Conclusions and Summary Report Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Highway Guard Rail Posts

Similar documents
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT ON COTTON AND VISCOSE FIBRES FOR TEXTILE PRODUCTION

Carbon Sequestration Tool Background and User Guide

GYPSUM ASSOCIATION LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

A clean energy solution from cradle to grave

Life Cycle Assessment of Deinked and Virgin Pulp FINAL

Screening Study of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the Electric Kettle with SimaPro Software***

LCA of biofuels: developments and constraints

Legrand's environmental commitments

Final Report. Life Cycle Impact Assessment of Aluminum Beverage Cans. Aluminum Association, Inc. Washington, D.C. PE Americas.

A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Canadian Hardwood Flooring with Alternative Flooring Types. Acknowledgements

Levi Strauss & Co. San Francisco, CA March 2009

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION

White Paper Life Cycle Assessment and Product Carbon Footprint

Category 5: Waste Generated in Operations

Printed circuit board [EDP (0)]

Life Cycle Assessment of Three Water Scenarios: Importation, Reclamation, and Desalination

Sustainable Plastics with Reduced Carbon Footprint & Reduced Waste

This fact sheet provides an overview of options for managing solid

Climate Change and Waste The Missing Link December 2010 Written by Jacob Gregory

Life Cycle Assessment of Reusable and Single-use Plastic Bags in California

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Tool. for Commercial Building Developments in Hong Kong

Life Cycle Inventory Packaging Options for Shipping Soft Goods in E-Commerce and Catalog Sales

Legrand's environmental commitments

A Green Idea. Reclaiming Urban Wood Waste And Urban Forest Debris. For Fuel/Combustion & Renewable Energy

An environmental comparison of paper and plastic labels. Chris Edwards & Gary Parker Intertek Expert Services

Environmental Life Cycle Assessment Framework for Sukker Production (Raw Sugar Production)

Life Cycle Assessment and Forest Products: A White Paper

Using resources in an efficient way Case Metsä Group

How To Calculate The Greenhouse Effect (Carbon Footprint) On A Desktop Pc (Fujitsu)

Life Cycle Assessment of Newsprint Distribution at an Integrated Mill. Erica Salazar, M.Sc.A. (P2004)

Water Footprint Project

Birmingham City University / Students Union Aspects and Impacts Register. Waste. Impacts description

Life Cycle Assessment of Hand Drying Systems

Sustainable Manufacturing Seminar. Designing to Sustain the Economy, Environment and Society. Sustainable Product Standards (case-study)

Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis of Polyethylene Milk Bottles and Polyethylene-coated Paperboard Milk Cartons

CCX Forestry Carbon Offset Programs

Environmental Performance Data Calculation Standards

ECO-EFFICIENT RECYCLING THE RECYCLING INDUSTRY: A PERSPECTIVE FOR THE GREEN ECONOMY FACING THE ECONOMIC CRISIS. Duccio Bianchi - Ambiente Italia

FINAL REPORT LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY OF PLASTIC FABRICATION PROCESSES: INJECTION MOLDING AND THERMOFORMING

Life Cycle Inventory of Australian Forestry and Wood Products

Papapostolou 1, E. Kondili 1, J.K. Kaldellis 2

CARBON ASSESSMENT TICKETING DELIVERY SYSTEMS

Environmental Product Declaration

How To Do A Complete Life Cycle Analysis Of Packaging

READING GUIDE FOR THE REPOSITORY ON SHOES BP X Contents. Introduction 2

Solid softwood panelling for interior use Product

Eco- and water efficiency development prospects in Pulp-Board integrate.

Belgard Pavers Interlocking Concrete Paving Units

McDonald s Case Note: Note on Life-Cycle Analysis

A case study on multi-impact life cycle assessment of coffee alternatives

Biosolids Resource Recovery Monthly Report

Harmonization of LCA Methodologies for Metals

SMaRT. Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) Policy & Product Criteria Rule (PCR) Approved March 28, 2011 Amended March 28, 2012

GaBi EDU. Handbook to Explain LCA Using the GaBi EDU Software Package

EMISSIONS OF AIR POLLUTANTS IN THE UK, 1970 TO 2014

ALLIED PRINTING SERVICES, INC. CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REPORT

Foreword What is a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)? History of LCA Commonly Used LCA Metrics What Can LCA Do?...

HUGO BOSS ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT. Our claim. Our approach


Streamlining of LCI compilation as the basis of a continuous assessment of environmental aspects in product development

NOTE: 08/2014 revision corrects issues related allocation & slag and fly ash within the Int. EPD PCR evaluation.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) & Sustainable Product Standards Training

Techno-economic and ecological evaluation of a wood biorefinery

Review Timber as a Building Material - An environmental comparison against synthetic building materials

Arbor Day Tree Trivia

GHG Protocol Product and Supply Chain Initiative. Proposed List of Technical Topics

Groupwork CCS. Bio-Energy with CCS (BECCS) Platzhalter Logo/Schriftzug (Anpassung im Folienmaster: Menü «Ansicht» «Folienmaster»)

A Life Cycle Assessment Comparing Select Gas-to-Liquid Fuels with Conventional Fuels in the Transportation Sector

