Challenges in Integrating Environmental Product Declarations in the Decision-Making

Process Amlan Mukherjee, PhD

Associate Professor

[avniR] Life Cycle Management Conference

8-9 November 2017 in Lilliad, Villeneuve d'Acsq, France

This workshop is being conducted under Federal Highway Administration's Contract# DTFH61-11-D-00009 awarded to Engineering & Software

Consultants, Inc. (ESCINC) and hosted by the Michigan Tech Transportation Institute under a subcontract from ESCINC.

Outline

• Understanding market drivers

• Broad consensus at FHWA Workshop in September 2016

– Organizing the domain information, underlying data and model

• Industry response: Case of the asphalt industry

• Agency response: Case of California Department of Transportation

increase the awareness, visibility, and the body

of knowledge of sustainability considerations in

all the life cycle phases of pavement systems.

FHWA Sustainable Pavement TWG

2011

Working group of stakeholders

to address the challenges of

conducting an LCA.

UCPRC

2010

Stakeholders:

- State agencies (DOT)

- City municipalities

- Industry

- Private owners

Drivers: LEED v4

Challenges:

- Organizational Challenges

- Technological Challenges

PCR for Concrete2013

PCR for Asphalt

2016Guidelines and framework

Sustainable Pavements 2015

2016

LEED v4 (10/31)

2 points for having 20

products and materials

with EPDs & having

50% of the products by

cost demonstrating

lower impacts than

industry baselines

through EPDs

Objective

• Introduction of EPD in the decision-making process

– Organizational challenges

– Technical challenges of delivering a life cycle inventory database

• Long term: provide access to life cycle inventory data for construction materials

– comprehensive, inexpensive, reliable, and transparent.

Extracted

Crude Oil

Transportation

Refining

Process

Various

Co Products:

Heating oil

Diesel

Propane

RFO

Asphalt mixture

Transportation

Polymer

Manufacturing

Asphalt binder

Transportation

What level of detail is

necessary?

Multiple industries

Allocation:Protocols to be

used

Plant data collection protocols

Organizational

ChallengesTechnical

Challenges

• LCA applied to

decision-making –

which level?

- Network

- Project

- Procurement

• Who should lead

implementation?

• What is an

acceptably

reviewed

PCR/EPD?

• Who harmonizes

PCRs?

Workshop: Participation

• Stakeholders: 35 attendees

–US DOT (CA, MI, TX); Calif. HSR; IL Tollway

–City: Detroit, Austin, Ann Arbor

– Foreign: Netherlands, Sweden, Spain

– Industry and consultants,

–Academics

Who and how is it organized?

What data?

What are the driving

contexts?

EPDs are a vehicle

Summary of Discussions

• Technical challenges to get a valid EPD

– PCRs, System Boundaries, Databases

• Business and organizational processes

– EPD delivery mechanisms, Role in process

• Decision-making

– Using EPDs to support decision-making

Summary: Challenges and Gaps

• Significant data gaps in life cycle inventories for upstream impacts of (including but not limited to):– Project level material flows, aggregates, additives (various),

polymers, fibers, lime, transportation and asphalt binder. – Further guidelines on handling capital equipment impacts. – Recycled material handling

• Determine where the conflicts are in PCRs and EPDs: – Find common areas, conflicts (lateral and vertical) and

prioritize gaps

• Update the FHWA LCA Framework – Consensus on best practice, eventually leading to

requirements instead of just recommendations

Summary: Challenges and Gaps

• Increase knowledge in the industry regarding PCRs and EPDs: – Identify how they can best be produced and develop

rules and best practices for use.

• Develop a funding plan for curating transparent and reliable public datasets.

• Produce guidelines for agencies: – How to manage and use EPDs through management of

Information and benchmarking quantities and impacts, use in design, procurement and interpretation in decision-making.

EPD Delivery

• Outline types of tools needed tied to IT

– Standard templates for pulling data into EPDs,

– Seamless operation with LCA tools and

• Example of system in Sweden:

– Design + Bill of Materials + Tied to GaBi = LCA/EPD

(from presentation by Larissa Stromberg, NCC Construction, Sweden)

EPD Delivery: Organization

• Create single governmental

operator, or an effective consortium of

industry operators.

- Public Federal LCA Commons

• Collaboration of allied industry and agency groups.

• Examine the critical review process.

– Uniformity in the process followed by PCR program operators.

Decision-Making

• Uncertainty analysis to be considered

• Sensitivity analysis should be carried out in

most of the life cycle stages,

– More data is needed before these analyses can really be performed;

• Consider the indicators that are significant to the decision-making organization

Asphalt Mixture EPD Program

• PCR compliant with ISO 14025/EN 15804

• Asphalt industry:

– PCR specifically identifies upstream datasets

– Only public datasets used

– Average trends in regional foreground data

– Development of guides for design aid

– Automated third party reviewed EPD software

CompanyTest Organization 1 is a plant asphalt mixture producer.

TestPlant 1

Suite 1010, 3000 Asphalt Ave

SomeTown, CO

This EPD reports the impacts for

Mix 1, a Dense-Graded Superpave

asphalt mixture which can be

incorporated as part of the structure

for a roadway, parking lot and

recreational pavement and meets

mix specifications provided for its

application. This asphalt mixture is

categorized as a hot mix. This

asphalt mixture was produced

within a temperature range of 10.2

to 300.1 °F.

