Environmental and Health Product Declarations: …...This presentation will examine Environmental...

Environmental and Health Product Declarations: Opportunities within LEED and Green Globes

Jim Bowyer Dovetail Partners, Inc. Minneapolis, MN

Course Description

This presentation will examine Environmental and Health Product Declarations – what they are, what they reveal, what goes into developing them, and how to use them effectively. Opportunities for applying LCA provisions within LEED v. 4, Green Globes, and other green building standards will also be explored.

“The Wood Products Council” is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems (AIA/ CES), Provider #G516.

Credit(s) earned on completion of this program will be reported to AIA/CES for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members and non-AIA members are available upon request.

This program is registered with AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. _______________________ Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.

Learning Objectives

• Understand the nature of systematic evaluation using life cycle assessment and its increasing use in green building programs and model codes.

• Understand the purpose of EPDs, the science behind them, the nature of information they provide, and how to use them effectively in the building materials selection process.

• Learn the essentials of HPDs and their use.

• Explore new opportunities within LEED v4, Green Globes, and other green rating systems to capitalize on the environmental advantages of using wood as a construction material.

Life Cycle Assessment

Determining the Environmental Impact of Products

!  Brainstorming, intuition !

Determining the Environmental Impact of Products

!  Brainstorming, intuition !

Determining the Environmental Impact of a Product

!  Brainstorming, intuition !  Systematic analysis - - environmental accounting !





Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Examination of all measurable:

•  Raw material inputs

•  Products and by-products

•  Emissions

•  Effluents

•  Wastes

Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Typically involves all stages in production, use, and disposal, including:

•  Extraction

•  Transportation

•  Primary processing

•  Conversion to semi-finished products

•  Incorporation into finished products

•  Maintenance

•  Disposal/reuse

In determining environmental impacts, consider: ● Raw material extraction ● Transportation ● All steps in manufacturing

-  Analyze individual components, wall sections, entire structure.

- Full bill of materials. - Track life cycle environmental impacts of every component. ● Raw material inputs ● Energy consumption ● Emissions ● Effluents ● Solid wastes ● By-products

If the “product” is a component assembled on-site or an entire structure, also assess:

● Transport of materials to construction site ● Building construction ● Operation (heating/cooling) ● Maintenance ● End-of-building-life

Impact Measures Fossil fuel consumption

Weighted resource use

Global warming potential

Smog potential

Acidification potential

Human health respiratory effects

Photochemical oxidation

Ozone layer depletion

Depletion of non-renewable resources

Water consumption

Eutrophication

Solid waste

If comparing two different products: ● They must be functionally equivalent. ● They must be evaluated: - in the same way and in accordance with international protocols. - using the same system boundaries. - including all significant aspects and emission factors.

Steel Design Columns hollow structural section steel, beams wide flange steel; Intermediate floors open-web steel joists w/concrete topping; Exterior walls 2x4 steel studs 16” o.c., R-3.8 rigid insulation sheathing, stucco cladding, R-13 Batt insulation + PET membrane, gypsum board + latex paint; Roof open-web steel joists w/steel decking, R-20 rigid insulation + PET membrane, modified bitumen membrane, gypsum board + latex paint.

Concrete Design Columns reinforced concrete, concrete beams; Intermediate floors pre-cast double-T truss with concrete topping; Exterior walls concrete block w continuous insulation and polyethylene membrane, stucco cladding; Roof pre-cast double-T concrete, R-20 continuous insulation + PET membrane, modified bitumen membrane, latex paint.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY –CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION

Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt.

