Environmental and Health Product Declarations: Opportunities within LEED and Green Globes. Jim Bowyer Dovetail Partners, Inc.

Transcription

1 Environmental and Health Product Declarations: Opportunities within LEED and Green Globes Jim Bowyer Dovetail Partners, Inc. Minneapolis, MN

2 Course Description This presentation will examine Environmental and Health Product Declarations what they are, what they reveal, what goes into developing them, and how to use them effectively. Opportunities for applying LCA provisions within LEED v. 4, Green Globes, and other green building standards will also be explored. This presentation was developed by a third party and is not funded by WoodWorks or the softwood lumber check-off.

3 The Wood Products Council is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems (AIA/ CES), Provider #G516. Credit(s) earned on completion of this program will be reported to AIA/CES for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members and non- AIA members are available upon request. This program is registered with AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.

4 Learning Objectives Understand the nature of systematic evaluation using life cycle assessment and its increasing use in green building programs and model codes. Understand the purpose of EPDs, the science behind them, the nature of information they provide, and how to use them effectively in the building materials selection process. Learn the essentials of HPDs and their use. Explore new opportunities within LEED v4, Green Globes, and other green rating systems to capitalize on the environmental advantages of using wood as a construction material.

5 Life Cycle Assessment

6 Determining the Environmental Impact of Products! Brainstorming, intuition!

7 Determining the Environmental Impact of Products! Brainstorming, intuition!

8 Determining the Environmental Impact of a Product! Brainstorming, intuition! Systematic analysis - - environmental accounting! Life Cycle Assessment

9 Determining the Environmental Impact of a Product

10 Determining the Environmental Impact of a Product

11 Determining the Environmental Impact of a Product

12 Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Examination of all measurable: Raw material inputs Products and by-products Emissions Effluents Wastes

13 Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Typically involves all stages in production, use, and disposal, including: Extraction Transportation Primary processing Conversion to semi-finished products Incorporation into finished products Maintenance Disposal/reuse

14 In determining environmental impacts, consider: Raw material extraction Transportation All steps in manufacturing

15 - Analyze individual components, wall sections, entire structure. - Full bill of materials. - Track life cycle environmental impacts of every component. Raw material inputs Energy consumption Emissions Effluents Solid wastes By-products

16 If the product is a component assembled on-site or an entire structure, also assess: Transport of materials to construction site Building construction Operation (heating/cooling) Maintenance End-of-building-life

17 Impact Measures Fossil fuel consumption Weighted resource use Global warming potential Smog potential Acidification potential Human health respiratory effects Photochemical oxidation Ozone layer depletion Depletion of non-renewable resources Water consumption Eutrophication Solid waste

18 If comparing two different products: They must be functionally equivalent. They must be evaluated: - in the same way and in accordance with international protocols. - using the same system boundaries. - including all significant aspects and emission factors.

19 Steel Design Columns hollow structural section steel, beams wide flange steel; Intermediate floors open-web steel joists w/concrete topping; Exterior walls 2x4 steel studs 16 o.c., R-3.8 rigid insulation sheathing, stucco cladding, R-13 Batt insulation + PET membrane, gypsum board + latex paint; Roof open-web steel joists w/steel decking, R-20 rigid insulation + PET membrane, modified bitumen membrane, gypsum board + latex paint. Concrete Design Columns reinforced concrete, concrete beams; Intermediate floors precast double-t truss with concrete topping; Exterior walls concrete block w continuous insulation and polyethylene membrane, stucco cladding; Roof pre-cast double-t concrete, R-20 continuous insulation + PET membrane, modified bitumen membrane, latex paint.

