Last modified: 2014-09-11
Abstract
ecological impacts over the life cycle of a product or a service. Both criteria,
transparency and relevance, are crucial for the use of EPDs and are the
backbone for an ecological decision making. Existing EPDs and related
PCRs were compared to evaluate if they fulfill the goal to give a sound basis
for decision. The following provoking statement arose: “EPDs are often not
useful for the decision making.” The following reasons for this statement
indicate an optimization demand. The relevance of impacts is often not
analyzed and documented. Information of low relevance causes a loss of
focus. The uncertainty of results is neglected and frequently higher than the
ascertained difference between products.
Keywords
References
Ecoinvent (2010). Ecoinvent Data v2.2, Swiss Center for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf
EPD® (2010). Environmental products declaration for plain medium density fibreboards (MDF) and for melamine-coated medium density fibreboards (EPD 237, FINSA Spain)
European Commission (2013). Annex II: Product environmental footprint (PEF) Guide (draft, xxx)
INIES (2009). Déclaration environnementale et sanitaire conforme à la norme NF P 01-010, Panneau MDF Standard ou Panneau de fibres standard obtenues par voie sèche. (N° d’enregistrement 05-019)
IBU (2012/2013). Umwelt-Produktdeklaration nach ISO 14025, DHF/DFF Holzfaserplatte (EPD-EHW-2008611-D), AGEPAN® Holzfaserplatte (EPD-GLU-2010111-D), Kronotec WP50 (EPD-KRO-2012311-D)
Guinée et al. (2001). Handbook on life cycle assessment. Operational guide to the ISO standards (Kluwer Academic Publishers, ISBN 1-4020-0228-9, Dordrecht, 2002, 692 pp.")
Schmid H. and Kägi T. (2011): Robustness in Carbon Footprint Results: Evidence and Recommendations from a Comparative Study of Beer (5th PCF World Summit, Zurich, 7-8 April 2011)