(MJ) TOTAL

Weighted Resource

use (tonnes) TOTAL

GWP (tonnes CO2 eq) TOTAL

Acidification Potential (moles of H

+ eq) TOTAL

HH Respiratory

Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) TOTAL

Eutrophication

Potential (g N eq) TOTAL

Ozone Depletion Potential

(mg CFC-11

eq) TOTAL

Smog potential (g NOx

eq) TOTAL

Foundations & Footings 20000 532,998 581 68 26,524 161 21,288 109 383

Columns and Beams 40000 2,273,849 1,053 167 67,127 388 162,579 198 735

Intermediate Floors 20000 1,081,422 851 117 47,221 347 37,693 183 701

Exterior Walls 12000 3,758,182 662 280 76,860 436 113,229 223 1,051

Windows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Interior Walls 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Roof 20000 4,099,144 599 129 66,871 404 32,761 117 1,166

TOTALS 11,745,595 3,746 761 284,604 1,737 367,551 832 4,037

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY – STEEL CONSTRUCTION


(MJ) TOTAL

Weighted Resource

use (tonnes) TOTAL



+ eq) TOTAL

HH Respiratory


Eutrophication



(mg CFC-11

eq) TOTAL


eq) TOTAL


Columns and Beams 40000 1,400,670 123 56 24,486 114 99,964 0 144


Exterior Walls 12000 992,333 175 63 21,015 191 22,665 25 302

Windows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Roof 20000 4,405,157 225 117 58,468 335 42,132 5 914

TOTALS 8,760,105 1,693 405 166,307 1,067 237,349 211 2,079

CO

NC

RET

E VS

. STE

EL



(MJ) TOTAL

Weighted Resource

use (tonnes) TOTAL



+ eq) TOTAL

HH Respiratory


Eutrophication



(mg CFC-11

eq) TOTAL


eq) TOTAL




Exterior Walls 12000 3,758,182 662 280 76,860 436 113,229 223 1,051

Windows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Roof 20000 4,099,144 599 129 66,871 404 32,761 117 1,166

TOTALS 11,745,595 3,746 761 284,604 1,737 367,551 832 4,037



(MJ) TOTAL

Weighted Resource

use (tonnes) TOTAL



+ eq) TOTAL

HH Respiratory


Eutrophication



(mg CFC-11

eq) TOTAL


eq) TOTAL




Exterior Walls 12000 992,333 175 63 21,015 191 22,665 25 302

Windows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Roof 20000 4,405,157 225 117 58,468 335 42,132 5 914

TOTALS 8,760,105 1,693 405 166,307 1,067 237,349 211 2,079

CO

NC

RET

E VS

. STE

EL



(MJ) TOTAL

Weighted Resource

use (tonnes) TOTAL



+ eq) TOTAL

HH Respiratory


Eutrophication



(mg CFC-11

eq) TOTAL


eq) TOTAL




Exterior Walls 12000 3,758,182 662 280 76,860 436 113,229 223 1,051

Windows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Roof 20000 4,099,144 599 129 66,871 404 32,761 117 1,166

TOTALS 11,745,595 3,746 761 284,604 1,737 367,551 832 4,037



(MJ) TOTAL

Weighted Resource

use (tonnes) TOTAL



+ eq) TOTAL

HH Respiratory


Eutrophication



(mg CFC-11

eq) TOTAL


eq) TOTAL




Exterior Walls 12000 992,333 175 63 21,015 191 22,665 25 302

Windows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Roof 20000 4,405,157 225 117 58,468 335 42,132 5 914

TOTALS 8,760,105 1,693 405 166,307 1,067 237,349 211 2,079

CO

NC

RET

E VS

. STE

EL



(MJ) TOTAL

Weighted Resource

use (tonnes) TOTAL



+ eq) TOTAL

HH Respiratory


Eutrophication



(mg CFC-11

eq) TOTAL


eq) TOTAL




Exterior Walls 12000 3,758,182 662 280 76,860 436 113,229 223 1,051

Windows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Roof 20000 4,099,144 599 129 66,871 404 32,761 117 1,166

TOTALS 11,745,595 3,746 761 284,604 1,737 367,551 832 4,037



(MJ) TOTAL

Weighted Resource

use (tonnes) TOTAL



+ eq) TOTAL

HH Respiratory


Eutrophication



(mg CFC-11

eq) TOTAL


eq) TOTAL




Exterior Walls 12000 992,333 175 63 21,015 191 22,665 25 302

Windows 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Roof 20000 4,405,157 225 117 58,468 335 42,132 5 914

TOTALS 8,760,105 1,693 405 166,307 1,067 237,349 211 2,079

CO

NC

RET

E VS

. STE

EL

1.3X 2.2X 1.9X 1.7X 1.6X 1.5X 3.9X 1.9X

Alternatives to a Full LCA

•  Environmental product labels.