20 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY STEEL CONSTRUCTION Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt. (MJ) Weighted Resource use (tonnes) GWP (tonnes CO 2 eq) Acidificatio n Potential (moles of H + eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) Eutrophica tion Potential (g N eq) Ozone Depletion Potential (mg CFC-11 eq) Smog potential (g NOx eq) Foundations & Footings , , , CONCRETE VS. STEEL Columns and Beams ,400, , , Intermediate Floors ,428, , , Exterior Walls , , , Windows Interior Walls Roof ,405, , , S 8,760,105 1, ,307 1, , ,079 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt. (MJ) Weighted Resource use (tonnes) GWP (tonnes CO 2 eq) Acidificatio n Potential (moles of H + eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) Eutrophica tion Potential (g N eq) Ozone Depletion Potential (mg CFC-11 eq) Smog potential (g NOx eq) Foundations & Footings , , , Columns and Beams ,273,849 1, , , Intermediate Floors ,081, , , Exterior Walls ,758, , , ,051 Windows Interior Walls Roof ,099, , , ,166 S 11,745,595 3, ,604 1, , ,037

21 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY STEEL CONSTRUCTION Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt. (MJ) Weighted Resource use (tonnes) GWP (tonnes CO 2 eq) Acidificatio n Potential (moles of H + eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) Eutrophica tion Potential (g N eq) Ozone Depletion Potential (mg CFC-11 eq) Smog potential (g NOx eq) Foundations & Footings , , , CONCRETE VS. STEEL Columns and Beams ,400, , , Intermediate Floors ,428, , , Exterior Walls , , , Windows Interior Walls Roof ,405, , , S 8,760,105 1, ,307 1, , ,079 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt. (MJ) Weighted Resource use (tonnes) GWP (tonnes CO 2 eq) Acidificatio n Potential (moles of H + eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) Eutrophica tion Potential (g N eq) Ozone Depletion Potential (mg CFC-11 eq) Smog potential (g NOx eq) Foundations & Footings , , , Columns and Beams ,273,849 1, , , Intermediate Floors ,081, , , Exterior Walls ,758, , , ,051 Windows Interior Walls Roof ,099, , , ,166 S 11,745,595 3, ,604 1, , ,037

22 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY STEEL CONSTRUCTION Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt. (MJ) Weighted Resource use (tonnes) GWP (tonnes CO 2 eq) Acidificatio n Potential (moles of H + eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) Eutrophica tion Potential (g N eq) Ozone Depletion Potential (mg CFC-11 eq) Smog potential (g NOx eq) Foundations & Footings , , , CONCRETE VS. STEEL Columns and Beams ,400, , , Intermediate Floors ,428, , , Exterior Walls , , , Windows Interior Walls Roof ,405, , , S 8,760,105 1, ,307 1, , ,079 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt. (MJ) Weighted Resource use (tonnes) GWP (tonnes CO 2 eq) Acidificatio n Potential (moles of H + eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) Eutrophica tion Potential (g N eq) Ozone Depletion Potential (mg CFC-11 eq) Smog potential (g NOx eq) Foundations & Footings , , , Columns and Beams ,273,849 1, , , Intermediate Floors ,081, , , Exterior Walls ,758, , , ,051 Windows Interior Walls Roof ,099, , , ,166 S 11,745,595 3, ,604 1, , ,037

23 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY STEEL CONSTRUCTION Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt. (MJ) Weighted Resource use (tonnes) GWP (tonnes CO 2 eq) Acidificatio n Potential (moles of H + eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) Eutrophica tion Potential (g N eq) Ozone Depletion Potential (mg CFC-11 eq) Smog potential (g NOx eq) Foundations & Footings , , , CONCRETE VS. STEEL Columns and Beams ,400, , , Intermediate Floors ,428, , , Exterior Walls , , , Windows Interior Walls Roof ,405, , , S 8,760,105 1, ,307 1, , ,079 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SUMMARY CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION Assembly Total area Fossil Fuel Consumpt. (MJ) Weighted Resource use (tonnes) GWP (tonnes CO 2 eq) Acidificatio n Potential (moles of H + eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential (kg PM2.5 eq) Eutrophica tion Potential (g N eq) Ozone Depletion Potential (mg CFC-11 eq) Smog potential (g NOx eq) Foundations & Footings , , , Columns and Beams ,273,849 1, , , Intermediate Floors ,081, , , Exterior Walls ,758, , , ,051 Windows X 0 2.2X 0 1.9X 0 1.7X 0 1.6X 1.5X 0 3.9X X Interior Walls Roof ,099, , , ,166 S 11,745,595 3, ,604 1, , ,037

