The environmental product declaration EPD with a particular ...

The environmental product declaration EPD with a particular application to a solar thermal collector

F. Ardente, G. Beccali, M. Cellura & V. Lo Brano Department of Energy and Environmental Researches (DREAM), Facolth di Ingegneria, Palermo University, Italy

Abstract

The principles of sustainable development and of Integrated Product Policy are applied in new voluntary regulations, which have been internationally agree. The aim is to grant transparency of environmental information and to promote the diffusion of environmentally friendly products. A new tool under study is the Environmental Product Declaration (EPD), a technical paper annexed to products that synthesises their energy and environmental performances.

This paper points out the reasons for developing EPD for the energy sector, and puts special focus upon renewable energy systems, products whose environmental performances are often not clearly defined. We describe how results of a LCA upon a solar thermal collector can be included in an EPD- document, summarising its ecological profile and making information comparable. EPD could be employed for a correct decisional strategy, making a balance between the benefits and the impacts of this technology, and could represent a way to diffuse scientific results to customers.

1 The Environmental Product Declaration (EPD)

A great number of States have developed ecological label schemes for products, aiming to influence the consumer's choice in favour of more environmentally- friendly products and to assist the greening of public procurement. The Community will, within the framework of its proposed Integrated Product Policy (IPP) [l], look at measures to encourage the uptake of the types of eco-labels that allow consumers to compare performance between products. Consumers must

Transactions on Ecology and the Environment vol 63, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541

have easy access to understuadable, relevant, credible information either through labelling on the product or from another readily accessible source.

The International Community tried to perform a standard about Environmental Product Declaration (EPD), under the series IS014020 [2, 31. Unfortunately, a general agreement was not found for this difficult matter and for different political and economic pressures. The standard is still in the form of a technical report. The aims of an EPD are mainly: - Credibility: ensuring transparent, independent and competent control of

data; - Relevance: ensuring that the main environmental aspects have been

analysed; - Comparability: allowing the user to compare different products on the basis

of their environmental impacts. The product declarations are divided in three main groups: Type I

ecolabelling identifies products as being less harmful to the environment compared to other similar products, thanks to the compliance of minimum level of environmental performances and within the context of a third party verify. The European Ecolabel is one example of a Type-I EPD [4]. Type I1 is, instead, a self-declared environmental statement about the environmental performance of a product by the manufacturer itself.

In this paper we will focus upon the Type-I11 declaration, "a voluntary process by which an industrial sector or independent body develops an environmental declaration, including setting minimum requirements, selecting categories of parameters, defining the involvement of third parties and the format of external communications" [3]. The general steps in performing a declaration are: - to perform a Life Cycle Analysis of the studied product, respecting the

international standards of series IS014040 [5,6,7,8]; - to follow minimum requirements of the belonging product's category; - to diffuse the results with precise categories of parameters and a precise

format; - to receive the approbation of an accredited third party verifier. Many EPDs schemes were developed worldwide, generally following the previous structure. The Swedish EPD is by the far the best-established scheme in Europe, and maybe all over the world [9], and other countries took it as model (like the Italian "DAY developed by the National Agency for the Environment- ANPA [10]). The peculiarity of these schemes is the central role of the public authorities in the certification process and in the redaction of specific requirements that product declarations have to follow. The public involvement grants a greater credibility of the certification process.

1.1 Development of specific product requirements (PSR)

One of the most important features of environmental product declarations is that they shall enable comparisons between declarations. The collection and calculation of the underlying data must be done in a similar way using some


rules to carry out the LCA. These rules are prepared and established in so-called product-specific requirements (PSR) for selected product groups and service types [l l]. The requirements of PSR are only procedural, and they not describe specijic pevformance criteria. This represents the main difference between Type- I11 and Type-I schemes.

PSRs are developed after a long consultation process that involves members of public authorities, accreditation companies, consumers, NGOs (non governmental organisations) and the members of branches, companies and organisations (foreign ones if needed) relevant to the product or service for discussion. At the time of this paper, 63 PSRs are approved and another 13 are under preparation [12].

1.2 Advantages in developing EPD

Many companies have decided to develop EPDs mainly because customers are increasingly asking for information concerning the environmental performance of products. This is due to an increasing environmental awareness and to the desire to compare products of different types and from different companies in an environmental context. The resulting EPD can also serve as good sales arguments for environmentally friendly products.

