Skip to main content

Tag: Study type: Simplified LCA

C-01 End-of-waste status

Written on .

Aspect C-01 End-of-waste status
Description
 Different countries define a waste’s end-of-waste status at different points in the waste treatment or recycling process. How should the end-of-waste state be defined?

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 The provisions in EN 15804, which are copied from the European Waste Directive, should be followed. They include the definition, when the end-of-waste state is reached. Based on the end-of-waste state, module D is used: further processing of materials that have reached the end-of-waste state (e.g. recycling, energy recovery, etc.) is covered from module D. The definition of the end-of-waste status is given in the European Waste Directive [European Directive 2008/98/CE, see article 6]. This also means that national rules (the implementation of the Directive into national legislation) on the specific definition of the end-of-waste status should be applied, if available and appropriate.
Rules from:

EN 15804

 

 6.3.4.2 Product stage: End-of-Waste definition of this standard applies also to raw materials or products manufactured outside Europe.
6.3.4.5 End-of-life stage: Definition of the end-of-waste status
Guidance
 EN 15804 follows the Waste Framework Directive in setting the system boundary at the end-of-waste state using the same criteria.These end-of-waste criteria are used for assessing the system boundary for the waste treatment of construction products at the end of life stage (C3), but also for setting the system boundary for the input of secondary/waste material and secondary fuel to manufacturing (A1–A3), and for deciding the system boundary for wastes arising from all life cycle stages, including manufacturing (A1–A3), construction (A5) and use (B2–B5).The Waste Framework Directive, as with other EU directives, is implemented individually within each EU Member State. This means that the same material may be considered a waste in one Member State but to have reached the end-of-waste state in another Member State. This may be, for example, because the material is commonly used for one purpose in one Member State but not in another, or because a market for the material exists in one Member State that does not exist in another, or because national legislation in one Member State prevents the use of the material in that Member State.

The end-of-waste state for waste in Europe is considered to be reached when the material is no longer considered a waste under the national implementation of the Waste Framework Directive. This means that the rules of the (national) context of a study should be applied in the first place. If the waste arises or is treated outside Europe, EN 15804 is clear that the same rules regarding the end-of-waste state (i.e. from the Waste Framework Directive) should be applied, irrespective of legislation in the relevant country.  In this case, the LCA practitioner should consider the end-of-waste criteria and apply them to the waste to decide the end-of-waste state, and justify this in the background report.

By the same argument, within Europe, the LCA practitioner can also consider the end-of-waste criteria and apply them to wastes produced in Europe, and set a different end-of-waste state than national implementation of the Waste Framework Directive. In this case, the decision must be stated and justified in the background report.

For example, a trade association study covering products produced in several Member States may choose a conservative/worst-case choice for the end-of-waste state for secondary/waste material/fuel inputs if the material/fuel has different status in different Member States.

It would not be appropriate to take a best-case choice based on the end-of-waste state in another Member State if the situation where the waste is produced is completely different. For example, another Member State may have a common use and active market for a material, and the end-of-waste state may be set at the point where the waste is collected. The manufacturer, however, produces the same waste in a location where there is no common usage or market for the waste. In this case it would not be appropriate to use the situation in another Member State to decide the end-of-waste state, if this meant the manufacturer was able to avoid the burdens of waste treatment associated with the waste to achieve the national end-of-waste state where the recovered material had a more local common usage and active market. This follows the ‘polluter pays’ principle underlying EN 15804.

C-02 End of life (EoL) scenarios

Written on .

Aspect C-02 End of life (EoL) scenarios
Description
 In different countries, various options exist for the end of life of products and materials. Should general scenarios be defined for end-of-life routes?