24 Alternatives to a Full LCA Environmental product labels.

25

26 ISO Environmental Labeling Standards ISO has established standards for three types of labels: Type I - the most common type of label in today s market. Require third party certification of a pre-set list of criteria for issues such as recycled content, VOC s, and bio-degradability. Type II - provide criteria for self-declarations by a materials extraction organization (mining, for example), manufacturer or supplier. There is no third party review in Type II labels. Type III - require the rigorous use of life cycle environmental information, an open consultation process, and ease of comparison among products. Type III labels are similar to consumer nutrition labeling on food products.

27 ISO Environmental Labeling Standards ISO has established standards for three types of labels: Type I - the most common type of label in today s market. Require third party certification of a pre-set list of criteria for issues such as recycled content, VOC s, and bio-degradability. Type II - provide criteria for self-declarations by a materials extraction organization (mining, for example), manufacturer or supplier. There is no third party review in Type II labels. Type III - require the rigorous use of life cycle environmental information, an open consultation process, and ease of comparison among products. Type III labels are similar to consumer nutrition labeling on food products.

28 ISO Environmental Labeling Standards ISO has established standards for three types of labels: Type I - the most common type of label in today s market. Require third party certification of a pre-set list of criteria for issues such as recycled content, VOC s, and bio-degradability. Type II - provide criteria for self-declarations by a materials extraction organization (mining, for example), manufacturer or supplier. There is no third party review in Type II labels. Type III - require the rigorous use of life cycle environmental information, an open consultation process, third party review, and ease of comparison among products. Type III labels are similar to consumer nutrition labeling on food products.

29 Alternatives to a Full LCA Environmental product labels. - ISO Type I 3 rd party, single attribute. - ISO Type II self declaration. - ISO Type III LCA-based, multiple attribute, 3 rd party verified information. Environmental Product Declaration

30 Environmental Product Declarations

31 Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) An EPD provides consistent and comparable information to industrial customers and enduse consumers regarding environmental impacts. Product category rules define how information is to be collected and how measurements are to be made.

32 Environmental Product Declarations LCA - based Disclose quantified life cycle data for a product. Must clearly state the life cycle stages and product components covered. Third party verified

33 Development of an EPD Organization for Implementation Product Category Rules Input from producers, LCA experts, testing institutes, NGOs, consumer orgs. Tests, Certificates, Other information Life Cycle Assessment EPD Draft Verification by independent third party EPD Publication

34

35

36 Product description Light Gauge Steel profiles are cold-formed profiles that are used to construct the bearing walls, flooring and roof panels of a building. Declaration is based on aver- aged thickness of cold-formed steel profiles prepared according to a design specification of a building. Application Light Gauge Steel profiles from hot-dip galvanized steel are used in construction industry as well as many other applications: roofing (roofing sheets, roof tiles), cladding (Trapezoidal sheets, sandwich panels, wall cassettes), interior trim (trapezoidal sheets, sandwich panels, wall cassettes), flat sheets (covers, structural panels, wall connections, facing roof), roof drainage systems (gutters, downspouts, soffit boards and accessories), Automotive (vehicles, trailers, refrigeration units), white and brown goods. Typical applications of steel profiles are: - Detached houses, - Villas, vineyard huts, - School and dormitory buildings, - Commercial buildings, - Factory buildings.

37

38

39 Publisher Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.v. Tel. +49 (0) Rheinufer 108 Fax +49 (0) Königswinter Germany Web Programme holder Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.v. Tel. +49 (0) Rheinufer 108 Fax +49 (0) Königswinter Germany Web Owner of the Declaration Akkon Steel Structure Systems Co Tel Çerkezköy Organize Sanayi Bölgesi, Fax: GMKP Mah Atatürk Caddesi No:134, Çerkezköy, Tekirdağ Turkey Web Author of the Life Cycle Assessment Metsims Sustainability Consulting Tel Veko Giz Plaza, Meydan Sk. No:3 K.13 Fax: Maslak İstanbul Turkey Web

40 lumber. This EPD was developed in compliance with ISO and ISO and has been verified under UL Environment s EPD program. The EPD includes Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) results for all processes up to the point that planed and dry lumber is packaged and ready for shipment at the manufacturing gate; the cradle-togate product system includes forest management, logging, transportation of logs to lumber mills, sawing, kiln-drying, and planing.

