Embedded Files
Disclaimer: All product performance ratings on this website are based on EPDs and independent sustainability assessments developed for educational purposes only. The publishers do not claim ownership of any products referenced and are not responsible for decisions made based on this information. Designers are responsible for reviewing additional product information and consulting manufacturers before specifying any products.
Method and Analysis:
Life cycle analysis of select Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)
Review of Product Sustainability Framework
Completion of Product Performance Evaluation Template
Fiberglass Acoustic Ceiling PanelGWP = 37.03 Kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 51 00 Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
Drop / Suspended CeilingGWP = 261 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 51 23Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m²EPD Evaluation
PROs
- Low Ozone Depletion Potential: 2.52E-08 kg CFC-11 eq is relatively low compared to other products.
- Low Waste Production: Hazardous waste: 2.81E-03 kg (low), Non-hazardous waste: 0.834 kg (moderate)
- Reusable Potential: Panels can be reused if kept in good condition, which can extend product life and reduce waste.
- Durable Composition: Fiberglass (44.09%) and metal extrusion (21.17%) contribute to product longevity and resistance to damage.
CONs
- Landfill Disposal: 100% of the product goes to landfill at end of life, with no recycling pathways.
- Eutrophication Potential: 1.55E-03 kg N eq, indicating some nutrient pollution potential during A1-A3 stages.
- Resource-Intensive: Manufacturing phase (A3) is a notable contributor to ozone depletion, while raw material extraction (A1) dominates most other environmental impacts.
- VOC Information Missing: No VOC emissions data provided in the EPD, leaving indoor air quality impact unclear.
PROs
- High Recyclability Potential: 94.1% aluminum (typically highly recyclable). Steel (5.3%) also has good recycling pathways. Recycled content: 25% for aluminum and 22% for steel, reducing virgin material use.
- Moderate Ozone Depletion Potential: 2.77E-07 kg CFC-11 eq is low compared to some other materials.
- Durable Materials: Aluminum and steel contribute to long product lifespan and resistance to corrosion.
CONs
- High Non-Hazardous Waste Production: 86.2 kg of non-hazardous waste is relatively high compared to other products.
- High Energy Demand:Renewable primary resource energy: 1.57E+03 MJ. Non-renewable primary resource energy: 2.73E+03 MJ. Energy consumption is significant throughout A1-A3 stages (raw material extraction, transport, and manufacturing).
- High Eutrophication Potential: 4.87E-02 kg N eq—higher than many other building materials, indicating potential nutrient pollution during production.
Acoustic Lay-in TileGWP = 41.8 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 51 23 Service Life = N/AUnit Size = 1 m²EPD Evaluation
Vaulted Ceiling GWP = 15.93 Kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 22 16Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
PROs
- High Recycled Content: 92% aluminum with 25% recycled content. 5.7% PET (soft sound) with 60% recycled content.
- Potential for High Recyclability: Aluminum and PET are both widely recyclable materials. Packaging materials (wood, cardboard, plywood) are likely recyclable, though LDPE film could be more challenging.
- Low Ozone Depletion Potential: 4.33E-08 kg CFC-11 eq, indicating minimal ozone layer impact.
- Energy Surplus Declared: 4.50E+01 MJ energy surplus from fossil fuel resources, which suggests efficient energy recovery processes during A1-A3 stages.
CONs
- High Eutrophication Potential: 1.11E-02 kg N eq, indicating potential nutrient pollution—higher than some other materials.
- Raw Material Extraction is Impact-Heavy: A1 phase (raw material extraction) is the dominant contributor to environmental impacts, especially due to aluminum production.
- End-of-Life Uncertainty: Packaging and product end-of-life pathways are not explicitly stated. LDPE packaging film may end up in landfill or be difficult to recycle.
- VOC Levels Not Declared: No VOC emissions data is provided, which could be a concern for indoor air quality assessments.
PROs
- High Natural Material Content: 84.4% lumber and 7.7% wood backer – wood is a renewable resource and can store carbon.
- Low Ozone Depletion Potential: 2.08x10-7 kg CFC-11 eq, indicating minimal ozone impact.
- Renewable Energy Utilization: 6.59 MJ of renewable primary resource energy used during A1-A3 stages, reflecting some reliance on sustainable energy sources.
- Net Energy Surplus Declared: 2.97 MJ fossil fuel depletion surplus, indicating some efficiency in fossil fuel energy use during production.
CONs
- High Packaging Waste Likely to End Up in Landfill: Plywood (67.6%), cardboard (25.2%), foam (4.3%), stretch wrap (2.4%), tape (0.3%). Foam, stretch wrap, and tape are notoriously difficult to recycle, and plywood often ends up in landfill.
- End-of-Life Waste Uncertainty: Linear wood panels are often disposed of in landfill if not reused, though wood can sometimes be repurposed.
- Transportation Impact Noted: A2 stage (transportation of raw materials) is highlighted as a significant contributor, which may reflect long-distance sourcing of wood or other materials.
Gypsum Board (Drywall)GWP = 1.80 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 29 13Service Life = 75 yearsUnit Size = 1 m²EPD Evaluation
Steel Suspended Panel System GWP = 162 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 51 23Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m²EPD Evaluation
PROs
- Common, Widely Available Material: Standardized and accessible, making it easy to source and supporting efficient supply chains.
- Contains Reclaimed Gypsum: Portion of reclaimed gypsum reduces demand for virgin materials.
- Low Hazardous Waste Output: 4.08E-04 kg hazardous waste is relatively low compared to other materials.
- Low Ozone Depletion Potential: 6.62E-08 kg CFC-11 eq, indicating minimal impact on the ozone layer.
