Skip to main content

Tag: Related study objective: stand-alone LCA

B-30 Transport of the users of the building

Written on .

Aspect B-30 Transport of the users of the building
Description
 For building LCA, the environmental impacts of transportation of people during the use stage may influence the decision between alternative construction sites (e.g. is the building located near public transport services?), or between alternative projects for the same site. Generally speaking, if the transport of building occupants is included within the system boundaries,  it can have a significant impact on the results of the use stage. However, it is not always relevant for inclusion in LCA studies.When and how should the transport of people be included for building 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 people may be taken into account if it is relevant for the goal and scope of the building LCA study (e.g. during the early design of a building, when a construction site needs to be chosen). If included, all relevant results should be documented separately, and the results should be subject to sensitivity analyses.
Rules from:

EN 15978

 No provisions
Guidance
 Generally speaking, when LCA is used during the design process of a building, this aspect is not relevant when the construction site has already been defined. Conversely, in the early design stages of the building project, assessment of the transport of people may be relevant if the goal and scope is to assess different options for the construction site (e.g. choosing between a site in the suburbs, in the countryside or in the city centre). In this case, the share of this aspect in building LCA results may be significant.In specific cases during the stages of the building project, this aspect may also be included if LCA practitioner needs to focus on it (e.g. for assessment in urban structures, or in large retail buildings).If the transport of people is included, the practitioner should identify the key parameters to calculate this contributor outside the scope of the EN 15978 standard, or otherwise use existing calculation rules within the building LCA software used. Such parameters may include:

  • the type of building (e.g. detached houses or office buildings);
  • the location of the building (e.g. in the countryside, in the suburbs, or in the city centre);
  • the number of people who commute to the workplace every working day, and for other activities if relevant (e.g. shopping, leisure etc.);
  • the mode of transport (e.g. bicycle, public transport including tramway, trains, autobus, individual car etc.);
  • the transportation distances between the building site and the workplace, and the distances from the public transport network.

Assessment of the transport of people then needs both default values and scenarios to be defined, particularly for:

  • the different modes of transport (e.g. bicycle, public transport including tramway, trains, autobus or individual car);
  • the transportation distances (e.g. below 10 km, between 10 and 100 km etc.) and the respective fuel consumption (if relevant);
  • the number of people in the building.

The LCA data on transportation processes should be taken from existing generic LCA databases (e.g. Ecoinvent, ELCD, ESUCO). The reference flow of the functional unit of the generic data of transportation processes is generally expressed as tons*km or persons*km. The data usually include a default scenario for fuel consumption and the average load (e.g. an average load of 2.5 persons in a car with a maximum capacity of 5 persons can be assumed in some generic LCA data). As the load factor may influence the results, a sensitivity analysis is needed on this parameter if the corresponding mode of transport significantly influences the results.

B-31 (Buildings) / B-11 (Products) Distinction between Modules B2, B3, B4 and B5

Written on .

Aspect B-31 (Buildings) / B-11 (Products) Distinction between Modules B2, B3, B4 and B5
Description
 Modules B2 to B5 cover the impacts related to the service life of building and building parts, whether it is a light modification, such as a small maintenance operation or an important retrofit (rehabilitation).It is sometimes difficult to determine which module a specific operation should be attributed to. The present aspect proposes a common definition of these modules, plus recommendations on how to use them at the product and building scale.

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 Standards EN 15804 and EN 15978 provide definitions and examples of aspects B2 to B5. The LCA practitioner should refer to these standards.B2 – Maintenance encompasses all actions related to maintaining a product or building part – i.e. replacement or reparation of a used, damaged or worn part of the product (a part, but not the entire functional unit) in a state in which it can perform its functions [EN 15978]. According to EN 15978, this applies to planned actions, and should include:

  • preventive and regular maintenance operations;
  • cleaning operations.

Maintenance actions are part of the ‘intended use’ definition that should be provided with a product’s reference service life (see EN 15804, annex A and 7.3.3.2 Reference service life). The reference service life (RSL) is valid under a specific set of conditions, notably the in-use environment (e.g. UV, heat, humidity, etc.), and proper implementation and maintenance that comply with the producer’s recommendations and with state-of-the-art practices. The RSL should be used to calculate the number of replacements. See the aspects: ‘Definition of the service life of a building product’ and ‘replacement frequency’ for additional information.

B3 – Repair encompasses all actions related to returning a product or building part to an acceptable condition in which it can perform its required functional and technical performances [EN 15804], including:

  • corrective, responsive or reactive treatment of a construction product;
  • replacement of a broken component or part because of damage (replacement of a whole element should be assigned to replacement).

The example given in EN 15978 and EN 15804 is a window with a broken pane.

–> Although the distinction between the maintenance and repair modules is not straightforward, the example given for repair falls outside the scope of the intended use that defines reference service life.