41

42

43

44

45

46

47 F. INTERIOR WALLS Assembly Type Fossil Fuel Consumpt. per ft. 2 (MJ) Weighted Resource use per ft. 2 (mt) GWP per ft. 2 (mt CO 2 eq) Acidifica tion Potential per ft. 2 (moles of H+ eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential per ft. 2 (kg PM2.5 eq) Average across interior walls x4 Wood Stud Wall 16 o.c. 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint x4 Wood Stud Wall 24 o.c. 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint x4 Wood Stud Wall 16 o.c. 2 x 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint /8 x 3 5/8 Steel Stud Wall 16 o.c. 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint /8 x 3 5/8 Steel Stud Wall 24 o.c. 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint /8 x 3 5/8 Steel Stud Wall 24 o.c. 2 x 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint Concrete Block 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint Concrete Block 2 coats latex paint

48 F. INTERIOR WALLS Assembly Type Fossil Fuel Consumpt. per ft. 2 (MJ) Weighted Resource use per ft. 2 (mt) GWP per ft. 2 (mt CO 2 eq) Acidifica tion Potential per ft. 2 (moles of H+ eq) HH Respiratory Effects Potential per ft. 2 (kg PM2.5 eq) Average across interior walls x4 Wood Stud Wall 16 o.c. 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint x4 Wood Stud Wall 24 o.c. 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint x4 Wood Stud Wall 16 o.c. 2 x 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint /8 x 3 5/8 Steel Stud Wall 16 o.c. 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint /8 x 3 5/8 Steel Stud Wall 24 o.c. 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint /8 x 3 5/8 Steel Stud Wall 24 o.c. 2 x 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint Concrete Block 5/8 gypsum board + 2 coats latex paint Concrete Block 2 coats latex paint

49 Product Description Typical board size: ¾ x 6 (31.75mm x 152.4mm) Grade: Average Product composition (on the basis of m 2 of installed decking with a 25-year service life): - Western red cedar lumber: 8.14kg (od basis)/(0.0247m 3 ) - Optional coating stain 1.25 litres - Fasteners (2 ½ galvanized nails, No. 8 or 10): 1kg/m 2 installed decking. Installed and used according to Western Red Cedar Lumber Association specifications (see Base case is an untreated deck. An alternative scenario has regular applications of a stain coating.

50 Environmental Performance Base Case (No stain) Impact Category Unit Per m 2 of decking Per 100 ft 2 of decking Total primary energy: Mj Non-renewable, fossil Mj Non-renewable nuclear Mj Renewable (SWHG)* Mj Renewable, biomass Mj Feedstock, non-renewable fossil Mj Feedstock, renewable biomass Mj Renewable material consumption (wood) kg Non-renewable material consumpt. (nails) kg Fresh water use L Total waste Kg Hazardous Kg Non-hazardous kg Global warming potential (GWP) Kg CO 2 eq Acidification potential H+ moles eq Eutrophication potential Kg N eq 2.62E E-02 Smog potential Kg NO x eq 5.91E E-01 Ozone depletion potential Kg CFC-11eq 2.55E E-08 * WWHG: Solar, wind, hydroelectric, and geothermal.

51 Environmental Performance, Decking with Regular Applications of Stain Impact Category Unit Per m 2 of decking Per 100 ft 2 of decking Total primary energy: Mj Non-renewable, fossil Mj Non-renewable nuclear Mj Renewable (SWHG)* Mj Renewable, biomass Mj Feedstock, non-renewable fossil Mj Feedstock, renewable biomass Mj Renewable material consumption (wood) kg Non-renewable material consumpt. (nails) kg Fresh water use L Total waste Kg Hazardous Kg Non-hazardous kg Global warming potential (GWP) Kg CO 2 eq Acidification potential H+ moles eq Eutrophication potential Kg N eq 2.62E E-02 Smog potential Kg NO x eq 5.91E E-01 Ozone depletion potential Kg CFC-11eq 2.55E E-08 * WWHG: Solar, wind, hydroelectric, and geothermal.