ISO has established standards for three types of labels:

Type I - the most common type of label in today’s market. Require third party certification of a pre-set list of criteria for issues such as recycled content, VOC’s, and bio-degradability. Type II - provide criteria for self-declarations by a materials extraction organization (mining, for example), manufacturer or supplier. There is no third party review in Type II labels. Type III - require the rigorous use of life cycle environmental information, an open consultation process, and ease of comparison among products. Type III labels are similar to consumer nutrition labeling on food products.

ISO Environmental Labeling Standards


Type I - the most common type of label in today’s market. Require third party certification of a pre-set list of criteria for issues such as recycled content, VOC’s, and bio-degradability. Type II - provide criteria for self-declarations by a materials extraction organization (mining, for example), manufacturer or supplier. There is no third party review in Type II labels. Type III - require the rigorous use of life cycle environmental information, an open consultation process, and ease of comparison among products. Type III labels are similar to consumer nutrition labeling on food products.



Type I - the most common type of label in today’s market. Require third party certification of a pre-set list of criteria for issues such as recycled content, VOC’s, and bio-degradability. Type II - provide criteria for self-declarations by a materials extraction organization (mining, for example), manufacturer or supplier. There is no third party review in Type II labels. Type III - require the rigorous use of life cycle environmental information, an open consultation process, third party review, and ease of comparison among products. Type III labels are similar to consumer nutrition labeling on food products.


Alternatives to a Full LCA

•  Environmental product labels. - ISO Type I – 3rd party, single

attribute.

- ISO Type II – self declaration.

- ISO Type III – LCA-based, multiple attribute, 3rd party verified information.

Environmental Product Declaration

Environmental Product Declarations

Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) An EPD provides consistent and comparable information to industrial customers and end-use consumers regarding environmental impacts.

Product category rules define how information is to be collected and how measurements are to be made.

Environmental Product Declarations

•  LCA - based •  Disclose quantified life cycle data for a product. •  Must clearly state the life cycle stages and product components covered. • Third party verified

Organization for Implementation

Product Category Rules

Tests, Certificates, Other information

EPD Publication


Verification by independent third party

Development of an EPD

EPD Draft

Input from producers, LCA experts, testing institutes, NGOs, consumer orgs.

Product description Light Gauge Steel profiles are cold-formed profiles that are used to construct the bearing walls, flooring and roof panels of a building. Declaration is based on aver- aged thickness of cold-formed steel profiles prepared according to a design specification of a building. Application Light Gauge Steel profiles from hot-dip galvanized steel are used in construction industry as well as many other applications: roofing (roofing sheets, roof tiles), cladding (Trapezoidal sheets, sandwich panels, wall cassettes), interior trim (trapezoidal sheets, sandwich panels, wall cassettes), flat sheets (covers, structural panels, wall connections, facing roof), roof drainage systems (gutters, downspouts, soffit boards and accessories), Automotive (vehicles, trailers, refrigeration units), white and brown goods. Typical applications of steel profiles are: - Detached houses, - Villas, vineyard huts, - School and dormitory buildings, - Commercial buildings, - Factory buildings.