CONs
- High Fossil Fuel Depletion: 4.45E+02 MJ fossil fuel depletion during A1-A3 stages, indicating energy-intensive production processes.
- Significant Eutrophication Potential: 9.85E-02 kg N eq suggests substantial nutrient pollution, potentially impacting waterways.
- Extraction & Manufacturing Phases Dominate Impact: A1 (raw material extraction) is driven by natural gypsum extraction and face/backer materials. A3 (manufacturing) is dominated by natural gas and electricity usage.
- End-of-Life Waste Concerns: Gypsum board is often landfilled and can generate hydrogen sulfide gas in anaerobic landfill conditions, raising long-term environmental concerns if not properly handled.
PROs
- High Recyclability: The panels are composed of 72.8% aluminum (highly recyclable) and 20.5% steel (also recyclable)
- Low Ozone Depletion: Ozone depletion potential is very low (1.12E-08 kg CFC 11eq)
- Durable and Reusable: Proper maintenance could extend the lifespan and enable reuse
- Hazardous Waste Minimization: Very low hazardous waste production (3.00E-05 kg)
CONs
- High Energy Consumption: Significant non-renewable energy use during production (1.75E+03 MJ)
- Eutrophication Potential: Moderate eutrophication potential (3.23E-02 kg N eq)
- Packaging Waste: Packaging materials include lumber (2.78 kg/m2), plywood (2.33 kg/m2), and cardboard (0.16 kg/m2), which may not be fully sustainable
- Waste: Significant waste produced (4.95E+01 kg)
- EOL: plans for end of life are not addressed in EPD
Aluminum Frame (T-Bar Framing) GWP = 1.54 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 51 13 Service Life = 75 YearsUnit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
T-Bar Ceiling Tile GWP = 4.00 Kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 51 23Service Life = 75 Years Unit Size = 1 m²EPD Evaluation
PROs
- High Recyclability: The system is designed for disassembly and reuse at the end of the building's life.
- Low VOC: Very low VOC emissions during use contributing to better indoor air quality.
- Low Ozone Depletion Potential: Minimal ozone depletion potential (5.05E-10 kg CFC 11-eq)
- Eutrophication Potential: Very low eutrophication potential (2.13E-05 kg N eq)
- Waste: Minimal waste produced (2.72E-05 Kg)
CONs
- High Steel Content: The system is composed of 99.6% galvanized steel
- High Energy Consumption: The manufacturing process is the largest contributor to environmental impact
- EOL: Recycling in only assumed but there is no formal declaration or data on the actual recycling rates or processes
PROs
- Reusability and Recycling Efforts: USG has a take-back recycling program for tiles in good condition, reducing landfill waste
- Low VOC: Very low VOC emissions during use contributing to better indoor air quality
- Low Ozone Depletion Potential: Extremely low ozone depletion potential (4.34E-10 kg CFC 11 eq)
- Low Eutrophication Potential: Very low eutrophication potential (1.76E-04 kg N eq)
- Renewable Energy Use: Use of renewable primary resource energy (3.54E+00 MJ)
CONs
- Sensitivity to Environmental Conditions: Tiles must be protected from moisture, high humidity, and high temperatures to ensure reusability
- Material Composition: Contains 11.8% coatings, which may complicate recycling or contribute to environmental impacts during production
- Waste: Moderate non-hazardous waste produced (5.75E-02 kg)
Acoustic Fabric Panel GWP = 25.83 Kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 51 00 Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m²EPD Evaluation
Composite Wood Panels GWP = 20.88 Kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 22 16Service Life = As building Unit Size = 1 m²EPD Evaluation
PROs
- Reusability Potential: Panels can be reused if kept in good condition.
- Low Ozone Depletion Potential: Relatively low ozone depletion potential (2.84E-08 kg CFC-11 eq)
- Moderate Renewable Energy Use: Use of renewable primary resource energy (3.38E+00 MJ)
- Low Hazardous Waste: Minimal hazardous waste produced (3.15E-03 kg)
- Durable Packaging: Packaging includes wooden crates (pine boards and MDF), which are more sustainable than plastic alternatives
CONs
- High Non-Renewable Energy Use: Significant use of non-renewable primary resource energy (4.49E+01 MJ)
- End-of-Life Landfill: Panels go 100% to landfill at end-of-life, with no recycling or recovery options
- Material Composition: Contains fiberglass (64.59%), adhesives (8.96%), and resins, which are not environmentally friendly and complicate recycling
PROs
- Renewable Material Content: The panels are composed of 83.4% lumber, a renewable resource
- Low Hazardous Waste: Minimal hazardous waste produced (3.20x10⁻⁵ kg)
- Moderate Renewable Energy Use: Use of renewable primary resource energy (6.92 MJ)
- Low Ozone Depletion Potential: Relatively low ozone depletion potential (6.38x10⁻⁷ kg CFC-11 eq)
- Potential for Reuse:If properly maintained, the wood components could be reused or repurposed
CONs
- High Non-Renewable Energy Use: Significant use of non-renewable primary resource energy (33 MJ)
- Fossil Fuel Depletion: Fossil fuel depletion is a major impact (3.95 MJ surplus), second only to global warming potential (GWP)
- Manufacturing Impact: The manufacturing phase (A3) is the largest contributor to environmental impact, followed by raw material transportation
- Limited Recyclability: The composite nature of the panels (with stains, topcoats, fabric backers, etc.) reduces recyclability compared to pure wood products
Summary of Key Finding
Results: Comparison of Embodied LCA for Wall Partition
Explore Other Material Categories
Credit: Research Assistant, Aaron Philipp Ruiz - Fall 2025
Credit: Research Assistant, Aaron Philipp Ruiz - Fall 2025
Page updated
Report abuse