A major benefit is the possibility of utilising LCA and EPD data during the development process of new products, or the modification of old ones, with the aim of continuously reducing the total environmental impacts. This represents the concept of eco-design, intended as to integrate environmental considerations throughout the whole production process, and in particular, during the early stages of product development [13].

There are several links between EPDs and eco-design, including the underlying information management system, the use of EPDs in choosing components or materials during products design, as a benchmark for eco-design and in communicating the results of eco-design. In order to these links to be strengthened, more EPDs need to be published so that EPDs can become an increasingly important benchmark and information tool within the eco-design process [14]. However, one has to keep in mind that typical EPD information is often too complex or detailed to be useful to designers and normally an aggregation step is needed to provide them with suitable information.

On the other side, the volume of information needed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the environmental burdens is large and complicated. Even though the simplification of information in a single index looks attractive to the decision-makers that want simple answers based on meanin@l data, the results may be misleading [15]. For these reasons, documents like EPD, which report the environmental performances of products without any elaboration or modify, could represent a data source for a further decisional model (like the Multi Attribute Decision-Making Process [16]).

The EPDs, like other voluntary tools, have been seen as having brought a general reduction of environmental impacts during production, but they have


also provided economic benefits for reductions in the cost of pollution treatment, saving on raw materials and an improved public image [17].

1.3 Energy indicators for EPD

The analysed EPD schemes [9,10] suggest how to assess the energy impacts. First of all, it is necessary to develop the energy balances during the Life

cycle of the product. All the energy quantities are valued as primary, defined as the energy content of energy carriers that have not yet been subjected to any conversion. The secondary sources can be transformed into primary quantities by using specific conversion factors expressed as MJ~,,,/MJ,. The overall energy consumption can be obtained multiplying the primary quantities by the calorific value. ANPA suggests the employment of the gross calorific value [10]. In fact gross calorific value represents the maximum energy that can be derived from a fuel and is a measure of the total energy that must be extracted from the earth [18].

Companies have to give more detailed information about, for example, how much energy comes from renewable sources or the feedstock energy rate. Feedstock energy is defined as "heat of combustion of raw material inputs, which are not used as an energy source, to a product system" [6]. It is important to separate the process energy consumption from the feedstock because it quantifies the potential of a material (as wood or plastics) to deliver energy if it is burned with heat recovery after its useful life.

2 Application of EPD to a solar thermal collector

The renewable energy sources are often presented to the public as "clean" energy, hiding the environmental impacts related to their manufacture. In fact, the production of the renewable plants, like every production process, entails a consumption of energy and natural resources as well as the release of pollutants.

Furthermore, customers purchase the product under the promise of great product's efficiency but without any clear or scientifically based information.

We have studied the energy and environmental performances of one of the most common renewable technologies: the solar thermal collector for warm sanitary water demand. The main aims of our research are to trace an ecobalance of an exemplary equipment comparing the energy necessary for the production of a collector with the saved energy thanks to its use. Our objectives of transparency could be well integrated with the previously described principles of EPD.

Firstly, the environmental convenience of a renewable technology can be stated thanks to the LCA-approach, which includes every energy and mass flows occurring during production, use and disposal. Secondly, the EPD scheme suggests the use of environmental impact's indices: they are useful to summarise the LCA results and can be used to compare, under a scientific basis, the efficiency of analogous products. Thirdly, the third part control grants that data are truthful.


2.1 The Functional Unit

The first step of a LCA is the definition of the Functional Unit (FU), defined as the "reference unit expressed as quantijied performance of the product system" [6] . The functional unit is important as a base for the collection, handling and calculation of LCA data to ensure the possibility to "add up" information from EPDs in the supply chain and to be able to compare EPDs in the same product category [l l]. However, the choice of FU is not always immediate.

