WP4 – Task 4.3 LCA Activities

1. Innovative recycled plastic based panels for building field WP4 – Task 4.3 LCA Activities 30° MonthMEETING Madrid February 6, 2014

2. Contents • EcoPlasBrick panel general description • LCA – Phases • LCA – Goal and scope • LCA – Inventory Analysis (LCI) • LCA – Impact Assessment (LCIA) • LCA – Interpretation • Status in brief DeliverableD4.2 November 2013 Deliverable D4.3 January 2014 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

3. Deliverable D4.2 D. 4.2.1 – LCA phase I: Definition of goal and scope, Data inventory D. 4.2.2 – LCA phase II: Impact Assessment 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

4. EcoPlasBrick panel general description In particular, the LCA will be performed on a specific panel used for vertical indoor rooms division. In the following are provided brief descriptions for the LCA phases, and the results achieved. Ecoplasbrick panel is a sandwich panel made of a core of recycled plastic waste (in form of densified flakes) mixed with Polyurethane resin, and two plasterboard skins. The panel frame is made of wood and steel plates. 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

5. LCA – Phases The LCA study is performed in accordance with internationally recognized guidelines (ILCD Handbook: General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance) and standards (ISO 14044:2006 and ISO 14040:2006). It is structured in a series of steps, which are: 1. LCA goal & scope definition 2. Inventory analysis (LCI) 3. Impact assessment (LCIA) 4. Interpretation Goal and scope definition Results interpretation and improvement analysis Inventory analysis Impact assessment 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

6. LCA – Phases • Study scope • System limits • Functional unit • System functions • Energy flows • Material flows • Emissions 3 step 1 step 2 step • Assessment method application 4 step • Identification of strategy intervention 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

7. LCA – Goal and scope • Goal and Scope definition phase aims to define how big part of product life cycle will be taken in assessment and to what will assessment be serving. The criteria identified and specific time horizon are described in this step. • In particular, the analysis of the energetic and environmental impacts of the innovative recycled plastic based panel has been performed, considering • “Cradle to grave” life cycle: • Production process • Use phase • End of life 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

8. LCA – Goal and scope In order to perform the LCA, a proper Functional Unit has been defined: • Functional unit is represented by 0.5 m2 of panel surface, with 0.09 m of thickness and 28.53 kg of weight • All data regarding materials and energy consumption will be referred directly or through a proportion, to this functional unit • All calculated impacts (e.g. global warming potential, acidification potential, eutrophication potential, use of non renewable resources, etc.) will be referred to the selected functional unit 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

9. LCA – Inventory analysis (LCI) • Inventory analysisis the description of material and energy flows within the product system and especially its interaction with environment, consumed raw materials and emissions to the environment. All important processes and subsidiary energy and material flows are described here. • In the following all the collected information on the EcoPlasBrick panel are reported. 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

10. LCA – Inventory analysis (LCI) • Main components of the panel: • Skin materialconstituted by 1 cm (thickness) of plasterboard on both side of the panel. The plasterboard density is 600-900 kg/m3 • Core materialmade of 6-10 cm (thickness) of mixed densified plastic waste, polyurethane foam and water • Woody frame constituted by: • Wood: total weight of 1.5 kg • Steel plates: total weight of 0.1-0.4 kg 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

11. LCA – Inventory analysis (LCI) • Core composition: • Densified material + polyurethane foam + water • Core total weight: 18.88 kg • Densified material: • Aggregate weight: 15-20 kg • Available LCA for other data • Polyurethane foam: • Polyurethane weight: 1.3-3.4 kg • Water used as activator: • Water weight: 0.2-0.8 kg • The densified material is mixed with the polyurethane and water by using a mixer (1.5 CV) for 2-15 minutes. 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

12. LCA – Inventory analysis (LCI) • Production process of the panel: • A first layer of skin(plasterboard) is placed in a mold • The densified material-polyurethane mix is put on the skin layer in the mold • The second layer of skin is placed on the mixture • The panel made of the three layers is pressedby using simple clamps • The curephase takes around 10-90 minutes at 15°-60°C • The densified material is transported from Treviso (Centro RicicloVedelago) • The polyurethane foam is transported from Correggio, Reggio Emilia • The materials used to build the panel frame are provided by local producers. 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

13. LCA – Impact Assessment (LCIA) Impact assessmentis based on the details from Inventory Analysis 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

14. LCA – Impact Assessment (LCIA) results The indicator results of all impact categories for Panel manufacturing, Use phase and End of Life are here reported: 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

15. LCA – Interpretation Interpretationof life cycle involve critical review, determination of data sensitivity and result presentation • LCIA results update: Update of the GaBisoftware realized in order to be fully compliant to PEF (Product Environmental Footprint) recommendation 2013/179/EU DEVIATIONS ARE MINOR!!! 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