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 EoL scenarios are based on current treatment technologies for the most common materials. They have to be defined depending on each national context, as scenarios are likely to vary nationally.Sensitivity analyses are possible to assess the impact of the future mix of waste treatment options. This aspect is likely to be predefined in every national EPD programme. It may be advisable to adopt rules from the national EPD programme that refer to the context of the product LCA study.
Rules from:

EN 15804

 

 5.4 Additional information
6.3.4.6 End-of-life stage
6.3.8 Developing product scenarios
7.3 Scenarios and additional technical information
7.3.4 End of life
Guidance
 End-of-life scenarios may be given within national building certification schemes or EPD programmes. For example, for Germany, one may refer to the DGNB scheme (e.g. criteria 1 to 5): predefined EoL scenarios for different classes of materials.Current practice should be used for developing scenarios. Additional technical information, describing the technical conditions underlying scenarios and characterizing the product’s technical and functional performance during the optional EoL life cycle stages, must be provided if a scenario is assessed.The default scenario should be based on actual achievement in current waste management practice, and not on what might happen in 50 years’ time. It is important to use average recovery rates based on the mix of recovery techniques used and not the best case, although additional scenarios can be used to illustrate the effect of the different waste management options that are available. Geographically, the default scenario may vary: for example, a waste may be more commonly landfilled in one Member State, used for energy recovery in another Member State, and recycled in another Member State.For each material, the percentage of end-of-life material typically going to various end-of-life options, such as landfill, incineration, energy recovery, recycling or reuse, should be estimated. This may be provided by the EPD programme, or may be available through national statistics or building-level schemes.

EoL scenarios can be provided for each EoL option. These may be useful if the product is sold in more than one Member State, as EoL options may differ significantly across Member States. Such scenarios also provide guidance on the most advantageous EoL option currently available. This is useful, for example, in determining the best way to dispose of construction waste arising.

Alternatively, or additionally, a single EoL scenario can be provided for the typical mix of EOL options, or the most common EoL option. This procedure is less useful and informative.

Material-specific models for waste treatment may be relevant for particular materials, to take account of emissions or the amount of energy recovery; otherwise generic models of inert waste in landfill or non-hazardous waste incineration can be used.

C-03 Choice of data

Written on .

Aspect C-03 Choice of data
Description
 Should generic (material specific) or product-specific data be used?

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 Recycling processes are always specific to a product or material. Thus the provisions in EN 15804 should be referred to. This aspect is likely to be predefined in every national EPD programme, and may be adopted within the context of the conducted LCA study.
Rules from:

EN 15804

 

 6.3.4.6 End-of-life stage
6.3.6 Selection of data
6.3.8 Developing product scenarios
7.3 Scenarios and additional technical information
7.3.4 End of life
Guidance
 Current practice should be used for scenarios. Material-specific models for waste treatment may be relevant for particular materials, to take account of emissions or the amount of energy recovery. Also, public and commercial background LCA databases provide material-specific datasets that may be used.The default scenario should be based on actual achievement in current waste management practice, and not on what might happen in 50 years’ time. It is important to use average recovery rates based on the mix of recovery techniques used and not the best case, although additional scenarios can be used to illustrate the effect of the different waste management options that are available. Geographically, the default scenario may vary: for example, a waste may be more commonly landfilled in one Member State, used for energy recovery in another Member State, and recycled in another Member State. It may be advisable to use product-specific end-of-life datasets.

C-04 Waste classification

Written on .

Aspect C-04 Waste classification
Description
 How should output wastes be classified: as e.g. inert, non-hazardous, hazardous?

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 The model should reflect the real situation. The classification into three types – hazardous, non-hazardous and inert waste – should be performed according to article 4 of the Landfill Waste Directive 1999/31.This aspect is likely to be predefined in every national EPD programme scheme, and may be adopted within product LCA studies that are made within the same context.
Rules from:

EN 15804

 6.3.4.6 End-of-life stage
6.3.8 Developing product scenarios7.2.5 Other environmental information describing different waste categories and output flows
7.3 Scenarios and additional technical information
7.3.4 End of life
Guidance
 Current practice should be used for scenarios. Specific models for waste treatment may be relevant for particular materials, to take account of emissions, or of the amount of energy recovery. EN 15804 requires that the total amounts of inert, non-hazardous and hazardous waste, measured at the system boundary, be reported. All waste covered by the Waste Framework Directive should be classified within the European Waste Classification system, and it should be possible to report these figures.

C-01 Demolition/deconstruction – screening and simplified LCA

Written on .

Aspect C-01 Demolition/deconstruction – screening and simplified LCA
Description
 The deconstruction and demolition stage involves quantification of the impact related to the end of life of the constructed system. For example, if it is a reinforced concrete building, deconstruction activity will consist mainly in separating the reinforcing steel from the concrete. During this operation, energy is consumed, and pollutants are emitted to the air. In this context, should the demolition and deconstruction stage be considered in the context of a screening or simplified LCA?