In the case study of solar collector, three different alternatives were checked: 1- FU equal to the entire equipment. In this case, the results are presented as global quantities concerning the whole collector. Probably, this is the most intuitive choice but it could cause misunderstanding. In fact, there are various models of collectors, which can be divided in two categories: collector with forced or natural circulating flow. The former represents the normal flat collector whose thermal fluid is moved by a pump toward a separate boiler. The latter is a compact collector strictly connected to a smaller boiler, and the fluid is moved by the difference of density caused by the solar heating. If we compare these two collector's types, without any distinction, the environmental impacts of natural- flow collector (that includes also the boiler) will be greater. This is not precise because the boiler is not computed in other collector categories. 2- Impacts per unit of collector area. This alternative may be misleading. Enlarging the collector surface (S), the specific environmental impacts (as, for example, the "COz IS") would be decreased. Two collectors with the same total impacts could have different specific ones. In particular, the collector with a greater surface would appear as more "ecological" though not necessarily being so. Furthermore, a great extension does not necessarily mean greater energy harvest, due to the not linear relation between collector surface and collected energy. 3- Impact per unit of energy output. This is generally the most common alternative for energy systems [19,20], because it is related to the energy performance of the plant. However, it is difficult to apply this procedure to the collectors. The output of a solar system is an extremely variable data, depending on the solar energy input. The choice of the energy output as FU could cause confusion, because the same collector would have a different eco-profile depending on the area in which it is working.

In our study we chose the first alternative. In fact, being the EPD a product's certification, a company could prefer to refer to the entire product, also for marketing reasons. Of course, it is necessary to fix exactly the system's boundaries and the components that have to be inserted in the study. Anyway, two different PSR's should be prepared, one for each collector's typology.

2.2 Description of the collector

An EPD shall include the description of the product sufficient for a customer to assess and evaluate the technical perfonnance and usefulness of the product [l I]. Our case study is focused upon a solar collector with natural water circulation.


The studied FU includes the absorber, the boiler with an inner heat exchanger, the support and the connecting pipes. Figure 1 shows the technical specifications.

Boiler Specification

Dunensmns [mm] 1150-560-560

Fluid Capactty [htres]

Boiler Test Pressure [atm]:

Mass Description

Absotberlkgl: 67.4

Boiler [kg]: 78,8

Support [kg]: 27.5

Auxiliary kg]: 5.4

Total cmyly mass [k 61: 179.1

Absorber Specification

Dimensions [mm]: 2005-1165-91

Total Surface [m2]:

Net Surface [m2]:

Test Pressure [atm]:

Main Materials

Framework (zinc Steel, Aluminiur

Absorberplate-Pipes (Copper)

Coverage (Glass)

Boiler (Stainless steel)

Support (Zinc Steel) Insulation (PUR)

Circulating fluid (Propylen Glycol

Figure 1: Collector specifications.

3 The LCA results

We have performed an LCA of the studied product by collecting data in the manufacturing site, and computing the energy and mass flows during the various life-cycle phases (Figure 2).

Extraction & Production T r ~ y p ; ~ Manufacture & assembly xrz?%?~; of raw material of collector's parts l im

Transport to landfill 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1) Data from ANPA database 2) Direct measure

Figure 2: Life-cycle phases included in the study.

The study involved also the installation and two maintenance cycles. The disposal process was not included; we considered only the transport from customer's home to a landfill. However, the main collector's parts are metallic and they could be easily recovered and re-used. This would cause an energy credit of the product, sensibly modifying the results and reducing the energy consumption related to the FU. Due to the lack of information about disposal, we decide to omit this life phase.


Table 1: Resource and primary energy consumption.

Primary Energy Consumption I Not Renewable 1

Coal [kg] 172,l Natural Gas [ ~ r n ~ ] 52,l

Coke [kg] 1,7 Wood [kg] 6,9

Lignite [kg] 12,7 Oil [kg] 98,l

Uranium [kg] 0,001 Renewable [MJ] 296,5 I FU; Ener; [GJ]

Feedstock Energy [GJ] Total Primar Ener [GJ] 10,8

Resource Consumption Iron [kg] 210,6

Bauxite [kg] 14,9 Water [m3] 9,5

copper [kg] 9,l Iron Scraps [kg] 8,9

Salt [kg] 7,7 C D , [kg] 6,s

Copper Scraps [kg] 6,O Zinc [kg] 4,7

Dolomite [kg] 3,s Lime [kg] 2,O Clay [kg1 1,3

Nitrogen [kg] 1,2

Table 2: Main air, water and soil pollutants.