Carbon Credits: An Opportunity for Forest Landowners. Hughes Simpson Texas Forest Service

Original Research Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Solid Waste Management Comparison of Results Using Different LCA Models

UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report. Life Cycle Assessment of UBC Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences Building

Product Environmental Assessment Activities in Taiwan

BASIS cement ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCT DECLARATION. Aalborg Portland A/S ISO ISO EN The Norwegian EPD Foundation

Avoiding co-product allocation in a simplified hypothetical refinery 1

Solid Waste: Opportunities for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction in Sonoma County. Community Climate Action Plan

THE ACCOR GROUP S ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT: AN APPLICATION OF LIFE-CYLE APPROACH TO ASSESS AND MONITOR AN ORGANIZATION ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE

The renewable materials company

12.5: Generating Current Electricity pg. 518

The new Audi TT Coupé. Life Cycle Assessment

ENVIRONMENTAL Product Declaration as per ISO and EN Akçansa Çimento Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. Portland Cement CEM I 42.

Amherst County Public Schools. AP Environmental Science Curriculum Pacing Guide. College Board AP Environmental Science Site

Note on Life Cycle Analysis

TABLET DETERGENTS Towards A More Sustainable Future

SEATTLE STEAM COMPANY FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Efficient forest biomass supply chain for biorefineries A project for cross border cooperation

Introduction and guide to LCA data documentation using the CPM documentation criteria and the ISO/TS data documentation format

Technical Paper 13. Embodied energy considerations for existing buildings

GHG Emission Reductions Quantification Report

Zinkbolt. ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCT DECLARATION in accordance with ISO 14025, ISO and EN Owner of the declaration:

REPUBLIC OF TURKEY INTENDED NATIONALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTION

Life Cycle Assessment of a Solid Ink MFP Compared with a Color Laser MFP Total Lifetime Energy Investment and Global Warming Impact

Product Environmental Profile Step Down Transformers

Transcription:

Conclusions and Summary Report Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Highway Guard Rail Posts ISO 14044 Compliant Prepared by: AquAeTer, Inc. Treated Wood Council (2013)

Conclusions and Summary Report 1. Conclusions & Executive Summary The Treated Wood Council has completed a quantitative evaluation of the environmental impacts associated with the national production, use, and disposition of treated wood and galvanized steel highway guard rail posts using life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies and following ISO 14044 standards. The results for treated wood guard rail posts are significant. Less Energy & Resource Use: Treated wood highway guard rail posts require less total energy and less fossil fuel than galvanized steel highway guard rail posts. Lower Environmental Impacts: Treated wood highway guard rail posts have lower environmental impacts than galvanized steel highway guard rail posts in five of six impact indicator categories assessed: anthropogenic greenhouse gas, total greenhouse gas, acid rain, ecotoxicity, and smog-causing emissions. Offsets Fossil Fuel Use: Reuse of treated wood highway guard rail posts for energy recovery in permitted facilities with appropriate emission controls will further reduce greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere, while offsetting the use of fossil fuel energy. Impact indicator values were normalized to better support comparisons between products and to understand the quantitative significance of indicators. Product normalization sets the cradle-to-grave life cycle value of treated wood highway guard rail posts to one (1.0) with galvanized steel highway guard rail post impact indicator values being a multiple of one (if larger) or a fraction of one (if smaller). The normalized results are provided in Figure 1. Figure 1 Normalized impact indicator comparison (treated wood guard rail (GR) posts = 1.0) 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Anthropogenic Fossil fuel use GHG Net GHG Acidification Water Use Smog Eutrophication Ecotoxicity CCA-treated GR posts 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Galvanized steel GR posts 1.8 1.3 6.2 2.4 0.88 1.3 0.92 2.4 2

2. Goal and Scope The goal of this study is to provide a comprehensive, scientifically-based, fair, and accurate understanding of environmental burdens associated with the manufacture, use, and disposition of highway guard rail posts using LCA methodologies. The scope of this study includes: A life cycle inventory of two guard rail post types: preservative-treated wood (round and sawn) and galvanized steel. Chromated copper arsenate (CCA) was chosen as a representative preservative for assessment of treated wood highway guard rail posts. Calculation and comparison of life cycle impact assessment indicators: anthropogenic greenhouse gas, total greenhouse gas, acid rain, smog, ecotoxicity, and waterborne eutrophication impacts potentially resulting from life cycle air emissions. Calculation of energy, fossil fuel, and water use. 3. Quality criteria This LCA study was done in accordance with the principles and guidance provided by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in standards ISO/DIS 14040 and ISO/DIS 14044. The LCA procedures and findings were evaluated by a panel of external reviewers in accordance with Section 6 of ISO 14044. The external reviewers confirmed that the LCA followed the ISO standards and that the comparative assertions were done using equivalent functional units and equivalent methodological considerations. 4. Manufacturer Information This LCA addresses two highway guard rail post products. The LCA for treated wood highway guard rail posts includes weighted averages of primary data (i.e., survey responses from U.S. treaters of wood highway guard rail posts). The LCA for galvanized steel highway guard rail posts represents a general product category. The galvanized steel highway guard rail posts LCA was prepared using secondary data sources and provides a basis for general comparison of products. 3