Product Description

An Environmental Product Declarationfor Asphalt Mixtures

Declaration Number: 2.7.19.18

Date of Issue: Mar 29, 2017 Period of Validity: Dec 31, 2021

This declaration is an environmental product declaration in accordance with ISO 14025:2006

Type III environmental performance labels which transparently describes the potential

environmental impacts of the described product caused during the identified stages. The data

specific to this product can be found on page 3 of this document.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00% 2.50% 3.00% 3.50%

%ReduconinGWP-kgofCO2Eq.

%AsphaltBinderReplacement

5%Ini alVirginMix

8%Ini alVirginMix

5% Virgin Mix

- 11.4% - by RAP

- 10.9% - by RAP+RAS8% Virgin Mix

8% Virgin Mix

- 8.8% - by RAP

- 8.4% - by RAP+RAS

5% Virgin Mix

Reduction in GWP / 1% reduction in binder content

Specified upstream datasets

Program Operator:

PCR ISO 14025/EN

15804 CompliantAutomated Third Party Reviewed

Software Interface

User Interface: Asphalt Producers

EPD Production for

Asphalt Mixes

- Reliable

- Transparent

- Inexpensive

- Easy to use

CompanyTest Organization 1 is a plant asphalt mixture producer.

TestPlant 1

Suite 1010, 3000 Asphalt Ave

SomeTown, CO

This EPD reports the impacts for

Mix 1, a Dense-Graded Superpave

asphalt mixture which can be

incorporated as part of the structure

for a roadway, parking lot and

recreational pavement and meets

mix specifications provided for its

application. This asphalt mixture is

categorized as a hot mix. This

asphalt mixture was produced

within a temperature range of 10.2

to 300.1 °F.

Product Description

An Environmental Product Declarationfor Asphalt Mixtures

Declaration Number: 2.7.19.18

Date of Issue: Mar 29, 2017 Period of Validity: Dec 31, 2021

This declaration is an environmental product declaration in accordance with ISO 14025:2006

Type III environmental performance labels which transparently describes the potential

environmental impacts of the described product caused during the identified stages. The data

specific to this product can be found on page 3 of this document.

Agency Response

• Some states moving towards using EPD in procurement

– Caltrans considering product EPDs

– California high speed rail requiring the submission of EPDs

– Oregon Dept. of Environmental Quality assisting contractors get EPD

• Primarily informational rather than for decision-making purposes

– Benchmarking purposes – this is for now.

Market Drivers: Push and Pull

Availability of

Consistent

Upstream Data

Uncertainty

Foreground

Reporting

Reliability

State Agencies

Requiring EPDs

During Procurement

Market Driver

Nature of use:

- Decision-making?

- Benchmarking?

Industry EPD

Programs based on

Compliant PCR

Facilitator

Nature of use:

- Easy to use

- Low cost

Effective Integration of EPD into Design and Procurement

THANK YOU

Technical Questions to Consider

• Goal: Construct a data guidelines for the checklist provided

• Question T1: Limit scope to cradle to gate (no use stage):

– Identify data set for each item on checklist – unit and granularity

– Who will provide the data sets

– How does a data item affect the conceptual - program description

– How does a data item affect the design and network levels

– Challenges and gaps

• Would this be the first step to a “single PCR”?

Organizational Questions to Consider

• Goal: Managing processes to collect and organize data

• Question O1: What is the best way to develop and make available data inventories from suppliers outside the immediate supply chain

• Question O2: Identify existing data collection procedures that can be used to collect flow data at the local government level.

• Question O3:How to manage multiple PCRs?

• Question O4: How should we manage the certification and review process?

Decision-Making Questions to Consider

• Goal: Understanding uncertainty in data (variability and epistemic) and its impact on decision-making

• Question D1: When and how should sensitivity analysis apply?

• Question D2: How to use multiple indicators for decision-making?

– What is a “significant difference” in different contexts? (For example: When is 5% difference significant and 20% not?)

Workshop Structure

• Discuss and discover– Day 1: Talks by representative speakers

– Day 2: Break into stakeholder groups

• Consider what we learned from speakers

• Identify gaps in knowledge/ organizational needs

• Consider immediate and long-term “solutions”

• Present back to group

– Gaps, Needs, Priorities

Technical: Status of PCRs

• European approach to PCR

– Nation level PCRs

– Towards an European standard PCR

• Possibility of a Core PCR for all materials

– “Single PCR”: 80% of the rules are common

– Similar to EN 15804 with product specific “Part B”

– Allows better coordination and harmonization

• Who would be the common program operator?

Technical: System Boundary

• Consistent use of declared units

– Mass based definitions be normalized to reflect

specific gravity

• EPD for a material with 100% recycled content

– Allocation and cut-off

• Consistent and appropriate definition of a “gate”

– Avoid missing impacts between gates

• Capital equipment used to produce construction materials

Technical: Reporting Guideline

• Pavement LCA Checklist needs updating– Reflect the EN 15804 framework.

• Data collection should be organized by – Life cycle stages and

– Within the context of network,

project and design/execution levels

• Emphasize collection of flow data at

local/city levels– Life cycle thinking (LCT) on projects

Technical: Databases

• Need for rules for reporting and using upstream background data across all industries.

– Upstream producers outside the immediate supply chain– Encourage collaboration with allied industries

• Consistent use of “proxy” datasets– Specifically for incomplete upstream datasets.

• Need for guidelines for following:– Characterization of uncertainty in reported foreground data.– Reporting data from models - validation and documentation necessary

• Develop benchmarks for processes to standardize across available databases and reported datasets.