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 The demolition and deconstruction aspects may be included for screening and simplified LCA. Generic data should be taken from LCA databases if available.
Rules from:
 EN 15978:

8.7.2 Scenarios for deconstruction – Module C1

EN 15804:

6.2.6 C1-C4 End-of-life stage information modules
Guidance
 Depending on the goal and scope of the study, this aspect may be neglected, owing to its minor relevance.The practitioner may use ratios based on the materials impact (e.g. 3% for GWP in the case of concrete) if the purpose of the assessment is to obtain a rough estimate of the end of life for specific impact categories.Very few LCA data are currently available in every national context. One option is to use existing generic LCA data on the impact of demolition and the deconstruction process (e.g. the impact of sorting the reinforcing steel from the concrete at the end of life of the building). Such generic LCA data can be found e.g. in the Ecoinvent database.

The practitioner should be aware that the data on demolition process may not be fully adapted to the context. Another option is to define generic data with stakeholders (collection of specific data).

C-05 Transport of wastes to landfill, incineration and recycling facilities – screening and simplified LCA

Written on .

Aspect C-05 Transport of wastes to landfill, incineration and recycling facilities – screening and simplified LCA
Description
 The transportation distances are likely to be different, depending on the EoL scenarios. For example, whereas a landfill facility is likely to be found in every city, a recycling plant may be far away as, for example, only one exists in a country exists.In this context, how should representative distances according to different waste EoL routes be defined for screening and simplified LCA?

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 The transport of wastes or recycled products to EoL facilities remains optional for screening and simplified LCA, owing to the assumed minor relevance.This aspect is likely to be predefined, for example in generic LCA data for EoL processes or in each national EPD programme, and may be adopted within a given LCA study.
Rules from:

EN 15804

 

 6.3.4.6 End-of-life stage
6.3.8 Developing product scenarios
7.3 Scenarios and additional technical information
7.3.4 End of life


Guidance
 For recycling and disposal routes, the distances will vary, depending on each national context. Transport distances for different waste types may also vary according to the number of treatment sites. For example, hazardous waste may have the longest transport distance, owing to the limited number of sites, whereas inert waste may have the shortest. (http://www.sepa.org.uk/waste/waste_infrastructure_maps.aspx or http://www.landfill-site.com/html/how_many_landfills.php) National waste management plans or waste infrastructure maps may help in identifying the locations of waste management sites.Data may be currently available for transport of waste between the demolition site and sorting plant: e.g. for the French context see the report from [ADEME 2003]. For example, current practice in generic databases or EPD programmes may take into account:- between 10 and 30 km for inert and non-hazardous wastes, as well as for incineration with energy recovery;- around 100 km for hazardous wastes.

For recycled products sent to a recycling facility it is likely that the distance will be higher because, to date, the number of recycling facilities is still low, leading to higher distances than for landfill facilities. As an average value, 250 km for trucks can be assumed. This figure may be revised if more accurate data are available in a national context, and if the EoL transport is found to be significant in the final results.

 

C-07 Waste treatment vs recycling and recovery process

Written on .

Aspect C-07 Waste treatment vs recycling and recovery process
Description
 How should the waste treatment and recycling/reuse/energy recovery of building materials be accounted for (e.g. different recycling practices, economic feasibility)?

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 The provisions in EN 15804 should be referred to.Scenarios should then be developed, based on each national context. For example, for the French context [ADEME 2010] can be referred to for estimates of the amounts of sorted and recycled materials.This aspect is likely to be predefined in every national EPD programme, and may be adopted within a given LCA study.
Rules from:

EN 15804

 

 6.3.4.6 End-of-life stage
6.3.8 Developing product scenarios
7.3 Scenarios and additional technical information
7.3.4 End of life
Guidance
 Module C3 provides information on waste treatment processes until the product reaches the end-of-waste state or is disposed of (included in C4). In theory, processes before the end-of-waste state is reached are waste treatment processes, and processes after the end-of-waste state is reached are recycling or recovery processes. When deciding whether a process should be included in C3 or be considered as a recycling process within Module D. the focus should be less on the terminology for the process and more on whether the waste has reached the end-of-waste state. The default scenario for the end-of-life stage C3 should be based on current national practice for demolition material. However, alternative scenarios can be given, if a range of waste treatment options is available.National schemes may provide default scenarios and models for Module C3 for various materials, based on current practice.The end-of-waste state is defined in EN 15804 6.3.4.5. All waste treatment process impacts until the end-of-waste state are reached should be included in Module C3, excluding demolition (considered in C1) and transport to waste treatment or disposal (considered in C2).

