Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Construction
understanding the issues for products using plant- and animal-based
materials
Overview
As
pressure
by Dr Jo Mundy
on
resources
with contributions from John Hutchinson, Dr Gary Newman and Mark
grows and
Lynn
the
demand
for sustainability rises, much
attention is being given to the use of
materials from plants and animals as
Contents
the basis for a wide range of
Overview..................................................................................................
products. However, it is extremely
1
Background....................................................................................1
2
Commercial issues.........................................................................2
difficult to get a clear picture of the
2.1
Production and procurement................................................2
consequences of using such
2.2
Standards.............................................................................2
2.3
Economic issues...................................................................3
'biomaterials' as alternatives to
2.4
Practical issues.....................................................................3
3
Social issues..................................................................................4
existing (typically non-biological)
4
Environmental performance issues...............................................4
options.
4.1
Environmental problems related to agricultural systems....5
4.2
5
Conclusions..................................................................................15
This paper is aimed at
6
References...................................................................................15
manufacturers interested in
manufacturing with these products
and those interested in selecting
them. It is also of interest to those
producing policy relating to these
materials and researchers seeking to assess them.
The paper reviews the key economic, social and environmental issues for
biomaterials and the approaches being taken to address them. It highlights the
need to ensure that these materials are assessed in a way that is comparable to
approaches being used to assess existing materials that are performing the same
function.
1 Background
Biomaterials have a long history of use as construction materials, such as timber for
framing, boarding and roofing, and reeds and straw for roofing and flooring. Where
the use of these materials is well established and their performance known then
2 Commercial issues
2.1 Production and procurement
Many applications of bio-based materials in construction are relatively new and the
market structure characterised by a low concentration of SMEs that are making the
2.2
Standards
The nascent state of the segment means there are few standards that embrace the
sector and the various product groups within. As such products can fail to meet the
expectations of specifiers. This can be addressed through technical approvals such as
British Board of Agrment (BBA) certification or the European Technical Approval (ETA)
for established products such as insulation. However, it can prove more difficult for
newer or novel applications to gain standard recognition.
Social issues
Environmental and social issues surrounding the supply of bio materials have been
well recognised in the field of forestry and sustainable forest management schemes,
such as the schemes of the Forest Stewardship Council and the Pan European Forestry
Council, have been developed to help assess this aspect. Whereas these may
represent more extreme aspects, they highlight the importance of responsible
sourcing to the biomaterials sector. Sourced and utilised responsibly, biomaterials
offer the opportunity to utilise highly sustainable material sources in a variety of enduses and to contribute to the sustainability goals of the construction sector as a whole.
Biomaterials in construction also face the same issues as the biofuels sector, as
described in the Gallagher Review, the key ones being the potential displacement of
food crops and the Climate Change impacts of changing land use. It is also possible
that biomaterials will come under pressure in the area of water consumption as
supplies of fresh water come under ever greater stress.
Agricultural systems raise particularly complex issues for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
methodology. These issues include:
4.2.4 Boundaries
Since there are no factory walls it can be difficult to answer the question, where does
the agricultural system border the environment system?
How the soil is regarded can have a considerable influence on the final results: some
have argued for its exclusion but others regard it as an ancillary product that is
required by the system and altered by it, even though it does not remain part of the
final product. The alteration of the soil by the agricultural system introduces a time
boundary consideration as it has implications for future activities - this is covered in
the section on crop rotation.
Cowell (1998) raised the question of time boundaries and suggested that activities in
the past affecting actual productivity should also be included in the analysis. Examples
10
11
Avoid allocation wherever possible by dividing the shared unit process into subprocesses
Allocate on any underlying physical relationship
Allocate on a relevant relationship.
EN 15804 also advocates the avoidance of allocation wherever possible giving priority
to a physical relationship where processes can be subdivided and to a value
(economic) approach when subdivision is not possible.
As noted earlier, co-production is common in agriculture. The various parts of animals
and plants produced are often used for different applications. Before allocation is
undertaken, it must therefore be clear that multi-output processes have as far as
possible been divided into single-output processes. Only for those processes that
cannot be further subdivided should allocation be carried out, and this should be done
on the basis of economic value.
If manure is used in arable farming, recycling is taking place and the environmental
interventions associated with the processes involved (storage, transport, processing)
should be allocated to the product system that pays for these processes. If payment is
collective, e.g. in the case of storage in a manure centre, interventions should be
allocate on the basis of the ratio between the cost paid by the arable farmer and the
cost paid by the cattle farmer. Again, these rules are based on economic value.
The inclusion of complete rotation schemes can also present allocation issues. It has
been suggested that the inclusion of soil quality and quantity into the LCIA greatly
reduces the allocation problem for crops but this requires the development of a
convenient impact indicator.
