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
Hardwood Lumber PartitionGWP = 2.40 kg CO₂-eq Div = 09 22 16 Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
Acoustic-seal Accordion PartitionGWP = 91 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 10 22 26Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
PROs
- Emission Controls: Sawing, kiln-drying, and planning processes are subject to emission controls, reducing harmful outputs.
- Carbon Neutral (A1-A3 Stages): Biogenic carbon emissions during production stages are zero, indicating a carbon-neutral status.
- Non-Hazardous: No substances classified as hazardous across the life cycle (e.g., no VOC emissions from the lumber itself), making it safer for indoor use.
CONs
- Non-Hazardous Waste: Generates 5.05 Kg of non-hazardous waste during A1-A3 stages, contributing to material disposal concerns.
- Lack of Forest Management Data: The EPD does not address landscape-level forest management impacts, leaving gaps in sustainability assessment (e.g., deforestation, wildlife habitat loss, endangered species, soil and water quality).
- Potential VOCs on Site: While the lumber itself is VOC-free, VOC emissions could occur if primers or finishes are applied on-site.
PROs
- No VOC Emissions: No VOC levels recorded, ensuring good indoor air quality during manufacturing and use.
- Use of Secondary Materials: 31 kg of secondary (recycled) materials are used, contributing to resource efficiency.
- Renewable Energy Use: 113 MJ of renewable primary energy is used during A1-A3 stages, reducing reliance on non-renewable energy sources.
CONs
- High Packaging Waste: Packaging includes wood pallets (60.4%) and corrugated particleboard (38.1%), which could result in significant waste, though end-of-life disposal is not assessed.
- Bulk Waste: 17.9 kg of bulk waste is produced during A1-A3 stages, representing a notable material disposal issue.
- Material Extraction Dominance: Over 90% of environmental impact stems from raw material extraction (A1), particularly metal components, highlighting resource-intensive production.
Glass Wall PartitionGWP = 9.83 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 10 22 26 Service Life = 25 YearsUnit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
Plexi-Glass Screen Wall GWP = 7.93 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 08 83 00Service Life = 25 Years Unit Size = 1 m² (based on 6 mm acrylic panel thickness)EPD Evaluation
PROs
- No VOC Emissions: No VOCs reported during manufacturing, installation, or use phases, ensuring good indoor air quality.
- Sturdy Construction: Panels are thick (1-5/8") and wide (up to 48"), suggesting durability and structural stability.
- Secure Assembly: Glass is mechanically attached to top and bottom rails, enhancing safety and longevity.
- No Health Concerns: No health risks associated with installation or use.
CONs
- Limited End-of-Life Circularity: Lack of robust recycling or reuse pathways for the glass and metal components.
- Resource-Intensive Production:Metal fabrication in the A1 Raw Material Extraction phase accounts for 20-50% of the overall embodied energy and global warming potential (GWP), indicating a significant environmental impact.
- High Waste at End of Life: 2.59 kg goes to landfill. 0.648 kg is incinerated. Low recycling rate overall, meaning most material becomes waste.
PROs
- High Recycled Content: Made predominantly from recycled methyl methacrylate monomer (R-MMA), promoting circularity and reducing virgin material use.
- Zero Waste in Material Use: PMMA waste is regenerated and fully reused in the production process, leaving no raw material waste.
- No VOCs After Installation: While VOCs may occur during manufacturing, the installed product is assumed to emit no VOCs, ensuring safe indoor air quality in use.
CONs
- High Energy Consumption: Manufacturing is energy-intensive (electricity, heating, fuel), making it a major environmental impact contributor.
- Possible VOC Emissions During Production: While not declared, VOC emissions are likely during PMMA waste processing and R-MMA production.
- Eutrophication Potential: Recorded at 2.48E-02 Kg P eq, indicating potential nutrient pollution in water systems.
- Water Deprivation: High water use potential (5.23E+03 m³ eq), raising concerns about water resource depletion.
Glass Wall System (Aluminum Frame)GWP = 112 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 10 22 39 Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
Steel Stud Partition GWP = 6.21 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 05 41 00Service Life = As buildingUnit Size = 1 m² (based on 2.7kg/m² ) EPD Evaluation
PROs
- No VOC Emissions: No VOCs recorded during manufacturing or use, ensuring good indoor air quality.
- Durable Material Composition: Made of 22% aluminum, 15% steel, and 62% glass, offering structural strength, longevity, and aesthetic appeal.
- Use of Renewable Energy: 208 MJ of renewable primary energy is used during A1-A3 stages, showing some commitment to sustainable energy.
CONs
- Low Use of Recycled Material: Only 1.46 kg of secondary (recycled) material is used, indicating low material circularity.
- High Waste Production: Hazardous Waste: 3.60x10⁻³ kg produced during A1-A3 stages. Bulk Waste: 21 kg of bulk waste generated. Radioactive Waste: 2.23x10⁻⁴ kg (high-level) radioactive waste.
- Ozone Depletion Potential: 6.00x10⁻⁶ kg CFC-11 eq during A1-A3 stages, contributing to environmental degradation.
- Fossil Fuel Depletion: 79.4 MJ eq of fossil fuel resources depleted, showing reliance on non-renewable energy.
PROs
- High Recyclability: The steel used is fully recyclable, and 100% of steel waste from manufacturing is actively recycled on-site.
