A comparative Life Cycle assessment of building insulation products made of stone wool, paper wool and flax

Part 1: Background, goal and scope, Life Cycle inventory, impact assessment and interpretation
  • Anders C. Schmidt
  • Allan A. Jensen
  • Anders U. Clausen
  • Ole Kamstrup
  • Dennis Postlethwaite
LCA Case Studies

Abstract

Insulation of buildings in order to save heating energy is an important technology for enabling sustainable development. This paper summarises the results of a comparative LCA study according to ISO 14040 standard series of HT stone wool, flax representing crop grown products and paper wool representing recycled products applied for roof insulation. As the three materials have vastly different lifecycles, yet fulfil the same function cycles, the methodology used should be of general interest. Part 1 consists of the project background, goal and scope definition, a detailed life cycle inventory analysis with sensitivity analysis, impact assessment and interpretation. The actual comparison of the results from the life cycle assessments of the three products, in which an attempt is made to answer the question of whether the biological products flax and paper wool are more environmentally preferable than the mineral product stone wool representing more traditional insulation materials, is discussed in Part 2.

Keywords

Building insulation case study flax goal and scope LCA LCI paper wool stone wool 

References

  1. [1]
    Commission of the European Communities, (2001): Commission Staff Working Paper Third Communication from the European Community under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Brussels, 30 November 2001. http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/ official sec 2001 2053 en.pdfGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Rockwool International A/S (1996): B0rsintroduktion (Stock Market Introduction)Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Stranddorf HK, Schmidt A, Hansen LE, Jensen AA, Thorsen M (1995): Thermal Insulation Products for Walls and Roofs. Impact Assessment and Criteria for Ecolabelling. Draft for the Danish EPA. S0borg: dk-TEKNIKGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Stranddorf HK, Hansen LE, Schmidt A et al. (1995): Establishing of key features (and criteria) covering the full life cycle for thermal insulation products for walls and roofs based on a LCA. Søborg: dk-TEKNIKGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Bowdidge J (1998): Life cycle inventory assessment for Rockwool Limited for 1996. Rollbatts loft insulation thickness 150 mm. Pencoed, Bridgend, UK: Rockwool Limited (Unpublished)Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Krogh H, Rasmussen JO, Nielsen PA (2001): Miljøvurdering af isoleringsmetoder. By og Byg Dokumentation 012. Hørsholm: Statens ByggeforskningsinstitutGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    CEPMC (2000): Guidance for the provision of environmental information on construction products. Brussels:Council for European Producers of Materials for ConstructionGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Weidema B (2001): Market information in life cycle assessments. Technical report (final draft) from the Danish LCA-methodology development and consensus project, Subproject 2. Danish Environmental Protection Agency (to be published)Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Frees N, Weidema BP (1998): Life cycle assessment of packaging systems for beer and soft drinks. Energy and transport scenarios. Technical report 7. Miljøprojekt nr. 406. Copen hagen: MiljøstyrelsenGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Boustead I (2001): Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry. Polyethylene Terephthalate. A report for the European Centre for Plastics in the Environment. Brussels: APMEGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Boustead I (1997): Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry. Report 10: Polymer conversion. Brussels: APMEGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Boustead I (1998): Eco-profiles of the European Plastics Industry. Report 6: Polyvinyl chloride. Brussels: APMEGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    BUWAL (1996): Ökoinventare für Verpacknungen. Schrif-tenreihe Umwelt Nr. 250/1. Bern: Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und LandschaftGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    BUWAL (1994): Vergleichende okologische Bewertung von Anstrichstoffen im Baubericht. Schriftenreihe Umwelt Nr. 232. Bern: Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und LandschaftGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    IVAM LCA Data 3.0 (2000). IVAM Environmental Research, University of AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Guinée J (ed) (2001): Life cycle assessment. An operational guide to the ISO standards. Final report. Leiden: CMLGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Hauschild M, Wenzel H (1998): Environmental assessment of products. Volume 2: Scientific background. London: Chapman & HallGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Eco-Profile of hydrogen peroxide. Brussels: CEFIC. (http://www.cefic.be/sector/peroxy/ecohvdro/tc.htmGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Rio Tinto Borax (2002): Optibor® Data sheet. Draft, November 2002Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Rio Tinto Borax (2002): Borax Data Sheet. Draft, November 2002Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    BioMat NET (2000): Flax anGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ecomed Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anders C. Schmidt
    • 1
  • Allan A. Jensen
    • 1
  • Anders U. Clausen
    • 2
  • Ole Kamstrup
    • 2
  • Dennis Postlethwaite
    • 3
  1. 1.dk-TEKNIK ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTSøborgDenmark
  2. 2.Rockwool InternationalHedehuseneDenmark
  3. 3.Mulberry HouseWalesUK

Personalised recommendations