Publisher Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V. Tel. +49 (0)2223 2966 79- 0 Rheinufer 108 Fax +49 (0)2223 2966 79- 0 53639 Königswinter E-mail [email protected] Germany Web www.bau-umwelt.com

Programme holder Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V. Tel. +49 (0)2223 2966 79- 0 Rheinufer 108 Fax +49 (0)2223 2966 79- 0 53639 Königswinter E-mail [email protected] Germany Web www.bau-umwelt.com

Owner of the Declaration Akkon Steel Structure Systems Co Tel. +90 0282 726 76 90 Çerkezköy Organize Sanayi Bölgesi, Fax: +90 0282 726 77 41 GMKP Mah Atatürk Caddesi No:134, Çerkezköy, Tekirdağ E-mail: [email protected] Turkey Web www.akkoncelik.com

Author of the Life Cycle Assessment Metsims Sustainability Consulting Tel. +90 534 499 32 40 Veko Giz Plaza, Meydan Sk. No:3 K.13 Fax: +90 212 705 36 36 34396 Maslak İstanbul E-mail: [email protected] Turkey Web www.metsims.com

lumber. This EPD was developed in compliance with ISO 14025 and ISO 21930 and has been verified under UL Environment’s EPD program. The EPD includes Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) results for all processes up to the point that planed and dry lumber is packaged and ready for shipment at the manufacturing gate; the cradle-to-gate product system includes forest management, logging, transportation of logs to lumber mills, sawing, kiln-drying, and planing.

F. INTERIOR WALLS

Assembly Type

Fossil Fuel Consumpt. per ft.2 (MJ)

Weighted Resource

use per ft.2

(mt)

GWP per ft.2 (mt CO2

eq)

Acidification

Potential per ft.2 (moles

of H+ eq)

HH Respiratory

Effects Potential

per ft.2 (kg PM2.5 eq)

Average across interior walls 46.29 3.05 0.96 21.91 884 2x4 Wood Stud Wall 16” o.c. 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 29.28 1.33 0.45 19.08 587.77 2x4 Wood Stud Wall 24” o.c. 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 28.84 1.30 0.44 18.88 544.43 2x4 Wood Stud Wall 16” o.c. 2 x 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 41.00 2.10 0.74 20.68 912.41 1 5/8” x 3 5/8” Steel Stud Wall 16” o.c. 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 36.58 1.89 0.58 19.08 789.19 1 5/8” x 3 5/8” Steel Stud Wall 24” o.c. 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 34.32 1.72 0.54 18.88 695.32 1 5/8” x 3 5/8” Steel Stud Wall 24” o.c. 2 x 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 46.49 2.52 0.83 20.68 1063.30 6” Concrete Block 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 81.72 6.88 1.82 35.98 1673.64

6” Concrete Block 2 coats latex paint 69.56 6.08 1.53 34.18 1305.66

F. INTERIOR WALLS

Assembly Type

Fossil Fuel Consumpt. per ft.2 (MJ)

Weighted Resource

use per ft.2

(mt)

GWP per ft.2 (mt CO2

eq)

Acidification

Potential per ft.2 (moles

of H+ eq)

HH Respiratory

Effects Potential

per ft.2 (kg PM2.5 eq)

Average across interior walls 46.29 3.05 0.96 21.91 884 2x4 Wood Stud Wall 16” o.c. 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 29.28 1.33 0.45 19.08 587.77 2x4 Wood Stud Wall 24” o.c. 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 28.84 1.30 0.44 18.88 544.43 2x4 Wood Stud Wall 16” o.c. 2 x 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 41.00 2.10 0.74 20.68 912.41 1 5/8” x 3 5/8” Steel Stud Wall 16” o.c. 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 36.58 1.89 0.58 19.08 789.19 1 5/8” x 3 5/8” Steel Stud Wall 24” o.c. 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 34.32 1.72 0.54 18.88 695.32 1 5/8” x 3 5/8” Steel Stud Wall 24” o.c. 2 x 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 46.49 2.52 0.83 20.68 1063.30 6” Concrete Block 5/8” gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint 81.72 6.88 1.82 35.98 1673.64

6” Concrete Block 2 coats latex paint 69.56 6.08 1.53 34.18 1305.66

Product Description

•  Typical board size: ¾” x 6” (31.75mm x 152.4mm)

•  Grade: Average •  Product composition (on the basis of m2 of installed decking with a 25-year service life):

- Western red cedar lumber: 8.14kg (od basis)/(0.0247m3)

- Optional coating – stain 1.25 litres - Fasteners (2 ½” galvanized nails, No. 8 or 10): 1kg/m2 installed decking.