Air Pollutants CO2 [kg] 618,O

Water Pollutants COD [g] 201,8

Nitrogen [g] 13,2 NH3 [g1 13,s

Phosphorus [g] 0.2

Ni [g] 3,84

Pb [g1 0,7 Fe [g1 31S

Soil Pollutants Normal Waste [kg] 46,0

Special Waste [kg] 0.8 Ash [kg] 1.9

The study shows the great incidence of raw materials production, which embodies about 70% of the total primary energy consumption. For this reason, the PSR should precisely state the scientific source where ecoprofiles are taken from. As suggested by the Italian EPD guideline [IO], the ecoprofiles of materials are taken from the Italian official database [21]. Unfortunately, this database is not still complete, due to the lack of information about many materials. When not available in [25], data comes from other scientific database (as the German official database-GEMIS [22]. We report the results about energy and resource consumptions (Table 1 ) and main pollutants (Table 2).

4 The collector's eco-performances

The aim of EPD is to synthesise the environmental performances by ecological indices. Referring to solar collectors, these indices have to summarise both the energy performances and the energy consumption obtained by the LCA study.


4.1 The energy collected

We calculate the energy saving by using the calculation model suggested by Duffie & Beckman [23]. However, the water flow is unknown in a passive circulation collector.

The flow depends on the differences of pressure caused by differences of temperature [24]. On the other side the energy absorbed by the collector depends on the water flow. Consequently, the equation system that arises is not directly solvable. To simplify the calculation, we suppose the flow as a c.onstant. Common values for this variable are enclosed in the range 0.01-0.03 kgls [24]. The results of Figure 3 are obtained with a water flow of 0.02 kgls. By changing this value inside the described range, the energy collected does not change greatly (the variations are enclosed in the range of +3%).

The collector's efficiency calculation is the key issue. The producing companies generally declare high performance levels without specifying how these values are obtained. The PSR has to describe how to test the collector and how to obtain the efficiency. Furthermore, companies shall report in the EPD every assumption made. The PSR should also suggest the solar energy input, which calculations refer to. In fact, the energy collected depends on the solar input and the same collector will have different performances depending on the working site.

To grant transparency and comparability, PSR could impose a test performed by accredited laboratory, following some international standard (as the [25 ] ) or could suggest the efficiency calculation by means of some internationally agree methods (as the "F-Chart Method" [26] or the "Day by Day Method" [27]).

Input data W ater demand lVdavl 1 320

Wind velocity [&S]

Collector Inclination 38" Latitude 1 38"

Temperature (from UN1 10349)

Figure 3: Total daily solar radiation on horizontal surface and energy collected.

The results of figure 3 are obtained from average temperatures and solar inputs for the city of Palermo (Sicily, 38" latitude) as reported in [28]. The yearly average energy harvest is close to 6.2 GJ per year. This is an end-energy quantity, meaning the energy effectively saved by the final consumers.


Supposing that the renewable system is substituting a conventional gas boiler, the conversion factor from end energy to primary one is 1.06 MJPm/MJEND [29]. The primary energy harvest is 6.6 GJ per year.

4.2 The energy paybaek time

We suppose that energy payback-time is a key indicator to evaluate the eco- performances of a renewable energy source. It is an indicator generally used in economic studies to state the necessary time to recover an initial investment. The energy payback-time (EPT) is likewise defined as the time necessary for a solar equipment to collect the energy (valued as primary) equivalent to that used to produce it [30]:

where: LCA,,,, = Primary energy consumed during all the LCA phases [GJ]; EUseful = Yearly useful saved energy [GJ per year]; E",,= Energy necessary for the use of the renewable system [GJ per

year1 In passive collector systems, the water circulation takes place naturally,

without any energy consumption; consequently, the term E,,, is null. The payback time related to the studied equipment is 1.6 years. This value

shows the great energetic and environmental convenience in installing such technology.

5 Conclusions

We have described in this paper the importance of voluntary tools in greening the market, following the experience of many countries and the suggestions of the European Commission. The EPD is a document that reports the main environmental performances of a product, based on LCA study. It could allow an environmentally based comparison of various products belonging to the same category and could grant transparency in the diffusion of environmental information. However, the EPD-scheme is not yet acknowledged worldwide and the works of an IS0 Technical Committee are still in progress.

In our study, we have followed the Swedish-Italian scheme. We have applied it to a renewable energy system: the passive solar thermal collector for sanitary warm water. This technology is often granted as "green" without any scientific support. We think that a more precise way to evaluate the ecological performances of renewable sources is the LCA-based approach. The LCA-results should be diffused granting transparency, and we see in the EPD an optimal way to proceed.