The carbon cycle also presents an allocation problem in agricultural systems. Some
consider it a negative climate change impact and account for it whereas others regard
the storage as happening over too brief a period with the CO 2 released again when the
material degrades. This is sensible for food crops where the lifetime of the product is
very short but it is not the case for non-food crops used in construction products, for
example, the Green Guide uses a 60-year study period for assessing building element
specifications. Consequently, CO2 sequestration is taken into account along with endof-life scenarios that include disposal in landfill where part of the sequestered carbon
will be emitted as methane; the Global Warming Potential of methane is more than 20
times that of CO2 over a 100-year period1.
1
12
4.2.4.7Crop rotation
Agricultural crops are typically cultivated in a system of crop rotation, with different
crops being cultivated in succession on a given plot of land. If a comparison is being
made between different crop-rotation schemes, this will cause no extra allocation
problems. In practice though, such a comparison will not often be useful, because LCA
is a tool designed for comparing the environmental impacts of various different
products. What will usually be compared is a product from one crop-rotation scheme
with one from another rotation scheme. This gives rise to difficulties, because the
various crops and the activities performed in cultivating these crops often also have
consequences for the crops grown later in the rotation scheme. Examples include:
Soil fumigation carried out for potatoes but also benefiting other crops
Application of organic fertilisers in a given crop, with some fraction of the
minerals only being taken up after the following crop has been sown.
These allocation problems cannot simply be ignored in an LCA. The question Why is a
given activity performed? can be used to guide decisions. For example, the soil
fumigants applied in potato cultivation would not be used if potatoes were not
included in the crop-rotation scheme. The environmental interventions associated with
the soil fumigants should therefore be allocated entirely to the potatoes, even if
benefits accrue to other crops too. In the same way, the environmental interventions
associated with the application of nitrogen fertiliser are allocated to the crop to which
the fertiliser dressing is applied, while the environmental interventions associated with
application of phosphate and potassium are divided over the crops in the rotation on
the basis of the recommended dressings for each individual crop.
It has been recommended that organic matter is allocated on the basis of the share of
the various crops in the crop rotation scheme (expressed in terms of space
requirements, ha.year). When multiple fertilisers (manure and other animal wastes, in
particular) are applied, the emissions occurring up until the moment the mineral reach
the soil (emissions during storage, transport and application) are divided over the
various crops on the basis of the economic value of the minerals in the fertilisers.
Climate Change impacts can be assessed for effects occurring over a 20-year, 100year or 500-year timeframe. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change regularly
reviews and updates the characterisation factors for all greenhouse gases. The BRE
methodology assesses Climate Change over the 100-year timeframe.
13
14
Land use
Biodiversity
Soil condition
Carbon cycle.
15
5 Conclusions
There are many factors to consider when assessing the sustainability of biomaterials
any of which could present limiting factors for the successful uptake of construction
products using these materials.
The assessment of their environmental impact presents some complex issues to
address it is crucial that they are assessed in a manner compatible with the
assessment methods applied to alternative materials that are used to perform the
same function.
6 References
Brentrup, F; Ksters, J; Lammel, J, and Kuhlmann, H. 2002. Life Cycle Assessment of
Land Use based on the Hemeroby Concept. 7(6), 339-348.
Cowell, S and Clift, R. 1997. Impact assessment for LCAs involving agricultural
production. Int. J. LCA 2(2), 99-103.
Cowell, S. 1998. Environmental life cycle assessment of agricultural systems:
integration into decision-making. PhD thesis. Centre for Environmental Strategy,
University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Defra and DTI. 2004. A strategy for non-food crops and uses. Creating value from renewable materials.
16
Mattsson, B; Cederberg, C, and Blix, L. 2000. Agricultural land use in life cycle
assessment (LCA): case studies of three vegetable oil crops. J. Cleaner Production, 8,
283-292.
Mil i Canals, L. 2003. Contributions to LCA methodology for agricultural systems.
Site-dependency and soil degradation impact assessment. University of Barcelona
PhD thesis.
Wegener Sleeswijk, A; Meeusen-van Onna, MJG; van Zeijts, H; Kleijn, R; Leneman, H;
Reus, JAWA, and Sengers, HHWJM. 1996. Application of LCA to agricultural products. 1.
Core methodological issues; 2. Supplement to the LCA Guide; 3. Methodological
background. Leiden, Centre of Environmental Science Leiden University (CML), Centre
of Agriculture and Environment (CML), Agricultural-Economic Institute (LEI-DLO), ISBN
90-5191-104-1. CML Report 130.
17