The Loads and benefits of recycling, recovery and reuse beyond the system boundary are recorded in Module D.

Energy recovered by energy recovery processes, e.g. incineration with an efficiency greater than 60%, is recorded in Module D (as the recovery process impacts and avoided impacts of conventional generation), as the material must have reached the end-of-waste state to be considered for energy recovery (EN 15804 6.3.4.5 Note 2).

Recovery processes with efficiencies of less than 60% cannot be considered as energy recovery, and must be considered as waste management processes, e.g. as incineration (Module C4).

Incineration of demolition materials that have not reached the end-of-waste state must also be considered within Module C4, irrespective of the efficiency of incineration (EN 15804 6.3.4.5 Note 2). In both instances, benefits from these C3 processes beyond the system boundary can be recorded in Module D.

C-03 (Buildings) / C-08 (Products) LCA modelling of landfill/disposal

Written on .

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:

EN 15978

 8.7.5 Scenarios for disposal – Module C4

EN 15804

 6.3.4.6 End-of-life stage
6.3.7 Data quality requirements
6.3.8 Developing product scenarios
7.3 Scenarios and additional technical information
7.3.4 End-of-life
ILCD Provisions 7.4.4.2 Modelling waste treatment
I) SHALL – Waste and end-of-life product deposition
I.a) Model waste management completely
         I.b) Modelling discarding of goods into nature
I.c) Modelling waste as output“Note: the use of generic waste treatment models/processes may be considered to limit time and resources required for data collection.”
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-03 Credits for recycling and energy recovery

Written on .

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:

EN 15978

 7.4.6 Boundary for the benefits and loads beyond the system boundary (Module D)
8.8 Scenarios for benefits and loads beyond the system boundary – Module D

EN 15804

 6.2.7 D Benefits and loads beyond the system boundary, information module

ILCD

 Not mentioned
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

B- 09. “Repair with simplified LCA”

Written on .

Aspect B- 09. “Repair with simplified LCA”
Description
 Repair module covers all corrective, responsive or reactive treatment of a construction product or construction works to return it to a condition in which it can perform its required functional and technical performance. It covers only the partial replacements of components and building parts (in case of failure), and shall be distinguished from the replacement module that is related to the complete replacement of component and building parts.

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 Repair is optional in the context of simplified LCA. For provision and guidance, please refer to the aspect “Repair with complete LCA” of the present document.The reparation procedure refers only to corrective, responsive or reactive actions in response to losses of performances of a building component or building part.Repair is distinguishable from Maintenance and Replacements by the following aspects [EN 15804]:

  • Maintenance is a planed (proactive) action that maintain components performances whereas Repair is a corrective (reactive) action in response to damage;
  • Replacement covers the complete replacement of a component whereas Repair covers only replacement of sub-components.

According to EN 15978, the boundary for repair shall include:

  • the production of the repaired part of component and ancillary products;
  • the transportation of the repaired part of component and ancillary products, including production impacts
  • and aspects of any losses of materials during transportation;
  • the repair process of the repaired part of component and ancillary products;
  • waste management of the removed part of the component and of ancillary products;
  • the end of life stage of the removed part of the component and of ancillary products

Water and energy usage related to the repair process should always be included.

However, in the context of simplified LCA, only the production of the replaced component/repaired part may be included.
Rules from:
 EN 15978:7.4.4.1 General7.4.4.4 Boundary for repair (module B3)8.3 Time related characteristics

8.6.3 Scenarios for maintenance, repair, replacement

EN 15804:

6.3.3. Reference service life

6.3.4.4.2  – B3 Reparation

7.3.3.1 B1-B5 use stage related to the building fabric

Annex A
Guidance
 Repair is optional in the context of simplified LCA. For provision and guidance, please refer to the aspect “Repair with complete LCA” of the present document.

Back to 5.4.  Module B3