52 Carbon Balance per 100 ft 2 of Cedar Decking Base Case No Stain Kg CO 2 eq Alternative Scenario Regular Applications of Stain Forest carbon uptake GWP* harvesting and manufacturing Net carbon balance cradle-to-gate GWP transportation to consumer Net carbon balance cradle-to-site GWP installation and use Net carbon balance cradle to end-of-use GWP end-of-life processes Net carbon balance cradle-to-grave * GWP Global warming potential; includes all biogenic carbon sinks and sources throughout the product system boundary.

53 Health Product Declarations

54 Health Product Declarations The Health Product Declaration Standard was originally developed by the HPD Working Group in collaboration with the Healthy Building Network and Building Green. It is now managed by the HPD Collaborative.

55 Health Product Declarations - HPDs describe product content and direct health hazards associated with human exposure to the individual components of a product. - An HPD is not an assessment of risks associated with actual use of a product. - An HPD does not address potential health impacts of substances used or created during manufacture. - An HPD is not a full assessment of environmental impacts from the life cycle of a product.

56 Health Product Declarations - An HPD differs from a MSDS: o An HPD aims for 100% disclosure of all ingredients: If hazardous, must be reported much as in MSDS. Also provides information as to long-term, chronic exposure. o A MSDS provides information about how to work with a hazardous substance or product in a safe manner. Focus is acute health risks: Physical data melting point, boiling point, flash point) Other information toxicity, health effects, first aid, storage, disposal, protective clothing, spill handling, etc.)

57

58

59

60

61 LEED v.4 and LCA Building life-cycle impact reduction (5 pts. possible) - Historic building reuse (5 pts), or - Renovation of abandoned or blighted building (5 pts), or - Building and materials reuse (2-4 pts), or

62 LEED v.4 and LCA Building life-cycle impact reduction (5 pts. possible) - Historic building reuse (5 pts), or - Renovation of abandoned or blighted building (5 pts), or - Building and materials reuse (2-4 pts), or - Whole building life cycle assessment (3 pts)

63 LEED v.4 and LCA Building life-cycle impact reduction (5 pts. possible) - Whole building life cycle assessment (3 pts) New construction (bldgs or portions of bldgs) LCA must demonstrate a minimum 10% reduction compared to a baseline building in at least 3 of the 6 impact categories listed below:! GWP! Stratospheric ozone depletion! Acidification potential! Eutrophication potential! Formation of tropospheric ozone! Depletion of nonrenewable energy resources

64 LEED v.4 and LCA Building life-cycle impact reduction (5 pts. possible) - Whole building life cycle assessment (3 pts) New construction (bldgs or portions of bldgs) LCA must demonstrate a minimum 10% reduction, compared to a baseline building, in GWP and at least 2 additional impact categories from the following list.! GWP! Stratospheric ozone depletion! Acidification potential! Eutrophication potential! Formation of tropospheric ozone! Depletion of nonrenewable energy resources

65 LEED v.4 and EPDs Building product disclosure and optimization environmental product declarations (2 pts. possible) - Use at least 20 different permanently installed products sourced from at least 5 different manufacturers that meet one of the following disclosure criteria: EPDs (1 point) - Industry-wide (generic) EPD where the product manufacturer is a participant. (counted as ½ of a product in credit calculation) - Product-specific EPD where the product manufacturer is the participant. Second point is gained for optimization

66 LEED v.4 and EPDs Building product disclosure and optimization environmental product declarations (2 pts. possible) - Use at least 20 different permanently installed products sourced from at least 5 different manufacturers that meet one of the following disclosure criteria: EPDs (1 point) - Industry-wide (generic) EPD where the product manufacturer is a participant. (counted as ½ of a product in credit calculation) - Product-specific EPD where the product manufacturer is the participant. Clarification being sought

67 LEED v.4 and EPDs Building product disclosure and optimization environmental product declarations (2 pts. possible) - Use at least 20 different permanently installed products sourced from at least 5 different manufacturers that meet one of the following disclosure criteria: Product specific declarations. (1 point) Products for which there is a publicly available, critically reviewed (ISO 14044) assessment of at least cradle to gate scope (counted as ¼ of a product in credit calculation). AND/OR...