The EPD (and the related PSR) shall include a set of indicators that companies have to calculate. We consider the energy payback-time as a useful index to synthesise both the energy efficiency and the energy consumption impact. In our case study, payback time is 1.6 years, showing the great environmental convenience of this technology,


Remark

The results presented in this work are extracted from the case study "CS2" performed within the works of Task27- SubtaskC of IEA (International Energy Agency) about "Performance, durability and sustainability of advanced windows and solar components for buildings".

References

[ l ] Green Paper on Integrated Product Policy (IPP), Cornrnission of the European communities, Brussels 7/02/2001 COM(2001), 68 Final, 2001.

[2] IS0 14020, "Environmental labels and declarations - General principles", 1998 IS0 TR 14025, "Type 111 environmental declarations", 2000 "Regulation (EC) no 198012000 of the European Parliament and of the Council" of 17 July 2000 on a revised Community eco-label scheme IS014040: "Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework", 1998 IS014041: "Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Goal and scope definition and inventory analysis", 1999 IS0 DIS 14042: "Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Life cycle impact assessment", 1998 IS0 DIS 14043: "Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Life cycle interpretation", 1998 Swedish Environmental Management Council, "Requirements for Environmental Product Declaration, EPD - An Application of IS0 TR 14025 Type I11 Environmental Declarations", 27/3/2000.

[l01 ANPA- Agenzia Nazione per la Protezione dell'Ambiente, "Regole per la redazione della Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto", July 2001.

[ l l ] Swedish Environmental Management Council, 2000: "Product Specific Requirements- for preparing an environmental product declaration EPD for.. . ", 2000

[l21 From website http:l/www.environdec.com updated to November 2002. [l31 Fiksel J., Design for Environment: Creating Eco-Efficient Products and

Processes, MacGraw-Hill, 1996. [l41 European Cornrnission DG Environment, Evaluation of Environmental

Product Decalration Schemes, Final Report, September 2002. [l51 Boustead, I., Yaros, B.R., Papasavva, S., Eco-labels and Eco-indices. Do

they make sense?, Society of automotive engineers, paper OOTLCC-49, 2000

[l61 Yoon, K. Hwang, C.L., Multiple attribute decision making- an introduction, London: Sage Publications, 1995

[l71 Allander, A., Successful Certification of an Environmental Product Declaration for an ABB Product, Corporate Environmental Strategy, Elsevier Science inc, Vol 8, no 2, pp 133-141,2001.


[l81 Boustead I., 1999, Eco-profile of Plastics and related Intermediates- Methodology, Association of Plastics Manufacturers in Europe (APME).

[l91 The Swedish Environmental Management Council, "Product-Specific Requirements (PSR)- Electricity and District heating Generation", 2001.

[20] The Swedish Environmental Management Council, "Product-Specific Requirements (PSR)-Electrical manipulating industrial robot", 2002.

[21] Agenzia Nazionale per la Protezione dell'Ambiente (ANPA), "I-LCA Banca dati italiana a supporto della valutazione del ciclo di vita", version 2.0, 2000

1221 Global Emission Model for integrated systems (GEMIS), version 4.1. [23] Duffie, J. A. , Beckrnan, W.A. ,LYenergia solare nelle applicazioni

terrniche, Liguori editore, 1978. [24] Avina, J., Beckman, W.A., Klein, S.A., Simulation of a natural convection

heat exchanger solar domestic hot water system, proceedings of American Solar Energy Society annual conference, Minneapolis Minnesota, 1995

[25] UN1 EN 12975: "Impianti terrnici solari e loro componenti -Collettori solari - Requisiti general?', 2002

[26] UN1 8477: Energia solare. Calcolo degli apporti per applicazioni in edilizia. Valutazione dell'energia raggiante ricevuta, 1983

[27] IS0 9459: "Solar heating - Domestic water heating systems - Part 2: Outdoor test methods for system performance characterisation and yearly performance prediction of solar-only systems", 1995

[28] UN1 10349, Riscaldamento e raffrescamento degli edifici.Dati climatici, 1994

[29] F. Ardente, Energetic and Environmental Analysis of Thermal Solar Collectors, Graduating thesis, 2001

[30] Ardente, F., Beccali, G., Cellura, M., Hidden energy and environmental loads of solar thermal collectors: a case study, Journal of Advance Science, Society of Advanced Science, Vol. 13 no 3,2001.


The environmental product declaration EPD with a particular ...

Documents

Transcript of The environmental product declaration EPD with a particular ...