•  Installed and used according to Western Red Cedar Lumber Association specifications (see http://www.wrcla.org/installation_and_finishing/finishing_cedar_decks/default.htm).

Base case is an untreated deck. An alternative scenario has regular applications of a stain coating.

Environmental Performance – Base Case (No stain)

Impact Category

Unit

Per m2 of decking

Per 100 ft2 of decking

Total primary energy: Mj 275.86 2562.71

Non-renewable, fossil Mj 74.13 688.64

Non-renewable nuclear Mj 0.60 5.62

Renewable (SWHG)* Mj 14.08 130.79

Renewable, biomass Mj 3.46 32.12

Feedstock, non-renewable fossil Mj 0.00 0.00

Feedstock, renewable biomass Mj 183.59 1705.54

Renewable material consumption (wood) kg 8.14 75.60

Non-renewable material consumpt. (nails) kg 0.10 0.91

Fresh water use L 0.03 0.30

Total waste Kg 8.24 76.51

Hazardous Kg 0.00 0.00

Non-hazardous kg 8.24 76.51

Global warming potential (GWP) Kg CO2 eq -1.45 -13.39

Acidification potential H+ moles eq 2.71 25.31

Eutrophication potential Kg N eq 2.62E-03 2.43E-02

Smog potential Kg NOx eq 5.91E-02 5.49E-01

Ozone depletion potential Kg CFC-11eq 2.55E-09 2.37E-08

* WWHG: Solar, wind, hydroelectric, and geothermal.

Impact Category

Unit

Per m2 of decking

Per 100 ft2 of decking

Total primary energy: Mj 275.86 2562.71

Non-renewable, fossil Mj 74.13 688.64

Non-renewable nuclear Mj 0.60 5.62

Renewable (SWHG)* Mj 14.08 130.79

Renewable, biomass Mj 3.46 32.12

Feedstock, non-renewable fossil Mj 0.00 0.00

Feedstock, renewable biomass Mj 183.59 1705.54

Renewable material consumption (wood) kg 8.14 75.60

Non-renewable material consumpt. (nails) kg 0.10 0.91

Fresh water use L 0.03 0.30

Total waste Kg 8.24 76.51

Hazardous Kg 0.00 0.00

Non-hazardous kg 8.24 76.51

Global warming potential (GWP) Kg CO2 eq -1.45 -13.39

Acidification potential H+ moles eq 2.71 25.31

Eutrophication potential Kg N eq 2.62E-03 2.43E-02

Smog potential Kg NOx eq 5.91E-02 5.49E-01

Ozone depletion potential Kg CFC-11eq 2.55E-09 2.37E-08

* WWHG: Solar, wind, hydroelectric, and geothermal.

Environmental Performance, Decking with Regular Applications of Stain

Carbon Balance per 100 ft2 of Cedar Decking Kg CO2 eq

Base Case – No Stain

Alternative Scenario – Regular Applications

of Stain

Forest carbon uptake -143.17 -143.17

GWP* harvesting and manufacturing 25.49 25.49

Net carbon balance cradle-to-gate -117.68 -117.68

GWP transportation to consumer 18.25 18.25

Net carbon balance cradle-to-site -99.43 -99.43

GWP installation and use 0.03 13.18

Net carbon balance cradle to end-of-use -99.40 -86.25

GWP end-of-life processes 86.01 86.10

Net carbon balance cradle-to-grave -13.39 -0.15

* GWP – Global warming potential; includes all biogenic carbon sinks and sources throughout the product system boundary.

Health Product Declarations


The Health Product Declaration Standard was originally developed by the HPD Working Group in collaboration with the Healthy Building Network and Building Green.

It is now managed by the HPD Collaborative.