B4 – Replacement covers the replacement of a whole construction element [EN 15804], including the production and installation of a new (and identical) construction element. Examples given in EN 15978 include replacement of a partition wall, and replacement of a boiler or heating system.

–> The replacement module is distinguished from the maintenance and repair modules by the fact that a complete component or part is replaced (maintenance include the replacement of subcomponents, and repair the replacement of damaged parts). Although this ultimately depends on the breakdown of the building into subcomponents, it seems reasonable to understand it as the replacement of a complete functional unit such as defined in the EPD.

B5 – Refurbishment covers concerted programmes of maintenance, repair and/or replacement activity across a significant part or whole section of the building [EN 15804]. Examples provided include: ‘a major change of the internal layout (partitioning)’, a ‘change of the technical system related to heating’ and ‘modification for the purpose of a […] change of use’ [EN 15978].

–> The refurbishment module addresses important modifications that would impact on several building components, and modify building performances and/or functions.

All these aspects are related to the notions of durability and service life planning, as described in the ISO 15686 series. Relations between the type of operations and performance of a given product or building part could be represented as follows:

Figure 18: Example of performance over time relation depending on operations [EN 15804]

This figure is shown only for explanation purpose, and many other cases are possible, such as:

  • performance stability over the reference study period;
  • overall decrease of performance despite maintenance operations;
  • failure at implementation.

Furthermore, “service life planning can only address foreseeable changes. Since service life planning is concerned with foreseeable risks, it is not applicable to the estimation of obsolescence […] or to defective performance resulting from unforeseeable events or processes” [ISO 15686-1, part B.8.2.].

In the case of sound statistical feedback on the replacement rate of a specific product for a given country or region, it is unlikely that a clear distinction between the causes of replacement could be easily made. In that specific case, replacement causes would naturally encompass all cases: i.e. premature failure, failure due to foreseeable ageing (i.e. RSL) and obsolescence. The figure below presents a hypothetical distribution of replacement rate according to the main causes of replacement (including building deconstruction).

Figure 19: Replacement rate [EN15804]

 
Rules from:

EN 15978

 7.4.4.1 General
8.6.3 Scenarios for maintenance, repair, replacement

EN 15804

 6.3.3. Reference service life
6.3.4.4.2  – B4 Replacement
Annex A
Guidance
 As the distinction between Modules B2 to B5 is not straightforward, it is recommended that the following principles be applied when developing product and building LCA. These principles are based solely on the distinction between the causes of end of life:–> For end of life related to performance decrease over time (e.g. aging, decay, degradations, etc.):

  • causes related to foreseeable events (i.e. related to reference service life) in a defined set of conditions lead to maintenance and replacement scenarios;
  • causes related to unforeseeable events lead to repair scenarios.

–> For end of life related to modification of expectations regarding the building’s performance level or functionalities (e.g. obsolescence, such as modification of activities inside the building, modification of regulation, etc.):

  • causes lead to refurbishment scenarios.

B2 – Maintenance:

For product LCA, this module should cover all operations necessary to maintain the performance of products, or to return them to their original level, including scheduled replacement of parts and subcomponents. Example include: scheduled replacement of boiler parts; scheduled replacement of light bulbs from luminaires; repainting of a wall, door or window frame; replacement of small elements of roofing, such as tiles (e.g. a certain number of tile per 10 years per square metre), etc.

For building LCA, maintenance should take into account maintenance modules as provided within EPD, as well as additional information if needed (e.g. current or state-of-the-art practices, recommendations, etc.).

–> Maintenance should be understood as the set of operations performed under normal conditions. This applies in a given context (e.g. maintenance of a product could change, depending on the climate). Product modification and operations caused by accidents, improper installation or handling, unforeseeable events (such as flood), etc. should be covered by the repair module (see below).

–> Maintenance scenarios at the building scale should be consistent with the building’s physical structure: maintenance of a given component should take into account the influence of neighbouring components (e.g. accessibility).

B3 – Repair:

For product LCA, the repair module should not be included in the baseline scenario.

For building LCA, the repair module should not be included in the baseline scenario. The repair module may cover all operations related to product modification outside the scope of the maintenance module – that is, outside the scope of normal conditions, including improper use of a product, unforeseeable events such as flood or vandalism, etc.

–> For existing buildings, repair scenarios could be based on the history of the building (i.e. examples based on previous reparation);

–> For new buildings, repair scenarios could be used to assess the environmental impacts of a specific risk (e.g. the impact of reparation due to flood, the impact of improper installation that causes damage, etc.).

B4 – Replacement:

Replacement is necessarily related to the reference service life. Replacement occurs at the end of life of a product: that is, when it does not meet its initial performance requirements (modification of the requirements after product installation should be considered as obsolescence, and be covered by a specific scenario: see below). The number of replacements is further described in the aspect ‘Replacement frequency’.

–> It is recommended that replacement caused by events that are outside the scope of condition defined by the reference service life be treated as repair.

