume 54, 2009. |
| [Habert 2012] | Habert, G., Roussel, N. ‘An allocation method based on relative profit between industrial sectors’, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction – Civil Engineering and Buildings, 10–12 July 2012, Nantes, France, 8p. |
| [Herfray 2011] | Herfray, G. ‘Contribution to the evaluation of environmental impacts of urban settlements’, PhD Thesis (in French), MINES ParisTech, available online: http://pastel.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/65/82/ 20/PDF/Herfray.pdf) |
| [Herfray 2012] | Herfray, G., Peuportier, B: ‘Evaluation of electricity related impacts using a dynamic LCA model’, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction – Civil Engineering and Buildings, 10–12 July 2012, Nantes, France, 9p. |
| [Hodkova 2012] | Hodkova, J., Lasvaux, S: ‘Guidelines for the use of existing Life Cycle Assessment data of building materials as generic data for a national context’, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction – Civil Engineering and Buildings, 10–12 July 2012, Nantes, France, 9p. |
| [Hodo 2010] | Hondo, H. (Ed.): EcoBalance 2010. The 9th International Conference on EcoBalance. Towards & Beyond 2020. Manuscripts. November 9–12, 2010. Tokio: ILCAJ 2010. |
| [Hofstetter 1998] | Hofstetter, P. ‘Perspectives in Life Cycle Impact Assessment. A Structure Approach to Combine Models of the Technosphere, Ecosphere and Valuesphere’. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 484 pp, 1998. |
| [Huijbregts 2000] | Huijbregts, M.A.J., Thissen, U., Guinée, J.B., Jager, T., Van de Meent, D., Ragas, A.M.J., Wegener Sleeswijk, A., Reijnders, L. ‘Priority assessment of toxic substances in life cycle assessment, I: Calculation of toxicity potentials for 181 substances with the nested multi-media fate, exposure and effects model USES-LCA’, Chemosphere, Volume 41, 2000. |
| [Huijbregts 2001] | Huijbregts, M., Norris, G., Bretz, R., Ciroth, A., Maurice, B., von Bahr, B., Weidema, B., et de Beaufort, A. ‘Framework for modelling data uncertainty in life cycle inventories’, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Volume 6, 2001. |
| [Huijbregts 2005] | Huijbregts, M.A.J., Rombouts, L.J.A., Ragas A.M.J., Van de Meent, D. (2005). Human-toxicological effect and damage factors of carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic chemicals for life cycle impact assessment. Integrated Environ. Assess. Manag. 1: 181-244. |
| [Huijbregts 2009] | Huijbregts, M.A.J., Van Zelm, R. ‘Ecotoxicity and human toxicity’. Chapter 7 in: Goedkoop, M., Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, M.A.J., Struijs, J., De Schryver, A., Van Zelm, R. ‘ReCiPe 2008 A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. Report I: Characterization factors’, first edition, 2009. |
| [ILCD 2010a] | European Commission – Joint Research Centre – Institute for Environment and Sustainability (Ed.): ILCD Handbook. General guide for life cycle assessment: detailed guidance. First edition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2010. ISBN: 978-92-79-19092-6. |
| [ILCD 2010b] | European Commission – Joint Research Centre – Institute for Environment and Sustainability (Ed.): ILCD Handbook. Analysis of existing Environmental Impact Assessment methodologies for use in Life Cycle Assessment. First edition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2010. |
| [ILCD 2010c] | European Commission – Joint Research Centre – Institute for Environment and Sustainability (Ed.): ILCD Handbook. Framework and requirements for Life Cycle Impact Assessment models and indicators. First edition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2010. |
| [ILCD 2011a] | European Commission – Joint Research Centre – Institute for Environment and Sustainability (Ed.): ILCD Handbook. Recommendations for Life Cycle Impact Assessment in the European context – based on existing environmental impact assessment models and factors. First edition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2011. ISBN: 978-92-79-17451-3. |
| [ILCD 2011b] | European Commission – Joint Research Centre – Institute for Environment and Sustainability (Ed.): ILCD Handbook. Characterization Factors of the ILCD, Recommended Life Cycle Impact Assessment methods, database and supporting information. First edition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2012. ISBN: 978-92-79-22727-1. |
| [INSEE, 2006] | Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques (INSEE) (2006). Les logements en 2006. Available on: http://www.insee.fr/fr/themes/document.asp?ref_id=ip1202 |
| [ISO 14025] | ISO 14025: Environmental labels and declarations – Type III environmental declarations – Principles and procedures. ISO – International Organization for Standardization. Geneva: ISO 2006. |
| [ISO 14040] | ISO 14040 Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework;. |
| [ISO 14044] | ISO 14044 Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines |
| [ISO 15686] | ISO 15686 series: Buildings and construction assets – Service life planning Part 1 to 10. ISO – International Organization for Standardization. Geneva: ISO 2011. |