-  HPDs describe product content and direct health hazards associated with human exposure to the individual components of a product. -  An HPD is not an assessment of risks associated with

actual use of a product. -  An HPD does not address potential health impacts of substances used or created during manufacture. - An HPD is not a full assessment of environmental impacts from the life cycle of a product.


-  An HPD differs from a MSDS:

o  A MSDS provides information about how to work with a hazardous substance or product in a safe manner. Focus is acute health risks:

•  Physical data – melting point, boiling point, flash point) •  Other information – toxicity, health effects, first aid, storage, disposal, protective clothing, spill handling, etc.)

o  An HPD aims for 100% disclosure of all ingredients: •  If hazardous, must be reported much as in MSDS. •  Also provides information as to long-term, chronic exposure.

LEED and LCA Building life-cycle impact reduction (5 pts. possible)

-  Historic building reuse (5 pts), or

-  Renovation of abandoned or blighted building (5 pts), or

-  Building and materials reuse (2-4 pts), or

LEED and LCA Building life-cycle impact reduction (5 pts. possible)

-  Historic building reuse (5 pts), or

-  Renovation of abandoned or blighted building (5 pts), or

-  Building and materials reuse (2-4 pts), or

-  Whole building life cycle assessment (3 pts)

LEED and LCA Building life-cycle impact reduction (5 pts. possible) -  Whole building life cycle assessment (3 pts)

•  New construction (bldgs or portions of bldgs) •  LCA must demonstrate a minimum 10% reduction

compared to a baseline building in at least 3 of the 6 impact categories listed below: !  GWP !  Stratospheric ozone depletion !  Acidification potential !  Eutrophication potential !  Formation of tropospheric ozone !  Depletion of nonrenewable energy resources

LEED and LCA Building life-cycle impact reduction (5 pts. possible) -  Whole building life cycle assessment (3 pts)

•  New construction (bldgs or portions of bldgs) •  LCA must demonstrate a minimum 10% reduction,

compared to a baseline building, in GWP and at least 2 additional impact categories from the following list. !  GWP !  Stratospheric ozone depletion !  Acidification potential !  Eutrophication potential !  Formation of tropospheric ozone !  Depletion of nonrenewable energy resources

LEED and EPDs Building product disclosure and optimization – environmental product declarations (2 pts. possible) -  Use at least 20 different permanently installed products

sourced from at least 5 different manufacturers that meet one of the following disclosure criteria:

•  EPDs (1 point) - Industry-wide (generic) EPD where the product manufacturer is a participant. (counted as ½ of a product in credit calculation) - Product-specific EPD where the product manufacturer is the participant.

LEED and EPDs Building product disclosure and optimization – environmental product declarations (2 pts. possible) -  Use at least 20 different permanently installed products

sourced from at least 5 different manufacturers that meet one of the following disclosure criteria:

•  Product specific declarations. (1 point) Products for which there is a publicly available, critically reviewed (ISO 14044) assessment of at least cradle to gate scope (counted as ¼ of a product in credit calculation).

AND/OR . . .

LEED and EPDs Building product disclosure and optimization – environmental product declarations (2 pts. possible) (must comply with one of criteria below for 50% by cost of total value of permanently installed product)

•  Third-party certified products that demonstrate impact reduction below industry average in at least 3 of the following categories: !  GWP !  Stratospheric ozone depletion !  Acidification potential !  Eutrophication potential !  Formation of tropospheric ozone !  Depletion of nonrenewable energy resources

LEED and HPDs Building product disclosure and optimization – material ingredients (2 pts. possible) -  Material ingredient reporting. (1 pt.)

Use at least 20 different permanently installed products sourced from at least 5 different manufacturers that meet one of a number of specified programs to demonstrate the chemical inventory of a product to at least 0.1% (1000 ppm)

•  Manufacturer inventory (complete, public, CASRN) •  Health product Declaration •  Cradle to Cradle certification at Basic or Bronze level

LEED and HPDs Building product disclosure and optimization – material ingredients (2 pts. possible) -  Material ingredient optimization. (1 pt)

Use products that document their material ingredient optimization using various identified paths* for at least 25% of the cost of the total value of permanently installed products in a project.