68 LEED v.4 and EPDs Building product disclosure and optimization environmental product declarations (2 pts. possible) (must comply with one of criteria below for 50% by cost of total value of permanently installed product) Third-party certified products that demonstrate impact reduction below industry average in at least 3 of the following categories:! GWP! Stratospheric ozone depletion! Acidification potential! Eutrophication potential! Formation of tropospheric ozone! Depletion of nonrenewable energy resources

69 LEED v.4 and HPDs Building product disclosure and optimization material ingredients (2 pts. possible) - Material ingredient reporting. (1 pt.) Use at least 20 different permanently installed products sourced from at least 5 different manufacturers that meet one of a number of specified programs to demonstrate the chemical inventory of a product to at least 0.1% (1000 ppm) Manufacturer inventory (complete, public, CASRN) Health product Declaration Cradle to Cradle certification at Basic or Bronze level

70 LEED v.4 and HPDs Building product disclosure and optimization material ingredients (2 pts. possible) - Material ingredient optimization. (1 pt) Use products that document their material ingredient optimization using various identified paths* for at least 25% of the cost of the total value of permanently installed products in a project. * Green Screen, Cradle to Cradle Certified, REACH Optimization

71 LEED v.4 and HPDs Building product disclosure and optimization material ingredients (2 pts. possible) - Product mfg supply chain optimization (1 pt). Products are sourced from manufacturers that engage in validated safety, health, hazard, and risk programs and that also document at least 99% (by weight) of product ingredients, and that have independent 3 rd party verification of their supply chain with respect to a number of measures.

72 LCA, EPDs, and HPDs and Green Globes! Reuse of buildings and assemblies rewarded.! Use of LCA in building design and materials selection awarded separately from building reuse, and more heavily emphasized for both structural and nonstructural elements. Performance Path.! EPDs rewarded, but no differentiation between generic and product specific EPDs. No requirement for specific number of products from specific number of manufacturers. Prescriptive path.

73 GREEN Globes and EPDs Prescriptive Path Core and Shell - Use products that account for at least 10% of products* selected that are accompanied by: EPDs (industry-wide generic or product-specific) Third party certifications Third party verified product LCA that minimally covers cradle to gate. > 40% of products (20 pts) 25-39% of products (15 pts) 10-24% of products (10 pts) < 10% of products ( 0 pts) * Based on cost

74 GREEN Globes and EPDs Prescriptive Path Interior Fit-outs - Use products that account for at least 10% of products selected that are accompanied by: EPDs (industry-wide generic or product-specific) Third party certifications Third party verified product LCA that minimally covers cradle to gate. > 40% of products (10 pts) 25-39% of products ( 7 pts) 10-24% of products ( 5 pts) < 10% of products ( 0 pts)

75 GREEN Globes and EPDs Prescriptive Path - Documentation of product comparisons required. - Comparable product, industry wide or product specific comparisons.

76 GREEN Globes and HPDs There is no specific reference within Green Globes to HPDs. Hazardous chemicals are addressed through monitoring and minimization of VOC and other emissions through the building and commissioning processes.

77 Summary Environmental impacts of materials and products cannot be accurately determined through intuition. Life cycle analysis (LCA) performed in accordance with international protocols facilitates accurate determination of environmental impacts and product comparisons. LCA-based EPDs provide reliable information regarding product attributes. Product comparisons difficult. HPDs provide complete information regarding chemical ingredients. Too much information??

78 This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems Course Questions? Jim Bowyer Dovetail Partners, Inc.