| [ISO 16000-11] | ISO 16000-11, Indoor air – Part 11: Determination of volatile organic compounds from building products and furnishing – Sampling, storage of samples and preparation of test specimens; |
| [ISO 16000-3] | ISO 16000-3, Indoor air – Part 3: Determination of formaldehyde and other carbonyl compounds – Active sampling method |
| [ISO 16000-6] | ISO 16000-6, Indoor air – Part 6: Determination of volatile organic compounds in indoor and test chamber air by active sampling on Tenax TA sorbent, thermal desorption and gas chromatography using MS or MS/FID |
| [ISO 16000-9] | ISO 16000-9, Indoor air – Part 9: Determination of volatile organic compounds from building products and furnishing – Emission test chamber method |
| [ISO 16017-1] | EN ISO 16017-1: Indoor, ambient and workplace air – Sampling and analysis of volatile organic compounds by sorbent tube/thermal desorption/capillary gas chromatography – Part 1: Pumped sampling; |
| [Jolliet 2003] | Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G., Rosenbaum, R. ‘IMPACT 2002+: A New Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methodology’, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Volume 8, 2003. |
| [JORF 2011] | JORF. Décret n° 2011-321 du 23 mars 2011 relatif à l’étiquetage des produits de construction ou de revêtement de mur ou de sol et des peintures et vernis sur leurs émissions de polluants volatils, 2011, 3p. |
| [Kellenberger 2009] | Kellenberger, D. & Althaus, H.-J. 2009. Relevance of simplifications in LCA of building components. Building and Environment, 44, 818–825 |
| [Kemna 2005] | Kemna, R., Van Elburg, M., Li W., Van Holsteijn, R. ‘MEEUP – Methodology Report’, European Commission, Brussels, 2005. |
| [Koellner 2012] | Koellner et al, Principles of inventory of land use on a global scale, 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (21 March 2012), pp. 1–13, doi:10.1007/s11367-012-0392-0 |
| [Lasvaux 2010] | Lasvaux, S. ‘Study of a simplified model for the Life Cycle Assessment of buildings’, PhD thesis (in French), MINES ParisTech, available online: http://pastel.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/71/20/43/PDF /19919_LASVAUX_2010.pdf) |
| [Lasvaux 2011] | Lasvaux, S., Chevalier, J., Peuportier, B. ‘A data analysis tool to compare two LCA databases of construction materials used in building LCA applications for the French context’, Proceedings of the Life Cycle Assessment XI Conference, 4–6 October 2011, Chicago, USA, 11p. |
| [Lasvaux 2012] | Lasvaux, S., Schiopu, N., Peuportier, B., Chevalier, J., ‘Relevance of a French simplified Life Cycle Inventory database using building products industry data’, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction – Civil Engineering and Buildings, 10–12 July 2012, Nantes, France, 9p. |
| [Lebert 2012] | Lebert, A., Lasvaux, S., Chevalier, J., Hans, J., ‘Environmental Performances of Buildings: identification of reference values through a statistical analysis’, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction – Civil Engineering and Buildings, 10–12 July 2012, Nantes, France, 9p. |
| [Lemaitre 2009] | Lemaitre, C., DGNB (Ed.): Nachhaltiges Bauen. DGNB Handbuch Neubau Büro- und Verwaltungsgebäude Version 2009. Stuttgart: DGNB 2009. ISBN: 978-3-942132-00-8. |
| [Leroy 2012] | Leroy, C., Thomas, J-S., Avery, N., Bollen, J., Tikana, L. ‘Tackling recycling aspects in EN 15804’, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction – Civil Engineering and Buildings, 10–12 July 2012, Nantes, France, 8p. |
| [LoRe-LCA 2011] | LoRe-LCA: Low Resource consumption buildings and constructions by use of LCA in design and decision-making, European project (FP7), 2011, deliverables available online: http://www.sintef.no/ Projectweb/LoRe-LCA/Training/ |
| [Lupsea 2012] | Lupsea, M., Schiopu, N., Tiruta-Barna, L. Leaching of building products during their use stage: proposal for a reliable Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) of the released substances in water and soil. Proceeding of the international symposium on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction – Civil Engineering and Buildings, 10–12 July 2012, Nantes, France, 10p. |
| [Milà i Canals 2007] | Milà i Canals, L., Bauer, C., Depestele, J., Dubreuil, A., Freiermuth Knuchel, R., Gaillard, G., Michelsen, O., Müller-Wenk, R., Rydgren B. ‘Key elements in a framework for land use impact assessment within LCA’, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, volume 12, 2007. |
| [Nemry 2008] | Nemry, F., Uihlein, A., Makishi Colodel, C., et al.: Environmental Improvement Potentials of Residential Buildings. (IMPRO-Building). (JRC Scientific and Technical Reports). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 2008. ISBN: 978-92-79-09767-6. |
| [Oers 2002] | Oers, L. van, A. de Koning, J.B. Guinée & G. Huppes, ‘Abiotic resource depletion in LCA – Improving characterisation factors for abiotic resource depletion as recommended in the new Dutch LCA Handbook’, DWW report, Delft; available on: http://www.cml.leiden.edu/research/industrialecology/researchprojects/finished/abiotic-depletion-lcia.html |
