DOI: 10.7569/JRM.2017.634135
M.Cˇ ekon et al.: Cardboard-Based Packaging Materials as Renewable Thermal Insulation of Buildings
Table 4 Mass of the insulation materials used as a basis for the LCAs.
have different equivalent units. This makes direct evaluation and comparison between them impossible. A method known as “normalization” can be used to overcome this problem and increase the clarity of the results [18]. Normalization transforms the results in individual impact categories into dimensionless quan- tities that can be easily compared either separately or as a sum. It is, for example, used to compare the share of individual impact categories on total results. CML2001 EU25+3 normalization factors in version Nov 10 are used in this work. 4.3 LCA Results Table 5 shows calculated environmental impacts related to production of 1 kg of each assessed mate- rial: CBMs (representing samples M1 to M7), PIR (sample M8), EPS (sample M9) and MW (sample M10). Table 6 shows normalized environmental impacts related to the production of 1 kg of these materials. Figures 5 to 11 present the comparison of normal- ized environmental impacts (vertical axis) related to the production of each CBM as well as the envi- ronmental impacts related to the production of comparable mass of PIR, EPS or MW. Share of the Table 5 Environmental impacts related to the produc- tion of 1 kg of the assessed materials. Impact cat. Unit CBM PIR EPS MW ADP-el. 10 –6 kg Sb -Eq. 1.7 22.6 0.6 3.6 ADP-fos. 10 –2 MJ 1.5 6.5 6.8 2.6 AP 10 –3 kg SO 2-Eq. 2.9 17.8 15.0 8.4 EP 10 –3 kg Phs- Eq. 1.1 3.1 1.4 1.1 GWP 10 –1 kg CO 2 - Eq . 7.8 43.1 42.0 14.6 ODP 10 –8 kg R11- Eq. 9.8 2.013.16.5 POCP 10 –4 kg eth- Eq. 3.9 35.7 89.9 7.3 Table 6 Normalized environmental impacts related to the production of 1 kg of the assessed materials. Impact cat. Unit CBM PIR EPS MW ADP-el. 10 –13 2.9 37.5 1.0 6.0 ADP-fos. 10 –16 4.3 18.7 19.3 7.4 AP 10 –13 1.7 10.6 8.9 5.0 EP 10 –14 5.8 16.5 7.5 5.7 GWP 10 –13 1.5 8.3 8.1 2.8 ODP 10 –15 9.7 2.0 12.8 6.3 POCP 10 –13 2.2 20.6 52.0 4.2
Equivalent mass of common insulation materials [kg]
CBM sample Mass [kg]
PIR (M8) EPS (M9) MW (M10)
M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7
1.7067 1.4308 0.1826 1.3530 3.0443 1.8921 0.2414 1.7892 1.1354 0.8750 0.1116 0.8274 1.2850 0.9654 0.1232 0.9129 0.6402 0.4905 0.0626 0.4639 0.7020 0.6120 0.0781 0.5787 3.6932 1.2223 0.1560 1.1558
It is obvious that the EPS is the material with the best ratio between thermal insulation and mass in the presented comparison. The mass of the EPS necessary to provide the same thermal resistance as the CBMs varies between 4% (compared with CBM sample M7) and 11% (compared with CBM sample M1) of the CBMs mass. The necessary mass of PIR and MW is significantly larger, with MW being slightly more effi- cient in this regard. The mass of PIR varies between 35% (compared with CBM sample M7) and 87% (com- pared with CBM sample M6) of the CBMs mass. The mass of MW between 35% (compared with CBM sam- ple M7) and 82% (compared with CBM sample M6). The resulting environmental impacts are calculated using CML 2001 method developed by the Institute of Environmental Sciences in Leiden, Netherlands [20], with impact categories and characterization fac- tors in version Nov 10. This method uses 12 “impact categories” to describe the environmental impacts of products. Only seven impact categories mandatory according to EN 15804 [15] and EN 15978 [16] stan- dards are used in the LCAs presented in the follow- ing section: Abiotic Depletion Potential with regard to fossil fuels (ADP-fos.) and scarce resources (ADP-el.), Acidification Potential (AP), Eutrophication Potential (EP), Global Warming Potential (GWP), Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) and Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP). Results in each impact cat- egory are represented by “equivalent units.” These units express the harm that the assessed product sys- tem causes to the environment by comparing it to damage caused by defined reference substance. For example, in GWP impact category the environmental impacts of the assessed product system are expressed by the amount of CO 2 emissions that would cause the same damage if released into the atmosphere [18]. Results in individual impact categories can be confus- ing for the general reader. Also, individual categories
J. Renew. Mater. Supplement June 2017
89
CC BY-NC-ND - Creative Commons
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software