For product LCA, replacement covers the replacement of the whole functional unit by a new one after RSL. The boundaries of replacement include [EN 15978]:

  • production of the replaced component and ancillary products;
  • transportation of the replaced component and ancillary products, including production impacts and aspects of any losses of materials during transportation;
  • the process of replacing the components and ancillary products;
  • waste management of the removed component and of ancillary products;
  • the end-of-life stage of the removed component and of ancillary products.

Most of these may be similar to other modules for cradle-to-grave product LCA, for instance:

  • The transport scenario of the new component may be similar to A4 – Transport.
  • The replacement process may be similar to C1 – Deconstruction.

–> If no differences arises from a comparison between a replacement scenario and an installation scenario (including related production, transport, end of life, etc.) then a replacement scenario is not necessary. In any case, it should be clearly stated whether or not the assumptions regarding B4 modules are similar to those used for other modules (e.g. the replacement process is different from the initial implementation because of the building structure, etc.).

For building LCA, replacement should include:

  • replacement modules as described in cradle-to-grave EPDs (or cradle-to-gate EPD with corresponding option);
  • additional LCA data to cover components without EPD.

–> Replacement scenarios at the building scale should be consistent with the building physical structure. Replacement of a given component should take into account the influence of neighbouring components (e.g. accessibility, possible replacement of other components, etc.).

B5 – Refurbishment

For product LCA, no refurbishment module need be included in the baseline scenario, as this is highly dependent on information at the product scale.

For building LCA, the refurbishment module should not be included in the baseline scenario if the building service life is equivalent to the reference study period. Additional refurbishment scenarios may be developed. For example:

  • to assess the modification of building functions (e.g. switching from a commercial building to habitation);
  • to assess the effect of an expected regulation that would affect the buildings.

–> A refurbishment(or deconstruction/new construction) scenario should be developed if the service life of the building is less than the reference study period.

It is recommended that a refurbishment scenario be developed when long reference study periods (>100 years) are being considered, as modification of the building use is expected over such a period of time. Refurbishment scenarios could also be developed if the reference study period is longer than the reference service life of the load-bearing components and structural elements.

Additional recommendations:

The progressive loss of performance of some components will have an impact on the overall performance of the building (e.g. loss of performance of insulation may lead to an increase of energy demand for heating). If sufficient data are available, these aspects should be addressed using a sensitivity analysis.

According to NEN 15804 (Annex A), Reference service life “could be based on empirical, probabilistic or statistical data and shall always taking into account the intended use (description of use) as described in ISO 15686-1, -2, -7 and -8” [EN 15804, Annex A].

B-12 Robustness of data (LCA, service life) to model the life cycle of a building product

Written on .

Aspect B-12 Robustness of data (LCA, service life) to model the life cycle of a building product
Description
 How representative is a production process for a product?

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 In line with harmonized standards or technical approvals.
Rules from:

EN 15804

 6.3.3 Reference service life (RSL)
7.3.3.2 Reference service life8.2 LCA-related elements of the project report

Annex A Requirements and guidance on the reference service life

ISO 15686 Pt 1

 7.1.4 Taking account of variability and reliability
Guidance
 LCA studies may be conducted on a specific manufacturer’s product, in which case the use phase for that specific product can be considered, and service life data be generated in line with the relevant parts of ISO 15686.Where an LCA for an average product is being developed, the use phase may be harder to define robustly, owing to the variation in the use scenarios and application in the building, as well as in the products. It may be relevant to determine different use phase scenarios based on performance criteria for the products, although if this is associated with different manufacturing impacts (±10% for key environmental indicators), the product types should not be considered as a single average group.EN 15804 requires that, where an EPD is produced from more than one product’s data, the variance from the mean data reported in the EPD should be described in the project report for the verifier. Variance could be reported using the coefficient of variation or the standard deviation.

Some EPD programmes may have specific rules limiting the variance from the mean LCIA results for EPD covering a range of products, meaning that results must be reported for smaller groups of products with similar performance.

For simplified and screening LCAs, generic service life data can be used. For complete LCA, the service life for the specific product should be considered. Generic service life data are provided in various sources, including e.g. the national databases of different countries. It is recommended that practitioners refer to the service life data used in the context of the respective LCA study.

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-02 Demolition/deconstruction – complete LCA

Written on .

Aspect C-02 Demolition/deconstruction – complete 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 complete 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 should be included for a complete LCA. Generic or specific data should be taken from LCA databases or other relevant sources if available, unless they fall under cut-off rules.
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
 The practitioner should use detailed calculation (based on specific data) for a complete LCA. The energy, materials and related emissions of these processes should be included. However, 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 or in the Greenest Building, which provides indicative demolition energies for various building types (see exhibit 2). 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). For most construction projects this aspect is likely to fall under the cut-off rules, and may be omitted.

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.