| [Paulsen 2003] | Paulsen, J. H., Borg, M.: A building sector related procedure to assess the relevance of the usage phase. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 8 (2003) 3, pp. 142–150. Online: doi: 10.1007/BF02978459. |
| [Peuportier 2008] | Peuportier, B. ‘Eco-conception des bâtiments et des quartiers’. Presse de l’Ecole des Mines de Paris, 2008. ISBN: 978-2-35671-001-7 |
| [Pfister 2009] | Pfister, S.; Koehler, A.M; Hellweg, Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Freshwater Consumption in LCA; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, 4098–41042008 |
| [Potting 2005] | Potting, J. and Hauschild, M. ‘Background for spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment – the EDIP2003 methodology’, Environmental project no. 996, Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen, 2005. |
| [Rosenbaum 2008] | Rosenbaum, R.K., Bachmann, T.M., Gold, L.S., Huijbregts, M.A.J., Jolliet, O., Juraske, R., Köhler, A., Larsen, H.F., MacLeod, M., Margni, M., McKone, T.E., Payet, J., Schuhmacher, M., van de Meent, D., Hauschild, M.Z. ‘USEtox – The UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in Life Cycle Impact Assessment’ International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Volume 13, 2008. |
| [Solomon 2007] | Solomon, S., Quin, D., Manning, M., et al. (Ed.): Climate change 2007. The physical science basis ; contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York: UNEP 2007. ISBN: 978 0 521 88009 1. |
| [Van Caneghem 2010] | Van Caneghem, J., Block, C., et Vandecasteele, C. ‘Assessment of the impact on human health of industrial emissions to air: Does the result depend on the applied method?’, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Volume 184, 2010. |
| [Van Zelm 2008] | Van Zelm, R., Huijbregts, M.A.J., Den Hollander, H.A., Van Jaarsveld, H.A., Sauter, F.J., Struijs, J., Van Wijnen, H.J., Van de Meent, D. (2008). European characterization factors for human health damage of PM10 and ozone in life cycle impact assessment. Atmospheric Environment 42, 441–453. |
| [VROM 2007] | VROM – Dutch Ministry of Spatial Planning Housing and the Environment. Soil Quality Decree (Netherlands), Decree of 22 November 2007 containing rules with respect to the quality of soil (Soil Quality Decree). Bulletin of Acts, Orders and Decrees of the State of the Netherlands, 34p, 2007. |
| [Waste directive 2008] | European Union. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European parliament and of the council on waste and repealing certain directives. Off J Eur Union 2008;L312:3–30. |
| [WCED 1987] | World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1987. ISBN: 019282080X. |
| [Weidema 1996] | Weidema, B., et Wesnes, M. ‘Data quality management for life cycle inventories – an example of using data quality indicators’. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 4, 1996. |
| [Wittstock 2010] | Wittstock, B., Fischer, M., Kreißig, J., et al.: The Role of LCA in the German Sustainable Building labelling. In: Hondo, H. (Ed.): EcoBalance 2010. The 9th International Conference on EcoBalance. Towards & Beyond 2020. Manuscripts. November 9–12, 2010. Tokio: ILCAJ 2010, pp. 81–82. |
| [Wittstock 2011] | Wittstock, B., Braune, A., Fischer, M., et al.: LCA in Building labelling: Experiences from Germany. In: Finnish Association of Civil Engineers RIL, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland (Ed.): SB 11 Helsinki. World Sustainable Building Conference. Oct. 18–21, 2011. Proceedings, vol. 1. Helsinki 2011, pp. 134–135. |
| [Zamagni 2012] | Zamagni, A., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Masoni, P., Raggi, A ‘Light and shadows in consequential LCA’. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Volume 17, 2012. |
Annex A: Default Values.
When conducting an LCA study, the practitioner is constantly confronted with figures: some are needed to specify a modelling parameter; others are needed as cross-references, or benchmarks for comparison purposes. Such numbers always depend on the context of a study, and are generally not globally valid, which is why this guidance does not specify the use of predefined default values.
For numerous studies, however, average or default values may be helpful, and have the potential to significantly reduce the effort for data collection, especially if the relevant figures are required, yet are not critical for the study outcome. Also, to gain confidence in one’s study, the practitioner may use such values for cross-reference. For such purposes, a non-comprehensive collection of various default values is provided in this Annex. This collection of values does not claim to be ultimately right, and the practitioner has to decide by himself or herself whether the given values are applicable to the study’s context, and whether utilizing these values will be beneficial for the study.
Default Parameters for Building LCA