16. Deliverable D4.3 LCA phase III: Interpretation of results 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

17. LCA – Interpretation Interpretationof life cycle involve critical review, determination of data sensitivity and result presentation • The following analyses have been performed: • Hot spot Analysis • Sensitivity Analysis • Normalization 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

18. LCA – Interpretation • Hot Spot Analysis: Identify the processes that are the main responsible of environmental impacts • The manufacturing phase is the phase in which the most impacting contributions are present. • For each indicator the one/two main contributor(s) have been identified and also their shares compared to total value have been calculated. • Results: Polyurethane and Gypsum plaster board production are the heaviest phases from the environmental point of view. For GWP also the energy used for densified flake production contributes to total indicator value. 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

19. LCA – Interpretation • Sensitivity Analysis: Identify and focus on key data and assumptions that have most influence on a result • Data on manufacturing process are quite accurate, due the direct interaction with manufacturer. Instead uncertainties are present on transport contributions (before and after the production) and end of life options.The following assumptions have been made: 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

20. LCA – Interpretation • Sensitivity Analysis: identify and focus on key data and assumptions that have most influence on a result OPTION V1: The distance between PU foam provider and Motulab facilities has been shifted from 451 to 1353 km Results: The only important variations over 10% regards Human Toxicity – Non cancerogenic. Further noticeable variations affect Marine Eutrophication (8.18%) and Terrestrial Eutrophication (48.5%) 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

21. LCA – Interpretation • Sensitivity Analysis: identify and focus on key data and assumptions that have most influence on a result OPTION V2: The distance between PU foam provider and Motulab facilities has been split in half from 451 to 225.5 km Result: No important variations are present 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

22. LCA – Interpretation • Sensitivity Analysis: identify and focus on key data and assumptions that have most influence on a result OPTION V3: The distance between Motulab facilities and estimated installation site has been shifted from 200 to 1000 km • Results: The hypothetical enlargement of the market in terms of area of deliveries, entails an evident increase of several indicators. In particular: • Human Toxicity (non cancer) becomes an impact, while was a benefit (credit) in standard conditions. • Acidification (31.67%) • Marine (86.21%) • Terrestrial Eutrophication(51.16%) 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

23. LCA – Interpretation • Sensitivity Analysis: identify and focus on key data and assumptions that have most influence on a result OPTION V4: Except steel plates which are still sent to recovery, the other panel components (core and skin) are sent directly to landfill • Results: • The recourse to landfillhave an important impacton: • Freshwater • Eutrophication • Particulate Production • Human Toxicity (non cancer) • Ozone Depletion Global life cycle still generates benefits (thanks to the recycling of materials) even if lower than standard option 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

24. LCA – Interpretation • Sensitivity Analysis: identify and focus on key data and assumptions that have most influence on a result OPTION V5: Combination of V1,V3 and V4 • Results: The worst conditions generate the worst impacts in terms of environmental and energeticperformances. • The main impacts affected by these variations (over 100%) are: • Freshwater Eutrophication • Human Toxicity, non cancer (which become an impact while in standard condition were avoided impacts) • Particulate Matter production • Marine Eutrophication(increases the impact value) • Ozone Depletion (avoided impact is reduced by almost 90%) 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

25. LCA – Interpretation Normalization: The different characterized impact scores are related to a common reference. The term of comparison used is the annual environmental impact of an European citizen equivalent • Considerations: • Some impact categories do not have a normalization value referred to person equivalent • If the global value of an indicator is negative (benefit for the environment) it has no sense to define a normalization value • Normalization methods used: • USEtox Europe • ReCiPe 1.08 (E) • USEtox Europe • IPCC, EU25+3 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

26. LCA – Interpretation Normalization: The different characterized impact scores are related to a common reference. The term of comparison used is the annual environmental impact of an European citizen equivalent Results: As regards climate change indicator, for instance, an Ecoplasbrick panel, assuming the conditions expresses in LCI, has an impact equal to 1.799*E-03person 556 m2 of Ecoplasbrick panel ≡ 1 Equivalent European Person/ year 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

27. LCA – Interpretation Reccomandations: The hot spot analysishighlights that the primary impact in all main indicators is “RER: Polyurethane rigid foam (PU) Plastic Europe”, in some case reaching up to 80% of the overall impacts. Huge amount of recycled materials are generating “avoided impacts” thus decreasing the overall figure. This is critical and it is recommended in the real case to implement this “recycling material chain” to support the above quoted hypothesis. 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

28. Status in brief 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

29. Questions? 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014

30. Thank you for your kind attention! Daniela Reccardo 30° MONTH MEETING -Madrid, February 6, 2014