* Green Screen, Cradle to Cradle Certified, REACH Optimization

LEED and HPDs Building product disclosure and optimization – material ingredients (2 pts. possible) -  Product mfg supply chain optimization (1 pt). Products are sourced from manufacturers that engage in validated safety, health, hazard, and risk programs and that also document at least 99% (by weight) of product ingredients, and that have independent 3rd party verification of their supply chain with respect to a number of measures.

GREEN Globes and LCA Materials and Resources

Credit is given for reuse of existing structures (18 pts. Possible)

-  Facades -  Structural systems -  Non-structural elements

GREEN Globes and LCA Performance Path

Use Athena Impact Estimator or another LCA tool for evaluating a minimum of a minimum of two different core and shell designs. (33 pts.)

Use Athena Impact Estimator or another LCA tool for evaluating a minimum of a minimum of two alternative interior fit-outs (including finishes and furnishings). (16 pts.)

GREEN Globes and LCA Regarding LCA:

•  A brief narrative must accompany LCA results to demonstrate how LCA influenced the design process.

•  The LCA comparison is to occur prior to the Construction Document phase, with documentation provided during the stage 1 review.

•  LCA results must be shown for the design options – typically a proposed final design (least environmental impact) and a reference building or earlier design iteration.


•  The LCA may or may not include operating energy.

•  At a minimum, values for the following impact estimators must be reported for the preferred and reference designs:

!  GWP !  Acidification potential !  Eutrophication potential !  Ozone depletion potential !  Smog potential !  Fossil fuel use


The proposed final design with the least environmental impact must achieve one of the following performance targets:

!  A minimum 10% reduction for at least 3 impact indicators, one of which must be GWP. *

!  A minimum 15% reduction for at least 2 impact indicators, one of which must be GWP. *

!  A minimum 20% reduction in GWP. *

* No more than one indicator can exceed the reference result.

GREEN Globes and EPDs Prescriptive Path – Core and Shell

-  Use products that account for at least 10% of products* selected that are accompanied by:

•  EPDs (industry-wide generic or product-specific)

•  Third party certifications •  Third party verified product LCA that minimally

covers cradle to gate.

> 40% of products (20 pts) 25-39% of products (15 pts) 10-24% of products (10 pts) < 10% of products ( 0 pts)

* Based on cost

GREEN Globes and EPDs Prescriptive Path – Interior Fit-outs

-  Use products that account for at least 10% of products selected that are accompanied by:

•  EPDs (industry-wide generic or product-specific)

•  Third party certifications •  Third party verified product LCA that minimally

covers cradle to gate.

> 40% of products (10 pts) 25-39% of products ( 7 pts) 10-24% of products ( 5 pts) < 10% of products ( 0 pts)

GREEN Globes and EPDs

Prescriptive Path

-  Documentation of product comparisons required. -  Comparable product, industry wide or product

specific comparisons.

GREEN Globes and HPDs

There is no specific reference within Green Globes to HPDs. Hazardous chemicals are addressed through monitoring and minimization of VOC and other emissions through the building and commissioning processes.

Summary

•  Environmental impacts of materials and products cannot be accurately determined through intuition. •  Life cycle analysis (LCA) performed in

accordance with international protocols does allow accurate determination of environmental impacts and product comparisons.

•  Systematic assessment of various building types and components consistently shows that production and use of wood products results in lower environmental impacts than functionally equivalent non-wood products.

Summary •  There is no meaningful relationship between the

type of structural material and building life. •  Environmental product declarations (EPDs) are

based on LCA, governed by strict rules and third-party verified, and provide a way to assess the environmental impacts of materials and products.

This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing

Education Systems Course

Jim Bowyer [email protected] Dovetail Partners, Inc. www.dovetailinc.org

Questions?

This presentation was developed by a third party and is not funded by WoodWorks or the softwood lumber check-off.

Date post:	27-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

Environmental and Health Product Declarations: …...This presentation will examine Environmental...

Documents