5. Product Description and Functional Unit Guard rail posts are used as the vertical supports for highway guard rails. The horizontal guard rails attach to the post and generally are made of galvanized steel, except in rural areas or areas where decorative or less industrial applications are necessary. The guard rail posts can be made of either wood or steel and include blocking of steel, wood, or composite materials. Scope: Cradle-to-grave Functional unit: one highway guard rail post sawn wood product is 6 inches wide and 8 inches deep (nominal) round wood product is 7.5 inches in diameter galvanized steel product is W6x8.5 I-Beam all products are 6 feet long Service life: 40 years System boundary: from the extraction of the raw materials through processing, transport, primary service life, reuse, and disposal of the product. Geographic boundary: U.S. 6. Life Cycle Inventory The inventory analysis phase of the LCA involves the collection and analysis of data for the cradle-tograve life cycle of the highway guard rail post. For each stage of the product life cycle, inputs of energy and raw materials, outputs of products, co-products and waste, and environmental releases to air, water, and soil are determined. Figure 2 System boundary and process flows for highway guard rail posts. Cradle-to-gate processes for treated wood are shown in green and galvanized steel are shown in blue. Gateto-grave processes are shown in black as combined. Fossil fuel Electricity Water Transportation Cradle-to-gate processes for CCA-treated posts Gate-to-grave processes combined Mineral extraction and refining CCA formulating CCA Secondary use Seedling production, softwood planting & growth Softwood harvest Milling to green timber Guard rail post drying and treating Use as guard rail post Landfill Cradle-to-gate processes for galvanized steel posts Raw material extraction/ collection and processing Steel post manufacture System boundary Emissions to air, releases to land and water Soild waste 4

The system boundaries include all the production steps from extraction of raw materials from the earth (cradle) through to final disposition after service life (grave). Figure 2 illustrates the system boundaries and process flow for both wood and non-wood highway guard rail posts assessed in this study. The length of time a highway guard rail post remains in highway service is dependent upon a number of factors. Often, posts are removed from service before the end of their useful service life, such as for highway upgrades. Assumptions used in this LCA for disposition of highway guard rail posts after service life include: Treated wood posts are recycled for secondary use or disposed in a solid waste landfill Galvanized steel posts are recycled 7. Environmental Performance The assessment phase of the LCA uses the inventory results to calculate total energy use, impact indicators of interest, and resource use. For environmental indicators, USEPA s Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI) is used to assess anthropogenic and total greenhouse gas, acid rain, smog potential, ecotoxicity, and eutrophication impacts potentially resulting from air emissions. The categorized energy use, resource use, and impact indicators provide general, but quantifiable, indications of environmental performance. The results of this impact assessment are used for comparison of highway guard rail post products as shown in Table 1. Table 1 Environmental performance (per post) Impact category Units Treated wood post Galvanized steel post Energy use Energy input (technosphere) MMBTU 0.28 0.20 Energy input (nature) MMBTU 0.16 0.47 Biomass energy MMBTU 0.10 0.0080 Environmental indicators Anthropogenic greenhouse gas lb-co 2 -eq 98 123 Total greenhouse gas lb-co 2 -eq 20 125 Acid rain air emissions lb-h+ mole-eq 18 44 Smog potential g NOx / m 0.11 0.15 Ecotoxicity air emissions lb-2,4-d-eq 0.16 0.40 Eutrophication air emissions lb-n-eq 0.0067 0.0062 Resource use Fossil fuel use MMBTU 0.33 0.60 Water use gal 12 11 Wood products begin their life cycles removing carbon from the atmosphere (as carbon dioxide) and atmospheric carbon removal continues as trees grow during their approximate 40-year growth cycle, providing an initial life cycle carbon credit. Approximately half the mass of dry wood fiber is carbon. Transportation and treating operations are the primary sources of carbon emissions in the manufacture of treated wood products. 5

The galvanized steel post begins its life cycle either as a raw material or with the recycling of steel products. Both processes result in carbon emissions. Burdens associated with recycling, including transportation, sorting, cleaning, and melting, must be included in the manufacturing stage. Minimal impacts are required for both treated wood and galvanized steel in the service life stage. Following the service life stage, wood posts are recycled for secondary uses or disposed in landfills. Galvanized steel guard rail posts are assumed recycled. The carbon balance of highway guard rail posts, through the life cycle stages, is shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 Carbon balance for post products (per post) 200 150 Treating/manufacture & use Final disposition Carbon Dioxide (lbs CO2-eq/Post) 100 50 0-50 -100 Tree growth (wood product only) -150 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Time from Life Cycle Start (yrs) Treated wood guard rail post Galvanized steel guard rail post 8. Additional Information This study is further detailed in a Procedures and Findings Report completed October 5, 2011 and is available upon request from the Treated Wood Council at www.treated-wood.org/contactus.html. This study has been published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Transportation Technologies (Vol. 3 No. 1, January 2013, pp 58-67) and is available at http://www.scirp.org/journal/jtts. 6