- No VOC Emissions: No VOCs reported, ensuring good indoor air quality.
- Efficient Waste Management (Production Phase): Waste within the manufacturing process (e.g., slitting and roll-forming) is recycled, minimizing production waste.
CONs
- Fossil Fuel Depletion: 25,900 MJ eq of fossil fuel depletion recorded during A1-A3 stages, indicating heavy reliance on non-renewable energy.
- Resource-Intensive Raw Material Extraction: The A1 stage (raw material extraction) is the dominant contributor to environmental impact, largely due to the energy-intensive production of steel coils.
- Hazardous Waste: 0.44 kg of hazardous waste produced, mainly during raw material extraction and transportation (A1-A2 stages).
Fiberglass Acoustic Panel GWP = 46.24 kg CO₂-eq Div = 09 84 33 Service Life = 30 YearsUnit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
Wallpaper GWP = 0.179 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 72 00Service Life = 10 Years Unit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
PROs
- Low VOC Emissions: While specific VOC levels are not provided, CertainTeed declares the product as low VOC, supporting good indoor air quality.
- Renewable Energy Use: 89.3 MJ of renewable primary energy used during A1-A3 stages, showing some reliance on sustainable energy.
- Diverse Material Composition: Balanced composition of fiberglass, steel, acrylic, epoxy, fabric, and glue—designed for acoustic performance and durability.
CONs
- Fossil Fuel Depletion: 19.7 MJ of fossil fuel depletion during A1-A3 stages, highlighting dependence on non-renewable resources.
- Waste Production: 7.02E-08 kg of hazardous waste produced. 2.3 kg of non-hazardous waste generated.
- Resource-Intensive Fiberglass Production: A1-A3 stages dominate environmental impact, largely due to the energy-intensive production of fiberglass and electricity consumption during manufacturing.
PROs
- High Paper Content: Composed of 80% paper and 20% PET, which is a relatively natural and lightweight material mix.
- Potential for Recyclability: Packaging materials (cardboard, pallets, paper, polyethylene) are generally recyclable, though not officially declared in the EPD.
- Biogenic Carbon Impact: The GWP - biogenic rating (-0.145 kg CO2 eq) suggests some carbon sequestration from paper content.
CONs
- Non-Reusable at End-of-Life: 98% incinerated, and 2% sent to landfill, indicating poor circularity and waste management.
- High Water Usage: Manufacturing involves significant water consumption, contributing to eutrophication potential (2.77E-05 kg P eq).
- Carbon Emissions from Fossil Fuels: GWP - Fossil rating (0.327 kg CO2 eq) and energy-intensive processes (A3 stage) involving thermal energy for drying and electricity increase greenhouse gas emissions.
- Cancerogenic Potential: Though low, a comparative toxic unit for humans (7.92E-10 CTUh) is noted, indicating potential long-term health concerns.
Ceramic Wall Tile GWP = 45.9 kg CO₂-eqDiv = 09 30 13 Service Life = 75 YearsUnit Size = 1 m²EPD Evaluation
Solid Demountable Wall Partition GWP = 327.4 Kg CO₂-eq Div = 10 22 19Service Life = 10 Years Unit Size = 1 m² EPD Evaluation
PROs
- Low VOC Emissions: No VOC rating declared (N/A), likely indicating emissions are negligible and air quality impact is minimal.
- Recycled Packaging: 75% of packaging is recycled, 20% goes to landfill, and 5% is incinerated, showing a reasonably good recycling rate for packaging materials.
- Durable Material Composition: Made from granite, clay, glass, mullite, and internal scrap, suggesting long-lasting performance and resistance to wear.
CONs
- High Water Consumption: 59.9 m³ of fresh water used during A1-A3 stages, indicating a water-intensive manufacturing process.
- Eutrophication Potential: 8.21E-03 kg phosphate eq, indicating a notable contribution to nutrient pollution (e.g., algae growth in water bodies).
- Energy-Intensive Production: Significant impact from electricity consumption and thermal energy (kiln firing) during manufacturing (A3), increasing greenhouse gas emissions and resource use.
- End-of-Life Waste: 100% of tiles go to landfill, with no recycling or reuse, highlighting poor circularity and waste management.
PROs
- Recyclability of Components: End-of-life recycling rates for certain materials: Non-ferro metals 67.6%, paper/pulp 79%, and steel 27.8%
- No VOC Concerns: Declared no environmental or health concerns related to VOCs during production.
- Durable Material Composition: Steel (73%) and other metals contribute to long-term durability and structural integrity.
CONs
- High Waste Production: 0.233 kg of hazardous waste. 1,060 kg of non-hazardous waste during A1-A3 stages.
- Eutrophication Potential: 41.6 kg N eq, indicating a significant contribution to nutrient pollution (e.g., algal blooms in water systems).
- Landfill and Incineration: Despite recyclability, 80% of non-recyclable product and packaging waste still ends up in landfill, with 20% incinerated.
Summary of Key Finding
Results: Comparison of Embodied LCA for Wall Partition
Explore Other Material Categories
Credit: Research Assistant, Veronica Rodriguez - Fall 2025
Credit: Research Assistant, Veronica Rodriguez - Fall 2025
Page updated
Report abuse